Where is the city square?

Does the city work as a place where public life is engaging, active, interesting, sometimes exciting, sometimes reassuringly familiar and always full of the ritual of the everyday that makes us feel part of a place, that makes us feel connected to this community, our home?

We need shared public places to sit, to engage, to be together.

We need shared places to sleep, to skate, to party, to protest, to plant, to grow, to argue and to bump into each other, to read, relax, stretch, breathe, perform, observe, survey, shelter, retreat...

A community needs spaces that all members of the community can use, young and old, parent and business person, cafe owner and graffiti artist, busker and builder, painter and procrastinator alike. We have to have places where we can engage the conviviality, the discussion and debate that forms the public life of a city. These are things that happen in the public square.

If I ask myself how are the spaces in this town organised? then I cannot help but answer: apparently without thought. Albany is an unplanned city. Or perhaps it would be more correct to say it is an overly planned and controlled city which lacks any sense of vision. Often it feels in this place that one enjoys it despite the built environment, not because of it.

How can we engage in the reformation of this city as a machine for living? How can we create a shelter that nurtures our community?

We can begin by playing, by experimenting with form and space, by imagining the possible, by messing around with ideas...

...by beginning from where we are.

Extension to the Denver Art Museum, Frederic C. Hamilton Building

Denver, Colorado

I was just doing some random searching online this evening when I came across this report in relation to the sheoak woodland we were trying to protect from clearing back in 1998-2000, that is now Woodrise Estate.

REPORT OF THE

STANDING COMMITTEE ON CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS

IN RELATION TO

A PETITION INTO HOMESWEST AND THE DEPARTMENT OF LAND ADMINISTRATION POLICIES: OPPOSING THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OF LAND OWNED BY HOMESWEST IN SPENCER PARK, ALBANY.

If your interested in the processes of government, the full document is available at this link:

http://www.parliament.wa.gov.au/Parliament/Commit.nsf/(Report+Lookup+by+Com+ID)/60DF7C63DBF572E848257831003E94C4/$file/ca050.pdf

Here are a few interesting extracts. Right now, I don't have any comments to make, I want to think about it some more. And see if this can be used in any useful way. Then I'll do another post.

But if you've gat anything to say, for now, I'm interested.

The Committee requested information from the Minister for Housing, Hon Dr Kim Hames MLA, relating to the development of the land the subject of the petition. In response to its request, the Committee received a letter from the Minister dated January 14 2000.

3.2 In response to its inquiries about the public open space in the development, and the amount of natural vegetation that would be retained, the Minister advised the Committee that a standard allocation of ten per cent public open space as per the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) requirements was allocated for the subdivision. The Minister advised that this has been allocated in three separate parcels in the manner listed below:

8 892m2 3 919m2

Parcel 1 Parcel 2 Parcel 3 2 685m2 TOTAL 15496m2 Total land area 15.496 hectares

3.3 The Minister also advised that the open space allocation has been designed to provide for a mix of recreational pursuits including active, passive and natural recreation and children’s playgrounds. The Committee was informed that of the total amount of open space, 3 919m2 has been specifically set aside for natural recreation through the retention of existing vegetation. The other two areas of open space will retain a percentage of existing trees whilst also including grassed areas, playgrounds, walking paths and seating in a landscaped setting.

6.9 In regard to the Committee’s request relating to remnant vegetation and bio-diversity, Mr Prattley advised that the WAPC does not have a strategy or policy which specifically deals with remnant vegetation in Albany. “Perth’s Bushplan” only applies to the metropolitan area and although the State Planning Strategy and Albany Regional Strategy give broad direction encouraging the preservation of remnant vegetation, specific areas worthy of protection are not identified.

6.10 The Committee was advised that the WAPC's “Residential Expansion Strategy for Albany” (1994) which was a key action of the Albany Regional Strategy only gives broad guidance in promoting the preservation of significant remnant vegetation as follows:

• “Existing reserves, wetlands, waterways, proposed buffer areas and significant remnant vegetation will be integrated into a comprehensive regional, district and local open space system...” (p5); and

• “Significant areas of remnant vegetation, particularly in prominent locations, should be given priority when designing areas for public open space.” (p6).

6.11 Mr Prattley informed the Committee that the City of Albany, with assistance from the Ministry for Planning, is presently preparing a Local Planning Strategy. Mr Prattley submitted that this will be an ideal opportunity to identify areas of remnant vegetation which should be preserved. The City of Albany will then have an opportunity to reserve these areas under a new town planning scheme.

6.12 Mr Prattley also informed the Committee that the State Planning Strategy identifies the need for a Statutory Region Scheme for Albany by 2005 which would identify

12 F:\DATA\CA\CARP\Ca050rp.docFIFTIETH REPORT

areas of remnant vegetation significant at a regional level and provide a mechanism for the acquisition of this land.

8 CONCLUSIONS

8.1 Having visited the land the subject of the petition, met with the petitioners and conducted a hearing into the issues raised in the petition, the Committee is aware of

F:\DATA\CA\CARP\Ca050rp.doc 13Standing Committee on Constitutional Affairs

the local significance the land has for people in Albany and the petitioners in particular.

8.2 The Committee concludes that the Local Planning Strategy currently being prepared by the City of Albany and the Ministry for Planning will assist in identifying areas of remnant vegetation which should be preserved. The City of Albany will then be able to reserve those areas under a new town planning scheme.

8.3 It is Committee policy that with respect to petitions concerning planning and environmental matters the Committee’s role is not to replace existing planning or environmental appeal bodies but is limited to inquiring into breaches of the proper planning and environmental procedures.

8.4 Having considered all of the submissions received in relation to this petition, the Committee concludes that the evidence supplied to it indicates that at least the current minimum planning and environmental requirements have been met and that there has not been a breach of the current proper planning or environmental procedures in this instance.

9 RECOMMENDA TIONS

9.1 That the Local Planning Strategy and the Statutory Region Scheme for Albany

referred to in paragraphs 6.11 and 6.12 respectively of this report be implemented at

the earliest possible opportunity.

9.2 That in allocating the areas of land to be set aside as public open space,

consideration be given to:

• the quality of the vegetation to be included in that ten per cent;

• allocating a sufficient amount of land in each parcel of remnant vegetation in

the public open space to sustain its ecological integrity; and

• the amount of public open space in surrounding areas and the possible need to

set aside more than the current ten per cent minimum.