A controversial $8 million Dianella apartment complex has been approved despite it exceeding building height limits and overlooking a neighbouring primary school.
State planners approved the 35-dwelling apartment at Chester Avenue on Thursday, 3-2.
City of Stirling councillors Suzanne Migdale and Teresa Olow voted against the proposal, while the DAP members voted in favour of the development.
The approval of the six-storey apartment with a roof terrace was despite lengthy opposition from parents of the neighbouring primary school Our Lady’s Assumption and surrounding residents.
The decision was made after the original DAP meeting was deferred in December to address concerns about the overall height and bulk of the building and the “perception of overlooking the school”.
In response, the applicant Urbanista Town Planning on behalf of the owners Affluent Property Investments Pty Ltd and Snow Oak Ptd Ltd reduced the height by 3m by removing a level, as well as reducing the area of the rooftop terrace.
Setbacks were also increased away from neighbouring properties and the school while a total of eight dwellings were removed from the apartment complex.
Space Design Studio design director Felipe Soto said in the meeting that there were not many openings in the northern facing apartments which faces the school while still providing ample light and airflow.
He said 1m deep planter boxes were also added into the design for these north facing apartments to limit views to the school grounds.
Interior designer Felicity Lam spoke on behalf of other concerned parents and rejected this claim, arguing there were multiple viewpoints from the complex into the school playgrounds and buildings.
“This is a non-compliant development with six levels of residences and facilities that enable views overlooking 12-year-old children,” she said.
The original recommendation from City of Stirling officers was to approve the development however this was changed last month when the council voted to not endorse the recommendation and instead recommended the development be rejected.
“We have a community asking us to use our discretion in this instance,” Cr Migdale said.
She said 500 local residents had voiced their concerns online in regards to the school privacy and local amenity due to the height and in context with the low-rise buildings it surrounds.
“At the end of the day it’s beyond the height restrictions and overlooking the school.”
DAP presiding member Francesca Lefante said she has not seen enough evidence to show the apartment would be in regular view of the school children during learning hours.
“I know there are many schools that are viewable from public domain in all sort of manners,” she said.
“I do understand and appreciate the caution and concerns of members of community and school toward protection of the school and overlooking.
“From my perspective I don’t see any evidence that these sites will extensively impact the school as has been addressed.”