TOWN OF CLAREMONT ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY 21 OCTOBER, 2014 - Stephen Goode CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
TOWN OF CLAREMONT
ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING
MINUTES
TUESDAY 21 OCTOBER, 2014
Stephen Goode
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
Date:DISCLAIMER Would all members of the public please note that they are cautioned against taking any action as a result of a Council decision tonight until such time as they have seen a copy of the Minutes or have been advised, in writing, by the Council’s Administration with regard to any particular decision.
ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 21 OCTOBER, 2014
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ITEM SUBJECT PAGE NO
1 DECLARATION OF OPENING/ANNOUNCEMENT OF VISITORS ............ 1
2 RECORD OF ATTENDANCE/APOLOGIES/LEAVE OF ABSENCE .......... 1
3 DISCLOSURE OF INTERESTS .................................................................. 1
4 RESPONSE TO PREVIOUS PUBLIC QUESTIONS TAKEN ON NOTICE . 1
5 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME .......................................................................... 2
6 PUBLIC STATEMENT TIME ....................................................................... 2
7 APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE ............................................ 3
8 PETITIONS/DEPUTATIONS/PRESENTATIONS ........................................ 3
9 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS ..................... 3
10 ANNOUNCEMENT OF CONFIDENTIAL MATTERS FOR WHICH
MEETING MAY BE CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC ......................................... 3
11 BUSINESS NOT DEALT WITH FROM A PREVIOUS MEETING ............... 3
12 REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ..................................................................... 3
13 REPORTS OF THE CEO............................................................................. 4
13.1 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT .................................................. 4
13.1.1 LOTS 9-14 (18-24) BAY VIEW TERRACE, CLAREMONT –
PROPOSED ADDITIONS TO EXISTING COMMERCIAL
TENANCIES ........................................................................... 4
13.1.2 LOTS 20 AND 21 (1) LANGSFORD STREET, CLAREMONT
– PROPOSED DELISTING (AND DEMOLITION) OF
HERITAGE DWELLING AND CONSTRUCTION OF TWO
SINGLE HOUSES ................................................................ 20
13.1.3 LOT 10 (1/24) ST QUENTIN AVEUNE, CLAREMONT –
PROPOSED SIGNAGE FOR SHOP ‘PRESSED EARTH’ ... 35
13.1.4 PROPOSED VARIATIONS TO CLAREMONT NORTH EAST
PRECINCT DESIGN GUIDELINES AND DETAILED AREA
PLANS.................................................................................. 39
13.2 CORPORATE AND GOVERNANCE .............................................. 49
Page (i)ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 21 OCTOBER, 2014
13.2.1 LIST OF PAYMENTS 1 SEPTEMBER TO 30 SEPTEMBER
2014 ..................................................................................... 49
13.2.2 MONTHLY STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL ACTIVITY FOR
THE PERIODS ENDING 31 AUGUST 2014 AND 30
SEPTEMBER 2014 .............................................................. 51
13.3 INFRASTRUCTURE ....................................................................... 54
13.3.1 JETTY ROAD TOILET UPGRADE ....................................... 54
13.3.2 NORTH EAST PRECINCT PROJECT – PREFERRED
TREATMENT FOR ROAD INTERSECTION AT SHENTON
ROAD AND DAVIES ROAD ................................................. 57
13.3.3 PROPOSED CLOSURE AND DISPOSAL OF RIGHT OF
WAY ADJACENT TO 19 CLAREMONT CRESCENT,
CLAREMONT ....................................................................... 71
14 ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE PRESIDING PERSON ............................... 74
15 ELECTED MEMBERS’ MOTIONS OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS
BEEN GIVEN............................................................................................. 74
16 NEW BUSINESS OF AN URGENT NATURE APPROVED BY THE
PERSON PRESIDING OR BY DECISION OF MEETING ......................... 74
17 CONFIDENTIAL MATTERS FOR WHICH THE MEETING MAY BE
CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC ....................................................................... 74
18 FUTURE MEETINGS OF COUNCIL ......................................................... 74
19 DECLARATION OF CLOSURE OF MEETING ......................................... 74
Page (ii)ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 21 OCTOBER, 2014
TOWN OF CLAREMONT
ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING
21 OCTOBER, 2014
MINUTES
1 DECLARATION OF OPENING/ANNOUNCEMENT OF VISITORS
His Worship the Mayor, Mr Jock Barker, welcomed members of the public,
staff and Councillors and declared the meeting open at 7:01PM.
2 RECORD OF ATTENDANCE/APOLOGIES/LEAVE OF ABSENCE
ATTENDANCE
Mayor Barker
Cr Peter Browne West Ward
Cr Karen Wood West Ward
Cr Jill Goetze South Ward
Cr Paul Kelly South Ward
Cr Chris Mews South Ward
Cr Alistair Tulloch East Ward
Cr Bruce Haynes East Ward
Cr Anita Lorenz East Ward
Mr Stephen Goode (Chief Executive Officer)
Mr Les Crichton (Executive Manager Corporate and Governance)
Mr Saba Kirupananther (Executive Manager Infrastructure)
Mr David Vinicombe (Executive Manager Planning and Development)
Ms Julia Kingsbury (Manager Planning)
Ms Katie Bovell (Governance Officer)
36 Members of the public
2 Members of the press
APOLOGIES
Cr Edwards - Leave of Absence
3 DISCLOSURE OF INTERESTS
NIL
4 RESPONSE TO PREVIOUS PUBLIC QUESTIONS TAKEN ON NOTICE
NIL
Page 1ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 21 OCTOBER, 2014
5 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME
Mr Kim Doepel, 61 Forrest Street, Subiaco.
Re: Item 13.1.2, Lots 20 and 21 (1) Langsford Street, Claremont –
Proposed Delisting (and Demolition) of Heritage Dwelling and
Construction of Two Single Houses.
Question:
How confidential information was released to the press which is contrary to
Council policy? I have written to the administration on two occasions and
haven’t received satisfactory answers so I am seeking a written explanation
from the Council, and if that isn’t satisfactory the matter will be taken further.
The Mayor took the questions on notice.
6 PUBLIC STATEMENT TIME
Mrs Caroline Winterbottom – 3 Langsford Street, Claremont.
Re: Item 13.1.2, Lots 20 and 21 (1) Langsford Street, Claremont –
Proposed Delisting (and Demolition) of Heritage Dwelling and
Construction of Two Single Houses.
Mrs Winterbottom spoke for the officer recommendation.
Mr Kim Doepel, 61 Forrest Street, Subiaco.
Re: Item 13.1.2, Lots 20 and 21 (1) Langsford Street, Claremont –
Proposed Delisting (and Demolition) of Heritage Dwelling and
Construction of Two Single Houses.
Mr Doepel spoke against the officer recommendation.
Mr Alex Norvilas, 1 Langsford Street, Claremont.
Re: Item 13.1.2, Lots 20 and 21 (1) Langsford Street, Claremont –
Proposed Delisting (and Demolition) of Heritage Dwelling and
Construction of Two Single Houses.
Mr Norvilas spoke against the officer recommendation.
Ms Kylie Bacon, 61 Forrest Street, Subiaco.
Re: Item 13.1.2, Lots 20 and 21 (1) Langsford Street, Claremont –
Proposed Delisting (and Demolition) of Heritage Dwelling and
Construction of Two Single Houses.
Ms Bacon spoke against the officer recommendation.
Mr Mike Balfe, 15 Langsford Street, Claremont.
Re: Item 13.1.2, Lots 20 and 21 (1) Langsford Street, Claremont –
Proposed Delisting (and Demolition) of Heritage Dwelling and
Construction of Two Single Houses.
Mr Balfe spoke for the officer recommendation.
Page 2ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 21 OCTOBER, 2014
7 APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE
NIL
8 PETITIONS/DEPUTATIONS/PRESENTATIONS
NIL
9 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS
Moved Cr Tulloch, seconded Cr Mews
That the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 7 October
2014 be confirmed.
CARRIED(169/14)
(NO DISSENT)
10 ANNOUNCEMENT OF CONFIDENTIAL MATTERS FOR WHICH MEETING
MAY BE CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC
NIL
11 BUSINESS NOT DEALT WITH FROM A PREVIOUS MEETING
NIL
12 REPORTS OF COMMITTEES
NIL
Page 3ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 21 OCTOBER, 2014
13 REPORTS OF THE CEO
13.1 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
13.1.1 LOTS 9-14 (18-24) BAY VIEW TERRACE, CLAREMONT – PROPOSED
ADDITIONS TO EXISTING COMMERCIAL TENANCIES
File No: A-422/DA-2014.121
Attachments - Public: Location and Submission Plan
Photographs including historic photograph of shop
frontage
Attachments - Restricted: Plans
Responsible Officer: David Vinicombe
Executive Manager Planning and Development
Author: David Vinicombe
Executive Manager Planning and Development
Josh Wilson
Urban Planner
Proposed Meeting Date: 21 October 2014
60 Days Due Date: 29 August 2014
Property Owner: Lot 9 Jeffery Leach
Lots 10-14 Arundell Nominees
Submitted By: Fred Cole
Area of Lot: Lot 9 195m2
Lot 10 412m2
Lot 11 417m2
Lot 12 3m2
Lot 13 3m2
Lot 14 13m2
Zoning: Town Centre
Enabling Legislation: Planning and Development Act 2005 (PDA)
Town Planning Scheme No. 3 (TPS3)
Purpose
For Council to consider an application to extend the ground and upper floors of the
existing commercial buildings at 18-24 Bay View Terrace, Claremont.
The application requires the Council’s determination as it is of a commercial nature.
Summary
• Application for planning approval received for ground and upper floor additions
to shops fronting Bay View Terrace and Walt Drabble Lane.
• Additions include 110m2 of ground floor shop and 352m2 of upper floor
consulting rooms.
Page 4ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 21 OCTOBER, 2014
• Proposal does not comply with a number of provisions under TPS3, however
may be conditioned to achieve compliance, or varied where appropriate.
• The site has an overall car parking shortfall of 14.3 car bays (rounded to 14).
The proposal was referred to Council’s meeting on 7 October where it was
withdrawn to clarify parking considerations relative to the cash-in-lieu (CIL)
provisions of TPS3.
• The former ‘moratorium’ on parking bays for ‘defined small businesses’ is no
longer applicable, however consistent with other applications which have not
satisfied the precise terms of the former ‘moratorium’, consideration may be
given to satisfaction of parking requirements through a parking licence fee.
• Options are provided for the payment of the parking licence fee in the report.
They range from the formerly applied $1,250 per bay up front with an
additional $500 per bay on finalisation of Amendment No 123 to TPS3, or a
modified licence fee. Modifications may acknowledge that the initial fee of
$1,750 (total) was a discounted fee from the original construction cost relative
to ‘at grade’ parking ($3,500) less 50% to acknowledge that the parking bays
may receive an income if parking fees were to be applied to the use of the
bays. Alternatively, the licence fee could be increased to reflect more recent
cost estimates for construction ranging from $4,000 - $25,000 per bay
dependant on whether the parking is ‘at grade’ or a ‘decked’ parking station
(as recommended to Council on 3 June 2014).
• Application is recommended for conditional approval with the satisfaction of
the CIL requirements by way of the existing parking licence fee.
Background
The following table outlines key dates regarding this proposal:
Date Item/Outcome
1 July 2014 Planning application received by Council.
2 July 2014 Application undergoes internal DCU assessment.
11 July 2014 Advertising commenced.
25 July 2014 Advertising closed.
22 August 2014 Additional information requested from applicant.
12 September 2014 Additional information received from applicant.
30 September 2014 Report prepared for Council.
7 October 2014 Report withdrawn from Council.
14 October 2014 Revised report prepared for Council.
Past Resolutions
Recent Approvals
Council has issued the following approvals for the subject lots in recent years:
Approval Date Property Description
Extension to ground floor of Friendlies Chemist and a
29 June 1999 20 Bay View Tce
new upper floor consulting room space (day spa).
13 July 2005 24 Bay View Tce Retail shop fit out for Dymocks bookstore.
20A Bay View
22 March 2006 Retail shop fit out for Sunglass Hut.
Tce
15 February 2011 20 Bay View Tce New upper floor storage space for Friendlies Chemist.
Page 5ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 21 OCTOBER, 2014
Approval Date Property Description
Change of use to restaurant with seating for 108
17 September 2013 24 Bay View Tce
internally and 12 alfresco seats.
Cash-in-Lieu
The applicant proposes to use the cash-in-lieu (CIL) provisions of cl.33 under TPS3
in order to meet their car parking requirements.
