PAST CHA­RADE SPARKS ANGER

Southern Gazette (South Perth) - - OPINION -

I AM par­tic­u­larly dis­ap­pointed by com­ments in last week’s edi­tion where for­mer City of South Perth mayor James Best has at­tacked pre- sent ad­ver­tised changes to Amend­ment 46.

Given the lack of full and trans­par­ent con­sul­ta­tion sev­eral years ago, it is disin­gen­u­ous to say that the com­mu­nity agreed to the scheme (about which most were not com­pletely in­formed).

Pre­sented to a coun­cil meet­ing on Oc­to­ber 28, 2014 was a sched­ule show­ing a map of “Build­ing Height Lim­its” with a max­i­mum of 41 me­tres.

This was clearly mis­lead­ing, as it did not in­clude the im­pact of per­for­mance cri­te­ria.

Pro­mo­tional ma­te­rial at the time for a South Perth Sta­tion Precinct cer­tainly did not show scenes of 39-storey or 129-me­tre mega tow­ers, but pic­tures of build­ings less than a third that size.

At the DAP hear­ing on May 25 last year, for­mer min­is­ter for plan­ning Ken­non Richard Lewis was very crit­i­cal of de­fi­cien­cies in the lo­cal plan­ning pro­cesses, and sup­ported op­po­si­tion to the pro­posed 29-storey build­ing at 74 Mill Point Road.

Lo­cal res­i­dents have been un­der­stand­ably an­gry by a past cha­rade of dis­guised con­sul­ta­tion, let down by the DAP that is stacked for pro de­vel­op­ment, and where their in­ter­ests and “good and proper plan­ning” have been pushed aside by pres­sure from Big Busi­ness.

I am glad the present coun­cil has lis­tened to lo­cal res­i­dents, and has sup­ported ad­ver­tis­ing a se­ries of rea­son­able changes to Amend­ment 46, which I hope are ap­proved. GREG BEN­JAMIN, South Perth.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.