A DIRECTIONS hearing in the appeal of the proposed redevelopment of the Guildford Vaudeville Theatre, mostly due to concerns about the lack of parking, is scheduled in the Supreme Court for Friday, June 14.

In Review of JDAP decision sought in Supreme Court (Echo News, February 9) it was reported a new association – Friends of Guildford Historical Precinct – had been formed to apply to the Supreme Court to appeal the decision to approve redevelopment of the vaudeville theatre.

The story said the association was formed after about 60 people attended a meeting, including attendees who had made submissions opposing the development application for Lot 2 & 67 (No.163) and Lot 18 (No.159) James Street.

A Guildford resident, who said they attended the meeting at the Guildford town hall, claims the association was formed before the meeting and that not everyone there supported the group.

The resident also questioned whether anyone from the association who made a submission were from Guildford.

When JDAP considered the proposal on September 26 last year it included comments from the city’s design review panel and State Heritage.

“The proposed design is an exemplary outcome that breathes new life into a heritage building in a restrained and sensitive manner and will help to activate Guildford’s historic main street,’’ the city’s design review panel said.

“The proposed development will have an overall positive impact on the registered places and on the James Street streetscape,’’ State Heritage said.

The appeal application lodged by the association on November 3 last year said the grounds for the review included that in granting approval the Metro Outer joint development assessment panel (JDAP) erred by failing to require any onsite parking to be provided, contrary to the requirement of regulations and failed to consider the adequacy of parking required by regulation.

Also the application said the JDAP erred by failing to consider that the applicant made reasonable effort to comply with minimum on-site parking and also failed to require payment in lieu of parking or shared parking both required by regulation.

Another ground for the application said that the JDAP erred in the exercise of any discretion and failed to have regarded submissions made as required by the City of Swan town planning scheme.

The first respondent named in the application for judicial review is the JDAP presiding member, with Hawthorn Brewing Company the first other respondent party and Castle Towers and Fanucci the second other respondent party.