B&WLogo_circle&text

 

 

 

 

BRIEFING PAPERS

FOR ELECTED MEMBERS’

BRIEFING SESSION

 

Draft Only

 

 

 

 

 

to be held at

the Civic Centre,

Dundebar Rd, Wanneroo

on 14 July 2015 commencing at 6.00pm


PROCEDURE FOR FULL COUNCIL BRIEFING

PRINCIPLES

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

 

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

 

PROCESS

The briefing session will commence at 6.00 pm and will be chaired by the Mayor or in his/her absence the Deputy Mayor.  In the absence of both, Councillors will elect a chairperson from amongst those present.  In general, Standing Orders will apply, EXCEPT THAT Elected Members may speak more than once on any item, there is no moving or seconding items, Officers will address the Elected Members and the order of business will be as follows:-

 

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

Ø  Attendance and Apologies

Ø  Declarations of Interest

Ø  Reports for discussion

Ø  Tabled Items

Ø  Public Question Time

Ø  Closure

 

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

 

AGENDA CONTENTS

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

 

AGENDA DISTRIBUTION

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

 

DEPUTATIONS

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

 

RECORD OF BRIEFING

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

 

LOCATION

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


 

 

 

Briefing Papers for Tuesday 14 July 2015

 

 

 

 

CONTENTS

 

Item  1_____ Attendances_ 1

Item  2_____ Apologies and Leave of Absence_ 1

Item  3_____ Reports_ 1

Planning and Sustainability  1

Policies and Studies  1

3.1                         Amendment to Local Planning Policy 3.8: Marmion Avenue Arterial Road Access Policy  1

Town Planning Schemes & Structure Plans  13

3.2                         Adoption of Amendment No. 1 to the Alkimos - Eglinton District Structure Plan No. 18  13

3.3                         Reconsideration of Amendment No. 2 to Drovers Place Precinct Agreed Structure Plan No. 80  29

Development Applications  45

3.4                         Proposed Drive Through addition to Approved Liquor Store  45

3.5                         Four Grouped Dwellings with Commercial Portions DA2015/489 at Lot 2 (8) Duncombe Grove, Quinns Rocks  72

3.6                         Application for Child Care Centre at 1K Hinchinbrook Avenue, Ridgewood  88

3.7                         Proposed Child Care Centre - Wyatt Grove Shopping Centre - 100 Gungurru Avenue, Hocking  104

Other Matters  114

3.8                         Draft Perth and Peel @ 3.5 Million Strategy and Draft North-West Sub-regional Planning Framework  114

3.9                         Consideration of a Management Strategy - Pedestrian Accessway between The Avenue and Feathertop Rise, Alexander Heights  178

3.10                      PT01-05/15 Request to construct a coastal Dual Use Pathway between Burns Beach and Mindarie  224

Infrastructure  229

Asset Management  229

3.11                      Metropolitan Regional Roads Program - 2016/2017  229

Infrastructure Maintenance  234

3.12                      Two Rocks Coastal Management  234

3.13                      Quinns Beach Long Term Coastal Management Study - Coastal Processes Assessment (Stage 1) 242

Infrastructure Projects  250

3.14                      Spence Road Closure at Old Yanchep Road, Neerabup  250

Traffic Management  253

3.15                      PT01-02/15  Request Traffic Treatments, Upgrades of Road Surfaces and Footpaths, Landsdale Road, Landsdale. 253

3.16                      Parking Prohibitions - The Broadview between Southmead Drive and Playford Mews, Landsdale. 261

3.17                      Mercy College, Alexander Heights - Traffic Flow and Road Safety Improvement Works  268

3.18                      Parking Prohibitions Review - Ocean Keys Shopping Centre, Clarkson  279

3.19                      City of Wanneroo Road Safety Strategic Action Plan 2015- 2018  285

3.20                      Aldersea Circle, Clarkson Traffic Treatments - Community Consultation  333

Corporate Strategy & Performance  376

Finance  376

3.21                      Warrant of Payments for the Period to 30 June 2015  376

3.22                      Financial Activity Statement for the Period Ended 31 May 2015  452

Governance and Legal  466

3.23                      Financial Assistance Grants to Local Government  466

3.24                      Naming of City Assets and Memorials Policy  471

3.25                      Donations to be Considered by Council - July 2015  485

Property  491

3.26                      Proposed Joint Lease to the Vikings Softball Club Inc and the Wanneroo Giants Baseball Club Incorporated over portion of Crown Reserve 28058, Kingsway, Madeley  491

Item  4_____ Motions on Notice_ 495

4.1                         Cr Brett Treby – Proposal to remove Civic and Cultural zoning from Lot 5483 (41) Park Lane, Alexander Heights and incorporate the land into Alexander Heights Park  495

4.2                         Cr Linda Aitken – Yanchep Secondary School  499

Item  5_____ Late Reports (to be circulated under separate cover) 503

5.1                         Application for Cattery at Lot 151 (41) Casuarina Way, Wanneroo  503

Item  6_____ Public Question Time_ 503

Item  7_____ Confidential_ 503

7.1                         Investigation into Potential Breaches of Confidence and Violations of the City’s Code of Conduct  503

7.2                         Proposed Disposal of Lot 9001 (44) Mullingar Way, Landsdale  503

7.3                         Proposed Land Sales Opportuntiy Street, Wangara  503

7.4                         Acquisition of Lot 505 (3) Lagoon Drive, Yanchep  504

7.5                         Appointment of CEO to the Shire of York Monitoring/Mentoring Panel  504

Item  8_____ Date of Next Meeting_ 504

Item  9_____ Closure_ 504

 


Agenda

 

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

Cr DG Guise                                                   Central Ward (Leave of Absence 19.06.15-03.08.15)

Item  3      Reports

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

Planning and Sustainability

Policies and Studies

3.1    Amendment to Local Planning Policy 3.8: Marmion Avenue Arterial Road Access Policy

File Ref:                                              4605 – 15/122934

Responsible Officer:                           Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       4         

Previous Items:                                   PS08-04/13 Agenda; PS08-04/13 Resolution

                                                            Adoption of Amendment No. 1 to the Butler District Centre - Agreed Activity Centre Structure Plan No. 87

 

Issue

To consider submissions received in response to advertising of a proposed amendment to Local Planning Policy 3.8: Marmion Avenue Arterial Road Access Policy (LPP 3.8).

 

Background

At the Council Meeting of 30 April 2013 (item PS08-04/13), Council adopted Amendment 1 to Agreed Structure Plan No. 87 Butler District Centre (ASP 87).  This Structure Plan Amendment proposed to apply new precincts and zones as well as to alter the access arrangements to Butler Boulevard, between the railway and the freeway.

 

In accordance with Provision 6 (Part 2) of LPP 3.8, an amendment to LPP 3.8 is required where an application is made to Council seeking to depart from the intersection location, design or any other provision of the Policy. 

 

As the proposed revised access arrangements to Butler Boulevard were not consistent with the access arrangements identified in LPP 3.8 Council, as part of the decision to adopt the Amendment 1 to ASP 87 on 30 April 2013 (item PS08-04/13), therefore resolved to:

 

INITIATE an amendment to Local Planning Policy 3.8: Marmion Avenue Arterial Road Access to reflect the access arrangements sought by the applicant as shown in Attachment 3 of this report and ADVERTISES the amendment for a period of 21 days by way of:

 

a)      An advertisement in a local newspaper for two consecutive weeks;

b)      Display at the City's Administration Centre Building, City Libraries and on the City's website; and

c)      Written notification to relevant government departments and stakeholders as determined by the Director Planning and Sustainability.”

 

The ASP 87 Preferred Access Plan (Attachment 1) shows the proponent's preferred access arrangements along Butler Boulevard between the Butler Railway and the proposed freeway. The only changes proposed to Amended LPP 3.8 are to the Spatial Plan on the eastern part of Butler Boulevard (refer Attachment 2). The proposed changes are summarised below:

 

·        Relocation of intersections between Butler Railway and the eastern-most traffic signals;

·        Additional intersections east of Butler Railway;

·        Classification of some intersections east of Butler Railway changed from only left-in left-outs to:

o   left-in only;

o   full movement T intersections; and

o   no right-out T intersections.

 

There were no changes proposed to the LPP 3.8 text provisions. The complete draft amended LPP 3.8 is included as Attachment 3.

 

The Western Australian Planning Commission approved Amendment 1 to ASP 87 on 4 June 2014.  The draft amended LPP 3.8 is now being presented to Council for final approval.

Consultation

The advertising of the proposed amendment to LPP 3.8 has been completed as per the requirements in Council's resolution above.  Two submissions were received; one from Chappell Lambert Everett and one from Main Roads WA. A summary of the two submissions, and Administration's comment on them, are included as Attachment 4.

Detail

The submission from Chappell Lambert Everett expressed support for the proposed Policy amendment, which is in line with the Structure Plan amendment for which they were the applicant. This submission also outlines the process of how the traffic assessment was conducted during the Structure Plan stage.

 

The submission from Main Roads raised some issues with the proposed amendment to LPP 3.8.  A summary of Main Roads WA's comments and Administrations response is provided below:

 

1.       The road classification for Butler Boulevard should be further assessed because of the projected future traffic volumes.


Administration considers the design for Butler Boulevard, and the intersections along it, are within the design specifications for the road types identified. The proponents traffic modelling suggests that the current road classification of Butler Boulevard can support the forecast traffic volumes.

 

2.       Additional vehicular access to Butler Boulevard at the proposed locations will not assist in reducing traffic congestion and should be rationalised in accordance with WAPC's Regional Roads Development Control Policy 5.1 (DC 5.1)


Administration considers the additional access points are necessary to link the modified Structure Plan area with Butler Boulevard. The number of full access T junctions has been minimised as much as practicable, which also reduces the risk of dangerous incidents, as stated in DC 5.1.

 

3.       LPP 3.8 refers to no direct access being permitted to Integrator Arterial roads (A) and (B) except for the purpose of superlots or where a commercial development creates rationalised access with the public road with an easement in gross granting reciprocal rights of access. No rationalised access has occurred.

 

          No properties are gaining direct access to Butler Boulevard as part of this amendment.

 

4.       The proposed amendment to Local Planning Policy 3.8 does not conform to the Transport Report prepared for the Brighton District Structure Plan. There needs to be consistency so that appropriate details are provided and comments developed.

 

          Administration confirms the proposed amendment to LPP 3.8 shows an access arrangement that is the same as the preferred ASP 87 access arrangements in Attachment 1. The changes that exist between the preferred ASP 87 access arrangements and the Traffic Report prepared and submitted as part of ASP 87 were considered during the 3 April 2013 Council Meeting and deemed acceptable due to their minor nature.

Comment

The proposed amendment to LPP 3.8 is an administrative requirement to comply with the provisions of the Policy.

 

The comments provided by Main Roads are primarily in response to Amendment 1 to Agreed Structure Plan No. 87 Butler District Centre (ASP 87), which has already been adopted by both Council and the WAPC; and not directly in relation to the draft amended LPP 3.8.

 

In light of the above comments, Administration recommends no changes in response to submissions and that Council finally adopts draft amended LPP 3.8.

Statutory Compliance

In accordance with Clause 8.11.3(c) of DPS 2, Council shall review the draft amended Policy in light of submissions made and shall then resolve either to finally adopt the draft amended Policy with or without modification, or to not proceed with the draft amended Policy.


 

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.

Policy Implications

This proposal involves an amendment to LPP 3.8.

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

 

 1.      NOTES the submissions received regarding draft Amendment 1 to Local Planning Policy 3.8: Marmion Avenue Access Policy and ENDORSES Administration's responses to issues raised in those submissions as set out in Attachment 4;

 

2.       Pursuant to Clause 8.11.3 of District Planning Scheme No. 2, ADOPTS the draft amendment to LPP 3.8, as shown in Attachment 3;  and

 

3.       Pursuant to Clauses 8.11.3.1(d) and (e) of District Planning Scheme No. 2, PUBLISHES notice of its adoption of LPP 3.8 in the Wanneroo Times and North Coast Times community newspapers, FORWARDS a copy of the adopted Policy to the WAPC for its information, and ADVISES respondents of Council's decision.

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1 AMENDMENT 1 - BUTLER DISTRICT CENTRE ACTIVITY CENTRE STRUCTURE PLAN NO 87 - PART 1 STATUTORY SECTION(3).PDF

13/137930

 

2.

Attachment 2 Comparison of spatial plans

13/137937

 

3.

Advertised Amendment 1 LPP 3.8 Marmion Avenue Arterial Road Access Policy

13/88542

Minuted

4.

Attachment 4 Summary of Submissions

13/140823

Minuted

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                      5

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                   6


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                   7


 


 


 


 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                    12

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                     13

Draft

Town Planning Schemes & Structure Plans

3.2    Adoption of Amendment No. 1 to the Alkimos - Eglinton District Structure Plan No. 18

File Ref:                                              3384-01 – 15/181660

Responsible Officer:                           Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       4         

 

Issue

To consider submissions received during public advertising of Amendment No. 1 to the Alkimos Eglinton District Structure Plan No. 18 (DSP 18) and adoption of Amendment No. 1.

 

Applicant

Roberts Day

Owner

LandCorp

Site Area

2,626ha

MRS Zoning

Urban, Urban Deferred, Regional Parks and Recreation, Other Regional Road, Public Purpose

DPS 2 Zoning

Urban Development, Regional Parks and Recreation, Centre, Other Regional Roads, Primary Regional Roads, Public Purpose - MRS

 

 

Background

On 26 August 2013, Roberts Day on behalf of LandCorp, submitted Amendment No. 1 to DSP 18 for the City’s consideration. On 9 October 2013, the Manager Planning Implementation forwarded a memorandum to all Elected Members, providing the opportunity for members to request referral of the proposal to Council for consent to advertise. No such requests were received and, as such, advertising of Amendment No. 1 to DSP 18 commenced on 22 October 2013 in accordance with Clause 9.5 of District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DSP 2).

 

A copy of the DSP 18 map showing the location of the Amendment No. 1 area is provided as Attachment 1.

 

The proposal was advertised in conjunction with the Draft Central Alkimos Structure Plan No. 95 (LSP 95) and Draft Alkimos City Centre Activity Centre Structure Plan No 89 (CSP 89). The complexity and interrelated nature of the issues has led to a significant delay in the proponent responding to the issues raised through consultation (as discussed below). The draft LSP 95 and CSP 89 are intended to be presented back to the City later in the year for further consideration.

Detail

DSP 18 provides for the overall district context for planning of the area and has formed the basis for development of more detailed Local Structure Plans in Alkimos and Eglinton primarily the South Alkimos Agreed Structure Plan No. 72 (ASP 72), North Alkimos Agreed Structure Plan No. 73 (ASP 73), Eglinton Agreed Structure Plan No. 82 (ASP 82) and North Eglinton Agreed Structure Plan No. 93 (ASP 93) as well as Draft CSP 89 and Draft LSP 95. Amendment No. 1 was submitted proposing the following modifications:

 

1.         Reduction of land area zoned for ‘Service Commercial’, from 61 hectares to 29 hectares adjacent to Romeo Road;

2.         Increase of land area zoned for ‘Secondary and District Centres’, from 154.8 hectares to 186.8 hectares (as reflected in CSP 89)

 

3.         Removal of reference to the proposed Park and Ride Station on Alkimos Drive, on advice from the Public Transport Authority (PTA) that this station is no longer required (as reflected in LSP 95);

 

4.         Relocation of a proposed Neighbourhood Centre; and

 

5.         Associated minor modifications to text and figures associated with the modifications detailed above.

 

A map showing the Amendment No. 1 to DSP 18 map and proposed changes, as lodged and advertised, is provided as Attachment 2.

Consultation

Amendment No. 1 was advertised for public comment from 22 October 2013 to 3 December 2013 by means of an on-site sign, an advertisement in the Wanneroo Times, North Coast Times and Sun City newspaper, the City’s website and letters written to adjoining landowners. 13 submissions were received during this period. A summary of submissions received and Administration responses including proposed modifications are shown in Attachment 3.

 

The main issues raised during the advertising period and Administration’s assessment of Amendment No. 1 relate to:

·    Provision of Service Commercial Land;

·    Relocation/Removal of Neighbourhood Centre; and

·    Review of ‘Opportunity for Business, Commercial and Mixed Use Development’.

A more detailed discussion of the major issues considered in the assessment of Amendment No. 1 is provided below.

 

Comment

 

The above issues were discussed with the proponent upon completion of Administrations assessment and the consultation period and a number of modifications were agreed upon (as discussed below and included in Attachment 3). A plan to illustrate these agreed modifications is included in Attachment 4.

 

Provision of Service Commercial Land

 

Amendment No. 1 to DSP 18 sought to reduce the amount of ‘Service Commercial’ zoned land from 61 hectares to 29 hectares adjacent to Romeo Road (as shown in Attachment 2). Administration, the Department of Planning (DoP) and Mike Allen Planning (on Behalf of Yanchep Beach Joint Venture) raised concerns that the reduction of employment land would have negative impacts on the surrounding commercial centres and residential land uses.

 

The justification provided by the proponents stated the intensity of the employment land would allow greater job creation within a smaller space. Based on the land uses that would be located within the ‘Service Commercial’ zoned land this justification was not considered sufficient and as such it was requested that additional land be set aside for this purpose.


 

The proponents have amended the proposal, as shown in Attachment 4, to include a total of 57.6ha of ‘Service Commercial’ zoned land. The relocation of the area is equivalent in size to the approved ‘Service Commercial’ zoned land after the road widening of the proposed freeway (approximately 5.8ha) is taken into account and relocates the land running north/south along the proposed freeway to running east/west along Romeo Road to Marmion Avenue. This is considered to alleviate Administrations, DoP and Mike Allen’s concerns about the provisions of employment land as well as improving the location to permit greater exposure to Marmion Avenue and Romeo Road.

 

Relocation/Removal of Neighbourhood Centre

 

Amendment No. 1 to DSP 18 sought to relocate a Neighbourhood Centre from the vicinity of the proposed North Alkimos train station on Alkimos Drive to the intersection of Alkimos Drive and Marmion Avenue (as shown in Attachment 2). The relocation was considered necessary as the removal of the rail station would reduce the need for a Neighbourhood Centre in this location and the relocation to the west would be adjacent to commercially zoned land in the adjoining North Alkimos Local Structure Plan.

 

Through the consultation period, two submissions raised issues with the relocation of the Neighbourhood Centre. Main Roads Western Australia raised concern with access from Marmion Avenue and DoP indicated that a retail assessment on the impacts of surrounding centres would need to be undertaken.

 

Due to the concerns of the DoP, the proponent undertook a retail viability assessment (RVA) and based on the conclusions are now seeking to have the Neighbourhood Centre removed altogether from the DSP. The RVA stated that approximately 700m2 of retail floor space, intended for the Neighbourhood Centre, could be incorporated into other centres in the area with minimal effect. The RVA also indicated that the retention of the Neighbourhood Centre, if developed, could result in high vacancy rates. In addition, since the closure of the advertising period the area to the north of the proposed Neighbourhood Centre (within North Alkimos Structure Plan) has been subdivided into partial residential development and partial commercial development. Should the Neighbourhood Centre proceed to be developed into commercial uses then this could have an adverse impact on these residential lots by enclosing these lots between two commercial developments.

 

Administration considers the removal of the Neighbourhood Centre acceptable due to the minimal impact it would have on surrounding centres.

 

Review of ‘Opportunity for Business, Commercial and Mixed Use Development’

 

The DoP raised concern that should the railway station no longer be required, the existing hatching designated "Opportunities for Business, Commercial and Mixed Use Development" should be reviewed in this context. Administration considers the review of this hatching would be done through the relevant LSP, specifically through the appropriate zoning.

 

The proponent has shown a willingness to retain the hatching in all areas except one small area abutting the playing fields (a small portion south of the removed train station). The reason for the removal of this portion is that further investigation has been undertaken as part of the draft LSP 95 and commercial land uses are not proposed. In order to avoid inconsistencies with the draft LSP 95 and the DSP 18 the proponent has requested it be removed.

 

Administration considers that the removal of the small section can be supported as it is relatively minor in the overall context of the development of the area and based on the area to be removed not abutting any major transport corridors, it is unlikely to be developed for commercial uses. Further consideration to the matter can be given when the draft LSP 95 is assessed in detail.

Removal of Train Station from Part 1 and 2 of DSP 18

 

The Amendment proposes modifications to remove reference to the North Alkimos train station from the Part 1 plan as well as in figures throughout Part 2. This is consistent with advice provided by the PTA, which identified that North Alkimos train station is not within the Master plan being prepared, and it is also not within the Draft Public Transport for Perth 2031 document which is currently undergoing public consultation.  Administration considers the removal of the North Alkimos train station from the DSP will accurately reflect the PTA master plan and as such supports its removal.

Conclusion

Amendment No. 1 to DSP 18 has been prepared to accurately inform the draft CSP 89 and LSP 95 to ensure orderly and proper planning. The issues raised during public consultation primarily relate to detailed design issues which are dealt with at later stages in the planning process and therefore do not need to be addressed prior to progression of Amendment No. 1 or have been addressed through the submission of a revised plan (Attachment 4).  In light of this, Administration considers Amendment No. 1 to DSP 18 to be acceptable.

Statutory Compliance

This Structure Plan Amendment has been processed in accordance with the requirements of DPS 2. Clause 9.6.1 of DPS 2 provides that following advertisement of a Structure Plan amendment, Council may refuse to adopt the amendment or resolve that the amendment is satisfactory with or without modifications. It is recommended that Amendment No. 1 to DSP 18 be approved without modifications.

 

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.

3.1    Local Jobs - You can choose to work locally and reduce the impact of travel time on you and your family.

Risk Management Considerations

Nil

Policy Implications

This proposal has been assessed under the provisions of the City’s District Planning Scheme No. 2 and Local Planning Policy 4.2 Structure Planning.

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 


 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       Pursuant to Clause 9.6.1 of District Planning Scheme No.2 RESOLVES that Amendment No. 1 to the Alkimos Eglinton District Structure Plan No. 18, as submitted by Roberts Day on behalf of LandCorp and as outlined on Attachment 2 to this report is satisfactory subject to the recommended modifications listed in the Schedule of Submissions included as Attachment 3 being made to the satisfaction of the Director Planning and Sustainability;

2.       Pursuant to Clause 9.6.1 of the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2, SUBMITS three copies of Amendment No. 1 to Alkimos Eglinton District Structure Plan No. 18 to the Western Australian Planning Commission for its adoption and certification, once modified in accordance with 1. above

3.       Pursuant to Clause 9.6.5 of the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2, ADOPTS Amendment No. 1 to the Alkimos Eglinton District Structure Plan No. 18 documents and AUTHORISES the Director, Planning and Sustainability to SIGN once certified by the Western Australian Planning Commission; and

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

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1 to DSP 18 (including notes)

15/214478

 

2.

Attachment 2 - Amended Alkimos-Eglinton DSP Modifications

15/187813

Minuted

3.

Summary of Submissions – Amendment No. 1 to Alkimos Eglinton District Structure Plan No. 18.

14/77352

Minuted

4.

Attachment 4 - Proposed Alkimos-Eglinton DSP Modification

15/188000

 

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                 18

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                 19

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                    22

Summary of Submissions – Amendment No. 1 to the Alkimos-Eglinton District Structure Plan No. 18

 

Submission No.

Issue

Administration Comment

Recommended Modifications

1.0

WESTERN POWER

1.1

The information provided has been noted in Western Power's planning database in advance of the next review of network capacity requirements.

Noted. This information will be provided to the applicant.

No action required.

2.0

WATER CORPORATION

2.1

The proposed amendment does not materially affect current broad scale planning. There may be minor impacts on detailed reticulation planning, which is yet to occur.

Noted. This information will be provided to the applicant.

No action required.

3.0

DEPARTMENT OF WATER (DoW)

3.1

No comment.

Noted.

No action required.

4.0

DEPARTMENT OF ABORIGINAL AFFAIRS (DAA)

4.1

There is one site under Section 5 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act, 1972 currently mapped on the Register of Aboriginal Sites within the relevant area: DAA 3509 Karli Spring. The above site is within the District Structure Plan (DSP) area but not in the amendment area.

Noted. The proposed amendment does not affect the Aboriginal Heritage site of Karli Spring.

No action required.

4.2

For proposals for the development of land where there are registered Aboriginal sites, developers are advised to use the Aboriginal Heritage Due Diligence Guidelines.

Noted. This information will be provided to the applicant.

No action required.

5.0

MAIN ROADS WA (MRWA)

5.1

 

Main Roads can provide ‘in principle' support for the proposal, however have the following comments.

Noted.

No action required.

5.2

 

The relocation of Neighbourhood Centre to the intersection Marmion Ave / Alkimos Dr raises concerns regarding access, primarily what sort of access is proposed onto Marmion Ave. As a condition of approval an Access Strategy will need to be developed so that the impact on the regional road network is understood. Further, the Access Strategy should not propose any access onto Marmion Ave, and all access should be via local roads. The Access Strategy shall be referred to Main Roads for comment to determine its suitability.

Noted. The above the Neighbourhood Centre is proposed to be removed from the DSP as discussed in the body of the report.

Modify District Structure Plan Map to remove the Neighbourhood Centre located on the proposed Alkimos Drive in accordance with Attachment 4.

5.3

Main Roads has no comment to make regarding the proposed change of zoning from Service Commercial to Urban.

Noted.

No action required.

5.4

The Public Transport Authority’s comments relating to the North Alkimos Rail Station is noted. Main Roads expects that the removal of this facility will impact on the Alkimos Rail Station and surrounds by redirecting traffic to this location. The impact of the removal of the North Alkimos Rail Station, in vehicle movements, will need to be demonstrated in the development of LSP 89 for Alkimos City Centre SP.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Noted. This information will be provided to the applicant.

No action required.

6.0

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND WILDLIFE (DPaW)

6.1

No objection to the amendment provided it is in accordance with the conditions outlined in Ministerial Statement No. 722. DPaW would not support any proposal to develop or indirectly impact areas that are recommended to be set aside by the Environmental Protection Authority for the protection and conservation of significant environmental values.

Noted. The proposed amendment does not affect any of the land reserved for Parks and Recreation as per Ministerial Statement No. 722.

No action required.

7.0

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (DoE)

7.0

No objection to the proposed amendment. The DoE will assess the impact of the additional residential dwellings in regards to school development for land proposed to be zoned Urban in lieu of Service Commercial.

Noted. This information will be provided to the applicant.

No action required.

8.0

PEET LIMITED on behalf of Peet Alkimos Pty Ltd (PEET)

8.1

Supports the amendment to the DSP addressing the deletion of the ‘Park and Ride’ Station formerly proposed for Alkimos Drive.

Noted.

No action required.

9.0

MIKE ALLEN PLANNING on behalf of Yanchep Beach Joint Venture

9.1

Amendment 1 to the DSP should be rejected until such time as it can be demonstrated that employment generation alternatives are in place. Otherwise the task of achieving the employment self-sufficiency target for the corridor will fall increasingly on Yanchep Two Rocks which already has a higher target than Alkimos-Eglinton.

Agree. The City does not support such a large reduction in the high employment-generating Service Commercial. Through discussion with the proponent a revised plan which indicates 57.6ha of Service Commercial land (in accordance with Attachment 4 to this report) has been provided. It is considered this revised plan can be supported as discussed in the body of the report.

Modify District Structure Plan Map to include 57.6ha of ‘Service Commercial’ zoned land in accordance with Attachment 4.

 

Modify proposed amendment item no. 4, 15, 16 and 17 are to be amended to reflect the 57.6ha of ‘Service Commercial’ land.

10.0

PUBLIC TRANSPORT AUTHORITY (PTA)

10.1

The PTA does not accept the proposal to lease the land designated for Park and Ride. Reference to the leasing of bays should be removed.

Agree. Administration does not consider any specific reference to the leasing of land designated for Park and Ride within the proposed amendment is appropriate for the DSP.

Modify proposed amendment item no. 2, relating to Part 1: 7.9 (S16) shall be removed from the proposed amendment text. 

11.0

DEVELOPMENT PLANNING STRATEGIES (DPS) on behalf of Eglinton Estates Pty Ltd

11.1

 

No objections on the removal of the 'Park and Ride' rail station at Alkimos Drive, provided there will be no expectation for additional parking to be provided within the Eglinton District Centre.

Noted. The provision of additional bays being required within the Eglinton landholdings is at the discretion of the PTA – based on modelling of estimated passenger numbers and car parking demand.

No action required.

11.2

 

No objections to the relocation of the Alkimos Drive neighbourhood centre provided there will be no adverse impact on both the surrounding activity centres and / or the overall activity centre hierarchy in the broader Alkimos Eglinton DSP area.

Noted. The City cannot provide any surety in this regard; however, the proponent has provided a retail viability assessment which concludes that the neighbourhood Centre is not viable and the proposed 700m2 of retail land use can be absorbed into the surrounding commercial centres.

See recommended modification 5.2

11.3.

 

No objection to the reduction of land area zoned 'Service Commercial' and associated increase in land area zoned 'Secondary and District Centre' but reserve the right to amend the Alkimos Eglinton DSP in a similar fashion (reduction of land area zoned Service Commercial) at such time that planning for the Eglinton District Centre is being progressed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Noted. The City cannot provide any surety that a future amendment within the Eglinton District Centre would be supported. Any future amendment to the DSP lodged will be assessed on its merits at the time of submission and advertising.

No action required.

12.0

DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING (DOP)

12.1

Of the 61ha it is claimed 50ha represents the net developable area. This assumes a net developable area of 82%. The reduced land area is stated to be 29ha. Of the 29ha it is claimed 22ha represents the net developable area (76%). A definition of the composition of the net land area is required.

Noted. See Administration Comment to item 9.1 above.

 

See recommended modification 9.1

12.2

 

Under DSP 18, the Service Commercial land correlates with the provision of employment, therefore under the DSP model a loss of service commercial land would correspondingly reduce employment provision. It is suggested that the applicant provide a clear estimate of employment implications associated with the departure from DSP No. 18 having regard to the overall land use mix and intensity in the area and the methodology for calculating employment provision set out in DSP No. 18.

Noted. See Administration Comment to item 9.1 above.

 

See recommended modification 9.1

12.3

 

The amended structure plan indicates that the relocated neighbourhood centre has not been assessed in terms of impact on other proposed and existing centres. It is recommended that a retail and economic analysis of the new Neighbourhood Centre is undertaken to determine corresponding impacts on the overall provision of retail floor space and local services set out in DSP No 18.

Agreed. A retail viability assessment has been undertaken by the proponent which identifies that the Neighbourhood Centre is not viable. The assessment also concludes that there would be no impact on the surrounding centres which will absorb the approximately 700m2 of retail floor space.

 

See recommended modification 5.2

12.4

The removal of the proposed North Alkimos Railway Station will require approval of the WAPC.

Noted. The proponent has provided documentation from the DoT which confirms that the North Alkimos Park and Ride station has not been identified as a future station in the Public Transport Network Plan. The DoT supports the removal of the North Alkimos (Alkimos Drive) Station from the Alkimos-Eglington District Structure Plan. The City supports this view, and considers that the WAPC should have due regard to the DoT’s position.

No action required.

 

12.5

Should the railway station no longer be required the existing hatching designated "Opportunities for Business, Commercial and Mixed Use Development" should be reviewed in this context.

Disagree. Administration considers the review of this hatching would be done through the relevant LSP, specifically through the appropriate zoning.

 

It is noted that the proponent wishes to modify the area to remove a small portion abutting playing fields, south of the removed train station. As the area is not proposed along any major transit corridor and the minor change would be inconsequential it supports the minor portion being removed from the DSP Map.

Modify District Structure Plan Map to remove the ‘Opportunities for Business, Commercial and Mixed Use Development’ designation west of the ‘Playing Fields’ in accordance with Attachment 4.

13.0

Department of Transport

13.1

We acknowledge that PTA and MRWA have sent separate responses.  After reviewing PTA and MRWA responses DoT will not be providing a separate submission, however DoT concurs with the advice and recommendations within PTA and MRWA responses.

Noted.

No action required.

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                 29

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                     30

3.3    Reconsideration of Amendment No. 2 to Drovers Place Precinct Agreed Structure Plan No. 80

File Ref:                                              2957-02 – 15/205876

Responsible Officer:                           Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       3         

Previous Items:                                   PS06-05/15 Agenda; PS06-05/15 Resolution

                                                            Reconsideration of Amendment No. 2 to the Drovers Place Precinct Agreed Structure Plan No. 80

 

Issue

To reconsider Amendment No. 2 to the Drovers Place Precinct Agreed Structure Plan (ASP 80) under Clause 9.12.1 of the City’s District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2); following receipt of a request to reconsider from the applicant.

 

Applicant

Roberts Day

Owner

Roman Catholic Archbishop of Perth

Location

Lot 6 (43) Drovers Place, Wanneroo

Lot 7 (53) Drovers Place, Wanneroo

Lot 8 (61) Drovers Place, Wanneroo

Site Area

Lot 6 – 2.9270 hectares

Lot 7 – 3.2959 hectares

Lot 8 – 3.0740 hectares

MRS Zoning

Urban

DPS 2 Zoning

Urban Development

ASP 80 Zoning

Special Use

 

 

Background

On 25 March 2014, Roberts Day Group, on behalf of the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Perth, lodged a request with the City to rezone Lot 6 (43), Lot 7 (53) and Lot 8 (61) Drovers Place, Wanneroo from Special Use zone to Residential zone. The subject lots are located in the Western Precinct of ASP 80. A plan showing the location of Lots 6, 7 and 8 is provided as Attachment 1.

 

Currently, Table B of ASP 80 prescribes only the following land uses as discretionary (or 'D') uses on Lots 6, 7 and 8:

 

·        Educational Establishment; and

·        Low scale tourism-related uses, as determined by Council, including tea rooms, local arts and crafts, art galleries and restaurants/café.

 

On 8 April 2014, the Manager Planning Implementation forwarded a memorandum to all Elected Members, providing Elected Members with an opportunity to request referral of the proposal to Council for consent to advertise. No such requests were received and, as such, advertising of Amendment No. 2 to ASP 80 commenced on 13 May 2014 in accordance with Clause 9.5 of District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2).

 

Council considered this amendment proposal at its 3 February 2015 Council Meeting. At that Meeting, Council resolved to carry a Procedural Motion for the matter to be deferred pending receipt of further environmental advice.


 

 

Once further advice was received from the Department of Parks and Wildlife (DPaW), Yellagonga Regional Park Community Advisory Committee (CAC) and the Committee of the Friends of Yellagonga Regional Park (FoY); Administration presented the amendment proposal to the 25 May 2015 Council Meeting (PS06-05/15). At that meeting, Council resolved the following:

 

“That Council pursuant to Clause 9.6.1 (b) of the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2, RESOLVES that Amendment No. 2 to Drovers Place Precinct Agreed Structure Plan No. 80, included as Attachment 2, submitted by Roberts Day Group on behalf of the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Perth is NOT APPROVED for the following reasons:-

 

a)      The proposed residential density is considered to be excessive in view of the environmental significance of Lake Joondalup and the Yellagonga Regional Park and midge management issues associated with the area; and

 

b)      The proposal is considered to generate excessive traffic that cannot be accommodated on the local road network and the arrangements for vehicle access are considered to be unsatisfactory.”

 

The applicant is now seeking Council’s reconsideration of its previous decision, pursuant to Clause 9.12.1 of DPS 2. Clause 9.12.1 of DPS 2 states as follows:

 

9.12.1         If a proponent is dissatisfied by a requirement, or any decision or determination of the Council under this Part, the proponent may within 14 days of the imposition of the requirement or the making of the decision or determination request a reconsideration. Such request shall be in writing, delivered to the Council within the fourteen (14) day period.

 

Council’s reconsideration of its previous decision on Amendment No. 2 to ASP 80 is the subject of this Report.

Detail

Amendment No. 2 to ASP 80 proposes to rezone Lot 6 (43), Lot 7 (53) and Lot 8 (61) Drovers Place, Wanneroo from Special Use zone to Residential zone. To coincide with the proposed residential zoning, the amendment also proposes to modify various parts of the ASP 80 text and Plan 1.

 

The amendment document is included as Attachment 2. The key elements of proposed Amendment No. 2 to ASP 80 are as follows:

 

·        The rezoning of the amendment area to Residential, to accommodate dwellings with a range of housing densities from R20 to R60;

 

·        Modification to the Statement of Intent of the Western Precinct of ASP 80, to emphasise the intent for residential development to occur in this Precinct;

 

·        Modification to the proposed location of traffic signals required for the Drovers Place and Joondalup Drive intersection, and modification to the responsibility for the subdivider/developer to construct those traffic signals; and

 

·        The removal of a requirement for the subdivider/developer of the land comprising the amendment area to construct an emergency vehicle access from Joondalup Drive to the existing fire station on Drovers Place.

 

On 8 June 2015, the applicant, through Administration, formally requested Council to reconsider Amendment No. 2 to ASP 80, pursuant to Clause 9.12.1 of DPS 2. Additional information responding to Council’s decision not to adopt Amendment No. 2 was presented in further correspondence dated 25 June 2015, which is included in Attachment 3 for Council’s consideration. In its request, the applicant has presented an argument on the themes from Council’s decision not to adopt the amendment.

 

In relation to residential density, the applicant in subsequent correspondence to Administration has provided the following information:

 

Residential Density

 

1.       The applicant’s current target for dwelling yield for the amendment area is 230 dwelling units. This will comprise of:

·        Approximately 160 dwellings provided at R25–R40; and

·        Approximately 70 dwellings provided at a density of R40-R60 comprising of a mix of grouped and/or multiple dwellings.

 

2.       This figures are indicative and will be subject to Council’s approval at the DAP stage based on the merits of the final design concept for the site considering environmental factors;

 

3.       The upper density threshold of 450 dwellings was provided in the amendment proposal to:

·        Ensure a maximum development scenario that could be assessed for the purposes of traffic modelling; and

·        Provide flexibility for future planning to accommodate different product types most suited to the location and local demand.

The applicant has stated that there is no current intention to achieve a dwelling yield of 450 dwellings in the amendment area.

 

4.       The purpose of this amendment is to provide direction to facilitate more detailed planning at the DAP stage. The planning framework set up in the ASP ensures that Council retains the final say in approving density on the site at the DAP.

 

Midge Management

 

In relation to midge management issues, the applicant does not consider it possible in the absence of detailed subdivision design to provide further certainty than the suite of measures previously recommended by Administration. The applicant considers the existing planning framework (as well as modifications previously recommended by Administration) ensured that midge management was addressed in a proper and orderly fashion at a later stage.

 

Traffic

 

The subsequent arguments presented by the applicant provide that:

 

·        The traffic volumes generated by residential development in the amendment area would be less than that generated by an Education Establishment on the same land parcels; and

 

·        Traffic generated from residential development in the amendment would be dispersed throughout the day.  This would differ from the traffic generated from an Education Establishment, which would generate very high traffic volumes primarily in the morning and afternoon drop off and pick up times.

 

 

 

A table derived from the information supplied by the applicant that outlines potential traffic generation in the amendment area is provided for below:

 

Development Scenario

Daily Traffic Flows (vehicles per day)

Peak Hour Traffic Flows (vehicles per hour)

Current scenario

School (1,500 students)

3000

1500

R60 Residential (450 dwellings)

2700

270

Target Dwelling Yield

(230 Dwellings)

1840

184

R20 Residential (150 dwellings)

1200

120

 

The anticipated development scenario (of 230 dwellings) generates approximately 40% less daily traffic than an Education Establishment, and approximately 87% less traffic in the peak hour. 

 

Administration’s response to the applicant’s request for reconsideration is provided for in the ‘Comment’ section below.

Consultation

No further consultation has occurred subsequent to Council’s decision of 26 May 2015.

Comment

Administration has identified that Council’s previous decision on the amendment proposal primarily identified three issues – being residential density, midge management issues and traffic. Administration’s response to those issues is outlined below:

 

Residential Density

 

The applicant has reiterated in their submission that the residential density proposed for the amendment area will be in the range of between R20 to R60. In this R20 to R60 density range, the number of dwellings that could be accommodated would be between 150 (if the entire amendment area was to be developed at a density of R20) to 450 (if the entire amendment area was to be developed at a density of R60). What the applicant considers would be developed in the amendment is 230 dwellings, with a mix of dwelling densities as provided in the ‘Detail’ section of the Report.

 

It is noted that the applicant through their submission has not sought any change to the density coding range that could be established onsite. However, what the applicant has provided is an intention (made at this point in time) of the number of dwellings that would be developed in the amendment area. The applicant anticipates it would seek the City’s formal consideration of residential density on submission of a detailed area plan – required under ASP 80 to be lodged and certified prior to subdivision or development of the amendment area.

 

Midge Management Issues

 

In relation to midge management issues, Administration has identified in the applicant’s request for reconsideration is that the submission only highlights and emphasises the information and recommendations previously presented to Council. The request did not provide Council with new information or a change to the amendment proposal; which, in Administration’s opinion, may have provided Council with grounds to ‘reverse’ its previous position on this matter.

 

 

Traffic

 

New information provided by the applicant in response to traffic issues was the provision of traffic volume projections based on the applicant’s intended dwelling yield of 230 dwellings. This information is outlined in the table provided in the ‘Detail’ section above. Apart from the traffic volume projections provided, Administration has identified that the remaining traffic information presented by the applicant predominantly highlights and emphasises the information and recommendations previously presented to Council.

 

In light of the information provided by the applicant, Administration considers that:

 

·        As the density coding range is not proposed to change; the ‘intended’ dwelling yield (discussed in the ‘Residential Density’ subsection above) does not adequately respond to Council’s concerns regarding the traffic volumes generated by the residential development in the amendment area; and

 

·        There has been no additional information provided that specifically responds to traffic access into the amendment area.

 

Conclusion

 

In light of the request for reconsideration (and the information provided through that request), Administration identified that:

 

·        Although the applicant has stated their intention to achieve a dwelling yield of 230 dwellings, the proposed residential density code range of R20-R60 sought through the amendment proposal remains unchanged;

 

·        No new information or studies have been provided to respond to midge management issues; and

 

·        The information on traffic and access does not, in Administration’s opinion, adequately address Council’s concerns on these matters.

 

As such, Administration recommends that Council affirm its previous decision not to adopt the amendment proposal.

Statutory Compliance

This Structure Plan amendment has been processed in accordance with the requirements of DPS 2.

 

Clause 9.12.1 of DPS 2 provides that where an applicant is dissatisfied by a decision or determination of Council relating to a structure planning proposal, the applicant may request a reconsideration of the determination or decision. Clause 9.12.2 requires Council to reconsider the determination or decision within 60 days of the request; otherwise the original decision of Council (made at the 26 May 2015 Council Meeting) would be the operative decision.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

This proposal has been assessed under the provisions of the City’s Local Planning Policy 4.2: Structure Planning and Local Planning Policy 4.4: Urban Water Management.

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council pursuant to Clause 9.12.2 of the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2, reconsiders Amendment No. 2 to the Drovers Place Precinct Agreed Structure Plan No. 80 and AFFIRMS its decision made at its Meeting of 26 May 2015 (PS06-05/15), which is included as follows:-

 

“That Council pursuant to Clause 9.6.1 (b) of the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2, RESOLVES that Amendment No. 2 to Drovers Place Precinct Agreed Structure Plan No. 80, included as Attachment 2, submitted by Roberts Day Group on behalf of the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Perth is NOT APPROVED for the following reasons:-

 

a)   The proposed residential density is considered to be excessive in view of the environmental significance of Lake Joondalup and the Yellagonga Regional Park and midge management issues associated with the area; and

 

b)   The proposal is considered to generate excessive traffic that cannot be accommodated on the local road network and the arrangements for vehicle access are considered to be unsatisfactory.”

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Revised Attachment 1 - Location plan

15/12810

 

2.

Attachment 2 - Amendment Documentation - Amendment No. 2 to ASP 80

14/394227

Minuted

3.

Attachment 3 - Applicant Justification for Council's Reconsideration

15/209821

 

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                    36

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                 37

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                 43

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                     46

Draft

Development Applications

3.4    Proposed Drive Through addition to Approved Liquor Store

File Ref:                                              DA2014/1895 – 14/369134

Responsible Officer:                           Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil.

Attachments:                                       5

Previous Items:                                   PS03-06/14 Agenda; PS03-06/14 Resolution

                                                            Proposed Change of Use to Liquor Store at Lot 1061 (2) Captiva Approach,

                                                            PS05-04/12 Agenda; PS05-04/12 Resolution

                                                            Proposed Commercial Development at Lot 1061 (2) Captiva Approach, Butler - DA2100/799

 

Issue

To consider a development application for a drive-through addition to an approved Liquor Store at Lot 1061 (2) Captiva Approach, Butler.

 

Applicant

Tango Investments (WA) Pty Ltd

Owner

Tango Investments (WA) Pty Ltd

Location

Lot 1061 (2) Captiva Approach, Butler

Site Area

15,907m2

DPS 2 Zoning

Urban Development

ASP 27 Zoning

Commercial

 

 

Background

Council, at its meeting of 3 April 2012, approved a Mixed Use Development comprising of a Medical Centre, Pharmacy, Hairdresser, Convenience Store, Office, Bakery, Beauty Parlour, Costume Hire, Bakery and Veterinary Consulting Room (PS05-04/12) on Lot 1061 (2) Captiva Approach, Butler.  On 28 May 2013, Administration approved an application for a Child Care Centre, Recreation Centre (Gymnasium), Restaurant, Take-Away Food Outlet (Pizza, Fish and Chips, Chicken), Medical Centre and Hairdresser under delegated authority (DA2013/485). On 7 October 2013, Administration approved modifications to the tenancy layout and uses approved by DA2011/799 comprising of a Shop (Farmer Jacks), Bakery, Pharmacy, Shop (Retail), Medical Centre (Dentist), Take-Away Food Outlet and Restaurant. 

 

Council, at its meeting of 24 June 2014, approved a Liquor Store (PS03-06/14) on the subject site. On 9 October 2014, Tango Investments (WA) Pty Ltd submitted an application to the City for a drive-through addition to the approved Liquor Store.  The application was to be presented to Council at its meeting of 28 April 2015 for determination, however, was withdrawn for the purposes of readvertising after discussion at Council’s Briefing Session on 21 April 2015 where a concern was raised that the use of the word existing in the advertisement could have mislead members of the public to think that the Liquor Store was already operational.  The proposal was readvertised from 28 April 2015 to 20 May 2015.

 

A location plan of the subject site is provided as Attachment 1.

 

An aerial location plan is provided as Attachment 2.

Detail

The proposal will result in a one way dual lane drive-through being attached to the approved Liquor Store.  The approved Liquor Store has a nett lettable area (NLA) of 340m2


If approved, the drive-through addition will result in an additional covered 103.1m2 of floor area comprising of an 8.9m2 pedestrian walkway, a 22.3m2 area for a fridge display and a 71.9m2 drive-through service area for vehicles.  The pedestrian walkway and vehicle traffic area are public thoroughfares and therefore, in accordance with the District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2) definition of NLA, are not considered as NLA, meaning that this proposal will result in an additional 22.3m2 of NLA.

 

A site plan, floor plan and elevations are provided as Attachment 3.

 

A Liquor Store is an ‘A’ (discretionary, subject to advertising) land use on the subject land.  This land use has been approved, however, given the proposal seeks to increase the area of operation for the Liquor Store, the application has been advertised in accordance with the requirements for an ‘A’ land use outlined in Part 6.7 of DPS 2.

Consultation

The proposal was initially advertised for a period of 21 days by way of an advertisement placed in the North Coast Times, Sun City News and on the City’s website, a sign erected on site and letters sent to 19 nearby landowners (comprising of all properties in Tarpon Link and those landowners of properties on Loyola Green and Captiva Approach that are directly opposite to the subject site). At the conclusion of the 21 day comment period (1 December 2014) five submissions were received, all objecting to proposal. A summary of submissions received and Administration’s responses are shown in Attachment 4.

 

As a consequence of the concerns raised at Council’s Briefing Session on 21 April 2015, the proposal was readvertised from 28 April 2015 to 20 May 2015 by the same means as the initial public consultation and letters to all submitters to clarify that the Liquor Store had been approved by Council but had not yet opened.  At the conclusion of the public consultation period, five new submissions were received (including once late submission), all objecting to the proposal.  A summary of submissions received and Administration’s responses are shown in Attachment 5.

 

The main issues raised during the advertising period, following detailed assessment by Administration and questions raised during public question time relate to:

 

·        Liquor licensing process;

·        Advertising of the application;

·        Location of the entrance to the drive-through;

·        Proximity of the drive-through exit to an existing pedestrian crossing; and

·        Car parking requirements.

 

A more detailed discussion of these is provided in the Comment section.

Comment

Several submitters expressed objections to the Liquor Store being located in close proximity to existing schools.  Council has already approved the land use of Liquor Store on the subject land, and therefore is not required to further consider whether the land use is appropriate in this location.  Council is only required to consider whether a drive-through addition to the approved Liquor Store is appropriate.

 

Liquor Licensing process

 

A question was raised during public question time at Council’s Briefing Session on 21 April 2015 querying how Council can give consent for the drive-through addition when a liquor licence has not been granted by the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor (DRGL). 

The City cannot lawfully withhold its determination of an application for planning approval subject to the outcome of an approval issued under difference legislation.  In the event that planning approval is granted under the provisions of the City’s DPS 2, the proponent will still be lawfully required to obtain a liquor licence from DRGL under the provisions of the Liquor Control Act 1988.

 

Council is advised that, in accordance with its request from its meeting on 26 May 2015 (UB01-05/15), Administration has written to the DRGL to advise them of the progress of this planning application, and to provide them with a summary of the submissions made during public consultation of the Liquor Store and proposed drive-through addition. 

 

Advertising of the application

 

Questions relating to the advertising of the application have been asked during public question time.  Particular concerns raised relate to the use of the word ‘approved’ in the second round of advertising and the location of the advertising sign.

 

As Council will recall, the application was withdrawn from Council’s meeting of 28 April 2015 due to a concern that the use of the word ‘existing’ in the advertisement may have mislead members of the public to think that the Liquor Store was already operational.  The proposal was readvertised where it was clarified that the Liquor Store had been approved by Council.  A further public question has queried whether the use of the word ‘approved’ in the re-advertisement of the proposal was still confusing to members of the public by making them think that the liquor licence was approved.  The City’s advertisement related to the application for planning approval and the use of the word ‘approved’ was due to the fact that Council has approved the land use of Liquor Store on the subject land.  The advertisement did not relate to the outcome of the application currently under consideration by the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor for a liquor licence.  It would not appropriate for the City to make reference on the progress or outcome of an application made under other legislation in an advertisement for a planning application.

 

A concern was also raised in relation to the location of the advertising sign at the back of the shopping centre and that it was not sufficiently visible to allow all users of the shopping centre to view the proposal.  It was further suggested that a sign should have been placed in the tenancy window to make more customers aware of the application.  The advertising sign was situated at the Tarpon Link entrance to the shopping centre, which is the entrance closest to the subject tenancy.  All vehicles and pedestrians using this entrance would have been able to view the sign and therefore be made aware of the application.  In addition, letters were sent to 19 landowners of properties in Tarpon Link and Captiva Approach adjacent to the shopping centre.  Administration is satisfied that the advertising sign was located in a conspicuous location to provide reasonable opportunity for the community to be made aware of the application.

 

Location of entrance to drive-through

 

There is concern that the proximity of the entrance of the drive-through to the access driveway from Tarpon Link will lead to queuing vehicles blocking the entrance to the car park.  The design of the drive-through facility will allow for two vehicles to queue in each lane at any one time, meaning that up to four vehicles can be accommodated within the facility at any one time.  The main peak period for a drive-through Liquor Store is between 4pm and 7pm on a Friday evening.  The existing McDonalds store on the subject land shares the same peak period.


 

 

A traffic engineering review of the proposal estimates that during the Friday afternoon peak period approximately 43 vehicles per hour will use the drive-through.  Based on this estimated demand and using a service rate of 30 customers per hour per server, if three servers were working during peak period then queuing vehicles would not block the entrance from Tarpon Link.  However, if demand was greater than 43 vehicles per hour, or if less servers were working, queuing vehicles could potentially block the Tarpon Link entrance.  If this situation was to occur, it would be likely to be for less than 3 minutes for each hour of the peak period.  It is expected that the drive-through lanes will operate normally without any potential queuing problems at all other times.

 

Recognising that there is a possibility for queuing vehicles to block the Tarpon Link entrance if demand for the drive-through service was greater than estimated or less than three servers are working, the installation of line marking in the car park to delineate a ‘keep clear zone’ to direct vehicles away from stopping within the main car park thoroughfare is considered appropriate.

 

Proximity of drive-through exit to pedestrian crossing

 

Several submitters expressed safety concerns due to the proximity of the drive-through exit to the pedestrian crossing that runs in a north-south direction between the shopping centre entrance and Lukin Drive.  The proposed drive-through exit is approximately 8.5 metres from the pedestrian crossing, which is clearly visible from the drive-through exit.  Administration has discussed these concerns with the proponent, who has agreed to extend the kerb at the drive-through exit to direct exiting vehicles into one lane, and provide a speed bump to slow vehicles and ensure they exit the drive-through addition at a low speed suitable for a car park environment.  The kerb extension and speed bump are reflected on Attachment 2 (the advertised plans did not depict the kerb extension or speed bump as these measures were agreed post-advertising).  A car park is a low speed environment and Administration is satisfied that the kerb extension and addition of a speed bump will alleviate safety concerns relating to the proximity of the drive-through exit to the pedestrian crossing.

 

Car Parking Requirements

 

The currently approved parking configuration provides a total of 225 parking bays in lieu of 273, a shortfall of 48 parking bays.  The overall parking shortfall for the development will increase by a further three parking bays (from the 48 bays currently supported to a 51 bay shortfall), as demonstrated in the table below. 

 

 

DPS 2 requirements

Provided

Shortfall

Current parking

273 bays

225 bays

48 bays

Proposed parking

275 bays

(increased as an additional 2 bays are required as proposal will generate an additional 22.3m2 NLA)

224 bays

(including 4 bays within drive-through addition)

51 bays

 

The drive-through addition to the Liquor Store will reduce the demand on car parking, as it will facilitate drive-through sales as opposed to patrons parking in the car park and entering the store on foot.  Therefore, Administration considers the additional three bay shortfall which will result from this proposal is capable of being supported.

 

During its assessment of the application Administration has also identified that the parking bays in the vicinity of the subject premises have not been constructed in accordance with Council’s approval dated 24 June 2014. 


 

Should Council support this application, the parking bays that are not constructed in accordance with Council’s previous approval will be required to be removed to allow for construction of the drive-through addition and therefore the non-compliance will no longer exist.  Should Council not support this application it could take compliance action for non-compliance with the current approval.

 

Signage

 

Council’s approval of the Mixed Use Development (PS05-04/12) on 3 April 2012 required a Signage Strategy for the development to be approved.  A Signage Strategy was approved by Administration on 18 October 2012.  The approval issued under delegated authority on 7 October 2013 also required a Signage Strategy to be submitted, however, no further Signage Strategy has been provided at this stage.  Therefore, Council should require a revised Signage Strategy incorporating any signage proposed for the Liquor Store for the development site to be submitted prior to any further signage being erected on the site.   

 

Conclusion

 

Council is required to make a decision as to whether it considers the drive-through addition to the approved Liquor Store is appropriate.  The subject land is zoned Commercial which is considered an appropriate zone for a Liquor Store with a drive-through facility attached.  Concerns relating to pedestrian safety in the car park are acknowledged and the addition of extra kerbing and a speed bump are considered beneficial in reducing vehicle speed within the car park.  It is expected that the drive-through addition will largely operate without incident, however, Administration acknowledges that there may be issues with queuing vehicles for periods of up to three minutes during the peak afternoon period generally on a Friday afternoon. 

 

With this said, Administration considers that the drive-through addition is appropriate in this location and can be supported subject to additional line marking of a keep clear zone and a revised Signage Strategy for the development site being submitted.  Council could however, refuse the application based on the potential for queuing vehicles to block the entrance to the shopping centre resulting in traffic congestion on Tarpon Link.  Should Council not support this application due to concerns with potential queuing, it should advise the proponent to rectify the car park layout in accordance with the approved plans.

Statutory Compliance

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

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.

3.2    Growing Business - Our community is a preferred place for business to locate and grow.

Risk Management Considerations

Nil


 

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Nil.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.                APPROVES the development application for a drive-through addition to the approved Liquor Store at Lot 1062 (2) Captiva Approach, Butler, as shown in the plans dated 30 March 2015, 8 April 2015 and 19 August 2014, pursuant to Clause 6.9.1(c) 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 addition to an approved Liquor Store (Drive-through Facility), as shown on the attached plans.  It does not relate to any other development on the lot;

b)      Line-marking to delineate a ‘keep clear zone’ as marked on the plans dated 30 March 2015, 8 April 2015 and 19 August 2014 in red ink being installed prior to the commencement of the Liquor Store (Drive-through);

c)      The drive-through lanes shall not be used for the purpose of storage or obstructed in any way at any time without the prior approval of the City;

d)      A revised Signage Strategy for the subject lot shall be submitted for approval within 30 days of the date of this decision.  Signage on the subject lot shall be in accordance with the approved Signage Strategy.

2.       ENDORSES Administration’s responses to the submissions received as provided in Attachment 4 and Attachment 5 and ADVISES the submitters of this decision.

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1 - Location Plan

14/150419

 

2.

Attachment 2 - Aerial Location Plan

15/229966

 

3.

Attachment 3 -Development Plans

15/110864

 

4.

Attachment 4 - Schedule of Submissions

15/26029

Minuted

5.

Attachment 5 - Schedule of Submissions (2nd round of advertising)

15/156004

Minuted

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                    53

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                    54

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                    55

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                    58

CITY OF WANNEROO

PROPOSED DRIVE THROUGH ADDITION TO APPROVED LIQUOR STORE

2 CAPTIVA APPROACH, BUTLER (DA2014/1895)

(Advertising closed 1 December 2014)

 

No.

Summary of Submission

Administration Comment

Recommended Modification

1.

Submitter 1

BUTLER WA 6036

1.1

Expresses disappointment that the Council has approved the Liquor Store in close proximity to three schools.

Noted.  The Liquor Store was approved by Council at its meeting of 24 June 2014.  The current application seeks approval for a drive-through addition to the Liquor Store and has been assessed on its planning merits.

No modification required.

1.2

The design encourages students to walk directly in front of the drive through exit, which is considered to be a serious safety issue.

Noted.  A designated pedestrian crossing is provided from the shopping centre entrance to Lukin Drive.  Drivers exiting the drive through will have the option of turning left immediately before the pedestrian crossing, or travelling in a westerly direction which will require them to stop for pedestrians using the crossing.  The proponent has submitted revised plans which depict a kerb extension to direct vehicles exiting the drive through into one lane, and a speed bump at the exit of the drive through to ensure vehicles exiting are travelling at an appropriate speed for a car park environment.

No modification required.

1.3

Studies have shown that an increase in outlet liquor sales have been linked to higher rates of traffic accidents, road crashes, general injuries, drink driving or being a passenger of a drink driver (Review of the Liquor Control Act 1988).

Noted.  See response for 1.1 above.

No modification required.

1.4

Submitter notes the Liquor Store will have an opening time of 8am which means children will be inadvertently exposed to alcohol related sale and transactions as the drive through is in full view of students walking/biking.

Noted.  The permitted trading hours for a Liquor Store within the Perth metropolitan region are set by the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor and are 8.00am to 10.00pm Monday to Friday and 10.00am to 10.00pm Saturday and Sunday.  Individual proprietors can tailor their opening hours as required within the span of permitted trading hours.

No modification required.

1.5

The proposed drive through will expand the area of advertising that children are exposed to.  According to the Australian National Preventative Health Agency “The early and cumulative exposure to alcohol advertising contributes to both an earlier initiation of alcohol use (i.e. younger age of first drink) and more frequent and heavy drinking by young Australians, and patterns of harmful drinking later in life.”

Noted.  See response to 1.1 above. The proposal does not incorporate any signage.  Any application for signage for the Liquor Store will be assessed against the provisions of the City’s Signs Local Planning Policy. 

No modification required.

2.

Submitter 2

QUINNS ROCKS  WA  6030

2.1

Submitter is confused as to whether this Liquor Store is different to another Liquor Store being advertised on the Department of Liquor and Gaming website.

 

There is minimal information on the City’s website and the advertisement states the addition is to an existing Liquor Store.

 

The submitter objects on the basis that she feels the City has mislead the public into believing that the liquor licence has already been granted and therefore it is too late to object. 

 

The advertising sign was placed at the back of the centre away from most of the general public and is not in clear view.

Noted.  The advertisement on the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor website related to an application for a liquor licence for the subject Liquor Store.  The application made to the City seeks approval for a drive through addition to the approved Liquor Store and made no reference to the liquor licencing process.

 

The information provided on the City’s website consisted of a site plan and floor plan.  The use of the word ‘existing’ in the City’s advertisement was to reflect the fact that the Liquor Store had an existing approval from the City.  Notwithstanding this, the proposal was readvertised between 28 April 2015 to 20 May 2015 at the request of Council to clarify that Council had granted planning approval for the Liquor Store, however, the Liquor Store had not yet opened.

 

The advertising sign was placed in the same location as the advertising sign for the Liquor Store, which was near the crossover on Tarpon Loop.

No modification required.

2.2

Submitter is not satisfied with information provided on the City’s website.  The overall plan does not show that two of the roads bounding the shopping centre have residential homes on them, and makes no mention of the proximity to schools and/or other public places.

Noted.  The site plan provided for advertising purposes clearly identified all street names bounding the subject land, and written referral letters for the proposal were sent to all residential landowners on Tarpon Link and Captiva Approach directly adjacent to the development site.  There is no requirement for the advertising plans to identify the proximity to schools and/or other public places.

No modification required.                                 L

2.3

The location of the driveway is closest to Tarpon Link which will bring increased traffic turning off Lukin Drive increasing the chances of pedestrian accidents. 

 

The entry to the drive through is close to the entrance and queuing vehicles could block cars coming from the street entrance.

Noted. The design of the drive-through facility will allow for two vehicles to queue in each lane at any one time, meaning that up to four vehicles can be accommodated within the facility.  A traffic engineering review of the proposed drive-through addition estimates that 95% of the time less than 1 vehicle will be queuing within this area with a maximum demand of 1 vehicle per three minutes entering and exiting the drive-through.  The traffic engineering review was based on a single service lane operating at any one time, therefore, given the proposed drive-through is a dual lane facility, the likelihood of queuing vehicles blocking the car park entrance is low.

 

Notwithstanding this, Administration does consider that the installation of line marking in the car park to delineate a ‘keep clear zone’ to direct vehicles away from stopping within the main car park thoroughfare would be beneficial and has recommended a condition accordingly.

Condition to be included requiring installation of line marking to delineate a ‘keep clear zone’ within the main car park thoroughfare.

2.4

The location of the drive through exit is a concern as it has ACROD parking to its direct right and the main pedestrian crosswalk from Lukin Drive directly in front of it.  This encourages students from neighbouring schools to cross the car park and exit of the drive through, not only exposing them to advertising of alcohol but the dangers of cars exiting the drive through area.

Noted.  See response to 1.2 above.

No modification required.

2.5

The submitter quotes the following information:

" The Australian Guidelines Report notes that vulnerability of children and young people relates to: 

the level of influence of the external environment (physical and social) on current and future drinking attitudes, behaviors and related harms."

 

"That is, a child or young person does not have to be drinking to experience, or be susceptible to, alcohol-related harm. The environment and the activities of people in

the environment, play a significant role in shaping and impacting on young people and children."

 

EHA additional submission in support of City of Cockburn's submission for Review of the Liquor Control Act 1988

 

The proximity of schools to licensed premises means that larger numbers of children are exposed to the activity of licensed premises in the area, including the advertising activities of the venue. There are consistent media reports of concerns about the location of advertising hoardings promoting alcoholic products next to schools.

 

Noted.  See response to 1.1 above.

No modification required.

2.5 (Cont)

There is a strong argument that taverns and liquor stores should not be located adjacent to schools. Clearly the above mentioned “permitted grounds of objection”

against a liquor licence application appear to be established to address these issues.

 

For the reasons provided above the following position statement was adopted by the City of Cockburn:

-

The City does not support applications for liquor licensed premises located within

view of, or close proximity to schools. A specific set back distance is not provided

because the location of the school and liquor licensed premises may be

disconnected.

 

EHA additional submission in support of City of Cockburn's submission for Review of the Liquor Control Act 1988

 

 

2.6

Submitter is of the view that if the Liquor Store didn’t exist or if it was not a drive through, the risk of harm to the most vulnerable (school children, elderly and disabled) would be greatly reduced.

Noted.  See response to 1.1 above.

No modification required.

2.7

Submitter questions whether residents of Tarpon Link have been notified that if the drive through addition goes ahead the business will be operating until 10pm every night and that there will be a significant increase in lighting around the premises as the applicant notes in their public interest assessment.

Noted.  The inclusion of a drive through addition to the approved Liquor Store will not increase operating hours past the hours which would be permitted by the Department of Racing Gaming and Liquor for a Liquor Store.  Please refer to response for 1.4 above.

 

The provision of lighting to the development will not change as a consequence of the addition of the drive through.

No modification required.

2.8

Submitter is concerned about the sale of Pegas Craftap been poured on-site from a keg into 1 and 2 litre containers.  This does not promote responsible drinking due to the limited lifespan of the product.

Noted.  See response to 1.1 above.  This comment does not relate to the proposed drive through addition.

No modification required.

2.9

Submitter would also like to bring your attention to the current application for a liquor licence open for public comment http://liquor.reports.rgl.wa.gov.au/liquor/appqry.php (15229).

 

"The current Public lnterest Assessment process allows for the manipulation of data by including more affluent suburbs in the catchment area and applicants

via consultants are able to manipulate data to support their application."

(Vic Andrich, President, Environmental Health Australia (WA). Submission for Review of the Liquor Control Act 1988 (24/02/2013))

 

I note that the suburb of Merriwa has been left out of the defined locality.

 

 

 

 

Noted.  The Public Interest Assessment (PIA) was submitted by the proponent to the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor (DRGL) in support of their application for a liquor license.  Any concerns relating to the content of the PIA should be addressed to DRGL.

No modification required.

2.10

In the consumer questionnaire provided by the applicant, a drive through was listed as 5th out of a possible 7 answers.  Throughout the PIA the applicants claim to be rotating branding and stock to provide new labels on a regular basis.  These new items will not get the exposure needed from the drive through but rather are targeted at their ‘walk-in’ consumers, also eliminating the need for a drive through facility.

Noted.  The application for the drive-through addition has been assessed on its planning merits.  The manner of how brands and stock are rotated is not a valid planning consideration.

No modification required.

3.

Submitter 3

BUTLER  WA  6036

3.1

Submitter is appalled that one of the Liquor Stores approved by Council has now applied for a drive through. 

 

With all the good work done to get children walking safely to school, children will be directed straight into the exiting traffic from this proposed drive through due to pedestrian crossing in the path of exiting traffic.  Submitter is of the view this is a safety concern.

Noted.  See responses to 1.1 and 1.2 above.

No modification required.

4.

Submitter 4

BUTLER WA 6036

4.1

Expresses disappointment that previous concerns regarding the conflict of educational and development values were acknowledged when the Liquor Store was approved.  Is disappointed that the owners are now applying for a drive through addition.

Noted. 

No modification required.

4.2

Concerned about proximity of pedestrian crossing to exit for drive through.

Noted.  See response to 1.2 above.

No modification required.

`

The 2013 Review of Liquor Control Act stated that studies have shown that an increase in outlet liquor sales have been linked to higher rates of traffic accidents, road crashes, general injuries and drink driving or being a passenger of a drink driver.

Noted.  See response to 1.1 above.

No modification required.

4.4

From 2015, Irene McCormack (and in 2017 Butler College) will have an increasing number of 18 year old students who can legally purchase alcohol which will present serious challenges and unwanted work for school staff.  Submitter is of the view that the sale of liquor next to a school sends the message to students that it must be OK.

 

 

 

Noted.  See response to 1.1 above.  Laws in Western Australia permit the sale of, and consumption of alcohol by, persons aged 18 years and over.

No modification required.

5.

Submitter 5

BUTLER WA 6036

5.1

Concerned that the proposal will put children into a dangerous position due to the proximity of the crosswalk and drive through exit.

Noted.  See response to 1.2 above.

No modification required.

5.2

The 2013 Review of Liquor Control Act stated that studies have shown that an increase in outlet liquor sales have been linked to higher rates of traffic accidents, road crashes, general injuries and drink driving or being a passenger of a drink driver.

Noted.  See response to 1.1 above.

No modification required.

5.3

Opposed to the opening time of 8.00am and cannot understand why there is a need to sell alcohol at this time, especially when children are coming to school.

Noted.  See response to 1.4 above.

No modification required.

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                    68

CITY OF WANNEROO

PROPOSED DRIVE THROUGH ADDITION TO APPROVED LIQUOR STORE

2 CAPTIVA APPROACH, BUTLER (DA2014/1895)

(Second Round of Advertising closed 20 May 2015)

 

No.

Summary of Submission

Administration Comment

Recommended Modification

1.

Submitter 1

MERRIWA WA 6030

1.1

The proposal is not a safe option at the entrance of a carpark nor is it necessary in the area.

Noted.  The design of the drive-through facility will allow for two vehicles to queue in each lane at any one time, meaning that up to four vehicles can be accommodated within the facility.  A traffic engineering review of the proposed drive-through addition estimates that 95% of the time less than 1 vehicle will be queuing within this area with a maximum demand of 1 vehicle per three minutes entering and exiting the drive-through.  The traffic engineering review was based on a single service lane operating at any one time, therefore, given the proposed drive-through is a dual lane facility, the likelihood of queuing vehicles blocking the car park entrance is low.

 

Notwithstanding this, Administration does consider that the installation of line marking in the car park to delineate a ‘keep clear zone’ to direct vehicles away from stopping within the main car park thoroughfare would be beneficial and has recommended a condition accordingly.

 

No modification required.

2.

Submitter 2

(no suburb details provided)

2.1

The area already has a bad name which will not be improved by this proposal.  The submitter considers that we should be doing more to cut down on alcohol.

Noted.  The application has been assessed on its planning merits.

No modification required.

3.

Submitter 3

(no suburb details provided)

3.1

Does not agree with the drive through addition and considers that it is too close to schools and other shops.

Noted.  The subject land is zoned Commercial and identified as a local centre under the Butler-Jindalee District Structure Plan No. 39.  A local centre is intended to provide for the main daily and weekly household shopping and community needs and therefore a Liquor Store (with or without a drive through) is considered an appropriate use.

No modification required.

4.

Submitter 4

BUTLER WA 6036

4.1

There are already many delivery trucks between 7am and 9pm seven days per week and this proposal will only increase the numbers.  There are often three to four trucks attending the site at any one time – one reversing into the loading bay and the remainder parking in the carpark near the loading bay on Tarpon Link opposite residential houses.  Residents on Tarpon Link already experience conditions similar to an industrial area.

Noted.  The delivery trucks referred to by the submitter are associated with the approved supermarket on the subject lot.  Further delivery vehicles are expected once the approved Liquor Store commences operations.  The number of deliveries to the Liquor Store will not be changed as a consequence of the drive-through addition.

 

Delivery vehicles are required to comply with the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997.  If residents are experiencing issues with noise generated by delivery vehicles they are advised to contact the shopping centre owner and/or the City’s Environmental Health Officers.

No modification required.

4.2

The proposal will result in more traffic and congestion.  The entrance to the loading bay and drive through is one of only two entrances to the centre.  The centre is already well patronised and there is already an issue with service vehicles queuing on Tarpon Link waiting to enter to the centre.

Noted.  There is no evidence to suggest that the drive-through addition will attract more vehicles to the centre.  It will simply give customers a choice as to whether they park and walk in for service or use the drive-through addition.

 

It is estimated that the drive-through addition will largely operate without incident, however, there is the potential for queueing to occur for small periods of time during the peak afternoon period generally on a Friday afternoon.

 

The issue relating to queueing service vehicles is not related to the subject application. 

No modification required.

5.

Submitter 5 (Late Submission)

BUTLER  WA  6036

5.1

The proposal ignores congestion the addition will cause to the centre due to the location of the entrance and exit to the drive-through addition.

Noted.  See responses for 1.1 and 4.2 above. 

No modification required.

5.2

The centre has a steady stream of people using the child care centre, medical centre, 24 hour gym, restaurants and McDonalds.  Submitter questions why it needs a Liquor Store as well.  In addition there are also three schools nearby.  School children often frequent the centre to go to McDonalds and Subway, which is next door to the proposed Liquor Store.

Noted.  See response to 3.1 above.

No modification required.

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                     71

3.5    Four Grouped Dwellings with Commercial Portions DA2015/489 at Lot 2 (8) Duncombe Grove, Quinns Rocks

File Ref:                                              DA2015/489 – 15/172008

Responsible Officer:                           Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       2         

 

Issue

To consider a development application seeking approval for four Grouped Dwellings with Commercial portions at Lot 2 (8) Duncombe Grove, Quinns Rocks.

 

Applicant

Sathree

Owners

Bofam WA Pty Ltd and Martina Margaretha Gericke

Location

Lot 2 (8) Duncombe Grove Quinns Rocks

Site Area

2,000m2

DPS 2 Zoning

Commercial R20

 

 

Background

On 12 May 2009 a development application for a Mixed Use development incorporating four Shop tenancies on the ground floor and four Residential units on the upper floor, was approved by the City for Lot 2 (8) Duncombe Grove, Quinns Rocks (subject site). On 30 March 2010 a building licence was issued for the same development. The approvals were not acted upon by the applicant and as such have since lapsed.

Detail

Proposal

 

The subject site is 2,000m2 and is zoned as Commercial with a density code of R20 under the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2). A location plan is included as Attachment 1.The application is proposing four Grouped Dwellings on the subject site, which are a discretionary (‘D’) use within the Commercial zone. The proposal incorporates the following:

 

·        Four single storey Residential Grouped Dwellings;

 

·        Each unit has a front room which is capable of being used for Residential use as part of the Grouped Dwellings or Commercial land uses (Commercial portion);

 

·        The Commercial portions range in size from 50.87m2 to 57.36m2;

 

·        Separate entry point from the front of the development for the Commercial portions; and

 

·        Two car parking bays per Residential unit and one additional car parking bay per unit for the Commercial portion.

 

The plans depicting the development are included as Attachment 2.

 

Consultation

 

The proposal was not advertised to surrounding landowners as it was not considered to have an adverse impact on the locality.

 

The site only adjoins an existing Child Care Centre and the surrounding area has been developed with Single Houses as can be seen in Attachment 1. Given that the proposal is predominantly Residential with a potential portion of Commercial, it is considered that the proposal is consistent with the locality and therefore, did not require consultation.

Comment

In considering the application, Administration gave due regard to the provisions of DPS 2 and the Residential Design Code (R-Codes) as discussed below.

 

Commercial Development

 

The proposal incorporates a predominantly Residential development with the front room of each proposed dwelling that can potentially be developed for Commercial uses. The intent behind this development is to provide a degree of flexibility for land use in order to promote small businesses within the development. After discussing the proposed uses with the applicant it was identified that uses which would facilitate both the use of the residential and commercial areas by the same residents would be preferred (i.e. living in the house and utilising the commercial area). The uses listed below were identified as the most appropriate for the subject site and are all permitted (‘P’) uses within the commercial zone;

 

·                Hairdresser;

·                Beauty Parlour;

·                Consulting Room;

·                Office; or

·                Corner Store.

 

If approved, it will be possible for residents in the proposed units to operate non Residential uses in the Commercial portions. The applicant has indicated that no tenants have been secured for the site as approvals have not yet been granted by the City. Therefore, the use of the Commercial portions is unknown and only indicative. It is possible that some of the units may be used for Residential purposes only. In order to avoid conflict between adjoining landowners, a condition of any approval will require a Notification on Title which will advise prospective owners/tenants of the ability of the units to be utilised for commercial uses.

 

Residential Development in Commercial Zones

 

A recent trend in the lodgement of development applications has seen several areas in mixed use and commercial zones being developed for residential only development. Administration generally does not support this development, however, when assessing residential development in these zones a number of factors need to be considered. These include matters such as the proximity to transport and other commercial areas, the existing development of the surrounding area and constraints of the site. In considering these factors it is considered that the subject site can be developed with a flexible approval (incorporating both residential and commercial uses), for the following reasons;

 

·                The lack of public transportation within close proximity will have a direct impact on the viability of a Commercial only development. Areas being developed for Mixed Use within the Commercial zones are located within walkable catchments to major transport routes (such as train stations and major high frequency bus routes) whereas the subject site is not located near any major transport routes.

 

·                The size of the subject site (2,000m2) is not conducive for any large scale Commercial tenancy, with the largest possible development being a neighbourhood convenience store (such as a small supermarket). The subject site is within 1.5km of two supermarkets and as such, may not be commercially viable.

 

·                Development of Commercial and Mixed Use zones for Residential use is generally undertaken while developments are still new (such as Butler). The proposed development is being undertaken in an established area whereby the needs of residents are being catered for by existing neighbouring centres (two small supermarkets 1.5km away and a Growers Market, Bakery and Hair Salon approximately 400m away).

 

·                Should this site not be developed with commercial land uses there would not be significant impacts on employment within the Quinns Rocks areas. On the contrary some new development areas rely on employment generation from the mixed use zone and development of residential only land limits the ability to achieve the desired employment targets.

 

·                The applicant has previously sought for a Mixed Use approval (as discussed in the Background section above). This venture was not successful as no tenants could be secured for the site.

 

In considering the above factors Administration recommends the proposal be supported for residential development, with the option of commercial elements and this recommendation should not be constituted for Administrations support for all residential development in mixed use and commercial zones.

 

Car Parking

 

Although the applicant has not indicated specific uses for the Commercial portions of the development, the uses listed above have been used in order to estimate car parking requirements for the site in accordance with DPS 2. The proposal has incorporated two car parking bays for the Residential use of the development and one additional car parking bay for the Commercial portion.

 

Car parking for the Commercial portions is assessed against the parking ratios set out in DPS 2 and vary depending on the different Commercial land uses. The worst case scenario (highest car parking ratio) for the site is whereby, all four Commercial portions are used as a Consulting Room as this would require a total of 20 car parking bays across the site. The car parking for the Commercial portion would not in this instance meet the provisions of DPS 2 as only one car parking bay per Commercial portion has been proposed, however, it is considered that a variation to the car parking requirements is capable of being supported for the following reasons;

 

·                The estimated car parking requirement is a worst case scenario which is if all Commercial portions were to be developed as a Consulting Room. It is highly unlikely that all four proposed tenancies will be used as a Consulting Room and thus, requiring 20 car parking bays across the subject site (not including the Residential car parking requirements).

 

·                Given the connected nature of the Residential units to the Commercial portions, it is considered that the owner/tenant is likely to operate a business in the Commercial portion of the building. This would significantly reduce the car parking requirements for staff as two car parking bays have been proposed for the Residential use of the development.

 

·                The small scale of the Commercial portion of the development would not attract a large number of visitors.

 

·                Given that the subject site is surrounded by established Residential properties it is considered that any Commercial tenancies will most likely attract local visitors some of which are within a walkable catchment of the development.

 

·                The proposal caters for Commercial land uses however, it is possible that all or some of the units will be utilised solely as Residential and as such, the additional car parking will not be required.

 

R-Code Variations

 

Pursuant to 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. The development has proposed some variations to the Deemed-to-Comply provisions of the R-Codes as discussed below.

 

Setbacks

 

In accordance with Clause 5.1.2 (street setback) of the R-Codes, R20 sites require a 6.0m average primary street setback for all buildings. Units 1, 2 and 3 have proposed variations to the Deemed-to-Comply primary street setback provisions. Unit 1 has proposed the carport to be setback at 1.53m and units 2 and 3 have proposed the front room (potential Commercial portion) to be setback at 3.63m and 3.57m respectively to the building.

 

It is the view of Administration that the proposed variations meet the Design Principles for the following reasons:

 

·                The proposed variation for unit 1 is for the carport only as the remainder of the development is setback at 7.39m. The carport is an open structure and will not impact on the streetscape by means of building bulk.

 

·                The proposed variations will not impact adjoining landowners as the site only adjoins a Child Care Centre and does not directly abut any Residential development.

 

·                The irregular shape of the lot heavily constrains the site and limits the ability to meet the requirements of the R-Codes due to the odd angles of the lot boundaries.

 

·                The proposed development allows for essential service corridors, car parking, utilities and landscaping.

 

·                The proposed development provides adequate open space for the dwellings and will not compromise the privacy of the owners/tenants or the surrounding landowners.

 

Store Rooms

 

As per Clause 5.4.5 of the R-Codes, an enclosed, lockable storage area is required for each Grouped Dwelling. The development has omitted the store rooms from all four units. Although, no store rooms have been proposed for the site it is considered that there is sufficient space on all four sites to accommodate an external storage area such as a shed. In light of this it is considered appropriate to condition the proposal to include a storage area for each unit on the development site.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed development is considered to be designed in a manner which can cater for Residential and Commercial land uses and therefore, can respond to the market demand and will not compromise the zoning of the subject site. The proposal is consistent with the locality and will not have any adverse impacts on the surrounding landowners.

 

As such, the proposed development is considered to be satisfactory and it is therefore recommended that Council approves the proposed development of Four Grouped Dwellings with Commercial Portions at Lot 2 (8) Duncombe Grove, 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 Four Grouped Dwellings with Commercial Portion at Lot 2 (8) Duncombe Grove, Quinns Rocks as shown in Attachment 2, pursuant to Clause 6.9.1 of the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2 and subject to compliance with the following conditions to the satisfaction of the Manager, Planning Implementation:-

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

b)   The driveways and crossovers shall be designed and constructed to the residential specifications before occupation of the dwellings.

c)   The Commercial portion, as shown on the approved plans, of Units 1 – 4 may be used for the following uses as defined in the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No.2:

·   Grouped Dwelling

·   Hairdresser

·   Beauty Parlour

·   Consulting Room

·   Office

·   Corner Store

          A change of use from that outlined above will require the approval of the City. For the Commercial portion, no application is required for change between uses.

d)   A notification is to be placed on the certificates of title of the proposed lots advising of the potential of Commercial use of the units prior to occupation of the dwellings. 

e)   Parking areas, driveways and points of ingress and egress shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the Australiana Standard for Offstreet Carparking (AS2890), and shall be drained, sealed and marked.

f)    The applicant shall undertake adequate measures to minimise any impacts of dust and sand drift from the site.

g)   A storeroom is to be provided for each of the dwellings with a minimum area of 4m2 and minimum dimensions of 1m in accordance with the Residential Design Code requirement clause 5.4.5.

h)   Landscaping and reticulation shall be in accordance with the approved landscaping and reticulation plan (lodged to the City 17 June 2015) and completed prior to the occupation of the development and thereafter maintained.

2.       ADVISES the submitters of this decision.

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1 Location Plan Lot 2 (8) Duncombe Grove 1

15/189535

 

2.

Attachment 2 Site plans 8 Duncombe Grove Quinns Rocks

15/189537

Minuted

 

 

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                    77

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                 78

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                     87

3.6    Application for Child Care Centre at 1K Hinchinbrook Avenue, Ridgewood

File Ref:                                              DA2015/339 – 15/186452

Responsible Officer:                           Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       5         

 

Issue

To consider a development application for a proposed Child Care Centre at Lot 2472 (1K) Hinchinbrook Avenue, Ridgewood.

 

Applicant

Hindley & Associates Pty Ltd

Owner

Melsam Holdings Pty Ltd

Location

Lot 2472 (1K) Hinchinbrook Avenue

Site Area

1,827m2

DPS 2 Zoning

Urban Development

ASP 27 Zoning

Commercial

 

 

Background

A Development Application (DA2015/339) was lodged for a Child Care Centre by Hindley and Associates Pty Ltd on behalf of the landowner Melsam Holdings Pty Ltd at Lot 2472 (1K) Hinchinbrook Avenue, Ridgewood (subject site).

 

The subject site is 1,827m2 in area and is zoned Urban Development under the District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2) and Commercial under Butler-Ridgewood Agreed Structure Plan 27 (ASP 27). The subject site is bound by Connolly Drive to the west, Hinchinbrook Avenue to the south, Widnes Lane to the east and Feakle Bend to the north. A location plan is included in Attachment 1.

Detail

The development application incorporates the following:

 

·                A Child Care Centre building of approximately 480m2 in area, located in the southeast corner of the lot;

·                Verandah to the west of the Child Care Centre approximately 100m2 in size;

·                An Outdoor Play Area of 440m2 in area to the west of the lot; and

·                A total of 21 on-site car bays with vehicle access provided from Feakle Bend.

·                The Child Care Centre proposes a maximum of 82 children and 10 staff members.

·                The operating hours of the Child Care Centre will be between 7am to 7pm Monday to Friday excluding public holidays.

 

The proposed Child Care Centre is designated as a 'D' (discretionary) use within the Commercial zone, as per Table 1 - Zoning Table of DPS 2.

 

Attachment 2 provides a site plan, floor plan and elevations for the Child Care Centre on the subject site.

Consultation

Public consultation was undertaken for a period of 21 days by way of a sign erected on site and surrounding landowners were notified in writing with plans available on the City of Wanneroo website.

 

 

At the conclusion of the advertising period five submissions were received, all objecting to the proposal. A summary of submissions received and Administration’s responses are shown in Attachment 3.

 

The main issues raised during the advertising period and following detailed assessment by Administration relate to:

 

·        Traffic;

·        Vehicular Access;

·        Parking;

·        Landscaping; and

·        Setbacks.

 

A more detailed discussion of the major issues considered in the assessment of the application is provided in the Comment section below.

Comment

Traffic

 

Objections were received during the advertising period raising concerns that the increased traffic generated by the Child Care Centre will impact the surrounding residential area. In accordance with Liveable Neighbourhoods; Feakle Bend and Hinchinbrook Avenue are considered to be ‘Access Streets’ which can accommodate approximately 3,000 vehicles trips per day (VTPD). Widnes Lane is considered to be a ‘Laneway’ which can accommodate approximately 300 VTPD. As part of the Traffic Report provided by the applicant, it was expected that the Child Care Centre will generate 286 additional VTPD that will be distributed over the surrounding road network. The following table represents the anticipated increase in traffic as a result of the Child Care Centre:

 

 

Total vehicle trips per day (VTPD)

Current VTPD

Additional VTPD as a result of the Child Care Centre

Total VTPD as a result of the Child Care Centre

Hinchinbrook Avenue

2,323

84

2,407

Feakle Bend

550

256

806

Widnes Lane

150

98

248

 

It is noted that the additional traffic generated by the Child Care Centre will not result in the capacity of the roads being exceeded. 

 

Vehicular Access

 

The original application submitted to the City proposed that the parking area was located on the southern side of the site and that the crossover was from Widnes Lane. The original site plan is included in Attachment 4. There were concerns raised by surrounding landowners regarding the location of this crossover. Administration also had concerns that this crossover was not compatible with a low volume narrow laneway and its proximity to residential properties on the eastern side of the laneway and the Hinchinbrook Avenue intersection. Cars entering the site could potentially queue from the crossover onto Hinchinbrook Avenue during peak hours causing traffic and congestion problems.

 


 

 

As a result, the applicant amended the application by relocating the carparking area to the northern side of the site and relocating the crossover to Feakle Bend. This will reduce any impact on Widness Lane and Hinchinbrook Avenue and will encourage customers to access the Child Care Centre from the north to utilise the intersection of Connolly Drive and Tarbert Parade which then connects with Feakle Bend. As shown in Attachment 5, this intersection is located approximately 400m from the subject site and acts as a direct link to the site. As a result, it is expected that the amount of vehicles accessing the Child Care Centre by the Hinchinbrook Avenue intersection to Connolly Drive and any through traffic along Widnes Lane will be reduced.

 

As a result of the new location of the crossover an existing on-street car bay will need to be removed on the southern side of Feakle Bend and relocated to the northern side. The relocation of the bay will be at the applicants cost.

 

Parking

 

The proposed development requires a total of 21 car bays as per the Local Planning Policy 2.3: Child Care Centres (LPP 2.3). The application as originally proposed contained a shortfall of two car bays, with 19 bays proposed in lieu of 21 bays. This shortfall was also the subject of objections. As part of the redesign, the objections have been resolved by reducing the maximum children numbers to be accommodated at the proposed Child Care Centre and providing additional tandem parking bays for staff members. As a result, the amended plans now provide 21 on-site car parking bays which is compliant with the car parking requirements under LPP 2.3.

 

Landscaping

 

Clause 4.1 of LPP 2.3 requires landscaping to occur within the first 3 metres of all street boundaries. Landscaping has been provided as part of the outdoor play area adjoining Connolly Drive with the exception to the carparking area which extends to the boundary. A 1.9m to 3m landscaping strip has been provided along Hinchinbrook Avenue boundary. Landscaping has not been proposed along Feakle Bend or Widnes Lane.

 

These variations to the policy are considered acceptable for the following reasons:

 

-     The surrounding residential lots do not directly front the Child Care Centre and therefore will not be impacted by the lack of landscaping;

-     Shade trees have been proposed within the carpark adjoining the Feakle Bend boundary;

-     Sufficient landscaping exists on the verge abutting Connolly Drive, which includes mature endemic trees; and

-     The policy specifies that 8% of the lot has to be landscaped, which has been achieved.

 

As a result of the above, the proposal is considered to meet the intent of the landscaping provisions of LPP 2.3 and therefore the variation is supported by Administration.

 

Setbacks

 

Clause 4.7.1 of DPS 2 requires a 3m setback to any secondary street boundary being Hinchinbrook Avenue, Feakle Bend and Widnes Lane. The setback to Feakle Bend exceeds 3m, however the Child Care Centre is proposed to be setback 1.5m from Widnes Lane and 1.9m from Hinchinbrook Avenue.

 

 

 

 

These variations are considered acceptable for the following reasons:

 

·                As the adjacent residential lots do not front Widnes Lane, the visual impact of the reduced setback will be minimal;

·                The adjoining residential lots to the east are setback approximately 1.5m to Widnes Lane which creates a consistent streetscape;

·                The adjoining residential dwellings on Widnes Lane are elevated above the Child Care Centre on the subject lot; and

·                The Child Care Centre fronts a sump to the south of Hinchinbrook Avenue.

 

Conclusion

 

The amended plans are considered to address the objections of surrounding landowners. The application is now also compliant with the car parking requirements as outlined in LPP 2.3 and variations to both the landscaping requirements outlined in LPP 2.3 and setback requirements outlined in DPS 2 are considered acceptable. As a result, Administration recommends approval of the proposed Child Care Centre.

Statutory Compliance

This application has been assessed in accordance with the City of Wanneroo’s District Planning Scheme No. 2 and LPP 2.3.

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 Child Care Centre at Lot 2472 (1K) Hinchinbrook Avenue, Ridgewood as shown in Attachment 2, pursuant to Clause 6.9.1(c) 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 relates only to the proposed Child Care Centre as indicated on Attachment 2. It does not relate to any other development on the site.

b)      The use of the building is to be Child Care Centre as defined in the City of Wanneroo’s District Planning Scheme No. 2 as follows:

          Child Care Centre: means premises used for the daily or occasional care of children in accordance with the Community Services (Child Care) Regulations 1988.

c)      A change of use from that outlined above will require the approval of the City.

d)      A maximum of 82 children and 10 staff are permitted within the Child Care Centre premises at any one time.

e)      The hours of operation of the Child Care Centre are to be between the hours of 7:00am and 7:00pm on weekdays. No operations are permitted on weekends or public holidays.

f)       The parking areas, driveways and points of ingress and egress shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the Australian Standard for Offstreet Carparking (AS2890) as amended and the City of Wanneroo Technical Standards, and shall be drained, sealed and marked.

g)      The parking areas and associated access indicated on the approved plans shall not be used for the purpose of storage of obstructed in any way at any time without prior approval of the City.

h)      An on-site stormwater drainage system, sufficient to contain a 1:100 year storm even (over 24 hours) must be provided. Plans illustrating the system proposed shall be submitted for approval when application is made for a building license and the system shall be installed during the construction of the development.

i)       Planting and installation shall be in accordance with the approved landscaping and reticulation plans.

j)       The applicant shall undertake adequate measures to minimise any impacts of dust and sand drift from the site to the satisfaction of the City.

k)      All refuse shall be stored within the designated bin store and shall be collected from the site by a private contractor at the cost of the applicant/owner.

2.       ADVISES the submitters of this decision.

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1

15/203291

 

2.

Attachment 2

15/194383

Minuted

3.

Attachment 3

15/190645

 

4.

Attachment 4

15/117407

 

5.

Attachment 5

15/208655

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                    92

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                    93

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                   96

 

Submission No.

Issue

Administration Response/Comment

Modification

1.0

Donald and Susan Hall – 63 Feakle Bend, Ridgewood

1.1

Traffic Flow - in our neighbourhood will increase with the amount of projected family vehicles using The Centre.

 

Disagree. As stated within the report, the increased traffic to Widnes Lane, Hinchinbrook Avenue and Feakle Bend falls within the road capacities as prescribed in Liveable Neighbourhoods.

No modification required.

1.2

Parking - it is now even more restricted with the completion of the 14 homes on the Residential part of this site, this will spill out onto all the surrounding Streets at drop off & pickup times of the day.

 

The original development application proposed a two car bay shortfall. The application has been amended by increasing the number of parking bays on-site. The amended application now meets the car parking requirements as detailed under Local Planning Policy 2.3.

Plans modified to include two additional car bays.

1.3

Noise factor - all types of noise in our area is emphasised as it is confined, this will be greatly increased with even more vehicles & people.

 

Noted. An acoustic report has been submitted on behalf of the applicant and has been assessed by the Health Services at the City. Health Services deemed the proposed Child Care Centre would comply with the current noise legislation.

 

Any noise generated by the Child Care Centre is required to comply with the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 at all times. If the application was approved and in the event that noise is emanated at a level that becomes a nuisance to local residents, Administration would investigate the noise levels and if substantiated, require a property owner to undertake appropriate measures to ensure compliance with the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997.

No modification required.

2.0

Paul Anderson

2.1

Severe congestion of traffic that will occur on a daily basis.

 

Please refer to Administration’s response 1.1.

No modification required.

2.2

The lack of parking during drop off & pick up times will cause local residents severe impact on their general daily life.

 

Please refer to Administration’s response 1.2.

Plans modified.

2.3

Hinchinbrook Avenue is the major intersection 1 of 3, of the main entry & exit points for Connolly Drive for residents of Ridgewood.  The land in question is situated in a laneway that just had around 20 or so new houses built directly opposite. With the impending freeway extension to come to Hester Avenue & the dual lane widening of Connolly Drive the situation will become even more congested especially during the peak times morning & evening. This will only be impacted on with the addition of up to 86 vehicles plus staff members trying to enter & exit this intersection every morning & again in the afternoons.

 

The access point has been relocated to Feakle Bend. As discussed within the report, this will encourage patrons who need to access the Child Care Centre from Connolly Drive to utilise the intersection of Tarbert Parade to the north which connects to Feakle Bend. This will reduce the amount of vehicles accessing the Child Care Centre by the Hitchinbrook Avenue intersection to Connolly Drive and therefore the amount of traffic along Widnes Lane.

Plans modified by relocating the crossover to Feakle Bend.

2.4

There is currently construction just started of a church & child care centre on Connolly Drive & Jenolan Way while there is another Day care centre approximately 100m from this development.  There are better locations further towards the new Lukin Centre just recently developed and is already a controlled intersection with traffic lights.

 

 

The Child Care Centre is a ‘D’ or discretionary use on the subject site which is zoned commercial. As a result, the proposed use can be approved at this site. The quantity and location of Child Care Centres is driven by market demand. There are no provisions within DPS 2 which limit the number of Child Care Centres within an area.

No modification required.

3.0

Belinda Shelley - 50 Feakle Bend, Ridgewood

3.1

The increase in traffic along Widnes Lane with the centre car park entrance on Widnes Lane. Perhaps the car park entrance would be better situated if it was moved to Feakle Bend or Hinchinbrook Avenue.

 

Agreed. Please refer to Administration’s response 2.3.

Plans modified by relocating the crossover to Feakle Bend.

3.2

Traffic is currently a problem on the T intersection of Hinchinbrook Avenue and Connelly Drive with a least one accident per week. I can see a lot more accidents happening if the Child Centre is built unless lights or a roundabout is installed.

 

Please refer to Administration’s response 2.3.

Plans modified by relocating the crossover to Feakle Bend.

4.0

Laurie Richards & Terrance McIntosh – 3 Hinchinbrook Avenue Ridgewood

4.1

Increased traffic congestion on Widnes Lane, especially at the entrance of the Child Care Centre car park.  Widnes Lane is not wide enough for regular vehicle access.

 

Please refer to Administration’s response 1.1 and 2.3. Widnes Lane is 6m in width which is considered to be a standard width of a laneway as listed under Liveable Neighbourhoods.

Plans modified by relocating the crossover to Feakle Bend.

4.2

Parents may try and stop on Widnes Lane to drop children off, hence blocking the traffic. Widnes Lanes needs to be widened and a ‘No Stopping’ sign erected.

 

As indicated under Administration’s response 1.1.  With the relocation of the access point, pedestrian access associated with the Child Care Centre should be focused upon Feakle Bend, which should alleviate any safety and traffic issues regarding the intersection of Widnes Lane and Hinchinbrook Avenue.

Plans modified by relocating the crossover to Feakle Bend.

4.3

Potential hazard for pedestrians walking down Hinchinbrook Avenue. There is a large retaining wall along 1 Hinchinbrook Avenue as you drive south you need to stop to see if there are any pedestrians as you simply cannot see people walking down the hill because it is blocked by the retaining wall.

 

As indicated under Administration’s response 4.2. 

Plans modified by relocating the crossover to Feakle Bend.

4.4

Hinchinbrook Avenue is a very busy road and people drive very fast up and down the hill from Connolly Drive. There is real danger of cars entering Hinchinbrook Avenue from Widnes Lane. When cars are parked from number 1-7 Hinchinbrook Avenue, it is very difficult to see cars coming down the hill.

 

Please refer to Administration’s response 1.1 and 2.3.

Plans modified by relocating the crossover to Feakle Bend.

4.5

Recommendations:

a)   The car park for the Child Care Centre be moved to the northern side of the block so the entrance is off Feakle Bend and not Widnes Lane.

b)   The speed limit on Widnes Lane be reduced to 20km/h and speed signs be placed along the laneway.

c)   No stopping signs put along Widnes Lane to prevent parents stopping on a very narrow road to drop off children.

d)   Stop signs need to be placed at the intersection of Widnes Lane and Hinchinbrook Avenue to prevent pedestrians walking along Hinchinbrook Avenue from being knocked down and to prevent an accident at the intersection, as motorists cannot easily see other cars on Hinchinbrook Avenue when cars are parked on Hinchinbrook Avenue.

e)   A major upgrade of the intersection of Hinchinbrook Avenue and Connolly Drive needs to occur so it contains either traffic lights or a roundabout to alleviate major congestion due to at least 100 cars accessing the Centre twice a day.

 

a)   The access point has been moved to Feakle Bend.  As a result, many of the issues associated with vehicles stopping and accessing the site from Widnes Lane have been addressed.

b)   Speed limits are enforced through Main Roads WA and cannot be considered as part of this application.

c)   There are no plans to implement stopping signs along Widnes Lane at this point in time. Should it be evident that illegal stopping and parking of vehicles is still occurring, the City’s Rangers can investigate any complaints received and potentially signage can be erected to discourage this activity in the future.

d)   A laneway is considered to be a low speed environment and a stop sign is not considered necessary.

e)   A road widening of Connolly Drive is scheduled to be done by the City of Wanneroo in 2016. As part of this road widening, this intersection will be upgraded to permit dual lane crossing which may improve the level of service provided. At this point in time there are no plans for traffic lights or a roundabout at this intersection.

Plans modified by relocating the crossover to Feakle Bend. No modification required for other issues.

5.0

Christopher and Patricia Betteridge -  2 Hyland Crescent, Clarkson

5.1

The area is residential with no parking except outside residences in Hinchinbrook Avenue and Widnes Lane a medium density development.

 

As indicated under Administration’s response 1.2. 

Plans modified to include two additional car bays.

5.2

There are no pedestrian crossings within the vicinity of the child care centre on any of the roads mentioned. During the hours of 7 and 9am and 3 to 6.30 pm Connolly Drive is congested to the point it can take 10 to 12 mins to join the stream of traffic and longer to cross on foot.

 

Noted. There are existing pathways along Feakle Bend, Hinchinbrook Avenue and Connolly Drive and a proposed pathway being proposed along Widnes Lane as part of the application. This pathway will connect the pathway along Feakle Bend to Hinchinbrook Avenue. There are existing pedestrian crossings on

-     On Hinchinbrook Avenue to the south of the subject site;

-     On Connolly Drive approximately 25m southwest of the intersection with Hinchinbrook Avenue; and

-     On Feakle Bend to the northwest of the subject site.

 

In regards to the congestion refer to Administration’s response 1.2.  the additional vehicle trips per day that will result from the Child Care Centre fall within the permitted amounts as detailed within Liveable Neighbourhoods.

No modification required.

5.3

At the junction of Jenolan and Connolly a recent approval for a Church and Child Care Centre will also add to this congestion.  The added traffic of approximately 60 vehicles throughout the day will not do anything to alleviate this congestion. All this extra traffic will eventually find its way through the built-up residential areas surrounding this proposal adding pollution and noise to the resident’s lifestyle.  In addition to this our local Doctors, Chemist Restaurants and Shops are located at Merriwa across Connolly drive.

 

 

Please refer to Administration’s response 1.1.

No modification required.

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                  101

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                  102

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                   103

3.7    Proposed Child Care Centre - Wyatt Grove Shopping Centre - 100 Gungurru Avenue, Hocking

File Ref:                                              DA2015/449 – 15/186002

Responsible Officer:                           Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       2         

 

Issue

To consider a development application for a Child Care Centre at 100 Gungurru Avenue, Hocking.

 

Applicant

Planning Solutions

Owner

Wyatt Grove Developments Pty Ltd

Location

Lot 20 (100) Gungurru Avenue, Hocking

Site Area

1.98 hectares

DPS 2 Zoning

Urban Development

ASP 6 Zoning

Centre

ASP 42 Zoning

Commercial

 

 

Background

Planning Solutions, on behalf of Wyatt Grove Developments Pty Ltd (the owner), submitted a development application for a Child Care Centre at Lot 20 (100) Gungurru Avenue, Hocking, commonly known as Wyatt Grove Shopping Centre.

The subject site is bound by Gungurru Avenue to the north, Wyatt Road to the east, Nicholas Road to the south, and residential properties along Verteramo Way to the west. A location plan is included as Attachment 1.

 

The site is zoned Centre under the East Wanneroo Cell 4 Agreed Structure Plan No. 6 (ASP 6) and Commercial under the Hocking Neighbourhood Centre Agreed Structure Plan No. 42 (ASP 42).

 

There have been a number of development approvals issued for the site, specifically being four stages of development which are outlined below.

 

·        Stage 1 of Wyatt Grove Shopping Centre (DA2012/1371) was approved by the City on 9 April 2013, incorporating the following:

 

o      15 tenancies (retail and non-retail land uses);

o      Liquor store;

o      Supermarket (Woolworths);

o      Landscaping; and

o      Car parking and vehicle/pedestrian access ways.

 

·        Stage 2 (DA2013/706) was approved by the City on 26 July 2013, incorporating the addition of a Medical Centre and an Office.

 

·        Stage 3 (DA2013/823) was approved by the City on 6 August 2013, incorporating the addition of a Recreation Centre and a Medical Centre.

 

·        Stage 4 (DA2014/894) was approved by the City on the 19 September 2014, incorporating four additional tenancies (retail and non-retail land uses) and underground car parking.

 

On 7 January 2015, the Western Australian Planning Commission also granted conditional subdivision approval (refer WAPC 147797) over the subject site for the creation of 11 individual lots.

Detail

The details of the proposed development application are as follows: 

 

·        A Child Care Centre fronting Nicholas Road to cater for a maximum of 62 children from zero to five years old and a maximum of 14 staff at any one time;

·        An additional 23 car parking bays directly adjacent to the east of the proposed Child Care Centre with access gained from the rear service lane.

 

The applicant has requested operating hours of the Child Care Centre to be from 6:30am to 6:30pm, Monday to Friday and not including public holidays.

 

The proposed Child Care Centre is designated as a ‘D’ (discretionary) use within the Commercial zone, as per Table 1 – Zoning Table of the City’s District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2).

 

The proposed site plan and elevations plans for the proposed development are included as Attachment 2.

Consultation

Under Clause 6.7 of DPS 2, public notification of an application for planning approval involving a ‘D’ use may be undertaken if the City considers it appropriate.

 

In this instance, consultation was not considered necessary as the proposed use of Child Care Centre is considered an appropriate use within the Wyatt Grove Shopping Centre site and the Commercial zone.

 

Furthermore, Clause 1.2 of the City’s Local Planning Policy 2.3: Child Care Centres (LPP 2.3), encourages Child Care Centres to be located adjacent to uses such as shopping centres, medical centres/consulting rooms, schools, parks and community purpose buildings.

 

It is noted that although the application was not advertised, a submission in regard to the proposed Child Care Centre was received by a member of the community who became aware of the proposed development through other means. The submission received made objections based on the following reasons:

 

·        Potential safety and traffic issues in regard to the location of the access points to the proposed car parking areas; and

·        The potential safety risks that may be caused in the event of a fire on site and how this may affect the ease of access and egress to the proposed car parking areas.

 

These objections are addressed further in the report.

 

Comment

 

An assessment of the proposal has been carried out against the provisions of DPS 2, LPP 2.3, ASP 6 and ASP 42. The proposal generally complies with the requirements of the relevant provisions. Further discussion on the proposal and the submission received is provided below:

 


 

 

Car Parking:

 

LPP 2.3 requires Child Care Centres that cater for between 57 and 64 children to provide eight car parking bays, plus one additional bay required for each staff member.

 

The proposed Child Care Centre will cater for a maximum of 62 children with a maximum of 14 staff at any one time. In this regard, the proposed development requires a total of 22 car parking bays to be provided. The development proposes a total of 23 additional car parking bays on the Wyatt Grove Shopping Centre site and as such, the proposal complies with the car parking requirements of LPP 2.3.

 

Additionally, the proposed car parking facilities and the existing car parking facilities on the Wyatt Grove Shopping Centre site will be subject to a public access easement in favour of the public at large to allow for the car parking facilities over the entire site to be utilised by all patrons visiting the Wyatt Grove Shopping Centre site. This was initially imposed as a condition of approval for DA2012/1371 and is recommended to be imposed as part of any approval for the proposed Child Care Centre development.

 

Vehicular Access:

 

The development proposes access to the car parking area provided to the east of the Child Care Centre site to be gained from a service lane which is located to the rear of the proposed development area. This rear service lane is provided to allow access to the lots fronting onto Nicholas Road as well as allowing delivery vehicles to access the loading dock for the existing Woolworths on site.

 

The submission received raised concerns in regard to potential safety issues caused by vehicular access being gained from the rear service lane. 

 

A Traffic Report was submitted as part of the original application for the development of the Wyatt Grove Shopping Centre site to assess and make recommendations regarding the proposed traffic impact and access configuration of the site. This Traffic Report based its findings on the service lane providing rear access to nine dwellings and one commercial development lot which were proposed to be located fronting Nicholas Road. In this regard, the rear service lane was initially proposed to provide access to a total of 10 driveways. Based on this original proposal the Traffic Report concluded that the rear service lane was designed to accommodate both the service vehicles accessing the supermarket loading dock as well as the 10 access points and vehicles generated from the residential and commercial development. The findings from this Traffic Report were also validated by the City’s Traffic and Transport Service Unit.

 

Since the submission of the original Traffic Report, there have been a number of Traffic Report Addendums relating to the subject site to comment on the traffic impact of subsequent development proposals. The conclusions made from these addendums have identified that the subject site and surrounding road network can accommodate the traffic created by the Wyatt Grove Shopping Centre development.

 

Furthermore, the updated Traffic Report submitted as part of this application concludes that the rear service lane can accommodate both the service vehicles using the loading dock as well as vehicles using the two access points and car parking areas that are proposed as part of this application. This ensures that the rear lane will remain unimpeded when the loading dock is in use.

 


 

 

Based on the above information and given that the proposal for the Child Care Centre proposes only two access points to the rear service lane in lieu of the 10 access points which were originally predicted and found to create no conflict with the rear service lane use, it is considered that the access points to the proposed car parking areas will not create any safety risks to vehicles.

 

Pedestrian Access:

 

Concerns were raised in regard to the safety of parents and children when walking to and from the proposed car parking area to the Child Care Centre.

 

It is noted that the rear service lane that will provide vehicular access to the proposed car parking area does not make provision for a pedestrian footpath and is likely to provide the quickest route for pedestrian access from the northern side of the car parking area to the entrance point of the proposed Child Care Centre. Notwithstanding, there are a number of alternative options for patrons to utilise existing footpaths and pedestrian crossings in order to ensure a safe walking route from the proposed car parking area and the existing car parking areas on the site to the entrance of the proposed Child Care Centre.

 

There is an existing pedestrian network within the Wyatt Grove Shopping Centre site which includes multiple pedestrian crossing points and footpaths to cater for patrons walking to and from the existing car parking areas to the proposed Child Care Centre. There is also an existing footpath running along Nicholas Road, which continues along the western boundary of the proposed development and leads directly to the entry point to the proposed Child Care Centre. The applicant has also identified two pedestrian access points leading from southern side of the proposed car parking area directly to the footpath running along Nicholas Road.

 

As briefly noted in the ‘Car Parking’ section above, it is recommended that an easement be placed over all car parking areas of the Wyatt Grove Shopping Centre site to allow public access to all car parking bays on-site. In this regard, the car parking areas proposed within this application will be able to be utilised by all patrons accessing the Wyatt Grove Shopping Centre. The applicant has further noted that the proposed car parking areas will predominantly be used by staff of the Child Care Centre and the Supermarket. Patrons of the Child Care Centre will predominantly be using the car parking bays located abutting the western boundary of the Child Care Centre, the existing on-street car parking bays along Nicholas Road as well as the existing car bays in the Wyatt Grove Shopping Centre site because they are located closer to the entrance of the Child Care Centre.

 

Based on the above, it is considered that although the rear service lane does not allow for pedestrian paths, there are a number of alternative footpaths and pedestrian links available for use from the existing and proposed car parking areas on the Wyatt Grove Shopping Centre site to the entrance of the Child Care Centre. This existing pedestrian network will work to ensure the safety of patrons accessing the proposed Child Care Centre.

 

Fire Safety:

 

A concern was raised in relation to the potential fire safety risks of the proposed Child Care Centre development and the proposed access to and egress from the car parking area.

 

The National Construction Code Volume 1 (NCC) details minimum requirements and technical provisions for the design and construction of commercial, industrial, and multi-residential buildings. These provisions include minimum requirements which must be met in relation to fire safety and access to and egress from any commercial building. In this regard, any application submitted for a building permit for the proposed Child Care Centre must demonstrate compliance with the provisions in the NCC which will ensure that patrons are able to safely evacuate the site in the case of a fire or any emergency.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed Child Care Centre and associated car parking located at Lot 20 (100) Gungurru Avenue, Hocking has been assessed against the provisions of DPS 2, ASP 6, ASP 42 and LPP 2.3. Additionally, the concerns raised in the submission received are considered to have been satisfactorily addressed. As such, the proposed development is considered acceptable and it is therefore recommended that the proposal be approved subject to conditions.

Statutory Compliance

This application has been assessed in accordance with DPS 2, LPP 2.3, ASP 6 and ASP 42.

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 Child Care Centre at Lot 20 (100) Gungurru Avenue, Hocking as shown in Attachment 2, pursuant to Clause 6.9.1(c) 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 relates only to the proposed Child Care Centre and car parking areas as indicated on the attached site plan. It does not relate to any other development on the site.

b.      The use of the building is to be Child Care Centre as defined in the City of Wanneroo’s District Planning Scheme No. 2 as follows:

          Child Care Centre: means premises used for the daily or occasional care of children in accordance with the Community Services (Child Care) Regulations 1988.

         

          A change of use from that outlined above will require the approval of the City.

c.       A maximum of 62 children and 14 staff are permitted within the Child Care Centre premises at any one time.

d.      The hours of operation of the Child Care Centre are to be between the hours of 6:30am and 6:30pm on weekdays and shall not operate on weekends or public holidays.

e.       The granting of an easement in gross, in favour of the public at large prior to the development first being occupied over the area identified as carparking and vehicular accessways on the approved plan. All costs associated with the preparation of the easement shall be met by the landowner.

f.       The parking areas, driveways and points of ingress and egress shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the Australian Standard for Offstreet Carparking (AS2890) as amended and the City of Wanneroo Technical Standards, and shall be drained, sealed and marked.

g.      The parking areas and associated access indicated on the approved plans shall not be used for the purpose of storage of obstructed in any way at any time without prior approval of the City.

h.      Detailed landscaping and reticulation plans, for the subject site shall be lodged for approval by the City within six (6) months from the date of this approval to the satisfaction of the Manager, Land Development. Planting and installation of landscaping and reticulation shall be provided in accordance with the approved landscaping and reticulation plans prior to occupancy of the development and thereafter maintained.

i.        An on-site stormwater drainage system, sufficient to contain a 1:100 year storm even (over 24 hours) must be provided. Plans illustrating the system proposed shall be submitted for approval when application is made for a building license and the system shall be installed during the construction of the development.

j.        The applicant shall undertake adequate measures to minimise any impacts of dust and sand drift from the site.

k.       All refuse shall be stored within the designated bin store and shall be collected from the site by a private contractor at the cost of the applicant/owner.

l.        No signage is approved as part of this development application. All signage shall accord with the City of Wanneroo's Signs Local Planning Policy. In the event that a variation to the Signs Local Planning Policy is proposed, a signage strategy for the development shall be submitted to the City in a separate development application for planning approval.

 

2.       ADVISES the submitter of this decision.

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1- Location Plan (DA2015/449)

15/228890

 

2.

Attachment 2 - Site Plan, Floor Plan and Elevation Plan (DA2015-449)

15/189337

Minuted

 

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                  110

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                  111

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                   114

Draft

Other Matters

3.8    Draft Perth and Peel @ 3.5 Million Strategy and Draft North-West Sub-regional Planning Framework

File Ref:                                              6607 – 15/180930

Responsible Officer:                           Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       11         

 

Issue

To consider proposed submissions on the draft Perth and Peel @ 3.5 Million Strategy (‘Perth-Peel Strategy’) and the draft North-West Sub-regional Planning Framework (NWSRPF), which have been released for public comment by the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC).

 

Background

In August 2010, the WAPC released ‘Directions 2031 and beyond’ (‘Directions’), as the new strategic land use plan for the Perth-Peel region.  Directions is of a broad nature, including targets for future population, housing and employment growth for the sub-regions which comprise the broader Perth-Peel region.

 

To translate these broad strategic directions into proposed spatial plans for the region, Directions included as part of its implementation proposals, a number of initiatives to be undertaken:

 

·        Development of two sub-regional strategies: one for the outer metropolitan sub-region and one for the central sub-region.  (Drafts of those sub-regional strategies were released for comment in August 2010, together with Directions, however they were not finalised).

 

·        Development of a ‘Vision for Perth’, which was to include the development of a discussion paper on the future development of the Perth-Peel region to accommodate 3.5 million people.

 

·        Development of a series of sub-regional structure plans to support the implementation of the outer sub-regional strategy.  The structure plans were to provide more detailed spatial information than that provided in the sub-regional strategy.

 

As an outcome of the above Directions’ initiatives, on 1 May 2015, the Minister for Planning released a suite of draft strategic land use documents for public comment:

 

·        a draft Perth-Peel Strategy

 

·        four draft Planning Frameworks for the North-West, North-East, South Metropolitan Peel and Central sub-regions.  It is intended that these be finalised as Sub-regional Structure Plans.

 

These draft documents have been released for public comment until 31 July 2015.

 


 

Relationship to Strategic Assessment for the Perth-Peel Region (SAPPR)

 

In 2011, the Commonwealth and State governments commenced the SAPPR study.  The need for this largely arose from concerns related to the impacts of development and associated land clearing on Carnabys Cockatoo, whose population is declining.

 

The SAPPR study and the Perth-Peel and associated sub-regional planning studies are being undertaken in an integrated manner, with the aim being to arrive at a future plan for the region which adequately protects the region’s key environmental values, while also providing certainty regarding the areas which will be permitted to be developed in the future.

 

These studies are also including review of the Basic Raw Materials State Planning Policy to ensure that adequate basic raw materials are identified to meet the region’s long term requirements, having regard for the constraints presented by environmental values which need to be protected.

 

The draft proposals arising from the SAPPR study are expected to be released for public comment in late 2015 (they were originally intended to be released in April 2013).

 

The draft Perth-Peel and Sub-region Planning Framework proposals have been informed by the work undertaken to date on the SAPPR study.

Detail

This report focuses on the two documents now released which are most relevant to the City of Wanneroo, being the Perth-Peel Strategy and the NWSRPF.

 

Following is an overview of the key proposals of each.

 

DRAFT PERTH-PEEL STRATEGY

 

Overview of key proposals:

 

1.       A vision statement of “When Perth reaches a population of 3.5 million people, it will continue to be an innovative 21st century city delivering distinctive Western Australian lifestyle choices and global opportunities”.

 

2.       A spatial plan for the Perth-Peel region (see Attachment 1).  The key proposals shown on this plan affecting the City of Wanneroo are also reflected in the draft NWSRPF, and are therefore dealt with in the following section on the NWSRPF.

 

3.       Five objectives relating to the themes of: liveable, prosperous, connected, sustainable and collaborative.  (The objectives in-full are included in Attachment 2).

 

4.       An implementation framework, which for each objective, includes ‘key strategies’, ‘aspirations/actions’, and ‘by whom’.  (see Attachment 2).

 

5.       A residential infill target for 2050 of 47% (that is, 47% of the approximately 800,000 new homes required, being built within areas classified as ‘infill’, and the rest built within areas classified as ‘greenfield’).  This is the same as the Directions’ target for 2031.  Approximately 57% of this infill housing is proposed to be built within the Central Sub-region with the balance of 43% in the outer sub-regions.

 

6.       Projected increases in population, housing and jobs to 2050:


 

 

 

Increase 2011 - 2050

Sub-region

Population

%

Houses

%

Jobs

%

North-West

417,832

23

168,793

21

148,523

19

North-East

241,434

13

102,554

13

105,607

13

Central

417,026

23

215,000

27

240,000

30

South Metro Peel

736,594

41

302,177

38

293,754

37

Total

1,812,886

100

788,524

100

787,884

100

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DRAFT NWSRPF

 

Overview of key proposals:

 

1.       A Planning Framework plan (see Attachment 3). 

 

          This plan largely reflects the planning proposals already in place through the approved District Structure Plans (DSP) for the Alkimos-Eglinton and Yanchep-Two Rocks areas, the WAPC’s East Wanneroo Structure Plan (EWSP), and the Economic and Employment Lands Strategy: non-heavy industrial, Perth Metropolitan and Peel regions (EELS).

 

          However, there are several notable differences (with the following lettered items being similarly lettered on Attachments 3 and 4):

 

          a)      Substantial new areas are shown as ‘Urban Expansion’ in the southern part of Gnangara (both east and west of Sydney Road) and in the eastern part of Wanneroo (on the west side of Badgerup Road).  These areas had previously been shown as remaining rural under the EWSP.

 

          b)      Flynn Drive is shown extending eastward to link into Neaves Road to form a proposed major east-west Regional Road link.  (Previously, Joondalup Drive had been intended to form the main east-west link with Neaves Road).

 

          c)      The land south of the proposed east-west road link referred to above is shown as ‘Urban Investigation’.  (Under the EWSP, this land is shown as part of the proposed South Pinjar industrial area).

 

          d)      A ‘Passenger Rail – Potential’ is shown following the alignment of the southern part of the proposed ‘East Wanneroo By Pass’ (this same road is now being referred to as the Whiteman to Yanchep Highway by Main Roads, and this is the name used in this report) and then heading west to meet the northern suburbs railway line between the Clarkson Station and the Nowergup Rail Car Depot.

 

          e)      A large area to the east of Mariginiup, in the current State Forest reserve area, is shown as remaining State Forest, whereas this area is shown in the EWSP as ‘employment purposes (subject to further planning’) and in the EELS study as ‘potential industrial area – long-term’.

 

          f)       The proposed Whiteman to Yanchep Highway is shown extending north generally along the alignment of Old Yanchep Road, and then heading west through Carabooda to meet the Mitchell Freeway alignment at Pippidinny Road, Eglinton.

 

          g)      A proposed cemetery is shown just to the east of Carabooda.

 

          h)      An ‘Industrial Investigation’ area is shown in the north part of Carabooda.  (The EELS study does not show this proposal).

 

2.       Population and Dwellings Projections

 

          The NWSRPF includes the following projections for the sub-region (which includes the Cities of Wanneroo and Joondalup):

Local

Government

Existing

Dwellings

(2011)

Existing

Population

(2011)

Additional

dwellings

Additional

population

Total

Dwellings

(2050)

Total

Population

(2050)

Wanneroo

56,362

160,281

146,161

376,486

202,523

536,767

Joondalup

58,561

162,205

22,632

41,346

81,193

203,551

Total

114,923

322,486

168,793

417,832

283,716

740,318

 

 

It may be noted that the projected population growth for the City of Wanneroo for 2011-50 of 376,486 means an average annual population growth rate of approximately 9,650 people per year. This is a significantly higher rate of growth than that assumed in the City’s current population forecasts prepared by id.forecast for the 2011-36 period, which represent an average annual population growth rate of approximately 7,450 people (over the last 5 years the City has grown by an average 8,020 people per annnum).

 

3.       Infill Housing Targets

 

The NWSRPF includes the following targets for infill housing for the Cities of Wanneroo and Joondalup and the sub-region as a whole:

 

Local Government

2011‑16

2016‑21

2021‑26

2026‑31

Total 2031

Post 2031

Total

Wanneroo

5,555

4,069

3,864

2,871

16,359

11,563

27,922

Joondalup

4,630

2,980

2,840

1,660

12,110

8,559

20,669

Total

10,185

7,049

6,704

4,531

28,469

20,122

48,591

 

The above targets for the City of Wanneroo are the same as those set by the WAPC through its Delivering Directions 2031 Report Card of 2013, except that the target for the Post-2031 period has been increased from 5,980 to 11,563, meaning that the total for the 2011-50 period has also increased from 22,340 to 27,922.

 

In respect to what new dwellings in what areas are counted as ‘infill’ and which are counted as ‘greenfields’, it should be noted that the Department of Planning (DoP) has recently introduced a new way of determining this.  This involves a regular monitoring of residential densities of all areas, and the calculation of an average density for the Perth-Peel region.  Where the density of an area is above the average density, it is considered an infill area, and where it is below, it is considered a greenfield area.  (However, where a greenfields area is surrounded by infill areas, it is also considered infill).  As the densities of areas change over time as they develop, particularly on the urban fringe, there is no fixed classification of areas, with some areas changing from greenfields to infill as they develop.

 

It may be noted that the infill target of 27,922 dwellings is 19% of the projected total additional dwellings for the City of 146,161.


 

4.       Employment

 

The NWSRPF includes the following projections for growth in labour force and jobs for the sub-region:

 

2011

2021

2031

2050

Total

change

Total %

change

Labour force

163,636

211,087

268,331

376,386

212,750

130.0%

Jobs

80,566

126,014

174,201

229,089

148,523

184.3%

Employment

Self-sufficiency

49.2%

59.7%

64.9%

60.9%

11.7%

-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The above projections show the number of new jobs increasing at a significantly higher rate than the number of new workers living in the sub-region, leading the employment self-sufficiency rate to increase from 49.2% to 60.9%.

 

          The NWSRPF also includes projections for job numbers in the major activity centres (Joondalup strategic metropolitan centre and Whitfords secondary centre are included below for comparison):

 

Activity Centre

2011

2031

2050

Total additional

(2011-50)

Strategic metropolitan

Centres:

Yanchep

Joondalup

 

 

0

14,183

 

 

18,657

17,446

 

 

23,282

20,181

 

 

          23,282

          5,998

Secondary centres:

Alkimos

Clarkson

Two Rocks (north)

Wanneroo

Whitfords

 

26

1,528

0

1,620

2,869

 

4,574

2,680

6,555

4,733

3,343

 

5,769

3,084

9,823

8,803

3,681

 

          5,743

          1,556

          9,823

          7,183

              812

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Notable points from the above projections are:

 

·        Significant jobs growth is shown for the Yanchep strategic metropolitan centre between now and 2031, with this centre projected to be, at that time, larger (in job numbers) than the Joondalup strategic metropolitan centre was at 2011, and also larger than the Joondalup centre at 2031.

 

·        Significant jobs growth is also projected for the Wanneroo secondary centre, with (by way of comparison) it being larger (in job numbers) than the Whitfords centre by 2031, and more than twice the number of jobs of Whitfords by 2050.

 

In respect to how the NWSRPF proposes that the level of employment self-sufficiency in the sub-region be increased to achieve the targets set, the implementation section of the document includes only very broad information on this, referring to promotion of employment nodes, protection of employment land from non-employment uses, and improving employment self-sufficiency.

 

5.       Community and Social Infrastructure

 

          The NWSRPF includes a plan which shows its key community and social infrastructure proposals for the sub-region (see Attachment 5).

 

          Points of note:

 

·        Regarding tertiary education facilities, it shows a university and technical school at the Yanchep strategic metropolitan centre site, and two technical school sites to the north of that.  However, it should also be noted that the NWSRPF report states: “Additional sites within the sub-region will be identified by the respective tertiary institutions”.  These proposals shown on the plan therefore should not be regarded as firm proposals.

 

·        Regarding regional health facilities, while the plan shows a ‘hospital/health facility’ sited at the Yanchep strategic metropolitan centre, the report states:  “While increased population will result in increased demand for regional health facilities, the preference will be to redevelop or better utilise existing health sites and facilities instead of developing new regional health facilities within the sub-region.  A new site, likely within the Yanchep City Centre, is required by the Department of health for a future ambulance facility and satellite service linked to the Joondalup Health Campus”.

 

·        Regarding regional sports and recreation facilities, the plan shows three sites in the Yanchep-Two Rocks area (consistent with the Yanchep-Two Rocks DSP) and a site just to the east of the Alkimos secondary centre site (between the freeway reserve and Wanneroo Road).

 

While not shown on the plan, the report also refers to a regional facility of approximately 50ha needing to be identified with the East Wanneroo area

 

·        As noted earlier, a cemetery site is shown just to the east of Carabooda, in the current State Forest Reserve area.  The report notes that this is subject to further investigations.

 

6.       Transport

 

          The main Planning Framework plan (Attachment 3) shows the regional road proposals.  It should be noted that while this plan does not show Wanneroo Road extending north of its intersection with the Whiteman to Yanchep Highway, DoP has advised that it is intended that Wanneroo Road will continue to link north into Indian Ocean Drive as it currently does, and has not been shown on this plan because it is currently not reserved on the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS) and is not within an existing road reserve (and instead is within the Yanchep National Park reserve).

 

          The Planning Framework plan also shows the proposed and potential railway lines and stations.  The NWSRPF also includes a plan showing additional public transport proposals (see Attachment 6).  This shows ‘Proposed Transit Priority Routes’ (PTPR).  Points of note:

 

·        The PTPR linking Joondalup City Centre with Warwick station is different to that shown in the Department of Transport’s (DoT) draft public Transport Plan for Perth, 2031 in that it includes a link from Hillarys to Warwick station; there is no direct link from Joondalup to Whitfords City and instead an indirect link via Wanneroo; and there is no link from Mirrabooka to Joondalup (see Attachment 7).  The Public Transport Plan for Perth is still be to be finalised.


 

·        While the Planning Framework shows the PTPR stopping at Warwick station, the draft Planning Framework for the Central Sub-region shows a route continuing east from Warwick station and linking into Mirrabooka Avenue (south of Beach Road).

 

·        The PTPR’s shown in the Alkimos-Eglinton and Yanchep-Two Rocks areas are consistent with the DSPs for those areas, except that the PTPR is shown finishing at the Two Rocks North Centre, rather than continuing north to the north-west corner of the Two Rocks area.

 

          The NWSRPF includes anticipated timings for extension of the northern suburbs railway north of Butler to Yanchep, and the provision of the Yanchep, Alkimos and Eglinton stations.  The anticipated timing for all of these is “post-2025”.  It may be noted that the proposed timing for provision of this infrastructure under the draft Public Transport Plan for Perth was “before 2020”.

 

          Regarding proposals for cycling and pedestrians, it may be noted that the NWSRPF includes a proposal that: “Opportunities to connect the cities of Joondalup and Wanneroo, possibly across Lake Joondalup, should be investigated as an option post 2031”.

 

7.       Implementation

 

          The NWSRPF includes proposals for implementation which comprise:

 

·        A table of ‘Implementation Actions’ (see Attachment 8).  This includes 38 actions, and it may be noted that 26 of these has ‘local government’ as the responsible agency.

 

·        An ‘Urban Staging’ plan (see Attachment 9), which shows the proposed urban areas as either short term (2015-2021), short-medium term (2015-2031), medium-long term (2022 +) or long term (beyond 2031).

 

Consultation

 

In assessing these draft proposals, Administration has consulted with the City of Joondalup Administration (acknowledging that the North West Sub-region comprises the Cities of Wanneroo and Joondalup), and officers from the Outer Metropolitan Growth Councils.

 

Comment

The draft Perth-Peel Strategy and the draft NWSRPF have been assessed and recommended comments on each have been prepared for inclusion in a submission to the WAPC on each.

 

The recommended comments on the draft Perth-Peel Strategy are included in Attachment 10 and the recommended comments on the draft NWSRPF are included in Attachment 11.

 


 

The following is an overview of the key points proposed to be included in Council’s recommended submissions on the draft Perth-Peel Strategy and NWSRPF:

 

1.       With such a significant amount of future urban growth to occur in the outer sub-regions, adequate infrastructure also needs to be provided in these areas, particularly that needed to stimulate local jobs growth and public transport use.  The infrastructure also needs to be provided in a timely manner, coordinated with the staging of development, to ensure that the new development (particularly major activity centres and public transport nodes) is able to be undertaken in a form which takes full advantage of those key sites.  For example, if there is no commitment from State Government on the delivery of rail stations there is a serious concern that the scale and density of development near to them will be inadequate.  It is intended to emphasise this point and link this with the City Advocacy Strategy.  Key elements in this regard involve a commitment from State Government towards timing of the freeway extension (and other regional roads), rail extension north of Butler and new stations, public transit extension from Mirrabooka, active regional open space and other major regional economic infrastructure.

 

2.       The proposal for Tonkin Highway to be extended into the sub-region as the Whiteman to Yanchep Highway is supported, subject to consideration being given to this being aligned to be more accessible to the East Wanneroo area, and to be more directly linked to the Yanchep strategic metropolitan centre.

 

3.       The proposed additional public transport corridor within the City is strongly supported, however, consideration should be given to this being provided as an extension of the Mirrabooka Avenue public transit route identified in the draft Public Transport Plan for Perth.  This should extend through the East Wanneroo Structure Plan potential urban area and the Neerabup Industrial Area, rather than it deviating off to the north-east as currently proposed.

 

4.       In terms of employment generation, Administration recommends a higher employment target is included for the North-West Sub-region (currently the target for the Sub-region is 19% of the region’s new jobs and this should be increased to at least 23%). Firm commitment from Government (as a whole-of-government approach) is required to collaborate with the City and other stakeholders to achieve this target.

 

5.       The continued designation of the Yanchep centre as a Strategic Metropolitan Centre is supported, along with the employment projections for this centre which indicate it being subject to substantial development in the near future.

 

6.       The designation of substantial areas as industrial expansion and investigation areas, generally as per the EELS study, is supported, together with the designation of the new industrial investigation site at Carabooda (subject to the boundary of this being adjusted to accord with the boundary of the proposed Landscape Enhancement Zone in this area).

 

7.       The designation of the East Wanneroo area as an urban expansion area is supported.   The identification of additional potential urban land in the south-east of the area is recommended for provisional support, subject to Council being satisfied that it will not present a serious impediment to progression of planning of the broader East Wanneroo area, and to further consideration of this at the time of rezoning under the Metropolitan Region Scheme.

 

8.       Recognising that new urban development in East Wanneroo will be displacing a substantial amount of local food production, strategies need to be developed to determine where any new food production areas are to be established, addressing issues such as water, transport and workforce.

 

9.       Greater transparency is required about how infill housing targets are being set and monitored, and more support for local government is needed from the State Government to facilitate achievement of the targets.  Such an approach would greatly assist the City in delivering the recoding proposals in the Wanneroo and Girrawheen‑Koondoola housing precincts. Consideration should also be given to applying enforceable infill targets, especially for key areas such as major activity centres and public transit nodes.

 

The draft NWSRPF will be finalised as a new North-West Sub-regional Structure Plan.  This will replace the now dated North-West Corridor Structure Plan released in 1992, and will be a very significant strategic planning document, guiding how the City of Wanneroo will develop over the short, medium and long term.

 

It will provide a regional land use planning framework important for determining how our communities will live, work, and get around in the future, and how our environmental values and resources will be managed.

 

Statutory Compliance

Nil

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

Finalisation of the North-West Sub-regional Structure Plan may lead to a need for a review of City policies to ensure alignment with the final Structure Plan.

Financial Implications

The draft strategies include many actions for local government to take as part of their implementation proposals.  Many of these actions will have cost implications for the City however, it is difficult to estimate what these costs may be at this time.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       ENDORSE the proposed submissions to be made on the draft Perth-Peel Strategy and the draft North-West Sub-regional Planning Framework included as Attachment No 10 and Attachment No 11 respectively;

 

2.       In forwarding the above submissions to the Western Australian Planning Commission, ADVISES the Commission that:

a)      Council strongly supports the following proposals included in the draft Perth-Peel Strategy and the draft North-West Sub-regional Planning Framework:

          i)       the continued designation of the proposed Yanchep centre as a Strategic Metropolitan Centre, along with the employment projections for this centre which indicate substantial development of the centre occurring in the near future;

          ii)      the proposed extension of Tonkin Highway through the sub-region as the Whiteman to Yanchep Highway, subject to consideration being given to it being aligned to be more directly linked to the Yanchep Strategic metropolitan centre;

          iii)     the continued designation of the East Wanneroo area as an urban expansion area, and particularly its designation with a ‘short term’ development timeframe; and

          iv)     the proposal for a potential additional major public transport corridor within the City, subject to this being aligned through the East Wanneroo urban area (rather than in the State Forest area to the east);

b)      Council requests that further consideration be given to the following strategy and framework proposals with a view to more effectively achieving the objectives of the draft Strategy and Planning Framework:

          i)       the proposal to include only broad, high-level proposals for implementation. For the key objectives of the strategy to be met, particularly large-scale, high-quality, transit-oriented development, and adequate employment self-sufficiency levels in the outer sub-regions, a detailed, whole-of-government implementation strategy for infrastructure is required;

          ii)      the proposal to put the timing for extension of the northern suburbs railway line back from ‘before 2020’ (as proposed under the draft Public Transport Plan for Perth) to ‘post 2025’.  The ‘before 2020’ timing should be retained;

          iii)     the proposal for new job creation to continue to be focussed on the central areas of the region.  The target for the North-West Sub-region to attract 19% of the region’s new jobs needs to be increased to at least 23%, to at least match the proportion of the region’s population growth projected to occur in this sub-region;

          iv)     the proposal that the future hospital/health facility within the Yanchep strategic metropolitan centre only be for a future ambulance facility and satellite service linked to the Joondalup Health Campus.  A full major health campus should be provided at the centre;

c)      Council requests to be closely involved in the preparation of the final North-West Sub-regional Structure Plan.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1 to Council Report - Submission on Draft Perth-Peel 3.5 Million

15/203254

 

2.

Attachment 2 Implementation Table Perth and Peel Strategy

15/215577

 

3.

Attachment 3 to Council Report - Submission on Draft Perth-Peel 3.5 Million

15/203256

 

4.

Attachment 4 to Council Report - Submission on Draft Perth-Peel 3.5 Million

15/203258

 

5.

Attachment 5 to Council Report Community and Social Infrastructure Map

15/215609

 

6.

Attachment 6 to Council Report Public Transport Map

15/215618

 

7.

Attachment 7 to Council Report Draft Public Transport Map

15/215663

 

8.

Attachment 8 to Council Report Implementation Action Table from Planning Framework

15/215696

 

9.

Attachment 9 to Council Report Staging Map

15/215857

 

10.

Attachment 10 Report to Council COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT PERTH AND PEEL @ 3.5 MILLION STRATEGY PDF Version

15/215867

 

11.

Attachment 11 Report to Council COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT PERTH AND PEEL @ 3.5 MILLION STRATEGY

15/215898

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                               125

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                               126


 


 


 


 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                               131

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                               132

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                               133

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                               134

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                               135

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                               136

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                               140

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                  141

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                  154

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                               177

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                   178

3.9    Consideration of a Management Strategy - Pedestrian Accessway between The Avenue and Feathertop Rise, Alexander Heights

File Ref:                                              8755 – 15/166546

Responsible Officer:                           Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       2         

Previous Items:                                   PS09-01/15 Agenda; PS09-02/15 Resolution

Proposed Pedestrian Accessway Closure - Pedestrian Accessway between Feathertop Rise and The Avenue, Alexander Heights

                                                           

Issue

To consider a management strategy prepared for a pedestrian accessway (PAW) situated between Feathertop Rise and The Avenue, Alexander Heights.

 

Background

The PAW consists of a land parcel formally known as Portion Lot 1055 (20P) Feathertop Rise, Alexander Heights.

 

The PAW was created in the late 1980's as part of the subdivision of the locality. The PAW was intended to provide a pedestrian connection to and from the cul-de-sac of Feathertop Rise and The Avenue. A plan that identifies the location of the PAW is included as Attachment 1.

 

The physical characteristics of the PAW are as follows:

 

·        The subject PAW is four metres wide and approximately 64 metres long.

·        The footpath within the PAW is two metres in width, with one metre landscape strips on both sides. The landscaping strips have no vegetation, with the exception of some small weeds.

·        The path slopes gently from The Avenue toward Feathertop Rise and is relatively straight. 

·        There is no lighting in the PAW; however, street lights exist at both ends of the PAW.

·        The PAW has access barriers at either end. Access into the PAW is controlled by three ‘u-rails’ and wooden bollards at either end.

·        The PAW contains signage at either end prompting users to clean up after their dogs.

·        Previous incidences of graffiti on fences, street lighting and the footpath are evident, as parts of these structures have sporadically been painted over.

 

Administration received a request on 29 April 2014 to consider closing the PAW. This request was made by the landowners adjoining this PAW, citing frustration with anti-social behaviour, vandalism, theft, graffiti and the PAW being used as a thoroughfare for motorcycles.

 

As part of considerations of this request, the City’s Administration advertised the proposed PAW closure between 22 July 2014 and 16 September 2014. In that time, Administration received 27 submissions; and of those submissions, 18 objected to the closure of the PAW, and nine supported the PAW closure. The matter was then presented by Administration to Council at its 3 February 2015 Meeting (Council Agenda item reference PS09-02/15). At that Meeting, Council resolved to adopt Administration’s recommendation, which was as follows:


 

 

“That Council:-

 

1.       NOTES the submissions received as summarised in Attachment 3 in respect to the proposed closure of the pedestrian accessway formally known as Portion Lot 1055 (20P) Feathertop Rise, Alexander Heights, and ENDORSES Administration's responses to those submissions;

 

2.       DOES NOT SUPPORT the closure of the pedestrian accessway formally known as Portion Lot 1055 (20P) Feathertop Rise, Alexander Heights, between Feathertop Rise and The Avenue, Alexander Heights, where identified on the plan included as Attachment 1;

 

3.       ADVISES the adjoining landowners, Department of Lands, Department of Planning, and the submitters of its decision; and

 

4.       REQUESTS Administration prepare a management strategy that may assist in reducing anti-social behaviour within the pedestrian accessway formally known as Portion Lot 1055 (20P) Feathertop Rise, Alexander Heights within three months for consideration of Council and to provide a further update to Council by December 2015.”

 

In light of Item (4) of Council’s resolution above, a draft management strategy has been prepared for Council’s consideration, and is the subject of this report.

Detail

The draft management strategy as prepared by Administration is included as Attachment 2. The draft management strategy has been prepared to provide the following information:

 

·        A summary of maintenance and inspections that are conducted by Administration within the PAW;

 

·        The number of incidences where Administration undertakes maintenance and repairs to the infrastructure in the subject PAW, in comparison to other PAW’s in Alexander Heights. Statistics also provide a comparison as to the incidences that graffiti is cleaned;

 

·        Considerations on how infrastructure could be upgraded in the PAW to reduce the prospect of anti-social behaviour. Considerations are made in reference to the guidance provided in the Department of Planning publication ‘Reducing Crime and Anti-Social Behaviour in Pedestrian Accessways: Planning Guidelines’ (provided as Appendix 2 of the management strategy);

 

·        Resources and legal authority available to the City’s Rangers and Community Patrol Officers to react to incidences of anti-social behaviour in the PAW; and

 

·        Initiatives undertaken by WA Police; including the establishment of local policing teams through the WA Police ‘Frontline 2020’ program.

Consultation

As the recommendations of the draft management strategy would not affect pedestrian movement and activity in the PAW, the draft management strategy has not been subject to any public consultation.

 

 

 

Comment

As part of the preparation of the draft management strategy, Administration identified that:

 

·        The inspection and maintenance carried out in the subject PAW is similar to other PAW’s in the locality;

 

·        The statistics available to Administration suggest that the subject PAW currently does not attract a level of anti-social behaviour that exceeds that of other nearby PAW’s;

 

·        There are no identified flaws in the design or provision of infrastructure in and adjoining the PAW, which entices anti-social behaviour to occur in the subject PAW rather than in other PAW’s in the locality; and

 

·        The City’s Rangers or Community Safety Officers do not have the authority to arrest persons, or to issue ‘move-on’ notices, as do WA Police Officers. Therefore, the response to anti-social behaviour and criminal activity should remain the responsibility of WA Police.

 

In light of the above, the draft management strategy does not identify the necessity for additional maintenance, infrastructure upgrades or community safety measures to be specifically provided for this PAW. Rather, the management strategy concludes that Administration will:

 

1.       Continue to:

 

a)      Inspect the subject PAW three times each calendar year, and when complaints or enquiries from members of the public on the PAW’s condition are received;

 

b)      Perform maintenance works within 14 days, should an inspection of the PAW conclude that such maintenance works are required. Maintenance works required to be undertaken to address valid public safety concerns should be completed within 24 hours; and

 

c)      Endeavour to remove graffiti within 48 hours of an enquiry or complaint being received, or within four hours should the graffiti be deemed offensive.

 

2.       Encourage landowners and residents adjoining the PAW to familiarise themselves with the WA Police local policing team responsible for the Alexander Heights locality, and engage in ongoing discussions with WA Police on the behaviour of persons using the PAW.

Statutory Compliance

Nil

 

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

The draft management strategy was prepared having regard to the Department of Planning publication ‘Reducing Crime and Anti-Social Behaviour in Pedestrian Accessways: Planning Guidelines’, which is provided as Appendix 2 of the draft management strategy included in Attachment 2.

Financial Implications

Addressing the recommendations of the management strategy can be met by utilising Administration’s operational budget.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

 

1.   ENDORSES the management strategy (included as Attachment 2) prepared for the pedestrian accessway known as Portion Lot 1055 (20P) Feathertop Rise, Alexander Heights; and

 

2.   NOTES that Administration will provide a further update on this matter by December 2015.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

New Attachment 1 - Location Plan - PAW Feathertop Rise & The Avenue

15/189233

 

2.

V 3 - Management Strategy - PAW Situated Between The Avenue and Feathertop Rise, Alexander Heights

15/213561

Minuted

 

 

 

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                  182


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                               183


 


 


 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                  187


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                               188


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                   224

3.10  PT01-05/15 Request to construct a coastal Dual Use Pathway between Burns Beach and Mindarie

File Ref:                                              5523 – 15/175158

Responsible Officer:                           Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       1         

 

Issue

To consider a petition requesting the construction of a coastal Dual Use Pathway (DUP) between Burns Beach and Mindarie.

 

Background

At Council’s meeting on 26 May 2015, petition PT01-05/15 was tabled. The petition was signed by 617 residents and requested Council:

 

“To construct a shared path along the coast between Burns Beach and Mindarie. This project has been in development for many years and it is time that the City of Wanneroo, together with the City of Joondalup and the Department of Parks and Wildlife progress this project as a priority.”

 

Council has previously resolved at its Meeting on 1 July 2008 to apply to the State Government to amalgamate parcels of land reserved ‘Parks and Recreation’ in the Metropolitan Region Scheme between Burns Beach and Mindarie to create a Regional Park. In addition, Council resolved to request that the State Government develop a management plan for the proposed Regional Park that incorporates a shared pathway between Burns Beach and Mindarie. In November 2008, the City of Joondalup resolved to support the City of Wanneroo’s resolutions from its 1 July 2008 Council Meeting as detailed above.

 

In December 2008 the Western Australian Planning Commission established a Community Advisory Committee (CAC) consisting of representatives from the Cities of Wanneroo and Joondalup and the State Government. The CAC was created for the purpose of producing an Establishment Plan to guide the long term management of the area and the provision of a coastal DUP.

 

The CAC’s deliberations resulted in the development of the Tamala Conservation Park Establishment Plan (2012). The plan details the conservation and recreational values of the Park and identifies the proposed boundaries, outlines park management options and the tenure and establishment process.

 

At Council’s Meeting on 9 February 2011, it was resolved that the City of Wanneroo would make a one third contribution of $50,000 towards the cost of a feasibility study into the possible coastal DUP routes and that the construction cost and maintenance of the DUP should be borne by the State Government as the relevant land owners. The City of Joondalup also resolved to make a $50,000 contribution and that the cost of construction and maintenance should be the responsibility of the State Government.

Detail

Coastal Dual Use Path Study

 

The City of Wanneroo, City of Joondalup and the Department of Planning provided equal funding contributions towards the cost of a Coastal Dual Use Path Study, managed by the Department of Planning.

 

The objective of this study was to detail a route that provides universal access with minimal environmental impact, within the Tamala Park Coastal Reserve, between Burns Beach and Mindarie.

 

Environmental consultancy GHD was appointed to complete the Proposed Dual Use Path – Mindarie to Burns Beach (2013). The study recommended two possible routes for the coastal DUP (as illustrated in Attachment 1):

 

·        Option 1 – Traverse as close to the foreshore reserve and coast as practicable, whilst remaining in the Tamala Park Study Area. This option requires significant amounts of cut and fill to stabilise mobile dunal systems. The estimated cost to construct this pathway is approximately $3M; and

 

·        Option 2 – Follows the edge of the Tamala Park Conservation Park along the existing residential development and along Marmion Avenue in order to minimise cut and fill. This option is significantly longer than Option 1. The estimated cost to construct this pathway is approximately $4M.

 

Of relevance to the outcomes of this study is the Burns Beach Foreshore Management Plan, which prescribes a list of actions that the estate developer, PEET Limited, is required to complete as a condition of subdivision approval for the Burns Beach Estate. In accordance with this document, PEET are required to construct a DUP for the area of foreshore adjacent to their subdivision. Should PEET fund the construct of the path within their foreshore development, the estimated cost to construct the remainder of the path is approximately $1.5M (Option 1) or approximately $1.8M (Option 2).

 

The City of Joondalup has been advised by PEET that they have scheduled the completion of their portion of the coastal DUP to coincide with the construction of the adjoining lots in the North West precinct of the Burns Beach Estate. They have also stated that they do not expect the last lots to be constructed until 2020 and that this is dependent on the sale of lots in the estate. Furthermore, one of the large parcels of land within the Tamala Conservation Park is owned by PEET and will not be transferred to the WAPC until the last stages of subdivision for the Burns Beach Estate have been completed.

 

Tamala Conservation Park Management Plan Status

 

The City of Joondalup has sought clarification from the Department of Parks and Wildlife, Department of Environment and Regulation, and Department of Planning regarding the status of the Tamala Conservation Park Management Plan and the recommendations resulting from the Establishment Plan. The City of Joondalup has also requested that funding sources be defined and agreed to.

 

All of these actions have been undertaken by the City of Joondalup with the support of the City of Wanneroo and a summary of the correspondence to date is provided under the following subheadings:

 

·        Department of Parks and Wildlife

 

In November 2013, The Department of Parks and Wildlife advised that it will not progress the Tamala Conservation Park Management Plan or any aspects of the project until all of the land parcels which make up the proposed Tamala Conservation Park are formally transferred to the Conservation Commission of Western Australia (CCWA). Once the Burns Beach Estate is completed, the land parcels will be transferred to the CCWA and this will signal the commencement of the Tamala Conservation Park Management Plan.

 

·        Department of Environment Regulation

 

In November 2013, the Department of Environment Regulation (DER) confirmed that it will need to be consulted with regard to any environmental approvals or processes. DER has also indicated that further environmental studies may need to be undertaken in relation to the coastal DUP options presented by GHD.

 

·        Department of Planning

 

The Department of Planning has advised that they have not endorsed the recommendations outlined in the Proposed Dual Use Path – Mindarie to Burns Beach (2013) study completed by GHD.

 

In May 2015, the Department of Planning advised the City of Joondalup that it does not support construction within the Bush Forever sites and that Tamala Park is a highly constrained biodiversity area with significant environmental values that should be protected. The Department advised the following:

 

“Construction of a path through this area has major implications for the sensitive coastal environment and raises significant issues such as fire risk, public safety and security, vegetation management, emergency and service vehicle access and ongoing maintenance costs.

 

It is the Department’s preference that the existing developments of Mindarie and Burns Beach be connected by a path along Marmion Avenue within the road reserve.  This would prevent any impact on the Park and obviate the various maintenance and public safety issues associated with the construction of a path through the Park.”

Consultation

The City’s Administration has previously consulted with the Department of Planning, Department of Parks and Wildlife and Department of Environment Regulation. Administration is also in frequent correspondence with the City of Joondalup’s Administration and continues to work in partnership to progress a coastal DUP between Burns Beach and Mindarie.

Comment

The City of Wanneroo and City of Joondalup have previously resolved that the construction of the coastal DUP from Burns Beach to Mindarie is to be funded solely by the State Government. Given that no provision of funding has been made by either Councils or the State Government, there is no funding available to undertake this project.

 

It is evident from the City of Joondalup’s consultation with the relevant State Government agencies that commencement of the Tamala Conservation Park Management Plan cannot be progressed until Burns Beach Estate is completed and the relevant land parcels are transferred to the CCWA. Regardless of this, the Department of Planning is currently not supportive of the construction of a DUP through Tamala Conservation Park due to concerns with fire risk, public safety, security, emergency vehicle access and ongoing maintenance costs. They also consider that the construction of a DUP will have a significant impact on the environmental values of the area.

 

The Mayor recently met with the Minister for Environment, Albert Jacob MLA, who advised that he had approached the Minister for Planning to review the Department of Planning’s position on this matter.

 


 

 

Administration is cognisant of the community interest in a coastal DUP from Burns Beach to Mindarie. However, given the subject land is owned by the State Government, the City does not have the authority to progress this project. Notwithstanding this, the provision of a DUP is an important public asset that should provide a cycle and pedestrian link between Burns Beach and Mindarie for the local community. Administration recommends that the City writes to the Minister for Planning and the Minister for Environment seeking a commitment to construct the coastal Dual Use Pathway from Burns Beach to Mindarie upon completion of the Burns Beach Estate.

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.

2.2    Healthy and Active People - We get active in our local area and we have many opportunities to experience a healthy lifestyle.

Risk Management Considerations

Risk Title

Risk Rating

Integrated Infrastructure and Utility Planning

Moderate

Accountability

Action Planning Option

Director Planning & Sustainability

Manage

The above risk relating to the issue contained within this report has been identified and considered within the City’s Strategic risk register. Action plans have been developed to manage this risk to improve the existing management systems.

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       AUTHORISES the Mayor to write to the Minister for Planning and the Minister for Environment seeking a commitment to construct a coastal Dual Use Pathway from Burns Beach to Mindarie on completion of the Burns Beach Estate;

2.       SEEKS the support of the City of Joondalup for this proposal; and

3.       ADVISES the petition organiser of Council’s decision.

 

Attachments:

1.

DUP Options Burns Beach to Mindarie

15/234489

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                               228

PDF Creator

  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                   229

Draft

Infrastructure

Asset Management

3.11  Metropolitan Regional Roads Program - 2016/2017

File Ref:                                              6923 – 15/175289

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil         

 

Issue

To consider submissions for funding from the 2016/2017 Metropolitan Regional Road Program for Road Improvement and Rehabilitation Projects.

 

Background

Each year, Main Roads WA (MRWA) invites project submissions for funding consideration as part of the Metropolitan Regional Road Program (MRRP).

 

This report outlines the guidelines for the assessment of road works and recommends projects for consideration by the Metropolitan Regional Road Group (MRRG).

 

The project types are separated into two categories as outlined below:

 

Road Improvement Projects

Improvement projects are those which would involve the upgrading of an existing road to a higher standard than currently exists, i.e. dual carriageway construction, pavement widening, new overtaking lanes, traffic control measures, etc.

 

A multi-criteria analysis (taking into consideration road capacity, geometry, accidents, benefits and costs) is used to prioritise road improvement projects on urban arterial roads within the metropolitan area.  This analysis is an integral part of the guidelines for the MRRP and must be followed for submissions to be considered for funding.

 

Road Rehabilitation Projects

Road rehabilitation projects are those proposed for existing roads where a failed link is to be brought back to pre-existing physical condition, e.g. resealing, reconstruction, re-sheeting and reconditioning.

 

A number of conditions have to be met for a project to be considered in the program.  Projects qualify only if the road has a classification of a local distributor road or higher and its Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) exceeds 2,000 vehicles per day or the design traffic exceeds 1 x 106 Equivalent Standard Axle (a measurement that relates to the commercial vehicle content).  Another qualifying criterion requires the points scored for the criterion relating to road condition to be greater than 700 points.

Detail

Project submissions have already been forwarded to MRWA. The deadline for Road Rehabilitation submissions was 30 April 2015 while the deadline for Road Improvement submissions was 29 May 2015. These submissions have been submitted subject to Council endorsement.

 

Following Council’s endorsement, a follow up letter will be sent to MRWA advising of the outcome.

 

Submissions are checked by MRWA for omissions and errors in computations.  The MRWA Pavement Branch will audit submissions relating to Road Rehabilitation Projects and an independent auditor appointed by MRWA will audit Road Improvement Projects.

 

Final audited projects are then collated by MRWA and a priority listing developed based on the audited points score. It is anticipated that this list of audited projects will be distributed to all Councils by September 2015.

 

The Sub Groups of the MRRG, each have technical meetings to discuss and approve projects within their own Sub Group. Recommendations are forwarded to the MRRG.  The Cities of Wanneroo, Joondalup and Stirling form the North West Sub Group.  The MRRG considers funding submissions in accordance with the guidelines and makes recommendations to the State Road Funds to Local Government Advisory Committee.

 

Councils would expect to receive advice from MRWA early in 2016 of the successful projects for the 2016/17 financial year.

Consultation

Nil

Comment

Road Improvement Projects

Opus International Consultants (PCA) Ltd and GHD Pty Ltd were commissioned to prepare the City's Road Improvement submissions. The multi-criteria analysis adopted by MRWA was used to evaluate roads in the City of Wanneroo. The higher the points score the better the chance the project has in being funded. The Road Improvement projects listed below have been submitted for the 2016/2017 program:

 

YEAR

ROAD

SECTION OF PROPOSED DUAL CARRIAGEWAY

ESTIMATED PROJECT COST

POINTS SCORE*

2016/2017

Hartman Drive, Darch/Madeley

Hepburn Avenue to Gnangara Road

$4.5M

4.05

2016/2017

Marmion Avenue

Hughie Edwards Drive to Butler Boulevard

$5.0M

6.77

2016/2017

Marmion Avenue

Jindalee Boulevard/ Kingsbridge Boulevard Intersection

$0.7M

37.50

2016/2017

Marmion Avenue

Lukin Drive Intersection

$0.55M

37.50

2016/2017

Mirrabooka Avenue

Gnangara Road to Hepburn Avenue

$5.5M

4.8

 

*The contributing factors to the points score of each project are traffic volume, crash history, congestion improvement and project cost. The cost of the projects above, in this instance, has been the main contributing factor influencing the large variance in the points score (i.e. the effect of benefit to cost ratio). In general, a minor improvement to an intersection can result in higher points scored because of its low cost compared to the high anticipated benefits to congestion improvement. Therefore, it is noticeable that the intersection projects submitted above scored significantly higher than large road section upgrade projects.

 

There were two Road Improvement projects funded in the 2015/16 Program for the metropolitan area with the lowest points score for the successful projects being 40.25.

 

Road Rehabilitation Projects

Pavement Analysis Pty Limited was commissioned to undertake the road rehabilitation and mechanical study of various roads, and to provide technical details and recommendations to comply with the criteria for the assessment of road rehabilitation projects. As a consequence, the table below lists the rehabilitation projects that were submitted for consideration in the 2016/2017 program. The cut off score for Road Rehabilitation Projects in 2015/16 was 1759.

 

ITEM

ROAD

LOCALITY

SECTION

WORKS

ESTIMATED PROJECT COST

POINTS SCORE

1

Buckingham Drive

Wangara

Dobbins Street to Arrigo Way (full width)

Asphalt Reseal

$419,026

1,740

2

Marangaroo Drive

(East Bound)

Marangaroo

Wanneroo Road to Templeton Crescent (full width)

Asphalt Reseal

$380,590

2,421

3

Marangaroo Drive

(West Bound)

Marangaroo

Templeton Crescent to Wanneroo Road (full width)

Asphalt Reseal

$405,549

3,402

4

Marmion Avenue

(North Bound)

Tamala Park

300m north of Tamala Park to Anchorage Drive (full width)

Asphalt Reseal

$281,404

2,981

5

Yanchep Beach Road (West Bound)

Yanchep

350m west of Wanneroo Road – 120m long section (full width)

Asphalt Reseal

$55,268

3,160

 

The above projects for both the Road Improvement Program and Road Rehabilitation Program were submitted to MRWA by their respective due dates with advice that a letter will be sent following Council’s endorsement at this meeting.

 

On receipt of audited point scores for both the Road Improvement and Rehabilitation Projects from MRWA in September 2015, Council will be further advised of the outcomes and if necessary a report will be presented for consideration of project priorities for successful projects.

 

Should the City be unsuccessful in receiving grant funding for these projects, the risk to the City is that it will need to fund the projects from its own sources, e.g. Municipal funds, unless it can source other grants opportunities. Based on previous years grant funding submissions to the MRRP, the Road Rehabilitation Projects listed for 2016/2017 have a high potential of success.

Statutory Compliance

Nil


 

Strategic Implications

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

 “2     Social

2.4    Improve community safety

 

                   2.5     Improve transport options and connections

Risk Management Considerations

Nil

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

The maximum annual allocation for Councils is $2,000,000 for Road Improvement Projects and $750,000 for Road Rehabilitation Projects. A condition of the grant under the MRRP is that the City must contribute at least one third of the project cost to secure the State Government funding.

 

It is noted that the City had been successful in securing grant funding for two Connolly Drive projects, over three financial years commencing in 2014/15, totalling $5.765M. The final grant allocation for the two projects committed in 2016/17 totals $1,153M. 

 

Should any of the new Road Improvement projects be successful, the maximum funding which the City could potentially receive in 2016/17 will be $846,933 with the remainder of the grant allocation provided in 2017/18.

 

Should the funding submission for projects submitted to the Road Improvement and Road Rehabilitation Program be successful, the matching funding will be considered as part of the City's 2016/17 Capital Work Budget deliberations. Based on the City's historical funding ability, it is likely that the City will be able to match the funding required.    

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 


 

Recommendation

That Council ENDORSES the submission of the following projects to Main Roads WA for grant funding consideration as part of the 2016/2017 Metropolitan Regional Road Program: -

 

Road Improvement Projects:-

YEAR

ROAD

SECTION OF PROPOSED DUAL CARRIAGEWAY

ESTIMATED PROJECT COST

2016/2017

Hartman Drive, Darch/Madeley

Hepburn Avenue to Gnangara Road

$4.5M

2016/2017

Marmion Avenue

Hughie Edwards Drive to Butler Boulevard

$5.0M

2016/2017

Marmion Avenue

Jindalee Boulevard/ Kingsbridge Boulevard Intersection

$0.7M

2016/2017

Marmion Avenue

Lukin Drive Intersection

$0.55M

2016/2017

Mirrabooka Avenue

Gnangara Road to Hepburn Avenue

$5.5M

Road Rehabilitation Projects:-

ITEM

ROAD

LOCALITY

SECTION

WORKS

ESTIMATED PROJECT COST

1

Buckingham Drive

Wangara

Dobbins Street to Arrigo Way (full width)

Asphalt Reseal

$419,026

2

Marangaroo Drive (East Bound)

Marangaroo

Wanneroo Road to Templeton Crescent (full width)

Asphalt Reseal

$380,590

3

Marangaroo Drive (West Bound)

Marangaroo

Templeton Crescent to Wanneroo Road (full width)

Asphalt Reseal

$405,549

4

Marmion Avenue (North Bound)

Tamala Park

300m north of Tamala Park to Anchorage Drive (full width)

Asphalt Reseal

$281,404

5

Yanchep Beach Road (West Bound)

Yanchep

350m west of Wanneroo Road – 120m long section (full width)

Asphalt Reseal

$55,268

 

 

 

Attachments: Nil  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                   234

Draft

Infrastructure Maintenance

3.12  Two Rocks Coastal Management

File Ref:                                              1702 – 15/116162

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       1         

Previous Items:                                   IN01-09/14 Agenda; IN01-09/14 Resolution

                                                            Two Rocks Coastal Management

 

Issue

To consider the outcomes of the Two Rocks Coastal Management study report.

 

Background

Management of the Two Rocks coastline, specifically the area north of the marina, has been actively investigated by the City over a number of years as follows:

 

·        A study of coastal erosion at Two Rocks, north of the Two Rocks Marina, was undertaken by M P Rogers & Associates (MRA) and completed in May 2006. The study recommended the construction of two partial length groynes to protect the coastline north of the marina.

 

·        Submissions were made to the State Government in 2006 seeking funding for the implementation of the recommended coastal management option but no funding commitment was received.

 

·        The City again approached the State Government in August 2011 to which the Minister for Transport responded advising the City to seek grant funding under the 2012/2013 Coastal Protection Grants Program for a review study of the 2006 report.

 

·        The City received a letter dated 14 August 2012 from the Minister for Transport advising that a grant of $50,000 was approved for this project.

 

·        Following a detailed tender evaluation process MRA was appointed in November 2012 to undertake a two stage review study on Two Rocks Coastal Management including preliminary design of management options.

 

·        DoT's coastal engineers provided final review comments on the MRA study in March 2014 and the final draft study report – "Two Rocks Coastal Management" was received in April 2014.

 

·        A geotechnical investigation was commissioned by DoT and undertaken by Aurecon in May/June 2014 to investigate the location of bedrock within the coastal dune system north of the existing Two Rocks marina. Final recommendations from this study indicated that limestone bedrock is present above mean sea level along the majority of interpreted sections, which may provide some protection against future coastal erosion.

 

·        Council considered a report at its meeting on 16 September 2014 (IN01-09/14 refers) and resolved as follows:

“THAT Council:-

1.      RECEIVES the M P Rogers and Associates draft report titled "Two Rock Coastal Management" dated April 2014;

2.      AUTHORISES a presentation of the recommendations and coastal management options from the study report outline in Item 1 at a public meeting to be held in Two Rocks;

3.      NOTES that Administration will undertake ongoing photographic beach monitoring on a quarterly basis and following major storm events, and six monthly beach surveys to capture seasonal and long term changes;

4.      WRITES to the developers in the surrounding areas advising them of the draft report and invites them to the public meeting;

5.      WRITES to the State Government outlining its position in regard to financial liability of the proposed coastal erosion management works and request the State Government to fund the works.”

 

·        Following the inclusion of the community information session (refer below) minutes into the study report and no further review comments by the City or DoT, a finalised report was received in March 2015. Refer to Attachment 1 for a summary of the final report recommendations. A copy of this finalised study report and relevant correspondence with State Government referred to in this report has been placed in the Elected Members reading room for perusal.

 

This report now considers the recommendations made in the final MRA study report.

Detail

In response to Council Resolution Number 2 from the September 2014 Council Meeting (Item No. IN01-09/14), a community information session was held at the Phil Renkin Centre Function Room in Two Rocks on 18 March 2015. The meeting was attended by 29 community members, the Mayor, Councillor Winton, Councillor Aitken, City of Wanneroo staff and representatives from DoT and MRA. The meeting was chaired by the Mayor and included a presentation of the Two Rocks Coastal Management Study by MRA and a presentation of the findings of the recent coastal geotechnical investigation by DoT. Following the presentations, the community members were given the opportunity to raise any queries or concerns and these were responded to by MRA, DoT and City Representatives. Presentations and answers to community queries and/or concerns were well received by all meeting attendees.

 

DoT has regularly monitored the Two Rocks coastline through photographic monitoring up until May 2014 in order to investigate seaweed movements and shoreline change. DoT's investigation into seaweed movement is now complete and the City has taken over photographic beach monitoring commencing August 2014. This is currently scheduled to take place quarterly and following major storm events as per MRA's recommendations. This will assist in identifying timeframes on the need for retreat of existing assets and supplementary coastal management works.

 

DoT is undertaking surveys of the near shore and beach areas north of Two Rocks Marina every 1 to 2 years to capture any significant movement of sediment in the area. This is likely to continue into the future, however in order to capture a continuous record of seasonal and long term beach change, the City has appointed a beach surveying contractor, to undertake beach profile surveys north and south of the marina. Beach surveys are currently scheduled for every 6 months (pre and post winter) and will continue until such time that coastal management measures are implemented.

 

In response to Council Resolution Number 4, a letter was sent to Two Rocks developers on 17 February 2015 informing them of the public meeting and providing a link to the MRA Two Rocks Coastal Management Report.

 

In response to Council Resolution Number 5, correspondence with the Minister for Transport and DoT’s Coastal Management department has continued. A letter was sent to the Minister for Transport on 22 October 2014 with information on actions since previous correspondence in 2011 and re-iterating the fact that beach erosion north of the marina is due to the construction of the marina and is therefore the responsibility of State Government. A response was received on 18 December 2014, to which the City responded on 21 January 2015.

 

The City will continue to lobby State Government into the future for funding and management of the erosion issues north of the Two Rocks marina.

Consultation

The details of the MRA study were presented to the Two Rocks community at a community information session held on 18 March 2015.

 

The Coastal Infrastructure Section of DoT has undertaken a detailed review of the draft Two Rocks Coastal Management study and is satisfied with MRA's response to comments and the finalised report. DoT and the City have shared and will continue to share all available studies and information regarding coastal issues and management at Two Rocks.

 

The City will continue to consult with DoT into the future on coastal management matters, specifically with regards to funding and management responsibilities.

Comment

The MRA Stage 2 assessment of the two preferred coastal management options (managed retreat and staged groyne construction) has identified managed retreat as the highest ranking option based on a net present value analysis over a planning timeframe of 25 years. Over an extended timeframe, as additional infrastructure such as Sovereign Drive and private development becomes vulnerable to coastal processes, this option would no longer be ranked higher than the staged groyne option. Therefore the implementation of staged groynes is the recommended option for medium to long term.

 

It is recognised by both the City and State Government that the erosion issues north of the marina are a direct result of the marina construction in 1973. Therefore, funding of detailed design and future coastal management works along with future management responsibilities should reside with State Government. The City will continue to liaise with State Government to ensure the City’s position on Two Rocks coastal management is understood and accepted.

 

In order to implement the recommended option, a detailed design is necessary which should be undertaken by DoT in the short term, a maximum of five years, to allow for the implementation of staged groyne construction when it is required. In the meantime, it is recommended that the managed retreat option is enforced whilst undertaking appropriate monitoring and survey to track shoreline movements.

 

The MRA study report has established that there is no immediate coastal erosion threat to the adjoining assets other than the navigational marker and the Sceptre Court stairway and this risk can be managed by ongoing monitoring and undertaking some protection/remedial works as necessary. However, if no coastal management works are undertaken in short to medium term (5 to 10 years), the erosion trend suggests the loss of the foreshore dunes and hence the loss of environmental/amenity value of the adjoining foreshore areas. It is therefore important that the risk due to ongoing coastal erosion is managed by the implementation of the coastal management measures within the next 5 to 10 years.

 

Construction of coastal structures north of the marina could potentially result in the shifting of coastal erosion further north to the undeveloped Two Rocks coastline. Two Rocks developers will be advised of the City’s and State Government’s intentions and checks will be undertaken to ensure that setback distances for future coastal developments allow for this potential increase in erosion rates. This process will be initiated through correspondence with Developers as soon as decisions are made with DoT regarding funding and management responsibilities.

Statutory Compliance

Any coastal protection works are subject to obtaining all necessary statutory approvals including Development Application, Clearing Permit and Aboriginal Heritage Approval. However, these approvals will be required at the time of preparation of the design and documentation of the approved coastal management options.

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

Nil

Policy Implications

The Coastal Protection Policy for Western Australia is a DoT Operational Policy and identifies issues relating to the coastal protection in Western Australia. This Policy describes the responsibilities of the local coastal managers (such as Local Authorities) and the State Government and provides details of any funding opportunities/conditions for coastal protection works.

 

The State Government, through the DoT (pursuant to its Coastal Protection Policy for Western Australia) can provide funding assistance of up to 50% for emergency coastal protection works, however that is subject to several conditions, the most relevant being:

 

·        The funds must be available in the State budget and the City must cover the balance of the costs;

·        The funding assistance will only cover the immediate costs of the works and not any incidental costs such as fencing, landscaping repairs, etc.;

·        Assets must be at immediate risk from erosion and be valued at equal to or more than the costs of the works; and

·        The works must be designed primarily to halt the immediate erosion threat. 

 

Financial Implications

There is no direct cost related to the photo monitoring program as it is undertaken by the City's Project Manager Coastal Projects.

 

Beach Survey costs are in the order of $5,000 per year and are funded from the routine foreshore maintenance operating budgets.

 

The exact cost of the coastal management options is dependent of the adoption of a suitable option and detailed design/documentation. Since the MRA Study clearly indicates that the Two Rocks Marina has been the cause of the coastal erosion to the north of the marina, it is Administration's view that the City is not liable to fund any coastal erosion management works. Hence the budget provisions for such works should be made by the State Government as the owner of Two Rocks Marina.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       RECEIVES the M P Rogers and Associates study report titled "Two Rock Coastal Management" dated March 2015;

2.       REQUESTS the State Government to undertake a detailed design and implement the recommended coastal management option, comprising the staged construction of groynes as a priority;

3.       WRITES to the developers in the surrounding areas advising them of the outcomes of the MRA study and the City’s preferred approach to coastal management at Two Rocks; and

4.       NOTES that Administration will continue to undertake ongoing photographic beach monitoring on a quarterly basis and following major storm events, and six monthly beach surveys to capture seasonal and long term changes.

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1 - Two Rocks Coastal Management Study Report Summary

15/142336

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                               239

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                   242

3.13  Quinns Beach Long Term Coastal Management Study - Coastal Processes Assessment (Stage 1)

File Ref:                                              16989 – 15/204975

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       2         

 

Issue

To consider the Stage 1 draft report for the Quinns Beach Long Term Coastal Management Study prepared by Cardno under Contract No 01440 – Provision of Consulting Services for Quinns Beach Long Term Coastal Management.

 

 

Background

The Quinns Beach Long Term Coastal Management Study is currently being undertaken by coastal engineering consultants, Cardno in accordance with the Council decision at its ordinary meeting of 16 September 2014 (IN02-09/14) as follows:

 

“That Council ACCEPTS the tender submitted by Cardno WA Pty Ltd for Tender No. 01440 for the Provision of Consulting Services Quinns Beach Long Term Coastal Management for a Stage 1 and 2 lump sum price of $114,516 and schedule of rates for Stages 3 to 5; noting that the commencement date of the Contract shall be 6 October 2014 with expiry dates of 30 June 2015 (Stages 1 and 2 based on lump sum price) and 30 June 2017 (Remaining Stages based on schedule of rates); and options to extend the contract for two 12 month periods subject to (a) satisfactory performance; and (b) price adjustment of the year 3 rates based on Perth Consumer Price Index or 5% increase whichever is greater.”

 

The scope of work for this study comprises:

 

·        Stage 1 – Detailed coastal processes assessment and preliminary options assessment based on existing studies and recently collected data;

·        Stage 2 – Assessment of coastal management options and identification of a preferred option based on a multi criteria analysis;

·        Stage 3 – Detailed design of the preferred coastal management option;

·        Stage 4 – Technical advice during tendering and construction phases of the project; and

·        Stage 5 – Technical advice and coastal engineering services post construction.

 

As part of the long term coastal management project, a Community Reference Group (CRG) was established in June 2014 including City Officers, Elected Members, DoT Representatives and Community Representatives. The aims of the group are to:

 

·        Receive information at the key stages of the development and detailed design of the options for Quinns Beach long term coastal management.

·        Provide input in to the development of the long term options for Quinns Beach coastal protection; and.

·        Present community views to the Group.

 

 

The CRG has met a number of times since its establishment at key stages of the project.

 

A preliminary draft Stage 1 report was submitted to the City and Department of Transport for comment in February 2015. Following reviews, a meeting was held with Cardno to discuss the preliminary results and decide on the appropriate actions required to finalise the Stage 1 study. These actions were centred on the need for further numerical model refinement due to the complicated wave and hydrodynamic environment of the Quinns Rocks nearshore reef systems. Preliminary outcomes were presented to the CRG in March 2015 to update the Group on the work undertaken to date and the plans moving forward.

 

Following revised numerical modelling and completion of the coastal processes assessment, a draft Stage 1 report was received in April 2015 and after a detailed review by the City and Department of Transport and presentation of the final outcomes to the CRG, a finalised draft report was received in June 2015. A copy of this draft Stage 1 Report has been placed in the Elected Members reading room for perusal.

 

This report now considers the recommendations made in the draft Quinns Beach Long Term Coastal Management Stage 1 Report.

Detail

The Quinns Beach Long Term Coastal Management Stage 1 Study included detailed analyses of measured data and numerical modelling of waves, hydrodynamics and sediment transport utilising a range of internationally recognised numerical models. Based on these analyses, a sediment budget was developed for Quinns Beach which includes the following key features:

 

·        Up to 60,000 m3/yr (gross) of longshore transport with a net northward drift of 3,000 to 5,000 m3/yr but with significant inter-annual variability in direction and magnitude of this transport;

 

·        Approximately 80,000 m3/yr (gross) of cross-shore transport with 40,000 m3/yr offshore during winter and 40,000 m3/yr onshore during summer;

 

·        Approximately 25,500 m3/yr lost to offshore sediment sinks;

 

·        Dune erosion has supplied on average 5,500 m3/yr into the beach system over the last 10 years; and

 

·        Limited connectivity exists between Quinns Beach and adjacent alongshore tertiary sediment cells to the north and south with respect to littoral drift.

 

Refer to Attachment 1 for a depiction of sediment transport pathways along Quinns Beach.

 

A conceptual review and short listing of coastal management options was undertaken as part of the Stage 1 study, which included all of the options proposed by the community in past correspondence with the City and options identified in previous coastal studies. A qualitative multi-criteria assessment (MCA) was undertaken on the following six options:

 

·        Option 1 – Shifting of the existing headland, removal of groynes 1 and 2, construction of groyne 1A north of the Quinns Beach carpark and construction of a fourth groyne;

 

·        Option 2 – Managed Retreat. Planned removal or loss of assets as coastal processes are allowed to continue without significant additional human interference;

 

 

 

·        Option 3 – Shifting of the existing headland, construction of a fourth groyne, upgrade of existing groynes and an artificial headland in front of the Quinns Beach carpark;

 

·        Option 4 – Extension of existing groynes, construction of a fourth groyne and offshore breakwaters in front of the carpark and dog beach;

 

·        Option 5 – Same as option 4 but with a modification of the groyne shape to a Y or T shaped groyne rather than a straight extension; and

 

·        Option 6 – Same as option 4 but with the inclusion of the shifting of the existing headland.

 

The qualitative MCA has identified Options 3 to 6 as the preferred options for further assessment and optimisation in the Stage 2 study. Optional extras including a revetment at the back of the car park beach and dog beach or a 5th groyne further north will still be considered in Stage 2 if deemed necessary following further numerical modelling and coastal engineering assessment. Refer to Attachment 2 for a depiction of conceptual option layouts.

 

Further information on coastal processes and preliminary options assessment will be presented at Council Forum by Cardno’s representative.

 

As per the contract scope of works, the Stage 2 study will include a minimum of four concept options which shall be assessed and optimised through the use of calibrated numerical models developed in the Stage 1 study. A multi criteria analysis will then be undertaken in conjunction with CRG members to rank the options and identify a recommended option for detailed design. Based on the current project schedule, completion of Stage 2 is anticipated for October 2015. This will be followed by a Community Information Session to present the Stage 1 and 2 outcomes to the public prior to commencement of Stage 3 (Detailed Design).

Consultation

Department of Transport

Department of Transport (DoT) has provided assistance throughout the project including comments on the consultancy scope of work, involvement in the tender evaluation process, attendance of key meetings with the City and Cardno and review of Stage 1 deliverables. DoT has also provided data necessary for study including hydrographic survey data and metocean data.

 

Community Engagement

As per the project specifications and scope of works in Contract No 01440, a community information session is scheduled for after the completion of the Stage 2 works expected in or around September 2015, where Cardno will present the findings from both Stages 1 and 2.

Comment

Cardno’s Stage 1 report provides detailed information regarding the assessment of coastal processes for the Quinns Rocks area including analyses of measured data, set up and calibration of numerical wave, hydrodynamic and sediment transport models and preliminary options analysis to identify four concepts to investigate further in the Stage 2 study. This study contributes significantly to the current understanding of sediment transport rates and pathways along the Quinns Rocks coastline.

 

Following a review of the Stage 1 study report by the City and Department of Transport, the work to date was deemed sufficient to allow for the assessment of coastal management options in the Stage 2 study.

 

 

Four concepts have been identified in the Stage 1 options short listing to be further assessed and optimised in Stage 2. All community suggestions and previously considered coastal protection options were considered in this exercise.

 

Based on the Stage 2 scope of works and current project schedule, it is anticipated that a draft Stage 2 report will be available for review in October 2015. This will be followed by a CRG meeting to undertake a Multi Criteria Analysis and then a Community Information Session prior to a final decision on the recommended option and commencement of Stage 3 (Detailed Design).

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

Cardno WA Pty Ltd was appointed after a thorough tender assessment and based on previous experience and the information contained in their tender submission there are no concerns regarding the risk of non-delivery of services.

 

Due to the need to undertake further refinement of the numerical models in Stage 1 of the study, delays to the original project schedule have been encountered. As a result, it is unlikely that coastal management works will commence before the 2016/17 summer period and therefore a coastal erosion risk to existing infrastructure is present. This risk will be managed by ongoing monitoring and implementation of emergency coastal protection works such as beach re-nourishment as required.

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Funding allocation for the Provision of Consulting Services for Quinns Beach Long Term Coastal Management has been made in the approved 2014/2015 Capital Works Program -PR-2561 - Design of Long-Term Coastal Protection Works at Quinns Beach. This includes a 50% contribution by Department of Transport as per the approved 2014/2015 Coastal Adaptation and Protection (CAP) Grant. Grant acquittal and receipt of payment was achieved in May 2015.

 

Due to project delays as a result of the need for additional numerical model refinement, Stage 3 of the study (Detailed Design) was excluded from the 2014/15 CAP Grant works. The remaining CAP Grant budget was allocated to maintenance works on the Quinns Beach groynes which was completed in November 2014. A 50% contribution of the Stage 3 study was included in the CAP Grant application for 2015/16 which was submitted in March 2015 and approved by the Department of Transport on 25 June 2015.

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       RECEIVES the Quinns Beach Long Term Coastal Management Stage 1 Report titled "Coastal Processes and Preliminary Options Assessment Report" dated June 2015; and

2.       NOTES that Stage 2 (Coastal Management Options Assessment) of the Quinns Beach Long Term Coastal Management Study is progressing and will be presented to Council upon completion in October 2015.

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1 - Sediment Transport Pathways

15/162652

 

2.

Attachment 2 - Conceptual Option Layouts

15/162653

 

  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                               247

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                               248

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                   250

Draft

Infrastructure Projects

3.14  Spence Road Closure at Old Yanchep Road, Neerabup

File Ref:                                              10654 – 15/201504

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       1         

 

Issue

To consider a proposal to permanently close Spence Road to vehicular traffic at its junction with Old Yanchep Road.

 

Background

The City will be undertaking road upgrade works along Old Yanchep Road from Trandos Road to Pederick Road during the 2015/2016 financial year as part of the City`s Black Spot projects. The purpose of the works is to improve road safety by road widening and the reconstruction of the existing bends. During the design process the Spence Road and Old Yanchep Road intersection was identified as a potential road hazard for motorists entering and egressing from Spence Road.

Detail

The intersection of Spence Road and Old Yanchep Road is located on a bend and considered as a hazard due to the geometry of the roads. It is therefore intended to cul-de-sac the western end of Spence Road as shown on Attachment 1.

Consultation

In accordance with the Local Government Act 1995, Sections 3.50. (4) and 3.51, the proposed Closure of Thoroughfare was advertised in “The West Australian” on 18 March 2015, “Wanneroo Times” and “North Coast Times” on 17 March 2015 inviting public submissions by 17 April 2015. Individual letters were also mailed to all affected property owners/occupiers on 11 March 2015. Information on the proposal was also was made available on the City`s website.

 

As per the requirements of the Local Government Act of 1995, Section 3.50. (5) a notification letter was forwarded to the Commissioner of  Main Roads WA on 3 June 2015.

Comment

In the absence of any objections, Administration considers that Council should proceed with the closure of Spence Road to vehicular traffic at its junction with Old Yanchep Road.

Statutory Compliance

Section 3.50 of the Local Government Act 1995 permits a local government to wholly or partially close a thoroughfare to the passage of vehicles.

 


 

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

There is no existing Strategic or Corporate Risk within the City`s existing risk registers which relates to the issue contained within this report however the proposed closure will address safety related risks.

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       In accordance with Section 3.50 of the Local Government Act 1995, as amended, ENDORSES the proposal to permanently close Spence Road at its junction with Old Yanchep Road as shown at Attachment 1; and

2.       advises the residents of Spence Road of Council`s decision.

 

 

Attachments:

1.

3098-1-0 - Spence Road Closure

15/201621

Minuted

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                  252

PDF Creator

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                   253

Draft

Traffic Management

3.15  PT01-02/15  Request Traffic Treatments, Upgrades of Road Surfaces and Footpaths, Landsdale Road, Landsdale. 

File Ref:                                              8697 – 15/112854

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       2         

 

Issue

To consider a petition requesting traffic treatments, upgrades to the road surface and footpaths (pathways) along Landsdale Road between Mirrabooka Avenue and Alexander Drive, Landsdale.

 

Background

Council received petition PT01-02/15 at its meeting on 3 February 2015. The petition was signed by 21 residents representing 18 properties in Landsdale area and reads as below:

“We, the undersigned, all being residents of the City of Wanneroo do formally request Council’s consideration: On the construction of traffic treatments and upgrades of the road surface and footpaths along Landsdale Road, between Mirrabooka Avenue and Alexander Drive.

 

Of the 18 properties represented by the signatures on this petition, 6 were from properties within a 500 metre radius of the section of Landsdale Road, 5 were within a 1km radius, other 6 within a 2km radius and one is more than two kilometres from Landsdale Road. The petition did not contain a signature from any properties along Landsdale Road.

 

Refer to Attachment 1 for a locality map showing the extent of the section of Landsdale Road in question.

Detail

Landsdale Road between Mirrabooka Avenue and Alexander Drive, Landsdale is a two lane single carriageway Local Distributor Road, 7.5 metres wide and approximately 2 km long. It carries approximately 1,400 vehicles per day with a posted speed limit of 60 km/hr. This road is planned to collect and distribute residential traffic within the Landsdale area in accordance with the City’s Functional Road Hierarchy. This class of road is expected to carry a maximum desirable traffic volume of 6,000 vehicles per day.

 

This section of Landsdale Road is currently located on a development front with extensive land development and home construction still occurring within the abutting land parcels, specifically towards Alexander Drive. This section of Landsdale Road is progressively being upgraded to urban standards by developers as subdivision of the adjacent land parcels occur. This requirement for developers to upgrade existing roads to urban standards adjacent to their subdivision, has consistently been applied throughout the City. Other roads, such as Kingsway, the western section of Landsdale Road (Mirrabooka Avenue to Hartman Drive), Rangeview Road, Evandale Road have similarly been upgraded in this manner by developers over time as development occurred.

 

Where subdivision developments abut an existing road, the City through the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) approval process imposes a condition on developers to upgrade these roads to urban standards.


 

 

This will include the provision of road widening, road resurfacing, kerbing and drainage, pathways and street lighting upgrades. In the case of subdivision developments alongside Landsdale Road, a condition of subdivision approval includes:-

“Satisfactory arrangements being made with the local government for the full cost of upgrading and/or construction of Landsdale Road in the relevant locations to a standard of Liveable Neighbourhoods. The upgrade includes but is not limited to road widening, resurfacing, footpath/dual use path, drainage work and street lighting.”

The majority of the pathway constructed by developers along this section of Landsdale Road is located on the north side. A fair portion of the entire section of Lansdale Road pavement have already been upgraded and resurfaced as a result of the adjacent subdivision development with the exception of some sections which are adjacent undeveloped land parcels. The standard and condition of these sections of road and unconstructed portions of pathways are further discussed in the comments section of this report.

 

With respect to the provision of traffic treatments, the City’s Traffic Management Investigation and Intervention Policy (Policy) is used to consider and prioritise these requirements. This Policy guides the decision making process to decide whether roads require infrastructure changes or increased policing.

 

The Policy requires an assessment score of over 60 to qualify for traffic management treatments, while scores between 30 and 60 points may warrant attention to law enforcement and driver education. However, the Policy precludes the installation of traffic treatments in areas where development is still ongoing and has less than 90% residential occupancy. The reason for delaying the need for traffic treatments in these areas is that these treatments are costly and they may ultimately be shown to be unnecessary or inappropriate once the area fully develops. Waiting for subdivisions to fully develop and homes occupied also enables all potential residents including the existing residents to comment on any proposals.

Consultation

Nil.

Comment

Traffic Treatments

The City’s Traffic Management Investigation and Intervention Policy (Policy) precludes the installation of traffic treatments in areas where development is still ongoing and has less than 90% residential occupancy. Along this section of Landsdale Road subdivision development is still occurring particularly towards the eastern end.

 

Notwithstanding, an assessment was completed on this section of Lansdale Road in accordance with the Policy. The assessment was conducted in two segments of Landsdale Road, Alexander Drive to Rangeview Road and Rangeview Road to Mirrabooka Avenue, the results of the traffic assessment are as follows:

 

·                Landsdale Road, Alexandra Drive to Rangeview Road

Average Weekday Traffic Volume – 1177 vehicles per day

85th percentile (speed at or below which 85% of drivers are travelling) – 79 Km/hr

Traffic Management score – 58

 

·                Landsdale Road, Rangeview Road to Mirrabooka Avenue

Average Weekday Traffic Volume – 1411 vehicles per day

85th percentile (speed at or below which 85% of drivers are travelling) – 68 Km/hr

Traffic Management score – 20

 

The resultant scores for Landsdale Road, in accordance with the Policy, indicate that the construction of traffic management treatments cannot be justified at this time ahead of other priority projects.

 

In addition to the consideration for traffic management treatments, the City sends traffic data to WA Police for enforcement of speed limits in accordance with WALGA – Local Government Speed Enforcement Program. A referral benchmark was established by the WA Police Intelligence Branch and WALGA for the program whereby a minimum of 15% of recorded vehicles are required to exceed the posted speed limit by at least 10 kilometres per hour before a referral is made. 

 

In the case of Landsdale Road, this benchmark was met and the traffic count data has been referred to WA Police as part of the WALGA - Local Government Speed Enforcement Program.

 

Road and Pathway Upgrade

The majority of the road surface along this section of Landsdale Road is in good condition. A major portion of this road has been upgraded by developers as part of the adjacent subdivision development. There are two sections that remain in poor condition which are towards the Alexander Drive end of the road. These are located in Sections D and E in Attachment 2 and further described below. Some road sections although resealed have not fully been upgraded in that it lacks kerbing and the provision of drainage facilities.

 

A major portion of the concrete pathway along the northern verge of Landsdale Road has also been constructed by developers as part the adjacent subdivision development. There are four sections of pathway along the northern side of the road that remain unconstructed. These are located in Sections A, B, D and E shown in Attachment 2 and further described below. The pathway along the southern side of Landsdale Road only exists for the first 330 metres from the Mirrabooka Avenue intersection.

 

The following details the required upgrade works and the associated estimated costs for the road sections, as identified in Attachment 2, along Landsdale Road between Mirrabooka Avenue and Alexander Drive which are subject to future upgrading by the adjacent development.

1.         Lot 58 (187) Landsdale Road (opposite Delta Rise) – kerbing and pathway for a 120 metre section.

Construction of this 120m section of unconstructed pathway will require the reconstruction of the adjacent kerbing and verge regrading at a cost of $25,000.

2.         Lot 62 (28) Rangeview Road (fronting the Landsdale Child Care Centre) – kerbing and pathway for a 70 metre section.

Construction of this 70m section of unconstructed pathway will require the construction of the adjacent kerbing and verge regrading at a cost $17,000.

3.         Lot 146 (284) Landsdale Road (east of Marginson Drive) – kerbing and drainage for a 80 metre section.

The southern section of this road is not kerbed or drained and upgrading at this stage prior to subdivision occurring is not essential. However, the cost to upgrade this section of road will involve the construction of kerbing, verge grading and drainage is $20,000.


 

 

4.         Lot 159 (337) Landsdale Road (east of Cavolfiore Grove) –  full road upgrading (reseal, kerbing, drainage and pathway construction) for a 85m section.

The road surface condition for this section of road, although in an acceptable state, is considered to be in poor condition. The road is not kerbed on either side and does not have drainage facilities installed.

Upgrading of this section of road will involve road widening, road reseal, installation of kerbing and drainage, and construction of a pathway on the northern side and verge grading. The estimated cost for this work is $120,000.

5.         Lot 154 (365) Landsdale Road (west of Alexander Drive) – full road upgrading (reseal, kerbing, drainage and pathway construction) for a 130m section.

The road surface condition for this section of road, although in an acceptable state, is considered to be in poor condition. The road is not kerbed on either side and does not have drainage facilities installed. Upgrading of this section of road will involve road widening, road reseal, installation of kerbing and drainage, and construction of a pathway on the northern side and verge grading. The estimated cost for this work is $180,000.

6.         Lots 149, 150, 151, 152 and Hepburn Park, Landsdale Road (west of Alexander Drive) – construction of kerbing and drainage facilities only on the south side of the road for approx. 660 metres.

Lots 149, 150, 151, 152 are undeveloped lots on the south side of Landsdale Road with Hepburn Park being the last lot on the south side before Alexander Drive. Accordingly, the verge on the southern side is undeveloped with no kerbing installed for 660 metres east of Alexander Drive. Construction of this work at this stage prior to subdivision occurring is not essential. However, the cost to install kerbing only on the south side of the road is $30,000.

 

The City does not support the early upgrading of the sections of Landsdale Road which are yet to be upgraded by developers. These will progressively be upgraded by developers as the development of the adjacent land occurs. This practice has consistently been applied throughout the City where the adjacent land is subject to urban development. The City continues to undertake maintenance on these sections of Landsdale Road to ensure that it continues to function satisfactorily and are in a safe condition.

 

The City already has significant road funding commitments within its long term Capital Works Program, some of which have been pushed out to outer years. The construction of pathways and the resealing of the roads, which are subject to construction by developers in conjunction with future developments, traditionally have not been considered and prioritised as part of the City’s Capital Works Program.

 

It is noted however that, at this stage, there are no subdivision applications in place for the vacant lots. These may not occur potentially for an extended period of time whereby the City may need to intervene.

 

In recognition of the above need to provide adequate infrastructure for pedestrians and road users in this instance, it is recommended that the City lists the following, as a minimum, for consideration in its future long term Capital Works Program:

 

·        Provision of a continuous pathway facility along the northern verge of Landsdale Road between Mirrabooka Avenue and Alexander Drive. This will involve the construction of the pathways in Sections 1, 2, 4 and 5 described above. The estimated cost for this work is $100,000.

 

 

·        Widening and resealing the two remaining sections of Landsdale Road that are yet to be resealed. This will involve the widening and resealing of the road in Sections 4 and 5 described above. The estimated cost for this work is $95,000.

 

It is considered that the above works will provide adequate infrastructure to pedestrians and road users in interim ahead of future development of the adjacent land.

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

Nil.

Policy Implications

Nil.

Financial Implications

The estimated cost of a traffic management scheme if considered for implementation, subject to a detailed concept and design is in the order of $250,000.

 

The estimated cost of all road upgrade and pathway installation works if considered for implementation, subject to a detailed design is in the order of $350,000.

 

The estimated cost to undertake the minimum upgrade works to Landsdale Road as described above, ahead of subdivision development, is $100,000 for pathways and $95,000 for road resurfacing. These projects are not specifically listed in the City’s long term Capital Works Program and it is recommended that these projects be listed for consideration and prioritised in conjunction with future budget deliberations for the Pathways & Trails Program and Road Resurfacing Program.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       DOES NOT SUPPORT, at this stage, the installation of traffic treatments along Landsdale Road between Mirrabooka Avenue and Alexander Drive, Landsdale noting that Administration has notified WA Police of speeding concerns along this section of Landsdale Road;

 

 

2.       LISTS for consideration and prioritisation in the future 20 Year Pathways and Trails Capital Works Program for the installation of the unconstructed sections of pathway along the north side of Landsdale Road,

3.       LISTS for consideration and prioritisation in the future 20 Year Road Resurfacing Capital Works Program, the resurfacing of the remaining road sections in Landsdale Road yet to be upgraded at the eastern end of Landsdale Road; and

4.       ADVISES the petition organiser of Council’s decision.

 

Attachments:

1.

Locality Plan for Landsdale Road, Landsdale Petition - PT01-02/15

15/114456

 

2.

Landsdale Road (Mirrabooka Avenue to Alexander Drive) - Existing Infrastructure

15/215814

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                  260

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                  261

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                   262

3.16  Parking Prohibitions - The Broadview between Southmead Drive and Playford Mews, Landsdale.

File Ref:                                              5597 – 15/155881

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       4         

 

Issue

To consider the installation of parking prohibitions along the southern side of The Broadview, between Southmead Drive and Playford Mews, Landsdale.

 

Background

The City received a request for parking prohibitions from the residents of St Helen’s Grove Private Estate to restrict vehicles parking on the east side of The Broadview. It was reported that parked cars along the verge up to the entrance to the Private Estate were blocking the sight–lines of vehicles exiting St Helen’s Grove Private Estate, making both left and right hand turns hazardous. The uncontrolled parking across pedestrian ramps is also increasing the safety risk to school children crossing at this location

 

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

Detail

The Broadview is a key local distributor within the suburb of Landsdale, connecting community assets such as Landsdale Primary School and Landsdale Forum (Neighbourhood Centre). St Helen’s Grove Private Estate is situated on the northern and western end of The Broadview, with its access road connecting to western most leg of The Broadview.

 

Landsdale Primary School is situated on the north side of The Broadview’s along the northern boundary of St Helen’s Grove Private Estate. This section of road experiences significant parking congestion during the peak school times of 8am - 9am and 2:30pm - 3:30pm. The parking congestion has been reported to extend around to the western most leg of The Broadview affecting the access road into St Helen’s Grove Private Estate.

 

The installation of the parking prohibition proposed in this report addresses the parking issues experienced in The Broadview between Southmead Drive and Playford Mews adjacent to the St Helen’s Grove Private Estate.

 

St Helen’s Grove Private Estate residents have raised concerns regarding the parking of cars, by parents of school children, along the east side of The Broadview adjacent to the access road into the Private Estate during the peak drop-off/pick-up school times. The parked cars are restricting sight lines to approaching traffic when exiting from the access road out of the Private Estate. Cars have been noted parking along the Broadview, between Southmead Drive and Playford Mews and at times parking across pathway crossing ramps. The reduction in the available sight lines to oncoming vehicles increases the chances of conflict between cars and is also creating a sightline issue when school children cross the Private Estate’s access road.

 

The existing approved parking prohibitions for Landsdale Primary School currently terminate immediately south of Southmead Drive as detailed in the City’s Drawing No. 2711‑3‑0 (Attachment 2 refers).

 

 

 

The proposed extension to the parking prohibitions along the eastern side of The Broadview from Southmead Drive to Playford Mews is as shown at Attachment 3.

Consultation

City officers, together with two South Ward Councillors, met on site with St Helen’s Grove Private Estate representatives to discuss the concerns raised. It was agreed, at the time, that the City will investigate the option of extending the parking prohibitions on the eastern side of The Broadview from where it currently ends to Playford Mews.

   

As the section of The Broadview being investigated for parking prohibitions abuts only the St Helen’s Grove Private Estate, the City requested the President of the Estate to advise their levels of support on behalf of the entire estate. A letter from the Estate President expressing his approval to the proposed parking prohibition signage is shown at Attachment 4.

Comment

It is considered that the installation of parking prohibitions along the east side of The Broadview, from Southmead Drive to Playford Mews, will be beneficial in improving the issues being faced by St Helen’s Grove Private Estate residents when exiting from the access road.

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

Nil

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 $1,750 which can be funded from Project PR-2657: Parking Scheme Signage and Line Marking of the 2015/16 Capital Works Program.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 


 

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       APPROVES the installation of “NO STANDING ROAD OR NATURE STRIP – SCHOOL TIMES” (R5-36) signs along the eastern side of The Broadview between Southmead Drive and Playford Mews as shown in City of Wanneroo Drawing No 3131-1-0 (Attachment 3 refers);

2.       APPROVES the installation of “BUS ZONE” (R5-20) signs along the eastern side of The Broadview between Southmead Drive and Playford Mews as shown in City of Wanneroo Drawing No 3131-1-0 (Attachment 3 refers); and

3.       Advises the President of St Helen’s Grove Estate of Council’s decision.

 

 

Attachments:

1.

The Broadview, Landsdale - Location Map

15/185927

 

2.

The Broadview, Landsdale - Drawing No  2711-3-0 : Existing Parking Prohibitions

15/186129

 

3.

The Broadview, Landsdale - Drawing No 3131-1-0 : Proposed Parking Prohibitions

15/186160

Minuted

4.

The Broadview, Landsdale - Community Consultation Response - President, St Helens Grove Private Estate

15/185952

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                  265

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                  266

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                  267

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                  268

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                   269

3.17  Mercy College, Alexander Heights - Traffic Flow and Road Safety Improvement Works

File Ref:                                              2129 – 15/104644

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       3         

Previous Items:                                   IN03-11/14 Agenda; IN03-11/14 Resolution

Golders Way, Girrawheen Footpath - Community Consultation Outcomes

 

Issue

To consider undertaking community consultation in relation to various infrastructure works proposed to improve traffic movements and access issues during school peak times in the vicinity of Mercy College, Alexander Heights.

 

Background

Council, at its meeting of 11 November 2014, considered a report (IN03-11/14 refers) investigating the installation of a footpath along Golders Way and resolved in part to:

 

“REQUESTS Administration to liaise with Mercy College, Main Roads WA, Public Transport Authority and WA Police to develop a long term strategy to resolve traffic safety and congestion around the College.”

Refer to Attachment 1 for a locality map of the school site in relation to the road network.

Detail

Mercy College is a private school catering for all year groups including Kindergarten through to Year 12. The school site is located in Koondoola and is bound by Mirrabooka Avenue to the west and Beach Road to the south. There are no direct road connections along the northern and eastern boundaries of the school site. There are three on-site car parks within the school property which cater for staff and parents parking as detailed below.

 

Northern internal car park area

The northern most car park is solely provided for staff and visitors. It has 106 standard parking bays and two disabled access bays. The car park has a single entry / exit crossover access on to Mirrabooka Avenue which is located at the Golders Way / Mirrabooka Avenue intersection. The parking bays are 90 degree bays and feed into a free flow access lane which accesses the rear of the school. It also provides direct access to the school Administration block.

 

Western internal car park area

The western internal car park area is provided for parent parking and is also utilised for access to an on-site kiss and drive facility. It has 52 standard parking bays and 2 disabled access bays. The car park has a single entry/exit crossover access on to Mirrabooka Avenue which is located approximately 105m south of the Golders Way / Mirrabooka Avenue intersection. Traffic flows in a ‘One Way’ direction within the car park and exits left only due to the central raised median on Mirrabooka Avenue.

 

Southern internal car park area

The southern internal car park area is provided for parent parking and is also utilised for access to an on-site kiss and drive facility. It has 118 standard parking bays and 2 disabled access bays. The car park has two crossover accesses off Beach Road.

 

The City conducted an onsite investigation of Mercy College on 4 December 2014 and identified two issues around the school as detailed below:

 

Mirrabooka Avenue/Golders Way intersection

Traffic movements at the Mirrabooka Avenue/Golders Way intersection were considered, at the peak pick-up times, to be chaotic with high risk traffic manoeuvres taken by motorists/parents in their endeavour to pick up students from Mercy College.

 

In order to access the western internal car park, parents heading northbound along Mirrabooka Avenue were witnessed completing U-Turn movements at the Golders Way intersection, merging with south-bound traffic and manoeuvring across into the left lane to turn left into the western internal car park. In addition to this, parents who utilise Golders Way to park and wait before picking up students access Golders Way from Mirrabooka Avenue using left‑in or right-in movements at this same intersection. Once students had been picked up, parents would then attempt to exit Golders Way and merge with the traffic on Mirrabooka Avenue by either a right-out or left-out movement. An articulated school bus travelling north along Mirrabooka Avenue was also witnessed turning right into the Mercy College northern internal car park crossover to access an internal bus lay-over area.

 

Residents living along the western side of Mirrabooka Avenue north of Golders Way have restricted left‑in/left-out access to their properties due to the central raised median on Mirrabooka Avenue. These residents are forced to complete a U-Turn movement at the Golders Way intersection in order to gain access to their homes. This movement was witnessed to frequently occur at the peak pick-up period and only added to the congestion occurring at the intersection.

 

The situation is further complicated by the presence of a children’s crossing across Mirrabooka Avenue immediately north of the Golders Way intersection. The Children’s Crossing is operated by two crossing wardens who coordinate together to ensure that students safely cross Mirrabooka Avenue in one movement. However, at times (due to excessive traffic volumes) they may operate independently.

 

The entry/exit access crossover to the Mercy College northern internal car park is also located directly opposite the Golders Way intersection forming in effect a 4-way intersection.

 

Access/Egress to western internal school carpark

The western internal school carpark is accessed via Mirrabooka Avenue, and is heavily utilised by parents for student pick-up at school finish times. The carpark has a single left‑in/left-out crossover access which is located approximately 110m south of the Golders Way intersection. Parents accessing this car park were witnessed queuing along Mirrabooka Avenue in the left lane extending north towards the Golders Way intersection. This queuing virtually reduces Mirrabooka Avenue down to one lane and forces traffic to merge into the median lane within close proximately of the Golders Way intersection. There is also a Transperth bus stop located on the eastern side of Mirrabooka Avenue immediately south of the Golders Way intersection which further compounds the issues being created by the on-street queuing.

 

The issues witnessed pose a significant risk to road users in the vicinity of the Golders Way / Mirrabooka Avenue intersection and on the approach to the entrance to the western internal school car park.

 

Based on the issues identified, the City has prepared a concept plan proposing infrastructure changes to address the issues being faced. Drawing No. 3074-1-0 (Attachment 2 refers) details the proposed works as detailed below;

 


 

 

Mirrabooka Avenue/Golders Way Intersection - Movement restrictions

Administration investigated options for addressing the congestion issues created as a result of parents completing U-Turn manoeuvres at the intersection. Consideration was given to installing a “NO U-TURN” sign within the raised central median and extending the median kerb slightly to discourage motorists to complete the U-Turn manoeuvre at this location and still maintain right out turning manoeuvres from Golders Way (refer to diagram below). However, due to the wide configuration of the intersection, it is likely that motorists will continue to undertake the manoeuvre and ignore the road signage.

 

Therefore a physical obstruction is required to ensure motorists comply with movement restrictions in areas of high congestion. Therefore, it is proposed to extend the central raised median substantially through the Golders Way/Mirrabooka Avenue intersection to fully restrict the U-Turn manoeuvre and in turn also restrict the right-turn exit manoeuvre from Golders Way (refer to the diagram below and Drawing No. 3074-1-0 in Attachment 2).

 

 

This physical barrier will ensure that safety to road users is not compromised including restricting the unsafe right-turn entry manoeuvre of the articulated priority school bus into the school. These works will have a negative impact on school staff and visitors who exit right onto Mirrabooka Avenue to head north. However, as the issues currently being faced are a matter of safety, it is considered that sacrificing full access is necessary to ensure a safer and more risk considerate outcome.

 

New U-Turn Facility north of Golders Way (for cars only)

It is proposed to install a U-Turn facility for use only by cars in accordance with Austroads 94 Class 1 vehicles (car, van, wagon, 4WD, Utility) on Mirrabooka Avenue midblock between Golders Way and Chataway Road. The facility will work in conjunction with the works proposed at the Mirrabooka Avenue/Golders Way intersection and will enable motorists in the northbound lane along Mirrabooka Avenue to perform a U-Turn at a safer location away from the Golders Way intersection. In addition, the facility will have a slip lane provision which will reduce the likelihood of impeding the flow of northbound traffic along Mirrabooka Avenue at peak pick-up times. Buses and long vehicles however will be required to travel further north to turn around at the Mirrabooka Avenue/Koondoola Avenue roundabout.

 

New Bus Embayment along Mirrabooka Avenue outside Mercy College, south of Golders Way

It is proposed to install a new bus embayment along Mirrabooka Avenue on the eastern side, 50m south of the Golders Way intersection. The embayment will replace the existing ‘on- carriageway’  bus stop enabling PTA buses to move out of the main carriageway without blocking the left lane on Mirrabooka Avenue. The creation of the bus embayment will require the relocation of the bus shelter further east to a location that will reside partly onto Mercy College grounds.

Consultation

The proposed concept plan was discussed with the Deputy Principal of Mercy College in December 2014 who, at the time, supported the proposed infrastructure improvements and encouraged the early implementation of the changes in order to alleviate the issues currently experienced. The school also provided its support regarding the possible need to have the bus shelter relocated to reside partly on the school’s property as part of the bus embayment construction works.

 

A further on-site meeting was held on 5 May 2015 with a South Ward Councillor, City Officers and Mercy College representatives to discuss the proposed infrastructure works and a copy of the concept proposal Drawing No. 3074-1-0 was provided to the College for further comment. The College responded with comments as detailed below and the City’s corresponding response to the comments included in the table below.

 

Points Raised By Mercy College

Administrations Comments

1.  The safety concern at the intersection of Mirrabooka Avenue and Golders Way is noted and any improvement to reduce potential road danger points is supported.

 

Agree and noted.


 

Points Raised By Mercy College

Administrations Comments

2.  The proposed new turning area (adjacent to house number 31 Mirrabooka Avenue) should be of sufficient design/space to facilitate vehicles that would access Mercy College via this road. These vehicles would include delivery vehicles and buses up to an articulated vehicle.

The proposed U-Turn facility adjacent to house number 31 Mirrabooka Avenue only provides for cars, vans or a car with trailer to complete a U-Turn manoeuvre. Delivery trucks and buses will be required to continue north to the purpose built roundabout at the Mirrabooka Avenue/Koondoola Avenue/Montrose Avenue intersection to complete the required U-Turn manoeuvre. There is insufficient width in the central median to accommodate the turning circle/movement of delivery trucks or buses to enable these vehicles to complete the U‑Turn manoeuvre. The roundabout at the Mirrabooka Avenue/Koondoola Avenue/Montrose Avenue intersection is designed to accommodate the larger vehicles for this manoeuvre.

Signage will be placed at the proposed U-Turn facility stating, “U-TURN CARS ONLY”.

3.  The dedicated/off road turning area (stretching from house number 25 through to house number 31) would appear to hold up to 8 to 9 vehicles. If that is correct then it would appear that this space would be sufficient, if it is any less then we may have some concerns.

Agree and noted.

4.  Pushing the traffic further to the north along Mirrabooka Avenue will in our opinion create more traffic congestion along Mirrabooka Avenue (southward bound).

This will be the same traffic that would have undertaken a U-Turn manoeuvre at the Golders Way/Mirrabooka Avenue intersection. Any congestion along the southbound lanes in Mirrabooka Avenue will remain.

5.  Currently vehicles turning into the school at the Golders Way intersection have the benefit of the Student Pedestrian Traffic Wardens regularly stopping southbound vehicles on Mirrabooka Avenue which creates an opportunity for vehicles to access

Mirrabooka Avenue.

Agree. However, the safety concerns at this intersection remain and the proposed improvements are designed to address this concern.

6.  Would it be possible to replicate a turning area (similar to that already proposed) for traffic exiting the school car park onto Mirrabooka Avenue in a southerly direction and wishing to proceed north along Mirrabooka Avenue?

The City is unable to justify the cost associated with the installation of a complete U-Turn facility to service traffic generated only by staff and visitors exiting the northern internal carpark wishing to head north along Mirrabooka Avenue. Staff and visitors wishing to leave the school will be required to turn left out of the school and find an alternate route north by either turning left or right at Beach Road.

Alternatively, the College would need to consider constructing an internal access road as part of its future development and seek access to the road network at the northeast end of the College.

Points Raised By Mercy College

Administrations Comments

7.  Would it be possible to have a dedicated turning area into our Beach Road car park by having a turning area located along the westbound lane Beach Road (just prior to the Beach Road/Mirrabooka Avenue intersection).

Beach Road (south carriageway) is under the care and control of the City of Stirling and any requests for improvements or modifications to this road will need to be directed to them accordingly.

.

 

Main Roads WA was also consulted, and indicated its support for the proposed modifications.

 

The issue relating to articulated bus U-Turn movements at the Golders Way/Mirrabooka Avenue intersection was referred to the Public Transport Authority (PTA). The City suggested to PTA to request its bus drivers to use the roundabout at the Mirrabooka Avenue/Montrose Avenue/Koondoola Avenue intersection to complete the turnaround manoeuvre. PTA responded in part as follow:

 

“We have viewed the situation at Mercy College in the afternoon on two occasions since receiving the letter and have taken video footage on each occasion that shows the buses turning right from Mirrabooka Avenue at Golders Way into Mercy College do so with ease.

 

As can be seen from the picture below, the Crosswalk Attendant stops any traffic to allow buses an easy turning manoeuvre. This manoeuvre is not a U-Turn but rather a right hand turn into Mercy College grounds. Having operated this service for the past 18 years and viewing the area in question onsite recently, we cannot see any safety concerns caused by our drivers. I do concede that the school is quieter than usual at present as years 10, 11 & 12 have finished.

 

Should you wish to pursue this issue further I am happy to be part of an on-site meeting at this location once school resumes in February 2015.”

 

Following the endorsement of the concept plan, Administration proposes to undertake wider consultation in October 2015 with Mercy College, PTA, Main Roads WA and the affected residents (residents of Golders Way and Mirrabooka Avenue between Beach Road and Chataway Road).

 

Administration will report back to Council on the outcomes of the community consultation feedback for consideration in December 2015.

Comment

Administration considers that the infrastructure improvement works as depicted in City’s Drawing No. 3074-1-0 will alleviate the majority of the traffic issues being experienced in the vicinity of Mercy College at the peak drop-off and pick-up times. It is expected that there will be opposition from Golders Way residents to the intersection modifications, however with consideration of the proposed U-Turn facility located 100m north of the Golders Way/Mirrabooka Avenue intersection, the inability for motorists to turn right from Golders Way is adequately provided for with only a moderate inconvenience.

 

Crash data obtained from Main Roads WA for the period extending between January 2010 to December 2014  for the Mirrabooka Avenue/Golders Way intersection outlines the following crash types (A Crash Diagram has been included as Attachment 3).

 

 

 

·        2 x Same Direction: RIGHT-THRU crashes, crashes occurred as a result of a vehicle turning right from Golders Way into Mirrabooka Avenue hitting a vehicle heading south along Mirrabooka Avenue. Both crashes were Property Damage Minor crashes and incurred less than $3,000 each.

·        1 x Opposite Direction: THRU-RIGHT crash, crash occurred as a result of a vehicle turning right from Mirrabooka Avenue into Golders Way turning across a vehicle heading north along Mirrabooka Avenue. Crash was a Property Damage Major crash and resulted in damages over $3,000.

·        1 x Pedestrian Other crash, crash occurred as a result of a vehicle turning right out of Golders Way into Mirrabooka Avenue losing control, mounting the verge and hitting a pedestrian. The crash resulted in hospitalisation (likely being the pedestrian).

 

The above crashes all occurred on weekdays and occurred between 2:30pm – 5:10pm. It is considered that these crashes were likely to be attributed to the congestion at the intersection. The proposed extension of the median island to physically restrict the ‘U-Turn‘ manoeuvres, as shown in Drawing No. 3074-1-0 (Attachment 2 refers), will improve safety at this intersection.

 

The installation of the bus embayment on Mirrabooka Avenue will also assist with creating a safer road environment along Mirrabooka Avenue improving traffic flow for southbound motorists.

 

In conjunction with the proposed changes, the City will need to work closely with Mercy College to ensure that parents are made aware of the changes and encouraging them to change their driving habits to match with the new access arrangements.

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

Nil

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

The cost to implement the infrastructure improvement works is estimated at $200,000. This project is currently not listed in the City’s Capital Works Program. Following community consultation and subject to Council endorsement of the project, this project will need to be listed for consideration in the City’s future 20-year Capital Works Program.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       ENDORSES the proposed traffic improvement concept plan for Mirrabooka Avenue between Beach Road and Chataway Road as shown in the City’s Drawing No. 3074-1-0 (Attachment 2 refers) for the purpose of community consultation with Mercy College, Public Transport Authority, Main Roads WA and residents of Golders Way and Mirrabooka Avenue between Beach Road and Chataway Road; and

2.       NOTES that a report will be presented to Council on the outcomes of the community consultation process.

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Mercy College, Alexander Heights - Locality Plan

15/106520

 

2.

Proposed Infrastructure Works - Drawing No 3074-1-0

15/106529

Minuted

3.

Crash Diagram - Intersection Mirrabooka and Golder Way, Alexander Heights

15/207184

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                               277

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                  278

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                                                                  279

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 14 July, 2015                                   280

3.18  Parking Prohibitions Review - Ocean Keys Shopping Centre, Clarkson

File Ref:                                              5597 – 15/143973

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       3         

 

Issue

To consider changes to parking prohibitions on Ocean Keys Boulevard and Key Largo Drive, in the vicinity of Ocean Keys Shopping Centre, Clarkson.

Background

Ocean Keys Shopping Centre has experienced major redevelopment over the past 2 years. As a result, many of the existing parking prohibitions along Ocean Keys Boulevard have been removed or made redundant. New signage has also been erected by the developer during the redevelopment of the Shopping Centre which is not enforceable by the City’s Parking Compliance Officers.

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

Detail

Ocean Keys Shopping Centre is an important retail and social centre for the City’s northern corridor. The shopping centre is also adjacent to several key community facilities, such as Clarkson Police Station, Clarkson Library and Clarkson Youth Centre.

 

Parking Prohibitions for the area were originally installed in 2006 and were designed to encompass large portions of Ocean Keys Boulevard, Pensacola Terrace, Sarasota Pass and Key Largo Drive. The approved parking prohibition drawing is shown in Attachment 2.

 

The development of Ocean Keys Shopping Centre has resulted in alterations to large portions of the existing kerbline along the southern side of Ocean Keys Boulevard and the western side of Key Largo Drive. This has also resulted in the existing parking prohibitions signage in these areas being removed or made redundant. In addition, the revitalisation works have included the installation of Taxi Zone and Mail Zone signs and line marking without Council approval.

 

The changes required to existing approved parking prohibition plan are generally minor in nature to formalise the current signage and align with the altered road frontage to the Ocean Key Shopping Centre along Ocean Keys Boulevard. This report details some of the key changes required to existing approved parking prohibition plan and recommends the approval of a revised parking prohibition plan.

Consultation

Nil

Comment

Administration considers the introduction of the new Mail Zone and Taxi Zone to be necessary and appropriately located in consideration of the large traffic volumes and pressure placed on parking facilities in the area.

 

 

 

 

Additional alterations to the existing parking prohibitions along Ocean Keys Boulevard and Key Largo Drive are recommended to align parking areas with the new kerb lines. The recommended alterations to the existing parking prohibitions are as shown in Attachment 3.

Statutory Compliance

The endorsement of the proposed amended parking prohibition plan as detailed in Attachment 3 will enable the enforcement by the City’s Parking Compliance Officers in accordance with the Parking and Facilities Local Law 2003 (as amended).

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

Nil

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 estimated at $2,000 which can be funded from PR-2657: Parking Scheme Signage and Line Marking in the 2015/16 Capital Works Program.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       APPROVES the installation of "MAIL ZONE” (R5-26) signs on the southern side of Ocean Keys Boulevard, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2141-2-3. (Attachment 3 refers);

2.       APPROVES the installation of "TAXI ZONE” (R5-21) signs on the southern side of Ocean Keys Boulevard, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2141-2-3. (Attachment 3 refers);

3.       APPROVES the installation of "1P 9AM - 5PM MON - SAT” (R5-1) signs along the southern side of Ocean Keys Boulevard, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2141-2-3. (Attachment 3 refers);

 

 

4.       APPROVES the installation of "3P 9AM - 5PM MON - SAT” (R5-3) signs on the western side of Key Largo Drive, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2141-2-3. (Attachment 3 refers);

5.       APPROVES the removal of "1P 9AM - 5PM MON - SAT” (R5-1) signs along the southern side of Ocean Keys Boulevard, as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2141-2-3. (Attachment 3 refers); and

6.       ADVISES Ocean Keys Shopping Centre of Council's decision.

 

 

 

Attachments: