Freo's View

FREO’S WEST END CONSERVATION AREA TO BE REDUCED

Posted in architecture, city of fremantle, heritage, historic, local government, Uncategorized by freoview on June 18, 2018

 

Fremantle Council is reviewing its West End Conservation Area Policy, with the aim to put it in line with the area included in the WA Register of Heritage Places.

The agenda item on the agenda of the Strategic Planning and Transport Committee reads in part as follows:

The boundaries of the current policy extend well beyond the area commonly known as the West End, and accommodate diverse land use, built form and character. The area commonly known as the West End (Precinct 2 within the current policy) corresponds with one of the distinct areas established by John Septimus Roe in the first (published) town plan in 1833. This reflected both the topography of the area and its intended role within the hierarchy of the town, each area of which included distinctive block shapes and sizes as well as differing orientation, street widths and lot size.

The concentration of investment in the buildings within this area during the gold rush has created a strong built form character which has remained relatively intact, with buildings not only visually harmonious but also reflective of the function and evolution of the town’s early days. The significance of this area and its recent listing on the state heritage register prompt a tailored approach.

The current boundaries include areas of land exempt from approvals under the Local Planning Scheme (namely the Port area, Arthur Head Reserve and the Fishing Boat Harbour) which are controlled by the state, and areas within which the City’s primary control is as manager of the land, as opposed to through the scheme (such as The Agenda – Strategic Planning and Transport Committee 20 June 2018 Page 16 Esplanade and Arthur Head). Furthermore some of these areas, such as Arthur Head Reserve, are separate listings on the State Register of Heritage Places in their own right in recognition of their different (from the West End) character and qualities in terms of cultural heritage significance.

From an administrative perspective, it is recommended that these areas be excluded and covered in separate documents informing the City’s position on the planning and management of these areas, but recognising that the City’s approval under the scheme is generally not required. This has been occurring to a certain extent already, through the development of separate policies and masterplans for these areas, as outlined in Attachment 2. The boundaries of the current policy area overlap with those of Precinct 5 within Local Planning Policy 3.1.5 (LPP 3.1.5) (adopted in 2013) which causes inconsistency and confusion. LPP 3.1.5 recognises (as this policy does) that the Fremantle city centre is made up of a number of inter-related precincts which function as a whole. The boundaries of these precincts vary slightly, depending on whether they are being drawn more from a heritage versus zoning versus land use versus built form perspective, but as there is a relationship between all of these matters, so there are similarities in precinct boundaries. In relation to built form, it is preferable that each distinct area be subject to a single area-based policy. 

The item is on the agenda this coming Wednesday at 6pm at the SPT Committee of the City of Fremantle at the North Fremantle community hall.

Roel Loopers

QUALITY AND DIVERSITY GOOD CITY PLANNING

 

According to WA Transport, Planning, Lands Minister Rita Saffioti the revised Perth and Peel@3.5 planning concept will focus on good design and amenity while pushing to develop half of the 800,000 needed dwellings in existing suburbs through urban infill and higher density.

But as we are experiencing in Fremantle we do get urban infill and higher density but not quality architectural design and new innovative public amenity, with the Kings Square public realm as the exception.

Wood Bagor principal Leslie Ashor, who is visiting Perth from San Francisco, says we need to build up a different demographic and embrace not only new residents but also universities and schools and encourage incubators and co-working spaces for new technology because they would create potential for new micro businesses.

Roel Loopers

 

Comments Off on QUALITY AND DIVERSITY GOOD CITY PLANNING

FREMANTLE KINGS SQUARE UPDATE

Posted in city of fremantle, development, kings square, local government, Uncategorized by freoview on March 2, 2018

 

 

The ugly fences all around Kings Square have been made a little bit less on the eye with artist’s impressions of the future buildings.

The demolition is going fast and the facade of the Queensgate building is crumbling down daily.

Roel Loopers

Comments Off on FREMANTLE KINGS SQUARE UPDATE

FREO COUNCILLORS EARNING THEIR KEEP TONIGHT

Posted in city of fremantle, community, local government, Uncategorized by freoview on February 28, 2018

 

No one can claim with any credibility that Fremantle Councillors don’t earn their keep and that they are not working hard for our city.

Just have a look at the agenda for this evening’s Ordinary Council Meeting, which will be held from 6pm at the North Fremantle Community Hall.

