VICTORIAN CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
administrative DIVISION
planning and environment LIST	vcat reference No. P1952/2018
Permit Application no. PlnA00372/18	
CATCHWORDS	
Section 77 Planning and Environment Act 1987; Casey Planning Scheme; Activity Centre Zone Schedule 1; Kindergarten; Car parking; Waste Collection.    	

APPLICANT	Great Start Kindergarten and Children Services Pty Ltd	
responsible authority	Casey City Council	
SUBJECT LAND	45 Bakewell Street, Cranbourne	
WHERE HELD	Melbourne	
BEFORE	Joel Templar, Member	
HEARING TYPE	Hearing	
DATE OF HEARING	11 April 2019   	
DATE OF ORDER	21 May 2019	
CITATION	Great Start Kindergarten and Children Services Pty Ltd v Casey CC [2019] VCAT 748	

Order
Permit granted
1	In application P1952/2018 the decision of the responsible authority is set aside.
2	In planning permit application PlnA00372/18 a permit is granted and directed to be issued for the land at 45 Bakewell Street, Cranbourne in accordance with the endorsed plans and the conditions set out in Appendix A.  The permit allows:
•	Use and development of the land for a kindergarten; and
•	Reduction of car parking requirements.

Joel Templar 
Member			

Appearances
For Great Start Kindergarten and Children Services Pty Ltd	Mr Michael Dunn, town planner of Metropol Planning Solutions	
For Casey City Council	Mr Peter Whebell, town planner of Casey City Council.	

Information
Description of proposal	The proposal is to construct buildings and works to an existing dwelling to enable the use of the land for the purposes of a kindergarten. The kindergarten would operate between the hours of 9:15am and 2:15pm, Monday to Friday for a maximum of 33 children and 3 staff. Three car parking spaces are proposed on the site within the frontage setback. 	
Nature of proceeding	Application under section 77 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 – to review the refusal to grant a permit. 	
Planning scheme	Casey Planning Scheme	
Zone and overlays	Activity Centre Zone Schedule 1	
Permit requirements	Clause 37.08-2 (Clause 3.0 of Schedule 1) – to use the land for a child care centre.
Clause 37.08-5 - to construct a building or construct or carry out works.
Clause 52.06-3 – to reduce the number of car parking spaces required under clause 52.06-5.	
Land description	The review site is generally rectangular in shape with a frontage width of 16.11 metres, a maximum length of 50.81 metres and an overall site area of approximately 819 square metres. It is located on the north side of Bakewell Street, approximately 40 metres east of its intersection with the Narre Warren-Cranbourne Road. It currently contains a single storey brick dwelling with vehicle access provided form a single crossover at the south-eastern corner of the site. A detached single storey outbuilding is located along the eastern boundary towards the rear of the site with a swimming pool near the rear boundary. There is minimal fall across the site. 	
Tribunal inspection	7 April 2019 and 7 May 2019	

