VICTORIAN CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
planning and environment division
planning and environment LIST	vcat reference No. P1754/2019
Permit Application no. P/2018/6740	
CATCHWORDS	
Section 77 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, Knox planning scheme, Repeal appeals, Neighbourhood character, clause 71.02, Landscaping	

APPLICANT	Z & H Management Pty Ltd	
responsible authority	Knox City Council	
RESPONDENTs	Vanessa Hall & Others, Mark Kochan, Bruce Paterson	
SUBJECT LAND	24-26 Taylors Lane, Rowville	
WHERE HELD	Melbourne	
BEFORE	Tracey Bilston-McGillen, Member	
HEARING TYPE	Hearing	
DATE OF HEARING	18 February 2020	
DATE OF ORDER	17 March 2020	
CITATION	Z & H Management Pty Ltd v Knox CC [2020] VCAT 279 	

Order
1	Pursuant to clause 64 of Schedule 1 of the Victorian Civil & Administrative Tribunal Act 1998, the permit application is amended by substituting for the permit application plans, the following plans filed with the Tribunal:
•	Prepared by:		Jess Ant Architects
•	Drawing numbers:	TP05 to TP14
•	Dated:			07.01.2020
2	In application P1754/2019 the decision of the responsible authority is set aside.
3	In planning permit application P/2018/6740 a permit is granted and directed to be issued for the land at 24-26 Taylors Lane, Rowville in accordance with the endorsed plans and the conditions set out in Appendix A.  The permit allows:
•	Development of the land for 11 double storey and seven (7) single storey dwellings (total 18 dwellings).

Tracey Bilston-McGillen
Member			

Appearances
For applicant	Mr Andrew Clarke, town planning consultant, Clarke Planning.	
For responsible authority	Mr Darren Wong, Solicitor Planology.	
For respondent	Ms Vanessa Hall and Mr Mark Kochan appeared in person.
Mr Bruce Paterson made a submission by telephone.	

Information
Description of proposal	It is proposed to construct eighteen dwellings with vehicular access provided along two, east-west aligned driveways (except for proposed dwelling no. 1 which features its own access directly off Taylors Lane). 
All dwellings are two storeys except for townhouses 4, 9 and 14 located on the eastern boundary and townhouses 15 – 18 located along the southern boundary which are all single storey.
Three visitor car spaces are proposed. 
All dwellings are provided with a double garage with the exception of townhouse 13 provided with a single car space (noting the townhouse is two bedroom).  	
Nature of proceeding	Application under section 77 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 – to review the refusal to grant a permit. 	
Planning scheme	Knox Planning Scheme.	
Zone and overlays	Clause 32.08 – General Residential Zone, Schedule 2.	
Permit requirements	Clause 32.08-6 – Construct two or more dwellings on a lot. 	
Relevant scheme policies and provisions	Clauses 11, 15, 16, 21.01, 21.02, 21.03, 21.05, 21.06, 22.07, 32.08, 52.06, 55, 65 and 71.02.   	
Land description	The subject site is located on the eastern side of Taylors Lane and is currently developed with a single dwelling. The subject site is a rectangular shape with a frontage of 75.4 metres and a depth of 84.1 metres, yielding a site area of 6,330m2. The subject site is located in a residential area.	
Tribunal inspection	I inspected the site and surrounds.   	

Reasons
What is this proceeding about?
1	This is an application for review against the decision of the Council to refuse to grant a planning permit for the construction of eighteen dwellings at 24-26 Taylors Lane, Rowville.  Council refused the proposal on the grounds that the proposed built form is inconsistent with the requirements of policies at clauses 15.01, 21.04, 21.05 and 22.07 generally all relating to neighbourhood character, the design has not addressed the issues outlined in the previous VCAT decision, is an overdevelopment of the site and fails to achieve a number of clause 55 ResCode provisions.
2	The objectors raised matters of neighbourhood character, overdevelopment and traffic and parking issues.  
3	The permit applicant put that the proposed development has responded to the previous Tribunal decision and on balance the proposed development is a development that responds to its interfaces appropriately.
