Social psychologist Ellen Langer states that when an individual is mindless their thinking is dominated by a narrow perspective, they rigidly rely on narrow categories and fail to take into consideration different perspectives.

Never before have I seen so many councillors mindlessly pass a strategy that will dramatically impact on the natural environment, my community and future generations.

It became apparent at tonight’s meeting that the councillors had had only 3 days to look at the revised strategy, accompanying documents and compiled submissions, some noting that they hadn’t even had time to look at them.

And yet, they were quite confident in their decision to vote on passing the Planning Strategy.

The fact that there were 188 objections to rezoning Wattle Grove, 25 supporting and 7 neutral did not seem to make any difference to these mindless councillors.

11 out of 12 councillors voted for the strategy to be adopted.

The Shire's reasoning for ignoring the submissions of 85% of Wattle Grove Residents who Opposed the Planning Strategy (Click on image to enlarge)

Very little debate between councillors took place tonight. All councillor Stallard had to say on the matter of Wattle Grove becoming an urban development area was that “We can’t stop progress” and “If we don’t do it, someone else will do it”. Really deep.

The 1 councillor who opposed the strategy, Maureen Robinson, was not mindless. In fact, she was the complete opposite. She spoke passionately and authentically for the residents of Wattle Grove. You could tell she had taken the time to look through the revised Planning Strategy and really think about it. She questioned why the council is rushing into making such dramatic changes and moving to rezone for a population prediction for the year 2056.

Most importantly, she highlighted that the most important thing that came out of the “community consultations” was that residents wanted to retain their home in the forest. Yet, the planning strategy that was adopted tonight is the beginning of the destruction of the trees and the biodiversity of our area.

They can keep repeating the word “sustainable” and “sustainable growth” but we are not stupid. Do you really think that you can change the zoning of an area to include more houses, more people, more electricity, more cars, etc and you’re not going to have an impact on the environment or community?

The sad thing is that it no longer surprised or shocked me to see developer Ross Leighton being very familiar and chatting with the councillors.

At what point did our shire councillors stop listening to the people they are supposed to represent and only take into account the wishes of a vocal minority?

One thing is for sure, we need to reclaim our Shire. It’s going to take something, but it must be done.

Often when people become highly emotive, they lose perspective, are unable to see things clearly and fail to see other viable options/solutions. I fear this may be the case for Iris Jones, a number of residents and shire councillors within the Shire of Kalamunda who have been misinformed.

Residents in the Shire of Kalamunda have been led to believe that the proposal by Ross Leighton is about supplying high care for the elderly in an appropriate location. Well, this isn’t exactly the case….in fact, it couldn’t be further from the truth.

It seems that the vomit principle has been effectively employed and has worked a treat in the Shire of Kalamunda.

You may be thinking “What’s the vomit principle?”

The vomit principle is the repetitive use of slogans to the point when you feel like you want to vomit (and at that point you know whatever you are saying is starting to have an effect).

Let us make this clear – the only condition on Mr Ross Leighton is that one person over the age of 55 must occupy each dwelling. Now if I was Iris Jones I would certainly want a little more assurance than that.

Has Iris Jones even thought carefully about the appropriateness of the site? I will happily go for a walk with her from Lot 500 Gavour Road in Wattle Grove to the local shops if she can spare a couple of hours of her time.

After reading Iris Joneses letter I felt despair. It made me realise that people are not thinking clearly about this matter at all.

Alas, I was relieved to see John Day’s letter the following week in the Echo news replying to Iris Jones’s letter (click on image to download a PDF copy of the letter). He states -

“What is essential is that there is a fair and proper process and I do not intend to subvert this in an improper way. There are also other proposals for aged care facilities in the Kalamunda district and I will continue to work with the Shire and others to facilitate these in appropriate areas”.

I would like to say thank you John Day. Thank you for remaining so rational and reasoned in the face of such irrationality around this issue.

The community has made their feelings well known with regards to the urbanisation of Wattle Grove East (officially in 2004, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010). But once again, we are being asked to comment on the future of this area.

