BRIEFING PAPERS

FOR ELECTED MEMBERS’

BRIEFING SESSION

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

to be held at

the Council Chambers, Civic Centre, Dundebar Road, Wanneroo

on 30 April, 2019 commencing at 6.00pm

PRINCIPLES

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

 

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

 

PROCESS

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

 

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

Ø  Attendance and Apologies

Ø  Declarations of Interest

Ø  Reports for discussion

Ø  Tabled Items

Ø  Public Question Time

Ø  Closure

 

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

 

AGENDA CONTENTS

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

 

AGENDA DISTRIBUTION

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

 

DEPUTATIONS

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

 

RECORD OF BRIEFING

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

 

LOCATION

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

Acronym	Meaning
ABN	Australian Business Number
ACN	Australian Company Number
Act	Local Government Act 1995
CBP	City of Wanneroo Corporate Business Plan
CHRMAP	Coastal Hazard Risk Management & Adaption Plan
City	City of Wanneroo
CPI	Consumer Price Index
DBCA	Department of Biodiversity Conservation and Attractions
DFES	Department of Fire and Emergency Services
DOE	Department of Education Western Australia
DOH	Department of Health
DPLH	Department of Planning Lands and Heritage
DPS2	District Planning Scheme No. 2
DLGSCI	Department of Local Government, Sport and Cultural Industries
DWER	Department of Water and Environmental Regulation
EPA	Environmental Protection Authority
GST	Goods and Services Tax
LTFP	Long Term Financial Plan
MRS	Metropolitan Region Scheme
MRWA	Main Roads Western Australia
POS	Public Open Space
PTA	Public Transport Authority of Western Australia
SAT	State Administrative Tribunal
SCP	City of Wanneroo Strategic Community Plan
WALGA	Western Australian Local Government Association
WAPC	Western Australian Planning Commission

 

 

 

 

Briefing Papers for Tuesday 30 April, 2019

 

 

 

 

CONTENTS

 

Item  1_____ Attendances_ 1

Item  2_____ Apologies and Leave of Absence_ 1

Item  3_____ Reports_ 1

Planning & Sustainability  1

Approval Services  1

3.1                         Amendment No. 169 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 - Introduction of a Massage Premises Use Class  1

3.2                         Reconsideration of Development Application (DA2018/736) for a Child Care Centre at Lot 400 (10) Harbour Elbow, Banksia Grove  16

3.3                         Consideration of Development Application for Modifications to Car Park (Boat and Trailer Parking) at Lot 496 (3) Ocean Falls Boulevard, Mindarie (DA2018/1237) 111

3.4                         Proposed Amendment No. 2 to the Alkimos - Eglinton District Structure Plan No. 18  170

Assets  191

Infrastructure Capital Works  191

3.5                         Tender No 19062 - Provision of Major Works, Halesworth Park, Butler - New Sports Facilities  191

Community & Place  202

Cultural Development  202

3.6                         Concept Designs for Southern Suburbs Library  202

Community Facilities  216

3.7                         Kingsway Regional Sporting Complex - Proposed WAFL Game  216

3.8                         Concept Design - Results of Community Workshops - Splendid Park Skate Park, Yanchep  222

3.9                         Cycling Activity at Splendid Park, Yanchep  256

 

Community Development  266

3.10                      Community Funding Program March 2019 Round  266

Corporate Strategy & Performance  299

Business & Finance  299

3.11                      Financial Activity Statement for the period ended 31 March 2019  299

Transactional Finance  325

3.12                      Warrant of Payments For The Period to 31 March 2019  325

3.13                      Change of Valuation of Land Method - 16 Rousset Road, Jandabup  394

3.14                      Proposal for Levying Differential Rates 2019/20  399

Council & Corporate Support  403

3.15                      Donations to be considered by Council - May 2019  403

Chief Executive Office  406

Advocacy & Economic Development  406

3.16                      State Government North Wanneroo Agriculture and Water Taskforce Update and Proposed Response  406

3.17                      Strategic Partnership: Wheatbelt Development Commission Memorandum of Understanding  448

Item  4_____ Motions on Notice_ 452

Item  5_____ Late Reports (to be circulated under separate cover) 452

Item  6_____ Public Question Time_ 452

Item  7_____ Confidential_ 452

7.1                         East Wanneroo District Structure Plan - Draft Community Facilities Plan  452

Item  8_____ Date of Next Meeting_ 452

Item  9_____ Closure_ 452

 

 

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

 

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

Item  1     Attendances

Item  2     Apologies and Leave of Absence

Item  3     Reports

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

Planning & Sustainability

Approval Services

File Ref:                                              35777 – 19/104781

Responsible Officer:                          Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       1         

 

Issue

To consider the submissions received during the public advertising of Amendment No. 169 to DPS 2.

Background

Administration has prepared Amendment No. 169 to DPS 2 for the purpose of introducing a new use class into DPS 2 with the name ‘Massage Premises’. The definition will encompass activities such as remedial massage, traditional massage, sports massage, reflexology massage and other associated therapeutic or remedial services such as acupuncture and aromatherapy. The proposed Massage Premises use class will specifically exclude the provision of sexual services.

 

Massage Premises are considered to be ‘unlisted uses’ – that is, a use that DPS 2 does not define or set land use permissibility for. When assessing unlisted uses (such as Massage Premises), the Zoning Table (Table 1) of DPS 2 does not determine whether the use is permitted (‘P’), discretionary (‘D’ or ‘A’) or not permitted (‘X) in the zone. Rather, the permissibility of an unlisted use in a zone is determined under DPS 2 by considering whether that unlisted use is or may be consistent (or not consistent) with the objectives and purposes of the relevant zone.

 

Preparation of this amendment to DPS 2 was prompted by the following comment made in a SAT decision, in the context of its review of a development application for a massage premise at a property within the City:

 

“The Tribunal observed that it is in the interests of orderly and proper strategic and statutory planning for an identified innominate use to be specifically listed in the Zoning Table and for the Scheme to expressly nominate whether the use is prohibited, permitted (but may be conditioned), or may be approved or refused in the exercise of planning discretion, in the various zones. The Tribunal observed that this would provide greater certainty and avoid public and private resources having to be incurred is the complex task of assessment as to whether an unlisted use is consistent with, may be consistent with, or is not consistent with the objectives and purposes of the zone.”

 

Council at its 13 November 2018 Ordinary Council Meeting resolved to prepare (or initiate) Amendment No. 169 (PS04-11/18). The amendment proposal was then subsequently advertised as outlined in this Report. Council’s previous resolution on Amendment No. 169 was as follows:

 

“That Council:

1.   PREPARES Amendment No. 169 to the City’s District Planning Scheme No. 2 pursuant to Section 75 of the Planning and Development Act 2005, to amend the local planning scheme by:

a)  Adding the following land use definition for ‘massage premises’ into Section 2 of Schedule 1:

massage premises : means premises involving the massaging manipulation or other treatment of body parts for therapeutic or remedial purposes, but does not include the provision of any sexual services.

b)  Inserting permissibility for the ‘massage premises’ use class into “Table 1 (Clause 3.2) - The Zoning Table” as follows:

Zones

Residential

MIXED USE

BUSINESS

COMMERCIAL

CIVIC & CULTURAL

PRIVATE CLUBS/RECREATION

GENERAL INDUSTRIAL

SERVICE INDUSTRIAL

GENERAL RURAL

RURAL RESOURCE

SPECIAL RURAL

SPECIAL RESIDENTIAL

LANDSCAPE ENHANCEMENT

USE CLASSES

Massage Premises

X

D

P

P

X

X

X

D

X

X

X

X

X

c)  Inserting car parking standards for the ‘massage premises’ use class into “Table 2 (Clause 4.14) - Car Parking Standards” as follows:

 

 

Use Class	Number of On-Site Car Parking Spaces
Commercial
Massage Premises	5 per practitioner

2.    Pursuant to Regulation 35(2) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, RESOLVES that Amendment No. 169 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 is a Complex Amendment for the following reason:

An amendment that is not addressed by any local planning strategy.

3.    Pursuant to Regulation 37(2) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, SUBMITS two (2) copies of the Amendment No. 169 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 documentation to the Western Australian Planning Commission for its consideration;

4.    Pursuant to Section 81 of the Planning and Development Act 2005 REFERS Amendment No. 169 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 to the Environmental Protection Authority; and

5.    Subject to approval from the Environmental Protection Authority and the Western Australian Planning Commission, ADVERTISES Amendment No. 169 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 for a period of not less than 60 days pursuant to Regulation 38 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.

Detail

Amendment No. 169 proposes the following:

 

1.   Adding the following land use definition for ‘Massage Premises’ into DPS 2:

 

massage premises : means premises involving the massaging manipulation or other treatment of body parts for therapeutic or remedial purposes, but does not include the provision of any sexual services.

 

2.   Inserting land use permissibility for the ‘Massage Premises’ use class into the DPS 2 Zoning Table; and

 

3.   Inserting a car parking standard for ‘Massage Premises’ into DPS 2, being five bays per practitioner.

 

Further detail of how Amendment No. 169 proposes to amend DPS 2 is outlined in Item 1 of Council’s 13 November 2018 resolution (PS04-11/18, refer to the Background section above).

Consultation

In accordance with Council’s previous resolution, the amendment was referred to the EPA for comment. In response, the EPA advised the City that the scheme amendment did not warrant an environmental assessment.  Being a complex amendment, Amendment No. 169 was also referred to WAPC for initial consideration, also in accordance with Council’s previous resolution. In its response, the WAPC advised that the amendment was suitable to be advertised for public submissions.

 

Advertising of Amendment No. 169 was carried out between 22 January 2019 and 26 March 2019 by way of advertisements in the ‘Wanneroo Times’ and ‘Wanneroo Weekender’ local newspapers, a notice in Council offices and the City’s website. The City received two submissions on the amendment proposal. A summary of the submissions received, including Administration’s response to those submissions, is included in Attachment 1.

Comment

The key issues relating to this amendment, including the key issues raised in the submissions, are discussed below:

 

Departure from the Model Provisions

 

Schedule 1 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015 (Regulations) provides model provisions for local planning schemes (model provisions). The model provisions do not have a definition for Massage Premises; and as such, proposing to include a Massage Premises land use into DPS 2 would be a departure from the model provisions.

 

It has already been noted by the WAPC in their initial consideration of the amendment (refer to the ‘Consultation’ section above) that the proposed amendment is additional to the model provisions. However, departing from the model provisions is appropriate and justifiable in this instance for the following reasons:

 

·    The SAT in a previous planning decision (refer to the ‘Background’ section above) expressed the view that the City should identify the relevant innominate use (or unlisted use being Massage Premises) in DPS 2, and to expressly nominate its permissibility in each zone. In Administration’s opinion, this proposed DPS 2 amendment sets out to achieve this; and

 

·    There are no land use definitions in the model provisions that suitably encompass massage premise activities. The model provision definition for ‘shop’, as defined below:

 

shop means premises other than a bulky goods showroom, a liquor store — large or a liquor store — small used to sell goods by retail, to hire goods, or to provide services of a personal nature, including hairdressing or beauty therapy services

 

In the context of the above definition, Massage Premises are considered ‘services of a personal nature’. However, Administration considers that using this ‘shop’ definition will be problematic for the following reasons:

o  The definition refers to the ‘bulky goods showroom’, ‘liquor store – large’ or ‘liquor store – small’ land uses, which are not included in DPS 2;

o  The definition encompasses the hiring of goods, hairdressing or beauty therapy services, which are currently separate land uses in DPS 2;

o  Land use permissibility for ‘shop’ in DPS 2 would need to be reviewed in light of a new definition for this use.

 

In other words, if the City were to amend to DPS 2 to align the ‘shop’ definition with the model provisions (to encompass Massage Premises), the City would also need to address all the other land use types through the same amendment. Administration therefore considers it to be more effective and clear to have ‘Massage Premise’ included as its own use class in DPS 2.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Land Use Permissibility Arguments

 

As outlined above, Amendment No. 169 proposes the land use permissibility for the Massage Premises as below:

·    Permitted (or ‘P’) in the Business and Commercial Zones;

·    Discretionary (or ‘D’) in the Mixed Use and Service Industrial Zones; and

·    Not permitted (or ‘X’) in all other zones.

 

A submission received argues that the Massage Premises land use should be permitted (or ‘P’) in the Service Industrial Zone and discretionary (or ‘D’) in the Business Zone. However, Administration considers the proposed land use permissibility is appropriate.

 

The submitter considers that Massage Premises in the Business Zone will locate next to other land uses permissible in this zone such as child care centres, offices, pharmacies, take-away food outlets and restaurants. The submitter therefore argues that Massage Premises form an ‘odd combination’ with these other land uses, which could lead to negative impacts. In response, Administration refers to the DPS 2 intent of the Business Zone, which (in part) is to accommodate for trade and professional services. Administration considers that the practitioners in a massage premise would be using a learnt trade, thereby offering a ‘trade service’. Negative impacts from Massage Premises in the Business Zone would be limited, as Massage Premises are likely to occupy the same form of commercial tenancy as other land uses and surrounding businesses. Negative impacts from a Massage Premises could also be limited further through conditions of development approval. Massage Premises therefore is considered to be a land use that meets the intent of the Business Zone, and a land use permissibility of ‘permitted’ (or ‘P’) is appropriate.

 

The same submitter also questions why Massage Premises are proposed to be a discretionary (or ‘D’) use in the Service Industrial Zone, rather than permitted (‘P’). The submitter argues that Massage Premises could offer a complementary business service to recreational facilities that could locate in the zone (the submitter specifically refers to martial arts, gyms, fitness centres, and dance centres).

 

The nature of the land use being a personal care service is not directly encompassed within the intent or the objectives of the Service Industrial Zone as defined in DPS2 as follows:

 

“3.12.1        The Service Industrial Zone is intended to provide for a wide range of business, industrial and recreational developments which the Council may consider would be inappropriate in Commercial, Business and General Industrial Zones and which are capable of being conducted in a manner which will prevent them being obtrusive, or detrimental to the local amenity.

 

3.12.2         The objectives of the Service Industrial Zone are to:

 

(a)     accommodate a range of light industries, showrooms and warehouses, entertainment and recreational activities, and complementary business services which, by their nature, would not detrimentally affect the amenity of surrounding areas;

 

(b)     ensure that development within this zone creates an attractive façade to the street for the visual amenity of surrounding areas.”

 

In this regard Administration considers that an element of discretion is needed to determine the appropriateness of a Massage Premises in a setting this is intended to provide for industrial and larger scale recreation and entertainment activities as described above. It is therefore appropriate for a use such as Massage Premises which is not directly aligned with the intent of the zone to be a discretionary (or ‘D’) land use within the Service Industrial Zone.

Proposed Car Parking Rate

 

Through Amendment No. 169, Administration was proposing to include a car parking standard of five bays per practitioner for Massage Premises in DPS 2. This is consistent with the car parking standards already set out for the Medical Centre use class in DPS 2. Administration had initially considered that five bays per practitioner was an acceptable parking standard for Massage Premises; as it would provide parking for the practitioner, a support staff member (such as a receptionist), a client receiving treatment, a waiting client, and a departing client.

 

A submission received disagrees that Massage Premises require the same parking ratio as Medical Centres – as client movements and treatments in Massage Premises are different to patient movements and treatments in Medical Centres. The submission argues that the car parking rate for Massage Premises should not exceed three bays per practitioner. That submission has prompted Administration to further review the proposed car parking rate; and in doing so, identified the following points of consideration:

 

·    The ‘Shop’ land use in a number of other local government authorities expressly includes “services of a personal nature” which includes hairdressing, beauty parlours and massage premises. Parking requirements for Shop in the other local government authorities vary between five to eight bays per 100m² of floor space. DPS 2 has a car parking rate for ‘Shopping Centre’ (which includes Shop) which is seven bays per 100m², reducing for centres over 10,000m².

 

·    Imposing a car parking requirement based on floor area (rather than the number of practitioners) could be further justified as other service uses under DPS 2 (such as ‘Hairdresser’ and ‘Beauty Parlour’) require a car parking rate as per Shopping Centres. The car parking rate imposed for these service uses is not based on the number of hairdressers or beauticians that work within salons.

 

·    Reviewing previous approvals granted for Massage Premises, the average floor area for such premises is approximately 90m², often with two or more practitioners. Administration therefore agrees that requiring at least ten car parking bays for an average sized massage premise (e.g. 5 bays each for two practitioners) would be excessive in those instances.

 

·    A practitioner-based car parking standard may not allow for additional practitioners to practice in a massage premise, than what is prescribed in application or approval for Massage Premises. A car parking standard based on floor area could, however, allow practitioner numbers to fluctuate over time depending on the Massage Premise business, without further approval being granted.

 

·    The submitter was also the applicant of a 160m² massage premise approved (by SAT) in the Service Industrial Zone. Administration does acknowledge that imposing the ‘Shopping Centre’ car parking standard would be impractical for larger massage premises; particularly when such premises provide no more than two practitioners. In those instances, the original car parking standard of five bays per practitioner would be a lesser and more appropriate standard, rather than a car parking rate for Shopping Centre, which is based on floor area.

 

In light of the above, Administration is recommending a modification to the car parking rate initially proposed for Massage Premises, which is a combination of the two approaches. The modified car parking rate as now proposed by Administration is as follows:

 

 

 

Use Class	Number of On-Site Car Parking Spaces
Commercial
Massage Premises	As per Shopping Centre or 5 per practitioner – whichever is lesser.

Statutory Compliance

Amendment No. 169 was prepared by Administration and advertised in accordance with the Planning and Development Act 2005 and the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 (the Regulations).

 

In accordance with the Regulations, Council is required to consider the submissions received in respect of Amendment No. 169 and resolve to either support the amendment with or without modification – or alternatively not support the amendment. Administration is recommending that Council supports Amendment No. 169 in accordance with the Regulations, with modifications.

 

Further, the Regulations require Council to provide the WAPC with (among other things) a copy of the resolution, a schedule of submissions and response to the submissions, together with particulars of any modifications recommended to the amendment.

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2017 – 2027:

 “2     Economy

2.2    Strategic Growth

2.2.4  Protect and increase availability of employment generating land”

Risk Management Considerations

Risk Title	Risk Rating
CO-O19 Decision-Making	Low
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Chief Executive Officer	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 support existing management systems.

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Further costs in completing this amendment to DPS 2 can be met from the current operational budget.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

 

1.   Pursuant to Regulation 41(2) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, CONSIDERS the submissions received in respect of Amendment No. 169 to District Planning Scheme No. 2, a summary of which is included in Attachment 1;

 

2.   Pursuant to Regulation 41(3)(b) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, SUPPORTS the prepared Amendment No. 169 to District Planning Scheme No. 2, as resolved by Council at the 13 November 2018 Ordinary Council Meeting (PS04-11/18) but subject to the following modifications:

 

a)   Deleting the following:

 

3.    Inserting car parking standards for the ‘massage premises’ use class into “Table 2 (Clause 4.14) - Car Parking Standards” as follows:

 

Use Class	Number of On-Site Car Parking Spaces
Commercial
Massage Premises	5 per practitioner

 

b)   Insert the following:

 

3.    Inserting car parking standards for the ‘massage premises’ use class into “Table 2 (Clause 4.14) - Car Parking Standards” as follows:

 

Use Class	Number of On-Site Car Parking Spaces
Commercial
Massage Premises	As per Shopping Centre or 5 per practitioner – whichever is lesser

 

3.   AUTHORISES the Mayor and the Chief Executive Officer to SIGN and SEAL Amendment No. 169 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 documents in accordance with the City’s Execution of Documents Policy;

 

4.   Pursuant to Regulation 44 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 and subject to Item 2. above, PROVIDES Amendment No. 169 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 to the Western Australian Planning Commission; and

 

5.   ADVISES the submitters of its decision.

4.                      

 

Attachments:

1⇩.

Attachment 1 - Submission Schedule - Amendment No. 169 to DPS 2

19/127014

Minuted

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

File Ref:                                              DA2018/736 – 19/118576

Responsible Officer:                          Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       9         

 

Issue

To reconsider the refusal of development application (DA2018/736) for a Child Care Centre at Lot 400 (10) Harbour Elbow, Banksia Grove (subject site) in response to an invitation made by the SAT, pursuant to Section 31 of the State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA).

 

Applicant	MW Urban
Owner	Hindle Properties Pty Ltd
Location	Lot 400 (10) Harbour Elbow, Banksia Grove
Site Area	5003m2
DPS 2 Zoning	Special Residential

 

Background

On 15 June 2018 the City received a development application for a Child Care Centre at the subject site. The site is bound by land zoned Special Residential to the north and south, Residential R20 to the west and Special Rural to the east. A location plan of the subject site is included as Attachment 1.

 

The original application was for a Child Care Centre which is a Discretionary (D) land use, and comprised the following:

 

·      A maximum of 120 children and 21 staff;

·      Demolition of the existing building and construction of a single storey building, split into baby, toddler and kindergarten sections with various ancillary rooms (staff rooms, change rooms and sleep rooms);

·      Operating hours of 7:00am – 7:00pm Monday to Friday;

·      37 car parking bays; and

·      Modifications to the existing building envelope.

 

The application was considered at the 16 October Council meeting, whereby Council resolved to refuse the proposal (Resolution PS04-10/18). The original development plans are included as Attachment 2. The application was refused for the following reasons:

 

a)    The proposed Child Care Centre is not considered to be compatible with the  surrounding Residential  and  Special Rural land uses and is therefore not considered to be  consistent with the objectives of the Special Residential zone;

 

b)    The  proposal  does  not  comply  with  Clause  67(m)  of  the  City  of  Wanneroo 
DPS 2 as the proposal may have a negative impact on the amenity of the surrounding residents by way of increased noise and increased traffic generation;

 

c)    The  proposal  does  not  comply  with  Clause  67(n)  of  the  City  of  Wanneroo
DPS 2 as it will have a negative impact on the natural environment and character of the area by removal of 20 trees;

 

d)    The  proposal  does  not  comply  with  Clause  67(t)  of  the  City  of  Wanneroo 
DPS 2 as it will generate traffic that will negatively impact the efficiency and safety of the road system in the locality; and

 

e)    The proposed  Child  Care  Centre  does  not  meet  the  requirements  of  the  Child  Care  Centres Local Planning Policy, specifically the following clauses:

 

i)   Location – Road Hierarchy

 

ii)  Location – Neighbouring Uses

 

iii) Amenity – Residential areas

 

SAT Proceedings

 

Following Council’s decision the applicant chose to exercise their right of review at SAT. This resulted in mediation being held between the applicant and the City on 30 January 2019, and concluded on the basis that the applicant will prepare a revised proposal for reconsideration, which is discussed in further detail below.

 

Following mediation and with regard for the above, SAT issued the following orders:

 

1.       The applicant is to provide additional information as discussed at the mediation to the respondent by 20 March 2019;

2.       The matter is listed for mediation on 1 April 2019 at 10:00am at 565 Hay Street, Perth, Western Australia;

3.       Pursuant to s.31 of the State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA) the respondent is invited to reconsider its decision on or before 7 May 2019; and

4.       The matter is listed for directions hearing on 17 May 2019 at 9.30 am.

 

As per the SAT orders the applicant submitted revised plans on 20 March 2019, which are included as Attachment 3.

Detail

The revised development application submitted to the City on 20 March 2019 proposes the following modifications:

 

·      Reduction in the maximum occupancy numbers to 92 children and 17 staff;

·      Modifications to the building elevations to make it more in keeping with the residential character of the area;

·      Revised building envelope in response to the revised building layout. The overall building envelope remains at 1,000 square metres, however the floor area has been reduced by 114 square metres;

·      Modifications to the car parking layout and a reduction in the number of bays from 37 to 29, in response to the reduced children and staff numbers. This in turn has reduced the amount of car park hardstand by 226 square metres, from 941 square metres to 715 square metres; and

·      Improved identification and designation of the outdoor play spaces to assist with managing potential noise impacts on adjoining residents.

 

The following technical documentation was also provided in support of the revised proposal:

 

·      Revised Acoustic Report;

·      Noise Management Plan;

·      Revised Traffic Report;

·      Revised Bushfire Management Plan and Emergency Evacuation Plan; and

·      Landscape Survey.

 

Consultation

The revised plans and supporting documentation were readvertised for a period of 14 days, commencing on 27 March 2019 and concluding on 9 April 2019. Advertising was undertaken by writing to nearby landowners/occupiers and making available on the City’s website the development plans and technical reports. The proposal was readvertised to all original landowners/occupiers who previously received a letter from the City, and widened to include all lots abutting the primary access routes to the subject site. A map of the readvertising area is included as Attachment 4.

 

The City’s standard advertising period is 21 days, however, the revised proposal was only advertised for 14 days due to the timeframes imposed by SAT. This timeframe is consistent with the requirements of DPS 2 and the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.

 

A total of 13 submissions were received, with 12 submitters objecting to the proposal and one in support of the proposal.

 

The main issues raised by submitters were the same as those previously identified during advertising, which were:

 

·      Appropriateness of a Child Care Centre in the Special Residential zone;

·      A caveat between the landowners and developer restricting development to a single residential dwelling;

·      An increase in traffic impacting surrounding residents; and

·      Impacts of noise generated from the development impacting surrounding residents.

 

A summary of submissions is included as Attachment 5. The original submissions received for this proposal remain valid and are therefore included as Attachment 6.

 

A more detailed discussion of the main issues raised along with Council’s original reason for refusal is provided in the Comment section below.

 

Comment

 

Council’s reasons for refusal of the original application addressed a number of provisions of DPS2 and the Deemed Provisions regarding compatibility of the use with the objectives of the Special Residential Zone, impact of traffic and noise, loss of vegetation and traffic safety. Council also refused the application as it did not meet the locational criteria of the Child Care Centres Local Planning Policy.

 

The Applicant through the SAT mediation process has amended the application to address the Council’s reasons for refusal by:

 

a)      altering the appearance of the proposed structures to incorporate more rural residential materials and elements;

b)      reduced the floor space of the development and contained it within the approved building envelope;

c)      reduced the number of children and staff the centre can accommodate which reduces traffic generation and parking demand;

d)      increasing native vegetation on site through proposed additional planting and landscaping; and

e)      additional works and actions to address noise mitigation.  

 

 

 

 

With respect to the compatibility of a Child Care Centre within the Special Residential Zone, it is established within Table 1 of DPS2 that the use is a Discretionary (D) land use. A “D” discretionary land use is not permitted unless Council chooses to exercise its discretion by granting planning approval. In exercising its discretion, Council is to have regard for clause 67 of the Deemed Provisions and the City has provided detailed analysis of the amended application against these matters as per the Council’s prior reasons for refusal below.

 

The applicant through the submission of amended plans has in the view of the City suitably addressed the concerns raised in submissions and the Council’s reasons for refusal by modification of the proposal as outlined in points a) to e) above.

 

In considering the departures from Local Planning Policy 2.3: Child Care Centres, the relevant policy objectives have been considered by Administration in assessment of the revised proposal and are detailed below. While the locational criteria have not been met these are a policy guideline and variations need to be considered on their merits.

 

It remains at the discretion of Council to determine whether to support the City’s recommendation that the amended proposal be approved. If however the Council determines that the application has not suitably addressed those reasons for refusal Council is empowered to refuse the application for those or any other relevant planning reasons. 

 

The following points are a detailed assessment of the application against each of the reasons for refusal of the original application and the City’s response to the issues raised during advertising.

 

a)    The proposed Child Care Centre is not considered to be compatible with the surrounding Residential and Special Rural land uses and is therefore not considered to be consistent with the objectives of the Special Residential zone.

The objectives of the Special Residential Zone are to:

 

(a)   accommodate a spacious style of living in a low density setting; and

 

(b)   maintain important environmental and landscape values through site-sensitive design and development.

 

DPS 2 allows certain non-residential land uses to be approved within the Special Residential zone, including a Child Care Centre which is a Discretionary land use. The proposed built form is contained within the approved building envelope and does not impact on the spacious style of living found within the Special Residential zone. The proposed development complies with the setback requirements of the Special Residential zone.

 

To address Council’s concerns regarding the incompatibility of the proposal with the objectives, the proposal has been modified to reduce the maximum number of children from 120 to 92 and the maximum number of staff from 21 to 17.

 

Reducing the maximum number of children from 120 to 92 represents an overall reduction of 23 per cent, whilst the modification to the maximum number of staff from 21 to 17 represents a 19 per cent reduction. This is considered to be a substantial reduction in the scale of the development which also reduces traffic and noise impacts while improving retention of vegetation on site. 

 

In addition, the building has also been modified to provide a design that better represents the rural-residential character of the area.

 

 

The modified plans have the following changes:

 

·      A more articulated building layout to reduce the perceived size of the building and improve its general appearance.  The original building footprint was of an unadorned simple form, whereas the revised floor plan incorporates additional setbacks, articulated walls and verandahs to reduce the impression of building bulk;

·      A more varied roof form via the introduction of additional skillion sections. The east elevation comprises eight skillion sections where originally three were proposed, and the west elevation six skillion sections where originally two were proposed.  The modifications to the roof result in a building that is closer to residential in appearance. Exposed rafters are also proposed which assist in delivering a more residential character;

·      The use of natural limestone in the construction of the walls consistent with the character of the area.  Previously, panel walls with a combination of incidental materials (custom orb Colorbond and rammed earth) were proposed; and

·      The use of natural timber at the entrance of the building and where verandahs are proposed.  Similar to limestone, timber is proposed as a natural product designed to be in keeping with the rural-residential character of the area.

 

The amended proposal is considered to have improved its overall compatibility with the objectives of the Special Residential zone through the implementation of changes to address Council’s reason for refusal. The amended proposal also responds to the issues raised during advertising regarding the appropriateness of the development in the Special Residential Zone.  Council is requested to determine whether the modifications have sufficiently addressed this matter.

 

b)    The  proposal  does  not  comply  with  Clause  67(m)  of  the  City  of  Wanneroo  District  Planning Scheme No. 2 as the proposal may have a negative impact on the amenity of the surrounding residents by way of increased noise and increased traffic generation.

 

Reason b) in part related to the perceived negative impact on the amenity of surrounding residents resulting from noise generated from the development. The Acoustic Report dated May 2018 submitted with the original proposal concluded that, subject to the inclusion of a 1.8 metre high solid fence on the northern and southern boundary, the proposal would comply with the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997. A 1.8 metre high solid fence is permitted under the City’s Fencing Local Law 2016 and does not require Development Approval.

 

Notwithstanding this, the Acoustic Report was revised in response to the modifications to the occupancy numbers and building elevations, and is included as Attachment 7. With regard for the reduction in children and staff numbers and the siting of the development, the report concluded that the proposal would comply with the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997. Administration has reviewed the revised report, which has been deemed satisfactory.

 

To further address the concerns raised in relation to noise, a Noise Management Plan (NMP) was provided as part of the modified proposal which is included as Attachment 8. The NMP provides additional information regarding the following:

 

·      Times of outdoor play;

·      Maximum number of children permitted to play outdoors at any given time;

·      Supervision of children; and

·      Information for parents/guardians.

 

As documented in the NMP, the number of children permitted to play outside at any one time is limited to 60 (excluding babies). Children are dispersed across three different play spaces, with a maximum of 30 children permitted in a single play area. The times children are permitted to play outdoors will be staggered, and are limited to between the hours of 7:00am – 9:00am and 2:00pm – 6:00pm. The NMP has also included measures for managing outside noise more generally, such as responding to crying children and education for parents/guardians when dropping off/picking up their children.

 

With regard for the information above, the proposal will comply with the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 whilst incorporating an appropriate strategy to manage noise generated from the subject site. Conditions of approval have been recommended to require compliance with both the Acoustic Report and NMP, including the construction of a 1.8 metre high solid fence on the northern and southern boundary, which is permitted under the City’s Fencing Local Law 2016.

 

The amended proposal has addressed noise concerns raised by both Council and submitters. Reason b) also related to a perceived negative impact on surrounding landowners as a result of increased traffic. This is discussed below in conjunction with reason for refusal d) which also related to traffic.

c)    The  proposal  does  not  comply  with  Clause  67(n)  of  the  City  of  Wanneroo  District  Planning Scheme No. 2 as it will have a negative impact on the natural environment and character of the area by removal of 20 trees.

The impact on existing vegetation from the proposed development also formed the basis for Council’s refusal. A Landscape Survey was undertaken by a qualified Landscape Architect, which found that 79 mature native trees, 11 exotic/fruit trees and 32 native plants (such as Grass Trees) currently exist on site. To facilitate the development 31 native trees and one exotic/fruit tree would be removed. 15 of the native trees required to be removed is to comply with the Bushfire Management Plan (BMP) which has been endorsed by DFES.  A copy of the BMP has been placed in the Elected Members’ Reading Room and is available on the City’s website.

 

A total of 48 native trees, 10 exotic/fruit trees and all 32 native plants will be retained. To allow all native plants to be retained, transplanting (relocation) would occur within the subject site. An additional 33 new native trees are proposed, replacing the trees lost to enable the development. Lastly, 74 new native plants will be provided for the purpose of screening and noise amelioration. Included as Attachment 9 is a tree summary illustrating the proposed changes to vegetation on-site as a result of the development.

 

Overall, one additional native tree would be added to the subject site, whilst the total amount of native species would increase by 60 per cent. The native trees selected have also been chosen with regard for the areas native fauna. For example, the Little Ghost Gum and Pin Cushion Hakea provide a food source for birds, including the Carnaby’s Black Cockatoo.

 

The modified plans and additional landscaping are considered to demonstrate a design responsive to the setting of the site, with all vegetation removed being replaced with native species. It is noted that the quantity of trees proposed to be removed has increased from the previous proposal. However, this is due to the Landscape Survey providing a more detailed analysis of on-site vegetation than was previously provided.

 

The Landscape Survey and associated landscaping plan increase the total amount of native trees and plants on site, compensating for the loss in any on-site native vegetation with new plantings. Consequently, the proposal addresses the environmental objectives of the Special Residential zone by increasing planting on site and will not have a negative impact on the natural environment by its containment within the building envelope. These changes will improve the subject site as viewed from the public domain and are consistent with the surrounding area.

 

d)    The  proposal  does  not  comply  with  Clause  67(t)  of  the  City  of  Wanneroo  District  Planning Scheme No. 2 as it will generate traffic that will negatively impact the efficiency and safety of the road system in the locality.

Council also refused the proposal as traffic generated from the development would impact the amenity and safety of surrounding residents. Whilst traffic generated from the original proposal was considered to fall within acceptable limits, reducing the overall scale of the proposal has assisted in mitigating traffic related concerns.

 

The revised Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) provided by the applicant discussed the following:

 

·      Estimated vehicle volumes from the revised proposal;

·      Expected travel routes to and from the subject site; and

·      Potential impacts on the surrounding roads from the traffic generated.

 

The applicant has provided real-time data from an existing Atlantis Child Care Centre in Clarkson, to more accurately reflect the likely peak hour traffic generated from the development. This information concluded that the original proposal would have generated approximately 420 vehicle trips per day (vpd). The modified proposal, with reduced occupancy numbers, would generate approximately 322 vpd. In terms of daily vehicle volumes the revised proposal generates approximately 98 (23 per cent) less vehicle movements.

 

As noted, the revised TIS also discussed the travel routes to and from the subject site to highlight the likely distribution of traffic on the surrounding road network. This established that the primary access route to the subject site would be from Joondalup Drive via Viridian Drive, Turquoise Loop and then Malachite Fairway. Viridian Drive is classified as a neighbourhood connector designed to cater for around 3000 vpd. The traffic counts undertaken estimated that Viridian Drive currently carries approximately 1450 vpd in this location. Turquoise Loop and Malachite Fairway are considered access streets suitable for vehicle volumes up to 1000 vpd. It was estimated that Turquoise Loop currently carries around 630 vpd and Malachite Fairway 100 to 200 vpd.

 

Traffic from the proposed development will increase from what is currently experienced on Malachite Fairway and Turquoise Loop. However, the vehicle volumes will remain within the design capacity of the road network and will not result in congestion, or affect the safety of surrounding residents.

 

Alternatively, vehicles will access the subject site from Tumbleweed Drive via Greenvale Place. Greenvale Place in the vicinity of the subject site consists of Special Residential zoned land to the west and Special Rural zoned land to the east. The majority of dwellings along this section of Greenvale Place are setback over 50 metres from the road, with no dwelling closer than 30 metres. With regard for the likely distribution of vehicles along Greenvale Place and the setback of dwellings from the street, the proposed development is not considered to have an adverse impact on surrounding residents.

 

While vehicle access to the site is only via Greenvale place, the property address being 10 Harbour Elbow may be confusing for new customers of the Child Care Centre, resulting in additional and avoidable traffic along Harbour Elbow and the surrounding local roads. It is proposed to change the street address to Greenvale Place to avoid confusion. A condition of approval has been recommended requiring the applicant/owner to change the street address before an application is made for a building license.

 

The significantly reduced scale of the proposal and associated reduction in traffic generation has addressed the concerns raised by both Council and submitters relating to traffic, amenity and safety impacts on the surrounding residents and road network by demonstrating that the road network will not exceed design capacity and ensuring access is from the most appropriate frontage for the proposed use.

 

e)    The proposed  Child  Care  Centre  does  not  meet  the  requirements  of  the  Child  Care  Centres Local Planning Policy, specifically the following clauses:

 

Location – Road Hierarchy

Location – Neighbouring Uses

Amenity – Residential areas

The proposal was considered by Council to be non-compliant with the abovementioned elements of the City’s Local Planning Policy 2.3: Child Care Centres (LPP 2.3). These departures are considered to have been addressed above, in responding to Council’s other reasons for refusal. However, listed below are the elements of LPP 2.3 where the applicant is seeking approval for a departure from the policy provisions, and Administration’s response.

 

Policy Provision	Administration’s Response
Road Hierarchy Child Care Centres should not be located in or adjacent to Access Roads where amenity, safety and aesthetics take priority.	The applicant provided a TIS which determined the surrounding road network could accommodate the proposed increase in traffic without affecting the amenity or safety of surrounding residents or the road network.
Neighbouring Uses Where possible, it is preferred to locate Child Care Centres adjacent to non-residential land uses such as Shopping Centres, to minimise the impact such centres have on the amenity of residential areas.	Further to the above, the proposal has demonstrated through the TIS, Acoustic Report, NMP and Landscape Survey that the development would not adversely affect the amenity of surrounding residents. In particular, the proposal incorporates planting of new native trees, screen planting along the northern and southern property boundaries, an NMP to assist with the daily management of noise and providing all access via Greenvale Place. The location of the proposal is therefore not considered to impact the amenity of the neighbouring uses.
Amenity in Residential Areas Child Care Centres located in residential areas shall maintain a residential appearance consistent with the character of the area.	The proposed modifications to the building, adopting a ‘homestead’ design, have improved its appearance by adopting a residential character which is consistent with the surrounding area.

 

In summary the amended application addressed the objectives of LPP 2.3 as the development will not create amenity or road safety issues, its location will not impact on residential areas to an unreasonable extent and the proposed structure and landscaping will be compatible with the Special Residential character of the area.

 

Contract of sale between the developer and landowners

A number of submitters objected to the proposal as the Special Residential zoned lots are subject to an agreement between the original developer (Landstart) and the landowners. The agreement imposes a number of development requirements, including the following:

 

·      The purchaser shall not at any time apply to rezone the property under any Town Planning Scheme for the purpose of altering the zoning or permitted use of the property.

·      The purchaser shall not erect or cause to be erected on the land more than one private single residential dwelling; and

 

·      No land shall be cleared of vegetation without prior approval of the Local Authority, except to the extent necessary for the construction of the approved single residential dwelling and driveway.

 

The inconsistency of this proposal with the contract of sale was raised during both advertising periods. However, as discussed in Administration’s previous report to Council, the City is not a party to this agreement and therefore has no ability to enforce the development standards. As noted previously, a Child Care Centre is a Discretionary land use in the Special Residential zone which makes it capable of approval, should it meet the relevant development standards of DPS 2.

Conclusion

In light of the above, the modified proposal for a Child Care Centre at the subject site is considered to satisfactorily meet the requirements of DPS 2 and the objectives of LPP 2.3. The amended plans and supporting documentation have adequately addressed the issues raised during the advertising period, and Council’s reasons for refusal in its decision dated 16 October 2018.

 

It is therefore recommended that Council approve the proposed Child Care Centre at 10 Harbour Elbow, Banksia Grove, subject to conditions.

Statutory Compliance

This application has been assessed in accordance with the City of Wanneroo’s DPS 2 and LPP 2.3 Child Care Centres.

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2017 – 2027:

 “1     Society

1.3    Distinctive Places

1.3.3  Advocate and partner to meet changing community service expectations in place”

Risk Management Considerations

Risk Title	Risk Rating
ST-S12 Economic Growth	Moderate
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Chief Executive Officer	Manage

 

Risk Title	Risk Rating
CO-O20 Productive Communities	Moderate
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Director Community and Place	Manage

 

Risk Title	Risk Rating
CO-O23 Safety of Community	Moderate
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Director Community and Place	Manage

 

The above risks relating to the issues contained within this report have been identified and considered within the City’s Strategic and Corporate risk registers. Concerns in regards to traffic have been addressed in detail within the body of this report.

Policy Implications

This application has been assessed against the relevant provisions of the following:

 

·      City of Wanneroo DPS 2

·      LPP 4.17: SAT

·      LPP 2.3: Child Care Centres

·      WAPC Planning Bulletin 72/2009: Child Care Centres

·      WAPC Transport Impact Assessment Guidelines for Individual Developments

·      State Planning Policy 3.7: Planning in Bushfire Prone Areas

·      City of Wanneroo Fencing Local Law 2016

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.         Pursuant to Clause 68 (2)(b) of the Deemed Provisions of District Planning Scheme No. 2, APPROVES the Development Application (DA2018/736), as shown in Attachment 2, for a Child Care Centre at Lot 400 (10) Harbour Elbow, Banksia Grove, subject to the following conditions:

            a)    The use of the development subject to this approval shall only be for the purpose of a Child Care Centre as defined in the City of Wanneroo’s District Planning Scheme No. 2;

            b)    A maximum of 92 children and 17 staff are permitted on-site at any one time;

            c)    This approval does not relate to any advertising signage, which is subject to separate approval from the City should it not satisfy the development standards of the City’s Local Planning Policy 4.6: Signs;

            d)    The hours of operation of the Child Care Centre shall be between the hours of 7:00am and 7:00pm Monday to Friday only, excluding public holidays;

            e)    The operation of the Child Care Centre use is to comply at all times with the Herring Storer Environmental Acoustic Assessment dated March 2019 included as Attachment 1, including implementation and compliance with the following recommendation:

                   i)  Installation of a 1.8 metre high solid screen along the northern and southern boundaries of the lot as shown on the attached plan Drawing No. LC-04;

            f)     The Child Care Centre use is to be operated in accordance with the Atlantis Group’s Noise Management Plan dated April 2019 included as Attachment 2, to the satisfaction of the City;

            g)    The eight tandem car parking bays as shown on the approved plans are to be set aside as staff parking only, and shall include appropriate signage and pavement marking for identification as staff parking bays, to the satisfaction of the City;

            h)    The postal address of 10 Harbour Elbow, Banksia Grove shall be changed from Harbour Elbow to Greenvale Place prior to a building license being issued;

            i)     Planting and Landscaping shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Landscape Plan Drawing No. LC-03 Rev D prior to the occupation of the building and thereafter maintained to the satisfaction of the City;

            j)     The development is to be implemented in accordance with the Bushfire Management Plan and Bushfire Emergency Evacuation Plan dated March 2019 prepared by Bushfire Safety Consulting;

            k)    Parking areas, driveways and points of ingress and egress shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the Australian Standard for Offstreet Carparking (AS 2890) and shall be drained, sealed, marked and maintained to the satisfaction of the Council prior to occupation of the development;

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

            m)   Stormwater and any other water run-off from buildings or paved areas shall be collected and retained on site;

            n)    All waste shall be stored within the designated bin enclosure and collected from the site by a private contractor between the hours of 9:00am and 3:00pm Monday to Friday (excluding public holidays) at the cost of the owner/occupier;

            o)    A construction management plan shall be submitted for approval when application is made for a building licence. This plan is to detail how construction will be managed to minimise disruption in the area and shall include as a minimum:

                   i)       The delivery times for materials and equipment to the site;

                   ii)      Adequate measures being undertaken during construction to minimise the impacts caused by dust and sand drift from the site;

                   iii)     Storage of materials and the location and type of equipment on site;

                   iv)     Parking arrangements for contractors and sub-contractors;

                   v)      Construction times;

                   vi)     Measures to minimise noise impacts on surrounding residents; and

                   vii)    Any other matter required by the City; and

2.         ADVISES the submitters of its decision.

 

Attachments:

1⇩.	Attachment 1: Location Plan	18/319666
2⇩.	Attachment 2: Original Development Plans	19/160264
3⇩.	Attachment 3: Modified Development Plans	19/156088	Minuted
4⇩.	Attachment 4: Map of Readvertising Area	19/148886
5⇩.	Attachment 5: Modified Proposal Schedule of Submissions	19/156161
6⇩.	Attachment 6: Original Proposal - Schedule of Submissions	19/156165
7⇩.	Attachment 7: Acoustic Report	19/111250	Minuted
8⇩.	Attachment 8: Noise Management Plan	19/158232	Minuted
9.	Attachment 9: Landscape Tree Summary	19/156184

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

File Ref:                                              DA2018/1237 – 19/111822

Responsible Officer:                          Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       6         

 

Issue

To consider a development application for Modifications to Carpark (Boat and Trailer Parking) at Lot 496 (3) Ocean Falls Boulevard, Mindarie (the subject site).

 

Applicant	FJM Property
Owner	Sanctus Nominees Pty Ltd
Location	Lot 496 (3) Ocean Falls Boulevard, Mindarie
Site Area	6,802m2
MRS Zoning	Urban
DPS 2 Zoning	Marina
ASP 13 Zoning	2A Harbourside Commercial Precinct

 

Background

The subject site abuts Ocean Falls Boulevard to the north, Anchorage Drive to the east, residential properties to the south, and carparking for the Mindarie Marina to the west. A location plan is included as Attachment 1. The subject site currently consists of car parking and landscaping. 

 

The subject site is zoned Urban under the MRS, and Marina under the City’s DPS 2. The subject site is located within the District 2: Harbourside Village – 2A Harbourside Commercial Precinct under the Mindarie Keys Harbourside Village Agreed Structure Plan No. 13 (ASP 13). The subject site is also identified as being within a bushfire prone area, as per State Planning Policy 3.7: Planning in Bushfire Prone Areas (SPP 3.7).

 

The Mindarie Marina, located at Lot 7001 (33) Ocean Falls Boulevard is approximately 250m to the west of the subject site, and consists of a variety of uses, including:

·    The Boat Bar and Restaurant;

·    The Indian Ocean Brewing Company;

·    The Mindarie Marina Hotel and Villas; and

·    Four boat ramps; and

·    Approximately 250 boat pens.

 

On 26 May 2017 a development application (DA2017/655) was lodged to erect a fence around the existing boat trailer parking bays, for the purposes of parking boats at the subject site. A full assessment and public consultation was conducted though the application was subsequently withdrawn by the applicant on 21 March 2018.

 

The Department of Planning and Infrastructure conducted a Recreational Boat Facility Study in 2008 which projected long term growth to 2025. The study concluded boating numbers are likely to increase at a rate faster than population growth where existing boating facilities would not be able to keep up. The responsibility to deliver new facilities and upgrade existing facilities to accommodate growth is shared between State Government, Local Government and the private sector. The Northern Metropolitan Corridor is planned to see major changes to existing facilities, particularly those closest to the Mindarie Marina such as Ocean Reef as well as the construction of a new facility in Alkimos. While there may be some impact on the Mindarie Marina in the short term, the long term impact will see recreational boating spread across more facilities within the Northern Metropolitan Corridor which will assist in meeting demand and alleviating pressure from existing facilities. 

 

Detail

The subject development application was lodged with the City on 21 September 2018, and proposes:

·    The construction of a 1.8m high fence around 27 existing boat and trailer parking bays centrally within the subject site;

·    The installation of mature landscaping around the perimeter of the facility;

·    Civil works within the car parking area, including the removal and relocation of existing traffic islands and line marking, the removal for four car parking bays, and the provision of 11 new parking bays; and

·    Installation of CCTV to minimise the potential for anti-social behavior. Access to the facility will be by electronic swipe card only.

 

A copy of the proposed plan is included as Attachment 2.

 

As noted in the Background section of this report, the site is zoned Marina under DPS 2. Clause 3.10.3(b) of DPS 2 states that the permissibility of uses is to be determined in accordance with the provisions of the relevant structure plan, which in this instance is ASP 13. Clause 3.2.2 of ASP 13 states that for the 2A Harbourside Commercial Precinct, uses permitted for this precinct are the same as those which apply to the Commercial zone in DPS 2, with the exception of Holiday Village/Resort, Drive-Through Food Outlet, Funeral Parlour, and Restricted Premises, which have a different permissibility to that which is outlined in Table 1 – the Zoning Table of DPS 2. The proposed development falls within the Car Park land use as per DPS 2. A Car Park is a permitted “P” use in the Commercial zone under DPS 2. Administration proceeded to advertise the application for public consultation.  A detailed discussion of this is outlined in the Comment section of this report.

Consultation

Public consultation was undertaken by way of a notice on the City’s website, and landowners and occupiers within a 100m radius of the subject site were notified in writing, commencing on 13 November 2018. At the conclusion of the comment period (21 days) 45 submissions were received. 15 of these submissions were provided from adjoining landowners who objected to the proposal and 30 were provided by the applicant who obtained surveys in support of the proposal from potential stakeholders whilst at the Mindarie Marina.

 

Following the conclusion of the consultation period and reassessment by Administration, the City was advised that there was confusion amongst the public with regards to the proposed use as the original application was submitted as a Boat Storage Yard and subsequently referenced on the initial advertising letters and listed on the City’s website. Following a full assessment of the application, Administration’s interpretation of the proposal was that it was properly defined by the Carpark land use as discussed in the Comment section below.

 

To assist in clarifying the land use, the application was readvertised as additions to the existing carpark for the purpose of providing secure boat and trailer parking. Advertising commenced on 14 March 2019 for a period of 21 days. At the conclusion, a total of three additional submissions were received as well as comments from two submitters from the initial consultation period. Administrations classification of the use class is discussed in the Comment section. 

 

A summary of submissions received during both advertising periods and Administration’s responses are shown in Attachment 3.

 

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

·    The provision of adequate car parking for the Mindarie Marina;

·    The proposal does not meet the definition of ‘carpark’ under DPS2 and should be assessed as a ‘storage yard’

·    The impact of the proposal on the existing amenity of the area;

·    The impact of noise and odour generated from the proposal on nearby residential properties;

·    The appropriateness of the land use;

·    The impact of additional traffic generated by the proposal on the surrounding road network; and

·    The increase in anti-social behaviour.

 

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

Comment

Land Use

 

Consideration of Car Park Land Use

 

As stated in the Detail section of this Report, the proposal does not change the existing land use being Car Park under DPS 2. Schedule 1(2) of DPS 2 defines a Car Park as:

 

“Car park: means premises used primarily for the parking of private vehicles or taxis whether open to the public or not but does not include any part of a public road which is used for the through movement of traffic or premises on or in which vehicles are displayed for sale or premises set aside to meet a specific parking requirement under the Scheme.  The term includes the land required on site for access and manoeuvring to enable vehicles to gain access to car parking bays” (emphasis added).

 

The land use definition refers to the term ‘vehicle’. Schedule 1(1) of DPS 2 defines a ‘vehicle’ as:

 

“Vehicle: includes motorcycles, boats, caravans, trailers” (emphasis added).

 

DPS 2 specifically includes boats and trailers within the definition of vehicle therefore parking of a vehicle be it a boat, car or caravan is consistent with the definition of the car park land use. The DPS 2 definition of carpark also specifically refers to private vehicles, which in the context of this application, refers to boats and trailers being owned and used privately, and not commercially. As the site is intended for private use, this satisfies the ‘private vehicle’ aspect of the Car Park land use definition.

 

In determining the appropriate DPS 2 use class of the proposal, Administration has considered other potential uses classes, including ‘Storage Yard’, ‘Marina’, and ‘Unlisted Use’, however these are not appropriate definitions, as follows:

 

·    Storage Yard - A Storage Yard is not a permitted “X” use within the Commercial zone, and is defined as “means any land or buildings used for the storage of goods, equipment, plant or materials.” The parking of boats and trailers may be considered to fall within the broad definition of goods and equipment. However, Clause 3.2.3 of DPS 2 identifies that “where in Table 1 a particular use is mentioned it is deemed to be excluded from any other use class which by its more general terms might otherwise include such particular use.” The proposal may be interpreted by some to fall under the Storage Yard use based on the general terms included in its definition, however as the proposal is specifically referred to in the Car Park definition, the proposal cannot be considered to be a ‘Storage Yard’ land use.

 

·    Marina – A Marina land use is defined in Schedule 1(2) of DPS 2 as “means premises at which berths or pens, and fuelling, servicing, repairing, storage (including storage on land) and other facilities for boats are provided, with or without the sale of boating gear and equipment, and includes all jetties, piers, embankments, quays and moorings appurtenant thereto and all offices and storerooms used in connection therewith.” Despite being defined as a land use, Marina is not included within Table 1, and is not referenced in ASP 13, and as a result, the permissibility of this use is not listed. The ‘Marina land’ use is therefore not applicable in this instance.

 

·    Unlisted Use – Clause 3.3 of DPS 2 outlines that if the use of the land for a particular purpose is not specifically mentioned in Table 1 (such as Marina) and cannot reasonably be determined as falling within the interpretation of one of the use categories, the proposal can be considered as an Unlisted Use, and can be treated as either a permitted “P”, discretionary “D”, or not permitted “X” use. As the proposal falls reasonably within the Car Park use class, the proposal is not an ‘Unlisted Use’.

 

The most appropriate use class under DPS 2 for the proposal is Car Park, and the application has been assessed on this basis. Administration notes that the applicant’s initial classification of the proposed use class has created confusion during the assessment and consultation periods. While the applicant has used the term ‘storage’ within the application documents, a Storage Yard is used to accommodate the storage of any goods, equipment, plant or materials, whereas a car park is limited to the parking of vehicles only.

 

In this regard, the classification of a Storage Yard is not considered appropriate as it consists of the storage of goods, equipment, plant or materials, where the applicant is seeking an approval for additions and alterations to an existing carpark only, in order to enable a section for the parking of private vehicles, in this case boats and trailers.

 

In contrast the same methodology would be applied were the applicant intending to park cars given they are also classed as vehicles under DPS 2. Any subsequent additions and alterations (i.e vehicle racking) would require a separate development application to be lodged with the City. Applications of this nature that remove the ability for vehicles to gain access to parking bays would no longer be appropriate under the car park land use. In this regard, Administration would consider that vehicle racking would fall under ‘Storage Yard’ use and would be considered an ‘X’ use.

 

Process for Considering Permitted “P” Uses

 

Clause 6.2.1 of DPS 2 states the following with respect to dealing with “P” uses:

 

“If an application under the Scheme for Development Approval involves a “P” use, the Council shall not refuse the application by reason of the unsuitability of that use, but notwithstanding that, the Council may in its discretion impose conditions upon the Development Approval and if the application proposes or necessarily involves any building or other work, the Council upon considering that building or other work may exercise its discretion as to the approval or refusal and the conditions to be attached to the proposed development”.

 

Applications for permitted “P” uses cannot be refused based on a perceived unsuitability of a use, however discretion can be exercised to approve or refuse the works associated with the use. In the context of this application, Council cannot reasonably refuse the application by reason of the unsuitability of the use (being the parking of private boats and trailers). However it can approve or refuse the application based on the associated fencing and modifications to the car park which are proposed in association with the existing land use.

 

Works Associated with Application

 

To accommodate the secure boat parking area, the application proposes the following modifications to the existing car parking layout:

·    The erection of a fence around 27 existing trailer bays, with this area to be used for the secure parking of boats;

·    The removal of four existing car parking bays, with these to be replaced by 11 new car parking bays, which will be abutting the northern portion of the proposed boat and trailer parking area;

·    Modifications to the existing kerbing within the car park to accommodate the above works. This includes the removal/modification of some of the existing kerbing, and the installation of new kerbing; and

·    The installation of new landscaping around the permitter of the boat and trailer parking area within the car park. Further planting is also proposed in existing landscaped areas within the Anchorage Drive and Ocean Falls Boulevard verges.

 

Installation of Landscaping

 

Clause 4.17.1 of DPS 2 requires 8% of the site area to be developed and maintained as landscaping. Based on the current site configuration approximately 1,001m² of the 6,802m² site area is landscaped, which equates to 14.7% of the site. As a result of the proposed modifications, the landscaped area will be reduced to approximately by 106m² to 895m². This will result in 13.1% of the site being landscaped. While this is a reduction, the percentage of landscaping exceeds the 8% requirement of DPS 2, and is considered acceptable by Administration. A copy of the proposed landscape plan is included as Attachment 4.

 

Modifications to Existing Kerbing

 

The proposed modifications to the layout of car park, including the modified kerbing, has been reviewed and considered acceptable by Administration. In this regard, the proposal is considered acceptable.

 

Provision of Adequate Car Parking

Concerns were raised regarding a potential shortfall in parking across the site and that the proposed modifications will increase illegally parked vehicles within the area. Car parking for the Mindarie Marina is currently provided across Lot 7001, Lot 109 (23), Lot 107 (23), Lot 7002 (7), and the subject site. There is an existing approved car parking shortfall on the site which was increased as a result of approval for the installation of a Bar, Outdoor Dining Area, Limestone Wall & Earthworks to the Mindarie Hotel. The applicant submitted a parking analysis for the Mindarie Marina which identifies a total of 564 car parking bays, four motorcycle bays and 157 boat trailer bays within the survey area. Refer to Figure 1 of Attachment 5 for the survey area. All parking is unrestricted and publicly available, with the exception of 11 car bays which have been set aside for the exclusive use of hotel guests. The difference between a car parking bay and a trailer parking bay is the length, of which a trailer parking bay is twice the length of a car parking bay. Under the current parking arrangements, the trailer parking bays are not marked to restrict cars without trailers parking in these bays. Two cars can be accommodated in a trailer parking bay resulting in the equivalent of 878 car parking bays within the survey area. The survey area currently has an approved shortfall of 209 bays as noted in the table below. The subject site currently consists of 77 car parking bays and 51 trailer parking bays.

 

 

Type of bay	Total Bays	Cumulative Total of Bays
Standard Bay	544	544
Standard Bay (Exclusive Use)	11	555
ACROD Bay	9	564
Trailer Bay	157 (2x a standard bay)	878
Trailer Bay (Exclusive Use)	0	878
Total Bays	878	-
Required Bays	1,087	-
Shortfall	209

 

The application proposes to create 7 additional standard bays and enclose 27 existing boat and trailer parking bays (which can accommodate 54 car parking spaces). Although the existing bays are being enclosed for secure long term parking, the definition of carpark under DPS 2 includes the parking of private vehicles whether open to the public or not. In this regard, although the bays are intended to be utilised for controlled access use only, they still contribute to the overall parking calculations. As such, the application would result in a decrease in the overall car parking shortfall by seven bays to 202 car bays.

 

Type of bay	Total Bays	Cumulative Total of Bays
Standard Bay	551	551
Standard Bay (Exclusive Use)	11	562
ACROD Bay	9	571
Trailer Bay	130 (2x a standard bay)	831
Trailer Bay (Exclusive Use)	27 (2x a standard bay)	885
Total Bays	885	-
Required Bays	1,087	-
Shortfall	202

 

Notwithstanding the above and in addition to the concerns raised, submitters provided Administration with photos of the parking at the subject site and surrounding streets, during events held at the Marina. These photos are included as Attachment 6, and indicate that during events, there is a high demand for parking, which results in cars parking within the existing trailer bays and on surrounding streets.

In light of this, Administration conducted a desktop study of the subject and surrounding area to investigate the how the carpark has been utilised over the past five years. It was identified that the area is generally busiest during summer periods, particularly late in December close to the holiday period. Utilisation of the carpark generally did not exceed half capacity. However, parking did peak whilst events were held.

Events held at the subject site would be subject to an event license which require a Traffic Management Plan to address these concerns and are dealt with on an individual basis. Events are not an indication of daily parking activities in the area. Parking requirements are not based on the worst case scenarios (i.e events, peak periods, etc) as this would result in a significant oversupply of parking that would be vastly underutilised at all other times. While parking overflow during peak periods can create amenity issues, these are short term and usually in the interest of the community. The City can use its enforcement powers under the Parking Local Law to infringe those who park illegally.

The parking analysis of the subject site and surrounding area provided by the applicant identified the daily and yearly peak parking periods and also concluded that the car park is generally underutilised and rarely reaches peak capacity. Overall there is an abundance of both off-street (at the Marina) and on-street parking within less than a 300m radius of the Mindarie Marina Hotel, which can comfortably cater for parking demand generated by existing (and currently proposed) Marina activities This is supported by aerial imagery of the parking area, included in Attachment 5.  Based on the consistency of these findings, Administration agrees with the applicant’s analysis. 

The likely impact of the proposal will be that boat owners may park their trailers and boats for longer periods in the secured fenced area than compared to the casual parking provided elsewhere within the Marina carpark. The proposal does not change the primary use of the subject area as it remains parking associated with the Marina land use. The proposal also does not reduce the total amount of parking available on site as the casual or secured parking areas are the same land use under DPS 2.

The analysis of the current utilisation of the carpark areas of the Marina demonstrates a consistent underutilisation in normal operation. On this basis it can be argued that there is sufficient capacity for the current carpark to accommodate the proposed secured parking area and any anticipated growth taking into account future planned facilities in the north metropolitan area. The supporting information therefore demonstrates the site has capacity to support daily parking activities in the area and the proposed secured parking area.

The proposed decrease in the existing parking shortfall by seven bays can be supported for the following reasons:

·    21 boat and trailer bays on the subject site will remain unaltered as part of the proposal;

·    The proposed modifications are unlikely to result in a significant increase in the number of patrons to the site as the proposal is alterations to the existing parking area;

·    Outside event periods, there are no reported issues of car parking problems at the Mindarie Marina.

It is recommended that a condition be applied for the provision of a car parking management plan to demonstrate the availability of parking on an ongoing basis and for the condition to limit the use of the subject area to the parking of boats and trailers only to ensure the use remains consistent with the Marina land use.

ASP 13 Requirements

 

Clause 3.2.2 of ASP 13 outlines the specific objectives of the Harbourside Commercial Precinct, as well as specific criteria for development. The minor nature of the works have no impact on the objectives and criteria of the Harbourside Commercial Precinct, and Administration’s comments in respect to these.

 

Further Issues Raised During Public Consultation

 

Amenity & Character of the area

 

Concerns were raised during the advertising period regarding the potential for the development to detract from the visual amenity and character on the immediate vicinity, in particular the surrounding residential properties.

 

The subject site is currently utilised for casual vehicle and boat trailer parking associated with the Marina. The application proposes to incorporate steel black fencing and landscaping around the existing parking area. The existing use does not change as part of the application. It is also noted that the subject site sits approximately 2m below the ground level of the adjacent residential homes. The applicant provided architectural drawings which identify how the fenced parking area will be seen from the street. These are noted in Attachment 2. As the existing use is not changing, the proposal will not detract from the appearance of the Harbourside Commercial precinct of ASP 13. As the subject site and adjacent residential homes are located within a Marina Precinct, it should be expected that there would be some impact on residential amenity from marina land uses. Whilst the concerns raised in the submissions are acknowledged by Administration, it is noted that the State Administrative Tribunal’s decision in DCSC Pty Ltd v Presiding Member of the Southern Joint Development Assessment Panel on 23 August 2017 confirmed that residents adjoining a commercial site are to expect a diminished level of comfort, and residential uses in close proximity to non-residential uses cannot expect the same degree of amenity as would be found in a homogenous residential suburb.

 

In light of this, Administration is of the view that the standard of the existing amenity and character for the subject site will not be altered as a result of this application.

 

Noise

 

Concerns were raised during the advertising period regarding the potential for noise to be generated by the proposed development. The submissions raise concern that this will occur as a result of owners undertaking maintenance on boats, as well as moving them during the morning and evening.

 

The applicant has advised Administration that no maintenance will be permitted to be undertaken on the boats. In light of this, should the application be approved, Administration recommends the imposition of a condition to prohibit maintenance and other activities occurring on parked boats, to ensure that no additional noise is generated by these activities. It is considered that the imposition of this condition will adequately address these concerns.

 

With respect to the movement of boats, Administration does not consider that the proposal will generate any more noise than is currently generated from the subject site or adjacent Lot 7002 as the use of the land doesn’t change. This is on the basis that the proposal will fence an area for the controlled parking of boats and trailers within the existing car park, which can currently be used for this purpose (albeit in a casual manner). Boats on trailers already park in the existing bays which are proposed to be fenced. In light of the use of the proposal remaining in a similar manner to the current situation, Administration does not consider that there will be any more noise generated from the site.

 

Notwithstanding the above, an Environmental Noise Assessment was provided by the applicant which considered the potential impacts the proposed parking area. The report concluded that the proposed development could comply with the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 subject to:

 

·    Patrons minimising general noise whilst in the area, given the proximity of houses;

·    Patrons not operating or maintaining their boat motors in the area;

·    Reversing alarms on work type vehicles to be turned off and spotters being utilised where necessary;

·    Not to leave vehicle engines running; and

·    Not to leave car radios on.

As part of the submissions received, the City received a third party Environmental Noise Assessment which documented that the applicant’s acoustic report lacked information to fully support the proposal. Both Environmental Noise Assessments were referred to the City’s Health Services team who considered that the information provided by the applicant was satisfactory subject to compliance with the recommendations.

In light of the above, Administration considers that potential noise impacts associated with the proposed development can be sufficiently managed through compliance with the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 and through the imposition of specific conditions of development approval. Should any complaints arise relating to noise generated on the site, Administration will investigate to ensure that proposed parking area is operating in compliance with the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997.

Traffic

 

Concerns were raised during the advertising period regarding the potential for additional traffic to be generated by the proposal, and the impact that this may have on the surrounding road network.

 

Submitters also raised concerns that the Traffic Survey provided did not adequately address the existing traffic issues in the area.  The Traffic Survey provided was referred to the City’s Transport and Traffic Services who agreed with the information provided and concurred that any additional traffic generated by the proposed modifications are not likely to impact on the normal flow of traffic on the adjoining and surrounding roads, and can be accommodated within the existing road network. Administration considers the proposal is unlikely to generate any further traffic, given the site can currently be used for boat and trailer parking, albeit the application proposes this to be provided in a more formalised manner through the erection of an internal fence.

 

A Parking Survey was provided as part of this application, which investigated the projected traffic increases for the proposal. The parking area was noted to be over 95% unoccupied throughout the survey period and further observational data outlined that the car park rarely reaches capacity and therefore generates low traffic numbers within the area. As such, the Parking Survey concluded that given the subject area is underutilised (apart from when events occur), there is no anticipated adverse impact on traffic in the area

 

Landscaping and Screening of Development

 

Concerns were raised during the advertising period regarding the proposed landscaping not being able to sufficiently screen the proposed parking area and that it will not be sufficiently maintained.

 

As part of the application, a detailed landscape plan was provided which indicates the location of various shrubs and trees to be planted within the site and around the proposed parking area to act as a form of screening. The proposed shrubs and trees are indicated to exceed two metres in height in order to contribute to the amenity of the site and the presentation of the development. This is shown in Attachment 4. Administration considers that the proposed landscaping is acceptable and can adequately screen the parking area and it demonstrates a clear separation between the public car parking area, notwithstanding Administration has requested that some shrubs and trees be replaced with more suitable species.

 

In light of the above, Administration, recommends that a condition is included requesting an updated Landscaping Plan be provided, prior to occupation of the development. It is also recommended that a condition enforcing the ongoing maintenance of the overall site be applied to the approval.

 

Planning in Bushfire Prone Areas

 

The subject site is identified as being within a bushfire prone area, however, as the proposal does not involve the construction or use of a building, it is exempt from the requirements of Clause 78 of the Deemed Provisions of DPS 2, which includes the provision of a Bushfire Attack Level (BAL) assessment. Additionally, Administration considers that the proposal is exempt from requiring a BAL assessment under SPP 3.7 as the subject site is currently used for the parking of vehicles, and the proposal will not result in an intensification of development or land use. This interpretation is consistent with the Planning in Bushfire Prone Areas Planning Bulletin 111/2016, and given this, the proposal is not considered to result in an increased bushfire threat, and is therefore exempt from requiring further assessment under SPP 3.7. 

 

Conclusion

In light of the above, the proposed Modifications to Car Park (Boat and Trailer Parking) are considered to satisfactorily meet the requirements of DPS 2 and ASP 13. Administration considers that the issues raised during the advertising period can be sufficiently addressed through the imposition of conditions and no further modifications to the proposal are required.

It is therefore recommended that Council approve the proposed development subject to conditions.

Statutory Compliance

This application has been assessed in accordance with the City of Wanneroo’s DPS2.

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2017 – 2027:

 “3     Environment (Built)

3.4    Activated Places

3.4.2  Provide safe spaces, centres and facilities through our infrastructure management and designs for community benefit and recreation”

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 application has been assessed against the requirements of the following:

·    DPS2;

·    Mindarie Keys Harbourside Village Agreed Structure Plan No. 13;

·    State Planning Policy 3.7: Planning in Bushfire Prone Areas; and

·    Planning in Bushfire Prone Areas Planning Bulletin 111/2016.

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

 

1.       Pursuant to Clause 68(2)(b) of the Deemed Provisions of District Planning    Scheme No. 2, APPROVES the Development Application (DA2018/1237), as          shown in Attachment 2, for Modifications to Carpark (Boat and Trailer   Parking)    at Lot 496 (3) Ocean Falls Boulevard, Mindarie, subject to the following       conditions:

 

a)   This approval relates on to the proposed Modifications to Carpark (Boat and Trailer Parking) as indicated on the approved plans. It does not relate to any other development on the lot.

 

b)   All stormwater and waste water shall be contained on-site.

 

c)   A detailed landscaping and reticulation plan for the subject site and adjoining road verges shall be lodged with and approved by the City prior to commencement of any development. The plan shall be drawn to a minimum scale of 1:100 and is to provide the following information:

 

i.    The proposed plant species Adenanthos sericeus, Banksia burdettii and Melaleuca nesophila being replaced with either Ricinocarpus Bridal Star or Grevillia olivacea;

ii.   Appropriate shrub species being provided to adequately screen the parking area;

iii.  Appropriate shrub species being provided to the existing planting bed areas.

 

The amended Landscaping Plan is to be submitted to the City for approval, prior to the commencement of development. Planting and installation shall be in accordance with the approved landscaping and reticulation plans.

 

d)   Within the parking area there shall be (1) shade tree planted in tree wells for every four (4) parking bays and protected from damage by vehicles and thereafter maintained to the City’s satisfaction.

 

e)   Landscaping is to be maintained to the satisfaction of the City.

 

f)    Parking areas, driveway and points of ingress and egress shall be designed in accordance with the Australian Standard for Off-Street Car parking (AS2890) and shall be drained, sealed, marked and thereafter maintained to the City of Wanneroo's satisfaction.

 

g)   The parking areas and associated access depicted on the approved plans shall operate in accordance with the ‘carpark’ land use as defined in DPS 2 and only be used for the parking of private vehicles (boats and trailers) and shall not be used for the purpose of storage or obstructed in any way at any time.

h)   A Car Parking Management Plan shall be submitted and approved by the City prior to the commencement of the use. Car Parking shall be managed in accordance with the approved Car Parking Management Plan for the duration of the development to the satisfaction of the City.

i)    No maintenance, cleaning, refuelling and/or other similar activities shall be undertaken on boats and/or trailers parked within the car parking area shall be undertaken at any time.

 

 

 

2.   ENDORSES Administration’s responses to the submissions as provided in Attachment 3; and

3.   ADVISES the submitters of its decision.

 

Attachments:

1⇩.	DA2018/1237 - Location Plan - 3 Ocean Falls Boulevard, Mindarie (Attachment 1)	19/4260
2⇩.	DA2018/1237 - Working Plans - 3 Ocean Falls (Attachment 2)	18/454860	Minuted
3⇩.	DA2018/1237 - Schedule of Submissions ~ 3 Ocean Falls Boulevard MINDARIE (Attachment 3)	19/62348	Minuted
4⇩.	DA2018/1237 - Landscaping Plan -  - 3 Ocean Falls (Attachment 4)	18/454846
5⇩.	DA2018/1237 - Parking Analysis - 3 Ocean Falls Blvd, Mindarie (Attachment 5)	19/22215
6⇩.	DA2018/1237 - Photos Provided by Submitters (Attachment 6)	19/58597

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

File Ref:                                              3384-02 – 19/132233

Responsible Officer:                          Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       3         

Issue

To consider submissions received during public advertising of Amendment No. 2 to the Approved Alkimos-Eglinton District Structure Plan No. 18 (DSP 18) and adoption of the amendment.

 

Applicant	CLE Town Planning & Design
Owners	Daws & Son Pty Ltd, Khan Keath, Jane Terp, Peter Wayne Maloney, Herongate Pty Ltd, Estate of Carmen Germann, Anton Germann, Steven and Brenda Brown, Eugenio and Guiseppe Rabbone, Estate of Lola Gibbs, Frank and Heather Magatelli, Joseph and Barbara Doughty, Aswell Construction Pty Ltd, Patrick Roach
Location	Lot 1 (1) Taronga Place, Carabooda Lot 4 (20), Part Lot 9001 (19) Taronga Place, Eglinton Lot 2 (3049), Lot 6280 (3119) Wanneroo Road, Carabooda Lot 4 (73), Lot 6 (91) Lot 7 (51), Lot 8 (25)  Pipidinny Road, Eglinton Lot 3 (31), Lot 5 (17), Lot 20 (23) Beonaddy Road, Eglinton Lot 5002 (56) Scotthorn Drive, Alkimos
Site Area	149.35 hectares
MRS Zoning/Reserve	Urban, Rural, Primary Regional Roads, Parks and Recreation
DPS 2 Zoning/Reserve	Urban Development, General Rural, Regional Parks and Recreation

 

Background

On 17 September 2018, CLE Town Planning & Design on behalf of the landowners of part Lot 9001 (formerly Lot 6) (19) Taronga Place, Eglinton (Daws & Sons Pty Ltd) submitted Amendment No. 2 to DSP 18 for the City’s consideration. A copy of the DSP 18 map showing the location of the Amendment No. 2 area is provided as Attachment 1.

 

On 1 November 2018, Administration forwarded a memorandum to all Elected Members, to inform Council of Administration’s intent to advertise the proposal. Advertising of Amendment No. 2 to the DSP 18 commenced on 8 November 2018 and concluded on 6 December 2018.

Detail

The Site

 

The amendment area is bounded by the Railway Reserve to the west, Wanneroo Road to the east, Pipidinny Road to the north and the northern boundary of Shorehaven Estate. Mitchell Freeway Reserve runs through the amendment area separating part Lot 9001 into two portions. A part of Yanchep National Park located to the south of Pipidinny Road borders the amendment area.

 

The proposal

 

Amendment No. 2 to DSP 18 proposes the following:

 

·    Reclassifying a portion of land between the railway and freeway reserves from ‘Service Commercial’ to ‘Urban’ to support a residential development outcome (referred to as the ‘Central Precinct’); and

·    Inclusion of land to the northeast of the freeway reserve within DSP 18 and classifying the land as Service Commercial (referred to as the ‘Eastern Precinct’).

Attachment 2 illustrates the existing and proposed DSP 18 amendment map.

Consultation

The Amendment was advertised for public comment for a period of 28 days commencing 8 November 2018 and concluding on 6 December 2018. The proposal was advertised in the following forms:

 

·    Letter of notification sent to surrounding landowners and the major developers of the Alkimos/Eglinton suburbs;

·    Placement of an advertising sign on-site;

·    Wanneroo Weekender Newspaper; and

·    A link to the proposal on the City’s Community Consultation webpage.

 

A total of 12 submissions were received on the proposal. A summary of submissions received and Administration’s comments are contained within Attachment 3.

 

The main issues raised during the advertising period relate to:

 

·    An MRS Amendment not being finalised prior to this Amendment being endorsed;

·    The expansion of the DSP to the Eastern Precinct to include the rural landholdings;

·    The relocation and removal of employment land within the DSP area;

·    The economic and employment statistics of DSP 18 with an oversupply of Service Commercial land within the DSP area;

·    No District Water Management Strategy being prepared for the Eastern Precinct;

·    The exclusion of the rural landholdings north of Pipidinny Road from the proposed Amendment; and

·    The loss of rural amenity and the surrounding locality as a result of the Eastern Precinct expansion.

 

A more detailed discussion of the major issues considered in the assessment of Amendment No. 2 is provided below.

Comment

The purpose of this Amendment is to redesignate and include two precincts within DSP 18 known as ‘Central Precinct’ and ‘Eastern Precinct’ (refer Attachment 1). The Amendment is comprised of two components with the first to reclassify the Central Precinct designation from Service Commercial to Urban to allow for residential development to occur. The second component of this Amendment is to include lots east of the future Mitchell Freeway extension within the DSP area and designate the land for Service Commercial purposes and is referred to as the Eastern Precinct. Each precinct will be discussed within individual sections for the purposes of the report, however, the relationship between these precincts is important in the context of the structure plan and should be considered as a whole.

 

The redesignation of the Central Precinct through this Amendment would result in a loss of approximately 35 hectares of Service Commercial employment generating land and enable the development of approximately 500 new dwellings.

 

The inclusion of the Eastern Precinct within the DSP area will provide 110 hectares of Service Commercial employment land (net increase of 75 hectares) resulting from the removal of the loss of existing rural land.

 

Central Precinct

 

The total extent of the Service Commercial land located between the Railway and Mitchell Freeway Reserves as proposed in DSP 18 is approximately 88 hectares. A portion of the Service Commercial land is identified as Central Precinct in the proposed amendment.

 

Amendment No. 2 to DSP 18 seeks to redesignate the Central Precinct as Urban to support future residential land uses. This precinct is zoned Urban under the MRS and Urban Development under DPS 2.

 

The Central Precinct occupies approximately 35 hectares of the total 88 hectares. 28 hectares has been allocated through Agreed Structure Plan No. 73 – North Alkimos (ASP 73) and has been designated as Precinct 4 – Transit in ASP 73. This precinct zoned Mixed Use and Business in ASP 73 is proposed to accommodate a variety of land uses including a range of residential densities and the establishment of viable and sustainable non-residential land uses namely mixed use and service commercial. This precinct has largely been developed for residential purposes and contains Northshore Christian Grammar School, which are Discretionary uses in these zones (refer Attachment 1). The remaining 25 hectares of the northern portion of the Service Commercial land is located directly south of the future Eglinton District Centre, and has not yet been developed.

 

Employment

 

An Economic Employment Strategy (EES) was approved through DSP 18 in December 2010 which calculated an estimated 27,700 workers living in the DSP area. The DSP also required a minimum 40 per cent and desirable 60 per cent employment self-sufficiency target, which equates to 11,080 jobs and 16,620 jobs respectively of the estimated total 27,700 work force.

 

The applicant considers that the methodologies used to assess employment targets within the original DSP 18 are outdated as they were assessed using the ‘WAPC Metropolitan Centres Policy Statement for the Perth Metropolitan Region (2000)’. This policy statement is now superseded by State Planning Policy 4.2 – Activity Centres for Perth and Peel. In light of this, the applicant has provided an updated Economic and Employment Assessment (EEA) to identify the employment viability of the Central and Eastern Precincts.

 

A review of DSP 18 is required every five years from the endorsement of the DSP. However, it should be noted that no subsequent economic or employment studies of DSP 18 were undertaken prior to this Amendment. The City has requested the DPLH to undertake a holistic review of DSP 18 including employment statistics across the DSP area. DPLH has confirmed their intention to review the DSP, however, this review is yet to occur. Therefore, it is considered unreasonable for the review of the DSP to be completed prior to consideration of Amendment No. 2 given the DPLH has yet to commence this review.

 

The applicant provided the following justification in support of the proposed redesignation from Service Commercial to Residential:

 

·    The Central Precinct is not suited to its Service Commercial designation as it is significantly constrained by its topography and elongated configuration to accommodate showrooms and warehousing.

·    The precinct is located between the Alkimos Activity Centre to the south and future Eglinton Activity Centre directly to the north. The range of uses envisaged in the Central Precinct will compete with these centres both functionally and commercially;

·    The use of the Central Precinct for residential purposes will enable higher density around the Alkimos Activity Centre and future Eglinton Activity Centre. The Central Precinct could accommodate an additional 500 residential lots, resulting in approximately 1,200 residents to the area and help support the jobs required within these activity centres;

·    The removal of the future North Alkimos Train Station as part of Amendment 1 to DSP 18 has reduced the demand for Service Commercial employment land within the Central Precinct; and

·    Many of the ‘non industrial’ employment generating uses envisaged for the Central Precinct would now be encouraged within the centres themselves. Many of the ‘industrial’ employment generating uses would be better suited in large and more specialised industrial locations.

 

Eastern Precinct

 

Amendment No. 2 to DSP 18 seeks to include approximately 110 hectares of land to the northeast of the freeway reserve within the DSP 18 area and classify the land as Service Commercial (referred to as the Eastern Precinct). This land is currently zoned Rural under the MRS and General Rural under DPS 2. If approved, the amendment is estimated to provide 110 hectares of Service Commercial employment land and will remove the existing rural land identified within the Eastern Precinct.

 

The EES identifies the Eastern Precinct as a more suitable area to accommodate the future employment targets as originally identified within DSP 18. The applicant has provided the following justification below in support of the inclusion of the Eastern Precinct:

 

·    Amendment No. 2 effectively proposes the relocation (not removal) of 35 hectares of employment land within the Central Precinct to form part of the approximately 110 hectares of Service Commercial employment land in the Eastern Precinct. The result is approximately three times the area of the Central Precinct and presents a significant employment generating opportunity;

·    The Eastern Precinct is more appropriately located (compared to the Central Precinct), for employment generating land uses as the land is less undulating and provides a larger land mass for the delivery of industrial and commercial sized lots. Additionally, the site is further removed from residential areas which will assist in providing suitable buffers, but is still close enough to provide local employment services;

·    The Eastern Precinct benefits from strong links to major transport networks including Wanneroo Road, the future freeway extension, Pipidinny Road and the future East Wanneroo Bypass (Whiteman/Yanchep Highway). The Eastern precinct is also within 1km of the Eglinton District Centre and within 2km of the Alkimos District Centre both supported by future train stations;

·    The uses envisaged within the Eastern Precinct are intended to complement, and not compete with the traditional uses envisaged for Neerabup nor the commercial, retail, office and community uses best placed within the Alkimos and Eglinton District Centres;

·    The Eastern Precinct could accommodate the following land uses:

o  Elements of both light commercial and light industry as provided for in the Service Commercial areas of DSP 18;

o  Larger floor-plate commercial/warehouse uses which benefit from high exposure and passing traffic and typically require more land for parking than would be appropriate in a town centre. Potential uses could include large hardware and building supplies, pool shops, nursery supplies, car sales, motor vehicle related warehouses;

o  Agribusiness, rural supplies and agricultural equipment to service the eastern hinterland. Equipment, supplies, research and services;

o  Transport, storage, distribution and logistics benefitting from transport links to the broader region;

o  Major corporate offices more suited to a business park setting;

o  Technology and research development premises; and

o  Advanced manufacturing engineering and processing; and

·    An Environmental Assessment Report (EAR) was provided in support of the amendment. The EAR demonstrates that any future development of the Eastern Precinct for Service Commercial will have regard for, and manage appropriately, all environmental values within the site.

 

Administration provides the following comments with respect to the applicant’s justification on the Central and Eastern Precincts:

 

·    The proposed Amendment will provide the ability for an additional 75 hectares of gross developable employment land within the DSP 18 area;

·    The revised EEA provided by the applicant considers that the remaining 35 hectares of Service Commercial land available cannot achieve the desired employment targets of DSP 18 due to the site constraints of the Central Precinct. The Central Precinct spans 1.5 kilometres from north to south and a minimum width of 230 metres from west to east with has a cross fall in heights of approximately 9 metres from west to east. Administration acknowledges the site constraints and agrees that from a lot creation perspective the land is better suited for residential development. Whilst it is possible for pre-development earthworks to assist in flattening the land to facilitate Service Commercial lots, the topography of the Eastern Precinct provides better base topography to deliver a range of larger lot sizes to support employment generating uses;

·    The Central Precinct has good exposure and road access as it is bounded by the future Mitchell Freeway extension to the east and will be serviced by future distributor roads to the north and south. However, the Eastern Precinct is considered to be better located than the Central Precinct to provide employment land as it has direct frontage and access to Wanneroo Road, the future Mitchell Freeway extension, Alkimos Drive and East Wanneroo Bypass (Whiteman/Yanchep Highway) which are all high servicing regional roads and would provide significant exposure for future businesses. Furthermore the Mitchell Freeway road reservation is situated between the Central and Eastern Precincts and will assist in providing a suitable buffer between the residential and commercial land uses;

·    The Central Precinct is situated between the Alkimos City Centre and future Eglinton District Centre station which are anticipated to provide high levels of employment land surrounding the future train stations. The redesignation of this land to provide residential development will enable the creation of an additional 500 lots. This increased population of approximately 1,200 residents would create additional demand for jobs within the locality and will complement the use of the nearby Alkimos and Eglinton Activity Centres, in addition to the Eastern Precinct;

·    The location of the Eastern Precinct is positioned further away from the Alkimos District Centre and future Eglinton District Centre and is adjacent to existing rural land uses east of Wanneroo Road within Carabooda. Administration considers the Eastern Precinct can provide a diversification of land uses which could be complementary to the existing rural land uses and would not detrimentally impact on the nearby employment centres. Furthermore, the two Activity Centres will be retail-based centres and would not be detrimental to the Service Commercial areas which are intended to be developed for large scale showrooms and warehouses;

·    The City’s Strategic Land Use Planning and Environment Service Unit has reviewed the EAR provided by the applicant and provided support to the Amendment on the proviso that significant vegetation is retained and green links through the area are preserved. A future MRS Amendment, DPS 2 Amendment and Local Structure Plan (LSP) for the Eastern Precinct will be required and these documents will help to identify the key areas for retention. To note, these areas of retention do not include the Beonaddy Swamp and Yanchep National Park reserves as these are not included within the Eastern Precinct designation; and

·    Administration has reviewed the proposal and is supportive of the inclusion of the Eastern Precinct within DSP 18 to accommodate future employment given the net increase in employment generating land and the larger area of the Eastern Precinct by comparison to the Central Precinct. Additionally, AED are supportive of the potential land uses that can be accommodated within the Eastern Precinct given its nearby location to rural landholdings.

In addition to the above, Administration has also considered the following matters.

 

Bushfire Risk

 

The subject site is located within a Bushfire Prone Area (BPA) and is subject to the requirements of State Planning Policy 3.7 – Planning in Bushfire Prone Areas (SPP 3.7). The applicant has provided a Bushfire Management Plan (BMP) in accordance with the requirements of SPP 3.7 in support of the DSP amendment. The Department of Fire and Emergency Services stated the BMP has adequately identified issues arising from the bushfire hazard level assessment and therefore considered it acceptable.

 

Planning Investigation Area

 

The Eastern Precinct has been identified as a ‘Planning Investigation Area’ (PIA) within the North-West Sub-Regional Planning Framework (NWSRPF). The NWSRPF provides guidelines surrounding the future planning procedures for a series of PIA’s across the Perth Metropolitan Area which require further planning investigation. The boundaries of the Eastern Precinct are consistent with the ‘Eglinton East’ PIA as identified within the NWSRPF and the PIA is required to address the following key considerations:

 

·    Employment - identification/confirmation of land for employment generating activities:

o  As stated above, the Eastern Precinct will be better located to provide Service Commercial employment for the DSP 18 area in comparison to the Central Precinct. The Service Commercial designation will ensure that commercial/light industrial based land uses will be accommodated for within the Eastern Precinct;

·    Land use transition/interface with Parks and Recreation reserve and Bush Forever areas:

o  The Eastern Precinct is located adjacent to Beonaddy Swamp and a portion of Yanchep National Park. These areas are Regional Parks and Recreation Reserves under the MRS and are listed as Bush Forever sites. The proposal is not considered to detrimentally impact on these reserves as demonstrated through the applicant’s EAR which has been supported by the City’s Strategic Land Use Planning and Environment Service Unit;

·    Relationship with the future Whiteman-Yanchep Highway:

o  The Eastern Precinct northern boundary will align with the Whiteman-Yanchep Highway which is proposed to run through Pipidinny Road. The northern most lots within the Eastern Precinct will have direct frontage onto the Whiteman-Yanchep Highway once this road is constructed and the lots are developed.

 

·    Access to regional road network:

o  The Eastern Precinct will have direct access to Wanneroo Road, Alkimos Drive and East Wanneroo Bypass (Whiteman/Yanchep Highway) which are regional roads and would provide significant exposure for future businesses; and

 

·    Bushfire risk:

o  As stated above, the BMP provided by the applicant has adequately identified issues arising from the bushfire hazard level assessment and therefore considered it acceptable.

 

 

The NWSRPF states the above investigations are required to be undertaken to determine whether it is possible to rezone the land under the MRS.

 

Issues raised in the submissions

 

MRS Amendment

 

The Eastern Precinct is currently zoned Rural under the MRS and an amendment to the MRS to rezone the land to Urban, would be required prior to any Service Commercial development occurring on the land. The traditional planning process is outlined as follows:

 

·    MRS Amendment to change the zoning from Rural to Urban (which can be undertaken concurrently with a DPS 2 Amendment to change the zoning from General Rural to Urban Development);

·    DSP Amendment to redesignate the Eastern Precinct to Service Commercial;

·    A new LSP to identify zoning and key strategic areas such as public open space and location of regional roads;

·    Subdivision of lots; and

·    Development applications for individual lots.

 

However in this instance, Amendment No. 2 to DSP 18 has been lodged with the City and is being considered prior to an MRS Amendment being endorsed. Administration has undertaken consultation with DPLH surrounding the fact this amendment has been submitted ahead of an MRS amendment. The DPLH has confirmed they do not object to this amendment being considered prior to an MRS amendment being initiated given that the proposal is consistent with the objectives of the NWSRPF and addresses the key considerations of the Eglinton East PIA.

 

Notwithstanding this, Administration acknowledges that there is no statutory obligation for the developer to initiate an MRS Amendment in the event this DSP Amendment is supported. The Central Precinct may be developed for residential purposes without a MRS Amendment for the Eastern Precinct being initiated. The future development of the proposed Eastern Precinct will ultimately be at the discretion of the landowner and be influenced by market demands and timing. Despite this, the applicant has confirmed their commitment to preparing and lodging a MRS amendment if Amendment No. 2 to DSP 18 is endorsed by the City and WAPC.

 

In consideration of these matters, Administration is of the view that Amendment No. 2 to DSP 18 can be supported prior to an MRS Amendment being considered for the following reasons:

 

·    The Eastern Precinct is identified as a PIA within the NWSRPF and is identified as a key strategic area for the development of employment land. The applicant has addressed the key objectives of the NWSRPF which allows for consideration a DSP Amendment prior to an MRS Amendment;

·    There is still no obligation for the Eastern Precinct to be developed even if an MRS Amendment was supported. As stated above, the applicant has confirmed their commitment to preparing and lodging an MRS amendment if Amendment No. 2 to DSP 18 is endorsed by the City and WAPC; and

·    The DSP does not zone land and only designates suitable areas of land for future development. The DSP is intended to guide the future development of the area and future planning stages such as an MRS amendment and LSP will identify the required infrastructure and services necessary for the delivery of employment land for the Eastern Precinct.

 

 

Impact on Rural Amenity

 

Concerns were raised from various landowners regarding the potential impact on rural amenity and loss of vegetation of the adjoining rural landholdings to the north and east of the designated Eastern Precinct area. Administration considers that any future MRS amendment and/or LSP would identify appropriate buffers (e.g. roads, landscape) between the rural land and the Service Commercial Precinct and the key strategic open space areas for vegetation retention. The applicant has advised that although he does not represent most of the land owners they have been consulted and have offered support to the amendment proposals.

 

The Amendment will result in a loss of 110 hectares of land zoned General Rural under the City’s DPS 2. The rural landholdings, subject of this amendment, include a variety of rural based land uses those mainly being intensive agriculture, market gardens and small rural hobby farms. If the Amendment is approved, these rural lots within the Eastern Precinct will be designated for Service Commercial purposes in the DSP, however, it is important to note that the landowners may continue their existing rural operations until such time as they seek to redevelop the land.

 

Future planning of the DSP area through an MRS amendment or LSP will guide the future land uses within the Eastern Precinct and minimise the impact on existing rural amenity within the locality. The applicant considers that the potential future land uses within the Eastern Precinct could provide a complementary service to the existing rural lots and may include agribusiness, rural supplies and agricultural equipment type businesses.

 

The inclusion of the Eastern Precinct is considered acceptable as the redesignation of the land at the DSP level would not affect the current use of the land for rural purposes as no development of land will occur through this Amendment. Future planning stages of the Amendment area such as an MRS Amendment, LSP, subdivision and development applications would look to deliver on these services and ensure the impact on the rural amenity of the area is mitigated.

 

Department of Education

 

Eglinton Approved Structure Plan No. 82 (ASP 82) proposes a primary school which is located to the immediate west of the subject amendment area. The DoE has advised that the primary school catchment area will include the Central Precinct, Eglinton suburb and lots east of Marmion Avenue within Shorehaven estate. The inclusion of 500 dwellings within the Central Precinct will result in a total yield of 2,265 lots, which is greater than the number of lots typically recommended for a primary school site.

 

In this regard the applicant has advised DoE that the adequacy of this primary school site in terms of size and final location to support the forecast dwelling yield can be determined as part of the local structure planning for the amendment area. Administration is also of the view that DoE’s concerns can be addressed through future local structure planning. DPLH has advised the City that this approach is considered appropriate stipulating that further consideration into the primary school sites will be required to be undertaken and resolved at the LSP stage.

Oversupply of Service Commercial land within DSP area

 

Eglinton Estates Pty Ltd in its submission has stated that an employment analysis of the ASP 82 undertaken in August 2017 has identified that there was an oversupply of Service Commercial employment zoned land within the DSP area.

 

In this regard it is noted that a holistic review of DSP 18 needs to be undertaken to identify the viability of Service Commercial and other employment land in the District Structure Plan area to meet the employment self-sufficiency target. The increase in residential density as part of this amendment and generally within the coastal growth corridor must also be taken into consideration in terms of a review of DSP 18 as the increased population may ultimately affect the amount of employment land required to achieve employment self-sufficiency.

 

Conclusion

CLE Town Planning and Design has requested the City to consider Amendment No. 2 to DSP 18 to designate the Eastern Precinct located between the Mitchell Freeway Reserve and Wanneroo Road as Service Commercial and to redesignate the Central Precinct located between the Railway and Mitchell Freeway reserves from Service Commercial to Urban. The Eastern Precinct being larger than the Central Precinct would operate as an employment node at a far more strategic level than would the Central Precinct. The concerns raised by Eglinton Estate Pty Ltd in terms of oversupply of employment land and by DoE on the primary school catchment can be addressed adequately at the detailed local structure planning stage. 

Additionally, Administration considers Amendment No. 2 has addressed the key objectives of the North-West Sub Regional Planning Framework in dealing with the Eglinton-East Planning Investigation Area. As such, Administration supports the process to consider the amendment prior to WAPC amending the MRS.

In light of the above, it is recommended that the proposed Amendment be supported.

Statutory Compliance

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

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2017 – 2027:

 “2     Economy

2.2    Strategic Growth

2.2.4  Protect and increase availability of employment generating land”

Risk Management Considerations

Risk Title	Risk Rating
ST-S12 Economic Growth	Moderate
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Chief Executive Officer	Manage

 

Risk Title	Risk Rating
CO-O03 Strategic Land	Moderate
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Director Planning and Sustainability	Manage

 

Risk Title	Risk Rating
CO-O20 Productive Communities	Moderate
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Director Community and Place	Manage

 

The above risks relating to the issues contained within this report have been identified and considered within the City’s Strategic and Corporate risk registers. The proposed Amendment No. 2 has been considered against relevant provisions of DPS 2 and DSP 18 as outlined in the report context.

Policy Implications

The proposal has been assessed against the relevant provisions of the following:

·    State Planning Policy 3.7 – Planning in Bushfire Prone Areas; and

·    State Planning Policy 4.2 – Activity Centres for Perth and Peel.

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.         Pursuant to Clause 20(2)(e) of the deemed provisions of the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2 RECOMMENDS to the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) that Amendment No. 2 to the Approved Alkimos-Eglinton District Structure Plan No. 18,

a)    To reclassify a portion of land between the railway and freeway reserves from ‘Service Commercial’ to ‘Urban’; and

b)    To include and designate a portion of land to the northeast of the freeway reserve within the Approved Alkimos-Eglinton District Structure Plan No. 18 area as ‘Service Commercial’,

 as shown on Attachment 2 to the report be APPROVED;

2.         Pursuant to Clause 20(1) of the deemed provisions of the District Planning Scheme No. 2 PROVIDES the WAPC with a copy of the report including the schedule of submissions along with the City’s comments; and

3.         ADVISES the submitters of Council’s decision.

 

Attachments:

1⇩.	Attachment 1 - Location Plan - Amendment No. 2 to ASP 18	18/463580
2⇩.	Attachment 2 - Comparison of existing and proposed for  Amendment 2 to District Structure Plan 18 -	18/463194	Minuted
3⇩.	Attachment 3 - Submission Schedule - Amendment No. 2 to the Alkimos-Eglinton District Structure Plan No. 18(2)	19/40341

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

Assets

Infrastructure Capital Works

File Ref:                                              23757 – 19/116665

Responsible Officer:                          Director Assets

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       1         

 

Issue

To consider Tender No. 19062 for the Provision of Major Works, Halesworth Park, Butler - New Sports Facilities.

Background

At the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 28 April 2015, Council considered a report on the Butler North District Open Space Master Plan Review (CD02-04/15) and endorsed the master plan. It is noted that the project is now known as Halesworth Park, Butler.

 

The City is now seeking to appoint a suitably qualified and experienced Contractor to undertake the following Civil and Landscaping works in connection with the construction of two sports ovals, site amenities, road and pedestrian infrastructure, and pad sites for two proposed buildings at Halesworth Park, Butler.

 

Scope of works include (but not limited to):

·        Clearance of the site (in accordance with Environmental Permit requirements)

·        Bulk Earthworks;

·        Retaining Walls;

·        Stormwater Drainage;

·        Power and Lighting;

·        Roadworks;

·        Paths;

·        Hardcourts;

·        Sports Oval construction (turfed areas);

·        Landscaping Planting;

·        Landscaping Reticulation;

 

It is noted that the two buildings proposed on site do not form part of this Tender.

 

The site is presently undeveloped bushland and is bounded by Santorini Promenade and Halesworth Parade (with residential properties adjacent), John Butler Primary College and Butler North Secondary School (opening Feb 2020) and Rail reserve for the future Yanchep Rail Extension. 

 

The project is to be delivered in two stages:

a)      Separable Portion 1 –Stage 1 Southern Oval by 16 December 2019 – playable surface for schools opening Feb 2020; and

b)      Separable Portion 2 –Stage 2 – Balance of all works to complete the Southern Oval amenities and delivery of the Northern Oval and associated amenities by 14 May 2020.

 

Detail

Tender No. 19062 for the Provision of Major Works, Halesworth Park, Butler - New Sports Facilities was advertised on 9 March 2019 and closed on Tuesday 2 April 2019.

 

A non-mandatory site inspection and tender briefing was held at 10:00am on Thursday 14 March 2019. The tender briefing provided tenderers the opportunity to clarify any tender enquiries they have in relation to the tender in person prior to the closing of the tender. 

 

During the tender period there were 8 Tender Addendums issued; all tenderers confirmed as being received.

 

Essential details of the proposed contract are as follows:

 

 

Tender submissions were received from the following companies:

Company (full entity name)	Company (abbreviated name)
D.B.Cunningham Pty Ltd t/a Advanteering Civil Engineers	Advanteering
Environmental Industries	Environmental Industries
McCorkell Constructions WA Pty Ltd	McCorkell
Menchetti Consolidated Pty Ltd	Menchetti
Murphy Group Contracting Pty Ltd Trading as MGC Civil	MGC Civil
Ralmana Pty Ltd T/A RJ Vincent & Co. (RJV)	RJ Vincent
TRACC Civil Pty Ltd	TRACC Civil
Wormall Civil Pty Ltd	Wormall

 

 

Tender Evaluation Panel

The Tender Evaluation Panel comprised:

·        Project Manager Major Buildings - Infrastructure Capital Works

·        Principal Technical Advisor, Parks & Conservation Management

·        Brenton Washfold JDSi - Civil Engineering Consultant

·        Zac Fried  - Emerge Associates Landscape Design

·        OSH Officer Safety and Injury Management

Tender submissions were evaluated in accordance with the following weighted selection criteria:

 

Item No	Description	Weighting
1	Organisational Experience	25%
2	Key Personnel Experience	25%
3	Methodology	25%
4	Occupational Health & Safety	25%

Price was not included in the Qualitative Criteria, but was considered as part of the overall value for money assessment and the minimum acceptable baseline for Qualitative Criteria being set at 50%.

Probity Oversight

Oversight to the tender assessment process was undertaken by Administration and William Buck Consulting (WA) Pty Ltd provided the external probity services.

Tender submissions were evaluated in accordance with the Procurement and Evaluation Plan (PEP).  On initial review of the tender submissions by the City’s Contracts Officer confirmed that the tender submission from TRACC Civil was deemed to be a non-conforming tender due to incomplete tender submission, and excluded from further consideration.

 

All other tender submissions were deemed to be conforming and included for further consideration.

 

Evaluation Criteria 1 – Organisational Experience (25%)

The tenderer’s resources as presented in its tender submissions were assessed in order to evaluate their capacity to meet the requirements of the contract.  Assessment of this criterion considered the tenderers' experience in supplying services of a similar nature and circumstances, with considerations given to project relevance, type, size, complexity and resourcing availability.

 

Based on the response provided by the tenderers the assessment of this criterion has resulted in the following ranking:

 

Tenderer	Ranking
RJ Vincent	1
Wormall	2
Menchetti	2
Advanteering	4
Environmental Industries	4
McCorkell	4
MGC Civil	7

Evaluation Criteria 2 – Key Personnel Experience (25%)

The tenderer’s resources as presented in its tender submissions were assessed in order to evaluate their capacity to meet the requirements of the contract.  Assessment of this criterion considered the tenderer’s key personnel with considerations given to project experience, type, size and complexity.

 

Based on the response provided by the tenderers the assessment of this criterion has resulted in the following ranking:

 

Tenderer	Ranking
RJ Vincent	1
Wormall	1
Menchetti	1
McCorkell	4
Advanteering	5
Environmental Industries	5
MGC Civil	5

 

Evaluation Criteria 3 – Methodology (25%)

The tenderer’s resources as presented in its tender submissions were assessed in order to evaluate their capacity to meet the requirements of the contract.  Assessment of this criterion considered the tenderer’s project management procedures and project methodology, as presented in their tender submissions, were assessed in order to evaluate the tenderer’s understanding, methods and construction programme to meet the relevant timeframe of the contract.

 

Based on the response provided by the tenderers the assessment of this criterion has resulted in the following ranking:

 

Tenderer	Ranking
RJ Vincent	1
Wormall	2
Menchetti	2
Environmental Industries	4
Advanteering	5
MGC Civil	5
McCorkell	7

 

Evaluation Criteria 4 – Occupational Health & Safety (25%)

Evidence of safety and quality management policies and practices was assessed from the tender submissions. The assessment for safety management was based on the tenderers’ responses to an Occupational Health and Safety Management System Questionnaire included in the tender documentation.

 

Based on the response provided by the tenderers the assessment of this criterion has resulted in the following ranking:

 

Tenderer	Ranking
Wormall	1
RJ Vincent	2
Environmental Industries	3
MGC Civil	3
Advanteering	5
Menchetti	6
McCorkell	7

 

Overall Weighted Assessment and Ranking

Tenderer’s submissions were reviewed in accordance with the Tender Evaluation Plan with the following key observations:

·        The tenderers’ bids were evaluated in accordance with the selection criteria and were assessed as having the necessary resources, previous experience, capability and safety and quality management systems to undertake the tender.

 

·        The baseline for the Qualitative Criteria was set at 50%, and six tenderers achieved scores higher; of which Wormall achieved the highest overall qualitative score.

 

The overall weighted assessment resulted in the following tender ranking:

Tenderer	Ranking
RJ Vincent	1
Wormall	2
Menchetti	3
Environmental Industries	4
Advanteering	5
MGC Civil	5
McCorkell	7

 

Value for Money Assessment

The combined assessment of Price vs Qualitative Scores resulted in the following tender ranking (highest to lowest):

Tenderer	Ranking
Wormall	1
RJ Vincent	2
Environmental Industries	3
MGC Civil	4
Menchetti	5
Advanteering	6
McCorkell	7

 

 Overall Comment

The tender submission from Wormall achieved the second highest weighted ranking and the highest ranking for overall value for money assessment in accordance with the assessment criteria and weightings as detailed in the Procurement and Evaluation Plan and is therefore recommended as the successful tenderer.

 

An assessment and evaluation of Wormall tender also noted the following:

·        Ranked high in all assessments; 

·        Wormall  tender price is competitive and is within the budget estimate prepared by the City’s professionally engaged Quantity Surveyors;

·        A reputable and large organisation with substantial backing;

·        Wormall has performed a number of large scale projects within the City of Wanneroo, for land developers and Landcorp;

·        Previous work undertaken relating to timelines for completion of projects, project management, quality of work and overall delivery of projects is considered positive; and

·        Wormall has a strong and large team, capable of successfully delivering a large number of projects.

Consultation

Throughout the design phase of the project the City has worked collaboratively with key stakeholders; Department of Education, Property Developers LWP Property Group and Satterley Property Group (LWP and Satterley), sports clubs and user groups.

 

The public comment process was undertaken July to August 2015 with Property Developers (LWP and Satterley), nearby residents, various sporting clubs and user groups.

 

As reported in CD03-11/15 Outcomes of Community Consultation for Butler North District Open Space, the public comment process for the project was undertaken via an initial online survey, which was open for a period of two weeks from 27 July 2015 to 7 August 2015. The survey was promoted through the City’s SmartClubs newsletter (circulation of 130), website, Facebook and Twitter pages.

 

In addition, this survey was also sent to Property Developers; LWP Property Group and Satterley Property Group to forward on to residents via their respective mailing lists. Survey respondents were provided a copy of the Master Plan. However this resulted in a limited number of submissions. As a result, Administration decided to re-open the survey and undertook a mail-out to residents within a 400m radius of the reserve (1,871 households) for a further four weeks from 21 September to 16 October 2015. This resulted in an additional 74 submissions.

 

The survey results indicated support for the proposed Master Plan.

 

It should also be noted that additional public comment processes have been undertaken as part of the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation’s clearing permit application assessment process.

 

Post tender award and during the construction phase, the City will provide regular progress updates on key project milestones or events; posting of information on City’s webpage and media channels in addition notifying DoE, DLGSCI, developers, local residents, John Butler Primary College, relevant sports and user groups.

Statutory Compliance

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

 

The proposed works being undertaken by the City received Development Approval on 16 May 2018.

 

A Draft clearing permit has been provided to the City and is in the final stages of processing.  It is noted that works cannot start until 28 days after the clearing permit is granted by the DWER. 

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2017 – 2027:

 “1     Society

1.1    Healthy and Active People

1.1.1  Create opportunities that encourage community wellbeing and active and healthy lifestyles”

           “1     Society

                   1.1    Healthy and Active People

1.1.2    Facilitate opportunities within the City to access peak and elite activities”

           “3     Environment (Built)

3.4    Activated Places

3.4.2  Provide safe spaces, centres, and facilities through our infrastructure management and designs for community benefit and recreation”

          “3      Environment (Built)

3.4    Activated Places

3.4.4  Improve local amenity by retaining and complementing natural landscapes within the built environment”

Enterprise Risk Management Considerations

The below risks relating to the issue contained within this tender have been identified and considered within the City’s Strategic and Corporate risk register. Action plans have been developed to manage/mitigate/accept these risks to support existing management systems.

 

Risk Title	Risk Rating
CO-O08 Contract Management	Moderate
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Executive Management Team	Manage
Risk Title	Risk Rating
ST-S23 Stakeholder Relationships	Moderate
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Director Assets	Manage

Risk Title	Risk Rating
CO-O17 Financial Management	Moderate
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Executive Management Team	Manage

Financial and Performance Risk

Financial Risk

A financial risk assessment was undertaken as part of the tender evaluation process and the outcome of this independent assessment by Corporate Scorecard Pty Ltd advised that Wormall has been assessed with a strong financial capacity to meet the requirements of the contract and no additional risk mitigation actions are required outside of the need for a contractor to provide security as per the tender documents.

 

As per tender requirements, Wormall is required to provide two bank guarantees / retention with a combined total of 7.5% of the contract value, for practical completion and for the defects liability period within 14 days after acceptance of tender or five days prior to possession of site, whichever is the latest.

Performance Risk

Over the past five years, Wormall has successfully completed major projects averaging more than $95 Million per financial year.

 

Wormall Civil currently has over $70 Million of contracts in progress with most to be completed during 2019.

 

Wormall haven’t completed any projects directly for the City as principal in the past 5 years, but have completed a number of projects within the City that were completed on time and to a high standard, which including the following developments:

·   Banksia Grove - all stages at this development since 2009;

·   Jindee Stage 1 – Large Civil works and small landscaping portion also included; and

·   Trinity at Alkimos for LWP - the last 4 stages of development.

 

Independent reference checks have further confirmed that the recommended tenderer has provided an excellent level of service and delivery to its customers, with minimal defects and work done to a high standard.

Operational Risk

Operational risk and mitigation will be addressed through the risk assessment process of the project management framework.

 

Prior to the commencement works, the appointed contractor will be inducted to the project site. Ongoing auditing of the contractor’s work practices during the course of the works will be undertaken to ensure compliance with the Operational Health & Safety requirements.

 

 

Social and Environmental (Sustainable Procurement) Considerations

The Tender document included this consideration as a non-weighted criterion. Wormall indicated that company operates under an environmental management system and will ensure that the construction is in accordance with the environmental requirements.

 

Wormall provided an example of Traffic Management Plan for works, which within provides protection to workers and the general public from traffic hazards that may arise as a result of the construction activity.

 

Broader Economic Impact Implications for the City of Wanneroo

The Tender document included broader economic impact implications as a non-weighted criterion through the use of a “Buy Local” questionnaire.

 

In this context ‘local’ is defined as all suburbs within the City of Wanneroo and City of Joondalup or within a 5 kilometre radius of the project site.

 

The response form Wormall advises:

·        26 of Wormall‘s current employees live locally.  Their nominated Project Manager and Site Supervisor also live locally;

·        If awarded this tender, Wormall will not be required to employ additional staff;

·        Wormall intends to employ locally based sub-contractors; and

·        Warmall will be supplying goods to the City which are:

a)  Purchased locally: $1.2M; and

b)  Made locally: $300,000

Policy Implications

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

Financial Implications

The table below summarises the available funding for the project, current expenditures and the recommended tender price by Wormall for the Provision of Major Works Halesworth Park, Butler – New Sports Facilities and associated expenses:

 

PR-2955 Provision of Major Works Halesworth Park, Butler – New Sports Facilities
Description	Project Costs	Project Funding
Budget:
Allocated Capital Works Budget to end of FY2017/18		$485,784
Allocated Capital Works Budget for FY2018/19		$4,158,511
Capital Works Budget for FY2019/20 - Listed		$6,962,500
Capital Works Budget for FY2020/21 -  Listed		$9,107,994
Total Funding		$20,714,789
Expenditure to Date:
Expenditure incurred to date	$642,969
Expenditure to be incurred:
Commitments	$153,111
Project Management Fees	$600,000
Professional Fees	$1,100,000
RFT 19062 Provision of Major Works Halesworth Park, Butler – New Sports Facilities (Recommended Tender)	$7,650,332.14
Construction Contingency	$500,000
Other Works (Buildings, Environmental Offsets, Art Services, etc.).	$9,000,000
Total Expenditure (Estimate)	$19,646,412

 

Funding allocated to the project for FY2018/19 and FY2019/20 is sufficient for Provision of Major Works Halesworth Park, Butler – New Sports Facilities. The actual budget provision for FY2020/21 will be reviewed after the Tender for Construction of the Buildings is requested.

 

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council ACCEPTS the tender submitted by Wormall Civil Pty Ltd for Tender No. 19062, for Provision of Major Works Halesworth Park, Butler – New Sports Facilities as a Fixed Lump Sum Price of $7,650,332.14 + GST in accordance with the terms and conditions specified in the tender document and subject to the City receiving all necessary permits and approvals.

 

Attachments:

1.

19 152637 (Revision 0)  Confidential Attachment - Tender 19062.docx

Confidential

 

 

   

 

 

 

Attachment 1 – (Revision 0)  Confidential Attachment - Tender 19062

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This attachment is confidential and distributed under separate cover to all Elected Members

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Administrative Use Only

Attachment 1 – HPE # 19/152637

 

 

 

Community & Place

Cultural Development

File Ref:                                              25883V02 – 19/150878

Responsible Officer:                          Director Community and Place

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       7         

 

Issue

To endorse draft concept designs for the Southern Suburbs Library proposed to be situated at 15 The Broadview, Landsdale for the purposes of community consultation.

Background

The development of a new library/community facility in the southern suburbs has been under consideration for some time, with Council approving further investigation of site options for the Southern Suburbs Library in December 2018 (CP01-12/18).

Detail

In response to the Council resolution, Administration undertook a review of potential sites for the proposed facility in the southern suburbs and identified the site at Lot 990 (15) The Broadview, Landsdale as the most suitable. Within The Broadview site, Administration has identified two locations that have the capacity to accommodate a proposed facility (Attachment 1).

 

The table below provides further detail in respect to the site of 15 The Broadview, Landsdale:

 

OWNER	State of WA (Crown Land)
MANAGEMENT ORDER	City of Wanneroo (Document No. XE L040598)
LEGAL DESCRIPTION	Lot 990 on Deposited Plan 39373 Volume: LR3134 Folio: 32
RESERVE NUMBER	47559
RESERVE PURPOSE	Community Purposes
RESERVE CLASS	C
POWER TO LEASE	Yes
LEGAL AREA	5,000m2
DPS2 ZONING	Civic & Cultural
ASP ZONING	Commercial ASP No. 16 (Landsdale Gardens Estate Neighbourhood Centre)
DEVELOPMENT STATUS	Vacant

 

Following the identification of a proposed site in Landsdale, Bollig Design Group Pty Ltd was engaged to revisit the original single and two storey concept designs provided for the Southern Suburbs Library, adapting four concept designs to ascertain if the original concepts for the facility are able to fit on the two potential location options at The Broadview site. This is able to be achieved as demonstrated on the attached plans.  Location 1 (Attachments 2, 3 and 4) are single and two storey options overlooking the park, and Location 2 (Attachments 5, 6 and 7) are single and two storey options overlooking the road.

 

Noting that the Landsdale site has unique topographical features, a request was made to review the two storey design overlooking the park to maximise the potential facility distinctiveness and outlook.   In response to this, Bollig Design Group Pty Ltd has revised the design and proposed that the café be incorporated over two levels. The café kitchen and seating component remains on the ground floor and a seated area is provided on the upper floor, replacing the alfresco reading area.

 

A proposed café over two levels resolves a number of operating issues such as kitchen deliveries, street access and maintaining visibility of the café to passing trade. To enable service of food and drinks to the upper level, a servery will need to be provided in the upper area and to avoid using the internal lift in the Library (for delivery of food and drinks) a dumbwaiter (servery lift) is included in the design. The provision of the café over two levels increases the fully enclosed covered area by 150sqm, increasing construction costs.

 

The two storey options are generally more expensive to construct, however provide the benefit of a strong civic statement and distinctive facility design. The concept designs have an improved outlook from the upper levels and generous setbacks from the site boundaries allowing greater perimeter landscaping. However, the two storey option for Location 2, overlooking the Broadview (road), may overwhelm the adjacent residential streetscape and impact close residents.

 

Whilst the single storey options generally have lower construction costs, they occupy a greater site footprint. The result is building closer to site boundaries (reduced setback), providing less space for surrounding landscaping and additional amenity.

 

Provision for parking on the site can be sufficiently catered for and compliant with parking requirements. Parking for Location 1 is easier to accommodate in close proximity to the building. Parking for Location 2 uses the same parking design layout shown for Location 1.

Consultation

Community consultation will take place on the proposed location and concept designs following endorsement by Council. Consultation will be undertaken in accordance with the City’s Community Engagement Policy and will take place between June and July 2019.

 

At the appropriate time, it is intended that Administration will consult with the City’s Design Review Panel on the proposed design for the Southern Suburbs Library.

Comment

Following the December 2018 Council resolution, further investigation of site options for the Southern Suburbs Library has been undertaken.  These investigations have identified a suitable site at Lot 990 (15) The Broadview, Landsdale with two potential location options available on this site.

 

The pre-planning for the Southern Suburbs Library undertaken in 2016 has informed the concept design for The Broadview site. The detailed design for Location 1 overlooking the park needs to be mindful of adjacent commercial buildings, required clearing permits and connectivity to the public open space. Similarly, the detailed design for Location 2 overlooking the road will need to consider immediate residents, commercial buildings and traffic flow.

 

A café over two levels will need to be conscious of the commercial market to ensure the design is viable, to attract commercial café tenants.

 

Location 1 presents the opportunity to develop a distinctive facility, integrating the natural landscape of the park whilst connecting to the shopping precinct. Location 2 is closer to the shopping precinct, directly adjacent to the road and residents.

 

It is proposed that as Location 1 has the greatest potential for the development of a distinctive and unique community facility, this location and the associated single and two storey concept designs be released for community consultation.

Statutory Compliance

Nil

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2017 – 2027:

 “1     Society

1.4    Connected Communities

1.4.2  Strengthen community and customer connectedness through community hubs ”

Risk Management Considerations

Risk Title	Risk Rating
CO-020 Productive Communities	Moderate
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Director Community & Place	Manage

 

Risk Title	Risk Rating
ST-S23 Stakeholder Relationships	Moderate
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Chief Executive Officer	Manage

 

Risk Title	Risk Rating
ST-G09 Long Term Financial Planning	Moderate
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Director Corporate Strategy & Performance	Manage

 

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

Policy Implications

Any potential tender process will be in accordance with the City’s Purchasing Policy. Any potential commercial lease will be in accordance with the City’s Leasing Policy. Community consultation will be undertaken in accordance with the City’s Community Engagement Policy.

Financial Implications

There is $52,819 available within the 2018/19 budget for the concept design review, with any remaining budget proposed to be carried over to 2019/20. In addition, the City’s Long Term Financial Plan makes the following provision for the remaining stages:

 

 

·        2019/20      $301,249 (detailed design and tender documentation)

·        2020/21      $400,000 (detailed design and tender documentation)

·        2021/22      $6,244,000 (construction)

 

Given the range of concept designs that have been produced for the two location options at The Broadview site, detailed design will need to be undertaken to determine more accurate construction costs.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       ENDORSES the draft concept designs of Location 1 as shown in Attachments 2, 3 and 4 of this report for the proposed Southern Suburbs Library to be situated at 15 The Broadview, Landsdale for the purpose of community consultation; and

2.       NOTES that based on the proposed schedule, consultation with the community will take place from June 2019 through to July 2019, with the outcomes to be reported to Council in August 2019.

 

 

Attachments:

1⇩.	Southern Suburbs Library - 15 The Broadview Landsdale Site Options	19/114838
2⇩.	1930_SK01 PLAN GROUND FLOOR - LOCATION 1 two storey.pdf - Report	19/129205	Minuted
3⇩.	1930_SK02 PLAN FIRST FLOOR - LOCATION 1 two storey.pdf - Report	19/129211	Minuted
4⇩.	1930_SK05 PLAN - LOCATION 1 one storey.pdf - Report	19/129241	Minuted
5⇩.	1930_SK03 PLAN GROUND FLOOR - LOCATION 2 two storey.pdf - Report	19/129225
6⇩.	1930_SK04 PLAN FIRST FLOOR - LOCATION 2 two storey.pdf - Report	19/129236
7⇩.	1930_SK06 PLAN - LOCATION 2 one storey.pdf - Report	19/129248

 

 

 

Site Location Map – Lot 990 (15) The Broadview, Landsdale

 

 

 

 

Community Facilities

File Ref:                                              27368 – 19/102585

Responsible Officer:                          Director Community and Place

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       1  

Previous Items:                                   CP07-05/16 - Kingsway Regional Sporting Complex – AFL Ground Cricket Wicket Re-location - Ordinary Council - 24 May 2016 7.00pm      

 

Issue

To consider a proposal received from the Subiaco Football Club to conduct a WA Football League (WAFL) game at the Kingsway Regional Sporting Complex on 17 August 2019.

Background

The Kingsway Regional Sporting Complex Australian Rules Football (AFL) ground is located at 100 Kingsway, Madeley (Attachment 1) and is classified as Regional Active Open Space. The property type is Crown Land, vested within the City of Wanneroo for the purposes of Recreation.

The AFL ground is located on the corner of Sporting and Spectator Drives and currently accommodates junior and senior AFL, cricket, Little Athletics and some small ball sports training and match play (day light hours only). The oval has also been used extensively for various City community events.

Existing infrastructure on the ground includes the central concrete cricket wicket, cricket practice wickets, four pole floodlighting installation for large ball sport ball and physical training, throwing circles (used by Little Athletics), car park, storage sheds, car park and the Kingsway Football and Sporting Club. 

Previously, a WAFL game between Subiaco and West Perth was held at the Kingsway AFL ground on 6 August 2016. In this respect, Council has previously considered report CP07-05/16 relating to the proposed WAFL game and the need to remove and re-locate the central cricket wicket currently located at the Kingsway AFL ground to accommodate the game.

Detail

The proposal received by the Subiaco Football Club is to hold a WAFL fixture between Subiaco and West Perth at the ground on Saturday, 17 August 2019.

The Clubs are seeking to play the fixture at a community facility that is relevant to both Club’s talent pathways and junior clubs located within the City of Wanneroo. The day will be promoted as a family fun event with games and attractions for children and families being the focus. In addition to this, the proposal is also seeking to play a WAFL (W) (a new Women’s League) post the men’s league game under lights on the same day.

The Club has noted that it will be seeking a grant/sponsorship to cover the cost of the gate and to enable residents and local families to attend the game for free.

In reviewing the requirements of the proposed game, and as was the case for the game held in 2016, the existing central cricket wicket will need to be removed on the basis that the WAFL’s standards indicate that:

“Artificial wickets will be covered with turf so that a flat, even and solid surface is produced. The new turf must be fixed and allow no greater movement than the surrounding surface.

Where this cannot be achieved the artificial surface must:-

1.         Artificial wicket must be removed; and

2.         Not be covered with rubber matting as this may shift during play.”

The current wicket has been constructed so that the top of the wicket is at ground level to enable use for cricket, which is as per the City’s standard. During the winter season, the wickets are covered with rubber matting to facilitate winter sports, with the surrounding turf being allowed to grow to the level of the matting. As result, when the wicket is turfed over (that occurs using jumbo turf rolls 50mm thick) there will be a mound effect created, that poses an unacceptable risk to players.  

To enable the proposed game to progress the removal of the central cricket wicket is required and this has been listed for consideration within the draft 2019/20 budget at an estimated cost of $35,000.

Administration has sought feedback from existing user groups of the reserve, including the following clubs:

·          Kingsway Junior Football Club;

·          Kingsway Senior Football Club;

·          Kingsway Little Athletics Centre;

·          Kingsway Cricket Club; and

·          Softball/Baseball Clubs.

Feedback has been received to date from the resident Football Clubs and the Kingsway Little Athletics Centre and has been positive. At the time of completion of this report feedback has not been received from the balance of the clubs noted above. The key points raised for further consideration include:

User Group	Comment
Kingsway Little Athletics Centre	·    State Cross Country Championships are held on that day so will need access to their building to collect and return equipment. ·    Request that any designated areas for alcohol consumption are not placed near our building. Little Athletics is sponsored by Healthway that has strict policies regarding alcohol. Any social media photos of alcohol being consumed with our signage behind them can be detrimental to that agreement.
Kingsway Junior Football Club	·    Verbal advice provided indicated that the Club are supportive of the proposal.
Kingsway Senior Football Club	·    Support the proposed WAFL fixture. ·    Acknowledge that use of the ground will need to be managed prior to the game to ensure the surface is at the required standard. Noted that this may also need to extend to other bookings for the reserve. ·    Interested in holding a game after the WAFL fixture.

 

In addition to this, Administration supports the proposed event on the basis that:

·          There is in place a formal ground use agreement with resident clubs for the period prior to the game (e.g. 4 weeks); and

·          Consideration is given to amending the date for the fixture to schedule it within school holidays or on WA Day on 3 June 2019. This would provide additional parking capacity given that junior fixtures are not normally held on school or public holidays.

Subject to Council’s consideration of this report, it is Administration’s intention to request that the Subiaco Football Club progress an Event Approval Application for the proposed event. This is on the basis that the following items will need to be progressed as a part of the Event Approval process:

·          Confirmation of ground maintenance requirements for the period prior to the game (e.g. up to 4 weeks prior);

·          Development of  an appropriate ground usage plan to accommodate resident clubs training and match play to other venues for the period prior to the game;

·          Confirmation of the Club’s proposed marketing approach and tie in with the City’s communications and activities for the proposed event;

·          Confirmation of the match day fixtures and timing;

·          Consultation with other neighbouring users, including netball, rugby and soccer in respect to other scheduled fixture on the proposed date; and

·          Engagement with residents and the broader community.

 

It should also be noted that the re-laying of the cricket wicket will require a curing time of 28 days, which will impact on the availability of the ground for the beginning of the 2019/20 cricket season.

Consultation

Administration has undertaken initial consultation with the resident clubs at the Kingsway AFL ground including:

·          Kingsway Junior Football Club;

·          Kingsway Senior Football Club;

·          Kingsway Little Athletics Centre;

·          Kingsway Cricket Club; and

·          Softball/Baseball Clubs.

Further consultation will be undertaken with these clubs and the Subiaco Football Club as required. Any required community consultation will be undertaken as per the City’s Community Engagement Policy.

Comment

In consideration of this proposed WAFL fixture at the Kingsway Regional Sporting Complex, it is Administration’s view that consideration should also be given to the opportunity to host WAFL games at other venues within the City, such Splendid Park Yanchep which is in the West Perth zone. This is noting that the AFL ground at Splendid Park has been designed specifically without a concrete cricket wicket on it to enable the ground to more easily host games such as this. The same approach has been taken in the design of the Butler North District Open Space, the construction of which is scheduled to commence in 2019.

It is also important to note that there will be costs associated with the hosting of WAFL games at Kingsway, beyond those associated with the removal and replacement of the cricket wicket. These relate primarily to the additional ground maintenance required. It should be noted that hosting of these fixtures at the ground will also impact on the resident clubs and their ability to use the ground in the lead up to the game and impact those clubs who use the grounds to which the Kingsway games have been re-located.

The development of an agreement with the Subiaco Football Club to hold the game on a bi-annual basis (as noted within the recommendations of report CP07-05/16) has not been progressed by Administration given there has been minimal interest shown by parties in such an arrangement. Moving forward, it is Administration’s view that requests for community-based WAFL games can best be managed on a case by case basis.

Statutory Compliance

Nil

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2017 – 2027:

 “1     Society

1.1    Healthy and Active People

1.1.2  Facilitate opportunities within the City to access peak and elite activities”

Risk Management Considerations

Risk Title	Risk Rating
ST-S23 Stakeholder Relationships	Moderate
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Chief Executive Officer	Manage

 

Risk Title	Risk Rating
CO-020 Productive Communities	Moderate
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Director Community and Place	Manage

 

Risk Title	Risk Rating
CO-O17 Financial Management	Moderate
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Director Corporate Strategy & Performance	Manage

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

Policy Implications

Due consideration has been given to the City’s Local Planning Policy 4.3 Public Open Space and Facility Hire and Use Policy.

Financial Implications

A sum of $35,000 has been listed for consideration within the draft 2019/20 budget (PR-2820) for the Kingsway Regional Sporting Complex – Kingsway Football Oval replacement of cricket wicket for WAFL game.

As noted above, the removal of the central cricket wicket is required to enable the ground to meet the requirements of the WAFL standards for League matches.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.         NOTES the proposal from the Subiaco Football Club to hold a WA Football League fixture at the Kingsway Regional Sporting Complex AFL ground on Saturday 17 August 2019;

2.         APPROVES the removal of the existing central cricket wicket to enable the game to be held at the Kingsway Regional Sporting Complex AFL ground, NOTING the cost has been included within the draft 2019/20 Capital Budget; and

3.         NOTES that Administration has requested the Subiaco Football Club submit an Event Approval Application for the proposed event.

 

 

Attachments:

1⇩.

Kingsway Sporting Complex - AFL Ground

16/157059

 

 

File Ref:                                              25887 – 19/19038

Responsible Officer:                          Director Community and Place

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       4  

Previous Items:                                   CP06-11/18 - Proposed Yanchep Skate Park - Site Analysis - Ordinary Council - 13 Nov 2018 6.30pm      

 

Issue

To consider the proposed concept plan for new skate facility at Splendid Park, Yanchep.

Background

Splendid Park (the Park) is located on Splendid Avenue Yanchep (Attachment 1). The Park has an overall land area of approximately 12.8 hectares, classifying it as a district park. The Park is Crown Land vested to the City of Wanneroo for the purpose of public recreation.

The Park is bounded by residential properties to the west and bushland to the north, east and south. Residents to the west are separated by the road reserve for the future Marmion Avenue extension.

The Park includes the following amenities:

·               Two multipurpose ovals catering for Athletics and junior and senior Australian Football League (AFL), Soccer, Rugby and Cricket;

·       Two multipurpose hard courts accommodating basketball and netball;

·               Floodlighting to the required Australian Standard for large ball sports;

·       Cricket nets;

·       Long jump pits;

·       1.8 metre perimeter fence;

·       Sports Amenities Building; and

·       Playground adjacent to the amenities building.

At the City’s Annual General Meeting (AGM) held on 27 January 2016, a motion in regards to the provision of a skate park in Yanchep was put to the meeting as follows:

“That the City of Wanneroo consider in their 2016/17 budget the design and installation of a skate plaza together with a family friendly park amenities in Yanchep that caters for all ages and levels of experience and includes community input into the design.  Additionally, a youth working reference group be formed.”

In response to the motion Administration undertook to consult with young people in Yanchep in regards to their needs for leisure facility provision and broader service delivery needs. This was undertaken via the City’s Y-Speak survey which was completed in late 2017. A key outcome for the Y-Speak survey was as follows:

“The community has identified the need for an increase in youth services and facilities. Community consultation indicates that facilities and services for families and young people to access which are open and safe for the community to utilise are valued. Statistics demonstrate the top ranked facilities for young people in Yanchep include the following:

 

·        Recreational facility;

·        Youth centre;

·        Training facility;

·        Community centre; and

·        BMX, Skate and Scooter facility.”

In February 2017, the City was awarded State Government funding of $300,000 towards the construction of a skate park within Yanchep. This was later increased to $450,000 as part of the Local Projects, Local Jobs program. 

On 13 November 2018, Council considered Report CP16-11/18 Proposed Yanchep Skate Park – Site Analysis and resolved the following:

“1.  NOTES the outcome of the site analysis process;

2.   ENDORSES site Option A at Splendid Park (as per Attachment 5 of this report) being pursued for the development of the proposed Yanchep Skate Park;

3.   NOTES that further negotiation is to occur with the land owner, Yanchep Beach Joint Venture, in respect to the City’s existing lease over Splendid Park and the proposed skate park development;

4.   NOTES that the additional sum of $210,000 will be required for the project, to be sourced from external grant funds; and

5.   CONSIDERS the inclusion of CCTV at the design stage of the proposed Yanchep Skate Park, to ensure that adequate surveillance is provided to the City’s assets.”

Detail

Concept Development

Administration has prepared a concept design (Attachment 2) for the proposed skate facility at Splendid Park. The concept design seeks to create an active youth recreation precinct that combines the natural features of the park and surrounds with the interests of young people in the area. As the site for the skate park is long and linear and to avoid a large concrete slab feel to the skate park, landscaping has be brought into the rectangular site. This provides shape and helps create a more interesting journey as riders travel from one end of the facility to the other. A row of trees is proposed to be planted along the outside edge of the existing footpath to block wind whilst still maintaining views in and out of the facility.

The facility has been divided into three main zones in order to maximise capacity. Seating zones are provided at either end of the facility, with a ‘street flow’ and transition flow’ zone in between. These zones can be ridden in isolation and still have some overlap to allow the zones to be used as one during less busy periods.

The concept plan includes a number of skate obstacles and features that are multi-functional and can be used in a variety of ways, creating a unique rider experience when compared to other wheeled sports facilities within the City and surrounds (Attachment 2). The facility also provides a mixture of transition style obstacles; mini-ramp/mini bowl, smaller spines, box jumps and quarter pipes with some larger extension or obstacles for progression. There are a number of street style obstacles including a mellow fun box with ledges and rails, a flat bar and stairs, all of which are designed to encourage riders to progress their skill levels across all styles of riding

The design ncludes items of supporting infrastructure to create an accessible, family-friendly facility. This includes the provision of seating, shade, bins and a drink fountain, with these items being designed with users, spectators and parents in mind. 

Cost Estimate

A breakdown of estimated capital costs based on the draft concept plan is provided in the table below.

CCTV provision has been estimated at $35,000, however is not included within the project budget.

Project Schedule

The proposed timeframes for the balance of the project is as follows.

Key Tasks / Milestones	Anticipated Start	Anticipated Finish
Appointment of consultant	December 2018	December 2018
Initial Consultation and Concept Design	January 2019	April 2019
Report to Council – consultation outcomes	May 2019	May 2019
Grant Application	June 2019	July 2019
Detailed Design	May 2019	August 2019
Construction Tender Preparation and Implementation	August 2019	November 2019
Construction and Practical Completion	December 2019	June 2020
Defects Liability Period	June 2020	June 2021

Consultation

To support the concept design development process, Administration organised two workshops during January and March 2019. The purpose of these workshops was to provide the basis for the initial design and obtain feedback on the draft concept design prior to this being considered by Council.

The first “pre-design” workshop was held at Splendid Park Sports Amenities Building on 24 January 2019, hosted by the City’s appointed consultant, CONVIC Pty Ltd. The workshop had a total of 12 participants attend and included a number of ideas and information gathering activities to help create a design vision for the skate park. These included picture voting, a questionnaire and a group design workshop to develop an understanding of demographics, skill levels, facility types / usage, and preferences for the facility. The outcomes were summarised to inform a community driven design brief for the facility. A detailed consultation report resulting from this process is included in (Attachment 3).

Participants from the first workshop were then invited to attend a second workshop on 20 March 2019, to review the draft concept design and provide feedback. This workshop had a four participants attend with a further three survey responses being received (for a total of seven).  Surveys were provided to the Yanchep District High School and Yanchep Primary School however none were returned.

Overall the feedback provided was positive, with a summary of the feedback received from the workshop provided below:

·        Provide additional pedestrian access to the facility;

·        Remove ledge and replace with grind rail; and

·        Additional obstacles.

 

This feedback was included in the final proposed concept design (Attachment 2), with the final Concept Design Report included as (Attachment 4).

Comment

In considering the comments from the second workshop (noted above), the following advice is provided:

Comment	Response
Provide additional access.	Incorporated into final Concept design
Remove ledge and replace with grind rail	Incorporated into final Concept design
Additional obstacles	This was discussed with participants at the second workshop. The addition of more obstacles within the budget will result in a loss of existing elements.

Statutory Compliance

Nil

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2017 – 2027:

 “1     Society

1.1    Healthy and Active People

1.1.1  Create opportunities that encourage community wellbeing and active and healthy lifestyles”

Risk Management Considerations

Risk Title	Risk Rating
ST-S23 Stakeholder relationships	Moderate
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Chief Executive Officer	Manage

 

Risk Title	Risk Rating
CO-O20 Productive Communities	Moderate
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Director Community and Place	Manage

 

Risk Title	Risk Rating
CO-O17 Financial Management	Moderate
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Director Corporate Strategy & Performance	Manage

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

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

A budget of $700,000, allocated to PR-4145 is listed within the Capital Works Budget for the project, with $40,000 listed in 2018/19 for design and surveys, and a further $660,000 for construction in 2019/20. There has been a contribution from the State Government of $450,000 towards the project budget, with an additional $250,000 to be sought through additional grant funding.

The current total estimated for construction of the new skate park facility, as provided by the consultant, is $700,000 and therefore within budget.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

 

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       ENDORSES the Splendid Park Skate Park Concept Design as shown in Attachment 2 of this report, for the purpose of broader community consultation;

2.       NOTES that based on the proposed schedule, consultation with the broader community will take place from May 2019 through to June 2019, with the outcomes to be reported to Council by July 2019;

3.       NOTES that the City will apply for additional external grant funding of $250,000 towards the project; and

4.       RECOGNISES and THANKS the workshop attendees for their involvement with the concept design development process.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1⇩.	Splendid Park - Site Plan	19/132092
2⇩.	Splendid Park Skate Park - Final Concept Design	19/144396	Minuted
3⇩.	Splendid Park Skate Park - Draft Concept Design Report	19/144350
4⇩.	Splendid Park Skate Park - Final Concept Design Report	19/144386