Reasons
What is this proceeding about?
1	This proceeding relates to an appeal against Council’s refusal to grant a permit for use and development of the land for a child care centre and associated reduction in car parking requirements.
2	The Council’s grounds of refusal included concerns relating to the impact of non-residential uses in a designated residential intensification area, issues relating to car parking provision, design and access and matters relating to waste collection.
3	The Applicant essentially sought to refute the grounds of Council and submitted that the proposal will not hinder the vision for this area being achieved, that a kindergarten is appropriate in a residential area, that there is adequate public car parking available opposite the review site to warrant a reduced car parking requirement and that waste collection can occur on-street consistent with Council’s Traffic Planning department comments.
4	Based on the submissions, the key issues for consideration are:
•	Is the use acceptable in the Activity Centre Zone?
•	Is the proposed car parking acceptable?
•	What waste collection arrangements are acceptable?
5	I must decide whether a permit should be granted and, if so, what conditions should be applied.  Having considered the submissions of the parties with regard to the relevant policies and provisions of the Casey  Planning Scheme, assisted by my inspection, I have determined to set aside the Council’s decision and direct that a permit be issued subject to conditions.  My reasons follow.
is the use acceptable in the activity centre zone?
6	The Council submitted that the repurposing of the existing building for the purposes of a kindergarten would not prejudice the future development of the site at a higher density but that allowing the review site to be utilised for a non-residential purpose hinders other sites in the area from developing in accordance with the vision under the Activity Zone Schedule 1 (ACZ1). It said that in relation to residential intensification which is envisaged for this area, the proposal would have a reverse adverse affect on adjoining sites ability to develop.
7	The Council also submitted that the proposed use would encourage the continued non-residential use of the land within the area which is also inconsistent with the ACZ1.
8	Precinct objectives of the ACZ1 for Precinct 6 include:
•	To provide diverse housing at increased densities in buildings up to and including four storey buildings
•	To promote a high standard of residential amenity for new development, including optimum solar access and privacy through design. 
•	To encourage a scale of development that provides a transition between areas of more intensive use and development and other residential areas. 
•	To encourage the consolidation of sites to facilitate a broader range of medium and higher density residential developments. 
•	To encourage the development of Lyall Street as a boulevard providing an eastwest link between the Retail Core West Precinct, High Street and the Casey Complex. 
•	To manage the interface with existing commercial uses to mitigate acoustic impacts on new residential development and ensure that new residential development includes appropriate acoustic protection.
9	Decision Guidelines in the ACZ1 include specific guidance for Precinct 6:
Non-residential use and development in Precinct 6 
•	Whether the proposed use or development is compatible with nearby residential uses. 
•	Whether the proposed use generally serves local community needs. 
•	The scale and intensity of the use and development. 
•	The design, height, setback and appearance of the proposed buildings and works. 
•	The proposed landscaping. 
•	The provision of car and bicycle parking and associated accessways. 
•	Any proposed loading and refuse collection facilities. 
•	The safety, efficiency and amenity effects of traffic to be generated by the proposal. 
10	The Schedule 1 does not prohibit Kindergartens in this precinct, as it does in some other precincts. So I find that there has been strategic intent not to prohibit such uses in this precinct whereas there has been a conscious intention to do so in others.
11	I am not persuaded that the proposal will hinder the realisation of the vision for this area as a future residential precinct. Whilst the primary purpose for this precinct is for residential intensification, the proposed used is not prohibited, and it has been a long-standing position of the Tribunal in a vast number of cases that child care centres, of which a kindergarten is included, are complementary uses to, and acceptable in, residential areas. 
12	In terms of the potential for adverse reverse effects on adjoining properties, clause 5.6-2 of the ACZ1 includes the following Objective:
•	To manage the interface with existing commercial uses to mitigate acoustic impacts on new residential development and ensure that new residential development includes appropriate acoustic protection.
13	I find that this makes it clear that the potential for future residential development to be impacted by existing commercial uses, is a consideration that would need to be taken into account at the time any such future residential development is considered.
14	Whilst the proposal may not exclusively serve the local community, I find that the prospect that this proposed kindergarten will largely serve local community needs is high. This is owing to the fact that it is within an existing residential area and also close to an existing primary school. Whilst it is possible that children who reside in more distant locations could attend the kindergarten I find that this is unlikely. 
15	The location of the review site within an existing residential area and one which is identified for further intensification adds credence to this use being appropriate as there is a prospect that with increased population will come increased demands for such uses. The Council said that encouragement of less vehicle dependence is an aspiration of the ACZ1 and I find the proposal is consistent with this.
16	The location of the review site is also proximate to commercial and industrial areas, with the core retail area of the activity centre approximately 500 metres to the west and an industrial or employment precinct approximately 600 metres to the north of the review site as well as recreational facilities such as Casey Stadium and Casey Recreation And Aquatic Centre to the east.
17	I find that given residential densities are forecast to increase in this location, the need for services and facilities that service future residents will also increase and the proposed use is complementary to this. To disallow such uses on the basis that it is non-residential, when also taking into account policy that seeks to reduce car dependency, is inconsistent with the purpose of the ACZ.
18	For these reasons, I find that the proposed use is acceptable.
is the proposed car parking acceptable?
Car Parking provision
19	The Council submitted that the reduction sought was not supported by the high level of usage of the on-street spaces adjacent to the primary school opposite the review site. It said that at peak times, being school drop-off and pick-up times, parking was at capacity and therefore there was insufficient availability in the on-street parking to accommodate the four space reduction sought. 
20	It further submitted that the proposed operating times of the kindergarten would result in some overlap of parents attending to drop off or pick up children from both sites even though the times did not directly conflict. 
21	The primary school start and finish times are 8:45am and 3:15pm respectively. The kindergarten proposes to operate between 9:15am and 2:15pm Monday to Friday.
22	The Council submitted that all of this would amount to prejudicial management of Bakewell Street and also impact the amenity of Bakewell Street. 
23	The Council’s traffic planning section internal referral response states the following:
Even though the proposed parking arrangement is not ideal, we will accept that parking shortfall of 4 spaces can be accommodated on street during the proposed pickup/drop off times.
24	This proposal requires a total of seven car parking spaces to be provided on-site. A total of three car parking spaces is proposed on site resulting a reduction of the car parking requirements of four spaces being sought.
25	Clause 52.06-7 of the scheme includes a number of decision guidelines that are relevant to this application but which I do not recite in full here. However, these include:
•	Any relevant local planning policy or incorporated plan. 
•	The availability of alternative car parking in the locality of the land, including: 	
•	Efficiencies gained from the consolidation of shared car parking spaces. 
•	Public car parks intended to serve the land. 
•	On street parking in non-residential zones.
•	Streets in residential zones specifically managed for non-residential parking
26	Clause 22.02, ‘Non-Residential Uses in Residential and Future Residential Areas Policy’, also applies to this proposal.
27	It includes the following policy objectives:
•	To facilitate, in appropriate locations, the establishment of non-residential uses that serve the needs of the local community. 
•	To reduce car dependency in Casey by encouraging non-residential uses to locate adjacent to an activity centre or commercial/industrial area, or within a recognised community activity cluster. 
•	To ensure the sensitive integration of complementary non-residential uses into residential areas. 
•	To ensure that non-residential uses in residential areas do not adversely affect residential amenity.
•	…
•	To ensure that residential and future residential areas do not become a repository for non-residential uses that are more appropriately located in a commercial/industrial area.
28	The following policy in that clause is also applicable:
•	In established residential areas, non-residential uses be located adjacent to an activity centre or commercial/industrial area, or within a recognised community activity cluster, and, wherever possible, nearby similar non-residential uses to reduce car dependency and maximise accessibility to public transport. 
•	In new and future residential areas, non-residential uses be clustered around planned activity centres. 
•	Non-residential uses be required to result in a net benefit and convenience to the local community. 
•	Non-residential uses be located along roads that are capable of carrying anticipated traffic volumes, such as arterial or collector roads, and on or close to a designated public transport route.
29	There are also performance standards within this clause and those specific to childcare centres (which includes a kindergarten), include:
•	Car parking should be provided at the rate of one space per staff member and one space per 20 children. 
•	A drive-through drop-off bay that caters for at least three vehicles, or three conveniently located short-term visitor spaces, should be provided.
