2016-08-09 Planning & Environment Committee Agenda

PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                     9 AUGUST 2016


Applicant’s Request
Conditions 1, 10 and 36 of the development approval require the construction of a multi-deck
carpark and the provision of 395 carparks. The applicant considers the provision of 395 carparks
including a multi-deck carpark is not an appropriate town planning and traffic engineering response.
They consider an appropriate provision is 355 carparks (315 onsite bays plus the 40 carparks
associated with the childcare facility) and thus there is no need to construct the multi-storey
carpark.
The applicant indicates that the cost of constructing the multi-storey carpark is estimated to exceed
$3,000,000. The applicant considers this cost to be an unreasonable imposition on the
development, notwithstanding the applicant with previous development approvals proposed its
construction.
Assessment of Request
Beard Traffic Engineering was engaged by officers during the assessment of the application to
comment on the requested changes to the use areas and associated carparking demand. At the
time of the assessment of the application Council’s consultant advised that the current
development uses could be reasonably assessed as requiring the following car parking:




Notably for the original development approval, car parking for the adult education was required to
provide car parking at the rate of 1 space per 20m2 (1:20) compared with subsequent stages
wherein the applicant agreed that a higher rate of 1 space per 10m 2 (1:10) was needed. This is
the reason for the different rates for the education use in the table above.
At the time of the assessment, the applicant’s proposal of 315 on-site parking spaces (not including
the 40 spaces for the childcare) was considered substantially below the normal design standard,
whereby the design peak parking demand is only exceeded by the actual parking demand for 10
to 20 hours per year. Beard Traffic Engineering considered at the time it could be reasonably
expected the current onsite carparking of 315 spaces would be exceeded by the actual parking
demand from the current uses for between 50 and 70 hours per year (~1.25hours per week). This
was considered unacceptable for the development particularly as nearby streets lacked capacity
to absorb any over flow at peak periods.
Since the lodgement of the appeal,
    a revised car parking layout for the site has been provided identifying a total of 329 car
      parking spaces (not including the 40 car parks associated with the childcare centre facility)
      for the site. This new layout has incorporated a further 14 car parking spaces to the spaces
      previously submitted by the applicant.
    the applicant’s traffic engineer has undertaken further work, including survey work of the
      site’s car parking, to support their proposal. Overall, the applicant asserts their proposed car
      parking is more than adequate supply for the development as a whole.
      “The survey data/car park counts undertaken by our client indicate that the greatest number
      of cars parked on site at any one time was 307 (on 21 August 2014). Treating the
      development as a ‘mixed use’ development would mean that no more than 343 car parking
      were required for the development.

                                                                                     Page 11 of 119