CouncilCouncil MinutesMinutes
2525 FEBRUARYFEBRUARY 20032003
MEETING OF COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 INDEX OF MINUTES
1. Declaration of Opening/Announcement of Visitors...... 1
2. Record of Attendance/Apologies/Leave of Absence...... 1
3. Questions from Elected Members of Which Previous Notice Has Been Given (Without Discussion) ...... 1
4. Public Question Time ...... 1
5. Applications for Leave of Absence ...... 1
6. Petitions/Deputations/Presentations ...... 2
7. Confirmation of Minutes...... 2
8. Announcements by the Mayor without Discussion...... 2
9. Committee Reports...... 2
Technical Services Committee ...... 3
TS03.01 The Boulevard – Floreat Avenue to Linden Gardens – Median Island...... 5 TS03.02 Petition – The Boulevard Traffic Congestion – Woolworths Petrol Plus...... 12 TS03.03 Mindarie Regional Council – Security of Tenure for Tamala Park...... 14 TS03.04 Railway Parade – Traffic Speed Limit ...... 20 TS03.05 Branksome Gardens – Traffic ...... 24 TS03.06 Reabold Hill Access Road...... 27 TS03.07 Rights of Way – Management Program ...... 34 TS03.08 Road Works – Draft Budget Consideration 2003/2004 ...... 39 TS03.09 Lake Monger Drive – Birdlife Crossing...... 42 TS03.10 Helston and Alyth Parks – Emergency Bore and Pump Repairs...... 45 TS03.11 Perry Lakes Reserve – Upgrade Power Supply ...... 48 TS03.12 Parks and Landscape Budget Forward Works...... 54 TS03.13 Lake Monger Reserve – Improvement Program Future Direction ...... 62 TS03.14 Perry Lakes Reserve – Entry Statements ...... 66
Policy and Administration Committee ...... 72
PA03.01 Confirmation of Delegated Authority Decisions: Christmas/New Year...... 74 Recess 2002/2003 PA03.02 Areas “F” and “G”, Mount Claremont and Former Nursery Site, ...... 76 Salvado Road, Jolimont: Approaches by Hon Minister for Planning and Infrastructure PA03.03 Promulgation of Information Regarding Council Activities ...... 85 PA03.04 20th AWA Ozwater Convention and Exhibition ...... 89 PA03.05 ICLEI World Congress and Full Council Meeting 2003 ...... 91 PA03.06 2003 Local Government Managers Australia (LGMA) National Congress ...... 93
\\cambadmin\admin\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\A Council Front.doc i COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Corporate and Customer Services Committee ...... 97
CCS03.01 Accounts for Payment...... 99 CCS03.02 Investment Schedule...... 101 CCS03.03 Monthly Financial Statements...... 102 CCS03.04 Financial Statements – Periodic Review ...... 103 CCS03.05 Documents Sealed...... 113 CCS03.06 Local Studies Collection – Development Strategy...... 114 CCS03.07 Quarry Amphitheatre Noise Regulations ...... 121 CCS03.08 Senior Needs Advisory Committee – Minutes ...... 125 CCS03.09 Art and Cultural Advisory Committee Minutes ...... 127 CCS03.10 Art and Culture Policy ...... 131 CCS03.11 Wembley Golf Complex – Licence for an Outdoor Seating Area...... 134 CCS03.12 Road Closure – Portion of Road on corner of Branksome Gardens and Dartmouth Avenue...... 136 CCS03.13 North Wembley/West Leederville Underground Power Project Customer Satisfaction Survey ...... 140 CCS03.14 Fire and Emergency Services Levy – Funding Arrangements ...... 144 CCS03.15 Financial Assistance Grants – Review of Grants Commission Methodology (Draft Report) ...... 151
Development and Environmental Services Committee...... 157
DES03.01 Lot 2 (No. 53) Fortview Road, Mt Claremont – Proposed Two Storey Split Level Dwelling ...... 159 DES03.02 Urban Design Improvements for The Boulevard Shopping Centre – The Boulevard, City Beach ...... 173 DES03.03 Swan Location 12965 Reserve A45409 – Bold Park Cnr Oceanic Drive and Perry Lakes Drive, City Beach ...... 183 DES03.04 Proposed Subdivision – Underwood Avenue, Shenton Park...... 187 DES03.05 Lot 3 (No. 5) Station Street, Wembley – Radiology Centre ...... 189 DES03.06 Proposed Mobile Telephone Microcell Installations Agreement ...... 202 DES03.07 Lot 134 (No. 41) Kingsland Avenue, City Beach – Provisional Three Storey Residence ...... 207 DES03.08 Lots 123 and 124 (Nos. 231-233) Cambridge Street, Wembley – Proposed Grouped Dwelling Development – 13 Two Storey Dwellings ...... 212 DES03.09 Lot 11 (No. 114) Northwood Street, West Leederville – Proposed Two Storey Grouped Dwelling ...... 229 DES03.10 Lot 721 (No. 68B) McCourt Street, West Leederville – Proposed Two Storey Dwelling ...... 232 DES03.11 Lot 1418 (No. 86) Nanson Street, Wembley – Provisional Additions and Alterations...... 239 DES03.12 Lot 237 (No. 106) Grantham Street, Floreat – Proposed Colorbond Shed ...... 243 DES03.13 Lot 164 (No. 16) Talgarth Way, City Beach – Proposed Additions and Alterations...... 245 DES03.14 Proposed Pedestrian Access Way Closure – Portion of West Leederville Primary School – Lot 0 on Plan 1514 Glen Street, West Leederville ...... 251 DES03.15 Residential Design Codes...... 254 DES03.16 Town Planning Scheme Amendment No. 11 – Introduce Local Zoning to Land Generally Occupied by City Beach Bowling Club,
\\cambadmin\admin\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\A Council Front.doc ii COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
City Beach Scout Hall and Former Quarry – Lots 723, 724 The Boulevard, Corner Kalinda Drive, City Beach...... 260 DES03.17 Stephenson Highway Reserve Review – Minister’s Response ...... 268 DES03.18 Information Report – Construction Management Plans...... 278 DES03.19 Southport Street Planning Study ...... 281 DES03.20 Delegated Decisions and Notifications ...... 289 DES03.21 Building Licences Approved Under Delegated Authority ...... 292
10. Elected Members Motions of which Previous Notice has been Given ...... 294
11. Representation on Statutory Authorities and Public Bodies ...... 294
12. Late Items...... 296
12.1 Mindarie Regional Council - Landfill Gas and Power Contract...... 296
13. Confidential Items...... 299
14. Closure...... 321
\\cambadmin\admin\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\A Council Front.doc iii
MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF THE TOWN OF CAMBRIDGE HELD AT THE COUNCIL’S ADMINISTRATION/CIVIC CENTRE, 1 BOLD PARK DRIVE, FLOREAT ON TUESDAY 25 FEBRUARY 2003.
1. PRAYER, DECLARATION OF OPENING AND ANNOUNCEMENT OF VISITORS
His Worship the Mayor took the Chair and the prayer was read by the Chief Executive Officer. The meeting was declared open by the Mayor at 6.02 pm.
2. RECORD OF ATTENDANCE/APOLOGIES/LEAVE OF ABSENCE
Present:
Mayor: Ross Willcock
Councillors: Marlene Anderton (In at 6.11pm) Graham Burkett Corinne MacRae (In at 6.03 pm) Ken McAullay Pauline O’Connor JP Hilary Pinerua Kerry Smith
Officers: Graham D Partridge, Chief Executive Officer Jason Buckley, Executive Manager Corporate and Customer Services Chris Colyer, Executive Manager Technical Services Ian Birch, Executive Manager Development and Environmental Services Denise Ribbands, Administration Officer
Apologies:
Cr Alan Langer
Leave of Absence:
Nil
3. QUESTIONS FROM ELECTED MEMBERS OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN (WITHOUT DISCUSSION)
Nil
4. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME
Nil
5. APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE
Nil
\\cambadmin\admin\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\A Council Front.doc 1 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
6. PETITIONS/DEPUTATIONS/PRESENTATIONS
Nil
7. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES
Moved by Cr McAullay, seconded by Smith
That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Council held on 17 December 2002 be confirmed.
Carried
8. ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE MAYOR WITHOUT DISCUSSION
Nil
9. COMMITTEE REPORTS
Prior to consideration of the following reports, members of the public present at the meeting were reminded by the Mayor that they should not act immediately on anything they hear at this meeting, without first seeking clarification of Council’s position. They were advised to wait for written advice from the Council before taking any action on any matter that they may have before the Council.
\\cambadmin\admin\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\A Council Front.doc 2 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE
The report of the Technical Services Committee Meeting held on 11 February 2003 was submitted as under:-
1. DECLARATION OF OPENING
The Presiding Member declared the meeting of the Technical Services Committee open at 6.04 pm.
2. RECORD OF ATTENDANCE/APOLOGIES/LEAVE OF ABSENCE
Present : Time of Time of Entering Leaving Members:
Cr Pauline O’Connor, JP (Presiding Member) 6.04 pm 8.00 pm
Deputy Mayor Cr Marlene Anderton 6.04 pm 8.00 pm Cr Alan Langer 6.04 pm 8.00 pm Cr Hilary Pinerua 6.04 pm 8.00 pm
Observers:
Mayor Ross Willcock JP 6.04 pm 8.00 pm Cr Graham Burkett, JP 7.33 pm 8.00 pm Cr Kerry Smith 6.04 pm 8.00 pm
Officers:
Graham D Partridge, Chief Executive Officer Chris Colyer, Executive Manager Technical Services Richard Watson, Manager Engineering and Waste Management Ross Farlekas, Manager Parks and Landscape Jon Bell, Manager Construction and Operations Denise Ribbands, Administration Officer (Governance)
Adjournments: Nil
Time meeting closed: 8.00 pm
APOLOGIES/LEAVE OF ABSENCE
Nil
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 3 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
3. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME
Nil
4. DEPUTATIONS AND PETITIONS
Item TS03.06 – Mark Webb, Director, Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority and David Smith, Consultant Landscape Architect
5. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES
Moved by Cr Pinerua, seconded by Cr Langer
That the Minutes of the Ordinary meeting of the Technical Services Committee held on 3 December 2002 as contained in the December 2002 Council Notice Paper be confirmed.
Carried
6. DECLARATION OF MEMBERS INTERESTS
Item TS03.05 – Cr Anderton
7. REPORTS
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 4 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
REFERRED BACK
TS03.01
THE BOULEVARD - FLOREAT AVENUE TO LINDEN GARDENS – MEDIAN ISLAND (File Reference: TES 0004)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To define the construction works for the median island in The Boulevard from Floreat Avenue to Linden Gardens in accordance with the budget allocation and community comment.
BACKGROUND:
The Council budget for 2002/2003 allocated $25,000 in the Capital Works Section (Account number C001-016) to extend and create a median island treatment on The Boulevard between Floreat Avenue and Linden Gardens.
These works were requested during community consultation process for The Boulevard works between Floreat Avenue to Empire Avenue which was conducted in 1999/2000. At this stage, the community was concerned that the increase in traffic along The Boulevard would create a barrier in the residential suburb. The objective was to develop a streetscape that would:-
• Assist pedestrians crossing The Boulevard. • Create an aesthetic streetscape. • Prevent speeding traffic from overtaking along The Boulevard. • Reduce traffic speed at intersections and prevent the cutting of corners.
The principle behind the plan is to establish a median island along The Boulevard. Sections of the median island will be established in flush red hotmix with median painted lines. At intersections, a raised median will be established in concrete to provide safe refuge for pedestrians and to guide traffic through the intersections. There will be no restriction to right or left turn in or out of any side street or property driveway. A median island with tree planting is proposed and bus bays were to be established to facilitate through traffic.
Similar works have been carried out last year on Grantham Street between The Boulevard and Kenmore Crescent.
There are 27 properties adjacent to the proposed works and a letterbox drop was delivered to each of these properties. An advertisement was placed in a local newspaper to notify all residents of the proposed works and community comment period. Plans identifying the proposed works were displayed in the Council Administration office foyer for community comment between 21 October 2002 and 4 November 2002.
During consultation, a multi signatured letter was received signed by 45 people from 21 properties in The Boulevard adjacent to the proposed works. One additional resident forwarded comments. Five residents who signed the petition also responded with individual letters. Two residents from an adjacent side street also responded.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 5 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
A copy of the survey letter, plan and response form is included in the attachments to this report. A summary of community comments is also included in the attachments to this report. Item 7 in the summary of Community Responses is a summary of the multi signatured letter. A copy of this letter is included in the attachments to this report.
DETAILS:
The proposed traffic management median island in The Boulevard from Floreat Avenue to Linden Gardens is not viewed as a major traffic management program. It is considered to be more of a streetscape improvement which provides a safer traffic environment. It is recognised that no traffic will be restricted from taking movements that are available into properties or side streets prior to the works. The median island does provide residents with an opportunity to enter both the side streets and properties and permit through traffic.
It is ideal that the through lanes be expanded from 4 metres to 4.5 metres so that commuter cyclists and through traffic can proceed parallel with each other. The guidelines for the development of both Grantham Street and The Boulevard have been that there be no through road widening. This is seen as a criteria recognising the need to slow through traffic through this residential precinct. Further, cyclists can utilise the adjacent local streets, including the Perth Bicycle Network route along Peebles Road. Young cyclists are well catered for along the dual use path in accordance with the Road Traffic Act.
Pedestrian crossings at each intersection will improve the road and pedestrian safety. The ramps across the kerbline have been included. Recognising the 30 metre wide road reserve along The Boulevard, ramps across side streets can be conveniently set back one car length behind the side road holding line. This will enable the motorist to concentrate on through traffic without conflict with pedestrians. The second car wishing to enter the through road will see the pedestrian and wait its turn until the first car has moved off.
The key element behind the introduction of median islands in the side streets is to discourage traffic from cutting the corners at intersections. This issue has been raised as a positive benefit by a number of residents.
There have been some accidents along The Boulevard east of Floreat Avenue. The numbers are not high and it is considered that the median island will draw attention to the motorist that The Boulevard is a District Road and requires caution. The accident statistics as recorded through the Police and Main Roads WA are:-
• The Boulevard/Linden Gardens = 4. • The Boulevard/Everton Street = 1. • The Boulevard/Bournville Street = 1.
One of the elements that has caused some discussion is the position of bus stops. There are three bus stops in this section of The Boulevard from Floreat Avenue to the eastern side of Linden Gardens. These are at:-
• Opposite Number 76 The Boulevard - for eastbound buses. • Opposite Number 58 The Boulevard – for eastbound buses. • Opposite Number 57 The Boulevard – for westbound buses.
It is recognised that the bus stop opposite No. 76 The Boulevard is just east of a crest in the longitudinal grade of the road pavement and at a location where the two eastbound lanes from Floreat Avenue merge into one lane. Collectively this creates a potentially unsafe situation which should be addressed by consideration of two options:-
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 6 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
(a) Construct an indented bus bay. (b) Remove the bus stop location.
The construction of a bus bay will require the removal of one tree. There is an existing bus stop 250 metres to the west and 220 metres to the east. Therefore, without this stop, the maximum distance for a resident to walk along The Boulevard would be 235 metres. Further, it is recognised that the side streets off Kirkdale Avenue and Linden Gardens are closer to the other bus stops than the one opposite No. 76 The Boulevard. The residents of Hornsey Road/Floreat Avenue will be those disadvantaged as they will walk along The Boulevard for a distance of 150 metres instead of the existing 100 metres.
The Department of Planning and Infrastructure Bus Transport Section has been requested to give consideration to the removal of the bus stop opposite No, 76 The Boulevard for the reasons outlined above.
Should the removal of this bus stop be approved, this will provide an opportunity for there to be additional treed median islands established adjacent to the properties at 76 and 69 The Boulevard.
The bus stop adjacent to 58 The Boulevard is a westward extension of the left hand slip lane for eastbound traffic on The Boulevard that once had the slip lane to turn left into Seymour Avenue. The disruption to residents is seen as minimal. The bus stop at this point has been moved approximately 20 metres eastwards to ensure that the bus bay does not conflict with the intersection of The Boulevard/Linden Gardens. The current bus shelter is at 90o to the through kerbline and the proposed position is parallel with the kerbline to provide minimum impact on the adjacent properties.
The third bus shelter for the westbound traffic is adjacent to 57 The Boulevard. It is recognised that the bus shelter will impact on the verge garden and could be adjusted. The approach zone to the bus bay will impact on the crossovers, however, the standard bus at the bus stop will not restrict crossover access. If the bus bay is installed, an additional median with a tree could be planted adjacent to 57 The Boulevard.
Recognising the adjacent residents comment concerning the bus stop adjacent to 57 The Boulevard, it is recommended that no bus bay be constructed at this stage. The option to place the median island tree adjacent to 57 not proceed, but vehicles passing the bus at the bus stop can utilise the median to permit through flow. This may be reviewed in the light of adjacent resident requests or the future development of an accident history. It is recognised that there is an existing bus stop 400 metres to the west of house number 57 and 300 metres to the east. Further, the side street of Linden Gardens is within 60 metres of the stop. Therefore, for customer convenience, it is proposed that the stop remains. It is recognised that the bus service utilising this stop collects school children in the morning and is a drop off stop during the rest of the day. Further, there is no weekend service at this stop.
The community comments are mainly encapsulated in the multi signatured letter. This letter has been included in the attachments to this report. The key elements in this letter are:-
• That the bus stop numbered 10169 adjacent to No. 76 The Boulevard be removed. • That more tree planted median islands be installed in The Boulevard between Floreat Avenue and Linden Gardens. • Support for the objectives of the above issues can be included.
It is recommended that these two principles be supported.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 7 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
COMMENT:
The proposal for the median island in The Boulevard between Floreat Avenue and Linden Gardens has been well received. The following two significant alterations can be considered:-
• A review of the bus stops. • The installation of additional median islands.
Discussions have commenced with Department of Transport with a view to removing the bus stop adjacent to 76 The Boulevard. Once a decision has been resolved with respect to the bus stop at 76 and 57 The Boulevard, the additional treed median islands can be established.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
To provide improved safe pedestrian and traffic environment in accordance with community comment.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The proposed works are beyond the current 2002/2003 Budget funds of $25,000. It is proposed that the order of priority work be:-
• The implementation of concrete median islands at The Boulevard/Linden Gardens intersection and the bus bay adjacent to 58 The Boulevard. • Resolve the bus bay adjacent to 76 The Boulevard. • Complete the median in The Boulevard between Linden Gardens and Floreat Avenue.
It is anticipated that this work can be completed this financial year, with the assistance of the surplus $20,000 allocated to Ruislip Street/Keane Street intersection in the budget. Reallocation of these funds is the subject of a separate report on the December 2002 Technical Services Committee Agenda.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil
PUBLIC CONSULTATION:
This recommendation is a result of public consultation in accordance with the project objectives. It is noted that extensive support has been received from residents on The Boulevard.
CONCLUSION:
In recognition of the community comment and the budget constraints, it is considered that the median island in The Boulevard/Linden Gardens intersection and the bus bay adjacent to 58 The Boulevard be the priority works. When the bus stops at 57 and 76 have been resolved, the balance of the median can be completed.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 8 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
The progress of construction works here is supported Council’s decision in November 2002 (Item TS02.95), to accept a grant to asphalt overlay the existing pavement of The Boulevard between Floreat Avenue and Keane Street.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
That:-
(i) the proposed works on Plan Number E001-02-02 be approved for construction subject to:-
(a) the bus stop adjacent to 76 The Boulevard being resolved with the Department of Planning and Infrastructure, Transperth; (b) the bus stop bay adjacent to 57 The Boulevard not proceeding at this stage but being subject to review;
(ii) should Transperth not support the removal of the bus stop adjacent to Number 76 The Boulevard, the plans be amended to incorporate the bus indent. Transperth be advised that the Town supports removal of this bus stop site as adequate servicing is currently available;
(iii) the $20,000 surplus budget funds allocated to Account Number C268-006 Ruislip Street/Keane Street intersection be reallocated to Account Number C001-016 The Boulevard as follows:-
(a) C268-006 Ruislip Street/Keane Street Intersection – Plateau - $3,000; (b) C001-016 The Boulevard (Floreat Avenue to Linden Gardens) – Median - $45,000.
Committee Meeting 3 December 2002
During discussion, Members requested additional information relating to landscaping options along The Boulevard to supplement the proposed plan.
It was therefore agreed that the item be submitted to Council for determination.
Council Meeting 17 December 2002
During discussion at the Council meeting held on 17 December 2002, Members agreed that additional information would be required before this matter could be considered further.
It was therefore agreed that the item be referred back to enable the Administration to provide sketches and additional information in relation to proposed tree species and numbers.
FURTHER REPORT (Post Council Meeting 17 December 2002)
Questions were raised by the Technical Services Committee at its meeting held on 3 December 2002 and the Council meeting held on 17 December 2002. In particular, it was requested that a plan be submitted showing details of the type of landscape treatment for the median and verges of The Boulevard between Floreat Avenue and Linden Gardens and how that fits in with the landscaping treatments to the west of Floreat Avenue, as well as eastwards to Selby Street.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 9 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Two Memoranda were sent to His Worship the Mayor and all Councillors relating to the above and also attached to this report is a plan showing details of proposed landscaping treatments on The Boulevard.
In particular, the median tree species proposed in The Boulevard is Eucalyptus maculata, with a small colourful shrub Callistemon “little John” planted within the same tree well as the tree. These species have been selected to continue the median theme already established back to Empire Avenue on The Boulevard.
The verge tree species selected is Jacaranda mimosifolia. This species is already established within various sections of The Boulevard and adding to this theme, where appropriate, along both north and south verges would greatly improve the aesthetics of The Boulevard.
It is further proposed and recommended that this street tree theme be extended to Selby Street to the east and Durston Road to the west, with any future road works programs.
A plan of the proposed works with an additional median tree, verge trees and cross section showing the proposed treescape is included as an attachment to this report as requested. The issue of additional trees in the median has been addressed. Additional trees on the verge have also been identified on the plan.
Median island trees recognise the residential street nature of The Boulevard as well as the expectation of the motorists’ to have a continuity of travel. The vertical impact of the trees as seen by the motorist is one of end on view of the line of trees and therefore the trees frame the view of the road ahead. In recognition of the vertical aspect of the verge and median trees, the open full width of the road pavement is reduced and traffic speed often also reduces.
The introduction of the median island does assist pedestrians to cross the road as they need only recognise the traffic travelling in one direction at a time. Recognising the desire to maintain the existing road pavement width, the introduction of a median island does prevent kerbside parking. The spacing between the raised median islands with trees does provide space to pass slow traffic such as service vehicles and cyclists. This issue was favoured by the community in their comments during the consultation period. To facilitate traffic to merge into the median and pass slow vehicles, the median islands should be at least 50 metres apart.
It is desirable that trees not be planted in a median near a road intersection so that the “motorists’ sight distance” when exiting the side street is not restricted. Stopping sight distance is 50 metres, but any tree planted within 120 metres, ie. “intersection sight distance”, requires specific consideration.
Trees in median islands may be planted adjacent to bus stops where there is a bus bay. An additional median island tree will be planted adjacent to 76 The Boulevard if the bus bay is constructed or the bus stop is cancelled.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr O’Connor, seconded by Cr MacRae
That:-
(i) the proposed works on Plan Number R001-03-02 as amended in January 2003 be approved for construction subject to:-
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 10 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
(a) the bus stop adjacent to 76 The Boulevard being removed and the Department of Planning and Infrastructure, Transperth be notified; (b) the bus stop bay adjacent to 57 The Boulevard not proceeding at this stage but being subject to review;
(ii) should Transperth not support the removal of the bus stop adjacent to Number 76 The Boulevard, the plans be amended to incorporate the bus bay. Transperth be advised that the Town supports removal of this bus stop as adequate servicing is currently available;
(iii) the $20,000 surplus budget funds allocated to Account Number C268-006 Ruislip Street/Keane Street intersection be reallocated to Account Number C001-016 The Boulevard as follows:-
(a) C268-006 Ruislip Street/Keane Street Intersection – Plateau - $3,000; (b) C001-016 The Boulevard (Floreat Avenue to Linden Gardens) – Median - $45,000.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 11 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
TS03.02
PETITION – THE BOULEVARD TRAFFIC CONGESTION – WOOLWORTHS PETROL PLUS (File Reference: PRO 0067)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To consider a petition tabled at the Council’s Meeting held on 17 December 2002.
BACKGROUND:
A petition was submitted by Mr Chris Robinson from 94 The Boulevard containing 40 signatures regarding the Woolworths Petrol Plus operation at the Floreat Forum. The signatures supported the following statement:-
“SERIOUS TRAFFIC PROBLEM WOOLWORTHS PETROL+ PETROL STATION, FLOREAT FORUM
This petrol station has now been operating for approximately 3 months and since its opening has caused major traffic problems in and around The Boulevard and adjoining streets.
Motorists are ignoring directional signs, queuing on The Boulevard to gain entry to the petrol station and car park, trying to enter the exit road from the petrol station and carrying out illegal traffic movements in general.
We the undersigned being residents and ratepayers request that the Town of Cambridge and LendLease take immediate action to overcome the serious traffic hazards that have been caused by allowing this ad hoc development to take place.”
The Council, in accordance with the Standing Orders referred the matter to the appropriate Committee.
DETAILS:
The traffic congestion issues associated with the operation of the Woolworths Petrol Plus operation have been evident since the initial opening of this facility and the Administration have on several occasions discussed this situation with representatives of the Floreat Forum developers Bovis Lend Lease. After the closure of other petrol outlets in Floreat and City Beach, Woolworths Petrol Plus is the only petrol station remaining in the area and this factor combined with cheap petrol prices and the awkward access to the petrol pumps, have led to the congestion occurring.
During September 2002 and October 2002, following a review of the traffic circulation, revised proposals were presented by Bovis Lend Lease and details of these proposals are included as an attachment to this report. The works associated with the October 2002 proposal was completed prior to Christmas 2002. It is still evident that due mainly to poor driver behaviour, the traffic circulation has not improved and a further review is required.
Discussions have taken place between the Administration and Bovis Lend Lease and it is accepted by Bovis Lend Lease that a further review is required. This review has been conducted by Bovis Lend Lease, through their Consultant Traffic Engineers and a preferred option has been developed. This option is currently being costed and being discussed with the Woolworths Petrol Plus operational personnel. Until these discussions are finalised, no further advice can be provided on the proposed improved solution. It is
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 12 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
expected these negotiations will be completed in early February 2003 and accordingly an update on the progress can be tabled at Committee.
COMMENT:
Bovis Lend Lease Administration has agreed that a further review of the traffic circulation is required and the revised solution should be fully detailed and agreed with the Woolworths Petrol Plus Operator in early February 2003. Implementation would then be possible in late February 2003.
It is noted that the upper carpark currently has temporary construction buildings and removal of these in late February 2003 will also assist with circulation through and around the Woolworths Petrol Plus operations.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
Nil.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Nil
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil
PUBLIC CONSULTATION:
Nil
CONCLUSION:
A petition received by Council in December 2002 has been tabled and signed by 40 persons. The petition requests Council to take immediate action to overcome traffic hazards caused by queuing motorists on The Boulevard when accessing the Floreat Forum carpark and Woolworths Petrol Plus operations.
Details have been provided in relation to previous discussions that the Administration has had with the Floreat Forum developers in relation to this traffic management issue. This includes a revised design which was implemented prior to Christmas 2002.
Further discussions have been held with the Floreat Forum developer and a revised plan has been prepared and is currently being evaluated by the Woolworths Petrol Plus Operator. The revised plan is expected to be available during February 2003, with implementation proposed for late February 2003 or early March 2003.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr O’Connor, seconded by Cr MacRae
That the petitioners be advised that negotiations are currently being finalised with the Floreat Forum developer and Woolworths Petrol Plus operator in relation to improving traffic circulation and reducing traffic hazards in the vicinity of the Woolworths Petrol Plus operations.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 13 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
TS03.03
MINDARIE REGIONAL COUNCIL – SECURITY OF TENURE FOR TAMALA PARK (File Reference: PRO 1486)
PURPOSE
The Mindarie Regional Council (MRC) has considered its position in relation to its security of tenure on Lot 118 Marmion Avenue and, in order to implement its strategy to establish long term security of land tenure at Tamala Park, the Town’s commitment to the various options from the perspective as a partial landowner of Lot 118 is sought.
BACKGROUND
In January 1988 the Cities of Perth, Stirling and Wanneroo bought lot 118 primarily for the purpose of waste disposal and formed the MRC under the Local Government Act 1960. The owners leased 251ha to the MRC with an option to extend for a further 21 years from 2011 provided conditions and obligations of the lease were met. A portion of the lease area 22ha was designated for landfill.
The ownership of Lot 118 has now been further divided as a consequence of local government divisions and is now owned by the following local government authorities.
• City of Stirling Four twelfth’s • City of Wannerroo Two twelfth’s • City of Joondalup Two twelfth’s • City of Perth One twelfth • Town of Vincent One twelfth • Town of Victoria Park One twelfth • Town of Cambridge One twelfth
It is noted that the owners of Tamala Park are all now members of the Mindarie Regional Council (MRC) and membership is in similar portions to the ownership of the land.
There is an ongoing requirement to provide landfill in the region and for the Member Councils. The introduction in the next two to three years of a Resource Recovery Facility (RRF) at a site other than Tamala Park will mean a significant reduction in tonnages being disposed to landfill, however, there is still a requirement for disposal until approximately 2040 of the residue from the RRF and for contingencies associated with the operation of the RRF such as operational down time. The second stage development approval by the State Government agencies at Tamala Park within the approved 22 Ha lease portion is conditional on the MRC’s introduction of a RRF. Failure to introduce an RRF will mean no second stage approval and at the current rate of tipping, stage 1 will be filled by late 2003 or early 2004. This highlights the importance of the MRC security of tenure on the Lot 118 site and the requirement to establish a Resouce Recovery Facility ( RRF ).
The MRC requires security of tenure for Tamala Park in order to develop business opportunities, such as landfill gas harvesting over the next 30 years and for orderly planning of waste management requirements for the region. If security of tenure cannot be achieved, the MRC will need to urgently secure an alternative landfill site and this is not a desired option.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 14 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Significant events such as the division of the Cities of Perth and Wanneroo have also made the original lease document antiquated and it is necessary to at least review the intent of the document to reflect modern day practice and the new strategic direction the MRC has taken.
DETAILS:
The MRC currently has a lease for 251 ha of the total 432 ha of Lot 118 until 2011 with an option to extend for a further 21 years provided conditions and obligations in the lease are met.
The MRC wishes to secure at least 159 ha for landfill operations and 34 ha for a landfill buffer to continue operations and several options have been assessed by the MRC members.
Following an initial report presented to the MRC meeting held on 17 October 2002, a workshop was held on 21 November 2002 to discuss options to improve the MRC’s security at Tamala Park. The workshop was attended by seven (7) Mindarie Regional Council Councillors, two visiting Councillors, ten officers and three consultants
The workshop attendees agreed that improved security of land tenure ie beyond lease expiry of 2011, was necessary so that Mindarie Regional Council could optimise long term benefits of potential business opportunities. A detailed report on workshop proceedings is included as an attachment to this report together with a copy of the MRC report ( Item 9.2.6 Tec.Comm.Item 6 ) from the meeting held on 12 December, 2002.
Key options for improvement of security of land tenure were identified as follows:-
• Option One – The purchase of required land (159 ha) and confirmation of an agreement over buffer area (34ha) (BUY).
• Option Two – The negotiation of a new lease, as replacement to the existing, which contains characteristics and conditions which more appropriately address the needs of the Council (LEASE).
• Option Three – The continuation of the existing lease, with reliance on the extension clause within for long term tenure (EXISTING LEASE).
• Option Four – the purchase of all Lot 118, and subsequent expansion of the Council’s business to include land development, with a subsequent revenue stream provided to the current land owners. (BUSINESS EXPANSION).
Attendees considered the advantages and disadvantages of each option, with due respect to the BSD Consultant’s report considered at the Council meeting in October 2002, noting that this report contained a recommendation for Option One (BUY).
Attendees agreed a strategy as follows:-
Option One (BUY)
The submission of a proposal to land owners for commencement of negotiations on the purchase of 159ha of land at Tamala Park for response by 30 June 2003
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 15 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Option Two (NEW LEASE)
In the event of a rejection of this Option One (BUY) proposal by land owners, the submission of a proposal to negotiate a new lease and buffer agreement, with key characteristics as follows:-
• Required land (159ha). • Buffer area (34ha). • Lease expiry: 2040. • Commercial rental only whilst business operations in progress. • Rehabilitation period: 30 yrs.
Option Three (EXISTING LEASE)
In the event of a rejection of Option Two (NEW LEASE), the confirmation of the workability of the existing lease extension ie 21 years from 2011 to expire 30 June 2032.
The details relating to this workshop were presented to the MRC meeting held on 12 December 2002 where the following MRC decision was reached:-
“That Council:
(i) approve a strategy to establish long term security of land tenure at Tamala Park as follows:
(a) The submission of a proposal, to land owners, for commencement of negotiations on the purchase of 159ha of land at Tamala Park Option One (BUY), for response by 30 June 2003
(b) In the event of a rejection of this Option One (BUY) proposal by landowners, the negotiation of a new lease and buffer agreement, with key characteristics as follows:
(1) Required land (159ha)
(2) Buffer area (34ha)
(3) Lease expiry: 2040
(4) Commercial rental only whilst business operations in progress
(5) Rehabilitation period: 30 years (Option Two) (LEASE)
(c) In the event of a rejection of this Option Two (LEASE), the confirmation of the workability of the existing lease extension ie 21 years
(ii) authorise the Chief Executive Officer to commence action associated with this strategy
(iii) receive a progress report on this work in August 2003
(Carried 10/0)”
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 16 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
COMMENT:
The MRC has a need to secure long term tenure at Tamala Park beyond the existing lease expiry milestone of June 2011, in order to maximise the MRC’s ability to exploit long term business opportunities like gas extraction and to ensure that the operations of the Resource Recovery Facility have a site provided for the disposal of any residue from the treatment process.
A strategy has been developed and adopted by the MRC and the MRC has now requested member Councils to signal their support for the way forward. It is to be noted that the Town’s support for the strategy will not necessarily allow the preferred strategy to be implemented as any purchase of land or review of lease documentation technically requires the consent of all of the owners of Lot 118.
The adoption of the MRC strategy or any alternate strategy by the Town will allow discussion between the owners to be facilitated in order to determine if a complete owners position can be adopted. The reluctance of any one owner to progress this MRC strategy will in effect frustrate the other owners and MRC.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The proposed MRC adopted options do not have any effect on the town’s policies at this stage.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Included in the report, considered by the MRC in October 2002, was a financial analysis by Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu (DTT). This analysis covered the two options of BUY and LEASE and, based upon this analysis, concluded there are financial benefits for the MRC to purchase land. Fundamentally, the lease option is more expensive due to the requirements to hold the asset for its 50 year life. The lease option can only be comparable with the purchase option if rental payments remain fixed for the lease period.
A report prepared by the Valuer General suggests a reasonable market price for purchasing 159 ha would be $4,700,000 and reasonable annual rent would be approximately $400,000 per annum. The current rent is around $200,000 and if the option is pursued this could mean a rise in the gate fee at Tamala Park. Depending on how this rise is implemented, it could mean a rise in the rubbish rate for the Town.
STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS:
In the remote case that security of tenure cannot be negotiated for Tamala Park, a new landfill would need to be located and secured before 2011. This will greatly impact on the Town’s operations as the state government has directed that no new landfill will be located on the Swan coastal plain. The process of selection of a new residue landfill site would be very expensive, time consuming and could pose a significant threat to the operation of the proposed Resource Recovery Facility.
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS:
Nil.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 17 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
PUBLIC CONSULTATION:
A Workshop was conducted for all members of the MRC on 21 November 2002 which was attended by elected members and technical officers of the MRC.
SUMMARY:
The MRC currently has a lease for 251 ha of the total 432 ha of Lot 118 until 2011 with an option to extend for a further 21 years provided conditions and obligations in the lease are met.
The MRC wishes to secure 159 ha for landfill operations and 34 ha for a landfill buffer for a period at least up to 2040.
In order to progress this issue, a report was considered at the MRC meeting held on 17 October 2002 where the MRC received a report (Item 9.2.9 Tech Comm. Item 9) which included work by BSD Consultants and Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu (DTT). The MRC referred the report to a workshop of MRC members which was held on 21 November 2002. Attendees at the workshop considered four options and the advantages and disadvantages of each and the attendees agreed a strategy as follows:-
Option One (BUY)
The submission of a proposal, to land owners, for commencement of negotiations on the purchase of 159ha of land at Tamala Park.
Option Two (NEW LEASE)
In the event of a rejection of this Option One (BUY) proposal by land owners, the submission of a proposal to negotiate a new lease and buffer agreement, with key characteristics as follows:
• Required land (159ha) • Buffer area (34ha) • Lease expiry: 2040 • Commercial rental only whilst business operations in progress • Rehabilitation period: 30 yrs
Option Three (EXISTING LEASE)
In the event of a rejection of Option Two (NEW LEASE), the confirmation of the workability of the existing lease extension ie 21 years
Option Four (BUSINESS EXPANSION)
The purchase of all Lot 118, and subsequent expansion of the Council’s business to include land development, with a subsequent revenue stream provided to the current land owners.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 18 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
This position was subsequently endorsed by the MRC at its meeting held on 12 December 2002 and the Town has been requested by the MRC to consider the implication of this strategic position from the perspective of Council’s partial ownership of Lot 118. The position adopted by the MRC is recommended for adoption by the Town and when this is achieved will allow the Town to communicate with the other six owners to determine if the strategy can be progressed. Implementation of the strategy will be jeopardised by any single owner not supporting the strategy.
COUNCIL DECISION; (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr O’Connor, seconded by Cr MacRae
That:-
(i) Council supports the MRC’s strategy to establish long term security of land tenure at Tamala Park as follows:-
(a) the submission of a proposal to land owners for commencement of negotiations on the purchase of 159ha of land at Tamala Park (Option One BUY), for response by 30 June 2003;
(b) in the event of a rejection of this Option One (BUY) proposal by landowners, the negotiation of a new lease and buffer agreement with key characteristics as follows:-
(1) required land (159ha); (2) buffer area (34ha); (3) lease expiry: 2040; (4) commercial rental only whilst business operations in progress; (5) rehabilitation period: 30 years;
(c) in the event of a rejection of this Option Two (LEASE), the confirmation of the workability of the existing lease extension ie 21 years;
(ii) the position outlined in (i) above be presented to the other owners of Lot 118 in order to allow the MRC and owners of Lot 118 to finalise lease or purchase negotiations.
During discussion, Members were advised that a meeting of the Chief Executive Officers who jointly own Lot 118 (Tamala Park) was held on Monday 17 February 2003 and they have agreed that a position paper be prepared on the impact of any action to sell a portion or develop a portion of the Lot on the Bushplan negotiaions. As this position is currently being prepared, it is appropriate that this item be referred back to the Technical Services Committee.
Motion to Refer Back
Moved by Cr O’Connor, seconded by Cr Pinerua
That the item relating to Mindarie Regional Council – Security of Tenure for Tamala Park be referred back to the Technical Services Committee for further consideration.
Refer Back Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 19 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
TS03.04
RAILWAY PARADE – TRAFFIC SPEED LIMIT (File Reference: TES 0038)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To review the existing 60kph speed limit along Railway Parade from Loftus Street to Haydn Bunton Drive in West Leederville.
BACKGROUND:
It has been brought to Council’s attention that the existing upper speed limit as signed in Railway Parade from Loftus Street to Haydn Bunton Drive is 60kph and the speed limit in Railway Street in the City of Perth is 50kph. This variation in speed limit was reported to be inconsistent.
Railway Parade is a section of an east/west route that commences in the City of Perth as Roe Street, extends westwards to Railway Street and changes from Railway Street to Railway Parade at Loftus Street. Railway Parade extends westward to Salvado Road at Haydn Bunton Drive.
