Rarely a Dull Moment - Adult Shop, Davis Park, 40k Zones, White Ribbon Christmas

Here we are at last, less than two weeks away from Christmas with the last Ordinary Council Meeting of the year on 11 December 2024. What a big year it has been indeed and this meeting was no different.

We learned: a local Hilton child’s favourite colour is purple, which unfortunately matches the local adult shop proposal; the Heart of Beaconsfield is a step closer to fruition; a daughter’s well-meaning gesture of replacing a shed and fence for her mum went horribly astray (one of the residential items not discussed but my own heart still goes out to her); and Hilton residents are being told to put on the brakes this Christmas.

Let’s unwrap them, shall we?

CHANGE OF USE TO RESTRICTED PREMISES (ADULT SHOP) AND SIGNAGE AT 1/364 SOUTH STREET, O’CONNOR

Sinsational?

Not everyone thinks so.

It’s a little risqué, in fact.

Specifically, this application proposed a change of use from Bulky Goods Showroom to Restricted Premises and Signage (also known as an “adult shop”).

“Red Rooster-level branding?” What do you think? Image from Council attachments

Restricted Premises is an ‘A’ use in the Commercial Zone, meaning that the use is not permitted unless Council exercises discretion by granting planning approval. This discretion may be exercised by determining whether the proposal generally satisfies the requirements of the Local Planning Scheme 4, is compatible with its immediate surroundings and the locality, and adequately responds to submissions raised during the advertising period.

The proponents of Sinsations sought discretion for elements relating to:
• Land use
• Parking (2 bay shortfall)
• Signage.

This involves:
• Internal fitout of the premises for the retail sale of products.
• Installation of an internal partition wall.
• Installation of signage to the existing roof façade and windows on the south and west aspects.
• Installation of opaque adhesive film to the remainder of the window area.
• PA (personnel access) door and roller door indicated on plans are existing.

Given that this site abuts a Primary Regional Road (South Street), the application was referred to Main Roads WA who advised that they don’t object to the proposal as long as it ensures:
1. All signs must be placed on private property and must not overhang or encroach the Primary Regional Road Reservation.
2. The signage must not contain fluorescent, reflective, or retro-reflective colours or materials.

The application attracted 12 objections during the advertising period (which concluded on 27 November 2024), which are summarised below but essentially consider the use to be inappropriate, will attract crime, and is too close to schools and family areas to be allowed.

Summary of the objections received on this proposal alone from the Council report

It is important to remember that the Council are required to consider development applications based upon the parameters of planning, inclusive of Local Planning Scheme 4. This precludes determination of proposals on moral grounds or unsubstantiated alleged criminal activity. Cr Williamson-Wong offered a very insightful legal perspective on the matter and the remit of Council to consider social matters, but perhaps not moral matters.

The car parking shortfall of two bays is principally caused by the fact the carpark is shared by neighbouring tenancies and the previous approved land use of Bulky Goods Showroom had a lower carparking threshold. The shortfall was therefore considered minor.

The window signage proposed raised a few eyebrows as it fully obscures the windows and results in “visual clutter”, while I note in this instance that may be a preferable outcome for modesty reasons. Council agreed it is “a bit confronting” and expressed their willingness to risk the application being contested at SAT – the State Administrative Tribunal – given their misgivings.

All but two councillors (Cr Williamson-Wong and Cr Archibald) resolved to support Cr Lawver’s alternative motion to disagree with the officer recommendation for approval and instead resolve to:
REFUSE, under the Metropolitan Region Scheme and Local Planning Scheme No. 4, Change of Use to Restricted Premises and Signage at No. 1/364 (Lot 4) South Street, O’Connor, as detailed on plans dated 17 October 2024, for the following reasons:
1. The proposal is inconsistent with the objectives of the Commercial zone.
2. The proposal is inconsistent with clause 67(n) of the Deemed Provisions as the proposal will result in a detrimental impact to the character and amenity of the area.
3. The proposal is inconsistent with the requirements of the LPP 2.14 Advertisement Policy, in relation to the extent of the signage proposed including the translucent treatment of all windows and the negative impact on the locality by way of visual clutter and amenity.

Reasons for alternative motion:
The change of use would have a detrimental impact on amenity of the area and the original zoning is appropriate.

