Here are the key impacts to amenity if Satterley's amended North Stoneville plan goes ahead.
Remember to always start your submission with "I am totally opposed to this amended plan for North Stoneville - reference number DR 189/2020."
Ready to submit? Go to the online consultation.
Want to use our examples? Go to the example submissions.
We oppose the plan because...
The Western Australian Planning Commission in considering this application for development approval, must have due regard to the existing and future amenity of the locality including, the character of the locality. Amenity is all those factors which combine to form the character of an area and include the present and likely future amenity.
Amenity is important, not only to residents and future generations, but also to visitors to the hills, especially in an area heavily reliant on local, interstate and international tourism. The community has rejected any form of urban development in the area for over 32 years expressly showing the desire of the community for the area to remain rural in character.
When considering amenity of the location the WAPC must consider the following
Character of the locality
Social impacts of the development
"The future is mine Nigel Satterley – not yours. North Stoneville is - Out of date. Out of step. Out of time. A dangerous and destructive dinosaur development "
Cleo Williams, Stoneville teenager
The key objections
Character of the Locality
The surrounding land is primarily beautiful natural Jarrah and Marri forest country with mostly two-hectare rural properties containing residences, outbuildings, self-sufficient water tanks, (no scheme water), dams and paddocks for livestock. This is the essence of the hills character and lifestyle.
The character and amenity of the area would dramatically change with an urban development of approximately 1001 houses in North Stoneville followed by up to 750 dwellings (2,360 more people) in the North Parkerville townsite.
1. Many (almost all) of the residents surrounding, or living nearby, this proposed townsite have bought land that originally belonged to the current landowner (Anglican Diocese). They invested, financially and holistically, in the belief that the area would remain semi-rural (5 acres and above), as the first advertisements for this land attested to in the 1970s and 1980s, and as subsequent land releases here, have honoured. An urban townsite does NOT align to the semi-rural lifestyle which people bought into here. A suburban-style townsite such as North Stoneville, would severely impact their amenity, their chosen rural lifestyle, and ultimately - their property values – because those who wish to experience a rural lifestyle would not move into an area with a suburban townsite ‘down the road – with all the traffic and noise constraints, population impacts, environmental devastation and bushfire risks a townsite of this size and style will bring to this otherwise-semi rural secluded location.
2. The current area is characterised by hobby farms, horse/agistment properties and bush blocks of 1-2 hectare separated by 1 1/2-2 km buffer zones.
3. The area is serviced by a network of rural roads with forested winding lanes and sharp bends in the style of a rural or semi-rural landscape.
4. An important and unique aspect of the hills is its flora and fauna.
5. All three rare and endangered Black Cockatoos found in Western Australia have been observed, nesting, foraging, and roosting on the site. 160 hectares of the Cockatoo habitat, 50,000+ trees will be bulldozed to make way for the proposed North Stoneville development.
6. There would be substantial increase in local traffic - 8,000 extra traffic movements everyday, on rural roads surrounding North Stoneville. This would impact road safety, (single lane gravel siding-roads, no footpaths), air quality, noise and. The development would require blasting of forested hills to reduce the slope to try to reduce Bushfire Attack Level (BAL) building expenses Noise, dust and vibrations from machinery and blasting, would have a profound effect on the local community and on all wildlife in and around this operational area.
7. The location is at least 20 kms from the nearest METRONET in Midland - requiring travel to the train station by private vehicles. No public transport from North Stoneville), There would be a substantial increase in local traffic (8000 extra traffic movements every day on rural roads around Nth Stoneville), impacting road safety, (gravel sided rural road- single lane, and no footpaths) air quality, and noise.
Social Impact of the Development
Social impacts are factors which a proposal will have on the community and the surrounding area. With an area as unique as the Perth Hills, amenity must always be considered with visitors and tourists in mind. It’s not just the people who live here it’s the visitors who come to the Perth Hills to recharge and take refuge from hectic lifestyles.
1. Ultimately the decision should be concerned with the community's welfare and the community's interests, not just the interests of the applicant for development approval. Federal Government Mental Health Studies prove the innate value of natural locations such as the ocean - and bush environments.- such as the Perth Hills.
2. The character and amenity of the area would dramatically change with an urban development of 1001 houses for almost 3,000 people in North Stoneville followed by 750 dwellings in the proposed North Parkerville townsite for 2,360 more people.
3. Cumulative effects of piecemeal, fragmented development will further stretch Mundaring Shire’s capacity to cope with a massive financial risk and burden to ratepayers who would receive zero benefit from this development. The City of Swan almost went broke in having to prop up the stranded Ellenbrook development in the first two decade. It has led to massive a State taxpayer burden (hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars in infrastructure) to support this stranded development – which is a template plan of the even more-remote, geologically challenging, and stranded North Stoneville.
4. The area has no footpaths along the single lane, gravel-sidings-rural road network nor is any public transport planned for the North Stoneville area.
5. Only minor local employment would be provided by the proposed development - the majority of people would have to travel by car 15-35 kms to work.
6. The location is at least 20kms from the nearest METRONET requiring travel to Midland train station by private vehicles. This contravenes the State Government’s planning strategy for infill close to public transport hubs – which nominates a distance of ‘1000m (1km) for a METRONET Statin Precinct or a nominated METRONT Station to qualify for the State Govt’s Infrastructure Development Fund – Stream 2 Unlocking Infill Precincts’.
7. There would be a substantial increase in local traffic (8000 extra traffic movements every day) as demonstrated by huge lines at school drop off and pickup times. (Stoneville Rd, Roland Rd, Stevens St). Access and parking in Mundaring shopping centre is limited and designed for the current population levels.
8. Both increased traffic and land clearing would increase greenhouse gas emissions at a time when the State Government is actively establishing a framework (2023), to reduce Government emissions by 80 per cent below 2020 levels by 2030, with a net zero goal by 2050.
9. According to the developer, the proposed townsite would be without services such as medical facilities, shops and schools until at least 2038. (Public transport remains questionable even at 2038). The existing facilities in Mundaring support the current population but would be over stretched and highly pressured with the arrival of almost 3000 more people from North Stoneville and then a further 2,360 from North Parkerville. Financial pressure and risks would be applied to the State Government (taxpayers) to provide infrastructure and state services to support this extra population (as per Ellenbrook).