Council Agenda

 

 

Ordinary Council Meeting

7.00pm, 25 June, 2013

Civic Centre,

Dundebar Road, Wanneroo


 

Public Question & Statement Time

 

Council allows a minimum of 15 minutes for public questions and statements at each Council Meeting.  If there are not sufficient questions to fill the allocated time, the person presiding will move on to the next item.  If there are more questions than can be dealt with in the 15 minutes allotted, the person presiding will determine whether to extend question time.

 

Protocols

 

During the meeting, no member of the public may interrupt the meeting’s proceedings or enter into conversation.  Each person seeking to ask questions during public question time may address the Council for a maximum of 3 minutes each. 

 

A register of person’s wishing to ask a question/s at the Council Meeting is located at the main reception desk outside of the Chamber on the night.  However, members of the public wishing to submit written questions are requested to lodge them with the Chief Executive Officer at least 30 hours prior to the start of the meeting i.e. noon on the previous day.

 

The person presiding will control public question time and ensure that each person wishing to ask a question is given a fair and equal opportunity to do so.  A person wishing to ask a question should state his or her name and address before asking the question.  If the question relates to an item on the agenda, the item number should also be stated.

 

The following general rules apply to question and statement time:

·                Questions should only relate to the business of the council and should not be a statement or personal opinion.

·                Only questions relating to matters affecting Council will be considered at an ordinary meeting, and at a special meeting only questions that relate to the purpose of the meeting will be considered.  Questions may be taken on notice and responded to after the meeting.

·                Questions may not be directed at specific members of council or employees.

·                Questions & statements are not to be framed in such a way as to reflect adversely on a particular Elected Member or Officer.

·                The first priority will be given to persons who are asking questions relating to items on the current meeting agenda.

·                The second priority will be given to public statements.  Only statements regarding items on the agenda under consideration will be heard.

 

Deputations

 

The Mayor and Councillors will conduct an informal session on the same day as the meeting of the Council at the Civic Centre, Wanneroo, commencing at 6.00pm where members of the public may, by appointment, present deputations relating to items on the current agenda. If you wish to present a deputation please submit your request for a deputation in writing, at least three clear business days prior to the meeting addressed to the Chief Executive Officer or fax through to Governance on 9405 5097.  A request for a deputation must be received by Governance by 12 noon on the Friday before the Council Meeting.

·                Deputation requests must relate to items on the current agenda.

·                A deputation is not to exceed 3 persons in number and only those persons may address the meeting.

·                Members of a deputation are collectively to have a maximum of 10 minutes to address the meeting, unless an extension of time is granted by the Council.

Please ensure that mobile phones are switched off before entering the Council Chamber.  Any queries on this agenda, please contact Governance on 9405 5027 or 9405 5018.


Recording of Council Meetings Policy

 

 

Objective

 

·         To ensure that there is a process in place to outline access to the recorded proceedings of Council.

 

·         To emphasise that the reason for recording of Council Meetings is to ensure the accuracy of Council Minutes and that any reproduction is for the sole purpose of Council business.

 

Statement

 

Recording of Proceedings

 

(1)     Proceedings for meetings of the Council, Electors, and Public Question Time during Council Briefing Sessions shall be recorded by the City on sound recording equipment, except in the case of meetings of the Council where the Council closes the meeting to the public. 

 

(2)     Notwithstanding subclause (1), proceedings of a meeting of the Council which is closed to the public shall be recorded where the Council resolves to do so.

 

(3)     No member of the public is to use any electronic, visual or vocal recording device or instrument to record the proceedings of the Council or a committee without the written permission of the Council.

 

Access to Recordings

 

(4)     Members of the public may purchase a copy of recorded proceedings or alternatively listen to recorded proceedings with the supervision of a City Officer.  Costs of providing recorded proceedings to members of the public will be the cost of the recording plus staff time to make the copy of the proceedings. The cost of supervised listening to recorded proceedings will be the cost of the staff time. The cost of staff time will be set in the City's schedule of fees and charges each year.

 

(5)     Elected Members may request a recording of the Council proceedings at no charge.  However, no transcript will be produced without the approval of the Chief Executive Officer.  All Elected Members are to be notified when recordings are requested by individual Members.

 

Retention of Recordings

 

(6)     Recordings pertaining to the proceedings of Council Meetings shall be retained in accordance with the State Records Act 2000.

 

Disclosure of Policy

 

(7)     This policy shall be printed within the agenda of all Council, Special Council, Electors and Special Electors meetings to advise the public that the proceedings of the meeting are recorded.


 

 

Notice is given that the next Ordinary Council Meeting will be held at the Civic Centre,

Dundebar Road, Wanneroo on Tuesday 25 June, 2013 commencing at 7.00pm.

 

D Simms

Chief Executive Officer

20 June, 2013

 

CONTENTS

 

Item  1_____ Attendances_ 1

Item  2_____ Apologies and Leave of Absence_ 1

Item  3_____ Public Question Time_ 1

PQ07-05/13     Mrs S Winton, Gibbs Road, Nowergup  1

Item  4_____ Confirmation of Minutes_ 2

OC01-06/13     Minutes of Ordinary Council Meeting held on 28 May 2013  2

Item  5_____ Announcements by the Mayor without Discussion_ 2

Item  6_____ Questions from Elected Members_ 2

Item  7_____ Petitions_ 2

New Petitions Received  2

Update on Petitions  2

PT01-05/13      Request for Implementation of Local Beach Policy  2

Item  8_____ Reports_ 2

Planning and Sustainability  3

Town Planning Schemes & Structure Plans  3

PS01-06/13      Initiation of Advertising for Amendment No. 134 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 - Lots 478 Prestige Parade & 479 Vision Street, Wangara  3

PS02-06/13      Adoption of Blackmore Local Structure Plan No. 97  10

PS03-06/13      Amendment No. 122 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 - Northern Coastal Growth Corridor Development Contributions  52

Development Applications  177

PS04-06/13      Reconsideration of Development Application- Single House and Shed at 30 Capri Leone Way, Sinagra (DA2012/1326) 177

Other Matters  191

PS05-06/13      PT05-04/13 Request to Extend Northern Boundary of Yanchep Beach Dog Exercise Area by 250 Metres  191

City Businesses  197

Regulatory Services  197

CB01-06/13     Application to Keep More Than Two Dogs  197

Property  202

CB02-06/13     Proposal by the Shire of Wanneroo Aged Persons Home Trust (Inc) to Purchase the Drainage Sump Site at 71 (Lot 135) Belgrade Road, Wanneroo From the City. 202

Infrastructure  209

Tenders  209

IN01-06/13       Tender 01312 Supply and Installation of Mass Block Retaining Walls - Brazier Road, Yanchep  209

Traffic Management  217

IN02-06/13       Parking Prohibitions - Spring Hill Primary School, Spring Hill Drive, Tapping  217

IN03-06/13       Parking Prohibitions - Salerno Drive, Elliston Parade and Anchorage Drive North, Mindarie  233

Community Development  244

Communication and Events  244

CD01-06/13     2013 Australasian Safari HQ Event and Sponsorship  244

Program Services  252

CD02-06/13     Naming of the Internal Roads in Kingsway Regional Sporting Complex  252

Corporate Strategy & Performance  257

Finance  257

CS01-06/13     Warrant of Payments for the Period to 31 May 2013  257

CS02-06/13     Financial Activity Statement for the Period Ended 30 April 2013  332

CS03-06/13     Write Off Outstanding Sundry Debtors  344

CS04-06/13     Annual Budget 2013/2014  346

Risk and Business Improvement  497

CS05-06/13     Internal Audit of the Deed for the Yanchep Active Open Space  497

Governance  525

CS06-06/13     Donations to be Considered by Council - June 2013  525

Chief Executive Office  534

Office of the CEO Reports  534

CE01-06/13     Integrated Planning & Reporting Framework  534

Item  9_____ Motions on Notice_ 851

Item  10____ Urgent Business_ 851

Item  11____ Confidential_ 851

CR01-06/13     Proposed Acquisition of Lot 166 (484) Kingsway for the Purposes of Future Public Open Space - East Wanneroo Cell 9  851

Item  12____ Date of Next Meeting_ 851

Item  13____ Closure_ 851

 


Agenda

 

Good evening Councillors, staff, ladies and gentlemen, we acknowledge the Traditional Owners of the land on which we meet and I invite you to bow your head in prayer:

 

Lord

 

We ask for your blessing upon our City, our community and our Council.  Guide us in our decision making to act fairly, without fear or favour and with compassion, integrity and honesty.  May we show true leadership, be inclusive of all, and guide the City of Wanneroo to a prosperous future that all may share.  We ask this in your name.

 

Amen

Item  1      Attendances

Item  2      Apologies and Leave of Absence

Recommendation

 

That Council grants Cr Denis Hayden a leave of absence from 8 – 31 July 2013 inclusive.

Item  3      Public Question Time

Further response to questions from 28 May 2013 Ordinary Council Meeting.

PQ07-05/13       Mrs S Winton, Gibbs Road, Nowergup

Question 1 – Clarification of Answers to PQ03-05/13

 

In answer to whether the City of Wanneroo had legal representation in the current matter with Lime Industries at SAT,  it is extraordinary the City did not use its in house lawyers on this matter.  This matter has been before Council for over 3 years and was disappointed to find the City did not send a lawyer to represent them in this matter.  Is the City confident in the technical and legal expertise of the officers who have represented the City in this matter?

 

Question 3 – Yanchep Boardwalk

 

There was an ad in the paper a couple of weeks ago in regard to a clearing permit extension application by the City of Wanneroo in regards to the Boardwalk.  Would I be able to get an explanation of what that clearing permit involved and an update of where that process of the Boardwalk redevelopment is up to?

 

Further Response by Director Planning and Sustainability

 

Question 1

 

The comment that this matter has not been before the City for 3 years is incorrect. The actual application for planning approval to which this matter relates and which triggered the current SAT proceedings, was received by the City on August 2011. However, that application was deemed incomplete and the proponent only provided the required additional information to enable advertising of the proposal in September 2012. In answer to the question as to whether the City is confident as to its officers' "legal and technical" expertise to represent the City on this matter at SAT, the simple answer is yes.

If the matter proceeds to a hearing for final determination by SAT, then consideration will be given to engaging legal representation to act under instruction from City Administration.

 

Further Response by Director Infrastructure

 

Question 3

 

The approved clearing permit from the Department of Environment and Conservation related to the extension of the existing permit until 22 June 2015. This will allow an amendment to the existing clearing permit to accommodate any additional clearing required to accommodate the lowered and realigned sections of the boardwalk.

 

The design and documentation phases for the lowering and realignment sections of the board walk are nearing completion. The project's construction phase will be programmed when outstanding statutory approvals are finalised.

Item  4      Confirmation of Minutes

OC01-06/13       Minutes of Ordinary Council Meeting held on 28 May 2013

That the minutes of Ordinary Council Meeting held on 28 May 2013 be confirmed.

Item  5      Announcements by the Mayor without Discussion

Item  6      Questions from Elected Members

Item  7      Petitions

New Petitions Received

Update on Petitions  

Cr Goodenough presented a petition of 1247 signatures requesting the implementation of a local beach policy that identifies swimming and non-swimming beaches with appropriate signage that can be understood by both English and non-English speaking members of the community.

 

UPDATE

A report in response to the petition will be presented to Council at its meeting held on 23 July 2013. It is intended that the issues raised within the petition, being the development of a local beach policy and erection of suitable signage be addressed as a part of the Coastal Risk and Safety Signage Audit project.

 

Item  8      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

Town Planning Schemes & Structure Plans

PS01-06/13       Initiation of Advertising for Amendment No. 134 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 - Lots 478 Prestige Parade & 479 Vision Street, Wangara

File Ref:                                              9362 – 13/54454

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       2         

 

Issue

To consider a request to amend District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2) by rezoning Lots 478 Prestige Parade and 479 Vision Street, Wangara from 'Centre' to 'General Industrial'.

 

Applicant

Greg Rowe and Associates

Owner

LandCorp

Location

Lot 478 Prestige Parade and Lot 479 Vision Street, Wangara

Site Area

0.5920 and 0.5132 hectares (ha). Total: 1.1052ha

MRS Zoning

Industrial

DPS 2 Zoning

Centre

 

 

Background

On 8 April 2013, the City received from Greg Rowe and Associates (the applicant) on behalf of LandCorp (the developer) a request to initiate an amendment to DPS 2. The amendment to the DPS 2 proposes to rezone Lots 478 Prestige Parade and 479 Vision Street, Wangara (the subject lots) from 'Centre' to 'General Industrial'.

 

In November 2009 Amendment No. 73 to DPS 2 was gazetted, which rezoned the subject lots (at the time portion of Lot 9032 Prestige Parade and Lot 9035 Vision Street, Wangara) from 'General Industrial' to 'Centre' (Item PS08-06-09). Justification to rezone the land to 'Centre' at that time was to provide a centrally located, commercially viable industrial service centre which enjoys high vehicular exposure, and to cater for the retail needs of the workers within the Wangara and Landsdale Industrial Estates. Proposed Amendment No. 134 to DPS 2 now seeks to rezone the subject lots back to their former 'General Industrial' zone.

 

On 6 March 2012 (Item PS02-03/12) Council resolved to adopt the draft East Wangara Neighbourhood Centre Structure Plan No. 81 (CSP 81) relating to the 'Centre' zoned lots rezoned by Amendment No. 73 to DPS 2, subject to modifications. The modified structure plan documents were then forwarded to the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) for certification. In December 2012, the WAPC resolved to adopt CSP 81, subject to further modifications. The City is currently considering these modifications.

Detail

Site

Lots 478 Prestige Parade and 479 Vision Street, Wangara comprise a total of 1.1052 hectares of land and are located on the corner of Gnangara Road and Prestige Parade. The subject lots are bound by Gnangara Road to the south, and industrial zoned land to the north, south, west and east (refer Attachment 1).

The land is zoned 'Industrial' under the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS) and 'Centre' under the DPS 2.

Proposal

The proposal seeks to amend DPS 2 by rezoning Lots 478 Prestige Parade and 479 Vision Street, Wangara from 'Centre' to 'General Industrial' to facilitate a range of industrial activities.

 

The applicant’s justification for the proposal can be summarised as follows:

 

1.       The proposed rezoning to 'General Industrial' is consistent with the MRS and Directions 2031, and with the zoning of surrounding lots.

 

2.       The reduced commercial viability and lack of market interest for the 'Centre' zoned lots.

 

Attachment 2 contains the amendment plan showing the existing zoning and proposed scheme amendment zoning.

 

The applicant has requested that consideration of CSP 81 be deferred, pending the outcome of proposed Scheme Amendment No. 134.  This is because CSP 81 is only needed as a result of the current 'Centre' zone, but will not be needed if the land is successfully rezoned back to 'General Industrial' by Amendment No. 134.  Administration supports this approach.

Consultation

All scheme amendments are subject to public consultation. In order for Council to undertake public consultation, the amendment will first need to be referred to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) for comment, pursuant to Section 81 of the Planning and Development Act 2005.

 

Subject to no objections being received from the EPA, the amendment must be advertised for public comment for a period of 42 days. Advertising is to occur in the following manner, consistent with the requirements of the Town Planning Regulations 1967:

 

·        Advertisement in a local newspaper for one week;

·        Placement of a sign on affected sites, giving notice of the proposal;

·        Display notice of the proposal in Council offices;

·        Display on the City’s website;  and

·        Referral in writing to affected persons/agencies.

 

The Town Planning Regulations provide that where an amendment is consistent with the MRS and State planning policies and strategies, then the consent of the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) will not be required to advertise the amendment. However, if an advertising period of less than 42 days is proposed, the WAPC’s consent to advertise is required. Given that the proposed amendment is consistent with the MRS zoning and State planning policies and strategies, and the recommended advertising period is for 42 days, the consent of the WAPC to advertise the Amendment is not required in this instance.


 

Comment

Consistency with Planning Framework

The subject land is zoned 'Industrial' under the MRS and together with the surrounding land is designated under Directions 2031 as an 'existing Industrial Centre' within the North-West Sub-Region. The proposed rezoning from 'Centre' to 'General Industrial' under DPS 2 is consistent with these documents.

 

Schedule 3 of DPS 2 limits the maximum retail net lettable area (NLA) for 'Centre' and 'Commercial' zoned lots. As there will be no retail lettable area associated with the subject site should the rezoning proceed, it is recommended that Schedule 3 of the DPS 2 be amended by deleting reference to the subject lots in the following table:

 

LOCALITY

DESCRIPTION OF CENTRE AND COMMERCIAL ZONES

NLA (m2)

WANGARA

Portion of Lot 9032 Prestige Parade and Lot 9035 Vision Street

1750

 

Land Use Context and Compatibility

 

The subject lots are surrounded by the Wangara Industrial Estate to the north and Landsdale Industrial Estate to the south. Therefore, the proposal will ensure that the zoning of the site is compatible and consistent with the zoning of lots within the locality.

 

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’ (refer Attachment 1). Thus, the proposal will potentially avoid any land use conflicts between incompatible land uses between industrial land uses on adjoining 'General Industrial' zoned lots and sensitive land uses on the subject 'Centre' zoned lots. It is noted that the landowner of Lot 80 Gnangara Road, Landsdale has submitted a letter of no objection to the City in support of the subject scheme amendment proposal.

 

Commercial Viability

 

According to the proponent, the subject lots are less commercially viable and attractive than previously anticipated, for several reasons, as discussed below:

 

·        The realignment of Gnangara Road coupled with the extension of Ocean Reef Road have changed travel patterns and the potential exposure of the subject lots to passing trade;

 

·        The Darch Neighbourhood Centre has been developed and is located approximately 1.5 kilometres to the south of the subject lots. The Darch Neighbourhood Centre includes a supermarket, specialty shops and other services that can serve the needs of workers in the Wangara and Landsdale Industrial Estates. The Darch Neighbourhood Centre enjoys direct access to the Wangara and Landsdale Industrial Estates via Hartman Drive;

 

·        To guard against potential land use conflicts and incompatibility with adjoining Industrial land uses, a number of uses previously proposed in the current 'Centre' zone were prohibited under Amendment No. 73 to DPS 2, thus reducing the range commercial land uses able to be developed on the subject lots.

 


 

Surrounding Road Network and Traffic Impact Considerations

 

A Traffic Impact Assessment has previously been prepared for the subject site by Riley Consulting as part of the separate structure planning process of CSP 81 for the 'Centre' zoned site. The Traffic Impact Assessment confirms that traffic generation from industrial land uses would be substantially less than land uses permissible in the 'Centre' zone. Additionally, it is noted that the existing road network was designed to accommodate industrial land uses when the subject site was previously zoned 'General Industrial'. On this basis, the road network is sufficient to accommodate the traffic generated by industrial land uses on the subject lots should the land be rezoned to 'General Industrial'.

Statutory Compliance

The scheme amendment will follow the statutory process outlined in the Town Planning Regulations 1967.

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

Nil

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       Pursuant to Section 75 of the Planning and Development Act 2005 PREPARES Amendment No. 134 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 by:

a)      Amending the Scheme Map to rezone Lot 478 Prestige Parade and Lot 479 Vision Street, Wangara from 'Centre' zone to 'General Industrial' zone as shown in Attachment 2; and

b)      Deleting the following entry from Schedule 3 of District Planning Scheme No. 2:

LOCALITY

DESCRIPTION OF CENTRE AND COMMERCIAL ZONES

NLA (m2)

WANGARA

Portion of Lot 9032 Prestige Parade and Lot 9035 Vision Street

1750

2.       REFERS Amendment No. 134 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) for comment, pursuant to Section 81 of the Planning and Development Act 2005;

3.       Subject to no objection being received from the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA), ADVERTISES Amendment No. 134 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 for public comment for a period of 42 days, pursuant to Regulation 25(2) of the Town Planning Regulation 1967; and

4.       FORWARDS a copy of Amendment No. 134 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 to the Western Australian Planning Commission.

 

 

Attachments:

1View.

Attachment 1 - Site Plan for Council Report to Initiate Advertising of DPS 2 Amendment 134

13/64888

 

2View.

Attachment 2 - Zoning Plan for Council Report to Initiate Advertising of DPS 2 Amendment 134

13/77442

Minuted

  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                    8


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                    9


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                      10

PS02-06/13       Adoption of Blackmore Local Structure Plan No. 97

File Ref:                                              8649 – 13/74196

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       4         

 

Issue

To consider submissions on the proposed Blackmore Local Structure Plan No. 97 (LSP 97) to determine the modifications required and its acceptability for final adoption and forwarding to the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) for endorsement.

 

Applicant

Masterplan Consultants Pty Ltd

Owner

WA Land Authority (Landcorp)

Location

Lot 500 (64) Allinson Drive, Girrawheen

Site Area

4.106ha

MRS Zoning

Urban

DPS 2 Zoning

Urban Development

 

 

Background

On 14 November 2012, Masterplan Consultants Pty Ltd (the Applicant), on behalf of the Western Australian Land Authority (LandCorp), lodged LSP 97 with the City for its consideration. A location plan, depicting the area subject to LSP 97, is included as Attachment 1.

 

On 19 December 2012, the Acting Director Planning and Sustainability forwarded a memorandum to all Elected Members, advising of Administration’s intention to advertise the draft LSP 97 under delegated authority and providing the opportunity for Elected Members to request referral of the proposal to Council for consent to advertise. No such requests were received and advertising of the draft LSP 97 subsequently commenced in accordance with Clause 9.5 of DPS 2.

Detail

Site

LSP 97 relates to all of the land formerly being Blackmore Primary School, which was rezoned from 'Public Purpose (Primary School) Reserve' to 'Urban Development' by Amendment No. 125 to the City's District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2). The structure plan covers an area of approximately 4.1 hectares. The extent of LSP 97 is depicted in Attachment 1. The site is currently vacant, cleared land and, with the exception of boundary fences, there are no existing structures on the site.

Proposal

The whole of Lot 500 (64) Allinson Drive, Girrawheen is zoned 'Urban Development' under DPS 2 and therefore an agreed structure plan is required to be in place prior to any subdivision or development of that land, in accordance with Clause 3.15.3 of DPS 2. The key elements of proposed LSP 97 are as follows:

·        A residential development with a range of densities from R40 to R60, to accommodate approximately 100 dwellings;

·        Delineation of future road connections and access arrangements through the subject site that will integrate with the surrounding road network;

 

·        Provision of approximately 2765m² public open space (POS), representing 6.7% of the required POS provision, with the remainder of the minimum 10% POS obligation to be paid as cash-in-lieu; and

·        Identification of indicative grouped and single housing sites which will require detailed area plans (also referred to as 'Local Development Plans') to be prepared prior to development or subdivision.

 

Draft LSP 97, comprising both Part 1 (statutory) and Part 2 (non-statutory/explanatory), as advertised, is included as Attachment 2.

Consultation

Draft LSP 97 was advertised for public comment for a period of 42 days by means of an on-site sign, an advertisement in the Wanneroo Times newspaper, inclusion under the 'Your Say' section of the City’s website, letters to relevant government bodies and letters to all landowners adjoining the LSP area.  At the close of the advertising period on 19 March 2013, seven (7) submissions were received, primarily letters of support or no objection.

 

A summary of submissions received and Administration's response is contained within Attachment 3. Administration's recommended modifications to draft LSP 97 that have arisen as a result of its assessment of the document are contained within Attachment 4.

 

The two main issues raised in the submissions received, and Administration's assessment relate to the future house designs to be accommodated on proposed lots and the amount of POS available in the locality, to justify the less-than-10% POS proposed by LSP 97.  These issues are discussed below.

Comment

Density

 

One submitter commented that (existing) local residents should be notified if the development would contain two-storey homes, due to the perceived impact of those homes on the privacy of existing residents.  Administration disagrees, as two-storey homes could be constructed in residential areas regardless of the density coding apply8ing to that land.

 

The majority of the structure plan area is proposed to be coded R40, with a portion of the structure plan area proposed to be coded R60. The residential densities proposed by LSP 97 are considered acceptable as they are generally in accordance with the City’s policies and the proposed future recoding of the Girrawheen and Koondoola area under Council's Local Housing Strategy Implementation Policy.  Issues such as privacy, over-shadowing, setbacks and building height will be addressed through the City's consideration and approval of a Detailed Area Plan(s) (DAP) for LSP 97 and individual home designs, in accordance with the DAP and Residential Design Codes of WA.

 

Public Open Space

 

LSP 97 proposes to provide 2765m² of POS, representing 6.7% in lieu of the required 10% POS provision. The remaining 3.3% POS contribution requirement is proposed to be cash-in-lieu. The City's Local Planning Policy 4.3: Public Open Space allows for the City to accept cash-in-lieu of POS where it is considered that the provision of 10% of the gross subdivisible area for POS will not result in spaces of sufficient size or quality to be of benefit to the community, or where sufficient space already exists in the surrounding areas.

 

 

 

Given the smaller size of the structure plan area (and hence small gross subdivisional area), the combination of both physical POS and  cash-in-lieu of POS in accordance with the proposed POS Schedule of LSP 97 is considered to be acceptable. Particularly when considering that 17.6% POS is already available within an 800m radius ('walkable catchment') of the subject land.

 

Modifications

 

Administration is recommending several modifications to the format and content of draft LSP 97 which are summarised in Attachment 4. The majority of these modifications are editorial changes or requirements to provide additional details within the Part 2 – Explanatory Section. The applicant has reviewed and is supportive of Administration's recommended modifications to the LSP. 

Conclusion

Draft LSP 97 reflects the outcomes of Amendment No. 125 to DPS 2 and will enable the coordinated development of land within the structure plan area and appropriate integration, and interface between, surrounding land uses. Administration therefore considers proposed LSP 97 to be acceptable, subject to Administration's recommended modifications contained within Attachment 4.

Statutory Compliance

Draft LSP 97 has been processed in accordance with the requirements of Part 9 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 considered that the issues raised during the advertising period can be resolved through the recommended modifications to the Structure Plan and/or a request for additional information to provide Administration with clarity and certainty at the more detailed planning stage. Considering this and in light of the comments contained within this report, the draft LSP 97 is considered to be acceptable, subject to Administration's recommended modifications included in Attachment 4 to this report being made.

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

 

           "2     Social

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

Policy Implications

Administration's assessment of Draft LSP 97 has been undertaken in accordance with the requirements of 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 proposed Blackmore Local Structure Plan No. 97 dated November 2012 submitted by Masterplan Consultants Pty Ltd on behalf of LandCorp and included in Attachment 2 is SATISFACTORY, subject to the recommended modifications contained within Attachment 4 being made to the satisfaction of the Director, Planning and Sustainability;

2.       REFERS the Blackmore Local Structure Plan No. 97 to the Western Australian Planning Commission for its consideration pursuant to Clause 9.6.1 of the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2;

3.       Pursuant to Clause 9.6.5 of the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2, ADOPTS the Blackmore Local Structure Plan No. 97 documents once modified in accordance with item 1 above and AUTHORISES the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer to SIGN and SEAL the documents; and

4.       NOTES the Schedule of Submissions received in respect of the draft Blackmore Local Structure Plan No. 97 included as Attachment 3, ENDORSES Administration's response to those submissions and FORWARDS the same to the Western Australian Planning Commission and ADVISES submitters of its decision.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1View.

Attachment 1 - Location Plan

13/75205

 

2View.

Attachment 2 - Draft Blackmore Local Structure Plan no. 97 (Part 1)

13/89298

Minuted

3View.

Attachment 3 - Summary of Submissions

13/86538

Minuted

4View.

Attachment 4 - Administration's Recommended Modifications

13/86535

Minuted

  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                      14


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                  15


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                      40


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                  41


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                      42


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                      43


 


 


 


 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                      48


 


 


 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                      52

PS03-06/13       Amendment No. 122 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 - Northern Coastal Growth Corridor Development Contributions

File Ref:                                              7018 – 13/87038

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       10         

 

Issue

To consider submissions received in respect of Amendment No. 122 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2) and adoption of that amendment.

 

Applicant

City of Wanneroo

Owner

Various

Location

Alkimos Eglinton & Yanchep Two Rocks localities

Site Area

~100km2

MRS Zoning

Various

DPS 2 Zoning

Various

 

 

Background

At its meeting of 7 February 2012, Council resolved to adopt Amendment No. 122 to DPS 2 for the purpose of public advertising (Item PS03-02/12). At that same meeting, Council resolved to adopt the Northern Coastal Growth Corridor (NCGC) Community Facilities Plan (CFP) to support the public advertising of Amendment No. 122 (Item PS02-02/12) and required Administration to review the CFP in light of submissions received on Amendment No. 122 and to submit a report on the same to Council, concurrently with Amendment No. 122.

 

Amendment No. 122 proposes to:

 

(i)      Modify Clause 5.5.1 of DPS 2 to introduce two new special control areas relating to the Alkimos Eglinton and Yanchep Two Rocks Development Contribution Areas;

 

(ii)      Modify "Schedule 16 – Special Control Areas" of DPS 2 to introduce two new Special Control Areas relating to the Alkimos Eglinton and Yanchep Two Rocks Development Contribution Areas;

 

(iii)     Introduce three new Schedules (Schedules 18, 19 and 20) into DPS 2 pertaining to:

a.       Text provisions relating to the operation of the new Development Contribution Plans (DCPs);

b.       Alkimos Eglinton DCP; and

c.       Yanchep Two Rocks DCP.

 

(iv)    Amend the Scheme Map to show the Special Control Areas proposed to be introduced.

 

A copy of the advertised Amendment No. 122 text and maps is included as Attachment 1.

 

In accordance with Council's February 2012 resolution, Amendment No. 122 was referred to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) for assessment, prior to being advertised for public comment.  The EPA advised that the Amendment did not require environmental assessment, and therefore Amendment No. 122 was advertised for public comment for a period of 42 days.

 

 

 

The Amendment No. 122 report that was advertised for public comment included the Draft DCP Report covering both DCP areas, together with the Draft CFP adopted by Council in February 2012.

Detail

Amendment No. 122 to DPS 2, as advertised, comprises the following three key components:

 

1.       Special Control Areas

 

Amendment No. 122 proposes to introduce two new "Special Control Areas" under DPS 2 that would apply individually to the Alkimos Eglinton and Yanchep Two Rocks DCP areas.

 

2.       New Schedules

 

Amendment No. 122 proposes to introduce three new Schedules into DPS 2, as follows:

 

a)      A new Schedule 18 comprising "Model Scheme Text" provisions to implement DCPs through DPS 2, including definitions, principles and detailed provisions on the operation of the DCPs.

 

b)      A new Schedule 19 describing the infrastructure and administrative items to be funded by the Alkimos Eglinton DCP, together with the methodology for calculating cost contributions, the period of operation and the review framework.

 

c)      A new Schedule 20 describing the infrastructure and administrative items to be funded by the Yanchep Two Rocks DCP, together with the methodology for calculating cost contributions, the period of operation and the review framework.

         

3.       Amendments to Scheme Map

 

The Scheme Map is proposed to be amended to show the new Special Control Areas to be introduced by Amendment No. 122.

 

It is important to note that Amendment No. 122 will only introduce and provide the 'head of power' for the City to administer DCPs for Alkimos Eglinton and Yanchep Two Rocks to collect contributions for the provision of district-level facilities identified in the CFP. Although the amending text to be inserted in DPS 2 makes reference to the DCP Report and a cost apportionment schedule, these details do not form part of Amendment No. 122 and will not be included in DPS 2 as a result of this Amendment. Details regarding facility scope and cost estimates, construction timing and cost apportionment among landowners will be included in the final DCP Report and/or CFP (as appropriate) to be agreed by Council. Both of these documents will sit outside of but be 'called up' by DPS 2. Council is required to adopt the final DCP and related CFP within 90 days following gazettal of Amendment No. 122 by the Minister for Planning.

 

Although Council's resolution from February 2012 relating to the CFP required a report on the CFP to be presented to Council for consideration in tandem with this report on Amendment No. 122, that has not been possible for the following reasons:

 

·        Divergent landowner views have been expressed on several key aspects of the CFP and DCP Report. Those issues will only be resolved once the Minister for Planning has made a final determination on Amendment No. 122. The Minister's decision on Amendment No. 122 will provide a final ruling on these keys issues, thus providing certainty and clarity for the City to finalise both those documents.

 

·        Through his final determination of Amendment No. 122, the Minister for Planning will determine the facilities to be included in DPS 2, for which the City will collect contributions. The CFP and DCP Report will then need to be brought into compliance with the Minister's decision on Amendment No. 122, within 90 days of gazettal of the Amendment. Hence, any attempts to finalise the CFP and DCP Report now, will only need to be reconsidered once the Minister's decision on Amendment No. 122 is known;

 

·        Advice received from the Department of Planning supports the approach of Council considering adoption of the CFP and DCP Report following gazettal of Amendment No. 122.

 

In view of the preceding points, it will be recommended that Council agree to consider the CFP and DCP Report for final adoption, following gazettal of Amendment No. 122, rather than concurrently with Amendment No. 122, as resolved by Council in February 2012.

Consultation

Amendment No. 122 and the related DCPs and CFP were the subject of exhaustive consultation and collaboration with all affected landowners prior to and following Council's formal consideration of the Amendment in February 2012.

 

Following receipt of advice from the EPA that the Amendment did not require formal assessment, a 42-day public advertising period was carried out between 25 September 2012 and 7 November 2012 by way of:

 

·        on-site signs;

·        advertisements in the local newspaper for two consecutive weeks;

·        a notice in Council offices and on the City’s website; and

·        letters to affected and nearby landowners.

 

At the request of Capricorn Village Joint Venture (CVJV), the advertising period was extended by a further week to 14 November 2012.

 

During the public comment period (up to 14 November 2012) the City received twenty submissions.  Of those, thirteen were from landowners or their representatives, six were from State Government departments, and one submission was received from a member of the general public.

 

Subsequent to the close of the formal public comment period, the City has continued to receive correspondence and feedback from landowners throughout Alkimos Eglinton and Yanchep Two Rocks on all aspects of Amendment No. 122 and the draft CFP and DCP Report. This has resulted in many new and additional issues being raised, which has made it difficult for Administration to identify a clear or unanimous landowner position on several aspects of the Amendment.

 

Administration met with Alkimos Eglinton landowners in February, April and May 2013 and with Yanchep Two Rocks landowners in February and April 2013 to discuss and clarify the key issues raised in their submissions and subsequent correspondence and to obtain feedback from landowners on Administration's preliminary responses to those issues.

 

Included as Attachment 2 is a summary of all submissions received during the formal advertising period of Amendment No. 122, together with Administration's comments and recommendations. Included as Attachment 3 is a summary of all other issues raised by landowners in correspondence since the close of the formal advertising period, together with Administration's comments and recommendations.

 

 

In summary, the comments received in respect of Amendment No. 122 do not specifically support or object to the amendment as a whole, but rather, highlight particular aspects of the Amendment that are supported, not supported or suggested to be changed by the persons making those submissions. In fact, many of the issues raised in the submissions and correspondence received actually relate to the draft CFP and DCP Report, rather than the amending text to be inserted into DPS 2 by Amendment No. 122.  For the reasons explained in the 'Detail' section of this report, these issues are intended to be addressed through Council's subsequent consideration (for final adoption) of the CFP and DCP Report, following determination of Amendment No. 122 by the Minister for Planning.

 

The seven key issues raised by landowners, which specifically relate to Amendment No. 122 are:

 

i)        Term of operation;

ii)       Additional facilities;

iii)      Methodology for cost contributions;

iv)      Cost and scope;

v)      Land acquisition;

vi)      Landowner consultation; and

vii)     Splitting of Yanchep and Two Rocks.

 

These seven key issues are discussed in detail in the 'Comment' section below. Further detail is contained in Attachments 2 and 3.

Comment

1.       Term of Operation

 

Amendment No. 122 proposed that the Alkimos Eglinton and Yanchep Two Rocks DCP's would both operate for 20 years. This was the maximum timeframe likely to be supported by the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) but was shorter than the expected completion of residential development in both areas (around 30 years for Alkimos Eglinton and 50 years for Yanchep Two Rocks).

 

The Alkimos Eglinton landowners have since unanimously agreed that the DCP for that area should be extended to 25 years to capture all proposed facilities in a single contribution period.  All the Alkimos Eglinton landowners agreed that they would nearly all be operating from now until the end of the 25 year time period and therefore it was unnecessary to fragment the time period. 

 

By increasing the Alkimos Eglinton DCP timeframe from 20 years to 25 years, the number of facilities provided will increase from 6 to 13 (if two new skate facilities are included, or 12 if not), with the estimated value of those facilities increasing from approximately $47 million to $87 million. Included as Attachment 4 is a table illustrating the resultant changes to the number and timing of facilities now proposed in Alkimos Eglinton over a 25 year DCP.

 

Conversely, the Yanchep Two Rocks landowners have expressed a strong preference for a shorter DCP timeframe of 10 years.  Some of the Yanchep Two Rocks landowners are developing now and will be finished within 10 years, whilst other landowners will not even commence for at least 10 years.  By adopting a 10 year DCP time frame there will be a clear nexus between infrastructure provided and demand created by development. 

 


 

 

Administration acknowledges this issue and recognises that regardless of whether the DCP timeframe is 20 years or 10 years, because development is expected to continue in the Yanchep Two Rocks area for another 50 years, additional DCPs will be required should Council wish to continue collecting contributions for facilities required beyond the initial DCP timeframe.

 

By reducing the Yanchep Two Rocks DCP timeframe from 20 years to 10 years, the number of facilities provided will reduce from 8 to 3, with the estimated value of those facilities reducing from approximately $53 million to $19 million, if the Yanchep District Open Space is not acquired, or around $29 million, if the Yanchep District Open Space is acquired. Included as Attachment 5 is a table illustrating the resultant changes to the number and timing of facilities now proposed in Alkimos Eglinton over a 25 year DCP.

 

Administration supports increasing the Alkimos Eglinton DCP timeframe to 25 years and reducing the Yanchep Two Rocks DCP timeframe to 10 years, as requested by landowners. This will alter the advertised draft contribution rates for each area because contributions would then be collected over a longer or shorter period at a rate that fully covers the costs of delivering all facilities planned within that 25-year or 10-year period. The estimated impact on contribution rates for each DCP area is discussed in the 'Financial Implications' section of this report.

 

2.       Additional Facilities

 

The Alkimos Eglinton landowners initially requested the inclusion of the following additional facilities in the DCP and Schedule 19 of Amendment No. 122:

 

·        Changerooms in Alkimos;

·        Changerooms and land for playing fields in Eglinton;

·        Bowling greens and associated clubrooms in Alkimos and Eglinton;

·        Skate facilities in both Alkimos and Eglinton.

 

In subsequent discussions between landowners and Administration, it was noted that:

 

·        The changerooms in Alkimos are considered to be neighbourhood level facilities associated with a neighbourhood level open space and therefore below the scope of the DCP which targets district level facilities only.

 

·        The suggested land for playing fields in Eglinton is depicted in the Eglinton LSP No. 82, and arguably would not have a district-level function.  Likewise, the suggested changerooms on that site would potentially be below the scope of the DCP.  The suggestion for these additional facilities to be included in Amendment No. 122 has since been withdrawn.

 

·        The suggested bowling greens and clubrooms are sport-specific facilities that need to be justified by a needs analysis and feasibility study involving other relevant stakeholders.  The suggestion these additional facilities to be included in Amendment No. 122 has therefore since been withdrawn.

 

·        The suggested skate facilities in Alkimos and Eglinton are considered to be district-level multipurpose facilities that would meet an important need in a growing community, particularly one with a large proportion of younger people and young families.

 

 

Since these points were discussed with Alkimos Eglinton landowners, those landowners have more recently advised Administration that they no longer support any of the additional facilities mentioned above being included in the DCP. Nevertheless, it is Administration's view, for the reasons previously discussed with landowners, that a skate facility in either Alkimos or Eglinton would serve a district-level function and cater for the needs of the community in that area. Accordingly, it will be recommended that a single skate facility be provided in Alkimos or Eglinton and included in Schedule 19 of Amendment No. 122.  If this facility is ultimately included in the gazetted version of Amendment No. 122, following final determination by the Minister for Planning, then it will also need to be included in the CFP and DCP Report.

 

3.       Methodology for cost contributions

 

Alkimos Eglinton landowners supported the 'per hectare' approach to calculating a landowner's cost contribution, but raised some issues in relation to determining the 'developable area' on which contributions would be based.

 

A landowner's developable area is proposed to be calculated by deducting a number of statutory (i.e. regional reserves and industrial zoned land) and non-statutory exclusions (un-developable land uses and non-residential land uses).

 

Landowners were concerned that while a standard deduction for non-residential land uses was a reasonable approach in predominantly residential zoned land, there were significant areas of City Centre land in the DCP area that, although having a residential component, needed to be treated differently. As a consequence, Alkimos Eglinton landowners are in the process of more accurately calculating their developable areas based on Local Structure Plans. This detail will need to form part of the DCP once finally adopted by Council after gazettal of Amendment No. 122, but does not require any change to the advertised text of Amendment No. 122.

 

Yanchep Two Rocks landowners were not unanimous in their views on the cost contribution methodology, with some landowners favouring a 'per hectare' approach and others preferring a 'per dwelling' approach. However, the majority of Yanchep Two Rocks landowners did prefer a 'per dwelling' approach.

 

Administration acknowledges the difficulties associated with defining the developable area of land in Yanchep Two Rocks, which would be required to administer a 'per hectare' contribution rate. This is largely due to the substantial size of the area, the estimated 50-year timeframe for full build-out, and the absence or immaturity of Local Structure Planning for much of the area (compared to Alkimos Eglinton). Administration will therefore be recommending a 'per dwelling' approach for the Yanchep Two Rocks DCP, instead of the advertised 'per hectare' approach. This will require a change to the calculation methodology described in the new Schedule 20 of the advertised version of Amendment No. 122.

 

4.       Cost and Scope

 

Both Alkimos Eglinton and Yanchep Two Rocks landowners requested that more detail be included in proposed Schedules 19 and 20 to describe the scope of all facilities to be provided in each DCP. Landowners were concerned that the scope and composition of each facility could change over time, which in turn could increase cost contributions. Landowners were apprehensive that Council could increase contribution rates to fund expanding facility scope instead of reducing the scope of each facility to match contributions that have been collected.

 


 

 

Some landowners suggested specific details be included in Schedules 19 or 20 for each facility, such as the timing of delivery, precise maximum floor areas, number of rooms, number of car parking bays and the like. Much of this detail is presently included in the CFP and DCP Report.

 

Administration does not support including precise facility details in the Scheme text, as any changes to these details in future would then necessitate an amendment to the Scheme. However, Administration does agree that Schedules 19 and 20 should provide some indication of the purpose and key elements of each facility, including land acquisition where that is proposed.

 

To further address landowner sentiments, Administration will also be recommending changes to Clause 11 of the amendment text, to introduce an additional consultation step for landowners to be more involved in the annual review of each DCP. This will provide landowners with the opportunity to scrutinise the scope and therefore cost estimates for each facility on a regular and ongoing basis, and to provide feedback to Council on whether and how the scope of facilities might be altered to keep contribution costs to a minimum while still satisfying community needs.

 

In addition to the above, landowners have commented that any grant funding received in future for community facilities, should be credited towards the cost of the facility rather than used to increase the scope of facilities, thereby reducing the contribution rate paid by developers. In response to this, Administration will recommend that a new principle of this sort be included in the text of Amendment No. 122.

 

Landowners have also commented that Administrative costs should be clearly defined and itemised, in order for landowners to review those costs.  Amendment No. 122 did not include administrative cost estimates because at the time of preparing the amendment documentation these costs were not (and still are not) known. These costs will be calculated and included in the final DCP Report to be adopted by Council.

 

Included as Attachment 6 is a table illustrating the status of agreement or consensus reached with Alkimos Eglinton landowners on the scope of each facility proposed in that DCP area. The scope of each facility is outlined in the CFP and DCP Report, not in Amendment No. 122, so any currently unresolved scope issues will need to be addressed in the final CFP and DCP Report adopted by Council following gazettal of Amendment No. 122.

 

5.       Land Acquisition

 

The Alkimos Eglinton and Yanchep Two Rocks DCPs both include estimated land acquisition costs for facilities such as libraries and community centres, where those facilities cannot otherwise be located on Foreshore Reserves, Regional Reserves and land given up for Public Open Space (POS). The exception to this is the proposed land acquisition for the Yanchep District Open Space, which was always proposed as an incentive to the developer (Yanchep Beach Joint Venture) to facilitate the early delivery of that facility, ahead of when the land might otherwise be given up free of charge by the developer as part of their normal subdivision obligations.

 

Despite originally expressing their strong opposition to the acquisition of the Yanchep District Open Space (during the formal advertising period), most affected Yanchep Two Rocks landowners have now expressed their support for that acquisition, either in full or 'in principle'.

 


 

 

One landowner (Yanchep Sun City Pty Ltd) has recently commented that while it supports the use of DCP funds to acquire land for the Yanchep District Open Space, it believes that the cost and responsibility for doing so should rest with both the City and developers, rather than being borne entirely by the DCP. Administration disagrees that the City should co-fund the acquisition of this land, because Council has already agreed to contribute financially to delivering this project through its various past decisions on deed negotiations with YBJV.

 

Although Yanchep Sun City Pty Ltd has stated that the DCP should not fund 100% of the proposed acquisition of land for the Yanchep District Open Space, there is no 'need and nexus' justification provided by that landowner as to why developments occurring in Yanchep Two Rocks should contribute less than 100% towards the cost of the Yanchep District Open Space acquisition, when those same developments would be contributing to 100% of the cost of constructing the facility.

 

More recently, a group of Yanchep Two Rocks landowners (Australand Property Group, Peet Yanchep Land Syndicate, Peet Yanchep P/L, GMPM (Fini Group), and P&N Landreach) have written to the City stating that the landowners support "in principle" the Yanchep Two Rocks DCP being used to purchase "POS only in excess of the 10% allocation" but that the "terms of the proposed sale of the Yanchep District Open Space" need to be provided to them before they can reach a final position. The letter goes on to request that the City provide "further details regarding the terms of commercial arrangements entered into with Yanchep Beach Joint Venture...before full support can be given for Amendment No. 122".

 

Administration has responded to this letter, raising several practical issues and questions, including:

 

1.       How would the City calculate the amount of POS to be provided in Yanchep and Two Rocks, given that State and Commonwealth environmental approvals play a significant part in determining the amount of POS to be provided by developers, often regardless of what is proposed in adopted Structure Plans?

 

2.       Would the DCP acquire POS from all landowners in Yanchep and Two Rocks only when the actual amount of POS given up by each respective landowner reaches and then exceeds the minimum 10% obligation, or by some other means or at some other stage?

 

3.       The "terms of commercial arrangements" between the City and Yanchep Beach Joint Venture (YBJV) have not yet been determined or agreed by Council. Only once Council formally and finally decides to execute a deed of agreement with YBJV to deliver the Yanchep District Open Space project, will the "terms" of that arrangement be known; and even then, Council will need to itself decide whether and how to disclose the details of that arrangement. At its Special Council Meeting on 10 April 2013, Council resolved, among other things (Item SCR02-04/13) – "2.  NOTES that it has not been possible to finalise a Deed of Agreement with Yanchep Beach Joint Venture for the early delivery of the Yanchep Active Open Space, pending the gazettal of Amendment No. 122 of the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2, dealing with the introduction of the Development Contribution Plan". Hence, Council will only be in a position to execute an agreement with YBJV (and the terms of that agreement will only be determined) once Amendment No. 122 is gazetted.

 

4.       What "further details" (regarding the arrangement with YBJV) are landowners seeking, given that the precise details have not yet been determined and given the City's 'principles' which are to form the basis of any agreement with YBJV, have been determined by various Council decisions in the past and the (previously confidential) reports relating to those decisions have now been made publicly available by Council?

 

 

Administration does not believe the 'in principle' approach suggested in the above-mentioned letter can be seriously entertained, because it is entirely lacking in detail and is stated as being conditional upon those landowners being provided with 'further details' of the agreement between the City and YBJV and reserving their final position on the matter until they have considered those details. So it cannot be assumed that the 'in principle' support recently offered by those landowners would ultimately represent support at all.

 

It is understood that Council would not be in a position to execute an agreement with YBJV until after Amendment No. 122 has been gazetted, meaning the landowners' final position would not be known until then. In that case, Council would need to determine whether the land acquisition for the Yanchep District Open Space is included or excluded in the cost of that facility when it considers the DCP for final adoption.

 

Administration also has concerns regarding the practicalities and risks associated with implementing the 'in principle' approach suggested by some Yanchep Two Rocks landowners, as it would be virtually impossible for the City to predict with any accuracy, how much POS is going to be given up in Yanchep Two Rocks over the 10-year DCP timeframe. The City would need to maintain a detailed register of the amount of POS given up by each original 'parent lot' in order for the acquisition to be triggered once more than 10% of the original parent lot is given up as POS. However, parent lots are rarely preserved and are typically fragmented into several 'super lots', which are then further subdivided and/or sold, thus making it difficult to determine the beneficiary of any payment for the provision of more than 10% POS.

 

Another problem with this approach is that it could be open to exploitation by some landowners choosing to provide substantially more than 10% POS for marketing and sales purposes, on the basis that other landowners (together with the subdividing landowner themself) would effectively pay for or subsidise their 'over-provision'.

 

Local Structure Plans cannot be relied upon to calculate how much land needs to be acquired for the over-10% provision of POS, because those plans can and do change over time and although a structure plan proposes land to be set aside for POS, that does not guarantee that will occur within the 10-year DCP timeframe now proposed for Yanchep Two Rocks, if at all.

 

For the reasons set out below, Administration will be recommending that the land acquisition cost for the Yanchep District Open Space be included in Schedule 20 as a DCP cost for that facility, consistent with the advertised draft DCP Report and CFP:

 

·        The Yanchep Two Rocks landowners have expressed changing and conflicting views on the acquisition of land for the Yanchep District Open Space and have been unable to establish a clear, consistent or unanimous position on the matter among themselves.

 

·        The only alternative approach suggested by some landowners (i.e. the over-10% principle mentioned earlier) provides no detail, would be unworkable, impractical and cannot be seriously entertained by Administration;

 

·        Despite criticisms by some landowners about this land acquisition component being included as a DCP cost, those landowners who previously expressed their strong opposition to the acquisition (during the formal submission period), appear to have now largely softened their position in favour of the land acquisition proceeding in one form or another. The exception to this is Capricorn Investment Group Pty Ltd, which is a 50% owner of CVJV, which has expressed its opposition to DCP funds being used to acquire land for the Yanchep District Open Space;

 

 

 

·        No other Yanchep Two Rocks landowner has come forward to voluntarily cede their land free of cost to facilitate the early provision of an alternative active open space facility. The fact remains that active open space serving a district-level function will be required in Yanchep Two Rocks within the next 10 years, but the provision of such facilities depends entirely on the land being given up free of cost through the normal subdivision process. If the staging of subdivision occurs in areas remote from designated district-level facilities, then either the facility will not be provided, or the landowner will need to voluntarily cede that land free of cost ahead of when that would otherwise occur through the subdivision process, or the City would need to acquire the land. The City cannot deliver any community facilities under the DCP until or unless land is available upon which to develop those facilities. The divergent landowner views on this matter do not change that fact.

 

Despite the comments received from landowners in relation to the acquisition of the Yanchep District Open Space, the actual text of Amendment No. 122 does not presently include any details of land that is to be acquired under either DCP, because that information is contained in the corresponding DCP Report, which only needs to be adopted by Council within 90 days following gazettal of Amendment No. 122, not concurrently with Amendment No. 122. However, as stated earlier, it will be recommended that any proposed land acquisition be included in Schedules 19 and 20 of Amendment No. 122.

 

If no change is made to the text of Amendment No. 122 to specifically reference acquisition of the Yanchep District Open Space (and any other acquisition proposed by either DCP), then Council will be able to decide whether the land cost is included or excluded in the cost of that facility when it considers the DCP for adoption after gazettal of Amendment No. 122, rather than as part of its consideration of Amendment No. 122. However, in considering Amendment No. 122 the Minister may require that it include certain additional details for each facility (such as land acquisition), in which case the Minister's decision would be final and Council's adopted DCP would need to align with the Minister's decision.

 

6.       Landowner Consultation

 

The Alkimos Eglinton and Yanchep Two Rocks landowners have both sought to be more closely involved in the review and administration of the DCPs, particularly in terms of monitoring the scope of facilities and the future costs of those facilities. To address these comments, Administration will be recommending changes to clause 11.0 of the Amendment No. 122 text, to provide additional consultation steps for landowners to become more involved in the review process before any decision is made by Council to adjust costs.

 

7.       Splitting of Yanchep and Two Rocks

 

Some Yanchep Two Rocks landowners have argued that Yanchep and Two Rocks should be split into two separate DCP areas, on the basis that (for the next 10 years) developments in Two Rocks will be making payments towards facilities in the DCP, but none of those facilities are planned for Two Rocks in the initial 10-year DCP timeframe. The landowners arguing this point have stated that developments in Two Rocks should only have to contribute to facilities that are planned to be delivered in Two Rocks in a later DCP period and that developments in Two Rocks should not be subject of a DCP and cost contributions.

 

Administration is opposed to the notion of splitting Yanchep and Two Rocks into two separate DCPs because only those landowners who develop in Two Rocks over the next 10 years could reasonably argue that they might not substantially or immediately benefit from being included in the Yanchep Two Rocks DCP, given that all the facilities planned within that period would be located in Yanchep. However, there is another side to that argument, insofar as residents living in new Two Rocks developments would need to use the Yanchep facilities (and should therefore contribute to them) if no other facilities are planned for Two Rocks in the next 10 years.

 

The strength of the argument to split Yanchep and Two Rocks would diminish over time as the DCP approaches its tenth year and would be further eroded by the following key facts:

 

·        Payment of contributions is only triggered by subdivision/development occurring, so only those developers who subdivide and therefore contribute to an increase in population (and demand) would be required to make payments towards the DCP;

·        Yanchep and Two Rocks are included in the same District Structure Plan and so should be included in the same district-level DCP;

·        Yanchep and Two Rocks are not so geographically remote from each other to justify being split from the outset;

·        The use of facilities throughout the Yanchep Two Rocks area will not be limited to facilities within the catchment of the contributing land;

·        The premise of the DCP is not to 'benefit' contributing landowners in terms of marketing or sales opportunities to promote access to new or future facilities. Rather, the DCP requires developers to pay for the facilities that will be required to cater for the needs of their purchasers/residents.

Statutory Compliance

Amendment No. 122 has been prepared and processed in accordance with the Planning and Development Act 2005 and Town Planning Regulations 1967.

 

In accordance with Regulation 17(2), Council is required to consider the submissions received in respect of Amendment No. 122 and must resolve to either (a) adopt the amendment with or without modification, or (b) not proceed with the amendment.

 

Further, pursuant to Regulation 18(1), within 28 days of the passing of that resolution, the City must provide the WAPC with (among other things) a schedule of submissions and Council's recommendation and response to the submissions, together with particulars of any modifications recommended to the amendment. In this regard, Council may only 'recommend' changes to Amendment No. 122 to the WAPC and Minister and will not itself be entitled to make any changes to the advertised version of Amendment No. 122.

 

Following Council's determination of Amendment No. 122, the Amendment documentation will need to be signed and sealed by the Mayor and CEO and forwarded to the WAPC for consideration. The WAPC is not bound by any timeframe within which it must consider Amendment No. 122. It is unlikely that the City will be notified of the WAPC's recommendation to the Minister. The Minister's decision on Amendment No. 122 will be final.

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

Local Planning Policy 3.3: Northern Coastal Growth Corridor Development Contributions (LPP 3.3) outlines an interim arrangement for development contributions agreed to by all landowners affected by Amendment No. 122.  The interim arrangement involves the payment of cost contributions at an agreed rate per lot by land developers in the Alkimos Eglinton and Yanchep Two Rocks DCP areas, until such time as Amendment No. 122 is gazetted.

 

 

Following Council's decision on Amendment No. 122, Administration will submit a separate report to Council to consider initiating an amendment to LPP 3.3 (for the purpose of public advertising), to revise the interim development contribution rate for both DCP areas, to reflect the higher likely contribution rate to be applied when Amendment No. 122 is finally gazetted.

Financial Implications

The changes that will be recommended to Amendment No. 122 will:

 

·        Increase the collection period for Alkimos Eglinton from 20 years to 25 years, with the number of facilities increasing from 6 to 13 (if two skate facilities are provided, or 12 if not), with the estimated cost of facilities increasing from around $47 million to $87 million; and

 

·        Reduce the collection period for Yanchep Two Rocks from 20 years to 10 years, with the number of facilities reducing from 8 to 3., with the estimated cost of facilities increasing from around $53 million to $19 million (if the Yanchep District Open Space is not acquired) or approximately $29 million (if the Yanchep District Open Space is acquired).

 

The impact of these changes on the estimated contribution rate for each DCP area is shown in Attachment 7 (Alkimos Eglinton) and Attachment 8 (Yanchep Two Rocks).

 

As an overarching principle, Administration has aimed to stage the timing and type of facilities to be delivered in each of the DCPs with the collection of contributions to pay for those facilities at the times when they will be demanded by the future population of the area, in an attempt to minimise or avoid the need for borrowings. This principle is illustrated in the graphs contained in Attachment 9 (Alkimos Eglinton) and Attachment 10 (Yanchep Two Rocks), which depict the projected annual contributions received against the forecast balance in each DCP reserve account based on expenditure associated with delivery of each facility.

 

By implementing a contribution arrangement and collecting contributions, Council is committing to the delivery of the facilities identified in the DCP at the times specified therein (subject to population and land availability), and takes on the risks associated with this, including potentially having to make up any shortfall in funding at the time of construction and/or to construct the facility at the required point in time, regardless of whether sufficient funds have been collected at that time to do so.  In any event, the administration of the DCPs will be managed closely to ensure it is ‘cost-neutral’ to the City, with any additional or borrowing costs incurred by Council (including interest on any new loans) being recouped through ongoing annual reviews of both DCPs.

 

Contributions are required to be deposited into a reserve account until they are required, and may only be used for the purposes outlined in the DCPs. Surplus funds at the end of the life of the DCP must be either returned to those developers that paid the funds or, where that is not possible, used to fund the provision of additional facilities or improvements in the relevant development contribution area. All interim development contributions received to date, in accordance with LPP 3.3, have been held in reserve accounts dedicated to each DCP area. The reserve account for Alkimos Eglinton currently contains approximately $1.7 million dollars in collected contributions, while the Yanchep Two Rocks reserve account contains approximately $183,000 in collected contributions.

 

It should be noted that developer contributions can only be used to fund the acquisition of land (where necessary) and construction of new community facilities and not for operating costs associated with the City’s running of these facilities. 

 

 

As such, those operating costs will need to be factored into the City’s 10 year financial plan and relevant annual budgets in future.

 

Further, it should also be noted that cost estimates included in the DCP documentation will, within 90 days following gazettal of Amendment No. 122, need to be indexed and reviewed to reflect construction costs at the time of gazettal, advertised publicly and subsequently endorsed by Council prior to being implemented.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

 

1.       NOTES the summary of submissions received in respect of Amendment No. 122 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 contained in Attachment 1 and the summary of additional comments contained in Attachment 2, ENDORSES Administration's comments and recommendations contained therein, FORWARDS those Attachments to the Western Australian Planning Commission for its consideration in respect of Amendment No. 122 and ADVISES submitters of its decision;

 

2.       Pursuant to Town Planning Regulation 17(2)(a) ADOPTS Amendment No. 122 to District Planning Scheme No. 2, as advertised for public comment and set out in Attachment 1 and RECOMMENDS the following modifications to the Western Australian Planning Commission and Minister for Planning:

 

Schedule 18

 

a)      Inserting the following additional principle in Clause 6.0:

 

          "(i)    Funding

 

Grants and alternative funding sources should be secured where possible, and any cost savings resulting from confirmed funding sources should in the first instance, where practicable, be credited to the development contribution plan rather than used to expand the scope of infrastructure or infrastructure costs."

 

b)      Insert new sub-clauses 11.4 to 11.7 as follows:

 

"11.4     The local government's review of estimated costs, carried out in accordance with clause 11.2, shall recommend that the estimated costs are to be:

 

(a)   maintained;

(b)   reduced; or

(c)   increased.

 

11.5       Where the review of estimated costs recommends those costs be maintained or reduced, pursuant to clauses 11.4(a) or (b), then the local government shall decide to either maintain or reduce the estimated costs and shall notify owners of its decision.

 

 

11.6       Where the review of estimated costs recommends those costs be increased pursuant to clause 11.4(c), then the local government shall in writing invite comment on the proposal from owners for a period of not less than 28 days, prior to making any decision to increase the estimated costs.

 

11.7       The local government shall consider all submissions received and within ninety (90) days of the date of the latest date specified in the notice given under clause 11.6, decide that the estimated costs are to be:

 

(a)   maintained; or

(b)   increased and if so the degree of that increase.

 

The local government shall notify affected persons of its decision."

 

c)      Amend existing sub-clause 11.4 (a) to read as follows:

 

"is to adjust the cost contribution of any owner in accordance with the revised estimated costs determined in accordance with clauses 11.5 or 11.7; and"

 

d)      Delete existing sub-clause 11.5;

 

e)      Re-number existing clauses 11.4, 11.6 and 11.7 as clauses 11.8, 11.9 and 11.10 respectively.

 

f)       Amend sub-clause 13.2(b) to read as follows:

 

"the commencement of any development on the owner’s land within the development contribution area with the exception of clearing and earthworks commenced under a Development Approval in the case of land subdivisions;"

 

g)      Insert a new sub-clause 16.4 as follows:

 

"The local government may (but is not obliged to do so) raise loans or provide funds from other sources for the purpose of providing the finance necessary for the implementation of the infrastructure costs specified in the development contribution plan and any interest or charges incurred in doing so will be deemed to be an infrastructure cost."

 

Schedule 19

 

h)      In the "Infrastructure and administrative items to be funded" row of the table, delete the facilities listed under the "District Facilities" heading and replace them with the following:

 

"

·     Surf Life Saving Club, Alkimos South Coastal Village – facility to support surf life saving operations and associated activities, including:

Planning, design and project management costs;

Site, servicing and construction costs.

 

 

 

·     Public Open Space (Active), Alkimos Regional Parks and Recreation Reserve – playing fields and associated infrastructure to support sporting and recreational uses, including:

 

Planning, design and project management costs;

Site, servicing and construction costs.

 

·     Multipurpose Hard Courts, Alkimos Regional Parks and Recreation Reserve – fenced hard courts facilities and associated amenity to support a variety of court sports, including:

 

Planning, design and project management costs;

Site, servicing and construction costs.

 

·     Library, Alkimos Secondary Centre – facility to support the storage and community access to printed and electronic media and associated community meetings and activities, including:

 

Planning, design and project management costs;

Land acquisition costs;

Site, servicing and construction costs.

 

·     Community Centre, Alkimos Secondary Centre – facility to support community meetings, gatherings and associated activities, including:

 

Planning, design and project management costs

Land acquisition costs;

Site, servicing and construction costs.

 

·     Indoor Recreation Centre, Alkimos Secondary Centre – facility to support indoor recreation and sporting activities, including:

 

Planning, design and project management costs;

Land acquisition costs;

Site, servicing and construction costs.

 

·     Skate Park, Alkimos Eglinton District – facility to support skateboard, BMX and other wheeled sport activities, including:

 

Planning, design and project management costs;

Site, servicing and construction costs.

 

·     Public Open Space (Active), Eglinton District Centre - playing fields and associated infrastructure to support sporting and recreational uses, including:

 

Planning, design and project management costs;

Site, servicing and construction costs.

 

·     Multipurpose Hard Courts, Eglinton District Centre – Fenced hard courts facilities and associated amenity to support a variety of court sports, including:

 

 

 

planning, design and project management costs;

Site, servicing and construction costs.

 

·     Indoor Recreation Centre, Eglinton District Centre – Facility to support indoor recreation and sporting activities, including:

 

Planning, design and project management costs;

Land acquisition costs;

Site, servicing and construction costs.

 

·     Community Centre, Eglinton District Centre – facility to support community meetings, gatherings and associated activities, including:

 

Planning, design and project management costs;

Land acquisition costs;

Site, servicing and construction costs.

 

·     Library, Eglinton District Centre – facility to support the storage and community access to printed and electronic media and associated community meetings and activities, including:

 

Planning, design and project management costs;

Land acquisition costs;

Site, servicing and construction costs.

 

Contributions shall be payable for the initial district facility only.  No contributions shall be payable for any future upgrade of a district facility to regional standard."

 

i)       In the "Period of operation" row of the table, delete "20" and replace it with "25".

 

Schedule 20

 

j)       In the "Infrastructure and administrative items to be funded" row of the table, delete the facilities listed under the "District Facilities" heading and replace them with the following:

 

          "

·     Surf Life Saving Club, Yanchep Lagoon – facility to support surf life saving operation and associated activities, including:

 

Planning, design and project management costs;

Site, servicing and construction costs.

 

·     Coastal Node Facilities, Capricorn Coastal Node – facilities and amenity to support community use and enjoyment of coastal node areas, including:

 

Planning, design and project management costs;

Site, servicing and construction costs.

 

·     Public Open Space (Active), Yanchep Metropolitan Centre - playing fields and associated infrastructure to support sporting and recreational uses, including:

 

Planning, design and project management costs;

Land acquisition costs;

Site, servicing and construction costs.

 

Contributions shall be payable for the initial district facility only.  No contributions shall be payable for any future upgrade of a district facility to regional standard."

 

k)      In the "Method for calculating contributions" row of the table, delete all text after the sentence "The methodology for determining contributions is in accordance with the following formula:" and replace it with the following:

 

" CC           =   TC x NDU

TDU

Where:

CC   =   Landowner's Cost Contribution Amount ($)

TC   =  Total cost of delivering community facilities + Total Administrative Costs ($)

NDU =   Number of additional lots proposed to be created as part of a proposed subdivision; and the number of dwellings proposed to be created as part of an application for planning approval, other than the first dwelling.

TDU =   Total number of dwellings expected within the DCA."

 

l)       In the "Period of operation" row of the table, delete the number "20" and replace it with the number "10".

 

3.       Pursuant to Town Planning Regulations 22 and 25 AUTHORISES the affixing of the common seal to, and endorses the signing of, the Amendment documentation by the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer; and

 

4.       FORWARDS the Amendment documentation to the Western Australian Planning Commission for its consideration REQUESTING the Hon Minister for Planning grant final approval to the Amendment, subject to the modifications listed in 2. Above.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1View.

Advertised Amendment No. 122 text and maps

13/81909

Minuted

2View.

Attachment 2

13/88501

Minuted

3View.

Attachment 3

13/88505

 

4View.

Attachment 4

13/88454

 

5View.

Attachment 5

13/88463

 

6View.

Attachment 6

13/88468

 

7View.

Attachment 7

13/88470

 

8View.

Attachment 8

13/88472

 

9View.

Attachment 9

13/88474

 

10View.

Attachment 10

13/88477

 

  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                  69


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                      83


 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                      85


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                    149


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                    170


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                    171


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                    172


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                    173


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                    174


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                    175


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                    176

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                    177

 

Development Applications

PS04-06/13       Reconsideration of Development Application- Single House and Shed at 30 Capri Leone Way, Sinagra (DA2012/1326)

File Ref:                                              DA2013/567 – 13/71214

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       5         

 

Issue

To reconsider the planning approval and associated conditions imposed in relation to a Single House and shed at 30 (Lot 9001) Capri Leone Way, Sinagra (DA2012/1326) under the provisions of Clause 6.10.2 of the City's District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2).

 

Applicant

Marin Garbin

Owner

Mrs J Garbin & Mr M Garbin

Location

Lot 9001 (30) Capri Leone Way, Sinagra

Site Area

1.824 ha

DPS 2 Zoning

Urban Development

ASP 4 Zoning:

Residential, Buffer Precinct

 

 

Background

The applicant lodged a development application for a Single House and associated shed at 30 (Lot 9001) Capri Leone Way, Sinagra on 6 December 2012 (DA2012/1326). The location of the subject property is shown in Attachment 1. The application was approved under Delegated Authority for the proposed shed on 25 March 2013 (refer Attachment 2). 

 

On 30 April 2013 the City received a written request from the owners of 30 Capri Leone Way, Sinagra to reconsider Condition 1 of the approval, which stated:

"1.     The proposed Single House does not form part of this application."

The City is able to revoke or amend any planning approval under Clause 6.10.2 of DPS 2, which states the following:

"The Council may, on application in writing from the owner of land in respect of which planning approval has been granted, revoke or amend the planning approval, prior to the commencement of the use or development subject of the planning approval."

The applicant has requested that the matter be brought before Council, in accordance with Delegated Authority register 8.3 (Development Control); whereby any application for planning approval shall be referred to Council for determination, where requested by the applicant in writing.

Detail

The development application proposed a 'Single House' and shed within the existing 500m Buffer Zone of Ingham's poultry farm, Wanneroo. This Buffer Zone is depicted within the Agreed Structure Plan No. 4 – East Wanneroo Cell 2 (ASP 4) Cell 2 – Zoning Plan and is referred to as a 'Buffer Precinct' in that structure plan (refer Attachment 3).

 

The 'Single House' and shed were proposed within the Buffer Zone because the owners had obtained subdivision approval from the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) (in April 2011, Ref: 143620) to subdivide that portion of the original lot located outside of the Buffer Zone (refer Attachment 4).

A condition of this subdivision approval requires the removal of the existing residence of Mr and Mrs Garbin to allow for the road connection of Torrenova Way and Francina View. Whilst some lots approved under this subdivision have been created, the existing dwelling needs to be demolished before any further lots can be created. The owners intend to sell all of the proposed lots created outside the Buffer Zone and to build a new dwelling for themselves within the Buffer Zone.

Comment

No development is permitted within the Buffer Zone in accordance with Clause 3.3 of ASP 4, which states:

"Based on the Western Australian Planning Commission’s Statement of Planning Policy No. 4.3 – Poultry Farms, a 500 metre buffer precinct from the poultry sheds at Location 1665 Wanneroo Road, Sinagra is proposed.

 

Whilst it is generally intended that land uses within the Buffer Precinct will be guided by the Agreed Structure Plan, prior to the Council issuing a use or development approval, or, giving subdivision support to an application within the Buffer Precinct (i.e.; within 500 metres of the activity requiring the buffer measured from the boundary of the lot containing the activity or from a point determined by Council) the Agreed Structure Plan will need to be modified to remove the Buffer Precinct zoning and replace it with an appropriate zoning e.g., Residential Development Precinct.

 

Such a modification will only be supported by Council if either:

 

a) the activity requiring the buffer has ceased operating indefinitely; or

 

b) the applicant can clearly demonstrate that the odour and/or other impacts associated with the activity can be ameliorated or do not impact on the land subject to the proposed modification to the satisfaction of Council, Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) and the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP).

 

Consideration of Rural uses within the Buffer Precinct are the same as those in the Residential Development Precinct."

 

Under the same clause of ASP 4, it is stated that consideration of a 'Rural Use' within the Buffer Precinct is 'the same as those in Residential Development Precinct'. In the Residential Precinct, a 'Rural Use' may be approved by Council if it is considered that such uses would not compromise the intention to develop the precinct for residential purposes, as per Clause 3.1 (Residential Precinct) of ASP 4. A 'Rural Use' is defined within the City's DPS 2 as follows:

Rural use: Means agriculture, horticulture and may include aquaculture, and includes the raising of livestock and the retail sale of the produce of the property where satisfactory access and parking can be provided, and provided that any processing of the produce prior to sale can take place on site.

 

A 'Single House' has a separate land use definition within DPS 2, and is not included in the definition of 'Rural Use'. A 'Single House' therefore cannot be considered to be a 'Rural Use'. Because a 'Rural Use' is the only use that can be approved in the Buffer Precinct, all other uses (including a 'Single House') are prohibited, unless the structure plan is first modified in accordance with Clause 3.3 of ASP 4.

Administration granted approval for the proposed shed because it was considered to be incidental to and necessary for the 'Rural Use' of the property within the Buffer Precinct, which contains a small-scale orchard.  Approval for the shed and associated conditions was granted by administration under delegated authority on 25 March 2013.

The owners of the property have twice been advised, in November 2005 and again in April 2012 (refer Attachment 5), that the City would not support an application for a house on the portion of the property affected by the Buffer Precinct, unless the structure plan is modified in accordance with Clause 3.3. Clause 3.3 of ASP 4 is clear in the intent that the structure plan must be modified to remove the Buffer Precinct, prior to any development occurring within the buffer. According to ASP 4 such a modification will only be supported by Council if either:

 

a)      the activity requiring the buffer has ceased operating indefinitely; or

b)      the applicant can clearly demonstrate that the odour and/or other impacts associated with the activity can be ameliorated or do not impact on the land subject to the proposed modification to the satisfaction of Council, Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) and the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) [now known as Department of Environment and Conservation].

Neither of the above criteria have been met and the City therefore has no discretion to consider approving the proposed Single House in the Buffer Precinct until such time as the Buffer Precinct prescribed under ASP 4 is removed or modified as a result of either (a) or (b) above occurring.

 

Council has no option but to uphold the original decision dated 25 March 2013.  If the landowner wishes to further challenge that position, then they would need to lodge an application for review (appeal) of that decision with the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT).  However, the City would argue that no right of appeal even exists in this case, because the City has no discretion but to refuse any application for a non-'Rural Use' in the Buffer Precinct, until or unless the structure plan is amended.

Statutory Compliance

This application has been assessed in accordance with 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:

 “1     Environment

1.3    Minimise impact of development on the environment

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 


 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       UPHOLDS in its entirety, the planning approval granted under delegated authority on 25 March 2013 in respect of 30 (Lot 9001) Capri Leone Way, Sinagra, included as Attachment 2; and

2.       ADVISES the applicants that, in accordance with the provisions of Clause 3.3 of the East Wanneroo Cell 2 Agreed Structure Plan No. 4, prior to the Council issuing a development approval for a Single House (or any other non-Rural Use) within the Buffer Precinct, the Agreed Structure Plan No. 4 is required to be modified to remove the Buffer Precinct Zoning and to replace it with an appropriate alternative zoning. Such a modification will only be supported by Council if:

a)     The activity requiring the buffer has ceased operating indefinitely; or

b)      The applicant can clearly demonstrate that the odour and/or other impacts associated with the activity can be ameliorated or do not impact on the land subject to the proposed modification to the satisfaction of the Council, Western Australian Planning Commission and the Department of Environment and Conservation.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1View.

Location Plan - 30 Capri Leone Way, Sinagra

13/75111

 

2View.

DA2012/1326- Planning Approval for 30 Capri Leone Way, Sinagra (25 March 2013)

13/58197

Minuted

3View.

Agreed Structure Plan No. 4 East Wanneroo Cell 2 (Sinagra) Zoning Plan

13/86680

 

4View.

Plan of Subdivision- WAPC 143620

11/27729

 

5View.

Previous letters of Advice

13/86589

 

  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                    181


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                182


 


 


 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                    186


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                187


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                188


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                189


 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                    191

 

Other Matters

PS05-06/13       PT05-04/13 Request to Extend Northern Boundary of Yanchep Beach Dog Exercise Area by 250 Metres

File Ref:                                              5523 – 13/69639

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       3         

 

Issue

To consider a petition presented to Council at its meeting on 30 April 2013 (PT05-04/13), requesting Council to extend the northern boundary of Yanchep dog beach exercise area by 250 metres.

 

Background

The existing Yanchep dog beach is located south of the Yanchep Lagoon off Brazier Road (refer Attachment 1) and is 400 metres in length.

 

On 30 April 2013 a petition containing 500 signatures was presented to Council requesting the existing dog beach be extended another 250 metres to the north.

 

The petition stated an extension of the dog beach to the north would encompass part of the small pools off the reef, and would not trespass on the 'Fisherman's Hollow' beach, while fairly addressing the needs of all who use the beach. 

Detail

An extension to the existing Yanchep dog beach was considered as part of a three-month community consultation exercise for the City's Coastal Management Plan (CMP) Part 1, undertaken in October 2011. As part of the consultation, the community was encouraged to complete a survey, which asked the following questions in relation to the Yanchep dog beach:

 

"1.     Would you support any extensions to an existing dog beach?

 

2.       Please tick which options you would prefer:

-        Yanchep dog beach south 500m

-        Yanchep dog beach north 350m"  

 

Of the submitters who chose these two options, 45% of submitters supported an extension south and 55% supported an extension north.

 

In response to the matter of dog beach extensions, the CMP Part 1 (as adopted by Council) stated that:

 

"As the population increases due to new development in existing communities, such as Yanchep and Two Rocks, there will be the need for additional dog beaches within these locations. It is intended that the City will reassess these communities within 5 to 10 years as part of the major review of the CMP Part 2; to ensure that adequate dog beaches are being provided in line with population growth."  

Consultation

The community consultation for the CMP Part 1 commenced on Monday 24 October 2011 and concluded on Friday 27 January 2012.  No public consultation has been carried out in respect of this petition.

Comment

Despite the option for a northern extension to the dog beach being available in the survey, in light of the redevelopment of facilities adjacent to Yanchep Lagoon and the tourist potential this will create for the City, Administration no longer feels an extension to the north is appropriate. The map included with the petition is not accurate, as the proposed 250m northern extension to the dog beach would extend beyond the distance indicated by the petitioners, as depicted in Attachment 2 and would encroach on Fisherman's Hollow. In addition to this, the closest northern access way is located opposite the Fisherman's Hollow car park and directly adjacent to the Yanchep Lagoon. Administration believes that despite the dog beach not extending as far as this access way, this access way may be utilised by the community to access the dog beach.

 

Administration considers that an option exists to extend the existing dog beach south, without waiting to undertake a review in 5-10 years, as stated in the CMP Part 1.

 

There are currently two existing access ways to the south of the existing dog beach. One access way is located 215 metres south of the existing dog beach along Compass Circle and is adjacent to 17 car parking bays. The other access way is located 340 metres south of the existing dog beach along Compass Circle, but does not include any parking (refer Attachment 3). Should the dog beach be extended southwest, its southern boundary should align with one of these existing access ways.

 

In order to extend the dog beach, the City's Animals Local Law would need to be updated, the boundary sign relocated and additional bin and bag dispensers installed at any additional access ways. By extending the existing dog beach southward, the City can ensure that the community is adequately provided for in terms of dog beach provisions in line with future population growth.

 

Administration recommends that prior to Council formally considering an amendment to the Local Law to extend the Yanchep dog beach southward, public consultation be undertaken, together with investigation into the adequacy of existing car parking areas and the condition of the existing access ways. The results of the consultation can then be taken into consideration by Council on whether the Local Law should be amended to extend the existing dog beach to the south.

Statutory Compliance

Nil

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

The City of Wanneroo Coastal Management Plan Part 1.

Financial Implications

The cost of carrying out public consultation on the possible southern extension of the Yanchep dog beach can be met through existing operational budgets. If an amendment to the Local Law is eventually pursued, then additional costs will be incurred to install additional bin and bag dispensers, and to add, modify or upgrade any parking areas, access ways and signs.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

 

1.       ADVISES the petition convenor that Council does not support a northern extension to the existing Yanchep Dog Beach;  and

 

2.       REQUIRES Administration to carry out public consultation on a potential southern extension to the existing Yanchep dog beach for a period of no less than 28 days, with the results of that public consultation exercise being presented to Council for further consideration on whether to extend the existing dog beach southward.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1View.

Current Yanchep Dog Beach

13/74270

 

2View.

Petition Proposal - Northern Extension to Yanchep Dog Beach

13/74283

 

3View.

Yanchep Dog Beach Southern Extension - Access ways and parking

13/86834

 

  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                194


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                195

 

 



CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                196

  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                    197

 

City Businesses

Regulatory Services

CB01-06/13       Application to Keep More Than Two Dogs

File Ref:                                              2323V03 – 13/79048

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director City Businesses

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil       

 

Issue

To consider five applications for an exemption under section 26(3) of the Dog Act 1976 to keep more than two dogs.

 

Background

Clause 14 of the City of Wanneroo Animals Local Law 1999 (Amendment 2008 GG 508) stipulates:

 

“A person shall not keep or permit to be kept on any premises more than:

 

a)      2 dogs over the age of 3 months and the young of those dogs under that age; or

 

b)      6 dogs over the age of 3 months and the young of those dogs under that age if the premises are situated on a lot having an area of 4 hectares or more,

 

unless the premises are licensed as an approved kennel establishment or have been granted exemption pursuant to section 26(3) of the Dog Act and have planning approval under the town planning scheme.”

Detail

The following applications have been made under the Dog Act 1976 and are submitted for consideration:

 

Address of Applicants

Description of Dogs

90 Azelia Street, Alexander Heights

1. Male Sterilised brown & white Jack Russell

2. Male Sterilised brown & white Jack Russell

3. Male Sterilised black & tan German Shepherd

21 Lee-Steere Drive, Mariginiup

1. Male Unsterilised black & tan German Shepherd

2. Female Unsterilised black & tan German Shepherd

3. Male Unsterilised white Maltese

7 Salzburg Way, Wanneroo

1. Male Unsterilised black & tan German Shepherd

2. Male Sterilised black Tenterfield Chihuahua X

3. Male Sterilised red & white Kelpie Shar Pai X

24 Ollera Meander, Carramar

1. Male Sterilised white Shih-Tzu X

2. Female Unsterilised tri colour Pug X

3. Male Sterilised roan Rottweiler X

16 Hazeltine Court, Yanchep

1. Male Sterilised beige Retriever

2. Female Sterilised beige Chesapeake Retriever

3. Male Sterilised brown Nova Scotia Retriever

 

Rangers have inspected the aforementioned properties to ensure means exist on the premises at which the dogs will ordinarily be kept for effectively confining the dogs within the premises.

 

Address of Applicants

Property Zonings

Size of Properties

90 Azelia Street, Alexander Heights

Residential

722m2

21 Lee-Steere Drive, Mariginiup

Special Rural

13024m2

7 Salzburg Way, Wanneroo

Residential

521m2

24 Ollera Meander, Carramar

Residential

456m2

16 Hazeltine Court, Yanchep

Residential

690m2

Consultation

Where applications have been received by the City to keep more than two dogs, residents immediately adjoining the applicant’s property in question are consulted by letter to ascertain if they have any objections.

 

On this occasion the following objection have been received:

 

Address of Applicant

Number of Neighbours Consulted

Number of Objection Forms Received

90 Azelia Street, Alexander Heights

Five

Nil

21 Lee-Steere Drive, Mariginiup

Two

One

7 Salzburg Way, Wanneroo

Five

One

24 Ollera Meander, Carramar

Four

Two

16 Hazeltine Court, Yanchep

Five

Nil

Comment

In considering these applications for exemption, the following two options are available:

 

a)      Council may grant an exemption pursuant to Section 26(3) of the Dog Act 1976 subject to conditions; or

 

b)      Council may refuse permission to keep more than two dogs.

 

Application One: 90 Azelia Street, Alexander Heights

 

The applicant is seeking permission from the City to keep three dogs at 90 Azelia Street, Alexander Heights.  The applicant would like to keep three dogs at the property as they have recently immigrated to Australia from the United Kingdom and were unaware of the local laws within the City of Wanneroo.

 

A Ranger has inspected the property and confirmed it is adequate for the confinement and exercise of the dogs as per Clause 13 of the City of Wanneroo Animals Local law 1999.  The dogs are kept in a large sized yard and sleep in the house at night and no objections were received during the consultation process.

 

A check of the City’s records reveals that prior to this application being made no complaints have been received by the City regarding this address.

 

It is recommended that an exemption under section 26(3) of the Dog Act 1976 be granted.

 


 

Application Two: 21 Lee-Steere Drive, Mariginiup

 

The applicant is seeking permission from the City to keep three dogs at 21 Lee-Steere Drive, Mariginiup.  The applicant would like to keep three dogs at the property as the third dog is an indoor dog and keeps the applicant company as she is home a lot due to a back injury.

 

A Ranger has inspected the property and confirmed it is adequate for the confinement and exercise of the dogs as per Clause 13 of the City of Wanneroo Animals Local law 1999. The dogs are kept in a large sized yard and sleep in the house at night.

 

Upon consultation with neighbouring properties one objection was received regarding barking made by the dogs on the property. Ranger Services have received one barking dog complaint regarding the dogs at the property; however it was resolved in June 2012.

 

A check of the City’s records reveals that prior to this application being made; four complaints have been received by the City regarding the dogs at this address. One complaint was the barking dog complaint that was resolved in June 2012. In January 2013 there was a report that the two German Shepherds were out wandering in the street, when Rangers arrived the dogs were back on their property. In December 2012, both German Shepherds were involved in a minor dog attack that resulted in two cautions and two infringements. In September 2012 both German Shepherds jumped the fence and were involved in a minor dog attack that resulted in infringements and poundage as the dogs had been captured and taken to the animal care centre.

 

Given the complaint lodged and the previous history, it is not recommended that an exemption under section 26(3) of the Dog Act 1976 be granted.

 

Application Three: 7 Salzburg Way, Wanneroo

 

The applicant is seeking permission from the City to keep three dogs at 7 Salzburg Way, Wanneroo.  The applicant would like to keep three dogs at the property as they were unaware of the City of Wanneroo's local law requirements before they purchased their third dog.