30	I find that the proposed reduction of four car parking spaces for the proposal is acceptable. I find this for the following reasons.
31	The applicant submitted that Council’s policy at clause 22.02 would unlikely have contemplated the existence of on street public car parking opposite sites such as the review site. It submitted that this was a significant factor that weighed in favour of the reduction sought and variation from clause 22.02.
32	Whilst I find that it is somewhat speculative regarding whether or not the drafting of this policy would have contemplated the circumstances of the on street public car parking opposite the review site (or any site where similar circumstances apply), the existence of this public on street car parking opposite the review site is a significant factor to my findings.
33	I also accept that parking demand for this on street parking may be particularly high at peak times relating to the school start and finish times of the primary school opposite the review site.
34	However, the proposed operating hours of the kindergarten are not so close that I am concerned about the conflict or potential conflict between the two uses and that the outcome of approving this proposal would result in unacceptable traffic and car parking concerns as a result of the reduction.
35	The applicant submitted that a kindergarten use operates such that children are not able to be dropped off prior to the start time and so it is unlikely that parents would arrive to drop off children significantly before the start time of 9:15am. I accept this submission and that this further weighs in favour of the reduction sought and would reduce the potential for conflict between the primary school and kindergarten use and any necessity to utilise the on street car parking spaces to drop off or pick up children for each.
36	Furthermore, the Council accepted that there may be some synergies between both the primary school and the kindergarten use and I find that locating a kindergarten opposite a primary school would provide benefits for parents utilising both the school and the kindergarten and that to some extent, this would result in effectively a multipurpose trip which weighs in favour, at least in part, to the reduction that is being sought.
37	As I found earlier that the location of the proposed kindergarten in an existing residential area and a precinct within the ACZ that is identified for residential intensification is complementary to the existing residential uses and future residential intentions for this area, there will be a strong likelihood that both existing and future residents will utilise this kindergarten and could access it by walking, which is one of the policy aspirations under clause 22.02.
38	Although the proposal does not strictly meet the performance standards under clause 22.02 regarding car parking provision and a drop-off bay, the existence of the on-street car parking is a mitigating factor to those requirements in this case.
39	For these reasons I find that the proposed reduction sought is acceptable.
Car Parking Design
40	In terms of design, the Council was critical of the disabled space dimensions and adjacent ‘shared area’ as required by Australian Standard  AS/NZS2890.6:2009, for which compliance is required pursuant to Design Standard 2 of clause 52.06-9 of the Scheme.
41	It said that the proposed disabled space is 4.9 metres long by 2.4 metres wide where as the Australian Standard requires the length to be 5.4 metres. It also said that the shared area adjacent to this space requires a bollard under the Australian Standard.
42	In terms of the shared area, the Council submitted that the area adjacent to the disabled space was effectively the access way for one of the other car parking spaces on site and as such, was not able to include the required bollard and therefore did not comply with the Australian Standard.
43	The Australian standard requires a disabled car parking space to be 5.4 m long and 2.4 m wide. It also requires bollards to be provided within the shared area adjacent to a disabled car parking space.
44	The shared area is defined in the Australian standard as:
An area adjacent to a dedicated space provided for access or egress to or from a parked vehicle and which may be shared with any other purpose that does not involve other than transitory obstruction of the area, e.g. a walkway, a vehicular aisle, dual use with another adjacent dedicated space.
45	Although the wording of this definition is not particularly clear, the way I understand it is that “walkways, vehicular aisles and dual use with another adjacent dedicated space” areas are those which may be used as a shared area.
46	I find that it stands to reason that if a vehicular aisle is able to be used as a shared space, it is impractical and illogical that a permanent fixed bollard also be installed in this area.
47	The Applicant produced correspondence from a traffic engineer to the same effect.
48	I find that the Australian Standard in respect of the shared area adjacent to a disabled space is drafted in such a way that some practical interpretation of it needs to be applied in this instance. Whilst I accept the applicant’s submission that the shared area adjacent to the disabled space is one of those areas that is shared with another purpose, i.e. a vehicular aisle, and therefore a bollard is not practical or required in such an instance, I find that there is potential for this shared area to be utilised for the purposes of car parking and that this would compromise the intent behind the shared area adjacent to the disabled space. I will therefore require that a retractable or hinged bollard be placed in this shared area otherwise in accordance with the Australian Standard and appropriate line marking to indicate no vehicles are to park in that location be included as a condition on the permit.
49	The dimensions of the proposed disabled car parking space do not meet the minimum length as required under the Australian Standard but there is sufficient room to lengthen this space on the site and I will also require this to be undertaken as a condition on the permit, as well as the space identification and delineation requirements of the Australian Standard for a disabled car parking space.
50	For these reasons I find that the design of the proposed car parking is acceptable.
what waste collection arrangements are acceptable?
51	The Council submitted that its waste management department required private waste collection from within the site and that amended waste management plan would be required and which would need to provide swept path analysis that demonstrates that trucks are readily able to enter and exit the site in a forwards direction. The Council then submitted that based on the application plans this would not be able to be accommodated and therefore would have a negative impact on the amenity of the area as a result of unsafe and inefficient waste collection. 
52	The waste management plan that was submitted with the permit application was based on a child care centre and the waste generation rates were calculated accordingly. 
53	It appears that this waste management plan made some assumptions that did not directly correlate to the proposed use of the land as a kindergarten. The applicant submitted that there are inherent differences between a child care centre and a kindergarten in terms of the nature in the way they operate particularly with respect to waste generation. The applicant submitted that the kindergarten operates with a reduced level of waste generation compared with a child care centre as children were required to be toilet trained in order to attend the centre and that meals were not prepared on site and consequently waste generated from the kindergarten use would be lesser. 
54	In support of its submissions, the applicant tendered a letter from the same company that prepared the waste management plan. This letter altered the waste generation calculations based on the use of a kindergarten rather than a childcare centre. This information included that a total of 304 litres of general waste and 304 litres of recycling would be generated by the proposed kindergarten use and that this could be accommodated in two 240 litres bins for both types of waste resulting in a total of four 240 litre bins being required for the proposed use. It also stated that both general waste and recycling could be collected on street once a week either by Council or a private waste contractor. 
55	The key issue in contention in relation to waste management is whether a private waste collection service should be able to collect waste from within Bakewell Street, as opposed to on-site.
56	I find that a private waste collection service collecting from within the street is acceptable. In this case, I find that collecting from within the street is unlikely to cause any significant or unacceptable traffic or amenity impacts, particularly considering the likely waste generated from the proposed use. I have not found that a private waste collection service is required. However, should the Council and the operator come to an agreement for Council provided waste collection, this too will be acceptable.
57	I find that a total of four 240 litre bins being collected once a week is unlikely to result in a waste collection vehicle being present within the street for any significant period of time such that traffic impacts on amenity impacts would result. 
58	However, I also find that considering the existing primary school and the proposed kindergarten uses would have confined times of traffic generation and for which there would be a high volume of traffic generation, collection times of the waste from the proposed use should be restricted to be outside these times. I have therefore included a condition restricting waste collection outside of peak drop-off and pick-up times. 
Are there any other issues?
59	The Council submitted that a 2 metre wide landscaping strip should be provided between the car parking areas and the eastern boundary, consistent with the Council’s Child Minding Centres Policy, City of Casey, 1996. 
60	Currently, a 1 metre landscaping strip exists between the existing driveway and the eastern boundary, in front of the existing car port. The proposal is to retain this 1 metre wide landscaping strip.
61	I find that this is an acceptable outcome. Although the 2 metre width landscaping strip is not achieved in accordance with this policy, little will change between the existing conditions and the proposed, except for some increase in hard paving to the west of the existing driveway.  
62	The Council also said that acoustic fencing should be provided to the side and rear boundaries, given the proposed use could impact existing adjacent residential uses. 
63	I do not find that this is necessary, given the relatively large area of play space and the modest number of children allowed at the kindergarten.
Conclusion
64	For the reasons given above, the decision of the responsible authority is set aside.  A permit is granted subject to conditions.

