Proof_CouncilAgenda_Coverpage_Template_Governance

 

 

 

Council Agenda

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ordinary Council Meeting

7.00pm, 30 May 2017

Council Chambers, Civic Centre, Dundebar Road, Wanneroo


PUBLIC QUESTION AND STATEMENT TIME

 

1.         TIME PERMITTED

A minimum of 15 minutes is permitted for public questions at each Council Meeting.  If there are not sufficient questions to fill the allocated time, the person presiding will move to the next item.  If there are more questions than can be considered within 15 minutes, the person presiding will determine whether to extend question time. Each person seeking to ask questions during public question time may address the Council for a maximum of 3 minutes each. 

 

2.         PROTOCOLS

No member of the public may interrupt the meeting’s proceedings or enter into conversation. 

 

Members of the public wishing to ask a question/s at the Council Meeting are to register on the night at the main reception desk located outside of the Chamber.  Members of the public wishing to submit written questions are requested to lodge them with the Chief Executive Officer at least 30 hours prior to the start of the meeting (that is by noon on the day before the meeting).

 

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

 

3.         GENERAL RULES

The following general rules apply to public question and statement time:

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

·                Only questions relating to matters affecting the local government will be considered at an ordinary meeting, and only questions that relate to the purpose of the meeting will be considered at a special meeting. 

·                Questions may be taken on notice and responded to after the meeting.

·                Questions may not be directed at specific Elected Members or Employees.

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

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

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

 

DEPUTATIONS

 

An informal session will be held on the same day as the Council meeting at the Civic Centre, Wanneroo, commencing at 6.00pm where members of the public may, by appointment, present deputations relating to items on the current agenda. To present a deputation members of the public are required to submit a request for deputation in writing at least three clear business days prior to the meeting addressed to the Chief Executive Officer.  A request for a deputation must be received by Council Support by 12 noon on the Friday before the Council Meeting.

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

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

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

 

Please ensure mobile phones are switched off before entering the Council Chamber.

For further information please contact Council Support on 9405 5027.


Recording of Council Meetings Policy

 

 

Objective

 

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

 

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

 

Statement

 

Recording of Proceedings

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Access to Recordings

 

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

 

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

 

Retention of Recordings

 

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

 

Disclosure of Policy

 

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


 

 

Notice is given that the next Ordinary Council Meeting will be held at the Council Chambers, Civic Centre, Dundebar Road, Wanneroo on Tuesday 30 May 2017 commencing at 7.00pm.

 

 

 

 

 

D Simms

Chief Executive Officer

25 May, 2017

 

 

 

CONTENTS

 

Item  1_____ Attendances_ 1

Item  2_____ Apologies and Leave of Absence_ 1

Item  3_____ Public Question Time_ 1

Item  4_____ Confirmation of Minutes_ 1

OC02-05/17     Minutes of Ordinary Council Meeting held on 9 May 2017  1

Item  5_____ Announcements by the Mayor without Discussion_ 1

Item  6_____ Questions from Elected Members_ 1

Item  7_____ Petitions_ 1

New Petitions Received  1

Update on Petitions  1

UP05-05/17     Objection to the Removal of Trees Peaslake Street, Butler (PT01-05/17) 1

UP06-05/17     Support the U3A Wanneroo Region’s Submission to the City of Wanneroo Facility Development and Planning Department Regarding a Request to Construct a Petanque/Bocce Pitch (PT02-05/17) 2

UP07-05/17     Request for Shade Sails to be Constructed over the Play Equipment at Fred Stubbs Park in  Quins Rocks (PT03-05/17) 2

Item  8_____ Reports_ 2

Planning and Sustainability  2

City Growth  2

PS03-05/17      Energy Reduction Plan  2


 

Approval Services  23

PS04-05/17      Consideration of Development Application – Golf Course Fencing (Retrospective) at Lot 888 (144) St. Andrews Drive, Yanchep – DA2017/30  23

PS05-05/17      Consideration of Local Development Plan No. 1 - Two Rocks Town Centre  92

Assets  110

Community & Place  110

Cultural Development  110

CP06-05/17     Museum Collection Policy Review   110

Community Facilities  135

CP07-05/17     Development of Hardcastle Park, Landsdale  135

Corporate Strategy & Performance  159

Business & Finance  159

CS08-05/17     Financial Activity Statement for the Period Ended 30 April 2017  159

Transactional Finance  183

CS09-05/17     Warrant of Payments for the Period to 30 April 2017  183

CS10-05/17     Proposal for Levying Differential Rates 2017  244

Property Services  250

CS11-05/17     Proposed Lease of Portion of Lot 500, Reserve 10845, Leach Road, Wanneroo to the Wanneroo Community Men's Shed  250

Council & Corporate Support  278

CS12-05/17     Donations to be Considered by Council - May/June 2017  278

Chief Executive Office  283

Governance & Legal  283

CE06-05/17     Delegated Authority Annual Review   283

Item  9_____ Motions on Notice_ 386

Item  10____ Urgent Business_ 386

Item  11____ Confidential_ 386

Item  12____ Date of Next Meeting_ 386

Item  13____ Closure_ 386

 


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      Public Question Time

Item  4      Confirmation of Minutes

OC02-05/17       Minutes of Ordinary Council Meeting held on 9 May 2017

That the minutes of Ordinary Council Meeting held on 9 May 2017 be confirmed.

Item  5      Announcements by the Mayor without Discussion

Item  6      Questions from Elected Members

Item  7      Petitions

New Petitions Received

Update on Petitions  

UP05-05/17       Objection to the Removal of Trees Peaslake Street, Butler (PT01-05/17)

Cr Parker presented a petition of 11 signatures for the objection to the removal of trees Peaslake Street, Butler. (Trim 17/128208).

 

Update

 

A report on this matter will be tabled to the Council Meeting scheduled for 25 July 2017.

 


 

UP06-05/17       Support the U3A Wanneroo Region’s Submission to the City of Wanneroo Facility Development and Planning Department Regarding a Request to Construct a Petanque/Bocce Pitch (PT02-05/17)

Cr Guise presented a petition of 181 signatures for the support of the U3A Wanneroo Region’s submission to the City of Wanneroo Facility Development and Planning Department regarding a request to construct a Petanque/Bocce Pitch (Trim 17/139365).

 

Update

 

A report on this matter will be tabled to the Council Meeting scheduled for 27 June 2017.

 

 

UP07-05/17       Request for Shade Sails to be Constructed over the Play Equipment at Fred Stubbs Park in  Quins Rocks (PT03-05/17)

Cr Sangalli presented a petition of 693 signatures to request for shade sails to be constructed over the play equipment at Fred Stubbs Park in Quinn’s Rocks. (Trim 17/146542).

 

Update

 

A report on this matter will be tabled to the Council Meeting scheduled for 27 June 2017.

 

Item  8      Reports

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

Planning and Sustainability

City Growth

PS03-05/17       Energy Reduction Plan

File Ref:                                              27494 – 17/159309

Responsible Officer:                           Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       1      

 

Issue

To consider a draft Energy Reduction Plan 2017-2020.

Background

In June 2010, Council approved the allocation of $50,000 seed funding to an Environmental Initiatives Reserve for the purpose of expenditure on sustainability initiatives that demonstrate improved environmental benefit and financial savings.  It was intended that the Reserve would be replenished by the accumulation of financial savings achieved through the implementation of the environmental initiatives.

 

On 5 April 2011, Council endorsed the Sustainability Investment Reserve Fund Expenditure and Reporting Policy which set out a process for identifying the type of projects that might be suitable for funding through the City’s Environmental Initiative Reserve; how they are selected and managed; and the required reporting on these projects to ensure the financial savings are reinvested back into the Environmental Initiatives Reserve.  Administration tracked the effectiveness of this Policy over a 5 year period, following which it was determined that the future of the Policy should be considered through the City’s preparation of an Energy Reduction Plan (ERP).

 

The City’s Corporate Business Plan 2016/17 includes an action to finalise an Energy Reduction Plan (ERP) for City owned facilities and operations by June 2017.

 

The proposed approach to the preparation of an Energy Reduction Plan was supported by the Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC) at its meeting on 3 February 2016.  The City subsequently engaged Climate Change Response Group (CCR) in April 2016 to conduct an energy audit compliant with Australian Standard AS3598:2000 – Level 1 Energy Audit.

 

Energy Audit

 

The Energy Audit involved an inspection and reporting on the following City owned and operated assets, in order to better understand the City’s current energy use and identify avenues for potential savings:

 

·    Wanneroo Library and Cultural Centre;

·    Wanneroo Aquamotion;

·    Kingsway Sporting Complex (including Indoor Sports Centre);

·    Wanneroo Community Centre (representative of community centres);

·    Wanneroo Showgrounds (representative of parks and reserves);

·    Street Lights at Dundebar Road and the underpass at Joondalup Drive (representative of City managed street lights);

·    Carramar Golf Course (representative of golf courses); and

·    The City’s vehicle fleet including light and heavy vehicles.

 

The Civic Centre building (23 Dundebar Road) was excluded from the audit as it is currently subject to a major refurbishment and any data collected during this refurbishment would not be a true reflection of the energy consumption of the building.

 

The Energy Audit outlined a number of possible energy reduction savings, but stated that these savings would not be achievable unless the City prepared an Energy Monitoring Strategy (EMoS) to properly inform the implementation of energy reduction strategies.  This was on the basis that:

 

·    The City lacked a formal governance structure to track and improve energy consumption and efficiency across its operations;

 

·    The City has some understanding of the energy capacity or requirements of individual buildings, but it is not currently possible to determine whether energy reduction and efficiency projects would represent a financial or operational risk to the City; and

 

·    If the City did commence renewable or energy efficiency initiatives, there is no mechanism to record or assess the positive impact that it would have on the City’s budget or carbon footprint. Consequently it is difficult to determine the success of any initiative with any great confidence, which effectively diminishes opportunities for effective energy reduction, positive media exposure or enhancement of the City’s reputation. 

 

This is also important if the City wishes to take advantage of funding opportunities from the Clean Energy Finance Corporation which exists to help local government transition to more energy efficient futures.  As it stands, the City would not be able to provide the essential data to be eligible for Federal grants.

 

In November 2016 Administration engaged CCR to prepare an EMoS.

 

Energy Monitoring Strategy

 

The EMoS was completed for the City by CCR in January 2017.  The EMoS recommended the preparation of an energy monitoring and implementation program, comprising a monitoring phase in year one and both monitoring and implementation phases for year two and so on.

 

Together, the findings of the energy audit and EMoS have been used to prepare a draft Energy Reduction Plan, which is included as Attachment 1 for discussion and consideration of the EAC.

Detail

The draft ERP has many discrete elements which together contribute to an overall effort to reduce energy use (refer Figure 1).

Initial Priority

 

Figure 1: Elements of the draft Energy Reduction Plan

 

While it is possible to address all aspects of an ERP simultaneously, given the City’s developing maturity in this space and the resourcing necessary to do so, it is proposed to address the various aspects of energy reduction progressively, focussing initially on electrical energy. 

 

Given this, the critical first element in the establishment/implementation of an ongoing energy reduction regime is the development of an energy monitoring strategy that establishes a reporting framework and database of current energy use patterns across the City.  Without embedding a strong approach to energy monitoring the City cannot set baseline energy use patterns; develop knowledge of where energy is being used excessively; or identify options on how to best minimise this.  This process is outlined in Figure 2 below.

 

Figure 2: Energy Monitoring and Implementation Strategy

 

The draft ERP provides a range of recommendations, that primary address the implementation of an Energy Monitoring Strategy and Energy Monitoring and Implementation Program.

 

Key recommendations include:

 

·    Development of an overarching Sustainable Energy Management Framework that reflects the City’s current Structure, resourcing and responsibilities.

 

This is critical to the effective implementation of an ERP and includes defining an appropriate governance structure that sets out who will be responsible for monitoring energy use, analysing energy use data, and preparing business cases and making recommendations for future energy reduction initiatives.

 

·    Implementation of an Energy Monitoring and Implementation Program

 

The establishment and implementation of an energy monitoring program is the primary element of the draft ERP as it pertains to electrical energy.  The proposed approach is to implement the stepped approach illustrated in Figure 3 below:

 

Figure 3: Energy Monitoring & Implementation Program Years 1-3

 

Figure 3 illustrates the first three years of the monitoring program.  The monitoring phase includes circuit disaggregation and sub-metering of selected facilities, data collection and analysis and identification of energy reduction opportunities.  This information can then be used to support business cases for the energy reduction or renewable energy installation strategies in the implementation phase.

 

To ensure that City can be responsive to both internal and external factors in relation to energy consumption it is recommended that three sites are selected for the monitoring phase in year one.  The data collected in the monitoring phase will then be used to inform energy reduction strategies identified for implementation in year two.  These three buildings are represented by ABC in Figure Two. 

 

The buildings recommended by CCR for inclusion in year one are:

 

·    Aquamotion;

·    Kingsway Indoor Stadium; and

·    Girrawheen Library.

 

These buildings have been chosen for their size and savings potential.

 

In year two, the same three buildings (ABC) will continue to be monitored and implementation of the identified energy reduction strategies will commence.  The energy reduction strategies are assessed at the end of year two and this assessment information coupled with the continued monitoring data is evaluated to provide a comprehensive understanding of the success of the strategies and savings for these buildings.

 

In year two, monitoring commences for a second set of large buildings (represented by DEF in Figure 2).  By year three, buildings (DEF) also move into the implementation phase and another set of three buildings (represented by GHI in Figure 2) commences monitoring and so the process of continual improvement and energy savings continues.

 

A major advantage of this stepped approach is the ability of the City to adopt new technologies as they arise or become more affordable.  An example of this is the impending commercialisation of solar battery storage making it a financially viable option for the City to implement.

 

Other elements of the ERP, which will be addressed in future stages of implementation, include:

·    Behaviour change - targeting residents and employees of the City of Wanneroo to think and act in more sustainable ways.

·    Procurement - engaging contractors or suppliers of goods or services to the City to engage in energy reductive practices within their own equipment and behaviour.  This includes companies such as Western Power whom own and operate the majority of street lights within the City.

·    Fleet – considering energy efficiency in the purchase, operation and maintenance of the City’s fleet assets.

Consultation

The draft ERP was presented to the Environmental Advisory Committee on 2 May 2017.  The Committee endorsed the draft ERP and recommended that it be presented to Council for final adoption.  The draft ERP was subsequently presented to Council Forum on 16 May 2017 and is now being presented to Council for final adoption. 

 

Given that the draft ERP primarily deals with internal governance and process issues for the City, it is not proposed that it be advertised for public comment.

