Council Agenda

 

 

ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

7.00pm, 12 December, 2006

Civic Centre,

Dundebar Road, Wanneroo

 

 

Council allows a minimum of 15 minutes for public questions and statements at each Council meeting.  If there are not sufficient questions to fill the allocated time, the person presiding will move on to the next item.  If there are more questions than can be dealt with in the 15 minutes allotted, the person presiding will determine whether to extend question time.

 

Protocols

 

During the meeting, no member of the public may interrupt the meeting’s proceedings or enter into conversation.  Each person seeking to ask questions during public question time may address the council for a maximum of 3 minutes each.

 

Members of the public wishing to submit written questions are requested to lodge them with the Chief Executive Officer at least 30 hours prior to the start of the meeting.

 

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

 

The following general rules apply to question and statement time:

 

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

·                Only questions relating to matters affecting Council will be considered at an ordinary meeting, and at a special meeting only questions that relate to the purpose of the meeting will be considered.  Questions may be taken on notice and responded to after the meeting.

·                Questions may not be directed at specific members of council or employees.

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

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

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

 

 

The Mayor and Councillors will conduct an informal session on the same day as the meeting of the Council at the Civic Centre, Wanneroo, commencing at 6.00pm where members of the public may, by appointment, present deputations. If you wish to present a deputation please submit your request for a deputation in writing addressed to the Chief Executive Officer or fax through to Executive Services on 9405 5097. 

 

·                A time period of 10 minutes is set aside for each deputation. 

·                Deputations shall not exceed five (5) persons in number and only three (3) of those persons shall be at liberty to address the Council and to respond to questions the Mayor and Councillors may have.

 

Please ensure that mobile phones are switched off before entering the Council Chamber.  Any queries on this agenda, please contact Executive Services on 9405 5027 or 9405 5018.

Objective

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

·      To emphasise that the reason for tape recording of Council Meetings is to ensure the accuracy of Council Meetings.

Statement

Recording of Proceedings

(1)          Proceedings for meetings of the Council, of electors and of the Audit Committee shall be recorded, by the City, on sound recording equipment except, in the case of meetings of the Council or the Audit Committee, where the Council or the Committee, as the case may be, closes the meeting to the public.

(2)          Notwithstanding sub clause (1), proceedings of a meeting of the Council or of the Audit Committee which is closed to the public shall be recorded where the Council or the Audit Committee, as the case requires, resolves to do so.

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

Access to Recorded Tapes

(4)          Members of the public may purchase a copy of the taped proceedings or alternatively listen to recorded proceedings with the supervision of a City Officer.

(5)          Elected Members may listen to a recording of the Council proceedings upon request, free of charge.  However, no transcript will be produced without the approval of the Chief Executive Officer.

(6)          Costs of providing taped proceedings to members of the public will be the cost of the tape plus staff time to make the copy of the proceedings.  The cost of supervised listening to recordings will be the cost of the staff time.  The cost of staff time will be set in the City’s schedule of fees and charges each year.

Retention of Tapes

(7)          Recordings pertaining to the proceedings of Council Meetings shall be retained in accordance with the Library Board of Western Australia Act (1951-83), General Disposal Authority for Local Government Records.  The current requirement for the retention of recorded proceedings is thirty (30) years.

Disclosure of Policy

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

 

 

Notice is given that the next Ordinary Council Meeting will be held at the Civic Centre,

Dundebar Road, Wanneroo on Tuesday 12 December, 2006 commencing at 7.00pm.

 

 

 

 

C JOHNSON

Chief Executive Officer

07 December 2006

 

 

 

 

CONTENTS

 

Item  1          Attendances  1

Item  2          Apologies and Leave of Absence   1

Item  3          Public Question Time   1

Item  4          Confirmation of Minutes  1

OC01-12/06    Minutes of Ordinary Council Meeting held on 21 November 2006  1

Item  5          Announcements by the Mayor without Discussion   1

Item  6          Questions from Elected Members  1

Item  7          Petitions  1

New Petitions Presented  1

Update on Petitions  1

PT01-11/06     Proposed Amendment No 16 to East Wanneroo Cell 4 Local Structure Plan No. 6  1

PT02-11/06     Residential Parking on Verges, Palgrave Elbow, Marangaroo  2

PT03-11/06     Reduce Traffic Speed, Weymouth Boulevard, Quinns Rocks  2

Item  8          Reports  2

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. 2

Planning and Development  3

Town Planning Schemes and Structure Plans  3

PD01-12/06     Proposed Amendment No 69 to District Planning Scheme  No. 2 - Recoding Lots 282 to 284 Clarkside Court, Wanneroo from R20 to R40  3

PD02-12/06     Proposed Amendment No 3 to the Capricorn Coastal Village Agreed Structure Plan  8

Development Applications  25

PD03-12/06     Proposed Resource Recovery Facility - Lot 505 (87) Pederick Road, Neerabup  25

PD04-12/06     Proposed Caretaker's House and Bee Keeping:  Part Lot 10 (132) Franklin Road, Jandabup  43

Delegated Authority Reports  54

PD05-12/06     Subdivision Applications Determined under Delegated Authority during October 2006  54

PD06-12/06     Development Applications Determined by Delegated Authority for October 2006  69

Other Matters  80

PD07-12/06     Payment for Cell Works in East Wanneroo Cell 6: Madeley-Darch  80

PD08-12/06     Acquisition of Land for Ocean Reef Road, Wangara  83

PD09-12/06     Acquisition of Land for Hartman Drive and Gnangara Road, Madeley-Darch. 86

Infrastructure  89

Tenders  89

IN01-12/06     Tender No 06070 - Upgrade of Materials Recovery Facility, Wangara  89

IN02-12/06     Tender No. 06071 - The Replacement of Wanneroo Recreation Centre Fascia and Soffit Linings  93

Traffic Management  99

IN03-12/06     Traffic Management Treatments and Speed Limit Review - Clarkson Avenue, Harrington Avenue, St Stephens Crescent and Yandella Promenade, Tapping  99

IN04-12/06     Ocean Reef Road Advanced Warning Flashing Signals Before Wanneroo Road  109

IN05-12/06     Wanneroo Roadwise Advisory Committee - 2006 Action Plan  112

Waste Management  117

IN06-12/06     Purchase of Second Hand Bag Recycling Collection Trucks  117

Funding and Budget  119

IN07-12/06     State Black Spot Program Project - Gnangara Road/Alexander Drive Intersection Upgrade – Reallocation of Funds  119

IN08-12/06     Hepburn Avenue Extension - City of Swan Contributions  126

Corporate Services  129

IT Services  129

CS01-12/06     Tender 06066 – Supply, Installationand Commissioning of a Two-Way Radio System   129

Finance  130

CS02-12/06     Warrant of Payments - for the Period 31 October 2006  130

CS03-12/06     Sale of Property due to Outstanding Rates - 40 Bendix Way Girrawheen  177

CS04-12/06     Change Basis of Valuation Of Property - 143 (Lot 93) Dundebar Road, Wanneroo  180

CS05-12/06     Budget Timetable 2007/2008  183

CS06-12/06     Financial Activity Statements for the Period ended  31 October 2006  190

Contracts and Property  198

CS07-12/06     Civic Purpose Site – Lot 12 Fowey Loop, Mindarie  198

CS08-12/06     Proposed Lease to Wanneroo Kingsway Football & Sporting Club Inc  202

CS09-12/06     Heads of Agreement - Neerabup Industrial Area Joint Venture  208

Community Development  229

Community Services  229

CD01-12/06    Membership of the Youth Advisory Council  229

CD02-12/06    Tender 06073 - The Provision of Specialist Care Services for Eligible Aged and Disabled Residents  232

CD03-12/06    Request for a Waiver of Fees  238

Leisure & Cultural Services  242

CD04-12/06    Appointment of Community Representatives for the Lebuse Sculptures Working Party  242

Leisure & Library Services  245

CD05-12/06    Grant from Lotterywest for 2006/07 Community Events Series  245

CD06-12/06    Acquisition and Development of Community Purpose Sites Policy  248

CD07-12/06    Future Management Options for the Kingsway International Sports Stadium   258

Ranger & Safety Services  266

CD08-12/06    Proposed Extension of the Closure of the Quinns Rocks Car Park at Night Until July 2007  266

Governance and Strategy  271

Governance  271

GS01-12/06     Review of Council Policies  271

GS02-12/06     Resignation of Cr Gray as Delegate from Yanchep/Two Rocks Community Bus Management Committee (External Committee) 287

GS03-12/06     Donation Requests to be Considered by Council  289

GS04-12/06     Community Funding Allocations October 2006 Round  305

Strategic Projects  313

GS05-12/06     Girrawheen-Koondoola Revitalisation Project  313

Chief Executive Office  316

General  316

CE01-12/06     Delegation of Authority over the Council Recess  316

CE02-12/06     Appointment of Acting Chief Executive Officer  318

CE03-12/06     Donation Requests Considered under the Delegated Authority of the Chief Executive Officer  320

Item  9          Motions on Notice   323

MN01-12/06   Mayor Kelly - Establishment North-West Corridor  Co-Coordinating Committee  323

MN02-12/06   Mayor Kelly - Wall of Honour - City of Wanneroo Pioneers  333

MN03-12/06   Cr Salpietro – Honour Board  338

Item  10        Urgent Business  344

Item  11        Confidential   344

CR01-12/06    Mindarie Regional Council  Resource Recovery Facility - Member Council Guarantees  344

CR02-12/06    St Anthony's Church Land Acquisition  344

CR03-12/06    Chief Executive Officer Performance Report  345

Item  12        Date of Next Meeting   345

The next Ordinary Councillors Briefing Session has been scheduled for 6.00pm on Tuesday, 23 January 2007, to be held at the Civic Centre, Dundebar Road, Wanneroo. 345

Item  13        Closure   345

 

Item  1                Attendances

Item  2                Apologies and Leave of Absence

Cr Laura Gray             North Ward                             Apology

Cr Mark Pearson         Alexander Ward                     (31/10/06 – 12/12/06)

Cr Alan Blencowe      South Ward                             (08/12/06 – 29/12/06)

Item  3                Public Question Time

Item  4                Confirmation of Minutes

That the minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 21 November 2006 be confirmed.

 

Item  5                Announcements by the Mayor without Discussion

Item  6                Questions from Elected Members

Item  7                Petitions

New Petitions Presented

Update on Petitions

Cr Monks presented a petition with 57 signatories from the residents at Pearsall requesting that Proposed Amendment No 16 to East Wanneroo Cell 4 Local Structure Plan No. 6 be refused as they believe the Amendment is detrimental to the future lifestyle of the existing residents and will create an increase in traffic issues and antisocial behaviour.

 

UPDATE

 

A report will be presented to the 30 January 2007 meeting of Council.

 

Cr Treby presented a petition with 9 signatories from residents of Palgrave Elbow, Marangaroo requesting they be allowed to park on their own verges and to have any written fines annulled.

 

UPDATE

 

This matter was addressed at Item CD04-11/06 at Council’s meeting of 21 November 2006.

 

Cr Roberts presented a petition with 13 signatories from residents of Weymouth Boulevard, Quinns Rocks requesting action to be taken to reduce traffic speed at the curve at the west end of Weymouth Boulevard, Quinns Rocks.

 

UPDATE

 

A report will be presented to the 20 February 2007 meeting of Council.

 

Item  8                Reports

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

Cr Loftus to declare a financial interest in PD02-12/06 Proposed Amendment No. 3 to the Capricorn Coastal Village Agreed Structure Plan due to being director of a business that has conducted business with the applicant.

 

Cr Goodenough to declare an impartial interest in GS04-12/06 Community Funding Allocations October 2006 Round due to being the Anglican Bishop’s representative on the Peter Moyes Anglican Community School Council.

 

Cr Roberts declared an impartial interest in GS04-12/06 Community Funding Allocations October 2006 Round due to being a member of staff at the Peter Moyes Anglican Community School and also People Against Vandalism.

 

Planning and Development

Town Planning Schemes and Structure Plans

File Ref:                                              TPS/0069V01

File Name: BA Proposed Amendment No 69 to District Planning Scheme No 2   Recoding Lots 282 to 284 Clarkside Court  Wanneroo from .doc This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Planning and Development

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Author:   Timothy Dawson

Meeting Date:   12 December 2006

Attachments:                                       2

StartStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Issue

To consider an amendment to the District Planning Scheme No.2 to recode Lots 282 to 284 Clarkside Court, Wanneroo from R20 to R40.

 

Applicant	Taylor Burrell Barnett
Owner	DK, AL and VK Fasher
Location	Lots 282 to 284 Clarkside Court, Wanneroo
Site Area	2,570 m2
DPS 2 Zoning	Residential
MRS Zoning	Urban

Background

Taylor Burrell Barnett on behalf of DK and AL Fasher has submitted a scheme amendment proposal to recode Lots 282 to 284 Clarkside Court, Wanneroo from R20 to R40.

Detail

Site

The subject site comprises 2,570m² of land, and is located on Clarkside Court, Wanneroo.  A plan showing the location of the subject land is included as Attachment 1. The rear boundary of the site adjoins a Local Parks and Recreation Reserve, which abuts Scenic Drive. Each lot within the site contains a single dwelling. There are some trees within the site and on the road verge. A 3.5 metre wide pedestrian accessway abutting Lot 282 links Clarkside Court with the Parks and Recreation Reserve.

Proposal

The proposal seeks to amend District Planning Scheme No. 2 by recoding the subject site from R20 to R40. The applicant intends to amalgamate all three lots in order to maximise development potential and design flexibility. 

The concept plan submitted with the application indicates four single dwelling sites and two grouped dwelling sites to create nine dwellings. The proposed single dwelling lot sizes vary between 300 to 310 m² and the grouped dwelling sites are 548 and 810m² respectively. Attachment 2 contains the indicative concept proposal.

 

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

 

1.       Satisfies the City’s Local Housing Strategy (LHS) as the site is located within 800 metres of the Wanneroo Town Centre.

2.       Consistent with the objectives of the Network City and Statement of Planning Policy 3 – Urban Growth and Settlement by way of locating higher densities in locations accessible to transport, services and activity corridors (Wanneroo Road).

3.       Satisfies the Designing Out Crime Planning Guidelines as higher density would increase the level of surveillance given that the site abuts a Parks and Recreation Reserve and a public accessway.

Consultation

All scheme amendments require public consultation.  The consultation period is normally 42 days and is undertaken by way of an on-site advertising sign, advertisements in the local newspaper and on the City’s website, as well as letters to relevant service agencies and adjacent landowners.

 

The Town Planning Regulations provide that where an amendment is consistent with the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS) and State policies and strategies, then the consent of the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) will not be required to advertise the amendment.  Given that the proposed amendment is consistent with the MRS zoning and State policies the consent of the WAPC is not required in this instance.

Comment

The City’s Smart Growth Strategy identifies “Lifestyle and Housing Choice” as one of its six principles. This principle seeks to create a variety of housing types and the enhancement of lifestyle options. The City’s Local Housing Strategy, which has been adopted pursuant to the above Smart Growth principles, includes as a main objective, “...to ensure that a wide range and choice of housing is provided to meet the changing social and economic needs of the community”.

 

Advice from the Water Corporation of Western Australia indicates that the existing three lots are connected to deep sewerage.

 

The proposal will create the potential for up to an additional six dwellings, which would generate a maximum of up to another 60 vehicles per day (vpd). Clarkside Court has a road reserve and carriageway width of 20 and 6.5 to 7 metres respectively. Since this road is capable of carrying a traffic volume of up to 1000 vpd, the additional traffic generated by the proposal will not impact on the normal flow of traffic.

 

Whilst the recoding is considered to have some merit, the proposed concept layout is considered to be inadequate as the design would result in streetscape dominated by carports/garages and it does not adequately address the adjoining pedestrian access way.  Given the established nature of this area, it is recommended that a suitable design concept be provided and some commitment be given to the design concept prior to the advertising of the amendment. The amendment could be initiated subject to this issue being satisfied to the satisfaction of the Director Planning and Development. 

Statutory Compliance

The scheme amendment will follow the statutory process outlined in the Town Planning Regulations.

Strategic Implications

Consideration of this amendment is consistent with the Social Outcome area of the City’s Strategic Plan which seeks to increase choice and quality of neighbourhood and lifestyle options. 

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority.

EndStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       ADVISES the applicant Taylor Burrell Barnett acting on behalf of DK and AL Fasher, that it will prepare Amendment No.69 to the District Planning Scheme No.2 subject to a satisfactory concept plan and commitment to the principles contained in the design concept being submitted to the satisfaction of the Director Planning and Development. 

2.       Subject to 1 above, pursuant to Section 75 of the Planning and Development Act 2005 PREPARES Amendment No. 69 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 to recode Lots 282 to 284 Clarkside Court, Wanneroo from R20 to R40.

3.       REFERS Amendment No. 69 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) pursuant to Section 81 of the Planning and Development Act 2005.  Should the EPA advise that the amendment does not require assessment, ADVERTISE the amendment for a period of 42 days.

4.       FORWARDS a copy of the amendment to the Western Australian Planning Commission.

EndOfRecommendation - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

File Ref:                                              SP/0055/03V01

File Name: BA Proposed Amendment Number 3 to the Capricorn Coastal Village Agreed Local Structure Plan.doc This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Planning Development

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Author:   Michael Hudson

Meeting Date:   12 December 2006

Attachment(s):                                    7

StartStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Issue

To consider an Amendment to the Capricorn Village Structure Plan (ASP).

 

Applicant	Roberts Day Town Planning & Design
Owner	Capricorn Village Joint Venture
Location	Part Lot 312 and Lots 2, 303 and 304 (original numbers)
Site Area	260 Hectares (Approx)
DPS 2 Zoning	Urban Development

Background

At its meeting on 14 October 2003 (PD01-10/03), Council resolved that the Capricorn Village Structure Plan was satisfactory, subject to a number of modifications. On 14 September 2004, the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) resolved to adopt the structure plan. (refer Attachments 1 and 2 – Current ASP and Density Code Maps).

Detail

The proposal (refer Attachments 3 and 4) seeks to amend the ASP by introducing modifications to the overall design and, more specifically seeks to:

 

1.         Incorporate a Civic and Cultural site on the western side of the foreshore road adjacent to the Mary Lindsay Homestead.

2.         Extend and rationalise the ASP boundary.

3.         Delete the “Area Subject to Change” notation from the northern portion of the ASP area.

4.         Modify and extend the Centre Zone boundaries.

5.         Modify the local road system, open spaces and density codes.

 

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

 

1.         The ASP is being redesigned in response to a comprehensive review of the physical and contextual elements of the northern two thirds of the Capricorn Coastal Village Structure Plan area, which was recently undertaken by the Capricorn Village Joint Venture.

2.         The proposed amendment will provide greater retention and recognition of the unique coastal landscape and the linking of places and destinations within the new community.

Consultation

The Structure Plan was advertised for a period of 28 days by way of an on-site sign and advertisements in the Wanneroo Times newspaper and on the City’s website. The submission period closed on 31 October 2006. At the close of advertising, three (3) submissions had been received.

Comment

Submissions

The key issues raised by the submissions and an Administration comment on each is set out below:

 

Issue 1: Sterile high-density development has a negative social effect resulting in grottos and slums; we are making the same mistakes as Europe and the USA

 

Comment:

 

Only 11% of the overall structure plan area is coded R80 (high density) with 67% of the land being coded for medium density housing (R30, R40 and R60) and the remaining 22% coded low-density (R5, R10 and R20).

