Agenda of Statutory Planning Committee - 18 November 2014 · AGENDA – STATUTORY PLANNING COMMITTEE 18 NOVEMBER 2014. 10 1.3 The MPA has provided Council with the opportunity to

AGENDA – STATUTORY PLANNING COMMITTEE 18 NOVEMBER 2014

9

6.1 FBURA APPLICATION - 171-183 FERRARS STREET, SOUTH MELBOURNE

LOCATION/ADDRESS: 171-183 FERRARS STREET, SOUTH MELBOURNE

RESPONSIBLE MANAGER: GEORGE BORG, MANAGER CITY DEVELOPMENT

AUTHOR: SIMON GUTTERIDGE, PRINCIPAL PLANNER

TRIM FILE NO.: MPA0002/2014

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Plans

2. Draft Conditions

3. Office of Victorian Government Architect Design Review Comments

WARD: EMERALD HILL WARD

TRIGGER FOR DETERMINATION BY COMMITTEE:

COUNCIL PROTOCOL

APPLICATION NO: MPA REFERENCE: MPA14/0004. COUNCIL REFERENCE: MPA0002/2014

APPLICANT: CONTOUR CONSULTANTS AUSTRALIA PTY LTD

EXISTING USE: RESTAURANT (CAFÉ) AND OFFICES

ABUTTING USES: CAR REPAIRS AND COMMERCIAL USES

ZONING: CAPITAL CITY ZONE (CCZ)

OVERLAYS: DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN OVERLAY (DCPO2) PARKING OVERLAY (PO1)

STATUTORY TIME REMAINING FOR DECISION AS AT DAY OF COUNCIL

06 NOVEMBER, 2014 (28 DAYS)

PROPOSAL

Demolition of existing buildings and construction of a 24 storey mixed use building containing 122 dwellings, a retail premise (restaurant) and an office.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.

1.1 The application site is located in the Montague precinct of the Fishermans Bend Urban Renewal Area (FBURA).

1.2 The Metropolitan Planning Authority (MPA) is the Responsible Authority for the application pursuant to Section 2.0 of the schedule to Clause 61.01 of the Port Phillip Planning Scheme as the proposal is for a building of more than eight storeys and more than 60 dwellings.


10

1.3 The MPA has provided Council with the opportunity to consider and provide advice on this application which will be used by the MPA in their assessment of the proposal. Council’s advice is provided on an informal basis as the Capital City Zone (CCZ1) exempts most applications from notice and review.

1.4 On 28 July 2014, the State Government released the Fishermans Bend Strategic Framework Plan (SFP).

The Plan sets out the strategic objectives for the long term redevelopment of the Fishermans Bend precinct for mostly medium and high density mixed use development with up to 40,000 new jobs and 80,000 residents by 2050. The Plan is structured around four key elements being ‘Street network’, ‘Sustainable transport’, ‘Open space’, and ‘A series of places’.

The SFP includes design guidance for new buildings, including preferred heights and setbacks and direction regarding managing amenity impacts, achieving high quality architecture, and providing for community facilities and infrastructure.

1.5 The subject site is in an area identified as having a preferred maximum building height of 18 storeys (60.0m). The application is seeking discretion for a taller 24 storey (82.5m) building, and to reduce the street and side setbacks of the tower element of the building to less than those recommended in the SFP design guidance.

1.6 The design proposes to provide:

• A publicly accessible internal arcade style through-link between Ferrars Street at the front of the site and Railway Place at the rear of the site at ground floor level and first floor level;

• A footbridge link from the internal arcade at first floor level across Railway Place to the elevated light rail platform stop opposite;

• A start-up business incubator style hot-desk/studio/office space at first floor level.

1.7 The publicly accessible through link at ground floor level would make a positive contribution to the neighbourhood pedestrian network and is supported. Conditions are recommended to confirm ongoing 24hr public access to the arcade though-link.

The first floor level of the through link and the associated link-bridge across Railway Place are not supported because of design concerns and doubts about its overall benefit.

The first floor level studio/office space is supported because it would contribute to employment opportunities in the neighbourhood.

1.8 The design has been reviewed by the Office of the Victorian Government Architect (OVGA) who advised that they supported the design including the proposed reduced setbacks and the additional height for the tower.

1.9 Officers support the reduced setbacks for the tower, but have concerns that the increased height of the tower (24 storeys – 82.5m):

• Is inconsistent with the preferred building scale for the site and surrounds as expressed in the SFP. The proposal is more than 30% higher than the preferred height for this site (18 storeys – 60.0m).

• Would establish a precedent for other buildings to exceed the preferred height. • Does not provide sufficient community benefit to justify a variation to the preferred

height.


11

• Does not achieve an urban design outcome that could not be achieved by other means (such as by reducing the height of the podium and the tower to achieve similar proportions to that proposed).

1.10 Officers have raised a number of detailed concerns such as sustainable design, large vehicle access for waste collection, openings on side boundaries etc. These matters could be addressed by conditions of any approval that the MPA may issue for the proposal.

1.11 It is recommended that Council advise the MPA that:

• Council endorses the publicly accessible through link at ground floor level and the first floor level studio/offices, subject to conditions to confirm ongoing 24hr public access to the arcade though-link.

• Council does not support:

o The first floor level of the through link and the associated link-bridge across Railway Place;

o The height of the tower in excess of the 18 storey (60m) preferred height for the site.

• In the event that the MPA determines to grant a permit for the application, any permit issued should incorporate conditions requiring:

o An environmental audit;

o An integrated urban art contribution;

o A sustainable management plan;

o A S173 Agreement for Development Contributions.

o A S173 Agreement that the windows and openings on the north and south side boundary walls of the podium be removed and the walls made good should a development be approved up to and/or over these openings on the adjacent lot(s).

KEY ISSUES

1. Tower height and street and side setbacks. 2. Contribution to community facilities and infrastructure. 3. Place making

RELEVANT BACKGROUND 2.

2.1 In July 2012 the Minister for Planning identified the Fishermans Bend Urban Renewal Area (FBURA) as a project of state significance.

2.2 The land was rezoned to the Capital City Zone on 5 July 2012, via Port Phillip Planning Scheme Amendment C102. The Amendment also made the Minister the Responsible Authority for the majority of planning applications in the zone pursuant to Section 2.0 of the schedule to Clause 61.01 of the Port Phillip Planning Scheme.


12

2.3 The Minister requested Places Victoria prepare a Strategic Framework Plan and a Development Contributions Plan for the Renewal Area.

