Butler-Brighton Charrette

(1)

WORKING PAPER 9 JULY 2002

Butler-Brighton

Charrette

Accommodating future growth through

Liveable Neighbourhoods

principles

20-24 August 2001

Held at the City of Wanneroo Administration Centre,

Western Australia

Co-ordinated by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure in conjunction with the City of Wanneroo and the Satterley Group

(2)

This Working Paper is Number Nine in a series of papers which tests or supplements the Western Australian Planning Commission’s Liveable Neighbourhoods trial policy. Papers are:

Working Paper No. 1: Karratha Enquiry-by-Design workshop May 1999 Working Paper No. 2: Kalgoorlie-Boulder Enquiry-by-Design workshop March 2000 Working Paper No. 3: Esperance Enquiry-by-Design workshop June 2000 Working Paper No. 4: Armadale Enquiry-by-Design workshop May 2000 Working Paper No. 5: Mirrabooka Enquiry-by-Design workshop January 2001 Working Paper No. 6: Claremont Enquiry-by-Design workshop March 2001 Working Paper No. 7: Two Rocks Enquiry-by-Design workshop December 2001 Working Paper No. 8: Bassendean Enquiry-by-Design workshop April 2002 Working Paper No. 9: Butler-Brighton Charrette July 2002

Papers 2 – 9 are available on the Web.

Papers may be viewed at the Department for Planning and Infrastructure’s Head Offi ce Library: Albert Facey House, 469 Wellington Street, Perth WA 6000

Phone: (08) 9264 7777, fax: (08) 9264 7566 Internet: http://www.planning.wa.gov.au

Email: [email protected]

TTY: (08) 9264 7535 Infoline: 1800 626 477

Papers available in alternative formats on application to the Disability Services Coordinator.

Disclaimer

Any representation, statement, opinion or advice expressed or implied in this publication is made in this light and on the basis that the Government, its employees and agents are not liable for any damage or loss whatsoever that may occur as a result of action taken or not taken (as the case may be) in respect of any representation, statement, opinion or advice referred to herein.

Published by the Western Australian Planning Commission Albert Facey House, 469 Wellington Street

Perth, Western Australia 6000 Published July 2002

(3)

(4)

PREFACE

Since 1999, the Department for Planning and Infrastructure (formerly the Ministry for Planning) has undertaken eight non-binding Enquiry-by-Design workshops that have been based either on producing vision plans for town centres, or on subdivision layouts for specifi c development sites. The workshops have considered issues pertaining to development on the urban fringes or large urban infi ll areas of Perth, and other towns in Western Australia. Revitalisation and improvement options for existing places have also been investigated.

Other Enquiry-by-Design workshops that have been documented in this series of Working Papers include those that have taken place in:

• Karratha in the north-west of Western Australia; • Kalgoorlie-Boulder in the Goldfi elds Region; • Esperance in the south-east of Western Australia;

• Armadale, the designated strategic regional centre in the south-east corridor of Metropolitan

Perth;

• Mirrabooka Regional Centre in the City of Stirling; • Claremont Town Centre in the Perth’s western suburbs; • Two Rocks town centre in Perth’s far northern suburbs; and • Bassendean Town Centre in the Town of Bassendean.

The Enquiry-by-Design Workshops have been initiated by either the relevant Council or landowner, with each Workshop being based on the application of the Liveable Neighbourhoods trial policy or, in existing areas, on the principles of traditional mixed use development. In every case the Department for Planning and Infrastructure has investigated urban design solutions in conjunction with the land developer’s or Council’s appointed consultants.

The Butler-Brighton Charrette differed from the non-binding Enquiry-by-Design approach in that agreements were sought from stakeholders on key issues and principles to enable outcomes and implementation to be progressed more effectively.

(5)

(6)

7.2.2 Employment Characteristics of the Outer North–West Corridor 40 7.2.3 Commuting and the Outer North–West Corridor Area 41 7.2.4 Implications Based on Broader Employment Trends 42 7.2.5 Potential Sources of Suburban Employment Growth 44 7.2.6 Service Sector Employment Growth and Opportunities 44 7.2.7 Self-Employment and Home-Based Businesses 45

(7)

8 SUB–REGIONAL STRUCTURE – DESIGN OPTIONS AND ASSESSMENT... 47

8.1 Sub-Regional Structure: the Starting Point – the three 1996 Jindalee

Workshop Options 47

8.2 Key Infl uences on the Proposed Sub-Regional Structure 47 8.3 The Four Options prepared – Options 1 and 2 (Rail along Freeway) and

Options 3 and 4 (Rail within Urban Corridor) 49

8.3.1 Option 1: Rail along Freeway with Butler and Alkimos as Main Town

Centres (refer Figure 5) 50

8.3.2 Option 2: Rail along Freeway with Brighton and Eglinton as Main

Town Centres (refer Figure 6) 53

8.3.3 Option 3: Butler-Brighton New Rail Alignment within Urban Corridor

(refer Figure 7) 54

8.3.4 Option 4: Butler-Brighton New Rail Alignment Mostly within Urban

Corridor (refer Figure 8) 57

8.4 Features of the Preferred Sub–Regional Plan 59

9 DETAILED URBAN STRUCTURE PLAN... 63

9.1 Background 63

9.2 Key Features of the Plan and the Design Rationale 63

9.3 Town Centres 68

10 MAJOR PLAN ELEMENTS... 71

10.1 Household Yields 71

10.2 Employment and Economic Development 71

10.2.1 Land and Space Budgets for the Brighton Study Area 71 10.2.2 Employment Budgets for the Brighton Study Area 72 10.2.3 Regional Structuring to Deliver These Employment Outcomes 75 10.2.4 Demand for Space at Integrated Business Centres 76

10.3 Retail Hierarchy 77

10.3.1 Town Centres 77

10.3.2 Other Retail Facilities 79

10.4 Road Network 80

10.4.1 Future Traffi c Volumes on the Arterial Road Network 80

10.4.2 Design Details for Arterial Routes 81

10.5 Public Transport Provision 85

10.6 Staging 86

11 COST–BENEFIT ANALYSIS... 89

11.1 Introduction 89

11.2 Overview 89

11.3 Conclusion 92

12 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY - THE NEXT STEPS... 93

12.1 Governance 93

12.2 District Structure Plan Preparation and Adoption 94

12.3 District Structure Plan Contents 94

12.4 Metropolitan Region Scheme 94

12.5 Local Structure Plans and Subdivision 95

12.6 Other Implementation Items 95

(8)

APPENDICIES

Appendix 1 Outline of Charrette Process 97 Appendix 2 Invited Charrette Participants and Charrette program 98-103

Appendix 3 Summary of Briefi ng Booklet topics 104

Appendix 4 Results of Residents’ Survey 105

Appendix 5 Public Transport Options 106

Appendix 6 Predicted Traffi c Flows 119

Appendix 7 Better Business and Employment by Design 120-129

Appendix 9 Glossary of Terms 130-131

Appendix 10 References 132

TABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 1 Study of Area in Regional Context 13

Figure 2 1996 Jindalee Options A,B,C 14

Figure 3 Study Area and Land Ownership 16

Figure 4 Environmental and Vegetation Features 31

Figure 5 Option 1: Rail along Freeway with Butler and Alkimos as the Main Town Centres 51 Figure 6 Option 2: Rail along Freeway with Brighton and Eglinton as the Main Town

Centres 52

Figure 7 Option 3: Butler-Brighton New Rail Alignment within Urban Corridor 55

Figure 8 Option 4: Prefered Rail Option 56

Figure 9 Preferred Sub–Regional Structure 61

Figure 10 Detailed Urban Structure Plan 62

Figure 11 Detailed Urban Structure Plan (annotated) 65

Figure 12 Brighton Town Centre Detail Plan 66

Figure 13 Passenger Rail Line Treatments 70

Figure 14 Household Yield Scenarios 73

Figure 15 Notional Integrator Arterial Cross–section: MRWA Version 82 Figure 16 Notional Integrator Arterial Cross–section: Alternative Version 82

Figure 17 2–Lane Divided Sub-arterial Road Type 1 83

Figure 18 Divided Neighbourhood Connector Type 1 83

Figure 19 2–Lane Divided Town Centre Street 83

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Sustainability Principles 32-33

Table 2 Ultimate Daily Traffi c Volumes on Key Network Elements 80

Table 3 Net Value Comparison of the Two Rail Options 85

(9)

(10)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Butler-Brighton Charrette was held over a week in late August 2001 and jointly sponsored by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure, City of Wanneroo and the Satterley Group for the landowners. The objective of the Butler-Brighton Charrette was to apply the principles of the Western Australian Planning Commission’s Liveable Neighbourhoods Policy at a district level to achieve more sustainable development for over 30,000 future residents of Perth’s North-West Corridor. In particular, design approaches that provided for mixed use towns supported by viable public transport, a cluster of supporting neighbourhoods, and a context for local employment creation, were explored. The charrette also had to accommodate current subdivision approvals and construction, and accommodate changes to district level infrastructure while maintaining land supply for the landowner/developer.

Pre-charrette work examined transit alignment and model technology options. Bus and light rail use were discarded due to the requirement for mode changes at Butler to connect with the metro rail network, and travel time and access implications for areas further north to Yanchep and Two Rocks.

During the fi rst four days of the charrette, a number of design options were proposed and evaluated. Essentially, these options differed from each other by the proposed alignments of the railway line, together with the size, number, form and location of the proposed town centres.

Three main options were subjected to an evaluation process:

• Option 1 – the railway maintains its alignment on the freeway reserve, then leaves the

reserve to swing in towards the currently proposed location of the Alkimos Town Centre which, together with Eglinton, form the two main regional centres in the Corridor. Butler is a small town centre, and there is no centre at Brighton/Jindalee.

• Option 2 – the railway maintains its alignment on the freeway reserve, then leaves the

reserve in a similar manner to Option 1, however, the Alkimos Town Centre is much smaller than in Option 1. Eglinton and Brighton/Jindalee are the two main regional centres in the corridor. Butler is a small town centre.

• Option 3 – the railway leaves its alignment on the freeway reserve at Butler, just to the

north of Lukin Drive, and swings into a central position in the Corridor. Butler is a small neighbourhood town centre, with Brighton/Jindalee being a little larger. Alkimos and Eglinton would be the two main regional centres in the Corridor.

Each of these options were found to have signifi cant defi ciencies, which led to them being discarded after rigorous evaluation using a number of criteria.

By the last day of the charrette, a fourth, ‘preferred’ plan emerged, which best addressed the identifi ed shortcomings of the three initial options, and appeared to provide the most economic and social benefi ts for the corridor.

This preferred sub-regional plan provides for a rail alignment swinging inland north of a park and ride station at Butler, a station east of the Brighton/Jindalee Town Centre, and a park and ride station at the Alkimos Town Centre. The rail alignment is a narrow reserve, and in-cut through most of the urban area, and particularly the town centres. The Brighton and Alkimos Town Centres are supported by a cluster of neighbourhoods, based on 400m walking distances.

(11)

These town centres would accommodate a mix of land uses, higher densities, and employment to support local employment self-suffi ciency. Additional employment would be provided along arterial routes and along the freeway.

The main arterial routes – Marmion Avenue, Lukin Drive, Connolly Drive, and the proposed new east-west Jindalee Boulevard – are designed with frontage development to provide for business location.

Strong east-west routes provide better access to the coast and limit the dividing infl uence of north-south routes.

Key environmental features were identifi ed. A major challenge was in balancing the need for local bushland protection against the need for more effi cient use of urban land through higher populations in station and town catchments to support public transport usage and reduced greenhouse gas production.

A detailed urban structure plan that provided a guide for future structure planning to street block level was produced for the district area. To support the sub-regional and detailed urban structure plan, local employment opportunities were identifi ed and land areas and appropriate building forms proposed. The size and location of local centres were also identifi ed. The preferred plan was measured and evaluated for its levels of performance against economic and social criteria. Indicative retail centre sizes were also determined.

This cost-benefi t analysis measured the ‘business as usual’ scenario (with the consequent costs to State and local government and the landowners) against the ‘Liveable Neighbourhoods plus transit’ preferred scenario developed at the charrette. The analysis indicated that the Liveable Neighbourhoods plus transit’ scenario was of signifi cant economic benefi t to all stakeholders, and identifi ed options for addressing a funding gap of $15m to $25m.

Finally, a staging plan and implementation schedule were proposed to progress the charrette outcomes.

The key element in implementing the preferred plan is the construction of the railway to the Butler-Brighton Town Centre as quickly as possible. This will need to be around 2006/2007, when Brighton Town Centre will commence.

(12)

1_{For an explanation of the charrette, refer Appendix 1.}

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

The Butler-Brighton Charrette1_{was held over}_fi_{ve days during August of 2001, and was jointly} sponsored by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure (DPI) on behalf of the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC), the City of Wanneroo and the Satterley Property Group. Satterley are project managers for the Butler Land Company and Department of Housing and Works. Principal responsibility for the organisation and management of the charrette lay with the DPI.

The charrette focussed on the Joint Venture’s land at Butler and Jindalee, and particularly landholdings north of Lukin Drive. The charrette also considered the immediate context of these landholdings, particularly lots to the west where concept planning based on Liveable Neighbourhoods principles was being prepared. In examining the regional context for the site, especially with regard to the location of town centres, rail alignments and stations, the area north to Alkimos Eglinton was considered (refer Figure 1: Study Area in Regional Context).

The origins of the charrette date back to August 1996 when an Enquiry-by-Design Workshop was undertaken in the North-West Corridor of Perth to inform, test and measure the Liveable Neighbourhoods Community Design Code, then in preparation.

