CITY OF ARMADALE
M I N U T E S
OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE HELD IN THE COMMITTEE ROOM, ADMINISTRATION CENTRE, 7 ORCHARD AVENUE, ARMADALE ON MONDAY, 21 FEBRUARY 2011 AT 7:00 PM.
PRESENT: Cr H A Zelones JP Chair Cr P J Hart Cr C J MacDonald Cr M H Norman (7.07pm to 7.54pm) Cr L Reynolds AM JP Cr L Sargeson Cr R J Tizard
APOLOGIES: Nil
OBSERVERS: Cr W Mauger Cr D M Shaw (7.00pm to 7.30pm)
IN ATTENDANCE: Mr I MacRae Executive Director Development Services Mr P Sanders Executive Manager Planning Services Mr J Erceg Health Services Manager Ms M McGinity Communications Manager Mrs N Cranfield Minute Secretary
Public 2
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 2 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING 21 FEBRUARY 2011
DISCLAIMER
The Disclaimer for protecting Councillors and staff from liability of information and advice given at Committee meetings was read by the Chairman.
DECLARATION OF MEMBER’S INTERESTS
Cr Norman
Proposed Structure Plan Amendment – Lot 700 Eighth Rd, Armadale ------Page 27
QUESTION TIME
Nil.
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES
RESOLVED
Minutes of the Development Services Committee Meeting held on 17 January 2011, to be confirmed.
MOVED Cr Tizard MOTION CARRIED (6/0)
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 3 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING 21 FEBRUARY 2011
ITEMS REFERRED FROM INFORMATION BULLETIN – ISSUE No.2 / 2011
The following items were included for information in the “Development Services” section -
Outstanding Matters & Information Items
Report on Outstanding Matters - Development Services Committee Results of the Streamcare Program 2010 & Direction for 2011
Health
Health Services Manager’s Report for the month of January 2011
Planning
Planning Services Report for the month of January 2011 Planning Application Processing Times - January 2011 Reviews before the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) Town Planning Scheme No.4 - Amendment Action Table Subdivision Applications - WAPC Approvals/Refusals - January 2011 Subdivision Applications - Report on Lots Registered for 2010/2011 PAW Closure Report - Significant Actions during January 2011 Road Naming Report 2010/11 & consequential action of Council Recommendation Compliance Officer’s Report for the month of January 2011
Building
Building Services Manager’s Report for the month of January 2011 Building Compliance Report for the months of January 2011 Building Applications Monthly Statistics - January 2011
Committee noted the information and no further items were raised for discussion and/or further report purposes.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE
INDEX
21 FEBRUARY 2011
HEALTH TERMINATION OF EUROPEAN WASP PROGRAM ------9
ROAD NAMING ROAD RENAMING - CHIDZEY DRIVE TO CHEDZEY DRIVE, SEVILLE GROVE------6 ROAD NAMES NEWHAVEN ESTATE - PRECINCT 9 - LOT 16 NICHOLSON RD, HARRISDALE ------14 ROAD NAMING - LOTS 25 TO 28 WHITELEY ROAD, HILBERT------21
SCHEME AMENDMENTS & STRUCTURE PLANS PROPOSED STRUCTURE PLAN AMENDMENT - LOT 700 EIGHTH ROAD, ARMADALE ------27
STRATEGIC PLANNING FINAL ADOPTION OF COUNCIL POLICY DEV-2 NAMING OF PARKS, PLACES & BUILDINGS ---39
MISCELLANEOUS CONSIDERATION OF RUINS ON TWO ADJOINING PROPERTIES ON THOMPSON ROAD, ROLEYSTONE, FOR INCLUSION IN THE MUNICIPAL HERITAGE INVENTORY ------53 TENDER NO. TEN/29/10 - PROVISION OF PRIVATE SWIMMING POOL INSPECTION SERVICE --- 59 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REPORTS------67
COUNCILLORS' ITEMS CR MACDONALD - ELECTRONIC LODGEMENT OF APPLICATIONS------66 CR MAUGER - FENCING - 17 CARTWRIGHT DRIVE, FORRESTDALE ------66
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 5 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Road Closure / Road Naming 21 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 6 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Road Closure / Road Naming 21 FEBRUARY 2011
ROAD RENAMING – CHIDZEY DRIVE TO CHEDZEY DRIVE, SEVILLE GROVE
WARD : PALOMINO In Brief:-
DATE : 4 February 2011 At its 18 October 2010 meeting, it was recommended to Council that a spelling REF : RM mistake had occurred in 1987 when the road name was originally considered for a RESPONSIBLE : EMPS subdivision in this area. The proposal was MANAGER advertised to the residents of Chidzey Drive to see if they supported the spelling change. APPLICANT : Mrs Delys Powell The proposal was advertised by way of letters LAND : Various and advertising in the Comment News. OWNERS Out of a total number of 33 submissions SUBJECT : Chidzey Drive, Seville received, 29 objected to the name change and LAND Grove 4 supported the proposal. : ZONING MRS : Urban Recommend that Council decline to seek TPS No.4 Residential R15/25 GNC approval for the name change due to lack of support of the residents of Chidzey Tabled Items Drive, but consider taking appropriate action to name a Reserve/Park after Thomas Nil. Chedzey in order to recognise the family name. Officer Interest Declaration
Nil.
Strategic Implications
2.5.1 Provide a safe and efficient movement network including local and arterial roads and associated infrastructure.
Legislation Implications
Land Administration Act 1997. Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1960.
Council Policy / Local Law Implications
Nil.
Budget / Financial Implications
Nil.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 7 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Road Closure / Road Naming 21 FEBRUARY 2011
Consultation
Geographic Names Committee (GNC).
BACKGROUND
At its meeting on 25 October 2010, Council resolved that as a consequence of a misspelling of the name of Chidzey Drive, residents should be canvassed by way of letter and newspaper advertisement to ascertain whether there is support to rename Chidzey Drive to Chedzey Drive.
The applicant believes the street (Chidzey Drive) was named after her father Thomas Henery Chedzey also known as Harry Chedzey and has requested the City to consider changing the spelling of Chidzey Drive to Chedzey Drive, Seville Grove in recognition of a pioneering family.
COMMENT
The Community Heritage Advisory Group (CHAG) considered the matter and agreed it appeared to be a genuine case of misspelling. A study of the City’s old records had discovered references to the name “Chedzey” but not to “Chidzey”. This supports the contention that the name has been spelled incorrectly and Mr Chedzey has not received the proper recognition.
The proposal was advertised by way of a letter to the affected landowners and advertising in the Comment News for a period of three weeks from 8 November 2010 to 3 December 2010. A total of 33 submissions were received, including 29 objections and 4 supporting the proposal.
Refer to Confidential Attachment “B1” of the Agenda for Submitter Plan and Schedule of Submissions outlining comments and issues with the name change.
ANALYSIS
Geographic Names Committee criteria requires such a change of road name to have majority support from affected residents.
There was an approximately 39% response to the City’s letter and from those who responded an 85% objection rate to the name changing proposal. There is not the necessary majority to support the name change.
One means of offering recognition to Mr Chedzey would be to name a Reserve in the area the Harry Chedzey Reserve (or Park) as Thomas Chedzey was better known by the community as “Harry” Chedzey. This was also suggested by one of the respondents. A future Reserve/Park in the Haynes area in the vicinity of Gray Road and Eighth Road could be considered for this naming, as Harry Chedzey had built a new house nearby and planted a citrus orchard on the land.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 8 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Road Closure / Road Naming 21 FEBRUARY 2011
OPTIONS
1. Seek GNC approval for the road name change as submitted.
2. Not support a spelling change and advise the applicant that the Council will retain the street name previously approved but will consider taking appropriate action to name a new Reserve in the district of Haynes in the vicinity of Gray Road and Eighth Road, Harry Chedzey Park or Reserve.
CONCLUSION
It is apparent by the number of residents who responded and opposed the proposal that the name change is not supported. Option 2 is therefore supported.
D9/2/11 RECOMMEND
That Council:
1. Decline to seek approval for the road name change due to lack of support by the residents of Chidzey Drive to Chedzey Drive.
2. Advise the submitters and residents of Chidzey Drive of Point 1 above.
3. Undertake appropriate procedures to name a future Reserve in the vicinity of Gray Road and Eighth Road “Harry Chedzey Reserve” or Park in recognition of Mr Chedzey’s contribution to the Armadale district of over 40 years. If GNC do not support “Harry Chedzey Reserve/Park” then suggest “Chedzey Reserve/Park”.
4. Advise the applicant of the above Council decision.
MOVED Cr Sargeson MOTION CARRIED (6/0)
Cr Norman joined the meeting at 7.07pm. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 9 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Health 21 FEBRUARY 2011
TERMINATION OF EUROPEAN WASP PROGRAM
WARD : ALL In Brief:- • For many years the Department of Agriculture and Food FILE REF : PH/PC/1 Western Australia (DAFWA) has funded the European Wasp Management Program.
DATE : 14 February 2011 • A recent decision to significantly reduce the program, including the discontinuation of the nest removal RESPONSIBLE : HSM program will have adverse impacts on the City. MANAGER Committee additionally recommended that -
- Write to the Minister for Agriculture and Food to express the City’s concerns about the decision to significantly reduce the European Wasp Management Program. - Request that WALGA approach the Minister for Tabled Items Agriculture and Food requesting that the Program be continued. Nil - Note that the Minister for Agriculture and Food has recently confirmed in writing to WALGA that a final decision on the future of the European Wasp Program Officer Interest Declaration has been deferred pending a six month review that DAFWA will conduct in conjunction with key Nil stakeholder groups, including local government. Strategic Implications
Community Wellbeing Ensure effective management of risks to health in accordance with relevant legislation and community needs.
Legislation Implications
Nil.
Council Policy / Local Law Implications
Nil.
Budget / Financial Implications
The termination of the European Wasp program could shift the cost burden for removal of European Wasp nests to local government.
Consultation
WALGA Manager Parks
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 10 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Health 21 FEBRUARY 2011
BACKGROUND
The Department of Agriculture and Food WA (DAFWA) has recently decided to significantly reduce the European Wasp Management Program and will no longer remove European Wasp nests, which in effect transfers the expectation to remove them to local government.
European Wasp nests, which can contain hundreds of thousands of wasps, are usually concealed either underground or in a cavity and it can take several days to locate and remove them. Councils will most likely bear the cost of engaging a specialised pest control contractor to perform the task.
Unlike other biting pests, the European Wasp can sting multiple times in an attack, resulting in swelling and in some cases more severe symptoms that require urgent medical attention.
When that is taken into account together with the fact that they are attracted to raw meat and fruity odours and that they are likely to be active most of the year in our warm Mediterranean climate, their potential impact on traditional outdoor activities such as barbeques becomes apparent.
They are also an environmental as well as an economic pest, as they attack bees and bee hives, native insects and butterfly populations and have a significant impact on the horticultural sector, particular the soft fruit industry.
COMMENT
This is of significant concern to the City as the DAFWA program has been very successful in limiting the establishment of the wasp in this state and as a result of the decision it is likely that the wasp will quickly become established throughout the metropolitan area.
WALGA has begun a multifaceted strategy to advocate for reinstatement of the full European Wasp Program in DAFWA and is seeking a commitment from Government to continue the program.
OPTIONS
1. To write to the Minister for Agriculture and Food to express the City’s concerns about the decision to significantly reduce the European Wasp Management Program and provide a copy to WALGA.
2. To take no action to express the City’s views about the decision to significantly reduce the European Wasp Management Program.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 11 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Health 21 FEBRUARY 2011
CONCLUSION
The European Wasp Management Program has been very successful over many years in preventing the establishment of European Wasps in Western Australia. By reducing the program and ending the removal of nests, the number of nests wasp numbers is likely proliferate and lead to adverse social, economic and environmental impacts.
Executive Director Development Services advised Committee of amended Recommendation.
D10/2/11 RECOMMEND
That Council:
1. Write to the Minister for Agriculture and Food to express the City’s concerns about the decision to significantly reduce the European Wasp Management Program.
2. Request that WALGA approach the Minister for Agriculture and Food requesting that the Program be continued.
3. Note that the Minister for Agriculture and Food has recently confirmed in writing to WALGA that a final decision on the future of the European Wasp Program has been deferred pending a six month review that DAFWA will conduct in conjunction with key stakeholder groups, including local government.
MOVED Cr Hart MOTION CARRIED (7/0)
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 12 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Health 21 FEBRUARY 2011
PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 13 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Road Closure / Road Naming 21 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 14 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Road Closure / Road Naming 21 FEBRUARY 2011
ROAD NAMES NEWHAVEN ESTATE – PRECINCT 9 – LOT 16 NICHOLSON ROAD, HARRISDALE
WARD : LAKE In Brief:-
DATE : 3 February 2011 Council has received a proposal for new road names within the Newhaven Estate – REF : RM/HC Precinct 9, Harrisdale. The proposed road names have a famous RESPONSIBLE : EMPS Town Centres/Places theme and comply MANAGER with the Geographic Names Committee (GNC) criteria. APPLICANT : Whelans Recommend that Council approach the
Geographic Names Committee seeking LAND OWNER : Stockland WA approval for the following new road names Development Pty Ltd within the Newhaven Estate: “Alamo Link”,
“Bloomsbury Way”, “Chatham Way”, SUBJECT LAND : Lot 16 Nicholson Road, “Chrisp Lane”, “Copley Link”, “Covent Harrisdale Lane”, “Cowes Street”, “Dealey Elbow”, “Duomo Way”, “Erlon Way”, “Exchange ZONING Avenue”, “Lafayette Avenue”, “Liberation MRS : Urban Street”, “Mayor Street”, “Monument TPS No.4 : Urban Development Zone Street”, “Navona Lane”, “Pershing Link”, “Portsmouth Way”, “Emanuel Bend”, “Rockefeller Way”, “Rossio Lane”, “Safra Lane”, “Sheaf Way”, “Times Street”, Tabled Items “Tompkins Way”, “Torget Lane”, “Victory Street”, “Vondel Lane”, “Whitmore Loop” Nil. and “Worth Lane” and hold the names “Emanuele”, “Montserrat”, “Hare”, Officer Interest Declaration “Recoleta” and “Bleeker” in reserve until the Geographic Names Committee has approved the names above, or use them as Nil. necessary where any names above may not receive GNC approval. Strategic Implications
2.5.1 Provide a safe and efficient movement network including local and arterial roads and associated infrastructure.
Legislation Implications
Land Administration Act 1997.
Council Policy / Local Law Implications
Nil.
Budget / Financial Implications
Nil.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 15 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Road Closure / Road Naming 21 FEBRUARY 2011
Consultation
Geographic Names Committee (GNC).
DETAILS OF PROPOSAL
Council has received a proposal for the road naming of Newhaven Estate – Precinct 9 - which is being created by a subdivision proposed for Lot 16 Nicholson Road (SUB/141208). The developers are following a famous Town Centres/Places theme.
The applicant proposes the following names to be allocated to the Newhaven Estate in the positions indicated on the attached subdivision plan:
Alamo Link – Alamo Square Park, San Navona Lane – Piazza Navona is a city square in Francisco. Rome, Italy. Bloomsbury Way – Bloomsbury Square Pershing Link – Pershing Square is a public park in Garden, Camden, London. downtown LA, California. Chatham Way – Chatham Square is a major Portsmouth Way – Portsmouth Square, Chinatown, intersection in Chinatown, Manhattan, NY. San Francisco, Ca. Rabin Bend – Rabin Square is the largest open city Chrisp Lane – London, UK. square in central Tel Aviv, Israel. Rockefeller Way – Rockefeller Plaza -situated in the Copley Link – Copley Square, public square middle of the Rockefeller Centre in mid town Boston, Massachusetts. Manhattan, NY. Rossio Lane – The Rossio - name of Pedro IV Square Covent Lane – Covent Garden, London. in Lisbon, Portugal. Cowes Street – Isle of Wight – world’s oldest Safra Lane – Safra Square is Jerusalem’s city hall sailing regatta. public square. Sheaf Way – Sheaf Square is a municipal square, Dealey Elbow – Dealey Plaza, Dallas Texas. Sheffield, England. Duomo Way – Plaza del Duomo, main piazza Times Street – Times Square, a famous New York in the city of Milan, Italy. landmark. Erlon Way – Place Drouet d’Erlon – important Tompkins Way – Tompkins Square 10.5 acre public landmark of the city of Reims, France. park, Manhattan, NY. Exchange Avenue – Exchange Square, Torget Lane – Torget is the administrative centre of Manchester, England. Hurdal municipality in Norway. Lafayette Avenue – Lafayette Square – park Victory Street - Victory Square is a park in that hosts the Civil War monument in New Vancouver, BC, Canada. York. Liberation Street – Liberation Square, major Vondel Lane - Vondel Park is a public park of 47 ha monument in Baghdad. in Amsterdam, Netherlands. Whitmore Loop – Whitmore Square is a public Mayor Street – Plaza Mayor, Madrid, Spain. square in the centre of the south-western quarter of the Adelaide city centre, South Australia. Monument Street – the tallest free standing Worth Lane – Fort Worth, Texas. stone column in the world in London, UK.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 16 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Road Closure / Road Naming 21 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 17 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Road Closure / Road Naming 21 FEBRUARY 2011
The applicant has also provided several names for consideration to hold in reserve in case GNC decides later that a name or names are not suitable. The suggested names to hold in reserve are:
Emanuele - Emanuele Square is situated in Rome. Montserrat - Montserrat Square is situated within the confines of the famous Montserrat Monastery in Spain. Hare - A court situated adjacent to the Thames River in London. Recoleta - Recoleta is an area of great historical and architectural interest in Buenos Aires, Argentina. Bleeker - Bleeker Street is a famous Greenwich Village nightclub district in Manhattan, New York.
COMMENT
Informal consultation with officers of the GNC suggests that the road names will meet the GNC criteria for road naming. The road names chosen have not been duplicated more than 5 times in the metropolitan area and are more than 10 kilometres from existing duplications.
OPTIONS
1. Approve the road names as submitted.
2. Not approve the road names and request the developer to provide alternative road names complying with GNC criteria.
3. Not approve the road names and Council recommend new road names to GNC and the developer.
CONCLUSION
The road names chosen by the developer should meet GNC criteria and appear to be an appropriate proposal for Council to approve. Option 1 is recommended.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 18 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Road Closure / Road Naming 21 FEBRUARY 2011
COMMITTEE considered that the proposed road names “Plac Defilan” and “Rabin” were unsuitable and requested that “Rabin” be replaced with “Emanuele Bend” and that “Plac Defilan” be deleted from the proposed reserve road names list. Accordingly the recommendation was amended.
D11/2/11 RECOMMEND
That Council:
1. Approach the Geographic Names Committee (GNC) seeking approval for the new road names “Alamo Link”, “Bloomsbury Way”, “Chatham Way”, “Chrisp Lane”, “Copley Link”, “Covent Lane”, “Cowes Street”, “Dealey Elbow”, “Duomo Way”, “Erlon Way”, “Exchange Avenue”, “Lafayette Avenue”, “Liberation Street”, “Mayor Street”, “Monument Street”, “Navona Lane”, “Pershing Link”, “Portsmouth Way”, “Emanuele Bend”, “Rockefeller Way”, “Rossio Lane”, “Safra Lane”, “Sheaf Way”, “Times Street”, “Tompkins Way”, “Torget Lane”, “Victory Street”, “Vondel Lane”, “Whitmore Loop” and “Worth Lane” (or suitable road types acceptable to the GNC) for the Newhaven Estate as shown on the attached plan.
2. Hold in reserve for the present the names – “Montserrat”, “Hare”, “Recoleta” and “Bleeker” until the Geographic Names Committee has approved the names above, or use them as necessary where any names above may not receive GNC approval or for future roads in this area.
MOVED Cr Tizard MOTION CARRIED (7/0)
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 19 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Road Closure / Road Naming 21 FEBRUARY 2011
PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 20 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Road Closure / Road Naming 21 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 21 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Road Closure / Road Naming 21 FEBRUARY 2011
ROAD NAMING – LOTS 25 TO 28 WHITELEY ROAD, HILBERT
WARD : LAKE In Brief:-
DATE : 1 February 2011 Council has received a proposal to name new road reserves for a REF : RM/HC subdivision on Lots 25 to 28 Whiteley Road, Hilbert. RESPONSIBLE : EMPS MANAGER The proposed road names follow a theme of Australian rivers and lakes APPLICANT : McMullen Nolan & and comply with the Geographic Partners Pty Ltd Names Committee (GNC) criteria.
LAND OWNER : Department of Housing Recommend that Council approach the Geographic Names Committee SUBJECT : Lots 25 to 28 Whiteley Rd, seeking approval for the new road LAND Hilbert. Property Size - 12.1ha names “Annan Pass”, “Burdekin : Turn”, “Calvert Loop”, “Catani Way”, ZONING : ARA Scheme “Comet Way”, “Jindabyne Street”, “Lyne Street”, “Marne Way” and Tabled Items “Narran Street” and the extension of Ninth Road for the subdivision on Lots Nil. 25 to 28 Whiteley Road, Hilbert, and hold in reserve the names “Barcoo”, Officer Interest Declaration “Georgina”, “Goulburn” and “Isaac” should any of the above names be Nil. found to be unsuitable by the GNC. Strategic Implications
2.5.1 Provide a safe and efficient movement network including local and arterial roads and associated infrastructure.
Legislation Implications
Land Administration Act 1997.
Council Policy / Local Law Implications
Nil.
Budget / Financial Implications
Nil.
Consultation
Geographic Names Committee (GNC).
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 22 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Road Closure / Road Naming 21 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 23 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Road Closure / Road Naming 21 FEBRUARY 2011
DETAILS OF PROPOSAL
Council has received a proposal for the naming of road reserves for new streets which are being created by a subdivision proposed for Lots 25 to 28 Whiteley Road, Hilbert (SUB/139940). The developers are following the theme of Australian lakes and rivers. It is also requested that the road name Ninth Road be extended through the subdivision as the extension of that road will be part of the subdivision process.
The suggested names are:
• Annan Pass – Annan River in far north Queensland; • Burdekin Turn – Burdekin River, Queensland; • Calvert Loop – Calvert River, Northern Territory; • Catani Way – Lake Catani, Victoria; • Comet Way – Comet River, central Queensland; • Jindabyne Street – Lake Jindabyne on the Snowy River, NSW; • Lyne Street – Lyne River in north east WA; • Marne Way – Marne River, South Australia; and • Narran Street – Narran River along the Queensland NSW border.
The applicant has also provided several names for consideration to hold in reserve in case GNC decides later that a name or names are not suitable. The suggested names to hold in reserve are:
• Barcoo – Barcoo River in Queensland; • Georgina – Georgina River in Northern Territory and Queensland; • Goulburn – Goulburn River in Victoria; • Isaac – Isaac River in Queensland; and
COMMENT
Informal consultation with officers of the GNC suggests that the names will meet the GNC criteria for road naming. Each of the road names is duplicated less than five times in the metropolitan area and is more than ten kilometres from existing duplications. The extension of Ninth Road should also be acceptable.
OPTIONS
1. Approve the road names as submitted. 2. Not approve the road names and request the developer to provide alternative road names complying with GNC criteria. 3. Not approve the road names and that Council recommend new road names to GNC and the developer.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 24 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Road Closure / Road Naming 21 FEBRUARY 2011
CONCLUSION
The road names, chosen by the developer, should meet GNC criteria and appear to be an appropriate proposal for Council to approve. Option 1 is recommended.
COMMITTEE considered that the proposed road names “Finke” and “Staaten” were unsuitable and requested that “Fink” be replaced with the reserve name “Georgina Way” and “Staaten” be deleted from the reserve road names list. Accordingly the recommendation was amended.
D12/2/11 RECOMMEND
That Council:
1. Approach the Geographic Names Committee (GNC) seeking approval for the new road names, “Annan Pass”, “Burdekin Turn”, “Calvert Loop”, “Catani Way”, “Comet Way”, “Georgina Way”, “Jindabyne Street”, “Lyne Street”, “Marne Way” and “Narran Street” (or suitable road types acceptable to the GNC) and the extension of Ninth Road for the subdivision of Lots 25 to 28 Whiteley Road, Hilbert as shown on the attached plan.
2. Hold in reserve for the present the names “Barcoo”, “Goulburn”, and “Isaac” until the Geographic Names Committee has approved the names above, or use them as necessary where any of the names above may not receive GNC approval.
MOVED Cr MacDonald MOTION CARRIED (7/0)
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 25 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Road Closure / Road Naming 21 FEBRUARY 2011
PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 26 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Scheme Amendments & Structure Plans 21 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 27 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Scheme Amendments & Structure Plans 21 FEBRUARY 2011
Cr Norman declared a non-financial interest as he has an association with one of the landowners. As a consequence, there may be a perception that his impartiality on the following matter may be affected, but declared that he would disregard this association, consider the matter on its merits and vote accordingly.
PROPOSED STRUCTURE PLAN AMENDMENT - LOT 700 EIGHTH ROAD, ARMADALE
WARD : LAKE In Brief:
APPLN NO. : 35.2010.10.1; SD/DA/4 The City received an application for a Structure Plan amendment on 2 DATE : 14 February 2011 November 2010.
REF : IG The application was advertised for a period of four weeks. A total of 16 RESPONSIBLE : EMPS submissions were received, MANAGER including eleven (11) objections and two (2) submissions supporting the APPLICANT : Dykstra Planning proposal.
LANDOWNER : Neerigen Brook Estate Pty Ltd Pursuant to Clauses 6A.4 and 6A.3.7(a) of Town Planning Scheme SUBJECT LAND : Property size 62193m² No.4, adopt the proposed Change to the Structure Plan over Lot 700, Eight ZONING Road, Armadale subject to several MRS : Urban modifications and additional TPS No.4 : Local Centre provisions.
Tabled Items Nil
Officer Interest Declaration Nil.
Strategic Implications 2.1 Long term planning and development that is guided by a balance between economic, social and environmental objectives. 2.1.1 Review, update and implement the City’s Town Planning Scheme, taking into account the Local Biodiversity Strategy and other environmental considerations.
Legislation Implications • Town Planning & Development Act 2005 • Town Planning Scheme No.4 • State Planning Policy 4.2 - Activity Centres for Perth and Peel
Council Policy / Local Law Implications • Local Planning Strategy • Retail Hierarchy Review • Southern River / Forrestdale / Brookdale / Wungong District Structure Plan (WAPC)
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 28 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Scheme Amendments & Structure Plans 21 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 29 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Scheme Amendments & Structure Plans 21 FEBRUARY 2011
Budget / Financial Implications
Nil.
Consultation
• Development Control Unit (DCU) • Neighbourhood consultation
BACKGROUND
Lot 700 Eighth Road is 62,193m² in area. The Structure Plan was approved in January 2004. The Structure Plan includes the following uses (and associated Structure Plan Provisions): • Shopping centre; • Petrol station; • Car wash; • Fast food outlet; • Medical centre; • Child care premises; • Nursery; and • Hardware store.
There has been one amendment approved September 2010 to the Structure Plan which proposed the inclusion of the following uses (and the addition of associated Structure Plan Provisions): • Club premises; • Community purpose; • Education establishment; • Recreation – Private; and • Showroom.
DETAILS OF PROPOSAL
The application proposes to amend the Structure Plan by including: • A proposed Tavern (Bar/Restaurant), bottle shop and drive-through coffee outlet on the western portion of the site. • Relocating the petrol station and fast food outlet. • An additional drive through coffee outlet. • Sites for potential future additional development near corner of Eighth and Armadale Roads. • Potential subdivision of the site into three lots instead of the two previously depicted. The western lot to accommodate the petrol station, car wash, fast food outlets, bar/restaurant, bottle shop and medical centre; the centre lot to accommodate the main shopping centre. The eastern lot to accommodate complementary development suitable for a range of potential land uses. • Minor changes to internal access configuration. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 30 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Scheme Amendments & Structure Plans 21 FEBRUARY 2011
The land is located opposite the northern portion of the Armadale Redevelopment Authority’s Wungong Scheme Area (Hilbert & Haynes). This area is expected to have more than 30,000 new residents. Subdivisional approval has been issued and work have commenced at some sites. This proposal is well located to serve the northern portion of the new subdivision of Haynes. COMMENT Development Control Unit (DCU) At its meeting on 8 February 2011 the DCU had no objections regarding the proposed Structure Plan amendment, however requested that the access point onto Eighth Road needs to be moved. Public Advertising The application was advertised for two weeks, closing on 7 January 2011. Advertising was carried out by way of letters to affected and nearby landowners. Total No. of submissions received : 16 No. of submissions of conditional support/no objection : 2 No. of submissions of objection : 11 No. of submissions of general advice by Service Agencies : 2 Anonymous submission regarding irrelevant subject : 1 Refer to Confidential Attachment “B2” of the Agenda for location plan of submittors. Refer to Schedule of Submissions at Attachment “A1” of the Minutes. The main issues raised in the submissions, together with a comment on each issue are outlined below. Key Issues Issue 1 – Objection to the proposed Tavern being located on the subject site. This is the issue raised by all the submissions of objection. Concerns raised include increase in noise, hooning, antisocial behaviour, vandalism, intoxicated people walking around in the area and potential for drug use. Comment The issues listed above are issues that may have a detrimental impact on the amenity of the area. However, they are indirectly related to the matter under consideration. The application before the City requests consideration of the future location of built form on the lot that may become a Tavern. The subject lot is zoned 'Local Centre' within TPS No.4 where a Tavern is already a use that may be considered subject to Council's discretion and as such there is valid Planning argument that the use can be represented on the Structure Plan. Amending the Structure Plan does not imply that a Planning Approval has been granted and a subsequent development application for a tavern would need to be considered on its merits. The issues raised are centred around potential negative behaviour should a Tavern be approved and constructed as opposed to the representation of built form on the Structure Plan, and the appropriate time to consider the issues raised would be at the Development Application stage, via an Alcohol Management Plan. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 31 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Scheme Amendments & Structure Plans 21 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 32 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Scheme Amendments & Structure Plans 21 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 33 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Scheme Amendments & Structure Plans 21 FEBRUARY 2011
The applicant has submitted information to address the City’s Alcohol Risk Minimisation Policy. Further to this the applicant has proposed that an Alcohol Management Plan should be prepared in support of a future Development Application for the premises, however at this stage the applicant emphasises that the following broad principles will be adhered to:
Provision of appropriate lighting; Provision of safe and clear pathways around the facility; Responsible serving of alcohol; Reasonable hours of operation suited to the locality; and Opportunity for provision of taxi services.
Recommendation
That the issue is noted.
Issue 2 - The proposal of a Tavern being located in the same development as a child care premises is detrimental to the children attending the facility.
Comment
The proposed Tavern is located approximately 300 metres away from proposed premises available for a child care facility. The City has not received any application for a child care facility on this land. It is only a use that maybe considered under the Structure Plan. If a Development Application for a Child Care Centre is received, then management issues will be considered at that time.
Recommendation
That the issue be noted.
Issue 3 - Public access way being located between Lots 144, 145 and 3153 will encourage bad behaviour, bring criminals and drunks close to residences.
Comment
The public access way(s) were previously approved as part of the Structure Plan and is not being proposed to be amended. Provision No.9 of the currently approved Structure Plan includes a requirement that a safe pedestrian link is provided between the shopping centre and Girrawheen Street. Without this public access way, pedestrian access will be restricted to the shopping centre and other facilities on site.
Recommendation
That the issue not be supported. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 34 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Scheme Amendments & Structure Plans 21 FEBRUARY 2011
Issue 4 – Concerns raised about the use of ‘Club Premises’ and the following related issues:
• Late night noise • Anti social behaviour • Drunkenness • Vandalism • Proximity to housing • Potential for drug use • Attracting undesirable people at all hours.
Comment
The definition of a Club Premises under the City’s TPS No.4 ‘means premises used by a legally constituted club or association or other body of persons united by a common interest;’ and not a ‘night club’. The use may only be considered under the Structure Plan. The use ‘Club Premises’ is an ‘A’ use under the City’s TPS No.4 Zoning Table, which means it is a Discretionary use and requires advertising prior to being approved. If or when an application is made it will be advertised to affected residents providing them with details as to what the proposal is. This use is already included in the adopted Structure Plan.
Recommendation
That the issue not be supported.
ANALYSIS
Town Planning Scheme No.4
The objectives of the 'Local Centre' zone within TPS No.4 are:
"(a) To provide for a limited range of shopping and community services to meet the day-to- day needs of individual neighbourhoods. (b) To ensure the design and landscaping of development provides a high standard of safety and amenity and contributes towards a sense of place and community within the local neighbourhood".
The proposed Structure Plan Amendment proposes the addition of the following uses in the western area of the subject site. The proposed uses are as per below on the City’s Town Planning Scheme (TPS) No.4 Zoning Table:
Drive through coffee outlet - Fast Food Outlet - D - Discretionary use Tavern - A - Discretionary use and requires advertising DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 35 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Scheme Amendments & Structure Plans 21 FEBRUARY 2011
These uses can clearly be seen as complimentary to providing day-to-day needs of the neighbourhood (drive through coffee) and contributing to the sense of place and community within the neighbourhood (Tavern), thus meeting the objectives of the Scheme. Drive through coffee outlets are being provided throughout the metropolitan area at present, and Taverns have long been recognised as a casual social gathering place, a facility that could be argued to be missing from the immediate area with the closure of the Bega Tavern. All of these additional uses require a further Development Approval. An indicative calculation of parking has been provided by the applicant which shows ample parking on the subject site. The parking requirements will change according to the separate floor areas occupied by the separate uses and assessed at the Development Approval stage more thoroughly.
State Planning Policy 4.2 Activity Centres for Perth and Peel
The State Planning Policy 4.2 limits shopping retail floor space within Neighbourhood / Local Centres to an area of 4,500m² net lettable area (nla) unless consistent with a Commission endorsed Local Planning Strategy or centre plan for the area. The total retail floor space approved for the subject site under the existing Development Approval for the shopping centre is 4125m², which complies with the State Planning Policy 4.2. There is adequate floor space for the proposed Tavern and Bottle Shop.
The City's Alcohol Risk Minimisation Policy.
The applicant has submitted information to address the City’s Alcohol Risk Minimising Policy as identified in italics below. The information is generally satisfactory for the Structure Plan stage.
“1.1 Location and Compatibility with Other Land Uses and Activities
The location of the proposed tavern/restaurant and bottle shop is within an area zoned `Local Centre'. As such it will be located adjacent to other commercial and non-residential uses. The proposed location is considered appropriate for the proposed use as the site is separated from surrounding residential uses by Armadale and Eighth Roads. Additionally, shared parking and access would be well accommodated on the local centre site, and the size and scale of the development would not have any amenity impacts on residential uses.
1.2 Location and Public Safety
The proposed location does not pose a high risk to public safety. The location is well connected to the surrounding street network and would be easily accessible for taxi services. Additionally, buildings and pathways will be designed to comply with all relevant standards and a lighting plan will be developed as a condition of development approval to ensure safety around the building and surrounding parking areas. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 36 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Scheme Amendments & Structure Plans 21 FEBRUARY 2011
1.3 Public Interest Test
There was public support for the closure of the West Armadale Tavern in Girraween Street and it was the owner of lot 700 Eighth Road and proponent of this Structure Plan that facilitated the closure. A new tavern/restaurant and bottle shop at Lot 700 Eighth Road will allow for a well located, new purpose built facility that will be family orientated and will attract a different mix of patrons. Given the history of the Girraween Street Tavern, and in the context of the extent of public advertising there have only been a relatively small number of objections to the proposed inclusion of a tavern use on the Structure Plan.
1.4 Density
The density of liquor outlets is not increasing as a result of including a tavern/restaurant and bottle shop use on the Structure Plan. The proposed uses will effectively replace the uses formerly on Girraween Street with new better located facilities including a restaurant component targeting a more family based demographic. There are no similar facilities nearby and the potential for such a use on the site will provide the surrounding residential area with the convenience and choice of a high quality restaurant /tavern venue and bottle shop without compromising the amenity of the area.
The nearest bottle shops to the subject land are all located in excess of 2 km away with Challis Liquor on Challis Road and Liquorland at Champion Drive Shopping Centre being the closest. The nearest taverns are located in the Armadale City Centre approximately 3 km away. The proposed uses are therefore considered to be appropriately located in terms of the density of existing outlets.”
1.5 Strategies to Prevent Anti Social Behaviour
An Alcohol Management Plan will be prepared by the licensee to demonstrate strategies to prevent anti-social behaviour. This requirement may be included as a condition on the Structure Plan and would be implemented as a condition of development approval.
The Alcohol Management Plan would be required to ensure:
• The responsible serving of alcohol; • Monitoring and control of people under the influence of alcohol while they are in the licensed area and its vicinity; • Bar staff are trained in the responsible service of alcohol; • Minimal impact on neighbouring properties and people due to excessive noise or anti- social behaviour; • No person under the age of 18 is able to purchase or consume alcohol; and • Compliance with any relevant legislation in addition to the above, the inclusion of a restaurant will result in a significant number of patrons also consuming food on the premises. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 37 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Scheme Amendments & Structure Plans 21 FEBRUARY 2011
1.6 Accessibility
As the premises would be a purpose built facility it will be designed to ensure appropriate access, egress and compliance with the BCA.
1.7 Past History
There is no past history of this facility. The proposal is new and will provide opportunity for detailed assessment through a development application. It will also allow for an Alcohol Management Plan to be prepared in accordance with Council's policy and will facilitate a development appropriate to the site.”
The information submitted by the applicant has demonstrated an understanding of the undertakings that would need to be made should a Tavern be applied for in the future. It is acknowledged that the information is at a broad level as it is difficult to be precise when the eventual layout and capacity of a Tavern are not known at the present time, however it is considered appropriate to the application under consideration. Further, the general principles are sound and a greater level of detail can be provided should a development application ever be made. The City may make it a Provision within the Structure Plan that an Alcohol Management Plan shall be submitted during Development Approval stage to the City’s satisfaction and it be adhered to at all times during operation.
OPTIONS
1. Council may adopt the proposed Structure Plan Amendment subject to modifications and impose Provisions on the Structure Plan that require issues to be addressed as part of any future Development Applications.
2. Council may refuse the proposed Structure Plan Amendment taking into consideration the submissions of objections received during the advertising period.
CONCLUSION
Although the objections received during the advertising period are justifiable concerns, they are merely speculations given the history of the Bega Tavern. The applicant has addressed the City's Alcohol Risk Minimisation Policy and agreed to submit an Alcohol Management Plan during the Development Application stage, which the City would then consider. The applicant has also provided an indicative layout that shows the proposal is relatively small scale and will comprise of a bar/bistro of approximately equal areas (i.e. approximately 50% of the floor area open to the public will be a bistro/restaurant). Examples of similar (though larger) premises that combine restaurant/bar uses include the 'CY O'Connor Village Pub' near the corner of Warton Road and Nicholson Road in Piara Waters and 'The Gate' at Cockburn Gateway. It is therefore recommended that Council adopt Option 1.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 38 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Scheme Amendments & Structure Plans 21 FEBRUARY 2011
Committee discussed the location and character of the proposed tavern. It was noted that the proposed location was orientated more towards future residents rather than current ones north of Armadale Road and it was recognised that the proponents preferred fast food uses to front Armadale Road. It was also noted that the tavern was a replacement of the West Armadale Bega Tavern and would offer a more family orientated facility. Committee was advised that the structure plan modification had been advertised quite widely (including 358 letters to nearby residents).
D13/2/11 RECOMMEND
That Council:
1. Pursuant to Clauses 6A.4 and 6A.3.7(a) of Town Planning Scheme No.4 adopt the proposed Amendment to the Structure Plan over Lot 700 Eighth Road, Armadale subject to the following modifications:
a) The inclusion of following provision on the Structure Plan under the heading of “Provisions” to the satisfaction of the Executive Director Development Services:
i) A comprehensive Alcohol Management Plan shall be prepared and submitted as part of the Development Application for the Tavern to the satisfaction of the City of Armadale.
ii) A detailed parking calculation plan shall be submitted by the applicant upon the submission of every Development Application to the satisfaction of the City of Armadale.
b) The modification of the Structure Plan to move the southern most access point onto Eighth Road to a suitable location to the satisfaction of the Executive Director Technical Services.
2. Upon the matters specified in Part 1 above, being included in the Structure Plan documentation or otherwise being attended to by the applicant, pursuant to Clauses 6A.4 and 6A.3.9 of Town Planning Scheme No.4, Council authorises officers to forward the proposed Amendment to the Structure Plan to the Western Australian Planning Commission for approval under Clauses 6A.4 and 6A.3.10.
3. Endorses the comments made in this report regarding the submissions received on the proposed Amendment to the Structure Plan for inclusion in the schedule of submissions to be forwarded to the Western Australian Planning Commission and advises the submitters and applicant of its decision.
MOVED Cr Sargeson MOTION CARRIED (7/0) DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 39 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Strategic Planning 21 FEBRUARY 2011
FINAL ADOPTION OF COUNCIL POLICY DEV-2 NAMING OF PARKS, PLACES AND BUILDINGS
WARD : ALL In Brief:
DATE : 7 February 2011 In response to a request by Council a draft policy was prepared to guide the naming of REF : MAK parks, places and buildings owned or managed by the City. RESPONSIBLE : EDDS MANAGER Council adopted draft Council Policy COMD 5 (now to be known as DEV 2) Naming of Tabled Items Parks, Places and Buildings, for the purpose of advertising, on 22 March 2010. Nil. The draft Policy was advertised for a period Officer Interest Declaration of 28 days.
Following close of advertising the Policy Nil. DEV 2 Naming of Parks, Places and Buildings was referred to Council for final Strategic Implications approval. Council deferred final approval of the policy pending further review of the 2.1 Long term planning and naming and consultation processes of the development that is guided by a policy. balance between economic, social and environmental objectives. The policy has now been amended and is again referred to Council for final approval. Legislation Implications
Local Government Act 1995
Council Policy / Local Law Implications
Policies are determined by Council and may be amended or waived according to circumstances. This power is conveyed to Council in section 2.7(2) (b) of the Local Government Act 1995.
All policies are required to be reviewed at least once every three (3) years.
Budget / Financial Implications
There were minor budget implications related to advertising of both the draft policy and practice. Ongoing costs may be incurred in the carrying out of community consultation processes that may be required under the management practice. For the naming of individual parks or buildings the community consultation process may include newspaper advertisements, letters to nearby landowners and/or the erection of a sign on site for the duration of the consultation period. Consultation costs are likely to be in excess of $1000 per naming proposal. Therefore, if there are a number of proposals to rename a facility throughout a year then the advertising costs are likely to run into the several thousands. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 40 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Strategic Planning 21 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 41 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Strategic Planning 21 FEBRUARY 2011
There will also be costs related to the manufacture and erection of name signage at the newly named parks and facilities. Consideration needs to be given to how these budget implications will be accommodated with the Parks’ Budget.
In addition, there could be staff and document search costs associated with the research required to validate proposed names or to determine the origin of and reasons why a previous name was chosen, in instances involving the renaming of a facility.
Various Departments have been involved in naming over the last few years and the costs involved have been recovered from general accounts for advertising and signage within the relevant Department’s budget. However, given the potential for increases in costs with regard to this process, it may be necessary to allocate specific accounts for this purpose in subsequent budgets.
It is noted that some local governments charge an administration fee for naming requests submitted by external parties and this could be considered in the future in the Schedule of Fees and Charges adopted annually by Council.
Consultation
Following adoption of the draft documents by the Council on 22 March 2010, the draft policy was advertised comprehensively for public comment via newspaper advertisements, the City’s website and letters to community and sporting groups within the City (Refer Council minute D76/9/10 28 September 2010 for full details of the consultation process).
BACKGROUND
Refer Council minute D76/9/10 28 September 2010 for full background.
At the meeting held on 28 September 2010, Council, with regard to the adoption of Policy DEV 2, resolved as follows:
1. That Council Policy DEV 2 be recommitted to the next Development Services Committee pending further review of the naming and consultation processes of the policy.
The following Parts 2 to 5 of the 28 September resolution related to approval of names for various specific parks. The actions required by parts 2 to 5 of the resolution have been completed or are being progressed.
COMMENT
Details of Modifications to Policy and Management Practice
A modification has been made to part g) of draft policy DEV 2 to include reference to business owners who have contributed significantly to the local community. Part g) now reads as follows:
g) Individuals, including business owners and service providers, who have contributed substantially to the community (eg Harold King Community Centre). DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 42 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Strategic Planning 21 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 43 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Strategic Planning 21 FEBRUARY 2011
The Management Practice DEV 2 has been amended in the following ways:
1. Modification of clause 3 to include suburb names as a possible name for parks and sporting reserves. This would generally be applied if a park/reserve was a district level sporting facility; 2. Modification of clause 6 d) i to include Councillors who have served a minimum of 2 terms; 3. Modification of clause 6 d) ii to include business owners and associations; 4. Addition of new part v to clause 6 d) to include “Contributors to the community”; and 5. Modification to the third paragraph of clause 9 to include small parks and reserves as generally being exempt from the need for public consultation prior to adopting a name as set out below: In newly developing urban areas (ie areas that do not have a longstanding resident population) or where a small park or reserve is involved, community consultation prior to the assignment of a name to a new park or facility will not generally be considered necessary. 6. Modification to the first paragraph of Clause 10 to more clearly define when a naming proposal should go to a Council meeting for determination and to allow for Council scrutiny of naming proposals for the City’s assets. The proposed modified clause reads as follows:
10. Approval Process
Prior to a name being formally applied to a particular park, place or building, Councillors will be advised by memorandum of the proposal and given seven (7) days to advise of any objections.
Naming or re-naming of a park, place or building will generally only require a resolution of Council in the following instances:
i The name has not been chosen from the list maintained by the City; or ii A Councillor raises an objection to the use of a name on the list in a particular instance.
The policy and management practice are included at Attachment “A2” of the Minutes.
A number of names of local business people who have contributed to the community have been provided to the City by a Councillor and have been added to the list of potential names for parks, places and buildings. This list will be maintained and added to by the City on an ongoing basis.
A copy of the list is included at Attachment “A3” of the Minutes. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 44 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Strategic Planning 21 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 45 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Strategic Planning 21 FEBRUARY 2011
Naming of Various Parks
At its meeting of 28 September 2010, Council resolved to formally name a large number of parks. Part 3 of Council’s resolution required the referral of the adopted names for parks over 1 hectare in area to the Geographic Names Committee for approval. In addition part 4 of the Council’s resolution required the referral of the other names adopted by Council to Landgate for information only.
Landgate/Geographic Names committee have advised that most of the names forwarded to them by the City have been approved. However, there were a small number where they expressed non-acceptance of a name, parcel type (eg reserve or park) or simply asked for additional background information. These include:
Park Name Landgate response COA proposed modified name The use of “Reserve” in the name is not acceptable as the reserve William Lockard number applies to multiple parcels Reserve of land, only one of which is the Advise Landgate the name “William Portion reserve 48977 parcel the COA wish to name after Lockard Park” is acceptable to COA. William Lockard. The name “William Lockard Park” is acceptable The land that will eventually form It is recommended that Landgate be this park is made up of a couple of advised that COA support the name different reserves and some “Jim and Alma Baker Park”. private land. Accordingly, the use The matter has been discussed with of “reserve” is not supported. The Andrew Baker (son), who confirmed Baker’s House Reserve duplication of the name “Baker’s that his father Henry James Baker Reserve 48977 House” for the park as well as the was also known as “Jim” and that his building is not supported. The mother (Alma Scott Baker) had a following would be supported: significant role in the construction of “Baker’s Park” or “Peaceful Park” the house. The options would be “Jim or “Welcome Park” after the Baker Park” or “Jim and Alma Baker adjoining street names. Park”. The use of “Reserve” in the name is not acceptable as the reserve Damerham Reserve number applies to multiple parcels Advise Landgate the name Part Reserve 28745 of land, only one of which is the “Damerham Park” is acceptable to parcel the COA wish to name after COA. Damerham Road. The name “Damerham Park” is acceptable The name for the park is not acceptable as it is an exact duplication of the road name and Seminole Gardens Advise Landgate the name “Seminole could cause confusion for Reserve” is acceptable to COA. Reserve 42936 emergency responders. Landgate recommend instead: Seminole Reserve or Seminole Park. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 46 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Strategic Planning 21 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 47 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Strategic Planning 21 FEBRUARY 2011
Park Name Landgate response COA proposed modified name Advise Landgate the name “Heronwood Reserve” is acceptable to COA. Heronwood Glade is one of the streets that abut the park. The other The name for the park is not streets abutting the park are Sacred acceptable as it is an exact Glade and Harrisdale Drive. duplication of the road name and Harrisdale Park was deemed not Sacred Glade Reserve could cause confusion for suitable, as the name already applies Reserve 49892 emergency responders. Landgate to the nearby Harrisdale Swamp. Similarly, Wright Park is not recommend instead: Sacred Reserve or Park, Heronwood considered an appropriate name given Reserve or Park or Wright Reserve the nearby Wright Lake. Whilst our or Park. previous decision to use the name Sacred Glade was an obvious reflection of the abutting street name, it is considered that simply calling the park Sacred Park may potentially have mistaken connotations that the reserve is a sacred site. The use of “Reserve” in the name is not acceptable as the reserve number applies to multiple parcels Advise Landgate the name “Matron of land, only one of which is the Olive Galliers Park” is acceptable to Matron Olive Galliers parcel the COA wish to name after COA. Reserve Matron Galliers. The name
Part Reserve 28745 “Matron Olive Galliers Park” is acceptable to Landgate. Biographical information provided to Additional information on Matron Landgate. Galliers’ history requested by Landgate The use of “Reserve” in the name is not acceptable as the reserve Joe Saunders Reserve number applies to multiple parcels of land, only one of which is the Advise Landgate the name “Joe Reserves 49768 & parcel the COA wish to name after Saunders Park” is acceptable to COA. 49769 Joe Saunders. The name “Joe Saunders Park” is acceptable to Landgate
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 48 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Strategic Planning 21 FEBRUARY 2011
ANALYSIS
Policies are generally only developed if they will further the achievement of the City’s strategic goals or contribute to the fulfilment of mandatory obligations. They are defined courses of action that should be followed in particular circumstances and are intended to give guidance to staff on what is permissible when dealing with certain matters. They guide the discretionary part of Council’s decision making and form an essential step in the delegation of Council powers.
Council Policy DEV 2 has been drafted to provide guidance for Council and City Staff with regard to the naming of Council facilities and particularly to address the following matters:
1. Careful consideration should be given to the naming of the City’s parks, places and buildings. The name of such a facility can have a significant influence on the future development and sense of community within an area.
2. To ensure new names meet Council’s general requirements without each decision having to be made by Council.
3. To ensure that the naming of Council facilities is managed in a considered way according to an established set of criteria.
Policy DEV 2 will be required to be reviewed within three (3) years in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 1995.
The reserve and building naming proposals contained in this report demonstrate the application of the new policy and management practice.
OPTIONS
Policy 1. Council could resolve to adopt Council Policy DEV 2 with or without modifications. 2. Council could resolve not to adopt Council Policy DEV 2 in respect to the Naming of Parks, Places and Buildings.
Naming Proposals 1. Council could resolve to name the reserves detailed in this report as set out in the table contained in the report with or without modification. 2. Council could resolve not to name the reserves as set out in this report because there are other more pertinent names that could be applied.
CONCLUSION
This policy will provide a clear and rational framework for the naming of Council owned or managed facilities, enable the acknowledgement of local history, recognise the contribution of individuals to the community and facilitate the identification of parks and reserves in the City.
In this regard, Option 1 is recommended for both the Policy and the Naming proposals.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 49 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Strategic Planning 21 FEBRUARY 2011
Committee discussed the reserve name “Baker’s Park” and possible non-acceptance of the proposed name by GNC due to the apostrophe in the word “Baker’s”.
Committee suggested that officers investigate the original owner/s Christian name/s which may be included in the proposed reserve name.
Executive Director Development Services advises that the matter has been discussed with Mr Andrew Baker (son) who confirmed that his father Henry James Baker was also known as “Jim” and his mother (Alma Scott Baker) had a significant role in the construction of the house. The Baker family erected the house over a number of years using recycled materials collected from across the State.
The suggested options are –
Jim Baker Park; or Jim and Alma Baker Park.
It is recommended that Jim and Alma Baker Park be approved.
Accordingly the officer's report and recommendation was modified.
D14/2/11 RECOMMEND
That Council:
1. Adopt Council Policy DEV 2 as set out below:
RATIONALE A policy is required to provide a consistent framework for the naming or renaming of Parks, Places and Buildings owned or managed by the City to enable the acknowledgement of local history, recognise the contribution of individuals to the community and facilitate the identification of parks, buildings and reserves in the City.
1. POLICY When proposing names for facilities developed and owned by the City, the following will be taken into consideration:
a) The locality within which the facility is situated (eg – Kelmscott Hall); b) Any historical events associated with or near the site (eg – Martin’s Cairn, Cole’s Shaft); c) Indigenous and cultural heritage relevant to the site (eg - Minnawarra Park, Migrant Park); DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 50 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Strategic Planning 21 FEBRUARY 2011
d) Marketing opportunities for the City (eg - Armadale Arena); e) Pioneering families (family names only) associated with the immediate area (5-10 kilometres radius) (eg - Fancote Park); f) Social or calendar events relevant to the place or building (eg – Kelmscott Agricultural Showgrounds); and g) Individuals who have contributed substantially to the community, including business owners and service providers (eg - Harold King Community Centre).
A list will be maintained by the City of names suitable for the naming of Parks, Places and Buildings and preference shall be given to the application of names on this list. Compilation of the list of names shall follow the Geographic Names Committee of Western Australia’s Principles, Guidelines and Procedures (as amended).
For the purposes of this policy a “Place” is a geographical location or a special feature within another facility (eg The Amphitheatre in Memorial Park or Picnic Rock in Roleystone).
Any approval by the City for the naming of a Park, Place or Building should be in accordance with the current Management Practice.
2. Names the following reserves/part reserves as detailed below:
Park Name Proposed Name Portion Reserve 48977 “William Lockard Park” * Wright Road Harrisdale Welcome Meander, Harrisdale “Jim and Alma Baker Park”* Reserve 48977 Damerham Road Armadale “Damerham Park” * Part Reserve 28745 Seminole Gardens, Seville Grove “Seminole Reserve” * Reserve 42936 Sacred Glade, Harrisdale “Heronwood Reserve” * Reserve 49892 Galliers Road Armadale “Matron Olive Galliers Park” Part Reserve 28745 Advise Landgate the name Dorney Esplanade, Champion “Joe Saunders Park” is Lakes - Reserves 49768 & 49769 acceptable to COA. * reserve is larger than 1 ha.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 51 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Strategic Planning 21 FEBRUARY 2011
3. The proposed names for those reserves identified as exceeding one (1) hectare in area (refer tables above) be referred to Landgate for approval by the Minister for Lands.
4. Landgate be notified of the names approved for reserves less than 1 hectare in area.
5. Signs detailing the approved park and building names be erected on the reserves set out above, when sufficient funds are available in the relevant Department budgets and approval by the Minister for Lands has been obtained for those reserves exceeding one (1) hectare in area.
MOVED Cr Tizard MOTION CARRIED (7/0)
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 52 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Miscellaneous 21 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 53 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Miscellaneous 21 FEBRUARY 2011
CONSIDERATION OF RUINS ON TWO ADJOINING PROPERTIES ON THOMPSON ROAD, ROLEYSTONE, FOR INCLUSION IN THE MUNICIPAL HERITAGE INVENTORY
WARD : JARRAH In Brief:-
FILE REF : P17047; & P29347 The Thomas Buckingham House Ruins on Thompson Road, Roleystone, DATE : 27 January 2011 comprise two cottage ruins, dry stone walls, stone dam and a timber and iron REF : HC shed.
RESPONSIBLE : EMPS The place is connected with the MANAGER pioneering Buckingham family and relates back to the days of settlement of APPLICANT : City of Armadale Roleystone.
LAND OWNER : P Yang; & Recommend that Council undertake the Araluen Golf Resort Pty Ltd advertising processes outlined in the TPS to consider the places for entry in SUBJECT LAND : Property size 2.3992ha & the City’s MHI, with the ruins, stone 7.7437ha wall, stone dam and the shed having an “A” Management Category, and ZONING MRS : Rural reconsider the matter once submissions TPS No.4 : Rural Living 4 & Additional have been received. Use No.30
Tabled Items
Nil.
Officer Interest Declaration
Nil.
Strategic Implications
Relates to: Aim 2.3 for diverse and attractive development that is integrated with the distinctive character of the City to: - 2.3.2 Ensure preservation and maintenance of heritage buildings, heritage items and places of interest.
Legislation Implications
Town Planning Scheme No.4. Heritage of Western Australia Act 1990. Municipal Heritage Inventory 2008. Local Government Act 1995. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 54 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Miscellaneous 21 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 55 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Miscellaneous 21 FEBRUARY 2011
Council Policy / Local Law Implications
Policy PLN 3.8 Heritage Management Incentives Policy.
Budget / Financial Implications
The City has funded the Heritage Assessment from the Planning Services Budget.
Consultation
Community Heritage Advisory Group (CHAG). Kevin Palassis Architects (Palassis).
BACKGROUND
Council at its meeting on 28 April 2008 (D54/4/08 refers) considered an additional MHI entry (subject to confirmation following the commissioning of a further detailed heritage assessment) for the Buckingham House Ruins in Thompson Road, Roleystone.
The owner of the land containing the old shed, stone dam and stone walls did not support the entry of the place into the MHI in 2007 (outlined in the Agenda for Council’s consideration in July 2007 – Resolution D 86/7/07 refers). Points made by the owner included that the timber and iron shed was clearly not from the same time period as other parts of the ruins. It was termite infested, damaged by fire, structurally unsound and unsafe to visit. The stone walls were ruins and it was doubtful that they were close to original form as people had moved stones and added modern materials to them. The only masonry craftsmanship evident was in the stone dam (the owner commented that if that must be included in the MHI it should be a “C” or “D” Management Category).
A heritage assessment has been undertaken by Palassis and considered by the CHAG.
DETAILS OF HERITAGE ASSESSMENT
A copy of the Palassis heritage assessment is at Attachment “A4” of the Minutes.
COMMENT
TPS No.4 outlines a process, in Clause 7.1.3 (a) to (d), to be followed when considering proposals to include places on the heritage list which includes:
Notifying in writing the owner and occupier of the place and providing them with a copy of the description proposed to be used of the place and the reason for its entry; Inviting submissions on the proposal from the owner and occupier of the place within 21 days of the day the notice is served; Carrying out such other consultations as is thought fit; and Considering any submissions made and resolving to enter the place on the Heritage list with or without modification or reject the proposal after consideration of the submissions. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 56 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Miscellaneous 21 FEBRUARY 2011
The Palassis heritage assessment includes a Statement of Significance for the Thomas Buckingham’s House Ruins which outlines its cultural heritage significance for a number of reasons including that the place:
Is associated with early settlers to the Roleystone and Armadale areas, in particular the Buckingham family;
Is associated with the first European land grants in the colony, and the early European settlement of the Roleystone and Armadale districts of Western Australia;
Is indicative of early struggles and failures by settlers to establish and develop farming land;
Has landmark qualities as a cultural environment of historic built elements in an isolated, semi-rural environment; and
Is valued by the community for its connection to the early settlers of the area and for providing a link with this heritage.
The heritage assessment notes that overall the place is in a poor condition, has a moderate degree of integrity and, due to the large amount of original fabric lost, has a low to moderate authenticity.
CHAG Consideration
CHAG has considered the heritage value of the properties and it was resolved to recommend to Council that the Thomas Buckingham Cottage Ruins be added to the MHI with an “A” Management Category, with the curtilage as suggested by Palassis in the report, including the two cottage ruins, the stone dam, shed and the dry stone walls.
An “A” Management Category is defined as:
Worthy of the highest level of protection – recommended for entry into the State Register of Heritage Places.
Development would require consultation with the City of Armadale. Maximum encouragement to the owner should be provided under the City of Armadale’s Town Planning Scheme to conserve the significance of the place. A Heritage Assessment and Impact Statement should be undertaken before approval is given for any major redevelopment. Incentives to promote heritage conservation should also be considered.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 57 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Miscellaneous 21 FEBRUARY 2011
ANALYSIS
The Buckingham family is intimately interwoven into the fabric of the history of Roleystone and Armadale as important pioneers and members of the society. The Buckinghams’ association with the land in question, as agriculturalists, goes back to 1860, a mere 32 years from the settlement of the Swan River Colony. The ruins, it is speculated, may be even older. It is stated:
“Although colloquially known as ‘Thomas Buckingham’s Cottage’ it is possible that the stone ruins seen today may in fact be Henry Martin’s Cottage, or even the Gregory’s Cottage. It is impossible to know if Churchman himself may have built a cottage on the land. Although he is listed as an ‘Agriculturalist’ in the 1832 census a place of residence is not provided.
“Regardless of the question of its age, the ruins are certainly intimately associated with Thomas Buckingham Snr and his family. He and his wife, Mary, lived at Roleystone until their deaths in 1879 and 1875 respectively and Thomas Buckingham Jr lived there for a number of years before and after his marriage”.
Whatever their age, the stone ruins are related to Roleystone’s beginnings. They are monuments to the men and women who pioneered the hard and harsh land – a land that no doubt broke the heart and spirit of quite a few. The Buckinghams suffered the privations of farming the land but branched out into more lucrative pastimes and by sheer backbreaking toil made a life for themselves and helped give life to the nascent City of Armadale. The building remains attest to the pioneers’ dogged spirit and determination in a harsh environment.
It would also seem important that the stark ruins be recorded in the MHI as an important reference to the City’s pioneering past and the hardy people who overcame hardship and adversity and built the social and economic base for the modern city.
The curtilage suggested by Palassis and agreed by CHAG as appropriate covers portions of two private properties. The stone cottage ruins are on Lot 701 Thompson Road, Roleystone, and the dam, shed and stone walls on Lot 140 Thompson Road.
OPTIONS
1. Resolve that the Thomas Buckingham Cottage Ruins, shed, stone dam, stone walls and artefacts within the Palassis nominated curtilage are worthy of entry in the MHI and undertake the procedures outlined in the TPS to progress two entries for the appropriate properties. 2. Resolve that only parts of the outlined items are worthy of entry into the MHI, undertake the procedures outlined in the TPS to progress the entry and decline to consider the other parts for entry into the MHI. 3. Decline to consider any of the outlined items for inclusion in the MHI.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 58 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Miscellaneous 21 FEBRUARY 2011
CONCLUSION
The various constructions, though mostly ruins, relate back to the early days of the settlement of the Roleystone area and the pioneering Buckingham family. The ruins, stone dam, stone walls and shed have merit enough to warrant entry in the City’s MHI with an “A” Management Category. Option 1 is therefore recommended.
Committee discussed the Heritage Management Category of the Buckingham Ruins and the timber and iron shed on the property being worthy of entry into the MHI.
D15/2/11 RECOMMEND
That Council:
1. Include The Thomas Buckingham’s House Ruins on Lot 701 Thompson Road, Roleystone, and stone dam, stone wall and timber and iron shed on Lot 140 Thompson Road, Roleystone, in the City’s Municipal Heritage Inventory at an “A” Management Category, within the curtilage suggested by Kevin Palassis Architects, following advertising.
2. Advertise the proposal to the owners of the places in accordance with the provisions of Clause 7.1.3 (a) to (c) of Town Planning Scheme No.4.
3. Recommit the matter and any submissions for consideration once the advertising period is concluded.
MOVED Cr Hart MOTION CARRIED (7/0)
Cr Shaw left the meeting at 7.30pm and did not return. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 59 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Miscellaneous 21 FEBRUARY 2011
TENDER NO. TEN/29/10 – PROVISION OF PRIVATE SWIMMING POOL INSPECTION SERVICE
WARD : ALL In Brief:-
The existing contract for the provision of private DATE : 1 February 2011 st swimming pool inspections expired on 31 January REF : IM 2011. The City called for tenders from parties interested RESPONSIBLE : EDDS in undertaking Private Swimming Pool Inspections MANAGER under contract on behalf of the City.
Two tenders were received in response to the City’s advertisement. Tabled Items Recommendation that a contract for the provision The tenders received. of the Private Swimming Pool Inspection Service be entered into with C E Nicholls and Son Pty Ltd. Officer Interest Declaration
Nil.
Strategic Implications
1.4.3 Ensure effective management of risks to health in accordance with relevant legislation and community needs.
Legislation Implications
Section 3.57 Local Government Act 1995 – Tenders for providing goods or services Section 245A(5)(aa) Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1960 Building Regulations 1989 Division 2 Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 “Tender Regulations”
Council Policy / Local Law Implications
Council Policy ADM 19 – Procurement of Goods and Services.
Budget / Financial Implications
Provision has been made in the 2010/11 budget to undertake the required inspection programme.
Consultation
Governance and Administration
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 60 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Miscellaneous 21 FEBRUARY 2011
BACKGROUND
The provisions of Section 245A of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1960 require that each Local Government inspect all private swimming pools in their district at least once every four years.
Contract Information
For the past eleven years the City has contracted with C. E. Nicholls and Son Pty Ltd to undertake the inspection program on its behalf. The current contract expired on 31st January 2011.
Table 1: Existing Contract Information Current/Former Contractor C E Nicholls & Son Pty Ltd Contract Duration Three years Commencement Date 31st December 2007 Expiry Date 31st January 2011 Extension Permitted No Cost per Inspection $31.90
DETAILS OF PROPOSAL
An advertisement was placed in the West Australian on 9th January 2011 seeking a contractor to undertake the City’s Swimming Pool Inspection service on the basis of a three year contractual arrangement with the possibility of a year extension.
ANALYSIS
Table 2: New Contract Information Contract Duration Three years Commencement Date 1st March 2011 Expiry Date 28th February 2014 Extension Permitted Yes – one year in accordance with Clause 4.1 Cost escalation As per clause 3.5.3 prices to remain fixed for first 12 months and increased by CPI every year thereafter.
The Tender closed at 10.00am on 25th January 2011 and tenders were received from. The Tenders were received from:
C E Nicholls and Son Pty Ltd Royal Life Saving Society Western Australia Inc
The Selection Criteria were set out under clause 3.4 of the Tender documentation with appropriate weighting. In addition to compliance criteria relating to the tender specification the selection criteria are set out in the following table.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 61 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Miscellaneous 21 FEBRUARY 2011
Table 3: Selection Criteria Item No. DESCRIPTION WEIGHTING 1. Relevant Experience 30% 2. Key personnel, skills and experience 25% 3. Demonstrated understanding 25% 4. Tendered price 20% TOTAL 100%
The tenders received complied in full with the City’s advertised “Tender Request” and were from service providers with significant experience in the inspection of private swimming pools – one with experience in the Armadale district.
Based on the panel’s evaluation using the above criteria, the submission from CE Nicholls and Son Pty Ltd represents the most advantageous submission. The ranking of the compliant tender submissions as determined by the evaluation panel is as follows:
1. CE Nicholls
2. Royal Life Saving Society
As a result of the valuation panel’s assessment, when compared to the other submission, SE Nicholls and Son demonstrated greater strength in the following areas:
The service offered would result in inspections undertaken by a man and a woman which is considered more likely to prove acceptable to residents at home during the day – most of which tend to be women.
The family company offered a more personal service with less overheads, and with greater daily contact with City of Armadale staff.
Price.
A summary of the evaluation is included in the confidential Attachment “B3” Agenda.
CONCLUSION
On the basis of the evaluation of the tenderers received, against the advertised selection criteria, it is considered that the submission received from CE Nicholls and Son Pty Ltd is the most appropriate. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 62 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Miscellaneous 21 FEBRUARY 2011
D16/2/11 RECOMMEND
That with Tender 29/10 for the provision of a Private Swimming Pool Inspection Service, Council:
1. Accept the tender of C. E. Nicholls and Son Pty Ltd for the period 1 March 2011 to 28 February 2014 in accordance with their submitted tender and Council’s contract documentation.
2. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to approve an extension of the contract for a further year under clause 4.1 of the tender document.
MOVED Cr Reynolds MOTION CARRIED (7/0)
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 63 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Councillors’ Items 21 FEBRUARY 2011
ELECTRONIC LODGEMENT OF APPLICATIONS
WARD : ALL In Brief:-
DATE : 2 February 2011 Council seeks a progress report concerning electronic lodgement of REF : IM development and building applications.
RESPONSIBLE : EDDS Recommend that Council note the MANAGER progress report on electronic lodgement of applications. Tabled Items
Nil.
Officer Interest Declaration
Nil.
Strategic Implications
2.1 Long term planning and development that is guided by a balance between economic, social and environmental objectives.
Legislation Implications
Planning and Development Act 2005 Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1960
Council Policy / Local Law Implications
Nil.
Budget / Financial Implications
No immediate implications.
Consultation
WALGA
BACKGROUND
At the January meeting of the Development Services Committee Cr MacDonald requested an ongoing update to Councillors regarding the electronic lodgement system for Development and Building Applications. Council on 24th January 2011 (D8/1/11) resolved that the Councillor item regarding the electronic lodgement system for Development and Building Applications be referred to the appropriate Directorate for action and/or report back to Committee. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 64 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Councillors’ Items 21 FEBRUARY 2011
COMMENT
The City has been investigating the merits of electronic lodgement of building and planning applications for the past few years. Key staff (variously from Building, Planning and IT Departments) have visited sites in the Cities of Rockingham, Bunbury, Melville, Swan and Cockburn to assess the merits of systems being installed by other local governments.
A group comprised of officers from various departments has investigated the issues associated with electronic lodgement and has identified issues such as the need to integrate systems, provide for electronic payment and the ability of applicants to submit complete applications as being key issues to overcome.
The City participated in the NEDA (National Electronic Development Assessment) project in 2007/2008, which involved WALGA, internal staff and Civica. The City implemented and tested Civica's NEDA software and experienced several functionality and operational issues with it. These issues prevented the software from being rolled-out into an on-line live environment at that time.
The City is one of eight local governments (including Rockingham, Cockburn, Wanneroo, SJ, Kwinana, Mandurah and Swan) participating in a program instigated through WALGA to develop an electronic lodgement system. The WALGA eDA Solution is proceeding by the engagement of consultants (Diversus) who are assessing each local government’s system with a view to determining the potential for a common eDA lodgement through a WALGA portal. WALGA itself has appointed an organisational change manager to advise on how local governments can make the most out of such systems on the basis that internal behavioural change may be a critical success factor.
While there have been a number of Federal government programs to facilitate electronic lodgement it appears that considerable funds have been expended for little result. In the Eastern states there has been less take-up than expected. For instance in Queensland there is little take-up by local governments despite a $20 million expenditure. It is noted that the City of Cockburn has invested heavily in establishing its electronic lodgement system which is used more for tracking applications lodged manually rather than receiving electronic applications. Some individual Councils have spent over $500k developing such systems, in addition to employing two to four new staff for the development and ongoing implementation.
ANALYSIS
One issue upon which the whole concept hangs is the ability of applicants to submit complete applications. The City has long experience of inadequate applications which is frustrating but lends itself to a manual system. An electronic lodgement system cannot work with partial applications and although the industry tends to support the development of electronic lodgement the reality may be that the applicant will be less well served. Generally there appears to be a low take-up of electronic lodgement and in this environment it would be likely that the type of applications the City receives may not provide a high percentage of uptake on online lodgement. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 65 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING – Councillors’ Items 21 FEBRUARY 2011
There will be costs associated with the installation of electronic lodgement. This may need to be covered by increasing fees, indeed in Queensland fees were increased by $150 across the board to pay for eDA development. It would appear unlikely that the introduction of eDA will be conducive to the promotion of housing affordability in view of the likelihood of application fees increasing and there being a greater move towards reliance on consultants to submit applications.
While it may appear self evident that conversion to electronic lodgement would result in cost and time savings the reality is different. For this reason, the City has been reluctant to over commit to new unproven systems but has preferred to be part of the WALGA eDA Solution which at this stage has not required the City’s financial commitment. Federal Government funds have been made available to WALGA on the understanding that a significant number of WA local governments participate. However, in due course consideration will need to be given to a budgetary commitment.
OPTIONS
Council could: 1. Note the progress report on electronic lodgement; 2. Seek a further more detailed report on electronic lodgement.
CONCLUSION
The City of Armadale, like many other local governments in Australia, is grappling with the issue of electronic lodgement of building and planning applications. There are many technical and practical difficulties associated with the introduction of electronic lodgement which the City is currently progressing through a group of like local governments facilitated through WALGA.
The City is concentrating on developing the information on its website for Development Services, especially the online mapping tools. Additional funding and resources would be required to instigate on-line lodgement at this stage.
Committee requested that a progress report be submitted pending the outcome of the WALGA review of the electronic lodgement of development applications software proposal.
D17/2/11 RECOMMEND
That Council, pending the outcome of the WALGA review of the electronic development software proposal, note the progress report on electronic lodgement of applications.
MOVED Cr MacDonald MOTION CARRIED (7/0)
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 66 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING 21 FEBRUARY 2011
LATE ITEMS
Nil.
COUNCILLORS’ ITEMS
Cr Zelones
Cr Zelones updated Committee on the Prostitution Legislation Reform as discussed at the recent WALGA South East Metropolitan Zone meeting.
Cr Hart
Cr Hart queried if the proposed new reserve names, particularly Thomas Price Reserve, had been approved by Geographic Names Committee.
Executive Manager Planning Services advised that GNC had approved Thomas Price Reserve on 15/2/11 in accordance with Council’s decision in September 2010. GNC have approved most of the park names requested by the City. There are over 20 reserves. The Parks Department have recently been advised of GNC's park name approvals and requested to erect signs, when funds and resources are available in their budget and work programs. Further information on the approved Park Names will be included in the Information Bulletin.
Cr Mauger
1. Fencing – 17 Cartwright Drive, Forrestdale
Cr Mauger reported on the unsightly construction of the fencing at 17 Cartwright Drive, Forrestdale.
Committee requested that officers write to the Armadale Redevelopment Authority regarding approval and compliance issues of the fence.
D18/2/11 RECOMMEND
That Officers write to the Armadale Redevelopment Authority regarding approval and compliance issues of the fence at 17 Cartwright Drive, Forrestdale.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 67 FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 COMMITTEE MEETING 21 FEBRUARY 2011
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REPORTS
Nicholson Road
Executive Director Development Services advised that the CEO and EDDS made a presentation to the Infrastructure Coordinating Committee (ICC) of the Western Australian Planning Commission on 9th February 2011 in respect of the designation of a portion of Nicholson Road for Heavy Freight. The ICC saw the merit of the City's argument that Warton Road was a more suitable Heavy Freight route particularly in view of the $9.6m expended by the City (funded by the North Forrestdale Development Contribution Scheme and grants) and accordingly agreed to the City's recommendation.
Fire Planning
Executive Director Development Services provided an update on the position being communicated to those seeking to rebuild in the wake of the Roleystone/Kelmscott fires. While the City will be engaging consultants to prepare more comprehensive mapping of areas of bushfire risk, with a view to including appropriate provisions in the town planning scheme review, proposals to rebuild on fire affected land will not be subject to additional fire related controls. The City will include an advice note on future building licences to advise that property owners should be aware that AS3959 provides a selection of building responses to building in fire risk areas.
MEETING DECLARED CLOSED AT 7:54 PM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 68 ATTACHMENT “A1” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 69 ATTACHMENT “A1” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 70 ATTACHMENT “A1” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 71 ATTACHMENT “A1” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 72 ATTACHMENT “A1” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 73 ATTACHMENT “A2” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 74 ATTACHMENT “A2” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 75 ATTACHMENT “A2” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 76 ATTACHMENT “A2” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 77 ATTACHMENT “A2” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 78 ATTACHMENT “A2” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 79 ATTACHMENT “A3” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 80 ATTACHMENT “A3” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 81 ATTACHMENT “A3” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 82 ATTACHMENT “A3” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 83 ATTACHMENT “A3” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 84 ATTACHMENT “A3” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 85 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 86 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 87 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 88 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 89 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 90 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 91 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 92 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 93 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 94 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 95 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 96 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 97 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 98 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 99 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 100 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 101 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 102 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 103 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 104 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 105 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 106 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 107 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 108 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 109 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 110 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 111 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 112 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 113 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 114 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 115 ATTACHMENT “A4” COMMITTEE MEETING FULL COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011