 

A Ranger has inspected the property and confirmed it is adequate for the confinement and exercise of the dogs as per Clause 13 of the City of Wanneroo Animals Local law 1999. The dogs are kept in a medium sized yard and sleep in kennels in the backyard at night.

 

Upon consultation with neighbouring properties one objection was received regarding barking, whining and yapping made by the dogs on the property.

 

A check of the City’s records reveals that prior to this application being made; one complaint had been received by the City regarding the amount of dogs at this address. This complaint has been investigated culminating with the applicant's application to Council to keep more than two dogs at the property.

 

It is recommended that an exemption under section 26(3) of the Dog Act 1976 be granted.

 

Application Four: 24 Ollera Meander, Carramar

 

The applicant is seeking permission from the City to keep three dogs at 24 Ollera Meander, Carramar.  The applicant would like to keep three dogs at the property as two dogs belong to her and the third belongs to her housemate.

 

A Ranger has inspected the property and confirmed it is adequate for the confinement and exercise of the dogs as per Clause 13 of the City of Wanneroo Animals Local law 1999. The dogs are kept in a small sized yard and sleep in the house and in the backyard at night.

 

Upon consultation with neighbouring properties two objections were received regarding barking, whining and yapping made by the dogs on the property, however the City has not received any official barking dog complaints regarding the dogs at the property.

 

It should be noted that the applicant and her housemate have only recently moved into the area and the dogs have been settling into their new environment over the past few weeks.

 

A check of the City’s records reveals that prior to this application being made; no complaints have been received by the City regarding this address.

 

It is recommended that an exemption under section 26(3) of the Dog Act 1976 be granted.

 

Application Five: 16 Hazeltine Court, Yanchep

 

The applicant is seeking permission from the City to keep three dogs at 16 Hazeltine Court, Yanchep.  The applicant would like to keep three dogs at the property as the third dog is registered to their son who is living with them whilst his new house is being built.

 

A Ranger has inspected the property and confirmed it is adequate for the confinement and exercise of the dogs as per Clause 13 of the City of Wanneroo Animals Local law 1999.  The dogs are kept in a medium sized yard and sleep in the house at night and no objections were received during the consultation process.

 

A check of the City’s records reveals that prior to this application being made; no complaints have been received by the City regarding this address.

 

It is recommended that an exemption under section 26(3) of the Dog Act 1976 be granted.

Statutory Compliance

The exemptions sought to Council’s Animals Local Law 1999 are permissible under Section 26(3) of the Dog Act 1976.

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

 

2.4.3           Develop and implement a range of activities that promote community    inclusiveness, safety and well being.”

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

 

1.       GRANTS an exemption under the City of Wanneroo Animal Local Laws 1999 made under Section 26(3) of the Dog Act 1976 to keep more than two dogs at the following properties:

90 Azelia Street, Alexander Heights;

7 Salzburg Way, Wanneroo;

24 Ollera Meander, Carramar; and

16 Hazeltine Court, Yanchep.

2.       ADVISES that the exemption relating to the four properties in Recommendation    1 are subject to the following specified conditions:

a)      If any one of the dogs die or is no longer kept on the property, no replacement is to be obtained;

b)      Any barking by the subject dogs is to be kept to a minimum;

c)      This exemption may be varied or revoked if any complaints are received which are considered reasonable; and

d)      Any and all unregistered dogs are to be registered with the City of Wanneroo within 14 days;

3.       REFUSES an exemption to the City of Wanneroo Animal Local Law 1999 made under Section 26(3) of the Dog Act 1976 for the applicant at 21 Lee-Steere Drive, Mariginiup;

4.       ADVISES the applicant listed in Recommendation 3 that they may appeal Council’s decision by writing to the State Administrative Tribunal within 28 days of receiving notice of Council’s decision; and

5.       ADVISES all adjoining neighbours of these decisions in relation to all the properties listed in the above recommendations.

 

 

 

Attachments: Nil  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                    202

 

Property

CB02-06/13       Proposal by the Shire of Wanneroo Aged Persons Home Trust (Inc) to Purchase the Drainage Sump Site at 71 (Lot 135) Belgrade Road, Wanneroo From the City.

File Ref:                                              7244 – 13/50892

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director City Businesses

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       1         

 

Issue

To consider a proposal from the Wanneroo Aged Persons Home Trust (Inc) to purchase from the City the existing drainage sump site located at Lot 135 (71) Belgrade Road, Wanneroo.

 

Background

The City owns in freehold Lot 135, an existing drainage sump site bounded on three sides by Lot 138 Belgrade Road, being the location of the Jacaranda Lodge Frail Aged Hostel facility. Adjoining Jacaranda Lodge on Lot 137 Belgrade Road is Belgrade Park Village aged person facility (attachment 1 refers).  Both Belgrade Park Village and Jacaranda Lodge are privately owned by the Shire of Wanneroo Aged Persons Home Trust (Inc), (the Proponent).

 

It should be noted that the City has no ownership in, connection to or affiliation (prior or present) with the Proponent.

 

Lot 135 was transferred to the City by the Proponent at no cost on 18 September 1984 as a condition of subdivision for the purposes of drainage. The property is zoned Residential R20 under the City’s District Planning Scheme No.2 (DPS2), is subject to Agreed Structure Plan No.5 (East Wanneroo Cell 3) and comprises 1500m2 in area. However in the initial East Wanneroo Cell 3 calculations both the drainage sump site and the aged person’s facility were deducted from the gross Cell area and exempt from any contribution costs. The site is currently used as a stormwater drainage sump for the collection of stormwater from the surrounding road network and has been operational since development in the mid 1980’s.

 

Property details:

OWNERSHIP

City of Wanneroo

ADDRESS

71 Belgrade Road, Wanneroo WA 6065

LEGAL DESCRIPTION

Lot 135 Diagram 66974

CERTIFICATE OF TITLE

Volume: 1675 Folio: 651

LAND AREA

1500m2

MRS (Metropolitan Region Scheme) ZONING

Urban

DPS2 (District Planning Scheme No.2) ZONING

Residential R20

USE

Drainage

AGREED STRUCTURE PLAN

No.5 – East Wanneroo Cell 3

In 2005, Consultants representing the Proponent held discussions with the City's then Director of Planning and Development relating to a proposal to have the existing drainage sump on Lot 135 decommissioned and acquire the land from the City with the intention of extending the existing aged persons facilities.


 

The proposal was to be a two stage process, firstly to consider the feasibility of decommissioning the drainage sump located on Lot 135 and diverting all stormwater discharge to an alternative existing drainage sump located at Lot 12046 (8) Joel Way, Wanneroo and gain "in principle" support from the City. Then secondly, subject to the City supporting the decommissioning, the Proponent would seek to acquire Lot 135 from the City.

Detail

Following initial discussions between the City’s then Director Planning and Development and civil engineering consultants CID Consultants, representing the Proponent, the City was provided with a feasibility report on 26 October 2005 for the decommission and diversion of the drainage site at Lot 135.  The submission proposed to divert all stormwater discharge from Lot 135 Belgrade Road to the existing drainage site located on the south side of Belgrade Road, being Lot 12046 (8) Joel Way, Wanneroo. Preliminary analysis by CID Consultants confirmed that all stormwater discharge from the Belgrade Park Village and Jacaranda Lodge was contained within the village sites and no discharge entered directly into the Lot 135 drainage site. 

 

Following the analysis of that report, correspondence dated 20 January 2006 from the City’s Manager Infrastructure Planning to CID Consultants gave support to the proposal, "It is confirmed that the relocation of the stormwater runoff that normally runs into the sump on the northern side Belgrade Road to the sump on the southern side of Belgrade Road is supported. However, this support is based upon calculations provided in your letter dated 26 October 2005 and any further design changes will require the City's approval prior to any physical works being undertaken on the site."

 

On 7 May 2010 further discussions were held between the City’s Manager Asset Management and the Proponent regarding the decommissioning of Lot 135 and its potential purchase from the City.  Further correspondence from the City dated 4 June 2010 requested additional detail design calculations to support the proposal.

 

Subsequently in July 2011 the City received the additional detailed drainage analysis report from David Wills and Associates Consulting Engineers (DWA) with a finalised submission being presented in October 2011 to support the proposal.

 

On 28 November 2011 the Manager Asset Management formally advised DWA that the City supported, from an engineering perspective, the proposal subject to the following conditions;

 

"1.                  All the work associated with decommissioning of north sump and redirecting of stormwater to south sump shall be undertaken by the management of Belgrade Park Village or their nominated contractor to the satisfaction of the City. All costs incurred shall be borne by the management of Belgrade Park Village.

 

2.                    Detailed design drawings indicating methods of construction shall be submitted for the City’s approval prior to commencing any civil work on site.

 

3.          All civil works related to redirection of stormwater from north sump to south sump shall be completed prior to processing the land transaction."

 

Therefore, should Council support the proposed sale of land to the Proponent, the Proponent will then be required to submit further detailed design and construction drawings for approval by the City prior to construction, with all approved works to be completed to the satisfaction of the City's Infrastructure Directorate prior to the transfer of land. All project costs involved to be payable by the Proponent. These conditions will subsequently form part of a deed of agreement between the City and the Proponent setting out the obligations (the deed).

In February 2012 the Proponent contacted the City to confirm that it remained interested in acquiring the drainage site from the City.

 

The City's Planning and Sustainability Directorate has advised that if the site was decommissioned, under the current DPS2 zoning of Residential R20, the site has the development potential for two "Green Title" residential lots or three lots by grouped dwelling/strata development. However, given the location and close proximity to the existing aged care facilities, the transfer of the site to the Proponent would be considered preferable to maintain a logical and consistent land use, rather than subdivide for independent housing.

 

In addition, it was confirmed that in the initial East Wanneroo Cell 3 calculations both the drainage sump site and the aged person’s facility were deducted from the gross Cell area and at this stage are exempt from any contribution costs. The aged person's facility was developed prior to the preparation of the East Wanneroo Cell 3 Structure Plan. However under this proposal the use of the sump would now be considered for residential purposes, and subsequently it is considered that the lot would need to be included into the net residential area and be required to pay contributions. Lot 135 is 1500 m2 and therefore three (3) contributions would be payable at the current Cell 3 rate of $14,036 per 500m2, equalling $42,108, to be secured in the deed.

 

The Proponent has advised that if Lot 135 is acquired it is intended to extend the existing facilities. Planning and Sustainability Officers have advised that under DPS2 the land use "Retirement Village" is a 'D' (Subject to Determination) use for the existing Residential zone. The use is allowable on this land, subject to application and assessment and approval by the City.

 

In March 2012 expressions of interest were sought for the appointment of a property valuation consultant for the provision of appropriate valuation/s for the site. Administration subsequently engaged the services of McGees Property and two valuations were obtained.  The first based on the site being a decommissioned drainage sump site, having been backfilled to match the levels of surrounding property allowing for development on a “Residential R20” basis. The valuation returned was $465,000 (exclusive of GST). The second valuation was based on an “as is” basis, after decommissioning and with further no improvements or earthworks, this valuation was $400,000 (exclusive of GST).

 

Following the provision of the property valuations Administration held discussions with the Proponent in August 2012 to:

·    Outline the processes of property transactions with Local Government Authorities and the requirements of the Local Government Act 1995; and

·    Provide an indication of the valuations that the City had obtained.

 

At that meeting the Proponent reiterated that the site was transferred to the City by the Owners of Belgrade Park Village for the purposes of drainage at no cost and this should be considered and that the acquisition was intended for the extension of its existing aged care facilities. He also advised that the information provided by Administration would be required to be presented to the Board for consideration and would advise the City of the outcome late in 2012 or early 2013.

 

On 13 March 2013 the City received further correspondence from the Proponent formally requesting special consideration be given to the transfer of Lot 135 from the City at nil consideration. Although the site has been previously valued at $400,000 (ex GST), it was requested that the following points be considered in relation to the waiving of a purchase price:

·    Costs of decommissioning and redirection of drainage to be borne by the Proponent (estimated to be in excess of $320,000);

·    Its status as a not-for-profit organisation;

·    Care of in excess of 400 residents;

·    Employment in excess of 170 staff;

·    Lot 135 was transferred from the Proponent to the City in 1984, at no cost, for the purposes of drainage;

·    Reduction in Commonwealth Government grants for residential care facilities;

·    Commitment to improving and extending its services (e.g. $5m - 27 bed extension in 2009); and

·    Ongoing 30 year cooperative relationship between the City and the Proponent.

Consultation

The City's Planning and Sustainability and Infrastructure Directorates have assisted with the compilation of this report.

All property valuations were provided by a Licensed Valuer.

Comment

The conditional support for the proposal to decommission the Lot 135 drainage sump and redirect stormwater discharge to Lot 12046 (8) Joel Way was formally conveyed by the City's Infrastructure Directorate on 28 November 2011. Should the disposal of Lot 135 be agreed to by Council, all works would be required to be completed to the satisfaction of the City and all costs borne and paid by the Proponent, prior to the transfer of land process, pursuant to the deed.

 

A property valuation was obtained in April 2012, firstly to satisfy any potential requirements for disposal of property under the Local Government Act 1995, secondly to provide an indication of its market value as a residential site and finally to ensure that any disposal of the site be in accordance with good governance and that any potential transaction represents good economic value for the City.

 

Planning and Sustainability Officers have also advised that under this proposal the use of the sump may now be considered to have changed, and subsequently the lot will be required to be included into the net residential area of the Cell, requiring the payment of Cell contributions equalling $42,108. This cost to be paid by the Proponent and secured by the deed.

 

In the event that Council agrees to dispose of Lot 135 by private treaty to the Proponent, the process of the transfer of the land would not occur until all project works are completed to the satisfaction of the City and all costs paid pursuant to the obligations in the deed.

 

Administration considers that the disposal of Lot 135 to the Proponent to be the preferred and logical option. The lot is considered to be an unlikely and unsuitable residential development site for either the City, or a party other than the Proponent given its proximity to the aged care facility and the estimated costs of decommissioning. In the event that the site be decommissioned as proposed and transferred to the Proponent, there would be a direct saving to the City as it would no longer need to maintain the drainage sump.

 

On that basis, Administration considers the following conditions should apply to the disposal of Lot 135 Belgrade Road, Wanneroo between the City and the Proponent and will be incorporated into the deed:

·    The sale of Lot 135 Belgrade Road, Wanneroo is on an "as is" basis;

·    The sale of Lot 135 Belgrade Road, Wanneroo to the Proponent is for nil consideration;

·    The Proponent is required to submit detailed design drawings indicating methods of construction for works relating to the decommission of the Lot 135 drainage sump and the diversion of all stormwater discharge to the existing Lot 12046 (8) Joel Way drainage site, for approval by the City's Infrastructure Directorate;

·    That all infrastructure works for the decommission of the Lot 135 drainage sump and the diversion of all stormwater discharge to the existing Lot 12046 (8) Joel Way drainage site by the Proponent be completed to the satisfaction of the City's Infrastructure Directorate, with all costs payable, including cell costs, by the Proponent prior to the transfer of land;

·    That relevant cell contributions be payable at settlement by the Proponent; and

·    That all costs of the Transfer of Land be payable by the Proponent, including any valuation fees incurred by the City,

 

all of which will be secured by the deed.

Statutory Compliance

Any disposal of City owned land must be undertaken in accordance with the provisions of Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995.  The Shire of Wanneroo Aged Persons Home Trust (Inc) is an incorporated body and is registered under the Associations Incorporation Act 1987 as a not for profit organisation.  Copies of the body's Constitution and Certificate of Incorporation have been provided to Administration. In addition, the land owned by the Shire of Wanneroo Aged Persons Home Trust (Inc) is not rateable by way of a Governor's declaration published in February 1983.

 

On that basis it is considered that any proposed disposition would be an exempt disposition for the purposes of Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995 and not subject to any advertising requirements.

 

Copies of the minutes of the Board of the organisation agreeing to any ultimate arrangement for the acquisition of Lot 135 will be required.

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 transfer of Lot 135 Belgrade Road, Wanneroo to the Shire of Wanneroo Aged Persons Home Trust (Inc) for no cost would also result in no rate income being obtained under the current exemption.

 

Should the transfer of Lot 135 at no cost be agreed, it is considered that Cell contributions of $42,108 will be payable by the buyer, with payment (if applicable) at settlement to be included as a condition of the "Contract for Sale of Land".

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       NOTES that the proposed disposition of land is an exempt disposition in accordance with the provisions of Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995;

2.       NOTES the City of Wanneroo (City) Infrastructure Directorate has granted "in principle" support for the proposed decommissioning of the drainage sump located at Lot 135 (71) Belgrade Road, Wanneroo (Lot) and the diversion of all stormwater discharge to the drainage sump located at Lot 12046 (8) Joel Way, Wanneroo;

3.       NOTES that a deed of agreement between the Shire of Wanneroo Aged Persons Home Trust (Inc) (the Trust) and the City (deed) will be entered into to require conditions precedent to be met prior to the City being obliged to transfer the Lot to the Trust.

4.    NOTES that the conditions precedent to be satisfied prior to transfer of the land    to the Trust will include, but not be limited to :

a)      the Trust submitting detailed design drawings indicating methods of construction for approval by the City of Wanneroo Infrastructure Directorate prior to commencement of any civil works;

b)      all civil works relating to the approvals in (a) above are completed to the satisfaction of the City of Wanneroo Infrastructure Directorate prior to the transfer of Lot;

c)      all costs :

i)       involved in (a) and (b) will be payable by the Trust;

ii)      relating to the transfer of the Lot will be payable by the Trust; and

iii)     Cell 3 contributions will be payable on or before settlement of the transfer of the Lot by the City to the Trust;

4.       AGREES that in the event of satisfaction of the conditions precedent contained in the deed the City will transfer the Lot to the Trust for nil consideration; and

5.       AUTHORISES the affixing of the Common Seal of the City of Wanneroo as applicable to the deed, a Transfer of Land Landgate form and any other associated documentation in relation to the disposition of the Lot pursuant to the City's Execution of Documents Policy.

 

 

Attachments:

1View.

Lot 135 Belgrade Road, Wanneroo Drainage Sump Proposal Site Plan

13/52723

 

  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                208

  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                    209

 

Infrastructure

Tenders

IN01-06/13         Tender 01312 Supply and Installation of Mass Block Retaining Walls - Brazier Road, Yanchep

File Ref:                                              4448V02 – 13/79910

Responsible Officer:                           Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         None

Attachments:                                       2         

 

Issue

To consider Tender No 01312 for the Supply and Installation of Mass Block Retaining Walls at Brazier Road, Yanchep

 

Background

Council at its meeting of 5 March 2013 (IN01-03/13 refers) resolved the following:

"1.  NOTES that no submissions were received in relation to the public notice for temporary closure of a thoroughfare and the realignment and alteration to levels to Brazier Road between Wilkie Avenue and the Yanchep Kiosk, Yanchep;

 

2.   In accordance with Section 3.50 of the Local Government Act as amended, CLOSES Brazier Road, Yanchep to vehicular traffic in accordance with City of Wanneroo Drawing Number 2680-92-0 (Attachment 1) as soon as practicable after 8 April 2013;

 

3.   AUTHORISES the calling of tenders for the Supply and Installation of Mass Block Retaining Walls for Brazier Road, Yanchep; and

 

4.   DELEGATES BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY to the CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER the AUTHORITY to award the tender for the Supply and Installation of Mass Block Retaining Walls for Brazier Road, Yanchep."

Due to there being only a single submission for Tender No 01312 and that the tender price received was above the Engineer's estimate, it is considered more appropriate that this tender report be presented to Council for consideration of tender award.

 

The proposed extent of the road works for the first stage of the Brazier Road Realignment Project (PR-1671) for which the supply and installation of the mass block retaining walls is required is shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2680-92-0 (Attachment 1 refers) and the extent of the Mass Block Retaining Walls associated with the works and the subject of this tender report is shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2680-85-0 (Attachment 2 refers).

Detail

Tender No 01312 for the Supply and Installation of Mass Block Retaining Walls at Brazier Road, Yanchep was advertised on 4 May 2013 and closed on 28 May 2013.

 


 

Essential details of the proposed contract are outlined below:

 

Contract Type

Lump Sum

Contract Duration

13 weeks

Commencement Date

8 July 2013

Expiry Date

7 October 2013

 

Stonecivil Pty Ltd (Stonecivil) provided the only submission for Tender 01312, with a lump sum price of $1,013,432. The Engineer's estimate was $837,945, being $175,487 below Stonecivil's tender price.

 

The Tender Evaluation Team, consisting of the Project Manager Yanchep Infrastructure, Projects Engineer and the Contracts Officer evaluated the tender submissions in accordance with the following selection criteria:

 

Item No

Description

Score

1

Price for the services offered

50%

2

Safety Management

20%

3

Methodology

20%

4

Tenderer’s experience and ability to do the work

5%

5

Tenderer’s resources

5%

Price for the Services Offered (50%)

As there was only one tender submission, Stonecivil's weighted score was given the full weighted score of 50%.

Methodology (20%)

Stonecivil's methodology statement was considered to be basic. However, it did convey an understanding of the works to be carried out and included a Gantt chart which clearly outlines the timelines for each phase of the works. A weighted score of 8% out of a possible 20% was achieved.

Safety Management (20%)

The assessment for safety management was based on Stonecivil's response to the Occupational Health and Safety Management System Questionnaire included within the tender documentation. It is noted that Stonecivil are working towards certification in the Civil Contractors Federation IMS. A Safety Management Plan is to be provided prior to the commencement of the works if Stonecivil is awarded the tender. A weighted score of 8% out of a possible 20% was achieved.

