minutes - City of Stirling

More documents

Recommendations

Info

MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL 18 SEPTEMBER 2012 The current approved predominant use of Lot 96 (i.e. ‘industry general’ - coffee roasting plant) is ‘low key’ in nature and has comparatively low patronage volumes meaning that limited pressure is being placed on existing on-site car parking facilities. As such it is contended that the total number of on-site car parking bays proposed to be provided (i.e. 11 bays) is capable of satisfying the car parking demand likely to be generated by the current and proposed uses; The shortfall of two (2) on-site car parking bays is considered unlikely to have a detrimental impact upon the current amenity, character, functionality and safety of the immediate locality; The payment of a cash-in-lieu contribution for the two (2) bay car parking shortfall is considered unnecessary in this particular instance given that Lot 96 has good accessibility to public transport (i.e. buses & trains) and existing onstreet car parking along Roberts Street West; Roberts Street West contains approximately fourteen (14) on-street car parking bays that are not allocated to a specific property or land use and are freely available for use by the general public during normal business hours; and A key objective of the City’s ‘Parking Policy’ is to ensure the provision of suitable and adequate car parking facilities throughout the municipality. It is contended that the provision of eleven (11) on-site car parking bays will adequately service the needs of the existing and proposed uses on Lot 96 in a manner consistent with the City’s key policy objective." Additionally, the applicant has advised that the following staff breakdown is applicable to the existing operations on site:- OFFICE One (1) Director One (1) Fulltime Reception One (1) Part Time Accounts: FACTORY One (1) Fulltime - Coffee Roaster/Despatch SALES (On the road) One (1) Director One (1) Sales Rep DELIVERY/SERVICE (On the road) Two (2) Fulltime Comment The proposal requires consideration in relation to the proposed Restaurant use and the parking shortfall the proposed use creates. 232
MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL 18 SEPTEMBER 2012 Land Use A Restaurant land use is a ‘D’ use in the Industry zone, meaning that the use is not permitted unless the Council has exercised its discretion by granting planning approval. In considering the appropriateness of the land use, reference is to be made to the objectives of LPS3 as they relate to the Industrial Zone and the statement contained in the Industrial design Guidelines for the Osborne Precinct. The proposed land use is considered appropriate in light of these requirements. The proposed development is considered to provide an additional local amenity for existing occupiers of the industrial area. Car Parking The proposed development requires the provision of 14 car parking bays, following the application of a 5% variation as a result of the on site provision of seven (7) bicycle bays. 11 bays are proposed on site, however, the City’s Traffic Design Engineer has advised that the location of the proposed disable bays within a corner truncation area cannot be supported, and consequently, only 10 bays can be accommodated on site, resulting in a four (4) car parking bays shortfall. Any variation to the City’s Parking Policy is to be considered against the objectives of the policy. In this instance, it is considered that the proposed development, although resulting in a shortfall of on site parking, will still maintain adequate parking facilities for the site and will not result in a major parking problem in the locality. The City accepts the applicant’s contention that the proposed restaurant will serve the local area, and that many of the customers are likely to walk to the site, which is a common feature of this type of development in this area. Additionally, it is noted that there currently exists informal on street parking on the southern side of Roberts Street West, opposite the subject lot, which can be utilised by customers. For these reasons, the City is satisfied that the proposed development will not result in a car parking problem in the area. Notwithstanding the above, the car parking shortfall is noted, and the Parking Policy does provide for the City to require cash in lieu of car parking where the full amount of car parking cannot be accommodated on site. Specifically, the policy provides for cash in lieu where existing on street parking has been constructed, as it the case with the on street parking on the southern side of Roberts Street West. Consequently, a condition is recommended to be imposed requiring the applicant to make a cash in lieu contribution in respect of the four (4) car parking bays shortfall. Where formal or informal parking exists, the City has historically required a payment of $4,500 per bay shortfall, and this approach is considered appropriate in this instance. Policy and Legislative Implications Should the Council refuse the application for development approval, the applicant may have the right to have the decision reviewed in accordance with Part 14 of the Planning and Development Act 2005. 233
Page 1 and 2:
MINUTES ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL
Page 3 and 4:
TABLE OF CONTENTS ITEM SUBJECT PAGE
Page 5 and 6:
ITEM SUBJECT PAGE 10.1/AP7 LOT 678,
Page 7 and 8:
MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
125 MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY MEETING
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182: MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF
Page 231: MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
Page 307 and 308:
Page 309 and 310:
Page 311 and 312:
Page 313 and 314:
Page 315 and 316:
Page 317 and 318:
Page 319 and 320:
Page 321 and 322:
Page 323 and 324:
Page 325 and 326:
Page 327 and 328:
Page 329 and 330:
Page 331 and 332:
Page 333 and 334:
Page 335 and 336:
Page 337 and 338:
Page 339 and 340:
Page 341 and 342:
Page 343 and 344:
Page 345 and 346:
Page 347 and 348:
Page 349 and 350:
Page 351 and 352:
Page 353 and 354:
Page 355 and 356:
Page 357 and 358:
Page 359 and 360:
Page 361:
show all

minutes - City of Stirling

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?