Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Planning Committee Meeting
28 September 2010
Notice and Agenda of Meeting
to be held in the Council Chamber,
Magid Drive, Narre Warren
Commencing at 6:30 p.m.
Chairperson: Councillor Sam Aziz Members: Mayor - Councillor Lorraine Wreford Deputy Mayor - Councillor Shar Balmes Councillor Geoff Ablett Councillor Kevin Bradford Councillor Simon Curtis Councillor Beverley Hastie Councillor Lynette Keleher
Councillor Daniel Mulino Councillor Wayne Smith, JP Councillor Amanda Stapledon Chief Executive Officer: Mike Tyler
ORDER OF BUSINESS
Statement of Acknowledgement The City of Casey acknowledges that we are on the traditional land of the Bunurong and Wurundjeri People”.
1. Apologies 2. Confirmation of Minutes of:
Planning Committee Meeting held on 24 August 2010
3. Declaration by Councillors of any Interest or Conflict of Interest pursuant to
Sections 77A and 79 of the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act) in any items on the Notice Paper. (Note that Sections 77A(4) and 79(1)(a) of the Act require Councillors to disclose the nature of an Interest or a Conflict of Interest immediately before the relevant consideration or discussion).
4. Consideration of Officers’ Reports
Section 1 - Permit Applications
Section 2 - Appeals - Nil
Section 3 - Planning Scheme Amendments (Council) - Nil
Section 4 - Planning Scheme Amendments (State Government) - Nil
Section 5 - Council Planning Policies - Nil
Section 6 - State Government Matters - Nil
Section 7 - General Matters - Nil
Section 8 - In Camera Items - Nil
Planning Officers
Acting Director Planning and Development Services - Liam Hodgetts
Acting Manager Planning - Michael Pollard
Manager Strategic Development - Liam Hodgetts
Planning Committee
Permit Applications
Registration and Delegation of Application to Planning Officer
Preliminary assessment and Site Inspection
Further Information if required
Referral of application - internal/external
Advertising of Application
Assessment of Application
Notice of Decision Refusal Permit
Objections received No objections
Appeal to VCAT
VCAT decision
Refusal Permit Permit amended conditions
RefusalPermit
Planning Committee
I N D E X T O S E C T I O N 1 – P E R M I T A P P L I C A T I O N S
Item Page No.
File Ward (if
applicable)
Description Recommendation
1.1 5 13122.PPD01 Four Oaks Application No. P284/10 9 Grantchester Road, Narre Warren North Development of a Shed
Refusal to Grant a Planning Permit
1.2 17 3394.225.PPD01 Balla Balla Application No. P759/97B 220 Fisheries Road, Devon Meadows Amendment to Planning Permit P759/97(Amended) – Construction of Buildings and Works for the Purposes of Additions to an Existing Poultry Farm (Chicken Hatchery)
Notice of Decision to Amend a Planning Permit
1.3 28 52576.PPD01 Mayfield Application No. P219/10 10 Greaves Street, Cranbourne Increase Number of Medical Practitioners from One to Two with a Reduction in Carparking Requirements
Defer Further Consideration to Forthcoming Meeting
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.1
Page 5
File No.: 13122.PPD01 Application No.: P284/10 Location: 9 Grantchester Road, Narre Warren North (Lot:11 LP:64888) Proposal: Development of a Shed
Recommendation: That Council issue a Refusal to Grant a Planning Permit
Executive Summary
Date Lodged 6 May 2010 (27 statutory days elapsed) Existing Land Use Low density residential Surrounding Land Use
Low density residential
Applicant Mrs Zurijie Musoski Zone Low Density Residential Zone Overlays None Council Policies Casey Foothills Policy
Objections None Key issues Compatibility of large shed with residential area.
Impact of sled on visual amenity of area. The Proposal
It is proposed to develop the land for a shed. A full description of the proposal is included in Appendix 1. Details of the proposal are shown on the attached plans (refer to Plans 1- 6). Site and Surrounding Area
The subject site has an area of 5977m2 and is located on the south western side of Grantchester Road in Narre Warren North. Other features of the site are as follows: The site is irregularly shaped with a frontage of 56m, a northern side boundary of 121
metres, a southern side boundary of 117 metres and a rear, western boundary of 42 metres. There is a two-metre-wide easement on the western boundary. The site is heavily vegetated around the boundaries and in the front yard. The surrounding area is characterised by larger, low density residential lots with dense canopy planting. Details of the neighbourhood character are included in Appendix 2. Any relevant planning history is included in Appendix 3 for background information.
