B&WLogo_circle&text

 

 

 

 

BRIEFING PAPERS

FOR ELECTED MEMBERS’

BRIEFING SESSION

 

Draft Only

 

 

 

 

 

to be held at

the Civic Centre

Dundebar Road, Wanneroo

on Tuesday, 06 December, 2011 commencing at 7.00pm


PROCEDURE FOR FULL COUNCIL BRIEFING

PRINCIPLES

A Council Briefing occurs a week prior to the Ordinary Council Meeting and provides an opportunity for Elected Members to ask questions and clarify issues relevant to the specific agenda items before council.  The briefing is not a decision-making forum and the Council has no power to make decisions.  The briefing session will not be used, except in an emergency, as a venue or forum through which to invoke the requirements of the Local Government Act 1995 and call a special meeting of Council.

 

In order to ensure full transparency the meetings will be open to the public to observe the process.  Where matters are of a confidential nature, they will be deferred to the conclusion of the briefing and at that point, the briefing session closed to the public.  The reports provided are the Officers’ professional opinions.  While it is acknowledged that members may raise issues that have not been considered in the formulation of the report and recommendation, it is a basic principle that as part of the briefing sessions Elected Members cannot direct Officers to change their reports or recommendations.

 

PROCESS

The briefing session will commence at 7.00 pm and will be chaired by the Mayor or in her absence the Deputy Mayor.  In the absence of both, Councillors will elect a chairperson from amongst those present.  In general, Standing Orders will apply, EXCEPT THAT Members may speak more than once on any item, there is no moving or seconding items, Officers will address the members and the order of business will be as follows:-

 

Members of the public present may observe the process and there is an opportunity at the conclusion of the briefing for a public question time where members may ask questions (no statements) relating only to the business on the agenda.   The agenda will take the form of:

 

Ø  Attendance and Apologies

Ø  Declarations of Interest

Ø  Reports for discussion

Ø  Tabled Items

Ø  Public Question Time

Ø  Closure

 

Where an interest is involved in relation to an item, the same procedure which applies to Ordinary Council meetings will apply.  It is a breach of the City’s Code of Conduct for an interest to not be declared.  The briefing will consider items on the agenda only and proceed to deal with each item as they appear.  The process will be for the Mayor to call each item number in sequence and ask for questions.  Where there are no questions regarding the item, the briefing will proceed to the next item.

 

AGENDA CONTENTS

While every endeavour is made to ensure that all items to be presented to Council at the Ordinary Council Meeting are included in the briefing papers, it should be noted that there will be occasions when, due to necessity, items will not be ready in time for the briefing session and will go straight to the Full Council agenda as a matter for decision.  Further, there will be occasions when items are TABLED at the briefing rather than the full report being provided in advance.  In these instances, staff will endeavour to include the item on the agenda as a late item, noting that a report will be tabled at the agenda briefing session.

 

AGENDA DISTRIBUTION

The Council Briefing agenda will be distributed to Elected Members on the FRIDAY prior to the Council Briefing session.  Copies will be made available to the libraries and the Internet for interested members of the public.  Spare briefing papers will be available at the briefing session for interested members of the public.

 

DEPUTATIONS

Deputations will generally not be heard prior to the Council Briefing session and are reserved for prior to the Ordinary Council meeting.

 

RECORD OF BRIEFING

The formal record of the Council Briefing session will be limited to notes regarding any agreed action to be taken by staff or Elected Members.  No recommendations will be included and the notes will be retained for reference and are not distributed to Elected Members or the public. 

 

LOCATION

The Council Briefing session will take place in the Council Chamber in the Civic Centre.


 

 

 

Briefing Papers for Tuesday 6 December, 2011

 

 

 

CONTENTS

 

Item  1_____ Attendances_ 1

Item  2_____ Apologies and Leave of Absence_ 1

Item  3_____ Reports_ 1

Planning and Sustainability  1

Policies and Studies  1

3.1                         North Alkimos Foreshore Management Plan  1

Town Planning Schemes & Structure Plans  21

3.2                         Adoption of East Wangara Neighbourhood Centre Structure Plan No. 81 - Lots 478 Prestige Parade & 479 Vision Street, Wangara  21

3.3                         Adoption of Jindalee North Local Structure Plan No. 88  56

Development Applications  110

3.4                         Proposed Extension to Ocean Keys Shopping Centre, Clarkson - DA09/1266  110

3.5                         Development Application - Tourism/Advertising Signs Located Within Marmion Avenue Road Reserve  138

3.6                         Development Application - Temporary Sales Office (and associated car park, access and earthworks) at Lot 9504, 1700 Marmion Avenue, Tamala Park  155

3.7                         Development Application – Clearing and Bulk Earthworks at Lot 9002 (2611) Marmion Avenue, Alkimos  161

3.8                         Development Application – Bulk Earthworks and Other Development at Lot 2 Marmion Avenue, Eglinton  165

Other Matters  173

3.9                         Subdivisional Retaining Walls Over 3.0 Metres in Height - Lots 134 and 135 Landsdale Road, Landsdale (WAPC 142790) 173

3.10                      Subdivisional Retaining Walls Over 3.0 Metres in Height - Lot 130 Landsdale Road Stage 2, Landsdale (WAPC 141832) 178


 

City Businesses  184

Regulatory Services  184

3.11                      Provision of an Emergency Services Levy Grant Scheme Funded Incident Control Vehicle  184

City Business  192

3.12                      Expenditure of Surplus Reserve Funds - Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) Reserve  192

Infrastructure  197

Infrastructure Maintenance  197

3.13                      Installation of a Fully Monitored Fire and Smoke Detection System at Aquamotion  197

Infrastructure Projects  200

3.14                      Flynn Drive Realignment Project  200

Tenders  204

3.15                      Tender No. 01133 for Supply and Installation of Fencing (Panel Contract) for a Period of One Year  204

3.16                      Tender No. 01140 - Supply and Laying of Block Turf (Panel Contract) for a Period of One Year  209

Traffic Management  213

3.17                      PT03-06/11 - Lagoon Drive/Brazier Road Intersection - Request for Traffic Calming  213

3.18                      Parking Prohibition - Abbeville Circle - Mindarie Primary School, Mindarie  222

Community Development  226

Communication and Events  226

3.19                      Request to Sponsor West Coast Employee of the Year Award 2012  226

Other Matters  229

3.20                      Australian Government: Regional Development Australia Fund - Round Two - Yanchep Active Open Space Playing Fields and Sports Amenities  229

Corporate Strategy & Performance  234

Finance  234

3.21                      Financial Activity Statement for the Period Ended 31 October 2011  234

Governance and Executive Services  247

3.22                      Annual Review of Delegated Authority Register  247

3.23                      Delegation of Authority Over the Council Recess  283

3.24                      Proposed Additional Ordinary Council Meeting in February 2012  285

3.25                      Donations to be Considered by Council - December 2011  287

Property  291

3.26                      Proposal to Create a New Locality Named 'Catalina' 291

3.27                      Proposed Lease to Youth Futures WA (Inc) - Portion of Clarkson Youth Centre  297

Chief Executive Office  301

Nil  301

Item  4_____ Motions on Notice_ 301

4.1                         Cr Rudi Steffens – Dog Exercise Area - Kingsway  301

Item  5_____ To Be Tabled at the Briefing_ 303

5.1                         Proposed Northern Extension of Wangara Industrial Area  303

5.2                         Warrant of Payments for the Period – 30 November 2011  303

5.3                         Review of 10 Year Financial Plan  303

5.4                         Proposed Sale of Portion of Lot 506 (3) Rocca Way, Wanneroo to ECU   303

5.5                         Salaried Officers Union Collective Agreement 2011  303

5.6                         Metropolitan Local Government Review Submission  303

5.7                         Motion on Notice - Cr Treby – Basketball Stadium – City of Wanneroo  303

Item  6_____ Public Question Time_ 304

Item  7_____ Confidential_ 304

7.1                         Acquisition of Land - Lot 148 (257) Franklin Road Wanneroo Required for the Widening and Upgrading of the Caporn/Franklin Road Intersection  304

7.2                         Mindarie Regional Council and the Process Associated with the Withdrawal of the City of Stirling  304

7.3                         Withdrawal From Food Act Prosecution  304

7.4                         Proposal for Mary Lindsay Homestead  305

7.5                         Yanchep Active Open Space – Agreement to Address Costs and Responsibilies  305

Item  8_____ Date of Next Meeting_ 306

Item  9_____ Closure_ 306

 


Agenda

Item  1      Attendances

Item  2      Apologies and Leave of Absence

Item  3      Reports

Declarations of Interest by Elected Members, including the nature and extent of the interest. Declaration of Interest forms to be completed and handed to the Chief Executive Officer.

Planning and Sustainability

Policies and Studies

3.1    North Alkimos Foreshore Management Plan

File Ref:                                              2947 – 11/124601

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       9         

 

Issue

To consider the draft North Alkimos Foreshore Management Plan (FMP) for endorsement.

 

Background

Council adopted the North Alkimos Local Structure Plan (LSP) at its meeting on 31 May 2011 after originally considering the LSP in June 2009.

 

As the development abuts the coastline, the LSP requires a FMP to be produced and approved by the Department of Planning (DoP), the City of Wanneroo, and the Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC).

 

On 13 April 2011, the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) endorsed the draft FMP; however, the City did not receive a copy of the draft FMP until after the WAPC had endorsed the document.

 

Administration wrote to the WAPC on 23 June 2011, highlighting that under the provisions of the LSP, the draft FMP requires the approval of the DoP, CoW and the DEC and the DoP therefore should have consulted with the City regarding its position on the draft FMP to enable a concurrent and coordinated assessment of the FMP. The DoP responded in a letter dated 27 July 2011 stating that:

 

The FMP having been endorsed by the WAPC simply means that where works are in accordance with the FMP they are not required under the MRS to obtain development approval from the WAPC. WAPC endorsement in no way excuses the applicant/owner from being subject to all City of Wanneroo (City) planning approval processes.”

 

Administration and the DEC have subsequently reviewed the draft FMP and required various changes to be made by the proponent (PEET Alkimos Pty Ltd).


 

The proponent has now amended the draft FMP and resubmitted the revised version for endorsement. A copy of the draft (revised) FMP has been placed in the Elected Members Reading Room.

Detail

The purpose of the draft FMP is to provide a management framework that will guide foreshore management and appropriate development of the foreshore area adjacent to PEET’s Shorehaven development.

 

The Shorehaven development has a coastal frontage of 1.74km. The foreshore reserve, as shown in Attachment 1 forms part of Bush Forever (BF) site No. 397 (coastal strip from Wilbinga to Mindarie). Attachment 2 depicts that the foreshore is reserved for Parks and Recreation under the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS) and delineates between land owned by PEET and land that is managed by the City on behalf of the WAPC, within the foreshore reserve.

 

Proposed development

 

The draft FMP proposes the following structural elements within the foreshore reserve; these are also shown in Attachment 3.

 

·        Four lookouts within the foreshore reserve;

·        One lookout just east of the MRS boundary in the northern end of the development;

·        Four major nodes, including pedestrian and vehicular access, as well as seating, BBQ’s and shade structures;

·        Eight minor pedestrian nodes;

·        Eight beach access ways;

·        Two access ways for people with disabilities;

·        Primary north/south pedestrian access route that runs the length of the development;

·        North/south coastal promenade and bike trail that runs the length of the development;

·        Six secondary pedestrian foreshore accesses;

·        Two primary pedestrian routes (Viggo Trail) east/west leading into the foreshore;

·        Two secondary pedestrian routes (Viggo Trail) east/west leading into the foreshore;

·        Three drainage basins proposed in the foreshore reserve; one in active POS and two in landscaped areas;

·        Two drainage basins are located adjacent to the foreshore in active POS.

 

Details and descriptions of proposed public facilities and infrastructure included in the foreshore are included in Attachment 4.

 

The typical construction details for the above structural elements that are proposed in the FMP, are outlined in Attachment 5. Administration is satisfied with the specifications included within the draft FMP, with the exception of fence design and dual use path widths. The proponent has been informed that the design specifications for these proposed structures do not accord with the City’s standards.  The FMP will therefore need to be amended to accord with the City’s requirements. 

 

Drainage

 

The FMP currently depicts some drainage in vegetated areas of the foreshore and swales within the foreshore. In this regard, drainage in vegetated foreshore areas is unacceptable, while swales should only exist in active Public Open Space (POS) areas, as a last resort for drainage of the adjacent subdivision.


 

All other drainage from the adjacent subdivision must be dealt with in that subdivisional area, not in the foreshore reserve.  The FMP will need to be amended accordingly.

 

Village Foreshore Park

 

One of the four major nodes proposed in the draft FMP is the Village Foreshore Park. The Village Foreshore Park has been strategically located within a large central blowout, the extent of which is shown in Attachment 6. Locating the Village Foreshore Park within this blowout that is identified as being “Completely Degraded”, will avoid clearing other areas of vegetation in better condition. As this dunal area is highly mobile, before development can commence, the blowout needs to be stabilised. Stabilisation of the blowout and subsequent development will be undertaken in six stages, as detailed in Attachment 7.

 

The conceptual design of the Village Foreshore Park POS shown in Attachment 8 includes passive park spaces, zones for active sport and play, event spaces, beach lookouts, picnic and BBQ areas, a promenade and walking paths. This area will provide a range of leisure and recreational options for the community and will likely become a major destination for use and enjoyment of the City’s coastline in future. A diagram showing the conceptual Village Foreshore Park view perspectives is included as Attachment 9.

 

A beach club is proposed on the southern side of the Village Foreshore Park. The draft FMP describes it as a key community facility for both local residents and visitors.

 

When developed, the beach club will be a focal point for many activities, including sports and recreation; health and fitness; youth activities; community events and local information.

 

Administration is currently involved in discussions with the proponent in regards to concept designs for the proposed beach club and whether the City would have any desire or need to be involved in its future operation.

 

Implementation Schedule

 

An implementation schedule has been included in section 7 of the draft FMP. This schedule contains objectives, recommendations, actions, responsible authority, monitoring and staging in delivering the FMP.

 

The implementation schedule does not require the City to undertake any works, however it does propose the City accept handover of certain assets to maintain and manage.  However, the FMP acknowledges that the City may require any works or infrastructure that the City deems not feasible to manage or maintain, based on life-cycle costs, to be removed or modified to the satisfaction of the City prior to handover. The FMP also requires the proponent to provide to the City (at the time of making its request for handover), asset management data for the said works or infrastructure, to the City’s satisfaction. To further reinforce this arrangement it is recommended that a new provision be added to the FMP, requiring the developer to provide plans and specifications of all proposed works, to the City for approval, prior to any such works being undertaken.

 

City of Wanneroo Draft Coastal Management Plan (CMP)

 

Council has endorsed a CMP for public comment.  The advertising period for Part 1 of the CMP commenced on 24 October 2011.  One of the recommendations of the draft CMP is to provide a 500m long dog beach in North Alkimos by 2015.

 

The proposed dog beach in the draft CMP overlaps the northern section of the draft FMP by approximately 400m.


 

The draft FMP does not plan for the provision of a dog beach and this is understandable because the CMP is only in draft form and may change following public consultation. Council endorsement of the draft FMP will not prevent or prejudice the delivery of a dog beach in this general location.

 

If Council endorses the current North Alkimos FMP then it will (along with other endorsed FMPs along the City’s coastline) inform the preparation of Part 2 of the CMP in terms of beach usage, the assets provided as part of the foreshore development, as well as the management implications for the City following handover.

 

Consultation

 

Administration has consulted the adjacent developing landowners to the north and south of the FMP area and responded with no objection. Given that there is currently no legal public access to the coast, through the proponent land and as there is no existing community within or adjacent to the foreshore area, Administration recommends that Council endorse the draft FMP without advertising for public comment.

 

Comment

 

The draft FMP acknowledges that the development at Shorehaven is likely to create an influx of regular visitors to the foreshore area, and while the foreshore will provide recreational opportunities for the community, the natural environment will ultimately provide amenity, biodiversity, and natural stability of the foreshore system.

 

The draft FMP identifies as a major issue, the risk of degradation of vegetation that is currently in ‘good to excellent’ condition. In order to overcome this issue, major high-use areas have been strategically located in areas of “Degraded” and “Completely Degraded” condition vegetation (i.e. the Village Foreshore Park) to minimise disturbance to higher condition vegetation. Areas of higher condition vegetation that will attract visitors will be provided with suitable access and lookouts to minimise the disturbance to vegetation and landforms while still allowing the community to enjoy those areas.

 

Given that the WAPC has already endorsed the draft FMP, the City and the DEC were the remaining two authorities yet to endorse the document. Both the City and the DEC have worked together and reviewed the draft FMP and agreed on a number of changes. Those changes included a more detailed summary of the requirements of the City’s Local Biodiversity Strategy, clarification on drainage including deletion of the word ‘sump’ and clarification of the proposed implementation framework. Administration has informed the DoP of the comments and revisions required by the City and the DEC. With the changes having been made to the document Administration now endorses the updated version of the draft FMP, subject to those additional minor points raised earlier in this report, also being addressed in the FMP.

 

If endorsed by Council, Administration recommends the revised FMP be resubmitted to the WAPC for its endorsement.

Statutory Compliance

Endorsement of the draft FMP by Council is required to satisfy approval requirements detailed in Table 8: Reports, Surveys, Strategies and Plans of the North Alkimos LSP No 73.

 

There is currently no formal approval process to guide Council’s assessment of Foreshore Management Plans.


 

Previous FMPs along more accessible sections of the coastline and adjoining existing communities have been presented to Council for endorsement to advertise for public comment. However, advertising of the FMP is considered unnecessary in this instance, for the reasons stated earlier in the ‘Consultation’ section of this report.

 

Where development is proposed that is in accordance with an approved foreshore management plan, separate planning approval is not required under the City’s District Planning Scheme No. 2 or MRS. Where development is proposed that is not in accordance with an approved foreshore management plan, an application for planning approval under the MRS is required. In dealing with these applications the City is required to forward the application to the WAPC within 7 days of receipt for its determination and forward its comments and recommendations to the WAPC within 42 days of receipt of the application.

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “1     Environment

1.1    Improve conservation of local biodiversity in designated areas

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

The life-cycle costs and asset management details of all future works and structures installed in accordance with the proposed FMP, will be provided to the City in future (by the proponent), prior to the City accepting handover of those particular coastal areas. The FMP also acknowledges that the City may require the removal or modification of any works or infrastructure deemed not feasible to manage, based on life-cycle costs, prior to accepting handover.

 

The City will accept handover of public open space (POS) within the foreshore reserve after two years from practical completion, subject to compliance with the requirements of clause 7.1 of the City’s Local Planning Policy 4.3: Public Open Space.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council ENDORSES the draft North Alkimos Foreshore Management Plan and FORWARDS a copy of the Foreshore Management Plan to the Western Australian Planning Commission, subject to the following modifications being made to the satisfaction of the Director, Planning and Sustainability:

 

1.       Design specifications for fencing and dual use path widths shall be amended to accord with the City’s standards and requirements;

 

2.       Deletion of any drainage infrastructure in natural vegetated areas of the foreshore and rationalisation of swales within the foreshore, to restrict them to active open space areas and designed to not take in excess of a 1 in 100 year storm event;

 

3.       Provision being included that requires the proponent to provide, for the City’s approval, detailed plans and specifications of all future works proposed to be installed or constructed on land currently managed by or to be handed over to the City, prior to any such construction occurring.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Shorehaven Development Location

11/107998

 

2.

North Alkimos Foreshore Reserve - MRS

11/102427

 

3.

Shorehaven Movement Network

11/132738

 

4.

Proposed Public Facility and Infrastructure Tables

11/107995

 

5.

Typical Works Specifications

11/102404

 

6.

Foreshore Blowout Boundaries and Reserves

11/107999

 

7.

Staging concept for stabilisation of the blow out

11/102398

 

8.

Foreshore landscape plan - Village Foreshore Park

11/102419

 

9.

Village Foreshore Park viewsheds

11/102412

 

  


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                   7


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                   8


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                   9


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                 10


 


 


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               13

Typical Seating at Small Coastal Node with Sculptural Element as proposed in the draft FMP (reference: Plate 11: page 37)

 

 

Large View Deck with associated seating area as proposed in the draft FMP (reference: Plate 12: page 39)

Small View Deck as proposed in the draft FMP (reference: Plate 13: page 39)

Typical Beach Access Section as proposed in the draft FMP (reference: Plate 14: page 41)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Detail of Beach Access Section as proposed in the draft FMP (reference: Plate 17: page 50)

 

 

Typical Footpath Section as proposed in the draft FMP (reference: Plate 18: page 50)

 

 

Typical Fence Detail as proposed in the draft FMP (reference: Plate 20: page 52)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Typical Entry and Node Feature Fence as proposed in the draft FMP (reference; Plate 21: page 52)

 

 

 Primary Path Section with Drainage as proposed in the draft FMP (reference; Plate 24: page 56)


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                 17


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                                                                18


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                                                                19


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                                                                20

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                         21

Draft

Town Planning Schemes & Structure Plans

3.2    Adoption of East Wangara Neighbourhood Centre Structure Plan No. 81 - Lots 478 Prestige Parade & 479 Vision Street, Wangara

File Ref:                                              2958 – 11/113964

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       7         

 

Issue

To consider submissions on the proposed East Wangara Neighbourhood Centre Structure Plan No. 81 (CSP 81) at the close of advertising, to determine the modifications required and its acceptability for final approval and forwarding to the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) for endorsement.

 

Applicant

Taylor Burrell Barnett

Owner

Landcorp

Location

Lots 478 Prestige Parade and 479 Vision Street, Wangara

Site Area

1.1052 hectares

MRS Zoning

Industrial

DPS 2 Zoning

Centre

 

 

Background

The draft CSP 81 was lodged with the City by Taylor Burrell Barnett (TBB), on behalf of Landcorp, on 2 May 2011. The Structure Plan area comprises 1.1052 hectares of land encompassing Lots 478 Prestige Parade and 479 Vision Street, Wangara. The subject lots are located on the corner of Gnangara Road and Prestige Parade, bound by Gnangara Road to the south, industrial zoned land to the west, north and south; and rural zoned land to the north east (refer Attachment 1).

 

The land is zoned Industrial under the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS) and Centre under District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2). Council, at its meeting on 30 June 2009, considered and endorsed a request to initiate an amendment to DPS 2 that included the rezoning of Lots 478 Prestige Parade and 479 Vision Street, Wangara from General Industrial Zone to Centre Zone. The scheme amendment was endorsed by the Minister for Planning on 27 October 2009 and gazetted on 20 November 2009.

 

On 5 August 2011, following the lodgement of the draft CSP 81 by TBB, the Director Planning and Sustainability forwarded a memorandum to all Elected Members, providing the opportunity for members to request referral of the proposal to Council for consent to advertise.  No such requests were received and advertising of the draft CSP 81 subsequently commenced in accordance with Clause 9.5 of DPS 2 on 12 August 2011 for a period of 42 days, closing on 4 October 2011.

Detail

The draft CSP 81 has been prepared in order to satisfy the requirements of the ‘Centre’ zone under DPS 2 and to facilitate a commercial centre to service employees in the Wangara and Landsdale Industrial Estates.

 


 

The key elements of the draft CSP 81 are as follows:

 

·        Lot 478 is zoned ‘Business’ and Lot 479 is zoned ‘Commercial’;

 

·        No retail uses are to be permitted on Lot 478, while Lot 479 will be permitted a maximum of 1,750m2 NLA retail floorspace; and

 

·        Land use permissibility for Lots 478 and 479 has been varied from the Zoning Table in DPS 2.

 

Attachment 2 contains the advertised version of the Part 1 Statutory Section of draft CSP 81, including the draft Structure Plan Map.

Consultation

The draft CSP was advertised for public comment for a period of 42 days by means of on-site signage, an advertisement in the Wanneroo Times newspaper, the City’s website and letters to nearby landowners. The advertising period commenced on 12 August 2011 and closed on 4 October 2011, with a total of seven submissions received, five of which had no objection to the proposal and two which expressed specific concerns with the proposal. A summary of all submissions received, together with Administration’s response to each is included as Attachment 3.

 

In accordance with the City’s Local Planning Policy 4.2 – Structure Planning (LPP 4.2), Administration also conducted its assessment of draft CSP 81 during the advertising period. Administration’s recommended modifications arising from its assessment are included as Attachment 4.

 

The main issues identified in Administration’s assessment and the submissions received relate to:

 

·        Permissibility of uses and land use conflicts with the surrounding industrial area; and

 

·        Traffic impacts on the surrounding road networks.

 

A more detailed discussion of the abovementioned issues is provided in the Comment section of this report.

Comment

Permissibility of Uses and Land Use Conflicts

 

Lots 478 Prestige Parade and 479 Vision Street, Wangara were rezoned from General Industrial to Centre under Amendment No. 73 to DPS 2, which was endorsed at the 30 June 2009 Council Meeting and gazetted on 20 November 2009. The primary objective of this rezoning was to provide a mix of commercial based activities to cater to the needs of the employees of the surrounding industrial estates. The preparation of CSP 81 will facilitate this by zoning the subject lots ‘Commercial’ and ‘Business’, and determining the land use permissibility of these zones. The advertised version of CSP 81 proposed a number of land use controls (refer Attachment 2). However a number of sensitive land uses proposed are considered incompatible with the surrounding ‘General Industrial’ zoned area and do not meet the objectives of CSP 81.

 


 

Recommended separation distances between industrial and sensitive land uses are outlined in the Environmental Protection Authority’s (EPA’s) ‘Guidance for the Assessment of Environmental Factors (in accordance with the Environmental Protection Act 1986) Separation Distances between Industrial and Sensitive Land Uses’ Guidance Statement (June 2005). The purpose of these generic separation distances (buffers) is to avoid conflicts between incompatible land uses. Considering the Wangara area has historically been a general industrial area, it is of primary importance that the land use permissibility in proposed CSP 81 area does not prejudice the existing and future development of the adjoining General Industrial Zone.

 

Lots 78 & 80 Gnangara Road, Landsdale, which are adjacent to the CSP 81 area, have approval for and are currently operating as concrete batching plants, while Lot 79 Attwell Street, Landsdale, has an approval to be used for and is currently operating as a waste processing and transfer facility. Both of these uses could potentially impact upon sensitive land uses located in CSP 81. The separation distance for a concrete batching plant is between 300-500m, and is the shortest distance measured from the boundary of an area used for an industrial land use and the boundary of an area used by a sensitive land use. Attachment 5 shows the Centre Zoned land subject of CSP 81 and the surrounding General Industrial zoned land. This reinforces the industrial nature of the surrounding area and the need to ensure CSP 81 does not allow sensitive land uses or development that would be impacted upon by existing adjacent industrial operations or preclude general industrial development from occurring in the surrounding area in the future.

 

Under the EPA’s Guidance Statement, sensitive land use is defined as:

 

‘Sensitive land use – land use sensitive to emissions from industry and infrastructure. Sensitive land uses include residential development, hospitals, hotels, motels, hostels, caravan parks, schools, nursing homes, child care facilities, shopping centres, playgrounds and some public buildings. Some commercial, institutional and industrial land uses which require high levels of amenity or are sensitive to particular emissions may also be considered “sensitive land uses”. Examples include some retail outlets, offices and training centres, and some types of storage and manufacturing.’

 

Similarly, under the DPS 2, a sensitive use is defined as:

 

Sensitive Use: means any use in which the people involved in that use may have reason to object to noise, dust, odour and other impacts which may arise from rural resource operations and includes, but is not limited to, residential, hospitals, schools, shops and all public establishments where food and drink is consumed.’

 

Though it is recognised that the definition of sensitive use under DPS 2 makes reference to ‘rural resource operations’ only, it (together with the EPA’s definition for sensitive land use) does serve to provide guidance on land use types that are considered sensitive.

 

Administration is recommending that the permissibility of a number of sensitive land uses be amended in CSP 81 in order to reduce the potential impact and conflict with the surrounding general industrial area. Administration advises that sensitive land uses under CSP 81 have been designated as either ‘A’ uses (meaning a use that is prohibited until advertising has been undertaken and Council has exercised its discretion to otherwise approve the use) or ‘X’ uses (meaning a prohibited land use). A comparison between the permissibility of land uses in the Business and Commercial Zones under DPS 2 and the permissibilities proposed by Administration for CSP 81 is included in Attachment 6.

 


 

Traffic Impacts on the Surrounding Road Networks

 

A submission by the Department of Transport (DoT) raised the issue that the rezoning of Lot 478 Prestige Parade to ‘Business’ and Lot 479 Vision Street to ‘Commercial’ would result in a significant increase in traffic movements and impact the surrounding road network. Administration considers that the development of the two subject lots within the CSP area is unlikely to have any significant traffic impacts on the surrounding road network, given that vehicle access to and from the subject lots, and consideration of any potential effects that the development of the CSP area may have on the traffic movements of the surrounding road network, can be addressed by a detailed area plan (DAP) and through the development assessment process. At that more detailed stage of the planning process, when the specific land uses are proposed, a traffic impact assessment can be required if necessary.

 

Technical Appendices

 

The City’s LPP 4.2: Structure Planning (LPP 4.2) requires the lodgement of Part 3 – Technical Supporting Documentation for a centre structure plan. This part of the structure plan is required to contain a number of technical reports, including the following:

 

·        Local Environmental Impact Assessment and Management Strategy;

 

·        Local Water Management Strategy;

 

·        Local Engineering Infrastructure Report;

 

·        Local Transport Strategy;

 

·        Local Community Development Strategy; and

 

·        Local Heritage Strategy.

 

These technical reports have not been included as part of the Part 3 lodged, as required under LPP 4.2. The CSP 81 area forms part of the broader Agreed Structure Plan No. 10 – East Wanneroo Cell 8 and adjoining lots to its south have already been subdivided and developed. In light of this and together with the limited extent of the structure plan, Administration considers that these reports are not required to be provided as part of this structure plan proposal. Matters dealt with by these reports have previously been addressed through earlier structure planning, scheme amendment and subdivision processes. Thus, it is recommended that the requirement for the preparation of these technical reports should be waived in this instance.

 

Conclusion

 

Lots 478 Prestige Parade and 479 Vision Street, Wangara are zoned ‘Centre’ under DPS 2.  In accordance with the provisions of DPS 2, Council may require a structure plan as a prerequisite to subdivision and development in the Centre zone. Draft CSP 81 has thus been prepared for the subject lots and submitted for the City’s consideration and approval.

 

Draft CSP 81 is considered to be satisfactory for final approval by the City, subject to modifications as discussed above and depicted in Administration’s tracked changes version of the Part 1 – Statutory Section of the draft CSP, included as Attachment 7. These modifications include the recommended changes to the land use permissibilities for the CSP 81 area.

Statutory Compliance

This Structure Plan has been processed in accordance with the requirements of DPS 2.  Clause 9.6.1 of DPS 2 provides that following advertisement of a Structure Plan, Council may refuse to adopt the Structure Plan or resolve that the Structure Plan is satisfactory with or without modifications. It is recommended that draft CSP 81 be approved subject to the modifications recommended in Attachments 3 and 4 of this report.

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “3     Economic

3.1    Create strategic shifts in job markets to meet future needs and demands

 

Policy Implications

The proposal has been processed in accordance with the City’s Local Planning Policy 4.2 – Structure Planning.

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

 

1.       Pursuant to Clause 9.6.1 of the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2, RESOLVES that the draft East Wangara Neighbourhood Centre Structure Plan No. 81 submitted by Taylor Burrell Barnett, on behalf of Landcorp, is satisfactory subject to the Recommended Modifications contained within Attachment 3 and Attachment 4 being made to the satisfaction of the Director Planning and Sustainability; 

 

2.       REFERS the East Wangara Neighbourhood Centre Structure Plan No. 81  to the Western Australian Planning Commission for approval in accordance with Clause 9.6.1 of the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2;

 

3.       NOTES the Schedule of Submissions provided in Attachment 3, ENDORSES Administration’s recommended responses to those submissions and FORWARDS that Schedule to the Western Australian Planning Commission and ADVISES submitters of its decision; and

 


 

4.       Pursuant to Clause 9.6.5 of the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2, ADOPTS the duly modified East Wangara Neighbourhood Centre Structure Plan No. 81 documents and AUTHORISES the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer to SIGN and SEAL the documents once certified by the Western Australian Planning Commission.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Site Plan

11/117410

 

2.

Part 1 Statutory Section

11/117412

 

3.

Summary of submissions, responses and recommended modifications

11/129247

Minuted

4.

Summary of CoW Administration Comments

11/128921

 

5.

Zoning Plan

11/128844

 

6.

Table Showing Comparison of Use Class Permissibility between DPS 2 and CSP 81

11/128912

 

7.

Recommended Modifications for Part 1 Statutory Section

11/128913

 

  


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                 28


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                 29


 


 


 


 


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                                                                34


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                                                                44


 


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                 46


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                 47


 


 


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                 50


 


 


 


 


 


 


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                 57

3.3    Adoption of Jindalee North Local Structure Plan No. 88

File Ref:                                              5396 – 11/123705

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       14         

 

Issue

To consider the submissions on the proposed draft Jindalee North Local Structure Plan No. 88 (LSP 88) to determine the modifications required and its acceptability for final approval and forwarding to the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) for its adoption.

 

Applicant

Chappell Lambert Everett Town Planners

Owner

Ocean Springs Pty Ltd; Butler Land Company Pty Ltd; and Department of Housing

Location

Lot 9 (2559) Marmion Avenue, Jindalee;

Lot 6002 (2559A) Marmion Avenue, Jindalee; and

Portion of Lot 9055 (2500) Marmion Avenue, Butler

Site Area

108 hectares

MRS Zoning

Urban Zone and Parks and Recreation Reserve

DPS 2 Zoning

Urban Development Zone and Parks and Recreation Reserve

 

 

Background

The draft LSP 88 was submitted on 15 March 2011 for the City’s consideration. On 5 August 2011, the Director, Planning and Sustainability forwarded a memorandum to all Elected Members, providing the opportunity for members to request referral of the proposal to Council for consent to advertise.  No such requests were received and, as such, advertising of the draft LSP 88 commenced in accordance with Clause 9.5 of District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2).

Detail

The Site

Attachment 1 contains the location plan of the structure plan area. The subject land is bounded by Lots 1002 and 9002 Marmion Avenue, Alkimos to the north, Lot 10, Marmion Avenue, Jindalee to the south, Marmion Avenue and Brighton Estate to the east and Foreshore Reserve to the west. The eastern portion of the land has been cleared and bulk earth-worked in 2006 (DA2006/618 dated 7 September 2006).

 

The characteristics of the site are as follows:

 

·        The site has a number of dominant landform features which provide an excellent opportunity to create a strong sense of place for development and to enhance views along the coast. On an average, the land slopes westwards at 1 in 55 gradient;

 

·        Unlikely occurrence of any karstic features;

 

·        No naturally occurring water courses or water bodies;

 

·        Depth of groundwater varying between 11 metres along the western side to 35 metres along the eastern side;

 

·        Located within Priority 3 Groundwater Source Protection Area;

 

·        No Threatened Ecological Communities present;

 

·        Carnaby’s Black Cockatoos have been recorded within the proximity of the site but with only limited suitable foraging habitat known on the site;

 

·        Lomandra maritime being a known habitat species for Graceful Sun Moth (GSM) is known to be present on the site. A total 15 GSMs have been recorded; and

 

·        One Aboriginal Heritage Site located within the LSP area. No European heritage sites are present on the site.

 

Zoning

 

While the entire area of land subject to LSP 88 is zoned Urban under the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS) and Urban Development in DPS 2, 3.7 hectares of land located in the north-western portion of the site abutting the Foreshore Reserve is reserved as Parks and Recreation Reserve. A portion of the Foreshore Reserve including the Parks and Recreation Reserve located within the subject land is classified as Bush Forever Site No. 397.

The Proposal

Attachment 2 contains the Statutory Section of the draft LSP 88, as advertised, which includes the Structure Plan Map, the Zoning Map and the Residential Density Range Map.

 

The details of the draft LSP 88 are as follows:

 

Zoning

 

The LSP area is predominantly zoned Residential except for the Coastal Village Precinct and the centrally located local centre, which are zoned Centre and Commercial respectively.

 

Local Centres

 

Two local centres with a retail floor space of maximum 500m2 and 300m2 respectively are proposed. The 500m2 local centre is centrally located and the other local centre is proposed within the Coastal Village Precinct. As it is proposed to zone the Coastal Village Precinct as ‘Centre’, which requires that it be subject to separate structure planning, the LSP 88 maps do not indicate the location of the coastal local centre.

 

Residential

 

It is proposed to provide approximately 1,590 single lots/units with residential densities ranging from R30 to R100. The LSP 88 area is divided into four residential precincts namely, Coastal Village Precinct, Coastal Fringe Precinct, Central West Precinct and Marmion East Precinct (refer Attachment 3).  As per the advertised version of the LSP, a density code range of R80 - R100 is proposed for the Coastal Village Precinct with R80 being the base coding and R100 being applicable where it is proposed to develop multiple dwellings. In regard to the other three precincts, a density code range of R30 - R60 is proposed with R30 being the base code while the location of R60 lots will be determined on the basis of locational criteria.

 

It is proposed to vary some of the provisions of the Residential Design Codes (R Codes) relating to setbacks, private open space, boundary walls, and ancillary accommodation in areas coded R30 and R60. The provisions of R Codes will apply in respect to the R80 and R100 developments.

 

POS areas

 

The draft LSP 88 makes provision of 10.44 hectares of Public Open Space (POS) areas. This provision is greater than the minimum 10% (10.14 hectares) required under the WAPC’s Liveable Neighbourhoods Policy. The draft LSP 88 maps depict only the strategic POS areas. The remaining POS areas will be provided at the subdivision stage.

 

An Aboriginal heritage site has been identified on a small ridge along the northern boundary of the LSP area. It is proposed to protect this site within a 4,000m2 ‘U’ shaped park.

 

Primary School

 

A Primary School site of 3.5 hectares is centrally co-located with an active POS area of 2.2 hectares at the south-western corner of two Neighbourhood Connectors. The POS will contain a junior oval. The periphery of the POS is proposed to accommodate a drainage swale.

 

Movement Network

 

The LSP area is connected to Marmion Avenue via two Neighbourhood Connectors. The northern intersection is proposed to allow left-in/left-out and right-in movement only. The southern intersection will be signalised as a four-way intersection with Camborne Parkway to the east within Brighton Estate.

 

The Neighbourhood Connectors are proposed with a reserve width of 20 metres excepting the Neighbourhood connector linking Marmion Avenue and the foreshore which is proposed to be 24 metres wide due to the estimated volume of traffic. These roads are proposed to contain a shared path on at least one side of the road with a pathway on the opposite side.

 

There are opportunities to provide feeder bus connections through the LSP 88 area connecting to the future Brighton train station, which would be located about one kilometre to the east of the LSP 88 area.

 

The Access Streets, not shown on the LSP maps, are proposed to have a reserve width ranging between 15 and 20 metres depending on the traffic volumes.

 

Drainage

 

The drainage system will be designed based on water sensitive design principles. Four drainage catchment areas are identified. The drainage swales of catchments 2 and 4, which abut the Foreshore, would partly affect a portion of the Foreshore Reserve.

Consultation

The draft LSP was advertised for public comment for a period of 42 days by means of two on-site signs, an advertisement in the Wanneroo Times newspaper and the City’s website and letters to adjoining landowners.  The submission period commenced on 23 August and closed on 4 October 2011. The City received ten submissions, nine of them were from government agencies and one from Roberts Day Town Planners on behalf of the owners of Lot 10, Marmion Avenue, Jindalee located to the immediate south of the subject land. The main issues raised in the submissions are as follows:

·        Opposition to the coastal local centre in close proximity to the planned Jindee Coastal Village; 

 

·        That the northern intersection of the Neighbourhood Connector and Marmion Avenue be a left-in/left-out intersection only;

 

·        That POS areas 4 and 5 be denoted as Conservation POS areas and that the necessary provisions be included in the statutory section of the LSP 88 requiring Conservation Management Plans; and

 

·        Objection to proposing drainage swales within the foreshore reserve affecting Bush Forever Site 397.

 

A summary of submissions received and Administration’s responses are provided in Attachment 4. This summary makes reference to Attachments 5 to 11.

Comment

The applicant originally named this LSP as Lot 9 Jindalee LSP. As the site comprises of three lot numbers, the applicant has renamed it to the Jindalee North LSP 88 and resubmitted the statutory section of the LSP with some modifications (refer Attachment 12). The modifications replace the proposed density range of R30 - R60 applicable to the Coastal Fringe Precinct, Central West Precinct and Marmion East Precinct with a dual coding of R30/60 and to code the entire Coastal Village Precinct as R100 by deleting the range of R80 - R100. The reason for providing dual coding instead of a range is that the developer does not propose to develop R40 and R80 lots but only R30, R60 and R100 lots within the LSP 88 area. The LSP maps have been modified by depicting larger POS 4 and 5 areas as requested by the DEC to accommodate the Graceful Sun Moth habitats.

Agreed Butler-Jindalee District Structure Plan No. 39 (DSP 39)

 

The LSP 88 area forms part of DSP 39, which establishes the district level planning network. Attachment 13 contains a copy of DSP 39 indicating the LSP area. DSP 39 was adopted by the City in November 2005 and by the WAPC on 20 October 2006. As per the statutory provisions of DSP 39, it provides the general basis for the preparation of LSPs.

 

DSP 39 identifies the following key elements that are relevant to the draft LSP 88:

 

·        A predominantly residential area;

 

·        A centrally located Local Centre with a retail floor space in the range of 250 to 600m2;

 

·        An east-west road connecting Marmion Avenue and the Foreshore;

 

·        Two north-south connector roads including a coastal foreshore access road allowing connectivity with the future development to the north and south; and

 

·        A centrally located Primary School.

 

Based on the general principles of DSP 39, the applicant has prepared the draft LSP 88.

 

In addition to the matters discussed in the summary of submissions, the following additional comments are made on the draft LSP 88.

 


 

Residential Zone

 

Coastal Fringe, Central West and Marmion East Precincts

 

While the Coastal Village Precinct is proposed to be coded R100 in its entirety, the applicant has proposed a dual coding of R30/60 in respect to the Coastal Fringe Precinct, Central West Precinct and Marmion East Precinct. The determination of R30 and R60 coding in these three precincts is proposed to be based on the following:

 

While R30 will be the base code in these precincts, the location of R60 lots will be determined as per the following locational criteria:

 

1.       Vehicular access to a laneway;

2.       Located in proximity to public transport routes and neighbourhood connectors;

3.       Within 400 metres to a local centre or Primary School;

4.       Proximity to public open space;  and

5.       Within Central Fringe Precinct.

 

The above criteria are generally in accordance with the City’s Local Housing Strategy, which recommends higher densities of R30 and R40 within 250 to 400 metres of high amenity areas such public open space and bus routes. The locational criteria 2 and 4 mentioned above do not indicate a distance. But an assessment of the LSP indicates that the proposed R60 laneway lots are likely to be located within 250 to 400 metres from the areas of high amenity.

 

In regard to the fifth criterion above, the applicant has advised that although it is the intention to develop the entire Central Fringe Precinct to R60 standards, in order to accommodate some possible R30 lots, this precinct is included as one of the criteria to locate R60 lots.

 

In considering the above matters, the proposed locational criteria are supported.

 

Centre Zone

 

The coastal node area identified as Coastal Village Precinct has been proposed to be zoned Centre in the draft LSP 88. The applicant advised that the intention of zoning this precinct as Centre was to arrive at more appropriate development control measures to achieve a desired urban form at the structure planning stage. As these matters could, however, be addressed through Detailed Area Plans and as the land use of this precinct is predominantly residential, it is recommended that the Centre Zone not be accepted and that the area be zoned as Residential instead, except for the coastal local centre which can be zoned Commercial.  The applicant has agreed to make this modification.

 

Coastal Setback Assessment

 

The Coastal Setback Assessment report submitted by the applicant recommends that the draft LSP 88 may be amended to accommodate the Physical Process Setback (PPS), which extends into the LSP 88 area. Attachment 14 contains a plan showing the PPS affecting the south-western corner of the LSP 88 area. Accordingly, the applicant has agreed to modify the draft LSP by shifting the residential area affected by the PPS by approximately 20 metres behind the cadastral boundary and to depict the affected portion as a POS area.

 


 

Variations to R Code provisions

 

The applicant has requested variations to some of the provisions of the R Codes relating to R30 and R60 that are generally in line with the R Code variations currently available in the Butler-Ridgewood Agreed Structure Plan No.27 (ASP 27) and Banksia Grove Agreed Structure Plan No. 21A (ASP 21A) adopted by the WAPC and the City.

 

These variations are discussed below:

 

a.       Setback (relating R Code Provision 6.2)

 

A minimum primary street setback of 2.0 metres is proposed. A maximum primary street setback is not proposed in order to provide more flexibility in locating a dwelling depending on the site conditions and the design of the dwelling.

 

A minimum rear setback of 0.5m for garages abutting a 6 metre wide laneway and 1.0 metre where garages abut a 5 metre wide laneway, similar to the provisions in ASP 27.

 

b.       Open Space (relating R Code provision 6.4)

 

i)        R30 Lots

 

          It is proposed to reduce the minimum open space from 45% to 30% for R30 lots with a frontage less than 13 metres and 45% to 40% for R30 lots with frontage greater than 13 metres, subject to providing a 2 metre solar setback to habitable rooms with major openings on the northernmost or easternmost side boundary and to provide 24m2 outdoor living area on the northernmost or easternmost side boundary. If the outdoor living area is not accessible from an internal living area, an additional outdoor living area of 20m2 will be required. This provision is currently available in ASP 27.

 

ii)       R60 lots

 

          In regard to R60 lots, it is proposed to reduce the open space to 25%, subject to providing useable space of 24m2. This provision is currently available in ASP 21A.

 

c.       Boundary Walls (relating R Code provision 6.3)

 

The following boundary wall provisions similar to those in ASP 21A are proposed:

 

Item

Single Storey (metre)

Two Storey and Above (metre)

Maximum height

3.5

6.5

Maximum length

No limit

Up to 12.0

 

 

d.       Ancillary Accommodation (relating R Code Provision 6.11)

 

The R Codes do not allow ancillary accommodation for lots less than 450m2 in area. In considering the possibility of enabling the provision of a studio apartment above a garage in areas coded R30 and above, it is proposed to allow ancillary accommodation on lots less than 450 m2 in area.


 

As a double garage is generally about 40m2 in area, the maximum area of an ancillary accommodation is limited to 40m2. An additional car parking bay for ancillary accommodation is not recommended for the following reasons:

 

·        Considering an average site area of 300m2 and 180m2 for R30 and R60 lots respectively and the proposed reduction in the minimum open space for these lots resulting in greater site coverage for dwellings, an additional car bay for ancillary accommodation within these lots may not be feasible; and

 

·        The LSP 88 area is proposed to be connected by bus routes along the central north-south Neighbourhood Connector and along Marmion Avenue. These bus routes are located within 400 metres walking distance.

 

e.         POS Interface

 

Similar to the provisions of ASP 27 and ASP 21A, lots abutting a POS are required to be orientated towards the POS area with a minimum of one habitable room (excluding bedroom) to face towards the POS area. Although the R Codes define a bedroom as a habitable room, considering its limited occupancy during the day time, it is not classified as a habitable room for the purpose of providing surveillance of the POS area. The only departure from ASP 27 provisions is that a dwelling on a lot abutting POS within the LSP 88 area is proposed to be setback at 1.0 metre compared to 3.0 metres proposed in ASP 27. Given that the dwelling adjoins a POS area, 1.0 metre setback is considered appropriate. A provision is proposed to allow a visually permeable fence on the boundary with the POS area.

 

As the above mentioned variations are currently available in other Agreed Structure Plans such as ASP 21 A, and they have proven to work effectively, it is recommended that these variations be included in the draft LSP 88.

 

In addition to the above variations the applicant is proposing single garages/car ports including tandem parking for lots less that 10 metres frontage, to ensure that garages do not dominate the primary street.  This provision is considered reasonable and is therefore supported.

Conclusion

Chappell Lambert Everett Town Planners have submitted the draft LSP Jindalee North Local Structure Plan No. 88 for the City’s consideration. The LSP makes provision for predominantly residential development with two local centres. Being located within the DSP 39 area, the draft LSP 88 has been prepared considering the principles of DSP 39. Following the public comment period, the draft LSP 88 contained in Attachment 12 has been assessed and is considered to be acceptable, subject to modifications contained in Attachment 4. It is recommended that the draft LSP 88 be considered satisfactory under subclause 9.7.1 of DPS 2 and forwarded to the WAPC for its adoption.

Statutory Compliance

Draft LSP 88 has been processed in accordance with the requirements of DPS 2.  Clause 9.6.1 of DPS 2 provides that following advertisement of a Structure Plan, Council may refuse to adopt the Structure Plan or resolve that the Structure Plan is satisfactory with or without modifications. It is recommended that the Local Structure Plan be approved with modifications.

 

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “1     Environment

1.3    Minimise impact of development on the environment

 

1.4 Improve the quality of built environment; and

 

2     Social

 

1.1     Increase choice and quality of neighbourhood and lifestyle options; and

2.4    Improve transport options and connections.”

Policy Implications

The draft LSP 88 has been assessed as per the provisions of the City’s Local Planning Policy 4.3: Structure Planning.

Financial Implications

Nil.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

 

1.      Pursuant to Clause 9.6.1 of District Planning Scheme No. 2, RESOLVES that the draft Jindalee North Local Structure Plan No. 88 as submitted by Chappell Lambert Everett Town Planners on behalf of Ocean Springs Pty Ltd, Butler Development Company and Housing Authority and as outlined in Attachment 12 to this report is satisfactory, subject to the following modifications being undertaken to the satisfaction of the Director, Planning and Sustainability:

Part 1 – Statutory Section

a)      Text

(i)      To include a provision requiring the preparation of Conservation Management Plan for the Conservation Public Open Spaces;

(ii)     To include a provision ensuring that residential lots do not abut the foreshore reserve;

(iii)    To modify Table C to include the coastal local centre with a maximum retail floor space of 300 m2;

b)      Structure Plan

(i)      To identify the 3.45 hectare and 3.22 hectare strategic Public Open Space located to the immediate north of the east-west Neighbourhood Connector as Conservation Public Open Space;

(ii)     To delete the drainage swales of the Catchment areas 2 and 4 located within the Foreshore and to accommodate them within the structure plan area;

(iii)    To depict the northern intersection of the Neighbourhood Connector and Marmion Avenue as left-in/left-out intersection only and to delete the right-in notation;

(iv)    To modify Figure 15 – Road Hierarchy and Arterial Access in Part 2 - Explanatory Report and Figure 2 - Road Hierarchy and Arterial Access of the Traffic Report in Part 3 by deleting the southernmost intersection of a Neighbourhood Connector and Marmion Avenue as it is situated outside the structure plan area;

(v)     To delete the residential area affected by the Physical Process Setback as shown on Attachment 14 to this report by 20 metres from the cadastral boundary of Lot 9, Marmion Avenue, Jindalee and to depict the affected area as a Public Open Space;

(vi)    To zone the Centre Zone as Residential Zone; and

(vii)   To locate and zone the Coastal Local Centre as Commercial Zone.

Part 2 – Explanatory Report

(i)      To include a path network plan in Section 6.0 - Movement Network by also depicting the Regional Recreation Shared Path adjacent to the foreshore.

2.       Upon receipt of the documents modified in accordance with 1 above, FORWARDS the draft Jindalee North Local Structure Plan No. 88 to the Western Australian Planning Commission for its adoption and certification:

3.       Pursuant to Clause 9.6.5 of District Planning Scheme No. 2, ADOPTS, SIGNS and SEALS the Jindalee North Local Structure Plan No. 88 documents once certified by the Western Australian Planning Commission;  and

4.       NOTES the summary of submissions received on the draft Jindalee North Local Structure Plan No. 88 included as Attachment 4, ENDORSES Administration’s responses to those submissions, FORWARDS the summary of submissions to the Western Australian Planning Commission and ADVISES the submitters of its decision.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment  1 - Lot 9 LSP

11/127244

 

2.

Attachment  2 - Lot 9 LSP

11/127245

 

3.

Attachment  3 - Lot 9 LSP

11/127791

 

4.

Attachment 4 - LSP 88

11/128644

Minuted

5.

Attachment 5 - Lot 9 LSP

11/127247

 

6.

Attachment 6 - Lot 9 LSP

11/127249

 

7.

Attachment 7 - Lot 9 LSP

11/127250

 

8.

Attachment 8 - Lot 9 LSP

11/127252

 

9.

Attachment 9 - Lot 9 LSP

11/127253

 

10.

Attachment 10 - Lot 9 LSP

11/127255

 

11.

Attachment  11 - Lot 9 LSP

11/127811

 

12.

Attachment 12 - Lot 9 LSP

11/127892

Minuted

13.

Attachment 13 - Lot 9 LSP

11/127808

 

14.

Attachment 14-  Lot 9 LSP

11/127257

 

  


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                 66


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                 67


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                 78


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                 79


 


 


 


 


 


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                 85


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                 86


 


 


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                 89


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                 90


 


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                 92


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                 93


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                 94


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                 95


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               109


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               110

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                       111

Draft

Development Applications

3.4    Proposed Extension to Ocean Keys Shopping Centre, Clarkson - DA09/1266

File Ref:                                              DA09/1266 – 11/87990

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       10         

 

Issue

To consider an application for proposed extensions and alterations to the Ocean Keys Shopping Centre in Clarkson following the public comment period and adoption of Amendment No. 6 to the Clarkson District Centre Agreed Structure Plan No. 2 (ASP 2) by the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) and the City.

 

Applicant

Greg Rowe & Associates

Owner

AMP Royal Randwick Pty Ltd

Location

Lot 406 (36) Ocean Keys Boulevard, Clarkson

Site Area

7.6300 hectares (ha)

MRS Zoning

Urban

DPS 2 Zoning

Centre

Clarkson District Centre ASP 2 Zoning

Commercial

 

 

Background

The Development Application

 

In November 2009, Greg Rowe and Associates, on behalf of AMP Royal Randwick Pty Ltd, submitted an application seeking approval for proposed extensions and alterations to the Ocean Keys Shopping Centre in Clarkson. The shopping centre is generally bounded by Ocean Keys Boulevard to the north, Pensacola Terrace to the west, a laneway to the south and Key Largo Drive to the east and includes a service station located at the south-eastern corner of Marmion Avenue and Pensacola Terrace.  Attachment 1 contains the location plan of the shopping centre.

 

Currently, the shopping centre has a retail floor space of 21,690m2 net lettable area (NLA) consisting of two supermarkets, a Discount Department Store (DDS), speciality shops, kiosks, K Auto and service station. A total car parking supply of 1,196 bays is available on-site. 204 bays are available in the basement car park near K Auto accessible from Pensacola Terrace and the remaining bays in the main car park are accessible from Key Largo Drive and the laneway.

 

It is proposed to increase the retail floor space of the shopping centre by 13,794m2 NLA to include a new DDS, two mini majors, speciality shops and kiosks and a new east-west mall running parallel to the existing mall. When developed, the total retail floor space of the shopping centre will be 35,484m2 NLA. Attachment 2 contains the plans showing the existing shopping centre and the proposed extension.

 

Prior to and since the submission of the development application, the applicant has had several meetings with Administration to discuss the proposal in detail. Through the meetings, Administration has conveyed to the applicant the need to ensure that the proposal meets the requirements of District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2) and ASP 2 to deliver a development that would create streetscapes that are interesting, of a high quality and activated.

ASP 2

 

The shopping centre is located within the ASP 2 area (refer Attachment 3) and is subject to the provisions of ASP 2. One of the provisions of ASP 2 is to limit the maximum retail floor space within the Clarkson District Centre (including the Ocean Keys Shopping Centre) to 28,800m2 NLA.

 

As the overall retail floor space of the shopping centre, when extended, would exceed the maximum retail floor space limit, the applicant in November 2009 lodged an amendment (No. 6) to ASP 2, which among other matters sought to remove the limitation on the retail floor space. No further action on the development application could be taken until such time the proposed amendment was adopted by the WAPC and the City.

 

Following a public comment period, Council at its meeting of 27 July 2010 resolved that the amendment was satisfactory subject to modifications (Item PS03-07/10). On 19 September 2011, the WAPC resolved to adopt the amendment subject to modifications. Subsequently, Council at its meeting of 11 October 2011 considered the modifications required by the WAPC and resolved to modify the amendment document accordingly (Item PS06-10/11). The provisions of the amendment relevant to the shopping centre are as follows:

 

·        No retail floor space limit shall apply;

 

·        Stage 1 of any additional development shall comprise of an expansion of no more than 13,642m2 retail NLA;

 

·        A minimum of ten residential apartments being integrated with the shopping centre fronting Ocean Keys Boulevard and/or Key Large Drive;

 

·        Car parking within the structure plan area should be provided within a range of 4.5 to 6.0 bays per 100m2 of floor space. The Traffic Impact Assessment should assess the rate of provision for major applications; and

 

·        In the Commercial Zone, Council, at its discretion, may reduce the number of car parking bays for ‘retail’ development at a rate not lower than 4.5 bays per 100m2.

 

As the shopping centre site is zoned Commercial in ASP 2, the applicant submitted modified plans (included as Attachment 4) proposing car parking bays at the optimum discretionary rate of 4.5 bays per 100m2 for the retail development. The modified plans also addressed the traffic issues raised by Administration relating to the improvements to the laneway, the intersection of Key Largo Drive and to the laneway and the intersection of Ocean Keys Boulevard and Marmion Avenue.  These modified plans are now the subject of this development application for the shopping centre’s expansion.

Detail

The details of the proposal are as follows:

 

As per the provisions of ASP 2, Ocean Keys Boulevard and Key Largo Drive have been identified as a Main Street and a Transitional Street respectively.

 

The buildings with ‘Nil’ front setback are oriented towards Ocean Keys Boulevard with predominantly active frontages and no blank facades. Awnings are proposed to give pedestrians protection from the weather. 

 


 

The multi-level car park and the DDS fronting Key Largo Drive are setback from Key Largo Drive providing a transition area between these buildings and Key Largo Drive to allow for future additions and development of buildings fronting and addressing the street.  In this regard and in response to the requirement to provide a residential component within the redevelopment, this transition area incorporates ten multiple dwellings.

 

Additional floor space

 

In addition to the existing 21,690m2 retail NLA available in the shopping centre, the applicant has proposed 13,244m2 retail NLA (which is less than the maximum 13,692m2 retail NLA provided in ASP 2). In addition to this retail floor space, 550m2 of commercial NLA has been proposed to accommodate ‘non-retail’ land uses such as ‘Office’. Therefore, when developed, the shopping centre will have an overall retail floor space of 34,934m2 NLA and a commercial floor space of 550m2 NLA. The overall total floor space in the shopping centre will be 35,484m2, as originally proposed by the applicant.

 

Car parking provision

 

The number of car parking bays proposed are as per the following table:

 

Land use

NLA (m2)

Rate of parking bays

Number of bays

Retail

34,934

4.5 bays per 100m2 (as per ASP 2)

1,572

Commercial

550

3.3 per 100m2

(as per DPS 2)

18

Total

 

 

1,590

 

The 1,590 car bays are proposed to be distributed as follows:

 

 

Parking area

No. of bays

Basement

204

Multi-level car park

1,342

K Auto

15

Service Station

29

Total

1,590

 

 

Access to the multi-level car park is proposed via Ocean Keys Boulevard with left-in/left-out movement only, and via Key Largo Drive and the laneway with full movement.

 

Movement Network

 

The proposal makes the following provisions in terms of the existing movement network:

 

·        Improvements to the 70 degree bend on the laneway located at the south-western corner of the shopping centre to ensure smooth movement of trucks and other vehicles (refer Attachment 5);

 

·        Widening the carriageway of the laneway from 5.5 to 6.5 metres between the car park driveway to the upper level car park and Key Largo Drive and to improve the intersection of Key Largo Drive and the laneway (refer Attachment 6); and

 

·        Relocating the driveway to the car park currently located at the intersection of Key Largo Drive and Caribbean Circuit in a southerly direction by approximately 40 metres between Caribbean Circuit and The Straits to provide access to the proposed multi-level car park. This driveway will also provide access to the new service area for the proposed DDS.

 

Servicing

 

New service areas off Key Largo Drive and the laneway are proposed for the DDS and Mini Major 2 and another service area is proposed off Ocean Keys Boulevard to service Mini Major 1.

 

Residential Component

 

As per the provisions of ASP 2, the applicant has proposed 10 multiple dwellings integrated with the shopping centre at the corner of Ocean Keys Boulevard and Key Largo Drive overlooking Key Largo Drive. Six of these dwellings are 1-bedroom units and the remaining four are 2-bedroom units. Five units (three 1-bedroom units and two 2-bedroom units) along with five store rooms are proposed adjoining the middle deck level of the car park and the other five units along with five store rooms are proposed adjoining the upper deck of the car park.  At the ground floor level, a residential lobby is proposed to provide access to a lift and a flight of stairs.

 

A residential parking area for 16 bays and a bin storage area for 20 bins are proposed at ground level. The car park gains access off Ocean Keys Boulevard. The car park and the ground floor residential lobby can be accessed from the forecourt located at the corner of Ocean Keys Boulevard and Key Largo Drive via two separate doors. The landscaped forecourt is surrounded by buildings on three sides.

Consultation

The original proposal (refer Attachment 2) submitted in November 2009 was subject to public consultation for a period of 28 days between 10 August and 7 September 2010 by way of placing three on-site signs, an advertisement in the Wanneroo Times, a notice on the City’s website and letters to the adjoining landowners. At the conclusion of the comment period, 11 submissions were received. The main issues raised in the submissions relate to:

 

·        Width of the laneway being too narrow to accommodate the additional traffic; and

·        Insufficient provision of car parking bays;

 

A summary of submissions and Administration’s responses are contained in Attachment 7. The summary of submissions makes reference to Attachment 8.

 

Additionally, this proposal was briefly discussed at the Council Forum on 22 November 2011.

Comment

 

Car parking Provision

 

Sub-section 7.5.3(l) of ASP 2 states that in the Commercial Zone, the number of car parking bays for retail developments may be reduced, at Council’s discretion, to a rate not lower than 4.5 bays per 100m2 of floor space where the total number of bays on the site exceeds 500 bays. At this rate, the shopping centre will require 1,590 bays as demonstrated above. Including the 16 bays required for the residential component of the proposal, the total number of bays required will be 1,606.

 

A reduced rate of 4.5 bays per 100m2 is supported for the following reasons:

 

·        The reciprocal use of parking bays that can occur in light of the variety of uses within the broader district centre. In this regard it is noted that many uses, such as video stores, fast food outlets, taverns, restaurants, cafes, and the like, do not peak in demand for parking at the same time as a retail shop. On this basis, the requirement for all uses at a centre to individually comply with the parking standards is often not necessary, as car bays can be shared by different uses throughout each day.

 

·        The WAPC’s State Planning Policy 4.2: Activity Centres recommends minimising the amount of off-street parking, particularly for centres that are readily accessible by walking, cycling or public transport. The shopping centre is well connected by public transport, cycle paths and footpaths, and therefore it is considered reasonable to minimise the amount of off-street (i.e. on-site), parking.

 

·        The City’s draft Local Planning Policy 5.2: Wanneroo Town Centre recommends a lesser provision of vehicle parking bays for non-residential development at the rate of 1 bay per 50m2.  If this rate were to be applied to the subject shopping centre, then 35,484m2 NLA would require 710 car bays.

 

Improvements to roads

 

Intersection of Marmion Avenue and Ocean Keys Boulevard

 

Currently at the intersection of Ocean Keys Boulevard and Marmion Avenue there is no provision for a left-turn slip lane on Ocean Keys Boulevard. Considering the increase in the volume of traffic on Ocean Keys Boulevard at Marmion Avenue from 12,490 to 16,880 vpd, as requested by Administration, the applicant has agreed to improve this intersection by providing a left-turn slip lane on Ocean Keys Boulevard as shown on Attachment 9. It is recommended that a condition to that effect be included in the development approval.

 

Improvements to the laneway

 

At the request of Administration, the applicant has agreed to improve the 70 degree bend on the laneway as shown on Attachments 5 and to widen the laneway and to improve the intersection of the laneway and Key Largo Drive as shown on Attachment 6. It is recommended that a condition to that effect be included in the development approval.

 

Key Largo Drive

 

The future Thursday daily traffic on Key Largo Drive between the laneway and Ocean Keys Boulevard is estimated to be approximately 6,200 vehicles per day (vpd). The WAPC’s Liveable Neighbourhoods policy recommends a road reserve width of 24.4 metre for a Neighbourhood Connector carrying a traffic volume up to 7,000 vpd making provision for single-carriageway and parking embayments, and cycle paths on both sides. The current width of Key Largo Drive road reserve is 23 metres and makes provision for cycle paths and parking embayments on both side of the road. Key Largo Drive is therefore considered to be adequate to carry the estimated volume of traffic.

 

The driveway to the multi-level car park from Key Largo Drive is estimated to carry a traffic volume of about 6,000 vpd. The traffic report does not recommend a right-turn slip lane into the driveway for the following reasons:

 

·        Caribbean Circuit is a residential street that connects Ocean Keys Boulevard and Key Largo Drive. While it will be possible for vehicles from the  east to use Caribbean Circuit to access the centre, it is not considered that this will occur to any great extent due to the proposed new driveway to the multi-level car park off Ocean Keys Boulevard; and

·        Currently the driveway into the multi-level car park from Key Largo Drive carries a traffic volume of 10,180 vpd. By proposing a new access into the car park from Ocean Keys Boulevard, traffic flows into the driveway from Key Largo Drive will significantly drop.

 

The City’s Traffic section has assessed the traffic report and concurs with the findings of the report.

 

Multi-level car park

 

The multi-level car park is proposed to be designed with landscaping and graphic treatments that will serve to screen the car parking decks from the eastern boundary. However, the applicant has not provided the details and therefore it is recommended that the planning approval include a condition requiring the final materials and finishes of the car parking structure to be detailed to the City’s satisfaction prior to the issue of a building licence.

 

Residential Component

 

R Code Provisions

 

The proposed ten (10) multiple dwellings satisfy the provisions of Part 7 of the Residential Design Codes relating to the design elements for multiple dwellings. Each unit is provided with a balcony, a store room, bin area and clothes drying area. The store rooms are provided opposite each unit across the residential lobby. The bin areas are provided on the ground floor along with the car park area. Screens have been proposed to screen off the drying areas. While only 14 bays including 3 visitor bays are required, the proposal makes provision for 16 bays.

 

Designing Out Crime Planning Guidelines

 

Some of the objectives of the WAPC’s Designing Out Crime Planning Guidelines are:

 

·        To raise awareness of key community safety, security and crime prevention issues; and

·        To ensure that planning and detailed design for redevelopment takes into consideration designing out crime principles.

 

In this regard the following matters are noted:

 

The proposal does not provide a direct access between the ground floor residential lobby and the car parking area.  Attachment 10 contains an enlarged version of the ground floor plan at the corner of Ocean Keys Boulevard and Key Largo Drive depicting the residential lobby, residential car bays, the forecourt and the doors to the residential car park and lobby. As both doors open into the forecourt, the residents from the car park would be required to step outside onto the forecourt and then enter the residential lobby. Such an arrangement is not desirable as the residents would not only be exposed to the elements of the day but also it would be potentially unsafe especially at night times. Residents should not be expected to go outside in order to enter their apartment after parking their car in the designated residents parking area.

 

One of the factors to be considered in designing out crime is that buildings need to be designed so as to not introduce ‘dead zones’ and entrapment spaces. In the subject proposal, the forecourt is likely to be an entrapment space as it is confined by buildings on three sides and open to Key Largo Drive. Consequently, the area may be subject to vandalism and anti-social behaviour.

 

It is therefore recommended that the applicant be requested to modify the design to comply with the provisions of the WAPC’s Designing Out Crime Planning Guidelines.

Further to the above, it is expected that (typical with most commercial and mixed use developments) the proposed shopping centre redevelopment will entail an expansion of the centre’s own CCTV surveillance network, which will further contribute to the perception of safety and serve as a deterrent to anti-social behaviour in and around the development.

 

Legal Agreement

 

ASP 2 requires that prior to the commencement of development for the retail expansion of the shopping centre, a legal agreement supported by a caveat on title, is to be entered into by the applicant with the City of Wanneroo and the WAPC to ensure that a minimum of ten residential apartments are constructed within stage 1. It is recommended this provision be included as condition in the development approval.

 

Conclusion

 

Greg Rowe and Associates, on behalf of AMP Royal Randwick Pty Ltd, requested approval to commence development of the proposed extensions and alterations to the Ocean Keys Shopping Centre in Clarkson. Currently, the shopping centre has a retail floor space of 21,690m2 net lettable area (NLA). The applicant proposed to increase the retail floor space of the shopping centre by 13,794m2 NLA. When developed, the total retail floor space of the shopping centre will be 35,484m2 NLA.

 

The shopping centre is located within the Clarkson District Centre Structure Plan area and is subject to the provisions of ASP 2. One of the former provisions of ASP 2 was to limit the maximum retail floor space within the Clarkson District Centre to 28,800m2 NLA. As the retail floor space of the shopping centre, when extended, would exceed the maximum retail floor space limit, the applicant requested an amendment to ASP 2, which among other matters sought to remove the limitation on the retail floor space. A requirement of the WAPC’s consideration of the amendment, however, limited the first stage of the centre’s expansion to 13,642m2 retail NLA that will result in a total retail floor space of 34,934m2 NLA. Including the proposed 550m2 commercial floor space the total floor space of the centre will be 35,484m2 NLA.

 

Following Council’s and the WAPC’s resolution to adopt the amendment, the applicant submitted the modified plans addressing the requirements of the amended ASP 2. It is recommended that the modified plans be approved subject to conditions.

Statutory Compliance

This application has been assessed in accordance with DPS 2.

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “3     Economic

3.1    Create strategic shifts in job markets to meet future needs and demands

 

3.2     Support business and initiatives.

Policy Implications

Policy Clause 1.2 of the City’s Local Planning Policy 4.2: Structure Planning states that an Agreed Structure Plan is required as a prerequisite for land zoned Centre in DPS 2 unless Council having regard to the matters listed under clause 9.11.2 of DPS 2 determines that the proposal or application is for one or more of the following:

 

a)      The amalgamation of lots or part lots;

b)      The consolidation of land for ‘super lot’ purposes to facilitate land assembly for future development; or

c)      The purpose of allowing access or the provision of services or infrastructure that would not prejudice future development outcomes.

 

As per subclause 9.8.1 of DPS 2, an Agreed Structure Plan comes into operation on the later date when it is either certified by the WAPC or adopted, signed and sealed by Council. Although adopted by the WAPC and Council subject to modification, Amendment No. 6 to ASP 2 has not yet been certified by both the WAPC and Council.

 

Clause 4.2 of DPS 2 states that if a development is subject of an application for Planning Approval and does not comply with the development standard or requirement prescribed in the scheme, Council may approve the application conditionally if Council is satisfied that the proposed development would be appropriate and not have any adverse effect upon the inhabitants of the locality or upon the likely future development of the locality. In this regard it is noted that as the amendment has been adopted by the WAPC and Council and is now merely going through an administrative procedure for its final certification, it is recommended that the subject development application be approved.

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council APPROVES the development application submitted by Greg Rowe & Associates on behalf of AMP Royal Randwick Pty Ltd in accordance with the provisions of District Planning Scheme No. 2 for the proposed extension of the Ocean Keys Shopping Centre at Lot 406 (36) Ocean Keys Boulevard, Clarkson as shown in Attachment 4 to this report, subject to the following conditions being met to the satisfaction of the Manager, Planning Implementation:

Additional Retail Floor space

1.      Stage 1 of any additional development shall not exceed more than 13,642m2 retail Net Lettable Area as per the provisions of Amendment No. 6 to the Clarkson District Centre Agreed Structure Plan No. 2 adopted by the Western Australian Planning Commission and the City of Wanneroo;

Modifications to the Plan:

2.     Modifications to the plans to ensure that the design of the multiple dwellings and associated car park and the adjoining forecourt fronting Key Largo Drive comply with the provisions of the Western Australian Planning Commission’s Designing Out Crime Planning Guidelines;

3.     Buildings fronting Ocean Keys Boulevard shall be oriented towards Ocean Keys Boulevard and shall incorporate active frontages with no blank facades and with awnings with a minimum width of 2.0 metres projecting over the road reserve at a minimum clearance of 2.75 metres above the finished pavement level. Awnings shall not encroach within 600 millimetres of the kerbline;

Improvements to the roads:

4.      Improvements to the 70 degree bend on the laneway located at the south-western corner of the shopping centre as shown on Attachment 5 to this report shall be completed at the cost of the applicant prior to the occupation of the extended Centre;

5.      Improvements to the intersection of Key Largo Drive and the laneway as shown on Attachment 6 to this report shall be completed at the cost of the applicant prior to the occupation of the extended Centre;

6.      Widening of the laneway as shown on Attachment 6 to this report shall be completed at the cost of the applicant prior to the occupation of the extended Centre;

7.      Improvements to the intersection of Marmion Avenue and Ocean Keys Boulevard as shown on Attachment 9 to this report shall be completed at the cost of the applicant prior to the occupation of the extended Centre;

Car parks:

8.      The proposed multi-level car park shall be designed and constructed as per the provisions of Australian Standard 2890 and shall make provision for a minimum of 1,358 car bays including 16 car bays for the proposed Multiple Dwelling units. The visitors car parking bays shall be marked and set aside for the visitors;

9.      The final materials and finishes of the multi-level car park to be detailed prior to the issue of a building licence;

10.    The proposed crossovers are to be constructed in concrete to commercial specifications;

11.    Existing crossover at the intersection of Key Largo Drive and Caribbean Circuit not required for this approval shall be closed; kerbs, footpaths, cycle paths and on-street car parking bays reinstated; medians closed and verges graded stabilised and landscaped, where appropriate;

12.    All the proposed pedestrian linkages within the proposed development area are to be linked to the existing pedestrian network within the surrounding road network as shown on Attachment 8 to this report;

13.    Motorcycle/scooter/bicycle parking facilities must be provided to meet Australian Standard 2890. Details of the location of bicycle parking facilities and associated end of journey facilities for employees are to be provided for approval when application is made for a building licence;

14.    Lighting shall be installed along all driveways and pedestrian pathways and in all common service areas prior to the development first being occupied;

15.    Parking areas, driveways, and points of ingress and egress shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the Australian Standard for Off-street Car Parking (AS 2890) and shall be drained, sealed and marked;

16.    Disabled parking bays shall be provided at the rate required under the Australian Standard for Off Street Parking (AS 2890) and shall be distributed across the site in locations convenient to the shopping centre entrances;

17.    Carparking bays are to be 5.5 metres long and a minimum of 2.5 metres wide. End bays are to be 2.8 metres wide and end bays in a blind aisle are to be 3.5 metres wide;

18.    No parking bays shall be obstructed in any way or used for the purposes of storage;

19.    A dedicated taxi stand shall be provided within or immediately abutting the shopping centre, in the vicinity of the shopping centre entrance(s) prior to the development first being occupied;

20.    Service vehicle manoeuvring to and within the site shall be provided in compliance with the Australian Standard for Off-street parking Part 2 – Commercial vehicle facilities (AS 2890.2).  A plan indicating service vehicle sweep paths shall be provided prior to the submission of a building licence application;

21.    Provision of at least one shopping trolley collection area for each two rows of car bays in a mid block location. The shopping trolley collection areas shall be designed sufficient to contain the trolleys, protect them from damage by vehicles and be sign posted for easy identification by shoppers;

Other:

22.    The preparation and implementation of a suitable Stormwater Drainage and Waste Water Disposal Strategy for the development.  The Strategy shall be submitted for the City’s approval when application is made for a building licence and the system shall be installed during the construction of the development;

23.    A landscape plan for the proposed development shall be lodged when application is made for a building licence;

24.    The colours, design and materials of the proposed development shall complement existing development as far as possible;

25.    A refuse removal management plan shall be prepared in consultation with the City’s Waste Services to illustrate how service vehicles will manoeuvre on the internal access ways of the development;

26.    An overall signage strategy for the development shall be submitted before any licences are issued;

27.    For all new or modified development, an acoustic consultant’s report is to be provided for the City’s approval, prior to the commencement of the development.  This report is to indicate the anticipated sound level measurements for all types of noise associated with the development indicating plant and equipment noise as well as noise associated with operational activities.  The report must also indicate any specific requirements that are needed to ensure noise emissions comply with the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulation 1997.  Upon approval of that report by the City, any modifications required to the development as a result of its recommendations, shall be made to the City’s satisfaction.  Upon completion of the development, a further report is required confirming that actual noise levels comply with the Regulations;

28.    Bin Storage Areas to be provided with a concrete floor graded to a 100mm industrial floor waste gully connected to sewer. A hose cock is required to be provided within the Bin Storage Area;

29.    All services such as air conditioning plant and compressors shall be located away from public areas.  All services and service yards shall be screened from view of streets and other public areas, including car parking areas to the City’s satisfaction.  Roof mounted equipment such as air conditioning plant and antennae shall also be screened from view of the street and other public areas, including car parking areas, to the City’s satisfaction. Relative to this condition plans and specifications of all screening required and proposed shall be submitted to the City for approval and, upon approval, such screening installed prior to occupancy of the development; and

Legal Agreement:

30.    Prior to the commencement of development for the retail expansion of the shopping centre, a legal agreement, supported by a caveat on title is to be entered into by the proponent with the City of Wanneroo and the Western Australian Planning Commission to ensure that the proposed ten (10) residential apartments are constructed as part of the proposed extension to the shopping centre. All costs associated with the preparation and execution of this agreement and associated caveat shall be borne by the proponent.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1 - OKSC

11/129982

 

2.

Attachment  2 - OKSC

11/129984

 

3.

Attachment 3 - OKSC

11/130003

 

4.

Attachment 4 - OKSC

11/129986

Minuted

5.

Attachment 5 - Fig 1

11/129328

Minuted

6.

Attachment 6 - Fig 3

11/129327

Minuted

7.

Attachment 7 - OKSC

11/131389

 

8.

Attachment 8 - 111118_BIKE + PEDESTRIAN PATHS_DA12

11/130054

Minuted

9.

Attachment  9 - OKSC

11/130005

Minuted

10.

Attachment 10 - OKSC

11/130150

 

  


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               122


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               123


 


 


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               126


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               127


 


 


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               130


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                                                              131


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               132


 


 


 


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                                                              136


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               137


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               138


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               139

3.5    Development Application - Tourism/Advertising Signs Located Within Marmion Avenue Road Reserve

File Ref:                                              DEV11/1152 – 11/124325

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       4  

 

Issue

To consider authorising administration to approve a development application for retrospective approval of five tourism signs within the Marmion Avenue regional road reserve, in the suburbs of Alkimos and Eglinton.

 

Applicant

Eugene Ferraro on behalf of the Yanchep Two Rocks Tourism Network

Owner

Crown Land - City of Wanneroo Management

Location

Marmion Avenue Regional Road Reserve, Alkimos & Eglinton

Site Area

N/A

MRS Zoning

Other Regional Road

 

 

Background

At its meeting of 25 August 2009 (Item IN10-08/09), Council approved the installation of five signs within the Marmion Avenue Road Reserve for the purpose of promoting tourism in the Yanchep Two Rocks area. The signs approved by Council were installed but later replaced by five larger signs, in contravention of the approval and without seeking consent from the City.

 

The unauthorised signs came to the City’s attention and on 19 July 2011 a direction notice was issued for the removal of the non-compliant signage.  The proponent (Yanchep Two Rocks Tourism Network) submitted an application for review (appeal) against that Direction to the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) and sought the matter to be deferred. A SAT Directions hearing was held on 2 September 2011 to determine if the applicant’s requested deferral would be granted. At that hearing, SAT ‘stayed’ (deferred) the City’s direction notice until a further order by SAT.

 

Concurrently with the SAT proceedings, a development application was lodged with the City for retrospective approval of the five tourism signs within the Marmion Avenue regional road reserve, in the suburbs of Alkimos and Eglinton. At its meeting of 20 September 2011 (PS06-09/11) Council, in its capacity as owner/manager of the road reserve, resolved (among other things) to authorise the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to sign the development application for retrospective planning approval of the five existing tourism signs, including the proposed use of the ‘back’ of the signs for display of advertisements; thus allowing the application to be formally processed.

 

The sign structures are proposed entirely within the Marmion Avenue road reserve and are therefore subject to assessment under Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS).


 

Under Planning and Development Act 2005 Instrument of Delegation 2010/10 the power to determine applications within areas zoned ‘Other Regional Roads’ (ORR) under the MRS is delegated to local governments, subject to referral to the Department of Planning (DoP) for comment and recommendation. The application was referred to DoP 24 November 2011. Subject to no objection being received within 30 days, the City may determine the application. As yet no response has been received by the City.

 

Detail

The applicant has applied for retrospective development approval to construct five signs for the purpose of tourism/advertising within the Marmion Avenue Road Reserve in the suburbs of Alkimos and Eglinton (refer Attachment 1). The sign structures are each 7.4m high and consist of a 6.4m sign mounted on two 0.8m high support poles. The proposed signs are each 2.7m wide (refer Attachment 2).

The signs incorporate the promotion of regional tourism on their ‘front’ (facing north-bound traffic), while the Tourism Network proposes to use the ‘back’ of the signs (facing south-bound traffic) to sell advertising space for ‘sponsorship’. This ‘sponsorship’ is proposed to fund the signs and raise revenue for the Tourism Network, which is a ‘not for profit’ organisation. The front of the signage originally approved by Council incorporated both the sponsor’s name (Capricorn Village) and the City of Wanneroo’s name and logo, as do the current signs.

The application is retrospective as the signs have already been constructed with the advertising already applied to the backs of three of these signs. Attachment 3 contains photographs of the front of all five signs as erected while Attachment 4 contains photographs of the back (advertising) of the three signs that currently display advertising. A City vehicle is visible in all photographs to provide a sense of scale.

Following a recent site inspection, it is noted that the top portion of the front of the signs now also incorporates commercial advertising of land for sale, which was not previously approved, was not applied for recently and appears to have been installed since and despite the City’s direction issued in respect of the unapproved signs. 

Consultation

Nil

Comment

The City has management responsibility for the subject road reserve and is therefore effectively the ‘owner’ of the land for the purpose of enabling development applications to be made. In this regard, it is important to note that the Chief Executive Officer’s (CEO’s) authorisation of the development application merely enabled that application to be made and assessed, and will in no way prejudice Council’s decision on this matter.

 

An assessment of the application was undertaken by Administration in which the following matters were considered:

 

·        The City’s Signs Local Planning Policy: Size and Location of the Signs;

·        Road Safety/ Compliance with Main Roads Western Australia Guidelines;

·        Advertising on the back of the signs; and

·        Delegation to approve the applications within MRS reserve.

 


 

Each of these matters is discussed below.

 

Signs Local Planning Policy: Size of Signs

 

The City’s Signs Local Planning Policy (Signs Policy) is silent on signage for tourism promotion. Due to the lack of direct guidance for tourism signage, and as the signs are proposed to incorporate some advertising material related to nearby residential estates, Administration also assessed the signs using the ‘Estate Sign’ guidelines of the Signs Policy, which states that estate signs shall:

 

·        be located entirely within the estate to which they relate and may be located on public land within that estate;

·        not exceed six metres by three metres, mounted on one or more support poles;

·        be located at justified strategic points within the estate to avoid unnecessary proliferation of estate signs;

·        where visible from the perimeter of the subdivision or development estate be limited to a maximum of two signs; and

·        be removed within 30 days of 95% of the lots or buildings within the estate being sold.

 

Points one, four and five above have not been directly applied in the assessment as these are considered to directly relate to the sale of property rather than the promotion of tourism. Points two and three, in relation to size and location of signs, was considered in the assessment as they directly relate to the impact of any signs on Marmion Avenue.

 

The height of the proposed signs, as shown in Attachment 2, represents a variation to the Signs Policy as the signs, excluding support poles, are marginally greater than 6m. The height variation of 0.4m is considered minor due to the design of the sign being curved at the top rather than square. Further, the surface area of the sign is 17.11m2 which is less than the possible 18m2 for a compliant sign of 6m high and 3m wide.

 

Signs Local Planning Policy: Location of Signs

 

The location of the signage approved by Council on 25 August 2009 was different to that of the signs that were erected. The applicant has justified the relocation of the signs, stating that the new locations achieve increased vehicle safety than the approved locations, due to their separation distances from the road edge and increased legibility to passing traffic.

 

Administration has considered the tourism signage having regard to the existing estate signs located along Marmion Avenue.  The separation distance and number of signs are not, at this stage, considered to result in a proliferation of signage that would be detrimental to the amenity of Marmion Avenue or the locality.

 

The signs are located within the Marmion Avenue road reserve, which will be widened to accommodate a second carriageway in the future. As per Council’s 2009 resolution, it is recommended that a condition be applied to any approval granted for the signs, requiring them to be relocated at the expense of the Yanchep Two Rocks Tourism Network when the second carriageway of Marmion Avenue is constructed.  At that time, a separate development application will need to be submitted for the City’s consideration and approval to reinstall the signs elsewhere within the road reserve.

 

Road Safety Compliance with Main Roads Western Australia Guidelines

 

The Council resolution of 25 August 2009 stated, among other things, that the individual location of the signs was to be in accordance with Main Roads Western Australia’s (MRWA’s) Clear Zone Guidelines and Aust Roads Guidelines.


 

The current application has been assessed by Administration against both the Main Roads Guidelines as well as Aust Roads Guidelines.

 

MRWA’s Assessment of Roadside Hazards identifies that based on speed and daily traffic of the relevant sections of Marmion Avenue, an 8.4m ‘clear zone’ is required from the nearest edge of the ‘travelled path’ to each of the sign structures, in order to achieve a safe separation distance between the road and the sign structures. Aust Roads Guide to Road Design identifies that a 9m ‘clear zone’ is required from the travelled path.

 

The existing signs are located between 10.4 metres and 12.2 metres from the travelled path of Marmion Avenue and meet both MRWA and the Aust Roads requirements. Notwithstanding this, the application was referred to MRWA for assessment and comment.  MRWA responded confirming that the signs are located outside the clear zone and therefore its ‘Guide to the Management of Roadside Advertising’ is not applicable.

 

Advertising on the Back of the Signs

 

The application includes a proposal to use the ‘back’ of the signs as advertising space. This signage has already been applied to three of the signs, as depicted in Attachment 4. The applicant indicates that, while the primary purpose of the signage is to promote visitation to the attractions of Yanchep and Two Rocks, given the cost of the signage, sponsorship is required to maintain the signs as well as provide a stream of income for the Tourism Network, which is a not for profit organisation. The expected return for this sponsorship is approximately $7,000 per annum per sign in the first year.

 

In the 20 September 2011 report, Administration commented that the proposed arrangement with the back of the signs would effectively constitute billboards with the advertising being controlled by the Tourism Network. At the time it was commented that the City should always retain control over advertising on its land, but that the matter could be dealt with as part of a conditional approval of a development application.

 

The Tourism Network has advised that any proposed advertising would be subject to its separate assessment and approval prior to installation and would be assessed against certain criteria restricting the size and nature of advertising. In order to manage the display of advertising on the back of the signs, it is recommended that the following condition be applied to any approval granted:

 

          “The content of the back of the signs shall, in the City’s opinion:

          (a)     be tourism related;

          (b)     not have more than 25% of its surface area taken up by the sponsors’ names, brand, logo, product or the like;

          (c)     not contain advertising that is of a general nature;

          (d)     not contain any information or graphics that are politically sensitive, religious or pornographic in nature or considered offensive to the public;

          (e)     not depict smoking or tobacco products or substances prohibited by law;

          (f)      not contravene any local law or other written law;

          (g)     not be illuminated or have moving parts; or

          (h)     not cause a hazard or undue distraction to traffic.” 


As noted above, the top portion of the front of the signs now also incorporates advertising of land for sale.  This advertising was not previously approved and is not tourism related.  Apart from the logo of the developer and the City of Wanneroo, the front of the signs (as originally approved) were and still are to be tourism based.  The existing general lot sales advertising on the front of the signs is inappropriate and should be removed.  Any approval of the signs should incorporate provisions to preclude such general advertising.

Delegation to approve the applications within MRS reserve

Under the Instrument of Delegation 2010/01, the application can only be approved by local government after referral to the DoP for comment and recommendation.

 

The application has been referred however no comment or recommendation has been received, therefore the application cannot be determined by the City. By authorising the Manager of Planning Implementation to conditionally approve the application, subject to no objection from the DoP the matter can be dealt with in a timely manner. Should the DoP provide a response that is not acceptable to the local government then the application must be immediately referred to the WAPC for determination. This means that if Council authorise the Manager Planning Implementation to approve the application and DoP do not support the proposal then the delegation for local government to approve the application is withdrawn.

