19 It was suggested by Mr Scally that the strategic level of MUZ Policy 4 was too general and insufficient in detail to guide us on the specifics of how this site may be used. It was also suggested that residential or mixed use would not be a good outcome given the isolated nature of the site. We disagree finding that applied to this site the MUZ-Policy 4 demonstrates an intention to integrate the site into the residential land use that predominates on the south side of Ballarat Rd.
20 It is useful to reflect on the history of this site and on other MUZ locations within the area to provide some further context to this matter.
21 As noted by all parties the site was formerly a (petrol) service station. We are aware that this use was established prior to the residential development of the former industrial land to the west of the site. Thus the two former land uses can in some way be considered to have had a complimentary setting, i.e. industrial and commercial land uses. However, with the redevelopment of the industrial land to residential use, the commercial use fell into a somewhat isolated position.
22 It seems to us that while the mixed use zone is at first glance, at odds with the context of surrounding land uses, the site's history provides an understanding of how it came about and why integration into the residential use would be the main objective.
23 Other locations that are currently zoned MUZ include larger parcels of land that fall within three policy precincts and smaller parcels that fall within Policy 4. The three policy precinct areas are specifically nominated as areas where mixed commercial use and / or residential use are specifically encouraged to address site issues and policy objectives. Policy 4 was prepared to address "...either very small former local business zones with declining retail functions or small, isolated former light industrial zones (one or two blocks) in otherwise continuous residential areas with good amenity..."across a range of various sites.[8] While we accept that this site is not strictly within a continuous residential area, as put by Mr Scally, we find it lies at the commencement of such an area that extends for a considerable distance along the south side of Ballarat Road. It follows that this policy and its objectives are applicable in this context.
24 Our inspection of a sample of the smaller MUZ parcels also confirms land uses are typically former local shops now being converted to dwellings or are local convenience strip shops that are integrated into the surrounding residential setting.
25 Mr Song informed us, and we accept given the site's land use history, that the site was zoned as Mixed Use (Schedule 4) in anticipation of it eventually being available for redevelopment[9]. Council contends that such development should have a residential focus in line with the policy objectives of Cl 22.02-4 and the site's context. The applicant's submissions suggest that such development may not be viable or produce a substantive outcome for residential dwelling supply, and by way of an alternative, the retail use is a more suitable and realistic development.
26 We find that despite the assertions to the contrary, there remains a possibility of extending the adjoining medium density patterns and building layouts onto this site and produce a more orderly and integrated planning outcome. Our inspection identified that the site is well screened from the eastern approaches by existing vegetation with a back drop of the medium density residential dwellings. The use of the site for residential dwellings would have a more harmonious integration both visually and from a land use perspective than a single retail development.
27 It follows that we can find no support or benefit for a single use retail development over the stated intentions of council's policy, the zoning or the site's context.