Fu­ture shock for Nalder

Claims staff said ‘no cars in the fu­ture’

Melville Times - - Front Page - Aaron Cor­lett

BATEMAN MLA Dean Nalder has urged the City of Melville to con­sider mak­ing changes to park­ing and traf­fic flow in its re­view of the Can­ning Bridge Ac­tiv­ity Centre Plan (CBACP).

Mr Nalder said he would en­cour­age a much broader re­view of the CBACP that in­cor­po­rated is­sues such as traf­fic flow and ser­vices such as wa­ter, power and sew­er­age, in ad­di­tion to den­sity, height and de­sign.

“I do not ac­cept com­ments made to me by plan­ning staff of Melville City that ‘there will not be cars in the fu­ture, so we do not need to con­sider park­ing is­sues and traf­fic flow im­pacts’,” he said.

City act­ing chief ex­ec­u­tive Steve Cope said nei­ther the City nor the CBACP an­tic­i­pated a fu­ture with­out cars.

“Both park­ing and traf­fic will con­tinue to be con­sid­ered as im­por­tant on­go­ing is­sues now and into the fu­ture, with a clear re­quire­ment for de­vel­op­ment in the Can­ning Bridge precinct to re­spond to park­ing con­trols and assess­ment of traf­fic im­pacts,” he said.

“Fur­ther­more, the City has also com­pleted a sig­nif­i­cant re­view of its park­ing strat­egy and pro­duced a de­tailed park­ing man­age­ment plan for the Can­ning Bridge precinct, which was de­vel­oped in con­sul­ta­tion with lo­cal busi­nesses and the com­mu­nity.”

The City has pro­posed changes mainly to the H4 zone, which is an area that al­lows for four-storey de­vel­op­ments, with the com­mu­nity to be con­sulted dur­ing Au­gust.

Height caps in the 10 and 15-storey ar­eas, in which de­vel­op­ments can go higher if they demon­strate com­mu­nity ben­e­fits, have also been floated for the fu­ture.

Mr Nalder said plan­ning is­sues were the topics raised most of­ten with him in the Bateman elec­torate, in­clud­ing the CBACP, Rise­ley Centre Struc­ture Plan and the Wave Park.

“I wel­come the City of Melville re­view­ing the (CBACP), how­ever I fear that the re­view will not go far enough and is pri­mar­ily fo­cused on the H4 zone. Any assess­ment to con­sider in­creased den­sity and height lim­its must have clear ob­jec­tive mea­sures that are not ap­par­ent in de­vel­op­ment ap­pli­ca­tions that have been ap­proved to date,” he said.

“That said, ex­em­plary de­sign should al­ready be a min­i­mum stan­dard for our com­mu­nity, not a mea­sure to achieve a bonus.”

Mr Cope said the CBACP was de­liv­er­ing the longterm vi­sion for the precinct as ap­proved by the WA Plan­ning Com­mis­sion and de­vel­oped in con­sul­ta­tion with the com­mu­nity.

“The plan has im­por­tantly al­ways in­cluded cri­te­ria for assess­ment of de­ter­mi­na­tion of com­mu­nity ben­e­fit,” he said.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.