The 1996 exercise, known as the Jindalee Workshop (refer to Results from the Jindalee Enquiry-by-Design Workshop 1996 report), developed proposals based on the new regional planning model, with the clustering of neighbourhoods around a town centre anchored at one end by a rail station and at the other by a major arterial road. Three designs at a regional scale were drawn and evaluated, based upon alternative alignments for extensions to the Northern Suburbs Rail Line. The three different rail alignments considered at the 1996 workshop were:

• On the alignment of the freeway (‘Option A’);

• On the alignment of Connolly Drive (‘Option B’); and • To the west of Connolly Drive (‘Option C’).

Detailed plans were then developed based on the preferred design ‘Option C’ (refer Figure 2: 1996 Jindalee Options A, B, C), which featured a rail alignment central to the Corridor.

Measurements were undertaken to compare the performance of the Liveable Neighbourhoods approach with the conventional design approach refl ected in the North-West Corridor Structure Plan (1992). The results indicated the potential of a Liveable Neighbourhoods approach to better perform in terms of employment self-suffi ciency, retail distribution and accessibility, access to public transport and environmental performance in terms of greenhouse gas production and solar orientation. Many of the principles and practices identifi ed and derived from the Jindalee Workshop were included in Edition 1 of Liveable Neighbourhoods, published in December 1997. Since 1996 the urban development front in the north-west corridor has progressed to the Butler landholdings, with Stage 1 known as Brighton. (The Joint Venture’s land will be referred to in this report as Butler-Brighton.)

In November 2000, approval was granted to the fi rst stage of subdivision (some 600 lots) of the Joint Venture’s landholdings, on the basis that the initial development phase did not impact on options for future rail alignments or town centres identifi ed as preferred through the Jindalee Workshop. The aim of the 2001 Butler-Brighton Charrette, therefore, was to refi ne and progress

(13)

the 1996 work, in developing Liveable Neighbourhoods scenarios of mixed use, transit-oriented neighbourhoods and town centres as the context for employment generation.

The charrette was to undertake a comparative evaluation and cost-benefi t analysis of options, in terms that included of social, economic and environmental criteria. A specifi c charrette objective was to produce an optional design that would provide the basis for a District Structure Plan that would have stakeholder support, and acknowledged staging and timing issues.

1.2 Why a Charrette?

A charrette is a consensus-building, non-adversarial approach to resolving complex planning projects. Key landowners, community representatives, and regulatory agencies work together, generally over an intensive week, to develop principles for development of an area, draw plans to show how principles translate ‘on the ground’, and debate and revise options to reach ‘win-win’ solutions.

A charrette provides an alternative to the traditional sequential planning process by being an interactive forum where concepts are drawn, discussed and iterated in a live environment. There is generally a greater sense of understanding, consensus and ownership of the outcomes. A charrette for Butler-Brighton was seen as the appropriate method to develop and test approaches to the integration of public transport with urban development in the North-West Corridor. It was intended at the Butler-Brighton charrette to reach agreement on key issues and principles, and to provide a cost-benefi t analysis and implementation framework.

A more detailed description of the charrette process is included at Appendix 1. A list of invited charrette participants and the program is included at Appendix 2. A Briefi ng Booklet was prepared to inform charrette participants, and a summary of Briefi ng Booklet topics is included as Appendix 3.

(14)

Alkimos

Butler-Brighton

(15)

Figure 2 1996 Jindalee Options A, B, C

Option A

Option B

(16)

2 CHARRETTE SCOPE, OBJECTIVES AND PRINCIPLES

2.1 Scope of the Charrette

The charrette focussed on the landholdings of the Joint Venture, from Lukin Drive northwards. This landholding totals some 600ha, and is located between Marmion Ave and the Mitchell Freeway reserve, 40km north of Perth city, 12km north of Joondalup city, and 4km north of the Clarkson District Centre (refer Figure 3: Study Area and Land Ownership).

The charrette analysis commenced with consideration of the study area in its sub-regional context. Accordingly, the area north to Eglinton was examined due to issues of rail line, station and centre location options. In considering more detailed (district level) planning for the study area, connections to, and land use relationships with, land to the west at Jindalee and to the north at Alkimos were considered.

The charrette and its fi ndings will have implications for the land located to the north of the Joint Venture landholdings in the Alkimos/Eglinton area, particularly with respect to the issues of rail alignment and the locations of town centres and stations, and further north to St Andrews (Yanchep/Two Rocks) project area.

2.2 Objectives

The objectives of the Butler-Brighton Charrette were to develop and evaluate alternative approaches to the integration of public transport with urban development in this section of North -West Corridor, with a focus on mixed use, transit-oriented neighbourhoods and town centres as the context for employment creation. A major element requiring resolution was how the study area could be served by rapid transit in the future, and how future rail extensions could be integrated with the overall development of the area. A comparative evaluation and cost-benefi t analysis of the options developed were to be undertaken during the charrette.

A further objective was to try to reach agreement with stakeholders on key issues and principles so as to enable more detailed design work to be undertaken, and implementation processes established for outcomes to be fast tracked.

The objectives of the key stakeholders were:

Department for Planning and Infrastructure : the key planning objective was to evolve Liveable Neighbourhoods from its present project-by-project level of implementation, and to create the conditions and an implementation strategy for a transition to an optimal Liveable Neighbourhoods scale of Sustainable Growth Management in the North-West Corridor. The key transport outcome was for certainty of direction on public transport infrastructure as an input to budgeting and forward planning. The main area of investigation was the rail line, its physical impact, operational characteristics, alignment, use of alternative technologies, and patronage modelling.

City of Wanneroo: to develop an agreed structure plan, and certainty in its implementation process, for the study area. Options were sought for centralising the railway within the urban area of the Corridor, and for a town layout that will enable the generation of local employment.

Joint Venture: This group required further subdivision approval to maintain its land sales program. Key issues were the rail alignment and likely impacts, distribution of centres (both district and local), and access points to and from the freeway. In particular, the Joint Venture requires certainty, and to be convinced of the benefi ts and practicality of the fi nal recommended urban form.

(17)

Figure 3 Study Area and Land Ownership

(18)

The stakeholders more specifi c pre-charrette development objectives were:

• Overall population of some 25,000 residents. • Employment for up to 10,000 people.

• Provision of upfront built form to a local main street in Stage 1 that includes a medical and/

or health facility, community facilities in a multi-use environment, a sales and information centre, and a café with convenience shopping.

• Mixing of road treatments to help create pedestrian- and cyclist-friendly streets. • Meeting places and activity nodes to be established early.

• Beach access to be provided by January 2002. • Interesting streetscape and urban form.

• Community facilities and an ongoing program of community activities, including local

community participation in an art in public spaces program.

• An implementation strategy for a business incubator to assist the small business

operator.

• Positioning of the town centre in the most sustainable location; e.g., adjacent to a major

arterial road linking the freeway and with a rail station nearby.

• Enabling sustainable mixed business activities to be created adjacent to the freeway and

railway access.

• Enabling the primary and secondary school facilities to operate by 2002.

• Storm water disposal via a combined system including a lined lake, infi ltration basins and

grass swales located as a part of the public open space system.

• Encouraging the use of solar energy.

2.3 Expected Charrette Outcomes

The charrette was aimed at producing three principal outcomes:

• the basis for a district structure plan for the Butler-Brighton area, including:

- agreed locations and alignments for rail and other transport infrastructure; - the nature, location and distribution of major land uses;

- the urban structure for the area as represented by walkable neighbourhoods; - arterial routes and neighbourhood connectors; and

- town and neighbourhood centre locations and indicative sizes.

• a negotiated framework, statutory process and timetable for implementation.

• the basis for an updated and revised report on the existing North-West Corridor Structure

(19)

In preparation for the charrette, investigation was undertaken into a range of fundamental issues, including a residents’ survey, potential rail technologies and noise attenuation, retail development parameters and traffi c context.

2.4 Liveable Neighbourhoods Principles

A specifi c design philosophy underlies the series of Enquiry-by-Design workshops and charrettes undertaken by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure. The planning and design principles of the Western Australian Planning Commission’s (WAPC) Liveable Neighbourhoods trial policy are used in order to test their applicability, and further refi ne them to provide a structure, planning, subdivision and development model for Western Australia that embraces best practice sustainable urban growth management. A summary of the key Urban Structuring principles are outlined in Sections 2.4.1, 2.4.2 and 2.4.3 (diagrams are sourced from the Commission’s Liveable Neighbourhoods policy Edition 2, 2000).

A charrette objective was to examine options for the development of a transit-oriented mixed use town centre as a context for local employment creation. The benefi ts of this form of town centre are summarized below:

Transit-oriented design: A policy of encouraging a greater mix of uses, and higher densities of development around town centre railway stations and major bus interchanges is likely to result in greater patronage of the public transit system, and less reliance on the private car. To be most effective, development needs to be within walking distance of the transit stop.

Mixed use development: The closer that different uses are to each other, the more likely people are to walk between them rather than using a car, thereby saving money, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and the need for road and car-parking infrastructure. However, adjacent uses need to be compatible.

Generation of local employment : creating local employment provides jobs for people who are unable and/or do not wish to travel long distances for work, as well as providing support for other local businesses and services. It also reduces the requirement for massive road infrastructure to cope with needs for city centre commuters.

(20)

Neighbourhoods clustered to form and support a town centre

Neighbourhood unit based on a 400m radius circle or 5-minute walk to the centre

Walkable catchment diagram

2.4.1 Neighbourhood and Town Structure Principles

Neighbourhood structuring approach

Liveable Neighbourhoods seeks to integrate land uses within a network of interconnected streets designed for all users. Neighbourhood centres are located at the intersection of major streets to provide for retail exposure. Large parks and schools of a standard size are located between neighbourhoods so that walking access is not compromised.

Town structure

The town structure should be compact and well defi ned. It should consist of a clustering of highly interconnected neighbourhoods that are mutually supportive of existing and future neighbourhood centres and the town centre.

Neighbourhood structure

A neighbourhood is typically defi ned as a 400-metre radius catchment with a shop supplying daily needs, or another type of community focus at its centre (usually taking fi ve minutes to walk along streets to the centre).

Walkability of the town centre

Walking is the most energy-effi cient mode of travel. This choice is to be facilitated via an interconnected street network that enables pedestrians a choice of routes at intersections, and accessibility to a wide range of community facilities in an attractive and safe environment.

Walkability to community facilities and public transport

As a measure of effi ciency, at least 60% of the dwellings in a neighbourhood should be within a 400-metre walk of a neighbourhood centre or bus stop, or an 800-metre walk of a railway station or bus terminus.

(21)

A perimeter block layout with street frontages and private yards

Parking integrated with surroundings

(Source: Mixed Use Developments, Dept. of Tourism, Small Business and Industry)

STAGE TWO LATER ADDITION OF BUISNESSES

Lot and housing design that accommo-dates change

2.4.2 Mixed Use Town Centre Principles

Safety, security and surveillance

To reduce opportunities for crime and improve the sense of security, a clear defi nition is required between public places (streets and parks) and building frontages of windows and entrances, and their private backs (rear gardens).

Effi cient and attractive car parking within the urban fabric

Car parking should be integrated with surrounding land uses; the capacity should conform to derived demand; and streetscape quality should be maintained.

Facilitating choice, fl exibility and variety in the urban fabric

The urban layout should respond to the current as well as the future needs of society. Buildings and lots should be designed to be adaptable and to accommodate changes in land use or additions expected over time. In existing areas adaptive reuse of buildings is important to consider. Corner lots are especially fl exible as they have more street frontage that may provide more on-street parking and on-site parking, offer increased exposure for businesses and more potential entries for different parts of the building.

n N

(22)

An example of urban water management where public open space and drainage are combined with bushland retention, nutrient stripping and visual surveillance from perimeter roads, footpaths and nearby houses

2.4.3 Other Design Principles

Site responsive design – character and identity

Local identity should be complemented or created by responding to site features, context, landscape and views.

Environmentally and culturally responsive design

Key environmental and cultural features should be identifi ed and protected within the design.

(23)

(24)

3 CONTEXT AND CHALLENGES

3.1 North-West Corridor Strategic and Statutory Context

In 1978, the area now known as Clarkson-Butler was subdivided into 17 superlots and onsold from two properties totalling some 3,000ha owned by Mindarie Property Co. These ranged in area from 60ha to over 400ha. The lands for the district distributor roads including Marmion Ave, Connolly Drive and Lukin Drive, the Mitchell Freeway, and for additional coastal foreshore reserves, were ceded to the Crown as a condition of subdivision.

In 1992 the WAPC fi nalised the North-West Corridor Structure Plan (NWCSP) which was supplemented in 1993 by the Yanchep Structure Plan.

The 1992-93 Corridor Plans identifi ed a number of objectives, and outcomes of:

• urban land for 420,000 residents over a 30-year period; • a target of 60% employment self-suffi ciency;

• a Strategic Regional Centre at Joondalup, with Regional Centres at Alkimos and Yanchep,

and District Centres at Clarkson (28,800m²), and Butler (23,500m²);

• major industrial areas at Landsdale and Flynn Drive; and

• the suburban railway and Mitchell Freeway both extending to Two Rocks and beyond.

Most of the Clarkson-Butler superlots were zoned to ‘Urban’ in the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS) in the late 1980s/early 1990s, and the district distributor roads to ‘Other Regional Roads’. The Freeway and Lot 17 Tamala Park were not reserved or zoned in accordance with the 1977 Structure Plan, and remained zoned Rural.

Since the late 1980s the WAPC established a program of MRS Amendments to statutorily implement the various corridor structure plans which had been adopted as policy guides. These included Alkimos (1994), Yanchep-Two Rocks (1996) and the balance of Clarkson-Butler (commenced May 1997). The current Clarkson-Butler amendment includes the Mitchell Freeway and reserves for the Northern Suburbs railway extension to Hester Avenue. The railway was not proposed to be reserved in the amendment because its alignment north of Hester Avenue was undetermined.

