SUBMISSION RELATING TO PETITION No. 109—Nedlands Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 3 INFILL DENSITY IN NEDLANDS: WHAT IS THE ISSUE? The issue at hand is not increased density per se; it is how it is done. This petition opposes the approach adopted by the WA Government for increasing density within the City of Nedlands. Infill should be consistent with principles of good town planning, maintain amenities for current and future residents, and be in keeping with the existing character, amenity and heritage of the area. These principles are being largely ignored in Local Planning Scheme 3 (LPS3), which the Government is imposing upon the Nedlands community against its wishes. If passed into law, LPS3 will have a huge detrimental impact on the liveability and heritage of Nedlands. This petition therefore calls for the Minister's scheme to be rejected and a more holistic approach adopted. BACKGROUND In 2016, the WA Government directed that an additional 4400 dwelling units be accommodated in the City of Nedlands by 2050 as part of the Perth & [email protected] strategy. The City developed its Local Planning Strategy, which was endorsed by the WA Planning Commission (WAPC) despite an extremely low level of consultation and feedback (representing <0.5% of residents). The City then developed its Local Planning Scheme 3 (LPS3), which fulfilled the requirement for 4,400 additional dwellings. After consultation with the WAPC, the City advertised a planning scheme with a dwelling target of 9,000. No explanation was given for this increase. Nedlands residents responded with over 1,000 submissions, the vast majority of which objected to the WAPC’s LPS3. The Nedlands Council voted to reject the WAPC's LPS3. A compromise LPS3 providing for 6,500 new dwellings, developed by the City after analysis of the submissions, was not presented to the WAPC. Instead, the Minister made modifications to the WAPC's LPS3, resulting in a small reduction of new dwellings to 7,500. The Minister then directed that the City of Nedlands approve her version of LPS3, which the Council did under protest and only to comply with the law. The residents of Nedlands have not been consulted on the final version of LPS3 which is to be gazetted in May 2019. This final version is, for many properties, significantly different from the advertised LPS3 and most of the planning concerns raised in community submissions have been ignored. INCONSISTENCIES, LACK OF CONSULTATION, LACK OF TRANSPARENCY Orders without justification The Minister has mandated that LPS3 be approved by the City of Nedlands. The Mayor of the City of Nedlands refused to sign the Minister's LPS3. The Deputy Mayor stated that he was advised to sign LPS3 to comply with the law. It is in the spirit of the law that a local planning scheme should be devised by local government, and that any external orders should be justified and debated in parliament. The Minister has neither explained nor justified, to the Parliament of WA, the decision to enforce LPS3 upon the Nedlands community. No community consultation There has been no opportunity for residents to provide feedback on the Minister's LPS3. Under s84 of the Planning and Development Act 2005 (PDA 2005), a local planning scheme prepared by a local government is to be advertised for public inspection in accordance with the regulations. The Minister has deemed all documentation regarding her LPS3 (except for maps released) to be confidential. To keep Nedlands residents in the dark in this way is both extraordinary and unacceptable. It runs counter to fundamental principles of democracy and transparency. Heritage and assessment The Minister's LPS3 fails to value the existing character and heritage of homes within the affected area. Section 79 of the PDA.2005 requires all new local planning schemes covering areas that contain heritage buildings to be assessed and approved by the Heritage Council of WA. This requirement was by–passed when, on 17 October 2017, the Minister instructed the City of Nedlands to proceed without advice from the Heritage Council. This showed a complete disregard for a 100+ year heritage precinct. As a result, large areas containing heritage buildings are earmarked for moderate to high density, further destroying the State's history and architectural legacy. Procedural inconsistency Some individual resident groups were given the opportunity to present their concerns about the WAPC's LPS3 to the WAPC. This opportunity was not offered to the wider Nedlands community, many of whom were also deeply concerned about the proposed LPS3. This procedural inconsistency privileges the rights of some residents over others and disregards basic principles of fairness and transparency. NEGATIVE IMPACTS OF POORLY PLANNED DENSITY INCREASE Traffic nightmare Main Roads WA has advised against ribbon development along Stirling Highway, which is already close to capacity. The Minister’s LPS3 lacks a transport solution to accommodate the additional traffic that would be generated along Stirling Highway—yet the plan concentrates density increases along and close to the highway. High density infill west of Nedlands will also generate an increase in traffic flow. Stirling Highway would become a traffic nightmare. Destruction of character In response to resident submissions, the Minister claimed, in a letter dated 1 Feb 2019, that LPS3 would preserve the character and amenity of established neighbourhoods. It is clear, however, that density of this type and scale would destroy the character of the rezoned areas. Of particular concern are the character precincts that were identified in a report by Palassis Architects and historian Robyn Taylor, commissioned by the City of Nedlands. These character precincts are the very ones that LPS3 has marked for a significant increase in density and a dramatic change in built form. Destruction of amenity The Liveable Neighbourhoods 2015 (LNP.2015) policy, a WAPC document that guides planning and subdivision for greenfield and brownfield (urban infill) sites, promotes healthy, happy and safe communities through urban design that creates 'well distributed public open spaces' and 'a strong sense of place', at the same time 'responding to local character and environmental values'. The Minister's LPS3, which has the capacity to almost triple the number of existing dwellings in the City of Nedlands, fails to adhere to key design principles set out in LNP.2015, including the preservation of local character, consideration of environmental factors (see below), and close access to public open space—this being of particular concern for dwellings north of Stirling Highway. This will inevitably have an adverse impact on the quality of life for current and future residents. Destruction of green canopy The introduction of medium to high density housing will destroy the green canopy and the wildlife it supports, including the endangered Carnaby cockatoos. All of the areas to be rezoned will become R40 and above which, under the new Design WA Policy, allow apartment development and decreased setbacks. The result: destruction of green canopy, increased ambient temperatures, increased use of air conditioning, and other negative environmental impacts—ironically at a time of heightened awareness of climate change. Lack of supporting infrastructure The increase in density will occur predominantly on small to medium lots of land. Smaller developments of this kind do not need to provide infrastructure upgrades (sewage, traffic, schools etc.) to maintain the current level of amenities in the area. Taken cumulatively, however, the proposed developments will inevitably require expansion of the existing infrastructure. There has been no pledge from the Minister to provide for future infrastructure needs. Conflicts of size and scale within transition zones Radical rezoning changes under LPS3 would allow existing dwellings to be juxtaposed with new multi–level apartment complexes. This would result in differing street setbacks, side setbacks, overshadowing, and an inevitable loss of privacy and liveability for existing dwellings. THERE ARE BETTER ALTERNATIVES LPS3 ignores alternative locations in the City of Nedlands for high density development, such as the non- residential land in close proximity to the Perth-Fremantle railway line. This particular location would enable the existing rail infrastructure to be utilised and would be consistent with the Government’s heavily promoted Metronet plan. IN CONCLUSION Re reiterate: the issue is not increased density per se; it is how it is done. Legitimate concerns have been raised by the community—and they have been ignored. The desecration of amenity, heritage, green canopy and an existing harmonious community is not a sensible way to proceed, particularly when there are better alternatives. Poor planning decisions remain with communities for generations, with adverse impacts upon health, heritage, identity, and quality of life. We therefore ask the Legislative Council to support: • The rejection of the Minister's LPS3 for the City of Nedlands. • A more holistic approach to town planning that addresses the above concerns. • A process of community consultation that endeavours to capture the local community’s vision for the development of the City, which can then be used as a solid basis for the updating of LPS3. • A review of assets within State, Local and Federal jurisdictions with a view of identifying surplus government–owned land suitable for residential development. • Full transparency in the planning process. City of Nedlands D D T A A D E VEY ROAD T R O A D O A V E H EE R R A O E O D R L T O R T R N A R A E D R T I N S G N T CUTHBERT STREET I A E S C RO Y R H T O R B R E A E K RN 0 100 200 300 400C R T City of Subiaco E B L R D O A L S L E R M O I G E I N D E L HO L H M V I H L H O Y A Y O A C metres R J W A ARE ROAD P ABERD E Produced by Data Analytics, U D N A Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage, SAPPER E V RO A T P T on behalf of the Western Australian PlManning Commission.