attachments - city of belmont...ordinary council meeting attachments 24 november 2009 ordinary...

City of Belmont

Attachments

Ordinary Council Meeting

Held24 November 2009

A1

ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING Attachments 24 November 2009

Ordinary Council 24/11/09

Item 12.2 refers

Attachment 1

Grandstand Road Realignment -Road Closure & Dedication

A2



Item 12.4 refers

Attachment 2

Lot 200 (325) Fulham Street, Cloverdale

DA30 – Preliminary & Final Built Strata Approval

A4



Item 12.4 refers

Attachment 3

Lot 200 (325) Fulham Street, Cloverdale

DA30 – Preliminary & Final Built Strata Approval

A7

DA30 – PRELIMINARY & FINAL BUILT STRATA APPROVAL

POWER / DUTY ASSIGNED TO: Local Government

POWER TO DELEGATE: Planning & Development Act 2005:- s16(3)(e) Delegation by Commission

DELEGATION TO: Director Community & Statutory Services Manager Planning Services Manager Building Services

Senior Planning Officer

POWER / DUTY DELEGATED: Planning and Development Act 2005 S16(3)(e) Delegation by Commission

Strata Titles Act 1985:- s25 Certificate of Commission; and s27 Review of Commission decision

FUNCTION: Determine applications for preliminary built strata approval, and final built strata approval & endorse the applicable Form 26 after the conditions preliminary strata plan approval have been fulfilled, as delegated by the Western Australian Planning Commission.

CONDITIONS: Must act in accordance with the City’s “Standard Conditions Relating to Delegations”.

This delegation must not be exercised by the delegated officer for applications that:

� Propose the creation of a vacant lot; � Propose vacant air stratas in multi-tiered strata

scheme developments; and � Where, in the opinion of the WAPC as notified to

the relevant local government in writing, or in the opinion of the relevant local government as notified to the WAPC in writing, relate to a type of development.

RECORD KEEPING: Delegation proforma register to DW11/005.

Ensure that evidentiary documents are retained in the City’s record keeping systems that meet the requirements of LocalGovernment (Administration) Regulations 1996 Reg.19 - Records to be kept by Delegates.

REFERENCES: Decision Making Plan – Decision Level 4

POWER TO SUBDELEGATE: Nil.

A8



Item 12.5 refers

Attachment 4

Development Area 7 Land Ownership Plan

A9



Item 12.5 refers

Attachment 5

Development Area 7 Opportunities & Constraints Plan

A11



Item 12.5 refers

Attachment 6

Development Area 7 Proposed Structure Plan

Option 1

A13



Item 12.5 refers

Attachment 7


Option 2

A15



Item 12.6 refers

Attachment 8

Development Area 8Land Ownership Plan

A17



Item 12.6 refers

Attachment 9

Opportunities & Constraints Plan

A19



Item 12.6 refers

Attachment 10


Option 1

A21



Item 12.6 refers

Attachment 11


Option 2

A23



Item 12.7 refers

Attachment 12

Lot3 (116) Kooyong Road, Rivervale

Site Plan, Floor Plan & Elevation

A25



Item 12.8 refers

Attachment 13

The SpringsStructure Plan

A28



Item 12.8 refers

Attachment 14

The SpringsTable of Revision

A34



Item 12.8 refers

Attachment 15

The SpringsStructure Plan Document

A38

Tayl

or B

urre

ll B

arne

tt To

wn

Plan

ning

& D

esig

n

TheSprings

Structure

Plan

October2009

Preparedfor

LandCorp

A40

DOCUMENTHISTORYANDSTATUS

JobNo.

04/101

Author

KarenWright

Revision

Date

Prepared

Reviewedby

Approvedby

Date

Approved

Rev0

16.02.06

BenDeMarchi/LexBarnett

LexBarnett

16.02.06

Rev1

02.03.06

LexBarnett

LexBarnett

03.03.06

Rev2

07.04.06

LexBarnett

LexBarnett

07.04.06

Rev3

20.04.06

LexBarnett

LexBarnett

20.04.06

Rev4

08.01.07

KarenWright

LexBarnett

12.01.07

Rev5

03.08.07

CityofBelm

ont

CityofBelm

ont

28.08.07

Rev6

06.10.07

KarenWright

LexBarnett

25.10.07

Rev7

18.12.07

KarenWright

KarenWright

18.12.07

Rev8

07.10.09

KarenWright

PreparedBy:

TaylorBurrellBarnettTownPlanningandDesign

187RobertsRoad

SUBIACO

WA

6008

Phone:93822911

Fax:

93824586

[email protected]

Inassociationwith:

Cossill&Webley

Hassell

Estill&Associates

NSProjects

PlanE

RileyConsulting

ColliersInternational

SinclairKnightMerz

A41

PARTONE

STATUTORYPLANNING

A42

TABLEOFCONTENTS–PARTONE

1STATUTORYPLA

NNING

1

1.1

Structure

PlanArea

1

2STRUCTUREPLA

NCONTENT

1

3INTERPRETATION

1

4OPERATIONDATE

1

5RELA

TIONSHIP

WITHTHESCHEME

1

6STRUCTUREPLA

N1

6.1

PrecinctDevelopmentRequirements

1

6.2

SpecialProvisions

3

6.2.1

Development

6

6.2.2

RetailFloorspace

6

6.2.3

DetailedAreaPlans

6

6.2.4

DesignGuidelines

6

6.2.5

transportplanning

7

6.2.6

LandscapingofPOSandStreets

7

6.2.7

DeveloperContributions

7

A43

TheSpringsStructure

Plan

04/101

1|Page

1STATUTORYPLANNIN

G

1.1

STRUCTUREPLAN

AREA

TheStructure

Planshallapplyto

thelandcontainedwithin

theinneredgeofthered

lineonPlans13form

ingTheSpringsStructure

Plan.

TheStructure

Planareacomprisesapproximately13.6709ha.

2STRUCTUREPLAN

CONTENT

ThisStructure

Plancomprises:

Statutory

PlanningSection(PartOne)

Explanatory

Report(PartTwo)

3IN

TERPRETATIO

N

Thewordsandexpressionsusedin

this

Structure

Planshallhavetherespective

meaningsgivento

them

intheCityofBelm

ontLocalPlanningSchemeNo.14.

4OPERATIO

NDATE

ThisStructure

Planshallcomeinto

effect

whenitisadoptedbytheCouncilpursuant

tosubClause

10.18.10.1

oftheSchemeandendorsedbytheWestern

Australian

PlanningCommission(W

APC)pursuantto

subClause

10.18.11.2oftheScheme.

5RELATIO

NSHIP

WITHTHESCHEME

Intheeventofthere

beinganyinconsistenciesorconflicts

betw

eentheprovisions,

standards

or

requirements

of

the

Scheme

and

the

provisions,

standards

or

requirementsoftheStructure

Plan,thentheprovisions,standardsorrequirementsof

theSchemeshallprevail.

6STRUCTUREPLAN

TheStructure

Plancomprisestheplansoutlinedbelow.

Plan1–PrecinctPlan

IdentificationofTheSpringsdevelopmentprecincts.

Plan2–LandUse

Outlineslanduse.Alldevelopmentshouldbegenerallyinaccordance

withthe

density

andlanduse

asshownin

Plan2andasdescribedwithin

Table

1and

Section6.0ofPart2ofthisreport.

Plan3–BuildingHeights

Depicts

theintended

buildingheights

within

theStructure

Plan

area.

All

developmentshoulddemonstrate

consistency

withtheBuildingHeightsPlan.

6.1

PRECIN

CTDEVELOPMENTREQUIREMENTS

LandwithintheStructure

Planshallbedevelopedinconform

itywithTable1.A44

2|Page

TABLE

1:PRECINCTDEVELO

PMENTTABLE

Precinct

RCode

Min.Height

Max.Height

Min.sidesetback

Min.frontsetback

Max.frontsetback

Proportionof

max.60m

2

plotratio

floorarea

onebedroom

dwellings

Proportionof

max.90m

2plot

ratiofloorarea

twobedroom

dwellings

1Hawksburn

Road

R60

617m

and4storeys

nil

35m

2GreatEastern

Highway

Mixed

Use

R80

andR100

6m

or2storeys

27m

and6storeys

RCodes/BCA

Podium:Nil

Abovepodium:4m

15%

15%

3HighwayPeninsula

Mixed

Use

R250

30m

Podium:15m

Tower:AsperSched.

