australian research centre for water in society · australian research centre for water in society...

C S I R O

THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN “IDENTITY” FOR THE

BROOKDALE REDEVELOPMENT

Catherine Johnston Melissa Green Blair E. Nancarrow

December 2004

Australian Research Centre for Water in Society

© 2004 CSIRO To the extent permitted by law, all rights are reserved and no part of this publication covered by copyright may be reproduced or copied in any form or by any means except with the written permission of CSIRO Land and Water and the Armadale Redevelopment Authority. Important Disclaimer: CSIRO Land and Water advises that the information contained in this publication comprises general statements based on scientific research. The reader is advised and needs to be aware that such information may be incomplete or unable to be used in any specific situation. No reliance or actions must therefore be made on that information without seeking prior expert professional, scientific and technical advice. To the extent permitted by law, CSIRO Land and Water (including its employees and consultants) excludes all liability to any person for any consequences, including but not limited to all losses, damages, costs, expenses and any other compensation, arising directly or indirectly from using this publication (in part or in whole) and any information or material contained in it.

CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 METHODOLOGY 2

2.1 THE SAMPLE SECTORS 2 2.2 THE SURVEY 2 2.3 THE QUESTIONNAIRE 3 3.0 SURVEY RESULTS 5

3.1 RESULTS: ARMADALE REGION AND THE WIDER METROPOLITAN AREA 5

3.1.1 Demographics 5 3.1.1.1 Home ownership and property structure 5 3.1.1.2 Household characteristics 6 3.1.1.3 Age 7 3.1.1.4 Level of education 7

3.1.1.5 Gross annual income 8

3.1.1.6 Gender 8

3.1.1.7 Time lived in area/region 9

3.1.1.8 Friends and/or relatives in the Armadale Region 10

3.1.2 The Armadale Region 10 3.1.2.1 Familiarity with the region 10

3.1.2.2 Most favoured attributes of the region 11

3.1.2.3 Least favoured attributes of the region 12

3.1.2.4 Special characteristics of the Armadale Region 12

3.1.2.5 Other special qualities or places 16

3.1.2.6 Regional “contrasts” or “opposites” 16

3.1.2.7 Other appealing “contrasts” or “opposites” 20

3.1.3 Brookdale and Redevelopment 20 3.1.3.1 Attributes of Brookdale 21

3.1.3.2 Location of Brookdale 22

3.1.3.3 Brookdale redevelopment features 23

3.1.3.4 Living in the Brookdale redevelopment 26

3.1.3.5 Indicators of success of the Brookdale redevelopment 27

3.2 RESULTS: THOSE WHO WOULD OR MIGHT LIKE TO LIVE IN THE BROOKDALE REDEVELOPMENT 28

3.3 RESULTS: REGIONAL SECTORS 29 3.3.1 Hopes for the Armadale Region 29

3.3.2 Brookdale Redevelopment and Hopes for the Armadale Region 30

3.3.3 Concerns for the Armadale Region 31 3.3.4 Brookdale Redevelopment and Concerns for the Armadale

Region 32

3.4 RESULTS: WIDER METROPOLITAN SECTORS 33 3.4.1 Current Residential Aspects for Inclusion in a New

Development 33 3.4.2 Attractive Features for a Residential Location 34

4.0 SUMMARY OF KEY RESULTS 35

4.1 THE ARMADALE REGION 35 4.2 THE BROOKDALE REDEVELOPMENT 36

4.3 RESPONDENTS WHO WOULD OR MIGHT LIKE TO LIVE IN THE BROOKDALE REDEVELOPMENT 37

4.4 THE REGIONAL SAMPLE 38 4.5 THE WIDER METROPOLITAN SAMPLE 38 5.0 CONCLUSIONS 40

5.1 THE ENVIRONMENT AND THE COMMUNITY 40 5.2 LOCAL INVOLVEMENT AND PLANNING 41 5.3 THE EVOLVING BROOKDALE IDENTITY 41

APPENDIX A Map of the Regional and Wider Metropolitan Sample Sectors

APPENDIX B List of Sector Suburbs and Postcodes APPENDIX C Questionnaire for the Regional Sample APPENDIX D Questionnaire for the Wider Metropolitan Sample

1

1.0 INTRODUCTION In May 2004 The Australian Research Centre for Water in Society (ARCWIS) commenced research commissioned by the Armadale Redevelopment Authority (ARA) to develop an “identity” for the Brookdale redevelopment. The overall aim of this research was to: ‘Establish the past and future social and cultural aspirations associated with the Armadale Region and their relationship to alternative futures and water management to develop an “identity” and theme for the redevelopment of Brookdale and a foundation for community development.’ This report is concerned with the second stage of the study in which information from the first, scoping phase of the research was used to develop a survey questionnaire to gain wider regional and metropolitan input into the identity development. The scoping study was conducted in the Armadale Region and consisted of semi‐structured interviews with a range of regional representatives and long‐term residents. Perspectives were obtained on themes such as: the area’s history; unique regional features; places of special meaning; current and future hopes and concerns; and, aspirations for the future development of the area, including the Brookdale redevelopment. A number of key impressions were identified in the scoping phase of research (Johnston, Green and Nancarrow, 2004). These were:

a strong attachment to and pride in the Armadale Region; the importance of special and valued regional features to the community, including

rural characteristics, a blend of city and country living, features of the natural environment, and the unique regional heritage;

an appreciation of contrasting aspects of the area, for example the hills and the flat areas and the diversity of people in the community;

community endorsement of regional development and revitalisation, but in a manner that did not compromise the valued features of the region (as mentioned above) or the local community;

associated concerns about potential loss of regional identity and character, further marginalisation of more disadvantaged areas and people, inadequate amenities and services for meeting higher population numbers, and the impact of the new population on the existing community;

the need for the new Brookdale development to reflect and “fit with” the region’s unique identity and character, and to be integrated with the natural environment.

The second stage of research was concerned with the further exploration and development of the above key impressions. In addition, it aimed to elicit opinions specifically about Brookdale, including possible impressions about the area, preferences for design features for the new development, and thoughts about living in Brookdale after the completion of the redevelopment. Towards this end a survey was conducted of residents of both the regional vicinity and those in the wider Perth metropolitan area, as potential future investors in the new Brookdale development. This report discusses results of the survey, of both regional and wider metropolitan respondents, and individual sample groups where appropriate. In addition, separate attention is given to findings of those who said they would or might like to live in the Brookdale redevelopment when it is completed. Results of this survey are principally

2

reported as statistical analysis of questions in the survey questionnaire. For this reason they are presented in a more technical manner. A summary of key results (Section 4.0) which examines important findings emerging from the results is included at the end of the report, along with concluding considerations (Section 5.0).

2.0 METHODOLOGY

2.1 The Sample Sectors To ensure that a good cross section of people were included in the survey, a substantial part of the Perth metropolitan area was divided into five sectors. These sectors were each categorised as either a “Regional sector” or a “Wider Metropolitan sector”. The division of the Perth metropolitan area into these sectors was to ensure a representative sample of respondents within each sector. It also allowed for important analytical comparisons between sectors. There were two Regional sectors, located within a 15km radius of the Brookdale area. The first, the “Inner Regional sector” principally comprised the suburbs within the Armadale City Council. The second “Outer Regional sector” consisted of the remaining suburbs within the 15km radius that were situated outside the local government boundaries (see map, Appendix A). The wider Perth metropolitan area was divided into three sectors: Northern Metropolitan sector; Eastern Metropolitan sector; and, Southern Metropolitan sector (see map, Appendix A). These together made up the Wider Metropolitan sample.

The sample of households from each sector was obtained using software specifically designed for professional survey purposes. All suburbs and their respective postcodes were firstly identified for each sector (see Appendix B). Household details from across all the suburbs and respective postcodes for each sector were then randomly selected using the survey software. These households were then used for possible participation in the survey.

2.2 The Survey The survey was conducted by telephone with randomly selected residents from each of the sectors. A total of 410 residents were targeted for participation in the survey. This comprised 200 respondents from the Regional sample (100 each from the Inner Regional and Outer Regional sectors) and 210 respondents from the Wider Metropolitan sample (70 each from the Northern, Eastern and Southern Metropolitan sectors). Slightly more respondents were targeted for the Regional sectors to ensure the key impressions that strongly emerged from the scoping study were adequately tested. A team of trained interviewers undertook the survey and were instructed to survey private households within the sectors. Householders over the age of 18 were invited to participate. Telephone lists of randomly selected households for the sectors were provided to the interviewers. The interviewers were instructed to contact each household on their lists at least

3

three times at different times of the day before it could be classed as “no contact”. This ensured a random selection of people in the survey. In total, 1250 people were contacted, with 410 participating in the survey. This produced a refusal rate of 67.2% overall, which is average for these types of surveys. Table 1 below displays the details of these refusals, demonstrating ‘not interested’ as the most frequent reason for refusal in the survey. Comparisons in reasons for refusal were made between the Regional sample and the Wider Metropolitan sample (see Table 1). These revealed that the overall percentage of refusals from those in the Wider Metropolitan sample (61.1%) was higher than for the Regional sample (38.9%). Further, the Wider Metropolitan sample had approximately twice the number of people giving ‘not interested’ as a reason for refusing to participate in the survey.

Table 1: Reasons for Refusals

Reason for Refusal Total (n = 840)

Regional (n = 327)

Metropolitan ( n = 513)

Not interested 411 135 276 Too busy 282 139 143 Insufficient English 63 25 38 Unwell 37 12 25 Elderly 34 10 24 Other 13 6 7

2.3 The Questionnaire Two questionnaires (Appendices C & D) were designed for the survey to accommodate differences in the Regional and Wider Metropolitan samples. The questionnaires differed slightly only where specific information was required from a particular sample group. Questions were designed to further explore impressions emerging from the scoping study and opinions and attitudes towards Brookdale and the new development. The themes covered in the questionnaire were: the Armadale Region; Brookdale and development; and, demographics. With respect to the questionnaire for the Armadale region, respondents from this sample were also asked about their hopes and concerns for the Armadale Region to further investigate impressions gained in the scoping study. Further, they were asked about the potential role of the Brookdale redevelopment in helping with these. The Wider Metropolitan questionnaire was designed to also gain “outside” perceptions about the new Brookdale development. Hence, these respondents were asked about appealing aspects of current residential locations and the appeal of a country lifestyle theme and proximity to the natural environment and water features. Those with friends and/or relatives were also identified to allow for analytical comparisons to be conducted.

4

Both questionnaires began with a question to determine the respondent’s familiarity with the Armadale Region. Only respondents who reported some degree of familiarity with the region were asked the questions requiring some knowledge and experience of the region. Questions asked of all respondents for a questionnaire are marked (*) below. Both survey questionnaires covered the following aspects:

*degree of familiarity with the Armadale Region; best liked and least liked aspects of the Armadale Region; agreement with statements about special characteristics of the Armadale Region; other possible special characteristics or places; *the possible appeal of a number of unique “contrasts” or “opposites” in the region

and associated reasons; *other possible appealing “contrasts”; discernment between Brookdale and the Armadale Region as a whole; *knowledge of the exact location of Brookdale; *importance of certain design features in the redevelopment of Brookdale, and

prioritisation of these features; *considerations about living in the Brookdale redevelopment, and reasons; *indicators of success for the Brookdale redevelopment; *demographic variables: age, education, income, gender, home owner status,

property structure, household characteristics and time lived in area/region. The following specific questions were included in the questionnaire for Regional respondents:

hopes and concerns for the Armadale Region; the role of the Brookdale redevelopment in meeting or overcoming these hopes and

concerns. The following specific questions were included in the questionnaire for Wider Metropolitan respondents:

*appealing aspects of current residential area for inclusion in a new development; *appeal of a country lifestyle and proximity to the natural environment and water

features; *friends, relatives or both living in the Armadale Region.

5

3.0 Survey Results The following details the principal results of the survey. Results for the entire sample are firstly discussed. This is followed by discussions about data elicited from those interviewed in the Regional sample and Wider Metropolitan sample respectively. A specific review is made of results from all respondents who reported they would or might like to live in the Brookdale redevelopment when it was completed. A summary of key results are presented, along with conclusions for the second stage of research. Analytical comparisons were made to determine possible statistically significant differences (where p<0.01) in responses between the sector samples and the demographic characteristics of respondents. Further comparisons were made between respondents who reported some intention of living in the completed Brookdale development and those who did not. Where statistically significant differences occurred they are reported in the following results. For open‐ended questions in the survey questionnaire, respondents could nominate up to 3 or 4 answers. Results are presented as a percentage of the number of cases and therefore do not add to 100%. This is noted where applicable.

3.1 Results: Armadale Region and Wider Metropolitan Area As mentioned previously, the questionnaires included many of the same questions for respondents from both the Regional and the Wider Metropolitan samples. These were categorised under themes of demographics, the Armadale Region, and the Brookdale redevelopment. Results from these questions for respondents from both samples are discussed below.

3.1.1 Demographics All respondents were asked to answer a number of demographic questions. These pertained to home ownership and structure, household characteristics, duration of time in current location, age, education, annual income and gender. Information about whether respondents had friends and/ or relatives living in Armadale Region was also sought from respondents in the Wider Metropolitan sample.

3.1.1.1 Home ownership and property structure The vast majority (87.0%) of respondents owned their home. Thirteen percent of people rented their current property. Most respondents (88.7%) lived in a detached house. A small percentage reported to live in a townhouse or villa (4.7%) or a unit or flat (4.2%). Just over two percent of people lived in a semi‐detached house.

6

3.1.1.2 Household characteristics Respondents were asked to state how many people lived in their household, and the category of the unit of people (see Tables 2 & 3 for results).

Table 2: Number of People in Household of Respondents

Number of People % (n=405)

One 12.3 Two 42.0 Three 17.5 Four 17.0 Five 7.7 Six 2.0 Seven 1.0 Eight 0.2 Nine 0.0 Ten 0.0 Eleven 0.2

Table 3: Household Unit Category of Respondents

Household Unit Category % (n=404)

Single adult 65 years or less 9.2 Single adult more than 65 years 3.5 Two adults, with older person 65 years or less 27.2 Two adults, with older person more than 65 years 11.4 Single adult, with eldest child 18 years or less 3.7 Single adult, with eldest child more than 18 years 2.5 Two adults, with eldest child 18 years or less 22.3 Two adults, with eldest child more than 18 years 11.6 More than two adults, with no children 4.7 More than two adults, with eldest child 18 years or less 2.7 More than two adults, with eldest child more than 18 years 1.2

7

3.1.1.3 Age Respondents were asked to state the category that best described their ages. Table 4 below shows the distribution of ages of respondents.

Table 4: Age Categories of Respondents

Age % (n=407)

Less than 24 years 5.2 24 to 39 years 25.1 40 to 55 years 33.2 56 to 65 years 20.6 66 to 75 years 11.5 More than 75 years 4.4

3.1.1.4 Level of education Details were sought about respondents’ highest levels of education. See Table 5 below for results.

Table 5: Education Level of Respondents

Level of Education % (n=407)

All or some of primary school 1.7 All or some of secondary school 34.4 Partial trade or technical qualification 5.7 Trade or technical qualification 20.9 Partial university qualification 12.3 University qualification 25.1

8

3.1.1.5 Gross annual income Respondents were asked to state their gross annual income (Table 6), however response to this question was optional. A refusal rate of 6.4% was recorded for this question, although another 6.9% responded don’t know which can be considered a refusal.

Table 6: Gross Annual Income of Respondents

Gross Annual Income % (n=354)

Less than $22,000 14.4 $22,001 to $42,000 28.0 $42,001 to $62,000 21.8 $62,001 to $82,000 13.8 More than $82,000 22.0

3.1.1.6 Gender A relatively even distribution of females and males were targeted for the survey. Table 7 below shows the distribution of the gender of respondents.

Table 7: Gender of Respondents

Gender % (n=410)

Female 54.9 Male 45.1

9

3.1.1.7 Time lived in area/region All respondents were asked how long they had lived in their current area or, in the case of the Regional respondents, in the region. The following figures show the results.

Figure 1: Time Lived in Area of Wider Metropolitan Respondents

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Less than 5 years 5 to 10 years 11 to 20 years 21 to 30 years More than 30years

Duration of Time

% (n

=209

)

Figure 2: Time Lived in Region of Regional Respondents

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Less than 5 years 5 to 10 years 11 to 20 years 21 to 30 years More than 30years

Duration of Time

% (n

=200

)

10

3.1.1.8 Friends and/or relatives in the Armadale Region In addition, respondents from the Wider Metropolitan sample (n=210) were asked if they had any friends or relatives in the Armadale Region. Most people (60.8%) answered no and over a third (39.2%) reported that they did. Respondents for this question who answered yes (n=82) were asked if they had relatives or friends or both living in the region. Sixty‐one percent of these respondents (n=50) said they had friends in the Armadale Region. Over a quarter (n=22) reported they had relatives in the region, and just over twelve percent of people (n=10) had both relatives and friends living in the Armadale Region.

3.1.2 The Armadale Region The survey questionnaires comprised a number of questions designed to elicit perceptions and attitudes specifically towards the Armadale Region. These questions were developed around key impressions obtained in the scoping phase of the study and were designed to test the strength and extent of these, both regionally and in the wider metropolitan area. Topics included most and least favoured characteristics of the region, special qualities and places, and certain “contrasts” that might be considered appealing in a place to live. To ensure validity of results, those who indicated at the first question (3.1.2.1 below) that they were not at all familiar with the Armadale Region were not asked questions which required specific knowledge.

3.1.2.1 Familiarity with the region All respondents were firstly asked to rate their familiarity with the Armadale Region (see Table 8 below). They were asked to do this on a four‐point scale with 1 being not at all familiar and 4 being very familiar. The mean rating was 2.19, which indicates that respondents generally identified themselves as having some degree of familiarity with the region. Two‐thirds of the sample (n=269) went on to answer the questions requiring specific knowledge of the Armadale Region.

Table 8: Familiarity with the Armadale Region

Familiarity Frequency % (n=410)

Not at all familiar 141 34.4 Vaguely familiar 105 25.6 Familiar 108 26.3 Very familiar 56 13.7

11

Analytical comparisons were conducted to identify possible sector differences in respondents’ degree of familiarity with the Armadale Region. Not surprisingly, respondents from the Regional sectors had a statistically significantly (p<.001) higher level of familiarity with the Armadale Region than those in the Wider Metropolitan sectors.

3.1.2.2 Most favoured attributes of the region Respondents who in the previous question reported some familiarity with the Armadale Region (n=269) were then asked to describe what they liked most about the region (see Figure 3). The country atmosphere and lifestyle (31.6%) and the hills (29.0%) were the main attributes favoured by respondents. Further rural attributes such as peace and quiet, open space and larger blocks were similarly valued (17.0%). Bush and water features, for example, rivers and wetlands, (16.7%) were also among the more popular aspects of the Armadale Region. Other favoured characteristics of the Armadale Region included “city living, country style”, attractiveness and scenery, and pleasantness for visiting.

Figure 3: Most Favoured Attributes of the Armadale Region

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Country lif

estyle Hills

Rural attr i

butes

Bush/w

ater features

Don't know/nothing

City Liv ing C

ountry S

tyle

Atrractiv

e/scenic

Pleasant to vi

s it

Attribute

% o

f Cas

es (n

=269

)

NB: Percentages do not add to 100 as more than one response was allowed.

12

3.1.2.3 Least favoured attributes of the region Respondents with a degree of familiarity with the Armadale Region were next asked to describe what attributes of the region they least liked (see Figure 4). Perceived unsociable factors (50.5%), including a high crime rate, unsafe, lower socio‐economic elements, State housing and poor reputation, were the least liked aspects of the region. A lack of services and facilities (including a university) and jobs (23.1%) were also a more unpopular aspect of the region. Distance from Perth and central suburbs (10.4%), an unappealing built environment (8.6%), and natural elements (6.3%), for example the Easterly winds, were less favoured regional attributes. Twenty percent of respondents said they were unsure or that there was nothing that they did not like about the Armadale Region.

Figure 4: Least Favoured Attributes of the Armadale Region

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Unsocia

ble el

emen

ts

Lack

of fa

cilitie

s/serv

ices/j

obs

Unsure/

Nothing

Distanc

e from P

erth

Aesthe

ticall

y unp

leasing

Natural el

emen

ts

Attribute

% o

f Cas

es (n

=268

)


3.1.2.4 Special characteristics of the Armadale Region Respondents with some familiarity with the region were read a series of statements about special or unique qualities or places that characterised the Armadale Region. These statements were derived from information obtained from regional representatives in the scoping phase of the study. Respondents were asked to rate their agreement with each statement on a five‐point scale, from 1 being strongly disagree to 5 being strongly agree. In order to control the possibility of bias in results, the statements were read in varying order to respondents. Percentages of responses are shown in Table 9 on the following page.

13

Table 9: Agreement with Special Characteristics of the Armadale Region

%

Regional Statement

Strongly Disagree

or Disagree

Neither

Strongly Agree

or Agree

Freq.

(n)

Mean

*

Araluen Botanical Park is a place of special beauty 1.5 9.1 89.4 265 4.32

A special part of the region is the natural environment of hills and bushland 1.5 2.2 96.3 268 4.27

The nearby dams and picnic areas provide a special quality of the region 1.9 4.9 93.2 265 4.16

The best part of the region is that it is a “gateway” to the city, the hills and the south 6.7 7.5 85.8 268 3.99

The region has a good mix of bushland, parks and housing areas 3.0 9.8 87.2 265 3.98

The region offers the benefits of both city and country living 8.6 9.4 82.0 267 3.92

The region offers peace and quiet and fresh air 6.8 15.8 77.5 266 3.87

The Wungong Gorge is a place of special beauty 1.2 35.5 63.2 242 3.81

It is a comfortable place to live 10.8 21.2 68.0 250 3.64

The history and heritage of the region makes it different from the rest of Perth 20.1 22.0 58.0 259 3.47

“What you do” not “What you own” takes priority in the region 11.6 35.5 52.9 242 3.44

There is plenty to do in the region with something for everyone 24.2 21.4 54.3 252 3.37

The community in the region is very close and all help each other 31.6 36.3 32.0 234 2.97

The diversity of people with different cultures and backgrounds is an attraction 35.6 30.0 34.4 247 2.95

The region is just an ordinary place to live 46.6 15.8 37.6 266 2.89

The casual lifestyle is the best in Perth 41.0 24.6 34.4 256 2.89

The region isn’t much different from anywhere else in Perth 73.0 9.4 17.7 266 2.37

There is nothing particularly special about the region 73.3 8.6 18.0 266 2.34

*The higher the mean score, the stronger the agreement with the statement.

14

As shown in Table 9, the vast majority of respondents saw the hills and bushland (96.3%) and the dams and picnic areas (93.2%) as special qualities of the Armadale Region. A mix of city and country living (82.0%), peace and quiet (77.5%), and a good mix of the natural environment and residential areas (87.2%) were also seen to characterise the region. The “gateway location” of the region was highly valued and the Araluen Botanical Park and the Wungong Gorge were viewed as places of special beauty. Over two‐thirds of respondents (68.0%) believed the region was a comfortable place to live and it was generally agreed (58.0%) that a unique regional history and heritage characterised the area. More than half of respondents agreed that there was “something for everyone” in the region and that material status is less important than “what you do”. Most people disagreed that the region is similar to other places in Perth (73.0%) and that there was nothing very special about the region (73.3%). There was also general disagreement that the region is an ordinary place to live and offered the best casual lifestyle in Perth. Opinion was more evenly spread about whether social networks are close and supportive and the attractiveness of social diversity. Comparisons were conducted to determine whether statistically significant differences existed in responses between the different sector samples or the demographic characteristics of respondents in agreement on regional characteristics. Not surprisingly, a large number of significant (p<.01) differences emerged, as detailed below.

Respondents in the Wider Metropolitan sectors were significantly (p<.01):

More likely to agree that there is nothing particularly special about the region than those in the Regional sectors.

More likely to agree that the Wungong Gorge is a place of special beauty than those in the Regional sectors.

Respondents in the Eastern Metropolitan sector were significantly (p<.001):

More likely to disagree that the regional community is close and supportive; the gateway location is the best part of the region; the unique history and heritage make the region different from other places in Perth; a diverse community is an attraction; and, the region offers the best casual lifestyle in Perth in comparison to the other sectors.

Less likely to agree that the region is a comfortable place to live; and, the natural environment is a special regional quality than those in the other sectors.

More likely to agree that there is nothing particularly special about the region in comparison with those in the other sectors.

Respondents in the Southern Metropolitan sector were significantly (p<.001):

More likely to agree that the region offers plenty to do for all people in comparison with those in the other sectors.

Less likely to agree that what you do takes precedence over what you own in the region than those in the other sectors.

15

Respondents in the Northern Metropolitan sector were significantly (p<.001):

More likely to strongly agree that that Araluen Botanical Park is a place of special beauty compared with the other sectors.

Respondents in the Regional sectors were significantly (p<.001):

More likely to agree that the gateway location of the Armadale Region is the best part of the region, and the region offers peace and quiet and fresh air than those in the Wider Metropolitan sectors.

Respondents in the Inner Regional sector were significantly (p<.001):

More likely to agree that a close and supportive community existed in the Armadale Region; the region is a comfortable place to live; a diverse community is an attraction; the region offers the best casual lifestyle in Perth; and, what you do takes precedence over what you own in the region in comparison with other sectors.

Less likely to agree that Araluen Botanical Park is a place of special beauty in comparison with the other sectors.

Respondents with a gross household income of more than $82,000 were significantly (p<.01):

More likely to disagree that the region is a comfortable place to live in comparison with other income categories.

Respondents with a gross household income of less than $22,000 and between $22,001 to $42,000 were significantly (p<.01):

More likely to agree that the region is a comfortable place to live in comparison with other income categories.

Respondents with a gross household income of less than $22,000 were significantly (p<.01):

More likely to disagree that the region offers the best casual lifestyle in Perth in comparison with other income categories.

Respondents with gross household incomes of between $62,001 and $82,000 and more than $82,000 were significantly (p<.01):

Less likely to agree that the region offers the best casual lifestyle in Perth in comparison with other income categories.

Respondents less than 24 years of age were significantly (p<.01):

More likely to agree that a diversity of people is an attraction than did those in other age categories.

Respondents between the ages of 66 to 75 years were significantly (p<.01):

More likely to disagree that a diversity of people is an attraction than did those in other age categories.

16

3.1.2.5 Other special qualities or places Respondents who answered the above question (n=269) were next asked if they thought there were any other special regional qualities or places. Over half of these respondents (n=157) said no to this question. Those who answered yes or maybe (n=112) were asked to explain. Results are shown in Figure 5 below.

Figure 5: Other Special Qualities or Places

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Natural bu

sh/flo

wers

Enterta

inmen

t/ rec

reati

on

Water

featu

res

Diversi

ty/va

riety

Parklan

ds Hills

Service

s

Historic

build

ings

Walki

ng tr

ails

Special Quality or Place

% o

f Cas

es (n

=112

)


As seen in Figure 5, the natural environment, including the natural bush surrounds (25.9%), water features (19.7%) such as rivers, and the hills (11.6%) were considered key qualities of the Armadale Region. Entertainment and recreational facilities (24.1%) such as the Elizabethan Village and Pioneer World were also thought to be important regional characteristics. Diversity and variety (17.9%), the parklands (17.0%), and historic buildings and walking trails were seen as unique features of the region.

3.1.2.6 Regional “contrasts” or “opposites” All respondents, including those who indicated they were not at all familiar with the Armadale Region at the outset of the survey, were read a number of different “contrasts”, which were identified during the scoping phase of the study as being valued and distinguishing characteristics of the Armadale Region. This question was designed to find out if respondents found a particular contrast appealing. Table 10 on the following page shows the results.

17

Table 10: Percentage of Respondents Who Found Appeal in Contrasts

Contrast % (n=410)

A mix of rural and urban lifestyles 83.7

Keeping the history with modern development 85.6

A mix of hills and flat landscapes 89.3

A mix of people of all ages, cultures and backgrounds 82.2

A mix of expensive and affordable housing 71.0

As shown above, most respondents found all of the different contrasts appealing. Interestingly, very few statistically significant differences were found between sectors and demographic variables in responses for this question. The following significant (p<.001) differences were identified for reference.

More respondents from the Regional sectors, and from the Inner Regional sector in particular, found a mix of expensive and affordable housing appealing than those in the Wider Metropolitan sectors.

Fewer respondents in the Southern Metropolitan sector found a mix of expensive and affordable housing appealing than respondents in other sectors.

Respondents were asked to give reasons for their responses. The main responses are shown in the following tables.

Table 11: Reasons for Finding Appeal or Not in the Contrast of Rural and Urban Lifestyles

A mix of rural and urban lifestyles

Why % (n=410) Why Not %

(n=410)

Best of both worlds 36.1 Prefer urban living 4.6 Open space 21.2 They don’t mix 3.4 Rural appeal/ lifestyle 14.6 Only want rural lifestyle 3.1 Diversity/ Variety 11.9 Too far from CBD/ coast 1.7 Natural environment 6.7 Good for families 4.1

NB: Percentages do not add to 100 as more than one response was allowed. As shown in the Table 11, the most common reason for an appeal of a mix of rural and urban lifestyles was that it offered the best of both worlds. Open space, with associated lack of

18

suburban build‐up, and a rural lifestyle further appealed. The diversity and variety offered by a mix of rural and urban lifestyles was also favoured. Reasons for lack of appeal for this contrast were less frequently nominated. Of those who did not find a mix of rural and urban lifestyles appealing, the most common explanation was that urban living is preferable. Conversely, some desired a purely rural lifestyle. It was also thought that a mix of both rural and urban is unworkable.

Table 12: Reasons for Finding Appeal or Not in Keeping the History with Modern Development

Keeping the history with modern development


(n=410)

History is essential 66.2 Keep history within reason 6.4 The blend is complementary 10.5 Don’t value history 3.2

History gives character 8.3 Don’t want modern development 2.2

Educational value of history for youth 8.1 There shouldn’t be a mix 2.2 Aesthetic appeal 6.9 We need modern progress 2.0

NB: Percentages do not add to 100 as more than one response was allowed. As seen in Table 12, the an appeal of a mix of history and modern development was principally because history is essential and needed to be respected and learnt from. The educational value for youth was given particular mention. It was also thought that history gives character and aesthetic appeal to an area. It was thought that a blend of history and modern development is complementary to an area. Of the few respondents who did not like a mix of history and modern development, the most common reason was a need for parameters in retaining history to avoid “history for history’s sake”. Others found no value in history at all. There was varying opinion about the value of modern progress.

Table 13: Reasons for Finding Appeal or Not in a Mix of Hills and Flat Landscapes

A mix of hills and flat landscapes

Why % Why Not %

Beauty/ aesthetically pleasing 42.7 Prefer hills 3.9 Diversity/ variety 19.7 Don’t like flat areas 1.6 Best of both worlds 9.0 Doesn’t matter to me 1.7 Retaining the natural attributes 7.8 Don’t like the hills 0.6


19

As indicated in Table 13, aesthetic value was most frequently seen as the most appealing aspect of a contrast of hills and flat landscapes. Diversity and variety and having “the best of both worlds” were also viewed as a pleasing part of this mix. Keeping the natural attributes of a landscape was favoured. Of those who did not find this mix appealing, it was mostly due to a preference for hills. Other reasons included an aversion to the hills or to flat areas.

Table 14: Reasons for Finding Appeal or Not in a Diversity of People

A mix of people of all ages, cultures and backgrounds

Why % Why Not %

For a healthy community 47.0 Doesn’t always work 7.6

Interesting/ variety 29.6 Is not important 3.2

The “Australian way” 2.0 Don’t like other cultures 1.5


As seen in Table 14, the main reasons for the appeal of a diversity of ages, cultures and backgrounds of people predominantly fell into two main categories. The most common reason was that a mix of people contributed to a healthy community, particularly through creating understanding and tolerance. The second main reason was that it was interesting and offered variety. The primary response from those who said they did not find a diverse community appealing was that it does not always work. Others considered that a mix of different ages, cultures and backgrounds was not important. An aversion to “other cultures” was also reported.

Table 15: Reasons for Finding Appeal or Not in a Mix of Expensive and Affordable Housing

A mix of expensive and affordable housing


(n=410)

Affordability/ equity 30.9 Would not work 16.4

Choice and variety 25.0 Impact of lower socio-economic 6.7

No segregation 11.2 Not important 2.5

A nice concept 8.3

Uplifting for an area 4.6

NB: Percentages do not add to 100 as more than one response was allowed. As seen in Table 15 above, a mix of expensive and affordable housing was mostly liked because it was equitable and offers affordability for all people. A lack of segregation was also valued. The choice and variety offered in a mix of expensive and affordable housing was also a popular appeal.

20

Those who did not support this contrast mostly said it was because it was not workable. Concern about the impact of lower socio‐economic elements on an area was also a more frequently nominated reason.

3.1.2.7 Other appealing “contrasts” or “opposites” All survey respondents were next asked if there were any other “contrasts” or “opposites” they might find appealing in a place to live. The majority (75.3%) of respondents said no to this question. Those who indicated yes (n=70) or maybe (n=31) were asked what this contrast, or contrasts, may be. As seen in Figure 6 below, a mix of open space and residential housing (33.7%) was a commonly favoured contrast. A rural lifestyle with urban facilities and amenities (31.8%) and a contrast of land and water (23.8%) were also valued mixes. A rural location with city proximity and a mix of ages were further favoured.

Figure 6: Other Appealing Contrasts

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Open space withhousing

Rural lifestylewith urbanfacilities

Land with water Rural with cityaccess

Mix of ages

Contrast

% o

f Cas

es (n

=101

)


3.1.3 Brookdale and Redevelopment Following the questions about the Armadale Region in general, perceptions and attitudes specifically towards the Brookdale redevelopment were sought from all respondents. For the benefit of respondents, Brookdale was reiterated as being a key site identified by the Armadale Redevelopment Authority for special attention. Respondents were requested to specifically keep the Brookdale area in mind when considering the questions outlined below.

21

3.1.3.1 Attributes of Brookdale In order to understand if respondents distinguished between the general Armadale Region and Brookdale, those who had reported to have some degree of familiarity with the Armadale Region at the beginning of the survey (n=269) were asked if the things that they said they most and least liked about the Armadale Region as a whole were the same for Brookdale (see Table 16). Approximately thirty percent (31.1%) of people said yes to this question.

Table 16: Discernment of Brookdale from the Armadale Region

Region (%) Wider Metropolitan (%) Response Total %

(n=267) Inner (n=98)

Outer (n=68)

Northern (n=33)

Eastern (n=39)

Southern (n=29)

Yes 31.1 24.5 30.9 24.2 53.8 31.0

Maybe 27.0 18.4 22.1 51.5 23.1 44.8

No 41.9 57.1 47.1 24.2 23.1 24.1

Comparisons were made to determine if there were any statistically significant differences between sectors and key demographic variables in responses to this question. The following significant (p<.001) differences were found.

More respondents from the Regional sectors than those from the Wider Metropolitan sectors said that their most and least liked attributes of the Armadale Region as a whole were not the same for Brookdale.

Respondents from the Eastern Metropolitan sector were significantly less likely to discern between Brookdale and the Armadale Region as a whole than respondents in the other sectors.

Respondents in the Northern and Southern Metropolitan sectors were more inclined to be unsure if their most and least liked attributes of the Armadale Region as a whole were the same for Brookdale.

Those who answered no (41.9%) or maybe (27.0%) were asked what they thought was different about Brookdale from what they most and least liked about the Armadale Region as a whole. The most frequently nominated responses are shown in the table below.

Table 17: Reasons for Discernment of Brookdale from the Armadale Region

Discerning Features % (n=184)

Insufficient familiarity with Brookdale to discern 55.1

Poor reputation/ Brookdale Waste Treatment Facility 28.5

Open country 8.5

Flat, water-dominated features 3.6


22

As seen in the Table 17, many respondents, whilst stating that they thought of Brookdale differently to the Armadale Region as a whole, believed they were not sufficiently qualified to state an exact reason. Of those who proposed differences, the most common answer was that the Brookdale Waste Treatment Facility and associated poor reputation was the distinguishing characteristic. Natural features such as the open country and flat, water‐dominated features were also nominated differences between the region as a whole and Brookdale.

3.1.3.2 Location of Brookdale To further understand the degree of familiarity with Brookdale, all survey respondents were asked if they knew the exact location of Brookdale (see Table 18 below). Over half (57.3%) of respondents said they did not know. Just over one quarter (27.8%) indicated they knew exactly where it was located and almost fifteen percent (14.9%) of people said they might know.

Table 18: Knowledge of the Exact Location of Brookdale

Region Wider Metropolitan Response Total %

(n=410) Inner %

(n=100)

Outer %

(n=100)

Northern %

(n=70)

Eastern %

(n=70)

Southern %

(n=70)

Yes 27.8 62.0 34.0 0.0 14.3 11.4

Maybe 14.9 14.0 13.0 14.3 24.3 10.0

No 57.3 24.0 53.0 85.7 61.4 78.6

Statistical comparisons conducted for this question revealed the following significant (p<.001) differences for this question:

Respondents from the Inner Regional sector were more likely to know the exact location of Brookdale than those from the Wider Metropolitan sectors.

Respondents from the Northern Metropolitan sector were least likely to know exactly where Brookdale was located.

Respondents who answered yes or maybe (n=175) to this question were asked to explain exactly where Brookdale was located. The most frequent responses were that it was located near Armadale Road (21.7%), in the Armadale Region (14.3%) or the south‐west part of Armadale (12.6%). Other responses included near Forrestdale, Forrest Road, in Wungong and where the contamination is. Few of these descriptions indicate an exact knowledge of Brookdale’s location.

23

3.1.3.3 Brookdale redevelopment features During the scoping stage of research a number of design characteristics that were consistently deemed important for the Brookdale redevelopment were identified. Based on this information, a series of statements of possible design features for the Brookdale redevelopment were devised. These statements were read to all respondents who were firstly asked to rate the importance of these features on a four‐point scale from 1 being not at all important to 4 being extremely important. Results are detailed in the Table 19 below. A higher mean score indicates a higher importance rating.

Table 19: Importance of Brookdale Redevelopment Features

Statement

1 Not at all important

%

2 Slightly

important %

3 Important

%

4 Extremely important

%

Mean

(n=410)

Ensuring the needs of youth are met 1.2 2.7 32.0 64.1 3.59

Retaining and using the natural environment in the development 0.7 4.1 31.2 63.9 3.58

Allowing local people to have a say in the design 2.2 7.8 30.3 59.7 3.47

Innovative and forward thinking 2.7 7.3 40.1 49.9 3.37

Attraction of people of all ages 2.0 5.1 48.8 44.1 3.35

Provision for people of all family types 2.2 7.8 48.2 41.8 3.30

Retaining the theme of “city and country” 4.9 12.5 47.8 34.8 3.13

All the advantages and technologies of modern society 6.8 12.7 44.4 36.1 3.10

Integration of regional history and heritage 7.6 14.6 48.3 29.5 3.00

Integration of the new development with the older areas and buildings in the region 3.4 17.1 55.9 23.7 3.00

Large blocks with single homes 10.5 23.4 37.8 28.3 2.84

Creation of a country village lifestyle 10.3 23.8 39.7 26.2 2.82

Using water as a key design feature 23.5 18.3 32.3 25.9 2.61

Clusters of smaller houses 26.3 35.4 28.5 9.8 2.22

Multi-storey housing 67.3 25.4 5.6 1.7 1.42

24

After rating the importance of the possible design features for development, respondents were asked to rank their first five priorities for important design features. An importance weighting of each feature was then calculated by the product of the importance rating and the priority ranking (the ranking having been recoded so that the most preferred was 6, the second choice was 5, the third choice was 4, the fourth choice was 3, the fifth choice was 2, and “not ranked” was 1). Therefore possible importance weightings for each feature could range from 24 through to 1. A higher mean score indicated a higher importance weighting. As shown in Figure 7 below, highest priority was given to retaining and using the natural environment in the Brookdale design. Other top preferences included meeting the needs of youth, local input to design, innovative and forward thinking and provision for all family types. Large blocks with single homes, which was considered less important than many other features in the first aspect of this question, emerged as a relatively high priority in the importance weighting. Multi‐storey housing and clusters of smaller houses were the lowest priorities for inclusion in the new development.

Of note in the results for this question are the design features that emerged as strong preferences in the scoping study, but did not receive the same rating in the wider survey. The use of water as a key design feature did not receive a high importance weighting. Similarly, a mix of city and country living and integration of the new development with existing areas and buildings and with regional history had some of the lower importance weights.

Figure 7: Preferences for Design Features for the new Brookdale Development

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

Retaining & using the natural environment

Meeting the needs of youth

Local input to design

Innovative & forward thinking

Provision for all family types

Large blocks with single homes

Attract people of all ages

Modern advantages and technologies

City & country theme

Water as a key design feature

Integration of regional history & heritage

Country village lifestyle

Integration with older buildings & areas

Clusters of smaller houses

Multi-storey housing

Desi

gn F

eatu

re

Mean Importance Weighting

25

Comparisons were made to determine if there were any statistically significant differences between sectors and key demographic variables in importance weightings for this question. The following significant (p<.01) differences emerged. Respondents in the Eastern Metropolitan sector had a significantly:

Lower importance weighting (mean = 5.12) for provision for people of all family types compared with respondents in the Southern Metropolitan sector (mean = 8.91).

Lower importance weighting (mean = 3.61) for using water as a key design feature than respondents in the Southern Metropolitan sector (mean = 7.62).

Lower importance weighting (mean = 6.26) for innovative and forward thinking in comparison with respondents in the Northern Metropolitan sector (mean = 10.03).

Respondents in the Southern Metropolitan sector had a significantly:

Lower importance weighting (mean = 7.34) for local input to design compared with respondents in the Eastern Metropolitan sector (mean = 13.44).

Lower importance weighting (mean = 3.93) for retaining the theme of “city and country” than respondents in the Outer Regional sector (mean = 6.81), which was significantly lower again than for respondents from the Inner Regional sector (mean = 8.52).

Respondents in both the Regional sectors had a significantly:

Lower importance weighting (means = 10.81 – Inner; and 11.52 – Outer) for retaining and using the natural environment than respondents in the Southern Metropolitan sector (mean = 15.86) and the Eastern Metropolitan sector (mean = 16.55).

Respondents in the Outer Regional sector had a significantly:

Lower importance weighting (mean = 10.06) for ensuring the needs of youth are met than respondents in the Southern Metropolitan sector (mean = 14.13).

Respondents in the Inner Regional sector had a significantly:

Lower importance weighting (mean = 1.26) for multi‐storey housing in comparison with respondents in the Northern Metropolitan sector (mean = 1.76). However, all sectors accorded this design feature very low importance weightings.

Respondents aged less than 24 years had a significantly:

Lower importance weighting (mean = 5.33) for the attraction of people of all ages than did people aged more than 75 years (mean = 10.11).

Higher importance weighting (mean = 2.29) for multi‐story housing than did all other age groups (means ranged between 1.26 and 1.60). It should be noted, however, that all groups assigned very low importance weightings to this design feature.

Of note in these differences is the lower importance weighting given by those in the Regional sectors to retaining and using the natural environment in the new development, particularly as this received the highest importance rating overall. It is evident that whilst this design feature is relatively important to those living in the Regional sectors, there are discriminating factors in their assessment of this feature that are not held by those further removed from the region.

26

3.1.3.4 Living in the Brookdale redevelopment All respondents were asked if they would consider living in Brookdale if it were developed with all the features they had indicated were important to them. Just under a quarter (23.5%) said that they would and thirteen percent said maybe1. Most respondents (63.5%) stated they would not move to Brookdale. People who indicated that they would or might (n=149) move to Brookdale were then asked when they thought they would live there. Just over twenty percent (n=31) of respondents stated they would move as soon as redevelopment was completed as soon as the redevelopment was finished. Over half (n=77) said they would move a few years after redevelopment was completed. A quarter of respondents (n=37) stated other in response to this question, and elected their own timeframe. Of respondents who nominated their own timeframe for moving, over one‐third (n=11) said they had no immediate plans to move. Some stated they would only move if it were affordable (n=6) or that they would move in the distant future (n=6). Others reported that it was dependent upon block sizes (n=3) or upon resolution of issues related to the Brookdale Waste Treatment Facility (n=2). Respondents who said they would move to Brookdale a few years after the completion of the redevelopment (n=75) were asked how many years after completion of Brookdale they thought they might move. Responses are shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8: Timeframe for Moving to Brookdale

As seen above, most respondents (56.0%) who answered this question stated that they would move to Brookdale between one to three years after completion of redevelopment. Almost thirty percent (29.4%) of people said they would move from four to six years after development was completed. Twelve percent of these respondents reported they would move ten to twelve years after the completion of the Brookdale redevelopment. 1 See section 3.2

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

one to three four to six seven to nine ten to twelve thirteen to fifteen

Number of Years

% (n

=75)

27

Respondents who said that they would not consider living in Brookdale (n=259) when redevelopment was completed were asked to give reasons for their position. Figure 9 shows the most frequent responses. Being happy in current residential location (58.2%) was the principal reason why respondents did not want to move to Brookdale. Distance to Perth city, their workplace and universities (20.6%) was another common reason. Other reasons included wanting to be near the ocean, or simply not wanting to move, for example because they were elderly. Controversy associated with the Brookdale Waste Treatment Facility and natural factors such as a high water table were given as reasons for not moving to Brookdale by a few respondents.

Figure 9: Reasons for not moving to Brookdale

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Happy incurrentlocation

Too far Like theocean

Don't want tomove

Brookdale'sstigma

Naturalelements

Reason

% o

f Cas

es (n

=258

)


3.1.3.5 Indicators of success of the Brookdale redevelopment All respondents were asked what would indicate to them that the Brookdale redevelopment had been successful (see Table 20). The most frequent response was investment in the redevelopment and associated rising property values (55.8%). A happy, healthy and vibrant community (26.9%) was also commonly thought to be a sign of success. Public awareness of the Brookdale redevelopment through media and word of mouth (14.0%) was seen as a positive indicator. Good provision of services, visual appeal, a low crime rate, retention of the natural environment and an improved reputation with respect to the Brookdale Waste Treatment Facility were also considered to demonstrate success of the new development. It is of note given the high importance accorded the natural environment in a residential location by respondents in the survey, both prompted and unprompted, that it received little mention as an indicator of success for the new Brookdale development.

28

Table 20: Indicators of Success for the Brookdale Redevelopment

Indicator % (n=407)

Investment and increasing property prices 55.8

Happy, healthy, vibrant community 26.9

Public awareness 14.0

Good provision of services 9.1

Visual appeal 8.1

Low crime rate 8.1

Retention of natural environment 5.9

Improved reputation (Brookdale Waste Treatment Facility) 4.4

NB: Percentages do not add to 100 as more than one response was allowed. Of interest, when comparing results for the Regional sample and Wider Metropolitan sample, far more respondents from the Wider Metropolitan sectors unprompted gave investment in the development and a happy, healthy community as indicators of the success of Brookdale than those in the Regional sample. By contrast, more Regional respondents unprompted gave public awareness and visual appeal as indicators of success than those in the Wider Metropolitan sample.

3.2 Results: Those Who Would or Might Like to Live in the Brookdale Redevelopment.

As mentioned previously, approximately thirty‐six percent of all respondents said that they would or might like to live in the Brookdale redevelopment when it was completed. Specific analyses were conducted on key variables to determine if there were any significant differences in preferences between these respondents and those who did not intend to live in Brookdale. Of special note was the finding that there was no significant difference between sectors, familiarity with the region, income groups or education in respondents’ considerations of living in the redeveloped Brookdale. Also, there was no difference in importance ratings of different features in the design of the new development between those who might live there and those who did not intend to do so. In fact, few differences emerged from the analyses and are outlined below.

The younger respondents, those less than 40 years, were more inclined to indicate an

interest in living in the redeveloped Brookdale (p < .001) than did the older respondents.

29

Those respondents with some intention of living in the redeveloped Brookdale were significantly more likely (p < .01) to find the mix of rural and urban lifestyles to be appealing than did those who had no intention of living there.

Those respondents with some intention of living in the redeveloped Brookdale were significantly more likely (p < .01) to find the mix of expensive and affordable housing to be appealing than did those who had no intention of living there.

Those respondents among the Wider Metropolitan sample with some intention of living in the redeveloped Brookdale were significantly more likely (p < .01) to find the theme of country lifestyle and closeness to the natural environment and water features to be attractive than did those who had no intention of living there.

3.3 Results: Regional Sectors As mentioned in the methodological discussion, two questionnaires were designed for this survey, one for respondents in the Regional sectors, and the other for those in the Wider Metropolitan sectors. These questionnaires were similar in most respects, however differed where specific information needed to be elicited from either a regional or “outside” perspective. This section discusses results from the questions asked specifically of the regional sample. Particular hopes and concerns for the Armadale Region were sought from respondents in the Regional sectors. These questions were designed to evaluate the strength of concepts obtained in the scoping phase of the study. In addition, opinions about the possible role of the Brookdale redevelopment in being able to help with their hopes and concerns were sought. Only those who had indicated at the beginning of the survey that they had some degree of familiarity with the Armadale Region (n=167) were asked these questions. Statistical comparisons were conducted to determine possible differences in the regional sectors and demographic variables for the questions discussed below. It is interesting to note that no statistically significant (p<.01) differences were found.

3.3.1 Hopes for the Armadale Region Respondents from the Regional sample who had some familiarity with the Armadale region (n=167) were firstly asked if they had any special hopes for the future of the region. Most (61.1%) said that they did and thirteen percent of those interviewed stated maybe. A quarter of people reported that they did not have any special hopes for the region. Respondents who answered yes or maybe (n=124) to this question were then asked to describe their special hopes. The most frequent responses are show in Figure 10.

30

Figure 10: Special Hopes for the Future of the Armadale Region

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Growth of

region

Revitali

satio

n of re

gion

Not too m

uch gr

owth

Safe plac

e for a

ll

Better

reputa

tion

Little

chan

ge

Suppo

rtive C

ouncil

Satellit

e city

Hopes for the Armadale Region

% o

f Cas

es (n

=124

)


As seen in the above figure, the growth of the Armadale Region (42.8%) and revitalisation of the region (31.4%), including beautification and more facilities and amenities for shopping, leisure and cultural activities, were the main aspirations. However, it was also hoped that that there would not be too much growth at the expense of the existing communities (27.4%) or that there would be little change (8.1%). Other hopes included improved safety and improved reputation for the region.

3.3.2 Brookdale redevelopment and hopes for the Armadale Region Regional respondents who had special hopes for the region (n=124) were then asked if they thought the Brookdale redevelopment could help to ensure that some of their hopes occurred. Over half (54.8%) of these respondents believed it could and twenty‐one percent said maybe. Just under a quarter of people did not think that it could. Those who answered yes or maybe (n=91) to this question were asked to explain how they thought that the redevelopment of Brookdale could or might help meet some of their hopes for the Armadale Region. As shown in Table 21, it was most commonly thought that the Brookdale redevelopment was evidence of a start to improvement in the region and was a possible template for future improvement. It was also believed that the Brookdale Redevelopment might integrate personal hopes for the region (n=14). However, local participation in decision making (n=11), well‐planned development and Shire leadership (n=6) were seen to play an essential role in whether Brookdale could help meet important hopes for the region.

31

Table 21: The Role of the Brookdale Redevelopment in Helping Hopes for the Armadale Region

How Brookdale Could Help With Hopes Freq. (n=91)

A start to improvement/ template for the future 47 May integrate my hopes 14 Well-designed transport 12 Local involvement 11 Depends on way redevelopment proceeds 11 Care of the environment 8 Shire leadership 6


3.3.3 Concerns for the Armadale Region Respondents from the Regional sample with some familiarity with the Armadale Region (n=167) were next asked if they had any concerns for the future of the region. More than forty percent (44.9%) of people said they did not. Those who answered yes (36.5%) or maybe (18.6%) to this question were asked to explain their reasons.

Figure 11: Concerns for the Future of the Armadale Region

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Poor re

putat

ion/ u

nsocia

ble fa

ctors

Over d

evelo

pment/

crowdin

g

Inade

quate

amen

ities/

servi

ces

Enviro

nmen

t

Service

s not

maintai

ned

Loss

of cu

rrent id

entity

Poor d

ecision-m

aking

Concerns for the Armadale Region

% o

f Cas

es (n

=91)


32

As shown in Figure 11, a perceived poor reputation and associated unsociable factors such as crime, undesirable behaviour and lower socio‐economic elements (28.6%) was the most common concern. Over‐development and crowding in the future (26.4%) was also one of the strongest regional concerns. There was some apprehension about inadequate amenities and services to meet future demands (21.9%), and also about the environment, including lack of water (16.5%). Loss of the current regional identity was a worry to some.

3.3.4 Brookdale redevelopment and concerns for the Armadale Region Regional respondents who said that they had or may have concerns for the future of the Armadale Region (n=92) were next asked if they thought the redevelopment of Brookdale could help overcome any of their concerns. Opinion was divided, with just over one‐third (35.9%) of people stating that it could not, and slightly fewer believing that it could (31.5%) or might be able to help (32.6%). Those who answered yes or maybe (n=59) to this question were asked how they thought the Brookdale Redevelopment could help with any of their concerns (see Table 22 for the most frequent responses). The most common response was that it was dependent upon proper planning (n=39). It was thought that Brookdale might help the region by attracting more people and providing more regional jobs and services (n=11). Implementing regional change was also seen as a positive way in which the redevelopment could help overcome concerns for the region (n=9).

Table 22: The Role of the Brookdale Redevelopment in Helping Concerns for the Region

How Brookdale Could Help With Concerns Freq. (n=57)

Only if properly planned 39

Creating more jobs and services by attracting people to live in the region 11

Is implementing regional change 9

Raising environmental awareness 4


33

3.4 Results: Wider Metropolitan Sectors An important purpose of the study was to gauge the attitudes and perceptions of people in the Wider Metropolitan area, as potential investors and/or residents in Brookdale. For this reason they were asked a number of specific questions about features that were important to them in a residential location. The following details results of these questions.

3.4.1 Current residential aspects for inclusion in a new development All respondents from the Wider Metropolitan sample (n=210) were asked what aspects of their current residential location they would like to see included in a new development. They were able to give several responses to this question. As shown in Table 23, (40.5%) was a mix of the natural environment and bushland with the urban aspects was the most popular aspect of current residential location for inclusion in a new development. Parklands (26.2%) were also valued. Local shopping amenities and easy access to public transport were considered important for a new development. Some liked a mix of different things of where they lived, including block sizes, housing types, “old and new”, and ages of people. Water‐related aspects, including lakes, river views, recreational water facilities and water‐wise features such as native gardens were more commonly valued features.

Table 23: Aspects to Include in a New Development

Aspect for inclusion % (n=210)

Mix of natural environment and urban 40.5

Parklands for everyone 26.2

Local shopping 17.6

Close to public transport 17.1

A mix of different things 14.3

Water-related aspects 9.5

Sporting areas 9.0

Good security 8.1

Landscaping 6.7

Peaceful 6.2

Dining/ arts amenities 6.2


34

3.4.2 Attractive features for a residential location Country‐style living, the natural environment and water features were identified as particularly important aspects for the new Brookdale in the scoping phase of research. It was therefore important to determine if those in the Wider Metropolitan population shared a similar view. Given this, respondents from this sample group were asked if they would find a theme of country lifestyle and close proximity to the natural environment and water features appealing. As shown in the table below, the vast majority (85.6%) of these respondents said they would or might find these features appealing.

Table 24: Appeal of a Country Lifestyle and Natural Features

Response % (n=201)

Yes 72.7 Maybe 12.9

No 14.4

35

4.0 SUMMARY OF KEY RESULTS

4.1 The Armadale Region The survey questionnaire affirmed that many of the major impressions that strongly emerged from the scoping research extended to the wider regional and metropolitan Perth. This included most and least favoured aspects of the Armadale Region, distinguishing and valued characteristics and/or places, and the appeal of a number of different regional “contrasts”. Over two‐thirds of all respondents reported to have some familiarity with the Armadale Region, with those in the Regional sectors having the highest degree of familiarity. As in the scoping study, the Armadale Region was widely known and appreciated for its natural and rural features, in terms of the natural environment (bushland and hills), open spaces, country lifestyle and even large‐sized blocks. The mix of city and country living was also valued. It was seen as an attractive place for visiting and features such as dams, picnic areas and the Araluen Botanical Park were strongly appreciated. Similarly, many of the least liked aspects of the Armadale Region reflected those identified in the scoping study. “Unsociable” aspects, and the associated poor regional reputation, were particularly unpopular. Inadequate services and facilities, including the lack of a university, were also considered more unfavourable aspects of the region. From a wider perspective, the distance from Perth and central suburbs was seen as a downside, and the built environment was considered unappealing by some. However, many reported that there were no aspects of the Armadale Region that they disliked. A striking feature noted from the scoping study was the widespread strength of attachment to the unique features that were seen to characterise the region. The questionnaire survey found that many of these perceptions of special regional characteristics were extensively held. This particularly referred to the natural and rural features and the mix of country and city living, as discussed above. In addition, a comfortable lifestyle, “gateway” location and unique history were seen as distinguishing features of the region. Important differences were noted in respondents’ views of the major characteristics of the region. Not surprisingly, Inner Regional respondents tended to be in stronger agreement about aspects such as the casual and non‐pretentious lifestyle offered and the value of the gateway location. They were also more confident about a close, supportive and diverse community in the region. There was less certainty among the wider regional and metropolitan Perth residents about these features, which may reflect less familiarity with community aspects of the region. It was noted that the Wider Metropolitan sample were more likely to appreciate special places in the region such as the Araluen Botanical Park and Wungong Gorge than those in the Regional sample. However, they were more inclined to think that there was nothing particularly special about the region or its lifestyle and community. Those in the Eastern Metropolitan sample were found to have the most negative view of the Armadale Region. Of note are the differences identified in income and age variables. Those in the highest income bracket were least likely to think that the Armadale Region was a comfortable place to

36

live, whereas those in the lowest income categories were most likely to agree with this proposition. Respondents in the higher and lower income brackets were also the least likely to think that the region offered the best casual lifestyle in Perth. When considering a diverse community, the youngest respondents were most likely to find this appealing and the eldest to think it was not an attractive feature. The survey showed that the regional “contrasts” identified as valued assets of the region in the scoping research had a similar level of appeal for most of the wider population surveyed. These included mixes of rural and urban, “old and new”, hilly and flat landscapes, people and housing areas. The appeal of these contrasts was often attributed to having the “best of both worlds” and the offer of variety. Contribution to the social good was also quite highly valued, for example through the educational value of history, promotion of tolerance and solidarity in a diverse community, and equity in a mix of housing areas. The belief that a mix is unworkable or a preference for a single feature were the most frequent reasons given for lack of attractiveness in a contrast. Other appealing contrasts nominated by respondents were “open space and residential housing”, and “land and water”. Interestingly, few differences were found between sectors and demographic variables in considerations of attractiveness of different contrasts. However, it is of note that Regional respondents, and Inner Regional respondents in particular, were the most likely to find a mix of expensive and affordable housing to be appealing.

