RIVERSIDE MASTER PLAN REVIEW/2008 Prepared for East Perth Redevelopment Authority August 2008 Riverside Master Plan Review / 1 CONSULTANT TEAM This document has been prepared by HASSELL Ltd on behalf of the East Perth Redevelopment Authority. HASSELL Town Planning HASSELL Urban Design HASSELL Architecture HASSELL Landscape HASSELL Project Management NS Projects Environmental Syrinx Environmental Property Consultant Colliers International Economic Development Pracsys Sustainability URS Heritage Palassis Architects Traffic Engineers SKM Quantity Surveyor Ralph Beattie Bosworth Riverside Master Plan Review / 2 PREPARED BY Ken Maher Peter Lee Chris Melsom Denise Morgan Gary McCullough Andrew Lefort Cressida Beale Andrew Nugent Amber Hadley Riverside Master Plan Review / 3 CONTENT Executive Summary 8 1 Introduction 12 2 2004 Master Plan Vision and Objectives 14 2.1 Riverside Master Plan Update 16 2.2 Community Consultation 16 3 Riverside Master Plan Review 2008 17 3.1 Built Form 17 3.2 Streetscape and Public Realm 18 3.3 Density and Scale 18 3.4 Traffic 19 4 Key Influences 23 4.1 Urban Context 23 4.2 Landscape and Urban Form 25 4.3 Sustainability 27 4.3.1 Effective Sustainable Urban Place Making 27 4.3.2 Reduced Climate Change Impact 27 4.3.3 Strengthen and Enhance Community Wellbeing 27 4.3.4 Enhancement of Ecological Value 28 4.3.5 Sustainable Resource Use 28 4.3.6 Vital Economic Development 28 4.3.7 Flexible Transport and Optimal Connectivity (Movement) 28 4.4 Market Conditions and Demographic Change 28 4.4.1 Demographic Change 29 4.4.2 Residential Implications 29 4.5 Market Conditions 29 4.5.1 Residential Market 29 4.5.2 Office Market 30 4.5.3 Retail Market implications 30 Riverside Master Plan Review / 4 4.6 Changes in Built Form Assumptions 31 4.7 Government Policy 31 4.8 Site Influences 32 5 Precincts 34 5.1 Queens Precinct 34 5.1.1 Proposed and Approved Development 34 5.1.2 Chem Labs 37 5.2 WA Police Services Site 38 5.3 Waterbank 40 5.4 Hillside 42 5.4.1 2004 Master Plan 42 5.4.2 Vision 43 5.4.3 Design Philosophy 43 5.4.4 Plan Overview 43 5.4.5 Streets and Open Space 43 5.4.6 Access and Movement 43 5.4.7 Parking 44 5.4.8 Built Form 44 5.4.9 Summary 45 5.4.10 Development Yield 45 5.5 WACA, Gloucester Park and Trinity 47 5.5.1 Landowner Considerations 47 5.5.2 WACA 48 5.5.3 Gloucester Park 51 5.5.4 Trinity 54 6 Key Findings 57 7 Technical Review 59 7.1 Economic Activation, Pracsys 59 7.1.1 Population and Expenditure 59 7.1.2 Location and type of retail tenancies 60 7.1.3 WACA 60 7.2 Market Assessment, Colliers International 61 7.2.1 Residential Market 61 7.2.2 Dwelling and Household Typology 62 7.2.3 Office Market 62 7.2.4 Retail Market 62 7.3 Traffic and Transport, Sinclair Knight Mertz 63 Riverside Master Plan Review / 5 CONTENT List of Figures 1. 2008 Riverside Master Plan Update 11 2. 2004 Riverside Master Plan (Launched as ‘Gateway’) 15 3. Riverside Master Plan Update 2008 20 4. Master Plan Update - Building Heights 21 5. East West section along Adelaide Terrace and the Causeway looking North 22 6. North-South section across Queens Gardens and ‘Hillside’ looking West 22 7. Key Movement and Visual Corridors 26 8. Landscape Influences 33 9. 2008 Master Plan updated - Precinct boundaries 35 10. Queens Precinct - 2004 Gateway Master Plan 36 11. Queens Precinct - Approved development shown on former Metrobus site and updated Chemlabs site plan 36 12. Police Headquarters Precinct - 2004 Gateway Master Plan 38 13. Police Headquarters Precinct - Master Plan Update 38 14. Western Australian Police Headquarters site 39 15. Causeway Common Precinct - 2004 Gateway Master Plan 40 16. Waterbank Precinct - Master Plan update 40 17. Architectural modelling - Waterbank Precinct 41 18. Hillside Precinct - 2004 Gateway Master Plan 42 19. Hillside Precinct - Revised Master Plan 45 20. Hillside aerial view from the south 46 21 Indicative Development Proposals - WACA, Gloucester Park and Trinity College 47 22. WACA Precinct - 2004 Gateway Master Plan 48 23. 2008 WACA Proposal 48 24. Implications of Key View Corridors 50 Riverside Master Plan Review / 6 25. Response to 2008 WACA Master Plan 50 26. Gloucester Park - 2004 Gateway Master Plan 51 27. Implications of Key View Corridors 52 28. Revised 2008 WATA Proposal 53 29. Response to Cloucester Park 2008 Master Plan 53 30. Trinity College - 2004 Gateway Master Plan 54 31. Implications of Key Movement and View Corridors 55 2008 Trinity College 32. Trinity College and View Corridor viewed looking north-west 55 33. 