Penin­sula plan put on hold

Southern Gazette (Belmont) - - NEWS - Matt Zis

A GROUP of South Perth res­i­dents have scored a timely win in de­lay­ing the next step for the con­tentious draft South Perth Ac­tiv­ity Cen­tre Plan.

South Perth Coun­cil last week voted to post­pone for­mal ad­ver­tis­ing of the plan, po­ten­tially un­til April next year, so the coun­cil has more time to fur­ther con­sider the con­tent of the draft and an as­so­ci­ated town plan­ning scheme amend­ment, known as Amend­ment 61.

Cr Colin Cala’s mo­tion and the coun­cil­lors’ unan­i­mous sup­port drew ap­plause from nearly ev­ery­one in­side the packed cham­ber to hear the de­ci­sion, par­tic­u­lar as the ini­tial rec­om­men­da­tion from City of South Perth plan­ners had been to pro­ceed.

“I can’t put my hand on my heart at the mo­ment and say that op­tions that are pre­sented are the best,” Cr Cala said.

The ac­tiv­ity cen­tre plan aims to gov­ern plan­ning of the Mill Point Penin­sula district for the next quar­ter of a cen­tury.

Amend­ment 61 would pro­vide the tech­ni­cal de­vel­op­ment guide­lines for the area.

Mayor Sue Do­herty ac­knowl­edged the de­lay would frus­trate res­i­dents who were in favour of push­ing ahead with ad­ver­tis­ing the ac­tiv­ity cen­tre plan and scheme amend­ment, but she said the penin­sula area was an es­pe­cially chal­leng­ing town plan­ning zone.

Ear­lier in the meet­ing the coun­cil had con­sid­ered an op­tion to ad­ver­tise only the ac­tiv­ity cen­tre plan now, but voted against the idea.

As part of that op­tion Cr Glenn Crid­land had sug­gested hold­ing off ad­ver­tis­ing the town plan­ning scheme amend­ment un­til con­sul­ta­tion for the ac­tiv­ity cen­tre plan had fin­ished – but even he be­lieved that was just the “less worse” of all the coun­cil’s choices.

“We are in a po­si­tion where there is no good way out,” he said.

“We al­ready have a town plan­ning frame­work that is caus­ing us is­sues.”

Cr Cala said sep­a­rat­ing the ad­ver­tis­ing pe­ri­ods would con­fuse res­i­dents and be a strain on coun­cil re­sources.

“This ex­pe­ri­ence is a se­ri­ous un­der­tak­ing by the City,” he said.

“(To do it twice) will fully tax the re­sources of the City and the res­i­dents.”

The area’s pop­u­la­tion is ex­pected to triple by 2041, cre­at­ing plan­ning chal­lenges for the City.

A post on the Save the South Perth Penin­sula Face­book page af­ter Tues­day’s meet­ing thanked the coun­cil for post­pon­ing the next step.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.