CONFLICT between current and future plans for Osborne Park is causing problems for developers.
The City of Stirling recommended the Metro North-West Development Assessment Panel refuse an application to build a five-storey office complex on Edward Streetat its meeting last week.
Owner and EMCO Building director John Ripp wants to create the $6.5 million development next to the company’s existing site.
Get in front of tomorrow's news for FREE
Journalism for the curious Australian across politics, business, culture and opinion.
READ NOWA report by the City said it did not fit with the current industrial zoning and vision for the Herdsman Glendalough area, which aims to provide a mix of residential, office and shopping areas surrounding Glendalough station.
The area was recently rezoned urban under State planning guidelines and is in the process of being changed locally to ‘development’.
Planning Solutions associate Trent Will spoke on behalf of the owner and said they believed the development fitted well between the current and future “contradictory objectives”.
“We think it’s a good transitional land use,” he said.
Mr Will believed the City “picked from both sides” in its reasons for refusal and insisted it was a high quality design that would bring jobs to the area and be a catalyst for development.
City approvals manager Greg Bowering suggested the applicant was also “picking and choosing” aspects of future and current planning uses.
He said the proposal did not meet provisions for a bonus height requirement above two storeys because the public open space offered was covered, had insufficient landscaping and was far inside the building.
There was also a parking bay shortfall and variations to setback and verge tree requirements.
The panel voted to defer the application for 50 days to allow the applicant to consult with the City and consider changes to parking, the public open space, building setbacks and boundary wall treatment.
In June, the panel rejected plans for redevelopment of a caryard in Osborne Park because it was inconsistent with future plans for the area and would prejudice the site’s development as a district centre.