Arbitrary decision taken without consultation
I READ the March 31-April 6 edition report headlined “Plans have no downsize options” with interest mixed with a little frustration.
Surely the Hollins family cannot love City Beach yet want it changed out of all recognition.
I hope Keri Shannon’s remarks have enlightened them sufficiently to have second thoughts over the council’s proposed amendments to the planning rules.
I would like to add that a corner block could have three so-called manor houses (a euphemism for apartments) on the block, resulting in six residents living next door on a block that previously accommodat- ed only one family. Furthermore, with a little imaginative sale of land and subdivision you could achieve 900sq m on the adjacent two blocks.
This would allow a developer to build an additional four houses. Hence, 10 residents when previously there were three.
How can Joe Lenzo suggest this is “gentle density?” Some time ago, I attended a meeting organised by the council to discuss suburb density and types of dwellings for the area.
Most people were not opposed to higher density achievable with smaller blocks but they were strongly opposed to multiple dwellings on one block.
When the council passed the proposal, it took an arbitrary decision without due consultation. After the event, it has now circulated a survey of residents.
The mayor talks about adequate time to analyse the results and the council making a recommendation in June. He does not indicate that the wishes of the residents will be taken into consideration.
The council should not have even considered the Amendment 31 proposal without the results of the survey.
My observation, based on how councillors voted before, is that they have already formed their opinion.
I hope the WA Planning Commission and the Minister for Planning will be more sympathetic to the views of the majority of residents. FrankPitts, CityBeach.