One wonders how it will go at SAT, if this decision is appealed…

DAVIS PARK SUBDIVISION (STAGE 1) – MULTIPLE LOTS, BEACONSFIELD

Approval was sought for the freehold subdivision of multiple lots within the Heart of Beaconsfield masterplan area surrounding and adjacent to Davis Park in Beaconsfield in order to create 36 new lots, details of which entail:
• 33 medium-density residential lots (Density Coding – R60);
• Two multiple-dwelling lots (Density Coding R100);
• One Local Centre lot (Density Coding – R100);
• 1,154m2 of Public Open Space (POS);
• Movement network consisting of alterations to footpaths, roads, intersections and laneways;
• Landscaping (including tree retention) and site works.

Aerial of subject land in Davis Park – courtesy of the Council report

The land is currently owned by the Housing Authority (within Department of Communities) and has historically provided social housing. Existing housing within the precinct is being demolished to allow for redevelopment and ultimately form part of the South Street Neighbourhood Centre. All this is being coordinated by Development WA, in a similar approach to WGV White Gum Valley, 115 Hamilton Hill, and Beaconsfield TAFE.

This particular proposal forms stage 1 of the redevelopment, under the guidance of the approved Davis Park Precinct Structure Plan (PSP – Approved May 2021). The affected site is known as the “Transition Sub-Precinct” and includes the eastern side of the South Street Sub-Precinct identified in the PSP. It is accompanied by the draft South-Street Sub-Precinct Local Development Plan which will further govern future development.

The structure plan area is divided into four sub-precincts:
• South Street Sub-Precinct
• Transition Sub-Precinct
• Innovative Housing Sub-Precinct
• Lefroy Sub-Precinct

Davis Park Precinct Structure Plan – courtesy of the Council report

The City deemed that the subdivision proposal is “largely consistent” with the approved PSP, including in relation to road and lot layouts, density, building typology, land use, landscaping, and public open space.

Members of the public speaking on this proposal on the night decried it as a “departure from the original vision” and street feel along Fifth Avenue, and reminded Council that the masterplan was “developed through extensive community engagement and demonstrated a thoughtful approach”. In consideration of this, they were concerned the subdivision proposal threatens to destroy community amenity and fly in the face of good planning principles. There was a very strong sentiment for density to be limited in accordance with the community engagement.

It was reiterated by Council that this concerns the subdivision of the land only, and while the masterplan represents the culmination of extensive work by the community and the City, it is the structure plan which has statutory weight. Building height and layout will be finessed later, and will not necessarily be locked in by the subdivision plan. That is the role of the local development plans, which tailor designs solutions to land and controls built form. We expect a maximum of three storeys in parts rather than the five feared by some, although we cannot be certain of such at this stage.

“Isn’t planning fun?” Quipped Mayor Fitzhardinge. Well, I’m glad someone agrees.

Council discussed at length how the proposal seeks the maximum densities designated in the structure plan rather than the desired range indicated, and the pressure that will be placed upon the future Local Development Plans to reinforce the structure plan vision. The road configuration of Nannine Street was also considered. Limited timeframes afforded to local governments for subdivision proposals are the most challenging factor here, as the State Government through the Western Australian Planning Commission is the determining authority and local governments like City of Fremantle can only offer advice.

Council resolved to recommend conditional approval to the Planning Commission. The conditions are too lengthy to outline here in a display of green added text and red omitted that came to resemble a Christmas tree on the screen, despite Cr Sullivan’s desire to “keep it very simple”. But critically they endeavour to ensure that the final outcome is consistent with the structure plan, including restricting heights to two storeys along Fifth Avenue in the local development plan.

AREA-WIDE 40 KPH SPEED ZONES

You might recall the 24 July 2024 Council meeting where Council resolved to investigate the opportunity for “City-wide” 40kph zones affecting all local roads while considering a report on the Traffic Calming and Narrow Streets Safe Access Policies.

The City of Fremantle decided a trial run in one part of the City is the way to go, taking inspiration from a trial conducted in the City of Vincent, to see if it could replicate its success. The officer report notes that while the imposition of 40kph zones are growing in popularity throughout the State, including in Fremantle, applying it to the entire City would be rather unusual and the City of Vincent is the only example of a Perth metropolitan local government that has taken this momentous step.

For the Traffic Calming policy and the Narrow Streets Safe Access policy discussed in the July meeting, both policies invited community input from 29 November 2023 to 16 February 2024, through the City’s Safe and Functional Streets public engagement program.