2.4 In September 2012, Council adopted the Montague Precinct Structure Plan and Fishermans Bend Guiding Principles and Strategic Directions to formalise Council’s position on the FBURA. The principles include creating a child and family friendly place that prioritises sustainable travel and the movement of people, and a precinct which is vibrant, well serviced, with a diverse mix of land uses, and a local community that welcomes everyone.

2.5 Since July 2012, representatives of Places Victoria, Melbourne City Council, DTPLI and Council have worked closely to develop a planning framework for the Renewal Area.

2.6 On 16 September 2013, the Premier and the Minister announced the start of the community engagement on the:

• FBURA Draft Vision; and • Interim Fishermans Bend Design Guidelines.

2.7 The FBURA Draft Vision provided an impression of how the FBURA may look in 2050. It outlined the overarching Strategic Directions and Key Moves needed to realise the vision and transform the existing Fishermans Bend industrial areas into a thriving, mixed-use inner city environment.

2.8 The Draft Vision was the result of extensive collaboration between Places Victoria, DTPLI, the Melbourne City Council and Port Phillip City Council.

2.9 The Interim Design Guidelines provided more detail on the objectives of the Vision and assist in the consideration of planning applications in the Renewal Area.

2.10 At its meeting of 26 November 2013 Council resolved to endorse a submission to the Draft Vision Fishermans Bend Urban Renewal and Interim Design Guidelines.

2.11 On 28 July, 2014, the State Government released, and the Minister approved the Fishermans Bend Strategic Framework Plan (SFP).

The Plan sets out the strategic objectives for the long term redevelopment of the Fishermans Bend precinct for mostly medium and high density mixed use development with up to 40,000 new jobs and 80,000 residents by 2050. The Plan is structured around four key elements being ‘Street network’, ‘Sustainable transport’, ‘Open space’, and ‘A series of places’.

The SFP includes design guidance for new buildings, including preferred heights and setbacks, and direction regarding managing amenity impacts, achieving high quality architecture, and providing for community facilities and infrastructure.

2.12 Subsequent to the release of the SFP. Council outlined its 12 key priorities for Fisherman’s Bend based on five themes, as follows:

Theme 1: Build Transport and Community Infrastructure early and set aside open space

Priority 1. Inclusion of the Collins Street tram extension and better pedestrian and bike riding infrastructure

Council has consistently advocated for the Collins Street tram extension. The SFP also includes strategic cycling corridors,


13

pedestrian pathways and road upgrades to facilitate a best practice approach to sustainable transport. Council is continuing to work with the State Government on a funding and delivery strategy for transport links.

Priority 2. Explicit infrastructure commitments

Council supports the infrastructure delivery table in the SFP setting out explicit commitments to timely infrastructure delivery at Fishermans Bend, but is disappointed that the estimated date for the delivery of the light rail tram service, including the Collins Street tram extension, has been pushed out from 2018 to 2023.

Council will work with the State Government to ensure that the documented commitments are honoured. Council is also working with the State Government on the Fishermans Bend Development Contributions Plan (DCP), which is due for release within the next 12 months. Council’s aim is to ensure that the DCP includes the infrastructure program and funding strategy that will set Fishermans Bend up for long-term success.

Priority 3. Increased public open space

Council believes the open space network shown in the SFP is the minimum acceptable to mitigate the impacts of high development densities, and more work on open space is required.

Theme 2: Sensible Height Restrictions and Quality Design for Developments

Priority 4. Reduced building height and intensity at sensitive interfaces

Council advocated for sensitive building height and intensity provisions around all established residential areas, and supports the preferred height of four storeys along the southern perimeter of the FBURA and the preferred height of eight storeys in the historic, fine grained parts of the Montague Precinct.

Priority 5. Protection for established open spaces and recreation facilities

Council supports SFP provisions to protect existing and proposed public open spaces in Fishermans Bend from overshadowing.

Priority 6. Establishment of a Design Review Panel

Council is pleased to see that the establishment of a Design Panel has been included in the SFP to assist in delivering high quality design and public realm outcomes.


14

Theme 3: Business Attraction and Investment

Priority 7. A stronger emphasis on jobs and economic growth

Council is concerned that under the Capital City Zone, there is no formal method of controlling the land use mix in Fishermans Bend and ensuring that in addition to residential development, there is sufficient commercial development to ensure weekday activity, economic sustainability and jobs for Melbourne’s future.

Council believes that significant transport infrastructure including the Collins Street tram extension is required in the short to medium term and underground rail in the longer term, needs to be constructed in order to act as a catalyst to attract jobs to the area.

Theme 4: City of Port Phillip Responsibility for Developments

Priority 8. Control over development near established residential areas

Council is the responsible authority for all planning applications that impact established residential areas around Fishermans Bend (four and eight storey areas shown on the FBURA height map, as well as all development under four stories everywhere else). This includes sensitive interfaces along Williamstown Road, Boundary Street and City Road, representing a significant proportion of the Fishermans Bend precinct. This means Council can better manage development in sensitive areas to protect and enhance the amenity of existing and future residents.

Council will be notified of any planning permit applications in the Fishermans Bend Urban Renewal Area and given 28 days to provide comments back to the Minister. Our comments will be considered at Council meetings prior to lodgement with the Minister.

Council will continue to lobby the State Government to make us the responsible authority for all developments below 25,000 square metres (buildings approximately 18 storeys) in Fishermans Bend.

Theme 5: A Place for all Generations

Priority 9. Recognition of the FBURA Draft Vision

The Strategic Directions contained in the Draft Vision have been carried forward to the SFP, and the Key Moves have been translated into the final land use themes that will guide all future development.

Priority 10. Inclusion of sustainability goals

Council supports the sustainability goals included in the SFP and will continue to advocate for the inclusion of specific targets, as well as further work on how Fishermans Bend can


15

be a global demonstration of next generation buildings and infrastructure.

Priority 11. A commitment to affordable housing

Council believes the affordable housing provisions in the SFP are weak, and is seeking further commitments from the State Government regarding the development of a detailed affordable housing strategy for Fishermans Bend.

Concurrently, Council will continue to work with landowners, developers and community groups to proactively facilitate housing diversity in the precinct and has allocated funding for a joint affordable housing research initiative with the University of Melbourne, for a new affordable housing delivery model for Fishermans Bend.