 

This is consistent with both the City’s Smart Growth Strategy and Local Housing Strategy which seeks to encourage the provision of a variety of housing types to enhance lifestyle options and to meet the housing needs of the community.  It also reflects one of the key principles of ‘Liveable Neighbourhoods’, which is to provide a range of residential lot sizes in an effort to achieve more sustainable urban outcomes.

 

The higher densities are primarily located within the ‘mixed-use’ environment of the Coastal Node and within the Neighbourhood Centre along Two Rocks Road.  It will promote a greater choice for a work/live urban environment. The ‘mixed use’ form of development promotes a more vibrant character and provides enhanced security through extended hours of activity and occupation for both residential and commercial components. This form of development will reduce the dependence on the car and the extent of urban sprawl.

 

Both the coastal node and the neighbourhood centre are zoned ‘Centre Zone’ in the ASP and will be the subject of more detailed structure planning to ensure a quality built form is achieved.

 

Recommendation

 

That this issue be dismissed.

 

Issue 2: People don’t mind paying for environmentally sensitive developments such as ‘Sea Trees’ (Two Rocks – Special Rural). Developers hype is forcing people to accept small blocks of land.

 

Comment:

 

A range of lot sizes and housing products will be available throughout the structure plan area to accommodate a diversity of household types and socio-economic levels. Recent market trends have seen an increased demand for smaller lots reflecting the current high land and house prices.

 

The amendment increases the amount of low density R10 and R20 coded land over the current ASP. It should be noted that the ‘Sea Trees’ estate is zoned ‘Rural Community’ and includes lot sizes of between one and two hectares. The land subject to this amendment is zoned Urban Development and the range of lot sizes is consistent with this zoning. 

 

Recommendation

 

That this issue be dismissed.

 

Issue 3: New development such as Capricorn Village should include environmentally thoughtful design such as underground water tanks, solar panels and wastewater recycling as mandatory in all homes:

 

Comment:

 

The Building Code of Australia currently requires that all residential buildings achieve a minimum ‘four-star’ energy rating. It is anticipated that from early next year the energy efficiency rating will be lifted to ‘five-star’, which involves design principles for building orientation, window location/size, ceiling height, and also the use of energy efficient appliances such as solar and gas. It should be noted that whilst the revised energy rating will require a higher level of energy efficiency, the overall rating is calculated through a combination of building techniques, and as such, not all desirable techniques such as solar, water tanks etc. will necessarily be incorporated into each design.  The City, through its Energy Action Plan and Local Environmental Strategy is also is also considering additional initiatives to support environmentally sensitive design principles within local housing. 

 

The Capricorn Village Joint Venture has also produced a ‘Sustainability Information Sheet’ to inform prospective purchasers of how the Capricorn Development is delivering sustainable development (refer Attachment 6).

 

Recommendation

 

That the issue be noted.

 

Issue 4: There is a disproportionate gain in residential densities over gains to the community in regard to public open space, civic and cultural and the environment. The developer should make a major allowance for an additional 5 hectares for nature reserve/POS.

 

Comment:

 

Significant areas of land including the Foreshore Reserve and other regional reserves adjacent to the Sea Trees estate on Breakwater Drive, Two Rocks and the southern portion of Yanchep have already been ceded to the Crown as part of earlier rezoning and subdivision applications. 

 

In addition, a further 11.94% of the overall area of Amendment 3 will be set aside as local open space, which represents a greater amount than required under State policy (10%). Other areas with landform and vegetation worthy of retention have been included within areas of low-density housing where the extent of clearing and earthworks will be closely controlled through Detailed Area Plans.

 

The proposed design incorporates an extensive pedestrian network providing easy access to the coast, Yanchep Lagoon and Yanchep Townsite, National Park and all areas of active and passive open space.

 

Recommendation

 

That this issue be dismissed.

 

Issue 5: Opposed to the Club Capricorn resort being redeveloped prior to the resolution of the final location for a replacement coastal caravan park in the immediate region.

 

Comment:

 

The Club Capricorn resort site is a privately owned development, has been rezoned Urban Development and the current ASP provides for the development of a coastal node (predominantly over this land.  The land affected by the coastal node will require further structure planning prior to any subdivision or development. The future use of land within this area will be examined in more detail as part of the preparation of this structure planning.

 

The draft St Andrews District Structure Plan (DSP) that is currently being prepared recognizes the importance of tourism as part of the overall economic framework for the area. In accordance with the directions of both the City and Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, further consideration will be given to the provision of tourism and recreational land uses as part of the DSP. The applicant has advised that up to 2,200 hotel rooms across a range of categories will ultimately be required across the wider St Andrews development and a further 200 to 250 backpacker beds and 150 to 250 caravan bays in a range of locations will also contribute to overall tourism accommodation available throughout the Yanchep/Two Rocks region. The ultimate design, location and mechanisms to promote these facilities will be further considered in the assessment of the DSP and subsequent detailed structure planning.

 

Finally, it must be noted that it is not a Statutory Requirement that developers make provision for caravan parks and camping grounds.

 

Recommendation

 

That this issue be dismissed.

 

Issue 6:  The notion of a civic and cultural centre adjacent to the Mary Lindsay Homestead is astute and palatable, however the site should be developed in a manner sensitive to the Lindsay Homestead as a historic icon.

 

Comment:

 

The site has been defined as a ‘civic and cultural’ zone in the structure plan and will ultimately be developed for a suitable purpose. The City will consider any future proposal on the site on its merits and with due consideration for its context and use within the locality.

 

Recommendation

 

That this issue be noted.

 

Issue 7: The modification to the structure plan boundary will affect rare or special flora located in the north and northeastern portion of the site (Melaleuca sp). There is no preservation of significant stands of the unique plant and an oval is proposed in the centre of one area.

 

Comment:

 

A comprehensive environmental study was undertaken as part of the preparation of the original Capricorn Village Structure Plan.

 

The Structure Plan has been developed in accordance with environmental conditions and requirements imposed through the Environmental Review undertaken in association with Amendment 787 to the City of Wanneroo Town Planning Scheme No. 1. Following the broad re-assessment of the physical and contextual elements of the site, the ASP has been redesigned in order to provide a more site responsive outcome that recognizes the prominence of the east west dunal ridge in this part of the structure plan.

 

The oval in the northern portion of the structure plan area has been located adjacent to a proposed school optimizing co-location opportunities and additional areas of open space have been located in this area to protect the prominent east west dunal ridge.

 

It should be noted that further consideration and detail has been requested as part of the City’s recommendation to rationalise public open space and to determine the suitability of the size and orientation of the future oval adjacent to the future primary school site in the north eastern portion of the site. It will also be recommended that consideration be given to preserving native vegetation around the oval and passive open space areas (where possible) and that preliminary design levels be provided to ensure substantial cutting or filling does not occur within those areas to be retained (where possible).

 

Recommendation

 

That this issue be noted.

 

Issue 8: The stands of Tuarts located along the entrance road to Club Capricorn should be preserved in accordance previous agreements with the developer.

 

Comment:

 

The area west of Two Rocks Road in the vicinity of the Club Capricorn Resort is included within the ‘Centre Zone’ and will be subject to more detailed planning through the preparation of secondary Structure Plans for the Coastal Node and Neighbourhood centre.

 

Recommendation

 

That the issue be noted.

 

Issue 9: There has been modifications to the structure plan on the western side of Two Rocks Road, where land previously identified as R5 is now identified as R10.

 

Comment:

 

Amendment 3 has been prepared in response to the broader vision for the Capricorn project which seeks to retain and recognize the unique coastal landscape.

 

This has seen a general redistribution of densities to more sensitively reflect the topography, enable greater areas to be protected and to minimize the earthworks.

 

The area west of Two Rocks Road is characterized by dunal formations. Whilst there has been a reduction in the extent of R5 lots (2000 m2 lots), a larger area of R10 lots (1000 m2 Lots) has been identified. The extent of low density housing throughout this area has been increased and the areas with higher codings relocated onto flatter portions of the site in an effort to retain the topography and limit the extent of clearing. Overall the lot yield of low-density lots has likewise risen from 74 to 178.

 

Recommendation

 

That the issue be dismissed.

Additional Issues

·                The Water Corporation has supported the proposal subject to appropriate arrangements being made for the provision of essential services. Servicing requirements, associated land requirements and infrastructure provision will be further considered at the time of subdivision.

·                Due to the limited usability and the high cost of ongoing maintenance, the increased provision of small pocket parks is not supported. Further modification of the structure plan to rationalise the number of pocket parks is required.

·                There appears to be some conflict in regard to the retention of landform/native vegetation intensions and the earthworks that will be required to accommodate the two schools and an area of active open space in the north-eastern portion of the site. There is also concern over the adequacy of the land area, configuration, supporting road network/circulation to support the schools and suitability of the configuration and extent of adjacent residential land.  It is recommended that further details and concept planning be undertaken in association with the Department of Education and Training to demonstrate the adequacy and suitability of the design in this portion of the structure plan area. 

·                At the ordinary meeting of Council on 14 December 2004 (Report CD07/12/04), the relocation of the Life Saving Club was supported to a position within the foreshore reserve adjacent to the Club Capricorn Site.

Any development of a permanent Yanchep Surf Life Saving Club will be dependant on a finalised design and funding. Previous estimates were provided for extensive modifications to the present Yanchep Surf Life Saving Club facilities to cater for demand in the period prior to a permanent structure being built. The estimates amounted to $702,000 and the Yanchep Surf Life Saving Club Relocation Technical Reference Group formed the view that these costs were excessive for a temporary solution. On this basis, it was recommended that further discussions take place with the Yanchep Surf Life Saving Club and the Capricorn Village Joint Venture to determine an acceptable short-term solution. It appears that negotiations with Capricorn Village JV have not progressed and whilst the existing club facilities are not located with the structure plan area, it is appropriate that a further request be made to encourage discussions be held between the Capricorn Village Joint Venture and the City’s Leisure and Cultural Development Directorate to explore possible options to improve the existing facilities.

·                A range of other issues were raised by the City’s Infrastructure Development Directorate relating to the provision of roundabouts at four way intersections, intersection types and the staging of the one way pair along Two Rocks Road. In this regard, it is anticipated that further consideration of these issues will be made at the time of subsequent structure planning over the ‘Centre Zone’, or detailed subdivision stage. However, to ensure other issues of a technical nature appropriately addressed, it is recommended that further discussion between the applicant and the City’s Infrastructure Directorate be initiated, prior to the finalisation of the Amendment.

·                A number of minor inconsistencies have been identified between the density code map and the structure plan map (such as an area of POS having density coding and proposed R10 lots being included into the coastal node ‘Centre Zone’.). As such, further minor adjustments will be required.

·                An additional area of R60 has been proposed in the northwestern portion of the site, adjacent to the foreshore reserve. The location of this site is not supported as it will reduce public access to the foreshore area, does not have a road interface between the foreshore and the residential lots and is identified in the adopted Foreshore Management Plan as being in close proximity to the future Surf Life Saving facility and foreshore access paths (refer Attachment 7). It is intended that this area will accommodate supporting recreational infrastructure such as car parking, picnic areas and other passive creational uses for the Life saving Club and foreshore area.

·                It is intended that the Two Rocks Road Neighbourhood Centre will incorporate a ‘Civic and Cultural’ use. Whilst the land is identified as a ‘Centre Zone’ the structure plan should include reference to its possible future use as a community and tourist information point.

·                The trend with subdivision and development within the structure plan area to date has been to prepare detailed area plans for each stage of subdivision.  The detailed area plans that have been produced to date however (with the exception of the R5 –10 lots) are relatively generic in nature and have proved to be cumbersome administrate.  A more effective way of incorporating many of the development standards and requirements that are addressed by the detailed area plans would be to incorporate them into the structure plan text.  It would be appropriate that this be undertaken in the context of this amendment. 

Statutory Compliance

The proposed Amendment to the ASP has followed the statutory process outlined in Part 9 of DPS2.

Strategic Implications

Consideration of this proposal is consistent with the Social Outcome area of the City’s Strategic Plan, which seeks to provide healthy, safe, vibrant and connected communities.

Policy Implications

The consultants have used the City’s Smart Growth Assessment Tool (SGAT) in the preparation of the new design, including assessment of the current ASP for comparison purposes. A summary of the assessment has been prepared by the consultants (refer Attachment No. 5). It may be noted that the proposed Amendment to the ASP achieves a SGAT score of 80%, compared to a score of 71% for the current plan. It should be noted that the improvement in rating can be attributed to enhancements across the six Smart Growth principles. 

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

EndStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       Pursuant to Clause 9.6.1 of District Planning Scheme No.2 RESOLVES that Amendment No. 3 to the Capricorn Coastal Village Agreed Structure Plan 44, as submitted by Roberts Day Town Planning and Design on behalf of Capricorn Village Joint Venture and as outlined on Attachments 3 and 4 to this report is satisfactory subject to the issues raised in the Comment section of this report being adequately addressed.

2.       REQUEST the Capricorn Village Joint Venture to initiate further discussion with the Director Community Development to explore acceptable, cost effective, short-term solutions for the provision of appropriate Surf Life Saving facilities for the Yanchep/Two Rocks area.

3.       Upon receipt of structure plan documents modified in accordance with 1 above, SUBMITS three copies to the Western Australian Planning Commission for its adoption and certification.

4.       Pursuant to Clause 9.6.5 of District Planning Scheme No.2 ADOPTS, SIGNS and SEALS Amendment No. 3 to the Agreed Structure Plan once certified by the Western Australian Planning Commission.

5.       ENDORSES the comments made in this report regarding the submissions received on this structure plan amendment for inclusion in the schedule of submissions to be forwarded to the Western Australian Planning Commission and ADVISES the submitter of its decision.

EndOfRecommendation - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

Development Applications

File Ref:                                              P023/0084V01

File Name: EB Proposed Resource Recovery Facility   Lot 505  87  Pederick Road  Neerabup.doc This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Planning and Development

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Author:   Rod Peake

Meeting Date:   12 December 2006

Attachments:                                       3

StartStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Issue

To consider an application for the development of a Resource Recovery Centre (RRF) within the Neerabup Industrial Area (NIA).

 

Applicant	Worley Parsons
Owner	Mindarie Regional Council
Location	Lot 505 (87) Pederick Road, Neerabup
Site Area	20.0278 hectares
MRS Zoning	Industrial
DPS 2 Zoning	Industrial Development
Structure Plan Zoning	General Industrial

Background

The Tamala Park landfill facility is the major waste disposal site in the north-west metropolitan region.  The Mindarie Regional Council (MRC) leases and manages the facility.  In granting approval to stages 2a and b of the landfill facility, the Environmental Protection Authority required the MRC to progress towards the establishment of a RRF to reduce the amount of waste to landfill.

 

In November 2001, Council supported the development of a RRF, subject to it not being located at Tamala Park (item CE09-11/01 refers).  In early 2003, the MRC resolved to locate the RRF within the NIA and commenced negotiations with the owners of three potential sites.

 

The MRC were initially considering both biological and thermal (gasification and combustion) technology options for the RRF.  In view of strong community opposition to the gasification and combustion options however, the MRC resolved to exclude these options.

 

The Environmental Protection Authority required the preparation of a Public Environmental Review (PER) for the RRF.  The PER was prepared by the BSD/Meinhardt Joint Venture on behalf of the MRC for the three potential sites.  The PER addressed the likely environmental issues and impacts of the RRF for each site using one or a combination of biological treatment processes/technologies (composting and aerobic and/or anaerobic digestion). The PER concluded that, subject to management and monitoring in respect of several environmental issues, the environmental impact of the RRF would be able to operate within relevant environmental criteria and standards.

The PER was released for an eight week public comment period and Council considered the matter at its meeting on 16 March 2004 (item PD12-03/04 refers).  Whilst not raising any concerns with the environmental review per se, it did request that various land and planning related information be corrected in the review.

Detail

Site

Lot 505 is located south of Pederick Road and at the eastern end of the NIA.  Attachment 1 indicates the location of the site.  The land subject to the application comprises the western 10 hectares (approx.) of Lot 505.

 

The land is currently vacant.  The eastern portion of the site, is covered by regionally significant vegetation protected by the State Governments Bush forever and the western portion of the site, subject to this application has been cleared of vegetation and previously quarried. 

Proposal

The proposal includes a series of steel frame and clad industrial buildings with associated office, access, car parking and landscaping.  The facility will be used for composting of approximately 100,000 tonnes of municipal solid waste per annum.  A range of key plans depicting the proposal are included as Attachment 2.  A full copy of the plans and supporting report, explaining the proposal have been placed in the Elected Members Reading Room.

Planning Framework

District Planning Scheme No. 2

 

District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS2) includes the site within the Industrial Development zone.  The purpose of this zone is to “…provide for the orderly planning of larger areas of land proposed for industrial use in an integrated manner within a regional context whilst retaining flexibility to review planning with changing circumstances”.

 

Subclause 3.15.3 of DPS2 requires that no development shall be commenced or carried out in an Industrial Development Zone until an Agreed Structure Plan (ASP) has been prepared and adopted under the provisions of Part 9 of the Scheme and further requires that no development be commenced or carried out otherwise than in conformity with the ASP. 

 

Agreed Structure Plan

 

The site is located within both the Lot 505 Pederick Road Neerabup and NIA Agreed Structure Plan areas.  These structure plans establish the planning framework to guide the subdivision and development of the site and the broader Neerabup Industrial Area.  This ASP zones the land General Industry and identifies a number of additional studies and/or issues to be resolved prior to subdivision or development occurring. These include servicing infrastructure issues and preparation of services concept plans and developer contribution arrangements, road dedication and construction requirements, final surface levels (post-resource extraction) and environmental issues such as drainage, karst landform and Bush Forever Sites.

 

The proposed Resource Recovery Facility would be classed as a General Industrial use, which is permitted under the zoning in the ASP.

Consultation

The application was advertised for public comment for a period of 30 days.  It was advertised by means of an on-site sign, advertisements in the local newspaper and on the City’s website and letters to landowners within approximately a two kilometre radius of the site, including those landowners within the residential area of Banksia Grove, north of Joondalup Drive.  The applicant also conducted three public information sessions at the Carramar Community Centre during the consultation period.

 

The submission period closed on 10 November 2006 and four submissions were received. Details of the submissions are as follows:

 

Submission 1

 

From the Water Corporation advising that water and waste water services are remote from the site and therefore onsite disposal is to be in accordance with the requirements of the Health Department of Western Australia.  The submission also advises that the site is located within a priority three Underground Water Pollution Control Area.

 

Recommendation:

 

That the submission be noted.

 

Submission 2

 

From a Banksia Grove resident and objects to the proposal, although no reasons were given for the objection.

 

Recommendation:

 

That the submission be noted.

 

Submission 3

 

From an adjoining landowner objecting to the proposal if it is to be located within the 300 metre wide bushland buffer (Bushforever site).  It is however to be noted that the proposal is located to the west of the Bushforever site.

 

Recommendation:

 

That the submission be noted.

 

Submission 4

 

From a resident of Carramar outlining several areas where he considers that the information provided in the application is either insufficient (eg water tanks or transformer missing from plans) or non compliant with Environmental Protection Authority requirements (eg Odour systems).  The submitter urges the City to place conditions on the approval to ensure that these inconsistencies are rectified in the design/construction process.  The submitter also makes the point that he is keen to see the Resource Recovery Facility succeed and even keener to see the facility does not become a long term legacy for local residents and adjacent commercial/industrial areas with odour control and noise issues. A copy of the relevant section of the submission and a response by the applicant on the issues raised has been included in Attachment 3 to this report.  Whilst much of the detail referred to by the submitter has not been provided to date, it must be recognised that the present application is seeking planning approval only.  The detailed issues raised by the submitter will need to be submitted to satisfy all statutory building, health and environmental requirements and to satisfy conditions of planning approval.  The details will be required to be submitted as part of the building licence and EPA Works Approval applications.  It is normal for development proposals to be designed and assessed in this manner. To provide Elected Members will the security that these issues will be addressed a condition has been recommended requiring the submission of detailed plans for the endorsement by the Manager Planning Services indicating compliance with all statutory requirements, prior to the commencement of works.

 

Recommendation:

 

That the submission be noted.

Comment

The RRF proposal will contribute to more sustainable waste management and offers a range of environmental benefits compared to landfill.  The site is appropriately zoned for such a facility and the composting option to be used, the relatively significant distance to existing or proposed residential properties (at least 750 metres) and the proponents obligations under its Environmental Approval, mean that the facility will operate with minimal amenity impact.

 

The landowner will be required to make infrastructure contributions (on equitable basis across the landowners in the NIA) in respect to major roads serving the NIA, servicing concept plans and other planning and administrative works.  The details of this scheme are currently being devised, however the ASP requires the landowners commitment to the infrastructure contribution scheme. 

 

The eastern portion of Lot 505 has been identified as a Bush Forever site.  The ASP requires that the site be managed by the landowner as an Environmental Park in accordance with the Environmental Management Commitments endorsed by the EPA through the Public Environmental Review for Lot 505.  This will require the preparation and implementation of a Construction Environmental Management Plan and an Environmental Management System by the proponent to address in detail the measures that will be undertaken to protect the Bush Forever land during the development and ongoing use of the site.

 

The ASP also requires that the landowner cede free of cost, land required for the widening of Pederick Road where it abuts the site.  The widening would be in the order of 7.5 metres, subject to a detailed design. 

Consultants on behalf of the City are currently designing this road.  The ASP also indicates a ‘mandatory’ road along the interface of the Bush forever site.  This road is proposed to be 20 metres in width and arrangements should be made with the City for the dedication and construction of this road as part of this approval.  The development plans will require some adjustment to accommodate these roads. 

Statutory Compliance

The application for planning approval has been assessed in accordance with the requirements of the City’s DPS2 and the Agreed Structure Plans for the area. 

Strategic Implications

The RRF proposal is consistent with the Environmental Outcome area of the City’s Strategic Plan which seeks to improve management, recycling and reuse of waste.  It would also support the various environmental initiatives undertaken by the City, including Local Environment Strategy actions and the Cities for Climate Protection programme. The development of the RRF will also contribute toward addressing the City’s recent concerns regarding the long-term capacity and use of the Tamala Park Refuse Disposal Facility for its municipal solid waste.

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority.

EndStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       APPROVES the application submitted Worley Parsons on behalf of the Mindarie Regional Council for the development of a Resource Recovery Facility on Lot 505 (87) Pederick Road, Neerabup subject to the following conditions:

a)       Prior to the commencement of construction the landowner shall make arrangements to the satisfaction of the City for a contribution to the City for the provision of major roads, service concept plans and associated facilities (including planning and administrative costs) to service the Neerabup Industrial Area.

b)       Prior to the commencement of construction the landowner shall make arrangements to the satisfaction of the City for the Pederick Road widening and the Bushforever interface road as indicated in the Lot 505 Pederick Road Neerabup and Neerabup Industrial Area Agreed Structure Plans, to be dedicated as public roads free of cost and without payment of compensation. 

c)       Prior to the commencement of construction the landowner shall make arrangements to the satisfaction of the City for the Bushforever interface road as indicated in the Lot 505 Pederick Road Neerabup and Neerabup Industrial Area Agreed Structure Plans, to be constructed. 

d)       The design shall be amended to the satisfaction of the City to accommodate the Bushforever interface road and the widening of Pederick Road.

e)       Design levels of the development shall be to the satisfaction of the City.

f)       An Environmental Management Plan shall be prepared and implemented by the landowners to the satisfaction of the City for that portion of the land identified as a Bush Forever site. 

g)       The parking bays, driveways and points of ingress and egress shall be designed in accordance with the Australian Standard for Off Street Parking (AS 2890). Such areas shall be constructed, drained and marked prior to the development first being occupied and thereafter maintained to the satisfaction of the City. 

h)       Disabled car parking bays shall be provided at the rate required under the Australian Standard for Off Street Parking (AS 2890) and shall be located convenient to the building entrance/s to the satisfaction of the City. 

i)        A stormwater drainage system with a storage capacity sufficient to contain a 1:100 year storm event with a 24 hour duration shall be provided onsite prior to the development first being occupied.  The system shall thereafter be maintained to the satisfaction of the City.

j)        The car parking areas shall be provided with one shade tree for every four bays prior to the development first being occupied.  The trees shall be located within tree wells protected from damage by vehicles and maintained to the satisfaction of the City.

k)       Service vehicle manoeuvring to and within the site shall be provided in compliance with the Australian Standard for Off-street Parking Part 2 – Commercial vehicle facilities (AS2890.2).  A plan indicating service vehicle sweep paths shall be provide to the City for endorsement prior to the submission of a building licence application. 

l)        Service areas shall be screened from view of public areas.  No storage shall be carried out outside the service areas.

m)      All services such as air conditioning plant and compressors shall be located away from public areas.  All services and service yards shall be screened from view of streets and other public areas, including car parking areas, by an enclosure in keeping with the style and materials of the adjacent building.  Roof mounted equipment such as air conditioning plant and antennae shall be screened from view of the street and other public areas, including car parking areas, by the roof form or parapets.

n)       Detailed landscape plans for the development site and the adjoining road verges shall be submitted to and approved by the City prior to the submission of a building licence application.  Landscaping shall be established in accordance with the approved plans prior to the development first being occupied and thereafter maintained to the satisfaction of the City.

o)       An acoustic consultants report demonstrating to the satisfaction of the City that the proposed development and associated activities are capable of containing noise nuisance and all noise emissions in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations shall be submitted to the City with the building licence application. The recommendations of the approved acoustic consultants report shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City.

p)       Prior to the commencement of construction the applicant shall submit detailed amended plans for the endorsement by the Manager Planning Services indicating compliance with all conditions of this approval and with all statutory building, health and environmental requirements.

q)       Arrangements being made to the satisfaction of the City for effluent disposal and potable water supply to service the development.  The development shall connect to the reticulated sewer and water supply when this becomes available to the site.

2.       ENDORSES the comments made in this report regarding the submissions received on this development application and ADVISES the submitters of its decision.

EndOfRecommendation - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

ATTACHMENT 3

Page 1 of 8

 

Comments of the RRF Development Application by Submission 4

 

     a.  Section 2 – Buildings

 

The last paragraph of Section 2.0 states that the buildings would be “effectively” sealed. We contest this. There are no air locks on entry / exit doors and for a total building area totalling almost 2 hectares, to seal a building of this size would require pre-construction detailing. There has been no other statement made in the DA that identifies what proactive measures would be taken in the architectural detailing and construction to ensure that the RRF buildings were sealed. We suggest that if it is not sealed, odour control would be diminished and possibly ineffective (as per the Southern Metropolitan RRF). Sealing of roof and wall sheeting to concrete walls and from wall to roof and to eaves would be essential. The provision of air locks, particularly where used for the entry / exit of trucks where the roller doors are in the order of 5 metre wide by 5 metres high (and there are a number of these doors) would be imperative in containing odours (and noise) within the building envelope. However airlocks have not been provided and this was confirmed by the proponent.

 

Response by Proponent

 

The building will be sealed to the extent that will enable the facility to be kept under a negative pressure. The cladding will be sealed using Compraband which is a pre-formed bitumen-impregnated foam provided by the cladding supplier. This sealing will be included in the architectural details for the facility.

 

Having reviewed the May 2006 report by the Odour Unit Pty Ltd on the Odour Control System Review for Canning Vale there was no evidence that the sealing of the building was a contributor to the odour problems at that site.

 

The issue of air locks has also been raised and again in reference to the on the Canning Vale Facility there is no recommendations for the installation of air locks for that facility.

 

In relation to air locks that undersigned has visited similar facilities in

 

·      USA – Los Angeles (California), West Palm Beach (Florida), Delaware County (New York)

·      Canada – Tracy (Quebec), Edmonton (Alberta), Vancouver (British Columbia)

·      Italy -  Padova

·      Netherlands - Amsterdam

·      Australia – Port Stephens

 

From all these plants there was never a requirement for air locks and odours were not a problem.

 

ATTACHMENT 3

Page 2 of 8

 

b.  Clause 3.1 – Fire Services

 

The proponent indicates that there would be two 375 m³ tanks used for the storage of water to be used by the fire pumps. I could not locate these tanks (each at say 10 metres x 10 metres x 3.75 metres high) on the drawings provided. As they would be relatively large water tanks we suggest that the tanks should form part of the DA.

 

Response by Proponent

 

The requirement for fire water tanks is a statutory requirement. The location and the position of these tanks is a detail design issue. BioVision has a commitment to maintain the amenity of the area and will look at options that screen these tanks from public view. Preliminary planning has these tanks on the southern side of the building away from the street frontage. 

 

     c.  Clause 3.2 – Water Services

 

The proponent indicates that bore water would be used and a 12.4 m³/hr pump installed but no indication given as to what the bore water would be used for.

 

Response by Proponent

 

This is correct. Bore water will be used for moisture on the maturation floor, the air scrubbers, washing down and general house keeping. It will also be used in composters if not sufficient process water (leachate water) is available.

 

The proponent also indicates that rainwater runoff collection system from the roof of the RRF would be directed to holding tanks, but no indication of size or location of the rainwater tanks provided in the DA or the associated drawings.  With approximately 16,400 m² of roof area, we would imagine that the rainwater tanks would be relatively large. No indication given as to the basis o the rainwater collection system, as in 1 in 20 year rain intensity, or 1 in 100 year rain intensity or where rainwater overflow would be directed too. What would the rainwater be used for?

 

Response by Proponent

 

When weather permits rain water will be captured and used instead of bore water. The water will be directed to the same holding tanks that the bore water will be directed to. Excess stormwater will be directed to soakage areas.

 

The RRF would also incorporate a water leachate recycling system to collect water from the sumps and biofilters and be stored in leachate tanks. Size and location of tanks not identified in the DA or the associated drawings

 

Response by Proponent

 

It is proposed that this system be constructed under ground and it will not be visible to visitors to the site. It will be a closed system.

ATTACHMENT 3

Page 3 of 8

 

As water is a valuable resource, we suggest that the DA should have identified an estimate of the RRF water use and how the various water supplies would interact with the RRF.  As this RRF plant design is a “copy” of an existing RRF, water consumption profiles could have been provided.

 

Response by Proponent

 

BioVision will be paying for its water consumption therefore it has a big incentive to recycle and use rain water where possible, since each of these are cannot be relied on throughout the year a reliable water supply is required. The contract with the MRC stipulates the maximum water that is available for use in the facility.

 

     d.  Clause 3.3 – Electrical

 

No indication provided in the DA or the associated drawings of where transformer compound would be located.

 

Response by Proponent

 

Final location has not been determined as this was considered part of detail design but it is expected that it will be integrated into the overall building design. Notwithstanding, any transformer use on the site would be consistent with transformers used in residential sub division throughout the city.  There are three TX compounds and sub-stations planned – two on the north elev and one to the south. They will be of similar construction to the rest of the facility.

 

The EPA recommended the provision of standby power generation to enable the odour control system to still operate in the event of mains failure. The DA clearly does not mention a standby generator. This therefore appears to contravene the requirements of the EPA.

 

Response by Proponent

 

This statement is a somewhat confusing in that there is no such specific requirement for back up generation, as stated, in the Minster’s statement. In fact it was a significant issue with the MRC that has BioVision contractually bound to take on back up generation during the some of the hotter summer vacation periods. Also, our understanding of the process is that the Minister’s Conditions cannot be abated by the DA. The DA has been submitted with the clear understanding that the Minister’s conditions will be adhered to.

 

     e.  Clause 6 – Odour Control

 

The DA document states that “An air – process schematic diagram is provided indicating the quantity of air being extracted from each process area to be eventually filtered within the biofilter.” No schematic diagram found on the COW web site, which makes public comment on the odour control system near impossible.

ATTACHMENT 3

Page 4 of 8

 

Response by Proponent

 

This was an oversight; the schematic is attached to this response.

 

There was no statement or description in the DA documentation to confirm that the odour control system would comply with the requirements of the EPA in respect to the provision equipment redundancy such that in the event of equipment failure or maintenance, the odour control system would still be fully operational. From the drawings and from brief discussions with the proponent, we understand that:

 

-     There is a single exhaust fan located in the Receiving Building that exhausts air from the Receiving Building into the Composter Feed Building. No standby fan provided.

-     There are two exhaust fans that exhaust air from the Composter Feed Building through a single air / water scrubber and discharge air into the biofilters. No standby air / water scrubber provided. (The drawings indicate a total of 3 off air / water scrubbers in total for the RRF)

-     There is a single exhaust fan located in the Primary Refining Area that exhausts air from the Primary Refining Area into the Maturation Area. No standby fan provided.

-     There is a single exhaust fan located in the Secondary Refining Area that exhausts air from the Secondary Refining Area into the Maturation Area. No standby fan provided.

 

Response by Proponent

 

The requirements of the EPA approval are onerous and must be complied with. BioVision accepts this and will address all the issues noted above in the detailed design. There is a requirement for BioVision to get “works approval” before commencing on site and this will require a detailed submission to the EPA.

 

-     In the event of failure (or scheduled maintenance) of either the Primary Refining Area or the Secondary Refining Area exhaust fans, we understand (from the proponent) that these areas would rely on the Maturation Area exhaust system to maintain design airflows and negative pressures, or the Primary and Secondary Refining areas would be shut down and rubbish deliveries would be diverted to landfill. I believe (given the limited information provided) that in the event of exhaust fan failure (or routine maintenance) of the Primary Refining Area or the Secondary Refining Area exhaust fans, there would be insufficient airflow through these fans to maintain acceptable odour control.

-     There appear to be 2 off exhaust fan systems each with air / water scrubbers to exhaust air from the Maturation Area and discharge air into the biofilters. Each exhaust air system exhausts one half of the Maturation Area. No standby exhaust fan or standby water scrubber provided for each system.

ATTACHMENT 3

Page 5 of 8

 

It would appear that in the event of plant failure (or routine maintenance) that only half the Maturation Area exhaust system would operate. I believe that in this instance there would be insufficient airflow to maintain acceptable odour control.

-     There are 3 off exhaust systems that discharge air into the biofilters. We understand that there are for sets of biofilters. However, from the drawings provided, it would appear that the exhaust air ductwork arrangement and physical size may not be sufficient to allow interchange of the spare biofilter to be used by any of the three exhaust systems. For example, if the southern most biofilter failed or was being replaced and the “spare” biofilter was located between the Maturation Area exhaust systems, could exhaust air from the Composter Feed Building be re-directed up to the “spare” biofilter. Difficult to tell from the drawings, but from the duct sizes, this does not appear to be the case. It would appear that in order to provide biofilter redundancy, there would need to be a minimum of 5 off biofilters for the three of exhaust systems.

-     From the above, it would appear that the proponent has not complied with the requirements of the EPA in providing equipment redundancy for the odour control system.

 

Response by Proponent

 

The above issue are points that can be addressed in the Peer Review of the detailed design of the odour management system as required by the EPA approval. The peer review will be a public document.

 

The DA document indicates that the RRF buildings would be kept under negative pressure. I ask how this is possible when there would be times when one if not more of the large 5 m x 5 m external roller doors would be open numerous times in the day to allow rubbish truck entry and exist as well as fertilizer truck dispatches? Evidence collected at the SMRC facility identified that the delivery roller door were open for most of the day, allowing a significant opportunity for odours to escape the “sealed” building. 

 

Response by Proponent

 

It is not proposed that the doors remain open for extended period as stated and the tipping floor has been designed for a drive in drive out situation so as to minimise the time that the doors are open.

 

The odour modelling has been based on the efficiency of the biofilters. It would appear that no odour modelling has been carried out based on the RRF buildings being partially open (roller doors) or the buildings not being airtight.

 

Response by Proponent

 

This is incorrect. Odour modelling has been based on real studies in the US and when modelling was done a very conservative approach was taken.

 

ATTACHMENT 3

Page 6 of 8

 

The odour modelling Figures 6.1 and 9.2 identifies the odour concentration as 2 odour units per cubic meter (OU/m³) and 4 OU/m³. The EPA classes 2 OU/m³ as weak and 4 OU/m³ as strong. Not that the odour modelling pin some locations places the 2 OU/m³ inside the circle for 4 OU/m³ which would appear to be unlikely as the odour concentration would tend to be stronger closer to the RRF. This then casts some doubt as to the accuracy of the odour modelling presented.

 

Response by Proponent

 

The odour modelling was done by independent specialists in that field. If the author of this submission was prepared to provide specific details of this matter BioVision would be happy to have our specialist review and comment.

 

The input parameters for the calculation of the odour modelling have not been identified in the DA documentation, nor in the Public Environmental Review (January 2004) from where Figures 6.1 and 9.2 were copied from. The shape of the odour plume, being almost circular around the RRF does not appear to reflect the hot summer  easterly winds or the prevailing south westerly winds, as I would expect to see a tear drop shape. This casts further doubts as to the accuracy of the odour modelling presented.

 

Response by Proponent

 

The full report for on the odour modelling was given to the EPA as part of the review. This has not been challenged. Again should the author of this submission be able to substantiate these comments BioVision would be happy to have its specialist make comment.

 

The DA document indicates that independent modelling of the odour emissions would be carried out by the peer review process, which has not even been initiated by the proponent at this point in time. Odour control and odour modelling is a very important issue to adjacent residents and adjacent land users, such as the Wanneroo Golf Club and other commercial operations within the Neerabup Industrial Park. I am of the opinion that the review of the odour management system and the odour modelling needs to occur prior to DA by the COW to ensure that the project was viable and would integrate into the community.

 

Response by Proponent

 

It is pointless undertaking such a review on the preliminary designs that have been done to date. BioVision has an obligation to do this work prior to the commence of construction, if it is unable to achieve this then work could not commence on site and BioVision would be potentially in default of its contract. The peer review is a critical part of the development process and to hasten it as suggest above has the potential to compromise the integrity of the odour management system

 

    

ATTACHMENT 3

Page 7 of 8

 

f.  Clause 7 – Environmental Compliance

 

The proponent indicates that the RRF and its “operation shall conform to the conditions of the environmental approval as given in Statement No 000662 dated 13^th October 2004.” This document and what conditions actually apply was not included in the DA documentation and was not available from the EPA web site. Therefore, we have no basis for reviewing what the environmental conditions that are applicable for this project and there has not been a statement by the proponent to identify how it would comply with the conditions set down by the EPA. As can be seen by Item (d) and (e) above, not all conditions have been complied with.