This east/west road traffic link is signed as 50kph east of Loftus Street and west of Jersey Street. The 2.9km section between Jersey Street and Loftus Street is designated as 60kph.
DETAILS:
The speed limit is based on a number of factors, namely the:-
• extent of traffic using the road as a link between districts; • number of intersections with district roads, and the length of the road; • adjacent land use; • traffic volume; • number of pedestrians crossing the road and the frequency of crossing points; • road geometry and available sight distance.
Railway Street/Roe Street in the City of Perth east of Loftus Street has adjacent land use dominated by commercial development in the form of shops and businesses. Railway Parade and Salvado Road westward to Harborne Street is dominated by a combination of commercial and residential premises. Salvado Road west of Harborne Street has residential and recreational adjacent land uses.
The Perth to Fremantle railway line dominates the south side of Railway Parade, Railway Street and Roe Street.
Roe Street carries up to 30,000 vehicles per day at its western extremity. Railway Street east of Sutherland Street carries approximately 30,000 vehicles per day and between Loftus Street and Sutherland Street approximately 10,000 vehicles per day. Railway Parade west of Loftus Street carries between 13,000 and 16,000 vehicles per day. Salvado Road carries approximately 15,000 to 20,000 vehicles per day east of Harborne Street, 10,000 to 12,000 vehicles per day between Jersey Street and Harborne Street, between 5,000 and 9,000 vehicles per day from Selby Street to Jersey Street and less than 1,000 vehicles per day west of Selby Street.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 20 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
The crossing of this east/west road link by pedestrians is managed at specific points along the route. The density of pedestrians is greatest adjacent to the commercial shopping and transport nodes. These are less frequent towards the western end of this road network.
A summary of this detail is placed in a matrix in the attachments to this report.
COMMENT:
The existing upper speed limit of 50kph in Railway Street/Roe Street is standard for the majority of the road network in the City of Perth recognising the commercial nature of the city streets. The District Roads such as Riverside Drive, Mounts Bay Road, Thomas Street, Kings Park Road, which are recognised as the exit links from the City, are designated 60kph or above.
In the City of Perth, roads such as Fitzgerald Street, William Street, Beaufort Street, Lord Street, Plain Street are 50kph. Northwards through the Town of Vincent and the City of Stirling, the speed limits increase to 60kph. This is also the case from Railway Street to Railway Parade, where 50kph is designated on this route in the City of Perth and 60kph in the Town of Cambridge, with the change of speed limit being at Loftus Street.
Within the Town of Cambridge, Railway Parade is recognised as a link road for district traffic from the Railway Street and Loftus Street to Southport Street, Haydn Bunton Drive, Salvado Road, Harborne Street, Jersey Street/Cambridge Street linkages. The transition back to 50kph in Salvado Road west of Jersey Street has been introduced in recognition of the dominant residential/recreational nature of this section of road and restricted turning movements at Selby Street.
It is noted, the current road hierarchy for Salvado Road and Railway Parade is as follows:-
• Salvado Road – Selby Street to Jersey Street – Local Access 50kph. • Salvado Road – Jersey Street to Harborne Street - District Distributor B. • Salvado Road – Harborne Street to Haydn Bunton Drive – District Distributor A. • Railway Parade – Haydn Bunton Drive to Loftus Street – District Distributor B.
Recognising the nature of the adjacent land use and traffic along Railway Parade, it is considered that the 60kph is appropriate. Further, that traffic and pedestrian links be strengthened. This work has continued this financial year between Blencowe Street and Kerr Street. Previous works carried out by Council include:-
• The development of two lanes in Railway Parade approaching Loftus Street. • The median island in Southport Street at the Railway Parade intersection. • The pedestrian underpass under the Railway Line at the intersection of Northwood Street and Railway Parade. • Various footpath improvements to pavements leading from the underpass.
The existing Railway Parade road geometry is in keeping with the 60kph limit. Further development of the road work completed this year will improve the continuity for through traffic, parking facilities and pedestrian movements.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
To provide a safe environment for adjacent land use, pedestrian movements and through traffic.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 21 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The question of reducing the 60kph to 50kph in Railway Parade will have financial implications relating to replacement of regulatory signage.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
It is recognised that District Distributor Roads within the Town including Railway Parade have been designated as 60kph or higher in recognition of the Road Hierarchy Policy.
This position was formalised by Council at the meeting held on 27 March 2001 (Item TS01.30) when the following decision of Council was reached:-
“That:-
(i) a 50km/h local precinct speed limit for all Local Access and Local Distributor roads within the Town be supported;
(ii) the District Distributor and Primary Distributor Roads be designated by Main Roads WA in accordance with the current level of speed with the one exception that Challenger Parade and Oceanic Drive west of West Coast Highway be designated as a 50km/h speed limit road.”
PUBLIC CONSULTATION:
Nil
CONCLUSION:
In recognition of current speed zone differences either side of Loftus Street, a study has been completed to review the 60kph in Railway Parade west of Loftus Street with a view to reducing the speed to 50kph. It is recommended that the existing 60 kph speed limit be retained, which is in keeping with the principles of the present road namely:-
• The through traffic and links to District Roads of Loftus Street, Southport Street, Haydn Bunton Drive, Harborne Street and Jersey Street. • The current pedestrian links over Railway Parade at Kerr Street, Kimberley Street and Northwood Street. • Approximately 90% of the adjacent land zone, which includes commercial premises, residential R60 and railway development. The 10% residential R30 from Tate Street to Blencowe Street includes a number of properties with front brick walls and side walls. • The district nature of the traffic using Railway Parade.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
Moved by Cr Langer, seconded by Cr Pinerua
That:-
(i) the existing maximum speed limit of 60kph be retained on Railway Parade from Loftus Street to Haydn Bunton Drive;
(ii) a review of the road traffic Speed Zoning be undertaken with the next review of the Road Hierarchy and Town Planning Scheme.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 22 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Committee Meeting 11 February 2003
During discussion, Members agreed that a speed limit of 50 kph should be introduced on Railway Parade from Loftus Street to Haydn Bunton Drive for the following reasons:-
• to maintain consistency with the 50 kph speed limit on Railway Parade, east of Loftus Street; • Railway Parade is a highly pedestrianised precinct and even more so during the Football Season.
Amendment
Moved by Cr Langer, seconded by Cr Anderton
That the motion be amended to read as follows:-
That Main Roads WA be requested to make the necessary amendments to introduce a speed limit of 50 kph on Railway Parade from Loftus Street to Hadyn Bunton Drive.
Carried
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr O’Connor, seconded by Cr MacRae
That Main Roads WA be requested to make the necessary adjustments to introduce a speed limit of 50 kph on Railway Parade from Loftus Street to Haydn Bunton Drive.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 23 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
TS03.05
BRANKSOME GARDENS – TRAFFIC (File Reference: TES 0127)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To consider the establishment of a centre line in Branksome Gardens from Oceanic Drive to Launceston Avenue in City Beach in order to improve road safety.
BACKGROUND:
Branksome Gardens is approximately 1.5 kms in length linking Oceanic Drive with Launceston Avenue. The road pavement is approximately 10 – 11 metres in width and the horizontal and vertical alignment has a number of curves that restrict motorists’ sight distance.
The adjacent land use is residential with the exception of Jubilee Park on the western side of Branksome Gardens adjacent to Oceanic Drive.
The road carries approximately 1,000 vehicles per day and the designated traffic speed is 50 kph. The route is used by the 81 and 85 bus services.
Council has received requests to consider the introduction of a roundabout at the Branksome Gardens/ Boscombe Avenue intersection and/or other traffic management devices, to reduce traffic in this road.
DETAILS:
Consideration has been given to the installation of a roundabout at the intersection of Branksome Gardens and Boscombe Avenue. Three options have been considered namely:-
• The intersection of Branksome Gardens and Boscombe Avenue west. • The intersection of Branksome Gardens and Boscombe Avenue east • The intersection of Branksome Gardens and an alignment of Boscombe Avenue to form a cross road.
All three options have significant limitations. These limitations include:-
• Boscombe Avenue West and Branksome Gardens roundabout results in:-
- The banning of the right turn from Boscombe Avenue east into Branksome Gardens north because of the roundabout approach island. - Conflict with the crossovers at the north eastern corner of Branksome Gardens and Boscombe Avenue east. - The new road bitumen being too close to the property boundary, in particular at the north eastern corner. - The conflict with underground services and the earthworks required at the north eastern corner.
• The roundabout at the intersection of Branksome Gardens and Boscombe Avenue east is not practical because:-
- The roundabout will be too close to the south western property boundary.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 24 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
- There will be no right turn from Boscombe Avenue west into Branksome Gardens because of the roundabout approach island. - A conflict at the crossovers at the north eastern corner of the intersection. - A conflict of the services at the north eastern corner when the necessary cut is carried out to fit the roundabout.
• The roundabout at the geometric intersection of the Branksome Gardens and Boscombe Avenue road reserves is not practical because of:
- The resulting non standard roundabout due to the oblique nature of the intersection. - The roundabout will be within three metres of the property boundary and this will prove to be too close recognising the cut and fill earthworks that will be required to fit the roundabout. - The levels of the services at the north eastern corner will conflict with the necessary cut into the existing bank and the conflict with the existing crossovers.
Discussions have proceeded with Main Roads WA concerning a proposed centre line in Branksome Gardens to encourage traffic to drive to one half of the road and therefore reduce their speed and in particular at the horizontal and vertical curves. Main Roads WA has indicated its support for a dashed centre line. A copy of a plan showing the proposed dashed centre line in Branksome Gardens is to be tabled.
COMMENT:
Consideration may be given to the implementation of median island in Branksome Gardens both north and south of Boscombe Avenue. This will channel the traffic and unless it is carried out on an extended length will not have the required speed control but will add to driver tension. Median islands will prevent adjacent kerbside parking.
It is recognised that the width of the road pavement in Branksome Gardens has been established in accordance with the guidelines from the Ministry for Planning for a bus route at the time of the subdivision development. The road does act as a Local Distributor for traffic accessing the local streets in this South City Beach residential precinct.
The proposed dashed centre line will be a first stage in developing traffic calming measures for the street and is in harmony with the current use by both buses and local traffic. When this work is complete, further consideration for additional median islands may be considered if required.
It is also prudent to defer any other significant works until the installation of sewerage to South City Beach is completed. This is currently being programmed by the Water Corporation.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
This recommendation is in accordance with the staged development of the 10 metre wide roads in local residential precincts.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The proposed works will be funded by Main Roads WA and Council will set out the position of the centre line in accordance with Main Roads WA standards. Council expenditure will be absorbed in the operational budget.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 25 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil
PUBLIC CONSULTATION:
This proposal has been the result of requests from the community to introduce some additional traffic treatments in Branksome Gardens. Discussions have taken place with Main Roads WA as they have been the regulatory responsible for signs and lines on road pavements.
CONCLUSION:
It is recognised that Branksome Gardens is a long winding road in South City Beach and as the width of the existing pavement is approximately 10 metres wide, a centre line is desirable.
Main Roads WA has indicated its support for the centre line.
Committee Meeting 11 February 2003
Prior to consideration of this item, Cr Anderton, in accordance with section 5.65 of the Local Government Act 1995, declared an interest in this matter.
Cr Anderton left the meeting at 6.38 pm. Members agreed that, in accordance with section 5.68 of the Local Government Act 1995, Cr Anderton be allowed to be present at the meeting and to participate in discussions and the decision making procedure relating to the matter.
Cr Anderton returned to the meeting at 6.39 pm and participated in the discussion.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr O’Connor, seconded by Cr MacRae
That arrangements be made for the installation of a dashed centre line in Branksome Gardens from Oceanic Drive to Launceston Avenue in accordance with the plan E118-02-01 as tabled.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 26 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
TS03.06
REABOLD HILL ACCESS ROAD (File Reference: RES 0008)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To consider the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority proposal to build a two-way access road from Oceanic Drive to the Reabold Hill Lookout.
BACKGROUND:
The Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority developed an Environmental Management Plan for Bold Park in 2002. One of the key strategies endorsed in the Bold Park Environmental Management Plan was Item 191 “Improve safe access to Reabold Hill Scenic Drive for pedestrians and cyclists by constructing a walkway adjacent to the road, improving the road alignment, installing vehicle slowing devices and reducing the speed limit to 20kph.” As a result of the geotechnical survey into the stability of the slopes in the vicinity of the eastern access to Reabold Hill through Scenic Drive, it was demonstrated that it is not possible to achieve this objective (Item 191) on this alignment. The major concern was the risk of a landslide if the existing up hill road is widened to provide the objectives.
The Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority has prepared a revised concept for improving safe access to Reabold Hill for pedestrians and cyclists. A preliminary plan of this proposal is tabled. In summary, the revised concept involves the:-
• Closure of the eastern access (Scenic Drive from Oceanic Drive) to the lookout for public vehicles and designate the existing road for pedestrian, bicycle and management access only. • Provision of a two-way vehicle access along the alignment of the existing western access road from the Reabold Hill Lookout westward to Oceanic Drive. • The provision of a new pedestrian pathway on the eastern side of this new western roadway. • Construction of a new intersection at the Quarry Amphitheatre exit onto the western Reabold Scenic Drive. • The construction of a new safe intersection where the western Reabold Scenic Drive two-way access road will meet Oceanic Drive.
The Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority is seeking the Town’s co-operation and comment, particularly on some specific elements of the plan. It is recognised that the proposed work will impact on the Town’s infrastructure including:-
• Reconfiguration of existing access (Eastern access). • Construction of a new intersection with Oceanic Drive (Western access). • Removal of four trees, three on the southern verge of Oceanic Drive and one in the median strip adjacent to the new two-way western Reabold Scenic Drive to enable the construction of the new western intersection with Oceanic Drive. • The proposal to install new drainage along the lower section of western Reabold Scenic Drive connecting into the drainage along Oceanic Drive. • Requirement for a minor alignment of the boundary of the Quarry Amphitheatre to accommodate the two-way western Reabold Scenic Drive upgrade and pedestrian pathway.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 27 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
The Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority has a preliminary budget estimate of $105,000 for the construction of the intersections. The two intersections are at Amphitheatre Exit/ Lookout Road and Oceanic Drive/Lookout Access Road. The Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority has requested that Council gives consideration to providing some financial support for the project as the Quarry Amphitheatre’s patrons will benefit from the proposed works.
DETAILS:
The Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority requires vehicular access to its existing standpipe and storage shed, as well as bicycle and pedestrian access at the existing Scenic Drive eastern access off Oceanic Drive. This can be established utilising the existing facilities and laying crossover kerb to restrict vehicle access. A white continuity line can be established to define the through lanes for Oceanic Drive on the southern side where the existing bitumen has been widened to accommodate the public access. It is desirable to establish bicycle access from both the existing Oceanic Drive road pavement and the City to Sea Greenway dual use path at this location.
The western Reabold Hill exit road is an existing one-way road. This road provides exit from both Reabold Hill and the Quarry Amphitheatre carpark. The angle of the intersection of this road with Oceanic Drive and the position of the Oceanic Drive median break ensures that traffic will exit in a westerly direction only. It is proposed that this Reabold Hill Lookout Road to Oceanic Drive be made a two-way access road with a footpath on the eastern side. Further, that the median island break be adjusted and the intersection be constructed to a established 90o T-junction.
The location of the new intersection of Oceanic Drive and Reabold Hill Lookout Road is approximately 300 metres east of Kalinda Drive and 400 metres west of the existing Quarry Amphitheatre access road. The spacing of intersections is safe and the entry and exit intersection sight distance for the new Reabold Hill intersection with Oceanic Drive is good, provided the trees are removed as proposed. (Three Norfolk Pines and one median tree).
Enclosed in the attachments to this report is an arboricultural assessment of the three Norfolk Island Pine trees that will require removal to facilitate this proposal. It is recognised that the first tree indicated in the report is the one adjacent to the new works and the third one is the eastern most one to be removed. The first tree is in fair health and poor structural condition. The second tree is in reasonably good condition with dead wood visible throughout the lower canopy. The third tree is in poor health condition. The three trees are estimated to be between 35 and 45 years old and the proximity of the dual use path and road bitumen has had its impact on the tree root system. The fourth tree to be removed is in the median island.
The proposed access road and path will intrude up to approximately two metres into the Town’s Amphitheatre property over a length of approximately 70 metres. The fill road batter will intrude a further 8 metres and will not impact on any significant trees. If the road is moved southwards into Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority property, then a number of significant trees will be removed.
The proposed intersection of the existing exit Amphitheatre road with the new link road from Oceanic Drive to Reabold Hill Lookout will remain in a similar traffic movement as existing.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 28 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
COMMENT:
The current Council Oceanic Drive stormwater management system is dependent on a soakage outlet into Bold Park and is under the control and management of the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority.
The land adjustment between the Quarry Amphitheatre and the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority will have minimal impact on site. The major impact will be the cut/fill batters and these will be required to be revegetated.
There are a number of technical issues that need to be developed when the concept plan as tabled is completed to the level of construction drawings. Some of these issues include:-
• A review of the stormwater discharge and the possible development of soakage pits within the proposed road pavement structure. • The establishment of a splinter island to separate left and right turn traffic from Oceanic Drive into the new western access road. • Consideration be given to providing a sound road base in Oceanic Drive road reserve for the new access road. This may be 250mm compacted base with 30mm of asphalt and that the left turn slip lane from Oceanic Drive into the new service road be concrete in recognition of the steepness of the new road. • Additional street lighting for the intersection to be considered. • The dual use path on both the northern and southern side of Oceanic Drive be extended and developed in an alignment with the existing path to match the new intersection. The path to be fitted with standard pedestrian and cycle ramps and road crossings are to be completed. • Signs and lines to be established in accordance with Main Roads WA guidelines and approval. • The maintenance of the new service road within the Oceanic Drive road reserve to be under the Council control and in Bold Park to be under the care and management of the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority.
It is recognised that the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority is initiating this proposal and that there is no advantage for the Town. It is considered incumbent on the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority to maintain the existing trafficable exit from the Amphitheatre carpark. Therefore, there is no incumbence on Council to contribute financially to the project. Council may wish to contribute financially in recognition of the improved asset within the Town.
In order to assess this proposal, representatives from the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority will be in attendance at the Committee meeting.
Quarry Amphitheatre – Management Issues
The proposal by the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority to construct the two-way vehicle access road to the west of the Quarry Amphitheatre, provides an opportunity for the Town to consider relocating the main entrance to the Amphitheatre and consolidate the access with the entrance to Reabold Hill.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 29 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
The advantages in consolidating the access are:-
• reduces confusion to patrons attending the Quarry Amphitheatre as there would be only one main entry to both the Amphitheatre and Reabold Hill. If the entrances remain separate, some patrons may use the Reabold Hill access instead of the Quarry Amphitheatre if they are not familiar with the venue; • the two-way access road would be of a higher standard than the current Quarry Amphitheatre road which is narrow and steep; • the current Quarry Amphitheatre access road could be downgraded and used by performers and users of the Cavern only; • ingress and egress for the Quarry could be consolidated in one location; • reduces the number of main entrance points from Oceanic Drive.
A consolidated access for both facilities would also create some difficulties and the following disadvantages are presented:
• the identity of the Quarry Amphitheatre could be compromised as the main entrance would require signage for both facilities. For marketing purposes, it is important for the Amphitheatre signage to be clearly distinguishable and include advertising for current and forthcoming performances; • the Council has approved new signage for the Quarry Amphitheatre and expenses have already been incurred for design. This design would need to be modified to be included in a consolidated entry statement; • the common entrance point could confuse some patrons in relation to their desired destination i.e. Quarry Amphitheatre or Reabold Hill; • major works would be required at the intersection of the current Quarry Amphitheatre exit with the Reabold Hill road to accommodate the two-way traffic which would add to the cost of the proposed works; • the timeframe for the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority to undertake the proposed roadworks is not known. It may be some time before the Authority is in a position to carry out these works and the proposed signage for the Quarry Amphitheatre is ready for installation; • if the Reabold Hill road was to be used as the main entrance and exit to the Quarry Amphitheatre, it could be expected that the Town would provide a financial contribution to the cost of the works proposed by the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority. This contribution could be quite considerable and the operations of the Quarry Amphitheatre could not justify the cost. The Amphitheatre is in need of funds for other priority projects before considering the proposed works which will have limited benefit.
The installation of signage for the Quarry Amphitheatre has been deferred pending the outcome of Council’s decision in this matter, particularly if Council expresses an interest in consolidating the entrances. If so, the entry statement proposed by the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority would need to be amended to incorporate signage for the Quarry Amphitheatre that would need to be separately identifiable for the marketing of the Town’s venue.
Although there may be some advantages to consolidate, and the Manager (Starlight Theatre Lighting) of the Quarry Amphitheatre would support the concept, the proposal cannot be justified on a financial basis at this time.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 30 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
The proposed works is in accordance with the Bold Park Environmental Management Plan Item 191 and is supported by Council.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority is keen that Council contributes financially to this project in recognition that Quarry Amphitheatre patrons will benefit from the upgrade of the existing access road. Council may wish to give this consideration.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil
PUBLIC CONSULTATION:
This proposal is in keeping with the public comment during the development of the Bold Park Environmental Management Plan.
CONCLUSION:
The Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority proposes to develop a two-way access road from Oceanic Drive to Reabold Hill along the existing alignment of the one-way exit road from Reabold Hill to Oceanic Drive. The new two-way access road will accommodate a footpath on one side. The redundant access road from Oceanic Drive on the eastern side of the Quarry Amphitheatre to the top of Reabold Hill will become a pedestrian, cycle and service route only.
The proposed works will provide improved vehicle and pedestrian access to Reabold Hill Lookout and not disadvantage the existing exit from the Quarry Amphitheatre carpark or the existing traffic and access along Oceanic Drive. The removal of the three Norfolk Island Pine trees on the south side of Oceanic Drive and the one tree in the median is supported, recognising the age and deterioration of the trees and the importance of the proposed works. It is recommended that all new cut and fill batters on the road work be fully reinstated and an additional tree be planted in the section of the median island that will be closed as part of the road works and the opening of the new gap adjacent to the new road.
Whilst the proposed works may assist the Quarry Amphitheatre, the works will assist more regional users than those visiting the Quarry. From a Quarry Amphitheatre perspective, it is not necessary to undertake any of the works proposed.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Pinerua
That the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority be advised that:-
(i) approval is given for:-
(a) the closure of the existing eastern leg of the Reabold Scenic Drive at Oceanic Drive and a pedestrian/cycle and service vehicle crossover link being established;
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 31 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
(b) the existing Reabold Hill western exit road being replaced with a two-way service road from Oceanic Drive as indicated on the plans with the necessary amendments as indicated in the Comments section of this report;
(c) the three Norfolk Island Pine trees and one median verge tree being removed as required and that one additional verge tree be planted and all cut and fill batters be vegetated;
(d) the adjustment to the property boundaries at the intersection of the new Reabold Hill two-way service road and the Quarry Amphitheatre exit road. This work is to be formalised through Department of Land Administration by the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority at no cost to Council;
(ii) the Council is not prepared to support this project financially.
Committee Meeting 11 February 2003
During discussion, Members agreed that all removed trees should be replaced.
Amendment
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Langer
That clause (i) (c) of the motion be amended to read as follows:-
(i)(c) the three Norfolk Island Pine trees and one median verge tree being removed as required and all trees to be replaced. Cut and fill batters to be vegetated.
Carried
Council Meeting 25 February 2003
It was noted, prior to discussion of this item, that Mayor Willcock and Cr Smith , in accordance with section 5.65 of the Local Government Act 1995, declared an interest in this matter. Mayor Willcock and Cr Smith said that the nature of their interest is that they are members of the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority Management Board. Mayor Willcock and Cr Smith left the meeting at 6.08 pm. In the absence of both the Mayor and the Deputy Mayor, Members appointed Cr MacRae as acting Presiding Member. Cr MacRae took the chair at 6.08 pm.
Moved by Cr Burkett, seconded by Cr O’Connor
That in accordance with section 5.68 of the Local Government Act, Mayor Willcock and Cr Smith be allowed to be present at the meeting and to participate in discussions and the decision making procedure relating to the matter.
Carried
Mayor Willcock and Cr Smith returned to the meeting at 6.10 pm. Mayor Willcock resumed the Chair at 6.10 pm.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 32 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr O’Connor, seconded by Cr MacRae
That the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority be advised that:-
(i) approval is given for:-
(a) the closure of the existing eastern leg of the Reabold Scenic Drive at Oceanic Drive and a pedestrian/cycle and service vehicle crossover link being established;
(b) the existing Reabold Hill western exit road being replaced with a two-way service road from Oceanic Drive as indicated on the plans with the necessary amendments as indicated in the Comments section of this report;
(c) the three Norfolk Island Pine trees and one median verge tree being removed as all trees to be replaced. Cut and fill batters to be vegetated;
(d) the adjustment to the property boundaries at the intersection of the new Reabold Hill two-way service road and the Quarry Amphitheatre exit road. This work is to be formalised through Department of Land Administration by the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority at no cost to Council;
(ii) the Council is not prepared to support this project financially.
During discussion, Cr Smith suggested that the Council could contribute an amount of up to $10,000 to the project as the works would also be of considerable benefit to the Town. Amendment
Moved by Cr Smith, seconded by Cr McAullay
That clause (ii) of the motion be amended to read as follows:-
(ii) the Council is prepared to contribute up to an amount of $10,000 towards the project.
Amendment lost
Members requested that the vote of all those present be recorded:-
For: Mayor Willcock, Crs McAullay and Smith Against: Crs Anderton, Burkett, MacRae, O’Connor and Pinerua
The original motion was then put and carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 33 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
TS03.07
RIGHTS OF WAY – MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (File Reference: TES0311 : POL0013)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To review and update, with Council, a proposed 5 year right of way pavement upgrading program covering budget years 2003/2004 to 2007/2008.
BACKGROUND:
The acceptance of a five year program can form the basis for future budget considerations. The program will allow design and acquisition of laneways not currently owned by the Town to proceed in the required order.
In June 2001 (Item TS01.53), Council decided that the following program be adopted for future budget consideration:-
ROW STREET 1 STREET 2 STREET 3 STREET 4 SUBURB LENGTH WIDTH OF TOTAL COST NO OF ROW ROW Year 1 2001/2002 26 McKenzie Daglish Grantham Wembley 91 5 $20,000 30 Grantham Essex Ruislip Nanson Wembley 100 5 $21,000 87 St. Leonards Blencowe Cambridge Woolwich Leederville 201 5 $50,000 96 Northwood Glen Cambridge Leederville 48 4 $15,000 97 Glen Lesser Cambridge Leederville 48 3 $15,000 98 Lesser Cambridge Kimberley Leederville 153 3 $45,000 100 Woolwich Northwood Kimberley Leederville 70 4 $20,000 392 Southport Cambridge Railway Leederville 40 5 $20,000 28 Scaddan Gregory Grantham Harborne Wembley 392 5 $125,000 $331,000 Year 2 2002/2003
81 Mc Court Tate Cambridge Woolwich Leederville 201 5 $60,000 106 Woolwich Argyle St. Carlton Coldstream Leederville 111 3 $20,000 88 St. Leonards Blencowe Woolwich Ruislip Leederville 201 5 $60,000 89 Blencowe Northwood Woolwich Ruislip Leederville 201 5 $60,000 $200,000 Year 3 2003/2004 76 Ruislip Joseph Woolwich Connolly L/W 209 5 $70,000 27 Wise Harborne Grantham Daglish Wembley 392 5 $130,000 $200,000 Year 4 2004/2005 66 Ruislip Harborne Cambridge Daglish Wembley 298 5 $125,000 42 Warwick Ruislip Kimberley Leederville 103 5 $33,000 84 Tate St. Leonards Cambridge Woolwich Leederville 201 5 $65,000 $223,000 Year 5 2005/2006 77 Ruislip McCourt Woolwich Joseph Leederville 209 5 $67,000 82 Mc Court Tate Woolwich Ruislip Leederville 201 5 $66,500 83 Tate St. Leonards Woolwich Ruislip Leederville 201 5 $66,500 $200,000
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 34 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
ROW STREET 1 STREET 2 STREET 3 STREET 4 SUBURB LENGTH WIDTH OF TOTAL COST NO OF ROW ROW Year 6 2006/2007 33 Grantham Harborne Ruislip Daglish Wembley 322 5 $110,000 107 Coldstream Regent Antrim Brighton Leederville 171 3 $35,000 400 Southport Cambridge Leederville 50 5 $20,000 45 Barrington Connaught North/South Leederville 65 3 $15,000 45 Connaught Barrington East/West Leederville 73 3 $15,000 $195,000
The first two years of the above approved program have been constructed. The criteria considered in developing this program was:-
• Laneways that are well used as a consequence of development. • Flooding problems. • Rights of way parallel to District Distributor Roads.
Attached to this report is a Plan dated February 2003, showing the rights of way that have been included in this proposed new five year program.
Laneway Statistics:-
• Total laneways 22.01 kms
• Owned By The Town 17.78 kms
• Owned By Others 4.23 kms
• Total Constructed & Drained 6.46 kms ( 29.4 % )
• Average Construct & drain Cost = $ 300 per metre ( Ave Width =4.6 m )
DETAILS:
In developing this program, it is assumed that the Town maintains a level of funding of $200,000 per annum for the upgrading of Rights of Way over the next five years. If Council maintains the budget level of $200,000 per annum, it is anticipated that the majority of the laneways in the Town would be brought to a reasonable bitumen standard within a twenty year period. This does not include the impact of inflation and increased cost of maintaining the laneways.
It is not considered reasonable to prepare a twenty year program at this stage, however, the attached five year program will highlight the direction, time frame and level of funds that will be required to upgrade the laneways within the Town based upon current priorities.
The standard to which the laneways have been built includes a bitumen surface, flush kerbing and soakage drainage system. It is recognised that in severe wet weather the soakage drainage system may overflow.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 35 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Using the above criteria, the new five year Rights of Way upgrade program is as follows:
ROW LENGTH WIDTH TOTAL STREET 1 STREET 2 STREET 3 STREET 4 SUBURB NO OF ROW OF ROW COST
Year 1 2003/2004 76 Ruislip Joseph Woolwich Connolly West Leederville 209 5 $70,000 27 Wise Harborne Grantham Daglish Wembley 392 5 $130,000 $200,000 Year 2 2004/2005 66 Ruislip Harborne Cambridge Daglish Wembley 298 5 $125,000 42 Warwick Ruislip Kimberley West Leederville 103 5 $33,000 84 Tate St.Leonards Cambridge Woolwich West Leederville 201 5 $65,000 $223,000
Year 3 2005/2006 77 Ruislip McCourt Woolwich Joseph West Leederville 209 5 $67,000 82 Mc Court Tate Woolwich Ruislip West Leederville 201 5 $66,500 83 Tate St.Leonards Woolwich Ruislip West Leederville 201 5 $66,500 $200,000 Year 4 2006/2007 33 Grantham Harborne Ruislip Daglish Wembley 322 5 $110,000 107 Coldstream Regent Antrim Brighton West Leederville 171 3 $35,000 400 Southport Cambridge West Leederville 50 5 $20,000 45 Barrington Connaught North/South West Leederville 65 3 $15,000 45 Connaught Barrington East/West West Leederville 73 3 $15,000 $195,000 Year 5 2007/2008 5 Herdsman Alexander Simper Wembley 102 5 $33,025 7 Herdsman Pangbourne Jersey Wembley 103 5 $33,355 8 Herdsman Holland Pangbourne Wembley 107 5 $34,150 15 Herdsman Drew Johnson Wembley 103 5 $33,345 22 Ranson Gregory Wise Harborne Wembley 302 4 $78,360 $212,235
Total $1,030,235
This program maintains the previous program to budget year 2006/2007 and adds new projects only for budget 2007/2008.
COMMENT:
This report outlines a proposed direction for the development of laneways. The funding level may vary as the budget is finalised or as funds may become available from other sources.
Works in a laneway may be carried out at an increased rate if the adjacent property owners make a direct financial contribution. This option is available under the existing Council Policy No. 4.2.22.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 36 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
This proposal is in keeping with the Council Policy No. 4.2.22 for the development of laneways.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The allocation of $200,000 per year will be reviewed when each annual budget is compiled. In order to maintain the five year program, it is essential that funds be allocated at the rate of $200,000 per year.
To increase the construction of laneways over a shorter period is dependent upon available funding levels.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
This recommendation is in accordance with Council’s objective to provide leadership in the planning and development of the Town.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION:
The Council is in the process of acquiring all the laneways within the Town. The community has supported this.
There have been many enquiries from the public to upgrade the laneways throughout the Town. The main reasons for upgrading the laneways are to provide alternative access to properties that front District Distributor Roads and to resolve issues of stormwater encroaching into private property. The proposed program recognises the increase in development activity, particularly in West Leederville. Extra consultation may be required to identify laneways where adjacent residents have a strong wish not to complete construction. The proposed five year program does address these issues.
SUMMARY:
The proposed five year program is an extension of the previous work carried out in laneways in the Town. There is significant community demand for this work. The funding is commensurate with the direction for the Council Principal Activities Plan. If this level of funds varies, the program can be adjusted accordingly.
The completion of this five year program will add an extra 3,214 metres of laneway to the constructed standard. This will lift construction from 6,460 metres to 9,674 metres which is 44.0% of the laneways within the Town by June 2008.
Committee Meeting 11 February 2003
During discussion, Members agreed that the item be submitted to Council for determination.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 37 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
COUNCIL DECISION: (ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr Cr O’Connor, seconded by Cr MacRae
That:-
(i) the following rights of way development program be accepted for consideration within Council’s future budgets:-
ROW LENGTH WIDTH TOTAL STREET 1 STREET 2 STREET 3 STREET 4 SUBURB NO OF ROW OF ROW COST
Year 1 2003/2004 West 76 Ruislip Joseph Woolwich Connolly Leederville 209 5 $70,000 27 Wise Harborne Grantham Daglish Wembley 392 5 $130,000 $200,000
ROW LENGTH WIDTH TOTAL NO STREET 1 STREET 2 STREET 3 STREET 4 SUBURB OF ROW OF ROW COST Year 2 2004/2005 66 Ruislip Harborne Cambridge Daglish Wembley 298 5 $125,000 West 42 Warwick Ruislip Kimberley Leederville 103 5 $33,000 West 84 Tate St.Leonards Cambridge Woolwich Leederville 201 5 $65,000 $223,000 Year 3 2005/2006 West 77 Ruislip McCourt Woolwich Joseph Leederville 209 5 $67,000 West 82 Mc Court Tate Woolwich Ruislip Leederville 201 5 $66,500 West 83 Tate St.Leonards Woolwich Ruislip Leederville 201 5 $66,500 $200,000 Year 4 2006/2007 33 Grantham Harborne Ruislip Daglish Wembley 322 5 $110,000 West 107 Coldstream Regent Antrim Brighton Leederville 171 3 $35,000 West 400 Southport Cambridge Leederville 50 5 $20,000 West 45 Barrington Connaught North/South Leederville 65 3 $15,000 West 45 Connaught Barrington East/West Leederville 73 3 $15,000 $195,000 Year 5 2007/2008 5 Herdsman Alexander Simper Wembley 102 5 $33,025 7 Herdsman Pangbourne Jersey Wembley 103 5 $33,355 8 Herdsman Holland Pangbourne Wembley 107 5 $34,150 15 Herdsman Drew Johnson Wembley 103 5 $33,345 22 Ranson Gregory Wise Harborne Wembley 302 4 $78,360 $212,235
Total $1,030,235
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 38 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
TS03.08
ROAD WORKS – DRAFT BUDGET CONSIDERATION 2003/2004 (File Reference: FIN 0120, Vol 3)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To establish priority road works projects that may be considered with the 2003/2004 Budget discussions.
BACKGROUND:
A number of requests have been forwarded to Council for consideration with the 2003/2004 Budget. These have come directly to the Administration or via Councillors or have been raised through the past Council meeting discussions. It is desirable that these be prioritised so that consideration can be given to preparing preliminary designs and more accurate budget estimates.
It is clear that the number of requests will exceed one year budget allocations. Further, it is desirable that Council develops a list of possible projects for a minimum of two years so that preliminary designs can be developed each year and estimates be forwarded to grant applications and/or budget consideration based on some initial engineering input. To facilitate this cycle of events, it is proposed that a preliminary two year program be developed. The actual budget works will be decided when the budget is approved by Council later in 2003.
It is proposed that the sum of funds available be taken from the Principal Activities Plan, recognising the previous year’s allocation. If an alteration of the level of funds is considered necessary, then this can be resolved at the time of budget approval.
DETAILS:
Included in the attachments to this report is a list of projects that have been forwarded to Council. The cost adjacent to some of the items is an initial cost only and will be confirmed after additional work, including location of existing services and preliminary designs has been completed.
It is recognised that some of these projects have been the subject of grant applications. Additional projects may attract alternative grants. If projects selected by Council through this agenda item will be subject to grant consideration, then applications can be made and referred to the budget accordingly. This is particularly relevant to:-
• Road rehabilitation grants. • Road improvement grants. • Black Spot grants. • Education Department School Facilities grants. • Bikewest grants.
The priority ranking that has been used is based on projects that are:-
1. A continuity of 2002/2003 works, high priority or frequently requested. 2. Considered good projects if funds are available. 3. Projects warranting further consideration but could be deferred because of their position with respect to other staged developments or because of their priority.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 39 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
It is recognised that Road Works and Local Area Traffic Management have often been crossed linked in the budget classifications. It is considered that these two items be amalgamated and that consideration be given to the projects totalling approximately $530,000 each year.
COMMENT:
The purpose of this report is to establish priority projects so that preliminary designs may be commenced to facilitate:-
• Improved accuracy in budget estimates. • Early design completion. • Community comment when required.
Early design completion is desirable so that community comment may be sought and Main Roads WA signs and lines approval can be obtained. These two elements may take up to six months. It is difficult to carry out the detailed design, obtain Main Roads WA approval, seek community comment and undertake construction in one financial year if the preliminary design work is not carried out prior to budget approval.
It is recognised that a number of projects are carried forward from previous years. Some of these projects have commenced. The continuation of these projects are considered desirable. Some examples of these are:-
• Salvado Road/Lissadell Street - roundabout. • Grantham Street – The Boulevard to Selby Street – median. • The Boulevard – Floreat Avenue to Selby Street – median. • Railway Parade – Blencowe Street to McCourt Street – median.
Some of the projects that may attract further grants would include those adjacent to schools, works along Railway Parade where parking and median safety treatments are implemented and bicycle facilities.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
To provide the necessary direction to prepare plans and estimates for road projects in accordance with the Council priority requirements.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Nil.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION:
The early preparation of road plans will provide the community with an opportunity to comment so that detailed design can be finalised in time for construction.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 40 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
CONCLUSION:
Included in the attachments to this report is a list of projects that have been raised for consideration with the 2003/2004 and 2004/2005 Council Budgets. The early guidelines for the specific project will facilitate the preparation of detailed estimates for the Council budget, obtain early Main Roads WA approval for signs and lines and seek community consultation prior to construction in a particular financial year.
The projects included in the list for consideration are those that have been raised by the Administration, community and Council and have not been carried out to date due to funding restrictions.
Committee Meeting 11 February 2003
During discussion, Members noted a requirement to consider listing Clanmel Road traffic impacts as a result of The Boulevard works and following the development of the Floreat Forum. A Priority Ranking 1 should be included which also incorporates impacts on Seymour Avenue (Refer Item 3.3 in attachments).
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr O’Connor, seconded by Cr MacRae
That preliminary plans and detailed estimates be prepared for budget consideration in 2003/2004 and 2004/2005 for the projects with Priority Ranking 1 as attached to and forming part of the Notice Paper.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 41 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
TS03.09
LAKE MONGER DRIVE – BIRDLIFE CROSSING (File Reference: TES 0064)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To establish options available to increase the safety and reduce vehicle/birdlife conflict on Lake Monger Drive adjacent to Lake Monger in West Leederville.
