Accessible Communities report - Final Compendium October 2009€¦ · • Rights of Way Improvement...

Contract Report

Accessible Communities Study Report Compendium

by ARRB Group and TPG Urban Planning for Department of Planning Department of Transport

000541 - October 2009

Although the Report is believed to be correct at the time of publication, ARRB Group Ltd, to the extent lawful, excludes all liability for loss (whether arising under contract, tort, statute or otherwise) arising from the contents of the Report or from its use. Where such liability cannot be excluded, it is reduced to the full extent lawful. Without limiting the foregoing, people should apply their own skill and judgement when using the information contained in the Report.

Accessible Communities Study Report Compendium

for Department of Planning Department of Transport

Reviewed

Project Leader Anne Still

Quality Manager Paul Morris

000541 - October 2009

Accessible Communities Study 000541- October 2009

1

Report Compendium

Given the substantial scope of this study a report compendium has been produced. For readers, this comprises copies of process related documents, full review tables and related study material. The following identifies what is contained within the Compendium.

Appendix A International and National Best Practice Review

Appendix B Summary of Local Government Response to DPI Survey

Appendix C Full Review of Strategies and Policies

Appendix D Full Review of WAPC Planning Bulletins

Appendix E Summary of Stakeholder Workshop Proceedings and Workshop Presentation (separate PDF file)

Appendix F Workshop Transcript


2

APPENDIX A INTERNATIONAL AND NATIONAL BEST PRACTICE REVIEW


3

Introduction This appendix was prepared by the consultant team to present the raw data outputs of a best practice review authored by the Department of Planning (DP) as a component of Part 1 of the Accessible Communities Study. The review investigated transport and land use practices in international and national cities. The Consultant team provided broad topic areas to the DP and a template assessment index table on which information could be recorded.

The review looked at the following topics and locations:

• Travel planning

o United Kingdom

• Planning and development control policies

o Brisbane

o Denmark

• Technical issues and audit of design manuals

o Oregon Metropolitan Planning Organisation

o US Institute of Engineers and Department for Transport

o UK Manual for Streets

• Planning systems

o Portland

o Denver

o Vancouver

o New Zealand

• Planning policies

o Scotland

o England

• Successful systematic approaches

o Vancouver

o Portland

o Geelong

o Sydney

o Brisbane

o Curitiba

o Perth.

The DP identified information sources mainly through Internet searches. ARRB’s McLay Library provided hard copies of some documents.

Key findings have been summarised by the consultants and presented in table format in the main report. It should be noted that the information obtained about the practice examples is broad and the applicability of some best practice examples to Perth is as yet untested.


4

Transport Plans Overview This section contains a review of Local Transport Plans in the United Kingdom (Source: Consultation on Local Transport Plan 3 Guidance, Department for Transport UK).

Local Transport Plans. In the UK the Transport Act 2000 made it mandatory for local transport authorities to produce Local Transport Plans (LTP) and also mandated that they be reviewed every 5 years. The Local Transport Act 2008 retains the statutory requirement to produce and review Local Transport Plans and policies. However, there have been some changes to the statutory framework. These include:

1. While previously some authorities could be exempt from producing LTP’s, this is no longer the case.

2. The Act now requires that LTP’s contain policies and implementation plans.

3. Prior to the Act, Plans had to be reviewed at least every 5 years. The new Act means that local transport authorities must constantly keep their plans under review and can replace their plans as they see fit.

4. The Act now removes the requirement to produce a separate bus strategy. New measures now allow bus strategies to be better integrated with the LTP.

The Local Transport Act 2008 places a duty on local transport authorities to consult with key stakeholders when formulating policies and plans. These stakeholders include:

• Bus and rail operators

• Public transport user groups

• Adjoining district and city councils

• The Secretary of State with respect to Highway Agency roads

• Any other people the consider appropriate

With respect to the environment the amended Act requires local transport authorities to pay regard to Government guidance and policies on the environment when formulating LTP’s.

The amended Act also adds a new requirement to pay regard to the needs of disabled people, both in developing and implanting the LTP’s. This brings the Act into line with the Disability Discrimination Act.

At a national level the amended Act expects local transport authorities to consider how their LTP contributes to national transport goals. There are 5 key goals set by the UK Department for Transport, they are:

1. Support national economic competitiveness and growth, by delivering reliable and efficient transport networks.

2. Reduce transport’s emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases, with the desired outcome of avoiding dangerous climate change.

3. Contribute to better health and longer life-expectancy through reducing the risk of death, injury or illness arising from transport, and promoting travel modes that are beneficial to health.


5

4. Improve quality of life for transport users and non-transport users, and promote a health natural environment.

5. Promote greater equality for transport opportunity for all citizens, with the desired outcome of achieving a fairer society.

With respect to LTP funding it is expected that implementation plans demonstrate how both capital and revenue funding are to be used to further transport objectives. Also that strategies and implementation plans be based on realistic estimates of the funding likely to be available. Capital funding is available for block allocations and major schemes, subject to Regional Funding Advice. Most funding will continue to be delivered via the three year Local Government Settlements. The Department for Transport does not currently intend to link any national performance based funding to the quality or delivery of LTP’s. Lastly, it is recommended under the amended Act that local transport authorities consider alternative funding sources such as:

• Specific grants

• Supplementary Business Rates

• Community Infrastructure Levies

• Developer contributions, pricing measures, and/or charges

Under the amended Act the Department for Transport will no longer formally assess LTP’s, impose mandatory targets, or require formal monitoring reports above those supplied under the Local Area Agreement Framework. In effect, this places sole responsibility on individual local transport authorities to consider how they should best use the LTP Framework in ways that are best for them. The Department for Transport will provide support to authorities in the preparation and delivery of their LTP’s.

It is specified under the amended Act that the scope of an LTP should cover all of an authority’s policies and delivery plans relating to transport. It is also specified that the LTP relates to transport to, from and within the local transport authorities area and that arrangements should be in place for accountability and delivery.

A process for developing an LTP is outlined under the amended act, which in order is:

1. Clarify goals

2. Specify the problems or challenges the authority wants to solve

3. Generate options to resolve these challenges

4. Appraise the options and predict their effects

5. Select preferred options and decide priorities

6. Deliver the agreed strategy

There are two points worth mentioning with respect to other pieces of legislation. Firstly, under European directive 2001/42/EC local transport authorities in the UK must undertake a Strategic Environmental Assessment of their LTP’s. Secondly, local authorities have a duty under race, disability and gender legislation to carry out an Equality Impact Assessment of their LTP’s.

The amended Act also recommends that local transport authorities look at several other plans in relation to their LTP, these are:

• Network Management Duty, Traffic Management Act 2004: that stipulates local highway authorities have a statutory duty to manage their road network to secure the expeditious


6

movement of traffic on their network and to facilitate the same on the network of other local authorities.

• Air Quality Action Plan, UK Air Quality Strategy: that stipulates local authorities have a duty to review and assess local air quality, specifically in Air Quality Management Areas.

• Rights of Way Improvement Plan, Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000: that introduced a duty on all local highway authorities to prepare a Rights of Way Improvement Plan (ROWIP). Consultation with environment groups is recommended under the ROWIP framework.

• Habitats Regulation Assessment: under Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive (Council Directive 92/43/EEC) and Regulation 85B of the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c) Regulations 1994, (S.I. 1994/2716 as amended) local transport authorities must consider the impact of their LTP on a site designated as a special area of conservation, alone or in conjunction with other plans. If this is thought to be the case then the LTP must be subject to an appropriate assessment.


7

Planning and Development Control Policies Overview Two examples of development control are looked at in this section - Brisbane QLD and Denmark.

Brisbane, Queensland Development control in Brisbane is actioned through The City Plan. The City Plan (the Plan) is a comprehensive statement of Council’s intentions for the future development of Brisbane. The Plan provides guidance for builders, developers, solicitors and others to ensure development progresses in a way that will enable achievement of the vision for Brisbane. In one cohesive integrated package the Plan aims to:

• adopt a performance approach to development assessment

• promote urban design as a fundamental part of City development

• provide a strong local focus in its implementation

In addition, the City Plan draws together the outcomes for the City of Brisbane from:

• State planning and strategies such as the Integrated Regional Transport Plan for South East Queensland 1997 and South East Queensland Regional Air Quality Strategy.

• Regional planning processes over the last decade through the SEQ2001 Regional Framework for Growth Management project and the Brisbane 2011 Plan (B2011 Plan).

• Local area planning undertaken by Council in a rolling program covering many areas of the City.

With respect to Queensland Sate Government Legislation the City Plan explicitly recognises, and is consistent with, the following State planning policies:

• State Planning Policy 1/92—Development and the Conservation of Agricultural Land (SPP 1/92)

• State Planning Policy 2/92—Planning for Aerodromes and Other Aeronautical Facilities (SPP 2/92)

• State Planning Policy 1/97—Conservation of Koalas in the Koala Coast (SPP 1/97)

• State Planning Policy 2/02—Planning and Managing Development involving Acid Sulphate Soils

• State Planning Policy 1/03—Mitigating the Adverse Impacts of Flood, Bushfire and Landslide.

The detail incorporated into local plans with respect to development allows the Brisbane City Council to exert significant control over selected areas. The Local Area Plans are designed to:

• manage development and change in local areas in the context of the broad policy framework of The City Plan;

• establish a shared vision and common understanding of key issues in the local community;

• establish an integrated approach to local planning;

• identify and prioritise local planning initiatives, and

• ensure that private and public sector development proposals are consistent with local aspirations.

Most Local Area Plans include two documents:


8

• The Action Plan, which includes strategies and actions for implementation by the community, Council and government agencies to realise the vision of the District.

• The Town Plan Recommendations, which includes those recommendations specifically influencing land use and development outcomes.

Within The City Plan the Development Control Plans continue to have a statutory role as Local Area Plans. It should be noted that under The City Plan, the land within the DCP boundaries has been allocated to the Area that is most closely aligned with its precinct intent and development requirements. In some situations where the intent or requirements of the DCP vary from, or are in addition to, that of the Area in which the land has been placed, these variations or additions are maintained within the Local Area Plan.

Denmark Development control in Denmark has been undergoing significant changes. Therefore it will be looked at chronologically across two time periods 1970-2007 and 2007-present.

Urban development in Denmark accelerated post WWII into the mid 1980’s and across this time development was regulated via Town Planning Acts set up in 1925 and reviewed in 1938, 1945, 1970, and 1975. From 1970 to 2007 the key feature of the Danish planning system was a three tier structure national, regional, and local. A major revision of the planning system in 1992 saw country divided into three zones, urban, recreational, and rural. It should be noted here that the 90% of allocated rural zone was heavily protected from development through as special permissions were required to change land use away from agriculture and forestry. At this time responsibility, decision making, and administration were decentralised to regional and local levels. The planning was controlled through a The Planning Act of 2002 which implemented a framework control method and meant that plans at lower levels must not contradict plans at higher levels. The diagram below excerpted from Spatial Planning System in Denmark (Enemark, 2002) outlines the policy framework used to control development.


9

Figure 1. Danish Planning Policy Framework (Enemark, 2002).

The consequence of this structure was that if a project or development was consistent with the specified planning regulations there was little to no delay for approval. Further control could also be exerted through the withholding of building permits. While this system could ensure that undesirable development was highly unlikely to occur, it did little to ensure that desired development occurred in the right places at the right times due to the heavy reliance on private investment. This system resulted in a highly political and effective planning process, but also the quality of plans were dependent on the quality of the political and administrative processes at the local level.

In January of 2007 a local government reform took place that brought about a radical restructure of the political and administrative map of Denmark. The former 14 counties were dissolved an5 new regions were created. Simultaneously the existing 271 local governments were merged into 98 new ones. In addition the new Danish planning system was changed in accordance with the OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) view of governance from a traditional top down approach to a more open, horizontal networking process. The figure below is excerpted from Governance in Regional Development Planning? Exploring the Danish Case (Galland, 2008) and outlines the reformed Danish planning system.

Figure 2. Denmark’s planning system after the reform of local governments 2007 (Galland, 2008).

Under this system most land use responsibilities and competencies are now under the control of the local governments and central government. As a result the local municipal governments are now in the process of linking local plans and developments to national level planning frameworks.

It is argued that this form of decentralised regional planning will ensure future spatial development of cities to small town regions that are sensitive to environmental, business, tourism, employment, education and cultural needs. In essence, planning and policy-making with respect to land use and spatial plans will be carried out via networks where central factors of governance rely heavily on deliberative, argumentative, and communicative approaches. Importantly this will significantly impact on the role of planners in a move away from authoritative and regulatory positions to ones of a more facilitating and process oriented nature. In conclusion, this change in land use planning towards overall strategic and deliberative regional spatial plan also reflects a shift towards a spatial planning framework that takes into account regional differences.


10

Audit of Design Manuals Overview This section investigates technical issues through an audit of design manuals.

Three manuals are reviewed:

• Creating Liveable Streets: Street Design Guidelines 2nd Edition (Portland)

• Context Sensitive Solutions in Designing Major Urban Thoroughfares for Walkable Communities (USA)

• Manual for Streets (UK)

The following technical areas are covered:

• Speed control on urban roads

• On-street parking standards

• Footpath location and widths

• Street trees standards

• Road widths

• Bus stop locations

• Urban kerb radius and channelised left turns

• Design of urban intersections (roundabouts, pedestrian and cyclist treatments).

There are three documents audited here. The first that will be audited is Creating Liveable Streets: Street Design Guidelines 2nd Edition. This design manual was developed by Oregon Metro in 2002 and is linked to the Portland 2040 Growth Project. The 2040 Growth Project directs most urban development toward mixed use, higher densities, and locations along major transport corridors. The purpose of the guideline document is to provide the Portland region with street design guidelines that support the goals outlined in the 2040 Growth Concept. The approach of this guideline document crosses the boundaries between traditional concepts of separate transport and land use planning frameworks by “linking the design of streets to multi-modal street function, community liveability, and economic vitality.” (Oregon Metro, 2002, pg. 1).

The second document audited here is Context Sensitive Solutions in Designing Major Urban Thoroughfares for Walkable Communities. This design manual was published by the Institute for Transport Engineers in 2005 and builds on the existing evidence of successful use of context sensitive solutions in the planning and design of major urban thoroughfares. The authors state that “CSS is the result of developing transportation projects that serve all users and are compatible with the surroundings through which they pass – the community and the environment.” (Institute for Transport Engineers, 2005, pg. 3). More specifically the CSS guidelines extend on other policies, guidelines, and standards used by state and local transportation and public works engineers and planners in the United States of America. These other publications include documents developed by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).

The third document that will be audited is the Manual for Streets. This document was published by the United Kingdom Department for Transport in 2007. This document supersedes Design Bulletin 32


11

and its companion Places, Streets, and Movement. The Manual for Streets compliments Planning Policy Guidance’s 6 (Town Centre Planning) and 13 (Transport Planning) of the Government of the United Kingdom. The Manual for Streets adopts the perspective that “Better-designed streets…contribute significantly to the quality of the built environment and play a key role in the creation of sustainable, inclusive, mixed communities.” (Department for Transport, 2007, pg. 11).

Speed Control on Urban Roads Creating Liveable Streets: Street Design Guidelines 2nd ed., Portland Metro, 2002

In this document speed control is limited to the posting of speed limits and fitting road widths to suit this. The perspective that speed can be controlled through design changes and vehicle friction with the urban environment is not adopted. With respect to Travel lane width it is stated that “Travel lane width is a function of the use of the lane, the type of vehicles served and the vehicle speed. Travel lane width is also determined by the locations of the travel lane within the travel way and the character of the adjacent land use the street is intended to serve. Outside curb lanes require a wider width to accommodate turning trucks and buses, and reduce the effect of adjacent obstructions such as parked vehicles.” (Portland Metro, 2002, pg 15).

Context Sensitive Solutions in Designing Major Urban Thoroughfares for Walkable Communities,

Institute for Transportation Engineers, 2005

The Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS) manual takes a slightly different approach to speed control on urban roads. The CSS guide uses target speed, design speed, and operating speed to frame the discussion around speed control. The target speed is defined as the speed at which vehicles should operate on a thoroughfare. This is usually the posted speed limit and is selected based on level of multi-modal activity generated by adjacent land uses. The design speed is defined as the speed, which governs certain geometric features of the thoroughfare, i.e. bends, elevation, and sightlines. The design speed is typically higher than the posted speed limit. This is thought to result in safety conservative values for design criteria. The operating speed is the speed at which drivers operate their vehicles.

In the past the design speed has been encouraged to be as high as is practical. The CSS recommends that the design speed become a function of the thoroughfare type and context (i.e., residential or commercial). Setting target speeds that are artificially below the design speed encourage operating speeds that are too high and are not enforceable. The CSS identifies the following design factors that contribute to speed reduction:

• Lanes of appropriate width, without excess;

• Minimal or no horizontal offset (gap) between inside travel lane and median curbs (assuming there is no pedestrian standing on the median);

• Elimination of superelevation (road camber);

• Elimination of shoulders in most urban applications;

• On-street parking;

• Smaller curb return radii at intersections and reconfiguration/removal of channelised right turns (left turns in Australia);

• Spacing of signalised intersections and synchronising to the desired speed;

• Paving materials with texture so that drivers can feel when approaching areas likely to have pedestrians;

• Proper use of speed limit, warning, advisory signs and other devices to gradually transition speeds when travelling though changing speed zones.


12

The CSS also lists the following:

• Canopy of street trees;

• Enclosure of thoroughfare by proximity to boundary walls of buildings;

• Striping of bicycle lanes

Lastly it is mentioned that designers should not relate speed to capacity in urban areas, avoiding the perception that high-capacity needs high design speeds. It is argued that intersection operations and delay can influence capacity in urban thoroughfares to a greater extent than speed. Capacity issues should be addressed with sound traffic operations management, such as coordinated signal timing, improved access management, removal of unwarranted signs, and the accommodation of turning traffic at intersections.

Manual for Streets, Department for Transport United Kingdom, 2007

Section 7.4 Achieving appropriate traffic speeds of the Manual for Streets outlines key points regarding speed control in urban environments:

• Designers should aim to create streets that naturally control vehicle speed rather than use traffic calming devices and generally speaking separate pedestrian/cycle routes away from motor traffic should only be considered as a last resort.

• In residential streets a maximum speed of 20mph (32kph) should normally be the objective due to lower injury incidents and intimidation of pedestrians and cyclists.

• Straight and uninterrupted links of road should be limited to around 70m to ensure that the arrangement has a natural traffic calming effect. Continuous links can be broken with:

o physical features involving horizontal and vertical deflection (other means are preferable);

o changes in priority at roundabouts and other junctions, this can be used to disrupt flow and bring overall speeds down;

o street dimensions can have impact i.e., short lengths between junctions and decreased carriageway width will impact to reduce speed;

o reduced visibility may also impact to reduce vehicle speed (although this also reduces pedestrian visibility);

o street features can impact on psychology and perception on driver behaviour, such as:

edge markings that visually narrow the road

removal of centre line markings

close proximity of buildings to the road

pedestrian refuges

on-street parking

types of land use, e.g. shopping

pedestrian activity


13

• Speed limits in urban areas are normally 30mph (48kph), however 20mph (32kph) are becoming common.

• In the UK a 20mph limit only has signage and may or may not have traffic calming devices. However, traffic-calming devices are a legal requirement in a 20mph zone.

• Any speed limits below 30mph (other than 20mph limits or zones) require individual consent from the Secretary of State for Transport. It is made clear that designers should be aware that approval is unlikely to be given.

• Speed limits are not an indication of appropriate operational speeds. It is stated here that “for new streets, or where existing streets are being modified, and the design speed is below the speed limit, it will be necessary to include measures that reduce traffic speeds accordingly.” (Manual for Streets, pg. 90).

On Street Parking Standards Creating Liveable Streets: Street Design Guidelines 2nd ed., Portland Metro, 2002

According to this document:

• The preferred on-street parking lane width for parallel parking is 7 feet (2.13m);

• Diagonal parking is to be avoided on heavily travelled streets.

• On street parking should be prohibited near cross walks, curb returns. Alternatives include extending the curb at the crossing point to equal the width of the on-street parking lane.

• Prohibit on-street parking where speeds are in excess of 45mph (72kph).

• At public transit stops, curbs should be extended to equal the width of the on-street parking, and provide additional space for level landing at curb ramps.



The CSS manual outlines several benefits of on street parking, these are:

• Proximate access to local uses and visitor needs in residential areas;

• Pedestrian comfort by acting as a buffer;

• Slows traffic, making crossings easier;

• Enables drivers and passengers to become pedestrians safely and easily;

• Increases pedestrian activity between cars and businesses, exposure to ground floor retail and social interactions;

• Increases economic activity by increasing visibility of stores and signs

• Supports local business by decreasing development costs of on-site parking needs;

• Provides space for on-street loading and unloading of trucks, and

• Provides an indication to the motorists that the desired operating speeds are reduced.

The CSS manual also outlines some general considerations with respect to on-street parking:


14

• Location of on-street parking needs to be based on characteristics of the urban thoroughfare, adjacent land uses and local policies.

• On-street parking should be primarily parallel parking. Angled parking may be used on low-speed, low-volume commercially oriented avenues and streets. On-street parking should be prohibited on streets with speeds above 35mph (56.3kph).

• Orientation of parking (angled or parallel) should be based on the desired volume and speed of the street, and the right of way width to accommodate the desired elements.

• Metered parking should be used to enforce time limits. Suggested time limits are between 30mins to 2hours in areas where high turn over is important to nearby businesses.

• In developing areas, on-street parking should be provided for planned future use rather than current use.

• On-street parking can reduce speeds by 3 to 30% depending on the number of lanes and frequency of parking manoeuvres.

Table 1 below is excerpted from the CSS manual and outlines the recommended parallel parking widths applicable to all context zones. The 8ft (2.4m) width is recommended in areas where turnover is higher (e.g., commercial), in lower turnover areas (e.g., residential) 7ft (2.1m) widths can be used.

Table 1. Recommended Parallel Parking Lane Widths (Institute for Transport Engineers, 2005, pg. 132).

The CSS also provides for angled parking on thoroughfares where there is sufficient space. However, as the sightlines for drivers are reduced when reversing into traffic it is suggested that reverse angle (back in) parking be used as it is safer for cyclists and other drivers using the thoroughfare. The CSS manual is quite specific on the minimum dimensions for angled on-street parking, an excerpt from the manual is presented in Table 2 below. It is important to note here that as the angle becomes more perpendicular to the curb, the wider the adjacent lane needs to become. Therefore keeping the angle as low as possible will be more beneficial to the allocation of space in the planning of the thoroughfare.


15

Table 2. Minimum Dimensions for Angled On-Street Parking (Institute for Transport Engineers, 2005, pg. 133).

Some other design considerations are presented in the CSS with respect to on-street parking:

• On-street parking can be made available during off-peak times if issues around traffic capacity are of concern;

• Angled parking should be allowed in areas where speeds are below 35mph (56.3kph) and manoeuvring delays are acceptable;

• Provide a minimum 1.5ft wide operational offset between the face of the curb and footpath/sidewalk obstructions to allow for opening of car doors;

• Parking should be prohibited within 20ft (6.1m) of either side of a fire hydrant, 20ft (6.1m) to 50ft (15.2m) of mid block crosswalks and at least 20ft (6.1m) from the curb return of the intersection, and 30ft (9.1m) from a signalised intersection;

• At bus stops, intersections and mid block crossings extend the footpath at least 6ft (1.8m) into the parking lane to improve pedestrian visibility;

• The extra width of overhang needed in reverse-in angled parking can be compensated for by the narrow travel lane needed adjacent to parking for manoeuvring.


The Manual for Streets (MFS) does not specify parking lane widths, car park space sizes or angle parking. The focus of this section of the MFS documents is around the purpose and suggested contexts for the inclusion of on-street parking and in this respect the MFS is useful. The MFS begins by making several suggestions regarding on street parking:

• The preference is for discrete parking bays adjacent to the running lane;

• That some parking demand in residential and mixed use areas is met by on-street parking;

• Break up the visual impact by limiting on-street parking to groups of five bays separated by build-outs, street furniture, or tree planting;

• When planning for expected levels of car parking it is not always necessary to construct on-site parking. It can be appropriate to cater for all demand on-street (e.g., infill development);

• Where regulated on-street parking is provided, it is important to note that it cannot be allocated to individual dwellings but can be reserved for particular users (e.g., disabled people);

The MFS also outlines positive effects of on-street parking;


16

• Efficiently caters for resident, visitor and service vehicles;

• Caters for peak demands from different users at different times of day;

• Increases street activity;

• On-street parking is well looked over from nearby structures, improving security;

• It’s popular and likely to be well used;

• Can provide a buffer between pedestrians and vehicles;

• Can allow the creation of areas within perimeter blocks that are free of cars.

Although, not mentioned here but is covered in other sources is the potential traffic slowing effects of on street parking in highly urbanised areas. The MFS also lists potential negative effects of on-street parking:

• Potential safety issues when traffic speeds exceed 20mph (32.2kph) and no provisions for pedestrian crossings have been made;

• Can become visually dominant and undermine the character of a streetscape;

• Could lead to footway parking unless adequate provision is made in the street for parked vehicles;

• Indiscriminate parking can block vehicular access to dwellings;

• On-street parking can be more vulnerable to opportunistic crime unless passive surveillance occurs.

Lastly, at a design level the MFS also outlines some points for traffic engineers to take into account:

• Overall level of car ownership in the immediate area;

• The existing amount of off-street and allocated parking;

• Speed and volume of existing traffic;

• Width and geometry of the street and its junctions;

• Line or textured surface demarcation of spaces will encourage good parking behaviour.


17

Footpath Location and Widths Creating Liveable Streets: Street Design Guidelines 2nd ed., Portland Metro, 2002

There are some general considerations outlined in Creating Liveable Streets:

• An active pedestrian environment is vital to the function of a regional street with commercial areas

• Provide adequate width for all sidewalk uses including on street parking, walking traffic, window shopping traffic, bike parking, and street furniture. The sidewalk is treated as a corridor with separate functional clearances and is outlined in a separate table re-presented in Table 3. The point is made that sidewalks greater than 10ft (3.0m) accommodate more intensive pedestrian traffic and mixed use by local merchants.

• Provide pedestrian scale lighting and a spatial definition that is human scale.

• Consider special paving treatment to delineate pedestrian from vehicle realms.

• Provide continuous sidewalk improvements on major arteries, close gaps in pedestrian connections.

• Provide pedestrian improvements on all new and redevelopment street projects.

• Provide special pedestrian features on transit streets, such as furniture, bus shelters, marked crossings, wider sidewalks.


18

Sidewalk widths in Feet Sidewalk Function Minimum

Width Range 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Pedestrian path clearance from building wall 1’6”

Open car door clearance from curb 1’-6” to 2’-0”

Pedestrian path clearance from street trees 1’-6”

Single pedestrian through traffic 1’-10” to 3’-0”

Bus traffic curbside clearance for street furniture 2’-0”

Street furniture zone 2’-0” to 3’-0”

Wheelchair movement clear width 2’-8” to 3’-0”

Window shopping zone width from storefront 3’-0”

Clear distance width between bus bench and curb 3’-0”

Planting strip width for trees 3’-0” to 4’-6”

Clear distance between bus shelter and curb 3’-0” to 4’-6”

Two-way pedestrian through traffic 3’-8” to 4’-0”

Minimum ADA sidewalk (5’-0” wide required every 200’) 4’-0”

Practical ADA sidewalk (wheelchair turning circle) 5’-0”

Bus zone with bench width 5’-0”

Bus zone with bus shelter 7’-8”

Minimum ADA bus drop-off clear zone 8’-0”

Table 3. Minimum sidewalk functional clearances. (Portland Metro, 2002, pg. 31).

Creating Liveable Streets also presents a set of design guidelines for sidewalks, these are outlined below:

• Provide a minimum 5ft (1.50m) clear zone along sidewalks conforming to ADA minimum passing distance for a wheelchair. ADA requires wheelchair passing spaces be no more than 200ft (60m) away from each other.

• In commercial areas the preferred width is 12-15ft (3.65-4.50m), the minimum is 8ft (2.43m).

• Sidewalks of greater that 12ft (3.65m) provide space for pedestrian amenities, business to utilise sidewalk space, and for vehicle traffic not to dominate the pedestrian realm.

• Sidewalks must always be continuous, when work is being carried out temporary asphalt sidewalks should be used.

• On rural roads the preferred width for a paved shoulder is 6ft (1.82m), the minimum is 4ft (1.21m) on an open shoulder, and 5ft (1.5m) if a guard rail is in place.

• Ensure the minimum sidewalk width for pedestrian through traffic is not obscured by street furniture, utility poles, traffic signs or trees.


19

• Avoid combining pedestrian and cycle paths unless specified as a multi-use path separated from the street with a 12ft (3.65m) gap.



The CSS Manual outlines some general principles concerning roadside (footpath) widths:

• Roadside zones should be clearly defined such that the pedestrian throughway is identifiable;

• Sidewalks should be provided on both sides of the street in urban contexts. It is only in unusual circumstances where it is appropriate to have a footpath on only one side of the street (e.g., canals, steep vertical walls, rail roads).

• Crossings of driveways, alleys, etc should maintain the elevation of the sidewalk and should contain special materials (e.g., colours, textures) to alert drivers that they are crossing a pedestrian zone.

• Utilities should not interfere with pedestrian movement, building entrances, curb cuts, or sight distances.

• Space requirements for public transport (e.g., bus stops) should be included in the design of the roadway and outside of the pedestrian clearway.

• Footpaths must provide convenient access to buildings and public transport stops.

• Designers should consult with utility providers regarding the locations of poles, lights, grates, and manholes.

• Footpaths should be as straight and direct as possible, other than to avoid mature trees and immovable obstacles.

With respect to the pedestrian throughway principles the CSS Manual raises the following points for consideration:

• The clear pedestrian throughway zone should be clear of any obstacles and provide a smooth walking surface.

• The width of the walkway should vary by land use; the minimum recommendation is 5ft in constrained residential areas, 6ft in constrained commercial areas. For higher pedestrian traffic areas the width increases to 10ft. Should the provision of transit facilities be needed the width increases again. The specific widths outlined in the CSS Manual are presented in a table. This has been presented in Table 4.


20

Table 4. Recommended Roadside Zone Dimensions (Institute for Transport Engineers, 2005, pg. 107).


21


The MfS under section 6.3.22 pg 68 states that there is no maximum width for footways and refers to another guideline document called Inclusive Mobility (Department for Transport UK, 2005). Inclusive Mobility outlines the ideal and minimum widths for footpaths and pedestrian areas, these are summarised below:

• The ideal width is 2.0m and should be considered the minimum under normal circumstances. Under constrained circumstances the minimum can be reduced to 1.5m. If an obstacle is present then the passing width can be reduced to a minimum of 1.0m. If obstacles are frequent they should be placed regularly and logically to assist sight impaired persons.

• The minimum recommended width at bus stops is 3.0m and 3.5 to 4.5m in commercial areas.

• If a cycle track runs along a footpath it should be physically segregated, if this is not possible use tactile and colour separation to assist the visually impaired. The demarcation line between the cycle and foot path should be in a contrasting colour and raised 12-20mm high with a base width of 150mm and top width of 50mm.

The MfS also makes a statement that footway widths can vary dependent on nearby land uses and pedestrian volumes. In areas of high pedestrian activity larger footpath widths will be necessary otherwise the pedestrian experience will deteriorate and will encourage pedestrians to step onto the carriageway.

Street Trees Standards It should be noted at the outset that tree varieties differ between countries. Therefore design guidelines are limited to trees that are used in each of the cities investigated. In Australia, native species of trees should take preference over introduced species, as they are more drought resistant and able to tolerate Australian climates.

Creating Liveable Streets: Street Design Guidelines 2nd ed., Portland Metro, 2002

The design guidelines regarding street trees state that the preferred tree wells with tree grates is 5ft x 5ft (1.5m x 1.5m), in a constrained location this can be reduced to 3ft x 3ft (90cm x 90cm). Depending on the species (predominantly North American, European) trees can be spaced from 12ft (3.6m) to 25ft (7.6m) apart depending on size of canopy. Trees can be planted in the on-street parking lanes to delineate spaces, a minimum 1-2ft (30-60cm) gap is needed between tree and curb to allow for drainage. It is mentioned within this guideline that canopies should be maintained high at the intersection or end prior to the intersection to allow for traffic control devices and clear lines of sight. Good maintenance of trees is essential to maintain lines of sight for all road users. Relative distances of frangible and non-frangible trees are not addressed in this document.

Context Sensitive Solutions in Designing Major Urban Thoroughfares for Walkable

Communities, Institute for Transportation Engineers, 2005

The CSS manual opens the section on street landscaping by reinforcing the benefits of good street tree planting including aesthetic, comfort, and safety for pedestrians. Other benefits can include reducing urban heat island effects, and absorption of CO2 gas emissions. The CSS manual presents some guiding principles for the location of street trees:

• Sight distance must always be maintained therefore plantings should not be within 50ft from the end of median strips and if on street corners should be clear of foliage to a height of at least 13ft.


22

• Spacing can vary between 15ft to 30ft depending on the canopy size of the tree. Trees can be planted such that the trunk is a minimum of 18in from the curb and a minimum height clear of foliage to at least 13ft of the road surface.

• Tree plantings in more urbanised areas need to be covered by grates to maximise the surface area for pedestrian movement. Branches and foliage should also not be within 6ft of the footpath surface to allow adequate movement of pedestrians.


The MfS gives a brief outline of street tree placement in urban areas:

• Trees to be sited in or close to pedestrian movement corridors need to be carefully selected and positioned so that their spread does not interfere with pedestrian movement and allow a minimum clearance between footway and foliage of 2.6m. This is because potentially low hanging foliage or branches can be particularly hazardous to visually impaired people.

Road Widths Creating Liveable Streets: Street Design Guidelines 2nd ed., Portland Metro, 2002

It is recommended that travel lane width be selected based on the land use and functional classification given to the street. The travel lane size varies from 10ft (3m) to 14ft (4.2m) with high speed, lager volume travel lanes being wider.

A more in-depth description of road width is covered under Chapter 4 Predominant Regional Street Design Types. They are presented under the categories of throughways, boulevards, streets, and roads. The sizes refer to the right of way distance. This is the total carriage way width including footpaths, medians, bike lanes, travel lanes and on-street parking. The road types will differ in their respective mix of these facilities (i.e., there is no on-street parking on freeway).

Throughways which include two types; freeways and highways, are essentially a no-go zone for non-motorised transport and are only used to connect major centres/cities. The right of way distance for a freeway is 135ft (40m), and for a highway 114ft (35m). The term ‘highway’ as used in Western Australia covers the above definition (e.g., Tonkin Hwy, Reid Hwy) and the below definition of boulevards (e.g., Stirling Hwy, the metropolitan sections of Albany Hwy and Great Eastern Hwy).

Boulevards are separated into regional, double median (Parisian), and community boulevards. Right of way distances for a regional boulevard are 80-120ft (24-36m), for a double median are 100-132ft (30-40m), and for a community boulevard are 61-98ft (18-30m).

Streets are separated into regional streets, community streets and one-way couplets. Right of way distances for a regional street are 80-100ft (24-30m), for a community street are 60-80ft (18-24m), and for a one-way couplet the distance is 60ft (18m).

Roads are defined as either urban or rural. The right of way distance for an urban road is 90ft (27m), and for a rural road is 63ft (19m) for two lanes or 83ft (25m) for four lanes.



The CSS manual outlines some general considerations with respect to road widths:

• Reducing lane width to accommodate pedestrian, cycling, and public transport design elements into the available right of way demonstrates a priority towards accessible design.


23

• A minimum lane width of 10ft may be used for low speed travel lanes (operating speeds of 25-30 mph).

• Where lanes are to be of an uneven width, the outside lane should be the wider to accommodate cyclists.

• Avoid combining minimum width dimensions for all elements in the right of way design (i.e., minimum footpath, cycle path, parking, and lane widths should be avoided).

• It is recommended that a lane width of 11ft is appropriate for most circumstances although they can be as low as 10ft or as wide as 12ft (although 12ft widths should only be used if the desired operational speed is above 40mph).

• Streets that will have high volumes of buses and trucks will need to be at least 11ft. They could possibly need to be as large as 13-15ft but only for short distances to allow buses and trucks to negotiate left turns in their own lane on highly trafficked roads.

• If a wide curb lane is necessary consider reducing the median width or inside travel lane width to maintain shorter pedestrian crossing distances.

• Consider wider lanes on horizontal curves to accommodate for vehicle off tracking.

• Turn lanes of 10-11ft are appropriate for most vehicles.

• Wider travel lanes have only a small increase on overall traffic capacity, other better management techniques include signal synchronisation and access management.

• Consider converting two parallel lanes into a pair of one-way streets to increase capacity.


The MfS gives a short summary regarding the width of travelled lanes and lists several factors that should be considered when deciding the lane width:

• Volume of vehicular traffic and pedestrian activity;

• Composition of traffic;

• Demarcation (if any) between carriageway and footway;

• Whether parking is to take place in the carriageway, and if so, it’s distribution, frequency of occupation and enforcement;

• Design speed (20mph or less in residential areas);

• Curvature of the street (bends need to be larger if frequently used by larger vehicles);

• Any intentions to include one-way streets or short sections of single lanes in two-way streets.


24

Bus Stop Locations Creating Liveable Streets: Street Design Guidelines 2nd ed., Portland Metro, 2002

The design guidelines suggest that:

• Bus shelters should be oriented to provide easy access from the adjoining pedestrian network and boarding/de-boarding area.

• Bus stops should be placed on regional streets based on demand, or at intervals of approximately 1/8 to 1/4 mile (200-400m) in areas of higher intensity land use. In central business districts bus stops are spaced 600-900ft (182-274m).

• The minimum bus stop width is 10ft (3m). The guidelines also suggest that pedestrian crossings should be provided at all transit stops using striped crosswalks, pedestrian refuges, and/or curb extensions as appropriate.

• On high-capacity, frequent, and express routes, buses should be given priority over personal motor vehicles.

• It is important that passenger waiting areas (mostly bus shelters) do not interfere with footpaths or cycle paths. Secure bicycle parking should be available at all major transit stations.

• The preferred distance between street furniture and a bus stop is 6ft (1.8m).

• The preferred distance between the bus stop and curb is 6ft (1.8m) when the shelter faces the street. If facing the other way this distance may be less, about 2.5ft (0.70m).

• The minimum ADA (American Disability Act) requires a bus drop off zone is 5ft (1.5m) by 8ft (2.5m). The minimum width of a passenger waiting area with a bench is 5ft (1.5m), or with a shelter 7.5ft (2.2m).



