Planning for Growth - Reports

2.4

Ordinary Meeting - 20 July 2016

1, 2, 35 AND 42 IRONTREE CLOSE, KANGAROO FLAT 3555 - 8 LOT

SUBDIVISION

Document Information
Author

Bryce Kilian, Statutory Planner

Responsible
Director

Prue Mansfield, Director Planning & Development

Summary/Purpose
Application details:

8 Lot subdivision

Application No:

DS/543/2015

Applicant:

Tomkinson Group

Land:

1, 2, 35 and 42 Irontree Close, KANGAROO FLAT 3555

Zoning:

General Residential Zone

Overlays:

None

No. of objections:

Consultation
meeting:

No formal consultation meeting took place. Consultation was

undertaken through phone conversations with the objecting
parties.

Key considerations:

Does the proposal accord with the covenant?

Will the proposal result in an unacceptable increase in
vehicle traffic in the area?
Will the proposal significantly alter the character of the
area?
Loss of vegetation.

Conclusion:

The application is recommended for approval on the basis that

it represents an acceptable outcome with regards to the
requirements of the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme.

Policy Context
City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2013 2017 (2016-2017 Update)
Planning for Growth
Planning ensures residents have access to diverse, affordable and sustainable
housing choices.

PAGE 35

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 20 July 2016

Productivity
Greater Bendigo has a vibrant and diverse economy that grows jobs and enables
good living standards.
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 actually four separate sites, two adjoining and two stand alone. All are
owned by the same entity and all have frontage to both Duke Street and Irontree Close.
The four lots are similarly sized and range from 740 to 940 square metres. The lots all
slope downward from south to north and slightly downward from west to east. The lots
are all able to be connected to reticulated services.
The area to the west of the subject lots was created at roughly the same time and as part
of the same subdivision so they are generally similar to the lots in question, size wise
and are all rectangular. The main difference between the subject lots and the majority of
other lots in the subdivision relates to street frontage in that the majority of lots only have
a single street frontage whereas the subject lots have two street frontages.
The vast majority of surrounding lots contain single dwellings. The new dwellings within
this subdivision to the west of Duke Street are modern, contemporary housing styles with
shallow street frontages and dominant vehicle storage facilities. Land to the east of Duke
Street forms part of an older area established through the 1970s approximately with the
majority of houses being weatherboard construction with vehicle storage to the side and
rear.

PAGE 36

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 20 July 2016

Figure 1: Location map showing subject site. Objectors' properties marked with a star. Two objections
were received from a single property.

Figure 2: Aerial Photo of the area.

received from a single property.

Objectors' properties marked with a star. Two objections were

Proposal
The application seeks approval to subdivide four existing lots in common ownership into
eight lots.
The four lots in question all have frontages to both Duke Street and Irontree Close. At
present the lots have the ability to connect to all reticulated services.
The lot sizes range from 740 to 940 square metres and the proposed lots will range from
370m2 and 477m2, with the average lot size being 427m2.

PAGE 37

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 20 July 2016

Figure 3: Application Plans

Planning Controls - Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme

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).
Residential development (clause 16.01).
Movement networks (clause 18.02).
Development infrastructure (clause 19.03).

PAGE 38

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 20 July 2016

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).
Reference documents (clause 21.10).
Other Provisions
General Residential Zone (clause 32.08).
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

Powercor

No objection subject to conditions

Coliban Water

No objection subject to conditions

Tenix

No objection subject to conditions

Traffic & Design

No objection subject to conditions

Drainage

No objection subject to conditions

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, four objections were received, with the grounds of objection
being:
The proposal does not accord with the covenant.
The proposal will generate additional, unacceptable amounts of traffic.
The proposal will significantly alter the character of the area.
Vegetation loss.
The objections are discussed below.

PAGE 39

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 20 July 2016

Planning Assessment
What does the covenant control?
The common objection to all parties is the question of whether the proposal accords with
the covenant registered on the title of the majority of lots within the subdivision.
The specific part of the Covenant AG669360M the objecting parties refer to reads as
follows;
"That the said lot will not be re-subdivided nor will more than one residence be
erected on the said lot, with the exception of lot 64, and any lot prefixed with the
Letter S which is for a further stage of development or unless the said lot
exceeds 1000 square metres in area in which case no more than two townhouses
can be erected on the said lot."
In this case, all of the lots applicable to this application are indicated as being an S lot
therefore this element of the covenant never applied.
Further to the above, the specific lots in question do not contain any such covenant
owing to the intention of the original developer to allow these lots to be more further
developed.
The above information being the case, no weight can be given to the objection ground as
the covenant does not apply to the lots in question and therefore cannot be considered.
Is the site appropriately located for some form of infill residential development?
The State and Local Policy framework of the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme lends
support for an intensification of development on well serviced sites which are in proximity
to a full range of urban services including public transport and local convenience
shopping. The site is well situated to take advantage of the Kangaroo Flat business area
and is served by bus route 55 which travels along Duke Street. In this regard, the policy
attributes of the application are excellent.
The local provisions of the Planning Scheme, Clause 21.06 (Housing) and the
referenced Bendigo Residential Development Strategy 2014 identify the site as being
within existing urban zoned land (being in the General Residential Zone) hence policy
support for development on this site exists, subject of course to consideration of whether
the proposed development is site responsive and appropriate with regard to character.
The General Residential Zone has purposes to: encourage development that respects
the neighbourhood character of the area; implement neighbourhood character policy and
adopted neighbourhood character guidelines; provide a diversity of housing types and
moderate housing growth in locations offering good access to services and transport;
and allow educational, recreational, religious, community and a limited range of other
non-residential uses to serve local community needs in appropriate locations.

PAGE 40

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 20 July 2016

A significant amount of growth has occurred in the area over the past 5 10 years with
numerous subdivisions approved and developed which have contributed to the changing
character of the area. Previously, the area featured larger blocks and had a semi-rural
feel, however the new subdivisions have created what is now a conventional look and
feel with smaller lot sizes and significantly reduced setbacks between dwellings. These
developments have created a new character to the area to the west of Duke Street which
the proposal would accord with.
In this case, the proposed development complies with the zone purposes and the
general neighbourhood character of the area.
The Residential Strategy 2014 has the aims of striving for urban containment and a
compact Bendigo. This proposal complies with the objectives of this by creating
additional lots within a well serviced, developing area.
Will the character of the area be significantly altered as a result of the proposal?
Some of the objectors believe that the lots being proposed are too small in comparison
with the prevailing pattern of subdivision in the area. They argue that larger lot sizes are
called for in the area. The proposed subdivision will yield lot sizes between 370m 2 and
477m2, with the average lot size being 427m2.
The proposed subdivision represents a fairly conventional suburban development. This is
not an unreasonable response to the site context. The area has undergone significant
change with large greenfield sites progressively transformed into housing estates. The
proposed subdivision is part of that change. The sites exclusions from the covenant
discussed earlier in this report add further weight to this.
The proposed subdivision offers diversity in the suburban housing market, perhaps
catering for people who want a smaller than average house. Providing such lot diversity
will not come at the expense of a desirable neighbourhood character. All of the proposed
lots will be large enough to accommodate a single dwelling with front and side setbacks,
providing the opportunity for garden planting and separation between dwellings.
In this context there is no compelling reason why the proposed lot sizes should be made
to exactly match those found in the surrounding estates. It is enough that the lots are
compatible with the general pattern of suburban development in the area and that they
are capable of producing positive built form outcomes that also support a more compact
Bendigo.
Traffic and vehicle movements
The sites have two street abuttals: Duke Street to the east and Irontree Close to the
north and south depending on the locality of the site. Irontree Close is a loop. The entire
area forms part of a contemporary housing estate with land to the west of Duke Street
being a more modern form. Duke Street links Wesley Street and Queen Streets though
both respective streets link back to Mitchell Street, a larger collector road.

PAGE 41

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 20 July 2016

The current plan proposes to cut each of the four lots in half which would allow any
development on the sites to be designed in a manner which could have a single access
to Irontree Close and a single access to Duke Street or two separate access points to
Duke Street.
Concern was raised by objectors in Irontree Close regarding increased traffic in Irontree
Close.
In this case, all of the lots are at the entry and or egress points to Irontree Close owing to
the street being a loop. It would be highly irregular for vehicles from any of the proposed
new lots to drive around the Irontree Close loop as this would serve no purpose as the
loop only leads back to Duke Street. In order to exit or enter the area vehicles travel
along either Wesley Street or Queen Street.
The proposed subdivision layout will disperse the lots along Duke Street such that no
vehicles from the proposed lots will need to travel along the entire length of Irontree
Close with Duke Street being constructed in a manner that can accommodate the
additional 40 vehicle movements per day potentially generated in addition to what is
currently possible.
Does the subdivision comply with clause 56 in the Planning Scheme?
The proposal complies with all the subdivision design objectives in clause 56 of the
Planning Scheme. The lots in the subdivision will be fully serviced and they will enjoy a
good standard of amenity owing to their solar orientation and outlook. The site has many
locational advantages that make it a strong candidate for residential development,
including access to a shopping centre in Kangaroo Flat and public transport linkages. All
the lots will be large enough to contain a suburban dwelling with a backyard.
The site will also integrate well with the existing pedestrian and cycling network
established linking the development with the existing infrastructure.
Will roadside vegetation require removal?
At present it is difficult to determine if any of the existing roadside vegetation in either
Duke Street or Irontree Close would require removal as the proposal is for subdivision
only.
Notwithstanding this, the vast majority of the vegetation within the road reserve was
planted at the time of the subdivision for amenity value by the developer over the past 5
10 years with some older, remnant trees present.
Whether any vegetation would require removal would be contemplated by the City's
Engineers when vehicle crossover permits are applied for at the time of dwelling
construction.
Conclusion
The proposed subdivision complies with the requirements of the Planning Scheme for
the reasons discussed above. On this basis the submitted subdivision should be
approved and a permit should be granted for the proposal.
PAGE 42

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 20 July 2016

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 8 lot subdivision
at 1, 2, 35 and 42 Irontree Close, KANGAROO FLAT 3555 subject to the following
conditions:
1.

LAYOUT PLANS
The subdivision, as shown on the endorsed plans, must not be altered without
the prior written consent of the responsible authority.

2.

DETAILED DRAINAGE
Prior to the certification of the plan of subdivision under the Subdivision Act
1988, 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 then will form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to
scale with dimensions. The plans must include:
(a) Direction of stormwater run-off.
(b) A point of discharge for each lot.
(c) Independent drainage for each lot.
(d) Consent from responsible authority for discharge.

3.

CONSTRUCTION OF WORKS
Road works, drainage and other civil works must be constructed in accordance
with the Infrastructure Design Manual and plans and specifications approved by
the responsible authority and must include:
(a) Underground drainage.

4.

SECTION 173 AGREEMENT

Should the applicant opt to install an on-site stormwater detention system or
water quality treatment system then, prior to the issue of statement of
compliance, the applicant/owner must enter into an Agreement under section
173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. Such Agreement must covenant
that:
(a) The owner will maintain each system and not modify without prior written
approval from the responsible authority.
(b) The owner shall allow duly authorised officers of the responsible authority to
inspect the system at mutually agreed times.
(c) The Owner will pay for all costs associated with the construction and
maintenance of the system.
PAGE 43

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 20 July 2016

5.

COLIBAN WATER
(a) The owner is required to provide reticulated water and sewerage services to
each of the lots within the subdivision. Services are to be provided in
accordance with our specifications.
(b) All Coliban Water assets within the subdivision, both existing and proposed,
are to be protected by Registered Easement in favour of Coliban Region
Water Corporation.

6.

POWERCOR
(a) The plan of subdivision submitted for certification under the Subdivision Act
1988 shall be referred to Powercor Australia Ltd in accordance with section
8 of that Act.
(b) The applicant shall provide an electricity supply to all lots in the subdivision
in accordance with Powercors requirements and standards, including the
extension, augmentation or re-arrangement of any existing electricity supply
system, as required by Powercor (A payment to cover the cost of such work
will be required). In the event that a supply is not provided the applicant
shall provide a written undertaking to Powercor Australia Ltd that
prospective purchasers will be so informed.
(c) Where buildings or other installations exist on the land to be subdivided and
are connected to the electricity supply, they shall be brought into
compliance with the Service and Installation Rules issued by the Victorian
Electricity Supply Industry. The applicant shall arrange compliance through
a Registered Electrical Contractor.
(d) Any buildings must comply with the clearances required by the Electricity
Safety (Network Assets) Regulations.
(e) Any construction work must comply with the Officer of the Chief Electrical
Inspector No Go Zone rules.
(f) The applicant shall provide to Powercor Australia Ltd, a copy of the version
of the plan of subdivision submitted for certification, which shows any
amendments which have been required.

7.

TELECOMMUNICATIONS
The owner of the land must enter into an agreement with:
(a) A telecommunications network or service provider for the provision of
telecommunication services to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in
accordance with the providers requirements and relevant legislation at the
time.
(b) A suitably qualified person for the provision of fibre ready
telecommunication facilities to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in
accordance with any industry specifications or any standards set by the
Australian Communications and Media Authority, unless the applicant can
demonstrate that the land is in an area where the National Broadband
Network will not be provided by optical fibre.
(c) Before the issue of a Statement of Compliance for any stage of the
subdivision under the Subdivision Act 1988, the owner of the land must
provide written confirmation from:
(d) A telecommunications network or service provider that all lots are
connected to or are ready for connection to telecommunications services in
accordance with the providers requirements and relevant legislation at the
PAGE 44

Planning for Growth - Reports

Ordinary Meeting - 20 July 2016

time.
(e) A suitably qualified person that fibre ready telecommunication facilities have
been provided in accordance with any industry specifications or any
standards set by the Australian Communications and Media Authority,
unless the applicant can demonstrate that the land is in an area where the
National Broadband Network will not be provided by optical fibre.
8.

AUSNET SERVICES (GAS)

The plan of subdivision submitted for certification must be referred to AusNet
Services (Gas) in accordance with section 8 of the Subdivision Act 1988.

9.

EXPIRY OF THE PERMIT

(a) The plan of subdivision is not certified within two years from the date of this
permit; or
(b) The subdivision is not completed within five years from the date of
certification of the plan of subdivision.
The responsible authority may extend the time for certification of the plan if a
request is made in writing before the permit expires or within six months
afterwards.

CITY OF GREATER BENDIGO ASSETS

Before the development starts, the owner or developer must submit to the responsible
authority a written report and photos of any prior damage to public infrastructure. Listed
in the report must be the condition of kerb & channel, footpath, seal, street lights, signs
and other public infrastructure fronting the property and abutting at least two properties
either side of the development. Unless identified with the written report, any damage to
infrastructure post construction will be attributed to the development. The owner or
developer of the subject land must pay for any damage caused to any public
infrastructure caused as a result of the development or use permitted by this permit.
City of Greater Bendigo Engineering & Public Space Note
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.
CONSENT FOR WORK ON ROAD RESERVES
The applicant must comply with:
(a) The Road Management Act 2004,
(b) Road Management (Works and Infrastructure) Regulations 2005, and
(c) Road Management (General) Regulations 2005
with respect to any requirements to notify the coordinating authority and/or seek consent
from the coordinating authority to undertake works (as defined in the Act) in, over or
under the road reserve. The responsible authority in the inclusion of this note on this
planning permit is not deemed to have been notified of, or to have given consent, to
undertake any works within the road reserve as proposed in this permit.

PAGE 45