379-387 Punt Road, Cremorne

In May 2012, the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) approved a six storey residential and office development at 379-387 Punt Road, Cremorne.

VCAT ordered the removal of two storeys from the eight storey proposal that had been submitted by developer A Genser & Associates.

VCAT concluded that the eight storey proposal was "too tall and bulky". Here is the doc format VCAT decision regarding 379-387 Punt Road, Cremorne (181.00 KB).

The developer had originally proposed a 33-storey development for the site but revised its proposal back to 12-storeys in an application to Council last year.

In February, the developer appealed to VCAT against Council’s failure to determine the 12-storey application within 60 days.

Later the same month, Council resolved to oppose the 12-storey proposal for several reasons including that its height and scale were out of character with the neighbourhood surrounds. Eighty-nine people had objected to Council against the proposal.

Taking on board feedback from Council and objectors, the developer reduced the proposal to an eight-storey development in amended plans submitted to VCAT.

Here is a media release issued by Council following the VCAT decision.

Here is more information on:    

Amended plans lodged with VCAT
Evidence associated with the VCAT hearing
Council's position

Amended plans lodged with VCAT

The applicant submitted amended plans to VCAT. The main changes to what was previously proposed are:  

  • Reduction in height by four levels so that what is being proposed now is an eight-storey building
  • Reduction in the number of apartments from 123 to 91 
  • Reduction in on-site car parking spaces from 152 spaces to 119 spaces
  • Redesign of the facade.

VCAT ordered that the following documents be published on Council's website ahead of the hearing:   

pdf format Statement of changes (VCAT hearing) (478.44 KB)
pdf format Design Response (VCAT hearing) (1.96 MB)
pdf format Floor Plans (VCAT hearing) (2.69 MB)
pdf format Elevations (VCAT hearing) (1.19 MB)
pdf format Shadow diagrams (VCAT hearing) (2.48 MB)
pdf format Sections & Typical Plan (VCAT hearing) (773.73 KB) 


Evidence associated with the VCAT hearing

In accordance with the orders of the tribunal, here is the evidence associated with the VCAT proceedings provided by those parties relying on evidence:  

Council Evidence     

pdf format Urban Design - Hansen Partnership Pty Ltd (1.15 MB)
pdf format Urban Design - SJB Urban (681.21 KB)
pdf format Traffic - O'Brien Traffic (1.12 MB)

Permit Applicant Evidence  

pdf format Planning - Andrew Biacsi (1.63 MB)
pdf format Urban Design -  Tim Biles
pdf format Traffic - Traffix Group (Part One) (2.20 MB)
pdf format Traffic - Traffix Group (Part Two) (2.25 MB)
pdf format Environmentally Sustainable Design Outcomes - Ark Resources (1.08 MB)
pdf format Visual Amenity - Orbit Visualization (1.72 MB)
pdf format Visual Amenity - Montages - Orbit Visualization (Part One) (2.45 MB)
pdf format Visual Amenity - Montages - Orbit Visualizatio (Part Two) (2.28 MB)
pdf format Visual Amenity - Montages - Orbit Visualization (Part Three) (2.53 MB)
pdf format Visual Amenity - Montages - Orbit Visualization (Part Four) (2.84 MB) 

Council's position

In February 2012, Council determined its position on the application. Council's planning officers determined that if Council had been in a position to decide on the application, it would have refused to issue a permit. Council argued this position at the VCAT hearing.

The grounds for this refusal would have been:

  • that the scale, height and architectural quality of the proposed development does not respond to the site context nor fit into the emerging built form context and streetscape

  • the proposed development will have a monolithic appearance and will be visually dominating in Punt Road and the immediate surrounding area (failing to comply with the Neighbourhood Character of the precinct)

  • the proposed development fails to adequately respond to the off-site amenity impacts on the immediate neighbours to the north, south and east through overlooking, overshadowing and visual bulk, and

  • the proposed vehicular access will create an unreasonable impact on amenity and safety within surrounding streets, particularly along Rout, Huckerby and Wellington Streets. 



Council sought community feedback on the application from A Genser and Associates in late 2011. The application involved changes to a previous plan for the site which was advertised for community comment earlier in 2011.

The amended application provided for: 

  • A 12-storey building over three basement levels of car parking, and five three-storey townhouses (plus roof decks).
  • A total of 123 dwellings, comprising 94 one-bedroom units, 24 two-bedroom units, and five two-bedroom and study units.
  • An office (with existing use rights) at ground floor level.
  • Vehicle entry to the site from Huckerby Street to three levels of basement car parking. Individual at grade car parking is proposed for the townhouses.
  • A total of 152 car parking spaces (128 for residents, 15 for visitors and 9 for office staff), therefore requiring a reduction in the standard number of car parking spaces required
  • Forty bicycle spaces for residents and 12 visitor spaces.
  • Alterations to Huckerby Street to widen the roadway.

Some of the main differences from the previous proposal include: the reduction of the proposal by one storey (the previous proposal was for a 13-storey development) and the removal of plans for a cafe.  

Planning application and supporting documents 

pdf format Town Planning and Urban Context Report (1.87MB)

pdf format Plans (Part One) (2.73MB)
pdf format Plans (Part Two) (2.67MB)
pdf format Plans (Part Three) (2.87MB)

pdf format Urban Context Report (Part One) (1.46MB)
pdf format Urban Context Report (Part Two) (1.95MB)
pdf format Urban Context Report (Part Three) (2.49MB) 

pdf format Urban Design Response (1.60MB)

pdf format Visual Amenity Evidence (Part One) (2.39MB)
pdf format Visual Amenity Evidence (Part Two) (2.39MB)
pdf format Visual Amenity Evidence (Part Three) (2.03MB)  

pdf format Traffic Report (Part One) (2.01MB)
pdf format Traffic Report (Part Two) (2.16MB) 

pdf format Shadow Diagrams (Part One) (2.70MB)
pdf format Shadow Diagrams (Part Two) (2.62MB)
pdf format Shadow Diagrams (Part Three) (1.38MB)

pdf format Design Response Plan (2.28MB)
pdf format Sustainability Report (644.69kB)
pdf format Waste-Recycling Management Plan (1.27MB)
pdf format Acoustic Assessment (1.40MB)
pdf format Display Board (100.57kB)

Further information
Matthew Cohen
Coordinator - Statutory Planning
9205 5123


Back to top
Back to top Back to top