COVID-19 update

Stay up to date with the latest information.

Close alert

Pedestrian Access Way Strategy

Pedestrian Access Way Strategy

In response to the growing number of enquiries regarding the possible closure of pedestrian access ways (PAWs), we did a study to evaluate all PAWs within the district to guide our consideration of applications to close PAWs. The purpose of the strategy was to have a coordinated approach in dealing with the applications to close PAWs. It also provides us with recommendations on which PAWs are essential, should be retained, and those that are not essential and may be closed.

The strategy was commenced in June 2008 and involved substantial time, work and effort by the consultant team in undertaking various tasks for the project including site visits to over 300 PAWs, assessing each individual PAW and providing recommendations accordingly.  The extensive work culminated in November 2009 when Council endorsed the draft strategy, subject to advertising.

Following extensive advertising, Council adopted the strategy in February 2010 and it was endorsed by the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) in December 2010.

We apply the following approach when considering any requests for PAW closures:

  1. All PAWs classified as Essential ('E') will not be closed by Council.
  2. All PAWs classified as Retain ('R') subject to substantial justification and evidence of anti-social behaviour will be referred to the Council for further consideration.
  3. All PAWs classified as Not Essential ('Nee') where a closure request is made in accordance with our Strategy and Planning Procedure 1.5 - Closure of Pedestrian Access Ways, the Director, Planning and Development Services is authorised to initiate PAW closure proceedings and seek the approval of the WAPC and Minister for Planning.

As a means of improving the essential pedestrian network identified by the strategy, Council also resolved to investigate on ongoing program for upgrading Priority PAWs identified in the officer's report at the February 2010 meeting; priority being determined by their level of usage, the quantity and form of complaints received from adjacent landowners, the design characteristics/short comings of the PAWs, and their condition.

Go to Top of the page