Stock image.
Camera IconStock image. Credit: Supplied/Supplied

Hands tied on development in housing opportunity areas

John ChesterJoondalup Times

FOR very good reasons, the community generally accepts that continued expansion of the metropolitan area at its edges is undesirable.

Firstly, it requires the removal of irreplaceable bushland, reducing habitat and foraging for native species, particularly small marsupials and Carnaby’s cockatoos.

Secondly, it costs the State Government tens of thousands of dollars to provide utilities such as power, water, sewerage and roads at the urban fringe.

PerthNow Digital Edition.
Your local paper, whenever you want it.

Get in front of tomorrow's news for FREE

Journalism for the curious Australian across politics, business, culture and opinion.

READ NOW

Thirdly, residents in these areas need to travel further to work and to amenities.

In the interests of long term sustainability, the State Government mandated that local government increase allowable density around shopping centres and transport hubs, particularly train stations, creating so called Housing Opportunity Areas (HOA).

Essentially, this was to encourage residents in these areas to either walk or ride to the shops, or public transport. It also allows for some aging housing stock to be replaced with quality group and multiple dwelling developments.

The density in HOAs considered acceptable by State Government was a zoning of R20/60 within 400m walking distance from hubs, and R20/40 within 800m riding distance.

In theory, this should produce good planning and sustainability outcomes, and I don’t personally disagree with the strategy, but it would also be unrealistic not to expect some character changes in these areas over time.

It will mean more traffic on local roads, more immediate neighbours with the possibility of some overlooking and loss of privacy.

Will it result in anti-social slums like some alarmists are suggesting? No. I doubt it very much.

In fact, when the strategy first went out for public comment in 2010, many residents requested to be included in HOAs because it offered an opportunity to sell their properties at a premium or even to develop their own properties and downsize on site.

I sympathise with residents who are currently facing these challenges.

However, since the infill strategy is principally driven and mandated by the State Government, in particular the Department of Planning, and signed off by the WA Planning Commission, these are the agencies which have the ultimate capacity to modify or fine tune the strategy.

For this reason, I hope it will be understood by residents living in the City’s Housing Opportunity Areas, that councillors, even with the best of intentions, have a very limited ability, if any, to influence the style or density of developments in these areas.

Currently, if the City’s planning team receives a submission that is deemed to comply with the requirements of the State Government Residential Design Codes, the City’s Local Housing Strategy and District Planning Scheme No2, then the planning team is obliged to approve the development under delegated authority with no necessary requirement even to consult with neighbours.

This may not be the most desirable situation, but it is, for better or worse, the situation as it exists at the moment.

John Chester is a City of Joondalup councillor.

MORE: Albert Jacob confirms he will run for Joondalup Mayor

MORE: Severe weather warning issued for parts of WA

MORE: Luxury beachside apartments proposal a boon for Scarborough redevelopment