This entailed multi-modal, intensive engagement where “City officers worked directly with the community to understand the kinds of traffic calming measures that would result in safer local streets for all users”, according to the officer report.

Cr Van Dorssen recalled past times when North Fremantle apparently used to be a 40kph zone and felt like “a much safer space”.

“Speed reduction” was rated as the second highest priority for safer roads, with the number 1 priority being the use of traffic calming devices such as speed humps and chicanes. The communities of Hilton and Beaconsfield “actively” conveyed their interest in speed reduction trials for their suburbs.

Hilton was selected as the guinea pig for a trial due to its residential characteristics and amenities that encourage pedestrian and cyclist activity already.

During public question time, there was a request from the community for Beaconsfield to be included in the 40kph area and Council advised that as this trial forms the first stage only, there will be opportunities later to extend it to include the entire City or other parts.

Trial area boundary for 40km/hr speed zone – courtesy of Council report

Council unanimously resolved that it:
1. Supports the implementation of a 12-month trial for a 40 km/h speed zone in Hilton, as indicated in Attachment 1, subject to consideration of appropriate funding in the annual budget and relevant agency approvals.
2. Request a report be brought back to council on the conclusion of the trail period, prior to further consideration of a ‘City-wide’ 40km/h zone.

A WHITE RIBBON CHRISTMAS

Cr Mofflin raised a Notice of Motion to address violence against women by asking the City to explore ways to spread awareness of how widespread this problem is and play a stronger role in providing support, in addition to its role in funding the Fremantle Community Legal Centre.

Readers may have noticed the harrowing white ribbon display at the Walyalup Civic Centre that brought attention to it. According to the Notice of Motion, 305,400 women in WA (30%) have experienced physical, emotional or economic abuse by a cohabiting partner at the time recorded.

Cr Williamson-Wong grimly informed the room that 97 women were killed in WA this year, which equates to 1 every 3 days, and 1 in 4 have experienced violence from an intimate partner. 84% of all sexual assault victims are female. Most are aged 10-14.

There are many more shocking statistics contained within the report and in stories recorded at the Community Legal Centre.

The Centre is a unique business unit provided by the City where:
“Core services include daily telephone assistance (9am-4pm), walk-in appointments for urgent matters, and a weekly after-hours legal clinic providing unrestricted legal advice through private practitioners. The Centre maintains a comprehensive triage system and flexible service model with specialist lawyers who can address various legal areas.”

The Motion asked that Council:
1. Acknowledges the 16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence campaign, supports all efforts to eliminate violence against women, and states that there is no excuse for violence against women.
2. Recognises that the City of Fremantle has an important leadership role to play in addressing the causes of Family and Domestic Violence and supporting victims in our community.
3. Understands the engagement of men and boys is critical in changing attitudes and precenting violence in the future.
4. Request the Chief Executive Officer to:
a. Review the City of Fremantle Financial hardship policy to include Family and Domestic Violence as criteria for Financial Hardship; and
b. Present options for consideration in the FY25/26 budget process to enhance existing programs and present options for new programs that aim to prevent family and domestic violence by addressing the root causes.

According to the report, the City’s Financial Hardship Policy is “scheduled for review in 2025, and officers will take this motion into consideration when reviewing the policy.”

Cr Archibald recalled her own experiences in wage inequality where her pay was lower than a man doing the exact same job and it boils down to attitudes held by society.

It called to mind a very confronting and though-provoking Politics in the Pub on 8 October 2024 at the Local Hotel in South Fremantle, MC’d by local community champion Sarah Davis. That month’s topic was Stopping Violence Against Women.

The panel comprised of author Shoma Mittra, Stephanic Monck from Women’s Legal Service, and Ryan Corbould from Stopping Violence Together. Sarah Davis also bravely shared her own stories.

The key messages of the evening: it is everyone’s responsibility to stop violence against women. Domestic or family violence can be physical, psychological, or financial. It is never the victim’s fault.

Members of the audience rightly found this uncomfortable, some took the opportunity to point out “not every man” is a perpetrator of violence. Yes. But the statistics do plainly show that violence is disproportionately high against women by men. Cultural change is key to change this.

Many thanks to Fremantle Network for providing an opportunity to discuss this critically important topic and to the City of Fremantle for their admirable and noble act of leadership by supporting the Community Legal Centre and Cr Mofflin’s Notice of Motion, which was passed.