Sie sind auf Seite 1von 213
AGENDA Ordinary Meeting of Council 6.00pm Wednesday 2 March 2016 *** Broadcast live on Phoenix

AGENDA Ordinary Meeting of Council

6.00pm Wednesday 2 March 2016

*** Broadcast live on Phoenix FM 106.7 ***

VENUE:

Reception Room, Bendigo Town Hall, Hargreaves Street, Bendigo

NEXT MEETING:

Wednesday 23 March 2016 Bendigo Town Hall

Copies of the City of Greater Bendigo Council’s Agendas & Minutes

can be obtained online at www.bendigo.vic.gov.au

Council Vision

Council Vision Greater Bendigo - Working together to be Australia's most liveable regional city. Council Values

Greater Bendigo - Working together to be Australia's most liveable regional city.

Council Values

Council wants the community to continue to have reason to be proud of the city and will do this through:











Transparency - Information about Council decisions is readily available and easily understood; Efficiency and effectiveness - Council provides services based on evidence of need and demonstrates continuous improvement in the delivery of services; Inclusion and consultation - Council uses a range of engagement strategies to ensure community members can understand and take part in discussion that informs the development of new strategies and actions; Clear decisive and consistent planning - In a rapidly growing municipality, Council undertakes to plan effectively for our long-term future; Respect for community priorities and needs - Council will advocate for improved services for community members and will consider community impact and feedback the decisions it makes.

for improved services for community members and will consider community impact and feedback the decisions it
for improved services for community members and will consider community impact and feedback the decisions it
for improved services for community members and will consider community impact and feedback the decisions it
for improved services for community members and will consider community impact and feedback the decisions it

Themes

1. Planning for Growth

2. Presentation and Vibrancy

3. Productivity

4. Sustainability

5. Leadership and Good Governance

ORDINARY MEETING

WEDNESDAY 2 MARCH 2016

ORDER OF BUSINESS:

ITEM

PRECIS

PAGE

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY

5

PRAYER

5

PRESENT

5

APOLOGIES

5

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS

5

PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

5

RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS

6

CR WERAGODA'S REPORT

6

DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

7

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

8

1.

PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS

9

2.

PLANNING FOR GROWTH

10

2.1

42 Milroy Street, Bendigo - Construct Second Dwelling on

10

Lot, Subdivide Land Into 2 Lots, Construct Front Fence, Construction of Vehicle Crossover and Retrospective Construction of Carport and Partial Front Fence

a

Demolition

2.2

66 Kirkwood Road, Eaglehawk - Construction of Second Dwelling on a Lot (Two Storey) and Removal of Vegetation

25

2.3

575 Sedgwick Road, Sedgwick - Use and Development of

39

Store (Machinery) and Use Land for Agriculture (Cropping)

a

2.4

1 Arlington Court, Maiden Gully - Subdivide Land into 2

51

Lots

2.5

Intensive Animal Industries Advisory Committee

58

Discussion Paper - Submission by the City of Greater

Bendigo

2.6

Greater Bendigo Residential Strategy and Adoption of Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme Amendment C215

69

3.

PRESENTATION AND VIBRANCY

93

3.1

Greater Bendigo Municipal Early Years Plan (2015-2018)

93

3.2

Proposed Changes in the Outdoor Dining System

102

4.

PRODUCTIVITY

106

5.

SUSTAINABILITY

107

5.1

Proposed Kerbside Organics Service for Urban Residents of Bendigo and Marong

107

5.2

Potential Disposal of Lot 1 Raglan Place West, Axedale

128

6.

LEADERSHIP AND GOOD GOVERNANCE

136

6.1

Council Plan 2015-2016: Second Quarter Report, December 2015

136

6.2

Record of Assemblies

183

6.3

Contracts Awarded Under Delegation

190

6.4

Election Period Policy

192

6.5

Finance Report as at 31 December 2015 and Mid-Year Budget Review 2015-2016

198

6.6

Proposed Citizens Jury as the First Step to the Council Plan for the New Council

206

7.

URGENT BUSINESS

210

8.

NOTICES OF MOTION

211

8.1

NOTICE OF MOTION: Hopley Recycling

211

9.

COUNCILLORS' REPORTS

213

10.

MAYOR'S REPORT

213

11.

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S REPORT

213

12.

CONFIDENTIAL (SECTION 89) REPORTS

213

DARREN FUZZARD ACTING CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY

PRAYER

PRESENT

APOLOGIES

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS

That Standing Orders be suspended to allow the conduct of Public Question Time.

PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

Public Question Time Guidelines

Public Question Time Purpose Council has provided the opportunity for members of the public to ask questions of broad interest to Council and the community. Matters relating to routine Council works should be taken up with Council’s Customer Service Officers through its Customer Request System.

No questions relating to planning matters on the Agenda will be accepted. By the time planning matters have reached the council agenda, they have been through an extensive process as required by the Planning and Environment Act. In addition and in most instances, mediation has been held between the parties involved. Throughout the process there are many opportunities for people to ask questions.

Public Question Time Where, When And Who The public question time is held at every Ordinary Meeting of the Greater Bendigo City Council. Meetings of Council commence at 6.00pm in the Reception Room, Bendigo Town Hall, Hargreaves Street, Bendigo.

The public question time is held at the start of the meeting as close as practical to 6:00pm. A maximum of 30 minutes has been provided for registered and unregistered questions.

Residents are encouraged to lodge questions in advance so that a more complete response can be provided.

Questions will be put to the Council by the individual posing the question; the question will be answered by the Mayor or Chief Executive Officer, or where appropriate, Councillors or Council Officers.

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Acceptance of Questions Each person asking a question of Council is required to stand, state their name and address the Mayor. Public Question Time is not an opportunity for the making of statements or other comments. Council’s Meeting Procedure Local Law does not allow for other questions or comments during the remainder of the meeting.

1. An individual may only ask one question per meeting, a follow-up question may be permitted at the discretion of the Mayor.

2. In the event that the same or similar written question is raised by more than one person, an answer may be given as a combined response.

3. In the event that time does not permit all questions registered to be answered, questions will be answered in writing or referred to the next meeting if appropriate.

4. The Mayor and or CEO have the right to decline registration on basis of:



Legal proceedings;



More appropriately addressed by other means;



Vague or lacking in substance, irrelevant, frivolous, insulting offensive,



improper, defamatory or demeaning; Answer likely to compromise his / her position;



Confidential, commercial-in-confidence.

RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS

That Standing Orders be resumed.

CR WERAGODA'S REPORT

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Pursuant to Sections 77, 78 and 79 of the Local Government Act 1989 (as amended) direct and indirect conflict of interest must be declared prior to debate on specific items within the agenda; or in writing to the Chief Executive Officer before the meeting. Declaration of indirect interests must also include the classification of the interest (in circumstances where a Councillor has made a Declaration in writing, the classification of the interest must still be declared at the meeting), i.e.

(a)

direct financial interest

(b)

indirect interest by close association

(c)

indirect interest that is an indirect financial interest

(d)

indirect interest because of conflicting duties

(e)

indirect interest because of receipt of an applicable gift

(f)

indirect interest as a consequence of becoming an interested party

(g)

indirect interest as a result of impact on residential amenity

(h)

conflicting personal interest

A Councillor who has declared a conflict of interest, must leave the meeting and remain outside the room while the matter is being considered, or any vote is taken.

Councillors are also encouraged to declare circumstances where there may be a perceived conflict of interest.

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Wednesday 10 February 2016.

The following items were considered at the Ordinary Council meeting held on Wednesday 10 February 2016 at 6:00pm.



Petition: Empire Road and Lancashire Road, Long Gully



Lot A Lynch Lane and CA 6Z Taig Road, Axedale - 9 Lot Subdivision and Removal



of Native Vegetation in Road Reserve Progress Report: Independent Review Implementation



Record of Assemblies



Appointment of An Acting Chief Executive Officer



Confidential Section 89 Report - Contractual Matter

The unconfirmed minutes have also been posted on the City of Greater Bendigo website pending confirmation at this meeting.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on Wednesday 10 February 2016 as circulated, be taken as read and confirmed, with the inclusion of the following mandatory condition associated with the Planning for Growth Report No. 2.1 (Lot A Lynch Lane and CA 6Z Taig Road, Axedale - 9 Lot Subdivision and Removal of Native Vegetation in Road Reserve) as outlined in page 30 of these Minutes:

9. COUNTRY FIRE AUTHORITY MANDATORY CONDITION (SUBDIVISION) Before the statement of compliance is issued under the Subdivision Act 1988

the owner must enter into an agreement with the responsible authority under Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. The agreement must:

(a)

State that it has been prepared for the purpose of an exemption from a planning permit under Clause 44.06-1 of the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme;

(b)

Incorporate the plan prepared in accordance with Clause 52.47-2.4 of this planning scheme and approved under this permit; and

(c)

State that if a dwelling is constructed on the land without a planning permit

that the bushfire mitigation measures set out in the plan incorporated into the agreement must be implemented and maintained to the satisfaction of the responsible authority on a continuing basis.

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

1.

PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS

Nil.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

2.

PLANNING FOR GROWTH

2.1

42 MILROY STREET, BENDIGO - CONSTRUCT SECOND DWELLING ON A LOT, SUBDIVIDE LAND INTO 2 LOTS, CONSTRUCT FRONT FENCE, CONSTRUCTION OF VEHICLE CROSSOVER AND RETROSPECTIVE CONSTRUCTION OF CARPORT AND PARTIAL FRONT FENCE DEMOLITION

Document Information

Author

Lachlan Forsyth, Statutory Planner

Responsible

Prue Mansfield, Director Planning & Development

Director

Summary/Purpose

Application details: Construct second dwelling on a lot, subdivide land into 2 lots, construct front fence, construction of vehicle crossover and retrospective construction of carport and partial front fence demolition

Application No:

DS/653/2015

Applicant:

Penno Drafting & Design

Land:

42 Milroy Street, BENDIGO

Zoning:

General Residential Zone

Overlays:

Heritage Overlay 841

No. of objections:

Six (6)

Consultation

19

November 2015

attended by Councillors Cox and

meeting:

Williams.

 

Key considerations:

A second on-site meeting was attended by the assessing officer, the applicant and the objectors. Amended plans were submitted and re-advertised following this meeting. No objections have been withdrawn following the submission of amended plans.

Whether the proposal accords with Planning Scheme policy relating to medium density infill housing;  Whether the proposal represents an appropriate outcome with reference to Neighbourhood Character Policy and ResCode.  Whether the proposal is an acceptable heritage outcome.



Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Conclusion: Planning Scheme policy and the General Residential Zone supports construction of a second dwelling and subdivision of the land. The development is also consistent with the majority of ResCode standards.

However, the design response is non-compliant with neighbourhood character and heritage policy, and the Heritage Overlay. Whilst the site is suitable for development - subject to an appropriate design, on balance the proposed design response is not acceptable.

Policy Context

City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2013 2017 (2015-2016 Update)

Planning for Growth Housing options provide broader choice in order to meet current and future community expectations and needs.

Productivity Council fosters business and industry growth.

Sustainability The built and natural qualities that make Greater Bendigo an attractive and appealing place are valued and conserved.







Report

Subject Site and Surrounds

The subject site is a rectangular shaped parcel of land located on the north-eastern side

of Milroy Street, approximately 60 metres north-west of Moran Street.

The lot has a frontage width of 24.21 metres, a depth of 29.20 metres and a total area of 705m². The topography of the land sees a gradual slope away from the street, with a change in level from front to rear of approximately 1.0m.

A single storey weatherboard dwelling is located on the site. City records indicate this

building was constructed circa 1922. Vehicle access is provided by a concrete driveway along the north-western side of the lot, which links to a newly constructed carport.

The south-eastern part of the site has been fenced off form the existing dwelling. This section has also been cleared and the front fence has been removed. This part of the site now presents to the street as a small, independent vacant parcel of land, even though it is part of the parent title (refer to street photograph below).

The broader area is residential in nature, with most of the dwelling stock being detached, single storey, clad in weatherboard or brick and featuring pitched roof forms. Several original miners' cottages are found in the area, with few examples of double storey buildings evident.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

The clear built form anomaly in the area is the adjoining building to the south-east which features high, solid masonry walls built to the lot boundary and a flat roof.

masonry walls built to the lot boundary and a flat roof. Figure 1 : Location map

Figure 1: Location map showing subject site. Objectors’ properties marked with a star. Note: Objection from 9 Bannerman Street outside of map area.

star. Note: Objection from 9 Bannerman Street outside of map area. Figure 2 : Aerial photograph

Figure 2: Aerial photograph of subject site.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

for Growth - Reports Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016 Figure 3 : Streetscape photograph. Note:

Figure 3: Streetscape photograph. Note: The tree in the background is sited on neighbouring land.

Proposal

The applicant seeks approval to construct a second dwelling and a front fence, and to subdivide the land into two lots. Permission is also sought to retrospectively approve the partial removal of the front fence and for construction of the carport.

Dwelling

The proposed dwelling is a double storey building which features a single garage, living areas, laundry, bathroom and kitchen at lower level and three bedrooms with two bathrooms at the upper level.

The design includes a 15 degree hipped roof at upper level and an 18 degree gable fronted roof at ground level with the gable sited over the garage and entry door.

Materials include weatherboard at upper level, brick at ground level and rendered brickwork on the façade at ground floor.

Subdivision

Lot 1 (containing existing dwelling) = 466m². Lot 2 (containing the new dwelling) = 239m².

Front fence

Construction of a 1.5m high capped timber picket fence is proposed for Lot 2.

Vehicle Crossover

Construction of a 3.0 metre wide concrete vehicle crossover and driveway.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

for Growth - Reports Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016 Figure 4: Proposed site plan Figure

Figure 4: Proposed site plan

Meeting - 02 March 2016 Figure 4: Proposed site plan Figure 5: Streetscape elevation. Note: Existing

Figure 5: Streetscape elevation. Note: Existing fence not shown in front of existing dwelling.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

for Growth - Reports Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016 Figure 6 : 3D diagrams of

Figure 6: 3D diagrams of proposed dwelling.

Planning Controls - Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme

The following clauses are relevant in the consideration of this proposal:

State Planning Policy Framework Integrated decision making (cl. 10.04) Regional development (cl. 11.05) Urban environment (cl. 15.01) Sustainable development (cl. 15.02) Heritage (cl 15.03) Residential development (cl. 16.01) Movement networks (cl. 18.02) Development infrastructure (cl. 19.03)

















Municipal Strategic Statement Municipal profile (cl. 21.01) Key issues and influences (cl. 21.02) Vision - strategic framework (cl. 21.03)







Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016



Strategic directions (cl. 21.04)



Settlement (cl. 21.05)



Housing (cl. 21.06)



Environment - Heritage (cl. 21.08)



Reference documents (cl. 21.10)

Local Planning Policies Heritage Policy 22.06 Central Bendigo Residential Character Precinct 5 (cl. 22.11)





Other Provisions General Residential Zone (cl 32.08) Heritage Overlay Schedule 1 (cl. 43.01) Car Parking (cl. 52.06) ResCode Two or more dwellings on a lot (cl. 55) Decision guidelines (cl 65) Referral and notice provisions (cl. 66)













Permit Triggers







Clause 32.08-4 General Residential Zone: Construction of two or more dwellings on a lot. Clause 32.08-2 General Residential Zone: Subdivision. Clause 43.01-1 Heritage Overlay:

of two or more dwellings on a lot. Clause 32.08-2 General Residential Zone: Subdivision. Clause 43.01-1
of two or more dwellings on a lot. Clause 32.08-2 General Residential Zone: Subdivision. Clause 43.01-1

o

Subdivision.

o

Construction of a building.

o

Construct or carry out works.

o

Remove and construct a fence.

o

Construct a vehicle cross over.

Consultation/Communication

Referrals

The following internal departments have been consulted on the proposal:

Department

Comments

 

Heritage Advisor

Concerns raised over the tall, narrow form of the building and the prominence of the garage door. Initial concerns have been partly addressed by recessing the upper level further away from the street. Proposal not supported in current form.

Traffic & Design

No objection subject to standard driveway/cross over construction conditions

Drainage

No

objection

subject to

drainage

infrastructure

and

plans conditions.

 

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Public Notification

The application was advertised by displaying a notice board on the site and by posting letters to adjoining and nearby owners and occupiers. A statutory declaration was provided as evidence that the notice was given in accordance with the requirements of the Act.

As a result of advertising, six objections were received, with the grounds of objection being:

(a)

Dwelling design not in keeping with the character of the area (specifically the height, bulk, site coverage, narrow form, excavation of the site and front setback at ground and first floor level).

(b)

Dwelling design not appropriate for the heritage precinct.

(c)

Small lot size.

(d)

Lack of landscaping.

(e)

Overshadowing to neighbours.

(f)

Visual dominance of garage.

(g)

Concerns over tandem car parking bay length and driveway gradient.

The objections are discussed below.

Planning Assessment

Is the proposal consistent with the Planning Scheme policy regarding housing and infill development?

The following is a brief outline and discussion on the relevant Planning Scheme policies.

State Policies

Clause 11.05 (Regional development) seeks to promote the sustainable growth and development of regional Victoria.

Clause 15.01 (Urban environment) seeks to create urban environments that are safe, functional and provide good quality environs with a sense of place and cultural identity.

Clause 15.03 (Heritage Conservation) has the objective of ensuring the conservation of places of heritage significance. A key strategy is to encourage appropriate development that respects places with identified heritage values and creates a worthy legacy for future generations.

Clause 16.01 (Residential development) seeks to provide for housing diversity, affordability and to ensure the efficient provision of supporting infrastructure.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Comment

Infill development of this style is broadly supported by State policy at Clause 11 (Settlement) and 16 (Housing) and the Loddon Mallee South Regional Growth Plan (Cl.

11.12).

The proposed development will allow for urban consolidation which will utilise existing services and infrastructure. The proposal would also assist in implementing urban containment policy aims found with the MSS Housing Policy (Cl. 21.06), as well as the residential diversification aims of the zone.

The urban context of the site is suitable for further development, particularly due to the existing service infrastructure, good proximity to recreational public open space (approximately 300m from Fenton Street Reserve) and its short commuting/walking distance of the Bendigo CBD.

Whilst provision of housing is generally supported by the above policies, the importance of design and heritage protection is also emphasised under Clause 15, local policy and the zone.

In this case the proposal is found to be inappropriate with regards to heritage and neighbourhood character, due to the narrow, vertically oriented building form which is out of keeping with surrounding buildings. Detailed discussion on heritage and neighbourhood character is found below.

Local Policies

Clause 21.04, 21.05 and Clause 21.06-1 sets out the policies which aim to provide sufficient housing to support a forecasted increase in population for Bendigo of nearly 43,000 individuals by 2030. The policy and associated Residential Development Strategy have been prepared to guide future residential development in the urban areas of Bendigo. Relative to this application the Strategy promotes an increase in density on land which is suitable for infill development.

Clause 22.06 Heritage Policy builds on the MSS objective in Clause 21.08-2 to protect and enhance the municipality’s built heritage for future generations. The policy also states that protecting cultural and natural heritage assets is important in maintaining the municipality’s character and sense of place.

Council’s Heritage Policy has the following objective which is most relevant to the subject site and application:

To ensure that new land uses and developments are sympathetic with the appearance and character of heritage places.



Comment

In consideration of the Bendigo Residential Development Strategy 2004, the proposed development would allow for consolidation of residential land in an established urban area which is close to numerous services and infrastructure.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

A balance must be struck however, between accommodating residential growth and respecting neighbourhood character and areas of heritage significance. The major question in this case is whether the proposed infill development and subdivision is acceptable, with regards to heritage conservation and neighbourhood character.

It has been assessed that the proposal is an inappropriate heritage and neighbourhood character outcome. Again this is discussed in depth later in this report.

Is the development acceptable with regard to neighbourhood character policy?

The State and Local Planning Policy Framework, as well as the MSS and the purpose of the General Residential Zone encourage development that is respectful of neighbourhood character. This is also a requirement of ResCode.

The site is located within Central Bendigo Residential Character Precinct 5, which is described under Clause 22.11 as follows:

This precinct has a consistency created by the regular front and side setback to the dwellings. In some areas dwellings are sited at an angle to the street. The horizontal emphasis of the dwelling form adds to an open feel to the streetscape due to the long, low elevations of the buildings in relation to their height. Occasional tall trees in the low level gardens and low or open style fencing and consistent side setbacks provide a sense of spaciousness to the streetscape.

The statement of desired future character seeks to ensure that: the openness of the streetscapes and spaciousness of the dwelling settings will be maintained.

The desired future character is to be achieved by the objectives and design responses outlined and discussed in the table below:

Objectives

 

Response

To maintain and strengthen the garden settings of the dwellings.

Prepare a landscape plan to accompany all applications for new dwellings, showing the incorporation of substantial vegetation. Retain large, established trees and provide for the planting of new trees wherever possible.

Comment:

 

No vegetation is required to be removed to facilitate the development.

The small size and narrow width of the proposed lot, as well as the new dwelling’s footprint and driveway location leaves little opportunity for landscaping opportunities.

A landscape plan has been provided which allows for one small tree to be planted in the front yard of the new dwelling. This is by no means a substantial amount of vegetation, however; it would partly add to the garden character of the street and would help soften the appearance of the new building.

To

maintain

the

consistency,

where

The front setback should be not less than

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Objectives

Response

 

present, of building front setbacks.

the average setback of the adjoining two dwellings.

Comment:

The dwelling’s front wall would sit approximately half way between the existing dwelling’s façade and the adjoining property’s front wall (which is built to the footpath). The upper level will also be further recessed from the street to be in line with the front wall of the existing dwelling.

This design response would generally respect the consistency of front setbacks within Milroy Street and would comply with ResCode requirements.

To reflect the existing rhythm of dwelling spacing.

Buildings should be setback between 1 and 3 metres from one side boundary, based on the predominant pattern in the streetscape.

Comment:

The ground level side wall (NW) of the new dwelling is to be set back approximately 2.8 metres from the existing dwelling’s wall. The upper level would be recessed a further 480mm which would allow for a clearance of more than 3.0 metres between the buildings.

The SE ground level side wall is proposed to be constructed to the side boundary. This is seen to be generally acceptable as the neighbouring dwelling has a visually dominant solid wall built across the entire front boundary.

To ensure that buildings and extensions do not dominate the streetscape.

Respect the predominant building height in the street and nearby properties. The height of the dwelling at the front of the dwelling should match the typical single storey wall height. Use low pitched roof forms.

Comment:

It

is recognised that the proposed dwelling is double storey, where most surrounding

buildings are single storey. It is also recognised that this is a major concern of

objectors.

The single storey nature and horizontal emphasis of dwellings in the surrounds forms

a

recognisable character. Whilst double storey dwellings are not opposed in theory,

the narrow vertical form of the proposed double storey dwelling would sit oddly within the streetscape.

Efforts have been made to setback the upper level of the building further from the street, to articulate the form of the building. Whilst this is an improvement, the building will still be out of keeping with the form and appearance of surrounding buildings. This will have an adverse impact on the character of the area.

It

should be noted that the proposed lot does not exist, and is currently part of the

existing dwelling’s yard.

To use building materials and finishes

In

streetscapes,

where

weatherboard

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Objectives

 

Response

that complement the dominant pattern within the streetscape.

predominates, use timber or other non- masonry cladding materials where possible, and render, bag or paint brick surfaces.

Comment:

 

The use of weatherboards and corrugated roofing materials would generally complement the dominant pattern within the streetscape and the wider area. If a permit were to be approved, face brickwork to the façade would be a more appropriate cladding option as it would pick up on common building materials found in the surrounds.

To

maintain

the

openness

of

the

Provide low or open style front fencing up to a maximum of 1.2 metres. Front fences should not exceed 1.2 metres other than in exceptional circumstances.

streetscape.

 

Comment:

 

A 1.5m high fence would be generally acceptable due to the existing dwelling’s high fence and the adjoining dwelling’s masonry walls built to the boundary. The proposed site cut and the dwelling’s siting below natural ground level would result in a fence height which screened much of the dwelling’s ground floor. This would be an unsatisfactory urban design outcome.

The proposal is found to be inconsistent with key aspects of the Central Bendigo Residential Character Policy for Precinct 5. Whilst many design objectives of Clause 22.11 have been satisfied, the proposed narrow lot size and the vertical orientation of the dwelling would be generally out of keeping with the existing neighbourhood character of the area.

Does the proposal comply with ResCode?

Clause 55 sets out the relevant standards and objectives to assess internal and external amenity provision/protection, neighbourhood character/design detail and building siting considerations (i.e. site coverage, overshadowing, wall heights, boundary setbacks, etc.).

Compliance with the objectives of Clause 55 (ResCode) is a mandatory requirement for developments of two or more dwellings on General Residential Zone land.

The proposed development has been assessed as being compliant with all Clause 55 standards and objectives with regard to building siting and internal and external amenity considerations.

Compliance with Clause 55.02-1 Neighbourhood character objective and Clause 55.06-1 Design detail objective has not been achieved, as discussed in the table above.

Due to this non-compliance, ResCode is not met, and no permit should be issued.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Will the proposal result in an acceptable heritage outcome?

The purposes of Clause 43.01 Heritage Overlay, relevant to this proposal are:

- 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, and;

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

The decision guidelines of the Heritage Overlay reflect this, with the most relevant being the following:

- Whether the location, bulk, form or appearance of the proposed building will adversely affect the significance of the heritage place.

- Whether the location, bulk, form and appearance of the proposed building is in keeping with the character and appearance of adjacent buildings and the heritage place.

- Whether the proposed subdivision will adversely affect the significance of the heritage place.

The property at 42 Milroy Street is covered by HO841 ‘Bannerman Street, Long Gully & Bendigo, which forms part of the ‘Bannerman Street Precinct’.

The existing dwelling is identified as being contributory to the Bannerman Street Precinct (Ironbark Heritage Study 2010).

Comment

The City’s Heritage Advisor has raised concerns over the form of the building, with the following comments provided in the referral response:

"The proposed townhouse will sit forward of the dwellings on the north west side, and will have a tall narrow form. The location and form are not in keeping with the character and appearance of adjacent buildings in the heritage precinct, and are likely to have an adverse effect on the significance of the heritage precinct."

To address this, the applicant took the advice of the Heritage Advisor to setback the upper level further from the street, and amended the plans accordingly. Whilst this has improved the design, the tall and narrow form remains, as does the new dwelling’s height difference over surrounding dwellings.

No concerns have been raised with the subdivision, particularly as it leaves a reasonable curtilage around the existing dwelling. The narrow width of the proposed lot would require a sensitive design if the proposal were to be respectful of the heritage precinct however.

Generally speaking, the roof forms and cladding materials are found to be acceptable for the heritage precinct. The garage door is also generally acceptable in the context of the adjoining modern building (subject to careful selection of materials and design detail).

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

In consideration of the purpose and decision guidelines of the Heritage Overlay, Council’s Heritage Policy and the Ironbark Heritage Study citations, the proposed development is found to be inappropriate for the following reason:

 The narrow width of the new lot and tall, vertically oriented form of the proposed building are not in keeping with the form and siting of buildings within the precinct. This has potential to have an adverse impact on the significance and character of the heritage place.

Both the assessing officer and the City’s Heritage advisor do not support the proposal in its current form.

Objectors’ concerns not already addressed:



Concerns over tandem car parking bay length and driveway gradient.

The development complies with the applicable requirements of Clause 52.06 (Car Parking), including the driveway widths, and car parking dimensions (including the minimum car parking bay length requirements for tandem car parking spaces). It is noted that the gradient requirements of Clause 52.06-8 do not apply to single property driveways.



Overshadowing to neighbours

Shadowing diagrams have been submitted which demonstrate compliance with ResCode standard B21 (Overshadowing).

Conclusion

In conclusion, although the site is in a good location in terms of meeting infill development objectives, the application should be refused on the basis that the design response represents an unacceptable outcome with regard to Council’s Heritage Policy, the Heritage Overlay, Neighbourhood Character Policy and ResCode.

Options

Council, acting as the responsible authority for administering the Planning Scheme, may resolve to: grant a permit, grant a permit with conditions, or refuse to grant a permit.

Attachments



Objections.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to section 61 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987), Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to refuse to grant a permit for the construction of a second dwelling on a lot, subdivide land into 2 lots, construct front fence, construction of vehicle cross over and retrospective construction of car port and partial front fence demolition at 42 Milroy Street, BENDIGO on the following grounds:

1. The tall and narrow form of the building would adversely impact the significance and appearance of the heritage place, contrary to clauses 15.03, 21.08, 22.06 and 43.01 of the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme.

2. The proposed subdivision and development does not comply with Clause 22.11 (Central Bendigo Residential Character Policy) and is inconsistent with the purposes of Clause 32.08 (General Residential Zone) which call for new development to respect neighbourhood character and to implement neighbourhood character policy.

3. The proposal does not comply with ResCode (Clauses 55.02-1 and 55.06-1) due to the design response’s inconsistency with existing and preferred neighbourhood character.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

2.2 66 KIRKWOOD ROAD, EAGLEHAWK - CONSTRUCTION OF SECOND DWELLING ON A LOT (TWO STOREY) AND REMOVAL OF VEGETATION

Document Information

Author

Lachlan Forsyth, Statutory Planner

Responsible

Prue Mansfield, Director Planning & Development

Director

Summary/Purpose

Application details:

Construction of second dwelling on a lot (two storey) and removal of vegetation.

Application No:

DR/690/2015

Applicant:

Penno Drafting & Design

Land:

66 Kirkwood Road, EAGLEHAWK

Zoning:

General Residential Zone (GRZ)

Overlays:

Environmental Significance Overlay 1 (ESO1)

No. of objections:

Six (6)

Consultation

25 January 2016 - attended by Cr Williams, Cr Ruffell and Cr

meeting:

Cox. No resolution of issues.

Key considerations:

Whether the proposal is consistent with Planning Scheme policy regarding housing, design and infill development;  Whether the proposal is consistent with neighbourhood character policy and the provisions of the General Residential Zone;  Compliance with ResCode.



Conclusion: Planning Scheme policy and the General Residential Zone supports construction of a second dwelling on the lot. The design is found to be appropriate with regards to neighbourhood character and the proposal is compliant with ResCode. Overall the development is an appropriate and orderly planning outcome.

Policy Context

City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2013 2017 (2015-2016 Update)

Planning for Growth

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Housing options provide broader choice in order to meet current and future community expectations and needs.

Productivity Council fosters business and industry growth.

Sustainability The built and natural qualities that make Greater Bendigo an attractive and appealing place are valued and conserved.







Report

Subject Site and Surrounds

The subject site is a semi-regular shaped parcel of land located on the southern side of Kirkwood Road, Eaglehawk to the north of Lake Neangar.

The lot has a frontage width of 18 metres, an average depth of ~60 metres and a total area of 948m². The topography of the land sees a gradual slope away from the street, with a change in level from front to rear of approximately 1.5m.

A single storey Victorian-era weatherboard dwelling is located at the front of the site. Vehicle access is provided by a gravel driveway along the south-western side of the lot. A small colorbond shed is also located in the rear yard.

Noteworthy landscaping includes one large gum tree in the rear yard, a conifer in the front yard and numerous shrubs/bushes.

The broader area is residential in nature, with most of the dwelling stock being single storey, clad in weatherboard or brick and featuring pitched roofs. There are examples of double storey and flat roof buildings in the immediate surrounds.

Land adjoining to the west and south is a small Crown land park which contains a Scout hall. The adjoining residential land to the east is vacant. The rear of the site is visible from Simpsons Road, although it is set back 40+m from the street.

Simpsons Road, although it is set back 40+m from the street. Figure 1 : Location map

Figure 1: Location map showing subject site. Objectorsproperties marked with a star.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Proposal

The applicant seeks approval to construct a second dwelling on the lot and to remove vegetation in the rear section of the lot.

Dwelling

The second dwelling is a double storey, contemporary “cuboid” design which is oriented to face south (looking towards Lake Neangar).

The dwelling features four bedrooms and a double garage. Living rooms and bathrooms are located at both ground and first floor level, as well as a south facing balcony.

A range of cladding materials are proposed including:

- Ground level: concrete panels, face brickwork, rendered brickwork and stacked stone.

- Upper level: horizontal lightweight “stria” cladding and “matrix panel” cladding.

Vehicle access is to be provided via the existing driveway which runs along the south west boundary of the lot. A new crossover, driveway and car parking area is proposed to be installed on the north eastern boundary of the lot to service the existing dwelling. Both driveways will be concreted.

Vegetation Removal

Vegetation removal includes one mature gum tree, two small trees/shrubs and bushes on the rear boundary.

one mature gum tree, two small trees/shrubs and bushes on the rear boundary. Figure 2: Proposed

Figure 2: Proposed site layout plan.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

for Growth - Reports Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016 Figure 3: Side elevation of existing

Figure 3: Side elevation of existing and proposed dwelling at rear.

Side elevation of existing and proposed dwelling at rear. Figure 4: 3D diagrams of proposed dwelling.

Figure 4: 3D diagrams of proposed dwelling.

Planning Controls - Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme

The following clauses are relevant in the consideration of this proposal:

State Planning Policy Framework Integrated decision making (cl. 10.04) Regional development (cl. 11.05) Urban environment (cl. 15.01) Sustainable development (cl. 15.02) Residential development (cl. 16.01) Movement networks (cl. 18.02) Development infrastructure (cl. 19.03)















Municipal Strategic Statement Municipal profile (cl. 21.01) Key issues and influences (cl. 21.02) Vision - strategic framework (cl. 21.03) Strategic directions (cl. 21.04) Settlement (cl. 21.05) Housing (cl. 21.06)













Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016



Reference documents (cl. 21.10)

Local Planning Policies Eaglehawk Residential Character Precinct 2 (cl. 22.13)



Other Provisions General Residential Zone (cl 32.08) Environmental Significance Overlay Schedule 1 (cl. 42.01) Car Parking (cl. 52.06) ResCode Two or more dwellings on a lot (cl. 55) Decision guidelines (cl 65)











Permit Triggers



Clause 32.08-4 General Residential Zone: Construction of two or more dwellings on a lot.



Clause

42.01

Environmental

Significance

Overlay

Schedule

1:

Removal

of

vegetation.

Consultation/Communication

Referrals

The following authorities and internal departments have been consulted on the proposal:

Referral Authority / Department

Comment

Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (s.55)

No objection to the removal of vegetation, no conditions relating to vegetation removal recommended.

North

Central

Catchment

No objection, no conditions.

Management Authority (s.52)

Traffic & Design

 

No objection subject to standard driveway/cross over construction conditions and garage door width modifications.

Drainage

No objection subject to drainage conditions.

Public Notification

The application was advertised by erecting a notice board on the site and by posting letters to adjoining and nearby owners and occupiers. A statutory declaration was provided as evidence that the notice was given in accordance with the requirements of the Act.

As a result of advertising, six objections were received, with the grounds of objection being:

a) Building will obstruct views to the lake.

b) Not enough car parking provided.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

c) Building will have negative impacts on the neighbourhood character of the area.

d) Concerns with the character of potential future occupants (concerns the building will be used for public housing).

e) Tree removal concerns.

f) Traffic concerns.

g) Development will have negative impact on property values.

h) Inconsistencies with application documents.

i) Potential noise impacts for new occupants from park and Scout hall.

j) Concerns that the building will remain unfinished.

k) Concern with the characterof the property developer.

The objections are discussed below.

Planning Assessment

Is the proposal consistent with the General Residential Zone and relevant Planning Scheme policy regarding housing and infill development?

The subject land is zoned General Residential and is situated within the Bendigo Urban Growth Boundary. The property is situated in an established residential area of Eaglehawk which is served by existing civil infrastructure, local services, the Eaglehawk town centre and public recreation facilities.

The most relevant purposes of the General Residential Zone include:

 To implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies. To encourage development that respects the neighbourhood character of the area.





To

implement

neighbourhood

character

policy

and

adopted

neighbourhood



character guidelines. To provide a diversity of housing types and moderate housing growth in locations offering good access to services and transport.

The proposal is found to be consistent with these purposes, as detailed below.

The construction of a second dwelling will allow for an increase in dwelling stock which will provide for the growing population of Greater Bendigo at a small scale. In doing so, the land will be consolidated and used to its full potential.

This will assist in implementing urban containment policy aims found with the MSS Housing Policy (Cl. 21.06), which seeks to accommodate an additional 3,164 dwellings, housing 6,000 new residents by 2030.

Infill development of this style is also broadly supported by state policy at Clause 11 (Settlement) and 16 (Housing), Council’s Residential Growth Strategy, and the Loddon Mallee South Regional Growth Plan (Cl. 11.12).

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

The proposal will also allow for residential diversification that will utilise the existing services and facilities local to the area. It is noted that the subject site is located within close proximity to recreational public open space (adjoining Crown land, Lake Neangar 60m south and Canterbury Park 350m west) and is within short walking/commuting distance of the Eaglehawk town centre. The property is also within walking distance of public transport options (buses and trains) operating out of Eaglehawk.