4	This is a repeat appeal.  It was agreed at the hearing that we are all familiar with the principles of repeat appeals and the decisions of Sprut, Amoco and Zumpano were referenced.  In considering this application against the repeat appeals principles, I note that there has been no significant change to the physical or planning policy context.  Council and the objectors put that the proposed development is very similar to the previously refused development whilst the applicant submitted that the design has made some significant changes.  

Figure 1: Proposed development.  

5	On first review, the proposed development plans appear similar to the previous scheme.  The road layout is the same, the access points the same and the layout of the houses is similar.  However, I am persuaded by the applicant, that there have been changes made to the plans including:
•	The overall number of houses has been reduced from 20 dwellings to 18.
•	The number of single storey dwellings has been increased from four to seven.
•	There has been a variation to the setbacks to the north, east and southern boundaries. 
•	There has been a variation to the design detailing of the proposed houses.
6	Based on the principles of repeat appeals, I have had regard and give weight to the decision of Z & H Management Pty Ltd but I am also to consider the proposed development on its merits.  
7	In June 2018, the Tribunal affirmed the decision of the Council and ordered that no permit be granted for the construction of twenty dwellings including single and two storeys dwellings.  I have reviewed the decision and make the following background observations:
•	There was no dispute that the subject site is suitable for some form of future medium density housing development.  It is noted that the GRZ supports housing growth and increased housing diversity.
•	There was no issue with the traffic and parking impacts of the proposal.  Whilst objectors raised concerns with traffic and parking, the Tribunal noted that the proposal complied with the provisions of clause 52.06.  The Tribunal found that the proposal is acceptable in relation to all traffic and parking considerations.
•	The Tribunal determined that the key issue related to the proposal’s impact on the neighbourhood character of the area.  In the decision, the following observation is made:
[7]	Broadly, I cannot take issue with any of these submissions and agree that all of these matters support future medium density housing on the subject site which will result in a degree of change in this neighbourhood. The subject site is located in the Knox Neighbourhood Area pursuant to Clause 21.02 of the planning scheme. I note that, ‘villa unit’ developments are supported on larger blocks (such as the subject site) in the Knox Neighbourhood Areas. However, I find that the level of change proposed in this design response goes beyond what is an acceptable planning outcome in this unique context.
[8]	Ultimately, I must be satisfied that the neighbourhood character objectives at Clause 55.02-1 of the planning scheme have been met, and in this case I am unable to do so.
•	The key neighbourhood character concerns identified by Member Watson include:
o	The design response goes beyond what is an acceptable planning outcome in this unique context.  The design response fails to sufficiently respond to both the existing physical context of the site as well as its policy context.
o	The proposal failed to appropriately respond to the sensitive interfaces to its south, east and north (where it abuts 24 Murray Crescent).
o	Properties to the east along the southern side of Murray Crescent are significantly larger than conventional suburban allotments and are in the order of 2,000m2.
o	Properties to the south along Norris Road are in the order of 4,000m2 and zoned Low Density Residential where the minimum permissible lot size is 0.4 hectares.  Norris Street has a distinctive character reflected in its Bush Suburban classification under clause 21.02 of the planning scheme.  The preferred future character of the Bush Suburban Areas pursuant to clause 22.07-3 reads “Continues to be low-scale neighbourhoods where significant vegetation is retained and complemented”.
o	The proposal fails to adequately retain the ‘green and leafy’ character sought for the Knox Neighbourhood Areas (as set out in clause 22.07-4).
o	In future, consideration should be given to how greater setbacks can be provided around all of the side boundaries, as well as between the proposed buildings at both the ground and first floor levels.
o	The street setback at 7 metres failed to comply with clause 55.03-1.  
o	The development needs to respond to the overall sense of spaciousness which is a key characteristic of the properties along the southern side of Murray Crescent and Norris Road.
8	It is accepted that developments are not expected to replicate existing built forms but are encouraged to ‘fit in’ with the neighbourhood.  The Planning Practice Note ‘Understanding Neighbourhood Character’ addresses the question what does ‘respect’ mean and states:
Respecting character does not mean preventing change. The neighbourhood character standard is not intended to result in the replication of existing building stock or stop change.
Neighbourhood character is one of many objectives that must be met. Some areas will see significant changes as a result of new social and economic conditions, changing housing preferences and explicit housing policies. In these areas, it is important that respecting character is not taken too literally, as a new character will emerge in response to these new social and economic conditions.
In simple terms, respect for the character of a neighbourhood means that the development should try to ‘fit in’. Depending on the neighbourhood, there are two broad approaches to respecting character:
•	respecting the scale and form of surrounding development
•	respecting the architectural style of surrounding development.
•	I agree with the observations in the previous case, that this dispute is about neighbourhood character.  However, unlike Member Watson, I find that the proposed development of the site for eighteen dwellings is an appropriate ‘fit’ in the neighbourhood character when you balance all competing objectives.  It is an accepted planning principle that: 
Neighbourhood character is not a static concept, it is dynamic and evolves over time to meet contemporary housing needs. For example, respecting character does not mean protecting character in an incremental change area. 
•	Clause 71.02-3 requires a decision maker to balance competing objectives in favour of net community benefit and in this case, that means balancing character, housing diversity in this location and achieving suitable internal/external amenity outcomes.  It is policy to:
Planning and responsible authorities should endeavour to integrate the range of planning policies relevant to the issues to be determined and balance conflicting objectives in favour of net community benefit and sustainable development for the benefit of present and future generations. However, in bushfire affected areas, planning and responsible authorities must prioritise the protection of human life over all other policy considerations. 
9	Despite the site being located within an area that has seen relatively little change and being a site that abuts to the south a LDRZ, these facts do not require development to be single or two storey detached dwellings.  
10	Having regard to the submissions, my site inspection and the earlier Tribunal decision, I have decided to set aside the decision of Council and order that a permit be granted subject to conditions.  My reasons follow.
Reasons for decision
11	As I have stated above, this case focusses on neighbourhood character.  This case is not about the matters of car parking and traffic, dwelling density and diversity or internal amenity but I will address these issues now.
12	The resident objectors submitted that there is insufficient parking provided on site and the increase in traffic will have adverse impacts on Taylors Lane.  This issue was addressed in Z & H Management Pty Ltd v Knox CC where the Tribunal accepted the evidence of Ms Marshall and concluded that the proposal is acceptable in relation to all traffic and parking considerations.  I see no reason to depart from this finding.  In this case, the provision of parking complies with the provision of clause 52.06 and the increase in traffic is considered acceptable.
13	Council submitted that the planning scheme’s approach to implementing urban consolidation is through a scaled approach to residential development, that is, there are areas of the municipality where growth is to be targeted and where growth is discouraged.  The review site is located in the Knox Neighbourhood area.  Council put to me that the scheme expresses a strong policy position to direct growth away from this area, this does not mean no development but there is a strategic imperative to maximize development opportunities in areas such as Local Living and Activity Areas.  I agree that a strategy of clause 21.06 reads:
Direct growth away from Bush Suburban and Knox Neighbourhood areas.
14	I am not persuaded that policy at clause 21.06 means or should be interpreted as ‘no growth’.  Policy under dwelling diversity goes on to identify that single dwellings on large blocks remain the dominant form of housing and that the ‘current sizes and types of housing overall are inadequate to respond to the increasing demand for smaller dwellings, particularly from sole and older person households’.  These policies demonstrate the range of policies that are to be considered and balanced when making a decision.
15	Council also criticised the development for lack of diversity.  I am persuaded by the applicant that the proposal includes diversity in the form of single and two storey forms, attached and detached housing and there is a two bedroom dwelling.  