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.1
Page 6
Locality Plan
Subject site ▲ North Ward: Four Oaks Melway Ref: 108C8 Planning Controls
Why is a permit required?
Zone Low Density Residential Zone
Buildings and works including outbuildings with dimensions above 80m2 and 3.6m in height.
Overlay n/a n/a Particular Provisions
n/a n/a
A full assessment against the above provisions and the relevant sections of state and local policy is included in Appendix 4. Referrals
The application was referred to external agencies and Council departments for comments and advice. A complete list of responses and standard conditions is included in Appendix 5. Advertising
The application was required to be advertised. The advertising was satisfactorily completed and no objections were received.
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.1
Page 7
Conclusion
A recommendation for refusal is based on an assessment against the requirements of the Casey Planning Scheme. The key issues influencing the recommendation are as follows: The proposed shed does not meet the objectives of the Casey Foothills Policy due to its
substantial visual bulk, the shed being 6.4 metres in height with an area of 450m2. The size is inappropriate for a residential area. There are no sheds of this magnitude in the surrounding area and this proposal would set a
precedent. The proposed shed would have a negative visual impact on surrounding properties as it is
located in an elevated area and is only 1.5 metres from the boundary. Recommendation
That Council issue Refusal to Grant a Planning Permit (No. P284/10) for Development of a Shed at 9 Grantchester Road, Narre Warren North (Lot:11 LP:64888) on the following grounds:
1. The proposed shed does not meet the objectives of the following local planning policies:
Clause 21.04: The Foothills – The proposal is unsympathetic to the landscape values of the area.
Clause 22.30: Casey Foothills Policy – The proposal will compromise the long-term protection and enhancement of the Foothills.
2. The proposed shed would have a negative visual impact on the surrounding properties.
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.1
Page 8
Appendices: Application details, considerations and assessment
Appendix 1: Details of proposal
The proposal is for the development of a shed. Other information worth noting includes: The shed has a length of 30 metres and a width of 15 metres and a total area of 450m2. The shed will have a maximum height of 6.4 metres. The proposed shed will be constructed from dark green colourbond. The proposed shed will be used to store a collection of five classic cars, two motorbikes, a
home gym and large fishing boat. The proposed shed will replace two existing sheds. Access to the shed will be via an existing driveway on the northern boundary. The shed is setback 1.5 metres from the western and northern boundary. Appendix 2: Neighbourhood character
The surrounding area is predominated by large low density residential lots with areas of dense vegetation. To the north:
Is a similar sized lot comprising a single dwelling and tennis court with large trees along the boundary.
To the south:
Is a similar sized lot comprising a single dwelling and tennis court. To the east:
On the eastern side of Grantchester Road is a lot of similar size with a single dwelling. To the west:
Is a similar sized lot comprising a single dwelling. Appendix 3: Relevant planning history
The property has not been subject to any previous planning applications.
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.1
Page 9
Appendix 4: Assessment against relevant Planning Scheme controls
Planning Scheme reference Assessment
Local Planning Policy Framework Clause 21.04: The Foothills The strategic vision for the Foothills area includes: the long term protection and enhancement of the valued rural landscape and character, including significant hilltops, ridge lines and vegetation; the preservation of the identity of rural settlements and townships; and appropriate development in the bushfire prone area.
The proposed shed will be 450m2, which is larger than the existing house (318m2). In addition, the land slopes from the front to the back, which will serve to elevate the shed and enhance its prominence. Furthermore, the proposed setback to the rear (western) and side (northern) is only 1.5 metres, which could result in adverse visual impacts to neighbouring properties. Aerial photographs reveal that the hedges along the boundaries have already been removed and there is inappropriate screening of the development.
Clause 22.03: Casey Foothills Policy The objectives of this policy are to conserve the landscape and scenic qualities of the Foothills; to ensure that development occurs in a manner that is sympathetic to the landscape and scenic qualities of the Foothills and to ensure the long-term protection and enhancement of the Foothills for its valued rural landscape and character, significant visually exposed hilltops and ridge lines, and vegetation which provides the “green backdrop” to the City.
It is considered that the shed is of such magnitude and proportions that it would have a negative impact on the existing vistas and be out of character with the area.
Zone Clause 32.03: Low Density Residential Zone The shed’s size and height is inappropriate for
a residential area and its approval would set a negative precedent.
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.1
Page 10
Appendix 5: Referral comments
Type of referral Response
External statutory n/a Internal Department Parks & Reserves Department – Landscape Design Section
It is considered adequate for a condition to be added to any eventual planning permit which requires the footings of the shed to be sited no closer than 2.5 metres from both the western and northern boundaries. This should ensure sufficient protection of the root systems of these trees (placing the shed beyond driplines) and also allows for future growth.
In addition to this condition, it is also recommended to add a condition to ensure the screening already in place around the site (and other mature trees on site) is retained in perpetuity. The applicant then has the option to amend this condition in future if they wish to re-develop other portions of the site in time.
The applicant has indicated on revised plans that there are no hedging plants around the proposed shed and therefore it is advisable to put in a permit condition requiring the re-planting of the hedge with suitable native shrubs.
Engineering Department- Drainage Section
No objection subject to the standard drainage conditions being included on any permit.
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.1
Page 11
PLAN 1
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.1
Page 12
PLAN 2
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.1
Page 13
PLAN 3
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.1
Page 14
PLAN 4
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.1
Page 15
PLAN 5
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.1
Page 16
PLAN 6
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.2
Page 17
File No.: 3394.225.PPD01/2 Application No.: P759/97B Location: 220 Fisheries Road, Devon Meadows Proposal: Amendment to Planning Permit No. P759/97(Amended) (Construction
of Buildings and Works for the Purpose of Additions to an Existing Poultry Farm (Chicken Hatchery)) by amending Condition 17 to allow for (in part) vehicle movements between 6am and 9pm on days of extreme heat
Recommendation: That Council issue a Notice of Decision to Amend a Planning Permit
Executive Summary
Date Lodged 10 February 2010 Existing Land Use Chicken Hatchery Surrounding Land Use
Rural residential, agriculture, cropping
Applicant Dr Akram Yalda Baiada Poultry Pty Limited
Zone Green Wedge Zone (Schedule 5) Overlays Land Subject to Inundation Overlay Council Policies Intensive Animal Husbandry Policy
Poultry Farming Policy Objections 6 Key Issues Proximity of residents to the Hatchery
Noise and smells associated with existing operations Expansion of existing operations Amenity
The Proposal
It is proposed to amend Condition 17 of Planning Permit P759/97(Amended), which was issued on 17 April 1998 for the Construction of Buildings and Works for the Purpose of Additions to an Existing Poultry Farm (Chicken Hatchery) (refer Attachment 1). Condition 17 states:
“Deliveries or removal of supplies and material associated with the poultry farm by vehicle shall occur only between the hours of 7.00am and 7.00pm”.
It is proposed to amend the condition to read:
“Deliveries or removal of supplies and material associated with the poultry farm by vehicle shall occur only between the hours of 7.00am and 7.00pm except on days of extreme heat when vehicles movements associated with the removal of chicks from the hatchery may occur between 6.00am and 9.00pm.”
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.2
Page 18
Extreme heat is defined as days where the expected ambient temperature will be equal to or greater than 38 degrees Celsius”. The additional hours are required to enable the transportation of day-old chicks; commencing in the cooler early morning and the later evening to avoid extreme heat conditions. This is expected to reduce mortality rates of these chickens. A full description of the proposal is included in Appendix 1. Site and Surrounding Area
The subject site is rectangular in shape and located on the eastern side of Fisheries Road. Lying on an east/west axis, it has a frontage measuring 162 metres and side boundaries of approximately 993 metres (160,827m2). The land is generally flat near its front boundary; however, there is a gradual fall towards the rear boundary of approximately 5 metres overall across the site. The site has been developed as a chicken hatchery, with associated buildings, access, parking areas and two dams located midway along the length of the site. A somewhat isolated dwelling is located towards the rear of the site, with access off North Road. The site is sparsely vegetated, with established canopy tree plantings evident around the main hatchery building and carparks to the front setback. The surrounding area is rural residential and rural. Details of the surrounding area are included in Appendix 2. Any relevant planning history is included in Appendix 3 for background information.
Locality Plan
Subject site Objectors’ properties ▲ North Ward: Balla Balla Melway Ref: 138H12-G12
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.2
Page 19
Advertising
The application was required to be advertised. The advertising was satisfactorily completed and six objections were received (refer to Locality Plan for the location of objectors’ properties). The grounds of objection may be summarised as follows: Extra noise due to trucks and machinery. Extra traffic movements. Increased smells and odour. Adverse impact to residents and stock. Fisheries Road will need to be upgraded to cater for additional traffic. The hatchery has become an industrial use rather than an agricultural use. A response to these objections is provided in Appendix 4. Planning Controls
As assessment against relevant Planning Scheme controls is included in Appendix 5. The application is appropriate for approval as it meets the following tests for an amendment of a planning permit under Section 72 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987: The permit was not issued at the direction of the Tribunal. The permit was not issued under Division 6 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (e.g. with
involvement from the Minister). It does not change the effect of any condition required by a referral authority (unless their
consent is received). It does not affect the interests of a relevant referral authority (or is acceptable to them). It will not cause an increase in detriment to any person. It does not change the use for which a permit was issued (other than a minor change to the
description of the use). The changes to the proposal do not result in a breach of any Covenant applicable to the land. Conclusion
A recommendation for approval is based on an assessment against the requirements of the Casey Planning Scheme and consideration of all written objections. The key issues influencing the recommendation are as follows: Compliance with the Local Planning Policy Framework, which seeks to recognise the
importance of poultry farms to the rural economy and to the protection of the amenity of nearby residential properties.
The existence of other substantial rural activities adjoining the subject site (market garden and rural warehouse), which also generate traffic movement and noise.
Consideration of other objectors’ concerns. These concerns have been addressed elsewhere in this report.
The proposed amendment is considered to satisfy the relevant tests of Section 72 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.2
Page 20
Recommendation A. That Council issue a Notice of Decision to Amend a Planning Permit (No. P759/97B), to
amend Planning Permit P759/97(Amended) issued on 17 April 1998 by:
1. Amending Condition 17 of the permit to read as follows:
“Deliveries or removal of supplies and material associated with the poultry farm by vehicle shall occur only between the hours of 7.00am and 7.00pm, except on days of extreme heat when vehicles movements associated with the removal of chicks from the hatchery may occur between 6.00am and 9.00pm.
Extreme heat is defined as days where the expected ambient temperature will be equal to or greater than 38 degrees Celsius.”
B. That objectors be notified of Council’s decision.
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.2
Page 21
Appendices: Application details, considerations and assessment
Appendix 1: Details of proposal
The applicant originally sought the amendment to Condition 17 as follows: ‘Deliveries or despatch/removal of supplies, livestock and materials associated with poultry farm/hatchery by vehicle shall occur only between the hours of 7.00am and 7.00pm except on days of extreme heat when vehicle movements shall be between 5.00am and 9.00pm to permit compliance with the Land Transport of Poultry code of practice (copy attached). A day of extreme heat is defined herein as any day when the expected ambient temperature will be 30 degrees centigrade or greater at the hatchery or at the destination point. This applies to the expected temperature at the destination as well as some farms are 3 hours from the hatchery.’ When this application was registered at Council, the description of the amendment was described in correspondence both to the applicant and residents incorrectly as follows: ‘Amendment to Planning Permit P759/97 (Construction of Buildings and Works for the purpose of Additions to an Existing Poultry Farm (Chicken Hatchery) by permitting vehicle movements ‘at any time’ for the Southern entrance only.’ This description picked up a previous amendment request lodged in 2005. It is noted that following the receipt of a number of objections this application was subsequently withdrawn. This latest amendment request was advertised from 8 April 2010 with the abovementioned incorrect description. The amendment received six written objections. In a letter dated 14 May 2010, Council officers wrote to the applicant advising them of the receipt of objections and the previously incorrect description of the application. The letter also sought a stronger justification for the amendment. A written response was received from the applicant on 19 May 2010. This response is summarised as follows: The business cannot operate on very hot days due to Victorian animal welfare law. Chickens
are transported to central and northern Victoria where temperatures are warmer than those in Casey.
During unloading procedures at the farm, chickens will be exposed in unventilated boxes where temperatures reach between 38 to 45 degrees Celsius.
The number of trucks operating between 5am and 7am/4pm and 7pm during hots days will not be more than four vehicles.
The business is a substantial employer, directly or indirectly, including employees and contractors, with a hatching capacity of 1.2 million birds per week.
The business is located in an agricultural zone and it is expected that the business should operate legally within the requirements of animal welfare and curfew requirements.
Truck movements will be confined to the northern entrance and no changes are sought for the southern entrance.
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.2
Page 22
Following the receipt of this response from the applicant, Council officers wrote to the objectors to: Alert them to the correct description of the proposed amendment. Outline the response received from the applicant. Seek confirmation of their objections based on this new information. Three of the objectors provide additional written submissions confirming their original grounds. On the 9 August 2010, Council received a further written submission from a planning consultant firm (PSA Consulting) on behalf of the applicant (Baiada Poultry Pty Limited). The letter outlined further changes to Condition 17; more particularly, that the early start to be later (from 5.00am to 6.00am) and that the ambient temperature to be increased from 30 degrees to 38 degrees Celsius. The letter is further summarised as follows: Day-old chicks are typically transported from the site on Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and
Friday. Wednesday and Saturday deliveries are only required if birds are held overnight due to extreme temperatures. Trucks are only operational during the 10-20 minute loading period or when fully loaded. At other times the truck is off and ventilation is not available.
Truck movements associated with day-old chicks are typically six incoming and six outgoing over the course of the day and limited to the northern entrance.
The amendment application is sought to ensure the safety and welfare of poultry during transportation and unloading.
The CSIRO Model Code of Practice for the Welfare of Animals – Land Transport of Poultry 1998 identifies that poultry should not be transported on very hot days and that transport temperatures should ideally be between 10-30 degrees Celsius. For the purposes of this amendment, days of extreme heat are defined as those where the expected ambient temperature will meet or exceed 38 degrees Celsius. The Model Code also seeks that day-old chicks are transported as soon as possible after hatching. To achieve best practice with respect to animal welfare, the extended hours on days of extreme heat are required to meet both the temperature and timing requirements under the Code.
Analysis of local weather conditions indicate that in 2009 there were 13 days that exceeded 35 degrees C. and four days that exceeded 40 degrees C. Based on these observations, the normal hours of operation as permitted under Condition 17 of the permit (7am – 7pm) would only need to be exceeded approximately 17 times in any one year.
The drivers will be (and are currently) required to approach and manoeuvre on-site at a low speed to ensure compression/engine breaking will not be required.
Trucks will only be running during loading operations (10 – 20 minutes) and when mobile. Other noises, such as loud conversations and shouting, will not be permitted and will be
monitored by the site manager. Appendix 2: Surrounding area
To the north:
Market garden operations (190 Fisheries Road). A warehouse is located at 200 Fisheries Road, between two rural residences at 194 and 204 Fisheries Road.
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.2
Page 23
To the south:
Market garden/vegetable growing and rural residential. To the east:
Market garden operations.
To the west:
Market gardens and rural residential. Appendix 3: Relevant planning history
Planning Permit No. P759/97 was originally issued on 17 April 1998. This permit allowed for the construction of building and works for the purpose of additions to an existing poultry farm (chicken hatchery). This permit was subsequently amended on 7 December 1999 (No. P759/97(Amended)) and later corrected on 5 January 2004. Appendix 4: Response to objections
Objectors’ concerns Extra noise and traffic due to trucks and machinery It is considered that any potential noise as a result of the increased hours of operations can be mitigated by appropriate on-site management. To this end, the applicant has advised the following: Day-old chicks are typically transported from the site on Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and
Friday. Deliveries on Wednesdays and Saturday are only undertaken if chicks are held overnight due to extreme heat.
Movements would be restricted to the northern entrance and such movements would only occur on average 17 times a year (based on the historical number of extreme heat days recorded at the Cranbourne Botanical Gardens Weather Station).
The loading operations commonly take between 10 to 20 minutes and the trucks are only operational (on) when they are fully loaded and preparing to leave the site.
Truck movements are typically six incoming and six outgoing daily. In summary, the number of truck movements will only take up those movements currently undertaken on Wednesday and Saturday, so potentially, there will be no transportation activity on these days if this amendment is approved. It is noted that this business has operated in a rural area for many years and ambient rural and associated noises (such as from trucks and machinery) are expected. It is further noted that several of the objectors also undertake substantial rural activities on their land (market garden/vegetable growing and warehousing).
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.2
Page 24
Increased smells and odour It is noted on the existing planning file that the hatching process involves incubating eggs until they hatch and the transportation of day-old chicks to broiler farms. This process requires a clean environment to prevent the spread of disease amongst the chickens. No manure or other offensive material is present that could cause odour from these operations. The proposed amendment will not result in an extension to these operations and any transport-related smell or odour is expected to be negligible given the expected number of days that the exemption applies. The number of truck movements is not expected to be increased; rather, their movements will be spread over a longer daily period. Adverse impact to residents and stock Summer days will be subject to daylight savings, such that sunrise and sunset events will be earlier and later respectively. Little adverse impacts are expected. The hatchery has become an industrial use rather than an agricultural use The use currently serves an agricultural purpose and is located in an appropriate zone. The additional hours will only be utilised on specific summer days to facilitate the humane welfare of recently hatched chickens. Appendix 5: Assessment against relevant Planning Scheme controls
Planning Scheme reference Assessment
Local Planning Policy Framework Clause 22.10 - Intensive Animal Husbandry Policy
The proposed amendment does not seek an intensification of uses that would likely cause an increase in detriment. It seeks some flexibility in the timing of chicken delivery on days of extreme heat.
Clause 22.12 - Poultry Farming Policy The proposed amendment is unlikely to result in detriment to amenity given the range of existing activities in the area and that the changes sought will be restricted to days of extreme heat only.
Zone Clause 35.04 - Green Wedge Zone (Schedule 5)
The proposed amendment will not change the existing uses on the land and therefore will have limited impact to surrounding properties.
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.2
Page 25
ATTACHMENT 1
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.2
Page 26
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.2
Page 27
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.3
Page 28
File No.: 52576.PPD01 Application No.: P219/10 Location: 10 Greaves Street, Cranbourne (Lot 15 LP42316) Proposal: Increase Number Of Medical Practitioners From One To Two With A
Reduction In Carparking Requirements
Recommendation: Defer further consideration of application to forthcoming Planning Committee Meeting
Executive Summary
Date Lodged 14 April 2010 (120 statutory days elapsed) Existing land Use Medical Centre Surrounding land Use Residential and commercial Applicant: Love & Associates Zone Residential 1 Zone Overlays Development Plan Overlay (Schedule 8) Council policies Non-Residential Uses in Residential and Future Residential Areas Policy Objections 0 Key issues Traffic and parking Background
At its Planning Committee meeting of 24 August 2010, Council resolved:
That this item be deferred to the next Planning Committee meeting. A copy of the report to the Planning Committee of 24 August is included as Attachment 1. The consideration of this application was deferred from this Planning Committee meeting in order to allow further discussions between the applicant and officers regarding the reported parking and traffic concerns. A meeting between both parties was held on Friday, 3 September 2010 where an alternative parking layout (that would facilitate an extra car space being made available on the land, bringing the total to seven) was tabled by the applicant. Officers are currently assessing the revised layout. It is therefore recommended that further consideration of the application be deferred to enable this assessment to occur. Recommendation
That further consideration of Planning Application No. P219/10 for the Increase in Number Of Medical Practitioners From One To Two With A Reduction In Carparking Requirements at 10 Greaves Street, Cranbourne (Lot 15 LP42316) be deferred to a forthcoming Planning Committee meeting until amended plans have been assessed.
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.3
Page 29
ATTACHMENT 1
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.3
Page 30
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.3
Page 31
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.3
Page 32
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.3
Page 33
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.3
Page 34
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.3
Page 35
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.3
Page 36
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.3
Page 37
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.3
Page 38
Planning Committee
Section 1 – Permit Applications 28 September 2010
Item 1.3
Page 39