Development within established urban areas is also beneficial from a sustainability viewpoint as all civil and service infrastructure exists, and can be taken advantage of (electricity, water, sewerage, roads, telecoms, etc.).

The design of the dwelling is also considered to be satisfactory and will be suitably integrated within the surrounding established neighbourhood. A more thorough discussion on design and neighbourhood character is detailed below.

Overall the proposal is considered to be consistent with the relevant State and Local Planning Policy Framework objectives and the purposes and decision guidelines of the zone.

Is the development acceptable with regard to neighbourhood character policy?

The State and Local Planning Policy Framework, as well as the MSS and the purpose of the General Residential Zone encourage development that is respectful of neighbourhood character. This is also a requirement of ResCode.

The site is located within Eaglehawk Residential Character Precinct 4, which is described under Clause 22.13 as follows:

This precinct contains housing mainly built since the 1950s that constitute the ‘outer suburbs' of Eaglehawk. Consistency of setbacks within street scapes is important, as are roof shapes, because they can be dominant in streetscapes and provide a consistent theme. The horizontal emphasis of the dwelling form is also important, resulting from the long, low elevations of the buildings in relation to their height. Mature vegetation in private yards and public reserves often provides a backdrop.

The statement of desired future character seeks to ensure that the consistency of siting and horizontality of the dwellings will be maintained.

The desired future character is to be achieved by the objectives and design responses outlined and discussed in the table below:

Objectives

Response

To maintain and strengthen the garden settings of the dwellings.

Prepare a landscape plan to accompany all applications for new dwellings. Retain large, established trees and provide for the planting of new trees wherever possible.

Comment:

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Objectives

Response

One large tree is proposed to be removed from the rear of the site to facilitate the development.

Whilst this tree does contribute partly to the character of the area, its removal will not significantly alter the character or appearance of the neighbourhood. The existing trees within the adjoining reserve and neighbouring lot and the retention of the mature conifer within the front yard ensure the garden character of the area is maintained.

Further to this, a landscape plan has been submitted which includes planting around the new dwelling.

A

further condition will require replanting of a suitably chosen and sited canopy tree

to

replace the removed tree.

To minimise site disturbance and impact of the building on the landscape.

Buildings should be designed to follow the contours of the site or step down the site.

Comment:

 

The dwelling has been designed to follow the contours of the site as much as practicable. Minimal site cuts are proposed which allows for minimal site disturbance, particularly when viewed from the street.

To reflect the consistency, where present, of building front setbacks.

The front setback should be not less than the average setback of the adjoining two dwellings.

Comment:

 

The new dwelling is to be sited at the rear of the existing dwelling. This will ensure that building setbacks within the Kirkwood Road streetscape are maintained. Further

to

this, the new building is setback 40+m from Simpson Road. Given the large street

setbacks, the building will not be visually prominent from either road.

To reflect the existing rhythm of dwelling spacing.

Buildings should be setback between 1 and 3 metres from both side boundaries, based on the predominant pattern in the streetscape.

Comment:

 

Again it should be noted that the new dwelling is sited at the rear of the existing dwelling. Further to this, no dwelling abuts the site on either side due to the Crown land to the west and a vacant lot to the east. As a result, the rhythm of building spacing within the streetscape is maintained.

To ensure that buildings and extensions do not dominate the streetscape.

Respect the predominant building height in the street and nearby properties. Use low pitched roof forms.

Comment:

 

It

is recognised that the proposed dwelling is double storey, where most surrounding

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Objectives

 

Response

buildings are single storey. The design response is seen to be appropriate, however, for the following reasons:

- The dwelling is set behind the existing building which will partly screen it from street view.

- The fall of the land away from the street helps reduce the overall height of the building when viewed from Kirkwood Road.

- The upper level of the building will be set back approximately 15m beyond the existing dwelling, and approximately 37 metres from the front boundary. This siting will ensure the building is not visually prominent when viewed from the street. Rather than being prominent within the streetscape, the building will form a common backdrop in an established suburban area.

- The building is setback more than 40 metres from Simpsons Road.

- The building’s upper level has been visually articulated by use of varied materials and physical wall articulation.

- The staggered built form of the dwelling (upper level set back further from the street than the lower level) allows a graduation in height between the existing and new dwelling.

- Similar built forms exist in Kirkwood Road, particularly the double storey square façade and flat roof of 71A Kirkwood Road.

To use building materials and finishes which complement the dominant pattern within the streetscape.

In streetscapes where weatherboard predominates, render, bag or paint brick surfaces.

Comment:

 

The most visually prominent walls of the building from the street will have brick cladding on the SW ground floor and horizontal lightweight board cladding at upper level NW and SW elevations. These materials are commonly found in the precinct and are acceptable.

The other materials (rendered brick, matrix cladding and concrete) will also respectfully sit within the neighbourhood.

To

maintain

the

openness

of

the

Provide low or open style front fences.

streetscape.

 

Comment:

 

No front fencing is proposed. This will maintain the open character of Kirkwood Road.

With regards to neighbourhood character the proposal is considered to be appropriate.

Does the proposal comply with ResCode?

Compliance with the objectives of Clause 55 (ResCode) is a mandatory requirement for developments of two or more dwellings on General Residential Zone land.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

To achieve automatic compliance with an objective, a number of standards are detailed within Clause 55. It is noted that compliance with the standard is not mandatory, and that alternate options can be considered where particular siting or design contexts warrant a variation.

In this case, the majority of standards are complied with, and thus the objectives are also met. There are two standards which the proposal does not meet, but are considered to meet the objective as outlined below:



Cl. 55.04-1 Side and rear setbacks objective “To ensure that the height and setback of a building from a boundary respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and limits the impact on the amenity of dwellings”

Comment:

To meet the standard, the side walls of the dwelling would have to be setback the following distances:

- North east elevation: 2.4m rather than the 1.64m proposed.

- South west elevation: 2.5m rather than the 1.5m proposed.

The objective (outlined above) is considered to be met as both of these walls abut vacant land and as such, will have no adverse amenity impacts. The design response is also seen to be an acceptable neighbourhood character outcome, as detailed earlier in this report.



Cl. 55.04-2 Walls on boundaries objective “The ensure that the location, length and height of a wall on a boundary respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and limits the impact on the amenity of dwellings”

Comment:

The new dwelling’s garage wall is the only wall to be built on a boundary. The length and setback of this wall meets the requirements of the standard, however the height does not as the average height exceeds 3.2m by approximately 600mm.

This wall abuts the small neighbourhood park (Crown land). Due to this context, the wall will have no adverse impact on residential amenity as it does not abut a dwelling. The height variation is also seen to be minor, and will not have an unreasonable impact on neighbourhood character.

Removal of vegetation within the Environmental Significance Overlay 1

The purpose of the ESO1 is to protect waterways and their riparian zones. A permit is required to remove any vegetation from an area covered by an ESO1.

In this case the waterway in question is a drainage depression running along the rear of the site towards Lake Neangar.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

The advice of the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning has been sought (determining authority). The Department has offered no objection and has recommended that no offset conditions are necessary in this circumstance. With regard to the purpose and decision guidelines of the overlay, the City agrees that the proposed removal of vegetation does not pose unreasonable environmental risk to the waterway, and should be allowed.

Objectors' concerns not already addressed:

 Building will obstruct views to the lake.

The question of whether impacts on views are a valid ground has been tested numerous times at VCAT. VCAT has found (and the City agrees) that potential impacts on views as a result of developments is rarely a relevant planning consideration.

 Not enough car parking provided.

Both dwellings been provided with two car spaces (with at least one covered car space provided). This meets the Planning Scheme requirements for car parking provision (Cl. 52.06).

 Concerns with the “character” of potential future occupants (concerns the building will be used for public housing).

The character and nature of potential occupants is not regulated by the planning system and is not a valid ground of objection.

 Traffic concerns.

The new dwelling and its vehicle accessway have been designed to allow vehicles to enter and exit the site in a forwards direction. The City’s engineers have assessed this arrangement (and the new driveway/carport for the existing house) and have raised no concern with the safety or functionality of the layout. Adequate sight lines for pedestrian and vehicle entry/exit are also provided at the site frontage.

 Development will have negative impact on property values.

Potential property devaluation is not a relevant planning consideration. There is a long standing position by VCAT and the City that other than in exceptional cases, and where clear evidence can be presented, loss in property value will not be entertained as a valid ground of objection.

 Potential noise impacts for new occupants from park and Scout hall.

The adjoining park and Scout hall is not considered to pose significant risk to the amenity of future residents with respect to noise. It is commonly held that public parks are a necessary and complimentary land use/asset in residential areas.

 Concerns that the building will remain unfinished.

There is no evidence to suggest the building will not be completed.

 Concern with the “character” of the property developer.

This has no planning relevance and should be given no weight whatsoever.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Conclusion

For the reasons discussed above, the application is found to comply with the Planning Scheme and a permit should be granted.

The proposal is compliant with ResCode and relevant housing and neighbourhood character policy found within the planning scheme.

The proposal represents an orderly and sustainable land use and development outcome which will utilise existing, serviced residential land.

Options

Council, acting as the responsible authority for administering the Planning Scheme, may resolve to: grant a permit, grant a permit with conditions, or refuse to grant a permit.

Attachments



Objections

RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to section 61 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987), Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit for construction of second dwelling on a lot (two storey) and removal of vegetation at 66 Kirkwood Road, EAGLEHAWK 3556 subject to the following conditions:

1. MODIFIED PLAN REQUIRED

Before the use and/or development start(s), amended plans to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and 2 copies must be provided. The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans submitted with the application but modified to show:

(a)

Existing dwelling’s side window which adjoins the driveway to be removed and replaced with window which has a sill height of no less than 1.7m above finished floor level.

(b)

Amended landscape plan in accordance with Condition 3 (additional canopy tree).

(c)

Driveways to be concrete or similar.

(d)

Provision of carport for existing dwelling (set behind the front wall of the existing building).

(e)

Proposed dwelling’s garage door widened to 5.40 metres.

2. NO LAYOUT ALTERATION The use and development permitted by this permit as shown on the endorsed plans and/or described in the endorsed documents must not be altered or modified (for any reason) except with the prior written consent of the responsible authority.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

3. LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIRED Before the development starts, a landscape plan to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible

authority. When approved, the plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plan must be drawn to scale with dimensions and two copies must be provided. The plan must show:

(a)

A survey (including botanical names) of all existing vegetation to be retained and/or removed.

(b)

Details of surface finishes of pathways and driveways.

(c)

Planting schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs and ground covers, including botanical names, common names, pot sizes, sizes at maturity, and quantities of each plant.

(d)

Provision of one (1) appropriately selected canopy tree (minimum two metres tall when planted and 8+ metres tall when mature, preferably native species) in the rear yard of the new dwelling.

4. COMPLETIOJN OF LANDSCAPING Before the occupation of the development starts or by such later date as is approved by the responsible authority in writing, the landscaping works shown on the endorsed plans must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

5. LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE The landscaping shown on the endorsed plans must be maintained to the satisfaction of the responsible authority, including that any dead, diseased or damaged plants are to be replaced.

6. GENERAL EXTERIOR TREATMENT The exterior treatment of the buildings permitted by this permit including all exterior decoration, materials, finishes and colours must be to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. The exterior treatment of the building(s) must be maintained to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

7. REFRIGERATION AND AIR-CONDITIONING EQUIPMENT Any equipment required for refrigeration, air-conditioning, heating and the like must be suitably insulated for the purpose of reducing noise emissions and must be located so as to not be highly visible from the street to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

8. CONSTRUCTION PHASE All activities associated with the construction of the development permitted by this permit must be carried out to the satisfaction of the responsible authority and all care must be taken to minimise the effect of such activities on the amenity of the locality.

9. STORMWATER DRAINAGE Prior to commencement of the development, drainage plans, including computations and longitudinal sections, must be provided to and approved by the Responsible Authority for the lot in the development to the responsible authority’s nominated point of discharge. Once approved, the plans will be

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

endorsed as part of the planning permit and must not be further altered without the prior written consent of the responsible authority.

10. GENERAL DRAINAGE The proposed building(s) and works must be drained to the satisfaction of the City of Greater Bendigo as the responsible drainage authority.

11. VEHICLE CROSSINGS Vehicular access to the subject land from any roadway or service lane (and vice versa) must be by way of a vehicle crossing(s) constructed at right angles to the road, to suit the proposed driveway(s) and vehicles that will use the crossing. A Works within Road Reserves permit must be obtained from the City of Greater Bendigo Engineering & Public Space Unit prior to any work commencing in the road reserve.

12. SEALED CAR PARKING AND DRIVEWAY AREAS Areas set aside for the parking of vehicles together with the aisles and drives must be properly formed to such levels that they can be utilised in accordance with the endorsed plan and must be drained and provided with an impervious all weather seal coat. The areas must be constructed, drained and maintained in a continuously useable condition to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

13. USE OF CAR PARKING AND DRIVEWAY AREAS Areas set aside for the parking and movement of vehicles as shown on the endorsed plan must be made available for such use and must not be used for any other purpose.

14. NO MUD ON ROADS In the event of mud, crushed rock or other debris being carried onto public roads or footpaths from the subject land, appropriate measures must be implemented to minimise the problem to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

15. EXPIRY This permit will expire if the development permitted by this permit is not completed within 2 years from the date hereof. The time within which the development must be completed may be extended, on written request to the responsible authority, before or within 6 months after the expiry of this permit where the development has not yet started or 12 months where the development has commenced.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

2.3 575 SEDGWICK ROAD, SEDGWICK - USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF A STORE (MACHINERY) AND USE LAND FOR AGRICULTURE (CROPPING)

Document Information

Author

Nick Butler, Student Planner

Responsible

Prue Mansfield, Director Planning & Development

Director

Summary/Purpose

Application details:

Use and development of a store (machinery) and use land for agriculture (cropping)

Application No:

DG/772/2015

Applicant:

W G Aylett

Land:

575 Sedgwick Road, SEDGWICK

Zoning:

Rural Living Zone

Overlays:

Environmental Significance Overlay 1

No. of objections:

5

Consultation

A

consultation meeting was held on 17 December 2015 attended

meeting:

by one Ward Councillor, two planning officers, applicant (and

family member) and 5 objectors.

Key considerations:



Whether the proposed uses are appropriate for the site;



What impact the proposed store will have on the landscape;



Proposed measures to minimise potential impacts.



The objections received from residents.

Conclusion: The site is an undersized Rural Living zoned property with a primary frontage to Sedgwick Road. Whilst the site is suitable for an agricultural use, the design and location of the store fails to address the landscape values of the area and is detrimental to the character of the area.

It is recommended Council refuse the application.

Policy Context

City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2013 2017 (2015-2016 Update)

Planning for Growth

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Housing options provide broader choice in order to meet current and future community expectations and needs.

Productivity Council fosters business and industry growth.

Sustainability The built and natural qualities that make Greater Bendigo an attractive and appealing place are valued and conserved.







Background Information

The original proposal was for the construction of an outbuilding (for machinery). The applicant was advised that the use was classified as a ‘store’ which required planning approval. It also became apparent that the land would also be used for agriculture (crop raising).

The application was amended on 2 November 2015 to include in the permit description ‘Use and development of a store (machinery) and use of land for agriculture (cropping).

The minimum lot size in the rural living zone varies across the Municipality but the lot size required in this area is 8 hectares. The average lot size in the immediate vicinity is 7. hectares with lots ranging from 0.5 to 14 hectares. This site is 3.66ha and these smaller lots are historical and would be prohibited under the current Planning Scheme controls.

Report

Subject Site and Surrounds

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

for Growth - Reports Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016 Figure 1 : Location map showing

Figure 1: Location map showing subject site. Objectors' properties marked with a star.

The site is a 3.66ha irregular rectangular shaped allotment located east of Sedgwick Road and north of Boyd Lane. The site is zoned Rural Living and an Environmental Significance Overlay (Schedule 1 Watercourse Protection) applies to part of the south western section of the site. The site has an approximate frontage to Sedgwick Road of 372m and at its widest point is 156m wide. A dam is located adjacent to the Sedgwick Road frontage towards the south of the site.

A single storey cream brick dwelling and associated outbuildings and landscaped areas are present along the Sedgwick Road frontage approximately 110m from the northern- most point of the property. The dwelling is setback approximately 40m from the road frontage.

With the exception of a remnant patch of native vegetation in the south-west corner of the property, and a mix of native and exotic trees surrounding the dwelling, the site is mostly cleared of vegetation, featuring a number of scattered trees around the site.

The predominant use in the area immediately surrounding the subject land is rural living, often with a low scale ‘hobby farm’ use subsidiary to the dwelling. This includes a number of outbuildings. Opposite Boyd Lane is the Sedgwick Hall (including playground and tennis courts) and Sedgwick Country Fire Authority brigade. Adjoining the site to the east is the Sedgwick conservation reserve.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Proposal

The applicant proposes to use and develop the land for a machinery store, and to use the land for agriculture (crop raising). Plans detailing the site layout in terms of agricultural use have not yet been supplied, however the applicant has proposed to spray irrigate Lucerne as well as fruit and vegetables.

The proposed store would accommodate tractors and other machinery associated with both the agricultural use and to store produce from the land.

The proposed store would be setback 25m from Sedgwick Road and located 30m to the north of the dwelling. It will be 42.5m in length, 16m wide and have a total height of 7.91m. The shed will cover 680 square metres. The roof will have a 20 degree pitch with a 5m eave height. The applicant proposes to place 40 kilowatts of solar panels on the north facing roof panel.

On the south side, the store is proposed to have 7 bays comprising of a combination of electric and manual roller doors. See the site and elevation plans below:

manual roller doors. See the site and elevation plans below: Figure 2: Site plan showing location

Figure 2: Site plan showing location of proposed store.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

for Growth - Reports Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016 Figure 3: Elevation plans of the

Figure 3: Elevation plans of the proposed store.

The proponent has submitted a draft landscaping plan, however the plan does not enter into specific detail of what is proposed with the exception of some planting surrounding the proposed store.

Planning Controls - Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme

The subject land is zoned Rural Living. Under the zoning provisions, a permit is required to:









Use land for agriculture (crop raising). Use land for a store (equipment, goods, or motor vehicles used in conjunction with the occupation of a resident of a dwelling on the lot). Construct a building associated with an agricultural use. Construct a building within 100m of a waterway.

on the lot). Construct a building associated with an agricultural use. Construct a building within 100m
on the lot). Construct a building associated with an agricultural use. Construct a building within 100m
on the lot). Construct a building associated with an agricultural use. Construct a building within 100m

The following clauses are relevant in the consideration of this proposal:

State Planning Policy Framework









Loddon Mallee South regional growth (cl 11.12) Significant environments and landscapes (cl 12.04) Agriculture (cl 14.01) Sustainable development (cl 15.02)

(cl 11.12) Significant environments and landscapes (cl 12.04) Agriculture (cl 14.01) Sustainable development (cl 15.02)
(cl 11.12) Significant environments and landscapes (cl 12.04) Agriculture (cl 14.01) Sustainable development (cl 15.02)
(cl 11.12) Significant environments and landscapes (cl 12.04) Agriculture (cl 14.01) Sustainable development (cl 15.02)

Municipal Strategic Statement





Key Issues and Influences (cl 21.02) Economic Development (cl 21.07)

Key Issues and Influences (cl 21.02) Economic Development (cl 21.07)

Other Provisions



Rural Living Zone (cl 35.03)

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Consultation/Communication

Referrals

The following internal department has been consulted on the proposal:

Referral

Comment

Environmental Health

No objection subject to standard notation.

Public Notification

The application was advertised by way of notice on the site and letters to adjoining and nearby owners and occupiers.

As a result of advertising, 5 objections were received, with the grounds of objection being:

 Size and siting of proposed store.

 Eyesore to passing traffic and impact on landscape due to visual bulk.

 Out of character for the area.

 Storage of hay is a fire hazard.

 Impact on land values.



The objections are discussed below.

Potential future uses of store.

Planning Assessment

Is the site suitable for the proposed uses?

The site is zoned rural living. The zone primarily serves to provide for a residential use, but also allowing agricultural land uses that do not affect the amenity of the neighbouring residential properties. There is evidence to suggest that at some stage an agricultural use - be it low-scale grazing or cropping - may have been subsidiary to the use of land for the existing dwelling. Further, State and local policy (clauses 11.12-6, 14.01-2, 21.02- 4) encourage the retention and use of agricultural land, the ongoing investment in high value agriculture and assisting the development of innovative approaches to sustainable practices. One strategy relevant to the proposed use is listed in clause 11.12-6, which states:

“Facilitate new opportunities in agriculture that respond to the potential impacts of climate change.”

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Although minimal details of the agricultural use have been supplied, the applicant has explained their proposed practices, utilising solar panels, moisture sensitive drip-feeding and ‘hanging gardens’, ultimately aiming to innovate and set a precedent for future operations worldwide. It is considered that the proposed agricultural use has the potential to be innovative and acceptable in close proximity to rural residential properties (subject to further information being provided), and could be consistent with State and local policy. Furthermore, the objectors’ concerns only related to the proposed store and not the agricultural use.

Similarly, many other lots in the Sedgwick area have outbuildings used to store machinery assisting maintenance of the property or in conjunction of the occupation. Such a use in the Rural Living Zone requires planning permission, however, this is not to say it is unreasonable to store machinery in a rural residential setting.

The objectors have a number of concerns about the proposed store. These include:









Storage of hay a fire hazard. Size of store not justified for size of property. Potential future uses if land is sold. Siting of proposed store.

hazard. Size of store not justified for size of property. Potential future uses if land is
hazard. Size of store not justified for size of property. Potential future uses if land is
hazard. Size of store not justified for size of property. Potential future uses if land is

The applicant operates a similar cropping operation on a leased parcel of farming land approximately 10 kilometres from the subject site. The proposed store would not only house machinery and produce from the agricultural use on the subject land, but also machinery and produce from the external farm.

The storage of hay being a fire hazard is not so much a planning issue but building and maintenance. If the use of the proposed store were to change to industry (as raised by objectors), rural or otherwise, the new use would likely be either prohibited or require planning approval.

In summary, it is considered that both an agricultural use and store of machinery could be appropriate to the site.

What impact will the design and siting of the proposed store have on the landscape?

State Planning Policy (clause 12.04-2) and zoning provisions aim to mitigate poorly thought out development in order to protect the landscape. State policy has an objective to:

“Protect landscapes and significant open spaces that contribute to character, identity and sustainable environments.”

As above, the zone serves a purpose to:

Protect and enhance the natural resources, biodiversity and landscape and heritage values of the area.”

Notably, in the decision guidelines of the zone (clause 35.03-5) are environment, and design and siting issues, listed below as relevant:

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016





The impact of siting, design, height, bulk, colours and materials to be used, on the natural environment, major roads, vistas and water features and the measures to be undertaken to minimize any adverse impacts. The impact on the character and appearance of the area or features of architectural, historic or scientific significance or of natural scenic beauty or importance.

of the area or features of architectural, historic or scientific significance or of natural scenic beauty

Several objectors in their submissions made reference to ‘the Sedgwick valley’ and the aesthetics and landscape values of the area. The proposed store is located just 25m from the property boundary abutting Sedgwick Road, the main thoroughfare in the area.

abutting Sedgwick Road, the main thoroughfare in the area. Figure 4: View from Sedgwick Road to

Figure 4: View from Sedgwick Road to location of proposed store looking east.

The visual bulk of a structure that is 42m wide and 8m high, only partially screened by some smaller vegetation in the road reserve will be significant. Given its size and siting just 25m from the main road the shed would be in a high-profile location. Driving south along Sedgwick Road, the proposed structure will be visible from over 400m away.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

for Growth - Reports Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016 Figure 5: View from Sedgwick Road

Figure 5: View from Sedgwick Road from North to location of proposed store. Note The shipping container is approximately one quarter of the bulk of the proposed store.

Some objectors offered potential solutions to relocate the proposed store to a lower profile location and it is possible that a different location may be considered in a different light. However, the applicant is not prepared to consider alternative locations or a reduction in size of the shed. A structure such as the one proposed in such a location has a considerable impact on the landscape.

What measures are proposed to minimize the impact on the landscape?

As an alternative to refusing the application it is prudent to consider whether any mitigation measures could be applied to make the development acceptable.

The applicant has submitted a landscape plan (see figure 6) which identifies 4 key areas, those being around the proposed store, around the dwelling, west of the dam and the northern-most pocket of the site. At present, details are lacking for the area west of the dam and the fruit and vegetable plot to the North of the proposed store.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

for Growth - Reports Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016 Figure 6: Draft Landscape Plan Of

Figure 6: Draft Landscape Plan

Of these areas, the fruit and vegetable plot and area around the proposed store are particularly relevant in acting as a ‘screen’ for the proposed store. Although the fruit and vegetable area lacks detail, the area around the proposed store goes into some detail about what is to be planted.

store goes into some detail about what is to be planted. Figure 7: Draft Landscape Plan

Figure 7: Draft Landscape Plan around proposed store (highlighted area edited due to poor scanning).

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

The plan makes reference to planting trees with a mature height of at least 5m, three rows deep. A 30m section is proposed to be planted along the Sedgwick Road end of the proposed store, a 50m section to the north of the store and a 45m section along the eastern end of the store. This will result in the planting of approximately 100 Pittosporum angustifolium (Weeping Pottosporum), 20 Santalum acuminatum (Sweet Quandong) and 100 Callistemon viminalis (Dawson River Weeper).

Whilst the proposed planting will somewhat minimise the impact the proposed structure will have on the landscape, the trees will take many years to mature and even then it is unclear the extent that this vegetation will screen the store as no concept elevation plans or view lines have been provided. The report mentions that the trees will have a minimum mature height of 5m, however, the store is proposed to be 7.912m high. The north facing roof panel will be covered in solar. Considering that vegetation higher than eave height minimises the gain from the solar panels, it is unlikely that the mature height

of the trees will screen the roof and solar panels from vantage points, including Sedgwick

Road to the North of the site.

The applicant has not selected a colour for the proposed store, offering that the objectors choose the colour in an effort to minimise their concerns. Regardless of colour, the proposed store is of excessive bulk in the proposed location.

Whilst the landscape plan has some merit, it is considered that the lack of detail in the report/plans, the size of the proposed store and the high profile location in close proximity to the main road servicing the area have not satisfactorily considered the landscape values of the area and other design and siting issues.

Conclusion

The site lends itself to the proposed uses, however a range of issues have not been addressed by the design and siting of the proposed machinery store. Even with the proposed landscaping, the visual bulk of the proposed store is excessive for the siting.

A building of such scale is not appropriate for this Rural Living zoned site and other

design responses such as staggered roof heights and smaller stores were discussed with the applicant. Unfortunately the changes were not agreed to and could not be required by way of conditions on a permit as the applicant seeks approval for the plans as submitted.

Ultimately, the proposal fails to satisfactorily consider and address the landscape values

of the area, the impact of the proposed structure on nearby major roads and the visual

amenity of nearby residences which the rural living zone seeks to protect.

Options

Council, acting as the responsible authority for administering the Planning Scheme, may resolve to: grant a permit, grant a permit with conditions, or refuse to grant a permit.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Attachments





Objections Draft Landscape Plan

Objections Draft Landscape Plan

RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to section 61 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987), Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to Refuse to Grant a Permit for the Use and Development of a Store (Machinery) and Use of Land for Agriculture at 575 Sedgwick Road, SEDGWICK 3551, for the following reason:

1. The visual bulk and siting of the proposed store would unreasonably impact on the landscape values of the area, contrary to clauses 12.04-2 and 35.03 of the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

2.4 1 ARLINGTON COURT, MAIDEN GULLY - SUBDIVIDE LAND INTO 2 LOTS

Document Information

Author

Liz Commadeur, Subdivision Planner

Responsible

Prue Mansfield, Director Planning & Development

Director

Summary/Purpose

Application details:

Subdivide land into 2 lots

Application No:

DS/712/2015

Applicant:

Hadden Farren Land Surveyors Pty Ltd

Land:

1 Arlington Court, MAIDEN GULLY

Zoning:

General Residential Zone

Overlays:

Design and Development Overlay 10 Environmental Significance Overlay 2

No. of objections:

2

Consultation

26 November 2015

meeting:

Key considerations:

Central to an assessment of the application is the small size of Lot 1 relative to the character of the neighbourhood where large allotments predominate.

Conclusion: It is considered that the proposed subdivision does not satisfy the requirement of the Design and Development Plan 10 which requires that subdivisions respect neighbourhood character.

Policy Context

City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2013 2017 (2015-2016 Update)

Planning for Growth Housing options provide broader choice in order to meet current and future community expectations and needs.



Productivity Council fosters business and industry growth.



Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Sustainability The built and natural qualities that make Greater Bendigo an attractive and appealing place are valued and conserved.



Report

Subject Site and Surrounds

The subject site is located in an established residential area of Maiden Gully on the corner of Highland Way and Arlington Court. The site is generally rectangular in shape with an area of 1,291 square metres. A brick dwelling is located on the southern end of the site. The backyard is devoid of vegetation and outbuildings. There is a reasonable slope from north east to the west.

The subject site is formally described as Lot 59 on Plan of Subdivision 518344E. A covenant (AF022210B) was initially registered on the land title precluding further subdivision of lots but has now extinguished as of 13 April 2013.

Services, including reticulated water and sewerage, power, gas and telecommunications are able to be connected to the site.

Lot sizes in the area range from 620 square metres to 1,600 square metres. The dwellings in the area tend to be large with reasonable side setbacks. The site is located within close proximity to the Maiden Gully shopping precinct, primary school and recreation reserve. Highland Way and Arlington Court are sealed roads with kerb and channel. A footpath has been constructed along the Highland Way frontage of the site.

constructed along the Highland Way frontage of the site. Figure 1 : Location map showing subject

Figure 1: Location map showing subject site. Objectorsproperties are marked with a star.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Proposal

The applicant seeks approval to subdivide the site into two residential lots. It is proposed to subdivide the backyard off from the existing house to create a new vacant lot suitable for a dwelling.









Lot 1 will have an area of 501 square metres. Lot 2 will have an area of 790 square metres and will retain the existing dwelling. Access to Lot 1 will be from Highland Way. Access to Lot 2 will continue from Arlington Court.

the existing dwelling. Access to Lot 1 will be from Highland Way. Access to Lot 2
the existing dwelling. Access to Lot 1 will be from Highland Way. Access to Lot 2
the existing dwelling. Access to Lot 1 will be from Highland Way. Access to Lot 2
be from Highland Way. Access to Lot 2 will continue from Arlington Court. Figure 2 :

Figure 2: Proposed Subdivision Layout.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Planning Controls - Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme

The site is in the General Residential Zone (GRZ) and is affected by The Design and Development Overlay 10 (DDO10) and Environmental Significance Overlay 2 (ESO2)(Groundwater Recharge Protection Area). A permit is required to subdivide land under the GRZ and ESO2.

The following clauses are relevant in the consideration of this proposal:

State Planning Policy Framework:



Regional development (clause 11.05).



Urban environment (clause 15.01).



Sustainable development (clause 15.02).



Integrated transport (clause 18.01).



Movement networks (clause 18.02).

Municipal Strategic Statement:



Municipal profile (clause 21.01).



Key issues and influences (clause 21.02).



Vision - strategic framework (clause 21.03).



Strategic directions (clause 21.04).



Settlement (clause 21.05).



Housing (clause 21.06).



Environment (clause 21.08).



Infrastructure (clause 21.09).



Reference documents (clause 21.10).

Local Planning Policies:



Salinity and erosion risk policy (clause 22.04).

Other relevant provisions:



Residential subdivision (clause 56)



Decision guidelines (clause 65).



Referral and notice provisions (clause 66).

Consultation/Communication

Referrals

The following authorities and internal departments have been consulted on the proposal:

Referral

Comment

Goulburn-Murray Water

No objection subject to one condition

Drainage

No objection subject to conditions

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Public Notification

The application was advertised by way of notice on the site and letters to adjoining and nearby owners and occupiers.

The application was advertised by way of notice on the site and letters to adjoining and nearby owners and occupiers.

As a result of advertising, two objections were received, with the grounds of objection being:

 Proposed subdivision will compromise the existing neighbourhood character.

 Future development on Lot 1 will cause amenity issues for the abutting neighbours.

 Proposed subdivision will cause devaluation of their properties.

The objections are discussed below.

Planning Assessment

Neighbourhood Character

Maiden Gully has been the subject of detailed planning through the implementation of the Maiden Gully Structure Plan and in more recent times the inclusion of the Design and Development Overlay 10 (Maiden Gully Structure Plan) into the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme. The Maiden Gully Structure Plan has general aims consistent with the DDO10 to maintain the area’s amenity and rural residential character and also ensuring new residential development complies with the lot sizes indicated in the relevant precinct. With regard to this proposal, the subject site is included in Precinct 4 of the Maiden Gully Structure Plan. The Plan seeks the following outcomes with respect to Precinct 4:

“No minimum lot size. Consideration must be given to achieving a range of lot sizes - generally from about 600 square metres at the northern end of this precinct up to about 1500 square metres."

An outline development plan has been approved for Precinct 4 that shows broad-scale residential development at a range of densities. A considerable amount of Precinct 4 has been developed, in the form of new housing estates such as "The Meadows", "Lorient Park" and "Parklands".

The site is a part of "The Meadows Estate", which is located in the northern part of Precinct 4. Lot sizes throughout the neighbourhood are mostly 1,000 square metres or larger with single-storey detached dwellings backyards typical. Some smaller lots (600- 700 square metres) are scattered throughout the northern end of the neighbourhood.

These lot densities have created a neighbourhood with a somewhat semi-rural character which is reinforced by scattered native vegetation, low-rise built form and spaciousness between buildings.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Even though the DDO10 does not preclude lots less than 600 square metres in Precinct

4, the assessment of proposed subdivisions needs to occur in a manner that meets the

Decision Guidelines, including consideration of the existing character of the area and taking into account of the Maiden Gully Structure Plan.

The pattern of development along this part of Highland Way and Arlington Court is characterised by medium to large dwellings that are single storey and have generous setbacks from the street, which is in contrast to the likely siting of any new dwelling on Lot 1. If the proposed subdivision is approved it will have a detrimental impact on the low density character of Precinct 4 and it will set a poor precedent for future development within Maiden Gully. The area available for construction of a dwelling is half the size of the abutting lots. The area is too small to allow for the flexible siting of a dwelling - site coverage is likely to be high and front and side setbacks minimal.

The proposed size of Lot 1 is not in keeping with the general range of lot sizes in the

area, particularly being located in the northern part of the precinct. Whilst a small number

of two lot subdivisions have been approved to the south of the site, it is noted that the

average size lots here are generally much smaller than those in the north.

A future dwelling on Lot 1 will leave little room for the planting of trees and other

vegetation. Vegetation coverage is important to the character of Precinct 4 and the wider Maiden Gully area.

Amenity

The objectors are concerned that the future construction of a dwelling on Lot 1 will impact on the privacy and amenity of their properties. The neighbours have enjoyed a sense of openness in the past and suddenly could be confronted with some overlooking into the back and side yards. One neighbour to the west is also concerned that the construction of a dwelling on Lot 1 will compromise the integrity of the solar panels on the roof of their home.

The proposal will potentially enable the construction of an additional dwelling on the site. Whether the dwelling is single or double storey, it is difficult to suggest that this would result in a loss of privacy or other adverse impact on residential amenity over and above what could be expected in a suburban environment.

There is potential for some overshadowing of the objector’s property at 2 Arlington Court

in the mid-morning, however, the overshadowing effect on the this property for the

balance of the day will be minimal.

Any new development within the backyard of a site can potentially create amenity issues.

In regards to this application, the abutting neighbour to the west argues that their privacy

will be greatly curtailed by the construction of a future dwelling on Lot 1. Some overlooking may occur because any future dwelling on Lot 1 would be constructed reasonably close to the common boundary and the site is situated at a slightly higher elevation than the abutting property. However, in the event of the future construction of a dwelling on Lot 1, the minimisation of potential overlooking can be assessed at the Building Permit stage.

So, in conclusion it is unlikely that the proposed subdivision will have any significant impact with either overshadowing or overlooking into the back yard of the abutting neighbours.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Devaluation of properties in the neighbourhood

The objectors are concerned that the proposed subdivision will cause devaluation of their own properties.

Devaluation of property is not a town planning consideration and has been repeatedly tested at VCAT in the past.

Conclusion

The amenity issues raised by the objectors are unlikely to have any significant impact on the neighbouring properties.

However, it is considered that the application to subdivide land into 2 lots at 1 Arlington Court not be supported on the grounds that the proposed size of Lot 1 does not meet the preferred lot size of 600 square metres and subsequently does not accord with the character of the neighbourhood.