Comment

The City’s Corporate Business Plan identified a requirement for an ERP to be completed by June 2017.  In conducting the preliminary investigations for the preparation of the ERP the City’s current energy usage and possible energy reduction strategies were assessed. Through this assessment it was identified by the consultants that formulation of energy reduction initiatives should be underpinned by a robust monitoring plan that informs the implementation of the best energy reduction strategies for each individual site.  The lack of an effective energy monitoring framework has been a hindrance to the effective implementation of the Sustainability Investment Fund Policy in the past.

 

The completed Energy Audit, together with the recommended program for monitoring energy consumption set out in the EMoS are essentially what comprise the first iteration of the ERP.  They set out a clear way forward for identifying appropriate energy reduction initiatives across the City.  The adoption of this approach would allow the City to understand its energy consumption and respond to individual site requirements as well as capitalise on new and emerging technologies within the energy sector.

 

Furthermore, the establishment of an appropriate energy management framework will facilitate the expansion of energy reduction initiatives to other forms of energy.  It is important to note that the ERP will evolve and develop over time as energy monitoring and information is collected and used to inform decision making around which energy reduction measures are implemented for different City assets.  While the ERP is initially focussed on electricity usage, this will ultimately expand to address other forms of energy use as more robust monitoring frameworks are established and the City matures in its approach to energy reduction.

Statutory Compliance

Nil

Strategic Implications

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

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

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

Risk Management Considerations

Risk Title

Risk Rating

ST-S06 Climate Change

High

Accountability

Action Planning Option

Director Planning and Sustainability

Manage

 

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

Policy Implications

The proposed ERP will supersede the process set out in the Sustainability Investment Reserve Fund Expenditure and Reporting Policy, which has proven to be difficult to administer without a formal energy monitoring framework in place.  If the draft ERP is endorsed by Council, then a future report will be presented to Council regarding the future of the Environmental Initiatives Reserve and associated Sustainability Investment Reserve Fund Expenditure and Reporting Policy.

Financial Implications

Funds have been listed for consideration in the 2017/18 budget to implement the ERP in year one for Aquamotion, Kingsway Indoor Stadium and Girrawheen Library.  This includes the development of a governance framework and energy monitoring program, the installation of sub-meters and energy monitoring for these facilities.  This is expected to cost approximately $66,000.

 

Budget allocation for monitoring and implementation in each subsequent year of the program will need to be provided for as part of the annual budget process, with specific energy reduction measures determined annually by the conclusion of the monitoring process.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council ENDORSE the Energy Reduction Plan 2017-2020 included as Attachment 1.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1 - Energy Reduction Plan 2017-2020

17/131640

Minuted

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                      9


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                        23

 

Approval Services

PS04-05/17       Consideration of Development Application – Golf Course Fencing (Retrospective) at Lot 888 (144) St. Andrews Drive, Yanchep – DA2017/30

File Ref:                                              DA2017/30 – 17/115556

Responsible Officer:                           Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       9         

 

Issue

To consider an application for retrospective development approval for fencing on the Sun City Country Club landholding, located at Lot 888 (144) St. Andrews Drive, Yanchep.

 

Applicant

Sun City Country Club Inc.

Owner

Sun City Country Club Inc.

Location

Lot 888 (144) St. Andrews Drive, Yanchep

Site Area

66.427 hectares

DPS 2 Zoning

Private Clubs/Recreation

Background

Location of Subject Development

 

The Sun City Country Club (SCCC) is situated on Lot 888 (144) St. Andrews Drive, Yanchep. The subject property is zoned Private Clubs/Recreation under the City’s District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2).

 

The fencing which is subject to the development application (subject fencing) has already been erected, and is situated less than 0.5 metres from the boundary (but not on the boundary) the SCCC shares with residential properties located in the adjoining Yanchep Golf Estate. Subdivisional works creating the Yanchep Golf Estate have been occurring since 2011, well after the establishment of the SCCC.

 

The location of the SCCC landholding in respect to the Yanchep Golf Estate is shown on the plan included as Attachment 1.

 

Subdivisional Fencing

 

Prior to the erection of the subject fencing, the only fence separating the residential properties in the Yanchep Golf Estate from the SCCC was post, rail and mesh fencing (subdivisional fencing); installed by the developer of the Yanchep Golf Estate (Peet Limited) at the time subdivisional works were undertaken. The developer has informed Administration that the subdivisional fencing was installed to a height of 1.1 metres.

 

Subdivisional fencing along the boundaries shared by SCCC and the Yanchep Golf Estate (between 3 and 37 Parkland Drive, Yanchep) was required under an approval of subdivision granted by the Western Australian Planning Commission. The City (Administration) was then responsible for ‘clearing’ the conditions of subdivision, which means (among other things relevant to other subdivision conditions) confirming that the fencing was installed in accordance with the subdivision condition.

 

The same style of subdivisional fencing was also installed by the developer on boundaries that the SCCC shares with the Yanchep Golf Estate at the following locations:

·    At 39 and 41 Parkland Drive, Yanchep;

·    Adjoining the Bunker Crescent, Birdie Grove and Stableford Loop road reserves; and

·    At 1 Bunker Crescent, 3 Bunker Crescent and 3 Birdie Grove.

The installation of the fencing at the above locations was not prompted by a subdivision approval condition. As outlined later in this Report, fencing on boundaries is exempt from development approval under DPS 2.

 

Fencing Installed by the SCCC not Part of this Development Application

 

Works were undertaken by the SCCC in late 2016 to remove subdivisional fencing adjoining the Bunker Crescent, Birdie Grove and Stableford Loop road reserves, and to replace that fencing with a taller chain mesh fencing with barbed wire. This fencing is located where shown in Attachment 1.

 

As such works have occurred on the boundary of the SCCC landholding; the replacement fence is exempt from development approval under the DPS 2 Deemed Provisions and is not part of the development application subject of this Report. Administration has advised the SCCC that in undertaking such works, the replacement fencing is to satisfy the provisions of the City’s Fencing Local Law 2016 (Local Law).

 

Administration is satisfied that this fencing complies with the Local Law.

 

Lodgement of Petition

 

Prior to the lodgement of the development application, a petition was tabled at the 7 November 2016 Council Meeting (PT01-11/16). The petition was against the erection of a 2.4 metre or a four metre high fence on the boundary the SCCC shares with the Yanchep Golf Estate adjacent to Parkland Drive, Yanchep. Administration has already provided a responding update, which is included in the Minutes of the 6 December 2016 Council Meeting (UP01-12/16).

 

A further response to the principal petitioner is pending Council's resolution on the development application subject to this Report.

 

Containment of Kangaroos

 

Elected Members have previously been briefed about Administration’s initiatives and coordination with various stakeholders in Yanchep to control and contain the movement of kangaroos through developed and undeveloped land surrounding the SCCC.

 

During Administration’s attempts to coordinate a response to the kangaroo issues, the SCCC had raised the possibility with Administration as to whether the City could financially contribute to fencing needed to address the kangaroo issues. Although Administration considered (internally) making a contribution; what eventuated was no contribution was made, as the SCCC subsequently advised that no contribution was needed from the City. 

 

As outlined later in the Report, the SCCC erected fencing adjoining the Yanchep Golf Estate as a means to provide security and a deterrent for unwarranted access. The SCCC has erected the fencing subject to the development application on its own initiative. This fencing erected also acts to prevent additional kangaroos from the wider area entering the SCCC.

 

It is further noted that the responsibility to protect native fauna (including kangaroos) under the Wildlife Conservation Act 1950 rests with the landowners of land in which fauna is situated at any given time. In the case of the SCCC, it is their responsibility (and not the City’s) to manage the welfare of kangaroos occupying their property.

Poles and Security Cameras

 

The SCCC had previously erected poles with mounted cameras on their landholding, in proximity to their boundaries with residential properties. A photograph of one of these structures is included in Attachment 2. These structures have now been removed.

 

Whilst the poles and cameras were situated on the SCCC land, Administration did establish that these structures were erected without development approval. As such, Administration undertook compliance actions against the SCCC pursuant to the City’s Local Planning Policy 4.14: Planning Compliance (LPP 4.14). Now that the poles and cameras have been removed, Administration considers that no further actions are necessary in respect to this matter.

Detail

The subject application seeks retrospective development approval for fencing already installed by the SCCC on its landholding; adjoining and running parallel to its boundaries with 23 residential properties situated on Parkland Drive, Bunker Crescent and Birdie Grove in Yanchep.

 

Development approval is required for the subject fencing, as only boundary fencing is exempt from development approval under DPS 2. In Administration’s opinion, the subdivisional fencing (the 1.1 metre high post rail and mesh fencing) will continue to act as a boundary fence (irrespective of the erection of the subject fencing), as the subdivisional fencing is situated on the boundary that the SCCC shares with the residential lots.

 

The SCCC has advised Administration that they no longer consider the subdivisional fencing sufficient to their needs. The SCCC has argued that new fencing is necessary to:

 

·    Provide security – to reduce the incidences of vandalism of the greens, fairways, reticulation and ancillary facilities;

 

·    Prevent unwarranted access from local residents who use the fairways for recreation (such as to kick footballs or walk dogs). The SCCC is fearful that the local community accessing the golf course for recreation exposes them to dangers such as errant golf balls, fertilisers and pesticides; and

 

·    Prevent unwarranted access to an unfenced drainage easement, situated on the SCCC landholding adjoining the boundary with Bunker Crescent. The SCCC administration is fearful that the drainage easement can become a drowning hazard (especially for children) if it were to remain easily accessible and fill with stormwater.

 

The SCCC has since erected new fencing to respond to their above concerns; part of which is subject to this development application.

 

The site plan that the SCCC has lodged with their development application is included as Attachment 3. Administration has prepared a location plan (included as Attachment 4) that also shows the extent of the fencing subject to this development application.

 

A summary of the fencing detail is provided below:

 

·    The fence is made of chain mesh attached to steel posts. The chain mesh is visually permeable.

 

·    The fencing is situated setback less than 0.5 metres from the boundary with the abutting residential properties.

·    As outlined in the application submitted by the SCCC (and the elevation plan included in Attachment 3), approval is sought for the chain mesh component of the fencing to be at a height of 2.1 metres and for the fence posts to be at an overall height of 2.4 metres.

 

·    Approval is sought for three strands of barbed wire (to a maximum height of 2.4 metres) to be installed on the following portions of subject fencing, where shown on the plan included as Attachment 4

Adjoining the vacant residential properties that directly abut the SCCC and are situated on Bunker Crescent, Birdie Grove and Parkland Drive; and

Adjoining an established property at 27 Parkland Drive, where the SCCC has concerns that access over the fencing onto the golf course is possible via an existing raised platform (refer to photographs included in Attachment 5). Administration considers this structure unauthorised and is undertaking compliance actions pursuant to the City’s LPP 4.14.

 

The barbed wire has been installed attached to posts, which do not align with the side boundaries of the adjoining residential properties. This has resulted in the barbed wire being extended onto portions of fencing adjoining other established residential properties (situated next to vacant properties or next to 27 Parkland Drive), by a matter of up to a few metres.

 

The SCCC has expressed that they will remove the barbed wire from fencing adjoining the vacant residential properties once those properties are constructed. The SCCC has expressed an intention to remove barbed wire installed on the fencing adjoining 27 Parkland Drive, should that adjoining resident remove their raised platform.

 

Photographs of the fencing subject to the application for retrospective development approval are included in Attachment 6.

Consultation

Public consultation was undertaken for a period of 21 days (from 30 January 2017 to 20 February 2017), by way of letters to landowners and occupiers of 23 residential land parcels located adjoining the subject fencing.

 

During the formal public consultation period, Administration received a Freedom of Information (FOI) request from an affected adjoining residential landowner, to obtain information that the City had relating to the fencing installed by the SCCC (fencing subject to the development application and that erected adjoining the Bunker Crescent, Birdie Grove and Stableford Loop road reserves). Administration understands that this landowner made other residents in the Yanchep Golf Estate aware that they had lodged an FOI request. This landowner and other residents felt that until information sought through this FOI request was received and assessed, they were disadvantaged in terms of making appropriate submissions in respect to the fencing that has been erected. Residents requested an extension of time to provide a submission; and in response, Administration advised that it would allow submissions up until a date 14 days after an outcome to the FOI request had been reached. As an outcome to the FOI request was reached on 9 March 2017, Administration allowed submissions to be received up until 23 March 2017.

 

There were 38 submitters providing submissions that did not rely on an outcome of the FOI being reached. Of those submissions received, 37 submitters expressed an objection to the application. One submitter expressed a ‘no objection’ in respect to the fencing subject to the application. Of the 37 submitters that expressed objection, 20 submitters were landowners and/or occupiers of residential properties that are situated adjacent to the fencing subject to the development application. A summary of submissions received is included as Attachment 7.

Administration received one submission which was informed by the outcome of the FOI request. That submission was previously circulated to Elected Members; however a summary of submissions received is included as Attachment 8. The submission summarised in Attachment 8 was signed by 30 landowners/occupiers of land in the Yanchep Golf Estate; however only nine signatories were landowners/occupiers of land adjoining the subject fencing.

 

Administration has also provided detailed responses in Attachment 9 concerning the following issues raised in the submissions:

 

·    Fencing around other golf courses;

·    Instances of vandalism of the golf course;

·    Safety of children and animals;

·    Maintenance of the subdivisional (boundary) fencing and land adjacent;

·    Fire and emergency evacuation; and

·    Resident health and wellbeing.

Comment

In assessing the proposal, Administration has identified the following as some key aspects relating to this development application:

 

·    Compliance actions;

·    Setback of the subject fencing from the boundary and its amenity implications;

·    The extent of the barbed wire installed on the subject fencing;

 

Administration’s comments in respect to the above items are provided for below.

 

Compliance Actions

 

Prior to the subject fencing being erected, Administration met with the SCCC administration and provided correspondence in writing outlining the approval requirements for the subject fencing. Through that correspondence, the SCCC administration indicated their concerns regarding the time it may take to obtain an approval from the City. Although Administration did advise of the consequences in undertaking development prior to seeking approval (application fee penalties and potential compliance actions), the SCCC erected the subject fencing without the City’s approval.

 

Where an applicant seeks approval for development that has commenced or has been carried out (as the subject fencing is in this case), the DPS 2 Deemed Provisions allow the City to consider such applications.

 

Administration has not yet pursued any compliance action against the SCCC in the case of the subject fencing being erected without approval. Pursuant to LPP 4.14, Administration had been deferring compliance action temporarily, pending the outcome of the assessment of the development application. The City still can explore undertaking compliance actions against the SCCC, particularly if Council resolves to refuse this development application.

 

Setback and Amenity

 

As outlined above, the subject fencing does not constitute boundary fencing as it is not situated on the boundary. Therefore, it is not exempt from development approval and is considered ‘development’ for the purpose of planning assessment.

 

Clause 4.7.3 of DPS 2 prescribes that non-residential development less than 2 storeys in height is to have a minimum 3.0 metre setback to residential zoned lots. The fencing however has been erected at a setback of less than 3.0 metres from these boundaries. Although the setback of the subject fencing is less than the minimum of 3.0 metres required under DPS 2; the chain mesh element of the fencing integrates with the character and landscape of its surrounds (as discussed below), and therefore can be approved pursuant to the provisions outlined in DPS 2 relating to variations to development standards.

 

Dwellings at the northern end of Parkland Drive are elevated above the golf course in excess of the height of the subject fencing. This allows for views of the golf course over the subject fencing. At the southern end of Parkland Drive however, the lots are smaller and are levelled relative to the adjoining SCCC land; which means the fencing is more visible for the residents of those dwellings (or future dwellings constructed on vacant land).

 

Lot 409 Birdie Grove and Lot 411 Bunker Crescent (vacant land abutting the SCCC) are levelled relative to adjoining SCCC land, meaning that the subject fencing would be visible from future dwellings constructed on these land parcels. Lot 412 Bunker Crescent however (also vacant land abutting the SCCC) has a building pad considerably higher than the base of the subject fencing.

 

Administration considers that the chain mesh element of the fencing achieves a balance of enabling the residents to maintain views of the golf course from their rear gardens, whilst meeting the needs of the SCCC to provide some security and manage the movement of kangaroos. Chain mesh (or garrison style) fencing is common adjoining golf courses, as opposed to colorbond or ‘super six’ which is commonly found in suburban residential areas. However, Administration does not support the barbed wire component of the fencing, as it is an element of the subject fencing that Administration considers is imposing an unacceptable impact on the amenity of adjoining residential lots. Such considerations relate to barbed wire on the subject fencing only (as it is located in close proximity to residential property boundaries), and are not considerations relating to barbed wire on fencing adjoining the Bunker Crescent, Birdie Grove and Stableford Loop road reserves.

 

Extent of Barbed Wire

 

As outlined above, the SCCC in their development application submission outlined that barbed wire would be installed on the subject fencing only adjacent to the vacant Parkland Drive lots as well as 27 Parkland Drive.

 

Administration understands that the installation of the barbed wire on the fence was completed on 9 February 2017. Site inspections undertaken by the City’s officers at (and after) that time confirms that the extent of barbed wire installed on the fence is inconsistent with what the development application outlines would be installed, as outlined in the ‘Detail’ section above.

 

As already outlined, the barbed wire element of the subject fencing is considered by Administration to be imposing an unacceptable impact on the amenity of adjoining residential lots. As such, Administration’s recommended action in respect to the barbed wire element of the fence is for the barbed wire to be removed. Without barbed wire, the 2.4 metre height for the fencing posts is therefore unnecessary. Council could also resolve that approval be subject to the fencing being modified so that the posts do not exceed heights of 2.1 metres; the same as the chain mesh element of the fence.

 

Time for Deciding Application for Development Approval

 

Under Clause 75 of the DPS 2 Deemed Provisions, the City must determine an advertised application within 90 days of its receipt. As the application was lodged on 12 January 2017, 90 days elapsed on 12 April 2017.

 

Also under Clause 75 of the DPS 2 Deemed Provisions, if the City has not determined an application in 90 days, the City is to be taken to have refused to grant development approval (deemed refused) of that application. If this does occur, an applicant can lodge an application to the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT), to have the ‘refusal’ reviewed. However notwithstanding this, the same DPS 2 Deemed Provision also allows the City to determine whether or not to grant development approval after the period after the 90 day period, and the validity of the determination is not affected by the expiry.

 

Alternative Fencing

 

Administration has liaised with Peet Limited (working on behalf of Yanchep Golf Estate residents) and SCCC to ascertain whether the parties would be amenable to alternative fencing on the boundary between the Yanchep Golf Estate and the SCCC. If an alternative boundary fencing outcome could have been agreed with the relevant parties, it may have allowed for the fencing subject to the development application to be removed.

 

Peet Limited has formalised their position, by offering to undertake the following at their cost:

·    Remove and dispose of the existing 1.1 metre high boundary fence (subdivisional fence) located behind and adjoining residents of Parkland Drive and Bunker Crescent;

·    Remove and dispose of the 2.1 metre high chain mesh fence erected by the SCCC, located behind and adjoining residents of Parkland Drive and Bunker Crescent; and

·    Erect a new 1.8 metre black PVC mesh fence on the boundary behind and adjoining residents of Parkland Drive and Bunker Crescent.

 

The offer from Peet Limited was conditional to SCCC agreeing that the new fence will be the only interface barrier or fencing between the Yanchep Golf Estate and the SCCC.

 

The City’s Administration met with the SCCC administration to discuss the above offer by Peet Limited. The SCCC administration has since provided the City’s Administration with correspondence advising that they are not amenable to the offer made by Peet Limited.

                                                                                                                                         

Conclusion

 

Administration acknowledges the community opposition toward the erection of the subject fencing, as outlined in the summaries of submissions included in Attachment 7 and Attachment 8. Administration has attempted to liaise with the relevant parties to ascertain whether they would be amenable to alternative fencing on the boundary between the Yanchep Golf Estate and the SCCC; however, no mutually agreed outcome could be reached.

 

The chain mesh element of the fencing subject to this development application ensures that a view of the golf course is maintained from adjoining residential properties, whilst providing security for the SCCC.

 

Although Administration considers of the chain mesh element of the subject fencing acceptable on planning grounds; Administration is not supportive of any barbed wire on the subject fencing, or fence posts in excess of the height of the chain mesh (i.e. the height necessary to support barbed wire strands).

 

Administration therefore recommends retrospective development approval of the subject fencing, on a condition that the subject fencing be modified as follows:

i)     All barbed wire is removed; and

ii)    The fence posts being reduced to a height not exceeding 2.1 metres.

 

If Council resolves to approve the subject fencing, it is also recommended that the approval be valid from the date of Council’s decision, with the approval not retrospectively authorising any fencing on the subject land.

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:

 “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 relate to the issues contained in this report.

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

 

1.       Pursuant to Clause 65 and Clause 68(2)(b) of the Deemed Provisions of District Planning Scheme No. 2, APPROVES the application for retrospective development approval for fencing at Lot 888 (144) St. Andrews Drive, Yanchep as shown in Attachment 3, subject to the following conditions:

 

a)      This approval is only valid from the date of this decision and does not retrospectively authorise any fencing on the subject land; and

 

b)      Within 60 days of the date of Council’s approval, the landowner/applicant shall undertake the following works to the fencing subject to this development application:

 

i)       Remove all barbed wire; and

ii)      Reduce the height of the fence posts to a height not exceeding 2.1 metres.

 

2.       ENDORSES Administration’s responses to the submissions as provided for in Attachment 7 and Attachment 8;

 

 

 

3.       NOTES that Administration will, pursuant to the City’s Local Planning Policy 4.14: Planning Compliance, continue to undertake necessary actions to bring the fencing on Lot 888 (144) St. Andrews Drive, Yanchep (located in proximity to the Yanchep Golf Estate) into compliance with the City’s District Planning Scheme No. 2;

 

4.       ADVISES the submitters and the applicant of this decision; and

 

5.       ADVISES the principal petitioner of a petition presented at the 7 November 2016 Council Meeting (PT01-11/16) of this decision.

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1 - Location Plan

17/79153

 

2.

Attachment 2 - Photograph of Pole with Mounted Camera

17/73270

 

3.

Attachment 3 - Plans for Advertising - Sun City Golf Course Fencing DA2017 30

17/29249

Minuted

4.

Attachment 4 - Extent of Fencing and Barbed Wire Subject to Application

17/79158

 

5.

Attachment 5 - Photographs of Raised Platform - 27 Parkland Drive, Yanchep

17/73298

 

6.

Attachment 6 - Photo Gallery - Fencing Subject to Development Application

17/73360

 

7.

NEW Attachment 7 - Summary of Submissions - ~ Lot 888 (144) St. Andrews Drive, Yanchep

17/152658

Minuted

8.

Attachment 8 - Summary of Post FOI Submission

17/153733

Minuted

9.

NEW Attachment 9 - Responses to Issues Raised in the Submissions

17/145651

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                                                       32

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                                                       33

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                                                       34

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                                                       36

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                                                       37

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                    39

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                                                       44

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                                                       71

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                    80

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                                                       87

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                    89

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                                                       91

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                        92

PS05-05/17       Consideration of Local Development Plan No. 1 - Two Rocks Town Centre

File Ref:                                              2945-D1 – 17/141144

Responsible Officer:                           Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       5         

 

Issue

To consider Local Development Plan No. 1 (LDP 1) for Two Rocks Town Centre.

 

Applicant

Roberts Day

Owner

Fini Group Pty Ltd

Location

Lot 50 (10) Enterprise Avenue, Two Rocks

Site Area

12.8 hectares  

DPS 2 Zoning

Marina

ASP 70 Zoning

Commercial, Mixed Use and Parks and Recreation

 

Background

On 16 February 2017, the City received an application for LDP 1 for Two Rocks Town Centre for its consideration (Attachment 1). The LDP is for a portion of Lot 50 (10) Enterprise Avenue, Two Rocks (subject site).

 

The site is subject to the provisions of the Two Rocks Town Centre – Agreed Structure Plan No. 70 (ASP 70) which requires the preparation and approval of a LDP for each precinct, as identified in ASP 70, prior to the commencement of any development. In light of this, the LDP was prepared over two precincts namely; Precinct A – Dolphin Island and Precinct B – The King. Attachment 2 is the ASP 70 map which shows all of the precincts, zoning and designated density codes. The site is currently vacant at this stage with the exception of the  King Neptune statue which is located in the south western corner of the LDP area. 

 

To the west of the subject site is the Two Rocks tavern and shopping centre which is adjacent to the Two Rocks Marina. To the north of the subject site is established residential dwellings and to the south is a vacant site (Lot 9011) zoned Commercial and Mixed Use which is also subject to ASP 70. To the east is a vacant site zoned Residential and Mixed Use under the Two Rocks – Agreed Structure Plan No. 69 (ASP 69). The density code plan for this site shows that the portion of land abutting Lisford Avenue is zoned Residential with a density code range of R40 – R80. Furthermore, to the east of the subject site is the Two Rocks Library (Lot 200) and Charwood Park. A location plan is included as Attachment 3.

Detail

The applicant has indicated that there is an intention to develop the subject site as a Retirement Village and/or an Aged or Dependent Person’s Dwelling in a form of a multiple dwelling development. It is anticipated that the development will range from one to five stories (details regarding building heights are discussed in the Comment section). Furthermore, the subject site is proposed to have one consolidated Public Open Space (POS) with a total area of 10,410m2 which will incorporate the King Neptune statue.

 

Under ASP 70 the LDP is required to incorporate a range of provisions including; building height and pedestrian linkages. The proposed LDP includes provisions relating to;

 

 

·        Buildings height;

·        Vegetation retention; and

·        Pedestrian linkages.

Consultation

ASP 70 requires the advertising of any proposed LDP for a period of 28 days. In light of this, public consultation was undertaken by way of an advertisement placed in the Wanneroo Times and the North Coast Times, a sign erected on site, a notice being placed on the City’s website and letters sent to surrounding landowners. Advertising commenced on 11 April 2017 and concluded on 11 May 2017. The advertising period was extended due to a number of public holidays including Easter and Anzac Day. At the conclusion of the advertising period a total of 18 submissions were received of which 15 objected to the proposal and three supported it. A summary of the submissions received and Administration’s responses are shown in Attachment 4.

 

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

 

·        Maximum building height;

·        Loss of vegetation;

·        Use of a retirement village; and

·        Ability for the site to be used for commercial purposes.

 

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

 

Comment

 

In addition to the issues raised through the submissions, Administration’s assessment of the proposed LDP identified an issue with the proposed public open space (POS). A more detailed discussion of all of the issues is provided below. 

 

Building Height

 

A number of submissions were received which objected to the proposed building heights. The main concerns raised were regarding loss of views, building bulk and inconsistency with the established locality.

 

The proposed LDP incorporates two maximum building height requirements namely;

 

·        A maximum of two stories for areas coded R20 – R30; and

·        A maximum of five stories for areas coded R60 – R80.

 

The maximum height of two stories for areas coded R20/R30 is considered acceptable as it is consistent with the height requirements of the Residential Design Codes (R-Codes). 

 

For R60 and R80 coded areas the R-Codes requires a maximum height of 9m and 12m to the top of the external wall respectively. This equates to approximately three and four stories for R60 and R80 coded areas respectively. Therefore, the LDP is proposing to vary the building height requirement of the R-Codes. Pursuant to Part 7.3 of the R-Codes, a LDP can amend or replace provisions relating to building height. 

 

Notwithstanding the above, ASP 70 requires the LDP to incorporate building heights whilst having due regard for the State Coastal Planning Policy – State Planning Policy 2.6 (SPP 2.6). Clause 5.4(iii) of SPP 2.6 outlines the criteria to be considered when determining appropriate building heights. An assessment of the LDP against the criteria of SPP 2.6 is included in the table below:

 

SPP 2.6 Criteria

Administration’s Response

Development is consistent with the overall visual theme identified as part of land use planning for the locality or in an appropriate planning control instrument such as a local planning strategy;

ASP 70 identifies the Two Rocks Town Centre to have a range of densities with the highest being R160 located within Precincts D and E. Currently, no development has been approved in the ASP area since the adoption of ASP 70. However, one of the objectives of ASP 70 is to provide a range of dwelling types and densities. Therefore, it is considered that the vision for the town centre provides a range of densities, including some high density living, which would be facilitate by this LDP.

Development takes into account the built form, topography and landscape character of the surrounding area;

Part 2 of ASP 70 contains some illustrations (refer to Attachment 5) regarding building heights within the Two Rocks Town Centre and is in response to the landform and built form of the area.

 

The predominant built form of the surrounding area is one and two storey development. The LDP proposes R20/30 fronting onto Sovereign Drive with a building height maximum of one to two storieys. This will allow development similar in character to the existing residential to the north.

 

In recognition of the site being located within a District Centre, as identified in the Yanchep – Two Rocks – District Structure Plan No.43 (DSP 43), the LDP allows for higher density development (R60 – R80) on the remainder of the LDP, which is acknowledged in ASP 70 and supported by Administration.

 

These coastal nodes are locations where from a planning perspective, the City should be encouraging higher density and intensity of development. This approach allows a gradation of density and building height so as to minimise the impact on the adjoining existing development.

The location is part of an identified coastal node;

It is considered that the Two Rocks Town Centre is an established coastal node given its proximity to the existing marina. Furthermore, DSP 43 denotes the site as a District Centre.

The amenity of the coastal foreshore is not detrimentally affected by any significant overshadowing of the foreshore; and

The subject site is located approximately 150m away from the foreshore and therefore, will not cast any significant shadow over the foreshore. 

There is overall permeability of the foreshore and ocean from nearby residential areas, roads and public spaces.

It is considered that permeability of the foreshore will be retained and enhanced by the proposed LDP which will provide a POS and a new road reserve.

 

In light of the above, it is considered that the proposed LDP meets the provisions of SPP 2.6 and therefore, the proposed five storey maximum, is capable of being supported in the R60 and R80 locations.

 

As part of Administration’s assessment of the LDP it was recognised that the proposed density code of R60 on the corner of Enterprise Avenue and Sovereign Drive may result in a five storey development in this location which may have some impact on the adjacent residents to the north. Specifically, it is considered that the interface between a potentially five storey development and the adjacent single house developments is undesirable and may impact on the streetscape, appearance of building bulk and amenity of the area. In this regard, the applicant has amended the LDP to extend the area coded R20/30 to the corner of Enterprise Avenue and Sovereign Drive to ensure that only one or two storey development will be permitted.

 

The abovementioned amendment to the LDP is considered to reduce the potential impact on the adjacent residents. Furthermore, it will create a more consistent streetscape comprising of one to two storey developments. This is also consistent with the provisions of ASP 70 which requires for the lower density to be along Sovereign Drive.

 

In light of the above, it is considered that the proposed building heights are consistent with the criteria of SPP 2.6 and the provisions of ASP 70. 

 

Retirement Village Land Use

 

A number of submissions received by Administration objected to the intended use of an Aged or Dependent Person’s Dwelling and/or Retirement Village. The submissions stipulated that a development of this nature will not activate the area nor will it create a vibrant Town Centre. The proposed LDP is a document which will guide the way in which the development is to be designed and to achieve built form outcomes envisaged by ASP 70 including the retention of the King Neptune statue. It does not permit development to occur but is the guiding document that the City will use to assess any future application.

 

Notwithstanding, it is noted that the subject site is zoned Mixed Use and Commercial. Pursuant to ASP 70, a Retirement Village and an Aged or Dependent Person’s Dwelling are both Permitted uses in these zones and are therefore, considered to be acceptable for the subject site.

 

Loss of Vegetation

 

A number of submissions raised concerns regarding the potential for loss of significant vegetation which is currently on the site. It is considered that this issue can be mitigated through the various stages of the planning process as follows:

 

LDP Provisions

 

As a result of the submissions received Administration requested an additional provision to be added into the LDP stating the following:

 

Any existing vegetation, as identified by a tree survey, is to be protected by relocation to areas of public open space or retained, to the City’s satisfaction, where practically possible.

 

As the LDP guides the manner and form in which a development is designed, the applicant will be required to demonstrate and ensure that significant trees are retained where possible.

 

Further to the above, the LDP currently denotes an area where there is an opportunity to retain mature exotic vegetation. It is noted that a private movement network is indicatively shown within this area. The movement network is foreseen to act as a pedestrian linkage through the site and not as a road. In this regard, it is considered that once a development application is submitted, Administration will have the opportunity to assess this linkage and its impact on the vegetation. The pedestrian linkage will need to be designed in a manner and form which ensures the retention of this vegetation. There is also an opportunity to retain some of the existing vegetation within the POS and within the development site itself.

 

Subdivision

 

A subdivision application for the site has been lodged with the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) which has been referred to the City for its comments. This application proposes to extend Enterprise Avenue and to connect is to Lisford Avenue as shown in the ASP 70 map. As part of this the Administration has recommended the following conditions:

 

Measures being taken to ensure the identification and protection of any vegetation on the site worthy of retention that is not impacted by subdivisional works, prior to commencement of subdivisional works.

 

The abovementioned condition is considered to adequately identify any significant vegetation on the subject site and ensure their protection prior to the issuing of subdivision clearances.

 

Development Application

 

Given that a development application will be submitted to the City for its consideration, Administration will be able to assess the acceptability of the development and ensure that all trees which have been identified as significant are not impacted by the development. Furthermore, Administration will be able to apply conditions on any development approval which may be granted which ensure the protection of significant trees whilst development is occurring.

 

In light of the above, it is considered that there are adequate mechanisms within the planning framework to ensure that significant trees are retained where practically possible.

 

Location of Public Open Space

 

Although no comments were received as part of the submission period in relation to the relocation of the POS, as part of Administration’s assessment of the LDP it was identified that there is a discrepancy between the proposed LDP and ASP 70 in relation to the location and size of the POS within the precincts. ASP 70 identifies two POS sites in the precincts namely; Dolphin Island within Precinct A which is 4,512m2 and the King within Precinct B which is 5,870m2. This is a total of 10,382m2 of POS across both precincts. The proposed LDP shows one consolidated POS to the south of the site which has a total area of 10,410m2. This consolidated POS will create a greater east/west POS linkage between Charnwood Park to the east of the subject site and the Two Rocks Marina to the west. It is considered that the larger POS area will enable for greater flexibility in its design and use.

 

The consolidation of the POS has resulted in the relocation of the Commercial zoned land from Precinct B to elsewhere with the LDP area. The relocation of this zone has instigated the need for a structure plan amendment to reflect the new location of the Commercial zone. It is common practice for the structure plan to be amended prior to the approval of a LDP to maintain consistency however, in this instance Administration is of the view that the LDP can be considered prior to the structure plan being amended for the following reasons:

 

·        The City’s District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2) does not include any provisions which prohibit a LDP to be considered prior to a structure plan being approved or amended when required;

 

·        The applicant has confirmed that there is a need to have the LDP considered by Council to ensure that the prospective developer of the site is maintained and for the development requirements established in the LDP can then inform detailed site planning. Administration is of the view that this is of high importance for the Two Rocks Town Centre as the potential future development of the subject site can act as a catalyst to promote further development of the Town Centre and create further activation and employment;

 

·        The purpose of the LDP is not to indicate zonings rather it is to establish development standards to guide future development. Consistent with this, the LDP does not indicate the Commercial and Mixed Use land. The new location of the Commercial zoned land and consolidated POS will be shown on the ASP 70 map by way of the amendment.

 

·        Administration has had preliminary and informal discussions to the Department of Planning (DoP) who raised no objection to the LDP being considered and potentially approved prior to the structure plan being amended. This was on the basis that the structure plan amendment is minor and only seeks to relocate the already zoned Commercial land and a POS area within the ASP area. Therefore, it will not result in a loss of the Commercial zoned land nor will it lead to a reduction in POS; and

 

·        It is noted that the applicant has confirmed in writing their intention to lodge a structure plan amendment to reflect the relocation of the Commercial zoned land to elsewhere in the LDP area. 

 

In light of the above, it is considered that:

 

·        The relocation of the POS will facilitate for a larger POS which will enhance the useability of it. Furthermore, it will create greater linkages between the Two Rocks Marina and the adjacent Charnwood Park; and

 

·        The relocation of the Commercial zone is considered to be minor and will not result in a loss of Commercial land. A Retirement Village and an Aged or Dependent Person’s Dwelling are permitted uses in both the Commercial and Mixed Use zone. Given this, it is considered that the new location of the Commercial zone will still enable for the site to be developed as a Retirement Village and an Aged or Dependent Person’s Dwelling.

 

Therefore, Administration considers that the relocation and consolidation of the POS within Precinct A and B is acceptable and is supported.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed LDP 1 for Two Rocks Town Centre is considered to address the requirements of ASP 70. It is considered that the additional provision regarding vegetation retention ensures that, where possible, significant vegetation on the subject site will be protected and relocated to the POS. Furthermore, the proposed building heights are considered to be acceptable and reflect the intent of ASP 70 and align with the criteria of SPP 2.6. In light of this, Administration recommends that LDP 1 to Two Rocks Town Centre be approved.

 

Statutory Compliance

 

LDP 1 for Two Rocks Town Centre has been processed in accordance with the Deemed Provisions of District Planning Scheme No. 2. 

 

In accordance with Clause 51(a), Council is required to consider the submissions received in respect to the LDP and in accordance with Clause 52(1) must resolve to approve the LDP, request modifications or refuse the LDP.

 

Administration recommends that Council approve LDP 1 for Two Rocks Town Centre in accordance with Clause 52(1)(a) of the Deemed Provisions of DPS 2.

 

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 relate to the issues contained in this report.

Policy Implications

Local Development Plan No. 1 – Two Rocks Town Centre was assessed against the provisions of the City of Wanneroo’s District Planning Scheme No. 2, Two Rocks Town Centre – Agreed Structure Plan No. 70 and State Coastal Planning Policy – State Planning Policy 2.6.

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       Pursuant to Clause 51(a) of the Deemed Provisions of District Planning Scheme No. 2 CONSIDERS the Schedule of Submissions contained as Attachment 4;

2.       Pursuant to Clause 52(1)(a) of the Deemed Provisions of District Planning Scheme No. 2 APPROVES, Local Development Plan No. 1 – Two Rocks Town Centre as shown in Attachment 1.

3.       ADVISES the submitters of its decision.

 

Attachments:

1.

Attachment 1: Local Development Plan No 1 Two Rocks Town Centre

17/160470

Minuted

2.

Attachment 2: Two Rocks Town Centre - Agreed Structure Plan 70 Map

17/160639

 

3.

Attachment 3: Location Plan Lot 50 (10) Enterprise Avenue Two Rocks

17/160540

 

4.

Attachment 4: Administrations response to Summary of Submissions - Local Development ~ Two Rocks Town Centre

17/158968

Minuted

5.

Attachment 5: Extract of Part 2 ASP 70

17/160580

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                                                       99


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                  100


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                                                     101


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                                                     102


 


 


 


 


 


 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                                                     109

  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                      110

 

Assets

Nil

Community & Place

Cultural Development

CP06-05/17       Museum Collection Policy Review

File Ref:                                              2699 – 17/158269

Responsible Officer:                           Director Community & Place

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       2         

 

Issue

To consider the revised Museum Collection Policy.

Background

Proposed changes to the Museum Collection Policy to bring this in line with modern collection practice are detailed in (Attachment 1).  These changes are the outcome of the scheduled review in May 2016. This review produced a significant number of changes that refined and reshaped the policy resulting in a document that now requires approval. The revised document has been endorsed by the Heritage Advisory Group.

Detail

A summary of the significant changes can be seen below:

 

·        The Policy Statement (2) has been expanded to cover objects housed at the Wanneroo Regional Museum, Cockman House, Buckingham House and the Old Wanneroo Schoolhouse, and the purpose of the Collection to provide a resource that can be used to:

o   Enrich the knowledge and understanding of the historical Wanneroo region.

o   Interpret the history and development of the district.

o   Help create a sense of identity and connectedness to both the past and the future of the Wanneroo community.

o   Conserve heritage for the benefit of the community and future generations.

o   Provide an important source of educational and research materials for the community.

 

·        The Policy Details (3) now explicitly states that the Museum Collection is comprised of two sub-collections, housed across the four museum sites. These are the Primary Collection and the Secondary Collection. The Primary Collection contains objects that are considered to be of high significance in museum terms, and the Secondary Collection contain objects of lower significance that can be used as a ‘hands-on’ educational resource, interpretation, promotional displays, and generally to aid the preservation of the Primary Collection.

 

·        Assessment of cultural significance has been moved forward in the policy and given a separate title. This is the process of researching and understanding the meaning and value of items and collections. Objects are accessed to determine their cultural significance before being accepted into the Collection.

·        Acquisitions (3.2) has been expanded into Acquisition (3.2.1) and Donations (3.2.2). Acquisition involves purchases based on the acquisition criteria, undertaken by the curator within budgetary limits. The donation section explains that objects should not be accepted simply because they are gifts but must be assessed against the acquisition criteria. Items for the museum collections are selected for their capacity to help tell the story of the history of the Wanneroo area.

 

·        The Acquisition Criteria are now listed in this section – 3.2.3 Maintenance and conservation, 3.2.4 Storage, 3.2.5 Constraints, 3.2.6 Consideration of other institutions. This leads in to the acceptance criteria for the Primary and Secondary Collections.

 

·        Deaccessions (3.5) section has been expanded to better explain the reasons for, principles and process of deaccession. Deaccessioning is the formal process of removal of an object from the collection register.

 

·        The general historical background and Roles and Responsibilities sections have been removed as they were deemed unnecessary for this document.

Consultation

The revision has been presented to the Heritage Advisory Group.

Comment

It is important to regularly revise policies such as the Museum Collection Policy in order to keep pace with the City’s continuous planning and refocusing of aims and objectives. Due to the significant changes in the policy, it is proposed to repeal the existing Museum Collection Policy once the revised policy is adopted.

 

This Policy aims to provide a framework that supports the operation of the museums and the museum collection to align with City aims and objectives, and the provision of a quality, sustainable museum service for the community.  The Museum Curator will be responsible for decisions regarding the acquisition and deaccessioning of collection items in-line with the principles outlined in the policy.  Any disputes will be dealt with as documented in item six of the policy under responsibility for implementation.

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 risk registers which relate to the issues contained in this report.

 

 

 

Policy Implications

 

Nil

Financial Implications

There are no direct financial implications from the revision of the Museum Collection Policy.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council ADOPTS the amended Museum Collection Policy as at Attachment 2.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Museum Collection Policy 2016 with track changes

16/115936

 

2.

Museum Collection Policy 2016 - final

17/150434

 

 

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                  113


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                  128


 


 


 


 


 


 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                      135

 

Community Facilities

CP07-05/17       Development of Hardcastle Park, Landsdale

File Ref:                                              23688 – 17/137347

Responsible Officer:                           Director Community & Place

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       4  

Previous Items:                                   CD03-07/14 - PT02-05/14 - Request to include Hardcastle Park on Passive Parks 10 Year Capital Works Program - Ordinary Council - 22 Jul 2014     

 

Issue

To consider the proposed concept plan for the development of Hardcastle Park, Landsdale.

Background

Hardcastle Park (the Park) is located at 39 Hardcastle Avenue, Landsdale and is an existing passive park of approximately 1.16 hectares in size. The Park is classified as a Neighbourhood Recreation Park or Nature Park due to the Threatened Ecological Community (TEC) on the site as per the City’s Public Open Space Hierarchy (Attachment 1).

 

Other existing public open space within the walkable catchment of the Park (400m to 800m, 5 minute to 10 minute walk) includes:

 

Park

Location

Status

Distance

Harrogate Park

1K Harrogate Vista, Landsdale

Undeveloped

475m

Trentham Park

18 Trentham Road, Landsdale

Undeveloped

540m

Middleton Park

26 Middleton Road, Alexander Heights

Conservation and recreation. Undeveloped.

595m

Strathpine Park

21 Strathpine Chase, Landsdale

Undeveloped

665m

Donatello Park

28 Donatello Drive, Landsdale

Undeveloped

665m

Brockwell Park

15 Brockwell Parkway, Landsdale

Developed with play equipment / softfall

750m

 

At its meeting on 22 July 2014 Council considered petition PT02-05/14 presented to Council at its meeting held on 27 May 2014 seeking to include Hardcastle Park on the City's Passive Park 10 year Capital Works Program. As a result, Council resolved as follows:

 

“1.     REQUESTS Administration to include Hardcastle Park in the 2014 Passive Parks Assessment Matrix review process and list  Hardcastle Park in the draft 2015/16 10 Year Passive Park Capital Works Program, based on the outcome of the 2014 Passive Parks Assessment Matrix review process;   

 

2.       REQUESTS Administration seeks the Management Order for Lot 3000 Hardcastle Ave, from the Department of Lands;

 

3.       LISTS for consideration in the 2015/16 Capital Works Program an amount of $55,000 for the design and documentation of Hardcastle Park, with the intention for construction to commence in  2016/17 ; and

 

4.       AUTHORISES the Director Community Development to inform the petition organiser of Council's resolution regarding petition PT02-05/14.”

 

As a result, Administration listed the project within the 2015/16 Capital Works Budget as follows:

 

Year

Budget Amount

Description

2015/16

$55,000

Concept design for consultation and detailed design and tender documentation;

2016/17

$335,000

Undertake the tender and construction

 

During the initial concept development phase of the project, site inspections conducted by Administration identified the existing vegetation on site as being significant. As a result a flora survey of the park was undertaken, confirming that the site was significant and that this would impact on the extent of development possible.

 

As a result, Administration investigated the use of environmental offsets to support an expanded development footprint within Hardcastle Park, with the following advice provided regarding potential consideration for offset at 334 Landsdale Rd:

 

·        A site would need to be TEC20a to qualify as a suitable offset.

·        Site 334 (POS 14) Landsdale Road was identified as a possible site for offset, however it would likely not qualify given the site is already being protected from development in the form of POS.

·        Hardcastle Park is listed in the State’s ‘Green Growth Plan’ as a location for high priority for protection and in addition to the presence of a TEC, the site is also Karrakatta Complex – Central and South which is poorly protected across the Perth metropolitan area.

 

On this basis, the use of offsets as a means to facilitate an expanded development footprint at Hardcastle Park is not a feasible option.

 

On 18 November 2015, Administration provided a project update to the Landsdale Resident’s Association and, in light of the environmental limitations identified, workshopped development options for the site. As a result of this process, the scope for the development was amended as follows:

 

·        Installation of appropriate nature play components which can be accommodated by existing bushland;

·        The southern degraded bush area within the parks boundary is to be designed for a play space to include play elements that can be located on the existing environment;

·        Consideration for the provision of bench seating, BBQ (optional), shade and path connections, noting accessibility by local residents is of paramount concern;

·        Installation of educational signage focusing on the flora vegetation located within the park;

·        Installation of safety fencing, including gates, on the parks boundary along Landsdale Road.

 

Following review of the environmental constraints identified for the site, Administration received advice from Western Power raising concerns of the proximity of the intended park development to the adjacent 6m easement for the overhead transmission power lines.

 

Western Power indicated that any proposed development within and adjacent to the easement area would need to be assessed by Western Power prior to any works being undertaken. Consequently the City was required to appoint an external consultant (approved by Western Power) to undertake this assessment in respect to any safety risks and subsequent remedial measures to be implemented within the park development.  As a result, the following easement restrictions were identified:

 

·        Access points to the POS for maintenance and pedestrian/users are part of the proposal along Landsdale Avenue which occurs within the Western Power easement.

·        Car Parking: to park or leave stationary within the easement any vehicle or machinery exceeding 2.5metres in height.

·        Construction: of any metallic equipment, shelters, and fences, etc partially located within the 6 metre easement area would be subject to the proposed studies. This assessment is not limited to the easement area but is subject to the boundary area of the proposed development.

·        Machinery: bring within the easement any vehicle or machinery which together with any attachment aerial or accessory exceeds 4.5 metres in height. An example of this requirement would be a crane machinery to lift equipment on site.

·        Stack, place or store any plant or material within the easement.

·        Grow, cultivate or maintain any vegetation exceeding 1m height from the natural surface of the land within the easement.

 

To obtain clearance from Western Power and remove public liability issues, Administration engaged consultants to undertake an Earthing System Assessment Report to determine the feasibility of the playground location, equipment, materials and any attenuation measures to minimise risk.

 

From the Assessment report the following recommendations were made:

 

·        Various mitigation options have been presented to further reduce the risk of electric shock to the public as a result of power system proximity. It is recommended the cost benefit of these controls be considered and implemented as reasonably practicable; 

·        It is highly recommended the reported minimum clearance values between powerline and proposed playground structures be maintained at all times; and 

·        It was recommended that the implementation of the installations be verified through Current Injection Testing (CIT) to ensure expected outcomes are achieved.

 

Consequently, Administration engaged consultants to undertake the CIT process. The outcomes of this process are as follows:

 

·        The inclusion of non-conductive down lead covers on poles 92 & 93, located within the development areas;

·        The use of minimal conductive materials within the park, including ground cover, pathways, walls, fencing;

·        Height restrictions of equipment to be used;

·        Installation of non-conductive fencing sections;

·        The requirement to have infrastructure located no closer than 6m from pole locations including foundations; and

·        Installation methodology to consider clearances from poles and cabling.

 

As a result of the concept development process, a final draft concept plan was developed (Attachment 2), which sought to take into consideration the various constraints and stakeholder feedback received during the process. The draft concept plan is supported by Western Power.

 

Key elements identified within this concept plan are as follows:

 

 

 

 

 

Element

Description

Central Playground

Combination unit located between the conservation area and the internal pathway

Junior Play zone

Multiple play features for children 3-8 year olds located outside 6m exclusion zone.

Birds Nest Swing

Located outside the 6m exclusion zone, with sand soft-fall

Rotating Net

Located outside the 6m exclusion zones, primarily for older children/teens

Turfed Area

Located on the south west portion of the park around disc swing and junior play zone

 

The draft concept plan has positioned all play equipment and footings outside the 6m exclusion zones, as well as incorporating bitumen pathways (as opposed to concrete) due to bitumen being of a less conductive nature. The total cost of this concept was $436,122 being $101,122 above the existing project budget of $335,000.The bulk of the additional cost (~ $70,000) is the result of mitigation costs associated with the conservation and electrical constraints identified at the site.

Detail

On 31 October 2016, Administration met with Mayor and Ward Councillors to table the preferred concept plan for the development of the park (Attachment 2) and to outline the proposed consultation strategy.

 

The concept plan (Attachment 2) was then released for community consultation between 7 and 20 November 2016. Administration received a total of 194 submissions from the 707 letters that were mailed out. Approximately 25-30 people attended the onsite consultation held on 16 November 2016 and the overwhelming majority of attendees at the onsite consultation did not support the design, for the following reasons:

 

·        Lack of space allocated for development;

·        Bush (TEC) should be cleared for larger development footprint;

·        Location of the development was too close to the road;

·        Keeping the bush would present risks of snakes and other reptiles to park users;

·        The equipment / elements did not cater well enough for older children; and

·        There was no parking as part of the development.

 

As a result, those present requested that the project be put on hold whilst an appeal is made to the State Minister for Environment and Heritage to increase the available footprint for the development of the park. Subsequently, the Mayor wrote to the Minister on 29 November 2016 and received a response on 6 January 2017 encouraging the City to liaise with the Department of Environment Regulation about any requirements for a clearing permit should the City need to clear native vegetation for the proposal.

 

Consequently, Administration contacted the Department of Environment Regulation to investigate available options and what the potential requirements of a clearing permit application would be (conditions and offsets) in order to assist with concept plan development. Administration received a response on 20 February 2017 advising the Department is unable to provide information on potential permit conditions and environmental offsets without undertaking a formal assessment of the application area.

 

In light of the advice received, it is considered prudent to request clearing of one half of the parcel of land rather than smaller and/or obscure parcels. It was therefore agreed to develop the concept plan based on the clearing of the western half of the parcel using the current north/south firebreak as the natural divider.

As a result of the community consultation that was undertaken, a further revision of the draft concept plan was undertaken (Attachment 3) taking into consideration of the following points:

 

·        Community consultation outcomes including:

o   Clearing remnant vegetation to create a larger footprint for development

o   Inclusion of a large turf area / kick-about space

o   Relocate play equipment to a more central location away from the road

o   Inclusion of amenities for children and early teenagers

·        Western Power easement restrictions

·        Local Planning Policy 4.3 requirements

·        A total available remaining budget of $421,706 (unconfirmed municipal funding as detailed in the financial implications section of this report).

 

The revised draft concept design (Attachment 3) has provided a larger turfed area for kick about and other activities, relocation of the equipment to a central location away from the road, as well as providing play equipment and accessibility where practicable within the park.

Consultation

The revised draft concept plan (Attachment 3) was released for community consultation between 10 April and 7 May 2017 in accordance with the following consultation strategy:

 

·        Distribution of an information letter, survey and concept plan to residents within a 400m radius of Hardcastle Park, requesting their feedback via the reply paid survey or by completing the online survey;

·        Face to face community consultation held on 24 April 2017 to allow interested members of the public to view and discuss the draft concept plan with City Elected Members and staff;

·        Promotion via the City’s website and social media; and

·        Inclusion of the concept plan and comment form on the City's web site under the 'Your Say" section.

 

Administration received 127 submissions in total from 699 mails outs (18% response rate) with 100 responses (81%) supporting the proposed concept plan and 24 responses (19%) not supporting the proposed concept plan. Three responses did not address the question.

 

Of the 24 respondents who did not support the plan, 12 comments (50%) focused on clearing more bush and/or creating a larger turf area, whilst 4 comments (17%) did not want any bush cleared. There were also 6 comments (25%) relating to reviewing proposed equipment provision and providing equipment for older children, mainly basketball facilities. A summary of the top 6 response categories specific to those who did not support the plan is provided below, with an additional summary included in (Attachment 4).

 

Top 6 response categories:

·        Clear more bush and provide more green space (12);

·        Review equipment and provide more equipment for older children (mainly basketball) (6);

·        Preference not to clear any bush (4);

·        Fencing of playground and/or along Landsdale Road boundary (3);

·        Better access off Hardcastle Avenue (2); and

·        More picnic settings and BBQ’s (2).

 

For the respondents who were in favour of the proposed concept, comments centred on support of the larger turf area, the balance between developed space and retained bushland, and the relocation of equipment to a central area away from Landsdale Road.

Whilst respondents were in support of the proposed concept design, there were still some comments that signalled a preference for more turfed area if possible, as well as comments requesting review of the equipment provision, mainly in relation to adding or swapping out the proposed provision for equipment that caters for older children such as basketball.

 

Of the 127 respondents, 114 respondents (90%) said they were in support of the provision of equipment that was proposed as per the revised concept design (Attachment 3), 12 respondents (10%) said they were not in support, and 1 respondent did not answer the question. There were 9 comments (16%) requesting additional equipment or equipment for older children, which was the most prevalent commentary in relation to this question, whilst 4 comments (7%) requested the stepping stones and logs be replaced with other items.

 

As outlined earlier within this report, Administration scheduled a face to face community consultation meeting with residents, the Mayor and Ward Councillors on 24 April 2017 at Warradale Park Clubrooms and no residents attended the consultation. The previously held on site consultation at Hardcastle Park was predominantly attended by community members in opposition of the proposal. As there were no attendees at the April meeting it is therefore assumed that the results provided via the reply paid and online surveys are an accurate reflection of the community’s opinion of the proposed concept plan.

Comment

Hardcastle Park contains Banksia Woodland, which is protected at State level under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 and at a Federal level since an update was made in 2016 to the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.

 

It is proposed that the concept plan that was presented for consultation (Attachment 3) be submitted as part of the State and Federal Government bi-lateral clearing permit application.

 

The comments from the community consultation relating to equipment provision will be addressed during the detailed design process, subject to the outcome of the clearing permit application. It should also be noted that the outcome of the clearing permit application may cause further design revisions, including equipment provision, with further reporting to Council if required.

 

In respect to project timeframes, there has been a change in the project schedule due to the extended consultation, State Government consultation, concept development process, and clearing permit application process. Based on advice received from the Department of Environment Regulation, the City has estimated that the clearing permit application process may take between 6 to 12 months.  

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 risk registers which relate to the issues contained in this report.

Policy Implications

The City's Local Planning Policy 4.3 Public Open Spaces was used as the guiding framework for the development of the draft concept plan.

Financial Implications

The table below provides a summary of the project budget allocations and expenditure to date for the project (PR-3063).

 

Year

Budget

Actual Expenditure

Balance

2015/16

55,000

47,213

7,787*

2016/17

335,000

23,673

311,327

2017/18

101,125

0

101,125

Total

491,125

71,663

420,239

*Carried forward to 2016/17

 

A concept design budget of $55,000 was allowed for within the 2015/16 Capital Works Budget. The balance of unspent funds from this budget was $7,800 which was carried forward to 2016/17. A construction budget of $335,000 has been allowed for in 2016/17 and the project currently has a total remaining available budget of $319,114. The main expenditure items to date have been in relation to consultancy fees, Western Power fees and internal cost recovery charges.

 

As part of the 2017/18 budget process an additional $101,125 has been listed for consideration in the 2017/18 capital works budget. This equates to a total project budget of $491,125, with $420,239 remaining available budget. The estimated cost of the proposed draft concept plan (Attachment 3) is $422,084, which will be reviewed as a part of the detail design process post environmental approval.

 

Administration has been advised that the Department of Environmental Application fee is $200, with a further $200 per amendment (if required). The initial application fee to the Federal Government is $6,577, however the Department will then determine if further information stages are required. If further stages are required the City is responsible to pay for each additional stage, and the Department will not commence that stage of the assessment until payment is received. It should be noted that the application fees are in addition to the estimated cost of the proposed concept plan. These costs have not been included within the current project estimate.

 

Based on advice received from the Department of Environment Regulation, it is envisaged that further additional and substantial clearing offset costs will also be required; however the costs and ratio of the required offsets are unknown until the clearing permit application is processed.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

 

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       ENDORSES the Hardcastle Park concept plan as shown in Attachment 3 of this report for the purposes of submission to the State Department of Environmental Regulation and Federal Department of Environment and Energy for the purposes of clearing permit application;

2.       NOTES the estimated total cost of the project (excluding clearing permit requirements) is $422,084, with the sum of $101,125 listed for consideration in the 2017/18 capital works budget; and

3.       RECOGNISES and THANKS the community for its involvement in the community consultation component of the project.

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Hardcastle Park - Location Plan

16/389125

 

2.

Hardcastle Park - Initial Draft Concept Design

16/389128

 

3.

Hardcastle Park - Revised Draft Concept Plan

17/102866

Minuted

4.

Hardcastle Park Consultation April 2017 - Survey Results Summary

17/146513

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                                                     143


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                                                     144


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                                                     145


 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                  147


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

  


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                      159

 

Corporate Strategy & Performance

Business & Finance

CS08-05/17       Financial Activity Statement for the Period Ended 30 April 2017

File Ref:                                              25973 – 17/143142

Responsible Officer:                           Director Corporate Strategy and Performance

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       5         

 

Issue

To consider the Financial Activity Statement for the period ended 30 April 2017.

Background

In accordance with Local Government Regulations, the Financial Activity Statement has been prepared in compliance with the following:

 

1.       Regulation 34(1) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996, which requires a local government to prepare a statement of financial activity each month, presented according to nature and type, by program, or by business unit.  For the 2016/17 financial year the statement of financial activity will be presented by nature and type.

 

2.       Regulation 34(5) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996, which requires a local government to adopt a percentage or value, calculated in accordance with Australian Accounting Standards, to be used in statements of financial activity for reporting material variances.  For the 2016/17 financial year 10% and a value greater than $10,000 will be used for the reporting of variances.

Consultation

This document has been prepared in consultation with Responsible Officers for review and analysis.

Comment

The budget figures within this report incorporate approved budget amendments.

 

As per item 2 in Background, comments on material variances are provided below.

 

In reference to tables provided in the report, the following colours have been used to categorise three levels of variance:

·        Green >+10%,

·        Orange <+/-10%, and

·        Red >-10%.

 


 

Summary

 

OVERALL SUMMARY OF CURRENT MONTH FINANCIAL FIGURES

 

Result from Operations

 

 

Capital Program

 

 

OVERALL COMMENTS ON YEAR-TO-DATE (YTD) FIGURES

 

Result from Operations

 

 

Capital Program Progress

 

 

Investment Portfolio Performance

 

 


 

DETAILED ANALYSIS OF STATEMENT OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (ATTACHMENT 1)

 

Comments relating to the Statement of Comprehensive Income are provided under the following two sections:

a)      Current month comparison of actuals to budgets, and

b)      Year to date and end of year comparison of actuals to budgets.

 

a)      Current Month Comparison of Actuals to Budgets

The below table highlights the operating performance for the current month and identifies variances of actual to budget for each category of Revenue & Expense. 

 

 

Total Comprehensive Income

The month of April produced a favourable variance (+$5.7m) predominately a result of developer contributed assets which were expected to be received in March. It is noted that of the unfavourable variances Non-Operating Grants, Main Roads grants were down when compared to budget as a result of progress receipts on projects not due as further project progress is required before grants are awarded. Another less substantial unfavourable variance was higher employee costs through an increase in long service leave provisions.

 

 

 

 

Operating Revenues

The month of April displayed an unfavourable variance for operating revenues of -$85K.  This is mainly a result of lower interest income due to interest rates being lower than anticipated. This was offset by higher Operating Grants through Mindarie Regional Council (MRC) upgrade works being reimbursed to the City.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Operating Expenses

 

The unfavourable variance for April is mainly a result of higher Employee costs through the recognition of increased long service leave provisions and less substantially through higher salary and wage expenses. Material & Contracts expenses however produced a favourable variance of +$156K which was caused by lower tonnages in Domestic Waste Expenses.

 

 

 

Other Revenue & Expenses

 

The month of April produced a favourable variance of +$6.0m due almost entirely to there being no recognition of developer contributed assets received in the March quarter.

 


 

b)      Year to Date and End of Year Comparison of Actuals to Budgets

 

 

Details for the variances are outlined below.

 

Operating Revenues

It is noted that all income categories present a balanced result when compared to budget to April and thus fall within the threshold for reporting purposes.

 

Operating Expenses

Materials and Contracts (Actual $39.0m, Revised Budget $45.0m)

·        The main contributor for the positive variance pertains to Contract Expenses which produced a YTD variance of (+$3.0m). There is an additional $4.3m in commitments for asset maintenance that will be incurred by June 2017 including specific one off expenditures such as GPT program as well as bulk sweeping and beach renourishment program.

·        Termination of the City of Joondalup bulk junk contract has resulted in cost savings though in part these have been offset through improved service levels and a reduction in overtime costs.  Further work is being undertaken in this area to ensure costs match this loss of income.

·        Consulting fee expenses has a favourable variance of +$1.2m due to various organisational reviews and planning for consultancy which have yet to take place.

 

Interest Expenses (Actual $3.5m, Revised Budget $3.8m)

·        The positive variance to April is a result of only a portion of the loan being obtained for the Yanchep DCP whilst the interest expense budgeted was for the entire loan. 

 

Insurance Expenses (Actual $1.2 Revised Budget $1.3m)

·        The positive variance relates to lower than expected premiums on Public Liability Insurance and Professional Indemnity Insurance.

 

Other Revenue & Expenses

 

Non-Operating Grants, Subsidies and Contributions (Actual $11.6m, Revised Budget $14.2m)

·        The unfavourable variance to April is attributed to the timing of progress payments for projects which are yet to be realised.  These grants are mainly related to Main Roads funding.

 

Contributed Physical Assets (Actual $36.2m, Revised Budget $45.0m)

·        The year to April recognised a parcel of developer contributed assets totalling $36.2m. 

 

·        Whilst the anticipated March contributions have now been recognised in April it is noted that only $7.6m of the anticipated $15.0m contributions were received due to development activity having been affected by market conditions.

 

Profit / Loss on Asset Disposals (Actual $1.4m, Revised Budget $2.0m)

·        The unfavourable variance is a result of lower sale of asset activities than anticipated as well as lower Tamala Park Regional Council (TPRC) contributions due to lower lot sales.  As the timing of asset disposals cannot be reliably estimated, results to budgets can be subject to variations. It was noted that in March the TPRC accruals reflected the expected final balance to reduce and therefore the March income has corresponded with a reduction. In April the reduction has now been captured and still falls below the expected budget anticipated after the mid-year review process.

 

Town Planning Scheme (TPS) Revenues (Actual $10.4m, Revised Budget $16.7m)

·        The YTD adverse variance is attributed to Lot Sale contributions across various TPS Cells.  The Cells with YTD unfavourable variances are Cell 1 (-$851K), Cell 4 (-$2.9m), Cell 7 (-$161K), Cell 8 (-$1.4K), Cell 8 (-$404K) and Cell 9 (-$3.3m) which are a result of lower lot creations due to current property market conditions.

 

Within Cell 9 there are 53 lots where development can now be undertaken after DFES has provided confirmation regarding the bushfire management plan.  Works on these lots is valued at approximately $1.7m.  21 lots have also been delayed in Cell 9 due to engineering approval only now being approved.  Further evidence of intersection costs as well as public open space development costs has now been sought prior to income related to the development can be finalised. Estimated revenue for these lots is $680K.

 

·        It is noted previously that the Cell 4 (East Road) developers will be completing the project in stages and is driven by the downturn in the property market. It has now been determined that the developer will continue the full development and is anticipated that confirmation of this will be determined within the next two weeks.

 

·        Cell 7 has also been postponed under advice from the developer for which no more revenue will likely be realised in this financial year. 

 

·        These unfavourable variances were partially offset by Cell 2 (+$1.2m).

 

Town Planning Scheme Expenses (Actual $4.8m, Revised Budget $17.8m)

·        The main contributor for the positive variance is a result of Lot 22 East Road POS development having begun however yet to be completed and settled. It was ascertained that further work is to be conducted in relation to civil works and is expected to be resolved over the next couple of weeks. Estimated costs remain at $6.7m

 

·        The positive YTD variance is also contributed by Cell 5 and 8 land acquisitions which are awaiting pending decisions from the Supreme Court. The matter has been heard but we are awaiting the decision to be handed down. Costs are estimated at $3.6m across the Cells pending this outcome.

 

 


 

STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL POSITION (Attachment 2)

Net Current Assets

When compared to the opening position as at 01 July 2016 Net Current Assets have increased by $38.9m which largely reflects the timing of Rates receipts for 2016/17.

Current Receivables are largely related to collectable Rates income ($15.4m). Remaining current receivables relates to Emergency Services Levy collections ($1.3m) and sundry debtor accounts. Non-Current receivables largely relate to Deferred Pensioner Rebates; being funds that cannot be collected until the Pensioner ceases to reside at the rateable property.

Non-Current Assets

Year to date Non-Current Assets have increased by $42.9m from 2015/16 which is attributed mainly to the recognition of contributed physical assets from developers as well as capital works in progress.

The year to date Work in Progress balance is largely contributed to Pathways, Purchase & Upgrade of Residential Land, Waste Domestic Plant and various Capital Infrastructure Projects.

Non-Current Liabilities

Year to date Non-Current Liabilities have increased by $3.2m which is mostly attributed to the new loan facility for the Yanchep DCP.  The existing loan with the Western Australia Treasury Corporation remains unchanged and when combined with the new loan make up 98% of total Non-Current Liabilities.

 

FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

 

The table below present’s data on relevant financial ratios, comparing the minimum standard expected as per the Department of Local Government & Communities, status at beginning of the financial year and year to date figures.

An explanation of the purpose of each ratio is also provided, together with commentary where a ratio does not meet the minimum standard (highlighted in Red).  A green highlight is used where the minimum standard is met or exceeded.

 

 

 

CAPITAL PROGRAM

 

The current status of the Capital Program is summarised below by Sub-Program category.

 

 

Actual expenditure and commitments of the projects within the revised adopted capital works program equates to 89% of the $80m budget as at 30 April 2017.  During the calendar month of April, $5.36m of works were completed. Significant capital works completed in April included:

•        $2.32m Civic Centre extension

•        $745k Marmion Avenue (Lukin Dr to Butler Blvd)

•        $593k Other road projects and traffic treatments

•        $350k Land acquisition – Moorpark Ave, Yanchep

•        $323k Quinns Surf Lifesaving Club

•        $240k Sports facilities

•        $159k Yanchep District Playing Fields

•        $158k Irrigation infrastructure replacement

•        $146k Fleet replacement

•        $109k Golf courses

 

To further expand on the Capital Works Program information above, key capital projects are selected to be specifically reported on, which are itemised in the Top Capital Projects attachment to this report (Attachment 3).

 


 

INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO (Attachment 4)

 

In accordance with the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 (and per the City’s Investment Policy), the City only invests in the following highly secured investments in Australian currency:

1.       Deposits with authorised deposit taking institutions and the Western Australian Treasury Corporation for a term not exceeding 12 months;

 

2.       Bonds that are guaranteed by the Commonwealth Government or a State or Territory for a term not exceeding three years.

 

 

As at the current month end, the City holds an investment portfolio (cash & cash equivalents) of $347.9m (Face Value), equating to $352.0m inclusive of accrued interest.  YTD the City’s investment portfolio return has exceeded the Bank Bill index benchmark by 0.79% pa (2.73% pa vs. 1.94% pa), however it is noted that Interest Earnings were budgeted at a 3.00% yield.

 

The current investment portfolio does not hold an investment in NAB and Suncorp as more competitive rates were attained in other institutions. It is noted that investments are within compliance levels with the exception of Bendigo Bank weighting which has a maximum allowable portfolio weighting of 25% however is currently weighted at 25.29%. This was due to an administrative error.  Controls have now also been put in place to ensure errors of this nature do not reoccur.  It is noted that the City has an investment of $10m with Bendigo Bank maturing on 15th May which will be reinvested in other institutions to reduce the weighting to below 25%.

 


 

RATE SETTING STATEMENT (Attachment 5)

 

The Rate Setting Statement represents a composite view of the finances of the City, identifying the movement in the Surplus/(Deficit) based on the Revenues (excluding Rates), Expenses, Capital Works and Funding Movements, resulting in the Rating Income required.  It is noted that the closing Surplus/(Deficit) will balance to the reconciliation of Net Current Assets Surplus/(Deficit) Carried Forward (detailed below).

 

Statutory Compliance

This monthly financial report complies with Section 6.4 of the Local Government Act 1995 and Regulations 33A and 34 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996.

Strategic Implications

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

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

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

Risk Management Considerations

Risk Title

Risk Rating

Financial Management

Moderate

Accountability

Action Planning Option

Executive Management Team

Manage

 

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

Policy Implications

·        Accounting Policy

·        Strategic Budget Policy

·        Investment Policy

Financial Implications

As outlined above and detailed in Attachments 1 - 5.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council RECEIVES the Financial Activity Statements and commentaries on variances to YTD Budget for the period ended 30 April 2017, consisting of:

 

1.       2016/17 Annual Adopted and Revised Budget;

 

2.       April 2017 YTD Revised Budgets;

 

3.       April 2017 YTD Actuals;

 

4.       April 2017 Statement of Financial Position and Net Current Assets; and

 

5.       April 2017 YTD Material Financial Variance Notes.

 

 

Attachments:

1.

April Income Statement

17/146198

Minuted

2.

April Balance Sheet

17/146204

Minuted

3.

Top Projects 2016-17 - April 2017 - 20170510

16/151914[v14]

Minuted

4.

April RSS

17/146201

Minuted

5.

April Inv

17/146212

Minuted

 

 

 

 

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                                                     175

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                  176

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                                                     177

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                                                     180

PDF Creator


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                                                                     181

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 


CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 30 May, 2017                                                      184

 

Transactional Finance

CS09-05/17       Warrant of Payments for the Period to 30 April 2017

File Ref:                                              1859 – 17/140626

Responsible Officer:                           Director Corporate Strategy and Performance

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil         

 

Issue

Presentation to the Council of a list of accounts paid for the month of April 2017, including a statement as to the total amounts outstanding at the end of the month.

Background

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

 

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

Detail

The following is the Summary of Accounts paid in April 2017:

 

Funds

Vouchers

Amount

Director Corporate Services Advance A/C

Accounts Paid – April 2017

   Cheque Numbers

   EFT Document Numbers

TOTAL ACCOUNTS PAID

 

Less Cancelled Cheques

Manual Journal

Town Planning Scheme

RECOUP FROM MUNICIPAL FUND

 

 

109143 - 109373

2848 - 2876

 

 

$561,906.78

$12,254,571.43

$12,816,478.21

 

($2,540.00)

($667,547.18)

($0.00)

$12,146,391.03

Municipal Fund – Bank A/C

Accounts Paid – April 2017

Municipal Recoup

Direct Payments

Payroll – Direct Debits

TOTAL ACCOUNTS PAID

 

 

 

$12,146,391.03

$44,891.65

$3,670,809.71

$15,862,092.39

Town Planning Scheme

Accounts Paid – April 2017                        

TOTAL ACCOUNTS PAID

 

 

 

 

$0.00

 

At the close of April 2017 outstanding creditors amounted to $446,010.17.

Consultation

Nil

Comment

The list of payment (cheques and electronic transfers) and the end of month total of outstanding creditors for the month of April 2017 is presented to the Council for information and recording in the minutes of the meeting, as required by the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996.

Statutory Compliance

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

Strategic Implications

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

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

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

Risk Management Considerations

Risk Title

Risk Rating

Warrant of Payments Information Only

Low

Accountability

Action Planning Option

Transactional Finance Manager

Accept

 

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

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council RECEIVES the list of payments drawn for the month of April 2017, as summarised below:-

 

 

 

 

 

 

Funds

Vouchers

Amount

Director Corporate Services Advance A/C

Accounts Paid – April 2017

   Cheque Numbers

   EFT Document Numbers

TOTAL ACCOUNTS PAID

 

Less Cancelled Cheques

Manual Journal

Town Planning Scheme

RECOUP FROM MUNICIPAL FUND

 

 

109143 - 109373

2848 - 2876

 

 

$561,906.78

$12,254,571.43

$12,816,478.21

 

($2,540.00)

($667,547.18)

($0.00)

$12,146,391.03

Municipal Fund – Bank A/C

Accounts Paid – April 2017

Municipal Recoup

Direct Payments

Payroll – Direct Debits

TOTAL ACCOUNTS PAID

 

 

 

$12,146,391.03

$44,891.65

$3,670,809.71

$15,862,092.39

Town Planning Scheme

Accounts Paid – April 2017                        

TOTAL ACCOUNTS PAID

 

 

 

 

$0.00

 

WARRANT OF PAYMENTS APRIL 2017

 

 

 

 

PAYMENT

DATE

DESCRIPTION

AMOUNT

00109143

04/04/2017

Rates Refund

$907.07

00109144

04/04/2017

Rates Refund

$1,454.83

00109145

04/04/2017

Rates Refund

$776.78

00109146

04/04/2017

Balga Cricket Club 

$84.00

 

 

  Key Bond Refund

 

00109147

04/04/2017

Ankit Patel 

$100.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109148

04/04/2017

Ankit Patel 

$540.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109149

04/04/2017

Gugulethu Ndlovu 

$540.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109150

04/04/2017

Mai Lui 

$100.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109151

04/04/2017

Sarah Schmidt 

$100.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109152

04/04/2017

Woodvale Secondary College P&C (Music)

$850.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109153

04/04/2017

Deepak Pawar 

$850.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109154

04/04/2017

Stacey Dewey 

$100.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109155

04/04/2017

Sophie Coid 

$850.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109156

04/04/2017

Lions Club of Girrawheen Incorporated 

$850.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109157

04/04/2017

Bhavin Trivedi 

$540.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109158

04/04/2017

Brighton Seahawks Senior Football Club 

$850.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109159

04/04/2017

Commissioner for Children & Young People 

$17.30

 

 

  Hire Fee Refund

 

00109160

04/04/2017

Golden Girls Rhythm Dance 

$148.00

 

 

  Hire Fee Refund

 

00109161

04/04/2017

The Potters House Church 

$229.50

 

 

  Hire Fee Refund

 

00109162

04/04/2017

Western Australia Matu Christian Church 

$134.60

 

 

  Hire Fee Refund

 

00109163

04/04/2017

Commissioner For Children & Young People 

$112.45

 

 

  Hire Fee Refund

 

00109164

04/04/2017

RSPCA 

$207.50

 

 

  Refund - Annual Reserve 2017 - Cinabar Park - Overpayment

 

00109165

04/04/2017

Melanie Dawson 

$100.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109166

04/04/2017

Tangent Nominees Pty Ltd 

$698.26

 

 

  Refund - Building Application Fees - Submitted Twice

 

00109167

04/04/2017

Stephen Brock Olsen 

$96.00

 

 

  Refund - Existing Structure Application Fees - Waived

 

00109168

04/04/2017

D J Zajitz 

$256.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00109169

04/04/2017

Petkovski Investments Pty Ltd 

$135.00

 

 

  Refund - Verge Licence Application Fees - Not Required

 

00109170

04/04/2017

Tangent Nominees Pty Ltd 

$70.00

 

 

  Refund - Verge License Application Fees - Not Required

 

00109171

04/04/2017

Stan Rousell 

$50.00

 

 

  Refund Of Copies Of Plans - Wrong Form

 

00109172

04/04/2017

Select Homes (WA) Pty Ltd 

$722.00

 

 

  Refund - Building Application Fees - Not Processed In Correct Timeframes

 

00109173

04/04/2017

Benjamin Buckland 

$50.00

 

 

  Dog Registration Refund - Charged For Microchip Fee

 

00109174

04/04/2017

Architecture At Its Best 

$294.00

 

 

  Refund - Development Application Fees - Overpaid Online

 

00109175

04/04/2017

Ms Patricia Parker 

$20.00

 

 

  Refund - HACC Services - Overpayment

 

00109176

04/04/2017

Rates Refund

$200.00

00109177

04/04/2017

Rates Refund

$11,222.00

00109178

04/04/2017

Rates Refund

$816.00

00109179

04/04/2017

Rates Refund

$20.39

00109180

04/04/2017

Rates Refund

$820.11

00109181

04/04/2017

Rates Refund

$103.93

00109182

04/04/2017

Minh Duc Lee 

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00109183

04/04/2017

Rates Refund

$750.01

00109184

04/04/2017

Mrs Dorothy Pritchard 

$16.00

 

 

  Refund - HACC Services - Overpayment

 

00109185

04/04/2017

Track Cycling WA 

$400.00

 

 

  Sponsorship Request For 1 X Member To Attend The Australian  Junior Track Championships In Sydney 23.02.2017 And 1 X Member To Attend The Australian Senior Track Championships In Brisbane 02.03.2017

 

00109186

04/04/2017

Rates Refund

$1,100.42

00109187

04/04/2017

Westside BMX Club 

$200.00

 

 

  Sponsorship For 1 X Member To Attend The BMX National Championships In Brisbane 23 - 29.04.2017

 

00109188

04/04/2017

Rates Refund

$918.83

00109189

04/04/2017

Rates Refund

$335.88

00109190

04/04/2017

Rates Refund

$750.00

00109191

04/04/2017

Rates Refund

$672.38

00109192

04/04/2017

Rates Refund

$284.71

00109193

04/04/2017

Rates Refund

$750.00

00109194

04/04/2017

J Roberts 

$24.00

 

 

  Reissue Of Stale Cheque 00104713 - Hire Fee Refund Cancelled Booking R4410218

 

00109195

04/04/2017

Rates Refund

$168.86

00109196

04/04/2017

T Kartawidjaja 

$136.00

 

 

  Refund - Food Business Registration Fee - Cancellation Of Application

 

00109197

04/04/2017

L Hills 

$38.75

 

 

  Dog Registration Refund - Sterilised

 

00109198

04/04/2017

E.L. Patino 

$21.20

 

 

  Refund - Term 1 2017 - Swimming Lessons - Not Enrolling

 

00109199

04/04/2017

Touch Football WA 

$200.00

 

 

  Sponsorship X 1 2017 National Touch League At Coffs Harbour 08.03.2017

 

00109200

04/04/2017

Mullaloo Surf Life Saving Club 

$400.00

 

 

  Sponsorship X 2 - Australian Surf Life Saving Championship In Gold Coast 25 - 26.03.2017

 

00109201

04/04/2017

Ice Synchro WA 

$500.00

 

 

  Sponsorship X 1 - World Synchronised Ice Skating Championships In Colorado Springs 07 - 08.04.2017

 

00109202

04/04/2017

Vision Impaired & Blind Bowlers of WA

$200.00

 

 

  Sponsorship X 1 - National Championships Coolangatta 21 - 31.05.2017

 

00109203

04/04/2017

Indoor Sports WA 

$200.00

 

 

  Sponsorship X 1 - Australian Indoor Junior Championships - Mackay 02 - 08.07.2017

 

00109204

04/04/2017

Cancelled

 

00109205

04/04/2017

Athletics WA 

$400.00

 

 

  Sponsorship X 2 - 2017 Australian Athletics Championships Sydney 26.03.2017 - 02.04.2017

 

00109206

04/04/2017

Breakers Swim Club 

$200.00

 

 

  Sponsorship X 1 - 2017 Georgina Hope Foundation National Age Championships Brisbane 15.04.2017

 

00109207

04/04/2017

School Sport Western Australia Incorporated 

$200.00

 

 

  Sponsorship X 1 - School Sport Australia Cricket 15's Championship Brisbane 24.03.2017 - 02.04.2017

 

00109208

04/04/2017

Clive Bain 

$40.00

 

 

  Refund - Gold Program - Electric Bike Tour - Unable To Attend

 

00109209

04/04/2017

S Fairclough 

$25.00

 

 

  Refund - Gold Program - River Cruise - Unable To Attend

 

00109210

04/04/2017

B Crawford 

$25.00

 

 

  Refund - Gold Program - River Cruise - Unable To Attend

 

00109211

04/04/2017

P & KGS Ahluwalia 

$122.40

 

 

  Refund - Term 1 2017 - Swimming Lesson

 

00109212

04/04/2017

Mr Stephen Freeborn 

$60.00

 

 

  Volunteer Payment

 

00109213

04/04/2017

Girrawheen Library Petty Cash 

$72.95

 

 

  Petty Cash

 

00109214

04/04/2017

Cancelled

 

00109215

04/04/2017

Water Corporation 

$21,742.08

 

 

  Water Supplies For The City

 

00109216

04/04/2017

Telstra 

$2,580.07

 

 

  Phone Charges For The City

 

00109217

04/04/2017

Ashby Operations Centre Petty Cash 

$296.30

 

 

  Petty Cash

 

00109218

06/04/2017

Building & Construction Industry 

$112,983.91

 

 

  Collection Levy Payments 01 - 31.03.2017 - Finance

 

00109219

11/04/2017

Rates Refund

$356.20

00109220

11/04/2017

Jennifer Perrin 

$100.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109221

11/04/2017

Quinns Rocks Junior Cricket Club 

$100.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109222

11/04/2017

Stephen Hancock 

$540.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109223

11/04/2017

Swan Valley Samoan Congregational Church 

$540.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109224

11/04/2017

Cheryl Anderson 

$850.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109225

11/04/2017

Doanh Kinh Le 

$850.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109226

11/04/2017

Viknesweri Segaran 

$100.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109227

11/04/2017

Estella Doegolia 

$540.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109228

11/04/2017

Natalie Whitman 

$100.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109229

11/04/2017

Filipino Association

$100.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109230

11/04/2017

Bibak-Cadwa 

$540.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109231

11/04/2017

Elmerien Heaysman 

$100.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109232

11/04/2017

Lorraine Lekias 

$100.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109233

11/04/2017

Rates Refund

$4,346.16

00109234

11/04/2017

Rates Refund

$652.50

00109235

11/04/2017

Rates Refund

$655.56

00109236

11/04/2017

Rates Refund

$288.70

00109237

11/04/2017

Rates Refund

$288.70

00109238

11/04/2017

Rates Refund

$652.50

00109239

11/04/2017

Rates Refund

$750.00

00109240

11/04/2017

Rates Refund

$750.00

00109241

11/04/2017

Rates Refund

$288.70

00109242

11/04/2017

Rates Refund

$375.00

00109243

11/04/2017

S Hill & J Plumb 

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00109244

11/04/2017

Niloha Mendoza Mejias 

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00109245

11/04/2017

Cancelled

 

00109246

11/04/2017

S Ratcliffe 

$100.00

 

 

  Refund Of Infringement Notice - Withdrawn

 

00109247

11/04/2017

Rates Refund

$283.21

00109248

11/04/2017

M & N Petrie 

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00109249

11/04/2017

J Diamond 

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00109250

11/04/2017

Rates Refund

$750.00

00109251

11/04/2017

E Vella 82 Warradale Terrace 

$30.00

 

 

  Refund - Dog Registration - Sterilised

 

00109252

11/04/2017

Rates Refund

$750.00

00109253

11/04/2017

Rates Refund

$374.29

00109254

11/04/2017

Rates Refund

$462.79

00109255

11/04/2017

HBF Health Limited - Partnership 

$84.00

 

 

  Key Bond Refund

 

00109256

11/04/2017

E Vella 

$30.00

 

 

  Refund - Dog Registration Refund - Sterilised

 

00109257

11/04/2017

A Sedgman 

$150.00

 

 

  Refund - Dog Registration Refund - Sterilised

 

00109258

11/04/2017

Kim Hubbard C/- DMD Storage Group 

$227.01

 

 

  Refund - Building Application Fees - Existing Mezzanine Floor Lodged Online - Cannot Be Processed Must Submitted As An Occupancy Permit

 

00109259

11/04/2017

Dale Alcock Homes Pty Ltd 

$1,145.61

 

 

  Refund - Building Application Fees - Submitted In Error

 

00109260

11/04/2017

BGC Residential Pty Ltd 

$3,058.19

 

 

  Refund - Building Application Fees - Lodged Online

 

00109261

11/04/2017

Allstyle Patios 

$147.00

 

 

  Reimbursement -Development Application Fees - Not Required

 

00109262

11/04/2017

Rates Refund

$36.00

00109263

11/04/2017

A Scales & L Tan 

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00109264

11/04/2017

Chiara Florian 

$550.00

 

 

  Reimbursement - Mowing Incident 15.03.2017 - Damage Door Window

 

00109265

11/04/2017

101 Residential Pty Ltd 

$307.74

 

 

  Refund -Fees Paid For Additional Information Submitted Incorrectly As An Amendment

 

00109266

11/04/2017

T Welch 

$122.40

 

 

  Refund - Term 2 2017 Swimming Lessons

 

00109267

11/04/2017

S Berlingeri 

$699.00

 

 

  Refund - Silver Gym 12 Month Membership As Per 48hr Cooling Off Period

 

00109268

11/04/2017

F Crisona 

$12.50

 

 

  Refund - Term 1 2017 Credited Swimming Lessons Missed

 

00109269

11/04/2017

D Pile & R Hammond 

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00109270

11/04/2017

Niche Living Construction 

$155.00

 

 

  Reimbursement - JDAP Fees Paid - Application Is To Be Determined By The City

 

00109271

11/04/2017

M Ajayi 

$260.00

 

 

  Reimbursement - Impounded Vehicles - No Longer Available Under Closed Bid Auction

 

00109272

11/04/2017

Aquatic Leisure Technologies T/A Aquatechnic Pools 

$2,000.00

 

 

  Refund - Street & Verge Bond Permit

 

00109273

11/04/2017

City of Wanneroo 

$1,040.00

 

 

  Cash Advance - Attending LG Professionals Australia Congress - Mayor Roberts & Cr Driver

 

00109274

11/04/2017

Aquamotion Office Petty Cash 

$239.40

 

 

  Petty Cash

 

00109275

11/04/2017

Girrawheen Library Petty Cash 

$112.75

 

 

  Petty Cash

 

00109276

11/04/2017

Water Corporation 

$16,044.98

 

 

  Water Supplies For The City

 

00109277

11/04/2017

Wanneroo Adult Day Centre Petty Cash 

$113.20

 

 

  Petty Cash

 

00109278

11/04/2017

Cr F Cvitan 

$2,663.79

 

 

  Monthly Allowance

 

00109279

11/04/2017

Cr D Newton 

$2,563.79

 

 

  Monthly Allowance

 

00109280

19/04/2017

Barbara Caporossi 

$100.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109281

19/04/2017

Rakesh Hirani 

$540.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109282

19/04/2017

Kylie Allison 

$100.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109283

19/04/2017

Stacey Archer 

$100.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109284

19/04/2017

Wanneroo Softball Club Incorporated 

$850.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109285

19/04/2017

Annerie De Lange 

$540.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109286

19/04/2017

Edmund Rice Centre Mirrabooka 

$540.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109287

19/04/2017

S Maciaszek 

$851.00

 

 

  Reimbursement - Broken Hair Dryers At Wanneroo Community Centre Senior Hairdressing Salon

 

00109288

19/04/2017

Rates Refund

$318.70

00109289

19/04/2017

Rates Refund

$105.22

00109290

19/04/2017

Natasha Bukilic 

$15.00

 

 

  Refund - Youth Program - Cancelled

 

00109291

19/04/2017

Nora Toth 

$20.00

 

 

  Refund - Youth Program - Cancelled

 

00109292

19/04/2017

Danielle Miller 

$7.50

 

 

  Refund - Youth Program - Cancelled

 

00109293

19/04/2017

Joanne Newman 

$10.00

 

 

  Refund - Youth Program - Cancelled

 

00109294

19/04/2017

Verica Stojceska 

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00109295

19/04/2017

Laura Smith 

$100.00

 

 

  Dog Registration Refund - Sterilised

 

00109296

19/04/2017

Melissa Lowry 

$30.00

 

 

  Dog Registration Refund - Sterilised

 

00109297

19/04/2017

Tennille K Vukovich 

$50.68

 

 

  Dog Registration Refund - Sterilised

 

00109298

19/04/2017

N Persic 

$290.70

 

 

  Refund - Term 2 2017 Swimming Lessons - Moved Interstate

 

00109299

19/04/2017

Rates Refund

$2,247.40

00109300

19/04/2017

Vietnamese Full Gospel Incorporated 

$540.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109301

19/04/2017

Graeme Riley 

$850.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109302

19/04/2017

Marzia Zamir 

$540.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109303

19/04/2017

Zande Association in WA Incorporated 

$540.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109304

19/04/2017

Palak Chokshi 

$540.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109305

19/04/2017

Merisa Smajlovic 

$540.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109306

19/04/2017

Merredith Edmonds 

$850.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109307

19/04/2017

Ayatt Alzubaidy 

$100.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109308

19/04/2017

Dawn Devereux 

$540.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109309

19/04/2017

Banksia Grove Catholic Community Incorporated 

$540.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109310

19/04/2017

Cancelled

 

00109311

19/04/2017

Seongeun Kim 

$153.00

 

 

  Refund - Swimming Lessons Term 2 2017 - Aquamotion

 

00109312

19/04/2017

Loveleen Khanna 

$272.00

 

 

  Refund - Food Business Registration - Not Required

 

00109313

19/04/2017

Colleen McConville 

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00109314

19/04/2017

Scilla Redman 

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00109315

19/04/2017

E & D Agno 

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00109316

19/04/2017

Martina Karasek 

$2,000.00

 

 

  Bond Refund - Street & Verge

 

00109317

19/04/2017

Celebrations Homes 

$2,000.00

 

 

  Bond Refund - Street & Verge

 

00109318

19/04/2017

Aquatic Leisure Technologies Trading As Aqua Technic Pools 

$2,000.00

 

 

  Bond Refund - Street & Verge

 

00109319

19/04/2017

Australian Outdoor Living (WA) Ltd 

$10,000.00

 

 

  Bond Refund - Street & Verge X 5

 

00109320

19/04/2017

Buckingham House Petty Cash 

$72.50

 

 

  Petty Cash

 

00109321

19/04/2017

The Heights Community Club Petty Cash 

$61.60

 

 

  Petty Cash

 

00109322

19/04/2017

Water Corporation 

$392.86

 

 

  Water Supplies For The City

 

00109323

19/04/2017

Telstra 

$34,786.55

 

 

  Phone Charges For The City

 

00109324

19/04/2017

Alexander Heights Day Centre Room Two 

$154.95

 

 

  Petty Cash

 

00109325

26/04/2017

Rates Refund

$1,890.00

00109326

26/04/2017

Rates Refund

$4,264.56

00109327

26/04/2017

RAAFA (WA Division) Incorporated 

$3,300.00

 

 

  Community Funding 2017 Hallmark - Events At Cambrai Memorial Village Merriwa

 

00109328

26/04/2017

Yanchep Two Rocks RSL Sub Branch 

$5,422.00

 

 

  Community Funding 2017 Hallmark - Events

 

00109329

26/04/2017

Linda Walton 

$220.00

 

 

  Refund - Heritage High Tea X 4 Persons - Unable To Attend

 

00109330

26/04/2017

Rates Refund

$86.33

00109331

26/04/2017

Raymond A Rabino 

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00109332

26/04/2017

D Salmon 

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00109333

26/04/2017

Y Regge 

$360.00

 

 

  Vehicle Crossing Subsidy

 

00109334

26/04/2017

Pearl McGough 

$20.00

 

 

  Refund - Mark Williams - Withdrawn From Bus Tour

 

00109335

26/04/2017

Thomas Hilary 

$530.00

 

 

  Bond Refund

 

00109336

26/04/2017

Aquatic Leisure Technologies Trading As Buccaneer Pools 

$2,000.00

 

 

  Refund - Street & Verge Bond

 

00109337

26/04/2017

Aquatic Leisure Technologies Trading As Sapphire Pools

$8,000.00

 

 

  Refund - Street & Verge Bond X 7

 

00109338

26/04/2017

Trischa Botha 

$2,000.00

 

 

  Refund - Street & Verge Bond

 

00109339

26/04/2017

Ashmy Pty Ltd 

$2,000.00

 

 

  Refund - Street & Verge Bond

 

00109340

26/04/2017

Giuseppe Vestrucci 

$2,000.00

 

 

  Refund - Street & Verge Bond

 

00109341

26/04/2017

Carers WA 

$73.75

 

 

  Hire Fee Refund

 

00109342

26/04/2017

Fiona Zimmerman 

$30.00

 

 

  Dog Registration Refund - Sterilised

 

00109343

26/04/2017

Dana Jane Graham 

$77.50

 

 

  Dog Registration Refund - Sterilised

 

00109344

26/04/2017

Murray Hodson 

$350.00

 

 

  Refund - Leyland Bus - Unable To Be Claimed

 

00109345

26/04/2017

K Pietrocola 

$51.00

 

 

  Refund - Copies Of Plans  - No Available

 

00109346

26/04/2017

Keady-Upton School Of Irish Dancing 

$1,000.00

 

 

  Sponsorship For 2 X Members To Attend The World Irish Dancing Championships In Dublin Ireland From 09 - 16.04.2017

 

00109347

26/04/2017

Ashdale Special Families Incorporated

$930.00

 

 

  Donation Towards Purchase Of Manual And 60 Workbooks &  Training For 3 Members Of The Ashdale Special Families Incorporated In The Sibworks Program

 

00109348

26/04/2017

Girrawheen Library Petty Cash 

$90.90

 

 

  Petty Cash

 

00109349

26/04/2017

Mr Evan Martin 

$279.50

 

 

  Keyholder Payments

 

00109350

26/04/2017

Quinns Rocks Adult Day Care Petty Cash 

$181.90

 

 

  Petty Cash

 

00109351

26/04/2017

Wanneroo Library Petty Cash 

$233.05

 

 

  Petty Cash

 

00109352

26/04/2017

Water Corporation 

$5,251.90

 

 

  Water Supplies For The City

 

00109353

26/04/2017

Yanchep Two Rocks Library Petty Cash 

$44.40

 

 

  Petty Cash

 

00109354

26/04/2017

Telstra 

$73.95

 

 

  Mobile Phones Charges For The City

 

00109355

26/04/2017

Mrs Jennifer Martin 

$246.00

 

 

  Keyholder/Tennis Booking Officer Payments

 

00109356

26/04/2017

Clarkson Library Petty Cash 

$144.80

 

 

  Petty Cash

 

00109357

26/04/2017

Kingsway Stadium Petty Cash 

$248.10

 

 

  Petty Cash

 

00109358

26/04/2017

Finance Services Petty Cash 

$625.10

 

 

  Petty Cash

 

00109359

26/04/2017

Ms Jodie Walter 

$111.80

 

 

  Keyholder Payment

 

00109360

26/04/2017

Ms Christine McGhee 

$55.90

 

 

  Keyholder Payment

 

00109361

26/04/2017

Projects Petty Cash 

$85.95

 

 

  Petty Cash

 

00109362

26/04/2017

Coffey Environments Pty Ltd 

$5,286.61

 

 

  Audit Services - Wangara Industrial Area - Property

 

00109363

26/04/2017

Dowsing Concrete 

$105,035.49

 

 

  Footpath - Alexander Heights Parks - Assets

 

 

 

  Footpath - Hvar Street - Engineering

 

 

 

  Footpath - Ainsbury Parade - Projects

 

00109364

26/04/2017

Dymocks Whitford City 

$40.00

 

 

  2 X $20 Gift Vouchers For Library Competition - Library Services

 

00109365

26/04/2017

Interskill 

$825.00

 

 

  Training - SQL Fundamentals (Beginner) - 1 X Attendee - IT

 

00109366

26/04/2017

Laseva Pty Ltd 

$1,980.00

 

 

  Food Director - Global Beats And Eats - Communications & Events

 

00109367

26/04/2017

Repco Auto Parts & Accessories 

$250.00

 

 

  Vehicle Spare Parts - Fleet

 

00109368

26/04/2017

Stephen McKee 

$6,490.00

 

 

  Repair Works/Asbestos Removal - Various Locations - Waste

 

00109369

26/04/2017

Ms Rosemary Stevens 

$300.00

 

 

  Workshop - Writing Your Own Memoirs - Cultural Services

 

00109370

26/04/2017

The Northern Mens Shed 

$170.00

 

 

  Production Of A Large Saw Horse For The  Exhibition - Cultural Services

 

00109371

26/04/2017

The Trustee - Young Australia League

$3,000.00

 

 

  Upper Secondary Scholarship - Economic Development

 

00109372

26/04/2017

West Australian Newspapers Ltd 

$176.79

 

 

  Newspaper Subscription For The City

 

00109373

27/04/2017

Dept of Transport 

$105,797.70

 

 

  Bulk License Payments City Of Wanneroo Schedule B9681 - Fleet Assets

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total Director Corporate Services Advance - Cheques

$561,906.78

 

 

 

 

ELECTRONIC FUNDS TRANSFER

00002848

04/04/2017

 

 

 

 

Synergy 

$135,618.55

 

 

  Power Supplies For The City

 

 

 

 

 

00002849

04/04/2017

 

 

 

 

Alinta Gas 

$636.55

 

 

  Gas Supplies For The City

 

 

 

Australian Manufacturing Workers Union 

$216.10

 

 

  Payroll Deduction

 

 

 

Australian Services Union 

$846.08

 

 

  Payroll Deduction

 

 

 

Australian Taxation Office 

$548,350.00

 

 

  Payroll Deduction

 

 

 

Badminton Association of WA Incorporated 

$220.00

 

 

  Kidsport Voucher X 1 Child

 

 

 

Brighton Seahawks Junior Football Club 

$3,682.00

 

 

  Kidsport Voucher X 19 Children

 

 

 

Butler Football Club 

$220.00

 

 

  Kidsport Voucher X 1 Child

 

 

 

Butler Little Athletics Club (Incorporated) 

$200.00

 

 

  Kidsport Voucher X 1 Child

 

 

 

Carramar Cougars JFC 

$600.00

 

 

  Kidsport Vouchers X 3 Children

 

 

 

Child Support Agency 

$1,291.83

 

 

  Payroll Deduction

 

 

 

City of Wanneroo - Payroll Rates 

$6,443.00

 

 

  Payroll Deduction

 

 

 

City of Wanneroo - Social Club 

$804.00

 

 

  Payroll Deduction

 

 

 

College Park Gymnastic Academy 

$220.00

 

 

  Kidsport Vouchers X 1 Child

 

 

 

Cracovia Club Incorporated 

$880.00

 

 

  Kidsport Voucher X 4 Children

 

 

 

Currambine Netball Club (Incorporated) 

$755.00

 

 

  Kidsport Voucher X 4 Children

 

 

 

Ellenbrook Eels Netball Club 

$400.00

 

 

  Kidsport Vouchers X 2 Children