 

Response by Proponent

 

The Minster’s statement is a public document; compliance with this document is in stages being works approval, operating licence and compliance reporting. To say that the conditions have not been complied with is misleading as at this stage as the project has not reach financial close, has not commence detailed design and has not made a submission to the EPA for works approval.

 

Part of the conditions of contract between the MRC and the RRF builder / owner / operator was the transfer of the conditions of the EPA from MRC to the RRF builder / owner / operator. I understand that this has not occurred to date. It therefore appears that the conditions of the EPA may be in limbo and may not have been included in the building design submitted for DA.

 

Response by Proponent

 

The MRC is required to fulfil two conditions the EPA approval prior to transfer of proponents. The conditions are being fulfilled and the transfer of proponents has been initiated by the MRC.

 

The absence of appointing an independent expert to review the odour control system prior to the DA further heightens the insecurity of having a possible odour problem with this project.

 

Response by Proponent

 

See comments above on the timing of the engagement of the independent expert.

 

In conclusion, I am of the opinion that insufficient information has been provided by the applicant to support this Development Application. What limited information that has been provided appears to be non-compliant with the Environmental Protection Authority requirements. There also appears to be structures (i.e. water tanks) that have not been identified on the site layout drawing. Odour control schematic information has been identified as missing although referenced in the DA documentation provided for public comment.

 

ATTACHMENT 3

Page 8 of 8

 

Response by Proponent

 

BioVision believe that considerable information is available in the public arena for the DA to be properly assessed and totally reject any suggestion that the facility is not compliant with the EPA approval.

 

However, if the City of Wanneroo were to provide development approval, then I urge that the City place conditions on the Approval to ensure that the above inconsistencies are identified to be rectified in the design / construction process.

 

Response by Proponent

 

It is noted that following DA  approval BioVision will still be required to submit an application to the EPA for works approval and a Building Licence to the City of Wanneroo at which stage both authorities have the opportunities to assess the detailed design for compliance with the respective approvals

 

I am keen to see the Resource Recovery Facility succeed and even keener to see that this Resource Recovery Facility does not become a long term legacy for local residents and adjacent commercial / industrial areas with odour control and noise issues. By ensuring good design and management principals at the early stages of the development would ensure a positive outcome for the life of the project.

 

Response by Proponent

 

BioVision will be entering into a 20 year contract with the MRC, the terms and condition of which are known to the CoW. Neither party is prepared to compromise the long term viability of the project for the sake of short term gains. The project has been costed in accordance with the EPA requirements and will be built in accordance with the conditions of the project approvals.

 

BioVision thanks council for the opportunity to respond to the submission that was received during the DA advertising period and trust that the above responses provide sufficient details for it to complete the assessment.

 

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

File Ref:                                              P14/0016V01

File Name: EA Proposed Caretaker s Dwelling   Part Lot 10  132  Franklin Road  Jandabup.doc This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Planning and Development

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Author:   Roman Zagwocki

Meeting Date:   12 December 2006

Attachments:                                       3

StartStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Issue

To consider an application for the development of a caretaker’s house and associated bee keeping use.

 

Applicant	Brian Smith
Owner	Brian and Margaret Smith
Location	Part Lot 10 (132) Franklin Road, Jandabup
Site Area	2.4962 Hectares
MRS Zoning	Rural
DPS 2 Zoning	General Rural

Background

The subject property contains an existing dwelling, which is occupied by the applicant as well as a swimming pool and several associated outbuildings.  The property is not currently used for any specific rural activity and is otherwise covered in native vegetation.   Attachment 1 indicates the location of the site. 

 

Between 1989 and 2001, the subject landowner lodged four separate applications with the Western Australian Planning Commission to subdivide this property into two lots of approximately 1.25 hectares.  These applications sought to fragment the land well below prevailing lot size in the area, were contrary to the minimum 4.0 hectares prescribed by both City and WAPC policy and were all ultimately refused.  An appeal against one of the applications was also dismissed by the then Minister for Planning. 

 

In March 2006, an application was lodged with the City seeking approval of a caretaker’s house, stables and associated agistment yards.  The applicant promoted the caretaker’s house on the basis that a responsible person was needed at the property all times to tend the horses.  It was proposed at that time, that the landowner’s daughter and son in law would move into the existing house on the property and the landowners would move into the caretaker’s house.  This application was subsequently approved on 13 July 2006 (refer Attachment 2.), however given that there was no other use on the property requiring ‘care taking’ at that time, conditions were imposed on the approval requiring, amongst other things:

 

1.       The stables to be constructed and commence operation prior to, or at the same time the caretaker’s house is first occupied and shall continue to operate whilst the caretakers house is occupied.

2.       The persons occupying the caretakers house to be restricted to those who care for the onsite horse agistment activities.

 

The application, as submitted, proposed that the stables and agistment yards be located at the eastern end of the property.  The property however, is located adjacent to Lake Jandabup, which is protected under the State Government’s Environmental Protection (Swan Coastal Plain Lakes) Policy.  Additional conditions were therefore imposed by the City regarding onsite management and requiring these facilities to be relocated at least 50 metres from the adjacent wetland to minimise any potential adverse environmental impacts.  It is understood that the applicant was reluctant to do this as it would have required clearing of vegetation and would have brought the stables significantly closer to the proposed caretaker’s house in which the applicant was proposing to reside.

 

Accordingly, this approval has not been proceeded with at this time.

 

In August 2006, a revised application was received seeking approval to replace the stables and horse agistment use with the growing of Geraldton Wax.  This proposal raised the following key concerns:

 

1.       It did not appear to be a use of significance that would justify the legitimacy of the caretakers house, and

2.       It raised environmental concerns as the Geraldton Wax was proposed to be planted within 50 metres of the adjoining wetland and would require clearing of native vegetation again.

After discussions with the applicant, the application was modified to delete any reference to growing of Geraldton Wax and was replaced with a proposal seeking approval for bee keeping.

Detail

Site

Lot 10 is located on the eastern side of Franklin Road, approximately 75 metres north of Belgrade Road, Jandabup.  The land directly abuts the Lake Jandabup wetland, which is covered by Bush Forever and also classified partly as a multiple use wetland and partly as a conservation category wetland under the State Government’s Environmental Protection (Swan Coastal Plain Lakes) Policy. 

Proposal

The application as it currently stands, seeks approval for a caretaker’s house and bee keeping from the site.  The applicant intends to keep 10 beehives on the property and advises that each hive, which measures 500mm wide by 400mm deep by 600mm high, house between 40,000 to 60,000 bees.  Each hive can produce up to 120 kilograms of honey per year, which has a value of between two and eight dollars per kilogram depending upon how it is marketed. 

 

The applicant also advises that it is best not to disturb the bees.  However, they do require monitoring including provision of a water supply, removal of honey from the hives, monitoring for pests and disease and supplementary feeding during winter when insufficient natural pollen or nectar is available.

 

The applicant has provided a letter indicating the nature and type of duties required to look after bees as referred to in Attachment 3.

Planning Framework

City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme (DPS) No 2 defines a caretaker’s house as follows:

 

“means a building used as a dwelling by a person having the care of the building, plant, equipment or grounds associated with an industry, business, office rural activity or recreation area carried out on or existing on the same site.”

 

The above definition is specifically provided for and only intended to allow an additional dwelling on a site (subject to Council approval) where the house is to be occupied by a person whose primary responsibility is for the care of a building, plant, equipment or grounds associated with an industry, business, office rural activity or recreation area on the same site and where the nature of the activities are such that require a person residing on the property on a permanent basis.  It should be noted that the definition does not provide for the development of a caretakers house to care for the existing house or grounds, that is not associated with industry, business, office rural activity or recreation area on the property.  The caretaker’s house must therefore only be considered in the context of the proposed bee keeping activity.

 

It should also be noted that whilst the City’s DPS allows a ‘caretaker’s house’ to be approved in addition to an existing dwelling on a Rural property, this is not regarded as “grouped dwellings” (or two houses on a rural lot). Grouped Dwellings on Rural land are generally dealt with in Part 3.16 and 3.17 of the DPS as follows:

 

“Where residential development is carried out in the General Rural Zone, the following provisions shall apply:

 

(a)     Notwithstanding that “Grouped Dwelling” is designated as a not permitted use class in the General Rural Zone in Table 1, the Council may approve the development of a maximum of two grouped dwellings on a lot if having regard to all relevant considerations it is reasonable to do so provided the Council is satisfied of all the following facts:

 

(i)      The lot is a minimum of 5 hectares in area if situated south of Flynn Drive and 8 hectares in area if situated north of Flynn Drive;

 

(ii)     Both dwellings will be erected in a position that complies with all other provisions of the Scheme, subject to any discretionary modifications by the Council;

 

(iii)    The second dwelling is necessary or desirable to provide accommodation on the lot for a person or persons who will assist in the lawful management or exploitation of a rural or other resource on the land consistent with the objectives of the Zone;

 

(iv)    There is no current proposal for or intention of any person to propose subdivision of the lot including strata or survey strata subdivision.”

Consultation

Nil

Comment

Any application for a second dwelling on a Rural lot must comply with the provisions of the City’s DPS as generally shown above.  Where an application cannot comply with these provisions the Council must refuse it, as there is no discretion available to vary from this. It is not intended that the caretaker’s house definition in the DPS serve as a defacto mechanism to allow second residences on a rural property contrary to the City’s DPS.

 

It is a fact that the owner has for some time been seeking approval to accommodate a second dwelling on the subject property.  Administration does not oppose the notion of a caretaker’s house and has indeed supported a previous application for the same.  However, it is considered that the current application for the keeping of bees (particularly when only 10 hives) is considered to require a low level of maintenance, and not considered sufficient to require a person permanently residing on the property. 

 

On this basis, the application as submitted can only be considered as a ‘grouped dwelling’ application which, based upon the City’s DPS, must be refused.

Statutory Compliance

To ensure that Administration’s interpretation of the DPS definition of caretakers’ house was appropriate, it sought comment from the City’s solicitor McLeods.  In short, the following advice was provided:

 

“… the Council proposed a Scheme Amendment, the effect of which was to broaden the scope of clause 3.16.3 to allow a second dwelling on a General Rural Lot.  However, the Scheme Amendment was not supported by the WAPC, and did not proceed.  Although it may have been the case that the Council was of the view there were sound planning reasons for allowing two grouped dwellings on lots in the General Rural zone in circumstances other than those stipulated in clause 3.16.3, that is no longer relevant given that the Scheme Amendment was not gazetted.  The starting point remains that grouped dwellings are not permitted in the General Rural zone, unless the proposal satisfies the conditions stipulated in clause 3.16.3”

 

“The only means by which a second dwelling can be approved on land within the General Rural zone is if the dwelling satisfies the Scheme definition of a caretaker’s dwelling…When considering an application for a caretaker’s dwelling,…the Council must have due regard to the following things, among others:

 

(a)     The objectives of the General Rural zone are to accommodate agricultural, horticultural and equestrian activities, and to maintain and enhance the rural character and amenity of the area…it is not an objective… to provide residential accommodation.

 

(b)     As a general rule, (subject to clause 3.16.3 only) a second dwelling on a General Rural lot is not permitted.”

 

“It follows that the Council must be careful to ensure that an application to construct and use a caretaker’s house is not simply an application for an impermissible second dwelling by another name…the City must be satisfied that the proposed dwelling is genuinely ancillary or incidental to the other activity on the land for which the occupant of the dwelling performs a caretaking function.”

 

“…if the true nature of the use is such that the motivating or predominant purpose is simply to provide residential accommodation, then the proposal should not be classed as a caretaker’s house.”

 

In considering this application the Council must firstly satisfy itself that the residential component of the proposal is correctly categorised as either a ‘caretakers house’ or a ‘grouped dwelling’.  This decision must be an objective and reasonable one, based on the facts before it.  The facts cannot be set aside.  It is the Administration’s view that based on the facts the proposal could not reasonably be categorised as a ‘caretakers house’ and is therefore a grouped dwelling, which in the circumstances of this property is not permitted and the Council therefore has no discretion to approve the residential component of the application. 

 

A full copy of the City’s legal advice will be distributed to Elected Members prior to the meeting.

Strategic Implications

Consideration of this application is consistent with the City of Wanneroo Strategic Plan (2006 – 2021) outcomes and objectives:

 

            “Governance

                        Leadership and community engagement ensures the best use of our physical, financial and human resources.

 

4.7       Maintain a high standard of governance and accountability”

 

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority.

EndStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Recommendation

That Council:

1.       REFUSES the application for a caretaker’s house for Part Lot 10 (132) Franklin Road, Jandabup as submitted by Mr B Smith for the following reasons:

          a)      The activity of keeping 10 beehives does not generate the need for a person to permanently reside on the subject property.

          b)      The application does not comply with the provisions of DPS 2 in respect to ‘Grouped Dwelling’ on Rural zoned Land.

          c)       Approval of this application could lead to an undesirable precedent whereby landowners who otherwise do not comply with the provisions of the City’s DPS for ‘Grouped Dwellings’ on Rural Land would seek the de facto approval of a second dwelling via the ‘Caretaker House’ definition.

2.       ADVISES the Applicant that it does not oppose a caretaker’s house for the subject property on the basis that there is a legitimate and demonstrable need for a person to reside on the subject property to care for any building, plant, equipment or grounds in accordance with the City’s DPS.  In this regard, it should be noted that the City’s previous approval for a caretaker’s house relating to the keeping of horses, issued on 14 July 2006 is still valid.

EndOfRecommendation - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

Delegated Authority Reports

File Ref:                                              S09/0008

File Name: FC Subdivision Applications Determined under Delegated Authority During October 2006.doc This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Planning and Development

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Author:   Amy Stockwell

Meeting Date:   12 December 2006

Attachments:                                       12

StartStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Issue

Determination of subdivision applications processed in the period for the month of October under delegated authority.

Detail

The West Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) is responsible for determining all subdivision applications within the State.  Applications for approval are lodged with the WAPC and are referred to local governments and affected public bodies for comment.  Comments are made within 42 days of receiving the application after which the Commission determines the applications.  There is a right of appeal by the applicant if aggrieved with the Commission’s decision.

 

Council has delegated to the Chief Executive Officer its functions relating to the provision of comments to the Commission on subdivision applications.  The Chief Executive Officer has in turn delegated to the Planning and Development Directorate this responsibility.  A Land Development Unit has been established to assist with the assessment of all applications.

 

Those applications considered to be either controversial in nature or contrary to Council policy, are referred to Council for consideration.  All other applications are dealt with in respect to the following categories.

 

SCU 1   Subdivision applications received which are generally consistent with an approved or Agreed Structure Plan (including Outline Development Plan and Development Guide Plan).

 

SCU 2   Subdivision applications previously supported, or not supported by Council and subsequently determined by the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) consistent with the Council’s recommendation.

 

SCU 3   Applications for extension of subdivisional approval issued by the WAPC which were previously supported by Council.

 

SCU 4   Applications for subdivision or amalgamation which result from conditions of development approval given by or on behalf of Council.

 

SCU 5   Applications for subdivision or amalgamation of lots which would allow the development of the land for uses permitted in the zone within which that land is situated including applications involving the excision of land for road widening, sump sites, school sites, etc.

 

SCU 6   Applications for subdivision or amalgamation of lots contrary to Council or WAPC Policy or are not generally consistent with an approved or Agreed Structure Plan.

 

The following table provides the details of the subdivision applications dealt with under delegated authority in the period for the month of October.

EndStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Recommendation

That Council NOTES the actions taken in relation to providing comments to the Western Australian Planning Commission on subdivision applications processed under delegated authority in the period for the month of October as listed below:

Subdivision Application Delegations

 

EndOfRecommendation - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

File Ref:                                              S09/0009V01

File Name: FA Development Applications Determined by Delegated Authority for October 2006.doc This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Planning and Development

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       1

StartStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Issue

Development Applications determined by Planning and Development between 1 October 2006 and 31 October 2006, acting under Delegated Authority from Council.

Background

Nil

Detail

The City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme 2 (DPS2) provides Council with development approval powers which are designed to avoid conflict between different land uses on adjoining lots.  It is also necessary to ensure the completed developments meet the required standards such as building setbacks, carparking and landscaping.  Planning approvals are not generally required for single residential houses unless they seek to vary the requirements of the Residential Design Codes (RD Codes.)

 

Council has delegated some of its responsibilities for decision making on development applications to certain officers in Administration which enables the processing of applications within the required 60 day statutory period and within normal customer expectations.   

 

The Administration, in assessing development proposals, attempts to extract from the relevant planning documents the key policies and requirements of Council in order to make comments and recommendations on the issues raised in the assessment of each individual development application.

 

Development applications determined by Planning & Development between 1 October 2006 and 31 October 2006, acting under Delegated Authority from Council are included in Attachment 1.

Consultation

Nil

Comment

Nil

Statutory Compliance

A Delegated Authority Register was adopted by Council at its meeting on 31 August 2004 (item CE06-08/04 refers).  The decisions referred to in attachment 1 of this report are in accordance with this register.

Strategic Implications

This report is consistent with the corporate management and development goal of the City’s Strategic Plan, which seeks to establish an organisation that is open, accountable and committed to customer services.

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Planning applications incur administration fees which are generally based on the Town Planning (Local Government Planning Fees) Regulations and have been adopted by Council in its annual budget.  The estimated cost of development for each application is listed in attachment 1.  Applications where an estimated cost has not been provided, are either applications for the exercising of discretion or for a change of use.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority.

EndStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Recommendation

That Council NOTES the determinations made by Planning and Development Services acting under delegated authority from Council on development applications processed between 1 October 2006 and 31 October 2006.

 

EndOfRecommendation - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

  Development Applications determined for Period  City of Wanneroo

  Development Applications determined for Period                City of Wanneroo

WHERE (Issued_date BETWEEN 01/10/2006 00:00:00 AND 31/10/2006 23:59:59)

Note:  Estimated cost not provided on applications for use only or where a flat fee is applicable

  Ram Id      Date          Owners                                                           Days               Est Cost        Decision

DA04/0740.01  19/10/2006    LAURENCE J REEVES & LYNETTE M REEVES             3                     $0.00              Approved

                   Prop address   52 RIGALI WAY WANGARA  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 209 DP 31494 Vol 2518 Fol 706

                   Descriptio      FACTORY UNIT - INDUSTRY - LIGHT (WELDING & FABRICATION)

                   Applicant       LJ REEVES

                   File Number   P33/0100V01

DA05/0713.01  26/09/2006    CITY OF WANNEROO                                           22                    $0.00              Approved

                   Prop address   MATERIAL RECOVERY FACILITY 70 MOTIVATION DRIVE WANGARA  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 15 D 16710 Vol 1164 Fol 564

                   Descriptio      STORAGE YARD - FOR PLASTICS IN BULK BAGS & MANUFACTURED PLASTIC

                   Applicant       JOJO PLASTICS PTY LTD

                   File Number   P33/0097V01

DA06/0256      06/04/2006    CHERYL L LARMONT & DARREN LARMONT               5                     $14,000.00       Refused

                   Prop address   3 EMERALD DRIVE CARABOODA  WA  6033

                   Land            Lot 101 DP 24938 Vol 2205 Fol 799

                   Descriptio      SINGLE HOUSE  - SWIMMING POOL ADDITION

                   Applicant       WIZARD POOLS

                   File Number   P06/0052V01

DA06/0419      31/05/2006    CROWN LAND-CITY OF WANNEROO MANAGEMENT  101                  $14,825.00       Refused

                   Prop address   DA VINCI PARK-RES 48382 11 DA VINCI DRIVE TAPPING  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 705 DP 46781

                   Descriptio      PARK - AERATOR

                   Applicant       PEET ASHTON HEIGHTS LIMITED

                   File Number   PR31/0008V01

DA06/0461      21/06/2006    TANKAS PTY LTD                                                79                    $980,000.00      Approved

                   Prop address   REGENTS GARDEN RESORT 33 DROVERS PLACE WANNEROO  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 5 P 7782 Vol 1536 Fol 999

                   Descriptio      AGED OR DEPENDENT PERSON DWELLINGS

                   Applicant       SALIM LEE ARCHITECTS

                   File Number   P34/0208V01

DA06/0491      06/07/2006    MILAN KAPURALIC & IVANKA KAPURALIC                  53                    $120,000.00      Approved

                   Prop address   1910 WANNEROO ROAD NEERABUP  WA  6031

                   Land            Lot 41 P 8548 Vol 1523 Fol 922

                   Descriptio      MARKET GARDEN SALES

                   Applicant       M KAPURALIC, I KAPURALIC

                   File Number   P23/0050V01

DA06/0513      13/07/2006    LOI T NGUYEN                                                    48                    $360,000.00      Approved

                   Prop address   24 FLORIDA DRIVE LANDSDALE  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 242 DP 42127 Vol 2577 Fol 635

                   Descriptio      GROUPED DWELLING - 2 UNITS

                   Applicant       STIRLING HOMES PTY LTD

                   File Number   P17/1055V01

DA06/0529      21/07/2006    IAN S MALEY & TONYA C MALEY                             67                    $227,272.73      Approved

                   Prop address   21 SEMINARA PLACE MARIGINIUP  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 6 D 86459 Vol 2095 Fol 447

                   Descriptio      SINGLE DWELLING

                   Applicant       IS MALEY

                   File Number   P20/0237V01

  Development Applications determined for Period                City of Wanneroo

  WHERE (Issued_date BETWEEN 01/10/2006 00:00:00 AND 31/10/2006 23:59:59)

Note:  Estimated cost not provided on applications for use only or where a flat fee is applicable

  Ram Id      Date          Owners                                                           Days               Est Cost        Decision

DA06/0531      06/04/2006    PERMANENT TRUSTEE COMPANY LTD                    138                  $0.00              Approved

                   Prop address   WANNEROO TAVERN 1/18 DUNDEBAR ROAD WANNEROO  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 1 Vol 1908 Fol 239 S/P 21521

                   Descriptio      SIGNAGE - WANNEROO TAVERN

                   Applicant       Australian Leisure & Hospitality Group

                   File Number   P34/0366V01

DA06/0558      03/08/2006    AUSEGY CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT PTY       47                    $305,000.00      Approved

                   Prop address   255 OCEAN KEYS BOULEVARD CLARKSON  WA  6030

                   Land            Lot 1164 DP 45468 Vol 2597 Fol 871

                   Descriptio      MIXED USE - BANK, PHARMACY, OFFICE X 2 AND SINGLE HOUSE X 2

                   Applicant       AUSEGY CONSTRUCTION &

                   File Number   P08/2297V01

DA06/0562      07/08/2006    PEET ASHTON HEIGHTS LIMITED                           37                    $4,000,000.00    Approved

                   Prop address   15 CROSTHWAIT CIRCLE TAPPING  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 703 DP 45447

                   Descriptio      GROUPED DWELLING - 27 UNITS

                   Applicant       SUMMIT PROJECTS

                   File Number   P31/1858V01

DA06/0570      10/08/2006    GRAHAM A CHALLEN & MARJORIE E CHALLEN          12                    $4,000.00         Approved

                   Prop address   HARBOURSIDE VILLAGE 25 THE TERRACE MINDARIE  WA  6030

                   Land            Lot 1300 Sec 55 D 100611 Vol 2230 Fol 251

                   Descriptio      GROUP DWELLING - PATIO ADDITION (UNIT 55)

                   Applicant       GRANTS HOME MAINTENANCE

                   File Number   P22/1919V01

DA06/0579      14/08/2006    LOULETTA PM D'SOUZA                                       43                    $254,909.09      Approved

                   Prop address   64 COOPER STREET MADELEY  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 617 DP 46620 Vol 2604 Fol 7

                   Descriptio      TWO GROUPED DWELLINGS

                   Applicant       JWH GROUP PTY LTD

                   File Number   P18/1053V01

DA06/0589      17/08/2006    ANDREW P LORD & ALISON M LORD                       41                    $3,595.00         Approved

                   Prop address   18 JUBATA TURN TAPPING  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 351 DP 42718 Vol 2585 Fol 983

                   Descriptio      SINGLE HOUSE - RETAINING WALL ADDITION

                   Applicant       CONWOOD FENCING AND RETAINING WALLS

                   File Number   P31/0794V01

DA06/0593      18/08/2006    DANIEL WY LEUNG, HELLE M LEUNG, HONG P          38                    $239,000.00      Approved

                   Prop address   12 GAUDI WAY CLARKSON  WA  6030

                   Land            Lot 1083 DP 45432 Vol 2593 Fol 852

                   Descriptio      TWO STOREY HOUSE & GARAGE ADDITION

                   Applicant       J GRIFFITHS

                   File Number   P08/1848V01

DA06/0626      01/09/2006    QUITO PTY LTD                                                  38                    $9,500.00         Approved

                   Prop address   32 SAFARI PLACE CARABOODA  WA  6033

                   Land            Lot 3 D 41471 Vol 488 Fol 005A

                   Descriptio      RETAINING WALLS

                   Applicant       STEVE MAWSON & ASSOCIATES

                   File Number   P06/0076V01

  Development Applications determined for Period                City of Wanneroo

  WHERE (Issued_date BETWEEN 01/10/2006 00:00:00 AND 31/10/2006 23:59:59)

Note:  Estimated cost not provided on applications for use only or where a flat fee is applicable

  Ram Id      Date          Owners                                                           Days               Est Cost        Decision

DA06/0644      06/09/2006    JOHN R GALLAGHER & MARTINE J GALLAGHER        22                    $13,700.00       Approved

                   Prop address   295 KAROBORUP ROAD CARABOODA  WA  6033

                   Land            Lot 101 D 98640 Vol 2186 Fol 431

                   Descriptio      SINGLE HOUSE - GARAGE ADDITION

                   Applicant       HIGHLINE LTD

                   File Number   P06/0020V01

DA06/0647      05/09/2006    XTREME HOLDINGS PTY LTD                                 32                    $3,187.00         Approved

                   Prop address   60A COOPER STREET MADELEY  WA  6065

                   Land            Part Lot 615 DP 46620

                   Descriptio      GROUPED DWELLING - PATIO ADDITION (UNIT 1)

                   Applicant       POULTER INSTALLATIONS

                   File Number   P18/1127V01

DA06/0666      12/09/2006    CHARLES R MORRIS, GERALDINE M MORRIS, LEE      5                     $16,000.00       Approved

                   Prop address   5/22 PARAMOUNT DRIVE WANGARA  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 5 Vol 2127 Fol 516 S/P 33982

                   Descriptio      CHANGE OF USE TO LIGHT INDUSTRY (PRODUCTION OF BEEF JERKY)

                   Applicant       CR MORRIS

                   File Number   P33/0089V01

DA06/0690      20/09/2006    NESSA PTY LTD                                                  13                    $400,000.00      Approved

                   Prop address   87 INNOVATION CIRCUIT WANGARA  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 216 DP 35032 Vol 2533 Fol 912

                   Descriptio      WAREHOUSE/SHOWROOM

                   Applicant       C VINCIULLO

                   File Number   P33/0170V01

DA06/0694      20/09/2006    BOOLEY CORPORATION PTY LTD                          16                    $277,720.00      Approved

                   Prop address   43 MATTA WAY PEARSALL  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 745 DP 43686 Vol 2584 Fol 921

                   Descriptio      TWO GROUPED DWELLINGS

                   Applicant       JWH GROUP PTY LTD

                   File Number   P25/0484V01

DA06/0697      19/09/2006    SUSAN E MCDONALD                                           24                    $26,352.00       Approved

                   Prop address   4 ACTION PLACE WANGARA  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 53 P 17245 Vol 1860 Fol 514

                   Descriptio      TRADE DISPLAY (REFURBISHMENT)

                   Applicant       OUTDOOR WORLD

                   File Number   P33/0311V01

DA06/0700      22/09/2006    BOOLEY CORPORATION PTY LTD                          14                    $267,265.45      Approved

                   Prop address   45 MATTA WAY PEARSALL  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 744 DP 43686 Vol 2584 Fol 920

                   Descriptio      TWO GROUPED DWELLINGS

                   Applicant       JWH GROUP PTY LTD

                   File Number   P25/0483V01

DA06/0702      26/09/2006    TRENT L JEFFREY & AMANDA K JEFFREY                8                     $1,000.00         Approved

                   Prop address   16 RATHKEALE BOULEVARD RIDGEWOOD  WA  6030

                   Land            Lot 1314 DP 45013 Vol 2594 Fol 158

                   Descriptio      HOME BUSINESS - CATEGORY 2 - HAIRDRESSING

                   Applicant       AK JEFFREY

                   File Number   P28/0235V01

  Development Applications determined for Period                City of Wanneroo

  WHERE (Issued_date BETWEEN 01/10/2006 00:00:00 AND 31/10/2006 23:59:59)

Note:  Estimated cost not provided on applications for use only or where a flat fee is applicable

  Ram Id      Date          Owners                                                           Days               Est Cost        Decision

DA06/0703      26/09/2006    DAVID R MARSDEN                                              7                     $0.00              Approved

                   Prop address   36A WINSHIP AVENUE WANNEROO  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 1 Vol 471 Fol 049A S/P 647

                   Descriptio      SINGLE HOUSE - GARAGE ADDITION

                   Applicant       DR MARSDEN

                   File Number   P34/1419V01

DA06/0704      27/09/2006    HOMESWEST RENTALS                                        7                     $1,120,000.00    Approved

                   Prop address   (16 UNITS) 54 SALCOTT ROAD GIRRAWHEEN  WA  6064

                   Land            Lot 959 P 10869

                   Descriptio      GROUPED DWELLING - THIRTEEN CARPORT EXTENSION ADDITIONS

                   Applicant       AP NAUGHTIN

                   File Number   P11/1684V01

DA06/0708      27/09/2006    THELMA J GOLDBOLD                                          4                     $4,363.00         Approved

                   Prop address   2/47 DENMAN GARDENS LANDSDALE  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 2 Vol 2623 Fol 939 S/P 50002

                   Descriptio      PATIO ADDITION (UNIT 2)

                   Applicant       THORN ROOFING CONTRACTORS

                   File Number   P17/1497V01

DA06/0710      26/09/2006    DAVID J CHAPMAN                                              5                     $4,536.36         Approved

                   Prop address   KALLISTA GARDENS 30/5 CALABRESE AVENUE WANNEROO  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 30 Vol 2572 Fol 742 S/P 45330

                   Descriptio      GROUPED DWELLING - PATIO ADDITION  (UNIT 30)

                   Applicant       THORN ROOFING CONTRACTORS

                   File Number   P34/0315V02

DA06/0712      27/09/2006    GULLA DEVELOPMENTS PTY LTD                           4                     $25,000.00       Approved

                   Prop address   49 INSPIRATION DRIVE WANGARA  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 298 DP 45312 Vol 2599 Fol 640 S/P 50656

                   Descriptio      WAREHOUSE FITOUT INCLUDING MEZZANINE ADDITION  (UNIT 2)

                   Applicant       GULLA DEVELOPMENTS PTY LTD

                   File Number   P33/0437V01

DA06/0723      29/09/2006    ERNEST HANDLEY, VERONICA HANDLEY, MARK        21                    $212,417.00      Approved

                   Prop address   1 FAIRPORT VISTA MINDARIE  WA  6030

                   Land            Lot 1593 DP 28984 Vol 2218 Fol 260

                   Descriptio      GROUPED DWELLING

                   Applicant       APG HOMES

                   File Number   P22/1275V01

DA06/0726      22/09/2006    QUITO PTY LTD                                                  10                    $80,000.00       Approved

                   Prop address   4 SAFARI PLACE CARABOODA  WA  6033

                   Land            Lot 2 D 41471 Vol 1370 Fol 155

                   Descriptio      WHOLESALE NURSERY - CARPARK ADDITION

                   Applicant       STEVE MAWSON & ASSOCIATES

                   File Number   P06/0160V01

DA06/0727      22/09/2006    QUITO PTY LTD                                                  10                    $10,000.00       Approved

                   Prop address   32 SAFARI PLACE CARABOODA  WA  6033

                   Land            Lot 3 D 41471 Vol 488 Fol 005A

                   Descriptio      WHOLESALE NURSERY - CROSSOVER & DRIVEWAY ADDITION

                   Applicant       STEVE MAWSON & ASSOCIATES

                   File Number   P06/0076V01

  Development Applications determined for Period                City of Wanneroo

  WHERE (Issued_date BETWEEN 01/10/2006 00:00:00 AND 31/10/2006 23:59:59)

Note:  Estimated cost not provided on applications for use only or where a flat fee is applicable

  Ram Id      Date          Owners                                                           Days               Est Cost        Decision

DA06/0729      04/10/2006    JOHN E ARNOLD & JULIE C ARNOLD                       2                     $3,075.00         Approved

                   Prop address   5 ANISE WAY DARCH  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 741 DP 42990 Vol 2603 Fol 883

                   Descriptio      PATIO ADDITION

                   Applicant       A1 PATIOS

                   File Number   P09/1389V01

DA06/0733      05/10/2006    PAUL E CLANCY                                                  1                     $11,597.00       Approved

                   Prop address   156 PINJAR ROAD MARIGINIUP  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 20 DP 222778 Vol 1765 Fol 935

                   Descriptio      SINGLE HOUSE - PATIO ADDITION

                   Applicant       PEARCEY CONSTRUCTIONS PTY LTD

                   File Number   P20/0242V01

DA06/0734      05/10/2006    STEVEN GOLDING & KARRON E GOLDING               4                     $2,995.00         Approved

                   Prop address   11 ST LOUIS AVENUE HOCKING  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 1 Vol 2610 Fol 747 S/P 49037

                   Descriptio      PATIO ADDITION

                   Applicant       SUNWISE PATIOS

                   File Number   P13/1387V01

DA06/0736      28/09/2006    PATRICIA AH WILLIAMS                                        9                     $26,500.00       Approved

                   Prop address   14 IANDRA LOOP CARRAMAR  WA  6031

                   Land            Lot 255 P 21237 Vol 2069 Fol 922

                   Descriptio      PATIO ADDITION

                   Applicant       PATIO LIVING

                   File Number   P07/1618V01

DA06/0737      06/09/2006    RAAFA ASSOCIATION INC                                     25                    $1,716.00         Approved

                   Prop address   CAMBRAI VILLAGE 85 HESTER AVENUE MERRIWA  WA  6030

                   Land            Lot 12 P 24265 Vol 2202 Fol 109

                   Descriptio      AGED OR DEPENDENT PERSONS DWELLINGS - PATIO ADDITION TO UNIT 32

                   Applicant       RAAFA ASSOCIATION INC

                   File Number   P21/0080V01

DA06/0739      06/10/2006    MARIA D HOLLICK                                               3                     $9,563.00         Approved

                   Prop address   4B KAMARA COURT WANNEROO  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 1 Vol 1822 Fol 335 S/P 16860

                   Descriptio      PATIO ADDITION

                   Applicant       1/2 PRICE PATIOS

                   File Number   P34/0749V01

DA06/0740      09/10/2006    JOHN A DESKEERE & MAUREEN D DESKEERE           5                     $1,600.00         Approved

                   Prop address   3B MEGA STREET WANNEROO  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 2 Vol 1522 Fol 942 S/P 6379

                   Descriptio      PATIO ADDITION

                   Applicant       JA DESKEERE

                   File Number   P34/2180V01

DA06/0743      03/10/2006    GARY R BECKHURST                                           6                     $6,533.00         Approved

                   Prop address   104 MANCHESTER DRIVE HOCKING  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 1 Vol 2533 Fol 496 S/P 42517

                   Descriptio      PATIO ADDITION (UNIT 2)

                   Applicant       PATIO LIVING

                   File Number   P13/0108V01

  Development Applications determined for Period                City of Wanneroo

  WHERE (Issued_date BETWEEN 01/10/2006 00:00:00 AND 31/10/2006 23:59:59)

Note:  Estimated cost not provided on applications for use only or where a flat fee is applicable

  Ram Id      Date          Owners                                                           Days               Est Cost        Decision

DA06/0744      06/10/2006    BRIAN R ROSS & CHRISTINE A ROSS                       4                     $150,000.00      Approved

                   Prop address   45/146 ST ANDREWS DRIVE YANCHEP  WA  6035

                   Land            Lot 45 Vol 2614 Fol 145 S/P 48121

                   Descriptio      SINGLE HOUSE

                   Applicant       CA ROSS

                   File Number   P36/1042V01

DA06/0745      09/10/2006    CITY OF WANNEROO                                           10                    $188,000.00      Approved

                   Prop address   MATERIAL RECOVERY FACILITY 70 MOTIVATION DRIVE WANGARA  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 15 D 16710 Vol 1164 Fol 564

                   Descriptio      BULK EARTHWORKS (Proposed Constructions Callaway Street)

                   Applicant       TAYLOR BURRELL BARNETT

                   File Number   P33/0097V01

DA06/0748      10/10/2006    ROBERT M KENT                                                 2                     $2,000.00         Approved

                   Prop address   10B SALITAGE LINK PEARSALL  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 2 Vol 2624 Fol 500 S/P 50391

                   Descriptio      PATIO ADDITION (UNIT B)

                   Applicant       KALMAR PTY LTD

                   File Number   P25/0490V01

DA06/0749      11/10/2006    HELEN D JACKSON & JOHN NELSON                       4                     $4,700.00         Approved

                   Prop address   154 PINJAR ROAD MARIGINIUP  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 21 DP 222778 Vol 1252 Fol 803

                   Descriptio      CARPORT  ADDITION

                   Applicant       HD JACKSON

                   File Number   P20/0051V01

DA06/0750      11/10/2006    ANDREW P GRAFEN                                            4                     $25,000.00       Approved

                   Prop address   62 HOUGHTON DRIVE CARRAMAR  WA  6031

                   Land            Lot 157 P 22994 Vol 2145 Fol 624

                   Descriptio      ANCILLARY ACCOMMODATION

                   Applicant       AP GRAFEN

                   File Number   P07/1630V01

DA06/0751      06/10/2006    LANDCORP                                                        7                     $1,450,000.00    Approved

                   Prop address   SUBDIVIDED 38 CALLAWAY STREET WANGARA  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 4 D 15871 Vol 1302 Fol 548

                   Descriptio      FACTORY WAREHOUSE UNITS (Proposed Lot 325 Inspiration Drive Wangara)

                   Applicant       SFRC ENTERPRISES

                   File Number   P33/0277V01

DA06/0753      12/10/2006    HOMESWEST RENTALS                                        2                     $2,000.00         Approved

                   Prop address   6B SHORTLAND WAY GIRRAWHEEN  WA  6064

                   Land            Lot 2 Vol 2039 Fol 497 S/P 28788

                   Descriptio      CARPORT ADDITION (6B)

                   Applicant       AP NAUGHTIN

                   File Number   P11/1693V01

DA06/0755      12/10/2006    BRUCE DURYEA & RHONDA M DURYEA                   3                     $4,912.00         Approved

                   Prop address   30 ST HELENS GROVE LANDSDALE  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 4 Vol 2143 Fol 117 S/P 34912

                   Descriptio      PATIO ADDITION

                   Applicant       OASIS PATIOS

                   File Number   P17/1418V01

  Development Applications determined for Period                City of Wanneroo

  WHERE (Issued_date BETWEEN 01/10/2006 00:00:00 AND 31/10/2006 23:59:59)

Note:  Estimated cost not provided on applications for use only or where a flat fee is applicable

  Ram Id      Date          Owners                                                           Days               Est Cost        Decision

DA06/0756      10/10/2006    ANDREW N MILLAR & CARLA O MILLAR                    4                     $1,600.00         Approved

                   Prop address   15 JACARANDA DRIVE WANNEROO  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 123 D 94304 Vol 2122 Fol 006

                   Descriptio      PATIO ADDITION

                   Applicant       OUTDOOR WORLD

                   File Number   P34/0588V01

DA06/0757      12/10/2006    BRIGHTWATER CARE GROUP                               3                     $3,120.00         Approved

                   Prop address   KINGSWAY COURT 141 KINGSWAY MADELEY  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 103 DP 36095 Vol 2536 Fol 968

                   Descriptio      AGED OR DEPENDENT PERSONS DWELLINGS - PATIO ADDITION TO UNIT 56

                   Applicant       PEARCEY CONSTRUCTIONS PTY LTD

                   File Number   P18/1494V01

DA06/0758      12/10/2006    VERONICA A FESTA & ALFREDO FESTA                   0                     $11,000.00       Approved

                   Prop address   322 BADGERUP ROAD GNANGARA  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 504 P 21845 Vol 2095 Fol 407

                   Descriptio      PATIO ADDITION

                   Applicant       NORTHERN PATIO INSTALLATIONS

                   File Number   P12/0276V01

DA06/0759      13/10/2006    LYNETTE I MOSEL & WILLIAM C MOSEL                    4                     $6,690.00         Approved

                   Prop address   55 LAKEVIEW STREET MARIGINIUP  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 25 D 60299 Vol 1593 Fol 333

                   Descriptio      RURAL SHED ADDITION

                   Applicant       WC MOSEL, LI MOSEL

                   File Number   P20/0136V01

DA06/0760      13/10/2006    HOMER HOLDINGS PTY LTD & MALAGA                   3                     $1,100,000.00    Approved

                   Prop address   57 INSPIRATION DRIVE WANGARA  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 327 DP 45312

                   Descriptio      WAREHOUSE UNITS

                   Applicant       CALIBRE CONSTRUCTIONS PTY LTD

                   File Number   P33/0502V01

DA06/0763      10/10/2006    EDUCATION DEPT OF WA                                     6                     $99,000.00       notsupport

                   Prop address   MERRIWA PRIMARY SCHOOL 38 ADDISON GARDENS MERRIWA  WA  6030

                   Land            Lot 410 P 17629 Vol 1881 Fol 152

                   Descriptio      EDUCATIONAL ESTABLISHMENT - SECURITY FENCE ADDITION

                   Applicant       DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING & WORKS

                   File Number   P21/1398V01

DA06/0769      13/10/2006    SHAHZAD KHAZALY & SHEDAN KHAZALY                  5                     $0.00              Approved

                   Prop address   22 HEATHFIELD DRIVE LANDSDALE  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 472 P 20141 Vol 2018 Fol 930

                   Descriptio      HOME BUSINESS - CATEGORY 2 - HAIRDRESSING

                   Applicant       S KHAZALY

                   File Number   P17/1541V01

DA06/0771      18/10/2006    EDNA A BROWN & PETER J PATERSON                   4                     $11,500.00       Approved

                   Prop address   45 CARLOW WAY DARCH  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 285 DP 34478 Vol 2532 Fol 628

                   Descriptio      PATIO ADDITION

                   Applicant       NORTHERN PATIO INSTALLATIONS

                   File Number   P09/0299V01

  Development Applications determined for Period                City of Wanneroo

  WHERE (Issued_date BETWEEN 01/10/2006 00:00:00 AND 31/10/2006 23:59:59)

Note:  Estimated cost not provided on applications for use only or where a flat fee is applicable

  Ram Id      Date          Owners                                                           Days               Est Cost        Decision

DA06/0773      19/10/2006    SHANE D FRENCH & JUANITA M FRENCH                 5                     $0.00              Approved

                   Prop address   60 MARCHWOOD BOULEVARD BUTLER  WA  6036

                   Land            Lot 731 DP 30598 Vol 2514 Fol 427

                   Descriptio      HOME BUSINESS - CATEGORY 2 - BEAUTY SALON

                   Applicant       JM FRENCH

                   File Number   P05/2048v01

DA06/0776      19/10/2006    BRIGHTWATER CARE GROUP                               3                     $1,700.00         Approved

                   Prop address   KINGSWAY COURT 141 KINGSWAY MADELEY  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 103 DP 36095 Vol 2536 Fol 968

                   Descriptio      AGED OR DEPENDENT PERSONS DWELLINGS - PATIO ADDITION TO UNIT 135

                   Applicant       MINDARIE PATIOS

                   File Number   P18/1018V01

DA06/0777      19/10/2006    REBECCA L OWEN                                              5                     $11,000.00       Approved

                   Prop address   8/72 AMBERTON AVENUE GIRRAWHEEN  WA  6064

                   Land            Lot 63 Vol 2610 Fol 627 S/P 24554

                   Descriptio      PATIO AND GARAGE TO UNIT  (UNIT 8)

                   Applicant       QUALITY PATIOS & CARPORTS

                   File Number   P11/1434V01

DA06/0779      20/10/2006    ANDREW N MILLAR & CARLA O MILLAR                    6                     $23,275.00       Approved

                   Prop address   15 JACARANDA DRIVE WANNEROO  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 123 D 94304 Vol 2122 Fol 006

                   Descriptio      SWIMMING POOL ADDITION

                   Applicant       AQUA TECHNICS (WA) PTY LTD - WELSHPOOL

                   File Number   P34/0588V01

DA06/0781      20/10/2006    BRETT M LUPTON & TERESA LUPTON                     6                     $28,000.00       Approved

                   Prop address   245 BENMUNI ROAD WANNEROO  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 132 D 75591 Vol 1841 Fol 61

                   Descriptio      SWIMMING POOL ADDITION

                   Applicant       FREEDOM POOLS

                   File Number   P34/0431V01

DA06/0786      23/10/2006    NEVILLE L FIRKINS                                              5                     $2,734.00         Approved

                   Prop address   4A HIGHAM ROAD MARANGAROO  WA  6064

                   Land            Lot 1 Vol 1805 Fol 351 S/P 16210

                   Descriptio      PATIO ADDITION

                   Applicant       SWAN PATIOS

                   File Number   P19/2037V01

DA06/0787      20/10/2006    FRANK GHALILI                                                   7                     $0.00              Approved

                   Prop address   176 NICHOLAS ROAD HOCKING  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 20 D 57196 Vol 1546 Fol 284

                   Descriptio      SHOPPING CENTRE SIGNAGE STRATEGY, CHANGE OF USE FROM SHOP TO

                   Applicant       F GHALILI

                   File Number   P13/0777V02

DA06/0788      23/10/2006    JULIA M POYNTON                                              3                     $1,584.00         Approved

                   Prop address   15B HATFIELD WAY GIRRAWHEEN  WA  6064

                   Land            Lot 25 Vol 2571 Fol 496 S/P 45692

                   Descriptio      PATIO ADDITION

                   Applicant       HERITAGE OUTDOOR

                   File Number   P11/0768V01

  Development Applications determined for Period                City of Wanneroo

  WHERE (Issued_date BETWEEN 01/10/2006 00:00:00 AND 31/10/2006 23:59:59)

Note:  Estimated cost not provided on applications for use only or where a flat fee is applicable

  Ram Id      Date          Owners                                                           Days               Est Cost        Decision

DA06/0792      20/10/2006    MARK W BEEDHAM                                              6                     $7,300.00         Approved

                   Prop address   JACARANDA 13/18 BUTTERICK PLACE GIRRAWHEEN  WA  6064

                   Land            Lot 13 Vol 2202 Fol 437 S/P 38772

                   Descriptio      PATIO ADDITION

                   Applicant       PEARCEY CONSTRUCTIONS

                   File Number   P11/0362V01

DA06/0794      25/10/2006    TREVOR RICHARDSON                                        3                     $4,000.00         Approved

                   Prop address   41 ST HELENS GROVE LANDSDALE  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 40 Vol 2165 Fol 231 S/P 34912

                   Descriptio      PATIO ADDITION

                   Applicant       ENVY PATIOS

                   File Number   P17/0268V01

DA06/0795      19/10/2006    ROBERT A HAIR & SHONA E HAIR                           7                     $3,200.00         Approved

                   Prop address   21B ADDINGTON WAY MARANGAROO  WA  6064

                   Land            Lot 2 Vol 1752 Fol 302 S/P 14472

                   Descriptio      PATIO ADDITION (UNIT 21B)

                   Applicant       ENVY PATIOS

                   File Number   P19/1004V01

DA06/0796      23/10/2006    GEORGE C IOPPOLO                                           5                     $2,230.00         Approved

                   Prop address   81 GUNGURRU AVENUE HOCKING  WA  6065

                   Land            Lot 1 Vol 2596 Fol 715 S/P 47347

                   Descriptio      PATIO ADDITION

                   Applicant       FASTA PATIOS

                   File Number   P13/1402V01

DA06/0798      23/10/2006    GILLIAN E HULL & SARAH J WHITTINGHAM               6                     $224,545.00      Approved

                   Prop address   43/146 ST ANDREWS DRIVE YANCHEP  WA  6035

                   Land            Lot 43 Vol 2614 Fol 143 S/P 48121

                   Descriptio      SINGLE DWELLING

                   Applicant       GE HULL

                   File Number   P36/1042V01

DA06/0799      18/10/2006    CROWN LAND-CITY OF WANNEROO MANAGEMENT  9                     $0.00              support

                   Prop address   FORESHORE MANAGEMENT-RES 48603 602L TWO ROCKS ROAD YANCHEP  WA  6035

                   Land            Lot 8024 DP 49302

                   Descriptio      ROAD INTERSECTIONS

                   Applicant       ROBERTS DAY GROUP

                   File Number   P36/0736V01

DA06/0800      26/10/2006    CORNELIS T BUMA & ANTHEA D BUMA                     2                     $11,950.00       Approved

                   Prop address   1A WROTHAM PLACE MARANGAROO  WA  6064

                   Land            Lot 100 D 80621 Vol 1921 Fol 928

                   Descriptio      PATIO ADDITION

                   Applicant       POULTER INSTALLATIONS

                   File Number   P19/1856V01

DA06/0807      20/10/2006    QUITO PTY LTD                                                  7                     $34,463.00       Approved

                   Prop address   32 SAFARI PLACE CARABOODA  WA  6033

                   Land            Lot 3 D 41471 Vol 488 Fol 005A

                   Descriptio      RETAINING WALL

                   Applicant       STEVE MAWSON & ASSOCIATES

                   File Number   P06/0076V01

 

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

Other Matters

File Ref:                                              SP/0007V01

File Name: HA Payment of Nett Compensation Entitlement in East Wanneroo Cell 6 Madeley Darch .doc This line will not be printed dont delete

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Planning and Development

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Author:   T Neale

Meeting Date:   12 December 2006

Attachments:                                       1

StartStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Issue

To consider a nett payment for Cell Works to a subdivider in East Wanneroo Cell 6.

Background

The subdivision and development of land within East Wanneroo Cells 1 to 8 is provided for by Part 10 of District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS2), which sets out the Planning and Developer Contribution Arrangements. Clause 10.6 deals with the calculation and apportionment of Cell Costs, and clause 10.14 deals with acquisition of land by subdivider and developers for Cell Works.

 

Each owner of land in an East Wanneroo Cell is required to make a contribution to the cell costs as they subdivide or develop their land. In the residential cells (Cells 1 to 6) the contribution is apportioned on the basis of an infrastructure cost per lot (ICPL) for each lot that is produced.

Detail

Patanal Pty Ltd (Patanal) is a subdivider in Cell 6 and has recently completed the subdivision of the final two stages of its land holding in the cell and ceded land for cell works in the form of public open space (POS) and an arterial road underpass apron.  The ICPL contributions due are less than the value of the land ceded and there is therefore a nett amount payable to Patanal.

 

The final two stages of Patanal produced 69 lots and these lots attracted aggregate ICPL contributions of $1,702,827.54. The Patanal land holding within Cell 6 is shown on the plan at Attachment 1.

 

The POS areas ceded by Patanal in theses stages was 1.8747 hectares and the arterial road ceded was 0.1241 hectares. The aggregate value of these cell works is $2,898,260.00. After offsetting the ICPL contributions due on the lots produced the nett amount that is to be paid to Patanal is $1,195,432.46. The calculation of this amount is summarised as follows:

 

ICPL contributions on 69 lots @ $24,678.66 ICPL                    $1,702,827.54

 

Acquisition cost for 1.8747 hectares public open space            .. $2,718,315.00

Acquisition cost for 0.1241 hectares arterial road land............... $   179,945.00

Aggregate Acquisition cost......................................................... $2,898,260.00

 

Nett amount payable to Patanal.................................................. $1,195,432.46

 

Patanal has submitted tax invoices and requested payment of the GST applicable to the transactions. The GST amounts to $289,826 and this is to be added to the nett acquisition cost.

Comment

The amount claimed for the POS and arterial road land is based on the current englobo land value for Cell 6 ($1,450,000 per hectare). It is therefore in accordance with the valuation provisions of Part 10 of DPS2.

Statutory Compliance

The provision of land for POS and arterial roads is identified as a Cell Work in Schedule 9 to DPS2. The charging of infrastructure contributions towards Cell Costs and the acquisition of land for Cell Works is authorised by Part 10 of DPS2.

Strategic Implications

The acquisition of land for POS and arterial roads is in accordance with the Social Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan, which seeks to improve the City’s identity and community through the provision of leisure and recreation facilities and improve transport options and connections.

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Funds to meet the nett acquisition costs are held in the Cell 6 overdraft account and the payment will not impact on any other aspect of the City’s operations.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority.

EndStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Recommendation

That Council AUTHORISES payment of an amount of $1,195,432.46 plus GST of $289,826.00 to Patanal Pty Ltd as a nett payment due for public open space and arterial road land ceded in East Wanneroo Cell 6 Madeley-Darch.

EndOfRecommendation - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

File Ref:                                              SP/0047V01

File Name: HA Acquisition of land for Ocean Reef Road  Wangara .doc This line will not be printed dont delete

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Planning and Development

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Author:   T Neale

Meeting Date:   12 December 2006

Attachments:                                       1

StartStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Issue

To consider the purchase of land that is required for the extension of Ocean Reef Road, Wangara.

Background

The land required for the extension of Ocean Reef Road between Hartman Drive and Badgerup Road is being acquired by negotiated purchase, or where it is necessary in two instances, by compulsory taking. Agreement has now been reached with the owner of the final section to be acquired by negotiation. The construction of the south carriageway of Ocean Reef Road is a matter of high priority and work is expected to commence in the middle part of 2007, subject to the compulsory taking process being completed.

Detail

The final section of land to be acquired by negotiation is situated at the south end of Lot 30 (254) Mary Street, Wanneroo. The preliminary road design indicated that an area of 551 square metres would be required, however the final design is currently being examined and there may be some reduction to that area. The owners Peter George Yewers and Lorraine Beverley Yewers have offered to sell the area that is determined to be required at the price of $110 per square metre.

 

Lot 30 Mary Street comprises 2.0257 hectares and, except for the small section required for Ocean Reef Road, is not situated in any East Wanneroo Cell. The portion required for Ocean Reef Road is however situated in East Wanneroo Cell 8, Wangara (East) and forms the north boundary of that cell (see Attachment 1).

Comment

The price of $110 per square metre is based on the current average englobo land value for East Wanneroo Cell 8 ($1,000,000 per hectare), plus an additional ten per cent (10%). It is therefore in accordance with the valuation and acquisition provisions of Part 10 of District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS2).

Statutory Compliance

Ocean Reef Road is an arterial road and is identified as a Cell Work in Schedule 9 to DPS2. The payment for acquisition of land for Cell Works is authorised by Part 10 of DPS2.

Strategic Implications

Acquisition of land for arterial roads is in accordance with the Social Outcome Objectives of the City’s Strategic Plan, which seeks to provide and improve transport options and connections.

Policy Implications

Nil.

Financial Implications

The acquisition of land for Cell Works is to be funded from the infrastructure contributions received by the East Wanneroo Cells in which the roads are situated. The Cell 8 overdraft account will provide the funds to meet the cost of acquiring the arterial road requirements from Lot 30 (254) Mary Street, and there will be no impact on any other area of the City’s operations.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority.

EndStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Recommendation

That Council AUTHORISES the purchase of land required for Ocean Reef Road within East Wanneroo Cell No. 8 from Lot 30 (254) Mary Street, Wanneroo at the rate of $110.00 per square metre, in accordance with the valuation and acquisition provisions of Part 10 of District Planning Scheme No. 2.

EndOfRecommendation - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

File Ref:                                              SP/0007V01

File Name: HA Acquisition of Land for Skeit Road and Gnangara Road  Madeley Darch .doc This line will not be printed dont delete

Responsible Officer:                           Director, Planning and Development

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Author:   T Neale

Meeting Date:   12 December 2006

Attachments:                                       1

StartStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Issue

To consider the purchase of land that is required for the extension of Hartman Drive and the widening of Gnangara Road, Madeley-Darch.

Background

Hartman Drive has been constructed between Ocean Reef Road and Gnangara Road. It is planned to extend the road south of Gnangara Road to link up with Kingsway thereby creating a through route between Hepburn Avenue and Ocean Reef Road, that will eventually include Lenore Road when that road is deviated and widened. Gnangara Road is also to be widened along its length either side of the Hartman Drive extension (see Attachment 1).

Detail

Generally the land required for new arterial road alignments is acquired at the time the adjoining properties are subdivided. The final section of land to be acquired south of Gnangara Road is situated in Lot 80 (156) Gnangara Road and the owner, Perron Developments Pty Ltd has offered to create the road alignment ahead of the subdivision of the residential part of its landholding and sell it to the City at the price of $1,983,020, subject to determination of the area involved plus GST.

Comment

The price of $1,983,020 requested by Perron Developments Pty Ltd for the 1.3676 hectares (subject to survey) that is required for the extension of Hartman Drive and widening of Gnangara Road is based on the current average englobo land value for East Wanneroo Cell 6 ($1,450,000 per hectare). The value is therefore in accordance with the valuation provisions of Part 10 of District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS2). The purchase will be subject to survey and adjustment of rates and taxes.

Statutory Compliance

Hartman Drive and Gnangara Road are arterial roads and are identified as a Cell Work in Schedule 9 to DPS2. The charging of infrastructure contributions towards Cell Costs and the acquisition of land for Cell Works is authorised by Part 10 of DPS.

