Council Agenda

 

 

ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

7.00pm, 06 April, 2010

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. 

 

A register of person’s wishing to ask a question/s at the Council Meeting is located at the main reception desk outside of the Chamber on the night.  However, 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 i.e. noon on the previous day.

 

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, at least three clear business days prior to the meeting addressed to the Chief Executive Officer or fax through to Governance on 9405 5097.  A request for a deputation must be received by Governance by 12 noon on the Friday before the Council Meeting.

 

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

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

 

Please ensure that mobile phones are switched off before entering the Council Chamber.  Any queries on this agenda, please contact Governance 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 recording of Council Meetings is to ensure the accuracy of Council Minutes and that any reproduction is for the sole purpose of Council business.

 

Statement

 

Recording of Proceedings

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Access to Recordings

 

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

 

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

 

Retention of Recordings

 

(6)     Recordings pertaining to the proceedings of Council Meetings shall be retained in accordance with the State Records Act 2000 (General Disposal Authority for Local Government Records). The current requirement for the retention of recorded proceedings is thirty (30) years.

 

Disclosure of Policy

 

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

 

 

 

Notice is given that the next Ordinary Council Meeting will be held at the Civic Centre, Dundebar Road, Wanneroo on Tuesday 06 April, 2010 commencing at 7.00pm.

 

 

 

 

K Caple

Acting Chief Executive Officer

31 March 2010

 

 

 

 

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

OC01-04/10    Minutes of Ordinary Council Meeting held on 09 March 2010  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

PT01-03/10    Request Extension of Footpath, Camira Park, Quinns Rocks  1

PT02-03/10    Concern over Proposed Commercial Ventures Operating on Mindarie and/or Quinns Beaches  1

PT03-03/10    Request to Investigate Vehicle Speeds, Dalecross Avenue and Russell Road, Madeley  2

PT04-03/10    Request that Spring Park, Tapping remains zoned as ‘Park and Recreation’ 2

PT05-03/10    Request the Development of Parks in Madeley  2

PT06-03/10    Request Speed Humps, Clover Square, Girrawheen  2

PT07-03/10    Request Skate Park, Wanneroo  2

Item  8          Reports   3

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. 3

Planning and Sustainability  3

Policies and Studies  3

PS01-04/10    Policy Finalisation – Local Planning Policy 3.1: Local Housing Strategy Implementation  3

PS02-04/10    Public Open Space Local Planning Policy  45

Town Planning Scheme and Structure Plans  76

PS03-04/10    Carabooda Nowergup – Proposed Landscape Enhancement Zone  76

PS04-04/10    Proposed Structure Plan No. 59 for Madeley District Centre (Kingsway City) Cnr Wanneroo Road and Hepburn Avenue, Madeley  93

PS05-04/10    Adoption of Omnibus Amendment No. 7 to Various Agreed Structure Plans  165

PS06-04/10    Purchase and Dedication of Lots 800 (425) and 15 (465) Gnangara Road, Gnangara for Gnangara Road  181

PS07-04/10    Dedication of Lot 300 (471) Gnangara Road, Gnangara as Road Reserve Widening  184

PS08-04/10    Adoption of Draft Local Structure Plan No. 76 - Lot 103 Yanchep Beach Road, Yanchep  187

Development Applications  227

PS09-04/10    Development Application for a Supermarket, Speciality Retail Stores and Liquor Store at Lot 12 (3) Newman Road, Yanchep  227

PS10-04/10    Development Application for a Service Station/Convenience Store and Showroom at Lot 11 (11) Yanchep Beach Road, Yanchep and Lot 12 (3) Newman Road, Yanchep  253

PS11-04/10    Development Application – Coastal Camel Rides; Claytons Beach, Mindarie to Tamala Park  285

City Businesses  316

Regulatory Services  316

CB01-04/10    Dog Beach Areas within the City of Wanneroo  316

CB02-04/10    Tender No. 01005 – The Construction of Two Residential Buildings  323

CB03-04/10    Joint Pet Crematorium and Animal Care Facility  329

Infrastructure  331

IN01-04/10      Wangara Industrial Estate - Catchment Study  331

IN02-04/10      Results of Public Responses to Proposed Change of Purpose of Management Orders – Alvarez, Spring, San Teodoro and Caporn Parks, Tapping, and Appleby Park, Darch. 337

IN03-04/10      Tender No. 01004 - The Supply and Delivery of Thermoplastic Drainage Chambers, Associated Parts and Geotextile Fabric  342

IN04-04/10      Tender No. 01007 - The Laying of Brick Pavers Within the City of Wanneroo (Panel Contract) for a Period of One Year  348

IN05-04/10      PT05-02/10 - Request for Footpath on Glenesk Street, Madeley  353

IN06-04/10      Parking Prohibitions -Toulon Circuit, Mindarie  357

Community Development  361

Communication & Events  361

CD01-04/10    Yanchep Boardwalk - Outcomes of Community Consultation  361

CD02-04/10    Update on Petition to Upgrade Longford Park - Darch  372

Program Services  375

CD03-04/10    Community Sport and Recreation Facilities Fund - 2010 March Small Grants Round  375

CD04-04/10    Concept Plan for the Development of Barndie Park, Wanneroo  382

Corporate Strategy & Performance  389

Finance  389

CS01-04/10    Warrant of Payments - For the Period to 28 February 2010  389

CS02-04/10    Financial Activity Statement for the Period Ended 28 February 2010 and 2009/2010 Mid Year Budget Review   446

CS03-04/10    Write-Off Outstanding Sundry Debtors  461

Governance & Executive Services  465

CS04-04/10    Council Members’ Fees, Allowances, Reimbursements and Benefits Policy  465

CS05-04/10    Donation of Building Licence Fee for 2010 Telethon Home at Lot 1006 (2931) Marmion Avenue, Alkimos  489

CS06-04/10    Determination of an Objection Received Under Part 9 of the Local Government Act 1995 - Hire of Gumblossom Community Centre  491

CS07-04/10    Proposed Lease to Koondoola Community Kindergarten Inc Over Portion of Lot 250 Burbridge Avenue, Koondoola  501

Chief Executive Office  506

Office of the CEO   506

CE01-04/10    National Growth Areas Alliance (Ngaa) - February 2010 Activities Report  506

Item  9          Motions on Notice   510

MN01-04/10   Cr Hewer - Yanchep Surf Life Saving Club  510

MN02-04/10   Cr Gray - Two Rocks Volunteer Sea Rescue Group  512

Item  10        Urgent Business   515

Item  11        Confidential  515

Item  12        Date of Next Meeting   515

The next Ordinary Councillors Briefing Session has been scheduled for 6.00pm on Tuesday, 27 April 2010, to be held at the Civic Centre, Dundebar Road, Wanneroo. 515

Item  13        Closure   515

 

 

Item  1                Attendances

Item  2                Apologies and Leave of Absence

Item  3                Public Question Time

Item  4                Confirmation of Minutes

That the minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 09 March 2010 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 Roberts presented a petition of 29 signatures requesting an extension to the footpath around Camira Park, along Accra Way in Quinns Rocks to ensure the safety of motorists, pedestrians and children.

 

UPDATE

 

A report is proposed for Council meeting of 4 May 2010.

 

Cr Roberts presented a petition of 213 signatures expressing concern regarding proposed commercial ventures operating on Mindarie and/or Quinns Beaches and asking that the City creates a sustainable environmental platform, improving family recreational areas and maintenance of the pristine coastline.

 

UPDATE

 

A report is proposed for Council meeting of 29 June 2010.

 

Cr Blencowe presented a petition of 78 signatures requesting an investigation of vehicle speeds in and around Dalecross Avenue and Russell Road in Madeley.

 

UPDATE

 

A report is proposed for Council meeting of 4 May 2010.

Cr Blencowe presented a petition of 122 signatures requesting that the zoning of Spring Park, corner of Spring Hill and Waldburg Road, Tapping, be left as ‘Park and Recreation’ rather than ‘Conservation and Passive Recreation’.

 

UPDATE

 

A report is proposed for Council meeting of 6 April 2010.

Cr Mackenzie presented a petition of 30 signatures requesting the development of all parks in Madeley, to include reticulation, grass and play equipment.

 

UPDATE

 

A report is currently being prepared for council meeting of 4 May 2010.

Cr Mackenzie presented a petition of 12 signatures requesting the installation of speed humps in Clover Square, Girrawheen to prevent the excessive ‘hooning’ in this street.

 

UPDATE

 

A report is proposed for Council meeting of 4 May 2010.

Cr Newton presented a petition of 296 signatures requesting the provision of a skate park in Wanneroo.

 

UPDATE

 

A report is currently being prepared for council meeting of 4 May 2010.

Item  8                Reports

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

Planning and Sustainability

Policies and Studies

File Ref:                                              S41/0010V02

File Name: AA Draft Local Housing Strategy Implementation Policy Framework.doc This line will not be printed dont delete

Responsible Officer:                           Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Author:   Ryan Hall

Meeting Date:   6 April 2010

Attachments:                                       4

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

Issue

To consider final adoption of the revised draft Local Planning Policy 3.1: Local Housing Strategy Implementation included as Attachment 4. The draft policy will establish a framework for implementing the Local Housing Strategy (LHS) recommendations for land identified for increased residential density within the City of Wanneroo.  Draft LPP 3.1 forms an integral part of the City’s Local Planning Policy Framework, which is illustrated in Attachment 2.

Background

This draft Local Planning Policy provides a framework for implementing Council’s LHS recommendations for land identified for increased residential density within the City of Wanneroo. The LHS places emphasis on increasing residential density and housing choice in residential areas that are supported by existing and planned neighbourhood and town centres.

 

The Policy identifies six Housing Precincts, divided across the suburbs of Wanneroo, Koondoola, Girrawheen, Yanchep, Two Rocks and Quinns Rocks. The extent of each Housing Precinct is detailed in the draft Policy as Attachment 4. The Policy Framework outlines the approach to be taken in implementing the proposed density increases, including the planning requirements to be addressed and the extent of each housing precinct.

 

At its meeting on 15 December 2009, Council determined that the draft Policy was satisfactory for the purposes of advertising. A copy of the draft Policy (as advertised) is included in Attachment 1.

 

The draft Policy was recently presented to the Special Council Forum Meeting on 10 March 2010 for discussion, prior to formal consideration by Council.

Detail

The draft Policy was advertised for public comment for a period of four weeks from 12 January 2010 to 9 February 2010 by way of:

·                Advertisements placed in the 'Wanneroo Times' and 'North Coast Times' Community newspapers in the editions dated 12 and 19 of January 2010.

·                An information sheet was prepared and along with the Policy was publicly displayed on the City's website.

·                Copies of the information sheet and the Policy were publicly displayed at the City's Administration Building, Wanneroo Library, Girrawheen Library, Clarkson Library and Yanchep-Two Rocks Library.

 

A large number of enquiries were made in respect to the draft Policy, with 26 submissions received, including a petition containing 37 signatures. A summary of submissions received and staff comments thereon are provided in the Schedule of Submissions included as Attachment 3.

Comment

The majority of submissions indicated their support for the draft Policy. The majority of the remaining submissions sought to increase the boundary in Wanneroo, Koondoola and Girrawheen Precincts.

 

The advertised LHS Policy designates land for each Precinct that is within a 400m radius from an identified centre as being suitable for a coding of R60.  Land that is outside a 400m radius but within 800m of an identified centre in each precinct has been identified for a coding of R40. This approach represents a consistent and fair way of designating land for future development that accords with State Government Policy. A significant deviation from this approach is not supported as it would set an undesirable precedent that could attract ad-hoc proposals seeking to amend the draft Policy for inclusion to a higher density designation for land that is outside an 800m radius to a centre.

 

However, it is acknowledged that there are instances where it would be appropriate to identify land for an increase in residential density that is located further than 800m to an identified centre. This includes instances where lots form part of a:

·                Gateway to the identified centre, and/or

·                A logical land cell (defined by clear physical boundaries) in conjunction with other lots identified for R40.

A revised draft Policy (refer Attachment 4) has been prepared by Administration in response to the comments received during advertising.  Set out in the table below is a schedule of the proposed modifications to the draft policy.

 

Schedule of Modifications to Draft Policy

 

Mod No.	Policy Provision	Modifications Detail	Reason
1.	Determination of Precinct Boundaries	Text has been modified in the General Policy Provisions by adding the following wording:   “Lots that fall outside of a 800m radius from the middle point of an identified centre but form part of a: ·         Gateway to the identified centre, and/or ·         A logical land cell (defined by clear physical boundaries) in conjunction with other lots identified for R40, have been identified for an increase in residential density to R40.”   and deleting the following wording:   “Lots that fall outside of a 400m or 800m radius from the middle point of an identified centre are not included for increases in density.”	To allow redevelopment to occur at key gateway locations and to facilitate redevelopment in a logical land cell in conjunction with existing land identified for increased residential density.
2.	Appendix 1	The boundary extent has been modified for the Housing Precincts of Wanneroo, Koondoola, Girrawheen, Yanchep and Two Rocks.	To update the Housing Precincts in accordance with Modification No. 1.
3.	Appendix 1	The boundary extent has been modified for the Housing Precinct of Wanneroo for the R60 coding to extend to Frederick Street.	The Wanneroo Activity Centre is a high order centre that offers substantial services through its role as a proposed regional centre. It is considered that expanding the area of R60 in this instance is appropriate as it will form a logical land cell in conjunction with the existing land identified for R60.
4.	Appendix 1	Sub-Precinct B and C in Yanchep has been removed from the Yanchep Housing Precinct.	There is an existing structure plan that already provides guidance on residential density for the subject area and therefore an additional policy position is not necessary.
5.	Policy Table	Two rows have been deleted, ‘Yanchep B’ and ‘Yanchep C’.	To reflect the removal of two of the Yanchep Housing Precincts in accordance with Modification No. 4.

 

 

Need for Additional Advertising

 

Despite the changes recommended to the content of the Policy, readvertising of the revised draft Policy is not considered necessary as those changes respond to submissions received and do not alter the intent of the Policy.

 

Implementation

 

The priorities for implementation of each Housing Precinct are shown in the Policy Table of the draft Policy. This shows the Wanneroo Housing Precinct as the first priority for implementation followed by Koondoola and Girrawheen. This has been established to guide Administration workloads and does not preclude other Scheme Amendment proposals from being submitted ahead of the City’s schedule (provided they are in accordance with section 8 of the draft Policy).