Joel Templar 
Member			

Appendix A – Permit Conditions

Permit Application No	PlnA00372/18	
Land	45 Bakewell Street, Cranbourne	

What the permit allowS	
In accordance with the endorsed plans:
•	Use and development of the land for a kindergarten; and
•	Reduction of car parking requirements.	

Conditions
Amended Plans
1	Before the development starts, 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 three copies must be provided.  The plans must be generally in accordance with plans identified as Proposed Plan, Drawing No. MET 18-02 Sheet 3 of 4 dated 29/5/2018 and Proposed Elevations Drawing No. MET 18-02 Sheet 4 of 4 dated 29/5/2018, but modified to show:
(a)	Location and associated screening of a waste storage area;
(b)	Installation of a retractable or hinged bollard in the shared area adjacent to the disabled car parking space;
(c)	Line-marking in the shared area adjacent to the disabled car parking space indicating that it is a no standing area;
(d)	Dimensions, identification and delineation for the disabled space in accordance with Australian Standard AS/NZS2890.6:2009;
(e)	Any requirements set out in the amended Waste Management Plan required by condition 6; and
(f)	A schedule of construction materials, external finishes and colours.
2	The bollard in the shared area adjacent to the disabled space and referred to in condition 1(b) must be in a vertical position when vehicles are not traversing that area to access car parking space number 1.
3	No vehicles are permitted to parked in the shared area adjacent to the disabled car parking space.
4	Before the development starts, a Noise Management Plan must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority.  When approved, the plan will be endorsed and form part of the permit.  The plan must set out practical measures to be taken as part of the day-to-day operation of the child care centre to minimise its noise impacts eg suitable signage in the centre lobby and suitable ‘please minimise noise impacts on neighbours’ type of reminders in the ‘starter pack’ for new parents to the centre and in the regular centre newsletters.  This plan must provide that no deliveries to the centre be made before 7.00 am.
5	Concurrent with the plans submitted under condition 1, an amended Waste Management Plan 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. It must be generally in accordance with the letter dated 11 April 2019 by Sustainable Development Consultants, Document number S3432.01 but amended to demonstrate:
(a)	How waste generated by the proposed centre will be stored and collected.
(b)	The location of on-site waste bin storage areas screened from public view.
(c)	The location of on-street waste bin collection points.
Layout not to be Altered
6	The use and development as shown on the endorsed plan/s must not be altered without the written consent of the Responsible Authority.
7	Once the development has started it must be continued and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
Landscape Plans
8	Before the development starts, a landscape plan prepared by a person suitably qualified or experienced in landscape design 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 on A1 sized paper, with dimensions and must be provided.  The plan must show:
(a)	A survey (including botanical names, trunk location, trunk diameter and canopy spread) of all existing vegetation. The survey must clearly mark existing vegetation to be retained and removed. The survey must also include any street trees located on adjoining Council road reserves.
(b)	Buildings and trees (including botanical names, trunk location, trunk diameter and canopy spread) on neighbouring properties within three metres of the boundary.
(c)	Details of surface finishes of pathways and driveways.
(d)	A 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.
(e)	Landscaping and planting within all open areas of the site, including;
i	Within the carparking area/s.
ii	A landscape strip, a minimum 2 metres wide, along the frontage to Bakewell.
iii	A landscaping strip a minimum of 1.0 metre wide where possible along the western and eastern side boundaries.
(f)	Medium canopy trees (minimum two metres tall when planted) within the development site and which are suitable species for planting in sensitive use areas. 
Landscape – General Requirements
9	A minimum 1200mm diameter organic mulch cover must be installed around any retained or proposed trees located in lawn areas.
10	Landscaped areas must be planted with shrub and groundcover species, such that 12 months after the initial planting, at least 85% of the relevant available soil area has been actively ‘planted out’.
11	All garden beds adjoining turf or gravel surfaces must have hard garden edging
12	All species selected must be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.  Landscaping must demonstrate the use of sustainable practices and if irrigation is to be provided it must not use potable water. Any planting within an easement must utilise species suitable for planting within easements and must have a natural growing height of no more than two metres.
13	Water sensitive urban design should feature in the overall landscape design, linking the internal landscape design with the external wetland environment. 
14	The landscaping shown on the endorsed plans must be maintained in accordance with the endorsed plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.  Areas shown on the endorsed plan as landscaped must not be used for any other purpose.  For the avoidance of doubt, maintaining landscaping includes the removal and replacement of any dead, diseased or damaged plants.