2008 Trinity College Master Plan Update 56 Riverside Master Plan Review / 7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The key urban renewal objectives of the 2004 Riverside (then Gateway) Master Plan remain valid. Providing a range for building heights and densities would provide a robust framework for future development within Riverside. Further public domain enhancements would be achieved by formal recognition of important visual and physical elements such as key view corridors and open space. View of Riverside from the east, showing potential built form. HASSELL was commissioned by the East Perth Redevelopment Authority (EPRA) to review the Gateway Masterplan and determine whether the objectives and vision recommended in 2004 remain valid. The key sustainability objectives underpinning the urban renewal of Riverside are sound. The provision of greater development potential within Riverside is, however, warranted to better support those objectives and is supported in light of continually developing urban form in the Perth central area. Riverside Master Plan Review / 8 Some of the key factors considered as part of the review include: — development approvals on land sold by EPRA within the Queens Precinct have exceeded 2004 guidelines in terms of height and expectations in terms of yield and quality — poor physical environmental conditions necessitated a fundamental re orientation of the detailed planning for Waterbank Precinct — detailed planning that has occurred for the Western Australian Police Headquarters site — further progress by major private land owners on their development aspirations for the WACA ground, Gloucester Park and Trinity College that would result in a fundamentally different distribution of activities than envisaged in 2004 — continued focus on the importance of achieving sustainable development outcomes. When these circumstances are compared to the 2004 vision for Riverside, there is a clear opportunity to develop a more responsive approach to the setting, and assessing expected built form outcomes to ensure that important visual and physical elements such as key view corridors remain valid within a changing urban context. A review of the road network, land ownership boundaries and prospects for success of the Gloucester Circus, proposed in 2004, have resulted in the removal of Gloucester Circus and adjustment of roads in that area to reflect land ownership. This will result in a greater ability for landowners to develop land within their existing boundaries without the need for complicated land swaps. Key view corridors and critical visual and physical links have been identified, as have key locations for landmark or taller ‘icon’ developments that will frame spaces or terminate views and enhance legibility and identity. The review has identified that there is scope for Riverside to achieve considerably more intense development than was published in 2004, and that projections on future population growth necessitate a more flexible approach toward generally greater heights and higher densities. The increased intensity is to be supported by a revised built form model of generally up to six storey podiums at the street level with taller tower elements positioned to enable good solar access and protection of view corridors. When compared to the 2004 Master Plan expected outcomes, the opportunity exists for greater development yields on both the Hillside (4A Car Park) and Chemlabs sites, and detailed Precinct plans reflect this. The WACA and Gloucester Park sites could also achieve more intensive development in the medium to long term. Riverside is extremely well positioned to help realise the State planning objective of incorporating greater density and intensity of development within existing urban areas to accommodate future population growth in a more sustainable manner, as described in Network City and the State Sustainability Strategy. Riverside Master Plan Review / 9 A comparison of the development potential that could be realised under the 2004 Master Plan and under the 2008 review is given in the following table. It should be noted that the increased yields in the 2008 review should be considered as minimum yield targets. Detailed planning for each precinct shall detail optimum development yields and targets for each precinct. Use 2004 2008 Review (Including % Change Landowner Development Proposals) Dwellings 2756 3439 24.7% Retail/ 28,130sqm 81,310sqm 230.4% Commercial Floorspace Civic Floorspace 1500sqm 4,600sqm 206.6% The profile of Perth’s urban form east of the CBD is changing, with several high-rise residential developments constructed since 2004 and others approved. Within Riverside, development approvals within the Queens Precinct have included heights between 3 and 18 storeys on Adelaide Terrace, differing from the 3 to 12 storey maximum identified in the 2004 Master Plan. In 2008, there are very low vacancy rates for commercial floorspace available within the Perth CBD and West Perth, and little residential accommodation available. Although supply will catch up over time, the demand for residential and commercial development is likely to remain strong for the next 5-10 years, albeit that there may be some market uncertainty during 2008-09 for small to mid-level developers who rely on third-party finance, as a result of the sub-prime mortgage fallout.