Coldstream Dual Occs Coming Think n fast!

SUBJECT LAND 4 Cheviot Avenue, Coldstream

Just a few comments from Dr S. Mainwaring, Member VCAT.

It was argued by the objectors and to some extent by the Responsible Authority that Coldstream is not a location where medium density development was encouraged. In particular it is the only rural township location which is not identified as being a preferred medium density area in the Planning Scheme. In this regard the Tribunal finds there is no prohibition contained within the Planning Scheme as it now stands of medium density development in Coldstream. I note that there is a single dwelling covenant over some 58% of the lots within the township which serves as a limit on the extent of future development.

I find in the present circumstances that given the size of the lot and the modest nature of this proposal for a single storey two bedroom dwelling there will be no challenge to the nature of the rural township so valued by local residents. The proposal has on the other hand the potential to positively contribute to the viability of commercial and social activities within the township without having any negative impact on the valued character and amenity of the town.


In coming to this conclusion I accept that the township has some very special qualities. It is however my view that the kind of development proposed here will not challenge the special nature of the township.



With respect to concerns raised by objectors regarding the number of driveway crossovers and matters of traffic volume and safety. I find the increase in traffic associated with this development will be minimal. Furthermore, the occupants of the new dwelling will be members of the community and will be aware of the necessity to take care on the roads within the township. It is also noted that the layout of the proposal enables vehicles from the rear dwelling to exit the site in a forward direction. I am further of the view that there is no issue with the second driveway and note that second driveways into lots are not unusual within the township. Furthermore that the proposed site has a street presentation that is wider than the average making it more capable of accommodating a second driveway which in any event is well within the ResCode provision for the proportion of street frontage that can be taken up with crossovers.


In conclusion it is my view that the fears of the residents are misfounded and that developments of this sort that preserve the streetscape character and generally speaking are modest in their scope will have the potential to add to the health of the township without changing its character.


To read the FULL story, please click on the TITLE