Attachments: 1. Supporting Attachment 2. Locality Plan 3. Proposed Plans 4. Delegate Report

F U T U R E M E L B O U R N E ( P L A N N I N G ) C O M M I T T E E R E P O R T

Agenda Item 5.6

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMIT: TP-2010-959 26-28 CURZON STREET, NORTH MELBOURNE

2 October 2012

Presenter: Martin Williams, Executive Officer Planning

Purpose and background

1. This application is presented to the Future Melbourne Committee at the request of Councillor Shanahan.

2. The purpose of this report is to advise the Committee of an Application for Planning Permit for partial demolition of the existing single storey warehouse building and construction of three triple storey dwellings at 26-28 Curzon Street, North Melbourne (refer Attachment 2 – Locality Plan and Attachment 3 – Proposed Plans).

3. The subject site is located on the southern corner of Little Curzon and Curzon Streets. The site is rectangular in shape and has a frontage of 8.425m, a depth of 20.625m and total area of approximately 180 square metres. The site is currently occupied by a single storey brown brick warehouse building that is not graded in Council’s Heritage Places Inventory Study 2008.

4. The site is located within a Mixed Use Zone and is affected by a Heritage Overlay (HO3 - North and West Melbourne Precinct) and a Design and Development Overlay (DDO31 - North Melbourne Central).

5. The application was advertised and received ten objections. Concerns raised by objectors resulted in the applicant formally amending the plans. The amended plans were re-advertised with further correspondence received from three objectors. No objections were withdrawn.

Key issues

6. The key issues for consideration in the assessment of this application relate to built form (in terms of heritage and character), compliance with Clause 55 and potential amenity impacts to nearby and adjoining properties.

7. The application was referred to the City of Melbourne Urban Design and Engineering Departments. The proposal was generally supported by Urban Design with respect to scale, bulk and character subject to further resolution of the western façade, which is a recommended condition of permit (condition 1a). As demonstrated in the 3D images (refer pages 21-23 at attachment 3), the proposal will present an appropriate built form when viewed from the public realm.

8. The site is located within a car parking precinct plan area which specifies a maximum rather than a minimum parking requirement. The Engineering Department supports the proposed provision of one car space to each of the dwellings.

9. With respect to potential amenity impacts, the proposed development will not result in any unreasonable amenity impacts as measured by Clause 55 (ResCode), particularly with regard to energy efficiency, overlooking or overshadowing of adjoining properties.

Recommendation from management

10. That the Future Melbourne Committee issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit subject to the conditions included in the delegate’s report (refer Attachment 4 - Delegate’s Report).

Page 1 of 48

1

SUPPORTING ATTACHMENT

Legal

1. Division 1 of Part 4 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (the Act) sets out the requirements in relation to applications for permits pursuant to the relevant planning scheme.

2. As objections have been received, sections 64 and 65 of the Act provide that the Responsible Authority must give the applicant and each objector a notice in the prescribed form of its decision to either grant a permit or refuse to grant a permit. The Responsible Authority must not issue a permit to the applicant until the end of the period in which an objector may apply to the Tribunal for a review of the decision or, if an application for review is made, until the application is determined by the Tribunal or withdrawn.

3. In making its decision, section 60(1)(c) of the Act requires the Responsible Authority to consider, amongst other things, all objections and other submissions which it has received.

Caretaker Policy

4. Application for Planning Permit: TP-2010-959, 26-28 Curzon Street, North Melbourne is neither a major policy decision nor a significant decision for the purposes of the caretaker policy.

Finance

5. There are no direct financial issues arising from the recommendations contained in this report

Conflict of interest

6. No member of Council staff, or other person engaged under a contract, involved in advising on or preparing this report has declared a direct or indirect interest in relation to the matter of the report.

Stakeholder consultation

7. Formal notification (advertising of the planning application) was carried out for the application. In response to concerns raised by objector’s and the Council’s Urban Design department amended plans were prepared. These plans were re-advertised to original objectors. Phone conversations and site visit to an objector property was undertaken by the Planning Officer Julian Larkins.

Relation to Council policy

8. Relevant Council policies are discussed in the attached officer report (refer Attachment 4).

Environmental sustainability

9. The dwellings all have a northern orientation and have been designed with sun shades to all windows. There is a green planted roof space proposed at first floor level to dwelling 3 and solar hot water systems are proposed to the roof.

Attachment 1Agenda Item 5.6

Future Melbourne Committee2 October 2012

19/09/2012 1:14 PM

����������� ��������������������������������

���������� ���������� ���������� ������ ��� ���������������� ����������� ������� �� � � ����������� ���������������������������� ���������!����� ����!��������������� �������� ���������� �������������� ���������� ������ �������� ������� �������������������������������� " ���������� ���������������� � ������� ������������� ������ ������

Attachment 2 Agenda Item 5.6

Future Melbourne Committee 2 October 2012

Page 3 of 48

Attachment 3 Agenda Item 5.6

Future Melbourne Committee 2 October 2012

Page 4 of 48

Page 5 of 48

Page 6 of 48

Page 7 of 48

Page 8 of 48

Page 9 of 48

Page 10 of 48

Page 11 of 48

Page 12 of 48

Page 13 of 48

Page 14 of 48

Page 15 of 48

Page 16 of 48

Page 17 of 48

Page 18 of 48

Page 19 of 48

Page 20 of 48

Page 21 of 48

Page 22 of 48

Page 23 of 48

Page 24 of 48

Page 25 of 48

Page 26 of 48

1

DELEGATED PLANNING APPLICATION REPORT

Application number: TP-2010-959

Applicant: Mr Jon Brock

Address: 26-28 Curzon Street, NORTH MELBOURNE VIC 3051

Proposal: Partial demolition and construction of three triple storey dwellings

Date of application: 29 November 2010

Responsible officer: Julian Larkins

1 SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDS

An inspection of the site and surrounding area was undertaken on 28 January 2011 and 17 August 2012. The site has a total area of approximately180m2 and is currently fully developed to all boundaries with a single storey brick warehouse building formerly occupied by Australian Wholesale Printers.

The main characteristics observed in the area include single and double storey period dwellings with low front fences as well as various one and two storey commercial and warehouse buildings.

Adjoining the site to the south is a single storey double fronted Victorian dwelling with a picket fence which is D graded in Council’s Heritage Places Inventory Study 2008. The adjoining site has a high proportion of built form covering the site with a small area of private open space to the rear. Further south along Curzon Street is a red brick Edwardian dwelling and a group of four Victorian row houses all with a D grading. All the dwellings south of the subject site on Curzon Street are characterised by high site coverage and are fully attached with boundary walls on either side. Each of the dwellings contains a small area of private open space to the rear.

North of the subject site over Little Curzon Street are recently constructed double storey apartment buildings, while further north are double storey forms including a C graded Victorian terrace. To the rear of the site across Little Curzon Street are triple storey apartment buildings and the back of house to warehouse buildings.

Directly opposite the subject site across Curzon Street are single storey red brick Edwardian dwellings all graded D in Council’s Heritage Inventory Study 2008. Further north on the opposite side of Curzon Street is the Union Memorial Church, while further south on the corner of Victoria Street is a triple storey modern office building.

On the subject site’s side of Curzon Street the nearby dwellings have small front setbacks, while on the opposite side of the road from 35-47 Curzon Street the front setbacks are significantly larger.

The site is not affected by any easements or restrictive covenants.

Attachment 4 Agenda Item 5.6

Future Melbourne Committee 2 October 2012

Page 27 of 48

2

Aerial Photo / Locality Plan

2 BACKGROUND AND HISTORY

2.1 Pre-application discussions

A pre-application discussion between the applicant and a City of Melbourne Planning officer took place in October 2010.

2.2 Amendments during the planning process

The original application has been amended twice since lodgement on 29 November 2010. The first amendment occurred when the applicant changed from the JH Town Planning on 17 February 2011. The new applicant formally amended the application in an amendment to Planning Application received on 10 April 2012 which increased the proposal from two to three dwellings. It was these plans that were the original advertised plans.

Following on from the notification period and receipt of 10 objections the applicant further amended the advertised plans in response to the concerns raised by objectors and the Urban Design Branch.

Plans received on 20 July 2012 and were re-advertised to all objectors. These are the plans which have been reviewed in this assessment.

2.3 Planning Application History

There is no directly relevant history or background for this application.

Page 28 of 48

3

3 PROPOSAL

The planning application seeks planning approval for partial demolition of the existing building and construction of three triple storey dwellings.

3.1 Demolition

Demolition consists of removal of various sections of the existing building including openings on the front (western) façade, the entire eastern façade and all openings on the northern façade. The northern façade will also have large sections of wall removed to accommodate aspects of the development.

3.2 Plans

The plans which have been considered in this planning assessment are those received on 20 July 2012 prepared by Hassell, Revision B.

The proposed contruction involves retention of most of the existing building and the additon of two additonal levels to accommodate three triple storey dwellings.

Ground level

At the ground level the plan proposes to have one car space for each dwelling. The Dwelling 1 and 2 spaces are accessed via tilt up garage doors fronting Little Curzon Street to the north while the rear Dwelling 3 is accessed via a tilt up door on Little Curzon Street to the east. In addition to fully enclosed car spaces the ground floor also includes storage, powder room (Dwelling 1), bathroom (Dwellings 2 and 3), laundry (Dwellings 1 and 2), bin storage, staircase and entry point to each dwelling. The Dwelling 1 entrance is via Curzon Street while the other two entrances are from Little Curzon Street to the north and east respectively. Furthermore, Dwellings 2 and 3 both have larger footprints compared to Dwelling 1 and contain courtyards and bedrooms on the ground level as well as bathrooms containing showers.

First floor

At first floor level both Dwellings 1 and 2 contain an open kitchen/living area as well as a small timber deck/terrace area to each. Dwelling 3 contains a bathroom, laundry and second bedroom.

Second floor

At the second floor level both Dwellings 1 and 2 contain a bedroom, bathroom and smaller bedroom/study. Seprating Dwelling 1 and 2 are void spaces with first floor terraces and courtyard below. Dwelling 3 contains an open kitchen/living area and a terrace.

Roof plan

On the flat metal deck roof is mechanical equipment and solar hot water panels with the roof of each dwelling separated by void spaces / open air to the courtyard and terraces.

3.3 Elevations

West (front) elevation

The maximum height of the development is shown at 10.12m high as measured from the middle of the footpath on the Curzon Street frontage.

The front façade contains a semi-transparent steel/timber gate at ground level providing access to Dwelling 1. The existing façade is proposed to have the blue

Page 29 of 48

4

paint removed and be made good. The existing brown bricks are retained with new red bricks above. At first floor level at the corner is a window which wraps around to the northern façade. The second floor contains a window with a metal sunshade around the perimeter. The sunshade projects 250mm beyond the building line.

East (rear) elevation

The maximum height is shown at 9.88m (set back) as measured from the middle of the Little Curzon Street frontage. The façade is 7.47m high at the eastern boundary.

The rear façade contains a semi-transparent steel/timber garage door and pedestrian access door to Dwelling 3. At first level is an opening in the brick wall. Perforated brick work is proposed at the second floor level to provide privacy to the terrace and limit overlooking.

North elevation

The maximum height is shown at 9.91m as measured from the middle of the Little Curzon Street frontage.

The north elevation shows a number of windows, one to the ground floor (screened by semi-transparent material), three to the first floor and three to the second floor. At ground level there is a double tilt garage door providing access to both Dwelling 1 and 2’s car spaces. Metal sunshades projecting 250mm are shown around the perimeter of some of the windows. The façade contains large sections of open air space where the decking areas are proposed.

South elevation

The maximum height is 9.98m as measured from the middle of the south façade to the highest point of the building.

This façade contains no windows given that it adjoins the dwelling at 24 Curzon Street. There is relief in the presentation of the façade due to the decking areas creating openings.

4 STATUTORY CONTROLS

The following clauses in the Melbourne Planning Scheme require a planning permit for this proposal:

Clause Permit Trigger

Clause 32.04

Mixed Use Zone

Pursuant to Clause 32.04-5, a permit is required to construct two or more dwellings on a lot.

A development must meet the requirements of Clause 55.

Clause 43.01

Heritage Overlay Schedule 3 North & West Melbourne Precinct

Pursuant to Clause 43.01-1, a permit is required for the proposed demolition and for the proposed buildings and works.

Clause 43.02

Design and Development Overlay Schedule 31

Pursuant to Clause 43.02 a permit is required for buildings and works unless specifically exempted by a schedule to this overlay.

Schedule 31 specifies a 10.5m mandatory height control so the development is consistent with this requirement but a permit is required under the schedule.

Clause 52.06 Under the schedule to this clause a permit is required to provide car

Page 30 of 48

5

Schedule to Clause 52.06-6

parking spaces in access of one space per dwelling. As the proposal proposes only one space for each of the three dwellings no permit is required under this provision.

5 STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK

5.1 State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF)

The relevant provisions of the SPPF are summarised as follows:

Clause 15.01-1, Urban design, which seeks to create urban environments that are safe, functional and provide good quality environments with a sense of place and cultural identity.

Clause 15.03, Heritage, which seeks to ensure the conservation of places of heritage significance.

Clause 16, Housing, which states that:

‘Planning should provide for housing diversity, and ensure the efficient provision of supporting infrastructure.’

‘New housing should have access to services and be planned for long term sustainability, including walkability to activity centres, public transport, schools and open space.’

‘Planning for housing should include providing land for affordable housing.’

Clause 16.01, Residential development, which seeks to promote a housing market that meets community needs.

Clause 16.01-2, Location of residential development, which seeks to locate new housing in or close to activity centres and employment corridors and at other strategic redevelopment sites that offer good access to services and transport.

Melbourne 2030 is highlighted as a relevant document under this clause.

5.2 Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF)

5.2.1 Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS)

The relevant provisions of the MSS are summarised as follows:

Clause 21.08-9, North and West Melbourne, provides a vision for North and west Melbourne with the most relevant sections summarised below:

‘Provide a balance of residential and commercial uses, and which maintain an emphasis on local community and liveability, and which have a clear distinction in scale from the Central City…An ongoing aim is to reflect North and West Melbourne’s history as a residential and mixed use area by protecting heritage places and precincts and encourage the reuse of former warehouses, manufacturing and historic business buildings.’

Relevant Land use implementation strategies include:

Support residential development in parts of the Mixed Use Zone in North Melbourne (identified as area [2] in Figure 20) while maintaining the predominantly low scale of the area. This area is expected to support a mix of uses including residential development, with retail and small scale business uses and some light industrial uses.

Page 31 of 48

6

Encourage the re-use of existing warehouse and industrial buildings with efficient recycling potential where these contribute to the traditional mixed use character of the area.

Maintain lower scale streetscapes in other parts of West Melbourne and North Melbourne (identified as [2 and 3] in Figure 20). Ensure that development is sympathetic to the architecture, scale and heritage character of the lower scale areas.

5.2.2 Local Policies

The relevant local policies are summarised as follows:

Clause 22.05, Heritage outside the Capital City Zone,

This provides policy direction on number of heritage matters including concealment of higher rear parts and appropriate levels of demolition. The objectives of the policy include:

‘Conserve all parts of buildings of historic, social or architectural interest which contribute to the significance, character and appearance of the building, streetscape or area.’

‘Ensure that new development, and the construction or external alteration of buildings, make a positive contribution to the built form and amenity of the area and are respectful to the architectural, social or historic character and appearance of the streetscape and the area.’

Clause 22.17, Urban Design outside the Capital City Zone

This clause seeks, among other things, to:

‘To ensure that the scale, siting, massing and bulk of development complements the scale, siting, massing and bulk of adjoining and nearby built form.

‘To ensure that the height of buildings relates to the prevailing patterns of height and scale of existing development in the surrounding area.’

‘To reduce unacceptable bulk in new development.’

‘To ensure that buildings on prominent sites are designed to achieve a high standard of design which reflects the importance of their location and extent of their visibility.’

‘To ensure that building design including the use of materials and activities at the ground floor frontages of buildings creates and improves pedestrian interest and engagement.’

‘To ensure that development includes architecturally integrated building tops.’

‘To ensure that development uses design and detail to ensure all visible facades (including the rear and sides of buildings) provide a rich and positive contribution to the public realm.’

‘To ensure that development avoids ambiguity and conflict in the design of fronts and backs of buildings.’

6 ZONE The subject site is located within the Mixed Use Zone, the purpose of which is ‘to provide for a range of residential, commercial, industrial and other uses which

Page 32 of 48

7

complement the mixed-use function of the locality’ and ‘to encourage residential development that respects the neighbourhood character’.

7 OVERLAY(S)

The subject site is affected by the Heritage Overlay Schedule 3 North & West Melbourne Precinct, the purpose of which is:

‘To conserve and enhance heritage places of natural or cultural significance.’

‘To conserve and enhance those elements which contribute to the significance of heritage places.’

‘To ensure that development does not adversely affect the significance of heritage places.’

‘To conserve specifically identified heritage places by allowing a use that would otherwise be prohibited if this will demonstrably assist with the conservation of the significance of the heritage place. ‘

The subject site is also affected by the Design and Development Overlay Schedule 31 North Melbourne Central which seeks:

‘To maintain the predominant low scale nature of the area.’

‘To ensure that development retains views to significant landmarks.’

‘To ensure development supports high levels of pedestrian amenity related to access to sunlight and sky views and a pedestrian friendly scale.’

8 PARTICULAR PROVISIONS

The following particular provisions apply to the application:

Clause 52.06, Car Parking

Clause 55, Two or More Dwellings on a Lot

9 GENERAL PROVISIONS

The following particular provision applies the application:

Clause 65, Decision Guidelines, which includes the matters set out in Section 60 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

10 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION

It was determined that the proposal may result in material detriment. On 12 April 2012 notice of the plans received on 10 April 2012 was given by ordinary mail to the owners and occupiers of surrounding properties and by posting two notices on the site for a 14 day period, in accordance with Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

After receipt of 10 objections, the applicant decided to revise the advertised plans in an attempt to respond to concerns raised by the objectors. On 27 July 2012 the revised plans received on 20 July 2012 were re-advertised to all owners/occupiers of adjoining dwellings the original objectors.

11 OBJECTIONS

The originally advertised application received 10 objections raising the following concerns (summarised):

Page 33 of 48

8

Overshadowing to adjacent properties in particular properties south of the proposal.

Loss of northern light.

Neighbourhood character concerns in regard to height and density of proposal.

Amenity concerns in relation to the size of the development.

Overlooking of neighbouring properties including the dwellings to the south, the apartments at 32, 34 and 36 Little Curzon Street to the north and properties to the east such as 26 Little Curzon Street.

Car parking and traffic issues.

Three storeys is inappropriate, two storeys more reasonable given the low height of surrounding development.

Concerns raised in regard to the chimney and burning of wood are presumably satisfied now that the chimney has been removed from the proposal.

Further correspondence was received in relation to the revised drawings with objectors at the apartments at 32. 34 and 36 Little Curzon Street reiterating that overlooking will still occur.

12 CONSULTATION

Given the receipt of the above objections, the following consultation was undertaken:

The applicant was encouraged to try and resolve objector concerns which resulted in the revised set of drawings being submitted.

Telephone conversations with a number of objectors explaining various aspects of the planning process.

A meeting was held with the objectors from 16 Curzon Street onsite to discuss aspects of the planning process and take photos from their backyard.

13 REFERRALS

13.1 Internal

The application was referred internally to both the Urban Design and Engineering Branches. The following is a summation of their comments:

Urban Design

Comments dated 22 December 2011 from Urban Design were in relation to the plans received on 20 December 2011 before the application was amended to three dwellings and subsequently revised to respond to objector concerns. The revised plans were informally referred to Urban Design in September 2012 and Urban Design expressed in-principle support subject to further articulation and fenestration to the western façade.

The most significant comments from Urban Design with the original proposal are summarised below:

The building height and associated bulk resulting is considered to be generally appropriate in this setting. With respect to building setbacks, given the re-use of the existing building shell and site context we find the zero building setbacks from Curzon Street to be, in this instance acceptable.

Page 34 of 48

9

Given that extent of site coverage we suggest the applicant take the opportunity to optimise rainwater collection and storage.

We commend the applicant on the decision to re-use and integrate the new development with the existing building shell for the associated environmental benefits of material re-use. We see the opportunity for additional fenestration to be added to the principal western elevation fronting onto Curzon Street to create a slightly more articulated façade. The objective here is to result in more contextually resolved and appealing facade with respect to the neighbouring buildings and surrounds.

We are of the opinion that the west elevation could be improved by the placement of addition fenestration. This would have the benefit of giving further articulation and enhanced passive surveillance for what is the primary façade.

We suggest that whilst supportive in principle of the windows presenting as projecting elements, the façade could potentially include windows which are recessed to further enliven the expression of the built form.

The existing wall and new wall are not described in detail as to brick colour, paint finish if any etc. We recommend this is investigated and considered by the Applicant to ensure the optimal visual presentation results.

All garage doors present an opportunity to enhance the presentation of the façade. We suggest the applicant consider a high quality metal mesh which could potentially present as an art element. The objective of this recommendation is to enhance the pedestrian experience of the building.

We note the inclusion of metal sunshades that project 190mm beyond the western and northern site boundaries. We recommend that details of the preferred sunshades (including colour) be submitted before offering comment on the suitability of these façade elements.

All unit entry points should be well lit to promote safe pedestrian access. We see this as an opportunity for the applicant to consider and ‘design in’ lighting as well as details such as numbering and post boxes which could contribute to the buildings ground floor presentation.

We find the retention of the existing brick and proposed new finishes to be in principle generally acceptable but note that colours are not indicated on the elevations. We recommend that a sample board of all external finishes (including existing materials to be retained) be submitted as part of this application before offering further comment.

We recommend that the applicant continue to explore further opportunities for environmental initiatives at this early design stage, so that they can be fully integrated into the design. Any effort to incorporate landscaping planting on the roof or facade greening would be favourably received.

Traffic Engineering

Traffic Engineering Branch provided initial comments dated 17 January 2011 (summarised) in which they reviewed the original proposal:

Engineering services considers the provision of one space per dwelling appropriate.

The plans indicate that Garage 1 would have dimensions of 3.5m in width by 6m in length. The proposed dimensions comply with Planning Scheme

Page 35 of 48

10

requirements. Application of a manual turning template shows that access/egress will be acceptable for this garage.

The plans indicate that Garage 2 would be 3.2m in width, which does not comply with Planning Scheme requirements, although it is the required 6 metres in length. It is accepted that there are additional areas provided as part of Dwelling 2 for bin storage, laundry and bicycle storage, and that a garage with dimensions as proposed would allow for adequate vehicular access/egress.

However, it is considered that the location of the garage immediately adjacent to the 90 degree bend of Little Curzon Street is a poor design proposal and is not acceptable, as sight distance issues will arise. The garage should be shifted to the south, further away from the corner.

In relocating this garage the applicant should be aware of a utility pole located on the east side of Little Curzon Street does not appear on the Town Planning drawings. The utility pole may require the garage to be widened to maintain convenient access/egress.

It is noted that tilt-up garage doors have been proposed for both garages. Theses doors should not extend over he footpath or road pavement of Little Curzon Street while in the open or closed position or while opening or closing.

Finally, it is noted that the Service Yard for Dwelling 1 has a separate pedestrian gate to Little Curzon Street. This yard should be accessed via the Dwelling 1 garage rather than via an additional external gate.

Traffic Engineering provided follow up comments upon review of the revised application:

The plans indicate that Garage 1 is to have an internal width of 3.2m and length of 5.3m, which does not comply with Planning Scheme requirements. The plans indicate that Garage 2 would have dimension of 5.3m in length, which also does not comply with Planning Scheme requirements although it is the required 3.5m in width.

A reduced width of 3.2m for Garage 1 is considered acceptable given that separate bin storage and laundry facilities are to be provided.

The AS/NZS 2890.1:2004 sets out that the base length for a 99th percentile vehicle is 5.2m (the 85th percentile design vehicle is 4.91m). It is recommended that as a minimum the garages be provided at a length of 5.5m.

A 2.8m wide tilt garage door is proposed for Garage 1 and 2. Access to both of the garages is to be provided via a 5.3m wide apron, including the width of the Little Curzon Street carriageway (4.4m). It is noted that the AS/NZS 2890.1:2004 sets out a doorway width of 3.0m for an apron width of 5.6m. It is recommended that the design of these garages be reviewed and modified, i.e. garage doors widened, and a swept path diagram prepared by a suitably qualified traffic engineer be provided to Council demonstrating that the garages can be adequately accessed by an 85th percentile vehicle.

Garage 3 is proposed to have an internal width of 3.0m (minimum) and length of 6.0m. In addition, the bin storage area for this dwelling is to be provided external to the garage. This provision is considered acceptable noting that the AS/NZS 2890.1:2004 sets out minimum width of 3.0m for single vehicle garages. The garage door is to be 3.0m wide with access

Page 36 of 48

11

provided via a 6.4m wide apron. Application of a manual turning template for an 85th percentile vehicle shows that access is tight but will be acceptable.

Engineering Services previous comments abut the use of tilt doors for this development is still relevant. Notably, the doors should not extend over the footpath or road at any time, i.e. when doors are open, closed or in use.

The submitted plan shows the provision of bin storage areas for each dwelling. Bins can be placed out for collection on the footpath close to the respective garages.

A Waste Management Plan (WMP) is not required.

Civil Engineering

Civil Engineering did not object to the proposal, but recommended that the following conditions be placed on any planning permit which might issue.

1. The owner of the subject land should construct a drainage system, incorporating water sensitive urban design, within the development and make provision to connect this system to the City of Melbourne’s stormwater drainage system in accordance with plans and specifications first approved by the Responsible Authority.

2. The Owner of the subject land should construct all necessary vehicle crossings and demolish all unnecessary vehicle crossings adjacent the subject land in accordance with plans and specifications first approved by the Responsible Authority.

3. The Owner of the subject land will not be permitted to alter the existing footpath/road levels in Curzon and Little Curzon Streets for the purpose of constructing new vehicle or pedestrian entrances without first obtaining the written approval of the Responsible Authority.

4. Requests for tree removal should be referred to the City of Melbourne’s Manager Urban Landscapes – Ian Shears (tel. 9658 8516).

5. The Owner of the subject land should reconstruct the footways in Curzon and Little Curzon Streets adjacent the subject land in accordance with plans and specifications first approved by the Responsible Authority.

6. All necessary approvals and permits are to be first obtained from the City of Melbourne and the works performed to the satisfaction of Manager - Engineering Services Branch.

13.2 External The application was not required to be referred externally.

14 ASSESSMENT

The application seeks planning approval for partial demolition and construction of three triple storey dwellings. The key issues for consideration in the assessment of this application are built form (in terms of heritage and character), compliance with Clause 55 and potential amenity impacts to nearby and adjoining properties.

14.1 Built Form, Heritage and Character

The subject site is located on the eastern side of Curzon Street at the south corner of Curzon Street and Little Curzon Street and is currently occupied by a single storey brown brick warehouse which is built to all boundaries.

Page 37 of 48

12

The site is located within a heritage area, however the host building is not recognised as having any specific heritage value.

Curzon Street is a 30 metre wide street (listed as a level 2 street under Council’s Heritage Places Inventory Study 2008) featuring predominantly Victorian and Edwardian dwellings as well as modern commercial buildings and the prominent Uniting Church at the corner of Curzon and Elm Streets. Immediately adjacent to the site to the south are a number of single storey dwellings all graded D under the inventory. To the north and east over Little Curzon Street are two and three storey modern apartment buildings respectively. Directly opposite on the other side of Curzon Street are a group of Edwardian dwellings, while further south is a large three storey office building on the corner of Victoria and Curzon Streets.

The existing building is 5.42m high and built to all boundaries. A number of the nearby sites have high site coverage with private open space to the rear of the dwellings to the south. The proposal will result in an increased height of 4.7m to the existing warehouse building with a proposed total height of 10.12m as measured from the middle of the Curzon Street frontage. Although the adjoining dwelling is single storey, the surrounding area does have a number of two and three storey forms. The overall height remains under the 10.5m mandatory height control and for this reason the overall ‘height’ is considered to be acceptable from a character point of view.

Likewise, the overall bulk and massing of the proposal is considered to respect both the character and heritage of the surrounding area. The proposal, with a modern form, will complement the existing double storey apartment building to the north. Like the apartment building, the proposal has no setback from the street and will remain consistent with the predominant low-scale of the area.

The overall height will not dominate the streetscape and remains respectful of the nearby heritage dwellings while the re-use of the warehouse is directly consistent with the relevant land use strategies outlined under Municipal Strategic Statement (Clause 21.08-9) for the area.

Having regard to the above it is considered that:

• The proposal has been designed to ensure that the scale, siting, massing and bulk of development complements the scale, siting, massing and bulk of adjoining and nearby built form or the prevailing pattern of height and scale in the immediate area.

• The design is considered to require some resolution to the front façade to present more appropriately to the street and, should a permit issue, conditions requiring ground floor fenestration as well other detailing should be required.

• Given the land is fully developed to all boundaries already, it is considered that the addition provides effective integration with both Curzon and Little Curzon Streets subject to some alterations that could be imposed via condition.

The overall bulk of the building will be broken up through the effective use of void spaces and fenestration implemented in the design.

14.2 Clause 55 & Potential Amenity Impacts

Neighbourhood Character (Clause 55.01-1)

For the reasons outlined above the proposal is considered to meet the objective of this clause.

Page 38 of 48

13

Integration with the street objective (Clause 55.02-5)

Since the issue of the original urban design comments the applicant revised the design to include further fenestration both the northern and western facades. Urban design have indicated that they are satisfied with the response for the northern façade – but that further resolution is still required for the western (front) façade.

The integration to the street is considered to require some improvement, however this is a matter that could be readily addressed by a condition requiring more glazing and details to the western façade (in particular to the ground floor).

As recognised above, the proposed design, which has no upper floor setbacks, is considered to be consistent with the character of the area.

Street setback objective (Clause 55.03-1)

The setbacks are remaining the same as the existing building is being retained.

Building height objective (Clause 55.03-2)

Under this provision, the maximum building height should not exceed the maximum height specified in the zone, schedule to the zone or an overlay that applies to the land. The maximum 10.5m mandatory height control under DD031 is therefore the applicable height control. For this reason, the proposed 10.12m height is considered to be acceptable and compliant with the objective of this clause.

Site coverage objective (Clause 55.03-3)

The site currently has site coverage of 100%. Due to the retention of the existing building the site coverage is to remain largely the same except for the inclusion of ground floor courtyards that are clear to the sky. This would reduce the overall site coverage to 94%. It is noted that the surrounding area is characterised by high site coverage.

Permeability objectives (Clause 55.03-4)

As above, as the site is currently fully developed and the objectives of this clause are not applicable to the proposal.

Energy efficiency objectives (Clause 55.03-5)

The north elevation contains a number of windows and new openings which will help maximise light and energy opportunities. The living areas and private open space (POS) areas are generally orientated to the north.

The energy efficiency of the adjoining site will not be unreasonably affected by the development.

Open space objective (Clause 55.03-6)

There is no communal or public open space proposed so the objectives of this clause are not applicable.

Safety objective (Clause 55.03-7)

The three access points to the building are all considered to be acceptable. Dwelling 1 has an entrance off Curzon Street, Dwelling 2 off Little Curzon Street (north) and Dwelling 3 off Little Curzon Street at the rear. The Dwelling 1 and 2 entrances are considered acceptable so long as they are well lit. The nature of Little Curzon Street also means that the rear entrance is acceptable given that there are similar pedestrian and vehicle entries to nearby sites that have access from Little Curzon

Page 39 of 48

14

Street. Both the apartments to the north and to the east contain pedestrian entries off Little Curzon Street. It is most important that the rear pedestrian entry is well lit to ensure safety.

Landscaping objectives (Clause 55.03-8)

Due to the full site coverage of the existing building which is to be retained, landscaping opportunities are limited. Nonetheless, the application includes two ground floor courtyards and a first floor planted roof which will provide some opportunities for landscaping. The Dwelling 1 terrace area is also shown with a creeper plant in the 3D images submitted with the application. Overall, opportunities for landscaping are considered adequate given the limitations of the site.

It is noted that the applicant has also expressed interest in providing a new street tree, however as this land sits outside the title boundary and within the public realm, this is not a matter addressed through a planning permit. Should a permit issue a note could be included directing the permit applicant to the City of Melbourne Tree Planning Branch.

Access objectives (Clause 55.03-9)

A referral to the Engineering Branch has confirmed that conditions of permit would be required to ensure that vehicles can enter and exit the site safely and the design of the crossovers is acceptable.

Parking location objectives (Clause 55.03-10)

The location of the car spaces and crossovers are considered generally acceptable subject to recommended conditions of permit from the Engineering Branch. All the car spaces are fully under cover within the site boundaries and are easily accessible and secure.

Side and rear setbacks objective (Clause 55.04-1)

The proposal contains a number of new walls that are on or within 150mm of a boundary and therefore the provisions of this clause are not applicable. Assessment of the boundary walls is below.

Walls on boundaries objective (Clause 55.04-2)

Given that three sides of this proposal face onto a street, only the south elevation is of relevance to the objective of this clause, which relates to limiting the impact on adjoining sites.

As previously stated, the existing building on site is currently built to all boundaries. At the south boundary of the subject site there is abutting built form for the entirety of this boundary. Consequently, the length of boundary wall for the proposal is consistent with the standard, which allows for a new boundary wall to be built to the length of the existing or simultaneously constructed walls.

For this reason, the primary focus is determining whether the proposed height of the new south wall is acceptable. Currently the south boundary wall is 5.7m high, which will increase to 9.880m for large sections as a result of the proposal.

The recommended maximum of 3.6m (3m average maximum) is of no particular relevance to this application given that the existing conditions are already outside this height.

The key considerations under the Decision Guidelines are:

- The design response.

Page 40 of 48

15

- The extent to which walls on boundaries are part of the neighbourhood character.

- The impact on the amenity of existing dwellings.

In regard to the design response, there are a number of design techniques, specifically reductions in wall height and clear breaks in the built form to this side of the proposal that will limit impact to the adjoining dwelling. A 2.6m wide section of the wall will be open air at the location of the courtyard to Dwelling 2 which abuts the southern boundary. In addition to this, towards the rear of the proposal the wall height is reduced to 7.47 for a width of 2.95m. Part of the existing wall has also been removed to accommodate the courtyard and first floor roof garden to Dwelling 3.

This demonstrates that the design has taken into consideration the amenity of the adjoining dwelling. The variations in the façade add interest and articulation to the southern boundary wall and ensure that it is not viewed as one large mass. The breaks of built from in the proposed southern façade will allow for significant relief to the adjoining dwelling and as such limit the visual intrusiveness of the proposal.

In regard to the extent of walls on boundary, it is acknowledged that the surrounding area contains a high proportion of walls on boundary. The layout of the adjoining dwelling, which contains walls on boundary for the entirety of this common boundary, also means that impacts are limited.

Daylight to existing windows objective (Clause 55.04-3)

The proposal will impact the existing north orientated skylights to a bedroom and kitchen of 24 Curzon Street. There is also a bathroom window that will be affected by the development (though this is not considered relevant as it is non-habitable).

Council records do not show any planning approval for these skylights at 24 Curzon Street, but nonetheless the potential impact to these windows is a relevant matter.

As previously stated, the development does include some relief to the boundary walls through large breaks in the built form. It appears that the 2.5m wide section of open air is located directly opposite the bedroom skylight at 24 Curzon Street, which in effect complies with the intent of this objective. The existing boundary wall will remain but the proposal includes no additional built form opposite the bedroom skylight and as such is considered acceptable.

Determining the exact location of the kitchen skylight is more difficult but based on a review of aerial photographs and a review of the objector submission, it appears to be approximately 4m south of the new wall proposed on the south boundary of the subject site.

The distance of the skylight from the wall will mean the potential amenity impact is limited. Even though the distance from the habitable window is most likely less than the 4.95m distance specified in the Standard (i.e. half of the 9.9m high proposed wall), the objective is still considered to be satisfied. It is considered that the level of impact is reasonable for the following reasons:

There will still be morning sunlight to the skylight.

The site specific circumstances mean that it is very difficult to limit impact via condition.

The window is a skylight, oriented at least in part to face the sky rather than a window facing the boundary, and as such will still receive daylight for significant periods of the day.

Page 41 of 48

16

North-facing windows objective (Clause 54.04-4)

The skylights are not considered to meet the definition of north facing windows under this provision, but the break in the built form directly opposite the bedroom skylight to 24 Curzon Street should ensure it still receives adequate solar access.

Overshadowing open space objective (Clause 54.04-5)

Due to the orientation of the site, the main consideration under the provisions of this clause will be the site adjoining to the south and also the private open space of the back yard of 16 Curzon Street.

With regard to the adjoining site at 24 Curzon Street, the POS is located to the rear of the site and is orientated to the south of their rear built form. Current solar access to this area of POS is therefore limited due to the shadow cast by the existing development abutting to the north.

The height of the rear built form abutting this POS at 24 Curzon Street is approximately 3.4m. Therefore the shadow cast by the existing development on this site means that only a very narrow section of the southernmost strip of POS is affected by the proposal at 2-3pm on 22nd September. At all other times the existing shadows cast will not be increased.

In regard to the site at 16 Curzon Street, the shadow cast to this POS again may be slightly increased at 3pm. The shadow cast by their existing fence will not be significantly increased if at all at 3pm.