The CSS delineates between mid block bus stops and bus stops at intersections. Regarding the placement of mid block bus stops the CSS lists some issues for consideration:

• Bus routing, turning, obstructions, furnishings, location of patron transit guide ways and available space for transit infrastructure all need to be considered when placing bus stops;

• Stops should be located based on population density and major trip generators;

• Stops should be clearly marked;

• Bus stop zones need adequate parking restrictions to allow unimpeded access for buses;

• Pedestrians must be able to access bus stops and cross the street to get to them;

• Bus stop boarding areas need to have a firm level surface to allow boarding and alighting of passenger with special needs;

• Stops should be located in areas with minimal above grade obstacles (powerlines, poles, utility boxes);


25

• Stops should be located to minimise difficulties with changing lanes and manoeuvres of other vehicles. If buses can not stop in traffic a pullout is preferred;

• When locating a stop near a driveway issues around sight distance and vehicle access need to be addressed.

The CSS also lists some elements that need to be addressed in the placement of a bus stop:

• Presence of sidewalks, crosswalks, and curb ramps;

• Nearby crossings (mid block or intersection);

• Connection to the pedestrian network;

• Access for people with disabilities;

• Passenger transfer to other routes;

• Effects on adjacent property owners.

The CSS outlines the traffic and user safety elements that also need to be considered:

• Conflict between buses, vehicles, and pedestrians;

• Passenger protection from traffic;

• Width of sidewalks;

• Width of furnishing zones and obstructions;

• Pedestrian activity;

• Non-slip surfacing at stops;

• Passive surveillance;

• Street illumination.

The CSS also covers bus operation elements that will impact on the placement of stops:

• Accessibility and availability of convenient curb space;

• Adequate space for the number of buses using a stop at any one time;

• On-street car parking and service vehicle zones;

• Traffic control devices near bus stop;

• Volumes and turning movement of other vehicles (including bicycles);

• Proximity and traffic volumes of nearby driveways;

• Street grade;

• Ease of re-entering traffic;

• Proximity to rail crossings.


26

Based on the context the CSS manual also gives some guidance regarding the spacing of bus stops:

• Bus stops should be provided at major generators (e.g., employment centres, high density residential, retail, education, and medical centres);

• Provide bus stops at transfer points;

• Provide spacing between stops as follows:

o Urban centre and urban core: a maximum 500ft

o General urban area with more than 5,000 people per square mile (1931 people per square kilometre): 750 to 900ft

o Suburban with 3,500-5,000 people per square mile (1351-1931 people per square kilometre): 900 to 1,300ft

The CSS manual breaks down bus stop design points into parking restriction, bus turnouts, turnout design, passenger boarding areas, and passenger security. For the sake of brevity only the passenger boarding area will be reviewed in detail.

Parking Restrictions at Bus Stops

• No Parking signage must be present and enforced;

• Minimum 60ft (18.28m) long bus stops (per bus if more than one using the stop at any one time) with an additional 40ft (12.19m or approximately two car spaces) of no parking at either end.

Bus Turnouts

Bus turnouts should only be used under certain conditions due to the delay created when re-entering traffic. These conditions are where:

• Speeds exceed 40mph;

• Peak period dwell time exceeds 30secs;

• A high frequency of pedestrian and/or bus accidents

• When traffic in the curb lane exceeds 250 vehicles per hour or bus volumes exceed 10 or more per peak hour.

Bus Turnout Design

On high speed urban or rural thoroughfares the use of extended bus turnout designs may be needed. The turnout design will consist of an entrance taper of 40-60ft, a stopping area of 50-70ft and an exit taper of 40-60ft. When deceleration and acceleration zones are included the overall distance can get as high as 500ft. As this reduces the available right of way space careful consideration is needed before opting for this type of design.

Passenger Boarding Areas

The CSS has outlined the ADA (American Disabilities Act) specifications for bus stop design and promotes this as the minimum requirements:

• Front door clearance of 5ft wide by 8ft deep (from face of curb to the back of boarding area);


27

• Rear door clearance of 8ft wide by 10ft deep (from face of curb to the back of boarding area);

• Distance between front and rear boarding area is 18ft;

• Surface material is stable, slip resistant;

• Slope does not exceed 5%;

• Cross slope does not exceed 2%;

• Clear throughway width of 48in maintained in the boarding area;

• Vertical clearance of 84in maintained in boarding area.

The following elements outlined in the CSS are minimum standards that should be included for passenger safety and comfort:

• In road sides with detached sidewalks:

o Provide a landing area 34ft in length and 8ft in depth (from curb face); and

o Provide a connecting pathway from pedestrian throughway to the landing area;

• Provide convenient pedestrian pathways/access ways to and from adjacent buildings;

• Locate stops so drivers have a clear view of waiting passengers and vice versa;

• Driveways should be kept to a minimum adjacent to the stop area;

• Street furniture more than 2.5ft tall should be kept away from nearby driveways;

• Passenger boarding areas must have smooth broom-finished surface and have high strength capacity to bear weight of a bus shelter. Slope of pad should match footpath and meet ADA requirements;

• Landscaping should be placed far enough back so as not to interfere with the bus, nor should it obscure sight lines. Shade trees are desirable and should be located at the back of the sidewalk;

• Maintain at least 5ft clearance between bus atop components and fire hydrants;

• Locate stops where there exists a standard curb in good condition, absent or damaged curbs make access difficult for physically impaired people;

• All street furniture should be surrounded by at least 48in of horizontal clearance for access and maintenance;

• There should be at least 10ft clearance pedestrian crosswalks and front or rear of a bus stop;

• Avoid placing a stop such that the bus wheels sit on a catch basin as this causes the bus to lurch and structural damage to the basin.


28

Passenger Security

The CSS also outlines some measures to improve pedestrian security at bus stops:

• Stops should be located such that lighting is present within 2-5ft of the stop area;

• Ensure adjacent shrubbery is low and hedges are not too thick;

• Ensure clear visibility of, through, and around the bus stop for passenger and law enforcement surveillance;

• Ensure pedestrian circulation routes near stops are not blocked by nearby walls or structures;

• Avoid placing stops near corners or edges of buildings that create blind spots;

• Do not separate stops from adjacent land uses with sound walls or high fences, if this has occurred a pedestrian path in the wall or fence can be created;

• If possible provide a public or emergency telephone or place stop near one of these;

• Provide secure bicycle parking and maintain proper clearance when bicycles are parked;

• Provide multiple exist from bus shelters;

• Regularly remove all evidence of vandalism, keep stops well maintained and in good repair.

The CSS manual also raises the issue of locating bus stops at intersections as this is the preferred option as opposed to a mid block stop. Stops can be either near side (before the intersection) or far-side (after the intersection). Considerations when locating stops at intersections include:

• Consider nearside stop on dual carriageway where vehicles will not pass a stopped bus;

• Consider a far-side stops on multiple lane carriage ways where vehicles may pass uncontrolled around the bus;

• At light controlled intersection the bus can stop either near or far side;

• In situations where a bus pullout is warranted consider either a far-side or mid block stop;

• Consider conflict issues when locating bus stops near driveways.

With respect to the placement of the stop at the intersection the following should be considered:

• When the route requires the bus to turn left (right) the stop should be on the far side, if it is unfeasible to have a stop at this point then it should be moved mid block;

• If there is a high volume of right (left) turns at an intersection or where the bus is turning right (left) locate the stop on the far side;

• In circumstances where a large number of buses gather at one stop and can run across the intersection, the stop should be located on the nearside;

• At intersections with complex dual left and right turn lanes a far side stop is preferred;


29

• When there is substantial transfer of activity between stops on separate routes locating one on the far side and one on the nearside allows better control of pedestrian activity at the intersection.

Curb extensions may be necessary along streets that have on-street parking. The placement of the extension should follow the previously stated guidelines above. The extensions should be a minimum of 6ft wide and long enough to allow passengers to use the front and rear doors of the bus. The extensions at intersections can also have the added bonus of reducing pedestrian crossing distances, make pedestrians more visible and can provide space for passenger amenities such as shelters and benches. In situations where a curb extension would create too much bus/traffic conflict a far side pullout can be created in the parking lane.

Queue jumpers give buses priority along major streets by allowing the bus to bypass traffic queued at congested intersections. Queue jumpers consist of a near side right (left) turn lane and a far side bus stop and/or acceleration lane. Buses are allowed to go straight at the right (left) turn lane and access the stop on the other side. They then renter traffic when the light has gone red and there is a break in the traffic at the rear.


The MfS outlines some of the key points to consider in relation to the location and design of bus stops, these are:

• Co-operation between public transport operators, local authorities, and developers is essential as the siting of stops and related pedestrian lines of travel are easier to establish at early stages of development.

• The siting of stops should be based on trying to ensure they can be accessed by pedestrians. There precise location will also need to take into account:

o Noise nuisance

o Visibility

o Convenience to pedestrians and cyclists

o Access by people with disabilities

• Stops should be placed near junctions so that they maybe accessed by more than one route or near major destinations. Setting back stops from junctions to maximise capacity should be avoided.

• Bus stops should be high quality places that are safe and comfortable to use. Consider having cycle parking at bus stops (provided it won’t interfere with pedestrian movement and access for disable people to the bus stop).

• Footpaths at the bus stop should be wide enough for waiting passengers while allowing pedestrians to pass (this may require widening of footpaths at the bus stop).

• Buses can also help reduce the speed of traffic and prevent cars from overtaking thus increasing the safety for pedestrians.

Urban Kerb Radius and Channelised Left Turns Creating Liveable Streets: Street Design Guidelines 2nd ed., Portland Metro, 2002

The design guidelines imply that curb return radii should be designed to shorten pedestrian crossing width, while still being able to accommodate bus and freight movement where deemed necessary. In areas of high pedestrian traffic curb extensions should be provided to


30

reduce crossing width. On a typical urban intersection a 10-25ft (3-7.6m) maximum radius is sufficient. In areas servicing regular truck and bus movements, a 40ft (12m) radius may be necessary. The guidelines also make a specific mention to “Avoid design of channelized right-turn islands (left turn in Australia) (pork chop design).” (Portland Metro, 2002, pg26). However, this guideline can be made exempt in areas of extremely low pedestrian volume and a high volume of large vehicles, e.g. industrial areas.



The CSS manual outlines some general point to consider in respect to curb return radii, these are:

• Curb return radii should be designed to accommodate the largest vehicle size frequently turn the corner. This principle assumes that the occasional larger vehicle (truck or bus) can encroach into the opposing lane.

• Curb return radii should be designed to reflect the effective turning radius of the corner. The effective turning radius takes into account the wheel tracking of the design vehicle utilising the width of cycle lanes, parking lanes. This allows for a smaller curb return radii but also accommodates larger vehicles.

• In areas where pedestrian activity is more intensive, curb return radii should be as small as possible.

• On multilane thoroughfares, larger vehicles may encroach entirely into other travel lanes.

• To help select a design vehicle identify the following:

• Location of bus routes

• Location of future transit routes

• Map existing and future land uses to evaluate potential truck trips

• Curb return radii of different lengths can be used on different corners of the same intersection to match the size of the vehicles that regularly turn there.

• If large vehicles are going to turn regularly and encroach onto an opposing lane consider setting the stop sign for opposing traffic further back from the intersection.

From a practical perspective the CSS manual states that flexibility in the design of curb radii is dependent upon three key factors:

• Choice of design vehicle

• Combination of dimensions that make up the width of the approaching and receiving lanes

• Curb return radius itself

The designer essentially has to balance the needs of frequent vehicles, infrequently larger vehicles that results in an intersection crossing width reasonable for pedestrians. Some practices that are recommended to help achieve this are:

• In urban centres at intersections with no vehicle returns the minimum curb radius should be 5ft.


31

• A typical curb return radius of 10 to 15ft should be used where:

o High pedestrian volumes are present or anticipated;

o Volumes of turning vehicles are low;

o Width of the receiving lane can accommodate a turning vehicle without it encroaching into the opposing lane;

o Passenger vehicles are the most frequent;

o Bicycle and parking lanes create additional space;

o Low turning speeds are required or desired;

o Occasional encroachment of larger vehicles into the opposing lane is acceptable;

• Curb return radii will need to be larger where:

o Occasional encroachment of larger vehicles is unacceptable;

o Curb extensions are proposed or might be added in the future;

o Receiving thoroughfare does not have bicycle or parking lanes and is less that 12ft in width.

The CSS Manual also outlines design points for channelised right turns (left turns in Australia) and points out that unless careful thought has gone into the design they will have a detrimental impact on pedestrian activity. The general considerations outlined in the CSS Manual with respect to channelised right turns are:

• Avoid using channelised right turns where pedestrian activity is high. If it is absolutely necessary always design in favour of pedestrians.

• A volume of 200-300 vehicles per hour should be the acceptable range for the provision of right turn lanes. Once the right turn lane is deemed necessary the channelised island should be design in favour of pedestrians.

• The right turn lane should be designed for speeds between 5-10mph and high pedestrian visibility;

• For signalised intersections it is ideal for pedestrians to cross fully under signal control.

• Consider channelised right turns at complex multilane intersections to assist pedestrians to negotiate crossing. Ensure wait periods on channel islands are pedestrian friendly.

The CSS also recommends the following with respect to channelised right turns:

• The provision of a channelised right turn lane is only appropriate where right turning volumes are high or where large vehicles frequently turn and pedestrian volumes are low.

• Where channelised right turn crossings already exist and pedestrian volumes are high, signals should be installed at the right turn lane crossings to allow pedestrians to negotiate each leg separately.

• Removing channelised right turn lanes makes in possible to use signing such as No Turn on Red, turn prohibition signs, or exclusive pedestrian signal phases.


32

• If a channelised right turn is justified and all other options have been considered and rejected the following design features should be incorporated:

o Low angle right turn (112 degrees);

o Locate crosswalks so that drivers have a clear view of pedestrians;

o The crossing point should be well illuminated and not located close to give way signs where drivers will be looking for pedestrians;

o Ensure islands are accessible and of sufficient size (150sq ft) such that pedestrians are a minimum of 4ft from the curb face in all directions. The island has to be large enough to accommodate curb ramps or channels cut through the island flush with the road surface;

o Unless the right turn lane is used frequently by large vehicles it should be no larger than 16ft and have painted edges to restrict the turn radii of smaller vehicles into a 12ft wide space to slow their speeds.

o Reminder signs to drivers that they must give way to pedestrians are likely to be needed in the right turn lanes;

o Signalisation may be necessary when there is/are multiple right turn lanes, something inherently unsafe about the unsignalised crossing, or high pedestrian/vehicle accidents.


The MfS briefly outlines some key points in relation to curb return radii:

• With respect to small corner radii, larger vehicles may need to use the full carriage way width to complete the turn. A swept path analysis can be used to determine minimum dimensions and the footpath may need to be strengthened to accommodate the large vehicle weight.

• Large curb radii can be used without interrupting the pedestrian line of travel if the footway is built out at the corners. If large radii cause excessive speeds consider lifting the road way surface at the intersection so it is level with the footpath.

• It is recommended that intersections are designed to promote slow vehicle speeds, this may include small corner radii or raising the road way.

• Bus routes in residential areas are likely to need a more generous swept path, while encroaching is acceptable for trucks it may not be so for buses. The amount of space provided should consider the frequency of buses and the likelihood of buses coming from opposite directions.

Design of Urban Intersections Creating Liveable Streets: Street Design Guidelines 2nd ed., Portland Metro, 2002

• Under Creating Liveable Streets there are some general points are made for designers to consider:

• Intersections need to accommodate appropriate level of service, speed and mix of traffic.

• Avoid elimination of any one travel mode at and intersection.

• Raised medians should extend into the intersection the same distance as the curb return.


33

• The preferred location for pedestrian crossings is at intersections.

• Capacity improvement (i.e. adding more lanes) can be at the expense of pedestrian waiting times and activity, bicycle use, and on street parking. Other strategies should be considered before increasing the number of lanes beyond three in each direction.

• Support intersection design that reduces right of way needs.

• Consolidate multiple driveways into single intersections (not sure what they are trying to get at here, there is no example given).

• Integrate access management policies into functional classifications and design standards (again, not sure what this means but this may relate to the point made above, there is no example given).

• Consider roundabouts as a possible design solution to address intersection delay (this may be at the expense of pedestrian movement if roundabouts are large and traffic speeds are high).

• Consider U-turns when retrofitting regional streets to allow a median (again not sure of the logic behind this statement, no example given).

Pedestrian guidelines under Creating Liveable Streets are presented below:

• Pedestrians can legally cross the street at any intersection whether a striped crosswalk or not. The pedestrian guidelines emphasise crossing with striped crosswalks.

• Set pedestrian crossing times at signalised intersections for 3.5ft (1.0m) per second.

• Stripe crosswalks should be placed at all signalised intersections.

• Stripe crosswalks at all intersections (no matter what type) near schools.

• Provide pedestrian pushbuttons at all signalised intersections and in high volume locations provide a walk phase every cycle.

• Provide pedestrian pushbuttons on median refuges at signalised intersections.

• Consider special paving treatments for crosswalks (colour, brick type) to remind motorists they are sharing the street with pedestrians.

• Provide ADA compliant wheelchair ramps (2 per corner) at all intersections.

• Avoid striping crosswalks at unsignalised intersections with inadequate sight distances. If possible, make changes to improve sight distance, or direct pedestrians to a safer route.

• In general provide striped crosswalks at stop controlled intersections when the maximum pedestrian crossing volume (for a peak of 4 hrs) exceeds 25 per hour when average daily traffic meets with guidelines specified in three reference documents:

o R.L Knoblauch; Investigation of Exposure Based Pedestrian Accident Areas: Crosswalks, sidewalks, local streets, and major arterials; Pub No. FHWA/RD 88/038, Sept 1988.

o Synthesis of safety research related to traffic control and roadway elements; Vol 2; U.S. Dept of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration; Pub No. FHWA-TS-82-233, Dec 1982.


34

o Median Intersection Design; Report 375, National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board.

• When the crossing is used by high numbers of children or elderly pedestrians the crossing volume decreases to 10 per hour.

• Avoid intersections with double left or right turn lanes, particularly when one is a shared through lane (e.g. Thomas street heading north turning into King’s park road heading east).

• If the median extends into the crosswalk (creating a pedestrian refuge) it needs to be ADA compliant.

• Reduce width at intersections by providing curb extensions equal to the width of the parking lane (but not interfering with cycle lanes) or reduce curb radius to the minimum stated under the curb return radius section. This is not necessary in narrow lane streets and not advisable at intersections with exclusive right turn lanes (in Australia left turn lanes), or areas with high volumes of large trucks turning right (in Australia left).

• Provide enough illumination to light all four corners of an intersection.

• Avoid placement of crosswalks on the right hand side (left in Australia) of unsignalised ‘T’ intersections (where pedestrians cross in front of left turns [right in Australia] from major streets), this is to minimise pedestrian/vehicle conflict.

Bicycle lane guidelines under Creating Liveable Streets are presented below:

• Bike lanes should extend up to intersection stop lines, or cross walks. Where the cycle lane right of way ends, mark the ending or use alternative colour to delineate the missing portion of the lane through the intersection.

• At intersections with exclusive right turn lanes (left turn lane in Australia), transition the bike lane to the left (right in Australia) of the right turn lane (left turn lane in Australia). If bike lane right of way ends, mark this as stated earlier.

• Avoid intersections with dual right turn lanes (left turn lanes in Australia), particularly when one of these is a shared through lane. These can be difficult for cyclists to negotiate.

• Install bicycle loop detectors at intersections with loop detectors, mark the location of the detector so cyclists can activate it. Alternatively provide additional pedestrian pushbuttons within reach of the cyclist.

• Provide a bike clearance at intervals at signalised intersections to accommodate a 10mph (16kph) crossing.



The CSS outlines recommendations for the design of roundabouts, pedestrian treatment and bicycle lanes at intersections. With respect to roundabouts the CSS lists a number of general principles to consider:

• The purpose should be to provide vehicles with free-flow capability through the intersection at reduced speeds to enhance pedestrian and cyclist safety.


35

• Roundabouts are not always appropriate, consideration should be given to:

o Type of design vehicles;

o Use by disabled and visually impaired persons; and

o Effects on pedestrian route directness

• The roundabout should be designed to reduce the relative speeds between conflicting traffic streams to improve pedestrian safety (stationary vehicles are slower than moving vehicles).

• Four way intersections and streets that meet at odd angles can be good candidates for roundabouts.

• Pedestrian crossings should be located approximately 25ft from the roundabout entry point.

• Bicyclists can be either integrated with the flow of traffic, diverted off and onto a shared sidewalk, or a combination of these.

• Single lane roundabouts can accommodate up to 20,000 vehicles per day, double lanes up to 40,000 per day.

• When considering double lane roundabouts also consider moving pedestrian crossings mid block away from the roundabout.

• Roundabouts should not be located near railroad crossings.

• Sight distance needs to be maintained at the roundabout to the left (right in Australia).

• Landscaping in the centre of a roundabout can visually enhance an area, although should not be designed as recreational space as it is not supposed to be accessed by pedestrians.

• Appropriate signage needs to be present for motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians to alert them to the presence of a roundabout ahead.

With respect to pedestrian treatments at intersections the CSS Manual outlines some general considerations:

• Assume that pedestrians want and need safe access to all destinations that are accessible to motorists, in addition to areas not accessible by motorists.

• Typical pedestrian generators include:

o Residential;

o Schools;

o Parks;

o Shopping centres;

o Employment centres;

• Safe access at uncontrolled locations (intersections and mid block) is essential;


36

• Pedestrians must be able to cross streets and highways at regular intervals no more than 300-400ft out of their way.

• Intersections provide the best location to control vehicles to permit pedestrians to cross.

• Pedestrian crossing areas should be clearly identifiable to motorists, the design of the crosswalk should be visible and incorporate realistic crossing opportunities for pedestrians.

• Three types of marking can be used:

o Two parallel lines

o Series of horizontal bars

o Series of diagonal bars

• At unsignalised or uncontrolled crossings, horizontal or diagonal bars should be used to increase visibility (high contrast markings should always be used).

• Materials that are used to delineate pedestrian crossing walks should be smooth, non-slip, and visible. Avoid using paver systems that may settle and become uneven.

The CSS Manual suggests the following practices are adopted in relation to pedestrian treatments:

• Provide marked cross walks at all urban signalised intersections; and

• Provide a marked crosswalk at intersections controlled by STOP signs where the minimisation of vehicle-pedestrian conflicts is especially important.

Bicycle lane treatments are also outlined in the CSS Manual. The general principles that are considered in the treatment of bicycle lanes are:

• Bicycle lanes should e striped through the approach to the intersection right up to the stop sign or crosswalk.

• Since bicyclists ride on the right (left in Australia) of motor vehicle traffic, cyclists desiring to go straight through an intersection often conflict with right (left) turning vehicles. The only choice at shared through/right-turn (left-turn) lanes is to have cyclists and motor vehicles give way to each other at the intersection.

• On intersections with an exclusive right-turn (left-turn) lane the bicycle lane should be located on the left (right) of that right-turn (left-turn) lane. Motor vehicles desiring to move into this turn lane must give way to cyclists travelling through.

• Complexities arise when an exclusive right-turn (left-turn) lane is created by dropping a through lane. The bike lane can transition from the right (left) of the right-turn (left-turn) lane to the left (right) of the right-turn (left-turn) lane by shifting across.

• Where there are a number of left-turning (right-turning) bicycles, a left-turn (right-turn) lane may be provided on approach to the intersection. The lane should be located between the vehicular left-turn (right-turn) lane and the adjacent through lane so that cyclists can keep to the outside as they turn left (right).

• On approach to a roundabout the bicycle lane should be terminated prior to entering the roundabout and not be provided on the circular roadway of the intersection.


37

The CSS Manual provides a table of practice recommendations for the treatment of bicycle lanes at intersections. This table is presented in Table 5:

Table 5. Bicycle lane treatments on major urban thoroughfares (Institute for Transport

Engineers, 2005, pg. 176).

The MUTCD chapters referred to in Table 5 are from the Manual of Uniform Traffic Devices (Federal Highway Administration, 2003).


The MfS address roundabouts in urban areas by outlining some general guidelines relating to the size and design:

• Conventional roundabouts are generally not appropriate for residential for three reasons:

o Capacity advantages are not needed;

o Negative impact on vulnerable road users; and

o Do little for the street aesthetic.

• Large roundabouts are inconvenient for pedestrians because:

o Deflect from desired lines of travel;

o Hard to anticipate the movement of motor vehicles on, entering or leaving the roundabout.


38

• Roundabouts can be hazardous to cyclists because:

o Drivers entering at high speeds may not see cyclists;

o Cyclists travelling on an arm of the roundabout are vulnerable to being hit by entering or leaving the roundabout.

• Small roundabouts may be suitable in residential areas as:

o They cause less deviation for pedestrians

o Easier for cyclists to use

o Occupy less land area

Practical guidelines for small roundabouts are outlined in Mini-roundabouts: Good Practice Guidelines (Department for Transport and County Surveyors’ Society, 2006).

• Continental-style roundabouts may also be suitable for residential areas, these roundabouts are larger than mini-roundabouts and retain the centre island, but they also have:

o Minimal flare at entry and exit points;

o Single lane carriageway;

o Negative camber so water drains away from the centre.

This geometry reduces entry, circulatory, and exit speeds and is safer for cyclists as drivers cannot pass while on the roundabout.

The MfS addresses pedestrian treatment at crossings rather than intersections per say, in general the MfS makes the following recommendations:

• Where networks are separated by heavily trafficked roads, appropriate surface level crossing should be provided where applicable. Footbridges and subways should be avoided unless conditions make them necessary. Level changes are problematic due to increased distances and difficulty for disabled people. In the event that a subway is used it should be as short as possible, very wide and very well lit.

• The type of crossing used at an intersection or street should be context specific and all crossings should have tactile paving.

• Intersections are generally places of high accessibility and visibility and are therefore ideal locations for public buildings and public transport. Good design of intersections can impact significantly on the integration of movement with land use.

• Basic intersection forms are usually decided fairly early on and it is essential that when refining the intersections at a street design level the following points are considered:

o Traffic priority;

o Signage;

o Markings and kerbs;

o Relationship of property and building lines.


39

• Intersection design should facilitate direct pedestrian desire lines, which means using smaller corner radii.

• Intersections can be marked to indicate which streets have priority over others. On quieter streets no markings may encourage motorists to slow down making the intersection more comfortable for pedestrians, however this approach requires careful consideration.

• Having cross road intersection are convenient for pedestrians as little diversion from desire lines is required, the network also becomes more permeable and legible.

• Staggering the intersecting roads can reduce vehicle conflict at intersections but may reduce directness for pedestrians.

• Where designers are concerned about potential user conflict, they may consider placing the intersection on a speed table (raising the road surface to level with the kerb). Alternatively, designers could close one arm of the intersection to vehicle traffic but leave it open for pedestrians and cyclists.


40

Planning systems Overview This section reviews planning systems operating in other countries and cities including:

• Portland, Oregon

• Denver, Colorado

• Vancouver, British Columbia

• New Zealand.

Case Study – Portland, Oregon Authority: Agency, organisation, individual

Within the city of Portland and the greater metropolitan area the key agency with respect to transportation planning is a federally designated Metropolitan Planning Organisation (MPO) called Metro. Metro is concerned solely with land use and transportation planning in metropolitan Portland and is governed by directly elected officials from:

• City of Portland and the 25 other municipal authorities • Washington County • Multnomah County • Clackamas County

Other agencies include the Oregon Department of Transport, TriMet (a state govt. owned public transport authority).

Jurisdiction: Policy, regulation, Strategy, guideline, educational manual

There are two guiding documents that are of interest with respect to land use and transport planning in Portland. The first is the 2040 Growth Concept Plan (GCP) developed by Metro, second is the 2035 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The 2035 RTP has a federal component that was approved by the US Dept of Transport and a state component due to be approved in October-November 2009. At a federal level the 2035 RTP complies with several pieces of federal legislation:

• Safe, Accountable, Flexible and Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users Act

• National Environmental Policy Act • Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 • Congestion Management Process • Endangered Species Act • Title VI and Environmental Justice • Americans with Disabilities Act

In a state context the RTP serves as the regional Transportation System Plan (TSP) which, by state law, local plans in MPO areas must be consistent with. In this instance the MPO is Metro. Likewise, the regional TSP must also be consistent with the Oregon Transportation Plan, adopted in 1992, and amended in 2006, by the Oregon Transportation Commission.

Extent of influence: State-wide City-wide Local Council Infill or Greenfield

As Metro is a federally designated organisation its reach extends over all of metropolitan Portland the influence of guideline documents extends down to the street level. For example the Creating Liveable Streets: Street Design Guidelines 2nd Edition design manual was developed by Metro in 2002 and is linked to the Portland 2040 Growth Project. The purpose of the guideline document is to provide the Portland region with street design guidelines that support the goals outlined in the 2040 Growth Concept. The extent of the plan is limited to the jurisdiction of Portland which is 134sq miles (346sq kilometres).


41

Application: Approval requirement Education programme Incentives system Funded action

Approval requirements are necessary for any work that is carried out on municipal streets. In addition, Metro is very well resourced (approx 700 million in federal funding each year). There are three ways in which Metro influences the allocation of this federal funding. First, all projects that receive federal transportation funding must be included in the Regional Transportation Plan. Second, spending is managed through the Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP), a four year program of projects identified to receive federal funds balanced against the forecasted availability of federal funds. Third, Metro coordinates the allocation of regional flexible funds every two years from the combination of two federal grant programs: the Surface Transportation Program and the Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality program.


42

Neighbourhood (speed and priority control, Road Access, speed controls) and Place (Intersection Design, signing, street widths, on street parking)

The 2040 Growth Concept land uses, called 2040 Design Types, are arranged in a hierarchy. The hierarchy serves as a framework for prioritizing Regional Transport Plan investments. An excerpt from the RTP below lists the 2040 design types based on this hierarchy. The hierarchy applies to developed and developing areas inside the urban growth boundary (UGB) and to undeveloped areas added to the UGB as of 2007. The primary and secondary land uses are the focus of Regional Transport Plan investments.

Excerpted from 2035 Regional Transport Plan, Metro, 2008, pg 3-3. In more detail the Regional Transport Plan addresses neighbourhood and place planning in only developed and developing areas. These are presented in the first two columns of the table excerpted below from the RTP:

Excerpted from 2035 Regional Transport Plan, Metro, 2008, pg 3-5. http://www.oregonmetro.gov/index.cfm/go/by.web/id=25038


43

Planning for walkability

Planning for walkability in the City of Portland is actioned through the 1998 Pedestrian Master Plan. The purpose of the plan is to establish a 20-year framework for improvements that will enhance the pedestrian environment and increase opportunities to choose walking as a mode of transportation. It covers five major elements:

• pedestrian policies • pedestrian street classifications • pedestrian design guidelines • capital projects • funding strategies

http://www.portlandonline.com/Transportation/index.cfm?c=37064

Planning for local cycling

The 1996 Bicycle Master Plan for the City of Portland aims to “Make the bicycle an integral part of daily life in Portland, particularly for trips of less than five miles, by implementing a bikeway network, providing end-of-trip facilities, improving bicycle/transit integration, encouraging bicycle use, and making bicycling safer.” The Bicycle Master Plan is currently being updated and key elements of the 2009 bicycle plan update include:

• Strengthen city policies in support of bicycling • Expand the network of planned bikeways from 650 to 926 miles • Develop new designs for safe, comfortable attractive bikeways that can carry more

bicyclists • Emphasize construction of “low-stress” bikeways in the strategic implementation plan • Provide more and better bicycle parking that does not clutter the sidewalks • Strengthen and expand our educational and encouragement programs like Safer Routes

to Schools, SmartTrips and Sunday Parkways • Continue to better integrate enforcement into transportation to reinforce safer roadway

conditions for all users • Monitor our efforts through various evaluation methods so we know what works and

what we need to adjust http://www.portlandonline.com/Transportation/index.cfm?a=71843&c=34812

Safe routes The City of Portland were able to petition the State of Oregon to pass House Bill 3712 (known as the ‘Safe Routes to School Bill') in 2001. Subsequent to this, City of Portland partnered with 5 schools in Portland that received $2,000 in state grants and delivered all school traffic safety services under the umbrella concept of ‘Safe Routes to School'. In 2005-06 Portland Safe Routes to School initiated a pilot project, with partnerships in eight schools. Lastly, in 2006-07 eleven more partner schools joined and seven more schools joined the program in 2007-08. http://www.portlandonline.com/TRANSPORTATION/index.cfm?c=49034


44

Place: Building design control (sunshine and shade) Passive surveillance Cycle paths (width and priority) Footpaths Lighting (street and place) Seating Landscape (micro climate and interest) Tree avenues (shade and orientation)

The 2040 Growth Concept is the growth management policy for Portland and the metropolitan area around it. The 2040 Growth Concept attempts to achieve several objectives:

• Guide how the urban growth boundary is managed • Enhance the transportation system to ensure the mobility of people and goods • Preserve access to nature. • Encourage efficient land use • Direct most development to existing urban centres and along existing major

transportation corridors • Promote a balanced transportation system within the region that accommodates a

variety of transportation options such as bicycling, walking, driving and public transit • Support the region's goal of building complete communities by providing jobs and

shopping close to where people live. There are two Oregon state policies that drive the growth management plan of Portland:

• Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 10 (“Housing”): “Buildable lands for residential use shall be inventoried and plans shall encourage the availability of adequate numbers of needed housing units at price ranges and rent levels which are commensurate with the financial capabilities of Oregon households and allow for flexibility of housing location, type and density.”

• Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 14 (“Urbanization”): “Urban growth boundaries shall be established and maintained by cities, counties and regional governments to provide land for urban development needs and to identify and separate urban and urbanizable land from rural land. Establishment and change of urban growth boundaries shall be a cooperative process among cities, counties and, where applicable, regional governments. Prior to expanding an urban growth boundary, local governments shall demonstrate that needs cannot reasonably be accommodated on land already inside the urban growth boundary.”

http://www.oregonmetro.gov/index.cfm/go/by.web/id=29959 http://www.oregonmetro.gov/index.cfm/go/by.web/id=277

Lessons learnt There are a number of lessons that can be taken from Portland. One of the key factors in the success of the cities design is the formation of the agency called Metro. Originally intended only to service and maintain state owned parks and zoos, the agency was able to expand its portfolio significantly and become a Metropolitan Planning Organisation. In doing so they have been able to attract significant Federal funding to implement a series of plans that have focussed on developing Portland into an accessible, sustainable city.


45

Case Study – Denver, Colorado Authority: Agency, organisation, individual

City/County of Denver Colorado Dept. of Transportation City/County of Denver Mayor’s Office


There are two planning documents that have been used to move Denver forward with respect to Accessible Communities. The first is the Denver Comprehensive Plan 200. Within this plan the objective is set to design and implement a metropolitan wide plan for the development of Denver. This plan is called Blueprint Denver. Blueprint Denver develops a comprehensive approach for addressing all the components needed to achieve a coordinated land-use and transportation system vision city-wide. The City/County can rely on three tools available for achieving their goals under this plan. The first are regulatory tools that define the type and intensity of new development and prescribe design and development standards to achieve an area’s overall urban design goals. Second are public infrastructure investments, such as a park or light-rail line to make it more attractive to private investment. Third are public-private partnerships which involve using public funds or activities to directly foster private investment and development activity. Several key elements of the Denver Comprehensive Plan 2000 provided the framework for Blueprint Denver. The key objectives of Blueprint Denver are:

• Creating a city-wide land-use and transportation plan; • Clarifying and updating Denver’s zoning ordinance; • Preserving and enhancing the individuality, diversity and liveability of Denver’s

neighbourhoods; • Supporting the development of a clean, efficient and innovative transportation system.

As an extension of this The Strategic Transportation Plan (STP) was developed. The STP is a multimodal transportation plan initiated by the Denver Department of Public Works, and other city departments and stakeholders. The STP addresses current and future transportation needs of the City/County of Denver. In addition Blueprint Denver also called for the development of pedestrian and bicycle master plans http://www.denvergov.org/TabId/382618/default.aspx http://www.denvergov.org/TabId/378734/default.aspx


Blueprint Denver extends over all of metropolitan Denver through the actions of the City/County of Denver. This covers the 11 districts which totals 153sq miles (386sq kilometres). The jurisdiction of the City/County does not extend to State owned highways and roads (although these are in the minority), otherwise the extent of influence is quite wide. The City/County’s work is structured through a number of plans. The comprehensive plan is outlined in a diagram excerpted from Blueprint Denver: Excerpted from Blueprint Denver 2002, City of Denver Publication. http://www.denvergov.org/TabId/378734/default.aspx?


46


Voter approved Build a Better Denver Bond program for capital works and transportation infrastructure. See http://www.denvergov.org/Default.aspx?alias=www.denvergov.org/betterdenver In addition to a significant amount of funding, there are other mechanisms designed to ensure that the City/County plans are actioned. These have been outlined above.


Design is not conducted at a neighbour hood or place level. Within the development of the Denver Strategic Transportation Plan the City/County have used Travel Sheds as a means to delineate between areas. The design of each area in turn influenced heavily by the people using that space. The travel shed idea was derived from the theory of a watershed. A watershed is a broad look at the inter connection of streams and tributaries that drain into a larger river basin. A travel shed takes a broad look at the collection of streets and mobility routes that feed into the larger, connected transportation system. There are 12 identified travel sheds in the City/County of Denver within which design issues are addressed. Travel shed boundaries are based on areas that share similar characteristics, such as trips that start and finish in the same area and geographic features that create barriers to travel movement. Use of travel sheds also accounts for mobility issues that cause the individual travel sheds to be interconnected. The use of travel sheds allows for broader analysis of how effectively people can move through the system by looking at:

• Street layout • The grid and arterial system • Transit routes • Bike routes • Pedestrian throughways and how they connect

http://www.keepdenvermoving.com/


The Pedestrian Master Plan (Ped Plan) is intended to guide the process of developing, funding and implementing a strategy for building, improving and maintaining the pedestrian infrastructure citywide. Streets in the network were selected based on their ability to connect pedestrians from one civic place to another, to provide access to transit, and to accommodate infrastructure that encourages pedestrian travel. The Ped Plan recommends prioritizing improvements on the most underdeveloped streets in the network. It is funded through three mechanisms. First, the city collects a small annual sidewalk fee from each property owner for the lifetime building maintenance and replacement of a city standard sidewalk required on their property. Second, the City/County’s Public Works Manager maintains the authority to require adjacent property owners to upgrade their sidewalks to meet City/County standards. At the time the Ped Plan was printed (2004) there was no annual construction and maintenance program to handle ongoing small to medium projects. Since then a voter approved Bond program has been successfully implemented. http://www.denvergov.org/TabId/425707/default.aspx?


The emphasis of the Denver Bicycle Master Plan (Bike Plan) is the identification and prioritization of improvements to the City/County’s bicycle infrastructure and programs with the goal of encouraging and accommodating bicycle usage for both recreational and transportation purposes. The Bike Plan addresses seven key issues which include improvements to Denver’s:

• Grid Route System • Downtown Bicycling • Major Missing Links • Parks & Trails • Recreational Bicycling • Transit Access and Accommodations • Advocacy

http://www.denvergov.org/Bicycle_Program/BicycleMasterPlanUpdate/tabid/378656/Default.aspx


47

Safe routes Denver Safe Routes to School Coalition/Denver Safe Routes to School Action Plan: On March 27, 2007, Denver City Council signed Proclamation 15 to establish the Denver Safe Routes to School Coalition with the charge to develop a Denver Safe Routes to School Action Plan Safe Routes to School Impact: To date, over 20 schools have or will benefit from infrastructure improvements and/or educational programming as a direct result of the Federal SRTS funding. http://www.denvergov.org/Portals/515/documents/FINAL%20Strategic%20Plan%2011-18-08.doc


Blueprint Denver does not seek to change the growth forecast for Denver. The Plan distributes forecasted growth to Areas of Change, where it will be most beneficial, and away from Areas of Stability, where it may have some negative consequences. In effect, Areas of Stability and Areas of Change have a symbiotic relationship. Each area in the city can be thought of as located on a continuum from change to stability. The Areas of Stability can be thought of as belonging to one of two categories:

• Committed Areas - Committed Areas are stable neighbourhoods that may benefit from the stabilizing effects of minor infill development rather than large-scale, major redevelopment.

• Reinvestment Areas - Reinvestment areas are neighbourhoods with a character that is desirable to maintain but that would benefit from reinvestment through modest infill and redevelopment or major projects in a small area.

Small area plans are the primary vehicle for applying tools to promote stability and re-investment. The tools applied are:

• Regulatory tools • Public Infrastructure tools • Partnership tools

The purpose of Areas of Change is to channel growth where it will be beneficial and can best improve access to jobs, housing and services with fewer and shorter auto trips. The most common traits for the areas targeted include:

• Close proximity to a commercial arterial street • Locations along a historical trolley routes • Locations adjacent to existing or planned light-rail stops • Locations in older industrial areas or in large vacant areas • Opportunities for pedestrian-oriented, mixed-use development.

The tools used to promote action in Areas of Change include: • Regulatory tools • Changes to zoning and land-use regulations • Public infrastructure improvements (mostly transportation) • Partnerships between the public and private sectors

http://www.denvergov.org/TabId/378734/default.aspx?

Lessons learnt As a case study Denver is very similar to Portland as they are operating under the same governing structures. The main difference is that the City of Denver operates as the Metropolitan Planning Organisation rather than a separate entity (Metro in Portland Oregon). Both Denver and Portland have used Bond systems and accessed Federal funding to action their pedestrian plans. This is an important factor to note as presently there is no allocated funding at Federal and State levels set aside specifically for pedestrian improvements in Metropolitan Perth or Western Australia. The funding source comes solely from Local Government Authorities. It should be noted that the geographical distances covered by Portland and Denver are significantly greater than those covered by West Australian Local Governments. To operate on a similar scale to Denver or Portland the City of Perth would have to amalgamate with several other LGA’s.


48

Case Study – Vancouver, British Columbia Authority: Agency, organisation, individual

(Local Govt) City of Vancouver (State Govt) Province of British Columbia (Federal Govt) Canadian Transportation Association (Non-Govt) Master Municipal Construction Document Association (Association of Local Govt’s) Greater Vancouver Regional District


Local Govt. Policies – City Council has set a list of transportation priorities in the following order: pedestrian, bicycle, transit, movement of goods, and private automobile. All existing and new projects in the City are evaluated with these priorities in mind and are developed to accommodate them, wherever possible. Local Govt. Regulations – Local regulations are enforced through the Office of the City Engineer, who with the authority of the local council controls all work on city owned streets. Local regulations are also enforced with local by-laws regulating land usage. Local Govt. Guidelines – The City's Engineering Department uses several standards and guidelines to design safe long lasting streets in Vancouver. They have used three main standards/guidelines: Street Restoration Manual, Transportation Association of Canada’s Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads, and the Master Municipal Construction Document. There are also other supporting documents and initiatives (e.g. MMCD Green Design Guidelines, 40kph limit on residential roads). Accessibility is not dealt with as a stand alone issue; it is incorporated across a variety of departments in the City of Vancouver and is supported through the City’s by –laws. The City’s Transportation Plan can be viewed at http://vancouver.ca/engsvcs/transport/plan/ and addresses accessible communities. Master Municipal Construction Document and The City of Vancouver Street Restoration Manual are guideline documents that operate at the level of city street design State and Federal Govt. Legislation – Accessible communities have been a focus at state and federal levels for quite some time. The present pieces of legislation that are relevant to accessible communities are:

State and Federal Govt. Policies State and Federal Govt. Guidelines – The Transportation Association of Canada’s Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads serves the key guideline document for road design in Canada, its states and territories.


Local Council – street design, land use at a local level State – road transport design along major arteries Federal – air, rail, marine transport The geographical sphere of influence for the City of Vancouver is 114sq kilometres. This incorporates a number of sub-districts under the influence of the City of Vancouver.


Local Council – Approval requirement and local council inspections. Education – Master Municipal Control Document comes with short course in how to use the guidelines and manage contractors.


49


Speed Control, Priority Control and Road Access (from uses) are addressed by the Master Municipal Construction Document (MMCD) Association. The MMCD is developed by a non-for-profit agency made up of representatives from the Municipalities; the MMCD Association sells the guideline to Municipal Engineers as the best practice guideline for Municipal Design. There are design specifications for all pedestrian related foot path designs (including traffic calming devices) and for Vancouver are outlined in a planning guideline called the Street Restoration Manual http://vancouver.ca/engsvcs/streets/design/pdf/SRMFinalN59August2008.pdf . The Streets Restoration Manual is a supplement to the MMCD. There is a focus on traffic control through road design (i.e. narrow streets) present also in the MMCD Green Design Guidelines http://www.mmcd.net/downloads/24093-GreenDesignGuidelines-Sept1-05.pdf. Furthermore, the Municipalities of British Columbia have proposed a blanket 40kph speed limit in all residential zones (similar to our 50kph limit) and they already have 30kph zones around schools and playgrounds http://vancouver.ca/engsvcs/transport/40kph/index.htm. This will require a change to the B.C. Motor Vehicle Act to allow the 40kph limit to be enforced.


While there is no specific Pedestrian Plan in place, planning for walkability is actioned through several guiding documents and projects:

• City of Vancouver Transportation Plan • City of Vancouver Streets Restoration Manual • City of Vancouver Greenways project

Specifically of interest is the Greenways Project. Greenways in Vancouver are linear public corridors for pedestrians and cyclists that connect parks, nature reserves, cultural features, historic sites, neighbourhoods and retail areas. http://vancouver.ca/engsvcs/streets/greenways/city/index.htm


In 1999, Vancouver Council adopted the Bicycle Plan which identified action items to improve cycling in Vancouver. The plan took into account extensive consultation with cyclists and residents, and analysed what we needed to integrate cyclists into the transportation network. The key objective for the plan was to develop a network of commuter and recreational bicycle routes throughout Vancouver. The 2008 update to the plan found that:

• Cycling mode share in some neighbourhoods exceeded 11% • Cycling and walking mode share downtown exceeded 40%

Also, the updated plan stated that “Cycling Program actions are directed at increasing cycling mode share city-wide, with an emphasis on the more southern and eastern neighbourhoods where, despite having some cycling infrastructure in place, only a small percentage of residents are choosing to cycle.” In general the Plan Update maintains that it is essential to continue work on the development of new facilities and promotional strategies that are aimed at addressing the barriers to cycling throughout the City. http://vancouver.ca/engsvcs/transport/cycling/plans/network.htm

Safe routes Vancouver’s Greenways are linear public corridors for pedestrians and cyclists that connect parks, nature reserves, cultural features, historic sites, neighbourhoods and retail areas. In 1995 the City decided to expand the Greenways network and design these routes to include city greenways and neighbourhood greenways. These routes offer safe alternatives to cycling and walking along busy traffic corridors. See http://vancouver.ca/engsvcs/streets/greenways/index.htm for more detail.

Place: Building design control (sunshine and shade) Passive surveillance

Land use and spatial planning occurs at a local level within the City of Vancouver. Rather than operating a master plan for the entire city, individual precincts are dealt with separately. The transportation plan, in effect, links these communities/precincts together. Vancouver have also embarked on a program called Building a Better City that addresses several different areas in order to create a sustainable city http://vancouver.ca/sustainability/building.htm


50

Cycle paths (width and priority) Footpaths Lighting (street and place) Seating Landscape (micro climate and interest) Tree avenues (shade and orientation)

Growth Boundaries and Population Distribution Attempts to limit the city’s growth boundaries and condense the population distribution are being achieved through the EcoDensity Charter. The EcoDensity Charter commits the City to make environmental sustainability a primary goal in all city planning decisions in ways that support housing affordability and liveable neighbourhoods. Council also approved a set of EcoDensity Actions. The first two actions to be implemented by the City immediately are: Rezoning Policy for Greener Buildings: Applications for new rezoning will need to meet a minimum LEED™ (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Silver rating, or similar equivalency in green design. This includes City priorities for energy performance, water efficiency, and storm water use. Rezoning policy for Greener Larger Sites: Rezoning on sites of generally two acres or more will need to meet a number of sustainability measures in addition to those required in the Rezoning Policy for Greener Buildings. For sites with housing, a range of types and tenures must be considered to increase affordable housing opportunities. See http://vancouver.ca/sustainability/building_ecodensity.htm for more detail. Density The Building a Better City program also addresses neighbourhood level concerns. For example, making changes to the zoning will allow people to build laneway housing in certain areas http://www.vancouver-ecodensity.ca/.

Lessons learnt The city of Vancouver is interesting as a case study as, similar to Portland and Oregon the extent of influence the City exerts can be extended to cover a large area. In Vancouver this is through an association of local government associations called the Greater Vancouver Regional Authority. Similar organisations exist in Western Australia as regional metropolitan councils. The key difference is that the GVRA covers all metropolitan councils, the WA metropolitan councils are fractured and have differing perceptions regarding their key roles (planning, waste management, shared services). The GVRA is mandated to look at land-use and transport planning at a larger scale than the individual municipal organisations. Funding structures differ between Western Australia and Vancouver, Portland, and Denver. The case study cities will specify to citizens what allocation of the rates are being allocated to pedestrian infrastructure via Bond payments, or work orders for footpaths adjacent to their properties. This also applies to other municipal services and works carried out. In Western Australia there is no information given to rate payers as to how much of their rate payments are allocated to the footpath, or road in front of their house.


51

Case Study – New Zealand Authority: Agency, organisation, individual

Crown organisation (Walking Access Act) Land Transport NZ (brings together functions of Transit and Land Transport) to provide integrated approach to transport planning, funding and delivery NZ Walking Access Commission – provides a central point for the coordination of all walking access in NZ. Responsible for walkways, formerly under the New Zealand Walkways Act, and day-to-day administration of walkways on conservation land.


Legislation – The Walking Access Act 2008 National level: National walking and cycling strategy (Ministry of Transport, 2003) Policy, Strategy and Guideline – Walking and cycling strategy document, Neighbourhood Accessibility Planning (operational policy) and public transport accessibility levels at local council level


Legislation: Crown (e.g. negotiate new walking access across private land, i.e., lakes, rivers and forests) and facilitate resolution of disputes relating to walking access. National level: National walking and cycling strategy (Ministry of Transport, 2003) Policy and Strategy: City-wide and local council


Funded action – Councils can get funding from the NZ Transport Agency under the different categories: pedestrian facilities, cycling facilities, travel demand management, road maintenance (lighting, amenity, safety maintenance) and minor improvements.

Precis Land Transport NZ currently facilitates the preparation of local and regional council walking and cycling strategies by subsidising the cost of this work with an increased financial assistance rate of 75% (2004/05 and 2005/06). The state highway network (managed by Transit), including any associated walking and cycling facilities, is fully funded by Land Transport NZ. Planning for state highway walking and cycling facilities is usually undertaken in conjunction with (and often by) the local authority through a walking and cycling strategy, although planning is sometimes done through a regional land transport strategy or a state highway 10 year plan. It is in this policy context that local and regional walking and cycling strategies have become increasingly common documents over recent years. There are also a number of areas of ensuring an integrated transport system that are not visible in our planning system. (e.g. Public transport accessibility levels). Local council’s projects can be classified into: promotional, policy, environmental/amenities/engineering/education and enforcement.


52

Neighbourhood (speed and priority control, Road Access, speed controls)

Neighbourhood accessibility planning implemented in urban areas where pedestrians and cyclists are at high risk of injury or in areas with ‘strategic significance’ (e.g. in areas where it is beneficial to improve linkages to passenger transport).

Place (Intersection Design, signing, street widths, on street parking)

Implemented by local council

Planning for walkability Walking Access Act September 2008 There is a walking strategy document: NZ walking and cycling strategies at local council level. Network and implementation programs (action plans) identify specific projects and programs to be incorporated in the Transit’s 10 year State Highway Plan to ensure the strategy is implemented. Local council projects include “improved rubbish collection services to benefit pedestrians and cyclists”


There is a cycling strategy document: NZ walking and cycling strategies at local council level Cycle network and route planning guide Local council projects include: education on the need to look for bikes when opening car doors and reversing cars, mapping of safer cycle routes and bike racks installation in shopping centre and library.

Safe routes Travel planning of safe routes is implemented before promotional activities. Improvements made to infrastructural changes as part of the design phase of engineering work and investigate integration with local area traffic management. Local council project include “Three new speed tables to slow traffic”.


Seating and signage, Lighting, overhead cover provision, art work provision, drop kerbs, intersection layout changes, traffic calming, red light running, commercial advertising and use of footpaths are all undertaken at local council level.


53

Lessons learnt 1) Funding The National Land Transport Program (NLTP) is the mechanism through which Land Transport NZ allocates funds to approved organizations for land transport infrastructure and services. The NLTP allocates funding to approved organizations across a number of national and regional activity classes. Priority is initially given to projects of national importance. (similar arrangements to PBN) 2) Transport assessment as part of new development proposals through the Public transport accessibility levels 3) Target local authorities and involved them in trial projects, created as a result of requests. 4) There is a Walking Access Act and a peak body for walking approved by Cabinet 5) At a local level, councils are ‘educated’ on the best practice of preparing walking and cycling strategy documents. 6) There is a national walking and strategy document. 7) There are a lot more campaigns organized by local council at a local level 8) NZ Transport develop guides and manuals for local council i.e. Pedestrian planning and design guide and education courses are organized to be attended by local council

Related websites http://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Images/NewFolder-

2/RaisingtheProfileWalkingCyclinginNZ.pdf http://www.landtransport.govt.nz/road-user-safety/walking-and-cycling/walking-and-cycling-strategies/index.html http://www.walkingaccess.org.nz/


54

Planning policies Overview This section reviews one planning policy each from the England and Scotland:

• Scottish Planning Policy: SPP17 – Planning for Transport

• UK Planning Policy Statement 6: Planning for Town Centres

• UK Planning Policy Guidance 13: Transport

Case Study Scottish Planning Policy: SPP17 – Planning for Transport Authority: Agency, organisation, individual

Planning in Scotland is essentially a local function and the planning authority in each local area is the first point of contact for all planning applications and enquiries (e.g. Aberdeen, Dundee, Edinburgh). Authorities have 3 main planning duties: development management, development planning and enforcement.


Legislation: The Town and Country Planning Act (Scotland) 1997 and The Planning Act (Scotland) 2006 administered by Scottish Ministers Regulation: National Planning Framework for Scotland Policy: The Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) and National Planning Policy Guidance series


At local government level, development plans lie at the heart of the planning system. They provide a clear vision of how places should be developed and are the core documents against which planning applications are assessed. They formed the basis for decisions on planning applications and contain policies for the future development and use of land in an area. Plans can cover a wide range of issues such as housing, transport, shopping, recreation and employment. It takes into consideration strategic environmental assessment and is the result of consultative process. Development plans are made up of 2 parts:

1) Structure plans – takes a long-term view of development, broadly where it should be located. Each council prepares a structure plan either along or working with neighbouring councils after consultation with the public and other interested organisations, the council submits a structure plan to local government for approval.

2) Local plans – usually used for smaller areas. They set out more detailed policies and proposals to guide development. Councils must consult widely on the content of a local plan and make suitable changes. Councils will adopt the local plan as the basis for decision making in the area and if the plan is not in line with the approved structure plan, no decisions to develop locally for smaller areas can be undertaken.


55


Procedures for dealing with applications are outlined in the Town and Country Planning Act. Applications are dealt with in the first instance by the local planning authority which must make its decisions in line with the development plan and the national policy, comments by the public and other organisations the authority has consulted, the design of the proposed development, access and the effect on the environment. Enforcement: The local council is responsible for enforcement to ensure that developments have the necessary planning permissions and are in line with any conditions which have been set. The local council can decide what action to take to reconcile the problem that breaks the planning rules. If a council does not take suitable action, it can be reported to the Commissioner for Land Administration in Scotland. Councils also have the power to issue notices detailing the action needed to correct it. Failure to act on these notices is a criminal offence.

Transport Planning: State (Regional road planning, rail planning, bus planning)

Statement of planning policy 17 – Planning for transport; this policy is essentially a land use planning policy but initiates the linkage between land use policy and transport policy. • Integration of land use, economic development, environmental issues and transport planning; • Introduction of parking standards: • Advocation of Travel Plans to support/enable adoption of maximum parking standards; • Revised Transport Assessment ( TA) Methodology: • TAs should focus on delivering an 'appropriate non-car mode share'; • Transport Appraisal and modelling outcomes to be used to inform decision making; • New development should be accessible by public transport accessing a range of destinations, with Development Plans providing clear guidance on requirements; and • Support for public transport contributions as part of planning agreements. Review of SPP17 indicated: The lack of consideration of transport issues in the detailed local planning brief considered is a concern, if this is reflected more widely. The limited focus on sustainable access issues at the early stage in the development planning process is a concern, particularly as it is likely (and certainly the intention) that such a brief should set the tone for the subsequent development of the site. There was a significant level of support for SPP17 and the principles that it promotes, however there are issues with its implementation, for example the following issues were identified as presenting significant problems in implementing SPP17 (in descending order of significance): • Lack of control of public transport; • Lack of integrated working between authorities; • Conflicts with the local political agenda; • Lack of integrated working within authorities; • Lack of funding; • Conflicts with National economic objectives; • Conflicts with local economic objectives; • Conflicts with the National political agenda; and • Lack of resources.


56

City (City road planning, buses planning, light/heavy rail planning)

Travel plan and public transport are part of the planning application lodged with the local city council

Neighbourhood (speed and priority control, Road Access, speed controls)

General traffic and construction traffic are part of the planning application


Undertaken at local council level

Land uses/spatial planning State (Regional growth planning)

Development planning authorities are required to prepare a spatial strategy. This is a broadly based statement of proposals as to the development and use of land in the area. An analysis of the relationship with development and land use proposals in neighbouring areas that are likely to affect the Strategic development plan area.

City (Growth boundaries, centres planning, population distribution)

Part of the national master plan

Town/Neighbourhood: clustering of neighbourhoods

Planned at local council level

Planning for local cycling/ Planning for walkability

These are included in local plans which relate the existing land use development pattern to the capacity of the transport network. Councils are to promote active travel by providing direct, attractive and coherent cycle/pedestrian routes. Councils have the power to ensure that secure, sheltered cycle parking is conveniently located to building entrances. Transport Assessment and Implementation guide was published alongside the SPP and developers develop a plan for non car mode share in respect of access to the proposed development. Cast study: Aberdeenshire Council Targets are set at local council level for non motorised modes.

Safe routes This is part of the travel plan. The new development proposals submitted for approval to the planning authority who in turn consults with the roads authority on street design issues. The safe movement network may include: Preliminary street designs and layouts Design statement Design codes A Transport Assessment A Travel Plan An Environmental statement A sustainability Appraisal


57


Designing streets: there is a user hierarchy where pedestrians are considered first (then cyclists, public transport users, specialist service vehicles, other motor traffic) in the design process and using walking and cycling audits undertaken by various professionals to In some cases, an environmental audit is also carried out. (cast study: Devon County Council) New developments: Local authorities can create development teams for all relevant departments with an interest in street design to work together during the design and approval process when considering improvements to existing streets or large or small developments. From pre application stage up to deciding how the street will be maintained in the future, the developer’s team engage with departments (planning, transportation, local authority, waste collection authorities) to prevent conflicting conditions.

Special needs: Access ramps, crossings, help posts, colour/tone differentiation, brail signage/mapping

Car parking for people with disabilities Local authorities have powers under The Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 to designate spaces for parking for disabled people on private land with the agreement of the land owner. In retail, recreation and leisure use developments spaces for car parking for disabled people should be allocated according to the “National maximum car parking standards” requirements.

Related Websites http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Built-Environment/planning http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2009

Review of SPP17 – Recommendations

Local authority organisations, Regional Transport Partnerships, Transport Scotland and the Scottish Government continue to promote the principles of SPP17 through profile raising and highlighting the links and synergies between the land-use/transport and health, environmental and social policy agendas. Organisations involved in the implementation of SPP17 (Regional Transport Partnerships and local authority organisations) review their structures with a view to putting in place a structure that fully supports implementation of the policies and principles within SPP17, whilst making efficient use of staff skills and resources. Scottish Society of Directors of Planning and Society of Chief Officers of Transportation in Scotland form a working party to consider issues associated with implementation of SPP17. In particular to identify and disseminate good practice and to identify areas requiring further research. Delivery organisations such as local authorities, Transport Scotland and the Scottish Government coordinate and facilitate (possibly through groups such as the Scottish Society of Directors of Planning, the Society of Chief Officers of Transportation in Scotland and the Planning and Transport Integration Group) appropriate training and the development of additional guidance in relation to the following key areas to promote awareness of and good practice at all levels to support the implementation of SPP17:


58

Review of SPP17 – Recommendations

• Guide to roles and responsibilities - both authorities and developers;

• Guidance on the appropriate level of appraisal and modelling of transportation proposals at the various stages of the development process;

• At the second stage of development, all travel modes and mobilities are included in the appraisal process, in order to encourage the use of walking, cycling and public transport. User hierarchy are to consider pedestrians first, followed by cyclists, public transport users, specialist service vehicles and lastly other motor vehicles.

• Clear and consistent approach to the application of parking standards, which nevertheless recognises differences in city, large town, small town and rural areas;

• Further guidance on the principles, basis and approach to agreeing developer contributions;

• Guidance on the mechanisms for developing, providing and supporting rail and bus infrastructure and services; and

• Guidance on accessibility analysis. • Scottish Government and Transport Scotland take forward the

adoption of the Manual for Streets in Scotland with local authorities being encouraged to adopt the emerging guidance.

• Scottish Government and Transport Scotland consider a review of SPP17 to reflect the change in the wider sustainability agenda and institutional set-up since its original publication.

• Scottish Government repeats the questionnaire element of this commission on an on-going basis and at regular intervals to provide information on the trends associated with implementation of SPP17.

• A more integrated approach with roads engineers being fully involved throughout the design and development stage so that detailed planning stage can move through the technical approval stage without requiring any significant changes. Early involvement of the Local Authority officers involved with Road Construction Consents is vital.

• Monitoring: this is undertaken to ensure continuity of a Masterplan which is prepared in detail. Monitoring is used to see how improvements to street environments can be redesigned to function in practice.

• Set targets at local council level for non motorised mode share.

• Case Study of Devon on quality audits conducted for walking, access and cycling is worth considering.


59

Title of document United Kingdom: Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 6: Planning for Town Centres Planning Policy Guidance 13: Transport

Authority: Agency, organisation, individual

PPS set out the Government’s national policies and principles on different aspects of planning and apply throughout England. These policies complement other national planning policies which should be taken into account by local planning authorities in preparation of local development documents.


Policy – PPG 13 (Transport)


Local council or planning authorities should set out their requirements through the core strategy development plan in line with the national policies. Local planning authorities should work in conjunction with stakeholders (retailers, developers, business) and the community. Local planning authorities make decisions relating to development needs.


Local planning authorities determine planning applications for all proposals taking into consideration Government’s objectives.

Transport Planning: State (Regional road planning, rail planning, bus planning)

Local authorities when considering planning applications, should give consideration on major generators of travel demand in the City and use parking policies, alongside other planning and transport measures to promote sustainable transport choices and reduce reliance on the car. Priority to be given to people over ease of traffic movement and plan more road space to pedestrians, cyclists and public transport in town centres and local neighbourhoods when implementing planning policies and traffic management scheme and in the design of individuals development to widen transport choices for passenger and freight. Compliance must be in accordance to the Regional Planning Guideline which set out a strategic framework through the use of public transport accessibility criteria that would offer a safe and easy access to transport mode.


Planned at local level by local planning authorities

Land uses/spatial planning State (Regional growth planning)

PPS 6: Creation of Town Centres and its accessibility


60

City (Growth boundaries, centres planning, population distribution)

Local authorities manage the pattern of urban growth to make the fullest use of public transport and focus major generators of travel demand in city, town and district centres and near to major public transport interchanges.

Town/Neighbourhood: clustering of neighbourhoods

PPS6

Planning for walkability and local cycling

Local authorities assess the distance of proposed developments from existing or proposed public transport facilities (bus or railway stations and interchanges). As part of the assessment, frequency and capacity of services and whether access is easy, safe and convenient for pedestrians, cyclists and disabled people must be taken into account.

Safe routes Local authorities ensure that the needs of disabled people as pedestrians, public transport users and motorists are taken into account in the implementation of planning policies and traffic management schemes and in the design of individual developments and consider how best to reduce crime and the fear of crime and seek by the design and layout of developments and areas, to secure community safety and road safety.

Monitoring and review Local planning authorities are required to submit Annual Monitoring reports to the Secretary of State which must cover performance against defined output indicators (e.g. amount of leisure development in town centres, completed office and retail development) and where policies not being implemented, the reasons why.


Street design is consistent with national, regional and local policy. The process begins with a review of relevant planning and transportation policies. The Local Plan and transport policy (e.g. Local Transport Strategy, Open Space Strategy, Core Path Network Strategy) dictates elements such as Green network, pedestrian links, frontage for surveillance etc. The user hierarchy for road network puts pedestrians first, then cyclists, public transport users, specialist service vehicles (emergency services) and other motor traffic. Parking: Cycle parking in developments to increase and car bays are lesser. A consistent approach on parking is set out in the Regional Transport Strategy to avoid competition between different locations based on supply or cost of parking.


61

Special needs: Access ramps, crossings, help posts, colour/tone differentiation, brail signage/mapping

The UK government wants to promote public transport that is accessible to disabled people and this is undertaken at the design and layout stage.

Lessons learnt 1) Transport Assessments should be prepared and submitted alongside the relevant planning applications for development. The coverage and detail of the Transport Assessment should reflect the scale of development and the extent of the transport implications of the proposal. For small scheme, the Transport Assessment should outline the transport aspects of the application. The assessment should illustrate accessibility to the site by all modes and the likely modal split of journeys to and from the site. It should also give details of proposed measures to improve access by public transport, walking and cycling to reduce the need for parking associated with the proposal and to mitigate transport impacts. Where appropriate, a travel plan should be included. 2) The Regional Transport Strategy set out the context for parking controls and charges by each local authority and within this context, local authorities set out appropriate levels and charges for parking so that the vitality of town centres are not compromised.


62

Successful Systematic Approaches Overview This section reviews successful systematic approaches to particular issues including:

• Vancouver (general)

• Geelong Walking Assessment

• Sydney Metro

• Brisbane and Curitiba Bus services

• Wungong Urban Water Development – Armadale Redevelopment Authority

Vancouver Introduction

Vancouver operates on 3 tiers of administration similar to Perth, WA. However it also has a metropolitan agency responsible for land use planning and transport for the metropolitan area called The Greater Vancouver Authority.

The Municipality of Vancouver sits within the Province of British Columbia in Canada. Vancouver is a major urban centre and the capital of British Columbia. The city centre is 114km2 serviced by a metropolitan area measuring 2878km2. The population of the city centre is 578,041 and the metropolitan area is approximately 2,116,581. It should be noted that relative to Perth, Vancouver has a smaller metropolitan area (Perth’s is approximately 5,300km2).

Public Transport

The public transport network for the city of Vancouver and the greater Vancouver Area is predominantly governed by TransLink which is the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority. TransLink operate five services, Sky Train, West Coast Express, Sea Bus, Coast Mountain Bus, and the Albion Ferry. TransLink is very similar to the Public Transport Authority of WA (i.e. a state government authority). TransLink also works closely with the Canadian Transport Association to ensure the British Columbia services link up with the Canada wide rail network.

Roads

Local roads are under the control of Municipal Government. Aspects regarding Speed Control, Priority Control and Road Access (from uses) are addressed by the Master Municipal Construction Document (MMCD) Association. The MMCD is developed by a non-for-profit agency made up of representatives from the Municipalities; the MMCD Association sells the guideline to Municipal Engineers as the best practice guideline for Municipal Design. There is a focus on traffic control through road design (i.e. narrow streets) present also in the MMCD Green Design Guidelines http://www.mmcd.net/downloads/24093-GreenDesignGuidelines-Sept1-05.pdf.

Furthermore, the Municipalities of British Columbia have proposed a blanket 40kph speed limit in all residential zones (similar to our 50kph limit) and they already have 30kph zones around schools and playgrounds http://vancouver.ca/engsvcs/transport/40kph/index.htm. This will requires a change to the B.C. Motor Vehicle Act to allow the 40kph limit to be enforced by Municipal governments.

State highways and bridges are managed by British Columbia, federal highways ay managed by the Canadian Transport Association.


63

Pedestrians

In the MMCD there are design specifications for all pedestrian related foot path designs (including traffic calming devices). In Vancouver foot path designs are also outlined in a supplement to the MMCD called the Street Restoration Manual http://vancouver.ca/engsvcs/streets/design/pdf/SRMFinalN59August2008.pdf. Interestingly the funding for footpath infrastructure is collected from property owners. Property owners pay the municipality on per meter basis for the construction or restoration of a footpath, so properties with large frontages pay more.

Cycling

Within the Municipality of Vancouver the overall cycle plan was developed in 1999. It has now been integrated with the overall transport plan for Vancouver. Funding is administered on a 50/50 basis between the Province of B.C. and the Municipalities up to the value of $200,000. Furthermore, cycle infrastructure will only be funded if it is part of an integrated cycle plan that links and extends the existing network.

Bicycle Parking By-Law. Depending on building use, new developments are required by law to have bicycle racks (class B) installed. If it is deemed necessary underground secure facilities must be also be installed (class A) and if this occurs then showers and change rooms must also be provided under this by-law.

There are also other regulations that have aided cycling to become more integrated with the existing traffic network. First, a Helmet Law enacted in 1997. Second, bicycle tests, licenses, and number plates for bicycle couriers are mandatory (the same as a motor vehicle license). Lastly, an online cycle route planner called Cycling Metro Vancouver. This was a joint project between the University of British Columbia, TransLink, the Heart and Stroke foundation of Canada, the Canadian Institute for Health Research.

Special Needs

The access issues for people with special needs do not appear to be governed by any one specific set of guidelines or standards (e.g. Disability Access and Inclusion Plan). Rather, the issues are addressed across all planning guidelines and approvals processes in a comprehensive manner as opposed to a piecemeal approach. In the design and planning of any intersection, foot path or streetscape the needs of disabled people are catered for the design specifications via the MMCD (in the case of specific infrastructure installations like pedestrian crossings) and through consultation procedures (in the case of street redesign like Granville St Redesign). This results in an accessible design by default.

Portland Portland, like Vancouver, operates on 3 tiers of administration similar to Perth, WA. Portland also has a metropolitan agency responsible for land use planning and transport for the metropolitan areas called Metro.

The City of Portland sits within the State of Oregon in the USA. While not the capital it is the most heavily populated city in the state. The city centre is 376.5km2 with a population of 575,930. The metropolitan area is approximately 1036 km2 and is home to about 1,400,000 people. Land use planning and transportation planning of the Portland metropolitan area is governed by a directly elected regional government agency (The Metro). The Metro consists of the Clackamas, Multnomah, and Washington Counties along with the 25 cities in the Portland Oregon region. It should be noted that relative to both Perth and Vancouver, Portland has a smaller metropolitan area.

Public Transport

Public Transport within Portland is mostly under the control of TriMet which is a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon (similar to the Public Transport Authority of WA). TriMet operate metropolitan bus,


64

light rail, commuter rail, and the Portland streetcar networks. Clark County also operate a bus service independent of TriMet called C-TRAN. C-TRAN only services Clark County and links into the TriMet network of downtown Portland.

Roads

The major arterial road network is planned in conjunction with the Oregon Department of Transport, Metro, and relevant local municipalities and counties. The minor street level planning is carried out by municipal governments using the design guidelines put out by Metro. A similar model for the upkeep of sidewalks operates in Portland as in Vancouver where by adjacent property owners are billed for the upkeep of the sidewalks in front of their property. However the main difference in Portland is that the full cost is borne by the home owner, they are also given manuals on how to maintain and repair the footpath themselves rather than pay for a contractor to complete the work. The city still inspects and issues work orders to property owners and will enforce the standards set by the city for ADA compliant footpath design.

Pedestrians and Cyclists

The state of Oregon passed a piece of legislation called ‘The Bicycle Bill’. This stipulates that 1% of all state highway funding must be spent on cycling and pedestrian infrastructure. This 1% is a minimum figure there is no maximum. Furthermore, unspent amounts can be put into a reserve that can be rolled over for a period of 10 years. This bill is independent from a separate stipulation that all new roads must include cycling and pedestrian paths. Lastly the Oregon Vehicle Codes (i.e. traffic laws) are designed to protect cyclists and pedestrians. For example, Oregon Crosswalk Laws designate all intersections as unmarked crosswalks, marked crosswalks. There are also mid-block marked crosswalks. For intersections, motor vehicles must give way to pedestrians and cannot cross until all pedestrians are clear of the lane plus 6ft of the adjacent lane before proceeding.

Special Needs

With respect to the transport needs of disabled people within the City of Portland, this is dealt with across several different aspects of the design of the transportation network. First through the white can law which gives priority to pedestrians (disabled and non-disabled) at all intersection whether marked or un-marked. The best way to sum up the approach taken towards disabled populations using the transport network is to look at the 2035 Portland Region Transport Plan which states as a key objective (Objective 3.3 Equitable Access and Barrier Free Transportation) “Provide affordable and equitable access to travel choices and serve the needs of all people and businesses, including people with low income, children, elders and people with disabilities, to connect with jobs, educational, services, recreation, social and cultural activities.”


65

This has been translated into a list of actions:

3.3.1. Place a priority on investments that remove barriers that prevent access to all modes of the transportation system for underserved populations.

3.3.2. Provide transit service that is accessible to people with disabilities and provide para-transit to eligible disabled individuals to the portions of the region without adequate fixed-route service in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.

3.3.3. Provide land use and economic incentives to locate affordable housing, transit connections between low-income residential areas and employment areas and related social services in close proximity to regional transit service.

3.3.4. Provide ADA compliant pedestrian facilities, including ramps on regional facilities.

3.3.5. Provide for audible signals, curb cut tactile strips and appropriately timed signalized crosswalks at major retail centres, near bus stops on arterial streets, high volume neighborhood circulators or other major arterial streets near elderly or disabled facilities or in neighborhoods with significant elderly or disabled populations.

3.3.6. Complete gaps in the bicycle and pedestrian networks.

3.3.7. Provide short and direct pedestrian crossings at transit stops and marked crossings at regional transit stops.

3.3.8. Provide crossings and continuous sidewalks along both sides of all arterial streets with sidewalks and crossings that connect to side streets, adjacent sidewalks, buildings and transit stops.

3.3.9. Provide innovative, flexible, attractive and cost-effective alternatives to standard fixed route buses, rail and para-transit services to increase available options to elders and people with disabilities.

3.3.10. Expand outreach and education on how to use multi-modal transportation services.

3.3.11. Maintain and periodically update regional pedestrian and bicycle system inventories in coordination with TriMet, ODOT and local agencies.

3.3.12. Coordinate transportation and land uses to reduce barriers to non-motorized travel by reducing travel lengths from residential to worksites, schools, food and services.

Geelong (walk assessment) In this case the Geelong local community has assisted the Geelong City Council in designing the first strategic footpath network for the City. The network is designed to link together an otherwise unwalkable environment with high amenity footpaths leading to the school, shops and other community buildings.

The Council has been working with the local community to define what walking environment qualities it wants provided in new subdivisions. The Council launched the Walkability Toolkit and established new benchmarks for subdivision design and amenity.

In Cloverdale the strategic footpath network is designed for a high amenity route taking people to all a variety of community amenities including:

• shops

• services

• public transport stops

• schools


66

• community facilities

• public open space

It is intended to ensure that most people can walk locally most often to the amenities they use regularly. It forms a key active transport network for the location.

Sydney Metro (developer contributions for rail) The change in the contribution developers must make to rail is outlined NSW Department of Planning

circular PS 08–017. The changes focuses on the levies imposed on development under the

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. On 17 December 2008, the Premier, the Hon.

Nathan Rees MP, announced a package of reforms to infrastructure levies. The two that are of interest

here are:

• A change to the way that State infrastructure contributions are calculated, by removing rail infrastructure and bus subsidies – leading to a reduction in the charges.

• Allowing for the deferral of the point at which developers pay the State infrastructure contribution to the point of sale of a new residential lot (to improve cash flow).

In NSW that current State levy framework includes recovery of train, road, bus subsidies, land for education, health and emergency service facilities, conservation and planning delivery. The rationale is this, as rail infrastructure and bus subsidies provide a benefit to the broader community the Government will remove these types of infrastructure from the State levy framework. Therefore, the costs of the construction and operation of rail infrastructure, bus subsidies as well as social infrastructure facilities will be borne by the NSW Government. Under the reforms the Government will increase its contribution to 50 per cent for all levies that are paid before 30 June 2011.

Under the new system a developer will still be required to construct the infrastructure needed to service a precinct at its own cost. However, the developer will receive an infrastructure levy credit as financial consideration for the works it provided. The credit will cover the State’s contribution, as well as the excess capacity that was required under the PAP approval. Similar arrangements will apply to developers providing works in kind. The credit will be able to be used by developers to offset future contributions, or be traded to other developers.

In the past the payment of State infrastructure levies typically occurred before a developer generates any land/property sales (and hence receives any revenue). As part of the reforms the payments of the State levy will now typically need to occur before the transfer of title from the developer to the purchaser. The rationale for this is that it is now more difficult for developers to acquire the lines of credit needed to complete works and pay contributions prior to land sales.

Whether or not this constitutes a successful systematic approach remains to be seen. It may well stimulate developer investment in the Sydney metropolitan area and also Newcastle to the north and Wollongong to the south. However, as long term strategy focused on sustainable and accessible development, unless there are some very strict controls regarding the planning approvals process there may be an increase in the urban sprawl as developers attempt to increase lot number and size at the expense of connectivity for non-motorised transport.

Bus investment in Brisbane Australia and Curitiba Brazil The case of bus investment in Brisbane Australia and Curitiba Brazil is an interesting one. Looking first at Curitiba one would ask the question why use buses for a mass transit system in and out of a city centre,


67

why not use trains. The city of Curitiba was restricted in the 1950’s and 60’s to using buses due to the high cost of rail and difficulties of laying rail infrastructure through a flood plain. Buses can be built and extended gradually, and over time in Curitiba this is what has occurred. The result is a well developed integrated bus network, with dedicated bus lanes and a lower priority towards motor vehicles in the city centre. The originator was not a purposeful choice or plan; there were significant external factors at play that have been capitalized upon to great effect. There are similar cases of this with respect to car use and oil supply, for example North Korea have extremely low use of private motor vehicle ownership and use because of restricted trade with Oil Producing Economies, not necessarily because the North Korean government is more environmentally friendly than others.

If we turn our attention to the bus network of Brisbane Australia perhaps this may offer some direction into how an extensive bus network can be developed. Brisbane City Council operates approximately 900 buses (as of June 2008) which begs the question, how does a local government authority find sufficient funds to purchase 900 buses. The fact is Brisbane City Council has the largest population of any LGA in Australia and an operating budget that exceeds the state of Tasmania. The Brisbane City Council was created by merging 20 smaller LGA in 1924. The population is now approximately 1,000,000 residents and covers 1367km2. In this respect the Transport Branch of Brisbane City Council is responsible for a bus network that rivals the size of that operated by the West Australian Public Transport Authority. The model operating in Brisbane is similar to those in Vancouver Canada and Portland Oregon.

In summary it could be argued that to compare Perth to Brisbane or Curitiba would surmount to comparing apples with the proverbial orange (or bananas and whatever fruit is commonly grown in Curitiba). However, what we can draw from this are two prime examples where governments (local or otherwise) have had the foresight to capitalize on what strengths their city possesses (in the case of Brisbane a centralized authority), or make the best decisions possible given the circumstances they are in (e.g. Curitiba.

Wungong Urban Water Development The Wungong Urban Water (WUW) Development is under the control of the Armadale Redevelopment Authority (ARA). The WUW Developer Contribution Scheme (DCS) identifies infrastructure costs required to serve the development of the WUW project and the various Scheme Costs that are to be shared among all landowners on an equitable basis as there are a variety of lot sizes and ownerships. Landowner (developer) contributions are separated into two categories Scheme Works and Cell Works. The Scheme Works are district wide infrastructure include major transport items such as footpaths that facilitate interconnectivity with open space, schools, activity centres, public transport network, road avenues (road with avenue of trees) and linear parkland with avenue of trees. Landownders are asked to contribute to Scheme Works based on net size of their development area and the intensity of the area to be developed (the greater the size and intensity of development, the more the developer must contribute). Cell Works contributions are calculated similarly but only apply to development areas with in each of the 13 Cells (if a developer has no land in that cell then they will not have to contribute to the infrastructure costs associated to that cell). The types of works to be undertaken include:

• Major Road Intersections.

• Vehicular bridges

• Pedestrian bridges

• Regional dual use paths

• Regional Road upgrades / realignments

• District entry intersections

• Community Bores

• Water Corporation Water Main Extension


68

• Water Corporation Sewer pump station

• Gas main extension

• Service Infrastructure

• Land for Public Open Space

• Aboriginal Heritage Sites

• Foreshore Buffer and stream enhancement

• Landscaping

• Drainage Infrastructure (including living streams)

• Master Planning consultant investigation

• Developer Contribution report preparation

• Administration Costs (of scheme)

• Project Promotion Costs

• Land and Specified Costs associated with Buildings for Community Infrastructure

• Development of Regional Recreation

• Horticultural Seed Bank

A Master Plan has been developed for the development at a district level. This will form the basis for the development of separate Structure Plans for each of the 13 cells. It is recognised by the ARA that the Structure Plans, which will form the basis subsequent plans for subdivision, need to be consistent with the Master Plan. The construction of the infrastructure items listed above is carried out by the ARA. The sequencing of this is based on cash-flow and timing of landowner subdivision. Agreements regarding the scope, cost, and timing of works are reached with landowners prior to development occurring to allow ARA to adequately manage cash-flow and infrastructure works.

Wungong Urban Water shows that an authority attempting to create Accessible Communities within Western Australia is likely, where it has the power to do so, to amend or complement current WAPC policies and require more commitments from the developer. There is also likely to be a greater focus on the control of built for outcomes to overcome shortfalls in the current system. In addition, current assumptions regarding trip generation will need to be challenged to avoid road design that actively overestimates demand and thus provides the capacity which in turn may attract more vehicle trips and under Accessible Communities.


69

APPENDIX B SUMMARY OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO DPI SURVEY


70

Stock Take of Local Government Strategies

R ef L GA level LGAWalking S trategy B ike P lan

T ransport S trategy T itle of document provided by officer

1 C ity of Armadale No mentioned on pg 61 of LP S but not provided

Local P lanning S trategy, F inal Town P lanning S cheme No 4

2 Town of Bassendean Under review Under review Under review E ast Metropolitan R egional C ouncil Integrated T ransport S trategy 2007

3 C ity of Bayswater Under review Under review Under review Nil

4 C ity of B elmont Under review Under review Under review E ast Metropolitan R egional C ouncil Integrated T ransport S trategy 2007

5 Town of C ambridge No Y es Y es S trategic P lan 2009 ‐2020 and Local T ransport S trategy

6 C ity of C anning No Y es No R eferral to R oad Hierarchies P lan and B ike P lan

7 Town of C laremont Y es Y es Y es Town of C laremonts Draft T ransport P lan 2009‐2014

8 C ity of C ockburn Y es (only if F ootpath P lan is S trategic)

Y es Y es S trategic B icycle network and F ootpath P lan

9 Town of C ottes loe No reply No reply No reply10 Town of E as t F remantle no no no Nil


71



11 C ity of F remantle no yes yes http://www.freofocus.com/council/resource/Green-Transport-Plan.pdfhttp://www.freofocus.com/council/resource/bike_plan_pt1.pdfhttp://www.freofocus.com/council/resource/bike_plan_pt2.pdfhttp://www.freofocus.com/council/resource/bike_plan_pt3.pdfhttp://www.freofocus.com/council/resource/Disablity-access-plan-2007.pdfhttp://www.freofocus.com/council/resource/universal-access-map.pdfhttp://www.freofocus.com/council/resource/TransportStrategy_final.pdfhttp://www.freofocus.com/council/resource/Travelsmart_Plan.pdfhttp://www.freofocus.com/council/resource/ccatstrategy.pdf

12 C ity of Gos nells No Y es No C ity of Gosnells C ycle P lan

13 S hire of K alamunda Under review Under review Under review E ast Metropolitan R egional C ouncil Integrated T ransport S trategy 2007

14 Town of Kwinana Y es (but targeted)

Y es (but targeted)

Y es (to an extent)

Town of Kwinina T ransport S tructure P lan 2002

15C ity of Mandurah No No No Nil

16 C ity of Melville No No Y es C ity of Melville T ransport S trategy (J uly 2000)

17 Town of Mosman Park No No No Nil

18 S hire of Mundaring Under review Under review Under review E ast Metropolitan R egional C ouncil Integrated T ransport S trategy 2007

19 C ity of Nedlands No No Y es C ity of Nedlands T ransport S trategy 2006

20 S hire of Peppermint Grove No reply No reply No reply

21 C ity of Perth Y es Y es No Nil

22 C ity of Rockingham Y es Y es Y es R ockingham Integrated T ransport P lan: Meeting our F uture T ransport C hallenges


72



23 S hire of S erpentine/ J arrahdale

No Y es No

24 C ity of S outh Perth Y es (addressed in the Integrated T ransport P lan)

Y es Y es Integrated T ransport P lan

25 C ity of S tirling Y es Y es No Nil

26 C ity of S ubiaco Y es Y es Y es C ity of S ubiaco Integrated T ransport S trategy 2003

27 S hire of S wan Under review Under review Under review C ity of S wan does not have a T ransport S trategy but is a member of E astern Metropolitan R egional C ouncil which has an over‐arching R egional Integrated T ransport S trategy (December 2007)

28 Town of Victoria Park No No No Nil

29 Town of Vincent No No E lements requested covered in Draft C ar Parking S trategy R eview 2008

Town of Vincent Draft C ar Parking S trategy, West Perth Masterplan including the Leederville Masterplan Integrated T ransport S tudy, Leederville S tation P recinct S tudy

30 C ity of Wanneroo No Y es No (but is in the process of drawing one up)

Nil

31 C ity of J oondalup No Y es No Nil


73

APPENDIX C FULL REVIEW OF STRATEGIES AND POLICIES


74

State Strategies State Planning Strategy

Strategy State Planning Strategy

Policy objective

The State Planning Strategy is a strategy of the WAPC. It provides the basis for long-term state and regional land use planning and coordinates a whole-of-government approach to planning. State Planning Strategy is supportive of the concept of accessible communities by listing the following principles and actions. A similar type wording should be included in the State Planning Policies. Note the abbreviations in brackets refer to the agency with carriage of the initiatives as outlined in the State Planning Strategy. 7.2 Responding to a changing community Strategies Build a sense of community through the design of accessible settlements and public facilities. There is a need to give greater attention to urban design and subdivision design in the planning of neighbourhoods to ensure that development is accessible to pedestrians, people with disabilities and cyclists, is energy efficient, minimizes potential for crime, and provides a mixture of land uses. Criteria for plans:

• Provide a central focus (small shopping centre, community facility or activity centre);

• Ensure that the primary school has safe walking and cycling access and relates to the open space system;

• Provide land for a multiple purpose community centre for uses such as child care, community groups, recreation and cottage industries;

• Provide a site for a church; and

• The design of open space maximises overlooking for security and is designed to link areas and reinforce the attraction of the centre.

Comments and suggested actions.

Should give greater emphasis to:

Ensuring that urban design considerations in the Liveable Neighbourhoods: Community Design Code for residential land maximises the potential to foster a strong sense of community, and an accessible, safe built environment.

Promoting mixed uses of land in communities, especially through the location of housing in commercial centres.

Monitoring and promoting to private developers world best practice in the area of accessible urban design which assists in the development of a sense of community and vibrant neighbourhoods.

Ensuring in the determination of subdivision applications that consideration of urban design policies are taken into account.

Ensuring infrastructure that prioritises active travel is planned into new communities.


75

Other State Strategies

Strategy Walk WA: A Walking Strategy for Western Australia (2007 – 2020) Physical Activity Taskforce/ Be Active WA.

Policy Objective

Walk WA aims to support walking by ensuring that all who are involved in promoting this strategy work together to provide walking opportunities for all Western Australian’s. The objectives are: 1: To provide strategic management, advocacy and coordination of Walk WA. 2: To promote walking. 3: To improve the places where people walk. 4: To improve safety and security of places where people walk. 5: To implement and expand programs and services which provide opportunities for walking. Specific planning outcomes are: Increase the proportion of adults using walking paths, streets/footpaths, signed trails and/or tracks to increase physical activity levels of Western Australian’s Increase the number of walkable* metropolitan suburbs; and (*a walkable suburb is one which has connected street networks, access to shops and services and is high density) Measure the change in adults’ perception of the walking distances to local amenities e.g. local shops, public open space, and schools.

Selected Actions

The Strategy contains an extensive list of actions. Many are programs. The list below contains actions related to DPI or to be led by DPI.

• Partner with local government to build a ‘walk friendly’ assessment tool for local government to assess comfort, safety and security, accessibility and aesthetics of the local community.

• Work in partnership with local government to develop and implement streetscape design guidelines that will increase walking, reflect local character and ensure ease of use by walkers. Standards, policies and guidelines PATF, OCP LG, WALGA, DPI, NHF 2009 and ongoing review.

• Assist local government to develop and promote recreational walk trails in natural environments and public open space through provision of best practice guidelines.

• Encourage and support the development of asset management plans for the maintenance of walking infrastructure to improve coordination and control of street works to minimise risk to walkers.

• Progress the implementation of Network City strategies, policies, guidelines and frameworks

• Liaise with agencies to ensure consideration is given to reducing travel speeds on local roads wherever possible, in order to encourage more use of footpaths.

• Review opportunities and if practical, develop guidelines, for the retrofitting of older communities to support walking environments, consistent with the Network City strategy and Liveable Neighbourhood principles. Opportunities identified and guidelines, if practical, developed and circulated to local governments

• Obtain government approval for, and subsequently administer, a grant scheme for footpath development and maintenance and other associated path infrastructure improvements.

• Develop, review and promote best practice guidelines supporting walking activity (for example: lighting standards, connectivity, provision of benches, pedestrian accessibility and pedestrian advocacy). Review, audit and improve main road design and traffic management schemes to reduce or remove existing barriers to pedestrian movement.

• Develop and increase publicity and policy support for enforcement campaigns on road safety initiatives that protect walkers.

• Review, audit and improve road safety for walkers and pedestrian access to public


76

transport nodes, in particular road crossings around schools, major highway crossings and destinations such as shopping centres, hospitals, and universities.

• Promote safe, courteous and responsible shared use practices (footpaths, recreational and urban paths/trails).

• Support school walking programs and improves safety around school areas through enforcement of the 40-km/hr zones.

• Support the inclusion of lighting suitable for walkers in scheme designs and in street lighting maintenance plans, audits and programs.

• Assess public and private development proposals to ensure designs minimise safety/security risks utilising CPTED principles and improve the security of the streetscape for walkers.


The Accessible Communities Study is aimed at ensuring environments are walkable. Many of the recommendations are fundamental to the successful delivery of accessible communities.

Strategy State Designing out Crime Strategy

Policy Objective

Preventing Crime: the State Community Safety and Crime Prevention Strategy provides the framework for making WA communities safer through targeted and coordinated crime prevention and crime reduction programs. This Strategy outlines 5 key goals: 1. Supporting families, children and young people; 2. Strengthening communities and revitalising neighbourhoods; 3.Targeting priority offences; 4. Reducing repeat offending; and 5. Designing out crime. The Strategy has 5 key goals: 1.To embed Designing Out Crime in local and state planning policies; 2.To manage the built and landscaped environment to reduce crime; 3.To increase understanding of Designing Out Crime; 4.To apply Designing Out Crime principles in a multi-agency approach; and 5. To use product design and technology to reduce crime.


Safety is a critical issue in supporting accessible communities. The strategy highlights the importance of programs and co-ordination in delivering safe environments for people in public space. The strategy is supported by built environmental design criteria outlined in the Designing out Crime Guidelines.

Strategy State Sustainability Strategy

Policy Objective

Hope for the Future: The Western Australian State Sustainability Strategy is Australia's first comprehensive sustainability strategy developed by an Australian State or Territory Government. The strategy seeks to give sustainability meaning for Western Australia: its regions, its issues, its projects and its communities. It accepts that there are tensions between economic, environmental and social goals and seeks to resolve them through finding mutual benefit. The goals are outlined below. The underlined items direct action or place a responsibility on government, institutions, corporations and the community to support accessible communities either directly or through implication.


77

Relevant Statements and Policy. Goal 1 Ensure that the way we govern is driving the transition to a sustainable future.

• Sustainability assessment

• Institutional change

• Embracing sustainability in government agencies

• Partnerships for action

• Planning for sustainability

• Sustainability in the regions

• Indigenous communities and sustainability

• Research and development for sustainability

• Measuring and reporting on sustainability Goal 2 Play our part in solving the global challenges of sustainability.

• Population, development aid and environmental technology

• Maintaining our biodiversity

• Responding to greenhouse and climate change

• Oil vulnerability, the gas transition and the hydrogen economy Goal 3 Value and protect our environment and ensure the sustainable management and use of natural resources

• Sustainable agriculture

• Sustainable fisheries and aquaculture

• Sustainable forestry and plantations

• Sustainable mining and petroleum production

• Sustainable tourism

• Protecting drinking water and aquatic systems

• Sustainable coastal and marine environments

• Sustainable rangelands management Goal 4 Plan and provide settlements that reduce the ecological footprint and enhance quality of life at the same time

• Managing urban and regional growth

• Revitalising declining centres and suburbs

• Sustainable urban design

• Integrating land use and balanced transport

• Managing freight and regional transport

• Preserving air quality

• Reducing waste and managing it as a resource

• Our water future

• Sustainable energy

• Conserving cultural heritage and landscapes and creating ‘sense of place’


78

• Building sustainably Goal 5 Support communities to fully participate in achieving a sustainable future

• Community services and development

• Housing and sustainability

• Sustaining healthy communities

• Education and community awareness for sustainability

• Sustainability through culture and the arts

• Sustainability through multiculturalism Goal 6 Assist business to benefit from and contribute to sustainability

• Training and facilitation for sustainability

• Financial reform and economic policy for sustainability

• Eco-efficiency and industrial ecology

• Corporate social responsibility and industry sustainability covenants Comments and suggested actions.

Accessible communities is aligned to the State Sustainability Strategy and the Strategy mandates all partners including government agencies are to support accessible communities. Reinforce the links between accessible communities and the sustainability agenda and strategies.

WAPC Planning Policies

State Planning Policy No 1 State Planning Framework Policy (Variation No 2)

Policy Objective

Variation 2 �The State Planning Framework unites existing state and regional policies, strategies and guidelines within a central framework, which provides a context for decision-making on land use and development in Western Australia. This statement of planning policy, which does not introduce new policies but simply brings together existing policies, strategies and plans approved by the WAPC, will continue to assist local governments in preparing schemes and will also clarify the state and regional policies that apply to a particular locality.


Seek opportunities to highlight that accessible communities are supported and explained (i.e. the vision) at the highest level of WAPC policy. Ensure accessible communities related development control policies and design codes are made pursuant to SPP1.

State Planning Policy No 2 Environment and Natural Resources Policy

Policy Objective

The environment and natural resources policy defines the principles and considerations that represent good and responsible planning in terms of environment and natural resource issues within the framework of the State Planning Strategy.


Environmental protection can undermine accessibility within the urban environment where it creates a barrier to movement. Objectives need to be better considered at regional level before urban settlements are laid out.


79

State Planning Policy No 2.1 Peel-Harvey Coastal Plain Catchment Policy

Policy Objective

The Peel-Harvey coastal plain catchment policy ensures that land use changes within the Peel-Harvey estuarine system likely to cause environmental damage to the estuary are brought under planning control and prevented.


No special action required

State Planning Policy No 2.2 Gnangara Groundwater Protection



State Planning Policy No 2.3 Jandakot Groundwater Protection Policy

Policy Objective The main purpose of the policy is to ensure development over the Jandakot public groundwater supply mound is compatible with the long-term use of the groundwater for human consumption. The policy is to ensure that land use changes within the policy area that are likely to cause detrimental effects to the groundwater are brought under planning control and prevented or managed.



State Planning Policy No 2.4 Basic Raw Materials

Policy Objective This policy sets out the matters, which are to be taken into account and given effect to by the WAPC and local governments in considering zoning, subdivision and development applications for extractive industries.



State Planning Policy No 2.5 Agricultural and Rural Land Use Planning

Policy Objective

The policy focuses on the identification and appropriate zoning of highly productive agricultural land throughout the state. � It also outlines the requirements for local government in the preparation of town planning schemes and local planning strategies and is to be applied to all rural land in the state. Of the four key objectives the second is most relevant: Objective 2 Plan and provide for rural settlement where it can:�(a) benefit and support existing communities; and�(b) have access to appropriate community services and infrastructure.


80


Consider how Accessible Communities agenda can inform planning decisions in and around settlements in the area.

State Planning Policy No 2.6 State Coastal Planning Policy (amended December 2006)

Policy Objective

The policy addresses land use planning and development issues specifically as they relate to the protection and management of the coast. The policy requires strategic plans to guide local planning, development setbacks for protection against coastal processes such as erosion and storms, and the provision of coastal foreshore reserves. Guidance is provided on determining setbacks. The preparation of coastal planning strategies or coastal foreshore management plans in partnership with the broader community is also strongly advocated. The policy provides high order guidance for decision-making on coastal planning matters and applies state-wide. Implementation will be through local government town planning schemes, and regional and local strategies. Of the objectives the most relevant are:

• Provide for public foreshore areas and access to these on the coast; and

• Ensure the identification of appropriate areas for the sustainable use of the coast for housing, tourism, recreation, ocean access, maritime industry, commercial and other activities.


Consider how Accessible Communities agenda can inform planning decisions in and around coastal areas.

State Planning Policy No 2.7 Public Drinking Water Source Policy

Policy Objective The policy addresses land use and development in public drinking water supply areas. The policy will protect and manage public drinking water source areas from incompatible land uses and pollution in order to maintain the quality of the drinking water.


No specific action required.

State Planning Policy No 2.9 Water Resources

Policy Objective This policy is directly related to the overarching sector policy SPP 2 Environment and Natural Resources policy and provides clarification and additional guidance to planning decision-makers for consideration of water resources in land use planning


No specific action required

State Planning Policy No 2.10 Swan-Canning River System

Policy Objective

The policy contains a vision statement for the future of the Swan-Canning river system, policies based on the guiding principles for future land use and development in the precincts along the river system and performance criteria and objectives for specific


81

precincts. The objectives of this policy are to:

• Provide a regional framework for the preparation of precinct plans based on the precincts identified in the Swan River System Landscape Description;

• Provide a context for consistent and integrated planning and decision making in relation to the river; and

• Ensure that activities, land use and development maintain and enhance the health, amenity and landscape values of the river, including its recreational and scenic values.


Consider how Accessible Communities agenda can inform planning decisions in and around the Swan and Canning River System.

State Planning Policy No 3 Urban Growth and Settlement

Policy Objective

This policy sets out the principles and considerations, which apply to planning for urban growth and settlements in Western Australia. The objectives of this policy are:

• To promote a sustainable and well planned pattern of settlement across the State, with sufficient and suitable land to provide for a wide variety of housing, employment, recreation facilities and open space.

• To build on existing communities with established local and regional economies, concentrate investment in the improvement of services and infrastructure and enhance the quality of life in those communities.

• To manage the growth and development of urban areas in response to the social and economic needs of the community and in recognition of relevant climatic, environmental, heritage and community values and constraints.

• To promote the development of a sustainable and liveable neighbourhood form which reduces energy, water and travel demand while ensuring safe and convenient access to employment and services by all modes, provides choice and affordability of housing and creates an identifiable sense of place for each community.

• To coordinate new development with the efficient, economic and timely provision of infrastructure and services.


The policy forms the critical next layer of state policy support under SPP1. Carefully review SPP3 to ensure it provides clear and direct support for accessible communities.

State Planning Policy No 3.1 Residential Design Codes (Variation 1)

Policy Objective

The Codes deal with fundamental aspects of the design of residential development, aimed at:

• Encouraging the widest possible range of dwelling types, to meet community desires;

• Encouraging innovative design solutions;

• Ensuring that new developments incorporate adequate standards of access and amenity including for people with a disability;

• Ensuring that adverse impacts on neighbouring residents are minimised;


82

• Ensuring that new developments contribute positively to the streetscape and locality of which they form a part; and

• Aiding fair, efficient, straightforward and timely approvals. These aims encompass the desirable, but potentially conflicting, concepts of flexibility and certainty. In order to accommodate both, the Codes have been formulated using a modified “performance” approach whereby the requirements are set out as follows:

• First, the aim or Objective of the design element or aspect is stated;

• Second, a set of Performance Criteria is provided that must be satisfied if the objective is to be met; and

• Third, a set of Acceptable Development provisions related to the performance criteria is established.

Parking provisions require two parking bays per single dwelling and one dedicated and approximately 1.5 to 2 bays in total with visitor parking. Off site parking is permitted and some reduction of parking is permitted for parking shared with daytime uses. On street parking may be permitted in lieu of on site parking where Council can identify parking that will in almost exclusive use. Parking controls can be performance assessed


The residential design codes provide an established framework for managing some aspects of density, bulk and design. They are being stretched to manage evolving expectations and practice without a change to the basic framework. The almost universal acceptance that detailed area plans are needed for greater quality and surety of outcomes including better environments for accessible communities shows the need to revise the R-Codes. The R-Codes permit estate-scale strata title developments without providing due control of these. The R-Codes provide almost no guidance on mixed use (residential). The R-Codes do not deal with non-residential forms of development in the urban environment. Parking requirements are set by the R-Codes other than if a local policy has been created or the local government accepts performance assessment for parking ratios. This, more than any other area of regulation should be based on the location of the development, and the availability of alternatives. These alternatives should include stronger recognition that on street parking can be used to meet requirements and waive requirements based on proximity to services.

State Planning Policy No 3.2

Planning for Aboriginal Communities

Policy Objective(s)

The purpose of the policy is to provide a framework for the planning of large permanent Aboriginal communities. The policy will also provide a basis for negotiation between Aboriginal communities and local government about planning control and foster the development of co-operative strategies, which aim to minimise the need to use strict regulatory powers.


Consider how Accessible Communities agenda can inform planning decisions in and around aboriginal settlements.


Natural Hazards and Disasters

Policy Objective(s)

The purpose of this policy is to inform and guide the WAPC in the undertaking of its planning responsibilities, and in integrating and coordinating the activities of state agencies that influence the use and development of land to minimise the adverse impacts of natural disasters on communities, the economy and the environment


83



State Planning Policy No3.5

Historic Heritage Conservation

Policy Objective(s)

This policy sets out the principles of sound and responsible planning for the conservation and protection of Western Australia’s historic heritage.




State Industrial Buffer Policy

Policy Objective(s)

The purpose of the policy is to provide a consistent state-wide approach for the protection and long-term security of industrial zones, transport terminals (including ports) other utilities and special uses.




Metropolitan Centres Policy Statement for the Perth Metropolitan Region (Draft State Planning Policy - Activity Centres for Perth and Peel)

Policy Objective(s)

The purpose of the policy is to provide a broad regional planning framework to co-ordinate the location and development of retail and commercial activities in the metropolitan region. It is mainly concerned with the location, distribution and broad design criteria for the development of commercial activities at the regional and district level. Local planning strategies prepared by local governments will provide more detailed guidance for planning and development control at the local level. The policy is intended to provide a guide for centre development that is flexible enough to enable commercial development to respond to market conditions and has a degree of certainty to assist in commercial investment decisions. The objectives of the policy are to:

• Establish a hierarchy of well-located centres in the metropolitan region;

• Encourage centres to be developed as the focus of the community and employment activities comprising a range of appropriate commercial and community uses;

• Ensure that centres are highly accessible, of a high standard of urban design and developed with due regard to the residential amenity of the locality;

• Encourage local governments to develop local planning strategies to provide detailed planning mechanisms to implement the objectives of this policy; and

• Provide policy measures and guidelines for the planning and design of centre developments.


The existing policy’s main intent is to manage the location and distribution of centres through allocation of allowable retail floor space. The draft policy has the same intent; however, it allows a performance based approach to determining appropriate levels of retail floor space based on, amongst other things, catchment and accessibility. The draft policy contains guidance on centre design pursuant to its core objectives; however, a more detailed examination of the policy revealed little concrete regulation in


84

this regard. The application is also limited to the Perth and Peel metropolitan areas. The role of the policy needs reconsideration and concrete regulations on design adopted within the policy or in another policy framework. The current broad statements of vision are open to misinterpretation and challenge.


Poultry Farms Policy

Policy Objective(s)

This policy is to guide the WAPC and local governments in determining rezoning, subdivision and development applications for land in the vicinity of poultry farms and for the development of poultry farms. The policy also sets out the process and matters to be taken into account in dealing with residential and other forms of development in the vicinity of poultry farms. The WAPC is aware of the conflicts, which can arise between poultry farms and residential, rural-residential and other developments because of the odours, noise, dust and visual impacts associated with poultry farms.




Land Use Planning in the Vicinity of Perth Airport

Policy Objective(s)

The policy applies to land in the vicinity of Perth airport, which is, or may in the future, be affected by aircraft noise.


No special action required. It should be noted that the airport forms a major land holding in the metropolitan area and is a barrier to movement. Conversely it presents a planning opportunity for compactness.


Telecommunications Infrastructure

Policy Objective(s)

The policy provides a framework for the preparation, assessment and determination of applications for planning approval of telecommunications facilities within the context of the planning system of Western Australia.




Jandakot Airport Vicinity

Policy Objective(s)

This policy applies to land in the vicinity of Jandakot Airport, which is, or may in the future, be affected by aircraft noise associated with the movement of aircraft. The objectives of this policy are to:

• Protect Jandakot Airport from encroachment by incompatible land use and development, so as to provide for its ongoing, safe, and efficient operation; and

• Minimise the impact of airport operations on existing and future communities with particular reference to aircraft noise.




85


Leeuwin-Naturaliste Ridge Policy

Policy Objective(s)

The purpose of the policy is to provide the strategic planning framework for the Leeuwin-Naturaliste Ridge area for the next 30 years by providing greater vision, guidance and certainty of land use.


Consider how Accessible Communities agenda can inform planning decisions in and around remote settlements.


Ningaloo Coast

Policy Objective(s)

The Ningaloo coast statement of planning policy 6.3 applies to all land within the Ningaloo coast policy area.


Consider how Accessible Communities agenda can inform planning decisions in and around remote settlements.

Draft State Planning Policy No 2.8

Bushland Policy for the Perth Metropolitan Region (Draft)

Policy Objective(s)

The aim of this policy is to provide a statutory policy and implementation framework that will ensure bushland protection and management issues in the Perth Metropolitan Region (PMR) are appropriately addressed. This policy recognises the protection and management of significant bushland areas, which have been identified for protection through an endorsed strategy, as a fundamental consideration in the planning process, while also seeking to integrate and balance wider environmental, social and economic considerations, thereby reflecting the principles of sustainability.


Bushland protection can undermine accessibility within the urban environment where it creates a barrier to movement. Objectives need to be considered at regional level before urban settlements are laid out.

Draft State Planning Policy No 3.6

Development Contributions (Draft)

Policy Objective(s)

The draft policy sets out the principles and considerations that apply to development contributions for the provision of infrastructure in new and established urban areas, and the form, content and process to be followed. The objectives of this policy are:

• To promote the efficient and effective provision of public infrastructure and facilities to meet the demands arising from new growth and development;

• To ensure that development contributions are necessary and relevant to the development to be permitted and are charged equitably among those benefiting from the infrastructure and facilities to be provided; and

• To ensure consistency and transparency in the system for apportioning, collecting and spending development contributions.


The policy allows for contributions pursuant to a contribution plan and also standard developer contributions. Standard contributions allow for contributions to paths and roads but not ancillary items such as bike racks and seating. The explanation of inclusions that could be added to a contribution appears more extensive. Review the policy to ensure it is supportive of contributions to the full needs of accessible communities prior to adoption.


86

Draft State Planning Policy

Metropolitan Freight Network

Policy Objective(s)

The intent of this policy is to identify and protect the metropolitan freight road and rail network as well as minimise the adverse impact of freight transport noise on adjacent development. The objectives of the policy are to:

• Facilitate the development and operation of an efficient freight network, based on strategic co-location of freight handling facilities serviced by an integrated network of freight transport facilities;

• Protect the primary freight network from avoidable encroachment by any incompatible or noise sensitive development with the potential to compromise freight handling and/or transport operations;

• Minimise adverse environmental and social impacts associated with the handling and movement of freight on noise sensitive development, such as housing; and

• Inform local government and landowners of the designation of existing and proposed freight network.


As many areas of the freight network impose pressures on the urban environment, the policy needs to allow a balance between objectives especially in regard to freight movement efficiency benefits versus accessible community benefits. Review the policy to ensure it is supportive of the full needs of accessible communities prior to adoption.

Draft State Planning Policy

Network City: Community Planning Strategy for Perth and Peel

The objectives of this policy are to confirm the primary status of the Network City Framework, Network City Action Plan and Network City: Community Planning Strategy for Perth and Peel as the metropolitan strategy for Perth and Peel. The policy sets out the ways in which Network City will be used by the WAPC and to inform the WAPC’s policy making program.

See Network City: Community Planning Strategy for Perth and Peel (September 2004) in this section..

WAPC Operational Policy Liveable Neighbourhoods

State Operational Policy

Liveable Neighbourhoods

. Liveable Neighbourhoods has been adopted by the WAPC as an operational policy, and is to be followed in the design and approval of urban development. Liveable Neighbourhoods applies to structure planning and subdivision for greenfield sites and for the redevelopment of large brownfield and urban infill sites. In general, Liveable Neighbourhoods replaces the current WAPC development control policies. Where there is conflict with existing policy, Liveable Neighbourhoods will prevail unless an applicant can demonstrate why the relevant Liveable Neighbourhoods policies cannot or should not apply. Overlaps between development control policies and Liveable Neighbourhoods will be progressively removed by either incorporation into Liveable Neighbourhoods or


87

rescission of redundant policies. Development control policies will of course be retained for those matters not covered by Liveable Neighbourhoods.


While Liveable Neighbourhoods replaces many (outdated) development control policies it is limited in its application to greenfield sites and large brownfield sites. Its application could be extended to all sites over 5 ha or in locations where strategic connections would be important and to all centres. Liveable Neighbourhoods relies on many references to other standards and guidelines. Many of these are useful contributions in that they deal with walking, cycling and disabled access as well as traffic management and constructions standards. However, some are contradictory to Liveable Neighbourhoods, intentions and subject to change. The success of Liveable Neighbourhoods at the street organisation level leaves scope for a supporting set of documents to control street design and built form.

Community Design chapter Key Objectives Relevant to Accessible Communities

To facilitate a sustainable approach to urban development by minimising non-renewable energy use and car dependence, encouraging greater local self-containment of neighbourhoods and towns.

To develop a coherent urban system of compact walkable neighbourhoods which cluster to form towns with relatively intense, mixed-use town centres that are capable of catalysing a broad range of employment and social opportunities.

To provide a movement network which has a highly-interconnected street network that clearly distinguishes between arterial routes and local streets, establishes good internal and external access for residents, maximises safety, encourages walking and cycling, supports public transport and minimises the impact of through traffic.

To structure urban areas to enable public transport systems to provide a viable alternative to private cars.


The Community Design requirements lead international current practice for accessible communities, in intent. They suggest a wide range of land form use and built form controls, which are largely outside the control of Liveable Neighbourhoods. Some of these can be reinforced through commitments in structure plans but implementation falls to local government which may not have the political support, resources, mandate or standards to enforce outcomes such as minimum densities, minimum built form intensity, maximum parking standards and proper investment in streetscape.

Movement chapter

Street movement network

Key Objectives Relevant to Accessible Communities

To provide acceptable levels of safety and convenience for all street users in residential areas, while ensuring acceptable levels of amenity and minimising negative effects of through traffic.

To provide a managed network of streets with clear physical distinctions between arterial routes and local streets based on function, legibility, convenience, traffic volume, vehicle speed, public safety and amenity.

To support development that fronts streets wherever possible. To establish a movement network which provides convenient linkages to activity

centres and local facilities either in or adjoining the development. To provide a movement network which is efficient, affordable, legible, minimises

travel time, supports access to public transport and contributes to limiting fossil fuel use.

Comments and The requirements lead international current practice for accessible communities, in


88

suggested actions.

intent. In practice the tables and diagrams in Liveable Neighbourhoods perpetuate an inflexible hierarchical road system that gives little consideration to accessibility, safety and convenience other than for vehicles. Speeds on larger roads are in particular set by volume rather than context. Conversely, minor streets are designed with kerb radii at intersections that exceed best practice. Large lot truncations accompany these. In addition, roundabouts are promoted where more accessible communities focused options are being adopted elsewhere.

Public transport Key Objectives Relevant to Accessible Communities

To design all urban areas to facilitate increased use of public transport.

To ensure efficient and convenient public transit routes and to locate transit stops in a street network that facilitates access by pedestrians, cyclists, buses and cars.

To accommodate a comprehensive public transit network that is efficient to operate, comfortable to travel on, and with bus stops that are conveniently and safely accessible by foot from most dwellings.


Planning for public transport is in line with accessible communities; however the provision of public transport is not within Liveable Neighbourhoods control. Timing of the delivery of public transport infrastructure and services and frequency is seen to be important but not always linked to approvals.

Cycle movement network


To provide a safe, convenient and legible bike movement network to meet the needs of both experienced and less experienced cyclists, including on-road and off-road routes.


The objective is in line with accessible communities and the requirements are excellent, however Liveable Neighbourhoods does not control detailed design. To ensure Liveable Neighbourhoods is achieved appropriate supporting guidelines are needed.

Movement for people with disabilities


To provide a safe, convenient and legible movement network for people with disabilities, including those using wheelchairs and similar aids.


The objective is in line with accessible communities and the requirements are excellent, however Liveable Neighbourhoods does not control detailed design. Requirements for footpaths are adequate except where footpaths are not required on both sides of the street.

Pedestrian movement network


To provide a safe, convenient and legible movement network for pedestrians, principally along the street network; to provide excellent accessibility between residences and safe and efficient access to points of attraction in and beyond the development.

To design street networks to optimise the walkable access to centres, schools, public transit stops, and other destinations.


89

To design major routes as integrator arterials with extensive and frequent opportunity for pedestrians to move safely along and across them.

To design and detail new developments to promote and support walking to daily activities.


The objective is in line with accessible communities and the requirements are excellent, however Liveable Neighbourhoods does not control detailed design. Requirements for footpaths are adequate except where footpaths are not required on both sides of all streets.

Street design Key Objectives Relevant to Accessible Communities

To provide attractive streetscapes which reinforce the functions of a street as important and valuable public places that add value to the amenity of adjacent housing and developments.

To enable roads and verges to perform their designated functions in the street network, recognising, that streetscapes that are too wide encourage higher vehicle speeds.

To provide street geometry which is safe and appropriate to the street function. To accommodate on-street parking where required, including parking for people with

disabilities.


The objective is in line with accessible communities and the requirements are excellent, however Liveable Neighbourhoods does not control detailed design. Requirements for street trees and street furniture are limited.

Street construction


To construct roads to carry vehicles at a minimum whole of life cost to the community.

To provide a road edge that is appropriate for the control of vehicle movements, performs any required drainage function, is structurally adequate, is detailed to accommodate pedestrian, cyclist and disabled user requirements and is sensitive to the context in which it is located.

To accommodate public utility services and sustainable water management features.


The requirements largely direct readers to other standards and policies. These polices are often inflexible and the guidelines referenced have sometimes been superseded. A review is needed to properly guide the reader to the appropriate guidelines. It may be simpler to refer to a new WA design manual or advice note reference, which can be updated as Austroads and other standards change without the need to update Liveable Neighbourhoods constantly.

Utilities Chapter Key Objectives Relevant to Accessible Communities

To maximise the efficient location of utilities while providing sufficient space to accommodate large canopy street trees in all road reservations, except rear laneways.

To provide public lighting in streets and public spaces for the safety of pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles.

To accommodate services that will reduce the effect on public amenity, provide flexibility in road design and minimise maintenance costs.


The requirements create large verge widths, relatively wide streets and only allow for trees. They are not required. The standards support an inflexible approach to utility provision undermining the potential for narrow traffic-calmed streets and more efficient land use.


90

Activity Centres and Employment Chapter Key Objectives Relevant to Accessible Communities

That new residential areas are provided with sufficient and appropriately located land for activity centres and other employment and business needs.

That activity centres, more intensive integrated employment areas and tertiary education facilities are located in walking distance of existing or proposed public transport nodes, and that provide adequate development intensity and land use mix that can support public transport services.

To facilitate activity centres that are structured as mixed-use centres in a predominantly main street based format, and are detailed to provide a high quality public realm supportive of public transport, walking and cycling, in addition to good car and service vehicle access.

To facilitate well-distributed town (district) and neighbourhood centres throughout the urban area, such that the majority of dwellings are within a 400 to 500 metre radius of a centre, such centres can support, at a minimum, daily local retail, a post box and a public transport stop.

That mixed uses centres are located and designed to encourage a broad mix of land uses that includes residential, commercial and office uses.

To provide adequate areas for low intensity industrial development and car-dependent service businesses in locations that are appropriate in terms of heavy vehicle access, client exposure, compatibility with surrounding uses, and that are not in core public transport nodes or in the walkable catchment of a neighbourhood.

To provide for appropriate industrial and low intensity non-retail business in strategically located land adjoining freeway intersections and major arterial roads to take advantage of the accessibility and exposure.

To identify a variety of appropriate locations for live and work dwellings and home-based businesses, and to ensure that detailed design and planning provisions can encourage their use for workplaces.

To promote the restructuring of existing urban areas to improve the distribution of centres in walking distance of residences, and to upgrade the quality and function of existing centres to support mixed uses, public transport, walkability, intensification, sense of community, amenity, and reduced car travel.

To encourage major civic, cultural and community facilities (such as council offices, performing arts centres, tertiary institutions, hospitals) to be located in centres, and are designed as well-integrated, land-efficient urban buildings, rather than in campus layouts.

To recognise that centres and employment areas often develop later than their surrounding residential areas, and to put in place mechanisms to facilitate appropriate interim uses, together with a strategy that easily facilitates gradual intensification over time.

To facilitate the identification and achievement of appropriate employment and jobs targets in association with new residential areas.

That an appropriate amount and variety of medium density housing is provided in and around activity centres.

That appropriate employment and business development strategies be required as a component of structure plans.


The objectives and majority of requirements would, if fully implemented, provide the foundation for exemplary accessible communities. Implementation beyond subdivision level is largely dependent on local government through assessment of compliance with subdivision conditions, town planning schemes and centres plans.


91

Schools Chapter Key Objectives Relevant to Accessible Communities

To provide a surrounding street network system that is appropriately designed to accommodate safe access and on-street parking.

To enable schools sites to be located and designed to promote safe walkability, cycling and access by public transport consistent with the requirements of this element.


The objectives and majority of requirements would, if fully implemented, provide the foundation for exemplary accessible communities for children. Implementation beyond subdivision level is largely dependent on local government and the Department of Education.

Note – Further review of regulations within Liveable Neighbourhoods was undertaken to inform the study. This is not provided within the report.

Development Control Policies

General

Development Control Policy 1.1

Subdivision of Land - General Principles

Policy Objective(s)

This policy sets out the general principles, which will be used by the WAPC in determining applications for the subdivision of land. It indicates the WAPC’s basic requirements for the creation of new lots as well as the procedures it will follow in processing subdivision applications.


Liveable Neighbourhoods has provided a comprehensive set of design principles for subdivision of land. The policy does not reflect these advances adequately.


Development Control - General Principles

Policy Objective(s)

This policy deals with the general principles to be used by the WAPC in its determination of applications for approval to commence development. The WAPC is the responsible authority for those classes of application listed in section 1.5 of the policy, although the creation of the Swan River Trust transfers responsibility for some of those applications to the trust.


While not a development control document Liveable Neighbourhoods and other policies including the Designing out Crime Policy provide a comprehensive set of design principles for development control. The policy does not reflect these advances adequately.


Strata Titles

Policy Objective(s)

This policy deals with those classes of strata title proposals, which require the approval of the WAPC and sets out the criteria to be used in the determination of applications for that approval. It does not apply to all strata title proposals, many of which are now exempt from the need for the WAPC's approval.


92


Strata titles vary between duplexes and strata title towns. While strata title provides a useful means of evading many obligatory service corridor and street width requirements it should be subject to accessible communities assessment. This is not ensured by the policy. Community title in the eastern states may be introduced in WA. This could coincide with the development of standards for strata title and green title neighbourhoods ensuring accessible communities.


Functional Road Classification for Planning

Policy Objective(s)

The purpose of this policy is to outline an established road classification system for use in planning new road networks. Policy Objective(s)s:

• To establish clear universal recognition of the expected functions of different roads, thereby providing a consistent and uniform approach to road planning in urban areas throughout Western Australia.

• To help identify and evaluate the degree of compatibility between roads and adjacent land use.


The policy is not supportive. It needs to be revised to manage application of poorly designed or incongruous cul-de-sacs and overcome excessive focus on hierarchy and traffic separation.


Bicycle Planning

Policy Objective(s)

This policy describes the planning considerations which should be taken into account in order to improve the safety and convenience of cycling. Policy Objective(s)s:

• To make cycling safer and more convenient through the provision of end-of-trip facilities and by the provision of better cycle route networks.

• To ensure that the needs of cyclists, are recognised and provided for by planning and road construction authorities.

• To encourage more work, school and shopping trips to be made by bicycle through the provision of more (and better) cycling facilities.

• To increase the general awareness of the benefits of cycling.

• To ensure adequate consideration is given to the provision of cycling facilities in planning studies and in the implementation of statutory planning controls.


The policy is out of date and must be reviewed. In particular the reference to standards is out of date. One of the policy objectives is to make cycling safer and more convenient through the provision of end-of-trip facilities and by the provision of better cycle route networks. If these facilities were actually required at the development approval stage then this policy could be implemented.


Planning to Support Transit Use and Transit Oriented Development

Policy Objective(s)

This policy seeks to maximise the benefits to the community for an effective and well used public transit system by promoting planning and development outcomes that will support and sustain public transport use. This policy applies to all areas of the state, within transit precincts as defined under the policy, and is intended to inform government agencies, local government,


93

landowners and prospective developers of the policy approach which will be applied by the WAPC.


The policy is highly relevant, however many standards, in particular minimum density are not practised. Should be made mandatory.


General Road Planning

Policy Objective(s)

This policy brings together in one document all those policies of the WAPC, which are not included in the residential road planning policy and apply generally to the planning of all roads. Consistent with the approach taken in the residential road planning policy, this policy also refers to the functional road classification system established in functional road classification for planning.


The policy is supportive of intense development and more accessible communities; however it outlines an outdated approach to road hierarchy and has been superseded by Liveable Neighbourhoods. The policy should be deleted.


Canal Estates and Other Artificial Waterway Developments

Policy Objective(s)

This policy sets out the WAPC’s requirements for the assessment and approval of canal estate developments. The general principles and procedures which should be observed and followed by those proposing to undertake canal estate projects are set out in the associated guidelines. The general policy principles and guidelines also apply to other projects incorporating artificial waterways, such as harbours and marinas. In these cases, however, the detailed zoning provisions may vary. Canal estates and artificial waterways projects affect the interests of many authorities and agencies and so it is important that the recommended procedures are followed as closely as possible to achieve the best and quickest results from the system through which proposals must pass before approvals are obtained.


The policy is limited in its guidance on Accessible waterfronts.


Amendments to the Metropolitan Region Scheme

Policy Objective(s)

The Metropolitan Region Town Planning Scheme Act 1959 provides two procedures by which the Metropolitan Region Scheme may be amended. The first of these follows the procedures observed when preparing the scheme itself involving, among other things, approval by the Governor and tabling in both houses of Parliament where motions to disallow the amendment may be passed. (s. 33). This is referred to as a 'substantial' or 'major' amendment. The other procedure involves matters, which in the opinion of the WAPC do not involve a substantial alteration to the scheme and are referred to as 'non-substantial' or 'minor' amendments (s. 33A).


There is a need to expand on one of the dot points in 2.1,”Any other land use, transport, environmental or planning implications associated with the proposal“.


94


Location and Design of Freeway Service Centres

Policy Objective(s)

This policy establishes that there are circumstances where a freeway service centre may be supported. The policy sets down the location criteria, submission and rezoning requirements for such proposals


N/A

WAPC Development Control Guidelines

For the Lifting of Urban Deferment

Policy Objective(s)

These guidelines describe the basis for lifting of urban deferment. These guidelines have been amended and updated in 2007. The amendments: (i) Provide for the notification to applicants of any unresolved issues concerning their proposal to lift urban deferment, and (ii) Advise applicants of the option to have their proposal referred to the WAPC for decision prior to the resolution of such issues.


N/A


Transport Assessment Guidelines for Developments (Version for trial and evaluation)

Policy Objective(s)

These guidelines (for voluntary trial and evaluation) are to assist transport officers in assessing the transport implications of land use development proposals. The Department for Planning and Infrastructure (DPI), on behalf of the WAPC, is preparing guidelines for the assessment of the transport components of land use planning and development proposals. A draft for stakeholder comment was distributed in August 2005 (and installed on this site). The comments received have been incorporated into the guidelines with the revised version, August 2006, endorsed by the WAPC Transport Committee as a “working” document for voluntary trial and evaluation. This latest version of the guidelines (Version for Trial and Evaluation, August 2006) replaces the August 2005 draft for comment. Transport officers within the DPI will be using the guidelines to assist them in assessing the transport implications of land use development proposals. Transport officers within local government are encouraged to do likewise. Proponents of land use developments, and their planning/transport consultants, are also encouraged to trial the guidelines to assist them in determining the transport infrastructure required to support their development and the potential transport impacts on the surrounding area.


The guidelines do provide a focus on planning for other users beside vehicle users. The role could be expanded. Policy needs to be reviewed and finalised.

Residential


95


Residential Subdivision

Policy Objective(s)

This policy establishes the WAPC’s position regarding residential subdivision. The policy has been developed and refined over many years taking into account the adoption and subsequent amendments to the Residential Design Codes and the government’s policies on sewerage and underground power.


Design codes are flexible enough to allow for appropriate street front design but do not require street surveillance. Need for a code on high density housing in urban areas. This work is underway. DP to review when complete. Contains extensive overlap with Liveable Neighbourhoods except that it would appear to cover infill and some other areas, which Liveable Neighbourhoods does not.


Public Open Space in Residential Areas

Policy Objective(s)

The basic component of this policy is the requirement that 10 per cent of the gross subdivisible area of a conditional subdivision shall be given up free of cost by the subdivider for public open space. This has been the basis of public open space policy in the state for many years, and emanates from the recommendations of the Plan for the Metropolitan Region Perth and Fremantle.


The policy supports accessible communities through the provision of public open space in urban environments. The recognition of the importance of using 10% and linking to other open spaces is not strong. Tends to allow playing fields as the primary open space approach. Review policy in light of the provisions provided for within Liveable Neighbourhoods.


School Sites

Policy Objective(s)

This policy statement contains the WAPC’s general requirements for school and TAFE college sites in residential areas, and recognises the need to consider any requirements for higher education facilities. It should be used during the preparation of designs for the subdivision of residential land at both the structure planning (district and local structure planning) and subdivision design stages.


The policy would be subject to detailed review, however the subject of schools is now included in Liveable Neighbourhoods. The policy should be deleted and any items not covered in Liveable Neighbourhoods transferred to Liveable Neighbourhoods.


Special Residential Zones

Policy Objective(s)

This policy sets out the requirements of the WAPC for the creation of special residential zones in terms of location, internal design and servicing, and statutory provisions. The purpose of special residential zones is to allow for lots, of a size, which will offer a style of spacious living at densities lower than those characteristic of traditional single residential developments but higher than those found in special rural zones.


N/A

WAPC Development Control Policy 2.6

Residential Road Planning

Policy Objective(s)

This policy sets out the WAPC's requirements for the planning and design of roads in residential areas and provides guidelines for the design and layout of residential roads. The policy has been prepared with particular reference to the quality of the neighbourhood environment and the cost of housing. It offers a response to these issues in terms of road planning and design.


96


The policy contains many inappropriate street layout forms and recommendations. The policy has been superseded by Liveable Neighbourhoods. The policy should be deleted.


The Design and Geometric Layout of Residential Roads

Policy Objective(s)

These guidelines provide suggested design criteria for each level of road in the road hierarchy and provide some simple aspects of geometric design. While responsibility for the approval of the detailed design will rest with the relevant local government, the WAPC will be guided by the policy and these guidelines in establishing road reservations and networks through its determination of subdivision applications. Local governments are advised to favourably consider these guidelines, but also to consider any Australian standards where they exist.


This is an obsolete policy, which provides little of the complexity and integration of Liveable Neighbourhoods. It suggests a road hierarchy without consideration of land use integration. Policy should be revised.


The Preparation of Local Structure Plans for Urban Release Areas

Policy Objective(s)

These guidelines have been prepared with the aim of achieving a more comprehensive and uniform approach to the preparation of local structure plans for urban release areas in the metropolitan region. They indicate the WAPC's basic requirements for local structure plans and set out the endorsements procedure to be followed.


The policy could be deleted in favour of Liveable Neighbourhoods.


The Preparation, Form and Content of Local Housing Strategies

Policy Objective(s)

These guidelines have been prepared to assist local governments in the preparation of local housing strategies. They provide a guide to the form, content and process of preparing such a strategy.


The policy is relevant but out of date. Densities are too low to provide for accessible communities.

Rural


Subdivision of Rural Land

Policy Objective(s)

This policy sets out the principles, which will be used by the WAPC in determining applications for the subdivision of rural land. This operational policy guides the subdivision of rural land to achieve the four key objectives of State Planning Policy 2.5 Agriculture and Rural Land Use Planning to protect agricultural land, plan for rural settlement, minimise land use conflict and manage natural resources.


N/A


97

WAPC Development Control Guidelines 3.7

Fire Planning

Policy Objective(s)

This policy seeks to ensure adequate fire protection for new subdivisions and related developments by proper strategic land use planning, good subdivision layout, and development criteria. The major changes introduced by this policy are: a) The use of bush fire hazard assessment from a fire protection perspective to determine the nature and extent of controls necessary to reduce fire risks inherent in the subdivision and development of land. b) The adoption of objectives, performance criteria and acceptable solutions which must be met to reduce fire risks (contained in Planning for Bush Fire Protection (2001) published by FESA or any adopted National Guidelines). c) The incorporation of model town planning scheme provisions relating to bush fire protection based on the model scheme text.


N/A


Preparation of a Local Rural Strategy

Policy Objective(s)

These guidelines are designed to assist local governments in preparing local rural strategies. Each local area will be different and have different needs that should be reflected in the content of the strategies. However, the basic structure and the type of considerations that go into the preparation of a local rural strategy should have a degree of commonality, which is embodied in these guidelines.


N/A


Land Capability Assessment for Local Rural Strategies

Policy Objective(s)

The guidelines provide for a variety of land uses, which may be appropriate for rural areas. The manual has been developed by the Department of Agriculture's land evaluation group with two aims:

• To inform local governments, planners, land developers and the relevant government departments of the Department of Agriculture's general methodology for land capability assessment; and

• To provide a more simplified method and appropriate guidelines for planners to undertake land capability assessment for the development of a local rural strategy.


N/A


98

Industrial and commercial

WAPC Development Control Policy 41.

Rural-Residential Development in the Perth Metropolitan Region

Policy Objective(s)

These guidelines have been prepared to assist local governments preparing local rural strategies and re-zonings for rural-residential development in the Perth metropolitan region. The WAPC will have regard to these guidelines in considering local rural strategies and re-zonings for rural-residential purposes.


N/A


Planning for Hazards and Safety

Policy Objective(s)

N/A


N/A


Local Commercial Strategies - Preparation, Form and Content - Guide

Policy Objective(s)

These guidelines have been prepared to assist local governments in the preparation of local commercial strategies. They are intended to provide advice on the form, content and process of preparing such a strategy.


The policy should be expanded to include more on appropriate location of centres.

Land reserved by the Metropolitan Region Scheme

WAPC Development Control 5.1

Regional Roads (Vehicular Access)

Policy Objective(s)

This policy sets out the principles to be applied when considering proposals for vehicle access to or from developments abutting regional roads. It is intended to inform government agencies, local governments and prospective developers of these principles and to act as guidelines for the exercise of development control powers in this regard.


Principles need to be modified to allow for regional roads of differing function (transport or activity corridors)


Use of Land Reserved for Parks and Recreation


99

Policy Objective(s)

The purpose of this policy is to outline the circumstances under which the WAPC may approve the use and development of land reserved for parks and recreation for different purposes. Specifically where the land is in the ownership of the WAPC. The policy also sets out the procedure for handling requests from sporting club and community groups for the use of reserved land.


The policy is supported, especially relating to passive and active recreation on public open space.


Advertising on Reserved Land

Policy Objective(s)

This policy sets out the objectives and considerations taken into account by the WAPC in determining applications for the display of advertisements on land reserved under a region scheme. The erection, alteration, and extension of any advertisement on land reserved by a region scheme require the approval of the WAPC.


N/A

Environment and amenity

WAPC Development Control Guidelines 6.1

Country Coastal Planning Policy

Policy Objective(s)

The policy is intended to assist local government, developers and planning consultants by providing a set of general guidelines, which set out the WAPC's approach. The policy is intended primarily to deal with new development and subdivision and may not always be applicable to areas previously developed and subdivided.


(refer 3.9 pedestrian access)


Planning Considerations in the Metropolitan Region for Sources of Public Water Supply and Sensitive Water Resource Areas

Policy Objective(s)

The WAPC will apply this policy when considering regional or district planning schemes or their amendment and in determining and imposing conditions on subdivision applications. The WAPC may require the provision of information such as a water resource management plan, incorporating consideration of drainage and water resource protection impact of planned development on water resources.


N/A


100

WAPC Planning Bulletins

WAPC Planning Bulletins

Various

Objectives The Planning Bulletins provide and extensive array of guidance on planning process, planning work underway and planning guidelines as well as including guidelines themselves The Bulletins are reviewed in detail in Appendix D.


The role and function of the bulletins is varied between providing advice and updates. A clear distinction needs to be made between their various roles and where they provide an interim advice they need to be deleted once the policy updates have been made or the process concluded. The role of bulletins should be reviewed.

Procedural Guidelines

Report Guidelines Liveable Neighbourhoods Street Layout, Design and Traffic Management Guidelines

Objective These Traffic Management Guidelines build on the current body of knowledge of planning and traffic engineering to provide solutions that meet the aims of Liveable Neighbourhoods. Planners and traffic engineers in assessing proposed designs submitted under Liveable Neighbourhoods can use them. They are also intended to help give design guidance for consultants preparing proposals.


These guidelines approximate a street design manual for Liveable Neighbourhoods. Many of the practices are not as accessible communities focused as approaches in other countries but they represent an advance on current practice in WA and a clear outline of how street design and urban landuse and access relate is required. The extent to which these align with other endorsed and accepted traffic guidelines such as Austroads also needs to be considered.

Audit Tools and Methodologies

Various including Healthy By Design

Objective Internationally and locally there are an extensive number of audit tools for agencies or communities to assess their environments. Healthy by Design: A planners’ guide to environments for active living (Heart Foundation) has become one of the most widely recognised of these. Healthy by Design may be used as a tool for:

• Preparing plans (such as open space master plans);

• Designing proposed developments;

• Developing design guidelines or checklists;

• Developing innovative built environment projects;

• Assessing development proposals;

• Influencing strategic directions;

• Embedding health into Municipal Strategic Statements;

• Influencing planning scheme provisions; and

• Ongoing development and enhancement of open spaces.


101

This resource aims to make it easier for planners to incorporate design considerations that positively impact on the health and well being of all, into daily planning decisions.


Audit tools, the funding of audits and the funding of remedial action are well established in Australia with billions of dollars being committed to the work. Almost all of this work is focused on auditing vehicle movement and accidents. Little of it is focused on integrated accessible communities work. Several Capital Cities and the Midland Redevelopment Authority have funded public spaces and places studies and undertaken improvements. In all cases the improvements have resulted in more public use of the city. The Public Transport Authority has also undertaken this form of work.

WAPC Metropolitan Policy

Policy Network City: Community Planning Strategy for Perth and Peel Role and Status Network City: Community Planning Strategy for Perth and Peel (September 2004)

was prepared as the metropolitan strategy for Perth and Peel. It has not been adopted.

Policy Objective(s)

Network City establishes the fundamental directions for Perth and Peel. The vision for Perth and Peel is that by 2030, Perth people will have created a world-class sustainable city, vibrant, more compact and accessible, with a unique sense of place. The values underlying Network City are sustainability, inclusiveness, innovation and creativity, sense of place and equity. There are three principles to guide decision making.

• Enhance efficiency of urban land use and infrastructure.

• Protect and rehabilitate the environment and improve resource efficiency and energy use.

• Enhance community vitality and cohesiveness. Network City has ten key objectives.

• Deliver urban growth management.

• Accommodate urban growth primarily within a Network City pattern, incorporating communities.

• Align transport systems and land use to optimise accessibility and amenity.

• Deliver a safe, reliable and energy-efficient transport system that provides travel choice.

• Protect and enhance the natural environment, open spaces and heritage.

• Deliver for all a better quality of life, building on our existing strengths.

• Plan with the communities.

• Ensure employment is created in centres.

• Deliver a city with ‘urban’ energy, creativity and cultural vitality.

• Provide a city plan that will be implemented, provide certainty and deliver results.

These principles, objectives and strategies are captured in eight headline statements. The headlines are included on the spatial plan endorsed by the Government.

• Manage growth by sharing responsibility between industry, communities and


102

government.

• Plan with communities.

• Nurture the environment.

• Make fuller use of urban land.

• Encourage public transport over private transport.

• Strengthen local sense of place.

• Develop strategies, which deliver local jobs.

• Provide affordable housing. Key Walking and Cycling principles and actions

The Network City concept is intended to provide an urban structure that reduces car dependence and makes it easier and more convenient to use alternatives such as cycling. An important planning principle relevant to cycling is the delivery of a safe, reliable, and energy-efficient transport system that provides travel choice by:

• Providing a range of high quality transport options including rail, bus, ferries, pedestrian, cycling and other options

• Reducing car dependence through improving, promoting, informing and providing inducement to use travel alternatives, and enhancing proximity to employment and services ensuring resilience in the face of uncertain future energy challenges.

Key actions outlined in the Strategy include:

• Strategy 6-2 (vii) Make provision for cycling and pedestrians in activity corridors by –

Providing bike lanes or shared paths along activity corridors with connections to other routes in the Perth Bicycle Network and ‘end of trip’ facilities at activity centres

Identifying opportunities for sharing kerbside bus lanes with cyclists without compromising safety or delaying bus passengers

Providing a legible network of paths from activity centres to surrounding communities.

• Strategy 6-2 (ix) Provide end-of-trip facilities for people cycling or walking to trip generators, including cycle parking or showers at workplaces.

• Strategy 6-6 DPI action 6-6c Continue to develop, implement and expand education and promotional initiatives (such as cycling programs) to encourage changes in travel behaviour in favour of increased cycling and walking.

• Strategy 5-10 (h) Introduce incentive programs to reduce car dependency and promote cycling, walking and the use of public transport.

• Strategy 6-2 (xii) Discourage through traffic by giving priority to public transport, pedestrians and cyclists.


Network City provides a comprehensive framework for metropolitan planning incorporating actions, which are aimed at producing a sustainable city. Creating accessible communities is recognised as central to this intent through a number of objectives and principles. It is recognised that implementing Network City would require a comprehensive review of many polices and strong interagency co-ordination of new and established areas. Central to Network City are activity corridors, which are major roads lined with intensive development. These roads would be traffic-calmed boulevards with a careful balance between modes of transport. The Accessible Communities Study can assist in delivering some of the objectives of Network City.


103

Frameworks Directions 2031 Spatial Framework for Perth and Peel Policy Objective(s)

Directions 2031 Spatial Framework for Perth and Peel is not a replacement of the Network City Strategy. Its purpose is to spatially define how DPI think the city should grow, identify structural changes necessary to support that growth and identify planning and policy priorities for implementation. Directions 2031 responds to several tasks within Network City, including detailing the metropolitan structure, determining local population, housing and job targets, managing growth and developing the activity centre concept. It is not a blueprint but an evolving plan for the metropolitan region. The Framework supports a more compact and environmentally sustainable city. It states the need to use land and infrastructure more efficiently and in the first instance prioritise land that is already zoned for development. It notes Metropolitan Centres Policy has been reviewed and a new Activity Centres Policy has been drafted. It states work is also well advanced on the preparation of sub-regional growth management strategies and structure plans. Another key element is an integrated public transport plan currently under preparation. The Metropolitan Region Scheme and Peel Region Scheme include almost 19,000 hectares of land that is zoned either urban or urban deferred and is yet to be developed. Its assumptions are:

• A more compact city is desirable;

• We must work with the city we have;

• We must make more efficient use of land and infrastructure: We must increase this to at least an average of 15 dwellings per zoned hectare if growth targets are to be achieved; and

• We must prioritise land that is already zoned. The Three integrated layers will form the key structural elements of the city, and be used as a means of organising the city:

1. Activity Centres Network: a network and hierarchy of centres that provide a more equitable distribution of jobs, services and amenity throughout the city.

2. Movement Network: an integrated system of public and private transport networks that are designed to support and reinforce the Activity Centres Network, and reduce the time, cost and impact of travel.

3. Green Network: a network of parks, reserves and conservation areas that support biodiversity, preserve natural amenity and protect valuable natural resources.

Aims to provide direction on:

1. How we provide for a growing population whilst ensuring that we live within available land;

2. Water and energy resources;

3. Where development should be focused and what patterns of land use and transport will best support this development pattern;

4. What areas we need to protect so that we retain high quality natural environments and resources; and

5. What infrastructure we need to support our growth. Themes

1. Liveable

• Promote good urban design and development to enhance people’s experience of the city

• Identify, protect and build upon neighbourhood character and sense of place


104

• Protect heritage places and values

• Improve community safety

• Provide good quality passive and active public open space

• Foster our cultural identity

2. Prosperous

• Provide a hierarchy of places and locations for a range of economic activity and employment across the Perth and Peel Region.

• Increase the levels of employment self sufficiency within sub-regional areas

• Ensure an adequate supply of well located land for industrial development

• Protect access to productive natural resources and agricultural land

3. Equitable

• Plan for an equitable distribution of public and community infrastructure throughout the city

• Improve the timing and coordination of infrastructure for new areas

• Improve access to local services and facilities

• Ensure an adequate supply of affordable housing

4. Accessible

• Improve the relationship between land use and public transport

• Plan for new public transport services to improve access to a greater proportion

• of the community

• Recognise and build upon the growing preference for non-motorised forms of

• transport - walking and cycling

• Promote connections between activity centres

5. Green

• Not relevant to this study

6. Responsible

• Ensure growth occurs in places that provide for long term viability and liveability

• Prioritise the development and use of land that is already zoned Urban or Urban Deferred.

• Develop a coordinated and systematic approach to infrastructure and land use planning and development;

• Minimise conflict between land use and key infrastructure assets.

• Ensure the cost of infrastructure provision is shared equitably. Directions 2031 promotes a connected city scenario for growth. In planning terms this means: Population A greater emphasis on consolidation will see an increased distribution of new residents to the central sub region, and an easing of fringe urban development


105

pressures in traditional growth areas - the North West, North East and Peel. The South East and South West are expected to see a consolidation of growth around existing and planned urban areas. Dwellings The most significant proportion of the 328,000 new dwellings is expected to be constructed in the central sub region. Jobs Improved levels of employment self-sufficiency across all sub regions. Activity Centres Directions 2031 states that greater diversity in centres not only provides a more equitable distribution of services and facilities throughout the metropolitan region, but it has the potential to significantly reduce the number and length of trips by locating those activities closer to the people that want to access them. It is therefore essential that these centres incorporate transit orientated development and mixed use principles. There is a description of the activity centres hierarchy and its importance.

• Public Transport is mentioned for strategic centres, Accessible Communities or non motorised users are not really mentioned again until local centres where the idea of a walkable catchment is introduced.

• Generally the centres are defined by the types of services, and economy they facilitate.

For local centres – “these centres will typically include a corner deli and newsagent but are generally limited in their retail offering. However, they provide an important and highly accessible service to local communities and will continue to be promoted as part of the overall Activity Centres hierarchy”. IMPLEMENTATION Implementation will be delivered by:

1. Endorsing Directions 2031

2. An activity centres policy

3. Structure plans and growth management strategies for sub regions

4. Program of collaboration and consultation will include:

a. Activity centres audit, document review, work program, business cases for funding.

b. Guidelines on model framework for activity centres.

c. Activity centre plans.

d. Activity Centre Implementation: Consideration will be given to the introduction of stronger planning mechanisms, such as planning assessment panels, planning control areas, improvement plans, and ‘call in’ powers for projects of regional significance, to ensure that strategic objectives for activity centres are achieved.

(Note - Activity Corridors) Directions 2031 still supports activity corridors but it does not support the expansion or ‘ribbon development’ of commercial activities beyond the core of activity centres, as it diminishes the viability of centres and has the potential to create access and traffic conflicts along the corridor. Movement Network Movement Network is considered through strategies to address continued demand for private transport, while at the same time encouraging a shift to other modes and identifying opportunities for new investment in transport infrastructure.

• Connect communities with jobs and services

• Improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the public transport network

• Encourage a shift to more sustainable transport options


106

• Maximise efficiency of road infrastructure – ITS and congestion management

• Protecting the movement economy – increase rail and intermodal transfer

• Parking – recognizes need for restraint

• Enhance open space network

• Reduce Greenhouse Gases

• Improving the relationship between land use and public transport - making optimum use of existing infrastructure

• Identifying opportunities for new public transport services to improve access to a greater proportion of the community

• Recognising and building upon the growing preference for non-motorised forms of transport - walking and cycling

• Promoting higher levels of employment self sufficiency within sub-regional areas, thereby reducing commuting distances and times.

Planning Implementation

-

Initiative Overview - Spatial Framework for Perth and Peel

Finalise and endorse Directions 2031 as the Spatial framework for the Perth and Peel Region

Growth Management Strategies

Preparation of growth management strategies for the north west, north east, central, south east, south west and Peel sectors to provide a sub regional strategic planning framework to guide future development and more detailed planning.

Sub Regional Structure Plans

Preparation of Sub Regional Structure Plans to guide land release, staging of infrastructure provision, and areas to be protected from urban development.

Activity Centres Policy

Review of State Planning Policy 4.2 Metropolitan Centres for Perth to ensure it aligns with and supports the strategic directions outlined in the Spatial Framework.

Activity Centres Planning Programme

A programme led by DoP in collaboration with local governments and key stakeholders with three key objectives:

1. Activity Centres Audit

2. Activity Centres Model Framework

3. Activity Centre Planning Comment Potentially very supportive of Accessible Communities, mechanism for identifying

active travel needs in activity Centres. Liveable Neighbourhoods Review

Ongoing review to update and incorporate contemporary approaches to structure planning and subdivision design. Priority issues include public open space, school sites, road standards and urban water management.

Comment Potentially supportive of Accessible Communities Residential Design Codes Review Program

Review State Planning Policy 3.1 Residential Design Codes by: 1. Preparation of a Multi Unit Housing Design Code that will focus on multiple and grouped dwellings and the residential component of mixed use development. 2. Review of the existing codes to focus on single residential development.

Comment Potentially supportive of Accessible Communities – Car parking needs to be reviewed

Review Guidelines for the Lifting of Urban Deferment

Update guidelines’ to ensure consistency with the intent of Directions 2031 in dealing with future residential development.

Comment Procedural relevance Funding Options for Strategic Land Acquisitions

Investigate options to source funding to acquire land for the Peel Region Scheme.

Comment Monitor Demography and Indicators

Ongoing implementation to provide: 1. Population, dwelling and employment projections to advise on the strategic


107

Program delivery of all government services; 2. Demographic and economic expertise and advice to land use planning/transport projects and policy development; 3. Knowledge and understanding of demographic trends and their future impacts on population, dwellings and employment.

Comment Potentially supportive of Accessible Communities Housing Strategy for Perth and Peel

Prepare a housing strategy to deliver a responsive housing system that meets the changing needs, aspirations and choices of the residents of Perth and Peel taking into account affordability and equity.

Comment Potentially supportive of Accessible Communities Planning Schemes Manual Review

Review the Planning Schemes Manual to reflect contemporary approaches to preparing Local Planning Strategies with particular regard to housing, commercial, activity centres and local biodiversity components.

Potentially supportive of Accessible Communities Activity Corridor Program

A program to guide the WAPC in developing Activity Corridor Policy through progressing two pilot projects on Stirling Highway and Scarborough Beach Road.

Comment Supportive of Accessible Communities Perth Central Area Planning Framework

Preparation of a planning framework to guide the future development of the Perth Central Area.

Comment Potentially supportive of Accessible Communities Environment

A range of environment conservation, environmental health buffer and open space initiatives are outlined. In addition the preparation of a regional open space plan is proposed.

Comment Potentially accessibility implications. Transport Implementation

Perth and Peel Transport Strategy

Preparation of an integrated regional transport strategy for Perth and Peel

Comment Potentially supportive of Accessible Communities Metropolitan Freight Network Strategy

Ongoing implementation including the Fremantle Port Rail Service Support between Kewdale intermodal terminal and the port.

Comment Uncertain effect on Accessible Communities Road and Rail Transport Noise and Freight considerations State Planning Policy

Develop a State Planning Policy to provide guidance on new major road and rail infrastructure, location of freight handling facilities and the designated Perth primary freight road network.

Comment Uncertain effect on Accessible Communities Road Reservations Review Program

Transport route planning review of the road reservation requirements for major road network links including North West Transport Network Review and South Metropolitan and Peel Transport Network Review. Reviewing and identifying Primary Regional Road reservations in the Metropolitan Region Scheme that are surplus to requirements to progress their sale, improve the statutory process for approvals along these roads and create landowner certainty.

Comment Potentially highly supportive of Accessible Communities Transit Orientated Development

Program to provide for the preparation of land use plans and associated infrastructure implementation strategies at strategic precincts throughout Perth and Peel that will facilitate the delivery of transit orientated development.

Comment Highly supportive of Accessible Communities Perth Airport Transport Plan

The preparation of an investment strategy for road and rail transport access to and around Perth airport for the next 15 to 20 years.

Comment Potentially beneficial to Accessible Communities Fremantle Outer Harbour Project

To expand the existing Fremantle Port by establishing a port in Cockburn Sound and include associated road and rail infrastructure. Project in conjunction with the Fremantle Port Authority.

Comment Potentially supportive of Accessible Communities


108

Accessible Communities

Development of a policy approach to facilitate the delivery of a more accessible built environment which better highlights and provides for the needs of pedestrians, cyclists, seniors and people with disabilities, as well as the designing out crime and physical activities strategies.

Comment Highly supportive of Accessible Communities Walking Project To provide strategic management, advocacy and coordination of Walk WA: A

Walking Strategy for West Australians 2007-2020 including Perth and Peel. Travel Smart Continuation of the program to reduce car dependency and promote alternative

modes of travel. Comment Highly supportive of Accessible Communities Public Transport Strategy

Prepare a public transport strategy for the Perth and Peel Region.

Comment Potentially highly supportive of Accessible Communities Metropolitan Parking Strategy

Prepare a public transport strategy for the Perth and Peel Region. • the appropriate levels of parking provision;

• Future supply and management within centres;

• The price of parking;

• How parking is to be funded and delivered;

• Guiding principles for Local Governments on good parking practices; and

• The relationship between commuter parking and transit orientated developments.

Comment Potentially supportive of Accessible Communities Perth Bicycle Network Plan Review

Review with the aim to create a strategic bicycle network and developing policy to support State and local government initiatives to increase cycling activity.

Comment Highly supportive of Accessible Communities Employment Implementation

The employment section is focused on employment generation strategies and infrastructure to assist business development.

Comment Uncertain effect on Accessible Communities Comments and suggested actions.

Much of the implementation initiatives in this framework confirm a commitment to continuing specific existing programs undertaken by DP and the WAPC. Many accessible communities related initiatives are supported and given greater weight with indications of more definitive policy and a greater degree of enforcement. There are few definitive commitments and the framework does not define priorities for projects. The range of issues to be addressed appears very supportive of accessible communities and accessible communities is specifically mentioned. The detailed implementation needs careful monitoring and extensive input and funding. Possible gaps are the lack of active travel projects identified for sub-regions (in NE, SE, SW and Peel) in comparison to the number of specific road projects.

Building a Better Planning System Policy Objective(s)

The Building a Better Planning System consultation paper sets out the a range of actions aimed a streamlining and improving the Planning System and Planning outcomes in Western Australia. It was published by DPI with the period for public comment closing in May 2009. The six priority areas in Building a Better Planning System are: • simplifying planning approvals • more effective planning instruments • prioritise major projects • integrated coordination of infrastructure and land use planning • a comprehensive regional planning framework • strengthen governance and institutional arrangements.


109


Building a Better Planning System is not a policy in its own right but many of the proposed changes will affect how development is assessed. The proposed changes will see greater focus on simplifying the system of policies to avoid overlap, streamlining subdivision condition and subdivision engineering standards, providing greater certainly on developer contributions and greater focus on delivering the State’s strategies and climate change management objectives through state and local policy. All of these changes have the potential to lead to improvements in accessible communities outcomes if accessible communities is given a higher level of priority.

Non-WAPC Policy and Guidelines Health-related policies and strategies

Premiers Physical Activity Task Force

A Strategic Physical Activity Action Plan for a Healthy Active WA 2007/08-2010/11

Objective. The guiding Principles for the PATF include:

• Achievability and sustainability – outcomes need to be assessed to ensure that they are achievable and sustainable.

• Inclusivity – outcomes should reflect the diversity of the Western Australian population and acknowledge cultural differences.

• Adaptability – provide for flexibility and adaptability to suit changing community needs.

• Integration – the best outcomes will be achieved through an integrated, across government and whole of community approach.

• Collaboration and Partnerships – success will depend on the development of a sense of shared responsibility and collaborative partnership.

• Equity – there must be equal opportunity for all people to participate in activities regardless of their income, gender, age, disability or cultural background.

The Physical Activity Action plan sets outs the PATF program for promoting physical activity in line with these principles.


The Physical Activity Task Force (PATF) recognises that it has a collaborating role with other agencies to promote active, supportive environments and active living. The PATF supports the intent of accessible communities in that accessible communities support increased levels of physical activity through an increase in non-motorised modes of transport.

Department of Education and Training

Physical Activity Strategy 2008 – 2011

Policy Objective(s)

To improve the quality and increase the amount of physical activity undertaken by all WA public school students.


The strategy includes an extensive list of initiatives to market physical activity to students and programs to involve them in physical activity. The policy promotes walk-to-school buses. Road and personal safety improvements may assist in a return to active transport journeys to school.


110

Department for Communities Office for Seniors Interests and Volunteering

Active Ageing Strategy

Policy Objective(s)

The Active Aging Strategy aims to work with government to identify, monitor and where possible fund and report on programs that support active seniors The active aging strategy includes five identified priority areas under which government initiatives will be developed. The priority areas are: 1. Health and Wellbeing; 2. Employment and Learning; 3. Community Awareness and Participation; 4. Protection and Security; and 5. Planning and the Built Environment.


The strategy includes an extensive list of initiatives to market physical activity to seniors. The policy recognises the importance of the built environment and monitors planning improvements.

Health Department

Health Impact Assessment in WA Discussion Paper

Policy Objective(s)

This Discussion Paper provides an overview of Health Impact Assessment and the means by which HIA can be integrated into current state and local government decision making processes. The paper requests feedback on essential issues to be dealt with during assessments of proposals and the means by which this can occur.


The Department of Health is not a statutory referral authority for development in Western Australia, as is the case in some other countries. The paper considers the potential for assessments by the Health Department to include assessments on whether the environment is supportive of physical activity. Achieving accessible communities has a range of objectives including promoting physical activity. However, there may be value in the Health Department providing an independent assessment as this could elevate the commitment to accessible communities and provide external agency support to DP’s assessment of a development from accessible communities point of view.

WAPC State Planning Policy

Designing Out Crime Guidelines

Policy Objective(s)

The objectives of the guidelines are:

• To raise awareness of key community safety, security and crime prevention issues, designing out crime principles and solutions;

• To ensure that planning and detailed design for land use, development and redevelopment activity takes into consideration designing out crime principles;

• To aid the integration of safety and security concerns throughout the planning and development assessment process for public and private sector projects and in the management and maintenance of the public realm;

• To encourage the incorporation of designing out crime principles in operational aspects of community and neighbourhood management; and


111

• To identify public and private sector roles, responsibilities and opportunities for partnerships in the planning and design process in the interest of community safety.

The guidelines are to be brought into force by reference in DPI and LGA policy.


Safety is a critical issue in supporting accessible communities. The policy provides strong guidance in delivering safe environments for people in public space. The guidelines should be brought into greater use.

Transport-related policies and guidelines

Public Transport Authority

Various Standards, Guidelines and Policies

Policy Objective(s)

There are four PTA guidelines that cover the planning, design, construction and maintenance of Public Transport Infrastructure (detailed below). The review of these guidelines and policies were outside the scope of this study.

1. Bus Route Planning and Transit Streets

This guideline details best practice approaches in urban transport planning principles and policy. It is designed to aid individuals and groups involved in road planning to gain an appreciation of Transperth operating systems.

2. Traffic Management and Control Devices

This guideline details best practice approaches of implementing traffic management devices along bus routes. It includes guidance for users involved in traffic legislation, implementation processes, traffic management, and design for low floor buses.

3. Bus Priority Measures: Principles and Design

This guideline details information and bus priority methods and approaches at a Regional and Local level. It is designed to aid individuals and groups involved in bus services, transport infrastructure providers, town planning and traffic engineering.

4. Maintenance and Constructability

This guideline is an outcome of PTA's accumulated knowledge of maintaining existing public infrastructure buildings and selected associated elements. It provides guidance to designers, engineers and project managers in order to ensure future projects are less problematic and have a longer public use span. The document covers material selection, details problems encountered with some materials, reasons for the selection and issues affecting maintainability.

• Public Transport Bus Stop Layout Policy

This policy relates primarily to the application of Tactile Ground Surface Indicators (TGSI) and wheelchair access at all new and existing bus stop locations. The intention is to provide a reasonable set of guidelines on the application of TGSI and wheelchair access and to ensure accessibility by the application of best practice at all bus stops including retrofits.


PTA policy is aligned with accessible communities in principle. There can be difficulties in some areas as large buses have some characteristics of large trucks and can result in expanded intersections (e.g. roundabouts) and wider lane widths. There is debate regarding the appropriateness of dedicated bus lanes where these are in addition to vehicle lanes. There is also debate regarding the extent of parking around stations and its effect on the urban environment. PTA and DP collaborate in many areas to achieve good outcomes. Policy integration is needed to ensure there are no conflicts and the concept of accessible communities is properly considered.


112

Main Road Policies

Various Standards, Guidelines and Policies

Policy Objective(s)

The function of many MRWA policies is to inform of its approach to design, funding, construction and auditing of roads including provision of infrastructure for waking, cycling and disabled The policies also include a range of design policies, standards and technical diagrams for road design.


The requirements provided by MRWA standardise design to ensure the safe movement of vehicles and controlled road crossings. They suit movement corridor conditions but sometimes make it difficult to implement desired proposals for roads in activity corridor settings. MRWA’s role in road line marking means its policies have an effect on all roads including its own roads. In addition MRWA standards create default standards for road design with possible negative consequences for accessible communities. The MRWA website is an exemplar in that it provides a concise summary of polices and standards with hyperlinks to associated standards.

Road Hierarchy Establishes criteria for various road types e.g. “public transport allowed?” Speed etc.


There is a lack of emphasis on providing for public transport, walking and cycling as a priority and does not advocate speed restraint in line with Austroads guidelines. Needs to be reviewed in line with latest Austroads guidance.

Main Roads Design Check Procedure Main Roads requires that all road designs be reviewed at the end of each design stage

(feasibility stage, preliminary design stage, detailed design stage) whereby project managers obtain an independent assessment of the design against good practices and relevant standards and guidelines. The output from a review is a report highlighting any areas of the design, which may not comply with good practices and relevant standards and guidelines. Main Roads have published a guideline1 on the review requirements and process. The fundamental design objectives of safety, economy, environmental sensitivity, efficiency and effectiveness are generally at odds with each other. The guidelines state that good design is achieved by appropriately balancing the fundamental design objectives and compliance with the standards and guidelines alone does not guarantee good design. The guideline expressly suggests that reviewers consider if the design cater for cyclists, pedestrians and adjacent residents and whether the design minimises negative social impacts.


Possible flaws in the process are that the outcomes could be constrained as to how the design aligns to existing standards and guidelines. Benefits could arise by implementing a framework that ensures decision-making reflects context sensitive design, in that design is responsive to the context in which transport activities occur, not simply the design process.

Policy for Cycling Infrastructure Deals with main roads policy on providing cycling infrastructure.

Comments and suggested actions

A review is suggested as the policy was published in 2000. The Austroads Guide that is referred to has been superseded.

1 http://standards.mainroads.wa.gov.au/NR/mrwa/frames/standards/standards.asp?G={E582C897-FF5E-4C02-8B46-51E88C1E5DD8}


113

AustRoads Various Policy Objective(s)

The function of many AustRoads policies is to create a national approach to design, construction and auditing of roads including detailed provision of infrastructure for public transport, parking, waking, cycling and disabled. The standards and guidelines also include a range of design policies, standards and technical diagrams for road design. The revised standards and guidelines are more performance based and create greater scope for context sensitive design.


Generally it was found that by considering research in recent years, the Austroads Guides are increasingly supportive of accessible communities. Several key concepts are introduced that alter accepted approaches to transport provision. Most notable is the introduction of context sensitive design and the increased emphasis on the opportunity for the flexible application of standards. It is stated in the Austroads Guide to Road Design that: ‘The Austroads Guide to Road Design is intended to provide designers with a framework that promotes efficiency in design and construction, economy, and both consistency and safety for road users. However, the Guide moves away from rigid design limits as the basis for achieving these goals, and promotes the concept of ‘context-sensitive design’. The intention is to allow designers the flexibility to exercise their critical engineering judgement, for example, by choosing design values outside of normally accepted limits when prevailing constraints require, provided that they recognise their responsibility to be able to produce strong, defensible evidence in support of that judgement’. However, proper implementation of the guidelines in key. Training conducted on the revised Guides will be key in highlighting new approaches, and conveying how the content of the Guides should be interpreted. It is essential that clear links be made from the Austroads Guides to strategic policy. It is this strategic policy that will drive how the guidelines are implemented – that is according to identified priorities. One area where further work is required is the review of approaches to road hierarchy. This has been discussed in earlier sections. Currently a two-tier road hierarchy is advocated which from a road function viewpoint states there are two essential needs which must be met: • The traffic movement, or mobility, function providing the means by which people

and goods can move from one place to another. • The access function providing access to properties and land uses adjacent to the

road. This lacks consideration of the function of ‘streets as places’ in their own right.

Guide to Road Safety Series Road Safety Overview

Liability and how it affects design discussed in detail – flagged at steering group meeting as possible obstacle. (Aus Vs NZ approach of no liability) Some comments on public not wanting to accept low speeds. The central consideration is to ensure that human bodies are not exposed to greater physical forces than they can withstand without serious damage. In principle, this may be achieved in a number of ways, most obviously by reducing speeds. However, to rely on reducing speeds on its own would require very low speeds, quite possibly lower than the public would be prepared to accept.


Supportive of accessible communities particularly in terms of reducing vehicle speeds.


114

Strategy and Evaluation

Three essential aspects of the road transport system with which road users interact are:

• Safer speeds – speed limits which are appropriate for the function and construction of the road, terrain, and adjoining land use.

• Safer vehicles – vehicles which protect occupants through structural design, protective equipment and design features which reduce injuries to vulnerable road users, and which provide better awareness of the vehicle and signals.

• Safer roads and roadsides – treating sites with adverse crash histories - roll-out of cost-effective road improvements and mass action programs.


Does not seem to be overly relevant in terms of fostering accessible Communities.

Speed Limits and Speed Management

Philosophy for setting speed limits - takes into consideration a range of factors - the safety record of the road, the operating performance, the road and roadside infrastructure, geometry and roadside development. Generally, default unsigned 50 km/h speed limits operate within urban built-up areas, and 100 km/h in rural open-road environments. To reflect differences that may prevail along roads across the road network varying sign posted speed limits are also applied for values ranging from 10 km/h for shared pedestrian vehicle road spaces to 110 km/h for high standard highways and freeways in rural areas. Speed limits need to reflect varying road user types, road environments, vehicle types and community needs such as safety, amenity and economics. The travel or operating speed of vehicles has a number of effects relating to vehicle emissions, traffic flow, user costs and safety. Reduced travel speeds can help reduce harmful emissions, enhance traffic flow, decrease user costs and improve safety. Speed limit management is about meeting an acceptable compromise across a wide range of objectives and a diverse group of road users and communities. Safe and efficient travel is the cornerstone to a healthy and prosperous society. The Australian Transport Council (ATC) (2006) reported that:

• Speeds 5 km/h above average in urban areas and 10 km/h above average in rural areas double the risk of a casualty crash

• Small reductions in average speeds (even one or two per cent) result in substantially greater percentage reductions in deaths and injuries

• The chance of surviving a crash decreases dramatically above certain impact speeds for the following types of crashes:

• Pedestrian struck by vehicle - 20 to 30 km/h

• Motorcyclist struck by vehicle (or falling off) - 20 to 30 km/h

• Side impact vehicle striking a pole or tree - 30 to 40 km/h

• Side impact vehicle to vehicle crash - 50 km/h

• Head-on vehicle to vehicle (equal mass)crash - 70 km/h

• Speed limits on much of Australia and New Zealand’s road network are higher than the limits many OECD countries set on comparable roads.

• In many OECD countries 30 km/h or 40 km/h limits are used extensively.

• In Australia, limits on urban arterials are usually 60 km/h, but limits of 70 km/h or 80 km/h are fairly common

• In many OECD countries limits above 60 km/h are less common, and 50 km/h limits are used more extensively.


115


Content is extremely agreeable in terms of fostering accessible communities. Offers options and advocates lower speeds.

Local Government and Community Road Safety

As planning authorities, LG has a duty to ensure that road safety is not compromised by excessive demands on the road system posed by developments, and have the capacity to ensure developers address potential safety issues as part of their development proposal (e.g. providing adequate road layouts (including lighting and footpaths) for new developments, providing traffic signals or intersection redesign for large new commercial developments). This may come about by requiring the developer to provide adequate road layouts and sight distances, or by relocating entrances or exits. Vulnerable road users are of particular concern. Venues that attract pedestrians during hours of darkness require brighter street lighting than is necessary for the road system generally. Footpaths are important for providing separation between pedestrians and traffic, and it is essential that they are ready when the first pedestrians begin to use a new facility. Assuming an agreed intent to support Accessible Communities, good road safety outcomes are most likely to be achieved through effective communication with the developer at an early stage of the proposal. Good communication between council’s planning and traffic staff is therefore necessary so that the fundamental requirements for a safe development can be identified before the developer’s plans are progressed to the stage where change is resisted. Refer Table 1.1 – Local govt. planning responsibility - Include road safety requirements in guidelines for developments; develop policies for bicycle and pedestrian safety to ensure they will be considered in new developments or changes to land use; use developer contributions to fund road Safety projects; include road safety in all council plans; include road safety audit as part of the planning and approval process.


Relevant in terms of roles and responsibilities of local government in managing development and developer requirements in terms of safety. The tone of this guideline highlights how firm the responsibilities are in the area of safety for councils in contrast to other areas e.g. achieving benchmarked standards for accessible communities. For example ‘As a road authority, a local council is required to have a reasonable knowledge of the deficiencies in its road network and a long-term plan to remedy these as funds become available’. This is also demonstrated by the need for road safety strategies and the detailed guidance on how to produce and fund them etc.

Rural and Remote Areas

N/A

Road Safety Audit N/A Except that is may be necessary to monitor to ensure the recommendation does not adversely effect other street users

Road Network Risk Assessment

N/A Except that is may be necessary to monitor to ensure the management of the risk adversely effect other street users

Treatment at Crash Locations

N/A Except that is may be necessary to monitor to ensure the proposed remedy does not adversely effect other street users.

Roadside Hazard Management

Irrespective of the reasons behind a vehicle leaving the roadway the provision of a forgiving roadside that is free of rigid objects, has flattened, smooth-sloped embankments and no other hazards, will reduce the potential for injury or death to the drivers Ideally a roadside environment should be free of any hazards that may increase the severity of a crash, should it occur. Such a roadside would prevent injuries in run-off-road crashes by providing drivers with enough space to regain control of their vehicles and stop safely without colliding with any objects or the vehicle rolling over.


116

In priority order, the following approaches should be taken with these hazards:

• Removal of the roadside hazard

• Redesign of the hazard so as to make it traversable

• Relocate hazard to a location where it is less likely to be struck

• Replacement of the hazard so that it breaks away or is impact absorbing

• Shield the obstacle with an appropriate barrier and/or a crash cushion

• If none of the above is attainable, delineate the obstacle. Recommended action – Trees. Trees greater than 100 mm in diameter located within the clear zone pose a potential hazard to motorists. New trees should be located outside of the clear zone so that they do not pose a serious roadside hazard. Where existing trees are within a clear zone, and are deemed to pose a risk, the first option is to remove the tree. Where this is not feasible it may be appropriate to install a safety barrier. Provision of a barrier should only be made where it is determined that collision with the barrier is less severe than collision with the existing hazard (i.e. trees).


Not supportive, in that this policy may result in removal of landscape features. Does not support accessible communities where conflicts with pedestrian safety (tree could protect pedestrians on side of road but could also cause injury car occupants). Trees are part of main street amenity.

Guide to Road Design Series Introduction to Road Design

Advocates safe, economical and efficient road designs Although local conditions and circumstances may sometimes require unique or innovative approaches to design, the bulk of works can be well accommodated by the approach outlined in the Guide to Road Design. Recognises that the design of roads should be based on the capabilities and behaviour of all road users, including pedestrians and cyclists, and on the performance and characteristics of vehicles. The different traffic mix and volumes, access requirements, functions and abutting developments that are typical of local roads create a different set of challenges that must be addressed in their own right. The design of existing and new roads should therefore be in accord with planning objectives as well as with the transportation and traffic management strategies for the particular road corridor or link. The location and function of a road within the built and natural environment will affect the objectives and strategies to be adopted and will influence both the design and the design process. The AustRoads Guide to Road Design is intended to provide designers with a framework that promotes efficiency in design and construction, economy, and both consistency and safety for road users. However, the Guide moves away from rigid design limits as the basis for achieving these goals, and promotes the concept of ‘context-sensitive design’. The intention is to allow designers the flexibility to exercise their critical, engineering judgement, for example, by choosing design values outside of normally accepted limits when prevailing constraints require, provided that they recognise their responsibility to be able to produce strong, defensible evidence in support of that judgement. Legal claims against road authorities have steadily risen in recent years, and court decisions have cast doubts on general immunities previously enjoyed by road authorities. Adherence to guidelines is not, of itself, necessarily a sufficient defence against claims of negligence that may arise. Likewise, deviation from established guidelines does not necessarily justify a claim for negligence. It is essential that the rationale for all decisions be suitably documented so that any claims that might arise may be suitably defended Design values that are not within the limits recommended by the relevant guide do not necessarily result in unacceptable designs and values that are within those limits do not necessarily guarantee an acceptable design. In assessing the quality of a design, it is


117

not appropriate simply to consider a checklist of recommended limits. The design has to be developed with sound, professional judgement and guidelines assist the designer in making those judgements. In considering the results of any design process, it is important to step back and apply a reality check. The designer should be satisfied that the finished product is likely to best meet the various objectives of the project. Despite the great advances in analytical methods, good design has a healthy dose of art mixed in with the science. The guide introduces concept of self-explaining roads (naked streets). The guide advocates consistency along cross section, speed and sufficient driver workload e.g. by lessening sightlines Design considerations include all the things that are important from an engineering and community perspective that impact on the outcome of the design. They also include consideration of economic, social and environmental matters and issues with respect to the development of a road project.


Supportive of accessible communities as it advocates context sensitive design as the backbone of the document. Does not try to cover design outcomes for every situation but aims to help guide the practitioner in making good decisions.

Design Considerations

Providing detailed discussions of three important, general aspects of design. Firstly, consideration is given to the range of objectives likely to apply to a road design project. These include appropriate recognition of transport demands, safe and efficient traffic operations and achievement of balanced provision for the needs of all road users. Secondly, context sensitive design and the associated concepts of design domain and functional classification of roads are considered, and the vehicular, Human and road factors influencing design are discussed. Finally, Part 2 concludes with a comprehensive, tabular presentation of the broad range of considerations affecting road design. The objectives of new and existing road projects should be carefully considered to achieve the desired balance between the level of traffic service provided, safety, whole of life costs, flexibility for future upgrading or rehabilitation, and environmental impact. These objectives should address areas including:

• Strategic fit with relevant government policies, strategies and plans

• The nature and magnitude of transport demand

• Road safety

• Community views and expectations

• Travel times and costs

• Freight costs

• Public transport provision

• Provision for cyclists and pedestrians. Most urban arterial roads continue to function as major through traffic routes but the management of these roads often requires space to be dedicated to public transport or bicycle use in preference to private car travel. There is also a trend on inner suburban roads for speed limits to be lowered to address pedestrian safety issues while sections of inner city streets (formerly through arterial routes) are sometimes converted to pedestrian areas or shared zones. This is discussed in more detail in AustRoads Guide to Traffic Management. Consequently, the function of particular sections of road may change over time in accordance with community values.


The guideline is generally aligned to accessible communities, however the hierarchy does not discuss street as a ‘place’. This could be reinforced through WAPC guidelines.


118

Geometric Design N/A Intersections and Crossings

Not Published

Drainage Design N/A Roadside Design Not Published Geotechnical Investigation and Design

N/A

Design process and Documentation

N/A

Guide to Traffic Management Series Introduction to Traffic Management

Addresses:

• Freeways/motorways, arterial roads and local roads

• All categories of road users including cars, trucks, public transport, cyclists, motorcyclists and pedestrians

• Different speed management environments, for example, school zones, linear shopping centres along roads and roadwork zones

• Other important uses of roads such as parking Increasingly, governments are recognising the importance of effective planning, development and management of land use and road networks in a more sustainable manner. This requires consideration not only of the required or desirable traffic flow conditions on different parts of the network, but also of broad issues such as the following:

• Land use planning strategies

• Travel demand management

• Energy/fuel consumption

• Urban design requirements

• Safety, mobility and accessibility issues for all road users

• Access to commercial, retail, industrial, residential and recreational facilities

• Parking requirements

• Amenity issues in residential areas

• Bio-diversity issues for rural roads

• Equity in respect to different user groups. The different transport and other functions served by roads, together with the needs of abutting land use, determine how they should be managed. From a road function viewpoint there are two essential needs which must be met:

• The traffic movement, or mobility, function – providing the means by which people and goods can move from one place to another

• The access function – providing access to properties and land uses adjacent to the road.

The function of a road is reflected in traffic characteristics such as volume, speed, and mix of vehicular and non-motorised traffic. The function should also be reflected in the physical characteristics of the road, such as formation width, number and width of lanes, proximity and protection of potential hazards.


119

Roads generally are classified on the basis of how they currently operate, but consideration should also be given as to how they are expected or desired to function in the future, in terms of the relative significance of the traffic function versus the land access function for a particular road, and its desirable operating speeds and traffic volumes. The management of different road classes may require the needs of a particular road user group (e.g. public transport users, cyclists, pedestrians) to be given priority, or for the needs of different users to be ‘balanced’. Where available road space is limited, this may mean that a particular transport mode is favoured over others. For some roads there are competing legitimate demands for a strong emphasis on mobility on the one hand, and increased emphasis on local amenity on the other.


Supportive, but in regard to road hierarchy does not consider place function.

Traffic Theory N/A Traffic Studies and Assessment

N/A

Networks Management

Not Published

Road Management Road management is concerned with traffic management on sections of road between major intersections Considers the needs of all road users including pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists, heavy vehicles and public transport. Part 5 provides the guidance under the four key areas of access management, road space allocation, lane management and speed limits. Figure 1.1(b) demonstrates that for some roads there are competing legitimate demands for a strong emphasis on mobility on the one hand, and increased emphasis on local amenity on the other. This inevitably creates debate and problems with respect to the traffic management required to achieve an appropriate balance between the mobility and access functions on many of these roads. As a result of the inherent conflict between the functions in the conventional ‘continuum’ concept of road classes (Figure 1.1(b)), there has been a trend in the traffic planning of some new urban developments towards the basic two-level functional classification system (refer to Figure 1.1(a)) The general traffic management goals for roads are to:

• Optimise mobility through efficient traffic movement

• Maximise road safety

• Provide priority and/or specific road space for non-car modes where appropriate

• Provide traffic flow conditions commensurate with the road functional classification.

Table – Road space requirements for general traffic use – needs to consider cyclists better and possibly redefine the typical characteristics of roads. Pedestrian and traffic dealt with separately but some things may detract from Pedestrian amenity.


Supportive in that all road users recognised, the classification to road types is fine with room for context sensitive design however the implication is to ensure the right classification is assigned to right roads – emphasis required on place function.

Intersections, Interchanges and Crossings

To be looked at as part of further study recommended in this report

Traffic Management in Activity Centres

Not Published

Local Area Traffic Management

To be looked at as part of further study recommended in this report

Traffic Operations N/A Traffic Control and Not Published


120

Communications Devices Parking Not Reviewed Traffic Impacts of Developments

Not Published

Road Environment Safety

Not Published

Wungong Urban Water Project

Review Wungong Urban Water Project Policy Objective(s) The Wungong Urban Water (WUW) Development is under the control of the Armadale

An Accessible Communities focused Master Plan has been developed for the development at a district level. This will form the basis for the development of separate structure plans for each of the 13 cells. It is recognised by the ARA that the structure plans, which will form the basis subsequent plans for subdivision, need to be consistent with the Master Plan. The sequencing of this is based on cash flow and timing of landowner subdivision. Agreements regarding the scope, cost, and timing of works are reached with landowners prior to development occurring to allow ARA to adequately manage cash flow and infrastructure works. The ARA is committed to Accessible Communities and has written a range of polices to compliment or amend the policies of the WAPC including liveable neighbourhoods and the preparation of a place based policies on street design, streetscape and built form. The redevelopment authority (ARA) has pioneered developer contributions to Accessible Communities infrastructure. The WUW Developer Contribution Scheme (DCS) identifies infrastructure costs required to serve the development of the WUW project and the various scheme costs that are to be shared among all landowners on an equitable basis, as there are a variety of lot sizes and ownerships. Landowner (developer) contributions are separated into two categories scheme works and cell works. The scheme works are district wide infrastructure include major transport items such as footpaths that facilitate interconnectivity with open space, schools, activity centres, public transport network, road avenues (road with avenue of trees) and linear parkland with avenue of trees. Landowners are required to contribute to scheme works based on net size of their development area and the intensity of the area to be developed (the greater the size and intensity of development, the more the developer must contribute). Cell works contributions are calculated similarly but some only apply to development areas with in each of the 13 cells (if a developer has no land in that cell then they will not have to contribute to the infrastructure costs associated to that cell). The types of works to be undertaken across the project or by precinct include amongst other things:

• Major Road Intersections.

• Vehicular bridges

• Pedestrian bridges

• Regional dual use paths

• Regional Road upgrades / realignments

• Service Infrastructure

• Land for Public Open Space

• Foreshore Buffer and stream enhancement

• Landscaping


121

• Drainage Infrastructure (including living streams)

• Land and Specified Costs associated with Buildings for Community Infrastructure

• Development of Regional Recreation While the transport report for the area accepts some of the hierarchical approach to road design its trip generation and traffic distribution assumptions reflect the potential of mode change and a locally integrated road network. This has resulted in fewer and more disbursed trips in the design model. As a result the road network should not need to accommodate as many dual carriageways and limited access roads making the whole area more accessible for the community.


This project shows that an authority attempting to create accessible communities within Western Australia is able to, where it has the power to do so, amend or complement current WAPC policies and require more commitment from the developer. Current assumptions regarding trip generation will need to be challenged to avoid road design that actively overestimates demand and thus provides the capacity which in turn may attract more vehicle trips and undermine accessible communities.


122

APPENDIX D FULL REVIEW OF WAPC PLANNING BULLETINS


123

Planning Bulletin 97

Proposed Street Tree and Utility Planning amendments to Liveable Neighbourhoods and DC Policy 1.3 Strata Title

[May 2009]

This planning bulletin has been prepared to explain proposed changes to the street trees and utility planning clauses in Liveable Neighbourhoods and Development Control Policy 1.3 Strata Titles. The objectives of the proposed amendments are to ensure: 1) road verges are of sufficient width to continue to accommodate all transport requirements, street trees, paths, utilities and services now and in the future; 2) flexibility in the road reserve for future changes in services, transport and future densification; and 3) that street trees are planted and maintained.

By widening the verge widths and thus the street reserves for access roads B, C and D this will influence perception of the nature of the road as a local road and thus the corresponding low traffic speeds that apply. That is, the tighter the street environment the slower the local traffic speeds and thus improved pedestrian mobility.


New Delegation Arrangements for development at Public Primary Schools within the MRS Area.

[April 2009]

This planning bulletin explains the new delegation arrangements adopted by the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) in order to fast track applications for development at public primary schools, to take advantage of the federal government’s stimulus package. The Department of Education and Training (DET) has prepared a list of standard works, which will be undertaken at public primary schools using these funds. These works include libraries, demountable classrooms, multi-purpose buildings, fencing and re-roofing.


Amendment to Residential Design Codes – R20 Provisions [April 2009]

This planning bulletin details the outcome of the amendment to the R20 provisions of the Residential Design Codes. It details the change to clause 6.1.3 A3 (iv) of State Planning Policy 3.1 (Variation) 1) Residential Design Codes, which has been adopted by the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) and gazetted on 28 April 2009. This amendment allows an average site area of 450m2 under R20 coding for grouped dwellings, for survey strata’s that incorporate common property only.

N/A


Approval requirements for Public Works and development by Public Authorities

[Nov 2008]

The purpose of this bulletin is to assist users of the planning system in understanding the development approval process for public works throughout the state and when a body must obtain WAPC approval to undertake development under a region planning scheme. The bulletin clarifies which bodies are entitled to the public works exemption, which bodies are a “public authority”, the distinction between the terms “public authority” and “section 6 body”, when a “public authority” is exempt from the requirement to seek development approval under a Region Scheme and the distinction between public authorities and local authorities.

In terms of overall accessibility planning some concern is expressed that public works are planned and designed in isolation to the broader neighbourhood and key accessibility principles may be overlooked. Currently Main Road WA must be notified and give approval of public works undertaken within the road reserve (Main Roads, Roads) by an individual or organisations (i.e. LG, property developer, non-government utility service provider or land owner). A process for referral of public


124

works for comment by a local authority or relevant state agency from an Accessible Communities perspective is encouraged to achieve maximum performance of the local movement network.


Planning and development (Local Government Planning Fees) regulations 2000

[Oct 2008]

The purpose of this planning bulletin is to advise of amendments to the Planning and Development (Local Government Planning Fees) Regulations 2000. The regulations provide a framework for local government fees and charges for planning services and include details of the fees that may be levied. The regulations were gazetted in 2000, reviewed in 2007 and in 2008.

N/A


Urban Water Management [Oct 2008]

This planning bulletin provides guidance on urban water management matters to be taken into account by the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC), local governments and applicants in considering planning proposals and applications for new residential, rural-residential, commercial and industrial areas. The purpose is to ensure planning decision-making, where water issues are a consideration, is informed via relevant and appropriate information.

In terms of accessibility generally, planning and design should ensure that water management features are where possible not designed as a barrier to walkability of the neighbourhood.


Estate Covenants: New Residential Subdivisions [July 2008]

The purpose of this planning bulletin is to explain the concept of Restrictive Covenants and outlines their use in the Planning System The bulletin addresses concerns by land developers primarily relating to covenants restricting the number of dwellings on a lot or potential for future subdivision which are inconsistent with the density provisions of the local planning scheme. The bulletin also clarifies the procedure for the extinguishment or variation to a restrictive covenant where the local planning scheme includes a clause, which provides such a power as set out in the Model Scheme Text.

N/A


125


Planning Requirements for the Prostitution Amendment Act 2008

[Oct 2008]

This planning bulletin advises on the planning implications arising from enactment of the Prostitution Amendment Act 2008. Under the Act, operators and managers of sexual service businesses will be required to obtain certificates from the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor. An individual sex worker or a small owner-operator business consisting of not more than two sex workers where each has control of his/her earnings are not required to obtain certification. Planning approval will otherwise be required for the use of premises for sexual service businesses. This bulletin is seeking comment from Local Government and other stakeholders.

N/A


R-Codes Amended [Feb 2008]

This planning bulletin details the outcomes of the review of the operations of the Residential Design Codes from 2004 through to 2006. Changes were detailed in State Planning Policy 3.1 Residential Design Codes and Residential Design Codes Explanatory Guidelines, and Planning Bulletin 77. The Bulletin outlines the outcomes of the review and where changes have been made. It also identifies a number of design issues that require future consideration as part of a more substantial review.

Matters relevant to AC, considered as part of this review deal with design elements 6. 2 Streetscape Requirements, such as set backs of buildings, surveillance of the street, street walls and fences and garage doors.


Historic Heritage Conservation [Nov 2007]

This planning bulletin introduces State Planning Policy 3.5 Historic Heritage Conservation and provides guidance on planning for historic heritage conservation. The state planning policy was one component of a package of measures recommended by the joint state/local government heritage working party, which delivered its findings to the Heritage and Planning Ministers in August 2005. The working party also recommended common standards and guidelines for preparing local government inventories, criteria for the assessment of local heritage places and areas, and model local planning policies for heritage, all of which have been released by the Heritage Council of WA. The guidelines (or common standards) on preparing inventories, criteria for heritage assessment and model policies for heritage assessment can be viewed on the Heritage Council website at www.heritage.wa.gov.au

N/A


126


High Pressure Gas Transmission Pipelines in the Perth Metropolitan Region

[Oct 2007]

This planning bulletin provides guidance on matters to be taken into account in considering planning proposals. This planning bulletin provides guidance on matters to be taken into account by the WAPC, local governments and applicants in considering planning proposals in the vicinity of the Dampier to Bunbury Natural Gas Pipeline and the Parmelia Gas Pipeline, in the Perth metropolitan region. This bulletin applies to the Perth metropolitan region as defined by the Metropolitan Region Scheme. It applies to schemes, scheme amendments, structure planning, subdivision or development, except for conventional agricultural or rural pursuits, within the vicinity of the Dampier to Bunbury Natural Gas Pipeline corridor and the Parmelia Gas Pipeline easement.

N/A


The Incorporation of Model Scheme Text Provisions into Local Planning Schemes by Reference

[Oct 2007]

The WAPC has agreed to a proposal from several local governments, supported by the Western Australian Local Government Association, to permit the incorporation of certain standard provisions of the Model Scheme Text into local planning schemes by reference. The purpose of this bulletin is to advise on the background to the proposal, the benefits of this approach, the provisions that may be incorporated by reference and the method of incorporation.

Supports a consistent planning framework across local government, which supports simplicity of responding to new trends and objectives.


Small Bar Licensed Premises [Sept 2007]

The purpose of this planning bulletin is to advise of a planning response to changes to section 41 of the Liquor Control Act 1988. This bulletin sets out interim measures for local governments to consider applications for the use of premises as a small bar, subject to applicable planning requirements and invites comment on suggested definitions for the new regime of licensed premises under the Liquor Control Act 1988.

Local small bars could be seen as a positive to local vitality and increased potential to walk to bar. Also may improve road safety with less drink driving.


Planning and Development (Local Government Planning Fees) Regulations 2000

[June 2004]

Planning bulletin 93 supersedes this planning bulletin. The purpose of this planning bulletin is to advise on further amendments to the Planning and Development (Local Government Planning Fees) Regulations 2000. The regulations have been amended to increase 2006/07 fees by Consumer Price Index (CPI) for 2007/08. The new fees will be effective from 1 July 2007. This planning bulletin supersedes Planning Bulletin 44 Town Planning (Local Government Planning Fees) Regulations 2000. The main changes include a new fee by way of penalty for retrospective approvals.

N/A


127


Planning for Tourism {June 2009]

This bulletin sets out the interim policy of the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) to implement the recommendations of the Tourism Planning Taskforce (the taskforce). The interim policy will guide decision making by the WAPC and local government on subdivision, development and scheme amendment proposals for tourism purposes in the short term while detailed planning mechanisms are being established, including the preparation of a state planning policy.

N/A


Planning and Development (Local Government Planning Fees) Regulations 2000

[June 2007]

Planning bulletin 84 supersedes this bulletin. N/A Planning Bulletin 81

Planning and Development Act 2005 - Frequently Asked Questions

[Oct 2006]

Planning and Development Act 2005 - Frequently Asked Questions This list of responses to frequently asked questions has been prepared as part of the implementation program for the Planning and Development Act 2005.

N/A


Swan Valley Planning Legislation Amendment Act 2006 [June 2006]

The bulletin explains the changes to the Swan Valley Planning Act 1995, the Planning and Development Act 2005 and the Metropolitan Region Scheme. The Amendment Act amends the Swan Valley Planning Act 1995 (SVP Act) to provide a strengthened framework that will protect the rural character of the Swan Valley and ensure it remains as a place of beauty and a recreation destination for current and future generations.

N/A


Designing Out Crime Planning Guidelines [June 2006]

The guidelines are intended to be a reference document. The guidelines do not override current statutory policy but rather identify concepts and approaches to improve design. Crime prevention through environmental design is based on the idea that peoples’ behaviour within the urban environment, particularly in terms of the possibility of offending, as well as an individual’s perceptions about their safety, is influenced by the design of that environment. The Designing Out Crime Planning guidelines are intended to provide local government, government agencies, town centre management, the development industry and planning and design practitioners with an understanding of the principles of designing out crime and crime prevention in their local areas. The guidelines are relevant to all forms of development at all stages of planning, design and implementation. The guidelines provide a framework for policy development and implementation. The guidelines do not override current statutory policy but rather identify concepts and approaches to improve design of the environment.

An urban form that incorporates crime minimisation techniques will be supportive of AC. Guidelines are reviewed in main report.


128


Planning and Development Act 2005 – Summary of Amendments and Comparison with Repealed Acts

[May 2006]

This bulletin provides a summary of how the provisions of the repealed Acts have been variously carried forward and amended in corresponding provisions of the PD Act. This planning bulletin is intended to augment the information in planning bulletin 76 by providing a detailed list of the new provisions, as well as a comparative table cross referencing provisions of the PD Act with the repealed legislation.

N/A


Review of the Operation of the R-Codes [March 2006]

This planning bulletin provides a summary of the proposed changes to SPP 3.1 Residential Design Codes (R-Codes) and the accompanying explanatory guidelines following the recent review of the operation of the R-Codes. The bulletin also highlights a number of important design issues and trends not recognised by the R-Codes that are beyond the scope of this initial review, but which will need to be addressed in a future substantial review of the R-Codes. Refer to the detailed assessment of the R-Codes.


Planning and Development Act 2005 and Related Legislation [Jan 2006]

The purpose of this bulletin is to advise on the provisions of the new Act and to explain the effects of the new provisions. The Planning and Development Act 2005, and the related Planning and Development (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Act 2005 and Metropolitan Region Improvement Tax Amendment Act 2005, received Royal Assent on 12 December 2005. The new Act(s) will come into operation upon proclamation on 9 April 2006. The new Act consolidates and makes a number of amendments to the existing planning legislation.

N/A


Review of WAPC Forms and Model Conditions [Dec 2005]

This bulletin outlines the modifications to WAPC forms and model conditions. The introduction, in July 2005, of significant changes to Western Australian Planning Commission forms (outlined in planning bulletin 73) has resulted in an overall improvement in the standard and quality of freehold and survey-strata applications. This is partly attributable to the requirement for most applications to be based on a recent on-site survey. The modified forms initially resulted in a significant proportion of incomplete applications. However, as applicants have become more accustomed to the forms, the number of incomplete applications has decreased markedly.

Conditions that are applied have the potential to be instrumental in the implementation of AC. In most cases the WAPC delegates it’s responsibility of conditions relating to streetscape and public open space to the local authority.


129


Use of Special Control Areas in Town Planning Schemes [Sept 2005]

The purpose of this planning bulletin is to explain and clarify the purpose and intent of using provisions in town planning schemes. Since the introduction of the Model Scheme Text (MST) in 1999, many local governments and state government agencies have proposed the use of special control areas (SCA’s) in town planning schemes to deal with a wide range of planning and environmental issues.

Special control areas have had limited application but could be used to support AC. Town centres could be in SCA that allow for more performance based planning, holistic (area based) improvements, easier variations to local policies including parking.


Statutory Planning Process Improvements [June 2005]

This bulletin sets out the first of a number of significant and complementary improvements, which are being made to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the process components of the statutory planning system. The aim is to improve the timeliness of decision making whilst ensuring planning outcomes meet community expectations.

N/A


Child-Care Centres [June 2005]

The purpose of this planning bulletin is to outline a consistent policy approach to planning for childcare centres. Also to advise of planning considerations in relation to the location and development of child-care centres and seek comment from the public, industry, local government and State government agencies concerning relevant issues and a draft policy. The bulletin has been prepared in consultation with the Department of Community Development and local government.

Supportive of centres being accessible to those that can walk to the location.


Residential Leasehold Estates and Development [March 2005]

This bulletin provides a summary of how the provisions of the repealed Acts have been variously carried forward and amended in corresponding provisions of the PD Act. This planning bulletin is intended to augment the information in planning bulletin 76 by providing a detailed list of the new provisions, as well as a comparative table cross referencing provisions of the PD Act with the repealed legislation.

N/A


Caretakers’ Dwellings in Industrial Areas [Nov 2004]

The purpose of this bulletin is to highlight the issues associated with the establishment of caretakers' dwellings in industrial areas. Also to outline a policy for dealing consistently with this demand through local planning strategies, town planning schemes and policy provisions. Although the bulletin has been prepared largely in response to emerging regional issues where there is a greater demand for caretakers' dwellings, it can be equally applied to the metropolitan region. However, the WAPC acknowledges the significant differences between metropolitan and regional local government areas throughout the State and the need to accommodate a range of responses to this issue. This bulletin supersedes planning bulletin 65

More mixing of uses in industrial areas is likely over time and so AC needs to be considered in these areas. Not the focus of the Bulletin.


130


Proposed Bush Forever Protection Areas [July 2004]

The purpose of this planning bulletin is to advise of a package of statutory planning measures that are being introduced to ensure that bushland protection and management issues are appropriately considered. In particular, these measures will give statutory effect to the protection of regionally significant bushland identified in Bush Forever (Government of Western Australia, 2000).

Providing areas of bushland in the urban form can contribute to the enjoyment of a journey for rec purposes but on the whole BFE has the potential to create less connectivity. Balance is not well managed.


Western Australian Planning Commission Reviews [May 2004]

The purpose of this planning bulletin is to inform local government, government agencies, the private sector and the community, of the WAPC’s intention to review and update a number of its current policies and guidelines. It also draws attention to a current review of planning processes and administration and the release of a green bill, the Planning and Development Bill 2004. This planning bulletin sets out the context, scope, relationship and timeframe for the various reviews and opportunities for public comment. The WAPC is currently undertaking a series of policy reviews, including: • a review of operational (development control) policies; • a review of Liveable Neighbourhoods; and • a review of the Residential Design Codes (R-Codes). The Department for Planning and Infrastructure is also undertaking a number of measures in conjunction with the WAPC, industry and stakeholders, to improve the planning approvals process together with an internal review of the administrative and business processes in the Statutory Planning Division. In addition, the State Government has prepared a green bill entitled the Planning and Development Bill 2004, has been released for public comment. The bill will have an overarching influence on the WAPC, local government, community and private sector involved in the planning and development of land.

This project is part of this process.


Guidelines for Wind Farm Development [May 2004]

This Planning Bulletin is intended to provide local government, other relevant approval authorities and wind farm developers with a guide to the planning framework for the balanced assessment of land-based wind farm developments. This bulletin is superseded by planning bulletin 67

N/A


Draft Use of Special Control Areas in Town Planning Schemes [May 2004]

The purpose of this planning bulletin is to explain and clarify the purpose and intent of using these provisions in town planning schemes and to provide guidance as to when the use of this mechanism is appropriate. Since the introduction of the Model Scheme Text in 1999, many local governments and state government agencies have proposed the use of special control areas in town planning schemes to deal with a wide range of planning and environmental issues.

N/A See Bulletin 74


Draft Caretakers' Dwellings in Industrial Areas [March 2004]

This bulletin is superseded by Planning Bulletin 70 N/A


131


Acid Sulfate Soils [Jan 2009]

The purpose of the planning bulletin is to provide advice and guidance on matters that should be taken into account in the rezoning, subdivision and development of land that contains acid sulfate soils. This planning bulletin introduces a set of revised acid sulfate Soils Planning Guidelines. The guidelines outline the range of matters which need to be addressed at various stages of the planning process to ensure that the subdivision and development of land containing acid sulfate soils is planned and managed to avoid potential adverse impacts on the Natural and built environment. The bulletin supersedes Planning Bulletin 64 Acid Sulfate Soils (November 2003), and the planning guidelines and risk maps appended to it.

N/A


Policy for Dealing with Potential Conflicts Between Residential Subdivision and Market Gardens in East Wanneroo

[Oct 2003]

The purpose of this bulletin is to advise on the WAPC policy to minimise the potential for conflict between market gardens and residential land uses in considering applications for subdivision. Much of the East Wanneroo area is zoned for urban development in the Metropolitan Region Scheme and is a major source of housing land particularly for first home-buyers. East Wanneroo is also traditionally an area for market gardens and other horticultural uses. Situations can arise where: a) Urban development is proposed in the vicinity of a market garden which is zoned rural, and where the market garden is expected to remain in productive use; b) Market gardens are zoned for urban development but that development may be delayed because owners are not contemplating subdivision with adjoining land. In both cases, conflicts can arise between the market garden use and residential development. The most common conflicts arise from agricultural chemical spray drift, noise, dust and odours. The policy applies to market gardens and includes fruit and vegetable growing cut flower production, turf farms, mushroom farms, plant nurseries and other horticultural uses.

N/A


132


Planning Appeals Amendment Act 2002 and Amendments to Policy No. DC 1.9 Amendments to the Metropolitan Region Scheme

[Oct 2003]

This bulletin outlines changes to the WAPC's policy on processing minor amendments to the Metropolitan Region Scheme. Legislation to introduce a new planning appeals system was promulgated on 18 April 2003. The new legislation abolished the right to appeal to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure and introduced a revised process associated with appeals to the Town Planning Appeal Tribunal. All planning appeals are now made to the tribunal. An outline of the key changes introduced under the new legislation is provided below. In addition this planning bulletin outlines changes to the WAPC's policy on processing minor amendments to the Metropolitan Region Scheme - these changes have been prompted in part by changes to the appeals legislation.

N/A


Urban Stormwater Management [Sept 2003]

Planning bulletin 92 supersedes this planning bulletin. N/A


New System for Classifying Western Australian Planning Commission Policies and Plans

[Sept 2003]

The purpose of this planning bulletin is to confirm the new classification system that the WAPC has introduced to guide the preparation and content of policies and plans. The new classification system is based on the principles set out in the State Planning Strategy and Statement of Planning Policy No. 8 State Planning Framework and is intended to: • Overcome difficulties in the complexity of the current policy framework; • Clarify the relationship of policies to the State Planning Strategy and state planning framework; and • Achieve consistency in the style and content of policies.

N/A


Draft Guidelines for Wind Farm Development [Sept 2003]

This bulletin is superseded by planning bulletin 67 N/A


Subdivision Applications: Information Checklist and Minor Variations to Strata Plans after Subdivision Approval

[June 2003]

This planning bulletin addresses minor variations to the strata plan after the WAPC issues a letter of approval but before the WAPC issues the form 26 under the Strata Titles Act 1985. The checklist for information to be supplied with subdivision applications was amended on 10 June 2003 to include additional requirements. The WAPC also varied its procedures in approving strata plans under the Strata Titles Act 1985 and the Town Planning and Development Act 1928.

N/A


Closure of Pedestrian Access Ways - Planning Considerations [May 2003]

The bulletin outlines the accessibility problems that can be created with closing PAW’s. Generally not supportive and outlines approach to considering closure.

Attempts to avoid PAW closure should be avoided. Needs to be properly applied.


133


Farm Forestry Policy [Feb 2003]

This policy initially was released for comment as Planning Bulletin 31 Draft Farm Forestry Policy in April 1999. It was amended following consideration of submissions and adopted as WAPC policy in April 2000. It now has been modified at the request of the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure to require the submission and approval of a transport strategy prior to planting, outlining the transport proposals at the time of plantation harvesting. Other sections also have been updated as appropriate. Given the passage of time since the release of the original farm forestry planning bulletin and the change that has now been effected to the policy, it is considered appropriate to release the revised document for a readvertising period of 42 days. Submissions on the revised document will be received until the close of business on Friday 4 April 2003. This bulletin supersedes planning bulletin 31

N/A


Residential Design Codes and Amendment to Residential Subdivision Policy

[Oct 2002]

This planning bulletin describes the manner in which the codes will be implemented and summarises the new provisions. The WAPC has completed a review of the 1991 Residential Planning Codes and adopted a new code - the Residential Design Codes of Western Australia. The new codes are effective upon gazettal. As a statement of planning policy they automatically supersede the 1991 codes for all those town planning schemes containing provisions to facilitate the incorporation of the codes by reference.

Refer to detailed assessment of current R-Codes.


New System for Classifying Western Australian Planning Commission Policies and Plans

[July 2002]

This bulletin is superseded by planning bulletin 60 N/A


Development by Public Authorities on Land Reserved Under the Metropolitan Region Scheme

[May 2002]

This bulletin outlines recent changes to the procedures to be followed by public authorities in carrying out development on reserved land. This Planning Bulletin outlines recent changes to the procedures to be followed in carrying out development on land reserved under the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS) following the gazettal, on Friday 12 April 2002, of MRS Amendment No. 1009/33A. This bulletin supersedes planning bulletin 42

N/A


134


Process for Seeking Approval Under the Strata Titles Act 1985 (and Town Planning and Development Act 1928) for Strata Titles

[June 2009]

This planning bulletin outlines some recent emerging issues associated with vacant lot and strata development (as distinct from survey strata) and sets out the WAPC's position regarding these issues. The WAPC has previously released Policy No DC 1.3 Strata Titles and Planning Bulletins 14 Amendments to Strata Titles Act and no 19 Strata Titles Amendment Act 1996 – Update on Policy and Practice (1997). This planning bulletin addresses the following issues: vacant air stratas in multi-tiered developments; requirements as to whether sketch plans need to be submitted with strata applications for approval; role of management statements and strata applications; acceptable variations to strata applications; measures to ensure documents endorsed are similar to those submitted at Department of Land Administration (DOLA); and issues raised by encroachments into air space by balconies. Some of the matters addressed in policy no. DC 1.3 will be reviewed in light of these issues.

The process for permitting certain developments is good. Policy on proper assessment of development is limited. Too many poor outcomes.


Draft Model Text Provisions for Guided Development Schemes [Nov 2001]

The model guided development schemes have now been completed and the purpose of this planning bulletin is to seek comment in relation to them. The WAPC released for public comment: Planning bulletin 37 (February 2000) explaining draft model text provisions for structure plans; and Planning bulletin 41 (July 2000) explaining draft model text provisions for development contributions. The WAPC also advised that draft model text provisions for guided development schemes were being prepared, and would be released for public comment when available. The model guided development schemes are included in attachment 1 of this planning bulletin.

N/A


R-Codes and Subdivision Issues [Sept 2001]

This planning bulletin provides a summary of the proposed changes to the draft Residential Design Codes of Western Australia (R-Codes) and foreshadows consequential changes to the WAPC's Development Control Policy 2.2 Residential Subdivision Policy. The draft R-Codes was released for public comment in October 2000. While they were available for public comment until 28 February 2001, in view of the extent of the changes proposed arising from the submissions, a further opportunity to comment is being provided. During the process of reviewing the R-Codes, the status of the minimum site areas on table 1 of the R-Codes and the WAPC's discretion to vary these minimum areas by subdivision approval has been questioned. This planning bulletin seeks comment on changes to policy and legislation in respect of this issue.

Refer to more detailed R-Code assessment.


135


Caravan Parks [Feb 2001]

This planning bulletin provides advice and seeks comments on matters to be taken into consideration in planning for the development of caravan parks. Key planning objectives for the development of caravan parks are: To provide short-term accommodation for tourists in locations which complement existing tourist and recreation facilities; To provide long-term accommodation for permanent residents in locations with access to services normally available to conventional residential development; and To encourage development of caravan parks in a manner, which is compatible with existing land uses, and which does not have a detrimental impact on the environment or the amenity of the locality.

Relevant to the use and also the influence of large caravan parks on access. Control and planning of large uses like this still limited.


Interim Revision to Development Control Policy 3.4 Rural Land Use Planning Related to Subdivision for Conservation

[Jan 2001]

The purpose of this planning bulletin is to advise of revisions to rural land use planning. This planning bulletin is to advise of revisions to Development Control Policy 3.4 - Rural Land Use Planning to enable the subdivision of areas of remnant vegetation from cleared rural land in special circumstances for conservation purposes.

N/A


New Subdivision Regulations and Application Forms [Dec 2000]

This planning bulletin outlines the new subdivision regulations and application forms. Planning bulletin 30 was released in February 1999 to outline proposals to change regulations and the associated application forms. Following comments received, amendments were made - particularly to the Form 1A - Subdivision Application Form. The Planning Legislation Amendment Act 1999 received assent in January 2000. This Act provides for an appeal right at the diagram or plan of survey stage, and accordingly requires that procedures be in place to ensure that application is made at this stage to receive appropriate clearances of the WAPC. The regulations will come into operation upon the proclamation of the Planning Legislation Amendment Act on 19 December 2000.

N/A


Applications for Telecommunications Infrastructure [Nov 2000]

This planning bulletin explains the changes to procedures since 1997 and addresses various other matters relating to the approval of applications for telecommunications infrastructure. The Telecommunications Act 1997 (Cwlth) resulted in the installation of telecommunications facilities, apart from specified low-impact facilities, being required to comply with state planning and environmental legislation. The WAPC issued Planning Bulletin 22 Telecommunications in June 1997 to advise on the planning approval processes, which took effect with the introduction of the new Act.

N/A


136


Subdivision Referrals to Service Providers [Nov 2000]

The WAPC has recently clarified its practice with respect to the referral of subdivision applications in recognition of the changing context regarding the increasing privatisation of public utility service providers. It is now WAPC practice to: Continue to refer subdivision applications to the licensed or authorised operator within each operating area. Refer subdivision applications for land outside a designated licensed operating area to the appropriate regulatory agency. Refer subdivision application for land partly within and partly outside a designated licensed operating area to both the license holder and the appropriate regulatory agency. Continue the practice of referring subdivision applications to Telstra. It should be noted that while developers are free in certain circumstances to nominate a service provider of their choice, careful thought should be given to the need for negotiations to be undertaken prior to the submission of formal subdivision applications to ensure that statutory time frames can be met.

Lack of co-ordination of responses by agencies is not addressed by the Bulletin. AC is not a priority for other agencies.


Town Planning (Local Government Planning Fees) Regulations 2000

[Sept 2000]

This bulletin is superseded by planning bulletin 84 N/A Planning Bulletin 43

Review of Subdivision Control [Sept 2000]

This planning bulletin provides an update on a joint WAPC and Ministry for Planning review of options for processing applications for subdivision. The review was initiated in 1997 to consider options, which could reduce resources allocated to the subdivision control process. Three options were identified and compared with the status quo. They were: Delegation of the process to local government; Contracting out the Ministry's role in the process; and Changing the process to allow for most of the work to be done externally under a system of professional certification.

N/A However, there might be an argument to say that if subdivision control was taken over by local government it could be more responsive to local needs. In practice even though the Dept controls subdivision the recommended conditions come for the local authority anyway.


Approval Requirements for Public Works Under the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS)

[Sept 2000]

This bulletin is superseded by planning bulletin 53 N/A Planning Bulletin 41

Draft Model Text Provisions for Development Contributions [July 2000]

These draft provisions have now been completed and the purpose of this planning bulletin is to seek comment in relation to them. The WAPC released for public comment Planning Bulletin No 37 Draft Model Text Provisions for Structure Plans (February 2000) explaining model text provisions for structure plans. The WAPC also advised that draft model text provisions for development contributions were being prepared, and would be released for public comment when available. The draft provisions are included in schedule 1 attached to this planning bulletin.

N/A


137


Development Control Under the Metropolitan Region Scheme [June 2000]

The purpose of this bulletin is to explain the changes to delegation and development control arrangements. The WAPC has reviewed its delegation to local government for development control arrangements in the Perth metropolitan region. The previous delegation (1997) has been cancelled and replaced by a new notice, which will become effective on 30 June 2000.

N/A


Processing Subdivision/Survey-Strata Applications [April 2000]

The purpose of this planning bulletin is to advise on: Procedures relating to the processing of subdivision and survey-strata applications; Signing subdivision / amalgamation applications; Procedures for processing survey-strata applications; Consideration of applications for deceased estates; Re-subdivision of strata’s; and Control of access to roads.

N/A However, the control of access to roads and the general management of roads is an issue for AC.


Restrictive Covenants and the Planning System [April 2000]

This planning bulletin explains the concept of restrictive covenants and outlines their use in the planning system. It is intended as a broad overview of the concept of restrictive covenants and further advice should always be obtained in relation to particular circumstances.

N/A


Draft Model Text Provisions for Structure Plans [Feb 2000]

The purpose of this planning bulletin is to seek comment on draft model text provisions for structure plans. The draft provisions set out a clear and consistent procedure for the preparation, assessment, advertising, approval and modification of structure plans. The draft provisions also introduce the concept of detailed area plans. Following consideration of comments and finalisation, it is intended to introduce the draft provisions as regulations.

Review clause 6.2.4.4 of Schedule 1 in the PB. Often with a report a LN assessment is required. Maybe this could be incorporated into scheme provisions.


Planning Bulletin 36 Amendments to Town Planning Regulations - Reintroduction of Requirement for Consent to Advertise and Town Planning Schemes and Nuclear Activities

[Jan 2000]

This bulletin provides advice on the modified procedures relating to amendments to town planning schemes arising from recent changes to the Town Planning Regulations 1967 and gives an update on the issue of the regulation of nuclear activities through town planning schemes. Amendments to the town planning regulations which were gazetted on 11 December 1998 enabled local governments to advertise town planning scheme amendments without first seeking the consent of the WAPC. Recently an amendment relating to nuclear activities was not granted final approval. The issue has arisen as to whether nuclear activities can be the subject of absolute prohibition under a town planning scheme.

N/A


138


Town Planning Amendment Regulations 1999: Model Scheme Text

[Nov 1999]

The regulations now require that local government zoning schemes comply with the MST except where the Minister approves any variation or exclusion to the provisions. The scope for exclusions and variations is set out in this planning bulletin. The Town Planning Amendment Regulations 1999 were gazetted on Friday 22 October 1999 and give effect to the Model Scheme Text (MST)

N/A


Review of the Residential Planning Codes Refer to detailed R-Codes assessment.

[August 1999]


Rights-of-Way or Laneways in Established Areas - Guidelines [July 1999]

These guidelines outline the WAPC's policy, practice and procedures regarding residential and commercial development and subdivision (including strata and survey-strata) adjoining existing rights-of-way (or laneways). The development of rights-of-way in 'green-field' subdivisions in new urban areas, or on large urban infill sites within developed areas, is addressed in DC Policy 2.6 and Liveable Neighbourhoods.

Bulletin is generally good but limits redevelopment of laneways. Less traffic focused approach should be promoted. View them as shared small mews and not require widening to 6m. Process of converting rights of ways to under-width roads should be a key focus.


Revised (final) Model Scheme Text [May 1999]

This bulletin is to advise on progress on the Model Scheme Text (MST). The purpose of the MST is to achieve greater consistency in the legal and administrative provisions of schemes whilst allowing flexibility in the planning content to suit local circumstances. It also introduces a new focus on strategic planning by the introduction of a Local Planning Strategy to express the strategic vision, policies and proposals of a local government and interpret State and regional policies at the local level.

N/A


Draft Farm Forestry Policy This bulletin is superseded by planning bulletin 56

[April 1991] N/A


Changes to Western Australian Planning Commission Regulations and Form 1A - Subdivision Application Form

[Dec 1998]

This planning bulletin described the changes to the regulations and the associated application forms as a result of a number of recent legislative and procedural changes. A number of recent legislative and procedural changes need to be reflected in the regulations, which govern the procedures for landowners in making application for the subdivision of land and for the WAPC in processing such applications.

N/A


139


Town Planning Scheme Amendments - Consent to Advertise [Dec 1998]

This planning bulletin outlines amendments to the Town Planning Regulations to be gazetted on 11 December 1998 concerning consent to advertise scheme amendments. This planning bulletin should be read in conjunction with Planning Bulletin 11 Town Planning Scheme Amendments, February 1996, on the content and general process for scheme amendments.

N/A


Planning Bulletin 28 Proposed Changes to the WAPC Policy on Variations to Lot Size Under the Residential Planning Codes for Single House Subdivisions and Planning Approval for Single Dwellings Under Local Government Town Planning Schemes

[August 1998]

The WAPC has recently reviewed its policy in planning bulletin 20 concerning variations to the minimum and average lot sizes in existing residential areas. The current policy provides for reductions in the minimum and average lot sizes in existing residential areas up to a maximum of 10 percent. Planning approval for single dwellings under a local government town planning scheme. It has been a common practice for some local governments to use the building licence approval process to implement planning controls in respect of single residential dwellings. This has occurred in two ways.

N/A


Local Government Fees and Charges for Planning Services [Feb 1998]

Planning bulletin 44 supersedes this bulletin. N/A


Water Source Requirements Relating to the Assessment of Subdivision Applications for Intensive Agriculture

[Nov 1997]

This planning bulletin is to advise of changes to the WAPC's practice in considering applications for subdivision of rural land for intensive agricultural purposes. This is to ensure that an adequate on-site water supply can be provided to all lots created for intensive agriculture and that each lot is capable of intensive agricultural use. The revised practice will apply particularly to applications for the subdivision of rural land for intensive agriculture in the south-west region but may also apply to other regions of the state.

N/A


Development Control Under Metropolitan Region Scheme 25 [Oct 1997]

The purpose of this planning bulletin is to explain the changes to delegation and development control arrangements. The WAPC has reviewed its delegation to local government for development control arrangements in the Perth metropolitan region. The previous delegation (1992) has been cancelled and replaced by a new notice, which will become effective on 28 November 1997.

N/A


140


Timely Processing of Town Planning Scheme Amendments 24 [August 1997]

The purpose of this planning bulletin is to clarify certain requirements of the Town Planning Regulations 1967 (the Regulations) in order to expedite the processing of scheme amendments. Specifically the planning bulletin addresses: Referral of amendments to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) for consideration of the need for environmental assessment; Accuracy of detail and inclusion of plans for amendments which involve a change in land use; The need for a resolution of council to approve modifications to amendments; Compliance with statutory periods for the consideration of submissions and forwarding amendments to the WAPC for final approval; and The format and presentation of schedules of submissions. The WAPC has previously issued planning bulletins on related issues - Planning bulletin 11 (February 1996) on the administration of town planning scheme amendments. Planning bulletin 16 (August 1996) on the Planning Legislation Amendment Act 1996 and the requirement to refer town planning schemes and amendments to the EPA.

N/A


Review of the Model Scheme Text 23 [July 1997]

This bulletin is to advise on progress of the review of the Model Scheme Text and to outline matters currently being considered for inclusion in the draft text. It also advises on the program for release of the draft Model Scheme Text and invites local government and other key stakeholders to suggest ideas as to how they would like to be involved in commenting and providing an input to the draft version.

N/A


141


Telecommunications [July 1997]

The purpose of this planning bulletin is to advise on the present position and the planning approval process, which will take effect from 1 July 1997 when new Telecommunications National Code comes into force. The development of telecommunications infrastructure is currently controlled by the Commonwealth Telecommunications Act 1991 and the Telecommunications National Code 1996. These provide certain powers and immunities for telecommunications carriers including exemption from complying with state planning and environmental legislation. With effect from 1 July 1997 the Telecommunications Act 1997 and a new Telecommunications National Code will come into force. The major effect of the new Act on planning processes will be that the installation of telecommunication facilities, other than low impact facilities as defined in a ministerial determination, will have to comply with state planning and environmental legislation. The new Telecommunications National Code is not yet finalised.

N/A


Cash-in-Lieu of Public Open Space [April 1997]

The purpose of this planning bulletin is to outline the purposes for which cash-in-lieu of public open space is given up under section 20C of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 may be expended. This planning bulletin is complementary to the following: Policy DC 2.3 Public Open Space in Residential Areas Policy DC 4.1 Industrial and Commercial Subdivision Policy DC 3.4 Rural Land Use Planning Policy Advice Note 2 of 1993 Review of Public Open Space Provision in Respect of Small Subdivisions.

With increasing levels of open space for other uses and too little of this having funding, the use of cash in lieu instead of more space is important to compactness and connectivity. Cash in lieu needs to be reviewed.


Variations to Lot Sizes Set by the Residential Planning Codes for Single House Subdivision

[Feb 1997]

The purpose of this bulletin is to advise on the WAPC's policy in relation to the consideration of subdivision applications for the creation of single house lots, which may fall below the minimum and/or average lot sizes set by the Residential Planning Codes. The WAPC has issued previous Bulletins relating to lot sizes and residential subdivision: Planning Bulletin No 6/80 - Residential Subdivision Lot Sizes, Frontages and Shapes Planning Bulletin No 9 - Battleaxe Subdivisions and Pedestrian Accessways Planning Bulletin No 17 - Battleaxe Subdivisions and Pedestrian Accessways (Revised Policy)

N/A Note- Density is an important broader consideration.


142


Strata Titles Amendment Act 1996 - Update on Policy and Practice

[Feb 1997]

The purpose of this planning bulletin is to provide information concerning the WAPC's policy, practice and procedures in relation to strata title subdivision following further recent changes to legislation. The planning bulletin is complementary to the WAPC's Policy DC 1.3 - Strata Titles.

N/A


Developer Contributions for Infrastructure [Feb 1997]

This planning bulletin has been prepared to provide a clear statement on the WAPC's policy on developer contributions and the process for recouping these contributions. It provides guidelines on the scope and method of exacting developer contributions, which can be applied uniformly and consistently in line with current policies of the WAPC. The power to require developer contributions derives from the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 (as amended), which is administered by the WAPC. The scope of developer contributions is determined by WAPC policy. Local governments do not have the authority under planning legislation to require developer contributions except where expressly provided for in town planning schemes, which have been recommended by the WAPC and approved by the Minister.

Use of developer contributions could be ramped up. Needs more clarity of intent and potential value to AC.


Battleaxe Subdivisions and Pedestrian Access ways (Revised Policy)

[Sept 1996]

The purpose of this planning bulletin is to advise on revisions to battleaxe subdivision and pedestrian access way policies. In December 1995 the WAPC issued planning bulletin 9 to advise local government and client bodies of proposed changes to the policies on battleaxe subdivisions and pedestrian access ways. Written submissions on the proposed policy changes, set out in the planning bulletin, were requested by the 31 January 1996, which was subsequently extended until 29 March 1996. The WAPC has now considered submissions on the proposed policy changes and has adopted revisions to section 3-5 (Battleaxe Subdivision) of Policy No. DC 2.2 Residential Subdivision and section 3-5 (Pedestrian and Cyclist Systems) of Policy No. DC 2.6 Residential Road Planning. This bulletin supersedes planning bulletin 9.

See bulletin on PAW above


143


Planning Legislation Amendment Act 1996 [August 1996]

The purpose of this planning bulletin is to draw attention to the Planning Legislation Amendment Act 1996, which was promulgated on 4 August 1996, and to provide an overview of the legislation and its effect. The Planning Legislation Amendment Act 1996 has amended planning and environment legislation, which previously had no explicit links. It has altered the following Acts: Town Planning and Development Act 1928; �Environmental Protection Act 1986; �Metropolitan Region Town Planning Scheme Act 1959; �Western Australian Planning Commission Act 1985; �East Perth Redevelopment Act 1991; and �Subiaco Redevelopment Act 1994. In addition, various consequential changes to the Town Planning Regulations 1967 have been made.

N/A


Town Planning Schemes - Examinations and Review [June 1996]

The purpose of this planning bulletin is to draw attention to the requirement for local governments to examine and review town planning schemes, and to provide guidance on the procedures to carry out scheme examinations and reviews. Local governments have a responsibility to examine and review their town planning schemes to ensure the timely consideration of land use, development and planning controls in a district, and to give the community an opportunity to comment on how a district will be developed. It is also important that the WAPC and the Minister for Planning have the opportunity to ensure incorporation of current planning policies and approaches in a scheme. Together, all of these matters ensure the continuing relevance of schemes.

N/A Note: The review process should provide opportunity to incorporate principles of accessible communities with potential to use LN as a model.


Amendments to Strata Titles Act [May 1996] Procedural relevance only.


Planning Legislation Amendment Bill (1995) [Feb 1996] Procedural relevance only.


Information Required to Support Requests for the Dedication of Under width Roads Under Section 288(4) of the Local Government Act

[Feb 1996]


Town Planning Scheme Amendments [Feb 1996] Procedural relevance only.

The purpose of this bulletin is to inform local governments and interested parties about the changes to the Town Planning Regulations 1967 gazetted on Friday 9 February 1996.

N/A


144

APPENDIX E SUMMARY OF WORKSHOP PRECEEDINGS AND WORKSHOP PRESENTATION


145

ACCESSIBLE COMMUNITIES WORKSHOP THURSDAY 7 MAY 2009

THE MELBOURNE HOTEL, HAY STREET Workshop Summary

Order of proceedings Introduction The workshop commended at 9am with an opening address delivered by Gary Prattley, Chair of the WA Planning Commission.

Paul Morris from ARRB, and Brett Wood-gush from TPG gave short presentations. Paul Morris as project leader introduced the consultant team and provided an overview of the project objectives and delivery stages. Paul also, briefly introduced the concepts of active travel and accessible communities in the context of this study. Brett Wood-gush gave a pictorial presentation on urban planning in recent years in Australia and overseas, commenting on the relative success of various initiatives, and provided a brief overview of the Western Australian planning system. These presentations are attached.

Workshop Participants were asked to discuss three topic areas at three different levels of analysis. The three topic areas:

• Ideal outcomes – how do participants view a truly accessible community, what are the characteristics.

• Gaps – what are the gaps and flaws in the planning system that act as barriers to achieving accessible communities.

• Recommendations – what are some suggested ways to remedy gaps and flaws in the planning system.

Participants were asked to consider the ideal outcomes from the perspective of the following groups; pedestrians, cyclists, special needs, public transport and motor vehicle users. In regard to recommendations some of the topic areas participants were asked to consider were governance, funding, policy, approvals, standards and construction. These topic areas were not an exclusive list and many other areas were discussed.

As discussed, participants were asked to discuss the ideal outcomes, gaps and recommendations for three different levels of analysis. These were:

• District planning level

• Neighbourhood planning level

• Block development level

Approximately 25 minutes was allocated for discussion on ideal outcomes, gaps and recommendations at each level of analysis. Participants were asked to record their discussions on the A1 worksheets provided to them.

Group feedback session Prior to the conclusion of the workshop, 30 minutes was allocated for a group feedback session whereby one participant from each table was asked to report back approximately three gaps and/or recommendations from any of the district, neighbourhood or block levels of analysis, that the groups


146

considered to be most important. Following this, the floor was opened up for a short general discussion. The workshop concluded at 12pm.

Sample feedback Examples of comments and discussion are shown below. Many comments were common to more than one group. The following feedback is a sample.

Block level analysis Ideal outcomes

• Footpaths both sides of street, lighting, visual surveillance, no fencing • Passive surveillance • Opportunities for more engaging street environment • Non-intervention / self-regulation of various transport mode networks • Safe on-road cycle movements / networks • Bypass for facilities at non-signalised intersections • Fully integrated disabled access / legibility – access to public transport and shopping centres • Activity centres that are 24 hours, not 8am to 5pm • Pedestrian dedicated areas • Street furniture – benches, bins, bike racks, trees! • EOT facilities for bikes • Signage for speed limits • Single lane traffic • On-street parking • Wide sheltered dual use footpaths • Designing ‘cut crime’ principles employed, eyes on the street and pathways for safety.

Gaps

• Over signed street environment, builds mentality that cars must drive a certain limit • Strength of WAPC policy to support pedestrian and cyclist provision • Good street trees / useful / citrus? • Local streets wide enough for delivery vehicles – no speeding – encourage pedestrians • Lack of adequate planning to establish low speed design of street system. • Policy gap for pedestrian planning • Prioritisation of transport modes – motorised lowest – pedestrian / cyclist / public transport

highest • Maintaining connected facilities – bike lanes through intersections • Funding processes – lack of consistent funding to LG’s • Lack of consistency of what goes in the verge / road and where

- during construction phase, pedestrians are disadvantaged for extended periods - roads / streets; building form; pavement / path widths; signage / lighting; parking /

seating. • Accessible bus stops • Lack of funding for infrastructure including bus shelters.


147

Recommendations

• Rather than minimum road reserve widths, regulate maximum permitted width which mandates effective use of land

• Not just minimum engineering standards, but minimum urban design standards • Street lighting mandated and designed for the pedestrian • Uniform crossovers • Metro-wide introduction of paid parking across all LGA (including private shopping centres) to

fund public transport and other mode networks • Introduce rate / tax for provision of off-street parking (as opposed to rates based on GRV) • Transport road-works charge at subdivision stage. • Increase density by more sustainable use of existing built structures • DAIPs must address gap between pedestrian networks and buildings • Roundabouts interfere with pedestrian / cyclist routes and bus routes • DPI to lead – local government strategy to be aligned with state strategy • Neighbourhoods, retro fitting, SPP – DC • No blank walls • Development concession for developer contributions (higher density for extra contributors) • Funding incentives for provision of street furniture etc. • Enquiry by design for established areas • Community education programs • Local government planning guidelines • Strong design guidelines • Commitment from local government and developers to enforce design guidelines • Set budget priorities • Consistent standards access local areas / regions so that areas are legible and useable (not

letting landscape architects / developers overrule as government will be maintaining everything) • Provision of street trees and street furniture to make active transport attractive • Reducing setbacks to promote greater community interaction. • Re-prioritise use of funding – transport plans identifying priority expenditure for public transport /

infrastructure • Need common trenching for services • PTA access policies / workshops with communities and improvements.

Neighbourhood level analysis Ideal outcomes

• Pedestrian prioritised neighbourhood, particularly accessible and connected network • Excellent way-finding, so both able and disabled people know how and where they are • Feeder routes to public transport / arterial connectors / main public transport routes • Wider verges / single car lanes • 400m to public transport (local neighbourhood routes) • Location of services and facilities (deli’s / open space) • 30km on every street


148

• River transport faster. • Layout of commercial areas – accessibility by PT, and other active transport • Car parking further away rather than close to destinations • Reduction of urban sprawl.

Gaps

• LG overly focused on ‘standards’ rather than the developed outcome • Making public transport delivery effective and of a reasonable service delivery. • Road widths can accommodate buses etc. • Policy on minimum bus frequency • Lack of footpaths along streets – lack of linkages between neighbourhoods / subdivision • Comprehensive cycle network (investment in PBN) signage and legibility • Circle route as opposed to radial routes • Liveable Neighbourhood good for greenfields, difficult to implement in brownfield • No incentives to get ideal outcomes – developers driven by financial which usually means

cheapest solution. • Fear of liability by not meeting standards can knock improvement projects on head in brownfield

sites • Drink fountains • Pathway priority over driveways – legible • Vegetation plan – lack of / connected green spaces • “Real” parking and driving costs not filtered down to the users - district level? • Loss of community heritage with redevelopment (i.e. loss of local deli’s due to competition with

Coles / Woolworths etc.) • LN and WAPC policy DC 2.6 requirements for space and planting of shade trees and that actually

being implemented. Recommendations

• Not only minimum engineering standards at LG but min urban design standards (safety and convenience)

• Access to a peak urban design body to advocate / support better design outcomes (have a role in assessing performance based approaches).

• Create market leading development examples of good accessible communities. These will create competition amongst developers and thereby lead demands of the market and consumers.

• Disability Inclusion Plans in local govt have focused on Local Govt buildings and how staff interact with people with disabilities, but these DAIPs should also consider town planning, road design, community (non-local govt) facilities.

• Over-arching standards to reflect strategic outcomes • MRIT (as one avenue) – tax to be used for improving / developing pathways – e.g. crossing rivers • Clear definition of financial responsibilities • Formalise financial contribution arrangements • Develop ‘models’ of ideal built form outcomes (visual representation) • Reduce MRWA involvement at neighbourhood road levels (i.e. line marking / signage) • MRWA required to maintain pedestrian / road crossings • Consistent policies and guidelines – coordination between LGs


149

• Inconsistencies between policies and guidelines e.g. MRWA guidelines match Liveable Neighbourhoods and Designing Out Crime etc – should be aligned

• Review of effects over over-supply of parking • Re-channel funding from car registrations to support public transport instead of funding roads • Developers to demonstrate connection of uses from district to local level (hierarchy of uses /

integration to be demonstrated) • Review of Aust roads Standards / implementation of standards and allowing for innovation rather

than business as usual • Investigate why liveable neighbourhoods not being implemented in relation to sufficient space for

the planting of shade trees.

District level analysis Ideal outcomes

• Large degree of self-sufficiency (employment, civic facilities, retail, recreation) • Reg. hierarchy of roads • Strategic routes / links to activity centres • Direct connections for cars – car-pool lanes etc. – constrained private vehicle use. Parking

standards less. • Design for buses, then cars. • Peak hour bus lanes on district roads • Dispersement of motor vehicle traffic / rather than concentration of high-speed routes • Local living principles (walking / cycling) integrated into district level • Roads for public transport to be straight, direct (approx. 800m – 1000m apart) • Catchment on both sides, hitting major attractions. Priority though congested areas • Grouped or segregated uses depending on use (i.e. suggested uses in areas from intra-regional

district but grouping of paths in areas of high activity) • Specialised uses when possible • 6km by 6 km “town” • Return of the ‘village’ style community incorporating employment, recreation, education, sporting

opportunities within the community. Gaps

• Not tying new development to self sufficiency targets (i.e. minimum job targets that must be reached before new land can be developed)

• Crossing of arterial roads (safe crossing), particularly given the car priority which still prevails • Need to focus on the pedestrian priority at the District Level • Limited examples of successful Greenfield centres which aren’t planned for the private vehicle • Poor recognition of pedestrians / cyclists • Strategic footpaths / cycle network to ensure permeability • What do you do with bikes on bus. Transferability e.g. bike not on train at peak hour. Inter- modal

storage facilities • Funding – freeways and railway crossing – sever existing networks • Too much emphasis on motorised transport • Too much emphasis on modelling outputs (need for reality checks and intuition)


150

• PTA needs to be automatic referral agency with mandatory approval. • High level of closure of Public Access Ways (crime issues) • To provide or not provide parking? No parking policy across all local govts. • Parking standards – supply too high in centres • Developer driven (isolated brands) • No agreement from service providers on using service corridors - developers try to use service

easements for POS / dual use paths and the servicing agencies cannot provide local government / WAPC with a consistent approach, which can result in missed opportunities

• TOD parking policy (PTA & DPI developing to be finalised) • LN policy doesn’t provide for sufficient density near public transport hubs • Lag time in bus routes being available in new areas • Public transport during peak hours excludes cyclists – prevents multiple trips e.g. cycle / PT /

cycle • Key destinations are not identified at the district level.

Recommendations

• District level planning needs to be informed by regional level planning, so that regional services are integrated with a transport network assessed at the district level

• Modal integration in route planning • Unified objectives – common plan and goal (empowering local government – single and LGA) • Balance access to funds (local and state government) competing drivers – infrastructure versus

servicing fund (need ongoing service funding) • Not good relationship between agencies, state and local government (better communication

required) i.e. PTA not always informed of structure plans (may be case for other agencies) • Developer must consult with agencies prior to beginning plan to local government = importance of

structures plan needs to be elevated • Online comment process for agencies • Partnerships between agencies and private (developers etc) • Design public transport before areas become established • Must be compatible with local planning and vice versa • Do away with early release approvals • Mechanism to connect places and developers but needs WAPC policies to support development

contributions, plans (this is where it falls over) *See City of Swan’s letters to WAPC on draft SPP developer contributions

• Public consultations (surveys / questionnaires etc.) as to what people want for their district • Strengthen policy requirements – remove should – so that resulting developments must comply

with policy objectives • Mandating for density • Developer contributions to infrastructure such as cycle lanes etc – changes to Town Planning

Schemes to permit this – awareness of the need • Improvements in rail freight infrastructure and future planning.


151


152


153


154


155


156


157


158


159


160


161


162


163


164


165


166

APPENDIX F WORKSHOP TRANSCRIPT


167

ACCESSIBLE COMMUNITIES WORKSHOP

THURSDAY 7 MAY 2009 THE MELBOURNE HOTEL HAY STREET

WRITE UP OF RAW DATA FROM TABLE SHEETS

ARRB GROUP TPG PLANNING AND URBAN DESIGN


168

BLOCK LEVEL

TABLE 1

1. IDEAL OUTCOMES • Pedestrians • Cyclists • Special Needs • Public Transport • Motorised Vehicles

INITIALS

• Opportunities for more engaging street environment • Streets being a ‘social place’ first and foremost • Strong way finding around streets, makes streets accessible for people with disabilities we make

them accessible for all • High urban design standards • Footpaths both sides of street, lighting, visual surveillance, no fencing • Creating street environments, which are perceived as safe.

2. GAPS Pedestrians Cyclists Special Needs Public Transport Motorised Vehicles

• Still the desire to segregate the car from the pedestrian • Over signed street environment, builds mentality that cars must drive a certain limit • Strength of WAPC policy to support pedestrian and cyclist provision • The disjointed relationship between planning and local ‘engineering standards’ • A SPP to support pedestrian and cycling priority • Education and awareness of best practice within local government • Perception of crime.

3. RECOMMENDATIONS Governance Funding Policy Approval Standards Construction

• Need change to regulations to place the pedestrian as the priority • Not just minimum engineering standards, but minimum urban design standards • Street lighting mandated and designed for the pedestrian • ‘Designing for all’ concept • Rather than minimum road reserve widths, regulate maximum permitted width which mandates

effective use of land • Better integration between pedestrian and cycle priority and other aspects including WSVD (flush

kerbing, rain gardens, etc) • Outdated and inflexible engineering standards • Establishing minimum parking numbers rather than maximum • Ability for planning system to regulate (enforce) ongoing requirements • Ensuring, especially in higher density / mixed use areas, we think strategically about service

provision (bins, deliveries etc)


169

• Uniform crossovers. DISTRICT LEVEL

TABLE 1


INITIALS

• Large degree of self-sufficiency (employment, civic facilities, retail, recreation) • Need to plan these services in partnership with the movement network • Good access to government services and facilities • Clustering of used as the decentralisation of uses around a district • Pedestrian and cycle priority.


• Crossing of arterial roads (safe crossing), particularly given the car priority which still prevails • Need to focus on the pedestrian priority at the District Level • Limited examples of successful Greenfield centres which aren’t planned for the private vehicle • Need to consider changing the law to give the pedestrian priority in all cases • Not tying new development to self sufficiency targets (i.e. minimum job targets that must be

reached before new land can be developed) • Over ‘signed’ street environment gives motorists sense that they must abide by certain minimum

speed / direction requirements • Often / always financial considerations drive location, rather than the best planning outcome.


• District level planning needs to be informed by regional level planning, so that regional services are integrated with a transport network assessed at the district level

• Need greater flexibility in the mode of service delivery (i.e. decentralising LG and State Gov services into activity centres)

• De-regulation of requirements to advocate for performance based outcomes • In the planning of service delivery, planning takes account of ultimate service delivery especially

as the age of the suburb evolves.

NEIGHBOURHOOD LEVEL TABLE 1


170


INITIALS

• Pedestrian prioritised neighbourhood, particularly accessible and connected network • Shared road environment between cars and cyclists • Excellent way-finding, so both able and disabled people know how and where they are • Strong desire for interconnectedness • Huge need for mixture of housing choices and options, mixing families with couples, singles,

students etc • Home based, highly technologically advanced communities which promote Tele-Commuting • Self-sufficiency local people filling local jobs • Mixed use environment, an adaptable environment • Local convenience based uses.


• Inflexible standards, based on previous poor examples • Inability / desire to regulate car use in a way which prioritised the pedestrian and the cyclist • Planning having an often disjointed relationship with engineering • LG overly focused on ‘standards’ rather than the developed outcome • Making public transport delivery effective and of a reasonable service delivery. • In relative terms, its free to drive on roads but costs money to use public transport • Urban design aspect of engineering design


DB

• Careful design of mixed use precincts so that noise and amenity impacts are avoided • Management of the type of uses which are within MV precincts (farm based codes) • Not only minimum engineering standards at LG but min urban design standards (safety and

convenience) • Access to a peak urban design body to advocate / support better design outcomes (have a role in

assessing performance based approaches) • Funding assistance and partnerships between councils • Sustainability of service provision • Design centres with adaptability for change. • Change laws to give pedestrians right of way over cars on streets that pedestrians use • Government services should not be located at activity centres and not at isolated low cost sites.


171

EW

This should have priority over locating of activity centres in the middle of its catchments. • Create market leading development examples of good accessible communities. These will create

competition amongst developers and thereby lead demands of the market and consumers. • Disability Inclusion Plans in local govt have focused on Local Govt buildings and how staff interact

with people with disabilities, but these DAIPs should also consider town planning, road design, community (non-local govt) facilities.

• People with disabilities should have more involvement with local govt. BLOCK LEVEL

TABLE 2


INITIALS

• Kerbs • Seamless streets • Good street trees / useful / citrus? • Local streets wide enough for delivery vehicles – no speeding – encourage pedestrians • Street trees • Need allotments / verge gardens etc. • Wider local access-ways that can be used as more than access-way • Passive surveillance.

2. GAPS • Pedestrians • Cyclists • Special Needs • Public Transport • Motorised Vehicles

• Street design does not address built form outcomes • Explore behaviour. Put in bus lane / parking means less regional traffic – e.g. Beaufort St. • Traffic calming • Behaviour modification • Conflict between engineering / design with urban planning • Lack of adequate planning to establish low speed design of street system.

3. RECOMMENDATIONS • Governance • Funding

• Integrate private and public development – e.g. small houses for narrow streets • Group dwellings diff. urban form – use diff. streets • Promote greater use of buildings – e.g. strata buildings / houses • Increase density by more sustainable use of existing built structures


172

• Policy • Approval • Standards • Construction

• Review of engineering standards – e.g. service easements to comply with new planning • Objectives • Accommodate broadband / telecommunications. Impact of ability to communicate on need to

travel – e.g. banking online • Book flexible route plans - e.g. mini-bus taxis.

DISTRICT LEVEL

TABLE 2


INITIALS

• Individual pedestrian routes? Integrated with cyclists • Direct links • Reg. hierarchy of roads • Dedicated cycle ways / roads • Strategic routes / links to activity centres • Identify geographical constraints – e.g. lakes etc. • Recreational routes vs. ‘work’ routes etc. • Identify modes of transport – bus to train – minibus etc. Modal integration • Direct connections for cars – car pool lanes etc. – constrained private vehicle use. Parking

standards less. • Design for buses, then cars.


• Poor recognition of pedestrians / cyclists • Strategic footpaths / cycle network to ensure permeability • Poor continuity of routes • What do you do with bikes @ bus. Transferability e.g. bike not on train at peak hour. Inter- modal

storage facilities • Commuter car parks at station. Poor trip planning – inter-modal links. Bus train connection • Poor lighting on cycle ways • Dedicated cycle ways • Better signage on cycle ways / pedestrians • Attitude changes to sharing • Cyclists pay registration? Bikes need minimum “equip” – lights, bell etc. Training / education. • Bikes


173

• Need access for handicapped to park; space on trains for wheelchairs – integration - universal access

• Motorised bicycles / gophers etc. Use footpaths? • Skateboards.

3. RECOMMENDATIONS • Governance • Funding • Policy • Approval • Standards • Construction

• Linked departments for policy • Linking contracts – e.g. footpaths and road • Modal integration in route planning • Traffic flow – roundabouts, traffic lights etc.

NEIGHBOURHOOD LEVEL

TABLE 2


INITIALS

• Feeder routes to public transport / arterial connectors / main public transport routes • Shared local paths – pedestrians / cyclists. Pedestrian takes priority • Wider verges / single car lanes • Local direct bus network. High frequency versus every stop bus • Accommodate people with disabilities • Usable paths to get to bus stop etc. • Car parking not dominate pedestrian routes • River transport faster.


• Road widths can accommodate buses etc. • Policy on minimum bus frequency • Linkages on buses / trains • Bus route connection to different train lines • Lack of innovation in public transport • Car pooling in high density areas – e.g. ‘hire’ car / fleet management • Path network planning • Identify key ‘services’ that need that need access – e.g. airport, university, schools, - strategic


174

locations • Funding of cycle ways • Crossing river is a problem – need faster ferries; more stops / routes. • Lack of permeability of different nodes - similar constraints presented by the railway line and

freeway – need better cross-links!


• Audit ‘black spots’ – strategic locations • Cross links between departments – e.g. PTA and DPI • Promote and encourage alternative / innovate public transport – bike hire / fleet management /

private cars • Over-arching standards to reflect strategic outcomes • MRIT (as one avenue) – tax to be used for improving / developing pathways – e.g. crossing rivers • Crossing points needed – bridging constraints to main roads • Clear definition of financial responsibilities.

BLOCK LEVEL TABLE 3


INITIALS

• Non-intervention / self-regulation of various transport mode networks • Path from individual property to public transport / shops / recreation etc. • Safe walking environment (footpath or safer street environment) • Roads that don’t require interventions • Safe on-road cycle movements / networks • Bypass for facilities at non-signalised intersections • Fully integrated disabled access / legibility – access to public transport and shopping centres • Ped shed (walking distance).

2. GAPS

• Pedestrians • Cyclists • Special Needs

• Need for rest facilities along path network • Need for curb ramps • Integration of on-road cyclist routes and on road parking (roads that are too wide) • Roundabouts interfere with pedestrian / cyclist routes and bus routes • DAIPs must address gap between pedestrian networks and buildings • Integration between shops and footpaths (disabled access) – currently only relates to parking


175

• Public Transport • Motorised Vehicles

• Location of aged persons accommodation needs to relate to shops / facilities / public transport (and vice versa)

• Design of facilities orientated to car parking (not pedestrian / cyclists).

3. RECOMMENDATIONS

• Governance • Funding • Policy • Approval • Standards • Construction

• Density / mix of housing choices / integration of uses • Introduce abuser pays system (congestion tax) • Metro-wide introduction of paid parking across all LGA (including private shopping centres) to

fund public transport and other mode networks • Introduce rate / tax for provision of off-street parking (as opposed to rates based on GRV) • Transport road-works charge at subdivision stage.

DISTRICT LEVEL

TABLE 3


INITIALS

• Generally too high a scale – connecting neighbourhoods and other districts • Regional connectivity – linking major nodes / recreation – no less than 1km away from principle

cycle • Integration with major nodes (principle high frequency) 800 metres – connection between services

– inter-modal connections • Peak hour bus lanes on district roads • Dispersement of motor vehicle traffic / rather than concentration of high-speed routes • Abuser pays system (using road space / congestion / pollution etc.).


• Funding – freeways and railway crossing – sever existing networks • End of trip facilities – legibility (lack of identifying district / regional path) – separation of cyclist /

pedestrian usage • Accessibility to services • Funding for bus services (frequency / availability) every 10 minutes.


176


• Unified objectives – common plan and goal (empowering local government – single and LGA) • Balance access to funds (local and state government) competing drivers – infrastructure versus

servicing fund (need ongoing service funding) • Federal government involved in public transport provision.

NEIGHBOURHOOD LEVEL

TABLE 3


INITIALS

• Legibility – safety (footpath on side of every street) – connection to every resident [non-motorised audit]

• Speed environment / urban design of street • Provision of end of trip facilities – 3 different types of cyclist users • Cycle storage / rental • 400m to public transport (local neighbourhood routes) • Location of services and facilities (deli’s / open space) • 30km on every street


• Lack of footpaths along streets – lack of linkages between neighbourhoods / subdivision • Use of roads by cyclists / motor vehicle (speed differentiation between different modes) –

including dual use cyclists / pedestrians path network • Comprehensive cycle network (investment in PBN) signage and legibility • Special needs access (need standards) around nodes / facilities / services • Linking locations of bus stops with services / shops (priority over parking) provision of bus

services • Circle route as opposed to radial routes • Linking aged accommodation to public transport • Prioritisation of different transport modes (linking off-road and on-road cyclist routes) • User pays for parking – school parking and access.

3. RECOMMENDATIONS • Community representative structures at neighbourhood levels


177

• Governance • Funding • Policy • Approval • Standards • Construction

• Developers to contribute to funding / provision of footpaths along every street (enforced by DPI) at subsidised level - cycle networks

• Formalise financial contribution arrangements • Develop ‘models’ of ideal built form outcomes (visual representation) • Common standards. • Reduce MRWA involvement at neighbourhood road levels (i.e. line marking / signage) • MRWA required to maintain pedestrian / road crossings • Common standards for end of trip facilities.

BLOCK LEVEL

TABLE 4


INITIALS

• Focus on improved foot path pedestrian amenities requirements (new and older subdivisions) • Consideration given to all demographics: shared spaces.


• Policy gap for pedestrian planning.

3. RECOMMENDATIONS • Governance • Funding • Policy

• DPI to lead – local government strategy to be aligned with state strategy • Local government employs unclear word • Building additions design guidelines for commercial developments – liveable • Neighbourhoods, retro fitting, SPP – DC. • No blank walls


178

• Approval • Standards • Construction

• Passive surveillance – eyes on street • Active frontages • Interest in design • Awnings – shade – comfort.

DISTRICT LEVEL

TABLE 4


INITIALS

• District public transport / pedestrian and cycling paths to be linked to regional network • Local living principles (walking / cycling) integrated into district level • Roads for public transport to be straight, direct (approx. 800m – 1000m apart) • Catchment on both sides, hitting major attractions. Priority though congested areas • Activity / density along pedestrian and cycle paths (to maximise walkable catchment) • Mandating self-sufficiency (living – working – shopping – recreation – food generation).


• Too much emphasis on motorised transport • Too much emphasis on modelling outputs (need for reality checks and intuition) • PTA needs to be automatic referral agency with mandatory approval.


• Not good relationship between agencies, state and local government (better communication required) i.e. PTA not always informed of structure plans (may be case for other agencies)

• Local government not always responded to by state agency • Developer must consult with agencies prior to beginning plan to local government = importance of

structures plan needs to be elevated • Online comment process for agencies • Minimum densities to be higher and higher density to be mandatory along transport corridors • Mixed use hubs rather than straight retail centres.


179

NEIGHBOURHOOD LEVEL

TABLE 4


INITIALS

• Limited commercial parking requirement in proximity of public transport • Focus on other modes of transport • Frequency of public transport • Road ---------- requirements that meet public transport • Dedicated cycle routes • Priority for road user hierarchy (UK system).



• Review of effects over over-supply of parking • Revenue from paid parking / developer contributions to be put towards public transport (active

transport) footpaths / cycle paths • Tax rebate for public transport use • Mechanism to give public transport advantages (financial and otherwise) over private cars • Re-channel funding from car registrations to support public transport instead of funding roads • Investigate better ways to improve transfer between public transport modes • Lower speed zones around town centres / schools.

BLOCK LEVEL

TABLE 5

1. IDEAL OUTCOMES • Pedestrians

INITIALS

• Activity centres that are 24 hours, not 8am to 5pm • Higher density, mixed use • Friendly, safe environment to walk around


180

• Cyclists • Special Needs • Public Transport • Motorised Vehicles

• Close proximity between residence and destination • Pedestrian dedicated areas • Street furniture – benches, bins, bike racks, trees! • EOT facilities for bikes • Attractive public transport modes • Less traffic – discourage motor vehicles • Protection from weather from pedestrians – awnings etc. • Low speed limits on local roads • Signage for speed limits • Interesting architecture • Attractive and functional public open space.


• Prioritisation of transport modes – motorised lowest – pedestrian / cyclist / public transport highest • Maintaining connected facilities – bike lanes through intersections • Identification and removal of pedestrian and cyclist barriers (intersections) • Funding processes – lack of consistent funding to LG’s • Whose responsibility is alternative public transport (not buses or trains, more trams etc.)? • Community will • Community perception doesn’t match contemporary planning principles in terms of creating

neighbourhoods. 3. RECOMMENDATIONS Governance Funding Policy Approval Standards Construction

• Development concession for developer contributions (higher density for extra contributors) • Funding incentives for provision of street furniture etc. • Enquiry by design for established areas • Community education programs • Strong leadership by state government.

DISTRICT LEVEL

TABLE 5

1. IDEAL OUTCOMES INITIALS • Interconnected road network capable for carrying people by public transport, more and cycling


181

• Pedestrians • Cyclists • Special Needs • Public Transport • Motorised Vehicles

• All modes of transport should have appropriate facilities • Main transport routes should not act as barriers to movement (rail sunk etc). • Centres – establish need, no’s, size, etc, amenities available.


• Priority of road users • Public transport to connect districts now – should connect within districts (e.g. cars) • High level of closure of Public Access Ways (crime issues) • Current focus on traffic movement. Cyclist and pedestrian barriers not addressed. • To provide or not provide parking? No parking policy across all local govts.


• Partnerships between agencies and private (developers etc) • Strong leadership from state agency • Links between district and larger picture • More proactive rather than reactive planning • Design public transport before areas become established • Longer term planning (20-35 years) needed • Must be compatible with local planning and vice versa • Do away with early release approvals.

NEIGHBOURHOOD LEVEL

TABLE 5

1. IDEAL OUTCOMES • Pedestrians • Cyclists • Special Needs

INITIALS

• Speed limit issues – limit them to encourage more active forms. Street design should reflect lower speeds on lower order roads

• All streets to be pedestrian and cyclist friendly • Priority links and lanes for public transport • End of trip facilities for bikes and people with special needs


182


• Good network for cyclists and pedestrians – good connectivity, signage • Active street fronts to encourage safety and security • Layout of commercial areas – accessibility by PT, and other active transport • Appropriate densities • Car parking further away rather than close to destinations.


• Disables access to the PT – addressed but still being implemented • Priority to motor vehicles – should be Pads, cyclists and special needs, PT then cars • Liveable Neighbourhood good for greenfields, difficult to implement in brownfield • No incentives to get ideal outcomes – developers driven by financial which usually means

cheapest solution. • Changing standards • Fear of liability by not meeting standards can knock improvement projects on head in brownfield

sites.


• Consistent policies and guidelines – coordination between LGs • Inconsistencies between policies and guidelines e.g. MRWA guidelines match Liveable

Neighbourhoods and Designing Out Crime etc – should be aligned • More performance base policies – outcome based rather than prescriptive • Volume of policies and guidelines overwhelming and overlapping and duplication – needs

streamlining • Relocation of funding from roads to public transport.

BLOCK LEVEL

TABLE 6

1. IDEAL OUTCOMES • Pedestrians • Cyclists • Special Needs • Public Transport

INITIALS

• Place maker / unique? • Vision that allows for flexibility • Single lane traffic • On-street parking • Wide sheltered dual use footpaths • Attractive function of landscapes


183

• Motorised Vehicles

• Reduce street setbacks - limit fencing - better safety • Active frontages • Design for shelter / weather protection – trees and shop front with awnings • Narrower roads, larger shop frontages • Fewer obstacles.


• Pathway obstruction • Mixed use environments (to be promoted) • Hierarchy of users • Lack of footpaths / maintenance • Accessible bus stops • Lack of density – need people to use transport • More accessible transports for people with disabilities • More accommodation for Gophers.


• Local government planning guidelines • Strong design guidelines • Commitment from local government and developers to enforce design guidelines • Set budget priorities • All councils to have sustainable ‘Travel-Smart’ officer to refocus from car-centric communities -

educate / promote staff and community - sustainable travel behaviour changes • Local government to provide very clear vision for their community • Servicing lanes should be designed to accommodate the local government’s refuse • Collection vehicle (sorry! it has to fit otherwise the local government has to purchase new

vehicles) • State level there should be method to standardise vehicles so that Perth can have a consistent

approach. DISTRICT LEVEL

TABLE 6

1. IDEAL OUTCOMES • Pedestrians

INITIALS

• Grouped or segregated uses depending on use (i.e. suggested uses in areas from intra-regional district but grouping of paths in areas of high activity)

• Specialised uses when possible


184

• Cyclists • Special Needs • Public Transport • Motorised Vehicles

• Frequency and accessibility – good connection to places of activity and end of journey facilities • Designing for people and prioritise active transport.


• One path serves all • Early delivery of public transport. Need to achieve density targets – chicken and egg delivery • Legible accessible • Connectivity through signage • Safety! • Parking standards – supply too high in centres • Developer driven (isolated brands) • No agreement from service providers on using service corridors - developers try to use service

easements for POS / dual use paths and the servicing agencies cannot provide local government / WAPC with a consistent approach, which can result in missed opportunities

• District distributor roads and 60 kph – dangerous through shopping precincts. 3. RECOMMENDATIONS Governance Funding Policy Approval Standards Construction

• Governance and direction – integrated state policy across all government departments • Community consultation and education • Needing to require structure plans to connect their development to wider regional network

(connecting their brands with place) • Mechanism to connect places and developers but needs WAPC policies to support development

contributions, plans (this is where it falls over) *See City of Swan’s letters to WAPC on draft SPP developer contributions

• Developer contributions - provided with developer incentives – (i.e. paths, end of journey facilities) • Linking local planning strategies with liveable neighbourhoods (local planning strategies should be

viewed as the “living document” extension of liveable neighbourhoods, but at a regional level • Requiring structural plans to set and enforce density targets- PTA req. R40 along activity corridors

(LN doesn’t) • Ability to coordinate agreement with servicing agencies early in the planning process to utilise

infrastructure easements for dual-use paths and other active transport infrastructure for local government and WAPC to commit to using sites for POS / public recreational reserves - guidance documents prepared by WAPC / servicing agency - (this would facilitate understanding) of which district structure plans should have governing principles and reports - this and cost on state


185

• Change road environment e.g. from four lanes to 2 lanes • Variable speed limit signs.

NEIGHBOURHOOD LEVEL

TABLE 6


INITIALS

• Reduction of urban sprawl • Connectivity • Safety • Attractive – weather protection • Speed reduction • Prioritise public transport • Creation of dual use path both sides of roads • Emphasis local traffic versus commuter traffic.


• Achieving density targets • Lack of safety • Lack of dual use paths • Urban speed limit excessive currently OK • (End of trip facility) – district / neighbourhood • Drink fountains • Pathway priority over driveways – legible • Vegetation plan – lack of / connected green spaces • Clear land and start again.


• Developers to demonstrate connection of uses from district to local level (hierarchy of uses / integration to be demonstrated)

• Local structure planning should achieve density targets • Local government, all LG’s need to adopt standardised policies / standards - consistency • Brown field policy – to integrate development, vegetation • Integrated vegetation / native policy parks and gardens i.e. movement corridors to and through • Base speed limit on land uses of road (town centre reduce speed, narrow road width etc.) • Movement corridors


186

• Consistent standards of construction • Local planning strategies linking in with liveable neighbourhoods • All LG’s to adopt same polices and guidelines.

BLOCK LEVEL

TABLE 7


INITIALS

• Paths and roads that are easy to read (legible) for people and drivers – signage and landscaping can help

• Transport modes are consistent with the neighbourhood / district character and needs • Accessible networks to public transport / cycle paths • Designing ‘cut crime’ principles employed, eyes on the street and pathways for safety.


• Pedestrian paths / cycle access integrated with public transport and infrastructure – remove obstacles in pathways

• No ‘walled’ developments – very active transport / accessibility unfriendly • Lack of consistency of what goes in the verge / road and where

- during construction phase, pedestrians are disadvantaged for extended periods - roads / streets; building form; pavement / path widths; signage / lighting; parking / seating.


• Consistent standards access local areas / regions so that areas are legible and useable (not letting landscape architects / developers overrule as government will be maintaining everything)

• Provision of street trees and street furniture to make active transport attractive • Building design and standards conducive to land users (i.e. noise buffering in Northbridge noise) • Well-lit paths / cycle ways • “Commonsense” clause in contracts if infrastructure does not meet up with footpaths on one side

of road and lighting on the other? Unlikely to work but an idea. • Footpaths and connectivity for green field and infill (brown field) sites • Practical focus – process + funding.


187

DISTRICT LEVEL

TABLE 7


INITIALS

• Universal access include disability • Connected / integrated with surrounding regions • 800m walk to public transport connections • Safer roads for active transport, lower road speeds / different road types • Understand broad demands and how to service them – transport, industry, freight infrastructure

requirements for the area.


• Identify road permeability for active transport i.e. Bullcreek train station and access paths • Lack of continuity • Lack of education – need a change of attitude • Need to provide benefits to people who choose active transport (and provisions for them) • Lack of clear vision for transport / cycling networks, lack of information on what the community

needs are • Lack of fast, efficient, accessible public transport • TOD parking policy (PTA & DPI developing to be finalised).


• Provide space for active transport (cyclists / pedestrians) along transport corridors • Public consultations (surveys / questionnaires etc.) as to what people want for their district • Strengthen policy requirements – remove should – so that resulting developments must comply

with policy objectives • PTA policies on district level public transport to be reviewed to provide faster / effective transport

that services the community.

NEIGHBOURHOOD LEVEL

TABLE 7

1. IDEAL OUTCOMES INITIALS • Permeable landscapes – access to public transport


188

• Pedestrians • Cyclists • Special Needs • Public Transport • Motorised Vehicles

• Integrated public transport connections with the urban landscape – (not like the Cockburn station) • Safe public transport both on and off peak hours • Universal access – paths / intersections / compact form – disabilities must be accommodated for • Reduced oil dependency / vulnerability by providing a diverse range of access options – i.e. bikes,

paths, scooters – less car dominated • Car / vehicle use and parking must not be first priority over people • Areas planned for people not cars (back to human scale).


• Higher focus on active transport, over private vehicle movements • Addressing driving behaviours / education to the real costs of driving • “Real” parking and driving costs not filtered down to the users - district level? • Loss of community heritage with redevelopment (i.e. loss of local deli’s due to competition with

Coles / Woolworths etc.) • Also many social / safety fear factors involved in walking / cycling – especially with children.


• Footpaths, cycle ways – provided and safe enough for users / including disabled / prams etc. • Prioritise infrastructure to encourage active transport • Make sure connections to schools, hospitals etc. are provided so vehicle use is not necessary

and safe, effective transport available • Have street trees and nice looking areas so people want to walk / cycle • Aim for a Fremantle - Leederville – Mt. Lawley type compact and serviced area • Give pedestrians / cycle ways priority over vehicles • Provision on bus lanes.

BLOCK LEVEL

TABLE 8

1. IDEAL OUTCOMES • Pedestrians • Cyclists • Special Needs

INITIALS

• Community connections / social environment / feelings of safety • Natural surveillance • Low fencing – private and public space defined • Well lit • Uninterrupted path networks (minimise driveway crossovers (3m rather than 5m)) rear laneways?


189


• Bus stop on street (not dented bays) locate near services • Adequate street parking (traffic calming effect).


• All industry working together – LG, planners, developers, health sector – getting better.


• To promote ped. friendly environments, review residential design codes in regard to limiting less intrusive front fencing, garage widths, and driveway crossovers

• Reducing setbacks to promote greater community interaction.

DISTRICT LEVEL

TABLE 8


INITIALS

• Ped access to public transport within 400m walkable distance – direct (not convoluted) • Increase accessibility – well connected / close proximity to services and shops • Legibility – easy navigation • Integration – variety of transport • Short Trip times – ease of using public transport • No conflict among pedestrians and cyclists.

2. GAPS • Greater shared path controls for a safer pedestrian / cyclist environment


190

Pedestrians Cyclists Special Needs Public Transport Motorised Vehicles

• Catering for an aging population • LN policy doesn’t provide for sufficient density near public transport hubs • Lag time in bus routes being available in new areas • All routes city centric.


• Shared path controls • Increased funding for shared paths • Create more bike lanes – ease of transport and traffic calming • Bus routes available as soon as subdivisions populated.

NEIGHBOURHOOD LEVEL

TABLE 8


INITIALS

• Avoid traffic calming devices • Attractive streetscapes • Tree- lined streets – shade, increased walkability • Footpath on both sides, adequate shared path networks • Street lighting / park / underground power • Legible streets – easy to navigate (non-convoluted) • Street network enables services to be easily reached • MV speed low • Road infrastructure is pedestrian / cyclist friendly • Identified shared spaces indicating a more pedestrian orientated area • Safe for all ages and abilities to travel to recreation facilities / service destinations.


191


• Difficulties / barriers to having tree-lined streets • LN and WAPC policy DC 2.6 requirements for space and planting of shade trees and that actually

being implemented • Non-direct networks, lengthy trips • Environments prioritise MV – need balance between MV / pedestrians / cyclists etc.


• Pedestrians / cyclists to have same priority as cars in service areas / town centres • Road width considerations to calm traffic (i.e. tighter intersections) • Investigate why liveable neighbourhoods not being implemented in relation to sufficient space for

the planting of shade trees • Safe pedestrian crossings with flashing lights • Road / town structure conveys to drivers that they are coming into an increased pedestrian area.

BLOCK LEVEL

TABLE 9


INITIALS

• Safe, attractive, diverse and accessible – street trees, good lighting, clear surveillance • Low traffic speeds, roads for pedestrians, cyclists not cars • Social space – people activities not car activities • Neighbourhood roads are for the neighbourhood - clear differentiations between routes for

transport and shared neighbourhood areas.

2. GAPS Pedestrians

• Lack of funding for infrastructure including bus shelters • Lack of uniformity in design of transport routes (paths / kerbs / roads) • Roads designed for cars e.g. Roundabouts problematic for buses / pedestrians


192

Cyclists Special Needs Public Transport Motorised Vehicles

• Current focus on footpaths and pedestrians.


• Re-prioritise use of funding – transport plans identifying priority expenditure for public transport / infrastructure

• Designing roads for all uses (e.g. Bus route, roundabouts / speed an issue) • Need to give more consideration to cyclists and differentiation between pedestrians and cyclists.

DISTRICT LEVEL

TABLE 9


INITIALS

• Integrated system for all forms of access, with pedestrians and cyclists and public transport given priority

• Recognition that pedestrians and cyclists have different needs • Distinction between cycling for recreation and cycling for commuting • Continues path of travel • Public transport routes identified and frequent service • Reduced need for travel outside of neighbourhood / district • Self sufficiency • Integration of public transport with special needs and cyclists • Increased density to enable transport / shops etc

2. GAPS Pedestrians Cyclists Special Needs

• Gap between provision of public transport service infrastructure (may be good) and level of service / frequency

• Public transport during peak hours excludes cyclists – prevents multiple trips e.g. cycle / PT / cycle

• Lack of incentive for using cars • Lack of early planning for public transport routes


193

Public Transport Motorised Vehicles

• No requirements for planning for aging in place / requirements for proportion of accessible housing

• Key destinations are not identified at the district level • Identification of incentives to get key destinations in.


• Outcome is a plan / strategy that provides an integrated system for all forms of access • See ideal outcomes • Public transport agencies having a role in early strategic planning • Mandating for density • More funding for early strategic planning and public transport planning.

NEIGHBOURHOOD LEVEL

TABLE 9


INITIALS

• Safe, attractive, diverse and accessible neighbourhood • Neighbourhood around schools, recreation facilities, practice safe areas to walk for children - so

designed to reduce exposure to traffic – co-location • Reduced traffic speeds – pedestrians, cyclists, public transport have priority over cares • Mix of uses / self containment / self sufficiency • Designed for surveillance • Connected paths / routes / destinations • Neighbourhood level public transport.


• Lack of connection of paths / cycle ways • Low density neighbourhoods, segregation of uses • Lack of consideration of neighbourhood level public transport • Lack of destinations and identifications of destinations within neighbourhoods – facilitate active

transport modes • Not considering multi trip / destination travel • Difficulties in implementation of co-location of school and recreation – everyone has their own

requirements


194

• Implementation of ideals (narrow roads / roads designed for other uses) and reality of engineering requirements / Australian Standards

• Lack of uniformity in requirements / standards • Lack of consideration of special needs e.g. Non-licensed motorised vehicles have to use

footpaths, but not provided for. 3. RECOMMENDATIONS Governance Funding Policy Approval Standards Construction

• Co-location of schools and recreational facilities • Increasing surveillance • Decreasing exposure to traffic planning to ensure other uses have primacy • Review of Aust roads Standards / implementation of standards and allowing for innovation rather

than business as usual • Active travel incentives (such as children who walk / cycle to school finish earlier) • Programs such as Walking School Bus • Funding for active travel programs and promotions • Funding and planning for infrastructure to support active travel (bike racks / seats) • Strategic planning for where people are / will go and how they are / will get there • Stop thinking about “footpaths” and instead consider / use / provide “multi-use path” –

pedestrians, cyclists and special needs • Mandating for density and destinations and consideration of incentives to encourage – can plan

and provide space but need to consider how to get on ground • See also ideals and gaps as also suggest recommendations.

BLOCK LEVEL

TABLE 10


INITIALS

• Environmentally sustainable housing – inc under house rainwater storage - do this and we will reduce the need for so many services – and can narrow the streets to be more accessible

• Streetscape – more trees = shelter – comfort – decrease road reserves and increase path reserves / widths to fit trees

• Requirement for bike lockers on each residential property • Choice of building form • Mixing densities • Street lighting – ensure that standards are met • Footpaths both sides of street


195

• Aligning ramps – more LG supervision – disabled access, flush access • Passive surveillance improvements • Bench seating • Corner shops • Reduce footpath clutter – signage, seating, parking boxes and bus stops. • Seating – resting places for elderly and people with disabilities • Solar powered water tanks and furniture • Cycle lanes.


• Federal or State funding for improved access and to change existing infrastructure – ‘retrofitting’ • Building Code of Australia and access inclusion – Acrod bays / access – transport accessibility • Legislation / BCA improvements local govt/ State govt – work together • PTA access policies / workshops with communities and improvements • Developers / contractors ‘blinded’ by the needs of people with disabilities – when new

infrastructure have people with disabilities included in consultations and do a walk through of a development so can see all ‘access’ is covered so no more work in needed after completion. Get it ‘right’ the first time – Melissa Northcott


• Need common trenching for services • Change the institutions mindsets.

DISTRICT LEVEL

TABLE 10

1. IDEAL OUTCOMES • Pedestrians • Cyclists

INITIALS

• 6km by 6 km “town” • Public open space requirements – including access paths • Employment opportunities – both in and out of the home • Return of the ‘village’ style community incorporating employment, recreation, education, sporting

opportunities within the community


196

• Special Needs • Public Transport • Motorised Vehicles

• Choice and opportunity to access various transport options • Car-less community centres – ring roads and public transport access incorporated • Special needs – attention to lighting and ramp access, tactile indications, signals and traffic lights,

cross walks • Public transport – accessible trains - Joondalup – connections to other lines.


• Local governments responsibility in Public Transport • Developer contributions to infrastructure such as cycle lanes etc – changes to Town Planning

Schemes to permit this – awareness of the need • Role of the developer, fair contribution • Planning knowledge by local govt not given the weight by empowered bodies • Freight transport – rail encouragement to reduce heavy vehicle use • Improvements in rail freight infrastructure and future planning • Designing roads for majority users – not the one off truck going through every week / month

infrequently. 3. RECOMMENDATIONS Governance Funding Policy Approval Standards Construction

• Refer above.

NEIGHBOURHOOD LEVEL

TABLE 10

1. IDEAL OUTCOMES • Pedestrians • Cyclists • Special Needs • Public Transport

INITIALS

• Conflict between cyclists and pedestrians – no dual use paths? • Driver behaviour and cyclist behaviour for awareness of other users / safety / needs • Local shops • Development integration • Revise road hierarchy • Prioritising pedestrians


197

• Motorised Vehicles

• Reduction speed • Public open space • Greenways – absolutely necessary • Driver arrogance • Farmers markets • Toilets • Local neighbourhood cafes • Greenway!! • Communities gardens, allotments • Connectivity, more active recreation – 1 hour walk, alternatives, safety.


• Lack of awareness of people with disabilities and needs • Need Acrod bays • Need more access paths • Roundabouts – pedestrian safety compromised – slows traffic but not safe for pedestrians so

must provide safe access for pedestrians and cyclists.


• Encourage smaller scale providers – legislate to get rid of monopolies • Measures to support smaller scale businesses.

Accessible Communities report - Final Compendium October 2009€¦ · • Rights of Way Improvement...

Documents

Transcript of Accessible Communities report - Final Compendium October 2009€¦ · • Rights of Way Improvement...