Council Members’ Briefing Session

 

 

6:00pm, 3 September 2024

Council Chamber (Level 1), Civic Centre,

23 Dundebar Road, Wanneroo

 

 

wanneroo.wa.gov.au

PRINCIPLES

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

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

PROCESS

The Briefing Session will commence at 6.00pm and will be chaired by the Mayor or in his/her absence the Deputy Mayor. In the absence of both, Councillors will elect a Chairperson from amongst those present.  Council Members may speak more than once on any item, there is no moving or seconding items, Officer’s will address the Council Members and the order of business will be as follows:

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

·                Attendance and Apologies

·                Deputations

·                Declarations of Interest

·                Reports for discussion

·                Tabled Items

·                Public Question Time

·                Closure

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

AGENDA CONTENTS

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

AGENDA DISTRIBUTION

The Council Briefing Session Agenda will be distributed to Council Members on the FRIDAY prior to the Council Briefing Session. Copies will be made on the City’s website for interested members of the public. Spare Briefing Session papers will be available at the Briefing Session for interested members of the public.

RECORD OF BRIEFING

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

LOCATION

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

DEPUTATIONS

During the Briefing Session, members of the public may, by appointment, present a Deputation relating to items on the current Briefing Session Agenda. A maximum of up to ten minutes (dependent on the number of deputations received) is permitted for each deputation with up to three people to address the Council Members.

Please note that Deputation requests are to be received by no later than 9:00am on the day of the Briefing Session, and must relate to an item on the current Briefing Session Agenda.

Deputation online form

Please note:

·                Deputation requests must relate to items listed on the current Briefing Session Agenda;

·                A Deputation is not to exceed three speakers in number and only those speakers may address the Council Members; and

·                Speakers of a Deputation will collectively have a maximum of up to 10 minutes (dependent on the number of deputations received) to address the Council Members, unless an extension of time is granted.

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

For further information please contact Council Support on 9405 5000

 

Objective

 

To ensure there is a process in place to outline the access to recorded Council Meetings.

 

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

 

Implementation

 

This Policy shall be printed within the Agenda of all Council Meetings which include:

 

·                Ordinary Council Meeting;

·                Special Council Meeting;

·                Annual General Meeting of Electors;

·                Special Electors Meeting; and

·                Briefing Sessions.

 

To advise the public that the proceedings of the meeting are recorded.

 

Evaluation and Review Provisions

 

Recording of Proceedings

 

1.         Proceedings for Meetings detailed in this policy; as well as Deputations and Public Question Time during these meetings shall be recorded by the City on sound recording equipment, except in the case of a meeting where Council closes the meeting to the public.

2.         Notwithstanding subclause 1, proceedings of a Meeting, 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 audio visual technology or devices to record the proceedings of a Meeting, without the written permission of the Mayor or the Mayors Delegate.

 

Access to Recordings

 

4.         Members of the public may purchase a copy of the recorded proceedings or alternatively, listen to the recorded proceedings at the Civic Centre online if the recording is published on the City of Wanneroo website. Costs of providing a copy of the recorded proceedings to members of the public will include staff time to make the copy of the proceedings; as well as the cost of the digital copy for the recording to be placed on. The cost of staff time will be set in the City’s Schedule of Fees and Charges each financial year.

5.         Council Members may request a copy of the recording of the Council proceedings at no charge.

6.         All Council Members are to be notified when recordings are requested by members of the public, and of Council.

7.         COVID-19 Pandemic Situation

During the COVID-19 pandemic situation, Briefing Sessions and Council Meetings that are conducted electronically, will be recorded.  The CEO is authorised to make a broadcast of the audio recording of such meetings accessible to the public, as soon as practicable after the meeting.

8.         Briefing Sessions and Council Meetings that are recorded.  The CEO is authorised to make a broadcast of the audio recording of such meetings accessible to the public, as soon as practicable after the meeting.

 

 

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

 

 

 

Briefing Papers for Tuesday 3 September 2024

 

 

CONTENTS

 

Item  1           Attendances   1

Item  2           Apologies and Leave of Absence  1

Item  3           Deputations   1

Item  4           Reports   1

Planning & Sustainability  1

Approval Services  1

4.1                   Consideration of Amendment No. 211 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 Following Advertising – Part Normalisation of the East Wanneroo Cell 5 (Landsdale) Structure Plan No. 7 Area  1

4.2                   Consideration of Amendment No. 212 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 Following Advertising – Part Normalisation of the Butler-Ridgewood Agreed Local Structure Plan No. 27 and Revocation of Brighton Village Agreed Local Structure Plan No. 38  60

4.3                   Preparation of Amendment No. 224 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 - Normalisation of Land in the Lots 1 and 102 Yanchep Beach Road, Yanchep (Jindowie West) Agreed Local Structure Plan No. 40 and Lots 1 and 2 Yanchep Beach Road, Yanchep (Jindowie East) Agreed Local Structure Plan No. 76  138

Assets  197

Asset Operations & Services  197

4.4                   Road Safety Management Plan  197

Strategic Asset Management  218

4.5                   Response to Petition PT02-07/24 - Request for Solid Fencing of Shaftesbury Avenue Drainage Basin, Alexander Heights  218

4.6                   Response to Petition PT01-07/24 Request to Increase Verge Maintenance between Patrick Court and Our Lady of Mercy Church, Girrawheen and/or Footpath Extension  222

Infrastructure Capital Works  227

4.7                   Tender 24034 - The Renewal of Play Equipment, Softfall and Installation of Shade Sail Structures  227

Community & Place  239

Community Facilities  239

4.8                   CSRFF Forward Planning Grant 2025/26 Application -  Sports Amenities Building Upgrade, Abbeville Park, Mindarie  239

Community Safety & Emergency Management Report  249

4.9                   Bush Fire Advisory Committee Terms of Reference Review   249

4.10                 Amendment to the City of Wanneroo Cats Local Law 2023  262

Place Management  307

4.11                 Australia Day Awards Working Group and Terms of Reference  307

Corporate Strategy & Performance  316

Transactional Finance  316

4.12                 Warrant of Payments for the Period to 31st July 2024  316

4.13                 Financial Activity Statement for the Period ended 31 July 2024  398

Chief Executive Office  422

Governance & Legal  422

4.14                 Extension of Review Dates of Council Policies  422

Item  5           Motions on Notice   427

Item  6           Late Reports (to be circulated under separate cover) 427

6.1                   Consideration of Precinct 15 - Central Mariginiup Local Structure Plan Following Advertising  427

6.2                   Tender 24043 Provision of Jindalee, Alkimos and Eglinton Streetscape and Park Maintenance  427

Item  7           Public Question Time  427

Item  8           Confidential  427

Item  9           Date of Next Meeting   427

Item  10         Closure   427

 

This meeting today is being held on Whadjuk Noongar boodja and we would like to acknowledge and pay respects to Elders past, present and future. We thank all past and present members of the community that have supported the City to better understand and value Noongar culture within the City of Wanneroo.

Item  1     Attendances

Item  2     Apologies and Leave of Absence

Item  3     Deputations

Item  4     Reports

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

Planning & Sustainability

Approval Services

File Ref:                                              48492 – 24/244852

Responsible Officer:                          Director Planning & Sustainability

Attachments:                                       11         

 

Issue

For Council to consider:

 

·        Amendment No. 211 to the City’s District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2) following a public advertising period; and

·        Requesting the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) amend the East Wanneroo Cell 5 (Landsdale) Agreed Local Structure Plan No. 7 (ASP 7).

Background

The land subject to proposed Amendment No. 211 to DPS 2 (Amendment No. 211) is located in the Landsdale locality. Amendment No. 211 affects land in which ASP 7 currently applies (subject area).

 

The current DPS 2 map over the subject area is provided in Attachment 1. Most of the subject area is zoned Urban Development; however, there are areas with zones or reserves that were imposed either:

 

·        At the time DPS 2 was initially gazetted in July 2001; or

·        As a result of other amendments to DPS 2.

 

 

The Urban Development Zone is applied as an interim (or transitional) zone for areas undergoing subdivision and development – and forms the basis for structure planning (such as ASP 7) to be prepared. ASP 7 affects the entire ‘Amendment Area’ as shown in Attachment 1.

 

Being a transitional zone, the Urban Development Zone is not intended to remain over land where subdivision has occurred. Once subdivision and subsequent development has progressed, the zoning of the established areas can undergo ‘normalisation’, meaning that it can be rezoned in DPS 2 to a specific zone (such as Residential) that is reflective of the actual land use. Any effect that a structure plan has over such areas can also be removed by way of amendment or revocation of the structure plan.

 

This process of normalising structure plan areas is part of the City’s ongoing approach to simplify the planning system and reduce complexity for the City’s stakeholders. Normalisation makes it simpler for landowners to understand the relevant planning controls for their property by reducing the number of planning documents relevant to the decision-making process. This aligns with the City’s goal to provide for well-planned land uses to support the economy, the growing community and environment.

 

Council previously initiated Amendment No. 211 at its 20 February 2024 meeting (PS05-02/24), and made the resolution as outlined in Attachment 2. The resolution also outlined how Amendment No. 211 would be presented to a subsequent Council meeting following advertising.

 

As this report recommends Council support Amendment No. 211, an additional resolution can now also be made to request the WAPC amend ASP 7.

Detail

Amendment No. 211 will generally take the zones, reserves and residential density codes (R-Coding) designated in ASP 7 for the established parts of the subject area – and place this into DPS 2. The full extent of the amendments as advertised (including the Scheme (Amendment) Maps) is detailed in Attachment 3.

 

Of the 288 hectares of land in the subject area, only 16.2 hectares will remain in the Urban Development Zone should Amendment No. 211 be finalised. The Urban Development Zone will only be retained in areas which are still to be developed. ASP 7 will remain in place to guide subdivision and development outcomes in those areas where the Urban Development zoning will remain.

 

Should the Minister for Planning approve Amendment No. 211, the WAPC will also need to consider amending ASP 7 to reflect the changes in DPS 2. To facilitate this, and pursuant to the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) 2015 (the Regulations), the Amendment No. 211 proposal included a Statement to that effect as provided in Attachment 4.

 

The Statement outlines the extent of amendments to the ASP 7 text, as also detailed in Attachment 5 and structure plan maps, as provided in Attachment 6. As discussed later in the report, a submission received through advertising the Amendment No. 211 proposal has prompted Administration to recommend minor revisions to the structure plan maps accompanying the Statement.

Consultation

In accordance with Council’s 20 February 2024 resolution, and pursuant to the Regulations, Amendment No. 211 was referred to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) for comment and to the Minister for Planning for approval to advertise.

On 27 March 2024, the EPA determined that a formal assessment under Part IV of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 was not warranted. The DPLH, acting under delegation for the Minister for Planning, approved advertising of Amendment No. 211 on 30 May 2024. The EPA and DPLH did not direct the City to modify Amendment No. 211 prior to advertising.

 

Amendment No. 211 was then advertised pursuant to the Regulations for a period between 13 June 2024 and 26 July 2024 by way of the following:

 

·        Publishing a notice of the amendment on the City’s website – and uploading the amendment documentation;

·        Making the amendment available for public inspection at the City’s Civic Centre;

·        Publishing a notice in the 13 June 2024 edition of the Perth Now – Wanneroo newspaper;

·        Notifying public authorities likely to be affected by the amendment; and

·        Letters sent to landowners and occupiers of land that Administration considered would be most affected by the DPS 2 amendment (and amendment to ASP 7).

 

Administration received five submissions during the advertising period, none of which objecting to the proposal. A summary of all the submissions received, and Administration’s responses, is provided in Attachment 7.

 

Three of the submissions were from government agencies and one submission was from a planning consultant representing a landowner in the amendment area. The key points from the consultant’s submission are discussed in more detail in the Comment section below.

Comment

The Regulations (Regulation 35A) make provision for when an amendment to a local planning scheme affects a structure plan area, the amendment must include a Statement that when the amendment takes effect:

 

(a)     the approval of the structure plan is to be revoked; or

(b)     the structure plan is to be amended in accordance with the Statement; or

(c)     the approval of the structure plan is not affected.

 

In this case, Amendment No. 211 already includes a Statement in accordance with Regulation 35A(b). The inclusion of this Statement into Amendment No. 211 was resolved by Council at its 20 February 2024 meeting and is provided in Attachment 4.

 

However, in light of a submission received (as discussed below), a minor change to the Structure Plan (Amendment) Maps is recommended. The modified Structure Plan (Amendment) Maps are included in Attachment 8, and the reason for the change is discussed further below. The modified maps do not require the wording of the Statement, as previously resolved by Council, to change.

 

As Amendment No. 211 can now be supported following advertising, Administration also recommends that Council request the WAPC amend ASP 7 in accordance with the Statement and modified Structure Plan (Amendment) Maps (in Attachment 8). These considerations will then be made by the WAPC after an approval of Amendment No. 211, pursuant to the Clause 29A of the deemed provisions for local planning schemes (deemed provisions), contained in Schedule 2 of the Regulations.

 

Submission Received – Land Adjoining Pollino Gardens, Landsdale

 

During the advertising of Amendment No. 211, Administration received a submission from a planning consultant on behalf of the landowner of a development site on Pollino Gardens, Landsdale. The submission in question relates to land identified on the plan included in Attachment 9. Further to the schedule of submissions in Attachment 7, discussion of this submission is provided below:

 

1.       Incorporation of private land in the ‘Local Road’ local scheme reserve into the Urban Development Zone.

 

A portion of the land subject to the submission was formerly within a gazetted road reserve (with no road carriageway constructed). This land is shown on the plans included in Attachment 9. This road reserve has recently been privately acquired and amalgamated into adjoining land, resulting in the permanent closure of a portion of the road reserve. Acquisition of the road reserve and its permanent closure occurred after Council’s initiation of Amendment No. 211.

 

The former road reserve land is still, however, located in the ‘Local Road’ local scheme reserve – a reserve type that DPS 2 applies over most road reserves in the Scheme area. The submission requests the former road reserve land be rezoned to Urban Development. Administration supports this request, as the Urban Development zoning is appropriate in supporting further development of this land, guided by ASP 7. A modified Scheme (Amendment) Map is provided in Attachment 10 (refer to Map 1) showing how the former portion of road reserve is to be rezoned.

 

ASP 7 shows the northern portion of this former road reserve land as Residential R40 and the southern portion as road reserve. The Structure Plan (Amendment) Maps, prepared to support Amendment No. 211, will also need to be modified to show all the former road reserve land as Residential R40. The modified Structure Plan (Amendment) Maps) are provided in Attachment 8.

 

2.       Advocating for an increase of residential density for the delivery of dwelling density during a recognised period of housing crisis.