COMMITTEE REPORTS- 1 PLANNING COMMITTEE 7 FEBRUARY 2018- 1 AUDIT AND RISK MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 13 FEBRUARY 2018- 2 ARMC1802-1 ADOPTION OF THE 2017 COMPLIANCE AUDIT RETURN- 2 ARMC1802-2 INVESTIGATION OF BEST PRACTICE PROCUREMENT OF ARTISTS IN THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT SECTOR 5- ARMC1802-3 OVERDUE DEBTORS REPORT AS AT 31 DECEMBER 2017- 8 ARMC1802-4 INTERNAL AUDIT REPORTS – PURCHASING, DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY AND INFORMATION/RECORDS MANAGEMENT 11 -ARMC1802-5 AUDIT AND RISK UPDATE FOR ASSETS 18- ARMC1802-6 INFORMATION REPORT – OFFICE OF THE AUDITOR GENERAL PROCUREMENT PERFORMANCE AUDIT 22- ARMC1802-7 INFORMATION REPORT – PURCHASING POLICY EXEMPTIONS DECEMBER 2017 AND JANUARY 2018 24- ARMC1802-8 INFORMATION REPORT – FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT REVIEW 2017 PROGRESS ON ACTIONS 26- ARMC1802-9 INFORMATION REPORT – LOCAL GOVERNMENT AUDITING REFORMS 33 -FINANCE, POLICY, OPERATIONS AND LEGISLATION COMMITTEE 14 FEBRUARY 2018 -35 FPOL1802-1 STATE GOVERNMENT SINGLE USE PLASTIC BAG BAN – SUBMISSION ON DISCUSSION PAPER -35 FPOL1802-5 PREFERRED TENANT AND KEY LEASE TERMS – EVAN DAVIES, LEVEL 1, 13 SOUTH TCE 44 FPOL1802-6 REQUEST FOR REIMBURSEMENT – 1A O’HARA STREET- 47 FPOL1802-7 DOG EXERCISE AND PROHIBITED AREAS POLICY 51 FPOL1802-8 CONSIDERATION OF DATES FOR SPECIAL MEETINGS OF COUNCIL FOR NEW COUNCILLOR DECLARATION AND TO CONSIDER MOTIONS CARRIED AT THE AGME -66 FPOL1802-9 UPDATE POLICY D.A.15 – PROCEDURES FOR THE DEDICATION, UPGRADE OR CLOSURE OF RIGHTS OF WAY- 68 FPOL1802-10 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL TO SET A FEE FOR RESIDENTS OF 7-17 HENDERSON STREET FREMANTLE TO PARK IN THE NEW SOUTH TERRACE CAR PART- 61 74 FPOL1802-11 ADOPTION OF MEETING PROCEDURES POLICY 2018 78 LIBRARY ADVISORY COMMITTEE 14 FEBRUARY 2018 -136 LAC1802-1 LIFELONG LEARNING QUARTERLY REPORT OCTOBER TO DECEMBER 2017- 136 LAC1802-2 REPORT TOY LIBRARY QUARTERLY REPORT OCTOBER TO DECEMBER 2017- 144 STRATEGIC PLANNING AND TRANSPORT COMMITTEE 21 FEBRUARY 2018 -147 SPT1802 -1 KINGS SQUARE PROJECT – PUBLIC REALM CONCEPT DESIGN 147 SPT1802 -2 DRAFT LOCAL PLANNING POLICY 2.21 – R60 DEVELOPMENT UNDER CLAUSE 4.2.5 OF LPS4 – ADOPT FOR ADVERTISING 152 MOTIONS OF WHICH NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN 166 REPORTS BY THE MAYOR OR OFFICERS OF COUNCIL 167 STATUTORY COUNCIL ITEMS- 167 C1802-1 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT – JANUARY 2018 167 COUNCIL ITEMS- 177 CONFIDENTIAL MATTERS -178 ARMC1802-10 CONFIDENTIAL REPORT – PROPERTY DISPUTE HIGH STREET ROAD RESERVE -178 FPOL1802-12 CONFIDENTIAL REPORT – CONSIDERATION OF REVISED OFFERS FOR PROPERTY DISPOSALS -179 FPOL1802-13 LEASE – 179 HIGH STREET, FREMANTLE- 180 AGENDA ATTACHMENTS 1 C1802-1 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT – JANUARY 2018 -2 Agenda – Ordinary Meeting of Council 28 February 2018 Page 1 COMMITTEE REPORTS PLANNING COMMITTEE 7 FEBRUARY 2018 Nil.

I’ll will attend of course to keep Freo’s View readers up to date with Council decisions, and you can also read agendas and minutes on the City of Fremantle website to stay informed about what goes on in your community.

Roel Loopers

Comments Off on FREO COUNCILLORS EARNING THEIR KEEP TONIGHT

DEMOLITIONS SIGN OF FREO REJUVENATION

Posted in architecture, city of fremantle, development, Uncategorized by freoview on February 26, 2018

 

KS 2

 

Exciting to see that part of the facade of the Queensgate building has been demolished to make way for the Fremantle Kings Square Project.

Big machinery arrived and the demolition will progress fast from now on. I also heard a lot of noise from jackhammers in the former Myer/Many building.

Down the road in Henry Street demolition has also started on the former Fremantle Workers Club, to make way for a four-storey residential development in the historic West End.

Roel Loopers

Comments Off on DEMOLITIONS SIGN OF FREO REJUVENATION

STATE GOVERNMENT CREATES URBAN INFILL MESS

Posted in architecture, city of fremantle, development, lifestyle, living, local government, Uncategorized by freoview on February 26, 2018

 

The issues Fremantle faces with urban infill, demanded by the State Government, are not unique to our city as an editorial by POST community newspapers editor Brett Christian shows.

Claremont residents are up in arms against proposed high density near the Loch Street train station. Christian writes “Distress in voices heard in the council chamber revealed the anxiety felt by home owners selected for high density infill.”

“These are real people with real fears who cannot be dismissed as being NIMBYs.”

Brett Christian says that the WA Government is keen to forcibly cram more housing units around transport hubs, which leads to permanent changes in the lifestyle.

The editor writes that Government planners naively believe that new residents will abandon their cars and use public transport when evidence proves the opposite.

Let me note here that public transport use in Perth has dramatically decreased over the last years and that only a very small percentage of those living within a ten minute walk from a railway station do use the train to work, according to government figures.

Christian rightly laments that local councils are being caught in the middle of the infill mess created by the state.

In Fremantle we are getting more and more inappropriate and unacceptable high rise development that will change the unique character of our city forever.

Yes, we need more people living, working and staying here to boost our local economy, but any development needs to show sincere consideration for the heritage, streetscapes and amenity, and that is not happening.

Fremantle Council has done well to encourage substantial development but it now needs to scale back and stop approving mediocre architecture in our inner city.

Tell developers and architects that if building proposals are not exceptional and great they are not good enough for Freo!

Roel Loopers

 

Comments Off on STATE GOVERNMENT CREATES URBAN INFILL MESS

PROTECT FREO’S UNIQUE CHARACTER!

Posted in architecture, city of fremantle, development, heritage, Uncategorized by freoview on February 24, 2018

 

The Fremantle Herald this week is full with opinions about how to protect Freo’s unique character when it comes to approving new development.

My old North Fremantle mate and former chair of the City’s planning committee Gerry MacGill says that Fremantle’s Councillors are struggling with the concept of exceptional architecture that grants developers discretionary additional height.

MacGill believes Council should not just rely on the opinion of the Design Advisory Panel but that the elected members are eminently qualified to make judgements on how the Woolstores development integrates with the surrounding streetscape and nearby buildings in regard to scale, massing and height.

I too found that at the special planning meeting Councillors and the Chair of the DAP were more concerned about small picture things and semantics like adding more bricks, than about the big picture; if the proposed building actually fits in well with the unique Fremantle character.

Also in the Chook is an opinion piece by architect Carl Payne, who often comments on Freo’s View.

Payne writes that the Manning Building approval shows that we only pay lip-service to heritage and that heritage protection is often not imposed if it affects the building’s owner.

The architect writes that the actions of Fremantle Councillors are not consistent with the Burra Charter heritage ideals and that compromises are made too easily to appease developers.

I am aware that a team from North Fremantle Slavin Architects also had a meeting with Mayor Brad Pettitt talking about their concerns about the often inappropriate architecture Council is approving in the CBD.

But there is more in the Herald with a full page advertisement by the Fremantle Society, which shows photos of buildings they believe ‘work’ and building which do not work. It comes as no surprise that there is not a single high building FS likes.

There is no doubt in my mind that Fremantle Council is bending over backward to accommodate development in Fremantle, and while I absolutely support the rejuvenation of the ugly east CBD Council needs to do a lot more to protect our city’s beauty. The architecture of the planned Woolstores development is not anywhere near good enough to consider it to be of exceptional quality, because it insufficiently addresses and respects Fremantle’s unique character. It’s not the height that worries me most, but the aesthetic incompetence.

Roel Loopers

Comments Off on PROTECT FREO’S UNIQUE CHARACTER!

FREMANTLE TAKES BROADER VIEWS ON DEVELOPMENT

Posted in architecture, city of fremantle, development, local government, Uncategorized by freoview on February 22, 2018

 

The new City of Fremantle Strategic Planning and Transport Committee met for the first time last evening at the Townhall with only two items on the agenda; the Kings Square public realm concept plan and Local Planning Policy 2.21-R60.

I reported on the Kings Square plans earlier this week so just some details of the new development plans draft that was considered and adopted last night. The entire draft can be viewed on-line on the CoF website. Click on agendas and minutes and view the agenda there.

Here some considerations that stood out for me:

Under clause 4.2.5 of the City’s Local Planning Scheme No. 4 (LPS4), the residential density of sites in the Local Centre, Neighbourhood Centre and Mixed Use zones may be increased up to R60 where the development application:

  1. Proposes ‘mixed use development’ as defined in the City’s Scheme.
  2. Would not be detrimental to the amenity of an area.

A policy has been prepared to provide guidance on the criteria against which impact on amenity will be assessed under Clause 4.2.5 of LPS4 in order to provide greater certainty and consistency of decision-making, and promote better built form and community outcomes. The draft policy has the following key elements:

Recognise that mixed use zones and local/neighbourhood centres have potential to accommodate higher density and intensity, but within which new development should acknowledge and be respectful of existing / traditional development as part of a responsible evolution.

Stipulate that the deemed-to-comply standards (excluding site area) of the base density are acceptable as a starting point for R60 development.

Where the base code deemed-to-comply standards are not met, consider variations up to the R60 coding only where assessed to not be detrimental to the surrounding area based on a series of considerations as set out in the policy relating to the impact on amenity; including impact on streetscape, heritage character, neighbour amenity, traffic and safety, impact on trees and quality of the built environment.

Stipulate some specific requirements / expectations in regards to commonly contested aspects including that plot ratio in excess of the deemed-to-comply standard for R60 will not be supported.

Require a site context assessment to accompany any proposal seeking an increase in density beyond the base coding.

It should be noted that the clause seeks to avoid detrimental amenity to the area rather than to specific individual lots, which requires Council to take a broader view of impact than solely that of the neighbour/s. Similarly, the definition of amenity in the Planning Regulations defines this in relation to the character of an area. This does not, of course, preclude neighbour impacts from forming a key consideration in assessing amenity impacts. The reference to ‘future amenity’ allows for application of the definition in new development areas or areas subject to revitalisation schemes and the like.

Site analysis and design response: requiring the preparation of these to inform any proposal

Orientation: requiring proposals to “respond to the streetscape and site while optimising solar access within the development” and building form and orientation which “minimises overshadowing on neighbouring properties”

Existing tree retention: requiring mature trees on site (or are clearly identifiable on site through aerial images from the last 5 years) for retention or replacement or offset Deep soil areas (12% of site where no trees retained): to support healthy plant and tree growth, and provision of trees proportionate to the size of the site

Communal and public open space: where more than 10 dwellings are proposed

Visual privacy: including a ‘cone of vision’ similar to that specified under the R-Codes (albeit lesser) and a minimum of 25% of the perimeter of balconies unscreened, and a requirement to site and design development to “increase privacy without compromising access to light and air and balance outlook and views from habitable rooms and private open space”

Public domain interface: considering CEPTED principles and promoting a functional and pleasing interface with the street which makes provision for services, landscaping of terraces and excludes parking

Pedestrian access and entries: which requires safe and ‘legible’ entries to buildings

Vehicle access points: requiring these to be designed and located to minimise streetscape impacts whilst avoiding conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles

Car and bicycle parking: to be provided at specified rates and designed to be functional but minimise visual impact

 

Roel Loopers

 

 

PUBLIC REALM DESIGN FOR KINGS SQUARE

Posted in city of fremantle, development, kings square, local government, Uncategorized by freoview on February 19, 2018

 

An officers’ Public Realm Concept Design Plan for Kings Square will be presented to the Strategic Planning and Transport Committee of Fremantle Council this Wednesday at the Townhall at 7pm.

The next stage will then be to produce a sequencing plan for budgeting, phasing, delivery of the project and the start of design development.

It is deemed important to manage and curate activation of the future Kings Square public spaces to ensure they are vibrant, activated and often changing.

The Windows of the Past concept would created windows in the pavement to look down into the recent archeological findings and limestone foundations of the former St John’s church.

The overall budget for improvements to the Kings Square public realm are estimated to be $ 8 million, which has already been captured in the ten year financial plan.

Below some highlights from the agenda:

  •   Re-energise Kings Square and create a destination for people.
  •   Respect the history and cultural significance of the place.
  •   Integrate the various projects that are currently underway.
  •   Create a place that is welcoming, safe and attractive to all.
  •   Deliver a high quality urban space that is civic, resilient and sustainable.
  •   Ensure the project remains strategically aligned with other plans and strategies for the  city.

    In response to feedback on the draft plan, the following changes/proposals have been made to the Kings Square Public Realm Concept Plan:

    1. URBAN FOREST: Addition of one extra shade tree in the main Civic Space to provide improved amenity and further reinforce the mini ‘urban forest’ concept. This will be achieved through the relocation of an additional mature tree from within Kings Square.
    2. NEWMAN COURT: Set-down/pick-up bays in Newman Court have been removed from draft concept to enable full pedestrianisation to occur in Newman Court for specific times of day/week (yet to be determined). A loading zone remains in the concept – this may be time restricted to occur ‘out of hours’ to minimise impact on the future pedestrianised character of the street.
    3. KERBSIDE USES: Minor adjustments have been made to the draft plan to improve the overall functionality and balance between competing needs in the square:
      • –  new coach/tourist set-down/pick-up bays in William and Queen Streets;
      • –  CAT bus stop introduced to Queen Street;
      • –  a loading zone in Queen Street moved around the corner into Adelaide Street;
      • –  3 ACROD bays (instead of 5 general bays for people with mobility needs);
      • –  4 general parking bays in Queen Street converted to set-down/pick-up bays;
      • –  Minor adjustments to locations for motorcycle parking.
    4. STREET TREES: Two additional street trees have been included in Queen Street, near the proposed CAT bus stop. The preferred tree species for planting around the perimeter of the square is the Jacaranda, subject to availability of suitable stock.
    1. ROUNDABOUTS:Replacementofthetwomini-roundaboutsinQueenStreetwith pedestrian-friendly raised road platforms – extending the urban design detailing of Kings Square. (These elements are still subject to further traffic modelling and confirmation that bicycle route integration will be legible, convenient and safe.)
    2. CHILDRENS PLAY SPACE:Development and integration of the schematic playspace design into the overall concept for the square, noting that further refinement will be guided by safety audits (especially with regard to the close proximity of Queen Street).

 

Roel Loopers

BIGGER GARDEN FOR NORTH FREO’S MOJO’S

Posted in city of fremantle, concerts, entertainment, music, Uncategorized by freoview on February 5, 2018

 

The very popular North Fremantle MOJO’S music bar wants to grow bigger and has applied to the City of Fremantle for an extension to its beer garden.

MOJO’S wants to extend the 72 square metre uncovered back beer garden by 57 square metres to make the total floor space of the bar area 212 square metres, to be able to accommodate approximately 250 patrons.

It wants to open a new bar in the existing beer garden and partly demolish some of the exterior walls.

The item is on this Wednesday’s CoF Planning Committee agenda and recommended for approval by the officers.

The officers recommend that the walls be constructed according to the expert’s Acoustic Report an that no music source, including sound systems and live performances will be permitted in the beer garden.

Roel Loopers

Comments Off on BIGGER GARDEN FOR NORTH FREO’S MOJO’S

%d bloggers like this: