1 Amendment C195 to the Boroondara Planning Scheme - Maling Road Built Form Controls - Adoption

Transcription

1 1 Amendment C195 to the Boroondara Planning Scheme - Maling Road Built Form Controls - Adoption Abstract The purpose of this report is to inform Council of the outcomes of the Urban Planning Special Committee (UPSC) on 7 April 2015 and seek a resolution from Council to: Adopt Amendment C195 to the Boroondara Planning Scheme as shown at Attachments 1, 2 and 3. Submit the amendment to the Minister for Planning for approval. Prepare and submit a ministerial amendment under section 20 (4) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to the Minister for Planning to apply an Environmental Audit Overlay (EAO) to 85 Maling Road, Canterbury. On 17 March 2014 the Urban Planning Special Committee (UPSC) resolved to commence Amendment C195 to the Boroondara Planning Scheme to implement the Maling Road Built Form Guidelines (MRBFG) (Attachment 4). Public exhibition of the amendment was undertaken from 17 July 2104 to 18 August Eleven (11) submissions were received during the exhibition period. The UPSC considered the submissions received and the officers response to these submissions on 20 October The UPSC resolved to make modifications to the exhibited amendment to address issues raised by some submitters (including the removal of 85 Maling Road (the Bradshaw site) from the amendment) and refer unresolved submissions to an independent panel for consideration. A Panel hearing was conducted on 8 and 22 December The Panel considered all submissions referred to it as well as late submissions made after the appointment of a panel. The Panel generally supported the amendment with the exception of the removal of 85 Maling Road (the former Bradshaw site) from the amendment and the UPSC decision to retain the site in the Neighbourhood Residential Zone 3 (NRZ3). A copy of the Panel report is provided at Attachment 6. On 7 April 2015, the Urban Planning Special Committee (UPSC) considered the Panel s report and recommendations, and officers response to the Panel s recommendations. The UPSC also heard from residents, many of whom raised concerns with the height limits proposed for Maling Road, which had not been raised as a concern as part of the exhibition process. The UPSC resolution in response to the Panel s recommendation is provided at Attachment 7. At this meeting, the UPSC resolved to refer the amendment to an Ordinary Council meeting subject to: The height limit of Maling Road being reduced from a mandatory maximum height of 11 metres to a mandatory maximum height of 8.5 metres. The street wall height for non-contributory buildings being expressed as mandatory, not discretionary, control. (Note, the street wall height for significant and contributory buildings is already expressed as a mandatory requirement.) The UPSC also endorsed the abandonment of that part of the amendment pertaining to the former Bradshaw site at 85 Maling Road in accordance with the UPSC s decision from 20 October This is explained in more detail later in this report. City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 1 of 109

2 Officers' recommendation That Council resolve to adopt the Urban Planning Special Committees' recommendation from 7 April 2015 to: 1. Split Amendment C195 into two parts. Part 1 - comprises the amendment as adopted by the UPSC on 7 April Part 2 comprises all parts of the exhibited amendment that relate to 85 Maling Road, Canterbury. 2. Adopt Amendment C195 Part 1 to the Boroondara Planning Scheme as shown in Attachments 1, 2 and 3 (as annexed to the minutes) in accordance with Section 29(1) of the Planning and Environment Act Adopt the Maling Road Built Form Guidelines shown in Attachment 4 (as annexed to the minutes) subject to the changes listed in Attachment 5 (as annexed to the minutes). 4. Submit Amendment C195 Part 1 to the Minister for Planning for approval in accordance with Section 31(1) of the Planning and Environment Act Abandon Amendment C195 Part 2, which relates to 85 Maling Road, Canterbury. 6. Write to the Minister for Planning, in accordance with Section 28 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, to advise the Minister for Planning of Council s decision to abandon Amendment C195 Part Request the Minister for Planning to prepare, adopt and approve an amendment to the Boroondara Planning Scheme pursuant to Section 20(4) of the Planning and Environment Act (1987) to apply an Environmental Audit Overlay (EAO) to 85 Maling Road, Canterbury. 8. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer and the Director City Planning to undertake minor administrative changes to the amendment and associated planning controls that do not change the intent of the controls. Document information City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 2 of 109

3 Responsible director: John Luppino City Planning 1. Purpose The purpose of this report is to: Inform Council of the outcomes of the UPSC meeting on 7 April 2014 at which the UPSC considered the Panel report and officers response to the Panel s recommendations for Amendment C195 to the Boroondara Planning Scheme. A copy of the UPSC s resolution is shown in Attachment 8. Inform Council of the response from the owners of Maling Road to the UPSC s recommendation on 7 April 2015 to reduce the height limits for this site. Provide background information in support of the officers recommendation to Council to: a. Split Amendment C195 into two parts and abandon the part of Amendment C195 relating to 85 Maling Road (Amendment C195 Part 2). b. Adopt Amendment C195 Part 1 as shown in Attachments 1, 2 and 3 and the Maling Road Built Form Guidelines (MRBFG) as shown in Attachments 4 with the updated listed in Attachment 5. c. Commence a Section 20(4) amendment to seek the application of an Environmental Audit Overlay (EAO) to 85 Maling Road. 2. Policy implications and relevance to council plan Council Plan Amendment C195 implements the Council Plan by providing clear built form outcomes for the Maling Road Shopping Centre ( the Centre ). Introducing these controls will help to preserve the unique character of this centre for future generations. In particular, the amendment addresses the strategic objective of Theme 3 of the Council Plan , Enhanced Amenity. The aim of this objective is to improve and protect the character of our neighbourhoods by engaging with our community and striving to protect our natural and built environments. City of Boroondara Public Health and Wellbeing Plan Amendment C195 implements the Boroondara Public Health and Wellbeing Plan by promoting a level of change in the Centre that is sympathetic to the heritage streetscape that is highly valued by the community, while allowing development that provides opportunity for housing and improved levels of safety in the Centre. In particular, the Amendment addresses Strategy 2.1 of Theme 2: Liveable, sustainable health promoting city of Council s Health and Wellbeing Plan which seeks to ensure that health promoting principles [are considered] when planning and developing the built environment. City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 3 of 109

4 Plan Melbourne Amendment C195 supports Plan Melbourne by retaining the retail and service function of the Centre, while supporting a level of change that will respect the historic buildings that define the Centre s character. Further, the amendment proposes the use of mandatory height controls to protect this neighbourhood centre from inappropriate development. In particular, the amendment addresses Theme 4 of Plan Melbourne Create healthy and active neighbourhoods and maintain Melbourne s identity as one of the world s most liveable cities. This theme is reinforced through Direction 4.7 which advocates for the protection of Melbourne s heritage and acknowledges the important role it plays in peoples connections to where they live. It also addresses Direction 4.2, which encourages the creation of a network of 20-minute neighbourhoods to provide a range of services close to where people live. Further, initiative seeks to protect Melbourne s neighbourhood shopping centres and supports the use of mandatory height controls for these areas. 3. Background On 17 February 2014, the UPSC adopted the MRBFG and resolved to seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare and exhibit Amendment C195 to the Boroondara Planning Scheme. Authorisation to prepare Amendment C195 was granted on 23 May Exhibited Amendment C195 The exhibited Amendment C195 proposed to implement the adopted MRBFG; and apply building height and setback controls to 210 to 216 Canterbury Road and 2B Wattle Valley Road. Specifically, the exhibited amendment sought to: Apply a Design and Development Overlay Schedule 23 (DDO23) to all properties identified in the MRBFG (including 85 Maling Road). Amend Design and Development Overlay Schedule 20 (DDO20) to include 210 to 216 Canterbury Road and 2B Wattle Valley Road in a new Precinct 6. Rezone 85 Maling Road, Canterbury from the Neighbourhood Residential Zone 3 (NRZ3) to the General Residential Zone (GRZ). Apply the Environmental Audit Overlay (EAO) to 85 Maling Road, Canterbury. Exhibition Process Exhibition of the amendment commenced on 17 July 2014 and closed on 18 August Eleven (11) submissions were received to the amendment during exhibition including: four (4) submissions of support, three (3) supporting the overall amendment but requesting changes to a component of the amendment, and four (4) submissions objecting to the amendment. City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 4 of 109

5 The key issues raised by submitters include: Reducing the height limit proposed for 85 Maling Road (the former Bradshaw site) from 11 metres to 8.5/9 metres; and providing a setback greater than 3 metres from the shared boundary between 83 and 85 Maling Road. Adding a new guideline in DDO23 requiring air conditioning units and associated services to be screened from public view. Modifying the controls proposed for Canterbury Road and 2B Wattle Valley Road, Canterbury to ensure that these properties have the same residential setback requirements as the properties in DDO23 and maintain a landscaped setback to Canterbury Road. Changing the heritage grading for 2 Bryson Street from non- contributory to contributory. Officers reported the outcomes of the exhibition process to the UPSC on 20 October In response to the submissions received, officers recommended that the following changes be made to the exhibited amendment: Modify DDO23 to reduce the height limit for the triangular portion of the Bradshaw site from 11 metres to 8 metres. Modify DDO23 and the MRBFG to include a guideline that the sensitive residential interface setback should be landscaped. Update DDO23 and the MRBFG to include a new guideline stating that building services such as air conditioners should be screened from view and not be located on the front façade of a building. Update map 2 of DDO20 and the MRBFG to apply a 3 metre landscaped front setback to 210 to 216 Canterbury Road. Update the Boroondara Schedule of Gradings Map to show 2 Bryson Street as a contributory heritage place. At this meeting the UPSC resolved to modify DDO23 and DDO20 (now DDO16 resulting from the recent approval of Amendment C108) as recommended by officers, subject to 85 Maling Road being removed from the amendment. Panel Hearing The Panel hearing was held over two days on 8 and 22 December The Panel heard from four (4) submitters, including the two submitters who lodged late submissions (see below). Council received the Panel s report and recommendations on 10 February The report was publicly released on 10 March 2015 through Council s website and the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning s (DELWP) Amendments Online website. A copy of the Panel report is provided in Attachment 6. The Panel report and its recommendation were considered by the UPSC on 7 April City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 5 of 109

6 Late submissions Two late submissions were received prior to the commencement of the Panel hearing; one from a local resident, and one from a planning consultant representing the owner of 85 Maling Road (the Bradshaw Site). The late submissions were not considered by the UPSC on 20 October The local resident s key concerns related to the potential rezoning of 85 Maling Road from Neighbourhood Residential Zone - Schedule 3 (NRZ3) to the General Residential Zone (GRZ) and the height limit proposed for 85 Maling Road and Maling Road. The resident requested that the height limit for Maling Road be reduced to one storey and 85 Maling Road remain in the NRZ3 to limit future development to a maximum height of 8 metres. The submission from the legal representative for 85 Maling Road objected to the removal of the site from Amendment C195 and the UPSC s decision to retain the site in the NRZ. They did not oppose the planning controls exhibited for the site as part of Amendment C195. The late submitters concerns regarding the height limits applied to Maling Road were considered by the Panel and the UPSC as discussed further below. UPSC meeting 7 April 2015 On 7 April 2015, the UPSC considered the Panel s report and recommendations for Amendment C195 to the Boroondara Planning Scheme, and officers response to the Panel s recommendations. In addition to considering the Panel s and officers recommendations, the UPSC also considered the views of residents who presented at the meeting. Four of the eight residents who spoke at the meeting did not lodge a submission to Amendment C195 or participate in the Panel hearing. Refer to detailed discussion in the issues section below. 4. Outline of key issues/options Panel recommendations Overall the Panel was supportive of Amendment C195 and concluded that the amendment provides clear and sensible built form controls for Maling Road. The panel recommended that the amendment should be adopted as resolved by the UPSC on 20 October 2014 subject to the following changes: The Bradshaw site be retained within the amendment and rezoned to the General Residential Zone (GRZ); and Design and Development Overlay - Schedule 23 (DO23) should be modified to encourage a 3 metre landscaped setback along the Maling Road frontage of the Bradshaw site. City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 6 of 109

7 The Panel also agreed that the Boroondara Schedule of Gradings Map should be updated to show 2 Bryson Street, Canterbury as a contributory heritage place to Heritage Overlay - Schedule 149 (HO149). USPC recommendation to Council At the UPSC meeting on 7 April 2015, the UPSC agreed with the Panel that the amendment should be adopted by Council. However, the UPSC recommended a number of changes compared to the Panel s recommendations: Reducing the street wall and overall height limits to be applied to Maling Road. Excluding 85 Maling Road, Canterbury from the adopted amendment. Each of these will be discussed below. The table at Attachment 7 summarises the difference between the recommendations of the Panel and the UPSC recommendation from the 7 April 2015 Council meeting Maling Road, Canterbury The height limits proposed for Maling Road, Canterbury was not raised as a concern during the preparation of the MRBFG or during exhibition of Amendment C195. This issue was raised by two submitters during the Panel hearing process and had previously not been considered by the UPSC. The submitter requested a reduction in the building height for this property to allow for only single storey development. At the UPSC meeting on 7 April 2015, seven residents spoke on this issue and requested a reduced building height for the property. One resident spoke in relation to the location of air conditioning units on the facade of buildings. In response to the presentations made on the night, the UPSC resolved to reduce the height limit proposed for Maling Road from a mandatory overall height of 11 metres and discretionary street wall height of 9 metres, to a mandatory height limit of 8.5 metres for the entire site. The UPSC did not support limiting the height to only single storey. Feedback from the owners of Maling Road In accordance with the UPSC s resolution of 7 April 2015 (Attachment 8), officers wrote to the owners of Maling Road and sought their feedback on the changes to the height limits endorsed by the UPSC. The owners of Maling Road met with Strategic Planning Officers on 22 April 2015 and lodged a written submission. The owners strongly oppose the proposed changes to the height limit for this site. They request that the mandatory maximum 11 metre height limit and discretionary 9 metre street wall height detailed in the exhibited DDO23, and supported by the Panel, be retained. The owners are of the view that they are being unfairly targeted as a result of VCAT s decision to approve the development on 85 Maling Road. City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 7 of 109

8 The owners questioned Council s rationale for reducing the height limits for this site when the abutting heritage building exceed the height limits proposed by the UPSC. The owners are concerned that an 8.5 metre height limit would limit their ability to construct a development that could respond positively to the scale and architectural detailing of the abutting heritage building. They are also concerned that the reduced height would result in a development that is at odds with the scale of the other heritage buildings in the Centre. 85 Maling Road, Canterbury The UPSC did not agree with the Panel s recommendation that 85 Maling Road should remain part of the amendment and upheld the UPSC s decision from 20 October 2014 to remove this site from the amendment. Specifically, the UPSC resolved to: Endorse abandonment of that part of the amendment pertaining to the Bradshaw site at 85 Maling Road and excise it from the amendment, with the exception of the application of the Environmental Audit Overlay. To give effect to this recommendation through the Planning and Environment Act 1987, Council must resolve to formally abandon this part of the amendment and write to the Minister for Planning to advise that all or part of this amendment has been abandoned. Consequently, officers recommend that Council split amendment C195 into two parts: Amendment C195 Part 1 (Attachments 1, 2 and 3) - As per the UPSC resolution from 7 April 2015 relating to all Commercial 1 zoned land (with exception of public car parks); and Amendment C195 Part 2 - affecting 85 Maling Road, Canterbury. Officers recommend that Council resolved to abandon Amendment C195 Part 2 and adopt Amendment C195 Part 1 as recommended by the UPSC on 7 April Environmental Audit Overlay to 85 Maling Road If Council resolves to split the amendment into two parts and abandon the part of the amendment that pertains to 85 Maling Road, officers recommend that Council pursue a ministerial amendment, through Section 20(4) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, to apply an EAO to 85 Maling Road. The application of the EAO formed part of the exhibited amendment, but is no longer applicable as it relates to land proposed to be excised from the Amendment C195 to form part of Amendment C195 Part 2. Given the past industrial use of the Bradshaw site, which included a service station, it is important that this overlay be applied to ensure this site is deemed suitable for sensitive uses prior to any works being carried out. The application of an EAO to the site was not disputed through any submission or by the owner at the Panel hearing. Consequently, officers believe a 20(4) amendment is appropriate in this instance. Officers from the DELWP have provided verbal advice, that a Section 20(4) ministerial amendment would be appropriate in this instance. This process would constitute the creation of a new planning scheme amendment and associated planning scheme amendment number. City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 8 of 109

