ocm 12 may 2009 appendix 13.5 - gosnells.wa.gov.au · tina bazzo . po box 6913 . east perth wa 6892...

1

Name and Postal Address: Barnie Tyson 23 Matison Street Southern River WA 6110

Affected Property: 23 (Lot 48) Matison Street Southern River

Summary of Submission Staff Comment No objection to proposal. Noted.

2

Name and Postal Address: Oakford Land Company Pty Ltd PO Box 6013 East Perth WA 6892

Affected Property: Lot 1747 Bradley Street Southern River


3

Name and Postal Address: Westfield Asset Pty Ltd PO Box 6913 East Perth WA 6892



4

Name and Postal Address: Gucce Holdings Pty Ltd PO Box 6913 East Perth WA 6892



5

Name and Postal Address: Oakford Land Company Pty Ltd PO Box 6013 East Perth WA 6892

Affected Property: Lot 1749 Matison Street Southern River


6

Name and Postal Address: Tina Bazzo PO Box 6913 East Perth WA 6892

Affected Property: Lot 2 Southern River Road Southern River


7

Name and Postal Address: Tina Bazzo PO Box 6913 East Perth WA 6892



OCM 12 MAY 2009 APPENDIX 13.5.1D

8

Name and Postal Address: Leslie Tilby Lot 1545 Margaret Street Southern River WA 6110

Affected Property: Lot 1545 Matison Street Lot 1544 Margaret Street Southern River


9

Name and Postal Address: Tan Tran for Trans family trust 37 Majestic Parade Dianella WA 6059

Affected Property: Lot 1515 Leslie Street Southern River


10

Name and Postal Address: Aldo Fedrici 86 Matison Street Southern River



11

Name and Postal Address: Anthony Hayes 5 Gwelia Place Gosnells WA 6110

Affected Property: 328 (Lot 6) Furley Road Southern River


12

Name and Postal Address: Claude and Shirley Wilkes 31 Matison Street Southern River WA 6110



13

Name and Postal Address: Public Transport Authority Grace Perrozzi PO Box 8125 Perth Business Centre WA 6849

Affected Property: N/A


14

Name and Postal Address: FESA Mark Rose 480 Hay Street Perth WA 6000




15

Name and Postal Address: Donald Douglas Lot 1516 Leslie Street Southern River WA 6110

Affected Property: Lot 1516 Leslie Street Southern River

Summary of Submission Staff Comment No objection to proposal.

15.1 Stated that “It makes sense to develop close to existing infrastructure. “

Noted.

15.2 Considers plan to be environmentally sensitive.

Noted.

15.3 Suggests Garden Street extension should be done earlier than planned.

Noted. The timing of construction of Garden Street through Precinct 3 will be dependant on the rate of development, and consequently traffic demand, and the availability of funds for undertaking detailed design and works.

Council has previously supported amending the Other Regional Road reservation for the extension of Garden Street to generally be aligned along the existing Holmes Street road reserve, so as to avoid dissecting the adjacent Bush Forever site 464. This amendment is currently with the Department for Planning and Infrastructure (DPI) to progress.

15.4 Plan appears to be consistent with State Government planning for the Southern River area.

Noted.

16

Name and Postal Address: Ann McCosker Lot 233 Tamby Court Southern River WA 6110

Affected Property: Lot 233 Tamby Court Southern River


The light industrial buffer will give certainty to the kennel zone life style.

Noted. The location of the Light Industrial/Mixed Business area is generally consistent with the Southern River / Forrestdale / Brookdale / Wungong District Structure Plan (DSP), which retains the adjacent kennel area and provides for a 500m kennel noise buffer.

17

Name and Postal Address: WestNet Energy Rume Faka PO Box 8491 Perth WA 6849



17.1 If the gas network is affected by the proposal and WestNet Energy works are required the following conditions must be met.

Noted. To be considered at the subdivision stage of development.

17.2 All work carried out by Alinta Gas Networks on the existing network will be at the proponent’s expense.


17.3 One months notice prior to commencement of the work should be given.



18

Name and Postal Address: Telstra Paul Nuttall Locked Bag 2525 Perth WA 6001



Telstra will factor this development into the longer term strategic plans for the Gosnells area.

Noted.

19

Name and Postal Address: SPM Project Marketing Victor Marcelino Level 1, 1 Howard Street Fremantle WA 6160

Affected Property: 13 properties in Precinct 3A


19.1 Believe that the proposed plans prepared by TBB have been prepared in a consultative approach are the most appropriate plans for Precinct 3A and Precinct 3 overall.

Noted.

19.2 Propose that any potential noise generated from proposed development in close proximity to the kennel zone can be addressed at the developmental stage of the Light Industrial Precinct with fencing, traffic movement routes within the site, landscaping buffers and land use controls.

Noted.

19.3 The proposed Eco-Living zone is proposed to be exempt from contributing towards the cost of common infrastructure and land costs development

Noted. Refer to the Eco-Living zone and Development Contribution Framework sections of the agenda report.

19.4 Adoption of the Structure Plan will still allow landowners to challenge the status of the wetlands at the ODP stage for each sub precinct.

Noted. Refer to the Wetlands section of the agenda report.

19.5 The location of the high school was chosen as a result of negotiations with the Department of Education and Training (DET) and the City of Gosnells. The proposed playing fields will make excellent use of the dog kennel buffer and the areas adjacent to the Forrestdale Main Drain that are to be infrequently required for drainage.

Noted. Refer to the High School and District Open Space sections of the agenda report.


20

Name and Postal Address: Greg Rowe & Associates C/-Westwin Assets Pty Ltd Level 3, 369 Newcastle Street NORTHBRIDGE WA 6003



Mixed Business Land Use

20.1 The subject site is identified within the Light Industrial land use designation which is in accordance with the DSP approved for the area. Our client has made representations to Council previously in support of the Light Industrial land use. Our client continues to support the Light Industrial land use and intends developing the land as soon as all the necessary approvals are in place.

Noted.

20.2 Our client wishes to continue towards progressing the necessary town planning and other tasks in order to develop the site. In addition our client is willing to continue working with the City of Gosnells to expedite the approvals process for sub-precinct 3F in light of Council being an adjoining landowner.

Noted.

20.3 Notes that a Mixed Business area has been identified fronting Southern River Road. Considers that a similarly sited Mixed Business area would be appropriate fronting Matison Street. Whilst acknowledged that Matison Street is unlikely to accommodate the same number of vehicle trips per day as Southern River Road, it will nevertheless act as an important neighbourhood connector, much in the same way as Southern River Road.

Noted. The proposed Structure Plan makes provision for Mixed Business development along Southern River Road, but not along Matison Street where Light Industrial development is shown. This is generally consistent with the DSP. It is understood that the intent of the DSP for Mixed Business development along Southern River Road was to provide a transitional use between Light Industrial development and Residential development within Precinct 2. It is acknowledged that there is a similar need for development adjacent to Matison Street to provide an appropriate interface between the Light Industrial development and kennel zone, though it does not automatically follow that Mixed Business should similarly be the form of interface in this instance.

The intended form of development, including the composition of land uses fronting Matison Street and the measures necessary to minimise the potential detrimental impact of development on the adjacent kennel zone will be a matter to be addressed at the ODP stage for Precinct 3F and subsequent subdivision and development phases. Consideration of a proposal for Mixed Business along Matison Street can occur at the ODP stage, notwithstanding that the proposed Structure Plan indicates Light Industrial development, which will need to be appropriately supported with adequate justification that is consistent with relevant policy guidance and principles of orderly and proper planning.


Summary of Submission Staff Comment 20.4 The provision of Mixed Business along

Matison Street will also provide a better transition of land uses from the kennel area to the Light Industrial land use. It is likely that landowners within the kennel area will be more supportive of a Mixed Business area fronting Matison Street than that of the Light Industrial land use. There are obvious potential amenity issues associated with Light Industrial development being located opposite a rural residential area.

See the response to submission 20.3.

20.5 The Mixed Business land use will also assist with servicing the south eastern portion of the Structure Plan area where there is limited commercial facilities. In this regard the closest planned commercial or local centre uses to the south eastern portion of the Structure Plan area are located at the intersection of Leslie and Matison Streets and at the intersection of Southern River Road and Holmes Road. The surrounding rural area will also be serviced if Mixed Business land uses were identified along Matison Street.

Noted.

Environmental Matters

20.6 The Structure Plan includes a Note which makes reference to environmental matters being resolved for the Light Industrial land use. The note states: “Planning of the Light Industrial Area will be subject to resolution of wetland and other environmentally sensitive protection requirements”. Whilst we acknowledge that certain environmental matters require addressing, we request that this provision provides greater flexibility. At this stage the note makes reference to the Light Industrial area as a whole and as a result resolving environmental issues on a particular property has the potential to delay the approvals process for another property in the sub-precinct which does not have any environmental constraints.

We therefore consider a note which provides greater flexibility will allow unencumbered properties to proceed through the approvals process without being delayed by other properties which have an environmental constraint. This is particularly relevant in terms of the wetlands associated with Lot 16 Southern River Road.

There is likely to be sufficient flexibility through further detailed planning that is required to allow consideration of whether environmentally unencumbered properties can proceed through the approvals process without being delayed by environmental constraints on other properties.

Consideration will be dependant on the environmental characteristics and how a particular proposal may impact on those characteristics and/or offer an appropriate planning and development outcome.


Summary of Submission Staff Comment Role of Matison Street

20.7 The Structure Plan report prepared by Taylor Burrell Barnett makes reference to the role of Matison Street being unknown at this stage and determination being necessary to resolve its status. As mentioned above, we consider Matison Street being an important neighbourhood connector in light of the strong south west – north east link Matison Street can provide. Matison Street runs parallel to Southern River Road and therefore is likely to provide another south west – north east link throughout the Structure Plan area and beyond. Matison Street will also act as a connector road between the subject Light Industrial area and the other Light Industrial areas located to the east and south east on the DSP.

Noted.

There are other submissions that raise concern with the intended role of Matison Street in the context how it might service the Light Industrial area, particularly if development would result in increased traffic volumes on this road.

This matter is discussed in the agenda report in the Traffic Concerns section.

Future Preparation of ODP

20.8 As Council is aware, our Client’s position is to obtain the necessary approvals to develop the subject site as soon as possible. Based on the Structure Plan’s preparation and pending endorsement we consider there to be sufficient District and Local level planning in place to proceed with the preparation of an ODP. We therefore seek Council’s Technical Officer’s support to proceed with the preparation of an ODP particularly in light of the City of Gosnells being an adjoining landowner.

Noted. This element of the submission is referring to the preparation of an ODP for Precinct 3F. The extent of Precinct 3F is detailed on the plan contained in Appendix 13.5.1B to the agenda report.

Consideration of the request for Council’s support to prepare an ODP for Precinct 3F as a participating landowner, is a matter that Council is entitled and ought to consider. However this is not a matter that is relevant to Council’s determination of the proposed Structure Plan as a planning regulator.

Metropolitan Region Scheme Zoning to Urban

20.9 Requests that the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS) Amendment to lift the Urban Deferred Status of the land to Urban be presented to Council as soon as possible for consideration in light of the Structure Plan now being advertised.

Noted. Refer to the Metropolitan Region Scheme section in the agenda report.

20.10 We also confirm that we have been in contact with the DPI where Staff have indicated that they would possibly support a change to Urban following Council’s support.

Noted.

21

Name and Postal Address: Western Power Locked Bag 2511 Perth WA 6001


Summary of Submission Staff Comment No objection to the proposal.

21.1 The Perth One Call Service is available for enquiries on the location of underground services

Noted.


Summary of Submission Staff Comment 21.2 WestNet Energy requires one months

notice prior to the commencement of the work on site. Notice should be given to the Project Coordinator on 9499 5166.

Noted.

22

Name and Postal Address: Swan River Trust PO Box 6740 Hay Street EAST PERTH WA 6892


Summary of Submission Staff Comment Comment on the proposal.

22.1 In accordance with City of Gosnells Policy 6.3.3.1 – Southern River Precinct 3 Planning Framework and the Southern River Interim Integrated Land and Water Management Plan (IILWMP; Water Corp, 2007), local Structure Plans should incorporate a Local Water Management Strategy (LWMS). The proposed Precinct 3 Structure Plan includes a drainage management plan (ENV, Nov 2007), but the level of information provided is not sufficient to meet the requirements for a LWMS. Although the Structure Plan states the requirements of the IILWMP, no indication of how these requirements will be achieved is provided. To ensure a comprehensive and coordinated approach to water management, the Trust considers that a LWMS addressing the requirements of the IILWMP must be provided for Precinct 3 before the Structure Plan can be supported.

Noted. The need for a hierarchy of water management strategies is acknowledged. The proposed Structure Plan is consistent with the broad management requirements of this issue. A detailed LWMS will be required for each sub-precinct ODP.

22.2 The Structure Plan indicates that sewerage is to be provided to Precinct 3, however details of the Eco-Living zone indicate that Alternative Treatment Units (ATUs) will be utilised (for effluent disposal). The Eco-Living zone is largely within a wetland buffer, and effluent should be managed through provision of sewerage rather than ATUs. If reticulated sewerage is not available, then the Trust may consider the use of ATUs, provided that the selected systems have the capacity to attenuate nutrients, and thereby a 50m horizontal separation from the wetland and a 2m vertical separation from the highest known level of groundwater. Given this requirement, it is considered that further site-specific information for the Eco-Living zone is needed to ensure the proposed planning mechanisms are appropriate (e.g. building envelopes and wastewater disposal areas).

Noted. Refer to the Eco-Living zone section of the agenda report.


Summary of Submission Staff Comment 22.3 Dewatering associated with subdivision

works should be managed to ensure that dewatering effluent is not discharged directly to the drainage system or river. For more information see Water Quality Protection Note 13: Dewatering of soils at constructions sites (DoW, 2006).

Noted. Dewatering requirements are to be addressed at the subdivision stage.

22.4 While it is noted that the proposed public open space provision exceeds the required area, the provision should be calculated in addition to the foreshore reserve area, in accordance with Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) Development Control Policy 2.3 Public Open Space in Residential Areas.

Noted. Public Open Space (POS) contribution requirements will be addressed in the required Precinct 3 Development Contribution Plan (as guided by relevant WAPC Policy). It is not anticipated that areas reserved under the MRS for Parks and Recreation will be counted as the local POS requirement for subdivision of land.

22.5 The State Planning Policy 2.10 Swan-Canning River System promotes the protection and re-establishment of fringing riparian vegetation, wetlands, tributaries, and bushland associated with the river. The Trust therefore supports the proposed maintenance of Forrestdale Main Drain as an ecological corridor.

Noted. The proposed Structure Plan identifies the land requirements for the Forrestdale Main Drain and includes other areas for conservation in Precinct 3.

23

Name and Postal Address: M Mayar 10 Portree Way Ardross WA 6152

Affected Property: Not Stated


Development of 3A/B/3C should be done con-currently.

Noted. The proposed Structure Plan does not contain or seek to enforce a development staging sequence nor can it compel landowners to develop.

24

Name and Postal Address: Turner Master Planners (on behalf of the owner) PO Box 430 Victoria Park WA 6979



Some of the light industry area adjacent to Southern River Road is proposed with a frontage of Mixed Business. The existing church on Lot 6 segregates the other industrial land. The frontage to Lander Street will facilitate access and frontage.

It is requested that Mixed Business be shown for the frontage and balance of the Lot 15 Southern River Road. The conservation area on adjoining Lot 16 to the south has been filled and a church built there, the conservation buffer should be deleted.

Noted.

More detailed planning phases will need to ensure that Southern River Road caters for the majority of vehicle movements to and from the Light Industrial/Mixed Business area, with consideration given to what role Matison and Lander Streets will have in providing access to the area.

The suggestion that the entirety of Lot 15 be shown for Mixed Business (instead of Light Industry) is not supported for the following reasons:


Summary of Submission Staff Comment • It is not known what an appropriate level of

provision of floorspace for Mixed Business in Southern River is. Mixed Business fronting Southern River Road is considered to be a desirable land use transition between residential development in Precinct 2 and the Light Industry area in Precinct 3. It does not follow that all of the Light Industry area be allowed to be developed to Mixed Business.

• Light Industry is considered a necessary land use in the locality to support local employment and business demand.

• Further detailed planning through an ODP may offer the opportunity for additional Mixed Business areas after further investigation.

Given that Lot 16 has been substantially developed and portion of the wetland cleared, the proposed Structure Plan has not indicated a conservation designation over this property. A notation is detailed on the proposed Structure Plan in relation to additional development on the site being subject to environmental matters being addressed.

25

Name and Postal Address: Shelah and Ronald Francis 7 Matison Street Southern River WA 6110



Should there be a light industrial area the traffic in the area will increase and exercising dogs will become difficult without the creation of footpaths.

The Structure Plan report notes that it is intended that all roads will have at least a 1.5m footpath on one side of the road reserve, which would generally be consistent with the WAPC’s Liveable Neighbourhoods.

Refer to the Traffic Concerns section in the agenda report.

26

Name and Postal Address: Tian Ng 31 Rosaglen Rise Noranda WA 6062

Affected Property: Lot 1 Phoebe Street Southern River


26.1 Adequate compensation needs to be put aside by developers for land owners with “wetland” zonings.

Refer to Wetlands and Development Contribution Framework sections in the agenda report.


Summary of Submission Staff Comment 26.2 Can the main drain be constructed

underground and allow construction and development of buildings above the main drain.

The Forrestdale Main Drain is a core piece of infrastructure managed by the Water Corporation. The Water Corporation requires an easement over both open and enclosed drains, in order to access the drain for the purposes of construction and maintenance. Under the provisions of the Metropolitan Water Act 1982, no permanent or hard infrastructure is able to be built within the easement without authorisation from the Water Corporation.

Given the drain is proposed to be widened to cater for drainage resulting from rare, high-volume rainfall events, with a series of adjacent basins to be constructed, a piped enclosed drain is unlikely to accepted by the responsible agencies. Such an action would also be contrary to the principles contained within the Department of Water’s Stormwater Management Manual for Western Australia, which promotes stormwater infiltration as close to source as possible as opposed to piped arterial drainage solutions.

27

Name and Postal Address: Department of Education and Training Shaarmini Wijay 151 Royal Street East Perth WA 6004



27.1 What are the likely conditions and restrictions on the school sites given the use, development and management of multiple use wetlands should be considered in the context of ecologically sustainable development and best management practice through land care?

Multiple Use wetlands are not typically a significant constraint to development. They are however an indication of particular soil and hydrological conditions, which may require management at the construction phase (for example, water management, acid sulfate soils and dewatering), though these are standard for this locality. As the detailed design and configuration of the High School and Primary School is not known, it is difficult to determine whether any special environmental restrictions/conditions will be imposed on the development of the school sites.

27.2 What are the implications of the liquid waste disposal sites and the potential groundwater contamination on the High School site?

The Liquid Waste Disposal site was located on Lot 1768 Southern River Road and operated from 1955 to 1981. A 1500m buffer zone has existed within which the extraction of groundwater is restricted due to the legacy of the site in terms of soil and groundwater contamination. The site has been the subject of a formal assessment by the EPA, which resulted in a number of Ministerial conditions being set for remediation. Remediation works have been completed and monitoring is ongoing. It is anticipated that future development of the proposed school sites should not be constrained by the former disposal site.

27.3 The primary school is no longer central to the catchment’s area, has an irregular shape, has only one road frontage and will have very poor surveillance as it is surrounded by wetland. We propose the school site be moved to the centre of

Noted. Refer to the Primary School Site section of the agenda report.


Summary of Submission Staff Comment precinct 3A.

27.4 The high school site is irregular and should exclude the narrow northern portion on Lot 6 and expand to take in additional area in Lots 11 and 12.

Noted. Refer to the High School Site section of the agenda report.

27.5 The conservation buffer is restricting access to Passmore Street. Both schools require three road frontages to accommodate traffic and embayment parking requirements

Noted. Refer to the Primary School Site and High School Site sections of the agenda report.

28

Name and Postal Address: Department of Indigenous Affairs (DIA) Sally McGann 197 St Georges Terrace Perth WA 6000



28.1 DIA is not in a position to comment on Aboriginal heritage values of the Structure Plan area.

Noted.

28.2 DIA agrees with the comments that there is the potential for currently unidentified sites to be found in the Plan area, made at the Council meeting of 23 September 2008.

Should an Aboriginal Heritage site be found within the Structure Plan area, a Section 18 notice under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 would need to be sought to apply for consent to use or develop the land. All Section 18 notices require a description of the subject land, aboriginal sites for which permission is sought and a details of the land use and activities which may disturb the identified sites.

28.3 DIA recommends that the Aboriginal community and/or Native Title claimants be advised of the Plans.

Noted.

28.4 DIA recommends that an Aboriginal heritage survey (examinations of ethnographic and archaeological heritage values) be undertaken.

Noted. Section 15 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 requires any knowledge of the existence of Aboriginal burial grounds, symbols or objects of sacred, ritual or ceremonial significance, cave or rock paintings or engravings, stone structures or arranged stones, carved trees or any other place or thing to which the Act may apply or to which the Act might reasonably be expected to apply, to be reported to the Department for Indigenous Affairs.

28.5 An Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Management Plan should contain management strategies for the protection of known sites and protocols for site management in the event of the discovery of other cultural material.

Noted. The need for such a plan will be considered through assessment of subsequent, more detailed planning proposals.

28.6 DIA is of the opinion that planning, far from not having an impact on the Aboriginal heritage values of the area, is the best way to ensure that the project will not be in conflict with Aboriginal heritage sites.

Noted.


29

Name and Postal Address: Dykstra Planning Henry Dykstra 2953 Albany Hwy Kelmscott WA 6111



The draft Structure Plan shows a local centre node at the corner of Southern River Road and Leslie street, consistent with the DSP that has been promoted as the strategic plan for the district. The lot was purchased to establish a "place of worship” in the north eastern part of the lot, adjacent to the river. It is requested that a symbol be placed on the Structure Plan to clearly illustrate the landowner’s intention to establish a place of worship on the land.

The proposed Precinct 3 Structure Plan shows Lot 1526 as being zoned for Local Centre and Residential uses.

A Place of Worship is a defined land use under TPS 6 and is a permissible land use in both the Residential and Local Centre zones subject to being advertised.

The land use identified in the proposed Structure Plan does not preclude the site from being utilised for this purpose in the future. It is not considered appropriate to show this level of detail identifying permitted uses on the proposed Structure Plan. This detail could be considered more suitably through an ODP or, once an ODP is in place, by seeking Development Approval.

30

Name and Postal Address: Water Corporation Kevin Purcher (Address not stated)



30.1 The Riverton Water Supply Scheme does not have the capacity to provide reticulated water to the proposed new development, which will require headworks-size water mains to be constructed.

Noted. Viento Pty Ltd, as part of its plans to develop Precinct 3A is currently negotiating with the Water Corporation on the extension of a 400mm water pipe from Chamberlain Street. Further discussions will need to be held with the Water Corporation to provide water to the other sub-precincts as part of further detailed planning.

30.2 There is no permanent pump station to the catchments that the subject area falls within and headworks infrastructure may be required to be constructed as part of the subdivision process.

Noted. To be addressed at the subdivision stage.

30.3 A permanent pump station is proposed to be located near the intersection of Leslie and Matison Streets. The pump station will require appropriate land to be provided for the works and the odour buffer and a route for any headworks mains will be required.

Noted. To be addressed at the subdivision stage.

30.4 Drainage - the disturbance of Acid Sulphate Soils in the subject area could have adverse changes to the quality of the ground water and the nearby waterways - managements procedures should be in place to prevent the potentially unacceptable impacts associated with the disturbance of the ASS.

Noted. Water monitoring is required as part of the Acid Sulphate Soils Management Plan to identify any unacceptable impacts which is required at the subdivision stage which will be addressed if need be at this time.


31

Name and Postal Address: Roberts Day Maureen Hegarty Level 1, 130 Royal Street East Perth WA 6004

Affected Property: Bletchley Park Estate

Summary of Submission Staff Comment Comment on the proposal

31.1 The proposed Structure Plan does not reflect the proposed modification to the Southern River Precinct 2 ODP with respect the location of the neighbourhood connector servicing the proposed local centre and Primary school.

Noted. However it would be premature and prejudicial at this point of the planning process to reflect a proposed modification to an adjoining ODP on the proposed Structure Plan.

31.2 The 4-way intersection on Southern River Road providing access to Eco-Living zone and Precinct 2 neighbourhood centre is inappropriate on the grounds of safety and cost (suggest staggered T intersections).

The intersection is only notionally shown. A more precise location will be proposed through further detailed planning at the ODP stage for sub-precinct 3E.

31.3 The SRP3 Structure Plan report should clearly indicate the arrangement for a 50% share of the cost of traffic signals at the intersection of Holmes Street and Southern River Road, and the requirement for a 50% contribution for the construction of a four-way roundabout at the intersection of Furley Road and Southern River Road.

The Draft Development Contribution Framework prepared by Taylor Burrell Barnett as part of the Precinct 3 Structure Plan proposes that 50% of the cost of the traffic signals at the Holmes Street and Southern River Road be shared between the landowners of Precinct 3. Town Planning Scheme No.6 (TPS 6) requires that landowners in Precinct 2 contribute 25% of the cost.

Contribution arrangements for infrastructure will need to be formalised in TPS 6 prior to subdivision or development within Precinct 3, as part of the TPS 6 Special Control Area provisions that apply.

The form of traffic management device required at the intersection of Furley Road and Southern River Road has not been determined. Detailed planning of Precinct 3F will need to determine if Furley Road, east of Southern River Road, should be constructed. Accordingly a determination as to whether a traffic management device at this location is required and if so whether it should be a shared cost, will need to be made at the next stage of the planning process through an ODP.

31.4 The proposed Structure Plan report should clearly reflect the requirements to dispose of 50% of the drainage run off from the ultimate configuration of Southern River Road adjacent to Precinct 2.

It is acknowledged that detailed road design for the widening of Southern River Road will in any event need to accommodate drainage requirements. It is not considered necessary to amend the Structure Plan report to stipulate this requirement.

31.5 Path linkages between Precincts 2 and 3 across Southern River Road should be considered.

Noted. Providing for a connected pathway network will need to be addressed through the preparation of sub-precinct ODPs and subdivision proposals.


Summary of Submission Staff Comment 31.6 There are strong reservations held in

regard to the proposed Local Centre site proposed in Precinct 3 on the corner of Holmes Street and Southern River Road based on:

• Not in the location proposed in DSP

• Relocation from a residential location to a busy intersection will change the type of retail use

• The land area set aside (7,490m2) to accommodate 400m2 of retail floor space is unnecessarily large

• Designation of a 7,490m2 site for a Local Centre gives the impression that it is the dominant centre for the area, which is inconsistent with the DSP, the Local Commercial Strategy and the land use outcome in the Precinct 2 ODP.

Refer to the Local Centres section of the agenda report.

31.7 The proposed Precinct 3 Structure Plan does not depict the current, adopted Precinct 2 ODP as it fails to reference the area that is subject to future planning.

It will be recommended that the Structure Plan be modified to reflect, for context purposes only, the adopted ODP layout for the adjoining Precinct 2.

31.8 Supports Mixed Business zone adjacent to proposed light industrial.

Noted.

31.9 Some differentiation is needed between the Mixed Business zones as they are serving different needs and will have different land use configuration.

Noted. As there is no major district centre proposed in Southern River, there is limited provision of floorspace for large-format retailing, service commercial or office development. The Mixed Business area fronting Southern River Road could cater for these types of uses. Detailed planning for Precinct 3F, through an ODP and subdivision proposals, will need to detail an appropriate pattern of land use and lot configuration.

31.10 The Structure Plan and ODPs for Precinct 3 should recognise the approved Local Water Management Strategy in place for the Bletchley Park estate and storm water from Bletchley Park must be conveyed through Precinct 3 to the Forrestdale Main Drain.

The proposed Structure Plan accommodates stormwater conveyance through Precinct 3 from upstream areas, including Bletchley Park. The preparation of ODPs for each sub-precinct will need to be consistent with the proposed Structure Plan and district and local water management plans.

32

Name and Postal Address: Department of Water 7 Ellam Street Victoria Park WA 6100



The Department of Water provides in principle support to the proposed Structure Plan. The Structure Plan will need to be inline with the recently revised Forrestdale Arterial Drainage Strategy and Southern River Integrated Land and Water Management Plan.

Noted. The proposed Structure Plan sets aside land for the widening of the Forrestdale Main Drain, consistent with these plans.

Refer to the Water Management section of the agenda report for discussion on this aspect of the proposal.


33

Name and Postal Address: WestNet Energy PO Box 8491 Perth BC WA 6849



33.1 All work carried out on Alinta Gas Networks existing Network to accommodate the proposed subdivision or any development will be at the proponent’s expense.

Noted. Refer submission No. 17.

33.2 WestNet Energy requires one months notice prior to the commencement of the work on site. Notice should be given to the Project Coordinator on 9499 5166.

Noted. Refer submission No. 17.

34

Name and Postal Address: Carolyn Gilmour Lot 40 Passmore Street Southern River WA 6110

Affected Property: Lot 40 Passmore Street Southern River

Summary of Submission Staff Comment Object to the proposal. Noted

35

Name and Postal Address: Fiona Rusloe Lot 8 Holmes Street Southern River WA 6110

Affected Property: Lot 8 Holmes Street Southern River

Summary of Submission Staff Comment Object to the proposal.

Had planned to develop the site; the rezoning now makes that impossible and compensation is required for all owners who have "lost" their property to the Government

Noted. The proposed Structure Plan does not seek to rezone the submitter’s or any other owners’ land, nor would it, on its own, cause landowners to ‘lose’ land.

However, it is recognised that the identification of land to be set aside for conservation and any subsequent requirement and action for this to occur would have a significant financial and personal impact on affected landowners. It is also recognised that landowners would feel entitled to compensation in these circumstances.

Refer to the Wetlands and Development Contribution Framework sections in the agenda report for discussion on the issues raised in this submission.

36

Name and Postal Address: Zora Nizich 83 Berehaven Avenue Thornlie WA 6108



Had planned to develop the site; the rezoning now makes that impossible and compensation is required for all owners who have "lost" their property to the Government.

See the staff response to submission 35.


37

Name and Postal Address: Walter and Louise Dorizzi Lot 1546 Margaret Street Southern River WA 6110

Affected Property: Lot 1546 Margaret Street Southern River


Concern that the core conservation area is within their property boundary. The land is high and dry - the proposed boundary does not make sense.

Noted. Concerns expressed in respect to the accuracy and validity of wetland mapping and how this mapping has translated into the identification of land for Core Conservation are recognised.

Refer to the Wetlands section of the agenda report for discussion on this issue.

38

Name and Postal Address: Barry and Lorraine Young 1520 Matison Street Southern River WA 6110

Affected Property: 1520 Matison Street Southern River


Precinct 3B core conservation areas fail to accurately reflect the true situation regarding the wetlands in the precinct. There are high dry blocks that have been designated wetlands.

The wetlands are in the vicinity of where the continuation of Matison Street would run into the Southern River; the land on either side of this is flooded during the wet winter as the river spills over the bank. The bottom portion of our land is at least 120m from the river and the land in dispute is a high point with a house located (for 50 years) in an appropriate place.



39

Name and Postal Address: John Gilmour Lot 40 Passmore Street Southern River WA 6110



39.1 Light industrial development in the noise buffer zone is against the noise sensitive guidelines set by the EPA. The buffer was intended to stop noise entering the kennel zone and leaving the kennel zone. The buffer was recommended at 1000m and not the 500m proposed. The industrial zone will increase the noise pollution into and out of the kennel zone.

The proposed Structure Plan reflects the retention of the kennel zone and an associated 500m buffer and provides for Light Industrial/Mixed Business development within the buffer, generally in accordance with the DSP. The WAPC endorsed the DSP in light of the EPA’s specific advice on the proposal.

The buffer will act to ensure that uses that are not compatible with the kennels area are not permitted within the buffer areas unless scientific studies can demonstrate an acceptable noise impact is achievable.

Light Industrial land uses will be required to meet the relevant noise regulations.

Refer to the Kennel zone section of the agenda report.


Summary of Submission Staff Comment 39.2 The proposed high school on Passmore

Street will increase traffic flow to an unacceptable level for a kennel zone.

Noted.

Refer to the High School Site and Traffic Concerns sections of the agenda report.

40

Name and Postal Address: Sarah Nidorf 8 Warralong Cres Coolbinia WA 6050



40.1 Planning changes have an impact on the Gross Rental Value of the property and the rates paid. Since the planning process began the owner has not been able to realise the investment made in this land. The classification in this plan will not allow the owner to proceed with any development.

Noted. It is recognised that a requirement for land to be set aside for conservation would deny its owner the opportunity to develop. However, the impact of a planning proposal on an owner’s rates or their ability to realise an investment are not planning considerations.

40.2 The owner is therefore seeking compensation of $2.4M from the City of Gosnells.

It is not clear upon what basis such a claim may be submitted, or if the submission in itself constitutes a compensation claim.

Refer to the Wetlands and Development Contribution Framework sections in the agenda report for discussion on the broader issues that relate to the matters raised in this submission.

41

Name and Postal Address: Southernrae 1 Pty Ltd V. Acalinovich Level 4 189 St Georges Terrace Perth WA 6000



41.1 Property was purchased with the knowledge that the DSP, the operative document for the eventual development of the area, designated the property as Urban. The high school location is at odds with the DSP.

Noted.

Refer to the High School Site section of the agenda report.

41.2 No public purpose uses are set out in the ODP for sub precinct 3A. Community uses have been purposely located on land other than that owned by Viento.

Disagreed.

While this comment is referring to the proposed Precinct 3A ODP, there is some relevance to the proposed Precinct 3 Structure Plan. The comment is however incorrect.

Viento Pty Ltd has purchased or is contracted to purchase approximately 50% of lots within Precinct 3A.

Public purpose uses are proposed in Precinct 3A for POS and drainage.


Summary of Submission Staff Comment It is recognised that other community uses such as

schools have been located on the proposed Structure Plan throughout Precinct 3. Regardless of who has prepared the proposed Structure Plan or where specific uses are proposed, the onus is on Council in considering the proposal to determine if it will provide a suitable framework for development.

41.3 If the Draft Precinct 3 Structure Plan is adopted a claim for compensation will be pursued.

Noted. It is not clear upon what basis such a claim may be submitted and it would be inappropriate to comment further until having had the opportunity to review the claim should one come forward.

42

Name and Postal Address: Mr George and Dr Suzanne Elliott 77 Matison Street Southern River WA 6110



42.1 The plan shows Wetland H covering only the rear portion of Lot 6. Given that the entirety of Lot 6 has been cleared of its original vegetation and is in a highly degraded state the whole property should be included in Wetland H and references to the area covered by Wetland H as a core conservation area should be removed from the Structure Plan.



42.2 The vegetation of Lot 6 is referred to as "Eucalyptus Rudis" on page 15 and "Eucalyptus Todtiana" on page 87 (presumably is referring to ENV Environmental Report). The proposed Structure Plan should be modified to show the correct vegetation and annotated that the vegetation is foreign to the site and was planted by the owner.

Noted. However, the description of the vegetation on Lot 6 in the environmental report has not influenced the overall design of the proposed Structure Plan. The suggested modification would serve no practical purpose.