Priority 12. Better recognition of Fishermans Bend’s heritage

Council independently funded a comprehensive study of heritage significance in Fishermans Bend, to inform the State Government’s work. The study identified a number of buildings with heritage significance and Council is now proposing they be protected as part of a specific Planning Scheme Amendment.

More work is required to protect and enhance the historic fabric of Fishermans Bend, as well as specific buildings and places.

2.13 On 7 August, 2014, the SFP was incorporated into the Port Phillip and Melbourne Planning Schemes by Amendment GC7. The amendment also changed the Responsible Authority (effective 1 October, 2014) for the FBURA from the Minister for Planning to:

• The City of Port Phillip for :

o Development with a building height of up to eight storeys. o Use and/or development for less than 60 dwellings. o Use and/or development with a gross floor area less than 10,000 square metres. o Use and/or development where any part of the land is owned by a public

authority and/or municipal council and the estimated cost of development is less than $10,000,000.

o Subdivision and consolidation of land, including buildings and airspace.

• The Metropolitan Planning Authority for:

o Development of a building of eight storeys or greater. o Use and/or development for 60 or more dwellings. o Use and/or development with a gross floor area exceeding 10,000 square metres. o Use and/or development where any part of the land is owned by a public

authority and/or municipal council and the estimated cost of development is more than $10,000,000.

o Any agreement that makes provision for development contributions in the FBURA.


16

2.14 The MPA has provided Council with the opportunity to consider and provide advice on applications received. Advice is provided to assist with the assessment of the proposal by the MPA and is provided on an informal basis as the Capital City Zone (CCZ1) exempts most applications from notice and review.

2.15 To date, eight planning permit applications have been approved within the FBURA. All of these were issued by the Minister for Planning as follows:

Address Proposal 179 Gladstone St, South Melbourne

7 storeys, 10 dwellings

161 Buckhurst St, South Melbourne

6 storeys, 6 dwellings

164 Ingles St, Port Melbourne

3 and 4 storeys, 258 townhouse dwellings

6-78 Buckhurst St, South Melbourne

Four towers (36-37 storeys) containing 1023 dwellings, 1557m2 commercial floor space and 704 car spaces

15-87 Buckhurst St, South Melbourne

Three towers (up to 22 storeys) containing 733 dwellings, 427m2 commercial floor space and 579 car spaces

199-201 Normanby Road, Southbank

One 40 storey tower containing 326m2 of commercial floor space, 262 dwellings and 174 car spaces.

89-103 Gladstone Street Demolition of the existing building, construction of a 30 storey building with 163 dwellings, retail use, and a waiver of the car parking requirement

134-150 Buckhurst Street, South Melbourne

5 level podium and 2 x 30 storey towers, 630 dwellings, 570 car parking spaces, and commercial use at ground floor level.

2.16 In addition, there are currently seven applications lodged with the Metropolitan Planning Authority (MPA) for sites in the City of Port Phillip which have not yet been determined as follows:

No. ADDRESS PROPOSAL PROPOSED # OF STOREYS

SFP PREFERRED HEIGHT

1 134-142 Ferrars Street South Melbourne

Demolish existing 2-storey offices and construct 49 Level tower comprising 2 shop tenancies (total 178.9m2 floor area), 60-80 place child care centre and 381 dwellings (145 x 1BR, 226 x 2BR and 10 x 3BR) and 214 car spaces (210 residents, 2 retail spaces, 2 child care centre). The design comprises a 6 level 21.9m high podium and a 49 Level 153.7m high single tower.

1 tower

(49 storeys)

18 storey


17

2 60-82 Johnson Street South Melbourne

The subject site is a large site of 5,711m2, bounded by Montague, Thistlethwaite, and George Streets, and is currently developed with warehouse buildings and a small open car park. The pre-application proposal comprised car parking (750 spaces) at basement and podium 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 levels. ground level retail including speciality shops and a 1,800m2 local community supermarket, a gym, function rooms, meeting rooms, pool, spa, bbq/paved and landscaped communal areas at podium roof level, and 705 apartments

4 separate towers of between 21 and 53 storeys

Discretionary

3 2-4 Buckhurst Street, South Melbourne

This island site is bounded by Gladstone, Kerr, Ferrars and Buckhurst Streets. The development proposes the construction of a six level podium and two towers containing 380 dwellings. The northern tower would have a height of 36 levels and the south tower would be 24 levels. Ground level commercial/retail tenancies are proposed along Kerr Street and on the corner of Ferrars and Buckhurst Streets opposite the location of the proposed primary school.

2 towers (24-36 storeys)

4 storeys

4 228-232 Normanby Road, Southbank

The development proposes a four storey street wall to Munro Street and Normanby Road and a six storey street wall to Montague Street with two towers of 39 and 44 levels. Commercial uses are proposed at ground level with approximately 500 apartments above and a residential car parking rate of 0.45 spaces per apartment.

2 towers (39-44 storeys)

Discretionary

5 320-332 Plummer Street, Port

Residential mixed use development comprising 379 apartments, 17 townhouses,

17-12 storeys 12 storeys


18

Melbourne 728 sqm commercial retail floorspace, frontage to Plummer Street civic spine.

6 181 Ferrars Street, South Melbourne

23 storey tower including an 8 level podium (2 office/retail levels and 6 car parking levels) containing 120 apartments. One car space per apartment is proposed.

23 storeys 18 storeys

7 101 Salmon Street, Port Melbourne

12 storeys including a 4 storey podium containing 157 apartments, 157 car spaces, and commercial and retail at ground along Salmon Street

12 storeys Discretionary

PROPOSAL 3.

3.1 It is proposed to:

• Demolish all the existing buildings on the land. • Construct a 24 level building comprising a 6 level podium with a tower above,

containing a restaurant, an office, 122 dwellings, and associated car and bicycle parking.

• Construct and carry out works.

3.2 More particularly, the proposal comprises:

Level 1 (Ground floor level)

• Restaurant / Café tenancy (285m2), dwelling entry and lobby off Ferrars Street frontage, publicly accessible internal arcade style through link between Ferrars Street and Railway Place along the north side of the property, waste bin room, building services inc. a substation, utility meters, fire pump booster etc, 12 x visitor bicycle parking spaces, car lift off Railway Place at rear to car parking levels above, and stairs and lifts to levels above.

Level 2 (first floor level)

• Hot desk/studio office tenancy (133m2), upper level continuation of ground floor level through link, connecting to a link bridge across Railway Place to the light rail stop opposite, three dwellings with rebated open space terraces, and lifts and stairs to levels above and below.

Levels 3, 4, 5 and 6 (second, third, fourth and fifth floor levels)

• Three dwellings with rebated open space terraces and ten or eleven car parking spaces per floor, tenant bicycle and motorcycle parking spaces, building services and lifts and stairs to levels above and below.

Level 7 (sixth floor (transfer) level

• Five dwellings with mix of outdoor and rebated open space terraces, and lifts and stairs to levels above and below.


19

Levels 8 to 24 (seventh to 23rd floor (tower) levels)

• Six dwellings with rebated open space terraces per floor, and lifts and stairs to levels above and below.

Plant level

• Building services, lift overrun, stairs etc.

Rooftop level

• Solar hot water panels atop lift motor room roof.

3.4 A table summary of the proposal is as follows:

Commercial 1BR 2BR 3BR Car spaces

Bicycle spaces

Level 1 - ground

Restaurant – 285m2

- - - - 12

Levels 2 - 6 Office - 133m2

(Level 2) 1 per floor

2 per floor

- 42 27

Level 7 - 2 1 2 - -

Levels 8 -24 - 2 per floor

4 per floor

- - -

Totals: - 40 80 2 42 39

3.5 The applicant’s submission notes that the floor plans have been designed to allow amalgamation of the one and two bedroom apartments to create larger three or four bedroom apartments if required.

3.6 The building is proposed in a podium and tower configuration.

The podium is proposed to be six levels and 20.5m high and to be constructed to the front, side and rear boundaries.

The tower comprises an additional 18 residential levels and a plant level above the podium for an overall height of 24 levels (82.5m) to parapet level.

The tower is proposed to be set back as follows:

• North (side): 5.1m. • South (side): 3.1m. • East (rear, facing Railway Place): 0.0m to 5.19m. • West (front, facing Ferrars Street): 2.1m.

3.7 Materials and finishes are proposed to include off form concrete with a natural grey finish, clear and light grey glazing, powder coated metal cladding for the principal structure and external walls and perforated metal screens to the car park.

3.8 The plans which are the subject of this report are those referred to as Project No. 7451, Drawing Nos. SK001 Rev 03, SL002 Rev 03, SK022 Rev 6, SK023 Rev 6, SK024 Rev 4, SK025 Rev 06, SK026 Rev 5, SK027 Rev 3, SK028 Rev 03, SK029 Rev 5, SK030, SK031, SK032 Rev 1, SK033 Rev 1, SK034 Rev 1, SK035 Rev 1 and SK036, prepared by Denton Corker Marshall Architects.


20

SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDS 4.

4.1 The subject site is located on the east side of Ferrars Street approximately 50m north of City Road.

4.2 The site is irregularly shaped, albeit generally rectangular save for a minor truncation along the rear boundary.

4.3 The site has a frontage width of 30.02m facing Ferrars Street, a north side boundary length of 30.18m and a south side boundary length of 24.21m for an area of approximately 820m2.

4.4 The site has a rear abuttal to Railway Place which is a 4.0m wide fully constructed bluestone street that runs between City Road to the south and Douglas Street to the north. The east side of Railway Place is developed for angle parking (on land owned and leased by the Public Transport Corporation - PTC).

4.5 Existing land surrounding the subject site is developed as follows:

• North (side): Single-storey Significant Heritage graded warehouse building occupied by a panel beating business and single-storey warehouse beyond.

• South (side): Single-storey older brick commercial building, and three-storey commercial building and one and two –storey commercial buildings beyond this to the corner of City Road.

• East (rear): Railway Place, an embankment topped with the City-St Kilda light rail line, and single-storey warehouse buildings beyond. It is noted that pursuant to Ministerial Amendment C83 dated 15 April, 2010 and an associated incorporated document, the land on the east side of the railway embankment at 400-430 City Road, 10-24 Cecil Street and 115-131 Whiteman Street, Southbank has approval for a mixed use development comprising a four level podium and four towers of 28 to 39 levels incorporating 1274 dwellings, a 288-room hotel, ground level retail totalling 1159m2, ground level showroom totalling 859m2, food and beverage floor space totalling 519m2, 1,019 associated car parking spaces and 1,274 bicycle parking spaces. This approval requires the development to commence by 15 April 2015 and be completed by 15 April, 2021. The approval has not been acted upon to date and is considered unlikely to be commenced in the permitted time frame because a permit was granted in 2014 to convert the majority of the buildings into a Place of Worship.

• West (opposite): One and two-storey warehouse, industrial and commercial buildings. It is noted that No. 134-142 Ferrars Street, diagonally opposite on the north-west corner of Thistlewaite Street and Ferrars Street is the subject of a current application for a 49 level (153.7m) building containing 381 dwellings, a child care centre and two shops. Council considered this application at its meeting of 23 April, 2013 and determined to advise the Minister for Planning that Council did not support the application in its current form and that it should be refused. The Minister did not make a decision and responsibility for determining the application has now transferred to the MPA.


21

4.6 The SFP includes a precinct vision plan for the proposed Montague Urban Village. This plan envisages land surrounding the subject being developed as follows:

• North: A new school and community hub, a new local recreational park and part of the Montague precinct Activity Centre with a focus on a mix of retail, commercial, residential and community uses. A potential laneway between Ferrars Street and Railway Place is proposed along the south side of the school site. Preferred building heights are 18 storey (60m) adjacent and up to Buckhurst Street (inc. the school site), and then 8 storey (27m) beyond this up to the Freeway.

• South: Mixed use development with preferred building heights of 4 storey (15m) to City Road and a mixture of 4 storey (15m) and 8 storey (27m) to the south-west .

• East: The light rail line, and discretionary preferred height beyond this. • West: Mixed use development including the Montague Precinct Activity Centre

along Buckhurst Street. Preferred building heights are18 storey (60m), increasing to 30 storey (100m), then reducing to 8 storey (27m), then increasing to discretionary beyond this to the west and north-west.

PERMIT TRIGGERS 5.

The following zone and overlay controls apply to the site, with planning permission required as described.

Planning Scheme Provision Why is a planning permit required?

Clause 37.04 - Capital City Zone (CCZ1)

The use of the land for Accommodation (including a Dwelling) does not require a planning permit provided the threshold distances from industrial and/or warehouse uses referred to in the table to Clause 52.10 are met. The use of land for Retail premises does not require a planning permit. Office is a Section 2 or permit required use. A permit is required to construct a building, or construct or carrying out works pursuant to Clause 37.04-4. A permit and prior approval for the redevelopment of the site is required to demolish or remove a building or works.