Options

Council, acting as the responsible authority for administering the Planning Scheme, may resolve to: grant a permit, grant a permit with conditions, or refuse to grant a permit.

Attachments



Objections

RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to section 61 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987), Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to issue a Refusal to Grant a Permit for a two lot subdivision at 1 Arlington Court, MAIDEN GULLY 3551 for the following reason:

1. The subdivision is not in keeping with the neighbourhood character due to the small size of the lots and in this regard it is contrary to the Maiden Gully Structure Plan.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

2.5 INTENSIVE ANIMAL INDUSTRIES ADVISORY COMMITTEE DISCUSSION PAPER - SUBMISSION BY THE CITY OF GREATER BENDIGO

Document Information

Author

Trevor Budge, Manager Strategy

Responsible

Prue Mansfield, Director Planning and Development

Director

Summary/Purpose

This report provides a copy of the Council submission to the Intensive Animal Industries Advisory Committee Discussion Paper and seeks endorsement of that submission. The Committee was established by the Minister for Planning to provide advice to both him and the Minister for Agriculture. The Discussion Paper was released on 21 December 2015 and required submissions to be forwarded to the Committee by 5 February 2016. This did not provide sufficient lead time to enable the submission to be prepared in time to be placed on an earlier Council agenda. The development of the submission has been informed by input from relevant CoGB staff, members of the Bendigo Manufacturing Group who are intensive animal industries producers (who have also made their own submission) and from Council’s Farming Advisory Committee chaired by Cr Williams. Trevor Budge Manager, Strategy is also a member of a Reference Group established by the Minister’s Advisory Committee to assist in the process. The Committee has indicated that it will hold hearings in late February to early March 2016 with the view to finalising its advice to the Ministers by 29 April 2016.

The submission sets out the importance and potential of intensive animal industries to Bendigo, issues that have arisen in respect to land use planning in the City of Greater Bendigo in relation to intensive animal industries and specific responses to a series of policy directions posed by the Advisory Committee in their Discussion Paper.

Policy Context

Council Plan Reference:

Leadership and Good Governance Strategy 1.3 Contribute to policy and strategy development being led by government and other agencies

Planning for Growth - Strategy 2.2 Council manages the planning and development of the City through the preparation of major strategies and effective amendments to the planning scheme.

Productivity - Strategy 4.1 Council fosters business and industry growth

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Strategy Reference:

An Intensive Animal Industries Strategy was endorsed by Council at its meeting in November 2013. It identified the importance of intensive animal industries to the Bendigo and regional economy. It set out proposals to amend the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme to protect existing operations from encroachment by ad hoc residential development. Subsequently Council drafted an Amendment to require planning permits for development in the buffers of existing intensive animal industries and sought authorisation from the Minister for Planning to exhibit the amendment. This amendment is now on hold pending the government’s response to the Advisory Committee report.

Regional Strategic Plan Reference:

The Loddon Mallee South Regional Growth Plan identifies the major economic role that intensive animal industries play in the region and supports the potential to grow the industry and the need to ensure that potential land use conflicts are minimised.

Background Information

In late 2015 the Minister for Planning established an Advisory Committee to provide advice to the Minister for Planning and the Minister for Agriculture on how the planning system can support the establishment and expansion of productive, competitive and market-responsive animal industries in Victoria, while balancing environmental outcomes and community expectations.

Specifically the Advisory Committee was asked to provide advice and present findings and conclusions on:

 The role and function of the planning system in supporting the establishment and expansion of animal industries in the context of changing industry practice to increase production, be competitive and respond to market changes.  The adequacy of the definition of ‘intensive animal husbandry’ in Clause 74 of the Victoria Planning Provisions and all planning schemes having regard to emerging farming systems and practices, incremental changes to existing operations over time and changing consumer preference.

In late December 2015 the Advisory Committee released a Discussion Paper and invited submissions. The Discussion Paper noted that:

 Livestock production systems are changing. On the one hand, free range pig and poultry production systems are growing to meet consumer demands, while on the other hand more intensive grazing and production systems are being adopted in the sheep, beef and dairy industries. The trend towards more intensive production systems is likely to continue, some say it needs to continue, if Victorian agriculture is to meet growing overseas demand for its produce. All livestock production systems have the potential for off-farm impacts on the environment and community. Community and local resident expectations are changing with more ‘non-farming’ or hobby farm residents living in farming zones.  Tourism-based agricultural enterprises, such as wineries with cellar door sales and restaurants, eco-tourism, and farm stays are taking advantage of Victoria’s rural amenity and increasing in number.







Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

The potential impacts from farming activities can be broadly categorised as:



Animal welfare and biosecurity



Environment



Residential amenity



Rural economic development



Infrastructure.”

A

submission (attached) was drafted with input from relevant CoGB staff, members of

the Bendigo Manufacturing Group who are intensive animal industries producers (who have also made their own submission) and from Council’s Farming Advisory Committee chaired by Cr Williams which includes Councillors Campbell and Chapman and forwarded to the Committee prior to the closing date of submissions 5 February 2016.

Report

The Council submission sets out the economic importance of intensive animal industries

to the City of Greater Bendigo and the wider Loddon Mallee South region and specifically

addresses 16 questions that the Committee sought responses to. In summary the major points made in the submission are that:

 The

encroachment on existing industries by residential development.  A system of buffers should be established in planning schemes to provide greater certainty for intensive animal industry operations.  Codes of Practice need to be the major way that the industry is regulated.  Compliance against Codes should be responsibility of a well-equipped EPA rather than local government.

Farming

zone

should

be

constructed

to

provide

greater

certainty

from

Priority/Importance:

The final outcomes of this process are important as it relates to a major industry in the City.

Options/Alternatives:

The Council has the option of endorsing the submission or amending it.

Timelines:

Council in its submission has requested the opportunity to discuss its submission with the Advisory Committee when it holds hearings in late February / early March. If the Advisory Committee’s Report (due on 29 April 2016) is publicly released Council may wish to make any further submission. Further action would await the release of the government’s response. The content of the government’s response will determine what action Council needs to take in regard to the amendment to the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme that Council has on hold pending the outcomes of the Advisory Committee work.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Risk Analysis:

Not applicable

Consultation/Communication

Internal Consultation:

Internal consultation from staff with particular interests and responsibilities related to this area.

External Consultation:

Input from members of Council’s Farming Advisory Committee and from intensive animal producers who are members of the Bendigo Manufacturing Group informed the preparation of the submission.

Resource Implications

Budget Allocation in the Current Financial Year:

Council in its submission has requested the opportunity to discuss its submission with the Advisory Committee when it holds hearings in late February / early March. This is covered by existing budget arrangements.

Previous Council Support:

Council has resolved to exhibit a planning scheme amendment to implement a number of the items included in the submission.

Projected costs for future financial years:

Not Applicable

Conclusion

Intensive Animal Industries are a significant component of the Bendigo and wider regional economy. Bendigo is one of Australia’s major regional centres for intensive animal industries. Greater certainty is required for the industry and this can be achieved by relevant changes in the current planning system and planning scheme provisions.

Attachments

1. Council

submission

Discussion Paper.

to

the

RECOMMENDATION

Intensive

Animal

Industries

Advisory

Committee

1. That the Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to endorse the submission to the Intensive Animal Industries Advisory Committee Discussion Paper.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

City of Greater Bendigo Submission to the Intensive Animal Industries Advisory Committee Discussion Paper

Background

In late 2015 the Minister for Planning established an Advisory Committee to provide advice to the Minister for Planning and the Minister for Agriculture on how the planning system can support the establishment and expansion of productive, competitive and market-responsive animal industries in Victoria, while balancing environmental outcomes and community expectations.

Specifically the Advisory Committee was asked to provide advice and present findings and conclusions on:

The role and function of the planning system in supporting the establishment and expansion of animal industries in the context of changing industry practice to increase production, be competitive and respond to market changes.

The adequacy of the definition of ‘intensive animal husbandry’ in Clause 74 of the Victoria Planning Provisions and all planning schemes having regard to emerging farming systems and practices, incremental changes to existing operations over time and changing consumer preference. In December 2015 the Advisory Committee released a Discussion Paper and invited submissions.

The Discussion Paper noted that

Livestock production systems are changing. On the one hand, free range pig and poultry production systems are growing to meet consumer demands, while on the other hand more intensive grazing and production systems are being adopted in the sheep, beef and dairy industries.

The trend towards more intensive production systems is likely to continue, some say it needs to continue, if Victorian agriculture is to meet growing overseas demand for its produce.

All livestock production systems have the potential for off-farm impacts on the environment and community.

• Community and local resident expectations are changing with more ‘non-farming’ or hobby farm residents living in farming zones.

Tourism-based agricultural enterprises, such as wineries with cellar door sales and restaurants, eco-tourism, and farm stays are taking advantage of Victoria’s rural amenity and increasing in number. The potential impacts from farming activities can be broadly categorised as:

Animal welfare and biosecurity

Environment

Residential amenity

Rural economic development

Infrastructure.

The Discussion Paper invited general comments and specifically sought responses to 16 questions.

General Comments

Intensive animal industries are one of the major employment industries across the City of Greater Bendigo. It is an industry that has the capacity to expand further. About 2,000 persons are

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

directly and indirectly employed in the City in this industry. There is considerable employment in processing as well as production. In November 2014 Council engaged REMPLAN to prepare an Agribusiness Economic Contributions Study using available ABS data. While it is not possible to separate intensive animal production and processing from other production and processing it showed in summary that

Food product production and processing (mostly from intensive animal production) was worth about $500m in total output to the Greater Bendigo economy, employed around 1,300 people, value added (value-added represents the marginal economic value that is added by each industry sector in a defined region) just over $1.06billion to the City’s economy and the multiplier effect of the agribusiness industry as a whole was 1.8. A copy of the report is attached.

Bendigo sits in a strategic location in regional cluster of such industries across the Loddon Mallee South region. Industry estimates are that there are over 4,000 persons employed directly or indirectly in intensive animal industries across the Loddon Mallee South region. The Loddon Mallee South Regional Growth recognises the importance of this industry and its capacity for expansion. The industry provides many jobs for unskilled and semi-skilled persons.

The region is one of the major national intensive animal production and processing areas.

This situation reflects long established production, processing plants, skilled and unskilled local labour force, supply of feed for animals from the wider region, and support industries such as trucking.

There is capacity and private sector support to further expand this industry and create greater levels of employment. A copy of the City’s adopted Intensive Animal Industry Strategy is attached.

The Greater Bendigo Council’s position is that the intensive animal industry is a vital component of the local and regional economy which has considerable further capacity to expand and it should be strongly supported by the state government.

The land use planning system in respect to intensive animal industries should be geared to provide the maximum level of certainty for existing operators to protect their investment.

Once established and operating with the appropriate permits and controls through state wide industry codes operators should not be subject to uncertainty due to issues like protecting biosecurity and amenity complaints from adjoining land owners.

Planning provisions in the Farming Zone should clearly set a framework where dwellings and other uses and developments cannot be allowed within the established buffer distances from intensive animal operations. If there is discretion for uses or developments within the buffer distance then the planning provisions must clearly give Council the discretion to refuse the development based on the likely detrimental impact on the intensive animal industry. Prior to the governments establishment of the Intensive Animal Industry Advisory Committee Greater Bendigo Council had sought authorisation for an amendment to its planning scheme to allow it to refuse dwellings that were sited within the buffer distance. In the absence of the work of the Advisory Committee establishing such a position and the government making relevant changes to the Victoria Planning Provisions Council will further pursue its own amendment.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Council supports a new regime where the EPA is charged with the responsibility and provided with the resources to deal with the technical aspects of compliance with relevant state wide intensive animal industry codes. Achieving mandatory sign off by the EPA of compliance with the relevant code should be part of the planning process. Councils are not necessarily equipped with the staff or financial resources to pursue the technical aspects of compliance with the relevant code. Multiple agencies responsible for regulations and enforcement create uncertainty confusion and potential for overlap and conflict.

The Greater Bendigo Council’s position is that state wide planning scheme provisions should be strengthened so as to prevent land uses and developments impacting on the ongoing operation of intensive animal industries and that the EPA should be resourced to deal with compliance with relevant industry codes.

Representatives from the poultry industry in the City of Greater Bendigo are members of the Bendigo Manufacturing Group - a peak industry advisory committee to the City of Greater Bendigo’s Economic Development Unit which has been operating since 2001. They are of the view that the Farming Zone (and its forerunners) has been diluted over time and it no longer provides the level of protection for the right to farm. In particular, the conflict between farming operations and ‘sensitive land uses’ (such as non- farming related housing), and rezoning of farming land to residential uses without proper consideration of its impact on commercial intensive animal operations has been a product of the evolving planning system to the detriment of farming. Further they believe that there has been insufficient farming protection and priority policy to guide planners in assessing planning permit applications related to this matter. They contend that intensive farming operations have been adversely impacted resulting in the relocation of parts of farming enterprise operations, limiting further growth at an enterprise’s principal operational site and in some cases leading to the cessation of the farming operations.

While the Advisory Committee has been established to focus on issues associated with the planning system Greater Bendigo Council submits that the issues and opportunities associated with the intensive animal industry are wider than this and warrant government attention. The economic opportunities for Victoria in this industry are extensive and they revolve around Australia’s bio-security, reputation and ability to deliver product that is safe and world class. There is an increasing demand in Asia for product and particularly protein. Australia including Victoria is a large exporter of grain as a raw product. Value adding in Victoria can provide increased jobs and higher returns. Maintaining this advantage and producing product that is both ethically and environmentally sound is important to these outcomes.

The Greater Bendigo Council’s position is that supporting an improved land use planning regime is important in this whole process of capitalising on the advantages of this industry sector. It needs to be matched by other state government initiatives and support that can fully capitalise on the potential of the industry. The Loddon Mallee South region is ideally placed to further expand on its leading regional role in intensive animal industry production and processing.

In respect to the sixteen questions posed by the Intensive Animal Industries Discussion Paper and on which comment has been sought, the Greater Bendigo Council submits:

Proposed Policy Direction

1. Provide stronger strategic guidance by undertaking regional agricultural land capability assessments and identifying appropriate areas for intensive agriculture in local planning policies.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Response

This direction is completely misplaced. The siting of most intensive animal industries has little if anything to do with regional agricultural land capability assessments. Siting is largely a factor of access to grain and other feed, provision of water and power, access to a large pool of labour particularly where production and processing are combined on a single site, good transport infrastructure and ready access to markets. It is this combination of factors that has made the Loddon Mallee South region such an attractive area for production and processing. The fact that industry production can take place on land with low quality agricultural land capability is often seen as a bonus. In fact it can be argued that siting such uses on land of high quality is a ‘waste’ of such a resource.

Council submits that there are considerable advantages in strengthening the State Planning Policy Framework to clearly indicate that this is an industry which government supports and that Councils in their Municipal Strategic Statement should if relevant identify areas where they would support such industries.

Proposed Policy Direction

2. Strengthen the purpose of the Farming Zone to promote agriculture activity as the priority activity and

remove reference to encouraging dwellings as a means of promoting population growth.

Response

Agree. This is a fundamental change that is required. Changing the role and purpose of the Farming Zone periodically has sent confusing messages. Treat the Farming zone as essentially an ‘outdoor industrial’ type zone and protect its integrity and role accordingly.

Proposed Policy Direction

3. Identify in planning schemes defined buffer distances for different types and scales of intensive animal

industries.

Response

Agree. Minimum distances required by Codes could be clearly stated. Currently all the relevant Codes are incorporated documents in all schemes. Few people have access to the relevant most up to date codes, stating the distances in the planning scheme would assist. The first reference people make to a planning scheme is to check the zone and then the overlay. There is inconsistency across the state in the application of Overlays relating to developments with potential off site impacts some waste water treatment plants, intensive operations etc. have an Overlay which alerts someone looking at the planning scheme – most don’t. A uniform approach across the State on a buffer which recognises an ‘impact area’ would assist everyone.

Proposed Policy Direction

4. Require a permit in the farming zones for new dwellings within the buffer distance of intensive animal

operations.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Response

Support strongly. The potential to apply an absolute prohibition in close proximity should be considered. Where properties are in Faming zone adjoining parcels are relatively large and alternative sites are generally possible. For instance, in the City of Greater Bendigo we examined every parcel of land within 500 metres of an existing intensive animal operation. There were about 600 such parcels. There were only four parcels where an owner could not locate a house more than 500 meters from the existing operation. The City was therefore proposing an Amendment to its Planning Scheme which would have proposed a requirement for a planning permit in the Farming Zone within 500 metres of a broiler shed and 700 metres from a piggery. Very few landowners would have been impacted. Other uses and developments should be considered for a planning permit; subdivision (which usually has an expectation that a potential house lot has been created, dams (issues of birds landing on with consequent water- biosecurity issues), tourist uses etc.

Proposed Policy Direction

5. Base the generic definition of intensive animal husbandry on the impacts of the operation.

Response

Agree, include impact as part of the definition.

Proposed Policy Direction

6. Base the requirement for a permit for animal industries on the potential environmental and amenity

impacts of the operation derived from an assessment with an online tool.

Response

Support to the extent that online tool can deliver on this requirement. It is not likely that a tool could achieve tis in all circumstances. Such a tool could easily indicate that a proposal would not meet the code and scheme requirements but it is likely that there will be circumstances where further inflation is required.

Proposed Policy Direction

7. Create specific land use terms for poultry farms (broiler, egg and hatcheries), cattle and sheep feedlots

and piggeries and other clearly intensive uses, to avoid reliance on a generic intensive animal husbandry definition where possible.

Response

Agree but these need to be subject to periodic review. Farming techniques and operations change.

Proposed Policy Direction

8. Strengthen permit triggers, application requirements and referral arrangements for animal industry

applications.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Response

Agree on the basis that it is very clear in the planning scheme and relevant codes when and where a planning permit is required.

Proposed Policy Direction

9. Limit the ‘right to object’ in the Farming Zone when standards prescribed for an animal husbandry enterprise type are met.

Response

Does the term limit mean prevent? Where the standards are fully met the right to object and have any decision subject to review can be removed through relevant clauses in the planning scheme. If the Code is properly framed and there is confidence that it can be enforced than the planning provisions in the Farming zone can establish that many elements that are currently subject to a planning permit can be as of right subject to compliance with conditions.

Proposed Policy Direction

10. Clarify when farming operations have existing use rights.

Response

Agree. Farming operations are subject to change over time. What may now be common practice may not have existed ten years ago. This would need some process of periodic review. There is a danger that over time as farming operations change what would once be considered usual practices could effectively become a ‘non-conforming use’.

Proposed Policy Direction

11. Create a single point of contact for all enforcement actions whose role it is to oversee enforcement

activities.

Response

Strongly support on the basis that this is not local government. Qualified and experienced personnel from a single agency suitably equipped to undertake inspections and compliance.

Proposed Policy Direction

12. Increase the role of the EPA as an enforcement body.

Response

Strongly support an appropriately resourced EPA is the most effective course of action. Compliance and enforcement action undertaken by the EPA should be in consultation with the relevant local Council.

Policy Proposed Direction

13. Set clearer prescribed standards and conditions for intensive animal industries in planning schemes

using the Codes of Practice approach.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Response

Strongly agree

Proposed Policy Direction

14. Develop and maintain a contemporary Codes of Practice for all intensively farmed livestock (as a

minimum for poultry (broiler, egg and hatchery), piggeries, cattle feedlots, sheep feedlots, and feedlot

dairies).

Response

Strongly agree

Proposed Policy Direction

15. Introduce a fast track process for applications that meet defined standards.

Response

Agree. If this is to be pursued than it applies equally to all relevant state government authorities and agencies not just local government.

Proposed Policy Direction

16. Formally recognise participation in compliant industry assurance programs in the planning process.

Some examples include APIQ, NFAS, Chicken Care and Egg Corp Assured.

Response

Agree

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

2.6 GREATER BENDIGO RESIDENTIAL STRATEGY AND ADOPTION OF GREATER BENDIGO PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C215

Document Information

Author

Andrew Cockerall, Coordinator Strategic Planning

Responsible

Prue Mansfield, Director Planning & Development

Director

Summary/Purpose

Amendment details:

The amendment proposes to implement the Greater Bendigo Residential Strategy (2014). Changes proposed by the amendment include:





Updating the Municipal Strategic Statement to include a new clause “Compact Bendigo”, strengthen the provisions relating to the Urban Growth Boundary, introduce new provisions relating to 10 minute neighbourhoods and including the strategy as a Reference Document. Various zone and overlay changes.

relating to 10 minute neighbourhoods and including the strategy as a Reference Document. Various zone and

No. of submissions:

71 in total (27 supporting, 32 seeking changes to the amendment, 12 opposing)

Key issues:



Inclusion of other land within the amendment.



Urban Growth Boundary.



Panel recommendations.

Recommendation:

Policy Context

That Council adopts Amendment C215 to the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme as recommended by the Panel, with changes set out in this report, and request approval from the Minister for Planning.

City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2013 2017 (2015-16 update)

Planning for Growth

Complete and implement the following major strategies through planning scheme amendments:



Greater Bendigo Residential Strategy

Background Information

The key steps in the Amendment process are summarised below:

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

Amendment and Planning permit application prepared Council decides whether to seek Ministerial Authorisation Public
Amendment and Planning permit
application prepared
Council decides whether to seek
Ministerial Authorisation
Public Exhibition of Amendment
and permit application
Submissions received
Council requests an Independent
Panel to consider submissions
Panel Hearing held
Council decides to Adopt or
Abandon the Amendment
Send to Minister for Approval
and Gazettal and issue of
Planning permit

Previous Council Decisions

and issue of Planning permit Previous Council Decisions We are at this point 15/06/11 Council endorsed
and issue of Planning permit Previous Council Decisions We are at this point 15/06/11 Council endorsed

We are at this point

15/06/11

Council endorsed the brief for the review.

29/02/12

Council adopted the Audit of the Residential Development Strategy.

06/03/13

Council releases the Issues and Options Paper.

21/08/13

Council seeks Ministerial Amendment for the conversion of the residential

26/03/14

zones. Council releases the draft Greater Bendigo Residential Strategy for

22/10/14

community comment. Council adopts the Greater Bendigo Residential Strategy and resolves to

06/05/15

commence the amendment process. Council considers submissions received to the exhibition of the amendment

Report

and requests the appointment of an Independent Panel.

Greater Bendigo Residential Strategy

The Greater Bendigo Residential Strategy (2014) was adopted by Council on 22 October 2014. The strategy establishes a framework to guide the residential growth of the Municipality to 2040 and beyond.

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016

The strategy is focussed on accommodating Bendigo’s future residential development through creating a compact city, vibrant City Centre, neighbourhoods and small towns where people can readily access their daily needs and where there is real transport choice rather than relying on the car.

What the amendment does

Amendment C215 implements the recommendations of the Greater Bendigo Residential Strategy (2014) into the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme.

The amendment is largely focussed on making strategy and policy changes within the Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) to reinforce the overall strategic direction of promoting a compact urban form.

Among the key changes to the MSS proposed by Amendment C215 are:



Updating the “Key Issues and Influences” clause to include issues such as liveability,



transport integration and planning for health. Combining the Housing and Settlement clauses into a new clause “Compact



Bendigo”. Strengthening the provisions around the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB).



New strategies around 10 minute neighbourhoods, key development sites, housing



density and diversity and design quality. Inclusion of the Greater Bendigo Residential Strategy (2014) as a Reference Document within the Planning Scheme.

A number of zone and overlay changes are proposed in the amendment including:

 Land identified in the Strathfieldsaye Township Plan and Huntly Township Plan that was identified for residential development but is yet to be rezoned. These areas are being rezoned from a Rural Living Zone to either a General Residential Zone or a Low Density Residential Zone. Inclusion of land off Goynes Road, Epsom in the General Residential Zone. Removal of the Design and Development Overlay 10 which requires larger lot sizes from parts of “Precinct 6” in Maiden Gully to allow for more conventional subdivision consistent with the Greater Bendigo Residential Strategy (2014).





Consultation/Communication

Exhibition procedures

The Amendment was exhibited for 6 weeks between 5 February and 20 March 2015.

Notice was provided in the following manner:

 Individual notices were sent to 700 residents, government agencies and interest groups who were affected by the amendment or had previously registered an interest in the Greater Bendigo Residential Strategy. Notices to the prescribed Ministers under Section 19(1)(c) of the Planning and Environment Act. Public Notice of the Amendment in the Bendigo Advertiser on 4, 7, 11, 14, 21 and 28 February and in the McIvor Times on 5 and 12 February 2015.





Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 02 March 2016