agenda master psc 17 july 2013 - city of fremantle · 17.07.2013 · agenda attachments 1...

AGENDA

Planning Services Committee

Wednesday, 17 July 2013, 6.00pm

CITY OF FREMANTLE

NOTICE OF A PLANNING SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING Elected Members A Planning Services Committee Meeting of the City of Fremantle will be held on

Wednesday, 17 July 2013 in the Council Chamber, Town Hall Centre, 8 William Street,

Fremantle (access via stairs, next to the playground in King Square) commencing at 6.00

pm.

Philip St John DIRECTOR PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 12 July 2013

PLANNING SERVICES COMMITTEE

AGENDA

DECLARATION OF OPENING / ANNOUNCEMENT OF VISITORS NYOONGAR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT STATEMENT "We acknowledge this land that we meet on today is part of the traditional lands of the Nyoongar people and that we respect their spiritual relationship with their country. We also acknowledge the Nyoongar people as the custodians of the greater Fremantle/Walyalup area and that their cultural and heritage beliefs are still important to the living Nyoongar people today." ATTENDANCE / APOLOGIES / LEAVE OF ABSENCE RESPONSE TO PREVIOUS PUBLIC QUESTIONS TAKEN ON NOTICE PUBLIC QUESTION TIME DEPUTATIONS / PRESENTATIONS DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST BY MEMBERS LATE ITEMS NOTED CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES That the Minutes of the Planning Services Committee dated 3 July 2013 be confirmed as a true and accurate record. TABLED DOCUMENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM NO SUBJECT PAGE

DEFERRED ITEMS (COMMITTEE DELEGATION) 1

REPORTS BY OFFICERS (COMMITTEE DELEGATION) 2

PSC1307-101 JOSLIN STREET, NO. 20 (LOT 1134), HILTON - RETROSPECTIVE PRIMARY STREET FENCE ADDITION - (AA/JS DA0239/13) 2

PSC1307-102 GREY STREET, NO. 15 (LOT 1), FREMANTLE - DETACHED TWO STOREY REAR ADDITIONS TO EXISTING GROUPED DWELLING – (AD DA0195/13) 6

PSC1307-103 PARMELIA STREET NO 16 (LOT 1) SOUTH FREMANTLE - PARTIAL DEMOLITION AND ADDITIONS & ALTERATIONS TO EXISTING SINGLE HOUSE - (AA DA0232/13) 14

PSC1307-104 SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY (3.61.21) 21

REPORTS BY OFFICERS (COUNCIL DECISION) 22

PSC1304-105 ESPLANADE RESERVE NO. 9399 - PROPOSED PUBLIC WORKS 22

PSC1304-106 PROPOSED SCHEME AMENDMENT NO. 60 - REZONING OF 7 (LOT 1) QUARRY SREET, FREMANTLE FROM RESIDENTIAL TO MIXED USE - ADOPTION FOR PUBLIC ADVERTISING 27

PSC1304-107 LANDOWNERS RESPONSE TO POTENTIAL REVIEW OF LOCAL PLANNING POLICY 3.11 MCCABE STREET AREA, NORTH FREMANTLE HEIGHT OF NEW BUILDINGS 41

CONFIDENTIAL MATTERS 45

AGENDA ATTACHMENTS 1

PSC1307-101 JOSLIN STREET, NO. 20 (LOT 1134), HILTON - RETROSPECTIVE PRIMARY STREET FENCE ADDITION - (AA/JS DA0239/13) 3

PSC1307-102 GREY STREET, NO. 15 (LOT 1), FREMANTLE - DETACHED TWO STOREY REAR ADDITIONS TO EXISTING GROUPED DWELLING – (AD DA0195/13) 6

PSC1307-103 PARMELIA STREET NO 16 (LOT 1) SOUTH FREMANTLE - PARTIAL DEMOLITION AND ADDITIONS & ALTERATIONS TO EXISTING SINGLE HOUSE - (AA DA0232/13) 10

PSC1307-104 SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY (3.61.21) 18

PSC1304-105 ESPLANADE RESERVE NO. 9399 - PROPOSED PUBLIC WORKS 20

PSC1304-107 LANDOWNERS RESPONSE TO POTENTIAL REVIEW OF LOCAL PLANNING POLICY 3.11 MCCABE STREET AREA, NORTH FREMANTLE HEIGHT OF NEW BUILDINGS 21

CLOSURE OF MEETING

Agenda - Planning Services Committee 17 July 2013

Page 1

DEFERRED ITEMS (COMMITTEE DELEGATION) The following items are subject to clause 1.1 and 2.1 of the City of Fremantle Delegated Authority Register NIL


Page 2

REPORTS BY OFFICERS (COMMITTEE DELEGATION) The following items are subject to clause 1.1 and 2.1 of the City of Fremantle Delegated Authority Register PSC1307-101 JOSLIN STREET, NO. 20 (LOT 1134), HILTON - RETROSPECTIVE

PRIMARY STREET FENCE ADDITION - (AA/JS DA0239/13) DataWorks Reference: 059/002 Disclosure of Interest: Nil Meeting Date: 17 July 2013 Responsible Officer: Manager Statutory Planning Actioning Officer: Planning Officer Decision Making Level: Planning Services Committee Previous Item Number/s: N/A Attachments: 1 – Development Plans 2 – Site Photo Date Received: 21 May 2013 Owner Name: C Parsons Submitted by: C Parsons Scheme: Residential R20/25 Heritage Listing: Hilton Heritage Area Existing Landuse: Two Grouped Dwellings Use Class: Grouped Dwelling Use Permissibility: ‘D’


Page 3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The application seeks retrospective planning approval for a Primary Street Fence Addition to an Existing Grouped Dwelling at No. 20 Joslin Street, Hilton. The fence is of brick construction, incorporates timber gates and contains solid portions to a minimum height of 1.1m and pillars to a maximum of 1.8m high. The fence is not considered to meet the acceptable development criteria or any of the performance based criteria of Local Planning Policy 3.7 (Hilton Garden Suburb Precinct Heritage Area Local Planning Policy) (‘LPP3.7’). Given that the fence already exists, it is recommended that the application be approved subject to the fence being modified to meet the requirements of LPP3.7; or subsequently be removed from the subject site. BACKGROUND

The subject land is located at No. 20 Joslin Street, Hilton and is zoned ‘Residential’ pursuant to Local Planning Scheme No. 4 (‘LPS4’). The subject site exists on the northern side of Joslin Street, opposite Griffiths Park and contains two Grouped Dwellings. The subject site is in the portion of Joslin Street bound by Thornett Street to the east, Hines Road to the west and Harwood Street to the north. On 17 January 2013, officers of the City inspected the site an observed what appeared to be a recently constructed Primary Street Fence (see Attachment 2). On 26 March 2013 the City issued an infringement notice to the owner of the subject site outlining that the existing primary fence at the land was not authorised. In March 2013 the City issued an infringement and direction notice to the owner of the subject land requiring that the fence be modified to meet the relevant planning requirements or a retrospective application made and approval obtained within four months of the issue date. On 21 May 2013, the City received the current application in relation to the direction notice. DETAIL

The application seeks retrospective approval for the development of a Primary Street fence including;

• The fence being solid, in differing portions, between 1.1m high and 1.3m high and containing 1.8m high pillars; and,

• The fence being of brick construction and containing a forward facing 1.4m high timber gate and side facing timber gate.


Page 4

STATUTORY AND POLICY ASSESSMENT

The proposal has been assessed against the relevant provisions of LPS4 and planning policies. Discretionary decisions are sought against these requirements in relation to;

• Fencing (Height, Visual Permeability) The discretionary decision is discussed further in the ‘Planning Comment’ section of this report. CONSULTATION

Community The application was not required to be advertised in accordance with Clause 9.4 of the LPS4. PLANNING COMMENT

Fence Height

Required Provided Discretion Fencing forward of the building line have a maximum height of 1.2m and be visually permeable where above 0.3m

Maximum height of 1.8m to pillars an visually permeable above 1.1m

0.6m to overall height and 0.8m to permeability requirement.

Clause 1.5 of LPP3.7 provides that;

‘Council may, at its discretion, vary the requirements of clauses 1.5.1-1.5.3 where it is satisfied that the proposed street wall and/or fence is consistent with the street walls and/or fencing within the prevailing streetscape and

the proposed street wall and/or fence maintains clear surveillance between the street and the dwelling.’

Having regard to the above, the discretionary decision is not supported for the following reasons;

• There are no examples of other street walls or fences above the requirements of LPP3.7 in the prevailing streetscape;

• The fence is out of character with the prevailing form and scale of primary street fences in the surrounding locality which consists of low, visually permeable fencing consistent with LPP3.7.

• The subject site exists on the opposite side of Joslin Street to Griffiths Park. Visual interaction and passive surveillance between the subject land and this area of public open space will be limited by the fence.


Page 5

On the basis of the above, the fence as existing is not supported. The application is recommended for conditional approval on the basis that the existing fence can be modified so as to comply with the requirements of LPP3.7. The fence is considered capable of modification to meet the requirements of LPP3.7. Therefore, approval subject to modifications is preferred as opposed to a refusal of the application as this would necessitate that the fence be wholly removed from the subject site. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION

A. That the application be APPROVED under the Metropolitan Region Scheme and Local Planning Scheme No. 4 for the Retrospective Primary Fence Addition at No. 20 (Lot 1134) Joslin Street, Hilton, as detailed on plans dated 21 May 2013, subject to the following conditions:

1. Within sixty (60) days of the date of approval, the development hereby

permitted shall be modified so as to be;

i. Not higher than 1.20 metre above natural ground level at any point; and,

ii. Visually permeable as defined by the Residential Design Codes where above 0.3m above natural ground level.

B. That after 60 days from the date of this approval, the Chief Executive Officer,

City of Fremantle, initiate legal action against the owner of No. 20 Joslin Street, Hilton if the fence is not modified in accordance with the above.


Page 6

PSC1307-102 GREY STREET, NO. 15 (LOT 1), FREMANTLE - DETACHED TWO

STOREY REAR ADDITIONS TO EXISTING GROUPED DWELLING – (AD DA0195/13)

DataWorks Reference: 059/002 Disclosure of Interest: Nil Meeting Date: 17 July 2013 Responsible Officer: Manager Statutory Planning Actioning Officer: Senior Planning Officer Decision Making Level: Planning Services Committee Previous Item Number/s: Nil Attachments: Development Plans (as amended) Photos Date Received: 1 May 2013; 17 June 2013 (amended plans) Owner Name: Susan Hall Submitted by: Collaborative Design Scheme: Residential (R35) Heritage Listing: Yes, MHI Management Category Level 2 Existing Landuse: Grouped Dwelling Use Class: Grouped Dwelling Use Permissibility: D


Page 7

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The application is presented to the Planning Services Committee (PSC) due to the nature of the proposed variations regarding the proposed development. The applicant is seeking Planning Approval for a detached two storey rear additions to an existing Grouped Dwelling at No. 15 (Lot 1) Grey Street, Fremantle. The application is considered to comply with the relevant requirements of the City’s Local Planning Scheme No. 4 (LPS4), the Residential Design Codes (R-Codes) and Council’s Local Planning Policies, with the exception of height.

Notwithstanding the above, it is considered that all of the discretionary decision being sought by the applicant should be supported. Accordingly, the application is recommended for conditional approval. BACKGROUND

The site is zoned ‘Residential’ with an applicable density coding of R35 under the City’s Local Planning Scheme No. 4 (LPS4) and is located within the South Fremantle Local Planning Area 4 (LPA 4) – sub area 4.3.1 as prescribed in Schedule 12 of LPS4. The site is located in the street block bound by Grey Street to the north, Marine Terrace to the west, Price Street to the south and South Terrace to the east. The site is listed on the City’s Heritage List and Municipal Heritage Inventory (MHI) as a Management Category Level 2. The site is not located within a prescribed Heritage Area under Clause 7.2 of LPS4. The subject site is 384m2 and is located on the southern side of Grey Street, Fremantle. The site has a north-west south-eastern orientation and is currently improved by a two storey Grouped Dwelling and is relatively flat in terms of its topography. A review of the property file revealed the following information relevant to planning and/or to this application: • On 1 April 1992, the City granted conditional Planning Approval under the former

Town Planning Scheme No. 3 (TPS3) for a single storey extension to existing residence at No. 15 (Lot 638) Grey Street, Fremantle (refer DA56/92);

• On 2 October 1997, the City granted conditional Planning Approval under the former TPS3 for bullnosed verandah and front fence addition at No. 15 (Lot 638) Grey Street, Fremantle (refer DA407/97);

• At its meeting held on 23 September 2002, the City’s Development Assessments Unit (DAU) granted conditional Planning Approval under the former TPS3 for second storey rear additions to dwelling at No. 15 (Lot 638) Grey Street, Fremantle (refer DA450/02);


Page 8

DETAIL

On 1 May 2013, the City received an application seeking Planning Approval for ‘detached rear addition (studio)’ at No. 15 (Lot 1) Grey Street, Fremantle (refer DA0195/13). Amended plans were received on 17 June 2013. The proposed development plans (as amended) are contained as ‘Attachment 1’ of this report. CONSULTATION

Community The application was required to be advertised in accordance with Clause 9.4 of the LPS4 and Council’s Local Planning Policy 1.3 - Notification of Planning Proposals (LPP 1.3), as the applicant is proposing a number of variations from the ‘Acceptable Development’ standards of the R-Codes and Council’s Local Planning Policies. At the conclusion of the advertising period, being 31 May 2013, the City received two (2) submissions pertaining to the proposal, raising the following concerns relevant to planning: • Visual privacy; • Bulk and scale; The following concerns relevant to planning that were also raised in the submissions; either complies with the relevant ‘Acceptable Development’ standards, or is otherwise not applicable to the assessment of this application: • Parking (not applicable); • Overshadowing (compliant with ‘Acceptable Development’ standards); • Land use (complies). Heritage In accordance with Council’s Local Planning Policy 1.6 – Heritage Assessment (LPP1.6), a heritage assessment was undertaken for this proposal, of which provided the following heritage comments:

“Heritage comment:The appropriateness of new work, such as additions to a heritage place, is judged in terms of the impact the proposed changes will have on the cultural significance of the place. The Burra Charter states that ‘new work should not distort or obscure the cultural significance of the heritage place, or detract from its interpretation and appreciation.

The proposed freestanding studio building will be located at the rear of the site. It will have no impact on the heritage building or on the contribution that the place makes to the established streetscape. The proposal will have little or no impact on the cultural significance of the place.

Recommendation

The proposal is therefore considered to be acceptable.”


Page 9

Accordingly, it is considered that the proposal can be supported on heritage grounds. STATUTORY AND POLICY ASSESSMENT

The proposal was assessed against the relevant provisions of LPS4, R-Codes and Council’s Local Planning Policies. Variations to the prescribed standards sought by this application are discussed in the ‘Planning Comment’ section of this report. PLANNING COMMENT

Local Planning Scheme No. 4 (LPS4) - Height Permitted Proposed Discretion Single storey with loft (maximum external wall height of 4.80 metres as measured from NGL with a maximum roof plain pitch of 38 degrees)

• Two storey; • 4.95m; • Maximum roof

plain pitch of 38

• One storey • 0.15m; • N/A

In relation to the 0.15m height discretion, clause 5.8.1.1 of LPS4 states that: 0.15m height discretion

“Where sites contain or are adjacent to buildings that depict a height greater than that specified in the general or specific requirements in schedule 12, Council may vary the maximum height requirements subject to being satisfied in relation to all of the following— (a) the variation would not be detrimental to the amenity of adjoining properties or

the locality generally, (b) degree to which the proposed height of external walls effectively graduates

the scale between buildings of varying heights within the locality, (c) conservation of the cultural heritage values of buildings on-site and adjoining,

and (d) any other relevant matter outlined in Council‘s local planning policies.”

As discussed in the ‘Background’ section of this report, the subject site is currently improved by a two storey Grouped Dwelling. Specifically, the two storey element of the existing dwelling which has a maximum external wall height of approximately 5.35 metres was approved by the City’s Development Assessment Unit (DAU) at its meeting of 23 September 2002) (refer DA450/02). In this regard, as the subject site currently contains a building that depicts a greater external wall height than the single storey with loft (maximum external wall height of 4.80 metres as measured from NGL with a maximum roof plain pitch of 38 degrees) as prescribed in Schedule 12, Council may vary the maximum external wall height requirements if they are satisfied in relation to the above criterion. With regards to (a) above, the height variation is not considered to be detrimental to the amenity of adjoining properties by way of building bulk, overshadowing and/or visual privacy for the following reasons:


Page 10

Building bulk: • The proposed two storey detached additions comprise a relatively small building

footprint (4.70 metres by 7.00 metres (not including patio)) and is setback a minimum of 1.50 metres from the eastern boundary and 1.575 metres from the western boundary;

• Impacts by way of building bulk would likely be limited to the eastern and western adjoining properties. Having said this, the incorporation of gable ends to both the eastern and western elevations of the proposal serve to partially break up the building bulk of these elevations in particular and this is considered to ameliorate its overall impact.

Overshadowing: • The proposal complies with the ‘Acceptable Development’ standards of the R-Codes

pertaining to overshadowing. Visual privacy: • The proposal will be made to comply with the ‘Acceptable Development’ standards of

the R-Codes pertaining to visual privacy via a condition of Planning Approval. In this regard, it is considered that this will ensure that the proposal does not unreasonably impact the amenity of the adjoining properties by way of visual privacy.

In relation to (b), the existing two storey element of the dwelling on-site has a higher maximum external wall height than what is proposed and is adjacent to the following properties that depict a building height greater than that specified in Schedule 12 for Sub Area 4.3.1: • No. 9A (Lot 2) Grey Street, Fremantle (three lots west of the subject site) comprises a

two storey Grouped Dwelling with a maximum wall height of 5.56 metres. • No. 22A (Lot 2) Price Street, Fremantle (one lot to the south-west and on the opposite

side of the right of way to the subject site) comprises a two storey Grouped Dwelling with a maximum wall height of up to 6.80 metres in height. The proposed two storey detached additions are located approximately 20 metres from the building on No. 22A (Lot 2) Price Street, Fremantle.

• No. 106 (Lot 2) Marine Terrace, Fremantle (seven lots west of subject site) comprises a non-residential land use and development with a maximum wall height which is considered to be in excess of 9.00 metres in height.

• At its meeting of 1 May 2013, the PSC granted conditional Planning Approval for a two storey Single House at No. 5A (Lot 2) Grey Street, Fremantle (five lots to the west of the subject site) which had a maximum external wall height of 6.75 metres (refer DA0071/13, PSC1305-63).

The discretion is considered to graduate to the 6.80 metre wall height associated with the two storey Grouped Dwelling at No. 22A (Lot 2) Price Street, Fremantle, which is located one lot to the south-west and on the opposite side of the right of way to the subject site. In relation to (c) above, and as detailed in the ‘Consultation: Heritage’ section earlier in this report, the proposal has been supported on heritage grounds due to it being detached from the existing dwelling and located towards the rear of the site. Given that the heritage assessment considers that the proposal will have little or no impact on the cultural significance of the place, it is considered that the proposed height discretion should be supported.


Page 11

With regards to (d) above, the Local Planning Policies applicable to this application will be discussed later in the Planning Comment section of this report. On this basis, the height discretions are supported.

In relation to the form of the proposed upper storey not being in a traditional loft configuration, clause 5.8.2.1 of LPS4 states:

Loft

“The Council may vary other requirements of the Scheme subject to being satisfied in relation to all of the following:

a) the variation will not be detrimental to the amenity of adjoining properties or with the locality generally;

b) conservation of the cultural heritage values of buildings on-site and adjoining; and c) any other relevant matter outlined in Council’s local planning policies.”

The justification for supporting the loft discretion are similar to those stated above for clause 5.8.1. Council’s Local Planning Policies

The subject site is located within ‘Area A’ as prescribed by Council’s DGF29 policy. DGF29 – Suffolk to South Streets Local Area (DGF29)

Permitted Proposed Discretion Residential development should be predominantly single storey and in accordance with Council’s DBH1 Urban Design and Streetscapes Policy*

Two storeys One storey

*Note: DBH1 Policy revoked and replaced by Local Planning Policy 2.9 – Residential Streetscapes Policy (LPP2.9)

Whilst the proposal exceeds the single storey prescribed by Council’s DGF29 policy, and as discussed earlier in the Planning Comment section relating to ‘Height’, the proposal is considered supportable. Furthermore, the overall height of the building is 5.60 metres (top of roof ridge) which represents a typical roof ridge height for a single storey building. Therefore, whilst the proposal is indeed for a two storey additions the overall height of the building is considered to be generally consistent with that of a single storey building. In this regard, it is considered that the proposal should be supported. Notwithstanding the above, the proposals compliance with Council’s now revoked DBH1 policy is discussed in Local Planning Policy 2.9 – Residential Streetscapes Policy (LPP2.9) section below.

In relation to the requirement of Council’s DGF29 policy above which seeks residential development to be predominantly single storey and in accordance with Council’s DBH1, of which has been revoked and replaced by Council’s LPP2.9 policy, Clause 5.1 of Council’s LPP2.9 relates to additions and extensions to heritage listed properties and states:

Local Planning Policy 2.9 – Residential Streetscapes Policy (LPP2.9)


Page 12

“5.1 Where the property is included on the City’s Heritage List and is not subject to specific provisions of Local Planning Scheme No. 4 or a local area planning policy: i. Second storey additions to an existing single storey dwelling are to be

setback behind the main roof ridge of the existing dwelling a minimum distance of four (4.0) metres; and

ii. Shall be designed and setback so as to retain the impression of a single storey house when viewed from the street.”

The proposed detached two storey additions are located at the rear of the subject site and as such are considered to satisfy the minimum 4.00 metre setback requirement from the main roof ridge of the existing dwelling. Given that there are already two storey rear additions on the existing dwelling, it is considered that this will limit the visibility of the proposed detached two storey rear additions from the street. In this regard, the proposal is considered to meet the requirements of Council’s LPP2.9 and therefore the requirements of Council’s DGF29 policy as detailed above. CONCLUSION

The proposed detached two storey additions to existing Grouped Dwelling at No. 15 (Lot 1) Grey Street, Fremantle has been assessed against the provisions of LPS4 in relation to height and roof form and it is considered that the proposal should be supported. Furthermore, the proposal satisfies the provisions of Clause 5.1 of Council’s Local Planning Policy 2.9 – Residential Streetscapes Policy, and is considered supportable under Council’s DGF29 policy. Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval.


Page 13

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION

That the application be APPROVED under the Metropolitan Region Scheme and Local Planning Scheme No. 4 for the detached two storey rear additions to existing Grouped Dwelling at No. 15 (Lot 1) Grey Street, Fremantle, subject to the following conditions: 1. This approval relates only to the development as indicated on the approved

plans, dated 17 June 2013. It does not relate to any other development on this lot and must substantially commence within four years from the date of this decision letter.

2. Prior to occupation, the first floor ‘balcony’ as contained on the southern,

western and eastern elevations shall be: (a) fixed obscured or translucent glass to a height of 1.60 metres above floor

level, or (b) fixed with vertical screening, with openings not wider than 5cm and with a

maximum of 20% perforated surface area, to a minimum height of 1.60 metres above the floor level, or

(c) a minimum sill height of 1.60 metres as determined from the internal floor level, or

(d) screened by an alternative method to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Officer, City of Fremantle,

in accordance with Clause 6.8.1 A1 of the Residential Design Codes and thereafter maintained to the satisfaction of Chief Executive Officer, City of Fremantle.

3. All storm water discharge shall be contained and disposed of on-site.


Page 14

PSC1307-103 PARMELIA STREET NO 16 (LOT 1) SOUTH FREMANTLE - PARTIAL

DEMOLITION AND ADDITIONS & ALTERATIONS TO EXISTING SINGLE HOUSE - (AA DA0232/13)

DataWorks Reference: 059/002 Disclosure of Interest: Nil Meeting Date: 17 July 2013 Responsible Officer: Manager Statutory Planning Actioning Officer: Planning Officer Decision Making Level: Planning Services Committee Previous Item Number/s: N/A Attachment 1: 1 - Development Plans Attachment 2: 2 - Site Photos Date Received: 17 May 2013 Owner Name: E Roberts Submitted by: Slavin Architects Scheme: Residential R30 Heritage Listing: Level 3 on MHI Existing Landuse: Grouped Dwelling Use Class: Grouped Dwelling Use Permissibility: ‘D’


Page 15

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The applicant is seeking planning approval for the Partial Demolition and Single Storey Additions and Alterations to the Existing Grouped Dwelling at No. 16 (Lot 1) Parmelia Street, South Fremantle. The application has been assessed against relevant requirements of the City’s Local Planning Scheme No. 4 (‘LPS4’), the Residential Design Codes (‘R-Codes’) and Council’s relevant Local Planning Policies and seeks discretionary decisions relating to boundary walls, open space, vehicle parking and solar access for adjoining sites. The discretionary decisions relating to vehicle parking and open space are considered to clearly meet the relevant performance criteria of the R-Codes. The discretionary decisions relating boundary walls and solar access for the adjoining site at No. 18 Parmelia Street, Hilton are also, on balance, considered to meet the relevant performance criteria of the R-Codes and the City’s planning framework. The application is therefore recommended, on-balance, for approval. BACKGROUND The subject site is zoned Residential with a density coding of R30 and is located within the South Fremantle Local Planning Area – Sub Area 4.3.3. The subject site is located on the eastern side of Parmelia Street and contains an existing Grouped Dwelling; the dwelling is listed on the City’s Municipal Heritage Inventory and the subject site is contained within the South Fremantle Heritage Area. The subject site is located within the street block bound Lloyd Street to the south, Chester Street to the east and Scott Street to the north. DETAIL The application seeks planning approval for Partial Demolition and Single Storey Additions and Alterations to the Existing Grouped Dwelling at the subject site including;

• Demolition of the rear portion of the existing dwelling and rear outbuilding at the subject land;

• The construction of a single storey rear addition integrated into the remaining portion of the original dwelling consisting of two additional bedrooms, new living and wet areas surrounding a large internal courtyard on the northern boundary and two smaller courtyards/light areas on the southern boundary; and,

• A flat roof design situated behind parapet wall sections on the southern boundary.


Page 16

CONSULTATION Community The application was required to be advertised in accordance with Clause 9.4 of the LPS4, pursuant to Local Planning Policy 1.8 – Public Notification of Planning Proposals (‘LPP1.8’). At the close of the advertising period, 3 submissions were received including 2 objections. The submissions received raised the following issues;

• Concerns were raised in relation to the northern boundary wall and its potential to shade the adjoining property and it being unattractive;

• Concern raised in relation to eastern boundary wall’s finish and disposal of stormwater;

• Concerns in relation to southern boundary wall’s finish and potential to cast shadow. The submitter suggests that this could be moderated through the use of a timber finish; and

• Concerns in relation to the removal of the existing boundary fence along the northern side of the subject site.

A summary of the submissions were provided to the Applicant. On 3 July 2013, the City received the following comments from the Applicant in response to the submissions received. The comments are summarised as follows;

• The proposed northern boundary walls will not cause any overshadowing owing to their orientation;

• The new building will be located within the existing fence line meaning that the level of overshadowing within the fenced portion of the adjoining property is reduced. The wall has been broken up to reduce the impact on the adjoining property;

• The block work proposed on the southern boundary would be more durable than a timber finish and require no on-going maintenance. The block work will be neatly finished;

• No down pipes, extractor fans or air-conditioners will be placed along the boundary wall; and,

• The existing boundary fence to the northern boundary will be retained. In response to the submissions received, City officers inspected the subject land, the adjoining properties and the surrounding streetscape on 27 June 2013 (see Attachment 2 – Site Photos).


Page 17

Heritage The application was referred to the City’s Heritage officers with comment received on 25 June 2013 as follows:

• The proposed demolition to the rear of the dwelling will not result in any loss of significant fabric and is supported;

• The long term consequences of the proposal are considered to be benign; and • The proposed development is considered to be sympathetic to the heritage

building and have minimal impact upon it. STATUTORY AND POLICY ASSESSMENT The proposed development has been assessed against the relevant provisions contained within LPS4, the R-Codes and Council Local Planning Policies. The proposed development includes the following discretions to acceptable design requirements:

• Boundary walls, • Open Space, • Vehicle Parking; and, • Solar Access for Adjoining Sites

Detailed assessments of the above discretionary decisions are discussed further in the ‘Planning Comment’ section of this report. PLANNING COMMENT

Boundary walls

Permitted Provided Discretion • where the wall is proposed to abut an existing

or simultaneously constructed boundary wall of similar or greater dimensions;

• on lots less than 10m wide in areas coded R30 and higher, walls not higher than 3.5m with an average of 3m for two-thirds the length of the balance of the boundary behind the front setback, to one side boundary only.

Boundary walls to the south, east and

northern boundaries

See comments

Six (6) individual boundary walls are included in the proposed development and are detailed as follows;

• Two boundary walls to the northern boundary (side) measuring 5.8m and 5.2m wide and up to 3.1m high separated by a large internal courtyard;

• Three boundary walls to the southern boundary (side) measuring 3.0m, 13.7m and 4.4m wide with a maximum height 3.2m and a minimum height of 2.6m, separated by courtyard areas;

• One boundary wall to the eastern (rear) measuring 4.2m wide and up to 3.2m high.


Page 18

The discretionary decision relating to the boundary walls on the northern and eastern boundary are supported for the following reasons;

• The orientation of the boundary walls means there is no impact on access to direct light on adjoining properties;

• The boundary walls are not considered to abut any primary outdoor living area or be close to major openings to habitable rooms;

• The boundary walls are not considered to be of a scale, or position that will restrict access to ventilation or general daylight; and,

• The boundary walls will not impact on any views of significance in the locality. Submissions received during the consultation period raised concern regarding the potential impact of walls located on the southern boundary of the subject site. These concerns primarily related to access to light to an existing opening to a dining area and outdoor living area at No. 18 Parmelia Street, South Fremantle. Notwithstanding the submissions received, discretionary decision relating to the boundary walls on the southern boundary are, on-balance, supported for the following reasons;

• While the boundary wall will contribute to overshadowing of the outdoor living area and opening at No. 18 Parmelia Street, the contribution is considered to be only marginally greater than that already caused by the existing dwelling and the land and the existing boundary fence;

• A larger, more usable outdoor space is located towards the rear of No. 18 Parmelia Street (see Attachment 2 – Site Photos), however this area is not considered an ‘outdoor living area’ under the R-Codes as it is not directly accessible from the main living areas of the dwelling. Notwithstanding this, there is considered to be sufficient, usable outdoor space available on the adjoining site that will be free of shadow, even at the winter solstice;

• Only lower portions of the major opening to the dining area are shaded with the majority open to winter sun at solstice; and,

• The proposed boundary walls are not considered to be of adverse scale or dimension given the relatively low wall height provided.

During the consultation period, the City received a submission from an adjoining landowner outlining that it would be preferred if a timber material was used to clad the western most ensuite southern boundary wall. A summary of the submission was provided to the Applicant who advised that;

‘The [proposed] blockwork is a more durable product requiring no on-going maintenance. Timber will require maintenance over time.’

In respect to the submissions raised relating to the treatment and materials used on the western most ensuite southern boundary wall, it is recommended that due to the extent of boundary walls and the proximity of the ensuite wall to the adjoining southern property’s courtyard, a timber finish be applied to this portion of boundary wall as requested by the applicant. A condition of approval has been included (condition 3) to reflect this.


Page 19

Solar Access for Adjoining Sites

Permitted Provided Discretion 35% (95.9m2) 42% (115m2) 7% (19.1m2)

The discretionary decision is supported for the following reasons;

• As discussed above, the proposed development is considered to only marginally contribute to loss of light to the adjoining property to the south compared to the existing development, or potentially deemed-to-comply development; which would be required to be setback 1.5m from the boundary;

• The characteristics of the site, having an east-west orientation and being relatively narrow (7.95m wide) means that achieving the solar access requirement is difficult without compromising the effective use of space at the subject site; and,

• While not directly accessible from a habitable room, a significant area of open space is located at the rear of the existing dwelling that will not be impacted by any shadow cast by the proposed development (see Attachment 2 – Site Photos).

Open Space

Required Provided Discretion Sought 45% (113.4m2) 40% (~100.5m2) 5% (~12.9m2)


• The lesser open space does not impact on the typical appearance of the dwelling when viewed from the street;

• The lesser open space suits the future needs of residents by minimising otherwise unusable space between buildings and boundaries and relocates this space towards a large central courtyard;

• The proposed development otherwise meets the outdoor living area requirement of the R-Codes.

Vehicle Parking

Required Provided Discretion Sought 2 bays 1 bay 1 bay


• There being sufficient off-site parking available on Parmelia Street and within the immediately surrounding streets;

• The subject land being within close proximity to local activity areas at Douro Road, South Terrace and Hampton Road; and,

• The subject land being within close proximity of frequent public transport on South Terrace and Hampton Road.


Page 20

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION That the application be APPROVED under the Metropolitan Region Scheme and Local Planning Scheme No. 4 for the Partial Demolition and Additions & Alterations to Existing Single House at No. 16 (Lot 1) Parmelia Street, South Fremantle, as detailed on plans dated 17 May 2013, subject to the following conditions: 1. This approval relates only to the development as indicated on the approved

plans, dated 17 May 2013. It does not relate to any other development on this lot and must substantially commence within four years from the date of this decision letter.

2. All storm water discharge shall be contained and disposed of on-site.

3. Prior to occupation, the boundary walls located on the southern, east and western elevation shall be of a clean finish in sand render, face brick or another material with the exception of the western most ensuite southern boundary wall which is to be clad in timber and maintained thereafter to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Officer, City of Fremantle.

4. The works hereby approved shall be undertaken in a manner which does not irreparably damage any original or significant fabric of the building. Should the works subsequently be removed, any damage shall be rectified to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Officer, City of Fremantle.


Page 21

PSC1307-104 SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED

AUTHORITY (3.61.21) Acting under authority delegated by the Council the Manager Statutory Planning determined, in some cases subject to conditions, each of the applications listed in the Attachments and relating to the places and proposal listed. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION

That the information is noted.


Page 22

REPORTS BY OFFICERS (COUNCIL DECISION) PSC1304-105 ESPLANADE RESERVE NO. 9399 - PROPOSED PUBLIC WORKS DataWorks Reference: 148/015 & 059/002 Disclosure of Interest: Nil Meeting Date: 17 July 2013 Responsible Officer: Director Planning and Development Actioning Officer: Manager Planning Projects and Policy Decision Making Level: Council Previous Item Number/s: C1304-06, C1211-06, SGS1210-10 Attachments: 1. Youth Plaza design plans

Figure 1- Esplanade Reserve No. 9399 (Lot 2046) outlined in red


Page 23

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The purpose of this report is to enable Council to formally consider whether the development of a public youth plaza within The Esplanade Reserve, as previously supported by Council, would constitute a ‘public work’ as defined in the Planning and Development Act 2005. The Esplanade Reserve has a current purpose of Recreation under the Land Administration Act 1997 (LAA) and is a Parks and Recreation Reserve under the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The City of Fremantle is the management body responsible for the reserve. Officers consider that development by the City of Fremantle of a youth plaza designed and located as shown in the design plans attached to this item would meet the requirements to be considered a ‘public work’ under section 6 of the Planning and Development Act 2005, subject to consultation with the Western Australian Planning Commission as the responsible planning authority for the Esplanade Reserve. BACKGROUND

Through previous reports to Council (including items SGS1210-10, C1211-06 and C1304 -06), the Council has resolved to support the development of a youth plaza facility on part of the Esplanade Reserve. The final design and placement of the facility is currently being finalised through a Chief Executive Officer’s Working Group acting under authority delegated by Council. The Esplanade Reserve has a current purpose of Recreation under the Land Administration Act 1997, as set out in the Crown Land Title, and is subject to a Management Order under which the City of Fremantle is the management body. The planning status of the Esplanade Reserve is a reserve for the purposes of Parks and Recreation under the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). Consequently the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC), not the City of Fremantle, is the responsible authority under the Planning and Development Act 2005 for planning matters relating to the Esplanade Reserve. STATUTORY AND POLICY ASSESSMENT Section 6(1) of the Planning and Development Act 2005 (the P & D Act) states that other provisions of the Act do not interfere with the right of the Crown, the Governor, the Government of the State or a local government to undertake, construct or provide any public work, or to take land for the purposes of that public work. Section 4 of the P & D Act defines ‘public work’ as ‘includes any public work as defined in the Public Works Act 1902’.


Page 24

In exercising the rights under section 6(1) referred to above, the relevant body must comply with the requirements of section 6(2) and (3) of the P & D Act, namely:

• to have regard to the purpose and intent of any planning scheme that has effect in the locality where the right is exercised;

• to have regard to the orderly and proper planning, and the preservation of the amenity, of that locality; and

• to consult with the responsible authority at the time when a proposal for a public work is being formulated.

WAPC Planning Bulletin 94 Approval Requirements for Public Works and Development by Public Authorities provides further guidance on this topic. The Bulletin states that the rights under section 6(1) apply to a local government undertaking a public work in respect of region planning scheme land. PLANNING COMMENT Prior to any works commencing on construction of the youth plaza, it is appropriate for the City to consider whether the works would constitute a ‘public work’ as defined in the P & D Act. As stated above, ‘public work’ is defined in the P & D Act to ‘include any public work as defined in the Public Works Act 1902’ (emphasis added). The word ‘include’ is significant as it means works defined in the Public Works Act are not an exhaustive list, and works not specifically referred to this Act may still be public works for the purposes of section 6 of the P & D Act. However, the list of works referred to in the definition in the Public Works Act include:

• parks and gardens or grounds for public recreation; and • any work incidental to any of the aforesaid works.

Officers consider the nature of works and structures involved in construction of the proposed youth plaza as indicated in the concept designs previously considered by Council, and in the final design plans in Attachment 1, carried out on a public reserve for the purpose of recreation, can be regarded as falling within the scope of grounds for public recreation or works incidental to public recreation grounds. Even if this was not the case, as the list of public works in the Public Works Act is not exhaustive, there is a strong argument that a youth plaza/skate facility as proposed for the Esplanade is a form of public work as it is provided for the purpose of public recreation. On this basis officers consider that the works involved in construction of the proposed youth plaza are public works to which the provisions of section 6(1) of the P & D Act apply. If this interpretation is accepted, it is still necessary to have regard to:

(a) the purpose and intent of the MRS as it applies to the Esplanade Reserve; and (b) the orderly and proper planning, and the preservation of amenity, of the locality.


Page 25

With regard to (a), the Esplanade Reserve is denoted on the MRS Scheme Map as being reserved for the purpose of a parks and recreation area. There are no site specific provisions relating to the Esplanade Reserve in the MRS scheme text. Officers consider the use of part of the Esplanade Reserve as a youth plaza would be a form of public recreation use that would be consistent with the purpose and intent of the MRS which reserves the Esplanade as a whole for use as a parks and recreation area. With regard to (b), a principal consideration of orderly and proper planning is the extent to which proposed development or use of land is consistent with the objectives and use(s) associated with the zoning or reservation of that land in any applicable planning scheme. As stated above, the proposed youth plaza use is considered to be a form of public recreation use that would be fully consistent with the designation of the Esplanade Reserve in the MRS as a reserve for parks and recreation purposes. Beyond this primary consideration, it is also relevant to consider the extent to which a proposal is consistent with any other statutory or strategic planning documents applicable to the location. There are no other statutory planning instruments applicable to the Esplanade; however the following Council-adopted documents could be regarded as forming part of the general strategic planning framework for the area, albeit of secondary status to the MRS:

• Esplanade Master Plan (adopted 2009, amended 2013) • Esplanade Conservation Plan (adopted 2009) • West End Conservation Area policy (adopted 1990, amended 1992)

The Esplanade Master Plan, as amended following Council’s resolution of 24 April 2013 (Item C1304-06), identifies the proposed location of the youth plaza. The design functions and elements section of the Master Plan includes a plan identifying facilities and everyday use of the Esplanade. This plan identifies the northern part the Esplanade as an area for predominantly passive uses, and the southern part including the area where the youth plaza is proposed to be located as an active area. The notation on this plan indicates ball games and skating as uses in the active area. Consequently development of the youth plaza in this location would be consistent with the Master Plan. The Esplanade Conservation Plan includes policy statements intended to guide future use of the Reserve. The Conservation Plan assesses different parts of the Esplanade Reserve as being of differing levels of significance. The proposed location of the youth plaza is outside of the part of the reserve assessed as being of ‘considerable significance’ (the highest level of significance in the Plan) – the area first reclaimed in approx 1906 – where the Conservation Plan recommends allowing only minor change and development. Other relevant policy statements in the Conservation Plan refer to new structures being subservient to present significant elements, and being readily distinguishable from existing significant structures and being contemporary in design. Based on the detailed design which is now being finalised, structures associated with the youth plaza facility would be low level in height, and of a contemporary appearance. The southern boundary of the West End Conservation Area follows the southern edge of the 1906 land reclamation area referred to above. Consequently the part of the Esplanade Reserve where the youth plaza is proposed to be located is outside of, although adjacent to, the Conservation Area boundary.


Page 26

Having regard to the above considerations, officers consider that development of the proposed youth plaza would clearly be consistent with the principles of orderly and proper planning as they apply to the Esplanade Reserve. With regard to the preservation of amenity of the locality, Council’s consideration of previous reports relating to the youth plaza proposal has included assessment of the relative merits of different location options within the Esplanade Reserve. This process has addressed amenity issues such as the separation of the potential plaza location from the parts of the Esplanade that are of greatest heritage significance, increasing the extent of separation between the plaza and the existing mature Norfolk Island pine trees (explicitly referred to in Council’s resolution of 24 April 2013) and ensuring that the final design of the plaza is well integrated with the overall landscape of the Esplanade. Through this process officers consider that the Council has given due regard to the preservation of the amenity of the locality prior to undertaking a public work as required under section 6(2) of the P & D Act. The final requirement when undertaking a public work under the provisions in section 6 of the P & D Act is to consult with the responsible authority (in this instance the WAPC). As the youth plaza detailed design process is now being completed through the work of the Chief Executive Officer’s Working Group (acting with delegated authority from Council) it is recommended that it would now be an appropriate time to notify the WAPC of the works, prior to site works commencing. It is currently anticipated that site works will commence in September 2013. The WAPC has already informally indicated, through its officers, that it considers the proposed works would constitute a public work under the P & D Act. CONCLUSION Having regard to the matters detailed in the Comment section of this report, officers consider that the construction of the youth plaza facility in part of the Esplanade Reserve, as previously considered by Council, would constitute a ‘public work’ and comply with the provisions of section 6 of the Planning and Development Act 2005, subject to consultation with the Western Australian Planning Commission. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION

That the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) be informed that:

1. The City of Fremantle considers that the construction by the City of a youth plaza in part of the Esplanade Reserve No. 9399 (Lot 2046), as shown in the plans in Attachment 1, would constitute a ‘public work’ as defined under section 4 of the Planning and Development Act 2005;

2. The City of Fremantle intends to undertake the public work referred to in 1

above under the provisions of section 6(1) of the Planning and Development Act 2005 having regard to the matters set out in section 6(2) of that Act, and the supply of a copy of this report including Attachment 1 constitutes the City’s consultation with the WAPC as the responsible authority, for the purposes of section 6(3) of the Planning and Development Act 2005.


Page 27

PSC1304-106 PROPOSED SCHEME AMENDMENT NO. 60 - REZONING OF 7 (LOT

1) QUARRY SREET, FREMANTLE FROM RESIDENTIAL TO MIXED USE - ADOPTION FOR PUBLIC ADVERTISING

DataWorks Reference: 218/067 Disclosure of Interest: Nil Meeting Date: 17 July 2013 Responsible Officer: Manager Planning Projects Actioning Officer: Strategic Planning Officer Decision Making Level: Council Previous Item Number/s: None Attachments: None


Page 28

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The purpose of this report is to recommend that Council initiate an amendment to Local Planning Scheme No. 4 (LPS4) to:

• Rezone 7 (Lot 1) Quarry Street, Fremantle from Residential with a density coding of R25 to Mixed Use with a density coding of R-AC3 and

• Modify Schedule 12: Local Planning Area 2 – Fremantle, 2.3.1 sub area 1 map to include 7 (Lot 1) Quarry Street, Fremantle into Area 6.

7 Quarry Street, Fremantle consists of two lots (lot 1 and lot 2 on Plan 758). Lot 2 is zoned Mixed use and has a density coding of R-AC3. Conversely, Lot 1 (the site subject to this scheme amendment) is zoned Residential and has a density coding R25. Together the total site area of the two lots is 1477m2. The building on 7 (lot 1 and 2) Quarry Street, Fremantle was built for the purpose of the Y.C.M.A clubrooms in 1963 and has never been used for residential purposes. The original building consisted of a gymnasium, and associated clubrooms, a kitchen and bathroom facilities. The gymnasium part is now used for offices and is predominantly located on lot 2. The associated clubrooms, kitchen and bathrooms, which are also now used for offices, are located on lot 1. Whilst the current land use of office on lot 1 is capable of being continued under the non-conforming use provisions of LPS4, the current Residential zoning constrains any potential future development and use of the site to only those of a residential nature. As 7 (lot 1) Quarry Street has never been used for residential purposes and shares the building on site with the adjoining lot, 7 (lot 2) Quarry Street, it is considered appropriate to rezone 7 (lot 1) Quarry Street to be consistent with the development requirements of 7 (lot 2) Quarry Street. Accordingly, it is recommended Council resolve to initiate Scheme Amendment No. 60 to LPS4 for public advertising. Should Council resolve to initiate Amendment 60, community consultation will be undertaken in accordance with the provisions of the Town Planning Regulations 1967 and local planning policy 1.3 - Public Notification of Planning Approvals.


Page 29

BACKGROUND

Site Description

7 Quarry Street, Fremantle consists of two lots (lot 1 and lot 2 on Plan 758) and is located on the eastern side of Quarry Street close to the Fremantle City centre. The total site area of the two lots is 1477m2. Both lots are freehold titles currently owned by the City of Fremantle. The building on 7 (lot 1 and 2) Quarry Street, Fremantle was purpose built for the Y.C.M.A club in 1963. The original building consisted of a gymnasium, and associated clubrooms, a kitchen and bathroom facilities. The building has since been fitted out to provide for office uses. The gymnasium part, now offices, is predominantly located on 7 (lot 2) Quarry Street and the associated clubrooms and facilities, which are also now used for offices, are located on 7 (lot 1) Quarry Street.


Page 30

A review of the file provided the following information on previous planning approvals for the property 7 (lot 1 and 2) Quarry Street, Fremantle:

• 14 February 1963 approval was granted under the City’s Town Planning Scheme No. 2 for a building on the property 7 (lot 1 and 2) Quarry Street. The building was purpose built for the Y.C.M.A club and included a gymnasium, games room, club room, and associated kitchen and bathroom facilities.

• 21 October 1986 planning approval was granted under the City’s Town Planning Scheme No. 3 for internal partitioning to create offices in the portion of the building on 7 (lot 1) Quarry Street.

• 24 August 1992 planning approval was granted under the City’s Town Planning Scheme No. 3 for alterations to the portion of the building on 7 (lot 2) Quarry Street to allow for its conversion from a gymnasium to an office for the company ‘Skillshare”. The alterations included a new entrance door to Quarry Street and the provision of window openings to the front and side elevations. This approval also changed the use of the site from gymnasium to professional office.

• 19 April 2001 planning approval was granted under the City’s Town Planning Scheme No. 3 for alterations to the building to provide universal access.

• In recent years the building has been tenanted by the South Metropolitan Youth Link, Polytechnic West and Quarry Street Health Centre.


Page 31

Subject site

7 (Lot 1) Quarry Street, Fremantle is zoned Residential and has a density coding R25. The property is not heritage listed or in a heritage area. The site is 895 sqm and consists of a single storey brick building which was built for the purpose of Y.M.C.A clubrooms and associated facilities. The building has been retrofitted and now provides for office uses.

7 (Lot 1) Quarry Street (The subject site of proposed Scheme Amendment No. 60)

The subject site was previously zoned Residence under the City’s previous Town Planning Scheme No. 3 and had a density coding of R35. Adjoining Property descriptions

7 (Lot 2) Quarry Street is zoned mixed use and has a density coding of R-AC3. The property is included in the East End sub area 1 (2.3.1) area 6 in Local Planning Area 2 Fremantle in LPS4 which provides height, street and side setbacks and design requirements for development of the site.

7 (lot 2) Quarry Street, Fremantle (directly south of the subject site)

7 (lot 2) Quarry Street, Fremantle directly adjoins the subject site to the south. The property is not heritage listed or in a heritage area. The site is 582 sqm and consists of a brick building (formerly the Y.M.C.A gymnasium), which was built and used in conjunction with the building on the subject site. The building is now used for offices. The property was previously zoned Inner Urban under the previous Town Planning Scheme No. 3 and had a density coding of R35.

3 (lot 3) Quarry Street, Fremantle, contains a single storey single house. The property is Heritage listed (MHI level 2) and not in a heritage area. The site is 462 sqm, zoned Mixed Use and has a density coding of R-AC3. The property is included in the East End sub area 1 (2.3.1) area 6 in Local Planning Area 2 Fremantle in LPS4. The building is currently used for residential purposes.

3 (lot 3) Quarry Street, Fremantle (south of the subject site)

1 (lot 4) Quarry Street, Fremantle contains a two storey commercial building. The property is not heritage listed or in a heritage area. The site is 400 sqm, zoned Mixed Use and has a density coding of R-AC3. The property is included in the East End sub area 1 (2.3.1) area 6 in Local Planning Area 2 Fremantle in LPS4. A showroom use is approved over the site.

1 (lot 4) Quarry Street, Fremantle (south of the subject site)


Page 32

9-15 (lot 8) Quarry Street, Fremantle is an irregular-shaped lot containing a single storey building, which was purpose built as a multi functional children’s service centre in 1985. The property is not heritage listed or in a heritage area. The building is setback approximately 30m from Quarry Street, with the front setback area used for parking. Due to the large front setback the bulk of the building is situated close to the eastern (rear) boundary of the subject site. The site is 2656 sqm and zoned Residential with a density coding of R25. The site is currently the location of the Quarry Street early learning and development centre.

9-15 (lot 8) Quarry Street, Fremantle (directly north and east of the subject site)

The remainder of the eastern side of Quarry Street is characterised by single residences zoned Residential with a density coding of R25. Many of these properties are heritage listed. There is a slight rise in topography of 1-3 metres from the south to the north.

17 (lot 10) Quarry Street, Fremantle and northwards

The area immediately opposite the subject properties, on the western side of Quarry Street (Queen Victoria Street), is zoned Mixed Use and contains a mixture of single and two storey mixed use development and associated car parking. The buildings front Queen Victoria Street and are included in the East End sub area 1 (2.3.1) in Local Planning Area 2 Fremantle in LPS4 (further information discussed below).

1 Queen Victoria Street, Fremantle onwards (opposite the subject property on the western side of Quarry Street)

Further development in the area

Scheme Amendment No. 38 - East End Area to LPS4 was approved by the Minister for Planning and subsequently gazetted on 1 July 2011. This amendment now exists as clause 2.3.1 and Sub Area 1 of Schedule 12: Local Planning Area 2 (LPA2) - Fremantle of LPS4. Sub Area 1 of LPA2 immediately adjoins the subject site to the south and is relevant to the western side of Quarry Street. The purpose of amendment No. 38 was to provide a range of development standards to encourage redevelopment in the area; achieving a greater residential population and the creation of a vibrant, attractive and sustainable mixed use neighbourhood. The amendment only increased the development requirements of the existing Mixed Use zone and did not consider rezoning other sites in the vicinity. Since gazettal of the amendment several large development applications have been proposed for redevelopment of sites in the area.

LPS4 - Schedule 12: Local Planning Area 2 – Sub area 1 (2.3.1)


Page 33

The map below shows the different areas in the LPA2 Sub area 1. LPA2 Sub area 1 map


Page 34

The following table shows the different heights allowable in each area of the map above. Height requirements of LPA2 – Sub area 1 Area Permitted Building Height (Metres) Minimum Façade

Height (Metres) 1a 12.5

Council may permit a maximum building height of 20 metres for Area 1a where the proposed development satisfies all of the following:

i) Exceptional design quality and distinctive architecture befitting its location

ii) Demonstrate a high standard of environmentally sustainable design, incorporating into the building fabric measures to minimise energy consumption, water usage, emissions and waste

iii) Provide a high quality and publicly accessible pedestrian environment within the site as an extension of the street space at the ground level frontages to Queen Victoria Street and Beach Street

Nil

1b 20 Nil 2 24.5 10 3 18 10 3a 18 10 4 18 10 4a 18 10 4b 15 10 5 11 10 6 11 10 7 18 10 7a 18 10 8 18

In granting consent to the maximum 18 metre height prescribed for Area 8 Council shall be satisfied in regard to all of the following-

a) That the proposal is consistent with predominant height patterns of adjoining properties and the locality generally,

b) The proposal would not be detrimental to the amenity of the area, c) The proposal would be consistent, if applicable, with conservation

objectives for the site and locality generally, and d) Any other relevant matter outlined in Council’s local planning policies.

Council may impose a lesser height in the event that the proposal does not satisfy any one or all of the above requirements.

10

The LPA2 sub area 1 requirements in LPS4 also include side and street setbacks and other design requirements for each area. CONSULTATION

Should Council resolve to initiate this amendment to the Scheme, it will be referred to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) for assessment, prior to the commencement of advertising. Assuming the EPA does not require an environmental assessment, the amendment will be publicly advertised for not less than 42 days in accordance with the Planning and Development Act 2005, the Town Planning Regulations 1967 and the City’s Local Planning Policy 1.3 - Public Notification of Planning Approvals.


Page 35

PLANNING COMMENT

Both properties (lot 1 and 2) that make up 7 Quarry Street, Fremantle, are located within Local Planning Area 2 (LPA2) – Fremantle of LPS4. However 7 (lot 1) Quarry Street, Fremantle (the subject site of this amendment) is currently zoned Residential, with a residential density coding of R25. Conversely, the adjoining property at 7 (Lot 2) Quarry Street, Fremantle is zoned Mixed Use with a density coding of R-AC3. Additionally, 7 (Lot 2) Quarry Street falls under LPA2 Fremantle sub area 1 (2.3.1) area 6 (see map above). Under LPA2 the height provisions for development in the Residential zone are as per the requirements of the Residential Design Codes (R-codes), allowing a maximum external wall height of 6 metres (two storey development). The height provision for development within area 6 of LPA2 sub area 1 (2.3.1) allows a permitted building height of 11 metres and a minimum façade height of 10 metres. Scheme amendment No. 38 – East End (gazetted 2011) increased the development potential of 7 (lot 2) Quarry Street as it is in the existing Mixed Use zone. The rezoning of 7 (lot 1) Quarry Street was not considered at that time as rezoning was not the focus of this amendment. 7 (lot 1) Quarry Street, Fremantle has never been used for residential purposes and shares the building on site with the adjoining 7 (lot 2) Quarry Street. Accordingly officers consider it would be an appropriate rationalisation of planning scheme provisions to include 7 (lot 1) Quarry Street, Fremantle into the Mixed Use zone, the same as its associated property, 7 (lot 2) Quarry Street, Fremantle. The amendment therefore proposes:

• Rezoning 7 (Lot 1) Quarry Street, Fremantle from Residential with a density coding of R25 to Mixed Use with a density coding of R-AC3 and

• Modifying Schedule 12: Local Planning Area 2 – Fremantle, 2.3.1 sub area 1 map to include 7 (Lot 1) Quarry Street, Fremantle into Area 6.


Page 36

The two parts of the amendment are discussed separately below: 1. Amend the Scheme map to rezone 7 (Lot 1), Quarry Street, Fremantle from

Residential with a density coding of R25 to Mixed Use with a density coding of R-AC3 as shown on the Scheme map below:

The potential land uses in the Residential zone under LPS4 are restricted to those that are of a residential nature. Whilst the current land use of office on 7 (lot 1) Quarry Street is capable of being continued under the non-conforming use provisions of LPS4, the current Residential zoning constrains any other potential future development and use of the site to only residential related uses. Accordingly, in view of the property’s past and present uses, and the purpose built non-residential building on the site, officers recommend rezoning 7 (lot 1) Quarry Street, Fremantle from Residential to Mixed Use. The Mixed Use zoning is considered to best reflect the long term non-residential use of the site and would allow the continuation of these uses whilst also providing the flexibility for other appropriate commercial uses and/or residential uses to be capable of being granted planning approval (subject to Council’s discretion) through a new proposed use of the existing building or planned as part of a redevelopment proposal.


Page 37

Rezoning 7 (lot 1) Quarry Street from Residential to Mixed Use is also considered appropriate in context of the wider surrounding area and the continued co-existence with the adjoining Mixed Use zoned property at 7 (lot 2) Quarry street. The rezoning of the subject property would reflect the Mixed Use zoning of the properties directly opposite on the western side of Quarry Street. Additionally, the increased density coding from R25 to R-AC3 would maintain consistency with the adjoining lot and facilitate appropriate development of the site including potential redevelopment of both sites (lots 1 and 2) bearing in mind their single ownership. The combined lot area of the two lots is 1477 sqm. This size would provide for a wider range of development opportunities for the redevelopment of 7 Quarry Street, Fremantle. 2. Modify 12.12 Schedule 12 - Local Planning Areas (Height Requirements) Local

Planning Area 2 - Fremantle 2.3.1 Sub Area 1 to include 7 (lot 1) Quarry Street into Area 6 as follows:


Page 38

Including the subject site into area 6 of LPA 2 sub area 1 will increase the current development requirements on the property. The following table provides the current development standards and the development standards of LPA 2 sub area 1 - area 6 in relation to 7 (lot 1) Quarry Street. Current development standards and potential development standards as proposed in Scheme amendment No. 60 for 7 (lot 1) Quarry Street, Fremantle Current Development Standards Development Standards of Area

6 Zone Residential zone Mixed use zone Height Residential Design Codes

Category B : 6m external wall height and 9m roof height

Minimum façade height of10m and permitted height of 11m Additional height (15m where upper levels setback)

Density R25 R-AC3 Street setback

5m (up to 4m height) 7m (greater than 4m height) LPP 2.9

Maximum 2m

Land use Restricted to uses of a residential nature including single house, home office and home business

A mixture of commercial and residential uses including multiple residential

Design Requirements

As per the grouped dwelling and single house requirements of the R-codes

As per the multiple dwelling requirements of the R-codes and Schedule 12 of LPS4

As outlined in the background the subject site abuts one Residential zoned, but non-residential use, property to the north and a Mixed Use zoned property to the south. The proposed amendment is considered to have no negative impact on the property to the south (7 (lot 2) Quarry Street) as the sites are connected and the amendment would result in these two lots having the same zone and development requirements. The adjoining property to the north and east, 9-15 Quarry Street, is not heritage listed and the building on site is an established purpose-built childcare facility. The building is well setback from the street so as to provide for car parking in the front. Being on the northern side of the subject site, potential future redevelopment of 7 (lot 1) Quarry Street would have limited overshadowing effect on the childcare facility building. Due to the large setback of the building on 9-15 Quarry Street redevelopment of the subject site would mostly abut the car park area of the adjoining property. The building on 9-15 Quarry Street is located mostly adjacent to the rear (eastern) boundary of the subject site. It is considered any impact of possible future redevelopment on 7 (lot 1) Quarry Street could be ameliorated through good design that takes into account the existing childcare centre use on the adjoining property. The adjoining property would then act as a buffer in both built form and land use terms between any new development and the heritage listed residential properties which make up the remainder of the eastern side of Quarry Street.


Page 39

CONCLUSION

This scheme amendment proposes rezoning 7 (Lot 1) Quarry Street, Fremantle from Residential with a density coding of R25 to Mixed Use with a density coding of R-AC3 and modifying Schedule 12: Local Planning Area 2 – Fremantle, 2.3.1 sub area 1 map to include 7 (Lot 1) Quarry Street, Fremantle into Area 6. The proposed Scheme amendment is considered appropriate as it would align the zoning and development requirements of 7 (lot 1) Quarry Street to be consistent with those applying to 7 (lot 2) Quarry Street. It is considered any potential future redevelopment of 7 (lot 1) Quarry Street, Fremantle would have only a limited impact on the adjoining property (9-15 Quarry Street). Therefore it is recommended that Council resolve to initiate Scheme Amendment No. 60 to LPS4 for public advertising. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION

1. That Council resolve, pursuant to Section 75 of the Planning and Development Act 2005, to amend Local Planning Scheme No. 4 by:

A. Amend the Scheme map to rezone 7 (Lot 1), Quarry Street, Fremantle from the Residential with a density coding of R25 to Mixed Use with a density coding of R-AC3 as shown on the Scheme map below:


Page 40

B. Modify 12.12 Schedule 12 - Local Planning Areas (Height Requirements)

Local Planning Area 2 - Fremantle 2.3.1 Sub Area 1 to include 7 (lot 1) Quarry Street into Area 6 as follows:

2. That the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer be authorised to execute the relevant Scheme Amendment documentation.

3. That the Local Planning Scheme Amendment be submitted to the Department for Environment and Conservation requesting assessment prior to commencing public consultation.

4. That the Local Planning Scheme Amendment be submitted to the Western Australian Planning Commission for information.

5. That upon receipt of the environmental assessment from the Department for Environment and Conservation, the amendment be advertised for a period of not less than 42 days in a local circulating newspaper.


Page 41

PSC1304-107 LANDOWNERS RESPONSE TO POTENTIAL REVIEW OF LOCAL

PLANNING POLICY 3.11 MCCABE STREET AREA, NORTH FREMANTLE HEIGHT OF NEW BUILDINGS

DataWorks Reference: 117/034 Disclosure of Interest: Nil Meeting Date: 17 July 2013 Responsible Officer: Manager Planning Projects Actioning Officer: Strategic Planning Officer Decision Making Level: Council Previous Item Number/s: PSC1304-58 Attachments: 1. 17 April 2013 PSC1304-58 minutes


Page 42

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The purpose of this report is to inform Council of the consultation undertaken and the policy area landowners’ response in relation to the potential review of the City’s Local Planning Policy 3.11 – McCabe Street Area, North Fremantle (LPP3.11). In April 2013 the City was requested by consultants acting on behalf of H.L.M Holdings, the owner of the former Matilda Bay Brewery Site – 130 Stirling Highway, North Fremantle, to consider amending LPP3.11. The request proposed increasing the building height permissible under the policy in relation to part of the property 130 Stirling Highway, North Fremantle. The request was presented to Council at its ordinary meeting 24 April 2013 (PSC1304-58) and Council resolved the following: 1. That the request to increase the height requirements under Local Planning

Policy 3.11, McCabe Street Area – Height of New Buildings in relation to part of the site of No. 130 Stirling Highway, North Fremantle, submitted on behalf of H.L.M. Holdings, be noted.

2. That Council instructs officers to contact all landowners in the area subject to Local Planning Policy 3.11, McCabe Street Area – Height of New Buildings to establish whether they are willing to participate in a coordinated approach to reviewing this policy, and that the request to amend the policy referred to in (1) above be held in abeyance pending the receipt of responses from landowners.

Accordingly, landowners in the LPP3.11 area were contacted to establish their interest in participating in a coordinated planning review of the policy as a whole. A meeting was held and written submissions were made. At the conclusion of the consultation period all landowners, apart from the landowner of 130 Stirling Highway, North Fremantle, confirmed that they opposed or were not interested in being involved in a review of the City’s LPP3.11. It is therefore recommended that Council no longer pursues a comprehensive review of LPP3.11. Instead officers will assess the request made by the landowner of 130 Stirling Highway, North Fremantle for a modification to LPP3.11 in relation to that site only, and report back to Council when this assessment is completed. BACKGROUND

In April 2013, the City was requested by Greg Rowe and Associates along with Mackay Urbandesign and Oldfield Knott Architects acting on behalf of H.L.M Holdings, the owner of the former Matilda Bay Brewery Site – 130 Stirling Highway, North Fremantle, to consider amending the City’s Local Planning Policy 3.11 – McCabe Street Area, North Fremantle (LPP3.11). The request proposed increasing the building height permissible under the policy in relation to part of the site of 130 Stirling Highway, North Fremantle. The request was presented to Council at its ordinary meeting 24 April 2013 (PSC1304-58) and Council resolved the following:


Page 43

1. That the request to increase the height requirements under Local Planning Policy 3.11, McCabe Street Area – Height of New Buildings in relation to part of the site of No. 130 Stirling Highway, North Fremantle, submitted on behalf of H.L.M. Holdings, be noted.

2. That Council instructs officers to contact all landowners in the area subject to Local

Planning Policy 3.11, McCabe Street Area – Height of New Buildings to establish whether they are willing to participate in a coordinated approach to reviewing this policy, and that the request to amend the policy referred to in (1) above be held in abeyance pending the receipt of responses from landowners.

For further background please see previous 24 April 2013 ordinary meeting of Council report PSC1304-58 (Attachment 1). CONSULTATION

As per Council’s 24 April 2013 resolution the landowners in the policy area were contacted and a meeting was held at the City of Fremantle offices on the 11 June 2013 with the landowners/ representatives from the following properties:

• 9 - 11 (Lot 315, 326 and 18) McCabe Street (Taskers), North Fremantle • 130 (Lot 5, 12, 218, 219, 220, 221, 314 & 253) Stirling Highway (Matilda Bay),

North Fremantle • 140 (lot 2) Stirling Highway (One Steel), North Fremantle • 21 (Lot 19) McCabe Street, North Fremantle

After the meeting documents were circulated to those that attended the meeting, including the discussion points from the meeting and the original submission from the owner of 130 Stirling Highway proposing an amendment of LPP3.11 proposal. A two week comment period was given. At the close of the comment period the City had received written comment from the following landowners:

• 9 - 11 (Lot 315, 326 and 18) McCabe Street (Taskers), North Fremantle • 140 (lot 2) Stirling Highway (One Steel), North Fremantle • 15 (Lot 16) McCabe Street, North Fremantle

All of the landowners above confirmed in writing that they do not wish to be included in a review of LPP3.11. Two landowners (140 Stirling Highway and 9-11 McCabe Street, North Fremantle) further commented that they did not support any review of the policy.


Page 44

PLANNING COMMENT

As per Council’s 24 April 2013 resolution on the proposed review of LPP3.11 the City undertook consultation with landowners in the McCabe Street policy area. The consultation responses received are outlined in the previous Consultation section of this report. As the landowners in the policy area are not supportive of being involved in a comprehensive review of the policy there would be little if any benefit in the City expending resources on pursuing this approach further. This does leave the original submission from the owner of 130 Stirling Highway to be considered. It is therefore recommended that officers undertake a more detailed assessment of the submitted proposal to amend LPP3.11 in relation to 130 Stirling Highway, North Fremantle to potentially allow for an increase in the height requirements. Once completed, this assessment will be the subject of a further report for Council’s consideration. CONCLUSION

In response to submission of a request to review LPP3.11 by the landowner of 130 Stirling Highway, Council resolved to undertake consultation with the other landowners in the policy area to gauge their interest in participating in a wider policy review of LPP3.11. As outlined above, all landowners apart from the landowner of 130 Stirling Highway have confirmed that they do not support such a review. It is therefore recommended that Council no longer pursues a comprehensive review of LPP3.11. Instead officers will assess the request made by the landowner of 130 Stirling Highway, North Fremantle for a modification to LPP3.11 and present a further report to Council when this assessment is completed. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION

1. That Council notes the lack of widespread support from landowners in the area subject to Local Planning Policy 3.11 McCabe Street Area – Height of New Buildings for a comprehensive review of the policy, and having regard to this response resolves not to take any further action in relation to a review of the policy as a whole.

2. That the request to amend the height requirements of Local Planning Policy

3.11, McCabe Street Area – Height of New Buildings in relation to part of the site of No. 130 Stirling Highway, North Fremantle, submitted on behalf of H.L.M. Holdings, be assessed in detail by officers and a report on the assessment of the request be presented to the Planning Services Committee before 30 September 2013.


Page 45

CONFIDENTIAL MATTERS Nil.


Page 46

SUMMARY GUIDE TO CITIZEN PARTICIPATION & CONSULTATION

The Council adopted a Community Engagement Policy in December 2010 to give effect to its commitment to involving citizens in its decision-making processes. The City values community engagement and recognises the benefits that can flow to the quality of decision-making and the level of community satisfaction. Effective community engagement requires total clarity so that Elected Members, Council officers and citizens fully understand their respective rights and responsibilities as well as the limits of their involvement in relation to any decision to be made by the City.

How consultative processes work at the City of Fremantle

The City’s decision makers 1.

The Council, comprised of Elected Members, makes policy, budgetary and key strategic decisions while the CEO, sometimes via on-delegation to other City officers, makes operational decisions.

Various participation opportunities 2.

The City provides opportunities for participation in the decision-making process by citizens via itscouncil appointed working groups, its community precinct system, and targeted community engagement processes in relation to specific issues or decisions.

Objective processes also used 3.

The City also seeks to understand the needs and views of the community via scientific and objective processes such as its bi-ennial community survey.

All decisions are made by Council or the CEO 4.

These opportunities afforded to citizens to participate in the decision-making process do not include the capacity to make the decision. Decisions are ultimately always made by Council or the CEO (or his/her delegated nominee).

Precinct focus is primarily local, but also city-wide

5.

The community precinct system establishes units of geographic community of interest, but provides for input in relation to individual geographic areas as well as on city-wide issues.

All input is of equal value 6.

No source of advice or input is more valuable or given more weight by the decision-makers than any other. The relevance and rationality of the advice counts in influencing the views of decision-makers.

Decisions will not necessarily reflect the majority view received

7.

Local Government in WA is a representative democracy. Elected Members and the CEO are charged under the Local Government Act with the responsibility to make decisions based on fact and the merits of the issue without fear or favour and are accountable for their actions and decisions under law. Elected Members are accountable to the people via periodic elections. As it is a representative democracy, decisions may not be made in favour of the majority view expressed via consultative processes. Decisions must also be made in accordance with any statute that applies or within the parameters of budgetary considerations. All consultations will clearly outline from the outset any constraints or


Page 47


limitations associated with the issue.

Decisions made for the overall good of Fremantle

8.

The Local Government Act requires decision-makers to make decisions in the interests of “the good government of the district”. This means that decision-makers must exercise their judgment about the best interests of Fremantle as a whole as well as about the interests of the immediately affected neighbourhood. This responsibility from time to time puts decision-makers at odds with the expressed views of citizens from the local neighbourhood who may understandably take a narrower view of considerations at hand.

Diversity of view on most issues 9.

The City is wary of claiming to speak for the ‘community’ and wary of those who claim to do so. The City recognises how difficult it is to understand what such a diverse community with such a variety of stakeholders thinks about an issue. The City recognises that, on most significant issues, diverse views exist that need to be respected and taken into account by the decision-makers.

City officers must be impartial 10.

City officers are charged with the responsibility of being objective, non-political and unbiased. It is the responsibility of the management of the City to ensure that this is the case. It is also recognised that City officers can find themselves unfairly accused of bias or incompetence by protagonists on certain issues and in these cases it is the responsibility of the City’s management to defend those City officers.

City officers must follow policy and procedures

11.

The City’s community engagement policy identifies nine principles that apply to all community engagement processes, including a commitment to be clear, transparent, responsive , inclusive, accountable andtimely. City officers are responsible for ensuring that the policy and any other relevant procedure is fully complied with so that citizens are not deprived of their rights to be heard.


Page 48


Community engagement processes have cut-off dates that will be adhered to.

12.

As City officers have the responsibility to provide objective, professional advice to decision-makers, they are entitled to an appropriate period of time and resource base to undertake the analysis required and to prepare reports. As a consequence, community engagement processes need to have defined and rigorously observed cut-off dates, after which date officers will not include ‘late’ input in their analysis. In such circumstances, the existence of ‘late’ input will be made known to decision-makers. In most cases where community input is involved, the Council is the decision-maker and this affords community members the opportunity to make input after the cut-off date via personal representations to individual Elected Members and via presentations to Committee and Council Meetings.

Citizens need to check for any changes to decision making arrangements made

13.

The City will take initial responsibility for making citizens aware of expected time-frames and decision making processes, including dates of Standing Committee and Council Meetings if relevant. However, as these details can change, it is the citizens responsibility to check for any changes by visiting the City’s website, checking the Fremantle News in the Fremantle Gazette or inquiring at the Customer Service Centre by phone, email or in-person.

Citizens are entitled to know how their input has been assessed

14.

In reporting to decision-makers, City officers will in all cases produce a community engagement outcomes report that summarises comment and recommends whether it should be taken on board, with reasons.

Reasons for decisions must be transparent 15.

Decision-makers must provide the reasons for their decisions.

Decisions posted on the City’s website 16.

Decisions of the City need to be transparent and easily accessed. For reasons of cost, citizens making input on an issue will not be individually notified of the outcome, but can access the decision at the City’s website under ‘community engagement’ or at the City Library or Service and Information Centre.


Page 49

Issues that Council May Treat as Confidential Section 5.23 of the new Local Government Act 1995, Meetings generally open to the public, states: 1. Subject to subsection (2), the following are to be open to members of the public -

a) all council meetings; and b) all meetings of any committee to which a local government power or duty has

been delegated.

2. If a meeting is being held by a council or by a committee referred to in subsection (1) (b), the council or committee may close to members of the public the meeting, or part of the meeting, if the meeting or the part of the meeting deals with any of the following:

a) a matter affecting an employee or employees; b) the personal affairs of any person; c) a contract entered into, or which may be entered into, by the local government

and which relates to a matter to be discussed at the meeting; d) legal advice obtained, or which may be obtained, by the local government and

which relates to a matter to be discussed at the meeting; e) a matter that if disclosed, would reveal –

i) a trade secret; ii) information that has a commercial value to a person; or iii) information about the business, professional, commercial or financial

affairs of a person. Where the trade secret or information is held by, or is about, a person other than the local government.

f) a matter that if disclosed, could be reasonably expected to - i) impair the effectiveness of any lawful method or procedure for preventing,

detecting, investigating or dealing with any contravention or possible contravention of the law;

ii) endanger the security of the local government’s property; or iii) prejudice the maintenance or enforcement of a lawful measure for

protecting public safety.

g) information which is the subject of a direction given under section 23 (Ia) of the Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1971; and

h) such other matters as may be prescribed.

3. A decision to close a meeting or part of a meeting and the reason for the decision are to be recorded in the minutes of the meeting.


Page 50


Page 51

AGENDA ATTACHMENTS

Planning Services Committee

Wednesday, 17 July 2013, 6.00 pm

Agenda Attachments - Planning Services Committee 17 July 2013

Page 2


Page 3

PSC1307-101 JOSLIN STREET, NO. 20 (LOT 1134), HILTON - RETROSPECTIVE PRIMARY STREET FENCE ADDITION - (AA/JS DA0239/13)

ATTACHMENT 1


Page 4

ATTACHMENT 2


Page 5


Page 6

PSC1307-102 GREY STREET, NO. 15 (LOT 1), FREMANTLE - DETACHED TWO STOREY REAR ADDITIONS TO EXISTING GROUPED DWELLING – (AD DA0195/13)

ATTACHMENT 1: Development Plans (as amended)


Page 7


Page 8

ATTACHMENT 2: Photos

Figure 2 - Two storey Grouped Dwelling at No. 22A (Lot 9) Price Street, looking west from ROW.


Page 9

Figure 3 - Two storey Grouped Dwelling at No. 22A (Lot 9) Price Street, looking south-west from ROW.


Page 10

PSC1307-103 PARMELIA STREET NO 16 (LOT 1) SOUTH FREMANTLE - PARTIAL DEMOLITION AND ADDITIONS & ALTERATIONS TO EXISTING SINGLE HOUSE - (AA DA0232/13)

ATTACHMENT 1 – Development Plans


Page 11


Page 12


Page 13


Page 14


Page 15

ATTACHMENT 2 – Site Photos

View of an existing outdoor area at the rear of No. 18 Parmelia Street.

View of an existing outbuilding on the northern boundary of No. 18 Parmelia Street.


Page 16

View of an existing opening to the dining area at of No. 18 Parmelia Street.

View of the existing bounday fence on the northern boundary of the subject land.


Page 17

View of Parmelia Street looking north directly infront of the subject site.

View of an existing dwelling at the subject site.


Page 18

PSC1307-104 SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY (3.61.21)

ATTACHMENT 1

1. CLARKE STREET, NO. 17 (LOT 33), HILTON - CARPORT ADDITION TO EXISTING SINGLE STOREY SINGLE HOUSE - (AA DA0285/13)

2. AINSLIE ROAD NO.4 (LOT 28), NORTH FREMANTLE – SIDE FENCE AND RETAINING WALL ADDITIONS TO EXISTING SINGLE HOUSE – (J L DA0196/13)

3. SWANBOURNE STREET NO.53(LOT 7), FREMANTLE – RE ROOFING OF EXISTING GROUPED DWELLING – (J L DA0277/13)

4. SMITH STREET, NO. 17 (LOT 15), BEACONSFIELD – DEMOLITION OF EXISTING SINGLE HOUSE – (JS DA0220/13)

5. SOUTH TERRACE NO.388 (LOT 28), SOUTH FREMANTLE - SECTION 40 CERTIFICATE – (JL LL00011/13)

6. 24.BENNEWITH STREET, NO.6 (LOT 51) HILTON - POOL AND INTERNAL FENCE ADDITIONS (JL DA0257/13)

7. 25.LIME STREET, NO.8 (LOT 204), NORTH FREMANTLE – TWO STOREY SINGLE HOUSE – (JL DA0231/13)

8. SNOOK CRESCENT NO 54 (LOT 1220), HILTON - TWO (2) LOT SURVEY STRATA SUBDIVISION (AD WAPC696-13)

9. SOUTH STREET, NO. 369A (LOT 2), HILTON – CHANGE OF USE TO HOME BUSINESS (HAIR DRESSING) – (KS DA0238/13)

10. SOUTH STREET, NO. 367 (LOT 1584), HILTON – CARPORT ADDITION TO EXISTING SINGLE HOUSE – (KS DA0202/13)

11. HIGH STREET, NO. 271 (LOT 18), FREMANTLE – DEMOLITION OF EXISTING SINGLE HOUSE AND THREE (3) REPLACEMENT SINGLE STOREY GROUPED DWELLINGS – (KS DA0249/13)

12. CARRINGTON STREET, NO. 240 (LOT 994), HILTON – TWO LOT SURVEY STRATA SUBDIVISION – (CJ WAPC623/13)

13. MARINE TERRACE, NO. 170 (LOT 38), SOUTH FREMANTLE – VERANDAH ADDITION AND ALTERATIONS TO EXISTING SINGLE HOUSE – (CJ DA0299/13)

14. WOOD STREET, NO. 50A (LOT 303), WHITE GUM VALLEY – PRIMARY STREET FENCE – (CJ DA0280/13)

15. CARNAC STREET NO.38 (LOT 11), FREMANTLE – RESTORATION WORKS TO EXISTING SINGLE HOUSE – (JL DA0274/13)

16. CHALMERS STREET NO.2/2 (LOT 2), FREMANTLE – EXTERNAL STAIRCASE AND DECK ADDITIONS & ALTERATIONS TO EXISTING GROUPED DWELLING – (JL DA0282/13)

17. AGNES STREET, NO 5 (LOT 20), BEACONSFIELD – TWO (2) LOT SURVEY STRATA SUBDIVISION – (KS WAPC539-13)

18. WARDLE ROAD, NO. 13A (LOT 2179), BEACONSFIELD – TWO STOREY GROUPED DWELLING – (CJ DA0229/13)


Page 19

19. SEAVIEW STREET, NO.27 (LOT 1), BEACONSFIELD – CHANGE OF USE TO FAMILY DAY CARE – (CJ DA0254/13)

20. WRAY AVENUE, NO. 92 (LOT 1), FREMANTLE – TWO STOREY SINGLE HOUSE AND ADDITIONS AND ALTERATIONS TO EXISTING OFFICE – (CJ DA0243/13)

21. BATEMAN STREET, NO. 9 (LOT 13), FREMANTLE - ALTERATIONS AND ADDITIONS TO EXISTING SINGLE HOUSE - (AA DA0259/13)

22. NO. 357 (LOT 1579) SOUTH STREET, HILTON - SINGLE STOREY GROUPED DWELLING - (AA DA0259/13)

23. SOUTH TERRACE, NO. 362 (LOT 2), SOUTH FREMANTLE - PARTIAL CHANGE OF USE TO TOURIST ACCOMMODATION - (AA DA0241/13)

24. CLIFF STREET NO.11 (LOT 101 & 102), FREMANTLE – REPAIR, MAINTENANCE & RESTORATION WORKS TO EXISTING BUILDING – (JL DA0245/13)

25. PROWSE STREET, NO. 8 (LOT 63), BEACONSFIELD - TWO LOT SURVEY STRATA SUBDIVISION WITH COMMON PROPERTY - (AA WAPC756/13)


Page 20

PSC1304-105 ESPLANADE RESERVE NO. 9399 - PROPOSED PUBLIC WORKS ATTACHMENT 1 - Esplanade Reserve Youth Plaza design plans


Page 21

PSC1304-107 LANDOWNERS RESPONSE TO POTENTIAL REVIEW OF LOCAL PLANNING POLICY 3.11 MCCABE STREET AREA, NORTH FREMANTLE HEIGHT OF NEW BUILDINGS

ATTACHMENT 1 - Minutes from 17 April 2013 – PSC1304-58 DataWorks Reference: 117/034 Disclosure of Interest: Nil Meeting Date: 17 April 2013 Responsible Officer: Manager Planning Projects Actioning Officer: Strategic Planning Officer Decision Making Level: Council Previous Item Number/s: PSC0807-195: 23 July 2008

PSC0904-72: 22 April 2009 Attachments: 1. Applicant’s Request to amend LPP3.11

2. 140 Stirling Highway Structure Plan 3. 9-11 McCabe Street Structure Plan


Page 22

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The City has been requested by Greg Rowe and Associates along with Mackay Urbandesign and Oldfield Knott Architects acting on behalf of H.L.M Holdings, the owner of the former Matilda Bay Brewery Site – 130 Stirling Highway, North Fremantle, to consider amending the City’s Local Planning Policy 3.11 – McCabe Street Area, North Fremantle. The request proposes increasing the building height permissible under the policy in relation to part of the site of 130 Stirling Highway, North Fremantle. The purpose of this report is to inform Council of the request, but also to recommend that rather than determining the request as submitted, in the first instance all landowners in the policy area should be contacted to establish their interest in participating in a coordinated planning review of the policy as a whole. Officers consider this would be a more appropriate approach to assessing the planning and urban design basis for any potential increase in the height requirements prescribed in the policy, rather than amending the policy on an ad hoc basis. It is recommended that Council note the request received and support the alternative approach outlined in this report. BACKGROUND

Local Planning Policy 3.11, McCabe Street Area – Height of New Buildings In November 2007 Council commissioned a height study to identify potential maximum heights of new buildings on land in the area adjacent to McCabe Street, North Fremantle as defined by the shaded area on the map below. This area included a number of significant potential redevelopment sites such as the former One Steel site at 140 Stirling Highway, 9-11 McCabe Street and the Matilda Bay Brewery site (Refer to 23 July 2008 Council minutes PSC0807-195). Using this study the Local Planning Policy 3.11 – McCabe Street Area – Height of New Buildings (LPP3.11), was drafted. LPP3.11 was adopted by Council in April 2009 (Refer 22 April 2009 Council minutes PSC0904-72).


Page 23

The heights prescribed by the policy, for the area, are as depicted map below:

Background to the area The LPP3.11 area is made up of four main property groupings that are zoned under the City of Fremantle’s Local Planning Scheme No. 4 (LPS4). Note 133-141 Stirling highway, North Fremantle, (zone A) is a Parks and Recreation reserve under the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS) and not zoned under LPS4. Each of the property groupings is at a different stage of planning. Accordingly, the background for each group is individually discussed below:

140 Stirling Highway, North Fremantle is the former ‘One Steel’ storage and distribution premises. The lot is 3.1ha and zoned Development Zone (Development area 18). An approved structure plan is applicable to the site (Refer to attachment 2). The structure plan provides indicative density, plot ratio and height requirements for future development of the property. The City has not received a development application to progress the structure plan further.

140 Stirling Highway

9-11 McCabe Street, North Fremantle consists of three lots (Lot 315, 326 and 18, McCabe Street, North Fremantle). The area is zoned Development Zone (Development area 18) and is subject to a structure plan that was approved by the State Administrative Tribunal 3 March 2009 (Refer to attachment 3). The structure plan provides indicative building envelopes and AHD height limits.

9-11 McCabe Street


Page 24

Various planning approvals and survey strata and subdivision applications have been approved over the site in recent years. The three most recent and applicable planning applications are as follows: The City granted planning approval for a 51 apartment Multiple Dwelling

development that consists of two basements and six storeys, on the south western portion of the three lots 315, 326 and 18 that comprise 9 McCabe Street, North Fremantle, on 25 October 2012, (DA0417/12). The City has not yet received a Building Permit application for this development.

WAPC approved a subdivision application that proposes the three lots to be subdivided into four lots along the boundaries of the originally approved multiple dwelling application (refer to DA0087/10 and VA0009/11) on 27 November 2012 (WAPC146664).

The City granted temporary planning approval for a viewing tower associated with the residential development approved on-site at 9 McCabe Street, North Fremantle, on 27 November 2012.

15 (Lot 16) and 19 and 21 (Lot 19) McCabe Street, North Fremantle both have separate owners. Each lot consists of established industrial/commercial type buildings and associated offices. There is no structure plan for either property. There are no recent development applications applied for or approved over the Lots.

15 and 19 and 21 McCabe Street

This area includes No. 130 (Lot 5, 12, 218, 219, 220, 221, 314 & 253), No. 136 (Lot 100) and No. 138 (Lot 8) Stirling Highway and No. 2-4 (Lot 9, 10 & 11) McCabe Street, North Fremantle. The area is zoned Industrial under the City’s LPS4. However a proposed amendment (No. 12) to the City’s LPS4 to rezone the area from Industrial to Development Zone (Development Area 18) is currently before the Minister for Planning for final determination.

McCabe – Coventry Street, North Fremantle area

130 Stirling Highway, North Fremantle is on the City’s Heritage List and a level 1B on the City's Municipal Heritage Inventory.136 and 138 Stirling Highway and 2-4 McCabe Street, North Fremantle are not on the City’s Heritage List. Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment – Road Reservation The WAPC is currently proposing an amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS Amendment 1210/41 – Rationalisation of Stirling Highway Reservation), which affects some lots in the area, predominantly 140 Stirling Highway and 138 McCabe Street, North Fremantle. The purpose of the amendment is to ensure adequate space is allocated for a consistent and safer highway design into the future including widening of Stirling Highway in the North Fremantle area.


Page 25

PLANNING COMMENT

The City has been requested by Greg Rowe and Associates along with Mackay Urbandesign and Oldfield Knott Architects (the applicant) acting on behalf of H.L.M Holdings, the owner of the former Matilda Bay Brewery Site – 130 Stirling Highway, North Fremantle, to consider amending the City’s Local Planning Policy 3.11 – McCabe Street Area, North Fremantle. The request proposes increasing the height requirements under the policy for part of the site of 130 Stirling Highway to a maximum height of 40m from natural ground level and not exceeding 55m AHD in height, compared to the current policy provision allowing a maximum height of 17m from natural ground level on the part of the site in question. The applicant has provided justification for the proposed increased height and accompanying 3D models to help illustrate the proposal (see attachment 1 for the applicant’s request). The request is based on the differing topography and lower levels of 130 Stirling Highway, North Fremantle comparative to other properties in the area, and the limited impact on access to views development of the site would have due to its lower topography and location. Clause 2.4 of LPS4 sets out the procedure to be followed if Council resolves to amend a local planning policy. The procedure requires advertising of the proposed amendment, consideration of any submissions and then a final decision by Council to either adopt the amendment to the policy (with or without further modifications) or to not proceed with the amendment. The current request to amend LPP3.11 would need to follow this procedure if Council was minded to initially support the proposed amendment as submitted. However, officers consider this request to amend the maximum permitted building height for one part of one property subject to a policy that applies to several other significant landholdings represents a somewhat ad hoc approach to the review of the height provisions in the policy. There is also a reasonable likelihood that if advertised in its current form, the proposed amendment to the policy would attract submissions from owners of other properties subject to the policy requesting that the maximum height prescribed in the policy for their property also be increased. Furthermore, LPP3.11 in its current form was adopted in April 2009, prior to the adoption of key strategic documents such as the WAPC’s Directions 2031 and Beyond and the City’s Strategic Plan 2010-15. It could be considered therefore that the strategic policy context into which this more detailed local area planning policy fits has changed, particularly with regard to issues of urban intensification and renewal, sustainable building design and housing diversity.


Page 26

Consequently officers see merit in a more comprehensive approach to any review of height and design controls applying to development in the McCabe Street LPP3.11 area. The area comprises a small number of relatively large landholdings which are appropriately zoned and offer the potential for significant redevelopment. Appropriate new development could potentially deliver greater density in a location highly accessible to the coast, river, amenities and public transport. It may also be a more appropriate urban design approach to express maximum height requirements as AHD levels, instead of maximum heights from natural ground level as in the current policy, given the undulating topography through the area and the benefits of encouraging coordinated design and scale of future development in the area. Accordingly, officers recommend that instead of amending the policy as requested, the City should initiate a process to engage all the landowners in the area in undertaking a coordinated review of LPP3.11 as a whole. The first step would be for the City to contact all landowners in the area and establish whether they are willing to participate in, and potentially co-fund, a broader review of LPP3.11. The responses to this approach would then be reported back to Council in order to determine appropriate further action. It is recommended that the current request to partially amend the policy should be held in abeyance pending the response to this approach to all landowners in the LPP3.11 area. CONCLUSION

The City has been requested to consider amending the City’s Local Planning Policy 3.11 – McCabe Street Area, North Fremantle to increase the height requirements under the policy in relation to part of the site of 130 Stirling Highway, North Fremantle. For the reasons outlined in the Planning Comment section of this report, it is recommended that rather than proceeding to deal with the policy amendment request as submitted, in the first instance all landowners in the area should be contacted by the City and offered the opportunity to participate in a more comprehensive and coordinated planning review of the policy. It is recommended that Council note the request received and support the alternative approach outlined in this report.


Page 27

COMMITTEE AND OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION

MOVED: Cr A Sullivan 1. That the request to increase the height requirements under Local Planning

Policy 3.11, McCabe Street Area – Height of New Buildings in relation to part of the site of No. 130 Stirling Highway, North Fremantle, submitted on behalf of H.L.M. Holdings, be noted.

2. That Council instructs officers to contact all landowners in the area subject to Local Planning Policy 3.11, McCabe Street Area – Height of New Buildings to establish whether they are willing to participate in a coordinated approach to reviewing this policy, and that the request to amend the policy referred to in (1) above be held in abeyance pending the receipt of responses from landowners.

CARRIED: 6/0 For Against Cr Rachel Pemberton Cr Robert Fittock Cr Josh Wilson Cr Ingrid Waltham Cr Bill Massie Cr Andrew Sullivan

agenda master psc 17 july 2013 - city of fremantle · 17.07.2013 · agenda attachments 1...

Documents