Clause 45.06 - Development Contributions Plan Overlay (DCPO2)

A permit may be granted to subdivide land, construct a building or construct or carry out works before a precinct wide development contributions plan has been prepared to the satisfaction of the responsible authority if any of the following apply: • A site specific development contributions plan has been

prepared by the developer to the satisfaction of the Minister for Planning;

• An agreement under Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 has been entered into with the responsible authority that makes provision for development contributions.

• The permit contains a condition requiring an agreement under Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 that makes provision for development contributions to be entered into before the commencement of development.


22

Clause 45.06 - Development Contributions Plan Overlay (DCPO2) continued

• The permit allows for the construction of a building or construction or carrying out works for; - Additions or alterations to a single dwelling or development

ancillary to use of land for a single dwelling. - A single dwelling on a lot - An existing use of land provided the gross floor of the

existing use is not increased by more than 1000 square metres.

- A sign. • The permit only allows the consolidation of land or a

boundary realignment.

Clause 45.09 - Parking Overlay (PO1)

Schedule 1 to the Parking Overlay specifies that a maximum of one car space should be provided for each Dwelling and a maximum of one car space per 100m2 of gross floor area for Office and Retail premises uses. A permit is required to exceed these rates. The proposal does not exceed these rates and does not require a permit under this Clause.

Clause 52.06 - Car Parking The car parking requirements for Dwelling, Office and Retail premises under this Clause do not apply because a car parking requirement for these uses is specified in the Schedule to the Parking Overlay. Car parking should meet the design requirements of Clause 52.06-8. A permit may be granted to vary any dimension or requirement of Clause 52.06-8 (Design standards for car parking).

Clause 52.10 - Uses with Adverse Amenity Potential

The threshold distances from industrial and/or warehouse uses referred to in the table to Clause 52.10 are required to be met.

Clause 52.34 - Bicycle Facilities

A new use must not commence or the floor area of an existing use must not be increased until the required bicycle facilities have been provided on the land pursuant to Clause 52.34-1. A permit may be granted to vary, reduce or waive the above requirement.

PLANNING SCHEME PROVISIONS 6.

6.1 State Planning Policy Frameworks (SPPF)

The SPPF contains a number of clauses that are relevant to the applications including:

Clause 11: Settlement, including 11.02 Urban Growth, and 11.04 Metropolitan Melbourne

Clause 15: Built Environment and Heritage including 15.01-1 Urban Design (This clause notes that: Planning must consider as relevant: Design Guidelines for Higher Density Residential Development (Department of Sustainability and Environment, 2004) in assessing the design and built form of residential development of four or more storeys) and 15.02-1 Energy and resource efficiency


23

Clause 16: Housing

Clause 17: Economic Development

Clause 18: Transport

6.2 Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF)

The Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) contains a number of clauses which are relevant to these applications as follows:

Clause 21.03 Ecologically Sustainable Development, including

Clause 21.03-1: Environmentally Sustainable Land Use and Development

Clause 21.03-2: Sustainable Transport

Clause 21.04 Land Use, including

Clause 21.04-1: Housing and Accommodation

Clause 21.05 Built Form, including

Clause 21.05-1: Heritage Clause 21.05-2: Urban Structure and Character Clause 21.05-3: Urban Design and the Public Realm Clause 21.05-4: Physical Infrastructure

Clause 21.06 Neighbourhoods, including

Clause 21.06-8: Fisherman’s Bend Urban Renewal Area

The following clauses of the LPPF are also relevant:

Clause 22.06 Urban Design Policy for Non - Residential Development and Multi - Unit Residential Development

Clause 22.10 Urban Design within Fishermans Bend

Clause 22.12 Stormwater Management (Water Sensitive Urban Design)

REFERRALS 7.

7.1 Internal referrals

Council has established the Major Development Group comprising officers from Council’s Heritage and Urban Design, Traffic and Parking, Engineering, Waste Management, Strategic Planning, Environmental Design, Asset Planning and infrastructure sections to review and provide internal referral advice on Fishermans Bend applications.

Internal responses are set out below. These issues are discussed in Section 9.

Traffic & Parking Management

General The applicant has reviewed and designed their scheme around the City of Port Phillip Planning Scheme and not the items included within the Strategic Framework Plan Design Guidelines. The applicant has also assumed that Railway Place will be closed and become two way from City Road. Whilst this is council’s aspiration it has not be approved and without this arrangement the applicants proposal will be flawed.


24

Car Parking Rate The car parking rate of 0.34 spaces/apartment is fully supported and aligns with the Strategic Framework Plan Design Guideline Objective 6.5 to ‘limit private car parking numbers, particularly within 400m of existing or proposed high frequency public transport stops’. Visitor Bicycle Spaces The visitor bicycle parking is located in the proposed new laneway. As discussed later the location of this may create a pinch point due to the location of adjacent tables and chairs. Resident Bicycle Spaces The Port Phillip Planning Scheme requirement is for the applicant to provide 41 on–site bicycle parking spaces. The applicant is however proposing to provide only 39 spaces which does not align with the Port Phillip Planning Scheme or Strategic Framework Plan Design Guideline objective 6.4 ‘to encourage cycling through the provision of easily accessible on-site facilities and bike parking’ and guideline 1 that states ‘one cycle space/dwelling and one cycle space per 50sqm of office floor area is preferred’. The low level of car parking supplied on site means that the applicant should provide residents with more choice for undertaking trips. The applicant should investigate providing additional on-site bicycle parking facilities for residents on Level 3 in the northwest corner of the car parking area. Provision of new Laneway The continuation of a pedestrian laneway aligned with Thistlewaite Street is supported and helps to create additional pedestrian connectivity through the precinct and access to the public transport stop (Route 96) is improved. The activation of this laneway aligns with Strategic Framework Plan Design Guidelines. Whilst we welcome the provision of the laneway there are a couple of pinch points within the design which may create conflict into the future. The design of the ramp at 1m wide is narrow (although it meets Australian Standards). Consideration of how a wheelchair will pass between the bottom of the stairs to the elevated connection and the dining tables to access the doorway to the commercial café/restaurant needs further work due to the small distance between structures to manoeuvre safely. Once again the location of the bicycle hoops on the northern wall of the laneway and the location of dining tables creates another opportunity for conflict. Elevated Public Transport Connection ... do not support the separate elevated link from 181 to the Light Rail Station. … feel pedestrian activity should be driven to the ground floor level and placed on the future single access ramp to the Route 96 stop from Railway Place. The elevated link still looks like it cuts across the property of 163-169 Ferrars Street (see image below). The concept design context plan shows the link being located at the very northern edge of the site. I think the current space is asphalt however in future the owner of this site may want to redevelop and will be impeded by the construction of the elevated link.


25

Visitor bicycle parking to support the use of the Light Rail Station is not required. The proximity of the CBD to the development and its future proximity to the CBD to Bay bicycle route will create improved mode choice and facilitate more people to cycle. The visitor bicycle parking spaces will be utilised to assist and support the liveability of the development itself. Car Park Access In the short term development requires removal of Victrack car parking spaces to enable safe access/egress from their car park lift. In the longer term the site is dependent on proposed changes to Railway Place lay out due to school development. Car Park Layout The majority of spaces conform to dimension as set out in Clause 52.06 and are considered satisfactory. Vehicle entry and egress manoeuvres have been satisfactorily demonstrated with swept path designs. Spaces on podium 2 & 4 will require reversing back to the main parking aisle to access the lift. The southern section also have on-site bicycle provisions and lift access (back to the main building). Considering the level of different user groups within this section, reversing from the southern bays to the main aisle is not supported as the likelihood of conflict with different user groups significantly increases. The floor to ceiling height of the car park is lower than specified in the Strategic Framework Plan Design Guidelines. Objective 6.6 Guideline 3 ‘Car parks should have level floors and a floor to ceiling height of at least 3m to provide for future conversion from car parking to other uses’. Pedestrian Sightlines The Traffic and Transport Impact Assessment recommends a convex mirror on the southern wall at the site access point in lieu of sight triangles. This proposal is supported and recommended in these conditions.


26

Car Lift Service Rate and Queuing A total average turnaround time of 61 seconds is anticipated to service a vehicle and return to the ground floor. Therefore it is estimated that the lift can service 59 vehicles per hour. Based on queue theory calculations, it is expected that the proposed system will generate a 95th percentile queue of 2 vehicles including one vehicle in the lift (or on car propping in Railway Place) based on PM peak volume generation of 8 arrivals and 5 departures. This is considered satisfactory as long as agreement to remove car parking spaces on VicTrack land is approved. Waste Removal The applicant proposes that garbage bins are wheeled into Railway Place to await pick-up. In its current state …. don’t believe there is sufficient width for these to be located here and have safe access past. Loading Considerations Whilst the proposal not to include loading would be consistent with the Port Phillip Planning Scheme the Strategic Framework Plan Design Guidelines Objective 6.2 is ‘to ensure all servicing and loading occurs on site’. This objective notes the high level of servicing required for resident apartments which results from removal vehicles. For this reason the proponent should investigate providing on-site loading facilities. The proponent indicates that the current on-street loading arrangement can continue into the future however with the road alignment changes on Ferrars Street there will be limited on street parking and loading opportunities available. Closure of Railway Place It remains Council’s aspiration to close Railway Place at Douglas Street. This will create improved public space on the route to the upgraded Route 96 stop and enable the integrated school/community hub a little more breathing space. Council still needs to work with affected parties including local landowners, and VicTrack to get the closure approved.

Sustainable Design

Sustainable Design Statement submitted with the application lacks commitment. Recommend a permit condition requiring provision of sustainable design measures. Encourage third pipe plumbing throughout the building. Concerned about the standard of internal amenity / access to light for battle-axe shaped rooms.

Property Services

Railway Place road reserve is only 4.0m wide. Parking area on east side is Public Transport Corporation (PTC) land and not part of road, and cannot be relied on for access.

Turning area at end of Railway Place is private land. No rights to rely on turning area.

Tall vehicles (3.8m or greater) such as moving vans, waste collection trucks, emergency vehicles exiting Railway Place cannot turn left because of low clearance under light rail bridge across Montague Street. Such vehicles can only exit to the right, across several lanes of traffic. This may result in long wait periods and blocking of entry/exit to/from Railway Place for other vehicles.


27

Waste Management

Waste Management Plan (WMP) states 8 x 1100 litre bins and only 7 listed on plans.

The exit door for waste bins on to Railway Place will need to be checked for width to confirm that 1100 litre bins can move through doorway.

The exit for the collection vehicle from Railway Place will need to be checked by our Traffic department, Vehicle listed is 4m high and will not be able to do a left hand turn into City Rd due to overhead bridge which has a clearance of 3.8m, thus will need to drive through main intersection to be able to do a right hand turn into City Rd.

7.2 External referrals

The MPA is responsible for external referrals for this application.

The application was not required to be externally referred by Council.

OFFICER’S ASSESSMENT 8.

8.1 Local Policy

8.1.1 Strategic Response

The building design proposes to respond to its site and surrounds by providing:

• A publicly accessible internal arcade style through-link between Ferrars Street at the front of the site and Railway Place at the rear of the site at ground floor level and first floor level;

• A footbridge link from the internal arcade at first floor level across Railway Place to the elevated light rail platform opposite;

• A start-up business incubator style hot-desk/studio/office space at first floor level.

The publicly accessible through link at ground floor level and the first floor level studio/offices are supported because:

• The through link would assist in activating the site and its surrounds, improve pedestrian permeability in the neighbourhood including aligning with Thistlewaite Street to the west, and improving links and accessibility to public transport, and would create an interesting semi-public space within the site.

• The studio offices would contribute to the employment base of the precinct, with an accent on continuing the young entrepreneur and creative industry character of the area.

A condition is recommended to confirm ongoing 24hr public access to the arcade though-link Refer recommended Condition 15.

The first floor level of the through link and the associated link-bridge across Railway Place are not supported because of concerns regards:

• the general narrowness of the internal stairs between the ground and first floor levels,

• ease of access for disabled persons, • the bridge-link obstructing traffic along Railway Place and being partly over the Title

boundaries of the adjacent lot to the north side, and


28

• the bridge being superfluous, or of only minor benefit if anticipated upgrade works are carried out to the light rail stop, and/or a bridge is constructed further to the north to the proposed school site.

8.1.2 Building height and setbacks

The FBSFP Design Guidelines recommend that street walls /podiums be of a low scale, generally up to five storeys (20.0m) so as to not dominate pedestrian spaces, but do support a degree of variation of four to six storeys to avoid undue uniformity in massing.

The podium is proposed to be six storey and 20.5m high and so would comply with the height objective for street walls / podiums.

The subject site is an area identified as having a preferred maximum height of 18 storeys (60.0m). The application is seeking discretion for a taller 24 storey (82.5m) high building. The application is also seeking discretion to reduce the street and side setbacks of the tower element of the building to less than that recommended in the Framework Plan Design Guidelines.

The Guidelines recommend towers over 40m height be setback 10m from the street and shared or side boundaries (with discretion for the setback of parts of tall buildings to be reduced to a minimum of 5.0m). The tower is proposed to be setback 2.1m from Ferrars Street, between 0.0m and 5.19m from Railway Place (due to an angled frontage), 5.1m from the north side boundary, and 3.1m from the south side boundary.

The design has been reviewed by the Office of the Victorian Government Architect (OVGA) who advised that they supported the design including the proposed reduced setbacks and the additional height for the tower. The OVGA’s comments are attached as Appendix Three to this report.

Whilst Council officers do not disagree with the OVGA regarding the general architecture of the proposal, and reducing the setbacks of the tower element, they do have concerns that the additional six levels (22.5m) height of the tower would:

• Be inconsistent with the strategic direction for the site and surrounds.

The subject site abuts a four storey (15m) preferred height precinct on its south (side) boundary, and is opposite an eight storey (27m) preferred height precinct across Ferrars Street to the south.

In this context, it is considered that development up to the 18 storey (60m) preferred height for the site would already represent a considerable step up in height, and the proposed additional height (more than 30% higher than the preferred height) would further accentuate this.

• Be highly visible as one of the first tall buildings in this part of the Montague precinct.

Unlike the reduced setbacks for the tower element which would not be generally discernible from a distance, the additional height of the tower would be visible for a considerable distance including land outside of the FBURA.

The four storey (15m) preferred height and small lot sizes to the south mean that it is unlikely that the land to the south of the subject site would be developed for tall buildings, meaning that the proposal would be highly visible from the south and would remain so.

• Establish a precedent for other properties to exceed the preferred height.


29

No tall buildings have yet been approved in this part of the Montague precinct pursuant to the Fishermans Bend Urban Design Guidelines. The 41 storey approval noted in the OVGA deliberations on height predates the Guidelines by four years, and as noted at Section 5.5 of this report, has not commenced, and is considered unlikely to commence, and is in a different and taller preferred height area in the SFP.

Whilst it is acknowledged that the Framework Plan provides discretion to exceed the preferred maximum height, it is considered important, particularly with regard to initial permit applications, for new building approvals to both establish and respect the preferred character of the precinct as expressed by the preferred heights for the various precincts unless significant community benefits can be realised.

Officers are also concerned about the cumulative impact that increased development density on the subject site and multiple other sites would have on the liveability, character and congestion of the precinct, and on achieving the balance of jobs and economic prosperity, urban renewal, housing, transport, and community objectives set out in the SFP.

• Not be necessary to relieve the bulk of the building facing Ferrars Street.

The OVGA supported the additional height because they believed it would create a more slender and elegant building, relative to its overall width.

Officers believe that concerns with mass and bulk and proportions would be better addressed within the preferred height for the site and surrounds by alternate measures such as (but not restricted to):

• Reducing the height of the podium by one level. • Breaking up the mass of the tower by use of varied setbacks (rebates).

• Not provide sufficient community benefit to justify both increasing the height and reducing the setbacks of the tower.

8.1.3 Transport and parking

The subject site is in the Parking Overlay which specifies maximum rather than minimum parking numbers including:

• Dwelling: Maximum 1 car space per dwelling x 122 dwellings = 122 spaces

• Office: Maximum 1 space 100m2 gross floor area x 133m2 = 1 space

• Retail premises (inc. restaurant): Maximum 1 space 100m2 gross floor area x 285m2 = 2 spaces

• 1 motorcycle parking space for every 100 car spaces = 1 spaces

Under these provisions, the proposal has a maximum requirement of 125 car parking spaces and 1 motorcycle space.

The proposal also requires 41 bicycle parking spaces comprising three employee, 24 resident and 14 visitor bicycle parking spaces.

It is proposed to provide 42 car spaces, 1 motorcycle space and 39 (2 employee, 12 visitor, and 25 resident) bicycle spaces for the 122 dwellings, restaurant and offices. The proposal does not allocate the parking spaces. This equates to a parking provision of 0.34 spaces if all spaces are allocated to the dwellings, or 0.32 if one space is allocated to the restaurant and the offices, and the remaining 40 spaces are allocated to the dwellings.


30

Council’s Transport Planner raised no objection to the number of car parking spaces for the dwellings, noting the site was opposite a light rail stop and the FBSFP Guidelines seek to limit private car parking numbers.

The layout and dimensions of the car park spaces and access aisles would mostly comply with the relevant standards and are considered satisfactory, however, some concerns were raised regarding the floor to ceiling heights of the car park levels and the need for some vehicles to reverse back to the car lift. These concerns should be passed on to the MPA.

Access to the car park levels is proposed via a single car lift via Railway Place at the rear.

Council’s Transport Planner concluded that the lift would not result in unreasonable vehicle queuing, subject to removal of existing car parking spaces along Railway Place. The car parking spaces in question are on adjacent private land and so cannot be forcibly forgone. It is considered that the vehicle access would be reasonable without removal of these spaces.

The parking and traffic submission accompanying the application proposed the installation of a convex wall on the southern wall adjacent to the car lift access. This would be satisfactory.

8.1.4 Sustainable design

A Sustainable Management Plan (SMP) including a STEPS assessment and a STORM rating report was submitted with the application. The report showed that the building envelope would achieve a 6.2 star energy rating pursuant to the FirstRate5 house-energy rating system, and the building would exceed the minimum requirements of the STEPS energy assessment for Greenhouse emissions from energy use, Peak energy use, Mains (drinking) water use, Stormwater quality impacts, and Building material impacts, and for stormwater treatment and reuse.

It is considered that a building of the scale and nature proposed would be best assessed under the Green Star rating system rather than STEPS and FirstRate5, and should achieve at least a 4 Star Green Star rating.

Council’s Sustainable Energy Officer raised a concern that the SMP did not set out a commitment to include all of the sustainable design measures featured in the SMP.

It is recommended that Council advocate to the MPA that any approval be subject to a condition requiring a revised SMP to achieve at least a 4 Star Green Star rating, and to incorporate all of the sustainable design measures in the revised SMP Refer recommended condition 3.

8.1.5 Wind impacts

The application documentation included a consultant engineer assessment of pedestrian wind impacts within a circular area of approximately 375m radius of the site. The assessment recommended a number of wind mitigations measures be carried out as follows:

• Addition of canopies over the Ferrars Street lobby entry and through-link entry. • The addition of openings along the north side of the Level 3 and 5 car parks. • The addition of a perimeter parapet and porous and solid fences and balustrades at

roof top level.


31

The report concluded that subject to these measures:

• The development would satisfy the criterion for safety at all locations and • The development would satisfy the recommended criteria for comfort in most

locations. • Wind conditions adjacent to the proposal would satisfy criteria for walking along the

footpaths, standing at the building entrance, and sitting in the east outdoor seating areas on the ground level.

The report noted that the wind conditions were based on the existing surrounding low rise buildings, and that wind conditions in and adjacent to the proposal would likely decrease in the future as the area was developed in accordance with the Strategic Plan.

Reliance on openings along the north side boundary for wind mitigation is not supported because they could be built over if the next door property sought to develop in a similar manner as on the subject site.

It is recommended that any approval include a condition that:

• The wind mitigation measures in the building be revised to not rely on openings along the north shared side boundary; and

• The development must incorporate the wind mitigation measures listed in the revised Wind Report Refer recommended conditions 1.(c) and 17.

8.1.6 Apartment design

It is considered that the apartment layouts would provide good levels of natural light and ventilation to habitable rooms, as well as flexibility to amalgamate smaller dwellings to create larger dwellings if desired.

The site faces a light rail line on its east side, is 50m from a Road Zone Category 1 to the south (City Road), and is proximate to the elevated West Gate Freeway, and so is subject to relatively high levels of ambient noise throughout most of the day. It is recommended that any approval include a condition that the development must incorporate sound attenuation measures in its construction Refer recommended condition 20.

8.1.7 Other matters

The north and south side boundary walls of the podium feature openings for car park ventilation and wind mitigation and (secondary) light to bathrooms and bedrooms.

These openings might inhibit the development potential of the adjoining properties.

Any approval should be subject to a condition requiring the land owner enter into a S173 Agreement that the windows and openings be acknowledged as non-required for the purposes of light or ventilation or wind mitigation, and be removed and the walls made good should a development be approved up to and/or over these openings on the adjacent lot(s) Refer recommended Condition 14.

8.2 Development Contributions

No Development Contributions Plan has been publicly released or adopted into the planning scheme. The Independent Advisory Committee appointed by the Minister for Planning is examining the current Victorian development contributions system and is currently working on a new development contributions framework based on a standard levy corresponding to different development settings (such as growth areas and strategic development areas).


32

It is recommended that any approval include a condition that development contributions must be provided via a S173 Agreement. The development contributions condition should require an owner to enter an agreement with Council before the development starts, with 10% of development contributions payable at the issue of the building permit, and 90% prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance (for subdivision) Refer recommended condition 13.

COVENANTS 9.

The applicant has completed a declaration that the subject land, being all that land contained within Volume 11126, Folio 160, commonly known as Lots 1 and 2 on Plan of Subdivision 616839D, is not encumbered by a restrictive covenant or Section 173 Agreement or other obligation such as an easement or building envelope.

OFFICER DIRECT OR INDIRECT INTEREST 10.

10.1 No officers involved in the preparation of this report have any direct or indirect interest in the matter.

OPTIONS 11.

11.1 Provide comments to the Metropolitan Planning Authority as recommended

11.2 Provide changed or additional comments to the Metropolitan Planning Authority Approve to those recommended.

11.3 Refuse to provide comments to the Metropolitan Planning Authority.

CONCLUSION 12.

12.1 The redevelopment of the subject site for a multi-storey mixed use building is supported in principle, as is the proposed arcade style through link between Ferrars Street and Railway Place.

12.2 The height of the building above the preferred height for the site, the first floor level of the through link and the associated link-bridge across Railway Place, and some of the proposed wind mitigation measures are not supported.

13. RECOMMENDATION

That Council advise the Metropolitan Planning Authority that:

13.1 Council endorses the publicly accessible through link at ground floor level and the first floor level studio/offices subject to conditions to confirm ongoing 24hr public access to the arcade though-link.

13.2 Council does not support the first floor level of the through link and the associated link-bridge across Railway Place because of concerns regards:

• the general narrowness of the internal stairs between the ground and first floor levels,

• ease of access for disabled persons, • the bridge-link obstructing traffic along Railway Place and being partly over the Title

boundaries of the adjacent lot to the north side, and • the bridge being superfluous, or of only minor benefit if anticipated upgrade works

are carried out to the light rail stop, and/or a bridge is constructed further to the north to the proposed school site.


33

13.3 Council does not support the proposed height in excess of the 18 storey (60m) preferred height for the site as expressed in the Fishermans Bend Strategic Framework Plan because of concerns the additional height (24 storeys – 82.5m):

• Is inconsistent with the preferred building scale for the site and surrounds as expressed in the SFP. The proposal is more than 30% higher than the preferred height for this site (18 storeys – 60.0m).

• Would establish a precedent for other buildings to exceed the preferred height. • Does not provide sufficient community benefit to justify a variation to the preferred

height. • Does not achieve an urban design outcome that could not be achieved by other

means (such as by reducing the height of the podium and the tower to achieve similar proportions to that proposed).

13.4 Council further does not support:

• The wind impact mitigation works relying on openings along the sides of the building which might impede future development abutting the subject site.

13.5 In the event that the MPA determines to grant a permit for the application, any permit issued should incorporate the conditions set out in Attachment 2 including conditions for:

• An environmental audit;

• An integrated urban art contribution;

• A sustainable management plan;

• The land owner to enter into a S173 Agreement that the windows and openings on the north and south side boundary walls of the podium be acknowledged as non-required for the purposes of light or ventilation or wind mitigation, and be removed and the walls made good should a development be approved up to and/or over these openings on the adjacent lot(s).

• The land owner to enter into a S173 Agreement with Council before the development starts, to provide development contributions with 10% payment to be made at the issue of the building permit, and 90% prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance (for subdivision).

Documents

Agenda of Statutory Planning Committee - 18 November 2014 · AGENDA – STATUTORY PLANNING COMMITTEE 18 NOVEMBER 2014. 10 1.3 The MPA has provided Council with the opportunity to