newsletters

SUBMISSION TO CITY OF NEDLANDS
Mrs ELAINE JACOBY
JUTLAND PDE DALKEITH 6009

In response to the Council's Dalkeith Draft Built Form Design Guidelines DDBFDG (Precinct 18 ) dated Dec 2007 .This document is a Submission
called for by the Nedlands Council , closing date the 15 February 2008.

I OBJECT STRONGLY TO :

o   the way the Council permitted the plans to get to this advanced stage without the whole community being consulted and informed .

o   the way' the brief ' given to the Consultants was not included in the DDBFDG documents.

o   the way there was no outline of the input that came directly from the officers of the State Planning Commission in the documents.

o   the way the Council allowed and even encouraged a division in the Dalkeith community by treating one group of ratepayer as' more worthy ' for inclusion in selective meetings.Councils should BOND the community not divide them!

o   the way terminology , used by professional Town Planners eg Built Form Design ,was deliberately used in advertisments to confuse and mislead.
Advertisments that were intended to encourage the general public to attend public meetings on DDBFDG.

o   the way the 'process' was treated as a Consultative process rather than a Participationary process where the public becomes directly and immediately involved in it's formulation and adoption.

o   any commercial development on residential land within Precinct 18 .

o any short term accommodation flats/ apartments any where in dalkeith

o any motels / hotels/ taverns as permitted using zoning any where in Dalkeith

o the inclusion of Circe Circle North West corner in the Precinct 18 plan
    and to any increase in R code beyond R10 in this area.

o any change in Waratah Ave   residential density.
Waratah Ave and Genesta Cres  be limited to single sub-division on existing lots with no amalgamation of lots and a height limited to 2 storeys overall.

o to the plan for a massive commercial strip to rival Rokeby Rd Subiaco and buildings up to 5 storeys in height with the possibility of using the roof space for residential use.

o to the way there is no evidence of a feasability study done by the Council, DPI, or the Consultants to assertain the impact of the massive increase in retail and commercial space already under construction in Claremont.

o to the plan to costruct large underground parking areas and widen lanes to be used as roads .. all in keeping with Village Values (p5).

o that there is no explanation as to why such an enormous increase is required given this is a community convenience shopping area not a sub regional centre.

o to the way there is no evidence of any studies done on traffic density , flow and increase caused by this redevelopment .
This is inexcusable given the proximity of the Dalkeith school and that in the Timeline this aspect is not thought worthy of addressing until after Councils initiates the New Draft Guidelines.

o to the way the Environmental Authority is consulted only after the Council initiates the New Draft Guidelines. Surely the EPA should have a representative working with the Steering Committee to make sure all EPA requirements are met before the draft is initiated?

o to the way the plan ignores the Council's own policy of retaining existing residential areas as R10 and encourages amalgamation of blocks to achieve a greater density . 10 homes on land that initially only allowed for 2 homes.

o to the loss of Dalkeith hall, a heritage listed building, and an asset of the city of Nedlands to retail and commercial use.

I RECOMMEND THE FOLLOWING :

o that the council and Administration need to reveal publically how the DDBFDG came into being.

o   that the process needs to begin over again with community participation in every phase.

o that the boundaries of Precinct 18 be reviewed and with community participation re-defined , as the NTh ,WSt corner of Circe Circle opposite the school is not siutable for anything other than R10 / R20 for family homes.

o that all community advertising be presented in colour in the local paper ( just like the Add asking people to tell the council when a sprinkler is broken. If it is important enough to do those Adds in colour then how much more important is it for these ADDs?) in large clear print and in language that can be understood by everyone.

o   that the commercial and retail buildings be limited to the North side if Waratah Ave between Adelma and Alexander Rd

o   that the height of 2 to 3 storeys be staggered back from the corner of Adelma and Waratah Ave to lessen the height impact on the houses opposite east and west.

o   that R 20 sub-division for both side of Waratah Ave from Alexander to Robert Rd to be done as long blocks or as 2 dwellings within 1 building . There must be adequate set backs from bothsides front and rear to preserve streetscape
o   that all parking areas in and around commercial developments in Waratah Ave north side should have parking areas front and rear ( like the Village does now). The rear parking area acting as a buffer between the houses in Philip Rd and the commercial and retail areas.

o   that the redevelopment of the existing commercial areas DA (6 7 8 9 ) be allowed between Adelma and Alexander Rd without the mixed use of residential and commercial and no underground parking and limited to 3 storeys with no residential in the roof space.

o that all residential be limited to 2 storeys and all sub -division (if agreed to) be in line with the buildings already established and accepted in Genesta Crs.

o   that a special Landscaping study be done to turn the park opposite Genesta Cres and the roadway from opposite the hall drive in ,infront of the NFFS office through to Alexander Rd into a pathed , grassed and treelined piazza with sculptures and water features.

o that the bus route be redirected around the park by going along Genesta Crs to the corner on Alexander Rd then turning north along Alexander Rd to Waratah Ave where it continues along its usual route.

o that the deviation by the bus and all traffic would create in front of the hall and cafes an open community area where fetes could be held and the elderly people, who in time may be housed in the area that is now the Hall and parking area , could join in more easily and feel part of the community

o that the bus and traffic deviation would have a natural road calming affect and slow the traffic as they negotiate each bend   and bollards would  prevent 'hoons' at night using the piazza as a through road .

o that the area created would be double the size the park is now and allow the cafe strip to expand ..

o that parking could be created on the area outside the hall where the sweep of the park meeting the road would create a triangular pathed area and parking in Genesta could become parallel rather than angled to allow more room for traffic flow.

   N. B. A map showing the area for Landscaping will be included with the hard copy of this document when it is delivered to Council on the 15 February 2008

o That when the process commences again there should be a 'site office' set up in Waratah Ave and manned by Planning officers to explain each step participating with the community at each stage.

In conclusion I would like to add that acting in the interests of all the people who live with in the City of Nedlands the Council and Administation should commence a period of rebuilding community faith and trust by beginning the process again and this time with full community participation and involvement in all levels.
People Against Density dalkeith would not have come into being if the Council and Administation had followed the normal planning process of...

SURVEY -- CONCEPT--DETAILED PLANNING--COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION AND CONSULTATION AT EACH STEP