Conclusion

 

If Council is satisfied that the signs have (and will continue to have) no adverse impact on Marmion Avenue and that design controls for the advertising on the back of the signs can be managed through planning conditions, then the Manager Planning Implementation should be authorised to approve the application subject to no objection received from DoP. If, however, Council is concerned that the proposal will have an adverse impact on Marmion Avenue, by virtue of the height, location or appearance of the signs, and/or that the advertising component cannot be managed through planning conditions, then the application should be refused.

Apart from the lot sales advertising appearing on the existing signs, Administration considers the impact of the signage on Marmion Avenue to be acceptable as it accords with the City’s ‘Estate Signage’ requirements, Main Roads’ requirements and Aust Roads requirements relating to traffic separation and safety.  It is therefore recommended that the authorisation be given to the Manager Planning Implementation to approve the application subject to conditions and no objection from DoP.

Statutory Compliance

The sign structures are proposed entirely within the Marmion Avenue road reserve and are therefore subject to assessment under MRS rather than the City of Wanneroo’s District Planning Scheme No. 2.

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “2     Social

2.3    Improve the capacity of local communities to support each other

Policy Implications

This application has been assessed in accordance with the City of Wanneroo’s District Planning Scheme No. 2 and the Signs Local Planning Policy.

Financial Implications

Nil


 

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council AUTHORISES the Manager of Planning Implementation to APPROVE the application for Five (5) Tourism Signs within the Marmion Avenue Road Reserve in the suburbs of Alkimos and Eglinton submitted by Eugene Ferraro on behalf of the Yanchep Two Rocks Tourism Network, as shown in Attachments 1, 2 and 3, subject to no objection being received by the Department of Planning and the following conditions:

 

1.       This approval is personal to the Yanchep Two Rocks Tourism Network and only relates to the existing five tourism signs. It does not relate to any other development within the road reserve, nor is it transferrable or assignable to any other person or entity;

 

2.       The content of the signs is restricted to (only) the promotion of tourism-related activities, opportunities and events within the City of Wanneroo, with the following exceptions:

 

·        The ‘front’ of the signs (facing north-bound traffic) shall include the name and logo ‘strap’ of the City of Wanneroo and may include the sign sponsor beneath the displayed tourism image, and the sponsor’s web address ‘strap’ above that image, as depicted in the photographs included as Attachment 3 in the Agenda Report to Council on this matter to the 13 December 2011 Council meeting;

 

·        The ‘rear’ of the signs (facing south-bound traffic) may include the sign sponsor’s name, brand or logo, to a maximum of 25% of the surface area of the sign;

 

3.       The general advertising currently on the front of the signs shall be removed and no advertising other than in accordance with condition 2 shall be permitted;

 

4.       The content of the signs shall, in the City’s opinion:

 

(a)     subject to condition 2, only be tourism related;

 

(b)     not contain advertising that is of a general nature;

 

(c)     not contain any information or graphics that are politically sensitive, religious or pornographic in nature or considered offensive to the public;

 

(d)     not depict smoking or tobacco products or substances prohibited by law;

 

(e)     not contravene any local law or other written law;

 

(f)      not be illuminated or have moving parts;

 

(g)     not cause a hazard or undue distraction to traffic.

 


 

5.       Public liability insurance of $10 million indemnifying the City from any claims or damage associated with the signs is to be provided at the expense of the applicant and thereafter maintained for the life of the sign(s) to the satisfaction of the City.  Relative to this requirement, evidence of the currency of this insurance shall be provided to the City’s satisfaction;

 

6.       Within 60 days of being given written notice by the City to do so, the signs shall be removed at the expense of the Yanchep Two Rocks Tourism Network when the second carriageway of Marmion Avenue is required to be constructed. Any proposal to relocate the signs elsewhere will be subject to a separate application for development approval; and

 

7.       The signs shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the City.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1 - Location of Signs

11/115191

Minuted

2.

Attachment 2 - Size of Signs

11/101940

Minuted

3.

Attachment 3 - Photos of front of signs

11/126883

Minuted

4.

Attachment 4 - Photos of backs of signs

11/126894

 

  


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               146


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                                                              147


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               148


 


 


 


 


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               153


 


 


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               156

3.6    Development Application - Temporary Sales Office (and associated car park, access and earthworks) at Lot 9504, 1700 Marmion Avenue, Tamala Park

File Ref:                                              DEV11/1293 – 11/126800

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       2         

 

Issue

To consider allowing a departure from Local Planning Policy 4.2: Structure Planning (LPP 4.2) and authorising Administration to support the following development at Lot 9504 (1700) Marmion Avenue, Tamala Park:

 

·        A current development application for a car park, access and earthworks (DA 2011/890); and

 

·        A future development application for a temporary sales office.

 

Applicant

Cossill & Webley Pty Ltd

Owner

City of Wanneroo, City of Joondalup, City of Vincent, City of Stirling, Town of Cambridge, City of Perth, Town of Victoria Park (together developing the land as Tamala Park Regional Council)

Location

Lot 9504 (1700) Marmion Avenue, Tamala Park

Site Area

342.97 Hectares

DPS 2 Zoning

Urban Development

 

 

Background

At its 4 May 2010 meeting (Item PS02-05/10), Council resolved that the Tamala Park Local Structure Plan No. 79 (LSP 79), encompassing all of Lot 9504, was satisfactory subject to certain modifications being made by the applicant. In April 2011 the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) wrote to the City informing that it had resolved to endorse LSP 79, subject to modifications, which were agreed by Council at its 31 May 2011 Meeting (PS08-05/11).

 

On 26 August 2011 the City received a development application (DA2011/890) from Cossill and Webley Consulting Engineers (the applicant) for earthworks, car parking and a slip road for a temporary sales office, within a portion of the subject Structure Plan area.

 

Detail

 

The applicant is seeking approval for a car park, access and earthworks on a portion of Lot 9405 in advance of an Agreed Structure Plan. The proposed works are located within an area denoted as ‘Proposed DA Boundary’ as depicted on the plan provided as Attachment 1. A site plan of the proposed works is included as Attachment 2.

 

To date, Administration is yet to receive an application for a sales office that correlates with the proposed car park, access and earthworks; however the applicant has advised that a development application would be lodged ‘in the near future’.


 

In addition to Council’s consideration to grant Delegation to Administration to determine the abovementioned development application, Administration is seeking further delegation from Council to issue a response for any temporary sales office development application within the area denoted as ‘Proposed DA Boundary’ as depicted on the plan provided as
Attachment 1.

Comment

LSP 79 is not yet ‘agreed’ and operational under the City’s District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2) as it has not yet been adopted by the WAPC or signed and sealed by the City. Further, clause 1.2 of the City’s LPP 4.2 states that, pursuant to DPS 2, an ‘agreed’ structure plan is required as a prerequisite to Council’s support for subdivision or consideration of an application for planning approval unless the development or subdivision pertain to the following:

 

a)      The amalgamation of lots or part lots;

 

b)      The consolidation of land for “superlot” purposes to facilitate land assembly for future development; or

 

c)      The purpose of allowing access or the provision of services or infrastructure that would not prejudice future development outcomes.

 

The applicant is seeking approval to construct a car park, access and earthworks. The applicant has advised Administration of their intent to lodge a separate development application at a later date for a sales office. With regard to the proposed car park, access and earthworks, the applicant is seeking planning approval for development prior to an Agreed Structure Plan being in place. The reasons put forward by the applicant in support of this development application are as follows:

 

·        The development application submitted for access, car parking and earthworks would enable preliminary works to commence;

 

·        LSP 79 has been approved by the Council and WAPC subject to modification but these are largely notational and concerned with updating the technical appendices in line with LSP 79, and do not materially affect  the overall land use arrangements;

 

·        The area to which this request relates and the nature of the request itself, is unaffected by Council’s adopted modifications to LSP 79.

 

Administration is in agreement with the above points and has no objection to Council granting dispensation from the aforementioned provision of LPP 4.2 in this instance, to allow Administration to grant conditional development approval for earthworks, access and car parking and to determine a future development application for a temporary sales office within the area depicted on the plan included as Attachment 1 to this report.

 

Should approval of the subject developments be granted by the City, the applicant should accept the risk that any development undertaken at this preliminary stage may need to be modified at a later date, in response to any impending WAPC subdivision approval or engineering design drawings and finished road and lot levels approved by the City.

 


 

Council has already delegated authority to Administration to make decisions of this nature under DPS 2 and the Planning and Development Act 2005 (Delegated Authority Clause 9.3), however, as these proposals do not comply with LPP 4.2, a separate one-off delegation of authority will be required in accordance with clause 8.6.1 of DPS 2 (by Absolute Majority) to enable these applications to be processed. A recommendation to this effect is included in this report.

 

An alternative is to recommend that Council approve the development application. Administration has not recommended approval in this report, as the submitted development application is subject to further internal assessment that is yet to be completed by Administration and is pending the submission of a further development application for a sales office. Delegation from Council to approve the development application is also sought in this instance, as the applicant is requesting prompt approval of the proposed works, and as Council is in recess in January 2012, Administration could therefore prepare and issue approval (with Council’s Delegation) immediately once a further development application for a sales office has been lodged to the satisfaction of Administration, and assessment of the development application for the car park, access and earthworks has been completed.

Statutory Compliance

Granting of a one-off delegation of authority to staff to conditionally approve the abovementioned development applications will require Council to exercise the provisions of subclause 8.6.1 of DPS 2 to grant delegated authority to do so, by Absolute Majority.

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “4     Governance

4.6    Provide and maintain a high standard of governance and accountability

Policy Implications

As discussed above, subclauses 1.1 and 1.2 within the “Policy Table” of LPP 4.2 requires an Agreed Structure Plan to be in place as a prerequisite to Council’s consideration of an application for planning approval.

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Absolute Majority

Recommendation

That Council pursuant to Clause 8.6.1 of the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2, DELEGATES BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY to the Manager Planning Implementation, over and above those already contained within Delegated Authority Clause 9.3, the power to:

 


 

1.      Determine a Development Application (DA2011/890) submitted by Cossill and Webley to construct a car park and slip road and undertake the associated earthworks as depicted on the plan included as Attachment 2 of this report subject to the conditions deemed appropriate by that officer; and

 

2.      Determine any future Development Application to construct a temporary sales office within the area depicted on the plan included as Attachment 1 in this report, subject to conditions deemed appropriate by that officer.

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1 - Council Report - Extent of Works - Tamala Park

11/128424

Minuted

2.

Attachment 2 - Site Plan for Proposed Works

11/132758

Minuted

  


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               160


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                                                              161


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               162

3.7    Development Application – Clearing and Bulk Earthworks at Lot 9002 (2611) Marmion Avenue, Alkimos

File Ref:                                              DEV11/1293 – 11/115204

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       1         

 

Issue

To consider allowing a departure from Local Planning Policy 4.2: Structure Planning (LPP 4.2) and authorising Administration to support the following development applications at Lot 9002 (2611) Marmion Avenue, Alkimos:

 

·        A current development application for clearing and earthworks (DA2011/967); and

 

·        A future stage 1 subdivision application.

 

Applicant

Cossill & Webley

Owner

Landcorp

Location

Lot 9002 (2611) Marmion Avenue, Alkimos

Site Area

224.4 Hectares

DPS 2 Zoning

Urban Development

 

 

Background

At its 31 May 2011 meeting (Item PS06-05/11), Council resolved that the South Alkimos Local Structure Plan No. 72 (LSP 72), encompassing all of Lot 9002, was satisfactory subject to certain modifications being made by the proponent.  LSP 72 was subsequently modified and referred to the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) for final adoption in accordance with Council’s decision.

 

On 4 October 2011 the City received a development application (DA2011/967) from Cossill and Webley Consulting Engineers (the applicant) to undertake bulk earthworks within a portion of the subject Structure Plan area.

 

Detail

The applicant is seeking approval to undertake clearing and bulk earthworks on a portion of Lot 9002 in advance of any subdivision approval from the WAPC, only in the area denoted as ‘Extent of Stage 1 Earthworks’ as depicted on the plan provided as Attachment 1.

 

To date, Administration is yet to receive any subdivision referral from the WAPC that correlates with the proposed earthworks; however the applicant has advised that a subdivision application would be lodged ‘in the near future’. In addition to Council’s consideration to grant Delegation to Administration to determine the abovementioned development application, Administration is seeking further delegation from Council to issue a response for any subdivision referral from the WAPC within the area denoted as ‘Extent of Stage 1 Earthworks’ as depicted on the plan provided as Attachment 1.

Comment

LSP 72 is not yet finally ‘agreed’ and operational under the City’s District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2) as it has not yet been adopted by the WAPC or signed and sealed by the City. 


 

Further, clause 1.2 of the City’s LPP 4.2 states that, pursuant to DPS 2, an ‘agreed’ structure plan is required as a prerequisite to Council’s support for subdivision or consideration of an application for planning approval, unless the development or subdivision pertain to the following:

 

a)      The amalgamation of lots or part lots;

 

b)      The consolidation of land for “superlot” purposes to facilitate land assembly for future development; or

 

c)      The purpose of allowing access or the provision of services or infrastructure that would not prejudice future development outcomes.

 

The proponent of the subject proposal has lodged a development application, seeking planning approval for development prior to an Agreed Structure Plan being in place. The reasons put forward by the proponent in support of this development application are as follows:

 

·        The Development Application will enable preliminary earthworks to commence, without prejudicing any decision by the WAPC on any future subdivision application;

 

·        The area to which this request relates and the nature of the request itself, is unaffected by Council’s adopted modifications to the respective Structure Plan; and

 

·        Approval of this request will enable access to the site and facilitate the early extension of essential services and provide for early construction of dwellings.

 

Administration is in agreement with the above points and has no objection to Council granting dispensation from the aforementioned provision of LPP 4.2 in this instance, to allow Administration to grant conditional development approval for the proposed bulk earthworks, subject to the following:

 

·        The earthworks being consistent with a valid subdivision referral from the WAPC;

 

·        The proponent accepts the risk that any earthworks undertaken at this preliminary stage may need to be revised at a later date, in response to any impending WAPC subdivision approval or engineering design drawings and finished road and lot levels approved by the City; and

 

·        Any approval granted for the proposed earthworks will be restricted to the movement of soil around the site for cut-to-fill purposes and will not authorise any trenching or laying of services.

 

Administration also has no objection to Council granting dispensation from the aforementioned provision of LPP 4.2 in this instance, to allow Administration to support an application for subdivision approval within the development application area, in accordance with the LSP but ahead of it being ‘agreed’.

 

Council has already delegated authority to Administration to make decisions of this nature under DPS 2 except where (as in this case) the proposal does not accord with an adopted policy (Delegated Authority Clause 9.3). As the proposed development application and possibly the future subdivision application (depending on when it is submitted), represent a departure from LPP 4.2, a separate one-off delegation of authority is recommended to allow Administration to process these applications.

 

An alternative is to recommend that Council approve the development application. Administration has not recommended approval in this report, as the development application cannot be cross-referenced with a subdivision referral from the WAPC, and is subject to further internal assessment that is yet to be completed by Administration. Delegation from Council to approve the development application is also sought in this instance, as the applicant is requesting prompt approval of the proposed works, and as Council is in recess in January 2012, Administration could therefore prepare and issue approval (with Council’s Delegation) immediately once a subdivision referral from the WAPC and assessment of the development application has been completed.

Statutory Compliance

In accordance with clause 8.6.1 of DPS 2 Council may, by absolute majority, grant a one-off delegation of authority to Administration to conditionally approve the proposed bulk earthworks development application and to respond to the subdivision application for that area when it is lodged (and ahead of LSP 72 being finally ‘agreed’).

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “4     Governance

4.6    Provide and maintain a high standard of governance and accountability

Policy Implications

This proposal represents a departure from LPP 4.2, for which Council approval is required.

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Absolute Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council, pursuant to Clause 8.6.1 of the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2, DELEGATES BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the following powers to the Manager Planning Implementation, over and above those already contained within Delegated Authority Clause 9.3:

1.       Provide a referral response to the Western Australian Planning Commission for a subdivision within the “Stage 1 Earthworks Boundary” depicted on the plan included as Attachment 1, subject to conditions deemed appropriate by that officer; and

2.      Determine the Development Application (DA2011/967) submitted by Cossill and Webley to undertake Clearing and Bulk Earthworks (cut-to-fill only) within the area identified as “Stage 1 Earthworks Boundary” depicted on the plan included as Attachment 1, providing such works accord with a subdivision application referral for that area from the Western Australian Planning Commission and subject to conditions deemed appropriate by that officer.

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1 - Stage 1 Earthworks Boundary

11/115238

Minuted

  


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               165


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               166

3.8    Development Application – Bulk Earthworks and Other Development at Lot 2 Marmion Avenue, Eglinton

File Ref:                                              DEV11/1350 – 11/121421

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       2         

 

Issue

To consider the acceptability of development prior to an Agreed Structure Plan being in place, as is required by Local Planning Policy 4.2: Structure Planning (LPP 4.2), for a current development application for a temporary land sales office at Lot 2, Marmion Avenue, Eglinton (DA2011/1012).

 

Applicant

Development Planning Strategies

Owner

Eglinton Estates Pty Ltd Atf Sns Trust

Location

Lot 2 (3100) Marmion Avenue, Eglinton

Site Area

198.18 Hectares

DPS 2 Zoning

Urban Development

 

 

Background

At its 8 February 2011 meeting Council resolved that the Eglinton Local Structure Plan No. 82 (LSP 82) was satisfactory subject to certain modifications (PS01-02/11) and referred LSP 82 to the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC).  At that time, Council also resolved to delegate authority to Administration to:

 

a)      Provide a recommendation to the Western Australian Planning Commission for approval of the subdivision to create the 43 lots shown on the plan attached to that report;  and

 

b)      Grant approval to the proponent‘s Development Application for Bulk Earthworks (cut-to-fill only) within the Stage 1 subdivision application shown on the plan attached to that report.

 

In accordance with item a) above, Administration provided a recommendation to the WAPC for approval of subdivision 143436, subject to conditions. In accordance with item b) above, Administration approved the proponent’s development application for bulk earthworks (cut-to-fill only) on 9 March 2011 (DA2010/1428).

 

Administration later received a revised (second) development application (DA2011/634) from the applicant to amend the Planning Approval issued on 9 March 2011 to:

 

·        Realign the “Clearing and Earthworks Boundary”;

 

·        Construct a sales office, associated car parking and access road;

 

·        Utilise the site compound during the construction of various stages within the estate;

 

·        Include a mulching area; and

 

·        Include an infrastructure service corridor for the provision of services from the Shorehaven estate to the south.

 

Council considered this revised application at its 26 July 2011 Meeting (PS06-07/11), where it resolved to delegate authority to Administration to approve the revised application. Administration subsequently granted a further planning approval on 10 August 2011.

 

Detail

On 13 October 2011 the City received another (third) development application (DA2011/1012) from Development Planning Strategies (the applicant). A site plan depicting the extent of works proposed as part of this development application is included as Attachment 1.  The extent of the proposed works is summarised below:

 

·        A further modification to the earthworks boundary, previously approved by Administration, to facilitate preliminary works on a ‘District Playing Fields’ site, in the absence of a subdivision approval issued by the WAPC. A subdivision application encompassing the ‘District Playing Fields’ site (WAPC reference 144914) has been received by Administration for its comment;

 

·        A further modification to the earthworks boundary, previously approved by Administration, to undertake earthworks adjacent to (but not within) public road reserves subject to WAPC subdivision approval. The applicant has argued that such works are necessary in facilitating the construction of public roads; and

 

·        The installation of an interim sales office, as well as carrying out associated earthworks, car parking and access. The applicant has suggested that an interim location for the sales office is necessary on a temporary basis until such time as the necessary Federal Government environmental (clearing) approvals are granted to facilitate the installation of the sales office on the previously approved site (refer to DA2011/634). The applicant intends to erect the same demountable sales office that was approved previously by Administration (refer Attachment 2).

Comment

LSP 82 is not yet finally ‘agreed’ and operational under the City’s District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2) as it has not yet been adopted by the WAPC or signed and sealed by the City.  Further, clause 1.2 of the City’s LPP 4.2 states that, pursuant to DPS 2, an ‘agreed’ structure plan is required as a prerequisite to Council’s support for subdivision or consideration of an application for planning approval, unless the development or subdivision pertain to the following:

 

a)      The amalgamation of lots or part lots;

 

b)      The consolidation of land for “superlot” purposes to facilitate land assembly for future development; or

 

c)      The purpose of allowing access or the provision of services or infrastructure that would not prejudice future development outcomes.

 

The proponent of the subject proposal has lodged a development application, seeking planning approval for development prior to an Agreed Structure Plan being in place. The reasons put forward by the proponent in support of this development application are as follows:

 

·        The Development Application will enable preliminary earthworks to commence, without prejudicing any decision by the WAPC on any future subdivision application;

 

·        The area to which this request relates and the nature of the request itself, is unaffected by Council’s adopted modifications to the respective Structure Plan; and

 

·        Approval of this request will enable access to the site and facilitate the early extension of essential services and provide for early construction of dwellings.

 

Administration is in agreement with the above points and has no objection to Council granting dispensation from the aforementioned provision of LPP 4.2 in this instance, to allow Administration to grant conditional development approval for the proposed bulk earthworks, subject to the following:

 

·        The proponent accepts the risk that any earthworks undertaken at this preliminary stage may need to be revised at a later date, in response to any impending WAPC subdivision approval or engineering design drawings and finished road and lot levels approved by the City; and

 

·        Any approval granted for the proposed earthworks will be restricted to the movement of soil around the site for cut-to-fill purposes and will not authorise any trenching or laying of services.

 

Council has already delegated authority to Administration to make decisions of this nature under DPS 2 except where (as in this case) the proposal does not accord with an adopted policy (Delegated Authority Clause 9.3). As the proposed development application represents a departure from LPP 4.2, a separate one-off delegation of authority is recommended to allow Administration to process these applications.

 

An alternative is to recommend that Council approve the development application. Administration has not recommended approval in this report, as the development application is subject to further internal assessment that is yet to be completed by Administration. Delegation from Council to approve the development application is also sought in this instance, as the applicant is requesting prompt approval of the proposed works, and as Council is in recess in January 2012, Administration could therefore prepare and issue approval (with Council’s Delegation) immediately once assessment has been completed.

Statutory Compliance

Granting of a one-off delegation of authority to staff to conditionally approve the abovementioned development applications will require Council to exercise the provisions of subclause 8.6.1 of DPS 2 to grant delegated authority to do so, by Absolute Majority.

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “4     Governance

4.6    Provide and maintain a high standard of governance and accountability

Policy Implications

As discussed above, subclauses 1.1 and 1.2 within the “Policy Table” of LPP 4.2 requires an Agreed Structure Plan to be in place as a prerequisite to Council’s consideration of an application for planning approval.

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Absolute Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council pursuant to Clause 8.6.1 of the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2, DELEGATES BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY to the Manager Planning Implementation, over and above those already contained within Delegated Authority Clause 9.3 the power to grant approval to the Development Application (DA2011/1012) submitted by Development Planning Strategies to undertake Clearing and Bulk Earthworks (cut-to-fill only), and the development of an interim sales office, access and parking within the areas identified within “Approved DA Boundary (DA2011/634)” and “Proposed New DA Boundary” as depicted on the plan included as Attachment 1 in this report, subject to conditions deemed appropriate by that officer.

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1 (Revised) - Extent of Earthworks Proposed - (DA2011/1012)

11/128462

Minuted

2.

Attachment 2 - Site Plan & Floor Plan - Sales Office

11/132723

 

  


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                                                              170


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                                                              171


 


 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                       174

Draft

Other Matters

3.9    Subdivisional Retaining Walls Over 3.0 Metres in Height - Lots 134 and 135 Landsdale Road, Landsdale (WAPC 142790)

File Ref:                                              SD142790 – 11/125027

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       2         

 

Issue

To consider approval of subdivisional development retaining walls over 3.0 metres and up to 4.19 metres in height on Lots 134 and 135 Landsdale Road, Landsdale (WAPC 142790).

 

Background

Council’s ‘Retaining Wall’ policy provides that subdivisional retaining walls over 3.0 metres in height require consideration and approval by Council.

 

The subject land is located within the East Wanneroo Cell 5 Structure Plan.  On 2 December 2010, the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) granted subdivision approval for 33 R20 residential lots ranging in size between 454 m2 and 557 m2 and three R40 grouped dwelling sites ranging in size between 913 m2 and 1,725 m2 (WAPC Ref 142790).

 

The WAPC proposed a number of conditions on the approval, including the following:

 

“9.       The land being filled and/or drained at the subdivider’s cost to the satisfaction of the Western Australian Planning Commission and any easements and/or reserves necessary for the implementation thereof, being granted free of cost.” 

 

Engineering drawings have been submitted on behalf of the subdivider in fulfilment of the above condition, depicting retaining walls over 3.0m in height. 

Detail

The subdivider’s consulting engineer, Westcoast Engineering (WA) P/L, on behalf of the landowners/developers, Watson Property Group Baldivis Village Ltd, has prepared design drawings including retaining walls exceeding 3.0 metres in height for the subdivision of Lots 134 and 135 Landsdale Road, Landsdale.  Refer to Attachment 1 for the location plan. 

 

The consulting engineer’s justification for the proposed retaining walls exceeding 3.0m in height is summarised as follows:

 

The site is bounded by lots 502,501,506,715 and 716 to the north, Lots 846, 845,844,843,842,841,840 and 824 to the west, Lots 613,614,621,622 and Falkner Street to the east and Landsdale Road to the south.  Existing height constraints imposed by current land topography and fall of land from south/west to north/east have combined to elevate some of the walls in Lots 236,235,234,227,225,206,205, 203 and 202 over the 3.0m height restriction to ensure a level building platform for the prospective purchasers and provide essential services to the site.


 

Consultation

The subdivider’s consulting engineer initially proposed retaining walls on the common boundary of existing residential lots. In accordance with Councils ‘Retaining Wall’ policy, where a boundary retaining wall within 10 metres of a dwelling on an adjoining property in a different ownership is proposed, its height shall be determined in accordance with the Residential Design Codes for a distance of 80 metres along the wall (centred on the adjoining dwelling). The subdivider wrote to all affected adjoining landowners requesting their agreement to the proposed retaining walls and three objections were received from the owners of neighbouring Lots 841, 842 and 843.

 

The subdivider subsequently amended the retaining wall proposal to locate the retaining walls 1.5 metres from the boundary. In this regard, Part 6.3.3 of the residential Design Codes – ‘Setback of Retaining Walls’ prescribes acceptable development as being ‘Retaining walls setback back from common boundaries in accordance with the setback provisions of table 1, tables 2a and 2b and figure 3’.  The relevant section is table 2a, which prescribes that walls less than 3.5 metres in height and more than 30 metres in length shall be setback 1.5 metres from the boundary.

Comment

The design of retaining walls higher than 3.0m was instigated by the developer to provide level blocks in an area where land falls across the site.  The majority of the retaining walls in the area do not exceed 3.0m, with those greater than 3.0m in height ranging from 3.27 to 3.72m, with only one retaining wall exceeding that range at 4.10m in height.  All of the walls exceeding 3.0m in height are located around the perimeter of the subdivision to the north, west and east sides (refer Attachment 2). 

 

Administration has considered the proposal and the need to accommodate the established ground levels surrounding the subject land, which cause a substantial fall of approximately 21m across Lots 134 and 135 from 84.62 AHD at its north-west corner to 63.34 at its south-west corner at Landsdale Road.  As the land to the north of the subdivision is higher than the proposed finished lot levels and the land to the west is lower, any changes to levels to reduce the height of the walls to the north would increase the height of the walls to the west and vice versa.  In view of these facts, Administration is prepared to support the proposal.

Statutory Compliance

A Building Licence will separately need to be granted for the retaining walls prior to their construction.

 

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “1     Environment

1.3    Minimise impact of development on the environment

 

1.4     Improve the quality of the built environment

 

 2       Social

 

          2.1     Increase choice and quality of neighbourhood and lifestyle options”.

Policy Implications

Application for approval to construct retaining walls exceeding 3.0 metres in height has been processed in accordance with Council’s Retaining Walls Policy.

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council AUTHORISES approval of the retaining walls higher than 3.0 metres and up to 4.19 metres proposed for Lots 134 and 135 Landsdale Road, Landsdale (WAPC No 142790), as depicted on the plan included as Attachment 2.

 

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1 - Location Plan

11/135670

 

2.

Attachment 2 - Retaining Walls

11/128617

Minuted

  


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               177

 

 



DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               178


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               179

3.10  Subdivisional Retaining Walls Over 3.0 Metres in Height - Lot 130 Landsdale Road Stage 2, Landsdale (WAPC 141832)

File Ref:                                              SDS141832/S2 – 11/123061

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       3         

 

Issue

To consider approval of subdivisional development retaining walls over 3.0 metres in height and up to 4.6 metres in height at Lot 130 Landsdale Road, Landsdale (WAPC 141832).

 

Background

Council’s ‘Retaining Wall’ policy provides that subdivisional retaining walls over 3.0 metres in height require consideration and approval by Council.

Detail

McDowall Affleck, on behalf of the developer, Mario Casella & Sons Builders Pty Ltd, has designed retaining walls exceeding 3.0 metres in height as part of their subdivision of Lot 130 Landsdale Road, Landsdale.  Refer to Attachment 1 for the location plan.

 

McDowall Affleck has designed and will superintend the construction of this subdivision.  Their justification for approval of the retaining walls exceeding 3.0 metres in height can be summarised as follows:

 

·        The road design follows the natural surface as best as possible while conforming to Urban Road Design Manuals.  This design dictates the levels to be set for the lots, which in turn dictate the heights of the retaining walls.  Design options are also constrained by the existing Marginson Road levels and proposed road design for the approved subdivision on Lot 129 Landsdale Road to the west.

 

·        There are six lots (three lots back to back) where retaining walls are over 3.0 metres, as shown on Attachment 2.  None of these retaining walls will be fronting the road, hence will not create any visual impact from the road.  Attachment 3 shows the cross sections throughout the site at various locations.

Consultation

Nil

Comment

The design of retaining walls higher than 3.0 metres was instigated by the developer, Mario Casella & Sons Builders Pty Ltd, to provide level blocks in an area where land fall across the site ranges from 56.5 to 68.0 natural ground level.  The AHD peg 58.81 is located at the intersection of Landsdale Road and Marginson Drive and the AHD peg 67.99 is located at opposite the existing residence in Marginson Drive, both marked on Attachment 2.  The West Australian Planning Conditions also require coordinating of levels with any adjoining development.  This results in sections of the subdivision where retaining walls are higher than 3.0 metres (ranging from 4.20 metres to 4.60 metres).

 


 

Administration supports the proposed design for the following reasons:

 

Maintaining 1 in 6 batters to the lot

The lots throughout the subdivision which are situated on the low side of the road have been designed to be up to 0.5 metres lower than the road level.  This design maintains the City’s maximum allowable batter of 1 in 6.  This maximum allowable batter is also used where the lots are on the high side of the road (up to 1 metre higher than the road level).  Changing the design levels would result in batters greater than the maximum 1 in 6, which would be unacceptable.

 

Coordination of levels with adjoining lots

If the road profiles were altered to reduce retaining wall heights, problems would be created for the future development of neighbouring sites with the continuation of the roads, drainage and retaining walls.

 

One way road cross fall

The roads have been designed with one way ‘cross fall’ to reduce the height difference and therefore the retaining wall heights between the lots.

Statutory Compliance

A Building Licence is necessary for all retaining walls before construction can commence.

 

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “1     Environment

1.3    Minimise impact of development on the environment

 

 

1.4     Improve the quality of the built environment

 

          2        Social

 

                   2.1 Increase choice and quality of neighbourhood and lifestyle options”.

Policy Implications

Application for approval to construct retaining walls exceeding 3.0 metres in height and up to 4.6 metres in height has been processed in accordance with Council’s Retaining Walls Policy.

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 


 

Recommendation

That Council AUTHORISES approval of the retaining walls higher than 3.0 metres proposed for Lot 130 Landsdale Road, Landsdale (WAPC 141832), as depicted on the plan included as Attachment 2.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1 - Location Plan

11/132658

 

2.

Attachment 2 - Layout & Heights

11/132782

Minuted

3.

Attachment 3 - Cross Section

11/132789

 

  


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               182


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               183


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               184

  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                       185

Draft

City Businesses

Regulatory Services

3.11  Provision of an Emergency Services Levy Grant Scheme Funded Incident Control Vehicle

File Ref:                                              3916V02 – 11/131436

Responsible Officer:                           Director, City Businesses

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       1         

 

Issue

To consider entering into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Fire and Emergency Services Authority of Western Australia (FESA) for the provision of an Emergency Services Levy (ESL) Grant Scheme funded Incident Control Vehicle (ICV).

 

Background

FESA has approved ESL Grant Scheme funding for the provision of a replacement ICV.

Detail

The ICV is a vehicle that forms part of an integrated network of response vehicles and arrangements within Western Australia. Although intended for use at a regional level, the vehicle will be branded with a livery reflecting the Wanneroo Fire Support Brigade and FESA, and will be based at Wanneroo.

Consultation

Nil

Comment

A copy of the MOU for the Provision of an Emergency Services Levy Grant Scheme Funded Incident Control Vehicle is attached to this report (Attachment 1). The MOU clearly outlines the objectives of the MOU, and the acknowledgement and undertakings of both FESA and the City of Wanneroo.

 

The MOU will remain as a guiding management document for the period that an ESL Grant Scheme funded and maintained ICV remains with the City, with a formal review to be conducted between the parties at least once every three years.

Statutory Compliance

The MOU does not constitute or create, and shall not be deemed to constitute any legally binding or enforceable obligations on the part of either the City of Wanneroo or FESA.

 

The City of Wanneroo and FESA have obligations under the following legislation in relation to the provision of fire management services:

 

·    Fire Brigades Act 1942

·    Bush Fires Act 1954

·    FESA WA Act 1998

 

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “2     Social

2.4    Improve community safety

 

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

All capital and operating costs for the ICV will be funded through the ESL Grant Scheme.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       AUTHORISES the Chief Executive Officer to sign the Memorandum of Understanding between the Fire and Emergency Services Authority of Western Australia and the City of Wanneroo for the Provision of an Emergency Services Levy Grant Funded Incident Control Vehicle; and

2.       NOTES the Memorandum of Understanding will remain in force for the period that an Emergency Services Levy Grant Scheme funded and maintained Incident Control Vehicle remains with the City, with a formal review to be conducted between the parties at least once every three years.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

FESA CoW MOU - Provision of an Emergency Services Levy Grant Scheme Funded Incident Control Vehicle (ICV)

11/131479

 

  


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                      187

                                                    

            

 

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

 

 

 

 

BETWEEN THE

 

 

FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES AUTHORITY OF

WESTERN AUSTRALIA

 

AND

 

 

 

CITY OF WANNEROO

 

FOR

 

 

 

 

PROVISION OF AN EMERGENCY SERVICES LEVY

GRANT SCHEME FUNDED

INCIDENT CONTROL VEHICLE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.      PURPOSE

 

This Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is intended to identify and document the arrangements, in relation to the provision and requirements for the allocation of an Emergency Services Levy Grant Scheme funded emergency response Incident Control Vehicle (ICV), between the City of Wanneroo (City) and the Fire and Emergency Services Authority of Western Australia, (FESA).

This MOU does not constitute or create, and shall not be deemed to constitute, any legally binding or enforceable obligations on the part of any party.

 

2.    FESA

 

This MOU will support FESA’s mission, vision and values:

Mission:            In partnership with the people of Western Australia to:

·     Improve community safety practices; and

·     Provide timely, quality and effective emergency services.

Vision:               A safer community.

Values:              Put the community first;

                            Work together as a committed team;

                            Respect and value each other;

                            Continuously improve our service;

                            Act with integrity and honesty;

                            Have open and honest two-way communications; and

                            Strive to keep ourselves and others safe.

 

3.    CITY OF WANNEROO

 

Vision: The City of Wanneroo, the centre for creative and sustainable growth, delivering strong, vibrant and connected communities.

Mission: Through strategic partnerships and effective leadership, we will provide         spaces, places and services that:

·    Build on our natural resources and cultural heritage

·    Create distinct and vibrant village communities

·    Enhance lifestyle choices

·    Foster economic prosperity

·    Encourage citizen and stakeholder participation in governance and development decisions.    

Values: Our values describe our core beliefs and guide our behaviour as individuals and as an organisation so that we can achieve our vision and improve the quality of services we offer to the community.

 

Team work: we build functional relationships and work collaboratively to achieve common goals.

Integrity: we behave in an honest, open, respectful and accountable manner.

Communication: we practice clear and timely exchange of information and feedback.

Innovation: we add creativity and excitement to the workplace and projects we undertake.

Continuous Improvement: we build capacity by improving our systems and processes.

Valuing Our People: we are committed to providing a safe workplace and the development of a healthy, productive, flexible and skilled workforce to adequately resource the organisation.     

 

4.    DEFINITIONS

 

BFS                Bush Fire Service

CBFCO         Chief Bush Fire Control Officer

COMCEN      FESA Communications Centre

DM (BFS)      District Manager (Bush Fire Service)

ESL                Emergency Services Levy

ICV                 Incident Control Vehicle

 

5.    MOU OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this MOU are;

5.1      To establish specific responsibilities with respect to the provision of a strategic Incident Control Vehicle to the City, in particular regarding:

§ requirements and standards for funding, maintenance and repair for the allocated vehicle;

§ minimum standards of brigade capability in relation to manning and response times;

§ service delivery standards, turnout arrangements and authorised use of the vehicle; and

§ future Resource to Risk reviews and the understanding that the vehicle may be recommended to be reallocated to reflect changes in risk.

5.2      To establish an agreement between the City of Wanneroo and FESA, under Part 3 section 12(2)(e) and (f) of the Fire and Emergency Services Authority of Western Australia Act 1998, to ensure the City and its brigades are supported, trained, equipped and capable of providing appropriate and timely emergency services to the WA community.

 

 

 

6.    ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND UNDERTAKINGS BY FESA

FESA acknowledges it shall:

6.1      provide through ESL Grant Scheme funding an Incident Control Vehicle, with livery reflecting the Wanneroo Fire Support Brigade and FESA, which will be available for use in that Brigade’s normal operations;

6.2      provide and support the City with standards for servicing and maintaining the Incident Control Vehicle, including an audit and technical support function to ensure allocated vehicles reach their serviceable life;

6.3      provide ESL Grant Scheme funding to maintain, repair and operate the Incident Control Vehicle under the terms of this agreement; and

6.4      notify the City’s CBFCO / FESA’s DM (BFS) through an appropriate means at any time the vehicle is mobilised outside its primary response area.

 

7.      ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND UNDERTAKINGS BY THE CITY OF WANNEROO

 

The City acknowledges:

7.1      that the Incident Control Vehicle is a strategic appliance that forms part of an integrated network of response vehicles and arrangements within Western Australia;

7.2      and agrees the response area will include areas outside but adjacent to the City.  Therefore this vehicle may be mobilised regularly and for extended durations to incidents outside the boundaries of the City at the discretion of FESA with notification to the City’s CBFCO / FESA’s DM (BFS);

7.3      that emergency vehicles are required to respond in a timely manner and therefore the Wanneroo Fire Support Brigade will be required to maintain the capability to mobilise the vehicle both within and outside the City for extended periods of time.  If the Wanneroo Fire Support Brigade is unable to maintain this capability the City agrees to immediately return the vehicle to FESA for reallocation (Note: a lack of capability is not demonstrated by a single event provided for in clause 7.4 below);

7.4      that if the Wanneroo Fire Support Brigade are unable to mobilise the Incident Control Vehicle then FESA will be provided access to the vehicle and may crew and deploy the vehicle;

7.5      that the Incident Control Vehicle will only be utilised for Emergency Service requirements and use for other activities will require the agreement of the FESA Chief Operations Officer or delegated authorised officer; and

 

 

 

7.6      that FESA will conduct future Resource to Risk reviews over the life of the Incident Control Vehicle and should the outcome of a review identify the community would be better serviced through the reallocation of the Incident Control Vehicle then the City, upon request from FESA, undertakes to return the vehicle  for reallocation.

8.    DURATION AND AMENDMENT    

This MOU will remain in force for the period that an ESL Grant Scheme funded and maintained Incident Control Vehicle remains within the City, with a formal review to be conducted between the parties at least once every three years.

This Agreement shall not be altered, varied or modified in any respect except by agreement in writing.

9.    DISPUTE RESOLUTION

The parties must first attempt to resolve any dispute arising between them in relation to any matter the subject of this MOU by way of conference and negotiation.  The parties must confer and negotiate within 7 days of receiving a written notice from the other party setting out the nature of the dispute.

If the issue cannot be resolved by negotiation then the matter of dispute is to be conferred, deliberated and resolved by the FESA CEO or a nominated delegate and the City’s CEO or a nominated delegate.

10.  TERMINATION

This Agreement may be terminated by:

·        either party by giving three months notice in writing to the other party at anytime; and/or

·        the ESL Grant Scheme funded Incident Control Vehicle being returned to FESA.

11.  NOTICES

Notices or other communications by each party to each other and under this MOU must, unless otherwise notified in writing, be addressed and forwarded as follows:

 

            FESA Chief Executive Officer

            Fire and Emergency Services Authority of Western Australia

            FESA House

            PO Box P1174

            PERTH WA 6844

 

Chief Executive Officer

City of Wanneroo
Locked Bag 1

Wanneroo WA 6946

                                                        

 

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

 

This Memorandum of Understanding is made

BETWEEN THE

 

Fire and Emergency Services Authority of Western Australia

480 Hay Street

PERTH WA 6000

 

AND

 

City of Wanneroo

23 Dundebar Road

Wanneroo WA 6065

 

and will take effect from the date of the last signature

 

 

SIGNED for and on behalf of the Fire and Emergency Services Authority of Western Australia by:

 

 

WAYNE GREGSON                               ___________________________             ____________

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER  Signature                             Date

SIGNED for and on behalf of the City of Wanneroo by:

 

 

 

DANIEL SIMMS                                     ___________________________             ____________

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER  Signature                             Date


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                       193

Draft

City Business

3.12  Expenditure of Surplus Reserve Funds - Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) Reserve

File Ref:                                              5408 – 11/114449

Responsible Officer:                           Director, City Businesses

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil       

 

Issue

To consider the expenditure of funds set aside in the Materials Recycling Facility (MRF) Upgrade Reserve.

 

Background

The reserve was established to set aside funds received from the operating partners (the Cities of Swan and Joondalup) of the MRF, now termed the Wangara Recycling Centre (WRC) for the planned capital upgrade of the MRF which was consequently undertaken in 2006/07. The reserve was used to quarantine these funds to ensure transparency in the financial management of the capital upgrades.

 

A summary of the transactions associated with the reserve since 2006/07 is included in the table below:

 

 

Actual  05/06

Actual 06/07

Actual 07/08

Actual 08/09

Actual 09/10

Actual 10/11

Budget 11/12

Materials Recovery Facility – Upgrade Reserve

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Opening Balance

 

0

2,975,349

241,099

358,439

376,158

396,873

Transfers In

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Contributions

 

3,600,000

50,000

300,000

0

0

90,000

Interest Received

 

101,949

85,895

16,619

17,719

22,678

19,899

Redundant Machinery

 

 

142,000

0

0

0

0

Transfers Out

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PR-2279, PR-2280, PR-1556.

 

-726,600

-3,012,145

-199,279

0

-1,963

-69,666

Closing Balance

 

2,975,349

241,099

358,439

376,158

396,873

437,106

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The initial contribution of $3,600,000 comprised of an equal contribution of $1,200,000 by each partner.

 

Current commitments against this reserve for the 2011/12 financial year include the following:

 

Project

Description

Adopted Budget 2011/12

MRF Upgrade Reserve Allocation

PR-2279

WRC New Plant Purchase 

$9,000

$3,000

PR-2280

WRC Plant Audit

$50,000

$16,666

PR-1556

Wangara MRF – Upgrade Existing Facilities (OSH Improvements) Re-location of Oil and Battery Storage Areas.

$150,000

$50,000

 

Total

 

$69,666

 

Contributions budgeted into the reserve for the period 2012/13 to 2020/21 are notionally $90,000 per annum and commitments budgeted against the reserve for the same period are $125,000 per annum (against PR-1556 Wangara Recycling Centre – Modifications to existing facilities to provide operational efficiencies). This report will recommend that the reserve be closed and on this basis the forecasted contributions and commitments should also be removed from the 10 Year Capital Works Program. The WRC partners have agreed that they will be invoiced for their capital contribution at the completion of each individual capital project, thus negating the need for their annual contribution to the reserve. 

Detail

As detailed above, the balance of the reserve is $396,873, as of 20 October 2011. Discussions held between the respective Administrations of the WRC partners has lead to agreement that a report should be put to the City of Wanneroo Council seeking approval to expend these funds on current capital projects before existing budgeted capital contributions for the 2011/12 financial year are expended. This is, of course, taking into account any funding commitments from the reserve for the 2011/12 financial year.  

 

As a result, the following project expenditure has been identified:

 

1.   Wangara Recycling Centre (WRC) – New Office and Staff Facilities.

 

This project was approved by the Council in its 15 November 2011 meeting (CB03-11/11), for Tender No. 01132 Design and Construct of New Office and Staff Facilities at the Wangara Recycling Centre, 86 Motivation Drive.

 

The project involves the construction of a new office, staff lunchroom and toilet facilities for staff at the Wangara Recycling Centre. The current staff facilities are substandard and limited office space means that the Business Manager and Administration Officer are located at Enterprise House, which is impacting on the effectiveness of the management team.

 

The tender report for this project indicates funding requirements of $113,759 from the reserve.  This is based on an initial project budget of $170,000 (initially listed in 2010/11) and a confirmed project cost as a result of the tender outcome of $283,759. The initial budget of $170,000 is being funded via a one third contribution from each partner. The City of Wanneroo’s contribution is being funded from the Domestic Refuse Reserve.

 

2.   Wangara Recycling Centre – Installation of Glass Separating and Grading System Upgrade.

 

The tender outcome for this project Tender No. 01120, was endorsed by Council at its meeting on 26 July 2011 (CB06-07/11). The project involves the installation of additional equipment that will re-direct glass currently going to the waste stream, separate it from other waste and recyclable material and grade it into glass fines (< 10mm in size) and glass cullet (>10mm in size). This will result in a higher grade of glass product, improving the price per tonne to the market and reducing the amount of material going to landfill, thus reduce tipping fees.

 

The total cost of the project is $424,580 with a project budget of $435,900 being available within PR-1555: Wangara MRF – Construct New Glass Sanding Unit. This project is being funded via a one-third contribution from each partner. The City of Wanneroo’s contribution is being funded from the Domestic Refuse Reserve.

 


 

3.   Wangara Recycling Centre – New Hard Cover for Glass Loading Area 

 

This project is linked to the Glass Separating and Grading System Upgrade project and involves the installation of a hard cover area of the existing loading area for the glass product produced by the upgraded plant. The existing loading area includes two silos which are no longer able to be used as per their intended use and represent a potential safety risk to staff on site. The proposed structure is a four post design with a colourbond roof and open sides, providing a 72 square meter roof span with an estimated cost of $45,000 (quoted October 2011).

 

The structure is required based on advice from Colmax Glass (a potential commodity buyer who re-process glass for on-sale) that wet glass will impact on the quality of the product and hence the potential income to be realised per tonne for the WRC. The requirement to keep the glass dry has not been identified by any other potential commodity buyer, however the proposed structure will provide the WRC with the ability to also store some paper and cardboard bales under cover.

 

It should be noted that this project is not currently listed on the 2011/12 Capital Works Budget. For the purposes of this report, this project has been listed against PR-1556 Wangara MRF – Upgrade Existing Facilities.

Consultation

The Director City Businesses has consulted with the Director Infrastructure Services from the City of Joondalup and the Executive Manager – Operations from the City of Swan, in addition with internal stakeholders in Finance and the Chief Operations Officer. 

Comment

The utilisation of the funds from the MRF Upgrade Reserve will reduce the capital funding required to be put forward by all three partners in the 2011/12 financial year.

Statutory Compliance

Nil

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “4     Governance

4.4    Maintain long-term financial stability

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

The table below outlines the proposed use of the current reserve balance of $396,837, based on the projects identified within the body of the report.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Item

 

Balance

Expenditure

Description

Opening Balance

$396,873

 

 

 

 

 

 

Funding Commitments for 2011/12  as per adopted budget

 

$69,666

PR-2279 (WRC New Plant Purchases), PR-2280 (WRC Plant Audit), PR-1556 (WRC Upgrade Existing Facilities – Oil and Battery Storage Re-location).

 

 

 

 

Available Balance

$327,207

 

 

 

 

 

 

Proposed Expenditure

 

 

 

PR-1556

 

$113,759

Tender No. 01132 – Design and Construct of New Office and Staff Facilities at the WRC. To fund difference in project cost ($283,759) to project budget ($170,000).

PR-1555

 

$45,000

New Hard Cover for Glass Loading Area 

PR-1555

 

$168,448

Tender No. 01120 – Supply and Installation of Glass Separating and Grading System. Project cost $435,900. Balance ($267,452) to be funded by partners. City of Wanneroo contribution to be funded from Domestic Refuse Reserve as per the 2011/12 adopted budget. . 

Total

 

$327,207

 

Closing Balance

$0

 

 

 

It should be noted that multiple projects are listed under PR-1556. 

Voting Requirements

Absolute Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       APPROVES BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the following budget variations to fully expend the sum of $396,873, being the current balance of the Materials Recovery Facility Upgrade Reserve; and

Project No./Account Code 

From

To

Description

Materials Recovery Facility  Upgrade Reserve

$327,207

 

Reserve funds set aside for capital improvements at the Wangara Recycling Centre – Materials recovery Facility.

 

PR-1556

 

$113,759

Wangara MRF – Upgrade Existing Facilities. Tender No. 01132 Design and Construction of New Office and Staff Facilities at the WRC.

 

PR-1556

 

$45,000

New Hard Cover for Glass Loading Area.

 

PR-1555

 

$168,448

Wangara MRF – Upgrade Existing Facilities. Tender No. 01120 – Supply and Installation of Glass Separating and Grading System

2.       APPROVES BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the closure of the Materials Recovery Facility Upgrade Reserve.

 

 

Attachments: Nil   


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                       198

Draft

Infrastructure

Infrastructure Maintenance

3.13  Installation of a Fully Monitored Fire and Smoke Detection System at Aquamotion

File Ref:                                              1702 – 11/131890

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil       

 

Issue

To consider allocation of funds for the installation of a Fire and Emergency Services Authority (FESA) fully monitored fire and smoke detection system at Wanneroo Aquamotion.

 

Background

Wanneroo Aquamotion upgrade works were undertaken three years ago and under the Building Code of Australia the building was classified as 9b. An Emergency Warning Intercommunication System (EWIS) and eight smoke detectors linked to the intruder alarm system were installed to suit the classification of the building.

 

In the event of a fire emergency, an alarm is sent to the City’s monitoring company who contact the City’s Rangers, who in turn call FESA. This facility is a public facility and in addition to the City’s own staff, a large number of users visit daily. Under the current EWIS system there is a delay in contacting FESA.  This represents a significant risk to the building fabric and safety of staff and visitors. To mitigate the risk, the fire and smoke detection system at Wanneroo Aquamotion requires an upgrade to allow automatic notification to FESA in case of a fire emergency.

Detail

Electrical consultant, Best Consultancy, was appointed to undertake a review of the current installations at Wanneroo Aquamotion, and prepare a proposal to include a detailed design and specification for a fully monitored fire and smoke detection system.

 

The proposal recommends installation of a fully monitored fire and smoke detection system which is monitored directly by FESA and provides 24 hour protection to the building and its occupants. It is proposed that the existing EWIS system currently located in the Centre Manager’s office be replaced by a combined EWIS and fully monitored fire and smoke detection system located in a new cabinet close to the front door. The proposed system will also have capability to detect and notify chlorine gas leakage from the plant located at this facility.

 

The design of the fully monitored fire and smoke detection system will be submitted to FESA for approval. The consultants have estimated that the installation of the new system will cost in the order of $90,000.

Consultation

The proposal to install the fully monitored fire and smoke detection system at this site has been developed in consultation with FESA.

Comment

The current fire and smoke detection system installed at Wanneroo Aquamotion is adequate for monitoring purposes but does not have the provisions to notify FESA directly. In case of a fire emergency, it is vital that FESA attend site without any lost time. The installation of a directly linked system will safeguard the City and reduce the risks associated with a fire emergency.

Statutory Compliance

The provision of a fully monitored fire and smoke detection system at Wanneroo Aquamotion will comply with the requirements of the Building Code of Australia.

 

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “2     Social

2.4    Improve community safety

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

This project is not included in the approved 2011/12 Capital Works Budget. Funds totalling $240,000 have been allocated in PR-1904 Building Asset Renewal Program. It is proposed to transfer $90,000 from PR-1904 Building Asset Renewal Program to fund this work.

 

The Building Asset Renewal Program which includes renewal of different assets at a number of buildings will be reviewed and limited to $160,000 in 2011/12.

Voting Requirements

Absolute Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:

 

1.   APPROVES the installation of a fire and smoke detection system at Wanneroo Aquamotion, fully monitored by Fire and Emergency Services Authority;

2.   Pursuant to Section 6.8(1) (b) of the Local Government Act 1995, APPROVES BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY expenditure of $90,000 for the installation of a fire and smoke detection system at Wanneroo Aquamotion; and


 

3.   NOTES the following budget variation to accommodate the expenditure for the  installation of a fire and smoke detection system at Wanneroo Aquamotion:

EXPENDITURE

Cost Code

FROM

TO

DESCRIPTION

Project No PR - 1904

$90,000

 

Building Asset Renewal Program

Project No. - New

 

$90,000

Wanneroo Aquamotion fully monitored fire and smoke detection system

 

 

Attachments: Nil  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                       201

Draft

Infrastructure Projects

3.14  Flynn Drive Realignment Project

File Ref:                                              2810 – 11/133511

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil       

 

Issue

To consider the current status of the Flynn Drive Realignment Project (PR-1494), Neerabup.

 

Background

Council, at its meeting on 26 July 2011, considered a report on the Flynn Drive Realignment Project (IN01-07/11 refers) and resolved as follows:

 

“1.     NOTES that the State Government has not allocated funding for the construction of the Wanneroo Road Duplication Project from Joondalup Drive to Hall Road in the 2011/2012 State Government Budget;

2.       PROCEEDS with the completion of design of the Flynn Drive Realignment Project, incorporating profile changes as agreed with Main Roads WA on the proposed realigned section of Flynn Drive to minimise future road reconstruction works when the Wanneroo Road Duplication Project is eventually funded by State Government and constructed by Main Roads WA; and

3.       NOTES that the following environmental approvals are still to be finalised:

a)      Amendment to the existing Clearing Permit to cover the additional clearing area required as a consequence of final design review.

b)      Approval through Main Roads WA in relation to clearing that needs to be undertaken within the Wanneroo Road road reserve.”

Administration has followed up profile changes in the design as agreed with Main Roads WA for the Flynn Drive Realignment Project in accordance with the Resolution 2.  The amendment to the existing Clearing Permit was presented to the State Government’s Department of Conservation in follow up of Part a) of Resolution 3, along with a request to Main Roads WA to action its requirement in relation to part b) of Resolution 3.

Detail

Following an onsite meeting at the intersection itself on 19 October 2011 with the Minister for Transport, Members for Mindarie and Wanneroo, Main Roads WA and the City of Wanneroo, City officers have met with Main Roads WA representatives to confirm the required scope of work and to review options on the understanding that the City is keen to commence construction early in 2012 in accordance with Council resolutions above.

 

Main Roads WA formally advised the City on 25 November 2011 that they have investigated the option tabled by the City at the onsite meeting (listed as Option 3 in IN01-07/11), and have concluded that this option does not represent value for money and would result in a    18-month time delay to the project.  Option 3 is quoted from Council’s report as follows:

 

“Option 3: Reconstruct the new intersection to the new levels and alignment as recently advised by Main Roads WA, with tie-backs into the existing Wanneroo Road road alignment inclusive of traffic signalised control. 

This would involve extensive re-design and subsequent reconstruction and widening of an additional 900 metres of the existing Wanneroo Road carriageway to meet design requirements in relation to the approaches either side of the new intersection.  However, this option allows for the future intersection without the need for extensive reconstruction works.”

 

Main Roads WA advice now supports the City’s original intention to construct the new intersection at the existing level and alignment of Wanneroo Road (listed as Option 2 in IN01-07/11) with the understanding that the State Government will incur extra cost when it upgrades this section of Wanneroo Road to dual carriageway standard because of the associated level and alignment differences.  Option 2 is quoted from Council’s report as follows:

 

“Option 2: Maintain the City’s original design of the new intersection with traffic signalised control on the alignment and levels as agreed with Main Roads WA, with works scheduled to be completed during 2012.  It is noted that this option would require the full reconstruction of the intersection by Main Roads WA, including 70m of the proposed realigned section of Flynn Drive when the construction of the Wanneroo Road Duplication Project is eventually funded by State Government.”

 

On this basis Main Roads WA now concurs with the fact that the only feasible approach to meet the City’s proposed timetable is to proceed with Council’s original intention as outlined in Option 2.  It is noted that Main Roads WA have also reconfirmed that the only State funding contribution to the works is the original $500,000 contribution from the State Black Spot Program.

 

Design Progress

The progress of the design of the Flynn Drive Realignment Project has been somewhat affected by the following in the intervening period:

 

·        Accommodating changes requested by Main Roads WA on the Flynn Drive profile on the Wanneroo Road approach;

·        Council’s resolution concerning changes to the Tranquil Drive intersection with Flynn Drive (IN08-11/11 refers); and,

·        On-going discussions with the landowner of Lot 1 accommodating road level changes on Flynn Drive to interface proposed land development levels.

 

However, it is still intended to advertise a tender for the works by mid 2012 for completion of construction to occur during late 2012.

 

Environmental Assessment

An amended clearing area has been agreed in-principle with the State Government’s Department of Environment & Conservation, with approval in writing to be confirmed shortly. The revised application to the Federal Government’s Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities is still being negotiated, with finalisation expected during late December 2011.

The timeframe associated with the processing of this revised application is at this time not anticipated to delay the project.  Consequently, the proposal to advertise a tender for the works by mid 2012 should not be impacted upon.

It is also noted that clearing within the Wanneroo Road road reserve is also required to be undertaken.  Given that this reserve falls under the care and control of Main Roads WA, Administration is still in consultation with Main Roads WA to ensure the appropriate protocol is followed.

 


 

Land Acquisition

As noted previously in IN01-07/11, all land has been acquired or agreed with landowners for the completion of the Flynn Drive Realignment Project.  Land transfer associated with the new intersection of the old section of Flynn Drive with the new road is being arranged with the landowner for Lot 1 who intends to develop this land, and is therefore in agreement with the process. Right of entry to be actioned if the land transfer is not completed prior to any works commencing on site.

Consultation

On-going consultation has occurred with City officers, adjacent landowners, Main Roads WA, LandCorp, the developer of the Neerabup Industrial Estate (NIA), and Eclipse Resources, the developer of Lot 1 adjacent to the NIA.

 

As advised previously (IN01-07/11 refers), a public information session will be held for affected property owners in parallel with tender advertisement.

Comment

The City continues to receive on-going correspondence from Developers within and adjoining the NIA requesting the City commit to implement road improvements on Flynn Drive.

 

Now that Main Roads WA on behalf of the Minister for Transport has confirmed a position that now aligns with Council’s original resolution, it is considered appropriate for the City to continue to proceed with the Flynn Drive Realignment Project on the basis of Option 2.

Statutory Compliance

Nil

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “2     Social

2.5    Improve transport options and connections

 

 3       Economic

 

3.3     Provision of timely and coordinated regional infrastructure”

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Funding totalling $6.216M is currently available in the 2011/2012 Capital Works Budget for the Flynn Drive Realignment Project (PR-1494).

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 


 

Recommendation

That Council:

 

1.       NOTES that the meeting with the Minister for Transport on 19 October 2011 did not result in any commitment to the construction of the Wanneroo Road Duplication Project from Joondalup Drive to Hall Road.

2.       NOTES that no additional funding other than the original $500,000 already allocated to the Flynn Drive Realignment Project from the State BlackSpot Program will be made available by State Government;

3.       PROCEEDS with the completion of design and associated documentation for the Flynn Drive Realignment Project, incorporating necessary design changes and profile changes as agreed with Main Roads WA on the proposed realigned section of Flynn Drive to minimise future road reconstruction works when the Wanneroo Road Duplication Project is eventually funded by State Government and constructed by Main Roads WA;

4.       NOTES that the following environmental approvals for the Flynn Drive Realignment Project are still outstanding:

a.       Federal Government’s Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities approval in relation to the amendment to the existing Clearing Permit to cover the additional clearing area required is still to be received.

b.      Approval through Main Roads WA in relation to clearing that needs to be undertaken within the Wanneroo Road road reserve as impacted by the project.

5.       NOTES that land acquisition has been agreed with all landowners, with land transfer associated with the new intersection of the old section of Flynn Drive with the new road is in the process of being completed, with right of entry to be actioned if the land transfer is not completed prior to any works commencing on site;

6.       PROCEEDS to advertise a tender for the works associated with the Flynn Drive Realignment Project pending resolution of outstanding environmental approvals as noted in Item 4;

7.       ARRANGES a Flynn Drive Realignment Project Public Information Session for affected property owners and interested general public in parallel with tender advertisement; and,

8.       ADVISES Main Roads WA of Council’s decision.

 

Attachments: Nil  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                       205

Draft

Tenders

3.15  Tender No. 01133 for Supply and Installation of Fencing (Panel Contract) for a Period of One Year

File Ref:                                              6570 – 11/121411

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil       

 

Issue

To consider Tender No. 01133 for Supply and Installation of Fencing (Panel Contract) within the City of Wanneroo for a Period of One Year.

 

Background

Fencing is a widespread activity associated with Infrastructure’s operations and the objective of this contract is to engage a panel of contractors that can provide a wide variety of fence types to meet the needs of construction and maintenance activity requirements.

 

The expiring contract for fencing (Contract No. 09041) provides for limited fence types. The key difference associated with the new tender is the inclusion of every fence type that is typically likely to be required by the City on a sustained basis. New categories of fencing in this contract include rabbit proof fencing and gates, horse gates, sand trapping fencing, colourbond fencing, temporary and permanent chainmesh fencing. These fence types are additional to timber bollards, sump and pedestrian chainmesh fencing, road frontage and conservation fencing which have typically been the main types of fencing procured under the existing contract.

 

The contract has been let as a panel contract because of the categories of fence types covered by this contract and the acknowledgement that different fencing companies specialise in different fence types and competitive pricing is determined accordingly.

Detail

Tender No. 01133 for Supply and Installation of Fencing within the City of Wanneroo for a Period of One Year was advertised on 24 September 2011 and closed on 18 October 2011.

 

A copy of the Tender Document as advertised has been placed in the Elected Members Reading Room for reference.

 

Essential details of the contract are outlined below:

 

Contract Type

Schedule of Rates

Contract Duration

1 Year

Commencement Date

1 January 2012

Expiry Date

31 December 2012

Extension to Contract

Yes, two 12 month options, CPI adjusted

Rise and Fall Included

No

 


 

Tenders Received

Tender submissions were received from the following companies:

Company

Reliable Fencing

JSB Fencing and Machinery Hire Pty Ltd

Austec Building and Constructions Pty Ltd

Southern Wire Pty Ltd

Fencewright Pty Ltd Trading as Fencewright

All submissions were accepted on the basis that they were compliant and worthy of inclusion in the tender evaluation process.

The Tender Evaluation Team, consisting of the Projects Engineer, Coordinator Conservation Maintenance and the Contracts Officer, has evaluated the tender submissions in accordance with the following selection criteria:

 

Item No

Description

Score

1

Price for the services offered

50%

2

Tenderer’s experience and ability to do the work

20%

3

Tenderer’s resources

20%

4

Safety Management

10%

Price for the Services Offered (50%)

All tenderers submitted prices for various items in the tender specification and scope of works. Reliable Fencing’s submission included lowest prices for the majority of the 108 schedule line items. Austec’s submission contained prices that were highest for the majority of items with no prices being cheapest for any of the line items. Fencewright did not provide any schedule line items that were cheapest in their submission.

The assessment has resulted in the tenderers being ranked as follows under this criterion:

Tenderer

Rank

Reliable Fencing

1

Southern Wire Pty Ltd

2

JSB Fencing and Machinery Hire Pty Ltd

2

Fencewright Pty Ltd Trading as Fencewright

3

Austec Building and Constructions Pty Ltd

4

Tenderer’s experience and ability to do the work (20%)

Assessment of this criterion considered the qualifications and experience demonstrated by each of the tenderers. Reliable Fencing refer to their current commitments with the City and the City of Swan, together with fencing provision for numerous current subdivisional developments as a sound experience profile in carrying out work similar to that required in this contract. Southern Wire cited previous relevant experience with six metropolitan local authorities as relevant previous experience. Fencewright also has a good level of experience with previous work for clients such as Main Roads Western Australia, WA Planning Commission and City of Gosnells being significant and relevant.

The information provided has resulted in the tenderers being ranked as follows under this criterion:

Tenderer

Rank

Reliable Fencing

1

Southern Wire Pty Ltd

1

Fencewright Pty Ltd Trading as Fencewright

1

JSB Fencing and Machinery Hire Pty Ltd

2

Austec Building and Constructions Pty Ltd

3

Tenderer’s Resources (20%)

The tenderer’s resources contained in the tender documentation were examined in order to evaluate their ability to meet the requirements of the contract. Assessment of this criterion considered the tenderer’s staff resources, vehicles and plant/equipment to manage the contract. The Reliable Fencing, Southern Wire and Fencewright submissions outlined equally high levels of relevant resources available without any excessive current commitments that could compromise their ability to deliver the required services in a timely manner. The remaining submissions provided fair offers in terms of resource adequacy.


The information provided has resulted in the tenderers being ranked as follows under this criterion:

Tenderer

Rank

Reliable Fencing

1

Southern Wire Pty Ltd

1

Fencewright Pty Ltd Trading as Fencewright

1

JSB Fencing and Machinery Hire Pty Ltd

2

Austec Building and Constructions Pty Ltd

3

Safety Management (10%)

Evidence of safety management policies and practices defined in the tender documents was assessed accordingly. The assessment for safety management was based on the tenderers’ responses to an Occupational Health and Safety Management System Questionnaire included within the tender documentation.

All tenderers provided details of their safety management systems. Southern Wire and Reliable Fencing provided superior information in their submissions in relation to fulfilment of safety management requirements. JSB Fencing and Machinery Hire Pty Ltd provided marginal information which set their submission apart from the other submissions, hence scoring lowest in the safety management assessment process.

The information provided has resulted in the tenderers being ranked as follows under this criterion:

Tenderer

Rank

Southern Wire Pty Ltd

1

Reliable Fencing

2

Fencewright Pty Ltd Trading as Fencewright

3

Austec Building and Constructions Pty Ltd

4

JSB Fencing and Machinery Hire Pty Ltd

5

Overall Weighted Score

The tenderer’s submissions were reviewed in accordance with the weighted score analysis process with the following observations being of significance:

    the key aspect of the tender evaluation is price

    the submissions were evaluated in accordance with the selection criteria and were assessed as having the necessary resources, previous experience, ability and safety management systems to undertake the tender

The overall weighted score has resulted in the following tender ranking:

Tenderer

Score

Reliable Fencing

1

Southern Wire Pty Ltd

2

Fencewright Pty Ltd Trading as Fencewright

3

JSB Fencing and Machinery Hire Pty Ltd

4

Austec Building and Constructions Pty Ltd

5

The top two tenderers, Reliable Fencing and Southern Wire Pty Ltd, have been evaluated to have the capacity to provide for all the City’s fencing needs under the terms of the tender document. Acceptance of a panel consisting of these two tenderers is recommended by the Tender Evaluation Team.

Consultation

Nil

Comment

The tender submissions from Reliable Fencing and Southern Wire Pty Ltd achieved the highest score in accordance with the assessment criteria and weighting as detailed in the tender document and are therefore recommended as the successful tenderers. Both contractors have previously provided acceptable service provision to the City in relation to fencing activities.

 

As per the provisions made in the tender document which will subsequently be included in the contract agreements, the City has the discretion to award work to the contractors appointed on the Panel. The work will be awarded to the contractors on the Panel, based on the lowest estimated cost of the work each time there is a need to utilise the services of a contractor for the fencing work. If the lowest cost contractor is not available to meet the time frame requirements, then the work will be awarded to the other contractor on the Panel.

Statutory Compliance

Tenders were invited in accordance with the requirements of Section 3.57 of the Local Government Act 1995. The tendering procedures and evaluation complied with the requirements of Part 4 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996.

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “1     Environment

1.4    Improve the quality of the built environment

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Based on the schedule of rates provided by the two tenderers being proposed to form a panel, namely; Reliable Fencing and Southern Wire Pty Ltd; the following parameters have been assessed to determine the total annual estimated value of works for the contract period:

    Historic quantity of fencing installed by the City;

    Types of construction/maintenance works carried out; and,

    Expected maintenance activity and projects as identified in the City’s 10-year Capital Works Program.

As a consequence, the total annual estimated value of works for the contract period is predicted to be $300,000. This cost is to be accommodated from existing and future allocated maintenance operating and Capital Works budgets.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:

1.       ACCEPTS the tenders submitted by Reliable Fencing and Southern Wire Pty Ltd to form a Panel for Tender No 01133 Supply and Installation of Fencing (Panel Contract) for a period of One Year from 1 January 2012 As per the respective tenderer’s schedule of rates, the general conditions of tendering and with options to extend the contracts for a further two 12 month periods, or part thereof, with CPI applied; and

2.       NOTES that the letter of tender award will advise Reliable Fencing and Southern Wire Pty Ltd that work will be awarded to the contractors on the Panel, based on the lowest estimated cost of the work each time there is a need to utilise the services of a contractor for the fencing work. If the lowest cost contractor is not available to meet the time frame requirements, the work will be awarded to the other contractor on the panel.

 

Attachments: Nil


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                       210

Draft

3.16  Tender No. 01140 - Supply and Laying of Block Turf (Panel Contract) for a Period of One Year

File Ref:                                              6570 – 11/124695

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil       

 

Issue

To consider Tender No. 01140 for Supply and Laying of Block Turf (Panel Contract) for a Period of One Year.

 

Background

The supply and laying of block turf is currently provided to the City by State Wide Turf Services under a Period Quotation that expired on 18 November 2011.  Due to the expected increase in the value of the supply and laying of block turf in 2012 and into the future it is now prudent to move to a public tender process to ensure that the City is receiving value for money and is in compliance with the Local Government Act 1995 and Regulations.

Detail

Tender No. 01140 for Supply and Laying of Block Turf (Panel Contract) for a Period of One Year was advertised on Saturday 22 October 2011 and closed on Tuesday 8 November 2011.

 

A copy of the Tender Document as advertised has been placed in the Elected Members Reading Room for reference.

 

Essential details of the contract are outlined below:

 

Contract Type

Schedule of Rates

Contract Duration

One (1) Year

Commencement Date

1 February 2012

Expiry Date

31 January 2013

Extension Permitted

Yes, Two 12 month options, CPI adjusted

Rise and Fall Included

No

Tender submissions were received from the following companies:

    Turfmaster Facility Management.

    Lovegrove Turf Services.

 

The Tender Evaluation Team, consisting of the Coordinator Parks Maintenance South, Acting Manager Infrastructure Maintenance and the Contracts Officer, has evaluated the tender submissions in accordance with the following selection criteria:

 

Item No

Description

Score

1

Price for the goods and services offered

50%

2

Relevant  experience & track record

25%

3

Resources and capacity to perform work

15%

4

Safety management

10%

 


 

Price for the Goods and Services Offered (50%)

The tenderers were asked to submit a schedule of rates for works detailed in the specification. Based on estimated future quantity of services likely to be required under the contract, an overall cost was calculated for both tenderers. For work where minimum charges apply, Lovegrove Turf Services provided better value for smaller quantities and Turfmaster Facility Management provided better value for larger quantities.

 

The information provided, has resulted in the tenderers being ranked as follows under this criterion:

 

Tenderer

Rank

Turfmaster Facility Management

1

Lovegrove Turf Services

2

Tenderer’s Experience (25%)

Turfmaster Facility Management and Lovegrove Turf Services both have extensive experience in supply and laying of turf throughout Local and State Government sectors within Western Australia. Both companies have the necessary experience to provide both large and small scale commercial turfing services.

 

The information provided has resulted in the tenderers being ranked equally under this criterion:

 

Tenderer

Rank

Turfmaster Facility Management

1

Lovegrove Turf Services

1

Tenderer’s Resources and Capacity (15%)

The tenderers resources contained in the tender documentation were examined in order to evaluate their ability to meet the requirements of the contract.  Assessment of this criterion considered the tenderer’s staff resources, vehicles, plant/equipment and workshop support to manage the contract. Both tenderers were assessed as having similar resources and capacity to undertake the contract.

 

The information provided has resulted in the tenderers being ranked equally under this criterion:

 

Tenderer

Rank

Turfmaster Facility Management

1

Lovegrove Turf Services

1

Safety Management (10%)

Evidence of safety management policies and practices was assessed from the tender documents.  The assessment for safety management was based on the tenderers’ responses to an Occupational Health and Safety Management System Questionnaire included within the tender documentation. Both tenderers have provided details of their safety management systems.

 

The information provided has resulted in the tenderers being ranked equally under this criterion:

 

Tenderer

Rank

Turfmaster Facility Management

1

Lovegrove Turf Services

1


Overall Weighted Score

The tenderer’s submissions were reviewed in accordance with the weighted score analysis process with the following observations being of significance:

    The key aspect of the tender evaluation is price.

    The companies’ bids were evaluated in accordance with the selection criteria and were assessed as having the necessary resources, previous experience, ability and safety management systems to undertake the tender.

The overall weighted score has resulted in the following tender ranking:

Tenderer

Score

Turfmaster Facility Management

1

Lovegrove Turf Services

2

Consultation

Nil.

Comment

The tender submissions from Turfmaster Facility Management and Lovegrove Turf Services were assessed in accordance with the assessment criteria and weighting as detailed in the tender document and are therefore recommended as the successful renderers. Both tenderers have been assessed to have the capability to provide the tendered services.

 

As per the provisions made in the tender document which will subsequently be included in the contract agreements, the City has outlined a procedure on how work will be awarded to the contractors appointed on the Panel. As per this procedure, the work will be awarded to the contractors on the panel, based on the lowest estimated cost of the work each time there is a need to utilise the services of a contractor for the fencing work. If the lowest cost contractor is not available to meet the time frame requirements, then the work will be awarded to the other contractor on the panel.

Statutory Compliance

Tenders were invited in accordance with the requirements of Section 3.57 of the Local Government Act 1995. The tendering procedures and evaluation complied with the requirements of Part 4 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996.

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “2     Social

2.1    Increase choice and quality of neighbourhood and lifestyle options

 

2.2    Improve the City’s identity and community well-being through arts, culture, leisure and recreation”

“4    Governance

4.4     Maintain long-term financial stability”

Policy Implications

Nil.

Financial Implications

Based on the schedule of rates provided by the two renderers being proposed to form a panel, namely; Turfmaster Facility Management and Lovegrove Turf Services; the following parameters have been assessed to determine the total annual estimated value of works for the contract period:

    Historic quantity of turf installed by the City;

    Types of construction/maintenance works carried out; and,

    Expected maintenance activity and projects as identified in the City’s 10-year Capital Works Program.

As a consequence, the total annual estimated value of works for the contract period is predicted to be of at least $200,000 in value annually. This cost is to be accommodated from existing and future allocated Maintenance operating and Capital Works budgets.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council ACCEPTS the tenders submitted by Turfmaster Facility Management and Lovegrove Turf Services to form a Panel for Tender No. 01140 for Supply and Laying of Block Turf (Panel Contract) for a Period of One Year from 1 February 2012:

a)      as per the respective tenderer’s schedule of rates, the general conditions of tendering, with options to extend the contracts for a further two 12-month periods, or part thereof, with CPI applied; and

b)      that the work each time there is a need to utilise the services of a contractor for the fencing work. If the lowest cost contractor is not available to meet the time frame requirements, then the work will be awarded to the other contractor on the panel.

 

 

 

Attachments: Nil  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                       214

Draft

Traffic Management

3.17  PT03-06/11 - Lagoon Drive/Brazier Road Intersection - Request for Traffic Calming

File Ref:                                              3000 – 11/126078

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       4         

 

Issue

To consider a petition requesting the City to install traffic calming measures along Lagoon Drive and Brazier Road, Yanchep, and a resident request to improve safety for vehicles entering/exiting 15 Brazier Road..

 

Background

Council received petition PT03-06/11 at its meeting of 28 June 2011.  The petition reads:

“We, the undersigned, all being Residents of the City of Wanneroo do formally request Council’s consideration:

Lagoon Drive and Brazier Road in Yanchep have for years been used as racetracks by irresponsible drivers. The double fatality on 16 April 2011 was an accident begging to happen, which could easily have involved innocent parties as well.

Both roads are configured to long redundant standards of width and geometry, which promote excessive speed.

We put to Council the urgency of installing traffic calming measures, including intersection treatments of Lagoon/Brazier. Such measures have already been implemented in locations with significantly less traffic.”

 

The petition was signed by 95 residents, representing 18 properties on Lagoon Drive, 6 properties on Brazier Road, and 51 other properties throughout Yanchep and Two Rocks.

 

Additionally, the owners of 15 Brazier Road have also approached the City on a number of occasions with their concerns over speeding vehicles on Brazier Road.  The crossover to their property is located just over the crest of a rise on Brazier Road and north bound vehicles cannot be observed when entering/exiting the property until they crest the hill. 

Detail

Lagoon Drive and Brazier Road are both Local Distributor Roads within the City’s Functional Road Hierarchy.  Lagoon Drive, between Marmion Avenue and Foreshore Vista, is constructed as a 10m wide single carriageway.  However, in the newer extension south of Foreshore Vista the road is constructed as a boulevard with 5m wide carriageways and a 3m wide median.

 

Brazier Road between Lagoon Drive and Compass Circle has been constructed as a 10m wide single carriageway, while from Compass Circle to Wilkie Avenue the road is constructed as a 7m wide single carriageway undulating through the original dune system.

 

As constructed, these roads are capable of carrying up to 7,000 vehicles per day, including commercial vehicles, and have the potential to accommodate a bus route. Both of these roads are currently covered by the default ‘built up area’ speed limit of 50kph.

 

The following traffic count data for Brazier Road and Lagoon Drive is provided for analysis.

 

Traffic Data

Definitions:

AWT                              Average Weekday Traffic

vpd                       vehicles per day

85%ile speed       the speed at or below which 85% of vehicles are travelling.

20km/h Pace       the 20km/h speed range in which the majority of vehicles are travelling

% in Pace            percentage of total vehicles travelling within the 20km/h Pace range

 

Brazier Road – North of Lagoon Drive - 23 February 2011 - 3 March 2011

AWT                    1159vpd

85%ile speed       63 km/h

Max Speed                   106 km/h

20km/h Pace       44 – 64 km/h

% in Pace            72.4%

 

Brazier Road - South of Wilkie Avenue - 23 February 2011 - 3 March 2011

AWT                    933vpd

85%ile speed       49km/h

Max Speed                   92km/h

20km/h Pace       32--52km/h

% in Pace            80.5%

 

Lagoon Drive – West of Marmion Avenue - 30 June 2009 - 9 July 2009

AWT                              2917vpd

85%ile speed       54 km/h

Max speed           93km/h

20km/h Pace       37 – 57 km/h

% in Pace            78.7%

 

Lagoon Drive – South of St Ives Drive - 26 March 2007 – 2 April 2007

AWT                              1871 vpd

85%ile speed       63 km/h

Max speed           127 km/h

20km/h Pace       44– 64 km/h

% in Pace            76.8%

 

Crash data provided by Main Roads WA, for the five years 2006 to 2010, record three accidents occurring on Lagoon Drive, between Marmion Avenue and Foreshore Vista, with two resulting in property damage only and one requiring hospital treatment.  For Brazier Road, between Lagoon Drive and Wilkie Avenue, two single vehicle accidents were recorded with one resulting in property damage only and one requiring medical attention.  On the 16 April 2011 a fatal accident is reported as having occurred at the intersection of Lagoon Drive and Brazier Road, however this does not yet show on the available records.

 

Refer to Attachment 1 for a location plan of the area of interest.

Consultation

In addition to investigating the matters raised in the petition, the City has been in discussion with the owners of 15 Brazier Road.

 

Subject to Council’s endorsement of the recommendations made in this report, consultation with the residents of Lagoon Drive and Brazier Road is also proposed to be undertaken.

Comment

To determine the justification and priority of any traffic management works on Lagoon Drive or Brazier Road, the roads were assessed in accordance with the City’s Traffic Management Investigation and Intervention Policy (TM Policy), which assesses roads against a range of criteria such as:

 

·        Speed

·        Traffic volumes

·        Crash history

·        Road design and topography

·        Vulnerable road users - Pedestrians/Cyclists

 

The TM Policy requires a score of > 60 to qualify for traffic management treatments, while scores between 30 and 60 points warrant increased attention to law enforcement and driver education.  The assessment for Lagoon Drive, between Marmion Avenue and Foreshore Vista achieved a score of 19, while Brazier Road, between Lagoon Drive and Wilkie Road, achieved a score of 24.  These scores include the fatal accident that occurred in April 2011.

 

For a local distributor road with a bus route the TM Policy discounts the score by 25 points in recognition of the importance of supporting public transport by providing a smooth ride to patrons.  If this score adjustment is discounted, the resulting scores are 44 for Lagoon Drive and 49 for Brazier Road.

 

While the TM Policy scores are low, due to the general layout of the roads there are some road safety issues that need addressing. The forward visibility over the crest is adequate for vehicles travelling at the posted speed, speeding vehicles will present a hazard. Administration considers that there is a need to improve traffic safety for these two roads and recommends that projects for traffic management along Lagoon Drive and Brazier Road be listed in the City’s 10-Year Capital Works Program and be considered by Council when developing the 2012/13 Capital Works Budget.

 

Concept plans for the proposed traffic treatments on Lagoon Drive and Brazier Road are shown in Attachments 2, 3 and 4.  The proposal shows a redevelopment of Lagoon Drive similar to that of the newer section of Lagoon Drive, south of Foreshore Vista, with a central planted median, and roundabouts at the intersection of Brazier Road and St Ives Drive.  Similarly, for Brazier Road between Lagoon Drive and Compass Circle a median is proposed to be installed.  Between Compass Circle and Wilkie Road, Brazier Road has a reduced width of 7m and it is proposed that speed cushions be installed to reduce speed through this undulating section. The residents of Lagoon Drive and Brazier Road will be consulted regarding the traffic management proposed in these two roads.

 

It is recommended that the WA Police be approached to increase speed enforcement in the area to improve speed compliance for the minority of drivers travelling above the default urban speed limit of 50km/h.

Statutory Compliance

Nil


 

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006– 2021:

 “2     Social

2.4    Improve community safety

Policy Implications

The City’s Traffic Investigation and Intervention Policy is applicable to the assessment of the need for traffic treatments along Lagoon Drive and Brazier Road.

Financial Implications

The indicative cost of the proposed traffic treatments on Lagoon Drive are $180,000 for each roundabout and $100,000 for landscaped median works.  For Brazier Road the estimated cost is $60,000 for median works and $12,000 for speed cushions.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

 

1.       ENDORSES public consultation with the residents of Lagoon Drive regarding support for the installation of traffic management treatments as shown in City Drawings 2725-1-0 (Attachment 2) and 2725-2-0 (Attachment 3);

2.       ENDORSES public consultation with the residents of Brazier Road regarding support for the installation of traffic management treatments as shown in City Drawings 2725-2-0 (Attachment 3) and 2724-1-0 (Attachment 4);

3.       LISTS for consideration $180,000 for the construction of a roundabout at the intersection of Lagoon Drive/Brazier Road, Yanchep, as shown in City Drawing 2725-2-0 (Attachment 3), in the City’s 10-Year Capital Works Program 2012/13 – 2021/22;

4.       LISTS for consideration $180,000 for the construction of a roundabout at the intersection of Lagoon Drive/St Ives Drive, Yanchep, as shown in City Drawing 2725-1-0 (Attachment 2), in the City’s 10-Year Capital Works Program 2012/13 – 2021/22);

5.       LISTS for consideration $100,000 for the construction of landscaped median traffic treatments on Lagoon Drive, Yanchep, as shown in City Drawings 2725-1-0 (Attachment 2) and 2725-2-0 (Attachment 3), in the City’s 10-Year Capital Works Program 2012/13 – 2021/22;

6.       LISTS for consideration $60,000 for the construction of landscaped median traffic treatments on Brazier Road, Yanchep, as shown in City Drawing 2725-2-0 (Attachment 3), in the City’s 10-Year Capital Works Program 2012/13 – 2021/22;


 

7.       LISTS for consideration $12,000 for the installation of speed cushions on Brazier Road, Yanchep, as shown in City Drawing 2724-1-0 (Attachment 4), in the City’s 10-Year Capital Works Program 2012/13 – 2021/22;

8.       REQUESTS the WA Police to undertake speed enforcement of vehicles using Lagoon Drive and Brazier Road; and

9.       ADVISES the petition organiser of Council’s decision.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

PT03-06/11 Lagoon Drive and Brazier Road, Yanchep - Location Map

11/131428

 

2.

Lagoon Drive, Yanchep - Traffic Treatment Concept 2725-1-0

11/131549

 

3.

Lagoon Drive, Yanchep - Traffic Treatment Concept 2725-2-0

11/131551

 

4.

Brazier Road, Yanchep - Traffic Treatment Concept 2724-1-0

11/131553

 

  


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               219

 

 



DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                                                              220


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                                                              221


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                                                              222


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               223

3.18  Parking Prohibition - Abbeville Circle - Mindarie Primary School, Mindarie

File Ref:                                              5597 – 11/128950

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       2         

 

Issue

To consider the provision of parking prohibitions on the north east bend of Abbeville Circle near Mindarie Primary School, Mindarie.

 

Background

The City has received a representation from a resident concerning parents of Mindarie Primary School students parking on and around the bend of Abbeville Circle at the north east corner of the school, creating an obstruction to safe sight distance and generating safety issues for children at the pedestrian crossing point.

Detail

Rothesay Heights and Abbeville Circle are the bordering roads of Mindarie Primary School, Rothesay Heights to the west; Abbeville Circle to the north and east whilst Abbeville Park is the adjoining property on the south side of the school.

 

Embayed car parking spaces are provided on Abbeville Circle adjacent to the school frontage and within Abbeville Park. A pedestrian crossing is located on Abbeville Circle near the north east corner, opposite Rainham Avenue. Bollards are installed on the boundaries of Abbeville Park and on the verge either side of the pedestrian crossing to prevent vehicle access. Parents have been observed parking on the road along the bend restricting visibility for pedestrians trying to cross the road at the pedestrian crossing and restricting the road to one lane causing congestion. Refer Attachment 1 for location plan.

 

To ensure traffic safety, Administration has developed parking prohibitions for Abberville Circle as per of the City of Wanneroo Drawing No. 2677-1-1 (Attachment 2 refers).

Consultation

The proposed parking prohibition was discussed with the reporting resident.  The proposed prohibition does not impact on any private residences, being only on the school side of the road. 

Comment

Administration is of the view that the proposed parking prohibitions are warranted to ensure proper sight distance and maintain pedestrian safety. 

 

The parking prohibitions also include yellow “No Stopping” lines at the bend to better indicate the restriction to parking in the area. It is considered that the additional visual aid on the pavement will reduce confusion and better aid traffic flow and parking compliance.

 

It should be noted that the proposed parking prohibitions will add an additional work commitment for the City’s Parking and Compliance Officers to ensure compliance and as a consequence, will only be able to be enforced on an infrequent basis.

Statutory Compliance

The installation of parking prohibition signage will allow the enforcement of Part 4 Clause 38 of the City’s Parking and Facilities Local Law 2003 (as amended).

 

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “2     Social

2.4    Improve community safety

 

2.4.1 Implement a range of road safety initiatives to improve the standard of the road network and user behaviour.

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

The provision of parking prohibitions incurs not only the initial cost of materials and installation of the signs but also the ongoing cost of maintenance due to vandalism and graffiti. The cost to install signs and line marking proposed in this prohibition is estimated to be $600 and is able to be funded from PR-1431 - Parking Scheme Signage and Line Marking Upgrade Project, for which a total of $10,000 has been approved in the 2011/2012 Capital Works Budget.

 

It is noted that the enforcement of parking prohibitions over an increasing number of sites across the City’s jurisdiction will also impact on the resource availability of the City’s Parking Compliance Officers to enforce all such prohibitions throughout the City.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

 

1.      APPROVES the installation of “NO STOPPING ROAD OR NATURE STRIP” signs at the north east bend of Abbeville Circle as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2677-1-1 (Attachment 2 refers);

2.      APPROVES the installation of Yellow No Stopping line marking at the north east bend of Abbeville Circle as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2677-1-1 (Attachment 2 refers), and;

3.      ADVISES the resident and Mindarie Primary School of Council’s decision.

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Location map of Mindarie Primary School

11/128845

 

2.

Mindarie Primary School - Parking Prohibition drawing - Abbeville Circle - 2447-1-2

11/128849

Minuted

  


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                                                              225


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                                                              226

  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                       227

Draft

Community Development

Communication and Events

3.19  Request to Sponsor West Coast Employee of the Year Award 2012

File Ref:                                              3986 – 11/131295

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Community Development

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil       

 

Issue

To consider a request to sponsor the West Coast Institute of Training (WCIT) Employee of the Year Award 2012.

 

Background

Each year, West Coast Institute of Training holds an awards evening to recognise and celebrate students and lecturers achieving excellence is their chosen fields.

 

“Council at its meeting of 8 March 2011 endorsed the following:

 

1.       APPROVES the request to sponsor West Coast Institute of Training Innovation Award at a cost of $2,000 from Community Funding and Donations Account 717633-1205-316;

2.       NOMINATES two people to attend the Awards Evening function on Monday 4 April 2011; and

3.       NOTES the Communications and Events operating budget for 2011/12 will be increased to include a sponsorship account.”

Detail

West Coast Institute of Training has proposed that the City this year consider being naming rights sponsor of the West Coast Employee of the Year Award which, through a detailed selection process, is awarded to a West Coast staff member who has found innovative ways to deliver training or services. The cost of this sponsorship is $2,500.

 

Benefits of the naming rights sponsorship include:

 

·        Exclusive naming rights to the Employee of the Year Award.

·        A visual profile piece on screen which includes new photographs taken by WCIT’s photographer.

·        Verbal acknowledgement at the beginning and end of the Awards Evening presentations.

·        City logo featured on pre-drinks function signage.

·        Two complimentary tickets to attend the Awards Evening Gala Dinner and present the award on stage.

·        City name, logo and description to feature in the program.

·        A visual profile piece on screen to feature your company.

·        Acknowledgement in all Awards Evening media releases and West Coast Institute's Stakeholder newsletter.

·        Recognition on West Coast Institute's website with a hyperlink to the City’s website.

·        City name and logo in a post-event community advertisement congratulating the award winners.

·        Photos with and access to award winner for the City’s own promotional activities.

·        City name and logo to display on college LCD screens for a period of one month after the event.

Consultation

Nil

Comment

It is considered that there is potential for future partnership opportunities between the City and West Coast Institute of Training and this sponsorship request would be a great way to continue this important stakeholder relationship. However, it is difficult to justify the sponsorship of an employee from another organisation when the City’s staff are making positive differences to our work practices and introducing innovations. It is recommended that the Council does not accept the sponsorship request and seeks an opportunity in 2012/13 to sponsor a student/trainee or an innovation that benefits the City of Wanneroo community.

Statutory Compliance

Nil

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “4     Governance

4.1    Improve strategic partnerships

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

A sponsorship account in support of this annual request was endorsed during the 2011/12 budget deliberation and funds are available from the Community Funding and Donations Account 717633-1205-316 should Council decide to approve this sponsorship request.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 


 

Recommendation

That Council:

 

1.       DOES NOT APPROVE the request to sponsor West Coast Institute of Training Employee of the Year Award at a cost of $2,500; and

2.       SUPPORTS Administration discussing with West Coast Institute of Training other sponsorship opportunities for student/ trainees or innovations which benefit the City of Wanneroo community.

 

 

 

Attachments: Nil  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                       230

Draft

Other Matters

3.20  Australian Government: Regional Development Australia Fund - Round Two - Yanchep Active Open Space Playing Fields and Sports Amenities

File Ref:                                              6712 – 11/130551

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Community Development

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil       

 

Issue

To seek endorsement of an application to the Federal Government’s Regional Development Australia Fund for the construction of the Yanchep Open Space for a grant allocation amount of $2,600,000.

 

Background

On 3 November 2011 the Australian Government Department of Regional Australia, Regional Development and Local Government announced that it was making available $200 million for round two of the $1 billion Regional Development Australia Fund (RDAF).  The funding is to support the infrastructure needs of Regional Australia. 

 

Under round one of the RDAF, 35 projects were funded to the value of $150 million.  The City of Wanneroo applied in round one for the redevelopment of Girrawheen library but was unsuccessful.  Whilst the City of Wanneroo addressed the focus area of education and training:

 

“the [Regional Development Australia (RDA)]committee did not see a direct alignment with the intent of the Strategies and Actions of  the focus area outlined in the RDA Perth Regional Plan”

 

For Round two, eligible projects are required to be:

 

·    ‘Investment ready” within six months of execution of the funding agreement, including construction.

·    Capital in nature such as new infrastructure and upgrades to existing infrastructure;

·    Be cohesive and not involve two or more different projects artificially drawn together to create the impression of one project under a common name.

 

Applications will be assessed through a competitive two stage application process.  The first stage is the submission of an Expression of Interest (EOI) form together with supporting documentation.  The EOI is due and is required to be submitted electronically by email to both the RDA committee and to the Department of Regional Australia no later than 5.00pm WST on Thursday, 1 December 2011.  

Detail

RDAF $200 million funding (Round two)

 

Applicants can apply from $500,000 up to $15 million (GST exclusive) for one project only.  At least 50 per cent of the partnership funding must be cash.

 

RDA committees will consider all EOIs from their region and select three viable priority projects to proceed to full application and assessment.  Notification of the EOI process is Wednesday 11 January 2012. 

Councils are required to enter an agreement with the Commonwealth by Wednesday 15 February 2012.  The funds must be expended by 30 June 2015.

 

Project Eligibility

 

Funding will not be available for:

 

·    Soft infrastructure, such as computer software or hardware; or the payment of salaries for service delivery staff/, research staff and/or contractors;

·    The purchase of plant and equipment that is not an integral part of the funded capital project;

·    Administrative overhead items, including office equipment and vehicles, mobile capital equipment such as trucks and earthmoving equipment; or the provision of services and support activities;

·    Commercial projects or components of projects that can be either on-sold or otherwise granted to a commercial or business organisation;

·    Activities that are directly and primarily supported by other Australian Government programs, including major roads and highways, bridges, schools (provate and public), and construction, upgrade or extensions to hospitals.  Exceptions to this may be:

Large transport hubs which facilitate the movement of freights and passengers within, around or across a region, thus supporting local industry and enhancing productivity; and

Minor roads, access corridors or access drives which lead to an area of common use or common benefit, including industrial estate or a social or economic facility which supports economic diversity, social inclusion or environmental sustainability;

·    Projects that are eligible to be funded under the National disaster relief and Recovery Arrangements in the calendar year of lodgement; and

·    Projects that are the  normal responsibility of local governments, including upgrades to or refurbishment of sewerage systems, water pipes and strom water drains; the construction of public amenity blocks; minor upgrades to a town centre, or the construction or refurbishment of Council offices.

 

Application Assessment

 

The main criterion for assessment is as follows:

 

·    Be ‘investment ready” within six months of execution of the funding agreement;

·    Be capital in nature;

·    Scheduled to finish on or before 30 June 2015;

·    Must be nominated by the RDA committee to submit an application;

·    Must be viable and sustainable;

·    Provide ALL mandatory documentation;

 

The RDA committee will base its assessment on:

 

·    Priorities in the Regional Plan;

·    Capacity of the project to address in the region, with consideration of the geographical spread of projects;

·    Impact of the project on the region and neighbouring regions, with endorsed projects coming from across the region, rather than any one town, locality or Local Government Area;

·    Level of community support; and

·    Readiness to proceed.

 

Contracting and Funding

The RDA will advise both the applicant and the Department of the three projects that will proceed to the second stage of the application process (full application).  The full application is due and is required to be submitted electronically by email to both the RDA committee and to the Department of Regional Australia no later than Wednesday 15 February 2012.

 

Successful applicants of stage two of the application process will be required to enter a Funding Agreement to be signed by both parties.  The Minister is expected to make an announcement on successful projects in May 2012. 

 

Successful applicants will be required to report at different stages (agreed milestones) as stipulated in the Funding Agreement and site visits may be conducted.  An initial payment will be made, with remaining payments made on achievement of agreed milestones.  Construction of the project must be completed no later than 30 June 2015.

Consultation

The sporting clubs in the Yanchep/ Two Rocks area were consulted on Monday 3 May, 2010 at a meeting facilitated by the Yanchep Two Rocks Recreation Association.  The Yanchep and Two Rocks sporting groups are supportive of the new playing fields and sports amenities and will be consulted further as part of the development of the final design drawings.

Comment

The following project is recommended for consideration under this funding program:

 

          Yanchep Active Open Space Playing Fields and Sports Amenities

 

Upon completion of the earthworks stage of the “Yanchep Active Open Space” by Yanchep Beach Joint Venture (YBJV), it is proposed to implement the project involving:

 

·   Provision for a District Sporting Facility that provides for Australian Rules Football, Soccer, Little Athletics, Cricket, Baseball/Softball, Rugby Union and League, Netball, Basketball and Passive Recreation.

·   Provision of irrigation infrastructure including mainline, detailed irrigation lines, sprinklers, sensors and related items. 

·   Landscaping, including the turfing of the sporting ovals, and treatment of earthworks batters

·   Provision of shared pathways and walkways

·   Provision of floodlighting

·   Provision for Carparking facilities to cater for 180 to 200 formal parking bays.

·   Amenities building (first stage) to include change rooms, toilets, umpires/first aid room and a kiosk.

 

The underlying purpose of the open space is to provide a design that will accommodate the current sporting needs and requirements of the community in the Yanchep/Two Rocks and provide for future growth that is anticipated within the area.

 


 

The estimated costs for the construction of the project is summarised below:

 

·   Preliminaries                                                            $   107,000

·   Professional Fees                                                    $   260,000

·   Earthworks and soil preparation                              $   263,000

·   Irrigation                                                                   $   424,000

·   Turfing                                                                     $   522,000

·   Landscaping & Carpark                                           $   944,000

·   Amenities                                                                 $2,680,000 

_________

Total:                                                                             $5,200,000

 

YBJV proposes to construct between February and August 2012, the irrigation bore, earthworks for the whole site and the access road to the site in accordance with the Deed of Agreement with the City (subject to another report on the agenda).

 

During this period, Administration will prepare the design and documentation for the playing fields and landscaping components of the project to enable these works to proceed on completion of the earthworks. This will ensure compliance with the requirement to be investment ready within six months of execution of the funding agreement, including construction.

Statutory Compliance

The City will need to adhere to the requirements of  a Federal Funding Agreement for successful applications.

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “2     Social

2.1    Increase choice and quality of neighbourhood and lifestyle options

 

2.2    Improve the City’s identity and community well-being through arts, culture, leisure and recreation; and

          4.       Governance

                   4.4     Maintain long-term financial stability”.

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Playing Fields and Amenities Building Stage 1

 

Funding has been allocation in the 10 year Capital Works Program for the construction of the Yanchep Open Space as follows:

 


 

 

Playing Fields                2011/12                         $1,000,000 (Loan Funds)

                                      2012/13                         $1,400,000 (Loans Funds       $1,000,000

                                                                                                Municipal            $   340,000

                                                                                                Grants                 $     60,000)

                                                                            _________

Sub Total    (1)     $2,400,000

 

Amenities Building        2011/12                         $   240,000 (Municipal)

                                                                            $2,400,000 (Municipal $1,101,417

                                                                                                Grants       $  770,333

                                                                                                Loan          $  619,250)

                                                                            _________

Sub Total    (2)     $2,680,000

                                                                            _________

TOTAL                $5,080,000

 

Should the City be successful with its application for 50% of the funding for the project, then the 10 Year Capital Works will need to be adjusted to reflect the grant from the Federal Government and the deletion of the Council funds allocated towards this project.

 

Given that the works proposed to be undertaken as part of this project will be predominantly or entirely funded by the collection of developer contributions from the proposed Yanchep Two Rocks Development Contribution Plan, the amount of any grant funding received (either in part or whole) will be deducted from the quantum of development costs under that Plan, thereby reducing the amount of development contributions to be paid and, in turn, further reducing any impact of developer contributions on housing affordability in future.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council ENDORSES the submission by Administration of the Yanchep Active Open Space Playing Fields of Sports Amenities project for a funding grant of $2,600,000 from the Regional Australia Development Fund (RDAF).

 

 

 

Attachments: Nil   


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                       235

Draft

Corporate Strategy & Performance

Finance

3.21  Financial Activity Statement for the Period Ended 31 October 2011

File Ref:                                              5509 – 11/125305

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Corporate Strategy and Performance

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       4         

 

Issue

To consider the Financial Activity Statement for the period ended 31 October 2011.

 

Background

Regulation 34(1) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 requires a local government to prepare each month a statement of financial activity, presented according to nature and type, by program, or by business unit.  Administration has opted to present the statement of financial activity by nature and type and in a similar format to that presented in the 2011/2012 Annual Budget.  This format separates Revenue and Expenses from Other Revenue and Expenses and provides improved disclosure of the City’s underlying Operating Result.

The Financial Activity Statement is in the form of an Income Statement, which compares year to date actual income and expenses with the year to date budget, shows variances and the adopted and revised budgets (if any). Revised budget figures are inclusive of endorsed amendments from Council (including the Mid Year Budget Review). It is accompanied by a Balance Sheet together with information relating to Capital Projects, an Investment Portfolio Summary, Statement of Net Current Assets and Rate Setting Statement.

In addition to the above, Regulation 34(5) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 requires a local government to adopt a percentage or value, calculated in accordance with Australian Accounting Standards, to be used in statements of financial activity for reporting material variances.  For the 2011/2012 financial year Council has adopted 10% for the reporting of variances, which is in line with previous years.

Detail

The Financial Activity Statement and October year to date financial performances of the City are detailed in Attachments 1, 2, 3 and 4.

Consultation

Nil

Comment

In accordance with the requirement of Regulation 34(5) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996, the commentaries on 10% variances to revised budgets in the Financial Activity Statement for the period ended 31 October 2011 are provided below:

Income Statement (Refer to Attachment 1)

Net Result                                                                     $ million

Year to Date Actual                                                      69.647

Year to Date Budget Estimate                                      61.215

Year to Date Variance                                                  +8.432 (+14%)

Full Year Adopted Budget                                            38.696

Full Year Revised Budget                                          38.696

The following information is provided on key aspects of the year to date financial results:

Revenues                                                                     $ million

Year to Date Actual                                                    102.725

Year to Date Budget Estimate                                    102.685

Year to Date Variance                                                  +0.040 (+0%)

Full Year Adopted Budget                                          133.806

Full Year Revised Budget                                        133.806

Operating Grants, Subsidies and Contributions

Currently Operating Grants, Subsidies and Contributions reflect an unfavourable variance of 31% (-$0.895 million).  As per previous years, the City received in June 2011 an early payment from the Grants Commission of its first quarterly instalment for 2011/2012 for $1.306 million with a subsequent payment of $0.985 million received during October.  Also received in October were $0.159 million and $0.140 million towards the provision of Financial Counselling Services, plus $0.136 million from FESA for Emergency Services (fire prevention).

Fees and Charges

Fees and Charges income as at the end of October are behind year to date budget by14%    (-$1.020 million).  The primarily reason for this variance is partly due to the timing of billing cycles within Waste Operations and the Materials Recovery Facility for Service Fee Income, which will be monitored over the coming months with any subsequent adjustments to be determined at Mid Year Review.

Interest Earnings

For the financial year to date ending October, Council’s investment portfolio return has exceeded the bank bill index benchmark by 0.76% pa (5.77% pa vs. 5.01 % pa). October year to date interest earnings amounts to $3.564 million reflecting a favourable variance of $0.931 million (+35%) compared to year to date budget.

 

The City intends to continue with a “cautiously optimistic” investment strategy throughout the year and has budgeted for $7.123 million to be achieved by year end considering the current economic climate.

Other Revenue

The Other Revenue category shows a favourable year to date variance to budget of $0.730 million (+54%).  The main contributor towards this variance is the unbudgeted payment of $0.258 million received by the City for the sale of sand at Lot 15 Motivation Drive Wangara and the $0.395 million favourable variance in Sale of Products Income for the Materials Recycling Facility.

Expenses                                                                      $ million

Year to Date Actual                                                       35.603

Year to Date Budget Estimate                                       42.421

Year to Date Variance                                                    +6.818 (+16%)

Full Year Adopted Budget                                            132.686

Full Year Revised Budget                                         132.686

  

Employee Costs

Under Employee costs a positive year to date variance of +17% ($3.004 million) has been reflected for the end of October. 

The main contributor towards this is the delay in recruitment for newly created positions adopted through the recently approved annual budget together with other vacancies.  It is noted that some positions in the current environment are proving difficult to fill.  In respect to the UCA for inside staff an updated agreement is still being negotiated. At present favourable variances to year to date budgets of +$2.083 million and +$0.752 million are reflected for Salaries and Wages respectively.

 

Materials and Contracts

Under Materials and Contracts a positive variance to year to date budget of +22% is represented (+$2.806 million).  This is a result of slower than expected recording of costs to some accounts within this category for the first four months of the financial year.  Material contributors towards this variance are Contract Expenses (+$1.666 million), Refuse Removal Expenses (+$0.603 million) and Material Expenses (+0.535 million).  As activities increase over the coming months this variance is expected to reduce, hence no reductions are identified at this stage. 

 

Utility Charges

The variance to year to date budget for Utility Charges is currently +13% (+$0.248 million).  Most accounts are within budget expectations except for Electricity which shows a positive variance of +$0.279 million, negated by Water with a negative variance of -$0.046 million, both due to timing of payments.    

 

Insurance

A positive variance to year to date budget of +18% (+$0.267 million) is noted as at October month end for Insurance costs.  The reason for this variance is from the timing of the payments of the annual premiums, which are staged over the year and should not result in any savings by year end.

Other Revenue and Expenses                                     $ million

(Excluding Contributions of Physical Assets)

Revenue in excess of expenses:

Year to Date Actual                                                        2.526

Year to Date Budget Estimate                                        0.951

Year to Date Variance                                                  +1.575 (+166%)

Full Year Adopted Budget                                              7.577

Full Year Revised Budget                                            7.577

Non-Operating Grants, Subsidies and Contributions

An unfavourable year to date budget variance of -56% is reflected under the Non-Operating Grants, Subsidies and Contributions category which relates primarily to Capital Grants for Capital Works, however, no reductions in the annual estimates are identified.  The most material amounts received during October were, $0.500 million from Department of Infrastructure and Transport and $0.364 million from Main Roads.

Town Planning Scheme (TPS) Expenses

TPS Expenses as at October month end reflects a +47% variance (+$3.308 million) to year to date budget.  These costs relate to expenditures for within specific Scheme areas and are funded by contributions received from land owners.  If timings of works carried out change there will be no impact on Municipal accounts.

Contributions of Physical Assets                                  $ million

Year to Date Actual                                                        0.000

Year to Date Budget Estimate                                        0.000

Year to Date Variance                                                    0.000 (0%)

Full Year Adopted Budget                                            30.000

Full Year Revised Budget                                          30.000

 

Each year Developers hand over physical assets (such as parklands) to the City, for its ongoing management and control.  These assets can be of considerable value and will be calculated and booked to the accounts during the preparation of end of year Financial Statements.  It should be noted that variations on the amounts of contributions of physical assets comparing to budget has no direct impact to the City’s current financial year financial results. 

Balance Sheet (Refer to Attachment 2)

Capital Works Program

The current status of the Capital Works Program as of 31 October 2011 is summarised below, by Program Category:-

 

Capital Works Detail by Program

 

Program

Category Description

Annual Revised

Budget

$ million

Year to date

Actual

$ million

 

Commitments

$ million

Community

  3.828

0.492

0.419

Corporate

  6.361

0.267

1.569

Drainage

  0.659

0.130

0.012

Investment

  4.128

0.622

0.002

Recreation and Sport

16.647

0.832

1.713

Transport

35.010

8.675

4.943

Waste Management

  4.185

0.221

0.664

Total

70.818

11.329

 9.322

The table above notes a total Annual Revised Budget for the Capital Works Program as $70.818 million.  As at the end of October $11.329 million has been spent against capital works which is in line with expectations at this stage of the financial year.  In addition to the actual expenditure, $9.322 million is recognised as committed. (Note: Commitments are life to date and will also relate to future financial periods).

To further expand on the Capital Works Program information above, key projects are selected to be reported on, on a regular basis, which are listed in the following table:

Capital Works Details for Selected Projects


Project Description

Annual Revised Budget

$ million

Year to Date Actual

$ million

Commitments $ million

 

 

 

Comments

Ocean Reef Road Wangara

10.291

4.717

2.720

Roadworks nearing completion with practical completion late Dec.

 

Flynn Drive Neerabup

6.215

0.005

0.017

Design review being undertaken with MRWA & waiting on ministerial direction in relation to additional funding.

 

Hepburn Avenue Alexander Heights

3.801

0.119

0.035

Stage 2 tender closed with tender award to be addressed under CEO delegation. 

Upgrade Kingsway RSC Stage 5

3.730

0.000

0.000

Stage 5 sports field redevelopment in progress with soccer, rugby & netball carpark designs being finalised.

Pinjar Road Ashby

3.719

1.184

0.477

Works currently focussed on Caporn/Pinjar intersection & progressing according to plan.

Develop Industrial Estate Neerabup

2.818

0.599

0.002

On hold pending resolution of environmental issues.

Joondalup Drive Carramar

2.645

1.028

0.419

Works progressing to plan with next stage dualling though to Pinjar Rd.  Completion scheduled for Dec

Replace Waste Management Plant

2.142

0.000

0.186

On track to be completed by June 30.

Replace Light Plant

2.083

0.000

0.402

Awaiting finalisation of analysis of log book review.

Lenore Road Wanneroo

1.450

0.000

0.000

Design being finalised with tender advertisement subject to finalisation of land acquisition matters.

Yanchep District Playing Fields

1.199

0.000

0.000

Report to Council current round.  Grant funding being applied for.

Yanchep Lagoon

1.042

0.027

0.007

Design progressing with approvals being actioned.

Investment Portfolio Summary (Refer to Attachment 3)

In accordance with the City’s Investment Policy, Council endorsed the City to continue maintaining a “cautiously optimistic” approach to its investments to ensure full protection of the City’s financial assets. As such, the City will only invest in government guaranteed products or short to medium term deposits with major banks during the present economic climate.

 

As at 31 October 2011, the City holds an investment portfolio (cash and cash equivalents) of $217.321 million. Interest Earnings were budgeted at 5% yield.  For the financial year to date ending October, Council’s investment portfolio return has exceeded the bank bill index benchmark by 0.76% pa (5.77% pa vs. 5.01% pa).  Further explanation of the current economic climate, market conditions and City’s portfolio analysis is detailed in Attachment 3.


 

Rate Setting Statement (Refer to Attachment 4)

The Rate Setting Statement outlined in Attachment 4 represents a composite view of the finances of the City, identifying the movement in the surplus/(deficit), primarily based on the operations and capital works revenue and expenditure, and resulting rating income required.

Overall Comment

The Operating Result for the City to October month end presents an overall positive variance of +11 (+$6.857 million) to year to date budget. Operating income presented a minimal variance to year to date budget of less than 1% (+$0.040 million).  Expenditures from Operations continue to present a favourable variance to year to date budget of +16% (+$6.818 million) with the major influences being the positive year to date variances generated from Employee Costs ($3.004 million) and Materials & Contracts ($2.806 million).  After a relatively slow start to the financial year, activities within the capital program have continued to progress from September into October. 

 

The external audit of the 2010/2011 financials was presented to and endorsed by Council at its 15 November 2011 meeting, with no adjustment required to be reflected in opening balance of the Rate Setting Statement for the current financial year.

Statutory Compliance

This monthly financial report complies with Section 6.4 of the Local Government Act 1995 and Regulations 33A and 34 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996.

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “4 Governance

4.6 Provide and maintain a high standard of governance and accountability

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

As outlined above and detailed in Attachments 1, 2, 3 and 4

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 


 

Recommendation

That Council RECEIVES the Financial Activity Statements and commentaries on variances to Budget for the period ended 31 October 2011, consisting of:

·        Annual Original and Revised Budgets,

·        October 2011 Year to Date Budget Estimates,

·        October 2011 Year to Date Income and Expenditures,

·        October 2011 Year to Date Material Variance Notes, and

·        October 2011 Year to Date Net Current Assets.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Income Statement for the period ended 31 October 2011

11/131755

Minuted

2.

Balance Sheet 31 October 2011

11/132030

Minuted

3.

Economic and Investment Portfolio

11/131753

Minuted

4.

Rate Setting Statement 31 October 2011

11/132029

Minuted

  


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               242


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               243


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               244


 


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                                                              246


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               247

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                       248

Draft

Governance and Executive Services

3.22  Annual Review of Delegated Authority Register

File Ref:                                              2883 – 11/125633

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Corporate Strategy and Performance

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       1         

 

Issue

To consider amendments to the City’s Delegated Authority Register, following a review as required by the Local Government Act 1995 (the Act).

 

Background

The Act provides for the delegation of certain powers and duties to the Chief Executive Officer (sections 5.42 and 5.43).  The Chief Executive Officer may, unless prohibited by Council’s instrument of delegation, further on-delegate powers and duties to employees (Section 5.44).  The purpose of delegating authority to the Chief Executive Officer is to provide for the efficient administration of the day to day functions of the local government.

 

The Act requires that a Delegations Register be maintained and reviewed on an annual basis (Section 5.46).

Detail

It is necessary to review all current delegations to ensure that they are consistent with the legislation and applicable to current needs.  Although the provisions of the Act do not affect the delegations made under other legislation, it is considered appropriate to review those delegations at the same time.

 

Attachment 1 details those delegations that have changed.  The complete register inclusive of changes is available in the Elected Members Reading Room and on the Members Web Portal.

Consultation

All Directorates have reviewed the delegations applicable to their officers.  In undertaking this review, Directorates have been requested to pay particular attention to any new delegations that may be required as a result of the introduction of new legislation or changes to existing legislation, and to the requirements of Council’s recently adopted Execution of Council Documents Policy.

 

An update on the review process was also presented to the Council Forum on 22 November 2011.

Comment

A summary of the amendments included in the reviewed Delegated Authority Register is as follows:

 

Delegation No

Delegation Title

Details of Amendment

All

All

Disclaimer added “This text is provided as a reference only.  Delegates shall only act in full understanding of the delegated statutory power, inclusive of conditions [see below].”

 

1.14

Disposing of Property (Private Treaty)

Conditions and Exceptions amended to extend delegation to CEO.

2.1

Expenses May be Funded Before Actually Incurred (Elected Members or Committee Members)

Conditions and Exceptions amended by deleting reference to superseded policies and replacing with reference to current policy.

2.2

Training, Travel and Accommodation – Elected Members

Conditions and Exceptions amended by deleting reference to superseded policies and replacing with reference to current policy.

2.3

Legal Representation – Elected Members and Officers

Conditions and Exceptions amended to clarify that delegation can only be exercised where legal costs do not exceed $10,000 per application.

3.1

Payments from the Municipal Fund and Trust Fund

Conditions and Exceptions amended by adding reference to Accounting Policy.

5.3

Requirement to Construct and Repair Crossing

Delegation to Manager Infrastructure Projects deleted, as crossing upgrades are generally dealt with by Infrastructure Maintenance.

6.1

Determining that Tenders do not have to be Invited for the Supply of Goods and Services

Conditions and Exceptions amended by adding reference to Purchasing Policy.

6.2

Tenders to be Invited for Certain Contracts

Conditions and Exceptions amended by adding reference to Purchasing Policy.

6.4

Choice of Most Advantageous Tender

Conditions and Exceptions amended to clarify limits relating to the exercise of this delegation.

8.3

Approve a Demolition Licence Other than for Buildings Classified by the National Trust and Council’s Heritage Register

Amended to reflect the fact that proposals to demolish places listed on the State Register of Heritage Places must be referred to the Heritage Council of WA.

9.1

Structure Planning

Delegation to Manager City Growth and Manager Planning Implementation deleted.  Various amendments made to Conditions and Exceptions.

9.3

Development Control

Function relating to entry of premises under clause 8.6 of DPS 2 deleted.  Conditions and Exceptions amended in e).

10.13

Private Property Local Law – Approvals, Consents and Consignments

Function relating to consignment of streets numbers deleted.

13.1

Authority for CEO to Call and Award Tenders – Kingsway Netball Facilities Upgrade Project

Deleted.  Action completed.

13.3

Kingsway Regional Sporting Complex Project Status and Future Staged Implementation

Deleted.  Action completed.

13.4

Joondalup Drive Pedestrian Facilities, Roundabout, Intersection Upgrade and Associated Road Widenings (Tumbleweed Drive – Old Yanchep Road), Banksia Grove

Deleted.  Action completed.

13.5

Tenders for Additional Waste Trucks

Deleted.  Action completed.

13.6

Local Structure Plan No. 82 - Eglinton

Deleted.  Action completed.

13.7

Appointment of Acting Chief Executive Officer (for Periods of 35 Days or Less)

Moved to Part 2 – Administration.  Now Delegation 2.6.

13.11

Approval of Development Application – Community Recreation Centre, Restaurant and Retail Outlets on Portion of Lot 9004 (2650) Marmion Avenue, Alkimos

Deleted.  Action completed.

13.12

Development Applications – Bulk Earthworks and Other Developments at Lot 609 Yanchep Beach Road, Yanchep

Deleted.  Action completed.

13.13

Appointment of Authorised Persons to Execute Documents on Behalf of Council

Moved to Part 2 – Administration. Now Delegation 2.7

13.15

Applications for Use of Land Under Section 18 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972

Moved to Part 7 – Other Legislation.  Now Delegation 7.14.

13.5

Offers to Claimants at Lot 6 (359) Gnangara Road Wangara, Lot 250 (560) Flynn Drive, Neerabup and Lot 101 (8) Becher Way, Gnangara

Delegation added.  Inadvertently missed after Council meeting on 26 July 2011.

13.6

Offers to Claimants at Lot 4 (150) East Road, Pearsall, Lot 28 (171) Elliott Road, Wanneroo and Lot 3 (185) Mary Street, Wanneroo

Delegation added.  Inadvertently missed after Council meeting on 23 August 2011.

13.7

Disposal of Lot 12 Fowey Loop, Mindarie

Delegation added.  Inadvertently missed after Council meeting on 11 October 2011.

 

Delegations have been renumbered as necessary as a result of the amendments listed above.

Statutory Compliance

The annual review of the City’s Delegated Authority Register has been undertaken in accordance with the requirements of Sections 5.42-5.46 of the Local Government Act 1995.

 


 

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “4     Governance

4.6    Provide and maintain a high standard of governance and accountability

 

Policy Implications

A number of policies adopted by Council have clauses enabling delegation to the Chief Executive Officer, who may in turn on-delegate to other appointed officers.

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Absolute Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:

1.       CONSIDER the review of the Delegated Authority Register conducted by the Chief Executive Officer; and

2.       DELEGATE by ABSOLUTE MAJORITY all Instruments of Delegation as detailed in the Delegated Authority Register (Attachment 1).

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Reviewed Delegations

11/135863

 

  


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               252


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               284

3.23  Delegation of Authority Over the Council Recess

File Ref:                                              2883 – 11/128036

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Corporate Strategy and Performance

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil       

 

Issue

To consider an increase in the delegated authority provided to the Chief Executive Officer to award tenders during the Council recess period for any tenders that are above the current delegation limit of $250,000 and the authority to approve a lease arrangement between the City of Wanneroo and the Department of Education.

 

Background

Nil

Detail

The last Ordinary Council meeting for 2011 is scheduled for 13 December 2011 and the next meeting will be held on 7 February 2012.  Should a decision be required during the period of recess that does not require an Absolute or Special Majority under the Local Government Act 1995 or any other act empowering the local government, then under delegation 2.5 in the Delegated Authority Register the Chief Executive Officer is authorised to make decisions in consultation with the Mayor or in the Mayor’s absence the Deputy Mayor on behalf of the City.

 

Decisions taken during the recess period will be documented and reported to the first Ordinary Council meeting in 2012.

 

During this period at least three tenders will close and for operational reasons it would be advantageous to award the tender as soon as possible.  It is possible that the value of the following tenders will exceed the current delegated authority to the Chief Executive Officer to award tenders to a maximum of $250,000.

 

·        Tender 01142 – Development of Jimbub Swamp Park, Tapping;

·        Tender 01143 – Provision of Legal Services (Panel Contract) for a period of five (5) years; and

·        Tender 01144 – Provision of Legal Services by a Barrister (Panel Contract) for a period of five (5) years.

 

In order to facilitate the awarding of these tenders, it is recommended that Council approve an increase in the authority to award tenders by the Chief Executive Officer during this period.

 

In addition the Chief Executive Officer may be required to approve a lease arrangement between the City of Wanneroo and the Department of Education for the Koondoola Kindergarten facility, with the lease arrangement expected to commence by 1 January 2011.

Consultation

Nil

Comment

This is a common procedure that is provided for in most local governments, and has been supported by Council in previous years.

Statutory Compliance

Section 5.42 of the Local Government Act 1995 allows Council to delegate functions to the Chief Executive Officer.  Section 5.43 does not permit Council to delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to award a tender above a limit set by Council.

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “4     Governance

4.6    Provide and maintain a high standard of governance and accountability

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

The awarding of any tender will be on the basis that adequate budget provision has been made.

Voting Requirements

Absolute Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council DELEGATE BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY to the Chief Executive Officer during Councils recess period being from 13 December 2011 to 7 February 2012:-

 

1.       The authority to DETERMINE the following tenders up to a maximum of $1,000,000 per tender in accordance with the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 (in addition to the current delegated authority to the Chief Executive Officer to award tenders to a maximum of $250,000):-

a)      Tender 01142 – Development of Jimbub Swamp Park, Tapping;

b)      Tender 01143 – Provision of Legal Services (Panel Contract) for a period of five (5) years; and

c)      Tender 01144 – Provision of Legal Services by a Barrister (Panel Contract) for a period of five (5) years; and

2.       The authority to APPROVE a lease arrangement between the City of Wanneroo and the Department of Education for the Koondoola Kindergarten facility.

 

 

 

Attachments: Nil


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               286

3.24  Proposed Additional Ordinary Council Meeting in February 2012

File Ref:                                              2374 – 11/135912

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Corporate Strategy and Performance

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil       

 

Issue

To consider calling an additional Ordinary Council Meeting on 21 February 2012.

 

Background

On 11th October 2011 Council adopted their meeting dates for 2012 according to its usual weekly meeting cycle being:

 

a)      Week One - Briefing Session;

b)      Week Two - Council Meeting;

c)      Week Three - Council Forum and/or Audit Committee meeting;

d)      Week Four - Council Forum, budget meetings, advisory committee/working group meetings and other policy and procedural reviews.

Detail

The Executive Management Team, due to the volume of matters listed for presentation to the 13 December 2011 Council meeting, have deferred a number of reports to the first Council meeting in the new year, however this will once again result in a demanding agenda for that meeting as well.  It is therefore proposed to schedule an additional Council Meeting for early next year and advertise accordingly.

 

It is intended that deferred reports from the December 2011 meeting and new reports, where the subject matter has not previously been considered at a Council Forum be presented to the first meeting of Council in the new year being 7 February 2012.  Members would have the benefit of a briefing session to request clarification on items intended for the Council meeting if necessary.

 

Administration would then recommend that deferred and new reports where the subject matter has previously been considered at a Council Forum be presented to the new proposed Ordinary Council Meeting on 21 February 2012 (the previously scheduled Forum will be cancelled).

 

This time line will still allow the Council Forum on 14 February 2012 to proceed as there are a number of items listed, some of which were postponed from the 29 November 2011 Council Forum.

Statutory Compliance

Local Government Act 1995

Part 5 – Administration

Division 2 – Council meetings, committees and their meetings and electors’ meetings

S5.3 – Ordinary and special council meetings

 

“(1)    A council is to hold ordinary meetings and may hold special meetings.

(2)     Ordinary meetings are to be held not more than 3 months apart.

(3)     If a council fails to meet as required by subsection (2) the CEO is to notify the Minister of that failure.”

 

Local Government (Administration) Regulations 1996

R12 – Public notice of council or committee meetings – s. 5.25(1)(g)

 

“(1)    At least once each year a local government is to give local public notice of the dates on which and the time and place at which –

(a)     the ordinary council meetings; and

(b)     the committee meetings that are required under the Act to be open to members of the public or that are proposed to be open to members of the public,

are to be held in the next 12 months.

(2)     A local government is to give local public notice of any change to the date, time or place of a meeting referred to in sub regulation (1).”

 

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “4     Governance

4.6    Provide and maintain a high standard of governance and accountability

 

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

The cost of calling an additional Ordinary Council meeting.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council APPROVES the calling of an additional Ordinary Council meeting to be held on 21 February 2012 and undertake local public advertising accordingly.

 

 

Attachments: Nil


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               288

3.25  Donations to be Considered by Council - December 2011

File Ref:                                              2410 – 11/130496

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Corporate Strategy and Performance

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil       

 

Issue

To consider requests for sponsorships, donations and waiver of fees in accordance with the City’s Donations, Sponsorships and Waiver of Fees and Charges Policy.

 

Background

The Donations, Sponsorships and Waiver of Fees and Charges Policy requires applications over $500 from individuals and organisations to be determined by Council. Consequently a report is prepared for Council meetings, coinciding with a period where applications of this nature have been received.

 

With respect to requests for sponsorships, the City’s Policy specifies that for National Events the amount provided will be $200.00 per individual, capped at $600.00 per team, and for International Events the amount provided is $500.00 per individual, capped at $1,500.00 per team.  Schools are capped at $2,000 per school per financial year. 

Detail

During this period, the City has received two sponsorship requests and one donation request which are summarised as follows. Copies of the full applications are available from Governance upon request.

Comment

Sponsorship Donations

Applicant 1 – Shona McDiarmid Dance School

Name of Individual/s

 

Alicia Spyvee, Alissa Whyte and Anthea Panagiotidis

Reside in City of Wanneroo

18years of age or under

Yes

Yes

Event Details

Showcase 2012 National Dance Championships, Gold Coast Qld 17 - 23 January 2012

Commitment to providing a written report regarding the event

Yes

Commitment to acknowledgement of the City of Wanneroo

Yes

Eligibility Level

National $200 each

Comments

 

 

In accordance with Council’s Policy for national events the amount provided is $200.00 per individual (capped at $600.00 per team).

Recommendation

 

 

 

 

 

APPROVE a request for sponsorship in the sum of $600.00 to Shona McDiarmid Dance School for the participation of Alicia Spyvee, Alissa Whyte and Anthea Pangiotidis in the Showcase 2012 National Dance Championships to be held in the Gold Coast Qld from 17 – 23 January 2012.

 

This request satisfies the criteria of the policy.

 

Applicant 2 – Western Australian Indoor Netball Association (U14s)

Name of Individual/s

 

Ashleigh Littlejohn, Aleasha Bennett and Kelsey Harris

Reside in City of Wanneroo

18years of age or under

Yes

Yes

Event Details

Indoor Netball Junior Nationals, Adelaide SA, 27 November – 3 December 2011

Commitment to providing a written report regarding the event

Yes

Commitment to acknowledgement of the City of Wanneroo

Yes

Eligibility Level

National $200 each

Comments

In accordance with Council’s Policy for national events the amount provided is $200.00 per individual (capped at $600.00 per team).

Recommendation

 

 

 

 

APPROVE a request for sponsorship in the sum of $600.00 to Western Australian Indoor Netball Association for the participation of Ashleigh Littlejohn, Aleasha Bennett and Kelsey Harris in the Indoor Netball Junior Nationals to be held in Adelaide SA from 27 November to 3 December 2011.

 

This request satisfies the criteria of the policy.

 

Community Group Donations

 

Applicant 1 – Yanchep & Districts CWA of WA

Request amount

$597.00

Description of request

Donation to assist with the cost of catering and advertising for a Friendship Day to be held at the Phil Renkin Centre, Two Rocks on 21 March 2012

Criteria

Evaluation

Potential for income generation

Nil

Status of applicant organisation

Not for Profit

Exclusivity of the event or project

Open to all

Criteria

Evaluation


Alignment with Council’s existing philosophies, values and strategic direction

This request supports Objective 2.2 of Council’s Strategic Plan being “Improve the City’s identity and community wellbeing through arts, culture, leisure and recreation.”

Alternative funding sources available or accessed by the organisation

Nil

Contribution to the event or activity made by the applicant or organisation

$230.00 plus in-kind $1,260 (104 hrs)

Previous funding assistance provided to the organisation by the City

$573 CS09-06/10 for International Day at Phil Renkin Centre, Two Rocks

Commitment to acknowledge the City of Wanneroo

Yes

Comments

Nil

Recommendation

APPROVE a donation of $597.00 to the Yanchep and Districts Country Women’s Association to assist with the cost of catering and advertising for a Friendship Day to be held at the Phil Renkin Centre, Two Rocks on 21 March 2012. 

Reason

This request satisfies the criteria of the policy.

Statutory Compliance

Nil

 

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “2     Social

2.2    Improve the City’s identity and community well-being through arts, culture, leisure and recreation

 

Policy Implications

The City of Wanneroo Donations, Sponsorship and Waiver of Fees and Charges Policy states that sponsorship applications for attendance at National Events will be capped at $600.00 per team and Regional or State capped at $600 per club.  International events will be capped at $1,500.00 per team and schools capped at $2,000.00 per school per financial year.


 

Financial Implications

Budget 2011/2012

 

$80 000.00

Amount expended to date (as at 24 November 2011)

 

$28,610.35

Balance

 

$51,389.65

Total of requests for this round:

Donations (in this report):

 

Total this Round

$1,797.00

 

 

$1,797.00

CARRY FORWARD

 

$49,592.65

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:

1.       APPROVE a request for sponsorship in the sum of $600.00 to Shona McDiarmid Dance School for the participation of Alicia Spyvee, Alissa Whyte and Anthea Pangiotidis in the Showcase 2012 National Dance Championships to be held in the Gold Coast Qld from 17 – 23 January 2012;

2.       APPROVE a request for sponsorship in the sum of $600.00 to Western Australian Indoor Netball Association for the participation of Ashleigh Littlejohn, Aleasha Bennett and Kelsey Harris in the Indoor Netball Junior Nationals to be held in Adelaide SA from 27 November to 3 December 2011; and

3.       APPROVE a donation of $597.00 to the Yanchep and Districts Country Women’s Association to assist with the cost of catering and advertising for a Friendship Day to be held at the Phil Renkin Centre, Two Rocks on 21 March 2012. 

 

Attachments: Nil  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                       292

Draft

Property

3.26  Proposal to Create a New Locality Named 'Catalina'

File Ref:                                              2074 – 11/128963

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Corporate Strategy and Performance

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       2         

 

Issue

To consider a request from Tamala Park Regional Council (TPRC) proposing the creation of a new locality named ‘Catalina’ for an area that currently is located within part of Clarkson and Tamala Park Localities (Attachment 1 refers).

 

Background

A request from the TPRC was received by the City on 18 July 2011 stating that at its meeting of 23 June 2011 the TPRC Council resolved to “request the City of Wanneroo to initiate the renaming of that part of the Clarkson locality within the Tamala Park Project (generally bounded by Mitchell Freeway, Neerabup Road, Marmion Avenue and the Tamala Park Landfill site) to ‘Catalina’.”

 

The TPRC will be utilising ‘Catalina’ as the estate name for the ‘Tamala Park Project’ currently being developed by Satterley Property Group (Development Managers) on behalf of the TPRC.  The proposed locality of ‘Catalina’ forms part of the ‘Tamala Park Project’, between Marmion Avenue, Neerabup Road and the Mitchell Freeway as indicated on the Tamala Park Local Structure Plan map (Attachment 2 refers). 

 

The portion of the ‘Tamala Park Project’ which falls within the Locality of Mindarie is not part of this proposal.

 

The applicant has given the following reasons for selection of the name ‘Catalina’: 

Catalina was selected as part of the historical element for Western Australia.  The Catalina flying boats were operated by the RAAF in WA and flew over this section of the WA coast.  Whilst there are no records of the Catalina flying boats landing in this particular location, the Catalina flying boats still have a strong association with WA.”

 

The TPRC believes that the renaming of this portion of Clarkson and Tamala Park Suburbs will have significant benefit to the ‘Tamala Park Project’.

Detail

Names for new localities or changes of names are required to conform to the principles, Guidelines and procedures set out by the Geographic Names Committee of Western Australia (GNC), and it is the GNC’s role to approve or reject such proposals in consultation with the local authority.

 

The table below outlines the GNC’s guidelines for new locality names or renaming proposals, together with Administrations comments on the assessment of the request:

 


 

 

GNC Guidelines

Administration’s Assessment Comments

Minimum size of urban localities to be 100ha, minimum number of available lots to be 1000 and maximum to be 10,000, ideal size to be approximately 500ha

The portion of Clarkson and Tamala Park subject to the proposal covers an area of approximately 148 ha and proposed number of lots in excess of 1000 lots.

Boundaries to be established in accordance with major highways, divided carriageways, other roads, railways.

The Northern Boundary is defined by the centreline of Neerabup Road, the Western Boundary is defined by the centreline of Marmion Avenue, the Eastern Boundary is defined by the centreline of the Mitchell Freeway and the Southern Boundary is within the locality of Tamala Park locality and will require realignment in conjunction with future development.

Names for the new localities or changes of names to preferably have an Australian emphasis and to be selected from the following categories

a)   Names associated with the area: aboriginal – feature or descriptive name, pioneer settler of the area, early property name.

b)   Names associated with the development of the state; statesman or former politician, other eg ship, event, etc

c)   Other choice of name: flora or fauna association.

d)   Localities may not be named in honour of someone still living

‘Catalina’ was an American and Canadian built flying boat of the 1930’s and 1940s. 

 

About 3300 Catalina’s were produced and several are still flying today.

 

The Catalina performed a significant role in Australia’s defence in World War II and Rathmines, NSW was then the world’s biggest flying boat base. 

 

There are no records of the Catalina flying boats landing in the proposed location.

The proposal is supported by a broad-based community survey indicating very strong community support for the name change

Not yet determined

The proposal is to rename all or part of a locality before urban development occurs.

Development has not yet occurred on the subject land however marketing and Estate signage have been approved for the site.

The proposal is based on a locality being divided by a newly constructed major road or railway.

Not applicable

 

 

 

The current name can be easily confused with another name, has mail delivery or emergency services problems

The City is not aware of these sorts of issues occurring anywhere in Clarkson or Tamala Park.

The proposed name has a long-standing association with the locality

The proposed name has no association with the location or surrounding areas.

The proposal is based on a change to local government boundaries

Not applicable

 

In addition, the Principles, Guidelines and Procedures of GNC provide the following guidelines –

 

“Furthermore, renaming proposals submitted to the GNC, which conform to the guidelines outlined above, are unlikely to succeed if: -

·        The proposal seeks to adopt a developer’s inappropriate name coined to promote a development.

·        The proposed name has no relationship to the area or is a made up name.

·        The proposed name is duplicated or similar spelling or sound to an existing Western Australian town or locality name.

·        Petitions presented in support only present one point of view.

·        The proposal does not have strong local community support.”

It should also be noted that the Australian/New Zealand Standard AS/NZS 4819:2011 ‘Rural and urban addressing’, Section 3.2.2 states that ‘A locality name shall not be duplicated within the country’.  There is a locality called ‘Catalina’ that exists in New South Wales.

Consultation

Comments were requested from the Geographic Names Section of Landgate.

In response the City was advised the following:

·        The area is well under the ideal size for a locality (500ha)

·        It is considered more appropriate to rationalise the locality boundaries by amalgamating the subject site with the portion of Tamala Park east of Marmion Avenue, to become part of the locality with which the subject site is already associated with – Tamala Park.  Alternatively the Eastern side could be included in Clarkson with the western side of Tamala Park being included in Mindarie.

·        ‘Catalina’ could be considered to be unacceptable as a locality name because the name would not be unique within Australia (Catalina NSW) furthermore the name is an ‘estate name’ and as such is non-compliant.

 

With any potential changes to locality boundaries of this nature it should be noted that the City would be required to undertake consultation with the community/residents and other interest groups (including Australia Post) to give the broader community an opportunity to comment as well as a chance to forward other names for consideration should the City wish to consider new locality names

Comment

The City is required to assess any naming proposals against the GNC Principles, Guidelines and Procedures prior to submitting a request to the GNC for consideration. The TPRC proposes to adopt the marketing estate name for that part of the development which falls within Clarkson and Tamala Park, the proposed suburb is not the ideal size and the name is not a unique locality name as there is a Locality within NSW called ‘Catalina’.  Therefore administration does not support the proposal on the basis that it does not conform to the GNC’s guidelines.

Statutory Compliance

Section 26 of the Land Administration Act 1997 empowers the Geographic Names Committee, representing the Minister of Lands to assign names to places, to investigate and determine the form, spelling, meaning and pronunciation, origin and history of any geographical name and the application of such name with regard to position, extent or otherwise.

 

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “4     Governance

4.6    Provide and maintain a high standard of governance and accountability

 

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:

1.       DOES NOT SUPPORT the proposal to create a new locality named ‘Catalina’, consisting of that portion of Clarkson and Tamala Park marketed as ‘Catalina Estate’; and

2.       AUTHORISES Administration to write to the Tamala Park Regional Council advising of the outcome of their request.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1 - Proposed Catalina Locality

11/129152

 

2.

Attachment 2 - Tamala Park LSP Map from WAPC

11/129102

 

  


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               296


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                                                                              297


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               298

3.27  Proposed Lease to Youth Futures WA (Inc) - Portion of Clarkson Youth Centre

File Ref:                                              5583 – 11/131448

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Corporate Strategy and Performance

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       1         

 

Issue

To consider leasing a portion of the Clarkson Youth Centre, 59 Key Largo Drive, Clarkson to Youth Futures WA (Inc).

 

Background

The Clarkson Youth Centre (the Centre) is situated on Crown Reserve 44537, and is vested to the City under a Management Order, for the purpose of “Community Purposes” with the power to lease or licence.

 

The City currently leases an 8.5m² office space portion of the Centre to Joondalup Youth Support Services (Inc) for a term of 2 years (Attachment 1 refers) and that lease is due to expire on 31 December 2011.  In September 2010 Joondalup Youth Support Services (Inc) – (JYSS) registered a change of name under the Associations Incorporation Act 1987 to Youth Futures WA (Inc) (Youth Futures).

 

Youth Futures, under its Constitution, continues to operate under the same objects as JYSS which include but are not limited to:

a)   to make available the information, practical assistance and contact with community resources to assist young people to re-establish links with their families and their communities;

b)   to provide a supportive environment in which people utilising the services offered by the Association are encouraged and assisted to make decisions about their future through educative processes, raised awareness, new opportunities, skill development and mutual support;

c)   to improve the status of at risk young people, especially those who are homeless and/or disengaged from family and community, through a collaborative approach with Government and community organisations.

Detail

Youth Futures has sought an extension of their current lease arrangement for a further two (2) years expiring 31 December 2013.

 

Given Youth Futures is grant funded and therefore under the City’s Tenancy Policy is considered as ‘Government’ which means the terms of the lease are negotiable.

 

A formal lease proposal was forwarded to Youth Futures and the essential terms of the proposed lease have been agreed, subject to Council approval and the consent of the Minister for Lands, as follows:

Leased Area (Premises)

An 8.5m² portion (being Office 2), of the Clarkson Youth Centre situated on Crown Reserve 44537.

Term of Lease

Two (2) years.

Commencement Date

1 January 2012

Lease Rental

$1,450 per annum (with an annual CPI increment to apply from 1 January 2013).

Permitted Purpose

Office space for the provision of youth support activities and programmes.

Rates, Taxes and Outgoings (1)

The Lessee will be responsible for all rates, taxes, assessments, impositions and outgoings for water consumption, electricity, gas, and telephone used in relation to the Premises whether billed directly or otherwise. 

Building Insurance

The City will insure the building.

Other Insurance (including contents, public liability, Workers Compensation etc)

Lessee responsibility.

Maintenance of Premises

The Lessee shall keep and maintain the inside of the Premises in good and substantial repair and condition.

Statutory Compliance

Lessee responsibility as much as applies to the Premises.

 

(1)  Given the very minor amounts involved in most of these charges the lease rental has been negotiated to include these items except for the provision of services directly billed to the Lessee such as telephone and internet charges.

In addition to the lease terms Youth Futures would also be granted access to the Common Areas of the building such as the foyer and toilets as part of the arrangement.

 

At the time of writing this report ‘in principal’ support from State Land Services on behalf of the Minister for Lands had not been obtained and will be required for the lease to proceed.

Consultation

Nil

Comment

The programmes run by Youth Futures continue to align with those run by the City at the Centre and on that basis Administration supports the lease proposal outlined in this report.

Statutory Compliance

The proposed lease is considered an exempt disposition under Regulation 30(2)(b) of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996, which states:

“30(2)     A disposition of land is an exempt disposition if –

              (b)     the land is disposed of to a body, whether incorporated or not –

                        (i)      the objects of which are charitable, benevolent, religious, cultural, educational, recreational, sporting or other like nature; and

                        (ii)     the members of which are not entitled or permitted to receive any pecuniary profit from the body’s transactions;”

 

 

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “2     Social

2.2    Improve the City’s identity and community well-being through arts, culture, leisure and recreation

 

Policy Implications

The lease has been negotiated in accordance with the City’s Tenancy Policy

Financial Implications

The lease agreement will provide an income stream to the City of $1,450 in year one of the lease, which will increase with CPI at the commencement of the second year.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:

1.       APPROVES the leasing of portion of the Clarkson Youth Centre, 59 Key Largo Drive, Clarkson known as Office 2 to Youth Futures WA (Inc) for a term of two (2) years commencing 1 January 2012, subject to the consent of the Minister for Lands; and

2.       AUTHORISES the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer to affix the Common Seal of the City of Wanneroo to and execute a lease between the City and Youth Futures WA (Inc).

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Site Plan - Clarkson Youth Centre - Youth Futures WA Inc

11/131485

 

  


DraftCITY OF WANNEROO Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                                               301

  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                       302

Draft

Chief Executive Office

Nil

Item  4      Motions on Notice

4.1    Cr Rudi Steffens – Dog Exercise Area - Kingsway

File Ref:                                              2496 – 11/132465

Author:                                                Cr Rudi Steffens

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil       

Issue

To consider the provision of exercise areas specifically set aside on Council Reserves for the purpose of exercising dogs.

 

Background

Council considered a proposal to consider providing a specific dog exercise area within the City at a meeting of Council 19 July 2005 (S24/0016V1). The proposal was for Kingsway Reserve Madeley, Charnwood Reserve Two Rocks, and Paloma Park Marangaroo to be considered as dog exercise areas. The report identified that implementation of the dog exercise park would require support and acceptance from the community and in particular the immediate residents surrounding the proposed parks.

 

The overall results from the ensuing community consultation supported the development of a dog exercise area.  All three parks were supported, with the strongest support being for Paloma Park and Kingsway Reserve.  Charnwood Park was not recommended as a dog exercise park as it received the lowest level of community support.

 

At the meeting held 18 July 2006 (CD03-07/06), Council approved the Kingsway Reserve site for the development of a pilot dog exercise park.  However at a further meeting held to consider this matter on 26 August 2008 (S24/00116V01) it was decided that due to the extent of the works being conducted at Kingsway, the progress of a dog exercise park on this site be delayed until the major works were completed.  The full completion of works was not estimated to be completed prior to the 2011/12 financial year, however Stage 6 of the Kingsway complex is now not due for completion until 2012/13 financial year.

Detail

In order to advance the concept of dog exercise parks it is suggested that a pilot dog exercise park be implemented with funding allocated in the 2012/13 Capital Works Budget for this project.

Consultation

Refer to the community consultation conducted in 2006 in which there was 88% support from respondents for Paloma Park and 91% support from respondents for Kingsway Reserve. 

Statutory Compliance

City of Wanneroo Local Law 1999 prohibits the exercising of dogs in Kingsway Reserve. Dogs may be exercised at Paloma Park off a leash provided they are under effective control at all times.

 

Strategic Implications

The proposal accords with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021:

 “2     Social

2.1    Increase choice and quality of neighbourhood and lifestyle options

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Allocation of funding would be required in the 2012/2013 Capital Works Budget.

Administration Comment

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council CONSIDER the proposal to provide a pilot dog exercise park and that funding be allocated in the 2012/13 capital works budget for this proposal

 

 

 

 

 

Attachments: Nil   


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                       304

Draft

Item  5      To Be Tabled at the Briefing

 

5.1    Proposed Northern Extension of Wangara Industrial Area

 

5.2    Warrant of Payments for the Period – 30 November 2011

 

5.3    Review of 10 Year Financial Plan

 

5.4    Proposed Sale of Portion of Lot 506 (3) Rocca Way, Wanneroo to ECU

 

5.5    Salaried Officers Union Collective Agreement 2011

 

5.6    Metropolitan Local Government Review Submission

 

5.7    Motion on Notice - Cr Treby – Basketball Stadium – City of Wanneroo

 


 

Item  6      Public Question Time

 

Item  7      Confidential

 

7.1    Acquisition of Land - Lot 148 (257) Franklin Road Wanneroo Required for the Widening and Upgrading of the Caporn/Franklin Road Intersection

File Ref:                                              4674 – 11/132648

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Corporate Strategy and Performance

 

This report is to be dealt with in confidential session, under the terms of the Local Government Act 1995 Section 5.23(2), as follows:

 

(e)(ii)     a matter that if disclosed, would reveal information that has a commercial value to a person, where the information is held by, or is about, a person other than the local government

 

 

7.2    Mindarie Regional Council and the Process Associated with the Withdrawal of the City of Stirling

File Ref:                                              5642 – 11/119469

Responsible Officer:                           Director, City Businesses

 

This report is to be dealt with in confidential session, under the terms of the Local Government Act 1995 Section 5.23(2), as follows:

 

(d)          legal advice obtained, or which may be obtained, by the local government and which relates to a matter to be discussed at the meeting

 

 

7.3    Withdrawal From Food Act Prosecution

File Ref:                                              5642 – 11/131600

Responsible Officer:                           Director, City Businesses

 

This report is to be dealt with in confidential session, under the terms of the Local Government Act 1995 Section 5.23(2), as follows:

 

(d)          legal advice obtained, or which may be obtained, by the local government and which relates to a matter to be discussed at the meeting

 


 

7.4    Proposal for Mary Lindsay Homestead

File Ref:                                              5642 – 11/136149

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Community Development

 

This report is to be dealt with in confidential session, under the terms of the Local Government Act 1995 Section 5.23(2), as follows:

 

(e)(ii)     a matter that if disclosed, would reveal information that has a commercial value to a person, where the information is held by, or is about, a person other than the local government  

 

 

7.5    Yanchep Active Open Space – Agreement to Address Costs and Responsibilies

 

This report is to be dealt with in confidential session and will be circulated under separate cover.


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 06 December, 2011                       307

Draft

Item  8      Date of Next Meeting

The next Ordinary Council meeting has been scheduled for 7.00pm on Tuesday,
13 December 2011, to be held at Council Chambers, Civic Centre, 23 Dundebar Road, Wanneroo.

Item  9      Closure