The Shire has released their Draft Local Planning Strategy with Aged Accommodation listed as first “issue” for comment (favouring Gavour and Brentwood Roads).  The second issue is the faux urbanisation of Wattle Grove East as a “Trojan Horse” to support the same landowners.

The Shire appear to operate on the basis that they will just keep asking and re-framing the question until they get the answer that they want.

The reality is that without sewerage there will be no general urbanization of Wattle Grove East. Interestingly, according to the Water Corporation there will be no reticulated sewerage in this area for decades! Allowing the Shire’s Draft Local Planning Strategy to proceed uncontested will merely aid to facilitate Urban Development on isolated lots in Wattle Grove East in the name of Aged Accommodation.

The Local Planning Strategy is currently open for public comment and submissions need to be sent in by the 11^th of August 2011. We are encouraging people to write letters not only to the Shire of Kalamunda but also the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) who will make the final decision. Since the Shire of Kalamunda continue to ignore the concerns of Wattle Grove residents, it is imperative that the WAPC know that we want our area to remain rural.

Below are some of the reasons for why the Wattle Grove Action Group (and the majority of residents we have spoken with) oppose the Shire’s Draft Local Planning Strategy.

• The majority of residents in Wattle Grove moved to the area in the first place because it was rural. We like the trees, wildlife and space.
• The Draft Local Planning Strategy (DPLS) as it relates to Wattle Grove (east of Tonkin Highway) and the Aged Accommodation proposed conflicts sharply with the rural character of the area and is inconsistent with orderly and proper planning.

• If adopted the DLPS as it relates to Wattle Grove (east of Tonkin Highway) and the Aged Accommodation proposed would see a huge increase in traffic resulting in the loss of rural lifestyle and values.

• The DLPS in respect to Wattle Grove (east of Tonkin Highway) and the Aged Accommodation seems to have been formulated by the Shire of Kalamunda in an attempt to minimise local objection to the rezoning of Lot 500 Gavour Road particularly as reticulated sewer is not available to the land proposed as future urban and will not be available for decades to come.

• The DLPS completely ignores the explicit wishes of our community in Wattle Grove east of Tonkin Highway as evidenced by the Land Vision Workshops held by the Shire in 2008. (not 2010/2011 as stated by the Shire’s)

•  The DLPS is based on the fundamental assumption of a predicted population growth of 25,000 by 2031. This is inconsistent with State Government forecasts of 20,000 by 2031 as well as their own forecasts as recently as November 2010 (20,000 over the next 30 years) and even inconsistent within the DLPS document (page 89 in reference to Table 3, 20,000 by 2031).

• The DPLS is inconsistent with the State Planning Strategy (December 2007) “Vision” statement. The State Planning Strategy (December 2007) is a regional planning policy relevant to the shire, and provides the basis for long term State and regional land use planning and co ordinates a whole of Government approach to planning.

• Our neighbours on the land immediately to the south of Wattle Grove (east of Tonkin Highway) – (City of Gosnells) occupy land which is zoned Rural under the MRS and I have been advised by the WAPC that there is no intention to develop this land for urban uses. Therefore any consideration to rezone Wattle Grove of Tonkin Highway for Urban uses is premature and not in accordance with Directions 2031 or orderly planning across the shire boundaries.

• The DLPS is inconsistent with the Outer Metro Perth and Peel Sub Regional Strategy.  The Outer Metro Perth and Peel Sub Regional Strategy which is critical to support Directions 2031 and Beyond does not designate Wattle Grove (east of Tonkin Highway) as Urban or Future Urban. To Quote the Outer Metro Perth and Peel Sub Regional Strategy directly Paragraph 9.4.2 page 67, ”Wattle Grove has potential for future consideration as an urban investigation area due to its proximity to the urban front and employment opportunities around the airport”. NOTE – “has potential for future consideration as an investigation Area” NOT IS AN “Urban Development Area” as the Shire suggested at the Special Council meeting of 11/06/2011.