The current MRS zoning and reservations for the corridor are shown on Figure 1: Study Area in Regional Context.

3.2 Transport Planning Context

Transport planning in the NW Corridor was last reviewed comprehensively in the context of the 1992 North-West Corridor Structure Plan. The current MRS basically refl ects that planning, although there have been some variations and the MRS Amendment now in progress for the Clarkson-Butler area will add in some of the currently missing regional road and rail links, consistent with the North-West Corridor Structure Plan.

In 1997 the Alkimos-Eglinton Structure Plan proposed the downgrading and minor realignment of Marmion Avenue through that area. The WAPC has initiated an MRS Amendment for Alkimos-Eglinton which proposes, among other things, a reduced road reservation for Marmion Avenue to a divided four-lane road (instead of six-lane divided), with implications for the timing of construction of the Mitchell Freeway.

(25)

The Northern Suburbs Transit System currently ends at Currambine, but at the date of the charrette was proposed to be extended to Clarkson by 2003. There has been no announcement on whether further extensions may be undertaken. The proposed alignment for major rail facilities under the North-West Corridor Structure Plan was along the western side of the freeway from Currambine to Alkimos, then swinging west of the Freeway at Alkimos north then more centrally through Yanchep-Two Rocks (and ultimately continuing beyond the metropolitan area).

The 1997 Alkimos-Eglinton Structure Plan proposed that the rail alignment should leave the freeway at the southern edge of Alkimos; however, the 1996 Jindalee workshop contemplated this occurring further south still, at Lukin Drive. The rail alignment through Alkimos-Eglinton is therefore not included in the current MRS Amendment being proposed for that area.

The Northern Suburbs Transit System – Currambine to Butler Extension Interim Master Plan (June 2000) proposed the railway to be relocated to the centre of the freeway between Currambine and Ridgewood (Merriwa), then to leave the freeway at Lukin Drive for a new alignment through the centre of the Corridor. The Plan also, however, retained the option of a freeway alignment. Railway alignment planning is therefore not fi nalised, and one of the key tasks of the Charrette was to examine rail options in more detail, including alignment, the relationship between rail and town centres, and the spacing of stations. This is dealt with in more detail in Section 6.

3.3 Other Major Development Projects in the Corridor

In 1996, LandCorp and Eglinton Estates, major land owners at Alkimos-Eglinton, undertook a detailed district structure planning exercise that revisited planning for this 2,660ha district of the Corridor, adopting similar principles to the Commission’s Liveable Neighbourhoods policy that was under preparation at the time. Implementation of the Structure Plan required amendment to the MRS. Following lengthy negotiations to resolve contentious issues, MRS Amendment 1029/ 33 was initiated in August 2000.

Signifi cant elements of the Amendment include:

• Relocation of the Water Corporation’s proposed 160ha wastewater treatment plant inland

from its coastal site to release land for urban development and a coastal node adjacent to a regional beach;

• Changes to the Parks and Recreation Reservations which have implications for Bush

Forever.

• The realignment of regional roads including Marmion Avenue (discussed in Section 3.2).

With regard to Yanchep-Two Rocks, in 1995 the WAPC, Tokyu Corporation, Yanchep Sun City P/L and the Western Australian Land Authority entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). This MOU included a program of actions for this area, including Urban and Central City Area rezonings and Parks and Recreation and Regional road reservations.

A 1999 St Andrews Strategic Co-operation Agreement was entered into by the State Government, Tokyu Corporation, the City of Wanneroo, Yanchep Sun City P/L and the WAPC. The Agreement describes joint initiatives and co-operation between the parties to investigate and progress various initiatives. The lack of direct road access and absence of rail access were issues highlighted in the Agreement as impediments to the short-term development of the area.

A key objective of the St Andrews project is to engender a high level of employment self-suffi ciency in the area, with the projected provision of 50,000 to 60,000 jobs at St Andrews over 25–30 years, with the fi rst 1,000 of those jobs created over the period 2003–2008.

(26)

3.4 Development Context for the Study Area

Since the Jindalee exercise of 1996, most developers in the study area have been reviewing structure planning for their land holdings including undertaking re-designs based on Liveable Neighbourhoods principles, and the concepts prepared during the 1996 Workshop. The Liveable Neighbourhoods approach to future development within the North-West Corridor is also supported by the City of Wanneroo as the local authority.

The Joint Venture received Liveable Neighbourhoods approval for a fi rst stage of its landholding in November 2000 (some 600 lots), on the basis that this initial development phase did not impact on possible options for future rail alignment(s) or the location of town centres.

3.5 Planning Issues and Challenges

The issues and challenges facing the North-West Corridor are summarised below.

The Economy and Employment Self-Suffi ciency: The implications of the end of the industrial economy and its evolution to the post-industrial economy need to be better understood and addressed appropriately through improved planning and integration of land use and transport. The current low level of employment self-suffi ciency in the NW Corridor places major pressures on existing transport infrastructure as people look to south of the NW Corridor and to central Perth for employment opportunities. The 1992 NWCSP was premised on an employment self-suffi ciency level of 60%; however, the actual level being achieved is little more than 20%. Unless this is substantially improved, transport infrastructure will simply be unable to sustain the demands placed upon it without unacceptable costs and implications for urban form.

Urban Form: The NW Corridor is characterised by many aspects of urban sprawl, including homogeneous suburban development with little choice or variety in housing type and facilities, and with rigidly segregated land uses, contributing to a limited sense of community and place, high levels of car dependence and consequent environmental impacts through greenhouse gas emissions, high energy use, and poor public transport accessibility off the main routes. There are issues about equity of access to services and facilities and the reinforcement of a sense of community that are integral to the debate about future urban form.

Development Pressures: Much of the land in the northern part of the NW Corridor already carries an Urban zoning and appropriate local zonings, and is in a relatively limited number of major ownerships with development already commenced or due to commence in the next

fi ve years. Early and binding decisions on fundamental issues such as the future alignment of transport infrastructure are needed to match and co-ordinate development expectations.

Public Transport Planning: Transport planning in the Corridor was last reviewed comprehensively for the 1992 North-West Corridor Structure Plan. The current Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS) basically refl ects that planning, although there have been some variations and the MRS amendment now in progress for the Clarkson-Butler area will add in some of the currently missing regional road and rail links. A review of planned transport infrastructure with more emphasis on supporting sustainable urban development is required.

(27)

(28)

4.0 NEW & EXISTING RESIDENTS SURVEY

As part of their primary research, Macroplan consultants on behalf of the Joint Venture undertook surveys of new residents to Butler (purchasers of land in the Brighton Estate), and surveys of existing residents in Joondalup and Wanneroo, to obtain basic socio-economic data.

A total of 148 new Butler-Brighton purchasers and 305 existing residents of the Cities of Joondalup and Wanneroo were interviewed to provide information on residential location preferences, neighbourhood character, employment characteristics and travel behaviour.

