CITY OF GREATER GEELONG PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD AT CITY HALL GHERINGHAP STREET, GEELONG ON WEDNESDAY 12 DECEMBER 2018

Transcription

1 CITY OF GREATER GEELONG PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD AT CITY HALL GHERINGHAP STREET, GEELONG ON WEDNESDAY 12 DECEMBER 2018 Meeting opened at 5.00pm 1. COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Councillors Asher, Murnane, Gryzbek, Harwood, Mansfield, Murrihy, Aitken, Sullivan, Mason 2. OTHER OFFICERS PRESENT: Joanne van Slageren, John Rush, Elena Anastos 3. APOLOGIES: Nil 4. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES: That the minutes of the meeting of 22 November 2018 as circulated be adopted. Moved: Cr Harwood Seconded: Cr Murnane Carried 5. DECLARATION OF INTEREST: Nil 6. MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION:

2 Application No: Applicant: Subject Land: Owner: Zone: PP The Planning Professionals 50 Mackey Street, NORTH GEELONG Powerview Pty Ltd Industrial 1 Zone Overlays: Design and Development Overlay Schedule 20 Listed Buildings: Existing Use: Proposed Use: Amendment: Nil Vacant for approx. 30 years (former power station) Use and Development of a Multi-Level Office Building generally in accordance with the endorsed plans NA Subject Site 50 MACKEY STREET, NORTH GEELONG

3 Summary The subject land is located on the southern end of Mackey Street and adjoins the Corio Bay foreshore. Central Geelong is located approximately 3 km south of the subject site and North Geelong Station is located approximately 750 metres south west of the subject site. The site has an area of area of approximately hectares. Vehicular access to the site is provided via an unmade crossover from Mackey Street which is a 30 metre wide local road and a default 50kph speed limit. The site is encumbered by a number of easements along the western and north-western boundaries for the purposes of electricity, sewerage and a carriageway easement. It is proposed to redevelop the former power station building on the subject site for offices. The redevelopment would utilise the existing footprint and shell of the former power station. The proposed refurbishment will comprise seven levels and would have a total floor area of approximately 12,106sqm. In terms of external works, most of the eastern building wall where the entrance is proposed would be demolished and replaced with glazing. The remaining existing glazing and louvres would be replaced with new glazing. A large outdoor forecourt area with sculptured art and landscaping is proposed at the east side of the building, which has an abuttal to the Corio Bay foreshore. 440 car parking spaces are provided, which will exceed the statutory requirement of 426 spaces, therefore a car parking reduction is not required as part of this application. The site is located within an Industrial 1 Zone and has a Design and Development Overlay Schedule 20. The application was notified by way of placing a notice on the site and by giving notice to adjoining and nearby property owners. Additional notice was given under Section 52(1)(d) to the Victorian Regional Channels Authority (VRCA), Geelong Port, EPA, CFA and the Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources (DEDJTR). Nine (9) objections were received, however three (3) were withdrawn, leaving six (6) objections to the application. Councils Traffic, Urban Design, Environment Strategy and Engineering Departments are all supportive of the proposal subject to conditions. The external referral authorities VicRoads, EPA, Powercor, Ausnet and CFA are supportive of the proposal subject to conditions. The key issues raised are associated with potential land use conflicts and lack of policy support. The application has been assessed against the provisions of the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme including the relevant policies and zone/overlays. It is considered that, on balance, the proposal will result in a positive planning outcome particularly with regard to the re-use of a high profile site which has been vacant for 30 years, creation of employment, the facilitation of an innovative use of a degraded site and broadly the proposal supports Council s direction to promote clever and creative future. Importantly, when considering the state and local planning policies, it is considered that broad support is readily achieved.

4 A key consideration has been the sites location and potential impact to adjacent nearby port activities, both current and future. This is also a key policy consideration. It is considered that the proposal and ultimately adherence to the recommendations contained in this report will introduce a complimentary non-sensitive and non-industrial activity that does not undermine the significance of the current and future operations of the port. Conversely, it is anticipated that the proposal can complement port activities through the provision of high quality office space and the ability to build on the emerging innovation hub. The report recommends the proposal be supported subject to conditions outlined below. Alternate Recommendation Moved: Cr Harwood Seconded: Cr Murrihy That the Responsible Authority having considered all matters which the Planning and Environment Act, 1987, requires it to consider, resolves to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit for the Use and Development of a Multi-Level Office Building at 50 Mackey Street, NORTH GEELONG generally in accordance with the plans submitted with the application and dated 7 August 2018 and subject to the following conditions: AMENDED PLANS 1. Prior to the commencement of the development, amended plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans submitted with the application and plans submitted and dated 7 August 2018 and the plans submitted with the application but modified to show: a) Details of screening and/or other measures to reduce view lines from any internal office space and roof terrace towards the Bulk Grain Piers and Port area (excluding Federal Mills) b) Removal of any vehicular link to Swinburne Street across Osborne Park. c) Detailed floor plans which show gross floor area/s, ingress and egress, internal circulation, facilities, toilets, showers, storage, bicycle parking, universal access initiatives, lift overruns and other plant equipment, detailed materiality schedule including fenestrations, balustrades, colours and glazing d) Vehicle turning areas at the end of each isle. e) Include notations on the plans which: i) Locate the outdoor air intakes away from the likely source of contaminated air. ii) Orient the outdoor air intakes on the prevailing winds which are generally south and west. iii) Provide standard filtration to the outdoor air system. iv) Provide user control on outside air system to reduce occupant dissatisfaction. f) Amended plans required by conditions specified by Powercor in this permit.

5 g) Revised driveway which intersects with the Mackey St at right angles and be 6.0m wide, with a minimum 1.4 m offset from the western property boundary. The driveway must be provided with a minimum 9.0m internal radius between the road reserve boundary and the driveway alignment which runs parallel with the western property boundary. h) Removal of the proposed food and drink premises. i) The location of bicycle facilities, including end of trip facilities, in accordance with Clause of the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme. ENDORSED PLANS 2. The use and development as shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered without the written consent of the Responsible Authority. ENVIRONMENTALLY SUSTAINABLE DESIGN 3. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority, prior to the commencement of the development a report prepared by an appropriately qualified person which outlines the environmentally sustainable design elements of the proposal in relation to building energy management, water sensitive urban design, construction materials, indoor environment quality, waste management and transport must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The approved ESD measures must be incorporated into the development. LANDSCAPE MASTER PLAN 4. Prior to the commencement of development, three (3) copies of a landscape plan prepared by a suitably qualified or experienced person, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The plan(s) must be drawn to scale and show: a) Details of surface finishes of pathways and driveways; b) A planting schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs and ground covers including botanical names, common names, pot sizes, sizes at maturity, and quantities of each plant; c) Clarify if the trees in the car parking areas are canopy/shade trees. d) Clarify whether WSUD is being used within the car parking areas (i.e. bioretention basins) e) Provide details on the Street Interface Fence. f) Provide details on the Foreshore Interface Fence. g) Provide more details on the two rain gardens. The plan states drainage and rain gardens are indicative and subject to further detailed survey and design. It is important to clarify what are they designed to treat, where does the water get directed to once its treated & is sufficient area being provided in the site plan to treat the overall stormwater runoff. h) Clarify what is proposed in the area between the old fence and existing eastern roadway. i) The removal of any native grassland will need to be supported by a flora assessment. (Note: this permit does not authorise the removal of native vegetation therefore separate may be required).

6 j) Setback indicative rain gardens >3m from property boundary with the aim to enhance waterfront treatments by not featuring infrastructure along the property boundary. k) Best practice storm water quality and reuse measures. l) Details of the relationship with the crown land east of the subject site including any pedestrian linkages to the foreshore. When approved, the plan will be endorsed and form part of the permit, all to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 5. Prior to the occupation of the building, the landscaping works as shown on the endorsed plans must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The landscaping shown on the endorsed plans must be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. SECTION 173 AGREEMENT 6. Prior to the occupation of the building the owner of the land may be required to enter into an agreement under Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 with the Responsible Authority. The agreement must be in a form to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, and the owner of the land must be responsible for the expense of the preparation and registration of the agreement, including the Responsible Authority s reasonable costs and expense (including legal expenses) incidental to the preparation, registration and enforcement of the agreement. The agreement must contain covenants to be registered on the Title of the property so as to run with the land or any part of it, and must provide an acknowledgement that: a) The land is located within an Industrial Zone and the owner or occupier may be impacted by noise, odours and other emissions from nearby industrial activities. b) The site must not be used for a sensitive use. sensitive use means a residential use, a child care centre, a pre-school centre or a primary school. c) The owner or occupier must consider measures to mitigate acoustic or odour impacts from nearby industrial activities. d) The owner will alert future tenants of the potential impacts, for example through a lease agreement and/or making this agreement available to tenants. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 7. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority, prior to the commencement of works, an updated site assessment must be submitted by a suitably qualified environmental professional. The assessment must be in accordance with the Potentially Contaminated Land General Practice Note and confirm that the site is suitable for its intended use to the satisfaction and/or make recommendation for site remediation (if applicable) of the Responsible Authority.