Council resolved on 5 June 2012 to initiate Amendment No. 123 to formalise parking
licence provisions and required preparation of a companion policy to provide
guidance. Part 5 of the Council resolution provided for Council to adopt a parking
licence fee for “existing small scale single tenancies” having a 200m2 GLA or less of
$1,250 per bay as a one off payment as an interim approach to satisfying CIL
requirements (the area was modified to 300m2 GLA by Resolution 270/13). Part 6
required a policy to be presented to Council prior to finalisation of the amendment.
The development of the amendment and policy identified a number of related issues
which needed to be addressed – resulting in report to Council on 14 June 2014 (see
below). The June 2012 resolution was based on legal advice from McLeod’s in May
which indicated a short term option for satisfying the requirement was for the Council
to require satisfaction through a lease which evolved to the licence fee approach
(non – exclusive licence to use existing bays under control of the Town) due to Local
Government Act provisions relative to disposal of land and exclusive use of bays.
On 19 June 2012 Council considered a Revocation Motion relating to Part 5 of the
June 2012 resolution providing for the licence to be revoked and replaced with:
(a) Adopt a parking license arrangement for existing small scale tenancies
thorough the Town Centre and having a GLA of 200m2 or less. (i.e. – change
to initial motion by removing reference to amount for licence). This
requirement is still active as it is the formal interim arrangement awaiting the
amendment and policy.
(b) Consider setting a fee for the Parking License in the preparation of the 2013-
2014 budget.
(c) The calculation of cash in lieu for car parking spaces for defined small
business within the Claremont Town Centre for 2012-2013 financial year will
be based on the estimated cost of creating at grade parking spaces (currently
$3,500), less 50%. $1,750 - This licence fee has not altered. The 50%
deduction took into account the potential for Council to charge fees for public
parking. This has not eventuated and, as determined by Council on a number
of occasions more recently, Council still wishes to promote free parking within
its public car parks.
(d) Defined small business development approvals within the Claremont Town
Centre will be exempt from cash in lieu for parking provision for the period until
30 June 2013. This is what is referred to as the ‘moratorium’.
(e) Council will review the cash in lieu provisions for small businesses within the
Town Centre prior to adopting the 2013-2014 budget. The report on this was
submitted June 2014 but deferred by Council, so the current status remains
the licence fee approach.
Page 6ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 21 OCTOBER, 2014
It is noted that on 3 July 2012 an application on Stirling Highway within the Town
Centre for consulting rooms was approved with a CIL concession (OCM 117/12).
Although strictly not in accordance with the ‘moratorium’ as the consulting rooms
exceeded 200m2 (which was the maximum area at that time), the report
acknowledged the CIL required of over $500,000 would be excessive and discourage
development. The approval included a condition requiring a parking licence for 7
bays at a fee prescribed by Council to satisfy CIL. Footnote (i) required a fee based
on initial payment of $1,250 per bay prior to Building Licence and a further $500 per
bay subject to finalisation of parking amendment and policy (making up the $1,750
licence fee above).
Numerous reports have been presented to Council for the ‘moratorium’ (3 reports –
16 bays) and licence fee (5 reports – 25 bays) approaches. The current application,
if approved within the licence fee approach would increase the number of bays
‘leased’ by 14 to 39 bays.
Council resolved at its Ordinary Council Meeting on 17 September 2013 (Resolution
270/13):
That Council reaffirm its ‘moratorium’ on cash-in-lieu for parking contributions under
Town Planning Scheme No 3 within the Town Centre, modified to include small scale
single tenancies of up to 300m2 throughout the Town Centre and include the
definition of “defined small business” as follows:
(a) Adopt a parking licence arrangement for development in existing small scale
single tenancies throughout the Town Centre and having a gross leasable
area of 300m2 or less.
(b) Consider setting a fee for a parking licence in the preparation of 2014-2015
budget.
(c) The calculation of cash in lieu for car parking spaces for “defined small
business” within the Claremont Town Centre for the 2013-2014 financial year
will be on the basis of the estimated cost of creating at grade parking spaces
(currently $3,500), less 50% (i.e. $1,750).
(d) “Defined small business” development approvals which include “Shops
(small), Restaurants, Small Bars, Consulting Rooms and Office (above ground
level), Hairdressers and Barbers, and Beauty Salons with a gross floor area of
200m2 or less, located within the Town Centre in Bay View Terrace, St
Quentin Avenue or the associated laneways.” will be exempted from cash-in-
lieu for parking provision for the period until 30 June 2014.
(e) Council will review the cash-in-lieu provisions for small businesses within the
Town Centre prior to adopting the 2014-2015 budget.
The above resolution is a revision of Council’s earlier decision along the same lines
made on 5 June 2012 (Resolution 84/12). Council should note however the following
in relation to this resolution:
• Although part (d) above refers to a “defined small business” with an area of
200m2, it is clear that the intent of the reaffirmed ‘moratorium’ was that it be
applied to “defined small businesses” with a modified area of 300m2(as stated
in the initiating paragraph).
Page 7ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 21 OCTOBER, 2014
• Technically, the above ‘moratorium’ expired on 30 June 2014.
• A report on parking requirements in the Town was presented to a Special
Council Meeting on 3 June 2014, however this was referred back for further
refinement before being represented to Council for consideration. The report
proposed to review the amendment and policy prior to adopting the budget for
2014-15. The recommendation included a proposal to formally revoke
application of the parking ‘moratorium’ (which is no longer required as it was to
expire) and further waive the CIL contributions in favour of the parking licence
until Amendment 123 is gazetted. It was also recommended that during the
interim period that the parking licence fee be increased to either $4,000 or
$25,000 based on the policy proposals ($4,000 for preferred uses where
opportunity is available within 100m of the site for the construction of at grade
public parking within the road reserve or on land owned/controlled by Council
and $25,000 otherwise). The report included a list of criteria for applying a
percentage discount to the amount charged. The matter was deferred
pending a further report to Council to reduce the complexity of the proposals.
The follow up report on this (taking into account discussion at the parking
forum) is expected to be presented to Council later this year – possibly the
second November OCM.
• A number of presentations have been made to Council on this matter inclusive
of a Parking Forum held 14 July 2014. Feedback from the Forum is being
collated and revised proposals formulated for presentation back to Council,
however it should be noted that opinions vary significantly on the various
aspects of the matter and these require detailed assessment and
incorporation into a recommended strategic direction.
• In the absence of Council resolving a formal strategic direction on the
proposed amendment to TPS3 and Council policy with regard to parking and
CIL payment, satisfaction of the parking requirement is difficult to determine. It
is clear that payment of the full CIL requirements (land value and construction
costs) are cost prohibitive for development and whilst needing to ensure that
future parking requirements are appropriately accommodated, satisfaction of
the requirement is a delicate balancing act between charging too much (with
no development resulting as it is cost prohibitive – e.g. over $1.4 million for
this application) and undercharging (leaving Council with the burden of
resolving any parking shortfalls in the Town Centre should that occur).
• As these matters are not resolved it is recommended that the interim ‘parking
licence’ continue operation in preference to extending the ‘moratorium’. The
parking licence approach has been recommended by Council’s solicitors as an
interim measure to address the parking shortfalls under the Scheme and
provisions are built into the initial drafts of the Scheme Amendment to
accommodate this.
• The former licence fee is $1,250 per bay up front with an additional $500 per
bay on finalisation of Amendment No 123 to TPS3 ($1,750 per bay total).
Council may however choose to modify the licence fee to reflect revised
estimates for construction cost which were reported to Council on 3 June 2014
- ranging from $4,000 - 25,000 per bay dependant on where the parking is “at
grade” or “decked” parking station as recommended to Council on 3 June
2014. It is also open to Council to decide whether or not the discount should
Page 8ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 21 OCTOBER, 2014
continue (presently 50%). As noted above, the initial fee of $1,750 (total) was
a discounted fee from the original construction cost relative to ‘at grade’
parking ($3,500) less 50% to acknowledge that the parking bays may receive
an income if parking fees were to be applied to the use of the bays.
• ‘Defined small business’ development includes single tenancies in the town
centre having a gross lettable area of 300m2 or less and specifically consulting
rooms above ground level.
• It is noted that the licence fee policy approach does not in its existing form
extend to this proposal (unless modified or varied). The reason for this is that
the proposal relates to a new addition and that the aggregated area of the
development exceeds the area of 300m2 stipulated. The area of this proposal
has predominantly resulted from other provisions in TPS3 which required the
land holdings to be amalgamated. Additionally the consulting rooms proposed
on the upper floor are 352m2 which exceeds the policy limit. Notwithstanding
this the officer review remains:
o The development is seen as a worthwhile addition to the Town Centre.
o No development of this nature will be possible if the CIL provisions are
strictly applied.
o Council has supported initiatives to re-energise the Town Centre and
could view this in a similar manner.
o Council has previously recognised that it has discretion when dealing
with a policy decision (e.g. OCM 270/13 referenced above) and could
consider supporting the application on the basis of the licence fee
approach with an acknowledged variation to accommodate the
variations in terms of lettable area and to recognise the new additions
to the tenancies.
Heritage
The property is listed in the Town's Schedule of Heritage Places as part of the Bay
View Terrace shopping precinct. The Town’s heritage officer has provided the
following comments in relation to the proposal:
The current plans for 20 Bay View Terrace are the outcome of several months of
negotiations between officers from the Town of Claremont and the designer. The
major aim of this process has been to retain the parapet walls facing Bay View
Terrace, thus preserving the characteristics which evidence the role of this place as a
shop/shops within the Town's historic commercial centre. The upper storey has been
setback from the parapet to prevent the new structure from dominating the original.
Further, the proposed structure provides a neutral background which does not
detract from the front elevation. These are significant concessions on behalf of the
owner and reflect an overall positive heritage outcome for the Town. While there
could be some improvement on the design of the upper storey, I feel it is important
for the Town to recognise the accommodation of the important heritage aspects of
the place. It is noted that the parapet above Friendlies Chemist is not original;
however, I suggest that its current form and scale are more in keeping with the
original than earlier modifications that were proposed. Therefore the current
proposal for 20 Bay View Terrace is supported without further recommendation. I
Page 9ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 21 OCTOBER, 2014
note that the retention of the shop fronts facing Bay View Terrace is important due to
the contribution these places make to precinct.
Consultation
The application was advertised in accordance with Local Planning Policy 308. Seven
neighbours were consulted and no submissions were received.
Discussion
Description
The existing site consists of three main properties – 18 (Lot 9), 20 (Lot 10) and 24
(Lot 11) Bay View Terrace (other Lots 12-14 are small party wall lots). Details of the
existing buildings and uses are as follows:
Existing Development
Address Building area Current / approved use
2
Lot 9 63.5m (ground floor) Shop (small) – previously Pennywise
(18) Bay View Jewellers, now vacant
Terrace
2
Lots 10 364m (ground floor) Shop (Intermediate) – Friendlies Chemist
2
(20) Bay View 122m (upper floor) Consulting Rooms – Escape Day Spa
2
Terrace 116m (upper floor) Storage for Friendlies Chemist
2
Lots 11 345m (ground floor) Restaurant (currently being renovated)
2
(24) Bay View 144m (upper floor) Restaurant (storage and staff rooms)
Terrace
The proposed additions will increase the floor areas of the existing buildings and will
change the use of some existing internal areas as follows:
Proposed Changes
Address Building area Description
2
Lot 9 110m (ground floor) New shop (intermediate) area added to rear of
18 Bay View Terrace existing shop with direct frontage onto Walt
Drabble Lane.
2
167m (upper floor) New consulting rooms area with access via 20
Bay View Terrace.
2
Lots 10 18.4m (ground floor) Existing shop converted into stair and lift
20 Bay View Terrace access for the consulting rooms on the upper
floor.
2
115m (upper floor) New consulting rooms connected to the upper
floor of 18 Bay View Terrace and with a new
doorway to the staff and storage areas on the
upper floor of 24 Bay View Terrace.
2
116m (upper floor) Existing shop storage area converted to
consulting room use.
2
Lots 11 144m (upper floor) Restaurant storage and staff rooms converted
24 Bay View Terrace into shop storage and common staff rooms.
Land Use
Shop (intermediate) is a ‘P’ (permitted) use within the Town Centre Zone, meaning
the use is permitted subject to compliance with TPS3.
