Not all infill proposals are good infill proposals

As the Amendment 31 saga draws to a close we’d like to ensure it’s seen as a turning point in the infill debate. The point at which it was accepted that not all infill proposals are good infill proposals. The point at which the community won the right to be a central part of the process.

We’d ask you to take the time to click on the below link and read the full review of A31 prepared by Ian Everett of CLE Town Planning & Design. This sets out some lessons to be learnt, lessons we hope councillors in Cambridge and in other suburbs heed. That it’s not unreasonable to expect a planning framework that delivers good outcomes.

The Town of Cambridge is now looking to preparing proper planning and housing strategies along with Activity Centre Structure Plans. It’s important that you remain engaged in this process and provide your input.

click the below link to read full article

amendment-31-an-example-of-bad-infill

 

Town of Cambridge scores 3.8 out of 23 for planning.

The Property Council of Australia released a report today comparing planning performance of WA local councils. Whilst we often don’t agree with the Property Councils agenda it’s still worth taking a look at this report which can be viewed here

local-govt-rankings

If you can’t be bothered reading the report in full here is the important bit. Of all the WA local councils the Town of Cambridge performed the worst, that’s right, the absolute worst, when it came to planning. This was because it has only just started work on it’s local planning strategy (at Mayor Shannon’s insistence), had lower than average levels of delegation and no data on processing times.

That’s right the Town of Cambridge scored 3.8 out of 23 for planning. Surprised? Didn’t think so.

 

This is what a community can do!

Minister for Planning, Donna Faragher, has announced that she will reject Amendment 31.

https://www.mediastatements.wa.gov.au/Pages/Barnett/2016/09/Minister-refuses-Cambridge-Amendment-31.aspx

This is a fantastic outcome for our community and the result of over 18 months hard work by many many people. Our thanks go out to Mayor Keri Shannon, Cr Andres Timmermanis and Cr Rod Bradley. Thanks also go to the CWRA committee and all community members involved in achieving this outcome.

The Town of Cambridge will now be required to develop a local planning strategy and a local housing strategy, which they should have done in the first place.

We’ll keep you updated as more details come to hand.

Congratulations all!

 

 

CWRA Wins in Supreme Court

We told them over and over and yet so far they’ve thrown away over $130k of your money on this and guess what? …. They lost. The Supreme Court has just announced that the CWRA have won their first court battle.

Justice Pritchard handed down her decision this week, finding that the CWRA DO HAVE STANDING to challenge A31 in court and will proceed to a final hearing. This means that the Town of Cambridge have thrown away over $135,000 of your dollars, to fight you, and lost.

Wembley Ward Crs MacRae, King, Powell and Carr and Coast Ward Councillor O’Connor voted at Council meetings to authorise spending more than $130,000 of ratepayer money trying to deny ratepayers a right to have their decisions reviewed by a Court – something property developers do at SAT everyday on planning matters. Justice Pritchard did not agree with them and allowed the CWRA arguments that the Town misled ratepayers during the advertising period and did not adequately explain particular changes to proceed saying that these arguments had “a reasonable prospect of success”.

Justice Pritchard determined that if elected members have a financial interest in a matter but have not disclosed it, they are entitled to participate and vote on the matter and their decision cannot be reviewed. Consequently the issue of whether the former Mayor had any interest in the scheme amendment and setbacks did not get determined by the Court because the Town led evidence he had made no disclosure of any interest before the 1 July 2016 meeting.

The CWRA also argued that the Town had adopted A31 without obtaining Heritage Council advice, however Justice Pritchard found that the Town had until the point the amendment was put into legal effect to refer it to the Heritage Council and as such our argument was premature. Given that once the Town had initiated A31 the Town’s ability to make changes to it is gone, this decision is perplexing.

The Judge recognised that at the heart of all the issues with Amendment 31 is the statutory advertising process and these issues regarding advertising will be heard at a hearing on 28 October 2016.

What’s this all mean? Well the Council will now have to decide if they are going to throw away even more of your money to keep fighting you, the people they are supposed to listen to and represent. A fight that a Supreme Court judge has said the CWRA has a reasonable chance of winning. A fight to protect A31 when it’s now so changed by Minister Day that even they don’t recognise it.

CWRA Winter Newsletter

The Coast Ward Ratepayers Association Winter Newsletter can be read in full by clicking here: Winter Newsletter

If you’d like to join the CWRA simply print and complete the form in the Winter Newsletter or email info.cwra@gmail.com

Don’t forget to follow Mayor Shannon’s blog at https://tocambridge.wordpress.com

Also stay tuned for an August CWRA Event at the City of Perth Surf Life Saving Club (yep that’s it’s actual name). You’ll be able to find out the latest on A31 plus get a tour of the new clubrooms and facilities.

 

 

WAPC says NO to Infill in City Beach & Floreat

FINALLY. Here’s what the Department of Planning actually think about A31.

The original Department of Planning Officers report on A31 has finally been released under FOI. We’ve had to fight for this. They tried to hide it. They even had a second report written. But finally we’ve got it.

Why was it hidden? Because it clearly tells the Minister to reject Amendment 31. Why? Because A31 is not consistent with the planning frameworks and that the affected areas in City Beach and Floreat ARE NOT APPROPRIATE AREAS FOR URBAN INFILL.

You can read it for yourself by clicking on the link below.

SPC October 2015 report redacted

 

Do you live around Lissadell St, Newry St, Birkdale Road or Selby Street?

If you do then you need to take a look at this map and you need to take action because you are about to be upcoded.

What does “upcoded” mean? Well it means the blocks in your area are going from R15 to R40 or even R60. That means a 900sqm block with one house on it may suddenly have between four to seven houses on it, or it may actually have an apartment block built on it. Yes. That’s correct. Next door to you. It’s called Amendment 31.
The good news is there is a lot of public opposition to this plan. Several reasons:

• The Heritage Council said reject A31 this as the Garden Suburbs should be protected
• The State Planning Commission said to reject A31 as it was fundamentally flawed
• This density is far in excess of that proposed under State Planning Policy guidelines which promote density within “walkable catchments” of 200m not a straight line radius of 400m
• There are no built form protections in this amendment

The bad news is you are in the Wembley Ward. This means:

• The Wembley Ward councillors that are supposed to protect your interests created this mess
• The Wembley Ward councillors voted to fight ratepayers who are trying to stop this in court
• Battle-axe blocks are back

We urge you to contact your Wembley Ward Councillor Corrine MacRae cr.macrae@cambridge.wa.gov.au and ask her to stop this. Ask her to support efforts to have the State Government apply their own planning guidelines. Ask her to stop fighting the ratepayers that are trying to stop this.

We also urge you to contact your local member Sean L’Estrange Sean.LEstrange@mp.wa.gov.au. Sean is part of the Liberal government that had an opportunity to reject this but didn’t, instead they made it worse. Ask him to get his government to follow their own planning policies. Now.

 

Who shall we blame?

Sadly last nights council meeting achieved little and largely turned into a session of who shall we blame with local member Sean L’Estrange being the main target.

Mayor Shannon spoke on Days Amendment at the start of the meeting providing her opinion that it was unreasonable and due process should have resulted in it’s rejection. She indicated the Town should consider if Day is outside power and that independent legal advice was being sought by the town. Mayor Shannon indicated that it was in the interests of all ratepayers for all elected members to vote and also reminded all members that they represented ALL of the community. Mayor Shannon was met with overwhelming applause.

Amongst matters raised:

• Motion to disallow Ocean Gardens board appointment and recommend they appoint a member that allows for both gender diversity and resident representation. Motion Lost 5:4 Cr O’Connor voting with the four Wembley Ward councillors.

• Motion to cease any further expenditure on defending the legal action by CWRA regarding A31. Mayor Shannon explained that if CWRA action successful A31 would cease to be which would allow the council to take the time to put in place an appropriate scheme amendment in consultation with the community. Cr Timmermanis expressed his opinion that given Days Amendments to A31 the council should be wishing the CWRA good luck. Motion Lost 5:4 Cr O’Connor voting with the four Wembley Ward councillors followed by much outrage and disbelief from the public gallery.

Crs O’Connor and Grinceri then both declared interests in A31 and left the meeting

• Motion to allow Cr Grinceri be allowed to vote on A31. Motion Lost 4:3

Consideration was given to include Cr O’Connor in the motion and thus allow her to vote on A31. It was requested Cr O’Connor return to the meeting to determine if she wished this to occur. Cr O’Connor refused to return to the meeting, thus denying the possibility of her being able to vote. Cr Timmermanis noting Cr O’Connor’s enthusiasm not to vote.

• Motion to allow Cr Grinceri to participate in discussions on A31. Motion passed.

Cr Grinceri was allowed to speak and took the opportunity to comment that local member Sean L’Estrange had only served to result in a worse outcome than the original A31. She encouraged residents to consider a return to an independent member at the next election.

Cr Carr then explained he had previously met with Sean L’Estrange and Day’s Amendment is what L’Estrange told him he should do. Cr Carr described this new amendment as ‘Sean L’Estrange’s Playbook’.

Mayor Shannon took exception to Cr Carr’s remarks and said Sean L’Estrange had represented his community and focused on state planning policy and supported A31 being rejected. She indicated that this did not equate to Day’s Amendment. Cr Timmermanis also expressed his support of Sean L’Estrange.

Mayor Shannon spoke about the need to prevent the Town looking like a subdivision paradise, highlighting that Days proposed walkable catchments were more than twice the number they should be. She also expressed a strong desire that this round of community consultation not be in the school holidays as there had previously not been sufficient community consultation.

Cr MacRae took the position that Minister Day had made a brave decision and now it was simply a matter of following the process.

Cr Grinceri said she was aghast at the extent of the draconian measures Day had recommended and suggested the council write to the new Minister in the strongest terms possible outlining their unhappiness with the proposal. She also suggested calling into question the population growth figures the density infill requirements are based upon.

Cr Carr suggested the Town go back to Minister Faragher with community feedback after the next advertising period and ask her to review the recommendations.

Discussion on A31 wound up with council agreeing to consider the matter further and obtain further information such as traffic reports.

Council to consider A31 on 26th April

The full council is considering the revised Amendment 31 on Tuesday the 26th of April. Yes. 26th April. Yes. This Tuesday.

What’s in it?

• R30, R40 and R60 Coding.
• Density around local shopping centres within a 500m radius despite State Planning Policy specifying 200m radius
• Battle-axe blocks allowed
• 4m setbacks for Corner Lots throughout both suburbs
• Driveways along side boundaries allowed

This is a radically different proposal which has nothing to do with diversity.

For more detail click here Details of Revised A31

For map of affected areas near Hale Road click here Hale Road map

For map of affected areas near The Boulevard click here The Boulevard map

For map of affected areas near Cambridge Street click here Cambridge Street map

The Heritage Council said A31 should be rejected. They said that 6m setbacks were vital to retain the character of the Garden Suburbs.

Stay involved. Have your say to ensure an acceptable outcome for all of us.

 

 

A31 Information released under FOI

Amongst information released to us this week was a copy of the ex-Mayor’s deputation to the State Planning Commission (SPC), which he made ON YOUR BEHALF. Before looking at this we recommend you be seated and breath deeply. Attempt to remain calm. Move all throwable objects out of reach.

The ex-Mayor made a 50-page deputation on your behalf. He devoted the first 20 pages to detailing his supposed “consultation” with the community and his motivating drivers behind A31. Yet at no time during these 20 pages does he actually mention the community consultation regarding the actual A31. Our ex-Mayor finally mentions this inconvenient truth on p22 in the form of a Simpsons comic, ridiculing your valid concerns as those of a dumb angry stupid mob.

This is how your Mayor actually portrayed your valid concerns to the SPC, in just 2 of his 50 pages.

In our opinion this is negligent, manipulative, dishonest and vindictive. It is clearly unacceptable. If this is how the ex-Mayor portrayed us in a formal deputation imagine how did he portray us to the then Planning Minister Day? We believe this deputation alone is grounds for the entire process to be set aside. It is certainly grounds for the new Minister for Planning to revisit Day’s version of A31 and finally address the concerns of the community. Concerns that the SPC upheld to be VALID despite the disrespect shown by the now ousted Mayor.

The ex-Mayor’s deputation then continues on in an attempt to persuade the SPC that the community actually supported A31. That’s right – supported!! He titles his slides “Level of Support” and highlights his now disgraced ‘housing surveys’ with little mention of the over 2,000 Statutory Form 4s that were lodged in direct opposition to A31. The ex-Mayor then goes on to spend pages actively disputing the deputation of respected Town Planning experts who savaged the amendment. Experts who had taken the time to show that there were alternatives that could provide diversity without inappropriate density and would preserve the Heritage of the suburb. Apparently the ex-Mayor thought he was better than all the experts. Thankfully the SPC did not think so.

We are personally revolted by this behavior. It’s an insult to our community, an insult to proper governance and we’re glad that this sort of individual is no longer in a position of power.

If you wish to look at his deputation in full click on the link below.

Withers Deputation to SPC

Once you’ve taken a look we urge you to lodge your disappointment with the new Minister for Planning Donna Faragher Minister.Faragher@dpc.wa.gov.au and your local elected representative Minister Sean L’Estrange Sean.LEstrange@mp.wa.gov.au. Sean has already indicated to us that members of the community don’t appear to be concerned with these latest developments. If you don’t write to them they will continue to assume you don’t care and they’ll let Minister Day’s recommendations stand. It’s up to you.