AN application to build 13 apartments across two residential lots in Duncraig has been refused.
The $2.73 million, three-storey project proposed a basement carpark, two floors of one and two-bedroom units and a roof terrace for communal open space across 9 and 11 Davallia Road.
At last week’s Metro North-West Joint Development Assessment Panel meeting residents raised concerns with the reduced setbacks, overshadowing, privacy, increased noise from the air-conditioners and potential rooftop parties, construction works, landscaping, the exit ramp and the fire escape.
Denis Charron, who lives directly behind the proposed site, raised concerns of visual privacy saying one unit would look into his yard and living space and have a “clear view” into his family room and kitchen.
He said while the development proposed to have a permeable screen and a tree to prevent overlooking, the screen still had holes to see through, was not taller than “the average man” and the tree would not create a screen until it had grown tall enough.
Kevin McKay, who lives next to the site, said the development would create a shadow on the “entire northern side” of his home “extending from the from to the rear” and he would not get any winter sun.
Suzanne Thompson also said the proposal fell “well short of creating infill to respect the surrounding area”.
Joondalup planning services manager Chris Leigh agreed saying they believed it also did not meet “the future intended character of the area” but that the City’s engineers did not have concerns with the proposed entry and exit ramp.
Ms Thompson said the 230 objections to the proposal showed there was strong support for the City’s recommendation to refuse the application.
However, CF Town Planning and Development director Carlo Famiano said the recommendation to refuse was disappointing and he hoped the panel would vote to defer its consideration to allow the City to consider it using the DesignWA guidelines and the applicant to make changes.
He said the proposal was designed using DesignWA and they did not have enough time to address all the concerns after they saw the City’s recommendation, though they did make changes to the height and setbacks.
“DesignWA is the future framework so let’s start working towards that,” he said.
However, Mr Leigh said the advice they had received was that DesignWA did not come into effect until May 24 and while it should be given some consideration, decisions needed to be based on the R Codes and planning frameworks currently in place.
“The appropriate level of regard has been applied,” he said.
Mr Famiano said the development was proposed opposite Carine Glades Shopping Centre and though the centre is only two storeys, it looks like three so the three-storey proposal was “not out of character”.
Harden Jones Architects principal Giles Harden Jones said they had “amended the roof structure” and the development would be “well within the DesignWA height”.
He said they had also amended a unit’s bedroom to meet the setback and reworked the entry, re-orientated some balconies, and they would work with the City on a waste management plan once they had more information from City officers.
“This is a good local centre to encourage development,” he said.
“Smaller developments need to be encouraged.
“This has no more bulk and scale than a single house.
“This is a changing area – the first tall building will always look out of place.”
Mr Leigh said though the City had not had a chance to assess the applicant’s revised plans in detail, it still had concerns with plot ratio, bulk and scale.
In moving to refuse the application, Joondalup councillor Christine Hamilton-Prime said she concerns of the development’s “interaction with Davallia Road”.
“It is a small and narrow main road and we need to look further at how it will work with the shopping centre entrance,” she said.
“There are some fundamental problems and it needs to be taken back to the drawing board.”
Panel acting deputy presiding member Chris Antill said the applicant had made “no attempt to provide a design compatible with the context”.
“It proposes a flat roof and there are none in the area except the shopping centre,” he said.
Mr Antill also raised concerns with the size, height, setbacks and visitor parking being behind roller doors.
“It is a good development but not for this site where it is completely out of context,” he said.
While panel acting presiding member Sheryl Chaffer said she would prefer to defer the application, Mr Antill said it was a “significant departure” and it should not be.
Ms Chaffer said she had “no problems with the flat roof” given its proximity to the shopping centre.
“Generally the form is of good quality,” she said.
The panel voted 4-1 to refuse, with Ms Chaffer reminding residents the applicant would have the right to appeal the decision to the State Administrative Tribunal.