High Density Development

Top of page

When will this happen?
Many people have claimed that all these developments are “years away”. The following shows that both Parkerville and Stoneville will be developed as soon as is practically possible.

Up until now these two developments have been unable to be rezoned from ‘rural’ to ‘urban’ and are zoned ‘urban deferred’ (see the WAPC criteria for lifting deferrment). Development of the high density blocks can only begin when ‘urban’ zoning is approved by the West Australian Planning Commission (WAPC). This hold up is caused primarily by the developers inability to find a suitable method of sewage disposal. In a letter from the Water Corporation to the Stoneville Progress Association (August 2005) it was stated that both the Stoneville & Parkerville developers are working with the Water Corporation to solve this problem.

A firm of consulting engineers, Cardno BSD, in March 2006, wrote to the Stoneville Progress Association stating that they had been hired in order to get the urban deferment lifted. They are among the top companies in Australia in their field and operate internationally. Choosing such a high powered company shows that the developers are anxious to resolve this as soon as possible before mounting public protest threatens their plans. They state that they will solve the persistent problem of sewage disposal. However, these plans will also have to be thoroughly reviewed by the WAPC regarding various other issues including: environmental, employment, roads & infrastructure and whether it is a "logical extension of urban development". This is because regulations and planning strategy have changed since 1996/7 when these developments were first approved by the Shire of Mundaring.

In December 2005 earthworks began on the access roads to the 5 acre blocks (32 in all) on the Parkerville site. These are already zoned 'rural' and therefore do not require any further planning consents for their development. These blocks went on the market in August 2006 and are for sale through Rundin Realty, starting at $385,000. A major road servicing these will also provide access to the High Density development in the centre of the project.

Therefore both high density developments can go ahead if and when Cardno BSD comes up with a solution. Currently it is proposed to build a large sewage plant on the western side of the Parkerville development adjacent to John Forrest National Park. This would have the capacity to service the Parkerville and Stoneville townsites. According to the Water Corporation "These types of plants have a greater ability to be staged to suit demand". In other words, when the two townsites are expanded in the future and possibly joined, the sewage plant can be expanded.

The Gidgegannup development was thought to be 10–15 years away, but in July 2004 the City of Swan commissioned David Wills & Associates (Consulting Engineers) to produce a report Investigation of Water and Sewer Options for Proposed Expansion of Gidgegannup Townsite.

In September 2006 3 separate Outline Development Plans were published by the City of Swan for public comment (public meeting October 16th. Agricultural Society Hall 7-30pm). These proposals are for development around the Gidgegannup townsite. A developer has offered to put up $10 million towards getting scheme water from the Kalgoorlie pipeline at Mount Helena to these developments. This could only be required for dense development. Additionally, just east of Gidgegannup a 569 unit retirement village is proposed for Bailup and Landcorp (the State government’s development agency) has been buying properties between Gidgegannup and Toodyay.

The Port Bouvard Group (PBG) has just acquired 483 hectares of Gidgegannup as the first stage of a development intended to house 12,000 people. (read article in the West Australian) It seems the idea of treated sewage disposal into creeks and rivers via the Parkerville site is proving technically impractical and investigations are now under way as to how to locate a plant within the Redhill Waste Treatment site. This would service all of the townsites planned in the NEHSPP. The developer's intention to provide scheme water is only financially viable for high density development, thereby dividing the high capital cost by a very large number of blocks.

We believe that PBG will initially present a proposal designed to allay community concerns and which only contains a limited number of small blocks designated for retirement and limited commercial activity. This will get them the vital rezoning from 'rural' to 'urban'. Once zoning is approved the plans can be altered radically at a later date (as per Parkerville and Stoneville) as a result of any 'problems' they encounter. If they should discover, for example, that the economics of providing scheme water requires a far greater number of small blocks, then there's little that can be done about it since urban zoning is already in place.

Given the Ellenbrook experience we believe this initial proposal is merely 'Stage 1' as thousands of surrounding acres of Gidgegannup have recently been acquired for development. In theory the Minister should reject this proposal since it is contrary to all the principles of her 'Network City' plan and far bigger than the proposal for the area in the NEHSPP. It also does not comply with the recently approved Gidgegannup Place Plan. Furthermore, when the food crisis that 'Peak Oil' is likely to create is considered, the destruction of arable land close to the metro area is a frightening prospect. The resident's dependency on cars will also exacerbate climate change. There is also a critical shortage of practicing doctors since most prefer to live near the coast (a survey by the Perth and Hills Division of General Practitioners last year showed that the doctor to patient ratio in Gidgegannup is 1:3,444). Once doctors are given a Medicare Provider Number they are able to practice wherever they wish, earning a good living with only 400 patients. Why would they want the hardship of treating 3444?

The Hills Spine Road will be built to cope with the enormous increase in road traffic as a result of the Stoneville, Parkerville and Gidgegannup developments. Much of this road (a 4 lane divided carriageway carrying 10,000 vehicles per day) is in the City of Swan, not the Shire of Mundaring. This means that the City of Swan would need to find a source of rates income to justify their expenditure on building the Gidgegannup section of the Hills Spine Road when Parkerville and Stoneville go ahead. Development of the Gidgegannup townsite would justify this cost.

But isn’t all this a “done deal”?
Many would have you believe there is nothing that can be done to change the current plans – nothing could be further from the truth. Because it is 10 years since these developments were given outline approval by the Council, planning regulations and government planning policy have changed. If the sewage system is finally approved the developers still have to go back to the drawing board and effectively start all over again. This was confirmed in a letter from the Minister for Planning to the Stoneville Progress Association.

The Stoneville Progress Association (SPA) has had meetings with: The Premier, Alannah MacTiernan Minister for Planning & Infrastructure, Local Members of Parliment (State and Federal) and Members of the Shadow Cabinet. If this was a "done deal" would these people have wasted their time with us?

At a recent meeting of SPA the guest speakers, Jonathan Throssell, Shire CEO and John Beaton, Shire President, addressed 93 residents from throughout the Shire. Mr Beaton invited those present to put forward their concerns and he would take them to Council and submit them to the Planning Minister on behalf of the community. The community concerns were summarised in three separate motions, and submitted to council. The Council, in a 7-3 vote, rejected them on the grounds that they did not reflect the views of the greater community.  This despite 120 people cramming into the Council Chamber (many more could not get in), waiting patiently for three hours just to be told they didn’t count.

So, let the Minister for Planning know how you feel…and get ready to vote in the next State and local elections.

Top of page

Why is high density a problem?

Creeping urbanisation

With predictions of the population of Perth reaching 2.5 million by 2035, "village" style development in the hills may seem like an effective way of controlling urban sprawl. However, this offers no guarantee. Such developments will create a precedent by producing changes in zoning that opens the door to increasing urbanisation.
Local Council's often seek to expand and sustain their realms via large-scale developments. Developers know that high density developments reap hefty financial rewards. Once Town Planning Schemes are modified to allow higher densities, developers find the potential of such development irresistible.

Throughout Western Australia rural land is being rezoned to urban.

The following are current examples of creeping urbanisation.

• Armadale Council intends rezoning land in the Canning Valley near Araluen to accommodate a 200 unit multi storey resort. When the Araluen Country Club development was approved they said that this land would always remain rural. (read the article in the Armadale Examiner);
• The Hills around Kalamunda are gradually being covered by brick and tile (read the article in the Echo);
• A rural wildlife corridor in High Wycombe is about to be zoned urban and developed. (read the article in the Echo);
• Rural land around Ellenbrook has been rezoned to urban in order to accommodate more development and
• Parts of Whiteman Park face a similar fate.

Market pressure to develop the Hills is steadily increasing. In an article in the West Australian Oct.2006 on the demand for a “tree change”, Gavin Hegney of the Hegney Property Group “…named the Perth Hills areas as the next big thing because they offered a “green” lifestyle similar to that of the South West.”

*Read the "Whole Perth Hills Vision" proposing legal protection from inappropriate development.

Crime
Currently the hills are a low-crime area. Dense housing and crime go hand in hand. Whether you are living in South Perth, Cottesloe, Ellenbrook, Midland or any other densely developed suburb, crime is an unpleasant fact. We have been told that increased population will mean that the number of police will increase, and solve the problem of increased crime. If this is true, where would these extra police come from as there is presently a shortage of police in the metropolitan area?

The Health System

Everyone living in a very large circle drawn around Midland will be adversely affected if these developments go ahead

Can the present health system cope?

The hardworking Mundaring Medical Centre knows the difficulties of getting doctors to practice in the Hills - their Mount Helena surgery has had to close. A surgery in Chidlow completed almost 3 years ago stands empty having never seen a patient due to the inability to attract medical staff.

The CEO of the Perth and Hills Division of General Practice stated in October 2005 that doctors in the Hills region currently deal with 2½ times as many patients as their metropolitan counterparts. He added that “current populations in the Hills area do not receive optimal access to primary health care – a situation that can only get worse if we as a community cannot match General Practice and allied health supply to population growth”. An article in the West Australian September 2006 highlights the findings of a survey comparing the number of patients per doctor in various metropolitan post codes. Doctors in Parkerville, Darlington and Gidgegannup, for example, deal with 10 times as many patients as their inner city colleagues. Guildford does not have a GP at all.

Furthermore, Swan District Hospital is already under extreme pressure and Royal Perth Hospital is set to close. Dr. Paul Skerritt, State President of the AMA, has stated on ABC’s Stateline 22-7-05 that “Swan District, like a lot of the peripheral hospitals, finds it very difficult to attract staff….at the moment, the reason Swan District is surviving is because of the great deal of support from Royal Perth.” That will disappear when Royal Perth closes.

Swan District Hospital is due to be upgraded because the Hospital is already struggling to meet demand. An extra 120 beds will barely cope with the extra demand caused by the closure of Royal Perth and the redevelopment of Midland, let alone the extra thousands of people that the new developments would house. (The population in the Mundaring Shire is projected to rise from 34,000 to to 53,350 [Council Minutes 10-6-97]). How will they attract the medical staff more effectively than they do now? These new towns will mean huge population increases.
[Read the Mailbag...]

Top of page

Financial
People come to the Hills for the quiet life, to escape suburbia - they value the unique environment. High density townsite developments will destroy that and its rural ‘real estate’ appeal. If these developments are going to improve land values, why aren’t local real estate agents promoting them as a huge benefit to people currently looking for property in the hills?

Do you believe that these developments will increase the value of your property? Aren't the hills attractive because they offer a completely different lifestyle to suburbia while still within easy reach of all that Perth offers? Most people buy in the hills because they expect tranquility, space and an escape from suburbia. Development will destroy these sought-after attributes. Will increased traffic, overworked health services and inadequate infrastructure decrease the value of your land?

Perth is experiencing an acute shortage of low cost housing due to the recent dramatic increases in land values. The Hills are known for lower property values - are these developments intended to be low-cost housing?

Does suburbia work in a rural setting?

• Let's consider Ellenbrook as an example. In spite of a housing shortage, Ellenbrook, 13 years after development began, has sold only 47% of the projected number of lots to date. In this last year of housing boom it has only managed to sell 104 lots • 346 less than the year before. (see Ellenbrook Economic Impact Study) This is a development with community centres, schools, a large shopping centre, libraries and sports facilities. It now has to advertise on television to attract buyers.

• Fifteen years ago, the Araluen Golf Course Estate developers predicted the 330 housing blocks would all be built on in 8 - 10 years. At the time, there were over 900 submissions from the community, most of them rejecting the proposal, but it went ahead anyway because of all the supposed benefits. 15 years later approximately half the blocks remain undeveloped. It was considered such an important development, one that the community just had to have, yet it went broke losing around $20M. The new owners now want to develop another resort along the Canning River and include in their plans a proposal to pump treated effluent into the river. This is proposed on a steep property that was to remain undeveloped. The owners have not even finished developing the present resort and can scarcely maintain what they already have.

The City of Joondalup has no shortage of dense development. However a few years ago there were rate increases as high as 25%. Will development lower your rates?  A study by Curtin University completed in August 2006 found that half of the State’s councils are financially unsustainable, and that currently they have $1.75 billion of dept due to infrastructure costs. Read article in West Australian    Many of the most in-debt Councils are ones that have experienced the most development.  Expected increases in rates revenue is more than offset by increased infrastructure costs. However the idea persists that development is the answer to council’s financial woes.  The Mundaring Shire CEO, Jonathan Throssell, recently expressed this view in an interview with the Hills Gazette.   Quote:  “Personally I think Perth is exhausted by growing north and south, and the only way to go now is east.”

The City of Swan has just presented a report to Council (30-11-05) concerning a shortfall in their projected rates income from the Ellenbrook development. It states that “If lot sales had met the developers expectations…..the City may have expected to achieve an additional $16.8 million over the project life to date leading to a cumulative surplus of $12.7 million as against a deficit of $4.14 million”. That’s a big price to pay for getting it wrong! [read What the Papers say...]

They are now discussing various ways to recover this money - from the developers? - No, from the ratepayers. In 1993 the Council made a contribution towards roads etc. based on advice given by the developer’s engineers believing that ”…Council rate income from the development would be considerable in the long term”. Alas, only 47% of the projected number of lots have been sold – what started as an attractive bushland development no longer has the same appeal. In reality it is a high density development in an isolated location.

If we are already short of retirement units in the Hills, why would you import thousands of people, who will themselves need retirement units in due course? The Parkerville and Stoneville developments will only provide a modest number of such units, yet increase the population by more than 7,000.

Many people living on large blocks accept the need to downsize as they get older. However they tend to downsize to ½ acre not 300 or 500 square metre blocks. This enables them to continue to enjoy a rural environment. Eventually even a ½ acre block may become too much so they seek a maintenance-free environment in the form of a retirement unit. Yes, we do need retirement units but not as a justification for dense developments.  Furthermore, such developments need to be close to shops, health services and good public transport, not in isolated locations.

Most people who have loved and enjoyed the hills lifestyle would not wish to see it destroyed simply because the time has come for them to downsize.

Developers are using proposals for developments containing retirement units as a means to implement high density development by stealth.

There is a proposal before council for a 569 unit retirement village at Bailup at the far eastern end of the Shire. If this is allowed it will set a precedent for dense development throughout the Shire - retirement or otherwise.

Environmental
These developments will inevitably increase the destruction of flora, fauna and bird habitat, especially that of the black cockatoo (an endangered species).

• Cats are a popular pet on restricted suburban blocks. These developments are adjacent to or contain remnant bushland and the Parkerville site has its entire western boundary adjacent to the John Forrest National Park. With over 2000 homes on these developments that could mean a lot of cats and devastation of the local wildlife.
• More traffic = more noise, more pollution, more road kill. The town planners report for the Stoneville site identifies roads that currently carry a handful of cars per day will be carrying 2000. Stoneville Road will carry 5,100 vehicles per day, Roland to Cameron Road 9,330, Cameron Road 7,600 and Cameron to Toodyay Road 10,000 vehicles per day on a 4 lane highway.
• Fertiliser and insecticides from reticulated lawns and gardens and treated sewage will enter our waterways and ultimately the John Forrest National Park, and the Swan River.
• Scheme water in large volumes will need to be piped from Sawyers Valley to each site. This can mean clearing back approximately 15 metres of bush from the road verge – not a pleasant prospect if your fence is within the area to be cleared. Scheme water enables many exotic plants to be grown that can become feral and colonise bushland when their seeds are dispersed by birds and the wind. But the biggest environmental problem is sewage disposal. These developments will discharge treated sewage into local creeks, as does the Mundaring Plant

The Water Corporation’s state-of-the-art Mundaring Sewage Plant has at times experienced a number of technical difficulties. Treated sewage is discharged into Jarrah Creek in the Jane Brook Water Reserve and hence into the Swan River. It was intended to water The Harry Riseborough Oval in the summer, but has only been able to do so on a few occasions due to poor water quality and pump failures. Recently an underground irrigation system was installed, thereby avoiding the need for surface watering.

50 acres have been set aside to build a sewage plant on the western side of the "Parkerville Highlands" development adjacent to John Forrest National Park.

According to a letter from the Water Corporation dated 13-12-06 this plant is intended to treat the wastewater from all the townsites in the North Eastern Hills Settlement Pattern Plan - a population of 80-100,000 people. At full capacity this plant would process approximately 34 million litres of wastewater per day. This cannot be dispersed solely by irrigating public open space. Inevitably this would enter the river system and water catchment via the adjacent creek that flows into the John Forrest National Park. Advertisements for the 5 acre blocks for sale on the "Parkerville Highlands" site describe the sewage treatment plant as a "Water Conservation Reserve".

Top of page

Social

• Where will all these people work?
• What about the ever-increasing fuel costs?
• What will there be for the youngsters to do when there’s little now for them as it is?

The town planners report for Stoneville states “At this stage, no new bus routes are anticipated for the Parkerville/Stoneville area under current Transperth planning and policy…..Transperth would be interested in serving R30 group housing (330 square metre blocks) if this could be achieved…” In other words, put in more high density blocks and you’ll see a bus occasionally. The bus service to Mundaring is inadaquate - Why would Transperth service locations 6km's away?

Write to your local MP and ask them to provide you with a copy of the North Eastern Hills Settlement Plan - Scarp Cordon Traffic Study and Within Better Public Transport: 10 Year Plan for Transperth 1998 – 2007 or any other document relevant to public transport in the hills.

Infrastructure
The impact of such an increase in population will cause a huge increase in road traffic, in some cases from the current handful a day to thousands a day. Roads are planned to be widened, junctions modified. The Stoneville town planners report states “It is a requirement of the Council that the Hills Spine Road and Brooking Road Bypass be built as part of the development scheme”. It also states that on Stoneville Rd "vertical and horizontal realignment may be necessary with possible resumptions".

The Minutes of the Mundaring Council·s Planning, Building and Health Committee (10-6-97 page PD747.97 ) stated in answer to residents' submissions on the Parkerville development: ·It is acknowledged that new development will bring additional traffic. However, such traffic will predominantly be encouraged to use the Hills Spine Route (Toodyay Road, Cameron Road) and the Brooking Road Bypass. It should also be noted that traffic in Great Eastern Highway will increase as development throughout the Shire proceeds to the estimated population of 53,350·. This will increase the present population of 34,000 by 20,000 - an increase of nearly 60%!

The following figures show the town planner’s predicted number of vehicles per day (vpd) that will use some of the roads around the Parkerville and Stoneville developments. The figures were calculated allowing for a 2.25% increase in traffic each year up until the 100% completion of development of both sites in 2011.

*Note: these are 1997 figures.  A 2003 Main Roads Department traffic survey showed Stoneville Rd. already carried 7,300 vpd - 2,200 more than is projected for when both townsites are built. This suggests that the estimated figures are may be grossly understated.

The Hills Spine Road from Stoneville to Roland Road and Roland Road from there to Toodyay Road will become a 4 lane highway. It will extend east from Cameron Road to meet Bunning Road in Mount Helena.

Roland Road and the Brooking Road Bypass will become the main north-south feeder road for all traffic heading to or from Midland.

The town planners state that the Stoneville development alone “will generate approximately 11,000 vehicle trips per day on full development and attract approximately 200-300 school based trips from the surrounding area”.

There will be a great deal of road widening and alterations to road layout as a result of the foregoing volumes of traffic. Furthermore, this amount of traffic will affect the whole of the Shire and especially the Mundaring town centre

Bushfires are always a major threat in the Hills - with increased population the risks can only be greater especially with development adjacent to a National Park. The developers rely on our volunteer fire brigades and emergency services volunteers to protect their investment. Once again, we pay - not the developers.

Dense developments will alter everyone's hills lifestyle - whether or not they live near the proposed developments.

Top of page

What is the solution?

• There are ways that we can preserve the social, cultural and environmental aspects of our community without obstructing development. However, it needs to be appropriate and reflect the current Hills Lifestyle. Blocks need to be no smaller than 1 acre, thereby placing less impact on the environment and the social structure.

Subdivisions in our water catchments are inapropriate given Perth's water crisis.

• We are currrently seeking legal protection for an area of the Perth Hills from approximately from Muchea to Serpentine. This has already in place for the Adelaide Hills and Melbourne's Dandenong ranges. See the first draft of the 'Perth Hills Vision' and please forward your comments to info@saveperthhills.org

• When people in the hills downsize to smaller properties as they get older, they need to be located near medical facilities, transport, major shopping centres etc. - not way off the beaten track. There is plenty of land in the centre of Mundaring and other townsites already earmarked for retirement properties, but as yet undeveloped.

Top of page

Can we make a difference – You bet!

Supporters of this site have achieved the following:

If these groups working on their own have achieved this, can you imagine what we can do together?

Can you imagine what we can do with your help?

What can I do?

• Write to the Minister for Planning and the Premier
• Write to your local MP, State and Federal
• Write to your Mundaring Councillors [download a sample letter - print, sign and send this letter to your local councillors, find them on political contacts
• Go on talkback radio eg. ABC or 6PR
• Write to The West Australian newspaper
• Write to your local newspaper
• Join one of the local residents associations who support this site.
• Buy a car sticker – place it on the back window driver’s side
• Talk to you friends, relatives, neighbours and workmates
• Keep up-to-date by visiting this site

Top of page