Mayor Bob Kirk says the approval of a second storey addition to a CBD building is unlikely to create a precedent where parking requirements are concerned.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Arguing the case at the most recent council meeting, the Mayor also flagged the need for a CBD car parking strategy, possibly including a multi-storey carpark.
The issue arose after former Ray White Real Estate principal Brian Walkom addressed councillors in open forum. He argued that his plans for a 62 square metre rear addition to his building at 42 Clifford Street should be approved.
Planners had recommended refusal based on what they said were a shortfall of two car parking spaces required for the addition under the 2009 Development Control Plan (DCP). They stated that the applicant had not supplied sufficient information to justify a variation from the DCP and that the development was not in the public interest.
But Mr Walkom said the two offices and boardroom were not adding to the building footprint and the council had authority to apply parking requirement flexibility under the NSW Environmental, Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to the DCP. This included cases where there was no detrimental impact to existing and future residents and the degree of compliance with other planning requirements.
He told councillors the addition was not for an extra tenancy. Mr Walkom disputed it was adding to the activity and that the extra spaces were needed.
He also pointed out that that the project was approved in 2006 but did not proceed. It was modified in 2007 to remove the second storey addition but in any case, two extra car parking spots had since been created.
“The DCP requirements for parking in 2006 are identical to the present DCP (2009) so it is unreasonable to argue non-compliance,” Mr Walkom said.
Under the latter plan, developers are required to provide one car space for every 40sqm created. Otherwise they can enter into a voluntary planning agreement with the council, paying $17,000 for each deficient parking spot. In Mr Walkom’s case, this would have been $34,000. He described this was a hard line approach that was unviable and declined to participate in such an arrangement.
“If you think that retail or small business is going so well it can afford this, you’d be wrong. Just take a look at the number of empty shops in the main street,” he said.
Cr Kirk won unanimous support from his colleagues to conditionally approve the plan, minus the parking requirements.
He said the project was exactly the same as that proposed in 2006 and if approved then, it would carry the same parking provisions as now. Moreover, there had been no objections.
“I don’t think it’s creating a precedent...Other DAs may come to us but they will have to win that debate on their merits. This had previous approval and that’s the difference,” he said.
But he and several councillors, including Deputy Mayor Peter Walker said the case highlighted an issue for small business owners on narrow blocks who wanted to extend.
“We want to encourage growth by building on top of CBD (structures) but we’ll never do it by putting in things like that,” Cr Walker said.
Cr Kirk said a longer term view could be needed.
“We know parking will continue to be a discussion point in the community and we can’t make any more spaces appear in Auburn Street or the CBD,” he said.
“If you were building from the ground up you could accommodate spaces underground but where there is a heritage area and old buildings it’s pretty hard to retrospectively find car parking on little narrow blocks.
“We need to develop a strategy for the future needs of car parking. That might be a multi-storey car park on Ellesmere Street but we need a plan to fund that.”
Under questioning from Cr Andrew Banfield, general manager Warwick Bennett told the meeting the money collected under voluntary planning agreements was placed into a reserve account for car parking needs. Cr Kirk speculated that contributions like this could help fund a multi-storey complex.
The council previously explored such infrastructure in Ellesmere Street but later abandoned it. A working party also undertook a parking needs study for Goulburn.
Meantime, council planners are currently reviewing the 2009 DCP. Councillors and the community will have input when a draft is completed.
While you're with us…
Did you know The Goulburn Post is now offering breaking news alerts and a weekly email newsletter? Keep up-to-date with all the local news: sign up here.