For this reason the overshadowing impacts are considered reasonable in an inner-city context and will have limited impact on these surrounding properties.

Overlooking objectives (Clause 55.04-6)

Overlooking from the Dwelling 3 terrace is of concern, however this is a matter that could be addressed by condition should a permit issue. Similarly the second floor living area window to Dwelling 3 on the north elevation can be screened in accordance with this standard to ensure that no unreasonable overlooking occurs to the apartments north of the site over Little Curzon Street.

Internal views objective (Clause 55.04-7)

The internal views from the Dwelling 1 and Dwelling 2 terraces of some concern and therefore clarification of the screening between these two terraces would need to be sought via condition of any permit that might issue. No other opportunities exist that would result in any of the courtyards or terraces being viewed by a separate dwelling on the site.

Noise impacts objectives (Clause 55.04-8)

The noise from the mechanical equipment on the roof of the developments is of some concern given the proximity to adjoining POS – in particular the mechanical equipment for Dwelling 1 being so close to the terrace of Dwelling 2. A condition of permit could require that the mechanical equipment is placed farther away from Dwelling 2’s terrace.

Accessibility objective (Clause 55.05-1)

The accessibility is considered to be acceptable for people with limited mobility.

Page 42 of 48

17

Dwelling entry objective (Clause 55.05-2)

The entrances to the dwellings are all considered acceptable. Two of the entries are clearly visible from Curzon Street, while Dwelling 3’s entrance is visible from Little Curzon Street which already contains pedestrian entries to the apartment buildings to the north and east of the subject site. Each of the entry points could be required to be well lit in accordance with the recommendation from the Urban Design Branch.

Daylight to new windows objective (Clause 55.05-3)

The proposal contains a number of north-orientated windows to maximise daylight opportunities. Bedroom 1 to Dwelling 2 contains a window to a courtyard to provide light access. Bedroom 1 to Dwelling 3 contains a window to provide light.

All habitable rooms will receive adequate light.

Private open space objective (Clause 55.05-4)

The layout of the development means that opportunities for POS are limited, however, the proposal includes two courtyards and terraces to all dwellings.

Dwelling 1 contains a first floor 7.8sqm terrace which will receive direct northern sunlight.

Dwelling 2 has a first floor terrace area of 7.085sqm and ground floor 5.252sqm courtyard (clear to the sky).

Dwelling 3 contains a 12.8sqm north orientated second floor terrace, a 5.4sqm ground floor courtyard (clear to the sky) and a 6.8sqm first floor planted roof.

Given the limitations of the site, the POS for each dwelling is considered acceptable. All the dwellings contain terraces easily accessible from a living area and in addition two of the dwellings contain courtyards. Overall, although Dwelling 1 and 2 do not contain the required 8sqm of balcony, the slight variation to the standard is considered acceptable.

Solar access to open space objective (Clause 55.05-5)

Although there are some limitations in regard to light access to the courtyards and terrace areas, generally the proposal has attempted to maximise light access opportunities. The terrace areas of Dwellings 1 and 3 are north orientated while limitations of the site restrict direct access to Dwelling 2’s POS. Dwelling 2 does contain a ground floor courtyard and first floor terrace which will allow an adequate amount of light access.

Design detail objective (Clause 56.06-1)

The design of the building uses a number of techniques to limit the overall impact of the built form while also respecting the neighbourhood character. The use of significant breaks in the built form reduces the overall bulk and massing of the proposal. The variation in materials clearly distinguishes old and new while also adding articulation and interest to the facades of the building. The retention and redevelopment of the existing warehouse building is consistent with strategic policy for the area and the maximum height is under the 10.5m mandatory height control.

As previously discussed, the development is considered to be respectful of the character of the area which includes a number of similar forms such as the apartments at 30-36 Curzon Street and 24-26 Little Curzon Street. The area includes high site coverage and proportion of boundary walls

Page 43 of 48

18

Since the issue of the original urban design comments the applicant has provided further detail regarding materials and colours – which would satisfy Urban Design. These can be required to be formalised via a condition requiring a materials and finishes board.

The applicant has also included further details regarding semi-transparent steel and timber material for doors and garage doors in accordance with the recommendations from Urban Design.

A condition of permit could also require changes to the presentation of the western façade to improve the integration with the street.

Conclusion

Overall the development is considered to be compliant with all the objectives under Clause 55. Variations to some of the standards such as the height of walls on boundary are considered acceptable in the context of the inner-city site. Conditions could readily be applied to a permit to require additional screening to protect neighbouring properties from overlooking to ensure the amenity of surrounding properties is protected.

14.3 Objector Concerns

The objector concerns have mostly been addressed via the Clause 55 and character assessments above. The below is a response to the main concerns raised by objectors:

Overshadowing to 24 and 16 Curzon Street.

The layout of the adjoining site, which has POS to the south of their rear built form, means that existing shadow impact is already outside the standard as discussed above. The additional impact therefore caused by the proposal will be modest and only affect a narrow section of no.24 Curzon Street’s POS in the mid-late afternoon. The dwelling will not be affected by and additional shadow between 9am and 1pm.

16 Curzon Street have rightly indicated that the plans incorrectly show covered verandah to their POS. Nonetheless, the impact on this property’s POS will be very limited given the distance from the proposal. The existing shadow caused by their north boundary fence will most likely not be exceeded as a result of the development. Any increase would be modest and limited to the mid-late afternoon hours. During the morning hours they will still receive uninhibited sunlight to their POS.

An independent shadow analysis conducted by the planning officer confirmed that the shadow drawings provided by the applicant were generally accurate although the 9am shadow plan appears to actually be 8am. Even so, the overall impact on POS from the development will only begin to occur after 1pm to sections of the adjoining dwellings POS. Additional shadow will fall on this area of POS as per below:

At 2pm approximately 2.5sqm of additional shadowing will fall onto the POS to 24 Curzon Street.

At 3pm about 3sqm of additional shadowing will occur though in both instances it is difficult to measure exactly due to the existing shadow caused by the dwelling at 24 Curzon Street. In any case, such moderate variations are deemed acceptable in an inner-city context.

An independent analysis demonstrated that no.16 Curzon Street will be unaffected by the proposal at all times of the day.

Page 44 of 48

19

Loss of northern light.

As discussed above, the loss of northern light to no 16 will be limited due to the distance between the proposal and this property. In regard to no.24, this dwelling will have a reduction in its access to northern light which is fully assessed above under the Clause 55 assessment.

Neighbourhood character concerns in regard to height and density of proposal.

The character concerns have been assessed above most notably under the section 14.1 of this report. The height is considered acceptable and the development respectful and complementary of its surrounds. Conditions of permit can be included to improve the Curzon Street frontage.

Amenity concerns in relation to the size of the development.

Concerns in relation to the size of the development have been discussed in detail above.

Overlooking of neighbouring properties including the dwellings to the south, the apartments at 32, 34 and 36 Little Curzon Street to the north and properties to the east such as 26 Little Curzon Street.

Conditions of permit can ensure that no unreasonable overlooking occurs.

Car parking and traffic issues.

The car parking arrangements have been assessed by the Traffic Engineering Branch and conditions of permit can be required to ensure that vehicles can enter and exit the site safely.

The number of spaces is consistent with the Schedule to Clause 52.06 as it provides one space per dwelling. There is no waiver of car parking required. At this inner-city location the parking provided is considered adequate with the site nearby to public transport and bicycle networks.

As noted, under the Resident Priority Parking Permit scheme, occupiers of the development approved by this permit are not eligible to obtain resident priority parking permits or visitor vouchers.

Three storeys is inappropriate, two storeys more reasonable given the low height of surrounding development.

The height, bulk and massing of the development is considered to be appropriate at this location as outlined above.

It is noted that concerns raised in regard to the chimney and burning of wood are presumably satisfied now that the chimney has been removed from the proposal.

15 RECOMMENDATION

That a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit be issued subject to the following conditions:

1. Prior to the commencement of any demolition or construction or carrying out of works on the land, the applicant must submit to the Responsible Authority three copies of plans drawn to scale generally in accordance with the plans received on 10 July 2012 but amended to show:

Page 45 of 48

20

a) A revised western elevation (front façade) with additional fenestration and articulation that enhances passive surveillance and improves presentation to Curzon Street.

b) Screening to the north facing living room window and terrace to Dwelling 3 in accordance with Clause 55.04-6 (Overlooking) of the Melbourne Planning Scheme to prevent overlooking into the balconies at 32-34 Little Curzon Street.

c) Details of the screening proposed to avoid internal views between the terraces for Dwelling 1 and 2.

d) The mechanical equipment plant of Dwelling 1 adequately separated from Dwelling 2 so that it does not impact upon the amenity of Dwelling 2.

e) A notation on the plans indicating lighting of pedestrian entrances to promote safe access.

f) Elevations detailing the provision of services including street numbering and mail boxes which are designed to complement the building and contribute to the ground floor presentation.

g) A section or diagram detailing the swing / opening of the tilt up doors to demonstrate that the doors do not extend over the footpath or road pavement of Little Curzon Street.

h) All garages to be a minimum length of 5.5m.

i) A 2.8m wide tilt garage door is proposed for Garage 1 and 2. Access to both of the garages is to be provided via a 5.3m wide apron, including the width of the Little Curzon Street carriageway (4.4m). It is noted that the AS/NZS 2890.1:2004 sets out a doorway width of 3.0m for an apron width of 5.6m. The design of these garages must be reviewed and modified, i.e. garage doors widened, and a swept path diagram prepared by a suitably qualified traffic engineer be provided to Council demonstrating that the garages can be adequately accessed by an 85th percentile vehicle.

j) All projections must be a minimum 750mm away from the Little Curzon Street curb.

These amended plans must be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and when approved shall be the endorsed plans of this permit.

2. The development as shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered or modified without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

3. A schedule and samples of all external materials, colours and finishes must be submitted to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority prior to the commencement of the development. The schedule must show the materials, colours and finishes of all external walls, roof, fascias, window frames, glazing types, doors, balustrades, fences and paving, (including car park surfacing), outbuildings and structures.

4. No architectural features and services other than those shown on the endorsed plans shall be permitted above the roof level unless otherwise approved in writing by the Responsible Authority.

5. Prior to the commencement of the development a suitably qualified professional must confirm to Council in writing that all of the recommendations of the environmental assessment report (24 pages plus

Page 46 of 48

21

appendices A, B, C & D) dated May 2011 prepared by Mr Robert Backhouse from Peter J Ramsay and Associates have been satisfactorily completed.

6. Prior to the commencement of construction, the owner of the land must enter into an agreement with the Responsible Authority pursuant to Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. The agreement must provide the following:

a) The removal of the windows/ openings on the boundary when the adjoining property is further developed in a manner which would affect these windows/openings.

The owner/permit applicant of the land subject of this permit must pay all of Council’s reasonable legal costs and expenses of this agreement, including preparation, execution and registration on title.

7. The owner of the subject land should construct a drainage system, incorporating water sensitive urban design, within the development and make provision to connect this system to the City of Melbourne’s stormwater drainage system in accordance with plans and specifications first approved by the Responsible Authority.

8. The Owner of the subject land should construct all necessary vehicle crossings and demolish all unnecessary vehicle crossings adjacent the subject land in accordance with plans and specifications first approved by the Responsible Authority.

9. The Owner of the subject land will not be permitted to alter the existing footpath/road levels in Curzon and Little Curzon Streets for the purpose of constructing new vehicle or pedestrian entrances without first obtaining the written approval of the Responsible Authority.

10. Requests for tree removal should be referred to the City of Melbourne’s Manager Urban Landscapes – Ian Shears (tel. 9658 8516).

11. The Owner of the subject land should reconstruct the footways in Curzon and Little Curzon Streets adjacent the subject land in accordance with plans and specifications first approved by the Responsible Authority.

12. All necessary approvals and permits are to be first obtained from the City of Melbourne and the works performed to the satisfaction of Manager - Engineering Services Branch.

13. This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:

the development is not started within two years of the date of this permit.

the development is not completed within four years of the date of this permit.

The Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing before the permit expires, or within three months afterwards.

Notes

Under the Resident Priority Parking Permit scheme, occupiers of the development approved by this permit are not eligible to obtain resident priority parking permits or visitor vouchers.

Page 47 of 48

22

16 DECISION

The Lord Mayor, Deputy Lord Mayor and Councillors were notified of the above recommendation on 14 September 2012.

The signature and date below confirms that the Lord Mayor, Deputy Lord Mayor and Councillors affirmed this recommendation as the Council’s decision.

Signature: Date affirmed:

Julian Larkins

Planning Officer

Page 48 of 48