 

There are planning requirements, such as servicing and traffic implications of increased density that must be addressed prior to initiating an amendment to District Planning Scheme No.2. The draft Policy requires as a minimum, a Scheme Amendment report to:

 

i)        evaluate the capacity of existing infrastructure and services;

ii)       address when infrastructure and services will need to be upgraded; and       

iii)      how upgrades will be delivered through cost contributions.

Statutory Compliance

In accordance with Clause 8.11.3.1(c) of the DPS 2, Council is required to review the draft Policy in light of any submissions made and must then resolve either to finally adopt the draft Policy with or without modification, or not to proceed with the draft Policy.

 

In accordance with Clauses 8.11.3.1(d) and 8.11.3.1(e), should Council resolve to finally adopt the revised draft Policy, notification of the final adoption must be published once in a newspaper circulating in the District and a copy of the Policy forwarded to the Western Australian Planning Commission.

Strategic Implications

The revised draft Policy Framework is consistent with the following relevant objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006-2021.

 

“Objective 1.5

Improve the physical quality of the built environment.”

Policy Implications

Draft LPP 3.1 will establish a clear and consistent framework for implementing the LHS recommendations for increased residential densities, where no such framework currently exists.

 

Draft LPP 3.1 is consistent with the City’s Local Planning Policy – Smart Growth, as it will facilitate delivery of a variety of housing types and the enhancement of lifestyle options through promoting higher residential densities in appropriate locations to meet different lifestyle choices and current and future market demands. Draft LPP 3.1 will contribute to the revitalisation of the City’s established suburbs and renewal of housing stock, to meet changing community needs.

 

Once Draft LPP 3.1 has been adopted by Council and is in operation, Administration will continuously review the Policy with a view to expanding the areas identified for increases in residential density, to include additional areas of high accessibility to public transport systems and high amenity.

Financial Implications

The cost of advertising notice of the adoption of the Policy can be met from the Planning and Sustainability operational budget.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       NOTES the submissions received in respect of draft Local Planning Policy 3.1: Local Housing Strategy Implementation and ENDORSES the responses to those submissions prepared by Administration included in Attachment 3;

2.       Pursuant to Clause 8.11.3.1(c) of District Planning Scheme No. 2 ADOPTS the revised draft Local Planning Policy 3.1: Local Housing Strategy Implementation included in Attachment 4; and

3.       Pursuant to Clauses 8.11.3.1(d) and 8.11.3.1(e) of District Planning Scheme No. 2 PUBLISHES notice of its adoption of the Policy in the Wanneroo Times and North Coast Times Community newspapers, INFORMS those persons who made submissions of Council’s decision and FORWARDS a copy of the adopted Policy to the Western Australia Planning Commission for its information.

 

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

ATTACHMENT 2

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:                                              S27/0051V01

File Name: AA Public Open Space Local Planning Policy.doc This line will not be printed dont delete

Responsible Officer:                           Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Author:   Nick Stawarz

Meeting Date:   6 April 2010

Attachments:                                       3

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

Issue

To consider the draft Local Planning Policy 4.3: Public Open Space (LPP 4.3) for public advertising.  The draft policy relates to the planning, provision, location, design, development and interim maintenance of Public Open Space (POS).

Background

POS is considered to be a critical element of the development process that provides numerous benefits for the community relating to health, environment, education, recreation and community development.

 

With the exception of National Parks, foreshore reserves and other regional level spaces that are reserved through the Metropolitan Regional Scheme, POS is normally provided through the subdivision process.  Subdividers are required to cede a minimum of 10% of the net subdivisible area free of cost to be vested with the Crown.

 

The mechanism by which this occurs is governed by state government policy – Liveable Neighbourhoods (WAPC, 2007) and DCP 2.3 – Public Open Space in Residential Areas.

 

A local planning policy relating to public open space is necessary to provide:

 

·                Guidance relating to how the 10% provision is used and distributed;

·                Local interpretation of the state policy; and

·                Council’s position on elements of public open space where the state policy provides little or no definition or acknowledges that the input of local government is required.

 

The existing POS policy was first implemented in 1999 and was last reviewed in 2004.  As a result the policy no longer aligns with current state policy and does not sufficiently address contemporary issues related to public open space.

 

A comprehensive review has been undertaken involving all relevant business units of Administration to ensure that the draft policy (refer Attachment 1) can be properly interpreted and implemented by developers, Administration and Council.

 

Draft LPP 4.3. forms an integral part of the City’s Local Planning Policy Framework, which is illustrated in Attachment 2.

Detail

The planning of public open space is a complex subject that has implications across many areas of local government operations.  As a result, the draft LPP 4.3 has had to address a variety of issues.  The key aspects of the policy are set out below:

 

Allocation and Distribution of POS

 

The draft policy provides specific guidance on how the ten percent provision of POS should be allocated as a variety of POS types and distributed throughout the development. 

 

Local Passive Spaces

 

The draft policy provides guidance on the distribution of local passive spaces in the form of a POS hierarchy to maximise community access to POS.  The hierarchy specifies that all households should be a maximum of 400m from a local park and 800m from a neighbourhood space.  Design, location and size criteria are also provided for these spaces.

 

Active Spaces

 

Liveable Neighbourhoods sets a requirement for all households to be within 150-300m of a local park, which may result in a proliferation of smaller pocket parks scattered throughout developments at the expense of larger, more multipurpose spaces.  These pocket parks have little practical use for passive recreation, often serve a drainage function (as allowed under Liveable Neighbourhoods) further limiting their use for leisure pursuits and are expensive to maintain.  As a consequence, existing urban areas developed under the Liveable Neighbourhoods policy are often unable to meet community demand for multipurpose active sporting grounds.

 

The draft policy sets a minimum requirement of 4% for the provision of active spaces (i.e. for formal sporting use) along with design and location criteria.  This specification provides a mechanism to secure appropriately sized and located POS for active use in new developments.

 

Retention of Natural Assets

 

The City has no current means of retaining natural assets in urban development areas.  To meet the City’s biodiversity targets it has been necessary to accept their inclusion in public open space in a way that does not compromise the use of POS for recreation. 

 

The draft policy acknowledges that open access to bushland areas can serve a valuable community function and enhance the recreation and leisure experience.  It specifies that a maximum of 3% may be allocated for conservation spaces where significant natural assets exist.  Where greater than 3% of the area comprises significant natural assets, the policy expects that greater than 10% POS may need to be provided.

 

Location and Design of POS

 

Further to the provision of a sufficient amount of different POS types, the draft policy includes principles for how POS should be located and designed within a development to maximise access and minimise antisocial behaviour.  This includes:

 

·                Specific criteria by which the City will support the co-location of POS with school sites.  Co-location is supported in principle by the City of Wanneroo in recognition of the numerous potential benefits associated with shared facilities.  The policy provisions in this section aim to ensure that co-location is used to its maximum potential.

 

·                Principles for the effective design of active POS areas to ensure that the resultant space is appropriate for high intensity use by the community.

 

These policy provisions aim to ensure that POS is located where access can be maximised, or in the case of certain active spaces, minimise negative impacts on surrounding residents.  It also aims to ensure that the resultant spaces are safe for their use by the community.

 

Development and Management of POS

 

The draft policy provides guidance on the approvals required for creation and development of POS, detail regarding the minimum level of development required of developers for new POS through the subdivision process and the City’s expectations regarding initial maintenance periods for new POS sites.

 

Minimum development requirements

 

Historically, land developers have not been required to improve or manage land set aside for POS through the subdivision process, although many developers did so as part of the marketing of their subdivisions.  The current version of Liveable Neighbourhoods now requires proponents to develop POS to a minimum standard “…that may include full earthworks, basic reticulation grassing of key areas, pedestrian pathways”.  The minimum development standards outlined in Liveable Neighbourhoods may not be appropriate for all types of POS.  Therefore the draft policy provides guidance on minimum, preferred and optional levels of development for different types of POS.

 

It is hoped that this will save the City a significant amount of money in both initial development costs and ongoing maintenance costs by improving the initial standard of development and minimising the installation of inappropriate infrastructure that may become an ongoing maintenance issue for the City.  The minimum development standards also acknowledge that a smarter approach to POS development is required in an environment where the availability of water is not always a given.

 

Maintenance of POS

 

Liveable Neighbourhoods specifies that developers must maintain all POS for a period of two summers (two years) following subdivision.  Administration considers this timeframe to be insufficient, mainly because design defects are often not identified until after this period and vegetation is generally not sufficiently established by this time.

 

The ongoing cost of maintaining POS beyond the initial period of developer maintenance is significant, particularly where the standard of development is above what is normally provided by the City of Wanneroo. 

 

The draft policy seeks to impose a maintenance period of five years, with an annual review process providing opportunity to accept handover earlier, if the City considers the standard satisfactory.  This is expected to serve as an incentive for developers to provide a more robust landscape design and to effectively manage the POS prior to handover.  The move towards a five year maintenance period is consistent with the approach taken by some other local governments, including the City of Swan, to address management issues.

 

These provisions aim to ensure that the City is receiving POS that has been well designed and developed to a standard that will enable it to be more effectively managed on an ongoing basis without attracting additional unexpected costs.

Comment

The revised policy is consistent with the City’s new Local Planning Policy Framework and is to be used by applicants, Administration and Council in the design, assessment and determination of various planning proposals.

 

Draft LPP 4.3 will provide much needed guidance on the allocation and distribution of POS in new developments to meet the recreational needs of the community into the future and maximise retention of significant natural assets not otherwise protected.  The draft policy also seeks to provide a consistent approach to assessing urban water management proposals for public open space.

 

Draft LPP4.3 will better link with current state planning policy than the existing City of Wanneroo POS policy and will more actively address contemporary issues being experienced by local governments in relation to the planning, development and ongoing management of public open space.

Consultation

The draft policy was recently presented to Council Forum on 10 March 2010 for discussion and, in response, Elected Members requested that consideration be given to addressing the following matters:

 

·                Public Open Space design for universal access;

·                Clarify the circumstances when less than 10% POS would be appropriate;

·                Clarify the circumstances when payment of cash-in-lieu of POS would be accepted; and

·                Make provision for POS design and maintenance to address water (including grey-water) harvesting, treatment and re-use technologies.

 

Following a review of the above issues, a number of minor changes were made to the draft policy.  These changes are outlined in the table included as Attachment 3.

 

If agreed by Council, it is proposed to advertise Draft LPP 4.3 for public comment for a period of 42 days.  This exceeds the minimum requirement of 21 days specified by DPS2.  It is proposed to advertise the draft policy in the following manner, consistent with the requirements of DPS 2:

 

1.       Advertisement in a local newspaper for two consecutive weeks;

 

2.       Display on the City’s website; and

 

3.       Letters to relevant stakeholders as determined by the Director Planning and Sustainability.

Statutory Compliance

In accordance with Clause 8.11.3.1(a) of DPS 2, Council may resolve to prepare and adopt a local planning policy to apply to any matter related to planning and development of the district.  A draft policy must be advertised for public comment for a period of not less than 21 days after which time it is to be reviewed in the context of any submissions received and either adopted with or without modifications or not proceeded with.

 

If adopted, draft LPP4.3 will supersede the current Public Open Space Policy, pursuant to Clause 8.11.4 (a) of DPS2.

Strategic Implications

The draft policy is consistent with the following relevant objectives of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006-2021:

 

“Objective 1.2 - Minimise use of water

Objective 1.4 - Minimise impact of development on natural landform

Objective1.5 - Improve the physical quality of the built environment

Objective 2.1 - Increase choice and quality of neighbourhood and lifestyle options

Objective 2.2- Improve the City’s identity and community wellbeing through arts, culture, leisure and recreation.”

Policy Implications

Pursuant to Clause 8.11.4 (a) of DPS2, draft LPP 4.3 will supersede the existing City of Wanneroo Public Open Space Policy.

Financial Implications

The costs of advertising the draft policy are estimated to be $500, which can be met from the Planning and Sustainability operational budget.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

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

Recommendation

That Council pursuant to Clause 8.11.3.1(a) of District Planning Scheme No. 2 ADVERTISES draft Local Planning Policy 4.3: Public Open Space, as contained in Attachment 1, for public comment for a period of 42 days, by way of:

1.       Advertisements in a local newspaper for two consecutive weeks;

2.       Display on the City’s website; and

3.       Letters to relevant stakeholders as determined by the Director Planning and Sustainability.

 

 

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

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

                                                                                                                                     ATTACHMENT 1

                                                                                                                                              Page 1 of 26

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Part 1

Policy Operation

 

Policy Development

This policy has been prepared under the provisions of Section 8.11 of the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2.

 

 

Application

The policy articulates Council’s position on the planning, provision, location, design, development and interim maintenance of Public Open Space (POS) and is to be considered by applicants, Administration, and Council in the design, assessment, and determination of:

·                Scheme amendments;

·                Structure plans;

·                Detailed area plans;

·                Subdivision applications; and

·                Development applications.

 

The Policy does not apply to Regional Parks and Recreation, Foreshore Reserves, Bush Forever or other types of POS for which the statutory responsibility lies with the Western Australian Planning Commission or other State Government body.

 

 

Context

Appropriately sized, located and designed Public Open Space is instrumental in delivering a number of community benefits related to:

 

·                Population health - Attractiveness and appropriately sized public open space encourages higher levels of physical activity and community use.  Further, local access to walkable public open spaces is essential for physical health benefits and can result in improved self-esteem and mood.

·                Environment – Public Open Space can provide green relief from the built environment, reduce the ‘heat island’ effect, improve air quality through mitigation of airborne pollutants, enhance stormwater management and improve quality of water run-off.  Vegetated areas provide habitat for flora and fauna, which can contribute to increased biodiversity within urban ecosystems.

·                Community development - The presence of attractive, well-maintained open spaces encourages higher levels of use and positive social interaction.

·                Community education - Social interaction and creative play by children occur in playgrounds and open spaces.  Parks also provide opportunities for children to learn about nature.

·                Sense of place – Public Open Space helps create a sense of place, which is associated with feelings of well being, community satisfaction and cohesion, neighbourhood attachment, place identity and meaning, local sentiment and belonging.

 

Despite the benefits of public open space being well recognised, current policy and process often does not result in public spaces that deliver these outcomes.  Following are the key issues experienced by the City of Wanneroo with regard to the planning of public open space:

 

·                The cost of providing POS infrastructure – the City has a large amount of undeveloped public open spaces, with an expectation by the community that they will be developed with infrastructure such as irrigated turf, BBQs, picnic areas, playgrounds and sports facilities.  A clear position is required on the City’s expectations of developers with regard to development of POS as part of subdivision.

·                Access to secure water supply for irrigation- in many cases the City is now unable to secure a water licence for the irrigation of public open space, both active and passive.  As this resource is likely to be difficult to come by in the future, a smarter approach to the planning and design of public open space is required.

·                Long-term maintenance costs – the ongoing cost of maintaining POS beyond the period of developer maintenance is significant, particularly where the standard of development is above what is normally provided by the City of Wanneroo.

·                Lack of variety in POS design – when land is fully cleared and levelled to make way for development, POS needs to be built from the ground up, resulting in spaces that reflect the visions of landscape architects rather than local character.  This results in public space appearing similar in all developments and a loss of individual attributes and sense of place between suburbs.

·                Large number of small pocket parks – The impact of Liveable Neighbourhoods has resulted in a large number of small pocket parks that have little practical use for passive recreation, and are generally of similar design and function.  Although this generally improves accessibility, it appears to be at the expense of larger, more flexible spaces.

·                Lack of appropriately sized spaces for sporting use – In newer developments, active POS is generally of insufficient size and shape to accommodate senior sporting competitions.  Further, they are generally not suited to providing for a range of sporting activity.  Future spaces need to be flexible in their design such that the space can react to the changing needs of the population and accommodate appropriate turf management practices for active sport.

·                Incorporation of bushland and drainage areas into the POS allocation – With state policy now permitting bushland, wetlands and drainage within public open space, this impacts on the ability to provide suitably sized and located POS for recreational use.

·                Co-located POS and schools not providing good outcomes – Liveable Neighbourhoods promotes the co-location of POS with school sites in the interest of dual use.  Although this is supported in principle by the City of Wanneroo in recognition of the numerous potential benefits associated with shared facilities, it is not currently resulting in more usable spaces for the community.  Co-location now appears to be used as the norm, instead of where there is benefit in doing so.

 

 

Purpose

The purpose of this policy is to:

·                Ensure that POS is delivered to maximise community benefit;

·                Provide local interpretation of the WAPC Liveable Neighbourhoods policy; and

·                Guide Council, its officers and applicants in considering the planning of POS in new urban areas.

The Policy should be read in conjunction with Liveable Neighbourhoods (WAPC, Oct 07) and other City of Wanneroo policies where relevant as below:

·                Landscape Upgrades to Distributor Roads and Parks Policy;

·                Council Reserves and Parks Policy;

·                Acquisition and Development of Community Purpose Sites Policy; and

·                Wetlands Local Planning Policy 4.1.

 

Although this policy is generally consistent with, and provides local interpretation of Liveable Neighbourhoods, it does differ where it is considered necessary to ensure the best outcomes for the City of Wanneroo community.

 

Objective

 

To ensure new POS areas provide a balance between:

·                A diversity of recreational uses and options for the community;

·                The predicted active recreational needs of the community;

·                Conservation of local natural assets;

·                High levels of amenity;

·                Affordability; and

·                Environmental sustainability.

 

Part 2

 

General Policy Provisions

 

 

1.       Provision of Public Open Space

 

1.1     A minimum 10% of the net sub-divisible area shall be ceded as public open space as per Liveable Neighbourhoods.

 

1.2     Greater than 10% may be considered acceptable and/or necessary where there are specific environmental, cultural or historic values that require protection to enhance the character of the local area or where it is considered essential to provide larger scale active spaces.  In these instances, a Financial Assessment Report detailing the likely financial implications of providing additional space may be required.

 

1.3     Less than 10% may be considered appropriate in centre zones where higher densities are proposed subject to:

 

          1.3.1  POS provision in the wider catchment being sufficient to meet community need; and

 

          1.3.2  The balance of POS being paid as cash-in-lieu to enhance the quality of the POS provided.

 

1.4     Clauses 1.2 to 1.3 shall be subject to discussion and approval of the City of Wanneroo.

 

1.5     Applicants shall provide the necessary information as outlined in Schedule 1 to support and justify the proposed provision of POS.

 

          1.5.1  A POS Schedule shall be provided for all applications that outlines the overall POS provision (as per liveable neighbourhoods) as well as detail on the purpose, function, and size of each individual POS and their percentage contribution towards overall POS provision.

 

1.6     POS shall be classified as either unrestricted POS or restricted POS as per Liveable Neighbourhoods.  Schedule 2 outlines the types of POS applicable to each of these categories.

 

1.7     Schedule 3 illustrates the general process expected by the City of Wanneroo by which POS should be planned for any particular area.

 

          Unrestricted POS

 

1.8     Unrestricted POS shall constitute a minimum of 8% of the net sub-divisible area as per Liveable Neighbourhoods.

 

          Restricted POS

 

1.9     Restricted POS (incorporating urban water management measures, wetlands etc) may constitute a maximum credit of 2% of the net sub-divisible area as per Liveable Neighbourhoods where the requirements for unrestricted open space in Section 2 of this part (Allocation and Distribution of POS) have been met.

 

1.10   Restricted POS in excess of 2% of the net sub-divisible area shall not be credited towards the overall POS obligation. 

 

1.11   Restricted POS provided in excess of 2% of the net sub-divisible area (in accordance with Clause 1.9) shall be considered as a deduction from the net subdivisible area.

 

          Cash-in-Lieu of POS

 

1.12   The City will accept cash-in-lieu of POS where it is considered that the provision of actual land for POS will not result in spaces of sufficient size or quality to be of benefit to the community, or where sufficient space already exists in the surrounding areas.

 

1.13   Where Cash-in-lieu is considered acceptable under Clause 1.12, the applicant shall contribute up to the total POS requirement, the market value of the land (as defined under Section 155 of the Planning & Development Act 2005) required as cash-in-lieu to be kept in Trust for the future provision and/or development of POS and related community facilities.

 

1.14   The provision of Cash-in-Lieu of POS is subject to the agreement of the Western Australian Planning Commission under Section 153 of the Planning & Development Act 2005.

 

 

2.       Allocation and Distribution of POS

 

2.1     A variety of POS shall be provided within a specified area that ensures a balance of sizes, types, functions and locations within a community.  The provision of POS shall generally be in accordance with the requirements of the POS Hierarchy shown at Schedule 4.

 

2.2     Unless otherwise provided for by Clause 2.3 of this policy, POS shall:

 

          2.2.1  be located within the nominated walkable distances from dwellings prescribed by Schedule 4 or where no distances are provided, in accordance with other location criteria as specified;

 

          2.2.2  be of a minimum size for the relevant type of POS as per Schedule 4; and

 

          2.2.3  be fit for its intended purpose in terms of:

·                Location

·                Size

·                Shape

·                Topographical nature

 

2.3     Exceptions

 

          2.3.1  The provision of a District Open Space (See Clause 2.5) shall negate the need for a Neighbourhood and Local POS within the walkable catchment of the District Open Space location;

 

          2.3.2  The location of a Neighbourhood Open Space shall negate the need for a local open space within the walkable catchment of the Neighbourhood Open Space location; and

 

          2.3.3  POS exhibiting “unacceptable criteria” as per Schedule 4 shall not be accepted.

 

          Active POS

 

2.4     A minimum of 4% of the net sub-divisible area shall be allocated for active POS;

 

2.5     A district active POS shall be provided for every two (2) government high schools planned within a development area (i.e. 1 per 13,000-14,000 lots);

 

2.6     Organised/formal sporting functions shall be restricted to neighbourhood, district and regional level POS.

 

          Conservation POS

 

2.7     A minimum of three percent (3%) of the net sub-divisible area shall be provided as POS for the purposes of conservation and passive recreation where the following significant natural assets exist:

·                Threatened and Priority Ecological Communities;

·                Declared Rare and Priority Flora Species;

·                Specially Protected and Priority Fauna Species;

·                Matters of National Environmental Significance;

·                Wetlands;

·                Karstic features e.g. caves and pinnacles;

·                Vegetation complexes protected below 30% of their original extent (as detailed in the City’s Local Biodiversity Strategy);

·                Coastal Vegetation;

·                Significant Trees (as defined by the City’s Tree Preservation Policy).

 

          POS provided for this purpose should be ecologically viable and meet the minimum viability criteria described in Schedule 6.

 

2.8     Where less than 3% of the subdivisible area has natural assets worth conserving, the maximum amount shall be retained.

 

2.9     POS provided for the purpose of local conservation shall be accessible by the community for recreational use.  This may be achieved through controlled access to walk trails through the site, or the co-location of natural areas with developed active and/or passive open space to provide an activated interface with natural areas (Refer to Schedule 5 for example concept).

 

2.10   Subject to conservation POS being accessible by the public in accordance with Clause 2.9, the City will accept the inclusion of conservation areas as unrestricted POS.

 

2.11   The provision of restricted access conservation areas (i.e. fenced off from the public) will not be accepted and shall not contribute to the overall 10% obligation.

 

2.12   Approval by the City of Wanneroo and the Department of Education and Training is required where conservation open space is co-located with schools.

 

          POS in Industrial Areas

 

2.13   A minimum of 5% of the net sub-divisible area (max 2% restricted space) shall be provided as POS within industrial areas to provide an opportunity for passive recreation during working hours (lunch breaks etc) and to improve amenity within a built environment.

 

2.14   POS in industrial areas shall be located where walkable catchment can be maximised and of appropriate size to provide an area protected where possible from the impacts of surrounding industry.

 

2.15   Where possible, natural assets shall be retained within the open space provision specified in Clause 2.13.

 

Community Purpose Sites

 

2.16   Unless otherwise provided for by Clause 2.17 of this policy, community purpose sites shall not form part of the POS allocation and their provision shall be subject to discussion and negotiation with the City of Wanneroo.

 

2.17   The inclusion of community purpose sites as part of the public open space contribution may be acceptable subject to:

 

          2.17.1    The community purpose site being located adjacent to another parcel of POS and the primary function of the community purpose site relating to that POS;

 

          2.17.2    A need being identified by a community development plan or other community needs study;

 

          2.17.3    The allocation being subject to the provision requirements of restricted open space (See Clauses 1.9 – 1.11); and

 

          2.17.4    Discussion and approval of the City of Wanneroo.

 

 

3.       Location of POS

 

3.1     Individual POS shall form part of an interconnected network of spaces for the purposes of encouraging pedestrian movement, ecological connectivity and improving public amenity.

 

3.2     POS shall be located to maximize accessibility and safety for the community in accordance with Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles:

·                Civic spaces, parks, plazas, footpaths, urban streets and other shared community spaces that connect the buildings of the community must be located, designed and managed in ways that encourage its legitimate use and hence its security;

·                The interface of public open space with the buildings that define and adjoin it must be located, designed and managed to promote informal surveillance and use.

 

          Co-location of POS with School Sites

 

3.3     Co-location of POS with school sites is supported and encouraged in the interest of optimising joint use and management, rationalising water use and creating community hubs.  Co-location shall be investigated (but not assumed) at each site and is subject to:

·                Co-located primary school and high school sites being retained as 4ha and 10ha sites respectively (i.e. no land concession) in recognition of increased pressure on school sites to accommodate built school infrastructure, generally at the expense of a functional public space as a result;

·                Creation of a larger, more multipurpose recreation or community precinct as a result of the co-location;

·                The co-located POS being a minimum of 3.0ha to ensure a usable senior size playing field in the event that the ongoing shared-use arrangement does not prove beneficial; and

·                Approval of the City of Wanneroo and Department of Education and Training.

 

 

4.       Design of POS

 

4.1     Design of POS shall have due regard for the design principles at Schedule 7;

 

4.2     POS shall be designed to:

·                Maximise environmental sustainability:

·                Provide alternatives to irrigated turf where possible;

·                Reflect best practice in water conservation, harvesting, re-use and irrigation; and

·                Include initiatives to minimise energy use (through design, product selection, alternative energy sources etc).

 

4.3     Retention of natural bushland within POS shall be maximised.  Where this is not possible, priority shall be given to transplanting vegetation, landscaping with mature species, or use of local native species.

 

4.4     Natural ground levels shall be retained where possible to suit the intended function of the POS.

 

          Active POS Design

 

4.5     To ensure maximum potential for Active POS to accommodate a full variety of recreational activity, Active POS shall be designed generally in accordance with the development models illustrated at Schedule 5.  Appropriate space shall be provided for:

·                formal playing fields;

·                buffers to roads and other infrastructure;

·                passive/unstructured recreation areas; and

·                pavilions, carparks and other sporting infrastructure (e.g. cricket nets, batting cages, baseball backnets etc).

 

These uses shall be reflected in the POS landscape plans at the appropriate stage of planning.  Applicants shall refer to Sports Dimensions Guide For Playing Areas – Sport and Recreation Facilities (Department of Sport and Recreation, July 2008) for relevant sporting design criteria.

 

4.6     Active POS sites shall:

 

          4.6.1  be of uniform shape, with preference given to square or rectangular;

 

          4.6.2  be graded (either naturally or through development) to allow for surface water runoff/drainage, with a slope of no greater than 1:200;

 

          4.6.3  have access to a water supply and water licence transferable to the City of Wanneroo, suitable for the irrigation of an appropriate amount of turf and landscaping;

 

          4.6.4  be free of the following constraints (either naturally or through development):

·                Easements & buffers (pipe line, power line, incompatible land use);

·                Wetland / water courses;

·                Significant historical sites – either Indigenous or European, which will prevent the development of the site for the proposed function;

·                Any transport or other feature that intersects the site or detracts from its development potential; and

·                Soil contamination.

 

 

5.       Urban Water Management within POS

 

5.1     The inclusion of urban water management measures within POS is supported in accordance with water sensitive urban design principles subject to Clauses 5.2 to 5.6 below.

 

5.2     Unusable drainage areas (unsafe drainage areas; fenced drainage areas; unlandscaped drainage areas; unmanaged drainage areas, drainage areas subject to inundation more frequently than a 1 year ARI) shall not be accepted.

 

5.3     Constructed permanent waterbodies (e.g. ornamental lakes) shall not be accepted unless approved by the City of Wanneroo as part of best practice water management.

 

5.4     Stormwater runoff from the 1 year critical duration Average Recurrence Interval (ARI) event shall be infiltrated or otherwise treated within the lot and road network.  Where this is not possible due to site characteristics, flows shall not enter the unrestricted component of public open space;

 

5.5     Infiltration/treatment areas for up to the 5 year ARI event may contribute to the maximum 2% restricted POS liability where they:

 

          5.5.1  Are safe, managed, unfenced and landscaped;

 

          5.5.2  Are usable by the community for recreation or amenity;

 

          5.5.3  Are compliant with the provisions of the Chironomid Midge and Mosquito Risk Assessment Guide for Constructed Waterbodies (Department of Health, 2007); and

 

          5.5.4  Are approved as part of the POS provision at Local Structure Planning stage by the City of Wanneroo.

 

5.6     Infiltration areas for up to the 100 year ARI event may be included within POS and contribute to the unrestricted POS liability where they:

 

          5.6.1  Are safe, managed, unfenced, and landscaped;

 

          5.6.2  Are useable by the community for recreation;

 

          5.6.3  Are compliant with the provisions of the Chironomid Midge and Mosquito Risk Assessment Guide for Constructed Waterbodies (Department of Health, 2007);

 

          5.6.4  Do not include flows from short term events up to and including the 5 year ARI event; and

 

          5.6.5  Are approved as part of the POS provision at Local Structure Planning stage by the City of Wanneroo.

 

5.7     Conformance with Clauses 5.2 through 5.6 shall be demonstrated through the development of a Local Water Management Strategy, lodged with any structure plan application.

 

 

6.       Development of POS

 

6.1     Approval Requirements for the Development of POS

 

          6.1.1  Where subdivision applications propose the creation of open space, the City shall in its response to the Western Australian Planning Commission, request that a condition be imposed requiring the applicant to develop the open space to the minimum standard defined in Schedule 8 of this policy.

 

6.1.2  Development of POS above minimum standards may be acceptable subject to approval of designs by the City of Wanneroo.  The future of infrastructure considered to be ‘over-provision’ following completion of maintenance responsibility is to be agreed prior to development.  Whole-of-life cost estimates may be required to support provision of these items.

 

          6.1.3  In accordance with sub-clause 6.1.1 (above), any works associated with those defined in Schedule 8 shall be considered to be subdivisional works and therefore exempt from requiring a separate planning approval under the scheme, unless it is considered by the Manager, Planning Implementation that the nature of the development: 

·                cannot reasonably be considered as 'subdivisional works';

·                is potentially controversial;

·                has the potential to significantly impact on the amenity of nearby residents; or

·                requires detailed assessment, consideration and the implementation of management conditions of a statutory nature.

 

          6.1.4  The applicant shall provide adequate details and information to enable a comprehensive assessment and evaluation of infrastructure drawings, which identify those features defined in Schedule 8 of this policy. The City will consider these drawings in accordance with the “Guidelines For the Development and Subdivision of Land - 2003’’ manual, “Local Government Guidelines for Subdivisional Development - 2009” manual and any other associated standard, guideline and management plan, prior to granting approval to the subdivisional and landscaping works.

 

          6.1.5  No clearing of vegetation of other works shall occur within the area of open space until the City of Wanneroo has granted approval for the subdivisional working drawings and associated landscaping plans.

 

          6.1.6  In the absence of a valid subdivisional approval issued by the Western Australian Planning Commission, or where the works are not listed in Schedule 8 (minimum standard of development), planning approval may be required in accordance with Part 6 of the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme Number 2.

 

          6.1.7  A Building Licence will be required for all structures as defined by the Building Code of Australia.

 

 

7.       Maintenance of POS

 

7.1     Upon granting practical completion of works, the subdivider shall maintain the POS for a minimum period of five (5) years and rectify design defects during this period, subject to:

 

          7.1.1  POS being in a healthy, functioning condition at completion of developer maintenance period;

 

          7.1.2  The standard of POS being acceptable to the City of Wanneroo at completion of developer maintenance period, with any defects to be fixed prior to handover; and

 

          7.1.3  An annual review process to ensure that the POS is being maintained to the standard expected of the City of Wanneroo.

 

7.2     Should the conditions of Clause 7.1 not be met, the maintenance period will be reviewed and another period of developer maintenance may be required.

 

7.3     Shorter maintenance periods may be negotiated with the City where:

 

          7.3.1  The style of landscaping and level of amenity proposed within the development does not warrant the full maintenance term; and

 

          7.3.2  Following the completion of an annual review as per sub-clause 7.1.3, the standard of the park is considered acceptable by the City of Wanneroo for handover.

 

 

8.       Consultation

 

8.1     Applicants shall consult with the City of Wanneroo regarding the planning and development of POS at all stages of the planning process to ensure that it meets the needs of the City of Wanneroo and the community in the long term.

 

8.2     Where possible, applicants shall show evidence of consultation with end-users (the community) in developing landscape plans for the development of POS.  Outcomes of the consultation shall be balanced against known design principles in the design process for the POS.

 

Definitions

 

Active open space means land for which the primary function is organised, high intensity sporting use.

 

 

Conservation open space means land for which the primary function is the retention and ongoing management of indigenous flora and fauna.

 

 

Net Sub-divisible Area means the land available for subdivision excluding areas for non-residential uses such as schools, shopping centres, infrastructure, dedicated drainage sites, community facilities or land set aside for arterial roads.  Referred to as ‘gross subdivisible area’ in Liveable Neighbourhoods.

 

 

Passive open space means land for which the primary function is unstructured recreational pursuits (picnics, children’s play, dog walking) or low intensity active recreation (jogging, walking, casual kick-about).

 

 

Public open space (POS) means land used or intended for use for recreational purposes by the public and includes parks, public gardens, playgrounds and sports fields but does not include regional open space and foreshore reserves (Liveable Neighbourhoods 2007).

 

 

Restricted public open space means those spaces that are constrained in a way that restricts the use of the space for recreational purposes by the general public (e.g. wetlands, certain drainage swales, power easements, cultural heritage sites, significant topographical features).

 

 

Unrestricted public open space means those spaces that are free from constraints or encumbrances (e.g. wetlands, easements, cultural heritage sites, significant topographical features) and are available at all times for recreational purposes by the general public.  This includes conservation areas that are accessible by the public.

 

Schedule 1

 

Required supporting information

 

● Minimum information required to support application

○ Information may be required to support application dependant on nature of proposal

ʘ Information likely required as a condition of approval

 

Supporting Information	Planning Proposal
	A Scheme Amendment	B Local Structure Plan	C Detailed Area Plan	D Subdivision proposal	E Development Application
Public Open Space Schedule		●	●	●
Public Open Space Strategy		○
Public Open Space Landscape Master Plan & Concept Strategy	○	●	●	○
Public Open Space Financial Assessment Report		○	○
Local Water Management Strategy	○	●	○
District Water Management Strategy	○
Conservation POS Viability Assessment (Refer Schedule 6)	○	●	○
Vegetation Management Plan	○	●	●	○
Financial Assessment Report	○	○	○	○	○

 

 

Schedule 2

POS Categories

 

POS PROPOSAL	POS CATEGORY	CREDIT	CONDITIONS / COMMENTS
Active / Passive POS
·                Active POS	Unrestricted	100%	Refer to Clause 4.6
·                Unconstrained ·                Local / Passive POS	Unrestricted	100%
Conservation POS
·                Natural assets	Unrestricted	100%	Refer to Clauses 2.7 – 2.12
·                Inaccessible natural assets	N/A	0%	Refer to Clause 2.11
Wetlands and Buffers
·                Conservation category wetlands ·                (Refer LPP 4.1: Wetlands for wetland definitions)	N/A	0%	Not accepted as POS.
·                Resource Enhancement category wetlands	N/A	0%	Not accepted as POS
·                Multiple-use wetlands	Restricted	100% (up to 1/5 of POS allocation)	Must form part of a stormwater management strategy
·                Natural wetland buffers           (i.e. buffers in a natural state)	Restricted	100% (up to 1/5 of POS allocation)	Management plans must be developed to demonstrate management of the wetland and buffer for conservation purposes
·                Compatible-use wetland buffers           (i.e. buffers where vegetation is completely degraded, permitting low impact uses)	Restricted	100% (up to 1/5 of POS allocation)	·               Must demonstrate the protection of the ecological values of the wetland and wetland buffer; ·               Development of a concept plan to demonstrate appropriate recreational use of the area; and ·               City of Wanneroo approval.
Urban Water Management
·                1 in 1 year ARI inundation	N/A	0%	Not accepted as POS
·                <= 5 year ARI inundation	Restricted	100% (up to 1/5 of POS allocation)	Refer to Clause 5.3
·                <=100 year ARI inundation	Unrestricted	100%	Refer to Clause 5.4
·                Constructed permanent water body performing a drainage function	N/A	0%	Not accepted as POS
·                Artificial lined water body	N/A	0%	Not accepted as POS
Other
·                Entry Statements	N/A	0%	·               Not accepted as POS. ·               Entry statements are not considered useable space by the community

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Schedule 5

Example public open space concept plans

 

MODEL TEMPLATE –Neighbourhood Active Open Space (Football/Cricket)

 

MODEL TEMPLATE – Neighbourhood Active Open Space (Multipurpose)

 

MODEL TEMPLATE –District Active Open Space

 

MODEL TEMPLATE – Conservation Open Space

 

Schedule 6

Viability Assessment Table

 

POS areas identified for retention for the purpose of conservation will be expected to be viable to ensure long-term survival and reduce ongoing maintenance costs. Viability shall be determined using the following table. A minimum score of 14 is required for a conservation POS area to be considered to be viable.

 

Viability Factor	Category	Score
Size	Greater than 20ha	5
	Greater than 10ha less than 20ha	4
	Greater than 4ha less than 10ha	3
	Less than 4ha	2
	Less than 1ha	1
Shape	Circle, square or squat rectangle	3.5
	Oval, rectangle or symmetrical triangle	3
	Irregular shape with few indentations	2.5
	Irregular shape with many indentations	2
	Long thin shape with large proportion of area greater than 50 m wide	1.5
	Long thin shape with large proportion of area less than 50 m wide	1
Perimeter to Area Ratio	Less than 0.01	4
	Greater than 0.01 less than 0.02	3
	Greater than 0.02 less than 0.04	2
	Greater than 0.04	1
Vegetation Condition	Pristine                                                                              10 x      % =
	Excellent                                                                             8 x      % =
	Very Good                                                                          6 x      % =
	Good                                                                                   4 x      % =
	Degraded                                                                            2 x      % =
	Completely Degraded                                                         0 x      % =
	Total Calculated Score
Connectivity	Forms part of a Regional Ecological Linkage* and is contiguous with a protected natural area** greater than 4ha	5
	Not part of a Regional Ecological Linkage but contiguous with a protected natural area greater than 4ha	4.5
	Forms part of a Regional Ecological Linkage and is within 500 m of more than 2 protected natural areas having an area greater than 4 ha	4
	Not part of a Regional Ecological Linkage but within 500 m of more than 2 protected natural areas having an area greater than 4 ha	3.5
	Forms part of a Local Ecological Linkage*** and is contiguous with a protected natural area greater than 4ha	3
	Not part of a Local Ecological Linkage but contiguous with a protected natural area greater than 4ha	2.5
	Forms part of a Local Ecological Linkage and is within 500 m of more than 2 protected natural area having an area greater than 4 ha	2
	Not part of a Local Ecological Linkage but within 500 m of more than 2 protected natural area having an area greater than 4 ha	1.5
	Forms part of a Regional or Local Ecological Linkage but is not within 500 m of any protected natural areas having an area greater than 4 ha	1

 

*        Regional Ecological Linkages are those defined by the Perth Biodiversity Project or the Gnangara Sustainability Strategy and are depicted by Figure 4 in the City’s Local Biodiversity Strategy.

 

**       Figure 5 of the City’s Local Biodiversity Strategy defines protected natural areas.

 

***     Figure 4 in the City’s Local Biodiversity Strategy depicts local Ecological Linkages, however, the formation of new local linkages in new development areas should be considered as part of local structure planning.

 

Schedule 7

POS Design Principles

From Healthy Places & Spaces, Planning Institute of Australia, 2009

 

Amenity

Design public open space so that it:

·                protects and enhances the environmental, cultural and heritage values of an area;

·                assists with place-making by building on the special attributes of an area, eg. hill tops, ridges, rocky outcrops, remnant vegetation, water features, views, vistas, and incorporating community art projects/public art;

·                is pleasant and welcoming, eg. through embellishments such as landscaping, park furniture (seats, drinking fountains) and lighting;

·                is well maintained and actively managed; and

·                is safe and perceived to be safe such as by providing lighting and areas that can be viewed by people.

 

Accessibility

Ensure open space is:

·                distributed throughout an area providing equitable access to all residents;

·                easily accessible via public transport where appropriate;

·                easily accessible via the walking and cycling network and with adequate bicycle parking facilities;

·                connected where practicable with a broader open space network throughout the area; and

·                universally accessible and compliant with disability access requirements.

 

Useability

Ensure open space:

·                is of a sufficient size and shape to cater for its intended purpose;

·                is adaptable, catering for multiple users and types of activities;

·                has access to appropriate facilities associated with moderate to vigorous physical activity; and 

·                is shared by a number of user groups, for example, school ovals could form part of the open space network and be available out of school hours for community use.

 

Schedule 8

Minimum Development Requirements ^…

 

 

 

TYPE OF POS (as per hierarchy)	MINIMUM REQUIRED DEVELOPMENT		OVER PROVISION**
	All POS (All items required)	Dependent on Function (Select as required)	Optional
Local	·          Earthworks and retaining required ·          Vegetation retention ·          Bollards	·           Waterwise landscaping ·           Native revegetation ·           Garden beds ·           Hydrozoned reticulation ·           Natural turf ·           Internal circulation paths ·           Park Furniture ·           Children’s playspace	·           Basketball/netball ring & hardstand (up to ½ court size) ·           Sports goals ·           Artificial / Synthetic turf**** ·           Public Art ***
Neighbourhood Passive	·          Earthworks and retaining as required ·          Pedestrian / cycle paths (external) ·          Vegetation retention where possible ·          Native revegetation ·          Bollards	·           Natural turf ·           Hydrozoned irrigation ·           Park Furniture ·           Internal circulation paths ·           Security lighting ·           Children’s playspace ·           Garden beds	·           Basketball/netball ring & hardstand (up to ½ court size) ·           Sports goals ·           BMX tracks ·           BBQs ·           Drink fountain ·           Artificial / Synthetic turf**** ·           Public Art ***
Neighbourhood Active	·          Earthworks and retaining as required ·          Pedestrian / cycle paths (external) ·          Hydrozoned irrigation ·          Natural turf ·          Security lighting ·          Vegetation retention where possible ·          Bollards	·           Basketball/netball ring & hardstand (up to ½ court size) ·           Sports goals ·           Children’s playspace ·           Exercise equipment ·           Cricket nets ·           Central cricket wickets ·           Seating ·           Internal paths ·           Drink fountain ·           Artificial / Synthetic turf **** ·           Garden beds ·           Toilets ·           Carparking	·           Hard courts (tennis, netball) ·           Bocce courts ·           Floodlighting ·           Skate Park ·           Public Art *** ·           BBQs
District Active	·          Earthworks as required ·          Vegetation retention ·          Pedestrian / Cycle Paths (external) ·          Hydrozoned irrigation ·          Natural turf ·          Security lighting	·           Car Parking ·           Children’s playspace ·           Exercise equipment ·           Basketball/netball ring & hardstand (up to ½ court size) ·           Sports goals ·           Cricket nets ·           Central cricket wicket ·           Seating ·           Drink fountain ·           Artificial / Synthetic turf **** ·           Garden beds	·           Hard courts (tennis, netball) ·           Bocce courts ·           Floodlighting ·           Toilets ·           Changerooms ·           Public Art *** ·           Bollards
Conservation	·          No earthworks ·          Access control gates (where appropriate) ·          Development and implementation of a management plan *	·           Signage ·           Limestone trail surfacing	·           Conservation fencing ·           Seating ·           Shade shelters ·           Interpretation signage ·           Directional signage ·           Alternative trail surfacing ·           Public Art ***

 

^…        List is not exhaustive and does not include standard subdivisional conditions.  Additional infrastructure subject to discussion and approval of the City of Wanneroo.

 

*        Development and implementation of a management plan to provide for environmental restoration, protection and maintenance, and activation of the POS for passive recreational use and maintenance of ecological function.

 

**       Subject to agreement with CoW on ongoing management following end of developer maintenance period.

 

***     Subject to discussions with City of Wanneroo Art Development Officer

 

****    The City encourages alternatives to irrigated turf, depending on the size and use of the area, however discussion is required with the City of Wanneroo where the installation of artificial surfaces is being considered.

 

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

ATTACHMENT 2

 

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

ATTACHMENT 3 Page 1 of 2

 

ATTACHMENT 3 Page 2 of 2

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

Town Planning Scheme and Structure Plans

File Ref:                                              S27/0098V01

File Name: BA Carabooda Nowergup Landscape Enhancement.doc This line will not be printed dont delete

Responsible Officer:                           Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Author:   Ryan Hall

Meeting Date:   6 April 2010

Attachments:                                       2

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

Issue

To consider initiating an Amendment to District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2) for the purpose of making the following changes:

·                Introduce a new zone titled ‘Landscape Enhancement’ with accompanying provisions and land use table permissibility (refer Attachment 1).

·                Amend the Scheme Map to rezone land in Carabooda Nowergup to ‘Landscape Enhancement’ as shown in Attachment 2.

Background

At its meeting of 11 December 2007 as part of its endorsement of the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) report titled The Future of East Wanneroo: Land use and water management in the context of Network City, Council resolved to undertake further detailed planning for rural subdivision and landscape protection in the Carabooda and Nowergup area.

 

The area is located adjacent to Neerabup National Park and near to the future Alkimos Regional Centre.  It is characterised by a range of low-key rural activities on landholdings of various sizes.  The natural environment comprises significant remnant native vegetation, conservation category wetlands and karst features.  All of these characteristics led to the Future of East Wanneroo report recommending that detailed planning be undertaken to facilitate rural lot subdivision and protect the unique landscape qualities of the area.

 

Administration has undertaken further detailed planning for the area and are now proposing to protect the landscape value of the area by amending District Planning Scheme No. 2 to:

 

·                Introduce a new zone titled ‘Landscape Enhancement’ with accompanying provisions and land use table permissibility (refer Attachment 1); and

·                Amend the Scheme Map to rezone land in Carabooda and Nowergup to ‘Landscape Enhancement’ as shown in Attachment 2.

The boundary of the proposed Landscape Enhancement zone is largely based on the extent of the landscape protection area depicted in the Future of East Wanneroo document and has been further refined by Administration to reflect the local topography.

 

To complement the proposed Scheme Amendment, it is also proposed that a Local Planning Policy be introduced to expand and elaborate on the proposed Scheme provisions and provide more detailed guidance for the assessment and determination of development proposals in the Landscape Enhancement Zone area, and the exercise of discretion in respect of those proposals.

A key issue that will be addressed through the Scheme Amendment and Local Planning Policy is the incompatibility between some activities that are currently permitted in the Rural Resource zone (such as resource extraction) and creating and maintaining a rural living, tourism and agricultural precinct that retains significant environmental features.

Detail

Proposed DPS 2 Amendment

The proposed amendment to DPS 2 comprises the following components:

 

Creation of new zone and text provisions

 

The Amendment proposes the introduction of a new zone titled ‘Landscape Enhancement’. The term Landscape Enhancement has also been used in Council’s Landscape Enhancement Areas Policy dated July 1999. This Policy identifies four areas in the City (including parts of Nowergup and Carabooda captured within the ‘Linear Lakes’ Landscape Enhancement area) as areas of environmental importance warranting special planning and development consideration.

 

To accompany the new Landscape Enhancement zone a set of provisions are proposed to be included in DPS 2. The provisions indicate the intent of the zone and provides broad guidance on subdivision and development within the area.

 

In addition, Table 1, Zoning Table of DPS 2, is to be amended to reflect the Landscape Enhancement zone. Administration has carried out a thorough assessment of all the land use classifications and propose a series of permissible and prohibited land uses (refer Attachment 1).

 

Modification of the Scheme Map

 

The Amendment proposes to rezone lots within Carabooda Nowergup that are currently zoned as Rural Resource and General Rural to Landscape Enhancement (refer Attachment 2). The area to be rezoned has been determined based on:

 

·                The indicative “landscape/rural small lot subdivision boundary” set by the Department of Planning through the Future of East Wanneroo Report.

 

·                The topography of the area to capture the valley its ridgelines

 

·                Respecting existing lot boundaries.

 

The Scheme Map will be amended to reflect the area affected by the new zone.

Consultation

A workshop on the proposed Amendment was held with the local community on 9 March 2010 and was attended by 25 landowners. The Director Planning and Sustainability presented the proposed Amendment and the community’s feedback to the 10 March Council Forum.  Following the forum, Administration has incorporated the landowner and Elected Member feedback into the proposed Amendment.

 

If agreed by Council, the Amendment will need to be forwarded to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) for comment, pursuant to Section 81 of the Planning and Development Act 2005 and the WAPC for their consent to advertise.

Subject to no objections being received from the EPA and consent from the WAPC, the Amendment will be advertised for public comment for a period of 42 days. Advertising will be undertaken in the following manner, consistent with the requirements of the Town Planning Regulations 1967:

 

·                Advertisement in a local newspaper for two consecutive weeks;

·                Notices sent to landowners affected by the proposal;

·                Placement of a sign on site giving notice of the proposal; and

·                Display on the City’s website.

 

In addition, an information session on the Amendment will be held during the consultation process.

Comment

It is recognised that in addition to the Scheme Amendment, a separate Local Planning Policy will be needed to expand and elaborate on the proposed discretionary uses with guidelines to deem them acceptable or not. This will be undertaken whilst the Scheme Amendment is being progressed.  The Local Planning Policy will cover (but will not be limited to) the following key issues:

·                Precinct boundaries;

·                Expansion and elaboration of the draft Scheme text provisions;

·                Detailed requirements for Subdivision, Development and Structure Plans; and

·                Environmental Management Plans and requirements.

 

The Scheme Amendment and Policy will provide clarity and consistency in the planning of the area, avoid incompatible uses and protect the integrity of the landscape character.

Statutory Compliance

Amendment to DPS 2 Special Provisions

Lots 23 and 24 Emerald Valley Drive, in the Emerald Valley Estate, are zoned Special Rural and are subject to special provisions under DPS 2. However, as part of this current Scheme Amendment, these lots are proposed to be rezoned from Special Rural to the Landscape Enhancement zone and, as such, the provisions of that zone will apply to this land instead of the Special Rural (and related special provisions) of DPS 2.

WAPC Consent

The Town Planning Regulations 1967 provide that where an amendment is consistent with the Metropolitan Region Scheme and State policies and strategies, the consent of the WAPC will not be required to advertise the amendment. In this instance, the proposed Landscape Enhancement zone, may not be entirely consistent with the WAPC Basic Raw Materials State Planning Policy No. 2.4. As a result, the consent of the WAPC will be required to advertise the proposed amendment to DPS 2.

Strategic Implications

The Scheme Amendment is consistent with the following relevant objectives of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006-2021.

 

“Objective 1.4

Minimise impact of development on natural landform

 

Objective 1.5

Improve the physical quality of the built environment

 

Objective 3.3

Increase tourism within the region

 

Objective 3.4

Improve the viability and profile of rural industry.”

Policy Implications

A separate Local Planning Policy will be prepared to provide more detailed guidance for the assessment and determination of development proposals in the Landscape Enhancement Zone area.

 

A review and amendment of Council’s Interim Local Rural Strategy (2000) will also be required where provisions of the Strategy are incompatible with the proposed Scheme Amendment.

Financial Implications

The cost of advertising the Scheme Amendment can be met from existing operational budgets.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

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

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       ADOPTS Amendment No. 108 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 to:

          a)      Insert Clause 3.25 “Landscape Enhancement Zone” in the Scheme as follows:

                   “3.25     LANDSCAPE ENHANCEMENT ZONE

3.25.1    The Landscape Enhancement Zone is intended to accommodate rural residential development, agricultural and horticultural land uses, and small-scale tourism activities. All subdivision and development in the Landscape Enhancement Zone shall be conducted in a manner that preserves the rural character of land within this zone.

3.25.2    The objectives of the Landscape Enhancement Zone are to:

             

a)     Enable a range of activities and land uses that support the characteristics of the landscape, including rural residential development, agricultural and horticultural land uses, and small-scale tourism activities.

              b)      Ensure that subdivision and development maintains the rural character of the locality and does not adversely affect the existing landscape and scenic values.

              c)      Facilitate subdivision and development that:

              (i)      Is compatible with the landscape amenity and rural character of the Zone;

              (ii)     Will not have a detrimental impact on sensitive land uses;

              (iii)    Is coordinated and compatible with surrounding land parcels; and

              (iv)    Does not necessitate the provision of large scale unplanned and uncoordinated service infrastructure and community services.

              d)      Encourage land use and management practices compatible with landscape and environmental conservation.

3.25.3    When considering applications for subdivision or for Planning Approval for development which relate to land which is within the Landscape Enhancement Zone, Council shall have regard to the objectives set out in Clause 3.25.2 of the Landscape Enhancement Zone, the relevant matters listed in Clause 6.8 of the Scheme and to the following: 

              a)      The Council shall not support any use or subdivision or zoning that is, or potentially could be, incompatible with the intent of the Landscape Enhancement Zone as set out in Clause 3.25.1

              b)      Council will not support any proposals that adversely impact on any designated Bush Forever site, conservation category wetlands and their buffers, important heritage site and important site of Aboriginal significance.

              c)      A person shall not without Planning Approval of the Council remove, cut down, or damage any vegetation on land within a Landscape Enhancement Zone including street verges. Where the Council grants approval it may impose a condition requiring the planting of suitable vegetation at the cost of the applicant.

              d)      The subdivider shall ensure that each prospective purchaser of a subdivided lot acknowledges in writing, at the time of purchase of a lot, the requirements and provisions of the Rights in Water and Irrigation Act and more specifically the fact that:

              (i)      the Department of Water imposes constraints on the extraction of ground water from and the use of groundwater on the land.

              (ii)     where the lot is within a proclaimed groundwater area it is unlikely that a licence will be issued for the use of groundwater for amounts more than 1500m³ per annum, i.e. sufficient for house and domestic garden requirements and for the irrigation of approximately 0.1 hectare of pasture or other crops.

              e)      The provisions of any Local Planning Policy relating to the Zone.

3.25.4    Building and development on a lot, except for fences and firebreaks, must be contained within a building envelope defined on a plan adopted by Council. Such an envelope shall accord with any relevant Council Policy and must be located so as to:

              a)      Avoid detrimentally impacting on areas of landscape and scenic value;

              b)      Avoid areas where ground or soil conditions may inhibit the structural integrity of buildings or cause pollution, erosion or flooding;

              c)      Maximise opportunities for buildings to take advantage of passive solar light; and

              d)      Maximise opportunities for efficient effluent disposal.

3.25.5    Notwithstanding the requirements set out in Clause 3.25.4, Council may at its discretion approve the construction of a building outside the building envelope, if it is satisfied that the amenity of the area, the privacy of adjoining properties, and the landscape or environment of the area will not be detrimentally affected.”

          b)      Inserting the Landscape Enhancement Zone in Table 1 (Zoning Table) of the Scheme, with the corresponding use permissibilities, as listed below:

 

          c)      APPLY the Landscape Enhancement Zone as shown on the Scheme (Amendment) Map as contained in Attachment 2; and

2.       FORWARDS Amendment No. 108 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 to:

          a)      The Environmental Protection Authority for comment pursuant to Section 81 of the Planning and Development Act 2005; and

          b)      The Western Australian Planning Commission for its consent to advertise under Regulation 25AA of the Town Planning Regulations 1967; and

3.       Subject to no objections being received from the Environmental Protection Authority and consent to advertise from the Western Australian Planning Commission, ADVERTISES the Amendment No. 108 for public comment pursuant to Regulation 25(2) of the Town Planning Regulations 1967 for a period of 42 days.

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

 

ATTACHMENT 1 Page 1 of 5

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

DRAFT DISTRICT PLANNING SCHEME NO. 2 TEXT

 

3.25     LANDSCAPE ENHANCEMENT ZONE

 

3.25.1  The Landscape Enhancement Zone is intended to accommodate rural residential development, agricultural and horticultural land uses, and small-scale tourism activities. All subdivision and development in the Landscape Enhancement Zone shall be conducted in a manner that preserves the rural character of land within this zone.

 

            3.25.2 The objectives of the Landscape Enhancement Zone are to:

 

(a)        Enable a range of activities and land uses that support the characteristics of the landscape including rural residential development, agricultural and horticultural land uses, and small-scale tourism activities.

 

(b)        Ensure that subdivision and development maintains the rural character of the locality and does not adversely affect the existing landscape and scenic values.

 

(c)        Facilitate subdivision and development that:

 

(i)         Is compatible with the landscape amenity and rural character of the Zone;

 

(ii)        Will not have a detrimental impact on the existing land uses or local amenity;

 

(iii)       Is coordinated and compatible with surrounding land parcels; and

 

(iv)       Does not necessitate the provision of large scale unplanned and uncoordinated service infrastructure and community services.

 

(d)        Encourage land use and management practices compatible with landscape and environmental conservation.

 

3.25.3  When considering applications for subdivision or for Planning Approval for development which relate to land which is within the Landscape Enhancement Zone, Council shall have regard to the objectives set out in Clause 3.25.2 of the Landscape Enhancement Zone, the relevant matters listed in Clause 6.8 of the Scheme and in addition to the following matters: 

 

(a)        The Council shall not support any use or subdivision or zoning that is, or potentially could be, incompatible with the intent of the Landscape Enhancement Zone as set out in Clause 3.25.1

 

(b)        Council will not support any proposals that adversely impact on any designated Bush Forever site, conservation category wetlands and their buffers, important heritage site and important site of Aboriginal significance.

 

 

ATTACHMENT 1 Page 2 of 5

 

 

(c)        A person shall not without Planning Approval of the Council remove, cut down, or damage any vegetation on land within a Landscape Enhancement Zone including street verges. Where the Council grants approval it may impose a condition requiring the planting of suitable vegetation at the cost of the applicant.

 

(d)        The subdivider shall ensure that each prospective purchaser of a subdivided lot acknowledges in writing, at the time of purchase of a lot, the requirements and provisions of the Rights in Water and Irrigation Act and more specifically the fact that:

 

(i)         the Department of Water imposes constraints on the extraction of ground water from and the use of groundwater on the land.

 

(ii)        where the lot is within a proclaimed groundwater area it is unlikely that a licence will be issued for the use of groundwater for amounts more than 1500m3 per annum, ie sufficient for house and domestic garden requirements and for the irrigation of approximately 0.1 hectare of pasture or other crops.

 

3.25.4 Building and development on a lot, except for fences and firebreaks, must be contained within a building envelope defined on a plan adopted by Council. Such an envelope shall accord with any relevant Council Policy and must be located so as to:

 

(a)        Avoid detrimentally impacting on areas of landscape and scenic value;

 

(b)        Avoid areas where ground or soil conditions may inhibit the structural integrity of buildings or cause pollution, erosion or flooding;

 

(c)        Maximise opportunities for passive solar light; and

 

(d)        Maximise opportunities for efficient effluent disposal.

 

3.25.5 Notwithstanding the requirements set out in Clause 3.25.4, Council may at its discretion approve the construction of a building outside the building envelope, if it is satisfied that the amenity of the area, the privacy of adjoining properties, and the landscape or environment of the area will not be detrimentally affected.

 

ZONES             USE CLASSES	LANDSCAPE ENHANCEMENT	ATTACHMENT  1 Page 3 of 5
Abattoir	X
Aged or Dependent Persons’ Dwelling	D
Amusement Facility/Parlour	X
Ancillary Accommodation	D
Animal Husbandry	D
Aquaculture	D
Art Gallery	D
Auction Room	X
Bakery	X
Bank	X
Beauty Parlour	D
Bed & Breakfast	D
Camping Ground	D
Car Park	X
Car Wash	X
Caravan Park	D
Caretaker’s Dwelling	D
Cattery	D
Child Care Centre	X
Cinema	D
Cinema Complex	X
Civic Building	D
Club (Non-Residential)	X
Concrete Batching Plant	X
Consulting Room	X
Convenience Store	X
Corner Store	D
Costume Hire	X
Department Store	X
Display Home Centre	X
Drive In Theatre	X
Drive –Through Food Outlet	X
Dry Cleaning Premises	X
Education Establishment	X
Equestrian Activity	D
Factory Unit	X
Fuel Depot	X
Funeral Parlour	X
Golf Course	D
Grouped Dwelling	X
Hairdresser	X
Hall	D
Hardware Store	X	ATTACHMENT  1 Page 4 of 5
Hire Service	X
Holiday Village/Resort	D
Home Business – Cat 1	P
Home Business – Cat 2	P
Home Business – Cat 3	D
Hospital	X
Hotel	X
Industry – Extractive	X
Industry – General	X
Industry – Hazardous	X
Industry – Light	X
Industry – Rural	X
Intensive Agriculture	P
Kennels	X
Kindergarten	X
Landscape Supplies	X
Laundromat	X
Laundry	X
Liquor Store	X
Lunch Bar	X
Market (Retail)	D
Market Garden Sales	D
Mast or Antenna	D
Medical Centre	X
Milk Depot	X
Motel	X
Motor Vehicle Repairs	X
Multiple Dwelling	X
Night Club	X
Nursing Home	X
Office	X
Open Air Display	D
Park	D
Park Home Park	X
Pharmacy	X
Piggery	X
Place of Assembly	X
Place of Worship	X
Plant Nursery	D
Private Recreation	D
Public Exhibition Facility	D
Reception Centre	D
Recreation Centre	X
Residential Building	X
Restaurant	D
Restricted Premises	X
Retirement Village	X
Road House	X
Roadside Stall	P
Rural Use	P
Salvage Yard	X
Service Station	X
Shop	D	ATTACHMENT  1 Page 5 of 5
Showroom	X
Single House	D
Smash Repair Station	X
Special Place of Assembly	X
Sports Ground	X
Stables	D
Stall – General	D
Storage Yard	X
Supermarket	X
Take-Away Food Outlet	X
Tavern	D
Telecommunications Infrastructure	D
Theatre	X
Trade Display	D
Transport Depot	X
Vehicle Sales/Hire Premises	X
Vehicle Wrecking	X
Veterinary Consulting  Rooms	X
Veterinary Hospital	X
Video Hire	X
Warehouse	X
Winery	D
Woodyard	X

 

 

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

ATTACHMENT 2

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

File Ref:                                              SP/0082V06

File Name: BA Proposed Structure Plan No  59 for Madeley District Centre  Kingsway City  Cnr Wanneroo Road and Hepburn Avenue

Responsible Officer:                           Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Author: P Thompson

Meeting Date: 6 April 2010

Attachments:   8

Issue

To consider proposed changes to proposed Structure Plan No. 59 (SP 59) for Madeley District Centre (Kingsway City) arising from a current State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) hearing relating to this proposal.

 

Applicant	Shrapnel Urban Planning
Owner	Tah Land Pty Ltd
Location	Wanneroo Road Corner Hepburn Avenue
Site Area	Approximately 20ha
MRS Zoning	Urban, Primary Regional Roads, Other Regional Roads
DPS 2 Zoning	Commercial, Business, Civic & Cultural

Background

Council last considered the matter of proposed SP 59 at its meeting of 29 July 2008 (PD17-07/08).  Council resolved to revoke an earlier resolution on the matter (from its meeting of 15 May 2007; item PD04-05/07), and further resolved as follows:

 

“3.        RESOLVES, in accordance with Part 9.6.1 b) of District Planning Scheme No. 2, that the proposed structure plan submitted by Shrapnel Urban Planning on behalf of Tah Land Pty Ltd for the Madeley District Centre is satisfactory, subject to:

 

a)         the structure plan being modified by the proponent to:

 

i)          provide statutory clauses and a plan that will encourage the provision of a diverse mix of uses and housing types in addition to the retail component, including the vertical integration of housing above the commercial elements;

ii)         provide for a comprehensive transport study which assesses on and offsite impacts, for all transport modes as well as infrastructure requirements necessary to service both the interim and ultimate development scenarios;

iii)         provide for a comprehensive analysis and strategy for the provision of car parking at the centre;

iv)        provide for best practice ecological sustainability elements including energy, water and waste minimisation strategies and initiatives incorporated into the design and functioning of the centre;

iv)        accurately delineate the land reserved under the Metropolitan Region Scheme for Primary Regional Road and Other Regional Road reserves and make provision for a design that would adequately accommodate the ultimate road designs;

 

b)         the following associated matters being addressed by the proponent:

 

i)          a submission being lodged with the City seeking the rezoning of the site to ‘Centre’ under District Planning Scheme No. 2;

ii)         reasonable alternative arrangements, to those set out in the current legal agreement between the City and the landowner, being made with the City in relation to the provision for community facilities to service the surrounding community;

iii)         a submission being lodged with the City for a change in purpose of the portion of Kingsway Reserve adjacent to the eastern boundary of the site to facilitate the extension of Bellerive Boulevard;

iv)        reasonable arrangements being made with relevant transport agencies for the provision of the transport infrastructure identified in the agreed transport study as necessary to accommodate the interim and ultimate development scenarios.”

 

While Council’s earlier resolution of 15 May 2007 also involved Council deciding that proposed SP 59 was satisfactory (subject to various conditions), the new resolution of 29 July 2008 was significant in that it did not include a requirement for limiting the amount of retail floorspace for the centre to 20,000m² net lettable area (nla) which had been included in the previous resolution.  (SP 59 is proposing a centre of 32,000m² nla).

 

The Council minutes state that the reason for the above alternative motion (it differed from the Administration recommendation) was that: 

 

“It allows the developer to proceed to the next stage of the structure plan while still needing to submit development applications for each individual aspect of the project giving Council plenty of opportunity to monitor the progress of the development in detail.”

 

On 26 September 2008, SAT dismissed an appeal which the proponent had lodged against a decision by the West Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) in April 2008 to refuse SP 59.

 

On 17 July 2009, the Supreme Court upheld an appeal which the proponent had lodged with it against the SAT decision, directing that SAT rehear the appeal with new members.

 

The appeal is now in the process of being reheard by SAT and in the course of this, WAPC has reconsidered SP 59 and the proponent has prepared a modified Structure Plan in response to the WAPC decision.

Detail

The WAPC (through its Statutory Planning Committee – SPC) reconsidered SP 59 on 24 November 2009.  Its decision is set out in a Department of Planning (DoP) letter dated 7 December 2009 (refer Attachment 1).

 

Whereas the WAPC had previously refused SP 59 due to the proposed size of the centre (particularly in respect to the proposed increase in retail floor space), this new decision sees WAPC refusing it for reasons mainly relating to urban design, staging and implementation.  It specifically advises that it would be prepared to adopt a Structure Plan for this centre which involved an increase to 32,000m²  nla, provided that the new Structure Plan adequately addressed the reasons for refusal and a number of related matters.

 

SAT required the proponent to submit revised plans for the centre to WAPC by 24 December 2009, responding to the above WAPC decision.

 

The proponent submitted an ‘initial response’ document to WAPC (refer Attachment 2).  WAPC (through its SPC) considered the proponent’s initial response document on 2 February 2010 and its decision is set out in a response dated 3 February 2010 it subsequently filed with SAT (see Attachment 3).

Consultation

Public consultation on proposed SP 59 occurred when it is was advertised for a six week public comment period concluding on 21 March 2007.  Details regarding the outcome of that consultation are provided in Administration Report PD04-05/07.

Comment

Need for Formal Reconsideration by Council

 

Prior to reconsideration of SP 59 at the SPC meeting of 24 November 2009, the DoP sought advice from the City as to its requirements in relation to the proposed Structure Plan.  DoP was advised as per the last Council resolution on this matter (PD17-07/08), as well as a number of matters which had been previously jointly agreed by Administration and the proponent as requiring further consideration.

 

Subsequently, prior to the SPC consideration of the proponent’s ‘initial response’ document at its meeting of 2 February 2010, WAPC sought this City’s comments and advice on the revised Structure Plan included in the ‘initial response’.  WAPC was advised that given the background to this matter, the City’s position on this proposal, including the proponent’s ‘initial response’, ought to be determined through formal consideration by Council.

 

The WAPC decision of 2 February 2010 requires that the proponent confirm a number of matters with the City, and this led to a meeting between the proponent and Administration officers on 10 February 2010 to discuss issues relating to Hepburn Avenue reserve land, the community purposes site and Bellerive Boulevard extension.  The proponent prepared draft minutes from this meeting and sought Administration’s feedback on the item with a view to the finally agreed minutes being able to be provided to SAT to confirm the City’s agreement on the matters discussed.

 

Administration provided a ‘without prejudice’ response to the draft minutes, noting that it would not prejudice Council’s formal position, or Administration’s position when it reports and recommends to Council upon the matter.

 

The above recent communications between Administration and WAPC, DoP and the proponent have been referred to, to show that it is now appropriate that Council give further formal consideration to the various matters which have occurred through the current SAT rehearing of the appeal.

 

This is also particularly appropriate because if the outcome of the current SAT process is that the current mediation phase is unsuccessful and it proceeds to the full hearing phase, then SAT will decide on the matter.  If SAT decides that the Structure Plan should be approved with or without modifications then both WAPC and the City are obliged to adopt and certify that plan, and it does not come back to Council for reconsideration (see details under ‘Statutory Implications’).

 

Overview of the Original SP 59

 

Before considering the proposed changes to the original SP 59, it may be helpful to briefly summarise what that original plan entailed.  The key part of it was its proposed statutory (Part 1) section (refer Attachment 4).  This included a ‘Development Control Plan’ and a Residential Density Code Map.

 

The explanatory (Part 2) section of SP 59 included an ‘Indicative Development Plan’, ‘Indicative Sections’ and an ‘Indicative Development Concept’ which provide further (non-statutory) guidance as to what was intended (refer Attachment 5).

 

WAPC Decision of 24 November 2009

 

The decision includes a number of design principles upon which an ‘urban design framework’ for the site is based (refer Attachment 1).

 

The proposed urban design framework is generally considered sound, reflecting well the principles and strategies proposed in the draft City of Wanneroo Activity Centres Strategy.  The main aspects of it which may, however, be of  concern to the City are:

 

1.       The proposal for the City’s community facility to be located in the north-east corner of the site, rather than being better integrated into the centre.

 

2.       The proposal for a road link from the centre to Old Trafford Avenue to the north.  Further studies are needed to confirm that such a link would be acceptable.

 

3.       The proposal for a pedestrian link from the centre to Lilac Hill Vista to the north.  There is a substantial difference in levels in this area and it is difficult to imagine how this would work.

 

Proponent’s Initial Response to WAPC Decision

 

The proponent’s initial response (see Attachment 2) involves a detailed response by the proponent to all of the issues raised in the WAPC decision.  These responses are of three types:

 

1.       Agreeing with the WAPC decision and intending to reflect this in revised proposals, or

 

2.       Disagreeing with the WAPC decision and giving reasons for this, with this to be further discussed at SAT, or

 

3.       Noting that the issue is still to be addressed.

 

The initial response includes a series of 11 plans which are intended to replace the single Development Control Plan included in the original proposed Structure Plan.

 

Administration comments on the initial response:

 

1.       While it states that it is “proposing an amended Structure Plan which is noticeably different from its predecessor in several significant respects”, it is considered to be really not particularly different at all from the original Structure Plan centre design, with the main difference being to the internal road layout, proposing a clearer internal loop-road system, with the main street being part of that main loop road.

 

2.       The revised plan includes similar road and pedestrian links to Old Trafford Avenue and Lilac Hill Vista to the north as the WAPC decision’s framework does, raising similar concerns.

 

3.       It proposes that the next stage of the development would include all of the proposed additional major retail component, and only a limited amount of non-retail development (and even that it is ‘subject to favourable market conditions’).  This raises concerns regarding how sure the City can be that a reasonable amount of non-retail development  will indeed occur over a reasonable timeframe in this centre.

 

WAPC Response to Proponent’s Initial Response

 

The WAPC has responded to the proponent’s initial response, advising of its decision of 2 February 2010 (see Attachment 3).  In this response, WAPC advises that the proponent’s proposed revised Structure Plan is considered generally acceptable, subject to seven issues being resolved via the provision of additional information or mediation.  This is somewhat surprising, given that in reconsidering the original Structure Plan, WAPC refused it due to urban design reasons, yet the proponent’s revised Structure Plan is not particularly different to the original one.

 

Recent Discussions with the Proponent

 

With a view to seeking the City’s agreement on a number of the matters raised in the above WAPC decision, the proponent sought a meeting with Administration officers and this was held on 10 February 2010.

 

The proponent prepared draft Minutes of the meeting (refer Attachment 6) and sought Administration’s confirmation of them to indicate Administration’s satisfaction on the way that the various matters were to be addressed.  Administration responded on a ‘without prejudice’ basis (see Attachment 7).

 

Proponent’s Response to WAPC Decision of 2 February 2010

 

The proponent submitted a document responding to the various matters the WAPC decision of 2 February 2010 required to be addressed.  Extracts of this are included in Attachment 8.  The following points should be noted regarding this response:

 

1.       It includes the City’s ‘without prejudice’ letter dated 16 February 2010.  It also states that in the proponent’s view, agreement in principle has been reached with the City on the matters involving the City, and outstanding ‘implementation/finalisation details’ can be worked through and agreed within the framework of the Structure Plan i.e. they need not delay the approval of the Structure Plan.

 

2.       It includes amended versions of the series of plans which were included in the proponent’s ‘initial response’.  Actually only two changes have been made, and they are to broaden one of the public open space areas in the eastern part of the site, and to have a bus route pass through the main street and for a bus stop to be next to the town square.

 

3.       It includes three-dimensional plans of the town square which give a good idea of what this is intended to look like.

 

4.       It includes a new section (1.4.7) for Part 1 of the Structure Plan, dealing with detailed design of the town square.

 

5.       It includes a new section (1.4.8) for Part 1, dealing with staging of development.  Note that this proposes that Bellerive Boulevard be constructed in a later stage of development, and not the next stage as required by Administration’s ‘without prejudice’ response.

 

Matters Requiring Council Consideration

 

1.       Centre Design

 

          The centre design currently intended for the site, arising from the SAT process, is that depicted in the plans included in Attachment 2, and as amended by the plans included in Attachment 8.  This design is recommended for support, subject to the following:

 

          a)      a comprehensive transport study being undertaken (as required under Council’s resolution of 29 July 2008), that will include assessment of the proposed road link to Old Trafford Road and the proposed pedestrian link to Lilac Hill Vista.

 

          b)      a comprehensive car parking study being undertaken (as required under Council’s resolution of 29 July 2008).

 

          c)      cross-sections of the centre being provided to give a clearer indication of how levels are intended to be addressed, especially in the eastern and north-eastern parts of the site.

 

2.       Timing for Resolution of Outstanding Issues

 

          Council’s previous resolutions of 29 July 2008 required that various matters, including those relating to the Hepburn Avenue reserve land, the community purpose site and facility, and Bellerive Boulevard provision, be resolved prior to approval of the Structure Plan.

 

          The proponent proposes that such matters not delay the approval of the Structure Plan but rather that they be worked through and agreed within the framework (i.e. following approval) of the Structure Plan.

 

          Some of the matters required to be addressed will involve preparation of a new deed between the City and the proponent and this is likely to be very detailed and may take a considerable time to finalise.  On this basis, the proponent’s approach would be acceptable, provided that Part 1 of the Structure Plan includes provisions to ensure that in general terms, the various obligations required of the proponent will be met (Clause 9.9 of DPS 2 will enable this).

 

3.       Hepburn Avenue Reserve Land

 

          Section 1 of Attachment 7 provides details regarding this issue.  The approach on this issue taken in the letter is recommended for Council endorsement.

 

4.       Community Purposes Site and Facility Provision

 

          Section 2 of Attachment 7 provides details regarding this issue.  The approach on this issue taken in this letter is recommended for Council endorsement.

 

          It should be noted that the matter of the acceptability or otherwise of the site being of strata title tenure is still being assessed.

 

5.       Bellerive Boulevard

 

          Section 3 of Attachment 7 provides details regarding this issue.  The approach on this issue taken in this letter is recommended for Council endorsement.

 

6.       Staging of Development, Particularly Non-Retail Uses

 

          Council’s resolution of 29 July 2008 included a requirement for statutory clauses to be included in Part 1 of the Structure Plan to encourage provision of a diverse mix of uses (i.e. in addition to retail).  The WAPC reconsideration of the Structure Plan included a similar requirement.  In response, the proponent proposed that the next stage of development would include all of the extension of the mall-based component of the retail core, plus the town square, main street (with tenancies on its north side), community facility, minimum 1,000m² office floorspace and minimum 2,000m² residential floorspace.  The latter two items were ‘subject to favourable market conditions’.

 

In its response to the above, WAPC reiterated its requirement for statutory provisions on this matter, and required deletion of the provisos ‘ … favourable market conditions’.

 

Administration’s ‘without prejudice’ letter of 16 February 2010 included a comment supporting the WAPC position on this (item 4. of letter).  This led to correspondence between Administration and the proponent on this issue, culminating in the following advice (dated 18 February 2010) being provided to the proponent:

 

“…I advise that I have reviewed Item (4) of the City's letter to you from yesterday and can confirm the City's position that there should be some provision that triggers the delivery of the non-retail floorspace. However, the mechanism for achieving this might not necessarily need to take the form of a "staging strategy" per se that dictates how much floorspace (of any sort) would need to be delivered and by when. I believe a compromise position could be reached that recognises the commercial realities of shopping centre redevelopment, whilst also ensuring the timely delivery of non-retail elements that contribute to the vibrancy of activity centres.

 

During our discussion last week, City staff acknowledged that the timing and amount of retail floorspace delivered at Kingsway would be market driven, but that does not mean the City would accept the delivery of non-retail floorspace entirely depending on market conditions. The City's fundamental position on this matter is simply that if non-retail floorspace is not delivered in key activity centres, such as Kingsway, then we will be left with just retail centres without the other mixed use elements that make a centre vibrant. This would be a highly undesirable outcome and I am sure incompatible with your vision for the centre. Similarly, if non-retail floorspace is not delivered until the final stage of centre development and if the centre is not completed to its ultimate design, then it will lack the vibrancy and status of a true activity centre, as would have otherwise been achieved by the timely delivery of non-retail land uses.

 

An option to address this matter might be to agree on the 'triggers' for the delivery of non-retail floorspace, rather than necessarily requiring you to provide a certain amount of non-retail floorspace by a particular date, or to deliver a certain proportion of non-retail floorspace during each stage of development. Instead, (for example) it may be more appropriate to agree on the maximum desirable amount of retail floorspace that could be delivered without the need for any new non-retail floorspace, beyond which amount you would need to start delivering non-retail floorspace (the proportion, amount and timing of which would then also need to be agreed).

However, if the delivery of non-retail floorspace is not commercially viable at the time of the 'trigger', then it would be reasonable to make provision for you to put forward justification as to why it is not viable and when it would otherwise be delivered, which would then need to be critically assessed by the City and/or WAPC.

 

The City is open to considering any options or mechanisms to ensure the timely delivery of non-retail floorspace during the course of redevelopment of Kingsway City.”

 

The proponent’s latest proposal (Attachment F of Attachment 8) includes proposed provisions for inclusion in Part 1 of the Structure Plan, dealing with staging of development.  This is basically as per the proponent’s earlier proposal.

 

However, it should be noted that on the day of the Council Briefing Session of 30 March 2010, advice was received from the applicant that at the most recent SAT mediation session held on 18 February 2010, the centre owner agreed with the WAPC to delete the words “subject to market conditions” from proposed clauses 1.4.8 (v) and (vi) relating to non-retail floorspace in the first stage of new development in Kingsway City (refer to Attachment F of Attachment 8 to this report).  Staff of the Department of Planning have confirmed this agreement was reached.  The effective result of this agreement is that the centre owner has now committed to delivering 1,000m² of office floorspace and at least 2,000m² of residential floorspace as part of the first stage of centre redevelopment, irrespective of market conditions.  This office and residential floorspace represents approximately 3% and 6%, respectively, of the total retail floorspace proposed by SP 59 (being 32,000m²).

 

Notwithstanding this agreement between the proponent and the WAPC, the principles set out in Administration's advice to the proponent on 18 February 2010 (as outlined in the italic text on the preceding page of this report) are still considered sound and are recommended to Council for endorsement.

 

Regardless of the agreement reached at SAT, Council should still, independently consider whether the amount of office and residential floorspace proposed in the next stage of development is adequate (minimum 1,000m² and 2,000m² respectively), given that the next stage of development is intended to involve all of the extension to the mall-based retail cone, thus taking the centre to the full 32,000m² retail floorspace limit proposed by SP 59 and more than doubling the 15,434m² retail floorspace in the existing mall-based cone.

 

The WAPC’s draft Activity Centres for Perth and Peel State Planning Policy (SPP) proposed a ‘mixed use threshold’ for Regional Centres (Council supported this centre being a Regional centre in its submission on the draft SPP) of 1m² of non-retail floorspace (not including residential) being provided for each 1m² of retail floor space above 15,000m² retail floorspace.  For a centre of 32,000m² retail floorspace, this means that 17,000m² of non-retail floorspace should be provided.

 

Since the release of the draft SPP, the Department of Planning (DoP) has been further assessing the matter of how best to facilitate increased provision of non-retail floorspace in activity centres.  While this is still very much a work-in-progress, for the purpose of considering this present proposal, a guideline of 40% of total floorspace to be used for non-retail purposes in Regional Centres is considered reasonable.  Applying this guideline to the proposed expansion of this centre to 32,000m² of retail floorspace would mean that a total of approximately 21,000m² of non-retail floorspace should be provided.

 

Currently, approximately 7,000m² of non-retail floorspace exists on this site (assuming that most of the floorspace outside of the main mall-based ‘box’ is not counted as retail).  This means that approximately 14,000m² of additional non-retail floorspace would be required.  Allowing for about 2,000m² of the expansion of the mall-based ‘box‘ to be non-retail, 1,000m² for community use and 1,000m² for the cinema leaves a balance of approximately 10,000m² of non-retail floorspace still being required (i.e. another 9,000m² on top of the 1,000m² office floorspace currently proposed by the proponent).  This gives some indication of the possible extent of additional non-retail floorspace which may be required if the DoP’s draft guidelines were strictly applied to the first stage of development.  It is therefore interesting to note that the WAPC has not adhered to its own draft SPP and guidelines in reaching agreement on this matter with the proponent through SAT.

 

In respect to the 2,000m² of residential floorspace proposed, at an average of 100m² per dwelling unit, this would translate to about 20 dwelling units. Council will need to consider whether this is adequate, given the scale of the additional retail floorspace proposed, particularly as the ‘first’ stage of development may also be the last stage of retail floorspace development permitted under SP 59.

 

In considering the above, it should be noted that the approach advocated in Administration’s advice to the proponent on 18 February 2010 still promoted a degree of market testing with regard to the delivery of non-retail floorspace and sought to engage the proponent and the WAPC on a discussion regarding appropriate ‘triggers’ for the delivery of non-retail floorspace in the centre’s redevelopment.

 

In essence, Administration's concern with the agreement reached between the proponent and the WAPC at SAT, can best be summarised as follows -

 

The proponent intends to deliver the total amount of retail floorspace (32,000m²) proposed by SP 59 as part of the first (i.e. next) stage of centre redevelopment. Although SP 59 proposes mixed use and residential development on the remainder of the site, outside of the retail core, there exists no mechanism to compel the proponent to deliver this non-retail development, unless they apply for development approval to do so. Hence, if the proponent chooses not to apply for further development of the site beyond the first stage (i.e. beyond the retail core) then the only office and residential floorspace that is likely to exist on site, will be that which the proponent has agreed with the WAPC to provide as part of the first stage of redevelopment. Pages 8 and 9 of Attachment 2 illustrate the approximate distribution of the proposed retail, mixed use, residential and civic floorspace on site under SP 59.

 

There is, however, an in-built safeguard provided by SP 59 to ensure the eventual provision of the mixed use and residential floor space on site, and that is that no further development of the site (whatsoever) will be permitted (beyond the retail core) unless in accordance with SP 59. In other words, the proponent will be forced to either leave the balance of the land undeveloped, or to develop it for mixed use and residential purposes, as that is the only development that would be entertained under SP 59. It is possible that, in time and with changing market conditions and naturally escalating rates and taxes, this situation will, in itself, provide an incentive for the proponent to eventually develop the non-retail floorspace that SP 59 proposes for the remainder of the site. However, it is impossible to predict when this would actually occur.

 

In light of the preceding discussion, Administration will recommend that Council accepts the agreement reached between the proponent and SAT for the provision of 1,000m² of office floorspace and at least 2,000m² of residential floorspace, as part of the first stage of development. However, to ensure that this floorspace is properly integrated with the first stage of development, Administration will also recommend that Council's acceptance be conditional upon that floorspace being located within the Town Square Precinct. This will have three distinct benefits - firstly, it will require the proponent to deliver the Town Square Precinct as part of the first stage of development; secondly, it will ensure that the required office and residential floorspace is provided in a location that will significantly enhance the vibrancy of the centre and Town Square Precinct; and, thirdly, it will ensure that the agreed office and residential floorspace is not provided in an unenviable, otherwise undeveloped part of the site, remote from the core retail and Town Centre activities with which it should be integrated.