The major fi ndings are outlined in Appendix 4. In summary, residents were choosing to live at Butler-Brighton primarily because the land is close to the beach (20%), is affordable (15%), and is seen to have good investment potential. While 71% of the Butler-Brighton residents are new home buyers, couples with children are less than half of the total households (46%) and 37% are aged 37 and over.

There is diversity in the demographic make-up, suggesting a greater housing mix could be successful. This indicated that higher densities than are traditionally achieved could be possible in the project area, and that public transport would be supported if an urban context was provided to support it.

With regard to employment, only 17% of the wider survey group travel to Perth, East Perth and West Perth and 21% travel to Joondalup for employment, and 8% work in Wanneroo. This indicates that the North-West Corridor is better self-contained than previously thought. The survey found 81% of residents travel to work by car or motorbike, but 51% would catch public transport to work instead of taking the car or motorbike, if it was available. The fi gure increased to 61% for recreation purposes.

This information formed the basis for the determination of lot size mix and resultant population yields that were used during the charrette to undertake the cost-benefi t analysis. (refer Section 10.1 and Chapter 11).

(29)

(30)

5.0 SUSTAINABILITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS

5.1 Introduction

An important charrette objective was the balanced achievement of social, environmental and economic sustainability in the outcomes produced. Five general principles were identifi ed prior to the charrette as guidance for the planning and design process. A number of outcomes and more specifi c actions were developed to refl ect these, as shown on Table 1. The actions, which in particular largely refl ect the principles of Liveable Neighbourhoods, were strongly infl uential in the design outcomes.

These fi ve sustainability principles were ‘effi cient’, ‘equitable’, ‘green’, ‘liveable’ and ‘creative’. During the charrette, however, it proved diffi cult to translate these objectives into indicators that would allow meaningful quantitative and qualitative measurement of options.

In particular, there are diffi culties where sustainability objectives potentially confl ict. For example overall increased residential densities and smaller lots increase the population that supports rail patronage (reduced greenhouse gas emissions, improved equity and choice), but reduces the likelihood of the retention of native vegetation on individual lots (vegetation protection).

In addition, urban structure will not be sole determinant of the level of sustainability achieved in the study area. In the planning context, sustainability will be determined by three factors: urban structure, built form and by individual/household behaviour. So, for example, street layout can be designed to maximise solar access (urban structure), but construction of individual dwellings to allow northern orientation (built form), and minimal use of air conditioning (behaviour) are all required to deliver sustainability through solar orientation

As outlined in Section 2.0, a major objective of the charrette was the integration of public transport with urban development, as a contributor to environmental sustainability through reduced greenhouse gas emissions. Consequently the cost-benefi t analysis that was undertaken (and is outlined in Section 11) relates primarily to social and economic criteria, with the main environmental criteria relating to the provision of public transport. Howeve, other environmental issues were taken into account through the design work at the charette, and are summarized below. The development of sustainability indicators to enable comparison of plans through sustainability audits would be a valuable addition to evaluation and implementation tools, but was beyond the scope of this project.

5.2 Environmental Context and Issues

Geology, landform and soils

The environmental context and relevant general and site-specifi c issues are below. The study area has a near coastal setting and consists of a series of sand dune ridges and swales, of Tamala limestone and sand. The limestone in this area is generally free of karsts and caves. Soils are predominantly sandy and are loose and prone to wind erosion when disturbed or denuded. Soils are permeable, so surface run-off is minimal.

The topography of the study area consists of a gently undulating elevated plateau with local relief of up to 30m. The slopes are generally gentle to moderate, mostly in the range of 8% to 12%, although some steeper areas of up to 20% occur. The highest ground (up to 50m AHD) occurs in the north and north-west, while the lowest ground (to 20m AHD) is situated in the south-east and centre of the site.

(31)

Hydrology

There are no naturally occurring surface watercourses or water bodies in the study area. An unconfi ned aquifer occurs at an elevation of 1m to 3m AHD and fl ows from east to west beneath the site. The depth to groundwater ranges from approximately 14m below the swales in the east to 40m below the ridges in the north. This area is regarded as moderately vulnerable to groundwater contamination due to the high proportion of sand and limestone.

All of the study area falls within a Priority 3 Source Protection area of the Perth Coastal Underground Water Pollution Control Area (UWPCA). Priority 3 zoning does not place any statutory controls on land use but the Department of Environment, Water and Catchment Protection (DEWCP) recommends that potentially polluting land uses such as fuel storage, service stations and industry be controlled or excluded.

Five unconfi ned aquifer production bores plus three backup bores of the Neerabup Groundwater Scheme (Quinns Borefi eld) occur within or immediately west of the study area. Each bore is surrounded by a 300m radius Wellhead Protection Zone, from which the WRC recommends that land uses such as service stations, industry and unlined infi ltration basins be excluded, and that service stations be excluded from areas directly upstream of production bores (refer Figure 4: Environmental and Vegetation Features). Development and land use will need to be carefully considered in the 300m protection zones.

Vegetation and fl ora

A vegetation and fl ora survey of the study area was conducted by botanist Dr Arthur Weston in July 2001 and is summarized on Figure 4. The study area contains a mixture of cleared former farm paddocks and uncleared native vegetation. Remnant vegetation occupies the north-west of Lot 7, most of Lot 8 and the south-east of Lot 33 (land recently excised from Neerabup National Park).

Remnant native vegetation consists of dense coastal heaths on the higher areas with shallow limestone soils, and Tuart and Banksia woodlands in the lower areas with deeper soils, in mostly good to excellent condition.

The vegetation is primarily Cottesloe Complex-Central and South except for the far north-west corner of Lot 8, which is Quindalup Complex. The Cottesloe Complex - Central and South is well represented in the Perth Metropolitan Region, with 36% of its original extent remaining. Fifteen per cent of the complex is currently reserved, while a further 3% is proposed for reservation under Bush Forever.

The study area contains two small areas identifi ed as Floristic Community Type (FCT) 26a : Melaleuca huegelii – M. acerosa Shrublands on Limestone Ridges (Keighery et al., 1994) (refer Figure 4). FCT 26a is listed as endangered on the Department of Conservation and Land Management’s informal Threatened Ecological Community Database. The CALM list does not confer statutory protection on the listed communities; however, the Environmental Protection Authority takes note of listings on the database when assessing proposals.

The occurrence of FCT 26a on Lot 7 was initially set aside for protection as Public Open Space in the approved plan of subdivision for Lot 7. However, this portion of Lot 33, is in a critical location with regard to the Butler Station walkable precinct. Further site evaluation should occur at the local structure planning stage to determine if other sites with similar or greater bushland signifi cance exist which do not impact on station walkable catchments.

The nearest Bush Forever sites, identifi ed as areas of regional signifi cance are Neerabup National Park to the east, and the coastal foreshore reserve sites to the west, which will be retained within Parks and Recreation reservations. A summary of Environmental Features is shown on Figure 4.