9 Officers also note that the planning permit issued by VCAT for 85 Maling Road conditioned that an environmental audit be carried out prior to any development occurring. However, in the event that the planning permit for 85 Maling Road is not acted on, officers recommend that an EAO be pursed to ensure that any further development of this site is assessed for possible contamination and deemed suitable before any sensitive uses occur on the site. 2 Bryson Street, Canterbury The UPSC also agreed that the Boroondara Schedule of Gradings Map should be updated to show 2 Bryson Street, Canterbury as a contributory heritage place to Heritage Overlay - Schedule 149 (HO149), and adopted the updated Schedule of Gradings Map accordingly on 7 April This change is reflected in Map 1 of the updated DDO23 at Attachment Consultation/communication Officers consulted with the community at various stages of the amendment process. This included consultation with key stakeholders (including members of the Canterbury Residents Action Group) as part of the preparation of the MRBFG and the preparation of Design and Development Overlay - Schedule 23. Public exhibition was undertaken in accordance with section 19 of the Planning and Environment Act Notification letters were sent to owners and occupiers of directly affected and surrounding properties to the north and south of the adjoining railway line. Submitters to the amendment also had the opportunity to present their views to the independent Panel appointed to consider submissions to Amendment C195. All submitters, and directly affected property owners have been notified of this Council meeting, and were notified of the USPC meetings on 20 October 2014 and 7 April 2015 where they had to opportunity to present to the UPSC. 6. Financial and resource implications All costs associated with the preparation of the MRBFG and Amendment C195 will be met by the Strategic Planning Department 2014/15 budget. 7. Governance issues The implications of this report have been assessed against the requirements of the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities, including Council's Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Compatibility Assessment Matrix (Version 1, August 2011). The outcomes sought by this report will not negatively impact on the values identified in the Charter. The officers responsible for this report have no direct or indirect interests requiring disclosure. City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 9 of 109

10 8. Social and environmental issues The application of planning controls to Maling Road through DDO23 and DDO20 will have a positive impact on the Centre and Canterbury Road. The proposed DDOs provide additional design guidance over and above the heritage requirements already provided by the Heritage Overlay and Clause Local Heritage Policy. They also provide more prescriptive guidance on the type of development and design outcomes expected within this Centre. The combination of the existing heritage controls and the proposed DDOs will give the community, landowners and developers clear direction on the scale, form and design outcomes appropriate for Maling Road. The controls will ensure that the unique character of the Centre is preserved and protected from inappropriate development. Manager: Report officer: Zoran Jovanovski, Strategic Planning Amanda Seymour, Senior Strategic Planner, Strategic Planning City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 10 of 109

11 BOROONDARA PLANNING SCHEME DD/MM/2015 Proposed C195 SCHEDULE 23 TO THE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY Updated as per 7 April 2015 UPSC resolution Shown on the planning scheme map as DDO23. Maling Road Built Form Design Guidelines 1.0 Design objectives DD/MM/2015 Proposed C195 To preserve and maintain the historic streetscape of Maling Road. To maintain long range vistas of Malone Hotel Tower (208 Canterbury Road). To maintain the varied building heights and low rise scale of Maling Road. To ensure new buildings and additions in the centre respect and enrich the historic streetscape of Maling Road. To respect the character and amenity of surrounding residential areas. To improve the safety and amenity of public spaces including pedestrian walkways, Theatre Place and public car parks. 2.0 Permit requirements Mandatory requirements DD/MM/2015 Proposed C195 A permit cannot be granted for development that exceeds the mandatory requirements specified in this Schedule. The overall vertical height is measured from the natural ground level to the roof or parapet at any point, whichever is the greater. 3.0 Buildings and works DD/MM/2015 Proposed C195 Mandatory controls Buildings must not exceed the mandatory building heights detailed in Map 1 of this schedule other than: To accommodate roof top services that are hidden from view from any adjoining public space or designed as architectural roof top features. Roof top services includes but is not limited to plant rooms, air conditioning, lift overruns, roof top gardens, decks and communal outdoor spaces and their ancillary facilities. Where the slope of the natural ground level at any cross section wider than 8 metres of the site of the building is 2.5 degrees or more, in which case the maximum overall building height may be exceeded by one (1) metre. Where an existing building on the subject land already exceeds the mandatory maximum height allowed under this Schedule. In this event, a permit can be granted to construct a building or carry out works to the same height as the existing building. Note: building height excludes roof top plant equipment or similar services. Discretionary controls Setbacks and street wall heights Buildings in a commercial zone must have a zero street setback. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 23 PAGE 1 OF 4 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 11 of 109

12 BOROONDARA PLANNING SCHEME Upper level additions to significant and contributory heritage places shown on Map 1 of this schedule should be set back a minimum of 5 metres behind the street wall. A greater setback may be required for upper level additions to single storey significant or contributory heritage buildings to protect heritage values. The street wall of new developments on non-contributory properties in Map 1 of this schedule should reflect the street wall height of any abutting significant or contributory heritage buildings. If there are no abutting heritage buildings the street wall should not exceed 9 metres in height and read as no more than 2 storeys from the street. Development over a height of 9 metres should be setback a minimum of 5 metres behind the street wall. Building facades The primary facade of significant or contributory heritage buildings must be retained and restored as part of any buildings and works, wherever possible. New pedestrian access should not result in significant impacts on heritage facades of significant or contributory heritage buildings. Services, such as air conditioning units and plant equipment should not be located on the facade of buildings or external balconies facing the street. All services should be screened from view and integrated in the design of buildings. Interface with public spaces Properties with a frontage to a laneway, public car park or pedestrian walkway should, where possible: - Provide a zero setback to create a clearly defined street edge. - Incorporate active frontages, such as pedestrian access, outdoor seating, shop fonts and/or windows at ground level. - Incorporate windows and balconies on upper levels. - Incorporate lighting into the design of buildings and create clearly visible entrances. - Screen service areas from public view Maling Road The facade of new developments should: - Read as no more than two storeys to the street. - Demonstrate high quality architectural design that complements the heritage properties in the Maling Road streetscape. - Provide frequent pedestrian access and glazing at street level to activate the street and facilitate interaction between the internal ground floor uses and the street. - Incorporate vertical and horizontal architectural elements that reinforce the rhythm and fine grain character of the historic Maling Road streetscape. - Avoid large sections of blank, unarticulated walls along primary and secondary street frontages. - Incorporate weather protection above all footpaths in commercially zoned land. Awning heights should be continuous and match the awning heights of abutting significant or contributory heritage building. New development that abuts a 'sensitive residential interface' shown on Map 1 of this schedule should: DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 23 PAGE 2 OF 4 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 12 of 109

13 BOROONDARA PLANNING SCHEME - Be set back from the side or rear boundary a minimum of 3 metres from a sensitive residential interface up to a height of 8 metres. Over a height of 8 metres the side or rear setback should be in accordance with Clause Standard B17 of the Boroondara Planning Scheme. The setback should be landscaped with plants that will provide visual screening of the building for surrounding residential areas. - Be articulated to reduce visual bulk and its dominance when viewed from Maling Road and Scott Street. Sheer, blank, unarticulated walls will be not supported. - Ensure the length of any side elevation responds to the siting and length of side walls of historic residences in the surrounding area. - Ensure the third floor is a recessive element. Use of lightweight materials and finishes are encourages for development over a height of 9 metres. New development should be designed to minimise amenity impacts on adjoining residences and demonstrate how overlooking and overshadowing impacts have been addressed in accordance with the objectives and standards of Clause of the Boroondara Planning Scheme. 4.0 Subdivision DD/MM/2015 Proposed C195 A planning permit is not required for subdivision. 5.0 Application requirements DD/MM/2015 Proposed C195 An application to develop land should include, as appropriate, the following information to the satisfaction of the responsible authority: - An urban design context report that demonstrates how the proposal addresses the objectives and design guidelines in this Design and Development Overlay. - Three dimensional drawings or photomontages taken from eye level, at various locations in and surrounding the centre that shows the proposed development in context with its surrounds. The image should demonstrate how vistas to the Canterbury Mansion building are maintained, and show views as you approach the centre from Maling Road and Scott Street. 6.0 Decision guidelines DD/MM/2015 Proposed C195 Before deciding on an application for a permit, the responsible authority must consider as appropriate: Whether the proposed development has a positive impact on the Maling Road heritage streetscape. Whether the development maintains long and short range views to landmark buildings in the centre. The visual and amenity impacts of the proposed development on the surrounding residential areas. Whether the proposed development improves natural surveillance of key pedestrian links, public car parks and other public spaces. Whether the proposed development has a positive visual impact on the south/west entry to the shopping centre. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 23 PAGE 3 OF 4 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 13 of 109

14 BOROONDARA PLANNING SCHEME Map 1: Maling Road Built Form Map DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 23 PAGE 4 OF 4 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 14 of 109

15 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME 09/04/2015 C108 SCHEDULE 16 TO THE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY Shown on the planning scheme map as DDO16. NEIGHBOURHOOD CENTRES AND COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS 1.0 Design objectives 09/04/2015 C108 To ensure the height and setbacks of development maintain and enhance: the established streetscape and traditional, low-rise, high street character of neighbourhood centres. the established streetscape and commercial character of the commercial corridors. To achieve innovative, high quality architectural design that makes efficient use of land whilst enhancing the appearance and strengthening the identity of the neighbourhood centres and commercial corridors. To ensure appropriate development that is complementary to the existing neighbourhood character and has regard to adjoining residential amenity. To ensure development respects and enhances identified heritage buildings and precincts. 2.0 Buildings and works 09/04/2015 C108 Permit requirements A permit is required to construct a building or construct or carry out works. This does not apply to: The installation of an automatic teller machine. An alteration to an existing building facade provided: The alteration does not include the installation of an external roller shutter. At least 80 per cent of the building facade at ground floor level is maintained as an entry or window with clear glazing. An awning that projects over a road if it is authorised by the relevant public land manager. Building and Street Wall Height A permit cannot be granted to exceed the mandatory maximum street wall height and the mandatory maximum overall building height in the relevant Table and Map at Subclause 7.0 of this Schedule. For the purposes of this requirement: The street wall is the front façade of a building along all street frontages. A frontage onto public open space or public car park is treated as a frontage onto a street and is subject to the maximum streetwall height. The overall vertical height is measured from the natural ground level to the peak of the roof or parapet. A permit cannot be granted to exceed the maximum overall building height set out in the relevant Table and Map at Subclause 7.0 of this Schedule except: To accommodate roof top services that are designed as architectural roof top features or hidden from view from any adjoining public space. Roof top services includes but is not limited to plant rooms, air conditioning, lift overruns, roof top gardens, decks and communal outdoor spaces and their ancillary facilities. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 1 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 15 of 109

16 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Where the slope of the natural ground level at any cross section wider than 8 metres of the site of the building is 2.5 degrees or more, in which case the maximum overall building height may be exceeded by one (1) metre. Where an existing building on the subject land already exceeds the mandatory maximum height allowed under this Schedule. In this event, a permit can be granted to construct a building or carry out works to the same height as the existing building. An application to reduce the street wall height in the relevant Table and Map at Subclause 7.0 of this Schedule must demonstrate how the design objectives of this schedule will be met. Setbacks Primary Street Frontage Where a preferred minimum upper storey setback is shown in the relevant Table at Subclause 7.0 of this Schedule, the building must be setback a minimum of 1.6 metres from the primary street frontage measured from the face of the building. The setback may be utilised for the purpose of the balcony. A permit cannot be granted to reduce this requirement, except for architectural features that enhance the façade articulation and create visual interest. Development up to the street wall height should be built on or within 200mm of the site boundary along all street frontages. This may be varied, if the setback is: designed as part of the public domain; and fully accessible to the public. For the purpose of this requirement, a frontage onto a public open space or public car park is treated as a frontage onto a street. Development above the street wall height should comply with the preferred minimum upper storey setbacks in the relevant Table at Subclause 7.0 of this Schedule. The setback for development above the street wall height is measured from the face of the building along the primary street frontage. Side Street Frontage Where a site is on a corner, development above the street wall height should provide the following setbacks along the side street frontage: 1.6 metres up to a building height of 14.5 metres; and 3 metres for building height in excess of 14.5 metres. The setback for development above the street wall height is measured from the face of the building along the side street frontage. An application to reduce the preferred upper storey setbacks must demonstrate how the design objectives of this Schedule and local planning policy at Clause have been met. From Residential Zones Where a rear boundary is shared with a property in a Residential Zone, any development must be set back: a minimum of three (3) metres; and in accordance with the provisions of Clause of the Planning Scheme thereafter. A permit cannot be granted to vary this requirement except where development: applies to alterations and/or additions to an existing building; or applies to a basement; or abuts a non-residential use. Where a service lane/laneway separates a rear boundary from a property in a Residential Zone, development should apply ResCode setbacks in accordance with the provisions of Clause of the planning scheme measured from the rear property boundary. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 2 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 16 of 109

17 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Where a side boundary is shared with a property in Residential Zone, a development should apply ResCode setbacks in accordance with the provisions of Clause of the planning scheme measured from the shared side property boundary. An application to reduce the rear or side boundary setback requirements must demonstrate how the design objectives of this schedule and local planning policy at Clause have been met. Public Acquisition Overlay Where a property boundary abuts/adjoins a Public Acquisition Overlay (PAO), buildings and works must be set back in accordance with the existing Schedule to the PAO. The responsible authority will only consider an application to encroach within a PAO where written consent can be provided from the acquiring authority for the land confirming that an encroachment into the PAO is appropriate. 3.0 Subdivision 26/07/2012 C107 A permit is required to subdivide land. 4.0 Decision Guidelines 09/04/2015 C108 Before deciding an application, the responsible authority must consider the following, as appropriate: Whether the proposed development achieves the design objectives and requirements of this schedule and local planning policy at Clause Whether the design of the development can accommodate an integrated mix of uses including retail, office/commercial and residential. Whether the proposed development is appropriately recessed to reduce potential amenity impacts on adjoining residential properties. Whether the proposed development is appropriately recessed to reduce visual bulk on service lanes/laneways. Whether the combination of heights, setbacks and design treatment of new buildings is sympathetic to the heritage place or adjoining the site. Whether the design of the proposed development supports the provisions of this planning scheme and in particular: Clause Heritage Policy. Clause Public Acquisition Overlay. Clause 55 objectives and standards. 5.0 Transitional arrangements 09/04/2015 C108 The requirements of this overlay do not apply to any planning permit application received by the responsible authority before the approval date of the amendment that introduced this schedule to Clause into the Planning Scheme. The requirements of Clause as in force immediately before the said approved date continue to apply. 6.0 Reference Document 09/04/2015 C108 Neighbourhood Centres and Commercial Corridors Guidelines, City of Boroondara, 2014 DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 3 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 17 of 109

18 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME 7.0 Building height and setback requirements 09/04/2015 C108 Neighbourhood Centres The tables and maps outline the height and setback requirements for each Neighbourhood Centre. The Maximum Street Wall Height and the Maximum Overall Building Height are mandatory heights. Table 1: Ashburton Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 8 metres 0 metres 8 metres 2 8 metres 5 metres 11 metres 3 9 metres 5 metres 11 metres 4 11 metres 0 metres 11 metres Note: Map 1 Ashburton Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 4 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 18 of 109

19 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 2: Ashwood Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 8 metres 3 metres 11 metres Note: Map 2 Ashwood Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 5 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 19 of 109

20 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 3: Auburn Village Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 11 metres 0 metres 11 metres 2 11 metres 5 metres 14.5 metres Note: Map 3 Auburn Village Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 6 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 20 of 109

21 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 4: Balwyn Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 13 metres 6 metres 16 metres 2 9 metres 5 metres 11 metres 3 9 metres 0 metres 9 metres 4 11 metres 0 metres 11 metres Note: Map 4 Balwyn Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 7 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 21 of 109

22 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 5: Balwyn East Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 8 metres 5 metres 14.5 metres 2 8 metres 5 metres 11 metres Note: Map 5 Balwyn East Neighbourhood Activity Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 8 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 22 of 109

23 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 6: Bellevue Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 8 metres 3 metres 11 metres Note: Map 6 Bellevue Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 9 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 23 of 109

24 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 7: Belmore Heights Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 8 metres 3 metres 11 metres 2 8 metres 3 metres 14.5 metres Note: Map 7 Belmore Heights Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 10 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 24 of 109

25 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 8: Boroondara Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 8 metres 0 metres 8 metres 2 8 metres 3 metres 11 metres Note: Map 8 Boroondara Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 11 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 25 of 109

26 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 9: Burwood Village Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 8 metres 5 metres 11 metres 2 9 metres 5 metres 11 metres Note: Map 9 Burwood Village Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 12 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 26 of 109

27 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 10: Canterbury Village Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 9 metres 5 metres 11 metres 2 8 metres 0 metres 8 metres Note: Map 10 Canterbury Village Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 13 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 27 of 109

28 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 11: Church Street Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 8 metres 0 metres 8 metres 2 11 metres 0 metres 11 metres 3 11 metres 5 metres 14.5 metres Note: Map 11 Church Street Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 14 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 28 of 109

29 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 12: Cotham Village Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 11 metres 0 metres 11 metres 2 11 metres 5 metres 14.5 metres 3 8 metres 3 metres 11 metres Note: Map 12 Cotham Village Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 15 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 29 of 109

30 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 13: Deepdene Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 8 metres 3 metres 11 metres Note: Map 13 Deepdene Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 16 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 30 of 109

31 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 14: Dickens Corner Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 8 metres 5 metres 14.5 metres 2 9 metres 5 metres 11 metres 3 8 metres 5 metres 19 metres 4 8 metres 5 metres 14.5 metres Note: Map 14 Dickens Corner Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 17 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 31 of 109

32 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 15: East Camberwell Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 8 metres 3 metres 11 metres 2 8 metres 0 metres 8 metres Note: Map 15 East Camberwell Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 18 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 32 of 109

33 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 16: Glenferrie Hill Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 11 metres 0 metres 11 metres 2 11 metres 3 metres 14.5 metres Note Map 16 Glenferrie Hill Neighbourhood Activity Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 19 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 33 of 109

34 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 17: Golf Links Village Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 8 metres 3 metres 11 metres Note Map 17 Golf Links Village Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 20 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 34 of 109

35 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 18: Greythorn Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 8 metres 5 metres 14.5 metres 2 8 metres 5 metres 11 metres Note: Map 18 Greythorn Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 21 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 35 of 109

36 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 19: Harp Village Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 11 metres 5 metres 19 metres 2 11 metres 5 metres 14.5 metres 3 9 metres 5 metres 11 metres 4 9 metres 0 metres 9 metres 5 11 metres 0 metres 11 metres Note: Map 19 Harp Village Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 22 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 36 of 109

37 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 20: Hartwell Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 11 metres 5 metres 22 metres 2 8 metres 5 metres 14.5 metres 3 8 metres 5 metres 11 metres 4 11 metres 0 metres 11 metres 5 8 metres 0 metres 8 metres 6 11 metres 5 metres 14.5 metres Note: Map 20 Hartwell Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 23 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 37 of 109

38 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 21: Middle Camberwell Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 8 metres 5 metres 14.5 metres 2 8 metres 0 metres 8 metres 3 8 metres 5 metres 11 metres Note: Map 21 Middle Camberwell Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 24 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 38 of 109

39 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 22: Mont Albert Tram Terminus Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 8 metres 5 metres 11 metres 2 9 metres 5 metres 11 metres Note: Map 22 Mont Albert Tram Terminus Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 25 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 39 of 109

40 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 23: Mount Street Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 8 metres 5 metres 11 metres Note: Map 23 Mount Street Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 26 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 40 of 109

41 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 24: North Balwyn Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 9 metres 3 metres 14.5 metres 2 9 metres 3 metres 11 metres Note: Map 24 North Balwyn Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 27 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 41 of 109

42 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 25: Riversdale Village Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 9 metres 0 metres 9 metres 2 9 metres 5 metres 11 metres 3 8 metres 5 metres 11 metres Note: Map 25 Riversdale Village Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 28 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 42 of 109

43 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 26: South Camberwell Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 11 metres 0 metres 11 metres 2 11 metres 3 metres 14.5 metres Note: Map 26 South Camberwell Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 29 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 43 of 109

44 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 27: Stradbroke Village Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 11 metres 0 metres 11 metres Note: Map 27 Stradbroke Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 30 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 44 of 109

45 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 28: Surrey Hills Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 8 metres 5 metres 11 metres 2 8 metres 0 metres 8 metres Note: Map 28 Surrey Hills Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 31 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 45 of 109

46 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 29: Through Road Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 8 metres 3 metres 11 metres 2 11 metres 0 metres 11 metres Note: Map 29 Through Road Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 32 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 46 of 109

47 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 30: Upper Glen Iris Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 9 metres 3 metres 11 metres 2 11 metres 3 metres 14.5 metres Note: Map 30 Upper Glen Iris Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 33 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 47 of 109

48 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 31: Willsmere Village Neighbourhood Centre - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 8 metres 3 metres 11 metres Note: Map 31 Willsmere Village Neighbourhood Centre - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 34 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 48 of 109

49 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Commercial Corridors The tables and maps outline the height and setback requirements for each Commercial Corridor. The Maximum Street Wall Height and the Maximum Overall Building Height are mandatory heights. Table 32: Burwood/Camberwell Road Commercial Corridor - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height 1 8 metres 5 metres 11 metres 2 11 metres 5 metres 7 metres for the Tower Hotel site 17 metres 3 11 metres 5 metres 14.5 metres 4 11 metres 3 metres 19 metres 5 11 metres on Burwood Road, Lilydale Grove and Montrose Street. 3 metres 30 metres 6 8 metres 0 metres 8 metres 7 11 metres 5 metres 22 metres Note Map 32 Burwood / Camberwell Road Commercial Corridor - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 35 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 49 of 109

50 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 33: Canterbury Road Commercial Corridor - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height Other Requirements 1 9 metres 0 metres 9 metres 2 9 metres 3 metres 11 metres 3 11 metres on Canterbury Road 0 metres 11 metres A 3 metre wide landscape buffer should be provided along the Shierlaw Avenue frontage. 3a 11 metres 0 metres 11 metres A 3 metres wide landscape setback should be provide along Canterbury Road metres 3 metres from Canterbury Road 5 metres from Union Road 14.5 metres DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 36 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 50 of 109

51 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Note: Map 33 Canterbury Road Commercial Corridor - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 37 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 51 of 109

52 BOROONDARAPLANNING SCHEME Table 34: Tooronga Commercial Corridor - Height and Setback Requirements Area Maximum Street Wall Height Preferred Minimum Upper Storey Setback Maximum Overall Building Height Other Requirements 1 16 metres 3 metres 19 metres A 3 metre wide landscape setback should be provided at ground level along the Hall Street, Cato Street and Auburn Road frontages metres Subject to detailed design analysis. 3 8 metres Subject to detailed design analysis. 16 metres A 3 metre wide landscape setback should be provided at ground level along the Auburn Road frontage. 16 metres Area 3 is subject to land slope. The maximum streetwall height should be equivalent to the maximum overall building height at the rear of the site. 4 8 metres 3 metres 16 metres A 3 metre wide landscape setback should be provided at ground level along the Cato Street and Auburn Road frontages. Note: Map 34 Tooronga Commercial Corridor - Built Form Areas Site constraints or context may mean it is not appropriate to develop to the full extent of the building envelope established by the building heights and setbacks specified in this Schedule. DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -SCHEDULE 16 PAGE 38 OF 38 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 52 of 109

53 BOROONDARA PLANNING SCHEME - LOCAL PROVISION Planning Mapping Services Amendments Coordination Team Planning & Building Systems Planning, Building & Heritage LEGEND LEGEND DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY - SCHEDULE 16 DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY - SCHEDULE 23 Part of Planning Scheme Maps 13DDO & 14DDO AMENDMENT C City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 53 of 109

54 Note: This version of the Maling Road Built Form Guidelines will be updated in accordance with Coun- Maling Road Built Form Design Guidelines Adopted by Council 17 March 2014 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 54 of 109

55 DOCUMENT STRUCTURE This document consists of two (2) parts: Part 1: Built Form Guidelines and Implementation Part 2: Background Information. Part 1: Built Form Guidelines and Implementation contains the built form objectives, guidelines and strategies for the Centre and details of how these guidelines will be implemented through the Boroondara Planning Scheme. The contents of this section will be used as the basis for the statutory planning controls that will be introduced into the planning scheme through an amendment to the Boroondara Planning Scheme. Part 2: Background Information contains details of the document review (which includes a review of submissions to the Draft ACS), and built form/urban design analysis that were carried out to inform preparation of the built form controls detailed in Part 1. The document is intended to act as a supplementary document to Part 1 to provide the reader with additional information on the basis for the objectives, guidelines and strategies detailed in Part 1. Adopted by Council on: 17 March 2014 Revision no: 1 Date: 20 February 2014 Revision no: 2 Date: 29 May Minor correction to errors in text Revision no: 3 Date:? - City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 55 of 109

56 Contents Contents Introduction i PART 1: BUILT FORM GUIDELINES Vision and Objectives 1 Design Guidelines 2 1. Building Heights and Street setbacks 2 2. Building Facades 4 3. Interface with Public Spaces 5 4. Implementation 9 PART 2 - BACKGROUND INFORMATION Document Review 11 SWOT Analysis - Built Environment 13 Built Form Analysis 15 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 56 of 109

57 Introduction BACKGROUND The Maling Road Shopping Village (the Centre) is a neighbourhood shopping Centre located along Maling Road between Canterbury Road and Scott Street, Canterbury. The Centre contains around 70 businesses that serve a convenience retail function for local residents (with basic items provided by a small supermarket, fresh food outlets, a newsagency/post office, chemist, bank and hairdressers) as well as a specialist destination Centre in areas such as fashion and homewares. The Centre enjoys a metropolitan wide reputation for its village atmosphere, specialist antiques shops, arts and crafts, fashion boutiques and eateries. The Centre forms part of Heritage Overlay HO145 - Maling Road Shopping Centre and Residential Environs and contains character of the Centre. One property in the Centre is on the Victorian Heritage Register; Canterbury Mansions (formally known as Malone s Family Hotel) at 208 Canterbury Road, terbury Road, Canterbury is on the Commonwealth Heritage Register. Draft Boroondara Activity Centres Strategy 2011 (Draft ACS) as a Neighbourhood Activ- given to lower order shopping Centres that provided a day-today convenience role to residents. The Draft ACS was placed on public consultation between November 2010 and March As a result of the consultation process Council received more than 400 submissions from residents in relation to Maling Road. As a result of strong community opposition, Council resolved to remove the Centre As a result of the Centre being removed from the Draft ACS, now known as the Neighbourhood Shopping Centres and Commercial Corridor Guidelines, Maling Road is the only neighbourhood shopping Centre in the municipality that does not have strategic direction in the Boroondara Planning Scheme regarding its future built form. PROJECT SCOPE The overarching objectives for the Maling Road project were to: Review the built form controls and respond to submissions to the Draft ACS; Develop revised built form guidelines for future development within the Centre (including building heights and building setbacks); and Develop and implement statutory planning controls to guide future built form outcomes within the Centre. The project scope includes the following deliverables: Review of submissions to the Draft ACS and other relevant planning policies. Built form/urban design analysis to develop clear built form objectives, guidelines and strategies relating to: Building heights; Building setbacks; and Any other key design elements. Preparation of statutory planning controls to implement the built form guidelines into the Boroondara Planning Scheme; and Processing a Planning Scheme Amendment, including public consultation. The project scope dealt solely with built form and does not include a review of land uses in the Centre, with the exception of 85 Maling Road, were officers considered which of the new residential zones was appropriate for the site. Part 2 of this document summarises the review of submissions and built form analysis undertaken. This background work was used to inform the built form controls detailed in Part 1 of this document. Page i City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 57 of 109

58 STUDY AREA also shows the revised boundary for the Maling Road Shopping Centre and the area to which the built form guidelines in the document apply. from the boundary proposed by the Draft ACS. The changes to the boundary remove Council Canterbury Road and 2B Wattle Valley Road. The boundary has also been extended to include 85 Maling Road. and 2B Wattle Valley Road are to be included in the Canterbury Road Commercial Corridor Overlay Schedule 20 (DDO20). The Properties were removed from the Maling Road Precinct as they have a stronger relationship with the Canterbury Road Commercial Corridor. Map 1: Study area Page ii City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 58 of 109

59 Part 1: Built form guidelines City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 59 of 109

60 Vision and Objectives VISION The vision statement expresses the key elements of the Centre that Council believes should guide development. The vision for Maling Road is: Future development should only be supported if it achieves these objectives. Maling Road Neighbourhood Shopping Centre will build on its location and architectural value to enhance its reputation and village atmosphere. The character of the Centre will be maintained and enhanced by providing development opportunities that respect the heritage value of the area. OBJECTIVES To assist in achieving the above vision, the following overarching objectives have been developed: To preserve and maintain the historic streetscape of Maling Road. To retain short and long range vistas to Canterbury Mansion. To maintain the varied building heights and low rise scale that is characteristic of the Maling Road. To ensure new buildings and additions respect and enrich the historic streetscape of Maling Road. To respect the character and amenity of surrounding residential areas. To improve the safety and amenity of public spaces including pedestrian walkways, station access, Theatre Place and public car parks. Photo 1: buildings in the Maling Road streetscape Photo 2: North site of Maling Road, looking south from the corner of Byrson Street Page 1 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 60 of 109

61 Design Guidelines Any buildings and works in the Centre should meet the following design guidelines. 1. BUILDING HEIGHTS AND STREET SETBACKS The key characteristic of building heights and setbacks in Maling Road are: Its mix of 1 and 2 storey buildings that give the streetscape a low rise varied appearance. Historic buildings in the Centre range from approximately 5 metres to 9-10 metres to the top of the parapet. Ceiling heights are lower than the to ceiling height). Hard built edge to Maling Road. The low rise scale of the Centre also allows short and long ranges vistas to the Canterbury Mansion on the southeast corner of the intersection of Maling Road and Canterbury Road (landmark building shown on Map 2). In particular its tower is a prominent landmark within the Centre and can be seen from the surrounding area. The scale of buildings in the Centre also contributes to the Centres village feel and intimate pedestrian environment. Design guidelines Design guidelines to retain vistas and the low rise character of the Centre are: Buildings heights in the Centre should be restricted to ensure view lines to landmark buildings are retained and the low rise character of the Centre is protected by: Applying a height limit of 11 metres to existing 2 sto- Applying a height limit of 8.5 metres to existing single ings. Applying a maximum height limit of 11 metres to the non-contributory propertyies at and 85 Maling Road. Applying a maximum height limit of 8 metres to the triangular section of 85 Maling Road (behind 83 Maling Road); and a maximum height limit of 11 metres to the remainder of 85 Maling Road. Applying a maximum height limit of 8.5 metres to 2 andtain the low rise character of this section of the Maling Road streetscape. New development of commercial properties must be built to the street edge (zero setback) at ground level. tage places shown on Map 2 should be set back a minimum of 5 metres behind the street wall. A greater setback may be required for upper level additions to single storey heritage values. The street wall of new developments on non-contributory ings. If there are no abutting heritage buildings the street wall should not exceed 9 metres in height and read as no more than 2 storeys from the street. Development over a height of 9 metres should be setback a minimum of 5 metres behind the street wall. Figure 1: Building height and upper level setback for single Figure 2: Building height and upper level setback for double non-contributory properties. Note: 2 andve a maximum height limit of 8.5 metres. As such no upper level setbacks apply to these properties. Page 2 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 61 of 109

62 Map 2: Building heights and street setbacks Page 3 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 62 of 109

63 2. BUILDING FACADES The historic buildings that make up the Maling Road streetscape are integral to the character and village feel of Maling Road. Loss of original building fabric will have a detrimental effect on the streetscape of Maling Road and erode the building fabric that is fundamental to the character that the community values. The key built form features in Maling Road that contribute to the streetscape are: The high degree of intactness of the early 1900 s Maling Road streetscape which has experienced minimal changes. Regular subdivision pattern which typically results in lot frontages of 5 metres to 8 metres. Vertical architectural detailing and proportions of buildings and architectural elements such as windows. Consistent use of external materials including rendered or Feature architectural elements such as feature tiles to shop fronts, pressed metal ceilings and detailing. changes to the building facade that could diminish the heritage value of the property or precinct. In additions to the policy direction in Clause the following Design guidelines should be followed: buildings that make up the streetscape of Maling Road, should be retained and restored. in Section 4 below. Photo 3: Maling Road Photo 5: Maling Road; Upper level addition to 109 Maling Road Design guidelines Clause Heritage Policy provides extensive design guidance for the facades of properties that are in Heritage Overlays. Including policy direction to: Ensure upper level additions are recessive elements in the streetscape. Ensure new buildings and works use building materials that complement heritage buildings. Photo 4: Maling Road Photo 6: 94 Maling Road, 2* *Existing non-contributory properties to the Maling Road heritage precinct. Page 4 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 63 of 109

64 3. INTERFACE WITH PUBLIC SPACES Public car parks, pedestrian walkways, laneways The majority of properties in Maling Road have two frontages; a well-defined edge to Maling Road and a secondary laneway frontage. The laneways are currently underutilised but offer key routes for pedestrian access to the station and public car parks. The laneways provide an opportunity to improve safety and amenity in these public spaces, in particular pedestrian access to Canterbury Railway Station and the public car parks on Wattle Valley Road and Bryson Street. These areas could become unique laneways that make a positive contribution to the village character of Maling Road. Current laneway characteristics include: Poor natural surveillance of laneways and pedestrian routes. Used primarily for services i.e waste, storage, on-site parking etc. Design guidelines Properties that have a secondary frontage to a public car park, laneway or pedestrian walkway should, where practical: Incorporate pedestrian access, outdoor eating and/or shop fronts and windows at ground level. Orientate windows and balconies on upper levels to the laneways. Screen service areas from public view. Incorporate lighting into the design of buildings and provide clearly visible entrances. Theatre Place Theatre Place is a public plaza located in the centre of the shopping centre. The plaza acts as one of the main pedestrian links to Canterbury Station and is the only public space in the centre that provides a place for people to sit and gather. Development of the building on the north side of the plaza (119 Maling Road) has the potential to further overshadow this public space, which already experiences extensive overshadowing during the day. This building is a double storey building with an overall height of approximately metres. Ensuring this space is not further overshadowed by development is important to maintain amenity in this public space. Design guidelines To protect the amenity of the public space the following guideline should be met: Development of 119 Maling Road should not exceed a height of 11 metres. The height and setback requirements applied to street frontage must be applied to properties fronting Theatre Place. Photo 7: Theatre Place mid morning Page 5 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 64 of 109

65 Map 3 Page 6 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 65 of 109

66 4. SITE SPECIFIC DESIGN GUIDELINES and 85 Maling Road The Post Office and Canterbury Mansion building at the northern end of the Maling Road shopping strip act as landmark buildings which identify the start of Maling Road from Canterbury Road. Road are the gateway properties to the Maling Road shopping strip. The properties have characteristics that are atypical of the properties in the rest of the Centre and do not reflect the historic character of the remaining buildings along Maling Road. These sites also have the most redevelopment potential. Particularly the building at 85 Maling Road, which does not have a positive impact on the streetscape. Future redevelopment of these properties is important given their location at the southern entrance to the centre. The redevelopment of these sites presents an opportunity to improve the southern entry into the Centre. The two sites also directly abut residential properties outside of the boundaries of the Centre. Careful and sensitive treatment of this interface is important to the amenity of the abutting residential properties Design guidelines - building facades To ensure redevelopment enhance the Maling Road streetscape the following design guidelines should be followed: The facade of new developments should: Demonstrate high quality architectural design that complements the heritage properties in the Centre. Provide frequent pedestrian access and glazing at street level to activate the street and facilitate inter- the public realm. Incorporate vertical and horizontal architectural ele- acter of the historic Maling Road streetscape. Avoid blank, unarticulated walls along primary and secondary street frontages. Incorporate weather protection above all footpaths in commercially zoned land. Awning heights should be continuous and match the awning heights of abutting The street wall for 85 Maling Road should be setback a minimum of the average distance of the two abutting buildings, and retain a residential character in accordance with Clause 55 of the planning scheme. Provide setbacks from the street which have regard to the setbacks of abutting heritage buildings. Design guidelines - sensitive residential interface To protect the amenity of abutting residential properties and provide an appropriate entry into the Centre, the following guidelines should be met: Provide an appropriate transition along the sensitive residential interface shown on Map 3 by ensuring development adjacent to residential properties is no more than - Setting back the side or rear boundary a minimum of 3 metres up to 8 metres. Over a height of 8 metres the side or rear setback should be in accordance with Clause Standard B17 of the Boroondara Planning Scheme. (Refer to Figure 3). A side or rear elevation that abuts a sensitive residential interface shown on Map 3 should: Be articulated to reduce visual bulk and its dominance when viewed from Maling Road and Scott Street. Sheer, blank, unarticulated walls will not be supported. Ensure the length of any side elevation responds to the siting and length of side walls of historic residences in the surrounding area. development over a height of 8 metres. New development should be designed to minimise amenity impacts on adjoining residences and demonstrate how overlooking and overshadowing impacts have been addressed in accordance with the objectives and standards of Clause Standards B21 and B22 of the Boroondara Planning Scheme. The setback should be landscaped with plants that will provide visual screening of the building from surrounding residential areas. Figure 3: Setbacks from sensitive residential interfaces shown on Map 3 and 4. Page 7 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 66 of 109

67 Page 8 Map 4: Maling Road built form design guidelines City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 67 of 109

68 Implementation STATUTORY IMPLEMENTATION Statutory implementation for the study area will be achieved by preparing and processing a planning scheme amendment which: Applies Design and Development Overlay Schedule 23 (DDO23) to the Maling Road Neighbourhood Shopping Applies Design and Development Overlay Schedule 20 (DDO20) Canterbury Road Commercial corridor to 210 ment up to 11 metres and a 3 metre landscaped setback to Canterbury Road. Note: Amendment C108 replaces ning Scheme. Rezones 85 Maling Road from Residential 1 Zone to General Residential Zone (GRZ). Applies the Environmental Audit Overlay (EAO) to 85 Mal- ger an environmental audit prior to the use of the site for sensitive land uses, such as residential uses. FURTHER WORK Upon approval and gazettal of Amendment C108 to the Boroondara Planning Scheme, investigate whether or not the draft Clause Urban Design Policy should apply to Maling Road and whether draft Clause Activity Centre, Neighbourhood Shopping Centres and Commercial Corridors needs to be updated to include Maling Road. Investigate changes to the draft Clause Neighbourhood Character Policy once introduced into the planning scheme (forms part of Amendment C190) to include DDO23 in the list of areas this policy does not apply to. Continue to work with the Environment and Sustainable Living Department on the Shopping Centres Improvement Programme which provides an ongoing program of streetscape improvements to shopping Centres in the municipality, subject to funding. This includes public realm improvements to the Maling Road shopping Centre. Investigate the feasibility of working with Victrack to make various improvements to access to the Canterbury Railway Station and making better use of the shared pedestrian spaces, railway station car park and under croft of the railway line. Page 9 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 68 of 109

69 Part 2 - Background Information City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 69 of 109

70 Document Review 1. DRAFT BOROONDARA ACTIVITY CENTRE STRATEGY 2011 AND SUBMISSIONS The Draft Boroondara Activity Centre Strategy 2011 (Draft Shopping Centre. The Draft ACS vision for Maling was: Maling Road Neighbourhood Activity Centre will build on its location and architectural value to enhance its reputation and village atmosphere. The character of the Centre will be maintained and enhanced by providing development opportunities that respect the heritage value of the area. This vision is still considered to be relevant for this Centre. The preferred role for the shopping centre in the Draft ACS was: amount of additional development will occur. This will comprise discreet additional levels to buildings along Maling Road, with some development on land behind the shops for mixed use or residential development. The Centre will strengthen its metropolitan-wide reputation of a village atmosphere. The Draft ACS propose a height limit of 12 metres for all buildings in the Centre. It also envisaged a street wall height of 8 metres for the centre, with development over 8 metres setback a minimum of 5 metres behind the street wall. Review of the submissions received during the consultation concerns: Neighbourhood character: In particular preservation of existing heritage character and opposition to proposed building heights (although there was misconception that build- Concern that Council car parks were going to be redeveloped. ment. The community strongly objected to the designation of the Centre as a Neighbourhood Activity Centre and felt that the built form controls did not adequately protect the unique character of Maling Road. sues raised by residents to the Draft ACS are sumarised below: Neighbourhood Character and heritage Maling Road is covered by a Heritage Overlay (HO145) which triggers a planning permit for any alterations and additions to properties in this centre. The overarching objective of the Heritage Overlay is to conserve and enhance heritage places and those elements The presence of the Heritage Overlay over Maling Road gives Council the ability to consider the impact new development may have on the heritage fabric of Maling Road. This overlay and Council s local Heritage Policy at Clause of the planning scheme inherently control aspects of built form such as building heights, upper level setbacks and alterations and additions to heritage facades. The Draft ACS sought to apply additional built form controls to the centre by applying a blanket height limit of 12 metres for the entire centre. It also proposed a maximum street wall height of 8 metres with development over 8 metres being setback a minimum of 5 metres. As a result of the built form analysis undertaken, some of the built form controls proposed in the draft ACS have been revised to better protect the Maling Road Streetscape and are detailed in Part 1 of this document. Provision of parking in the centre is controlled by Clause clauses provide parking rates for land uses in the centre and guidelines for when parking dispensations could be considered by Council. The introduction of built form controls will not change the current process for council considering parking rates or dispen- Page 11 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 70 of 109

71 sation for parking as part of planning permit applications. With respect to traffic, this is an ongoing concern of residents and an issue that is typically dealt with at planning permit application stage. In the case of Maling Road, the growth potential of the centre is constrained by the Heritage Overlay that affects all properties in the centre, and the attributes of properties in the centre. It is unlikely that this centre will see significant growth and any growth or additional floor space is unlikely to significant exacerbate any existing traffic conditions. For these reason traffic and car parking have not been considered in the scope of the built form review. When the Draft ACS was exhibited there was a public perception that the inclusion of Council owned car parks meant that these parcels of land were going to be redeveloped. However, that was not the case and Council has no plans to redevelop these sites. To alleviate these concerns, Council resolved to remove Council owned car parks from the ACS. Consistent with this resolution the Council owned car parks at 1A and 8 Bryson Street and 3 Wattle Valley Road are to be removed from the Maling Road shopping centre boundary. Accordingly, these sites are not propsoed to be included in the proposed Design and Development Overlay. 2. CURRENT PLANNING POLICY The following statutory planning controls apply to Maling Road at the time of preparing this document: Commercial 1 Zone Residential 1 Zone - 85 Maling Road only (proposed to be included in Neighbourhood Residential Zone by C190). Clause Heritage Overlay Schedule 145 (HO145) and HO29 (208 Canterbury Road - listed on the Victorian Heritage Register) Clause Parking Overlay Schedule 1 Clause Heritage Policy Zoning - 85 Maling Road The Residential 1 Zone currently applies to 85 Maling Road. Amendment C190 to the Boroondara Planning proposes to include this property in the Neighbourhood Residential Zone 1 (NRZ1) consistent with the residential land that surrounds this property. The objectives of the NRZ1 are to: To recognise areas of predominantly single and double storey residential development. To limit opportunities for increased residential development. To manage and ensure that development respects the iden- landscape characteristics. The NRZ1, as proposed by Amendment C190: a detached or a semi attached form on a lot. Accordingly, Council officers assessed which zone would be most appropriate to achieve the desired outcomes for the site and whether the zoning of 85 Maling Road should be changed to the Commercial 1 Zone like the rest of the Centre, or rezoned to another residential zone. It was concluded that more detailed economic analysis was required before officers could consider changing the site from a residential zone to a commercial zone. Such an assessment was outside the scope of this project. Hence, officers recommend that this site be rezoned to the General Residential Zone (GRZ) as part of Amendment C195. The objectives of the GRZ encourage development that respects the character of neighbouring properties and encourages housing diversity and moderate housing growth. The GRZ does not place limitation on subdivision size or how many dwellings can be accommodated on a site. It therefore provides greater development flexibility than the NRZ1 and encourages development at densities more suited to the subject site and its location. for this centre are already dealt with in the Boroondara Planning Scheme. The built form controls proposed for Maling Road do not need to replicate the controls that are already in place, rather provide additional guidance over and above the controls that already exist and ensure there are no contradistinctions or duplication between the proposed built form controls for Maling Road and those that already apply to the centre. would limit development to two dwellings on a lot and require a minimum subdivision area of 500 sqm; proposes a mandatory height limit of 8 metres; and envisages the construction of a second dwelling in either Page 12 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 71 of 109

72 SWOT Analysis - Built Environment The purpose of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) analysis was to analyse what attributes of the centre give it it s character and what attribute or development that might have a negative impact on Maling Road. The design objectives and guidelines developed have been tailored to reinforce the key strengths and manage the weakness and opportunities so the Centre. The key strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats for the centre are sumarised below and in Map 5. STRENGTHS The Centre s key strengths include: Intact historic streetscape with minimal changes. Village like feel created by its compact footprint and sense of street enclosure. The Canterbury Mansion (Malone Hotel) is an iconic building which is visible from the wider area and assist WEAKNESSES OPPORTUNITIES The Centre s key opportunities include: Improve the southern gateway of the centre to create strong gateways at both entrances to the centre. Make better use of secondary frontage to council car parks and laneways to improve passive surveillance of these areas and encourage additional retail frontage in the centre. Improve passive surveillance of key pedestrian links to the station and car parks. Improve access to the stations and Canterbury Gardens through a joint venture with Victrack. Control the height of development to protect vistas to key landmark buildings. Control the height of development to protect the historic streetscape of Maling Road. Control upper level setbacks to ensure protection of the Maling Road streetscape. THREATS The Centre s key weaknesses include: Interfaces with/lack of passive surveillance of the key pedestrian pathways that link Maling Road shops with the railway station. Interfaces with/lack of passive surveillance of public car parks. Limited opportunity for further growth without impacting on the heritage streetscape of Maling Road. Potential impact of redevelopment of the sites at the southern gateway into the centres. Particular the potential visual bulk of wester/southern elevations of these buildings. and Maling Road. The Centre s key threats include: Re-development of non-contributory properties in the centre. streetscape. Reduced amenity in Theatre Place. Impacts on the amenity of surrounding residential areas. Constraining development potential in the centre to a point where it does not allow for natural renewal and regeneration of the centre and starts to impact on the centres economic viability. Road which detract from the character of Maling Road and surrounds Page 13 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 72 of 109

73 Map 5: SWOT Analysis Page 14 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 73 of 109

74 Built Form Analysis The built form analysis considered: Building setbacks and heights Architectural features Building materials Lot widths and depths Access Public and sensitive interfaces. A summary of the key attributes is provided below and summarised in Map 7. SETBACKS Buildings built to the primary street edge creating a hard edge to Maling Road. Setbacks to laneways vary and are not consistent; no de- BUILDING HEIGHTS No prevailing building height in the centre. Building heights vary; equal portions of 1 and 2 storey historic properties within no set pattern. Street wall heights of heritage buildings in the centre range from approx. 5 metres to 9-10 metres to the top of the parapet. The Canterbury Mansion (Malone Hotel) building at the corner of Canterbury Road and Maling Road is the tallest building. The property is on the Victorian Heritage Register (VHR) and is a landmark building in the centre with a 3-4 storey scale. BUILT FORM Original buildings in the centre range from the late 1800 s to the early 1900 s. Buildings were typically built as groups; typically pairs or groups of 5+ shops. Buildings typically have high street walls with parapets that conceals the roof form behind. The key horizontal built form element in the centre is the awnings above the footpath. It is a strong feature which visually links buildings in the centre. Buildings typically have a vertical emphases which is emphasized by narrow lot frontages (typically 5 metres to 8 metres), window proportions and vertical architectural detailing, particularly at property boundaries. Maling Road has a road reserve width of approximately 15 metres. This creates a strong sense of enclosure emphasized by the groups of 2 storey shops in the centre. Use of parapet detailing is strong throughout the centre. Photo 8: View from the corner of Bryson Street and Maling Road, looking south. BUILDING MATERIALS Historic buildings in the centre typically have a rendered or such as: Feature tiles to shop fronts Pressed metal ceilings and detailing Use of a mixture of render and face feature brick work Brass and copper window frames. LOT FRONTAGES The historic properties along Maling Road typically have narrow lot frontage of 5 metres to 8 metres. Some wider lots are scattered through the centre. This give the centre Lot depths vary; on the north side (railway side) lot depth are typically 28 metres. On the south side they range from approx. 13 metres up to 57 metres (Malone s Hotel). The narrow lot frontages and lot depths place limitations on the level of development that is feasible on properties in this centre and limits the ability for parking to be provided onsite. Page 15 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 74 of 109

75 STATION AND ACCESS Pedestrian access to the station from the Maling is poor and lacks natural surveillance. Natural surveillance and access to the Council car parks is PUBLIC AND SENSITIVE INTERFACES Secondary frontages to laneways, and public parking ar- lance of public spaces. erties in residential zones. These properties are located to the south and consideration needs to be given to potential amenity impacts of these properties. In particular, overshadowing, overlooking and visual bulk. Further overshadowing of Theatre Place will impact on the amenity of Theatre place. FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES buildings offer some potential for additional development without impacts on the streetscape of Maling Road. tre are the sites most likely to undertake more substantial change in the future. Victrack landholdings around Canterbury Station could be better utilise and used to improve pedestrian access and amenity to the station. Photo 9: View looking south along the laneway which provide pedestrian access to Canterbury Station. Photo 10: View looking at the rear of shops that have a secondary frontage to the Bryson Street car park. Page 16 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 75 of 109

76 Officer recommended changes to the Maling Road Built Form Guidelines to reflect 7 April UPSC decision Page Where Change ii Map 1 Add a notation to Map 1 to note that 85 Maling Road, Canterbury was removed from Amendment C195 in accordance with the UPSC s resolution from 20 October Column 2, dot point 3 Remove reference to 11 metres. 3 Map 2 Delete 85 Maling Road, Canterbury from the map and update the height controls for Maling Road. 4 Column 2, last paragraph Delete reference to 85 Maling Road, Canterbury. 6 Map 3 Delete 85 Maling Road, Canterbury from the map. 7 Various Remove reference to 85 Maling Road, Canterbury and update text, guidelines and Figure 3 to reflect the reduced height limit for Maling Road, Canterbury. 8 Map 4 Delete 85 Maling Road, Canterbury from the map and update the height controls for Maling Road, Canterbury. 9 Column 1 - various Update column 1 to reflect the recent approval of Amendment C108 and any other changes to the Boroondara Planning Scheme since adoption of the MRBFG. Remove reference to rezoning 85 Maling Road, Canterbury. 12 Column 2 and 3 Update column 2 and 3 to delete discussion regarding the rezoning of 85 Maling Road, Canterbury, and reflect any changes to the Boroondara Planning Scheme since adoption of the MRBFG. 16 Column 2 and 3 Update columns to remove discussion relating to 85 Maling Road, Canterbury and to reflect the UPSC s recommendation to Council in relation Maling Road. City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 76 of 109

77 PlanningandEnvironmentAct1987 PanelReport BoroondaraPlanningScheme AmendmentC195 MalingRoadbuiltformcontrols 10February2015 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 77 of 109

78 PlanningandEnvironmentAct1987 PanelReportpursuanttoSection25oftheAct BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195 MalingRoadbuiltformcontrols 10February2015 LesterTownsend,Chair City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 78 of 109

79 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February2015 Contents Page ExecutiveSummary...i Introduction Thesubjectsiteandsurrounds Backgroundtotheproposal TheAmendment Summaryofissuesraisedinsubmissions IssuesdealtwithinthisReport...6 StrategicPlanningContext Policyframework StatePlanningPolicyFramework(SPPF) LocalPlanningPolicyFramework(LPPF)...9 TheformerBradshawsiteat85MalingRoad Siteandsurrounds Whatwasexhibited Proceduralissues Planningissues Otherissues OverallheightofbuildingsinMalingRoad VariationofsetbackwherethePublicAcquisitionOverlayapplies Thelocationofairconditioningunits CanterburyRoadand2BWattleValleyRoad SetbacksfromCanterburyRoad Heritagegradingof2BrysonStreet...23 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 79 of 109

80 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February2015 Figuresandtables Figure1: Figure2: Figure3: Page MalingRoadandsurroundingzoning...1 OverlaysapplyingtoMalingRoadandthesurroundingarea...2 ProposedbuildingheightsadoptedbyCouncil...5 Table1: Table2: Submissionsandattendances... 6 Currentandexhibitedheightcontrols...17 ListofAbbreviations C1Z DDO DTPLI EAO EPA GRZ HO LPPF MSS NRZ PO1 PPTN the Strategy SPPF Commercial1Zone DesignandDevelopmentOverlay DepartmentofTransport,PlanningandLocalInfrastructure EnvironmentalAuditOverlay EnvironmentProtectionAuthority GeneralResidentialZone HeritageOverlay LocalPlanningPolicyFramework MunicipalStrategicStatement NeighbourhoodResidentialZone ParkingOverlay Schedule1 PrincipalPublicTransportNetwork BoroondaraActivityCentreStrategy StatePlanningPolicyFramework City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 80 of 109

81 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February2015 AmendmentSummary TheAmendment CommonName PurposeofAmendment PlanningAuthority Authorisation Exhibition BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195 MalingRoadbuiltformcontrols AmendmentC195seekstoimplementtheMalingRoadBuilding FormGuidelines BoroondaraCityCouncil Authorisationwasgrantedon23May Julyto18August2014 PanelProcess ThePanel DirectionsHearing PanelHearing SiteInspections LesterTownsend 17November2014,PlanningPanelsVictoria 8and22December2014,PlanningPanelsVictoria Unaccompanied,3December2014and21January2015 Appearances - BoroondaraCityCouncilrepresentedbyMsAmandaSeymour - MsMaryDrost - MrRobertEwing - MsLorrieButtner - AustralianMeiJieInternationalCorporationPtyLtdrepresented byjohnciceroofbesthooperandcallingevidencefrom CatherineHeggen. Submissions Elevensubmissionswerereceivedduringthepublicexhibition period.foursupportingtheamendment,threesupportingthe overallamendmentbutrequestingchangestooneormore componentsoftheamendment,andfourobjections. TwolatesubmissionswerereferredtothePanel. Table1liststhesubmitters. DateofthisReport 10February2015 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 81 of 109

82 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February2015 ExecutiveSummary Summary The Amendment provides clear and sensible built form controls for Maling Road that are consistent with, and help implement, the State Planning Policy Framework and Local PlanningPolicyFramework. A number of submissions sought changes to the built forcontrols.council has supported someofthesechanges,andingeneraliagreewithcouncil. In considering submissions Council resolved to remove the Bradshaw site from the Amendment.Thereisnojustificationwhatsoeverfordoingthis.Theexistingcontrolsdo not provide an appropriate basis for the management of this redundant site.i agree, however,thattheexhibitedcontrols,whichapplyheightandsetbackcontrolsapplicabletoa commercial development to the site are not appropriate either.i have recommended changestotheexhibitedcontrolstoachieveabettertransitionbetweenthecommercialand residentialareas,andtoreflecttheresidentialzoningofthesite. Conclusionsandrecommendations Ihavemadeanumberofformalconclusions: AsexhibitedAmendmentC195supportsandimplementstheStatePlanningPolicy FrameworkandPlanMelbourne. AsexhibitedAmendmentC195supportsandimplementstheLocalPlanningPolicy Framework. Leaving the Bradshaw site in the Neighbourhood Residential Zone has no justificationandisnotappropriate. A combination of the exhibited control with a landscaped setback will create an appropriatetransitionalformforthebradshawsite. A combination of the exhibited control with a landscaped setback will create an appropriatescaleofbuildingadjacentto103malingroad. Removing the proposed Environmental Audit Overlay from the Bradshaw site has nojustification. Forthereasonsoutlinedinthisreport,Irecommendthat: Boroondara Planning Scheme Amendment C195 be adopted as exhibited subject to the followingchanges: 1 Modify Design and Development Overlay Schedule 23 to require a 3 metre landscape setback for the Bradshaw site.this will require some consequential changestothecontrolsinrelationtostreetinterfaceforthesite. 2 Modify Design and Development Overlay Schedule 23 to lower the height developmentonthetriangularportionofthebradshawsiteto8metres. 3 Modify Design and Development Overlay Schedule 23 to include a requirement that sensitive residential interface setbacks are landscaped to screen buildings fromsurroundingresidentialareas. Pagei City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 82 of 109

83 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February ModifyDesignandDevelopmentOverlaySchedule23andtheMalingRoadBuilt FormGuidelines to include a new guideline stating that building services should bescreenedfromviewandnotbelocatedonthefrontfacadeofabuilding. 5 ModifyMap2ofDesignandDevelopmentOverlaySchedule20/Schedule16and themalingroadbuiltformguidelines to apply a 3 metre landscape setback to CanterburyRoad. 6 Make any minor changes and corrections including those presented in the post exhibitioncopyoftheamendmentpreparedbycouncil. Ialsorecommend: 7 Change the heritage grading for 2 Bryson Street from noncontributory to contributory. Pageii City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 83 of 109

84 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February Introduction 1.1 Thesubjectsiteandsurrounds Maling Road, Canterbury, is a lower order shopping centre that provides for daytoday convenience shopping.it is also a metropolitanwide destination known for its village atmosphere, heritage streetscapes, specialist antiques shops, arts and crafts, fashion boutiquesandeateries.itscharacterandstreetscapesarestronglyvaluedbyresidents. TheMalingRoadabutstheCanterburyVillageCentretothenortheastandtheCanterbury RoadEnterpriseCorridortothenorthwest.ItisnotcleartomewhyMalingRoadandthe CanterburyVillageCentre(andCanterburyRoadEnterpriseCorridorforthatmatter)arenot conceptualizedaspartofthesameactivitycentre,apartfromthefactthatmalingroadis moreattractiveandappealingthanthesurroundingabuttingcommercialareas. Figure1: MalingRoadandsurroundingzoning AllpropertiesincludedintheAmendmentarecoveredbyHO145,whichcoverstheMaling Road Shopping Centre and Residential Environs, Canterbury. The property at 208 Canterbury Road is also subject to HO29, and is registered on the Victorian Heritage Register,referencenumberH869.TheCanterburyPostOfficeat206CanterburyRoadison thecommonwealthheritageregister. Page1of23 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 84 of 109

85 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February2015 All land within the Centre within the Commercial 1 Zone is subject to Parking Overlay Schedule1(PO1). Figure2: OverlaysapplyingtoMalingRoadandthesurroundingarea 1.2 Backgroundtotheproposal In 2009 Council commenced preparation of the Boroondara Activity Centre Strategy (the Strategy) to guide retail, commercial and residential development outcomes in shopping centresandcommercialcorridorsinboroondara. The draft Strategy identified Maling Road as a place suitable for incremental change with limitedredevelopmentopportunities.itproposedavisionformalingroad: Maling Road Neighbourhood Shopping Centre will build on its location and architectural value to enhance its reputation and village atmosphere.the character of the Centre will be maintained and enhanced by providing developmentopportunitiesthatrespecttheheritagevalueofthearea. ThedraftStrategyproposedamaximumheightlimitof12metresforallpropertiesinthe Centre and specified a maximum streetwall height of 8 metres and a setback of 5 metres behindthestreetwallfordevelopmentover8metres. Page2of23 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 85 of 109

86 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February2015 ThedraftStrategywasplacedonpublicconsultationfromNovember2010toMarch2011. Councilreceivedmorethan400submissionsrelatingtoMalingRoad.Thekeyissuesraised byresidentsincluded: Impactsonneighbourhoodcharacter,inparticularthepreservationoftheexisting heritagecharacterandoppositiontoproposedbuildingheights(althoughtherewas amisconceptionthatbuildingheightsof4 6storeyswerebeingproposed). Concern that applying design controls to public car parks meant Council was intendingtoredevelopthem. Trafficandcarparkingimpactsfromincreaseddevelopment. In responses to the strong community opposition, Council removedmaling Road from the Strategy when it was adopted on 6 June Maling Road did not form part of AmendmentC108preparedbyCounciltoimplementtheStrategy. 1 MalingRoadisnowtheonlyneighbourhoodshoppingcentreidentifiedintheStrategythat doesnothave,orisintheprocessofgetting,strategicdirectionintheboroondaraplanning Schemeforfuturebuiltform. CouncilofficerscommencedpreparationofrevisedbuiltformguidelinesforMalingRoadin late TheAmendment (i) Asexhibited Asexhibited,theAmendmentseeksto: Apply a Design and Development Overlay (DDO23) to the Maling Road Shopping Centretoimplementtheadoptedbuiltformguidelines. Include Canterbury Road and 2B Wattle Valley Road, Canterbury within the Canterbury Road Commercial Corridor and the existing DDO20 2 and apply a mandatorymaximumheightlimitof11metrestotheproperties. RezonetheBradshawsiteat85MalingRoad,CanterburyfromtheNeighbourhood Residential Zone Schedule 3 (NRZ3) to the General Residential Zone (GRZ) and includethepropertywithintheenvironmentalauditoverlay(eao). DesignandDevelopmentOverlay(DDO23)controlsinclude: Mandatoryheightlimitsof: - 8.5metresforsinglestorey'significant'and'contributory'heritagebuildingsand 2and6BrysonStreet. - 11metresfordoublestorey'significant'and'contributory'heritagebuildingsand thebradshawsiteand60 78MalingRoad. A streetwall with a maximum height of 9 metres for noncontributory properties. Heritage buildings should retain their existing facade.at heights greater than 9 metresaminimumsetbackof5metresisrequired. 1 NorwasitpartofAmendmentC107introducedinterimcontrols. 2 DDO20isaninterimcontrolintroducedaspartofAmendmentC107.ItwillbereplacedbyDDO16aspart ofamendmentc108 Page3of23 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 86 of 109

87 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February2015 Requiring additional floors to heritage buildings to be set back a minimum of 5 metres behind the streetwall (discretionary controls can be varied by a planning permit,ifjustified). Adiscretionary3metresetback,uptoaheightof8metres,toasensitiveresidential interface.ataheightgreaterthan8metresrescodesetbackswillapplyconsistent withthesetbackcontrolsproposedbytheplanningcontrolsinamendmentc108. Providing greater design guidance for the side and rear elevations of 85 Maling Roadand60 78MalingRoadtoensuresideandrearelevationsoftheseproperties haveapositivecontributiontothesouthernentrancetotheshoppingstrip. 1.4 Summaryofissuesraisedinsubmissions ElevensubmissionswerereceivedtotheAmendmentduringtheexhibitionperiod. The owner of the former Bradshaw site at 85 Maling Road requested to make a late submission to the Amendment and make a presentation to the Panel.Council agreed to acceptthelatesubmission.alatesubmissionwasalsoreceivedfrommsbuttner. Issuesraisedbysubmittersincluded: UpdatingDDO23toprovideguidelinesforthelocationofairconditioningunitsand associatedservices. Updating DDO23 to provide a setback greater than 3 metres from the shared boundaryof83and85malingroad. Reducingtheheightlimitproposedfortheformer Bradshaw sitefrom11metres to8.5or9metres. Updating DDO20 to include the sensitive residential interface setback controls proposedinddo23. Applying a 3 metre landscaped setback from Canterbury Road for properties proposedforinclusioninddo20. Changing the heritage grading for 2 Bryson Street from noncontributory to contributory. Atitsmeetingof20October2014thePlanningAuthorityresolvedto: 1 2 Receive and acknowledge the submissions to Amendment C195 (Attachment1)totheBoroondaraPlanningScheme. Adopttheofficers responsetosubmissionsandrecommendedchangesto AmendmentC195asshownatAttachments2and3(asannexedtothe minutes)subjecttothefollowingchange: Remove the property at 85 MalingRoad (formerbradshaw site) from theamendment(i.e.removalfromddo23andretentioninthenrz3). 3. Refer unresolved submissions 7, 9 and 10 to a Planning Panel in accordance with Section 23(1)(b) of the Planning and Environment Act WritetotheMinisterforPlanningtorequestappointmentofaPlanning Panel under Section 153 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to considersubmissions. Page4of23 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 87 of 109

88 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February Followingconsultationwiththeownerofthepropertyat2BrysonStreet, CanterburyupdatetheBoroondaraScheduleofGradingsMap,toshow2 BrysonStreet,Canterburyasa contributory heritagepropertyinheritage Overlay Schedule145(HO145). Changesmadeinresponsetosubmissionsinclude: UpdatingMap2ofDDO20andtheMalingRoadBuiltFormGuidelinestoapplya3 metrelandscapesetbackto CanterburyRoad. Updating DDO23 and the Maling Road Built Form Guidelines to encourage landscapingwithinthe3metresetbacktoresidentialboundaries. Updating DDO23 and the Maling Road Built Form Guidelines to include a new guideline stating that building services should be screened from view and not be locatedonthefrontfacadeofabuilding. Figure3: ProposedbuildingheightsadoptedbyCouncil Proceduralissues Councilresolvedonlytorefersubmissions7,9and10toapanelonthebasisthattheissues intheothersubmissionshadbeenresolved.allsubmitterswereadvisedofthepaneland sentarequesttobeheardform.twosubmitterswhosesubmissionswerenotreferredto thepanelrequestedtobeheard.iagreedtohearfromthesesubmitters. AlatesubmissionwasreceivedfromtheowneroftheBradshawsiteandCouncilconsented tothesubmitterbeingpartofthehearingprocess. Page5of23 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 88 of 109

89 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February2015 MsButtnerrequestedtobeheardatthePanel.Counciladvised: CouncilhasnoobjectiontoMsButtnerbecomingpartofthePanelprocessat thisstage. Please note that, as we have not received a formal submission, we will not abletoprovideafullresponseduringthepanelhearing. Wewillendeavourtoaddressanypointsraisedhowever. MsButtnerpresentedattheHearing. ForthesakeofcompletenessTable1showsthesubmissions,whethertheywerereferredto thepanelandattendanceatthehearing. Table1: Submissionsandattendances No Submitter ReferredtoPanelby Council? AttendedHearing? 1 TandLHollingsworth no no 2 REwing no Attended 3 EandADavies no no 4 RCrocker no no 5 SHollands no no 6 GYeo no no 7 Canterbury CommunityAction Referred no 8 MDrost no Attended 9 SWilliams Referred no 10 VicRoads Referred no 11 JRoach no no Late(1) MeiJieInternational Councilconsentedtosubmitter beingpartofthehearing Late(2) LButtner Councilconsentedtosubmitter beingpartofthehearing Attended Attended 1.5 IssuesdealtwithinthisReport ThePanelconsideredallwrittensubmissions,aswellassubmissionspresentedtoitduring the Hearing.In addressing the issues raised in those submissions, the Panel has been assisted by the information provided to it as well as its observations from inspections of specificsites. Page6of23 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 89 of 109

90 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February2015 Issuesofcarparkingandtrafficwerealsoraised.InotethattheareaiscoveredbyaParking OverlayandthatthisisnotbeingchangedaspartoftheAmendment. Thisreportdealswiththeissuesunderthefollowingheadings: TheformerBradshawsiteat85MalingRoad Otherissues: - OverallheightofbuildingsinMalingRoad - VariationofsetbackwherethePublicAcquisitionOverlayapplies - Thelocationofairconditioningunits CanterburyRoadand2BWattleValleyRoad - SetbacksfromCanterburyRoad - Heritagegradingof2BrysonStreet. Page7of23 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 90 of 109

91 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February StrategicPlanningContext Council provided a response to the Strategic Assessment Guidelines as part of the ExplanatoryReport.IhavereviewedthepolicycontextoftheAmendment. 2.1 Policyframework 2.2 StatePlanningPolicyFramework(SPPF) Clause10.04 Integrateddecisionmakingstatesthat: Planningauthoritiesandresponsibleauthoritiesshouldendeavourtointegrate the range of policies relevant to the issues to be determined and balance conflictingobjectivesinfavourofnetcommunitybenefitofpresentandfuture generations. Councilsubmittedthat: For Amendment C195 the overriding issue is to protect the heritage streetscapeofmalingroad.thestreetscapeisstronglyvaluedbyresidents andthewidercommunity.thecommunity soverwhelmingdesiretoprotect this Centre from inappropriate development is reflected by the number of submissionscouncilreceivedaboutthiscentreinthedraftacs. The protection of heritage has to be balanced with the need for this Centre to remain a viable and functional neighbourhood shopping centre that services to the local and wider community, and to provide a reasonable development future for the Bradshaw service stationsiteat85malingroadwhichmaywellbecontaminated. Councilwentontosay: AmendmentC195providesanappropriatebalancebetweenthecommunity s strongdesiretoretainandprotectthehistoricstreetscapeofmalingroadand theneedtoallowforamoderatelevelofchangeinthiscentretoallowthis Centretoremaineconomicallyviableinthefuture(Clause11.04). PlanMelbourne TheMalingRoadShoppingCentreisclassifiedasaNeighbourhoodShoppingCentreinPlan Melbourne.Table1ofPlanMelbournestatesthatneighbourhoodcentresshould provide neighbourhoodaccesstolocalgoods,servicesandemploymentopportunities.planningin theselocationswillhelptodeliver20minuteneighbourhoodsacrossmelbourne. PlanMelbourne(Initiative1.5.3 SupportPlanningofOtherActivityCentres)alsostatesthat local governments will be primarily responsible for the planning and management of neighbourhood centres.it encourages local governments to plan for local urbanrenewal andtransitorientateddevelopmentsitestobetteruseexistingandplannedinfrastructure forhousingandemploymentopportunities. Direction4LiveableCommunitiesandNeighbourhoods,seekstocreatehealthyandactive neighbourhoods and maintain Melbourne s identity as one of the world s most liveable cities. Page8of23 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 91 of 109

92 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February2015 Initiative seeks to protect Melbourne s neighbourhood shopping centres from inappropriate development and support the use of mandatory building heights and local character controls for neighbourhood shopping centres to assist councils to achieve their desired built form outcomes for neighbourhood centres.particularly for welldeveloped centreswherethecommunityisseekingtoprotecttheuniquecharacterofthecentresuch asprotectingheritagebuildings. Councilsubmitted: Consistent with these directions, the Amendment seeks to apply mandatory height controls to protect the Centre s unique character.plan Melbourne clearly supports the use of mandatory controls for neighbourhood shopping centres. Direction4.7 RespectourHeritage encouragesthecontinuedprotectionofmelbourne s heritageandacknowledgestheimportantroleitplaysinlinkingpeopletoaplaceandour past. Initiative Value our Heritage states that heritage places should be valued and consideredwhenmakingdecisionmanaginggrowthandchange. The proposed controls allow for a moderate level of change in the Centre to support economic viability while protecting the built characteristics in the Centre that residents value. TheAmendmentalsoproposesbuiltformguidelinesfor CanterburyRoadand2B Wattle Valley Road, Canterbury.The height controls proposed for these properties will ensurethataconsistentstreetscapeisachievedforcommercialbuildingsalongcanterbury Road and long range vistas to the Canterbury Mansion tower, listed on the Victorian HeritageRegister,areprotected. OverallIconclude: AsexhibitedAmendmentC195supportsandimplementstheStatePlanningPolicy FrameworkandPlanMelbourne. 2.3 LocalPlanningPolicyFramework(LPPF) MunicipalStrategicStatement The Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) in the Boroondara Planning Scheme sets out Council svisionanddirectionforthemunicipality.itstatesthatcouncilwillpreserveand enhance the amenity of Boroondara s urban environments and facilitate appropriate development(clause21.042mission). Clause21.052oftheMunicipalStrategicStatement(MSS)states: The distinctive character of the City is fundamentally important to its identityandtoitsresidents. Individual heritage places and precincts contribute significantly to the characterofthecity. Growth and development needs to be facilitated in sucha way that they complement and enhance this distinctive character, whilst ensuring the Page9of23 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 92 of 109

93 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February2015 ongoing preservation and protection of individual heritage paces and precincts. Toaddresstheseissues,Clause21.053oftheMSSstatesthatCouncilshould: Protect gateways and landmarks which create a sense of identity forour community. Conserve and enhance individual heritage places and heritage precincts withinthecity. ConserveandenhancedistinctivelandscapeswithintheCity. IagreewithCouncilthat: Maling Road is a prime example of a distinctive landscape in the City of Boroondara.ConsistentwiththeMSS,theAmendmentproposestointroduce built form controls that will ensure that future buildings and works in the Centre protect landmark buildings like the Canterbury Post Office and Canterbury Mansion.The controls also ensure the historic streetscape of MalingRoadisprotected. The MSS also highlights the need to ensure the long term viability of traditional strip shopping centres (Clause Activity Centre and Enterprise Corridors) and the Amendmentprovidesforthis. OverallIconclude: AsexhibitedAmendmentC195supportsandimplementstheLocalPlanningPolicy Framework. Page10of23 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 93 of 109

94 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February TheformerBradshawsiteat85MalingRoad 3.1 Siteandsurrounds TheformerBradshawsiteat85MalingRoadisadisusedvehicleservicecentreandanoffice. ThesiteisirregularinshapewithfrontagetoMalingRoadalongitssouthboundaryof571 metres,adepthof23.65metresandanoverallareaof1707.5squaremetres. ThenorthernboundaryofthesiteabutstheCanterburyrailwaystationreserve,theeastern boundaryofthesiteabutsa3metreswiderightofwayandthewesternboundaryisshared withtheresidentialpropertyat83malingroad,knownasstationmaster squarters. The site contains two single storey attached buildings designated as noncontributory in HO145.Immediately to the south, on the opposite side of the road is the intersection of ScottStreetwithMalingRoadandarowofsinglestoreyshops.Similarly,eastofthesiteare single storey shops which step up to double storey or a height equivalent of three contemporarystoreysaroundtheatreplace.aresidentialareaislocatedtothewestand south of the site at the Maling Road Activity Centre and comprises detached single and doublestoreydwellings. 3.2 Whatwasexhibited TheAmendmentproposedto: Rezone 85 Maling Road from Neighbourhood Residential Zone to General ResidentialZone ApplytheEnvironmentalAuditOverlaytotheland ApplyDDO23with11metresheightlimitbehinda9metresstreetwall. 3.3 Proceduralissues At Boroondara s Urban Planning Special Committee meeting of 14 October 2014, the Committeeresolvedtoremove85MalingRoadfromAmendmentC195.Thiswasnotthe adviceofcouncilofficers. On 28 November 2014 John Cicero of Best Hooper on behalf of Australian Mei Jie InternationalCorporationPtyLtd,thelandownerof85MalingRoad,wrotetothePaneland CouncilwithalatesubmissiononAmendmentC195.MrCiceroadvisedthatBestHooper didnothavesufficienttimetoproperlyprepareacaseforthehearingon8december2014. On 2 December 2014 John Luppino, Director City Planning, at Council (the Planning Authority)advisedby IwishtoadvisethatCouncilagreestoacceptthatlatesubmissionfromBest Hoopermadeonbehalfoftheirclient.Iunderstandthatthishasalreadybeen forwardedontoyou.councilconsentstobesthooper sclientbeingjoinedto thepanelhearing.councildoesnothoweveragreetoanadjournment. Following further submissions the timetable was revised to include a second sitting dayon22december2014. Section23(1)ofthePlanningandEnvironmentAct1987states: Page11of23 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 94 of 109

95 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February2015 After considering a submission which requestsa change to the amendment, theplanningauthoritymust: (a) changetheamendmentinthemannerrequested;or (b) referthesubmissiontoapanelappointedunderpart8;or (c) abandontheamendmentorpartoftheamendment. A number of submissions (submissions 6, 7, 8, 11 and possibly 9) seek changes to the controlsthatapplytotheformerbradshawsite. The role of the Panel is to consider submissions referred to it by the Planning Authority. Council sent a copy of all submissions to Panel and on 3 November 2014, and the Panel invitedallsubmitterstolodgearequesttobeheardform. InthiscaseadifficultyarisesinthatthelatesubmissionontheBradshawsitewasreferred tothepanelbutearliersubmissionswerenot.thisraisespotentialissuesofnaturaljustice. Natural justice is not served by giving some submitters an opportunity to be heard on an issuebutnotothers,whenthesubmissionsaddressthesameland. Panelapproachtostatusof85MalingRoad It is not clear to me whether or not the Council action in respect of 85 Maling Road constitutesanabandonmentoftheamendmentinrespectofthisland;ordinarilyonemight think so, and Council made submissions to that effect.no submission requestedthat the landnotberezonedandthisraisesdoubtsastowhethercouncilhadthepowertomakethis decision. 3 If the land had been removed from the Amendment then Council agreeing that the late submission could be considered by the Panel could serve no useful outcome and wouldonlywastethelandownerstimeandmoney. Iwillproceedonthebasisthat85MalingRoadisstillformallypartoftheAmendment,and thatcouncil spositionisthattheamendmentshouldnotproceedontheland.iamsatisfied that the requirement for natural justice for all submitters has been met in respect of the Panelprocess: allsubmittersweresentarequesttobeheardform allsubmitterswereadvisedthatthepanelwouldbehearingsubmissionsinrelation to85malingroad,andpartieswhodidnotlodgearequesttobeheardformon thebasisthattheirsubmissionwasnotreferredtothepanelwereinvitedtodoso inrelationtothelatesubmissionthathadbeenreferred. 3.4 Planningissues Canthesiteremainasitis? Thesiteisaredundantuseandthereisnorealprospectthatitwouldfunctionasaservice station again.planning controls are not an end in themselves, they should be applied to achieveidentifiedobjectives.therecanbenodoubtthatthesiteisappropriateforsome formofdevelopment. Thechallengeistofindaformofdevelopmentthatmeetstheplanningobjectivesforthe area.thisseemtobeadifficulttaskforcouncilwhencommunityadvocates(rightly)stress 3 See:LendLeaseApartments(Armadale)PtyLtdvStonningtonCC[2013]VCAT1663para22 Page12of23 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 95 of 109

96 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February2015 themaintenanceofcharacter,butfailtoacknowledgelegitimatereasonsfordevelopment. MsDrostsubmitted: Each area of Melbourne has its own character and this character should be respected.peoplemovetoanareabecausetheylikethecharacterandthey do not like that character being changed for usually no good reason except thatsomedeveloperwantstomakealotofmoney.thisisstronglyresented andresisted TheEnvironmentalAuditOverlay While submissions relate to the built form controls the application of the Environmental AuditOverlay(EAO)isalsoimportant.ItisprudenttoapplytheEAOevenifthesiteremains in the NRZ to ensure that any future development properly considers potential contaminationissues.decidingnottoapplytheeaotoanoldservicestationsitecanhave no justification whatsoever and runs counter to good planning practice; it suggests that Council sapproachtothissitehasnotbeenthoughtthrough. Iconcludethat: Removing the proposed Environmental Audit Overlay from the Bradshaw site has nojustification Whatistheappropriatezone? The site was been included in the Neighbourhood Residential Zone (NRZ) as part of Amendment C190 that introduced the Victorian Government s new residential zones replacing the previous Residential 1 and 2 Zones in Boroondara.The new zones became effective on 19 June 2014.They were introduced as part of a fast track process.the particularattributesofthissitewerenotconsideredwhenitwasrezonedtonrz. The exhibited Amendment proposed to rezone the site to the General Residential Zone (GRZ).CouncilhasnowdecidedthesiteshouldremainintheNRZ. Evidenceandsubmissions Thereisnodisputethattheappropriatefutureuseofthesiteisforresidential.Nooneis submittingthatthesiteshouldbezonedcommercial,orthattheservicestationuseshould berevived. TheproposedrezoningfromtheNRZ3totheGRZwasnotraisedinwrittensubmissions,but some submitters did raise the proposed rezoning with Council following the close of the exhibitionperiod.thecouncilcommitteereportstatedthatthis stemmedfromsubmitters desireforalowerheightlimitforthebradshawsitetolimitdevelopmentopportunities. MrCicerosubmittedthat: The Standing Advisory Committee of the Residential Zones is relevant.in relation to the applying the Neighbourhood Residential Zone it said in the Stageoneoverarchingreportdated20June2014: (iv)applyingthezones NeighbourhoodResidentialZone Page13of23 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 96 of 109

97 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February2015 P7 TheNRZshouldnotbeusedasthe default residentialzone. P8 TheapplicationoftheNRZatthemunicipallevelshouldnotbedrivenby the50percentreferenceinplanmelbourneorthepercentagesappliedin othermunicipalities. P9 TheNRZshouldnotbeappliedinprecinctswherethereispolicysupport for significant housing growth, including near PPTN stops and activity centresunlesssupportedbysoundstrategicjustification. P10TheuseoftheNRZinresponsetoidentifiedcharactershouldbebalanced with policies and strategies to provide housing choice and affordability, andefficientserviceinfrastructureprovision. P11The use of the NRZ to limit residential development in areas subject to environmentalhazardsorvaluesshouldhaveregardtowhetherthezone provisionsarenecessaryinadditiontotherelevantoverlay. MsHeggenexaminedtheurbancontextofthesiteandconcluded: InthiscontextaGRZratherthanaNRZwillenableatransitionofintensityin landusetobeestablishedonthesubjectsite.theretentionofthenrzwill onlyallowa2dwellingdensityona1707.5squaremetressiteequatingtoa ratio of 1:853 square metres. This density represents a lost opportunity strategically and is a policy failure in implementing the 20 minute neighbourhoodinvitationassetdownbyplanmelbourne. MsHeggenwentontoconcludethatdevelopmentofthesitewithonly2dwellingswould denytheopportunitythatamoreintensivedevelopmentcanprovideabuiltformtransition which steps down from east to west.in addition a more densely developed site will be better placed to screen the elevated railway line from views within the Maling Road streetscape. Discussionandconclusion The objectives of planning in Victoria are set out in Section 4 (1) of the Planning and EnvironmentAct1987.Theyinclude: (a) to provide for the fair, orderly, economic and sustainable use, and developmentofland (c) to secure a pleasant, efficient and safe working, living and recreational environmentforallvictoriansandvisitorstovictoria (d) toconserveandenhancethosebuildings,areasorotherplaceswhichare ofscientific,aesthetic,architecturalorhistoricalinterest,orotherwiseof specialculturalvalue (f) to facilitate development in accordance with the objectives set out [above] (g) tobalancethepresentandfutureinterestsofallvictorians. Page14of23 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 97 of 109

98 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February2015 TheBradshawsiteshouldbeusedefficiently,butdevelopmentonthesitewillonlyeverbe ofaninfillnature.thecharacterofmalingroadprecludessubstantialchangeorgrowth. I do not think the NRZ3 is the appropriate zone for the Bradshaw site for the following reasons: Theobjectivesofthezonecontemplateitbeingappliedinresidentialstreetscapes wherethereisaconsistentonetotwostoreyresidentialcharacter.thebradshaw site sits more in a commercial context not residential and is not characteristic of areasthathavebeenincludedinthenrz. ThebuiltformanalysisundertakenforMalingRoaddeterminedthatmoreintensive developmentthanwhatispermittedbythenrzwouldbeappropriateforthissite. The site is clearly capable of accommodating more than two dwellings without detrimentally impacting the character of Maling Road, or resulting in adverse off siteamenityimpacts. The8metreheightlimitdoesnotreflectthescaleofexistingtwostoreybuildingsin MalingRoadwhichrangefrom8.3metresto11metres.Thereisnojustificationto mandate an 8 metre height limit for this site when existing heritage buildings alreadyexceedthisheight. Thesitehasalongcommercialhistorydespiteitsresidentialzoning. The property has a much stronger relationship with the commercial properties in MalingRoadthanitdoestotheresidentialproperties. TheNRZmayleadtoanadhocformofdevelopmentwithsubdivisionofsmallerlots precedingdevelopmentpermits. IagreewiththeCouncilreportthattheGRZismoreappropriatethantheNRZ: Iconcludethat: OfficersthereforeconsidertheGRZtobethemostappropriatezoneforthis site.thegrzallowsawiderrangeofbuiltformoutcomesandwillallowbuilt form outcomes that complement the commercial heritage streetscapes of Maling Road. The NRZ would unnecessarily restrict possible built form outcomesatthedetrimenttothemalingroadstreetscape. Leaving the Bradshaw site in the Neighbourhood Residential Zone has no justificationandisnotappropriate Whatformofdevelopmentisappropriate? Ihaveapproachedtheissueastowhatcontrolsshouldapplytothesitebyconsideringwhat aretheappropriatedevelopmentoutcomesforthesite.asmsdrostpointsout,theareais currentlyprotected,andwillhaveincreasedprotectioninthefuture: Maling Road, rightly is a very protected area. This applies to both the shopping strip and the houses.it has a Heritage Overlay both shops and houses.theresidentialareaisprotectedbytheneighbourhoodresidential ZonerulesandtheshoppingstripisnowseekingaDDO,Amendment195,to doublyprotectitintothefuture.itotallyagreewiththis. Page15of23 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 98 of 109

99 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February2015 Thisareahasbeenlookedafterbyverydeterminedresidents.Yearsagothere wasamovetoputindevelopmentbutthankstothestrongresidentsthiswas stoppedanditisnowathrivingandfamousstreet. If this level of protection is not enough to ensure a proper outcome in Maling Road, we mightwellaskthen whatis? Iseenofundamentaldifficultyinallowingadevelopmentproposalto beassessedforthe site,thoughclearlyitwillneedtohaveanappropriate: streetinterface heightandsetback design. (i) Streetinterface Whilenotspecificallymentionedinthewrittensubmissions,setbacksfromthestreetareas importantasbuildingheightwhenconsideringwhatpotentialimpactsanewdevelopment mighthaveonthearea. Given the residential use on the Bradshaw site, any proposed development need to have regard to the controls in DDO23 as well as the standards and objectives in Clause 55 (ResCode). Thedwellingat83MalingRoadhasafrontsetbackofapproximately4metres(2metresto the centrally located architectural element to Maling Road).The buildings at 103 to 109 MalingRoadhaveazerofrontsetbacktowardsMalingRoad.UnderClause55,anyfuture developmentonthissiteshouldhaveaminimumsetbackof2metres. AnyredevelopmentwouldalsoneedtohaveregardtoCouncil slocalheritagepolicy(clause 22.05).TheHeritagePolicystatesthatnewbuildingsinheritageprecinctsshould: not be positioned forward of the abutting heritage places or positioned substantiallybehindtheprevailingfacadeof significant or contributory buildings. havesitesetbacksthatreflectthoseoftheadjacentheritageplaces. The site is relatively prominent, but this is partly due to the lack of street trees and large crossovers associated with the previous use.a nature strip and street tree pattern that continuedtheresidentialareasofthestreetwouldsoftenthesite sprominence. Aresidentialuseshouldhavearesidentialstyleinterface.Inthiscasethe3metrelandscape setback that applies on some nearby sites would provide an appropriate interface to the streetandreflecttheresidentialuse. DDO23 could be revised to provided more prescriptive guidance and require any redevelopmentofthebradshawsitetohaveregardtotheresidentialsetbackof83maling Road.Thedesignrequirementto providefrequentpedestrianaccessandglazingatstreet leveltoactivatethestreetandfacilitateinteractionbetweentheinternalgroundflooruses andthestreet isnotappropriateforaresidentialuse. Page16of23 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 99 of 109

100 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February2015 Irecommend: Modify Design and Development Overlay Schedule 23 to require a 3 metre landscape setback for the Bradshaw site.this will require some consequential changestothecontrolsinrelationtostreetinterfaceforthesite. (ii) Overallheightandfacadeheight Themainconcernraisedbysubmittersrelatedtothe11metreheightlimitproposedforthe Bradshawsiteandthepossibleimpactsontheabuttingbuildings.Submittersrequestedthat theheightlimitbereducedto8.5/9metretoallownomorethan2storeysonthissite. Table2: Currentandexhibitedheightcontrols Currentcontrols Height Exhibitedcontrols Heightandsetback 8metreheight(mandatory) Amandatoryheightlimitof11metres Astreetwallwithamaximumheightof9 metres.atheightsgreaterthan9metresa minimumsetbackof5metresisrequired. Thesubmitters primaryconcernswere: theproposedheightlimitwillallowdevelopmentofascalenotinkeepingwiththe characterofthearea theproposedheightandsetbackrequirementswillresultinavisuallybulkybuilding and adversely impact the neighbouring single storey properties at 83 and 103 MalingRoad. Overallbuildingheight SubmittersrequestedthattheoverallheightpermittedfortheBradshawsitebereducedto 8.5/9metres. WhileDDO23allowsforan11metrehighbuildingtobeconstructedonthissitethisheight limitdoesnotapplytothewholesite.thesetbackcontrolsmeanthatonlyasmallerportion of the site can be developed to this height. DDO23 does not support three storey development at the site s interface with Maling Road nor does it support three storey developmentatthesharedboundaryto83and103malingroad. Intermsofheritage,athekeydeterminantisthatanynewbuildingdoesnotdetractfrom thecontributorybuildingsinthestreet.intermsofcharacter,partofthecharmofmaling Roadderivesfromitrelativelyenclosedfeel. MsHeggensaidinevidence: The existing commercial buildings on the site and their nonresidential land usefunctionreflectsthesitecharacterisationasonewhichformspartofthe MalingRoadActivityCentre.Itisasitewhichhasalwaysbeenonewhichis Page17of23 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 100 of 109

101 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February2015 physically and functionally different from the established residential area to thewestwhichiszonednrz.inessencethesubjectlandisa transitionsite. The site clearly has a commercial context and a building form that acted as a transition betweentheresidentialareaandthecommercialareawouldbeappropriate. I have already concluded that the residential use of the land should be reinforced with a landscaped setback. Combining such a landscape setback with a building height that reflected the same rules that apply to the commercial area would create a transition in form. Iconcludethat: A combination of the exhibited control with a landscaped setback will create an appropriatetransitionalformforthebradshawsite. Interfacewith103MalingRoad Submitters raised concerns that the controls in DDO23 for the Bradshaw site would not provideanappropriatetransitioninscalebetween103malingroadandthebradshawsite. Thebuildingsat103to109MalingRoadareagroupofsinglestoreycontributoryheritage buildings.theoverallheightofthesebuildingsis8.3metres(tothetopoftheparapet)with adepthofapproximately5metres.a3metrewidelanewayseparatesthebradshawsite fromtheseproperties. Totherear(north)ofthesepropertiesisagroupofcontributoryheritagebuildingswitha heightof10.8metrestothetopoftheparapetfacingtheatreplace.ddo23allowsthese existingtwostoreyheritagebuildingstobedevelopedtoamaximumheightof11metres; 103 Maling Road could be developed to a maximum height of 8.5 metres, subject to achievinganappropriatesetbackbehindtheexistingstreetwall. The Centre is characterised by the mix of single and double storey buildings.in many instancesbuildingsofdifferentheightsdirectlyabuteachother. Iconcludethat: A combination of the exhibited control with a landscaped setback will create an appropriatescaleofbuildingadjacentto103malingroad. Residentialinterfacewith83MalingRoad Thedwellingat83MalingRoadissetbackapproximately10metresfromthesharedside boundary.attherear,thedwellingissetclosetotherearboundarywithlittlesetbackatall. ThebuildingenvelopecontrolsinDDO23encouragedevelopmentabove8metrestobeset back6metresfromthesharedboundary.combinedwiththeexisting10metressetbackof thedwelling,thethirdfloorofanyfuturedevelopmentshouldbesetbackaminimumof16 metresfromthedwellingat83malingroad. The proposed setbacks are ample to ensure that any development on this site will not dominatethedwellingat83malingroadwhenviewedfromthestreet.inadditionthese setbackaregreaterthannormalrescodestandardswhichwouldapplyifcouncil sproposal toremovethesitefromtheamendmentproceeded. Page18of23 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 101 of 109

102 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February2015 TheBradshawsitewrapsaroundbehind83MalingRoad.ThissectionoftheBradshawsite hasthemostpotentialtohaveadetrimentalimpactontheheritagepropertyat83maling Road. Councilofficersrecommendthatthemaximumbuildingheightforthetriangularportionof the site be lowered to 8 metres (2 storeys). The reduced height will ensure that an appropriatebuildinggraduationisprovidedtothesinglestoreybuildingat83malingroad. I agree with the proposed change that any set back to a sensitive residential interface shouldbelandscapedtoscreenbuildingsfromsurroundingresidentialareas. Irecommend: Modify Design and Development Overlay Schedule 23 to lower the height developmentonthetriangularportionofthebradshawsiteto8metres. Modify Design and Development Overlay Schedule 23 to include a requirement that sensitive residential interface setbacks are landscaped to screen buildings fromsurroundingresidentialareas Whatbuildingstyle Arealissuewithanydevelopmentonthelandiswhetheritcanbedeliveredwithadesign that does not undermine the valued characteristics of Maling Road.Not because such a designisnotpossible,butbecausemostcontemporarydesignswouldbeatoddswiththe particularcharacterofmalingroad. A role of planning to help provide sufficient welllocated houses to meet housing needs; thereisnoimperativetodeliverexcitingorinnovativearchitecturetoboroondara. MalingRoadischarming.Unfortunately, charm isnotadesignattributetypicallypursued inmodernarchitecturalapproaches.iamsurethatabuildingthattookitsdesigncuesfrom the surrounding area and sought charm over innovation could deliver an acceptable designoutcome. Maling Road has policy protections because its character is valued by the broader community.it follows therefore that any assessment of new development must consider howthatdevelopmentwillaffectthatcharacterinthemindsofthepeopleforwhomitis protected.thisisnotsimplyamatterofcountingobjections,butanassessmentofhowany new development is likely to be perceived; will it eventually become a component of the street,orwillitalwaysbeseenasan oddmanout? TheDDO23includesdesignguidelinesthatrequireanydevelopmentto: Demonstrate high quality architectural design that complements the heritage propertiesinthemalingroadstreetscape. Providefrequentpedestrianaccessandglazingatstreetleveltoactivatethestreet andfacilitateinteractionbetweentheinternalgroundfloorusesandthestreet. Incorporateverticalandhorizontalarchitecturalelementsthatreinforcetherhythm andfinegraincharacterofthehistoricmalingroadstreetscape. Avoid large sections of blank, unarticulated walls along primary and secondary streetfrontages. Page19of23 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 102 of 109

103 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February2015 Incorporate weather protection above all footpaths in commercially zoned land. Awning heights should be continuous and match the awning heights of abutting significant or contributory heritagebuilding. As well as these requirement, it must be remembered that the site is within a heritage Overlay.Thisshouldensurethatthedesignofanynewdevelopmentrespectsthevaluesof thearea. Page20of23 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 103 of 109

104 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February Otherissues Anumberofotherissueswereraisedinsubmissions. 4.1 OverallheightofbuildingsinMalingRoad Anumberofsubmissionssoughtreductionstotheexhibitedheights. Concernwasexpressedabouttheproposedheightfor60 78MalingRoad,asinglestorey buildingthathasaproposedheightof11metresbehindastreetwallof9metres. MsDrostsubmitted: Thedevelopmentofthisstriphasalonghistoryandthecommunitybattled hardtohavethebuilding60 78singlestoryandunobtrusive correctlyso,as it was to stand next door to a significant and beautiful building so must be recessiveandrespectful. Ihavereviewedthecentre,andtheproposedheights.Iamconfidentthatifdevelopment were to proceed on any site in the future the controls would provide for an appropriate scaleofdevelopment.asdiscussedabovefor85malingroadissuesofdesignwouldalso need to be considered, but the area is within a heritage overlay and this should ensure designissuesareproperlyconsidered. 4.2 VariationofsetbackwherethePublicAcquisitionOverlayapplies VicRoadssoughtachangethatanyvariationtothesetbackrequirementsalongCanterbury Road(whereaPublicAcquisitionOverlayapplies)willonlybeconsideredwhenthelandis surplustothe acquiringauthority,not responsibleauthority asexhibited. CounciladvisedthatthiswillbechangedaspartofAmendmentC108. Iagreethatthisisareasonableapproach. 4.3 Thelocationofairconditioningunits A number of the submitters raised concern that there was no policy direction in DDO23 relatingtothelocationofairconditionersandotherservices.submittersrequestedthata permittriggerbeincludedinddo23fortheseworks. Iagreethatthelocationofairconditioningunitsandotherservicescanhaveadetrimental impactontheoverallappearanceofanewdevelopmentandparticularlyitspresentationto thestreetscape.aplanningpermitisrequiredfortheseservicespursuanttotheprovisions oftheheritageoverlay(whichappliestoallpropertiesinthecentre)andfornonresidential usesundertheproposedddo. Policy direction is provided in Clause Heritage Policy to assist in the assessment of applicationstriggeredbytheheritageoverlay.however,iagreethereisvalueinproviding an additional guideline in DDO23 to deal with the location of services as part of an assessmentundertheddo23. Page21of23 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 104 of 109

105 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February2015 Irecommend: Update DDO23 and the Maling Road Built Form Guidelines to include a new guidelinestatingthatbuildingservicesshouldbescreenedfromviewandnotbe locatedonthefrontfacadeofabuilding CanterburyRoadand2BWattleValleyRoad Onesubmitterrequestedthatthesensitiveresidentialinterfacerequirementscontainedin DDO23alsobeappliedto CanterburyRoadand2BWattleValleyRoad. These properties originally formed part of the Maling Road Neighbourhood Centre in the Draft Activity Centres Strategy 2011.However, Council officers felt that these properties haveastrongerrelationshiptothecommercialpropertiesincanterburyroad.therefore, Amendment C195 proposes to include these properties in interim DDO20 which currently appliestothecanterburyroadcommercialcorridor,untilthepermanentcontrols(ddo16) for this Commercial Corridor are introduced into the Boroondara Planning Scheme by AmendmentC108. DDO20requiresasetbackof3metresfromresidentialpropertiesfordevelopmentsof3or morestoreys.ddo16containsthesameresidentialinterfacecontrolsasddo23.therefore, the setback from sensitive residential interfaces to commercial properties in DDO23 will applyto CanterburyRoadand2BWattleValleyRoadonceDDO20isreplacedby DDO16byAmendmentC108. CounciladvisedthatthiswillbechangedaspartofAmendmentC108. Iagreethatthisisareasonableapproach. 4.5 SetbacksfromCanterburyRoad A submitter requested that a 3 metre front setback be required for the properties from Canterbury Road to retain vistas of the Canterbury Mansions. The buildings currently existing on these sites provide front setbacks of approximately 3 metres.such guidelines wouldreinforcetheexistingconditionsforanyfutureredevelopment. Council advised that the key vista along Canterbury Road is the long range views of the CanterburyMansion stowerasyoutraveleast/westalongcanterburyroad.thekeyshort rangevistaisofthecanterburypostofficewhichcanonlybeseenasyoutravelwestalong CanterburyRoad. Iagreethatadditionalfrontsetbacksarenotjustifiedtoretainshortandlongrangevistasto CanterburyMansion stowerorcanterburypostoffice,butthatalandscapesetbackispart of the character of this section of Canterbury Road and is reflected in the existing front setbacksofbuildings. Councilsubmittedthat: Councilresolved to include provisions within DDO20 to recommend that a 3 metrelandscapedsetbackbeprovidedtocanterburyroad. This is not a change that will come to pass with the approval of Amendment C108, and DDO16willalsorequirechange. Page22of23 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 105 of 109

106 BoroondaraPlanningSchemeAmendmentC195PanelReport10February2015 Irecommend: Update Map 2 of DDO20/DDO16 and the Maling Road Built Form Guidelines to applya3metrelandscapesetbackto CanterburyRoad. 4.6 Heritagegradingof2BrysonStreet One submission questioned the noncontributory grading of 2 Bryson Street (in the map contained in DDO23.The submitter argued that this building forms part of the group of buildingsat94 104MalingRoadthatareidentifiedas contributory. Inresponsetothissubmission,CouncilreviewedtheCamberwellUrbanConservationStudy, whichformsthebasisforthegradingsinthisheritageprecinct.thereviewconfirmedthat thepropertyformspartofthegroupofcontributoryshopslocatedat94 104MalingRoad. AmappingerrorintranslatingtheCamberwellUrbanConservationStudyintotheplanning scheme lead to this property being given a noncontributory grading instead of a contributory gradingliketheothershopsinthisgroup. Council sheritageadvisorhasreviewedthispropertyandagreedthatthispropertyshould havea contributory grading.iunderstandthatthepropertyownerhasbeeninformed. Irecommend: Change the heritage grading for 2 Bryson Street from noncontributory to contributory. Page23of23 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 106 of 109

107 UPSC and Officers Response to Panel Recommendations/comments Panel recommendations/comments Recommendations Amendment C195 be adopted as exhibited subject to the following changes listed below: NB: The panel provided the following comments with the respect to the Bradshaw site I will proceed on the basis that 85 Maling Road is still formally part of the Amendment, and that Council s position is that the Amendment should proceed on the land [as exhibited] Modify Design and Development Overlay- Schedule 23 to require a 3 metre landscape setback for the Bradshaw site. This will require some consequential changes to the controls in relation to street interface for the site. Modify Design and Development Overlay - Schedule 23 to lower the height limit for development on the triangular portion of the Bradshaw site to 8 metres. Modify Design and Development Overlay- Schedule 23 to include a requirement that sensitive residential interface setbacks are landscaped to screen buildings from surrounding residential areas. Modify Design and Development Overlay- Schedule 23 and the Maling Road Built Form Guidelines to include a new guideline stating that building services should be screened from view and not be located on the front facade of a building. Modify Map 2 of Design and Development Overlay - Schedule 20/16 and the Maling Road Built Form Guidelines to apply a 3 metre landscape setback to Canterbury Road. UPSC recommendation Disagree with the Panel. The Bradshaw site should be excised from Amendment C195, as resolved by the UPSC on 20 October Disagree with the Panel. The Bradshaw site should be excised from Amendment C195, as resolved by the UPSC on 20 October Disagree with the Panel. The Bradshaw site should be excised from Amendment C195, as resolved by the UPSC on 20 October Agree with Panel. UPSC adopted this change on 20 October Agree with Panel. UPSC adopted this change on 20 October Agree with Panel. UPSC adopted this change on 20 October City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 107 of 109

108 UPSC and Officers Response to Panel Recommendations/comments Panel recommendations/comments Recommendations Make any minor changes and corrections including those presented in the post exhibition copy of the amendment prepared by Council. Change the heritage grading of 2 Bryson Street from non-contributory to contributory. Other Panel Comments Height controls for Maling Road if development were to proceed on any site in the future the controls [in DDO23] would provide for an appropriate scale of development Overall building heights (other than the Bradshaw site and Maling Road) UPSC recommendation Noted Agree with Panel. UPSC adopted this change on 20 October Disagree with the Panel. Reduce the height limit for this site from a mandatory maximum height of 11 metres with a discretionary street wall height of 9 metres to a mandatory maximum height of 8.5 metres. Agree with Panel s conclusion. if development were to proceed on any site in the future the controls [in DDO23] would provide for an appropriate scale of development Variations to DDO20 Public Acquisition Overlay (PAO) requirements I agree that this [Council s] is a reasonable approach. Residential setback controls for 210 to 216 Canterbury Road Noted Noted Council advises that this will be changed as part of Amendment C108. I agree that this is a reasonable approach. City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 108 of 109

109 Urban Planning Special Committee Minutes 07/04/15 AMENDMENT Moved Councillor Kreutz Seconded Councillor Mallis That the Urban Planning Special Committee resolve to: 1. Acknowledge receipt of the Panel s report and recommendations in accordance with Section 27(1) of the Planning and Environment Act Endorse the changes to Amendment C195 recommended by Council officers subject to the following additional changes to DDO23: a. Reduction of the mandatory maximum building height for Maling Road from 11 metres to 8.5 metres and a maximum of two storeys; b. Reduction of the maximum street wall height for Maling Road from 9 metres to 8.5 metres and a maximum of two storeys; and c. Application of mandatory, not discretionary, maximum street wall height controls. 3. Reinforce the heritage design guidelines for Maling Road to ensure the design of future development on the site responds to abutting significant heritage buildings, including: Reinforcing the fine grain character of the historic streetscape of Maling Road Incorporating vertical and horizontal architectural elements that reflect the detailing of heritage buildings in Maling Road Avoiding large sections of blank unarticulated walls facing the street. 4. Write to the owner of Maling Road to inform them of the changes listed in resolution 2, and provide them 14 days to provide feedback prior to the updated Amendment C195 being considered at an Ordinary Council meeting. 5. Endorse the revised Maling Road Built Form Guidelines subject to the changes listed in resolution Endorse abandonment of that part of the amendment pertaining to the Bradshaw site at 85 Maling Road and excise it from the amendment, with the exception of the application of the Environmental Audit Overlay. 7. Refer the updated Amendment C195 and Maling Road Built Form Guidelines to an Ordinary Meeting of Council for adoption in accordance with Section 29(1) of the Planning and Environment Act Adopt the updated Schedule of Gradings Map (as annexed to the minutes) that changes the grading of 2 Bryson Street, Canterbury from a noncontributory to contributory heritage place. The amendment was put and carried. The amendment became the substantive motion. The substantive motion was put and CARRIED. City of Boroondara Page 7 City of Boroondara Amendment C195 Page 109 of 109