Shire of Northam Local Planning Scheme No. 6 …planning.wa.gov.au/daps/data/regional daps/mid-west...

Shire of Northam Local Planning Scheme No. 6 Application for Planning Approval – New Shopping Centre – Lot 501 (10) Beamish Avenue, Northam

Schedule of Submissions

Page 17 of 23

Number Name & Address Address of Property Affected

Comments Made Local Government Comments Local Government Recommendation

contemporary building materials and articulated building facades to ensure visual interest and reduce building bulk’. It also represents a substantial improvement when compared to the large derelict existing hospital buildings and unmaintained open space on the site, and presents excellent contemporary building facades to key street frontages. RE: Point 7 It is noted that this objection has not been quantified in the submission in any detail and therefore it is impossible to respond to this accordingly. Notwithstanding this, the report outlines on page 13 that, ‘the development of a regional retail hub on the subject site is consistent with the stated intent of the Strategy’, which is to maintain and reinforce the Northam town site’s function and role as a ‘Regional Service Centre’. The proposed development will directly contribute to this outcome. Visual impact and architecture has been addressed on page 17 of the report, which responds to the following objective for the ‘Commercial’ zone: ‘maintain compatibility with the general streetscape for all new buildings in terms of scale, height, style, materials, street alignment and design of facades.’

11 Dallimore Nominees Pty Ltd 258 Fitzgerald Street, Northam Received 14/9/15

258 Fitzgerald Street, Northam

As a business trading in the west end of Fitzgerald Street, we wish to fully support the development. It is just what Northam needs to bring more shoppers to town.

Noted.

12 Pamela Peters 17 Gordon Street, Northam Received 14/9/15

17 Gordon Street, Northam

Deeply concerned regarding the demolishment of the old hospital. Many houses in this area are to be heritage listed. I have cut glass & stained glass windows. All houses are subject to cracks due to being built on clay.

In Northam, light earth tremors and current unusual weather patterns. Imploding would be a disaster. How are you addressing the problem?

Existing hospital buildings are set back a substantial distance from other buildings in the locality to the extent that such impacts are unlikely. In any event, this is an issue that is addressed through the building permit process including the preparation of dilapidations surveys if necessary. Expression of opinion only. Proposal needs to be considered and determined on its merits.

That the submission be dismissed.



Page 18 of 23



Surely Coles sales will automatically suffer from Aldi warehouse bulk buying, regardless of who owns both outlets.

Target, Rockmans and small boutiques will suffer from Best & Less cheap products. Are you considering the small shop owners or dismissing them.

We do not need yet another small café suggested on the plan near Coles. Dome will cover the need for Saturday afternoon & Sunday refreshment access which is lacking, but Café Yasou, Riversedge, Lucy’s, the Boulevard Café & the Panda and the Indian restaurant and the pub/hotel restaurants do not need more competition. Again have you considered the small outlet owners?

We do not need another liquor store, Celebrations, Northam Tavern & Liquor Barons well supply the public. As the police of they need more alcoholic problems.

We do not need another Petrol outlet. BP, Woolworths & Caltex and I think Dunnings are more than enough again regardless who owns them and the Gt Eastern Highway Caltex is sufficient as a convenience store as well as the small deli in the main street which is struggling against Coles & Woolworths.

There are no new industries to swell population numbers. There is one company which might eventuate but the story is that, due to lack of co-operation, the town lost a huge manufacturing company!?

So although we are titles a Super Town the population has not grown to need more of the suggested outlets. 7,000 when we came in 1974 and no different now I am told.

How overwhelming is the telecommunications tower for those that live around it? Could it be placed on the edge of town? However, better reception would be great.

This is not a valid planning objection and should not be a factor in determining the outcome of this proposal. Not a valid planning objection. Note previous comments in terms of the preparation of a PIA to support the liquor licensing process. Expression of opinion only. Proposal needs to be considered and determined on its merits. This is not a valid planning consideration and should not be a factor in determining the outcome of this proposal. This is not a valid planning consideration and should not be a factor in determining the outcome of this proposal. Notwithstanding this, as indicated on page 18 of the report the development will in fact encourage consolidation of retail within the town centre along Fitzgerald Street. It will also act as a catalyst for further growth and contribute to the existing commercial precinct in Northam as outlined on page 15 of the report. Not relevant. Not relevant. Noted.



Page 19 of 23



Flat parking for Coles would be wonderful - try being disabled or a parent with a pusher on the current clopped ACROD are parental parking spaces. An impossibility - that goodness for current Coles’ helpful staff.

Noted.

13 Doreen Parker 24 Gordon Street, Northam Received 11/9/15

24 Gordon Street, Northam

I think it is a brilliant idea and congratulate the Shire for its forward thinking. My only comment would be the liquor store is not needed, Northam is well catered for in that commodity.

This is not a valid planning objection and should not be a factor in determining the outcome of this proposal. Note previous comments in terms of the preparation of a PIA to support the liquor licensing process.

Submission not supported.

14 Les Holten on behalf of Northam Church of Christ 91-93 Wellington Street, Northam Received 4/9/15

Lot 400 Wellington Street, Northam

Happy to endorse the proposal, except for the liquor store due the following 3 reasons:

1. More than enough liquor outlets in town already.

2. A proposal for a liquor store in a nearby shopping centre was rejected after community opposition. It would be unfair if this is accepted.

The close proximity of the proposed liquor store to a drug rehabilitation facility is inappropriate.

Expression of opinion only. Proposal needs to be considered and determined on its merits. This is not a valid planning consideration and should not be a factor in determining the outcome of this proposal. Note previous comments in terms of the preparation of a PIA to support the liquor licensing process. It is understood that this process includes consideration of proximity to other uses.


15 Mr Brian & Mrs Cathy Smith 42 Stirling Street, Northam

N/A We are requesting permission to keep the two white crosses on the corner of Gairdner & Wellington Street (Hospital Site Land) in memorial of our son and daughter in law.

This information has been passed on to the landowner/developer

Noted.

16 Peter Martin 7 Burnside Place, Northam Received 2/9/15

7 Burnside Place, Northam

I feel that a project of this size could only be of terrific value to our town. I can see good in the added trade from outside country towns. There could be traffic problems but I am sure the Shire will act to overcome such problems.

Noted.

17 Jeanie Williams 99 Wellington Street, Northam Received 1/9/15

99 Wellington Street, Northam

I hope parking is more than adequate as we already have issues parking on the verge and making it dangerous to exit the property. Would prefer an IGA supermarket.

This comment appears to relate to current problems associated with people parking on verges and causing a traffic hazard in the area. Car parking provision requirements are specifically addressed on page 16 of the report, which states, ‘the proposed development provides 321 car parking bays in total and as such, proposes a 71 car parking bay surplus’. The proposed development complies with the required number of car parking bays as outlined on page 16 of the report. Existing issues with verge parking at the subject site will actually be likely to be mitigated through the ample amount of parking

Noted.



Page 20 of 23



provided and its location, being easily accessible to nearby premises, such as the Court House on Wellington Street. The proposed car parking and access arrangements have been addressed on page 16 and 17 of the supporting planning report, stating that, ‘all vehicle access points have each been designed to accommodate the turning movement of fuel, service and customer vehicles accessing the proposed development’.

18 M. Prudence Earle 113 Chidlow Street, Northam Received 28/8/15

113 Chidlow Street, Northam

Pleased to know the old hospital building is not to suffer further deterioration. New shops will create employment and add interest to the town. Site Plan very informative.

Noted.

19 Rob Tinetti 81 Garrigan Close, Northam Received 24/8/15

264 Fitzgerald Street, Northam

Good Luck with the liquor store outlet. Will have to declare impartial interest as a good friend owns Liquor Barons.

Noted.

20 Genofe Budas 186 Chidlow Street, Northam Received 20/8/15


Thank you and the Shire of Northam for working so hard to bring a shopping centre of such magnitude to Northam. Have no objections. See lots of potential. One question, I could not see how the old hospital is going to be removed. If it is going to be imploded what effect will it have on surrounding houses? With all the steel that was used on the hospital I assume it is the only way to go.

Noted.

21 RMM Patabendige 128 Chidlow Street, Northam Received 2/9/15


As the owner of a property in Chidlow Street, the effect of the proposed telecommunications tower on the health of citizens living nearby. It is a well-known fact that telecom towers transmit radiation which cause cancers in humans. Therefore please locate the tower near the north east corner away from residential area.

The WAPC’s SPP5.2 outlines the requirement for telecommunications carriers to comply with the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) Radiocommunications Licence Conditions (Apparatus Licence) Determination 2003, which make mandatory limits for human exposure to Radiofrequency electromagnetic fields from all sources, including telecommunications infrastructure. SPP5.2 outlines that measurement surveys undertaken demonstrate that environmental radiofrequency levels near base stations are extremely low. The Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) measurement surveys concluded that, “given the very low levels recorded and the relatively low power of these types of transmitters, it is unlikely




Page 21 of 23



that the radiofrequency radiation from base stations would cause any adverse health effects, based on current medical research”. Given that there are currently no known health impacts, the objection is unable to be justified and the proposed location of the telecommunications infrastructure on the subject site is appropriate in terms of potential adverse health impacts.

22 Klara Stylianou 38 Broome Terrance, Northam Received 1/9/15

155 Duke Street, Northam

I agree with the proposed shopping centre going ahead.

Noted.

23 Glen & Karen O’Driscoll 26 Selby Street, Northam Received 1/9/15

26 Selby Street, Northam

We think it will be great. Good for town & good for property owners in the area. Great location, lots of parking, great specialty shop opportunity. I think it’s great!

Noted.

25 Water Corporation PO Box 100 Leederville WA 6902 Received 16/9/15

N/A Thank you for your letter dated 20 August 2015. The Water Corporation offers the following comments in regard to this proposal. Water Reticulated water is currently available to the subject area. All water main extensions, if required for the development site, must be laid within the existing and proposed road reserves, on the correct alignment and in accordance with the Utility Providers Code of Practice. Wastewater Reticulated sewerage is currently available to the subject area. All sewer main extensions, if required for the development site, should be laid within the existing and proposed road reserves, on the correct alignment and in accordance with the Utility Providers Code of Practice. It should be noted that existing sewerage mains are located within the subject land. (please refer to plan attached) One is within the northern, Beamish Avenue boundary. A second is in the southern portion of the land coming off Gardner Street but extends under the proposed Coles building. A third is located

Noted.



Page 22 of 23



in the western corner of Wellington Street and Gardner Street. Easements may be required to protect those sewers. Due consideration will be required when developing in these areas as Water Corporation sewers should not be located under and existing or proposed buildings. The developer is required to fund the full cost of protecting relocating or modifying any of the existing infrastructure which may be affected by the proposed development. General Comments This proposal will require approval by our Building Services section prior to commencement of works. Infrastructure contributions and fees may be required to be paid prior to approval being issued. The principle followed by the Water Corporation for the funding of subdivision or development is one of user pays. The developer is expected to provide all water and sewerage reticulation if required. A contribution for Water and Sewerage headworks may also be required. In addition the developer may be required to fund new works or the upgrading of existing works and protection of all works. Any temporary works needed are required to be fully funded by the developer. The Water Corporation may also require land being ceded free of cost for works. The information provided above is subject to review and may change. If the proposal has not proceeded within the next 6 months, the Water Corporation should be contacted to confirm if the information is still valid. Please provide the above comments to the land owner, developer and/or their representative.

26 Department of Mines & Petroleum Mineral House 100 Plain Street,East Perth Received 10/9/15

N/A The Geological Survey of Western Australia (GSWA) has assessed this proposal on behalf of the Department of Mines & Petroleum (DMP) with respect to mineral and petroleum resources, geothermal energy and basic raw materials. The GSWA has no concerns with this proposed new shopping centre and communications tower development.

Noted.

27 Main Roads Western Australia PO Box 333

N/A Main Roads WA (MRWA) has determined from the information provided that the proposed development will not have an adverse impact on the MRWA

Noted.



Page 23 of 23



Northam WA Received 8/9/15

network and therefore advises no objection to the proposal.

28 Western Power Locked Bag 2520 PERTH WA 6000 Received 2/9/15

N/A Western Power does not have any specific comments at this time to the above proposal, however we would appreciate being kept informed of developments.

Noted.

29 Visionstream on behalf of Optus Mobile Pty Ltd 202 Pier Street, Perth WA 6000 Received 27/8/15

N/A Visionstream Pty Ltd. Writes on behalf of Optus Mobile Pty Ltd to advise that Optus fully support and have no objection to the proposed development. The relocation of the existing telecommunications facility will continue to benefit the wider community through continued Optus Mobile coverage.

Noted.

Planning Assessment - Proposed Shopping Centre & Convenience Store Lot 501 No.10 Beamish Avenue, Northam

P a g e 1 | 8

Clause Criteria LPS6 Provision Proposed by Development Criteria Met / Condition Required

5.5 Site and development standards and requirements

Table 2: Site and Development Requirements Table

Setbacks No minimum boundary setback requirements for the ‘Commercial’ zone

Wellington Street – 20m to the fuel outlet awning Gairdner Street – 2m to the fuel outlet awning 27 Gairdner Street – 7m to the main building 116 Chidlow Street – 21.5m to the main building 110 Chidlow Street – 0m setback to the telecommunications tower 107 Duke Street – 0m setback to the telecommunications tower Beamish Avenue – 13m to the main building

The proposed setbacks can be supported as they are consistent with the setbacks of existing buildings on surrounding lots in the commercial zone and are not expected to cause overshadowing or have privacy implications for adjoining properties. The nil setback of the telecommunications monopole structure is considered acceptable as there needs to be sufficient manoeuvring space for delivery vehicles at the rear of the proposed buildings. It is considered that the proposed location of the monopole structure at the eastern corner of the site is the most appropriate on this site as the shopping centre would provide partial screening.

Maximum Plot Ratio No maximum. To be determined by the local government

23% This is considered to be an acceptable plot ratio in terms of bulk and scale. The remaining

mgrplanning

Typewritten Text

DAP/15/00856 - ATTACHMENT 9

mgrplanning

Typewritten Text

mgrplanning

Typewritten Text


P a g e 2 | 8


areas of the lot are to be either landscaped or sealed and utilised for car parking and vehicle manoeuvring.

Minimum Landscaping area (%)

No minimum landscaping area. To be determined by the local government

The applicant has not provided sufficient detail as to the amount of landscaping proposed, verge treatments or details about the proposed plant species. Condition to be imposed requiring that the applicant submit a separate detailed landscaping plan that takes into account Clause 5.13.3 of the Scheme to be approved and implemented to the satisfaction of the local government.

Minimum Lot area No minimum lot area. To be determined by the local government

28,144m² Complies.

5.8 Outdoor storage areas

Any open storage area to be screened from public view

Criteria met. Suitable condition to be imposed requiring open storage areas to be screened from view.

5.9 Building Facades buildings designed and constructed so as to present a facade of brick, plate glass or other material

The lot has three frontages along public road reserves (Beamish Ave, Wellington Street and Gairdner Street). The facades of the building that face Wellington & Gairdner Streets are proposed to present facades of predominantly plate glass and brick. The façade

It is considered that the painted concrete façade of the building facing Beamish Avenue is acceptable as a wall cladding material.


P a g e 3 | 8


facing Beamish Avenue has no windows or plate glass and is proposed to be constructed of entirely painted concrete panels.

5.10 Building Height no site to be developed or building constructed to contain more than two storeys or exceed 9m

The majority of the building has a wall height of 6.5m-9m which is consistent with the Scheme requirements and existing built form within the Northam town centre. The proposal has a maximum height of 11.9m when measured from the finished ground level to the top of the louvered ventilation system located to the rear of the Coles tenancy and does not comply with this provision. The relocated telecommunications tower is proposed to have a height of 40m above natural ground level and also does not comply with this provision.

Clause 5.10.2 specifies that the local government may vary the requirements of clause 5.10.1 if it is satisfied that the development can comply with the relevant development standards and the following criteria:

will not restrict light, sunshine and natural ventilation enjoyed by surrounding properties;

will not intrude upon the privacy enjoyed by surrounding properties by virtue of overview;

will not diminish views or outlook available from surrounding properties; and

is sympathetic with the scale, townscape and character of the surrounding built environment.

The proposed buildings are sufficiently setback from lot boundaries which minimises any impact upon the light and natural ventilation to the adjoining lots. There are no major openings located along the rear walls of the building that overlook the adjoining residential zoned


P a g e 4 | 8


properties. The proposed height variation is applicable to a small portion of the building located at the rear of the site. The majority of the buildings height is compliant with clause 5.10.1 of LPS6.

5.11 Retaining Walls No retaining wall or the filling of property to alter contours of natural surface by more than 0.5 metres without planning approval

Some earthworks are required to level the site. The site plan submitted of the site as it exists now indicates that there is a 4.47m fall between the eastern and western corners of the site. The site plan of the proposed development indicates that up to 2m of cut will occur, with up to 1m of fill proposed in some areas.

The extent of the proposed earthworks are considered to be necessary and relatively minor in nature and will not affect any adjoining land properties.

5.12 Landscaping Requirement for landscaping plans The applicant has not provided sufficient detail as to the amount of landscaping proposed, verge treatments or details about the proposed plant species.

Condition to be imposed requiring that the applicant submit a separate detailed landscaping plan that takes into account Clause 5.13.3 of the Scheme to be approved and implemented to the satisfaction of the local government.

Ongoing maintenance of landscaping

Condition to be imposed requiring ongoing maintenance of landscaping.

5.13.1 Car Parking Suitable number of car parking spaces to be provided on site and in accordance with the car parking requirements for particular developments and land uses as

Required – 251 (@1 / 20 m² NLA Provided – 321

Complies. Suitable conditions to be imposed requiring ongoing maintenance of car parking areas.


P a g e 5 | 8


listed in ‘Table 3: Car Parking Guidelines’

5.13.2 dimensions of parking spaces as per the Australian Standards

Complies.

5.13.3 open car parking facilities with 20 or more parking spaces, a minimum area equivalent to one parking space to be provided in suitable locations for every 20 parking spaces for garden and planting of native plants and trees to provide visual relief

Not shown on plan. To be considered as part of approval of Landscaping Plan. Suitable condition included in the officer’s recommendation.

5.13.8 Local government to have regard to location and design of the required car parking spaces, natural planting, pedestrian spaces, any other matter deemed relevant

Deemed to comply. A number of car parking bays are orientated to face residential dwellings on the opposite sides of Beamish Avenue and Gairdner Streets. It is considered that the headlights of vehicles manoeuvring into these bays at night time may impact upon the residential dwellings opposite. It is recommended that as a condition of approval of the landscaping plan that landscaping be planted between these car


P a g e 6 | 8


parking bays and the lot boundary to assist in the screening of vehicle headlights. Condition to be imposed requiring additional shopping trolley bays.

5.13.9 In determining matters under 5.13.8, local government may consider matters including – proportion of car spaces to be roofed / covered; means of access to each car space and the adequacy of any vehicular manoeuvring area; location of car spaces on the site and their effect on the amenity of adjoining development, including potential effect if spaces later to be roofed or covered; extent to which car spaces are located within required building

112 parking bays proposed to be covered (approx. 35% of total car parking bays).

Deemed to comply. Upon the request of the Shire, the applicant has included two designated taxi bays on the site plan. Considering that elderly people are among the more frequent taxi passengers, the taxi bays should be located closer to the store entrances and alongside a pedestrian area where there is room for people to wait and load groceries into vehicles. It is therefore recommend that as a condition of approval, the two taxi bays are relocated to a suitable location to the satisfaction of the local government.


P a g e 7 | 8


setback areas; locations of proposed public footpaths, vehicular crossings, or private footpaths within the lot, and the effect on both pedestrians and vehicular traffic movement and safety;

5.14 Traffic Entrances Local government may require separate entrances and exits; and may require that entrances and exits be placed in positions nominated by it, if it necessary to avoid / reduce traffic hazards

Wellington Street One (1) nine metre wide centrally located customer access point. One (1) 7.65 metre wide shared (fuel vehicle/ customer) access point in close proximity to the Wellington Street and Gairdner Street intersection. Gairdner Street One (1) six metre wide shared (fuel vehicle/customer) access point approximately 30 metres from the Wellington Street and Gairdner Street intersection. One (1) six metre wide customer access point in close proximity to the Wellington Street and Gairdner Street intersection. One (1) 14 metre wide shared (service vehicle/customer) access

Complies. All vehicle access points have each been designed appropriately to accommodate the turning movement of fuel, service and customer vehicles accessing the proposed development.


P a g e 8 | 8


point towards the southern corner of the subject site. Beamish Avenue One (1) 15.5 metre wide shared (service vehicle/customer) access point towards the northern corner of the subject site.

5.15 Visual truncations – corner lots and vehicle access ways

no building, wall, fence or other visual obstruction greater than 0.75m in height, to be constructed or placed within a 3 metre by 3 metre truncation of a street corner or within a 1.5 metre by 1.5 metre truncation of a vehicular access way

Complies.

5.16 Access for loading & unloading vehicles

No land used or buildings developed unless provision is made for purpose of loading or unloading goods or materials; and servicing vehicles to enter street in a forward direction

Loading bays have been provided to the rear of the buildings and have been designed to ensure that service vehicles are able to enter the street in a forward direction.

The loading bays are considered compliant.

Date post:	16-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	trinhxuyen
View:	222 times
Download:	1 times

Shire of Northam Local Planning Scheme No. 6 …planning.wa.gov.au/daps/data/regional daps/mid-west...

Documents