BACKGROUND:
At the Annual General Meeting of Electors in November 2002, it was decided:-
“That the Council investigate options available, including improved signage, to increase safety and reduce vehicle/birdlife conflict on Lake Monger Drive.”
The mover of the motion at the Annual General Meeting has forwarded to Council his proposed words for a new sign. These are:-
“The Town of Cambridge proudly presents a World Class Wildlife Sanctuary. Please slow down and watch for Swan, Ducks and Turtles.”
The existing signs that are in place include the words:-
• “Breeding Season September to March” – black letters on yellow background. • Reduce Speed Wildlife Crossing” – red and black letters on white background.
The existing signs are placed on the median and verge for traffic heading both east and west. The existing signs are larger than that which would be normal under the Australian Standards. The signs have been erected and are maintained by Main Roads WA.
DETAILS:
The existing signs are in good condition. Eastbound traffic can see the signs prior to them becoming legible so that they are aware of the need to approach with caution and can read the signs.
The two signs for the westbound traffic are not so evident. The median island sign is clear from Southport Street, however, the kerbside sign is not visible due to the overhanging trees.
It is recognised that the signs are a standard colour. The yellow background acts as an advisory sign and the white background with red and black letters highlights the importance of the message.
It is desirable that the westbound traffic see both the median and kerbside signs from Southport Street. This will require the relocation of the kerbside sign to a position approximately 20 metres west of Kimberley Street.
The relocation of the kerbside sign for westbound traffic will ensure that the kerbside sign is legible prior to the median sign and both are clearly visible from Southport Street. This will improve both their visual impact and the ability to read the kerbside sign and then the median sign.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 42 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
It is considered that too many words in a sign makes the sign difficult to read and therefore reduces the impact. The existing sign with eight words is preferred to the 20 letter sign that was proposed by the mover of the motion at the Annual General Meeting of Electors in November 2002.
COMMENT:
It is considered desirable that the median and kerbside signs be visible to the motorist for maximum impact. The impact of staggering the signs so that the kerbside sign will be able to be read prior to the median sign for westbound traffic is considered an advantage so that the median island sign can be a follow up confirmation of the same message. The impact of this can be monitored and a similar development be implemented for the eastbound traffic if it is found to be an advantage.
In association with the resurfacing of this section of Lake Monger Drive, consideration may be given to laying red asphalt. This will highlight the variation of environment and highlight the need for caution. It is generally recognised that red asphalt is used for cycle or parking areas where the reduced speed is encouraged and the existing warning signs will explain the need for caution at this location.
It is recognised that the laying of red asphalt is approximately 50% more expensive than black asphalt and should be carried out in association with the resurfacing of the road as part of the road management program. The relocation of the signs will have an initial impact and will have to be carried out by Main Roads WA. Further, the monitoring of each of these two techniques will help to define the impact of each treatment for future reference.
The existing traffic volume along Lake Monger Drive is approximately 18,500 vehicles per day. Lake Monger Drive is seen as an important east/west access road providing access to the Perth CBD, Mitchell Freeway and as part of the link westward to the West Coast Highway.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
This recommendation recognises Main Roads WA signage and the need for caution for safe motoring associated with the vehicle/ birdlife conflict in Lake Monger Drive between Northwood Street and St Vincent’s Avenue.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
There are no financial implications for Council for the relocation of the signs.
The financial implications for the laying of red asphalt in lieu of black asphalt is an increased expenditure of approximately 50%. It is recommended that red asphalt be reconsidered at the time of road resurfacing.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
To improve traffic and wildlife safety.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION:
This report has been developed from a request that has been raised by an Elector at the Annual General Meeting in November 2002. There have been other community requests to increase safety for wildlife in this section of Lake Monger Drive.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 43 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
CONCLUSION:
It is recognised that the conflict of wildlife and vehicles along Lake Monger Drive is an issue especially during the breeding season from September to March each year. It is considered that the recommendation will provide increased awareness for the motorist to drive with caution.
The nature and volume of the traffic and the location of the wildlife sanctuary make this conflict an important issue.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr O’Connor, seconded by Cr MacRae
That:-
(i) Main Roads WA support be sought for the relocation of the “Wildlife Crossing” sign on the south side of Lake Monger Drive just east of Northwood Street to a position on the south side of Lake Monger Drive approximately 20 metres west of Kimberley Street;
(ii) consideration be given to the resurfacing of Lake Monger Drive from St Vincent’s Avenue to Northwood Street in red asphalt at a time when this section of road requires resurfacing under the road management program.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 44 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
TS03.10
HELSTON AND ALYTH PARKS – EMERGENCY BORE AND PUMP REPAIRS (File Reference: RES0001 : RES0009)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To inform Council of the requirement to undertake urgent repairs to the irrigation bore at Helston Park and the irrigation pump at Alyth Park in January 2003. The repairs were authorised by the Mayor in accordance with the Local Government Act 1995 as they were considered an emergency.
BACKGROUND:
The irrigation bore at Helston Park in South City Beach which is also used to irrigate West Coast Highway Median, between Oceanic Drive and Rochdale Road, developed a hole in the casing in late December 2002 and was drawing in sand and small rocks. This resulted in sprinklers and valves blocking up causing dry spots throughout the Park and also had the potential to damage the pump.
The irrigation pump at Alyth Park in Floreat, which is also used to irrigate the roundabout and median island landscaping on The Boulevard, had a major component failure. This damage resulted in the park turf going dry and some decline in the plants on The Boulevard median.
DETAILS:
The Administration, in accordance with section 6.8 (1) (c) of the Local Government Act 1995, obtained authorisation from the Mayor as the expenditure required was considered an emergency and actioned repairs in January 2003. If both of the above services were not repaired immediately, significant losses would have occurred to the turf on both Parks and the plants on The Boulevard median.
Helston Park
A licence application was sent to the Waters and Rivers Commission immediately for approval to install a new bore. This process takes two to three weeks and approval was received on 22 January 2003. Unfortunately, the grass did turn brown but will recover within two weeks of commencement of irrigation. The bore required total replacement at an estimated cost of $23,000. The pump was also checked and serviced in the process. An order to commence works was placed immediately following approval to replace the bore.
Unfortunately, the hole in the bore allowed a large quantity of sand and small rocks to enter the irrigation pipe work. This has resulted in many of the sprinklers and solenoid valves becoming blocked which require cleaning or replacement. The estimated cost for this work is $15,000, with a total cost for both works of around $38,000.
Alyth Park
Due to a major failure of the pump unit and the significant cost to repair it, Council’s contracted consultant advised that it would be more economical in the long term to totally replace the pump rather than to repair the faulty components. The cost to replace the pump and check the bore was estimated to be $7,000.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 45 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
To ensure plants within the Boulevard median survived whilst waiting for repairs, a water truck was used to water the newly planted trees and shrubs in this area until the irrigation system was repaired. The system was operational by 9 January 2003.
COMMENT:
The current Capital Budget lists an item for “Contingency - Emergency Bore/Pump/Reticulation Repairs” with an amount of $35,000. This has been established for the purpose of funding projects such as these. An amount of $21,000 has already been spent from this Account for unplanned repairs to one of the bores at Perry Lakes Reserve. The emergency amount would normally be sufficient, as the Towns Bore and Pump Management Program ensures necessary replacement/repairs are funded annually, however, this summer above average repairs have been required possibly due to the aging asset and the high iron content in the bore water.
The 2002/2003 Capital Budget includes the item ”Ocean Village Park – Replace Bore and Pump - $32,000”, Account Number C664-012. This item is part of the programmed maintenance/replacement schedule and can be deferred and scheduled for the 2003/2004 Budget. It is recommended that this proposal be adopted to fund the emergency works.
Funds of $13,000 from the Contingency - Emergency bore/pump/reticulation repairs Account, plus a reallocation of $32,000 from, the Ocean Village Park – Replace Bore and Pump Account, have been utilised to undertake the urgent repairs.
The new bore at Helston Park requires a new bore license from the Waters and Rivers Commission, and this takes approximately two to three weeks to obtain, plus another week to mobilise the drilling rig. Unfortunately, coupled with the hot weather, the Park will remain brown for a while but will recover within two weeks of commencement of irrigation. Some tree damage has occurred and these trees are currently being supplemented with water from a water truck.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
Nil
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The total cost of the works is as follows:-
• Helston Park $38,000 • Alyth Park $ 7,000
The Capital Budget Item “Contingency - Emergency Bore, Pump and Reticulation Repairs” which is funded from the Area Reserve Budget Account, has an available contingency amount of $14,000.
The Capital Budget item Ocean Village Park – Replace Bore and Pump has an available amount of $32,000.
The urgent works required have been funded as follows:
• Helston Park $38,000
Reallocate $32,000 from Account Number C664-012 previously designated for Ocean Village Park and use $6,000 from the contingency Account.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 46 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
• Alyth Park $7,000
Use $7,000 from the Contingency Account
PUBLIC CONSULTATION:
Nil
CONCLUSION:
The irrigation bore at Helston Park in South City Beach, which is also used to irrigate West Coast Highway Median, developed a hole in the casing in late December 2002 and was drawing in sand and small rocks. This resulted in sprinklers and valves blocking up causing dry spots throughout the Park and also had the potential to damage the pump.
The irrigation pump at Alyth Park in Floreat, which is also used to irrigate the roundabout and median island landscaping on The Boulevard, has had a major component failure causing the Park turf to go dry and some damage to the plants on The Boulevard median.
The Administration, in accordance with section 6.8 (1) (c) of the Local Government Act, obtained authorisation from the Mayor and actioned repairs in January 2003. If both of the above equipment were not actioned for repairs urgently, significant losses would have occurred to the turf on both Parks and the plants on The Boulevard median.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr O’Connor, seconded by Cr MacRae
That:-
(i) the report on urgent repairs to the irrigation systems at Helston Park in South City Beach and Alyth Park in Floreat be received;
(ii) the following amendments be made to the Council Budget:-
(a) an amount of $32,000 be reallocated from “Ocean Village Park – Replace Bore and Pump Account No. C664-012” and $6,000 from “Contingency – Emergency Bore and Pump Reticulation” item to new Budget Item “Helston Park – Replace Bore and Unblock Reticulation System” and the Budget be amended accordingly;
(b) an amount of $7,000 be reallocated from the “Contingency – Emergency Bore, Pump and Reticulation” item to new Budget Item “Alyth Park – Replace Pump” and the Budget be amended accordingly.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 47 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
TS03.11
PERRY LAKES RESERVE - UPGRADE POWER SUPPLY (File Reference: RES 0088)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To advise Council of a requirement to upgrade the power supply at Perry Lakes Reserve so that current budgeted and programmed works can be undertaken.
BACKGROUND:
The 2002/2003 Budget lists the following construction works for completion by 30 June 2003:-
1. Automatic Irrigation (stage 2) $415,000 - works commenced (refer TS02.115 December 2002) includes the installation of an additional 2 bores. One in the Garden week area and one in the south west area of the west lake.
2. Install new BBQ’s & seats $56,000 - Two additional BBQ’s are included in this project works are on hold.
3. Install Security Lights to toilets $10,000 - Lights proposed are for health & safety reasons and include two poles with twin floodlights on each, works on hold.
The above projects are part of the Perry Lake Reserve Management Plan Implementation Program.
In addition, the organisers of “Garden Week” Nursery Industries Association (NIA) have previously contacted Council requesting a number of initiatives to be introduced to assist them with the future running of the Garden Week event, (refer CCS02.100 August 2002). One of the requests included the upgrade of the current power supply at Perry Lakes Reserve as the current supply does not meet their needs. In report CCS02.100 August 2002, Council decided:-
“That:-
(i) the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to finalise a contract between the Town of Cambridge and the Nursery Industries Association (NIA) of Western Australia for the future conduct of Garden Week at the Perry Lakes Reserve based on the details in this report;
(ii) subject to successful negotiations above an amount of $35,000 be considered for inclusion in the 2003/2004 Budget representing 50% of the cost for upgrading the power supply at Perry Lakes Reserve.”
A copy of Report CCS02.100 August 2002 is included in the attachment to this report.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 48 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
DETAILS:
During initial investigations in identifying power requirements for the new works described above, it was discovered that the power available might not be sufficient for the works proposed. As a result, an investigation was carried out to identify power supply requirements for current budgeted works as well as for programmed future works as listed in the Perry Lakes Reserve Implementation Program.
The investigation identified a power requirement of between 375 and 400 Amps to accommodate current and future works proposals. This is an increase of about 150 Amps from the current 225 Amp supply. The new total power required includes power requirements for NIA to conduct Garden Week of about 225 Amps. The power supply compound is located adjacent to the toilet building in the south area of the reserve.
A list of the scope of works has been prepared by an Electrical Engineering Consultant as follows:-
• New, sole use, WPC owned, 315kVA transformer and other associated WPC works; • Disconnection and removal of existing redundant HV switchgear, 100kVA transformer, consumers mains and SMSB. An entirely new SMSB is required for the new maximum demand and metering requirements. • New direct buried consumers mains from new transformer to new SMSB. • New SMSB. • New bore/BBQ distribution board (DB) in the vicinity of the new loads. Given the distance away from the existing SMSB position, a new distribution board will need to be established to supply these new loads. • New direct buried sub main from SMSB to DB. • Sub circuit supplies in conduit from the new DB to the new loads. That is, two off bores, two off BBQ’s and miscellaneous small power and lighting. • Connection point on SMSB for “Garden Week” connection.
Total cost to upgrade the power supply to 375 Amps is estimated at $110,000. This upgrade is not listed in the 2002/2003 budget. An estimated $70,000 of this upgrade is directly related to power requirements by NIA to conduct “Garden Week”. This was identified in Report CCS02.100 August 2002.
All works in relation to the upgrade of the power will be undertaken by Western Power. Work can commence within two weeks of placing an order and be completed within two weeks. Taking into account the Council approval process and if approved, completion of works is estimated to be around end of March 2003.
COMMENT:
The upgrade of the power supply is essential to ensure power demands for current and future works are met. Unless this upgrade is undertaken, further works with significant power requirements cannot be undertaken. This means that the current works which have been programmed and budgeted to be undertaken this financial year, i.e. the BBQ’s, the floodlights to the toilets and the additional irrigation bore cannot be progressed and have been placed on hold. In addition, “Garden Week” organisers NIA will need to continue to hire generators to hold their event. Deferring these works until financial year 2003/2004 would not have a detrimental impact on the Town with the exception of the irrigation bore and the organisation associated with Garden Week.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 49 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Deferring the installation of the new bore would have a detrimental impact on the Parks turf quality and Lake level maintenance. The Garden Week area would not be able to be irrigated as the new bore will be used to water that area plus Underwood Avenue median. In addition, maintaining the Lakes levels by topping up with bore water will continue to be undertaken during the day whereas the new bore will allow this to be undertaken at night, to be in keeping with the water restrictions set down by the Water Corporation.
Funding sources for this upgrade can be derived from either one of the following two options:-
• Option 1. From available savings from irrigation works at Perry Lakes Reserve and Berkeley Park of approximately $44,000. This would then leave a shortfall of $66,000 which could be funded from the Endowment Lands Account. This option will allow current budgeted works to be progressed and accommodate the Garden Week requirements.
• Option 2. By deferring the BBQ’s and floodlights work at Perry Lakes Reserve with a combined budget of $66,000, plus savings available from the irrigation works at Perry Lakes Reserve and Berkeley Park of $44,000.
It is highlighted all savings on the above projects would be from the Endowment Lands Account.
The NIA have previously raised the issue of insufficient power availability at Perry Lakes Reserve with the Administration. They have indicated that they were willing to enter a cost sharing arrangement with the Town for the cost of upgrading the power supply. This will have a direct benefit to the running of their event by the organisers as there would not be a need to hire generators. However, when writing this report negotiations had not taken place and a contract had not been finalised. As endorsed by Council in report CCS02.100, negotiations will be progressed in relation to NIA contributing $35,000 which equates to 50% of the cost requirement of $70,000 to meet their needs.
In order to progress with the upgrade of the power it will be recommended that Option 1 be approved and a commitment be obtained from the NIA, to enter into a cost sharing arrangement with the Town as proposed in report CCS02.100 August 2002.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
To ensure that the Town’s assets perform in accordance with the appropriate, recognised, acceptable standards for the safety and benefit of the community.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The estimated cost for the electrical upgrade is $110,000. This is not a budgeted item. To fund the upgrade according to Option 1, it will be recommended as follows:-
1. Identify new budget item Perry Lakes Reserve – Upgrade Power Supply $110,000. with the funding to be sourced from the Endowment Lands Account.
2. The Administration will continue negotiations to obtain a commitment from NIA for a $35,000 contribution towards the capital costs and to ensure the integration of the Garden Week with the Perry Lakes Reserve area.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 50 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil
PUBLIC CONSULTATION:
The Administration has previously been communicating with the NIA in regards to upgrading the power supply at Perry Lakes Reserve in order to meet their requirements and do away with the use of generators. They have also been contacted to obtain their current and future power requirements to ensure an efficient and effective upgrade of the power supply.
CONCLUSION:
A requirement to upgrade the power supply at Perry Lakes Reserve has been identified as a matter of priority. This upgrade is required prior to progressing any further budgeted works, as well as for future planned works as listed in the Perry Lakes Reserve Improvement Program. Total cost is estimated at $110,000. To assist with funding with this upgrade, two options have been identified for Council’s consideration:-
• Option 1 – allows sourcing the funds from available savings of current works of $44,000, which can be supplemented by $66,000 from the Endowment Lands Account. This options allows current budgeted works of Perry Lakes Reserve to be progressed. • Option 2 – allows sourcing the funds by deferring current budgeted works at Perry Lakes Reserve to the value of $66,000 plus $44,000 from savings of existing works. This option allows the irrigation bore to be installed which will water the Garden Week area of the Reserve.
It will be recommended that Option 1 be approved and the funds be sourced from the Endowment Lands Account.
As endorsed by Council in Item CCS02.100 August 2002, negotiations will be progressed in relation to NIA contributing $35,000 which equates to 50% of the cost of $70,000, of upgrading the power to meet their needs.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
Moved by Cr Pinerua, seconded by Cr Langer
That:-
(i) the power supply to Perry Lakes Reserve be upgraded at a cost of $110,000 to facilitate the construction of current budget and future works;
(ii) the costs in (i) above be funded from the Endowment Lands Account and costs be authorised as an ABSOLUTE MAJORITY of Council as an unbudgeted expenditure in accordance with Section 6.8 of the Local Government Act 1995;
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 51 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Committee Meeting 11 February 2003
Prior to discussion, Members agreed that this item be considered fully following consideration of Item TS03.14 relating to Perry Lakes Reserve Entry Statements.
During discussion, Members agreed that as it has been decided not to proceed with entry statements to Perry Lakes (Item TS03.14), the amount of $55,000 allocated in this year’s budget for the entry statements could now be used for the upgrade of power at Perry Lakes. It was noted that the Town expects that a $35,000 contribution can be negotiated with the Nursery Industries Association to support this project. Should this be received, an amount of $20,000 would then be required to be funded from the Endowment Lands Account.
Amendment
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Langer
That a further clause be added to the motion as follows:-
• the $55,000 allocated for entry statements at Perry Lakes Drive be reallocated towards the funding of the upgraded power supply at Perry Lakes Reserve.
Carried
Council Meeting 25 February 2003
Prior to discussion, Members agreed that this item be considered fully following consideration of Item TS03.14 relating to Perry Lakes Reserve Entry Statements.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr O’Connor, seconded by Cr MacRae
That:-
(i) the power supply to Perry Lakes Reserve be upgraded at a cost of $110,000 to facilitate the construction of current budget and future works;
(ii) the $55,000 allocated for entry statements at Perry Lakes Drive be reallocated towards the funding of the upgraded power supply at Perry Lakes Reserve;
(iii) the costs in (i) above be funded from the Endowment Lands Account and costs be authorised as an ABSOLUTE MAJORITY of Council as an unbudgeted expenditure in accordance with Section 6.8 of the Local Government Act 1995;
During discussion, Members noted that as it has now been decided to proceed with entry statements at Perry Lakes Reserve (Refer Item TS03.14), it was necessary to delete clause (ii) of the motion.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 52 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Amendment
Moved by Cr Pinerua, seconded by Cr Burkett
That clause (ii) of the motion be deleted.
Amendment carried
The amended motion was then put and carried.
The motion, as carried, is as follows:-
That:-
(i) the power supply to Perry Lakes Reserve be upgraded at a cost of $110,000 to facilitate the construction of current budget and future works;
(ii) the costs in (i) above be funded from the Endowment Lands Account and costs be authorised as an ABSOLUTE MAJORITY of Council as an unbudgeted expenditure in accordance with Section 6.8 of the Local Government Act 1995;
Cr Anderton requested that she be recorded as voting against the motion
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 53 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
TS03.12
PARKS AND LANDSCAPE BUDGET FORWARD WORKS (File Reference: FIN 0140 Vol 3)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To provide information and highlight to Council the importance of funding and managing various works programs within the Parks and Landscape service area.
BACKGROUND:
A total of 6 major works programs are managed within the Parks and Landscape service area as follows:-
1. Bore and Pump Replacement Program. 2. Automatic Irrigation Improvement Program. 3. Sportsgrounds, Turf Renovation Program. 4. Street Tree Management and Ficus hillii Replacement Program. 5. Playground Replacement Program. 6. Bushland Improvement Program.
The need for these programs have been individually highlighted to Council in previous Council reports. They represent major Council assets and individual work items within these programs are prioritised and funded on an annual basis. The Lake Monger and Perry Lakes Reserve Improvement Programs have not been included in this report as these are well known to Council through their respective Working Groups. However, they represent an additional two major works programs.
DETAILS:
Details of the above programs are as follows:
1. Bore and Pump Replacement Program
The Council currently has 56 irrigation bores and pumps with a total replacement value of approximately $1.5 million. The program used to manage these bores and pumps is included in the report attachments. Bores and pumps have a useful life of around 15 years. The Town’s bore and pump replacement program ensures a maximum lifespan with minimal breakdowns for these assets. The program ensures the servicing of each pump and the development of each bore every five to six years with a complete replacement approximately every 15 to 20 years. To enable a full replacement cycle to be completed within these guidelines, it is necessary to program the maintenance of between 7 to 10 units per year within the Operating budgets and 2 to 3 replacements per year within the Capital Works budget. The annual cost of the maintenance program is approximately $100,000 per year and the cost of replacements is $60,000.
Although the implementation of this programmed maintenance/replacement schedule through preventative maintenance/replacement procedures will reduce the occurrence of unplanned breakdowns, it is not possible to totally eliminate them. As a result, a contingency amount of $30,000 has been listed annually in the budget to deal with and action repairs or replacements as necessary in a timely manner to ensure minimal loss of turf or trees, as most of these unplanned breakdowns occur in the middle of summer. This contingency amount is recommended to be increased to $50,000 next financial year as was in previous financial years based upon the results experienced over the last summer. This will minimise the need of reallocating funds from other existing projects or
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 54 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
deferring them as has occurred this financial year with the bore problems at Helston and Alyth Parks.
The Works Program proposed for the financial year 2003/04 is as follows:
• Alderbury Reserve – develop bore/service pump $8,000 • McLean Park – develop bore/service pump $8,000 • Perry Lakes Stadium – develop bore/service pump $8,000 • Birkdale Park – develop bore/service pump $8,000 • Lake Monger Reserve – develop bore/service pump $8,000 • Lake Monger Reserve – develop bore/service pump $8,000 • Leederville Memorial Gardens – develop bore/service pump $8,000 • Maloney Park – develop bore/service pump $8,000 • Perry Lakes Reserve– develop bore/service pump $8,000 • Perry Lakes Reserve– develop bore/service pump $8,000 • Winmarley Park– develop bore/service pump $8,000 • City Beach Park – minor service of bore and pump $5,000 • Jubilee Park – minor service of bore and pump $5,000 • Cowden Park – replace pump and service bore $24,000 • City Beach Oval – replace bore and service pump $25,000 • Drabble Park – replace bore and service pump $25,000 • Ocean Village Park – replace bore and pump $32,000 • The Boulevard Median – replace shaft and develop bore and service pump $15,000 $219,000
The 2002/2003 adopted Budget included the following works in relation to this program:-
Item Total Budget Municipal Reserve Grant Funds Endowment $ Funds Funds $ Land Funds $ $ $
Capital 99,000 64,000 35,000 - - Non Capital 4,000 4,000 - - - Total 103,000 68,000 35,000 - -
2. Automatic Irrigation Improvement Program
During the 1997/1998 financial year, the Town developed and commenced implementing the Irrigation Improvement Program. This program has been listed in the Principal Activities Plan as Activity No. 15. The program is attached to this notice paper.
The program is divided into two:-
• The replacement of the manually irrigated systems. • The upgrade of the old automatic irrigation systems.
The upgrading of the manually operated irrigation systems to automatic was implemented to achieve the following improvements and savings:-
• Reduction in casual labour costs and reduced electricity charges and maintenance costs. So far $350,000 per annum has been realised.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 55 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
• Low water usage as the watering is undertaken at night time. (Lower evaporation). • Less vandalism due to underground systems. • Safety – less water on roads. • Increased quality of parks – appropriate water application being achieved. • Efficient use of resource (water). • Being able to comply with restrictions placed by the Water Corporation.
With regard to the replacement of the manually operated systems, this program has reached a stage where only one location is left to be converted to automatic at Lake Monger Reserve (Stage 3) final stage. This will be listed in the 2003/2004 Draft Budget. The remaining manually operated systems ie. Matthews Netball Centre, Perry Lakes Stadium and Perry Lakes Warm Up Track (Rugby), have not been programmed for replacement due to the future development issues with these areas.
As at the end of financial year 2001/2002, the expenditure for replacing the manual systems to automatic since commencing in financial year 1997/1998, is $3,016,098 The total expenditure for upgrading the old automatic systems since financial year 1998 to the end of financial year 2001/2002 is $123,926.
Also, included in the above expenditure is the installation of a Central Control Communications system and a weather station. Seven sportsgrounds and fifteen major parks have now been connected to this Central Control Communications system, thus enabling water to be applied to the Council’s parks in the most efficient and effective manner and only when needed.
The Works program proposed for financial year 2003/2004 is as follows:-
• Matthews Netball Centre (southern section outside lease area) $120,000 • Donegal Park $40,000 • Kilkenny Park $40,000 • Tara Vista Park $50,000 • Lake Monger Reserve Stage 3 of 3 $290,000 $540,000
The 2002/2003 adopted Budget included the following works in relation to this program:-
Item Total Budget Municipal Reserve Grant Funds Endowment $ Funds Funds $ Land Funds $ $ $
Capital 519,000 9,000 20,000 - 490,000 Non Capital 3,000 3,000 - - - Total 522,000 12,000 20,000 - 490,000
3. Playgrounds Replacement Program
A management plan was developed for the Town’s playgrounds in 2000, including the development and implementation of a playground replacement program. This is aimed at improving the Council’s current standard of playgrounds that ensures conformance to appropriate safety and industry standards for the safety and enjoyment of users. Since the implementation of the replacement program in financial year 2000/2001, the Council has received quite a number of very positive comments from parents and children. A total of 47 individual playgrounds exist throughout various locations in the Town. The total asset value for all the playgrounds within the Town is estimated at over $900,000.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 56 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Playground items that are proposed to be included in the 2003/2004 Draft Budget are as follows:-
• Challenger Park North $ 12,500 • Ocean Village Park West $ 20,500 • Kingsland Playground $ 17,000 • Ocean Village Park North $ 4,500 • City Beach Park North $ 20,500 • Tilton Park $ 18,000 • Gifford Gardens $ 8,500 $101,500
The 2002/2003 adopted Budget included the following works in relation to this program:-
Item Total Budget Municipal Reserve Grant Funds Endowment $ Funds Funds $ Land Funds $ $ $
Capital 94,000 72,000 - - 22,000 Non Capital 4,000 4,000 - - - Total 98,000 76,000 - - 22,000
4. Treescape Plan Implementation Program/Ficus hillii Replacement Programs
In October 2002, the Council endorsed a Treescape Plan for the Town’s streets. This plan is aimed at providing strategic direction for improving the Town’s street trees to ensure the retention of its leafy nature. The plan provides detail of tree species and numbers for each street and their condition status according to their safe useful life expectancy (SULE). This information has been compiled into an Implementation Program which assists the Administration identifying high, medium or low priority streets where action is required in relation to tree replacements. This then provides the Administration guidance on how to deal with customer complaints in terms of pruning, removal and replacement of trees.
A total of 12,999 trees have been identified within the Town of Cambridge. The first part of the implementation program identifies trees requiring urgent removal/attention. The cost to undertake this work is estimated at $80,000. However, it has further been prioritised into high, medium and low priority, with the high priority trees requiring attention or removal estimated at a cost of $53,700. This amount will be considered for inclusion in the 2003/2004 Draft Budget as priority one works.
Also recommended in the Treescape Plan is the removal of all the dead and dying pine trees from The Boulevard verge. An amount of $20,000 will be considered for inclusion in the 2003/2004 Draft Budget to undertake this work as priority one.
In addition, the Treescape Plan identified and recommended that the Ficus hillii trees in Holyrood Street be retained and appropriately managed. It also identified that badly lopped and inappropriately scaled existing trees throughout the Town be removed from verges and not replaced. As an outcome, the Operating budget for street trees should be increased accordingly to accommodate these recommendations.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 57 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
The Town’s street trees are managed via a contract with a qualified tree surgeon and all pruning works are undertaken according to a specified program and to a specific pruning specification of which Council approved back in April 2001 (TS01.45).
The Ficus hillii replacement program is another program that has been progressed in the last three years. This program aims at removing and replacing these trees to alleviate problems and concerns that a lot of the Town’s residents have in relation to these trees’ root systems. An amount of $30,000 will be considered for inclusion in the 2003/2004 Draft Budget to undertake specific removals and replacements of these trees.
The 2002/2003 adopted Budget included the following works in relation to this program:-
Item Total Budget Municipal Reserve Grant Funds Endowment $ Funds Funds $ Land Funds $ $ $
Capital 14,000 14,000 - - - Non Capital 20,000 20,000 - - - Total 34,000 34,000 - - -
5. Sportsground Turf Renovation Program
The Council endorsed a three year cyclic turf renovation program in April 2002 (Item TS02.33), for the Town’s sportsgrounds in order to improve safety and quality of turf by reducing sponginess and removal of the thatch layer. The Council approved an allocation of $20,000 towards these works on a yearly basis. The Town manages 10 sportsgrounds with a total area of approximately 28 hectares. The main turf species is Kikuyu, which requires renovation on a three year cyclic basis. The 2003/2004 Budget included $15,000 for turf renovation which was used to renovate the turf surface of Alderbury Reserve. This renovation was mainly used as a trial to gauge the effectiveness and get an indication of the costs involved in undertaking this work. As a result, it has been estimated that the cost to renovate the Town’s turf surfaces would be in the order of $3,500 - $4,000 per hectare. At 28 hectares, this equates to $112,000 every three years, or $37,000 per year on a three year rotation basis.
An effective turf renovation program on sportsgrounds produces not only safer and better turf surfaces for the Town’s users, but also delivers cost savings, productivity and environmental benefits for the Town, ie. less water used, less fertiliser required, more efficient mowing programs.
Turf renovation works on sportsgrounds proposed to be included in the 2003/2004 Draft Budget are as follows:-
• City Beach Oval – south $10,000 • Floreat Oval $10,000 • Henderson Park $10,000 • Pat Goodridge Park $16,000 $46,000
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 58 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
The 2002/2003 adopted Budget included the following works in relation to this program:-
Item Total Budget Municipal Reserve Grant Funds Endowment $ Funds Funds $ Land Funds $ $ $
Capital - - - - - Non Capital 15,000 15,000 - - - Total 15,000 15,000 - - -
6. Bushland Improvement Program
There are 15 remnant bush areas located throughout the Town. Some of these areas are stand-alone as in the coastal dunes or Roscommon Park, whilst others are part of a developed park as in Ocean Village Park or Maloney Park. Combined they comprise of approximately 105.3 hectares. The Council originally endorsed the Town’s Bushland Improvement Program in June 1998 (TS98.59). Works have progressed with various community groups at Malton Park, Ocean Village Park and coastal dunes since financial year 1999/2000.
By funding this program, it allows increased involvement by community groups and individuals to participate in some of the works. It is intended to engender a spirit of care for and ownership of the bushlands concerned, especially amongst local residents, park users and school children. Some of the works undertaken within these bushland areas include bush restoration (planting), weed control, interpretation and education (signage community involvement), fire control (fire breaks and removal of excess dead material), and access (paths, fencing).
Items proposed to be included into the 2003/2004 Draft Budget include:-
• Malton Park $ 1,000 • Ocean Village Park $ 1,000 • Coastal Dunes $22,000 • Durston, Pandora Park $10,000 • Roscommon Park $10,000 • Combined Works in various bushland areas to control weeds such as the agave $ 5,000 $49,000
The 2002/2003 adopted Budget included the following works in relation to this program:-
Item Total Budget Municipal Reserve Grant Funds Endowment $ Funds Funds $ Land Funds $ $ $
Capital 15,000 15,000 - - - Non Capital 7,800 7,800 - - - Total 22,800 22,800 - - -
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 59 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
COMMENT:
The proper management and funding of the above six program areas ensure that Council’s major assets are maintained and upgraded on an ongoing basis to ensure appropriate safety and health standards are maintained or upgraded in relation to these assets, as well as meeting the needs of the community. The projects listed above will all be considered for inclusion in the 2003/2004 Draft Budget and in priority order for Council consideration.
The Lake Monger Reserve Improvement Program and the Perry Lakes Reserve Implementation Program have not been listed in this report as these are managed via their respective Working Groups and Council is regularly made aware of the issues and projects listed in financial year 2003/2004 will be listed in the Draft Budget for Council consideration.
It will be recommended that Council considers funding the various projects which have been listed in the above programs.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
This Project embraces the following goals of the Town’s Strategic Plan: -
• To improve the Town’s natural and built assets in consultation with the community, in an environmentally sensitive and sustainable manner.
• To effectively manage public open space to meet the needs of the community.
• To provide a safe, secure and clean, physical and natural environment for the Town, through environmentally oriented planning policies, development and operational practices.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Past funding of the programs listed in this report has been supplemented from Council’s Reserve Accounts, in particular, the Area Improvement Reserve and Endowment Lands Account. The continued use of funds from these accounts will be subject to the available funds from within those reserves and the level of development works being carried out by the Town in other areas of operations.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION:
The implementation of individual projects within the above programs have been developed so as to minimise any problems with the various stakeholders of the parks and sportsgrounds where works will be undertaken. Depending on the program, sporting clubs, user groups, community groups and individual residents are included in discussions when developing works programs and construction schedules.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 60 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
CONCLUSION:
A total of six major works programs are managed within the Parks and Landscape area. A summary of their respective funding proposal requirements for 2003/04 are as follows:-
1. Bore and Pump Replacement Program $ 219,000 2. Automatic Irrigation Improvement Program $ 540,000 3. Playground Replacement Program $ 101,500 4. Treescape Plan Implementation and Ficus hillii Replacement Programs $ 103,700 5. Sportsgrounds, Turf Renovation Program $ 46,000 6. Bushland Improvement Program $ 49,000 $1,059,200
The proper management and funding of the above program ensures that Council’s major assets are maintained and upgraded on an ongoing basis to ensure appropriate safety and health standards are maintained or upgraded in relation to these assets, as well as meeting the needs of the community. The projects listed above will all be considered for inclusion in the 2003/2004 Draft Budget and in priority order for Council consideration.
The Lake Monger Reserve Improvement Program and the Perry Lakes Reserve Implementation Program have not been listed in this report as these are managed via their respective Working Groups and Council is regularly made aware of the issues and projects listed in financial year 2003/2004 will be listed in the Draft Budget for Council consideration.
It will be recommended that Council considers funding the various projects which have been listed in the above programs.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr O’Connor, seconded by Cr MacRae
That:-
(i) the report on various parks and landscape works programs be received;
(ii) projects identified for implementation within the report be considered for inclusion in the 2003/2004 Draft Budget.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 61 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
TS03.13
LAKE MONGER RESERVE – IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FUTURE DIRECTION (File Reference: RES 0099)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To review the Lake Monger Reserve Improvement program and identify a strategy for future direction.
BACKGROUND:
In order to progress the various recommendations of the Lake Monger Reserve Management Plan (1993 – 1998) and Lake Monger Reserve Rehabilitation Plan (1995), the Council with the assistance of the Lake Monger Reserve Working Group developed and adopted an Improvement Program back in 1996. The program was designed for the listing of projects as an outcome of the above recommendations along with other improvements identified by Council. It also includes cost estimates. Council with the assistance of the Lake Monger Working Group and the Administration was then able to prioritise these projects, program them over a number of years and list them in the draft budget process annually for potential funding. This program is included in the report attachments.
Council, at its meeting held on 24 September 2002 (Item TS02.79) decided as follows:-
“That:-
(i) the current Lake Monger Reserve Management Plan (1993-1998) and Lake Monger Rehabilitation Plan be reviewed as the life of the current plans has been completed;
(ii) a Consultant be engaged to review the current Lake Monger Management Plan and Lake Monger Rehabilitation Plan, in consultation with the Lake Monger Working Group, to produce a new Management Plan for Lake Monger Reserve with works to be completed in the 2003/2004 Budget year;
(iii) the review in (ii) above be undertaken in consultation with the Aboriginal communities who have direct links with Lake Monger;
(iv) an amount of $30,000 be listed in the 2003/2004 draft budget for Council consideration to undertake works in (ii) above;
(v) the Town of Cambridge expresses its thanks to Council’s Administration and to members of the community who participated in the Lake Monger Working Group meetings for their diligence and dedication in implementing the 29 projects completed so far.”
DETAILS:
The Lake Monger Reserve Improvement Program is reviewed and updated annually to reflect the current status of projects in terms of their priority listing, cost estimates, project completion expenditure to date and to identify new projects as they arise. A summary of this Program to date is as follows:
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 62 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
• 30 Projects completed to date, cost $1,964,051 • 3 Projects programmed for 2002/2003, cost $ 323,440 • 1 On going Project channel management, cost $20,000 • 25 Projects to be programmed, cost $1,291,500 • 4 Projects require further consultation, cost $280,000 Total $3,878,991
Grants received $266,958
The projects programmed for this financial year are on target for completion by 30 June 2003. Projects not yet programmed or funded as listed in the Improvement Program can be summarised as follows:-
1. Install automatic irrigation – (stage 3 of 3) – Item 47 2. Upgrade playgrounds – northwest and southwest – Items 60 and 61 3. Landscape Old Freeway access ramp – item 10 4. Vegetated Channel Management – item18 5. Install new and upgrade existing furniture and drink fountains – item 22 6. Upgrade Lake level management device to Swan River drain – item 63 7. Lake edge rehabilitation West side – Item 13 – 16 (stage 1 of 4) 8. Create vegetated open drain to south-west road drain – Item 17 9. Upgrade recreation perimeter path – Items 31 – 35 (stage 2 of 6) 10. Upgrade recreation path lights – Items 37 – 40 (stage 2 of 5) 11. Install midge control units to lake’s edge – Items 41 – 43 (stage 1 of 3) 12. Develop picnic areas south of Powis street carpark – Item 23 13. Construct Boardwalk and Viewing platform in rehabilitation zones 2 and 3 – item 12 14. Rationalise carparks and construct new toilet along Lake Monger Drive and rehabilitate area – Items 51 – 54 (4 stages)
The above 14 major projects are comprised of a total of 29 individual projects. They have been split into stages so they can be funded and implemented with due respect to available funds and resources for implementation. Their total cost is estimated at $1,845,500. Four of these projects in 14 above (representing a cost of $280,000) will require further Council consideration and public consultation before they can be progressed.
An additional item which is not yet listed in the Improvement Program is the engagement of a consultant, $30,000, to produce a new Management Plan for Lake Monger Reserve by reviewing the current Management and Rehabilitation Plans and the Improvement Program. Council agreed to progress with this in September 2002 (Item TS02.79).
COMMENT:
The implementation of Rehabilitation works and various other projects at Lake Monger since 1997 have been extremely successful in terms of the quality of works, grants received and community acceptance. Part of their success is also attributed to the Improvement Programs management by ensuring it is updated regularly. Since 1997, 30 projects have been completed from a total of 63 with 4 more projects due for completion by June 2003. All these projects represent a total expenditure of $2,307,491.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 63 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
The basis for direction and implementation of Improvement works at Lake Monger Reserve has been the Management Plan (1993 – 1998). The rehabilitation Plan was developed to address a number of significant recommendations listed in the Management Plan. The Improvement Program lists not only outstanding projects/recommendations from both the Management and Rehabilitation Plans but also includes additional projects identified by Council since the development of these Plans. It also lists projects that have been completed.
It will be recommended that the improvement Program and specifically the 29 individual yet to be programmed projects as listed above and in the Improvement Program, form the basis of developing a new Management Plan for Lake Monger Reserve.
It is expected that the decision of Council in relation to this report will provide a basis from which the Lake Monger Advisory Working Group can develop a desired plan of works and to facilitate Aboriginal Heritage liaison.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
This proposal embraces several of the main targets incorporated within the Strategic Plan.
Goal: To provide a safe, secure and clean, physical and natural environment through environmentally orientated planning policies, development and operational practices.
Goal: To effectively manage public open space to meet the needs of the community.
Goal: To improve the Town’s natural and built assets in consultation with the community, in an environmentally sensitive and sustainable manner.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
An amount of $30,000 is proposed to be listed in the 2003/2004 Draft budget.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil
PUBLIC CONSULTATION:
Extensive public consultation would be required to be undertaken and this will be developed when the budget is approved. Specific attention will be given to Aboriginal Heritage issues. Lake Monger Reserve is registered as an Aboriginal Site that is of significance to the Nyungah Circle of Elders and other Nyungah Aboriginal people. The Nyungah Circle of Elders share in Nyungah cultural responsibility, for the protection of Lake Monger. Six elders from the Nyungah Circle of Elders are the registered native title claimants in the Native Title Claim and Lake Monger is subject to the Native Title Claim.
CONCLUSION:
The Lake Monger Reserve Improvement Program was developed in 1996 and its implementation commenced in 1997. This program identifies all recommendations and projects as listed in the Lake Monger Reserve Management and Rehabilitation Plans plus other projects identified by Council since the development of these Plans.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 64 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
The Improvement program lists a total of 63 projects with a value of $3,878,991. Of these, 30 have been completed at a cost of $1,964,51, three are programmed to be completed by June 2003 at a cost of $323,440, plus one on going project to the value of $20,000. There are 29 projects yet to be programmed at a total estimated cost of $1,571,500.
It will be recommended that the improvement Program and specifically the 29 individual yet to be programmed projects as listed in this report and in the Improvement Program, form the basis of developing a new Management Plan for Lake Monger Reserve. Council has previously approved to include an amount of $30,000 in the Draft Budget to engage a consultant to produce the new Management Plan.
Extensive public consultation will be required including addressing Aboriginal Heritage issues with the Nyungah Circle of Elders who are the registered native title claimants.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr O’Connor, seconded by Cr MacRae
That:-
(i) the report on the future direction of the Lake Monger Reserve Improvement Program be received and this Program along with the current Management and Rehabilitation Plans, form the basis for the production of a new Management Plan for Lake Monger Reserve;
(ii) an extensive public consultation process be undertaken with the involvement of the Lake Monger Working Group and to include Aboriginal Heritage issues.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 65 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
TS03.14
PERRY LAKES RESERVE – ENTRY STATEMENTS (File Reference: TES0074 )
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To advise Council on the outcome of discussions with the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority regarding the new designs for entry statements at Perry Lakes Reserve.
BACKGROUND:
Council, at its meeting held on 17 December 2002 - Item TS02.114, decided as follows:-
“That:-
(i) the Council notes that the concept design for entry statements to Perry Lakes is already endorsed in the Perry Lakes Environmental Management Plan:
(ii) the concept design contained in the Perry Lakes Environmental Management Plan for entry statements to Perry Lakes at Perry Lakes Drive be presented to the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority for comment;
(iii) a report be presented to Council on the outcome of discussions with the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority.”
At a previous Council meeting held on 23 April 2002 – Item TS02.28, decided as follows:-
“That:-
(i) the plans for an entry statement to both ends of Perry Lakes Drive at an estimated cost to the Council of $55,000 not be supported;
(ii) in not supporting the substantial entry statements at both ends of Perry Lakes Drive to comply with the criteria for a 40 kph speed zone, Main Roads WA be requested to give consideration to reducing the speed limit on Perry Lakes Drive to 50 kph;
(iii) entry statements on a reduced scale be considered by the Perry Lakes Working Group as part of the Perry Lakes Environmental Management Plan implementation.”
DETAILS:
As directed by Council, the Administration submitted plans for the two design options (which were presented to the Council on 17 December 2002) to the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority and invited comment.
The Administration discussed the design with the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority and has received a written reply in relation to their comment. This reply is an attachment to this report. In summary, the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority has no concerns with either of the two options presented as both are consistent with the objectives of the Environmental Management Plan for the reserve. They have suggested that Option 1 would be better suited to the locations identified rather than Option 2.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 66 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
COMMENT:
Further details in relation to the entry statements can be obtained from report TS02.114, December 2002, which is attached to this report for your information.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
Nil
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Nil
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil
PUBLIC CONSULTATION:
The Administration has liaised and consulted with the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority in relation to obtaining comment on the two new design options. They recommend that Option 1 would better suit the proposed landscape locations.
CONCLUSION:
The Administration has had discussions with the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority and has obtained written comment on the proposed two new design options for entry statements at Perry Lakes Reserve. The Authority has advised that both options are consistent with the objectives of the Environmental Management Plan and Option 1 would better suite the proposed landscape locations that have been identified.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
Moved by Cr Langer, seconded by Cr Pinerua
That:-
(i) the report on the discussion and comment obtained from the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority in relation to entry statements at Perry Lakes Reserve be received;
(ii) it be noted that the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority has no concerns with either of the two design options presented regarding entry statements for Perry Lakes Reserve and that Option 1 would better suite the proposed landscape locations as identified on the plan.
Committee Meeting 12 February 2003
During discussion, Members agreed not to go ahead with the installation of entry statements at Perry Lakes.
Amendment
That a further clause be added to the motion as follows:-
(iii) Council not proceed with the installation of entry statements at Perry Lakes Reserve.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 67 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr O’Connor, seconded by Cr MacRae
That:-
(i) the report on the discussion and comment obtained from the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority in relation to entry statements at Perry Lakes Reserve be received;
(ii) it be noted that the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority has no concerns with either of the two design options presented regarding entry statements for Perry Lakes Reserve and that Option 1 would better suit the proposed landscape locations as identified on the plan;
(iii) Council not proceed with the installation of entry statements at Perry Lakes Reserve.
During discussion, Cr Smith suggested that the Council should proceed with the installation of entry statements at Perry Lakes Reserve to ensure consistency in signage standards.
Amendment
Moved by Cr Smith, seconded by Cr MacRae
That clause (iii) of the motion be amended to read as follows:-
(iii) Council proceed with the installation of entry statements at Perry Lakes Reserve as outlined in (ii) above at a cost of up to $55,000 to be funded from existing Budget Item C143-002 Perry Lakes Drive (Oceanic and Underwood) – Entry Statement.
Amendment carried
Members requested that the vote of all those present be recorded:-
For: Mayor Willcock, Crs Burkett, MacRae, McAullay, Pinerua and Smith Against: Crs Anderton and O’Connor
The amended motion was then put and carried
The motion, as carried, is as follows:-
That:-
(i) the report on the discussion and comment obtained from the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority in relation to entry statements at Perry Lakes Reserve be received;
(ii) it be noted that the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority has no concerns with either of the two design options presented regarding entry statements for Perry Lakes Reserve and that Option 1 would better suit the proposed landscape locations as identified on the plan;
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 68 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
(iii) Council proceed with the installation of entry statements at Perry Lakes Reserve as outlined in (ii) above and costs of up to $55,000 be funded from existing Budget Item C143-002 Perry Lakes Drive (Oceanic and Underwood) – Entry Statement.
Members requested that the vote of all those present be recorded:-
For: Mayor Willcock, Crs Burkett, MacRae, McAullay, Pinerua and Smith Against: Crs Anderton and O’Connor
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 69 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
8. REPORTS FROM DELEGATES: COMMITTEES AND WORKING GROUPS
8.1 Lake Monger Working Group.
Nothing further to report
8.2 Perry Lakes Working Group.
Cr O’Connor reported that the next meeting will be held on Thursday 27 February 2003.
8.3 Mindarie Regional Council.
Mayor Willcock reported that a meeting to discuss the proposed secondary waste treatment plant will be held next week at the City of Wanneroo and the next evening it will be discussed at a meeting of the Mindarie Regional Council.
8.4 Wembley Golf Complex Advisory Committee.
Cr Anderton reported that the Golf Complex is running smoothly and the courses are in good condition. The new tenants are currently preparing business plans.
9. GENERAL BUSINESS
9.1 20th AWA Ozwater Convention and Exhibition
Cr Anderton referred to the Ozwater convention to be held at the Burswood in April 2003 (Item PA03.04) and suggested that it may be appropriate for the Executive Manager Technical Services or one of his staff to attend.
9.2 Selby Street, Floreat - Footpath
Cr Anderton advised that residents of Selby Street, between The Boulevard and Bournville Street, have submitted correspondence objecting to the proposed footpath.
It was agreed that a report be submitted next month on this issue/
9.3 Coast Care Works – Signage
Cr Anderton referred to works to be undertaken by Coast Care south of the access road to Kiosk No.2 and requested information on the progress of the installation of signage advising of the works and the removal of trees.
The Manager of Parks and Landscape advised that the signs are currently being manufactured.
9.4 South City Beach Bus Stops
Cr Anderton reported that a number of bus stops at South City Beach had been graffitied at the weekend.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 70 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
9.5 St Leonard’s Avenue, West Leederville
Cr O’Connor advised, on behalf of Cr MacRae, that a number of residents of St Leonard’s Avenue are now very upset that they are unable to see traffic coming from the east and west along Railway Parade when they are trying to exit St Leonard’s Avenue.
It was suggested that a report be submitted to Committee recommending the removal of some parking bays on the north side of Railway Parade at the corners of St Leonard’s Avenue and Railway Parade and Tate Street and Railway Parade.
9.6 Water Use at Perry Lakes
Cr Smith advised that a resident had expressed concern with regard to the Town’s water use at Perry Lakes.
The Manager Parks and Landscape confirmed that the resident has been advised of the Town’s irrigation practices.
9.7 West Leederville Primary School Crossing
Cr Smith requested information with regard to correspondence received from MLA Sue Walker and MLA John Hyde in relation to the guarded school crossing on Cambridge Street at the intersection of Northwood Street.
9.8 Sewerage Infill
` Cr Smith requested a copy of the latest Sewerage Infill Map for the Town.
9.9 Bus Shelter at Caltex Petrol Station
Cr Burkett advised that the advertising on the east side of the bus shelter at Caltex Petrol Station, Cambridge Street, Wembley Town Centre is preventing drivers from seeing oncoming traffic.
It was agreed that a report be submitted to the next Technical Services Committee on this matter.
9.10 Wildlife crossing Salvado Road
Cr Anderton requested that consideration be given to installing signage in Salvado Road, west of Jersy Street warning of crossing wildlife.
10. CLOSURE
There being no further business, the Presiding Member thanked those present for their attendance and declared the meeting of the Technical Services Committee closed at 8 pm.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\B TS.doc 71 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
The report of the Policy and Administration Committee Meeting held on 11 February 2003 was submitted as under:-
1. DECLARATION OF OPENING
The Presiding Member declared the meeting of the Policy and Administration Committee open at 8.03 pm.
2. RECORD OF ATTENDANCE/APOLOGIES/LEAVE OF ABSENCE
Present: Time of Time of Entering Leaving
Members:
Cr Kerry Smith (Presiding Member) 8.03 pm 9.02 pm
Cr Graham Burkett JP 8.03 pm 8.33 pm 8.35 pm 9.02 pm Cr Alan Langer 8.03 pm 9.02 pm Cr Pauline O’Connor JP 8.03 pm 9.02 pm
Observers:
Mayor Ross Willcock JP 8.03 pm 9 02 pm Cr Marlene Anderton 8.03 pm 9.02 pm Cr Hilary Pinerua 8.03 pm 9.02 pm
Officers:
Graham Partridge, Chief Executive Officer Neil Costello, Manager Policy and Administration Denise Ribbands, Administration Officer (Governance)
Adjournments: Nil
Time meeting closed: 9.02 pm
APOLOGIES/LEAVE OF ABSENCE
Nil
3. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME
Nil
4. DEPUTATIONS AND PETITIONS
Nil
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\C p+A.doc 72 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
5. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES
Moved by Cr Burkett, seconded by Cr O’Connor
That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Policy and Administration Committee held on 3 December 2002 as contained in the December Council Notice Paper, be confirmed.
Carried
6. DECLARATION OF MEMBERS INTERESTS
Nil
7. REPORTS
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\C p+A.doc 73 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
PA03.01
CONFIRMATION OF DELEGATED AUTHORITY DECISIONS: CHRISTMAS/NEW YEAR RECESS 2002/2003 (File Reference: ADM0033)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To note the action taken over the 2002/2003 Christmas/New Year recess in accordance with the powers delegated to the Chief Executive Officer by the Council at its meeting held on 17 December 2002.
BACKGROUND:
The Council at its meeting held on Tuesday, 17 December 2002, agreed that the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to exercise the powers and duties of the Council, other than those referred to in Section 5.43 of the Local Government Act 1995, subject to the following:-
(i) a majority of the four Ward Members of the relevant Ward are in agreement with the Administration recommendation;
(ii) where the recommendation is for an item of business of a general nature, a majority of all Elected Members are in agreement;
(iii) a report summarising the items of business dealt with by delegated authority be submitted for information to the next Council meeting.
DETAILS:
The following items were dealt with under delegated authority by the Chief Executive Officer during the 2002/2003 Christmas recess:-
1. Oceanic Drive – Scenic Drive to Bold Park Drive - Offer of Additional Metropolitan Regional Road Grant (MRRG) Funding
A report was circulated to all Elected Members to consider an offer of a Reserve Metropolitan Regional Road Grant (MRRG) of $58,000 for the resurfacing of Oceanic Drive between Scenic Drive and Bold Park Drive. This offer is conditional on the Town contributing $29,000 towards the project in accordance with the grant funding criteria of matching funds on a 2 : 1 ratio.
The offer of reserve funding was accepted and funds approved by an absolute majority to undertake the proposed works.
2. Jersey Street Subdivision - Residential Design Guidelines
A report was circulated to all Elected Members seeking approval to adopt the Jersey Street Residential Design Guidelines. It was noted that, in response to the submissions received during the advertising period, a number of amendments were made to the guidelines. Also, some minor changes were made following a review and reconsideration of the guidelines following the advertising period.
The Jersey Street Residential Design Guidelines were adopted.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\C p+A.doc 74 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
3. Auslink Green Paper – Towards the National Land Transport Plan
A report was circulated to all Elected Members presenting a synopsis of the Federal Government’s Auslink policy document in relation to a proposed National Land Transport Plan and seeking approval to advise the Western Australian Local Government Association and the Federal Government’s Department of Transport and Regional Services of Council’s comments in relation to the Auslink Green Paper.
The recommendation was approved.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr Smith, seconded by Cr Pinerua
That the following items submitted over the 2002/2003 Christmas/New Year recess in accordance with the powers delegated to the Chief Executive Officer by the Council at its meeting held on 17 December 2002, be noted:-
(i) Oceanic Drive – Scenic Drive to Bold Park Drive: Offer of Additional Metropolitan Regional Road (MRRG) Grant Funding;
(ii) Jersey Street Subdivision: Residential Design Guidelines;
(iii) Auslink Green Paper – Towards the National Land Transport Plan.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\C p+A.doc 75 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
PA03.02
AREAS “F” AND “G”, MOUNT CLAREMONT, AND FORMER NURSERY SITE, SALVADO ROAD, JOLIMONT: APPROACHES BY HON MINISTER FOR PLANNING AND INFRASTRUCTURE (File Reference: PRO1349 and PRO0390)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To advise Council regarding correspondence received from the Hon Minister for Planning and Infrastructure seeking to resolve issues outstanding in relation to land known as areas ”F” and “G” in Mount Claremont, and the former Nursery Site, Salvado Road, Jolimont.
BACKGROUND:
Correspondence addressed to His Worship the Mayor has been received from the Hon Minister for Planning and Infrastructure. The text reads as follows:-
“It is important we move to resolve the issues outstanding in relation to the above (Areas ‘F’ and ‘G’) land. In particular I am asking the Council to initiate an amendment to rezone Area ‘G’ to Residential R30.
It is apparent from previous correspondence there is considerable ongoing confusion with regard to the background on Areas ‘F & G’. A review of the available information reveals the following:
A deed dated 5 May 1995 was entered into between the Town of Cambridge (Commissioners of), the State of Western Australia and the Minister for Lands to provide for the establishment of ‘Bold Park’. Amongst other terms the Deed provided for the land referred to as Areas ‘F, G & H’ to be ceded by the Town to the State and developed into residential housing lots with “the Nett proceeds of the sale of the residential housing lots …(to be made available) .. to the Kings Park Board to be used exclusively by the Kings Park Board for the future development and management of Bold Regional Park”. [‘Nett proceeds’ were defined as – the final proceeds of sale after all normal development costs, including, without limitation, project management fees, marketing fees and financing costs have been deducted].
I am advised that the Deed was never executed and a dispute arose between the former Government and the then elected Council for the Town of Cambridge, whereby the Town refused to hand over the title deeds to Areas ‘F, G & H’ in accordance with the provisions of the Deed.
To advance the settlement of this issue a compromise arrangement was approved by Cabinet (dated 15 September 1997) whereby payment of $6.5 million was made to the Town “simultaneous with the Council effecting transfer of title deeds for blocks ‘F’ (Fortview Road) and ‘G’ (Whitney Crescent)”. Thus the Town received $6.5 million which was not envisaged by the Deed.
Cabinet endorsed that Treasury’s advance (to the Town) was to be recouped against the sale of “F & G” and if the proceeds exceeded $6.5 million, the next $5 million was to be paid to the Kings Park Board with any surplus above $11.5 million to be equally split between the Town and the Board. Unlike the Deed the Cabinet Submission makes no reference to the “Nett proceeds of the sale of residential housing lots” but refers to the sale of “F & G” by DOLA and specifically states “it is not intended that DOLA subdivide “F” but that it be sold en globo”. There were a number of issues to be resolved with “G” which did not allow it to be sold
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\C p+A.doc 76 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
immediately, however it was noted that this land would be worth “at least $7 million as the earlier valuation assumed a worst case (minimum available land for sale) scenario”. The sum of $7 million relates to various valuation advice obtained on the en globo land about that time, and if “Net proceeds” were intended, the sum quoted is likely to have been much greater, even under the worst case scenario.
As you would be aware Lot 87 (the southern portion of Area “G”) is subject to a Declaration of Trust which has been determined as a Charitable Trust for the purpose of “recreation for the use of the people for all time” and this will have to be lifted to enable development of the land. With community opposition to the proposal and a requirement for legislative approval to lift the Trust, a compromise on the area to be developed was offered to achieve support through the parliamentary process. In this case the land available for development would be less than envisaged in the earlier worst case scenarios.
It should be noted the Crown Solicitor’s Office has reviewed the acquisition by LandCorp of Area “F” from the DOLA (at the Valuer General’s Office valuation) and found that this was consistent with the Cabinet Decision.
I believe the provisions proposed in the Deed (but never implemented) are being confused with the terms of the Cabinet Submission/Decision – which have since been implemented by payment of $6.5 million to the Town.
I am satisfied from the available information and advice provided that the Cabinet Decision clearly intended for the proceeds of sale of Area “F” to be the sale of the en globo land and not the “Net proceeds” of sale.
As such I do not propose to reverse the transaction between DOLA and LandCorp on Area “F”.
I would hope agreement on the development of Area “G” can be achieved in the short term so that the sale of this land can be finalised and a distribution of proceeds made in accordance with the Cabinet Decision. In particular, confirmation of the earlier advice from your Council that it will support a rezoning of area “G” to R30 will be appreciated.”
DETAILS:
The subject land is one of two land parcels (known as Areas ‘F’ and ‘G’) transferred to Government ownership for residential development as part of the Bold Park Deed of Agreement.
When the Council and the State Government reached agreement on Bold Park, the following terms were agreed upon:-
(a) a payment of $ 6.5 million to the Town by way of compensation; (b) an amount of $ 5 million to the Kings Park Board, for the benefit of Bold Park; (c) the sale of land in areas ‘F’ and ‘G’ to fund the $11.5 million total in (a) and (b); (d) any surplus above the $11.5 million raised from the sale of the land to be split equally between the Town and the former Kings Park Board (now the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority).
Prior to the land in Area ‘F’ being made available for sale by public auction, it was “sold” by the Department of Land Administration to Landcorp at an en globo price, effectively circumventing the intended process and realising a far lower price that what would have been attained at auction.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\C p+A.doc 77 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Area ‘G’ has also been the subject of some controversy, with the proposed sale becoming a political matter between the State Government and the Friends of Banksia Farm over the amount of land comprising Area ’G’ that can be developed and subsequently sold.
Area ‘F’ comprises 17 lots and is located on the southern side of Fortview Road, Mt Claremont. Area ‘G’ is located on the eastern side of Rochdale Road and Stephenson Avenue between Montgomery Avenue and Whitney Crescent. Landcorp has prepared a concept subdivision plan in accordance with the proposed R30 zoning showing that the area can accommodate approximately 62 lots. This is less than originally anticipated due to the compromise negotiated by the State Government in relation to “Banksia Farm”.
The Council, at its meeting held on 26 October 1999 decided that:-
“Landcorp be advised that the Council has no objection in principle to their request to rezone their vacant landholding in Mount Claremont (Area G), however, before making a formal determination of such a proposal, the Council requires further details relating to the following:-
(i) subdivision concept/development standards; (ii) number of lots proposed; (iii) variation in lot sizes proposed.”
This request was made to the Chief Executive Officer of Landcorp in a letter dated 3 November 1999. A subsequent meeting was held with representatives of Landcorp and the community group “Friends of Banksia Farm” at which a number of issues were discussed.
One area of concern to the Administration included no mention at any time during negotiations of “en globo” land values. It also appeared that discussions were undertaken and agreements reached between State Treasury and the Department of Land Administration with no involvement by the Council. The discussions were not consistent with matters discussed when the Council met with the Hon Colin Barnett, the Hon Peter Foss and the Hon Paul Omodei.
The Council stated in correspondence to the Hon Colin Barnett, Member for Cottesloe and in Government at the time:-
“I am aware of the recent publicity concerning the lands commonly referred to as areas “F” and “G” in the Agreement that the Town and the State Government would share equally in any funds derived from the sale of the land exceeding $11.5m.
The Town of Cambridge, in reaching its Agreement with the State Government, supports the selling of areas “F” and “G” and any arrangements made to accommodate community concerns would be a matter between the State Government and the local community. The Town would however be disappointed, if the State Government were to compromise the Agreement by taking action that would reduce the monies to be derived from the sale and the Town not receiving its share of the funds exceeding $11.5m.
The areas known as “F” and “G” have been transferred to the State Government in good faith to enable Bold Park to be improved for the benefit of all Western Australians. You will recall that the Town of Cambridge has gifted well over 400 ha of freehold land to the State Government for the purposes of creating a regional park. The sale of areas “F” and “G” caters for the improvement of the Park and also compensates, in a small way, the ratepayers of the Town for the gifting of the land.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\C p+A.doc 78 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Once again, I trust that the State Government will do all in its power to ensure that an amount in excess of $11.5m is realised from the sale so that the Agreement between the State Government and the Town of Cambridge for a share of funds can be met.”
The Council also agreed in principle, at its meeting held on 26 October 1999, to rezone that part of Area ‘G’ zoned residential from R 12.5 to R 30 subject to further information being provided in relation to lot numbers and sizes. Increasing the density would assist the State Government in obtaining its revenue target of $11.5million, although this target has been made less achievable by virtue of the en globo transaction undertaken between the two Government authorities at an amount well below market value.
Former Nursery Site, Salvado Road, Jolimont
Although not directly related to the correspondence received from the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure regarding area “G” referred to above, the Council is also negotiating with the Department of Land Administration (DOLA) and indirectly with the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, in regard to the lifting of the municipal endowment trust currently in force on the Town’s freehold title for the former Nursery Site situated in Salvado Road, Jolimont.
Mayor and Councillors will also be aware that Council authorized the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate with DOLA and the relevant Ministers to remove the municipal endowment trust over the former Nursery Site. Negotiations have been under way for some time with DOLA, however, while agreement has been reached for the trust to be removed from the title, DOLA has advised that the Government will only lift the municipal endowment trust subject to a suitable revenue sharing arrangement being agreed between the State Government and the Town in return for the removal of the trust. The Minister for Planning and Infrastructure has advised that she supports the removal of the trust subject to revenue sharing arrangements being agreed upon between the parties. The Chief Executive Officer has pursued the Minister and DOLA in regard to the unfairness of the Government’s demand for a revenue sharing arrangement, however, the matter has not been able to be resolved.
Some of the facts surrounding the former Nursery Site land in Salvado Road, Jolimont, are as follows:-
The Town of Cambridge owns freehold land commonly known as the Former Nursery Site situated in Salvado Road, Jolimont. The site has been held by Local Government since 1905. The title of the land has been held by three local government authorities, namely Leederville Road Board (no longer in existence), the City of Perth and the Town of Cambridge. Following the restructure of the City of Perth, the site is no longer required as a plant nursery.
While the Town holds the freehold title, it is subject to a municipal endowment, which is in the form of a trust. The Town of Cambridge is desirous to remove the trust, so that it will have unrestricted use of the land.
The former Minister for Lands, Doug Shave, and the former Minister for Local Government, Paul Omodei, supported in principle the removal of the trust on behalf of the Town. Copies of relevant correspondence have been circulated for Members information.
The Chief Executive Officer has now been advised by the Department of Land Administration (DOLA), that the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is prepared to remove the trust subject to a revenue sharing arrangement being entered into with the Government. This condition for a revenue sharing arrangement is not considered acceptable and since the land has been held by Local Government since 1905, it seems unreasonable and an opportunistic action by the Government.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\C p+A.doc 79 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Should the Town of Cambridge develop the land, it would be for the benefit of the residents of the Town. The Council could continue to utilise the land for municipal purposes without the State Government receiving the benefit of any revenue sharing arrangements, however, this would significantly lessen the uses the land could be developed for and its overall financial value to the Town.
Under recent amendments to the Land Administration Regulations, the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure together with the Treasurer can override any requirement for a revenue sharing arrangement and approve the lifting of the trust.
Since the Town has been established, the Metropolitan Region Scheme Reservation for the former Nursery land has been amended from “Parks and Recreation” to “Urban”. No objections to the amendment were received and it was obvious to all involved that the Town of Cambridge should be given unencumbered use of the land. The electors of the Town of Cambridge also voted at a Special Meeting of Council to support this provision.
The following is a brief summary of the position as it now stands:-
• The Nursery Site situated at Salvado Road, Wembley, is owned freehold by the Town of Cambridge, however, is subject to a Municipal Trust.
• The Nursery Site has been used for municipal purposes for more than 95 years.
• The Nursery Site was identified in the Carr-Fardon Report as an asset, which potentially could be sold to fund the development of the Town.
• It is understood from the intention of the City of Perth Restructuring Act 1993 and the then Minister for Local Government that the Nursery Site would be an asset with which the Town could deal freely.
• On 27 June 1996, the electors of the Town of Cambridge voted in favour of removing the Trust on which the Nursery Site is held.
• The former Minister for Local Government and Minister for Lands in the previous Government have agreed in principle that the Municipal Trust should be lifted.
• The Trust over the land states that it is to be used and held upon trust solely for the purposes of municipal endowment.
• The Council can clearly develop the land, however, it would be restricted in on-selling the land by issuing titles.
• The Council may, however, be able to lease or license the land as it is held freehold.
• Any revenue raised from the site would clearly be used for municipal purposes, as that is all the Town of Cambridge can utilise the funds for. Therefore, the Trust seems no longer to have any relevance.
• The land is zoned “Urban” pursuant to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (recent amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme).
• The Town is desirous of making the best use of the land and is therefore requesting the Municipal Endowment Trust to be removed.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\C p+A.doc 80 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
• The State Government through the Department of Land Administration (DOLA), is continuing in its attempts to obtain some financial gain from the lifting of the Trust, even though the land is held freehold by the Town of Cambridge and any revenue derived would be used for municipal purposes.
• This matter has been under consideration since 1996 and it is the Town of Cambridge’s opinion that the matter should now be finalised and the Trust lifted.
• It is State Government policy to seek revenue from lands endowed or gifted to organisations.
Relevance of the Minister’s Request to Rezone Area “G” to R30 and the Former Nursery Site, Salvado Road, Jolimont
The Town of Cambridge gifted over 400 ha of freehold land to the State Government to create Bold Park and as a result, received $ 6.5 million as an upfront payment and was to receive a share of any funds over $ 11.5 million following the sale of areas “F” and “G”. Due to inter- government transfers on the sale of area “F”, the possibility of any funds exceeding $ 11.5 million will be highly unlikely. The land at area “F” sold at auction for approximately $ 8.9 million, whereas the valuation and the inter-government transfer was for $ 3.75 million. Also, area “G” will not obtain its full value due to the area being significantly reduced by the creation of the land known as ‘Banksia Farm’. To increase potential proceeds from the sale, the Government has requested that the remaining land in area “G” be rezoned to R30. The Council has agreed, in principle, subject to conditions to rezone the land as requested.
In regard to the former Nursery Site in Salvado Road, Jolimont, it would appear that when the Council requires the lifting of the long standing municipal endowment trust, the Government is requesting in return, a revenue sharing arrangement for the lifting of the trust. This would appear to be a double standard in the Government’s dealings over land. It should be noted that recent amendments to the Land Administration Act 1997 empower the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure together with the Treasurer, to exclude any revenue sharing arrangement to lift the trust over the former Nursery site.
It is therefore suggested that the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure be advised that the Council will proceed to rezone area “G” to R30 as requested and previously agreed in principle, subject to the trust on the certificate of title for the former Nursery site being lifted without the requirement for any revenue sharing arrangement being negotiated between the State Government and the Town. This arrangement would allow for both matters to be finalised as it would appear that the Cabinet Minute for area “F” and “G” does not reflect the Council’s understanding of the financial arrangements between the parties. Also, the land comprising area “F” was subdivided and sold by Landcorp some time ago and the funds dispersed.
In respect to the former Nursery site, the Metropolitan Region Scheme Reservation has been changed from “Parks and Recreation” to “Urban” and accordingly, the Council must now proceed to subdivide the land and bring its Town Planning Scheme in line with the Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment. A report on this matter is being held in abeyance until such time as the municipal endowment trust issue has been resolved and the current situation affords an opportunity to bring to an end these long standing issues.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\C p+A.doc 81 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The resolution of both issues will result in the Council being able to deal freely with its land assets which will generate significant revenue in the future. In regard to area “G”, once developed, the Town will receive rates income and, should the total sale of areas “F” and “G” exceed $ 11.5 million, the Town will gain a share of the revenue.
SUMMARY:
The Minister for Planning and Infrastructure has written to the Council, seeking to proceed with the rezoning of area “G”, situated on the eastern side of Stephenson Avenue and Rochdale Road, between Montgomery Avenue and Whitney Crescent, to R 30. The sale of this land together with area “F” has been subject to previous negotiations in regard to a financial return to the Town, should the land sell for more than $ 11.5 million. The Council has already received a payment of $ 6.5 million. Due to inter-government land transfers and the Government’s decision in regard to “Banksia Farm”, it is possible now that the revenue raised from the sale of areas “F” and “G” will not exceed $ 11.5 million.
The Council has requested the lifting of the municipal endowment trust placed on the certificate of title of the former Nursery site, Salvado Road, Jolimont, and the Government has advised it will lift the trust providing a revenue sharing arrangement is agreed upon. Informal discussions with DOLA representatives would indicate that the Government is envisaging a 50 : 50 revenue sharing arrangement. Any revenue sharing arrangement is seen to be unreasonable as local government has held freehold title over the land for 98 years and it has been used exclusively during that time for municipal purposes.
The Minister for Planning and Infrastructure together with the Treasurer has authority pursuant to the Land Administration Act to waive any revenue sharing arrangements. Both areas “F” and “G” and the former Nursery site land issues have been outstanding virtually since 1995, when the first Council of the Town of Cambridge was elected. It is now considered an appropriate time to finalise these matters.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
That the Hon Minister for Planning and Infrastructure be advised that the Council is disappointed with her decisions concerning the financial return for the land known as area “F” and requiring a revenue sharing agreement for the former Nursery site in Salvado Road, Jolimont. However, in a spirit of co-operation and to finalise the long standing disputes, the Council will agree to rezone the land known as area “G” situated on the eastern side of Rochdale Road and Stephenson Avenue, between Montgomery Avenue and Whitney Crescent, from Residential 12.5 to Residential 30 subject to the following conditions:-
(i) the municipal endowment trust on the Certificate of Title for the former Nursery site in Salvado Road, Jolimont, be removed without the requirement for any revenue sharing agreement;
(ii) submission to the Council of further details relating to the development of the land known as area “G” bounded by Rochdale Avenue, Stephenson Avenue, Montgomery Avenue and Whitney Crescent as follows:-
(a) subdivision concept / development standards; (b) number of lots proposed; (c) variation in lot sizes proposed;
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\C p+A.doc 82 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
(iii) the responsible Government Department to reimburse the Town for all costs associated with the rezoning of the land known as area “G”.
Committee Meeting 11 February 2003
During discussion, Members expressed concern that the content of the Minister’s letter is contrary to the spirit of the agreement in relation to Areas “F” and “G” as understood by Council. Also, Members were not prepared to support a revenue sharing agreement for the former Nursery Site in Salvado Road, Jolimont and considered that these issues should be dealt with separately.
The Administration’s recommendation was then put and lost.
Council Meeting 25 February 2003
It was noted, prior to the consideration of the following item, that Mayor Willcock and Cr Smith disclosed an interest affecting impartiality and declared as follows:- “with regard to Areas “F” and “G” Mount Claremont, the matter contained in the agenda as Item PA03.02, I declare I am a member of the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority Board of Management and as a consequence there may be a perception that my impartiality may be affected. I declare that I will consider this matter on its merits and vote accordingly.”
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr Smith, seconded by Cr Pinerua
That:-
(i) the Administration be thanked for its report on Areas “F” and “G”, Mount Claremont and the former Nursery Site in Salvado Road, Jolimont;
(ii) it be noted that the Hon Minister for Planning and Infrastructure’s response dated 4 December 2002 regarding Areas “F” and “G”, Mount Claremont is contrary to the spirit of the agreement reached with the previous State Government in 1999;
(iii) legal opinion be sought from the Council’s Solicitors in relation to the Minister’s proposal and in relation to issues concerning Areas “F”, “G” and the former Nursery Site;
(iv) further reports be submitted to Council on these matters.
During discussion, Members also noted the contents of the letter in relation to these matters submitted by the Chairman of the Coast Ward Ratepayers Association.
Amendment
Moved by Cr Smith, seconded by Cr Burkett
That the motion be amended to read as follows:-
(i) the Administration be thanked for its report on Areas “F” and “G”, Mount Claremont and the former Nursery Site in Salvado Road, Jolimont;
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\C p+A.doc 83 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
(ii) it be noted that the Hon Minister for Planning and Infrastructure’s response dated 4 December 2002 regarding Areas “F” and “G”, Mount Claremont is contrary to the spirit of the agreement reached with the previous State Government in 1999 such that the land in Area “F” was sold en globo and not as separate lots and that the Council never intended that the community be misled by this land transfer mechanism;
(iii) as the Council is now faced with a similar situation with regard to Area “G”, it is not prepared to consider the final rezoning of Area “G” unless:-
(a) the State Government agrees that the land in Area “G” be sold on a lot by lot basis so that the Town of Cambridge and the Western Australian community can realise the true value of the land for reinvestment in community projects and in the rehabilitation of Bold Regional Park;
(b) the municipal endowment trust of the Certificate of Title for the former Nursery Site in Salvado Road, Jolimont be removed without the requirement for any revenue sharing agreement;
(iv) legal opinion be sought from the Council’s Solicitors in relation to the Minister’s proposal and in relation to issues concerning Areas “F”, “G” and the former Nursery Site.
Cr Burkett left the meeting at 7.20 pm and returned at 7.22 pm.
During discussion, Members suggested that the item be referred back to the Policy and Administration Committee to enable further clarification to be obtained from the Council’s legal advisors on issues relating to Areas F and G, including the validity of previous agreements with the State Government, previous Cabinet decisions and the land transaction transferring Area F from one government organisation to another, the possibility of the Town being compensated for the loss of income as a result of the sale of Area F by the Department of Land Administration and the potential for Area G to also be sold “en globo” to Landcorp.
Motion to Refer Back
That the item relating to Areas “F” and “G”, Mount Claremont and Former Nursery Site be referred back to the Policy and Administration Committee for further consideration.
Refer Back Carried
Members requested that the vote of all those present be recorded:-
For: Mayor Willcock, Crs Anderton, Pinerua and O’Connor Against: Crs Burkett, MacRae, McAullay and Smith
As the votes of the Members present were equally divided, His Worship the Mayor cast a second vote in favour of the motion to refer back.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\C p+A.doc 84 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
PA03.03
PROMULGATION OF INFORMATION REGARDING COUNCIL ACTIVITIES (File Reference: ADM0033, ADM0081)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To advise the Council regarding proposals to increase public awareness of Council activities.
BACKGROUND:
At the Policy and Administration Committee meeting held on 3 December 2002, Members requested that a report be submitted to the Council in February 2003 outlining how important issues under consideration by Council can be communicated to the public. This request followed several instances during debate concerning the proposal for a drive-through bottle shop on Howtree Place at the Floreat Forum, where a number of parties stated that they had not been aware of the proposal. This criticism of the Council has also arisen on previous occasions, even though an appropriate and thorough advertising process had been undertaken.
DETAILS:
Print Media
The Council undertakes a large portion of its advertising of activities and proposals through paid-for advertising in the West Australian, Cambridge Post and Western Suburbs Weekly newspapers.
The West Australian is used mainly for advertising staff vacancies and for statutory advertising, where the Local Government Act 1995 or other legislation requires Statewide notification to be given. Local newspapers are used for the advertising of Council and Committee meeting dates, Council related activities, road and right-of-way closures and modifications, amended fees and charges, policies, practices and procedures and to seek public comment on a variety of issues, including Town Planning Scheme amendments and development proposals.
Occasionally, an unjustified criticism of local advertising from residents and ratepayers is that the particular advertisement was not seen because it was “too small” or “hidden on page 32” (for example). The Administration is always conscious of the size of advertisements relating to both the need for them to be viewed and the advertising budget available. Unfortunately, unless a significant premium is paid, the Town is at the mercy of local newspaper staff insofar as positioning of advertising is concerned.
It has been suggested that advertising space could be taken out in the local newspapers on a regular basis, providing local readership with an “overview” of current activities being undertaken by and within the Town. This advertisement, distinctive in style, could provide information alerting residents, ratepayers and interested parties to particular matters that are under consideration by the Council and inviting them to make further enquiries regarding detail. It should be stressed that this form of advertising would complement and not replace, regular advertising or consultation processes.
