GOVERNMENT LAND STANDING ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Transcription

1 GOVERNMENT LAND STANDING ADVISORY COMMITTEE NEPEAN HWY HIGHETT GAS & FUEL SITE STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE BY ANDREW CLARKE ON PLANNING ISSUES Prepared for Kingston City Council MARCH 2018 Matrix Planning Australia Pty Ltd A.C.N nd Floor, 50 Budd Street Collingwood Victoria 3066 Tel: +61 (3) Fax: +61 (3)

2 CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION: PRACTICE NOTE EXPERT EVIDENCE SUBJECT SITE & ENVIRONS EXISTING PLANNING POLICIES & CONTROLS STATE PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK LOCAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK Municipal Strategic Statement Local Planning Policies EXISTING PLANNING CONTROLS Zoning Overlays Heritage Overlay Design and Development Overlay Environmental Audit Overlay OTHER STRATEGIC PLANNING DOCUMENTS PLAN MELBOURNE PLAN MELBOURNE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN HIGHETT STRUCTURE PLAN PROPOSED PLANNNING POLICY CHANGES AND PLANNING CONTROLS PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT SITE/HOUSING OPPORTUNITY AREA DPO Pre emptive Requirements Before a Permit Is Issued Dilution/Deletion of Appropriate DDO12 Controls and Outcomes Figure 1 Concept Plan Social Impact Assessment Affordable Housing Overshadowing of Public Open Space Acoustic Protection Removal of Third Party Notice, Decision and Review Rights Other Matters CONCLUSIONS P18002

3 1 INTRODUCTION: PRACTICE NOTE EXPERT EVIDENCE Name and Address of Expert Andrew Clarke Director Matrix Planning Australia 2 nd Floor, 50 Budd Street Collingwood Vic Qualifications of Expert Bachelor of Town and Regional Planning (Hons), University of Melbourne, 1982 Member, Planning Institute of Australia Refer Curriculum Vitae at Attachment 1. Any Private or Business Relationship between the Expert Witness and the Party for Whom the Report is Prepared None. Instructions Written instructions dated 8 February 2018 from Russell Kennedy Lawyers acting on behalf of Kingston City Council as follows: You are retained to provide an expert opinion and appear as an expert witness in relation to the Proposal Facts, Matters and Assumptions Facts, matters and assumptions on which opinions expressed in the report are based are set out in the report. Documents and Materials Taken Into Account The documents and any literature or other materials taken into account in preparing the report are identified in the report. Examinations, Tests and Investigations All examinations, tests and investigations have been undertaken by me. Summary of Opinion A summary of opinion is included in the Conclusion. Provisional Opinion There are no provisional opinions. Relevant Questions Outside of Expertise There are no matters of relevance outside of my expertise. P

4 Whether the report is incomplete or inaccurate in any respect As far as I am aware the report is not incomplete or inaccurate in any respect. Declaration I have made all the enquiries which I believe are desirable and appropriate, and that no matters of significance which I regard as relevant have to my knowledge been withheld from the Advisory Committee. 2 SUBJECT SITE & ENVIRONS The subject site, Nepean Hwy, is a large irregularly shaped site fronting Nepean Highway and View Street, Highett. It comprises two lots within an overall area of ha. The site is relatively flat with an approximate 4 metre fall from north down to south west. The site is vacant and cleared of former buildings except for a remnant historic chimney. It contains some vegetation including canopy trees particularly along both of its road frontages (refer Aerial Photographs over page). The site is a former Gas & Fuel gas distribution centre. That use ceased many years ago. View of the subject site from the southern end of its Nepean Hwy frontage The subject site is located midway between the Highett neighbourhood activity centre (approximately 300 metres to the north) and Southland major activity centre (approximately 500 metres to the south). P

5 Aerial Photograph 1 Surrounding and nearby use and development includes: Buckingham International Motel fronting Nepean Hwy and View Street to the immediate north of the subject site; Dwellings (predominantly 1 2 storeys detached dwellings and units) along View Street and fronting both sides of the Nepean Highway; The Moorabbin Justice Centre (law courts) to the immediate south of the subject site fronting Nepean Highway; 5 storey apartment complex at 1142 Nepean Highway; 6 storey apartment complex (partly completed) at Nepean Highway; Sir William Fry Reserve (landscaped passive open space) to the immediate south of the P

6 Aerial Photograph 2 subject site Melbourne Frankston railway line to the west of the subject site. P

7 Subject site as viewed from the southern end of View Street View of the subject site from William Fry Reserve P

8 Moorabbin Justice Centre 1142 Nepean Highway P

9 Nepean Hwy 3 EXISTING PLANNING POLICIES & CONTROLS 3.1 STATE PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK The State Planning Policy Framework is the enunciation of State planning policies common to all Victorian new format planning schemes. State planning policies relevant to this Advisory Committee include: Clause : Settlement Networks which includes the strategy to focus investment and growth in places of State significance, including major urban renewal precincts; Clause : Supply of Urban Land. It includes the strategy that planning for urban growth should consider opportunities for the consolidation, redevelopment and intensification of existing urban areas; Clause : Open Space Planning which includes the strategy to ensure that land is set aside and developed in residential areas for local recreational use and to create pedestrian and bicycle links to commercial and community facilities; Clause : Noise Abatement, which includes the strategy to ensure that development is not prejudiced and community amenity is not reduced by noise emissions, using a range of building design, urban design and land use separation techniques; Clause : Integrated Housing which includes the following strategies: Increase the supply of housing in existing urban areas by facilitating increased housing yield in appropriate locations, including under utilised P

10 urban land. Ensure that the planning system supports the appropriate quantity, quality and type of housing, including the provision of aged care facilities, supported accommodation for people with disability, rooming houses, student accommodation and social housing. Clause : Location of Residential Development. The objective seeks to locate new housing in or close to activity centres and in urban renewal precincts and sites that offer good access to jobs, services and transport. Relevant strategies include: Increase the proportion of new housing in designated locations within established urban areas and reduce the share of new dwellings in greenfield and dispersed development areas. Encourage higher density housing development on sites that are well located in relation to jobs, services and public transport. Ensure an adequate supply of redevelopment opportunities within established urban areas to reduce the pressure for fringe development. Identify opportunities for increased residential densities to help consolidate urban areas. Clause : Housing Opportunity Areas. The relevant strategy is to identify housing development opportunities that are: Urban renewal precincts Areas for residential growth Metropolitan activity centres and major activity centres Neighbourhood activity centres especially those with good public transport connections Areas near existing and proposed railway stations that can support transitoriented development. Clause : Housing Affordability. Relevant strategies include Improve housing affordability by encouraging a significant proportion of new development to be affordable for households on low to moderate incomes; and Increase the supply of well located affordable housing by facilitating a mix of private, affordable and social housing in activity centres and urban renewal precincts. Clause : Distribution of Social and Cultural Infrastructure. The objective seeks to provide fairer distribution of and access to social and cultural infrastructure. The relevant strategy is to identify and address gaps and deficiencies in social and cultural infrastructure. P

11 3.2 LOCAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK Municipal Strategic Statement The Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) is the expression of the planning vision, objectives and strategies at the municipal level of consideration. The Kingston Planning Scheme MSS identifies the subject site as a Residential opportunity site on the Strategic Land Use Plan (Clause 21.04) and the untitled residential land use plan at Clause (refer Map 1 over page). Clause deals with residential land use. Under the sub heading Large Residential Opportunity Sites the MSS expresses that it is anticipated that additional large strategic redevelopment sites including the former Gas and Fuel site at 1138 Nepean Highway, Highett will become available for new housing redevelopment in coming years. One of the key issues identified (Clause ) is the impact that future population changes will have on the supply and demand for community and social facilities. The first objective seeks to provide a range of housing types across the municipality to increase housing diversity and cater for the changing housing needs of current and future populations, taking account of the differential capacity of local areas in Kingston to accommodate different types and rates of housing change. Relevant strategies to implement this objective include: Encourage residential development within activity centres via shop top housing and mixed use developments, and on transitional sites at the periphery of activity centres. The intensity and scale of such development will need to be in keeping with the scale of these centres. Support innovative residential infill development on former industrial sites adjacent to established residential areas, and on other mixed use or traditionally non residential sites where appropriate. Promote a range of lot sizes and housing types, including medium density housing, on large residential opportunity sites, particularly where such sites have good access to public transport and other facilities. Ensure development plans are prepared and implemented for all large residential opportunity sites to address the provision of a diversity of housing opportunities and to ensure that other site and contextual issues are addressed. Promote increased housing diversity in residential areas that are within convenient walking distance of public transport and activity nodes (increased housing diversity areas). Such areas will accommodate a variety of medium density housing types and layouts at increased residential densities, responding to the established but evolving urban character. P

12 Map 1: Strategic Land Use Framework Plan P

13 Encourage innovative and integrated higher density housing in residential areas around the Southland Principal Activity Centre. The seventh objective under Housing seeks to ensure all residential neighbourhoods in Kingston are provided with supporting social infrastructure adequate to the population s needs. Two of the strategies to achieve this objective are: In areas experiencing rapid growth, ensure appropriate social infrastructure is provided in accordance with the anticipated needs of future residents. Ensure the development of large residential opportunity sites contributes to identified social infrastructure needs. The eighth Housing objective is to recognise and respond to special housing needs within the community. The strategies to achieve this objective are: Support opportunities for the innovative provision of housing specific to housing needs not well catered for in the mainstream housing market such as aged accommodation and housing for low income groups. Ensure the provision of aged and low cost accommodation is integrated within residential neighbourhoods to ensure linkages with the general community and social networks and to avoid physically or socially isolating people. Recognise and respond to the specific needs for supporting infrastructure and services of some parts of the community. Support the provision of affordable housing, including low cost rental accommodation, particularly in areas designated for increased housing diversity. The Highett Structure Plan is identified as reference document in Clause Local Planning Policies There is one local planning policy relevant to the Advisory Committee, Clause 22.17: Highett Activity Centre Policy. The purpose of this policy is to implement the Highett Structure Plan, One of the objectives is to promote increased residential opportunities within the Activity Centre. Relevant land use policies include: Increase the intensity of activity in the Activity Centre and promote a mix of uses at upper levels of buildings, the rear of shops and identified opportunity sites. P

14 Ensure that any retail and commercial development within the Increased Density Areas Hwy West does not detract from the function of the Activity Centre. Relevant built form policies include: Maximise development opportunities on vacant and underutilised land which responds to the urban quality, proximity to transport and activity centres. Promote a diverse range of housing types and sizes within areas identified for increased residential and mixed use development. Relevant Access policies include: Improve access from existing and future residential areas to Sir William Fry Reserve, Southland and the Nepean Highway. Improve pedestrian access throughout the area and to overcome the barrier presented by the railway line and Nepean Highway. The subject site is in Precinct 3: Increased Density Highway West (refer Map 2). Policies specific to this precinct include: Encourage the development of residential dwellings of various sizes and formats. Encourage community uses compatible with the Moorabbin Courthouse and residential activities. Appropriate uses could include a child care centre or kindergarten. Encourage basic convenience retail uses to serve the needs of residents and employees within the precinct without undermining the role of Highett or Southland Activity Centres. Ensure that development on the former Gas and Fuel Site at 1138 Nepean Highway, Highett maximises views to the historic remnant chimney. Ensure that development provides a mixture of building heights and varying built forms and layouts to provide visual interest. Achieving innovative contemporary design and built form for all new development that is based on the best current architectural design practice and sustainability principles. Apply appropriate building setbacks for new development, ensuring that building occupants and users have a high level of amenity including daylight access and outlook. Ensure that building heights increase to a maximum furthest from established residential areas to the north and where contours of the land fall to minimise visual impact from surrounding residential areas. Negotiate for open space links to be provided on publicly and privately owned land to create pedestrian and cycling path connections between P

15 the Lyle Anderson Reserve, open space to be provided within the precinct, the Moorabbin Court Complex and the Sir William Fry Reserve through to Southland, that are useable, accessible, safe, well landscaped and provide opportunities for recreation and social interaction. Map 2: Highett Activity Centre Policy P

16 3.3 EXISTING PLANNING CONTROLS Zoning Under the Kingston Planning Scheme the subject site is in a Residential Growth Zone (RGZ1: Residential Growth Area; refer Map 3). Map 3: Zoning P

17 The purposes of the Residential Growth Zone are: To implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies. To provide housing at increased densities in buildings up to and including four storey buildings. To encourage a diversity of housing types in locations offering good access to services and transport including activity centres and town centres. To encourage a scale of development that provides a transition between areas of more intensive use and development and other residential areas. To ensure residential development achieves design objectives specified in a schedule to this zone. To allow educational, recreational, religious, community and a limited range of other nonresidential uses to serve local community needs in appropriate locations. A dwelling is an as of right no permit required use in the zone. Development of two or more dwellings requires a planning permit. There is a discretionary building height limit of 13.5 metres. Where the lot abuts another residential zone (GRZ2 is located to the immediate north) various ResCode amenity standards are required to be met Overlays Heritage Overlay The historic remnant chimney and its curtilage for a radius of 5 metres is included in a Heritage Overlay (HO11; refer Map 4). The purposes of the Heritage Overlay are: To implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies. To conserve and enhance heritage places of natural or cultural significance. To conserve and enhance those elements which contribute to the significance of heritage places. To ensure that development does not adversely affect the significance of heritage places. P

18 Map 4: Heritage Overlay To conserve specifically identified heritage places by allowing a use that would otherwise be prohibited if this will demonstrably assist with the conservation of the significance of the heritage place. A planning permit is required to demolish existing buildings and works and to construct new buildings and works Design and Development Overlay The subject site is in a Design and Development Overlay (DDO12: Highett Activity Centre; refer Map 5). The purposes of the Design and Development Overlay are: To implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies. To identify areas which are affected by specific requirements relating to the design and built form of new development. A planning permit is required for buildings, works and subdivision. P

19 Map 5: DDO12 DDO12 applies a number of precincts and sub precincts. The subject site is in Precinct 6 and in sub precincts 6(a), (b), (c), (d) and (e) (refer Map 6). Discretionary maximum building heights and design standards for each sub precinct are shown in Table 1 below. P

20 Map 6: DDO12 Precincts and Sub Precincts P

21 Table 1: Table to DDO Schedule 12 Height Control Maximum Area Building Height DDO12 H6 Former Gas and Fuel land and adjoining two industrial properties to its south. DDO12 H6(a) 3 storeys (11 metres) Design Standard Development must respect the scale of, and provides a transition to, adjoining lower scale residential buildings and proposed higher scale residential buildings within the precinct. Development must be setback to provide for a landscaped and tree lined new network of streets DDO12 H6(b) 3 storeys (11 metres) for a depth of 15 metres along Nepean Highway. 4 storeys (14 metres) for the remaining precinct. DDO12 H6(c) 4 storeys 14 metres High quality architecture must respond to and address the new and existing network of public streets, and open and public spaces. The scale of development must have a comfortable relationship with the lower scale, built form of adjoining development. Development must setback to provide for a landscaped and tree lined new network of streets. High quality architecture must respond to its visibility from Nepean Highway and makes a positive contribution to Nepean Highway. Development must be setback to provide for a landscaped and tree lined new network of streets. Development must respect the scale of, and provides a transition to, lower scale residential buildings and proposed higher scale residential buildings within the precinct. High quality architecture must respond to and addresses the new and existing network of public streets, and open and public spaces. The scale of development should take advantage of the opportunities of an uninhibited site but must not restrict views to and should maintain a comfortable relationship with the historic features within the precinct. New buildings must provide a transition from 2 storeys to higher storey built forms. Any 4th or higher storey must be setback from the street frontages to minimise its visual bulk. P

22 Table 1 (cont.) Height Control Area Maximum Building Height DDO12 H6(d) 4 storeys 14 metres DDO12 H6(e) 5 storeys (17 metres) Design Standard Development must be setback to provide for a landscaped and tree lined new network of streets. Development must respect the scale of, and provides a transition to, adjoining lower scale buildings and proposed higher scale residential buildings within the precinct. High quality architecture must respond to and addresses the new and existing network of public streets, and open and public spaces. New buildings to provide a transition from 3 storeys to higher storey built forms. Any 4th or higher storey must be setback from the street frontages to minimise its visual bulk. The scale of development should take advantage of the opportunities of an uninhibited site but must not restrict views to and should maintain a comfortable relationship with the historic features within the precinct. Development must be setback to provide for a landscaped and tree lined new network of streets. High quality architecture must respond to and addresses the new network of public streets, open and public spaces and Sir William Fry Reserve. High quality architecture must respond to its visibility from Nepean Highway and make a positive contribution to Nepean Highway. New buildings to provide a transition from 4 storeys to higher storey built forms. Any 5th or higher storey must be setback from the street frontages to minimise its visual bulk. Development must provide a transition to adjoining lower scale residential buildings within the precinct. Prior to a permit issuing for buildings, works and subdivision an outline development plan for the Increased Density Highway West Precinct must be approved by the responsible authority unless the responsible authority is satisfied the application is in accordance with the DDO12 design objectives and the Highett Structure Plan, May Various decision guidelines apply. The Highett Structure Plan is a reference document under the schedule Environmental Audit Overlay An Environmental Audit Overlay applies to the subject site and nearby land parcels (refer Map 7). P

23 Map 7: Environmental Audit Overlay The purposes of the Environmental Audit Overlay are: To implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies. To ensure that potentially contaminated land is suitable for a use which could be significantly adversely affected by any contamination. The overlay requires that before a sensitive use (residential use, child care centre, pre school centre or primary school) commences or before the construction or carrying out of buildings and works in association with a sensitive use commences, either a certificate of environmental audit or a statement must issue indicating that the land is suitable for the sensitive use. P

24 4 OTHER STRATEGIC PLANNING DOCUMENTS 4.1 PLAN MELBOURNE Plan Melbourne ( Plan Melbourne ) is the State Government s planning strategy for metropolitan Melbourne. Under the heading Surplus and Underutilised Government Land, Plan Melbourne states: Government land is an important resource for delivering services to Victorians, including places to live, work and learn. The government regularly reviews its land assets to ensure that they are being used efficiently. Land that is considered to be underutilised or surplus can then be considered for community or other government purposes or be disposed of. Any proceeds can then be reinvested into other important infrastructure. More efficient use of land owned by government can help facilitate Plan Melbourne outcomes and deliver social, economic and environmental benefits. (page 8). Direction 1.3 seeks to: Create development opportunities at urban renewal precincts across Melbourne. (page 12). Policy includes the following commentary: A number of former industrial and other sites including government sites around Melbourne are currently underutilised. Local planning authorities should identify and plan for ways these sites can be repurposed to create jobs and accommodate growth. (page 39). Direction 2.2 seeks to: Deliver more housing closer to jobs and public transport. (page 50). Policy seeks to: Direct new housing and mixed use development to urban renewal precincts and sites across Melbourne. (page 50). It includes the following commentary: The redevelopment of urban renewal precincts and sites will create more diversity in the housing market including opportunities for affordable and social housing as well as more jobs and community services. Urban renewal precincts will be major sources of medium and higher density mixed use development. (page 50). Plan Melbourne provides definitions of affordable and social housing: Affordable housing is housing that is appropriate for the needs of a range of very low to moderate income households, and priced (whether mortgage repayments or rent) so these households are able to meet their P

25 other essential basic living costs. Social housing is a type of rental housing that is provided and/or managed by the government (public housing) or by a not for profit organisation (community housing). Social housing is an overarching term that covers both public housing and community housing. (page 55). Direction 2.3 seeks to: Increase the supply of social and affordable housing. It includes the following commentary: For Melbourne to remain liveable for all its citizens, the supply of social and affordable housing needs to be increased. A range of housing types need to be developed within suburbs across Melbourne not just in outer areas to improve local affordability for homeowners and renters. (page 55). Policy seeks to: Utilise government land to deliver additional social housing. It includes the following commentary: The Victorian Government holds valuable land assets that can contribute to the delivery of additional social and affordable housing. The Victorian Government will increase the supply of social and affordable housing through identifying surplus government land suitable for housing. Sites identified as being surplus to government requirements need to be re used in ways that deliver broad community benefits such as boosting the supply and spread of social and affordable housing. Opportunities to increase overall supply through the regeneration of existing public housing also need to be identified. The government is taking a strategic approach to accelerating the development of well located surplus government land. A pilot program has been developed for a number of sites suitable for affordable housing. Other opportunities to leverage surplus government land to deliver social housing while maximising the opportunity to deliver planning uplift and certainty will be investigated, including local government land and surplus land held by other agencies. (page 55). 4.2 PLAN MELBOURNE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Plan Melbourne Five Year Implementation Plan outlines the actions to implement Plan Melbourne. Action 25: Surplus government land for social housing includes the following action: Identify underutilised and surplus government land that has potential to deliver additional social housing. Undertake pilot projects to demonstrate P

26 how planning mechanisms can deliver more social and affordable housing. Action 27: Value capture tool for delivery of affordable housing includes the following action: Develop a tool to share the uplift in land value from rezoning, with that value shared between the land owner, council and the delivery of affordable housing. Both actions have short timeframes for implementing the actions. 4.3 HIGHETT STRUCTURE PLAN The Highett Structure Plan was adopted by Council in May It is a reference document in the Kingston Planning Scheme. One of the Structure Plan s principles is to reinforce the development opportunities that exist on vacant and underutilised land in Highett, with respect to the precinct s urban quality and proximity to transport and activity centres. (page 4). The subject site is identified as being in an area designated as Increased Density Highway West (page 6; reproduced as Map 8). Proposed building heights over the subject site range from 2 6 storeys. Proposed land uses over the subject site were identified as Mixed Use High Density. Preferred uses are identified as: Residential apartments of various sizes and formats to reflect an increasing demand for smaller dwellings, while also accommodating for larger apartment types; Supportive community uses compatible with the Moorabbin Courthouse and residential activities (i.e. kindergarten); Local cafe within and servicing residential buildings, not as freestanding or drive through facilities; Basic convenience retail uses that serve the convenience needs of residents and employees within the precinct, and which do not undermine the respective roles of Highett Shopping Centre or of Southland. (page 16). Recommended built form, scale, height and massing are identified as: A maximum building height of up to 17 metres adjacent to the Sir William Fry Reserve; Opportunity for a variety of buildings of different form and height varying from 7.5 metres maximum building height adjacent to existing residential areas, up to a maximum building height of 17 metres, in order to provide diversity in the type of accommodation provided; P

27 Map 8: Highett Structure Plan: Key Plan P

28 Building heights stepped down to no more than 7.5m building heights adjacent to established residential areas in the Station Street and View Street areas, to the north of the precinct; Buildings to address Nepean Highway and to make a positive contribution to the role of the Highway as a notable boulevard; Buildings facing Nepean Highway to be set in an attractive landscaped setting, with a landscaping theme that complements the highway; and Buildings to address the new network of public streets to be established throughout the area and Sir William Fry Reserve. (page 17). 5 PROPOSED PLANNNING POLICY CHANGES AND PLANNING CONTROLS The proposed changes sought by the draft amendment are: Amendment of the MSS to remove the specific references to the subject site in Clauses and in its place an additional implementation measure in Clause to include the subject site in a DPO to reflect its status as a large strategic redevelopment site and residential opportunity site; Rezoning the site from RGZ1 to RGZ2 and the introduction of Schedule 2 to the RGZ. The fundamental difference between the two schedules is that RGZ1 uses the default discretionary maximum building height of 13.5 metres whereas GRZ2 specifies a mandatory maximum building height of 26 metres (with some minor exemptions); Presumably the removal of the subject site from DDO12 in the DDO map 1 ; Inclusion of the subject site in a Development Plan Overlay (DPO7: Former Gas and Fuel Land Strategic Redevelopment and Residential Opportunity Site); Introduction of Schedule 7 to the DPO. The most significant change is the inclusion of the subject site in DPO7 rather than DDO12. The purposes of the Development Plan Overlay are: To implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies. To identify areas which require the form and conditions of future use and development to be shown on a development plan before a permit can be granted to use or develop the land. To exempt an application from notice and review if it is generally in accordance with a development plan. 1 This is implicit in the amendment documents although I have not been provided with a DDO-D map. P

29 The DPO requires the preparation of a development to the satisfaction of the responsible authority before a permit can be granted for subdivision and buildings and works. A permit granted must be generally in accordance with the development plan. An application is exempt from third party notice, decision and review rights under any provision of the planning scheme. DPO7: Sets out circumstances where a permit may be granted before a development plan has been prepared; Various conditions and requirements on permits relating to: Safety and maintenance of the historic chimney; Extension of Remington Road around the Moorabbin Courthouse site; and Provision of a 2,200m² open space reserve (over and above any other requirement); Requirements (content) of the development plan. No changes are proposed to the existing Heritage Overlay, Environmental Audit Overlay and Clause Highett Activity Centre Policy. 6 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS I consider there are two principal issues associated with the draft amendment: 1. The subject site is a strategic redevelopment site/housing opportunity area; and 2. Detailed drafting of DDO7. I deal with both in turn. 6.1 STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT SITE/HOUSING OPPORTUNITY AREA I do not need to elaborate on this matter in detail. The subject site is clearly identified under all policy documents (SPPF, MSS, Clause 22.17, Highett Structure Plan, existing zoning) as a strategic redevelopment site/housing opportunity area, and I agree with that designation. It is a large disused Government site that has been vacant for many years, well located to excellent private and public transport modes and within walking distance to a major and neighbourhood activity centre and adjacent to a large well landscaped open space reserve to its south. Except to its north where the prevailing residential building height is 1 2 storeys, there are opportunities provided for high density residential development by the subject site being bordered by a train line and Nepean Highway (which provide distance buffers to existing residential development beyond), a non residential community facility (court house) and P

30 existing and proposed high density residential development to the south fronting Nepean Highway already of 5 6 storeys in height. 6.2 DPO7 There are a number of issues in the drafting of DPO7. These are summarised as: Pre emptive requirements before a permit is issued before a development plan is prepared; Dilution/deletion of appropriate DDO12 controls; The vagueness of Figure 1 Concept Plan; The lack of reference to a requirement to prepare a social impact assessment; The lack of reference to affordable housing; Overshadowing of public open space; The need for acoustic protection of future residents; Removal of third party notice, decision and review rights; Other matters. Each is dealt with below Pre emptive Requirements Before a Permit Is Issued It appears many of the permitted development matters listed which may occur before a development plan is prepared would need to be informed by a development plan. These include: Bulk excavation (for example for future basement garages); Site preparation and retention works including piling, footings, ground beams and ground slab, and Subdivision of the land into superlots. I cannot see how these matters can be designed in the absence of at least an overall development plan for the site. For example how can pile locations and superlot subdivision boundaries be determined in the absence of a plan showing the location of buildings, internal roadways, open space, etc? In my view some of these matters should be deleted because they require a development plan to guide their location. P

31 6.2.2 Dilution/Deletion of Appropriate DDO12 Controls and Outcomes Many of the Design Objectives for the Increased Density Highway West in DDO12 have not been picked up in DPO7. These include: Integrated development; Innovative urban design principles. DDO12 require the identification of these principles. There is the risk, particularly, if superlot subdivision and sale to different entities occurs that an integrated architectural theme for the whole site may be more difficult to achieve. This is picked up in DPO7 to some extent (in the third general requirement) but all that is sought is an urban design philosophy rather than urban design principles/guidelines. DPO7 would benefit by a requirement for urban design guidelines; How buildings address Nepean Highway, any new network of streets and open space areas; The creation of treed boulevards; Specific reference to linkages with Lyle Anderson Reserve west of the railway line, the Highett Activity Centre and Southland Activity Centre; At Attachment 2 I have provided suggested additions to pick up these matters Figure 1 Concept Plan Figure 1 Concept Plan depicts only building heights and principal connections through the site. Other than a building height control it serves little purpose otherwise. It should, at a minimum, also depict indicative locations of public open space (including the agreed 2,200 m² open space reserve) and a pedestrian and cycling link adjacent to the railway Social Impact Assessment The Traffic Engineering Assessment prepared by Traffix Group in July 2017 estimates a potential dwelling yield of 1,573 dwellings (or households). Such an increase is likely to increase demand on social and community infrastructure and warrants a Social Impact Assessment to determine whether additional social infrastructure is required and, if so, how it is to be accommodated. The Advisory Committee will be receiving separate expert evidence on this matter. I note that the following DPOs and DDO for very large former non residential redevelopment sites in the established metropolitan area required social and community infrastructure impact assessments: Channel 9 Site, Bendigo Street, East Richmond (Yarra Planning Scheme DPO5), including the transfer to Council at no cost a 400 m² site accommodating an existing building; P

32 Amcor site, Heidelberg Road, Alphington (Yarra Planning Scheme DPO11) The former Caltex Terminal, Blackshaws Road Kingsville (Hobsons Bay Planning Scheme DDO10). I have included a similar requirement at Attachment Affordable Housing I understand the Advisory Committee is to receive expert evidence on this issue. I deal only with planning policy in relation to affordable housing. The provision of affordable housing is supported by Clause : Housing Affordability. Relevant strategies include: Improve housing affordability by encouraging a significant proportion of new development to be affordable for households on low to moderate incomes; and Increase the supply of well located affordable housing by facilitating a mix of private, affordable and social housing in activity centres and urban renewal precincts. The MSS also includes commentary on provision of affordable housing. Plan Melbourne identifies surplus Government land is an opportunity to accommodate affordable housing. The subject site represents a perfect opportunity to pilot the provision of affordable housing on surplus Government land consistent with Action 25 of its Implementation Plan. The three sites I have identified in Section above are privately owned sites that make provision for affordable housing as follows: Channel 9 site: 5% of apartment dwellings; Amcor site: 5% of all dwellings; Caltex Terminal site: unspecified, however the proponent s Social Impact Assessment recommended 10% of all dwellings 2. I have therefore included an addition to DPO7 as to how this could be accommodated Overshadowing of Public Open Space I note that both DDO12 and DPO7 use similar terminology in relation to not excessively overshadowing public open space (existing and proposed). Therefore I make no criticism of DPO7 in so far that the requirement is qualitative rather than quantitative. In my view the provision is of greater importance to new open space areas within the subject site rather than Sir William Fry Reserve which is located immediately south of where 6 storey development (or possibly higher) is proposed. My inspection indicated the northern boundary of the reserve contains significant canopy vegetation along its length which already 2 Helen Weston Expert Evidence Statement in VCAT Hearing P2042/2014 (July 2015) P

33 overshadows this part of the reserve. Having regard to its large size any additional overshadowing from buildings on the subject site is likely to be negligible. In contrast, the open space areas within the subject site are likely to be smaller open spaces in area and dimension and depending on where they are located could be proximate to 8 storeys (or higher) built form Acoustic Protection Both the railway and Nepean Highway abut the subject site and are potential noise sources. Whilst I acknowledge there are existing residences adjacent to both transport corridors that do not demand acoustic protection, the Architectural Investigation Report prepared by CHT Architects (August 2017) identifies this as a potential issue (at page 17). As far as I am aware there has been no expert acoustic analysis provided with the Government s documentation. I have therefore recommended a requirement for an acoustic report in DPO Removal of Third Party Notice, Decision and Review Rights The effect of changing from a DDO to a DPO is that it removes third party notice, decision and review rights. This is of some concern given that proposed height controls are discretionary, the concept plan is vague and no draft of the development plan has been exhibited. In my view there are two ways to address this (other than retaining the land in a DDO and adapting the schedule accordingly). The first is to include an informal public notice process of the development plan in the DPO7 schedule. This is relatively common but in my experience can create unrealistic and unfulfilled expectations for residents, who might object but have no statutory right to pursue the matter beyond the Council objection stage. The second method is to identify where the most sensitive existing uses are located and strengthen the provisions proximate to their location. In this case I consider the most sensitive receptors are the residents to the immediate north of the site in View Street and Station Street. Residents on the opposite side of the railway and Nepean Highway are buffered from built form impacts by the width of those transport corridors. The law courts are not a sensitive use (from a residential amenity viewpoint). The existing residential developments to the south of the site are already 5 6 storeys in height and approximately 6 storeys is proposed at their interface. There would therefore appear to me to be an argument for a mandatory height limit of 2 storeys at the View and Station Streets interface (based on my interpretation that the 2 storey height limit is not mandatory). I am not sure whether a DPO schedule can include a mandatory height control. If not, this could be most easily accommodated by amending the schedule to RGZ2 by adding the following words (or similar) in Clause 3.0: P

34 A building used as a dwelling or a residential building must not exceed a height of 26 metres, except in the area depicted as up to 2 storeys in Figure 1 to Schedule 7 of the Development Plan Overlay a building used as a dwelling or a residential building must not exceed a height of 7.5 metres. The strategic basis for the 7.5 metres height is the Highett Structure Plan (page 17, 3 rd dot point) Other Matters I have also made other various other changes to the drafting of the schedule generally for clarity and what I regard as better drafting. I understand Council may also have other requirements some of which are beyond my expertise 7 CONCLUSIONS I am of the view that the subject site is a significant strategic redevelopment site/housing opportunity area and the proposed planning controls seek to reflect that status. However, in my view DPO7 and GRZ2 require changes, mostly in the form of additions, to accommodate some matters more adequately. I have made all of the enquiries that I believe are desirable and appropriate and that no matters of significance which I regard as relevant have to my knowledge, been withheld from the Advisory Committee. Andrew Clarke B.TRP (Hons.), MPIA 9 March 2018 P

35 ATTACHMENT 1: ANDREW CLARKE CURRICULUM VITAE P

36 CURRICULUM VITAE ANDREW CLARKE OCCUPATION: Consultant Town Planner DATE OF BIRTH: 9 th July 1960 NATIONALITY: Australian ACADEMIC QUALIFICATIONS: Bachelor of Town and Regional Planning (Hons.), University of Melbourne, 1982 PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS: Corporate Member, Planning Institute of Australia Member, Victorian Planning and Environmental Law Association SUMMARY OF CAREER HISTORY: Director, Matrix Planning Australia Pty Ltd, 2001-present Planning Manager, Fisher Stewart Pty Ltd, Senior Planner, SJB Planning Pty Ltd, Senior Planner, Fisher Stewart Pty Ltd, Town Planner/Senior Planner/Associate, Wilson Sayer Pty Ltd/Wilson Sayer Core Pty Ltd, OVERVIEW OF EXPERIENCE AND EXPERTISE Since 1982, Andrew Clarke has been employed as a consultant town planner, providing advice to private individuals and firms, as well as Commonwealth, State and local government. The particular expertise of Andrew Clarke has been in the area of planning and development approvals associated with a range of residential, commercial, industrial, recreational and institutional development projects. Andrew regularly appears as an expert witness in planning panels, tribunals and courts. Between 1988 and 2015, Andrew was regularly appointed by the Minister for Planning to sit on and chair planning panels and enquiries including advisory committees, environment effects statements and planning scheme amendments. Andrew is a former secretary ( and ) and chair ( ) of the Australian Association of Planning Consultants (Victoria Division). Andrew established Matrix Planning Australia Pty Ltd in June 2001 as a town planning consultancy.

37 Representative projects undertaken by Andrew under the Matrix Planning Australia Pty Ltd banner include: Melbourne Cricket Ground Northern Stand Redevelopment for MCG5 Sports Architects on behalf of the Melbourne Cricket Club and Melbourne Cricket Ground Trust (2001) Central Creek Grasslands Residential Subdivision and Conservation Project for the Urban and Regional Land Corporation (2001) Pharmacy College, Redevelopment, Royal Parade Parkville for the City of Melbourne (2001) Watt Road Mornington, Residential Rezoning and 100 Lot Subdivision for private client ( ) CSIRO Division of Petroleum Resources, Syndal, Subdivision Development, for CSIRO (2002) Hutchison Telecommunications Mobile Phone Towers Visual Impact Assessment, Hoppers Crossing (2001) Marlows Ltd, Marlows automotive outlets, Sunshine and Preston ( ) Melbourne Sports and Aquatic Centre, Stage 2 Redevelopment for 2006 Melbourne Commonwealth Games (2002) The Esplanade Hotel, St Kilda Redevelopment for the City of Port Phillip (2002) Deakin University Melbourne Campus, Burwood, development control advice for Deakin University (2002) BassGas Project Environmental Effects Statement Panel Inquiry Chair for Victorian Department of Infrastructure (2002) Cheltenham Green: Land Subdivision, Apartment and Townhouse Complex, Cheltenham for VicUrban (2003) (2008 Winner Urban Development Institute of Australia (Vic) Award for Excellence in the category of Urban Renewal Projects) West Field Coal Mine Hazelwood Project, for International Power Hazelwood ( ) Various School Building and Site Extensions for Brighton Grammar School (2004) Parkside Gardens Residential Subdivision, Shepparton, for VicUrban (2004) South Melbourne Supermarket and Mixed Use Commercial Development, for private client (2005) Mortlake Gas Fired Power Station, for Origin Energy ( ) School Expansion Planning Scheme Amendment and Stage 1 Buildings Permit, for Donvale Christian College ( ) and Plenty Valley Christian College ( ) Princes Highway, Traralgon Bypass, for Department of Primary Industries (2007) Shaw River Gas Fired Power Station and Gas Pipeline, for Santos Ltd ( ) Planning Controls Assessment, Nelson Place, Williamstown for Nelson Place Village Pty Ltd (2011) Numerous Licensed Premises Amenity Impact Assessments (ongoing) Numerous residential unit and land subdivision proposals for various private clients (ongoing) Numerous highest and best use advices and opinions in relation to land acquisition and compensation cases

38 ATTACHMENT 2: AMENDED DPO7

39