SkyscraperCity Forum banner

#SP | Approved | Lumiere [101m | Resi ]

145K views 644 replies 89 participants last post by  hayds 
#1 · (Edited)
Lots 7-20 (No. 74) Mill Point Road, South Perth Proposed Mixed Development within a 29 Storey, plus Basements​

DETAILS

• The demolition of existing two-storey grouped dwellings on the subject site;
• The construction of a 29 storey building (97.0 metres in height) plus 2 basement levels;
• Characterised by a 4 level, 12.8m, zero lot podium beneath a setback mixed commercial and residential tower.
• The subject site has a 33.1 metre frontage to Mill Point Road and a lot size of 1,427m2;
• 85 multiple dwellings with 5 types of unit varying from 1 to 4 bedroom dwellings (contained within levels 8 – 29);
• 9,144m2 residential plot ratio area (6.4 residential plot ratio)
• 18 non-residential tenancies of varying size contained within the ground floor (café) and levels 4 through 7 (office);
• 2,136m2 non-residential plot ratio area (1.5 non-residential plot ratio);
• car parking bays provided as follows:
• 50 non-residential bays (8 bays to be allocated for reciprocal residential visitor bays);
• 5 non-residential visitor bays;
• 182 residential bays (includes 66 long bays and 2 tandem bays) – provided in excess of requirements;
• 6 residential visitor bays (plus 8 as described above);
• 41 residential bicycle bays and 11 non-residential bicycle bays (associated end-of-trip facilities provided);
• 6 scooter bays – provided in addition of requirements
• Active street frontage including provision for a ‘Café/Restaurant’ use at the ground floor Mill Point frontage;
• Public art contribution and proposal;
• Sustainable building design; and
• Landscaping proposal and plans.

ARCHITECT: Hillam Architects
PLANNER: Hillam
DEVELOPER: Edge Visionary Living
COST: $60
DAP: http://daps.planning.wa.gov.au/down...FNvdXRoIFBlcnRoIC0gQ2l0eSBvZiBCZWxtb250LnBkZg

RENDERS


http://s1066.photobucket.com/user/DanSheikh1981/media/1_zpsob4e5tvc.png.html


http://s1066.photobucket.com/user/DanSheikh1981/media/3_zpsfjv5vmps.png.html


http://s1066.photobucket.com/user/DanSheikh1981/media/5_zpsnykigyrl.png.html


http://i1066.photobucket.com/albums/u412/DanSheikh1981/2_zpsf7rih1ut.png
 
See less See more
4
#196 ·
Only if the JDAP refuse the application - which it won't necessarily, I reckon there's probably a 50% chance they'll approve it.

Under the current Local Planning Scheme it would definitely be approved (the guidance statement/traffic assessment reasons are just bullsh*t) - it all depends on whether they take into account the proposed Amendment 46. On one hand a 142m development would be completely out of scale with the amendment - but on the other hand there's always a chance the Minister of Planning won't approve the amendment.

Not really sure what will happen
 
#198 ·
Unfortunately, draft policies and amendments that are yet to be adopted but which have been substantially progressed are often given due regard on the basis that they are a 'seriously entertained proposal'.

The general benchmark for amendments considered to be seriously entertained is having formal Local Government or WAPC support. The consultation period for the Amendment has recently finalised and I believe South Perth will be adopting Amendment 46 by formal resolution at Tuesday's OCM.

Council meets on the evening of the 26th. The DAP convenes on the morning of the 28th. To summarise their deputation argument:


 
#203 ·
Shanghai metro population: 34,000,000
South Perth: 11,990
 
#210 ·
Nope, whole precinct.

The proposal was to delete a portion of the peninsula (the part with Lumiere) entirely from the special design area, while putting in place additional controls on developments in the remainder of the area (including much stricter performance criteria for height limits).

Maybe the minister will tell them where they can stick it, but I'm not hopeful.
 
#211 ·
South Perth is a very safe liberal seat so rejecting the South Perth amendment changes is unlikely to lead to a meaningful loss of votes at the next election (meaning the minister should't have to worry about concequences at the ballot box for the Liberals if they tell the South Perth council to go jump).
 
#212 ·
RIP South Perth.

http://www.southperth.wa.gov.au/New...ecinct-Town-Planning-Scheme-Amendment-No.-46/

At the City of South Perth Council meeting held on Tuesday 26 April, the Council recommended to the Minister for Planning that Town Planning Scheme Amendment No. 46 ‘South Perth Station Precinct’ be adopted with modifications.

This followed a period of extensive community engagement and consideration of the public submissions, deputations and City Officer’s Report by the Council.

Mayor Sue Doherty said that the Council has endorsed recommendations that will achieve the vision for the precinct, while protecting the amenity for the local residents.

“The precinct is characterised by leafy, pedestrian-friendly streets, a sense of heritage and community focus. In recent times, the City has received a significant number of development applications for very tall buildings in the precinct. The scale of development and the rapid rate of change has exceeded the expectations of the City, the Council and our community.”

“The lesson is that change can be dramatic and sudden, and if we are not ahead of the game in anticipating what can happen we can be overwhelmed by its impact.”

“It is now appropriate to pause and take stock. To take time to understand the cumulative impact of this increased development and ensure the City’s planning controls are in place to deliver on our long-term strategic vision for a vibrant, liveable city, a business location with employment and public transport options.”

“The Council is committed to responsibly managing the transition and balancing the needs of all parties including local residents, ratepayers, developers, and acting for the good of the greater community as we move forward.”

“Amendment No. 46 is about ensuring that further developments enhance the area, and make a positive contribution to this unique and iconic part of Perth. Development can and will continue.”

“There is still significant development potential for the area and the City is well on its way to achieving our infill housing targets. With the applications already approved in the precinct, along with development in other activity centres, we are on track to reach these targets.”

“We will now be seeking to meet with the Minister for Planning as a matter of urgency to convey and clarify the Council’s decision. The Minister will have the final say on the approval of Amendment No. 46.”

Amendment No. 46 provides an interim and improved set of provisions to guide development control in the South Perth Station Precinct. The Council has determined to engage consultants to conduct appropriate investigations to provide a firm foundation underpinning the next scheme amendment. Further community engagement will be undertaken on any proposed modifications.

The Council’s final recommendations include:

Reduction in the extent of the ‘Special Design Area’ by deleting properties on Mill Point Road north of Judd Street and Ferry Street with the exception of 89 Mill Point Road and 20 Stone Street.
Introduction of a 4 metre street setback for the northerly portion of Mill Point Road.
Introduction of a 2 metre street setback for Bowman, Charles and Hardy Streets, except those lots in the ‘Special Design Area’.
Introduction of absolute height limits in the ‘Special Design Area’. The Council may approve heights above the ‘basic height limits’ of 25 metres and 41 metres if performance criteria are met. Absolute height limits of 55 metres (approximately 18 storeys) and 80 metres (approximately 26 storeys) respectively will apply, removing the ability to approve unlimited heights.
Where the Council is satisfied that a podium with a zero street setback would not adversely affect the amenity of an adjoining property, or there is a prospect of imminent redevelopment of the adjoining site, between 50% and 60% of the frontage of the site is required to have a zero setback. However, where a zero setback would adversely affect an adjoining property, the Council will require a greater street setback.
Where there is no prospect of imminent redevelopment on an adjoining site, and a zero setback from a side or rear boundary would adversely affect the amenity of the adjoining property, the Council will specify greater side or rear setbacks for portions of the building. Setbacks will be a minimum of 2 metres when the podium height is less than 9 metres and a minimum of 3 metres when the podium height is greater than 9 metres.
All comprehensive new development will be required to have a non-residential component with a minimum plot ratio of 1.0. For sites in the ‘Special Design Area’ where the total plot ratio of a Mixed Development is more than 3.0, the plot ratio of the non-residential component must be not less than 1.5.
In the case of an ‘under-sized’ lot which cannot be amalgamated with another lot, for the site to be eligible for any building height variation, the allowable shortfall in lot area and frontage to be not more than 10%.
 
#217 ·
"The scale of development and the rapid rate of change has exceeded the expectations of the City, the Council and our community.”

“The lesson is that change can be dramatic and sudden, and if we are not ahead of the game in anticipating what can happen we can be overwhelmed by its impact.”
 
Top