Summary
This paper critically analyses current neighbourhood Planning methods and outcomes from a community ‘consumer’ perspective and, in the full context of the most recent State Planning Strategy, proposes a substantially revised methodology. (Starting from the point where WAPC nominates a ‘Residential’ Zoning). That investigation is synthesised; and on Pages 5 – 7 proposes an alternative methodology for beginning the Planning of new residential neighbourhoods, suitable for both inner urban and outer suburban areas – in order to provide better assurance of socially acceptable outcomes than is resulting from current practices.
This Proposed Alternative system has three preliminary components) –
- Local Community Planning forums;
- Site Analysis Team/s;
- Urban Design Team/s.
These precede final verification of Residential Zoning of areas nominated for Residential development; undertake thorough local public consultation; professional site analyses; and provide preliminary design studies to meet WAPC standards, before applications are accepted from interested landholders. The costs of these preliminaries are then back-charged as a pre-development fee to developers.
Analysis of the current planning system and procedures in this Paper clearly points to where responsibility for some current poor local on-site outcomes within the chain of responsibilities resides and how important enhancements could be made. That is i.e. primarily with the WAPC and Department of Planning. I believe they could in fact, with goodwill act quickly together to improve outcomes.
The Paper suggests some interesting and useful alternative procedures that could operate together to make a wide range of differences. These appear to offer not only more appropriate and thorough application of various professional skills to produce improved outcomes on-site, but also smooth out the production process to leave it less vulnerable to ad hoc and sporadic commercial decision-making. Also, most likely have the eventual effect of simplifying and progressively speeding up development.
I feel confident that most independent professional urban design practitioners will broadly support the proposals in principle. Would you please ask WAPC to consider and respond to this Paper and perhaps other useful aspects discussed on this web-site and publish the responses for us to read?