Consulting Rooms is an ‘AA’ (discretionary) use. Council can only approve of an ‘AA’
use where it:
• will provide a local service to other land in the locality; or
Page 10ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 21 OCTOBER, 2014
• is consistent with the general use of land in that locality and the Council is
satisfied that the use, and the activities to be carried on which are connected
with, or incidental to that use; and any building to be erected on the land will
not have any adverse or detrimental effect on the residents or amenity of or
the properties in the locality.
The proposed consulting rooms use is supported as the proposed use provides a
local service and is not detrimental to nearby residents or the amenity of the locality.
Compliance
The development complies with the TPS3, Council Policy and local laws other than in
the following areas:
• TPS3 Table 2 - Car Parking
• TPS3 Table 2 – Landscaping
• TPS3 cl.38 – Amalgamation of Lots
• TPS3 cl.41 – Plot Ratio – Consulting Rooms
• TPS3 cl.60 – Town Centre Zone Objectives
• TPS3 cl.65 – Walt Drabble Lane
These items are discussed individually below.
Table 2 Car Parking
The proposal is required to provide sufficient car parking for the combined existing
and proposed uses on the site. A parking assessment for the site is as follows:
Car Parking Assessment
Parking required
Floor / Floor minus deductions Parking
# Use class Parking required
tenancy area and previous CIL shortfall
arrangements
18 GF – jewellers 173.5m2 shop (int.) 1:16.67 = 10.4 Nil bays provided 6.4 bays
(vacant) The existing floor 2
* 12.9m open
space of 63.5m2
space = 8.6 bay
required 3.8 bays.
deduction
It is Council’s
practice to Parking
acknowledge these requirement is
as ‘status quo’ reduced to 6.4
bays. The bays
remaining 6.6 bays
are required.
UF – doctors 168m2 consulting 1:20 = 8.4
15 (total)
Page 11ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 21 OCTOBER, 2014
20 GF – chemist 364m2 shop (int.) 1:16.67 = 21.8 Nil bays provided 7.9 bays
2
* 28.2m open
UF – day spa 122m2 consulting 1:20 = 6.1
space = 18.8 bays
UF - doctors 197m2 consulting 1:20 = 9.8 Requirement
reduced to 18.9
37.7 (total) bays
Previous CIL for
11 bays**
reduces
requirement to
7.9 bays.
24 GF – 108 restaurant 1:4 seats = 27 2 bays provided 0
restaurant seats
Approval of
(345m2)
DA2013.152
acknowledged 2
bays as satisfying
the former 18 bay
‘status quo’
requirement.
The additional 9
bays required for
CIL under were
required as a
‘parking licence’
fee.
UF – storage 144m2 Not applicable – no parking required for shared 0
etc. facilities and retail storage (TPS3 cl.31A.7)
TOTAL: 1532m2 14.3
bays
***
* TPS3 cl.65 allows for a reduction of up to 2 car bays for every 3m2 of open
space adjacent to Walt Drabble Lane (to improve the laneway’s amenity and
encourage activation).
** CIL for 11 bays was required under the planning approval dated 26 June
1999.
*** The 14.3 bay calculation is rounded to the nearest whole number – i.e.14
bays.
It is noted that the former ‘moratorium’ provided for CIL to be waived where preferred
uses are proposed in existing tenancies– these include consulting rooms at the
second level fronting Bay View Terrace with a maximum area of 300m2 and shops on
the ground floor. As the proposal includes extensions to the tenancy on the ground
floor and a new upper floor extension for the consulting room with an area of 352m2,
the proposal would not have automatically qualified for the former ‘moratorium’
waiving of CIL. The proposal was initially presented as two individual consulting
rooms at the upper level which would have complied with the former ‘moratorium’
requirement, however as cl.64 requires the lots to be amalgamated to satisfy non-
Page 12ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 21 OCTOBER, 2014
discretionary plot ratio requirements, it may have been reasonable to apply the
‘moratorium.’
It is also noted that ‘defined small business’ development includes single tenancies in
the Town Centre having a gross lettable area of 300m2 or less and specifically
consulting rooms above ground level.
Further, it is noted that the licence fee policy approach does not in its existing form
extend to this proposal (unless modified or varied). The reason for this is that the
proposal relates to a new addition and that the aggregated area of the development
exceeds the area of 300m2 stipulated. The above comments acknowledge that this
has predominantly resulted from other provisions in TPS3 which required the land
holdings to be amalgamated. Additionally the consulting rooms proposed on the
upper floor are 352m2 which exceeds the policy limit. Notwithstanding this, it may be
considered that the proposal is worthy of special consideration and continuation of
the ‘parking licence’ approach as:
o The development is seen as a worthwhile addition to the Town Centre.
o No development of this nature will be possible if the CIL provisions are strictly
applied.
o Council has supported initiatives to re-energise the Town Centre and could view
this in a similar manner.
o Council has previously recognised that it has discretion when dealing with a
policy decision (e.g. OCM 270/13 referenced above) and could consider
supporting the application on the basis of the licence fee approach with an
acknowledged variation to accommodate the variations in terms of lettable area.
The assessed parking shortfall is 14 bays. In order to satisfy the CIL provisions of
TPS3 Council could resolve to vary its non-exclusive car parking licence approach for
the satisfaction of CIL for parking requirements under TPS3 by acknowledging that
the proposal for the proposed new shop with an additional area of 110m2 and new
consulting rooms with an additional area of 365m2 represents a variation to the
existing licence fee approach for existing tenancies with a maximum of 300m2 and
further resolve to approve the proposed development with a condition requiring
satisfaction of the CIL requirements to the satisfaction of Council and an advice note
which stipulates how the CIL can be satisfied by way a parking licence fee. As
indicated above, Council has the option of varying its fee for the parking licence and
the following options (inclusive of the current licence fee) are provided for
consideration:
(a) Current licence fee of $1,250 per bay ($17,500) is required to be paid prior to
the issue of a Building Permit as an interim approach to addressing the cash-
in-lieu for car parking requirements of Town planning Scheme No. 3 as
detailed in condition 3 above. Further subject to the finalization of Amendment
No. 123 to the Scheme and adoption of Council Policy on parking in the Town
Centre, a final contribution of $500 ($7,000) (total fee $24,500) may be
required to finally satisfy the Town Planning Scheme parking requirements.
