21 Murchison Street St Kilda East - City of Port Phillip

STATUTORY PLANNING COMMITTEE
17 APRIL 2012
6.2. External Referrals
The application was not required to be referred to any external referral authorities.
7. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION / OBJECTIONS
7.1 It was determined that the proposal may result in material detriment therefore Council
gave notice of the proposal by ordinary mail to the owners and occupiers of surrounding
properties and directed that the applicant give notice of the proposal by posting one
notice on the site facing Murchison Street for a minimum 14 day period, in accordance
with s.52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.
In response, 46 objections were received. The key concerns are summarised as follows
followed by the planning officer’s comments in italics:
Issues raised by VCAT in order no. P3174/2010 have not been adequately
addressed.
This particular matter is further discussed at Sections 8.1, 8.4 and 8.5 later in this
report.
The height, scale and massing of the rear addition would be disproportionate with
the low-rise character of neighbouring dwellings.
The position of the rear addition would not respect the backyard garden character
of the area or the rear open space corridor.
The rear addition would present excessive site coverage and inadequate
permeability.
The upper storey walls of the rear addition would be inadequately setback from
adjoining property boundaries.
The rear addition would impact upon neighbouring amenity in terms of
overshadowing, overlooking and building bulk.
The abovementioned grounds relate to ResCode which does not apply to this
application. Therefore, these objections cannot be considered.
As the only trigger for this planning permit application results from the
requirements of Clause 43.01-1 of the Heritage Overlay, the only valid grounds
that can be applied to this application are those which relate to whether the
proposed rear addition would be in keeping with the heritage character of the
Murchison Street streetscape.
The sides of the rear addition would be visible from Murchison Street and would
adversely affect the significance of the heritage streetscape and adjacent heritage
places.
This particular matter is further discussed at Section 8.5 later in this report.
The rear addition would not be energy efficient and would not achieve benchmarks
for water sensitive urban design.
This particular matter is further discussed at Section 8.6 later in this report.
The double-hinged driveway gate and 2.1m high side gate would adversely affect
the heritage significance of the streetscape.
Although these particular buildings and works are represented on the ‘Proposed
Lower Ground Floor Plan’ TP09 and the ‘North Elevation’ TP10 as being “new”,
they have already been approved (Planning Permit No. 984/2011). An inspection
of the subject site indicates that these approved buildings and works are currently
underway.
To avoid future confusion, the labels associated with these buildings and works –
and indeed any other buildings and works authorised by Planning Permit No.
984/2011 – should be altered as they are represented on the design
documentation associated with this application (refer recommended Condition 1a).
16