Construction Activities
15	Construction activities must be managed so that the amenity of the area is not detrimentally affected, through the:
(a)	Transport of materials, goods or commodities to or from the land.
(b)	Inappropriate storage of any works or construction materials.
(c)	Hours of construction activity.
(d)	Emission of noise, artificial light, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke, vapour, steam, soot, ash, dust, waste and storm water runoff, waste products, grit or oil.
(e)	Presence of vermin.
(f)	Appropriate sediment control measures must be undertaken during construction to ensure that the development site is adequately managed in such a way that no mud, dirt, sand, soil, clay or stones are washed into or allowed to enter the stormwater drainage system.
16	Any filling of the land must occur in a manner that does not:
(a)	Cause an unreasonable amount of dust to be carried onto nearby land; and,
(b)	Adversely affect the drainage of adjacent land.
Drainage Conditions - General
17	Polluted drainage must not be discharged beyond the boundaries of the lot from which it emanates, or into a watercourse or easement drain, but must be treated and/or absorbed on that lot to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
18	Stormwater must not be discharged from the site other than by means of an underground pipe drain discharged to an approved outlet to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
19	An outfall drain must be constructed from the site to the existing stormwater drainage pit located on the northern boundary to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
20	Appropriate sediment control measures must be undertaken during construction to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority to ensure that no mud, dirt, sand, soil, clay or stones are washed into or allowed to enter the stormwater drainage system.
21	Soil erosion control measures must be employed throughout the construction stage of the development to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
22	All works must be undertaken in a manner that minimises soil erosion, and any exposed areas of soil must be stabilised to prevent soil erosion, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
23	The proponent must construct the outfall drainage providing a legal point of stormwater discharge to each dwelling.
Before the Use Commences
24	The use must not commence until the following works have been completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority:
(a)	The entrance/s to the development site and pedestrian links are provided with secure lighting installed to Australian Standards and to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
(b)	The areas set aside for car parking and access on the endorsed plan have been:
(c)	Constructed with an all-weather seal coat, concrete or asphalt as per the endorsed plans.
(d)	Properly formed to such levels that they can be used in accordance with the plans.
(e)	Drained.
(f)	Line marked to indicate each car space and all access lanes.
(g)	Clearly marked and signposted to show the direction of traffic and to distinguish short term and staff parking
(h)	The landscaping works shown on the endorsed plans have been carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
(i)	A letter box and street number have been provided to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
Use Conditions
25	The use may operate only between the hours of 9.15am to 2.15pm Monday to Friday.
26	Waste collection must not occur between the hours of 8:30am and 9:30am and 2:00pm and 3:30pm Monday to Friday.
27	Not more than 33 children may be present on the premises at any one time without the written consent of the Responsible Authority
28	Noise levels emanating from the premises must not exceed those required to be met under State Environment Protection Policy (Control of Noise from Commerce, Industry and Trade), No. N-1.
29	The use and development must be managed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority so that the amenity of the area is not detrimentally affected, through the:
(a)	Transport of materials, goods or commodities to or from the land.
(b)	Appearance of any building, works or materials.
(c)	Emission of noise, artificial light, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke, vapour, steam, soot, ash, dust, waste water, waste products, grit or oil.
(d)	Presence of vermin.
Expiry of permit for use & development
30	This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:
(a)	The development is not started within two years of the issue date of this permit.
(b)	The development is not completed within four years of the issue date of this permit.
(c)	The use does not commence within two years of the completion of the development.
In accordance with section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, an application may be submitted to the responsible authority for an extension of the periods referred to in this condition.

– End of conditions –