42.3 The need to widen the Forrestfield Main Drain causes uncertainty - will the owners be able to develop the land (sheds and such like) and how will this affect the value of the property.

Noted. Land required for widening the Forrestdale Main Drain will need to be set aside from development and acquired into public ownership. The opportunity will exist for the drainage area to be integrated into public parkland, with some recreational function possible during periods when not inundated, subject to detailed design and construction parameters.

42.4 The location of the High School site is not in a high residential area and therefore outside a walkable catchment.

Viento Pty Ltd has liaised with DET to identify a suitable site for the High School. The location on Passmore Street as shown in the Structure Plan is the DET’s preferred location for the High School Site according to the DET. High School sites have large catchments that exceed the radius of a typical 800m (10 minute walk) walkable catchment.

Refer to the High School Site section of the agenda report.


43

Name and Postal Address: RPS Koltasz Smith Matt Zuvela 141 Burswood Road; Burswood WA 6100

Affected Property: Lot 20 Matison Road Southern River


43.1 Lot 20 and surrounding land is covered by a Resource Enhancement wetland with the larger area proposed to be included within the new Eco-Living zone. This zone is recommended so as to protect environmental attributes and allow some development potential with the land left in private ownership without the need for formal acquisition under a Development Contribution Arrangement. Initial investigations indicate the boundary and location of the wetland and the better quality vegetation have been inaccurately mapped over the subject site.

Noted.

Noted. Concerns expressed in respect to the accuracy and validity of wetland mapping and how this mapping has translated into the proposal for an Eco-Living zone are recognised.

Refer to the Wetlands and Eco-Living zone sections of the agenda report.

43.2 RPS Environment recently undertook a site specific assessment of the wetland and vegetation condition on Lot 20 Matison Road. The assessment was undertaken in accordance with the protocol established by the EPA, DEC and WAPC.

The report concludes that the wetland mapping of the Resource Enhancement Wetland (REW) and Multiple Use Wetland (MUW) are not representative of the environmental condition of the land.

This report was submitted to the Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) on 12 January seeking to modify the existing wetland mapping database. The assessment is currently pending determination by DEC and we are advised that this will provided in the very near future.

Noted.

43.3 It is inappropriate for the City of Gosnells to predetermine the environmental integrity of the land and subsequently restrict affected landowners’ ability to undertake residential development consistent with the endorsed DSP.

The environmental assessment upon which the draft Structure Plan is reliant was undertaken over two (2) years ago and using processes contrary to environmental agency approved protocols. The assessment undertaken by RPS Environment demonstrates the inaccuracy of the DEC Wetland Mapping database and the ENV report. As such, the apparent justification for the proposed Eco-Living zone is lacking in validity and merit.

Noted. The submitter has not indicated why or how they consider the ENV assessment involved processes contrary to agency protocols. The City is satisfied with the adequacy of the ENV assessment, but recognises that there are anomalies between Government mapping and the on-ground situation and that additional, more-detailed assessment of individual wetlands is necessary to determine the parameters for development.



Summary of Submission Staff Comment We note that the Structure Plan outlines the capacity for landowners to challenge wetland classifications during the ODP/rezoning stages. However, the proposed Structure Plan will inherently influence the City and WAPC’s considerations of any proposal to develop the subject area in a manner more intensive than that currently proposed in the Structure Plan.

It would be more appropriate at this stage in the strategic planning process to identify the land as Residential consistent with the DSP. The subject area is still required to be rezoned to Residential Development prior to the formal adoption of an ODP. The ability to review the value of the area in environmental terms will not be compromised given that Section 81 of the Planning and Development Act 2005 (the ‘Act’) requires that any amendment to a Local Planning Scheme is to be referred to the EPA for environmental assessment.

The amendment process will also allow the relevant government authority to determine the value and integrity of the wetland via formal assessment. Based on the EPA’s assessment, the City can consider the suitability of an Eco-Living zone and include provisions within the Scheme which would be required to be incorporated into any ODP prepared over the area. It is requested that as a minimum, this portion of the subject site be excluded from the proposed Eco-Living zone and identified as Residential in the proposed Structure Plan as attached to this submission (refer to Appendix 13.5.1F)

44

Name and Postal Address: Property Planning and Appeals Consultants, Joe Algeri Unit 1, 28 Commerce Avenue Armadale WA 6112



44.1 More detailed investigation is needed into the mapping of the wetland and its conservation as an Eco-Living zone.

Noted.


44.2 There are sufficient high conservation value areas in other parts of the Structure Plan.

It is recognised that the Southern River locality supports a large range of environmental attributes.

Conservation areas are determined by Federal, State and local environmental policies and initiatives. They are not based on a fixed proportion of land within a planning precinct or cell. The existence of protected conservation areas through regional planning initiatives does not obviate the need to address conservation requirements at the local planning level.


Summary of Submission Staff Comment 44.3 If wetlands are recognised as significant

they should be properly acquired and managed by a Government agency not private landowners.

Noted.

Refer to the Development Contribution Framework section of the agenda report.

44.4 There are practical difficulties for private owners to undertake viable development.

Noted.

44.5 The Eco-Living zone should be removed and replaced with residential.

Noted.

Refer to the Eco-Living zone section of the agenda report.

44.6 Aerobic treatment units appear to be at odds with perceived environmental sensitivity but are generally considered appropriate where land is remote from the sewer network.

Noted.

44.7 Precinct 3A has the most net developable area and a significant proportion of development contributions will need to be secured from this precinct. There is some risk that an interim contribution rate may be insufficient until further ODPs are prepared for the remainder of the sub-precincts.

Noted. There is a requirement under the Special Control Area that applies to most of Precinct 3 that a Development Contribution Arrangement (DCA) needs to be in place prior to subdivision or development. The DCA would need to provide a funding basis for the acquisition of land for public purposes and the provision of common infrastructure.

Refer to the Development Contribution Framework section of the agenda report.

45

Name and Postal Address: Department of Housing and Works C/- Urbanplan Ian Bradshaw 10 Norfolk Street Fremantle WA 6160

Affected Property: Lot 13 Southern River Road Lot 14 Southern River Road Lot 21 Southern River Road Lot 22 Southern River Road Lot 19 Matison Street Southern River

Summary of Submission Staff Comment Object to the proposal

45.1 Urbanplan advocates replacing the proposed Eco-Living zone with medium density development to support the integration and critical mass of urban form.

Noted. It is acknowledged that landowners in the proposed Eco-Living zone are dissatisfied with the development outcomes under this concept.


45.2 Urbanplan requests, based on recent vegetation, soil and hydrological research that its wetland re-examination be accepted as a correct analysis in support of modifications to the proposed Structure Plan.

All applications to change the Geomorphic Wetlands Swan Coastal Plain Dataset must be referred to the Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) for assessment. It would not be considered appropriate to recommend the Structure Plan be modified to reflect the submitter’s alternative development concept in advance of a wetland reclassification request being determined.


Summary of Submission Staff Comment 45.3 Requests acknowledgement of DHW's

proposed process to continue re-examination of Precinct 3E because of the lack of ecological attributes and to reclassify through DEC Guidelines to Multiple Use Category suitable for urban development

Noted. It is acknowledged that landowners throughout Precinct 3 are undertaking further environmental review and liaison with the DEC, which may lead to a different outcome in terms of land use and development to what is currently shown on the proposed Structure Plan.


45.4 Requests adoption of increased residential densities as part of the modification to the Structure Plan of Precinct 3E to support creation of critical urban mass integrating urban form (refer to Appendix 13.5.1G)

The main intent of the proposed Structure Plan is to ensure there is a coordinated whole-of-precinct planning approach that both updates and further refines the broad urban structure outlined on the DSP and guides the preparation of the sub-precinct level ODPs. The proposed Structure Plan does not detail residential density codings. It is considered that the matter of density be addressed at the ODP stage for each of the sub-precincts.

46

Name and Postal Address: SJB Town Planning and Urban Design Unit 12, 33 -35 Pakenham Street Fremantle WA 6160

Affected Property: Lots 30, 32 and 33 Phoebe Street Southern River


46.1 The DSP designated the block Rural and Semi Rural with a minimum lot size of 1 hectare. The proposed Structure Plan proposes the property to be Open Space and Core Conservation. The property is suitable for rural- residential or residential. The property has been cleared and contains little or no remnant vegetation.


Refer to the Wetlands section of the agenda report for discussion on the wetland-related issues raised.

Refer to the Public Open Space section of the agenda report for discussion on the issues raised in respect to open space.

Refer to the section with the heading Submission No.46 in the agenda report for discussion on the issue of land use.

46.2 Environmental noise assessment of dog barking from the kennel area found that noise is not a constraint to residential development on the property and therefore the recommendation for a buffer is unfounded.

It is not clear what “environmental noise assessment” is being referred to. It is therefore not possible to comment on what the assessment concluded. It is noted however that the DSP makes clear recommendations in relation to the retention of the kennels and provision for a 500m buffer.

The implication of this approach is that residential zoning and close residential development is to be excluded from the buffer area unless scientific studies can demonstrate an acceptable noise impact is achievable.


Summary of Submission Staff Comment EPA Guidance Statement No. 3 – Separation

Distances between Industrial and Sensitive Land Uses identifies a generic 500m separation distance for facilities of this type in the absence of site-specific information.

46.3 There is no evidence of wetlands on the property and the Structure Plan reports do not identify any wetlands. The recommendation for core conservation is unfounded. The property is suitable for residential development. Should the Structure Plan not be modified there will be compensation claims based on fair net expectation of rural residential or residential use. These costs need to be reflected in the Structure Plan.

It is recognised that the identification of land to be set aside for conservation and any subsequent requirement and action for this to occur would have a significant financial and personal impact on affected landowners. It is also recognised that landowners would feel entitled to compensation in these circumstances.

Refer to the Wetlands and Development Contribution Framework sections in the agenda report for discussion on the issues raised in this submission.

46.4 Relocate the district open space and the high school to more densely populated planned zones in Precincts 3A, 3B and 3C.

Refer to the High School Site and District Playing Fields section of the agenda report for discussion of these issues.

47

Name and Postal Address: Dynamic Planning Neil Teo PO Box 525 North Perth WA 6906

Affected Property: Lot 9 Holmes Street Southern River


47.1 The DSP designated the majority of the subject site as Urban with an "Open Space" corridor dissecting the northern portion of the site. The MRS zoning is Urban Deferred and the City of Gosnells Town Planning Scheme zoning is "General Rural".

Noted.

47.2 The information forming the basis of Drainage Options A and B is inadequate. ENV Australia mapping appears to indicate the relocation of flood way and flood fringe areas away from their naturally occurring paths, to the Southern Precinct at the proponent’s benefit. This is inequitable and an unusual approach to drainage.

An inter-agency technical working group was established to oversee the production of an Arterial Drainage Strategy (ADS) for the Forrestdale Main Drain (FMD) catchment in recognition of the fact that urbanisation will necessitate the upgrade of the drainage systems in a catchment with important environmental characteristics. Precinct 3 lies at the downstream end of this catchment with the FMD being a key physical feature of the subject area.

The widening of the FMD and creation of a multiple use recreational corridor alongside was proposed in the DSP. The proposed Precinct 3 Structure Plan, in identifying a widening requirement for the FMD, is based on the more refined study of drainage requirements completed in the draft ADS. The widening area shown in the proposed Structure Plan is not substantially different to the DSP.


Summary of Submission Staff Comment Refer to the Urban Water Management section of

the agenda report for additional discussion on accommodating a widening requirement for the FMD.

47.3 The proposed Other Regional Road reservation amendment to align along Holmes Street for the future extension of Garden Street will avoid dissecting the Bush Forever site, however it seems that no other options appear to have been canvassed.

The process in regards to determining the alignment of and land requirements for the future extension of Garden Street is currently being driven by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure’s Urban Transport System’s branch and is awaiting formal resolution from the WAPC to initiate an MRS amendment. The proposed alignment is considered to be the only option so as to avoid dissecting Bush Forever Site 464. This option was endorsed by Council endorsed at its meeting on 28 June 2005 and there is considered to be no reason this should be reviewed.

Refer to the Metropolitan Region Scheme section of the agenda report for additional discussion in respect to this matter.

47.5 Support the interpretation that the designated buffer area can be included in the POS calculation.

Noted.

47.6 Environmental studies have confirmed that the wetland H and the associated Resource Enhancement classification are inappropriate and unnecessary in achieving environmental linkages along the drain and to the adjacent Bush Forever site. It is recommended that a section of the Core Conservation area within the site is reclassified to residential zoning to correspond with the proposed revegetation corridor.

The site is completely degraded, devoid of vegetation and has limited environmental and ecological value, if developed appropriately with appropriate management of storm and surface water the wetland values of the area could be enhanced.

Noted. Concerns expressed in respect to the accuracy and validity of wetland mapping and how this mapping has translated into the identification of land for Core Conservation are recognised, though it is not clear what environmental studies are being referred to in this submission.

Refer to the Wetlands section of the agenda report.


48

Name and Postal Address: Urban Endeavour Adam Brown Level 4 189 St Georges Terrace Perth WA 6000

Affected Property: Lot 1796 Matison Street Lot 11 Passmore Street Lot 12 Passmore Street Lot 1789 Passmore Street Lot 1790 Passmore Street Lot 1799 Passmore Street Lot 1792 Holmes Street Lot 1804 Holmes Street Southern River


48.1 The proposed location of the Senior High School and District Open Space is strongly opposed as the approved DSP identified an area north of Southern River Road for the high school site. The lots identified in the proposed Structure Plan for the school site were zoned Urban, Neighbourhood centre and rural and semi rural living under the DSP. These properties were purchased based on the DSP development potential; it would be inequitable to encumber these properties with a land use not included in the DSP.

The Precinct 3 Planning Framework Policy stipulates that a Structure Plan is required for Precinct 3. The main intent of this requirement is to ensure there is a coordinated whole-of-precinct planning approach that both updates and further refines the broad land use arrangements outlined on the DSP and guides the preparation of the sub-precinct level ODPs and associated arrangements for shared infrastructure provision and setting aside of land for public purposes.

There have been certain matters progressed and decisions made since the DSP was prepared that have implications for the planning of Precinct 3. One of key issues for Precinct 3 relates to the accommodation of a High School site in the area.

The DSP did not identify land to be set aside for district recreation/playing fields, even though there is a need for a large active recreational area to cater for future community needs in Southern River.

There is additional discussion on these matters in the High School Site and District Playing Fields and the Development Contribution Framework sections of the agenda report.

48.2 Lots 1796, 1799 - 1804 in Sub- Precinct 3C and parts of lots 1789 and 1792 within Sub-Precinct 3D are designated as Parks and Recreation Reserves and Core Conservation, which is at odds with the DSP which shows parts of this land as Urban and semi-rural living and is contrary to the Bush Forever Policy, which identifies much of this land for a Negotiated Planning Solution in keeping with its Urban Deferred status under the MRS.

The submission is referring to lots in the area bound by Holmes Street, Matison Street, Woongan Street and Passmore Street, which for the most part included in Bush Forever site 464 and proposed to be included the proposed Bush Forever Protection Area (BFPA) under the MRS Amendment 1082/33, but are not proposed to be reserved for Parks and Recreation.

The proposed Structure Plan identifies Bush Forever site 464 as Parks and Recreation Reservation, as it does for the four other Bush Forever sites in Precinct 3, even though not all sites are either reserved or proposed to be reserved for this purpose in the MRS. The proposed Structure Plan also identifies portion of some of the lots referred to in the submission as Core Conservation, in recognition of the existence of a mapped Conservation Category wetland that lies both within and outside of the Bush Forever site.


Summary of Submission Staff Comment The DPI has indicated to the City that it is prepared

to acquire the land referred to in this submission in the Bush Forever site and the other Bush Forever site of the same category (land east of the FMD near Phoebe Street) and will not seek to be reimbursed for the cost of land acquisition from the City or any DCA that may be established by the City for land acquired as a Bush Forever site. As a consequence, the City will not be responsible for acquiring approximately 40ha of land that may have otherwise have had to be considered as a common infrastructure cost for Precinct 3, though it may be responsible for acquisition of land shown Core Conservation.

Establishing a mechanism designed to ensure areas of conservation value are protected and a fair and equitable distribution of open space costs among all landowners in the planning area is a matter discussed in further detail in the report.

The wetland currently mapped on Lot 1792 is protected under the Environmental Protection (Swan Coastal Plain Lakes) Policy 1992. This policy was gazetted in 1992 to protect a selection of permanently and seasonally inundated wetlands on the Swan Coastal Plain. Wetlands identified under this policy are protected from unauthorised filing, mining, effluent disposal and drainage. Authorisation to impact on wetlands listed under this policy should be sought from the EPA.

48.3 The identification of a large area within Sub-Precinct 3D as "Widening required for Forrestdale Main Drain" is strongly opposed as any of the existing and proposed land uses within this precinct do not generate any need for the main drain to be widened. Should a widening be necessary to cater for storm water flows outside this area the entity responsible for the main drain should acquire appropriate land for this purpose from any owners willing to sell at fair market rates.

See the Staff Comment in response to Submission No. 47.2 and the Development Contribution Framework and Urban Water Management sections of the agenda report.

48.4 Adopting the draft Precinct 3 Structure Plan in its current form will have the effect of reserving various land parcels for public purposes and lead to significant compensation claims.

This contention is supported by legal advice obtained by the submitter and provided for the review of City staff and Councillors. The submitter requested that the legal advice not be disclosed to other parties without their consent.

It is not possible to provide a detailed comment on the matters contained in the legal advice without describing what that advice states. It is considered reasonable however to indicate in this circumstance that City staff do not agree with the main thrust of the submitter’s contention that adopting the Structure Plan in its current form will have the effect of reserving various land parcels for public purposes and lead to significant compensation claims. As stated above, the act of locating a public purpose land requirement on an individual’s landholding is not a matter taken lightly and it is recognised that doing so can have a significant detrimental personal impact on the affected landowner.


Summary of Submission Staff Comment There is additional discussion on issues relating to

landowner compensation and mechanisms aimed at achieving fair and equitable outcomes in the Development Contribution Framework section of the agenda report.

48.5 Outline Development Plans for sub-precinct 3C and 3D (refer to Appendix 13.5.1H) have been submitted to progress plans for development of land in these sub-precincts and to gain support to modify the proposed Structure Plan accordingly.

Generally, planning at the more detailed level and particularly in a situation when land is fragmented among multiple landowners and is subject to significant environmental constraints, should generally be undertaken in accordance with a higher order planning framework. It would not be considered appropriate to modify the proposed Structure Plan to detail the content of the proposed ODPs for a variety of reasons that relate to orderly and proper planning process and the need for resolution of matters concerning the High School and Playing Fields, wetland and buffer definition and drainage. These proposed ODPs are presently under assessment and will be addressed through a separate report/s to Council. It should be noted that the submitter may seek to exercise rights under TPS 6 to have the WAPC consider whether to advertise the proposed ODPs given a failure of the City to do so within the timeframe prescribed by the Scheme.

49

Name and Postal Address: David Ford PO Box 37 Gosnells WA 6990


Summary of Submission Object to the proposal.

Objects to a wetland protection buffer that coincides with the subject property. The buffer is 100m in width as recommended by ENV, however the DEC generally recommends a default buffer of 50m and 100m generally for regionally significant wetlands. The subject wetland is not considered to be of regional significance. Further the 100m buffer would see the existing Matison Street reserve included within the buffer. Matison Street represents a significant and suitable barrier, that any extension into the subject land offers little benefit to the protection of the subject wetland. It is requested that the buffer requirements be truncated at Matison Street.

A 50m buffer associated with CCW is shown on the proposed Structure Plan. The proposed Structure Plan also shows the reserve for Matison Street, which it is agreed physically disconnects part of the buffer from the CCW, with the severed part of the buffer. It is anticipated the wetland buffers shown on the Structure Plan will generally need to be set aside for Local Open Space on proposed ODPs.

The proposed Structure Plan, as it relates to Lot 20 Bradley Street, may be considered to be a pragmatic and warranted solution in the circumstances, as it is generally consistent with the requirement to set aside a buffer associated with a wetland of the conservation category, while recognising that part of the buffer is already developed and severed from a wetland which in itself remains in private ownership. Technically the proposal is likely to be in conflict with State Government environmental policy, however this has not been confirmed as neither the Department for Environment and Conservation (DEC) or the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) responded to the City’s invitation to comment on the proposed ODP and their specific views on the proposal are not known.


Summary of Submission It should be noted however that when the EPA

commented on Amendment No. 70 to TPS 6 (which proposed to rezone Precinct 3A to Residential Development and include much of the broader Precinct 3 area in a Special Control Area where related pre-requisite requirements to subdivision and development area would apply) it suggested that the CCW in question should be the subject of a site-specific study to determine parameters for development near the wetland and for its buffer and its extent. No such study was prepared in support of the proposed ODP nor has one since been completed.

The absence of a study that supports a 50m buffer is not considered in itself to represent a bar to Council adopting the proposed Structure Plan.

The parameters for setting aside a buffer to the CCW, including the extent of the buffer and the permitted land use, is a matter addressed by the Precinct 3A ODP. Coverage of the issues associated with this CCW and the submitter’s concerns of is provided in the report to be presented to Council in future in relation to the ODP.


ocm 12 may 2009 appendix 13.5 - gosnells.wa.gov.au · tina bazzo . po box 6913 . east perth wa 6892...

Documents