(b) Modified existing licence fee of $3,500 per bay ($49,000) to acknowledge that
the concept of discounting the licence fee to reflect a 50% discount to
recognise that the parking bays do not presently attract a separate parking fee
Page 13ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 21 OCTOBER, 2014
for their use. The required parking licence fee would be required to be paid
prior to the issue of a Building Permit as an interim approach to addressing the
CIL for car parking requirements of TPS3 as detailed in proposed condition 3.
(c) Revised licence fee to recognise the cost of constructing ‘at grade parking’ on
Council owned/controlled land in the proximity of the Town Centre - the
required parking licence fee of $4,000 per bay ($56.000) would be required to
be paid prior to the issue of a Building Permit as an interim approach to
addressing the CIL for car parking requirements of TPS3 as detailed in
proposed condition 3.
(d) Revised licence fee to recognise the cost of constructing decked parking on
Council owned/controlled land in the proximity of the Town Centre in
recognition that such land is a finite resource - the required parking licence fee
of $25,000 per bay ($350,000) would be required to be paid prior to the issue
of a Building Permit as an interim approach to addressing the CIL for car
parking requirements of TPS3 as detailed in proposed condition 3.
Should Council not support the relaxation of CIL requirements and any of the
alternatives presented for the payment of a licence fee, the CIL required under TPS3
would be in excess of $1.4 million.
In determining which is the most appropriate licence fee payable, it is noted that the
subject application has been in the process of preparation well before April this year
and was lodged in June, prior to the expiration of the ‘moratorium’. Whilst not
compliant with the terms of the ‘moratorium’ the alternative fee for the parking licence
has clearly been based on the existing fees during this period. Given Council has
consistently shown a reluctance to charge for public paring in Council parking areas
within the Town, the concept of allowing a 50% discount to the parking licence fee
should not be applied. Accordingly, in the absence of Council further resolving to
amend the fee during this period (despite the alternative recommendations presented
in June), it would be reasonable to charge at the current rate, modified to remove the
50% discount, of $3,500 per bay.
TPS3 Table 2 – Landscaping
Shop and Restaurant land uses in the Town Centre are required to provide
landscaping equal to at least 5% of the site under Table 2. Landscaping for
Consulting Rooms is at the discretion of Council and where land uses are mixed
Council has discretion to vary the Table 2 landscaping requirements under TPS3
cl.37.
The combined sites provide 41m2 of landscaped area (fully paved) adjacent to Walt
Drabble Lane. This represents 4% of the land area. A variation is supported in this
instance as there is limited ability to provide additional landscaping without altering
the existing buildings.
TPS3 cl.38 – Amalgamation of Lots
The proposed upper floor additions extend over the lot boundaries of 18 and 20 Bay
View Terrace. Cl.38 requires amalgamation of such lots prior to the issue of a
Building Licence. A condition of approval may be included to address this matter.
Page 14ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 21 OCTOBER, 2014
TPS3 cl.41 – Plot Ratio – Consulting Rooms
Cl.41 limits the plot ratio of any consulting room use to 0.5 (50% of the lot area). The
table below shows the plot ratio of the proposed development:
Consulting Room Plot Ratio
Lot No. Land Area Building area Plot ratio Complies
2 2
18 195m 168m 0.86 No
2 2
20 428m 337.4m 0.79 No
Combined tenancies
2 2
18 & 20 623m 505.4m 0.81 No
2 2
18, 20 & 24 1043m 505.4m 0.48 Yes
The proposed consulting rooms exceed the permitted plot ratio of each of the
properties they are to be constructed upon. No discretion is provided under TPS3 to
vary this requirement, therefore, in order to comply with TPS3, all three properties
require amalgamation. A condition of approval may be included to address this
matter.
TPS3 cl.60 – Town Centre Zone Objectives
The objectives for the Town Centre zone are as follows:
1. That Bay View Terrace be maintained as the centre of the specialised
shopping area of the District.
2. The need for the Zone to provide a varied and integrated centre incorporating
a wide range of retail outlets.
3. That buildings and the access and circulation for pedestrians and vehicles and
parking facilities be so laid out as to ensure safety and convenience for
shoppers and other users of the Zone.
4. The need for architectural and civic design of a high standard in order to
compliment the design of older buildings and provide diversity consistent with
overall harmony.
5. The provision of landscaping to provide shade and visual relief.
6. To enable appropriate residential development within the Zone.
7. The preservation of all buildings referred to in Clause 78.
In general, the proposed development is supported as it will increase the floor area of
commercial uses along Bay View Terrace, allowing an increased number and
diversity of commercial uses. The development provides safety and convenience for
shoppers and does not impact the ability of adjoining lots to provide residential
development in the future.
With regards to point 4 above, it is noted that the proposed upper floor is proposed to
be setback 3m from the street frontage and contains simple design features inclusive
of sash windows and a steel-framed awning running the length of the proposed upper
floors of both 18 and 20. These details have been prepared to address heritage
requirements by ensuring that the proposal does not detract from the main facade of
the buildings consistent with the Town’s heritage officer’s comments.
Page 15ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 21 OCTOBER, 2014
It is also noted that forward construction works issued as a Building Permit for
structural improvements have resulted in demolition of most of the building at No. 18
(including the facade to Bay View Terrace) to address resultant foundation stability
concerns. These works were undertaken as emergency measures during the
forward works. The main element of concern is the removal of the heritage features
of the old shop front. A review of old photographic records (see attached) for the
building indicate that the shopfront previously had a centrally located recessed
doorway, which should be reinstated in preference to a recessed doorway to the
side, or the proposed flat shop frontage. It is noted however that a number of
adjoining and adjacent shop frontages along Bay View Terrace have evolved over
time and no longer display their original heritage features. Reinstatement to the
original may therefore be unreasonable and requires further negotiation between the
applicant and the Town. It is therefore appropriate that this matter be addressed
prior to the issue of any further Building Permit, and accordingly an appropriate
condition may be proposed.
In addition, the Walt Drabble Lane facade of number 18 lacks articulation and
detailing other than the proposed aluminium frames windows on the upper floor and
a steel-framed awning over the rear entrance. It is flat-rendered and will appear as
an extension of the existing development on number 20 with matching setback (3m)
and height (8.2m). In order to address point 4 above, it is recommended that the
facade be modified to incorporate fine-grained details and articulation in keeping with
the more recent, high quality additions fronting the Lane at numbers 2 and 4.
TPS3 cl.65 – Walt Drabble Lane
Cl.65 is designed to encourage a high-quality, pedestrian environment along Walt
Drabble Lane and offers significant car parking concessions to enable this.
The proposed development does not meet some of the design requirements of cl.65
however as detailed in this report, revised details are required to address the facade
detail, and more specifically require that:
• At least 60% of the ground floor elevation to number 18 is to be glazed (in lieu
of the 46% currently proposed) with revised plans submitted as part of the
Building Permit.
• A concealed garbage storage area or areas sufficient for all the proposed
tenancies is to be provided. Currently number 20 has such an area however it
is only 2.0m by 1.2m in size which is not sufficient for the combined tenancies.
Number 24 has an open undercroft parking area with exposed garbage
storage areas and this is required to be rectified. Revised plans are to be
submitted as part of the Building Permit.
• Details of the proposed paving in front of number 18 are to be submitted to
and approved by the Town prior to installation.
Summary
Based on the above, it is recommended that approval be granted subject to the
conditions in the officer’s recommendation.
Page 16ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 21 OCTOBER, 2014
Voting Requirements
Simple majority decision of Council required.
Moved Cr Mews, seconded Cr Tulloch
THAT Council resolve to vary its non-exclusive car parking licence approach
for the satisfaction of cash-in-lieu for parking requirements under Town
Planning Scheme No. 3 and grant planning approval for proposed additions to
the existing commercial buildings at Lots 9-14 (18-24) Bay View Terrace,
Claremont, subject to the following conditions and advice notes:
1. All development shall occur in accordance with the approved drawings
(Planning Application DA2014.121), as amended by these conditions.
2. All lots are to be amalgamated prior to the issue of a Building Permit, or
alternatively the applicant entering into a legal agreement with Council to
provide for amalgamation within 12 months of issue of a Building Permit
to the satisfaction of Council’s solicitors. The agreement is to be lodged
as a Caveat on the Certificates of Title at the cost of the applicant.
3. Prior to issue of a Building Permit for the proposed Consulting Rooms
and shop extensions, the applicant/owner shall satisfy the cash-in-lieu
car parking requirements for the shortfall of 14 car parking bays in
accordance with clause 33 of Town Planning Scheme No. 3 (see advice
note (i)) at a fee prescribed by the Council.
4. Prior to issue of a Building Permit the applicant is to liaise with adjacent
owners and prepare a dilapidation report for those properties to clearly
establish their condition prior to works. On conclusion of work any
damage to adjacent properties is to be rectified to the satisfaction of the
Town of Claremont.
5. A schedule of colours, materials and finishes being submitted to and
approved by the Town of Claremont prior to the issue of a Building
Permit.
6. A Site and Traffic Management Plan for tradespersons and delivery
vehicles is to be approved by the Town of Claremont prior to the issue of
a building permit and implemented for the duration of construction.
7. All storm water is to be retained on the site with drainage details and
calculations being provided as part of the Building Permit application.
8. Detailed plans to reinstate the frontage to 18 Bay View Terrace are to be
lodged and approved by the Chief Executive Officer prior to the
lodgement for a Building Permit.
9. The rear elevation to Walt Drabble Lane is to be redesigned to the
satisfaction of the Town of Claremont. In particular, the following
modifications shall be incorporated:
(i) Number 18 is to incorporate fine-grained details and articulation
that are in keeping with the more recent, high quality additions to
the Lane at numbers 2 and 4.
(ii) At least 60% of the ground floor elevation of number 18 is to be
glazed (in lieu of the 46% currently proposed) with revised plans
submitted as part of the Building Permit.
Page 17ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 21 OCTOBER, 2014
(iii) A concealed garbage storage area or areas sufficient for all the
proposed tenancies is to be provided to the satisfaction of the
Town of Claremont. Revised plans are to be submitted as part of
the Building Permit.
(iv) Details of the proposed paving in front of number 18 are to be
submitted to and approved by the Town of Claremont prior to
installation.
(v) Street numbering is to be incorporated into the design of the
ground-level facades on Walt Drabble Lane and is to be
prominently displayed on the ground floor of the Bay View Terrace
facades.
10. The boundary wall is to be finished to the satisfaction of the adjoining
landowner. In the event that an agreement cannot be reached the
boundary wall is to be finished to the satisfaction of the Town of
Claremont.
11. Any graffiti on the property visible from a public place being removed
within 48 hours.
12. All servicing areas and other parts of the land or building which are
likely to be untidy in appearance are to be completely screened from
public view and from view from adjoining properties.
13. This application is valid only if the development is commenced within 24
months of the date of approval.
Advice Notes:
(i) Council advises the applicant that the required parking licence fee of
$3,500 per bay ($49,000) is required to be paid prior to the issue of a
Building Permit as an interim approach to addressing the cash-in-lieu for
car parking requirements of Town Planning Scheme No. 3 as detailed in
condition 3 above.
(ii) This is a Planning Approval only. A Building Permit must be obtained
from the Town of Claremont’s Building Services unit prior to the
commencement of any building works. Permits for non-residential
development MUST be certified prior to submission.
(iii) This property is listed on the Town of Claremont's Heritage Schedule
and/or the Heritage Council of Western Australia's Register of Heritage
Places. Any future alteration to the building or development on the land
requires planning approval and the application may be referred to the
Heritage Council.
(iv) The applicant/owner is advised of the following health requirements from
the Town of Claremont’s Health Services. For further information please
contact the Town of Claremont’s Health Services on 9285 4300:
a) Medical facilities are to comply with relevant regulations and codes
of practice, including the appropriate disposal of medical or
biological waste. The applicant is to provide a suitable medical
waste management plan outlining the method of handling and
disposing of medical or biological waste to the Town of Claremont's
Health Services prior to commencement of operation.
Page 18ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 21 OCTOBER, 2014
b) All plant and machinery (such as air-conditioners and pool pumps)
are to be suitably sound proofed to comply with the requirements of
the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 and so as not
to cause an adverse impact on the amenity of the adjoining
residential property.
c) Under the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 no
construction work is to be permitted or suffered to be carried out:
a) Before 7.00am or after 6.00pm Monday to Saturday inclusive; or
b) On a Sunday or on a public holiday.
(d) The applicant is required to remove any hazardous materials
encountered during construction/demolition at their own expense
and in accordance with the Code of Practice on Safe Removal of
Asbestos (NOHSC: 2002(1988) as stipulated by the Occupational
Health and Safety Regulations 1996, and disposed of in accordance
with the Health (Asbestos) Regulations 1992 and the Environmental
Protection (Controlled Waste) Regulations 2004.
(v) If an applicant is aggrieved by this determination a right of review may
exist under the Planning and Development Act 2005. An application for
review must be lodged with the State Administrative Tribunal
(www.sat.justice.wa.gov.au) within 28 days of the determination.
CARRIED(171/14)
(NO DISSENT)
Page 19ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 21 OCTOBER, 2014
13.1.2 LOTS 20 AND 21 (1) LANGSFORD STREET, CLAREMONT – PROPOSED
DELISTING (AND DEMOLITION) OF HERITAGE DWELLING AND
CONSTRUCTION OF TWO SINGLE HOUSES
File Ref: A-2321/DA-2014.00153 and DA-2014.00154
Attachments – Public: Location and Submission Plan
Photograph
Langsford Street Heritage Area Place Record
Submissions Schedule
Attachments – Restricted: Plans
Submissions
Petition
Heritage Assessment provided by applicant
Heritage Assessment undertaken for the Town
Responsible Officer: David Vinicombe
Executive Manager Planning and Development
Author: Jeremy Swan
Senior Planner
Proposed Meeting Date: 21 October 2014
60 Days Due Date: 24 October 2014
Property Owner: Fredalex Pty Ltd
Submitted By: Doepel Marsh Architects & Planners
Zoning: Residential
Enabling Legislation: Planning and Development Act 2005 (PDA)
Town Planning Scheme No. 3 (TPS3)
Residential Design Codes (RDC)
Council Policy LV123 – Retention of
Residential Character (Policy LV123)
Purpose
For Council to determine an application to delist the existing heritage dwelling over
Lots 20 and 21 (1) Langsford Street, Claremont, and for planning approval to
demolish the existing dwelling on the site.
A second planning application has been lodged to develop each of the lots with a
single house, however, the heritage dwelling is required to be demolished to facilitate
the development and thus the second application can only be considered if the
Council approves the demolition.
Council’s determination is required as objections have been received in regard to the
proposal. It is recommended that Council determine the application at this meeting
to prevent a ‘deemed refusal’ after the 60 day timeframe. It is noted that if the
applicant is aggrieved with Council’s determination a right of review may exist under
the Planning and Development Act 2005 with the State Administrative Tribunal.
Page 20ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 21 OCTOBER, 2014
Summary
• Two applications for planning approval received by the Town;
1. Demolition (with associate request for heritage delisting) of a dwelling; and
2. Construction of two single houses (one on Lot 20 and one on Lot 21).
• The primary issue is whether or not the existing dwelling is worthy of retention
as a heritage dwelling.
• Both the applicant and the Town have commissioned independent heritage
assessments.
• If the Council support the delisting and approve the demolition of the dwelling
then the application for the two single houses can be considered.
• If the delisting and demolition is refused by the Council then the planning
application for the dwellings must be refused.
• In the event that Council resolves to approve the delisting and demolition, the
second application for the dwellings is recommended for refusal due to non-
compliance with Town Planning Scheme No. 3 (height requirements) and non-
compliance with Council Policy LV123 – Retention of Residential Character
(Policy LV123).
• During the advertising period, the Town received a total of 29 submissions and
a 37 signature petition objecting to both applications. These submissions
raised concerns over delisting and demolition of the existing dwelling,
classification of the dwellings (e.g. whether the dwellings were more correctly
defined as multiple dwellings), amenity (overshadowing and overlooking),
traffic, parking and general over-development.
• Initial plans contained a number of bathrooms, kitchens and laundries, with
multiple entrances and stairways in each building. As such they presented as
multiple dwellings, and due to size restrictions under the RDC, could not be
approved. Legal advice confirmed this view and accordingly the matter was
raised with the applicant. Revised plans were received which enable
assessment as two single houses.
• Other concerns raised by residents are addressed in detail in the report. In
some instances, the concerns are upheld, but in others, the proposal may be
supported or possibly varied by way of appropriate conditions should Council
resolve to approve the demolition and development.
• Given that the delisting of the heritage dwelling is not supported, the
application for demolition and construction of two single dwellings is
recommended for refusal.
Page 21ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 21 OCTOBER, 2014
Background
The following table outlines key dates regarding this proposal:
Date Item/Outcome
25 August 2014 Planning application received by Council.
27 August 2014 Application undergoes internal DCU assessment.
1 September 2014 Advertising commenced.
18 September 2014 Advertising closed.
6 October 2014 Additional information requested from applicant.
7 October 2014 Additional information received from applicant.
8 October Report prepared for Council.
Past Resolutions
There are no past Council resolutions relevant to this application.
Heritage
The subject site is listed on the Town of Claremont Local Government Inventory as
part of the Langsford Street Heritage Area and the TPS3 Schedule of Heritage
Places. The Heritage Area is considered to be a cohesive group of predominantly
Federation residences demonstrating a consistency of form and fabric and variety of
details through the Inter-War period.
At its meeting held on 5 August 2014 the Council resolved to adopt the Town of
Claremont Local Government Inventory 2014 (LG Inventory). The LG Inventory was
the result of a review of the Town’s Municipal Inventory which commenced in 2011.
The subject site formed part of this review and it was resolved to retain the property
on the LG Inventory and include it in one of the newly introduced Heritage Areas.
Accordingly the existing listing on the Schedule of Heritage Places under TPS3 is
maintained.
Applicant’s Supporting Heritage Report
The applicant has submitted two heritage reports from Ron Bodycoat, an
independent heritage consultant to address the proposed delisting and demolition of
the existing dwelling. A summary of the findings in the first report is provided below:
“In 2003/2004, a Heritage Assessment as part of a Review of the Inventory removed
the potentially significant category and recommended the place be removed from the
Inventory.
I believe the place has no relevant cultural significance but rather, as a consequence
of the changes made to the original external fabric of the place, the house degrades
what otherwise is a significant Claremont Federation streetscape in Langsford Street.
The history of origin of this house is of interest, and should be recorded, but the
house itself should be demolished to allow new sensitively designed residential
development as improvement to the streetscape.
I strongly support removal of the existing building and introduced garage to allow for
new residential development at this location within the characteristics of the
Langsford Street precinct.”
The second report includes the following statements:
Page 22You can also read