• The WAPC have confirmed my view that the Aged Accommodation second and third preferred sites in Gavour and Brentwood Road do not meet the need to plan for accessible and affordable facilities which are integrated with existing infrastructure.

• It is my understanding that the Shire is not aware who should demonstrate the commitment to urbanisation of Wattle Grove (east of Tonkin Highway), The WAPC or the Shire. Prior to rezoning the Gavour and Brentwood Road sites for urban uses there should be a demonstrated commitment by the WAPC to the urbanisation of the surrounding area. The Shire does not seem to understand that in the interest of orderly planning and provision of hard infrastructure the Local Planning Scheme should conform with and should be led by amendment the MRS (WAPC control) not visa versa.

• As the Wattle Grove community have repeatedly stated, Lot 500 Gavour Road (the Shires second preferred site) and Lots 303, 53, 213 Brentwood Road Wattle Grove (the Shires third preferred site) are inappropriate for Aged Accommodation for all of the reasons as previously submitted in respect to the Shires proposed Amendment 18 to LTPS No#3.

• We want Wattle Grove (east of Tonkin Highway) to remain rural so that our children can continue to enjoy safely playing in the area without the dangers of the increased traffic.

• We want the area of Wattle Grove (east of Tonkin Highway) to remain rural so that we can continue to ride our horses on rural land in the area.

• Wattle Grove (east of Tonkin Highway) currently provides a refuge for the dwindling populations of Carnaby Cockatoos threatened by sprawling suburbia robbing their environment. An average Carnaby Cockatoo requires approximately 100 honky nuts each day to survive. Every tree cut down to make way for sprawling suburbia is instrumental in their rapidly declining populations. We want Wattle Grove east of the Tonkin Highway to remain rural to help protect these birds and other threatened species in the area.

• The area of Wattle Grove (east of Tonkin Highway) was designated a “Mitigation Zone” federally when recent approval for the development of the Perth Airport was granted and as such this area should be maintained as rural without explicit approval from the Federal Government.

We are encouraging all residents and concerned citizens to write letters to the Shire of Kalamunda, but most importantly the WAPC. A letter wizard is now available to help you write your letter.

Here is our response to his letter -

• Mr Leighton states that the Shire of Kalamunda Planning staff have consistently recommended support for the Amendment over a period in excess of 5 years.  Mr Leighton fails to mention however that both the Department of Planning and the Western Australian Planning Commission have not supported the proposed Amendment and that the WAPC recommended to the Hon. Minister for Planning that the Amendment not be granted consent to advertise on the basis that the proposed Amendment could not be supported on town planning grounds.

• Mr Leighton states that as a result of Amendment No. 18 being put out to public consultation, 2039 submissions were received and approximately 89% were in support of the proposed Aged Cade Facility being progressed.  Mr Leighton fails to note that the majority of submissions received in support of the proposed Amendment were from the localities of Kalamunda (506), Lesmurdie (419), High Wycombe (264) and Gooseberry Hill (186).  These localities are positioned 5km, 3km, 10km and 8km (respectively) from the Amendment Site.

• Mr Leighton also fails to note that of the 164 residents of Wattle Grove who lodged a submission in respect of the proposed Amendment, a significant 86.5% objected to the Amendment. It is clear from these figures that the local community does not support the proposed Amendment.

• A review of the submissions received during public consultation also shows that the overwhelming majority of submissions received in support of the proposed Amendment were from the localities of Lesmurdie and Kalamunda, together representing over 50% of the total submissions received. Aged care facilities are clearly most in demand in these localities.

• Amendment No. 18 will facilitate a form of development that is inconsistent with the purpose and objectives of the site’s “Special Rural” zoning under the provisions of the Shire of Kalamunda Local Planning Scheme No. 3. ‘Aged Residential Care’ is specifically identified as a prohibited (“X”) use class in the “Special Rural” Zone.  In this regard, the proposed Amendment (if adopted) would facilitate a land use that would ordinarily not be permitted on the Amendment Site. The introduction of an urban land use comprising an estimated 220 detached dwellings in addition to an aged care facility comprising some 120 beds and a range of supporting infrastructure and facilities, will erode the rural landscape and irreversibly change the amenity of the locality.

• Not only is the proposed Scheme Amendment inconsistent with its “Special Rural” zoning under the Shire’s Local Planning Scheme No. 3, it is also inconsistent with the site’s “Rural” zoning under the Metropolitan Region Scheme which designates the site “Rural”.  The form of development facilitated by the proposed Amendment is clearly of an urban nature and should, in the normal manner of process, necessitate an amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme. The WAPC communicated this view to the Shire in June 2007.

• The need for an aged care facility does not justify the irreversible loss of amenity that would result should the proposed Amendment be implemented.  The WAPC and the Hon. Minister for Planning have a responsibility to consider the full range of considerations which contribute to determining whether or not a proposed use is suitable and appropriate for a particular location. The perceived but unquantified demand or need for a proposed use is not in itself so significant as to exceed other considerations adverse to the use. If the need for aged care is of such importance to the Shire to the extent that the Council is prepared to initiate a drastic departure from the provisions of its own Scheme and waives all obligations to consider rational town planning arguments which clearly demonstrate the proposed use is not suitable or acceptable in the Special Rural Zone, it is appropriate to question why the Shire did not rectify the apparent failings of its Scheme prior to its adoption of LPS 3 in 2007.

• The Special Use provisions and conditions proposed to be included in Schedule 4 of LPS 3 via Amendment No. 18 are inadequate, in that they fail to address important considerations such as access, protection of visual amenity, interface with Welshpool Road, noise, and built form. Furthermore, the proposed scheme provisions intended to control the proposed development are significantly lacking. All that is required under the proposed Scheme provisions is that at least one occupant of any dwelling must have reached the age of 55 years and that development on site shall be connected to a reticulated sewer service or alternative system. The proposed Special Use provisions provide no statutory requirement for the provision of high end aged care on the Amendment Site despite the Shire acknowledging that it is high care not low care facilities (such as a retirement village) that are specifically required.  Given the proposal has effectively been advanced on the basis that it will provide high end residential care, the omission of Scheme controls in this regard is astonishing.  In fact the proposed Scheme provisions are so open and flexible that the form of development permitted is wide ranging.

• Amendment No. 18 does not satisfy the requirements of the Government Sewerage Policy – Perth Metropolitan Region. The Department of Health has considered the proposed Amendment and advised the Shire that the proposed development does not comply with the Government Sewerage Policy and cannot comply without connection to reticulated sewer. The Amendment Site is not currently serviced by reticulated sewer and the Water Corporation advises that it has no plans to extend its sewer infrastructure to this locality in the foreseeable future.  Mr Leighton has not explained how he intends to service the proposed Aged Care development in this regard.

• Amendment No. 18 is inconsistent with many of the recommendations contained within the Shire’s Aged Accommodation Strategy (2008). The Aged Accommodation Strategy recognises an overall need throughout the Shire for additional aged persons’ accommodation but importantly identifies the need to properly plan for such facilities through a comprehensively prepared planning and design framework.  In this regard, the Aged Accommodation Strategy specifically refers to the need for a local planning policy which establishes locational and design criteria and a consistent framework for planning and considering proposals for residential care. The Shire’s Aged Accommodation Strategy also recommends that aged persons accommodation be located around the town centres of Kalamunda and Forrestfield and other shopping and commercial hubs.  The Amendment Site is not located in proximity to any town centres or shopping areas and accordingly does not and cannot satisfy this recommendation.

• There is a need to ensure that sites for Aged or Dependant Persons’ Accommodation have reasonable access to shopping, community and public transport facilities. The Amendment Site is located approximately 1.7km from the nearest shopping centre in Forrestfield and is therefore not within walking distance.  This shopping centre is also located north of Welshpool Road which further reduces accessibility for residents. Community, recreation and health facilities are similarly distanced from the Amendment Site meaning the development will be largely insular and contribute little to the local community.

Attached to Mr Giardina’s letter were a series of dot points to help residents write comments on their submission forms. I found it disturbing that many of the dot points were contradictory and simply not true.

• “The Wattle Grove site is large and very flat, it is close to facilities and it is on a bus route, it is an excellent site”

The site is at least 6 – 7 kilometres away from shops and support services (e.g. health and medical centres). Residents would be placed in a remote location, isolated from their community.

There is a bus route however in order to access it residents need to cross 4 lane ways of fast moving traffic (speed limit 80km/hr).

• “The site has a wonderful rural outlook and is private”

Yes, this person is spot on – Wattle Grove is a beautiful rural area but unfortunately, dense urban developments like this will change that.

• “We all know that we should have this facility; why is it taking so long to get approved?”

This proposal has been rejected twice before, in 2004 and 2007. The reason for it being rejected was because the area is zoned special rural and not appropriate for such an urban dense development. We don’t dispute the fact that there is a need for aged care facilities, but do have a problem with them being inappropriately located.

Perhaps we should all be asking “Why has the shire failed to conduct proper research into more appropriate sites for aged care facilities?” and “Why have they chosen such a poor location?”

It saddens me that the elderly have been drawn into this issue and led to believe that this development is about them and ‘aged care facilities’. If you read the detailed documentation (available at the Shire of Kalamunda office) regarding this proposal it becomes quite clear that there is more to this development than meets the eye.

The Principal Solicitor at the Environmental Defender’s Office recently informed me about the following regarding the rezoning and development of 32 Gavour and Welshpool Roads:

“The fairly detailed documentation submitted with the rezoning application gives the impression that Council is being asked to approve a specific proposal.  In fact the legal effect of approving the rezoning application would be that the land ceases to be zoned rural, and acquires the ‘Special Uses – Aged Care’ zoning.  Under the new zoning, the only constraint affecting residential development would be the requirement for development approval, and that dwellings must be occupied by at least one person over 55″

The developer has no obligation to make these properties available to the elderly within the shire of Kalamunda. Effectively, he would be able to sell them to whoever he likes as long as one person occupying the house is over 55.

Let’s not fool ourselves, this isn’t about aged care and helping the elderly in the Shire of Kalamunda. This is about making money (lots of money) at the expense of an entire communities well-being and environment.

The image below is of a sign that was put up by the Shire of Kalamunda outside the Proponent’s property to alert local residents to the advertising period and request for submissions. Someone has spray painted over it.

Weeks ago the Shire was alerted to this fact but still no action has been taken to replace the sign.

You see my cousin’s daughter has lived in a dense urban area all her life. Her exposure to plants and animals either happens at the zoo once or twice a year or at my house in Wattle Grove.

With so many areas in Western Australia becoming more and more developed (resulting in the destruction of habitat) I can’t help but wonder to myself what will be the affect on young people who are totally deprived of experiences in nature?

I feel so lucky to have grown up in Wattle Grove and to have had such rich experiences in my surrounding area (e.g. playing in the creek, going for bushwalks and spotting quendas).To this day, the beauty of this area continues to bring so much joy and peace to my life.

In 2008, after my first day of work in the city (30 minutes away), I remember the immediate sense of peace I felt as I arrived back in Wattle Grove on the bus. The lack of traffic, the bush and the birds was incredibly soothing.

Psychological research is now telling us that experiences in nature are important to our health and well-being. For instance, researcher Terry Hartig (Uppsala University) has shown that experiences in nature can relieve individual’s mental fatigue. It was found that after 45 minutes of tough mental work a walk in a natural area was better recovery for participants than taking a walk in an urban area.

This is just one of the reasons for why I believe we need to protect areas like Wattle Grove from becoming like other dense urban areas. The preservation of greener, rural areas like Wattle Grove does not only benefit the local residents but also the wider community who either pass through the area, spend time in the National Park or visit there friends/family here.