VICTORIAN CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
planning and environment LIST	vcat reference No. P861/2021
Permit Application no. M/2020/1275	
CATCHWORDS	
Section 77 of the Planning & Environment Act 1987; Maroondah Planning Scheme; General Residential Zone 1; Significant Landscape Overlay (SLO4); Construction of two double storey dwellings; Neighbourhood Character; Massing, Scale and Setbacks; Landscaping; Tree removal; Limited landscaping opportunities; Private Open Space; Sense of Address; Bin Location; Design Detail	

APPLICANT	Grant Young	
responsible authority	Maroondah City Council	
SUBJECT LAND	9 Parrs Road
CROYDON  VIC  3136	
HEARING TYPE	Hearing	
DATE OF HEARING	9 September 2021	
DATE OF ORDER	16 September 2021	
CITATION	Young v Maroondah CC [2021] VCAT 1040 	

Order
Permit granted
1	In application P861/2021 the decision of the responsible authority is set aside.
2	In planning permit application M/2020/1275 a permit is granted and directed to be issued for the land at 9 Parrs Road, Croydon in accordance with the endorsed plans and the conditions set out in Appendix A.  The permit allows:
•	Construction of two dwellings in a General Residential Zone; and 
•	Removal of vegetation in a Significant Landscape Overlay.

Alison Slattery
Member			

Appearances
For applicant	Mr Robert Easton, town planner of Easton Consulting.	
For responsible authority	Ms Irene Plakidis, town planner of Refine Planning.	

Information
Description of proposal	The proposal includes the construction of two double storey dwellings on the lot, behind the existing dwelling.  The existing dwelling will face the street with dwellings 2 and 3 located to the rear and accessible from the internal driveway on the northern elevation.  A driveway is proposed to the southern elevation, from which parking is accessed for dwelling 1.  
13 trees are proposed to be removed, all of which require a planning permit under the SLO4: 
Tree 8  - Lilly Pilly - 6m tall  
Tree 9 - Broad-leafed Paperbark - 8m tall 
Tree 10 - Red-flowering Gum - 8 m tall 
Tree 11 - Camphor Laurel- 10 m tall 
Tree 12 - Yellow Gum- 9 m tall
Tree 13- Camphor Laurel - 9m tall  
Tree 14- Plum- 7 m tall 
Tree 15- Common Pear - 10  m tall 
Tree 16- Narrow-leafed Black Peppermint - 10 m tall Tree 17- Bottlebrush - 5 m tall 
Tree 18- Desert Ash - 10 m tall 
Tree 19- Plum - 6 m tall 
Tree 20- Plum - 5 m tall	
Nature of proceeding	Application under section 77 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 – to review the refusal to grant a permit.	
Planning scheme	Maroondah Planning Scheme	
Zone and overlays	General Residential Zone (Schedule 1).
Significant Landscape Overlay (SLO4)	
Permit requirements	Clause 32.08-6 (construction of two or more dwellings on a lot)
Clause 42.03-2 (removal of vegetation)	
Relevant scheme policies and provisions	Clauses 11, 15, 16, 18, 19,21.01, 21.02, 21.06, 21.07, 22.02, 52.06, 55, and 65.   	
Land description	The review site is located on the eastern side of Parrs Road, around 200 metres to the south of the intersection with Mount Dandenong Road.  There is currently a single storey, brick dwelling on the site and associated outbuildings.  The site contains a crossover to the northern and southern portions of the front boundary at its western end.  The site is approximately rectangular in shape and has a front boundary dimension of 22.1 metres and a depth of 45.72 metres for a total site area of 1010.41 square metres.  The site is generally flat with limited fall.  The site contains various planting in line with a garden setting with larger trees.  13 trees are proposed to be removed.  A 1.83 metre wide easement traverses the rear boundary.     
Surrounding sites generally include single and double storey dwellings of varied ages.  The emerging infill character generally including one and two storey dwellings with multi-unit development evident in the wider area.  Dwellings generally include carports or garages set behind the frontage of the dwellings.  
Croydon AC is located within 1.7 kilometres of the site and includes shopping, community facilities and train station.  
Vegetation in the area is typical of an outer suburb where gardens are valued and larger canopy trees are evident.  There are some well established street trees, especially on the eastern side of Parrs Road.  	
Tribunal inspection	The Tribunal inspected the site and surrounds after the hearing	

Reasons
What is this proceeding about?
