Freo's View

UGLY KINGS SQUARE BUILDING BACK TO DRAWING BOARD

Posted in city of fremantle, development, heritage by freoview on January 11, 2017

The building proposal for a five-storey tourist accommodation at 18-22 Adelaide Street at Fremantle’s Kings Square was unanimously deferred by the City of Fremantle Planning Commission tonight.

Public speakers objected to the proposal because of inappropriate height, heritage concerns and deemed it detrimental to adjoining properties and the public amenity.

It was pointed out also hat approving this inappropriate building would set a precedent for other property owners in the area.

Occupants of units at the Cantonment Street Dodson’s building behind the proposed development claimed it would negatively affect their lifestyle, sun light and air flow into their building and were also concerned about the staircase being too close to their living areas which would result in noise issues.

Committee chair Jon Strachan said he believed the proposal had not met the requirements to allow for discretionary additional heights and it would not create the best heritage outcomes.

Councillors Hannah Fitzhardinge and David Coggin expressed that a message needed to be sent to developers that we want high quality buildings in the inner city, especially at historic Kings Square, while professor Geoffrey Bolton said the CoF Design Advisory Committee were concerned about the impact on the public realm.

Councillor Jeff McDonald said we needed to respect what we already have at Kings Square and a five storey spike would impact on the Townhall.

It now has to be seen if the developer and architect will listen to the concerns of the community, elected members and Design Advisory Committee and make substantial changes. The developer murmured when he walked out that this was like Italy under Mussolini and that one could not even do what one wants with one’s own property.

Roel Loopers

 

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Andrew said, on January 12, 2017 at 5:55 pm

    Well done Planning Commission

  2. Gerry MacGill said, on January 12, 2017 at 10:52 am

    Well said, Roel; well done, Council, finally! The assessment of this proposal, leading the planners to recommend approval, was pathetic and raises serious questions about the internal processes. The Council’s own heritage staff seem to have been relegated to a back room.


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: