Council Agenda

 

 

Ordinary Council Meeting

7:00pm, 11 November, 2014

Civic Centre,

Dundebar Rd, Wanneroo

 

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.

 

 

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.

 

 

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 Rd, Wanneroo on Tuesday 11 November, 2014 commencing at 7:00pm.

 

 

 

 

 

D Simms

Chief Executive Officer

7 November, 2014

 

 

 

CONTENTS

 

Item  1_____ Attendances_ 1

Item  2_____ Apologies and Leave of Absence_ 1

Item  3_____ Public Question Time_ 1

Item  4_____ Confirmation of Minutes_ 1

OC01-11/14     Minutes of Ordinary Council Meeting held on 14 October 2014  1

Item  5_____ Announcements by the Mayor without Discussion_ 1

Item  6_____ Questions from Elected Members_ 1

Item  7_____ Petitions_ 1

New Petitions Received  1

Update on Petitions  1

Item  8_____ Reports_ 1

Planning and Sustainability  1

Policies and Studies  1

PS01-11/14      Rescission of Local Planning Policy – 'Calabrese Triangle - Statement of Intent' 1

Development Applications  11

PS02-11/14      Single House Addition (Shed) DA2014/1002 at 14 Dumaresq Loop, Quinns Rocks. 11

Other Matters  19

PS03-11/14      Review of the Yellagonga Integrated Catchment Management Plan  19

PS04-11/14      Proposed Pedestrian Accessway Closure - Portion Lot 56 (15P) Clyde Court, Wanneroo  109

City Businesses  120

Regulatory Services  120

CB01-11/14     Application to Keep More Than Two Dogs  120

Property  125

CB02-11/14     Proposed new land lease to the Department of Environment Regulation over a portion of Lot 211, Quinns Road, Mindarie for the continued provision of an Air Quality Monitoring Station  125

CB03-11/14     Dedication of Portions of Reserve 20432 (Wattle Park), Reserve 11598 (Pinjar Park), and Lots 1 (1731) and 601 (1771) Old Yanchep Road, Pinjar as Road Reserve  131

Infrastructure  139

Infrastructure & Coastal Maintenance  139

IN01-11/14       Tender No 01444 - Replacement of HVAC and Mechanical Services Systems at Ashby Operations Centre Buildings 1 and 2 and at Alexander Heights Community Centre  139

Infrastructure Projects  148

IN02-11/14       Tender No 01421 - the Provision of Architectural Consultancy Services for the Design, Documentation and Constructiion of the Wanneroo Civic Centre Extension  148

Traffic Management  160

IN03-11/14       Golders Way, Girrawheen Footpath - Community Consultation Outcomes  160

IN04-11/14       PT05-09/14 - Requesting Installation of Footpaths to Both Sides of Ashley Road and Waldburg Drive, Tapping  172

IN05-11/14       Parking Prohibitions Review- Spring Hill Primary School, Spring Hill, Tapping  177

IN06-11/14       PT02-06/14 Petition to Reduce, Remove or Modify the Traffic Calming Measures on Aldersea Circle, Clarkson  184

Other Matters  209

IN07-11/14       Dewars Beach Access Track - Progress Report  209

Community Development  230

Community Programs and Services  230

CD01-11/14     Write Off Outstanding Debt – Kingsway Indoor Stadium   230

CD02-11/14     Endorsement of Revised Partnership Agreement between the City and Youth Futures WA   232

CD03-11/14     Concept Plan Curtis Park,Girrawheen - Passive Park Upgrade  239

CD04-11/14     City of Wanneroo Coastal Risk and Safety Signage Audit (Part 2) 247

Corporate Strategy & Performance  277

Finance  277

CS01-11/14     Financial Activity Statement for the Period Ended 30 September 2014  277

CS02-11/14     Execution of the Local Government Master Lending Agreement - Western Australian Treasury Corporation  290

CS03-11/14     Petition Requesting Rates be Reduced in Eglinton Area Due to Lack of Amenities  338

CS04-11/14     Change Valuation of Land Method - Various Properties  341

CS05-11/14     Review of Accounting Policy  345

CS06-11/14     Audited Annual Financial Statements for the Period Ended 30 June 2014  382

CS07-11/14     Warrant of Payments for the Period to 31 October 2014  457

Governance  524

CS08-11/14     Annual Report 2013/14  524

CS09-11/14     Donations to be considered by Council - November 2014  562

CS10-11/14     Ward Boundary Review - Consideration of Discussion Paper  566

CS11-11/14     Review of Council's Policies  595

Chief Executive Office  612

Office of the CEO Reports  612

CE01-11/14     Funding Submission - Flynn Drive, Neerabup Industrial Area - National Stronger Regions Fund  612

Item  9_____ Motions on Notice_ 617

MN01-11/14    Cr Domenic Zappa – Request for Traffic Treatments on Heathfield Drive Landsdale  617

MN02-11/14    Cr Sabine Winton – Trial for free use of Tennis Courts  620

Item  10____ Urgent Business_ 622

Item  11____ Confidential_ 622

Item  12____ Date of Next Meeting_ 622

Item  13____ Closure_ 622

 

 

Good evening Councillors, staff, ladies and gentlemen, we wish to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the land we are meeting on, the Whadjuk people.  We would like to pay respect to the Elders of the Nyoongar nation, past and present, who have walked and cared for the land and we acknowledge and respect their continuing culture and the contributions made to the life of this city and this region 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

Item  3      Public Question Time

Item  4      Confirmation of Minutes

That the minutes of Ordinary Council Meeting held on 14 October 2014 be confirmed subject to the following:-

 

Item CB01-10/14 be amended to reflect that the Alternative Motion moved by Cr Cvitan and Seconded by Cr Newton should include an additional motion as follows:-

 

"That Council:-

 

1.       APPROVES the Codes Variation Application submitted by Julian Coletta for a Single House at Lot 242 (71) Kemp Street, Pearsall, as depicted in Attachment 1 of this report; and

 

2.       DELEGATE BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY to Administration, in accordance with Delegation 8.3 of the Delegated Authority Register, the power to approve applications for planning approval and applicatons for variations to the Residential Design Codes (R. Codes) that propose open space variations, where such proposals are deemed to meet the Design Principles of Clause 5.1.4 'Open Space' of the R-Codes".

 

CARRIED BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY

11/0

 

Item  5      Announcements by the Mayor without Discussion

Item  6      Questions from Elected Members

 

Item  7      Petitions

New Petitions Received

Update on Petitions  

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

Policies and Studies

File Ref:                                              3446 – 14/148199

Responsible Officer:                           Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       3         

 

Issue

To consider the rescission of Local Planning Policy 'Calabrese Triangle – Statement of Intent' (Policy).

 

Background

The location in which this Policy (Policy area) has effect is demonstrated on the plan included as Attachment 1.

 

The Policy was initially prepared to guide the City in determining applications for rezoning and/or planning approval in respect of land within the Policy area. This guidance is provided through 12 'Statement' Items which Council shall have regard to, when considering applications for rezoning and/or Planning Approval.

 

The Policy was initially implemented on 1 July 1999; and after review in 2004, was adopted by Council at its meeting of 14 December 2004 (PD01-12/04). This Policy is now scheduled for review.

Detail

The Policy is included as Attachment 2. Administration considers that this Policy no longer serves a planning purpose, and therefore rather than undertake a further review of this Policy, it is considered that it should be rescinded for the reasons outlined in this report.

Consultation

Under the City's District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2), no consultation is required prior to Council rescinding a Local Planning Policy. However, once Council resolves to rescind a Local Planning Policy, it is required under Clause 8.11.4 of DPS 2 to publish notice of the rescission in two consecutive editions of a local newspaper circulating in the Scheme Area.

Comment

Administration recommends that this Policy is rescinded for the following reasons:

 

·        At the time that the Policy was initially adopted (July 1999), there were a number of lots within the Policy area that were yet to be developed. The Policy was intended at that time to provide development, zoning and access guidance for lots within the Policy area, guidance that was not provided for under the (then) Town Planning Scheme No. 1.  Now that all lots within the Policy area are developed, Administration considers that such Policy guidance is no longer necessary;

 

·        The Policy includes 12 'Statement' Items that Council shall have regard to, when considering applications for rezoning and/or Planning Approval. As outlined in Attachment 3, the 12 'Statement' Items outlined in the Policy are either a duplication of development standards in DPS 2, or are considered by Administration to be obsolete; and

 

·        The importance of Calabrese Triangle as an 'out-of-centre development' is acknowledged in the City's Local Planning Policy 3.2: Activity Centres (LPP 3.2). The rescission of the Policy itself will not undermine the importance of LPP 3.2.

 

Overall, the need to retain the Policy is not considered necessary, as it does not provide any purpose or direction that is not already available under DPS 2. Therefore, the existing Policy is superfluous to the orderly and proper planning needs of the locality.

Statutory Compliance

Rescission of Local Planning Policy 'Calabrese Triangle – Statement of Intent' is proposed to be carried out in accordance with Clause 8.11.4 of DPS 2.

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2013 – 2023:

 “4     Civic Leadership - Working with others to ensure the best use of our resources.

4.2    Working With Others - The community is a desirable place to live and work as the City works with others to deliver the most appropriate outcomes.”

Risk Management Considerations

Nil

Policy Implications

Local Planning Policy 'Calabrese Triangle – Statement of Intent' will have no further effect once it is rescinded.

Financial Implications

The costs of advertising the rescission of Local Planning Policy 'Calabrese Triangle – Statement of Intent' can be met from the Planning and Sustainability existing operational budget.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council, pursuant to Clause 8.11.4 (b) of District Planning Scheme No. 2, RESCINDS Local Planning Policy 'Calabrese Avenue – Statement of Intent' as contained in Attachment 2, and PUBLISHES a formal notice of Council’s rescission of this Policy in all local newspapers circulating within the Scheme Area for two consecutive editions.

 

Attachments:

1.	Attachment 1 - Policy Area -'Calabrese Triangle - Statement of Intent	14/178148
2.	Attachment 2 - Local Planning Policy - 'Calabrese Triangle - Statement of Intent'	14/178149	Minuted
3.	Attachment 3 - Table Outlining Statement of Intent Items are Obsolete	14/206167

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Development Applications

File Ref:                                              DA2014/1002 – 14/305261

Responsible Officer:                           Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       3         

 

Issue

To consider a development application for a proposed Single House Addition (Shed) at Lot 542 (14) Dumaresq Loop, Quinns Rocks.

 

Applicant	T/A Highline (Bluescope)
Owner	Mark Bremner
Location	Lot 542 (14) Dumaresq Loop, Quinns Rocks
Site Area	698m2
DPS 2 Zoning	Residential

 

 

Background

On 27 June 2014, the City received a development application for a shed as an addition to a Single House located at Lot 542 (14) Dumaresq Loop, Quinns Rocks. The subject lot is 698m² in area and is zoned 'Residential' with a residential density code of R20 under the City's District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS2).

Detail

The site plan and elevations depicting the proposal are included as Attachment 1. The proposed shed has a wall height of 2.4m, and a ridge height of 3.0m. It is 8.4m in length, 3.0m in width and is setback 0.5m from the southern and western lot boundaries. As the western and southern walls of the proposed shed are set back 0.5m from the property boundaries, under the Residential Design Codes (R-Codes), they are considered to be built  'up to a lot boundary' which is defined as a wall, on or less than 600mm from any lot boundary, other than a street boundary. The 'deemed-to-comply' provisions of the R-Codes (Clause 5.1.3 C3.2) requires walls which are built up to a lot boundary to be:

-     a maximum of 9.0m in length;

-     a maximum of 3.5m in height; and

-     built up to one (1) side boundary only on lots coded R20.

 

A portion of the existing dwelling on the subject site is built up to the southern lot boundary. This existing boundary wall is 6.0m in length. The proposed shed will result in an additional 8.4m boundary wall on the southern lot boundary, which will equate to a total length of 14.4m in length should the proposal be approved. The proposed shed will also result in a boundary wall on the western lot boundary which is 3.0m in length. As the two (2) southern boundary walls exceed 9.0m in length in aggregate, and boundary walls have been proposed to two (2) side boundaries in lieu of one (1), the shed does not meet the deemed-to-comply provisions of the R-Codes.

 

Local Planning Policy 2.1 (LPP 2.1) establishes standards deemed to meet the 'performance criteria' ('design principles') where discretion in exercised in the determination of applications for planning approval. LPP 2.1, however, does not set standards relating to sheds which are built up to lot boundaries and thus is not applicable for this application.

Consultation

Pursuant to Part 4.2 of the R-Codes, consultation was undertaken by the City in writing to the affected landowners adjoining the southern and western lot boundaries advising them of the proposal. The advertising period was for a period of 14 days commencing on 4 July 2014 and concluding on 18 July 2014. One (1) submission raising objections to the proposal was received from the landowners at Lot 542 (14) Dumaresq Loop, Quinns Rocks located adjoining the southern boundary of the subject lot. The adjoining landowners objected to the shed because building closer to the fence would impact on their entertainment area. The summary of submission is included as Attachment 2.

Comment

In accordance with Part 2 of the R-Codes, if a proposal does not meet the 'deemed-to-comply' provisions, the City is to exercise its judgement to consider the merits of the proposal having regard to the relevant 'design principles'. As the proposed shed does not meet the 'deemed-to-comply' requirements of Clause 5.1.3 C3.2 of the R-Codes, it has been assessed against the corresponding 'design principles' as detailed below.

 

Design Principles – Clause 5.1.3 P3.2	Administration Comments
Makes more effective use of space for enhanced privacy for the occupant/s or outdoor living areas;	The existing dividing fence is 1.7m in height above natural ground level on the subject lot. The height of the dividing fence was confirmed through a site visit. Under the City's Private Property Local Law 2001, a dividing fence is to be between 1.75m to 1.85m in height. The reduced height of the existing dividing fence may enable overlooking into the neighbouring properties. Building the proposed shed up to the lot boundaries will create a 2.4m high screening wall between the site and adjoining properties which will enhance privacy.
Does not compromise the design principle contained in clause 5.1.3 P3.1;	Reduce impacts of building bulk on adjoining properties. The impact of building bulk on the adjoining property is considered minimal as the shed wall is 2.4m in height. As the dividing fence is 1.7m in height, this would result in only 0.7m of the shed's wall protruding above the existing dividing fence. In addition, the R-Codes permit boundary walls of up to 3.5m in height. With this in mind the impact of the proposed shed in terms of building bulk on the adjoining property is considered minimal.   Provide adequate direct sun and ventilation to the building and open spaces on the site and adjoining properties. The existing dividing fence casts a shadow of 77.5m2 onto the adjoining southern property on 21 June. The proposed shed would only result in approximately 3.5m2 of additional overshadowing. Attachment 3 illustrates the overshadowing cast on the adjoining property. When considering that the outdoor living area of the southern adjoining property is  greater than 100m2, it is considered that an additional 3.5m2 of overshadowing will not compromise direct sun and ventilation to the site or adjoining property.   Minimise the extent of overlooking and resultant loss of privacy on adjoining properties. The floor level of the shed will remain the same as the existing natural ground level which will not increase the extent of overlooking and resultant loss of privacy on adjoining properties. In addition, building the proposed shed up to the lot boundaries will enhance the privacy for the outdoor living areas of the neighbouring properties by acting as screening.
Does not have any adverse impact on the amenity of the adjoining property;	Whilst the proposed shed will protrude 0.7m above the dividing fence and increase the overshadowing by 3.5m2, the extent of this impact is considered minor. This is because the outdoor living areas of both adjoining properties are  greater than 100m2 and are open to winter sun and ventilation which greatly exceeds the minimum 30m2 required under the R-Codes for lots coded R20. Furthermore, the proposed shed will enhance the privacy for the neighbouring properties and will have a negligible impact on the adjoining properties, as outlined above. It is therefore considered that the amenity of the adjoining properties is not compromised.
Ensures direct sun to major openings to habitable rooms and outdoor living areas for adjoining properties is not restricted; and	With the addition of the proposed shed, each adjoining property will have in excess of 100m2 of outdoor living area that is open to direct sunlight which greatly exceeds the requirement under the R-Codes. Furthermore, the proposed shed will not cause overshadowing of the existing dwellings on the adjoining properties.
Positively contributes to the prevailing development context and streetscape.	The shed is located to the rear of the subject property and cannot be viewed from the street. Therefore the shed will have no impact on the streetscape. A number of existing sheds and patios in similar locations have been constructed on neighbouring lots including 54, 52 and 56 Minatro Parade, 18 Dumaresq Loop and 9 Vulcan Place. The proposed shed is therefore considered to be consistent with neighbouring properties and positively contributes to the prevailing development context of the locality.

 

In light of the above, the proposed variation is considered to meet the 'design principles' of the R-Codes. The shed also satisfies all other relevant deemed-to-comply clauses of the R-Codes. It is therefore recommended that Council approve the proposed shed at Lot 542 (14) Dumaresq Loop, Quinns Rocks.

Statutory Compliance

This application has been assessed in accordance with the City of Wanneroo’s District Planning Scheme No. 2 and the Residential Design Codes.

 

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2013 – 2023:

 “2     Society - Healthy, safe, vibrant and active communities.

2.1    Great Places and Quality Lifestyle - People from different cultures find Wanneroo an exciting place to live with quality facilities and services.”

 

Risk Management Considerations

Nil

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       APPROVES the development application for the Single House Addition (Shed) at Lot 542 (14) Dumaresq Loop, Quinns Rocks, as shown in Attachment 1 of this report, pursuant to Clause 6.9.1 of District Planning Scheme No. 2 and subject to compliance with the following conditions to the satisfaction of the Manager Planning Implementation:-

a)   This approval only relates to the proposed Shed, as indicated on the attached site plan. It does not relate to any other development on the lot

b)   All stormwater shall be collected and retained on site.

2.       ADVISES the submitter of this decision.

 

 

Attachments:

1.	Site Plan and Elevation Plan	14/305620	Minuted
2.	Summary of Submission	14/316909
3.	Overshadowing Diagram	14/305787

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other Matters

File Ref:                                              4409 – 14/17682

Responsible Officer:                           Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       2         

 

Issue

To consider the release of the draft revised Yellagonga Integrated Catchment Management (YICM) Plan 2014-2019 for a three week public consultation period.

 

Background

The YICM Plan 2009-2014 was adopted by Council on 17 November 2009 (PS01-11/09) for the purpose of providing a 'whole of catchment' and integrated approach for the management of the Yellagonga Regional Park.

 

The Yellagonga Regional Park is a significant natural feature of both the City of Wanneroo and Joondalup. Since the YICM Plan commenced in 2009, it has provided a framework for both Cities to adequately monitor, manage and enhance the environmental values and overall health of the wetlands. The individual projects that make up the YICM Plan have all contributed to developing an understanding of the environmental and social aspects of the Yellagonga Regional Park and its surrounding natural areas, for example:

 

·        The Management Framework and Memorandum of Understanding has assisted in facilitating a coordinated and equitable approach to undertaking agreed YICM Plan projects between the Cities of Wanneroo and Joondalup;

 

·        The Yellagonga Resource Allocation Strategy has had a positive effect on the ongoing management of Yellagonga Regional Park;

 

·        The Water Quality Mapping and Monitoring Program has provided a reliable and ongoing source of data that in turn has resulted in recommendations for the improvement of water quality within the Yellagonga wetlands;

 

·        The Acid Sulphate Soils and Contaminated Sites investigations, as well as the implementation of the Conservation Maintenance Schedule have all commenced and are ongoing projects. They have produced positive on ground management actions that provide constant improvement in the health of the wetlands;

 

·        The Water Management Strategy has influenced the preparation of two new Local Planning Policies that ensure that planning and development within the City of Wanneroo optimises the use and management of urban water resources. These policies are Local Planning Policy 4.3: Public Open Space, and Local Planning Policy 4.4: Urban Water Management; and

 

·        The Green Frog Stencilling project was completed in 2011 in order to improve community awareness regarding contaminants entering the wetland through stormwater drains.

 

 

The Yellagonga Catchment Working Group was formed between the Cities of Wanneroo and Joondalup along with the Department of Parks and Wildlife in order to effectively coordinate all YICM Plan projects. As the timeframe of the original YICM Plan is nearing its end, the Working Group initiated the review of the YICM Plan at its meeting of 8 January 2014, and a new draft revised YICM Plan 2014 – 2019 (refer Attachment 1) has now been prepared for Council's consideration.

Detail

The draft revised YICM Plan is a continuation of the existing YICM Plan. The review of all of the YICM Plan projects has resulted in the identification of ongoing works to be completed through continuing projects, as well as new projects that will lead to continued improvement in the management and health of the Yellagonga wetlands.

 

Attachment 2 provides detail on the status of each existing YICM Plan project, and states whether a project is:

 

·        Recommended for continuation in the revised YICM Plan; or

·        The project has been completed.

 

Completed projects have been omitted from the draft revised Plan, and some existing projects have been merged with each other in order to produce a more coordinated approach to project management.

 

COMPLETED PROJECTS

 

Key projects that have been completed and therefore not included in the draft revised YICM Plan are:

 

·        Management Framework (MF) and Memorandum of Understanding (MoU): The MF and MoU were endorsed by both Cities at the beginning of the implementation of the YICM Plan. The MoU was signed by the Chief Executive Officers of both the Cities of Wanneroo and Joondalup and executed on 30 June 2011. The MF was signed by the City of Wanneroo's Director of Planning and Sustainability and by the City of Joondalup's Director of Governance and Strategy on 6 May 2011.

 

·        Resource Allocation Strategy (formerly Yellagonga Lobbying Strategy): A gap analysis and Resource Allocation Strategy schedule were prepared in liaison with the Department of Parks and Wildlife. The recommended tasks from this project have been reallocated under ongoing and future projects recommended for inclusion in the draft revised YICM Plan.

 

·        Yellagonga Environment Centre – Phase 2: A feasibility study for the Environment Centre was completed in February 2007, and presented to Council in March 2007 (PD06-03/07) for approval to advertise for public comment. Two preferred site options were identified, however, public advertising revealed a lack of consensus on the best site location for the Centre. Furthermore, investigations into funding options found a lack of grant funding opportunities from State and Federal Government to carry out the construction of the Centre.

 

          In its meeting on 20 November 2007, Council resolved to advise the City of Joondalup that the City of Wanneroo was not prepared to proceed with the project until such time as sufficient alternative funding resources had been identified (PD03-11/07). The construction of the Yellagonga Environment Centre has therefore not proceeded, and the availability for Government grant funding for the project has not changed. On this basis, the project is not included in the draft revised YICM Plan.

 

The individual City of Wanneroo projects that have been completed and therefore not included in the draft revised YICM Plan are:

 

·        Green Frog Stencilling: This was completed in 2011 with support from the Friends of Yellagonga.

 

·        Water Management Strategy: This YICM Plan project was completed with the endorsement of the City of Wanneroo's Local Planning Policy 4.3: Public Open Space in 2010, and Local Planning Policy 4.4: Urban Water Management in 2013.

 

These completed projects are listed as Key Achievements in Appendix 1 of the draft revised YICM Plan.

 

ONGOING PROJECTS

 

The draft revised YICM Plan also includes a number of ongoing projects that have already commenced and are recommended to continue in the draft revised YICM Plan. These generally include those projects that provide benefit to the health of the wetlands and their coordinated management by gathering information, improving management procedures, and maintaining and improving on ground works in and around the Regional Park.

 

These are all extensively detailed in Section 4 of the draft revised YICM Plan (refer Attachment 1) and detailed below:

 

·        Water Quality Monitoring Program: This joint project between the Cities of Wanneroo and Joondalup provides ongoing water quality data for the Yellagonga wetlands. The data is provided in yearly reports from Edith Cowan University that provide recommendations for the continual improvement of the water quality throughout the wetlands.

 

·        Water Conservation Project: This is a joint project that aims to address concerns with the quantity of groundwater that is available to the wetlands in order to sustain them. The scope of the project includes liaising with the Department of Parks and Wildlife, the Department of Water, and the Water Corporation in order to maintain sufficient water levels in the Yellagonga wetlands, specifically Lake Goollelal which was identified in previous Acid Sulphate Soils Investigations as a high priority for water level maintenance. The project also looks at ways to minimise and reduce groundwater usage in the surrounding area in order to make more groundwater available to the wetlands.

 

·        Midge Steering Group Partnership Research: This joint project, previously called 'Scientific Investigations', is undertaken in coordination with the Water Quality Monitoring Program and aims to better understand the factors that lead to high midge numbers. This project primarily aims to reduce midge numbers through improving the water quality of the Yellagonga wetlands.

 

·        Stormwater Management Plans: This is an individual City of Wanneroo project that involves the upgrade of stormwater infrastructure in the Yellagonga catchment in order to improve water quality in the wetlands.

 

NEW PROJECTS

 

The review of the existing YICM Plan has identified the need for a number of new projects. The new joint projects are:

 

·        Vegetated Bund Construction: The Water Quality Mapping and Monitoring Project identified the requirement for a feasibility study into the construction of an artificial, vegetated bund. If found to be feasible, the bund would be located south of Ocean Reef Road and north of Beenyup Swamp at the southern end of Lake Joondalup. The aim of vegetated bund would be to reduce nutrients entering Lake Joondalup through Beenyup Swamp by increasing the time that water spends in this section of the wetland. This project outlines the steps involved in determining the feasibility of constructing a vegetated bund in this location including funding, consultancy, planning and staging of the project.

 

·        Local Biodiversity Project: This is similar in title but different in function to the existing 'Local Biodiversity' project in the 2009 – 2014 YICM Plan. Where the previous 'Local Biodiversity' project provided a strategic approach to biodiversity conservation, this new project provides a more direct management and action based approach through the development of various management plans for the Regional Park, as well as the completion of much needed flora and fauna surveys.

 

·        Strategic Partnerships: This project aims to provide both Cities with the means to keep informed of new developments in integrated catchment management. The management of the Yellagonga wetlands will benefit from continual improvement in integrated catchment management activities as well as an increased knowledge of best practice approaches to integrated catchment management.

 

·        Acid Sulphate Soils Management: Following initial investigations into acid sulphate soils in the Yellagonga wetlands, it was decided that a coordinated approach to acid sulphate soil investigation and management was necessary. The project aims to identify the extent and severity of acid sulphate soils within the Yellagonga wetlands and develop management strategies to manage the impact of any disturbed acid sulphate soils.

 

The review of the YICM Plan has also identified a number of new individual projects for both Cities. The new individual City of Wanneroo projects are:

 

·        Yellagonga Ecotourism and Community Awareness Program: This project was previously split into two separate joint projects in the existing YICM Plan, the 'Yellagonga Community Awareness Program' and the 'Yellagonga EcoTourism and Events Plan'. These projects have been merged together in the draft revised YICM Plan given their similar scope, and that they were both actioned by the Conservation Maintenance Service Unit. The combined project provides an integrated approach to ecotourism and community awareness within and around the Yellagonga wetlands by developing and implementing education initiatives.

·        Planning Framework for the East Wanneroo Structure Plan Area: This project has been added to the draft revised YICM Plan upon consideration of the projected development within the East Wanneroo area. It is expected that the proposed urbanisation of East Wanneroo could potentially impact the health of local wetlands, including the Yellagonga Regional Park. To prepare for this, the City must have adequate input into the planning framework of the East Wanneroo Area so as to avoid and minimise the potential environmental impacts of development. This project provides the basis for input of broader environmental considerations into the preparation of the Planning Framework for the East Wanneroo Structure Plan Area by outlining key documents and planning mechanisms that require direction on environmental matters.

 

Consultation

The draft revised YICM Plan was presented to the Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC) on 10 June 2014 where a number of comments and proposed modifications to the Plan were provided. Administration's response to these comments and proposed modifications is detailed below.

 

EAC Comments	Administration Response
There is a need to include specific targets for individual Projects within the Plan to ensure accurate and detailed annual reporting.	All YICM Plan Projects have been updated to include specific targets.   The annual reporting process will provide updates on the progress of all YICM Plan projects relative to these targets.
Objective Statements presented in Table 3 of the Plan are too broad and may result in ineffective outcomes and a waste of effort and resources. Objective Statements should be amended to be more specific to desired outcomes.	The Objective Statements presented in Table 3 of the Plan are intentionally broad so as to reflect overall outcomes for the entire set of Projects within the Plan. More specific objectives for each project are detailed in Part 4 of the revised YICM Plan.

 

 

The draft revised YICM Plan is also being considered by the City of Joondalup Council at its meeting on 18 November 2014.

 

If endorsed by both Councils, the draft revised YICM Plan will be advertised for public comment for a period of 21 days by way of:

 

·        Advertisement in a local newspaper for two consecutive weeks;

 

·        Display on the City’s website and at City libraries; and

 

·        Letters to relevant stakeholders, primarily State Government departments.

 

Following closure of the public comment period, any submissions received will be considered in the development of a final draft version of the revised YICM Plan. The final version of the revised YICM Plan will then be reported to both Councils for formal endorsement.

Comment

The existing YICM Plan provided a starting point for the integrated management of the Yellagonga wetlands between the Cities of Wanneroo and Joondalup. The review of the existing YICM Plan has clearly identified the need for a new revised YICM Plan to build on the research work already completed, continue established programs and management regimes, and to begin to implement many of the recommendations from the current Plan.

 

The projects that have been included in the draft revised YICM Plan have undergone extensive consideration, and have been selected based on their likely contribution to the improvement of the management and overall health of the Yellagonga Regional Park.

 

Projects that have been omitted are either complete, or have been merged with ongoing projects that share broader objectives and scope.

 

Ongoing projects included in the draft revised YICM Plan are those that continue data collection programs or contribute to the improvement of cooperative management practices.

 

New projects have been added to the draft revised YICM Plan based on recommendations from existing projects and the recognition that some areas of integrated wetland management were absent in the existing Plan. In particular, the 'Strategic Partnerships' project looks at how management practices can improve over time, and how the Cities of Wanneroo and Joondalup can provide best practice management techniques to the Yellagonga wetlands.

 

It is proposed that the YICM Plan continues from 2014 until 2019 so that further studies can be conducted into the health and function of the wetland. Information collected through these means will then be used to formulate and implement management strategies for the wetlands in order to improve their health, as well as provide essential community engagement and awareness through the implementation of ecotourism and environmental education initiatives.

 

If adopted, the YICM Plan (2014 – 2019) would be implemented by a number of Service Units within the City of Wanneroo and in partnership with the City of Joondalup.

Statutory Compliance

Nil

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2013 – 2023:

 “1     Environment - A Healthy and sustainable natural and built environment

1.1    Environmentally Friendly - You will be part of a community that has a balance of environmentally friendly development and conservation areas for future generations to enjoy”

 

Risk Management Considerations

There are no risks associated with the endorsement of the YICM Plan by Council. There are however a number of potential risks associated with the Plan not being approved, these include:

 

·        A decline in the water quality of the wetlands due to a lack of projects such as Water Quality Monitoring, Acid Sulphate Soils Management, and Vegetated Bund Construction;

·        Increased midge numbers in the wetlands leading to increased nuisance midge complaints received by the City;

·        A decline in the overall awareness of residents and business owners on the impacts of contaminants entering the wetlands;

·        A decline in perceived public perception of the City if it is decided that it is no longer involved in monitoring and managing the health of the Yellagonga wetlands through an integrated Plan; and

·        A negative impact on the relationship between the Cities of Wanneroo and Joondalup.

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

The cost of implementing City of Wanneroo projects within the YICM Plan is met by the operational budgets of the responsible service units listed in the Plan. The scope of each individual project only includes actions that are consistent with the standard operations of the responsible service units. Individual City of Wanneroo projects are therefore not projected to have any further financial implications requiring specific budget allocations. External funding for some joint projects will be sought where possible.

 

However, there are a number of joint projects that will require additional funding consideration. Projects that will require funding as part of the annual budget process include:

 

·        Water Quality Monitoring Program – The annual cost of this project is yet to be confirmed, but is estimated at $25,000 based on the budget allocation from previous years. This project is currently identified in the City's budget for 2014/15;

 

·        Vegetated Bund Construction – This project will investigate the viability of constructing a vegetated bund to improve the quality of water entering the wetland. Initial costs to determine feasibility are still being investigated and, if applicable, will need to be listed for consideration in the City Growth operational budget for the 2015/16 financial year.  If determined to be feasible the costs of implementation, once known, will be subject to future Council consideration and endorsement; and

 

·        Acid Sulphate Soils Management – The annual cost of this project is yet to be confirmed, but is estimated at $10,000 based on the budget allocation for the 2014/ 2015 financial year. This project is currently identified in the City's budget for 2014/15.

 

These costs represent the City of Wanneroo's contribution, with the City of Joondalup contributing equal amounts for each project. Detailed funding for projects will need to be considered as part of the annual budget process. External funding for some projects will be sought, where possible.

 

The cost of advertising the draft revised YICM Plan for public comment will be met from City Growth's operational budget.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council APPROVES the advertising of the Draft Yellagonga Integrated Catchment Management Plan 2014 – 2019 for a period of 21 days by way of:

 

1.       Advertisement in a local newspaper for two consecutive weeks;

 

2.       Display on the City’s website and at City libraries; and

 

3.       Letters to relevant stakeholders, primarily State Government departments.

 

 

Attachments:

1.	Draft Revised Yellagonga Integrated Catchment Management Plan 2014 - 2019	14/273593
2.	Yellagonga Integrated Catchment Management Plan Review Table	14/313319

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

File Ref:                                              14541 – 14/294823

Responsible Officer:                           Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       5         

 

Issue

To consider the permanent closure of a portion of a pedestrian access way (PAW) at Lot 56 (15P) Clyde Court, Wanneroo.

 

Background

Drescher and Associates (the proponent) on behalf of the landowners of Lot 141 (14) and Lot 142 (15) Clyde Court have sought to close a portion of a PAW formally known as Lot 56 (15P) Clyde Court, Wanneroo, and amalgamate this land into the adjoining road reserve. The portion of the PAW proposed to be closed abuts Lot 141 and Lot 142 Clyde Court, as shown on the plan included as Attachment 1.

 

The PAW has a width of 0.1 metres (10 centimetres). Rather than function as land used for pedestrian access, the PAW acts to restrict vehicular access from Calabrese Avenue to Lot 141 and Lot 142. The PAW was created following subdivision approval (that created adjoining Lot 141 and Lot 142), issued by the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) in December 1995.

 

The landowners of Lot 141 and 142 Clyde Court, together with the landowners of Lot 143 Clyde Court have lodged an amendment to the City's District Planning Scheme (Amendment No. 131), which was adopted at the 14 October 2014 Council Meeting (PS04-10/14). Amendment No. 131 proposes to recode Lot 141, Lot 142 and Lot 143 Clyde Court from R5 to R20. Should Amendment No. 131 be adopted by the Minister for Planning, each lot would then be capable of being subdivided into four separate land parcels.

 

A resolution of Council is required that supports the closure of the PAW and its amalgamation with the adjoining road reserve. Should Council resolve to approve the closure of the PAW, the City is required to seek the endorsement of the Western Australian Planning Commission prior to referring the proposal to the Minister for Lands for final approval.

 

At its Meeting of 14 October 2014 (PS07-10/14), Administration presented this matter to Council for its consideration. However, Council resolved the following:

 

That the motion be referred back to Administration for further information in relation to a matter raised in a deputation.

 

That matter referred to above relates to the extent of the PAW that Administration was recommending that Council support closing. A deputation made by the landowner of Lot 142 (15) Clyde Court sought Council to support an increased extent of the PAW to close, to maximise vehicular access opportunities from Calabrese Avenue onto their lot. Administration's response to this matter is outlined in the 'Comment' section, below.

Detail

It is proposed to close a portion of the PAW at Lot 56 (15P) Clyde Court, Wanneroo and amalgamate a portion of this land parcel with the adjoining road reserve.

 

 

Currently, the PAW acts as a mechanism to lawfully restrict vehicular access onto Lot 141 and Lot 142 from Calabrese Avenue. The purpose of the proposed closure is to allow for lawful access from Calabrese Avenue onto Lot 141 and Lot 142 Clyde Court, or land parcels that may be created following subdivision of those lots.

 

The portion of the PAW proposed to be closed is 0.1 metres wide, approximately 86 metres in length and a total area of approximately 8.6 square metres. There is no visible distinction between the PAW land parcel and the adjoining road reserve. Due to the dimensions of the PAW and the purpose for which it was created, it does not contain any of the typical pedestrian facilities seen on most PAW's, such as footpaths.

 

The PAW land parcel is zoned 'Residential' R5 under DPS 2. The PAW land parcel is not proposed to be recoded to R20 under Amendment 131 to DPS 2.

Consultation

In accordance with the Land Administration Act 1997, Administration arranged the publication of a notice in the Wanneroo Times on 22 April 2014, inviting comment for a 35 day time period concluding on 27 May 2014.

 

Administration undertook public consultation by way of sending letters to nearby landowners. Letters were also sent to relevant government agencies and service authorities as listed below:

 

·        Department of Lands

·        Water Corporation

·        Western Power

·        ATCO Gas Australia

·        Telstra

·        Western Australian Planning Commission

·        Main Roads Western Australia

 

A summary of the comments received from surrounding landowners, servicing authorities and government agencies is included as Attachment 2.

Comment

Local Planning Policy Considerations

 

Administration has considered the proposed closure of the portion of the PAW with reference to the City's Local Planning Policy for Pedestrian Access Ways. The proposed closure would accord with the provisions of this Policy, as pedestrian access would still be maintained through the adjoining Calabrese Avenue road reserve.

 

The Policy also requires Council to consider other matters when a PAW closure is proposed, such as anti-social behaviour and availability of alternative access. These considerations are not relevant as the PAW already presents as part of the Calabrese Avenue road reserve.

 

Assessment of the Proposal

 

The portion of the PAW proposed to be closed has a length of approximately 86 metres, all of which directly abuts a road reserve. A length of only 68 metres directly abuts the Calabrese Avenue carriageway, with the remaining length abutting an unnamed road reserve that does not presently provide for a road. This road reserve adjoins to the existing Wanneroo Road road reserve; and therefore there is a potential for a road to be constructed on this road reserve to intersect with Wanneroo Road (refer to Attachment 3).

 

The construction of a road within this road reserve (or an intersection with Wanneroo Road) is not included in the 10 year capital works program.

 

Should any road (and its intersection with Wanneroo Road) be constructed in the future, then vehicular access into Lot 141 and Lot 142 should be provided, so that access does not conflict with the possible intersection. In its previous Report on this matter (PS07-10/14), Administration considered that the closure of the PAW to the extent as shown on the plan included in Attachment 4 was appropriate to avoid conflict with the possible intersection.

 

On reconsideration of the matter, and in consultation with the landowner of Lot 142 Clyde Court, Administration supports an increased portion of the PAW being closed for the extent shown on the plan included as Attachment 5. The increased extent of PAW closure has been reconsidered to allow for greater vehicular access opportunities onto lots that could be created through further subdivision of Lot 142 Clyde Court. In Administration's opinion, increasing the extent of the PAW that can be closed would still allow for the design and construction of an intersection that avoids conflict with vehicular access points from Calabrese Avenue onto Lot 142 Clyde Court.

                                                  

The current traffic volumes on Calabrese Avenue north of St. Fillans Bend do not warrant the need to restrict vehicular access onto Lot 141 and Lot 142 Clyde Court. Closing the PAW would enable vehicular access onto the land which is currently Lot 141 and Lot 142 Clyde Court. If the PAW was not closed, and Amendment No. 131 was finally adopted, the lots created through subsequent subdivision of Lot 141 and Lot 142 could potentially have a battle-axe configuration. However, closing the PAW would allow the option for lots created through subdivision of Lot 141 and Lot 142 to have vehicular access from either Calabrese Avenue and/or Clyde Court.

Statutory Compliance

The City must comply with Section 58 of the Land Administration Act 1997 and Regulation 9 of the Land Administration Regulations 1998, dealing with public advertising, objections and service agency responses to the proposed PAW closure.

 

The Department of Lands has advised that, where a local authority makes a request under Section 58 of the Land Administration Act 1997, the local authority must indemnify the Minister for Lands in respect of that closure.

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2013 – 2023:

 “4     Civic Leadership - Working with others to ensure the best use of our resources.

4.2    Working With Others - The community is a desirable place to live and work as the City works with others to deliver the most appropriate outcomes.”

 

Risk Management Consideration

Council's decision to close (or not close) the PAW is not considered to raise any specific risk management concerns for the City as the current traffic volumes on Calabrese Avenue north of St. Fillans Bend do not warrant the need to restrict vehicular access onto Lot 141 and Lot 142 Clyde Court.

 

Policy Implications

The request to close the PAW has been considered in reference to the City's Local Planning Policy for Pedestrian Access Ways.

 

The Department of Planning has prepared a 'Procedure for the Closure of Pedestrian Access Ways – Planning Guidance' (the Procedure), which provides guidance to process and assess requests to close PAW's. The Procedure outlines the role and process of the local government, Western Australian Planning Commission and the Department of Lands when considering requests to close PAW's.

 

The Procedure outlines one of two processes that should be followed when considering a request to close a PAW. The first being when the PAW closure request is in accordance with a WAPC endorsed pedestrian and cycle access plan, and the second being when there is no WAPC endorsed pedestrian and cycle access plan. As there is no WAPC endorsed pedestrian and cycle access plan that affects the PAW, the process as below should be followed:

 

·        The local government receives a request to close a PAW;

 

·        The local government refers the PAW closure request to relevant infrastructure providers and other relevant agencies;

 

·        The local government consults the community likely to be affected by the PAW closure using two or more of the following methods that it considers appropriate:

 

o  placement of signs at either end of the pedestrian access way advising of the proposal to close the pedestrian access way;

o  press release and advertisement in the local newspaper and other media (the advertisement in the newspaper is required under Section 58 of the Land Administration Act 1997);

o  direct mail out to households likely to be affected by the closure;

o  liaison with local community groups;

o  stakeholder workshops;

o  information sessions and discussion groups;

o  questionnaire surveys; and

o  public displays.

 

Administration considered the use of an advertisement in the Wanneroo Times and a direct mail out to potentially affected households as appropriate forms of consultation in this instance.

 

·        The local government then assesses the proposal. Council would then resolve to close (or not close) the PAW, and advise all affected landowners of its decision.

 

Should Council resolve to approve the closure of the PAW, the City is required to seek the endorsement of the Western Australian Planning Commission prior to referring the proposal to the Minister for Lands for final approval.

Financial Implications

Nil

 

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

 

1.       NOTES the submissions received as summarised in Attachment 2 in respect to the proposed closure of a portion of the pedestrian access way formally known as Lot 56 (15P) Clyde Court, Wanneroo, and ENDORSES Administration's responses to those submissions;

 

2.       SUPPORTS the closure of the portion of the pedestrian access way formally known as Lot 56 (15P) Clyde Court, Wanneroo, identified in Attachment 5, and FORWARDS the proposal to the Western Australian Planning Commission for its endorsement;

 

3.       Subject to the closure of the pedestrian access way formally known Lot 56 (15P) Clyde Court, Wanneroo being endorsed by the Western Australian Planning Commission, AUTHORISES Administration to request the Minister for Lands to amalgamate the pedestrian access way formally known as Lot 56 (15P) Clyde Court, Wanneroo, as identified in Attachment 5, into the adjoining road reserve;

 

4.       INDEMNIFIES the Minister for Lands against any claim for compensation arising from the closure; and

 

5.       ADVISES the proponent and submitters of its decision.

 

 

Attachments:

1.	Location Plan - Closure of 0.1 metre PAW - Lot 56 Clyde Court, Wanneroo.pdf	14/91071
2.	Attachment 2 - Summary of Submissions - Proposed PAW Closure - Clyde Court, Wanneroo	14/239787	Minuted
3.	Attachment 3 - Proposed PAW Closure - Portion Lot 56 Clyde Court	14/176071
4.	Attachment 4 - Administration's Previous Support - Proposed PAW Closure - Clyde Court	14/265662
5.	Attachment 5 - Extent of Support of PAW Closure - Clyde Court	14/301464	Minuted

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

City Businesses

Regulatory Services

File Ref:                                              2323V04 – 14/274411

Responsible Officer:                           Director City Businesses

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil       

 

Issue

To consider four 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

Four applications have been made under the Dog Act 1976 and are submitted for consideration. Each application has been assessed against the City's Application to Keep More than Two Dogs Guidelines and Scoresheet.

 

As part of the assessment process, Rangers have inspected all of the properties to ensure means exist on the premises at which the dogs will ordinarily be kept for effectively confining the dogs within the premises.

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.

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: 37 Waldburg Drive, Tapping

 

Description of Dogs:	1.       Female black/white Chihuahua - sterilised 2.       Female tri-colour Kelpie X - sterilised 3.       Male black/white Border Collie X – sterilised
Property Zoning / Size:	Residential / 603m2
Objections:	One (four neighbours consulted)

 

The applicants are seeking permission from the City to keep three dogs at 37 Waldburg Drive, Tapping. The applicants would like to keep three dogs at the property as they have had three dogs registered with the City for a number of years and didn't realise that they needed approval.

 

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 indoors and outdoors at night.

 

Upon consultation with neighbouring properties one objection was received regarding barking and yapping made by the dogs on the property. The objection is unsubstantiated as the City has no history or records to support the claim.

 

A check of the City's records reveal that prior to this application, two complaints had been lodged with regard to the number of dogs at this property. The applicant subsequently submitted the application soon after the complaint. The complainant was the neighbour that objected to this application. In addition, four complaints had been lodged with regard to alleged barking dogs; none of the complaints have been substantiated. The complainant was the neighbour that objected to this application.

 

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

 

Application Two: 30 Dressler Way, Girrawheen

 

Description of Dogs:	1.       Female tan/white Jack Russell - sterilised 2.       Female tan/white Jack Russell - sterilised 3.       Male black/white Siberian Husky - unsterilised
Property Zoning / Size:	Residential / 687m2
Objections:	One (three neighbours consulted)

 

The applicant is seeking permission from the City to keep three dogs at 30 Dressler Way, Girrawheen. The applicant would like to keep three dogs at the property as she has moved in with her brother, who owns one dog, when she moved from Melbourne to Perth.

 

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 outside at night.

 

 Upon consultation with neighbouring properties one objection was received regarding barking and yapping made by the dogs on the property. The objection is unsubstantiated as the City has no history or records to support the claim.

 

A check of the City's records reveal that prior to this application, one complaint had been lodged with regard to the number of dogs at this property. The applicant subsequently submitted the application soon after the complaint.

The complainant was the neighbour that objected to this application. In addition, the neighbour that objected to this application also lodged two complaints with regard to alleged barking dogs and animal welfare; neither of these complaints has been substantiated.

 

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

 

Application Three: 12 Farnham Pass, Alkimos

 

Description of Dogs:	1.       Male apricot/white Maltese ShihTsu Poodle X -       sterilized 2.       Male black Maltese ShihTsu Poodle X - sterilized 3.       Male black Flat Coat Retriever – sterilised 4.      Female Golden Labradoodle – sterilised
Property Zoning / Size:	Residential / 510m2
Objections:	Nil (two neighbours consulted)

 

The applicant is seeking permission from the City to keep four dogs at 12 Farnham Pass, Alkimos. The applicant would like to keep four dogs at the property as she has temporarily moved in with her parents since her move back to Perth from Denmark WA.

 

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 inside 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 had 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 Four: 23 Turnatt Way, Wanneroo

 

Description of Dogs:	1.       Male red/white Ridgeback Heeler - sterilised 2.       Male white/tan Maltese ShihTsu X - sterilised 3.       Male wheat Wolfhound X - sterilised
Property Zoning / Size:	Residential / 711m2
Objections:	One (four neighbours consulted)

 

The applicant is seeking permission from the City to keep three dogs at 23 Turnatt Way, Wanneroo. The applicant would like to keep three dogs at the property as she recently rescued the third elderly dog from the pound.

 

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.

 

Upon consultation with neighbouring properties one objection was received regarding barking and yapping made by the dogs on the property. The objection is unsubstantiated as the City has no history or records to support the claim.

 

A check of the City’s records reveals that prior to this application being made no complaints had 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 aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2013 – 2023:

 “2     Society - Healthy, safe, vibrant and active communities.

2.3    Safe Communities - We feel safe at home and in our local area.”

Risk Management Considerations

Nil

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:

37 Waldburg Drive, Tapping;

30 Dressler Way, Girrawheen;

12 Farnham Pass, Alkimos; and

23 Turnatt Way, Wanneroo;

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;

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

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

 

 

Attachments: Nil  

 

Property

File Ref:                                              15923 – 14/182996

Responsible Officer:                           Director City Businesses

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       1         

 

Issue

To consider entering into a land lease with the Department of Environment Regulation (DER) over a 111m² portion of Lot 211, Quinns Road, Mindarie for a ten (10) year period commencing 1 March 2015.

 

Background

An Air Quality Monitoring Station (AQMS) facility is currently located on a portion of Lot 211, Quinns Road, Mindarie (Attachment 1 refers).

 

Lot 211 comprises an area of 78,070m² and is owned in freehold by the City under Certificate of Title Volume 485 Folio 181A. It is zoned 'Parks and Recreation' under the Metropolitan Regional Scheme and 'Regional Parks and Recreation' in the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No.2.

 

The AQMS was established on a portion of Lot 211 in 1992 as part of the Perth Photochemical Smog Study. Whilst the monitoring phase of the study was completed in 1995, the DER's findings were such that the subject AQMS was considered an important component of the monitoring network across the Perth metropolitan area, particularly for ground level ozone measurement, and hence was kept operational. It has been located within the boundary of Lot 211 at various locations since its inception and no formal lease arrangement was entered into with the City until 2005.

 

Council, at its Ordinary Council Meeting of 31 August 2004 (Item CS07-08/04) resolved to lease a 111m² portion of Lot 211 to the DER for the purpose of the installation, operation and maintenance of an AQMS for a term of ten (10) years at its current location, due north-east of the Quinns Rocks Caravan Park and south of Bush Forever Site 397, both of which are located on Lot 211.

 

The ten (10) year land lease term commenced 1 March 2005 and will expire 28 February 2015.

 

The AQMS facility currently consists of a transportable shed with a 10 metre high meteorological mast and a concrete pathway accessed from double entry gates attached to a 1.8 metre perimeter cyclone style fence that secures the infrastructure within the compound. Also included in the leased area is an un-fenced double concrete crossover that leads up to the enclosed compound from the City's public car park and an 12m² rectangular area to the south to allow for an adequate vegetation screen. The compound has its own independent power and water supply. The leased area is fairly inconspicuous due to its comparative small size and it is located a sufficient distance away from the other tenancies operating on Lot 211, namely the Portofino's Cafe & Restaurant and the Quinns Mindarie Surf Life Saving Club (Inc.) to have any negative effect on the other users of Lot 211. It also has no direct impact on the Quinns Rocks Caravan Park that currently has one tenant (due to vacate no later than 30 November 2014) and will close for redevelopment.

 

The DER has requested a new land lease for the AQMS facility as it is an important component in its air quality monitoring network for the Perth metropolitan area.

Detail

Under the City’s current Tenancy Policy, the DER is classified as a 'Government' entity, which means, according to the policy, that the method of dealing is to be 'By Negotiation'. The DER is a statutory body being a State Agency.

 

When a lease arrangement is negotiated over City land and the improvements to the land are to be (or have been) constructed either in their entirety or predominately by the lessee, and the City has no requirement for such improvements to remain on the land at the expiration or sooner determination of the lease, then the lease shall be a land lease.

 

Under the terms of the existing land lease agreement, the annual rent payable by the DER is $1 peppercorn. However, a special condition in the current lease outlines the requirement for the DER to pay an annual sum of $200 towards the City's costs in administering the land lease. The new draft land lease proposes an annual administration fee of $500.

 

As part of the lease negotiation process for the proposed new land lease, effective 1 March 2015 and in keeping with the direction outlined in the City's Tenancy Policy, a formal proposal was presented to the DER on 11 July 2014, detailing the essential terms of the proposed new land lease, subject to Council approval:

 

Land Lease Premises:	111m2 area of Lot 211 currently occupied by the Air Quality Monitoring Station facility as hachured on the plan (Attachment 1 refers)
Lease Term:	Ten (10) years
Commencement Date:	1 March 2015
Administration Fee:	$500.00 (plus GST) per annum (with annual CPI reviews to apply)
Lease Rental:	$1 peppercorn per annum
Termination Clause:	Lessor can terminate the lease with 6 months written notice
Permitted Purpose:	Operation and maintenance of an Air Quality Monitoring Station
Rates & Taxes*1:	Lessee responsibility
Outgoings (Water, Electricity Etc.)	Lessee responsibility
Outgoings (telephone & broadband):	Lessee responsibility
Insurances:(including Contents, Building & Public Liability):	Lessee responsibility. PLI to be minimum $20 million
Maintenance:	Lessee responsibility
Cleaning:	Lessee responsibility
Structural:	Lessee responsibility
Fencing and Screening:	Lessee responsibility
Lessee to make good:	As the proposed arrangement is a land lease, the City is not required to budget for the asset replacement of the structure. The lease will provide that at the expiration or sooner determination of the lease, the lessee shall remove all improvements and leave the land in a clean and level condition.

 

*¹ Note that Section 6.26(2)(a)(i) of the Local Government Act 1995 states that land being used or held for a public purpose is not rateable land and therefore the DER is exempt from paying Council Rates.

 

The DER agreed to the above essential terms and the draft lease agreement in writing on 6 October 2014.

Consultation

The essential terms of the proposed land lease have been prepared in consultation with the DER.

 

Administration confirms that there is no plan for the City to develop the subject portion of freehold Lot 211 in the immediate future and therefore support the terms of the lease.

 

Western Australian Planning Commission approval to the proposed new land lease under Section 136 of the Planning and Development Act 2005 is not required as the proposed term is less than twenty (20) years.

Comment

The DER had requested that a peppercorn land lease arrangement be entered into as per its other AQMS arrangements in place with other local governments as the information collected from its various facilities is used to provide data on Perth air quality for the National Environmental Protection Measure (NEPM) and provided to the public at no cost. It has advised that it has no budget to pay a lease fee. However, as Lot 211 is owned in freehold by the City and located on a prime coastal site, Administration has negotiated that the DER provide an annual administrative fee of $500 (plus GST) per annum (with annual CPI reviews to apply) in lieu of a rental payment. This annual administrative fee will cover the cost of the in-house time of preparing the new land lease and its ongoing management.