Strategic Implications

Acquisition of land for arterial roads is in accordance with the Social Outcome Objectives of the City’s Strategic Plan, which seeks to provide and improve transport options and connections.

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

The acquisition of land for Cell Works is to be funded from the infrastructure contributions received by the East Wanneroo Cells in which the roads are situated. The Cell 6 account contains sufficient funds to meet the aggregate cost of acquiring the arterial road requirements from Lot 80 (156) Gnangara Road, and there will be no impact on any other area of the City’s operations.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority.

EndStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Recommendation

That Council AUTHORISES payment of an amount of $1,983,020 plus GST, subject to survey and adjustment of rates and taxes, to Perron Developments Pty Ltd for the land required for the extension of Hartman Drive and widening of Gnangara Road, Madeley-Darch within East Wanneroo Cell 6.

EndOfRecommendation - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

Infrastructure

Tenders

File Ref:                                              C06070;S34/0002v02

File Name: AA Tender 06070   Upgrade of Materials Recovery Facility  Wangara.doc This line will not be printed dont delete

Responsible Officer:                           Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Author:   Robert Elliott

Meeting Date:   12 December 2006

Attachment:                                        Nil

StartStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Issue

To consider Tender No 06070 – Upgrade of Materials Recovery Facility, Wangara.

Background

At its meeting on 29 August 2006, Council agreed to the establishment of a joint agreement with the Cities of Swan and Joondalup to upgrade and operate the Material Recovery Facility (MRF) at Wangara (Item No IN12-08/06 refers). The estimated cost of the MRF upgrade was indicated as $3.6M, with the funding to be provided equally by the three Councils. In addition, a grant of $300,000 has been obtained from the National Packaging Covenant (NPC) to provide for the sorting of mixed paper and mixed plastics. This provides a budget of $3.9M to cover the tender works and various site works that are to be undertaken by the City of Wanneroo.

 

The new facility will have a single shift capacity of 32,000 tpa compared to the current facility’s two shift capacity of about 16,000 tpa.  The facility will be able to handle the expected growth over the next 5 years and the additional material collected should the City of Wanneroo change its recycling collection program to a universal cart service.

 

The upgrade to the facility will mean that it will be closed for a period of at least five to eight weeks. During that time the City of Wanneroo’s recyclables will be directed to any available facility for sorting but some of it may not be able to be placed and would need to be disposed of at Tamala Park.

Detail

Tenders were advertised on 21 October 2006 and closed on 21 November 2006.  A total of 16 copies of the specification were requested with four of these going to eastern states companies. 

 

The scope of the “Design and Construct’ contract is to remove all of the equipment in the current MRF and design supply, install and commission a new plant with approximately four times the processing capacity of the existing plant.

 

One tender was received from Recycling Design and Technologies (Aust) Pty Ltd.  The tender submission addressed three levels of automation.  The price for the three options is detailed below

 

Option	Original Tendered price	Number of staff
Option 1 (Automatic sort)	$5,780,800	10
Option 2 (Semi automatic)	$5,240,415	12
Option 3 (Manual Sort)	$3,695,000	16

 

By comparison the current MRF plant would require the equivalent of 50 staff to process the same amount of material and would recover significantly less recyclables.

 

The tender has a detailed schedule of equipment and negotiations have identified some savings that may be achieved during the detailed design phase of the project.  In particular, the use of the City’s existing Eddy Current Separator may be possible with a saving of $80,000.

 

A spreadsheet model of the full cost of operating the MRF was developed as part of the business plan for the MRF upgrade.  This includes the repayment of the capital contributions of the three councils and payment of interest on the outstanding capital at 7%.  The gate fee for using the MRF varies over the 5 year period of the agreement as the tonnes processed increases and the interest on the capital decreases.  The estimated costs for the first and last year of the agreement for the various options are given below;

 

Option	Cost per tonne year 1	Cost per tonne year 5
Option 1	$39.23	$20.30
Option 2	$36.93	$19.36
Option 3	$26.43	$13.25

 

This indicates that Option 3 (manual sort) is the best value option for the City.

Consultation

The tender document was prepared in consultation with the Cities of Swan and Joondalup.

Comment

The current MRF equipment needs to be replaced because it is at the end of its economic life and the volume of recyclables now being collected exceeds its processing capacity, even though it is being operated for two shifts each day.  The long term average cost of running the current MRF has been $35.49 per tonne delivered.  The proposed new plant will be cheaper to operate and will recover a greater range of materials.

 

The City is responsible for some additional works on the project.  These include upgrading the power supply and paving the northern storage area to handle truck movements.  There will also be a need to install soak wells for proper disposal of drainage from the roof and paved area.

 

The NPC has advised the City that it was successful in obtaining a grant of $300,000. The formal agreement for the grant is being prepared by the Department of Environment and Conservation and is expected to be finalised during December.  It is appropriate to reflect this grant funding in the City’s budget.

 

It is to be noted that the Joint Agreement provides for any extra costs incurred in the upgrade of the MRF to be shared equally by the three Cities. There is the capacity in the Joint Agreement to share any additional costs should the total cost of the contract and external works by the City exceed the $3.9M budget.

 

Recycling Design and Technologies (Aust) Pty Ltd have significant experience in building and upgrading recycling facilities in Australia and overseas.  Its tender submission was comprehensive and the company can be expected to provide a functional and effective plant within budget and time requirements.

Statutory Compliance

Tenders have been invited and evaluated against selection criteria in accordance with Section 3.57 of the Local Government Act and associated regulations.

 

The Manager Contracts and Property has reviewed the tender selection process for fairness and compliance and is satisfied with the evaluation process and result.

Strategic Implications

Upgrading the Material Recovery Facility at Wangara is consistent with the following City of Wanneroo Strategic Plan (2006-2011) goals and objectives: -

‘1.3 improve management, recycling and re-use of waste’

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Project expenditure of $3.6M has been approved as Project No PR-1218 in the 2006/2007 Infrastructure Works Budget with the $1.2M contributions from the Cities of Joondalup and Swan shown as income.  The net cost of $1.2 million for the City of Wanneroo will be funded from the Domestic Rubbish Reserve. 

 

There is a need to amend the budget to reflect the NPC grant of $300,000 and to allocate these funds to the MRF Upgrade, as detailed below:

 

INCOME

Cost Code	Present Budget	Additional Amount	Revised Budget
918954-8999-502	$0	$300,000	$300,000

 

EXPENDITURE

Account No/Project No	From	To	Description
918954-8999-502	$300,000
Project No PR 1218		$300,000	Upgrade the Material Recovery Facility (MRF)

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

EndStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.             ACCEPTS the grant funding of $300,000 from the National Packaging Covenant for the mixed paper and mixed plastic sorting capacity upgrade to the Wangara Materials Recovery Facility.

2.             ACCEPTS Tender No 06070 from Recycling Design and Technologies (Aust) Pty Ltd for the Upgrade of the Material Recovery Facility, Wangara, Option 3, at a cost of $3,695,000.

3.             Notes the following budget variations to reflect the grant money from the National Packaging Covenant to Project PR 1218.

INCOME

Cost Code	Present Budget	Additional Amount	Revised Budget
918954-8999-502	$0	$300,000	$300,000

 

EXPENDITURE

Account No/Project No	From	To	Description
918954-8999-502	$300,000
Project No PR 1218		$300,000	Upgrade the Material Recovery Facility (MRF)

 

EndOfRecommendation - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

 

File Ref:                                              PA13/0004V01

File Name: AA Tender No  06071   The Replacement Of Wanneroo Recreation Centre Fascia And Softfit Linings.doc This line will not be printed dont delete

Responsible Officer:                           Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Author:   Janek Sobon

Meeting Date:   12 December 2006

Attachment:                                        Nil

StartStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Issue

To consider Tender No 06071 – Replacement of Fascia and Soffit Linings at the Wanneroo Recreation Centre, Scenic Drive, Wanneroo.

Background

The proposed works initially comprised of the replacement of the existing roofing, fascias, gutters, asbestos eaves lining, rainwater heads and goods so that at the completion of the works, the Wanneroo Recreation Centre would have a completely new roofing, fascia, eaves lining and above ground storm water disposal system.

 

This full scope of works was advertised on 2 September 2006 as Tender No. 06058 with the tender period being closed on 19 September 2006.  This tender assessment was tabled in Report IN04-10/06 and the meeting resolutions in relation to this report were that Council:

 

“1.    DOES NOT ACCEPT Tender No. 06058 – The Replacement Of Wanneroo Recreation Centre Roof and Fascia

 2.      ENDORSES a redefined scope of works for the asbestos removal and perimeter fascia lining replacement only to the Wanneroo Recreation Centre, at an estimated cost of $115,000, and advertise for tender in October 2006. 

 3.      LISTS for consideration in the 2007/2008 Draft Budget second stage lower level and hall roof replacements to Wanneroo Recreation Centre.”

The 2006/2007 Capital Works Budget has a sum of $120,000 for the tendered works as a first stage funding provision assigned to asbestos removal and fascia/gutter replacement works for the perimeter of the lower level and hall roofs at the Wanneroo Recreation Centre.  In addition, an amount of $30,000 has been allowed in the Building Maintenance budget for asbestos removal and this funding source can be utilised to meet any shortfall in project funding.

 

Where possible the Centre is to remain operational and the works staged to minimise inconvenience and disturbance to the daily operations of the Centre and user groups.  An existing microwave link located on the roof of the Centre will need to be removed and then repositioned to re-establish the present service once the fascia cladding work is complete.  Work associated with the microwave link will be undertaken by the City’s IT Services Network Administrator and become an additional cost to this Project.

 

The tender specification was developed to incorporate the following works:

Fascia and Soffit Replacement Works

1.                  The removal of existing fascia cladding, box gutters, rain water heads and goods, associated capping, flashings, trims and non reusable items;

2.                  The supply and installation of new Colorbond Lysaght Klip-Lok 406 fascia cladding, box gutters and rain water heads and goods, associated capping, flashings, trims and reinstatement of reusable fascia mounted fixtures; and

3.                  The removal of all eave soffit linings and replacement with painted Villa Board.  Reinstatement of lighting and fixtures mounted from eaves soffits.

Asbestos Removal and Perimeter Fascia Lining Replacement

The corroded perimeter fascia linings need replacing and to accomplish this the contractor will be required to remove and replace the existing asbestos eave linings at ground and upper hall levels.  The removal of the asbestos is a major cost and complicating factor in the proposed works.

Detail

Tender No. 06071 for the replacement of roof and fascia to the Wanneroo Recreation Centre was advertised on 28 October 2006 and closed at the City’s Offices at 3.00pm on 14 November 2006 with the receipt of the following submissions:

 

Tenderer	Tender Price
Devco Holdings Pty Ltd	$133,920
Joondalup City Roofing Pty Ltd	$144,527
Numans Group Pty Ltd	$171,930

 

The price schedule breakdown provided by the three Tenderers assisted the tender assessment.  The total price difference between Tenderers is $38,010 or a variation of some 25%.

 

Tender Assessment

 

The Coordinator Building Projects assisted by the Manager Contracts & Property applied the following weighting to the tender evaluation to give a total score for each Tender based upon the following selection criteria:

 

1	Price for the Works offered	75%
2	Tenderer’s previous experience in carrying out work similar to the Works	15%
3	Tenderer’s resources	5%
4	Tenderer’s methodology	5%

 

The Coordinator Projects Building undertook a reference check and assessed the risk in engaging the lowest tenderer.

 

Price for the Services offered

Devco Holdings Pty Ltd submitted the lowest conforming tender.

 

Tenderer	Ranking
Devco Holdings Pty Ltd	1
Joondalup City Roofing Pty Ltd	2
Numans Group Pty Ltd	3

 

Previous Experience

·         Numans Group Pty Ltd has a proven record for competent performance, having undertaken asbestos removal and part re-roofing at the Wanneroo Sports Club in April 2006.

·         Devco Holdings Pty Ltd has extensive and varied experience as a building contractor.  The company has successfully undertaken several projects for the City of Stirling.  Reference checks verify the company’s good standing as a competent building contractor.  Devco Holdings Pty Ltd is the only tenderer who has not previously undertaken works for the City.

·         Joondalup City Roofing Pty Ltd has undertaken minor roofing works for the City and is able to undertake the proposed works.

 

Tenderer	Ranking
Numans Group Pty Ltd	1
Devco Holdings Pty Ltd	2
Joondalup City Roofing Pty Ltd	2

 

Resources

Numans Group Pty Ltd has the largest staffing resource of the Tenderers and is ranked highest.  Joondalup City Roofing Pty Ltd specialise as roofing contractors and are ranked second.  Devco Holdings Pty Ltd has a smaller staffing resource base and has asked for an additional 14 working days to complete the works.

 

Tenderer	Ranking
Numans Group Pty Ltd	1
Joondalup City Roofing Pty Ltd	2
Devco Holdings Pty Ltd	3

 

Methodology and Works Program

Based on the details supplied, Devco Holdings Pty Ltd has been ranked highest and having viewed the site, has offered alternative material options and scope of works giving a comprehensive approach to the execution of these works.  Each tenderer was assessed in the following order of merit:

·         Devco Holdings Pty Ltd provided a comprehensive plan listing tasks to be undertaken noting milestone events.

·         Joondalup City Roofing Pty Ltd provided a comprehensive plan listing tasks to be undertaken, a schedule of tasks and milestones.

·         Numans Group Pty Ltd provided a preliminary program for delivery of services.

 

Tenderer	Ranking
Devco Holdings Pty Ltd	1
Joondalup City Roofing Pty Ltd	2
Numans Group Pty Ltd	3

 

Overall Ranking Assessment

The merits that separate the engagement of any of the three Tenderers are small apart from their individual Tender price.  The overall ranking of Tenderers based on a weighted score is shown below:

 

Tenderer	Ranking
Devco Holdings Pty Ltd	1
Joondalup City Roofing Pty Ltd	2
Numans Group Pty Ltd	3

 

Devco Holdings Pty Ltd’s submission has been evaluated and is ranked highest in accordance with the selection criteria and weightings as detailed in the tender document.

Consultation

A meeting convened during the preparation of the contract documentation with the Manager Leisure Services, Recreation Development Officers and Heritage Officer, as representatives of the Centre users, addressed the issue of ensuring that there be minimal disruption to Centre users during the construction phase of the works.

 

The contractor will be required to meet with the Project Reference Group to discuss and resolve safe access for users, contractor access, storage of materials and Centre alarm and security issues, and a works programme agreed to and signed by the contractor will be enforced.

Comment

Devco Holdings Pty Ltd offered costed options for the City to consider within the scope of the proposed works.  These comprised cost savings of $3,650 for the use of King Clip 700 0.48BMT as an alternative fascia cladding material to the specified Snap Lok 406 and $2,000 using a negative edging detail in lieu of the specified flush joints.  Accepting these two savings will not compromise the appearance or existing aesthetics of the Centre and can be factored into the proposed works.

 

Other cost options were for additional expenditure and covered such items as the replacement of fibreglass skylights, dome lights and ventilation ridges.  This additional work needs to be undertaken, however can be incorporated into the next stage when the lower roof is replaced.

 

It is recommended that the tender for replacement of fascia and soffit linings at the Wanneroo Recreation Centre be accepted from Devco Holdings Pty Ltd for a tender sum of $128,270. By using an alternative cladding profile and soffit fixing, a cost saving of $5,650 is included in the tender sum.

Works Programme

It is proposed that the contract start date will be Monday 5 February 2007 with all asbestos product removed from site during the first week.  The contract end date for the bulk of the work is Friday 16 February 2007 and the recommended tenderer has requested a further 14 working days in which to bring the total works to Practical Completion.

Statutory Compliance

Tenders have been invited and evaluated against the selection criteria in accordance with Section 3.57 of the Local Government Act and associated regulations.

 

The Manager Contracts & Property has reviewed the Tender selection process for fairness and compliance and is satisfied with the evaluation process and result.

Strategic Implications

The replacement of the Wanneroo Recreation Centre Fascia and Soffit Linings is consistent with the City of Wanneroo Strategic Plan (2006-20021) outcomes and objectives:

“Social

  2        Healthy, safe, vibrant and connected communities

2.2       Improve the City’s identity and community well-being through arts, culture, leisure and recreation”

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

By accepting the tender from Devco Holdings Pty Ltd, the total estimated cost of the project is identified in the following table:

 

Tender No 06071 –Replacement of Wanneroo Recreation Centre Fascia and Soffit Linings
Description	Cost for Building Works	Funding
Project No PR-1053		$120,000
Maintain Wanneroo Recreation Centre Acc. 732380-9399-229		$15,000
Project Conforming Tender = $133,920 less deductions of $5,650 ($3,650 King Clip+$2,000 negative detail)	$128,270
Re-establishing existing microwave link	$2,000
Building Project Management - 3%	$3,800
Two Tender Advertisements	$850
Sub Total Project Cost	$134,920	$135,000
Remaining Funding		$80

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

EndStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Recommendation

That Council-:

1.             ACCEPTS Tender No. 06071 from Devco Holdings Pty Ltd for the Replacement of Roof and Fascia to the Wanneroo Recreation Centre, Scenic Drive, Wanneroo for the fixed lump sum of $128,270, inclusive of the minor variation of $5,650 for savings in cladding profile and soffit fixings, in accordance with the terms and conditions specified in the tender document.

2.             NOTES the following budget variation to accommodate the short fall in funding for the replacement of roof and fascia to the Wanneroo Recreation Centre, Scenic Drive, Wanneroo:

Project No	From	To	Description
GL 732380-9399-229	$15,000		Maintain Wanneroo Recreation Centre
PR-1053		$15,000	The Replacement of Wanneroo Recreation Centre Roof and Fascia

 

EndOfRecommendation - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

 

Traffic Management

File Ref:                                              R13/0009V01

File Name: BA Traffic Management Treatments and Speed Limit Review   Clarkson Avenue  Harrington Avenue  St Stephens Crescent and .doc This line will not be printed dont delete

Responsible Officer:                           Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Author:   Glenn Shaw

Meeting Date:   12 December 2006

Attachment(s):                                    4

StartStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Issue

To consider speed zone changes, traffic management and pedestrian crossing treatments for Clarkson Avenue, Harrington Avenue and St Stephen’s Crescent, Tapping.

Background

Tapping Primary School is currently being constructed and is scheduled for opening in January 2007. It is anticipated that 250 students will be attending the school in its first year of operation. Due to the close proximity of the existing St Stephen’s School and the new Tapping Primary School, a Joint School Road Safety Committee (JSRSC) has been established. The purpose of the JSRSC is to develop, coordinate and implement road safety initiatives for both schools. JSRSC members include the Principal of Tapping Primary School, Deputy Head of St Stephen’s Secondary School, Department of Education and Training representative, St Stephens School P & C representative and Administration staff.

 

The JSRSC has been proactive with three committee meetings being held since the inaugural meeting in July 2006. A summary of the road safety initiatives developed by the JSRSC to date include the following:

 

·                Both schools have agreed to work in partnership to develop and coordinate initiatives that have a positive influence on road safety within the school precinct.

·                Review of the existing pedestrian crossings and pathway network within the school precinct to identify any infrastructure deficiencies.

·                Review of the performance of the existing Kiss & Drive facility on St Stephen’s Crescent, which services St Stephen’s School.

·                Application to the School Crossing and Road Safety Committee for a traffic warden controlled children’s crossing on Stephen’s Crescent (west of Palmerston Crescent).