 

Through the Amendment No. 211 process, the consultant (acting on behalf of their client) has suggested the residential density for the land identified in Attachment 9 to increase from R40 (as it is in ASP 7) to R50. The suggestion is for this to occur through applying the Residential Zone and the higher density code in DPS 2 (instead of ASP 7), even though the land is still to be developed.

 

The consultant has provided the following as justification for this suggestion in their submission:

 

·        Increasing the density coding to accommodate high-density development would optimise the use of available land – and introduce a diversity in dwelling types in an area currently dominated by single houses.

 

·        The change would foster a more diverse and dynamic urban environment – and contribute to the overall growth and prosperity of the area whilst catering to a broader range of lifestyle needs and preferences.

 

·        The land adjoins a primary distributor road intersection (Ocean Reef Road and Gnangara Road) and acts as a transition piece between established medium density single and group dwellings in proximity.

 

·        Given the site has received development approvals, it would be appropriate to instil full normalisation across the whole area and not just to the established development to the west and public open space to the south.

 

·        The site is also well serviced by public open space to the south and medical centre (not yet developed) to the east.

 

At this stage, Administration is not open to applying the suggestion as a modification to the Amendment No. 211 proposal for the following reasons:

 

·        What is being suggested is beyond the scope and purpose of the Amendment No. 211 proposal – being to normalise the zoning of established areas, whilst not departing significantly from the planning controls currently in ASP 7.

 

·        Development on the subject land is still ongoing, so normalising the land now (regardless of what density coding is applied) would be premature.

 

·        Administration has initial concerns about higher density residential development being located away from activity centres. Although a medical centre, pharmacy, restaurant and child care centre are all approved over a portion of the land in question (not yet developed), it will not function as an activity centre. The nearest activity centre, being the Landsdale Forum Shopping Centre, is located approximately 1.7 kilometres away.

 

The landowner’s consultant can pursue an increase of the residential density through a separate structure plan amendment. Such a proposal would need to be adequately justified by a detailed planning argument that responds to the relevant planning issues. It is possible that Administration’s initial concerns could be alleviated by the submission of a satisfactory and comprehensive planning argument in support of a specific proposal.

 

Impact on Developer Contributions and Future of the Structure Plan

 

Amendment No. 211 (and the subsequent amendment to ASP 7) have been prepared so as not to interfere with the ability to collect or retain development contributions from owners within East Wanneroo Cell 5. The proposal does not seek to change the boundaries of the Cell. It does not identify lots which are no longer part of the ASP 7 nor does it modify Schedule 14 of DPS 2 which sets out the developer contribution arrangements. The proposal therefore has no effect on the developer contribution arrangements.

 

Extension of the ASP 7 Approval Duration Period

 

Under Clause 28 of the deemed provisions, a structure plan has effect for a period of ten years, unless another period of time is determined by the WAPC. For structure plans approved prior to 19 October 2015 (which ASP 7 was), the date of approval under the deemed provisions is taken to be from 19 October 2015.

 

Both the deemed provisions and the WA Planning Manual: Guidance for Structure Plans (Structure Plan Guidelines) outline the possibility for the duration of a structure plan to be extended. The Structure Plan Guidelines provide a range of considerations for the WAPC to determine an extension to a structure plan approval period, as listed below:

 

·        The extent of subdivision and/or development uptake in the structure plan area, and whether the plan has been largely implemented.

·        The plan’s delivery progress based on its set purpose, vision, and objectives, and whether implementation of the plan is aligning with its set targets.

·        Government priorities, any applicable planning strategy and policy framework, and whether significant changes to these have occurred since the plan was approved.

·        If consultation with the community and key stakeholders should be undertaken to confirm and adjust the direction and next stages of the plan.

·        Whether important infrastructure has or will become available, and whether adjustments will need to be made to the plan as a result.

 

Key reasons that Administration believes that an extension of ASP 7 would not conflict with the above listed considerations are outlined below:

 

·        ASP 7 has largely been implemented. There are now only limited areas in which subdivision and development is yet to occur;

·        The objectives of the Residential Zone in ASP 7 have been achieved through existing subdivision and development to date. These objectives need to remain within ASP 7 beyond October 2025 for delivery of ongoing residential development in the remaining parts of the structure plan area; and

·        The City’s intentions to extend the approval period of ASP 7 were expressed in Scheme amendment documentation made public when Amendment No. 211 was advertised. No submissions were received from affected landowners and occupiers to suggest the approval period for ASP 7 should not be extended.

 

Administration recommends that Council request the WAPC extend the approval duration of ASP 7 to 30 June 2029 for the following reasons:

 

·        To allow additional time for subdivision of the undeveloped areas to occur; and

·        To coincide with the proposed operation closure date for Cell 5 (relative to the subject area), proposed through Amendment No. 208 to DPS 2.

 

Even if Amendment No. 208 does not progress toward a final approval by the Minister for Planning, extending the duration period for ASP 7 to 30 June 2029 would allow subdivision and development to occur on the remaining development sites in the structure plan area.

 

The WAPC has a specific form (being Form 5D – Application to Extend the Approval of a Structure Plan) that can be used to request the duration of a structure plan be extended. A blank copy of this form is provided in Attachment 11. It is recommended that Council requests Administration complete this form on the City’s behalf; and forward it to the WAPC for consideration.

Statutory Compliance

Amendment No. 211 to DPS 2 can be processed in accordance with the Planning and Development Act 2005 and the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.

 

Following the Minister for Planning’s approval of Amendment No. 211, the WAPC should amend the East Wanneroo Cell 5 (Landsdale) Agreed Local Structure Plan No. 7 pursuant to Clause 29A of the deemed provisions for local planning schemes, provided in Schedule 2 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015. This can occur as Council previously resolved to include a Statement in the amendment to that effect, pursuant to Regulation 35A of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2021 – 2031:

5 ~ A well planned, safe and resilient City that is easy to travel around and provides a connection between people and places

5.2 - Plan for and manage land use

Risk Appetite Statement

In pursuit of strategic objective goal 5, we will accept a Medium level of risk, extended to High in the areas of Community / Reputation & Financial / Commercial impacts. Shifting transport modes and usage in the City may require short term pain for longer term gain as the City supports the development, maintenance and connection of alternatives to car use (e.g. cycle ways) and the supporting infrastructure.

 

Risk Management Considerations

 

Risk Title	Risk Rating
CO-O15 – Project Management	Low
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Director Corporate Strategy & Performance	Manage

 

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

Policy Implications

Amendment No. 211 is being processed noting the WAPC-prepared ‘WA Planning Manual: Guidance for Structure Plans’ in respect to the relationship between structure plans and local planning schemes.

Financial Implications

The costs of preparing and processing Amendment No. 211, as well as preparing the information to assist the WAPC amend ASP 7, can be met from the current Planning and Sustainability operational budget.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       NOTES the submissions received in respect of Amendment No. 211 to District Planning Scheme No. 2, as summarised with Administration’s responses in Attachment 7;

2.       Pursuant to Regulation 50(3)(b) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, SUPPORTS Amendment No. 209 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 subject to the modifications outlined in Attachment 10;

3.       MODIFIES the Statement in Attachment 4 included in Amendment No. 211 to District Planning Scheme No. 2, prepared pursuant to Regulation 35A(b) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 and as previously resolved at the 20 February 2024 Ordinary Council Meeting (PS05-02/24), to the extent that Structure Plan (Amendment) Maps are replaced by those in Attachment 8;

4.       AUTHORISES the Mayor and the Chief Executive Officer to SIGN and SEAL Amendment No. 211 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 documents in accordance with the City’s Execution of Documents Policy;

5.       Pursuant to Regulation 53(1) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, PROVIDES the advertised Amendment No. 211 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 to the Western Australian Planning Commission;

6.       REQUESTS the Western Australian Planning Commission amend the City of Wanneroo’s East Wanneroo Cell 5 (Landsdale) Agreed Local Structure Plan No. 7, pursuant to Schedule 2, Clause 29A(2) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 and the Statement in Attachment 4 (as modified pursuant to Item (3) above), after the Minister for Planning approves Amendment No. 211 to District Planning Scheme No. 2;

7.       NOTES that Administration will complete the Western Australian Planning Commission’s Form 5D to request that the Western Australian Planning Commission consider extending the approval duration of the City of Wanneroo’s East Wanneroo Cell 5 (Landsdale) Agreed Local Structure Plan No. 7 to 30 June 2029; and

8.       ADVISES submitters of this decision.

 

 

Attachments:

1⇩.	Attachment 1 - Current Scheme Map Extract Over Landsdale Locality	23/385401
2⇩.	Attachment 2 - Council Resolution PS05-02/24 – 20 February 2024 - Amendment No. 211 to District Planning Scheme No. 2	24/245245
3⇩.	Attachment 3 - Scheme Amendment Text and Maps - Amendment No. 211 to District Planning Scheme No. 2	23/388916
4⇩.	Attachment 4 - Regulation 35A Statement - Amendment No. 211 to District Planning Scheme No. 2	23/389144
5⇩.	Attachment 5 - Track Change Version of East Wanneroo Cell 5 Structure Plan Amendments - Supporting Amendment No. 211 to District Planning Scheme No. 2	23/389010
6⇩.	Attachment 6 - Structure Plan (Amendment) Maps - To Support Amendment No. 211 to District Planning Scheme No. 2	23/386952
7⇩.	Attachment 7 - Council Version of Submission Schedule - Amendment No. 211 to DPS 2	24/274695
8⇩.	Attachment 8 - Modified Structure Plan (Amendment) Maps - Prepared Following Advertising - Supporting Amendment No. 212 to District Planning Scheme No. 2	24/274075
9⇩.	Attachment 9 - Plan Showing Location of Submission 3 and 'Local Road' Local Scheme Reserve for Rezoning	24/274617
10⇩.	Attachment 10 - Amendment No. 211 Proposal - Modified After Advertising	24/275051
11⇩.	Attachment 11 - Western Australian Planning Commission Form 5D - Application to Extend the Approval of a Structure Plan	22/444361

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

File Ref:                                              48493 – 24/245473

Responsible Officer:                          Director Planning & Sustainability

Attachments:                                       9         

 

Issue

For Council to consider:

 

·        Amendment No. 212 to the City’s District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2) following a public advertising period; and

·        Requesting the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) amend the Butler-Ridgewood Agreed Local Structure Plan No. 27 (ASP 27) and revoke the Brighton Village Centre Agreed Local Structure Plan No. 38 (ASP 38).

Background

The land subject to proposed Amendment No. 212 to DPS 2 (Amendment No. 212) is located in the Butler and Ridgewood localities. Amendment No. 212 affects land in which ASP 27 and ASP 38 currently apply (subject area).

 

The current DPS 2 map over the subject area is provided in Attachment 1. Most of the subject area is zoned Urban Development; however, there are areas with zones or reserves that were imposed either:

 

·        At the time DPS 2 was initially gazetted in July 2001; or

·        As a result of other amendments to DPS 2.

 

The Urban Development Zone is applied as an interim (or transitional) zone for areas undergoing subdivision and development – and forms the basis for structure planning (such as ASP 27 and ASP 38) to be prepared. ASP 27 and ASP 38 affect the areas shown in Attachment 1.

 

Being a transitional zone, the Urban Development Zone is not intended to remain over land where subdivision has occurred. Once subdivision and subsequent development has progressed, the zoning of the established areas can undergo ‘normalisation’, meaning that it can be rezoned in DPS 2 to a specific zone (such as Residential, Commercial or Service Commercial) that is reflective of the actual land use. Any effect that a structure plan has over such areas can also be removed by way of amendment or revocation of the structure plan.

 

This process of normalising structure plan areas is part of the City’s ongoing approach to simplify the planning system and reduce complexity for the City’s stakeholders. Normalisation makes it simpler for landowners to understand the relevant planning controls for their property by reducing the number of planning documents relevant to the decision-making process. This aligns with the City’s goal to provide for well-planned land uses to support the economy, the growing community and environment.

 

Council previously initiated Amendment No. 212 at its 20 February 2024 meeting (PS06-02/24), and made the resolution as outlined in Attachment 2. The resolution also outlined how Amendment No. 212 would be presented to a subsequent Council meeting following advertising.

 

As this report recommends Council support Amendment No. 212, an additional resolution can now also be made to request the WAPC amend ASP 27 and revoke ASP 38.

Detail

The extent of the amendments proposed through Amendment No. 212, as already initiated by Council and subsequently advertised (including the Scheme (Amendment) Maps) is detailed in Attachment 3.

 

The purpose of Amendment No. 212 is to apply zonings, reserves and residential density codes (R-Coding) through DPS 2 for the established parts of ASP 27 and ASP 38. There were no submissions received during the advertising of Amendment No. 212 that requires this proposal to be modified from what Council initiated at its 20 February 2024 meeting.

 

Should the Minister for Planning approve Amendment No. 212, the WAPC will also need to consider revoking ASP 38 and amending ASP 27 to reflect the changes to DPS 2. To facilitate this, and pursuant to the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) 2015 (the Regulations), the Amendment No. 212 proposal already includes a Statement as provided in Attachment 4. The Statement outlines the extent of amendments to the ASP 27 text as detailed in Attachment 5 – and amendments to the structure plan maps as provided in Attachment 6. A resolution of Council is still needed to formally request the WAPC amend ASP 27 and revoke ASP 38 should Amendment No. 212 be approved by the Minister for Planning.

 

The amendments to ASP 27 will ensure that the structure plan still applies over the areas which are yet to be subdivided or fully developed. Areas which are now subdivided and developed will be indicated with ‘Refer to Detail in Scheme’ on the proposed amended ASP 27 maps provided in Attachment 6.

Consultation

In accordance with Council’s 20 February 2024 resolution, and pursuant to the Regulations, Amendment No. 212 was referred to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) for comment and to the Minister for Planning for approval to advertise.

 

On 20 March 2024, the EPA determined that a formal assessment under Part IV of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 was not warranted. The DPLH, acting under delegation for the Minister for Planning, approved advertising of Amendment No. 212 on 30 May 2024. The EPA and DPLH did not direct the City to modify Amendment No. 212 as initiated by Council. 

 

Amendment No. 212 was then advertised pursuant to the Regulations for a period between 13 June 2024 and 26 July 2024 by way of the following:

 

·        Publishing a notice of the amendment on the City’s website – and uploading the amendment documentation;

·        Making the amendment available for public inspection at the City’s Civic Centre;

·        Publishing a notice in the 13 June 2024 edition of the Perth Now – Wanneroo newspaper;

·        Notifying public authorities likely to be affected by the amendment; and

·        Letters sent to landowners and occupiers of land that Administration considered would be most affected by the proposal. This included all landowners and occupiers of single houses and grouped dwellings situated on land designated as ‘Mixed Use’ and ‘Commercial’ in the ASP 27 or ASP 38.

 

Administration received eight submissions during the advertising period. A summary of the submissions, and Administration’s responses, is provided in Attachment 7. Two submissions objected to elements of the Amendment No. 212 proposal as discussed in more detail in the Comment section below.

Comment

The Regulations (Regulation 35A) make provision for when an amendment to a local planning scheme affects a structure plan area, the amendment must include a Statement that when the amendment takes effect:

 

(a)     the approval of the structure plan is to be revoked; or

(b)     the structure plan is to be amended in accordance with the Statement; or

(c)     the approval of the structure plan is not affected.

 

In this case, Amendment No. 212 already includes a Statement in accordance with Regulation 35A(a) (regarding the revocation of ASP 38) and Regulation 35A(b) (that ASP 27 is to be amended). The inclusion of this Statement into Amendment No. 212 was resolved by Council at its 20 February 2024 meeting and is provided in Attachment 4.

 

As Amendment No. 212 can now be supported following advertising, Administration will also recommend that Council request the WAPC amend ASP 27 in accordance with the Statement. These considerations will then be made by the WAPC after an approval of Amendment No. 212, pursuant to the Clause 29A of the deemed provisions for local planning schemes (deemed provisions), contained in Schedule 2 of the Regulations.

 

Proposed Residential Zone in Structure Plan Commercial and Mixed Use Zone Areas

 

There are a total of 487 lots in the subject area with ‘single house’ or ‘grouped dwelling’ development that ASP 27 or ASP 38 designates a ‘Commercial’ or ‘Mixed Use’ Zone over. These include:

 

·        25 lots in the vicinity of the Brighton Village Centre, ranging from 209m² to 566m² (the largest of which provide two grouped dwellings). These lots are currently affected by ASP 38 and are designated Commercial (R60) under that structure plan; and

·        Fourteen (14) single house residential lots on Hinchinbrook Avenue and Feakle Bend, Ridgewood ranging from 219m² to 361m². ASP 27 designates a Commercial (R40) zoning over these lots.

·        A further 448 lots scattered throughout the subject area with ‘single house’ or ‘grouped dwelling’ development which ASP 27 or ASP 38 designates a ‘Mixed Use’ zone over.

 

Attachment 8 shows the location of land that has a Commercial and Mixed Use zoning designation in ASP 27 and ASP 38 – as well as the extent of land (with single house and grouped dwelling development) that will be rezoned to Residential through Amendment No. 212. This is justified in detail in Administration’s previous report on Amendment No. 212 (PS06-02/24), with a summary of those reasons provided below:

 

·        The potential for land use conflicts and community opposition could be notable if the introduction of non-residential land uses were to be allowed in these areas into the future; and

·        Following the recent gazettal of Amendment No. 172 to DPS 2, ‘single house’ and ‘grouped dwelling’ are now not permitted (or ‘X’) uses in the Commercial Zone. Therefore, the residential uses would become ‘non-conforming’ if the Commercial zoning were to be applied over the 39 lots through Amendment No. 212.

 

 

Each of the landowners and occupiers of the 487 lots mentioned above received a letter during the advertising of Amendment No. 212, advising of the City’s intentions to apply a Residential zoning. In response, only two submissions were received opposing the rezoning. Further details of those two submissions, and Administration’s responses are provided in Attachment 7.

 

The two submissions opposed to the zoning change to Residential are largely based on the impact on claimed future business plans from the residential dwellings constructed on the sites.

 

However, both submitters have dwellings on their lots which are not designed to accommodate commercial uses other than ‘home business’ activities. If the lots are rezoned to Residential under Amendment No. 212 (as proposed), the owners of these two dwellings could obtain home business approvals which can support a range of business pursuits.

 

Although not recommended, Council could consider a modification to the Amendment No. 212 proposal allowing the submitters properties (and other residential properties in the immediate area) to be normalised to Commercial Zone in DPS 2. However, this may present the following significant issues:

 

·        Grouped dwellings and single houses would become non-conforming uses. This could be burdensome as development applications for any alterations, repairs or additions to non-conforming uses must undergo a rigorous planning assessment, which requires public consultation on every proposal received. The dwellings would not become non-conforming uses if the submitters properties are rezoned to Residential as proposed; and

 

·        Land use conflicts with nearby residential lots could arise if the submitters were to pursue activities which are commonly carried out in a Commercial Zone, but may be inappropriate in a residential setting.

 

It may be possible that a demand may arise for additional ‘Commercial or ‘Mixed Use’ land within the subject area over the longer term. If that occurs – and there is an economic need to provide zoning of land that supports non-residential use alongside pure residential development – a separate local scheme amendment would be able to address this at that time.

 

Developer Contribution Implications

 

The subject area is situated within developer contribution area ‘DCA 4’ relating to the Clarkson and Butler area, as indicated on the Scheme Map extract provided in Attachment 1. Schedule 15 of the DPS 2 text then provides ‘district distributor road infrastructure contribution arrangements’ for this area – but makes no provision for structure plans to corelate with the developer contribution arrangements. Therefore, the Scheme provisions relating to the road infrastructure contribution arrangements for the Clarkson and Butler area stand in their own right.

 

Amendment No. 212 does not seek to amend any of the provisions in Schedule 15 of the DPS 2 text – or change the extent of the developer contribution area ‘DCA 4’ as shown on the Scheme Map. Therefore, what Amendment No. 212 is proposing should not affect the developer contribution arrangements in place.

 

Extension of the ASP 27 Approval Duration Period

 

Under Clause 28 of the deemed provisions, a structure plan has effect for a period of ten years, unless another period of time is determined by the WAPC. For structure plans approved prior to 19 October 2015 (which ASP 27 was), the date of approval under the deemed provisions is taken to be from 19 October 2015.

 

Both the deemed provisions and the WA Planning Manual: Guidance for Structure Plans (Structure Plan Guidelines) outline the possibility for the duration of a structure plan to be extended. The Structure Plan Guidelines provide a range of considerations for the WAPC to determine an extension to a structure plan approval period, as listed below:

 

·        The extent of subdivision and/or development uptake in the structure plan area, and whether the plan has been largely implemented.

·        The plan’s delivery progress based on its set purpose, vision, and objectives, and whether implementation of the plan is aligning with its set targets.

·        Government priorities, any applicable planning strategy and policy framework, and whether significant changes to these have occurred since the plan was approved.

·        If consultation with the community and key stakeholders should be undertaken to confirm and adjust the direction and next stages of the plan.

·        Whether important infrastructure has or will become available, and whether adjustments will need to be made to the plan as a result.

 

Key reasons that Administration believes that an extension of ASP 27 would not conflict with the above listed considerations are outlined below:

 

·        ASP 27 has largely been implemented. There are now only limited areas in which subdivision and development is yet to occur;

·        The objectives of the Residential Zone in ASP 27 have been achieved through existing subdivision and development to date. These objectives need to remain within ASP 27 beyond October 2025 for delivery of ongoing residential development in the remaining parts of the structure plan area; and

·        The City’s intentions to extend the approval period of ASP 27 were expressed in Scheme amendment documentation made public when Amendment No. 212 was advertised. No submissions were received from affected landowners and occupiers to suggest ASP 27 requires adjustment – or for the approval period to not be extended.

 

Administration recommends that Council request the WAPC extend the approval duration of ASP 27 to 19 October 2030 to allow additional time for subdivision and development of the undeveloped areas to occur.

 

The WAPC has a specific form (being Form 5D – Application to Extend the Approval of a Structure Plan) that can be used to request the duration of a structure plan be extended. A blank copy of this form is provided in Attachment 9. It is recommended that Council requests Administration complete this form on the City’s behalf; and forward it to the WAPC for consideration.

Statutory Compliance

Amendment No. 212 to DPS 2 can be processed in accordance with the Planning and Development Act 2005 and the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.

 

Following the Minister for Planning’s approval of Amendment No. 212, the WAPC will revoke and amend the structure plans that apply over the Amendment No. 212 area pursuant to Clause 29A of the deemed provisions for local planning schemes, provided in Schedule 2 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015. This can occur if Council resolves to include a Statement in the amendment to that effect, pursuant to Regulation 35A of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.

 

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2021 – 2031:

5 ~ A well planned, safe and resilient City that is easy to travel around and provides a connection between people and places

5.2 - Plan for and manage land use

Risk Appetite Statement

In pursuit of strategic objective goal 5, we will accept a Medium level of risk, extended to High in the areas of Community / Reputation & Financial / Commercial impacts. Shifting transport modes and usage in the City may require short term pain for longer term gain as the City supports the development, maintenance and connection of alternatives to car use (e.g. cycle ways) and the supporting infrastructure.

 

Risk Management Considerations

 

Risk Title	Risk Rating
CO-O15 – Project Management	Low
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Director Corporate Strategy & Performance	Manage

 

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

Policy Implications

Amendment No. 212 is being processed noting the WAPC-prepared ‘WA Planning Manual: Guidance for Structure Plans’ in respect to the relationship between structure plans and local planning schemes.

Financial Implications

The costs of preparing and processing Amendment No. 212, as well as preparing the information to assist the WAPC amend ASP 27 and revoke ASP 38, can be met from the current Planning and Sustainability operational budget.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       NOTES the submissions received in respect of Amendment No. 212 to District Planning Scheme No. 2, as summarised with Administration’s responses in Attachment 7;

2.       Pursuant to Regulation 50(3)(a) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, SUPPORTS Amendment No. 212 to District Planning Scheme No. 2, as advertised and as provided in Attachment 3;

3.       AUTHORISES the Mayor and the Chief Executive Officer to SIGN and SEAL Amendment No. 212 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 documents in accordance with the City’s Execution of Documents Policy;

4.       Pursuant to Regulation 53(1) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, PROVIDES the advertised Amendment No. 212 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 to the Western Australian Planning Commission;

5.       REQUESTS the Western Australian Planning Commission undertake the following, after the Minister for Planning approves Amendment No. 212 to District Planning Scheme No. 2:

a)      Amend the City of Wanneroo’s Butler-Ridgewood Agreed Local Structure Plan No. 27 in a manner consistent with the Statement provided in Attachment 4 and pursuant to Schedule 2, Clause 29A(2) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015; and

b)      Revoke the City of Wanneroo’s Brighton Village Centre Agreed Local Structure Plan No. 38;

6.       NOTES that Administration will complete the Western Australian Planning Commission’s Form 5D to request that the Western Australian Planning Commission consider extending the approval duration of the City of Wanneroo’s Butler-Ridgewood Agreed Local Structure Plan No. 27 to 19 October 2030; and

7.       ADVISES submitters of this decision.

 

 

Attachments:

1⇩.	Attachment 1 - Scheme Map Extract over Butler and Ridgewood Localities	24/33602
2⇩.	Attachment 2 - Council Resolution PS06-02/24 – 20 February 2024 – Amendment No. 212 to District Planning Scheme No. 2	24/246475
3⇩.	Attachment 3 - Scheme Amendment Proposal - Amendment No. 212 to District Planning Scheme No. 2	24/18890
4⇩.	Attachment 4 - Regulation 35A Statement - Amendment No. 212 to District Planning Scheme No	24/22770
5⇩.	Attachment 5 - Track Changes for Text Amendments to ASP 27 - Supporting Amendment No. 212 to District Planning Scheme No. 2	24/22840
6⇩.	Attachment 6 - Structure Plan (Amendment) Maps - Amendments to Butler-Ridgewood Agreed Local Structure Plan No. 27 - Supporting Amendment No. 212 to District Planning Scheme No. 2	24/24385
7⇩.	Attachment 7 - Council Version of Submission Schedule - Amendment No. 212 to District Planning Scheme No. 2	24/277754
8⇩.	Attachment 8 - Commercial and Mixed Use Zoned Lots in Structure Plans - Located in the Butler-Ridgewood Locality	24/31750
9⇩.	Attachment 9 - Western Australian Planning Commission Form 5D - Application to Extend the Approval of a Structure Plan	22/444361

 

 

File Ref:                                              50157 – 24/248218

Responsible Officer:                          Director Planning & Sustainability

Attachments:                                       9         

 

Issue

For Council to consider initiating Amendment No. 224 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2) to normalise zoning of land affected by:

·    Lots 1 and 102 Yanchep Beach Road, Yanchep (Jindowie West) Agreed Local Structure Plan No. 40 (ASP 40); and

·    Lots 1 and 2 Yanchep Beach Road, Yanchep (Jindowie East) Agreed Local Structure Plan No. 76 (ASP 76).

Background

The land subject to proposed Amendment No. 224 to DPS 2 (Amendment No. 224) is located in the Yanchep locality. Amendment No. 224 affects the land over which ASP 40 and ASP 76 currently apply (subject area).

 

The subject area is largely zoned Urban Development under DPS 2 as shown on the plan included in Attachment 1. The Urban Development Zone is applied as an interim zone for areas undergoing subdivision and development – and forms the basis for preparing structure plans.

 

ASP 40 was adopted by the WAPC in November 2007 to guide subdivision and development over the western part of the subject area. The current ASP 40 structure plan maps are provided in Attachment 2. Residential density codings (or R-Codings) are prescribed on the ASP 40 R-Code Plan, included within Attachment 2.

 

Subdivision and development over the eastern part of the subject area is guided by ASP 76, which was adopted by the WAPC in July 2010. The current ASP 76 structure plan maps are included as Attachment 3. One of the structure plan maps is a ‘Residential Density Range Map’, outlining ranges of R-Codings that apply over this structure plan area. Through subsequent subdivisions sought by the developer, R-Code Plans were prepared (and endorsed by the WAPC) that designate precise R-Codings over the lots created. Those R-Code Plans are provided in Attachment 4.

 

To date, both ASP 40 and ASP 76 have facilitated the creation of 613 residential lots through subdivision, of which 577 are occupied or have dwellings under construction. The structure plans cover an area of approximately 186 hectares, of which approximately 84 hectares is yet to be subdivided. ASP 40 has also facilitated development of a District Centre. This area now provides commercial development including a Coles, Woolworths, Aldi, fast food and service stations. 

 

The Urban Development Zone becomes redundant over land that becomes established through subdivision and development. At that point, the zoning of the established areas can undergo ‘normalisation’, meaning that it can be rezoned to a ‘permanent’ zone (such as Residential, Commercial or Service Commercial) that is reflective of land use. Any effect that a structure plan has over such areas can also be removed by way of the amendment.

 

The subject area is also affected by the City’s Yanchep-Two Rocks Agreed District Structure Plan No. 43 (DSP 43). DSP 43 provides the broad district level planning framework for development of the Yanchep and Two Rocks localities. The District Structure Plan map is included as Attachment 5. DSP 39 has also formed the basis for various local structure plans to be prepared, including ASP 40 and ASP 76. DSP 39 also expires in October 2025 – and its future will be considered separately to the Amendment No. 224 process by the WAPC who are responsible for the district structure plan.

 

This process of normalising structure planned areas is part of the City’s ongoing approach to simplify the planning system and reduce complexity for the City’s stakeholders. Normalisation makes it simpler for landowners to understand the relevant planning controls for their property by reducing the number of planning documents relevant to the decision-making process. This aligns with the City’s goal to provide for well-planned land uses to support the economy, the growing community and environment.

Detail

Amendments to DPS 2

 

Amendment No. 224 places zones, reserves and residential density codes (R-coding) over the established parts in the subject area.

 

The full extent of the amendments proposed through Amendment No. 224 (including the Scheme (Amendment) Maps) is detailed in Attachment 6. The key features of Amendment No. 224 include:

 

·        The rezoning of residential lots as created through subdivision from ‘Urban Development’ to ‘Residential’. The amendment will impose R-Codings that correspond either with the ASP 40 R-Code Plan (enclosed within Attachment 2) or the R-Code plans endorsed by the WAPC over the ASP 76 area as included in Attachment 4.

 

·        The rezoning from ‘Urban Development’ to ‘Commercial’ of the area indicated in ASP 40 for ‘District Centre’ (refer to the ‘Local Structure Plan’ map in Attachment 2). In addition, Amendment No. 224 also proposes to apply an R-Coding of R100 which is consistent with the ASP 40 R-Code Plan (also within Attachment 2).

 

·        The rezoning of select lots from ‘Urban Development’ to ‘Mixed Use’, consistent with the zoning designations identified in ASP 40.

 

·        The rezoning of land parcels to ‘Service Commercial’ Zone which are currently zoned ‘Business’ in ASP 40. The Service Commercial Zone was recently introduced into DPS 2 through Amendment No. 172 to replace the Business Zone in locations outside activity centres.

 

·        The reclassifying of public open spaces in the subject area from ‘Urban Development’ zone to the corresponding ‘Local Scheme Reserve’.

 

·        Reclassifying gazetted road reserves within the ‘Urban Development’ Zone in the subject area to ‘Local Scheme Reserve – Local Road’ local scheme reserve.

 

Amendment No. 224 does not affect land parcels which are still earmarked for subdivision in the subject area. These areas will remain in the Urban Development Zone to ensure ASP 40 and ASP 76 remain in effect for these sites.

 

Subsequent Amendments to ASP 40 and ASP 76

 

As discussed later in the report, if the Minister for Planning (Minister) approves Amendment No. 224, the WAPC should also consider amending ASP 40 and ASP 76. Administration considers that the following amendments are needed to those structure plans:

 

·        An update to the structure plan maps to identify areas where zoning and R-coding will be normalised into DPS 2;

·        For various text provisions to be deleted or modified in response to the changes to the planning framework arising from an approval of Amendment No. 224; and

·        To add an expiry date in which variations to the Residential Design Codes (R-Codes) will apply over land with an R60 R-coding. This is discussed further in the ‘Comment’ section below.

 

To facilitate the amendments to ASP 40 and ASP 76, Amendment No. 224 is proposed to include a Statement to that effect as provided in Attachment 7. The Statement will detail the full extent of amendments that Administration considers are needed to ASP 40 and ASP 76. The Statement has been prepared pursuant to the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 (Regulations) and the WAPC’s WA Planning Manual: Guidance for Structure Plans (Structure Plan Guidelines).

 

The recommended amendments to the structure plan maps are enclosed within the Statement in Attachment 7. Tracked changes of the amendments to the ASP 40 and ASP 76 texts are provided in Attachment 8 and Attachment 9 respectively.

 

DPS 2 Amendment Classification

 

Amendment No. 224 meets the following criteria for ‘Standard Amendments’ in the context of Regulation 34 of the Regulations:

 

·        an amendment to the scheme so that it is consistent with a region planning scheme that applies to the scheme area, other than an amendment that is a basic amendment; and

·        an amendment that would have minimal impact on land in the scheme area that is not the subject of the amendment.”

Consultation

Should Council resolve to prepare Amendment No. 224, the amendment will need to be referred to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) pursuant to Section 81 and 82 of the Planning and Development Act 2005. Administration is not satisfied that the legislation exempts the need for Amendment No. 224 to be referred to the EPA (being Section 81(2) of the Planning and Development Act 2005, Section 48AAA(2) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 and Regulation 33C of the Environmental Protection Regulations 1987).

 

Further to the EPA referral process, Amendment No. 224 will also need to be referred to the Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage (DPLH) for approval to advertise. This referral will be made pursuant to Section 83A of the Planning and Development Act 2005 and will be considered by an officer of the DPLH delegated to perform this function by the Minister. Under this section of the Planning and Development Act 2005, the Minister (or their delegate) may:

 

·        Approve a proposed scheme amendment for advertising; or

·        Require the local government to modify the scheme amendment, and resubmit it for further consideration; or

·        Refuse approval for the proposed amendment to be advertised. Should such a decision be made, the local government cannot proceed with the proposed amendment.

 

Subject to the EPA and the Minister’s delegate being satisfied with the amendment (with or without modifications), Amendment No. 224 will then be advertised for public comment for a period of 42 days. Advertising is to occur in the following manner, pursuant to Regulations 47 and 76A of the Regulations:

 

·        Publishing a notice of the amendment on the City’s website – and upload the amendment documentation;

·        Making a copy of the amendment document available for public inspection at a place within the district during normal business hours (City’s Civic Centre);

·        Where appropriate, publishing a notice in a newspaper circulating in the relevant locality (Perth Now Wanneroo);

·        Notifying public authorities likely to be affected by the amendment; and

·        Advertising the amendment as directed by the WAPC and in any other way the local government considers appropriate.

 

In addition to the above, Administration will write to landowners and occupiers of land that are most affected by Amendment No. 224 (and/or the amendments to ASP 40 and ASP 76).

 

The process to amend structure plans is set out in the deemed provisions for local planning schemes (deemed provisions), contained in Schedule 2 of the Regulations. The deemed provisions do not specifically outline advertising for amendments to structure plans after the Minister’s approval of a local planning scheme amendment. However, when Amendment No. 224 is advertised, Administration can ensure that potential submitters are also made aware of the City’s intentions to have ASP 40 and ASP 76 amended.

Comment

The Regulations (Regulation 35A) make provision for when an amendment to a local planning scheme affects a structure plan area, the amendment must include a Statement that when the amendment takes effect:

 

(a)     the approval of the structure plan is to be revoked; or

(b)     the structure plan is to be amended in accordance with the Statement; or

(c)     the approval of the structure plan is not affected.

 

In this case, Administration is therefore proposing that Amendment No. 224 include a Statement in accordance with Regulation 35A(b) (that ASP 40 and ASP 76 be amended) and Regulation 35A(c) (that there will be no change to DSP 43). As outlined previously, a Statement has been prepared for Council’s consideration and is provided in Attachment 7. The amendment to ASP 40 and ASP 76 will then be processed by the WAPC following the approval of Amendment No. 224, pursuant to Clause 29A of the deemed provisions.

 

Normalising established parts of the ASP 40 and ASP 76 areas would mean that DPS 2 would take precedence over the structure plan in prescribing zoning, R-Coding and land use. As a result, the subsequent amendment to ASP 40 and ASP 76 will recognise that such detail has been inserted into DPS 2.

 

Application of R-MD Standards in Structure Plans

 

Medium-density residential standards (or R-MD standards) are applied for single house development in the ASP 40 and ASP 76 areas, coded R30, R40 and R60. The R-MD standards are formalised through the City’s Local Planning Policy 4.19: Medium-Density Housing Standards (LPP 4.19). The R-MD standards relate to particular design elements such as building and garage setbacks, open space, parking, visual privacy and solar access. Remaining designing elements are controlled through the R-Codes.

 

In April 2024, the WAPC issued Planning Bulletin 114/2024 (Planning Bulletin) to coincide with updated R-Codes coming into effect. Amendments to the R-Codes introduced new medium-density housing standards for single houses coded R50 and above. As outlined above, ASP 40 and ASP 76 applies R-MD standards for single house lots with an R60 coding.

 

R-MD standards effectively ‘replace’ (or modify) various deemed-to-comply provisions of the R-Codes. Relative to the provisions in ASP 40 and ASP 76 that give effect to R-MD standards in R60 coded areas, Section 6.5 of the Planning Bulletin stipulates as follows:

 

“All WAPC approved standard and precinct structure plans that modify deemed-to-comply provisions of the R-Codes Vol.1 2024 will remain valid until their expiry.

 

When considering an amendment to an approved structure plan, the validity period should not be extended.

 

Notwithstanding, the WAPC may agree to an extension to the validity period if the instrument is modified to align with the R-Codes Vol.1 2024.”

 

As outlined in this report, amendments to ASP 40 and ASP 76 are proposed – as well as extension for the approval durations for these structure plans. In accordance with the Planning Bulletin, amendments to ASP 40 and ASP 76 which are to be effective after the current expiry date (19 October 2025) need to align with the current version of the R-Codes.

 

The effect of the R-MD standards over areas coded R60 in the ASP 40 and ASP 76 areas present a misalignment with the R-Codes. Administration therefore considers that the R-MD standards cannot remain in effect over the R60 coded areas in ASP 40 and ASP 76 after the current approval period for those structure plans end (on 19 October 2025).

 

Text provisions are proposed through amendments to ASP 40 and ASP 76, which outline that the R-MD standards over the R60 coded areas will cease to have effect from 19 October 2025. After this date, it is proposed that ASP 40 and ASP 76 will not inform any standards for single house development in the R60 coded areas.

 

Elsewhere in the same Planning Bulletin, the WAPC encourages local governments to amend local planning policies incorporating R-MD standards, by removing provisions relating to R60 coded lots. Administration will consider making such amendments to LPP 4.19, in due course separately to Amendment No. 224.

 

Developer Contribution Implications

 

Much of the subject area is situated within developer contribution area ‘DCA 2’ relating to the Yanchep and Two Rocks area, as indicated on the Scheme Map extract provided in
Attachment 1. Schedules 12 and 13 of the DPS 2 text then provides the ‘contribution arrangements’ for the DCA 2 area.

 

Amendment No. 224 does not seek to amend any of the provisions in Schedules 12 and 13 of the DPS 2 text – or change the extent of the developer contribution area ‘DCA 2’ as shown on the Scheme Map. Therefore, what Amendment No. 224 is proposing will not affect the developer contribution arrangements in place.

 

District Centre

 

ASP 40 designates an activity centre (a District Centre) over the land surrounding the Yanchep Sports Club, Aldi, service stations and fast food fronting Marmion Avenue, the Yanchep Central Shopping Centre and the Yanchep Village Shopping Centre areas. The District Centre location is indicated on the ‘Local Structure Plan’ included in Attachment 2.

 

Although still subject to further development and expansion, Amendment No. 224 proposes to apply a Commercial zone over the entire District Centre area. This is reflected on the Scheme (Amendment) Maps provided in Attachment 6. Amendment No. 224 also proposes to apply an R100 R-coding through DPS 2 over the District Centre.

 

Notwithstanding the proposed rezoning to Commercial under DPS 2, ASP 40 will still provide some planning guidance over the District Centre. ASP 40 will:

 

·    Allow the formulation of local development plans over parts of the District Centre, if required to guide specific built form outcomes. To date, no local development plans have needed to be prepared over land in the District Centre; and

 

·    Allocate a retail net lettable area (NLA) of 11,000m²; and together with State Planning Policy 4.2: Activity Centres for Perth and Peel, guide the planning requirements needed to deliver any additional retail floorspace in the District Centre.

 

Schedule 7 of DPS 2 lists maximum retail NLA for activity centres within the City of Wanneroo. However, Amendment No. 224 does not propose to add a maximum retail NLA for the District Centre into Schedule 7 of DPS 2. This is due to a shift by the WAPC away from supporting maximum retail NLA being listed in a local planning scheme (such as DPS 2). This position became evident in a recent requirement by the Minister (on recommendation of the WAPC) to delete maximum retail NLA proposed for commercial areas within the City’s Amendment No. 209 (refer PS03-02/24). Therefore, a maximum retail NLA of 11,000m² for the District Centre will continue to be prescribed in ASP 40 (as it is currently), rather than through DPS 2.

 

The District Centre also includes Lot 1 (81) Yanchep Beach Road, which the City owns in Freehold. Lot 1 is also proposed to be rezoned to Commercial through Amendment No. 224. Lot 1 has recreational facilities (tennis courts, bowling greens) and is also occupied by the Yanchep Sports and Social Club. Land use categories from DPS 2 that the activities on Lot 1 could fall under any of the following:

 

civic use: means premises used by a government department, an instrumentality of the State or the local government for administrative, recreational or other purposes.

 

community purpose: means premises designed or adapted primarily for the provision of educational, social or recreational facilities or services by organisations involved in activities for community benefit.

 

recreation – private: means premises that are —

·      used for indoor or outdoor leisure, physical exercise, recreation or sport; and

·      not usually open to the public without charge

 

The ‘Recreation – Private’, ‘Community Purpose’ and ‘Civic Use’ land uses are all discretionary (or ‘D’) in the Commercial Zone – and therefore, capable of approval. A Commercial Zone over Lot 1 would also support future activities which would be compatible with other developments on nearby lots.

 

Mixed Use Area

 

There are 24 lots on Avon Road, Yanchep which all contain single house residential development – but have a Mixed Use zoning designation in ASP 40.

 

The structure plan zoning of this land was considered previously by both Administration and DPLH when Amendment No. 5 to ASP 40 was being considered in 2021. At that time, Administration advised the DPLH that although the land on Avon Road has been developed for residential purposes, it was appropriate for that land to remain as Mixed Use. The main reason for this was for the Mixed Use zoned land to be allowed to appropriately separate future residential development to the south from the Business zoned land to the north.

 

Consistent with the approach taken in 2021, the Amendment No. 224 proposal will retain a Mixed Use (R40) Zone over the 24 lots on Avon Road through DPS 2 (refer to Scheme (Amendment) Map 1 in Attachment 6).

 

Extension of the ASP 40 and ASP 76 Approval Duration Period

 

Under Clause 28 of the deemed provisions, a structure plan has effect for a period of ten years, unless another period of time is determined by the WAPC. For structure plans approved prior to 19 October 2015 (which ASP 40 and ASP 76 were), the date of approval under the deemed provisions is taken to be from 19 October 2015.

 

Both the deemed provisions and the Structure Plan Guidelines outline the possibility for the duration of a structure plan to be extended by the WAPC. In this case, Administration considers the City request the WAPC extend the approval duration of ASP 40 and ASP 76 by five years to 19 October 2030. This will allow additional time for the subdivision of the undeveloped areas to occur. This extension will be discussed further in a subsequent report to Council, to be presented following public advertising of Amendment No. 224.

Statutory Compliance

Amendment No. 224 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 can be processed in accordance with the Planning and Development Act 2005 and the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.

 

Following the Minister for Planning’s approval of Amendment No. 224, the WAPC will amend the relevant structure plans pursuant to Clause 29A of the deemed provisions for local planning schemes, provided in Schedule 2 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015. This can occur if Council resolves to include a Statement in the amendment to that effect, pursuant to Regulation 35A of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2021 – 2031:

5 ~ A well planned, safe and resilient City that is easy to travel around and provides a connection between people and places

5.2 - Plan for and manage land use

Risk Appetite Statement

In pursuit of strategic objective goal 5, we will accept a Medium level of risk, extended to High in the areas of Community / Reputation & Financial / Commercial impacts. Shifting transport modes and usage in the City may require short term pain for longer term gain as the City supports the development, maintenance and connection of alternatives to car use (e.g. cycle ways) and the supporting infrastructure.

 

 

 

Risk Management Considerations

 

Risk Title	Risk Rating
CO-O15 – Project Management	Medium
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Director Corporate Strategy & Performance	Manage

 

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

Policy Implications

Amendment No. 224 is being processed noting the WAPC-prepared ‘WA Planning Manual: Guidance for Structure Plans’ in respect to the relationship between structure plans and local planning schemes.

Financial Implications

Costs in preparing Amendment No. 224 – and assisting the WAPC in amending ASP 40 and ASP 76 – can be met from the current Planning and Sustainability operational budget.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       Pursuant to Section 75 of the Planning and Development Act 2005, PREPARES Amendment No. 224 to City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2, to amend the local planning scheme to the extent outlined in Attachment 6;

2.       Pursuant to Regulation 35A of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, RESOLVES that Amendment No. 224 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 include the Statement as provided in Attachment 7;

3.       Pursuant to Regulation 34 and Regulation 35(2) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, RESOLVES that Amendment
No. 224 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 is a standard amendment for the following reasons:

a)      an amendment to the scheme so that it is consistent with a region planning scheme that applies to the scheme area, other than an amendment that is a basic amendment; and

b)      an amendment that would have minimal impact on land in the scheme area that is not the subject of the amendment;

4.       Pursuant to Section 81 and Section 82 of the Planning and Development Act 2005, REFERS Amendment No. 224 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 to the Environmental Protection Authority;

5.       Pursuant to Section 83A of the Planning and Development Act 2005, SUBMITS Amendment No. 224 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 to the Minister for Planning for approval to advertise;

6.       Subject to the satisfaction of the Environmental Protection Authority and the Minister for Planning (or their delegate), ADVERTISES Amendment No. 224 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 for a period of 42 days pursuant to Regulation 47 and Regulation 76A of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, incorporating any amendments that may be recommended or required;

7.       NOTES that prospective submitters will be advised that following the approval of Amendment No. 224 to District Planning Scheme No. 2, the Western Australian Planning Commission will consider amending the following structure plans, in a manner consistent with the Statement in Attachment 7:

·        Lots 1 and 102 Yanchep Beach Road, Yanchep (Jindowie West) Agreed Local Structure Plan No. 40; and

·        Lots 1 and 2 Yanchep Beach Road, Yanchep (Jindowie East) Agreed Local Structure Plan No. 76; and

8.       NOTES that a further report will be presented to a future Council Meeting, following advertising of Amendment No. 224 to District Planning Scheme No. 2, seeking resolution in respect to the following:

a)      Whether to support Amendment No. 224 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 (with or without modification) – or not support the amendment;

b)      To provide the advertised Amendment No. 224 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 to the Western Australian Planning Commission; and

c)      Subject to Council supporting Amendment No. 224 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 following advertising, requesting the following structure plans to be amended pursuant to Clause 29A(2) of the District Planning Scheme No. 2 Deemed Provisions:

·        Lots 1 and 102 Yanchep Beach Road, Yanchep (Jindowie West) Agreed Local Structure Plan No. 40; and

·        Lots 1 and 2 Yanchep Beach Road, Yanchep (Jindowie East) Agreed Local Structure Plan No. 76; and

d)      To request the Western Australian Planning Commission extend the approval duration period for the structure plans mentioned in Item 8(c) above to 19 October 2030, pursuant to Clause 28 of the District Planning Scheme No. 2 Deemed Provisions.

 

Attachments:

1⇩.	Attachment 1 - Scheme Map Extract over Area Affected by Amendment No. 224 to District Planning Scheme No. 2	24/286243
2⇩.	Attachment 2 - Structure Plan Maps - Lots 1 & 102 Yanchep Beach Road, Yanchep Structure Plan No. 40	24/249032
3⇩.	Attachment 3 - Structure Plan Maps - Lot 1 and 2 Yanchep Beach Road Yanchep Agreed Structure Plan No. 76	24/249044
4⇩.	Attachment 4 - R-Code Plans - Over Land Affected by Agreed Local Structure Plan No. 76	24/249072
5⇩.	Attachment 5 - Yanchep-Two Rocks District Structure Plan Map	24/249003
6⇩.	Attachment 6 - Scheme Amendment Proposal - Amendment No. 224 to District Planning Scheme No. 2	24/282959
7⇩.	Attachment 7 - Regulation 35A Statement - Amendment No. 224 to District Planning Scheme No. 2	24/283331
8⇩.	Attachment 8 - Track Changes of Recommended Text Amendments - Lots 1 and 102 Yanchep Beach Road Yanchep Agreed Local Structure Plan No. 40	24/282067
9⇩.	Attachment 9 - Tracked Changes of Recommended Text Amendments - Lots 1 and 2 Yanchep Beach Road, Yanchep Agreed Local Structure Plan No. 76	24/282069

  

 

 

Assets

Asset Operations & Services

File Ref:                                              1446V05 – 24/292465

Responsible Officer:                          Director Assets

Attachments:                                       1         

 

Issue

To consider the draft City of Wanneroo Road Safety Management Plan 2024-2030.

Background

The Terms of Reference for the RoadWise Advisory Group require that a Road Safety Management Plan be developed and reviewed by the group.

 

A new five-year State Road Funds to Local Government Agreement was signed in September 2023. This commits Local and State Government to work together to:

 

·        Increase sustainable road construction practices through the greater use of recycled

materials;

 

·        Provide increased opportunities for employment of Aboriginal people; and

 

·        Increase application of the Safe System for road safety approach to the local road

network.

Detail

The draft Road Safety Management Plan 2024-2030, refer Attachment 1, aligns to the State Government’s road safety strategy, Driving Change 2020-2030.  The Plan is based on the safe system approach towards road safety and covers a six-year period to provide a long term strategic direction for road safety actions in the City.

 

Road safety is a shared responsibility across all levels of government and the community. Strong leadership by the City on this issue can have a lasting positive impact for the whole community by adopting initiatives to reduce the number of people killed and seriously injured (KSI) on our roads. The draft Road Safety Management Plan focuses on how the City can improve safety on the its road network and aligns with the four elements of a safe system:

 

·        Safe Speeds

·        Safe Roads

·        Safe Vehicles

·        Safe People

Consultation

Administration facilitated discussion at the Roadwise Advisory Group meetings held on 17 April 2024 and 26 June 2024. These discussions included a review of the previous 2019-2021 Road Safety Strategic Action Plan and initiatives in order to rationalise and prioritise actions for inclusion in the 2024-2030 Road Safety Management Plan.

Based on the feedback received from the Advisory Group, Administration prepared a list of initiatives to be continued, along with new initiatives to be incorporated in the draft Road Safety Management Plan 2024-2030. This revised list of actions was presented to the RoadWise Working Group at its meeting held on 26 June 2024.

Comment

Administration facilitated a discussion within the RoadWise Advisory Group which resulted in the rationalisation and prioritisation of initiatives for inclusion in the Road Safety Management Plan 2024-2030.

 

Through this Road Safety Management Plan, the City will be committing to reducing road trauma on the local road network throughout the City of Wanneroo. This will be achieved by adopting Safe System principles and by accepting that people will always make mistakes on our roads but should not be killed or seriously injured consequently.

The Road Safety Management Plan (2024-2030) outlines the measures that the City will be taking to promote the Safe Systems principles to assist with promoting road safety in the City of Wanneroo. It does not contain specific projects but establishes the mechanisms that will be used to achieve the target of 50% reduction in the numbers of people killed, severely or seriously injured within the City.

 

Administration now seeks Council endorsement for the draft 2024-2030 Road Safety Management Plan as recommended by the RoadWise Working Group.

 

Statutory Compliance

 

The Wanneroo RoadWise Advisory Group was established under the Local Government Act 1996, Part 5-Administration, Section 5.9.c.

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2021 – 2031:

5 ~ A well planned, safe and resilient City that is easy to travel around and provides a connection between people and places

5.4 - People can move around easily

Risk Appetite Statement

In pursuit of strategic objective goal 5, we will accept a Medium level of risk, extended to High in the areas of Community / Reputation & Financial / Commercial impacts. Shifting transport modes and usage in the City may require short term pain for longer term gain as the City supports the development, maintenance and connection of alternatives to car use (e.g. cycle ways) and the supporting infrastructure.

 

Risk Management Considerations

 

Risk Title	Risk Rating
CO-023 Safety of Community	Medium
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Director Community and Place	Manage

 

The above risks relating to the issues contained within this report have been identified and considered within the City’s Strategic/Corporate risk register.

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

The Road Safety Management Plan does not identify projects to be delivered. All initiatives contained within the plan will be incorporated into existing programmes and subject to funding allocated through approved annual budgets.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council ENDORSES the City of Wanneroo Road Safety Management Plan for 2024-2030 as detailed in Attachment 1.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1⇩.

Attachment 1 City of Wanneroo Road Safety Management Plan 2024/2030

22/417034

 

 

 

 

Strategic Asset Management

File Ref:                                              37807V001 – 24/275279

Responsible Officer:                          Director Assets

Attachments:                                       1         

 

Issue

To consider petition PT02-07/24, requesting solid fencing of the drainage basin located on Shaftesbury Avenue abutting Hepburn Avenue, Alexander Heights to reduce vehicle noise and improve visual outlook for residents.

Background

At the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 16 July 2024, Council received a Petition signed by 25 residents, representing properties on Shaftesbury Avenue, Waterloo Court and Fenchurch Street, Alexander Heights, which reads as follows:

 

“We, the residents of Shaftesbury Avenue Alexander Heights, present this petition with the request that the drainage pit, located between Shaftesbury and Hepburn Avenues be enclosed by means of solid fencing.  This will assist in reducing vehicle noise from Hepburn Avenue and improve the visual outlook from our homes.  We make this request on precedents already set within our suburb, as at least several other drainage pits are fully enclosed with limestone pillars, colorbond and brick fences (please see attached some photo examples – St Quentin Parkway, Rolleston Dale, Avila Way, Adria Road/Benelli Place and Josephine Way).)

 

We would also like to clarify that the extra planting installed by Mr Hugh Nguyen back in September 2017, had all died off within months, due to lack of water after planting and the council contractors mowed the remaining down.  At this stage there are still major viewpoints for residences on Shaftesbury Avenue, looking through to Hepburn Avenue.  This makes for a very unsightly outlook from the front of our homes and the traffic noise travels, as it now seems to be worse since the installation of the southbound barrier wall build over in Ballajura, as it has now created an echo effect towards our homes.”

 

A location map of the subject site is shown in Attachment 1.

Detail

The Shaftesbury/Hepburn Avenue drainage basin was constructed as part of the duplication of Hepburn Avenue between November 2010 and July 2011. Works also involved revegetation and landscaping on Hepburn Avenue. The drainage basin and the verges alongside Hepburn Avenue and Shaftesbury Avenue are lined with street trees and vegetation.

 

The City’s standard of fencing treatment around drainage sumps have traditionally been PVC coated cyclone mesh fencing. In recent times however to address security issues and improve amenity, black powder-coated Garrison style fencing has been installed.  The use of solid fencing around drainage sumps have generally been constructed by land developers in conjunction with the subdivision of the land at the time.

 

The area surrounding the drainage sump is already heavily landscaped screening it from the adjacent roads. There may be some areas as indicated by the petitioner that may need additional planting.

Consultation

No community consultation has been undertaken at this stage as a result of this petition.

Comment

In terms of traffic noise, it is considered that the installation of solid fencing around the drainage sump site would have a negligible impact in reducing traffic noise from Hepburn Avenue.

 

Noise is legislated by the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997; which gives an exemption to noise emissions from vehicle propulsion and braking systems and states as follows:

3.       Regulations do not apply to certain noise emissions

(1)       Nothing in these regulations applies to the following noise emissions –

(a) noise emissions from the propulsion and braking systems of motor vehicles  operating on a road.

 

Historically, the City provides a vegetated landscape buffer as a natural transition and separation between road reserve and property boundaries. The existing vegetation buffer on this road section is fully established and acts as a noise attenuating buffer.  A number of new trees have been planted within the road reserve along Shaftesbury Avenue as part of the 2024 Street Tree Program including two new trees adjacent to the sump.

 

There are further opportunities to plant more trees on the western end of the sump where trees have recently failed and been removed. Whilst the density of planting along the Shaftesbury Avenue verge adjacent to the sump is currently suitable given its width, the health of existing trees will be monitored and any opportunities to increase the density of tree planting will be actioned to provide further noise attenuation.

 

It is considered that the installation of a solid fence in this instance is not warranted as the area surrounding the drainage sump is already heavily planted and provides for an adequate planting and screening buffer. If there are areas that require further planting, Administration will work with the residents to provide for additional screen planting, where suitable.

 

Should Council choose to install colorbond fencing to screen the drainage sump, it would impact some of the trees adjacent to the fence line to enable access and the construction of the fence. The estimated cost of constructing this type of fencing of approximately 220 metres along the perimeter is in the order of $40,000 and may be subject to a vegetation clearing permit pending further vegetation assessment.

Statutory Compliance

Nil

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2021 – 2031:

5 ~ A well planned, safe and resilient City that is easy to travel around and provides a connection between people and places

5.3 - Responsibly managed and maintained assets

Risk Appetite Statement

In pursuit of strategic objective goal 5, we will accept a Medium level of risk, extended to High in the areas of Community / Reputation & Financial / Commercial impacts. Shifting transport modes and usage in the City may require short term pain for longer term gain as the City supports the development, maintenance and connection of alternatives to car use (e.g. cycle ways) and the supporting infrastructure.

 

Risk Management Considerations

 

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

Policy Implications

Nil.

Financial Implications

The cost for any suitable infill planting will form part of the City’s annual operating budgets.

 

Should Council choose to install colorbond fencing along the perimeter (approximately 220 metres) to screen the drainage sump at a cost of $40,000, funding would need to be identified and allocated in future years budgets.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       NOTES the petitioners’ request for the City to construct a solid fence surrounding the drainage sump between Hepburn Avenue and Shaftesbury Avenue, Alexander Heights;

2.       DOES NOT SUPPORT the installation of a solid fence around the drainage sump;

3.       ENDORSES Administration to undertake additional planting around the drainage sump to improve the planted screen buffers; and

4.       ADVISES the petition organiser of Council’s decision.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1⇩.

Attachment 1. Location Plan - Shaftesbury Avenue, Alexander Heights

24/294773

 

 

 

 

File Ref:                                              8706V03 – 24/292430

Responsible Officer:                          Director Assets

Attachments:                                       2         

 

Issue

To consider petition PT01-07/24, received at Council meeting held on 16 July 2024, regarding the area of road reserve between the footpath on Patrick Court and the property boundary of Our Lady of Mercy Church in Girrawheen.

Background

The concrete footpath on the south side of Patrick Court (refer to Attachment 1 for location) is constructed approximately 0.3m from the property line in accordance with the Austroads Guidelines Part 6a – Paths for Walking and Cycling and is as shown in Attachment 2. The petition states the following:

 

“The petition requests for the City of Wanneroo to increase maintenance of the verge between the footpath of Patrick Court, Girrawheen and Our Lady of Mercy boundary line.

 

The weeds grow under the fence line, causing damage to the church gardens and nuisance for the volunteer maintenance team. 

 

The City’s maintenance team does not attend to the weed growth at the level required to mitigate this problem. The petitioners originally requested for the width of the path to be extended. This would restrict weed growth on a permanent basis, and benefit the pedestrians assessing the Library, Hub, Senior Citizens and Summerfield Shopping Centre.

 

The City added the request to the long-term financial plan, however it is not regarded as a priority.

 

The petition also requests for the City to prioritise the footpath extension if it cannot maintain the weed growth to an adequate standard.”

Detail

A 2.5m wide concrete shared path was constructed on the north side of Patrick Court in October / November 2022 to provide improved pedestrian connectivity to the shopping centre and the Girrawheen Library and Community Hub, connecting to the new asphalt shared path on Girrawheen Avenue. With a 1.5m wide concrete path on the south side of Patrick Court, the pedestrian /cyclist facilities are to the highest standard detailed in the City’s Pathways Policy, which is appropriate for a high pedestrian demand area such as this.

 

Footpaths are not constructed up to the property line, to ensure that adequate clearance to any vegetation, fence or wall is provided so that the entire constructed width of the path can be used. The pathways policy does identify that a 1.5m pedestrian path abutting a property boundary or kerb should be widened to 1.8m to ensure that a 1.5m effective path width is provided (detailed in Figure 1 of the Policy). In this instance this would mean a replacement of the existing 1.5m path with anew 1.8m pathway as it would be practically very challenging to widen the existing path by 300mm.

Consultation

The petition organiser had contacted Administration before the petition was submitted. An assessment for a replacement path was undertaken in accordance with the Pathways Policy which indicated that it does not meet the requirements of the policy, and the petition organiser was advised accordingly.

Comment

As noted earlier this report, widening of the pathway would be very challenging and a replacement to a 1.8m path would be required, which does not meet the Pathway Policy provisions.

 

As part of the recently endorsed Girrawheen Hub Masterplan, the streetscape in Patrick Court subject to the appropriate funding allocation is to be upgraded in the next few years. This will include the construction and modification of infrastructure including the pathway.

 

The City ordinarily only maintains street verges to a minimal standard that ensures that the footpath and road reserve is safe and accessible. The recent Service Review – Manage and Maintain Streetscapes identified Streetscape Responsibilities and that the owner/occupier is responsible for vegetation maintenance between the property boundaries and kerbs. Therefore, the maintenance of this verge remains the responsibility of the adjoining property owner/occupiers.

 

In this instance, the pathway section adjoining the Our Lady of Mercy Church is used by the community accessing the City’s facilities in the immediate vicinity. Therefore, in consultation with the petition organiser, Administration will consider the implementation of a seasonal weed control program to manage the vegetation between the fence and footpath.

Statutory Compliance

Nil

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2021 – 2031:

5 ~ A well planned, safe and resilient City that is easy to travel around and provides a connection between people and places

5.3 - Responsibly managed and maintained assets

Risk Appetite Statement

In pursuit of strategic objective goal 5, we will accept a Medium level of risk, extended to High in the areas of Community / Reputation & Financial / Commercial impacts. Shifting transport modes and usage in the City may require short term pain for longer term gain as the City supports the development, maintenance and connection of alternatives to car use (e.g. cycle ways) and the supporting infrastructure.

 

Risk Management Considerations

 

Risk Title	Risk Rating
CO-023 Safety of Community	Medium
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Director Community & Place	Manage

Policy Implications

The Pathway Policy provisions were used to determine the priority for upgrading the footpath.

Financial Implications

Should Council decide to construct a replacement 1.8m wide concrete pathway at this location, it would cost around $20,000.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       NOTES the Petition PT01-07/24 received at its 16 July 2024 Ordinary Council Meeting;

2.       DOES NOT SUPPORT the widening of the footpath on the south side of Patrick Court in front of Our Lady of Mercy Church;

3.       NOTES that, in consultation with the petition organiser, Administration will consider the implementation of a seasonal weed control program to manage the vegetation between the fence and footpath adjoining the Our Lady of Mercy Church; and

4.       ADVISES the petitioners of its decision.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1⇩.	Attachment 1 - Location Plan Patrick Court Girrawheen	24/303053
2⇩.	Attachment 2 - Patrick Court Road Verge	24/294657

 

 

 

 

 

Infrastructure Capital Works

File Ref:                                              24985V05 – 24/264647

Responsible Officer:                          Director Assets

Attachments:                                       1         

 

Issue

To consider Tender No. 24034 for the Renewal of Play Equipment, Softfall and Installation of Shade Sail Structures within the City of Wanneroo.

Background

The 2024/25 Capital Works Program has identified 31 parks across the City that require the renewal of park assets and/or the installation of shade structures. 

 

Tender No. 24034 included each park as a separable portion, which allowed Tenderers to submit tenders for each park separately, or collectively for all parks and optimised the number of parks awarded. 

 

The parks that formed the Scope of this Tender are as follows:

 

 

 

 

 

Detail

Tender No. 24034 for the Renewal of Play Equipment, Softfall and Installation of Shade Sail Structures within the City of Wanneroo was advertised on 4 May 2024 and closed on 28 June 2024. 

 

 

Essential details of the proposed contract are as follows: 

 

 

Tender submissions were received from the following companies: 

 

Part A 

·           A Space Australia Pty Ltd (A-Space); 

·           The Trustee for Humphrey Group Trust (Active Discovery); 

·           CRS Creative Recreation Solutions Pty Ltd (CRS) 

·           4Park Pty Ltd T/A Forpark Australia (Forpark); and 

·           Superior Nominees Pty Ltd T/A Miracle Recreation Equipment (Miracle) 

 

Part B 

·           Perth Playground and Rubber Pty Ltd (Perth Playground and Rubber); 

·           West Coast Shade Pty Ltd (West Coast Shade); 

·           Supreme Shades Pty Ltd (Supreme Shades); and 

·           NH Enterprises Pty Ltd t/as Perth Better Homes (Perth Better Homes). 

 

The initial review of the tender submissions by the Tender Evaluation Panel (TEP), confirmed that all offers EXCEPT for A-Space were conforming and suitable for further evaluation. 

 

A-Space failed to submit a price schedule for the works and was therefore non-conforming and removed from further evaluation. 

 

Probity Oversight

Oversight to the tender assessment process was undertaken as per Administration’s process in this regard.  

Tender submissions were evaluated in accordance with the Procurement Evaluation Plan (PEP).  The PEP included the following selection criteria: 

​Item No	​Description	​Weighting
​1	​Sustainable Procurement (Corporate Social Responsibility)  ·      ​Environmental Considerations 5%  ·      ​Buy Local 10%  ·      ​Reconciliation Action Plan 5%  ·      ​Disability Access & Inclusion 5%	​25%
​2	​*Work Health and Safety	​20%
​3	​*Demonstrated Understanding and Methodology	​25%
​4	​*Demonstrated Experience and Capacity	​30%
​5	​Design Suitability and Play Value Offered	​Not weighted
​6	​Pricing (assessed based exclusively on Value for Money principles)	​Not weighted

Tenderers must meet the City’s minimum requirements and for each of the qualitative criteria detailed above (*) to be considered for further evaluation. 

 

Price and design were not included in the weighted criteria but were considered as part of the overall value for money assessment.  Value for money also assessed the compliance of the individual playground proposals to the playground parameters and specifications in comparison to the lump sum price for each park. 

 

Evaluation Criteria 1 – Sustainable Procurement (25%)

 

An assessment was made to determine the ranking based on the tenderers’ environmental policy and practices, buy local contributions, as well as commitment to reconciliation and disability access and inclusion 

 

Sub Criteria a) – Environment Consideration (5%)

 

An assessment based on tenderers’ Environmental policy and practices, resulted in the following ranking:  

Part A

​Tenderer	​Ranking
​Active Discovery	​1
​CRS	​2
​Miracle	​3
​Forpark	​4

 

Part B

​Tenderer	​Ranking
​West Coast Shade	​1
​Supreme Shades	​1
​Perth Playground & Rubber	​3
​Perth Better Homes	​4

 

Sub Criteria b) – Buy Local (10%)

 

An assessment was made on the responses provided, that relate to: 

 

·           Purchasing arrangements through local businesses. 

·           Location of tenderer’s offices, depots, and production facilities. 

·           Residential addresses of staff and subcontractors. 

·           Requirement for new employees arising from award of the contract. 

 

 

This assessment resulted in the following ranking:

 

Part A 

​Tenderer	​Ranking
​Miracle	​1
​CRS	​2
​Forpark	​2
​Active Discovery	​4

 

Part B 

​Tenderer	​Ranking
​Supreme Shades	​1
​West Coast Shade	​2
​Perth Better Homes	​2
​Perth Playground & Rubber	​4

 

Sub Criteria c) – Reconciliation Action Plan (5%)

 

An assessment was made on the responses provided that relate to: 

 

·           Relationships - building positive relationships between indigenous and non-indigenous people. 

·           Respect - recognising the contribution of Indigenous people to Australia and learning more about the history, culture, and diversity in a two-way communication process; and 

·           Opportunities - attracting, developing, and retaining organisational talent to build opportunities for aboriginal employment, training, development and mentoring. 

 

This assessment resulted in the following ranking: 

 

Part A 

​Tenderer	​Ranking
​Active Discovery	​1
​Forpark	​2
​Miracle	​3
​CRS	​3

 

Part B 

​Tenderer	​Ranking
​West Coast Shade	​1
​Perth Better Homes	​2
​Supreme Shades	​2
​Perth Playground & Rubber	​2

 

Sub Criteria d) – Disability Access & Inclusion (5%)    

 

An assessment was made to determine the ranking based on the responses provided that relate to:  

 

·           People with disabilities have the same buildings and facilities access opportunities as other people, 

·           People with disabilities receive information in a format that will enable them to access information as readily as other people are able to access it, 

·           People with disabilities receive the same level and quality of service from staff as other people receive,  

·           People with disabilities have the same opportunities as other people to make complaints, and  

·           People with disabilities have the same opportunities as other people to participate in any employment opportunities.  

 

The assessment resulted in the following ranking:

 

Part A

​Tenderer	​Ranking
​Active Discovery	​1
​CRS	​2
​Forpark	​3
​Miracle	​4

 

Part B

​Tenderer	​Ranking
​Perth Better Homes	​1
​Supreme Shades	​1
​West Coast Shade	​3
​Perth Playground & Rubber	​4

Overall Sustainable Procurement Ranking Summary

​The overall assessment of the Sustainable Procurement criteria resulted in the following consolidated ranking: 

 

Part A

​Tenderer	​Ranking
​Active Discovery	​1
​CRS	​2
​Forpark	​3
​Miracle	​4

 

Part B

​Tenderer	​Ranking
​Supreme Shades	​1
​West Coast Shades	​2
​Perth Better Homes	​3
​Perth Playground & Rubber	​4

 

Evaluation Criteria 2 - Safety Management Systems (20%)

 

​​Evidence of safety management policies and practices was assessed from the tender submissions. The assessment for safety management was based on the tenderers’ responses to a Work Health and Safety Management System Questionnaire included within the tender documentation.

 

The assessment of this criterion has resulted in the following ranking: 

 

Part A

​Tenderer	​Ranking
​Active Discovery	​1
​CRS	​1
​Miracle	​2
​Forpark	​4

 

Part B

​Tenderer	​Ranking
​Supreme Shades	​1
​Perth Better Homes	​1
​West Coast Shade	​3
​Perth Playground & Rubber	​3

Evaluation Criteria 3 - Demonstrated Understanding and Methodology (30%)

​The tenderer’s methodology and understanding as presented in their tender submission were assessed to evaluate their capacity to meet the requirements of the contract. Assessment of this criterion considered the tenderer’s understanding of the project scope, how the scope is to be delivered and the proposed Schedule of Works. The assessment of this criterion has resulted in the following ranking: 

Part A

​Tenderer	​Ranking
​Forpark	​1
​Miracle	​2
​Active Discovery	​2
​CRS	​4

 

Part B

​Tenderer	​Ranking
​Perth Better Homes	​1
​West Coast Shade	​1
​Supreme Shade	​1
​Perth Playground & Rubber	​1

Evaluation Criteria 4 - Demonstrated Experience Capacity and Resources (30%)

​The tenderers’ relevant experience in demonstrating the achievement of meeting client expectations, as well as the personnel available as presented in their tender submission were assessed to evaluate their capability to meet the requirements of the contract. Assessment of this criterion considered the tendering entity’s credentials, current workload, and resources available to fulfil the requirements of the contract.

 

The assessment of this criterion has resulted in the following ranking: 

Part A

​Tenderer	​Ranking
​Active Discovery	​1
​Forpark	​1
​CRS	​3
​Miracle	​3

Part B

​Tenderer	​Ranking
​West Coast Shade	​1
​Supreme Shades	​1
​Perth Playground & Rubber	​1
​Perth Better Homes	​1

Overall Qualitative Weighted Assessment and Ranking

Tenderers’ submissions were reviewed in accordance with the PEP with the following key observations: 

·           Price and Design are not weighted and are included in the overall value for money assessment. 

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

·           The tenderers’ design proposals for both shade sails and play equipment complied with the scope of works. 

·           The works to be issued as a separable portion contract. 

 

The overall qualitative weighted assessment resulted in the following:

Part A

​Tenderer	​Ranking
​Forpark	​1
​Active Discovery	​2
​Miracle	​3
​CRS	​4

Part B

​Tenderer	​Ranking
​Supreme Shades	​1
​Perth Better Homes	​2
​West Coast Shade	​3
​Perth Playground & Rubber	​4

 

Evaluation Criteria 5 – Design Suitability and Play Value Offered (Non-weighted)

Each tenderer was required to provide an individual design proposal for each park within the scope of works.  

 

Each play equipment design was assessed on the playground parameters detailed in the scope of work, as well as their compliance to all relevant City specifications and Australian Standards. Shade sail designs and the softfall component were assessed on the compliance to all relevant City specifications and Australian Standards. 

The results of the design evaluation were included in the overall value for money assessment for tenderers that met the minimum Overall Qualitative Criteria requirement.  

Evaluation Criteria 6 - Pricing (Non-weighted)

The fixed lump sum price per each individual park proposal was applied in the overall value for money assessment for tenderers that met the minimum Overall Qualitative Criteria requirement. 

Overall Value for Money Assessment

Active Discovery, Miracle, Forpark, CRS, West Coast Shade, Perth Better Homes, Supreme Shades and Perth Playground & Rubber all achieved acceptable qualitative criteria weighted scores.  

The individual design proposals from these tenderers were assessed on the value for money offered, based on the lump sum price provided and the design consensus reached.  

Refer to Confidential Attachment 1 for the outcome of this assessment.  

A summary of this outcome is as follows: 

​Part A ​Park Name	​ Recommended Tender
​1A - Peridot Park, Banksia Grove	​Active Discovery
​1B - Banksia Grove Community Centre, Banksia Grove	​Active Discovery
​1C-Hainsworth Community Centre, Girrawheen	​Forpark Australia
​1D - Willespie Park, Pearsall	​Active Discovery
​1E - Crivelli Park, Ashby	​Active Discovery
​1F - Goolema Park, Wanneroo	​Forpark Australia
​1G - Richard Aldersea Park, Clarkson	​Forpark Australia
​1H - Leisure Park, Yanchep	​Active Discovery
​Part B Park Name	​ Recommended Tender
​1I - Cinnabar Park, Eglington	​Perth Better Homes
​1J - Burleigh Park, Yanchep	​Perth Better Homes
​1K - Discovery Park, Banksia Grove	​Perth Playground & Rubber
​1L - Mansfield Park, Butler	​Perth Playground & Rubber
​1M - Anthony Waring Park, Clarkson	Perth Playground & Rubber
​1N - Hainsworth Skate Park, Girrawheen	​Perth Playground & Rubber
​1O - Shelvock Park, Koondoola 1	​Perth Playground & Rubber
​1P - Marangaroo Park, Marangaroo	​Perth Playground & Rubber
​1Q - Foundation Park, Quinns Rocks	​Perth Playground & Rubber
​1R - Damperia Park, Sinagra	​Perth Playground & Rubber
​1S - Da Vinci Park, Tapping	​Perth Better Homes
​1T - Leemans Landing, Two Rocks	​Perth Playground & Rubber
​1U - Shelvock Park, Koondoola	​Perth Better Homes
​1UA - Viridis Park, Yanchep	​Perth Better Homes
​1UB - Alford Park, Alkimos	​Perth Better Homes
​1V - Mist Park, Banksia Grove	​Perth Better Homes
​1W - Ormiston Park, Clarkson	​Perth Better Homes
​1X - Tendring Park, Girrawheen	​Perth Better Homes
​1Y - Lenham Park, Marangaroo	​Perth Better Homes
​1Z - Two Rocks Child Health Centre, Two Rocks	​Perth Better Homes
​1AA - Nannatee Park, Wanneroo	​Perth Better Homes
​1AB - Shelvock Park, Koondoola 2	​Perth Better Homes
​1AC - Da Vinci Park, Tapping 1	​Perth Better Homes

 

As a result, it is recommended that the separable portions tenders be awarded to the tenderers as detailed in Attachment 1. 

 

Consultation

 

Community Consultation will be completed in accordance with the City’s Community Engagement procedures relating to minor construction works. 

 

On award of each Contract, the relevant contractor is required to install signage of the intended works at each individual playground relating to the construction works. Prior to construction, stakeholders will be notified of the upcoming on-site works and an information letter will be delivered to all residents within a 400m radius of the relevant park. 

 

Post tender award and prior to the construction phase, regular progress updates on key project milestones will be provided; posting of information on the City’s webpage and media channels. 

Statutory Compliance

Tenders were invited in accordance with the requirements of Section 3.57 of the Local Government Act 1995. The tendering procedures and evaluation complied with the requirements of Part 4 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996.

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2021 – 2031:

5 ~ A well planned, safe and resilient City that is easy to travel around and provides a connection between people and places

5.3 - Responsibly managed and maintained assets

Risk Appetite Statement

In pursuit of strategic objective goal 5, we will accept a Medium level of risk, extended to High in the areas of Community / Reputation & Financial / Commercial impacts. Shifting transport modes and usage in the City may require short term pain for longer term gain as the City supports the development, maintenance and connection of alternatives to car use (e.g. cycle ways) and the supporting infrastructure.

 

 

Risk Management Considerations

 

Risk Title	Risk Rating
CO-O08 Contract Management	Low
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Director Corporate Strategy & Performance	Manage

 

Risk Title	Risk Rating
ST-S04 Integrated Infrastructure & Utility Planning	Low
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Director Planning & Sustainability and Director Assets	Manage

 

Financial and Performance Risk

 

Financial Risk

 

A financial risk assessment was undertaken on recommended tenderers as part of the tender evaluation process. An independent assessment by Equifax Australasia was completed on recommended tenderers where the combined awarded value exceeded $250,000. This assessment advised that all recommended tenderers have a satisfactory financial capacity to meet the requirements of the contract. 

​ 

Each playground that forms part of the four contracts will be awarded as a separable portion, and payment for each separable portion will be made in full on reaching the practical completion for each park. 

 

Performance Risk

 

All tenderers have a varying degree of experience in the playground industry working with various local governments across Western Australia. They have completed several projects for the City with positive results. In addition to that, the recommended tenderers have no disputes and claims history as stated in each submission. 

 

Individual reference checks have also indicated that the recommended tenderers have a strong track record of working with local government for more than 5 years.

Policy Implications

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

Financial (Budget) Implications

The table below summarises the available funding for the renewal of play equipment, Softfall and installation of shade sails and associated expenses in the 2024/25 Capital Works Program: 

 

​Description	​Expenditure	​Budget
​Budget:	​	​
​Allocated Capital Works Budget for 2024/25 (PR-4516)	​	​$260,000
​Allocated Capital Works Budget for 2024/25 (PR-4517)	​	​$1,520,000
​Expenditure:	​	​
​Expenditure incurred to date	​$0	​
​Commitment to date	​$0	​
​Project Management and Professional Fees	​$30,000	​
​Tender 24034 (this Tender) - Total	$1,664,835	​
​Construction Contingency	$85,165	​
​Total	​$1,780,000	​$1,780,000

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:

1.       ACCEPTS the separable portions tenders, detailed in the Confidential Attachment 1, submitted by Active Discovery, Forpark, Perth Playground & Rubber and Perth Better Homes for Tender No. 24034, renewal of park assets and installation of new shade sails, for their respective separable portions’ lump sum prices as per the General Conditions of Tendering; and

2.       NOTES that the information contained in the Confidential Attachment 1 will be released via the City’s website after a formal letter of Tender Award is issued to the successful tenderers (as per item 1 above).

 

Attachments:

1.

Confidential Attachment 1 - RFT 24034 - Renewal of Play Equipment , Softfall and Installation of Shade Sail Structures

Confidential

 

 

This attachment is confidential and distributed under separate cover to all Council Members.
Confidential Attachment 1 – RFT 24034 – Renewals of Play Equipment, Softfall and installation of Shade Sail Structures	24/291154

 

Community & Place

Community Facilities

File Ref:                                              41352 – 24/258530

Responsible Officer:                          Director Community & Place

Attachments:                                       2         

 

Issue

To seek endorsement of an application for the Department of Local Government, Sport and Cultural Industries (DLGSC) Community Sport and Recreation Facilities Fund (CSRFF) for 2025/26 for a Sports Amenities Building Upgrade (Stage 1) at Abbeville Park, Mindarie.

Background

The CSRFF is administered by DLGSC on behalf of the State Government. Each year, funding is available to community/sporting groups and Local Governments to assist in the development of sport and recreation infrastructure. The aim of the funding program is to increase participation in sport and recreation through an emphasis on well-planned and well-utilised facilities.

 

Through CSRFF, the State Government will invest $20 million in the 2025/26 financial year towards the development of quality physical environments in which the community can enjoy sport and recreation. The CSRFF continues to focus on projects that will maintain or increase physical activity and improve the usability of facilities, such as change rooms, for female participants.

 

The 2025/26 Forward Planning round opened on 18 June 2024. The maximum grant offered for standard applications is one third of the total estimated costs, noting that grants cannot be used for internal City costs such as design and project management. Applications are due to be submitted to DLGSC by no later than 30 September 2024. The City will be advised by the DLGSC around February/March 2025 whether its application is successful.

Detail

For the upcoming 2025/26 funding round, Administration is proposing to submit one CSRFF application as follows:

 

Grant Type	Project #	Description	City Funds	Grant Funds	Total Cost
CSRFF	PR-4300	Abbeville Park, Mindarie, Sports Amenities Building Upgrade – Stage 1	$983,334	$491,666	$1,475,000
TOTAL			$983,334	$491,666	$1,475,000

 

 

Project:     Abbeville Park, Mindarie, Sports Amenities Building Upgrades

Applicant: City of Wanneroo

 

Abbeville Park (the Park) is located at 17 Abbeville Circle, Mindarie on Lot 12424 and has an overall land area of approximately 4.4 hectares (Attachment 1). The Park is classified as a Neighbourhood Park and is Crown Land vested to the City of Wanneroo for the purpose of public recreation. The Park is bounded by residential properties to the west, south and east. To the north is the Mindarie Primary School which has a shared use agreement in place with the City to use the grounds during school hours.

The Park is used extensively by local clubs - Mindarie Football Club (soccer) in the winter and Quinns Junior Cricket Club and Mindarie Mustangs Little Athletics Club in the summer – under seasonal booking arrangements.

 

The project is to design and construct upgrades to the existing sports amenities building. The current facility consists of two buildings and requires upgrades to achieve compliance with relevant regulations, and to meet the City’s level of standard provision for sporting reserves. The kiosk building constructed in 2019 consists of 1 x kiosk and 3 x storerooms. The toilet building constructed in 1997 consists of male and female toilet and dry changeroom, and 1 x universal access toilet which is non-compliant.

 

The Active Reserves Master Plan (ARMP) report completed in 2016, noted that focus for Abbeville Park should be on the provision of facilities that are to the required standard to support future use and are flexible to accommodate changing need within the community. The project has an emphasis on upgrading the changeroom building to Australian Standards, supporting universal access requirements, and providing amenities that will support female participation.

 

The upgrades are being designed in a staged approach to align with funding currently listed in the draft Long Term Financial Plan (LTFP) in 2025/26. This nominates for Stage 1 to be completed with funding that is currently listed in 2025/26, and Stage 2 to be completed subject to additional funding being considered in the future review of the LTFP. The scope for each stage is as listed below:

 

Stage 1: Upgrade and construct changeroom facilities, external universal access toilet, first aid room, and umpires room.

 

Stage 2: Construct multipurpose room (with internal access to existing kiosk), internal stores, toilets and universal access toilet.

 

A concept plan is included at Attachment 2 showing Stages 1 & 2. Administration has obtained costs estimates with Stage 1 being $1,475,000 and Stage 2 being $1,458,000.

The application to DLGSC for CSRFF funding is for the construction costs of Stage 1 upgrades only.

Consultation

Consultation on this project has been undertaken with current facility users and residents in line with the City’s Community Engagement Policy.

Comment

The State Government’s CSRFF funding is a vital component of the City’s funding model for the provision of community level sport and recreation infrastructure. This includes sports amenities buildings - change rooms, storage areas, kiosk, public toilets, and multipurpose/meeting room space.

 

This infrastructure is critical in increasing the capacity of existing facilities to accommodate growth within the City and in developing sustainable clubs. Without CSRFF funding the City would experience additional cost burdens, resulting in projects being staged, delayed or not proceeding. This directly impacts local clubs and the community.

 

In terms of assessment, this project identified for the 2025/26 Forward Planning grant round has been assessed against the philosophy and exclusion criteria established as part of the CSRFF Funding Review Process and it is Administration’s view that the project rating is well planned and needed by the community.

 

Statutory Compliance

 

Nil

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2021 – 2031:

1 ~ An inclusive and accessible City with places and spaces that embrace all

1.3 - Facilities and activities for all

Risk Appetite Statement

In pursuit of strategic objective goal 1, we will accept a Medium level of risk. The recent pandemic has challenged our previous event delivery, place activation and community connection processes, and the City accepts that meeting community expectations in a more restrictive environment needs flexibility and innovation if community connection is to develop and grow in contrast to social and individual isolation.

 

Risk Management Considerations

 

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

 

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

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

This project is listed under PR-4300 in the 2024/25 Capital Works Program with $40,000 for design. A further $1,420,000 is currently listed in the draft LTFP in 2025/26 for Stage 1 construction.

 

It is proposed that an additional $1,500,000 for Stage 2 construction will be listed for consideration in 2026/27 when the LTFP is reviewed later in 2024. If approved, Administration would review eligibility for further CSRFF funding to support Stage 2 construction.

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council ENDORSES the following Community Sport and Recreation Facilities Fund application to the Department of Local Government, Sport and Cultural Industries for the 2025/26 funding round with the following assessment, project rating and prioritisation, noting a total grant amount sought of $491,666:

CSRFF
Project	Assessment	Project Rating	Priority
PR-4300 Abbeville Park, Mindarie, Sports Amenities Building Upgrade – Stage 1	Satisfactory	Well planned and needed by the municipality	1

 

 

Attachments:

1⇩.	Attachment 1 - Abbeville Park Mindarie Location Plan	24/302304
2⇩.	Attachment 2 - Abbeville Park Sports Amenities Building Upgrades Concept Plan	24/276771

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Community Safety & Emergency Management Report

File Ref:                                              34520 – 24/239093

Responsible Officer:                          Director Community & Place

Attachments:                                       3         

 

Issue

To consider a review of the Bush Fire Advisory Committee (BFAC) Terms of Reference.

Background

At the Ordinary Council meeting of 6 February 2018, it was resolved:

 

“That council APPROVES the Terms of Reference for the Bush Fire Advisory Committee as detailed in Attachment 1”. (Attachment 1).

Detail

BFAC was established to provide advice to Council on matters relating to the Bush Fires Act 1954, Section 67(1):

 

“A local government may at any time appoint such persons as it thinks fit as a bush fire advisory committee for the purpose of advising the local government regarding all matters relating to the preventing, controlling and extinguishing of bush fires, the planning of the layout of fire-breaks in the district, prosecutions for breaches of this Act, the formation of bush fire brigades and the grouping thereof under group brigade officers, the ensuring of co-operation and co-ordination of bush fire brigades in their efforts and activities, and any other matter relating to bush fire control whether of the same kind as, or a different kind from, those specified in this subsection.”

 

At the BFAC meeting held on the 24 June 2024, it was agreed that the Terms of Reference was due for review to better align the aims and functions with the purpose of the BFAC.

 

The proposed changes to the ‘Aims and Functions’ includes:

 

·        Provide advice and make recommendations to Council related to fire prevention, preparedness, response and recovery.

·        Provide reports on bushfire mitigation achievements and recommendations

·        Provide support and guidance to the City of Wanneroo Bush Fire Brigades and assist those Bush Fire Brigades to fulfill their objectives.

·        Promotes cooperation and coordination between the City’s Bush Fire brigades and stakeholders.

·        Provide updates on projects, policies, events and any other issues related to the City’s bush fire service.

·        Performs any other function assigned to the Committee under the Bush Fires Act 1954, associated Regulations or Council Policy.

 

Updates have also been made in relation to administrative procedures to align with the City’s current software, systems and terminology.

 

Refer Attachment 1 for current Terms of Reference, Attachment 2 for proposed track changes and Attachment 3 for the draft updated version.

Consultation

Consultation has been undertaken with BFAC as well as the City’s Volunteer Bush Fire Brigades.

Comment

The BFAC, including the key stakeholders support the changes made to the draft Terms of Reference.

Statutory Compliance

Section 5.8 of the Local Government Act 1995 states:

 

“A local government may establish committees of three or more persons to assist the Council and to exercise the powers and discharge the duties of the local government that can be delegated to committees.”

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2021 – 2031:

5 ~ A well planned, safe and resilient City that is easy to travel around and provides a connection between people and places

5.6 - Prepared and resilient

Risk Appetite Statement

In pursuit of strategic objective goal 5, we will accept a Medium level of risk, extended to High in the areas of Community / Reputation & Financial / Commercial impacts. Shifting transport modes and usage in the City may require short term pain for longer term gain as the City supports the development, maintenance and connection of alternatives to car use (e.g. cycle ways) and the supporting infrastructure.

 

Risk Management Considerations

 

Risk Title	Risk Rating
ST-S26 Resilient and Productive Communities	Medium
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Director Community and Place	Manage

 

Risk Title	Risk Rating
CO-023 Safety of Community	Medium
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Director Community and Place	Manage

 

Risk Title	Risk Rating
ST-S23 Stakeholder Engagement	Medium
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Chief Executive Officer	Manage

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council APPROVES the revised Terms of Reference for the Bush Fire Advisory Committee as detailed in Attachment 3.

 

 

Attachments:

1⇩.	Attachment 1 - Terms of Reference Bush Fire Advisory Committee - Current Version	24/249589
2⇩.	Attachment 2 - Terms of Reference Bush Fire Advisory Committee - Proposed Tracked Changes	24/249593
3⇩.	Attachment 3 - Terms of Reference Bush Fire Advisory Committee - Draft Updated Version	24/235116

 

 

 

File Ref:                                              25244V002 – 24/243713

Responsible Officer:                          Director Community & Place

Attachments:                                       2         

 

Issue

To consider the draft Cats Amendment Local Law 2024 (Attachment 1).

Background

The City of Wanneroo Cats Local Law 2023 (Attachment 2) was adopted by Council on
21 November 2023 (CP03-11/23) and gazetted on 30 November 2023.

Once a local law is gazetted, it is referred to the Joint Standing Committee on Delegated Legislation (Committee) to consider under its terms of reference. Where the Committee finds that a local law offends one or more of its terms of reference, it will usually seek a written undertaking from the local government to amend or repeal the instrument in question.

Where a local government does not comply with the Committee’s request for an undertaking, it may, as a last resort, resolve to report to the Parliament recommending the disallowance of the instrument in the Legislative Council.

The Committee wrote to the City on 13 March 2024 requesting that the City, by
23 April 2024, undertake;

1.       Within 6 months, correct the typographical and reference errors in Part 1, clause 4.1, clauses 2.2(c), 4.1(1) and items 1 and 2 in Schedule 2;

2.       Not to enforce the local law to the contrary before it is amended in accordance with undertaking 1;

3.       To ensure that all consequential amendments arising from the undertaking will be made; and

4.       Where the local law is made publicly available by the City, whether in hard copy or electronic form, ensure that it is accompanied by a copy of the undertakings.

The Mayor wrote to the Committee confirming that the Council resolved to amend its local law as part of report (CR01-04/24).

Detail

To fulfill the Undertaking, the Cat Amendment Local Law 2024 (Amendment Local Law) was drafted. 

 

The Amendment Local Law corrects minor typographical and reference errors highlighted by the Committee and includes a provision relating to conditions of approval of an application which was inadvertently deleted from the local law thereby causing the reference errors identified.  By inserting the ‘Conditions’ back into the local law and renumbering all subsequent clauses, the references are now correct.

 

 

 

 

Consultation

 

Section 3.12 of the Act sets out the requirements for a local government to give local public notice for a six-week period when proposing to ‘make’ a local law. The local public notice is to state the purpose and effect of the local law, and detail where the proposed local law may be inspected or obtained.

 

The new local law was advertised for public comment for the duration of the statutory advertising period and copies were made available to be inspected at the City’s offices and supplied to any person who requested a copy.   The close of submissions occurred on 12 July 2024.

After the last day of submissions, the local government is to consider any submissions made and may make the local law as proposed or make a local law that is not significantly different from that proposed.  Should the proposed changes be considered significant, then the local law-making process is to begin again and will require a second consultation process.

 

Two responses were received at the close of the submission period. One response was from the Department of Local Government, Sport & Cultural Industries (DLGSCI) who review proposed draft local laws prior to their progression through to gazettal. The City has addressed those matters raised relating to minor drafting edits.

 

The second response was from a member of the community and was not directly related to the Amendment Local Law but rather a request for an enforcement response.  Community Safety and Emergency Management are addressing this request separately.

 

Comment

 

An absolute majority decision is required for Council to make a local law.

 

The local law, after adoption, will come into effect 14 days after its publication in the Government Gazette. 

 

When a local law is made it must be reviewed by the Joint Standing Committee on Delegated Legislation (the Joint Standing Committee).  

Statutory Compliance

Section 3(2) of the Cat Act 2011 provides that words and expressions defined in the Act have the same meaning in this Act, unless the contrary intention appears. This includes making local laws, and using the process set out in section 3.12(3) of the Act.

 

Local laws that deal with cats must comply with the Cat Act 2011, the Cat Regulations 2012 and the Cat (Uniform Local Provisions) Regulations 2013.  As each of these legislative instruments are quite prescriptive there is not a great deal of matters that can be addressed by local laws.

 

Section 79 of the Cat Act 2011 sets out what can be regulated by local laws:

 

“79.   Local laws

(1)     …

(2)     …

(3)     Without limiting subsection (1), a local law may be made as to one or more of the following —

(a)     the registration of cats;

(b)     removing and impounding cats;

(c)     keeping, transferring and disposing of cats kept at cat management facilities;

(d)     the humane destruction of cats;

(e)     cats creating a nuisance;

(f)      specifying places where cats are prohibited absolutely;

(g)     requiring that in specified areas a portion of the premises on which a cat is kept must be enclosed in a manner capable of confining cats;

(h)     limiting the number of cats that may be kept at premises, or premises of a particular type;

(i)      the establishment, maintenance, licensing, regulation, construction, use, record keeping and inspection of cat management facilities;

(j)      the regulation of approved cat breeders, including record keeping and inspection;

(k)     fees and charges payable in respect of any matter under this Act.”

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2021 – 2031:

7 ~ A well governed and managed City that makes informed decisions, provides strong community leadership and valued customer focused services

7.1 - Clear direction and decision making

Risk Appetite Statement

In pursuit of strategic objective goal 7, we will accept a Medium level of risk as the City balances the capacity of the community to fund services through robust cost-benefit analysis and pursues evidence-based decision making to be effective stewards of the Council and City for future generations.

 

Risk Management Considerations

 

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

 

Risk Title	Risk Rating
CO-O22 Environmental Management	Medium
Accountability	Action Planning Option
Director Planning & Sustainability	Manage

 

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

 

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

Policy Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

The cost of an amendment local law will be met through the operational budget.

Voting Requirements

Absolute Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       ADOPTS BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY, in accordance with section 3.12(4) of the Local Government Act 1995, the City of Wanneroo Cats Amendment Local Law 2024 as set out in Attachment 1;

2.       NOTES the purpose and effect of the local law as:-

Purpose

To correct typographical and reference errors.

Effect

To ensure that the Wanneroo Cats Local Law 2023 is compliant with the local law making process.

3.       REQUESTS Administration, in accordance with s3.12(5) of the Local Government Act 1995, publish the City of Wanneroo Cats Local Law 2023 in the Government Gazette and send a copy to the Minister for Local Government;

4.       NOTES that after Gazettal, in accordance with s3.12(6) of the Local Government Act 1995, local public notice be given:-

a)      stating the title of the local law;

b)      summarising the purpose and effect of the local law (specifying the day on which it comes into operation); and

c)      advising that copies of the local law may be inspected or obtained from the City’s office; and

5.       NOTES that following Gazettal, in accordance with the Local Laws Explanatory Memoranda Directions as issued by the Minister on 12 November 2010, a copy of the local law and a duly completed explanatory memorandum signed by the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer be sent to the Western Australian Parliamentary Joint Standing Committee on Delegated Legislation.

 

 

Attachments:

1⇩.	Attachment 1 - Cats Amendment Local Law 2024 - Draft	24/109840
2⇩.	Attachment 2 - Cat Local Law 2023	23/199807

 

 

 

 

Place Management

File Ref:                                              43390 – 24/291195

Responsible Officer:                          Director Community & Place

Attachments:                                       2         

 

Issue

To consider the establishment of an Australia Day Awards Working Group and draft Terms of Reference.

Background

The City of Wanneroo recognises and celebrates individuals and organisations who have made outstanding contributions to the community during the current year, and/or those who have given outstanding service over a number of years. This is done through the presentation of annual awards at the Australia Day Citizenship Ceremony.

 

Each year the City calls for nominations for the following four categories:

1.       City of Wanneroo Charles Searson Australia Day Youth Award - presented to an individual under 25 years of age.

2.       City of Wanneroo Australia Day Award - presented to an individual over 25 years of age.

3.       City of Wanneroo Australia Day Senior Award - presented to an individual over 65 years of age.

4.       City of Wanneroo Australia Day Community Group or Event Award - presented to an outstanding local community group or event.

 

Historically nominations have been reviewed and determined by an informal judging panel consisting of the Mayor, City staff, and two community representatives. The purpose of this report is for Council Members to consider formalising the judging panel as a Council Working Group by establishing an Australia Day Awards Working Group (Working Group).

Detail

The draft Terms of Reference for the proposed Working Group is provided at Attachment 1 and has been prepared in accordance with the City’s Management Procedure for Committees and Working Groups.

 

It is proposed that the Working Group meet once a year once the nominations have closed, with membership to include:

 

·        The Mayor (or nominee);

·        Up to four (4) Council Members;

·        Manager Place Management (non-voting);

·        Director Community & Place (non-voting);

·        Civic Events Officer (non-voting); and

·        Administration Officer, Place Management (Minutes; non-voting).

 

As per the Australia Day Awards Policy (Attachment 2), all award nominations are required to be subject to an assessment process to ensure there is neither conflict of interest nor negative impact on the City’s reputation or probity.

 

The Working Group would assess nominees according to the following criteria:

 

1.       Made a significant positive contribution to the local community;

2.       Demonstrated leadership and inspiring qualities as a role model for the community;

3.       Active member of the local community which has brought about positive change and improvements in their local community; and

4.       Committed to enhancing their local community.

 

Noting that a Working Group has no delegated power or authority to make decisions, the award winners recommended by the Working Group would need to be subsequently presented to an Ordinary Council Meeting for ratification.

Consultation

The need to establish a Working Group, and the proposed structure has been discussed previously with Council Members at Forum.

Comment

The establishment of a Working Group to oversee the assessment of nominations and determination of the Australia Day Awards will ensure that a more formal process is followed to determine the award winners, and that this process is properly documented through the City’s agenda and minutes software.

 

It is proposed that the Working Group membership comprise the Mayor and Council Member delegates only, along with City officers in a non-voting capacity. Community representatives are no longer proposed to form part of the Working Group as the Awards are presented on behalf of Council, and it is considered more appropriate that the membership be limited to Council Members and City officers.

 

Should Council resolve to support the establishment of the Working Group, the first meeting of the Group will be scheduled for mid-November with a view to presenting a further confidential report to Council in December 2024 to endorse the recommended Award winners.

 

Pending the formation of the Working Group, it is intended that Administration undertake a full review of the Australia Day Awards Policy and associated processes, including requests for additional awards and/or to rename existing awards.  This process would also consider the ongoing need for the Working Group, subject the outcomes the current review of the role and function of the City’s Festival and Cultural Events Committee.

Statutory Compliance

Nil

Strategic Implications

The proposal aligns with the following objective within the Strategic Community Plan 2021 – 2031:

1 ~ An inclusive and accessible City with places and spaces that embrace all

1.1 - Value the contribution of all people

Risk Appetite Statement

In pursuit of strategic objective goal 1, we will accept a Medium level of risk. The recent pandemic has challenged our previous event delivery, place activation and community connection processes, and the City accepts that meeting community expectations in a more restrictive environment needs flexibility and innovation if community connection is to develop and grow in contrast to social and individual isolation.

 

Risk Management Considerations

 

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

 

Risk Title	Risk Rating
ST-S26 Resilient & Productive Communities	Medium
Accountability	Action Planning Options
Director Community and Place	Manage

 

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

Policy Implications

The Australia Day Awards are managed by the Australia Day Awards Policy.

Financial Implications

Nil

Voting Requirements

Simple Majority

 

Recommendation

That Council:-

1.       APPROVES the formation of the Australia Day Awards Working Group;

2.       ENDORSES the Australia Day Awards Working Group Terms of Reference as included at Attachment 1; and

3.       APPOINTS the Mayor and up to four Council Members to the Australia Day Awards Working Group:

a.       Cr _____________________;

b.      Cr _____________________;

c.       Cr _____________________; and

d.      Cr _____________________;

 

 

Attachments:

1⇩.	Attachment 1 - Terms of Reference - Australia Day Awards Working Group	24/263103
2⇩.	Attachment 2 - Australia Day Awards Policy	14/372609[v4]