B&WLogo_circle&text

 

 

 

 

BRIEFING PAPERS

FOR ELECTED MEMBERS’

BRIEFING SESSION

 

Draft Only

 

 

 

 

 

to be held at

the Civic Centre,

Dundebar Rd, Wanneroo

on 01 December, 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 1 December, 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                         Draft Amended State Planning Policy 2.5: Land Use Planning in Rural Areas  1

Town Planning Schemes & Structure Plans  5

3.2                         Amendment No. 139 to District Planning Scheme No. 2  5

3.3                         Amendment No. 149 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 - Lots  9164 and 9176 Flynn Drive, Banksia Grove  13

3.4                         Initiation of Amendment No. 150 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 - Normalising the Zoning of the Drovers Place Precinct  19

3.5                         Final adoption of Amendment No. 151 to DPS 2  28

3.6                         Proposed Amendment No. 23 to the East Wanneroo Cell 1 Agreed Structure Plan No. 3  32

3.7                         Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1292/57: North-East and North-West District Omnibus 1  38

Development Applications  43

3.8                         Consideration of Development Application DA2015/1780 Single House Addition (Patio) at Lot 180 (97) Kemp Street, Pearsall  43

3.9                         Retrospective Single House Additions (Patios, Outbuilding and Ancillary Accommodation) at Lot 1 (37) Hadleigh Way, Girrawheen  47

3.10                      Reconsideration of proposed drive-through addition to an approved Liquor Store at Lot 1031 (2) Captiva Approach, Butler  52


 

Regulatory Services  58

3.11                      Application to Retain Existing Front Boundary Fences at Lot 106 and Lot 107 Safari Place, Carabooda  58

Other Matters  63

3.12                      Amberton Foreshore Management Plan  63

3.13                      Proposed Pedestrian Accessway Closure - Pedestrian Accessway between Nott Place and Oldham Park, Yanchep  71

3.14                      Approval of Expenditure from the Sustainability Investment Fund Reserve  77

Assets  80

Asset Management  80

3.15                      City of Wanneroo Roadwise Working Group  - Amendment to Terms of Reference  80

Infrastructure Maintenance  83

3.16                      Dewars Beach Access Track - Progress Report  83

Infrastructure Projects  92

3.17                      Wanneroo Civic Centre Extension and Refurbishment  92

Tenders  95

3.18                      Tender No 01545 - Supply and Application of Pesticides in Turf for a Period of 36 months  95

3.19                      Tender No 01546 - Provision of Turf Renovation Services of Active Sportsfields and Public Open Spaces for a Period of 36 Months  100

3.20                      Tender No. 01550 - Park Asset Renewal  105

Traffic Management  113

3.21                      Landsdale Road, Darch - Proposed Traffic Management Scheme - Community Consultation Results. 113

Community Development  120

Capacity Building  120

3.22                      Community Funding Program October 2015 Round  120

3.23                      Southern Suburbs Library (Kingsway) Update  125

3.24                      Installation of commemorative plaque at Wanneroo War Memorial  131

Program Services  134

3.25                      Update on Homelessness and Sleeping Rough in the North Western Corridor  134

3.26                      PT01-10/15 Develop a Shade Sails Policy for new playgrounds built in the North Coastal Ward  138

3.27                      North Coast Community Reference and Sporting User Group Terms of Reference  141

3.28                      Consideration of a Proposed Pedalo Business at Brampton Park Butler  144


 

Other Matters  150

3.29                      Riverlinks Sports Amenities Building and Carpark - Request for a portion of 2016/17 funds to be brought forward into 2015/16. 150

Corporate Strategy & Performance  153

Finance  153

3.30                      Financial Activity Statement for the Period Ended 31 October 2015  153

3.31                      Review of Accounting Policy  164

Governance and Legal  169

3.32                      Donations to be Considered by Council - December 2015  169

3.33                      Delegation of Authority - City of Wanneroo Local Laws - Appointment of Authorised Persons  177

3.34                      Appointment of Delegates and Community Representatives to Committees and Working Groups  180

Property  188

3.35                      Proposed Commercial Industrial Land Lease to Asphaltech Pty Ltd.  Portion Lot 9003 (85) Mather Drive, Neerabup  188

3.36                      Shared Use Facilities with the Department of Education - Licence Agreements  194

Chief Executive Office  200

Item  4_____ Motions on Notice_ 200

4.1                         Cr Dot Newton – Donation Towards the Victims of the Esperance BushFires  200

4.2                         Cr Sabine Winton – Amendment to the Council Members Fees, Allowances and Reimbursements Policy  202

4.3                         Cr Hugh Nguyen – Recognising and Flying the Vietnamese Co Vang Flag  205

Item  5_____ Late Reports (to be circulated under separate cover) 209

5.1                         Warrant of Payments  209

5.2                         Audited Financial Statements for the period ended June 2015  209

5.3                         Annual Report 2014/15  209

5.4                         Parking Local Law – Delegation of Authority  209

5.5                         Motion on Notice – Cr Hugh Nguyen – Lack of Local Specialist Stroke Trauma and Mental Health Rehabilitative Service Availability  209

Item  6_____ Public Question Time_ 209

Item  7_____ Confidential_ 209

7.1                         Request for Memorial Plaque at Deeside Park, Butler  209

7.2                         City of Wanneroo Mobile Beach Safety Patrol – 2015/16 Summer Season  209

Item  8_____ Date of Next Meeting_ 210

Item  9_____ Closure_ 210

 


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

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    Draft Amended State Planning Policy 2.5: Land Use Planning in Rural Areas

File Ref:                                              4033 – 15/531713

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       1         

 

Issue

To consider a submission on proposed amendments to State Planning Policy (SPP) 2.5: Land Use Planning in Rural Areas.

 

Background

The Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) adopted its current SPP 2.5 in May 2012.  Its aim was to support both rural and rural living land uses to cater for future needs, acknowledging rural land resources are becoming increasingly contested, leading to increased competition and conflict.

Detail

The WAPC has now prepared a new SPP 2.5, which is to be called SPP 2.5: Rural Planning Policy.  Its aim is similar to that of current SPP 2.5, except that it places greater emphasis on supporting rural land uses (rather than rural living), and therefore addresses planning for ‘animal premises’ and rural land use buffer issues in greater detail.

 

This new SPP 2.5 will supersede the current SPP 2.5, and will also replace SPP 4.3: Poultry Farms Policy. 

 

Attachment 1 describes the main proposed changes to current SPP 2.5.

Consultation

The WAPC is advertising the proposed new SPP 2.5 for public comment, with the comment period concluding on 19 January 2016. In order to meet the deadline for submissions it is necessary for Council to consider this matter at its 8 December 2015 Meeting.

Comment

In releasing the draft revised SPP, the WAPC advised that it is mostly unchanged from the current SPP 2.5.  However, it does include a number of proposed changes which are considered to be important for this City, due to their implications for the following matters:

 

·    How existing rural uses in areas zoned Urban Deferred should be addressed.  (Important for Inghams, Wanneroo);

·    How proposals for new and expanded rural uses in areas proposed for future urban development should be addressed.  (Important for East Wanneroo, including Crown Mushrooms);

·    Rezoning to Urban Deferred of rural areas affected by buffers to rural uses; (East Wanneroo)

·    Identification of rural uses considered of ‘State significance’ and ‘priority agricultural land’ (Important for Carabooda/Nowergup, and for how agricultural uses in East Wanneroo being displaced by new urban development are to be compensated for; and

·    How basic raw material extraction should be addressed.)

 

Part 1 of Attachment 1 details Administration’s comments on the main proposed changes to current SPP 2.5, and includes recommendations on the proposed changes to be made to WAPC in a submission.

 

Part 2 of Attachment 1 includes further comments of a more detailed nature, which are also recommended for inclusion in the Council submission.

 

The main issues proposed to be addressed in the recommended submission are:

 

1.       Support for the new SPP dealing with rural uses on Urban and Urban Deferred zoned land (and not just rural zoned land as under the current SPP) so that it can also be applied to issues such as Inghams (Wanneroo).

 

2.       Opposition to the new SPP not applying to extraction of basic raw materials in the Perth-Peel region.

 

3.       The need for clarity about how it will be determined whether established rural land uses are of State significance, and who will determine this.  (The draft SPP defines ‘State’ significance as: “A land use, area or issue that is considered to be of significance to the State of Western Australia by virtue of any or all of the economic, social, cultural or environmental values for that land use, area or issue.”

 

4.       The need for acknowledgement that where animal premises are impeding urban development, then the aim should be for them to eventually be relocated, and in some cases this may be of State and/or regional significance, necessitating a whole-of-government approach to implement relocation strategies.

          (The draft SPP defines ‘animal premises’ as: “An umbrella term which covers the following rural land uses: abattoirs, animal husbandry – intensive (including poultry farms and piggeries), rendering plants and sale yards.  Does not include animal establishment, catteries or kennels.”

 

5.       Need for the SPP to state new animal premises should not be located in proposed urban areas.

 

6.       Need for the SPP to state that expansion to animal premises will only be supported if such expansion will not make it more difficult to relocate the premises, where such premises may currently be impeding future urban development.

 

7.       Need for policy measures dealing with proposed sensitive land uses in Urban and Urban Deferred zoned areas (and not just rural zoned areas) which may be affected by a rural land use.

 

          (The draft SPP defines ‘sensitive land uses’ as: “Land uses that are residential or institutional in nature, where people live or regularly spend extended periods of time.  These include dwellings, short-stay accommodation, schools, hospitals and childcare centres, and generally excludes commercial or industrial premises.”)

 

8.       The need for the final Perth-Peel @ 3.5 Million Strategy and the final North-West Sub-regional Structure Plan to provide information on primary production sites of State significance and priority agricultural land, which draft SPP 2.5 proposes for strategic plans of these types.  (The draft SPP defines ‘priority agricultural land’ as: “Land of State, regional or local significance for food production purposes, due to its collaborative advantage in terms of soils, climate, water (rain or irrigation) and access to services.  Priority agricultural land is derived from High Quality Agricultural Land data that has been subject to consultation and refinement, and has removed land required for existing and future urban/development areas, public use areas and land required for environmental purposes”.)

 

          Further, that the State Government needs to develop a clear strategy for how it intends to replace the agricultural areas which are important for supply of fresh local produce, but are being lost to urban expansion.

 

9.       Buffer areas to rural uses need to be able to be zoned Urban Deferred, and not necessarily left zoned Rural. This is where ‘sensitive zones’ are proposed for buffer areas.  (The Draft SPP defines ‘sensitive zone’ as: “An umbrella term that covers land use zones that specifically provide for development of sensitive land uses.  These include urban, urban development, residential, rural living and community purpose zones, and proposals for the lifting of urban deferment.”)

Statutory Compliance

If the City wishes to make a submission on the draft amended SPP to WAPC, it must do so in writing, prior to 19 January 2016.

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.

4.1    Listening and Leading - Our community actively participates in forums and events to discuss and inform the local decision-making.

 

Risk Management Considerations

The above risks relating to the issue contained within this report have 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.

 

Risk Title

Risk Rating

Economic Growth

Moderate

Accountability

Action Planning Option

Director Planning and Sustainability

Manage

The specific risk referred to above relates to the draft SPP’s proposals which could make it more difficult to see the eventual relocation of Inghams, Wanneroo.  The proposed submission to WAPC will play a role in managing this risk by making DOP and WAPC aware of the issue of concern in considering the proposed final form of the SPP.

Policy Implications

The draft SPP 2.5 conflicts with the City’s Local Planning Policy (LPP) 4.9: Subdivision of Rural Zoned Land.  The SPP provides that subdivision of rural land will only be permitted in exceptional circumstances (as set out in WAPC Development Control Policy 3.4 – Subdivision of rural land), while LPP 4.9 provides that the City will support rural subdivision applications, mainly on the basis of whether minimum lot size criteria is met.

 

This SPP provision actually already exists in the current SPP, so the conflict with LPP 4.9 has existed for some time.  The Department of Planning (DoP) has also previously made it clear that it has no regard for LPP 4.9 when assessing rural subdivision applications.

 

Given the above, it is intended to undertake a comprehensive review of LPP 4.9 in the near future.  In association with this, it is also intended to review LPP 3.7: Interim Local Rural Strategy, particularly in the light of the proposed Landscape Enhancement zoning of the western parts of Carabooda and Nowergup (through Amendment No. 121 to District Planning Scheme No. 2), and investigations now being undertaken of the future use of the strip of rural land between Wanneroo Road and Lake Neerabup.

 

The amended draft SPP 2.5 also has implications for LPP 5.3: East Wanneroo, particularly in regard to rezoning of buffer areas, and this is subject to current consideration by City and DoP officers dealing with the East Wanneroo project.

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council ENDORSES the comments and recommendations made in Attachment 1 of this Report and SUBMITS this as its submission to the Western Australian Planning Commission on draft State Planning Policy 2.5: Rural Planning Policy.

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Submission on Draft Amended SPP 2.5  Rural Planning Policy

15/552718

Minuted

 

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 01 December, 2015                           5

Draft

Town Planning Schemes & Structure Plans

3.2    Amendment No. 139 to District Planning Scheme No. 2

File Ref:                                              11167 – 15/161437

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       4         

 

Issue

To consider a request to amend District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2) by rezoning Lots 16, 17 and 923 Grayswood Court, Lot 924, 925 & 926 Warradale Terrace and Lot 927 Kevo Place, Landsdale from Special Residential to Residential with a density coding of R40.

 

Applicant

Burgess Design Group

Owner

Colin Gibson, Lynne Amelia Nolan, Peter & Kaye Huisman, Peter Anthony & Teresa Marie Stokoe, Michael & Dorla Francis, Yemmy Effendi, Traian & Viorcia Stiube

Location

Lots 16, 17 and 923 Grayswood Court, Lot 924, 925 & 926 Warradale Terrace and Lot 927 Kevo Place, Landsdale

Site Area

5,000m2 (Lot 16), 5003m2 (Lot 17), 5001m2 (Lot 923), 5003m2 (Lot 924), 5005m2 (Lot 925), 5003m2 (Lot 926), 5003m2 (Lot 927)

MRS Zoning

Urban

DPS 2 Zoning

Special Residential

ASP 7 Zoning

Special Residential

 

 

Background

On 13 November 2013, Burgess Design Group submitted proposed Amendment No. 139 to the City on behalf of the landowners of the subject land, to amend DPS 2 by rezoning Lots 16, 17 & 923 Grayswood Court, Lot 924, 925 & 926 Warradale Terrace and Lot 927 Kevo Place, Landsdale from Special Residential to Residential with a density coding of R40. Prior to commencing a preliminary review of the proposed Amendment, Administration requested a transport assessment to support the proposal, in accordance with the Western Australian Planning Commissions (WAPC) Transport Assessment Guidelines for Developments.  The transport assessment was submitted on 22 October 2014.

 

Following a preliminary review of the proposal, Administration requested that the applicant provide a concept plan to demonstrate how the land could be developed if it were to be rezoned to Residential R40. A review of this concept plan raised concerns about the impact of developing the land on the surrounding area which resulted in discussions between Administration and the applicant over several months about the most appropriate density for development.

 

A location plan is provided as Attachment 1.


 

Detail

Site

The subject land is bounded by Kevo Place to the north, Warradale Terrace to the west, Rockdale Pass and Grayswood Court to the south and the draft East Wanneroo Cell 9 Structure Plan No. 57 (LSP 57) area to the east (subject land directly abuts residential lots fronting Raeside Drive within the LSP 57 area).  The subject land consists of 7 individual lots ranging between 5,000m2 to 5,005m2 which are occupied by residential dwellings, with the exception of Lot 926 which remains vacant.  The combined area of the subject land is approximately 3.5 hectares.

Proposal

The proposal seeks to amend DPS 2 by:

 

1.       rezoning Lots 16, 17 & 923 Grayswood Court, Lot 924, 925 & 926 Warradale Terrace and Lot 927 Kevo Place, Landsdale from Special Residential to Residential;

2.       applying an R40 density coding over the land;

3.       removing Special Residential 3 (SRES 3) from Schedule 14; and

4.       modifying the scheme map accordingly.

 

Attachment 2 contains the Amendment No. 139 plan showing the proposed zoning and coding.

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

 

1.       The subject land was zoned Special Residential in 2004 as it adjoined a buffer area around the Perth International Telecommunications Centre located to the east of the subject land.  This buffer has since been removed through Amendment No. 25 to the DPS 2 which rezoned this buffer area from General Rural to Urban Development. Therefore the Special Residential zoning is no longer necessary.

 

2.       The surrounding land is zoned Residential with a density coding of R20.  A density code of R40 will offer a greater variety in density.

 

3.       The Amendment proposal is consistent with Directions 2031 which promotes infill residential development and increases the population catchment near existing infrastructure such as schools and shopping centres.

 

4.       The Amendment proposal is consistent with the City's Local Planning Policy 3.1: Local Housing Strategy Implementation as the subject land is:

 

a.       within 250 metres of high frequency bus routes;

b.       within 800 metres of the Landsdale Neighbourhood Centre;

c.       directly adjacent to a district public open space (Warradale Park) and within walking distance to neighbourhood public open space; and

d.       close to existing major arterial routes, educational institutions and community facilities.

Consultation

Under the provisions of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 (the Regulations) the amendment is considered to be complex and therefore the approval of the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) is required before the amendment can be advertised. If the approval of the WAPC is obtained, Amendment No. 139 will be required to be advertised for public comment for a period of 60 days. Amendment No. 139 will also be referred to the EPA for their consideration as to whether the proposal requires further environmental assessment. Advertising is to occur in the following manner, consistent with the requirements of the Regulations:

 

·        Placement of an advertisement in a local newspaper;

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

·        Display notice of the proposal in Council offices;

·        Display on the City’s website; 

·        Referral in writing to affected persons/agencies; and

·        Any other manner as directed by the WAPC.

Comment

The following comments can be made on the proposal.

 

Current zoning of the land

 

The land is presently zoned Special Residential under DPS 2 and ASP 7 and has a minimum lot size requirement of 5,000m2.  This minimum lot size of 5,000m2 was imposed on the due to a requirement from Telstra to provide a buffer around the Perth International Telecommunications Centre (PITC) which is situated to the east of the subject land. The requirement for this buffer has now been removed and land to the east of the subject land (within Cell 9) has already been developed at an R20 density. 

 

Development potential of the land

 

The area surrounding the subject land is largely established and has been developed at an R20 density. On numerous occasions Administration has raised the issue that an R20 density may be more appropriate with the applicant and this has been the subject of discussions for several months. The applicant contends that the R40 density is preferable and that with proper planning controls a good urban design outcome can be achieved.

 

The table below outlines the development potential of the land based on the existing Special Residential zoning and for Residential R20 and R40.

 

 

Existing Special Residential zone

R20

(surrounding area)

R40

(proposed)

Lot size

Minimum 5,000m2

Minimum 350m2

Average 450m2

Minimum 180m2

Average 220m2

Min lot frontage

N/A

10m

N/A

Potential No. of dwellings per lot (single or grouped)

1 dwelling

8 dwellings

(approximate)

14 – 18 dwellings

(approximate)

Multiple dwellings

N/A

8 multiple dwellings

(approximate)

Maximum plot ratio 0.6

(minimum multiple dwelling plot ratio of 40m2)

 

The applicant has advised that it is intended for each landowner to develop their land individually to suit their own requirements and provided two concept plans to demonstrate how this could occur at an R40 density. 

Attachment 3 provides a concept plan depicting the possible outcome if each landowner elects to demolish the existing dwellings and develop their lot in its entirety.  Attachment 4 provides a concept plan which depicts the possible outcome if landowners elect to partially develop their lot and retain the existing dwelling.

 

The concern with each landowner developing their lot at their own discretion is that the development of the entire land parcel (all seven lots) is unlikely to occur simultaneously and is more likely to be staged to suit each landowner’s requirements. This will mean that it could take a number of years for the entire land parcel to be developed, with some lots possibly being redeveloped in their entirety and others being partially redeveloped and others not at all. This manner of development is considered ad-hoc and could have a significant impact on the streetscape and amenity of the area.  Administration considers that development of the land at a higher density should be coordinated to ensure an integrated planning outcome is achieved.  The concept plan illustrating the possible outcome if each lot is developed in full depicts pedestrian connections running north-south through the seven subject lots, and vehicle movements limited to within each individual lot only. Allowing individual landowners to develop at their own pace will mean there will be no pedestrian connectivity through the lots until all lots have been fully developed, which could take a number of years.

 

Administration considers that the best planning outcome will be achieved by requiring the development of the land to be coordinated across the entire land parcel rather than limiting the development of each individual lot to the discretion and motivation of individual owners. A coordinated development would require all landowners to work together so the land parcel can be developed as one whole development site instead of seven individual sites.  This approach would provide a greater opportunity to effectively integrate the subject land with the surrounding residential area, promote better vehicle connectivity through the land and allow continuity of the existing streetscape along Warradale Terrace and other road frontages. It is acknowledged that this scenario is unlikely to supported by the landowners of the subject lots as it will require all landowners to work together, however, this scenario is considered to provide the best planning outcome for the locality.

 

The surrounding land is predominantly coded and has been developed to an R20 density and therefore it would appear logical for the subject land to be coded as such. Development of the land at an R20 density would be less intensive than R40 (approximately eight dwellings per lot as opposed to between 14 to 18 dwellings at an R40 density) If the applicant is steadfast in wanting to allow each landowner to develop at their own pace rather than coordinated with other landowners, Administration would contend that an R20 density is more appropriate. Provisions could be inserted into the East Wanneroo Cell 5 Agreed Structure Plan No. 7 (ASP 7) to require Local Development Plans to be submitted as a condition of subdivision, to address urban design matters such as orientation of dwellings, vehicle access for each lot and ultimate connectivity through the overall land parcel. An amendment to ASP 7 will also be required to rezone the land under the structure plan and these issues could be addressed through this process.

 

The applicant contends that the contours of the land will require more significant and visible retaining at an R20 density code than would be required for an R40 density code.  Administration accepts that the contours of the land vary significantly from east to west (by approximately 9 metres), however, also notes that the contours of the subject land are no more significant than those of the surrounding R20 area.  Therefore, development of the subject land at R20 would present a similar outcome in terms of retaining to the already established area.

 

Development of the land at an R20 density is considered reasonable given the fact that there is no longer a valid reason for the lots to retain the minimum 5,000m2 lot size requirement and the surrounding land has been developed at this density. 


 

Council may be inclined to support Amendment No. 139 subject to the applicant modifying the density from R40 to R20, acknowledging that detailed design issues for each lot could be addressed through an amendment to ASP 7.  Administration does consider that an R40 density could be appropriate in this location, however, does not agree that such a density should be supported in the absence of an integrated approach to the development of the land. 

 

Urban Development zone

 

An alternative option which may also assist in achieving a desirable planning outcome is to rezone the land to Urban Development under DPS 2.  This would require a new structure plan to be prepared for the land, at which stage more detailed consideration could be given to an appropriate density and design outcome.  The structure plan could also address the proposed staging of subdivision and development across the subject land. Administration has raised this option with the applicant, however, this discussion did not occur until recently. Therefore, the applicant did not have sufficient time to give full consideration to this option in consultation with all of the landowners. Accordingly, Administration has recommended that Council advise the applicant that it may consider a proposal to rezone the land to Urban Development so that this option can be fully explored.

 

Local Planning Policy 3.1: Local Housing Strategy Implementation

 

The subject land is not within the six housing precincts identified by Local Planning Policy 3.1: Local Housing Strategy Implementation (LPP 3.1).  Section 9.1 of LPP 3.1 requires that where applications are made seeking an increase in the density coding of land which is outside the identified housing precincts, the applicant is to demonstrate the following:

 

i.      How the subject land meets the criteria upon which the existing precincts are based; and

ii.     How the proposal generally supports the objectives and recommendations of the Local Housing Strategy and Smart Growth Strategy.

 

The above matters are discussed below:

 

i.      The criteria upon which the existing precincts are based.

 

No.

Criterion Detail

Policy Application

Comment

1.

Easy access/close proximity to retail and employment centres

R40 between 400 metres and 800 metres of a Neighbourhood Centre

The subject land is approximately 700 metres from the Landsdale Neighbourhood Centre.

2.

Easy access/close proximity to public transport with priority towards rail nodes and bus interchange.

R40 within 250 metres of main bus route.

The subject land is located directly adjacent to a bus stop on Warradale Avenue which is serviced by 7 separate bus services.

3.

Easy access/close to areas of high amenity including public open space and recreational facilities.

R40 within 250 metres of district public open space.

The subject land is directly adjacent to district public open space (Warradale Park) and within walking distance to local open space.


 

4.

Easy access/close proximity to major arterial routes, educational institutions and community facilities.

This criterion is not applied spatially but rather the area concerned should be assessed in general terms regarding the adequacy of the arterial routes, educational institutions and community facilities serving the area to cope with increased population and traffic arising from increased densities.

The subject land is located approximately 200 metres from Landsdale Primary School, approximately 150 metres from the Warradale Community Centre and has easy access to and is within close proximity to major arterial routes (Gnangara Road).

ii.    The proposal to rezone the subject land to Residential with a density coding of R40 where the average lot size is 220m2 in area generally satisfies the following objectives of the City's Housing Strategy:

 

·    To ensure that an adequate supply of affordable housing is provided, particularly to first home buyers.  The surrounding area in Landsdale is predominately coded R20.  A proposed R40 coding is likely to result in more affordable housing due to smaller lot sizes; and

·    Promote appropriate forms of housing close to existing and proposed community facilities and services to enable more efficient and effective use of those facilities and services.

The proposal also generally satisfies the following Smart Growth Strategy principles:

 

·    Promoting a range of lot sizes to cater for different lifestyle choices; and 

·    Promoting a range of housing types in appropriate locations to meet current and future market demands.  The proposal location is considered suitable for an R40 development.

Type of amendment

 

Administration is of the view that Amendment No. 139 to DPS 2 should be classified as a complex amendment pursuant to Regulation 34 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, as it relates to development that is of a scale, or will have an impact, that is significant relative to development in the locality.

 

Conclusion

 

Administration acknowledges that proposed Amendment No. 139 generally satisfies the requirements of LPP 3.1 to allow the land to be developed at a density of R40.  There are concerns, however, about the staging of development given the applicant has clearly stated it is intended that each landowner will develop to their own requirements.  Administration considers that this will not provide the best planning outcome for the locality, and therefore does not support Amendment No. 139 proceeding to advertising in its current form.

Administration does not support individual development of each lot and considers that an integrated planning approach to the whole land parcel would deliver a better planning outcome for the locality.

Statutory Compliance

The scheme amendment will follow the statutory process outlined in the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.  Regulation 37 (1) requires Council to resolve to do one of the following:

 

a)   To proceed to advertise the amendment to the local planning scheme without modification; or

b)   To proceed to advertise the amendment to the local planning scheme with modifications; or

c)   Not to proceed to advertise the amendment to the local planning scheme.

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

There are no existing Strategic or Corporate risks within the City's existing risk registers which relates to the issues contained in this report.

Policy Implications

This proposal has been assessed under the provisions of the City’s District Planning Scheme No. 2.

Financial Implications

If the land was to be rezoned to Residential R20 or R40 this would generate additional rating income for the City.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       RESOLVES that Amendment No. 139 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 to rezone Lots 16, 17 & 923 Grayswood Court, Lots 924, 925 & 926 Warradale Terrace and Lot 927 Kevo Place, Landsdale from Special Residential to Residential with a density of R40 is a complex amendment pursuant to Regulation 34 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 as it relates to development that is of a scale, or will have an impact, that is significant relative to development in the locality;


 

2.       Pursuant to Regulation 37(1)(c) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 DOES NOT PROCEED to advertise Amendment No. 139 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 to rezone Lots 16, 17 & 923 Grayswood Court, Lots 924, 925 & 926 Warradale Terrace and Lot 927 Kevo Place, Landsdale from Special Residential to Residential with a density of R40 as the proposal does not demonstrate that an integrated planning outcome can be achieved;

3.       FORWARDS a copy of this resolution to the Western Australian Planning Commission; and

4.       ADVISES the applicant that it may be willing to consider an application to amend District Planning Scheme No. 2 to either:

a)      rezone Lots 16, 17 & 923 Grayswood Court, Lots 924, 925 & 926 Warradale Terrace and Lot 927 Kevo Place, Landsdale from Special Residential to Residential (R20 or R40) where the proposal demonstrates an integrated planning outcome of the whole Amendment No. 139 area with the surrounding area that is not limited by the development requirements of individual landowners;

b)      rezone Lots 16, 17 & 923 Grayswood Court, Lots 924, 925 & 926 Warradale Terrace and Lot 927 Kevo Place, Landsdale from Special Residential to Urban Development.

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Location Plan

14/324160

 

2.

Existing and proposed zoning

14/324162

 

3.

Concept Plan - total redevelopment

15/548055

 

4.

Concept Plan - Partial redevelopment

15/534676

 

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 01 December, 2015                         13

Draft

3.3    Amendment No. 149 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 - Lots  9164 and 9176 Flynn Drive, Banksia Grove

File Ref:                                              22761 – 15/495848

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       10         

 

Issue

To consider a request to amend District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2) by rezoning Lot 9164 and a portion of Lot 9176 Flynn Drive, Banksia Grove (amendment area) from Special Residential Zone No. 2 (SR 2) to Urban Development Zone and amending Schedule 14 of DPS 2 to delete the amendment area from SR 2.

 

Applicant

CLE Town Planning & Design

Owner

Housing Authority

Location

Lot 9164 and a portion of Lot 9176 Flynn Drive, Banksia Grove

Site Area

8.2262 hectares

MRS Zoning

Urban

DPS 2 Zoning

Special Residential

 

 

Background

In 1996, Town Planning Scheme No. 1 was amended to rezone the land to the east and south of the Carramar Special Rural Zone (CSRZ) from Rural to Residential Development and SR 2. The minimum lot size in SR 2 is 5,000m2. SR 2 extending from Wanneroo Road and along the eastern and southern boundary of CSRZ was proposed as a transition zone between CSRZ and the Residential Development Zone. Subsequently DPS 2 was amended to rezone the Residential Development Zone to Urban Development Zone to facilitate the preparation of structure plans. Attachment 1 contains an extract of the DPS 2 zoning map depicting SR 2, which also includes the Special Residential lots along the eastern boundary of the locality of Banksia Grove.

 

In June 2008, the City received a request from John Chapman Town Planning Consultant (representing Peet & Co) and Chappell Lambert Everett Town Planners (representing Department of Housing) to initiate Amendment No. 91 to DPS 2 to reduce the minimum lot size from 5,000 to 2,000m2 in the undeveloped part of SR 2 located along the southern and eastern boundaries of CSRZ.

 

Council at its meeting of 2 June 2009 resolved to prepare Amendment No. 91 pursuant to section 75 of the Planning and Development Act 2005 (PS02-06/09). Attachment 2 contains an extract of DPS 2 depicting the subject area as considered by Council. The City received advice from the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) that the proposed amendment was acceptable. The amendment was advertised for a period of 42 days and the City received 39 submissions. No submission was received from the residents of CSRZ.

 

Following the public comment period, however, at the request of the applicants, Council at its meeting of 4 May 2010 resolved to not proceed with the amendment for the following reason (Item PS01-05/10):

 


 

The residential lots on Golf Links Drive were marketed and sold by Peet and Co on the basis that the opposite Special Residential zone would be subdivided into at least ‘one-acre’ (approximately 4,000m2) lots and that those lots would be predominantly bushland lots.  For this reason, the purchasers of the residential lots claim to have paid around 50% more than the other lots.

 

Although not proceeding with Amendment No. 91 did not affect the SR 2 along the eastern boundary of CSRZ, the applicants representing the Department of Housing, also requested withdrawal of the amendment with an intention to consider it at a later stage.

 

On 16 April 2015, CLE Town Planning and Design, on behalf of Banksia Grove Nominees (acting on behalf the Department of Housing), submitted Amendment No. 149 to DPS 2 to rezone the amendment area from SR 2 to Urban Development and to amend Schedule 14 of DPS 2 by deleting the amendment area from SR 2.

 

The amendment area forms part of Banksia Grove Agreed Structure Plan No. 21A (ASP 21A).

Detail

Site

An aerial photograph of the amendment area is provided as Attachment 3. The site is approximately 8.63 hectares in area and is subject to WAPC subdivision approvals 146580 dated 14 February 2013 (Attachment 4) and 147352 dated 29 January 2014 (Attachment 5) to create 5,000m2 lots as per the DPS 2 provisions. As the subdivisional lots cannot gain access from Pinjar Road, which is an Other Regional Roads Reserve under the Western Australian Planning Commission’s Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS) and DPS 2, the subdivision proposed a road interface between the CSRZ and the subdivisional lots. The interface road named as Moort Rise has not yet been fully constructed by the developer excepting for the northern portion constructed through a separate subdivision approval.

 

The amendment area is undeveloped and slopes gently towards the west, and is predominantly vegetated in low woodland with an understorey of open heath. The applicant has advised that on review of ASP 21A, the amendment area is not known to have any significant vegetation requiring retention.

Proposal

In Schedule 14 of DPS 2, SR 2 is currently described as Swan Location 2579, Lots 1 and 2 Flynn Drive, Neerabup. Following subdivision of SR 2 land over a period of time, SR 2 can be now described as,

·     Lots 2111 – 2115 Carramar Road, Carramar,

·     Lots 3186-3193 Golf Links Drive, Carramar,

·     Lots 5001 – 5006 Peridot Turn, Banksia Grove,

·     Lots 70 – 78 Turquoise Loop,

·     Lots 398 – 401 Harbour Elbow, Banksia Grove, and

·     Lots 9164 and 9176 Flynn Drive, Banksia Grove.

The proposal seeks to amend DPS 2 by:

 

1.       Rezoning Lot 9164 and a portion of Lot 9176 Flynn Drive, Banksia Grove from Special Residential to Urban Development and amending the scheme maps accordingly; and

2.       Modifying the description of SR 2 in Schedule 14 – Special Residential Provisions by excluding the amendment area.

 

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

 

1.      The proposed rezoning of the land to Urban Development under DPS 2 is consistent with the Urban zoning under MRS; and

 

2.     As per the subdivision approvals for the amendment area, a 14-metre wide road reserve will be proposed along the boundary with CSRZ. Therefore the residential lots created by the subdivision in effect may not constitute a transition zone. The remaining portion of Lot 9176 would be directly backing onto CSRZ and remain as a transition zone, and therefore it is not proposed to be excluded from SR 2.

Attachment 6 contains the scheme amendment map showing the existing and proposed zoning of SR 2.

Consultation

Under the provisions of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 (the Regulations) the amendment is considered to be a standard amendment and therefore it will be required to be advertised for public comment for a period of 42 days. Subject to the EPA approval the scheme amendment will be advertised.  Advertising is to occur in the following manner, consistent with the requirements of the Regulations:

 

·        Placement of an advertisement in a local newspaper;

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

·        Display notice of the proposal in Council offices;

·        Display on the City’s website;  and

·        Writing to the affected persons and agencies.

Comment

Pre-consultation with adjoining landowners by applicant

 

The applicant has held pre-consultation discussions with adjoining landowners of CSRZ to inform them of the proposed scheme amendment and a subdivision concept plan.  A copy of the subdivision concept plan is provided as Attachment 7.

 

The applicant has advised the City that the landowners were generally supportive of the proposal with the following points raised:

 

·        Appropriate rear boundary fence to be constructed in consultation with the adjoining CSRZ landowners at the subdivision stage along Moort Rise at the developer’s cost; and

 

·        Traffic control measures on Moort Drive to minimise possible hooning.

 

The pre-consultation carried out by the proponent was informal and undertaken to identify any major concerns or issues held by those directly adjoining landowners.  The proposal will be put through a statutory consultation process which will allow these landowners and others in CSRZ to make a formal written submission on the amendment.  These formal submissions will be considered by Administration as part of its assessment of the amendment proposal. 

 


 

Building Protection Zone and vegetation retention

 

As per the requirement of the above-mentioned subdivision approvals, the developer has prepared fire management plans (FMP) for both approvals. One of them relating to subdivision approval 146580 was approved by the City’s Chief Fire Officer in December 2012. Attachment 8 contains a combined FMP for the entire amendment area delineating a 20-metre wide Building Protection Zone (BPZ) around the 25x25 metre building envelopes. The BPZ covers the entire lot excepting for a vegetation strip along Pinjar Road.

 

The proponent has provided an updated FMP to support the subdivision concept plan associated with the amendment proposal. Attachment 9 contains a map depicting the BPZ for the 1,500m2 lots. These lots are 23 metres wide and therefore the 20-metre wide BPZ overlaps into the adjoining lots. This FMP also shows the vegetation strip along Pinjar Road.

 

BPZ is a low fuel area immediately surrounding the buildings. Driveways, lawn or landscaped area including deciduous trees can form part of BPZ. Creating a BPZ will ensure vegetation and fuels within close proximity to buildings are managed to reduce predicted radiant heat flux levels and improve the survival of buildings in the event of a fire.

 

The level of retained vegetation east and west of the building envelopes (between the proposed 1500m² and the approved 5000m² lot) is the same. There may be some opportunity to retain some additional vegetation north and south of the building envelopes in the 5000m² lot scenario as compared with the 1500m². 

 

Administration’s recommendations

 

Considering the above matters, Administration supports the proposed amendment for the following reasons:

 

·          The 14-metre wide Moort Rise will act as an interface between the CSRZ and the residential lots when developed; and

 

·          The CSRZ residents immediately adjoining the amendment area are generally supportive of the amendment proposal provided the developer constructs an appropriate fence along the rear boundary of their lots and provides suitable traffic management devices to address any possible hooning.

 

Amendment to ASP 21A

 

Based on the DPS 2 amendment, the applicant proposes to amend ASP 21A by rezoning the amendment area from Special Residential Zone to Residential Zone with a density coding of R10. Under the provisions of the WAPC’s Residential Design Codes, the minimum and average lot sizes in R10 area are 875 and 1,000m2 respectively. However, the applicant has proposed 1,500m2 lots as shown in the subdivision concept plan (Attachment 7) and appropriate statutory provision 10.7.1 to that effect in the structure plan amendment as indicated in Attachment 10.

 

Under the provisions of the Regulations local government must advertise an amendment to a structure plan within 28 days of receiving it. In this instance it is considered appropriate to advertise it when the scheme amendment is advertised. This will provide an opportunity to the residents to comment on both proposals at the same time.

 


 

Conclusion

 

CLE Town Planning and Design, on behalf of Banksia Grove Nominees (acting on behalf of the landowner), submitted Amendment No. 149 to DPS 2 in regard to SR 2 by deleting the amendment area from SR 2 and to rezone it as Urban Development. It is recommended that the amendment be advertised for a period of 42 days should the EPA advise that an assessment is not required.

 

Statutory Compliance

 

Under the provisions of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 (the Regulations), the amendment is considered to be standard as it is consistent with MRS, which zones the amendment area as Urban. Therefore as per the provisions of the Regulations the amendment will require to be advertised for a period of 42 days.

 

In the event Council does not support this proposal, there is no right of appeal against the decision not to initiate a scheme amendment, however, Section 76 of the Planning and Development Act 2005 entitles a proponent for a scheme amendment to request the Minister for Planning to review the local government’s decision.  In determining what (if any) further action to be taken, the Minister must consider whether the local government should have initiated the scheme amendment.

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

There are no existing Strategic or Corporate risks within the City's existing risk registers which relates to the issues contained in this report.

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       Pursuant to Section 75 of the Planning and Development Act 2005 PREPARES Amendment No. 149 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 to:      

a)      Rezone Lot 9164 and portion of Lot 9176 Flynn Drive, Banksia Grove from Special Residential to Urban Development and amend the scheme map accordingly as shown on Attachment 6 to this report; and

b)      Replace the ‘Special Residential Zone No.2’ provisions of Schedule 14  - Special Residential Provisions with the following table:

 

NO

 

DESCRIPTION OF LOCALITY

SPECIAL PROVISIONS

SRes2            2

 

(formerly SRP No. 3 under TPS1)

Lots 2111 – 2115 Carramar Road,

Lots 3186 – 3193 Golf Links Drive, Carramar,

Lot 9164 and portion of Lot 9176 Flynn Drive, Banksia Grove,

Lots 5001 – 5006 Peridot Turn, Banksia Grove,

Lots 70 – 78 Turquoise Loop, Banksia Grove, and

Lots 398 – 401 Harbour Elbow, Banksia Grove.

1)  Subdivision is restricted to a minimum lot size of 5000m² in accordance with the Development Guide Plans for this zone and that all development shall be contained within the building envelopes as specified on these plans.

 

 

2.       RESOLVES, pursuant to the Regulation 35(2) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 (the Regulations), that Amendment No. 149 of the District Planning Scheme No. 2 is a standard amendment pursuant to Regulation 34(c) of the Regulations as it proposes to rezone the amendment area to Urban Development to be consistent with the Metropolitan Region Scheme wherein the amendment area is zoned Urban;

 

3.       Pursuant to Section 81 of the Planning and Development Act 2005, REFERS Amendment No. 149 of the District Planning Scheme No. 2  to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA); and

 

4.       Subject to EPA approval ADVERTISES Amendment No. 149 of the District Planning Scheme No. 2 pursuant to Regulation 47 of the Regulations for a period of 42 days.

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1 - Amendment 149

15/548178

 

2.

Attachment 2 - Amendment No. 149

15/545811

 

3.

Attachment 3 - Aerial Plan

15/439026

 

4.

Attachment 4 - Amendment No. 149

15/535627

 

5.

Attachment 5 - Amendment No. 149

15/535642

 

6.

Attachment 6- DPS 2 Amendment

15/433048

Minuted

7.

Attachment 7 - Subdivision Concept Plan

15/438980

 

8.

Attachment 8 - Amendment 149

15/536575

 

9.

Attachment 9- Amendment 149

15/536576

 

10.

Attachment 10 - Amendment 149

15/552445

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 01 December, 2015                         19

Draft

3.4    Initiation of Amendment No. 150 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 - Normalising the Zoning of the Drovers Place Precinct

File Ref:                                              21831 – 15/295839

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       4         

 

Issue

For Council to initiate Amendment No. 150 to the City of Wanneroo’s District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2) for the purpose of normalising the zonings prescribed in the City’s Drovers Place Precinct Agreed Structure Plan No. 80 (ASP 80).

 

Applicant

City of Wanneroo

Owners

Various

Locations

Lot 100 (25) Drovers Place, Wanneroo

Lot 5 (33) Drovers Place, Wanneroo

Lot 6 (43) Drovers Place, Wanneroo

Lot 12462 (47) Drovers Place, Wanneroo

Lot 7 (53) Drovers Place, Wanneroo

Lot 8 (61) Drovers Place, Wanneroo

Portion Lot 810 (1397) Wanneroo Road, Wanneroo

Lot 811 (1387) Wanneroo Road, Wanneroo

Lot 1 (1369) Wanneroo Road, Wanneroo

Lot 132 (1351) Wanneroo Road, Wanneroo

Lot 11 (1349) Wanneroo Road, Wanneroo

Lot 10 (1327) Wanneroo Road, Wanneroo

Lot 501 (1321) Wanneroo Road, Wanneroo

Lot 2 (1303) Wanneroo Road, Wanneroo

Lot 406 (1297) Wanneroo Road, Wanneroo

MRS Zoning

Urban

DPS 2 Zoning

Urban Development

 

 

Background

The location of the land parcels subject to ASP 80 (and Amendment No. 150 to DPS 2) is outlined in the plan included in Attachment 1. The land subject to the DPS 2 amendment is bounded by Wanneroo Road to the east, Ashley Road to the south, Joondalup Drive to the north and the Yellagonga Regional Park to the west.

 

The preparation of Amendment No. 150 was prompted by a written request Administration received from the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC). In that correspondence, the WAPC requested the City consider initiating an amendment to DPS 2, to normalise the zoning of the ASP 80 area under the local planning scheme (DPS 2). In particular, the WAPC requested that consideration be given to rezoning Lot 810 (1397), Lot 811 (1387), Lot 1 (1369) and Lot 132 (1351) Wanneroo Road, Wanneroo (situated in the ASP 80 Central Precinct) to a Business zone under the DPS 2. Administration agrees with the WAPC’s view (expressed through its request to the City to normalise the zoning) that the numerous amendments to ASP 80 made in recent years have resulted in a complexity of the ASP 80 planning framework that was not intended for this structure plan.

 

Currently, the entire ASP 80 area is zoned ‘Urban Development’ under DPS 2, with ASP 80 prescribing the various zonings for the land to be applied within that structure plan area. ‘Normalising’ the zoning in this context means amending DPS 2 in a way so that the zonings of the land prescribed in ASP 80 become zonings under DPS 2.

 

Administration has previously advised Council of the WAPC’s request to amend DPS 2 in its Council Reports relating to Amendment No. 4 (PS02-11/15) and Amendment No. 5 (PS01-10/15) to ASP 80. When Council considered those ASP 80 amendments, Council was advised through those Reports that Administration was preparing a DPS 2 Amendment, and intended to present a draft document for Council’s consideration once Amendments No. 4 and No. 5 to ASP 80 were finalised. Also, when Council considered adoption of Amendment No. 5 to ASP 80, it resolved (in part) the following:

 

“5.  REQUIRES Administration to submit a report on the proposed amendment to the District Planning Scheme No. 2 to normalise the zoning of the Drovers Place Precinct Agreed Structure Plan No. 80 area under the City’s District Planning Scheme No. 2 once Amendment No. 4 and No. 5 to the Drovers Place Precinct Agreed Structure Plan No. 80 are adopted and certified.”

 

More recently, Administration has received advice from the Department of Planning that the WAPC would prefer the City initiate the DPS 2 amendment in the immediate term, and not wait until Amendment No. 4 and No. 5 to ASP 80 are adopted and certified. So as to not prolong the initiation of this amendment, and to cooperate in good faith with the WAPC on this matter, Administration is now presenting Amendment No. 150 to DPS 2 to Council for initiation – even though the WAPC’s adoption and certification of Amendment No. 4 and No. 5 are still pending.

Detail

Attachment 2 contains the amendment plan showing the existing zoning of the subject land under DPS 2, and the zoning proposed through Amendment No. 150.

 

Amendment No. 150 proposes to rezone the extent of ASP 80, to replicate the zones as prescribed in this structure plan to equivalent zonings under DPS 2 and in a manner consistent with the recommendations resolved by Council regarding Amendments No. 4 and No. 5 to ASP 80. A table outlining the similarities between zonings proposed in the DPS 2 amendment, and the zonings of land under ASP 80 (or as recommended by Council through its resolution Amendments No. 4 and No. 5 to ASP 80) is provided in Attachment 3.

 

Amendment No. 150 also proposes to impose a Special Control Area over the ASP 80 area, and to create the necessary framework to enforce locational-specific requirements through Special Control Area provisions in DPS 2. The locational-specific provisions for the Special Control Area are proposed to be included in a new schedule of DPS 2, and would generally replicate the locational, traffic and environmental requirements that are currently prescribed throughout the ASP 80 text.

 

Amendment No. 5 to ASP 80 proposes to introduce a definition of ‘Costume Hire’ into ASP 80, as it is not defined in Schedule 1 of DPS 2. Although ‘Costume Hire’ is not defined in DPS 2, its permissibility is currently prescribed in the DPS 2 Zoning Table. Amendment No. 150 proposes to remedy this issue, by proposing a ‘Costume Hire’ definition into Schedule 1 of DPS 2 – consistent with what was proposed through Amendment No. 5 to ASP 80. The ‘Costume Hire’ definition proposed in Amendment No. 150 is as follows:

 

Costume Hire : means an area of land or building used for the hire or sale of costumes.


 

Consultation

In accordance with Section 81 of the Planning and Development Act 2005, Amendment No. 150 will need to be referred to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA), to assess the environmental impacts of the proposal and to determine whether any formal environmental assessment is necessary.

 

Subject to no objection being received from the EPA, Amendment No. 150 will be advertised for public comment in accordance with the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 (the Regulations).

 

Regulation 35 (2) of the Regulations require a scheme amendment to be classed as basic, standard or complex by a local government to determine the advertising requirements. Amendment No. 150 is deemed by Administration to be a standard amendment, for reasons as discussed further in the ‘Comment’ section of the Report.

 

Prior to advertising of Amendment No. 150, notification must be provided to the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) of Council’s intention to advertise the amendment as a ‘standard’ amendment in accordance with Regulation 47 (1) of the Regulations. On completion of that notification, advertising is proposed to occur in the following manner for a period of no less than 42 days, consistent with the requirements of 47 (2) to (4) of the Regulations:

·        Advertisement in a local newspaper;

·        Display notice of the proposal in Council offices and on the City’s website;  and

·        Referral in writing to affected persons/agencies.

Comment

Amendment No. 150 proposes changes to the DPS 2 text and map, as outlined in the ‘Detail’ section above.  The comments below expand and further discuss the key matters associated with this amendment proposal:

 

Amendment Type

 

Regulation 34 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 (the Regulations) prescribe three types of amendments to a local planning scheme – basic, complex and standard. Pursuant to Regulation 35 (2), the local government (Council) must make a resolution that:

 

(a)  specifies whether, in the opinion of the local government, the amendment is a complex amendment, a standard amendment or a basic amendment; and

 

(b)  includes an explanation of the reason for the local government forming that opinion.

 

Administration considers Amendment No. 150 to DPS 2 to be a ‘standard amendment’. Pursuant to Regulation 34, Administration considers Amendment No. 150 as an amendment to the scheme so that it is consistent with the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS), and is not considered to align with the criteria applicable for ‘basic’ and ‘complex’ amendments, prescribed in the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.  

 

The MRS zones the ASP 80 area as ‘Urban’, which is a zone compatible of supporting the Residential, Business and Special Use zones proposed for the subject land in Amendment No. 150 to DPS 2.

 

 

 

Application of a Special Control Area

 

With regard to the application of Special Control Area provisions in local planning schemes (such as DPS 2), Administration has received advice from the Department of Planning that:

 

·    The application of a Special Control Area needed to be argued and justified based on site characteristics; and

 

·    The Special Control Area provisions should, where possible, avoid duplication with corresponding provisions outlined in the General Provisions of DPS 2.

 

The City considers the application of a Special Control Area over all lots currently contained in ASP 80 can be justified, as the subject area has the following unique attributes not commonly found on other sites in the City of Wanneroo:

 

·    The proposed Special Control Area is situated on (or abuts) an area of environmental significance – being Yellagonga Regional Park. Much of the site is also situated within a ‘compatible use wetland buffer’ and a ‘high groundwater area’ as currently outlined in ASP 80. It is considered by the City that the standard provisions in DPS 2 are inadequate in maintaining the environmental attributes of the surrounding area. Therefore, the imposition of a Special Control Area is necessary to utilise the existing ASP 80 provisions relating to environmental management;

 

·    Given its location between the Yellagonga Regional Park and arterial roads (Wanneroo Road and Joondalup Drive), vehicular access into the area currently within ASP 80 is limited and constrained. It is considered that special controls for access provision need to be applied – and in particular, requirements for the design and construction of traffic signals at the Wanneroo Road/Clarkson Avenue and Drovers Place/Joondalup Drive intersections; and

 

·    The subject area has fragmented ownership, and provides for a variety of land use activities, both current and planned. This is considered to add to the complexity to the planning of this area, and the need for locational-specific provisions being applied.

 

This amendment has been prepared following a request by the WAPC to ‘normalise’ the zoning of the ASP 80 area. However, the implications of normalising the zoning would result in ASP 80 no longer having effect. The concern with that is this structure plan contains development provisions intended to respond to the site specific attributes of the site. The application of a Special Control Area as proposed in Amendment No. 150 to DPS 2 will allow for the development provisions outlined in ASP 80 to be utilised, and be applied through DPS 2 should ASP 80 cease to have further effect.

 

Key Variances between ASP 80 and Proposed Special Control Area Provisions

 

A detailed discussion on the proposed Special Control Area provisions proposed through Amendment No. 150 is provided in the Amendment’s Explanatory Report, included as Attachment 4. A summary of the key variances between ASP 80 and proposed Special Control Area Provisions are provided for below:

 

Reference to Local Development Plans

 

The Special Control Area provisions proposed for Amendment No. 150 make reference to ‘local development plans’ being approved, prior to further subdivision or development. This reflects the requirements currently prescribed in ASP 80.

 

Local development plans is a term applied in the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, and replaces the term ‘detailed area plan’ that has previously been applied through DPS 2.

 

The change to the term of reference to ‘local development plans’ will not change the ability to implement the provisions of the detailed area plan previously certified for the ASP 80 Central Precinct.

 

Reference to Government Departments

 

The ASP 80 provisions specifically refer to the name of government department or agencies – such as the Department of Environment and Conservation or the Department of Water. However, references to specific government agencies in the Special Control Area provisions proposed for Amendment No. 150 have been minimalised, on the basis that government agencies names and functions are likely to evolve over time, as they have in the past.

 

The proposed Special Control Area provisions will require certain matters to be addressed to the satisfaction of the local government (the City) – rather than to the satisfaction of a government agency or department. The proposed Special Control Area provisions should not inhibit the City’s satisfaction on certain matters being achieved through liaison with the relevant government agencies and departments when required.

 

Submission of Management Plans

 

The provisions of ASP 80 prescribe that the following management plans be provided at the subdivision or development stages:

 

·     Fire Management Plan;

·     Urban Water Management Plan;

·     Dieback Management Plan;

·     Landscaping Plan; and

·     Midge Management Plan.

 

However, noting the submissions received through the advertising of Amendment No. 2 to ASP 80, Administration considers that matters corresponding to the management plans listed above should be addressed prior to the lodgement of a subdivision or development application. Although Council at its 26 May 2015 and 21 July 2015 Meetings resolved not to adopt Amendment No. 2 to ASP 80, Council’s decision was not formed by this issue.

 

The provisions currently imposed in ASP 80 require a local development plan to be certified prior to the submission of an application for subdivision or development, so that a local development plan can be used to facilitate and inform subdivision design and/or development. Administration considers subdivision and development within the proposed Special Control Area would be better informed should the lodgement of a local development plan be accompanied by these management plans, which can be agreed to on certification of a local development plan. 

 

Therefore, the table included in the proposed new schedule of DPS 2 (proposed through Amendment No. 150) outlines the abovementioned management plans be provided on submission of a local development plan. This varies Table E of ASP 80, which prescribes that these management plans be provided at the subdivision or development stages.

 

Changes to Local Development Plan Submission Requirement – Vegetation Surveys

 

Table A (Section 1) of ASP 80 currently prescribes the following as a matter to be included on a detailed area plan prepared for all land parcels in the ASP 80 area:

Detailed site analysis including topography, vegetation, tree survey, view corridors, and microclimate.

 

However, Administration considers it appropriate for a local development plan prepared for all land in the Special Control Area to instead require the following:

 

Detailed site analysis including topography, vegetation, tree survey, view corridors, and microclimate. The vegetation analysis and tree survey shall clearly identify and justify the extent of:

 

i)   Any clearing that is proposed during the subdivision and/or development stages; and

 

ii)  Vegetation that will be retained and managed at the subdivision and development stages.

 

The above was formulated by the City’s Administration as a recommended modification to Amendment No. 2 to ASP 80, when it presented the matter to the City’s 26 May 2015 Council Meeting. Although Amendment No. 2 was not adopted by Council, the decision of Council was not particularly formed by their opinion of this recommended modification.

 

Administration considers that subdivision and development in the Special Control Area would be better informed should this information be demonstrated on a local development plan – lodged prior to subdivision or development.  The extent of vegetation to be retained and removed could then be agreed through the certification of the local development plan, and before further subdivision and development of the subject land.

 

Traffic Infrastructure Upgrades

 

Provisions relating to the design and construction of traffic signals at the Wanneroo Road/Clarkson Avenue and the Joondalup Drive/Drovers Place intersections as resolved by Council in its considerations of Amendment No. 4 and No. 5 to ASP 80 have been included as Special Control Area provisions within proposed Amendment No. 150 of DPS 2.

 

Costume Hire Definition

 

The ‘Costume Hire’ land use definition is currently being sought as a modification to Table C (Section 2) of ASP 80 through that structure plan’s Amendment No. 5. Amendment No. 150 of DPS 2 proposes to incorporate the same land use definition sought through Amendment No. 5 of ASP 80, into Schedule 1 of DPS 2.

 

Administration considers the inclusion of a ‘Costume Hire’ land use definition in Schedule 1 of DPS 2 as justified, for the following reasons:

 

·    Table 1 of DPS 2 currently prescribes the land use permissibility of ‘Costume Hire’. A definition in Schedule 1 of DPS 2 would better inform the land use permissibility as outlined in Table 1 – and make clear what is (or is not) permissible in each zone in relation to carrying out costume hire activities; and

 

·    It has been requested of the City to ‘normalise’ ASP 80. In response to that request, it was considered in the preparation of Amendment No. 150 that the definition of ‘Costume Hire’ (proposed for ASP 80) is utilised, and placed into DPS 2.

 

Revocation of ASP 80

 

The ASP 80 area is currently zoned ‘Urban Development’ under DPS 2.

The proposed rezoning of the subject land to ‘Business’, ‘Residential’ and ‘Special Use’ as well as the replication of the development control provisions from ASP 80 would result in this structure plan no longer being necessary; as DPS 2 would instead prescribe the relevant development control provisions and land use permissibility.

 

Should ASP 80 become redundant following final adoption of Amendment No. 150, the Council could consider requesting the WAPC revoke its approval of this structure plan. The WAPC has the ability to consider Council’s request, and resolve to revoke ASP 80 pursuant to Deemed Provision 28 (4) of DPS 2. This Deemed Provision prescribes the following:

 

“(4)    The Commission may revoke its approval of a structure plan if the Commission considers that the structure plan cannot be effectively implemented because of a legislative change or a change in a State planning policy.”

 

Conclusion

 

As outlined above, Administration’s preparation of Amendment No. 150 was prompted by correspondence received from the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) on 8 April 2015. In that correspondence, the WAPC requested the City consider initiating an amendment to District Planning Scheme No. 2, to normalise the zoning of the ASP 80 area under the local planning scheme (DPS 2).

 

In response to that request, Administration has now prepared Amendment No. 150 to DPS 2 in an effort to normalise the zoning of land parcels in ASP 80. The amendment effectively would transfer the same zoning and land permissibility prescribed for land parcels from ASP 80 into DPS 2. The zonings and land use permissibility proposed through Amendment No. 4 and No. 5 (and as supported by Council) have been proposed as zonings and land use permissibility in this DPS 2 amendment.

 

Administration considers that the general provisions of DPS 2 are insufficient to protect the unique locational, traffic and environmental attributes and constraints of the land within ASP 80. As such, Amendment No. 150 proposes to impose a Special Control Area over the ASP 80 area, and to create the necessary framework to enforce locational-specific requirements through Special Control Area provisions in DPS 2.

 

Amendment No. 5 to ASP 80 proposes to introduce a definition of ‘Costume Hire’ into ASP 80, as it is not defined in Schedule 1 of DPS 2. Although ‘Costume Hire’ is not defined in DPS 2, its permissibility is prescribed in the DPS 2 Zoning Table. Amendment No. 150 proposes to add a ‘Costume Hire’ definition in Schedule 1 of DPS 2 – consistent with what was proposed through Amendment No. 5 to ASP 80.

 

If Amendment No. 150 were to be adopted by the Minister for Planning, that would render ASP 80 redundant, as the ASP 80 provisions would be transferred into DPS 2, and enacted through DPS 2. While Amendment No. 150 does not formally propose the revocation of ASP 80, Council could later consider requesting the WAPC revoke ASP 80, should the Minister for Planning grant final adoption of Amendment No. 150.

Statutory Compliance

Amendment No. 150 is required to be considered in accordance with the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.

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

Nil

Financial Implications

The costs in undertaking Amendment No. 150 to DPS 2 can be met from the Planning and Sustainability existing operational budget.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

 

1.       Pursuant to Section 75 of the Planning and Development Act 2005 PREPARES Amendment No. 150 to City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2, to undertake the amendments to the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2 as prescribed in the document included as Attachment 2;

 

2.       Pursuant to Regulation 35 (2) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, RESOLVES that Amendment No. 150 of the District Planning Scheme No. 2 is a standard amendment pursuant to Regulation 34 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, for the following reason:

 

          Amendment No. 150 is considered to be a ‘standard’ amendment to the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2, as the amendment is consistent with a region planning scheme that applies to the scheme area (Metropolitan Region Scheme), and is not considered to align with the criteria applicable for ‘basic’ and ‘complex’ amendments, prescribed in the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015

 

3.       Pursuant to Section 81 of the Planning and Development Act 2005, REFERS Amendment No. 150 of the District Planning Scheme No. 2 to the Environmental Protection Authority; and

 

4.       Subject to no objections being received from the Environmental Protection Authority and pursuant to Regulation 47(1) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, NOTIFIES the Western Australian Planning Commission of its intention to advertise Amendment No. 150 and ADVERTISES Amendment No. 150 for public comment for a period of not less than 42 days, pursuant to Regulation 47(2) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.

 

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1 - Location Plan - Amendment No. 150 to DPS 2

15/541557

 

2.

Attachment 2 - Initial Amendment Document - No Explanatory Report - Amendment No. 150 to DPS 2 - Drovers

15/554274

Minuted

3.

Attachment 3 - Comparing ASP 80 Zonings with DPS 2 Proposed Zonings

15/545713

 

4.

Attachment 4 - Explanatory Report - Amendment No. 150 to DPS 2

15/549164

 

 

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 01 December, 2015                         27

Draft

3.5    Final adoption of Amendment No. 151 to DPS 2

File Ref:                                              22762 – 15/520649

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       2

Previous Items:                                  MN01-07/15 AgendaMN01-07/15 Resolution

                                                            Proposal to remove Civic and Cultural zoning from Lot 5483 (41) Park Lane, Alexander Heights and incorporate the land into Alexander Heights Park

                                                           CB03-09/12 Resolution

                                                            Possible Development of the Civic and Cultural Site Located in Park Lane Alexander Heights

                                                           CB10-04/13 Agenda; CB10-04/13 Resolution

                                                            Withdrawal of Interest to Develop Lot 5483 (41) Park Lane, Alexander Heights       

 

Issue

To consider the submissions received during the public advertising of Amendment No. 151 to District Planning Scheme No.2 (DPS 2) and adoption of that amendment.

 

Owner

City of Wanneroo

Location

Lot 5483 (41) Park Lane, Alexander Heights

Site Area

2840.521m2

MRS Zoning

Urban

DPS 2 Zoning

Civic and Cultural

 

 

Background

Council, at its meeting of 21 July 2015 considered a proposal to rezone Lot 5483 (41) Park Lane, Alexander Heights from Civic and Cultural to Parks and Recreation Reserve and resolved as follows (refer Item MN01-07/15):

 

“That Council:-

 

1.   Pursuant to Section 75 of the Planning and Development Act INITIATES Amendment No. 151 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 to rezone Lot 5483 (41) Park Lane, Alexander Heights from Cultural and Civic Zone to Parks and Recreation Reserve;

 

2.   Pursuant to Section 81 of the Planning and Development Act 2005 REFERS Amendment No. 151 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 to the Environmental Protection Authority for comment;

 

3.   Subject to no objection being received from the Environmental Protection Authority, ADVERTISES Amendment No. 151 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 for public comment for a period of 42 days, pursuant to Regulation 25(2) of the Town Planning Regulations 1967; and

 

4.   FORWARDS a copy of Amendment No. 151 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 to the Western Australian Planning Commission for information.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY”

 

Attachment 1 contains a location plan.

 

Attachment 2 contains the proposed Scheme Amendment map.

Detail

Proposal

 

Amendment No. 151 proposes to rezone the land from Civic and Cultural to Parks and Recreation under DPS 2.  The land is effectively part of the Alexander Heights Park and is currently used by the community as part of this park.

Consultation

In accordance with the Council’s decision, the amendment was referred to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) for comment. On 31 August 2015, the EPA advised the City that the scheme amendment did not warrant an environmental assessment. The Western Australian Planning Commissions (WAPC) consent to advertise was not required in this case.

 

A 42-day public advertising period was carried out between 22 September 2015 and 3 November 2015 by way of on-site signs, advertisement in the local newspaper, a notice in Council offices and the City’s website, and letters to the affected and nearby landowners. The City received three submissions, two of which support the proposal and one providing comment on the proposal.

Comment

Tenure of subject land

 

The purpose of rezoning Lot 5483 is to recognise that the land is not required for a Civic and Cultural purpose and is instead seen by Council as effectively forming part of the surrounding Alexander Heights Park.  Lot 5483 will remain in the City’s ownership and will not be ceded to the Crown (as is the case with Alexander Heights Park).

 

Submissions

 

The following table provides a summary of the submissions and Administration’s response.

 

No.

Name of Submittor(s)

Summary of submission

Response

1.

Kevin Burnett

Submitter supports proposed Amendment No. 151 to DPS 2 given the longstanding use of the land as part of the park.

Noted.

2.

Kevin and Bernice Lehane

 

Submitters support proposed Amendment No. 151.  Submitters comment that the opposition to previous development of the land by the Vietnamese Community in Australia (WA Chapter) was based on the fact it would have resulted in the unnecessary clearing of a number of trees.

Noted.


 

3.

Water Corporation

A sewer main exists to serve Lot 5483 located along the southern side of Lot 5484, and a water main and service tap exists in Park Lane, therefore Lot 5384 is rated for both water and sewerage.

Noted.  The presence of a sewer main will not be affected by the lot being rezoned from Civic and Cultural to Parks and Recreation Reserve.

 

Considering the matters noted in the table above, it is recommended that the amendment proposal be adopted without modification and forwarded to the WAPC for its consideration and recommendation to the Minister.

 

Type of amendment

 

Amendment No. 151 was initiated by Council prior to the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 (Regulations) taking effect and therefore was not classified as either a basic, standard or complex amendment in accordance with the Regulations. The Regulations requires scheme amendments to be classified by the local government prior to them being forwarded to the WAPC.  Amendment No. 151 is considered a standard amendment pursuant to Regulation 34 (e) as it is an amendment that would have minimal impact on land in the scheme area that is not the subject of the amendment.

Statutory Compliance

Amendment No. 151 was prepared and advertised in accordance with the Planning and Development Act 2005 and the Town Planning Regulations 1967.  As Council is aware, the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 which superseded the 1967 Regulations were gazetted on 25 August 2015 and took effect from 19 October 2015.  Amendment No. 151 will now be progressed in accordance with the new Regulations.

 

In accordance with Regulation 50(2), Council is required to consider the submissions received in respect of Amendment No. 151 and must resolve to either (a) support the amendment without modification, (b) support the amendment with proposed modifications to address issues raised in the submissions; or c) not to support the amendment.

 

Further, pursuant to Regulation 53(1), Council must provide the WAPC with (among other things) a copy of the resolution passed under Regulation 50 (3), a schedule of submissions and Council's recommendation and response to the submissions, together with particulars of any modifications recommended to the amendment.

 

Administration recommends that Council adopts Amendment No. 151 in accordance with Regulation 53(1) without modification.

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

There are no existing Strategic or Corporate risks within the City's existing risk registers which relates to the issues contained in this report.

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       RESOLVES pursuant to Regulation 35(2) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, that Amendment No. 151 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 to rezone Lot 5483 (41) Park Lane Alexander Heights to Parks and Recreation reserve is a standard amendment as it is an amendment that would have minimal impact on land in the scheme area that is not the subject of the amendment, acknowledging that Amendment No. 151 was initiated for the purposes of advertising prior to commencement of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015;

2.       Pursuant to Regulation 50(3), SUPPORTS Amendment No. 151 to District Planning Scheme No. 2, as shown in Attachment 2, without modification;

3.       AUTHORISES the Mayor and Director, Planning and Sustainability to SIGN and SEAL the Amendment No. 151 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 documents;

4.       PROVIDES Amendment No. 151 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 to the Western Australian Planning Commission for its consideration; and

5.       ADVISES the submitters of its decision.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Location Plan

15/523726

 

2.

Amendment No. 151 to DPS 2 Map

15/431795

Minuted

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 01 December, 2015                         31

Draft

3.6    Proposed Amendment No. 23 to the East Wanneroo Cell 1 Agreed Structure Plan No. 3

File Ref:                                              3377-24 – 15/499208

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       5         

 

Issue

To consider submissions received during public advertising of Amendment No. 23 to the East Wanneroo Cell 1 (Tapping and Ashby) Agreed Structure Plan No. 3 (ASP 3) and support of the amendment.

 

Applicant

Rowe Group

Owner

Freshlink Export Pty Ltd

Location

Lot 19 (20) Clarkson Avenue, Tapping

Site Area

40426m2

MRS Zoning

Urban

DPS 2 Zoning

Urban Development

ASP 3 Zoning

Commercial and Residential

 

 

Background

On 30 October 2014, Rowe Group, on behalf of Freshlink Export Pty Ltd, lodged Amendment No. 23 to ASP 3 for the City’s consideration. The amendment relates to the eastern portion of Lot 19 (No. 20) Clarkson Avenue, Tapping, as identified on the map included as Attachment 1. The eastern portion of the site is zoned 'Residential' with a density coding of R40 under ASP 3. The western portion of the site is zoned ‘Commercial’ however is not subject to this amendment.

 

Approval for subdivision of the subject site has been granted by the Western Australian Planning Commission on 6 November 2014 (WAPC 150486). Upon completion, the subdivision will facilitate the extension of Corvus Road and will split the site into two separate land parcels.

 

On 28 April 2015, 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 advertised. No such requests were received and, as such, advertising of Amendment No. 23 to ASP 3 commenced on 19 May 2015 in accordance with Clause 9.5 of District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2).

Detail

Amendment No. 23 proposes to modify the ASP 3 map and text to increase the residential density coding of the subject site from R40 to R60 and to increase the site’s height restrictions. The application initially proposed a maximum height of 24m (8 storeys) above natural ground level (NGL), however, prior to advertising, this proposal was reduced to a maximum height of 12m (4 storeys) above natural ground level (NGL). Attachment 2 shows the existing and proposed ASP 3 maps for the subject site as well as the proposed text modifications.

 

The purpose of the amendment is to enable a greater housing yield to facilitate multiple dwellings on the subject site. Under the current R40 coding, the subject site is capable of generating 1.164ha of plot ratio floor space.

If supported, the R60 coding will allow for 1.358ha of plot ratio floor space, an increase of 1,940m2 of plot ratio floor space on the subject site. The applicant has indicated that the future development of the site is likely to incorporate multiple dwellings of approximately 80m2 in area. Assuming 80m2 multiple dwellings are developed on the site, under the R40 coding 145 dwellings can be created whilst the R60 coding will allow for 169 dwellings, an increase of 24 dwellings.

 

The height restrictions will be implemented as part of a Local Development Plan for the subject site. The proposed layout of the site will include the following:

 

·    A 4m building setback buffer between the subject site and the existing Residential R20 lots adjoining the site;

·    A maximum height of 6.0m above NGL (2 storeys) between 4.0m and 20.0m from the southern and eastern lot boundaries;

·    A maximum height of 9.0m above NGL (3 storeys) between 20.0m and 45.0m from the southern and eastern lot boundaries; and

·    A maximum height of 12.0m above NGL (4 storeys) for the portion of land at the intersection of Clarkson Avenue and Corvus Road.

 

The applicant has not provided any concept plans for the future development or subdivision of the site.

Consultation

The amendment was advertised for public comment for a period of 42 days by means of an on-site sign, an advertisement in the Wanneroo Times newspaper, the City’s website and letters written to adjoining landowners. The submission period closed on 30 June 2015, with 13 submissions being received including one petition with 83 signatures. A summary of submissions received and Administration responses are shown in Attachment 3.

 

The main issues raised during the advertising period relate to:

 

·    Inconsistency between the proposed R60 coding and the surrounding locality;

·    Traffic generation;

·    Building heights; and

·    Incompletion of Hirundo Bend.

 

A more detailed discussion of the major issues considered in the assessment of Amendment No. 23 is provided below.

 

Comment

 

Assessment against Local Planning Policy 3.1: Local Housing Strategy

 

The amendment area falls under ASP 3, and as such, the proposal is subject to the requirements of Clause 9(b) and Table 1 of the City's Local Planning Policy 3.1: Local Housing Strategy Implementation (LPP 3.1). Table 1 of LPP 3.1 outlines criteria and specifies distances to infrastructure and nearby amenities which a site should meet in order for the City to support an application for re-coding of that lot. The proposal has been assessed against and is considered to satisfy the provisions of LPP 3.1 for the following reasons:

 

·    It is considered the amendment is appropriate within the broader planning framework as the Residential zone aims to provide a range of densities and a variety of housing to meet the needs of different household types.

 

·    The proposal is considered to satisfy the criteria of LPP 3.1 (Table 1), and summarised as follows:

 

-     The amendment area abuts a Neighbourhood Centre;

-     The amendment area is located within 200m of existing, high frequency bus routes;

-     The amendment area is located within 200m of Nankeen Park; and

-     The amendment area is located in close proximity to major arterial roads, both secondary and primary educational institutions as well as community facilities.

 

·    The proposal is generally in accordance with the objectives outlined in Part 9 of the City of Wanneroo Local Housing Strategy 2005 (LHS).

 

Key issues raised during advertising

 

Inconsistency between the proposed R60 coding and the surrounding locality

Numerous submitters raised concerns that the proposed recoding to R60 is inconsistent with the existing R20 and R30 lots in the locality. Whilst these concerns are noted, the proposal is consistent with State Government policies including WAPC’s Liveable Neighbourhoods policy and Directions 2031; and the City’s Local Planning Policy 3.1 – Local Housing Strategy Implementation (LPP 3.1). These policies promote higher residential densities in urban areas that are within close proximity to retail and employment centres, public transport services, major arterial routes, educational institutes and community facilities. The subject site abuts a neighbourhood centre, is adjacent to both a secondary and primary school and is within 200m of high frequency bus routes on Wanneroo Road.

 

The policies noted above also promote the facilitation of increased housing diversity and affordability and planning for an increased supply of housing and land in response to population growth and changing community needs.

 

In light of the above, whilst it is noted that the proposed R60 coding is a higher density than the surrounding residential development, it is considered appropriate given the context of the subject site.

 

Traffic Generation

Concerns were raised that the increased density coding of the subject lot would potentially result in traffic congestion on the surrounding road network. An accompanying Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) prepared by Transcore was submitted with the proposal.

 

As previously stated, the proposed recoding is estimated to increase the potential dwelling yield from 145 to 169 dwellings, resulting in an increase of 24 dwellings. Based on the Main Roads WA (MRWA) transport data, a single dwelling is assumed to generate 10 vehicle trips per day (VTPD) on average. However, the accompanying TIA considers that 8 VTPD is more suitable due to the smaller size of the future dwellings on the site on the basis that smaller dwellings are likely to hold fewer occupants and therefore will result in less traffic. If 8 VTPD was to be used, the proposal would increase the total VTPD from 1160 to 1352. Based on existing traffic patterns and attraction nodes in the surrounding locality, the TIA assumes that daily traffic will be distributed in accordance with the following:

 

·    32% of VTPD would travel south on Wanneroo Road;

·    16% of VTPD would travel north on Wanneroo Road;

·    20% of VTPD would travel east on Clarkson Avenue; and

·    32% of VTPD would travel south on Corvus Road and Hirundo Bend.

 

The City's Traffic and Transport Service Unit has assessed the TIA provided by the applicant and has confirmed that the projected traffic increases will not have a detrimental impact on the road network.

Having regard to the additional traffic of 192 VTPD that are anticipated to be generated by the future development of the subject area as a result of the proposed amendment, it is not considered to adversely impact on the flow of traffic in the surrounding area.

 

Building Heights

Concerns were raised regarding the proposed building heights for the subject site and the impact that these heights will have on the existing residential dwellings within the locality. Whilst the amendment proposes to increase the maximum building heights for a portion of the subject lot, the proposed height limits have been designed to reduce the impact of future development on the surrounding residential development. A draft Local Development Plan illustrating the proposed building heights is included in Attachment 4. As indicated on this plan, a 4m building setback will separate the future development of the subject site from adjoining lots. In addition, staggered building height limits have been implemented to ensure that the 12m maximum building heights are setback no closer than 40 metres from the adjoining residential properties. Administration considers that these measures are appropriate and will ensure that the impact of building bulk on adjoining properties is reduced.

 

Incompletion of Hirundo Bend

Whilst the amendment does not propose any modifications to the surrounding road network, the submissions highlighted existing issues associated with the incompletion of Hirundo Bend. When ASP 3 was first adopted, Hirundo Bend extended into the subject site before connecting with Corvus Road. However, this connection was removed when Amendment No. 12 to ASP 3 was adopted and as a result, Hirundo Bend is now incomplete on the ASP 3 map as indicated in Attachments 1 and 2. Hirundo Bend has now been constructed in accordance with the ASP 3 map which has resulted in the following issues:

 

·    A lack of connectivity now exists from Hirundo Bend to Corvus Road and Clarkson Avenue. Given that the subject site abuts a neighbourhood centre and is adjacent to a school, a lack of pedestrian and cycling connection from Hirundo Bend is undesirable.

·    Hirundo Bend abruptly ends at the southern lot boundary of the subject site, with no cul-de-sac head or reversing bay being provided. As a result, vehicles utilising this portion of Hirundo Bend have no means of turning and exiting the road in forward gear. This issue is particularly relevant to waste collection vehicles when servicing 19 and 21 Hirundo Bend.

 

Whilst the matters noted above are not directly associated with the proposed amendment, Administration considers this application to be an opportunity to include additional provisions within the structure plan to ensure that these issues are addressed through the future development of the land. Administration has discussed the matter with the applicant and the following modifications have been proposed in order to address the issues associated with the incompletion of Hirundo Bend:

 

·    Incorporate a pedestrian access easement linking Hirundo Bend with Corvus Road to ensure that pedestrian and cycling connections are established. This pedestrian access easement should be annotated on the ASP 3 Map as well as incorporated into the structure plan text. The structure plan text should ensure that the easement is provided with surveillance and lighting which will make certain that the pedestrian connection is usable and safe.

·    Include a textual provision requiring the future development of the subject site to make allowance for vehicles entering Hirundo Bend to either turn within the land and re-enter Hirundo Bend in forward gear or to connect from Hirundo Bend to Corvus Road.

 


 

It is considered that the modifications outlined above will ensure that the issues associated with the incompletion of Hirundo Bend are addressed through the future development of the subject site. An updated proposal incorporating the modifications outlined above is included in Attachment 5 with the modifications being highlighted.

 

Conclusion

 

Considering the above comments, the proposed amendment is considered to be acceptable subject to the modifications included in Attachment 5.

Statutory Compliance

This structure plan amendment will follow the statutory process outlined in the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.

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

There are no existing Strategic or Corporate risks within the City's existing risk registers which relates to the issues contained in this report.

 Policy Implications

This proposal has been assessed under the provisions of DPS 2, Local Planning Policy 4.2: Structure Planning and LPP 3.1.

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       Pursuant to subclause 20(2)(e) of the deemed provisions of City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2, RECOMMENDS to the Western Australian Planning Commission that Amendment No. 23 to the East Wanneroo Cell 1 (Tapping and Ashby) Agreed Structure Plan No. 3 submitted by Rowe Group on behalf of Freshlink Export Pty Ltd included as Attachment 2 be approved subject to the modifications as included in Attachment 5 and SUBMITS a copy of the proposed structure plan and all accompanying material as received from the applicant;


 

2.       Pursuant to subclause 20(1) of the deemed provisions of City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2, PROVIDES the Western Australian Planning Commission a copy of the report on the proposed structure plan amendment; and

3.       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 - Location Map

15/503259

 

2.

Attachment 2 - Existing and Proposed ASP 3 Maps

15/503247

Minuted

3.

Attachment 3 - Schedule of Submissions

15/553285

Minuted

4.

Attachment 4 - Draft Detailed Area Plan

15/503263

 

5.

Attachment 5 - Updated Proposal With Modifications

15/556087

Minuted

 

 

 

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 01 December, 2015                         37

Draft

3.7    Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1292/57: North-East and North-West District Omnibus 1

File Ref:                                              2080 – 15/514476

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       10         

 

Issue

To consider a submission on proposed Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS) Amendment 1292/57: North-East and North-West District Omnibus 1.

 

Background

The Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) prepares ‘omnibus’ amendments to the MRS to make a large number of small changes to the MRS through a single MRS Amendment.  Proposed MRS Amendment 1292/57 is one of these omnibus amendments.

Detail

MRS Amendment 1292/57 includes 27 ‘proposals’ for changes to the MRS.  These affect the local government areas of Wanneroo, Swan, Stirling, Kalamunda and Mundaring.

 

Six of the proposals affect the City of Wanneroo (Proposal Nos. 17 to 22) and detailed plans showing each proposal are provided as Attachments 1 to 6.

 

Attachments 7 to 9 are broader-scale plans which show where the various sites are located.

 

Following is an overview of the six proposals affecting the City of Wanneroo:

 

·    Proposal 17: Involves a widening of the reserve required for the future Mitchell Freeway extension through Alkimos, changing the zoning of various parcels of land from Urban, City Centre, Other Regional Roads reserve and Parks and Recreation  reserve to Primary Regional Roads reserve. Main Roads WA has determined that additional land is required for the freeway than originally thought required.

 

·    Proposal 18: Involves rezoning an area of 2,850m2 in the north east corner of the Girrawheen Senior High School site from Public Purposes – High School reserve to Urban, to enable it to then be developed by the Department of Housing for public housing.

 

The WAPC ‘Amendment Report’ states that this area is superfluous to the requirements of the Department of Education, and that the proposal will make land available for affordable housing, with proceeds from the sale of the land expected to provide finance for the school to undertake various capital works projects.

 

·    Proposal 19: Involves reserving a strip of land between Wanneroo Road and Gibbs Road from Rural to Public Purposes –WSD (Water Authority of WA).  The land is owned by the Water Corporation, and accommodates a water main connecting the Carabooda reservoir to the coastal urban area.  Water Corporation has requested the proposed MRS reservation as it is the most appropriate MRS classification for the land.

 

·    Proposal 20: Involves rezoning from Parks and Recreation reserve to Rural, of the portions of three properties in Pinjar. 

As the land concerned falls outside of the  Gnangara Underground Water Pollution Control Area, it is proposed to change the zoning of the land to Rural, to facilitate the continuation of existing rural activities on the subject land.

 

·    Proposal 21: This involves transferring two small areas in Tapping and Banksia Grove which are superfluous to the existing Pinjar Road reserve, from Other Regional Roads reserve to Urban zone, and changing from Urban to Other Regional Roads, the existing intersection of Pinjar Road and Yandella Promenade.  This is rationalising the MRS zoning with what has actually been developed.

 

·    Proposal 22: Involves rationalising the MRS boundaries of the Other Regional Roads reserves and Industrial zones with the existing property boundaries of Ocean Reef Road and Gnangara Road, in the eastern part of Wangara.

 

The WAPC’s ‘Amendment Report’ includes further information describing each proposal, and the reason for it.  An extract from the Amendment Report which deals with Proposals 17 to 22 is provided at Attachment 10.

 

The MRS Amendment has been released for public comment from 13 October 2015 to 18 December 2015.

 

It should be noted that the WAPC has decided that this MRS Amendment is to be processed as a ‘minor’ amendment, meaning that it will not be placed before Parliament, as occurs with ‘major’ amendments.

Consultation

The WAPC is now inviting public comment on the proposed MRS Amendment.  As part of this, it has written to all landowners whose properties are directly affected by any of the Proposals.  However, it does not write to adjoining landowners.

 

Proposal 18 involves rezoning to Urban of a 2,850m2 area in the north-east corner of the Girrawheen Senior High School site.  This area is currently bushland and the proposed change to Urban zoning to enable housing development is something adjoining landowners would likely want to be aware of and potentially make submissions on.  Administration has therefore written to landowners directly adjacent to Proposal 18 informing them on the matter.  While these landowners were advised to make submissions to the WAPC, if they wished, they were also invited to advise the City of their views on the matter so that Council could be made aware of nearby residents’ views in considering the matter.  No advice has been received from any landowners in response to this invitation.

 

It may be noted that in the information included in Attachment 10 regarding this proposal, it states that: “A structure plan will be prepared (including public consultation) to guide the development of the land.”

Comment

Proposal Nos. 17 and 19 to 22 are not considered to raise any issues of concern for the City and it is recommended that the Council advise in its submission that it has no objection to those Proposals.

 


 

Proposal No. 18 does, however, raise a number of concerns which are listed below:

 

1.       While this land may currently be superfluous to the requirements of the Department of Education, it is possible that with the significant increase in population of this area through the Girrawheen/Koondoola recoding proposal, this land may become required for school use.  The Education Department has recently made a submission on the proposed increase of R-Coding of these areas, expressing concern about its ability to accommodate future increase in school numbers, which reinforces Administration’s concerns.

 

2.       Regarding the proposal being ‘justified on the grounds that it will make land available for the development of affordable housing”, the proposed R-Code increases for this general area will lead to a significant increase in availability of land for affordable housing, making the impact of this site not being available for development negligible.

 

3.       The site contains remnant native bushland which is worthy of retention, on conservation and landscape grounds, prior to the site possibly being needed for expansion of the high school in the future. Whilst the vegetation as a whole is in a semi-degraded state it does provide a significant tree canopy for the area and a strong visual amenity.  The vegetation on the site is mapped as “Karrakatta Central and South Complex” of which less than 10% is currently protected within the City of Wanneroo.  This makes this vegetation a ‘high priority’ for further protection under the City’s Local Biodiversity Strategy.

 

Given the above, it is recommended that Council oppose this Proposal in its submission to the WAPC.

Statutory Compliance

Should this MRS Amendment be approved and take effect, then the proposed new regional reserves will automatically also take effect on DPS 2.

 

For proposed changes from regional reserve to zones, the City will be required (under the Planning and Development Act 2005) to prepare amendments to DPS 2 to zone the land to be consistent with the new MRS zoning.

 

For proposed changes to Urban zones (including for Proposal No. 18), the WAPC can also concurrently amend DPS 2 to rezone the sites to Urban Development. The MRS Amendment Report states that the WAPC will consider the matter of concurrent local scheme amendments after all submissions have been received.  If it is considering any concurrent amendments, it will presumably consult with local governments at that time.

 

Although WAPC is yet to consult with the City on this matter, the City can still request the WAPC to automatically amend DPS 2.  In the case of Proposal 21, as the two small areas of land proposed to be rezoned from regional reserve to Urban are surrounded by land currently zoned Urban Development under DPS 2, and already subject to approved Structure Plans, it is recommended that Council make this request for Proposal 21.

 

For Proposal 18, as the surrounding residential area is currently zoned Residential under DPS 2, it would be preferable for this site to also be rezoned to Residential, if the MRS rezoning to Urban is approved.  If the site was automatically rezoned to Urban Development, this would require that a Structure Plan be prepared for the site, and this is not considered warranted for such a small site.  A Local Development Plan would be more appropriate.  It is therefore not recommended that Proposal 18 be requested for automatic rezoning to Urban Development under DPS 2, should the site be rezoned to Urban.

 

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

 

           “4     Civic leadership – working with others to ensure the best use of our resources

                   4.1     Listening and leading – be strong advocates in the community’s interest”

Risk Management Considerations

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.

 

Risk Title

Risk Rating

Productive Communities

Moderate

Accountability

Action Planning Option

Director Community Development

Manage

 

The specific risk referred to above relates to Proposal No.18, and its relationship to the changing demographics of Girrawheen-Koondoola which will result from the proposed increase in R-Coding of that area.  The proposed submission on Proposal No.18 will play a role in managing this risk by ensuring that the WAPC is aware of the issue of concern in deciding whether to proceed with this proposal.

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Proposal Nos. 18, 20, 21 and 22 involve changes from reserves to zones under the MRS.  If these changes take effect, then DPS 2 will require amendment to ensure consistency with the new MRS zoning.

 

The DPS 2 amendment required for Proposal 18, if that takes effect, is anticipated to involve an application being made by a proponent who will then meet costs involved.

 

For Proposals 20 and 22, this is likely to involve an omnibus amendment to DPS 2 needing to be done by the City, at its cost.  This cost would be met through normal operational budget provision.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 


 

Recommendation

That Council ADVISES the Western Australian Planning Commission that Council:-

1.       has no OBJECTION to Proposal Nos. 17 and 19, 20, 21 and 22 of Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1292/57: North-East and North-West District Omnibus 1;

2.       DOES NOT SUPPORT Proposal No. 18, which proposes to rezone the north-east corner of the Girrawheen Senior High School site to Urban, because:

a)      The land may be required for future school use, particularly given the recoding proposal for Girrawheen and Koondoola.

b)      Regarding the proposal being ‘justified on the grounds that it will make land available for the development of affordable housing”, the proposed R-Code increases for this general area will lead to a significant increase in availability of land for affordable housing, making the impact of this site not being available for development, negligible.

c)      The site contains native bushland which is worthy of retention, on conservation and landscape grounds, prior to the site possibly being needed for expansion of the high school in the future.

3.       REQUESTS that for Proposal 21, the two areas to be rezoned to Urban be concurrently zoned as Urban Development under District Planning Scheme No. 2 under Section 126 (3) of the Planning and Development Act 2005.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Primary regional roads reservation Proposal 17 (1)

15/514745

 

2.

Urban Zone (2)

15/514749

 

3.

WSD public purposes Proposal 18 (3)

15/514754

 

4.

Rural zone Proposal 19 (4)

15/514762

 

5.

Other/Urban zone Proposal 20 (5)

15/514767

 

6.

Industrial/other Proposal 22 (6)

15/514773

 

7.

Excluded areas Proposals 17 & 19 (7)

15/514784

 

8.

Excluded areas Proposal 20-21 (8)

15/514792

 

9.

Excluded areas Proposal 18 & 22 (9)

15/514797

 

10.

WAPC Proposals to MRS 1292/57 (10)

15/514661

 

   


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 01 December, 2015                         42

Draft

Development Applications

3.8    Consideration of Development Application DA2015/1780 Single House Addition (Patio) at Lot 180 (97) Kemp Street, Pearsall

File Ref:                                              DA2015/1780 – 15/511422

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       2         

 

Issue

To consider a development application (DA2015/1780) for a Single House Addition (Patio) at 97 Kemp Street, Pearsall.

 

Applicant

Wanneroo Patios

Owner

Sean and Lisa Brooker

Location

Lot 180 (97) Kemp Street, Pearsall

Site Area

656m2

DPS 2 Zoning

Residential

 

 

Background

On 18 September 2015, the City received a development application for a Single House Addition (Patio) for Lot 180 (97) Kemp Street, Pearsall (subject site). The subject site is 656m2 in area and is zoned Residential with a density coding of R20 under the City of Wanneroo’s District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2). A location plan of the subject lot is included in Attachment 1.

Detail

The details of the proposed Patio are as follows:

 

·    Total length is 15.4m and is comprised of one gable roof section at 11.6m in length and one flat roof section at 3.8m in length;

·    The flat roof section of the Patio is composed of clear panels;

·    The Patio is a minimum height of 2.2m and a maximum height of 2.86m;

·    Posts setback 0.1m from the eastern boundary; and

·    Roofline setback 1m from the eastern boundary.

 

The posts and roofline setbacks are variations to the Deemed-to-Comply provisions of Clause 5.1.3 of the Residential Design Codes (R-Codes) which require a 1.5m setback from the adjoining boundary. The posts have been proposed to be setback 0.1m from the eastern boundary to allow access between the existing garage and outbuilding. If the posts were setback 1.5m from the boundary, the posts would impede the access from the garage to the outbuilding.

 

The site and elevation plans of the proposal are included in Attachment 2.

Consultation

A letter of objection from the adjoining landowners at Lot 179 (99) Kemp Street, Pearsall was included when the application was submitted. As no other adjoining properties are affected by the setback variation associated with the proposed Patio, no further consultation was required.

 

The objector raised concerns with regards to a loss of natural sunlight to the property. A more detailed discussion of the issue raised is provided in the Comment section.

Comment

Delegation to Determine Application

 

Pursuant to Part 8.3 (b) of the City’s Delegation of Authority Register and Sub-Delegation Authority Register, the application may be considered under delegation if, it is the view of the Operations Manager Planning and Development Services or Director Planning and Sustainability, that the objections do not raise relevant planning considerations that cannot be specifically addressed or overcome by modifications to the proposal, or imposition of appropriate conditions of approval.

 

In this instance, Administration is of the opinion that the objection raises relevant planning considerations in relation to the potential restriction of direct solar access for the adjoining property resulting from the Patio. Administration does not consider that this can be addressed by modification or imposing conditions. Therefore, the application cannot be considered under delegated authority and must be determined by Council.

 

Assessment of Application

In accordance with Part 2 of the R-Codes, if a proposal does not meet the Deemed-to-Comply provisions, the City is to exercise its judgement to consider the merits of the proposal having regard to the relevant Design Principles. The Patio does not meet the Deemed-to-Comply provisions of Clause 5.1.3 of the R-Codes and therefore has been assessed against the corresponding Design Principles, as detailed in the table below.

Design Principles – Clause 5.1.3 P3.1

Administration Comments

Reduce impacts of building bulk on adjoining properties.

The impact of building bulk on the adjoining property is considered minimal given that the Patio will be adjacent to the side of the adjoining property which does not comprise of active open spaces. 

 

Building bulk generally arises from large solid walls and structures that impact the amenity of the adjoining properties. The Patio is unenclosed along the shared boundary with the objector and therefore reduces negative visual impacts. The posts are located 0.1m from the shared boundary however they are not considered a large solid structure and therefore do not cause significant impacts relating to building bulk.

Provide adequate direct sun and ventilation to the building and open space on the site and adjoining properties.

The Patio is unenclosed on the northern and eastern sides of the structure and will therefore not restrict ventilation to the building or open spaces of the subject site and adjoining property.

 

The subject site has a north-south orientation and therefore the shadow cast from the proposed Patio will predominately fall over the subject lot. Furthermore, the clear roof panels of the Patio will provide opportunity for additional solar access to the adjoining property. As such, direct sunlight to the building and open space of the adjoining property will still be available.

Minimise the extent of overlooking and resultant loss of privacy on adjoining properties.

The finished floor level of the Patio is proposed to be the same as the existing ground level. Therefore, the proposed Patio will not result in overlooking to the adjoining property and the privacy of the adjoining property will be maintained by the existing boundary fence.

 

In light of the above, the proposed setback variation for the Patio is considered to meet the relevant Design Principles of the R-Codes. The Patio also satisfies all other requirements of the R-Codes.

Conclusion

The Patio meets the relevant Design Principles of the R-Codes. Administration considers that the issues raised in the letter of objection have been addressed and no modification to the proposal is required. It is therefore recommended that Council approves the proposed Patio at Lot 180 (97) Kemp Street, Pearsall.

Statutory Compliance

This application has been assessed in accordance with District Planning Scheme No. 2 and Residential Design Codes of Western Australia.

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

There are no existing Strategic or Corporate risks within the City's existing risk registers which relates to the issues contained in this report.

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

 

1.       APPROVES the development application for the Single House Addition (Patio) at Lot 180 (97) Kemp Street, Pearsall, as shown in Attachment 2, pursuant to Clause 68(2)(b) of the Deemed Provisions of the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2 and subject to compliance with the following conditions: -

 

a)      This approval only relates to the proposed Single House Addition (Patio), as highlighted on the approved plan. It does not relate to any other development on the lot.

 

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

 

2.       ADVISES the submitter of this decision.

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1 - Location Plan - 97 Kemp St, Pearsall

15/519686

 

2.

Attachment 2 - Site and Elevation Plan - 97 Kemp Street, Pearsall

15/536283

Minuted

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 01 December, 2015                         46

Draft

3.9    Retrospective Single House Additions (Patios, Outbuilding and Ancillary Accommodation) at Lot 1 (37) Hadleigh Way, Girrawheen

File Ref:                                              DA2015/1638 – 15/518881

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       3         

 

Issue

To consider a development application seeking retrospective planning approval for two patios, outbuilding and ancillary accommodation to an existing Single House at Lot 1 (37) Hadleigh Way, Girrawheen.

 

Applicant

Buildinglines

Owner

Velimir Savic and Jelena Savic

Location

Lot 1 (37) Hadleigh Way, Girrawheen

Site Area

526m2

DPS 2 Zoning

Residential R20

 

 

Background

On 1 July 2015, the City received an anonymous enquiry regarding the development on the subject site. After determining that the existing two patios, outbuilding and ancillary accommodation were unauthorised structures, the City contacted the landowners of 37 Hadleigh Way, Girrawheen to request that the structures be removed from the property or if they wished to retain them, a development application is to be submitted to the City to seek retrospective planning approval. This approach is consistent with the City’s Local Planning Policy 4.14 – Compliance.

 

It is noted that a retrospective development application incurs a fee of three times that of a standard development application. This increased fee is considered to encompass the processing fee of the development application and a penalty for developing without the required approvals first being obtained from the City.

 

On 2 September 2015, the City received a development application seeking retrospective planning approval for the patios, outbuilding and ancillary accommodation as additions to the single house located on the subject site.

Detail

The subject site is 526m2 in area and is zoned Residential R20 under the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2). A location plan is included as Attachment 1.

 

The plans depicting the subject development are included as Attachment 2. The details of the development are as follows:

 

Patios

 

As indicated on the plans there are two patios marked as Patio A and Patio B.

 

Patio A is 13.35 metres (m) in length, 5.16m in width, 2.3m in height and is setback 0.79m from the northern boundary and 0.69m from the southern boundary.

 

Patio B is 3m in length, 4.36m in width, 2.4m in height and is setback 0.4m from the southern boundary.

 

Outbuilding

 

The outbuilding is 4m in length, 3.98m in width, 2.7m in height and is setback 0.67m from the northern boundary and 0.35m from the western boundary.

 

Ancillary Accommodation

 

The ancillary accommodation which has a total area of 30.86m2 is 7.08m in length, 4.36m in width, 2.6m in height and is setback 0.88m from the southern boundary.

 

The abovementioned setbacks are a variation to the Deemed-to-Comply provisions of Clause 5.1.3 of the Residential Design Codes (R-Codes) which requires a 1.5m setback for the patios and ancillary accommodation and a 1m setback for the outbuilding.

Consultation

Pursuant to Part 4.2 of the R-Codes, neighbour consultation was undertaken by the City by writing to the affected landowners. The advertising period was for 14 days commencing on 1 October 2015 and concluding on 15 October 2015. One submission raising objections to the proposal was received from the landowners at Lot 2 (37A) Hadleigh Way, Girrawheen (adjoining landowner). The summary of submission and Administration’s comments are included in Attachment 3. Administration assessment and consideration of the proposal is included in the Comment section.

Comment

Delegation to Determine Application

Pursuant to Part 8.3(b) of the City’s Delegated Authority Register and Sub-Delegated Authority Register, the application may be considered under delegation if, it is the view of the Operations Manager Planning and Development Services or Director, Planning and Sustainability, that the objections do not raise relevant planning considerations that cannot be specifically addressed or overcome by modifications to the proposal, or imposition of appropriate conditions of approval.

In this instance, Administration is of the opinion that the objection raises relevant planning considerations in relation to the building bulk and scale of the proposed patios and ancillary accommodation. Administration does not consider that these can be addressed by modification or imposition of conditions. Therefore, the application cannot be considered under delegated authority and must be determined by Council.

Assessment of Application

In accordance with Part 2 of the R-Codes, if a proposal does not meet the Deemed-to-Comply provisions, the City is to exercise its judgement to consider the merits of the proposal having regard to the relevant Design Principles. As the patios, outbuilding and ancillary accommodation do not meet the Deemed-to-Comply provisions of Clauses 5.1.3, 5.4.3 and 5.5.1 of the R-Codes, they have been assessed against the corresponding Design Principles, as detailed in the table below. 


 

Design Principles – Clause 5.1.3

Administration Comments

Reduce impacts of building bulk on adjoining properties

The impact of building bulk on the adjoining property is considered negligible for the following reasons:

 

·    The subject site will result in approximately 60% open space which exceeds the 50% requirement, and as such, reducing the impact of building bulk across the site.

 

·    The height of the proposed developments are not considered to adversely impact on the amenity of the adjoining properties as they have a maximum wall height of 2.7m and predominantly have flat roofs further reducing any potential impact.

 

·    It is noted that the boundary fence between the properties is only 1.2m in height (height confirmed by site visit) which is less than what is considered a standard fence height as defined in the City’s Private Property Local Laws 2001 being between 1.75m and 1.85m 

 

Patios: 

 

·    The impact of the patios is negligible as they are both unenclosed and thus, reducing the impact of building bulk.

 

Ancillary Accommodation:

 

·    The ancillary accommodation has a wall length of 7.08m and is setback 0.88m. When considering that this wall can be built up to the boundary it is the position of Administration that the setback, although a reduction from the requirements, will have a lesser impact than a boundary wall.

Provide adequate direct sun and ventilation to the building and open spaces on the site and adjoining properties

Both the subject site and the adjoining property have their outdoor living areas located on the northern aspect of the property and each have over 100m2 of outdoor living area which is open to the winter sun and ventilation. As such, it is considered that the proposed structures do not compromise the ability for direct sun and ventilation to the building and open spaces.

 

The existing dividing fence casts a shadow of approximately 33.84m2 onto the adjoining property on 21 June. The proposed developments would result in additional 12.91m2 of overshadowing. As such, 12% of the adjoining site would be overshadowed which complies with the overshadowing provisions of the R-Codes, as 25% of overshadowing is permitted for lots coded R20. In light of this, it is considered that the overshadowing will not compromise direct sun and ventilation to the site.

Minimise the extent of overlooking and resultant loss of privacy on adjoining properties

The finished floor levels of the proposed developments are not elevated 0.5m above natural ground level and therefore, the proposal is compliant with the visual privacy requirements of the R-Codes as per Clause 5.4.1.

 

As mentioned above the subject and adjoining properties are separated by a sub-standard fence (1.2m in height).

Had the dividing fence been of typical height ranging from 1.75m to 1.85, the major opening of the ancillary accommodation would be screened and as such, would minimise the extent of overlooking into the adjoining property.

 

Design Principles – Clause 5.4.3

Administration Comments

Outbuildings that do not detract from the streetscape or the visual amenity of residents or neighbouring properties.

The proposed outbuildings are not visible from the street and will therefore have no impact on the streetscape. As outlined above, the outbuilding is considered to have a negligible impact on adjoining properties in terms of building bulk as discussed above (Design Principles for Clause 5.1.3). Overlooking and loss of privacy will not result from this outbuilding as it is non-habitable and does not have any windows facing the adjoining properties.

 

Design Principles – Clause 5.5.1

Administration Comments

Ancillary dwelling for people who live either independently or semi-dependently to the residents of the single house, sharing some site facilities and services and without compromising the amenity of surrounding properties.

The ancillary accommodation is self-contained and can be used independently to the residents of the single house. The ancillary accommodation is considered to not compromise the amenity of the surrounding residents as it is 31.9m2 and complies with all of the requirements (apart from the setbacks discussed above) of the R-Codes. The ancillary accommodation is considered to be consistent with the built form of the locality and will not detract from the residential setting of the locality.

 

Conclusion

In light of the above assessment, the proposed patios, outbuilding and ancillary accommodation are considered to meet the relevant Design Principles and satisfy all other relevant Deemed-to-Comply provisions of the R-Codes. Therefore, Administration recommends that Council approve the patios, outbuilding and ancillary accommodation at Lot 1 (37) Hadleigh Way, Girrawheen.

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 of Western Australia.

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

There are no existing Strategic or Corporate risks within the City's existing risk registers which relates to the issues contained in this report.

 Policy Implications

In accordance with the current Compliance Policy, the City may take various actions to deal with a non-compliant development. The initial steps seek to bring the matter into compliance. Where the landowner does not act to bring the matter into compliance, the City can take further action such as issuing a Directions Notice and/or Prosecution. In this case, the landowner has agreed to address the non-compliance by seeking retrospective approval. If the application is approved by Council, it is not proposed to take any further action.

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       APPROVES the development application for Single House Additions (Two Patios, Outbuilding and Ancillary Accommodation) at Lot 1 (37) Hadleigh Way, Girrawheen, as shown in Attachment 2, Pursuant to Clause 68(2)(b) of the Deemed Provisions of the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2 and subject to compliance with the following conditions:-

a)      This approval only relates to the proposed Single House Additions (Patios, Outbuilding and Ancillary Accommodation), as shown on the approved plan (Attachment 2). It does not relate to any other development on the lot.

b)      This approval is only valid from the date of this decision and does not retrospectively authorise any previous unapproved development on the subject site.

c)      The Outbuilding shall be used for purposes that are ancillary to the residential use of the property, and shall not be used for commercial/industrial purposes or for human habitation.

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

2.       ADVISES the submitter of this decision.      

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1: Location Plan - 37 Hadleigh Way Girrawheen

15/540230

 

2.

Attachment 2: Plans and Elevations - 37 Hadleigh Way Girrawheen

15/520256

Minuted

3.

Attachment No. 3 - Summary of Submission - DA2015 1598 37 Hadleigh Way Girrawheen

15/541011

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 01 December, 2015                         51

Draft

3.10  Reconsideration of proposed drive-through addition to an approved Liquor Store at Lot 1031 (2) Captiva Approach, Butler

File Ref:                                              DA2014/1895 – 15/495977

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       2         

 

Issue

To respond to the invitation from the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) for Council to  reconsider its decision from 21 July 2015 to refuse a development application for a proposed drive-through addition to an approved Liquor Store at Lot 1031 (2) Captiva Approach, Butler.

 

Applicant

The Gastevski Group

Owner

Tango Investments

Location

Lot 1061 (2) Captiva Approach, Butler

Site Area

15,907m2

DPS 2 Zoning

Urban Development

ASP 27 Zoning

Commercial

 

 

Background

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 misled 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.  The proposal was presented to Council at its meeting of 21 July 2015 where Council resolved as follows:

 

“That Council:-

 

1.       REFUSES the development application for a drive-through addition to an approved Liquor Store at Lot 1061 (2) Captiva Approach, Butler for the following reasons:

 

a)      The proposal will exacerbate an existing parking shortfall by seven bays. Council is not prepared to vary the parking requirements of District Planning Scheme No. 2 or to support the area within the drive-through addition towards the provision of on-site parking bays; and

b)      In considering a request to vary the car parking standards, the Council is entitled to give due regard to concerns about this proposal raised by adjoining residents and schools, in accordance with sub-clause 6.8 of District Planning Scheme No. 2; and

2.       ADVISES the submitters of this decision.”

A copy of the plans refused by Council are provided as Attachment 1.

 

The applicant was aggrieved by Council’s decision and subsequently lodged an application for review with the SAT.  A Directions Hearing was held on 2 September 2015, resulting in an on-site mediation session occurring on 1 October 2015. 

Pursuant to Local Planning Policy 4.17 State Administrative Tribunal (LPP 4.17), Administration engaged the services of an independent planning consultant - Joe Algeri (Altus Planning and Appeals) to represent Council’s decision.  Following this mediation, the SAT issued orders inviting Council to reconsider its decision to refuse the application, on or before 10 November 2015.  SAT also ordered further mediation be adjourned until 20 November 2015, pending Council’s reconsideration of this matter.

 

The orders issued by the SAT following the on-site mediation on 1 October 2015 required the applicant to submit additional information to the City as outlined below:

 

·    Signage strategy;

·    Delivery Management statement;

·    Overall car parking/landuse plan outlining current uses on-site;

·    Amended architectural drawings to remove the browsing lane from the drive-through addition; and

·    Safety analysis of vehicles exiting the drive-through addition and an analysis of the possibility of reversing the direction of vehicle traffic through the drive-through.

 

An assessment of this information was undertaken by Administration and concerns were identified in relation to the overall parking shortfall on the site, direction of traffic flow through the drive-through and the delivery management statement. Consequently, the applicant sought to defer the reconsideration and a further mediation session was scheduled to allow these concerns to be mediated. Accordingly, a mediation session was held on 12 November 2015, after which the SAT issued orders for the applicant to provide additional information to address the identified concerns and inviting Council to reconsider its decision on or before 8 December 2015.

Detail

The revised proposal submitted by the applicant proposes the following changes to the proposal refused by Council on 21 July 2015:

·    Removal of dedicated browse lane so both drive-through lanes will be used for drive-through service only;

·    Replacement of all parking bays which are required to be removed to accommodate the drive-through facility to alternative locations within the subject site (10 bays) and the inclusion of one additional bay; and

·    No deliveries for the development will occur between 4.30pm to 7.00pm on a Friday evening, which is the peak demand period for a drive-through Liquor Store.

A copy of the revised proposal submitted by the applicant is provided as Attachment 2.

In addition, the proponent submitted a signage strategy for the Liquor Store following the first mediation session for the City’s consideration together with the revised proposal. The strategy simply incorporates excerpts from the City’s Signs Local Planning Policy (SLPP) in relation to the number and location, use of signs, types of signs, content, colours and materials, dimensions, and planning approval and process. The proponent has advised that the details of the signage is yet to be finalised.

Consultation

The revised proposal has not been advertised for public comment as it does not deviate significantly from the proposal previously subject to public consultation.

 

The proposal refused by Council was advertised on two separate occasions – initially from 7 November 2014 to 1 December 2014 and then again from 28 April 2015 to 20 May 2015.

Comment

Car Parking/On-Site Land Uses

 

One of Council’s reasons for refusing the application was that it would have exacerbated an existing on-site parking shortfall by a further seven bays.  The applicant has submitted a revised plan which demonstrates how the carpark can be reconfigured to provide the bays which will be removed to allow for construction of the drive-through in an alternative location.  Specifically, the proposed drive-through requires 10 on-site bays to be removed and the applicant has proposed to construct 11 bays on site, as shown in Attachment 2. Therefore, the proposal will no longer exacerbate the existing parking shortfall of 48 bays but rather reduce the existing shortfall by one bay. It is noted that consistent with Council’s previous resolution, this does not include four bays within the drive-through.

 

Safety Analysis

 

The applicant has reviewed the safety of the car park in the vicinity of the proposed drive-through exit following concerns about safety of pedestrians and reversing vehicles. The revised plans have relocated the bay closest to the drive-through exit to the row of parking in front of the Pharmacy (western face of the supermarket building).

 

A concern was raised through public submissions about the possibility of vehicles queuing for the drive-through and obstructing the crossover access to the Centre from Tarpon Link.  In response to this concern, the applicant has deleted the browse lane facility, meaning that the drive-through lanes will operate for drive-through service only.  Administration agrees that this change will reduce the potential for queuing vehicles to block the access, particularly during the peak demand period.

 

The safety analysis also discusses the possibility of reversing the direction of traffic using the drive-through.  This would result in queuing vehicles stacking within the existing carpark thereby negating the possibility of the Tarpon Link entrance being blocked.  The safety analysis states the following in relation to this matter:

 

‘the reversal of the drive-through facility will result in effectively doubling the traffic generation within the existing car park to the west of the proposal with vehicles required to enter the site and ‘double back’ resulting in additional circulation and exposure with limited benefits.  The proposed layout with traffic entering in a line haul manner directly via Tarpon Link in a westerly direction and exiting into the car park will result in lower exposure and less conflict between vehicular movements on the site and is therefore considered to be the safer and more efficient option.’

 

At the mediation session held on 12 November 2015, the impacts of reversing the direction of traffic were discussed and the applicant has since provided further justification stating that:

 

‘If the direction of the drive-through was to be reversed (i.e. west to east movement) there would need to be, in effect, two counter areas or a redesign of the Liquor Store. This will result in poorer store functionality and mean that staff would need to either monitor two counter areas or monitor the entrance to the Liquor Store and the counter area. This may compromise security and harm amelioration (responsible service of alcohol management).

 

Furthermore, if the drive-through was reversed it will result in increasing the risk and exposure on the site by requiring vehicles to undertake a 180 degree turn near the western end of the drive-through in order to enter in an easterly direction or ‘doubling back’ resulting in additional circulation and exposure.

This will also potentially cause constraints to vehicles attempting to utilise the right-angle parking adjacent to the western end of the drive-through. The proposed layout with traffic entering in a line haul manner directly via Tarpon Link in a westerly direction and exiting into the car park will result in lower exposure and less conflict between vehicular movements on the site and is therefore considered to be the safer and more efficient option.’

 

In consideration of the above, Administration is of the view that the direction of the traffic for the drive-through addition as originally proposed is appropriate and therefore capable of approval. The purpose of this discussion was to be assured that due consideration had been given to all options and clearly, there are disadvantages to reversing the flow of traffic. Council should still be aware that there may be some instances where the vehicle queue may extend to the Tarpon Link entrance, however, Administration considers this would not be a regular occurrence and it would be unlikely to cause a significant detriment to the flow of traffic.

 

Signage Strategy

 

A concern that was raised during the public consultation period related to signage for the Liquor Store.  As a consequence of discussions at the on-site mediation, the applicant has submitted a signage strategy.  The submitted signage strategy simply outlines signage requirements contained within the SLPP.  Signs which comply with the SLPP do not require planning approval and therefore the submission of a signage strategy simply re-iterating policy requirements lacks any detail of the signage proposal. Council should impose a condition requiring the applicant to submit a development application prior to the erection of any signage associated with the drive-through addition if it is inclined to support the development.

 

Management of Deliveries

 

The peak demand period for a drive-through Liquor Store is on a Friday afternoon (4.30pm to 7.00pm). Given the proximity of the entry to the drive-through this could result in a conflict between queuing vehicles and delivery vehicles for the supermarket in the shopping centre during this timeframe. Deliveries for the supermarket are generally outside of these hours. Notwithstanding this and through the mediation process, the applicant agreed to a prohibition on deliveries occurring during the Friday afternoon peak period (4:30pm to 7:00pm) to eliminate any risk of conflict between queuing vehicles and delivery vehicles. This has been recommended as a condition of approval, should Council resolve to approve the proposal.

 

Conclusion

 

The orders prepared by the SAT invite Council to review its previous decision. Under Section 31(2) of the State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004, and in response to the invitation of the SAT, Council may do one of the following further to a previous decision:

 

(a)        Affirm the decision;

(b)        Vary the decision; or

(c)        Set aside the decision and substitute its new decision.

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

There are no existing Strategic or Corporate risks within the City's existing risk registers which relates to the issues contained in this report.

 Policy Implications

Given Council’s decision varied significantly from Administration’s recommendation, an independent planning consultant has been engaged to represent Council consistent with LPP 4.17.

Financial Implications

Financial implications would be dependent on the decision of Council and the applicant's further action arising there from.

Should the matter proceed to a Full Hearing at the SAT, the City is likely to incur further costs in legal and expert fees. These costs do not include the substantial Administration time involved to date and which will be further required should the matter proceed to Full Hearing.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council ADVISES The Gastevski Group and the State Administrative Tribunal that,        pursuant to Section 31 of the State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004, Council has reconsidered its decision of 21 July 2015 relating to refusal issued for a drive-through addition to an approved Liquor Store at Lot 1081 (2) Captiva Approach, Butler and RESOLVES to set aside its previous refusal decision (PS04-07/15), and APPROVES the revised drive-through addition to an approved Liquor Store proposal subject to the following conditions to the satisfaction of the Manager Planning Implementation:-

1.       This approval only relates to the drive-through addition to the approved        Liquor Store and modifications to the car-park as shown on the approved       plans. It does not relate to any other development on the lot;

2.       The drive-through lanes shall operate as drive-through service lanes only     and shall not be used for the purpose of browse lanes, storage or be           obstructed in any way at any time;

3.       No deliveries to the Liquor Store or the Supermarket shall occur during the period between 4.30pm to 7.00pm on a Friday, unless otherwise approved   by the City;

4.       No signage shall be erected for, or on, the drive-through addition without      further approval from the City; and


 

5.       Proposed modifications to parking areas and driveways shall be designed    and constructed in accordance with the Australian Standard for Offstreet Carparking (AS2890), and shall be drained, sealed and marked.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Refused Plans

15/417241

 

2.

Revised Plans

15/555827

Minuted

 

 

 

 

 

 

  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 01 December, 2015                         57

Draft

Regulatory Services

3.11  Application to Retain Existing Front Boundary Fences at Lot 106 and Lot 107 Safari Place, Carabooda

File Ref:                                              3601 – 15/553712

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       4         

 

Issue

To consider the Existing Structure Applications for limestone front fences at Lot 106 (102) and Lot 107 (108) Safari Place, Carabooda (the Properties).

 

Background

On 8 August 2014 the owners of the Properties submitted existing structure applications in relation to the limestone front fences that had been constructed without any valid building permit see Attachments 1 and 2.  On 19 November 2014 the applications were refused for the following reasons:

 

·        the applications did not comply with the Third Schedule of the City's Private Property Local Law 2001 (Local Law); and

·        the information requested by the City had not been received (namely amended plans to comply with the Local Law.

 

On 11 March 2015 the City issued Building Orders to the owners of the Properties due to failure by the owners to either amend the front fences to comply with the Local Law or demolish, dismantle and remove the front fences in their entirety.

 

Following failure by the owners to comply with the abovementioned Building Orders, the City’s then Director City Business approved a request to commence prosecution.

 

On 23 June 2015 the City received ten notices from the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) in respect of reviewing building orders issued by the City, two of which were in relation to the front fences at the Properties.  On 30 September 2015 the City attended a mediation conference at the SAT, which was adjourned to conclude the mediation conference onsite at the Properties on 15 October 2015. This meeting occurred on 15 October 2015 and resulted in the following agreement:

 

·    the owners of Properties would submit new existing structure applications for the front fences.

·    the plans provided as part of the applications would detail amendments to the front fences to provide various visually permeable openings; and

·    the City’s Administration would present the existing structure applications to Council for consideration.

 

The SAT matter was adjourned to 16 December 2015.

 

On 6 November 2015 the City received the existing structure applications in relation to the front fences at the Properties (Existing Structure Applications) which included visual representations of the visually permeable openings in the front fences as detailed in Attachments 3 and 4.

Detail

The Properties are zoned “Rural Resource”.

 

Section 3.2(1)(c) of the Local Law stipulates that a sufficient fence on a rural lot is one that is constructed and maintained in accordance with the specifications and requirements of the Third Schedule.

 

The Third Schedule of the Local Law states that:

 

"Subject to clause 5.2 relating to estate fences, a sufficient fence on a Rural Lot for the purpose of the Dividing Fences Act is a fence of posts and wire construction, the minimum specifications for which are –

 

(a)  Wire shall be high tensile wire and not less than 2.5mm. A minimum of five wires shall be used, these are generally with the lower wires spaced closer together than the higher wires so as to prevent smaller stock passing through, and connected to posts in all cases, and threaded through 12mm holes in posts to all fences;

 

(b)  Posts shall be of indigenous timber or other suitable material including timber impregnated with a termite and fungicidal preservative cut not less than 1.8m long x 100mm diameter at small end of round or 125mm x 60mm if split or sawn.

 

(c)  Posts to be set minimum 600mm in the ground and 1.2m above the ground; and

 

(d)  Strainer posts shall be not less than 2.25m long and 150mm diameter at the small end and shall be cut from indigenous timber or other suitable material. These shall be placed a minimum of 1m in the ground.

 

Permissible Alternative Fences

 

Permissible alternative fences apply to front fences only and are not intended for other boundary fences on a rural lot or special rural lot.

 

With approval from the local government, open front fences may be constructed of:

 

(a)  An open picket timber fence

 

(b)  Brick, stone or concrete piers with an open infill of timber, wrought iron or tubular metal; or

 

(c)  Such other open fencing as approved by the local government."

 

The Existing Structure Applications submitted by the owners of the Properties requests approval for a limestone front fence wall with the following specifications.

 

·        constructed of reconstituted limestone blocks;

·        ranges in height from 1.7 meters to 2.5 meters (depending on the land level where measured);

·        total length of approximately 160 meters over the frontage of the two lots; and

·        has two small visually permeable openings proposed.

 

The existing design of the front fences do not fall within the permissible design requirements mentioned above. 

 

The Existing Structure Applications propose to amend the front fences by incorporating two visually permeable openings.  Notwithstanding that the amended front fences would still not comply with Local Law, this was considered as a compromised outcome as a result of the SAT mediation conferenceThe Local Law provides for discretion in approving non-compliant front fences as section 3.6 – General discretion of the local government states:

 

" (1) The local government may approve the erection of a fence which does not comply with the requirements of this local law.

 

(2)  In determining whether to approve the erection of a fence, the local government may consider, in addition to any other matters that it is authorised to consider, whether the erection or retention of the fence would have an adverse effect on:

 

(a)  The safety or convenience of any person; and

 

(b)  The safe or convenient use of any land."

Consultation

In accordance with the District Planning Scheme No.2, the proposed front fence is exempt from requiring Development Approval and therefore there is no requirement to consult with the adjoining landowners.

Comment

As a result of the SAT mediation it became clear that the City had to consider exercising its discretion:

1.       in issuing the building orders; and

2.       to approve the amended front fences in accordance with section 3.6 of the Local Law.

In relation to the City exercising its discretion whether or not to issue the building orders in this matter, SAT set out a number of factors that SAT considered in a previous matter before that are relevant to this matter:

 

·        the public interest in enforcement of building standards requires that there should be compliance with the Building Act and the conditions of any building permit issued thereunder such that no part of any building or incidental structure is built outside the boundary of a property;

·        regard should be had for the nature and extent of any burden or other detrimental effect to land affected by any infringement of a building permit or building laws generally;

·        the factual circumstances in which the alleged infringement has arisen;

·        the time which has elapsed since the alleged infringement non-conforming structure;

·        the expense and inconvenience which would be involved in removing the structure at issue; and

·        in applying the above factors, sound common sense should be used to avoid the unnecessary expenditure of public funds.

 

The owners of the Properties claim that:

 

·        the families living in the houses located at the Properties had been subjected to targeted abuse including having a fire bomb thrown at one of the houses located on the Properties; 

·        the front fences provide a level of safety for the families living in the houses located at the Properties;

·        the costs in undertaking works to amend the front fences to comply with the Local Law would be approximately $100,000.

 

In relation to the City exercising its discretion to approve the front fences as proposed in the Existing Structures Applications, the following factors are to be considered:

 

·        Section 3.6(a) of the Local Law refers to "The safety or convenience of any person" and the owners of the Properties have sighted privacy, security and noise as the reasons they require and built the front fence.  The front fence is towards the end of Safari Place and this section of Safari Place is isolated and ends in a cul-de-sac where the Properties are located.  Safari Place currently only provides access to other lots zoned Rural Resource and is not considered visually intrusive.

·        Section 3.6(b) of the Local Law refers to "The safe or convenient use of any land" and the location of the front fence would not cause any safety issues relating to sightlines. In accordance with section 3.5 of the Local Law a fence is exempt from requiring a truncation to support sufficient sightlines where there is a distance of 3.5m between the fence and a carriageway or footpath.  The nearest point the front fence is to the carriageway is 4.4m.  Therefore there is sufficient setback to allow for sightlines for vehicles accessing the lots surrounding and around the Properties.

 

Notwithstanding that the proposed front fences as set out in the Existing Structure Applications do not comply with the requirements of the Local Law, Administration recommends Council consider that factors set out in this report and approve the proposed front fences.

Statutory Compliance

Approval of the Existing Structure Applications requires the local government to be satisfied that the fence meets the requirements of section 3.6 of the Local Law.

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 are no existing Strategic or Corporate risks within the City's existing risk registers which relates to the issues contained in this report.

Policy Implications

The approval of the proposed front fences has the potential to set a precedent however this risk is alleviated by the fact that the City is currently reviewing all its local laws and is intending to make a new Fencing Local Law.  The proposed Fencing Local Law in the final stages of drafting and will be presented to Council Forum in the first quarter of 2016.

Financial Implications

Should Council determine not to approve the Existing Structure Applications for the front fences, it is expected that the matter would proceed to a hearing before SAT and subject to the outcome the City’s may be liable for the applicant’s legal costs in addition to the legal costs incurred by the City. 

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council APPROVES the Existing Structure Applications for the limestone front fences at Lot 106 (102) and Lot 107 (108) Safari Place, Carabooda.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Current Front Fence - 108 Safari Place Carabooda

15/554237

 

2.

Current Front Fence - 102 Safari Place Carabooda

15/554243

 

3.

Proposed Front Fence - 102 Safari Place Carabooda

15/562020

 

4.

Proposed Front Fence - 108 Safari Place Carabooda

15/562023

 

 

 

 

 

  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 01 December, 2015                         62

Draft

Other Matters

3.12  Amberton Foreshore Management Plan

File Ref:                                              2442 – 15/519244

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       5         

 

Issue

To consider the draft Amberton Foreshore Management Plan (FMP).

 

Background

Council at its Meeting on 15 September 2015 reviewed the Amberton Foreshore Management Plan (FMP) and moved the following Procedural Motion:

 

That the Report is referred back to Administration for further assessment of the proposed cafe site.

 

On 18 November 2015 Administration coordinated a site visit for Elected Members to view potential cafe location options within the Amberton foreshore. Stockland’s preferred location is shown on their master plan in close proximity to the ocean (refer to Attachment 1).

 

The proponent (Stockland) will be required to submit development applications following Council approval of the FMP, which will be considered by the City and determined by the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) for all works carried out within the foreshore reserve.

 

Council approval of a FMP does not bind Council to approve any further applications within the area covered by the FMP. Any development application the City receives will be assessed against the FMP. A copy of the Amberton FMP has been circulated to Elected Members under separate cover and is available to members of the public on the City’s website – Council Meetings Minutes and Agenda page. The executive summary of the Amberton FMP is included at Attachment 2.

Detail

Emerge Associates, on behalf of Stockland has submitted the Amberton Foreshore Management Plan (FMP) for Council’s approval, in accordance with the requirements of LSP 82.

 

The proposed development has a coastal frontage of approximately 700 metres. The FMP has been prepared to guide the planning, development, rehabilitation and long term management of the Amberton foreshore which is a local beach.

 

The area incorporates a Parks and Recreation reserve and areas of Public Open Space (POS) allocated under LSP 82, to ensure that an adequate foreshore reserve is provided in accordance with State Coastal Planning Policy 2.6 (SPP 2.6).

 

The FMP contains information addressing the following:

 

·        Environmental characteristics of the management plan area;

·        Coastal management guidance relevant to the site;

·        Proposed foreshore development plans;

·        Management actions; and

·        Implementation roles and responsibilities.

 

Proposed development

 

Approval of this FMP relates only to the ‘Amberton Foreshore area’, as delineated in red in the FMP concept master plan (Attachment 1). The WAPC approved the subdivision to the east of the foreshore in October 2015. The FMP masterplan included as Attachment 1 reflects the latest subdivision proposal. The closest existing residents to the Amberton foreshore are approximately 1 kilometre to the east.

 

The FMP proposes the following structural elements within the foreshore reserve; as illustrated in Attachment 1:

 

·    One coastal node, including:

-     Pedestrian and vehicle access;

-     Car park - approximately 35 bays;

-     Children’s playground;

-     BBQs;

-     Beach shower;

-     Bike racks;

-     Shelters; and

-     Cafe.

 

·    3 pedestrian beach access ways;

·    3 passive recreation areas;

·    One dual use path adjacent to the foreshore reserve running north/south for the length of the development;

·    One emergency vehicle beach access way; and

·    One lookout.

 

Drainage

 

Within the foreshore reserve, drainage retention for 1 in 100 year storm events is proposed with no drainage entering the vegetated areas of the foreshore reserve. Drainage retention for 1 in 10 year storm events will occur outside of the foreshore reserve, in accordance with State Coastal Planning Policy No. 2.6 (SPP 2.6).

 

Beach safety

 

Surf Life Saving Western Australia (SLSWA) has completed a Coastal Aquatic Risk Assessment (CARA) to determine beach safety risks along the Amberton coastline. The CARA provided a number of recommendations:

 

·        SLSWA recommended that the southern area of the foreshore is the most “friendly” to a range of beach users based upon user competency and user experience;

·        Stockland is to provide safety signage and general locational and information signage to the satisfaction of SLSWA; and

·        Stockland is to develop an educational and awareness program in conjunction with City of Wanneroo in order to mitigate risks at aquatic coastal locations.

 

SLSWA has also indicated that a lifesaving and surveillance outpost could be accommodated at Amberton in the future, should visitation rates exceed the predicted usage for this local beach.

 


 

Proposed Cafe

 

Stockland is proposing a relocatable cafe within close proximity to the ocean.  Details of the proposed cafe are set out below:

 

·        The relocatable cafe shown in the concept master plan in Attachment 3 is proposed forward of the 30 year coastal processes line. This is in an elevated position to capture views of the ocean and the coastline. It is estimated that the asset will have a structural lifespan of between 30-40 years in a coastal setting.

·        Stockland’s consultant MP Rogers has indicated that the current indicative location of the cafe will not be impacted by coastal erosion for the first 10 years of its lifespan. Beyond this timeframe there is a low risk of impact from coastal erosion between 10 years and 20 years.

·        Stockland would place appropriate signage around the indicative site to acknowledge it is a relocatable structure and temporary in nature (this is the same approach as for Sprout in Alkimos).

·        The relocatable cafe will be designed in a way that would enable the building to be relocated to avoid being impacted by coastal erosion.

·        The building would be constructed from lightweight materials that are durable in a coastal setting. Examples of the potential design of the relocatable cafe, as shown in the FMP, have been included in Attachment 4.

·        Stockland is prepared to provide a bond to the City to cover any potential relocation cost for the cafe including removal of supporting infrastructure and revegetation of the area. A potential relocation site has been identified in the FMP and is illustrated in Figure 13 of the FMP (Attachment 5).

·        A development application is required for the cafe and all other foreshore facilities and infrastructure. Stockland has indicated that they would accept a time limited approval for the cafe.

·        The site will require re-contouring from the crest of the dune in an area of degraded vegetation to construct the cafe.

·        The proposed relocatable cafe location was originally proposed by Stockland to be Crown land within the foreshore reserve. However, during late October and early November 2015, Stockland advised Administration that it intended to subdivide the relevant land within the foreshore reserve for the relocatable cafe into freehold land and transfer the lot to the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC). The proposed arrangement is similar to that developed between PEET and the WAPC at Shorehaven. Administration understands that a reason for this change is that the leasing of the site is achievable in the freehold arrangement, whereas a Crown land, public recreation reserve, may not secure a power to lease.

·        In the event that the relocatable cafe land is provided to the WAPC in freehold as a separate lot, the WAPC would grant a land lease to Stockland to construct the cafe buildings and then sublease the site to the cafe operator. The leasing documents would be prepared between the WAPC and Stockland, although the WAPC has verbally advised Administration that it would seek input from the City and would be prepared to accommodate the City’s key considerations, namely:

 

-     The requirement that the cafe is relocatable;

-     Specifications for the building construction materials; and

-     An acknowledgement that the land is to remain owned by the WAPC, and will not be transferred to the State for City management until such time that the City consents to assume management under a management order.

 

 


 

Car Park

 

A car park of approximately 35 bays is located behind the prospective cafe sites and east of the 50 year coastal processes line. A car park has a structural lifespan of an estimated 50 years which will enable the City to make a decision as to whether the car park will be retained or reconstructed in 50 years based on the physical impact of erosion and inundation. As identified in the concept master plan, the road connecting to the car park will be constructed to allow for on road car bays should a new car park location be required beyond 50 years.

 

Condition of Management

 

Given the conceptual nature of some of the elements proposed within the FMP, the following conditions have been included within the document to ensure the City does not inherit an asset it cannot manage or maintain:

 

Stockland and the City of Wanneroo acknowledges that this FMP is conceptual and that the detailed design of all prescribed assets and infrastructure will occur during the development application stage. Stockland recognises that should the City of Wanneroo determine that they do not have the capacity to maintain and manage a proposed asset then the City reserves the right to require the application to show this accordingly. The City and Stockland will work together in a collaborative fashion to ensure that all assets are suitable to the resources available to the City.

 

The proposed playground and all other public amenities including but not limited to applications for play equipment, exercise equipment, outdoor furniture, shelters, structures, BBQ's, drinking fountains and public art will satisfy the following criteria:

 

1.       Maintenance thereof is to be within the City's operating budget;

2.       Replacement thereof is to be within the City's capital works budget;

3.       Compliance thereof with the Australian Standards and City's safety standards;

4.       The scale of the playground is to be appropriate to the size of park it is proposed in; and

5.       The playground provides opportunity for physical and creative play and accommodates for different age groups.

 

Implementation Plan

 

The implementation schedule in Table 10 of the FMP details issues and actions required to deliver the FMP, along with their frequency and the responsible authority.

 

The implementation schedule does not require the City to undertake any works. However, following a 5-year maintenance period by the proponent, the City will accept handover of assets to maintain and manage subject to the requirements of handover. This excludes the relocatable cafe which, if required, will be relocated at the expense of Stockland.

Consultation

Stockland has conducted extensive community consultation for the Amberton FMP through monthly community meetings held since mid-2013. Attendance at these meetings has included the following stakeholders:

 

·        Local residents;

·        Amberton Residents Association; and

·        City of Wanneroo staff and some local Elected Members.

 

Participants have provided valuable input towards the FMP masterplan and the proposed assets. Given the consultation that has taken place to date and the absence of residents adjacent to the foreshore, Administration believes that further external consultation is not required.

 

Internally, Administration has reviewed prior drafts of the FMP and requested a number of changes. These changes are now reflected in the document presented for approval and Administration is supportive of the final draft of the FMP subject to the conditions of approval in the recommendations of this report and the cafe being relocated in the master plan to a location between the 30 year and 50 year vulnerability line.

Comment

Under the State Coastal Planning Policy No. 2.6, a local beach is defined as the following:

 

Local beaches are those that are used by people living close by and are often accessed by foot or bicycle, as well as by car. Local beaches usually have very few facilities and infrastructure, and generally record relatively low rates of use.

 

Administration has worked in collaboration with the Department of Planning and Stockland to ensure that the amenity and infrastructure proposed within the Amberton foreshore corresponds with SPP 2.6. Administration is also cognisant of the projected impact coastal erosion and inundation may have on the Wanneroo coastline and specifically the assets proposed within the Amberton foreshore. These projections are illustrated in Attachment 5.

 

Administration’s approach in discussions with Stockland in the assessment of the FMP is that more expensive assets such as car parks, cafes and children’s play areas should be located in areas where they are not going to be potentially impacted by coastal erosion before the end of the asset’s natural lifespan.  For example, a car park has an estimated lifespan of 50 years and therefore the car park has been located behind the 50 year coastal processes setback line to allow for the full lifespan of this asset.  This reflects the approach Administration would like to take in a local planning policy currently being prepared. 

 

Stockland is proposing a relocatable cafe forward of the 30 year coastal processes line, in the land that Stockland will transfer in freehold to the WAPC. Whilst Administration is supportive of the provision of a cafe within the Foreshore, it is Administration’s recommendation that any long term cafe be located between the 30 year and 50 year coastal processes lines for the following reasons:

 

·        A location between the 30 and 50 year coastal processes line will provide a more long term and sustainable position for the cafe that would be less likely to be impacted by coastal erosion before the end of its natural lifespan than the current indicative location;

·        Stockland could still deliver a cafe between the 30 to 50 year coastal processes line that would deliver ocean views, and a strong relationship with the foreshore environment.

·        The proposed Stockland cafe location is located on top of a dune. To enable the construction of the cafe on the top of the dune re-contouring will be required within areas of degraded vegetation. Administration recommends that the cafe be located as indicated on the map included at Attachment 3 and that the degraded dune immediately to the west (Stockland’s preferred location) be re-contoured, as would also be required with Stockland’s proposed location. The area between Administrations preferred location and the dune could then be graded to act as a small viewing platform for the local community which would be connected to the cafe. By removing the top of the degraded dune it would also provide extensive ocean views, similar to those proposed by Stockland’s location.

The benefit of Administration’s recommendation is that the cafe is located between the 30 year and 50 year vulnerability lines but still contains ocean views and the provision of a low cost viewing area.

·        Administration is concerned that if the cafe were constructed in the current proposed indicative location and it had to be relocated; there could be very strong community expectation that it remain in situ. To an extent, this could be managed through the lease between the WAPC and Stockland, but the City would have limited input in this regard (such as in requesting that the WAPC ensure that the lease term is sufficiently limited to reflect the City’s preferred expiry date). There could be significant pressure placed on Council to retain the asset in that location and to implement coastal protection works as an alternative to relocation. It is therefore Administration’s preference that these community expectations are not raised and that the cafe initially is located in a position where it is not likely to be required to be relocated before the end of the cafe’s structural lifespan. Given the cafe structure is estimated to have a lifespan of 30-40 years, the cafe should be located between the 30 year and 50 year coastal processes lines.

·        Administration would also like to avoid a situation of disturbing the quiet enjoyment and business goodwill of the lessee if the cafe were to be relocated during the lease term.

 

The comments in this report regarding the arrangements between Stockland and the WAPC for the relocatable cafe site are provided notwithstanding that it is Administration’s preference for the land tenure for the leased site to be a Crown reserve managed by the City under a management order and the premises construction and lease arrangements to be documented in a deed of agreement to be negotiated between Stockland and the City. This would enable the City to control the timeframe for the cafe’s relocation should this be required in the future. However, Administration understands that Stockland is entitled to subdivide the proposed land and proceed with its planned arrangements with the WAPC.

 

The beach access path and emergency vehicle beach access are considered mandatory for the usability of this location and therefore should be retained as shown. The majority of vegetation within the foreshore reserve has been identified as Very Good or Good and the FMP proposes landform and vegetation retention for these areas. One of the main focuses of the FMP is to promote conservation and ecological features of the foreshore reserve by providing community recreation opportunities in degraded areas of the foreshore. The southern coastal node has been located in an existing degraded area and coastal access paths have been proposed to align with existing tracks where possible to minimise the disturbance to existing vegetation.

Statutory Compliance

Approval of the FMP by Council is required to satisfy the approval requirements of LSP 82. Once endorsed by Council, the Amberton FMP will be forwarded to the WAPC for approval. All future development applications for the Amberton foreshore will be assessed against the approved FMP.

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

Risk Title

Risk Rating

Climate change

High

Accountability

Action Planning Option

Manager City Growth

Manage

In accordance with SPP 2.6, a sea level rise of 0.9 metres is predicted by the year 2110. The risk to coastal infrastructure and assets as a result of sea level rise is a key consideration of the Amberton FMP. Acknowledging these risks, Administration has requested Stockland and Emerge Associates in preparation of the FMP to locate assets in areas which should not be impacted by coastal impacts prior to the conclusion of the asset’s structural life span. Stockland has identified adaptation options for all proposed assets and has identified relocation sites for the car park and relocatable cafe in response to these risks.

The location of the relocatable cafe is a key risk consideration for this foreshore development.  Whilst Administration is supportive of the provision of a relocatable cafe, it is considered that this should be positioned between the 30 year and 50 year coastal processes line to reduce the risk of impact from coastal erosion and storm events before the end of the café’s structural lifespan.

Policy Implications

Administration is in the process of preparing a Foreshore Assets Policy to guide the preparation and assessment of Foreshore Management Plans and in particular the location of assets within the Foreshore.  It is intended that this will be presented to a future Council Forum for Elected Members consideration.  The approval of the cafe in Administrations proposed revised location is generally consistent with the approach Administrations is including in the emerging draft policy.

Financial Implications

In accordance with SPP 2.6 ‘the proponent is responsible for the implementation of the FMP as well as funding, maintenance, monitoring and management of the foreshore works for a period not less than 5 years, commencing from the completion of all foreshore works’. After such time, following practical completion, the City will accept handover of the foreshore reserve in accordance with the City’s maintenance standards and approved detailed drawings.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

 

1.       APPROVES the draft Amberton Foreshore Management Plan subject to the following amendments:

 

a)      The cafe is situated between the 30 year and 50 year coastal processes lines, with the land tenure to be a Crown reserve managed by the City under a management order and a lease with the operator, but that in the event that the cafe is instead situated in land owned in freehold by the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) (as proposed by Stockland) the City advises the WAPC that:

 

i)       In the event that the cafe is situated in land subject to potential coastal hazards before the 30 year coastal processes line, the lease term will be in accordance with the City’s advice to the WAPC;

ii)      The building materials for the cafe are to be approved by the City; and

iii)     The formal consent of the City will be required before the City will accept any management order for the land incorporating the cafe.

b)      The turfed areas and asphalt walkways positioned west of the car park, with the exception of the emergency vehicle access and single beach access way, are relocated between the 30 year and 50 year coastal processes line;

 

c)      The identified relocation site for the cafe is to be shown on the FMP concept master plan; and

 

d)      The Amberton Foreshore Management Plan (FMP) is amended to reflect Council’s resolution.

 

2.       FORWARDS a copy to the Western Australian Planning Commission for its approval.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Amberton FMP MASTER PLAN REV E.pdf

15/464597

 

2.

Amberton FMP Executive Summary

15/450870

 

3.

Amberton FMP Master Plan and Cafe locations

15/546664

 

4.

Amberton Relocatable Cafe designs

15/451262

 

5.

Amberton FMP Coastal Vulnerability Mapping

15/454890

 

 

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 01 December, 2015                         70

Draft

3.13  Proposed Pedestrian Accessway Closure - Pedestrian Accessway between Nott Place and Oldham Park, Yanchep

File Ref:                                              22235 – 15/294510

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       4         

 

Issue

To consider the permanent closure of a pedestrian accessway (PAW) between Nott Place and Oldham Park, Yanchep.

 

Background

The PAW consists of a land parcel formally known as Lot 55 (10P) Nott Place, Yanchep.

 

The PAW land between Nott Place and Oldham Park was dedicated in the early 1970's as part of the subdivision of the locality. The PAW was intended to provide a pedestrian connection from the cul-de-sac of Nott Place and Oldham Park.

 

A location plan that identifies the location of the PAW is included as Attachment 1. Attachment 1 also includes a plan that identifies the location of roads and features (such as Oldham Park, Yanchep District High School and shopping centres) referred to in this Report, and the submissions received by Administration.

 

The physical characteristics of the PAW are as follows:

 

·        The subject PAW is four metres wide and approximately 34 metres long.

·        The PAW land slopes gently upwards from Nott Place. 

·        The PAW is vacant, and contains no footpath, fencing or other infrastructure. The PAW land is indistinguishable from the adjoining properties on either side.

·        The PAW land contains dense vegetation comprising of:

Overhang from non-native agonis flexuosa (peppermint trees), planted on the adjoining Lot 332 (11) Nott Place;

Various low-lying non-native weed species; and

Native shrub species olearia axillaris and scaevola crassifolia, situated predominantly on the eastern portion of the PAW where it adjoins the Oldham Park reservation.

 

Yanchep residents had previously enjoyed access from Nott Place to Oldham Park via an unsealed track that existed on the southern portion of a vacant Lot 334 (10) Nott Place, a residential lot adjoining the PAW. Residents lost the pedestrian access through Lot 334 in late 2014, as the unsealed track was removed to commence construction of a dwelling on that lot.

 

The density of the vegetation in the PAW had previously made it inaccessible for pedestrians. In late October 2015, and in response to requests made by local residents seeking to obtain access through the PAW, Administration arranged for the pruning of the overhang from the peppermint trees and the removal of weed shrub species. Pedestrian access through the PAW is still impeded by the native low-lying shrubs that Administration was required to retain, as removal of native vegetation requires a Clearing Permit pursuant to Section 51E of the Environment Protection Act 1986.

 

When advertising the proposed PAW closure; not only did Administration receive a strong response objecting to the PAW closure, but also a strong response for the City to provide pedestrian access through the PAW. This Report considers whether the PAW should be closed; and should the PAW not close, what measures the City can undertake in maintaining a pedestrian access between Nott Place and Oldham Park (within the PAW).

 

Lodgement of a Petition

 

A petition tabled by Cr. Winton with 144 signatures was tabled at the 18 August 2015 Council Meeting (PT02-08/15); requesting Council formally considers objecting to the permanent closure of the land designated as a pedestrian accessway between Nott Place and Oldham Park, Yanchep.

 

This Report responds to the request raised in the petition, and recommends that Council not support the PAW closure. Administration intends to respond to the principal petitioner following Council’s resolution on the matter.

Detail

A request was received on 3 June 2015 by the landowners (hereafter referred to as the applicants) of Lot 334 (10) Nott Place, Yanchep to close the PAW. In their submission to Administration on 3 June 2015, the applicants requested the City consider closing the PAW, for the following reasons:

 

·    Preservation of the existing vegetation located on the PAW;

·    Reduce potential traffic issues through Nott Place;

·    Maintain the beautiful and tranquil nature of the immediate area; and.

·    Maintain levels of privacy.

 

The applicants have expressed an intention to acquire the PAW land, and to meet costs associated with that acquisition. The applicants have also expressed their disappointment to Administration that the peppermint trees in the PAW have recently been pruned.

Consultation

In accordance with the Land Administration Act 1997, Administration arranged the publication of a notice in the Wanneroo Times and North Coast Times on 14 July 2015 and Sun City News on 16 July 2015, inviting comment during the advertising period concluding on 20 August 2015.

 

Public consultation was also carried out by way of:

 

·        Letters to landowners of land in proximity to the subject PAW. A map demonstrating the extent of the letter distribution is included as Attachment 2;

·        Installation of signage at the Nott Place cul-de-sac head adjoining the PAW; and

·        Letters to relevant government agencies and service authorities that may be affected by the closure of the PAW.

 

During the consultation period, Administration received 26 submissions. Of those submissions, 22 objected to the PAW closure, and four submissions raised no objection to the proposed closure of the PAW. A summary of the submissions received, together with Administration's comments to each is included as Attachment 3.

Comment

The City's Local Planning Policy for Pedestrian Access Ways (the Policy) provides guidance to evaluate PAW closure requests. Further assessment of the PAW closure request against the policy provisions is provided for below:

 

Role of the PAW within the Neighbourhood

 

Administration considers the PAW to be a 'Single Access Route PAW'. A Single Access Route PAW is defined in the Policy where a PAW does not form part of a continuous access route. A continuous access route is where more than one PAW forms part of an access route.

 

The PAW could enable the easterly pedestrian movement from Lefroy Road, down Nott Place and into the PAW to connect to Oldham Park. As outlined through the submissions, this route seems popular with residents accessing facilities such as Oldham Park, the Yanchep District High School and the shopping centres located adjacent to Marmion Avenue.

 

Residents walking in a westerly direction from Oldham Park could use the PAW to access Nott Place; and from there the beach via Lefroy Road and Kaiber Avenue.

 

Access to Community Facilities and Services

 

The Policy stipulates that where a PAW is considered to provide an important access route to community facilities and services, closure shall generally not be supported.

 

The PAW could provide residents with pedestrian access to existing community facilities and services, such as:

 

·    For eastbound pedestrian movement – Oldham Park, Yanchep District High School, as well as the shopping and medical facilities situated on Marmion Avenue; and

·    For westbound pedestrian movement – the beaches and foreshore along Brazier Road (in particular the Yanchep Lagoon).

 

A plan that demonstrates the location of the PAW in relation to the facilities mentioned above is included as Attachment 1.

 

Anti-Social Behaviour Considerations Related to the PAW

 

The Policy stipulates that Council should consider the role that the PAW may serve in facilitating anti-social behaviour, including graffiti, burglary and dumping of litter. Neither the landowners adjoining the PAW or the submitters have stated that the PAW attracts anti-social behaviour.

 

Access for the Disabled and Seniors

 

The Policy stipulates that a PAW access is especially relevant where a PAW provides pedestrian access from senior’s accommodation/aged person’s homes. As there are no seniors accommodation/aged persons homes located in close proximity to the PAW, this matter is not relevant.

 

Availability of Alternative Access Routes

 

The Policy states that PAW closure shall only be supported if alternative viable access routes are available. Viable alternative access routes should be safe, convenient and not substantially longer than a route through an existing PAW.

Although pedestrian routes along Chrisp Place or Kaiber Avenue provide access to these facilities, the comments received through the submission suggest an alternative route to these facilities via the PAW would provide a popular alternative. Removing the possibility of access through the subject PAW will result in longer pedestrian routes to local facilities, particularly for residents of Nott Place, Arney Place and parts of Lefroy Road.

 

Alternatives to the Closure of the PAW

 

Should Council not support the PAW closure as recommended, the City (as the authority that has care of the PAW) could ensure that the PAW can be used for its intended purpose of providing pedestrian access. To ensure that pedestrian access can be provided between Nott Place and Oldham Park, the City could consider the following:

 

·    Clearing existing shrubs on the PAW land, to provide unsealed access between Nott Place and Oldham Park. As outlined in the ‘Background’ section above, the clearing of native plant species would require a Clearing Permit under Section 51E of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. To obtain a Clearing Permit, Administration could arrange for the application to be prepared and lodged to the Department of Environment Regulation (DER). The DER would then have a statutory timeframe of 90 days to consider whether it grants (or refuses to grant) the Clearing Permit;

 

·    Ensuring that foliage from the peppermint trees overhanging from the adjoining Lot 332 is regularly maintained;

 

·    Whether the provision of permanent pedestrian infrastructure in the PAW (such as a footpath) is feasible. At Council’s request, Administration could undertake investigations into the feasibility of permanent pedestrian infrastructure in the PAW, and report back to Council at a later date (e.g. by June 2016). The investigations would form a conclusion whether the construction of pedestrian infrastructure in the PAW should be included in the City’s 10 year Capital Works Program. Administration anticipates that the estimated cost in constructing a footpath in the PAW (and additional connecting footpaths through the western extent Oldham Park as shown on the plan included as Attachment 4) would be approximately $80,000; and

 

·    Ensuring that pedestrian access (whether that access is sealed or not) can be provided through the PAW in a manner that is deemed safe by Administration.

 

Conclusion

 

In light of the above points, Administration does not support the closure of the PAW.

 

As outlined in the ‘Background’ section of the Report, the Yanchep residents had previously been enjoying informal access between Nott Place and Oldham Park via an unsealed track that was situated on a (then) vacant lot (Lot 334 Nott Place), situated adjoining the densely vegetated and inaccessible PAW. As construction of a dwelling on Lot 334 commenced in late 2014, and as the PAW remained densely vegetated, access from Nott Place to Oldham Park was inhibited; which, as expressed through the submissions, was at the detriment of existing Yanchep residents.

 

The landowner of Lot 334 has sought to acquire the PAW land, as the dense vegetation within the PAW provided a benefit for their amenity. On reviewing the PAW closure request, Administration is of the view that:

 

·    The dense vegetation providing the amenity for the landowner of Lot 334 is situated on a land parcel (the PAW) that is intended to provide pedestrian access; and

·    The use of the PAW land for pedestrian access is sought and favoured by the community generally (as expressed through the submissions summarised in Attachment 3).

 

Administration recommends that unsealed pedestrian access be facilitated through the PAW in the short term, provided that such access can be provided in a manner that is deemed safe by Administration. It is then recommended that Council requests Administration investigate the feasibility and cost in providing permanent, sealed pedestrian infrastructure in the PAW (and in adjoining portions of Oldham Park, as demonstrated in Attachment 4), and report findings of those investigations back to Council by June 2016.

Statutory Compliance

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

 

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

Strategic Implications

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

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

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

Risk Management Considerations

There are no existing Strategic or Corporate risks within the City's existing risk registers which relates to the issues contained in this report.

Policy Implications

The request to close the PAW has been considered in reference to the City's Local Planning Policy for Pedestrian Access Ways and the Department of Planning publication 'Procedure for the Closure of Pedestrian Access Ways – Planning Guidance' (the Procedure).

 

The Procedure outlines the consultation process that should be followed when considering a request to close a PAW. With consideration of the consultation methods prescribed in the Procedure, Administration considered the use of an advertisement in local newspapers, a direct mail out to potentially affected households and signage at the Nott Place end of the accessway as appropriate forms of consultation in this instance.

Financial Implications

Should Council resolve not to close the PAW, financial implications would then depend on the costs of clearing and maintaining the PAW land, as well as the costs of providing a footpath and other infrastructure if considered necessary.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

 

1.       NOTES the petition tabled at the 18 August 2015 Council Meeting requesting Council consider objecting to the closure of the pedestrian accessway between Nott Place and Oldham Park, Yanchep (PT02-08/15), and ADVISES the principal petitioner of this decision;

 

2.       NOTES the submissions received as summarised in Attachment 3 in respect to the proposed closure of the pedestrian accessway formally known as Lot 55 (10P) Nott Place, Yanchep, and ENDORSES Administration's responses to those submissions;

 

3.       DOES NOT SUPPORT the closure of the pedestrian accessway formally known as Lot 55 (10P) Nott Place, Yanchep; where identified on the plan included as Attachment 1;

 

4.       REQUESTS that Administration clear the vegetation in the pedestrian accessway formally known as Lot 55 (10P) Nott Place, Yanchep to the extent required to facilitate pedestrian access, and to obtain the required Clearing Permits from the Department of Environment Regulation pursuant to Section 51E of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 prior to any clearing;

 

5.       REQUESTS Administration investigate the feasibility and costs in providing permanent, sealed pedestrian infrastructure at the following locations, and report the findings of those investigations to Council by June 2016:

 

a)      In the pedestrian accessway formally known as Lot 55 (10P) Nott Place, Yanchep; and

 

b)      In the western portion of Oldham Park, where generally indicated on the plan included as Attachment 4; and

 

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

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1 - Location Plans - Proposed PAW Closure - 10P Nott Place, Yanchep

15/533814

Minuted

2.

Attachment 2 - Location Plan Showing Extent of Letter Distribution - Consultation of PAW Closure

15/533802

 

3.

Attachment 3 - Summary of Submissions - Proposed PAW Closure - Nott Place, Yanchep

15/554621

Minuted

4.

Attachment 4 - Concept Plan of Possible Footpath Location

15/531335

Minuted

 

 

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 01 December, 2015                         76

Draft

3.14  Approval of Expenditure from the Sustainability Investment Fund Reserve

File Ref:                                              6903 – 15/523263

Responsible Officer:                           A/Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil       

 

Issue

To consider approval of expenditure from the Sustainability Investment Fund (SIF), in accordance with the SIF Expenditure and Reporting Policy.

 

Background

Council at its Meeting on 18 August 2015 approved expenditure of $82,888 (ex.GST) for Next Energy to install additional solar panels at Aquamotion, Kingsway Indoor Stadium and Clarkson Library and a monitoring system at Aquamotion and for Power Intelligence to install a Voltage Optimisation system at Aquamotion (PS03-08/15). The value of the solar panel component totalled $51,492 (ex.GST).

 

Subsequent to Council’s consideration of this matter at its August 2015 meeting, Administration were advised by Next Energy that the Clean Energy Council (the peak body for the clean energy industry in Australia, including solar panel providers) had changed the rules on claiming Small Technology Certificates (STCs) and that this has an unavoidable impact on the price of the additional solar panels proposed to be installed.

Detail

When an organisation purchases and installs a solar panel system, it is entitled to create and claim STCs (formally called Renewable Energy Certificates).  Organisations are eligible to receive 1 STC for every Megawatt hour of energy the system is expected to produce over the next 15 years.  STCs can be sold (either to the Clean Energy Regulator or on the private STC market) to recoup a portion of the cost of purchasing and installing the system, and it is therefore common practice for the purchaser to allocate the STCs to the system installer in exchange for a discount on the purchase price of the system.  For example if 31 STCs equates to $1,500 then an organisation would receive a $1,500 discount on the system purchased.

 

All new solar panel installations now require an inverter that complies with a new standard, IEC 62109 - Earth Fault Alarms. An earth fault alarm is a new safety requirement designed to detect if there is a fault or short-circuit between the circuits of the solar panel system and the ground (earth).  Since the introduction of the new standard, only compliant inverters (those with an earth fault alarm) are able to claim STCs.

 

Although the inverters on the City’s existing solar panel systems at the Civic Centre, Clarkson Library, Kingsway Indoor Stadium and Aquamotion do not have earth fault alarms installed, there is no requirement for them to be retrofitted as a result of the new standard.  Should an earth fault occur, the inverter will automatically stop working and Next Power will notify the City of the fault within 12 hours.

 

However, it does mean that the additional solar panels proposed to be added to the systems at Clarkson Library, Kingsway Indoor Stadium and Aquamotion are unable to claim STCs to offset their cost and as a result Next Power has increased the price of their quotation to undertake this work.

 

Comment

The change to the eligibility for claiming STCs on new solar panel installations is beyond the City’s control and was not allowed for in quotations obtained from suppliers in the lead up to Council previously considering this matter in August 2015.  As a result, the unbudgeted expenditure out of the SIF Reserve account approved by Council at that meeting is not sufficient to cover the revised cost of the project.

 

In order for Administration to continue to progress the installation of additional solar panels, it is necessary for Council to consider approving additional unbudgeted expenditure from the SIF to cover the additional cost resulting from this policy change.

Statutory Compliance

Section 6.8 (1)(b) of the Local Government Act 1995 required unbudgeted expenditure to be approved by an Absolute Majority of Council.

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

Risk Title

Risk Rating

Workplace health and safety

Moderate

Accountability

Action Planning Option

Coordinator Safety Systems

Manage

 

The above risk relating to the issue contained within this report has been identified and considered within the City’s Corporate Risk Register.

Policy Implications

The City’s Accounting Policy Section 3(g)(c) states that where the budget allocation for a capital work project is insufficient, in accordance with Section 6.8 of the Local Government Act 1995 there is a requirement for a recommendation to the Council seeking authorisation of the necessary budget variation.

Financial Implications

The cost of the solar panel expansion project has increased by $15,976 (from $51,492 ex. GST to $67,468 ex. GST). 

 

There is currently $120,732 available in the SIF which is sufficient to fund the revised cost for the solar panels ($67,468) and the Voltage Optimisation system being installed at Aquamotion ($31,396).

Voting Requirements

Absolute Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council, Pursuant to Section 6.8 (1)(b) of the Local Government Act 1995, APPROVES BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the over expenditure of $15,976 excluding GST, to be funded from the Sustainability Investment Fund Reserve, for the increase in cost of the proposed solar panel installations at Aquamotion, Kingsway Indoor Stadium and Clarkson Library.

 

 

Attachments: Nil   


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 01 December, 2015                         79

Draft

Assets

Asset Management

3.15  City of Wanneroo Roadwise Working Group  - Amendment to Terms of Reference

File Ref:                                              1446V03 – 15/541438

Responsible Officer:                           Director Assets

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       1         

 

Issue

To consider amending the Terms of Reference (TOR) for the RoadWise Working Group (the Working Group).

 

Background

The City’s RoadWise Working Committee was formed in 2003.  At the Council Meeting of
23 September 2008, Council endorsed a revised TOR to consider the proposed conversion of the Roadwise Advisory Committee to a working group, and the amendment of the relevant Terms of Reference.

 

The Roadwise Working Group’s role is to provide a forum for community liaison, implement community road safety projects of a strategic nature. The TOR has been reviewed to include cycling as a key item and define suitable criteria for the appointment of community representatives to the Group.

Detail

Amendments to the Terms of Reference are summarised below and shown in Attachment 1.

 

Amended Role/Purpose

The Working Group’s role/purpose is to provide a forum for community liaison, implement community road safety projects and to provide strategic advice to the City of Wanneroo on strategic traffic and road safety issues aligned with the City of Wanneroo Road Safety Strategic Action Plan 2015-2018 that affects the residents and transport users within the City.

 

Aims and Function

Following items have been included, deleted or amended:

1.2  Include – to contribute to the development of the City’s Cycle Plan;

1.6. Delete – reducing trip travel speeds; and

       Add wording – or under the influence of alcohol and drugs.

 

Membership

It is proposed to:

·    increase the number of community representatives from four to five;

·    Include the following criteria for the appointment of community representatives:

1.   Reside or have a business within the City of Wanneroo that has a strong road safety involvement;

2.   Represent a specific road user group, such as cyclists, emergency services, walking clubs or vehicle clubs;

3.   Represent a specific section of the community such as seniors, disabled, schools, community service organisation;

4.   Have a demonstrated interest/experience in general road safety strategies;

5.   Have a positive attitude to road safety issues;

6.   Have committee experience;

·    Include a new clause authorising the Director Assets to appoint or remove of the Group members, other than the Elected Members appointed by Council.

          3.4.1 Administration Support

Administration Support of the Working Group will be provided by the City of Wanneroo. 

Consultation

Nil

Comment

The purpose of the TOR is proposed to be amended to reflect the Working Groups Strategic Action Plan (SAP) which provides direction to the Working Group in addressing local road safety issues and implementing projects of a strategic nature and requires review annually.

 

The increase in the number of community representatives will allow the inclusion of a range of community views, experience and knowledge to be presented and considered by the Group.

 

The inclusion of criteria to select community representatives will provide further enhance the selection process.

 

Other changes are considered to also assist in administering the working of this Group. 

Statutory Compliance

Section 5.15 and 5.19 of the Local Government Act 1995.

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 are no existing Strategic or Corporate risks within the City's existing risk registers which relates to the issues contained in this report.

 Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

 

Recommendation

That Council ENDORSES the amended Terms of Reference for the City of Wanneroo Roadwise Working Group as shown in Attachment 1.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Amended Terms of Reference - Nov 2015

15/557832

 

 

 

  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 01 December, 2015                         82

Draft

Infrastructure Maintenance

3.16  Dewars Beach Access Track - Progress Report

File Ref:                                              1695 – 15/106973

Responsible Officer:                           Manager Governance and Legal

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       6         

 

Issue

To consider the status of Dewars Beach Access Track (Track).

 

Background

Council at its meeting on 11 November 2014 considered a report (IN07-11/14 Dewars Beach Access Track – Progress Report) and resolved to:

 

“1.     NOTES that the Dewars Beach Access Track was re-opened on 17 April 2014;

 

2.       NOTES that the easement documents in relation to the existing Track have been amended to effect the variation of the public access easement;

 

3.       RECEIVES the “Dewars Beach Access – Concept Design Report” prepared by engineering consultant, Lycopodium;

 

4.       NOTES that an ‘off road 5 year strategy community working group’ has been established to develop a 5 year strategy for off-road users;

 

5.       NOTES that the investigation of parking prohibitions on Dame Pattie Drive of motor vehicles other than those owned by residents will be undertaken by Administration during November with a report scheduled for the December meeting of Council;

 

6.       NOTES that negotiations are progressing with the landowners to determine a possible realignment of the Track through their land;

 

7.       DOES not make a decision on the possible upgrade of the existing Track until the outcome of Item 6 above is known, an ‘agreement in principle’ is obtained from the landowners on the Track Options as explained in this report and a legal opinion is provided to Council regarding the risk implications of not proceeding with any of the Track upgrade options;

 

8.       SEEKS a further report when the items outlined in 4, 6 and 7 are resolved.”

 

A report was presented to the Council Forum meeting on 7 July 2015 providing an update on the matters and possible outcomes specifically regarding items 4, 6 and 7:

·    off road 5 year strategy community working group established to develop a 5 year strategy for off-road users;

·    negotiations with the landowners to determine a possible realignment of the Track through their land; and

·    possible upgrade of the existing Track, an ‘agreement in principle’ from the landowners on the Track options and a legal opinion regarding the risk implications of not proceeding with any of the Track upgrade options.

Council requested further information in relation to the risks and liability exposure for the City in respect of the Track, usage of the Track and facilitating usage beyond the Track.  Accordingly in August 2015, the City appointed LGIS Risk Management to facilitate a risk workshop to identify key areas of uncertainty, risk and opportunities related to the Track and its impact on the City.  The workshop was held on 23 October 2015 with a number of staff and was facilitated through LGIS Risk Management to identify key areas of uncertainty, risk and opportunities related to the Track and its impact on the City.  A copy of the Risk Workshop Report is attached as Attachment 1.

Detail

4WD Off Road Working Group

The 4wd Off Road Working Group (Working Group) was established and held its first meeting on 2 October 2014.  The Working Group was intended to be made up of key members of off road clubs/groups and organisations and was formed to provide the off road community a platform to voice their opinions for future off-road recreation.  One of the key functions of the Working Group was to provide a 5 year strategy to the City which would outline a sustainable and responsible off road use/plan for the off road driving community.  At this stage, there have been no alternative routes suggested or identified by the Working Group regarding changes to the Track.

To the best knowledge of the City, the Working Group has not met since its first meeting, and the City has not adopted an off road strategy.  The City does provide an “Off Road Vehicles” brochure which contains a list of permitted locations for this activity.  There was also an undertaking that 4WD clubs and groups would assist with educating the users on safe usage of the Track.  However despite their efforts, non-compliant, illegal and destructive use has continued.

 

Upgrade Options

As the Track traverses across two private land holdings, it is currently governed by two easements (Easements). The Easements provide for an area that is nominally a 10m wide corridor from Damepattie Drive through Lot 13 on DP39563 to its boundary, being a distance of approximately 2km, and is nominally 20m wide from that point through Lot 14 on DP 39563 to the informal parking area at the end of the Track.

The “Dewars Beach Access – concept Design Report” produced by Lycopodium (Report) was received by Council at its Ordinary Meeting held on 11 November 2014.  The Report identified three options for works to be carried out to improve the existing Track and reducing the risk to the City due to the current condition of the Track.  A summary of the three options is provided as Attachment 2.

 

Design Option 1 involves widening of the existing Track, expanding the airing down area and reducing the crests and length of curves in an attempt to make the Track safer at an estimated cost of $800,000.  Option 1 (Attachment 3 refers) was considered the best option for implementation. Lycopodium has also produced a Deposited Plan which can be lodged at Landgate based on the requirements to allow construction of design in accordance with Option 1.  The same Deposited Plan could also be used for design Option 3.  Should design Option 2 be considered, a revised Deposited Plan would be required. 

 

The private landowners have indicated ‘in principle’ agreement for the Option 1 concept designs prepared by Lycopodium. 

 

Should it be determined to upgrade the Track, it is proposed that the detailed plan of design Option 1 be prepared by Lycopodium in the coming months.  The detailed plan would also include all the statuary compliance issues identified below and will take a number of months to arrange.  Once the detailed design is provided, Council could then consider a future report based on tender prices before considering allocating funds to this project. 

Construction works on the Track are more suited to Autumn/Winter when the Track is less widely used and the weather conditions are more favourable for works to be carried out.  Therefore the earliest the works could be carried out is June 2016 subject to Council endorsement and obtaining external approvals as noted later in the report.

 

Easements

The Easements required updating following the Council meeting of 11 November 2014, to ensure the landowners for each portion of the easement area and the City were appropriately equipped to respond to risk and liability issues.  Following prolonged negotiations, an 'in principle' agreement has been reached with both landowners based on Option 1 of the Concept Design Report produced by Lycopodium.  It contains the following key clauses:

 

·    a public access easement is granted, providing access to pedestrians and assorted vehicles from Damepattie Drive to a carpark on the Reserve that the City holds under Management Order, which facilitates access to the beach;

·    a maximum term of ten years, noting that the parties have equal rights to apply for a surrender of the easement at any time;

·    the relevant land owner is not to interfere with the public access to the Track;

·    the City is able to close the Track for any period it deems appropriate, should the need arise;

·    the City is responsible for all maintenance and repair of the Track; and

·    the City will indemnify the relevant landowner against any claim in respect of loss, damage, death or injury to property or a person arising either directly or indirectly from the use of the Track.

 

An easement deed does not have the power to govern issues beyond the easement area, that is, it cannot deal with the illegal activity which occurs when users of the Track depart from the easement area.  In fact, the Easements, and the proposed replacement easements prohibit the City from erecting any structure (other than signs) in the car park area at the end of the Track which may prevent users from departing from the easement area, unless the land owner agrees.  The boundaries of the easement area are currently identified on maps displayed along the Track, and evident from fencing and other warning signs both at the start and end of the Track.

 

As noted above, the current Easements and the principally agreed easements have a surrender clause which can be activated by either party at any time during the term.  In the event that one or both of the landowners terminate the easements, the City would cease to have any responsibility for the easement Track across the private land, with the landowners would be responsible for closing the Track (or maintaining them if access continued). It is important to note that the City is similarly empowered to do so, even if the landowners wanted the easements to continue. 

 

Ongoing Maintenance Vandalism and Compliance

Ongoing maintenance measures will also be required should the Track remain open. The current maintenance costs are in the order of $50,000 per annum. Maintenance works undertaken on the Track includes a number of activities including grading, fence repairs, managing erosion issues and sign repairs (Attachment 4 refers.) It is expected that similar maintenance costs will still be required each year whether the Track is upgraded or not and these costs will be consistent irrespective of any decision to restrict operational hours for the Track.  There is a risk of increased costs arising depending on potential vandalism of any method used to restrict access within set time frames.  The restricted timeframes would not reduce the City’s overall risk responsibilities.

 

The City’s Ranger team conducted an extensive monitoring program on Dewars Track users during 26 to 28 September 2015.

A total of 562 vehicles entered the Track from Damepattie Drive. From their surveillance and patrols, the Rangers identified that approximately 90% of these vehicles were intending to use the Track to (illegally) facilitate a journey north beyond the end of the Tack.

 

It is known that non-compliant behaviour occurs at the Track (Attachment 5 refers). To mitigate the City’s risk exposure and ensure a level of compliance, Rangers services have been expanded to provide a presence at the Track. However, to ensure sustained compliance, Rangers presence is required on an ongoing basis for extended periods. The costs associated with Rangers providing a presence at the Track have now been calculated and set out in the table below:

 

Number of Rangers

Hours Present at Track

Costs Per Annum

Rangers x 2

4 hours per day

$140,000

Rangers x 2

10 hours per day

$314,000

 

Notwithstanding that the presence of Rangers helps to reduce known risks on the Track, should Track users leave the Track to carry out illegal activities, they are outside of the Rangers jurisdiction.  Rangers would not be able to follow and pursue those users that leave the Track to carry out enforcement activities, and the level of risk exposure remains extreme. Should a decision be made to close the Track, Rangers presence would likely still be required although the need would be much reduced and their responsibility would only extend to issues affecting the land outside of the Track maintained by the City.

 

Adjoining Residents’ Concerns

The City has received a number of concerns from the residents of Dame Pattie Drive and Sovereign Drive regarding the antisocial activities which occur at the entrance to the Track adjoining their properties. (Attachment 5 refers) The concern relate to the Track users stopping/parking on the streets blocking the driveways, using air compressors, loud music, litter and other matters both during the day and night. 

Between 1 November 2014 and 1 November 2015 the City:

·    received 65 customer requests relating to Track issues; and

·    issued 12 parking infringements.

 

Risk Workshop

The Risk Workshop was held on 23 October 2015 with a number of staff and facilitated by the LGIS Risk Management Team.  The LGIS Risk Management Team conducted the Risk Workshop in accordance with the principles and process as prescribed in ISO 31000.2009 and as part of the process the risks identified were aligned with the City’s Strategic Community Plan objectives.  The risks were assessed using the City’s adopted Risk Management Methodology and captured in the risk register as detailed in Attachment 6.

 

The key findings from the Risk Workshop identified a total of 15 risks that are summarised below:

 

Risk ID

Risk Title

Management Systems Effectiveness

Overall Risk

Action Options Identified

DBAT-01

Vehicles Impact Environment

Some Weaknesses

Extreme

Y

DBAT-02

Unauthorised Tracks and Access

Satisfactory

Moderate

Y

DBAT-03

Littering and Illegal Dumping

Satisfactory

High

Y

DBAT-04

Unsafe Track

Some Weaknesses

Extreme

Y

DBAT-05

Erosion and Deterioration

Some Weaknesses

Extreme

Y

DBAT-06

Uncontrolled Use

Some Weaknesses

Extreme

Y

DBAT-07

Unexploded Ordnance

Satisfactory

High

Y

DBAT-08

Active Lifestyle Impact

Newly Introduced

High

Y

DBAT-09

Local Business Impact

Some Weaknesses

Low

Y

DBAT-10

Short Return on Investment

Some Weaknesses

High

Y

DBAT-11

Competing Community Expectations

Some Weaknesses

Extreme

Y

DBAT-12

Unsustainable Resource Allocation

Some Weaknesses

Extreme

Y

DBAT-13

Easement Unequitable Allocation of Risk

Some Weaknesses

Extreme

Y

DBAT-14

Eroded Liability Protection

Some Weaknesses

Extreme

Y

DBAT-15

Lack of Strategy

Some Weaknesses

Extreme

Y

 

The risk assessment identified 9 risks with an overall rating of extreme, 4 risks were rated as high, 1 risk was rated as moderate and 1 risk was rated as low.

 

It is important to note that in accordance with the risk rating table (set out in Attachment 1), the overall risk ratings attributed to the 15 identified risks have been determined as follows:

 

·    for the overall risks identified as Extreme, the consequence parameters have predominately been due to a major event which with prioritised and focused management will be endured with the likelihood of such occurring being either likely or almost certain to occur;

·    for the overall risks identified as High, the consequence parameters have been either a significant event that which can be managed under special circumstances or a  major event which with prioritised and focused management will be endured with the likelihood of such occurring being either likely or unlikely; and

·    for the overall risk identified as Low, the consequence parameters is that it could be managed through normal activity with a moderate likelihood of occurring. 

 

Risk mitigation strategies were also identified during the Risk Workshop and are summarised below:

·    increase compliance activities, maintenance measures and capital expenditure;

·    surrender easement and close Track;

·    for any future Track changes, manage reputational exposures and community reaction;

·    proactively address known reputational exposures;

·    consider restricting operational hours of Track;

·    decision required on Track usage and associated operational costs;

·    terminate or renegotiate easement;

·    enhance legal position on reasonableness of control measures;

·    community consultation; and

·    establish an off road strategy.

 

The Risk Workshop confirmed that the existing control rating and level of risk will remain unchanged if nothing is done to address those unacceptable risks.

Consultation

Should the City decide to surrender the easement, discussions would be undertaken with the landowners and a timeframe of revoking the easement would need to be established. 

 

The landowners have been consulted in respect of negotiating the easements, however it is proposed that the City engages with the landowners to seek their comments should the upgrade option be endorsed regarding the proposed modifications to the Track.

Should an upgrade option be endorsed, it is proposed to:

 

·    undertake community consultation with the residents adjoining the Track entrance;

·    commence the detailed design of the upgrade option; and

·    liaise with the 4wd off road working group and encourage them to consider determining alternate alignment in the long term when the Track ceases to exist due to the proposed development by the landowners;

·    present a report to Council at the conclusion of the community consultation and detailed design.

Comment

The City has considered legal advice from both external counsel (Item SIN01-04/14 refers) and the City’s lawyer in respect of any potential liability issues arising out of the condition of the Track and further legal advice was provided to the Elected Members under a separate ‘confidential cover’.

 

Following consideration of the abovementioned legal advice, and substantial internal dialogue, Administration considers that there are two options available in respect of the Track:

 


 

I.    Keep the Track Open

 

Given the duty of care the City owes to users of the Track, and the various indemnity provisions under the Easements and principally agreed easements, the Track would need to be upgraded as outlined above if the Track was to remain open.

 

Similarly, given the consistent evidence of misuse of the Track, the City would need to increase its maintenance and monitoring program, and its regulatory compliance program.

 

Risks arising from the illegal use of the Track and its surrounds will remain under this option, and resident concerns will not be addressed.

 

An additional risk is that the term provision negotiated in the principally agreed easements allows for the landowners to apply to surrender the easement at any time. The City may undertake an extensive upgrade

 

The total cost associated with upgrading the Track and providing ongoing maintenance and a level of compliance for 10 years is in the range of $2.75m to $4.49m, as further detailed in the Financial Implications section of this report.

 

II.   Close the Track and Surrender Easements

 

The information obtained from Rangers patrols confirms that the majority of Track users are not accessing it for its intended purpose and confirms that vehicles are using the Track as a thoroughfare. This causes significant damage to the environment, including (inter alia) erosion, and poses great threat to the safety of all users of the Track. Closure of the Track will remove the City’s liability in respect of its use. Similarly, the City will no longer be seen to be facilitating something which it knows is being used and which provides for illegal and anti-social behaviour.

 

As the Track does provide community benefit to those few who are using its for its proper purpose, the City would be required to implement a manageable timeframe and plan for the closure, which would include managing community reaction. 

 

Similarly, in acknowledging that illegal use may continue beyond the closure of the Track, the City will undertake relevant patrols, and implement signage regimes to assist in informing the community of the closure, and work with the landowners and adjoining local authorities to minimise community impact.

 

Although some reduction in the risk can be achieved through the options outlined above with regard to upgrading the Track and ongoing maintenance and compliance activities, the ongoing risk issues regarding Track vandalism and misuse are not in keeping with the City’s 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

 

It is therefore considered that the option to close the Track and surrender the easement appears to be the only effective means to manage safety risks and avoid exposure and ongoing liability risks to the City.

Statutory Compliance

In the event that Council decides to implement an upgrade option for the Track, four applicable approvals were identified that will require further investigation during the detailed design stage:

 

•    Clearing Permit

•    Heritage Survey

•    UXO Clearances

•    Development Approval

 

Regardless of whether the Track is a thoroughfare for the purposes of the Local Government Act 1995 (Act), the City is not considered a 'manager' of the Track under the easements, and therefore section 3.50 of the Act (relating to the notification of thoroughfare closure) is not applicable. Despite this, the City will undertake various public notification programs, including:

 

·        Installation of signage at or near the track entrance;

 

·        Aletter drop to local residents; and

 

·        Information posted on the City’s website;

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.

 

2.3   Safe Communities – We feel safe at home and in our local area

Risk Management Considerations

Risks associated with the current state of the Track are being mitigated with ongoing inspections and maintenance works to ensure the safety of the Track users. However, further consideration is required to mitigate the risks identified and detailed earlier in this report. Long term management will be exceptionally costly to the City given the proportion of the community which properly utilises the Track.

Risks associated with the choice of the upgrade options have been addressed earlier in the Lycopodium report.

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

·     Upgrade Costs (Capital) - Based on the preliminary design and cost estimates provided by Lycopodium, the Track Upgrade and airing down area works are likely to cost in the order of $800,000. The exact financial implications will be confirmed as part of the detailed design and will be subject to Council’s consideration and decision as part of the report on the outcome of the community consultation and the detailed design of an upgrade option.

 

·     Maintenance Costs (Operating)Maintenance costs are estimated to in the order of $50,000 per annum, which may increase subject to the impact of any increased potential vandalism.

 

·     Compliance Costs (Operating)The costs associated with the ongoing compliance checking of the Track are estimated to be in the range of $140,000 to $314,000 per annum.

 

The total cost associated with upgrading the Track and providing ongoing maintenance and a level of compliance for 10 years is in the range of $2.75m to $4.49m.

 

Only $50,000 has been allocated in PR-3052 Upgrade Dewars Track, Two Rocks for preparing the design and documentation for the upgrade option. No funding provisions have been made in the Long Term Capital Works Program to facilitate the construction works associated with the Track upgrade; and in operating budgets for the ongoing maintenance and compliance costs.

 

Should the upgrade option be chosen, there will be a need to allocate $800,000 in the Long Term Capital Works Program and a total of $1.9m to $3.64m in the next 10 years’ Operating Budgets

 

The costs associated with withdrawing from the easement and closing the Track would be around $50,000, subject to consultation with the adjoining landowners regarding reinstatement requirements. The costs required to close the Track could be sourced by a re-allocation of funds from Project Number PR-3052 Upgrade Dewars Track, Two Rocks, listed in the approved 2015/16 Capital Works Program.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       APPROVES the permanent closure of the Dewars Beach Track from 11 December 2015;

2.       NOTES that signage will be installed at the Track to advise of the closure on 9 December 2015;

3.       NOTES that Administration will liaise with the Shire of Gingin to install signage to the North of the Track advising potential users of the closure;

4.       NOTES that Administration will liaise with the Landowners over the closure of the Track; and

5.       AUTHORISES the Chief Executive Officer to apply to surrender the easements over the Dewars Beach Access Track.

 

Attachments:

1.

LGIS Report

15/537301

 

2.

Upgrade Options

15/544672

 

3.

Draft Easement requirements Dewars Track

15/142428

 

4.

Dewars Track Maintenance Activities

15/561665

 

5.

Dewars Track vandalism and anti social behaviour

15/561704

 

6.

LGIS Risk Register  as at 23 October 2015

15/545257

 

 

 

 

 

 

  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 01 December, 2015                         91

Draft

Infrastructure Projects

3.17  Wanneroo Civic Centre Extension and Refurbishment

File Ref:                                              19008 – 15/556410

Responsible Officer:                           Director Assets

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil       

 

Issue

To consider advertising for public tender the Wanneroo Civic Centre Extension in early 2016.

 

Background

At its meeting of 26 May 2015, Council resolved (Item IN02-05/15 refers) to:

“ENDORSE the revised Wanneroo Civic Centre Extension Concept Plan, City of Wanneroo Drawing No 2836-1-1, and as detailed in Attachment 1, noting that:

 

1.         the plan is to be constructed with two storey office building with ability for an additional floor to be added in future; and

2.         the environmental and energy ratings applied to the design will align with State Government standard “4.5 Star” NABERS, but aiming for at a "5 Star" NABERS energy rating and for a “5 Star” (version 2) Green Star Office Design ratings.”

Detail

The Bollig Design Group (BDG) incorporated the resolutions arising from Council report item IN02-05/15 into the design of the revised Wanneroo Civic Centre Extension (WCC Extension) concept plans. 

An independent consultancy firm will peer review the design principles, including meeting the environmental and energy ratings, as endorsed by Council and implemented by BDG.  Noting compliance with the stipulated environmental and energy ratings can only be verified when a physical audit is undertaken after a year’s total occupation of the constructed extension.

There have been no significant changes to the BDG concept plans as previously presented to Council, other than those modifications that address the environmental and energy ratings and offices and amenity internal layouts, designed to satisfy the requirements of the spatial planning staff accommodation.

The July appointment by the Chief Executive Officer of a Spatial Design consultant, MKDC, has advanced the spatial design planning for work points within the existing Wanneroo Civic Centre and Extension building.

The principles proposed for the spatial planning take into account the current and future accommodation requirements that are envisaged with the growth of the City of Wanneroo; and involved visiting specific successful working examples of activity based working and open planning, and workshopping the design principles with the City’s executive to confirm that what was proposed would align with the City’s new operational management structure. 

It is proposed that the documentation for the construction of the WCC Extension and refurbishment of the Civic Centre be completed and tendered simultaneously as two separate tenders.  The advantage of this course of action is that all aspects of the construction and fitout works are known; a prime contractor can build the extension and the work can be coordinated with the fitout contractor to complete the internal works in the extension and the existing Civic Centre. 

This will avoid the reworking cost and time delays normal to a lessee fitout of a vacant tenancy, and with the use of a specialist consultant’s definitive program, within each tender documentation, the order and timing for the construction and fitout works will be determined to suit the City’s Administration.

The design principles endorsed by Council, on 26 May 2015, have been incorporated into the design documentation, and the cost estimate for the construction of the WCC Extension and refurbishment has been prepared.

A Chief Executive Officer signed application was submitted, in July 2015, to the local authority seeking its Approval to Commence Development for the construction of the WCC Extension.  The City advised adjoining property owners in regards to the proposed development and erected a roadside notice board on the corner of Servite and Cafaggio Terrace, seeking public comment by the end of 21 August 2015.  City Administration duly processed the application; granting approval to commence the development subject only to the City’s general conditions.

Consultation

Extensive consultation was undertaken with the primary stakeholders during finalisation of the design of the WCC Extension.  The same consultation is being finalised with the primary stakeholders in the settlement of the spatial design for the existing and extension building, paying particular attention, by the Spatial Planner, to the layout for workpoints and office amenities within each building so that the coordination of the implementation of the internal fitouts can be timed for a staged staff relocation during the construction of the WCC Extension and refurbishment of the Civic Centre.

Consultation external to the City of Wanneroo administration was undertaken in relation to the construction of the WCC Extension but not in regards to the scope of internal works and fitout.

Comment

The quantity surveyor has provided detailed cost estimates totalling $24M for the construction of the WCC Extension and refurbishment of the Civic Centre.

Administration’s recommendation is to accept the benefits that the current minimal building cost escalation and tender the proposed works as soon as possible.

Works Program

The tentative works program based on Council’s acceptance to proceed with tendering the WCC Extension building works indicates that tenders can be called during January/February 2016 after finalisation of design and documentation of the WCC Extension and refurbishment of the Civic Centre. Time required to undertake the tendering process and construction works is estimated to be 22 months. It is therefore recommended that the City proceeds to the construction tender stage of this project

Statutory Compliance

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

 

“4    Civil Leadership – Working with others to ensure the best use of our resources.

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

 

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

There are no existing Strategic or Corporate risks within the City's existing risk registers which relates to the issues contained in this report.

Project risks will be identified and addressed as part of the construction management and programming phase of the WCC Extension and refurbishment of the Civic Centre.

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

A total project budget of $27M is listed for the WCC Extension project (PR-2332) in the current draft long term Capital Works Program.  The cost provisions that have been initiated by a reduction in the scope of works for the construction of the WCC extension have been offset by an increase in scope of works for the refurbishment of the existing Civic Centre where the building is brought in line with the provisions being made within the fitout of the WCC Extension.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council ENDORSES advertising by public tender the construction of the Wanneroo Civic Centre Extension, at 23 Dundebar Road Wanneroo.

 

 

 

Attachments: Nil  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 01 December, 2015                         94

Draft

Tenders

3.18  Tender No 01545 - Supply and Application of Pesticides in Turf for a Period of 36 months

File Ref:                                              23342 – 15/510771

Responsible Officer:                           Director Assets

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil       

 

Issue

To consider Tender No. 01545 for the Supply and Application of Pesticides in Turf for a period of 36 months commencing 9 December 2015 to 8 December 2018.

 

Background

Pesticide application services on all the City of Wanneroo’s active and passive parks have previously been provided under a period quotation. Due to the expected increase in the value of the required service into the future it is now prudent to move to a public tender process to ensure that the City is compliant with the Local Government Act 1995 and Regulations.

Detail

Tender No. 01545 for the Supply and Application of Pesticides in Turf was advertised on 22 August 2015 and closed on 8 September 2015.

 

Essential details of the proposed contract are outlined below:

 

Contract Type

Schedule of rates

Contract Duration

36 months

Commencement Date

9 December 2015

Expiry Date

8 December 2018

 

Tender submissions were received from the following contractors:

 

·    Sanpoint Pty Ltd T/A LD Total;

 

·    Turfcare WA Pty Ltd;

 

·    Turfmaster Pty Ltd; and

 

·    The Trustee for B&S Tanasoski Family Trust & the Trustee for G&S Blazeski Family Trust T/A Tiger Pest & Weed Control.

 

The Tender Evaluation Team, comprising of the City’s Coordinator Parks Maintenance North, Coordinator Parks Maintenance South, Principal Technical Advisor and with oversight and guidance from the Contracts Officer, has evaluated the tender submissions in accordance with the following selection criteria:

Selection Criteria

Weighting

Price for the services offered

40%

Demonstrated relevant experience

20%

Demonstrated resources and capability

20%

Demonstrated compliance with OH&S requirements (safety management)

20%

 

Price for the services offered (40%)

 

This criterion was based on the estimated cost to the City over the term of the contract based on rates submitted by the tenderers in the price schedule and has resulted in the tenderers being ranked as follows:

 

Tenderer

Estimated Cost for 36 months

Rank

Turfmaster Pty Ltd

$410,745

1

Turfcare WA Pty Ltd

$426,790

2

LD Total

$593,775

3

Tiger Pest & Weed Control

$712,450

4

 

Demonstrated relevant experience in similar works with achievement of client expectations (20%)

 

The evaluation of this criterion considered the tenderers' experience in supplying services of a similar nature and circumstances.

Turfmaster Pty Ltd and Turfcare WA Pty Ltd demonstrated extensive experience in the application of pesticides in turf. Turfmaster Pty Ltd provided details of relevant contracts and clients including the City of Wanneroo, City of Perth and the City of Stirling. Turfcare WA Pty Ltd gave examples of the Cities of Wanneroo, Swan and Bayswater.

LD Total demonstrated some experience associated with the application of pesticides in turf for local government, being in the City of Kwinana and the City of Wanneroo.

Tiger Pest & Weed Control demonstrated minimal experience associated with pesticide application in turf. Tiger Pest & Weed Control’s experience was mainly with Main Roads WA and focused on hardstand areas.

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

 

Tenderer

Rank

Turfmaster Pty Ltd

1

Turfcare WA Pty Ltd

1

LD Total

3

Tiger Pest & Weed Control

4

 

Demonstrated allocation of sufficient resources and capability to undertake the services (20%)

 

The evaluation of this criterion considered the tenderers staff, resources, plant and equipment and a sound methodology to deliver the services required by the City.

Turfcare WA Pty Ltd demonstrated having significant modern resources, a sound methodology and provided detailed staff information and a detailed plant and equipment list.

LD Total and Turfmaster Pty Ltd provided adequate information on their methodology, detailed information on staff, and had a detailed list of available plant and equipment.

Tiger Pest & Weed Control provided documentation on their availability of resources and capacity; however the methodology on chemical application was not considered to be suitable to service this contract.

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

 

Tenderer

Rank

Turfcare WA Pty Ltd

1

LD Total

2

Turfmaster Pty Ltd

2

Tiger Pest & Weed Control

4

 

Demonstrated compliance with OH&S requirements (safety management) (20%)

The evaluation of safety management was based on the tenderers’ submitted occupational health and safety (OHS) policy documentation, working documentation, and responses to the OHS Management System Questionnaire. Evidence of completed examples of incident reports, near misses and hazard inspections were asked to be provided.

Turfcare WA Pty Ltd and LD Total provided detailed submissions.  They provided comprehensive policies, procedural documentation and demonstrated the use of working documentation including comprehensive risk assessments, incident reports, hazard reports, induction checklists, training records and toolbox records.

Tiger Pest & Weed Control provided an adequate submission; however, had some omissions such as no actual working documents.

Turfmaster Pty Ltd provided a detailed submission on safety management; however, because of a recent safety compliance breach by Turfmaster at the City’s Marangaroo Golf Course, Turfmaster was awarded a lower score.

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

 

Tenderer

Rank

Turfcare WA Pty Ltd

1

LD Total

1

Tiger Pest & Weed Control

3

Turfmaster Pty Ltd

4

Overall weighted score

The tenderer’s submissions were reviewed in accordance with the selection criteria with the key aspect of the tender evaluation being price.

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

 

Tenderer

Rank

Turfcare WA Pty Ltd

1

Turfmaster Pty Ltd

2

LD Total

3

Tiger Pest & Weed Control

4

 

Turfcare WA Pty Ltd was assessed as having the necessary experience, resources, operational capacity and safety management systems to fulfil the requirements of the contract.

 

The key characteristics of Turfcare WA Pty Ltd’s tender are:

 

·    Relevant experience with similar pesticide spraying operations including being a current service provider with the City of Wanneroo; and

 

·    Qualified key personnel and modern equipment to enable the services to be rendered successfully.

Consultation

Nil

Comment

The evaluation undertaken by the Tender Evaluation Panel resulted in the tender submission from Turfcare WA Pty Ltd achieving the highest score in accordance with the selection criteria and weighting and therefore Turfcare WA Pty Ltd is the recommended tenderer.

Statutory Compliance

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

Strategic Implications

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

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

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

Risk Management Considerations

Operational Risk

The condition of the City’s parks and reserves can deteriorate quickly if not maintained to an acceptable level. The inability of a contractor to supply these services will result the degradation of the City’s assets and the City not providing the required standard of service to its residents. It is important that the successful tenderer has the required experience, staff, equipment, safety systems and operational capacity to meet the contract requirements.

 

Financial Risk

An independent financial assessment of Turfcare WA Pty Ltd was undertaken by Corporate Scorecard Pty Ltd as part of the tender evaluation process. The financial assessment raised a concern about Turfcare WA Pty Ltd’s ability to meet the minimum desired financial criteria for this contract.

The actual financial risk to the City is assessed to be low because this contract is based on a schedule of rates for services only supplied upon request by the City, with the services paid for after satisfactory completion.

There may be some reputational risk to the City if Turfcare WA Pty Ltd fails to deliver any services as requested, although this is considered unlikely to occur, as the City has obtained references from other local governments advising that Turfcare is providing them with good, reliable service. The City has also recently received satisfactory services from Turfcare WA Pty Ltd.

In addition, Turfcare WA Pty Ltd has agreed to provide a bank guarantee to the value of $4,500 to mitigate financial risks to the City.

Although Corporate Scorecard Pty Ltd has raised a concern, in view of the further risk assessment and mitigation measures, it is not considered of enough significance to change the recommended tenderer for a contract of this nature.

Policy Implications

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

Financial Implications

The costs associated with the supply and application of pesticides in turf is included in the annual Parks Maintenance Operational Budget.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council ACCEPTS the tender submitted by Turfcare WA Pty Ltd for Tender No. 01545 for the Supply and Application of Pesticides in Turf for a period of 36 months from 9 December 2015 to 8 December 2018 as per the schedule of rates in the tender submission.

 

 

Attachments: Nil


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 01 December, 2015                         99

Draft

3.19  Tender No 01546 - Provision of Turf Renovation Services of Active Sportsfields and Public Open Spaces for a Period of 36 Months

File Ref:                                              23344 – 15/510857

Responsible Officer:                           Director Assets

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil       

 

Issue

To consider Tender No. 01546 for the Provision of Turf Renovation Services of Active Sportsfields and Public Open Spaces for a period of 36 months commencing 9 December 2015 to 8 December 2018.

 

Background

Turf renovation services on the City’s active and passive parks have previously been provided under a period quotation. Due to the expected increase in the value of the required service into the future, it is now prudent to move to a public tender process to ensure that the City is in compliance with the Local Government Act 1995 and Regulations.

Detail

Tender No. 01546 for the Provision of Turf Renovation Services of Active Sportsfields and Public Open Spaces was advertised on 22 August 2015 and closed on 8 September 2015.

Essential details of the proposed contract are outlined below;

 

Contract Type

Schedule of rates

Contract Duration

36 months

Commencement Date

9 December 2015

Expiry Date

8 December 2018

 

Tender submissions were received from the following contractors:

 

·    Lovegrove Turf Services;

 

·    Turfcare WA Pty Ltd;

 

·    Turfmaster Pty Ltd; and

 

·    Parker Family Trust T/A D & E Parker Lawn Service and Lawn Doctor.

 

The Tender Evaluation Team, comprising the City’s Coordinator Parks Maintenance North, Coordinator Parks Maintenance South, Principal Technical Advisor and with oversight and guidance from the Contracts Officer, has evaluated the tender submissions in accordance with the following selection criteria:

 

Selection Criteria

Weighting

Price for the services offered

40%

Demonstrated relevant experience

20%

Demonstrated resources and capability

20%

Demonstrated compliance with OH&S requirements (safety management)

20%


 

 

Price for the services offered (40%)

 

This criterion was based on the estimated cost to the City over the term of the contract based on the rates submitted by the tenderers in the price schedule and has resulted in the tenderers being ranked as follows:

 

Tenderer

Estimated Contract Cost for 36 Months

Ranking

Turfcare WA Pty Ltd

$436,180

1

Turfmaster Pty Ltd

$496,500

2

Lawn Doctor

$542,100

3

Lovegrove Turf Services

$772,596

4

 

Demonstrated relevant experience in similar works with achievement of client expectations (20%)

 

The evaluation of this criterion considered the tenderers’ experience in supplying services of a similar nature and circumstances.

 

Lawn Doctor demonstrated extensive experience associated with turf renovation in the local government sector by giving examples of the City of Canning, City of Melville and Town of Mosman Park.

 

Lovegrove Turf Services and Turfcare WA Pty Ltd both had more than adequate experience associated with the turf renovation services.  Lovegrove Turf Services gave examples of work competed at the Cities of Canning, Cockburn and Wanneroo. Turfcare WA gave examples at the Cities of Wanneroo, Swan and Fremantle.

 

Turfmaster Pty Ltd also demonstrated experience associated with turf renovations for local government; however, Turfmaster’s submission did not provide enough detail about the previous services provided to ensure the stated experience was entirely relevant to this contract.  Turfmaster provided examples of the City of Stirling, the City of Wanneroo and the City of Gosnells.

 

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

 

Tenderer

Ranking

Lawn Doctor

1

Lovegrove Turf Services

2

Turfcare WA Pty Ltd

2

Turfmaster Pty Ltd

4

 

Demonstrated allocation of sufficient resources and capability to undertake the services (20%)

 

The evaluation of this criterion considered the tenderers’ staff, resources, plant and equipment and a sound methodology to deliver the services required by the City.

Turfcare WA Pty Ltd demonstrated having significant modern resources, a sound methodology and provided detailed staff information and a detailed plant and equipment list.

 

Turfmaster Pty Ltd and Lawn Doctor provided adequate information on their methodology, detailed information on staff, and had a detailed list of available plant and equipment.

 

Lovegrove Turf Services provided documentation on the availability of resources and capacity; along with details of staff, plant and equipment; however, detailed information on proposed methodology to deliver the services was not provided.

 

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

 

Tenderer

Ranking

Turfcare WA Pty Ltd

1

Turfmaster Pty Ltd

2

Lawn Doctor

2

Lovegrove Turf Services

4

 

Demonstrated compliance with OH&S requirements (safety management) (20%)

 

The evaluation of safety management was based on the tenderers’ submitted occupational health and safety (OHS) policy documentation, working documentation, and responses to the tender OHS Management System Questionnaire. Evidence of completed examples of incident reports, near misses and hazard inspections were also requested.

 

All tenderers adequately answered the questionnaire.  They provided comprehensive policies, procedural documentation and demonstrated the use of working documentation including comprehensive risk assessments, incident reports, hazard reports, induction checklists, training records and toolbox records.

 

All respondents were found to have acceptable administration systems in place in relation to OHS risk and quality management which satisfied the criterion.

 

Turfmaster Pty Ltd provided a detailed submission on safety management; however, because of a recent safety compliance breach by Turfmaster at the City’s Marangaroo Golf Course, Turfmaster was awarded a lower score.

 

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

 

Tenderer

Ranking

Turfcare WA Pty Ltd

1

Lawn Doctor

1

Lovegrove Turf Services

1

Turfmaster Pty Ltd

4

 

Overall weighted score

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

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


 

Tenderer

Ranking

Turfcare WA Pty Ltd

1

Lawn Doctor

2

Turfmaster Pty Ltd

3

Lovegrove Turf Services

4

 

Turfcare WA Pty Ltd was assessed as having the necessary experience, resources, operational capacity and safety management systems to fulfil the requirements of the contract.

 

The key characteristics of Turfcare WA Pty Ltd’s tender are:

 

·    Relevant experience with similar turf renovation operations including being a current service provider with the City; and

 

·    Qualified key personnel and modern equipment to enable the services to be rendered successfully.

Consultation

Nil

Comment

The evaluation undertaken by the Tender Evaluation Panel resulted in the tender submission from Turfcare WA Pty Ltd achieving the highest score in accordance with the selection criteria and weighting and therefore Turfcare WA Pty Ltd is the recommended tenderer.

Statutory Compliance

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

Strategic Implications

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

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

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

Risk Management Considerations

Operational Risk

The condition of the City’s parks and reserves can deteriorate quickly if not maintained to an acceptable level. The inability of a contractor to supply these services will result the degradation of the City’s assets and the City not providing the required standard of service to its residents. It is important that the successful tenderer has the required experience, staff, equipment, safety systems and operational capacity to meet the contract requirements.

 

 

 

Financial Risk

An independent financial assessment of Turfcare WA Pty Ltd was undertaken by Corporate Scorecard Pty Ltd as part of the tender evaluation process. The financial assessment raised a concern about Turfcare WA Pty Ltd’s ability to meet the minimum desired financial criteria for this contract.

The actual financial risk to the City is assessed to be low because this contract is based on a schedule of rates for services only supplied upon request by the City, with the services paid for after satisfactory completion.

There may be some reputational risk to the City if Turfcare WA Pty Ltd fails to deliver any services as requested, although this is considered unlikely to occur, as the City has obtained references from other local governments advising that Turfcare is providing them with good, reliable service. The City has also recently received satisfactory services from Turfcare WA Pty Ltd.

In addition, Turfcare WA Pty Ltd has agreed to provide a bank guarantee to the value of $4,500 to mitigate financial risks to the City.

Although Corporate Scorecard Pty Ltd has raised a concern, in view of the further risk assessment and mitigation measures, it is not considered of enough significance to change the recommended tenderer for a contract of this nature.

Policy Implications

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

Financial Implications

The costs associated with the provision of turf renovation services of active sportsfields and public open spaces are included in the annual Parks Maintenance Operational Budget.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council ACCEPTS the tender submitted by Turfcare WA Pty Ltd for Tender No. 01546 for the Provision of Turf Renovation Services of Active Sportsfields and Public Open Spaces for a period of 36 months from 9 December 2015 to 8 December 2018, as per the schedule of rates in the tender submission.

 

 

Attachments: Nil


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 01 December, 2015                       105

Draft

3.20  Tender No. 01550 - Park Asset Renewal

File Ref:                                              22571 – 15/546145

Responsible Officer:                           Director Assets

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       3         

 

Issue

To consider Tender No. 01550 for the City’s Park Asset Renewal.

 

Background

The City’s Park Asset Renewal is an annual program of works for the replacement of park assets (playgrounds, fitness equipment, furniture etc.) which have reached the end of their useful asset life and require replacement. The asset renewal program is a ‘like for like’ replacement program focusing on replacing ‘old’ with ‘new’.

 

The City’s asset renewal requirements have been categorised into schedules based on the asset type, and are as follows:

 

1.   Schedule 1A – Playground renewal,

2.   Schedule 1B – Fitness equipment renewal; and

3.   Schedule 1C – Park furniture renewal.

 

Historically the City has sought park asset renewal on an individual park basis under a WALGA request for quote arrangement; however this has proven to be an inefficient business practice. In the interest of increasing efficiency and streamlining the City’s asset renewal practices, a tender for the implementation of a consolidated annual program of works has been developed.

 

This tender included park assets at the following locations:

 

Park Name, Suburb

Asset Type

Leemans Landing, Two Rocks

Playground

Wanneroo Showgrounds, Wanneroo

Playground

Mist Park, Banksia Grove

Playground

Blackmore Park, Girrawheen

Playground

Hainsworth Park, Girrawheen

Playground, Furniture

Homestead Park, Clarkson

Playground

Monaghan Park, Darch

Playground

Paloma Park, Marangaroo

Playground, Furniture

Mindarie Surf Life Saving Club, Mindarie

Furniture

Cherokee Park, Clarkson

Fitness Equipment

Detail

Tender No. 01550 was advertised on Saturday 12 September 2015 and closed on Tuesday 13 October 2015.

 Essential details of the contract are outlined below:

 

Contract Type

Lump Sum Price - Separable Portions

Tender Award

December 2015

Date for Practical Completion

30 April 2016

 

As a separable portion contract, park asset renewal works are arranged into individual schedules on a per park basis, with prospective tenderers able to tender on all or selected schedules of work.

 

To ensure asset designs meet the City’s requirements, the specification prescribed specific asset requirements and nominated a predetermined budget price for the supply and installation of the required asset. This predetermined budget price has been formulated based on asset modelling of the replacement cost of the City’s existing park asset. 

 

Additionally tenderers were required to provide and price for two different asset design options per schedule.

 

Tenders received.

Tender submissions were received from the following:

 

·    Proludic Pty Ltd (“Proludic”)

·    Beefmaster Steel Fabrications T/A Playmaster Pty Ltd (“Playmaster”)

·    Moduplay Group Pty Ltd (“Moduplay”)

·    Miracle Recreation Equipment (“Miracle”)

·    Hansen Pty Ltd T/A Forpark Australia (“Forpark”)

 

The Tender Evaluation Team (TET), consisting of two City Project Officers Parks and Conservation, Landscape Designer and the Coordinator Community Facilities Planning with oversight and guidance from the City’s Contracts Officer, evaluated the tender submissions in accordance with the following selection criteria:

 

Description

Weighting

Price for the services offered

10%

Ability to complete the works within the nominated timeframe

15%

Demonstrated experience

25%

Park Asset submission meets specification’s requirements, and offers high asset variety

30%

Occupational Health and Safety

20%

 

Price of services offered (10%)

Pricing is assessed on a schedule basis per Park against a pre-determined budget price. A number of submission contained options which were deemed non-conforming (“NC”) in not meeting the specified budget price. Not all tenderers provided pricing against both options presented for each Park.

 

Tendered pricing and ranking for each Park is provided as per Schedules 1A, 1B and 1C, refer Attachment 1.


 

Ability to complete the works within the nominated timeframe (15%)

Assessment of this evaluation criterion considered the tenderers’ resources listed for use in carrying out the services, level of current commitments and associated manufacturing and installation lead times.

Forpark stated a lead time from order placement to installation on site was approximately 8 weeks which complied with the City required timeframes; additionally they possess three fulltime installation teams.

Miracle stated lead time for locally produced products was nine weeks from order and 20 weeks for imported products. Miracle only listed one subcontractor and had four current commitments.

Moduplay and Proludic are interstate companies. Moduplay listed only one Western Australia subcontractor for installation works and had an extensive list of current commitments. Proludic stated lead time at 12-14 weeks and relied on numerous subcontractors for various works. 

Playmaster stated lead time of approximately 6-8 weeks, however provided no indication of start or completion dates. They provided a list of their current commitments.

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

 

Tenderer

Ranking

Forpark

1

Miracle

2

Proludic

3

Moduplay

3

Playmaster

5

Demonstrated Experience (25%)

Assessment of this evaluation criterion considered the tenderers' experience in undertaking works of a similar nature and circumstances.

Forpark provided an extensive list of their previous experience which included work with a large number of local councils, private landscape contractors and schools on projects of varying size and monetary budget.

Playmaster provided good examples to support their demonstrated experience and included written references from previous clients.

Miracle and Proludic provided good examples of previous experience however their experience was not shown to be as extensive.

Moduplay provided examples of previous experience but these were not for work undertaken in within Western Australia.   

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

 

Tenderer

Ranking

Forpark

1

Playmaster

2

Miracle

3

Proludic

3

Moduplay

5

Park Asset submission meets specification’s requirements and offers high asset variety (30%)

The asset options for each Park were assessed in respect to the following:

·    How each design met the specification requirements; and

·    The variety of play offered by each design.

Designs which conflict with the specific requirements as set out in the Specification where deemed non-compliant NC and Tenders which did not submit a design for specific schedules were assessed accordingly

The information provided has resulted in tenderers being ranked as per Schedules 1A, 1B and 1C, refer Attachment 2.

Occupational health and safety management (20%)

The assessment for safety management was based on the tenderers response to the OHS questionnaire provided within the Request for Tender document.

Moduplay provided a comprehensive submission, which included their OSH policy, project management plan, details of their last audit, extensive list of Safe Work Method Statements (SWMS), and completed examples of incident report forms.

Forpark, Miracle and Proludic all provided submissions detailing their OSH management. Forpark only provided auditing and Safe Work Method Statements in respect to their factory operations. Miracle did not provide details of previous OHS audit and did not provide completed examples of incident forms. Proludic did not include completed examples of incident reports.

Playmaster did not include details of their previous OHS audit, training records or safety induction procedure. 

Based on the information provided, tenders have been ranked as below under this evaluation criterion:

Tenderer

Ranking

Moduplay

1

Forpark

2

Miracle

2

Proludic

2

Playmaster

5

 

Overall Weighted Score

In accordance with the overall weighted evaluation criteria, tenderers have been ranked on a separable portion basis. For an overall ranking breakdown for Schedules 1A, 1B and 1C, refer Attachment 3. Tender documents and analysis are available in the Elected Members Reading Room.

Consultation

Nil

Comment

Playgrounds play an important role in child development, providing environments that stimulate the development of social skills, imagination and creativity, problem solving skills and key motor skills (Kidsafe Western Australia).

 

In the interest of diversifying children’s play; the City endeavours to provide a mix of playground designs from different suppliers in order to provide maximum playground variety across a neighbourhood.

 

Forpark ranked highest overall for all Schedule 1A and 1B locations and for two of the three Schedule 1C furniture renewal locations.

 

To ensure sufficient diversification and variability in playground design, the TET determined the recommended tenderer on per site basis. Design options were assessed based on the following considerations:

 

1.   Which design option best meets the City’s requirements; and

2.   Which existing playgrounds are in close proximity to the playground subject to renewal and the relevant manufacturer details.  

 

Based on the above criteria, the following comments and recommendations are provided:

 

Table

Location

Recommended Tenderer

Design Option

Price

Comment

1A-1

Leemans Landing, Two Rocks

Forpark

Option 1

$35,008

Meets the City’s requirements and an existing playground is in close proximity

 

1A-2

Wanneroo Showground

Forpark

Option 1

$21,800

Meets the City’s requirements,

However, due to operational requirements, the City has elected to withdraw this park. No tender will be awarded for Wanneroo Showgrounds.

1A-3

Mist Park

Forpark

Option 1

$43,564

Meets the majority of the City’s requirements. 

 

1A-4

Blackmore Park

Miracle

Option 1

$65,028

Met the majority of the City’s requirements. Blackmore Park contains an ‘early childhood’ playground which was installed in 2014 by Miracle.

1A-5

Hainsworth Park

Moduplay

Option 2

$41,220

Meets the City’s requirements. In the interest of playground diversification and variability it is recommended to proceed with Moduplay Design Option 2.


1A-6

Homestead Park

Moduplay

Option 2

$113,230

In the interest of playground diversification and variability across it is recommended to proceed with Moduplay’s Design Option 2.  

 

1A-7

Monoghan Park

Forpark

Option 1

$54,100

Meets the City’s requirements.

1A-8

Paloma Park

Forpark

Option 1

$25,788

Meets the City’s requirements.

 

1B-1

Cherokee Park

Forpark

Option 2

$39,038

Meets the City’s requirements.

1C-1

Hainsworth Park

Forpark

Option 1

$10,600

Meets the City’s requirements.

 

1C-2

Paloma Park

Forpark

Option 1

$5,300

Meets the City’s requirements.

 

1C-3

Mindarie Surf Life Saving Club

Moduplay

Option 1

$2,990

Meets the City’s requirements.

 

Statutory Compliance

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

Strategic Implications

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

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

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

 

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

There are no existing Strategic or Corporate risks within the City's existing risk registers which relates to the issues contained in this report.

 

Policy Implications

 

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

Financial Implications

A financial assessment was undertaken for Forpark and Moduplay.  Reports indicated that these companies have the financial standing to complete these works.  It was decided not to undertake a financial assessment for Miracle based on only the one playground being undertaken, its relative value and that payment will be approved on completion of the works.

 

Of the 2015/16 park asset renewals, playground renewals at Oldham Park in Yanchep and Koondoola Park in Koondoola will be completed separate to this Tender due to the requirement to construct new playgrounds following the completion of clubroom construction. These works and the associated costs (as outlined below as $160,400) will be committed in a separate tender process, which will cater specifically to the construction requirements at each location.

 

The remaining budget surplus fund of $134,444 can be utilised to renew additional park assets in the following locations:

 

1.       Warradale Park Community Centre – playground renewal – approximate costs of $33,600; and

2.       Frangipani Park – playground renewal – approximate costs of $68,568

The renewal of assets at the above locations will occur through a separate request for quotation arrangement and will be subject to the availability of City resources prior to the conclusion of the 2015/2016 financial year.

 

Tender 01550 – Park Asset Renewal (PR-1910)

Description

Expenditure

Budget

Budget:

 

 

Allocated Project Management Budget for 2015/16

 

$791,000

 

 

 

Recommended tender price – Forpark

$213,398.00

 

Recommended tender price – Miracle

$65,028.00

 

Recommended tender price – Moduplay

$154,450.00

 

Contingency

$39,550

Management fees

$23,730

 

Outstanding project costs to be committed separate to Tender

$160,400

 

 

 

 

Total Expenditure

$656,556

 

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council ACCEPTS Tender submissions from Hansen Pty Ltd T/A Forpark Australia Miracle Recreation Equipment and Moduplay Group Pty Ltd  for Tender 01550 for Park Asset renewal at specific locations for the tendered lump sum price in accordance with the General Conditions of Tendering as follows:

 

Schedule

Location

Tenderer

Design Option.

Lump Sum Price

Table 1A-1

Leemans Landing, Two Rocks

Forpark

 

Design Option 1

$35,008.00

Table 1A-2

Wanneroo Showgrounds, Wanneroo

No Tender Awarded

Table 1A-3

Mist Park, Banksia Grove

Design Option 1

$43,564.00

Table 1A-7

Monaghan Park, Darch

Design Option 1

$54,100.00

Table 1A-8

Paloma Park, Marangaroo

Design Option 1

$25,788.00

Table 1B-1

Cherokee Park, Clarkson

Design Option 2

$39,038.00

Table 1C-1

Hainsworth Park, Girrawheen

Design Option 1

$10,600.00

Table 1C-2

Paloma Park, Marangaroo

Design Option 1

$5,300.00

Table 1A-4

Blackmore Park, Girrawheen

Miracle

Design Option 1

$65,028.00

Table 1A-5

Hainsworth Park, Girrawheen

Moduplay

 

Design Option 2

$41,220.00

Table 1A-6

Homestead Park, Clarkson

Design Option 2

$113,230.00

Table 1C-3

Mindarie Surf Life Saving Club, Mindarie

Design Option 1

$2,990.00

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1 - Price of services offered_schedule summary

15/546163

 

2.

Attachment 2 - Park asset submissionmeets specification's requirements, offers high asset variety and value for money (30%)_schedule summary

15/546166

 

3.

Attachment 3 - overall ranking_schedule summary

15/551102

 

 

  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 01 December, 2015                       112

Draft

Traffic Management

3.21  Landsdale Road, Darch - Proposed Traffic Management Scheme - Community Consultation Results.

File Ref:                                              19442 – 15/241254

Responsible Officer:                           Director Assets

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil.

Attachments:                                       5         

 

Issue

To consider the outcome of community consultation for the proposed Traffic Management Scheme (TMS) along Landsdale Road from Hartman Drive to Mirrabooka Avenue in Darch. Refer to Attachment 1 for locality plan.

 

Background

In response to complaints received from residents relating to speeding and hoon driving on Landsdale Road between Hartman Drive to Mirrabooka Avenue, the City conducted traffic counts to investigate the traffic volumes and vehicle speeds along this section of road. The traffic data collected indicated that a large proportion of drivers were travelling above the posted speed limit of 60km/hr. Traffic counts undertaken in two locations along Landsdale Road in June 2013 revealed the following information:

 

Landsdale Road East of Hartman Drive

Average Weekday Traffic (AWT) = 2188 Vehicles Per Day (Vpd)

85th Percentile speed (where 85% of vehicles are travelling below 64Km/h with 15% travelling above 64Km/h) = 64 Km/hr

 

Landsdale Road East of Evandale Road

Average Weekday Traffic (AWT) = 1411 Vehicles Per Day (Vpd)

85th Percentile speed (where 85% of vehicles are travelling below 68Km/h with 15% travelling above 68Km/h) = 68 Km/hr

 

The City has also received complaints regarding the poor condition of a section of the verge area adjacent to Landsdale Park. This section of the carriageway edge is yet to be kerbed with the verge area currently in an untidy state and requires attention.

 

Council at its meeting of 12 November 2013 (IN03-11/13 refers), considered a report on speed limit reduction on a number of roads in Darch and Landsdale which included this section of Landsdale Road and resolved as follows:

1.   “SUPPORTS the reduction of the posted speed limit on Kingsway, Landsdale Road, Furniss Road and Driver Road from 60km/h to 50km/h; and

2.   REQUESTS Main Roads WA undertake a speed zone review of Kingsway, Landsdale Road, Furniss Road and Driver Road with the intent of reducing the speed limit from 60km/h to 50km/h.”

Following the City’s request for Main Roads WA (MRWA) to reduce the speed limit for the above roads, MRWA response dated 17 June 2014 advised as follow:-

“Main Roads have always advocated that physical devices are the most effective method of lowering vehicle speeds, and ensuring these lower speeds remain self-regulating. To maintain the integrity of a lower speed environment, Council will need to first install traffic calming devices along the lengths of the named roads as without any physical traffic calming measures installed the suggested proposed 50 km/h speed limit would see very little if any compliance without constant Police enforcement.

While the control of speed is an important aspect in effective traffic management, it should not necessarily be assumed that the imposition of a lower speed limit will resolve all perceived safety problems on a road or will necessarily alter travel speeds. Experience in Australia and overseas has demonstrated that arbitrarily imposed speed limits which are unrealistically low are not respected and actual operating speeds remain at the same levels. Realistic speeds limits however, can be effective in regulating traffic flow and reducing crashes because the majority of motorists will voluntarily observe them.

At this stage, Main Roads considers the existing 60 km/h posted speed limits along the above named roads to be appropriate and in keeping with the road use and environment, supplied traffic data and motorists expectations.

 

Should Council wish to pursue a reduced speed limit for the above named roads at a later date and after traffic calming measures have been introduced for some time (6-12 months) along with recent classifier data, the City of Wanneroo may wish to re-submit the original request for Main Roads consideration.”

 

As a result, a project for the installation of a TMS along Landsdale Road between Hartman Drive and Mirrabooka Avenue has been listed in the City’s approved 2015/2016 Capital Works Program.

Detail

Landsdale Road between Hartman Drive and Mirrabooka Avenue in the suburb of Darch, is 1.6km long and is classified within the City's Functional Road Hierarchy as a Local Distributor Road. This road functions to distribute traffic to local residential access roads, servicing residential dwellings fronting this road, as well as accommodating traffic volumes up to 6,000 vehicles per day.

 

The Average Weekday Traffic counts recorded for this road have been in the region of 2,000 vehicles per day which indicates that this section of Landsdale Road is operating well within its capacity. The section of Landsdale Road from Hartman Drive to Evandale Road is both a Transperth and school bus route.  

 

Landsdale Road, prior to the current urbanisation, was formerly a rural road serving rural properties and market gardens and has been progressively upgraded by developers in conjunction with the adjacent urban subdivision developments. This section of Landsdale Road has been planned and upgraded with a pavement width of 7.6m.  There is however, a 70m section of this road that remains a rural standard road with a pavement width of 5.7m.  There are also several other sections that remain un-kerbed which are adjacent to land that is yet to be subdivided to urban residential lots. A schematic map detailing the existing road and pathway infrastructure along this section of Landsdale Road is shown at Attachment 2.

 

The majority of properties fronting Landsdale Road are residential dwellings. Several other larger land parcels make up the remaining lots that front onto this road; these include Lot 43, Lot 567 (Landsdale Farm School), Landsdale Park and Landsdale Plants Nursery’s Lots 30, 31, 32 and 39.

 

A pedestrian pathway has been constructed on the south side of Landsdale Road from Hartman Drive to Evandale Road, excluding the sections fronting Lot 43 and Lot 39 (depicted as Sections A and C in Attachment 2). From Evandale Road, the pathway switches to the north side of the road and continues onto Mirrabooka Avenue. This pathway has been constructed by developers as part of the adjacent subdivision development.

 

A TMS for Landsdale Road was developed taking into consideration its road transport function and configuration including future residential development, number and proximity of crossovers and accommodating the passage of public transport buses.

 

In developing a cost effective traffic management plan for community consultation, Administration considered the following aspects:

·    Road function and configuration;

·    Intersections;

·    Crossovers;

·    Pathways;

·    Lighting;

·    Traffic treatment spacing; and

·    Bus routes

 

Option 1 : Median Treatment - Road widening and provision of median islands

The existing road pavement width is not wide enough to accommodate this option, as this option would involve the widening of the existing road pavement and the reconstruction of existing kerbing with most of the adjacent residential properties verges and crossovers already established. The majority of the existing pathways have also been constructed immediately behind the kerb which will require reconstruction. This option involves significant civil works and was not considered to be a suitable option.

 

Option 2: Horizontal Deflection Devices, slow points, chicanes or blister islands

Residential properties along Landsdale Road have property frontages 18m to 20m wide each with 6m wide crossovers resulting in the crossovers being in close proximity to each other. Coupled with this, there are 10 existing road intersections with a further two planned intersections in the future subdivision development of the undeveloped lots. Each of these devices requires approach/departure tapers and transitional treatments which will invariably block access to residential crossovers where these devices are located. As a result of these restrictions along the stretch of road, the ability to strategically locate horizontal deflection devices is limited to achieve satisfactory outcomes.

This option would adversely impact on adjoining residences and therefore this option was not considered to be a suitable option.

 

Option 3: Vertical Displacement Devices, such as Speed Cushions

This option involves the installation of nine sets of 1.6m wide speed cushions, strategically placed and adequately spaced along the stretch of Landsdale Road as shown on City Drawing No. 2946-1-0 and 2946-2-0 (Attachment 3 refers).

To ensure that the desired effect of traffic management is achieved, it is important that the relative distance between devices is kept constant. If the treatments are placed too close, drivers may become frustrated and seek alternative routes through local access streets or engage in anti-social behaviour. Should the treatments be placed too far apart, the overall effect will be lost and drivers will accelerate/decelerate between devices.

Rubber bollards are also proposed to be installed adjacent to the kerbs to prevent motorists mounting and traversing the verge area in order to avoid the speed cushions.

Although these devices will increase general vehicle noise, they have proven to be very effective in facilitating speed reduction and to deter hoon behaviour. They are also acceptable for emergency vehicles and on PTA bus routes, as the wheel bases of larger vehicles such as buses are wide enough to straddle the individual cushions.

The installation of any traffic treatment device will require street lighting to be provided to Australian Standards (AS1158, Section 3.2.6.1) to ensure that these treatments are clearly visible at night. In order to ensure the project is cost effective, the speed cushions were located, wherever possible, to take advantage of any existing street lighting. Where there was no opportunity for this to occur, additional street lighting is proposed.

 

This option was considered to be the most cost effective.

Consultation

In May 2015, the City presented the proposed TMS for community consultation to determine the views of affected residents and property owners. The TMS included installation of a series of rubberised speed cushions, kerbing along the frontage of Landsdale Park and mulching of the nature reserve abutting Landsdale Park as indicated in the concept plan (refer to Attachment 3). The community consultation took the form of 109 letters to all residences directly abutting to the section of Landsdale Road between Hartman Drive and Mirrabooka Avenue (refer to Attachment 4), notification on the City’s website and street signs erected on the relevant section of Landsdale Road.

 

Consultation began on 22 May 2015 and closed on 12 June 2015 and attracted a good response rate of 40%. 44 respondents (80%) were in agreement with the proposal and nine (20%) against. Thirteen of the replies came from properties not abutting Landsdale Road, however most are located close enough to be regular users of Landsdale Road. There is a clear majority of respondents (80%) in agreement with this proposed TMS.

 

Survey respondents were also given the option to provide additional comments for consideration by the City. The comments relevant to Landsdale Road have been reviewed and considered by Administration and are listed below.

Respondents Comments

Administrations Response

Concern over bus stop relocation and request to install bus bays. 

The location of bus stops has been rearranged to alternative locations, away from speed cushions.  Buses stopping on the road act as a mobile traffic treatment. Administration does not support installing bus bays on Landsdale Road.

Concern with the road width adjacent to the properties, numbers 12 and 38.

The road will be widened at these sections and resurfaced adjacent to property number 38, as part of this project.

Install cycle lanes.

There is insufficient road width to provide cycle lanes on Landsdale Road.

Existing pathway is not continuous; sections of path are missing from adjoining properties, numbers 12 and 38.

Pathways will be installed adjacent to these two properties.

Reduction in cushion numbers and/or their relocation.

The location/separation of speed cushions is governed by Main Roads WA guidelines as well as the opportunities presented by existing infrastructure (i.e. intersections and crossovers). The locations of the speed cushions detailed on the concept plans have been designed with consideration of these restrictions and any removal/relocation will impact the effectiveness of these treatments.

Utilisation of fixed Speed Cameras

WA Police is the responsible authority for installing speed cameras. 

Modified Landsdale Road for Local Traffic Only.

Landsdale Road is classified as a local distributor and therefore its function in the road network is to distribute traffic and hence modification of Landsdale Road for local traffic only may disrupt this network. 

Request for more street lighting at Evandale Road intersection.

The existing lighting is considered adequate for the intersection of the class of roads.   

Increase line marking and number of speed signs.

Pavement marking and signage are undertaken by Main Roads WA and only when installed with associated traffic treatments are considered to be effective to reduce speed or hooning behaviour. However this proposed TMS will substantially increase the amount of line marking on the road.  

Several alternative devices have been suggested, such as blister islands and roundabouts.  

The alterative devices suggested are horizontal displacement devices. Landsdale Road does not provide sufficient opportunity to install such devices. 

Lower speed limit from 60km/h to 50km/h

The City will request Main Roads WA for speed limit reduction on Landsdale Road after the installation of the traffic treatments. 

Comment

Prior to finalising the outcomes of the community consultation, due to a relatively lower traffic volume in Landsdale Road, MRWA was requested to consider approving the default built up area speed limit of 50km/h for Landsdale Road. This would have allowed the City to achieve the outcome of a reduced posted speed without having to implement the TMS, however MRWA has not supported the City’s request, citing the higher 85th percentile speed a concern. Therefore the need to implement TMS devices remains and will assist in lowering the speed in Landsdale Road. While the City has been considering the outcomes of the community consultation, the community was advised by mail, dated 13 October 2015, that a report will considered by Council at its meeting on 8 December 2015.

 

The traffic treatment proposed is a series of nine sets of rubberised speed cushions to both facilitate speed reduction and to deter hoon behaviour. The installation of speed cushions in this format has been proven to be effective in encouraging safer vehicle speeds and deterring hoon behaviour while having little effect on the larger vehicles such as emergency vehicles and buses.

 

The City has previously installed rubberised speed cushions at a number of locations with success in reducing vehicle speeds.

 

The consultation in May/June 2015 provided a response rate of 40% which is considered a good representation of the community's view. The overwhelming support received from 35 of the 44 respondents is a positive indicator that the community is in favour of the proposed TMS. In reviewing the comments made by the community, it is evident that the community is concerned with speeding and hooning along Landsdale Road. Given that Landsdale Road is a PTA bus route, the proposed speed cushions will offer the best traffic control solution. The cushions will mitigate speeding and hooning vehicles while allowing the wider buses to straddle the speed cushions, Therefore the proposed treatment is expected to be an effective measure in addressing the residents' concerns.  In reply to the City’s notification of this proposed Traffic Management Scheme, the Public Transport Authority (PTA) has no objections to these works and given its support for the use of speed cushions as its busses can straddle either side of these cushions and not affect passengers.

 

In response to issues raised during community consultation, the following changes have been made to the proposed TMS as reflected in Drawing No’s 2946-1-1 and 2946-2-1 (Attachment 5):

 

·        Inclusion of road widening, kerbing and pathways adjacent to property numbers 12 and 38.

·        Inclusion of road resurfacing adjacent to property number 38.

·        Relocation of bus stops.

 

The estimated cost of the TMS is in the order of $250,000 and other road infrastructure renewal works is $85,000.

 

Based on the support from a majority of the respondents, it is recommended that the TMS be approved with the above additions as proposed in City's Concept Drawing No. 2946-1-1 and 2946-2-1 (Attachment 5).

 

Subject to Council’s decision on the recommendation made in this report, the detailed design of the proposed works is scheduled to be undertaken by February 2016 and construction works undertaken during May/June 2016. This schedule will be subject to Western Power’s availability to complete the street lighting upgrades prior to installation of the speed cushions.

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

There are no existing Strategic or Corporate risks within the City's existing risk registers which relates to the issues contained in this report.

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

An amount of $250,000 has been allocated in PR-2878 – Traffic Treatments – Landsdale Road in the 2015/2016 Capital Works Budget for the implementation of this project.

 

Infrastructure renewal works, road widening and resurfacing to this section of Landsdale Road is estimated at $85,000 and can be accommodated from Project No 1087 – Annual Transport Infrastructure Renewal Program, noting that Council approved an increase in the overall budget allocation for this program by $68,384 in November 2015 (refer Item No IN01-11/15).

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       ENDORSES the proposed Traffic Management Scheme for Landsdale Road for construction as shown on the City of Wanneroo Drawings No. 2946-1-1 and 2946-2-1 (Attachments 5);

2.       NOTES that infrastructure renewal works in this section of Landsdale Road will also be undertaken in conjunction with the implementation of the Traffic management Scheme as per Item 1 above; and

3.       ADVISES survey respondents of Council’s decision.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Landsdale Road, Darch - Traffic Management Scheme - Locality Plan

15/298596

 

2.

Landsdale Road, Darch - Existing Road and Pathway Infrastructure

15/412562

 

3.

Landsdale Road, Darch - TMS - Concept Plans 2946-1-0 2946-2-0

15/300360

 

4.

Landsdale Road, Landsdale - TMS - Community Consultation Letter

15/300625

 

5.

Landsdale Road, Darch - TMS - Concept Plans 2946-1-1 2946-2-1

15/300636

Minuted

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 01 December, 2015                       119

Draft

Community Development

Capacity Building

3.22  Community Funding Program October 2015 Round

File Ref:                                              19964 – 15/534778

Responsible Officer:                           Director Community & Place

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       1         

 

Issue

To consider applications from community groups requesting funding through the City's Community Funding Program October 2015 round for specified projects, activities or events.

 

Background

There are two funding rounds per financial year, in March and October.  This funding round represents the first round for the 2015/2016 financial year.  Assessment criteria and eligibility requirements are detailed in the City's Community Funding Policy.

 

The Community Funding Working Group met on Tuesday 3 November 2015 to discuss and make recommendations for the Community Funding Program October 2015 round as follows:

 

“1.     APPROVES $1,726.00 to Playgroup WA (auspicing Trinity Playgroup) via Community Event Funding for the Playgroup Open Day on 11 February 2016 SUBJECT to receipt of a renewed certificate of public liability insurance;

 

2.       APPROVES $2,977.50 to the Landsdale Residents Association via Community Event Funding for the Landsdale Neighbour Day 2016 on 12 March 2016;

 

3.       APPROVES $5,616.30 or, a lesser amount should a scaled-down event become necessary if Lotterywest and Healthway funding is not obtained, to the West Australian Folk Federation via Community Event Funding for the West Australian Folk Federation Urban Folk Day on 28 May 2016;

 

4.       APPROVES $1,915.48 to the Pheonix Calisthenics Club via Community Event Funding for the Have a Go and Family Fun Day on 30 January 2016 SUBJECT to receipt of a renewed certificate of public liability insurance;

 

5.       APPROVES $1,589.80 to Communified (Inc) via Community Event Funding for Communified (Inc) Community of Wanneroo Launch Incorporating Information and Education Session on 13 February 2016;

 

6.       APPROVES $1,735.00 to the Quinns Rocks Environmental Group via Community Development Funding for a Community Environmental Education Series from 20 February 2016 to 11 June 2016 SUBJECT to receipt of a renewed certificate of public liability insurance;

 

7.       APPROVES $998.65 to the North Coastal Children’s Community Choir Inc (Pending) via Community Event Funding for the North Coastal Children’s Community Choir Come and Try Day on 13 March 2016 SUBJECT to receipt Certificate of Incorporation and a certificate for public liability insurance;

 

8.       APPROVES $3,000 to Women’s Health and Family Services via Community Development Funding for Community Building through Group Art Therapy and Art Making from 9 February 2016 to 28 June 2016.”

Detail

Eight (8) applications were received by the closing date of 20 October 2015.  Two (2) applications are for community development funding and sic (6) are for community event funding. 

 

Six (6) of the applications received were from first-time Community Funding applicants.

 

The table below identifies the number of applications received from each Ward:

 

Ward

Community Event

Funding

Community

Development Project Funding

North Coast

1

1

Central

1

0

South

1

0

Outside of the City

(but project/event is taking place within the City).

4

 

Outside of the City

(and project/event is taking place outside of the City)

0

0

 

A complete compilation of applications and relevant attachments was provided to each member of the working group including deputy delegates.  A copy was also made available in the Elected Members' Reading Room.  A summary report of applications is provided (Attachment 1).

Consultation

Community Funding briefing sessions were provided to Community & Place Directorate teams.  These sessions continued to build a team understanding of the program, further equipping teams to participate in a whole-of-team approach to promotion and delivery of the Community Funding Program. 

 

This commitment to incorporating a whole-of-team approach has contributed towards six (6) of the eight (8) submitted applications being from first time applicants to the program.

Comment

The Community Funding Program October 2015 round promotion included an advertisement the City’s Wanneroo Link on 1 September 2015.  An article was also included in the City’s What’s Happening Publication September 2015 Edition.  Email notifications were sent to all eligible organisations on the Community Links Community Asset Data Base.  Community & Place Directorate teams distributed information throughout their networks and databases.  Promotion also occurred via the City’s website, Facebook page, organisational Nabo profile, the ground floor Customer Relations area digital screen and posters and brochures displayed at the Wanneroo Library Cultural Centre and across the City’s libraries and community centres.

 

A total of 40 telephone and email enquiries were received regarding applications for the October 2015 round. Of these enquiries, 22 were regarding initiatives identified as ineligible for Community Funding. Main reasons for ineligibility included:

 

·        Funding support was required for one-off items or for equipment rather than a community development project or event.

·        The initiative was intended as a fundraiser or for profit-making.

·        The March 2015 round for requesting Christmas 2015 event support had been missed.

·        The enquiring applicant was a business.

·        The group was already in receipt of community funding not yet acquitted.

 

Twenty one (21) enquirers were provided with information about the City’s Donations and Waiver of Fees and Charges Program and five (5) were provided with information on external funding opportunities.  Ten (10) were encouraged and assisted to undertake further project or event planning for application readiness for the next round of funding.

 

Of the enquiries received, four (4) were from Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CALD) groups, one (1) from a disability group, one (1) from an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander group and four (4) were early childhood/family-related.   

 

One-to-one assistance in completing the on-line application process was provided via telephone upon request by applicant groups.  Community Links Team staff members responded to centre-based and ward-based group enquiries regarding the community funding round.  The City’s Youth Services and Healthy Communities teams also supported and encouraged potential applicant groups in their networks. 

 

Since the October 2014 round and leading up to the October 2015 round, Community & Place Directorate teams have received Community Funding Program briefings.  Delivery of briefings will continue between funding rounds while the Community Funding Program framework is reviewed for improving community and place strengthening as a part of the City’s structural realignment.

 

Enquiries received for this community funding round again highlighted the following challenges experienced by community groups:

 

·        Limited project/event (including budgetary) planning by community groups prior to applying for external funding support.

·        Little knowledge of the suite of funding support programs offered by the City.

·        Insufficient self-assessment regarding eligibility of their initiative for community funding and other funding opportunities.

 

A coordinated approach to address the above challenges and better support community groups will be introduced over the next 12 to 18 months. Proposed initiatives including leadership forums, information workshops, one-to-one in-reach meetings and community group peer-support meetings are currently being considered for the future.

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.

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

 

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

2.3     Safe Communities – We feel at home in our local area.

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

Risk Title         

Risk Rating

Productive Communities

·        The City inadequately plans and implements strategies that support the development of self-supporting, productive communities.

Moderate

Accountability

Action Planning Option

Director Community & Place

Manage

Policy Implications

Administration has assessed the applications against the Community Funding Policy and provided recommendations for each application.

 

The Community Funding Working Group voted and carried unanimously to recommend to Council that these submissions are approved.

 

The City’s Community Funding Policy is currently scheduled for review. It is anticipated that the policy will require only minor changes at this stage to standardise terminology, improve clarity and incorporate administrative changes which reflect change of service unit responsibility for program delivery. It is anticipated that this policy review will be presented to Council for consideration at the March 2016 Council Meeting in advance of the next funding round.

 

The policy will be subject to further review in the following 12 to 18 months as a Community Funding Program review is progressed. Once implementation of the new Place Strengthening Service Unit has progressed and the team provides opportunities for the community to share their ideas to potentially reinvigorate the approach to community funding, the further review will be informed by this input.

Financial Implications

It is noted that a total amount of $19,558.73 was requested from eight (8) community funding applications.  The average request for this funding round is $2,444.84.

 

Of the eight (8) community funding applications received, six (6) were for community events totalling $14,823.73 (76% of the total community funding requested in the October 2015 round) and two (2) applications were for community development projects totalling $4,735.00 (24% of the total community funding request in the October 2015 round).

 

The value of Administration recommendations in the October 2015 round of Community Funding for consideration is $19,558.73.  This leaves a balance of $2,714.62 for distribution in the March 2015 round. 

 

The Community Funding Program October 2015 round is funded through the 2015/2016 adopted budget for Community Funding. The current GL account is 717253-1205-316.

 

The Community Funding Program March 2016 round is funded through the 2016/2017 adopted budget for Community Funding, with payments made early in July 2016.

 

Annual Community Funding Budget 2015/16

 

Less March 2015 round payments, 2015 Community Christmas Celebration commitments and 2016 Hallmark Event commitments

 

Balance available for October 2015 round

 

Less value of Administration recommendations for October 2015 round

$80,000.00

 

 

$57,726.65

 

$22,273.35

 

$19,558.73

EXPECTED BALANCE OF FUNDS FOR MARCH 2015 ROUND

$2,714.62

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

 

1.       APPROVES $1,726.00 to Playgroup WA (auspicing Trinity Playgroup) via Community Event Funding for the Playgroup Open Day on 11 February 2016 SUBJECT to receipt of a renewed certificate of public liability insurance;

2.       APPROVES $2,977.50 to the Landsdale Residents Association via Community Event Funding for the Landsdale Neighbour Day 2016 on 12 March 2016;

3.       APPROVES $5,616.30 or, a lesser amount should a scaled-down event become necessary if Lotterywest and Healthway funding is not obtained, to the West Australian Folk Federation via Community Event Funding for the West Australian Folk Federation Urban Folk Day on 28 May 2016;

4.       APPROVES $1,915.48 to the Pheonix Calisthenics Club via Community Event Funding for the Have a Go and Family Fun Day on 30 January 2016 SUBJECT to receipt of a renewed certificate of public liability insurance;

5.       APPROVES $1,589.80 to Communified (Inc) via Community Event Funding for Communified (Inc) Community of Wanneroo Launch Incorporating Information and Education Session on 13 February 2016;

6.       APPROVES $1,735.00 to the Quinns Rocks Environmental Group via Community Development Funding for a Community Environmental Education Series from 20 February 2016 to 11 June 2016 SUBJECT to receipt of a renewed certificate of public liability insurance;

7.       APPROVES $998.65 to the North Coastal Children’s Community Choir Inc (Pending) via Community Event Funding for the North Coastal Children’s Community Choir Come and Try Day on 13 March 2016 SUBJECT to receipt Certificate of Incorporation and a certificate for public liability insurance; and

8.       APPROVES $3,000 to Women’s Health and Family Services via Community   Development Funding for Community Building through Group Art Therapy and Art Making from 9 February 2016 to 28 June 2016.

Attachments:

1.

Summary Report of applications received in Oct 2015 round

15/517592

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 01 December, 2015                       124

Draft

3.23  Southern Suburbs Library (Kingsway) Update

File Ref:                                              2731 – 15/544425

Responsible Officer:                           Director Community & Place

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       2         

 

Issue

To determine the preferred site for delivery of a Southern Suburbs library to enable commencement of a design process.

 

Background

In order to progress the delivery of a new “Southern Suburbs Library” by commencing concept design and any associated land acquisition requirements, it is necessary to further consider a range of sites and determine a preferred site to enable commencement of the design process.

 

Since May 2015 when various site options in the Kingsway Shopping Centre precinct were discussed at a Council Forum, there has been follow up with the shopping centre developer to progress dialogue in regard to a preferred site to commence design work for delivery of a new library.

 

In order to progress this matter further, a resolution of Council is sought to formalise Council’s preference for location of a new library. This report therefore includes information and analysis of relevant factors for all sites previously outlined in May 2015 at Council Forum, in addition to the existing library site in Girrawheen.

Detail

Site options

 

The various site options are outlined in detail in the accompanying table (Attachment 1). The options presented for reconsideration are:

 

1.       Bellerive Boulevard (‘Community purposes site’); situated in the eastern portion of 182 (Lot 3) Wanneroo Road, Madeley adjacent to Bellerive Boulevard;

 

2.       Kingsway Shopping Centre, Hepburn Ave (undeveloped site behind Goodlife health club);

 

3.       Kingsway Shopping Centre, Hepburn Ave (undeveloped site opposite Medical Centre);

 

4.       Kingsway Shopping Centre, facing Wanneroo Rd - within building footprint as part of a future centre expansion;

 

5.       Kingsway Shopping Centre, facing Hepburn Ave - within building footprint as part of a future centre expansion; and

 

6.       Girrawheen Library, Patrick Court (site of existing library).

 

As a summary of the above options, the Girrawheen Library site (Option 6) was previously ruled out of consideration.

 

It is not well located to service the broader South Ward catchment; would require closure of an existing library and a total re-build; and current use and research indicates benefit in its continuation as a ‘niche’ local service point – it has demonstrated its value in meeting the specific demographic needs of its local catchment e.g. computer and internet access, English language training, resume writing and recruitment training and support.

 

The site options to construct a library internal within a future shopping centre expansion (Options 4 and 5), whilst having proven to be a successful model in many locations, requires a lease arrangement with less control over the space by Council, particularly in regard to any future refurbishment or expansion. Whilst some shopping centre developers have contributed significantly to the capital costs to deliver this model and offered subsidised rent, at this stage Council has been provided with proposed lease estimates not reflective of current markets and exclusive of fit out costs. This option also provides significant uncertainty regarding timelines due to its direct connection with a future expansion of the shopping centre.

 

Of the two options (2 and 3) to deliver a library within the Kingsway Shopping Centre precinct facing Hepburn Ave, the site opposite the Medical Centre received support in views expressed by Council when a range of options were presented to a Council Forum in May 2015. Both of these sites might be acquired under a lease as freehold may be more unlikely to be achieved. Option 3 is the larger site (approx. 1100sqm) and was proposed by the shopping centre developer in discussions with Administration as an option that could accommodate a library. At that stage the developer advised his desire to progress planning for that parcel of land and that it was likely to provide the earliest option to deliver a library in the Kingsway Shopping Centre precinct should Council so choose.

 

Administration subsequently met with the shopping centre developer to progress negotiation in regard to this site, however at that stage the developer advised his preference to deliver a library at an alternate site, being the smaller undeveloped parcel of land (approx. 750sqm) behind the Goodlife health club. The smaller site potentially constrains Council in relation to planning and design of a new library model, including parking, accessibility for deliveries, disabled access, ground floor footprint, library profile and connections and inter-relationships with adjacent uses. Architectural drawings provided by the developer for the potential future shopping centre expansion did not demonstrate good connectivity with the shopping centre entrance or interfaces with other uses in proximity to the site. Additionally, the drawings indicated minimal profile for the library as a result of proposed future development surrounding the site. Whilst many of the issues can be negotiated with the developer and potentially resolved, the uncertainty in timing relating to planning of a future expansion of the shopping centre is significant.

 

Option 1, the Bellerive Boulevard site identified as ‘community purposes site’ is subject to a Deed of Agreement with the developer for its acquisition. This site is approx. 15,000sqm, currently undeveloped and is located between the shopping centre and the City’s Kingsway Regional Sporting Complex. Whilst further from the shopping centre than other site options in the precinct, it can still afford a single destination experience, as well as providing the greatest flexibility for library design and integration or co-location of other complementary uses. Subject to resolution on the Deed of Agreement, this site would be owned by Council and provide certainty for planning and delivery of a new library.

 

It should be noted that a standard model of delivery of a single storey library of approx. 1,200sqm, as proposed for the Southern Suburbs Library, with ancillary infrastructure, landscaping and parking, is commonly provided on a site of somewhere in the order of 4,000sqm.

 

Models for New Library Services Provision

 

The key criterion for a library, as with any community building, is profile and accessibility. 

While a single level library at street level is ideal in providing the best access and civic presence in the community, a multi-storey building with a well-located lift (as with the Wanneroo Library) does overcome most accessibility issues and provides an opportunity to create a landmark if done well and in the right location. 

 

Public libraries positioned within shopping centres can boost their usage as well as attracting people to the retail space. The City of Armadale’s central library was re-located from a site next to the Council offices to a shopfront in the Armadale Central Shopping Centre in 2009.  Over five years, their visitor numbers have increased by 152%.

 

A location that provides good visibility and easy walkability from the shopping centre, such as a site adjacent to or in the proximity of a shopping centre can also provide a successful model. For example, the City’s Clarkson Library has over 250,000 visitors annually, many of whom are attracted by the library’s proximity to the shopping centre which is easily accessible by those on foot.  Another example is the Cambridge Library Development where Lend Lease contributed $1million towards the project in acknowledgement of the value presented by having a library on site.

 

The most successful and well used public libraries, both in Australia and overseas, are those that master the balance between the provision of traditional library services and innovative programs and services. The vision for a Southern Suburbs, or Kingsway Library, is to test out new services, programs, partnerships and technology to improve the quality and range of services, as well as increase community access, including as a simple example consideration of self-service outside of normal operating hours.

 

Increasingly, innovative public libraries are providing a learning hub for their community.  Whilst joint-use libraries located on school or university land have had mixed success with many experiencing issues with governance, funding, shared space and facilities including IT, there are successful examples of converged use libraries that provide services to schools and other learning institutions.  These include the City of Salisbury’s Mawson Lakes Library in South Australia, which provides a service to the Mawson Lakes School located opposite the library and the Hume Global Learning Centres in Victoria.  These models have repositioned their library services as central drivers to support life-long learning opportunities for their communities.  Importantly, this has been achieved through partnerships with other providers, using their facilities, collections and staff to add value to these partnerships. 

 

There has been a substantial shift in library space planning from a focus on shelving for collections and large desks for staff to an emphasis on design for people, community outcomes, experience and innovation. The new Southern Suburbs Library provides an opportunity to leverage a new approach to library service delivery that responds to the community demand for new digital formats as well as technological advances such as self-serve issue kiosks that are changing the way people use their public libraries.

 

In order to succeed in delivering intended outcomes, a new library must provide a space that is flexible and adaptable so that it can accommodate multiple community needs and ongoing re-purposing to satisfy evolving usage. This is particularly important to cater for an area such as in the City’s South Ward catchment, which is an increasingly diverse population - almost 80% are aged under 50 and yet 29% under 18. 

 

While only 10% of the population is aged over 60, traditionally, this older age group are enthusiastic library users who will need their own spaces to read, meet, connect and share learning opportunities.

 

The proposed new Southern Suburbs Library provides an opportunity to create distinct, adaptable spaces that will enable the community to experiment with a new library offer possibly including:

 

·        24 hour access to materials via a smart locker (book vending machine) so that customers can borrow, reserve and return items at times convenient to them.

 

·        A technology makerspace that provides a social environment with cutting edge technology for the area’s young population where they can develop new knowledge and skills that will contribute to academic achievement and career preparation.

 

·        Social spaces supported by digital technology.

 

·        A small business hub or incubator with co-working and meeting spaces that align with workshops and informal support and mentoring provided with community partners.

 

·        A South Ward location for customer facing City services.

 

·        A community learning lounge in partnership with other community agencies to cater for the increased emphasis on lifelong learning.

 

A library at Kingsway also provides an opportunity or the City to provide a convergent library model such as that successfully used in other local governments.

 

Recently delivered examples of new library models that the City will research further to provide input into design include libraries at Cities of Rockingham and Kwinana. The City of Rockingham’s Mary Davies Library and Community Centre in Baldivis opened in 2014 and provides a state of the art library with a media hub, children’s play area, gaming stations for youth, meeting rooms, function spaces and an IT training room. The City of Rockingham attracted additional funding for the project from Lotterywest, the Australian Government’s Regional Development Australia Fund and Stockland Limited.

 

The City of Kwinana’s Darius Wells Library and Resource Centre opened in 2013 and was planned as a community meeting centre housing a large, modern library as well as offering accommodation for not-for-profit agencies and community services on the upper level.  The centre also has a Dome Café and a crèche.  Visitor numbers to the library increased by 14% when it moved from its previous stand-alone location to this new centre. 

 

There is a small but emerging trend of libraries being built to cater for a specific demographic and/or purpose. At Kingsway, we could have a technology hub that would be particularly attractive to the area’s young demographic - we know that designated spaces and technology attract young people. There are innovative overseas examples in the US and Scandinavia of libraries providing content creation spaces such as maker spaces and flexible programming areas for hand-on workshops e.g. Chattanooga 4th floor which provides a “public laboratory and educational facility with a focus on information, design, technology and the applied arts”.  It has equipment, programs and events as well as staff with expertise to foster this vision.

 

Today’s best practice libraries are unique and responsive to their local community, meeting a multiplicity of needs, usage, services and technology including mobile technology. They are also increasingly integrated with other synergistic facilities including community hubs, learning centres, cultural precincts, recreation and commercial/retail hubs and include complementary spaces such as cafes.

 

The proposed new Southern Suburbs Library presents a strong opportunity to provide a best practice, innovative and responsive community services to Wanneroo residents.

 


 

The concept design brief for the new library will incorporate the research undertaken to date, as outlined above, particularly in relation to innovation in service delivery models, flexible design that meets community needs and considers an expanded range of library offer as well as external additional services.

Consultation

Recent consultation on this matter has included reports to Council Forum for discussion, internal consultation with community facility planning and library staff, meetings with the shopping centre developer and consultation with library service providers at other locations.

Comment

Of the range of options presented in this report, the site which provides most certainty due to being in the City’s ownership is the existing Girrawheen Library, however this site is not best located to serve the catchment of a proposed new Southern Suburbs Library.

 

Of the remaining options, potential delivery of a library within a future shopping centre expansion or on undeveloped land in the precinct, the site which provides the most certainty to the City, control over its future use and development, and flexibility as the City looks to accommodate other and emerging community needs in the South Ward, is the Bellerive Boulevard, ‘community purposes site’.

 

The research and planning done to date in regard to library models will provide sound input into the concept design work due for completion in the current financial year. Resolution on a preferred site will further support this work by informing the specific model, in particular in relation to single versus multi-storey design and the opportunities for potential integration and co-location with other complementary uses.

Statutory Compliance

In accordance with the Library Board Act (1951), the Library Board of WA is required to be consulted and to approve any new library service designed and built in Western Australia.

 

The Kingsway City Activity Centre Structure Plan would require amendment, depending on the location of the facility.

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

Risk Title

Risk Rating

Site negotiations with Tah Land Pty Ltd are unsuccessful or cause significant delay

Satisfactory

Accountability

Action Planning Option

Executive Management Team

Manage

Policy Implications

City planning policies would apply to this project.

Financial Implications

An amount of $150,000 was committed by Council in the 2015/16 Capital Works Budget for concept design and land acquisition resolution, with detailed design and construction anticipated to follow. Through the 2015/16 Capital Works Program budget preparation process, the total project cost to construct the new library was estimated at $7.55m, based on the ‘community purposes site’ option. The cost estimate cannot be finalised until site resolution is achieved, as site selection will influence design requirements and factors such as lease costs. Subject to site resolution, cost estimates will be reviewed for consideration through the future 20 year Capital Works Budget Program process.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       ENDORSES that the preferred site for delivery of the new Southern Suburbs Library is the land identified as the ‘community purposes site’ situated in the eastern portion of 182 (Lot 3) Wanneroo Road, Madeley adjacent to Bellerive Boulevard; and

2.       ENDORSES commencement of a concept design for a new library to be located at this site.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Summary Table of Site Options for Southern Suburbs(Kingsway) Library

15/542054

 

2.

Kingsway Shopping Centre Redevelopment Indicative Structure Plan with proposed Library Site - CF 19 Nov 2015

15/542101

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 01 December, 2015                       130

Draft

3.24  Installation of commemorative plaque at Wanneroo War Memorial

File Ref:                                              16255 – 15/561802

Responsible Officer:                           Director Community & Place

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil       

 

Issue

To consider the placement of a commemorative plaque within the City of Wanneroo’s War Memorial Precinct.

Background

The Perth North Sub-section of the Naval Association of Australia has been conducting Commemorative Services at the City of Wanneroo’s War Memorial for a number of years.

 

2016 commemorates the 50th anniversary of the Battle of Long Tan in Vietnam and the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) is offering grant funding to commemorate this.  The Naval Association of Australia participated in the Battle with 17 RAN ships in addition to the Clearance Divers Group and the RAN Helicopter Flight involved. 

 

The Perth North Sub-section of the Naval Association of Australia intends to submit an application for funding to DVA under the ‘Saluting the Services’ project for a plaque to commemorate their involvement and is seeking the City’s support to install the plaque, should the application be successful, in an appropriate location within the Wanneroo War Memorial precinct.  The grant application will also cover costs of a dedication ceremony to unveil the plaque in August or September 2016.

Detail

Details of the proposed plaque are as follows:

 

·        Bronze plaque 560mm by 300mm.

·        Plaque to contain; ‘IN MEMORY OF’, crest, the names of the RAN ships that saw service in Vietnam and the Clearance Divers Group and RAN Helicopter Flight.

 

Installation is proposed for August or September 2016 followed by an appropriate Dedication Ceremony. This will be organised and funded by the Perth North Sub-section of the Naval Association of Australia.

Consultation

There has been consultation with representatives of the Perth North Sub-section of the Naval Association of Australia, the Wanneroo Joondalup RSL and the City’s Governance, Facilities and Planning Teams in the preparation of this report.  

Comment

Placement of the plaque is in line with the City of Wanneroo’s ‘Naming of City Assets and Memorials Policy’, specifically: Category 2 – Commemorating individuals, groups or events through Memorials and/or Commemorative Plaques.

 


 

Administration recommends that the plaque is placed on the semi-circular wall that frames the war memorial obelisk.

 

The wall has an existing plaque and has the capacity for more plaques to be added (if required).  The Wanneroo Joondalup RSL has indicated its support for this project and location.  The location is also supported by the above policy which states:

 

·        “Memorials are to be appropriately located. Applicants must consider whether the memorial will enrich a public open space and should be carefully balanced against public benefits;

·        Not compromise the aesthetic integrity of the site nor interfere or disturb the fabric or character of the proposed site.”

 

The placement of the plaque provides an opportunity for the City to support veterans and acknowledge the efforts of ex-servicemen who served in the Vietnam War. The plaque offers the opportunity to respectfully provide an enduring legacy to these veterans and provide a focal point for community response and expressions of support.

 

As per the Policy, the Perth North Sub-section of the Naval Association of Australia intends to cover all costs associated with the design, manufacture, installation and maintenance of the plaque and the organisation and funding of the commemorative ceremony.

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.

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

Risk Management Considerations

There is no existing Strategic or Corporate risks within the City’s existing risk registers which relates to the issue contained in this report. 

Policy Implications

Naming of City Assets and Memorials Policy

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       SUPPORTS the placement by the Perth North Sub-section of the Naval Association of Australia of a memorial plaque acknowledging the naval vessels involved in the Long Tan Battle in Vietnam, on the semi-circular wall of the Wanneroo War Memorial subject to finalisation of negotiations; and

2.       APPROVES the Perth North Sub-section of the Naval Association of Australia holding a Ceremony of Dedication to acknowledge the installation of the plaque.

 

 

Attachments: Nil  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 01 December, 2015                       133

Draft

Program Services

3.25  Update on Homelessness and Sleeping Rough in the North Western Corridor

File Ref:                                              21024 – 15/500374

Responsible Officer:                           Director Community & Place

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil

Previous Items:                                  MN06-03/15 Agenda; MN06-03/15 Resolution

                                                            Homelessness and Sleeping Rough in the Northern Corridor     

 

Issue

To propose the City’s approach and actions in addressing homelessness in Wanneroo and the North Western Corridor in response to the Motion on Notice MN06-03/15 and CD02-09/15 and the final research report received from the City of Joondalup.

 

Background

Council, at its meeting of 31 March 2015, requested as follows:

 

“That Council

 

REQUESTS the Chief Executive Officer prepare a report for consideration at a future Council meeting addressing the incidence of homelessness and sleeping rough in the City of Wanneroo and the North Western Corridor. The report should consider, but not be limited to, partnering with an adjoining Local Government Authority to co-host a Full Time Equivalent shared resource, the allocation of space at an appropriate City facility as a Drop-in Centre, identification of appropriate funds to fit-out a Drop-In Centre and active participation in the Homelessness Action Group to co-ordinate and facilitate relevant State Government Departments and Not For Profit organisations”.

 

The City continues to develop its response to homelessness through the development of a reporting protocol and developing partnerships with agencies servicing the needs of people at risk or experiencing protocols.

 

To provide further information on the impact of homelessness in the northern metropolitan region Shelter WA was commissioned by the City of Joondalup to investigate the prevalence, contributing factors and options to reduce homelessness within the City and the northern corridor and to explore the development of a drop in or resource centre within the City of Joondalup to provide supportive links to relevant agencies.

 

As a Local Government operating in a similar geographical area and as a member partner with the City of Joondalup in the Joondalup and Wanneroo Interagency Homelessness Action Group (JWIHAG) it is recognised that the report findings can provide the City of Wanneroo with recommendations and future direction of the City of Wanneroo’s response to homelessness.

Detail

The Shelter WA report and the City of Wanneroo’s own data highlighted the current trends relating to pathways leading to homelessness including:

·        Housing stress, driven by accumulated debt;

·        Access to affordable housing (data shows that of the total social housing stock available in WA 0.97% were located in the City of Joondalup and 2.93% in the City of Wanneroo);

·        Women with/without children escaping domestic and family violence;

·        Young people, on their own or in small groups, as a result of family conflict; and

·        People with underlying mental health conditions, who have difficulty maintaining housing and/or become homeless on release from hospital.

 

There are services available in Joondalup and Wanneroo aimed at assisting people in these situations, however, as with many homelessness services around the state, they are unable to meet increased demand with existing resources for example, the Patricia Giles Centre, a refuge for women and children escaping family/domestic violence, was forced to turn away 23 women and children in May-July 2015 due to a lack of capacity.

 

Recent data presented by the report shows in a 4 month period (May to August 2015), that 20 people have been reported as experiencing homelessness in the City of Joondalup and a total of 21 people reporting homelessness or at risk of homelessness in the City of Wanneroo.

 

There is no single profile of people who are experiencing homelessness, it reaches across ages and includes people with complex needs, such as alcohol or drug misuse, as well as those unable to keep up with increasing costs of living. Because people experiencing homelessness have diverse life experiences, challenges and needs, a range of services is required to address varied circumstances.

 

The report refers to research that shows that many people who present as homeless as adults, first experienced homelessness as child, suggesting that preventative approaches will help future generations to avoid homelessness. Additionally, service providers reported an increasing incidence of homelessness amongst those who had never previously required assistance, in particular seniors, due to the increased cost of living.

 

The report supports an approach of addressing homelessness through a collective response, including service providers, faith-based organisations, private industry and local government. A collective impact model, which has been used successfully in other locations to tackle homelessness, would be an appropriate approach that would incorporate those identified stakeholders as well as engaging other key stakeholders including all levels of government, WA Police, the justice system and those experiencing homelessness. Through a collective impact approach a regional framework could be developed that would realise significant achievements in tackling and preventing the issue including integration of services, reduction in services competition and duplication, advocacy and influence in policy formation, funding allocations and new initiatives.

 


 

A key recommendation of the report is the development of a Regional Homelessness Strategy as a collaborative approach for the City of Joondalup and the City of Wanneroo, with clear partnership processes for the Cities to align with local services, as well as other local governments and Western Australian Local Government Association (WALGA) to advocate to State and Commonwealth agencies for continued policy development and funding to address homelessness. Key components of the strategy would include partnering with existing service providers, provision of on-going education for front line City employees, sharing of information with WA Police and other relevant agencies and advocating for the development of social and affordable housing that are accessible to our residents.

Consultation

Shelter WA engaged with a range of different stakeholders throughout this project, including service providers and people who have experienced homelessness in the Joondalup area, to determine the prevalence of homelessness in and around the City of Joondalup and establish the extent of current service provision and gaps.

 

Stakeholder consultations included:

 

·        Interviews with 27 key stakeholders;

·        Workshop with members of the JWIHAG;

·        Survey of 26 people who experienced homelessness in Joondalup;

·        Examining social media for issues relating to homelessness in Joondalup; and

·        Follow up survey of 17 JWIHAG members relating to the establishment of a drop-in centre.

 

Shelter WA’s recommendations are based on stakeholder consultations as well as local, national and international housing and homelessness desktop research

 

The City of Wanneroo participated in the research project through the external consultation workshop, an individual interview with the consultant and the provision of homelessness statistics provided by the City’s Financial Counselling service and other partners.

Comment

The City has introduced a number of initiatives to be better placed to provide support for people at risk, or experiencing homelessness in the City of Wanneroo. The City of Wanneroo and the City of Joondalup have continued to work collaboratively in this area and the report findings provide future direction, highlighting the need for a regional homelessness strategy to provide a framework for the work going forward. To facilitate the development of the strategy and the actions developed (ie partnership development) a shared resource will be required to coordinate this work.

A regional strategy aimed at preventing and addressing homelessness would assist in guiding the City in clarifying its role as well as the role of other stakeholders to more collectively and successfully take action on the issues associated with homelessness.

Contact has been received by the two Cities from RUAH Community Services, who are looking to undertake an activity in February next year titled “Registry Week” that will investigate the numbers of people who are homeless or sleeping rough - whilst aimed at Perth City it has opened the opportunity to also explore this region. This is viewed as a beneficial step to verify accuracy of data available and inform strategy development.

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.

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

Risk Management Considerations

There are no existing Strategic or Corporate risks within the City's existing risks registers which relates to the issues contained in this report.

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

It is proposed that the City will contribute to the report already commissioned by the City of Joondalup due to its relevance and opportunity to inform the City’s role in tackling homelessness. An appropriate contribution will need to be negotiated with City of Joondalup, with total project cost for the report as yet unknown. A further cost of $5,000 will be incurred to participate in the RUAH event next year and potentially in resourcing development of a regional strategy. Any expenses will be covered by the City’s 2015/16 operating budget

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

 

1.       APPROVES the development of a regional homelessness strategy in conjunction with City of Joondalup and instructs Administration to arrange a meeting in early 2016 to commence this work;

 

2.       APPROVES the participation at a cost of $5,000 by the City in “Registry Week” to be conducted by RUAH Community Services in February 2016 with the purpose of further investigating the numbers of people experiencing homelessness or sleeping rough in this region; and

 

3.       APPROVES Administration to negotiate an appropriate contribution to the Shelter WA report commissioned by City of Joondalup due to its relevance to City of Wanneroo in informing a role in homelessness.

4.                     

 

 

Attachments: Nil

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Elected Members' Briefing Session 01 December, 2015                       137

Draft

3.26  PT01-10/15 Develop a Shade Sails Policy for new playgrounds built in the North Coastal Ward

File Ref:                                              13640 – 15/553956

Responsible Officer:                           Director Community & Place

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil         

 

Issue

To consider Petition PT01-10/15 requesting the development of a Shade Sail Policy for new playgrounds built in the North Coast Ward and the retro-fitting of existing playgrounds within the Ward.

 

Background

Petition PT01-10-15 comprises of 234 signatures and was presented to Council at its meeting held on 13 October 2015. The petition presented the following request for action and background information:

 

That the City of Wanneroo develops a policy to include Shade Sails as a standard part of any new playgrounds built in the North Coastal Ward. Furthermore that the City prioritise fitting shade sails to all existing playgrounds in our ward.

 

The City promotes healthy living and encourages residents to participate and enjoy the outdoors, particularly children and families. A bigger funding commitment to install shade sails to existing playgrounds will encourage safe and increased use of existing infrastructure.”

Detail

The provision of shade sails for playgrounds is currently being addressed by Administration in the following manner.