1	Grant Young applied to the Maroondah City Council for a permit to develop the land at 9 Parrs Road, Croydon for the construction of two double storey dwellings behind the existing dwelling and the removal of 13 trees.
2	Council issued a Notice of Refusal to Grant the Permit on 26 April 2021.  The decision was based on Council’s view that the scale and massing of the design shows little regard to the character of the neighbourhood and fails to provide appropriate landscaping which offends against the objectives of Clause 22.02, the GRZ and the SLO4.  Council contends that the development also does not comply with the standards of ResCode regarding the above as well as side and rear setbacks, private open space and bin provision.  
3	The review applicant, through Mr Easton, disagrees with Council and asserts that the design has considered the constraints of the site and is site responsive.  Mr Easton argued that the areas of non-compliance with ResCode are overstated by Council and contends that the proposal meets the objectives of ResCode.  It is his contention that the state and local policies lend support to the proposed development.  Mr Easton submitted that the proposal provides reasonable opportunity for landscaping.  
What are the key issues?
4	The key issues for determination are:
a.	Is the proposal consistent with the planning policy framework of the Maroondah Planning Scheme?
b.	Does the development achieve a satisfactory level of compliance with Clause 55 (ResCode)?
c.	Does the development further the purposes of the Significant Landscape Overlay Schedule 4?
5	The Tribunal must decide whether a permit should be granted and, if so, what conditions should be applied.  Having considered all submissions about the applicable policies and provisions of the Maroondah Planning Scheme, I have decided to set aside the Council’s decision.  My reasons follow.
Is the proposal consistent with the planning policy framework of the Maroondah Planning Scheme? 
Urban Consolidation
6	Planning policy in the Planning Policy Framework (PPF) and at a local level encourages the consolidation of established urban areas to make more efficient use of existing infrastructure and services.  There is an emphasis on increasing densities near strategic locations such as activity centres, rather than in the residential hinterland.  To this end, zoning often accords with this stated desire, such that sites with reasonable access to services are located within a General Residential Zone, such as the review site. 
7	I agree with Ms Plakidis that the issue of urban consolidation is not one which the Council pursues.  As Ms Plakidis put it “the dispute between the Council and the Applicant in this case is not about whether this site is a suitable candidate to accommodate a new medium density housing development.”  I agree that the proposal is consistent with the state planning policies that promote the consolidation of existing urban areas for the efficient use of existing infrastructure and services in that the site is located with reasonable access to local shopping facilities.  I say this having regard to the site’s location within 1.7km of Croydon Activity Centre which includes a train station and shopping.  The site is close to services, including access to daily shopping needs, open spaces, schools and public transport.  I find the site is well located for medium density development at this level, at an increase in density of a further two dwellings on the site.  
Neighbourhood Character and Design Response
8	Council’s concerns lie with the massing and scale of the dwellings in the rear of the site to adjoining properties, insofar as the impact of the buildings will be dominant and the ability to ameliorate the built form impacts through landscaping will be insufficient.  Ms Plakidis argued that the development lacked an appropriately responsive landscaping provision, in line with the surrounding context where vegetation is an important neighbourhood characteristic (in line with the Significant Landscape Overlay 4).  Ms Plakidis put that the built form proposed will detract from the character of the area, rather than enhance or contribute to it.  She put that this was on the basis that the built form does not allow for the maintenance or enhancement of canopy tree vegetation in line with the expectation of the Significant Landscape Overlay Schedule 4.  She submitted the siting of built form close to boundaries, with limited articulation between ground and first floors and with limited internal setbacks, would not allow for the enhancement of landscaping through planting of canopy trees, as envisaged in the policy and the overlay.  She submitted that this has been exacerbated by the removal vegetation (13 trees in total), which has impacted on the retention of vegetation that is sought within the Maroondah Planning Scheme.
9	I have reviewed the plans and do not find the proposed density of three dwellings, with the extent of form proposed as being inappropriate in this location.  I find the increase in the number of dwellings from 1 to 3 is not unreasonable.  I find that the siting, scale and massing of the development, with the retention of the existing dwelling to the frontage, is reasonable and provides opportunities for landscaping in line with the expectations of the PPF, local policy, zone and overlay.  I also do not share concerns with the removal of trees and note that Council’s internal referral response from the aboricultural officer raised no concern with the removal of vegetation as proposed.  
10	A required assessment consideration in the zoning and the overlay controls, the Maroondah Planning Scheme, includes a local planning policy framework that seeks to encourage new development that responds appropriately to the character of existing residential areas.  To achieve this aim, a Neighbourhood Character Study has been referenced into the scheme which identifies the importance of vegetation and the landscaped character of the municipality.  This study informs the Policy at Clause 22.02 under which the subject site and the surrounding area are included in Neighbourhood Character Area No 11 Eastfield.  The policy at Clause 22.02 has as a reference document the Maroondah Neighbourhood Character Study, Planisphere, 2004 in which the area is described in the following manner:
The Eastfield Neighbourhood Area is located in the east of the municipality around the Croydon commercial / recreational heart and parklands. The residential pockets within this area all surround large areas of open space including Eastfield Park and the Eastfield Golf Course. These parkland areas contribute a sense of spaciousness to the neighbourhood and strengthen the presence of ‘green corridors’ throughout the City.
11	The character study includes a statement of the preferred future character for the area which has an emphasis on the green character of the neighbourhood in the private and public realms, that is influenced by the golf course and parklands.  The preferred future character of the area is described in the following manner:
The Eastfield Neighbourhood Area will continue to evolve in a way that preserves its character of distinct residential pockets grouped around large areas of open space. The green ‘leafiness’ of the parklands and golf course will continue into the streets in the form of substantial street trees and well vegetated gardens and the spaciousness of the streets will be maintained through low front fences. Dwellings will be well articulated and relate to the street and areas close to the Croydon Activity Centre will provide opportunities for renewal and a greater variety of housing.
12	It is envisaged through policy that these preferred future characteristics will be achieved through the following policy objectives 
•	Ensuring building forms are well articulated and relate to the street.
•	Ensuring buildings are setback from all boundaries a sufficient distance to sustain substantial vegetation.
•	Ensuring the front setbacks are not dominated by impervious surfacing or car parking structures.
•	Strengthening the treed canopy of the neighbourhood in private gardens, streets and areas of parkland.
•	Ensuring low front fences.
•	Ensuring that development is well buffered from adjacent non-residential uses.
13	The character of Parrs Road and the surrounding area is generally reflected in the character statement, to the extent that there are some canopy trees evident in the front and rear setbacks of dwellings and development is generally surrounded by gardens with modest dwellings of one to two storey scale.  I have reviewed the aerial photography and Nearmaps and note that multi-unit development is evident in the area, notably opposite the review site where six dwellings are sited, but with dual occupancy prevailing.  Other notable exceptions to the dual occupancy form include the property on the corner of Parrs Road and Kauri Court containing three dwellings.  I further note the mix in architectural vernacular and the mix in building materials.  The front setbacks in the area are reasonably consistent, with exceptions generally located on corner sites where multi-unit development often relies on a sideage interaction.  Many dwellings have no or low front fencing, with few dwellings including high front fencing.  
14	I am satisfied that the proposed dwellings satisfy the policy at Clause 22.02 with regard to ensuring “that new dwellings are sited and constructed in a manner that contributes to and enhances the preferred neighbourhood character of Maroondah”.  I am satisfied that the maximum height of 7.3 metres responds well to the scale of the buildings on the immediately adjoining properties to the north, south and east where dwellings are constructed to a single storey scale.  I am satisfied that a single storey transition is entirely reasonable for the wider area where the infill built form scale is often greater than single storey.  
15	I do not share Council’s concerns with the spacing between dwellings or the lack of articulation between ground and first floors.  I am satisfied that the development is appropriately graduated across the rear portion of the site where setbacks of 2.05 metres are provided to each of the north and south boundaries at the first floor and a space of 1.73 metres is provided between dwellings at the upper level.  To the east (rear), setbacks are generous at between 5.0 and 7.0 metres, allowing for the rear dwellings to provide canopy tree planting in the secluded private open spaces.  I am satisfied that the built form is massed and sited in response to recent emerging construction typology in the wider area where built form is evident in rear yards.  The impact of the development on the streetscape is negligible due to the retention of the existing dwelling and the construction of an open carport to the southern side of the dwelling.
16	I have reviewed the landscaping plan included in the suite of plans assessed by Council.  I find it can provide for a landscaping environment where the dwellings will sit comfortably and will in time be subsumed within vegetation.  I note the inclusion of 214 new plantings, which includes 12 new canopy trees dispersed throughout the site and varying in height from 3 to 12 metres.  The canopy tree species are varied and include Blackwood, Wallangara White Gum, Swamp Paperbark, and Yarra Burgan.  These trees will grow to dominate over the built form, with the dwellings in time becoming subservient to vegetation.  I am satisfied that the placement of these trees throughout the site is thoughtful and serves to limit competition with existing vegetation, both in the public and private realms.  The planting of these canopy trees will screen the development into the future.  I do not find these trees will be slow growing and I am satisfied they will contribute to or enhance the vegetated character of the area.  These trees are sensitively placed throughout the site and serve to screen views down the driveway from angles other than directly in front, and will screen views to built form from the streetscape and from adjoining properties.  I am satisfied that the conditions of permit will require appropriate species in line with the species outlined in the concept landscape plan.
17	While it may be preferable for the existing trees to have been retained, I am satisfied that this level of replacement planting will provide for a level of vegetation commensurate with, if not greater than that provided by the 13 removed trees.  I am satisfied that the replacement planting as noted above will more than adequately ameliorate vegetation losses within a short period of time.  This is in line with the policy aspirations of ensuring that the development will generally maintain and enhance canopy vegetation.  
18	In this way. I am satisfied that the development includes a low level of change, is sensitively sited to limit offsite amenity impacts, provides appropriate levels of landscaping and is respectful of character as envisaged in policy, the General Residential Zone and the Significant Landscape Overlay.
19	I am also satisfied that the proposal represents an appropriate response to the broader objectives and policy in Clause 22.02 Neighbourhood Character Policy.  I say this for the following reasons:
a.	As noted above, the removal of trees is ameliorated through the opportunity for thoughtful landscaping scheme provided in the concept landscape plan.
b.	The front setback has not been altered due to the retention of the existing dwelling and the location of the car port to the side of the dwelling.  In this way the front setback of the site is maintained and continues to respond well to the character of the area. 
c.	I am satisfied that the dwellings are set back from side boundaries to incorporate space for the planting of additional vegetation.  I note the side setback to the north and south adjacent to the driveways do not include canopy tree planting (with the exception of the Swamp Paperbark to the north west corner of the site, at the street frontage).  I am satisfied with this response as it provides opportunity for trees 2-4 to the south, and an unspecified tree to the north to be appropriately maintained and for the amenity of these trees to be appropriately utilised.  In this way, whilst the driveways do not include various canopy tree planting, they are both still well vegetated and will not appear stark and without softening. 
d.	I am satisfied that the limited height, at double storey scale, constructed to 7.3 metres, will serve to keep the development below the mature tree canopy height, which varies from 3 to 12 metres. 
e.	A mix of brick garage and wall with light grey coloured weatherboard cladding and Colourbond corrugated roof in ‘monument’ (dark grey), with a variation on grey shades for other features of the development.  
f.	Cut and fill is not employed with the development generally following the contours of the land, reducing the visual impact of the development in the streetscape and in the private realm.  
g.	As noted above, I am satisfied that there is reasonable articulation of dwellings at the ground level and good breaks between the new and existing dwellings so that the dwellings appear as separate elements down the length of the site.  Upper level separation is reasonable to the rear with a break of 1.7 metres between dwellings 2 and 3 and an excellent set back of the new two storey form from the street (around 25 metres from the street frontage).  
h.	The two storey scale responds well to existing horizontal form of existing housing stock in the area.
i.	Eave elements are wide, at around 300-500mm, and serve to break up form between ground and first floor in line with the prevailing built form character of the streetscape.
j.	The garages of the two new dwellings are located to face the internal driveway and do not dominate the front setback.  The existing northern crossover will be used to provide access to these dwellings.  The existing southern crossover will serve dwelling 1, which includes a carport to the side of the dwelling and a tandem car parking space in front of that.
k.	With the exception of driveways, impervious surfacing in the front garden areas has been minimised. 
l.	No front fencing is proposed.
m.	There is no impact on street trees and planting is proposed to the frontage to reinforce the street tree pattern. 
20	I am satisfied that the proposed development responds well to the local policy (Clause 22.02) that seeks to ensure development responds to the preferred neighbourhood character of the area, and the purposes and decision guidelines of the General Residential Zone and the Significant Landscape Overlay 4. 
Does the development achieve a satisfactory level of compliance with Clause 55 (ResCode)? 
21	Several areas of ResCode compliance were included as grounds of refusal by Council.  These include Neighbourhood Character, Residential Policy, Landscaping, Side and Rear Setbacks, Private Open Space, Sense of Address, and Bin Location.  As noted in the previous section, I am satisfied that the level of landscaping proposed is reasonable and that the development responds well to the built form and siting character of the area.  
22	I am satisfied that the proposed development responds well to the objectives of Clause 55 (ResCode).  I say this for the following reasons:
a.	The proposal responds well to the state and local planning policy as noted previously.
b.	The dwellings are constructed to a double storey height, with a maximum height of 7.3 metres.  This is a reasonable response to the one to two storey scale in the street.  
c.	The site coverage 33.2% in line with recent multi unit development approvals.
d.	The permeability is 44.1% which is reasonable in this urban context.
e.	Landscaping will in time extend above the 7.3 metre high built form.
f.	As noted previously, I am satisfied that the minimum 9.16 metre front setback to Parrs Road respects the existing and preferred neighbourhood character and makes efficient use of the site insofar as the status quo is not altered.  
g.	The built form reflects the emerging residential typology in that contemporary forms are employed with materials readily found in the streetscape such as weatherboard and a brick garage, with windows and door proportions matching those found in the streetscape, wide eaves are employed and the built form is sited to respond to the front, side and rear setbacks found in the area.  The cue for the development has been taken, not only from the single dwellings in the area, but also the multi-unit development in the wider area. 
h.	One wall on boundary is proposed, to the north to the garage of dwelling 2.  In length and height the wall complies with the standard.
i.	I am satisfied that the proposed side and rear setbacks respect the existing neighbourhood character and limit the impact on the amenity of existing dwellings.  I do not share Council’s concerns regarding the opportunities for planting in the side and rear setbacks of the new dwellings.  As noted above, I am satisfied that appropriate landscaping can be included in the proposed development.  I accept that the first floor setback of 5.4 metres is reasonable given the required setback is 5.69 metres and the variation is minimal.  I do not share Ms Plakidis’ concerns that this non-compliance results in visual bulk and massing.  
j.	There are no north facing windows within 3 metres of the site.
k.	Dwelling entries are reasonably visible from the shared internal accessway.  I do not share Council’s concerns relating to the accessibility of entrances to dwellings 2 and 3.  Dwellings 2 and 3 entrances are visible, and reasonably safe, with reversing cars from their own dwellings the only real danger.  I am satisfied that residents will readily temper their enthusiasm for exiting the dwelling and look for oncoming vehicles.  
l.	Access for persons of limited mobility is provided to the existing dwelling.  
m.	Infrastructure is readily available with the area having been well established for residential development over many decades.  
n.	Cross ventilation is reasonable.  Northerly oriented windows are provided to the upper levels of dwellings 2 and 3 with all dwellings having good light to the living areas from the east and west.  Northern light is available to open spaces which are also usable.  A clothes line is provided for each dwelling reducing the reliance on clothes dryers.  Dwellings also include the provision of water tanks.
o.	Provision has been made for storage of at least 6 cubic metres for the dwellings.  
p.	Bins can be stored in rear yards and walked through the garages, and mailboxes provided to the frontage.  
q.	The carport parking space of dwelling 1 provides footpath access to the front door, with the garages of dwellings 2 and 3 providing access to the rear yard.  The garages are reasonably designed in width and location and require limited manoeuvres for access.  The number of car parking spaces is a reasonable provision for dwellings of this size, in an area where there is reasonable access to public transport and daily shopping needs.  
r.	Overlooking is minimised with screening and sill heights at first floor to 1.7 metres above FFL where required.  
s.	Internal views are not provided to more than 50% of secluded private open space (SPOS) of other dwellings.
t.	Shading of windows and private open space is minimised with the level of shade to the south and east falling within the reasonable limits, as enshrined by Clause 55.
u.	Windows of adjoining properties are properly protected and receive adequate light. 
v.	Secluded private open space for dwellings 1 to 3 is located at ground level, is accessible from a living area, has reasonable access to sunlight and has a generous area (100 square metres POS of which 100 square metres is SPOS for dwelling 1, approximately between 75.2 square metres POS of which 64.5 square metres is SPOS for dwelling 2, and approximately 75 square metres POS of which 59.4 square metres is SPOS for dwelling 3).  I find the provision of open space is reasonable, despite the minor non-compliances with the standard, and will not detrimentally impact on the amenity of future residents.  I say this having regard to the provision of various and extensive open spaces within close proximity of the site.  I also note that the non-compliances are minor and will not impact on the usability of the spaces
w.	I see no sources of noise that are located close to boundaries, such as mechanical devices.  Noise in the form of voices is a reasonable expectation in a residential area such as this.  
x.	I find that the development incorporates a reasonable design that adequately protects the amenity of the surrounding properties.
23	I am satisfied that the proposed dwelling is reasonably articulated, sited and designed in a manner that is in keeping with the scale and typology of dwellings in the neighbourhood now and into the future.  In this way, I am satisfied that the objectives of Clause 55 have been satisfied.
Does the development further the purposes of the Significant Landscape Overlay Schedule 4?
24	The review site is located within Significant Landscape Overlay Schedule 4 Landscape Canopy Protection (SLO4).  Within this overlay is the following Statement of Nature and Key Elements of Landscape:
The combination of canopy trees and steep to undulating topography contribute to major elements of the urban character of Maroondah. Canopy trees in particular soften the impact of buildings in the environment and provide a distinct leafy character to Maroondah. 
The continuous nature of the canopy vegetation throughout Maroondah provides a strong character element and is valued by the community. The canopy vegetation is a defining element of the urban character of Maroondah. 
25	The following landscaping objectives are sought to be achieved within this overlay:
To conserve the existing pattern of vegetation, landscape quality and ecosystems within the area. 
To encourage the re-generation of vegetation. 
To maintain a dense vegetation canopy that contributes to the special environmental character of Maroondah. 
To maintain the overall scenic beauty of the municipality.
26	I am satisfied that the development will further the objectives of the overlay.  I say this for the following reasons:
a.	As noted above, I am satisfied that the proposed 12 canopy trees (3-12m in height), in conjunction with lower order planting, will ameliorate the loss of the 13 existing trees.  
b.	Planting is proposed throughout the site in line with the objectives of SLO4.
c.	Trees 1-7 ranging in height from 6 to 16 metres will be retained on site.  
d.	Native tree planting is proposed, replacing several exotic trees.  These trees will better serve to provide for significant vegetation that is in line with the prevailing character of the area and can also contribute to the provision of habitat corridors throughout Maroondah and the region. 
e.	The landscaping plan includes good planting of indigenous and native vegetation.  The canopy tree species are varied and include Blackwood, Wallangara White Gum, Swamp Paperbark, and Yarra Burgan.  With a mature canopy height of between 3 and 12 metre, these trees will in time grow to dominate over the built form, with the dwellings becoming subservient to vegetation.
f.	This extent of planting is in line with the expectations for the SLO4 and the Eastfield area.  
g.	In time, the effect of the buildings on the profile of the ridgeline or skyline will be ameliorated through the thoughtful canopy tree and lower order planting included in the landscaping plan (reinforced through permit condition 3).
Conclusion
27	For the reasons given above, the decision of the responsible authority is set aside.  A permit is granted subject to conditions.

Alison Slattery
Member			

Appendix A – Permit Conditions

Permit Application No:	M/2020/1275	
Land:	9 Parrs Road
CROYDON  VIC  3136	

What the permit allows	
In accordance with the endorsed plans:
•	Construction of three dwellings in a General Residential Zone; and 
•	Removal of vegetation in a Significant Landscape Overlay.	

Conditions:
1	Before any buildings and works start, 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 the advertised plans dated December 2020, but modified to show:
(a)	A section plan to depict pier and beam construction (above grade) techniques be utilized where Dwelling 3 is located within the TPZ of retained canopy tree number 6.
(b)	The ground floor plan re-number the dwellings to correct the clerical error.
(c)	Notate and demonstrate on the plans that the existing double width vehicle crossing on the south is fully removed and reconstructed to Council standard MCC-501 to match the proposed internal driveway and the existing internal driveway of 11 Parrs Road
(d)	Notate and demonstrate on the plans that the existing vehicle crossing on the northern side of the development is fully removed and reconstructed to Council standard MCC-501.
Layout not altered – development 
2	The development as shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered without the written consent of the Responsible Authority. 
Construction plans for paving required
3	Before any building or works start, construction plans for all parking areas and access lanes must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The construction plans must be consistent with the endorsed site layout, development plans and landscaping plans. 
Car park and access lanes 
4	Before the development is occupied, the areas set aside for the parking of vehicles and access lanes as shown on the approved plan must be: 
(a)	Constructed; 
(b)	Surfaced with a durable all-weather seal; 
(c)	Drained to the nominated legal point of discharge; 
all to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 
Construction of Vehicle Crossing 
5	Before any new dwelling is occupied, the owner must at its cost fully remove the existing vehicle crossings and construct a new double width concrete vehicle crossing on the southern side of the development and a new single width concrete vehicle crossing on the north to Council standard MCC-501 at right angles to the road to suit the proposed and existing driveways in accordance with the endorsed plans to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. The vehicle crossing must be a minimum 1.0 metre offset from any existing tree or utility service assets.
Construction plans for drainage required 
6	Before any building or works start, drainage plans including calculations prepared by a suitably qualified person to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority.  The Drainage Plans must:
(a)	All drainage works associated with the development including any drainage works required outside the land.
(b)	The nominated legal point of discharge.
(c)	The conveyance of stormwater runoff by means of underground drains to the nominated legal point of discharge.
(d)	The mechanisms used to prevent overland flows from having a detrimental effect on the land, the environment or adjoining properties;
(e)	The mechanisms used to limit the Permissible Site Discharge (PSD) to the lesser of the equivalent of a 35% impervious site coverage; or the pre-developed discharge rate.: 
(f)	Stormwater detention storage that limits the maximum discharge rate to the PSD.
Drainage works required 
7	Before the development is occupied, the drainage and associated works shown on the Drainage Plans must be constructed in accordance with those plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Within 14 days of the completion of the works, certification by a suitably qualified engineer must be submitted to the Responsible Authority certifying that works have been completed in accordance with the Drainage Plans. 
Control sediment laden run off 
8	During the construction of the development, methods to control sediment laden runoff as described under ‘Best Practice Environmental Management Guidelines for Urban Stormwater’ or similar must be implemented and used to minimise sediment laden runoff and stormwater pollution from leaving the land to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 
Engagement of Site Project Arborist
9	Prior to the commencement of any works at the site (including demolition and excavation whether or not a planning permit is required), a letter of engagement must be provided to the responsible authority from the project arborist selected to oversee all relevant tree protection works. The project arborist must be an appropriately experienced and qualified professional (minimum Cert IV or equivalent in experience).
Installation of Tree Protection Fences
10	Prior to the commencement of any works at the site (including demolition and excavation whether or not a planning permit is required), the project arborist must advise the responsible authority in writing that the Tree Protection Fences have been installed to their satisfaction.
Site Arborist Log Books
11	The project arborist must maintain a log book detailing all site visits. The log book must be made available to the responsible authority within 24 hours of any request.
Tree Protection Plan
12	Concurrent with the endorsement of plans or prior to the commencement of any works at the site (including demolition and excavation whether or not a planning permit is required), whichever occurs sooner, a Tree Protection Plan (TPP) to the satisfaction of the responsible authority, must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority.  The TPP must be prepared by a suitably qualified arborist and clearly show:
(a)	for each tree shown to be retained on the land or on neighbouring land, a Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) and Structural Root Zone (SRZ) calculated in accordance with the Australian Standard for Protection of Trees on Development Sites (AS4970-2009). 
(b)	the development layout, all built features, including: pavement, retaining walls; and drainage infrastructure.
(c)	tree protection requirements for retained trees within and adjoining the subject site (including the road reserve), in accordance with the Australian Standards for the Protection of Trees on Development Sites (AS 4970-2009), including tree protection fence alignments and areas of ground protection, ie where fencing cannot adequately afford tree protection or access across the TPZ is required. 
(d)	any other specific tree protection requirements (eg low impact construction measures) or where these cannot be adequately shown reference to more detailed documentation/plans be provided.
Tree Protection Plan implemented 
13	Prior to the commencement of any building and or demolition works on the land, Tree Protection Measures as detailed on the approved Tree Protection Plan, must be established and subsequently maintained until completion of all buildings and works, including landscaping, to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.
(a)	The project arborist must advise the responsible authority in writing that the Tree Protection measures have been installed to their satisfaction. 
(b)	The TPP must be printed on A2 weatherproof paper.
(c)	The TPP must be highly visible on the site and be displayed at the site entry.
Landscape plan 
14	Before the development starts, a Landscape Plan to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority.  When approved, the landscape plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit.   The plans must be reconciled with all other plans which will form part of this permit and show:
(a)	Relocate the Eucalyptus scoparia within the rear private space of dwelling numbered 2 further to the north so as the tree can mature into a productive specimen free from proximity to other landscape features. 
(b)	Correa reflexa located on the rear boundary of dwellings numbered 2 & 3 is to be substituted with Syzygium australe.
(c)	There are more landscape opportunities within the following locations: -
i	Against the rear wall of dwellings numbered 1, 2 & 3.
ii	Within the front open space of the existing dwelling.
iii	with the rear private space of dwellings numbered 2 & 3 and under the proposed canopy trees
(d)	Sympathetic materials such as 40 - 75mm River pebbles be utilised in the narrow sideway of dwelling numbered 3 on the southern boundary and within the TPZ of retained tree numbered 6. 
(e)	The accurate location of existing canopy trees on the land and within 5m of the property boundary, clearly indicating if each tree is to be retained or removed. Each tree shall be identified by species and with any corresponding ID number as provided in the Arborist Report DB Horticulture, Damien Burgess, 13th February 2021
(f)	For each tree shown to be retained on the land or on neighbouring land, a Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) and Structural Root Zone (SRZ) calculated in accordance with the Australian Standard for Protection of Trees on Development Sites (AS4970-2009). 
(g)	TPZs may need to be expanded where development works encroach. Any such expansion must be accommodated on the land taking the benefit of this permit.
(h)	Tree protection notes which satisfy the Australian Standard for Protection of Trees on Development Sites (AS4970-2009).
(i)	Low impact construction measures specified, to the satisfaction of the responsible authority, wherever buildings, pavements or services are located within a Tree Protection Zone and which encroaches greater than 10% of the TPZ area, unless otherwise demonstrated that the tree will remain viable by the consultant arborist.  All low impact construction measures must be detailed through cross-section drawings.
(j)	All existing buildings and pavements which will be retained and all proposed buildings and pavements. Material and finish of pathways and driveways shall be specified.
(k)	Pathways may only be of impervious/sealed pavement where detailed on approved paving plans and drained in accordance with an approved drainage plan. 
(l)	All pathways and pavements not used for vehicle access be constructed of flexible / porous materials.
(m)	Sympathetically planted garden beds to the fullest extent of TPZs as is practical while providing for:
i	reasonable pedestrian access around the completed development.
ii	reasonable recreational opportunity in the SPOS of each dwelling.
(n)	Landscape details for all open spaces, demonstrating a balance of planted garden beds, lawns and hard surfaces.
(o)	Landscaping treatments within the front setback in a manner which complements the prevailing character of the surrounding area.
(p)	At least 1 canopy tree which will achieve a mature height in excess of 10-12m (minimum 2m tall when planted) provided in the rear private open space of each dwelling.
(q)	At least 1 canopy tree which will achieve a mature height in excess of 10-12m (minimum 2m tall when planted) provided in the front open space of dwelling 1.
(r)	At least 1 canopy tree which will achieve a mature height in excess of 8m (minimum 2m tall when planted) provided in the common property area.
(s)	All canopy trees must be located to optimise their long-term growth and development. In this regard, trees shall:
i	be shown at least 3.5m from the wall of any dwelling or building
ii	be shown at least 1m from any fence, pavement or retaining wall
iii	be shown beyond the canopy of any existing canopy tree
iv	be shown at least 3m from any other replacement tree and
v	be shown in to a mulched area or garden bed at least 1m wide (to provide at least a 0.5m radial area around the tree’s stem which is mulched and free of lawn).
(t)	Any approved free-standing lattice support detail, including a section drawing to demonstrate its method of construction.
(u)	details for the support structure for climbing plants, including a section drawing to demonstrate its method of construction.
(v)	Vehicle sightlines (ie driveway splays) indicating that all structures and planting heights are limited to 900mm in height.
(w)	Adequate storage facilities for each dwelling with convenient access to at least 6-cubic metres of externally accessible, secure storage space.  Sheds must be installed on a concrete slab.
(x)	Clothes lines, service and refuse bin storage areas and shed storage provided with suitable hard surfacing and access pathways to them.
(y)	Any approved WSUD measures 
(z)	All rainwater tanks are to be shown as installed on a concrete slab.
(aa)	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. All species selected must be to the satisfaction of the responsible authority
Landscaping completion 
15	Before the development is occupied, the landscaping works shown on the endorsed plans must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 
Landscaping maintenance 
16	The landscaping shown on the endorsed plans must be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, including that any dead, diseased, or damaged plants are to be replaced. 
Permit expiry
17	This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:
(a)	The development is not started within two years of the issued date of this permit.
(b)	The development is not completed within four years of the issued 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 -