4.2 The Brookdale Redevelopment Vital perceptions about the Brookdale redevelopment were gained in the survey. These both reflected and contradicted many of the impressions that emerged from the scoping study. Thirty percent of people who had some familiarity with the Armadale Region did not discern between Brookdale and the region as a whole in their favoured and less favoured regional features. Unsurprisingly, those in the Regional sectors were most likely to have distinguishing differences. Respondents from the Eastern Metropolitan sample were least likely to discern between Brookdale and the general Armadale Region. This is of note given the more negative perception of the region held by this sample group in comparison with those in the other sectors. Many felt insufficiently qualified to distinguish between Brookdale and the Armadale Region, but of those who did the most common differentiating feature was the Brookdale Waste Treatment Facility and its associated stigma. Most respondents were not sure as to the exact location of Brookdale and Wider Metropolitan respondents were the least likely to know. It was identified both by its geographical location and as the site of the Waste Treatment Facility “contamination”. Vital information was obtained about perceived important design features for the new Brookdale development. Reflecting opinions gained during the scoping study, retention and use of the natural environment was seen as extremely important and a high priority. Similarly, the needs of youth, local input to design and innovative thinking were also consistently rated as a highly important priority for inclusion in the new development. Multi‐storey housing was seen as the least important feature and lowest priority for inclusion. Of note were the design features that emerged as vital in the scoping study but were not given the same level of importance in the wider survey. Of particular significance is the

37

divided opinion among the wider population about the importance of using water as a key design feature in the new development, and the subsequent lower priority ranking accorded this aspect. Similarly, the integration of the new development with existing history and areas, and a mix of urban and rural lifestyles were seen as important in the scoping study, but were not accorded a high priority in the survey. Instead, social features such as provision for all family types and ages of people emerged here as higher priorities for inclusion in the design of the new Brookdale. Several significant differences were found in respondents’ importance ratings of possible design features for the Brookdale redevelopment. Of major consideration was the finding that whilst retaining and using the natural environment was consistently considered the most important design aspect, respondents from the Regional sample accorded this feature a significantly lower priority rating than those in the Wider Metropolitan sample. As mentioned previously, the regional sample appears to have discerning factors in their assessment of this feature not held by the Wider Metropolitan sample. Sector differences were also identified among the Wider Metropolitan sample. The Eastern Metropolitan sample gave the lowest importance weighting to provision for all family types, water as a key design feature and innovative thinking for the new Brookdale development. However, this group of respondents gave a significantly higher weighting to local input to design than did those in the Southern Metropolitan sample. Over one‐third of all respondents stated that they would or might like to live in the Brookdale development when it was completed. Most people said they would move within one to three years after development was completed. The most common reasons for not wanting to move to Brookdale were being happy in current residential location, distance to Perth, workplace and universities, and wanting to be near the ocean. Investment in the development, rising property prices and a happy, healthy and vibrant community were most commonly seen as indicators of success, particularly by those in the Wider Metropolitan sectors. Regional respondents more commonly offered public awareness of the new Brookdale development and visual appeal as signs of success. It is of note given that the natural environment consistently rated as hugely important in a residential location that it did not receive great mention as an indicator of success for the new development.

4.3 Respondents Who Would or Might Like to Live in the Brookdale Redevelopment

A key finding from the survey was that intention to live in Brookdale was not linked with sector location, familiarity with the region, income or education. A further result of note is that those who indicated some intention of living in the new Brookdale development did not rate the importance of different design features differently to the entire sample. It was found, however, that younger respondents, under the age of 40 years, were more likely to intend living in the redeveloped Brookdale than other age groups. Significant differences were identified with respect to the appeal of different contrasts. Respondents who would or might like to live in the Brookdale redevelopment were more likely to find mixes of rural and urban lifestyles, and expensive and affordable housing appealing than those who had no intention of living there. Among the Wider Metropolitan respondents, it was found that those who had some intention of living in the new Brookdale

38

development were significantly more likely to find a country lifestyle theme and proximity to the natural environment and water features appealing than those who did not intend to live there.

4.4 The Regional Sample Analyses conducted for the Regional sample showed that perceptions and attitudes identified in the scoping phase of the research were also held in the wider region. No significant sector or demographic differences were identified in Regional respondents’ responses to the specific questions asked of this sample group. Regional development and revitalisation were strongly shared aspirations among this sample group. Beautification of the area, improved facilities and amenities for recreational, leisure and cultural enjoyment, and all the benefits of a satellite city, were welcomed. However, it was hoped that this development would not be at the cost of the existing communities and the major attachments that comprised the regional “sense of place”. Some wanted the region principally to stay as it was currently. More than forty percent of Regional respondents did not have concerns about the Armadale Region. However, concerns that were reported reflected those identified in the scoping study. “Unsociable” factors such as crime, “undesirable” behaviour and the poor reputation of the region were a commonly shared concern. Apprehension was also held about the possible impact of development and the new population on the regional community, local services and amenities, and the natural environment. Loss of the unique regional identity and poor decision making in planning were of concern to some. Interestingly, possible marginalisation or further marginalisation of people or areas through development, a significant issue emerging from the scoping study, was not a common concern among those in the wider regional and metropolitan population. It was thought overall that the Brookdale development could or might be able to play a role in meeting regional aspirations or overcoming potential concerns. This was principally through initiating positive growth and change, and providing a template for future development. New jobs and services were also welcomed. However, following opinions of regional representatives in the scoping study, well‐planned development, local input and Shire leadership were considered essential to community acceptance and the ultimate success of the development.

4.4 The Wider Metropolitan Sample Important information was gained about the perceptions and opinions of the Wider Metropolitan population. This particularly pertained to favoured aspects of their current residential locations that were considered to be important for inclusion in a new development. It was found that a mix of the natural environment and bushland with urban aspects was the strongest preference. Parklands that were accessible for all people were also highly valued. Local shopping and public transport facilities were seen as important features for a new development.

39

Interestingly, a “mix” of certain aspects was nominated unprompted as an appealing and important part of a residential location by those in the Wider Metropolitan population. Also of note was that water‐related features were considered desirable in a place to live. These included such aspects as landscape and recreational features, water views, and water‐wise characteristics such as native gardens and water conservation. Hence, whilst water‐related design may not have been a priority among all possible design features, it was nevertheless seen as an important aspect of a pleasing place to live. An important part of the second phase of research was to investigate the strength of appeal of a “country sea‐change” lifestyle to the Wider Metropolitan population. This was an important potential theme for inclusion in the new Brookdale development that was identified in the scoping phase of research. It was found in the survey that the theme of country lifestyle and close proximity to the natural environment and water features was indeed appealing to the vast majority of respondents from this sample group.

40

5.0 Conclusions

5.1 The Environment and the Community Perhaps not surprisingly, appreciation of the natural environment emerged as a consistently strong theme in the results of the survey. The hills and bushland were strongly associated as valued distinguishing features of the region by both Regional and Wider Metropolitan respondents. Retaining and using the natural environment was also considered the highest priority design feature for the Brookdale redevelopment. However, survey results showed important differences with respect to the importance and preference accorded to this aspect. Moreover, differences were found in preferences for environmental or social aspects. These will require further investigation. Results of the survey showed that Wider Metropolitan respondents were more likely to view the Armadale Region in terms of its natural environment assets and to place more importance on environmental design features. Regional respondents, and those within the official City of Armadale boundaries in particular, also valued these environmental aspects and expressed concern about the regional environment in the future. However, they also placed value on more community‐oriented features such as a casual and unpretentious lifestyle and a close, diverse community. Moreover, the local regional community in particular were less fulsome in their ranking assessment of the importance of retaining and using the natural environment in the new Brookdale development. Further distinctions between environmental and social aspects were noted in the results. As mentioned previously, retaining and using the natural environment was given the highest importance weighting for possible Brookdale design features. However, social considerations were also shown to be a key priority for all respondents. The needs of youth and local input to design were ranked second and third in priority, and equity‐related design features such as provision for all family types and ages were included among the higher priorities. The importance accorded social aspects of the development is further evident in a healthy, happy and vibrant community being rated as a strong indicator of the success of the Brookdale redevelopment. It would appear, then, that environmental and social considerations took precedence over the more “cosmetic” design features for Brookdale. This may go some way to explaining why water‐related features, while evidently favoured in a place to live, were accorded a lower importance ranking overall. Moreover, it may explain why design features that were stressed in the scoping study emerged as lower preferences in the overall rating of all possible design features for the new Brookdale development. It is evident that greater understanding is needed of people’s preferences and overall importance weightings for environmental and socially‐oriented design concepts for the Brookdale development. It will be important to better understand exactly what it is that people value for both the local environment and vibrant communities. For example, does the value given to the environment by the wider metropolitan population refer to the immediate, water‐dominated environment in Brookdale, or to the surrounding environment of hills and bushland? Further understanding is also required of the different importance weightings given to the environmental and social dimensions. Results of this study also show that it will

41

be important to determine in these investigations possible differences in preferences and values between the regional and wider metropolitan population.

5.2 Local Involvement and Planning Local involvement in planning and decision making consistently emerged as a strong preference from the survey for both the regional and wider metropolitan population. This not only included input to the design of Brookdale, but to overall regional planning for development. Indeed, local input was seen as vital for the overall success and community acceptance of the development. The survey found widespread support existed for development and revitalisation of the region among Regional residents. However, it was consistently reported that local participation was vital for well‐planned development. Local input into design for Brookdale was rated as extremely important and as one of the highest priorities. Moreover, local participation and decision making, good planning and Shire leadership were seen to play a major part in meeting the hopes and concerns of Regional residents for the Armadale Region. These findings reflect opinions strongly expressed by regional representatives in the scoping research. It is evident, then, that public participation is widely considered an extremely important feature of the redevelopment of Armadale as well as for the new Brookdale development.

5.3 The Evolving Brookdale Identity An important survey result is the evident appeal of different mixes and contrasts to people throughout the Metropolitan area, both within and outside of the Armadale region. The majority of respondents from both the Regional and Wider Metropolitan samples found all of the nominated contrasts appealing. A mix of aspects was seen to offer the best of both worlds, be more interesting and in many ways offer social benefits. Moreover, the appeal of a mixes and contrasts emerged unprompted as a valued aspect of residential locations by those in the Wider Metropolitan sample. There is large scope for further exploration of a theme of contrasts in the evolving Brookdale identity. The redevelopment may have potential to offer a blend of all the different mixes that were found appealing and identified as important in both the scoping study and survey. This includes the mix of landscapes, lifestyles, people within a community, heritage and valued modern features, block sizes and housing areas. It can also take into account other valued contrasts that emerged from the survey, such as a blend of the environmental and social aspects that were seen as both appealing and important, and a mix of the natural environment and valued urban features. A contrast of land and water warrants particular consideration, not just because of the evident appeal of water‐related features among the wider metropolitan population, but due to the particular characteristics of Brookdale that may be utilised to best and mutual advantage. Finally, an important aspect of a theme of contrasts is that it would be in keeping with the widespread, strong attachment to the “distinctive regional character” identified in the scoping phase of research. Conversely, a strong aversion to standard suburban developments

42

was held and preference for the development design was substantially encapsulated in “not being like the Northern suburbs”. This sentiment intimated uniformity, lack of diversity and “sameness”. The wide appeal of contrasts and mixes therefore warrants important consideration in the planning for the redevelopment of Brookdale. Research to date shows that contrasts are important for both popular appeal and regional endorsement of the Brookdale redevelopment. Moreover, this theme may have an important role to play in the evolving Brookdale identity.

APPENDIX A

Map of the Regional and Wider Metropolitan Sample Sectors

i

Southern Metropolita

Inner Regional

Outer Regional

Eastern Metropolitan

Northern Metropolitan

APPENDIX B

List of Sector Suburbs and Postcodes

1

Sector 1: Northern Metropolitan

Ascot 6104

Ashby 6065

Balcatta 6021

Balga 6061

Ballajura 6066

Bassendean 6054

Bedford 6052

Beechboro 6063

Burns 6028

Carine 6020

City Beach 6015

Claremont 6010

Clarkson 6030

Connelly 6027

Cottesloe 6011

Craigie 6025

Cullacabardee 6067

Currambine 6028

Daglish 6008

Dalkeith 6009

Dianella 6059

Duncraig 6023

East Perth 6004

Eden Hill 6054

Edgewater 6027

Embleton 6062

Floreat 6014

Girrawheen 6064

Gnangara 6065

Guildford 6055

Gwelup 6018

Hamersley 6022

Herdsman 6017

Hillarys 6025

Hocking 6065

Inglewood 6052

Innaloo 6018

Joondalup 6027

Joondanna 6060

Kallaroo 6025

Karrakatta 6010

Karrinyup 6018

Kiara 6054

Kingsley 6026

Kinross 6028

Koondoola 6064

Lansdale 6065

Leederville 6007

Malaga 6090

Marangaroo 6064

Marmion 6020

Maylands 6051

Menora 6050

Mirrabooka 6061

Morley 6062

Mt Claremont 6010

Mt Hawthorn 6016

Mt Lawley 6050

Mullaloo 6027

Nedlands 6009

Nollamara 6061

North Beach 6020

Ocean Reef 6027

Osborne Park 6017

Padbury 6025

Pearsall 6065

Peppermint Grove

6011

Perth 6000

Scarborough 6019

Shenton Park 6008

Sinagra 6065

Sorrento 6020

Subiaco 6008

Swanbourne 6010

Tamala Park 6030

Trigg 6029

Tuart Hill 6060

Wanneroo 6065

Wembley 6014

Wembley Downs

6019

Whiteman 6068

Woodvale 6026

Yokine 6060

2

Baskerville 6056

Belhus 6069

Bellevue 6056

Bickley 6076

Brigadoon 6069

Bullsbrook 6084

Canning Mills 6111

Carmel 6076

Chidlow 6556

Darlington 6070

Ellenbrook 6069

Forrestfield 6058

Gidgegannup 6083

Glen Forest 6071

Gooseberry Hill

6076

Hacketts Gully

6076

Helena Valley

6056

Henley Brook 6055

Herne Hill 6056

Hovea 6071

Illawarra 6111

Jane Brook 6056

Kalamunda 6076

Koongamia 6056

Lesmurdie 6076

Mahogany Creek

6072

Maida Vale 6057

Middle Swan 6056

Midland 6056

Midvale 6056

Millendon 6056

Mt Helena 6082

Mundaring 6073

Parkerville 6081

Paulls Valley 6076

Pickering Brook

6076

Piesse Brook 6076

Red Hill 6069

Reservoir 6076

Sawyers Valley

6074

Stoneville 6081

Stratton 6056

Swan View 6056

The Lakes 6556

The Vines 6069

Upper Swan 6069

Viveash 6056

Walliston 6076

West Swan 6055

Wooroloo 6558

Sector 2: Eastern Metropolitan

3

Alfred Cove 6154

Applecross 6153

Ardross 6153

Attadale 6156

Baldivis 6171

Bateman 6150

Beaconsfield 6162

Belmont 6104

Bentley 6102

Bicton 6157

Brentwood 6153

Calista 6167

Cloverdale 6105

Como 6152

Coogee 6166

Coolbellup 6163

East Cannington

6107

East Fremantle

6158

Ferndale 6148

Golden Bay 6174

Hamilton Hill 6163

Hazelmere 6055

Henderson 6166

High Wycombe

6165

Hillman 6125

Hope Valley 6124

Hopeland 6176

Jarrahdale 6152

Karnup 6151

Karawara 6105

Kensington 6151

Kewdale 6105

Kwinana 6167

Kwinana Beach

6167

Lathlain 6100

Leda 6170

Manning 6152

Mardella 6152

Medina 6167

Melville 6156

Mt Pleasant 6153

Munster 6166

Murdoch 6150

Navel Base 6165

North Lake 6163

O'Connor 6123

Oldbury 6121

Palmyra 6157

Peron 6168

Port Kennedy

6172

Postans 6167

Queens Park 6107

Riverton 6148

Rockingham 6169

Rossmoyne 6148

Safety Bay 6169

Secret Harbour

6173

Serpentine 6125

Shelley 6148

Shoalwater 6169

St James 6102

Warnbro 6169

Wellard 6170

Welshpool 6106

White Gum Valley

6162

Winthrop 6150

Yangebup 6164

Sector 3: Southern Metropolitan

4

Anketell 6167

Banjup 6164

Byford 6122

Canningvale 6155

Canningdale 6112

Cardup 6112

Casuarina 6167

Ferndale 6148

Gosnells 6110

Huntingdale 6110

Jandakot 6164

Karrakup 6112

Kenwick 6107

Langford 6147

Leeming 6149

Maddington 6109

Mandogalup 6167

Martin 6110

Mundijong 6123

Oakford 6121

Orange Grove 6109

South Lake 6164

Southern River 6110

Success 6164

Wandi 6167

Wattle Grove 6107

Whitby 6123

Armadale 6112

Bedfordale 6112

Brookdale 6112

Churchman 6112

Forrestdale 6112

Karragullen 6111

Kelmscott 6111

Wungong 6112

Sector 4: Outer Regional

Sector 5: Inner Regional

APPENDIX C

Questionnaire for the Regional Sample

1


THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN “IDENTITY” FOR BROOKDALE

SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE 15 km - ARMADALE REGION

September 2004

Sector: Outer Region ..... 4

Inner Region ….. 5

Postcode:

Interviewer:

2

Please read to the respondent.

I will refer to the Armadale region in this survey. By this I mean the area that includes the following suburbs: Armadale; Brookdale; Forrestdale; Westfield; Kelmscott; Roleystone; Karragullen; Mt Nasura; Bedfordale; and Wungong. So when I talk about “the region”, I mean the area that I have just described to you. Would you like me to repeat it? A. THE ARMADALE REGION 1. How familiar are you with the Armadale Region that I just described to you?

Use the scale below and circle the nominated number. 1 2 3 4 not at all vaguely familiar very familiar familiar familiar Answer Questions marked

2. What do you like best about the Armadale Region?

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

3. What do you like least about the Armadale Region?

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

3

4. We have talked to people in the region who have told us many things about living there. We are interested to know what others think. Can you please tell me how much you agree or disagree with each of the following statements?

Using the scale below, write the number nominated by the respondent next to each statement. VARY THE ORDER IN WHICH YOU READ THESE

1 2 3 4 5 strongly disagree neither agree strongly disagree agree

The region offers the benefits of both city and country living. _____

The community in the region is very close and all help each other. _____

The best part of the region is that it is a “gateway” to the city, the hills and the south. _____

There is plenty to do in the region with something for everyone. _____

The region isn’t much different from anywhere else in Perth. _____

Araluen Botanical Park is a place of special beauty. _____

It is a comfortable place to live. _____

The region has a good mix of bushland, parks and housing areas. _____

The history and heritage of the region makes it different from the rest of Perth. _____

The diversity of people with different cultures and backgrounds is an attraction. _____

The region is just an ordinary place to live. _____

A special part of the region is the natural environment of hills and bushland. _____

The casual life-style is the best in Perth. _____

“What you do” not “what you own” takes priority in the region. _____

The nearby dams and picnic areas provide a special quality of the region. _____

The region offers peace and quiet and fresh air. _____

There is nothing particularly special about the region. _____

The Wungong Gorge is a place of special beauty. ____

4

5. Are there any other qualities or places that you think are special or unique to the region?

YES ….. 1 MAYBE ….. 2 NO ….. 3 Go to Question 6 If YES or MAYBE, what? 6. People in the region have talked about “contrasts” or “opposites” that they think

make the region special. Can you tell me which of the following contrasts you might find appealing in somewhere to live?

Read out each option below. Tick the contrasts nominated, and ask WHY (not)? for every contrast ….. even if it is not appealing.

A mix of rural and urban lifestyles Why (or why not?)

Keeping the history with the modern development Why (or why not?)

A mix of hills and flat landscapes Why (or why not?)

A mix of people of all ages, cultures and backgrounds Why (or why not?)

A mix of expensive and affordable housing Why (or why not?)

5

7. Are there any other “contrasts” or “opposites” that you might find appealing in a place to live?

YES ….. 1 MAYBE ….. 2 NO ….. 3 Go to Question 8 If YES or MAYBE, what? B. BROOKDALE AND DEVELOPMENT

Please read to the respondent. As I mentioned to you before, the Armadale Redevelopment Authority is working to improve services and develop new areas in the Armadale Region. Brookdale has been chosen to receive special attention. I would now like you to think specifically about the Brookdale area.

8. Thinking specifically about Brookdale, are the things you like best and least about the region as a whole the same for Brookdale?

YES ….. 1 MAYBE ….. 2 NO ….. 3 Go to Question 9 If NO or MAYBE what is different about Brookdale?

9. Do you know exactly where Brookdale is located?

YES ….. 1 MAYBE ….. 2 NO ….. 3

Go to Question 10

If YES or MAYBE, where exactly?

6

10. Now I’d like you to think about designing the redevelopment of Brookdale. I will

read a number of things that could be included in the new Brookdale. I’d like you to tell me how important you think it would be to include them in the design? You don’t have to know specifically about Brookdale, just consider whether you personally would like a new development to include any of these things.

Using the scale below, write the number nominated by the respondent next to each statement in the importance column. VARY THE ORDER IN WHICH YOU READ THESE.

1 2 3 4 not at all slightly important extremely important important important How important is it to include: Importance Priorities

All the advantages and technologies of modern society _____ _____

Integration of regional history and heritage _____ _____

Large blocks with single homes _____ _____

Retaining and using the natural environment in the development _____ _____

Ensuring the needs of youth are met _____ _____

Creation of a country village lifestyle _____ _____

Provision for people of all family types _____ _____

Clusters of smaller houses _____ _____

Integration of the new development with the older areas and buildings in the region _____ _____

Allowing local people to have a say in the design _____ _____

Attraction of people of all ages _____ _____

Retaining the theme of “city and country” _____ _____

Multi-storey housing _____ _____

Using water as a key design feature _____ _____

Innovative and forward thinking _____ _____

7

I will now read to you the things that you thought were important. Could you please choose 5 that would be your first five choices for the redevelopment.

Read the statements that were rated 3 or 4. Lead the respondent through choosing from 1 (most important) through to 5 (fifth most important). Write the numbers in the priorities column.

11. Do you have any special hopes for the future of the Armadale region?

YES ….. 1 MAYBE ….. 2 NO ….. 3

Go to Question 13

If YES or MAYBE, what?

12. Could the redevelopment of Brookdale help to ensure that some of these hopes occur?

YES ….. 1 MAYBE ….. 2 NO ….. 3

Go to Question 13

If YES or MAYBE, how? 13. Do you have any concerns for the future of the region?

YES ….. 1 MAYBE ….. 2 NO ….. 3 Go to Question 15

If YES or MAYBE, what?

8

14. Could the redevelopment of Brookdale help to overcome any of these concerns? YES ….. 1 MAYBE ….. 2 NO ….. 3

Go to Question 15

If YES or MAYBE, how?

15. If Brookdale was developed with all the aspects that you have said would be

important to you, would you consider living there? YES ….. 1 MAYBE ….. 2 NO ….. 3

Go to Question 17

16. When do you think you would live there? Read the following options

As soon as the redevelopment was completed….. 1 A few years after the redevelopment was completed….. 2 note how long ______Years

Other, ______________________________________ ….. 3 Go to Question 18

If NO from Question 15 17. Why not?

18. What would indicate to you that the Brookdale redevelopment had been

successful?

9

C. DEMOGRAPHICS all questions in this section

Finally, I’d like to ask you a few questions about yourself.

19. Do you rent or own your home? Rent … 1 Own … 2

20. What is the structure of your home? Detached house …….. 1 Semi-detached house (duplex) …….. 2 Townhouse/Villa …….. 3 Unit/Flat …….. 4

21. How many people live in your household? ______

22. How long have you lived in the region?

Less than 5 years ….. 1 5 to 10 years ….. 2 11 to 20 years ….. 3 21 to 30 years ….. 4 More than 30 years ….. 5

23. Which category best describes the unit of people living in your household? Single adult 65 years or less .......... 1 Single adult more than 65 years .......... 2 Two adults – older person 65 years or less .......... 3

Two adults – older person more than 65 years .......... 4 Single adult – eldest child 18 years or less .......... 5 Single adult – eldest child more than 18 years .......... 6 Two adults – eldest child 18 years or less .......... 7 Two adults – eldest child more than 18 years .......... 8 More than two adults – no children .......... 9 More than two adults – eldest child 18 years or less .......... 10 More than two adults – eldest child more than 18 years .......... 11

10

24. Would you please tell me which of the following categories best describes your

age?

Less than 24 years …….. 1 24 to 39 years …….. 2 40 to 55 years …….. 3 56 to 65 years …….. 4 66 to 75 years …….. 5 More than 75 years …….. 6

25. Could you please tell me which category best describes your highest level of

education? All or some of primary school .......... 1 All or some of secondary school .......... 2 Partial trade or technical qualification .......... 3 Trade or technical qualification .......... 4 Partial university qualification .......... 5 University qualification .......... 6 26. Could you please tell me which category best describes your gross household

income? Less than $22,000 …….. 1 $22,001 to $42,000 …….. 2 $42,001 to $62,000 …….. 3 $62,001 to $82,000 …….. 4 More than $82,000 …….. 5 Don’t know …….. 6 Refused …….. 7

Note the respondent’s gender. FEMALE ….. 1 MALE ….. 2

THANK THE RESPONDENT FOR HER/ HIS TIME.

APPENDIX D

Questionnaire for the

Wider Metropolitan Sample

1


THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN “IDENTITY” FOR BROOKDALE

SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

WIDER METROPOLITAN AREA

September 2004

Sector: North Metro ….. 1

East Metro ….. 2

South Metro ….. 3

Postcode:

Interviewer:

2

Please read to the respondent.

I will refer to the Armadale region in this survey. By this I mean the area that includes the following suburbs: Armadale; Brookdale; Forrestdale; Westfield; Kelmscott; Roleystone; Karragullen; Mt Nasura; Bedfordale; and Wungong. So when I talk about “the region”, I mean the area that I have just described to you. Would you like me to repeat it? A. THE ARMADALE REGION 1. How familiar are you with the Armadale Region that I just described to you?

Use the scale below and circle the nominated number. 1 2 3 4 not at all vaguely familiar very familiar familiar familiar Answer Questions marked

2. What do you like best about the Armadale Region?

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

4. What do you like least about the Armadale Region?

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

3

7. We have talked to people in the region who have told us many things about living there. We are interested to know what others think. Can you please tell me how much you agree or disagree with each of the following statements?

Using the scale below, write the number nominated by the respondent next to each statement. VARY THE ORDER IN WHICH YOU READ THESE

1 2 3 4 5 strongly disagree neither agree strongly disagree agree

The region offers the benefits of both city and country living. _____

The community in the region is very close and all help each other. _____

The best part of the region is that it is a “gateway” to the city, the hills and the south. _____

There is plenty to do in the region with something for everyone. _____

The region isn’t much different from anywhere else in Perth. _____

Araluen Botanical Park is a place of special beauty. _____

It is a comfortable place to live. _____

The region has a good mix of bushland, parks and housing areas. _____

The history and heritage of the region makes it different from the rest of Perth. _____

The diversity of people with different cultures and backgrounds is an attraction. _____

The region is just an ordinary place to live. _____

A special part of the region is the natural environment of hills and bushland. _____

The casual life-style is the best in Perth. _____

“What you do” not “what you own” takes priority in the region. _____

The nearby dams and picnic areas provide a special quality of the region. _____

The region offers peace and quiet and fresh air. _____

There is nothing particularly special about the region. _____

The Wungong Gorge is a place of special beauty. ____

4

8. Are there any other qualities or places that you think are special or unique to the region?

YES ….. 1 MAYBE ….. 2 NO ….. 3 Go to Question 6 If YES or MAYBE, what? 9. People in the region have talked about “contrasts” or “opposites” that they think

make the region special. Can you tell me which of the following contrasts you might find appealing in somewhere to live?

Read out each option below. Tick the contrasts nominated, and ask WHY (not)? for every contrast ….. even if it is not appealing.

A mix of rural and urban lifestyles Why (or why not?)

Keeping the history with the modern development Why (or why not?)

A mix of hills and flat landscapes Why (or why not?)

A mix of people of all ages, cultures and backgrounds Why (or why not?)

A mix of expensive and affordable housing Why (or why not?)

5

7. Are there any other “contrasts” or “opposites” that you might find appealing in a place to live?

YES ….. 1 MAYBE ….. 2 NO ….. 3 Go to Question 8 If YES or MAYBE, what? B. BROOKDALE AND DEVELOPMENT

Please read to the respondent. As I mentioned to you before, the Armadale Redevelopment Authority is working to improve services and develop new areas in the Armadale Region. Brookdale has been chosen to receive special attention. I would now like you to think specifically about the Brookdale area.

8. Thinking specifically about Brookdale, are the things you like best and least about the region as a whole the same for Brookdale?

YES ….. 1 MAYBE ….. 2 NO ….. 3 Go to Question 9 If NO or MAYBE what is different about Brookdale?

16. Do you know exactly where Brookdale is located?

YES ….. 1 MAYBE ….. 2 NO ….. 3

Go to Question 10

If YES or MAYBE, where exactly?

6

17. Now I’d like you to think about designing the redevelopment of Brookdale. I will

read a number of things that could be included in the new Brookdale. I’d like you to tell me how important you think it would be to include them in the design? You don’t have to know specifically about Brookdale, just consider whether you personally would like a new development to include any of these things.

Using the scale below, write the number nominated by the respondent next to each statement in the importance column. VARY THE ORDER IN WHICH YOU READ THESE.

1 2 3 4 not at all slightly important extremely important important important How important is it to include: Importance Priorities

All the advantages and technologies of modern society _____ _____

Integration of regional history and heritage _____ _____

Large blocks with single homes _____ _____

Retaining and using the natural environment in the development _____ _____

Ensuring the needs of youth are met _____ _____

Creation of a country village lifestyle _____ _____

Provision for people of all family types _____ _____

Clusters of smaller houses _____ _____

Integration of the new development with the older areas and buildings in the region _____ _____

Allowing local people to have a say in the design _____ _____

Attraction of people of all ages _____ _____

Retaining the theme of “city and country” _____ _____

Multi-storey housing _____ _____

Using water as a key design feature _____ _____

Innovative and forward thinking _____ _____

7

I will now read to you the things that you thought were important. Could you please choose 5 that would be your first five choices for the redevelopment.

Read the statements that were rated 3 or 4. Lead the respondent through choosing from 1 (most important) through to 5 (fifth most important). Write the numbers in the priorities column.

11. What aspects of where you live now would you like to see included in a new

development?

12. Would a theme of country lifestyle and closeness to the natural environment

and water features be attractive to you as somewhere to live? YES ….. 1 MAYBE ….. 2 NO ….. 3

13. If Brookdale was developed with all the aspects that you have said would be

important to you, would you consider living there? YES ….. 1 MAYBE ….. 2 NO ….. 3

Go to Question 15

14. When do you think you would live there? Read the following options

As soon as the redevelopment was completed….. 1 A few years after the redevelopment was completed….. 2 note how long ______Years

Other, ______________________________________ ….. 3 Go to Question 16

8

If NO from Question 13 15. Why not?

16. What would indicate to you that the Brookdale redevelopment had been

successful? C. DEMOGRAPHICS

all questions in this section

Finally, I’d like to ask you a few questions about yourself.

17. Do you rent or own your home? Rent … 1 Own … 2

18. What is the structure of your home? Detached house …….. 1 Semi-detached house (duplex) …….. 2 Townhouse/Villa …….. 3 Unit/Flat …….. 4

19. How many people live in your household? ______

20. How long have you lived in the area?

Less than 5 years ….. 1 5 to 10 years ….. 2 11 to 20 years ….. 3 21 to 30 years ….. 4 More than 30 years ….. 5

9

21. Which category best describes the unit of people living in your household? Single adult 65 years or less .......... 1 Single adult more than 65 years .......... 2 Two adults – older person 65 years or less .......... 3

Two adults – older person more than 65 years .......... 4 Single adult – eldest child 18 years or less .......... 5 Single adult – eldest child more than 18 years .......... 6 Two adults – eldest child 18 years or less .......... 7 Two adults – eldest child more than 18 years .......... 8 More than two adults – no children .......... 9 More than two adults – eldest child 18 years or less .......... 10 More than two adults – eldest child more than 18 years .......... 11 22. Would you please tell me which of the following categories best describes your

age?

Less than 24 years …….. 1 24 to 39 years …….. 2 40 to 55 years …….. 3 56 to 65 years …….. 4 66 to 75 years …….. 5 More than 75 years …….. 6

23. Could you please tell me which category best describes your highest level of

education? All or some of primary school .......... 1 All or some of secondary school .......... 2 Partial trade or technical qualification .......... 3 Trade or technical qualification .......... 4 Partial university qualification .......... 5 University qualification .......... 6

10

24. Could you please tell me which category best describes your gross household income?

Less than $22,000 …….. 1 $22,001 to $42,000 …….. 2 $42,001 to $62,000 …….. 3 $62,001 to $82,000 …….. 4 More than $82,000 …….. 5 Don’t know …….. 6 Refused …….. 7

25. Do you have any relatives or friends who live in the Armadale region? YES ….. 1 NO ….. 2 Relatives ….. 1 Friends ….. 2 Both ….. 3

Note the respondent’s gender. FEMALE ….. 1 MALE ….. 2

THANK THE RESPONDENT FOR HER/ HIS TIME.

australian research centre for water in society · australian research centre for water in society...

Documents