THE Metro Central Joint Development Panel (JDAP) has refused an amended proposal for 9 and 11 King William Street, in light of concerns over the height and loss of heritage that includes decreasing the height from seven to six-storeys.
At this morning’s meeting, JDAP members voted 5-0 to reject Yolk Property Group’s amended Heir apartments proposal that included a request for a two-year extension on the current approval citing a “slow market”.
The proposal included 27 apartments and change of use for two ground floor tenancies from restaurants to retail, increased street setback on the second and third floors (nil-3.2m to 5m) and boundary setbacks on the second to fourth floors reduced from 3.2m to 3m.
Get in front of tomorrow's news for FREE
Journalism for the curious Australian across politics, business, culture and opinion.
READ NOWJDAP’s refusal means the approved plan for a seven-storey development with 27 apartments plus restaurant and shop space on the ground floor, remains until the approval expires in February 12, 2018.
City of Bayswater approved the demolition of 9 King William Street and the facade of number 11 being retained in February 2015.
Bayswater residents presented their concerns over the development’s non-compliance with the City’s town planning scheme’s design requirements for the area, building materials and lack of landscape at the meeting.
Bayswater Planning officer Steven De Piazzi said the level of articulation provided to the ground and first floor, lack of distinction between the retained heritage facade, new building fabric and a non-compliant, 13m single-lane access ramp to the carpark were reasons for the refusal.
Mr De Piazzi said while the applicants tried to address the City’s concerns, they did not satisfy the proposed Bayswater Town Structure Plan’s development potential of a maximum four storeys, with potential for five based on excellent design, and 20m in height.
Yolk Property Group director Pete Adams told the Eastern Reporter after the meeting that the group had not decided if it would appeal JDAP’s decision to the State Administrative Tribunal, move forward with the original approval or reapply for an approval extension.
“I think there was some implication that we did not get along well; we get along really well and we have really good communication,” he said.
“We will be able to resolve it with the City and just get on with the existing approval.”
Community group Bayswater Deserves Better spokesman Keith Clements said the amended design was not to “human scale” and not sympathetic to the heritage in the Bayswater town centre.
“Many accept that Bayswater town centre, with its proximity to the train station, has plans for medium density development (but) this is not contributing to the quality lifestyle that is being advertised,” he said.
“It is still an imposing structure at 20m in under 1000 sq m, giving it an Residential-code rating of 270, which is only seen within the Perth CBD.”
Mr Clements said the group would continue its opposition against the development.
JDAP presiding member Charles Johnson said the development still had a long way to go because issues with the ramp and faade needed to be addressed.
Panel member Michael Hardy said the development was the first of its kind in the area so it needed to reflect the City’s “building envelope”.
MORE: VIDEO: Drone footage of whale and calf off Perth’s coast
MORE: Curtin University law students offer services to small businesses pro bono
MORE: New signs designed to create smooth sailing for surfers