16	Residents raised the issue of amenity in terms of the level of sunlight the proposed dwellings would receive given some secluded private open space is to the south.  I note that the proposed development complies with ResCode Standard B29 Solar access to open space.  I further make the observation that the level of open space to the proposed dwellings complies with the provisions of the planning scheme.  I find the level of internal amenity to the proposed dwellings acceptable.

Figure 2: Review site and surrounds. 
Neighbourhood character
17	This is a neighbourhood character case.  I was referred to a number of cases in Murray Crescent (the road to the east or rear of the site) where, in each case, the proposed development of the land has been refused by the Tribunal.  Council put to me that there has been a consistent approach of the Tribunal in considering the appropriateness of development in this location.  It was further submitted that each decision adopted the approach that a buffer or transition is required between the setback of the review site and the land adjoining to the south in the LDRZ.  
18	Policy at clause 22.07 Development in Residential Areas and Neighbourhood Character includes the site in a character area Knox Neighbourhood.  These areas are identified as:
Knox Neighbourhood areas have the characteristics that many people value about living in Knox – a sense of open space, fresh air, trees and large backyards. In this sense, they are ‘typical Knox’ and represent the majority of Knox’s residential areas. Some areas have access to bus services, but in many locations the car is the main way of getting around. 
19	The preferred future character is for these areas to continue to be low-scale neighbourhoods, characterised by detached houses, dual occupancies and some villa units whilst retaining the green and leafy identity through the retention of front and back yards with a garden setting that includes canopy trees.  The design objectives and guidelines include:
Design Objectives 
•	To retain and enhance the streetscape by the planting of appropriate trees on private land. To avoid the dominance of buildings from the street.
•	To avoid the loss of front and rear garden space.
•	To avoid the dominance of car storage facilities from the street. 
•	To retain large backyards for landscaping and open space.
•	To require buildings to reflect the prevailing scale of buildings in the street. 
Design Guidelines 
•	Design buildings to accommodate landscaping including canopy trees in front and rear gardens. Retain existing canopy trees and understorey planting, wherever possible. 
•	Provide a landscaped front and rear yard and plant indigenous canopy trees in accordance with the requirements of the applicable zone schedule. 
•	In developments of three or more dwellings, require the rear dwelling to be single storey in height. 
•	Provide single crossovers for driveways.
•	Locate carports and garages behind the line of the dwelling or in the rear yard. Minimise the amount of paving in front yards and driveways.
•	Design new buildings to incorporate pitched, hipped or gabled roof forms. Significantly set back first floor levels from the ground floor level.
•	Provide no, low or transparent front fencing. 
20	In Z & H Management Pty Ltd the Tribunal noted that the character of the LDRZ is an important sensitivity which needs to be appropriately considered and that, in each of the Tribunal cases identified above, they accepted the relevance of the physical interface context between the Knox Neighbourhood Area and the Bush Suburban Area.  For this site, it was submitted that ‘this principle is even more relevant to this proceeding, where the subject site has two distinctive, sensitive character interfaces (being the Murray Crescent properties; and the properties with an abuttal to Norris Road)’.  The decision also makes the observation that the proposal arguably responds appropriately to its conventional suburban interface (to the west) but fails to do so to the east, south and north where it abuts 24 Murray Crescent.
21	I agree that the interfaces of the site are an important consideration.  The review site has an interface to the LDRZ to the south, but to the eastern boundary the zoning is GRZ2, the same as the review site.  The density and character of development to the south is different but that is due to the zoning provisions setting minimum lot sizes.  To the east, the lots in Murray Crescent again are larger than the conventional suburban lot sizes, but this is a product of the subdivision of the time.  
22	The proposed development is a higher density than the surrounding area but if you look to the broader area, there are some large houses that occupy a substantial area of the lot.  As I have discussed above, respecting the neighbourhood character of the area is not about replicating what currently exists, that is, detached dwellings on large lots.  The characteristics I consider important to respect neighbourhood character include continuing the ‘green and leafy’ feel of the area, a level of spaciousness as viewed from Taylors Lane and development that will sit comfortably within its environment.  I find the proposed development appropriate for the following reasons.
23	Policy identifies the desire to facilitate development that contributes to the ‘strong green and leafy’ character of Knox.  On my inspection, the level of vegetation within the surrounding area varied.  Even in Norris Street the LDRZ area to the south, some sites had been largely cleared of vegetation, some houses with no vegetation within front setbacks.  Having said that, some sites were heavily vegetated such the immediately adjoining sites to the south of the review site. 
24	Council considers that a more generous landscape response is required.  Council also contended that the planting of tall trees so close to dwellings will inevitably lead to requests for trees to be removed.
25	A landscape plan was prepared by John Patrick Landscape Architects.  This plan provided detail as to what is proposed for the site including permitter planting, a combination of canopy trees, shrubs and ground cover planting.  The applicant submitted that the plan represents the planting of 80 new trees or 4.4 trees per dwelling achieving a height taller than the proposed two storey dwellings.  
26	Having regard to the landscape plan and proposed tree planting, I consider the rear setbacks of the dwellings on the northern, eastern and southern boundaries to be acceptable.  These setbacks provide for a combination of canopy trees as well as smaller shrubs and ground covers.  It is not the intention of policy to create a forest, this is an urban piece of land.  The planting will contribute to the green and leafy character of the area.
27	The design guidelines seek for development in the rear to be single storey, single crossovers for driveways, minimise paving in front yards or driveways, new buildings to have pitched, hipped or gabled roof forms and set back the first floor levels from the ground and low front fencing.  
28	The proposed development provides for single storey development to be sited along the eastern and southern boundaries.  The parties considered that both boundaries could be considered as ‘rear’ boundaries.  Development along the eastern and southern boundaries is set a minimum of five metres to the south, with the exception of a three metre setback to dwelling 1 and five metres to the eastern dwellings.  I consider this to be an acceptable outcome.  The proposed houses have hipped roofs and the garages do not dominate the street frontage.  There is only one wall on the boundary, the garage wall to dwelling 1 on the northern boundary.  This is considered acceptable.
29	I acknowledge that there is a sense of openness in this location.  But it is largely contributed to by the existence of the LDRZ located to the south and until a zoning change was to occur, it will remain like this.  But in a GRZ area the expectation is for some level of change.  In this case, the change is a more intense form of development, but I find that the development maintains the desired landscape outcomes sought for the neighbourhood.  
30	Council put to me that there is no tension in the Knox planning scheme between the competing objectives of neighbourhood character and urban consolidation.  It was put that this is due to the directed hierarchy of development with the more intense development to be focussed in activity centres and local living areas.  I am not persuaded by this submission.  The activity centres and local living areas are limited with the majority of the municipality identified as Knox Neighbourhood.  In this case, I have considered clause 71.02-3 and have balanced competing objectives in favour of net community benefit.  I find the development, whilst more intense, is the level of development anticipated in a GRZ area and will adequately ‘fit in’ with the surrounding area.  The landscaping of the site is important to it ‘fitting in’ with the area and it is incumbent on Council to ensure that the landscaping is fully completed.
Conclusion
31	For the reasons given above, the decision of the responsible authority is set aside.  A permit is granted subject to conditions.

Tracey Bilston-McGillen
Member			

Appendix A – Permit Conditions

Permit Application No	P/2018/6740	
Land	24 – 26 Taylors Lane, Rowville	

What the permit allowS	
In accordance with the endorsed plans:
•	Development of the land for 11 double storey and seven (7) single storey dwellings (total 18 dwellings).	

Conditions
Amended Development Plans
1	Prior to the commencement of the development approved under this Permit, amended development plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority.  The development plans must be approved prior to other plans required by this permit.  When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit.  The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions.  The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans substituted with VCAT prepared by Jesse Ant, Drawing Nos TP05-14 inclusive, Amendment C dated 7 January 2020 but modified to show:
(a)	The front fence post adjacent the northern boundary fence reduced to a height of 900mm.
(b)	Annotation stating, ‘all structures (including fences, letterboxes and meter boxes) must be constructed to a maximum height of 900mm or relocated clear of a splayed area near the access way to ensure safe sight distances.’  Letterboxes must front the street.
(c)	Annotation on the plans stating that windows to be screened will have fixed obscure glazing (non-openable) to a height of 1.7 metres above finished floor level.  The windows may be clear and openable above 1.7 metres.  Adhesive film must not be used.
(d)	Delete reference of water tanks from Development Plans, with an annotation to “refer to approved Drainage Plans for location and capacity of rainwater tanks”. 
(e)	Tree Protection Fencing to be drawn on the Development Plans in accordance with Conditions 16-23 of this Permit.
(f)	All levels to be to AHD (Australian Height Datum).
(g)	An amended Sustainable Design Assessment in accordance with Condition 12 of this Permit.
(h)	An amended Waste Management Plan in accordance with Condition 14 of this Permit, which must include provision for storage and collection of all waste streams.  Swept path diagrams for collection vehicles must be provided to demonstrate accessibility for collection vehicles including on-site manoeuvring and that vehicles can exit and enter in a forwards direction.
(i)	Any changes to the plans as a result of the approved Waste Management Plan required by Condition 14 of this Permit.
To the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
Other Plans
2	Prior to the commencement of the development and issue of a Building Permit for the development approved under this Permit, the following plans and computations must be submitted to the Responsible Authority as a complete set.  When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit.  Construction must be in accordance with these plans.  The plans must comprise the following:
(a)	Drainage plans in accordance with Condition 3 of this Permit.
(b)	Landscape plans in accordance with Condition 4 of this Permit.
(c)	Construction Management Plan in accordance with Condition 17 of this Permit.
To the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
Drainage Plans
3	Prior to the commencement of the development approved under this Permit, drainage plans and computations must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority.  Construction of the drainage must be in accordance with these plans.  The plans must show the following:
(a)	All stormwater drainage discharge from the site connected to a legal point of discharge.
(b)	The internal drains of the dwellings to be independent of each other.
(c)	An on-site detention system designed by a suitably qualified Civil Engineering Consultant to ensure no net increase in stormwater discharge from the proposed development.
(d)	The on-site detention system to be installed in a suitable location for easy access and maintenance.
(e)	A suitable overland flow path for the entire site to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.  Details of the overland flow path are to be included on the plans.
(f)	Any Environmental Sustainable Design initiatives shown on the Development Plans approved pursuant to Condition 1 of this permit.
(g)	Location of fencing in accordance with the Development Plans approved pursuant to Condition 1 of this permit.
(h)	All levels to be to AHD (Australian Height Datum).
To the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
Landscaping 
4	Prior to the commencement of the development approved under this Permit, a landscape plan prepared by a suitably qualified Landscape architect or a suitably qualified landscape designer to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.  When approved, the plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit.  The plan must show:
(a)	A survey (including botanical names, height and width) of all existing vegetation to be retained and / or removed.
(b)	The identification and removal of all vegetation identified as an environmental weed in Knox (as outlined in Council’s ‘Landscape Plan Guidelines).
(c)	Buildings and trees (including botanical names, height and width) on neighbouring properties within three metres of the boundary including all trees that have their Tree Protection Zone extending into the subject site.
(d)	Details of the surface finishes of pathways and driveways.
(e)	Details and location of all existing and proposed services including above and below ground lines, cables and pipes.
(f)	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.
(g)	Landscaping and planting within all open areas of the site (including additional planting within open space areas of the existing dwelling/s).
(h)	The plan must also show the provision of at least 38 trees and at least 20 medium/large shrubs.  They must be located on the site to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. 
To the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
5	Before the occupation of the development, the landscaping works shown on the endorsed plans must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.
6	The landscaping shown on the endorsed plans must be maintained to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.  Any dead, diseased or damaged plants are to be replaced.
General
7	All development must be in accordance with the endorsed plans.
8	The layout of buildings and works as shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered without the written consent of the Responsible Authority.  This does not apply to:
(a)	an open-sided pergola to a dwelling with a finished floor level not more than 800mm above ground level and a maximum building height of three metres above ground level; or
(b)	a deck to a dwelling with a finished floor level not more than 800mm above ground level,
where the total floor area of decks, pergolas and verandahs for each dwelling does not exceed 16m2.  
9	Once the development has started it must be continued and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
10	Prior to the occupation of the dwellings the development is to be completed in accordance with the endorsed plan/s to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
11	All walls on the boundaries of adjoining properties must be cleaned and finished to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
Sustainable Design Assessment
12	Prior to the commencement of the development approved under this Permit, an amended Sustainable Design Assessment detailing Sustainable Design initiatives to be incorporated into the development must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority.  The Sustainable Design Assessment must outline the proposed sustainable design initiatives to be incorporated throughout the development such as (but not limited to) energy efficiency, water conservation, stormwater quality, waste management and material selection, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.  To satisfy Council’s integrated water management requirements, total rainwater tank capacity must be increased to 63,000 litres ((3,500 litres per dwelling).  An InSite Report or equivalent must be provided.
13	Prior to the occupation of the development, the development must be constructed in accordance with the Sustainable Design Assessment.
Waste Management Plan
14	Prior to the commencement of the development approved under this Permit, an amended Waste Collection and Management Plan must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority, demonstrating how waste collection will be undertaken on site, including the operation of the garbage and recyclables storage area.  Garbage and recyclables storage and collection must be undertaken in accordance with the approved plan/documentation, and must be undertaken by a private contractor, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.  Council will not collect waste from the proposed development.
Street Tree Removal
15	Prior to the commencement of the development approved under this Permit, all costs associated with the removal of the street tree/s (amenity value, tree and stump removal and planting and maintaining a new tree) must be paid to Council by the owner/developer.  The removal and replacement of the street tree/s must be undertaken by Council.
Tree Protection
16	All works, including excavation, within the critical root zone areas of the tree/s to be retained and other critical root zones on the land must be undertaken under the supervision of a qualified Arborist to ensure that there is no unreasonable damage to the root system of trees to be retained and/or protected, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.  Before the development starts, the owner must submit to the Responsible Authority details of the name of the Arborist who will supervise the works and the tasks to be undertaken by the Arborist, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
17	Prior to any works commencing on the site (including demolition and tree removal), all trees and vegetation to be retained including other critical root zones must be fenced off to create a protection zone.  The protection zone must extend around the trees canopy drip-line unless an alternative tree protection zone has been approved by the Responsible Authority.  
18	The fence is to be chain link or wire mesh, comprise either wooden or steel posts set into the ground or on concrete pads, and be a minimum height of 1.8 metres.  Signage is to be affixed to the fence advising that the area is a tree protection zone and a no-go development area.
19	The fence and signage is to be maintained throughout the construction period and removed at the completion of all works.
20	No temporary removal of the fence, or encroachment into the protection zone is permitted without the written consent of the responsible authority.
21	Prior to erecting the fence around the tree protection zone, all unwanted vegetation and weed species must be removed from within the zone, and the ground within the protection zone must be covered with a layer of well composted organic mulch (maximum 100mm depth).  The area is to be watered at least fortnightly throughout the construction period.
22	The following activities are prohibited from the tree protection area, without the written consent of the responsible authority:
(a)	Construction activities.
(b)	Dumping and/or storage of materials, goods and/or soil.
(c)	Trenching or excavation.
(d)	Lopping branches, nailing or affixing signs, service lines, lights etc to the trees.
23	Prior to any works commencing on site, the Responsible Authority must be contacted to inspect the Tree Protection fencing.
Car Parking & Accessways
24	Before the dwellings are occupied, driveways and car parking areas must be:
(a)	Fully constructed to the minimum standard of 100mm reinforced concrete and available for use in accordance with the plans submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority; and
(b)	Formed to such levels and drained so that they can be used in accordance with the approved plan; and
(c)	Treated with an all-weather seal or some other durable surface; and
(d)	Line-marked or provided with some other adequate means of showing the car parking spaces. 
To the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
25	Parking areas and driveways must be kept available and maintained for these purposes at all times to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
26	Before the development is occupied vehicular crossing(s) must be constructed to align with approved driveways to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.  All redundant crossing(s), crossing opening(s) or parts thereof must be removed and replaced with footpath, naturestrip and kerb and channel to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
Construction Management Plan
27	Prior to the commencement of the development approved under this Permit, a Construction and Traffic Management Plan (CMP) to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority.  When approved, the plan will be endorsed as evidence of its approval and will then form part of the permit and must thereafter be complied with.  The CMP must specify and deal with, but is not limited to, the following:
(a)	A detailed schedule of works including a full project timing;
(b)	A traffic management plan for the site, including when or whether any access points would be required to be blocked, an outline of requests to occupy public footpaths or roads, or anticipated disruptions to local services; and preferred routes for trucks delivering to the site.  The traffic management measures must minimise disruption to the operation of roadway during construction;
(c)	The location for the parking of all construction vehicles and construction worker vehicles during construction;
(d)	A fully detailed plan indicating where construction hoardings would be located;
(e)	A waste management plan including the containment of waste on site, disposal of waste, stormwater treatment and on-site facilities for vehicle washing;
(f)	Containment of dust, dirt and mud within the site and method and frequency of clean up procedures in the event of build-up of matter outside the site;
(g)	Site security;
(h)	Public safety measures;
(i)	Construction times, noise and vibration controls;
(j)	Restoration of any Council assets removed and/or damaged during construction;
(k)	Protection works necessary to road and other infrastructure (limited to an area reasonably proximate to the site);
(l)	Remediation of any damage to road and other infrastructure (limited to an areas reasonably proximate to the site);
(m)	An emergency contact that is available for 24 hours a day; 
(n)	All contractors associated with the construction of the development must be made aware of the requirements of the Construction Management Plan.
28	During the construction, the following must occur to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority:
(a)	Any stormwater discharges into the stormwater drainage system is to comply with EPA guidelines;
(b)	Stormwater drainage system protection measures must be installed as required to ensure that no solid waste, sediment, sand, soil, clay or stones from the premises enter the stormwater drainage system;
(c)	Vehicle borne material must not accumulate on the roads abutting the site;
(d)	The cleaning of machinery and equipment must take place on site and not on adjacent footpaths, roads or parks;
(e)	All litter (including items such as cement bags, food packaging and plastic strapping) must be disposed of responsibly; and
(f)	All site operations must comply with the EPA Publication 1254 (including all revisions or replacement guidelines).
Fencing
29	All costs associated with the provision of the fencing are to be borne by the owner/developer under this permit.
30	Prior to the occupancy of the development all fencing must be in a good condition to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
Amenity During Construction
31	Upon commencement and until conclusion of the development, the developer must ensure that the development does not adversely affect the amenity of the area in any way, including:
(a)	the appearance of building, works or materials on the land;
(b)	parking of motor vehicles;
(c)	transporting of materials or goods to or from the site;
(d)	hours of operation;
(e)	stockpiling of top soil or fill materials;
(f)	air borne dust emanating from the site;
(g)	noise;
(h)	rubbish and litter;
(i)	sediment runoff;
(j)	vibration.
Should the development cause undue detriment to the amenity of the area then immediate remedial measures must be undertaken to address the issue as directed by, and to the satisfaction of, the Responsible Authority.
Stormwater
32	Stormwater runoff from all buildings and hardstanding surfaces must be properly collected and discharged in a complete and effective system of drains within the property and must not cause or create a nuisance to abutting properties.
Permit Expiry
33	This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:
(a)	The development is not started within two years of the date of this permit.
(b)	The development is not completed within four years of the date of this permit.
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 –