 

Administration is of the opinion that the 111m² portion of Lot 211 utilised as an AQMS site is not of significant benefit to anyone other than the existing lessee in the immediate future.

The City has no requirement for the improvements made on the subject portion of Lot 211 and therefore at the expiration of the proposed land lease or sooner determination of the lease, the DER at its cost will be liable to remove the AQMS infrastructure and make good the land.

 

The proposed land lease to the DER is in a somewhat isolated position and is regarded as having no detrimental effect on any immediate development of Lot 211 or on any other existing users of Lot 211, namely the Quinns Rocks Caravan Park, Quinns Mindarie Surf Life Saving Club (Inc.) and Portofinos Cafe & Restaurant.

 

Whilst the landscaping cover of the facility has deteriorated over the years, Administration has requested that the DER implement a new landscaping project to beautify the southern boundary of the site to a reasonable standard and act as a more aesthetic visual screen.

Statutory Compliance

It should be noted that in accordance with the Planning and Development Act 2005, any lease of, or the granting of a licence to occupy City freehold land for a term exceeding twenty (20) years (including any options to extend or renew) will generally require the approval of the WAPC. As the proposed land lease is for a term of ten (10) years only, the City is not required to seek WAPC approval in this instance.

 

Under the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 Regulation 30, the proposed lease to the DER is an exempt disposition of property to which section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995 does not apply:

 

·        Regulation 30 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 states:

 

"30. Dispositions of property excluded from Act s. 3.58

 

(1)  A disposition that is described in this regulation as an exempt disposition is excluded from the application of section 3.58 of the Act.

 

(2)  A disposition of land is an exempt disposition if –

 

(c)  the land is disposed of to –

 

(i)         the Crown in right of the State or the Commonwealth; or

 

(ii)        a department, agency, or instrumentality of the Crown in right of the State of the Commonwealth".

The 111m² portion of Lot 211 is being disposed of by way of lease from the City to the DER and is therefore is an exempt disposition as per the above legislation.

In lieu of the above, the City is not required to advertise as per section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995 as it meets the exempt disposition requirements of Regulation 30 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996.

 

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2013 – 2023:

 “4     Civic Leadership - Working with others to ensure the best use of our resources.

4.2    Working With Others - The community is a desirable place to live and work as the City works with others to deliver the most appropriate outcomes.”

 

Risk Management Considerations

Nil

Policy Implications

Under the terms of the City’s Tenancy Policy, lease negotiations with entities classified as 'Government' are to be 'by Negotiation'. The DER is a 'Government' entity and has advised that as the information obtained on-site is provided to the public at no cost it has no budget for an annual lease fee. However in consideration that the subject AQMS is located on City freehold land, the DER has agreed to pay an annual $500 (plus GST) administration fee with annual CPI increment increases to the City. All other aspects of the proposed land lease have been negotiated in line with the terms of the City's Tenancy Policy and Management Procedure.

Financial Implications

The proposed lease administration charge will guarantee an annual income stream of $500 (plus GST) per annum with annual CPI increment increases on a pro rata cost recovery basis.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       APPROVES the land lease of a 111m² portion of City freehold Lot 211, Quinns Road, Mindarie as per Attachment 1 to the Department of Environment Regulation for a term of ten (10) years commencing 1 March 2015 in accordance with the City's Tenancy Policy for a 'Government' entity; and

2.       AUTHORISES the affixing of the Common Seal of the City of Wanneroo to a land lease between the City and the Department of Environment Regulation in          accordance with the City's Execution of Documents Policy.

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1 - land lease area

14/185724

Minuted

  

File Ref:                                              14812 – 14/301746

Responsible Officer:                           Director City Businesses

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       3  

Previous Items:                                   IN02-10/14 Report IN02-10/14 Resolution - Old Yanchep Road State BlackSpot Project - Advice of Status - Ordinary Council - 14 Oct 2014 7:00pm      

 

Issue

To consider dedicating portions of Reserve 20432 (Wattle Park) and Reserve 11598 (Pinjar Park), and Lots 1 (1731) and 601 (1771) Old Yanchep Road, Pinjar as road reserve for the upgrade of Old Yanchep Road.

 

Background

The City was previously successful in seeking State Black Spot funding for the upgrading and realignment of a 2.87 km section of Old Yanchep Road from Wattle Avenue to Ziatas Road in Pinjar ("the Old Yanchep Road Project") (Attachment 1 refers). 

 

The status of the Black Spot funding was the subject of report IN01-10/14 on 14 October 2014.  Council resolved as follows:

 

          "That Council:-

 

          1.       AGREES to not proceed with construction of the Old Yanchep Road State BlackSpot project (PR-2598) between Ziatas Road and Wattle Avenue for which grant funding is spread over the 2013/2014 and 2014/2015 financial years due to cost implications and timeline constraints associated with required service authority relocations, land acquisition and, environmental and development approvals;

          2.       ADVISES Main Roads WA that the City of Wanneroo will not be proceeding with the construction of Old Yanchep Road State BlackSpot project during 2014/2015 (Stage 2) and that:

a)         The unspent portion of the Stage 1 first 40% claim of $104,000 is to be retained by the City in support of completion of design related activities, with any balance of this amount to be adjusted as part of the 2014/2015 Mid Year Budget Review when final costs will be known; and

b)         The balance of Stage 1 funding unclaimed (ie: $156,000) and all of Stage 2 funding unclaimed (ie: $1,140,000) be released from future claim by the City of Wanneroo;

          3.       NOTES that design and documentation is to be completed during 2014/2015  (PR-2598) to enable Western Power to commence its detailed design relating to its services impacted by the proposed works, land acquisition to be finalised and, environmental and development approvals to be sought;

          4.       NOTES that funding submissions have been made for both the 2015/2016 Australian Government and State BlackSpot Grant programs on the basis of two sections of Old Yanchep Road, namely;

a)         Old Yanchep Road (Pederick Road to Trandos Road) at a project value of $2.67M; and

b)         Old Yanchep Road (Trandos Road to Wattle Avenue) at a project value of $1.851M; and

         

 

          5.       NOTES that an adjustment will be required to the City of Wanneroo 10 Year Roadworks Program to reflect the outcomes of the funding submissions outlined in Item 4.5."  

 

The design for the Old Yanchep Road Project identified land acquisition requirements from adjacent properties to facilitate the realignment of road bends.

Detail

There are four properties affected by the land acquisition requirements.  The relevant land requirement plans are attached (Attachments 2 and 3 refer).

 

The details of the properties affected by the land acquisition requirements are as follows:

 

1.       Wattle Park (Reserve 20432, 610 Wattle Avenue East, Neerabup, being Lot 2704 on Deposited Plan 89747, and being the land comprised in Qualified Certificate of Crown Land Title Volume LR3044 Folio 366) ("Wattle Park"). 

 

An area of 755m² (approximate, subject to survey) is required for road widening, comprising approximately 2.19% of a total area of 34,491.16m².

 

Wattle Park is Crown land, managed by the City for the purpose of "Recreation".  Wattle Park is not currently leased or licensed to any third party.

 

A portion of Wattle Park is burdened by an easement to ERM Neerabup Pty Ltd.  The road widening area is distinct from and does not overlap with the easement area.

 

Following the road widening, there will be no change to the balance of Wattle Park.

 

2.       Pinjar Park (Reserve 11598, 1851 Old Yanchep Road, Pinjar, being Lot 10823 on Deposited Plan 187676, and being the land comprised in Qualified Certificate of Crown Land Title Volume LR3147 Folio 331) ("Pinjar Park").

 

A total area of 5,537m² is required for road widening, comprised in three portions with areas of 863m², 1,721m² and 2,953m² respectively (approximate, subject to survey).  The road widening areas comprise approximately 0.91% of the total area of 605,592.31m². 

 

Pinjar Park is Crown land, managed by the City for the purpose of "Recreation".  A portion of Pinjar Park is leased to Pinjar Motorcycle Park Inc., and a further portion is burdened by an easement to Electricity Networks Corporation.  The road widening areas are distinct from and do not overlap with the leased area or the easement area.

 

Following the road widening, there will be no change to use or status of the balance of Pinjar Park.

 

Pinjar Park was historically utilised as a landfill.  A memorial is registered on the Certificate of Title for Pinjar Park, describing the land as "Possibly contaminated – investigation required".  The memorial will remain on the Certificate of Title for the balance of Pinjar Park following the ceding of the road reserve areas.

 

3.       1731 Old Yanchep Road, Pinjar (Lot 1 on Diagram 43204, being the land comprised in Certificate of Title Volume 1337 Folio 323) ("1731 Old Yanchep Road").

 

 

 

An area of 1,203m² (approximate, subject to survey) is required for road widening.  The overall area of 1731 Old Yanchep Road is 356,237.1m².

 

1731 Old Yanchep Road is owned in freehold by the Western Australian Planning Commission ("WAPC").  The land is zoned "Parks and Recreation" under the Metropolitan Regional Scheme, and zoned "Regional Parks & Recreation" under the District Planning Scheme No. 2. 

 

4.       1771 Old Yanchep Road, Pinjar (Lot 601 on Deposited Plan 302260, being the land comprised in Certificate of Title Volume 1337 Folio 324) ("1771 Old Yanchep Road").

 

An area of 8,234m² (approximate, subject to survey) is required for road widening.  The overall area of 1731 Old Yanchep Road is 402,767.28m².

 

1771 Old Yanchep Road is owned in freehold by the WAPC.  The land is zoned "Parks and Recreation" under the Metropolitan Regional Scheme, and zoned "Regional Parks & Recreation" under the District Planning Scheme No. 2.

Consultation

Wattle Park and Pinjar Park

 

Administration liaised with the Department of Lands ("DOL") in relation to the road widening requirements from Wattle Park and Pinjar Park.  DOL provided "in principle" support for the land acquisition. 

 

As Wattle Park and Pinjar Park are Class “C” Reserves and were not created under section 152 of the Planning and Development Act 2005 (WA), DOL did not have any advertising or public consultation requirements for the land acquisition.

 

In respect of the memorial registered on the Certificate of Title for Pinjar Park, Administration also sought input from the Department of Environmental Regulation ("DER").  DER provided "in principle" support for the land acquisition, subject to the City implementing a specific health and safety plan for any workers undertaking intrusive works in respect of the road widening adjacent to Pinjar Park.

 

Administration understands that the land acquisition from Wattle Park and Pinjar Park will be effected by the DOL subdividing the land to cede the road widening areas.  At the date of the present report, the DOL is arranging a survey of the road widening areas.

 

1731 Old Yanchep Road and 1771 Old Yanchep Road

 

Administration liaised with the WAPC and the Department of Planning ("DOP") in relation to the road widening requirements from 1731 Old Yanchep Road and 1771 Old Yanchep Road.  The DOP provided "in principle" support for the land acquisition, and advised that, subject to all development and environmental approvals being secured, it would recommend that the WAPC cede the land.  The DOP also advised that it would require that the City replaces or reinstalls all fencing affected by the road widening, and that the City installs a replacement firebreak.

 

The ceding of the road widening areas will be effected by a subdivision from 1731 Old Yanchep Road and 1771 Old Yanchep Road.  The City lodged a subdivision application with the WAPC during June 2014.  At the date of the present report, the subdivision application is being assessed by the WAPC.

 

Comment

The excision and dedication of the road widening areas from Wattle Park, Pinjar Park, 1731 Old Yanchep Road and 1771 Old Yanchep Road are necessary to facilitate the Old Yanchep Road Project.

 

On the basis that:

 

·    the Old Yanchep Road Project is a priority for the City to alleviate an existing road Black Spot and to comply with State Black Spot funding requirements; and

 

·    the DOL and the WAPC support the land acquisition,

 

Administration recommends that the City requests the ceding of the land for road reserve.

Statutory Compliance

The ability to dedicate land as road reserve is authorised by the provisions of the Land Administration Act 1997 (WA) ("the LAA").

 

Section 56 of the LAA provides that where a local government requests the Minister for Lands to dedicate land as a road it is to indemnify the Minister against any claim for compensation that may arise from that action.

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2013 – 2023:

 “3     Economy - Progressive, connected communities that enable economic growth and employment.

3.3    Easy to Get Around - The community is well connected and accessible with an integrated transport approach for all.”

Risk Management Considerations

The Old Yanchep Road Project is a priority for the City to enhance the safety of users of Old Yanchep Road.  The relevant part of Old Yanchep Road met the criteria for State Black Spot funding.

The State Black Spot funding will establish deadlines for the completion of the Old Yanchep Road Project.  To ensure that the City has sufficient time to comply with these deadlines, it is strongly recommended that the land acquisition processes are completed in anticipation of final Black Spot funding approval for the upgrade/realignment of Old Yanchep Road.

The City is currently responsible for the care, control and management of Wattle Park and Pinjar Park pursuant to section 46 of the LAA.  Following the road dedication, the City will retain responsibility for the road widening areas by virtue of section 55(2) of the LAA.

Following the dedication of the road widening areas from 1731 Old Yanchep Road and 1771 Old Yanchep Road, the City will be responsible for the care, control and management of that land.

 

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

The Old Yanchep Road Project funds (including the Black Spot funding) will be applied to the design and construction costs, and will not be allocated to the land acquisition costs. 

 

The DOL and the WAPC have both advised that the City will not be required to pay a purchase price for the land acquisition, save that the City must pay all costs arising from the ceding of the road widening areas, including survey, subdivision and other approval costs, Landgate registration fees, and the costs of replacement and installation of fencing and firebreaks.  These costs and fees will be payable from the Land Acquisition Reserve with funding allocated to Project No PR-1056 as follows:

 

Description	Code	Amount
Land Acquisition Reserve	981501-9999-953	($30,000.00 + GST)
PR-1056 Purchase Land - Road Reserves	211501-9499-229	$30,000.00 + GST

Voting Requirements

Absolute Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       AUTHORISES a request being made to the Minister for Lands to dedicate as road reserve for Old Yanchep Road:

a)      a 755m² portion (approximate, subject to survey) of Wattle Park (Reserve 20432, 610 Wattle Avenue East, Neerabup); and

b)      5,537m² portions (approximate, subject to survey, and comprised by three portions with areas of 863m², 1,721m² and 2,953m² respectively) of Pinjar Park (Reserve 11598, 1851 Old Yanchep Road, Pinjar);

2.       INDEMNIFIES the Minister for Lands against any claim for compensation arising from the dedications authorised by 1. above;

3.       AUTHORISES a request being made to the Western Australian Planning Commission to dedicate as road reserve for Old Yanchep Road:

a)      a 1,203m² portion of 1731 Old Yanchep Road, Pinjar (Lot 1 on Diagram 43204) (approximate, subject to survey); and

b)      a 8,234 portion of 1771 Old Yanchep Road, Pinjar (Lot 601 on Deposited Plan 302260) (approximate, subject to survey);

4.       AUTHORISES the Chief Executive Officer and Mayor to affix the common seal of the City of Wanneroo to any associated documentation relating to 1. and 3. above;

 

 

5.       Pursuant to Section 6.8(1)(b) of the Local Government Act 1995 (WA) APPROVES BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the agreed expenditure for the payment of the costs and fees to acquire the land required as road reserve as outlined in Administration's report; and

6.       NOTES the cost and fees to acquire the land required for road reserve will be funded from the Land Acquisition Reserve.

 

 

Attachments:

1.	Location Map - Old Yanchep Road, Pinjar	14/245869
2.	Land Requirement Plan - Wattle Avenue East to Ziatas Road - Drawing 2281-11-0	14/109480
3.	Land Requirement Plan - Wattle Avenue East to Ziatas Road - Drawing 2281-12-0	14/109481

 

 

  

 

Infrastructure

Infrastructure & Coastal Maintenance

File Ref:                                              18766 – 14/277528

Responsible Officer:                           Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil       

 

Issue

To consider Tender No. 01444 – Replacement of HVAC (Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning) and Mechanical Services Systems at Ashby Operations Centre Buildings 1 and 2 and at Alexander Heights Community Centre.

 

Background

The replacement of the existing HVAC and mechanical services systems is being undertaken in the knowledge that although the systems are currently functional, they are past their life cycle and the original manufacturing companies are no longer producing a full range of replacement components. The sourcing of spare parts is becoming increasingly difficult and their requirement is becoming more prevalent as the systems deteriorate due to age.

 

The layout and usage of these buildings has evolved over the period since construction and the existing systems are considered to perform only at an acceptable level. The advancement of technology since the original installations incorporates energy saving measures which will provide improved performance and service output without increasing the running costs or maintenance requirements of the systems. The proposed new systems have been designed by a specialist consultant with reference to the current and expected usage patterns for each of the building assets.

 

In order to encourage a broad range of tenders, all three building sites were separated to provide options for tendering as summarised below:

·    Option 1 – Ashby Operations Centre Building 1

·    Option 2 – Ashby Operations Centre Building 2

·    Option 3 – Alexander Heights Community Centre

Detail

Tender No. 01444 for the Replacement of HVAC and Mechanical Services Systems at Ashby Operations Centre Buildings 1 and 2 and at Alexander Heights Community Centre was advertised on Saturday 16 August 2014 and closed on Tuesday 9 September 2014. A copy of the tender document has been placed in the Elected Members Reading Room.

 

Essential details of the contract are outlined below:

Contract Type	Fixed Lump Sum price
Contract Duration	10 weeks from date of possession of site
Commencement Date	24 November 2014
Date for Practical Completion	8 February 2015
Defects Liability Period	12 months
Extension Permitted	No
Rise and Fall Included	No

 

Tender submissions were received from the following five companies:

·    Associated Airconditioning;

·    Celsius Air Pty Ltd;

·    Jako Industries Pty Ltd;

·    KD Aire Pty Ltd; and

·    Trilogy Servicing Pty Ltd.

 

The Tender Evaluation Team comprising the Coordinator Building Maintenance, Acting Assets Systems Administrator and Contracts Officer evaluated the tender submissions in accordance with the following selection criteria:

 

Tenders were assessed against the selection criteria outlined above, along with the financial risk assessment and reference checking to determine the best ‘value for money’ submission.

After the initial review of assessments, it was determined that individual contractors performing the works at each building site would provide the best value for money to the City. The Tender Document included a clause noting that each of the three buildings is a separable portion and will be evaluated and assessed individually. A single contract may be awarded for all sites or multiple contracts may be awarded to individual Tenderers for individual sites.

The qualitative selection criteria have been evaluated only once and rankings have been applied equally to each option.

Evaluation results based on each of the individual options are summarised below:

 

Price for works (50%)

The evaluation of this criterion was based on the lump sum prices submitted by the tenderers for each of the options in the Price Schedule.

 

Based on lump sum prices for each option, tenderers have been ranked as follows:

Option 1 – Ashby Operations Centre Building 1

Option 2 – Ashby Operations Centre Building 2

Option 3 – Alexander Heights Community Centre

Safety management (20%):

Evidence of safety management policies, procedures and practices was assessed from the tender documents.  The assessment for safety management was based on the tenderers' submitted Occupational Health and Safety (OH&S) policy documentation and responses to an OH&S Management System Questionnaire included within the tender documentation.

 

For the safety of the contractor's staff, City staff and the public, this contract requires adherence to safe work practices when conducting removal works and performing installations working with electrical and mechanical machinery and appliances.

 

KD Aire, Jako Industries and Trilogy Servicing each provided a comprehensive OH&S policy document and adequately answered the questionnaire. Their submissions contained safe work method statements, risk assessments, hazard reports and checklists for recording various safety activities and inspections. The sample forms were completed, evidencing their use in the workplace and as a result these three firms were ranked equally at number 1.

 

Celsius Air provided an acceptable OH&S policy document and the responses contained within the questionnaire were considered adequate. Its OH&S policy contained only blank sample forms and this was reflected in their lower ranking.

 

Associated Airconditioning provided no OH&S policy documentation and only a partially completed questionnaire.

 

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

 

 

Project management (15%)

Assessment of this criterion considered the tenderers' project management systems, methodology and staff resources and plant and equipment listed for use in carrying out the services under this contract, and the tenderers' proposed methodology to utilise the resources to deliver the services.

 

KD Aire provided a detailed methodology statement with step by step description and allocation of responsibilities for the complete scope of the works. Its submission included a program detailing proposed timelines for all aspects of the works. It also provided a consideration to maximise the normal usage of the buildings with minimal disruption to the user requirements resulting in their high ranking.

 

Celsius Air's submission showed a consideration to maximise the normal usage with minimal disruption for the sites. Its program provided only a broad outline of the key components of the works, resulting in a ranking lower than KD Aire.

 

Jako Industries provided a program detailing acceptable timelines for all aspects of the works, however, there was no information relating to consideration of the user or requirements during the period of the works. This was reflected in this tenderer receiving a lower ranking than KD Aire.

 

Trilogy Servicing provided a program detailing proposed timelines for all aspects of the works, however, the timelines provided were considered longer than anticipated and showed limited consideration of the user or requirements during the period of the works.

 

Associated Airconditioning provided no methodology statement or proposed timeline details within their submission and has been ranked lowest accordingly.

 

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

 

 

Demonstrated experience in similar works (15%)

Assessment of this criterion considered the tenderers' experience in performing works of a similar nature, complexity and circumstances.

 

KD Aire has been registered for 11 years and currently provides HVAC maintenance services for the City. It has performed the services in a very responsive manner and to a satisfactory standard for this current contract period. Its submission provided a high level of detail regarding the experience of key personnel in their respective roles as nominated for undertaking the proposed works. KD Aire provided a full list of referees from current clients of relevant contract works and received the highest ranking.

 

 

Jako Industries detailed extensive experience within the HVAC industry for senior management and nominated key personnel. Its submission detailed a range of previous and existing client referees from relevant industry sectors, however, it lacked details of subcontractor companies required to perform integral parts of the proposed works and accordingly was ranked lower than KD Aire.

 

Trilogy Servicing provided a full list of staff and subcontractor companies required for completing the proposed works. Its submission detailed three referees from current clients of relevant contract works. Trilogy Servicing listed only limited experience for key personnel nominated to perform the works resulting in a lower ranking than KD Aire.

 

Celsius Air detailed extensive experience for its senior management and acceptable experience for nominated operational staff.  The list of staff and subcontractors provided is considered adequate to carry out the requirements of the proposed works. Celsius Air provided a minimal list of referees from current clients of relevant contract works and this was reflected in its lower ranking.

 

Associated Airconditioning has been registered for 17 years. Its submission provided details of experience for key personnel, however, it lacked detail regarding the scope of works or type of services performed resulting in a low ranking.

 

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

 

 

Overall Weighted Score

The tenderers' submissions were reviewed in accordance with the selection criteria with the key aspect of the tender evaluation being price.

 

The overall ranking as summarised below is based on the tenderer's scores against each criterion and its weighting for the relevant option:

Option 1 – Ashby Operations Centre Building 1

Option 2 – Ashby Operations Centre Building 2

Option 3 – Alexander Heights Community Centre

Consultation

Nil

Comment

The works proposed under this contract are an integral part of maintaining and improving the comfort and safety levels for the users of the City's buildings.

 

The tender submissions for option 1 and option 2 from Celsius Air and for option 3 from KD Aire achieved the highest score in accordance with the assessment criteria and weightings as detailed in the tender document.

 

A financial assessment of Celsius Air Pty Ltd was undertaken as part of the tender evaluation process and the outcome of this independent assessment by Corporate Scorecard Pty Ltd has verified that Celsius Air Pty Ltd has been assigned a Score of 5.04, indicating that it has the financial capacity to undertake the requirements of the contract.

 

Reference checks were undertaken for Celsius Air Pty Ltd with nominated referees who have indicated that Celsius Air Pty Ltd has provided a satisfactory level of service over an extended period.

 

A financial assessment of KD Aire Pty Ltd was undertaken in July 2013 as part of the tender evaluation for 01327 (The Provision of Mechanical and HVAC Services for a Period of Three Years) and the outcome of this independent assessment by Corporate Scorecard Pty Ltd verified then that KD Aire Pty Ltd was assigned a Score of 7.95, indicating that it had the financial capacity to undertake the requirements of the contract number 01327. Given that KD Aire has provided services under contract number 01327 to a satisfactory standard with no financial implication, no new financial assessment was undertaken as part of the evaluation for Tender No 01444.

 

Reference checks were not undertaken for KD Aire Pty Ltd as KD Aire Pty Ltd is the City's incumbent maintenance contractor for this field of industry and has provided a satisfactory level of service over an extended period.

Statutory Compliance

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

 

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2013 – 2023:

 “2     Society - Healthy, safe, vibrant and active communities.

2.1    Great Places and Quality Lifestyle - People from different cultures find Wanneroo an exciting place to live with quality facilities and services.”

Risk Management Considerations

Both Celsius Air and KD Aire have been assessed to have the necessary resources, experience, ability and safety systems to undertake the works as per Tender No. 01444 and no risks have been identified which may result in the non-delivery of the tendered works.

The main risk during the course of these works is an adverse impact on the users of these buildings for the duration of works. This risk can be mitigated by implementing a program as proposed by both tenderers to minimise such impact.

In view of Celcius Air's lower (but adequate) ranking under the safety criteria, any potential risk resulting from this contractor's ability to undertake works in a safe manner will be mitigated by implementing steps such as conducting a detailed site induction, seeking completion of risk assessments and close supervision/contract management.

Policy Implications

Tenders were invited in accordance with the requirements of the City's Purchasing Policy.

Financial Implications

Based on the recommended tenderers' prices, the overall tendered price for the works as detailed in the table below is accommodated in PR-2558 and PR-1904 of the Capital Works budget 2014/2015.

 

Tender No. 01444 – Replacement of HVAC and Mechanical Services Systems at Ashby Operations Centre Buildings 1 and 2 and at Alexander Heights Community Centre.
Description	Estimated Cost	Budget
Celsius Air - Option 1	$164,153.00
Celsius Air - Option 2	$145,417.00
Contingency	$10,000.00
Consultant's Fees	$22,000.00
PR-2558 – Building Assets Renewal Program Various Locations	$341,570.00	*$360,000.00
KD Aire – Option 3	$130,899.03
Contingency	$5,000.00
Consultant's Fees	$5,000.00
PR-1904 – Building Assets Renewal Program	$140,899.03	*$150,000.00
Total Expenditure	$482,469.03
Total Funding		$510,000.00

*These amounts have been allocated in the overall approved Program funding in the respective project numbers for these building sites.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council ACCEPTS the tender submitted by:

1.       Celsius Air Pty Ltd for Tender No. 01444 for Replacement of HVAC and Mechanical Services Systems at Ashby Operations Centre Buildings 1 and 2 at a lump sum price of $309,570.00 (Option 1 and 2 only): and

2.       KD Aire Pty Ltd for Tender No. 01444 for Replacement of HVAC and Mechanical Services Systems at Alexander Heights Community Centre at a lump sum price of $130,899.03 (Option 3 only).

 

Attachments: Nil  

 

Infrastructure Projects

File Ref:                                              7819 – 14/287358

Responsible Officer:                           Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil       

 

Issue

To consider Tender No. 01421 for the Provision of Architectural Consultancy Services for the Design, Documentation and Construction of the Wanneroo Civic Centre Extension for a Period of three Years.

 

Background

At its meeting of 4 March 2014, Council considered a report on the Wanneroo Civic Centre Extension Project (Item IN02-03/14 refers) and resolved, in part, as follows:

"7.     ENDORSES the preparation of tender documentation for advertising the appointment of an Architectural Design Consultant to provide design and construction services for the Wanneroo Civic Centre Extension and report the tender outcome to Council;"

This report considers tender submissions and provides a recommendation for the acceptance of a tender for an architectural consultant to provide design, documentation and administrative services for the construction of the Wanneroo Civic Centre Extension (WCC Extension) in accordance with Resolution 7.

The scope of the architectural consultancy does not include the design, documentation and administration services for the internal fit-out of the WCC Extension and refurbishment of the existing Civic Centre.  This work will be undertaken as a separate spatial design consultancy where the scope of works will utilise the balance of the project available funding; less a contingent sum, the known consultancy fees, general outgoings and the construction cost for the WCC Extension.

At its meeting of 14 October 2014, Council considered a report on the Wanneroo Civic Centre Extension Project (Item IN3-10/14 refers) and resolved:

"That Council ACCEPTS Tender No 01422 for the Provision of Cost Planner Consultancy Services for the Design, Documentation and Construction of the Wanneroo Civic Centre Extension from Ralph Beattie Bosworth P/L for its tendered lump sum of $145,000."

The early appointment of the cost planner has allowed the consultant to audit and provide an independent selection assessment for the preferred Architectural Consultant.

Detail

Tender No. 01421 for the Provision of Architectural Consultancy Services for the Design, Documentation and Construction of the Wanneroo Civic Centre Extension for a Period of Three Years was advertised on 19 July 2014 and closed on 5 August 2014.

 

Tender submissions were received from the following companies:

Tenderers Received	Tender Sum
Eames Architects P/L	$877,340
Bollig Design Group P/L AFT the BDG Trust	$998,035
Kelly Rattigan T/A Formworks Architecture	$1,078,408
Christou Design Group P/L	$1,184,778
Jones Coulter Young P/L T/A JCY Architects & Urban Designers	$1,230,836
Designinc Perth P/L	$1,244,580
Oldham Boas Ednie-Brown P/L T/A The Buchan Group	$1,248,025
Cameron Chisholm & Nicol P/L	$1,259,116
Holton Connor Architects & Planners	$1,319,100
GHD P/L	$1,480,098

Tenderers were required to have completed the design, documentation and contract administration, in the tenderer's own right without affiliation with another architectural firm, of an office building having a value of over $25M.  As compliance with this tender requirement was lacking in many submissions, a clarification request was issued to all tenderers asking them to provide a covering letter clearly nominating the office building that would fulfil this requirement, the terms of engagement, building details, referee contact details and evidence in support of the claim. Tenderers not meeting this requirement would be declared as nonconforming and excluded from further evaluation.  Conforming tender submissions from nine tenderers were advanced to Tender Assessment.  The tender submission from Holton Connor Architects and Planners was excluded from further consideration.

The Tender Evaluation Panel consisted of three members of Administration whose functions are noted as follows:

 

Evaluation Panel Member	Member's Function
Project Manager Major Buildings	To undertake the technical assessment and qualitative scoring of all tender submissions
Manager Infrastructure Projects	To provide general input and oversight to the qualitative (technical) assessment
Contracts Officer	To oversee the process for statutory compliance and verify the value for money assessment (non-price versus price rating assessment)

 

The nine conforming tender submissions received were evaluated applying the following evaluation methodology:

 

Step 1.  Tender assessment by the Tender Evaluation Panel against the selection criterion as outlined below.

Non-Priced Evaluation:

(a)     Tenderer’s experience - demonstrate experience in carrying out projects of a similar nature [to the Works in Perth within the last five years, detailing (as a minimum) the year the project was undertaken, the project name, value, and a description of the works (5%);

(b)     Tenderer’s methodology – soundness of design approach coupled with a comprehensive program for the required project milestones (20%);

(c)     Tenderer’s qualifications - relevant experience of the Tenderer's key personnel who will design and service this project listing similar past Projects that the key responsible personnel involved (15%);

(d)     Tenderer’s capacity - to professionally design and implement the construction of the proposed works within the nominated timeframe (5%); and

(e)     Provision of a Gantt chart listing critical events noting and allowing for Council endorsement where required for the project (5%).

Following completion of the non-priced selection criteria assessment by the Tender Evaluation Panel, the cost planner for the project, Ralph Beattie Bosworth Pty Ltd who had been awarded "Tender 01422 – Cost Planning Services for the Design and Construction of the Wanneroo Civic Centre Extension" at Council's meeting held on 14 October 2014 (IN3-10/14 refers), was engaged to undertake its non-priced selection criterion assessment of the top five tender submissions determined by the Tender Evaluation Panel and in conjunction with the Panel, to then confirm final non-priced ranking.

Priced Evaluation:

Assessment of the submitted fixed lump sum fee (50%).

Overall Evaluation:

Amalgamation of non-priced and priced selection criterion weightings to determine overall ranking.

 

Step 2.  The three highest ranked tenderers based on the overall evaluation undertaken as per Step 1 above were invited to present to the Interview Panel, consisting of the CEO, Director Infrastructure, Manager Infrastructure Projects, Project Manager Major Buildings and the Cost Planner, with assessment made in relation to each tenderers professionalism and capability to undertake the architectural consultancy in accordance with the City's objectives and timeframes as outlined in the project scope of works.

 

Step 3.  Final evaluation undertaken on a ‘weighted price assessment’ following completion of interviews to determine the tender submission that offers the best architectural services for the consultancy fee provided, along with reference checking and financial standing.

 

Step 1: Tender Assessment against the Selection Criteria

The initial non-priced selection criteria assessment was undertaken by the Tender Evaluation Panel, with the cost planner undertaking an independent review.  Thereafter, a comparison in assessment outcome was made, with lump sum price (ie: the outstanding selection criterion to be assessed being a standard calculation and applied to both the Tender Evaluation Panel and the Cost Planner assessments) then actioned in order to determine the overall ranking of tender submissions received.  The outcome of this process follows:

Non-Priced Selection Criteria Assessment

1.   Tenderer’s Experience (5%)

Tenderers demonstrated varying levels of experience in designing office building similar to the WCC Extension.  The majority of the tenderers clearly met the requirements relating to tenderers' experience and were equally ranked, with assessed ranking tabled as follows:

 

Tenderer	Ranking
Eames Architects P/L	1
Bollig Design Group P/L AFT the BDG Trust	1
Kelly Rattigan T/A Formworks Architecture	1
Christou Design Group P/L	1
Jones Coulter Young P/L T/A JCY Architects & Urban Designers	1
Designinc Perth P/L	1
Oldham Boas Ednie-Brown P/L T/A The Buchan Group	1
Cameron Chisholm & Nicol P/L	1
GHD P/L	2

2.   Tenderer’s Methodology (20%)

An assessment was made based upon the tenderers’ declared understanding of the project, design methodology and procedures applicable to the tendered works, recommendations and procedures to obtain NABERS Energy and Star Green Star Office Design ratings. Tenderers that presented a clear understanding of these governing design issues were ranked more highly under this criterion than others, with assessed ranking tabled as follows:

 

Tenderer	Ranking
Christou Design Group P/L	1
Jones Coulter Young P/L T/A JCY Architects & Urban Designers	1
Cameron Chisholm & Nicol P/L	1
Bollig Design Group P/L AFT the BDG Trust	2
Kelly Rattigan T/A Formworks Architecture	2
Eames Architects P/L	3
GHD P/L	3
Oldham Boas Ednie-Brown P/L T/A The Buchan Group	4
Designinc Perth P/L	5

3.   Tenderer’s Qualifications (15%)

All tenderers were required to nominate their project personnel, level of involvement and experience; and to table the same information for the sub consultancy team(s) nominated in tender submissions that would provide the technical support for the duration of the project.  The level of personnel information, together with the involvement of the listed sub consultants, provided the basis for ranking, with Designinc Perth P/L ranked lowest given it did not list any of its sub consultants.  The resultant assessed ranking is tabled as follows:

 

Tenderer	Ranking
Christou Design Group P/L	1
Jones Coulter Young P/L T/A JCY Architects & Urban Designers	1
Cameron Chisholm & Nicol P/L	1
Bollig Design Group P/L AFT the BDG Trust	2
Kelly Rattigan T/A Formworks Architecture	2
GHD P/L	2
Eames Architects P/L	3
Oldham Boas Ednie-Brown P/L T/A The Buchan Group	3
Designinc Perth P/L	4

 

 

4.   Tenderer’s Capacity (5%)

All tenderers provided details of their personnel and current commitments.  Information given indicates that all tenderers have the capacity to undertake the consultancy with some tenderers seeking new work and others with current projects nearing completion.  Tenderers with higher rankings indicated access to greater personnel resources, with assessed ranking tabled as follows:

 

Tenderer	Ranking
Cameron Chisholm & Nicol P/L	1
Jones Coulter Young P/L T/A JCY Architects & Urban Designers	1
Christou Design Group P/L	2
Bollig Design Group P/L AFT the BDG Trust	3
GHD P/L	3
Oldham Boas Ednie-Brown P/L T/A The Buchan Group	4
Eames Architects P/L	5
Kelly Rattigan T/A Formworks Architecture	5
Designinc Perth P/L	6

5.   Tenderer’s Timeline (5%)

The tender documentation noted a nominal project timeline for key project events.  Tenderers were expected to make comment on the proposed programme; and if deemed unacceptable were required to provide an alternative Gantt chart listing their proposed design and construction process for the project. Tenderers that offered comment upon the programme and offered to meet the timeline requirements were ranked highest, with assessed ranking tabled as follows:

 

Tenderer	Ranking
Cameron Chisholm & Nicol P/L	1
Kelly Rattigan T/A Formworks Architecture	2
GHD P/L	2
Bollig Design Group P/L AFT the BDG Trust	3
Christou Design Group P/L	3
Designinc Perth P/L	3
Oldham Boas Ednie-Brown P/L T/A The Buchan Group	4
Eames Architects P/L	5
Jones Coulter Young P/L T/A JCY Architects & Urban Designers	5

6.   Overall Non-Priced Ranking Assessment

Tenderer ranking based upon the combined weighted scores for each non-priced selection criterion resulted in the following overall ranking:

Tenderer	Ranking
Cameron Chisholm & Nicol P/L	1
Christou Design Group P/L	2
Jones Coulter Young P/L T/A JCY Architects & Urban Designers	3
Bollig Design Group P/L AFT the BDG Trust	4
Kelly Rattigan T/A Formworks Architecture	5
GHD P/L	6
Eames Architects P/L	7
Designinc Perth P/L	8
Oldham Boas Ednie-Brown P/L T/A The Buchan Group	9

 

On review of the outcome of this first phase of tender assessment, the Tender Evaluation Panel reviewed its determination and recommended that the submissions by the top five tenderers be forwarded to the cost planner for independent assessment.  Advice subsequently received from the cost planner proved to be similar in ranking order as determined by the Tender Evaluation Panel, with the only change being that equal ranking was applied to the tender submissions presented by Christou Design Group P/L and Jones Coulter Young P/L T/A JCY Architects & Urban Designers – refer ranking as tabled below:

 

Tenderer	Ranking
Cameron Chisholm & Nicol P/L	1
Christou Design Group P/L	2
Jones Coulter Young P/L T/A JCY Architects & Urban Designers	2
Bollig Design Group P/L AFT the BDG Trust	3
Kelly Rattigan T/A Formworks Architecture	4

Priced Selection Criteria Assessment

From an evaluation process perspective all tender submissions were checked and the Price of Works weighting determined by preset calculation against which a weighting of 50% was applied.  Price of Works ranking is noted as follows:

 

Tenderer	Ranking
Eames Architects P/L	1
Bollig Design Group P/L AFT the BDG Trust	2
Kelly Rattigan T/A Formworks Architecture	3
Christou Design Group P/L	4
Jones Coulter Young P/L T/A JCY Architects & Urban Designers	5
Designinc Perth P/L	6
Oldham Boas Ednie-Brown P/L T/A The Buchan Group	7
Cameron Chisholm & Nicol P/L	8
GHD P/L	9

 

The five tender submissions that were jointly assessed by the Tender Evaluation Panel and the Cost Planner (ie: those tenderers highlighted in bold in the above table) were further reviewed from a lump sum price perspective and in particular, tender submissions to have identified fee breakdowns for each sub consultant in order to ensure clarity for later payment purposes and initial assessment.  Each sub consultant's fee was reviewed as a percentage of the overall Fixed Lump Sum Tender Price as submitted.  The outcome of this assessment indicated that the lowest architectural fee component was submitted by Christou Design Group P/L at 57.94% of its total Fixed Lump Sum Tender Price, while the highest architectural fee percentage of 66.62% was submitted by Jones Coulter Young P/L T/A JCY Architects & Urban Designers. 

 

This range in fee percentage for the architectural component of the overall Fixed Lump Sum Tender Price and is seen to be fair and reasonable, and indicates that there is sufficient allowance in overall cost for the engagement of sub consultants.  Similarly, hourly charge out rates were requested so future consultancy fees associated with scope of work changes can be readily determined.

 

The ranking based on the lump sum price assessment for the top five tenderers is tabled as follows:

Tenderer	Tender Sum	Ranking
Bollig Design Group P/L AFT the BDG Trust	$998,035	1
Kelly Rattigan T/A Formworks Architecture	$1,078,408	2
Christou Design Group P/L	$1,184,778	3
Jones Coulter Young P/L T/A JCY Architects & Urban Designers	$1,230,836	4
Cameron Chisholm & Nicol P/L	$1,259,116	5

Overall Ranking for the Top Five Tenderers

The overall ranking of the top five tenderers was determined by amalgamation of the non-priced and priced evaluation results, with the outcome of this tabled as follows:

Tenderer	Ranking
Bollig Design Group P/L AFT the BDG Trust	1
Christou Design Group P/L	2
Cameron Chisholm & Nicol P/L	3
Jones Coulter Young P/L T/A JCY Architects & Urban Designers	4
Kelly Rattigan T/A Formworks Architecture	5

The result as tabled above was then advanced for interview assessment (Step 2).

Step 2: Interview

Following receipt of the cost planner's assessment and subsequent finalisation of the Step 1 process as noted above, the top three tenderers were invited to speak to their tender submission before the Interview Panel (ie: the CEO, Director Infrastructure, Manager Infrastructure Projects, Project Manager Major Buildings and the Cost Planner).

The interviews indicated that Christou Design Group P/L and Bollig Design Group P/L AFT the BDG Trust had a clear understanding of what Administration required and spoke to these aspects of the project.  Both firms interacted favourably with the Interview Panel, and were able to address the questions posed with assurance, often citing similar examples that had been encountered in past commissions.  As a consequence, they were both ranked equally. Cameron Chisholm and Nicol P/L, while competent in the delivery of the works that the firm has previously undertaken, did not address the City's building project to the same extent as the other two architectural teams, resulting in its lower ranking.

 

The resultant ranking as an outcome of the interview process is tabled below:

Tenderer	Ranking
Bollig Design Group P/L AFT the BDG Trust	1
Christou Design Group P/L	1
Cameron Chisholm & Nicol P/L	2

Step 3: Evaluation

Final evaluation, based upon a ‘weighted price assessment' supported Bollig Design Group AFT the BDG Trust as the preferred tenderer over Christou Design Group P/L.  In addressing the interview outcome where both firms were equally ranked there appears to be no appreciable professional gain to the project by accepting the higher fee offered by Christou Design Group P/L, with definite financial gain to the project by accepting the Bollig Design Group AFT the BDG Trusts' offer which is $186,743 lower.

In review of the outcome of the overall tender assessment process, supported by referee and financial checking, Bollig Design Group P/L AFT the BDG Trust is therefore recommended as the preferred tenderer for Tender No 01421.

Key characteristics of the recommended tenderer, Bollig Design Group P/L AFT the BDG Trust, are noted as follows:

·        Experienced architectural design firm with a proven record of undertaking this type of consultancy work and with the resources to maintain the project time frame;

·        A staff of eighteen professionals led by a Director and Associates;

·        Within the last five years completed the $330M Raine Square Office Building; the $45M Cockburn Office, a Health and Civic facility; the $40M 502 Hay Street Subiaco Office Building;

·        Presently undertaking the design for the $2.5M Pearsall Hocking Community Centre for the City and in 2012, provided the concept plans for the Yanchep Surf Life Saving Club;

·        In 2003 successfully completed the design and construction administration of the City's Hainsworth Leisure Centre Refurbishment and the Clarkson Library; and

·        Offers tender breakdown information that is consistent with the prices presented in other tender submissions received.

Consultation

The scope of consultancy work associated with the design and costing for the WCC Extension as offered within Tender 01421 was progressed through the WCC Extension Project Control Group.

No external consultation was undertaken in relation to the development of the scope of works and associated tender documentation for this consultancy service.

Comment

The acceptance and appointment of an Architectural Design Consultant to provide design, documentation and construction administration of the WCC Extension addresses the required outcome to Council Resolution 7 arising from Report IN02-03/14, that being:

"7 ENDORSES the preparation of tender documentation for advertising the appointment of an Architectural Design Consultant to provide design and construction services for the Wanneroo Civic Centre Extension and report the tender outcome to Council."

A tender for the appointment of a spatial designer will be advertised after Council has considered the concept plan and associated cost estimates for the WC Extension.  The appointed spatial designer will finalise and complete the internal fit-out design for the extension and the Civic Centre.  The scope of the fit-out work will be subject to Council endorsement and the resultant scope of work will be issued for public tender, with the appointment of a fit-out contractor to be subject to Council endorsement.  The fit-out contactor's work will be staged within the main building construction works; so that the fit-out work is completed in time to allow for the staged relocation of City staff from the Wanneroo Community Centre and Civic Centre into the WCC Extension after Civic Centre staff return to their refurbished work areas within the existing building.

The scope of fit-out works by the spatial designer will be budgeted to employ the balance of the projects $27M available funding less a contingent sum, the known consultancy fees, general outgoings and the construction cost for the WCC Extension.

Works Programme

The WCC Extension Works Programme is outlined as follows:

Council Consideration of Architectural Consultancy Tender	Tues 11 November  2014
Execute the Consultancy Contract	Fri 21 November 2014
Consultancy Contract Start Date	Tues 2 December 2014
Report to Council - Concept Plans with Cost Estimate	Tues 3 February 2015
Report to Council - Contract Documentation with Cost Estimate	Tues 10 November 2015
Report to Council - Construction Tender Outcome	Tues 2 February 2016
Construction Commencement	Mon 15 February 2016
Report to CEO - Spatial Design Consultancy Tender Outcome	Tues 15 March 2016
Report to Council - Fit-out Works Tender Outcome	Tues 8 November 2016
Commence Staff Relocation	Mon 24 July 2017
Complete On Site Construction (75 weeks)	Mon 7 August 2017
Practical Completion and final staff relocation	Fri 28 August 2017
Facility Commissioning	Mon 21 August 2017

The appointed Architectural Consultant arising from Tender 01421 will provide, over a period of 12 weeks, concept planning, followed by 10 weeks for design development and 14 weeks for contract documentation before the construction of the works is advertise by the City.  Following tender award the Architectural Consultant will then administer the contract works over the nominated 75 week construction period and thereafter, attend upon the 12 month defects liability period following issue of practical completion.

Statutory Compliance

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

 

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2013 – 2023:

 “4     Civic Leadership - Working with others to ensure the best use of our resources.

4.3    A Strong and Progressive Organisation - You will recognise the hard work and professionalism delivered by your council through your interactions and how our community is developing.”

Risk Management Considerations

Financial Risk Assessment

An independent financial risk assessment was undertaken by Corporate Scorecard which has verified with an overall rating of 8.62 out of 10 for Bollig Design Group P/L AFT the BDG Trust, which indicates that it has a very strong financial capacity to undertake this contract.

 

Cost Risk Assessment

The cost planner shall continue to manage project costs associated with the design and construction processes for the project through close liaison with the appointed Architectural Consultant.

Policy Implications

Nil

Budget/Financial Implications

Funding of $27M in total has been listed in the City's 10-year Capital Works Programme for the WCC Extension (PR-2332).

The following table identifies all costs to date associated with the project:

Tender No 01421 - Architectural Consultancy for the WCC Extension
Description	Project Costs	Project Funding
2012/2013 (Budget Expended)		$101,990
2013/2014 (Mid Year Review)		$1,098,610
2014/2015		$2,800,000
2015/2016		$20,000,000
2016/2017		$3,000,000
Expenditure/Commitments to Date:
Budget Reallocation from PR-2332 to PR-2448 (Report IN04-03/13)	$384,400
Cardno (WA) Pty Ltd – Forward Civil Works	$40,600
MKDC – Spatial Planning	$32,300
Marketforce Express Pty Ltd	$658
Road Signs Australia	$554
Purchase Lot 14010	$1,000
One Way Traffic Flow System – Estimated Cost	$873,000
Tender Advertisement & Administration Costs	$4,990
Project Management	$100,000
Public Art 1%	$230,000
Ralph Beattie Bosworth P/L– Cost Planning Fees	$145,000
Proposed Commitment
Bollig Design Group P/L AFT the BDG Trust	$998,035
Total Project Cost	$2,810,537
Total Project Funding		$27,000,600
Funding Balance for WCC Extension		$24,190,063

The balance of funding remaining is allocated to the proposed spatial design consultancy and subsequent construction of the WCC Extension and associated fit out works, with these components of the project subject to future consideration by Council.

It is recommended that Tender No. 01421 for Architectural Consultancy Services for the Design, Documentation and construction of the WCC Extension, be accepted from Bollig Design Group P/L AFT the BDG Trust for its tendered lump sum of $998,035.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council ACCEPTS the tender submitted by Bollig Design Group P/L AFT the BDG Trust for Tender No. 01421 for the Design, Documentation and Construction of the Wanneroo Civic Centre Extension for its tendered fixed lump sum price of $998,035.

 

 

 

Attachments: Nil  

 

Traffic Management

File Ref:                                              11277 – 14/196418

Responsible Officer:                           Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       4         

 

Issue

To consider the outcome of community consultation for Project PR-2709 – Golders Way Footpath.

 

Background

The City's 2014/2015 Pathways and Trails Capital Works Program lists Project PR-2709- Golders Way footpath for construction. The City conducted community consultation to gauge the level of community support for the project. This report considers the results of community consultation.

 

Refer to Attachment 1 for a network map of Golders Way.

Detail

Golders Way is classified as an Access Street in the City's Functional Road Hierarchy.  It is 640m in length and runs in a loop off Mirrabooka Avenue with one entry/exit point opposite Mercy College. The issue of pedestrian safety in Golders Way has been raised a number of times by Mercy College, as well as by residents of Golders Way. The proposed footpath section will provide a safe off road facility and connectivity for residents in Golders Way to public transport on Mirrabooka Avenue and Beach Road. In addition, the facility will improve the safety for students of Mercy College that are currently walking on the road to be picked up by parents.

Consultation

Community consultation for the 2014/2015 Pathways and Trails Capital Works Program was conducted from the 28 July 2014 to 18 August 2014. The majority of projects had overwhelming support from the community and Administration has proceeded with the construction of these projects as per the approved 2014/2015 budget.

 

Project PR-2709 – Golders Way Footpath received a mixed response  from the community. The City sent an invitation to comment (refer Attachment 2) to 86 residents in the walkable catchment of the proposed pathway. Refer Attachment 3 for a map identifying the owners and occupiers sent invitations to comment. The City received 35 responses; 17 residents supporting the installation and 18 residents opposing the installation of the pathway. Of the 12 owners and occupiers in the 10 properties directly affected by the installation of a footpath in Golders Way, four property owners and two occupiers of properties support the project and the remaining six properties did not provide a response. A number of residents provided comments to the proposal which have been collated, along with Administration's response at Attachment 4.

Comment

The road reserve, which includes the verge, is public property and utilised in part by the City for the provision of public infrastructure including pathways, street lighting and other services. The function of the road reserve is to cater for the transport needs of all road users, along with the provision of public utility services such as power, water, wastewater and telecom.  While vehicles may be the dominant form of road transport, they are not the only road user group.  Where traffic speeds are low and road lengths short, it is sometimes practicable for all road users to share a single facility, that being the road carriageway. Should traffic volumes, road geometry or speed make this dangerous for this type of shared arrangement, then separate facilities such as pathways (footpaths, shared paths, cycle paths) or on-road cycle lanes can be provided.

 

Liveable Neighbourhoods, under Pedestrian Movement Network states:

"Liveable Neighbourhoods recognises the complexity of daily movement patterns and the need to make pedestrian trips as short and pleasant as possible.  The primary pedestrian network is the street system, which is detailed to support pedestrian movement.

Footpaths should ideally be provided on both sides of all streets.  For cost reasons, footpaths may be omitted from one side of lower order access streets, unless the street forms an important pedestrian link (eg to a school, centre or station).

A standard footpath width of 1.5m is specified.  This enables two pedestrians to pass with comfort, and enables ease of use by people with prams, wheelchairs and other mobility aids."

 

The "State Road Safety Strategy - Towards Zero" is based on a Safe Systems approach which recognises that the human body is vulnerable and that unprotected pedestrians are unlikely to survive collision speeds above 30km/h.  As a consequence, where road traffic speeds cannot be reduced to safe levels, vulnerable road users should be separated.

 

The City has been working with Mercy College to address a number of safety and congestion concerns raised by the school and residents that live in close proximity to the school. Mercy College and a number of residents of Golders Way have raised concerns regarding the safety of students being picked up from Golders Way as a number of parents are parking contrary to the existing parking prohibitions, especially around the intersection of Golders Way and Mirrabooka Avenue. Parents parking on the verge contrary to the parking prohibitions force students to walk on the road and mix with vehicles performing a number of movements. Mercy College regularly includes parking information in the school newsletter, advising parents about the safety issues of parking contrary to the parking prohibitions. The City's Parking Compliance Officers regularly conduct parking enforcement in Golders Way. The installation of a footpath will provide a safer environment for students to negotiate the intersection of Golders Way and Mirrabooka Avenue. The construction of the footpath will also provide another deterrent to parking on the verge as it is illegal under the City' Parking Local Law to stop on a footpath.

 

The City is investigating a number of options to assist in alleviating congestion issues around the school, including the opening of an additional exit from the school grounds at an existing access to Whitehouse Drive on the northeast corner of the school. The addition of a new exit point from the school will allow for an even distribution from the school ground and reduce the pressure on access and egress to Mirrabooka Avenue.

 

In addition to the safety implications, community consultation conducted for Project PR-2709-Golders Way Footpath revealed the following information. As outlined in the Consultation section, the property owners/occupiers directly affected by the footpath offered no objections to its construction.

Given the results of community consultation and the safety implications outlined in this report, Administration recommends Council proceed with the construction of the project.

Statutory Compliance

Nil

 

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2013 – 2023:

 “2     Society - Healthy, safe, vibrant and active communities.

2.3    Safe Communities - We feel safe at home and in our local area.”

 

Risk Management Considerations

Should Council not support the installation of the proposed footpath, it is likely that pedestrian safety, particularly school aged children, in Golders Way will remain compromised leaving vulnerable road users at risk of serious injury.

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

The estimated cost to construct project PR- 2709 – Golders Way Footpath is $31,000.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       APPROVES the construction of the section footpath in Golders Way , Girrawheen as shown on Attachment 1; and

2.       ADVISES residents that requested a response as part of community consultation for Project PR- 2709- Golders Way Footpath of Council's decision.

 

 

Attachments:

1.	Golders Way Girrawheen - Network Map	14/270719	Minuted
2.	Golders Way Invitation to Comment Footpath Project	14/233475
3.	Golders Way Invitation to Comment Footpath Project	14/233471
4.	Resident s Comments - Golders Way Proposed Pathway	14/259629[v2]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

File Ref:                                              8706V02 – 14/277183

Responsible Officer:                           Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       2         

 

Issue

To consider a petition requesting the installation of footpaths on both sides of Ashley Road and Waldburg Drive, Tapping.

 

Background

Council received petition PT05-09/14 at its meeting on 16 September 2014.  The petition was signed by 91 residents of the City of Wanneroo and reads:

“Many people speed down these roads and whilst not much can be done to control people's actions we should be able to have a safer walking route to ovals and schools. Many of our children have to cross these busy roads multiple times due to the lack of continuing footpaths on both sides of the roads. Having to cross the road to get to the footpath, then cross back to get to the next footpath further down.

We would like the City of Wanneroo to install/extend footpaths down the other side of both these roads to ensure a safer journey for school children and other pedestrians.

Recently a young man was clocked doing 106kmph down one of these roads. It's just an accident waiting to happen."

Detail

Ashley Road and Waldburg Drive are Local Distributor Roads in the City's Functional Road Hierarchy. These roads operate under the default built up area speed limit of 50km/h.

Ashley Road has a continuous path on the south side running from Wanneroo Road to Pinjar Road, however has an incomplete pathway on the northern side with missing sections adjacent to No. 61 Ashley Road and from Waldburg Drive to Pinjar Road. A network map of Ashley Road is included as Attachment 1.

Waldburg Drive does not have a continuous path on either side with a missing link on the west side between Spring Hill and the southern leg of Ray Gardiner Vista. Waldburg Drive also has missing links on the east side between Ashley Road and Galileo Avenue as well as Alvarez Parkway and Yandella Promenade. A network map of Waldburg Drive is included as Attachment 2.

Consultation

No consultation was conducted in preparing this report, however should the missing pathway links be included in the draft 10 Year Pathways and Trials Capital Works Program, extensive consultation with property owners/residents of Ashley Road and Walburg Drive, will be undertaken in accordance with the City's Community Engagement Policy.

Comment

Pathways along Ashley Road and Waldburg Drive, were installed in a staged manner during the development of Tapping, resulting in the pathways changing from one side of the road to the other side on Ashley Road and Waldburg Drive.

 

 

As Ashley Road and Waldburg Drive are both local distributors in the City's Functional Road Hierarchy, the City's priority is to provide a continuous pathway on at least one side of each road where practicable to improve access and safety for vulnerable roads users.

 

Destinations accessed from Waldburg Drive include St Stephens Catholic Primary School, Tapping Primary School, Spring Hill Primary School and Jimbub Swamp Park, and therefore the most feasible side to construct a continuous pathway on is the west side. Once each Local Distributor Road has a continuous pathway on one side, the City could then install the remaining sections of pathway on the opposite side of the road, subject to budget funding.

 

The City is currently preparing a traffic management scheme for Ashley Road from Waldburg Drive to Pinjar Road. As part of this project some localised road widening will be required. The localised road widening may affect the position of the pathway and therefore the provision of a pathway will be considered as part of the design of the Traffic Management Scheme. The Traffic Management Scheme is listed for construction in the 2015/16 year of the City's 10 Year Traffic Treatments Program.

 

In addition, the section of missing shared path on the north side of Ashley Road from No. 53 Ashley Road to the existing pathway opposite the eastern end of Watkins loop cannot be constructed at this point in time due to the proposed pathway alignment and an undeveloped land parcel at Number 61 Ashley Road.  The City will consider the construction of a pathway as a condition of development for No. 61 Ashley Road.

 

In summary it is recommended that the below projects be listed for consideration in the City's 10 Year Pathways and Trails Capital Works Budget:

1.)  Waldburg Drive – construct 230m x2.5m concrete in situ shared path west side from Spring Hill to the southern end of Gardenia Vista – cost $53,000;

2.)  Waldburg Drive -  construct 345m x 2.5m concrete in situ shared path east side from Spring Hill to Ashley Road – cost $80,000; and

3.)  Waldburg Drive - construct 175m x 2.5m concrete in situ shared path east side from Yandella Prom to Alvarez Parkway – cost $36,000.

It is noted that the City has a significant number of unfunded pathway projects and the consideration of these missing pathway links in Walburg Drive will need to be addressed on a priority basis. Administration is currently preparing a Pathway Policy which will assist with the prioritisation of pathway projects.

Statutory Compliance

Nil

 

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2013 – 2023:

 “3     Economy - Progressive, connected communities that enable economic growth and employment.

3.3    Easy to Get Around - The community is well connected and accessible with an integrated transport approach for all.”

 

 

 

 

Risk Management Considerations

Should Council not support the installation of the proposed pathways it is likely that pedestrian and cyclist safety in the Tapping area will remain compromised, placing vulnerable road users at risk of serious injury.

The level of community support for the installation of pathways in the Tapping area indicated in the petition will create an expectation that Council implement these works in a timely manner to improve the walking and cycling environment for all residents.

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

The estimated additional proposed costs to complete all of the missing links in Waldburg Drive are as follows:

Project	Cost
Waldburg Drive – Construct 230m x2.5m concrete in situ shared path west side from Spring Hill to the southern end of Gardenia Vista	$53,000
Waldburg Drive-  Construct 345m x 2.5m concrete in situ shared path east side from Spring Hill to Ashley Road	$80,000
Waldburg Drive- Construct 175m x 2.5m concrete in situ shared path east side from Yandella Prom to Alvarez Parkway	$36,000.

 

In addition to the above projects, the cost of installing a pathway on the north side of Ashley Road from Waldburg Drive to Pinjar Road will be included in the cost of the proposed traffic management scheme. A report outlining the traffic management scheme will be presented to Council at a later date.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       LISTS the following projects for consideration in the City's 10 Year Pathways and Trails Capital Works Program:

-     Waldburg Drive - Construct 230m x2.5m concrete insitu shared path west side from Spring Hill to the southern end of Gardenia Vista – Cost $53,000;

-     Waldburg Drive -  Construct 345m x 2.5m concrete insitu shared path east side from Spring Hill to Ashley Road – Cost $80,000; and

-     Waldburg Drive - Construct 175m x 2.5m concrete in situ shared path east side from Yandella Prom to Alvarez Parkway – Cost $36,000;

2.       NOTES that a pathway will be included as part of the design of a traffic management scheme for Ashley Road from Waldburg Drive to Pinjar Road;

 

 

3.       NOTES a pathway from No.53 Ashley Road to the existing pathway opposite the eastern end of Watkins Loop will be included as a condition of development for  No. 61 Ashley Road; and

4.       ADVISES the petition organiser of Council's Decision.

 

 

Attachments:

1.	Ashley Road shared path network map	14/294971
2.	Waldburg Drive, Tapping Pathway Network Map	14/294969

 

 

File Ref:                                              5597 – 14/287599

Responsible Officer:                           Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       4         

 

Issue

To consider changes to parking prohibitions on Spring Hill, in the vicinity of Spring Hill Primary School, Tapping.

Background

Council at its meeting of 25 June 2013, considered the implementation of parking prohibitions in the vicinity of Spring Hill Primary School (IN02-06/13 refers) and resolved in part as follows:

 

"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".

The City has since received concerns from parents regarding sightline issues created by parked vehicles at the pedestrian crossing near the bend at Spring Hill, north-west corner of the school, adjacent to Jaeger Park.

A location map of the subject site is shown as Attachment 1.

Detail

Spring Hill Primary School is predominantly bound by Spring Hill, with the south-west portion bound in part by Crimson Way. Currently, parking prohibitions exist on the majority of roads in the vicinity of the school. The existing parking prohibitions allow motorists to park at the bend on Spring Hill, north-west corner of the school, adjacent to Jaeger Park as shown in Attachment 2. While there is sufficient road width to accommodate vehicles parking on the road, with two lanes of traffic operating under bi-directional flow, the parked vehicles are creating a sightline issue for pedestrians crossing from Spring Hill Primary School to Jaeger Park.

Currently, approximately 80 parking bays are available for use by parents. A temporary car park located on the south-east corner of the school also provides some additional parking for parents. Parking prohibitions along Spring Hill limit the available parking, however allow parking on road where possible. City Drawing No. 2777-1-1 details the previously approved parking prohibitions plan, with overlayed car images to help indicate where parents can park in accordance with the approved parking prohibitions (refer Attachment 3).

During the next stage of the school's development it is proposed that its parking capacity will be increased, however, the timeframe of this development is yet to be decided by the Department of Education. The City will be constructing more parking to the south-east of the school in 2016/2017 as part of the construction of a change room and kiosk facilities at Jimbup Swamp Reserve.

 

 

 Consultation

The City has met on site with the Principal of Spring Hill Primary School, who has supported changes to the current parking prohibitions scheme on Spring Hill to remove on-road parking on the inside of the bend between the entry and exit crossovers of the internal car park. Surrounding property owners have not been consulted as the proposed changes are adjacent to the school site only.

Comment

Administration considered the removal of the pedestrian crossing, however, due to the importance of the crossing in providing direct access to a footpath which runs along the boundary of Jaeger Park and connects to Ardea Way, it was considered that pedestrians would continue to cross at this point in any case and subsequently could create a more dangerous crossing environment.

Administration also considered relocating the pram ramps off the bend, however, there is no existing footpath on the western side of Spring Hill south of the current crossing point and there is already a crossing at the safest point north. To move the pram ramps to the straight section of road south of the crossing, a new footpath would have to be constructed. The resources and time needed to construct the path would be relatively high and would not ensure its use due to its large distance from the current crossing point. Furthermore, the implementation of a footpath would be subject to community consultation, design considerations, funding and Council approval.

To ensure safe sightlines are maintained for drivers exiting the school car parks and pedestrians crossing the street, Administration proposes that the existing parking prohibitions be amended to remove the provision for on-road parking on the inside of the bend on Spring Hill between the entry and exit crossovers of the internal car park. City Drawing No. 2777-1-2 reflects the proposed changes (Attachment 4 refers). This change will result in the loss of approximately 18 parking spaces. Furthermore, Administration proposes that the signs be extended to include all times of day, as this safety concern is not only applicable during school times. While the importance of having close proximity parking to the school is recognized, Administration considers pedestrians and other vulnerable road user groups' safety as a higher priority.

 

For the amendments to the parking prohibitions to be effective there will be a requirement for a combination of increased enforcement by the City's Parking Compliance Officers and support from the School community

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 aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2013 – 2023:

 “2     Society - Healthy, safe, vibrant and active communities.

2.3    Safe Communities - We feel safe at home and in our local area.”

 

 

 

Risk Management Considerations

Should Council not take action to improve sight lines on the bend of Spring Hill, then the likelihood of crashes involving pedestrians and other vulnerable road users at this pedestrian crossing will be significantly increased.

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 $100 which can be funded from $20,000 currently allocated to Project PR-2657: Parking Scheme Signage and Line Marking in the 2014/15 Capital Works Program.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

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

2.       Advises the Principal of Spring Hill Primary School of Council's decision.

 

 

Attachments:

1.	Locality_Map_Spring_Hill_PS	14/295112
2.	Spring_Hill_DetailedAerialPlan	14/295113
3.	Parking Prohibitions Existing City Drawing No. 2777-1-1	14/295097
4.	Parking Prohibitions Proposed 2777-1-0	14/295107	Minuted

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

File Ref:                                              3120V03 – 14/293605

Responsible Officer:                           Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       13         

 

Issue

To consider a petition requesting the removal, reduction or modification of the traffic calming measures on Aldersea Circle, Clarkson so as to be less intrusive in regards to noise and hoon traffic.

 

Background

Council received petition PT02-06/14 at its meeting of 24 June 2014.  The petition contains 119 signatures and reads as follows:

“We, the undersigned, all being residents of the City of Wanneroo do formally request Council’s consideration: To remove, reduce or modify the traffic calming measures on Aldersea Circle, Clarkson so as to be less intrusive in regards to noise and hoon traffic."

 

Within the 119 Signatories of the petition, there are 70 from Aldersea Circle, with a number being multiple signatories from the same property. The petition represents 53 properties out of a total 108 properties abutting Aldersea Circle. Refer to Attachment 1 for a location plan of the subject area.  Attachment 2 shows a map of the petition signatories in the Clarkson area.  Additional signatures were collected from residents in Mindarie, Quinns Rocks, Butler, Merriwa and Ridgewood.

Detail

Aldersea Circle is classified within the City's Functional Road Hierarchy as a Local Distributor Road and has been constructed with a 7.4m wide pavement.  Main Roads WA gives an indicative traffic volume range of 6,000 vehicles per day for a Local Distributor Road such as Aldersea Circle.  Average Weekday Traffic counts indicate a traffic volume in the region of 2,000 vehicles per day which indicates that Aldersea Circle is functioning well within its capacity. 

 

The majority of properties fronting Aldersea Circle are residential, however Clarkson Primary School and Richard Aldersea Park abut the northern end of Aldersea Circle and Anthony Waring Park abuts the southern side of Aldersea Circle.  A footpath is located on one side of Aldersea Circle to cater for pedestrians, including children from local schools with three school crossings located at the Renshaw Boulevard, Brooks Pass and Pitchford Glade intersections.

Consultation

Community consultation was undertaken in August 2012 to determine the view of affected residents and property owners.  A total of 132 letters were sent asking residents and property owners if they agree or disagree with the installation of speed cushions on Aldersea Circle.  A total of 57 responses were received (43% response rate).  Of these, 40 strongly agreed, 5 agreed, 3 disagreed and 9 strongly disagreed.  It is noted that two submissions were received from two separate properties.  One property submitted two resident responses, one strongly agreeing and one disagreeing.  The owner and resident of another property also submitted responses   strongly agreeing to the proposal. 

 

With 79% of responses either strongly agreeing or agreeing with the installation of speed cushions on Aldersea Circle, it was considered that the proposal had sufficient community support to proceed and a project for the installation of traffic treatments in this road was included in the City's Capital Works Budget 2012/13 and approved by Council.

 

During community consultation the City advised residents, by letter, of both the positive and negative impacts of the rubberised speed cushions, including the issue of increased vehicle noise with specific reference being made to the noise created by the displacement of loads in trade vehicles and trailers.  Residents were also asked whether they agreed to have a speed cushion outside their residence and whether they would agree to have a new streetlight adjacent or opposite their residence.   These responses were incorporated into the design as far as possible without compromising the overall effectiveness of the treatment.

 

Refer to Attachment 3 for a copy of the community consultation letter sent to residents and property owners and Attachment 4 showing a map of responses from residents and owners with properties abutting Aldersea Circle.

 

It is noted that 26 of the 53 signatory properties abutting Aldersea Circle of the Petition did not respond at the time of community consultation for the installation of speed cushions and 15 properties who strongly agreed/agreed at the time of community consultation have changed their position now. The remaining 12 properties disagreed at the time of initial community consultation

Comment

In July 2011, the City received a complaint from a resident reporting excessive speed along Aldersea Circle.  To obtain an objective assessment of the situation, the City evaluated Aldersea Circle in accordance with the City's Traffic Management Investigation and Intervention Policy (TMIIP) which provides the decision making process to decide between roads which require infrastructure changes and those requiring better policing. This is standard practice when complaints are made about speeding on this class of road. This assessment was undertaken in July 2011 using traffic data collected in March 2009. The assessment is based on the scoring of 9 criteria:

 

·    Speeding

·    Traffic volumes

·    Crash history

·    Road design and topography

·    Vulnerable road users – pedestrian/cyclists

·    Activity generators – schools/retail

·    Commercial vehicle volumes

·    Amenity

·    Future needs

 

This is a generic policy used for assisting the decision making process about the introduction of traffic treatments. There are many different traffic treatment options available and each of them has different positive and negative impacts on residents. Considering the variety of traffic treatments available, the varied impacts and the inability to convert the impact into numerical figure does not allow the City to include this impact as part of the TMIIP Policy.

 

As a result of this investigation, it was found that Aldersea Circle received a Traffic Management Score of 71.  A score over 60 indicates that traffic management treatments are warranted to provide the community with a safer road environment. 

 

 

 

Based on the assessment undertaken by the City, the installation of traffic treatments on Aldersea Circle was included in the City's Capital Works Budget 2012/13 which was approved by Council on 26 June 2012.

 

Following Council approval of the works, Administration conducted an assessment of potential traffic treatments to determine the most effective treatment option available at this location.  The decision to install speed cushions instead of other traffic management treatments was based primarily on the geometry of the road and existing crossover locations which precluded the use of a number of horizontal displacement devices such as median treatments and blister islands. The speed cushions chosen are vertical displacement devices and are effective in reducing vehicle speeds and minimising associated negative impacts such as increased vehicle noise and impact on public transport and emergency vehicles compared with other vertical displacement devices such as plateaux and asphalt speed humps.  As the speed cushions do not require any longitudinal element to be built into the median, they do not impact on property access. If motorists, including emergency vehicle drivers slow down and traverse the speed cushions at low speed, the generated noise and discomfort is very low compared to other vertical displacement devices. In regard to effect on emergency vehicles, it is acknowledged that all traffic treatments affect this class of vehicle. For example, emergency vehicles need to slow down at roundabouts, blister islands, speed humps and other horizontal deflection treatments.

 

This concern about the impacts on emergency vehicles has been raised by some residents.  The overall impacts on call out time and passenger comfort have been examined regarding speed humps in Austroads Guide to Traffic Management Part 8: Local Area Traffic Management with the following findings:

 

·        humps cause no damage to emergency vehicles if crossed at the recommended speeds

·        humps are no worse than the off-road, driveway and on-kerb manoeuvring done in the normal course of emergency vehicle operation

·        emergency response times are primarily determined by the adequacy of main roads, not the short approach stretches in neighbourhoods

·        the requirements of rare events should not be allowed to completely overshadow everyday safety and amenity needs

·        speed control devices, by reducing the risks of injury in local streets, help to reduce the number of calls for emergency services.

 

The speed cushions installed on Aldersea Circle are designed to minimise impact on emergency vehicles when compared with the speed humps reviewed.  Administration is of the opinion that these findings indicate that the speed cushions installed on Aldersea Circle will have minimal impact on emergency vehicles.  Refer to Commentary 26 in Attachment 5 for the relevant section of Austroads.

 

Report IN07-04/11 was presented to Council in April 2011.  This report outlines both the positive and negative impacts of speed cushions for general use within the City when compared to alternative forms of traffic management.  The report also examined both community acceptance and the effectiveness of speed cushions using a review of speed cushions installed on Burnett Drive, Clarkson and information from the State Government Anti Hoon Speed Humps Program.  The report recommended that speed cushions be considered for greater use by the City, and in response to this report Council voted unanimously to:

 

 

 

"1.  ENDORSE the use of rubber speed cushions as an acceptable traffic management treatment; and

2.   NOTE that rubber speed cushions will be installed in accordance with the guidelines used by Anti Hoon Speed Humps Program and at sites which qualify for traffic management under the City's Traffic Management Investigation and Implementation Policy."

 

Speed cushions are widely used by local governments throughout Australia.  The State Government also supports the use of speed cushions and administers an 'Anti Hoon Speed Hump Program' supporting their installation within the state.  The speed cushions used along with line marking and signage have been designed to meet Main Roads WA (MRWA) standards and lighting has been provided to meet current Australian Standards.

 

Administration concedes that while the speed cushions are considered to minimise noise in relation to other vertical displacement devices, there is still a recognised impact on noise levels for properties within close proximity to the speed cushions.  It should be noted, however, that all traffic treatments which are designed to reduce vehicle speeds have impacts regarding noise as vehicles decelerate on approach to the traffic treatment and accelerate again on exit. Should it be resolved that the speed cushions be removed, Administration considers that there is no effective alternative traffic treatment which could be installed in Aldersea Circle that would as effectively control vehicle speeds while reducing noise levels and allowing property access to all residents.  Any treatment option would be considerably more expensive to install and would either impact on residents' access to their properties or would require spacing of treatments at distances which would severely limit the effectiveness of the overall traffic management scheme.

 

The City has previously installed rubberised speed cushions at a number of locations within the Coastal Ward with repeated success in reducing vehicle speeds.  Traffic count data was used to assess the impact of speed cushions at these locations with the 85^th % speed (the speed which 85% of vehicles are travelling at or below) and the number of vehicles exceeding the speed limit used as the basis on which to measure success.  A summary of previous speed cushion installations is presented below:

 

Traffic Counter Location	85th % Speed (km/h)		Vehicles Exceeding Speed Limit (%)
	Before	After	Before	After
Burnett Drive, Clarkson	60	45	65	6
Alexandria View, Mindarie	53	34	23	1
Rosslare Promenade, Mindarie	58	41	41	3
Jenolan Way, Merriwa	55	47	46	9

 

Speed is a major factor in both the incidence and severity of crashes.  Vehicles travelling at higher speeds are more likely to be involved in a crash and the outcomes of the crash are likely to be more severe.  This is because travelling at greater speed:

 

·    allows motorists less time to recognise hazards;

·    increases the distance the vehicle travels while reacting to hazards;

·    increases the vehicle’s stopping distance after braking in response to the hazard;

·    reduces the opportunity for other road users to avoid a collision;

·    makes it more likely that a driver will lose control of the vehicle; and

·    increases the impact forces in the event of crash, making severe injuries more likely.

 

As can be seen in the data, speed cushions have had repeated success in lowering vehicle speeds at the sites of previous installations within the City of Wanneroo.

 

Community consultation was conducted by the City in August 2012 with the majority of respondents in favour of installing rubberised speed cushions on Aldersea Circle.  Minor design changes were made based on the feedback received during community consultation and the speed cushions were installed in February 2014.  Maps of the speed cushion locations are shown in Attachment 6 and Attachment 7 and the final design as constructed is shown in Attachment 8 and Attachment 9. It is to be noted that the City has previously installed speed cushions on various City roads. A list of roads with length and number of cushions are listed below.

 

 

Road Name	No of Locations	Total Number of Speed Cushions	Length of the Road (m)
Rosslare Promenade, Mindarie	3	6	381
Jenolan Way	5	15	515
Victorsen Parade	4	8	778
Brazier Road	3	6	1284
Driver Road Darch	5	10	899
Russell Road	3	6	963
Burnett Drive Clarkson	6	12	535
Coldstream Circuit	5	10	1089
Backshall Place	3	6	700

 

For comparison, 22 speed cushions are installed at 11 locations on Aldersea Circle on a 1600m length. The number and location of speed cushions on any road depends on the availability of other treatments along the road such as roundabouts, horizontal deflections and property access. The type and location of speed cushions along Aldersea Circle were chosen based on MRWA standard drawing no. 200931-0004-1 (Attachment 10 refers). MRWA approves and installs signs and line marking on the basis of the standard drawings. In accordance with Main Roads standards, speed cushions should ideally be spaced between 80 and 100m apart with a maximum of 250m to achieve the best results. All of the above criteria were considered at the time of selecting location for speed cushions on Aldersea Circle.

 

Following the installation of traffic treatments on Aldersea Circle, the City received feedback from four residents about vehicles mounting the kerb to avoid travelling over the speed cushions.  To rectify this issue, bollards were installed between 21 and 23 May 2014 near most speed cushions to stop this practice.  It is noted that the vast majority of signatures on petition PT02-06/14 were collected prior to the installation of these bollards with only 18 of the 119 signatures collected after 21 May 2014.  Administration considers that the installation of the rubber bollards represents a substantial modification which has improved the operation of the traffic treatments on Aldersea Circle.

 

Recent feedback from residents indicates that while the installation of bollards has deterred the majority of drivers from mounting the kerb, there remains a small minority of motorists still willing to leave the roadway to avoid travelling over the speed cushions, particularly where there is an adjoining pathway.  It is recommended that additional bollards be installed as shown in Attachment 11 to further address this issue.  An example of the proposed additional bollards is provided in Attachment 12.

 

During this period the City also received one report of a newly installed light not working, one report that large vehicles were not being slowed and requesting larger speed cushions to address this and one complaint about noise.  In addition to this, one resident submitted two complaints to Council citing the following perceived issues:

 

 

 

·    the speed cushions having limited effect in slowing large vehicles;

·    emergency vehicles being bumped as they cross the speed cushions;

·    noise created by vehicles at the speed cushions;

·    motorists doing burnouts on the speed cushions;

·    skateboarders using the speed cushions as ramps;

·    vehicles driving around the speed cushions;

·    pregnant ladies finding the speed cushions uncomfortable;

·    a car almost being rear ended because they had to slow at the speed cushions and the car behind was too close;

·    additional lighting causing a neighbour angst;

·    the speed cushions having no effect on the 'gunbarrel effect';

·    spinal stress for people with pre-existing medical conditions;

·    people mentioning that they need wheel alignments;

·    a real estate agent saying that property prices could be lowered;

·    drivers being distracted by speed cushions; and

·    council not being properly informed of the negative impacts of speed cushions

 

The City has carried out objective testing in order to determine the effectiveness of the rubberised speed cushions in reducing vehicle speeds on Aldersea Circle.  Traffic counts were undertaken in June 2014 with the counters being placed in the same locations as those of the original traffic counts used to assess Aldersea Circle.  These counters work by measuring the time difference and axle length of vehicles passing over two tubes laid perpendicular to the road. The information collected can be used to determine vehicle speeds, traffic volumes and vehicle classifications.  It is not possible at this time to conduct a full assessment in accordance with the City's Traffic Management Investigation and Intervention Policy as five years of crash data is required to allow an accurate assessment of crash history.

 

A Summary of the results of the traffic counts is presented in the table below:

 

Traffic Counter Location	85th % Speed (km/h)		Vehicles Exceeding Speed Limit (%)
	June 2012	June 2014	June 2012	June 2014
North of Victorsen Parade	58	48	56	9
East of Hurst Trail	59	45	57	6
North of Pitchford Glade	57	46	46	7
North of Frawley Ramble	58	50	59	15
COMBINED DATA	58	48	55	9

 

Overall, there has been a 10km/h drop in the 85^th percentile speed from 58 km/h to 48 km/h.  Compliance with the default speed limit of 50 km/h has also significantly improved from 55% of vehicles travelling over the speed limit prior to traffic treatments to just 9% of vehicles exceeding 50km/h following the installation of the rubberised speed cushions.  These results are consistent with the results of previous installations of rubberised speed cushions within the City.

 

Additional analysis of the traffic counts east of Hurst Trail was conducted to determine the effect of the speed cushions near Clarkson Primary school during the hours of 7:30am – 9:00am and 2:30pm to 4:00pm when the 40 km/h school zone is in place.  Prior to the installation of the speed cushions, 77% of vehicles were over the 40 k/h speed limit with the 85^th percentile speed 55 km/h.  After the installation of the speed cushions, the proportion of speeding vehicles fell to 23% and the 85^th percentile speed dropped to 42 km/h.

 

 

Speed cushions are primarily provided where a large proportion of vehicles are exceeding the speed limit such as in Aldersea Circle.  While low level speeding (0-9km/h over the limit) is not considered a significant risk by some members of the community, research shows that the high number of vehicles involved in low level speeding leads to a road safety burden for the community.  The Office of Road Safety attributes almost a third of speed related deaths and serious injuries to vehicles this low level speeding range.

 

Speed surveys and community attitude surveys demonstrate that speeding is a relatively common behaviour and low level speeding (0-9km/h over the limit) is considered largely acceptable. However, given the large numbers of those involved in low level speeding this translates to a real road safety burden for the community, with almost a third of the speed related deaths and serious injuries attributable to the low speed range.

 

The overall speed distributions for Aldersea Circle are shown graphically in Attachment 13.

 

No specific reference is made in the petition regarding the nature of the 'hoon traffic' which the petitioners feel is intrusive.   WA Police define a hoon driver as 'anyone who drives at very high speed or in a manner that is considered highly dangerous or antisocial.'

 

Examples given are:

 

·        Intentionally causing tyres to lose traction

·        causing a vehicle to make excessive noise or smoke

·        exceeding the speed limit by 45 km/h or more (e.g. travelling at more than 95 km/h in a 50 km/h zone )

·        engaging in a race or speed trial on a public road or in a public space

 

Of these hoon behaviours, the City has conducted traffic counts over the period of one week in 2012, prior to the installation of speed cushions and for one week in 2014, following the installation of the speed cushions.  Traffic counts data shows the number of vehicles exceeding the speed limit by 45 km/h or more has dropped from eleven to zero following the installation of speed cushions.

 

While speed cushions are primarily installed to stop low level speeding, they have also proven effective in reducing speeding over 45km/h above the speed limit, considered hoon behaviour under the Road Traffic Amendment (Hoons) Act 2009.  The installation of traffic treatments alone cannot be 100% effective in eliminating hoon behaviour.  While the City is concerned for the safety of all road users, its authority and responsibility is limited to the safe construction and maintenance of its roads.  Individual drivers have the responsibility to drive within the State road rules. If drivers choose to disregard those rules the WA Police is the only authority to enforce compliance.  If hoon driving is still occurring on Aldersea Circle, community members are encouraged to report their concerns to the WA Police to assist them with enforcement of the Road Traffic Code. Complaints about speeding/hooning should be directed to WA Police by calling the 'Hoon Hotline' on 13144. More information about reporting hoon behaviour can be found on the WA Police website in the following link

 

http://www.police.wa.gov.au/Yoursafety/Antisocialbehaviour/Reportinghoons/tabid/1127/Default.aspx

 

Crash Data is one of the criteria used in the City's Traffic Management Investigation and Implementation Policy which contributes to the Traffic Management Score.  As yet, it is not possible to accurately measure the impact of the speed cushions on crash rates in Aldersea Circle.  The City has access to crash data held by Main Roads WA.  This data is updated annually and the most recent update includes the period 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2013, but does not include the period following the installation of speed cushions.

 

 

 

 

This information is collected by Main Roads from all road crashes reported to WA Police.  At present, WA Police require that a crash be reported where:

 

·    the incident resulted in bodily harm to any person; or

·    the total value of property damaged to all involved parties exceeds $3000; or

·    the owner or representative of any damaged property is not present.

 

This information is broken down by Main Roads WA into five categories of crash severity, these being fatal; hospital; medical; property damage only (PDO) Major and PDO minor.  In assessment using the City's Traffic Management Investigation and Implementation Policy, these categories are combined to form the three categories, fatal; injury and PDO.

 

For clarification, Property Damage Only (PDO) crashes are those crashes where no medical treatment is required by individuals involved in the crash. These crashes do not specifically refer to damage to a property, but include damage caused to vehicles and infrastructure as a result of a crash.

 

A summary of current five year crash data is included in the table below and shows the inherent annual variation in the number of reported crashes over the period January 1 2009 to December 31 2013 where no significant infrastructure changes have taken place in Aldersea Circle.

 

Year	Fatal	Injury	PDO	TOTAL
2009	0	0	0	0
2010	0	0	3	3
2011	0	0	0	0
2012	0	0	1	1
2013	0	2	0	2

 

Residents have reported concerns about out of control vehicles causing damage to properties following the installation of the speed cushions.  Administration can not accurately assess the issue of out of control vehicles at this time as it relies on objective crash data collected by WA Police in any assessment of crash history.  Crash data for the five years from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2013 indicates that the issue of out of control vehicles causing damage to property is a pre-existing issue with four midblock (non intersection) loss of control crashes reported during this time.  These crashes resulted in damage to a parked car, an SEC pole, a letter box, a home and a fence.  No injuries were recorded at any of these crashes.  Once sufficient crash data is released to the City, further assessment of crash history will be undertaken by the City.

 

The rubberised speed cushions installed in Aldersea Circle have had a significant and measurable effect in reducing vehicle speeds.  This reduction in vehicle speeds is expected to lead to positive road safety outcomes for the local Community.  It is considered that the benefits in reducing the risk of death or serious injury from motor vehicle crashes outweigh the concerns expressed in the petition.

Statutory Compliance

Nil

 

 

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2013 – 2023:

 “2     Society - Healthy, safe, vibrant and active communities.

2.3    Safe Communities - We feel safe at home and in our local area.”

Risk Management Considerations

Due to the location of property accesses on Aldersea Circle, Administration considers the installation of alternative traffic treatments will not be as effective as speed cushions in the reduction of vehicle speed. Installation of alternative vertical displacement devices is possible but these are considerably more expensive and there is additional noise as a result of more severe displacement to vehicles. Horizontal displacement devices could be used and these would eliminate the noise caused by vertical displacement but there would still be noise generated by the deceleration and acceleration of vehicles. Additionally, the size of these treatments would mean that they would either restrict access to properties on Aldersea Circle or would need to be placed at intervals where they would have severely limited effect on vehicle speeds.  This view is supported by recent community consultation with residents of Quinns Road which found that blister islands were not supported by the community as they felt the associated impact on property access was not acceptable.

Council has consistently approved the installation of rubberised speed cushions on local roads to address speeding problems. Assessment of traffic speeds on Aldersea Circle since the installation of the speed cushions has shown that they have been effective in reducing the speed of motorists and minimised the risk of crashes. Based on this data, the removal of the speed cushions from Aldersea Circle will likely result in the vehicle speeds returning to the levels recorded prior to the installation of traffic treatments.  This increase in speed will increase the likelihood and severity of crashes.  In the case of a serious crash occurring on Aldersea Circle following the removal of the speed cushions, it is likely that Council's decision would be seriously questioned by the community as it is contrary to its risk appetite statement.

While the speed cushions can be reused in other locations, this traffic management project cost in the order of $74,000 and should the speed cushions be removed, then this action could be seen by the community as a waste of funds expended for this project.

Policy Implications

The City’s Traffic Management Investigation and Implementation Policy has been used in assessing this petition. The TM Policy was adopted by Council as a way of determining the justification and priority of competing requests for traffic treatments.

Financial Implications

The order of cost estimate to remove all speed cushions and associated signage and line marking from Aldersea Circle is $73,000.  Significant components of this cost estimate are the grinding off of the line marking and traffic control.  It is also noted that this estimated cost does not include the removal of the seven streetlights installed as part of the traffic management scheme.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       DOES NOT SUPPORT the removal of traffic treatments on Aldersea Circle;

2.       APPROVES the installation of additional bollards to the speed cushion installations at the locations shown on Attachment 11, with the works to be funded from Project No. PR-2656 Traffic Management Projects-Various

3.       ADVISES the petition organiser of Council's decision and the process with regards to advising WA Police of hoon behaviour;

 

 

Attachments:

1.	Aldersea Circle Location Map	14/193666
2.	Aldersea Circle, Clarkson - Speed Cushion Petition Signatories	14/225970
3.	Community Consultation - Speed Cushions - Aldersea Circle Clarkson pdf version	14/211299
4.	Aldersea Circle Community Consultation Map	14/226202
5.	AGTM08-08 Guide to Traffic Management - Impact on Emergency Vehicles	14/275153
6.	Aerial Map Speed Cushions Aldersea Circle, Clarkson 1	14/224768
7.	Aerial Map Speed Cushions Aldersea Circle, Clarkson 2	14/224765
8.	Aldersea Traffic Treatments Drawing 1	14/193615
9.	Aldersea Traffic Treatments Drawing 2	14/193617
10.	Main Roads WA standard drawing for Speed Cushions on 7.4m road pavement - 200931-0004-1	14/236343
11.	Aldersea Circle Pine Bollard Installation	14/280934	Minuted
12.	Aldersea Circle Additional Treatment Example	14/280407
13.	Aldersea Speed Distribution.xlsx	14/226248