7 The report should also make reference to the Preliminary Site Contamination Report Geelong Powerhouse Site dated 10 August Any recommendations required to satisfy site assessment must be implemented prior to the occupation of the building unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Responsible Authority. CAR PARKING, ACCESS AND TRAFFIC 8. Prior to the use of the development hereby approved and unless otherwise approved in writing by the Responsible Authority, the developer must construct: a) Vehicular crossings in accordance with the requirements and standards of the City of Greater Geelong; b) Any redundant vehicular crossings must be removed, kerb and channel reinstated and the footpath/nature strip area reinstated to match existing construction in the street; c) The car park including accessways, surface with an all-weather sealed coat and linemark the car and accessways in accordance with the endorsed plans; d) Pedestrian links to the foreshore as approved by the Responsible Authority and as shown on the Endorsed Landscape Master Plan. e) Pedestrian connections to the Federal Mills site which includes a connection to the existing concrete footpath on the north side of Mackey Street and provision of a pedestrian refuge in Mackey Street and a connection to the existing concrete footpath on the south side of Mackey Street (approximately 165 metres). All to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. ENGINEERING CONDITIONS Drainage 9. Unless otherwise approved in writing by the Responsible Authority, the stormwater drainage system on the site must be designed such that stormwater runoff exiting the subject site meets the current best practice performance objectives for stormwater quality, as contained in the Urban Stormwater Best Practice Environmental Management Guidelines (Victorian Stormwater Committee, 1999) as follows: a) 80% retention of the typical annual load of suspended solids; b) 45% retention of the typical annual load of total phosphorous; c) 45% retention of the typical annual load of total nitrogen; and d) 70% retention of the typical annual load of gross pollutants. The stormwater drainage system must be modelled using the MUSIC (Model for Stormwater Improvement Conceptualisation) program and submitted for review prior to approval to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The stormwater drainage system must be consistent with the Stormwater Management Strategy approved by the responsible authority under this permit.

8 Stormwater Management Strategy 10. Unless otherwise approved in writing by the Responsible Authority, prior to the commencement of works, a Stormwater Management Strategy must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The SMP must contain (but not be limited to) the following: a) Details of the best practice Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) treatment, On-Site Detention (OSD), locations of all Gross Pollutant Traps (GPT s) and the ultimate infrastructure providing outfall of stormwater. b) Details of the management of flows during and after the construction period. all to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Street Light in Mackey Street 11. Unless otherwise approved in writing by the Responsible Authority, prior to the occupation of the building, provision of a new street light to illuminate Mackey St at the proposed driveway must be provided to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. WASTE 12. Provision must be made on the land for the storage and collection of garbage and other solid waste. This area must be graded, drained and screened from public view to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. All waste material must be regularly removed from the site to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority POWERCOR CONDITIONS Amended Plans Required (Powercor): 13. Prior to the commencement of works, amended plans must be submitted to an approved by Powercor which: a) Provide for permanent access to the Powercor Site, through a secure gate with safe access for vehicles passing through the Proposed Development and into the Powercor Site. b) Provide a notation on the plans that appropriate low growing species of vegetation are planted to Powercor s satisfaction (vegetation must not grow to a height above 2.7m below a powerline) c) Provide a notation that no part of the building will be closer than 4.6 metres horizontally to the side or 6.4 metres from the top of any part of the building to the overhead powerlines. When approved the plans will be endorsed by the Responsible Authority and will form part of the permit.

9 Access to ZSS (Powercor) 14. Powercor's access through the carriageway from Mackey Street must be maintained, both during the construction phase and after the completion of construction; and The new driveways must be of a sufficient width, and built to a standard that supports large heavy vehicles carrying replacement transformers and other equipment. Overhead Powerlines (Powercor) 15. Access must be maintained around the poles and lines at all times (including during the construction phase). Noise Attenuation - Acoustic Report Required (Powercor) 16. An acoustic report must be prepared which assesses background noise levels from Powercor Geelong B Zone Substation (ZSS) and provides requirements for: a) The refurbishment works to the building and replacement glazing should be designed to control noise intrusion; b) The internal design objective noise levels should be consistent with values describe Aust/New Zealand Standard: Acoustics Recommended design sound levels and reverberation times for building interiors. The recommendations of the acoustic report must be implemented prior to the occupation of the building. CFA CONDITIONS Hydrants 17. Prior to the occupation of the building, the following requirements must be met to the satisfaction of the CFA: a) Above or below ground operable hydrants must be provided so that the buildings are within 90 metres of any street fire hydrant. b) The hydrants must be identified with marker posts and road reflectors as applicable to the satisfaction of the Country Fire Authority. Note CFA s requirements for identification of hydrants are specified in Identification of Street Hydrants for Firefighting Purposes available under publications on the CFA web site (

10 PERMIT EXPIRY 18. This permit as it relates to the use and development of buildings will expire if one of the following circumstances applies: Report a) The use and development of the building(s) hereby approved has not commenced within two (2) years of the date of this permit. b) The use and development of the building(s) hereby approved is not completed within four (4) years of the date of this permit. The Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing before the permit expires; or a) Within six (6) months after the permit expires where the use or development has not yet started; or b) Within twelve (12) months after the permit expires, where the use or development allowed by the permit has lawfully commenced before the permit expiry. Carried The Site & Locality The subject land is located on the southern end of Mackey Street and adjoins the Corio Bay foreshore. Central Geelong is located approximately 3 km south of the subject site and the North Geelong Station is located approximately 750 metres south west of the subject site. A sealed bicycle path also links the site to Central Geelong along the Corio Bay Foreshore. The site has an area of area of approximately 2.4 hectares. Vehicular access to the site is gained via an unmade crossover on Mackey Street. Mackey Street is a 30 metre wide local road and a default 50kph speed limit. The site is within an industrial area with Barrett Burston (grain malting plant) and GrainCorp (grain export terminal) located to the north. The Federal Mills commonly referred to as an emerging innovation hub/tech hub is located to the north west along with the former Pilkington Glass site which is currently used by a range of non-industrial land uses. MHG glass manufacturing and a Powercor electrical substation adjoins the subject property at the south west corner of the site. An active open space reserve is located to the south west of the site. Adjoining the subject property to the south is Osbourne House, the former offices of the Shire of Corio which is currently vacant.

11 Federal Mills Port MHG Glass Subject Site Corio Bay Open Space Osborne House Train Station Residential

12

13

14 Proposal It is proposed to retain and redevelop the former power station building on the subject site for offices. The redevelopment would consist of 7 storeys and would have a total floor area of approximately 12,106 sqm. It may be worth noting that the plans show a food and drink premises, however this is to be deleted via a condition on the planning permit. In terms of externally works, most of the eastern building wall where the entrance is proposed would be demolished and replaced with glazing. The remaining existing glazing and louvres would be replaced with new glazing. A large outdoor forecourt area with sculptured art and landscaping is proposed at the east side of the building, which has an abuttal to the Corio Bay foreshore. 440 car parking spaces are provided, which exceeds the statutory requirement outlined in the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme, therefore approval for a car parking reduction is not required as part of this proposal.

15

16 Greater Geelong Planning Scheme Definition and Nesting Office: Land used for administration, or clerical, technical, professional or other like business activity. No goods or materials intended for manufacture, sale, or hire may be stored on the land. Other than electoral office and medical centre, it does not include any other defined use. Food and drink premises: Land used to prepare and sell food and drink for immediate consumption on, or off, the premises.

17 Industrial 1 Zone (IN1Z) To implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies. To provide for manufacturing industry, the storage and distribution of goods and associated uses in a manner which does not affect the safety and amenity of local communities. Before deciding on an application, in addition to the decision guidelines in Clause 65, the responsible authority must consider, as appropriate: The State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies. The effect that the use may have on nearby existing or proposed residential areas or other uses which are sensitive to industrial off-site effects, having regard to any comments or directions of the referral authorities. The effect that nearby industries may have on the proposed use. The drainage of the land. The availability of and connection to services. The effect of traffic to be generated on roads. The interim use of those parts of the land not required for the proposed use. Subject Site

18 Design and has a Development Overlay Schedule 20 (DDO20) Design objectives To improve the visual appearance and image of industrial areas through well designed site responsive developments. To facilitate economic development through efficient and functional industrial development. To provide a high level of amenity for workers and visitors to industrial areas. To minimise the potential for negative off-site effects to occur. To promote best practise storm water quality and reuse measures. Permit required clause and condition IN1Z - Use of the subject land for an office (clause ) IN1Z Use the land for a Food and Drink Premises (clause ) IN1Z - Buildings and works (clause ) DDO20 - Buildings and works (clause ) Restrictive Covenant The subject site is not burdened by a Restrictive Covenant or Section 173 Agreement. Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) The Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2007 specify the circumstances in which a cultural heritage management plan is required for an activity or class of activity. Division 2 of the Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2007 specifies exempt activities which do not require a cultural heritage management plan. The proposal is not listed as an exempt activity. Areas of cultural heritage sensitivity are defined within Division 3 of the Aboriginal Heritage Regulations Division 3 identifies the site or part of the site as within an area of cultural heritage sensitivity. High impact activities are defined within Division 5 of the Aboriginal Heritage Regulations Division 5 lists the proposal as a high impact activity. The site is considered to have been the subject of significant ground disturbance which is defined as disturbance of (a) the topsoil or surface rock layer of the ground or (b) a way - by machinery in the course of grading, excavating, digging, dredging or deep ripping, but does not include ploughing other than deep ripping. In accordance with the above assessment, a cultural heritage management plan is not required.

19 COASTAL INUNDATION AND EROSION: Clause of the SPPF requires the Responsible Authority to consider the potential coastal impacts of climate change. Strategies include: In planning for possible sea level rise, an increase of 0.2 metres over current 1 in 100 year flood levels by 2040 may be used for new development in close proximity to existing development (urban infill). Plan for possible sea level rise of 0.8 metres by 2100, and allow for the combined effects of tides, storm surges, coastal processes and local conditions such as topography and geology when assessing risks and coastal impacts associated with climate change. Consider the risks associated with climate change in planning and management decision making processes. Council s data indicates that the site is unlikely to be affected by the potential coastal impacts of climate change at LANDFILL GAS RISK ASSESSMENT Before deciding on a Planning Permit application, a Responsible Authority is required to consider, amongst other things: Any significant effects the responsible authority considers the environment may have on the use or development [S 60(1) of the PEA]. Clause of The State Planning Policy Framework which aims to ensure that potentially contaminated land is suitable for its intended future use and development, and that contaminated land is used safely. The EPA has adopted the Best Practice Environmental Management, Siting, Design Operation and Rehabilitation of Landfills (September 2010) or Landfill BPEM.. The Landfill BPEM identifies that: Risks associated with landfill gases may occur for at least 30 years post-closure. Appropriate buffer distances must be maintained between the landfill and sensitive land uses. The BPEM recommends a 500 metre buffer for landfills that contained putrescible waste and 200 metres for landfills that contained non-putrescible waste. Where the recommended buffers are unavailable, it must be demonstrated that risks are suitably mitigated. All buildings and structures and associated infrastructure should be considered. The BPEM specifies that development undertaken within a buffer distance of up to 500 metres may be at risk. As the subject site is not located within 500 metres of an identified former landfill site, a risk assessment is not required. DEVELOPMENTS IN BUSHFIRE PRONE AREAS Clause (Bushfire) seeks to strengthen the resilience of settlements and communities to bushfire through risk-based planning that prioritises the protection of human life.

20 The policy must be applied to all planning and decision making under the Planning and Environment Act 1987 relating to land which is: Within a designated bushfire prone area; Subject to a Bushfire Management Overlay; or Proposed to be used or developed in a way that may create a bushfire hazard. The site is not located within a designated bushfire prone area. Officer Direct Or Indirect Interest: No Council officers have any direct or indirect interest in the matter to which this report relates, in accordance with Section 80 (C) of the Local Government Act. Car Parking and Traffic Clause (Car Parking) of the Geelong Planning Scheme sets out planning controls with respect to car parking and Table 1 to Clause specifies parking provision rates for various land uses. The Planning Scheme also states that the standard provision can be reduced or fully waived if required. Provision rates of 3.5 spaces / 100m2 NFA for office land use and 4 spaces / 100m2 LFA for a food and drink premises are specified. This equates to a requirement for the provision of 426 spaces as part of the proposed development (406+20, respectively). The proposal provides 440 spaces. Accordingly, a waiver of statutory car parking is not being sought. The proposal was supported by a Traffic Impact Assessment Report prepared by ESR Transport Planning Pty Ltd which assessed the road network, traffic volumes, accident history and car parking demand. The assessment concluded that: In general, the proposed location of the site access driveway to Mackey Street is considered suitable and parking aisle modules are laid out in a typical arrangement that is reasonable. It is likely that refinements can be made to improve aisle circulation patterns and pedestrian amenity. It is recommended that should planning approvals be given for the development and use of the land, there will be requirements for design drawings showing these arrangements in more detail to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Key design considerations include: Pedestrian pathways connecting the building with onsite carparks, the Mackey Street footpath and the Corio Bay foreshore shared trail. Parking module layout to provide an efficient route for circulating vehicles. Dimensions in accordance with Clause of the Planning Scheme. It is important to note that support has also been given to the proposal by Vicroads and Council s Traffic Engineer.

21 Bicycle Spaces Clause (Bicycle facilities) of the Geelong Planning Scheme sets out planning controls with respect to bicycle facilities. Bicycle parking has not been shown on the plans or discussed in the planning report therefore a condition has been included in the recommendations to require compliance with Clause Planning Policy Framework The following State Planning Policies are applicable to this application: The policy at Clause 11 Settlement seeks to ensure Planning prevents environmental and amenity problems created by siting incompatible land uses close together. Planning is to facilitate sustainable development that takes full advantage of existing settlement patterns and investment in transport, utility, social, community and commercial infrastructure and services. The local settlement strategy at Clause R (Geelong G21) support the role of Central Geelong as a major regional city and revitalise and strengthen its role as Victoria s second city. The policy at Clause S Activity centres has an objective to encourage the concentration of major retail, residential, commercial, administrative, entertainment and cultural developments into activity centres that are highly accessible to the community The objectives of Clause S Noise abatement is the control of noise effects on sensitive land uses. The objective of Clause S Air Quality is to assist the protection and improvement of air quality. In terms of amenity and safety, Clause S deals with land use compatibility and provides an objective to safeguard community amenity while facilitating appropriate commercial, industrial or other uses with potential off-site effects. Strategies include the need to ensure the compatibility of a use or development as appropriate to the land use functions and character of the area by: - Directing land uses to appropriate locations. - Using a range of building design, urban design, operational and land use separation measures. Clause 17 Economic Development confirms that Planning is to provide for a strong and innovative economy, where all sectors are critical to economic prosperity. Planning is to contribute to the economic wellbeing of the state and foster economic growth by providing land, facilitating decisions and resolving land use conflicts, so that each region may build on its strengths and achieve its economic potential.

22 Strategies are provided at Clause R Diversified economy - Geelong G21 to - Build on the region s competitive strengths, including tourism and agricultural land resources and economic, social and natural assets. - Support new businesses that provide employment and innovation opportunities in identified employment nodes across the region. - Support industries that utilise skills within the region. Clause S Diversified economy builds on this further to strengthen and diversify by providing the following strategies: - Protect and strengthen existing and planned employment areas and plan for new employment areas. - Facilitate regional, cross-border and inter-regional relationships to harness emerging economic opportunities. - Facilitate growth in a range of employment sectors, including health, education, retail, tourism, knowledge industries and professional and technical services based on the emerging and existing strengths of each region. - Improve access to jobs closer to where people live. - Support rural economies to grow and diversify. Clause S Innovation and research provides an objective to create opportunities for innovation and the knowledge economy within existing and emerging industries, research and education. Strategies include: - Encourage the expansion and development of logistics and communications infrastructure. - Support the development of business clusters. - Support the development of enterprise precincts that build the critical mass of employment in an area, leverage the area s public and private sector economic competitive strengths and assets, and cater to a diversity of employment types and scales. - Promote an accessible, well-connected, high-amenity and collaborative physical environment that is conducive to innovation and to creative activities. - Encourage the provision of infrastructure that helps people to be innovative and creative, learn new skills and start new businesses in locations identified to accommodate employment and economic growth. - Support well-located, appropriate and low-cost premises for not-for-profit or start-up enterprises. - Improve access to community-based information and training through further developing libraries as community learning centres. Clause S Out-of-centre development seeks to manage out-of-centre development. Ensure that out-of-centre proposals are only considered where the proposed use or development is of net benefit to the community in the region served by the proposal or provides small scale shopping opportunities that meet the needs of local residents and workers in convenient locations. The objective of Clause S Design of industrial development includes to facilitate the sustainable development and operation of industry and research and development activity.

23 Strategies to achieve this objective include to: Ensure that industrial activities requiring substantial threshold distances are located in the core of industrial areas. Encourage activities with minimal threshold requirements to locate towards the perimeter of the industrial area. Minimise inter-industry conflict and encourage like industries to locate within the same area. Provide adequate separation and buffer areas between sensitive uses and offensive or dangerous industries and quarries to ensure that residents are not affected by adverse environmental effects, nuisance or exposure to hazards. Encourage manufacturing and storage industries that generate significant volumes of freight to locate close to air, rail and road freight terminals. Under this Clause, the planning authority must consider: Recommended Buffer Distances for Industrial Residual Air Emissions (Environmental Protection Authority, 1990). Any comments from the Victorian WorkCover Authority on requirements for industrial land use or development under the Dangerous Goods Act 1985 and associated legislation and the Occupational Health and Safety (Major Hazard Facilities) Regulations The objective of Clause S Industrial land and development is to ensure availability of land for industry. Strategies to achieve this objective include to: Identify land for industrial development in urban growth areas where: o Good access for employees, freight and road transport is available o Appropriate buffer areas can be provided between the proposed industrial land and nearby sensitive land uses. Protect and carefully plan existing industrial areas to, where possible, facilitate further industrial development. Provide an adequate supply of industrial land in appropriate locations including sufficient stocks of large sites for strategic investment. Protect industrial activity in industrial zones from the encroachment of unplanned commercial, residential and other sensitive uses which would adversely affect industry viability. Encourage industrial uses that meet appropriate standards of safety and amenity to locate within activity centres. Avoid approving non-industrial land uses, which will prejudice the availability of land for future industrial requirements, in identified industrial areas. Clause S Industrial development siting Objective To facilitate the sustainable development and operation of industry.

24 Strategies Ensure that industrial activities requiring substantial threshold distances are located in the core of industrial areas. Encourage activities with minimal threshold requirements to locate towards the perimeter of the industrial area. Minimise inter-industry conflict and encourage like industries to locate within the same area. Protect industrial activity in industrial zones from the encroachment of commercial, residential and other sensitive uses that would adversely affect industry viability. Encourage industrial uses that meet appropriate standards of safety and amenity to locate within activity centres. Provide adequate separation and buffer areas between sensitive uses and offensive or dangerous industries and quarries to ensure that residents are not affected by adverse environmental effects, nuisance or exposure to hazards. Encourage manufacturing and storage industries that generate significant volumes of freight to locate close to air, rail and road freight terminals. The objective of Clause S Car parking is to ensure an adequate supply of car parking that is appropriately designed and located. Strategies to achieve this objective include to: Allocate or require land to be set aside for car parking subject to the existing and potential modes of access including public transport, the demand for off-street car parking, road capacity and the potential for demand management of car parking. Encourage the efficient provision of car parking through the consolidation of car parking facilities. Prepare plans for the design and location of local car parking to: o Protect the role and function of nearby roads, enable easy and efficient use and the movement and delivery of goods. o Achieve a high standard of urban design and protect the amenity of the locality, including the amenity of pedestrians and other road users. o Create a safe environment, particularly at night. o Facilitate the use of public transport. Protect the amenity of residential precincts from the effects of road congestion created by on-street parking. Plan adequate provision for taxi ranks as part of activity centres, transport interchanges and major commercial, retail and community facilities. PORTS Clause S Planning for port environs Objective To plan for and manage land near commercial trading ports so that development and use are compatible with port operations and provide reasonable amenity expectations.

25 Strategies Protect commercial trading ports from encroachment of sensitive and incompatible land uses in the port environs. Plan for and manage land in the port environs to accommodate uses that depend upon or gain significant economic advantage from proximity to the port s operations. Ensure that industrially zoned land within the environs of a commercial trading port is maintained and continues to support the role of the port as a critical freight and logistics precinct. Identify and protect key transport corridors linking ports to the broader transport network. Ensure any new use or development within the environs of a commercial trading port does not prejudice the efficient and curfew free operations of the port. Ensure that the use and intensity of development does not expose people to unacceptable health or safety risks and consequences associated with an existing major hazard facility. Ensure that any use or development within port environs: - Is consistent with policies for the protection of the environment. - Takes into account planning for the port. Clause S Objective To support the effective and competitive operation of Victoria s commercial trading ports at local, national and international levels and to facilitate their ongoing sustainable operation and development. Strategies Provide for the ongoing development of ports at Melbourne, Geelong, Hastings and Portland in accordance with approved Port Development Strategies. Identify and protect key transport corridors linking ports to the broader transport network. Manage any impacts of a commercial trading port and any related industrial development on nearby sensitive uses to minimise the impact of vibration, light spill, noise and air emissions from port activities. Clause R Freight links - Geelong G21 Strategy Recognise and develop a national transport and logistics precinct to the north of Geelong, connecting Avalon Airport, Geelong Port and the Geelong Ring Road Employment Precinct. Local Planning Policy Framework The following policies of the Municipal Strategic Statement are applicable to this application:

26 Clause City of Greater Geelong Sustainable Growth Framework states that a key element is to encourage Diversity in Industry. In doing so, Council will: Support existing businesses and employers in Greater Geelong to achieve sustainable outcomes. Encourage the growth of new and sustainable industry sectors. Look for innovative ways to engage with the private sector. Encourage the development of collaborative, interdependent industry clusters. Provide a diverse range of high quality industrial and commercial land. Clause Economic Development And Employment Key issues and influences Economic Role and Function Geelong is the largest regional city in Victoria and the primary service and employment hub for the G21 Geelong Region Alliance. The City s infrastructure base includes Avalon Airport, the Geelong Port and major road and rail connections to Metropolitan Melbourne and Victoria s western regions. The provision of high quality living, working and recreational environments is critical to attracting and retaining highly skilled people and the businesses in which they work. Industry There is a need to provide support for ongoing employment and economic development in the Geelong region. There is a need to provide a diverse range of appropriately located, well serviced industrial land which meets the needs of a range of industry types and minimises land use conflicts. Traditional manufacturing industries will continue to be key economic and employment drivers in the municipality, however at the same time the City s economy will need to focus on emerging industry sectors that underpin economic development, prosperity and employment growth in the new economy. The changing nature of industrial development means that most industrial development now requires high amenity land that offers a high quality environment for workers and visitors. There is a need to support industry through the maintenance and improvement of infrastructure including the road, rail, Avalon Airport, deep water port and associated facilities. The extractive industry operations in the municipality make a vital contribution to the building and construction industries and are of major economic importance to the Geelong region. Clause Industry outlines the objectives of this Clause are to To provide an adequate supply of appropriately located industrial land that meets the needs of different industries. To direct different types of industrial development to appropriate locations. To facilitate well designed and serviced industrial development that provides a high level of amenity for workers and visitors. To minimise land use conflicts.

27 Strategies to achieve these objectives include to: Focus new industrial development around major transport routes and infrastructure assets. Protect existing and designated future industrial areas from encroachment by incompatible land uses. Support the development of a technology/business park in the South Western Armstrong Creek Employment Area. Encourage regional and national scale industrial businesses to locate in the southern part of the Geelong Ring Road Employment Precinct, and in appropriate locations in the future South Western Armstrong Creek Employment Area. Direct industries which require substantial buffer zones from sensitive land uses to the core of the Industrial 2 Zone in the Geelong Ring Road Employment Precinct. Ensure all industrial development incorporates best practice water sensitive urban design and waste management practices. Ensure all industrial development is appropriately serviced by road, drainage, water, sewerage and telecommunications infrastructure. Ensure all industrial development provides high quality urban design and landscaping. Ensure new development in the Geelong Ring Road Employment Precinct is configured to minimise the individual and societal risk levels attached to the Shell LPG Storage Facility. Protect identified stone resources for future extraction and potential extraction industry operations from the encroachment of incompatible land uses. Direct materials recycling industries to locations that minimise land use conflicts and impacts on the amenity of surrounding areas. Support the establishment of infrastructure that reduces costs for business and industry. Support an integrated Geelong Transport Strategy, ensuring that industrial areas are well connected to each other and the rail/freeway network. Provide sufficient industrial land to meet a range of industrial needs in Geelong, including small to medium sized industry. Develop the North East Industrial Precinct as a vibrant, new generation, master planned industry and business park that will attract a wide range of users and respond to the changing needs of industry sectors over time, as a key business address in the region and Victoria. Clause GEELONG PORT Key issues and influences The Geelong Port is a vitally important resource for the City s economy. It is the second largest port in Victoria with a total throughput of approximately 12 million tonnes in 2004/05 with an estimated value of approximately $5.6 billion. Forecast trade growth will place significant demands on port infrastructure capacity requiring potential expansion. The current availability of suitably zoned land in the port area is critical to the continued viability of the port. Where demand for land cannot be met in the immediate Port environs, the Geelong Ring Road Employment Precinct offers potential for port related industries to locate. Efficient freight movements by road and rail within Geelong and beyond are critical to the port s growth and efficiency.

28 The maintenance of public amenity in surrounding communities needs to be a consideration in context of growth pressures at the port. Objectives To provide for the continued growth and development of Geelong Port as a key economic resource to the Victorian community. To maintain and enhance the efficiency of the port. To safeguard the port as a focal point for infrastructure development and economic prosperity within south-west Victoria. To ensure that development in the port area is environmentally sustainable. To give appropriate weight to the needs of a working port having regard to the amenity of the land uses at the port interface. Strategies To ensure that future development of the port and surrounding industrial land is linked and opportunities protected. Protect the port area from encroachment by non-compatible land uses or developments. Ensure that sufficient land is available for future port-related developments by discouraging nonport related land use and development. Facilitate increased throughput at the port through the development of extended berths at Corio Quay North and South and Lascelles Wharf. Facilitate and advocate for growth of the development of the port. Discourage further fragmentation of land holdings in the port area where this threatens to close off strategic development options for the port. Secure a dual gauge rail connection to Lascelles Wharf and appropriate road connections to the Geelong Ring Road Employment Precinct and the Geelong Ring Road. Ensure that appropriate mechanisms are in place to protect the operation of the port and minimise potential conflicts with surrounding land uses. Facilitate and advocate for growth of the development of port related industries in the Geelong Ring Road Employment Precinct. Implementation These strategies will be implemented by: Using policy and exercise of discretion Ensure that subdivision, use and development applications in the Port Zone are port related and port dependent. Applying zones and overlays Applying the Port Zone to proposed port facilities. It is noted that the site is not located within a Port Zone.

29 AMENDMENT OF THE PROPOSAL PRIOR TO PUBLIC NOTIFICATION: The application was not amended prior to public notification. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION & REFERRALS: The application is not exempt from the notice requirements of Section 52(1)(a), (b) and (d), the decision requirements of Section 64(1), (2) and (3) and the review rights of Section 82(1) of the Act and pursuant to Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 the following forms of advertising were undertaken: Notices were sent to owners and occupiers of adjoining land (including opposite) A3 sign(s) was placed on the land Notice was given to various agencies, outlined below, pursuant to s.52(1)(d) of the P& E Act. REFERRALS: The following referrals were undertaken: Section 55: Determining Authority Agency Response: Officer Comment: Noted AusNet Recommending Authority Agency Response: No Objection/No Comment Nil Officer Comment: NA Section 52: Agency Response: Powercor No Objection (Objection withdrawn subject to conditions)

30 A second response was received on 3 May The responsible officer contacted Powercor to clarify the terms of the objection. The following was sent which resulted in Powercor confirming that they do not object to the proposal subject to conditions: From: Marshall Sullivan [mailto:msullivan@geelongcity.vic.gov.au] Sent: Tuesday, 25 September :26 To: McCallum, Chris Subject: Powercor Further Referral Response - PP (50 Mackey Street North Geelong) Dear Chris, Thank you for taking my call earlier. I have received confirmation for the owner that they are accepting you the conditions contained in the attached document. It would be appreciated if you could confirm that Powercor do not object

31 to the proposal subject to the inclusion of the conditions in any permit issued. Please note that I have re-worded the conditions to make it clear when the information is required and to bundle the requirements for amened plans into one condition happy for you to make any corrections, additions etc.: Proposed Powercor Conditions Amended Plans Required: 1.Prior to the commencement of works, amended plans must be submitted to an approved by Powercor which: a) provide for permanent access to the Powercor Site, through a secure gate with safe access for vehicles passing through the Proposed Development and into the Powercor Site. b)provide a notation on the plans that appropriate low growing species of vegetation are planted to Powercor s satisfaction (vegetation must not grow to a height above 2.7m below a powerline) c)provide a notation that no part of the building will be closer than 4.6 metres horizontally to the side or 6.4 metres from the top of any part of the building to the overhead powerlines. When approved the plans will be endorsed by the Responsible Authority and will form part of the permit. Access to ZSS 2.Powercor's access through the carriageway from Mackey Street must be maintained, both during the construction phase and after the completion of construction; and 3. The new driveways must be of a sufficient width, and built to a standard that supports large heavy vehicles carrying replacement transformers and other equipment. Overhead Powerlines 4Access must be maintained around the poles and lines at all times (including during the construction phase). Noise Attenuation (Acoustic Report Required) 5.An acoustic report must be prepared which assesses background noise levels from Powercor Geelong B Zone Substation (ZSS) and provides requirements for: a) The refurbishment works to the building and replacement glazing should be designed to control noise intrusion; b) The internal design objective noise levels should be consistent with values describe Aust/New Zealand Standard: Acoustics Recommended design sound levels and reverberation times for building interiors.

32 The recommendations of the acoustic report must be implemented prior to the occupation of the building. Regards, Marshall Sullivan Team Leader Statutory Planning The following response was received: Officer Comment: The conditions agreed in writing with Powercor have been included in the recommended permit conditions. The permit applicant and owner have also confirmed their acceptance to the conditions in an dated 24/9/18. Agency Response: CFA No Objection

33 Officer Comment: Noted. Conditions have been included in the recommendations.

34 Agency Response: EPA No Objection EPA has no concerns with Council issuing this planning permit according to the information that has been provided. Council must ensure that the land is suitable for its intended use as per the Potentially Contaminated Land General Practice Note. The assessment matrix at Table 2 of the GPN classifies the retail/office use, on a site with high potential for contamination (electricity generation/power station) as requiring assessment level B. The site assessment submitted with the application was carried out in Council must be satisfied that the recommendations made in this report have been based on assessment of measures equivalent to current legislation, standards and requirements, and that any recommended remediation actions are carried out. Page 6 of the Potentially Contaminated Land sets out what a site assessment should include. If the assessment does not meet requirements, Council should request that the applicant: Assess potentially contaminated land in accordance with the Practice Note; Request an independent peer review of the report by another consultant; or Contact the consultant who wrote the report with specific technical questions. Officer Comment: Noted. The following condition has been included to respond to the comments from the EPA: Condition 7 Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority, prior to the commencement of works, an updated site assessment must be submitted by a suitably qualified environmental professional. The assessment must be in accordance with the Potentially Contaminated Land General Practice Note and confirm that the site is suitable for its intended use to the satisfaction and/or make recommendation for site remediation (if applicable) of the Responsible Authority. The report should also make reference to the Preliminary Site Contamination Report Geelong Powerhouse Site dated 10 August Any recommendations required to satisfy site assessment must be implemented prior to the occupation of the building unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Responsible Authority. Agency Response: Vicroads No Objection/No Comment

35 Officer Comment: Noted Agency Response: National Trust Objection Withdrawn Officer Comment: The National Trust s conditional withdrawal of the objection is accepted. That is: 1. No Vehicular Link to Swinburne Street, and; 2. Any amendments of the application which would involve a Vehicular Link across Osborne Park to Swinburne Street, the National Trust Geelong and Region Branch must be notified and may object. Agency Response: Osborne Park Association Objection Withdrawn

36 Officer Comment: The Osborne Park Association s conditional withdrawal of the objection is accepted. That is: 1. The application does not extend to approvals beyond the site boundary. This is taken to mean Osborne Park land. Agency Response: DEDJTR Objection

37 Officer Comment: The letter dated 24/8/18 expands on these issues. In response to the objection, an was sent to DEDJT seeking confirmation that the response is an objection for the purposes of Section 57 of the Planning & Environment Act A response was provided which stated that: The submission by our office is intended to provide a broader economic perspective of the proposal, and to acknowledge relevant port planning policy. Given our investment facilitation role, we recognise the potential employment benefits associated with the proposal. However, the submission emphasises the importance of long term planning for the Port of Geelong and expresses the view that the proposal is inconsistent with port planning and not compatible with port operations. While the submission is perhaps nuanced in parts, we think the points and conclusion are reasonably clear. Accordingly, the responsible officer has decided to treat the response as a formal objection for the purposes of the P&E Act.

38 A discussion of the issues raised is discussed below in the assessment section of this report. Agency Response: GrainCorp Limited Objection. The proposal is not supported for the following reasons: The proposal is inconsistent with the policy framework and will impact on the current and future port activities. The proposal does not implement the objectives of the Industrial 1 Zone; and Encroaches on the buffers for port operations. The objection discusses in detail concerns with the policy, zone and land use conflicts. Officer Comment: A discussion of the issues raised is discussed below in the assessment section of this report. The objection from the VFF, GrainCorp and Geelong Port are effectively identical and appear to be written by the same author. Agency Response: Geelong Port Objection. The proposal is not supported for the following reasons: The proposal is inconsistent with the policy framework and will impact on the current and future port activities. The proposal does not implement the objectives of the Industrial 1 Zone; and Encroaches on the buffers for port operations. The objection discusses in detail concerns with the policy, zone and land use conflicts.

39 Officer Comment: A discussion of the issues raised is discussed below in the assessment section of this report. The objection from the VFF, GrainCorp and Geelong Port are effectively identical and appear to be written by the same author. Agency Response: Victorian Regional Channels Authority Objection Officer Comment: A discussion of the issues raised is discussed below in the assessment section of this report.

40 Agency Response: Victorian Farmers Federation The proposal is not supported for the following reasons: The proposal is inconsistent with the policy framework and will impact on the current and future port activities. The proposal does not implement the objectives of the Industrial 1 Zone; and Encroaches on the buffers for port operations. Officer Comment: The objection discusses in detail concerns with the policy, zone and land use conflicts. This was a late objection received on 11 October A discussion of the issues raised is discussed below in the assessment section of this report. The objection from the VFF, GrainCorp and Geelong Port are effectively identical and appear to be written by the same author. Agency Response: Officer Comment: Geelong Manufacturing Council The GMC is concerned about the proposal being unsuited to the area s industrial zoning and may adversely impact on the surrounding industrial area with the potential impact to investment and jobs. A discussion of the issues raised is discussed below in the assessment section of this report. Internal Referrals Department: Response: Planning Strategy Supported. The application doesn t adequately address Clause Ports or the relevant reference document which is the Port of Geelong- Development Strategy prepared by the Victorian Regional Channels Authority in The PDS may be considered out of date by the applicant but it remains relevant in decision making as it remains in the planning scheme. Port Development Strategy 2018 It s understood that the PDS is being reviewed as is required by the Port

41 Officer Comment: Noted Management Act but no further information has been provided at this time. Planning Strategy Recommendation Response The proposal represents a reasonable re use of an old building. The industrial zone and the location proximate to the port would ideally be suited for a port related use and this is identified in the Port Development Strategy However no use of this nature has emerged in the intervening time or indeed since the site was vacated in the 1990 s. Therefore, Planning Strategy consider the use of the site as an office, with supporting food and drink premises, is acceptable as it offers a reasonable transition from the port related industrial uses to the north to the existing residential uses further south. Department: Response: Environment Unit Supported. In respect to the landscape master plan dated 4 th April 2018 the following matters require clarification: 1. Clarify if the trees in the car parking areas are canopy/shade trees. 2. Clarify whether WSUD is being used within the car parking areas (i.e. bioretention basins) 3. Provide details on the Street Interface Fence. It states see architects documentation but this detail can t be found. 4. Provide details on the Foreshore Interface Fence as none have been provided. 5. Provide more details on the two rain gardens. The plan states drainage and rain gardens are indicative and subject to further detailed survey and design. It is important to clarify what are they designed to treat, where does the water get directed to once its treated & is sufficient area being provided in the site plan to treat the overall stormwater runoff? 6. Clarify what is proposed in the area between the old fence and existing eastern roadway. 7. Clarify what is the long-term plan for the Crown Land east of the site boundary. 8. The Indicative Pedestrian Link needs to be clarified in more detail. The current informal track goes through an area of native vegetation including a patch of native grassland. It terminates near the sites southern boundary. There will need to be flora assessment undertaken to inform the final design & location of such a path.

42 In order for it to be continued it has to go through the Osbourne House site, remove fencing & construct a pathway through the front landscaping of this site. Council will need to make a decision on this and whether it would support such a concept. The land in question is Crown Land and consent from DELWP would be required to support such works being undertaken. It is understood the applicant is seeking approval to manage this area of Crown Land from DELWP. This is currently with the City as Committee of Management however this Unit has agreed with the request by the applicant. It is understood it is being resolved between Council s legal officers and DEWLP. If this is not supported an alternative will need to be discussed and incorporated into the overall design. The site is very challenging as there is a vegetated level area immediately east of the site boundary but then it falls away very steeply with a defined escarpment. Access down this escarpment would be difficult and expensive. Once fully operational the development will house a large number of workers who no doubt would want to, from time to time, access the adjoining foreshore precinct. The current vehicular access road down to the northern groyne and Geelong Trailable Yacht Club is narrow and not designed as a shared access path. The existing road is an unsuitable long term option for large numbers of pedestrians & cyclists and alternative would need to be discussed and agreed upon. Item 2- In respect to ESD initiatives these still need to be submitted. This was spoken about at length at the pre-app meeting where it was indicated ESD would be a feature of the development. It is not addressed in the plans and needs to be documented. There should also be a connection with the overall WSUD approach to be taken on-site in respect to Item 3. Item 3- Where is the preliminary stormwater management plan? A copy is not provided as part of the submitted documentation. The proposed WSUD measures need to be discussed and agreed upon rather than included as a permit condition. These should be a feature of the development and integrate with the overall landscaping and ESD measures. Item 6- There are actions listed in Section 13 (Site Remediation) section of the Site Contamination Report. These can be included as specific permit conditions for the development. Schedule 20 to the DDO-

43 One of the design objectives is to promote best practice storm water quality and reuse measures. Section 2.0 of the DDO lists the various requirements which includes Stormwater Quality and Re-Use and states- Best practice storm water quality and reuse measures should be considered as part of the design for larger developments and on sites where it is practical to implement. The planning submission states it will be implemented but the design and detail are best addressed as a condition on the permit. As stated above it is considered that due to the scale of this development and its proximity to the coast these details should be submitted now and factored into the overall design. It may be worthwhile arranging a workshop with the applicant to work through these matters & any others raised in other referral responses. Clarification of many of these items through the provision of additional documentation (i.e. amended plans) will avoid a large number of potentially unnecessary permit conditions being placed on the planning permit. I ll await your advice in respect to this suggestion. Officer Comment: Once these matters are clarified this Unit will be able to provide its final referral response and suggested planning permit conditions. Following the response from the Environment Unit there was a stakeholder meeting and more information was provided by the applicant. However it is acknowledged that the level of information provided does not adequately address all the issues. This is disappointing given the time and effort that went into the pre-application meeting process. That said, it is considered that the absence of all the information, for example a more detailed landscape master plan and stormwater management plan, does not preclude a decision being made on the application. Importantly, while the application is lacking in information, it is understood that the Environment Unit do not have any in-principle objection to the proposal. Accordingly it is recommended that the information sought by Council s Environment Unit be included as a condition of permit. A copy of the draft permit conditions was also provided to the Environment Unit and in an dated 16 October 2018, it was confirmed that the conditions are acceptable.

44 Department: Response: Urban Design Supported. Officer Comment: Recommended Conditions: 1. To supply a detailed floor plan supplied indicating: i. Gross floor area ii. Ingress and egress iii. Internal circulation iv. Facilities, toilets, showers, storage, bicycle parking, universal access initiatives, lift overruns and other plant equipment v. Detailed materiality schedule including fenestrations, balustrades, colours and glazing 2. To supply a detailed landscape Plan indicating: i. Plant species with expected heights of established trees ii. Vehicle access and egress iii. Car Parking plan 3. To supply a detailed a context plan indicating i. Shadow analysis ii. Interconnections with roads, waterfront and possible expansions iii. Indicative pedestrian and vehicle connections through to Osborne House 4. To ensure vehicle carriageway replace parking bays next to vegetation buffer at the waterfront interface with the aim to improve vehicle circulation and eliminate cul de sac structure as well as to screen car park from natural setting along pedestrian link with soft interface treatment and enhanced waterfront experience. 5. To setback indicative rain gardens >3m from property boundary with the aim to enhance waterfront treatments by not featuring infrastructure along the property boundary. 6. To supply a performance solution to fire safety is deemed to satisfy fire safety standards and provisions of Class 2 building Codes. Noted. Suggested Conditions have been included in recommendations. Department: Response: Traffic Supported. Conditions recommended:

45 Officer Comment: The driveway must intersect with the Mackey St road reserve boundary at right angles and be 6.0 m wide, with a minimum 1.4 m offset from the western property boundary. The driveway must be provided with a minimum 9.0 m internal radius between the road reserve boundary and the driveway alignment which runs parallel with the western property boundary. Road and Drainage Construction Plans- Prior to the commencement of works, Engineer designed roadworks and drainage construction plans must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The Engineering construction plans must show, but are not limited to, the following: i. Construction of new kerb and channel on the northern side of Mackey Street, from the entrance to the GrainCorp Site to the eastern boundary of Mackey Street; ii. Extension of the asphalt in Mackey Street along the new kerb and channel alignment and to incorporate the 90 degree curve in the road, and associated signage and linemarking; iii. Drainage infrastructure associated with the new road works; iv. Construction of a 6.0 m wide vehicle crossing to be centred on the driveway; v. Provision of a new street light to illuminate Mackey St at the proposed driveway and the access road to the GrainCorp site; all to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Construction of Roadworks / Drainage- Prior to the commencement of use, roadworks and drainage assets must be constructed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Grant Edmonds Traffic Development Engineer Noted. The majority of the suggested Conditions have been included in recommendations. Conditions requiring upgrades to Mackey Street have not been included in the recommendations. As discussed with the Engineer s, I am concerned about the nexus between the proposal and the requirement for road construction, which would be considerable in terms of cost and is unreasonable given the extent of road construction does not abut the subject site. While the actual works which are recommended are likely to result in an improvement to the current situation, there may be a need for consultation and consideration to a cost sharing arrangement between those who would benefit from such works.

46 Department: Response: Engineering Supported. Officer Comment: Noted. Suggested Conditions have been included in recommendations. Amendment of the Application Following Public Notification The applicant made a request to amend the application following public notification pursuant to Section 57A of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 on 7 August 2018 Council has accepted the amendment. The amendment made the following changes to the application: Removed the vehicle link to Osborne House on the landscape plan to respond to objections. This amendment resulted in the withdrawal of two (2) objections. It was not considered necessary to readvertise the proposal based on the amendment, as the amendment would not result in any additional material detriment compared with the advertised application, for the following reasons: Assessment Objections Nine (9) objections were received however three (3) were withdrawn therefore five (5) objections remain. The objections are from: DEDJTR Geelong Port Victorian Regional Channels Authority. GrainCorp. Victorian Farmers Federation Geelong Manufacturing Council The objections which were withdrawn were from: Osbourne Park Association National Trust Powercor. It is acknowledged that the concerns raised by objectors ought to be considered very carefully and if it was to be established that a proposal would have an impact on the port to the extent that it could impact on its viability, then the proposal could be refused. However it is in my opinion, that the balance of the objections have not clearly articulated how port activities will be affected through the grant of a permit or to fundamentally support their concerns.

47 Certainly the concerns which have been raised warrant close consideration, particularly those concerns which suggest that the proposal could impact on current and future port activities. However in the absence of evidence which support these concerns, it is difficult to form a view that the proposal should not be supported. The fact that the proposal is a non-port and nonindustrial land use is not a reason in itself to refuse the application. It is also acknowledged that there is strong policy to protect ports, just like there is strong policy to facilitate employment and innovating and emerging industries and businesses. Of course non-port and non-industrial land uses can successfully coexist and this is evidenced through the Federal Mills complex and other retail and commercial activities in the area. Osborne House and the active open space is also in the port environs however clearly those sites are not appropriate for port uses. It is unclear as to why there has been no attempt to secure the site for a port use, for example by applying the Port Zone or even purchasing the site, except for some reference in the 2013 Port of Geelong Strategy that Potential for former power station to be utilised for port-related use subject to buffers etc. To form a view that the proposal is in principle not appropriate simply because it might have an impact or just because the proposal is not a port or industrial use, would be too narrow and result in a significant lost opportunity, especially if port buffers would impact on its ability to be utilised anyway. Indeed a proposal that will impact on the port or industrial land uses should not be supported however this has not been demonstrated. The impacts that might occur can be controlled through permit conditions and it is considered that the recommended conditions introduced earlier in this report achieve this. In terms of traffic, certainly the proposal will result in a greater volume of vehicles in the area. Of course, any new port, industrial or commercial use would too have an impact to some degree. Importantly, all parking is provided on site and Council s Traffic Engineer, Vicroads and the permit applicants Traffic Engineer all support the proposal. The objectors have not submitted any traffic evidence to support their concerns. The ability for a site to provide 100% of their statutory car parking for a development like this is rare. Certainly most, if not all large scale office developments in Central Geelong require significant car parking dispensation therefore the proposal provides a unique opportunity to provide an option which demands car parking. That said, the site is in close proximity to the train station and has excellent bicycle and pedestrian linkages along the bay foreshore. A consultation meeting was held between the applicant, council officers, and objectors. The meeting discussed the issues raised to see if any resolutions were possible and an opportunity was given to all parties to expand on their issues, particularly with regard to port impacts. No additional information from objectors was provided however the applicant submitted some information which was circulated to the parties however no objections were withdrawn. On 27 November, the application was formally amended, under Section 57A of the P&E Act to formally remove the food and drink premises from the application. This has now been included as a condition on the Notice of Decision.

48 Discussion The development proposes the refurbishment of a substantial and prominent building on equally substantial and prominent site. There are no similar buildings in the area, or in Geelong for that matter, that could be the subject of a similar proposal. It also needs to be acknowledged that the potential reuse for an industrial purpose, despite its imposing character and scale, would be unlikely given the building design and siting. This is evidenced by the fact that the site has remained vacant for three (3) decades. Parties would agree that the proposed redevelopment is certainly unique on a number of levels. There is arguably a policy void which acknowledges the significant opportunities that exist by allowing the proposal to proceed. However there is certainly clear policy support for new and innovative uses that generate employment and to create opportunities for innovation and the knowledge economy within existing and emerging industries. The emerging nature of Federal Mills site, which has been referred to as an innovation district and tech hub is a successful example of how non industrial uses can coexist and in fact thrive in this location. To this end, there is strong policy support around fostering new and innovative businesses and employment opportunities. The site is located at the interface of the industrial, residential and open space areas. It essentially acts as a buffer between these two areas and if redeveloped as proposed, its role as a buffer would be enhanced. Whilst the site is within the environs of the port it is in fact on the edge of the port environs (or the interface) and has no physical link to the port. If the site were more centrally located then an argument for reducing land use conflict, and traffic movement issues would be more substantive. However this is not the case with this application site. As it is, there seems to be little, if any, opportunity for conflict between land uses and in particular port activities and the proposal. Increased traffic may be one potential issue, as would be the case even if an industrial activity was introduced, however the reality is that the road network is able to easily accommodate any increase in traffic the proposal will generate which is a view supported by Council s Engineers, the permit applicants engineers and Vicroads. Policy Considerations As discussed earlier there are a number of policies which are relevant to this proposal. For example Clause Industrial land and development, Clause S, Planning for port environs and Clause which specifically refers to Geelong Port. There is a general policy principle to avoid approving non-industrial land uses, which will prejudice the availability of land for future industrial requirements and in port areas, to plan for and manage land near commercial trading ports so that development and use are compatible with port operations and provide reasonable amenity expectations.

49 The site is not located within a Port Zone and there has never been any applications to rezone the land or for port stakeholders to acquire the land. Indeed, apart from some high level reference in a structure plan for a potential port use, the planning provisions certainly allow for non-port uses to establish at the site. That aside, the viability of the port and its protection does need to be upheld. However, with consideration to policy, particularly 21.12, it is not considered that this proposal represents an inappropriate encroachment of a non-compatible land use, rather there is a real opportunity to facilitate this as a compatible land use, albeit not directly port related. For example the sites close residential interface to the south means that an office use represents an ideal buffer. Of course the employment and innovation benefits among other things, which are also strongly supported by policy, are significant. Clause , Key issues and influences in relation to Industry refers to the need to provide support for ongoing employment and economic development in the Geelong region. Furthermore, There is a need to provide a diverse range of appropriately located, well serviced industrial land which meets the needs of a range of industry types and minimises land use conflicts. The policies also acknowledge that traditional manufacturing industries are important, however at the same time the City s economy will need to focus on emerging industry sectors that underpin economic development, prosperity and employment growth in the new economy confirms that The changing nature of industrial development means that most industrial development now requires high amenity land that offers a high quality environment for workers and visitors. While the site is not within the Port Zone and has never been used for port purposes, Clause which relates to the Geelong Port is relevant given the sites location. It is acknowledged that the Geelong Port is a vitally important resource for the City s economy and is the second largest port in Victoria. Policy objectives seek to provide for the continued growth and development of the port, to maintain and enhance the efficiency of the port, and to give appropriate weight to the needs of a working port having regard to the amenity of the land uses at the port interface. In this regard, confirms the strategies will be implemented by ensuring that applications in the Port Zone are port related and port dependent and to apply the Port Zone to proposed port facilities. It is noted that the site is not located within a Port Zone and no request has ever been made to introduce a Port Zone on the land. Furthermore, it is understood no attempt has been made to secure the land by port users. In terms of appropriate weight ought to be given to the working port, having regard to the amenity of the land uses at the port interface, the recommended conditions seek to achieve an outcome to mitigate impacts, both to the port but also the future occupiers of the proposed office. Clause S calls for the need to facilitate a diversified economy. The policy framework recognises that this can be achieved by facilitating regional, cross-border and inter-regional relationships and to harness emerging economic opportunities. Furthermore, we need to facilitate growth in a range of employment sectors, including (but not limited to) knowledge industries and professional and technical services. And further, Clause S which talks about innovation and research, provides an objective to create opportunities for innovation and the knowledge economy within existing and emerging industries. It is clear that the proposal seeks to provide a real opportunity to implement these policies and provide a unique planning outcome.

50 The assessment of the proposal against policy is certainly not straight forward and the concerns raised by objectors are certainly valid in terms of need to ensure non-port or non-industrial activities do not result in an undesirable land use conflict. It is considered that on balance, the proposal is an appropriate land use for this site for a number of reasons including the site location, relationship to Federal Mills and Osbourne House and nearby residential uses, its relationship to Corio Bay and its economic and employment benefits. It s an innovative approach to land use planning which responds well to the changing needs and demands of new and emerging businesses. Importantly, the perceived port conflicts can be managed through appropriate conditions. Industrial 1 Zone The subject site is situated within the Industrial 1 Zone which its purpose includes the need to provide for manufacturing industry, the storage and distribution of goods and associated uses in a manner which does not affect the safety and amenity of local communities. An Office is a section 2 use (permit required) and in principle is an acceptable land use and contemplated by the zone. In this regard, the decision guidelines at Clause are relevant to consider: The Municipal Planning Strategy and the Planning Policy Framework. Response: This will be discussed later in this report. The effect that the use may have on nearby existing or proposed residential areas or other uses which are sensitive to industrial off-site effects, having regard to any comments or directions of the referral authorities. Response: The site is on the southern edge of the industrial zoning with more sensitive uses located to the south. An office use is considered to be an ideal transitional use between the industrial activities to the north and the sensitive uses to the south. The effect that nearby industries may have on the proposed use. Response: The effect of nearby industries on the proposed use include air and noise emissions and traffic. The recommended conditions attempt to resolve this potential effect through the following mechanisms: - All car parking to be located on site (i.e. no statutory waiver of parking is required) - A Section 173 Agreement prohibiting sensitive uses and other items dealing with design considerations. - Screening and landscaping measures. The drainage of the land. Response: The proposal is supported by Council s Engineers and the recommended conditions include the need to submit for approval a stormwater management plan. The availability of and connection to services. Response: It is understood all services are available.

51 The effect of traffic to be generated on roads. Response: The application was supported by a traffic assessment which has been supported by both Vicroads and Council s Traffic Engineer. The interim use of those parts of the land not required for the proposed use. Response: Not applicable to this application. In considering the appropriateness of the proposal, consideration has also been given to the sites relationship to the Federal Mills complex, which has emerged as an innovation hub supporting a number of new business and employment opportunities, the relationship to the Corio Bay foreshore and the fact that the site has remained vacant for over 30 years. In addition, the sites close proximity to a residential area also means that an industrial, including a related port use, could be incompatible and result in a land use conflict. On office use however is a compatible land use. The reuse of the building, which would unlikely occur if it was to be developed for port or conventional industrial purposes, has a number of environmental benefits and will provide for a unique opportunity for not only the site and surrounds but also for Geelong. Design & Development Overlay Schedule 20 The design response would be a considerable improvement to the amenity of the site and the locality generally. The proposed open space and vegetation would be a positive contribution to the site and locality blending the existing vegetation at the foreshore into the built environment. The design response provides a more sensitive buffer between the residential and public open space to the south and the industry to the north than the current arrangement. The car parking to be provided on site would be constructed in accordance with Clause and AS A key feature of the proposal is the re-use of the existing powerhouse building. The building footprint would not change significantly. The opening and glazing of the large portion of the eastern wall captures and emphasises views and a visual connection to Corio Bay. A range of materials and finishes are proposed. The scale and bulk of the building is mitigated by its setbacks and the extent of open space and undeveloped area around the building. City of Greater Geelong Port Structure Plan Adopted by Council in 2007 The site is located in Precinct 4 (Grain Piers) which includes a number of industrial and nonindustrial uses. In particular GrainCorp and Barrett Burston are located in this precinct and the Port Structure Plan (2007) (PSP) confirms that the retention and protection of these facilities as economic assets of the community of Geelong is critical to the ongoing viability of the Port as a key economic role of Geelong. Both these operations are vulnerable to sensitive uses given dust, odour and noise emissions and extended hours operations.

52 Map No. 7 of the PSP identifies the site as being industrial interface and not within the area identified as either core industry either opportunities for Port related uses or existing core Port related industry. Activities in the industrial interface include areas within the Industrial 2 and 1 Zoned land accommodate some non-port related activities in Mackey Street and these areas still form part of an important buffer to Port industry. Part of the PSP refers to non-industrial uses in the Port and confirms that non-port uses in the core Port area or Port related industrial area should not conflict with the operation of Port facilities. The PSP refers to the need to consider the use of Section 173 agreements or similar for new uses to highlight the potential impacts from odour, dust and noise. A number of mechanisms have been included to mitigate the impacts such as a Section 173 Agreement, traffic and car parking management, discouraging inappropriate uses or sensitive uses and building design. Geelong Port City 2050 Geelong Port and Land Infrastructure Plan (adopted by Council in 2013) This planning documents provides data and highlight key infrastructure investment and planning issues that should be considered as part of any future business cases and environment and public amenity considerations associated with further development of the Geelong Port. It appropriately highlights the importance of the Port to Geelong and Victoria and on review, it is considered that the proposal will not undermine the policy direction of this plan. Ministerial Direction No.14 (Ports Environs) This direction seeks to ensure that an Amendment to the Planning Scheme does not introduce a sensitive land use or intensify an existing sensitive land uses in the area if it will prejudice the operation of the Port. The proposal is not a sensitive land use and a condition has been included in the recommendations to prohibit such uses. Therefore the proposal complies with the Ministerial Direction. Port of Geelong - Development Strategy (Victorian Regional Channels Authority, 2013) The site is located within the Dry Bulk Precinct as outlined below. It is noted that reference is made to potentially use the site in the long term for port related activities subject to buffers. The reference to buffers is important given the proximity to residential land to the south but also the opportunities that exist for Osborne House. The reliance of the site for port activities has not been articulated by objectors, despite being invited to do so as part of the consideration of this application. The site has remained vacant for over 30 years and is not in port ownership despite opportunities, has never been used for port activities and its potential use in the long term (subject to buffers) is uncertain. Furthermore, the Development Strategy also refers to three other and much larger sites for potential future port related activities therefore the reliance on the subject site to secure the success of the port in the future is likely to be negligible or significantly reduced. The subject land has no active interface with any port operations which also reinforces the likelihood that there will be no physical effect on the operations and development opportunities for port operations. Also, given the subject land has an interface with residential and public recreational uses to the south, future expansion of Port operations would potentially be limited.

53 Therefore the proposal can provide a buffer that is a natural progression from more responsive to residential and public recreation uses to the south and industrial and port uses to the north. Subject Site

54