Tenderers Experience and Ability to do the Works (5%)

Stonecivil provided in its submission a number of examples of similar projects undertaken, demonstrating it has the relevant experience and ability to undertake the requirements of the proposed works. A weighted score of 3% out of a possible 5% was achieved.

Tenderers Resources (5%)

Stonecivil's resources as nominated in its submission were examined in order to evaluate its ability to meet the requirements of the contract.  Assessment of this criterion considered staff resources, vehicles, plant/equipment and workshop support to manage the contract, with a weighted score of 3% out of a possible 5% being achieved.


 

Overall Weighted Score

Stonecivil's submission was reviewed in accordance with the weighted score analysis process, with the key aspect of the tender being price, and was assessed as having the necessary resources, previous experience, ability and safety management systems to undertake the works prescribed in the tender.

Stonecivil's overall weighted score was 72% out of a possible 100%.

Consultation

A Public Information Session was held on the 22 May 2013 at the Yanchep Community Centre for the proposed realignment of Brazier Road from Wilkie Avenue to Yanchep Kiosk.

Three members of the public attended the meeting and no issues where raised that would have a direct impact on the design as currently issued.

Comment

The tender submission from Stonecivil, although the only submission received, indicates a contractor capable of carrying out the works required. Reference checks have indicated that this contractor has previously provided a satisfactory service delivery to its clients. However, given only one tender submission was received, the question whether the tender price is value for money needs to be addressed.  To determine this the Consultant Engineer that was engaged to design the retaining walls for the project as a whole were re-engaged to provide its evaluation of Stonecivil's submission, with the following outcome advised:

"Tender appears to reflect scope of works, complexity of the project and the current construction climate."

 

Administration supports the award of this tender as it will enable the first stage of the Brazier Road Realignment Project to proceed in a timely manner, with completion by the end of 2013.  Retendering of the retaining walls at this time would mean works would not be able to be commenced until late September 2013, with completion in March 2014 and would therefore impact upon Yanchep Lagoon and associated facilities during its peak period of public use.

 

On the assumption that Tender No 01312 is awarded, the City's construction team will be required to undertake the drainage component of the works in conjunction with Stonecivil's retaining wall works. This would require both parties to undertake its respective works in a mutually agreed manner.

 

Risk Assessment

In consideration of the risk associated with this tender it is advised that Stonecivil's tender assessment was further scrutinised with the following comments:

a)   Reference Check:

The City obtained a reference check from Tracc Civil, RJ Vincent and the Downer Group, who all provided a positive reference for Stonecivil.

b)   Financial Check:

From Corporate Score Card – on the basis of information obtained, the subject has been assigned with a score of 7.61, indicating that it has a strong financial capacity to undertake the contract in question.


 

Works Program

Should tender award be supported then the following Works Program would be implemented:

 

Tender Award by the Council

25 June 2013

Execute Contract

8 July 2013

Practical Completion

7 October 2013

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.

 

A Building Permit is to be issued by the City's Building Services for the retaining walls to be constructed as part of the first stage realignment of Brazier Road.

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

 

2        Social

2.4     Improve community safety

2.5     Improve transport options and connections”

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

The cost of works associated with the realignment of Brazier Road presently stands as follows:

 

Yanchep Lagoon Redevelopment (PR-1671)

Item

Expenditure

Budget

Project Budget

PR-1671 – 2010/2011 Design & Documentation

 

$50,000

PR-1671 – 2011/2012 Design & Construction

$1,000,000

PR-1671 – 2013/2014 Construction

$2,300,000

PR-1671 – 2014/2015 Construction (Proposed)

$1,508,000

Overall Project Development & Implementation

Project Management (Internal)

$150,000

Concept Development Consultation Fees

$180,000

Upgrade of Power Supply & Street Lighting (Stages 1 & 2)

$242,024

Stage 1 Works

Tender Advertising and Signage

$7,383

 

Retaining Walls

Stonecivil Pty Ltd – Recommended Tenderer

$1,013,432

Drainage & Road Construction – Internal Resources

$1,035,000

Landscaping

NB: Includes rehabilitation works @ Fishermens Hollow following installation of stormwater drainage works

$227,000

Contingency Sum @ 10% of Stage 1 Works

$227,561

Stage 2 Works

Tender Advertising and Signage

$3,500

 

Retaining Walls, Drainage & Road Construction

$1,550,000

Landscaping

$61,000

Contingency Sum @ 10% of Stage 2 Works

$161,100

Total Funding

$4,858,000

$4,858,000

 

In considering the costs tabled above, it is advised that budget costs have previously been presented to Council at its meeting held on 11 December 2012 (IN03-12/12, Yanchep Lagoon Redevelopment Project – Brazier Road Realignment refers) in relation to Stage 1 works, with advice that the cost of Stage 2 works was to be listed in the City's    10-Year Capital Works Program hence reference to the 2014/2015 budget allocation for construction as "Proposed" as it is not currently included in the draft 10 Year Capital Works Program.

 

In review of the retaining wall tender price as submitted by Stonecivil, along with the updated construction cost estimated associated with the drainage and roadworks component for the Stage 1 works, an overall increase of $575,267 in costs associated with both the Overall Project Development & Implementation and Stage 1 Works components of the project is noted as follows:

Overall Project Development & Implementation – increase of $48,324

·    Project Management - cost up $50,000

·    Concept Development Consultants Fees – cost up $56,300

·    Upgrade of Power Supply & Street Lighting – cost down $57,976 following receipt of formal quotation from Western Power.

Stage 1 Works – increase of $526,943

·    Tender Advertising and Signage cost of $7,383 not previously accounted

·    Combined Retaining Wall and Road Construction – cost up $503,016, with provision of the retaining wall up $175,487 being the difference between tender price and the Engineers estimate, and road construction up $327,529 being the difference between the preliminary and construction estimates.

·    Landscaping – cost up $116,000

·    Contingency – down $99,456 (reduction in the Contingency Sum for the Works from 15% to 10%).

 

It is noted that the increase in costs for the retaining wall segment, include allowance for  Stonecivil's Safety Management systems and in particular the management related to the need to ensure that the public are not able to access the site.  The latter is particularly important due to the close proximity of the Yanchep Kiosk and the beach at Yanchep Lagoon, with access by the public to both these facilities to be gained via Yanchep Beach Road/Two Rocks Road intersection with Brazier Road to the north of the site.

 

The Yanchep Lagoon area sits over a limestone outcrop, which is evident when viewing from the Lagoon Beach back toward the existing Brazier Road.  Although the costs for the first stage of works are within the current budget allocation, rock excavation has not been allowed for and if found may incur additional cost. Should this be the case the cost for removal will be treated as a variation to the contract entered into and paid for from the project contingency sum.

As advised in the report to Council at its meeting held on 11 December 2012 (IN03-12/12 refers), further funding needed to be listed in the City's 10 Year Capital Works Program - Roads to cover the cost of the northern section of the proposed realignment of Brazier Road (ie: Stage 2 works). However, the proposed works for this section is dependent on whether Western Australian Planning Commission and Department of Indigenous Affairs approvals are supported in relation to the proposed Yanchep Surf Life Saving Club facility. If approvals are received by the City then the extent of the retaining wall required for Stage 2 works will need to accommodate a maximum height of approximately 5 metres, and if not, then a retaining wall of up to approximately 3 metres is required. The costs noted for Stage 2 Retaining Walls, Drainage and Road Construction in the table above reflect the 3 metre high retaining wall scenario as the difference in cost between a 3 metre high and 5 metre high retaining wall has already been allowed for in the budget allocated to the Yanchep Surf Life Saving Club Project (PR-1048).

 

A sum of $1,508,000 needs to be listed in the City's draft 10-Year Capital Works Program – Roads (2014/2015) to fund the Brazier Road Realignment Project Stage 2 works.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       ACCEPTS the tender submitted by Stonecivil Pty Ltd for Tender No 01312 for Supply and Installation of Mass Block Retaining Walls at Brazier Road, Yanchep for its tendered lump sum price of $1,013,431.77; and

2.       LISTS an amount of $1,508,000 for Stage 2 works associated with the realignment of Brazier Road in the City's draft 10-Year Capital Works Program – Roads (2014/2015).

 

 

Attachments:

1View.

site plan

13/21796

 

2View.

concept plan

13/4415

 

  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                    215


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                    216

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                    217

 

Traffic Management

IN02-06/13         Parking Prohibitions - Spring Hill Primary School, Spring Hill Drive, Tapping

File Ref:                                              5597 – 13/73994

Responsible Officer:                           Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       7         

 

Issue

To consider implementation of new parking prohibitions in Spring Hill Drive, Meneguz Drive, Corella Chase, Jaeger Bend, Crimson Way, Sparrow Brace and Stint Pass, in the vicinity of the Spring Hill Primary School, Tapping.

 

Background

Council has received a number of enquiries from residents and Ward Councillors with regard to issues relating to parking congestion in the vicinity of Spring Hill Primary School. The City has also been approached by representatives from Spring Hill Primary School to introduce parking prohibitions to remedy congestion issues.

 

Additionally, the City's Rangers and Parking Compliance Officers have received complaints regarding congestion as a result of uncontrolled parking.

Detail

Spring Hill Primary School is predominantly bounded by Spring Hill Drive, with the south-west portion adjoining Crimson Way. Subject to the development of the land parcel on the south-west corner of the school, Crimson Way will extend east and loop around into Stint Pass, allowing an alternate access/egress for the school. Parking bays are available adjacent to the school on both Spring Hill and Crimson Way, as well as an on-site parking area provided by the school, with the northern access operating as an entry, and the southern access as an exit. Refer Attachment 1 for locality plan.

 

Spring Hill Primary School has an afternoon bus service, collecting students from the school. A small bus utilises the internal car park at the southern end of the car park just north of the pedestrian crossing. Other buses operate using the on-site staff car park located on the north-east side of the school.

 

As there are currently no parking prohibitions in place, car parking in the vicinity of the school is unable to be controlled and/or enforced by Ranger Services.

Consultation

To ascertain the opinion of affected residents regarding the proposed parking prohibitions, a survey letter was sent on 8 April 2013, with the specified final reply date of
22 April 2013.  The survey was sent to owners and occupiers of properties in Corella Chase, Crimson Way, Stint Pass, Spring Hill between House numbers 1 and 87, Meneguz Drive between Spring Hill and Whimbrel Vista, Jaeger Bend between Spring Hill and Jacana Pass and residents at house numbers 45, 49 and 57 Whimbrel Vista. Drawing Numbers 2777-1-0 & 2777-2-0 detailing the extent of parking prohibitions and submitted as part of the survey sent to residents for comment have been included for reference in this report as Attachment 2 and Attachment 3 respectively. A copy of the survey letter is at Attachment 4.

 

Responses received from residents affected by the proposed parking prohibitions are summarised below:

 

·        Corella Chase - no responses received

·        Crimson Way - three responses received, representing three of the six properties; all supporting the proposed parking prohibition;

·        Stint Pass - four responses received from four of the 10 properties; two in favour of the proposed parking prohibitions, and two opposed;

·        Spring Hill Drive - 15 responses received from 15 of the 42 properties; nine being in favour of the proposed parking prohibitions, four opposed and two unable to be determined;

·        Meneguz Drive - two responses received from residents affected by the proposed parking prohibitions; both were in favour; and

·        Jaeger Bend - two responses received from residents, representing two of the six properties surveyed; both in favour.

 

The comments of those opposed or unable to be determined to the proposal, along with Administration's response, are outlined at Attachment 5.

Comment

Given the results of Community Consultation, the proposed parking prohibitions have been modified to reflect the view of residents, with the following changes made;

 

-     Removal of the proposed parking prohibitions along Spring Hill on the north side between Corella Chase and Rail Drive.

-     Removal of the parking bay line marking on Corella Chase.

-     Removal of the parking bay line marking on Stint Pass.

 

These changes are shown on Drawing Numbers 2777-1-1 and 2777-2-1 as Attachment 6 and Attachment 7 respectively.

 

Administration considered that the proposed parking prohibitions along Spring Hill could result in parents seeking alternate parking locations and subsequently using the road and/or verge area adjacent to properties along Spring Hill between Corella Chase and Rail Drive. However, given the objections received from residents regarding the installation of parking prohibitions adjacent to their properties, Administration has excluded this section from the proposed parking prohibitions.

 

Furthermore, a review of the line marked bays on Corella Chase has been considered unnecessary. Corella Chase connects between Spring Hill and Whimbrel Vista, and subsequently would be subject to bi-directional traffic movement, however, given the limited road carriageway width it is recommended that this line marking be removed. The reasoning behind this recommendation is that the placement of line marking on Corella Chase could influence motorists' decisions on using Corella Chase as a suitable place to park over Spring Hill. It is considered that this would have a negative impact in relation to congestion and safety.

 

The intent of parking prohibitions around schools is to improve safety for children during the peak drop off / pick up times. Residents are also considered as prohibitions are designed to ban parking on residents’ nature strips and allow parking adjacent to the kerb on only one side of the road during the same times.  The preferred side of the road for allowed parking is the side with a footpath to improve access for parents/students.

 

 

The changes made to the parking prohibitions on Spring Hill between Corella Chase and Rail Drive is not in accordance with this approach, however given the negative response made from residents, Administration has supported the removal of the proposed parking prohibitions at this location.

Statutory Compliance

The installation of prohibition signage will allow the enforcement of Clause 38 and 39 of the City’s Parking and Facilities Local Law 2003 (as amended):

“38  (1)   A person shall not stop or park a vehicle on a road or reserve unless the vehicle is stopped or parking in accordance with this Local Law.

       (2)   A vehicle is not stopped or parked in accordance with this Local Law if:

(a) it is stopped or parked in any place to which a “no stopping” sign applies.

(b) it is stopped or parked in any place to which a “no parking” sign applies;

(c) it is stopped or parked in contravention of any provision of this Local Law;

(d) it is stopped or parked in contravention of any sign; or

(e) it is stopped or parked on a carriageway with yellow edge lines.

 

39   (1)   Subject to subclauses (2), (3), (4) and (5), a person shall not park a vehicle in a parking stall in a road otherwise than –

(a)     parallel to and as close to the kerb as is practicable;

(b)     wholly within the stall; and”

 

For those properties not included in the parking prohibition plan, nature strip protection can be provided by Clause 58 (2) of the City’s Parking and Parking Facilities Local Law:

58   (2)   A person not being the occupier of the land abutting on to a nature strip, shall not, without the consent of that occupier, drive, park or stop a vehicle upon that nature strip.

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

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 estimated cost of materials and labour to implement these parking prohibitions is $8,750 which can be funded from $15,000 currently allocated in the draft 2013/14 Parking Scheme Signage and Line Marking program and funds to be carry forward from the 201/13 Capital Works Program.

 

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, 7.30-9AM, 2.30-4PM, SCHOOL DAYS” (R5-36) signs along the north/west side of Spring Hill, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2777-1-1 & 2777-2-1 (Attachment 6 and Attachment 7 refers);

2.       APPROVES the installation of "NO STOPPING, NATURE STRIP, 7.30-9AM, 2.30-4PM, SCHOOL DAYS” (R5-36) signs along the east side of Spring Hill, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2777-1-1 (Attachment 6 refers);

3.       APPROVES the installation of "NO STOPPING, ROAD OR NATURE STRIP” (R5-36) signs along the south side of Spring Hill, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2777-1-1 & 2777-2-1 (Attachment 6 and Attachment 7 refers);

4.       APPROVES the installation of "NO STOPPING, ROAD OR NATURE STRIP, 7.30-9AM, 2.30-4PM, SCHOOL DAYS” (R5-36) signs along the south side of Stint Pass, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2777-1-1 (Attachment 6 refers);

5.       APPROVES the installation of "NO STOPPING, NATURE STRIP, 7.30-9AM, 2.30-4PM, SCHOOL DAYS” (R5-36) signs along the north side of Stint Pass, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2777-1-1 (Attachment 6 refers);

6.       APPROVES the installation of "NO STOPPING, ROAD OR NATURE STRIP, 7.30-9AM, 2.30-4PM, SCHOOL DAYS” (R5-36) signs along the south side of Crimson Way, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2777-1-1 (Attachment 6 refers);

7.       APPROVES the installation of "NO STOPPING, ROAD OR NATURE STRIP, 7.30-9AM, 2.30-4PM, SCHOOL DAYS” (R5-36) signs along the east side of Jaeger bend, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2777-1-1 (Attachment 6 refers);

8.       APPROVES the installation of "NO STOPPING, ROAD OR NATURE STRIP, 7.30-9AM, 2.30-4PM, SCHOOL DAYS” (R5-36) signs along the west side of Meneguz Drive, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2777-2-1 (Attachment 7 refers);

9.       APPROVES the installation of "NO STOPPING, NATURE STRIP, 7.30-9AM, 2.30-4PM, SCHOOL DAYS” (R5-36) signs along the east side of Meneguz Drive, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2777-2-1 (Attachment 7 refers);

10.     APPROVES the installation of "NO STOPPING, ROAD OR NATURE STRIP, 7.30-9AM, 2.30-4PM, SCHOOL DAYS” (R5-36) signs along the west side of Corella Chase, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2777-2-1 (Attachment 7 refers);

11.     APPROVES the installation of "NO STOPPING, ROAD OR NATURE STRIP” (R5-36) signs at the Spring Hill/Stint Pass intersection, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2777-1-1 (Attachment 6 refers);

12.     APPROVES the installation of "NO STOPPING, ROAD OR NATURE STRIP” (R5-36) signs at the Spring Hill/Sparrow Brace intersection, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2777-1-1 (Attachment 6 refers);

13.     APPROVES the installation of "NO STOPPING, ROAD OR NATURE STRIP” (R5-36) signs at the Spring Hill/Crimson Way intersection, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2777-1-1 (Attachment 6 refers);

14.     APPROVES the installation of "NO STOPPING, ROAD OR NATURE STRIP” (R5-36) signs at the Spring Hill/Jaeger Bend intersection, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2777-1-1 (Attachment 6 refers);

15.     APPROVES the installation of "NO STOPPING, ROAD OR NATURE STRIP” (R5-36) signs at on the corner adjacent to house no. 23 Jaeger Bend, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2777-1-1 (Attachment 6 refers);

16.     APPROVES the installation of "NO STOPPING, ROAD OR NATURE STRIP” (R5-36) signs at the Spring Hill/Meneguz Drive intersection, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2777-2-1 (Attachment 7 refers);

17.     APPROVES the installation of "NO STOPPING, ROAD OR NATURE STRIP” (R5-36) signs at the Spring Hill/Corella Chase intersection, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2777-2-1 (Attachment 7 refers);

18.     ADVISES the residents of Corella Chase, Crimson Way, Stint Pass, Spring Hill Drive, Meneguz Drive and Jaeger Bend of Council's decision; and

19.     REQUESTS Administration to write to the Principal of Spring Hill Primary School advising of the approved parking prohibitions and seeking support with advising the school community, through the school newsletter, of the implications of these parking prohibitions.

 

 

Attachments:

1View.

Spring_Hill_LocalityPlan_Attachment1

13/75733

 

2View.

PPDrawing_2777-1-0

13/75778

 

3View.

PPDrawing_2777-2-0

13/76999

 

4View.

SurveyLetter_Questionaire_PP_SpringHillPS

13/77588

 

5View.

SpringHillPS - Community Consultation - Feedback & Administration Response

13/77593

 

6View.

Rev_PPDrawing_2777-1-1

13/77599

Minuted

7View.

Rev_PPDrawing_2777-2-1

13/77600

Minuted

  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                    222


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                    223


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                    224


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                225


 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                227


 


 


 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                    231


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                    232


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                    233

IN03-06/13         Parking Prohibitions - Salerno Drive, Elliston Parade and Anchorage Drive North, Mindarie

File Ref:                                              5597 – 13/77098

Responsible Officer:                           Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       5         

 

Issue

To consider the implementation of parking prohibitions on Salerno Drive, Elliston Parade and Anchorage Drive North abutting Peter Moyes Anglican Community School, Quinns Baptists College and Mindarie Senior College, Mindarie.

 

Background

The City has received requests from Peter Moyes Anglican Community School, Quinns Baptists College and parent representatives from the schools to install parking prohibitions on streets surrounding the schools. Parents have been observed parking on the road, footpath and nature strip on and around the school creating an obstruction to safe sight distance and generating safety issues for children.

Detail

Salerno Drive, Elliston Parade and Anchorage Drive North are Local Distributor Roads which abut Quinns Baptist College, Peter Moyes Anglican Community School and Mindarie Senior College. Refer Attachment 1 for location plan.

 

Direct property access is provided to residential properties opposite the school on Anchorage Drive North and Elliston Parade, north of the Bayfield Crescent intersection. There are no residential access constraints on Salerno Drive and Elliston Parade south of the Bayfield Crescent intersection.

 

Embayed parking spaces have been constructed on both sides of Salerno Drive and Elliston Parade and the school side of Bayfield Crescent. Parents have been observed parking on the road and nature strip of streets surrounding the schools. At times, parents have also been seen parking on the footpaths and restricting visibility for children exiting from the school and crossing roads. Additionally, it has been observed that parking spaces along the east side of Bayfield Crescent are underutilised while the majority of parents try to park close to the entrance of the schools.

 

Traffic management treatments have recently been installed on Salerno Drive and Elliston Parade to improve traffic flow and pedestrian safety around the schools. To complement the traffic treatments, Administration have prepared a parking prohibitions plan for Salerno Drive, Elliston Parade and Anchorage Drive North abutting Peter Moyes Anglican Community School, Quinns Baptists College and Mindarie Senior College, Mindarie. 

Consultation

A survey was recently undertaken to ascertain the opinion of affected schools and residents towards the proposed parking prohibitions.  The survey commenced on 27 February 2013 with a final reply date of 11 March 2013.  The survey covered the schools, affected owners and occupiers of Elliston Parade and Anchorage Drive North.  The proposed parking prohibitions are shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2765-1-1 and 2765-2-1 (Attachments 2 and 3 refers).

 

 

The survey feedback and Administration responses are summarised below:

Street / Property Name

Supported

Not Supported

Comments

Administration Response

Quinns Baptist College

1

0

The School supports the proposed parking prohibitions but requested unrestricted parking along north end of Salerno Drive.

Parking prohibitions amended as requested.

Peter Moyes Anglican Community School

1

0

The School supports the proposed parking prohibitions but requested unrestricted parking along north end of Salerno Drive and north end of Elliston Parade.

The school emphasised the need to enforce the parking prohibitions.

Parking prohibitions amended as requested.

Enforcing parking prohibitions is the responsibility of the City's Parking Compliance Officers.

Mindarie Senior College

0

1

The school does not support the proposed parking prohibitions and requested unrestricted parking along Elliston Parade on their school side.

Parking prohibitions amended as requested.

Elliston Parade

1

0

The resident at No. 2 Elliston Parade supported the proposed parking prohibition plan but other affected residents on the same road did not respond. The resident requested the City not to provide permission to Peter Moyes School for further extension.

Proposed parking prohibitions will remain unchanged.

 

The request for not approving further extension of the school is not related to the proposed parking prohibitions plan. Proposals for extension of schools are assessed by City's Planning Implementation Department.

Anchorage Drive North

3

1

318 Anchorage Drive North supports the proposed parking prohibitions plan and requested a pedestrian crossing on Elliston Parade.

The resident requested extension of the western side raised central median at the intersection of Anchorage Drive North and Elliston Parade to alleviate the parking issues on the nature strip. 

Proposed parking prohibitions will remain unchanged.

Regarding pedestrian crossing safety, the City has recently installed raised speed plateaus along Elliston Parade to improve pedestrian safety.

The request for extending the western side raised central median at the intersection of Anchorage Drive North and Elliston Parade is not related to the proposed parking prohibitions plan. Administration believes the proposed parking prohibitions signage will alleviate the issue of nature strip parking at the property. Administration does not consider extension of the median island is necessary at this moment.

320 Anchorage Drive North supports the proposed parking prohibitions plan and requested considering using speed cameras along the roads and making Elliston Parade and Salerno Drive one way streets.

Proposed parking prohibitions will remain unchanged.

The request for using speed cameras and making one way streets is not related to the proposed parking prohibitions plan. Operating speed cameras are the responsibility of WA Police. Administration does not support changing Elliston Parade and Salerno Drive to one way, considering the possibility of large scale non-compliance in the absence of enforcement.

322 Anchorage Drive North supports the proposed parking prohibitions plan.

Proposed parking prohibitions will remain unchanged.

 

328 Anchorage Drive North does not support the proposed parking prohibitions plan.

328 Anchorage Drive North is excluded from parking prohibitions.

Other affected residents along Anchorage Drive North did not respond to the community consultation.

Parking prohibitions amended to exclude the non responding and non supporting residences.

Comment

Amendments have been made to the proposed parking prohibition plan to reflect the community survey. The recommended parking prohibitions are as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2765-1-2 and 2765-2-2, (refer Attachment 4 and Attachment 5).

 

It should be noted that the proposed parking prohibitions will add an additional work commitment for the City’s Parking 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 estimated cost for materials and installation to implement this parking prohibition plan is $12,000 which can be funded from Project No PR-2404 – Parking Scheme Signage and Line Marking, for which $30,000 has been allocated in the 2012/2013 Capital Works Budget and the $15,000 funding allocated in the draft 2013/14 Capital Works Program..

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.      APPROVES the installation of “NO STOPPING ROAD OR NATURE STRIP”(R5-36) signs on the northern side of Anchorage Drive North, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2765-1-2 (Attachment 4 refers);

2.      APPROVES the installation of “NO STOPPING ROAD OR NATURE STRIP”(R5-36) signs on the southern side of Anchorage Drive North, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2765-1-2 (Attachment 4 refers);

3.      APPROVES the installation of “NO STOPPING ROAD OR NATURE STRIP”(R5-36) signs on the eastern side of Salerno Drive, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2765-1-2 (Attachment 4 refers);

4.      APPROVES the installation of “NO STOPPING ROAD OR NATURE STRIP”(R5-36) signs on the western side of Salerno Drive, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2765-1-2 (Attachment 4 refers);

5.      APPROVES the installation of “NO STOPPING ROAD OR NATURE STRIP”(R5-36) signs on the eastern side of Elliston Parade, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2765-1-2 (Attachment 4 refers);

6.      APPROVES the installation of “NO STOPPING ROAD OR NATURE STRIP”(R5-36) signs on the western side of Elliston Parade, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2765-1-2 (Attachment 4 refers);

7.      REMOVES the “NO STOPPING”(R5-35) signs from the northern side of Anchorage Drive North, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2765-1-2 (Attachment 4 refers);

8.      APPROVES the installation of “1/4P 7:30-9am and 2:30-4pm SCHOOL DAYS” (R5-15) signs on the eastern side of Salerno Drive, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2765-1-2 (Attachment 4 refers);

9.      APPROVES the installation of “1/4P 7:30-9am and 2:30-4pm SCHOOL DAYS” (R5-15) signs on the western side of Salerno Drive, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2765-1-2 (Attachment 4 refers);

10.    APPROVES the installation of “1/4P 7:30-9am and 2:30-4pm SCHOOL DAYS” (R5-15) signs on the eastern side of Elliston Parade, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2765-1-2 (Attachment 4 refers);

11.    APPROVES the installation of “1/4P 7:30-9am and 2:30-4pm SCHOOL DAYS” (R5-15) signs on the western side of Elliston Parade, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2765-1-2 (Attachment 4 refers);

12.    REMOVES the “NO PARKING 7:30-9am and 2:30-4pm SCHOOL DAYS” (R5-41) and "KISS AND DRIVE" signs from the eastern side of Elliston Parade, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2765-1-2 (Attachment 4 refers);

13.    APPROVES the installation of “P2 Minutes 7:30-9am and 2:30-4pm SCHOOL DAYS” (R5-13) and "KISS AND DRIVE" signs on the eastern side of Elliston Parade, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2765-1-2 (Attachment 4 refers);

 

14.    APPROVES the installation of “NO STOPPING ROAD OR NATURE STRIP”(R5-36) signs on the eastern side of Salerno Drive, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2765-2-2 (Attachment 5 refers);

15.    APPROVES the installation of “NO STOPPING ROAD OR NATURE STRIP”(R5-36) signs on the western side of Salerno Drive, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2765-2-2 (Attachment 5 refers);

16.    APPROVES the installation of “NO STOPPING ROAD OR NATURE STRIP”(R5-36) signs on the eastern side of Elliston Parade, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2765-2-2 (Attachment 5 refers);

17.    APPROVES the installation of “NO STOPPING ROAD OR NATURE STRIP”(R5-36) signs on the western side of Elliston Parade, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2765-2-2 (Attachment 5 refers);

18.    APPROVES the installation of “NO STOPPING ROAD OR NATURE STRIP 7:30-9am and 2:30-4pm SCHOOL DAYS”(R5-36) signs on the western side of Elliston Parade, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2765-2-2 (Attachment 5 refers);

19.    APPROVES the installation of “1/4P 7:30-9am and 2:30-4pm SCHOOL DAYS” (R5-15) signs on the eastern side of Salerno Drive, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2765-2-2 (Attachment 5 refers);

20.    APPROVES the installation of “1/4P 7:30-9am and 2:30-4pm SCHOOL DAYS” (R5-15) signs on the western side of Salerno Drive, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2765-2-2 (Attachment 5 refers);

21.    APPROVES the installation of “1/4P 7:30-9am and 2:30-4pm SCHOOL DAYS” (R5-15) signs on the eastern side of Elliston Parade, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2765-2-2 (Attachment 5 refers);

22.    ADVISES the residents of Elliston Parade, Anchorage Drive North and Salerno Drive, Mindarie of Council's decision; and

23.    ADVISES the principals of Peter Moyes Anglican Community School, Quinns Baptists College and Mindarie Senior College of the approved parking prohibitions and seek their support with advising their school communities, through the school newsletters, of the implications of these parking prohibitions.

 

 

Attachments:

1View.

Location map of Salerno Drive and Elliston Parade, Mindarie

13/77047

 

2View.

2765-1-1 Community consultation drawing for parking prohibitions on Salerno Drive and Elliston Parade, Mindarie

13/77053

 

3View.

2765-2-1 Community consultation drawing for parking prohibitions on Salerno Drive and Elliston Parade, Mindarie

13/77055

 

4View.

2765-1-2 Final drawing for parking prohibition on Salerno Drive and Elliston Parade, Mindarie

13/77059

Minuted

5View.

2765-2-2 Final drawing for parking prohibitions on Salerno Drive and Elliston Parade, Mindarie

13/77063

Minuted

  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                239


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                    240


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                    241


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                    242


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                    243

  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                    244

 

Community Development

Communication and Events

CD01-06/13       2013 Australasian Safari HQ Event and Sponsorship

File Ref:                                              8624 – 13/78826

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Community Development

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       1         

 

Issue

To consider sponsoring the 2013 Australasian Safari HQ event and media headquarters at Wanneroo Showgrounds from Monday 16 September – Friday 20 September 2013.  

 

Background

The Australasian Safari, an eight-day motorsport endurance race, will be held from the 19 to 27 September 2013. The event involves competitors travelling on off-road tracks through the outback of Western Australia. The event is known as one of the toughest and most challenging motorsport events in the world. The 2012 course was approximately 3,500km through the mid west of Western Australia. Australasian Safari has been supported by Tourism WA for a number of years. Tourism WA will again support the event in 2013. 

This event attracts some of the best competitors from across the world including China, France, Sweden, UK, Thailand, South Africa, Botswana, USA, Italy, Germany, Venezuela and the Netherlands. Before the Australasian Safari race commences, the event will set up its metropolitan base in the City of Wanneroo. This provides a focus for competitors and media as they arrive, and also provides an opportunity for the Perth audience to see the Safari before it heads to the WA outback. This means that the City is the focus for all metropolitan based spectator activities for this event.

Detail

Safari HQ Event

 

The City has received a proposal to host the "Safari Headquarters" and media centre at Wanneroo showgrounds in the week leading up to the event. The current proposal would see Wanneroo showgrounds utilised for the following functions:

 

·        The first point of contact for the competitors including marshalling and registration;

·        A Safari show established for the public giving them the opportunity to meet the competitors and view the competing vehicles;

·        A 'Bivouac' or camping ground for the arriving competitors;

·        A media centre will offer a facility to write, distribute and upload material; and

·        A service area for tuning of cars, bikes and quads.

An approximate timeline for the event is as follows:

Date

Activity / Description

Estimated Attendance

Monday, 16 September 2013

Main Entrance: Event Signage in place / entry statement set up

Margaret Cockman Pavillion: Commence bump in, partitions, office set up

20 (staff only)

Tuesday, 17 September 2013

Camping Grounds: Additional toilets and showers installed, catering setup arrives, medial team arrives, competitors comment arrival.

Margaret Cockman Pavilion: Event HQ and Media Centre open - documentation commences

accredited media sign on; competitor’s documents are checked for compliance

50

Wednesday, 18 September 2013

Margaret Cockman Pavilion: Event HQ and Media Centre open

100

Thursday, 19 September 2013

Margaret Cockman Pavilion: Event HQ and Media Centre open

Safari Show (3pm – 9pm): Free public event, all vehicles on display, VIP function

300 staff and competitors

 

2,000 general public

Friday, 20 September 2013

Bump out complete by 8.00am

300

 

Equipment & logistics

 

The Australasian Safari event consists of the following event equipment and personnel:

·        2 Helicopters;

·        2 Satellite dishes;

·        51 Satellite phones;

·        120 Radios;

·        7 generators;

·        4 Semi trailers (toilets and showers & catering);

·        1 9 Tonne equipment truck;

·        4 Motor homes (HQ and Safari Base);

·        1 medical equipment truck;

·        4 FIVs (First Intervention Vehicles);

·        Two large inflatable arches;

·        1 purpose built semi-trailer kitchen;

·        A 20-person medical crew;

·        85 event officials, most of whom are volunteers;

·        5 representatives from the Motorsport Authorities;

·        2 TV Production companies;

·        National and International media representatives;

·        3 Photographers; and

·        2 Policemen.

 

Compliance and Environmental Health Requirements

 

Public Liability

 

To date the Australasian Safari has provided the City of Wanneroo with copies of its public and products liability insurance cover under XL Insurance Company Limited, to a level of AU$100million. The cover expires on 30 September 2013.

 

Camping

 

Should the event be supported it will require Council to approve the use of two proposed areas of Wanneroo Show Grounds as temporary camping grounds.

Area one is in the South Western Corner of the Show Grounds bordered by Frederick St and Ariti Avenue. Area two is in the North Eastern Corner, immediately South of Noonan Drive and West of Wanneroo Road (Attachment 1).

 

Camping is proposed for 250 people over three nights; Tuesday 17, Wednesday 18 and Thursday 19 September 2013 with campers departing on the morning of 20 September 2013. The provision of on-site camping aligns the Australasian Safari with other world class marathon motorsport events that have a concentrated camping and administrative base, providing competitors with a 'one stop shop,' catering for all their requirements in the lead up to the race start. Privately owned camping venues are unable to cater for all the infrastructure requirements. 

 

Regulation 54 of the Caravan Park and Camping Grounds Regulations 1997 states that:

 

'A local government may grant a temporary license for a facility (a caravan park or camping ground) which is to remain in force for such period of less than one year, as is provided in the license'.

 

'A local government is to endorse on a temporary license for a facility as conditions of the license, the maximum number of sites that may be used at the facility, and the services and facilities that are to be provided'.

 

The facilities provided for the camping area are at the discretion of the City of Wanneroo. The City's Health Services will require the provision of toilet and shower facilities in accordance with the Caravan Park and Camping Ground Regulations 1997, and the provision of firefighting equipment in the camping area in accordance with FESA recommendations.

 

Noise

 

Noise from the event will be required to comply with the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997. Accordingly, the event organiser will be required to submit a noise management plan that will require the event organiser to provide written notice of the event including associated noise implications and the locations and the approximate operating times of on-site generators to surrounding residents. The notice shall include a 24 hour contact phone number manned by event staff, for the lodging of any noise complaints. The event organiser will be required to report any noise complaints to the City as soon as practicably possible. Quiet zones and times will be detailed in the plan and enforced by the event organiser.

 

City staff can undertake further noise monitoring upon receipt of any complaints.

 

Liquor License

 

The event organiser is proposing two licensed areas within the event for the sale and consumption of alcohol. The liquor license will require endorsement from the City of Wanneroo.

 

Food

 

The sale of food at the event will be through commercial catering services and will be required to comply with the requirements of the Food Act 2008.

 

Street Trading

 

The sale of food and merchandise will be required to comply with the City's Trading in Public Places Local Law 1999.

Public Buildings

 

The use of the Wanneroo Show Grounds and Margaret Cockman Pavilion will be required to comply with the Health (Public Building) Regulations 1992. Under the Health (Public Building) Regulations 1992 the event organiser will be required to:

 

·        Provide additional toilet facilities to cater for the anticipated 2,000 event attendees.

 

·        Submit

i.      Application to construct, extend or alter a public building (Form 1) for any temporary structure larger than 9 square meters;

ii.     Engineers certifications for temporary structures larger than 9 square metres;

iii.    Application for certificate of approval – maximum accommodation (Form 2); and

iv.    Certificate of electrical compliance (Form 5) for any additional electrical installations.

 

Helicopters

 

The landing of helicopters for this event, at the Wanneroo Showgrounds, will be subject to approval from the Director City Business.

 

Facility booking

 

Community Facilities has placed a tentative booking for the Wanneroo Showgrounds, in particular the Margaret Cockman Pavilion and the East and South sections of the passive area. These facilities have been booked from Monday 16 September 2013 to Friday 20 September 2013 with an estimated cost breakdown as follows:

 

·        Margaret Cockman Pavilion            $1,590

·        Reserve Hire                                    $1,471

·        Refundable Bond                                      $1,600

 

Sponsorship

 

In addition to hosting the Safari HQ event the City has been given the opportunity to secure sponsorship benefits associated with the Australasian Safari 2013.

 

Sponsorship benefits for the City include:

 

·        TV feature – A TV highlights program is developed each year running a lengthy feature on the start, interviewing key competitors on location prior to competition and screened around the world. The 2012 event was seen in over 130 countries with an estimated reach of well over one million people. It is envisaged the television coverage will expand again in 2013;

·        Logo use – The City of Wanneroo logo would be used on all marketing collateral including the media backdrop, the sponsor's matrix and outdoor signage;

·        Hospitality – The City of Wanneroo would receive invitations to functions including the VIP function on Thursday, 19 September 2013;

·        Exposure – Promotion of the City of Wanneroo on the Australasian Safari's Facebook, Twitter, YouTube accounts and on its website. Its Facebook page has currently over 10,000 likes with a reach of 4.7 million and it is followed by over 1,400 people on its Twitter account. The Wanneroo Showgrounds will also be promoted via the event's media partners. Coverage of the 2012 event spanned from 96FM, The West Australian, the official Dakar Rally site, Network 10, OneHD as well as international sports channels such as ESPN, Start Sports and FoxSports;

·        Community engagement – during the Safari Show the public are able to meet the competitors and view the vehicles; and

·        Brand association – The City of Wanneroo aligns itself with a unique event boasting to be Australia's toughest motorsport event, based entirely in WA and heavily supported by the WA State government as the major partner of the Safari using their 'Experience Extraordinary' branding.

 

In return for the sponsorship benefits outlined above and subject to compliance requirements being met the City of Wanneroo is asked to provide the following:

 

·        A cash component of $10,000 (excluding GST) to be re-invested in marketing of the event.

Consultation

The City's Communications and Events team have worked closely with the Health Services and Community Facilities teams who are supportive of this report's recommendations. 

Part of this event's conditional approval will include the requirement to provide written notice of the event including the associated noise implications to surrounding residents.

Comment

Approval of the event will be dependent upon the completion of all relevant applications and adherence to relevant regulations as determined by Health Services.  In addition, a small team of representatives from service units including Communications & Events, Health Services and Community Facilities will be in constant liaison with the event organiser to ensure that it complies with all the City's requirements.

 

It is anticipated by Administration that there will be minimal disruptions to other sporting clubs using the facility as all of the event's activities occur outside the main playing surface. If approved, the City will endeavour to put event organisers in contact with local club representatives who share this facility to explore any partnership opportunities that may arise. 

 

Whilst there may be minor noise implications associated with a motorsport event of this size, it is not likely to be intrusive to local residents. The overall impact of this event would be comparable to other annual events undertaken at the Wanneroo Showgrounds and other local venues such as the Wanneroo Show, Joseph Ashton Circus and City of Wanneroo Concert.

 

Event organisers have given Administration assurances that they are willing to work with both council and the local community to make this event a success with the view to making the Australasian Safari a regular feature on Wanneroo's events calendar.

 

On this basis, Administration is satisfied that hosting this event with all the proposed activities will be of benefit to the community and the close working relationship between the City and the organisers of the event ensures that risk is managed and the event remains compliant with all legislation.

 

The proposed sponsorship would provide the City with an opportunity to gain local, national and international exposure as the starting point of the Australasian Safari in 2013. Sponsorship of this event would also align closely with the City of Wanneroo Tourism Strategy adopted in 2011.

 


 

On page 27 of the Strategy, it states:

 

"The attraction, staging, management, control and promotion of events is crucial to the success of establishing Wanneroo as a tourist destination. This is reinforced by the research of 400 Metropolitan households who, when asked what would encourage visitation to a particular area, 42% (double the next reason), indicated that events would be the reason."

 

On page 29, it goes on to say:

 

"In summary, events are an extremely important means of attracting additional visitors to the area. All events of significance should all be used to attract additional visitors and to bring additional economic and social benefits to the area. The best means of achieving this is for the City to work in collaboration with event organisers to promote and support events. A collaborative approach will generate the maximum economic benefit for all stakeholders."

Statutory Compliance

An event at any location within the City of Wanneroo will be required to comply with relevant legislation including:

 

·        Health Act 1911;

·        Health (Public Building) Regulations 1992;

·        Food Act 2008;

·        Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997;

·        Caravan Park and Camping Grounds Act 1995;

·        Caravan Park and Camping Grounds Regulations 1997; and

·        Trading in Public Places Local Law 1999.

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

Nil

Financial Implications

If approved, the City will receive the following income from the Facility hire fees and charges:

 

·        Margaret Cockman Pavilion $1,590

·        Reserve Hire                          $1,471

·        Refundable Bond                             $1,600

Sponsorship of this event would require a $10,000 financial investment. It is proposed that the funds be allocated from Communications and Events GL Promote Council Image – General Expenditure: 717612 9399 243.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

 

1.       APPROVES the use of Wanneroo Showgrounds as a temporary camping site from 17 to 19 September 2013;

2.       APPROVES sponsorship of the 2013 Australasian Safari to the value of $10,000 to be made available from GL Promote Council Image General Expenditure - 717612 9399 243; and

3.       APPROVES the use of Wanneroo Showgrounds, Wanneroo to host the Australasian Safari from 16 September to 20 September 2013 subject to the event receiving all necessary statutory and legislative approvals.

 

 

Attachments:

1View.

Draft Site Plan

13/83099

 

  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                251

 

 


 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                    252

 

Program Services

CD02-06/13       Naming of the Internal Roads in Kingsway Regional Sporting Complex

File Ref:                                              4172 – 13/76679

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Community Development

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       2         

 

Issue

To consider the Geographic Names Committee's approval for the naming of the internal roads in the Kingsway Regional Sporting Complex.

 

Background

At its meeting on 6 March 2013 Council considered the application to the Geographic Names Committee (GNC) and made the following recommendations:

 

"1.  APPROVES the following proposed names for submission to the Geographic Names Committee in priority order;

a.   Goal Way;

b.   Sporting Drive;

c.   Spectator Drive;

d.   Player Place;

e.   Coach Road; and

f.    Volunteer Road

 

2.   NOTE the proposed road name allocations as per Attachment 1; 

3.   NOTE a final report will be presented to Council once advice has been received from the Geographic Names Committee."

The naming of the internal roads was the result of concerns being expressed through stakeholder engagement by the Wanneroo Districts Rugby Club (the Rugby Club) as part of the 2010 revised Kingsway Regional Sporting Complex Master Plan. Their concerns related primarily to the ability of emergency services, visiting teams and spectators being able to locate specific clubrooms and playing fields. Since 2010 both the Rugby Club and the Wanneroo Districts Netball Association have had incidents where emergency services have been delayed in getting to the respective venues as a result of a lack of internal road names and internal signage.

Detail

Since the proposed road names were endorsed at Council an application to the GNC was submitted and approval was received in May 2013 (Attachment 1). The proposed mapping of the proposed road names endorsed at the March Council meeting (Attachment 2) was also approved by the GNC.

 

Consultation

 

Correspondence highlighting the new mapping of the Kingsway Regional Sporting Complex will be sent to resident sporting organisations allowing the executive committees to inform members of the new street names.

Comment

Administration is very supportive of this outcome and is in the process of developing plans to install signage.  It is recommended that Council notes the approval provided by the GNC and Administration's intention to install appropriate signage at entry points and internal junctions within the Kingsway Regional Sporting Complex.

Statutory Compliance

Formalisation of the internal road names was subject to the approval of the GNC. 

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

Administration has funds currently allocated in the 2012/13 Capital Works Budget. These funds are under PR-1927 Kingsway Regional Sporting Complex – Signage (External) - $37,390, which will be subsequently carried forward to the 2013/14 financial year.

 

The budget allows for signage to give clear identification of road names at the appropriate entry points as well as directional signage at the internal junctions on the reserve to ensure clear guidance for users.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council NOTES the Geographic Names Committee have approved the following names:

1.   Goal Way;

2.   Players Place;

3.   Spectator Drive; and

4.   Sporting Drive

As shown in (Attachment 2) for the Naming of the internal roads in the Kingsway Regional Sporting Complex and that the City will install the appropriate signage.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1View.

GNC Approval - Road Names within Kingsway Regional Sporting Complex

13/78068

 

2View.

Proposed Road Names

13/78030

Minuted

  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                254


 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                                                                    256

   


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 25 June, 2013                                                    257

 

Corporate Strategy & Performance

Finance

CS01-06/13       Warrant of Payments for the Period to 31 May 2013

File Ref:                                              1859 – 13/79926

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Corporate Strategy and Performance

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil       

 

Issue

Presentation to the Council of a list of accounts paid for the month of May 2013, including a statement as to the total amounts outstanding at the end of the month.

 

Background

Local Governments are required each month to prepare a list of accounts paid for that month and submit the list to the next Ordinary Meeting of the Council.

 

In addition, it must record all other outstanding accounts and include that amount with the list to be presented.  The list of accounts paid and the total of outstanding accounts must be recorded in the minutes of the Council meeting.

Detail

The following is the Summary of Accounts paid in May 2013:

 

Funds

Vouchers

Amount

Director Corporate Services Advance A/C

Accounts Paid – May 2013

   Cheque Numbers

   EFT Document Numbers

TOTAL ACCOUNTS PAID

 

Less Cancelled Cheques

Bank Fees

Town Planning Scheme

RECOUP FROM MUNICIPAL FUND

 

 

92112 - 92569

1717 - 1739

 

 

$1,256,549.51

$8,701,019.03

$9,957,568.54

 

($5,885.05)

$15.00

($39,132.54)

($9,912,565.95)

Municipal Fund – Bank A/C

Accounts Paid – May 2013

Recoup

Direct Payments

Payroll – Direct Debits

TOTAL ACCOUNTS PAID

 

 

 

$9,912,565.95

$21,719.29

$3,064,383.01

$12,998,668.25

Town Planning Scheme

Accounts Paid – May 2013

                           Cell 1

                           Cell 2

                           Cell 3

                           Cell 4

                           Cell 5

                           Cell 6

                           Cell 7

                           Cell 8

TOTAL ACCOUNTS PAID

 

 

 

 

$370.00

$370.00

$370.00

$8,127.00

$14,805.37

$370.00

$370.00

$14,350.17

$39,132.54

At the close of May 2013 outstanding creditors amounted to $203,251.86.

 

Consultation

 

Nil

 

Comment

The list of accounts paid by cheque and electronic transfer in May 2013 and the end of month total of outstanding creditors for the month of May 2013 is presented to the Council for information and recording in the minutes of the meeting, as required by the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996.

 

Statutory Compliance

Regulation 13(1) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 requires a local government to list the accounts paid each month and total all outstanding creditors at the month end and present such information to the Council at its next Ordinary Meeting after each preparation.  A further requirement of this Section is that the prepared list must be recorded in the minutes of the Council meeting.

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 RECEIVES the list of payments drawn for the month of May 2013, as summarised below:-

 

Funds

Vouchers

Amount

Director Corporate Services Advance A/C

Accounts Paid – May 2013

   Cheque Numbers

   EFT Document Numbers

TOTAL ACCOUNTS PAID

 

Less Cancelled Cheques

Bank Fees

Town Planning Scheme

RECOUP FROM MUNICIPAL FUND

 

 

92112 - 92569

1717 - 1739

 

 

$1,256,549.51

$8,701,019.03

$9,957,568.54

 

($5,885.05)

$15.00

($39,132.54)

($9,912,565.95)

Municipal Fund – Bank A/C

Accounts Paid – May 2013

Recoup

Direct Payments

Payroll – Direct Debits

TOTAL ACCOUNTS PAID

 

 

 

$9,912,565.95

$21,719.29

$3,064,383.01

$12,998,668.25

Town Planning Scheme

Accounts Paid – May 2013

                           Cell 1

                           Cell 2

                           Cell 3

                           Cell 4

                           Cell 5

                           Cell 6

                           Cell 7

                           Cell 8

TOTAL ACCOUNTS PAID

 

 

 

 

$370.00

$370.00

$370.00

$8,127.00

$14,805.37

$370.00

$370.00

$14,350.17

$39,132.54

 

WARRANT OF PAYMENTS MAY 2013

PAYMENT

DATE

DESCRIPTION

AMOUNT

00092112

01/05/2013

Riskcover 

$370.00

 

 

Aquamotion Membership Paid Twice - Finance

 

00092113

01/05/2013

Rates Refund

$173.46

00092114

01/05/2013

Quinns Rocks Cricket Club

$80.00

 

 

Key Bond Refund

 

00092115

01/05/2013

Ridgewood Little Athletics Centre

$160.00

 

 

Key Bond Refund

 

00092116

01/05/2013

Rates Refund

$4,473.51

00092117

01/05/2013

Rates Refund

$96.74

00092118

01/05/2013

Rates Refund

$59.38

00092119

01/05/2013

R Wilkinson

$87.55

 

 

  Hire Fee Refund

 

00092120

01/05/2013

G Karunarathna

$66.00

 

 

Refund - Residential Plan Sale - Regulatory Services

 

00092121

01/05/2013

Kingsway Little Athletics Centre

$200.00

 

 

2013 Asics Australian Little Athletics Championships In Canberra 28.4.13

 

00092122

01/05/2013

Northern Districts Cycling Club

$500.00

 

 

Sponsorship For 1 x Child Junior Track Cycling World Championships At Glasgow, Scotland 07.08.13

 

00092123

01/05/2013

Health First Goldfield Vu Tran 

$148.15

 

 

1 x Financial Assistance

 

00092124

01/05/2013

L Bemrose

$70.00

 

 

Refund - Massage Fee - Cancelled

 

00092125

01/05/2013

J Grady

$26.60

 

 

Refund - Swim Lessons - Not Enrolling In Term 2

 

00092126

01/05/2013

Lisa Leow Laubbacher 

$14.00

 

 

Refund - Swimming Lessons Cancelled On Easter Saturday

 

00092127

01/05/2013

J Danielsen 

$26.60

 

 

Refund - Swim Lessons - Not Enrolling In Term 2

 

00092128

01/05/2013

M Szep

$14.00

 

 

Refund - Swimming Lessons Cancelled On Easter Saturday

 

00092129

01/05/2013

D Hall

$14.00

 

 

Refund - Swimming Lessons Cancelled On Easter Saturday

 

00092130

01/05/2013

Rates Refund

$543.00

00092131

01/05/2013

Nima Shah

$105.80

 

 

Refund - Swim Lessons - Cancelled Term 1 2013

 

00092132

01/05/2013

Janet Harrison

$11.20

 

 

Refund - Swim Lesson - Due To Illness

 

00092133

01/05/2013

Sasha McGinnity 

$11.50

 

 

  Refund - Swim Lesson - Easter Sunday

 

00092134

01/05/2013

Vietnamese Soccer Club of WA Inc

$53.00

 

 

Key Bond Refund

 

00092135

01/05/2013

La Clinica for Skin and Body Pty Ltd

$50.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00092136

01/05/2013

Yanchep Redhawks Cricket Club

$80.00

 

 

  Key Bond Refund

 

00092137

01/05/2013

Peci Properties

$34,500.00

 

 

   Bond Refund

 

00092138

01/05/2013

Judith Field

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00092139

01/05/2013

Alan Larosse

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00092140

01/05/2013

R & K Teale

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00092141

01/05/2013

Bee Tan

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00092142

01/05/2013

Robert Davis

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00092143

01/05/2013

Brian Cornell

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00092144

01/05/2013

Pamela Miles

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00092145

01/05/2013

Chi Chan & Ming Tong

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00092146

01/05/2013

Patrick Forde

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00092147

01/05/2013

Christopher Mounsey

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00092148

01/05/2013

Jenna Woodward

$156.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00092149

01/05/2013

Kathy Evans

$40.00

 

 

  Dog Registration Refund - Sterilised

 

00092150

01/05/2013

Jannine Rolfe

$33.15

 

 

  Booking Cancelled - Jindalee Foreshore

 

00092151

01/05/2013

Capital First National Real Estate

$380.00

 

 

  1 x Financial Assistance

 

00092152

01/05/2013

Harber Real Estate

$500.00

 

 

  1 x Financial Assistance

 

00092153

01/05/2013

Satterley

$1,555.44

 

 

Refund Of Portion Of Fees Not Expended Assessing The Butler District Centre Activity Centre Structure Plan No 87

 

00092154

01/05/2013

Rates Refund

$597.88

00092155

01/05/2013

Rates Refund

$100.00

00092156

01/05/2013

Florence Herbst

$10.00

 

 

  Dog Registration Refund - Sterilised

 

00092157

01/05/2013

Alinta Gas

$150.00

 

 

  1 x Financial Assistance

 

00092158

01/05/2013

Fines Enforcement Registry

$1,892.00

 

 

Lodgement Of 44 Infringement Notice Records - Regulatory Services

 

00092159

01/05/2013

Girrawheen Library Petty Cash

$80.50

 

 

  Petty Cash

 

00092160

01/05/2013

Hainsworth Youth Services Petty Cash

$106.90

 

 

  Petty Cash

 

00092161

01/05/2013

Facility Officer WLCC Petty Cash

$22.70

 

 

  Petty Cash

 

00092162

01/05/2013

Water Corporation

$4,519.30

 

 

  Water Charges For The City

 

 

 

  1 x Financial Assistance $43.40

 

00092163

01/05/2013

Yanchep Two Rocks Library Petty Cash 

$34.95

 

 

  Petty Cash

 

00092164

01/05/2013

Youth Projects Petty Cash

$92.70

 

 

  Petty Cash

 

00092165

01/05/2013

Cancelled

 

00092166

01/05/2013

Cancelled

 

00092167

01/05/2013

Synergy 

$20,292.84

 

 

  Power Supplies For The City

 

 

 

  1 x Financial Assistance $300.00

 

00092168

01/05/2013

Telstra

$5,091.73

 

 

  1 x Financial Assistance $192.38

 

 

 

  Phone Charges For The City

 

00092169

01/05/2013

Department of Housing

$62.80

 

 

  1 x Financial Assistance

 

00092170

01/05/2013

Clarkson Library Petty Cash

$115.55

 

 

  Petty Cash

 

00092171

01/05/2013

Dept of Transport

$236.25

 

 

  1 x Financial Assistance

 

00092172

01/05/2013

Wanneroo Adult Day Centre Petty Cash

$89.85

 

 

  Petty Cash

 

00092173

01/05/2013

Hospitality Petty Cash

$526.95

 

 

  Petty Cash

 

00092174

01/05/2013

Water Corporation of WA

$1,351.00

 

 

  Repair Water Meter - Waste Services

 

00092175

01/05/2013

Balga Soccer & Social Club (Inc)

$400.00

 

 

  Kidsport Vouchers For 2 X Children

 

00092176

01/05/2013

Allanmac Taekwondo Inc

$200.00

 

 

  Kidsport Vouchers X 1 Child

 

00092177

01/05/2013

Cancelled

 

00092178

01/05/2013

Marevic Enterprises Pty Ltd

$170.00

 

 

  Sand For Parks

 

00092179

01/05/2013

The Active Network

$17,775.00

 

 

Class System Maintenance & Support 12.01.11 - 30.11.12 - IT

 

00092180

07/05/2013

Synergy

$354,117.94

 

 

  Streetlights 25.02 - 24.03.13

 

00092181

07/05/2013

Deborah Sim

$480.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00092182

07/05/2013

Karishma Olomi

$480.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00092183

07/05/2013

Nikki Schwagermann

$750.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00092184

07/05/2013

Sue Smart

$480.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00092185

07/05/2013

Simon Tut

$480.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00092186

07/05/2013

Donna Hazzard

$750.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00092187

07/05/2013

Daniela Carulli

$750.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00092188

07/05/2013

Arvin Manangkel

$480.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00092189

07/05/2013

Blythe Allia

$480.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00092190

07/05/2013

Rachel Wilkinson

$480.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00092191

07/05/2013

Ezechiel Paglicawan

$480.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00092192

07/05/2013

Yanchep Little Athletics Club

$50.00

 

 

  Key Bond Refund

 

00092193

07/05/2013

Davina Stacey

$733.40

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00092194

07/05/2013

Landsdale Junior Cricket Club Inc

$80.00

 

 

Key Bond Refund

 

00092195

07/05/2013

K Bull

$10.08

 

 

Refund - Swimming Lesson - Not Enrolling In Term 4

 

00092196

07/05/2013

A Thorpe

$38.95

 

 

Hire Fee Refund

 

00092197

07/05/2013

M Bernardis

$44.10

 

 

Refund Swimming Lesson - Lessons Cancelled In Term 1

 

00092198

07/05/2013

J Harvey 

$19.50

 

 

Refund Swimming Lesson - Lessons Cancelled In Term 1

 

00092199

07/05/2013

N Claassen

$44.10

 

 

Refund Swimming Lesson - Lessons Cancelled In Term 1

 

00092200

07/05/2013

N Schwagermann

$39.20

 

 

Refund Swimming Lesson - Lessons Cancelled In Term 1

 

00092201

07/05/2013

M Dallachy

$37.10

 

 

Refund Swimming Lesson - Lessons Cancelled In Term 1

 

00092202

07/05/2013

C Bennett

$40.00

 

 

Refund For Cancellation Of Cartooning Workshop

 

00092203

07/05/2013

A Simmonds

$89.70

 

 

Half Refund Of Membership Fees - Sauna Closure Over 3 Months Period

 

00092204

07/05/2013

Cancelled

 

00092205

07/05/2013

D Lynch

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00092206

07/05/2013

J Parin

$10.00

 

 

Refund - Client Cancelled - Bowling - Gold Program

 

00092207

07/05/2013

Redink Homes Pty Ltd

$278.00

 

 

Development Application Not Required - Display Home

 

00092208

07/05/2013

Challenge Brass Bend

$226.50

 

 

  Refund Hire Fees

 

00092209

07/05/2013

S Venn

$131.30

 

 

Refund Membership Fees - 2 Month Payments For March & April 2013

 

00092210

07/05/2013

Rates Refund

$440.90

00092211

07/05/2013

Rates Refund

$673.43

00092212

07/05/2013

Cancelled

 

00092213

07/05/2013

Endeavour Properties Pty Ltd

$21,739.30

 

 

  Bond Refund - Stage 3B & 3C Ashby

 

00092214

07/05/2013

Foundation Housing

$150.00

 

 

  1 x Financial Assistance

 

00092215

07/05/2013

S Martdee

$1,650.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00092216

07/05/2013

Cancelled

 

00092217

07/05/2013

M Meharry

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00092218

07/05/2013

I May

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00092219

07/05/2013

City of Wanneroo

$880.00

 

 

Cash Advance – Mayor T Roberts, Cr L Gray & Cr F Cvitan To Attend Local Government Managers Australia In Hobart 19 - 22.5.13

 

00092220

07/05/2013

Alexander Heights Adult Day Care Petty Cash

$125.75

 

 

  Petty Cash

 

00092221

07/05/2013

Alinta Gas

$939.85

 

 

  Gas Supplies For The City

 

 

 

  2 x Financial Assistance $839.85

 

00092222

07/05/2013

Construction Training Fund

$61,553.30

 

 

Construction Levy Payment From
1 - 30.4.13 - Finance

 

00092223

07/05/2013

Mr Rod Hannan

$40.00

 

 

Volunteer Payment - Community Bus Driver

 

00092224

07/05/2013

Water Corporation

$3,417.88

 

 

  3 x Financial Assistance $733.38

 

 

 

Reinstatements Costs Due To Hydrant Works - Various Locations - Engineering

 

00092225

07/05/2013

Cancelled

 

00092226

07/05/2013

Synergy

$20,610.80

 

 

  Power Supplies For The City

 

 

 

  2 x Financial Assistance $675.65

 

00092227

07/05/2013

Department of Housing

$350.00

 

 

  2 x Financial Assistance

 

00092228

07/05/2013

Susan Morrissey

$105.00

 

 

Volunteer Honorarium - The Heights

 

00092229

07/05/2013

Roy Bastick

$40.00

 

 

Volunteer Honorarium - Community Bus Driver

 

00092230

07/05/2013

Faye Decima Marion Morgan

$90.00

 

 

Volunteer Honorarium - Wanneroo Day Centre Volunteer

 

00092231

07/05/2013

Ms Rita Lovett

$30.00

 

 

Volunteer Honorarium - Wanneroo Day Centre Volunteer

 

00092232

07/05/2013

John Barry Richards

$60.00

 

 

Volunteer Honorarium - Community Bus Driver

 

00092233

07/05/2013

Phoenix Basketball Club Inc

$440.00

 

 

  Kidsport Voucher For 3 Children

 

00092234

07/05/2013

Mrs Carla Blocksidge

$40.00

 

 

Volunteer Honorarium - Shopper Bus Aide

 

00092235

07/05/2013

Margaret Fonseca 

$75.00

 

 

Volunteer Honorarium - Activity Assistant At Wanneroo Day Centre

 

00092236

07/05/2013

Miss Sophie Hunter

$110.00

 

 

Reimbursement - Senior First Aid - Aquamotion

 

00092237

07/05/2013

Australian Garden History Society

$360.00

 

 

Registration - Tree Forum Wendy Pedretti - C Timms - Conservation

 

00092238

07/05/2013

Construction Information Systems

$2,189.00

 

 

Subscription Building Professionals 01.04.13 - 31.03.14

 

00092239

07/05/2013

RAC Motoring & Services Pty Ltd 

$85.00

 

 

Call-out Fee - Flat Battery WN 33141 - Fleet

 

00092240

07/05/2013

Reliable Fencing

$667.26

 

 

Supply & Installation Of Double Sump Chain Mesh Gate At Marangaroo Golf Course - Projects

 

00092241

07/05/2013

State Library of WA

$218.90

 

 

Lost/Damaged Book Charges - Library Services

 

00092242

07/05/2013

Universal Signs

$286.00

 

 

  Sign Repair - Waste

 

00092243

14/05/2013

Ridgewood Athletics Club

$80.00

 

 

  Key Bond Refund

 

00092244

14/05/2013

Jessica Terlick

$750.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00092245

14/05/2013

Glenda Anne Greenslade

$480.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00092246

14/05/2013

Chitra Ghalasasi

$480.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00092247

14/05/2013

Joondalup Giants Rugby League Club

$750.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00092248

14/05/2013

Alison Holdsworth

$480.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00092249

14/05/2013

Shree Kutch Leva Patel Community WA

$480.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00092250

14/05/2013

Tracie Simpson

$480.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00092251

14/05/2013

Nagi Suliman

$480.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00092252

14/05/2013

Lin Geden

$750.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00092253

14/05/2013

Christina Evans

$480.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00092254

14/05/2013

Helen Davies

$480.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00092255

14/05/2013

Gareth Walker