 

7.       Town Square

 

          The latest proposal submitted by the proponent indicates a series of three-dimensional drawings of the proposed town square (refer Attachment 8).  It is recommended that Council support in-principle the proposals depicted by these drawings.

 

          The latest proposal also includes proposed provisions relating to the town square, for inclusion in Part 1 of the Structure Plan.

 

          These provisions are considered sound and recommended for Council support in-principle.

Statutory Compliance

In statutory terms, the current position is basically as follows:

 

·                A proposed Structure Plan has been submitted to Council which Council has decided is satisfactory, subject to a number of modifications being made and other matters attended to;

·                That Structure Plan together with Council’s decision on it has been submitted to WAPC which has refused it;

·                The proponent has appealed to SAT against the WAPC refusal;

·                Mediation between WAPC and the proponent is currently occurring through SAT, with the City’s advice being sought on various matters in the course of mediation;

·                Should the outcome of that mediation be that WAPC approves the Structure Plan, subject to modifications, then pursuant to clause 9.6.3 (c) of DPS 2, the modified Structure Plan will need to be resubmitted to Council for consideration under clause 9.4 of DPS 2.  At that time, Council will need to decide if the nature of the modifications are such as to warrant readvertising;  and

·                Should the outcome of the current mediation be that agreement cannot be reached between WAPC and the proponent, then the appeal will proceed to formal hearings for SAT to make a determination on it.  Should the appeal be upheld, then WAPC and the City will be required to adopt and certify the Structure Plan, with any modifications which SAT might require.  If this occurs then the Structure Plan will not come back to Council for reconsideration.

Strategic Implications

A Structure Plan for this centre will establish an appropriate planning framework for the consideration of any proposed future development at this centre.  The form that the Structure Plan takes will be an important determinant of how this centre achieves the environmental, social and economic strategic key focus areas of the City’s Strategic Plan.

Policy Implications

In terms of the proposed amount of retail floor space for this centre represented by the Structure Plan as originally submitted, and as may be possibly modified through the current proceedings, the proposal is not consistent with the current Council Centres Local Planning Policy.  However, Council is not bound by such policies and indeed is still required to consider proposals on their individual merits and in this regard, Council has previously decided to depart from this policy through its decision of 29 July 2008.

Financial Implications

This proposal has financial implications for the City in the following key respects:

 

1.       In relation to the detailed arrangements to be made for the contributions to be made by the proponent to the provision of the community purpose site and facility.  The arrangements will need to ensure that the amount to be contributed will be of the same value as represented by the proponent’s obligation under the existing deed, and that this amount will be appropriately indexed to retain its value (accounting for inflation and similar factors).

 

2.       In relation to the detailed arrangements to be made for the provision of the Bellerive Boulevard connection.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       SUPPORTS the Madeley District Centre (Kingsway City) design as depicted on the plans included in Attachment No.2, and as amended by the plans in Attachment No. 8, subject to the following matters being addressed to the satisfaction of the Director Planning and Sustainability:

a)            A comprehensive transport study being undertaken (as required by Council’s resolution of 29 July 2008), which is to include assessment of the proposed road link to Old Trafford Road and the proposed pedestrian link to Lilac Hill Vista;

b)           A comprehensive car parking study being undertaken (as required by Council’s resolution of 29 July 2008);  and

c)            Cross-sections of the centre being provided to give a clearer indication of how levels are intended to be addressed, especially in the eastern and north-eastern parts of the site.

2.       SUPPORTS Administration’s position taken in respect to the Hepburn Avenue reserve land, community propose site and facility provision, and Bellerive Boulevard provision, as detailed in Attachment No. 7;

3.       RESOLVES that pursuant to Clause 9.9 of District Planning Scheme No. 2, detailed arrangements will need to be agreed with the proponent for implementation of matters associated with this Structure Plan, including Hepburn Avenue reserve land, community purpose site and facility, and Bellerive Boulevard provision, following adoption of the Structure Plan and REQUIRES such matters to be included in Part 1 of the Structure Plan;

4.       NOTES that the matter of the acceptability or otherwise of strata titling of the proposed community propose site is still being assessed by Administration and will be the subject of separate Council consideration;

5.       SUPPORTS Administration’s position on staging of development in this centre as detailed in the advice sent to the proponent on 18 February 2010 and in this report, and also ACCEPTS the agreement reached between the proponent and the Western Australian Planning Commission at the State Administrative Tribunal on 18 February 2010, for 1,000m² of office floorspace and at least 2,000m² of residential floorspace to be provided in the first stage of development of the Kingsway City Shopping Centre, subject to appropriate provisions being included in Part 1 of the Structure Plan requiring that floorspace to be incorporated in and integrated with, development of the Town Square;

6.       SUPPORTS in-principle the three-dimensional drawings and proposed statutory Structure Plan provisions for the town square included in Attachment 8;  and

7.       ADVISES the West Australian Planning Commission and the proponent of this resolution.

StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

 

ATTACHMENT 1 Page 4 of 12

ATTACHMENT 1 Page 5 of 12

ATTACHMENT 1 Page 6 of 12

ATTACHMENT 1 Page 7 of 12

ATTACHMENT 1 Page 8 of 12

ATTACHMENT 1 Page 9 of 12

ATTACHMENT 1 Page 10 of 12

ATTACHMENT 1 Page 11 of 12

ATTACHMENT 1 Page 12 of 12

EndOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 1 of 18

 

 StartOfAttachment - Do not delete this line will not be printed

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 2 of 18

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 3 of 18

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 4 of 18

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 5 of 18

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 6 of 18

 

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 7 of 18

 

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 8 of 18

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 9 of 18

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 10 of 18

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 11 of 18

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 12 of 18

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 13 of 18

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 14 of 18

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 15 of 18

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 16 of 18

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 17 of 18

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 18 of 18

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

ATTACHMENT 7 Page 4 of 4

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/0005/23V01: SP0/0032/06V01: SP/0036/02/V01

File Name: BA Adoption of Omnibus Amendment No 7 to various Agreed Structure Plans.doc This line will not be printed dont delete

Responsible Officer:                           Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachment(s):                                    11

Author:  J Thompson

Meeting Date:  6 April 2010

Attachments:  11

 

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

Issue

To consider submissions received during public advertising of Omnibus Amendment No. 7 to various Agreed Structure Plans (ASPs) and adoption of the amendment.

Background

On 13 January 2010, Elected Members were advised of three amendment proposals to various ASPs via a memorandum from the Director Planning and Sustainability (DPS). The proposals included:

 

·                Amendment No. 23 to East Wanneroo Cell 4 Agreed Structure Plan No. 6;

·                Amendment No. 6 to Lot 12 Jindalee Agreed Structure Plan No. 36;  and

·                Amendment No. 2 to the Lots 1 & 102 Yanchep Beach Road, Yanchep Agreed Structure Plan No. 40.

 

Elected Members did not request the proposals to be referred to Council for consideration and as such, on 25 January 2010 the DPS, under delegated authority from Council, resolved to advertise the above proposals for public comment for a period of 21 days to provide the opportunity for public comment.

Detail

The particulars of the three amendment proposals are as follows:

 

Proposal 1:    Amendment No. 23 to East Wanneroo Cell 4 Agreed Structure Plan No. 6

 

Applicant	Plan-It Town Planning
Owners	Samba Holdings Pty Ltd
Location	Lot 57 Kemp Street, Pearsall
Area	3.5835 hectares (ha)
DPS Zoning	Urban Development
ASP No. 6 Zoning	Residential Zone (R20)

 

The proposed amendment is to recode Lot 47 Kemp Street, Pearsall from R20 to R25. Attachments 1 and 2 respectively show the amendment boundary and proposed coding of the subject land. The surrounding residential land is coded R30.

 

Proposal 2:    Amendment No. 6 to Lot 12 Jindalee Agreed Structure Plan No. 36

 

Applicant	Chappell Lambert Everett Town Planners
Owners	Penhurst Nominees Pty Ltd; and Carine Nominees Pty Ltd
Location	Lot 1378, Jindalee Boulevard, Jindalee; and Lot 9030 Marmion Avenue, Jindalee
Area	1.64ha; and Approximately 27ha
DPS 2 Zoning	Urban Development
ASP 36 Zoning	Residential (R20/30 – R80), Centre & Parks and Recreation

 

The proposed amendment to Lot 12 Jindalee ASP 36 relates to:

 

·                Amending the Statutory Section relating to the ‘Nominated Zero Lot Line’;

·                Rezoning the Brighton West Village Centre located on the eastern portion of the ASP area from Business Zone to Centre Zone;  and

·                Deleting the R-Code (R40) that currently applies to the Brighton West Village Centre.

 

Attachment 3 contains the amendment to the Statutory Section. Attachments 4 and 5 contain the existing and modified R-Code plan respectively. Attachments 6 and 7 contain the existing and the modified Zoning Plan. The Amendment seeks to address the following issues:

 

1.       Table A of ASP 36 contains the Residential Design Codes (R-Codes) variation table. One of the variations is to allow reduced minimum open space for Garden Lots (R20) of a size ranging from 425 – 550m² and Cottage Lots (R30/40) of an average size ranging from 220 - 300m², subject to providing a 2.0 metre side setback to habitable rooms with major openings on the northernmost or easternmost boundary and constructing a boundary wall on the nominated Zero Lot Boundary.

 

          Clause 4.1.2 of ASP 36 states that the Nominated Zero Lot Line for any lot is the southern or western boundary.

 

          Although the Nominated Zero Lot Line provision was only intended to apply to Garden and Cottage lots as per Table A, this provision has actually been applied to lots greater than 550m², as Clause 4.1.2 referred to “any lot”.

 

          In order to address this issue, it is proposed to delete Clause 4.1.2 and to include that provision in section 2(b) of Table A. In doing so, the Nominated Zero Lot Line would be applied only to Garden and Cottage lots.

 

2.       In ASP 36, the Brighton West Village Centre is zoned Business Zone with a residential coding of R40 (refer Attachments 4 and 6).  However, this residential density coding and the extent of the Business zoning depicted by ASP 36 differ from that shown on ASP 52, which is the structure plan that relates specifically to this centre (refer Attachments 8 and 9).

 

          Amendment No. 6 to ASP 36 proposes to address the conflict between ASP 36 and ASP 52 by applying a centre zone, which would then default to ASP 52.  Whilst this approach would work and would have the desired effect, it would also impose a cumbersome and unnecessarily complicated planning framework over the subject land.  As such, it is instead proposed to modify Amendment No. 6 to simply apply a notation over the subject land to state that it is “subject to Agreed Structure Plan No. 52”.  The applicant is in agreement with this approach.

 

Proposal 3:    Amendment No. 2 to the Lots 1 and 102 Yanchep Beach Road, Yanchep Agreed Structure Plan No. 40

 

Applicant	Chappell Lambert Everett Town Planners
Owner	Australand Industrial No.140 Pty Ltd
Location	Lot 9002 Marmion Avenue, Yanchep
Area	Approximately 45ha
DPS 2 Zoning	Urban Development
ASP 40 Zoning	Residential Zone (R60 & R100)

 

The proposed amendment is to recode several R100 coded areas to R60 and to increase the density near the proposed Yanchep South train station from R100 and R60 to R160. Attachments 10 and 11 contain the existing and proposed R Code maps respectively. The amendment is proposed to:

 

·                Allow for a better mix and diversity of housing products close to the train station; and

·                Improve affordability options by allowing for smaller one bedroom apartments.

Consultation

Pursuant to Clause 9.5 of District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2), the amendment proposals were advertised for a period of 21 days by way of on-site signs, an advertisement in the Wanneroo Times and the City’s website and letters to the landowners in the vicinity of the subject sites. The submission period closed on 23 February 2010. Three submissions were received on proposal 1, with no submissions received on proposals 2 and 3.

Comment

The following table provides a summary of the submissions received in respect to proposal one and Administration’s response.

 

No.	Submitter	Summary of Submission	Response
1.	R. Hunnisett - Kemp St, Pearsall
1.1		Kemp Street should not  connect to Lenore Road.	ASP No. 6 already proposes that Kemp Street will connect to Lenore Road. The recoding proposal does not alter this aspect  of the plan.
1.2		The change in zoning would not provide consistency throughout the suburb and the same zoning (R20) should be maintained across the road.	The proposed site is surrounded by areas coded R30.  It is therefore not expected to impact on the consistency of the built environment of the area.
2.	Shiraz Developments	No objection.	Noted.
3.	Grenache Developments	No objection	Noted

 

The amendments, as advertised, are considered acceptable and are supported by Administration.

Statutory Compliance

These structure plan amendments have followed the procedures outlined in Part 9 of DPS 2.

Strategic Implications

The proposals accord with the following Outcome Objective of the City’s Strategic Plan 2006 – 2021

 

“1.5        Improve the physical quality of the built environment

  2.1        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.             Pursuant to Clause 9.6.1(b) of District Planning Scheme No. 2 RESOLVES that the following structure plan amendments are SATISFACTORY, and SUBMITS three copies to the Western Australian Planning Commission for its adoption and certification:

a)      Amendment No. 23 to the East Wanneroo Cell 4 Agreed Structure Plan No. 6 submitted by Plan-It Town Planning to recode Lot 47 (104) Kemp Street, Pearsall from Residential R20 to Residential R25 as shown on Attachment 2;

b)      Amendment No. 6 to Lot 12 Jindalee Agreed Structure Plan (ASP) No. 36 submitted by Chappell Lambert Everett Town Planners to amend the Statutory Section relating to the ‘Nominated Zero Lot Line’, as shown on Attachment 3, and rezone the Brighton West Village Centre located on the eastern portion of the ASP area as shown on Attachment 5, subject to the amendment being modified to the satisfaction of the Director Planning and Sustainability to exclude the Brighton West Village Centre from ASP No. 36 and apply a notation stating that the area is instead subject to ASP No. 52; and

c)      Amendment No. 2 to the Lots 1 and 102 Yanchep Beach Road Agreed Structure Plan No. 40 submitted by Chappell Lambert Everett Town Planners to recode various lots from Residential R100 to Residential R60 and various lots from Residential R60 and R100 to Residential R160, as shown on Attachment 7;

2.             Pursuant to Clause 9.6.5 of the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2, ADOPTS, SIGNS and SEALS the Agreed Structure Plan documents once certified by the Western Australian Planning Commission; and

3.             ENDORSES the comments made in this report regarding the submissions received on Structure Plan Amendment No. 23 to East Wanneroo Cell 4 ASP No. 6 for inclusion in the schedule of submissions to be forwarded to the Western Australian Planning Commission 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

 

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