Joondalup Times - - FRONT PAGE - Tyler Brown

DUNCRAIG res­i­dents are con­cerned over re­de­vel­op­ment in the sub­urb. About 140 peo­ple filled the Joon­dalup coun­cil cham­ber last month dur­ing a spe­cial elec­tors meet­ing.

Res­i­dent Der­ren Bessen said there were con­cerns re­gard­ing the new res­i­den­tial den­sity cod­ing in Duncraig as part of the City’s Lo­cal Housing Strat­egy.

The State Govern­ment re­quired the de­vel­op­ment of this strat­egy to see how the City would meet res­i­den­tial in­fill tar­gets.

“Housing needs in the met­ro­pol­i­tan area are chang­ing,” Joon­dalup plan­ning and com­mu­nity de­vel­op­ment di­rec­tor Dale Page said.

“The State Govern­ment has set housing tar­gets for all lo­cal gov­ern­ments in the met­ro­pol­i­tan area. For lo­cal gov­ern­ments who don’t have many or any green­field sites left, this housing needs to be in­fill de­vel­op­ment,” she said.

The City has iden­ti­fied 10 “housing op­por­tu­nity ar­eas” near train sta­tions, pub­lic trans­port and shop­ping cen­tres that would be most ap­pro­pri­ate for den­si­fi­ca­tion.

Duncraig is part of Housing Op­por­tu­nity Area 1, which had a pro­posed res­i­den­tial den­sity of R20/R30 with some R20/R40 around the War­wick train sta­tion and shop­ping cen­tre and some R20/R60 along Beach Road.

Dur­ing com­mu­nity con­sul­ta­tion in 2010, the City sent out 1759 in­for­ma­tion packs to res­i­dents and re­ceived 407 re­sponses.

Ms Page said 73 per cent agreed to be in­cluded in the housing op­por­tu­nity area, 24 per cent did not and 3 per cent did not state a pref­er­ence.

There were 45 sub­mis­sions ob­ject­ing to prop­er­ties in the Carine Glades es­tate be­ing in­cluded.

Re­gard­ing den­sity, 62 per cent felt it was ap­pro­pri­ate.

“As a re­sult of the gen­er­ally high level of com­mu­nity sup­port... the coun­cil adopted it in Fe­bru­ary 2011 and it was for­warded to the De­part­ment of Plan­ning (DoP) and the WA Plan­ning Com­mis­sion (WAPC) for en­dorse­ment,” Ms Page said.

“Un­for­tu­nately, the DoP didn’t sup­port the strat­egy be­cause they felt it didn’t re­spond strongly enough to the State’s strate­gic plan­ning doc­u­ments.

“They ad­vised us to ex­pand the size of the housing op­por­tu­nity area, to in­crease the cod­ing of the ma­jor­ity of the area to R20/R40 and to in­tro­duce more R20/R60 cod­ing near the train sta­tion and around the War­wick shop­ping cen­tre.”

The City adopted the re­vised strat­egy, which the WAPC endorsed, in Novem­ber 2013.

Mr Bessen said the res­i­dents were “not en­tirely op­posed to de­vel­op­ment” but just wanted it “scaled down and gov­erned by good de­sign prin­ci­ples to com­ple­ment the cur­rent amenity”.

He moved a mo­tion on April 24 for the coun­cil to “ur­gently work with the WAPC and DoP” to re­duce the res­i­den­tial den­sity to R20/R30 and to “im­me­di­ately put to­gether” an ur­ban de­sign pol­icy to “re­strict the build­ing of in­ap­pro­pri­ate dwellings, in par­tic­u­lar apart­ment blocks”.

Mr Bessen said cur­rent de­vel­op­ments, such as 21 Strathyre Drive – which is six dwellings at just over two storeys – were out of char­ac­ter with the area be­cause of their bulk and scale.

“If re­gards to the po­ten­tial im­pacts on ad­join­ing prop­er­ties and streetscape had been con­sid­ered, we would not have seen this tow­er­ing mon­stros­ity built be­cause the im­pact on both ad­join­ing prop­er­ties, es­pe­cially 19 Strathyre Drive, is ex­tremely detri­men­tal,” he said.

The mo­tion was unan­i­mously sup­ported.

But Ms Page said re­duc­ing the den­sity code was “not a quick or sim­ple so­lu­tion”.

“To make an ad hoc change to one of the housing op­por­tu­nity ar­eas so soon af­ter adop­tion of the Lo­cal Housing Strat­egy would not be in the in­ter­ests of or­derly and proper plan­ning and such a change is un­likely to be sup­ported by the DoP and WAPC.” THE City of Joon­dalup is be­ing urged to “stand up and fight” for the res­i­dents of Duncraig.

Carine MLA Tony Krstice­vic said while he un­der­stood the City’s draft Lo­cal Housing Strat­egy propos­ing a lower res­i­den­tial den­sity in Duncraig was “knocked back by the WA Plan­ning Com­mis­sion” in 2011, the City could “still push back”.

“Just be­cause the bu­reau­crats say you have to do some­thing, doesn’t mean you have to do it,” he said.

“You can still fight; you can still say ‘no, we don’t ac­cept this on be­half of our res­i­dents’. I think it would have been great if the res­i­dents had the chance to have that fight.”

Mayor Troy Pickard said “ul­ti­mately, lo­cal govern­ment is sub­servient to State Govern­ment”.

He said the City tried to im­ple­ment a lower res­i­den­tial den­sity cod­ing but the WAPC said it was in­ad­e­quate and did not meet the State’s ob­jec­tives.

“The WAPC said ‘here is the cod­ing and only at this cod­ing will we en­dorse your en­tire strat­egy’,” he said.

“Un­for­tu­nately it’s not a sit­u­a­tion where you can have a bit of give and take and ne­go­ti­ate and hope­fully ar­rive at a good out­come.

“It’s the R-Codes that are al­low­ing the type of de­vel­op­ment you’re see­ing in your pocket of Duncraig and that’s com­pletely out of our con­trol.”

Mr Pickard said the City’s of­fi­cers would now pre­pare a re­port on “what pow­ers we do have to in­tro­duce some ini­tia­tives that may ad­dress the con­cerns”, which will be pre­sented to the coun­cil at a fu­ture meet­ing.

Pic­ture: Martin Ken­nealey www.com­mu­ni­typix.com.au d468473

Lo­cal res­i­dents Chris Shaw, Shelly Har­ri­son, Namita Mehra and Leanne Panetta. Some Duncraig res­i­dents are un­happy at re­de­vel­op­ment plans for the sub­urb.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.