minutes - City of Stirling

More documents

Recommendations

Info

MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL 18 SEPTEMBER 2012 - The conclusions of the traffic consultant with respect to the determination of car parking demand generated by the proposed development is considered superior to the application of the City’s Parking and Access Policy with respect to the number of car parking bays required in view of the site specific, and technical manner in which the traffic consultant has undertaken the assessment. - It is noted that Council, in 2010, had previously agreed to extinguish a parking contingency plan on the basis that car parking within the Mirrabooka Regional Centre was under-utilised. - It is noted that the status quo remains with respect to car parking under-utilisation rates within the Mirrabooka City Centre. To this end, the re-introduction of a parking contingency plan, with specific application to the proposed development appears to be unwarranted, particularly given the nature of the development (small-scale) relative to the surrounding context of the Mirrabooka City Centre. Additionally, imposition of condition a may also set an undesirable precedent in light of these factors. - In conclusion, RPS concurs with the recommendations put forward by the City’s officers that Conditions a, b and c of DA11/1992 be removed as they are considered unnecessary.” Comment Conditions a, b and c of Council’s approval on 7 February 2012 were not recommended by the City’s officers and were imposed by Council of its own accord. It is however considered that there is sufficient parking on site to accommodate the technical parking shortfall and it is considered that Conditions a, b, and c should not be applied. Ability to Impose Conditions A query has been raised by the applicant in regard to the ability for Conditions a, b, and c to be imposed. Should the review by the State Administrative Tribunal proceed, a legal opinion may be required to consider the conditions relative to the provisions of the City of Stirling Local Planning Scheme No.3. Applicable Parking Ratio The City’s Parking Policy requires that where the land use of “Shop” involves in excess of 10,000m 2 parking is provided at a ratio of 750 bays plus six (6) bays per 100m 2 of gross floor area in excess of 10,000m 2 . In October 1998 Council resolved to apply a parking ratio of 5.5 bays per 100m 2 which had the effect of reducing the parking shortfall to 223 car bays. At its meeting on 16 March 2010 Council agreed to extinguish the contingency plan Legal Agreement which effectively accepted the 223 car bay short fall and reduced the parking ratio to 4.96bays per 100m 2 . Once the proposed addition to the Centre is implemented, there will be a total floorspace of 44,351m 2 with 2,173 car bays provided resulting in a parking ratio of 4.9 bays per 100m 2 . Although the provisions of the City of Stirling Town Planning Scheme No.38 (TPS38) Stirling City Centre Scheme do not apply to the subject site, it is noted that a parking ratio of 5 bays per 100m 2 is applicable under TPS38 for shop floorspace. It is also noted that Clause 5.3.2 (4) of State Planning Policy 4.2 Activity Centres for Perth and Peel, offers as a guide that a parking ratio of between four (4) to five (5) bays per 100m 2 could be applied for shop floorspace. 42
MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL 18 SEPTEMBER 2012 Parking Concessions Under the provisions of Policy 6.7 – Parking, the site is eligible for a 10% parking concession based on its location within 400m of a high frequency bus stop/station. This concession was factored in to the car parking calculation which resulted in determining that the proposed shop addition will result in a technical shortfall of 107 car bays. There has however been no consideration of the potential for reciprocal use of parking bays and the differing operational peak periods for the different uses within the overall Shopping Centre. Such an assessment was considered unnecessary given the Parking Assessment Report has concluded that there is an actual oversupply of parking on site. It is likely that the identified oversupply of parking may (at least in part) be as a result of reciprocal parking occurring. Parking Assessment Report The Parking Assessment Report submitted by the applicant in support of their application found that there is ample parking on site and that the actual parking demand generated by the shopping centre is less than the current provision on site. The City’s Traffic Design Engineer has reviewed the traffic report and concurs with its conclusions. The consultants undertook a parking survey during peak periods and found that during the busiest period (12.00pm Saturday) the peak utilisation was 1,518 spaces. Based on the provision of 2,173 spaces these figures suggest that there is indeed sufficient parking on site. Although the Parking Assessment Report could not factor in the proposed shop development the subject of the current application, the existing practical excess in parking bays on site is considered sufficient to adequately accommodate the proposed shop extension. The Parking Assessment Report also did not consider the impact of future changes in retail trading hours. Whilst the impact of the change in retail trading hours will not be known for some time, it is assumed that the parking demand during peak times will reduce to some degree. Previous Council Decision to Extinguish Mirrabooka Square Parking Contingency Plan On 16 March 2010 Council resolved to agree to extinguish the Mirrabooka Square Parking Contingency Plan legal agreement with Perron Investments Pty Ltd (Council Resolution Number 0310/051). The original Parking Contingency Plan was signed by the City and the owners of the Shopping Centre (Perron Investments Pty Ltd) as a condition of Development Approval for a significant extension of the centre approved in April 1998. Council’s agreement to extinguish the contingency plan was based on the under-utilisation of parking in the Mirrabooka Regional Centre. The parking supply and demand at the time was analysed and it was generally found that parking at the Regional Centre was under-utilised, with an overall parking utilisation across all precincts of only 60%. A figure of 82% utilisation was recorded for the shopping centre precinct itself, but this was offset by figures as low as 16% for other precincts. The justification for extinguishing the original Parking Contingency Plan is still considered valid in that the existing car park is not fully utilised and the proposed parking ratio is similar to that which was in place when Council agreed to extinguish the previous Parking Contingency Plan. The under-utilisation of car bays as outlined in the Parking Assessment Report submitted with the original application is considered sufficient to accommodate the parking demand of the proposed shop addition to Mirrabooka Shopping Centre. 43
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 41: MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF
Page 93 and 94:
MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF
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:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
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?