9,TPS14

Podium

adjacentto

RoweAve:Nil

10m

allother

boundaries

RoweAvenuePodium:

nil

15%

15%

4RiversdaleRoad

North

R100/160

AsperDetailedAreaPlans

15%

15%

5RiversdaleRoad

South

R60and

R80

EastofHawksburn:

6m

or2storeys

WestofHawksburn:

6m

or2storeys

EastofHawksburn:

17m

/4storeys

WestofHawksburn:

27m

and6storeys

RCodes/BCA

RoweAve:2m

CnrRowe/H

awksburn:

Rowe–nil

Hawksburn

–2

CnrHawksburn/

Riversdale:nil

RoweAve:2m

CnrRowe/

Hawksburn:

Hawksburn

–2m

CnrHawksburn/

Riversdale:3m

6RoweAvenueEast

Residential

R60and

R80

6m

or2storeys

17m

and4storeys

RCodes/BCA

General:3m

Rowe(m

idblock):2m

CnrRoweand

Hawksburn:nilto

Rowe

Ave,2m

toHawksburn

Road

General:5m

Rowe(m

idblock):

4m

CnrRoweand

Hawksburn:4m

to

Hawksburn

Road

7RoweAvenueEast

–MixedUse

R100and

Mixed

Use

R80

6m

or2storeys

17m

and4storeys

RCodes/BCA

Nil

3m

15%

15%

Podium:6m

or2

storeys

Podium:15m

or3

storeys

Podium:nil

Podium:nil

Podium:5m

8RoweAvenue

West–Residential

Towers

R160

Tower15m

and3

storeys

Tower30m

and9

storeys

Tower:25%frontage

width

(50%total)

Tower:5m

Tower:n/a

15%

15%

A45

6|Page

6.2

SPECIALPROVISIO

NS

6.2.1

DEVELOPMENT

Inadditionto

thePrecinctDevelopmentTable,thefollowingprovisionsapply:

i)TheRCode/densitiesare

tobereadasnumericallyproportionalto

dwellings

andnotfloorspace.

ii)

Forthewholestructure

planarea,in

respect

ofsingle

bedroom

dwellingsthat

are

multiple

dwellings,subClause

6.1.3

A3(i)oftheResidentialDesignCodes

(Variation1)isvariedbysubstitutingthewords“theminim

um

site

areamay

bereducedbyupto

onethird”with“theminim

um

site

areaperdwellingmay

bereducedbyupto

onehalf”.Thisdensity

bonusof50%

canbeachievedon

thebasisthattheadditionaldwellingswillbeless

thanorequalto

60m

2.

iii)

Within

each

ofthePrecincts2,3,4,5,7and8,aminim

um

of15%ofthetotal

numberofdwellingsdevelopedshallbeamaximum

of60m

2in

plotratioarea

andafurther15%

ofthetotalnumberofdwellingsshallbeamaximum

of

90m

2in

plotratioarea,thenumberascalculatedbeingroundedupordown

asappropriate.

iv)

Thistableisto

bereadinconjunctionwiththemore

detailedprovisionsofThe

Springs

built

form

guidelines,

regarding

requirements

for

laneway/rear

setbacks,facades,articulation,projections,fenestrationandgeneralbuiltform

character.

6.2.2

RETAIL

FLOORSPACE

Retailfloorspace

within

TheSpringsshallnotexceed400m2andshallbegenerally

distributedin

thelocationsasidentifiedonPlan2LandUse

andin

accordance

with

Part2,Section6.3.4ofthisreport.

6.2.3

DETAILEDAREAPLANS

Detailed

Area

Plans

are

required

tobe

prepared

priorto

subdivision

and/or

development(exceptdemolitionofexistingstructures)

inaccordance

withClause

10.18.16oftheSchemeinthefollowingcircumstances:

1.

Forthose

lots

adjacentto

CracknellPark

andtheRoweAvenueAmphitheatre

toaddress

interface

issues.

TheDetailedAreaPlansare

toaddress:

Minim

um

andmaximum

setbacksfrom

thepublicopenspace;

Requirementforhabitableroomsto

overlookthepublicopenspace;

Visuallyperm

eablefencing;and

Acceptableintrusionsinto

thesetback

area.

2.

Riversdale

RoadNorthprecinct.

TheDetailedAreaPlanmust

address

the

following:

Thewholeprecinct

oriftheCityofBelm

ontandWAPCagree,aportion

oftheprecinct;

Creationandpreservationofsignificantsightlines(orviewcorridors)to

andfrom

theSwanRiver;

Overshadowing;

Controlofbuildingbulkviasetbacks;

Response

totopography;

Articulationofpodium

andtowerelements;

Address

tostreetandpublicrealm

.

Inadditionto

Clause

10.18.16oftheSchemerequiringCityofBelm

ontadoption,a

DetailedAreaPlanwithin

theRiversdale

NorthPrecinct,orportionoftheprecinct

as

agreedto

above,mustbeendorsedbytheWAPC.

6.2.4

DESIG

NGUID

ELIN

ES

TheSpringsDesignGuidelinesshould

bepreparedandadoptedasaLocalPlanning

Policy

pursuantto

Clause

2.3

oftheScheme.TheGuidelinesshould

notberegarded

asprescriptivelyastheStructure

Plan,withtheunderlyingintentbeingasim

portant

asthestatedprovisions.In

caseswhere

itcanbedemonstratedthattheintentofthe

Guidelinescanbemore

effectively

achievedin

adifferentway,thenCouncilshould

havesufficientflexibilityto

considersuch

casesontheirmerit.

Allsubdivisionanddevelopmentshould

begenerallyin

accordance

withtheDesign

GuidelinesPolicy.

A49

TheSpringsStructure

Plan

04/101

7|Page

6.2.5

TRANSPORTPLANNIN

G

ATransport,Access

andParkingreportisto

bepreparedandadoptedbytheCityof

Belm

ontandtheWAPCto

supportTheSpringsStructure

Plan.

Thereport

willbepreparedbasedontheguidingprinciplesmentionedin

Section

6.3.7.1ofPart2ofthisreport.

Theappropriate

provisionoffootpathsandsharedpathsisintegralto

TheSprings

developmentandshallbeprovidedin

accordance

withFigure

21ofPart

2ofthis

report.

6.2.6

LANDSCAPIN

GOFPOSANDSTREETS

Nosubdivisionordevelopmentshalloccurunless

satisfactory

arrangements

have

been

madewith

theCouncilforthelandscapingofadjacentstreets

and,where

appropriate,POS,generallyinaccordance

withPart2,Sections6.3.6.3

6.3.6.7.

6.2.7

DEVELOPERCONTRIBUTIO

NS

Withtheexceptionofdemolition,nodevelopmentorsubdivisionto

create

alotshall

occurin

the

Structure

Plan

Area

untilAmendmentNo.53

isgazetted

oran

arrangementsuitable

totheWAPCandtheCouncilisapprovedthatwould

perm

it

developercontributionstowardssharedcosts.

A50

TheSpringsStructure

Plan

ADOPTIONOFSTRUCTUREPLAN

THESPRINGSSTRUCTUREPLANWASADOPTEDBYRESOLU

TIONOFTHECOUNCILOFTHECITYOFBELM

ONTON

.......................................(DATE)

ANDTHESEALOFTHEMUNICIPALITYWASPURSUANTTOTHECOUNCIL’SRESOLU

TIONHEREUNTOAFFIXEDIN

THEPRESENCEOF:

...................................................................

Mayor,CityofBelm

ont

...................................................................

ChiefExecutiveOfficer,CityofBelm

ont

.......................................(DATE)

ANDBYRESOLU

TIONOFTHEWestern

AustralianPlanningCommissionON

.......................................(DATE)

SignedforandonbehalfoftheWestern

AustralianPlanningCommission

...................................................................

AnofficeroftheCommissiondulyauthorisedbytheCommissionpursuantto

S.16ofPlanning&DevelopmentAct2005forthatpurpose,

inthepresence

of:

...................................................................Witness

.......................................Date

A51

TheSpringsStructure

Plan

PARTTWO

EXPLANATORYREPORT

A52

TheSpringsStructure

Plan

TABLEOFCONTENTS–PARTTWO

1INTRODUCTION

11

1.1

Location

11

1.2

StudyTeam

11

1.3

ProjectBackground

13

1.3.1

SiteHistory

13

1.3.2

CityofBelm

ontTownPlanningSchemeNo.13

13

1.4

PublicConsultation

15

1.4.1

LandownerWorkshops

15

1.4.2

PublicMeeting/W

orkshop

16

1.4.3

ConsultationwiththeCityofBelm

ont

16

1.4.4

CommunityIssues

16

2PLA

NNINGCONTEXT

17

2.1

Statutory

PlanningContext

17

2.1.1

form

erMetropolitanRegionScheme

17

2.1.2

CityofBelm

ontTownPlanningSchemeNo.14

18

2.2

StrategicPlanningContext

18

2.2.1

State

GovernmentLevel

18

2.2.2

LocalGovernmentLevel

21

2.3

CurrentProvisionofPublicOpenSpace

21

2.3.1

History

ofOpenSpace

ProvisionwithinThe

SpringsandTheCityofBelm

ont

21

3SITEANALYSIS

24

3.1

PhysicalDescription

24

3.2

ExistingTenure

24

3.3

ContextAnalysis

24

3.4

OpportunitiesandConstraints

24

3.4.1

Opportunities

24

3.4.2

Constraints

28

4EXISTINGSERVICEINFRASTRUCTURE

29

4.1

Roads

29

4.2

DrainageandStorm

waterManagement

29

4.3

WaterandSewerServices

29

4.4

PowerSupply

29

4.5

Telecommunications

29

4.6

MovementNetw

ork

29

4.6.1

ExistingRoadsandTrafficVolume

29

4.6.2

PedestrianandDualUse

Paths

31

4.6.3

PublicTransport

31

4.6.4

CarParking

31

5EXISTINGENVIRONMENT

32

5.1

Topography

32

5.2

ExistingVegetation

32

5.2.1

TheSpringsStructure

PlanArea

32

5.2.2

SwanRiverForeshore

Reserve

32

5.3

HeritageandCulture

34

5.3.1

Hawksburn

RoadFlameTrees

36

5.3.2

AboriginalHeritage

36

6STRUCTUREPLA

N37

6.1

Structure

PlanForm

at

37

6.2

DesignPhilosophy

37

6.2.1

DevelopmentObjectives

37

6.2.2

SustainabilityObjectives

41

6.3

DevelopmentProposal

41

6.3.1

DesignPrinciples

41

6.3.2

VisualIm

pact

42

6.3.3

HousingChoiceandLotYield

44

6.3.4

Retail/Commercial/MixedUse

Development

44

6.3.5

MovementNetw

ork

44

6.3.6

ProvisionofPublicOpenSpace

45

6.3.7

Transport,TrafficSafety

andManagement

54

6.3.8

ProposedInfrastructure

Servicing

55

A53

6.4

DesignGuidelines/DetailedAreaPlans

58

6.4.1

Hawksburn

Road

59

6.4.2

RoweAvenue

59

6.4.3

RoweAvenue–WestResidentialTowers

60

6.4.4

RoweAvenue–EastResidential

60

6.4.5

RoweAvenue–EASTMixedUse

60

6.4.6

GreatEastern

Highway

61

6.4.7

RiversdaleRoad–South

61

6.4.8

RiversdaleRoad–North

62

6.4.9

HighwayPeninsula

62

6.5

PrecinctDevelopmentRequirements

62

6.6

Relationshipto

LiveableNeighbourhoodsCommunity

DesignCodes

65

7IM

PLEMENTATION

66

7.1

Structure

PlanAdoption

66

7.2

Infrastructure

CostSharingProvisions

66

7.2.2

Services

67

7.2.3

Landscaping

67

7.2.4

AssociatedSchemeCosts

68

7.3

DesignGuidelines

68

7.4

DetailedAreaPlans

68

7.5

Subdivision

69

7.6

RoadClosure

69

7.7

CracknellPark

PublicOpenSpace

69

8CONCLU

SION

70

FIGURES

Figure

1:

LocationPlan

Figure

2:

PreviousSpringsPrecinctDevelopmentPlan

Figure

3:

CurrentMetropolitanRegionScheme

Figure

4:

ProposedMetropolitanRegionScheme

Figure

5:

CurrentTownPlanningSchemeZoning

Figure

6:

ExistingandForm

erPark

Areas

Figure

7:

ExistingLandUse

Figure

8:

ContextAnalysisandWalkableCatchments

Figure

9:

OpportunitiesandConstraints

Figure

10:

ExistingServices

Figure

11:

ExistingVegetation

Figure

12:

HeritageSites

Figure

13:

Masterplan

Figure

14A:

Structure

Plan

LandUses

Figure

14B:

Structure

Plan

BuildingHeights

Figure

15:

Structure

PlanSubPrecincts

Figure

16:

ProposedAreasofPublicOpenSpace

Figure

17:

ProposedHawksburn

RoadVillageSpi ne

Figure

18:

ProposedRoweAvenueAmphitheatre

Figure

19:

ProposedRoweAvenueAmphitheatreCross

Section

Figure

20A:

LandscapeConceptPlan

Figure

20B:

LandscapeConceptPlan–VegetationPlan

Figure

21:

ProposedFootpath

Plan

Figure

22:

PrecinctLocations

Figure

23:

Hawksburn

RoadReserve–VillageSpine

Figure

24:

ProposedRoweAvenueStreetscape

Figure

25:

WestResidentialTowers:NewRoadReserve

Figure

26:

ProposedHawksburn

RoadStreetscape

Figure

27:

RiversideRoadReserveandHawksburn

Intersection

APPENDICES

APPENDIXA

ArboriculturalReport

A54

TheSpringsStructure

Plan

04/101

11|Page

1IN

TRODUCTIO

N

In1993,theCityofBelm

ontcommencedinvestigationspertainingto

theproposed

redevelopmentofthedilapidatedinnerurbanareacolloquiallyknownasTheSprings.

The

City

commenced

preparation

ofTown

Planning

Scheme

No.13,a

Guided

DevelopmentScheme,to

facilitate

theredevelopment.However,alack

oflandowner

supportfortheschemeresultedin

thethenMinisterforPlanning,onadvice

from

the

Western

AustralianPlanningCommission(W

APC),rejectingtheschemein

November

2003.

The

Minister

subsequently

instructed

the

then

Department

for

Planning

and

Infrastructure

(DPI)to

reviewtheplanningofTheSpringsandprepare

anewscheme

tobedulypresentedback

totheMinister.TheDPI,in

turn,commissionedLandCorp

toassumetheroleofproject

managerforTheSpringsredevelopmentscheme,witha

strictemphasisonensuringthatacoordinatedapproach

betakentowardsthemaster

planningofthearea,withclose

consultationwiththeDPI,CityofBelm

ont(theCity)

andthesite’slandowners.

Since

then,theproject

hasbeenthesubj ect

ofsubstantialnegotiation,consultation,

research

and

design,in

an

endeavour

todeliver

aMaster

Plan

vision

and

implementationframework

thatoptimisestheuniqueandvariedattributesofthesite

anditslocation,meets

withtheapprovalofthemajority

ofthelandowners,and

satisfiesthestatutory

andpolicy

expectationsoftheCityandtheDPI.

Thisprocess

hasculm

inatedin

thepreparationofafinalMasterPlanandStructure

Planwhichare

presentedin

this

report.TheMasterPlanis

intendedto

visually

conveythedevelopmentvisionforTheSprings,to

helpprovidethecommunitywitha

clearunderstanding

ofthe

underlying

intentofthe

form

alStructure

Plan.The

Structure

Plan

willultim

ately

provide

the

regulatory

guidingframework

forthe

redevelopmentofTheSpringsinto

avibrantmedium

tohighdensity

residential

mixeduse

development.

Thereportrepresentsthework

ofvariousconsultantsonall

aspects

of

the

proposal,

the

outcomes

from

the

landowner

workshops

and

consultationwiththeCity,theDPI,andthebroadercommunity.

The

Structure

Plan

has

been

prepared

inaccordance

with

the

Liveable

Neighbourh

oodsCommunityDesignCode,andotherrelevantState

andLocalplanning

policies.

1.1

LOCATIO

N

The

Springscomprisesapproximately

13.6haofland,in

fragmented

ownership,

boundedbyGraham

Farm

erFreeway,GreatEastern

Highway,BrightonRoadandthe

SwanRiverforeshore,asshowninFigure

1.

Thesite

isstrategicallylocatedapproximately4km

eastofthePerthCBDand700750

metresnortheast

oftheBurswoodTrain

Station.Itisalsoapproximately700metres

from

theBurswoodResortandCasino.

Themain

roadaccess

into

theprecinct

isvia

thesignalcontrolledintersectionat

GreatEastern

Highway

and

Brighton

Road,with

secondary

access

available

by

RiversdaleRoadviaabridgeovertheGraham

Farm

erFreeway.

The

precinct

enjoysdirect

interface

with

the

Swan

Riverforeshore,and

direct

frontageonto

GreatEastern

Highway,albeitwithlimitedvehicle

access.Whilst

the

site

directlyabutstheGraham

Farm

erFreeway,there

isasignificantleveldifferential

overmuch

ofthisfrontagelimitinganyvisualrelationship.

1.2

STUDYTEAM

Inorderto

achievethemostsuccessfuloutcomesfortheproject,amultidisciplinary

consultantteam

wascompiled,comprising:

LandCorp

PrincipalDevelopers/ProjectDirector

NSProjects

ProjectManagers

TaylorBurrellBarnett

TownPlanningandUrbanDesign

Hassell

Architecture/U

rbanDesign

PlanE

LandscapeArchitects

Cossill&Webley

CivilEngineers

Estill&Associates

CommunityConsultation

RileyConsulting

TrafficEngineers

ColliersInternational

Valuations

SinclairKnightMerz

TrafficEngineers

A55

TheSpringsStructure

Plan

04/101

13|Page

1.3

PROJECTBACKGROUND

1.3.1

SITEHISTORY

Thelandis

zoned‘SpecialDevelopmentPrecinct’undertheCityofBelm

ontTown

PlanningSchemeNo.14(TPS14).

Priorto

theland’scurrentzoning,anumberofzoningsandreservationshaveexisted

within

theprecinct.In

particular,underCouncil’spreviousTownPlanningSchemeNo

11,themainzoningsincludedResidentialR80BandBusiness

Enterprise

Zone.

Anamendmentto

theMetropolitanRegionSchemewasundertakenin

theearly

1990’sto

allowfortherelocationoftheoriginalBurswoodBridgereservationfurther

easttowardstheBunbury

RailBridge.ThiseffectivelyremovedthedivisiveControlled

Access

Highwayreservation,whichwaspositionedcentrallythroughthesubject

site.

TheControlledAccess

Highwayreservationwassubsequentlyrelocatednorthwest

of

OrrongRoad,andnowform

stheGraham

Farm

erFreeway.

Asaresultoftheshiftin

theControlledAccess

Highwayreservation,TheSprings

urbanprecinct

remainedintact.Theareawasheavilyblighted,andtherefore

offered

significantredevelopmentopportunities.

Topromote

anintegratedapproach

tothearea’s

redevelopmentCouncilinitiated

SchemeAmendmentNo.78to

itsthenTownPlanningSchemeNo.11in

March1995.

Theamendmentsoughtto

delete

allexistingzoningsandreservationswithin

the

precinct

(apartfrom

threelargestrata

unitcomplexes)andprescribeablanketzoning

entitled‘SpecialDevelopmentPrecinct’.

AmendmentNo.78wasgazettedon4April1996.

The‘SpecialDevelopmentPrecinct’zoningstillremainsunderthecurrentTown

PlanningSchemeNo.14.Furtheramendments

havebeenundertakenbytheCityto

introduce

DevelopmentAreasandStructure

Planprovisions,andthese

are

discussed

inmore

detailinSection2.1.2ofthereport.

1.3.2

CITYOFBELMONTTOWN

PLANNIN

GSCHEMENO.13

In1993theCityofBelm

ontadvisedtheWAPCthataGuidedDevelopmentScheme

wasproposedoverthesubject

site

toassistin

theredevelopmentoftheareain

the

mostorderlyplanningmanner.

Toassistin

thecompositionanddevelopmenttheScheme,theCityengagedthe

servicesofaprivate

SchemeManager.

TheCityinstructedthemanagerthattheredevelopmentschemecould

onlyproceed

ifasuitable

participatory

arrangementcould

bereachedwithalllandowners

within

theprecinct.

Theparticipatory

arrangementwasrequireddueto

thesignificant

subdivisionandschemeheadworkscostsinvolvedinthedevelopmentoftheland.

In1996,theCityofBelm

ontprogressedwith

thepreparationofTown

Planning

SchemeNo.13,asaGuidedDevelopmentScheme.

TheSchemewaspreparedandinitiatedbytheCityasameansoffacilitatingthe

orderly

and

proper

planning

ofthe

precinct

and

addressing

issues

regarding

headworksandsubdivisionalcostsassociatedwiththesitesredevelopment.

Theaim

oftheScheme,whichwasexpressedin

theSpringsPrecinct

Development

Plan(Figure

2)wasto

create

anUrbanVillage,accommodatingupwardsof850

people,consistingofamix

ofhighquality

residential(R40R100),office,resort

and

associated

land

uses.

This

developmentwasproposed

tobe

complemented

by

parkland,new

roads,

serviceinfrastructure

andotherfacilities.

Theplanis

further

discussedinSection1.3.2.1.

Thepremiseofthedevelopmentplanwasto

allow

foramix

ofuses,

highquality

development,landuse

compatibility,viable

development,andachievementofthe

highestreturn.

In2001theCityforw

ardedSchemeNo.13to

theCommissionforfinalapproval.

However,

there

wassignificantlandowneropposition,and

opposition

from

Main

RoadsWA,to

theproposedscheme.Thisoppositionrelatedto

matters

includingthe

following:

The

requirementfora

Planning

Scheme,in

particularone

thatrequired

paymentofcontributionsbylandowners;

A57

TheSpringsStructure

Plan

04/101

15|Page

Thelack

ofcertainty

orguaranteeforparticipatinglandowners

inrelationto

thecostof,andreturn

from,development;and

Thattheproposeddevelopmentplandid

notidentify

the‘optimum’landuse

andanydeficienciesthatmightoccurasaresultoftheSchemeprocess.

Asaresultofthese

uncertaintiesandconcernsregardingtheproposedScheme,a

numberoflandowners

indicatedthattheywould

notmaketheirlandavailable

for

developmentasstipulatedundertheScheme.

InOctober2003TheCommissionconsideredfinalapprovalofTownPlanningScheme

13andrecommendedthattheMinisternotapprovetheScheme,dueto

thelack

of

supportindicatedfrom

landowners

andtheunlikelihoodoftheSchemebeingableto

beim

plemented.

1.3.2.1

THESPRINGSPRECINCTDEVELOPMENTPLAN

TheSpringsPrecinct

DevelopmentPlan,shownin

Figure

2waspreparedto

beused,

inconjunctionwiththeproposedTownPlanningSchemeNo.13,intheassessmentof

developmentproposalswithintheprecinct.

ProposedTownPlanningSchemeNo.13statedthat“theproposalsfortheScheme

Area

are

that

itbe

redeveloped

inaccordance

with

‘The

Springs

Precinct

DevelopmentPlan’.

Theplanproposedamix

oflanduses,whilst

incorporatingasmanyoftheexisting

featuresandinfrastructure

aspossible.

Theplanwasneverim

plementedgiventhatthemain

vehicle

foritsim

plementation,

TownPlanningSchemeNo.13,wasneverpromulgated.

1.4

PUBLIC

CONSULTATIO

N

FollowingtherejectionofTownPlanningSchemeNo.13in2003,itisunderstoodthat

thesubsequentdirectionoftheMinisterto

prepare

anew

proposalemphasisedthe

importance

of

attaining

stronger

community/stakeholder

support

through

an

effectiveconsultationprocess,andtheestablishmentofaworkinggroupinvolving

theCityandtheDPI.

Consequently,thestrategyforproducinganew

development

scheme

forThe

Springswasstructured

around

aprocess

involving

substantial

consultationbytheproponentwithauthoritiesandtheprecinct’sprivate

landowners,

andcontinuousengagementbetw

eenLandCorp,theCityandtheDPIthroughthe

workinggroup.

ConsultationforTheSpringsRivervale

recommencedin

October2004,andhasbeen

managed

intw

ostages.

InStageOneoftheconsultation

aworkinggroup

was

established,comprisingDPI,LandCorp,CityofBelm

ontandprivate

landowners,to

coordinate

thepreparationofaconceptplanandim

plementationstrategyforthe

redevelopment.

StageTwo

oftheconsultation

involved

thedevelopmentofthe

form

alStructure

Planthatwould

beusedto

facilitate

developmentanddeterm

ine

landownercontributions.

Theconsultationhasallowedtheproponentto

receiveandconsiderawidevariety

of

viewpoints

inthedesignprocess.

LandCorp

hasworkedcollaboratively

withthe

stakeholders

inanendeavourto

resolveallissuesrelatingto

thefinaldesignofthe

planandthecostsharingarrangement.

1.4.1

LANDOWNERWORKSHOPS

Theproponentissuedaninvitationto

theprivate

landowners

oftheprecinct,aswell

asrepresentativesfrom

theCityandtheDPI,to

beinvolvedin

theplanningand

designprocess

fortheredevelopmentthroughaseriesoflandownerworkshops.

The

workshopstructure

wassuch

thattheworkshopswere

designedto,firstly,inform

the

participants

ofthe

nature

ofthe

project,the

governmentagreements

etc.and

secondly,to

gain

somebroadindicationofcommunityexpectations,

concernsand

desiresinterm

softhedevelopmentvision.

Severalindividualmeetingshavebeenheld

withlandowners

todiscuss

theirspecific

issuesandcircumstances.

Afurtherlandownerbriefingwasundertakenonthe13thFebruary

2006.Thepurpose

ofthis

meetingis

tointroduce

thelandowners

totheStructure

Planandto

seek

feedback

on

the

proposal,

priorto

embarking

on

the

next

stage

ofdefining

developmentcosts.

Duringthecourseoftheworkshops,

arangeofalternativedevelopmentconcepts

were

form

ulatedasaresultofthevariousoutcomesreflectingboth

thediversityof

communityviewsandtheparametersoftheprojectteam’svisionandobjectives.A59

16|Page

The

significance

ofthe

community

workshop

exercise

wasthatit

enabled

the

proponent,

the

project

team

and

Councilrepresentativesto

gain

afirsthand

appreciationoftheconcernsandexpectationsofthecommunityin

relationto

The

Springsredevelopment.

1.4.2

PUBLIC

MEETIN

G/WORKSHOP

Oneinform

alpublicmeeting/w

orkshopwasheld

withthewidercommunityto

seek

feedback

onthedraftStructure

PlanforTheSprings.

Thepresentationofthedraft

Structure

Planwasfollowedbyaworkshopwhereby

each

tablewasableto

reviewtheplanindetailandprovidefeedback

toamemberof

theprojectteam.

1.4.3

CONSULTATIO

NWITHTHECITYOFBELMONT

TheCityofBelm

ontwasidentifiedasakeystakeholderin

theplanningprocess

and

wasregularlyconsultedthroughoutthecourseoftheplanning.Representativesof

both

theCityandthethenDPImetin

Project

SteeringCommitteemeetingsand

participatedinsomeoftheprojectteam

meetings.

TheCityofBelm

ontwasrepresentedontheBelm

ontSpringsProject

Team

bythe

ManagerPlanningandtheDirectorCommunityandStatutory

Services.

TheProject

Team

met

throughout

the

consultation

period

toco

ordinate

and

plan

the

consultationprocess.TheCity’srepresentativesprovidedconsiderable

inputinto

the

consultative

process

and

statutory

planning

processesand

provided

progressive

updatesto

theelectedmembers.

1.4.4

COMMUNITYISSUES

Whilst

theplanwasdesignedwithin

thenorm

allyrequiredtechnicalparameters

concerningroaddesign,servicing,urbandesignprinciples,etc,severalmatters

were

raised

by

the

landowners

inthe

Precinct

during

the

consultation

process.In

particular,theongoingkeyconcernswere:

PLANNINGISSUES

PublicOpen

Space

(including

Clinic

Park);

whetherornotanyadditional

contributionshouldberequired.

Acceptableheightanddensity

throughoutthearea.

Trafficmanagement.

IMPLEMENTATIO

NISSUES

Neglect

ofthearea;theCityshould

payforupgradeworksthatshould

already

havebeenundertakenthroughnorm

almaintenance.

Strata

block

involvementandequity;theextentto

whichownersinstrata

units

willbenefitfrom

thescheme,whichpropertiesshould

contribute

andhow

much.

Costapportionmentandhighheadworkscosts.

Previouspowerup

grade;landowners

havealreadypaid

forunderground

powerupgrade,whyshouldtheynowbepayingextra.

Itwasagreedbytheproject

team

thatafinaldesignreviewwasrequiredto

respond

tothe

planning

concerns,

and

thata

finalreview

ofthe

contribution

scheme

principlesshould

beundertakento

address

theim

plementationissues.

Thedesign

reviewconsideredarangeofalternativedesignoptionswhichwere

discussedbythe

projectteam,withtheinvolvementoftechnicalofficersfrom

theCityandtheDPI.

Thereviewultim

atelyledto

creationofthecurrentStructure

Plan.

Thereviewofim

plementationissueswasstillin

progress

atthetimeofpreparingthis

report.

A60

TheSpringsStructure

Plan

04/101

17|Page

2PLANNIN

GCONTEXT

2.1

STATUTORYPLANNIN

GCONTEXT

2.1.1

FORMERMETROPOLITAN

REGIO

NSCHEME

UndertheMetropolitanRegionSchemethesite

iszoned‘Urban’.

Thesubject

site

abuts

a‘ParksandRecreation’reserve,whichextendsalongthe

northern

boundary

ofthesite,anda‘Primary

RegionalRoads’

reserveforGreat

Eastern

HighwayandGraham

Farm

erFreewayalongthesouth

eastern

andsouth

western

edgesoftheredevelopmentarea.

AtthetimeofpreparingtheStructure

Plan,portionoftheStructure

Planextended

into

thePrimary

RegionalRoadreservation,asillustratedbelowinFigure

3.

Figure

3:Form

erMetropolitanRegionScheme

2.1.1.1

METROPOLITANREGIO

NSCHEME

DuringtheprocessingoftheStructure

Plan,Main

Roads(W

A)soughtareductionin

thewidth

ofthe‘Primary

RegionalRoads’

reservation

(portion

ofGreatEastern

Highway)asspecifiedundertheMRS.MRWAInternalinvestigationsfoundthatthe

reservationwasexcessiveforthefuture

trafficrequirementsforthearea.

TheexistingMRSzoningisillustratedwithinFigure

4below.

Figure

4:MetropolitanRegionScheme

A61

18|Page

2.1.2

CITYOFBELMONTTOWN

PLANNIN

GSCHEMENO.14

The

subject

land

iscurrentlyzoned

‘SpecialDevelopmentPrecinct’,

pursuantto

Clause

10.8oftheCityofBelm

ontTPS14(referFigure

5).

Figure

5:CurrentTownPlanningSchemeZoning

Clause

10.2.4

ofthe

Scheme

states

thatThe

Springs

isone

offourSpecial

DevelopmentPrecincts,withtheotherthreebeingAscotWaters,NulsenHaven,and

BelgraviaParklands.

Underthecurrentzoning,alldevelopment,includingsingle

housesrequirePlanning

Approvalofthe

Council.

The

provisionsofthe

ResidentialDevelopmentCodes

relatingto

frontandrearsetbacks,carparkingandopenspace

within

thiszonemay

bevariedatthediscretionoftheCouncilprovidedaLocalPlanningPolicy

isadopted

pursuantto

Clause

2.3oftheScheme.

DuringtheprocessingoftheStructure

Plan,theCityhasintroducedDevelopment

Areas.

TheSpringshasnow

alsobeenincludedwithin

Schedule

14–Development

AreasDA11,whichrequiresanApprovedStructure

Planto

guidesubdivisionand

development.

2.2

STRATEGIC

PLANNIN

GCONTEXT

2.2.1

STATEGOVERNMENTLEVEL

2.2.1.1

LIVEABLENEIGHBOURHOODS

LiveableNeighbourhoodssetsoutpoliciesandpracticesthatencourageasustainable

urbanstructure

ofwalkable

neighbourhoodsclusteringto

supporttowncentreswith

compactness

ofform

,compatibilityofmixeduses,reducedcardependence

andease

ofaccess

toemployment,retailandcommunityfacilities.

Theprincipleaim

sofLiveableNeighbourhoodsare

listedasfollows:

Tofosterasense

ofcommunityandstronglocalidentity

inneighbourhoods

andtowns;

Toprovideaccess

generallybywayofaninterconnectednetw

ork

ofstreets;

Toensure

anactivestreetlanduse

interface;

Tofacilitate

new

developmentthatsupportsefficiency

ofpublictransport

systemsandsafe

directaccess

tothesystem

forresidents;

Tofacilitate

mixeduse

developmentwhichisrobustandcanchangeovertime;

Toprovideavariety

oflotsizesandhousingtypes;

Protectionofenvironmentalareasandtheinclusionofsignificantculturaland

physicalfeaturesinto

designs;

To

provide

acomprehensive

open

space

and

urban

watermanagement

netw

ork;and

Tofacilitate

costeffectiveandresourceefficientdevelopment.

Thevitalingredientsofneighbourhooddesignrelevantto

TheSpringsincludes:

A62

TheSpringsStructure

Plan

04/101

19|Page

Compactness

somost

people

canwalkto

localcentresandpublictransportin

fiveminutes;

Build

streets

where

people

are

encouraged

towalk,cycle

ortake

public

transportratherthandrive;

Connect

thestreets

inasimple

pattern

sopeople

canchoose

differentroutes

andmakeshorttripsto

localfacilities;

Locate

windowsandverandasoverlookingstreetsto

detercrim

e;

Provideopportunitiesforlocalemploymentin

shopsandbusinessesclose

to

people'shomes;

Offerawidechoiceofhousingandlotsizesanduse

aflexible

layoutso

the

areacanbechangedto

meetfuture

needs;

Respondto

physicalcharacteristicsofthesite

toreinforcelocalcharacterand

protectnaturalfeatures;

Provideneighbourhoodparksofdifferentsizesandtypesforavariety

ofuses

andwithinafiveminute

walkformostpeople;and

Streetsare

laid

outonamodifiedgridorconnectednetw

ork,so

thatthere

are

alternate

routesto

every

destination.

This

perm

itsmost

streets

tobeof

humanscale,withslowertrafficin

aperm

eable

andlegible

netw

ork.Streets

becomeequitableforboth

vehicleandpedestrians.

Liveable

Neighbourhoodsrequiresdetailedcontext

andsite

analysisandcompliance

withCoderequirementsto

enableproposalsto

beconsideredundertheCode.

2.2.1.2

DCPOLICY1.6

PLANNINGTOSUPPORTTRANSIT

USEAND

TRANSIT

ORIENTEDDEVELOPMENT(2005)

Thispolicy

seeksto

maximisethebenefits

tothecommunityofaneffectiveandwell

usedpublictransitsystem

bypromotingplanninganddevelopmentoutcomesthat

willsupport

and

sustain

publictransport

use,and

which

willachieve

the

more

effectiveintegrationoflanduse

andpublictransportinfrastructure.

Amendments

tothe

policy

were

adopted

bythe

WAPC

in2005

toreflect

the

Government’svisionforasustainablefuture

asoutlinedinNetw

ork

CityandtheState

SustainabilityStrategy.

Within

existingdevelopedareas,

there

are

clearopportunitiesto

intensify

existing

activitiesandto

promote

new

usesthatwillmakebetteruse

oftransitfacilitiesand

services.

There

are

obviousbenefits

ofa

planning

policy

thatencouragesthe

integrationoflanduse

andtransitfacilities.

Highresidentialdensitiesandmixeduse

developmentin

thewalkable

catchments

oftransitfacilitieshavethepotentialto

reduce

cardependence;to

increase

accessibilityforthose

withoutaccess

toprivate

cars;to

reduce

congestionontheroadnetw

ork

andthedemandfornewroadspace;

toreduce

fuelconsumptionandair

pollutionandto

providequality,diverseand

affordableform

sofhousinganddevelopment.

These

benefitscombineto

produce

an

attractive

and

viable

alternative

tocarbased

suburban

and

urban

fringe

development.

The

policy

isan

integralpart

ofa

range

ofpoliciesdirected

towardsgreater

sustainability,in

accordance

with

the

State

PlanningStrategyand

Statementof

PlanningPolicy

3UrbanGrowth

andSettlements(SPP3).

Thepolicy

containsthefollowingmainpolicy

measuresrelevantto

thesubjectland:

TRANSIT

SUPPORTIVEDEVELOPMENTPATTERNS

Urbanstructure

isthefoundationofatransitsupportiveenvironment.

Effective

transitisfosteredbyamore

compact

urbanform

,mixeduses,higherdevelopment

densitiesandactivitylevels,andespeciallybyspatialpatternsofdevelopmentthat

makeiteasierto

planandefficientlyoperate

transitservices,andforusers

toaccess

those

servicesonce

theyare

inplace.

Streetpattern

tobe

designed

toenhance

walkability

and

tofacilitate

pedestrianaccess

totransitfacilities;

Streetpatternsshouldfacilitate

directpedestrianconnections;

Adiversityoflotsizesin

subdivisionswithin

transitprecincts,togetherwitha

robust

streetlayout,

isencouraged

as

itprovides

greaterflexibility

of

developmentoptions,

andenhance

therobustness

oftheurbanstructure,

makingiteasierfortheprecinct

toevolveovertimethoughaprogressive

intensification

ofactivitiesand

changesto

usesthatwillmore

effectively

supporttransituses;and

A63

20|Page

Agridbasedstreetpattern

issupportedbecause

itdispersesgeneraltraffic

more

effectivelyto

limitcongestionthatcanim

pedebusservicesandprovides

perm

eability.

LANDUSETOSUPPORTTRANSIT

Theleveloftransitpatronageisclosely

linkedto

thequality

andfrequency

ofthe

serviceprovidedand,in

turn,theserviceable

tobeprovidedis

afunctionofthe

density

andmixoflandusesthatgenerate

potentialtransitusers.Anappropriate

mix

andbalance

oflandusescanbeamajorcontributorto

theuse

andeffectiveness

of

transitfacilities.

Within

transitorientedprecincts,theemphasisshould

beonuses

whichare

likelyto

promote

transituse

andwhichwillbenefitbybeingaccessible

to,

andby,transitfacilities.Keylanduse

elementsinclude:

Residentialdevelopmentshould

beencouragedclose

totransitfacilitiesto

assistin

creatingasense

ofplace

thatmakesatransitorientateddevelopment

(TOD)precinctmore

thanjustaplace

where

transitisavailable;

Higherdensity

residentialdevelopment,placesgreaternumbers

ofresidents

close

totransitservices,whichcorrelatesto

anincrease

intransitpatronage;

Densitiesshould

beincreasedthroughasubdivisionpattern

whichallowsfor

theprogressiveintensificationofactivities;

Otherusesthatare

likely

tobesignificantgenerators

oftransittripsshould

alsobelocatedclose

totransitfacilitieswheneverpossible.

Relevantuses

includeofficesand

otherhigherdensity

employmentgeneratingactivities,

intensiveleisure

facilitiesandretailing.Sim

ilarconsiderationsapply

toaged

persons,

schools

andtertiary

educationuses,

hospitals,communityfacilities

andsocialservices;

Locatingeducationalbuildingswithin

TODprecinctsisappropriate

where

they

includemore

intensiveelements

oftheinstitutionsuch

asteachingfacilities

andindoorrecreationfacilities,

howevermore

landextensive/low

intensity

elements

ofschoolsandothersimilarpublicuses,i.e.playingfield

should

not

bedominantelementswithinthewalkablecatchmentoftransitfacilities;and

Desirable

tolocate

majorcivic

buildingsin

TOD

precincts,

where

theycan

activelycontribute

totheamenityoftheareaandactassignificantgenerators

oftransituse.

THEPUBLIC

DOMAIN

INTODPRECINCTS

Alm

ost

alltransitusers

are

pedestriansforatleast

partoftheirjourney,evenifitis

only

forashort

walk.Theamenity,quality

andsafety

ofthepublicdomain

within

transit

oriented

precincts

are

therefore

importantfactors

inestablishing

and

maintaininganenvironmentthatwillencouragepeople

toaccess

transitfacilitieson

foot,aswellaspromotingwalkinggenerallywithinthese

neighbourhoods.

TRANSIT

SUPPORTIVEDESIGN

Akeypolicy

requirementistheim

portance

ofanappropriate

framingurbanstructure

intransitorientedprecincts.

Landuse

thatpromotesinterest,interactionandactivity

should

beusedto

anim

ate

frontagesalongtheprincipalpedestrianroutesleadingto

andfrom

thetransitfacility.

INTEGRATINGTRANSIT

INFRASTRUCTURE

Thedesignandoperationoftransitinfrastructure

should

assistin

integratingtransit

facilitieswiththeirsurroundings.

2.2.1.3

WAPCDC2.3

PUBLIC

OPENSPACEIN

RESIDENTIALAREAS

(1998)

WAPCPolicy

DC2.3,‘PublicOpenSpace

inResidentialAreas’,statesthat10%

ofthe

gross

subdivisibleareaofasubdivisionshallbegivenupfreeofcostbythesubdivider

forpublicopenspace,whichis

consistentwithSection20A

oftheform

erTown

PlanningandDevelopmentAct

1928.DC2.3

hasbeenthebasisofopenspace

policy

inthe

State

formany

years

and

emanatesfrom

the

recommendationsofthe

MetropolitanRegionScheme.

Thepolicy

outlinesthattheWAPC“is

aware

ofthecontinuingdebate

aboutthe

validityofcertain

aspectsofthispolicy

inthelightofsuch

matters

asrestraints

on

localgovernmentexpenditure

(withconsequentlimitingeffectsuponitsabilityto

developandmaintain

openspace),

theneedto

ensure

adequate

openspace

in

existingurbanareasandthebalance

betw

eenpassiveandactiverecreationalareas.

Thispolicy

issubjectto

acomprehensivereview.”

Thepolicy’smainobjectivesare:

Ensure

adequate

andwelllocatedareasofpublicopenspace

thatwillenhance

theamenityofthearea;

A64

TheSpringsStructure

Plan

04/101

21|Page

Facilitate

theprovisionofcommunityfacilitiesin

conjunctionwithlandceded

forpublicopenspace;and

Protect

and

conservewetlands,

watercoursesand

foreshoresadjacentto

residentialdevelopment.

ThisPolicy

hassince

beensupersededbyLiveableNeighbourhoods,theobjectivesare

howeverconsistentwithLiveableNeighbourhoods.

2.2.2

LOCALGOVERNMENTLEVEL

2.2.2.1

CITYOFBELMONTLOCALPLANNINGPOLICYNO.9–BUILDING

HEIGHTANDBULKALONGGREATEASTERNHIGHWAY

Pursuantto

Clause

2.5

ofTPS14,theCityofBelm

ontLocalPlanningPolicy

No.9was

adoptedto

“controlth

eheightandbulk

ofbuildingsonland

abuttingGreatEastern

Highwaywithin

theCityofBelm

ont”.AlllandabuttingGreatEastern

Highwaywithin

theCityofBelm

ontissubjectto

thispolicy,includingTheSprings.

Thepolicy’sprincipalobjectiveisto

“ensure

thattheamenityofexistingandfuture

developmentalongthehighwayisnotcompromisedbytheapprovalofdevelopment

thatisinappropriate

inrespectofitsheightandbulk”.

2.2.2.2

CITYOFBELMONTLOCALPLANNINGPOLICYNO.17–PUBLIC

OPENSPACEPOLICY

TheCityofBelm

ontLocalPlanningPolicy

No.17outlinestherequirements

forthe

provisionofpublicopenspace

inresidentialareas.

Thepolicy

waspreparedasameansofcoordinatingtheprovisionofpublicopen

space

within

theCityto

reduce

thenumberofunusable

areasofopenspace

being

createdasaresultofsm

alllotsubdivisions.

Thepolicy

allowsCouncilto

choose

themost

suitable

option

inrelation

tothe

provision

ofpublicopen

space

arisingfrom

subdivisions,

which

mayincludethe

request

forphysicalopenspace,acash

contributionin

lieuofland,oracombination

ofacash

contributionandlandinaratioto

bedeterm

inedbytheCouncil.

2.3

CURRENTPROVISIO

NOFPUBLIC

OPEN

SPACE

2.3.1

HISTORYOFOPEN

SPACEPROVISIO

NWITHIN

THESPRIN

GS

ANDTHECITYOFBELMONT

Twoareasofpublicopenspace

were

createdsubsequentto

theoriginalsubdivision

ofthearea,priorto

1956.These

were:

1.

CracknellPark,acquiredbythethenBelm

ontPark

RoadsBoard

in1927;and

2.

ClinicPark,acquiredbytheRoadsBoard

betw

een1933and1945.

Noforeshore

reserveexistedalongthenorthern

boundary

ofthesite

untillandwas

compulsorilyacquiredbytheWAPCbetw

een1982and2001undertheMetropolitan

RegionSchemeAct.

Thelandthatwascompulsorily

acquiredisnow

reservedas‘ParksandRecreation’

undertheMetropolitanRegionScheme.

Anadditionalareaofforeshore

reserve,thathasnotbeenacquiredbytheWAPC,is

thenorthern

(foreshore)sectionofCracknellPark.Thislandstillremainsprimarilyas

freehold

landin

theCity’sownership;howeveritsitswithin

theParksandRecreation

Reservethatdenotestheforeshore

reserveforthepurpose

oftheMRS.This

is

furtherexplainedinSection2.3.2.

Figure

6showsthelocationoftheareasdescribedabove.

Thehistory

andcurrentstatusofthetw

oareasofPOSandexistingforeshore

reserve

are

describedbelow.

A65

22|Page

Figure

6:ExistingandForm

erPark

Areas

2.3.1.1

CRACKNELLPARK

Althoughnotshownaspart

ofthe‘SpecialDevelopmentPrecinct’CracknellPark

is

encompassedbytheredevelopmentareaand,forthepurpose

ofthereport,willbe

includedwithintheredevelopmentarea.

CracknellPark

comprisesLots27,28andCrownReserve45534RiversdaleRoad,with

atotalarea(excludingtheforeshore

reserve)of0.6259ha.

CracknellPark

abuts

theforeshore

reserveandislocatedalongRiversdale

Road.The

Park

wasacquiredbytheCityandcreatedsubsequentto

theoriginalsubdivisionof

thearea.

Portion

ofthe

lots

thatform

Cracknell

Park

are

situated

within

the

foreshore

recreationareaasdefinedbytheMRSParksandRecreationReserve.Theportionof

these

lotswithintheforeshore

reservecomprises0.2765ha.

CracknellPark

iscurrentlyreserved‘ParksandRecreation’undertheCityofBelm

ont

TownPlanningSchemeNo.14,is

allocatedaspublicparklandandis

proposedto

remainasthisuse

inthefuture.

Thepark

enjoysdirect

access

totheSwanRiverandassociatedRiverForeshore

reserveandiswellconnectedto

theprecinct.

CracknellPark

wasoriginallypurchasedbythethenBelm

ontPark

RoadsBoard

on10

June1927from

the‘Belm

ontYoungMen’sClub’forthepurpose

ofapublicpark.

Thelandwaspurchasedaspart

ofacontract

withtheClub,statingthatshould

the

‘Belm

ontYoungMen’sClub’sellthelandto

the‘Belm

ontPark

RoadBoard’,thatall

debtsowedbytheClubmustberelinquished.

Currently,CracknellPark

iswellusedforpassiverecreationalusesbyresidentsofthe

precinct,aswellasworkerswhose

businessesare

locatedwithin,orinclose

proximity

of,theprecinct(referto

Photos1,2and3).

Photo

1Photo

2

Photo

3

A66

TheSpringsStructure

Plan

04/101

23|Page

2.3.1.2

CLINIC

PARK

Lots

100,101,102,103GtEastern

Highwayare

locatedwithin

TheSpringsprecinct.

Theycomprise

atotalareaof0.4013haandwere,in

thepast,collectivelyreferredto

asClinic

Park

(presumably

referring

tothe

infanthealth

clinic

thatpreviously

operatedontheland).

Lot100waspurchasedbytheCityofBelm

onton14March1933andLots101,102,&

103were

resumedcompulsorily

bytheCityon27June1945,forthepurpose

of

creatingapublicpark,underthePublicWorksAct.

Thelandwaszoned‘HighwayDevelopment’undertheCity’searlierTownPlanning

Scheme,TPSNo.6.However,thelandwaseffectivelybeingusedforthepurpose

ofa

publicpark

and,asaconsequence,wasrezonedin

1988to

‘ParksandRecreation’

undertheCity’sTownPlanningSchemeNo.11.

Thelandwassubsequentlyrezonedto

‘SpecialDevelopmentPrecinct’aspart

of

AmendmentNo.78

on

13

March

1995.This

zone

embodied

theentire

Springs

precinct.

TheCityhasresolvedto

dispose

ofthelandastheclinicnolongeroperatesandthe

landis

notwelllocatedforrecreationaluse.Therecentrezoningofthelandnow

offers

theopportunityto

consideralternativedevelopmentpossibilitiesconsistent

withtheoverallprecinctdevelopmentobjectives.

2.3.1.3

FORESHORERESERVE

Aportion

ofallprivately

owned

lots

frontingthe

Swan

Riverwascompulsorily

acquiredbytheWAPCforthepurpose

ofcreatingaforeshore

reserve.Thislandis

nowreserved‘ParksandRecreation’undertheMetropolitanRegionScheme.

Thereserveiscurrentlyin

agenerallygoodconditionandcontainsadualuse

path

andrecentlyplantedvegetation(referto

Photos4,5,6and7).A

more

detailed

descriptionofthevegetationcharacteristicsoftheforeshore

reserveisprovidedin

Section5.2.2.

Photo

4Photo

5

Photo

6Photo

7

Thesectionofforeshore

reservedirectlyabuttingCracknellPark

isasm

allergrassed

areathatcontainsseveraltablesandchairssuitable

forpassiverecreationaluse.

(Referto

Photos8and9). Photo

8Photo

9

A67

24|Page

3SITEANALYSIS

3.1

PHYSICALDESCRIPTIO

N

The

subject

site

gentlyrisesfrom

GreatEastern

Highwayto

an

east

west

ridge

runningcentrallythroughthesite;theland

thengentlyfallsnorthward

towards

Riversdale

Road,and,northofRiversdale

Road,slopessteeplytowardstheriver.Site

levelsare

describedmore

specificallyinSection5.1.

Those

lotslocatednorthofRiversdaleRoadenjoyextensiveriverviews.

Severalview

corridorsalsoexistwithinthesite

createdbythecurrentroadlayout.

Thesite

hascontainedavariety

oflandusessince

itsoriginalsubdivision,withthe

predominantlanduse

beinglow

density

single

residential.Variousotherlanduses

stilloperate

within

the

precinct

and

include

aplace

ofworship

and

various

commerciallanduses,whichpredominantlyfrontGreatEastern

Highway.

Much

oftheareaisnow

severelydegradedwithasignificantportionoftheprecinct

comprisingvacantland.Themajority

ofdilapidatedhousingwasdemolishedin2005.

Aplanoutliningtheexistinglanduseslocatedonsite

isincludedatFigure

7.

3.2

EXISTIN

GTENURE

Thesite

currentlycomprises93separate

allotm

ents.LandCorp

currentlyownsover

67%

oftheland.Atthetimeofwritingthisreport,there

are

22lots

remainingin

private

ownership.

3.3

CONTEXTANALYSIS

TheSpringsPrecinct

ispositionedasaprime‘Gateway’developmentsite

tothePerth

CBD,andto

theCityofBelm

ont,locatedattheaxisoftw

omajorarterialtransport

routes;theGraham

Farm

erFreeway&GreatEastern

Highway.

The

site

islocated

approximately

700750

metreswalk

from

the

Burswood

rail

station,andprovidesgoodconnectivityforpedestrians,cyclists

andvehiclesto

the

Station,via

an

existing

bridge

betw

een

The

Springsand

the

neighbouring

light

industrialareato

thewestofGraham

Farm

erFreeway.

Anexistingpedestrianunderpass

islocatedatthesouthern

cornerofthesite

which

allows

pedestrians/cyclists

direct

access

toexisting

retail

facilities

and

other

operationalcommerciallanduseslocatedalongGreatEastern

Highway.

TheBurswoodredevelopmentareaislocatedapproximately350metreswest

ofthe

subjectsite

andtheCasino/H

otelislocatedapproximately700metresaway.

PerthCityis

approximately

5km

west

ofthesubject

site,via

theGraham

Farm

er

Freeway.

ThecontextanalysisisdepictedinFigure

8.

3.4

OPPORTUNITIESANDCONSTRAIN

TS

Thesiteskeyopportunitiesandconstraintsare

depictedonFigure

9.

3.4.1

OPPORTUNITIES

Variousopportunitieswere

identifiedand,where

possible,integratedinto

thedesign

oftheStructure

Plan.Someoftheidentifiedopportunitiesare

beyondthescopeof

this

Structure

Planto

fulfil;however,

theyshould

berecordedaspossible

future

initiativesforGovernmentconsideration.Theidentifiedopportunitiesinclude:

Good

connectivity

betw

een

the

subject

site

toadjoining

residential

developmentsandarterialroads.

Potentialforafuture

busroute

throughtheproposeddevelopmentalong

RiversdaleRoad.

Direct

access

totheSwanRiverandassociatedforeshore

reserveviaCracknell

Park

andBrightonRoad.

Anexistingpedestrianconnection(sharedpath)islocatedthroughforeshore

reservenorthofsubjectsite.

A68

28|Page

Apedestrian

link(underpass)currentlyexiststo

existingresidentialareas,

commercialusesandashoppingcentrelocatedsouth

eastofsubjectsite.

Thesite

isrelativelyflat,withasteepembankmentdownto

river,whichoffers

significantriverviewsfrom

landclose

totheRiver.

Elevateddevelopment

wouldalsobenefitfrom

these

opportunities.

Thesite

onthecornerofGreatEastern

HighwayandGraham

Farm

erFreeway

hasthepotentialto

benefitfrom

theviewsto

theskylineofPerthCity,Swan

RiverandtheDarlingScarp.Thesite

alsoenjoysgoodcommercialexposure

dueto

itscornerlocationonGtEastern

HighwayandGraham

Farm

erFreeway.

Existingservicesandinfrastructure,includingroads,

are

alreadylocatedon

site,reducingconstructioncostsofthenewdevelopment.

3.4.2

CONSTRAIN

TS

Variousconstraintsalsoinfluencedtheplanningofthesite.Constraintsaffectingthe

landinclude:

Thelimitedvehicularaccess

from

GreatEastern

Highwayto

lots

frontingthe

road.

Limitedaccess

tothecorner‘landmark’site

locatedonGreatEastern

Highway

andGraham

Farm

erFreeway.

Althoughservicesandinfrastructure

are

alreadylocatedonsite,theyare

not

sufficientfortheproposeddensity

ofthedevelopment.

The

existence

of

significant

Moreton

Bay

Fig

Tree

centrally

within

a

developablelot.

Heritagelistedtreesandresidences.

Thefragmentedlandownershipofthesite.

A72

TheSpringsStructure

Plan

04/101

29|Page

4EXISTIN

GSERVICEIN

FRASTRUCTURE

4.1

ROADS

Primary

access

tothesite

isprovidedvia

asignalisedintersectionlocatedatGreat

Eastern

HighwayandBrightonRoadandvia

theRiversdale

Roadbridgewhichlinks

thesite

withtheadjoiningBurswoodLightIndustrialArea.

Ageotechnicalinvestigationoftheroadpavements

hasindicatedthatthesubgrade

oftheroadis

sound,howeverthewearingcoursewillrequirerehabilitationand

replacement.

4.2

DRAIN

AGEANDSTORMWATERMANAGEMENT

Theprecinct

fallspredominantlywithin

twodrainagecatchments.These

catchments

includeRiversdale

Road,whichdischargesto

theSwanRivervia

a225mm

diameter

outfallpipelocatedwithin

CracknellPark,andtheRoweAvenueinfiltrationbasin,

whichservesthemajority

oftheremainderofthesite.

Apreliminary

review

ofthese

catchments

indicatesthatthe

existing

225mm

diameterpipeis

adequate

fora1in

5yearstorm

event.

However,waterquality

controlmaypotentiallybecomeanissue,asatpresentthere

isnopollutioncontrol

infrastructure

installedwithintheprecinct.

Generally,thedrainagepipework

within

theroadreservesislimitedandwould

not

meetCouncil’scurrentminim

um

requirements.Atpresent,alllots

are

requiredto

retainstorm

wateronsite

4.3

WATERANDSEWERSERVICES

Figure

10detailsthesize

andlocationoftheexistingwaterandsewerserviceswithin

TheSpringsPrecinct.

Alllots

within

theprecinct

are

currentlyservicedbywater.Themajority

ofthelots

are

servicedbysewer,withtheexceptionoflotslocatedalongtheeastern

portionof

RiversdaleRoad.

4.4

POWERSUPPLY

TheSpringsPrecinct

iscurrentlyservicedbyundergroundpowerandWestern

Power

streetlighting.

ExistingWestern

PowersubstationsincludeRiversdale

Road,BrightonRoad,Rowe

AvenueandHawksburn

RoadwithassociatedHighVoltage(HV)andLowVoltage(LV)

undergroundcablesdistributedthroughoutthearea.Whilst

theexistingsystem

has

thecapacity

tomeetthedemandsoftheexistinglanduses,itwillnotbesufficient

whenredevelopmentofthelandoccurs.

4.5

TELECOMMUNICATIO

NS

Telecommunicationcables,currentlyownedbyTelstra,are

locatedinallexistingroad

reserves.

4.6

MOVEMENTNETWORK

4.6.1

EXISTIN

GROADSANDTRAFFIC

VOLUME

GREATEASTERNHIGHWAY

TheGreatEastern

Highwayisaprimary

distributorroadandmajorserviceroadfor

thePerthMetropolitanRegion.Itfronts

thesouth

eastern

boundary

ofthesubject

land

and

comprisesthree

laneseastbound

and

four/five

laneswestbound,and

providesaccess

onto

theGraham

Farm

erFreeway.

Atthetimeofpreparingthereport,currenttraffic

vol umesindicate

atw

oway

movementofabout52,000vehiclesperdayadjacentto

thestudyarea.

BRIGHTONROAD

BrightonRoadisalocalaccess

streetmarkingtheeastern

boundary

ofthesite.It

comprisesastandard

7.2

metrewidecarriagewaywithwideningattheGreatEastern

Highwaytraffic

signals

toprovide

two

approach

lanes.

Currenttraffic

volumes

indicate

atw

owaymovementofabout3,000vehiclesperday.

A73

RIV

ERSD

ALE

MA

LVER

N

ROWE

AVENUE

RO

AD

HAWKSBURN

ROAD

RO

AD

GRAHAM

FARMER

FREEWAY

GREAT

EASTERN

HIGHW

AY

STRU

CTU

RE P

LAN

ARE

A

EXIS

TIN

G S

EWER

ALI

GN

MEN

T

EXIS

TIN

G W

ATER

ALI

GN

MEN

T

LEG

END

TH

E S

PR

ING

S R

ED

EV

EL

OP

ME

NT

AR

EA

, R

IVE

RV

AL

E

EX

IST

ING

SE

RV

ICE

SN

187

Robe

rts

Road

Sub

iaco

Wes

tern

Aus

tral

ia 6

008

Tele

phon

e: (0

8) 9

382

2911

Facs

imile

: (08

) 938

2 45

86ad

min

@tb

bpla

nnin

g.co

m.a

u

Tow

n Pl

anni

ng a

nd D

esig

n

TAY

LOR

BU

RR

ELL

BA

RN

ETT

jan

uar

y 20

07 |

04/1

01

20m

60m

0m20

40

FIG

UR

E

10

A74

attachments - city of belmont...ordinary council meeting attachments 24 november 2009 ordinary...

Documents