(32)

Floristic Community Type 26a

Water Corporation production or backup bore

Wellhead Protection Zone

Marmion A

venue

Lukin Drive

W

anneroo Road

Figure 4 Environmental and Vegetation Features

Nowergup

Lake

Neerabup

National

Park

(33)

Table1 Sustaina bility Principles

Principle

Outcome

Action

Ef

fi

cient

Reduce dependence on automobiles and resultant transport energy us

age and greenhouse

gas emissions

Integrate transport and land use to produce walkable, mixed use neighbourhoods Provide a high quality public transport system Provide bicycle/walk paths and facilities

Climate responsive building design

Ensure maximum number of lots oriented on correct axis Require buildings to be designed to achieve maximum passive solar heating/cooling and lighting opportunities

Ef

fi

cient and ef

fective urban water management

Implementation

of water sensitive urban design

Encouragement of ‘good’

water use practices

Ef

fi

cient, progressive development and servicing

of land Ef fi cient use of infrastructure capital

Equitable

Access to daily and weekly needs without the use of a car by the majority of the population

Provide a variety of housing closely integrated with support services and other uses

V

ariety of housing to meet changing _demographics

Provide mix of lot sizes and densities

High level of suburban employment including mixed use developments and home-based business

Provide variety of land uses, lot sizes and street layouts

Equitable mobility through an ef

fi cient public transport system Provide an e f fi cient and ef

fective public transpo

(34)

Liveable

Provide a movement network that provides balanced access for all modes and supports personal safety Street layout to provide: perimeter blocks high level of internal accessibility with good external connections development fronts to all streets, parks and natural areas

Social interaction and community formation

Provide for community focus points and services such as shops, medical and health

facilities,libraries

Parks with child facilities, cafes

Supportive physical environment for exercise

Provide places to walk to and facilities that allow for active recreation

Creative

Distinctive, high quality

, vital, safe and attractive

‘24 hour

’ cities and suburbs where people can live,

work and shop

Design a community with: community focus at centre containing essential services; lot diversity and variety accessible street network system

Institutional facilities that support creativity

,

information sharing and generation

Allow for inclusion of ‘creative places’

such as universities, business centres, centres of excellence

etc.

Green

Inclusion of key natural features

Ensure protection of regional bushland Ensure protection of local bushland Retention of signi

fi

cant natural landscape features including coastal areas with provision

of adequate setbacks for coastal processes and climate change

Ef

fective and useful open spaces

Incorporate active recreation areas

“Green” suburbs and commercial areas

Retain signi

fi

cant

trees

Require street planting in major centres Promote native gardens

(35)

Local bushland retention was identifi ed by the City of Wanneroo as needing addressing through the charrette. However, in producing a charrette design, objectives of local bushland retention were identifi ed at an early stage as needing to be considered in the wider sustainability context, and balanced against other, environmental, economic and social sustainability objectives. Fauna

No site-specifi c fi eld survey has been conducted over the study area. However, the condition and coverage of vegetation indicates the site contains feeding and breeding habitats for a variety of native fauna species. Western Grey Kangaroos are the largest native animals commonly seen at the site. Introduced species including rabbits, foxes and cats are also likely to be present. The CALM 1999 Threatened Fauna database indicates that Carnaby’s Cockatoo is the only Schedule 1 species (species that are rare or likely to become extinct) known to occur in the area. This species is a seasonal visitor to the area and uses the Banksiawoodlands as prime feeding areas during the summer and autumn months. It does not, however, breed in the area.

Two Schedule 4 species (fauna that is otherwise specially protected) are known to occur in the area. The Peregrine Falcon may occur as a vagrant in the area, either in open woodlands or around lake margins. The Carpet Python has been recorded from low heaths and Banksia woodland that grow in the area. Three Priority Four species have previously been recorded in the area. The Southern Brown Bandicoot has been recorded within the area, and also from locations immediately to the south where suitable low heath or shrub communities persist. The Western Brush Wallaby may occur at low density in Banksia woodlands and tall shrublands. Hylaeus globuliferus (a native bee) has been recorded from woollybush heaths just south of this area and, given the nature of vegetation communities in the area, it is possible that this species may also occur within the subject land.

Heritage

An Aboriginal heritage survey was conducted on Lots 7 and 8 in 1990. No sites of archaeological or ethnographic signifi cance, as defi ned by Section 5 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 – 1980, were located in the survey area. A search of the Aboriginal Affairs Department’s Aboriginal Sites Register found no recorded sites in the overall study area.

(36)

6 TRANSPORT OPTIONS

A major objective of the charrette was to understand how the area could be best served by public transport in the future, both short and long term; and how the district’s road network could accommodate future travel demands in a balanced way so as not to undermine urban design, integration and amenity outcomes.

A key issue was the relative merits and possible alignments of light rail, busway or metro (heavy) rail options, both in terms of the Butler to Alkimos district and the sub-region extending north to Alkimos, Eglinton and Yanchep-Two Rocks.

6.1 Public

Transport

A guiding document for Metropolitan Perth transit provision is the 1995 Metropolitan Transit Strategy (MTS). The MTS established increased public transport mode share targets (from 6.4% to 12.5% of all types by 2029) and reduced trip lengths (from 8.4km to 7.2km by 2029). These targets were adopted as part of efforts to limit the current trends in terms of infrastructure costs, land impacts and energy resource consumption.

The charrette was to explore how these public transport targets might be achieved, particularly by promoting local employment self-suffi ciency to reduce trip length.

Two studies were undertaken prior to the charrette to inform the charrette process. The Brighton Transit Alignment Options Study (Sinclair Knight Merz, August 2001) outlined possible alignments for three technology options: metro rail, light rail and bus; and provided specifi cation information, preliminary costs and information on travel time estimates and model transfer issues. The Brighton Transit Patronage Forecasting Study (SKM, August 2001) examined rail trip generation at existing rail stations to assist in analysing charrette transit options. The conclusions of the Transit Alignment Options Study are outlined in Appendix 5.

As the charrette progressed, and information became available on employment, population, urban centres, commercial nodes, and household structure, a consensus was reached that the extension of the existing rail system was likely to provide the greatest community benefi t.

The main reasons behind this consensus were:

Transfer Penalties

People leaving the study area to travel to the south by rail (to Perth City, Joondalup or other locations) would need to transfer between vehicles if either a bus-based system or a light rail system were to be adopted. This adds signifi cantly to the journey time. In addition to the actual increase in time, there is evidence that transfers are perceived negatively by users. It was considered that this disbenefi t would result in reduced patronage for public transport users travelling through the area and those leaving the area to travel to the south.

Equity and mode consistency

The major benefi t of a light rail or busway system, as compared to a metro rail system, is their ability to provide stops closer to a greater number of residents and businesses in the area. This leads to a higher density of development along a continuing corridor with rapid transit stops at around one kilometre spacings. As the charrette progressed, it become apparent that continuous frontal high density residential development was not envisaged and that there was only scope for

(37)

two true multi-functional centres in the area – one at Brighton and one at a re-positioned Alkimos, some two kilometres to the north of Romeo Road.

Urban Form

A view was expressed that any major change of rapid transit mode from metro rail to either busway or light rail should be planned to occur at a major regional centre such as Joondalup. The current commitments to extend the existing metro rail to Clarkson would result in considerable duplication of infrastructure between Clarkson and Joondalup if a decision were made to anchor a light rail or a busway system at Joondalup.

Mode Transfer Locations

On the assumption that Perth’s northern suburbs will continue to expand to the north to Yanchep, Two Rocks and potentially beyond, there was a view that a fast rail system similar to the current system may eventually be required. For equity and other reasons, future northern corridor residents would be likely to lobby for a rail system similar to that serving other major corridors in Perth. In the longer term, this could result in two rapid transit systems running parallel to each other – a light rail or busway system within the corridor and a metro rail system on the freeway alignment.

In developing and evaluating design options, the objective then became the development of a metro rail system that could be integrated within the urban area and generate suffi cient patronage to justify construction in the short to medium term.

Design objectives for the metro rail that were identifi ed to meet patronage targets and operational requirements were:

• Around 4,000 households being situated within a 1km radius of each rail station. • Street layout to be permeable and direct to minimise walking distance to rail stations. • The number of households in the study area to be increased to increase rail patronage. • Rail station spacing to be about 2km to balance the need to maximise walk-on patronage

against ensuring reasonable travel times, assuming the rail would ultimately continue to Yanchep (that is, reduce station spacing)

• The rail alignment to be constructed in a narrow reserve, mainly in cut, to reduce impacts

and severance. The reserve is indicatively reducing to 25 metres from the conventional 40m Perth ‘standard’ reservation. The minimum width at the bottom of a cutting would be 16.6m.

• Curve radius to generally accommodate train speeds of 110 and up to 130kph (consistent

with recently ordered rail stock for the Southern Suburbs extension). Notionally a minimum 800m radius was used for design purposes.

• Stations to be located on straight sections of track for operational ease including disabled

access.

• Central platforms to allow for single entry points and platforms 150m long to accommodate

six car train sets.

• A minimum clearance of 5.3m from the top of the highest rail to the underside of structures,

increasing to 5.7m at stations.

• The vertical gradient below 2.0% wherever possible, and below 1.0% at stations. • Four-lane and two-lane bridges are required, all with a 2m-wide footpath on each side.

(38)

6.2 Road

Network

The strategic road network for the North-West corridor is refl ected in the MRS as shown on Figure 1. The Mitchell Freeway is currently constructed at four lanes to Hodges Drive, with its reservation extending to the northern boundary of the metropolitan area to join the Perth-Lancelin road. The reservation is designed to cater for an ultimate six lanes (100 metres width). Current volumes on the Freeway south of Ocean reef road are 48,370. The Freeway is proposed to be extended to Shenton Avenue by 2006 and to Burns Beach Road by 2008. Preliminary indications are that the Freeway would not be extended to Lukin Drive until after 2015.

The Freeway reservation is planned with intersections at minimum spacings of two kilometres, feeding into the district distributor road network. A particular issue that required consideration at the charrette was how well freeway intersections and the feeder district distributor streets provided direct access into future town centres.

Wanneroo road is the other Primary Regional Road that currently provides some access to the area, although access is via Hester Avenue/Quinns Road at present. This is currently four lanes to Pinjar road to the south, with sections of two and four lanes beyond.

The district distributor road network, indicated as ‘Other Regional Roads’ in the MRS, comprises Marmion Avenue and Connolly Drive north-south, and Lukin Drive and Romeo Road east-west. Further north, the east-west routes of Alkimos Drive and Eglinton Avenue connect Marmion Avenue to the Freeway. These district distributor routes are planned for four lanes within 60 metre reserves. Marmion Avenue has been indicated as having potential for six lanes, although this would have signifi cant implications in terms of traffi c impacts to the south, integration of land east and west of Marmion Avenue and the character of adjacent urban land.

Connolly Drive is part constructed in two sections to the south. Marmion Avenue provides the main north-south route, connecting Brighton to the southern portions of the North-West Corridor. Traffi c volumes on Marmion Avenue north of Burns Beach road in 1998-1999 were 23,460 vpd. The southern sections of Marmion Avenue are built primarily with lots backing onto this regional route; however, the fi rst stage of Brighton was approved with lots fronting and service road or frontage road treatment to manage access. Main Roads WA preferred spacings for traffi c signals on regional routes such as Marmion Avenue is generally two kilometres, but less when the route passes through a town centre. A challenge for the charrette was designing these regional routes to still perform their regional road functions, but as integrating rather than dividing elements, recognising the economic and employment benefi ts that commercial development derives from selective and well designed arterial road frontage.

(39)

(40)

7 CENTRE AND EMPLOYMENT ISSUES

7.1 Centre Issues

7.1.1 Introduction

A principle established early for the charrette, and outlined in Chapter 2.1, was that centres were to be developed as mixed use centres in the form of village or town centres, and not as stand-alone shopping centres. The basis for this objective was to facilitate a higher level of public domain performance, a greater mix of uses in the area, higher levels of walkability and public transport use, better job containment around these centres, and generally improved social, environmental and economic performance.

7.1.2 Jindalee Workshop Outcomes

The preferred Option C of the Jindalee 1996 workshops (refer Figure 2) proposed two towns of similar size within the notional trade area between Alkimos and Clarkson. These centres were justifi ed on the basis of detailed density calculations as a consequence of the Enquiry-by-Design process of the time.

The Jindalee Workshop also proposed realigning the rail corridor from its proposed mid-freeway alignment on the edge of the corridor to a point in the middle of the corridor, providing improved walk-on catchment for future rail operations.

The combination of the move of the rail corridor, plus the proposed increased density as a consequence of the Workshop, created the opportunity for another mixed use town (in addition to the proposed Butler town centre) at Jindalee. However, as the development front for the corridor is now well within the infl uence of both proposed towns, it was considered important to revisit the conclusions of the 1996 Workshop and especially the assumptions relating to the two proposed town centres.

7.1.3 Populations and Retail Catchments

Each town in the corridor, including the new ‘town’ at Clarkson called Ocean Keys (although it is more of a shopping centre than a town) is functionally defi ned by a retail trade area that takes into account regional movement patterns and competitive trade dynamics. Retail catchments are reasonably simple to defi ne, and provide a starting point for future town centre roles and functions. However, whilst retail catchments might provide a basis for retail fl oor space provision, it is important to recognise that a number of other infl uences determine how these towns and other centres in the area might develop over time.

The attractiveness of seaside towns along the corridor will infl uence the retail role and the level of retail that may be provided. Consequently, if control of retail fl oor space in the area was to be promoted on the basis of a desire to support the principles of economic viability and equity of access, then it would be appropriate to allow seaside towns or villages to increase their levels of retail fl oor space commensurate with the expected level of additional visitation to the area. This visitation would be additional to the natural, residentially-based catchment.

This philosophy applies to all locations in the area, as regional and local movement patterns as well as notional retail catchments should inform a place-based philosophy for the amount of retail in each centre.