·                Initiation of a review of parking prohibition requirements for both Tapping Primary School and St Stephen’s College in light of the anticipated increase parking demand and pedestrian activity for 2007 school year.

·                Request Main Roads WA (MRWA) to review the 60km/h speed zone on Clarkson Avenue for the purpose of lowering the speed limit to 50km/h.

·                Development of a voluntary one-way traffic flow for parents to access both schools.  The one-way traffic flow is a voluntary system that has no formal implications in relation to the local road network. 

The aim of the voluntary one-way flow is to reduce congestion and improve vehicle circulation around both schools during morning and afternoon peak periods.

 

The JSRSC, in following up on the above road safety initiatives, sought assistance from the City in a letter dated29 September 2006 for the following traffic management and infrastructure improvements:

 

“1.    That the Kiss and Drive on St Stephen’s Crescent be decommissioned, signs removed and paint cover road markings.

  2.     That the vehicle speed limit on Clarkson Avenue be reduced from 60 km/h to
50 km/h.

 3.      That the crossing nib on Harrington Avenue be constructed.

 4.      That 40 km/h road markings be painted onto St Stephen’s Crescent.

 5.      That a 20m path be constructed on the north side of St Stephen’s Crescent to work with the current crossing there.

 6.      That a traffic circle be installed at the corner of Harrington Avenue and Clarkson Avenue. This is a current four way uncontrolled intersection.”

Detail

Kiss & Drive facility, St Stephens Crescent

The existing Kiss & Drive facility on St Stephens Crescent has been in operation for several years; however inappropriate long term parking within the facility provides limited opportunities for parents to drop off or pickup at this location. The JSRSC has requested the City decommission the facility by removing the associated signage and pavement markings.

 

A 3 minute time limit parking prohibition covering the Kiss & Drive embayment has been put forward as an alternative option by Administration to remove the facility. St Stephen’s School has confirmed that the removal of the facility is the preferred option and that the 3-minute parking prohibition proposal would be difficult to enforce. 

 

Clarkson Avenue speed zone review

At the request of the JSRSC, MRWA has conducted a preliminary assessment on the validity of the existing 60 km/h posted speed limit along Clarkson Avenue and Yandella Promenade (formerly Clarkson Avenue east of Waldburg Drive). The assessment confirmed that due to the rapid residential development in the area, a reduction of the 60km/h speed limit on these roads to the default built up area speed limit of 50km/h is warranted.

 

In support of MRWA assessment, seven-day traffic counts undertaken in October 2006 confirmed that speed is an issue and that the 85^th percentile speed on Clarkson Avenue is 70km/h within the existing St Stephen’s school zone. Similarly the 85^th percentile speeds recorded in October 2006 for Yandella Promenade is 61 to 66 km/h.

 

Correspondence has recently been received from MRWA seeking the City’s concurrence prior to the implementation of the reduction of the speed limit on Clarkson Avenue and Yandella Promenade.

 

School speed zone 40km/h pavement markers

The JSRSC has requested, as part of the road safety initiatives, that 40km/h pavement markings be installed on surrounding school roads.

The speed limit pavement markers raise awareness to the 40 km/h school speed limit which applies between the hours of 7.30 to 9AM and 2.30 to 4PM school days.  Administration has requested MRWA to provide the 40km/h pavement markers within the school zones on Waldburg Drive, St Stephens Crescent and Clarkson Avenue.  MRWA response to this request is still to be received.

 

Pedestrian pathways and crossing facilities

A review of the existing and proposed pathway network and pedestrian crossings for both schools has been carried out by the JSRSC. The results of the review confirmed the following infrastructure improvements are required to enable safe pedestrian movement within the school precinct.

 

·        Modification of the parking embayment and adjoining pathways on Harrington Avenue. The modifications are to include a parking embayment kerb nib, pedestrian kerb ramp and grab rails adjacent the Pedestrian Access Way on Harrington Avenue as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing 2202-1-0 – Attachment 1 refers.

·        Installation of grab rails adjacent the kerb ramps on Clarkson Avenue to visually identify the pedestrian crossing points. Grab rails to be installed at the intersections of Clarkson Avenue/Harrington Avenue and Clarkson Avenue/Berigora Avenue.

·        A dedicated pedestrian crossing facility on St Stephens Crescent (west of Palmerston Crescent).  This crossing facility will require modification to the existing school bus embayment and extension to the pathways on the northern and southern nature strips of St Stephen Crescent as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing 2198-1-0 – Attachment 2 refers.

 

Clarkson Avenue/Harrington Avenue/Meneguz Drive Intersection

Currently the layout of the intersection of Clarkson Avenue/Harrington Avenue/Meneguz Drive is a four-way uncontrolled intersection. In reviewing the JSRSC request for a roundabout at the intersection, the roundabout would complement other existing roundabouts within the school precinct and provide improved vehicle circulation around both schools. St Stephen’s School has previously raised the road safety concerns in relation to right turn manoeuvres into Clarkson Avenue from Harrington Avenue. The issue was detailed by St Stephen’s School in correspondence dated 30 August 2004 and 18 February 2005. Consideration of any action at this intersection was deferred while land to the south of Clarkson Avenue was subdivided.

 

The benefits of a roundabout as an alternative to the now four-way intersection would be improved intersection level of service for right turn manoeuvres and a reduced risk of right angle crashes occurring. The roundabout would also provide a lower speed environment on Clarkson Avenue near that intersection where there is a child care centre and St Stephens School.  The proposed roundabout is shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing 2193-1-0 – Attachment 3 refers.

 

Parking prohibitions

Administration has confirmed that inappropriate parking is occurring within the Controlled Access Place (CAP) system on Clarkson Avenue adjacent St Stephens School. Vehicles parked on either side of the carriageway within the CAP system restrict access and egress to residential properties. The proposed Parking Prohibitions as shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing 2172-1-0 – Attachment 4 refers, will prohibit parking on the northern side of the carriageway only, allowing vehicle through movement to occur.

 

Administration has investigated the option to prohibit parking on the southern side of the CAP system carriageway during school hours, however this option will limit parking opportunities for residents and their visitors during the parking prohibition school time period.

Consultation

A mail out to affected residents and property owners on Clarkson Avenue was undertaken on 24 November 2006, with responses due by 2 December 2006. There were no submission received from the adjoining residents. The St Stephens School has also endorsed the parking prohibition proposal.

Comment

Clarkson Avenue/Harrington Avenue/Meneguz Drive intersection

The structure planning for the suburb of Tapping has resulted in a 4 metre offset distance between the road alignments of Harrington Avenue and Meneguz Drive. This arrangement is not desirable from an intersection design perspective and results in irregular vehicle turning movements and driver confusion.  The modification to a roundabout from the current four-way configuration would accommodate the alignment offset without impacting on the roundabouts function or performance.

 

A crash analysis has confirmed that no reported crashes have occurred in the previous three year period at this intersection. However, with the anticipated increase in traffic volumes as a result of rapid residential development in the area to the south of the intersection, the potential for right angle crashes will increase significantly given the existing intersection configuration.

 

Pedestrian crossing warden facility, Stephens Crescent

St Stephens School has applied to the School Crossing Warden Road Safety Committee for a traffic warden controlled children’s crossing on St Stephens Crescent.  Modification to the existing pathways and bus embayment adjacent the crossing point is a requirement prior to final approval being given.  It is anticipated that pedestrian activity at this location will increase once Tapping Primary School commences operation in 2007. The location of the manned crossing point is strategically placed to benefit students from both St Stephen’s School and Tapping Primary School when in operation.

 

Parking prohibitions

Tapping Primary School’s parking prohibition requirements will be reviewed when the school opens in 2007. It is anticipated this review and the follow up report to Council detailing the parking prohibition requirements will be carried out by Administration within the early stages of 2007.

Statutory Compliance

Nil

Strategic Implications

The traffic management treatments and speed limit review for Clarkson Avenue, Harrington Avenue, St Stephen’s Crescent and Yandella Promenade is consistent with the City of Wanneroo’s Strategic Plan 2006-20021 goals outcome objectives:

 

            “Social

2.4              Improve community safety.

24.1     Implement a range of road safety initiatives to improve the standard of the road network and user behaviour.

            2.5       Improve transport options and connections.

2.5.1    Develop and implement a road network to maximise neighbourhood connectivity and support a range of transport options.”

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

In reviewing the cost of the identified works, the infrastructure improvements fall into three categories:

 

1.      Routine maintenance work to be undertaken by the City to remove the existing Kiss and Drive facility on St Stephens Crescent and install yellow edge lines and parking prohibition signs on Clarkson Avenue, Harrington Avenue and St Stephens crescent. The City’s 2006/2007Maintenance Budget will cover this cost.

2.      Pathway modifications, including kerb nibs and ramps on Harrington Avenue as shown on Attachment 1 as an estimated cost of $5,000.

3.      The pedestrian crossing warden facility and pathway extensions on St Stephen Crescent as shown on Attachment 2 at an estimated cost of $10,000.

4.      Subject to detail design, the works associate with the construction of a roundabout at the intersection of Clarkson Avenue/Harrington Avenue and pathway modification including kerb nibs and ramps on Harrington Avenue will require funding as part of the future Capital Works budget. In this instance $150,000 is proposed for funding consideration by Council in the draft 2007/2008 Budget.

 

The early implementation of the works associated with St Stephens Crescent and Harrington Avenue pedestrian facilities as outlined in 2 and 3 above, at an estimated total cost of $15,000 is supported on the basis of improving the safety of school children.

 

PR 1253 – Kingsway Sporting Complex – Badminton/Netball Carpark

$160,000 has been brought forward into 2006/2007 Capital Works Budget from the approved 2005/2006 Capital Works Budget for the construction of next stage of the proposed Kingsway Badminton/Netball Carpark Stage 2. These works have been put on hold following Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) direction to the City not to proceed with the works until further information is provided regarding the native vegetation to be cleared for construction of the carpark. A detailed flora survey is required prior to submitting information to EPA. This work can only be undertaken during the spring season and programmed for September/October 2007. Therefore the $160,000 allocated for this project will remain unexpended during 2006/2007. It is proposed to complete the flora survey and seek necessary approval from EPA in 2007/2008 and list this project for funding consideration in 2008/09 Capital Works Budget.

The reallocation of $15,000 from this project to Project No PR-1099 – Implement Traffic Management Works – Unspecified – will allow construction of the pedestrian and associated facilities early  in the 2007 school year.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

EndStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.         APPROVES the modifications to the parking embayment and pathways on Harrington Avenue as shown on Drawing 2202-1-0, (Attachment 1) at an estimated cost of $5,000 to be funded from Project No PR – 1099 – Implement Traffic Management Works – Unspecified.

2.         APPROVES the installation of a pedestrian crossing facility and pathway extensions on St Stephens Crescent as shown on Drawing 2198–1-0 (Attachment 2) at  an estimated cost of $10,000 to be funded from Project No PR – 1099 Implement Traffic Management Works - Unspecified.

3.         NOTES the following budget variation to accommodate the works in Harrington Avenue and St Stephens Crescent

Project No	From	To	Description
PR 1253	$15,000		Kingsway Sporting Complex Badminton/Netball Carpark
PR 1099		$15,000	Implementation Traffic Management Works - Unspecified

4.         LISTS $150,000 for consideration in the draft 2007/2008 Budget for a roundabout treatment at the Clarkson Avenue/Harrington Avenue/Meneguz Drive intersection as shown on Drawing 2193 –1-0 (Attachment 3).

5.         APPROVES the installation of “NO PARKING ROAD OR NATURE STRIP” and yellow edge lines on Clarkson Avenue, Harrington Avenue and St Stephens Crescent as shown on Drawing 2172 –1-0 (Attachment 4).

6.         APPROVES the removal of the Kiss and Drive facility on St Stephens Crescent as shown on Drawing 2172 –1-0 (Attachment 4).

7.         ENDORSES the speed limit restriction of 50km/h on Clarkson Avenue and Yandella Promenade, Tapping.

8.         ADVISES Main Roads Western Australia, the residents of Clarkson Avenue, the Principles of St Stephen’s School and Tapping Primary School of Council’s decision.

EndOfRecommendation - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

            ATTACHMENT 1

ATTACHMENT 2

ATTACHMENT 3

ATTACHMENT 4

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

File Ref:                                              R34/0002 and R34/0051

File Name: BA Ocean Reef Road Advanced Warning Signals before Wanneroo Road.doc This line will not be printed dont delete

Responsible Officer:                           Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Author:   Coordinator Transport & Traffic

Meeting Date:   12 December 2006

Attachment:                                        Nil

StartStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Issue

To consider an approach to Main Roads Western Australia (MRWA) for the installation of advanced warning flashing signals at the Ocean Reef Road and Wanneroo Road intersection.

Background

The intersection of Ocean Reef Road and Wanneroo Road was nominated by MRWA for the State Black Spot Project for 2006/07. The proposal includes:

 

·                Wanneroo Road – southbound, additional right turn lane plus lengthen lanes by 60 metres.

·                Wanneroo Road – northbound, additional right turn lane plus lengthen left and right turn lanes by 60 metres.

·                Ocean Reef Road – eastbound, additional left turn lane plus lengthen left and right turn lanes by 60 to 80 metres.

·                Improve pedestrian ramps and gaps in islands.

 

Council resolved to endorse the MRWA proposed upgrading of the intersection at the Council Meeting on 1 February 2005 (refer to Item TS01-01/05).

 

The City of Wanneroo RoadWise Advisory Committee met on 15 November 2006 and considered it appropriate for Council to approach MRWA to install advance warning flashing signals at the Ocean Reef Road and Wanneroo Road intersection, particularly on the eastern approach with trucks moving down a hill.

Detail

Advanced warning flashing signals are used when there is substandard sight distance to the intersection or to a stationary queue of vehicles.  The type and location of advanced warning flashing signals are described in Australian Standard 1742.14-1996 and the MRWA document 67-08-1, June 2000.  The advanced warning flashing signals become operational when the intersection traffic signals start or finish the green phase.  The advanced warning flashing signals give only a few seconds advance notice before the intersection signals change from green to amber.

 

The Ocean Reef Road/Wanneroo Road intersection has at least 250m sight distance on all approach roads. This is an adequate sight distance for stopping in most circumstances. The eastern approach has a crest approximately 750m to the east of the intersection and sight distance on that approach is over 500m. Heavy vehicles use the eastern approach from the Wangara Industrial area

Consultation

Nil

Comment

The intersection of Ocean Reef Road and Wanneroo Road would not normally be considered as appropriate for the use of advanced warning flashing signals as sight distance to the intersection traffic signals is adequate, provided the traffic is not queued. However, there are often queues exceeding the 250m available sight distance and around bends from the intersection. The fact that around 76% of the 36 crashes reported annually are rear end crashes, attests to the premise that drivers are not sufficiently aware of when the vehicles ahead are slowing or stopping.

 

Ideally drivers should leave sufficient distance from the vehicle in front to allow for a safe stopping distance.  A trend among Western Australian drivers however, is to travel too close to the vehicle in front and these drivers do not have the time to react when the lead vehicle slows, or stops in a queue. The use of advanced warning flashing signals will be of assistance, mainly during the morning and evening peak traffic flows, though will be of little benefit during the remainder of the day.

 

Considering the number of large bodied vehicles that use Ocean Reef Road and Wanneroo Road, and the fact that the sight distance to the normal intersection traffic signals can be blocked by a large vehicle, this could also be a contributing factor to the concern that is being raised about not seeing the traffic signals change.

 

The use of overhead mast traffic signals at the intersection, in combination with advanced warning flashing signals, would assist to reduce a second potential cause of risk at the intersection.  The overhead mast signals are effective in the area between the location of the advanced warning flashing signals and the intersection.

Statutory Compliance

Traffic signals are a regulatory traffic management device controlled by Main Roads Western Australia in accordance with the Road Traffic Code.

Strategic Implications

The consideration of advanced flashing signals and overhead mast signals at the Wanneroo Road/Ocean Reef Road intersection is consistent with the City of Wanneroo’s Strategic Plan (2006-2021) outcomes and objectives:

“Social

2.4     Improve community safety”

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

EndStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Recommendation

That Council REQUESTS Main Roads Western Australia to install advanced warning flashing signals and overhead mast signals at the intersection of the Ocean Reef Road and Wanneroo Road, Wanneroo.

EndOfRecommendation - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

 

File Ref:                                              S02/0009v01

Responsible Officer:                           Director Infrastructure

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Author:   Coordinator Transport & Traffic

Meeting Date:   12 December 2006

File Name: BA Wanneroo RoadWise Advisory Committee   2006 Action Plan .doc This line will not be printed dont delete

Attachment:                                        1

StartStrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete

Issue

To consider the City of Wanneroo RoadWise Advisory Committee Action Plan for 2006/2007.

Background

The Terms of Reference of the City of Wanneroo RoadWise Advisory Committee was revised on 1 February 2005 (Report TS05-02/05 refers). As part of the Terms of Reference there is a need to have an Action Plan developed and reviewed annually. The Action Plan is to provide the basis for funding of projects by the City.

 

Council last adopted a City of Wanneroo RoadWise Advisory Committee Action Plan at its meeting held on 30 August 2005  (Report IN10-08/05 refers).

Detail

The City of Wanneroo RoadWise Advisory Committee Action Plan for 2006/2007 is presented as Attachment 1.

Consultation

The Action Plan for 2006/2007 was supported by the City of Wanneroo RoadWise Advisory Committee at its meeting held on 19 July 2006.

Comment

The Terms of Reference 2005 reflects the aims of the State Government Office of Road Safety’s initiatives to reduce the number and severity of crashes. The Action Plan includes specific initiatives that can be easily reviewed and identifies actions to be done for each initiative.

 

The main issues of concern that the Office of Road Safety has identified from analysis of data from several years of crashes in Western Australia are:

 

·                Driving while tired

·                Not wearing seat belts

·                Driving at excessive speeds

·                Driving under the influence of alcohol

 

The City of Wanneroo RoadWise Advisory Committee Action Plan for 2006/2007 is the same as the 2005/2006 plan.

 

There is ongoing very good work with the Driver Reviver Caravan run by volunteers, the Caravan and Trailer Safety checks, and use of the speed display trailer.  Otherwise there are no new community driven initiatives being brought to the committee and this will be a key focus in 2007. Meetings are currently held on a monthly basis and a less regular meeting schedule may assist in the development and consideration of new initiatives.

Statutory Compliance

The City of Wanneroo RoadWise Advisory Committee is established under the Local Government Act 1995, Part 5-Administration, Section 5.9(c).

Strategic Implications

The operation of a local RoadWise Committee is consistent with the following objective from the City of Wanneroo Strategic Plan 2006-2021:

“Social

  2.4        Improve community safety”

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Funding totalling $5,000 covering both routine operation of the Wanneroo RoadWise Advisory Committee and actions as outlined in its Action Plan for 2006/2007, Attachment 1 refers, was approved by Council as part of the City’s 2006/2007 Operating Budget.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.             ADOPT the City of Wanneroo RoadWise Advisory Committee Action Plan for 2006/2007, refer Attachment 1.

2.             SUPPORT the on-going road safety initiatives of the Driver Reviver Caravan, Caravan, Trailer Safety Checks and Speed Display Trailer administratively and with the appropriate annual budget considerations.

EndOfRecommendation - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete