All recent comments on applications from City of Stirling, WA

I received an email response from the City of Stirling regarding my comments and objection made 6 days ago. I have responded directly to the email but fell its prudent to make my thoughts public. Below is my response:

Thank you for your response to my objection of the proposed medical centre application. I understand the criteria on which the council makes its determination.

The fact that the applicant is proposing 5 new car parking bays does not address my concerns about the limited parking available, both in front of the shops and street parking. The 5 proposed bays at the rear of the stores will only cover the medical personal who will need parking to attend their place of business.

The nature of a medical practice will result in patients arriving early for their appointment whilst the doctors are seeing other patients. This has a multiplier affect requiring many more bays to service the area. For example, if there are 5 doctors practicing that would result in say 10 bays being occupied by patients plus the further 5 bays provided by the applicant for staff.

Also, can you please advise if a pathology practice is being proposed. If so this would add further chaos to the parking as people often go for blood tests etc early morning and as such have to wait around.

You have also raised the matter of advertising of the application. I must say that I find it unusual that there is not a public notice in the area regarding the application. I only found out by accident that there is an application lodged and comments were being sought. I would suspect that the council will receive a far greater number of comments if a public notice was posted at the 4A Bayley St site.

I trust that the council will seriously consider the objections and disallowed the current application.

As a regular patron of the shops in this strip I totally oppose this development. The community feel of the village will be lost. As a consequence we have already lost the deli and I believe the Newsagency will close down as well in the new year. As a resident of the area I believe there is no need for yet another medical centre as there is a large one about 5 minutes away and with another one opening in the Dianella Plaza SC at the end of this year. A bad idea

As a home owner opposite these shops I don't believe there is adequate parking for a medical center. Currently as the shops are now we frequently have people parking in front of our house and sometimes blocking the driveway. This doesn't include the cars from the employees of the shops that fill the street daily.

A medical center seems excessive to the needs of the community.

As a resident of the area and frequent visitor to this address, it is already hard enough finding parking with three small children to visit the complex without the addition of a medical centre and the foot and road traffic that comes with this.

The area is already saturated with medical centres and the addition of such a commercial enterprise would damage the calm, family friendly and slow paced community feel of the complex.

I work at one of the local businesses and although I don’t live in the neighborhood I am there daily, considering this I want to share my objections to the proposed plans.

I have daily insight to how the locals feel about the proposed plans. Current feedback from the locals is querying where are they going to park if the medical center is approved and that it will impact them stopping if it proves to be too difficult. Also the neighbours are concerned with the overflow of traffic and parking in the street.

It would be such a shame to have the medical centre approved and take away the local services and community feel. Especially when there are medical centres already located close by in more appropriate settings with adequate parking.

I am a long term resident who frequents the complex on a daily basis.
The carpark is tight and barely copes with very short term visiting clientele currently.
Approving this would do nothing but turn Bayley Street into a carpark.
It is endearing for our community to still enjoy a relationship with its local newsagent.
Another medical centre is NOT required in our area.

The development of a new medical complex in this small shopping precinct with currently barely adequate parking spaces to service the existing businesses will no doubt result in parking chaos within the the shopping centre precinct. Any overflow will likely have a detrimental impact on the surrounding residential streets that will detract from the relatively peaceful ambience that occupants of the local residences currently enjoy.

I fully concur with the previous comments made. The current mix of shops is a rare find in our area. In particular the coffee shop has totally rejuvenated the strip and added vibrancy and customers to the neighbouring traders. Parking is currently a significant issue with the current mix of retailers and service providers. A medical centre with many doctors and possibly allied professionals, will only add to the often full to capacity parking of both the street and front shop parking available.
In my opinion it will also change the unique neighbourhood vibe that has developed as a meeting place for locals since Aposto coffee shop opened.
I am totally opposed to the medical centre application for the above reasons stated.

I’m a long term resident of Dianella. I really oppose to this - this definitely does not have my vote. Bad move especially since there is a full medical centre not even 5 minutes away.

I have lived in this area for 55 years. There are already plenty of medical centres in close proximity. We have such a great community in our local area. I feel this would invite more of the riff raff that have been frequenting the area more recently. I would be really annoyed if this goes ahead. Please reconsider!

There is already limited parking at this complex with the businesses that are there. What draws customers to the cafe, newsagency, pharmacy, convenience store and bottle shop is the ability to quickly pop in and out. The complex is a fantastic, friendly neighbourhood complex that services a lot of foot traffic and turns around many regular customers due to its accessibility for all. A larger medical centre will only take up all the bays for longer periods of times which will significantly impact business and the community (myself) which frequent it on a daily, often multiple times a day, basis. There is a large medical centre only a short distance down the road which I have never struggled for available appointments which begs the question of the necessity of this proposal.
Further to this, the impact of more traffic on the street and the area will impact on the large number of young families which access the area with children in prams, on scooters, bikes etc as the limited space will make the area unsafe

I just wanted to point out that this house a design by the renowned Perth architect Iwan Iwanoff and perhaps a consideration in terms of Heritage significance should be undertaken.

In Loughton Way there is an immense amount of on-road parking which contributes to driving along the street dangerous, also as it is used as a ‘rat run’ there is a considerable amount of speeding and hoon driving.
This property is on the bend of the road, 4-6 dwellings will have considerable amount of vehicles..has this application allowed for adequate OFF-ROAD parking space …(eg 2-3 adult residents with vehicles in each dwelling ..4 dwellings = 8-12 vehicles..6 dwellings = 12-18 vehicles) ….and ensuring nearby property owners are not impacted by an overflow of vehicles from No 28..using their private property and verge areas to park.
Surely six dwellings on that property would not be viable..4 yes, 5??, 6 definitely too much..

As the next door neighbours at 228 Royal Street, could we please view a copy of the plans before approval. Thank you, Jacquie Jones and Matt Dyer.

I object to a digital billboard being situated in our residential area which has the very real potential to be visually unsightly and aesthetically unpleasant for everyone else in the area. Clearly the intention for this is commercial purposes but why this cannot be discreet, tasteful printed signage which would more considerate for others and for the overall look of the area. We should be seeking to maintain or improve standards in this residential area, not lowering them.

Totally ridiculous and unworkable to have such height and density when Brighton Road has a needed median strip and traffic is congested most of the day heading West along Brighton Road between the roundabout and the WC Highway lights..
There is a reason for planning restrictions, stick to them ease.

Totally ridiculous and unworkable to have such height and density when Brighton Road has a needed median strip and traffic is congested most of the day heading West along Brighton Road between the roundabout and the WC Highway lights..
There is a reason for planning restrictions, stick to them ease.

I cannot understand why a developer and Development WA would even consider a development of an 18 storey building on this site. Single lane residential street that is already completely congested with traffic with no parking in the area. Completely ridiculous and once again the developer has ignored the Scarborough Masterplan!!

Hi,
I am concerned to know how many properties are permitted to be built on the land once 49 Lancaster Street has been demolished. Also will permission be granted for single or double storey development?

We are the residents living at Hugo Street and would like to express our concern about the development plan at 21 Hugo st, Stirling. According to the plan, it proposed to build a three-storey unit at the above site. The Stirling neighbourhood has been surrounded in nice single and double storey properties and a three storey unit has a negative impact on the general appearance. Despite this, a three-storey unit will be overlooking all houses around it- we will lose our privacy and will potentially be blocking the view of houses in Hugo street. On the other hand, parking has always been an issue around the neighbourhood- we and our neighbours often find that there aren't enough parking slots along the street. The three storey unit will bring another 12 families to the neighbourhood and yet the developer only provided 12 parking slots in total. There are only 6 available 2P parking slots along Hugo street and that is definitely not enough to accommodate the number of the occupants in the unit.
I hope the council will carefully reconsider approving this developmental plan before it solves the problem above as it will bring significant negative impact to our peaceful neighbourhood.

We live in Civic Place, just around the corner from Hugo Street and find it hard to believe in the necessity to build such a big block of units in such a place as 19 Hugo Street. Three stories comprising of twelve units is excessive and totally out of sync with the rest of the street. One parking space per unit for two and three bedroom apartments is totally inadequate along with three visitors parking bays, as this will cause a major change to local traffic and parking available in Hugo Street and surrounds. It is already quite busy and at time dangerous attempting to leave our house by car, as there is a big increase in traffic from the Osborne Park Hospital, and a lot of cyclists and scooter riders let alone having to deal more than likely with street parking if this building goes ahead. It is irresponsible of City of Stirling to allow this planning application to proceed. A building of this height will also over look existing properties and encroach on people's privacy so perhaps developer should comply with units already built in the area and have three single story or double story homes allowed. City of Stirling should be concerned for local residents and disallow this application.

With regards this proposal, we wish to object to the erection of a twelve multiple dwellings on this site. Hugo street already has a bus route going up and down plus several waste and medical waste and delivery trucks using this street for both Osborne Park Hospital and also Fresenius Kidney care clinic; there is already a massive parking problem in the area without adding another 12 households who could potentially have 24 or more cars between them, plus visitors cars. There is not enough parking for the current situation and its very badly managed. Currently our visitors cannot ever find parking, how much worse will it be when we have dense dwelling added to the current problem? This is a quiet street and not conducive to high rise apartments. It will infringe on the peace and tranquility of the surrounding neighbors and be unsightly, plus add a huge headache with regards parking. A resounding no from us!

Myself and my partner live on this street and are strongly opposed to the developmental proposal.
Currently the entire area is a combination of only single and double storey homes and this is the main reason why we decided to move into this lovely area nearly a decade ago.
Hugo street is already busier than surrounding streets, as the public use this as a shortcut to access the freeways. The addition of a huge concrete apartment block on the street will only cause further detrimental effects of choking up the local road, increasing traffic noise and pollution to our homes.
Currently there are a huge number of people using the quiet streets to walk daily for exercise and maintaining good mental health. The increase high density apartments will only serve to destroy the peace and tranquillity of our residential area.
With a 12 unit complex with only 15 parking bays (12allocated +3 visitors), this will result in the the parking situation on Hugo Street to be a nightmare. The number of parking bays needs to double at a minimum. However, even that won't be anywhere near enough to address the multiple issues mentioned above.
To allow such a drastic change to this area will be poor planning and greed on behalf of the council.

Our household strongly objects to the construction of three-story complex building as stated in DA22/0554.

Hugo Street currently comprises of single story (west side) and double story (east side) houses. The apartment does not fit in with the current street-scape, and will tower over adjacent single-story properties on the west side, and block sunlight and the sea-breeze to the double-story properties on the east side. Approving this building will also set a bad precedent, where the west side of Hugo Street is likely to be completely replaced with giant ugly apartment buildings put up by greedy developers.

The addition of 12 apartments will drastically increase traffic in the area, as well as result in increased parking problems for residents. This is an on-going problem, which the council has not addressed.

The addition of high-density housing in the area will also lead to an increase in crime and anti-social behavior, in what is a quiet and peaceful community.

I ask that the plan is not approved in its current form, and that local residents are consulted before this building is to go ahead in some form.

As a resident of Hugo Street, it is not the apartment building itself that I have issue. It is, however, my concern of what appears to be the extreme lack of parking available to the future residents of the building. There is already minimal street parking and with a thoroughfare to the local council offices and Osborne Park Hospital traffic has become ever increasing over the last few years impacting on street parked cars, along with the bus route. With 12 apartments and on average most homes have a minium of 2 cars, simple maths would prevail, that a miniumum of 24 bays, plus extra visitor bays would be required. Please explain to me how this proposal assumes that a total of 15 car bays is anywhere near sufficient, efficient or appropriate. Again it appears that money has of course come before safety, practicality and common sense. I ask this plan is not approved in its current form and extra bays are strongly considered if this apartment is to go ahead.