The advertisement could be published monthly, however the timing would be critical. Items should not be included in any advertising until they had been considered at Committee level. This would mean that the content of the advertising could not be confirmed until the Tuesday night, following the last Committee meeting (Development and Environmental Services) of the round. The publication deadline for the Cambridge Post is 12 noon on the next day
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\C p+A.doc 85 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
(Wednesday). Provided the majority of the content was prepared following each respective Committee meeting prior, this deadline could be met. The deadline for the Western Suburbs Weekly is Thursday at 5.00pm. Provided these times are met, the advertisement containing items of interest being considered by the Council would appear in the Cambridge Post on the weekend preceding the Council meeting and in the Western Suburbs Weekly on the day of the meeting.
Monthly costs associated with advertising of this nature would be, for a three column width (approx 10 cm):-
Cambridge Post Western Suburbs Weekly Annually (x11)
10 cm deep $203.40 $168.30 $4,088.70 15 cm deep $305.10 $252.45 $6,133.05 20 cm deep $406.80 $336.60 $8,177.40
A mock up of a 3 column x 15 cm advertisement would look like the example below:-
MATTERS CURRENTLY UNDER CONSIDERATION BY COUNCIL
PERRY LAKES STADIUM REDEVELOPMENT
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
FLOREAT FORUM DRIVE THROUGH BOTTLE SHOP
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
AMENDMENT TO TOWN PLANNING SCHEME
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
ROAD CHANGES: TEMPLETONIA/MARAPANA
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
CLOSURE OF PEDESTRIAN ACCESS WAY
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For further information in relation to any of the above matters, please access Agendas/Minutes at www.cambridge.wa,gov.au (select Council then Publications) or telephone 9347 6000.
GRAHAM D PARTRIDGE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\C p+A.doc 86 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Of course the size of the advertisement could vary monthly dependent upon the number of activities on which the Council is seeking comment being included.
Availability of Committee and Council Agendas
At the present time, Committee and Council agendas are delivered to Elected Members the Friday evening prior to the meetings to be held the following week. In order to increase awareness of Agenda content, it is proposed that delivery be brought forward by one day to provide agendas to Elected Members by Thursday evening. It would then be possible to include the agendas for Committees and Council meetings on the Town’s website by 12 noon on the Friday prior to the respective meetings. This would give the public two additional days to peruse Committee and Council Agendas prior to the meeting day.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Council Policy 1.2.4 Availability of Minutes and Notice Papers will require updating should this proposal proceed.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
The proposal would meet the identified strategic objective to ensure that services are delivered by best practice and standards.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
As stated above, expenditure will be incurred in implementing this proposal. A trial period could be commenced to be funded from existing allocations in the Members Support Services Advertising Budget Item. Any overrun in the budget would be minimal due to the fact that there are only four meetings in this financial year where the costs would apply.
SUMMARY:
Elected Members have requested that consideration be given to methods to improve public awareness of Council activities. It is suggested that this could be achieved through the use of regular newspaper advertising in addition to that already undertaken and by bringing Agenda distribution forward by 24 hours to enable the posting of information on the Council’s website before the weekend prior to Committee meetings.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr Smith, seconded by Cr Pinerua
That:-
(i) a regular monthly advertisement be placed in the Cambridge Post and the Western Suburbs Weekly newspapers advising the Town’s ratepayers, residents and other interested parties regarding current Council activities;
(ii) Committee and Council Agendas be prepared earlier to enable:-
(a) physical distribution to Elected Members on the Thursday evening prior to meetings;
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\C p+A.doc 87 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
(b) access to the information through the Council’s website from the Friday prior to meetings;
(iii) the expenditure in (i) above be funded initially from Budget Item “Members Support Services – Advertising.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\C p+A.doc 88 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
PA03.04
20th AWA OZWATER CONVENTION AND EXHIBITION (File Reference: CMS0063)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To advise Council of the details and content of the forthcoming Ozwater Convention and Exhibition.
BACKGROUND:
The Council has received an invitation for representatives to attend this year’s Ozwater Convention and Exhibition to be held at Burswood, Perth, from 6 to 10 April 2003.
DETAILS:
The Convention entitled ‘Innovations in Water’ will report on a wide range of innovation from new methods of planning, designing and delivering capital projects to a number of examples of where new technology has been introduced to Australia, either to solve particular problems or to reduce costs.
A feature of the event is a series of technical tours highlighting some outstanding examples of Perth’s wide range of innovative technologies and installations, many of which are either Australian or world first. Also, delegates have the opportunity to attend either a workshop focussing on various approaches to sustainability and using water wisely or a workshop on innovation through the management of residuals from the water industry.
Details of papers, invited speakers, workshops and tours are included in the attachment to the agenda.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Policy 1.1.5 Conference Attendance – Representation and Related Issues Policy 1.1.8 Travel and Accommodation Expenses at Conferences.
BUDGET IMPLICATIONS:
Full registration: $1,495.00 One Day Registration: $ 470.00.
Committee Meeting 11 February 2003
During discussion, Cr Smith suggested that should no Elected Member be interested then up to two officers could attend.
It was agreed that the item be submitted to Council for determination.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\C p+A.doc 89 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
COUNCIL DECISION: (ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr Smith, seconded by Cr Pinerua
That:-
(i) consideration be given to the nomination of any interested Elected Members and an officer nominated by the Chief Executive Officer to attend the Ozwater Convention & Exhibition to be held at the Burswood, Perth, from 6 to 10 April 2003;
(ii) the cost in (i) above be funded from Budget Item ‘Members – Course/Conference Expenses’.
Amendment
Moved by Cr Smith, seconded by Cr Burkett
That the motion be amended to read as follows:-
(i) an officer nominated by the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to attend the Ozwater Convention and Exhibition to be held at the Burswood, Perth from 6 to 10 April 2003;
(ii) the cost in (i) above be funded from the relevant Budget Item.
Amendment carried
The amended motion was then put and carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\C p+A.doc 90 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
PA03.05
ICLEI WORLD CONGRESS AND FULL COUNCIL MEETING 2003 (File Reference: ENS0113)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To advise Council of the upcoming ICLEI World Congress and full Council meeting to be held in November 2003 in Athens, Greece.
BACKGROUND:
ICLEI is the international association of local governments dedicated to achieving tangible improvements in global environmental and sustainable development conditions through cumulative local action.
In August 2001, the Town became a Member of the organisation at its inaugural meeting and for the past two years, Council has played an active part in Local Agenda 21 and the Cities for Climate Protection Milestone program, which all fall under the umbrella of ICLEI. The Town has successfully completed the requirement to be presented with awards for Milestones 1, 2 and 3 and is presently implementing Milestone 4 strategies.
Cr Smith was nominated as Council’s contact person for the promotion of the Cities for Climate Protection Program and represented the Town at the ICLEI Conference held in Adelaide from 1 to 3 August 2001.
DETAILS:
The upcoming ICLEI World Congress and full Council meeting will be held in November 2003 in Athens, Greece. At that time, the current Executive Committee’s mandate will come to an end and a new Executive Committee (ExCom) will be convened.
The election process is now under way. ICLEI looks to its Members to nominate political representatives or other high level officials as candidates. ICLEI’s ExCom has primary responsibility for the governance of this well-respected international association of local governments implementing sustainable development and requests that consideration be given to nominating a representative from within the Council.
The election results will be officially prepared by the ICLEI Secretary General, validated by the ICLEI Chair, and all members and candidates will be notified shortly thereafter. The ICLEI Charter and By-Laws require the following composition of the Executive Committee:-
• The 21 Executive Committee members will be directly elected by the Full Membership.
• At least three members must be from each of the six geographic regions as defined by the IULA. These regions are: Asia and Pacific, Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East, Africa, Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean, North America.
• Three members will be elected as members-at-large.
• A majority (11) of the 21 Executive Committee members must be local government officials.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\C p+A.doc 91 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
In preparing the election results the Chair will first nominate the 18 directly elected members. The three candidates receiving the highest number of votes among the field of candidates from each geographical region shall be elected to the 18 regional representative positions. The three candidates receiving the highest number of votes among the field of candidates remaining after the election of the regional representatives shall be elected to the position of at-large representatives.
A copy of the Candidacy Papers is circulated to Elected Members as attachment to the report.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
There may be costs associated with the attendance at any ICLEI Executive Committee meetings, however, these are unknown at present.
COUNCIL DECISION: (ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr Smith, seconded by Cr Pinerua
That the Council not participate in the nomination of a candidate for election at the upcoming ICLEI World Congress and full Council meeting to be held in November 2003 in Athens, Greece.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\C p+A.doc 92 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
PA03.06
2003 LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGERS AUSTRALIA (LGMA) NATIONAL CONGRESS (File Reference: ADM0021)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To advise of the details and content of the 2003 LGMA National Congress.
BACKGROUND:
The Council has been advised that the Local Government Managers Australia National Congress is to be conducted in Adelaide from 25 to 28 May 2003. The LGMA Congress is recognised as the premier Local Government Congress for Local Government professionals in Australia.
DETAILS:
The Local Government Managers Australia (formerly Institute of Municipal Management) is the professional organisation Australia-wide for Local Government managers in urban, regional and rural areas. LGMA is the second largest Local Government Professional Body in the world. The Chief Executive Officer is a past National and State President of LGMA. The LGMA congress attracts attendance from local government practitioners around the world. The input from international delegates adds to the significance of the congress in terms of outcomes.
LGMA is now inviting local government officers to attend the 2003 National Congress, which has been streamlined to provide an even more improved forum to learn about current and emerging issues which will impact on local government. This year’s National Congress is designed to showcase the very best of local government and to draw on practical experiences from within and outside of the sector in important areas such as business development, sustainability, e-government, commerce and business ethics. Discussion is facilitated among all stakeholders dealing with subjects such as:-
• Public Infrastructure Strategies • Strategic Demography • The Realities of Public Security • Getting Returns on your Social Capital • Why They Will Invest in Your Community • E-Services – a Citizen’s Perspective • Maintaining Best Practice in the Governance Stakes • Good Councillor/Staff Relations • New Ideas on Developing Young Leaders • Best Practice in Measuring Performance • A Life in Balance • Your Public Profile and the Media • “In the Public Interest” • Best practice Regional Partnership Models • Ethics and Morality in your Partnerships • Environmental Partnerships in the Next Ten Years • Transformational Leadership • Using Indigenous Knowledge
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\C p+A.doc 93 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Analytical Workshops: • Local Action 21 and the Sustainability Agenda • The “Cost Shifting” Inquiry as a Starting Point • Private/Public Partnerships with Community Buy-In
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The recommendation is in accordance with Council Policy 1.2.7, which allows the Chief Executive Officer to attend appropriate interstate conferences, subject to budget funding being available.
Policy 1.1.8 relating to travel and accommodation expenses also applies.
BUDGET IMPLICATIONS:
Funds have been budgeted for and are available from Budget Item “Governance Management – Conferences”.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
The Town’s Administration will be recognised for the quality of its staff and its use of modern and effective management practices. Council will operate in a financially prudent and ethical manner and staff will work in a safe and fulfilling environment.
SUMMARY:
The Local Government Management Australia’s Congress has won worldwide recognition for its quality. It is important for professional managers within any organisation to maintain currency with best practice. While the Conference is structured in the main for Local Government professionals, many Elected Members throughout Australia attend, due to the excellent content of the Conference. In past years, Mayor Willcock has been registered to attend, as well as the Chief Executive Officer.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Moved by Cr Burkett, seconded by Cr O’Connor
That:-
(i) in accordance with Council Policy 1.2.7, the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to attend the 2003 LGMA National Congress to be held in Adelaide from 25 to 28 May 2003;
(ii) the expenditure in (i) above be charged to Budget Item “Governance Management – Conferences”.
Committee Meeting 11 February 2003
During discussion, it was suggested that His Worship the Mayor should also attend the conference.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\C p+A.doc 94 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Amendment
Moved by Cr Smith, seconded by Cr Burkett
That the motion be amended to read as follows:-
(i) His Worship the Mayor and the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to attend the 2003 LGMA National Congress to be held in Adelaide from 25 to 28 May 2003;
(ii) the expenditure in (i) above be charged to Budget Items ‘Members – Course/Conference Expenses’ and ‘Governance Management – Conferences’.
Carried
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr Smith, seconded by Cr Pinerua
That:-
(i) His Worship the Mayor and the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to attend the 2003 LGMA National Congress to be held in Adelaide from 25 to 28 May 2003;
(ii) the expenditure in (i) above be charged to Budget Items ‘Members – Course/Conference Expenses’ and ‘Governance Management – Conferences’.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\C p+A.doc 95 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
8. REPORTS FROM DELEGATES: COMMITTEES AND WORKING GROUPS
8.1 Local Government Association Central Metropolitan Zone
Cr O’Connor reported that the next meeting will be held on 27 March 2003.
8.2 Ocean Gardens (Inc)
Mayor Willcock reported that the State Government is working to finalise the situation, as a matter of urgency.
9. GENERAL BUSINESS
9.1 Inaugural International Union of Local Authorities Congress
Cr Smith queried whether the Town had received details of the Inaugural International Union of Local Authorities Congress to be held in Sydney between 9 and 11 April 2003.
The Chief Executive Officer confirmed that details had been received and a report will be submitted to Council.
10. CLOSURE
There being no further business, the Presiding Member thanked those present for their attendance and declared the meeting of the Policy and Administration Committee closed at 9.02 pm.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\C p+A.doc 96 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
CORPORATE AND CUSTOMER SERVICES COMMITTEE
The report of the Corporate and Customer Services Committee Meeting held on 17 February 2003 was submitted as under:
1. DECLARATION OF OPENING
The Presiding Member declared the meeting of the Corporate and Customer Services Committee open at 6. 04 pm.
2. RECORD OF ATTENDANCE/APOLOGIES/LEAVE OF ABSENCE
Present : Time of Time of Entering Leaving
Members:
Cr Corinne MacRae (Presiding Member) 6. 04 pm 7.20 pm
Cr Ken McAullay 6. 04 pm 7.20 pm Cr Hilary Pinerua 6. 04 pm 7.20 pm Cr Kerry Smith 6. 06 pm 7.20 pm
Observers:
Deputy Mayor Cr Marlene Anderton 6. 04 pm 7.20 pm Cr Graham Burkett JP 6. 48 pm 7.20 pm Cr Alan Langer 6. 04 pm 7.20 pm
Officers:
Jason Buckley, Executive Manager Corporate and Customer Services Roy Ruitenga, Manager Financial and Business Services Cam Robbins, Manager Community Development Michelle Ledger, Manager Library Services Mathew Day, Manager Golf Complex Denise Ribbands, Administration Officer (Governance)
Adjournments: Nil
Time meeting closed: 7.20 pm
APOLOGIES/LEAVE OF ABSENCE
Nil
3. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME
Nil.
4. DEPUTATIONS AND PETITIONS
Item CCS03.12 – David Beattie Derek Laferla and Tim Wright
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 97 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
5. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES
Moved by Cr Smith, seconded by Cr Pinerua
That the Minutes of the Ordinary meeting of the Corporate and Customer Services Committee held on 9 December 2002 as contained in the December Council Notice Paper be confirmed.
Carried
6. DECLARATION OF MEMBERS’ INTERESTS
Nil
7. REPORTS
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 98 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
CCS03.01
ACCOUNTS FOR PAYMENT (File Reference: FIN0049)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To confirm the payment of accounts to pay for expenses incurred by the Town to fund its operation.
DETAILS:
Regulation 13 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 requires a list of accounts to be prepared and presented to Council. Below is a list of the cheques raised for the payment of accounts from the Municipal Account (and Trust Account where applicable).
POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:
Payments in accordance with Policy 2.3.4 “Council Bank Accounts and Payments”.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Expenses incurred are charged to the appropriate items included in the annual budget.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
There are no specific details in the Strategic Plan and Plan of Principal Activities providing for the payment of accounts.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr MacRae , seconded by Cr Smith
That in accordance with Regulation 13 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996, the schedule of accounts as detailed below be confirmed and the list of payments, as laid on the table, be included in the Minutes of the Council:-
Cheque No. Date Details Amount Municipal
401237 6 Dec 02 Advance Recoup Wages Transfer (29/11/02) $177,578.51 401238 6 Dec 02 Advance Recoup Taxation Dept (29/11/02) $59,758.97 401239 6 Dec 02 Advance Recoup V39009 – V39128 $565,646.29 401240 13 Dec 02 Advance Recoup V39129 – V39274 $209,001.66 401241 20 Dec 02 Advance Recoup V39275 – V39421 $311,474.57 401242 23 Dec 02 Advance Recoup Wages Transfer (13/12/02) $178,696.41 401243 23 Dec 02 Advance Recoup Taxation Dept (13/12/02) $61,493.00 401244 2 Jan 03 Advance Recoup Taxation Dept (27/12/02) $54,541.47 401245 2 Jan 03 Advance Recoup Wages Transfer (27/12/02) $160,060.90
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 99 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
401246 10 Jan 03 Advance Recoup V39422 – V39628 $766,695.24 401247 15 Jan 03 Advance Recoup Wages Transfer (10/1/03) $173,887.85 401248 17 Jan 03 Advance Recoup V39629 – V39745 $326,799.54 401249 24 Jan 03 Advance Recoup V39746 – V39840 $279,031.09 401250 28 Jan 03 Advance Recoup Wages Transfer (24/01/03) $183,478.75 401251 31 Jan 03 Advance Recoup V39841 – V39890 $30,353.21 401252 7 Feb 03 Advance Recoup V39891 – V39975 $278,563.20 401253 10 Feb 03 Advance Recoup V39976 – V40050 $164,144.78 401254 10 Feb 03 Advance Recoup Taxation Dept (24/01/03) $122,930.18 $4,104,135.62
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 100 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
CCS03.02
INVESTMENT SCHEDULE (File Reference: FIN0038)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To advise the Council of the amount of surplus funds invested, the distribution of those funds and the financial performance of each investment (ie interest earned) year to date for the period ended 31 January 2003.
POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:
Council Policy identifies an approved list of investment bodies. Not more than 25% of available funds is to be placed with any one institution. The current investment portfolio complies with this policy.
In addition, the policy requires an investment report to be submitted to the Council each month.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Interest from investments represents a significant revenue item in the Council’s Budget and it is important that the Council’s investment performance is monitored closely.
Interest is accrued in the financial statements for the month and upon the maturity of each investment is then compounded unless the funds are required for Council purposes.
The Investment Schedule as circulated provides details of the performance of each individual investment to date. A summary of the investment performance to budget is provided below:-
Budget Actual as at % 2002/2003 31/01/03 (ytd) $ $ General $260,000 $146,488 56.3% Reserves $162,000 $97,591 60.2% Endowment Lands $145,000 $117,502 81.0% TOTAL $567,000 $361,581 63.8%
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
There are no specific details in the Strategic Plan or Plan of Principal Activities outlining the requirements for the investment of Council funds. However, the management of these surplus funds is consistent with the Town’s Mission for the “efficient, accountable and quality management of public assets and infrastructure.”
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr MacRae , seconded by Cr Smith
That the Investment Schedule as at 31 January 2003, as attached to and forming part of the Notice Paper, be received.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 101 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
CCS03.03
MONTHLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (File Reference: FIN0026)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To receive the Financial Statements for the period ended 31 January 2003.
BACKGROUND:
The Financial Statements for the period ended 31 January 2003, have been prepared and have been circulated with the Notice Paper.
POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr MacRae , seconded by Cr Smith
That the Financial Statements for the period ended 31 January 2003 be received.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 102 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
CCS03.04
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - PERIODIC REVIEW (File Reference: FIN0026)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To review the Town’s financial performance and assess budget variations following the completion of the quarter ended 31 December 2002.
BACKGROUND:
The Local Government Act 1995 and Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 require Council to identify any significant variations to income and expenditure and project the effect of that variation to the end of the financial year on a regular basis. This ensures that both Council and management are able to identify problems and can therefore act upon them in a timely manner.
The December 2002 financial statements have been produced. The purpose of this report is to comment on those variances that have occurred for the period ended 31 December 2002 from the annual and year to date budgets set for that period. The January 2003 financial statements are circulated with this agenda and can be read in conjunction with the observations made.
DETAILS:
• Statement of Financial Position
The “Statement of Financial Position” as at 31 December 2002 shows the Town has a solid financial base with a net current asset position or working capital of $13.1 million, a decrease from $16.6 million at 30 September 2002. This was mainly due to rates receivables monies flowing in, decreasing receivables from $6 million in September to $3 million in December. The inflow of monies has been applied to both meeting day to day operational expenditure and capital works expenditure. Capital works expenditure has increased from $1.1 million to $2.4 million with a number of capital works programs being initiated during the quarter. It is expected that the amount of working capital will decline throughout the remainder of this financial year as monies continue to be expended to meet expenditure with respect to capital works programs and day to day operating commitments. The decline will be somewhat offset by monies flowing in from rates instalments becoming due in the ensuing months.
Total equity or net worth of the Town as at 31 December 2002 is $135.5 million, being an accumulated operation surplus of $68.9 million, cash reserves of $3.4 million, Endowment Lands Account funds of $3.5 million and asset revaluation reserve of $59.7 million. This represents a decrease of $2.9 million on September’s equity position of $138.4 million.
• Rate Setting Statement (Page 1)
Local Governments are required to produce a balanced budget, which in addition to the income and expenditure included in the operating statement, takes into account capital expenditure and income, monies transferred to and from reserves and any
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 103 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
funds carried forward from the previous financial year. It excludes non-cash items such as depreciation which are added back.
The statement is therefore an overview of sources of cash generated and the application of those funds in meeting both operational and non-operational commitments and providing for transfers to reserves in meeting future expenditure outlays. The Council always budgets for a “nil” position or balanced budget position at year end, the intention being to raise sufficient funds to meet annual expected costs. As at 31 December 2002, the Town has a surplus of $5,810,755 against a budgeted year to date position of $5,638,497. This surplus represents savings in expenditure, revenue collected in excess of budget and funds yet to be spent on uncompleted capital programs. The graph below shows the Council’s operational performance against budget.
Cash Surplus
10 8 6 4 Millions 2 0 S ep Dec Mar J une Budget Quarter Ended Actual
• Operating Statement (Page 3)
The net operating result for the current financial year as at 31 December 2002, is a profit of $4,758,620 against a budgeted year to date profit of $4,403,197 showing that Council is managing operations within budget set. The total revenue of $14,814,502 raised at December 2002 is 100% of the year to date budget. Total expenditure at December 2002 is $10,055,882 which is 96.6% of the year to date budget with all areas being under budget with the exception of economic services which is in excess of the year to date expenditure budget.
Net Operating Profit (Before Abnormals)
8 6 4 Millions 2 0 S ept Dec Mar J une Budget Actua l Quarte r E nded
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 104 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
• Overview by Program Expenditure
The actual expenditure for the past six months has been compared to the year to date budget 2002/2003 and the actual expenditure incurred for the same six month period ended December 2001. Looking at the graph below, it can be seen that the expenditure across all programs is below budget.
The actuals for each of the two financial years also compare very favourably indicating that operating expenditure is being kept at reasonable levels. This shows that the total expenditure for each program is being well managed in a responsible and financially prudent manner. It must be pointed out that Transport’s actual expenditure for 2001 has been adjusted for underground power expenditure of $1.4 million to make the figures more comparable, as a project of such magnitude did not occur in 2002.
Financial Position at December
5,000,000 4,500,000 4,000,000 3,500,000 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 0
e r se c lth rt rty o lture o e an u n Orde Hea menities C rop Purp A & P Actual 2001 aw, & Welfare Transp c Services L ity n i er eral Gover n tio h n Ot YTD Budget Ge mu onom ucation m crea c d o e E E C R Actual 2002
• Capital Works Programs
The actual expenditure for the Capital Works Programs as at the end of the December 2002 period is well below budget. As noted in the budget variances section in this report for the budget line item “Road Infrastructure-Footpaths”, the main effort to date by works and engineering has been on operational maintenance during the cooler months whilst management has been scheduling the capital works programs. It must also be pointed out that the majority of capital works are outsourced to contractors. The summer season is the traditional period in which most engineering and parks and landscape capital works are carried out due to the nature of the work involved . The March quarter therefore should show a significant increase in expenditure within this area.
Capital Expenditure at December
3,500,000 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 Dollars 1,000,000 500,000 0 Parks & Roads & Footpaths Reserves Lanes Capital Type
Annual Budget 2003 Actual YTD Dec 2002 H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 105 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
• Aged Debtors Report 60 Days and Over
The total amount of non rates debtors outstanding for more than sixty days beyond the due date of payment is $38,350 and a report detailing the debtors and the respective amounts outstanding with appropriate explanations where relevant is attached. It should be noted that $11,283 of these debts are being pursued by the Town’s lawyers, with a further $2,292 with the Town’s debt collectors.
• Budget Variances and Reallocations
Detailed explanations have been provided by staff responsible for the income or expenditure where variations from the year to date budget set were considered to be significant, that is $10,000 or more. The officer concerned was requested to consider whether the variance was due to an underlying cause which was ongoing or just a one off occurrence. It is not the intention to provide explanation in this report for variances of a lesser value but a list of those variances exceeding $5,000 is attached.
Whilst reviewing budget variances, staff were asked to review all budget items within their area and to identify and make any necessary budget re-allocation requests. This exercise is carried out each quarter. Given that budgets are normally set well in advance and that circumstances can and do change throughout the financial year, adjustments to the budget are expected.
(a) Wembley Community Centre - Fringe Benefits Tax (Page 3.48)
The role of the centre manager for the Wembley Community centre has changed in that this position is now responsible for a number of external facilities within the Town. As such, the vehicle belonging to Senior Services will no longer be used by the manager for commuting purposes. Accordingly, the budget expenditure item “Fringe Benefits Tax” of $3,500 within the centre’s operational budget can therefore be varied down to zero, as the vehicle will be kept at the centre’s premises after hours.
Recommendation: Reduce expenditure budget line item “Fringe Benefits Tax” of $3,500 for Wembley Community Centre down to zero.
(b) Plant and Equipment - Parks – Lifting Jib (Tractor) (Page 4.8)
When the capital budgets were formulated for the Town’s plant and equipment expenditure requirements, the acquisition of a lifting jib was identified as being needed for the parks and landscape tractor. However, it became apparent at a later date after the budget was adopted, that this was meant to have been for the golf course tractor. Therefore the budget of $1,800 needs to be transferred from parks and landscape to the golf course.
Recommendation: Transfer budget of $1,800 for Parks – Lifting Jib (Tractor) to new capital item Golf Course – Lifting Jib (Tractor).
(c) Wide Area Network Connection Upgrade (Page 4.5)
The communication facilities between the Town’s main administration building and external centres has been fragmented with some centres using modem dial up facilities for data transfer. This has proved to be very inefficient and slow and has halted progress with such initiatives as providing payment
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 106 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
services to customers at external centres. To provide a more efficient and effective service to customers, it has become imperative to upgrade the Town’s communication facilities. The most cost effective solution has been to implement a Wide Area Network (WAN) between external centres as an alternative to optic fibre cable which has proved to be too expensive. The cost of the network has been estimated to be $20,000. To fund the project, a number of capital budget items have been identified which can be deferred and considered in next years budget. The capital items being culled are acquisition of desktop computers for replacement as the Town is currently ahead in its computer asset replacement program.
Recommendation: To transfer $20,000 from a number of computer replacement capital budget items, as listed in the report recommendation, to new capital item “Wide Area Network Connection Upgrade”.
(d) Library CD Server
The library’s two CD ROM towers which store and provide access to the library’s CD collection have been rendered inoperable by the recent upgrade of the operating system of the desktop computers at the library to Windows 2000. It was not known at the time that the functionality of the existing CD ROM towers would be incompatible with the Window 2000 operating systems. To be able to continue to provide the public with access to the CD ROM information collection, it will be necessary to replace both CD ROM towers with a new CD Server, at a cost of $2,400.
Recommendation: To transfer $2,400 from capital budget item, “Library – Personal Computers (Replace 6)’ to new capital item “Library CD Server”.
(e) Golf Course - Staff Lunchroom and Office Facility Upgrade
The current lunch room and office facilities are cramped and not sufficient for the staff numbers at the golf course. Storage space is also at a premium. Fulltime staff numbers are now at eleven. The supervisor’s house is in need of some work but is large enough to provide adequate lunch room facilities and office space. There is no longer a need for a supervisor to be resident at the golf course, therefore the house is currently an unused asset. If left vacant it could be subjected to vandalism and will continue to deteriorate. The space provided by the relocation of the current lunchroom and office will provide extra storage space for both golf course items and spare machinery parts for golf course plant. The work required to upgrade and fit out the house suitable for lunchroom and office facilities has been estimated at $17,200. Several non capital and capital items, which are no longer required, can be deferred or have had savings identified within them are proposed as the source of funding. For example, the painting of the house can be deferred to next year until all other works have been carried out and savings of $4,000 have been identified with the construction of the limestone car park. These are listed in the report recommendation.
The works which are in progress were approved by delegated authority and endorsed by the Wembley Golf Complex Advisory Committee.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 107 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Recommendation: To transfer $17,200 from budget items:
S425-013 Paint managers office and fishnet $3,000 S425-014 Paint golf course supervisors house $4,000 S425-017 Construct limestone car park $5,000 S425-015 Connect depot computer $1,200 2003/30/520 Solar hot water system (caretakers) $4,000
to budget items:
S425-021 Upgrade lunchroom & office $8,600 2003/30/561 Air Conditioning $4,400 2003/30/562 Lunchroom/Office Furniture $2,400 2003/30/563 Microwave and dryer $ 800 S425-017 Construct limetone car park $1,000
1. General Purpose Funding Less Rates Written Off – Gross Rental Value (Page 3.13)
Budget Set: $10,000 Budget ytd: $5,100 Actual ytd: $25,660 Variance ytd: $20,560 Projected Expenditure for June 2003 $30,000
The large amount of rate write offs can be largely attributed to two properties, which were overcharged rates. This was the result of duplication in valuations from the Valuer Generals Office. The duplications were identified by the Town’s property and rates area. The valuation records have now been amended and refunds of the overpayments have been made.
2. Recreation and Culture The Boulevard Centre - Room Hire/Rent - Casual (Page 3.51)
Budget Set: $40,000 Budget ytd: $20,200 Actual ytd: $7,968 Variance ytd: $12,232 Projected Revenue for June 2003 $30,000
The annual budget set for room hire for The Boulevard Centre is based on the majority of revenue being received in the latter part of the financial year when the building development at the Floreat Forum are completed. It is therefore anticipated that the second half of the year will generate 66% of the income. Further delays to the construction at the Floreat Forum will impact on the volume of walk through traffic.
3. Recreation and Culture Parks Grounds – Perry Lakes Park (Page 3.61)
Budget Set: $102,900 Budget ytd: $51,800 Actual ytd: $70,554 Variance ytd: $18,754 Projected Expenditure for June 2003: $112,000
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 108 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Non programmed urgent works were undertaken to remove branches and fallen trees due to damage caused by severe winter storms. These storms were more intense and frequent than had been experienced in previous years. The new accessible playground required supplementary work after the initial construction phase. Increased maintenance work was also done to ensure that the area was up to the appropriate standard for the official opening. The level of expenditure will be reduced for the remainder of the year.
The variation of $10,000 will be offset against savings from within the Parks and Landscape Operating Budget.
4. Recreation and Culture Wembley Golf Course – Revenue Fees 18 Holes (Page 3.63)
Budget Set: $975,000 Budget ytd: $490,200 Actual ytd: $431,196 Variance ytd: $59,004 Projected Revenue for June 2003: $930,000
Due to the tender for the pro shop being awarded to Tees to Green Pty Ltd, Divots Golf Services heavily promoted a closing down sale which appears to have had a knock on effect to the golf course in August and September. Seasonally, the first quarter is slowest for revenue but numbers were down on corresponding months from 2001. There has been a 14% increase in revenue for the second quarter. Costs for the course controller will be lower than forecasted due to a lower commission payable on green fees and this will offset some of the reduction in revenue from fees. It is expected that revenue will remain on budget for the rest of the financial year.
5. Recreation and Culture Wembley Golf Course – Revenue Rent Tavern (Page 3.63)
Budget Set: $150,000 Budget ytd: $75,500 Actual ytd: $61,405 Variance ytd: $14,095 Projected Revenue for June 2003: $99,800
Council awarded the previous tenant a 50% rent reduction during the three month holding period for the tender process. This has resulted in a $19,188 reduction in rental income. The new tenant Nedgo Pty Ltd has tendered on a minimum rental value of $120,000 inc GST per annum. It is therefore expected that Tavern rental will not meet budget. The Town receives 8% of any revenue over $1,000,000 and if this is achieved there will be a reduction in the variance.
6. Recreation and Culture Wembley Golf Course Operations – Infrastructure Maintenance (Page 3.64)
Budget Set: $78,200 Budget ytd: $39,400 Actual ytd: $52,042 Variance ytd: $12,642 Projected Expenditure for June 2003: $83,200
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 109 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
The poor state of the wooden fence on The Boulevard has resulted in continual maintenance. Woodchip pathways are being better maintained and a spraying programme has been introduced to keep them weed free. The overall increase of $5,000 on the annual budget can be offset by savings within other maintenance expense areas and the overall course operations programme.
7. Recreation and Culture Wembley Golf Course Operations – Turf Management (Page 3.64)
Budget Set: $210,000 Budget ytd: $105,600 Actual ytd: $125,029 Variance ytd: $19,429 Projected Expenditure for June 2003: $210,000
The warmer months, especially December have required extra applications of wetting agent, fungicides and insecticides on greens to maintain the standard required. It is expected that the budget will be met without sacrificing standards.
8. Transport Road Infrastructure Maintenance - Footpaths (Page 3.73)
Budget Set: $160,000 Budget ytd: $80,500 Actual ytd: $98,751 Variance ytd: $18,251 Projected Expenditure for June 2003: $160,000
A higher than average amount of footpath maintenance was carried out during the wet cool months of July, August and September. Additional maintenance was carried out to remedy tripping hazards identified by the annual footpath inspection in November and December. This variation is expected to decrease to zero by June 2003 and no offset expenditure is expected. Overall, Road Infrastructure expenditure is 98.6% of Year To Date budget.
9. Economic Services Building Control – Salaries (Page 3.79)
Budget Set: $235,600 Budget ytd: $118,500 Actual ytd: $135,962 Variance ytd: $17,462 Projected Expenditure for June 2003: $258,000
Due to the Senior Building Surveyor taking 2.5 months long service leave and a Building Surveyor being on maternity leave, the Administration was required to employ relief building surveyors to maintain the Town’s statutory obligations in the provision of building approval services. As there is an extreme shortage of Building Surveyors in this State, the Town was forced to pay high contract rates in order to engage qualified relief Building Surveyors. Additionally, a relief building services administration officer was employed for six weeks to relieve for annual leave purposes.
Some of this over expenditure will be partially offset by building licence revenue.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 110 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
These additional employee costs were identified during the budget preparation. Unfortunately, the additional expenditure required for relief staff was not included in the final budget.
10. Transport Road Works - Railway Parade (Blencowe to Hamilton) (Page 4.11)
Budget Set: $49,800 Budget ytd: $49,800 Actual ytd: $61,028 Variance ytd: $11,228 Projected Expenditure for June 2003: $61,028
The volume of traffic on this road and presence of commercial properties required most of the work to be carried out on weekends at penalty rates for labour. This job required a relatively high amount of traffic control and work was hampered by traffic on the street. The work was completed on 20 December 2002. The variation on this account can be partly offset with under expenditure of $7,000 on the other account used for this project: C734-004 Railway parade (Rosslyn to Blencowe)
11. Transport Road Surfacing – McKenzie Street (Cambridge to Ruislip) (Page 4.11)
Budget Set: $27,500 Budget ytd: $27,500 Actual ytd: $39,695 Variance ytd: $12,195 Projected Expenditure for June 2003: $39,695
This is a road surfacing project that required the existing asphalt surface to be milled off. In the process of milling, the underlying asphalt was so weak that it broke up and left a rough surface. The extra tonnage of surface correction required to correct this reflected in the over expenditure on this account. The budget amount for these resurfacing projects is based on average amounts of milling and surface correction. In general, the over expenditure on some projects will be completely offset by the under expenditures on the other resurfacing projects which require less milling and surface correction. For example, account C218-001 Winmarley Street has an under expenditure of $11,000. Overall, the expenditure on completed Road Surfacing projects is $252,902 and the total budgets for these is $270,000.
CONCLUSION:
The main variations from budget to date, those exceeding $10,000, have been identified, including both expenditure and income of which there have only been a few instances. This report has only highlighted the adverse variances but there are also many favourable variances, which have occurred to date which have exceeded budgets set and which offset these adverse variances.
Budgets are normally prepared and finalised at the commencement of the financial year and therefore are based on information, trends and assumptions current at that time. However, circumstances and events can and do change as the financial year progresses and variances are to be expected. Therefore, a consolidated overview of the Town’s performance against total budget set needs to be taken which at the end of the December period indicates the Town has a healthy surplus of $5,810,755 against a year to date budget of $5,668,697.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 111 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr MacRae , seconded by Cr Smith
That:-
(i) the report on the Financial Statements as at 31 December 2002 be received and the variances to the budget be noted;
(ii) the following adjustments and reallocations to the 2002/2003 Budget be authorised:-
Amended Budget Adjustment Budget (a) Wembley Community Centre – Fringe $3,500 ($3,500) $0 Benefits Tax
(b) Golf Course – Lifting Jib (Tractor) $0 $1,800 $1,800
Parks – Lifting Jib (Tractor) $1,800 ($1,800) $0
(c) Admin - Internet Connection Upgrade $6,000 ($6,000) 0 Admin – Personal Computers (replace 9) $18,000 ($6,000) $12,000 Bold Park Aquatic – Personal Computer $2,000 ($2,000) 0 (replace 1) Library – Personal Computers (replace 6) $12,000 ($6,000) $6,000 Admin – Wide Area Network 0 $20,000 $20,000
(d) Library – Personal Computers (replace 6) $6,000 ($2,400) $3,600 Library – CD Server 0 $2,400 $2,400
(e) Paint Manager’s Office and fishnet $3,000 ($3,000) 0 Paint Golf Course Supervisor’s house $4,000 ($4,000) 0 Construct limestone car park $5,000 ($4,000) $1,000 Connect depot computer $1,200 ($1,200) 0 Solar hot water system (Caretaker’s) $4,000 ($4,000) 0 Upgrade Lunchroom and office 0 $8,600 $8,600 Airconditioning 0 $4,400 $4,400 Lunchroom and Office furniture 0 $2,400 $2,400 Microwave and dryer 0 $800 $800
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 112 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
CCS03.05
DOCUMENTS SEALED (File Reference: ADM0039)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
There is no statutory requirement for the Council to give prior approval for the Seal of the Municipality to be placed on documents. It is considered desirable, however, to provide the Council with relevant information relating to documents sealed.
DETAILS:
The following documents have been sealed with the Common Seal of the Town:-
Date Document Details No. 4 December 2002 Title: Memorandum of Understanding – Speech and 3 Hearing Centre for Children and Bold Park Advisory Council and the Town of Cambridge.
Purpose: Agreement between the two sub tenants prior to the preparation of a formal sub lease for the property.
17 December 2002 Title: Withdrawal of Caveat – Lots 100 and 101 (36-36) 1 Marlow Street, Wembley
Purpose: To enable the applicants to arrange for lodgement of applications at DOLA to register the plan for amalgamation of the two lots and to register the survey strata plan to finalise the subdivision.
POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Nil.
STRAGEGIC DIRECTION:
There are no specific details in the Strategic Plan and the Plan of Principal Activities in relation to the sealing of Council documents.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr MacRae , seconded by Cr Smith
That it be noted that the Common Seal of the Town of Cambridge has been affixed to the documents as set out in the schedule attached to and forming part of the Notice Paper.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 113 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
CCS03.06
LOCAL STUDIES COLLECTION - DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY (File Reference: CMS 0090)
PURPOSE OF THE REPORT:
The purpose of the report is to develop strategic directions for a Local Studies programme and consider the proposal for a local studies publication.
BACKGROUND:
A significant objective of the design of the new Cambridge Library was to create a building that would cater for the current and future needs of residents. These needs were determined in part by the User Needs Study conducted in March 2001. One finding of the User Needs Study was the desire for a local studies collection. Consequently, a feature of the new library was a purpose built Local Studies Room comprising a study/research room and a climate controlled Archives storage room.
Now that the Local Studies infrastructure is in place and the facility has a community profile, it is important that a collection development strategy be implemented as soon as possible to ensure a return on the Town’s investment.
Late in 2002, an Elected Member requested information on the possibility of publishing an official history of the Town of Cambridge. As the development of publication of an official history is dependent upon the availability of sufficient research material, it was decided to include consideration of the proposal as part of the broader strategic plan for the Town’s local studies programme.
DETAILS:
The Town has made a significant investment in providing for a Local Studies Collection in the new Cambridge Library. The facilities comprise a separate room where community members may research as well as a climate controlled Archives Room with a storage compactus where materials are to be preserved. To date, almost no materials have been collected, neither is there currently the required expertise available amongst the existing library staff to develop such a collection.
It is considered important that a strategy for the development of the collection be implemented as soon as possible for the following reasons:-
Community expectation that such a highly visible facility offer a service; Valuable information is being rapidly lost due the frail age of “pioneers” in the area; To expand available resources as the limited amount of recorded information on the history of the area cannot satisfy current and potential demand; Existing information, such as it is, still requires some organisation to be easily accessible to members of the public; Local history is a significant aspect of the local heritage; and Local history fosters a sense of community identity and pride.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 114 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
A local studies program promotes community participation; the community is actively engaged in recording the community experience, individual as well as collective, natural as well as man made, for current and future generations of the community. It has the potential to be a dynamic council program for community members of all ages including programs involving schools, seniors and volunteers.
SCOPE
Local Studies can represent a very diverse program. By its definition, it is the study of the local community in all its forms. Therefore, the nature of the collection will have a large natural component as well as an architectural, community and historical perspective.
The purpose of the collection is to collect, copy, organise and preserve records, physical and digital. It is a specialist programme requiring a suitably qualified person with either a library science or history background. To ensure a successful programme, the person responsible needs to have well developed research, time management, organisation, preservation, strategic planning, information technology, communication and marketing skills.
A diverse range of material is collected for a local studies collection including books, video, audio tapes, maps and ephemera. These materials require a range of indexing, preservation and storage techniques which need to be integrated in such a manner that one subject enquiry will provide access to all materials on the subject regardless of format. In addition, it is also important to provide a seamless link to online resources regardless of location within the Town of Cambridge, Western Australia, nationally or internationally.
Leading edge Local Studies collections are now providing dynamic outreach programs including visits to schools, community displays, training in oral history, research techniques such as genealogy and historical essay competitions which proactively stimulate local research and the generation of recorded information. These collections are also a valuable corporate research tool whether for planning or marketing purposes.
Oral history programmes involving volunteers can be very successful if structured carefully and managed by a person with excellent communication, organisation, research and team skills. Oral history programmes generally record information from individuals which would otherwise not be recorded in print format. This diverse range of information is valuable for a vast range of research and applications in years to come including the publication of books and theses, identification of historical sites or the development of community events. It also allows future generations to hear the experiences of the individual in his or her own words. It is recommended that Oral History be identified as an early priority as it has the capacity to target the most at risk information source quickly, i.e. the frail aged. It also enables the development of other collection formats. Through building a relationship with the interviewee, the interviewer is often also presented with the opportunity to locate photographs and other historical materials to add or copy for the collection. Most importantly, an oral history program outreaches to the community and therefore markets the existence of the collection. This ensures community awareness and subsequent use of the collection.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 115 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
TIMEFRAME
The scope of this project as well as resource constraints necessitate a staged approach. Research of other Local Studies collections confirmed that the majority of the time spent within the first two years will be primarily for acquiring and developing the collection and establishing guidelines for the development of the Collection. Minor work has been commenced by library staff including:-
investigating existing Local Studies collections in other local government authorities; linking to the corporate newspaper clipping service to minimise duplication of effort and as preliminary to the first stage of organising these records; development of a Registration of Interest form to commence the identification of contact persons through Senior Services and the Library (Appendix A); the location and transfer of Cambridge Library materials to the collection; the commencement of links to genealogy websites; the first draft of Local Studies Collection Development Guidelines (Appendix B) as a basic framework to guide staff until specialist expertise can develop comprehensive guidelines; and liaison with Seniors Services to identify opportunities for coordinating, developing and marketing joint programs.
The lack of staff resources and expertise in this area has meant this work has been very spasmodic and based on work elsewhere rather than being tailored to local Town of Cambridge needs.
To commence work in a structured manner, the following time frame is recommended:
2003/04
The focus of the first year will be employment of specialist staff with the expertise to establish the process infrastructure for the program. The recommended staffing establishment is based on information gathered on similar services offered by Joondalup, Bassendean, Vincent and Fremantle. Two part time positions are recommended with a combined full time equivalent of 0.76. This is well below that in all of these councils with the exception of Bassendean.
1. Local Studies Librarian (19 hours per week).
Responsibilities will include:-
finalise the draft collection development guidelines; develop a business plan for the Collection including timeframes for the introduction of sub programmes such as preservation programmes; develop a three year budget for the Local Studies Collection; develop an Oral History Program structure tailored to the Town of Cambridge including strategies for volunteers should this prove feasible; actively participate in strategies to enable access to historical records currently held by the City of Perth;
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 116 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
actively market the Local History Collection including articles in the local newspaper; and as a guest speaker for local groups; host an official launch for the Local History Collection early in 2004; collect and catalogue hard copy materials for the Local Studies collection; and assist customers undertaking local research.
2. Oral History Coordinator (10 hours per week).
Responsibilities will include:-
develop legal copyright agreements between the Town of Cambridge and the interviewee; develop collection management procedures including preservation, loan policy and a publication plan; commence the first interviews of priority interviewees; establish the first training program for volunteers; develop an interview schedule for volunteers; develop a transcript schedule for extended interviews; and develop a volunteer’s programme infrastructure including screening potential volunteers and volunteer support systems.
As part of the draft 2004/05 budget process, the Local Studies staff will consider if the developmental rate of the collection will provide sufficient materials to consider small scale publications such as leaflets, postcards or calendars to be commissioned during 2004/05.
2004/05
The focus of the Local Studies Collection in the second year will be the digitisation of the collection. It was determined from the outset to place a focus on a digitised collection to provide broadest possible access to the local and wider community as well as for researchers interested in the heritage of the Town of Cambridge.
Digitised records minimise storage space requirements, allow integration of audio and visual records can be accessed by more than one user at a time and can be made accessible via the Internet thus enabling research access to the service 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
In addition to the continued development of the collection, the Local Studies Librarian will:
commence the transfer of records into digital format identify digital records and commence linking sites as appropriate; and develop a plan to review, identify and make recommendations corporate records which are significant historical records.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 117 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
The Oral History will focus on the frail aged at risk interviewees. Should the volunteer programme attract a good community response, it will be possible to commence interview programmes based on subject specialisation. This enables interviewers to build a specialised knowledge of a subject area, with target interviews to build up consistent records across years of the changes in that area. An example of this could be primary education with teachers and ex teachers over many years being interviewed applying a similar interview structure. Another example could be local government councillors. Due to the community profile of the Town of Cambridge, it is anticipated that some well educated retirees will be interested in becoming local history volunteers bringing a wealth of valuable knowledge to the programme.
The City of Joondalup offers a model for such a programme where Council costs are limited to providing the infrastructure for community volunteers to develop the programme. The budget focus in 2004/05 will be on providing sufficient equipment to record, edit and index interviews and possibly commence transcriptions.
It is anticipated sufficient print, audio and photographic records will have been recorded or collected to enable Council to consider commissioning the publication of a history of the Town of Cambridge in 2005/06.
2005/06
2005/06 will be a year of consolidation and growth. The staff and programs will have been in place for two years and the collection will have gained a presence and momentum of its own. The infrastructure will be established and the Local Studies Librarian will commence the development of outreach programs in the community such as joint programs with schools and guest speaker events with local community groups.
Should the Town decide to commission a history of Cambridge the local studies staff would be actively involved in assisting the project research.
POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:
The development of the Local Studies Collection is in line with Council previously adopted direction and policy.
Although the Local Studies Collection is designed to meet the needs of all age groups and community sectors, it is acknowledged there is a strong interest amongst senior members. Many people in this age group are concerned to see the memories of their generation recorded and often become authors, researchers, oral history interviewers, and/or interviewees. They are also often the source of valuable donations as they are keen to ensure materials they have collected over the years, which may not have a personal value to others, are preserved in a manner that can be of value to the community. It is also important to many older people to just enjoy listening to the stories of others from their own era.
The user needs assessment conducted by Kay Consulting and the Town of Cambridge Library Service, in 2001 identified the establishment of a Local History collection as one of the five top community priorities.
The Town of Cambridge Seniors Policy and Plan April 2000 report states:
(i) seniors are increasingly seeking leisure and recreation activities which provide a learning and /or cultural experience…” (p.27)
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 118 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
(ii) 2.3.6 “ to foster the active participation of seniors in community life while promoting productive and meaningful programs and a strong sense of “continue to expand library based services and programs which address the needs, issues and expectations of seniors, developing the key role local libraries have in developing life long learning opportunities for seniors’ (p.51) (iii) “Continue to develop a local register system for seniors who are interested in volunteering their time and skills to the community”
The proportion of older residents in the Cambridge community is increasing. In 2000 18% (4,510 people) of the population were aged over 60 years, compared against the Perth average of 14%. It is estimated that by 2011, 21% (5,406 people) will be over 60 in Cambridge. Older users are major users of libraries and this trend is likely to grow as the number of older residents with significant leisure time increases.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
1. Official history publication
Investigations were undertaken to identify other councils who have commissioned an official history of the area.
Information gathered indicates that the Town could expect to pay between $55,000 and $80,000 for the production of 1,000 copies. The unit cost of publishing will reduce the larger the print run, however, given the size of the population of the Town of Cambridge it is anticipated that it would be difficult to find a market for 1,000 copies.
Councils generally would wish to recoup the production costs through the sale of the books. Based on 1,000 copies, the unit cost would be between $55 and $80 (excluding any administrative and marketing costs). It is anticipated this would further decrease the potential customer base. It is therefore recommended that the recording and publication of local historical materials become a part of the Local Studies brief.
Each year as part of the draft budget process, staff will evaluate the best means of recording and disseminating historical information to ensure its preservation and maximum benefit to the community. This may be through a variety of programs and formats (including digital).
2. Local Studies collection
Below is a 3 year estimate summary of the financial implications related to the development of the Local Studies Collection. The costs are detailed in Appendix 3.
2003/04 $32,828
2004/05 $34,480
2005/06 $33,861
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 119 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
SUMMARY
The Town accommodated a Local Studies section in the design of the new Cambridge Library. The need to minimise potential information loss, satisfy community expectations and gain a return for Council investment necessitates the development of a Local Studies programme.
A three year strategic plan is recommended for the development of the Local Studies collection. In order to capture at risk historical information and achieve maximum results in the short term, it is recommended that the Town places priority on establishing an Oral History programme as an integral part of the local studies programme.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr MacRae , seconded by Cr Smith
That:-
(i) the development of a Local Studies Collection as a key strategy in preserving and promoting the heritage of the Town of Cambridge be endorsed;
(ii) the first phase including staffing, equipment and operating requirements to establish the Local Studies Collection at a cost of $33,000, be considered in the 2003/2004 Budget;
(iii) the establishment of an Oral History programme be endorsed as a priority to ensure the preservation of at risk community memory of the history of the Town of Cambridge area;
(iv) the Town hosts an official launch of the Local Studies Collection early in 2004;
(v) the local studies publication recommendations be considered as part of the annual budget process;
(vi) the interim use of the Local Studies Collection Development Guidelines be endorsed.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 120 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
CCS03.07
QUARRY AMPHITHEATRE – NOISE RESTRICTIONS (File Reference: CMS00028)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To inform Council on issues relating to noise restrictions at the Quarry Amphitheatre.
BACKGROUND:
A report was presented to Council at its December 2002 Council meeting, outlining the bookings at the Quarry Amphitheatre for the 2002/2003 summer season. This report was received and accepted, however, a further report was requested by Council addressing issues relating to the various noise restrictions evident at the Quarry Amphitheatre.
It should be mentioned that the problems of noise emanating from the Quarry Amphitheatre has previously been examined and addressed by Council at the 24 October 2000 meeting (see Attachment). One of the recommendations of this meeting was the purchase and installation of personal monitors and a multi speaker array at the Quarry Amphitheatre, which has proven successful with few complaints relating to noise being received.
The focus of this report is to outline the noise restrictions that apply to the Quarry Amphitheatre and the processes required when approving performances, activities and functions in light of these restrictions.
DETAILS:
The Quarry Amphitheatre is the Town’s major cultural facility and its vision, mission and objectives (as outlined in the 2001-2006 Business Plan and Marketing Plan) all express the important links with the local, national and international arts and entertainment industry. Starlight Theatre Lighting (STL) manages the Quarry Amphitheatre on behalf of the Town, including aspects relating to noise emissions.
As eluded to in the December 2002 Council report, one of the major hirers of the Quarry Amphitheatre, the Perth International Arts Festival (PIAF), have not hired the facility for the forthcoming 2002/2003 series of performance. The lack of appearance by the PIAF has left a significant gap in performances being provided at the Quarry Amphitheatre and will hamper the ability to meet the forecasted budgeted income for the 2002/2003 financial year. Due to this predicament, STL have been examining alternative hirers of the Quarry Amphitheatre, however, some of these hirers have requested the use of the facility outside the noise restrictions guidelines.
Legislation
The control of noise emanating from the Amphitheatre is governed by the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997. These regulations operate under the Environmental Protection Act 1986. They outline specific assigned noise levels that can be received at noise sensitive premises (eg residential premises) at various times throughout the day, with levels being lower at night when residents are more sensitive to noise. These levels have been carefully designed to ensure that noise, specifically noise emanating from entertainment venues, is kept to acceptable and reasonable levels. The specific levels that are applicable to noise-sensitive premises (residences) in the vicinity of the Quarry Amphitheatre are outlined below:
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 121 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Assigned Noise Level Table as outlined in the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997
TIME OF DAY ASSIGNED LEVELS (dB) LA 10 LA 1 LA Max
7.00am to 7.00pm 45 +(IF of 2) = 47 55 + (IF of 2) = 57 65 + (IF of 2) = 67 Monday to Saturday 9.00am to 7.00pm 40 +(IF of 2) = 42 50 +(IF of 2) = 52 65+ (IF of 2) = 67 Sunday and Public Holidays 7.00pm to 10.00pm 40 +(IF of 2) = 42 50 + (IF of 2) = 52 55 + (IF of 2) = 57 All days 10.00pm to 7.00am 35 +(IF of 2) = 37 45 + (IF of 2) = 47 55 + (IF of 2) = 57 Monday to Saturday 10.00pm to 9.00am 35 +(IF of 2) = 37 45 + (IF of 2) = 37 55 + (IF of 2) = 57 Sunday and Public Holidays
Note: IF = Influencing Factor.
As outlined above and in accordance with Regulation 8 of the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997, assigned noise levels are categorised into three areas:
1. LA 10 – assigned level means the noise level which is not to be exceeded for more than 10% of the time; 2. LA1 – assigned level means the noise level which is not to be exceeded for more than 1% of the time; and 3. LA Max – assigned level means the noise level which is not to be exceeded any time.
Influencing Factor. The Regulations take into account that not all localities are the same due to the impact of noise from commercial and industrial areas, or from traffic noise from major and secondary roads in the vicinity of noise sensitive premises (ie residential areas). In the case of the Quarry Amphitheatre, the Influence Factor is the impact of traffic noise from Oceanic Drive (a secondary road). Accordingly, an Influencing Factor of 2dB is added to the assigned level for homes within 450 metres of Oceanic Drive.
Adjustment of Intrusive Noise. In interpreting any noise measurements obtained from a complainants residence at any time, it needs to be borne in mind that the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 and specifically Regulation 9, requires the addition of penalty factors of between 5 and 15dB(A) to the measured sound levels, so as to allow for the annoying characteristics of the noise, such as tonality, impulsiveness or modulation as these factors form the intrusive or nuisance values of annoying sounds. In the case of amplified music, a penalty of between 10 and 15dB is added to the measured levels.
To check compliance, noise levels are taken outside the premises of affected residents. The readings are checked against the assigned noise levels outlined in the regulations, as shown above, to determine whether or not the noise levels comply.
The Hire Agreement and Conditions of Use for the Quarry Amphitheatre, along with the accompanying Information Package states, in several places, the impact of noise and the Hirer’s obligations under the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 122 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
While hirers of the Quarry Amphitheatre are aware of noise restrictions being placed on them through these different mediums, STL also have a sound meter on site at all times and regularly monitor noise levels during a function or performance.
Approvals outside these Restrictions
In accordance with Regulation 18 of the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997, a Local Government Chief Executive Officer has the authority to approve a non- complying event which would permit noise levels in excess of those ordinarily assigned by the Regulations. Non-complying events should only be considered where the event would lose its character or usefulness if it had to meet the assigned levels. An example is the Relay for Life Event held at Perry Lakes, a fundraising event for Cancer which requires noise levels in excess of those assigned by the Regulations.
However, the Regulations limit the number of non-complying events to 2 at a particular venue in any period of 12 consecutive months, unless the Local Government Chief Executive Officer is satisfied that the majority of occupiers or residents on whom the noise emissions will impact have no objection to the holding of the additional events. The Chief Executive Officer also needs to take into consideration the type of hirer/event, the expected level of noise and the extension of time requested, i.e. 2.00am,3.00am etc.
It is proposed that the Chief Executive Officer would be able to approve two non- complying events at the request of the Venue Manager. In addition, it is recommended that nearby residents, likely to be affected, be consulted with a proposal to permit up to ten non-complying events per annum. If the majority of residents do not object, the Chief Executive Officer would be authorised to permit additional non-complying events up to the approved number.
The promoters of these events would follow the process outlined in the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 to obtain the Town’s approval for those non- complying events.
Since the purchase of personal monitors and a multi speaker array at the Quarry Amphitheatre, the Town has not received many complaints from residents in relation to noise emanating from Amphitheatre. This coupled with a number of management processes in place supports the proposal that Council should consider approving additional non-complying events.
POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Nil
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
The Town of Cambridge’s vision is ‘to be a local government of significance in metropolitan Perth, providing a quality living environment’.
The Town’s mission emphasises the importance of richness in heritage, culture and environment’.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 123 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Forging closer links with the community and encouraging an active and positive part in the affairs of the Town are seen as critical elements in achieving vision and mission. The Quarry Amphitheatre is therefore seen as an important component in achieving the Town’s Vision and Mission in partnership with the community. The Quarry Amphitheatre is currently the primary cultural centre within the Town. Its close proximity to the Town’s Administration and Civic Centre will assist in establishing a Town identity and provides an avenue of promotion for the Council.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
Moved by Cr McAullay , seconded by Cr Smith
That:-
(i) the number of non-complying events held at the Quarry Amphitheatre be restricted to two per annum as permitted by Regulation 18 of the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997;
(ii) nearby residents likely to be affected by noise emanating from the Quarry Amphitheatre, be consulted in relation to permitting up to ten non-complying events per annum at the venue. If the majority of residents do not object, the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to approve non-complying events up to ten per annum.
Committee Meeting 17 February 2003
During discussion, Members considered that nearby residents of the Quarry Amphitheatre should be consulted and provided with as much information as possible regarding future non-complying events that may be held at the Quarry Amphitheatre. It was therefore agreed that the item be deferred to enable a draft circular to be prepared providing information on the nature and times of such events and the extent of the consultation to be undertaken.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr MacRae, seconded by Cr Smith
That the item relating to Quarry Amphitheatre Noise Restrictions be deferred to enable further information to be obtained.
Carried
Cr Smith left the meeting at 7.38 pm and returned at 7.40 pm.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 124 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
CCS03.08
SENIOR NEEDS ADVISORY COMMITTEE - MINUTES (File References: CMS 0124)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To present the minutes of the Senior Needs Advisory Committee meeting held on Thursday 6 February 2003.
BACKGROUND
The Senior Needs Advisory Committee was established as a strategy of the Town of Cambridge Senior’s Needs Study completed in April 2001.
The terms of reference for the Senior Needs Advisory Committee state that the Minutes of meetings are to be presented to Council so as to form part of the public record of Council business. The Advisory Committee is constituted as a Council Committee with an Elected Member as a Chairperson.
DETAILS:
The Minutes of the Seniors Needs Advisory Committee held on Thursday 6 February 2003 are attached. Items discussed at the meeting for Council consideration are detailed below:
1. Directory for Seniors
At the meeting Consultants suggested that rather than developing a separate booklet as the senior’s directory and have two directories within the Town, that the senior’s directory be introduced as an appendix to the existing Community Directory.
Administration Comment
It has been advised that the original project brief for developing a detailed senior’s directory will become more compact than originally thought. It is envisaged that the seniors directory will only comprise of approximately ten to fifteen pages which can be inserted into the seniors section of the current Town’s community directory.
The community directory will be compiled and ready for print no later than June 2003. It is suggested that the consultants meet with Administration to determine that the information to be included in the community directory about seniors should be finalized by May 2003 to allow the content to be included in the community directory.
The inclusion of the information in the community directory will enable not only seniors but also children and families to access information for parents within the Town.
2. Signage
At the meeting it was suggested that although the signs and street numbers had already been installed on Alexander Street there may still need to be additional signs for the Centre on Cambridge and Grantham Streets.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 125 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Administration Comment
That the Community Development Officer Senior Services discuss the installation of additional signage with Technical Services.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
Policy 2.1.43 – Senior Needs Advisory Committee – Terms of Reference
STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS
The Seniors Needs Advisory Committee relates strongly to the Town’s Strategies Plan, particularly to the following goals:
• To develop and implement a coordinated program of services through community consultation. • To encourage community self-reliance for the growth of the community. • To create a sense of community within the Town. • To achieve a quality lifestyle and amenity. • To provide high quality affordable facilities for all residents and ratepayers including the aged, disabled, youth and children. • To promote communication with the people of the Town of Cambridge and the wider community and encourage their participation in council activities. • To encourage an active healthy lifestyle through the provision of a diverse range of affordable community activities.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr MacRae , seconded by Cr Smith
That the Minutes of the Senior Needs Advisory Committee meetings held on 6 February 2003 be received.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 126 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
CCS03.09
ART AND CULTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES (File Reference: CMS 0067)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To present the minutes of the Art and Cultural Advisory Committee meeting held on Wednesday 11 December 2002 and to seek Council’s endorsement of recommendations made by the Advisory Committee.
BACKGROUND:
The Terms of Reference for the Art and Cultural Advisory Committee state that the minutes of meetings are to be presented to Council so as to form part of the public record of Council business. The Advisory Committee is constituted as a Council Committee with an Elected Member as Chairman.
DETAILS:
The minutes are attached. The items discussed by the Advisory Committee are presented below for consideration.
1. Consideration of Applications - Community/Public Art Fund
In October 2002, expressions of interest were sought from community groups and individuals for a mosaic public artwork to be situated within the entry statement at the Town’s Administration/Civic Centre. An amount of $16,000 was allocated in the 2002/2003 financial year for the purpose of the Community/Public Art Fund, with a total of $12,000 made available for this mosaic project.
The purpose of the fund is to provide the community with a valuable art experience either by way of participation in a project, or through the final result of the artwork being displayed within the Town. A total of ten applications were received, of which three applicants have been requested to submit further details and a marquette of their respective designs.
Dynamic Ceramics provided images of the reptiles and swans that would be included in the design. It was suggested that the designs not be considered for the project. Larry Youngson’s designs were well presented but the Advisory Committee decided that a water feature and seating within the entrance area was not an aspect they were looking for in a design.
Carolyn Harrison’s depicted a flowing design of flora and fauna. It was recommended that Ms Harrison be requested to submit a marquette and an A1 detailed full colour drawing without the Town’s logo in the design so that all three designs can be compared as identical images.
Sharon Collins submitted a design which was colourful and professional. The design theme dawn to dusk was well represented by good use of colour in the drawing. It was recommended that Ms Collins be requested to submit a marquette and the design to not feature the bollard that she presented in her original concept drawings. It was also agreed that Ms Collins be informed that an A1 detailed full colour drawing need not be presented as she submitted one at the concept stage.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 127 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
J Shed Ceramic Art Studio’s design was simple and lacked the complexity of the other designs that were submitted. Safehaven Studios concept design does not meet the criteria set out in the project brief. Their mosaic design and previous work is appealing but unfortunately is not suitable for this project.
Leanne Emmitt provided some interesting concept designs for the mosaic project. Her previous work at the Bell Tower in Barrack Street demonstrates her professional style of work. She portrays the environment with the soft interaction of humans. It was recommended that Ms Emmitt be requested to submit a marquette and an A1 detailed full colour drawing so that all three designs can be compared as identical images.
As Carol Nadjarian did not submit a concept drawing of her design, she did not meet the selection criteria in the project brief.
The Advisory Committee was impressed with the design from Gonwandering but decided that it wasn’t appropriate for this project. It was decided that Gonwandering be informed that their details will be kept on file for any future public art projects that are more suitable for their designs.
Scape-Ism has also submitted an impressive design, but once again was considered not appropriate for the front entrance area. Mr Rees be requested that his details remain on file for any future projects within the Town that may be more suitable for his design.
The Art and Cultural Advisory Committee will meet on Wednesday 12 February 2003 to preview three concepts presented by the artists who were successful in reaching the second round. The Advisory Committee will make a final decision on the successful applicant who will undertake the mosaic at the front entrance to the Administration Centre. The details and concept drawing will be forwarded to Elected Members prior to the Council meeting in February 2003.
2. Consideration of Applications – Community Arts Development Program
In October 2002, expressions of interest were sought from community groups and individuals for the Community Arts Development Program. The program was developed to assist in the implementation of cultural activities and projects that reflect and develop a sense of community identity.
It was a unanimous decision that the Wembley Theatre Company should be awarded financial assistance from the 2002/2003 Program. It was noted that the pantomime is organised for January 2003 and the Advisory Committee decided to award the $2,500 to the Theatre Company even though the program would have been completed prior to the February Council meeting. It was noted that funding should not be provided to Play’s Kool Childcare Centre on the basis that they were not located within the Town but also because the organisation is a private business.
Kulcha have received numerous amounts of funding from the Town in previous years and are not a local organisation. It was suggested that funding should not be made available to the organisation in future as they have access to vast amounts of external funding which other smaller community groups within the Town cannot access.
Molly Coy’s project was very successful in 2002, which was outlined on the evaluation forms from participants and also from resident feedback, the Committee suggested not to fund this project this year.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 128 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
An amount of $2,500 has been set aside in the 2002/2003 financial year for the purpose of the Community Arts Development Program. Five applications were received totalling $14,400 and the details are as follows:-
Amount Applicant Project Requested Wembley Theatre Company Production of a pantomime $2,500 Naoko Matsushita Music of Neighbourhood $2,400 Play’s Kool Childcare Centre Tree of Life $2,500 Kulcha World Music Festival $4,500 Molly Coy Book Repair and Restoration Course $2,500 TOTAL $14,400
POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:
Policy 2.1.8: Art and Cultural Advisory Committee – Terms of Reference.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Nil
STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS:
Supports the mission of the Town to facilitate and deliver services that foster a quality lifestyle and promote richness in heritage, culture and the environment.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr MacRae, seconded by Cr Smith
That:
(i) the Minutes of the Art and Cultural Advisory Committee held Wednesday 11 December 2002 be received;
(ii) (a) the following applicants for the Community/Public Art Program be advised that they were unsuccessful for the 2002/2003 community/public art mosaic project and be thanked for their submission:-
• Dynamic Ceramics • Santorini Art Studio • J Shed Ceramic Art Studio • Safehaven Studio • Carol Nadjarian • Gonwandering Pty Ltd, and • Scape-Ism
(b) the following applicants for the Community/Public Art Program be requested to submit an A1 detailed colour drawing to scale and a 30cm2 sample marquette of the proposed design to the Town for further assessment by the Art and Cultural Advisory Committee by Friday 17 January 2003:-
• Carolyn Harrison
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 129 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
• Sharon Collins • Leanne Emmitt
(iii) (a) the following applicants for the 2002/2003 Community Art Development Program be advised that they were unsuccessful and be thanked for their submission:
• Naoko Matsushita • Molly Coy • Kulcha • Play’s Kool Childcare Centre
(b) the Wembley Theatre Company be allocated an amount of $2,500 from the 2002/2003 Community Art Development Program to undertake a pantomime at the Wembley Community Centre in January 2003 and be advised that financial assistance is subject to the acknowledgment of the Town’s contribution within the community. An evaluation report is to be provided by the Wembley Theatre Company at the conclusion of the project;
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 130 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
CCS03.10
ART AND CULTURE POLICY (File Reference: CMS 0091, CMS 0093, CMS 0005, CMS 0067, CMS 0129)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To seek Council endorsement for the policy titled “Art and Culture”.
BACKGROUND:
The Town’s Art and Cultural Advisory Committee originated in 1997 which plays an important role in providing opportunities for residents of the Town to participate in and enjoy a wide range of artistic and cultural activities. The Committee aims to enhance the cultural dimension of the community, provide a cultural investment for the Council and promote the richness, cultural diversity and heritage of the Town.
The Administration has prepared a Policy outlining the various objectives of art and culture within the Town as well as providing the funding guidelines in relation to the art and cultural programs the Town offers. The Town is currently in the process of organising its inaugural Art Award to be held in June 2003 at The Boulevard Centre which will enhance the asset register of acquired artwork within the Town. The Art and Cultural Advisory Committee has delegated authority to purchase artwork throughout the year on behalf of the Town to contribute to its art collection. The Town has two art and cultural funding programs, the:
• Community Art Development Program, and • Community/Public Art Fund (proposed name change to “Public Art Program”)
DETAILS:
The Community Arts Development Program and the Community/Public Art Fund (Public Art Program) were developed to assist with the implementation of cultural activities and projects that reflect and develop a sense of community as well as provide the community with a valuable art experience either by way of participation in a project, or through the final result of the artwork being displayed within the Town. Each year, a budget allocation is made for the programs with one application being chosen to undertake a project for each of the financial assistance programs.
The Art and Cultural Advisory Committee undertakes an advisory role to Council in making recommendations on the above mentioned art and cultural funding programs. The Advisory Committee promotes opportunities and creates awareness of art and cultural programs within the community, whilst providing support to local performers and artists, advising on the development of a comprehensive range of Art and Cultural programs as well as purchasing artwork for the Town’s art collection.
Various art and culture policies from surrounding local governments have been gathered to allow a suitable policy to be produced at the Town. The Town’s position in relation to art and culture has now been formalised and as a consequence the attached policy has been developed. A brief overview of the Art and Culture Policy is as follows:-
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 131 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Art Collection
The Town of Cambridge will endeavour to encourage the purchase, bequest or donation of a visual art collection which reflects the cultural heritage, lifestyle and environment in the Town and Western Australia. The collection of artworks is to be of long-term cultural value to the community. The policy outlines the acquisition of works, managing the collection which includes curatorial, conservation and housing the art collection. The collection would need to be documented, valuated, insured, setting aside an annual budget to undertake these tasks.
Public Art
The purpose of public art within the Town is to develop and implement a public art strategy which focuses on creating a ‘sense of place’ and community identity, through promoting the local authority and enhancing the urban environment to celebrate the Town’s history, culture, sites, facilities and services.
Community Funding Programs
The Town has two art and cultural funding programs, the Community Art Development Program and the Community/Public Art Fund (proposed name change to “Public Art Program”). Each year expressions of interest are sought from community groups and individuals for the Community Arts Development Program and the Community/Public Art Fund (Public Art Program).
1. Community Art Development Program
The aims of the Community Art Development Program are to extend the range of cultural activities within the Town, support cultural activities relevant to community groups, provide opportunities for professional artists to interact with community groups and to promote access and participation by community groups in cultural activities
2. Community/Public Art program (Public Art Program)
The Art and Cultural Advisory Committee determine a suitable location within the Town for the public artwork each financial year whilst Administration develops the project brief specific to each project. The budget allocation is determined with a public artwork piece in mind as well as a specified location. The artist is requested to address each of the headings within the brief which consist of the theme of the project, materials to be used, project budget and timeline.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The acquisition of artwork is administered through the annual capital budget item “Recreation Services – Artwork Acquisition” of $5,000. The funding programs will be administered through the annual operational budget amount of $2,500 “Community Art Development Program” and the “Community/Public Art Program” (Public Art Program) which is envisaged to consist of approximately $14,000.
An additional budget item may be considered to undertake the management of the art collection which will include the conservation, hanging requirements, labelling and documentation of all additional works on the Town’s artwork register, which would be approximately $800 whilst the collection is in its infancy. Once the collection increases in size, this budget amount will have to be reassessed accordingly.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 132 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:
Applications will be administered through the “Art and Culture” Policy.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
The mission of the Town is to facilitate and deliver services that foster a quality lifestyle and promote a prosperous and dynamic community and friendliness, cleanliness, safety and good health.
The “Art and Culture” policy supports the Community Development goals and strategies of the Town’s Strategic Plan by:
• Providing opportunities and encouraging residents and groups to form and interact through the provision of council facilities • Providing support to community groups • Identifying community/social needs • Supporting community activities • Encouraging individuals and residential groups to initiate and participate in activities enhancing an understanding between residents
SUMMARY:
The Town does not have a policy on art and culture, hence a policy has been developed for submission to Council for consideration. Although the conditions in the policy are stringent, they are considered necessary for the success and quality of artwork and program undertaken within the Town.
Committee Meeting 17 February 2003
During discussion, it was suggested that the Art and Culture Policy should consider making provision for leasing as well as purchase of artwork.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr MacRae , seconded by Cr Smith
That:
(i) the attached Art and Culture Policy be adopted;
(ii) the Town’s funding program titled Community/Public Art Fund be re-named Public Art Program;
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 133 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
CCS03.11
WEMBLEY GOLF COMPLEX – LICENCE FOR AN OUTDOOR SEATING AREA (File Reference: )
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To request the approval of a licence for an outdoor seating area at Wembley Golf Complex.
BACKGROUND:
Wembley Golf Complex is one of Perth’s leading public golf courses. Many patrons after playing golf like to sit outside, take in the views and enjoy a refreshment. Currently, the strong winds and sun deter a lot of patrons from doing this.
The Lessee of the Fairway Tavern has submitted a proposal for an outdoor seating area, which will be sheltered from the sea breeze and shaded using large market umbrellas.
DETAILS:
Plans have been submitted by the Lessee’s Architects for a proposed outdoor seating area, utilising an area adjacent to the side entry of the Tavern which is currently a non- irrigated garden bed. The works proposed are detailed on the attached plans. The plan stipulates that the area will be brick paved and umbrellas will provide shelter from the summer sun. All costs involved will be met by the Lessee.
This area is outside of the current leased area tendered on by Nedgo Pty Ltd and a licence will be required to allow Nedgo Pty Ltd to utilise this area. As the area is outside of the existing licenced area for the consumption of alcohol, Nedgo Pty Ltd will be required to gain an extension to their licence through the Liquor Licencing Court.
COMMENT:
The area chosen provides natural shelter from the predominant coastal wind and has views over the practice green and 18th green on the Tuart Course.
Whilst an area of garden bed would have to be removed, the provision of an outdoor area would provide an excellent facility for patrons. Wherever possible, existing plants will be relocated to other garden beds.
The introduction of an outside seating area will reduce the congestion currently encountered near the side door to the Tavern, where patrons currently congregate to try to get some shelter from the wind and sun.
POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Under the current lease arrangement, Nedgo Pty Ltd will pay the Town 8% of any income over $1,000,000. The expected extra revenue from this initiative will assist in increasing the dividend payable to the Town.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 134 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
Within the Town’s Strategic Plan, the maintenance and development of existing and new facilities is listed as one of the strategies for economic development. The provision of such an area will follow this strategy by providing patrons with an outdoor seating area to enjoy refreshments and food from the Fairway Tavern and Kiosk.
SUMMARY:
The addition of an outdoor-seated area will be a welcome feature for the patrons of the Wembley Golf Complex.
It will provide a sheltered area where patrons can enjoy the view without the effect of the strong wind often encountered.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr MacRae , seconded by Cr Smith
That a licence be granted to Nedgo Pty Ltd for the provision of a paved outdoor seated area subject to an addition to the existing liquor licence being obtained by Nedgo Pty Ltd and all costs are met by Nedgo Pty Ltd, including preparation of the licence agreement and development of the outdoor seating area.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 135 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
CCS03.12
ROAD CLOSURE – PORTION OF ROAD ON CORNER OF BRANKSOME GARDENS AND DARTMOUTH AVENUE (File Reference: PRO0575)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To consider submissions received on the permanent closure of portion of a public road on the corner of lot 13 (No 54) Branksome Gardens and Dartmouth Avenue City Beach.
BACKGROUND:
On 6 November 2002, the Town received a letter from the owners of lot 13 (No 54) on the corner of Branksome Gardens and Dartmouth Avenue requesting to purchase approximately 256 m2 of the road reserve adjacent to their property. The owners initiated the request with the intention of demolishing their existing premises and constructing a new two storey home.
Council, at its meeting held on 17 December 2002, considered a report on the road closure and decided as follows;
“That subject to:-
(i) no submissions being received objecting to the proposal after the statutory 35 day advertising period has elapsed and;
(ii) the owners of Lot 13 (No 54) Branksome Gardens reimbursing the Town’s advertising costs;
The Minister for Lands be requested to permanently close that portion of Branksome Gardens and Dartmouth Avenue, City Beach as detailed on the attached plan in accordance with Section 58 of the Land Administration Act 1997.”
DETAILS:
As outlined in the report presented to Council at its meeting held on 17 December 2002, it is a statutory requirement that a statewide public notice of Council’s intention to consider the road closure is advertised and that any submissions received be considered by Council, prior to any final decision being made on the road closure. A plan of the proposed road closure is attached.
As required, advertisements were placed in the Western Australian newspaper on Saturday 21 December 2002 and in the community paper on 28 December 2002, giving notice of the proposed road closure and inviting submissions from the public. Notices were placed on the public notice boards at the Administration/Civic Centre, Cambridge Library and Bold Park Aquatic Centre. The neighbours immediately opposite the premises were advised in writing of the proposed road closure and the 35 day period to submit comments.
The Town has received four objections within the statutory period. The comments made in each of the submissions received are similar in detail. A summary of the comments are as follows:-
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 136 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Submission 1
• The writer advised that they have a view of the ocean from their driveway in which they often enjoy the sunset. Closure of the proposed part of the road reserve will reduce that existing pleasant, open aspect and generally make the local streetscape more enclosed, especially if the neighbour adjacent also acquired portion of the road reserve. • Concerned that other members of the community may have their views interrupted as well. • The road closure may impact on the development potential of neighbouring properties thus reducing the value of these properties. • The Town’s design guideline 5.3.6 requires a 3.75 metre setback from secondary roads. If this portion of Dartmouth Avenue is closed and it ceases to be a road for the purposes of the design guidelines, the 3.75 metre setback may no longer be required resulting in a larger building footprint with consequently increases in the effects of items mentioned above. • It would be sad to see the possible removal of trees for the development of a larger house.
Submission 2
• Ocean view will be compromised. • Concerned that the property value will decrease.
Submission 3
• Concerned that the loss of views will decrease the value of their property. • The writer states that the land belongs to all and is an important part of the ambience of the area.
Submission 4
• Concerned at the loss of views to neighbouring properties. • Has the opinion that the acquisition of Crown land by individuals should be off limits. • Land and property values in City Beach have spiralled over the past few years. This is one of the reasons why the area has proven attractive. This makes the crimping of public open space, and the consequences of impinging upon views etc, even more sensitive. • The writer is concerned that should the application or any one like it succeed, that it would set a dangerous precedent for the area and for the Town of Cambridge itself and that the same could occur elsewhere in the area. The application is not the cordoning off of a back lane or a hidden right of way nor is it altering the dimensions by a metre here or there. This is ocean front prime real estate and has major economic impacts on ratepayers and landowners. • The writer has states that if the application were successful it would not only attract adverse publicity for the Town of Cambridge but it also could potentially expose the Town to unwanted, on its part, protracted action, including possible legal action from ratepayers wishing to protect their interests.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 137 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
All persons who have lodged submissions have requested that Council decides not to approve the closure of that portion of the road reserve.
Services
The Administration has written to all the necessary authorities (Western Power, Telstra, Water Corporation, Alinta Gas, etc) seeking their advice or objections to the proposed road closure. All authorities have responded and stated that they have no objections to the closure of that portion of the road reserve.
The major concern raised by persons in their submissions is that of the negative impact the road closure may have on the value of their properties and that, if approved, Council may establish a precedent in the area for other property owners to also expect that they can acquire portion of an adjacent road reserve.
It is therefore recommended that Council not approve the applicants’ request to close portion the road reserve on the corner of Branksome Gardens and Dartmouth Avenue in City Beach.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Nil.
POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
Council has a goal to promote consultation and awareness of local sensitivities in regional planning, regional infrastructure and land use.
SUMMARY:
At its meeting held on 17 December 2002, Council decided to proceed with statutory requirements and give statewide notification of its intent to close portion of the road reserve on the corner of Branksome Gardens and Dartmouth Avenue in City Beach. The notification advised that before considering the request for closure, Council invites submissions on the proposal within 35 days from the date of public notice.
Statewide notification was given in the West Australian on 21 December 2002 and in the local papers on the 28 December 2002. At the end of the advertising period four submissions were received. The contents of those submissions are outlined in the body of the report. The main objections were the negative impact that the proposed road closure may have on the value of surrounding properties, the loss of ocean views and the concern that Council may establish a precedent for other residents in the area to apply to acquire portion of the road reserve to accommodate additional development on their properties.
Due to the impact that the closure may have, on surrounding neighbours, it is recommended that Council does not support the applicants request to close portion of the road reserve on the corner of Branksome Gardens and Dartmouth Avenue in City Beach.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 138 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Committee Meeting 17 February 2003
Mr David Beattie, Mr Derek Laferla and Mr Tim Wright addressed Committee in relation to this item.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr MacRae, seconded by Cr Smith
That the applicants’ request to close portion of road reserve adjacent to Lot 13 (No 54) Branksome Gardens, corner of Dartmouth Avenue, not be approved.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 139 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
CCS03.13
NORTH WEMBLEY/WEST LEEDERVILLE UNDERGROUND POWER PROJECT CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY (File Reference: FIN0045)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To receive the results of the Customer Satisfaction Survey distributed to property owners that participated in the North Wembley/West Leederville Underground Power Project.
BACKGROUND:
The North Wembley/West Leederville Underground Power Project was undertaken in Round 2 of the State Government Underground Power Program. The project area included North Wembley, between Scadden Street, Herdsman Parade, Dodd Street and Lake Monger. The West Leederville section includes properties within the boundaries of Gregory Street, Lake Monger Drive, Southport Street and properties north of Cambridge Street. A section of Cambridge Street has recently been included within the project area from Loftus Street to Northwood Street with works commenced in January 2003.
The total number of properties included in the project area (excluding the Cambridge Street extension) was 1593. Work on the project commenced in September 2001 and was completed in November 2002.
DETAILS:
At the conclusion of the project, a Customer Satisfaction Survey was circulated to all property owners with responses required by 2 December 2002. A copy of the survey form is attached. The survey was personally addressed to property owners with approximately 30% (490) of the 1,593 property owners not occupying the properties.
A total of 551 responses were received to the survey, representing a response rate of 35%. Most of the responses received, 497 (90%), were from property owners occupying the premises.
Results
The survey responses have now been analysed and a copy of the results is attached. The survey contained 11 questions asking property owners for their views on a range of issues relating to the project.
Question 11 requested owners to provide their view on the overall success of the project considering all elements including cost, impact on verges and gardens, changes to the street lighting and the streetscape. The response to this question provides Council with a summary view of the owners. The results of this question are provided below:-
Well below expectations 20 3.8% Below expectations 36 6.8% Met expectations 195 36.7% Above expectations 194 36.5% Well above expectations 86 16.2% 531 100% Nil Response 20 551
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 140 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
These results indicated that of the property owners that responded to the questions, 89% indicated that the project met their expectations or above and only 11% responded that the project was below their expectations. A further 53% indicated the project was above or well above expectations.
A detailed analysis of the results is attached, however, a summary of each question is detailed below.
Met/Above Below Question Expectation Expectation 1. Do you occupy the property? Yes: 497 No: 54
2 Were you satisfied with the range of options provided for payment? 93% 7%
3(a) Were you happy with the amount of information provided? 91% 9% (b) Did you find this information useful? 91% 9%
4(a) Were you happy with the finished state of the verges in your street? 75% 25%
(b) Were you happy with the standard of work inside your property? 80% 20% (c) Were all the project workers you had contact with courteous to you? 96% 4%
5 Did you find the level of disruption acceptable? 93% 7%
6(a) Did the contractor respond in a timely manner to your requests (in 73% 27% relation to reinstatements)? (b) Were the repairs or reinstatement carried out satisfactorily? 66% 34%
7(a) Duration of the project? 81% 19% (b) Cost to ratepayers? 73% 27% (c) Damage to property? 71% 29%
8(a) How do you assess the impact the project has had on the 94% 6% streetscape? (b) How do you assess the new street lighting system 91% 9%
9(a) Were you happy with the response from the Town of Cambridge 78% 22% (communication)? (b) Were you happy with the response from Western Power 72% 28% (communication)?
10 Do you still feel there has been an improvement in your streetscape 72% 28% (properties affected by transmission lines)?
11 How do you rate the overall success of the project? 89% 11%
As a result of the above responses, it appears that the most dissatisfaction was in relation to:-
• reinstatements (6(b) 34%); • damage to property (7(c) 29%); • transmission lines (10 28%); • cost to ratepayers (7(b) 27%); • contractor response to reinstatement requests (6(a) 27%); and • finished state of the verges (4(a) 25%);
The dissatisfaction rating for half (9) of the 18 individual questions was less than 20% with seven less than 10% dissatisfaction.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 141 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Installation of the underground power is a very disruptive process and dissatisfaction concerning reinstatements and the condition of the verges can be expected. The technique of using horizontal boring as the means for installing the underground cable has significantly reduced the invasive nature of the project, as opposed to open trenching which would have generated substantially greater levels of dissatisfaction.
The response in relation to transmission lines (Question 10) is expected as it is acknowledged that all parties would prefer that transmission lines would also be removed as part of the project. Whilst 78% stated that the improvement to the streetscape, including transmission lines, met their expectations or above, 33% actually responded that the improvements were above their expectations. This is considered a good result considering the limitations of the project.
The cost factor is also considered to be an expected area of concern as, with any project of this nature, the costs are distributed amongst the property owners. 73% responded that the costs met their expectations and this validates the Town’s financial model which was designed to distribute the costs as fairly as possible across all property owners.
In summary, the results of the satisfaction survey are pleasing and support the Town’s strategy for actively pursuing underground power throughout the Town. Almost 90% of respondents indicated the overall success of the project met or were above their expectations.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Nil
POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
The North Wembley/West Leederville Underground Power Project is consistent with the Town’s Strategic Plan which includes a strategy to “promote the review and redesign of utilities (underground power)”. This strategy is provided in the Goal:
“To provide a safe, secure and clean, physical and natural environment for the Town, through environmentally orientated planning policies, development and operational practices.”
The Underground Power Program features in the Town’s Plan of Principal Activities adopted by the Town on an annual basis. Underground power is a prominent Principal Activity of the Town and demonstrates the Town’s commitment to this program for the entire Town.
SUMMARY:
The results of the Customer Satisfaction Survey has confirmed that the project has been an outstanding success due to the noticeable improvement in the appearance of the street scape, the financial performance of the project and now the confirmed property owner acceptance.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 142 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
The survey results should provide additional support for the Town proceeding with its overall strategy for undergrounding power lines throughout the Town.
Details concerning the results of the customer satisfaction survey have been forwarded to the Office of Energy and Western Power who were the other parties to the project.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr MacRae , seconded by Cr Smith
That the report on the results of the Customer Satisfaction Survey for the North Wembley/West Leederville Underground Power Project be received and the results noting the overall success of the project endorsed by the participating property owners be noted.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 143 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
CCS03.14
FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES LEVY - FUNDING ARRANGEMENTS (File Reference: ORG0010 )
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To advise of the funding arrangements for the Fire and Emergency Services Levy that will be collected in conjunction with Local Government Rates.
BACKGROUND:
A review into the funding arrangements for the Fire and Emergency Services Authority (FESA) has been in progress for several years. A similar proposal was to have been implemented in the 1999/2000 financial year. This funding model was submitted to the 21 December 1998 Council meeting (CCS98.157). This proposal failed to gain support in Parliament in 1999. Since then, the model has undergone review and some amendments have been made. This amended and revised funding model was then reintroduced into Parliament.
In December 2002, legislation was passed by Parliament for the introduction of the Emergency Services Levy proposed by FESA. The introduction of the levy will replace the current funding arrangements in place, which involve Local Governments, State Government and the Insurance industry. This charge will be a non-fire-risk based levy and will commence on 1 July 2003 as a special transitional arrangement until 30 June 2004, enabling the existing system to be gradually phased out.
DETAILS:
Current System
Under the present system, the insurance companies have been obligated to meet 75% of the annual cost of the Career Fire and Rescue Service which services the Perth Metropolitan area and the city centres of Albany, Bunbury, Geraldton, Kalgoorlie-Boulder, Mandurah and the Town of Northam. Insurance companies fund the cost by placing a levy on the insurance policies of those properties insured and serviced in the mentioned areas. This levy, placed on insurance premiums, is known as a Fire Service Levy or FSL.
The remaining balance of 25% of the Career Fire and Rescue Service budget is funded by both Local Governments collectively, and the State Government each contributing 12.5%. For the 2002/2003 financial year this equated to a cost of $194,427 for the Town of Cambridge. The contribution payable for each local government is determined as a percentage by dividing the Gross Rental Valuation for that Council over the total Gross Rental Valuations for all affected Councils within the serviced area, which is then applied against the total contribution amount needed. This cost of the levy to the Town is funded through both general purpose revenue and the Town's rate revenue.
For insurance policies holders, the present insurance contribution for the Fire Service Levy is funded and levied on both residential building and contents insurance at a rate of 19% (for 2001/2002). This increases the cost of the insurance cover and is further compounded by both the Goods and Service Tax (10%) and Stamp Duty (8% after all other taxes and levies) raising the Fire Service Levy effectively from 19% to 23% of the basic premium, having regard to the compounding effects of the GST and Stamp Duty.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 144 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
The situation is similar for both commercial and industrial property insurance Fire Service Levy arrangements with Contract/Engineering combined insurance at 26% (2001/2002) and Fire and Consequential Loss insurance at 28% (2001/2002). Again, with the effects of GST and Stamp Duty, the true Fire Service Levy of the base premiums are 31% and 33% respectively. This illustrates the significant cost of the levy to insurance policy holders, however, it is expected that the new Emergency Services Levy that will be levied will be less as it will be exempt from both Goods and Service Tax and Stamp Duty.
Problems with the Current Funding Arrangements
Due to the current system being substantially funded through the Insurance industry, the funding is vastly inequitable. It is currently estimated that one in three houses in Perth is either uninsured or underinsured. Based on this, under the existing insurance-based Fire Service Levy arrangement, those people insuring are subsidising those who do not insure but nevertheless are still provided with emergency services. In addition, 30% of all fire service call outs within the Perth Metropolitan Area and Regional Centres (areas covered by the Career Fire & Rescue Service) are for fires on vacant land, which are generally not insured.
It is estimated that based on a home and contents insurance survey conducted (ICA Survey 1999) that:
• 9% of all owner-occupied homes have no building insurance cover • 21% of all owner-occupied homes have no contents insurance cover • 75% of all tenanted properties have no contents insurance cover • 31% of all properties have no building or contents insurance cover
This confirms that under the existing funding methodology, a large number of people make little or no contribution to the cost of fire service protection. Additionally, some owners who choose to insure do so through companies which are located outside Australia which means they do not contribute to the 75% of funding levied by the insurance industry.
Due to the current levy attracting both the Goods and Services Tax and Stamp duty, property owners are paying approximately an additional 4% on residential properties and 5% for commercial and industrial properties which does not contribute to the funding of FESA.
Local Governments through the required 12.5% contribution are vastly funding a State Government service.
The current system is both largely inequitable and has a complex collection of funds with a combination of insurance levies, Local Government funds, State Government contributions and volunteer fundraising.
The new funding arrangements – Emergency Services Levy
1. Purpose
The Emergency Service Levy will replace the existing insurance industry levy and the Local Government Contributions commencing from 1 July 2003, however, during the first year of operation there will be a special transitional arrangement.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 145 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
The Emergency Services levy will fund Western Australia’s emergency services to respond to building and bush fire, road crash rescues, hazardous and toxic material spills, storms, cyclones, floods, earthquakes and tounamis, searches for missing persons and cliff and cave rescues.
The levy will also be used to fund the training of emergency service volunteers, community safety programs, emergency management planning and FESA’s management services. This includes funding of agreed operating costs and capital equipment purchases of each of the FESA emergency service units.
2. Funding Model
The Emergency Service levy will be a charge based on the level of service provided to an area. The levy will be calculated on the Gross Rental Value of a property for most urban properties, with a fixed charge for each property in rural and remote areas of the State. This levy will be charged by each Local Government, on behalf of FESA, on the Council rate notices and will be shown as a separate charge displayed as ‘Emergency Services Levy’.
The Emergency Services Levy will be levied against all property owners including vacant land and those properties currently exempt from Council Rates. This includes those properties claiming exemption under section 6.26 of the Local Government Act 1995 (for example churches and charitable organisations).
For the Town of Cambridge, the levy will be calculated for all properties using a rate in the dollar multiplied against the Gross Rental value of the property. This will include those properties located within the Endowment Lands Area, which are currently rated using the Unimproved Valuation for Council Rates. Therefore rate notices for properties in the Endowment Lands Area, will show both the Gross Rental Value and Unimproved Value. The remainder of the Town’s properties’ rate notices will only have the single Gross Rental Value shown.
The rate in the dollar has not been determined at present and the Minister has until 10 May each year to declare both the rate in the dollar and the minimum and maximum charges. It has been indicated, however, that the minimum payment for the Emergency Services Levy in 2003/2004 will be $30. The maximum payment for residential properties will be $175 and will apply at a GRV of $14,000 and $100,000 applies at a GRV of $8,000,000 for commercial properties. From this information, it is expected the rate in the dollar, yet to be officially announced, will be 1.25 cents. It has also been indicated that the rate in the dollar for both residential and commercially classified properties will not differ.
For residential properties in the Town, it has been estimated the average levy per property will be approximately $125, based on an average GRV of $10,000, using the proposed rate in the dollar of 1.25 cents. For the 2003/2004 financial year, which is a transitional period, the average charge will be approximately $75 which is 60% of the normal charge. This will be dependent on the financial and valuation data used by FESA.
Both pensioners and seniors who are eligible to claim a concession on Council Rates will be entitled to a concession on the Emergency Services Levy under the same rules applicable to Council rates. Therefore, seniors already claiming the maximum rebate ($193.55 for 2002/2003) will still be able to claim a 25% concession on the Emergency Services Levy.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 146 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
3. Council and Government Properties
State Government property will be assessed direct by FESA in relation to the amount payable. Generally, Commonwealth property will not be subject to the Emergency Services Levy as the Commonwealth makes a direct contribution to FESA.
The Town will no longer be required to pay its share of the 12.5% local government contribution. It is expected that a saving will be made under this new arrangement. As the amount to be contributed by the Town has not been determined at present, the amount of the savings has not been determined.
The Town and all other local governments will be charged the levy direct by FESA based only on the improved properties they own. This will not include areas such as monuments, sporting or recreational areas unless they are fully integrated with a significant sporting complex e.g. a tennis court with a large associated clubhouse.
4. Administration Fees
The Emergency Services Levy will be collected by local governments on behalf of FESA by including it on Council rate notices. For the levy, Council will be operating as a collection agency for the State Government. In recognition of this service, Local Governments will be paid an annual fee by FESA for billing and collecting the Emergency Services Levy.
The Town of Cambridge will receive approximately $3,000 as the commencement fee, which will be paid to the Town in June 2003. The Town will then receive approximately $26,000 in October 2003. The value received for 2003/2004 may, however, change for future years as the fee will be determined by the Minister from time to time. While these are only indicative figures the final fee calculations will be confirmed with Local Governments when July 2003 valuations are available and the Emergency Services Levy rates have been confirmed.
The administration fee will recognise and compensate the Town for the following Emergency Service Levy functions:
• Maintaining a complete list of those properties and their Gross Rental Valuations (where applicable) that are liable for an Emergency Service Levy assessment, • Calculation of annual Emergency Service Levy assessments and any required adjusted assessments, • Invoicing of annual and adjusted Emergency Service Levies, • Administrating Emergency Service Levy concession schemes that apply to both Pensioners and Seniors, • Dealing with general Emergency Service Levy queries • Collection of the Emergency Service Levy • Pursuing delinquent levy accounts, including the issue of a letter signalling intent to initiate legal proceedings where necessary, • Acquitting the Emergency Service Levy • Accounting for and auditing of the levy • Banking the levy including any associated bank or account charges
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 147 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
• Remitting the Emergency Service Levy to the FESA, • Producing and transmitting required Emergency Service Levy related reports, • Transmitting Emergency Service Levy Audit reports to the FESA, • Producing and transmitting other periodic Emergency Service Levy related information that may be required to the FESA
FESA will fund the costs associated with the amendments required to the Towns rating software in order to manage the billing, collection and remittance to FESA.
The introduction of the new levy will create additional work for the Town’s Administration. The Town’s officers will be expected to deal with all general inquiries regarding the Emergency Service Levy assessments. It is anticipated that a significant number of queries will be received in the first two years compounded due to the special transitional arrangements in place. In addition the requirement to manage the collection and remittance to FESA by the 10th of each month will create an administrative burden. Additional resources may be required to manage the new system and an assessment is currently being made into these requirements.
5. Transitional Arrangements (2003/2004)
During the first year of operation, (2003/2004) the levy will have a special transitional arrangement in place enabling the existing insurance based system to be gradually rescinded.
The insurance industry will continue to charge the Fire Services Levy on insurance premiums covering the period up to 31 December 2003. Subsequently, any insurance premiums calculated from 1 January 2004 onwards will not attract the Fire Services Levy. During this six month overlap from July to December 2003, the insurance industry’s contributions, under the existing system, will raise approximately $30 million. For this reason, funding required from the Emergency Services Levy in its first year of operation, will be reduced by the $30 million collected from the insurance industry. This will result in the Town’s property owners paying approximately 60% of the normal levy for the 2003/2004 financial year. For the 2004/2005 financial year, as no contribution will be received from the insurance industry, the full Emergency Services levy will be payable.
POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
No provision is provided in the Strategic Plan for Council to act as a collection agent for the funding of State Government services.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The administration of the new levy will have minimal impact on the Town’s overall financial position. However, benefits will be received in the reduction of Council’s direct contribution to FESA. It is anticipated that Council will incur additional costs in administrating the levy. Although the financial impact has not been quantified, it is expected the costs will be offset by the annual administrative fee paid to the Town by FESA. Consideration should be given to providing additional resources to assist in the process.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 148 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
SUMMARY:
The introduction of the new funding arrangement on Council rates is a significant change to the current funding arrangements in place for the FESA. The new funding methodology is intended to be far more equitable across the whole community at a favourable low cost option by utilising local government rate notices. While the Town will only be operating as a collection agency for the levy on behalf of the State Government it is anticipated that many property owners within the community will see the charge as an additional local government charge and subsequently a large rate increase.
To assist in informing residents of these new funding arrangements for the Emergency Services Levy and the additional charges to be placed on the Council rate notice, information be provided in the Council Newsletter.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
Moved by Cr Smith , seconded by Cr McAullay
That:-
(i) the report on the Emergency Services Levy funding arrangements be received;
(ii) information concerning the introduction of the Emergency Services Levy effective from 1 July 2003, be included in the Council Newsletter circulated to residents.
Committee Meeting 17 February 2003
During discussion, Members noted that Local Government does not have any option in the introduction of the funding arrangements.
Amendment
Moved by Cr Smith, seconded by Cr Pinerua
That a further clause (iii) be added to the motion as follows:-
(iii) it be noted that the Local Government does not have any option concerning the introduction of the Emergency Services Levy.
Carried
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr MacRae, seconded by Cr Smith
That:-
(i) the report on the Emergency Services Levy funding arrangements be received;
(ii) information concerning the introduction of the Emergency Services Levy effective from 1 July 2003, be included in the Council Newsletter circulated to residents;
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 149 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
(iii) it be noted that the Local Government does not have a say concerning the introduction of the Emergency Services Levy.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 150 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
CCS03.15
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE GRANTS – REVIEW OF GRANTS COMMISSION METHODOLOGY (DRAFT REPORT) (File Reference: FIN0010)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To consider the draft report of the WA Local Government Grants Commission concerning the review of the methodology for distributing the Financial Assistance Grants to local governments.
BACKGROUND:
The West Australian Local Government Grants Commission approved, in July 2002, a review of its methodology. An issues paper was released for comment at that time. The Town considered this matter at its September 2002 Council meeting (CCS02.112) copy attached, and made a submission concerning the 15 key issues that were identified by the Grants Commission. Twenty three Councils responded with submissions to the review.
As part of the review process, the Grants Commission is providing local governments with a copy of its draft report and a further opportunity to provide input to the review. A copy of the Draft Report, dated December 2002, is attached. Submissions in relation to the Draft Report are required by 15 March 2003.
DETAILS:
The Grants Commission advise that most of the issues discussed in the Draft Report were identified in the Issues Paper previously considered by Council, although there are a number of new issues in the report which have emerged during the course of the review.
The main aim of the review is to improve the allocation methodology, which forms the basis of determining grant recommendations to the Minister, for distribution of the equalisation component of the general purpose grants. The aims of the review include:-
• increased methodology consistency with the National Principles; • more equitable grant allocations to local governments; • increased transparency and simplicity; • greater understanding of grant allocation methodology among local governments.
The methodology used to allocate the local road component of the general purpose grant is not the focus of this review.
Under the National Principles, the State Government is required to distribute at least 30% of the total General Purpose amount based on each local governments per capita share. This is the minimum grant any local government can receive and the Town of Cambridge is a minimum grant Council. In 2002/2003 the Town is expected to receive a grant of $369,000 or approximately $15 per capita.
The balance of the funds (70%) are distributed on a horizontal equalisation basis. The Town does not currently receive any grant funds under this component of the grant allocation. The review presently being undertaken by the Grants Commission focuses on
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 151 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
the equalisation principles for this component of the grant. Therefore, the review has limited implications for the Town. Issues under consideration in the Draft Report include:-
• Changes to the way special purpose grants are included in the calculations, including the number of expenditure categories where they are included, and the inclusion of the minimum (per capita) grant element; • The treatment of other local government revenue, including fees and charges, ex gratia contributions and revenues from business undertakings such as airports; • The assessment of revenues and expenditures associated with sanitation and refuse operations; • The way disability factors are applied; • The inclusion of the budget result in the allocation model, to bring all disadvantaged local governments up to the average financial position of local government in the State.
The proposals outlined in the Draft Report are detailed below:-
“1. The WALGGC will retain but improve the Balanced Budget approach.
Option 2.1 Retain the current practice of not assessing sanitation and refuse. While this would not address the CGC point that all revenues and expenditures should be assessed, the Commission would have some valid reasons for doing so; or
Option 2.2 Return to the former practice of separately assessing sanitation and refuse revenues and expenditures. This would address the CGC concerns; or
Option 2.3 Include sanitation expenditure in with the other community services for a single expenditure standard, and group all fees and charges from sanitation as well as building control, recreation etc, into a single fees and charges assessment.
3.1 To maintain the current rate revenue assessments and give further consideration to the need for the use of categories in the mining rates assessment, and to the scope for the use of a single rate revenue assessment based on a single basis of valuation.
3.2 To cease netting out revenues from expenditure in the categories governance; law and order and public safety; education health and welfare; and community amenities, and to calculate a single non-rate revenue assessment for the above categories, together with the revenue from recreation and culture and building control.
3.3 To include in the revenue assessment all ex gratia rates received, as well as other significant revenues received (e.g. from mining companies).
3.4 To further consider the scope for assessing the revenues and expenditures associated with airport operations.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 152 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
4.1 To include all SPGs received by local government in all assessed expenditure categories, through the application of a state average discount (similar to the Commission’s current treatment of SPGs for education, health and welfare).
4.2 To include the state average discounts as the last step in assessing expenditure requirement in each category.
4.3 To treat the minimum grant/per capita grant by inclusion.
4.4 To include the identified local road funds in the transport assessment on an individual council basis (consistent with the current approach).
4.5 To include 63% of the Roads to Recovery Grants, on an individual council basis, in the transport assessment.
5,1 To further consider applying a sanitation expenditure standard (see Options 2.1 – 2.3).
5.2 To further consider calculating expenditure standards based on total expenditure (i.e. no longer nett out revenues from expenditure prior to calculating the standard). (Depending on whether the Commission applies disability factors less than 1.00, see proposal 7.1).
5.3 To further consider combining building control expenditure with other economic services expenditure.
6.1 Continue to include depreciation expense in the expenditure standards.
6.2 To exclude capital grants from the special purpose grants discount factor.
7.1 To retain the terminology ‘disability factor’.
7.2 To regularly review disability factors and the basis for their justification in the Balanced Budget.
8.1 To give further consideration to the inclusion of the budget result term in its Balance Budget model.
9.1 To retain the existing factoring back method.
10.1 To continue to provide Councils advice of notional grant allocations as early as possible, consistent with the use of the latest available financial year data in the grant allocation models.
10.2 To refine, improve and simplify as far as possible the process for data collection from local government.
11.1 To continue to use Commission discretion in determining the maximum grant reduction to the applied in any year.
11.2 To continue to base the final grants on the basis of a rolling average of equalisation requirement, to minimise disruptive reductions in council allocations.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 153 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
12.1 To continue the approach of making available to local government detailed information on the grant determination process and providing detailed responses to council submissions.
12.2 To develop a key drivers analysis to assist local government understanding of the key drivers of their grant outcomes.
13.1 To further consider the Commission policy on grants to amalgamating councils.
14.1 To continue to base the final grants on the basis of a rolling average of equalisation requirement, to minimise disruptive reductions in Council allocations (as per Proposal 11.2).
15.1 To continue with the use of the asset preservation model for the allocation of the road grant component, whilst undertaking continual refinement and reviewing elements as required.’
POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
At this time, it is not expected that any change in the WA Local Government Grants Commission will have an impact on the amount of General Purpose Grants received by the Town as the Town only receives the minimum grant allocation.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
There are no specific strategies in the Strategic Plan concerning this matter, however, under the Main Target of “Economic Development” the following strategy is included:-
“Seek appropriate grants and subsidies to fund regional facilities.”
SUMMARY:
The Draft Report of the review of the W.A. Grants Commission Methodology has been presented for consideration. The review focuses on the equalisation component of the General Purpose Grant from which the Town, at this time, does not receive any allocation. The Town considered the Issues Paper in September 2002 and made comments on the 15 issues that were identified. Twenty three Councils commented on the Issues Paper. These responses have now been considered by the Grants Commission and a Draft Report has been circulated outlining the proposals for the review. As there is limited application to the Town, and a submission has already been made to the review process, it is not proposed to comment any further.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr MacRae , seconded by Cr Smith
That the Draft Report for the review of the WA Local Government Grants Commission Methodology be noted and no further comments be made in respect of the Review.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 154 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
8. REPORTS FROM DELEGATES: COMMITTEES AND WORKING GROUPS
8.1 Safer WA Western Suburbs Committee
Nothing further to report
9. GENERAL BUSINESS
9.1 Investment Strategy
Cr McAullay requested information on the progress of the report on the Council’s Investment Strategy.
It was agreed that a progress report be submitted to Committee next month.
9.2 Local Government Self Insurance Schemes Board
Cr McAullay asked the Executive Manager Corporate and Customer Services if he had been successful with his recent application for membership of the Local Government Self Insurance Schemes Board.
The Executive Manager Corporate and Customer Services advised that he had not been successful.
9.3 Night Surfing Competition – City Beach
Cr Smith requested information on the recent Night Surfing Classic held at City Beach.
Members were advised that the event was organised very well by the City Beach Surf Riders Club and the conditions imposed on the Club by the Council were all put in place. It was agreed that the Club be thanked for its efforts in managing and organising the event.
9.4 Broadband
Cr Smith requested information on Local Government’s role in the provision of broadband services to the Town’s residents.
It was agreed that a report be submitted to Committee on this matter.
9.5 Wembley Golf Complex Concept and Feasibility Study (Bollig Report)
Cr Anderton requested that a report be submitted to Council within the next 6 to 8 months summarising the Bollig Report.
The Manager Golf Complex advised that a work on this matter is currently being undertaken.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 155 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
9.6 Underground Power – City Beach
Cr Anderton requested that a copy of the Town’s submission for Round 3 of the State Underground Power Program be forwarded to Elected Members prior to it being submitted to the State Government.
The Executive Manager Corporate and Customer Services advised that this was the Administration’s intention as outlined in the memorandum recently circulated to Elected Members.
10 CLOSURE
There being no further business, the Presiding Member thanked those present for their attendance and declared the meeting of the Corporate and Customer Services Committee closed at 7.20 pm.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\D CCS.doc 156 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES COMMITTEE
The report of the Development and Environmental Services Committee Meeting held on 18 February 2003 was submitted as under:-
1. DECLARATION OF OPENING
The Presiding Member declared the meeting of the Development and Environmental Services Committee open at 6.07 pm.
2. RECORD OF ATTENDANCE/APOLOGIES/LEAVE OF ABSENCE
Present : Time of Time of Entering Leaving
Members:
Cr Ken McAullay (Presiding Member) 6.07 pm 9.04 pm
Cr Marlene Anderton 6.07 pm 7.18 pm 7.21 pm 7.40 pm 7.47 pm 9.04 pm Cr Graham Burkett JP 6.07 pm 7.49 pm 7.53 pm 9.04 pm Cr Corinne MacRae 6.07 pm 9.04 pm
Observers:
Mayor Ross Willcock JP 6.07 pm 9.04 pm Cr Alan Langer 6.07 pm 9.04 pm Cr Hilary Pinerua 6.07 pm 9.04 pm Cr Kerry Smith 6.10 pm 7.55 pm 7.57 pm 9.04 pm
Officers:
Ian Birch, Executive Manager, Development and Environmental Services Pas Bracone, Manager Planning Services Denise Ribbands, Administration Officer (Governance)
Adjournments: Nil
Time meeting closed: 9.04 pm
APOLOGIES/LEAVE OF ABSENCE
Nil
3. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME
Nil
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 157 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
4. DEPUTATIONS AND PETITIONS
Deputations:
Item DES03.01 – Colin Coulson, neighbour Item DES03.01 – Fred Botica, neighbour Item DES03.05 – Ian Oldfied, Architect Item DES03.08 – Peter Jodrell, Architect
5. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES
Moved by Cr Burkett, seconded by Cr Anderton
That the Minutes of the Ordinary meeting of the Development and Environmental Services Committee held on 10 December 2002 as contained in the December Council Notice Paper be confirmed.
Carried
6. DECLARATION OF MEMBERS INTERESTS
Nil
7. REPORTS
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 158 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
REFERRED BACK
DES03.01
LOT 2 (NO. 53) FORTVIEW ROAD, MT.CLAREMONT - PROPOSED TWO STOREY, SPLIT LEVEL DWELLING (File Reference: PRO 1021)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To determine the application for building approval seeking variations to the requirements of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No.1.
BACKGROUND:
BA/DA REFERENCE: 539BA-2002 LANDOWNER: Katrina Marshall APPLICANT: Perception Homes ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme No.1: Residential R12.5
POLICY: Residential Planning Codes of Western Australia Residential Design Guidelines
COMPLIANCE:
Non-compliance Required Proposed Wall height - (RDG’s) 6.5 metres to the top of 6.9 metres eaves (maximum) to the top of eaves Fill and Retaining walls (R Codes) 0.5 metres permitted 1.1 metres west as by right to property boundary boundarys 0.42 metres east boundary
DETAILS:
Lot Area: 899 square metres Open Space: 67 per cent
Approval is sought for the construction of a two storey, split level single residential dwelling at Lot 2 (No. 53) Fortview Road, Mt.Claremont. The proposed dwelling will provide the majority of the main living areas on the ground level while the upper floor level will comprise the master bedroom, an ensuite and a separate retreat. Three minor bedrooms and a further bathroom are also located on this level, as is a balcony that is orientated to the front of the building looking towards Fortview Road.
The block is located within the relatively new Fortview Road subdivision and is the second last lot at the western end of the road. The topography within the subdivision generally reflects the natural ground levels and a consequence is that most lots have ground levels that are not uniformly consistent, either within the boundaries of the lot or with the levels of the adjoining properties.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 159 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
In this instance, the land rises up 3.0 metres from the mid point at the front boundary to the mid point of the rear boundary. The current levels of the property initially fall below the level of the road in the first half of the block, creating in effect a small depression and then rise steeply by some 2.5 metres in the back half of the property.
Having regard for these existing site conditions, the home has been designed with a split-level that rises generally in accordance with the rising levels of the block. The adjoining home on the western (right hand side) boundary has a finished level 10.21 metres and the adjoining eastern property on the left hand side has a finished level of 10.6 metres. The finished level of the front half of the dwelling has been set at 10.4 metres for consistency of streetscape and so that the proposed home is not set in a depression below the level of the road.
Consequently, there is a need for a degree of retaining and fill required at both side boundaries and also there is a variation to the permitted wall heights as measured under the method prescribed under the recently gazetted R Codes.
Neighbour Consultation
The original plans submitted have been referred to both adjoining landowners in respect to variations proposed in the original submission.
Submissions were received from the two adjoining landowners in respect to the proposed development. The main issues of concern in those submissions are summarised as being:-
the adjoining western neighbour raised concerns over the extent of retaining at the boundary and the flow on effects associated with the cumulative height of the retaining and boundary fence on the amenity of an adjoining courtyard at the rear of the dwelling.
the adjoining eastern neighbour raised concerns over building and privacy setback variations, the extent of retaining at the boundary and to the height of the building and the detrimental affects this have on his property and the streetscape.
Response to submissions:
Upon receipt of neighbour submissions, the applicant has met with officers from the Town and areas of concern raised by the neighbours have been discussed. Following on, the applicant has agreed to a number of changes to the plans that specifically address the aspects of the design to which objections were raised. The changes agreed to are considered to bring the development into compliance with the relevant standards and meet with the relevant performance criteria of Town Planning Scheme No.1 with the only outstanding non compliance being that relating to the permitted wall height
In summary, the following matters are identified as being addressed by the applicant in response to neighbour concerns;
Privacy – all widows on the eastern elevation of the building are to be modified to comply with the privacy provisions of the R Codes. This will involve windows being fitted with obscure, awning style windows or alternatively, windows are to be relocated to comply with privacy setback requirements. The eastern end of the north facing balcony is to have a privacy screen to 1.6 metres fitted and the alfresco area at the rear of the dwelling on the ground level is also to be screened to 1.6 metres.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 160 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Setbacks – the above mentioned treatments to the openings on the eastern elevation will bring the setbacks from the eastern boundary into compliance, as required by the R Codes. A minor variation of 0.06 metres on the western boundary is also to be brought into compliance with the required 1.0 metre setback.
Retaining walls – the initial assessment had noted that retaining walls of up to 0.68 metre were proposed on the eastern boundary, adjacent to a courtyard. The finished level of that courtyard is to be reduced so that the new retaining wall will only be 0.2 metres above the existing height of the retaining wall on the boundary. The initial assessment identified that there was retaining required of 1.3 metres on the western boundary of the lot. Whilst this amount of fill is required “internally”, the initial assessment did not take into account the finished level of the land on the neighbours property which is set at 10.97 metres. As such, the proposed retaining wall would have been approximately 0.33 metres higher than the existing retaining wall at the boundary. The finished level of the courtyard adjacent to the boundary is now to be further reduced by 0.2 metres to a RL of 11.13, meaning that the levels between the two properties are approximately equal with each other.
There has been insufficient time for the applicant to submit revised plans reflecting the above changes and therefore, any approval issued is to be the subject of conditions relating to the above amendments.
The only other outstanding matters from the consultation process involve the height of the building. This matter is discussed below in more detail.
COMMENT:
Building Height (RDG)
The application involves a variation to the wall height being 6.9 metres to the top of the eaves in lieu of 6.5 metres.
The applicant advises that the design of the dwelling has been some 12 months in the planning and at the time when the applicant had preliminary discussions with Planning Officers, the determination of building height was from the RDG’s. The RDG’s stipulated that natural ground level is the centre point of the house and maximum allowable heights are determined from this level. The applicant used this information to design the house. Based on the previously adopted RDG calculation of height, the height of the project is assessed as having a wall height of 6.3 metres, complying with the permitted 6.5 metre wall height.
The Residential Design Codes (R-Codes) have now been gazetted which specifies a different method of calculating the height of developments. The R-Codes, in relation to the method of calculating building heights supersedes the RDG’s method. Under the R-Codes building height is measured “from the natural level immediately below the relevant point on the wall or roof.” Based on this method of calculation the height to the top of the eaves shows a maximum height of 6.9 metres.
The difference in building height is due to the RDG’s using one reference point whereas the R-Codes uses all points along the wall or roof of the house.
In determining whether the variation should be supported or not the impact on adjoining properties should be taken into consideration.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 161 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Subject to the major openings being screened on the side elevations as discussed earlier in the report, the development accords with the required setback provisions and as such, those neighbouring properties should not be unduly compromised by the bulk of the building. Further, the side elevations of the dwelling do not present as one length of solid wall, but rather are broken up by stepping the building in and away from the boundary at various points. The eastern elevation incorporates a 5.2 metre wide, 4.0 metre deep courtyard that is located approximately at the middle of the building that serves to break the bulk of the development up. Further, as viewed from this elevation, the home does not exceed the permitted wall height of 6.5 metres above the natural ground level as this variation is apparent on other elevations. The orientation of the lot runs north – south and therefore the development does not unduly compromise the solar access of that property. As such, there is no discernable adverse affects on the amenity of the adjoining eastern property associated with the wall height variation.
Similar situations arise in connection to the adjoining western property, in that a courtyard has been included in the design that steps the building away from the boundary and serves to break up the bulk of the building. That neighbour has agreed to the location of a single storey parapet wall on the boundary, but the upper level of the building is setback distances from 2.5 metres to 5.5 metres. As such, it is considered that the neighbouring property should not be unduly compromised by the bulk and height of the building. Importantly, the neighbour has viewed the plans and not objected to the location or height of the building.
As stated in this report, under the previous standards set out in the RDG’s, no variation to the wall height is evident. What needs to be remembered is that the proposed development has been designed in accordance with the previous standards and as such the height and bulk of the building would not be dissimilar to other properties throughout the locality. Rather, it is only the method of calculation that has changed.
Variations to building height will continue to be assessed against the performance criteria of the revised RDG’s which state:-
(a) buildings which respect the scale of buildings generally in their vicinity, in terms of their height and bulk and remain subservient to the green streetscape; (b) buildings which are respectful of the predominate character and style of existing development within the locality (c) where the front of the building facing the street is broken up, presenting a varied and interesting façade to the street rather than a continuous wall; and (d) where the performance criteria contained in part 3.7.1 P1 of the R Codes are met.
3.7.1 Building Height (R Codes)
P1 Building height consistent with the desired height of buildings in the locality, and to recognise the need to protect the amenities of adjoining properties, including where appropriate:-
adequate direct sun to buildings and appurtenant open spaces; adequate daylight to major openings to habitable rooms access to views of significance.
Having regard to the comments in this report, it is considered that the application adequately meets with the relevant performance criteria to enable the variations to the wall height to be approved. The variation to the wall height is, in part, attributable to
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 162 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
the proposal to set the floor level of the dwelling between that of the two adjoining properties. Whilst the measure from the natural ground level suggests that the actual building is excessive, rather the variation emanates from the front half of the lot being in a depression and therefore, a degree of fill is required to achieve the desired finished floor level. As discussed, the flow on effects from this have now been appropriately addressed in that retaining at the side boundaries has been reduced to comparable levels of the adjoining properties.
A degree of support is given to the building being set at a level between the two adjoining properties having regard to the rhythm and pattern of development in the street. The style and configuration of the dwelling is not considered to be in conflict with other development in the street that features a range of architectural styles.
Further, consideration is given to the difficulties that arise in achieving full compliance when seeking to develop properties where there are significant variations in the levels of the land.
Retaining and Fill – (R Codes)
Element 6 of the R Codes permits fill and retaining of up to 0.5 metres at a property boundary as by right. The acceptable development standards require that retaining walls exceeding this height should be stepped away from the boundary in accordance with Table 2, as for setbacks of buildings.
As outlined earlier in this report, there was a maximum of 0.68 metres of fill proposed at the eastern boundary and 1.3 metres of fill at the western boundary. The applicant has agreed to reduce the amount of retaining at the boundaries to 0.42 metres and 1.1 metres respectively so that the revised levels (10.7 and 11.1 metres) will be equivalent to reduced levels of the two adjoining properties. As such, there will be little disturbance to the existing levels at the boundaries of the two adjoining properties.
Variations to the acceptable development standards are assessed under the following performance criteria:-
• development that retains the visual impression of the natural level of a site, as seen from the street or other public place, or from an adjoining property; • retaining walls designed or setback to minimise the impact on adjoining property
Sufficient grounds are considered to exist to permit the variations. The increased site levels will not introduce any overlooking issues and the building (with the proposed amendments) is set back from the boundaries in compliance with what is required. The topography of the lot presents a number of constraints in achieving an acceptable standard of development while achieving full compliance with all aspects of development controls.
Upon completion, the impact of the proposed retaining will not be readily apparent when viewed from the street or the neighbouring properties as the lot will have finished levels at the boundary equivalent to the adjoining properties and as previously outlined, the finished level of the home will be set at the intermediate level of the two adjoining properties and thus will maintain a consistency in the streetscape.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 163 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
Consideration of this application is consistent with the Town’s Strategic Plan for the provision of orderly planning to enhance the Town’s natural and built environment through effective and responsible use of the town planning scheme.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Nil.
CONCLUSION:
Having regard to the comments within this report, it is considered that the application can be supported, only on the basis that aspects of the plans are modified to ensure that the resultant development does not unduly impinge on the amenity of the adjoining properties. It is considered that the plans can be readily modified without compromising the integrity of the design of the home.
Given the time constraints between the preparation of this report and the Council meeting and given that the amendments can be made relatively simply, in this case it is recommended that the proposed amendments to plans to satisfy non-compliances can be applied as conditions of approval, rather than insisting on amended plans being submitted at this point.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
That in accordance with the provisions of Part 4 of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No. 1, the Council APPROVES the application submitted by Perception Homes for a two storey, split level dwelling with variations to the permitted wall height and retaining wall heights at Lot 2 (No. 53) Fortview Road, Mt Claremont, as shown on amended plans dated 11 November 2002, subject to the following conditions:-
(i) the paved courtyard adjacent to the eastern boundary at the side of the dwelling is to reflect a reduced level of 10.7 metres and any retaining walls are to be similarly reduced;
(ii) the paved courtyard adjacent to the western boundary at the side of the dwelling is to reflect a reduced level of 11.1 metres and any retaining walls are to be similarly reduced;
(iii) the upper floor, south facing windows from bedroom 3 are to be modified to comply with the privacy provisions of the R Codes, in accordance with Element 8 – A1;
(iv) the upper floor, south facing window from the retreat is to be modified to comply with the privacy provisions of the R Codes, in accordance with Element 8 – A1;
(v) the eastern end of the upper floor balcony is to be screened in accordance with Element 8 – A1 to a minimum height of 1.6 metres above the finished floor level;
(vi) the sill height of the screen wall at the eastern end of the ground floor alfresco area at the rear of the dwelling is to be raised to 1.6 metres above the finished floor level;
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 164 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
(vii) the ground floor right hand side setback (home theatre) is to be setback a minimum distance of 1.0 metre from the boundary; and
(viii) all screening and window treatments pertaining to privacy issues are to be installed prior to occupation of the dwelling;
(ix) all modifications are to be shown on plans and be to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Officer prior to the issue of a building licence.
Committee Meeting 10 December 2002
During discussion, Members were advised that a discrepancy in the levels for the neighbouring property, as shown on the application, had come to light. It was therefore suggested that the ground levels on either side of the subject dwelling be related specifically to the proposed finished floor level which is shown as 10.4 metres.
Amendment
Moved by Cr MacRae, seconded by Cr Burkett
That clauses (i) and (ii) of the motion be amended to read as follows:-
(i) the paved courtyard adjacent to the eastern boundary at the side of the dwelling is to be consistent with the FFL of the proposed dwelling (10.4 metres);
(ii) the paved courtyard adjacent to the western boundary at the side of the dwelling is to be consistent with the FFL of the proposed dwelling (10.4 metres);
Carried
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION)
That in accordance with the provisions of Part 4 of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No. 1, the Council APPROVES the application submitted by Perception Homes for a two storey, split level dwelling with variations to the permitted wall height and retaining wall heights at Lot 2 (No. 53) Fortview Road, Mt Claremont, as shown on amended plans dated 11 November 2002, subject to the following conditions:-
(i) the paved courtyard adjacent to the eastern boundary at the side of the dwelling is to be consistent with the FFL of the proposed dwelling (10.4 metres);
(ii) the paved courtyard adjacent to the western boundary at the side of the dwelling is to be consistent with the FFL of the proposed dwelling (10.4 metres);
(iii) the upper floor, south facing windows from bedroom 3 are to be modified to comply with the privacy provisions of the R Codes, in accordance with Element 8 – A1;
(iv) upper floor, south facing window from the retreat is to be modified to comply with the privacy provisions of the R Codes, in accordance with Element 8 – A1;
(v) the eastern end of the upper floor balcony is to be screened in accordance with Element 8 – A1 to a minimum height of 1.6 metres above the finished floor level;
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 165 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
(vi) the sill height of the screen wall at the eastern end of the ground floor alfresco area at the rear of the dwelling is to be raised to 1.6 metres above the finished floor level;
(vii) the ground floor right hand side setback (home theatre) is to be set back a minimum distance of 1.0 metre from the boundary;
(viii) all screening and window treatments pertaining to privacy issues are to be installed prior to occupation of the dwelling;
(ix) all modifications are to be shown on plans and be to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Officer prior to the issue of a building licence.
During discussion, Members were advised that for a number of reasons, it is impossible to establish exact levels and, therefore, difficult to precisely determine wall and floor heights from the natural ground levels. The applicant has indicated that he will give consideration to reducing the FFL at the rear of the house by 350 mm which will result in the rear half of the dwelling having a reduced floor level of 11.08 metres. This allows a reduction of the ground level of the drying court on the western boundary which has been raised as a concern by the neighbour. This will reduce the cumulative height of the retaining and boundary wall. It is intended that the floor level of this area be reduced to a RL of 10.52 which is 0.38 metres higher than the reduced level of the neighbouring property. Similarly, the rear yard will be reduced by the same amount (0.38 metres) resulting in the need for less retaining and lower boundary walls. A further effect will be a reduction in wall heights of the dwelling by approximately 0.2 metres.
Given that the above assessment is only based on discussion with the applicant, as well as the adjoining property owners, it is recommended that the application be deferred.
The motion was then put and lost
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Burkett
That the application submitted by Perception Homes for a two storey, split level dwelling, with variations to the permitted wall height and retaining wall heights, at Lot 2 (No.53) Fortview Road, Mount Claremont, be deferred to enable the applicant to respond to recent issues that have arisen concerning ground levels and building heights and to have the opportunity to amend the plans accordingly.
During discussion, Cr Burkett suggested that a site meeting be held in the New Year.
Carried
FURTHER REPORT (Post Council Meeting 17 December 2002)
BACKGROUND:
The Council at its meeting held on 17 December 2002 deferred the application to enable the applicant to respond to various issues concerning ground levels and building heights and to have the opportunity to amend plans accordingly. The decision to defer the application was influenced by a discrepancy that was identified on the survey plan relating to the finished levels of the adjoining western property.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 166 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
In making the decision to defer the application, it was proposed that an on site meeting between the applicants and adjoining land owners, together with representatives from the Town, be held in an endeavor to help resolve any outstanding issues.
The on site meeting has subsequently been held and proposed amendments have been discussed. The Town has received amended plans, which show reductions in the finished floor level of the rear half of the dwelling, courtyards at the side boundaries and an overall reduction in the height of the building. The finished level of the yard at the rear of the dwelling has also been further reduced.
A minor amendment has been made to the length of a parapet wall associated with the garage that has been extended 1.5 metres in length to accommodate an internal store. The parapet wall maintains a setback of 9.0 metres from the front boundary of the lot.
An on-site briefing has also been undertaken with elected members, representatives from the Town and the applicant to assist in identifying the relevant issues.
COMPLIANCE:
Non-compliance Required Previous Proposed Wall height - 6.5 metres to the West elevation West elevation (RDG’s) top of eaves 6.9 metres 6.9 metres 6.9 metres 6.7 metres 6.9 metres 6.3 metres
East elevation East elevation 6.7 metres 6.0 metres 7.0 metres 6.8 metres 6.9 metres 6.6 metres Fill and Retaining 0.5 metres 1.1 metres west 0.85 metres walls (R Codes) permitted as by boundary west boundary right to property boundarys 0.42 metres east 0.2 metres east boundary boundary
Neighbour Comments:
The adjoining western neighbour has cited concerns, primarily over the amount of fill and retaining that is required adjacent to a ground level courtyard on his property. The amended plans submitted show that there is fill and retaining of 0.85 metres proposed above the level of the neighbours property. The area that is to be retained is a courtyard that is adjacent to the laundry and will primarily serve as a drying court. A window from the kitchen also overlooks this courtyard and being over 0.5 metres above the natural ground level, raises privacy concerns for the neighbour. The neighbour continues to object to the amount of fill being used at the centre point of the dwelling.
The neighbour has raised concerns that if the area is built up as proposed then there are a number of possible adverse affects. One such impact is that of privacy, in that unless the dividing fence is raised in height, the new neighbours will be able to view into their yard as they are moving around the new courtyard and also from the kitchen window. Concern has also been raised that if the dividing fence is increased so that if the standard 1.8 metre height is achieved above the proposed level of the courtyard,
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 167 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
then the fence as viewed from his property will be 2.65 metres in height which he believes would have an adverse impact on the amenity of his courtyard.
It is the preference of the neighbour that the courtyard be maintained at the same level (10.14 metres) as the yard outside his dwelling, adjacent to the proposed courtyard.
Other concerns raised pertain to possible staining that may result from the fill leaching through to the inside face of the fence and also that the development proposes an amount of 1.6 metres of fill at the centre of the lot.
Due to the topography of the lot, there is less impact on the eastern neighbour and the proposed amendments to the plans will remove any need for retaining walls associated with fill along the eastern boundary. The proposed finished levels will be within a 0.2 metre tolerance of the existing eastern neighbours property. The reduction in the levels of the dwelling and the rear yard will bring the development into compliance on this boundary, with the exception of a minor variation to the permitted wall height.
Applicants Response To Neighbour Concerns
The applicants have made a number of amendments to their original proposal in order to address the ongoing concerns raised by the adjoining western neighbour.
The applicant has requested that a letter from that neighbour, consenting to 1.3 metres of fill being applied to their site, in exchange for setback dispensations be circulated to all Councillors for their information. A copy of this letter is circulated to all elected members for information.
The applicant is requesting that an amount of 0.85 metres of fill be permitted at the boundary that will enable the drying court to be constructed at a level (10.99 metres) equivalent to the finished level of the adjacent laundry (11.09 metres) so as to avoid the need for more than one step down to the court yard.
Fill and Retaining
Notwithstanding the contents of the above letter, much of the neighbour concerns relate to the modifications to the original topography of the lot. The rationale for these modifications have been outlined in the original report and as such are not discussed further.
Reference to drainage plans prepared as part of the original subdivision works in Fortview Road identify fill has been introduced into the centre of the site which the Town is advised was sourced from the two adjoining lots during excavation works associated with the construction of swimming pools. There is also some evidence that an amount of fill has “spilled” over from the two adjoining lots along sections of the side boundaries that have resulted in current levels that are equivalent to the existing finished levels of the two adjoining lots.
It must, however, be recognised that it is difficult to absolutely determine all pre- existing natural ground levels as the site has been heavily disturbed during the construction periods of the two adjoining properties. As stated in the original report, it is difficult to achieve absolute compliance with all standard provisions when dealing with development on lots affected by significant gradients.
Therefore, having regard to the preceding comments and the finished levels of the adjoining western property (which has substantial retaining at the boundary toward the
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 168 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
back of their lot), it is considered that that finished level of the proposed dwelling is not out of context with either of the adjoining properties. Regard is also given to the existing conditions that affect the area adjacent to the area of the proposed retaining and it is reasonable to accept the proposed finished levels.
Should the plans be supported in their current configuration, this would result in a dividing fence with a total height of 2.65 metres in height when viewed from the western neighbours property. It is noted that the Town’s Local Laws permit dividing fencing up to a height of 2.0 metres atop the permitted 0.5 metres of retaining. As such, the total height of the fence is not uncharacteristically high. Further, the location of the proposed building would mean that the fence would not introduce any significant issues that would not arise through the presence of the building in terms of matters such as shadowing and bulk. Should this be considered unsatisfactory, it is suggested that a compromise of 0.5 metres over the current ground level (notwithstanding some fill already has already been introduced) could be reasonably supported. This would result in a fence with an overall height of 2.3 metres when viewed from the western neighbours property.
Irrespective of either level that is approved for the courtyard (with 0.85 metres or 0.5 metres of fill), if a 1.8 metre high dividing fence is erected it will adequately screen the neighbours property from a kitchen window that looks onto the proposed drying court given the relative level of the courtyard on the adjacent property.
If the neighbours position was supported that no fill be permitted above the existing levels, this would require the applicant to construct some ten steps to access the drying court from the dwelling. This would be unworkable given the confined space available and would severely compromise the functionality of the area. If a maximum of 0.5 metres of fill were permitted, this would require some five steps be traversed to access the courtyard, which from the applicants position is not readily favoured given the function of the room (laundry) beyond.
Having regard for the above comments, it is considered that there are sufficient grounds to support the application as proposed. As discussed, while the proposal will result in a dividing fence with a total height of 2.65 metres when viewed from the neighbours property, this is not substantially greater than what can be accommodated as by right, notwithstanding that some previous fill has been deposited in the general area. Further, while the section of fence is adjacent to a courtyard, it is not the property’s only area of active outdoor space and will not introduce any additional overshadowing of the area above that which either the new dwelling or the neighbours own property imparts.
Building Height
The amended plans have resulted in overall reductions to the building height that now largely conforms to the 0.3 metre degree of tolerance to the 6.5 metre wall height restriction. One section of the dwelling is assessed as having a wall height of 6.9 metres, measured above the natural ground level below the wall. This element of the dwelling is in the front north-west corner of the dwelling. Support is given for this non- compliance on the basis that this section of the building is set back 5.5 metres from the western boundary and is above a depression in the lot. A single level garage is positioned between the wall and the neighbour’s property and therefore the variation would not be readily apparent when viewed from the neighbours property. As such, support for the variation is given.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 169 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
CONCLUSION:
The amended plans are considered an acceptable compromise by the applicant following the concerns raised by the adjoining owners. As such, it is recommended that the amended plans can be supported as submitted.
However, if Council wishes to respond to the concerns raised by the adjoining western neighbour then as a compromise, the Council could approve the application with a condition that the courtyard has a reduced finished level of 10.64 metres, representing a 0.5 metre increase over the current level at the boundary.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Burkett
That in accordance with the provisions of Part 4 of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No. 1, the Council APPROVES the application submitted by Perception Homes for a two storey, split level dwelling with variations to the permitted wall height and retaining wall heights at Lot 2 (No. 53) Fortview Road, Mt Claremont, as shown on amended plans dated 20 January 2003.
Footnote:
The applicant be advised that approval of this application does not obviate the applicants responsibility to liaise with the adjoining eastern property owner in respect to section of the fence to be constructed along his western boundary, in accordance with the Dividing Fences Act 1961.
Committee Meeting 18 February 2003
During discussion, Members noted that there has been considerable disturbance of the site and that levels have been altered. Having regard to the levels of the adjoining properties, it was considered that a level of 10.4 metres, as previously recommended by Committee on 10 December 2002, would be a reasonable solution. This level takes into account an amount of up to 500 mm of fill being allowed on side boundaries without the need for Council approval.
Amendment
Moved by Burkett, seconded by Cr Anderton
That clauses (i) and (ii) be added to the motion as follows:-
(i) the paved courtyard adjacent to the eastern boundary at the side of the dwelling is to be consistent with the FFL of the proposed dwelling (10.4 metres);
(ii) the paved courtyard adjacent to the western boundary at the side of the dwelling is to be consistent with the FFL of the proposed dwelling (10.4 metres).
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 170 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE RECOMMENTDATION)
Moved by Cr McAullay, seconded by Cr Burkett
That in accordance with the provisions of Part 4 of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No. 1, the Council APPROVES the application submitted by Perception Homes for a two storey, split level dwelling with variations to the permitted wall height and retaining wall heights at Lot 2 (No. 53) Fortview Road, Mt Claremont, as shown on amended plans dated 20 January 2003 subject to the following conditions:-
(i) the paved courtyard adjacent to the eastern boundary at the side of the dwelling is to be consistent with the FFL of the proposed dwelling (10.4 metres);
(ii) the paved courtyard adjacent to the western boundary at the side of the dwelling is to be consistent with the FFL of the proposed dwelling (10.4 metres).
Footnote:
The applicant be advised that approval of this application does not obviate the applicants responsibility to liaise with the adjoining eastern property owner in respect to section of the fence to be constructed along his western boundary, in accordance with the Dividing Fences Act 1961.
Amendment
Moved by Cr McAullay, seconded by Cr Anderton
That a further clause (iii) be added to the motion as follows:-
(iii) the FFL of the entire ground level of the proposed dwelling to be reduced to 10.4 metres.
Amendment carried
The amended motion was then put and carried
The motion, as carried, is as follows:-
That in accordance with the provisions of Part 4 of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No. 1, the Council APPROVES the application submitted by Perception Homes for a two storey, split level dwelling with variations to the permitted wall height and retaining wall heights at Lot 2 (No. 53) Fortview Road, Mt Claremont, as shown on amended plans dated 20 January 2003 subject to the following conditions:-
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 171 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
(i) the paved courtyard adjacent to the eastern boundary at the side of the dwelling is to be consistent with the FFL of the proposed dwelling (10.4 metres);
(ii) the paved courtyard adjacent to the western boundary at the side of the dwelling is to be consistent with the FFL of the proposed dwelling (10.4 metres);
(iii) the FFL of the entire ground level of the proposed dwelling to be reduced to 10.4 metres.
Footnote:
The applicant be advised that approval of this application does not obviate the applicants responsibility to liaise with the adjoining eastern property owner in respect to section of the fence to be constructed along his western boundary, in accordance with the Dividing Fences Act 1961.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 172 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
DES03.02
URBAN DESIGN IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE BOULEVARD SHOPPING CENTRE - THE BOULEVARD, CITY BEACH (File Reference: PLA0069)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To consider the results of a survey conducted in relation to the proposed improvements to the Boulevard Shopping Centre and to consider a recommendation to proceed with the proposal.
BACKGROUND:
The Council, at its meeting held on 26 March 2002, decided that:-
(i) on the basis of the detail outlined in the above report, the community be consulted on the proposed urban design improvements for The Boulevard Shopping Centre Precinct;
(ii) Chris Antill Planning and Urban Design Consultants be engaged to assist the Town with this consultation process, at an estimated fee of $2,500;
(iii) should it be required, the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to engage the consultant (at an hourly rate of $80) for any additional consultation work, up to a maximum of $1,500.
On the basis of the Council's decision, brochures were prepared showing three options for possible improvements to the subject area. A feedback form was included with the brochures. Public consultation was undertaken for a period of some four weeks from 5 to 30 August 2002. The consultation involved delivery of the brochure to some 462 residential properties, a display at the shopping centre, the Cambridge Library and the Town's Administration Centre. Approximately 150 brochures were taken from the displays. (The display at the shopping centre was attended by the Town's consultant on the Saturday morning of 17 August 2002.) An advertisement was also placed in The Post newspaper inviting comments. In total, it is estimated that some 612 brochures were distributed and/or collected.
Prior to commencing the public consultation, a meeting was held with the managing agent for the shopping centre, followed by a meeting with tenants of the shopping centre to ensure they were fully aware of the proposal.
A copy of the brochure and feedback form is circulated with the agenda. The brochure contains the project objectives and a description and plan of each option outlining the various features and benefits of each.
DETAILS:
The results of the survey were compiled by the Town's Consultant and a copy is circulated with the agenda. In brief, a total of 165 completed feedback forms were returned to the Town. This represents 27% of the estimated total distribution which is considered a good response. Overall the most strongly favoured option with 107 of the 165 responses indicating their support was Option 1.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 173 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
COMMENT:
During the preparation of the brochure, it became apparent that numerous alternatives and other options were possible. It was considered better to limit the number of choices in terms of the survey in order to reduce repetition and possible confusion. Whilst the results show that Option 1 is the most favoured, the survey attracted a variety of comments and suggestions in relation to the options proposed demonstrating the wide range of permutations possible. Comments ranged from no change to a variety of other options.
In recalling the objectives of the project, which are:-
1. To rectify existing problems associated with traffic and pedestrian movements in the vicinity of the northern side of The Boulevard Shopping Centre; and
2. To subsequently rectify problems associated with pedestrian safety, user amenity and streetscape appearance in the same locality;
it is important to consider the differing points of view expressed by respondents.
From the point of view of tenants of the shopping centre who responded, the improvement to access to the centre is important and this is reflected in the preference for Option 1. One tenant who indicated a preference for option 3, did so on the basis of some modifications to it, effectively resulting in it being similar to option 1. It is equally important to ensure that any changes do not detract or create any detrimental impacts on surrounding residential streets.
As reported in March 2002, "all roads within the vicinity of the shopping centre are designated as Local Access Roads within the Town of Cambridge road hierarchy. The Department of Planning and Infrastructure Road Hierarchy Guidelines indicate that access roads should not carry in excess of 3000 vehicles per day (VPD) and desirably no more than 1000 VPD." Further, it was stated that "if the preferred options……were to be implemented, some distribution in travel demand would occur within the local road network but, traffic levels are not expected to increase on local roads above 1000 VPD, apart from sections of road directly servicing the shopping centre."
Gayton Road
A strong response was received from residents in Gayton Road. This was to be expected given that the re-opening of the road proposed in two of the options is a notable change to the existing situation. Concerns were expressed that the re-opening would lead to additional traffic and greater vehicle speed along Gayton Road. Nevertheless, five households supported either Option 1 or 3 which propose the re- opening of Gayton Road while nine households supported option 2 which retains the cul-de-sac along Gayton Road.
The opening of the road will in fact re-establish the original road layout of the area. A search of records dating back to 1978 indicates that the changes to the road were made following what appeared to be confusion for drivers in relation to median islands around the shopping centre and to deter traffic from travelling from Empire Avenue to The Boulevard and using various streets in between to do so. At this stage, it is understood that Pandora Drive connected directly to The Boulevard. Since that time, Durston Road has been constructed, which now acts to service vehicles travelling from Empire Avenue to The Boulevard, however, the cul-de-sac along Gayton Road was never removed and remains in place.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 174 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Options
Whilst there are wide and varying views, it is considered that Option 1 with its strong support could be recommended as the manner with which to proceed. Option 1 provides the opportunity to meet the objectives of the project whilst re-establishing the local road network. It is recommended, however, that some modifications to Option 1 can be introduced to address the concerns expressed primarily by residents of Gayton Road. These could include the introduction of a roundabout at the intersection of Gayton Road and Olinda Avenue, this would act as a traffic management device to control traffic while enabling traffic to flow.
Other devices could also be introduced along Gayton Road to assist with traffic management. These could include intersection median islands near the intersections of Gayton Road with Norbury Crescent (two locations), Landra Gardens East and Pandora Drive. Further intersection median islands could also be installed at the intersection of Gayton Road and Oban Road. All of these could be considered in conjunction with residents of Gayton Road. The purpose of these treatments would be to improve traffic movements by eliminating the ability to "cut" corners, reduce speed at intersections and improve pedestrian safety. Such devices would require traffic engineering design and would need to be designed so as not to restrict access to adjacent properties.
Options 2 and 3 whilst receiving some support, do present some difficulties in that they prevent free circulation around the shopping centre, notably Option 2 does maintain the cul-de-sac along Gayton Road, which is supported by a number of residents. The modifications proposed in Option 1, above, do deal with the traffic concerns raised and in effect replace the cul-de-sac whilst at the same time allowing traffic to flow more freely.
Way Ahead
Should the Council decide to proceed with this project, detailed designs will need to be prepared to implement the changes. The design can take into account suggestions made which support Option 1 and contribute to improved safety. Also, the detailed design can incorporate the streetscape and landscaping changes proposed as part of the upgrade of the area. Details can include trees, paving, improved lighting, banners, signage and undergrounding of power, implementation of all or any of these improvements are subject to adequate funding.
Before progressing to the detailed design stage, however, it is appropriate that the outcome of the consultation and the resulting preferred option is discussed further with the community.
Prior to proceeding with further consultation, it would be appropriate to prepare some conceptual drawings of the revised Option 1 and associated streetscape works. This would assist when seeking further comments. It is recommended that Chris Antill Planning and Urban Design Consultants be appointed to assist with the preparation of the concept plan. The costs of preparing the plan are in the order of $2,000. This would include some engineering design work to show the changes within the roads. It is proposed that the engineering work be carried out by the Town's consultants, Connell Wagner (Professional Consultancy Tender 14 - 2001-02).
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 175 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
Consideration of this matter is consistent with the Town's strategic plan to promote streetscape improvements and diversity in activity and commerce, balancing commercial and lifestyle needs.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The study has incurred costs to date in relation to the community consultation. Provision for these costs has been made in the Budget under Planning Services item 410/75 - Special Projects/Consultancies. Further development of plans can also be funded from this item.
In the longer term, should the Council agree upon an upgrading plan for the area, appropriate funding will have to be set aside for the implementation of any required works.
CONCLUSION:
The adoption of a course of action for improvements to the traffic and pedestrian movements in the vicinity of the shopping centre will lend itself to the opportunity to address issues of the general upgrade of the landscaping and streetscape of the area north of the centre.
This project provides the opportunity to create an attractive and pleasant environment linking the shopping centre and Beecroft Park which is a desirable outcome.
It is recommended that Option 1 be progressed, with some modifications as described in the report. It is also recommended that those who made a submission be notified of the Council's decision and invited to provide further comments. Given the concerns expressed by a number of residents of Gayton Road, those residents be invited to discuss their concerns with the Town. In addition, it is proposed the concept be again displayed. Should the Council decide to proceed with the project and seek further comments, the result of these will be reported back to Council at a future meeting.
Committee Meeting 15 October 2002
During discussion, Members considered the safety of pedestrians crossing between the Shopping Centre and Beecroft Park, particularly children. It was broadly agreed that, at the very least, any vehicular traffic in Gayton Road must be restricted to low speed through the provision of appropriate traffic calming measures.
COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
That:-
(i) the results of the public consultation conducted be noted;
(ii) Option 1 as shown be developed to a concept stage together with modifications as follows:-
(a) a roundabout at the intersection of Gayton Road and Olinda Avenue;
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 176 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
(b) the installation of median islands at the intersections of Gayton Road with Norbury Crescent (two locations), Landra Gardens East, Pandora Drive and Oban Road;
(iii) the concept plan be prepared showing the modified Option 1 plan together with streetscape enhancements. Chris Antill Planning and Urban Design Consultants be engaged to assist in the preparation of the concept plan at an estimated cost up to $2,000;
(iv) those persons who made a submission be notified of this decision and invited to provide further comments;
(v) residents of Gayton Road who made a submission be invited to discuss the proposed modifications to the street with Officers of the Town;
(vi) the concept plan be displayed for public comment.
Council Meeting 22 October 2002
During discussion, Cr Burkett reported that he had been advised from a nearby resident of the Shopping Centre that he had not received the public consultation documents delivered to residential properties in the area. Cr Burkett therefore suggested that this item be referred back to the Development and Environmental Services Committee for further consideration.
Accordingly, it was decided that the item relating to Urban Design Improvements for The Boulevard Shopping Centre be referred back to the Development and Environmental Services Committee for further consideration.
FURTHER REPORT (Post Council Meeting 22 October 2002)
The question of public consultation was raised at the previous Council meeting. Details of the consultation are outlined in the report under the Background heading. It has been suggested that not everyone in the nominated area was consulted. The person who delivered brochures on behalf of the Town has advised that brochures were delivered to all properties nominated. A question of brochures not being delivered to properties in Gayton Road was raised during the consultation period and arrangements were made to deliver further brochures. A local resident in fact volunteered to deliver these additional brochures.
Given that responses were received from people in many streets in the area, it is assumed that the brochures were received. Further, due to the advertisement in The Post newspaper and displays at the shopping centre, administration centre and Cambridge library it is considered that the consultation undertaken was appropriate and widespread, evidenced by the number of submissions received.
A further matter arising from the Council meeting in October was the question of closing Gayton Road in front of the shopping centre. The matter was raised by a resident of Gayton Road. This matter has been investigated and advice obtained from the Town's consultant traffic engineer's Connell Wagner.
The response from Connell Wagner makes reference to option 5 which was one of the initial options prepared by the consultant (Chris Antill) appointed to review the Boulevard shopping centre. Option five did not appear in the brochure prepared for
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 177 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
public consultation, rather it became option 1 in the brochure following refinement of the early options.
Response from Connell Wagner:-
“In his initial work, Chris Antill provided five options for consideration in terms of potential solutions to the road network layout and traffic and pedestrian management within the precinct of the Boulevard Shopping Centre. Connell Wagner’s recommendation was for a variation of Chris Antill’s Option 5 as a potential solution, for the following reasons:-
• We believe that there is a need to still maintain circulating traffic within the shopping centre car park and therefore do not agree that the closure of the circulating lane within the shopping centre car park. We do however, support the recommended rationalisation of the northern area of the car park to widen the pedestrian precinct immediately adjacent to the shopping centre, supported by local speed control devices. • A pedestrian plateau should link the shopping centre to the adjacent park, this plateau should continue across Gayton Road to reinforce this pedestrian spine. • At least two access points should be available to access the shopping centre car park off Gayton Road. Implementation of supplementary speed humps on Gayton Road should be considered only if a speed problem has been identified from traffic data collected along Gayton Road. • We support the re-linking of Gayton Road to provide improved conductivity within the suburb and to simplify intersection layouts within the precinct of the Boulevard Shopping Centre.
Connell Wagner provided supplementary comment on the recorded traffic figures contained in the briefing information provided by Chris Antill. The general conclusions to this advice were as follows:-
• Landra Gardens recorded 770 vehicles per day, of which we estimated around 30% to be local traffic. Landra Gardens therefore has a function road to the shopping centre access. • Gayton Road near Olinda Avenue has only recorded traffic demand of 345 vehicles per day. If Gayton Road were to be reconnected to eastern Gayton Road, we believe that the probable increase in traffic would be in the order of 200-300 vehicles per day. This scenario is consistent with our view that the actual house catchments for Gayton Road is in the order of 100 households which would provide a traffic generation of approximately 1,000 vehicles per day. As such, the demand from these residences would be serviced from each end of Gayton Road, and as such, the figure of around 500-600 vehicles per day at each end of Gayton Road would seem reasonable. • The function traffic levels on Oban Road are not expected to change significantly with the potential changes to either Gayton Road or Landra Gardens. • If Option 5 were to be implemented, some redistribution in traffic demand would occur within the local road network but traffic levels are not expected to increase on local roads above 1,000 vehicles per day, apart from the sections of road directly servicing the shopping centre. This level of traffic would be consistent with the general road hierarchy within the shopping centre precinct, and be in accordance with DPI road hierarchy guidelines.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 178 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Our general comments on the scheme proposed by Mr Mark Walker are as follows:
• The proposal does not provide reasonable circulation within the Boulevard Shopping Centre car park. Although this may be desirable in terms of local traffic management, it would be a significant issue for the shopping centre. The proposal suggests no through access on the northern shopping centre car park isle, similar to Option 2 proposed by Chris Anthill, which in our view provides an aisle which will trap motorists and create increased congestion within the shopping centre car park. If an appropriate raised pedestrian spine were to be provided along this aisle and the aisle width restricted to six (6) metres, circulating traffic speed would be managed appropriately. • The presented scheme also proposes that Gayton Road be discontinued and that Gayton Road be realigned into the car park aisle for both the western and eastern ends. Connell Wagner believes that although this may assist in reducing through traffic vehicles along Gayton Road, it is an inappropriate traffic management solution and will provide a poor level of access to residents within the City Beach area near Gayton Road and Beecroft Park. • The possible encouragement of through traffic into the Boulevard Shopping Centre car park would also reduce the safety of this car park. • As discussed above, Connell Wagner does not believe that the traffic levels along Gayton Road will increase if Gayton Road were to be connected through in an east / west direction, because of the existence of Durston Road, which, as we understand, was the fundamental reason for disconnecting Gayton Road in the original traffic management work. • The proposed scheme will also create a very poor intersection configuration between Landra Gardens and Gayton Road with high levels of movement between this intersection and the proposed round about within a very short distance. Again, in traffic terms we do not believe that this is an optimum situation. • Connell Wagner is also of the view that proposed Option 5 solution will obviously be much safer than the traffic management which currently exists in the northern car park and adjacent road network in City Beach and that the proposed traffic solution as outlined in Mr Walker’s letter does not provide any advantages which would change our recommendation in terms of our advice on Option 5.”
As reported previously, there are many variations and permutations possible for changes to upgrade the area to the north of the Boulevard Shopping Centre. The option presented to Council as the preferred option, at its meeting in October 2002, was considered to achieve the objectives of the study, which are:-
(a) To rectify existing problems associated with traffic and pedestrian movements in the vicinity of the northern side of The Boulevard Shopping Centre; and
(b) To subsequently rectify problems associated with pedestrian safety, user amenity and streetscape appearance in the same locality;
The suggested closure of Gayton Road will have wider implications for this area in terms of the effect it would likely cause to traffic movements on other streets. Traffic management is often a difficult and contentious matter to deal with. The original objectives of the study need to be recalled and, in doing, so Option 1 will achieve these.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 179 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
The matter of improvements to this area has been discussed for some time. In order to implement the improvements, the matter needs to be progressed. If alternatives which result in wider implications are considered appropriate to pursue further, consideration may also need to be given to broadening the scope and objectives of the study.
Based on the advice received from Connell Wagner, Option One is still considered an appropriate option and it is recommended that it be progressed. The opportunity for additional comments to be submitted by the public will be available during the next phase of the study.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
That:-
(i) the results of the public consultation conducted be noted;
(ii) Option 1 as shown be developed to a concept stage together with modifications as follows:-
(a) a roundabout at the intersection of Gayton Road and Olinda Avenue;
(b) the installation of median islands at the intersections of Gayton Road with Norbury Crescent (two locations), Landra Gardens East, Pandora Drive and Oban Road;
(iii) the concept plan be prepared showing the modified Option 1 plan together with streetscape enhancements. Chris Antill Planning and Urban Design Consultants be engaged to assist in the preparation of the concept plan at an estimated cost up to $2,000;
(iv) those persons who made a submission be notified of this decision and invited to provide further comments;
(v) residents of Gayton Road who made a submission be invited to discuss the proposed modifications to the street with Officers of the Town;
(vi) the concept plan be displayed for public comment.
Committee Meeting 12 November 2002
During discussion, Cr Burkett suggested that consideration of the item be deferred to enable a workshop to be held, preferably on site, to consider options for Gayton Road.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION)
That consideration of the item relating to urban design improvements for The Boulevard Shopping Centre, The Boulevard, City Beach be deferred for 3 months to enable a workshop to be held.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 180 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
FURTHER REPORT (Post Council meeting 19 November 2002)
A workshop was held at the Administration Centre on 4 February 2003 following a site inspection on location at the shopping centre. The site inspection was attended by His Worship the Mayor and five Councillors as well as the Chief Executive Officer, Executive Manager Development and Environmental Services, Executive Manager Technical Services, Manager Planning Services, Manager Works and Engineering and consultants Chris Antill and Kim Hockley.
Considerable discussion took place on site at Gayton Road and then continued during the workshop. There was general agreement that the area required modification and upgrading. Several suggestions, ideas and alternatives were put forward. The notable issues discussed included:-
• whether or not Gayton Road should be opened to re-establish the original road layout of the locality; • whether or not traffic should be prevented from travelling through the northern car park; • traffic speed; • pedestrian safety (particular mention was made in regard to children); • improvements to enable alfresco dining; • consideration being given to vehicles which service the shopping centre; • consideration being given for provision being made for users of the centre such as trades persons who often have a larger vehicle or a vehicle and a trailer (e.g. Lawn mowing contractors); • extension of Beecroft Park into Gayton Road.
At the end of discussion, there was general consensus that Gayton Road should be re- opened and that circulation through the northern car park should remain open. It was recognised that cutting off access within the car park would create congestion and inconvenience shoppers. There was also agreement that there should be severe traffic calming devices in place to restrict traffic speed and discourage use of the car park as a through route or "short cut". It was not considered necessary to extend Beecroft Park, but that a strong link with safe access should be created between the park and the shopping centre. Further, the point was made that added space in front of the centre would be of greater value, allowing more room for alfresco trade.
Essentially, there was agreement to re-establishing the original road pattern of the locality. This included opening Gayton Road, providing a cul-de-sac towards the northern end of Landra Gardens East, establishing a "T" junction at the intersection of Landra Gardens West and Gayton Road and modifying the existing median island along Gayton Road in front of the shopping centre with appropriate traffic management devices to achieve the objective of controlling traffic speed and improving safety. This would direct through traffic to designated roads rather than ''rat running" through the car park.
With these general principles in mind, it was agreed that the next step would be to proceed to develop a more detailed plan which could include the various road modifications and other changes to improve the overall appearance of the locality. Once such a plan is prepared, the Council could review the proposal and then proceed to display the plan for further public comment.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 181 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
In light of this, it is recommended that the Town engages consultants Kim Hockley of Connell Wagner and Chris Antill of Chris Antill Planning and Urban Design to assist in the development of the concept. It was previously recommended that an amount of $2000 be set aside to prepare a concept plan. Given the additional input now being sought of both consultants, it is recommended that an additional $1000 be allocated for this purpose.
Committee Meeting 18 February 2003
During discussion, the Administration was requested to prepare revised drawings in accordance with the outcomes of the workshop held on 4 February 2003.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr McAullay, seconded by Cr Burkett
That:-
(i) the results of the public consultation conducted be noted;
(ii) the outcomes of the workshop held on 4 February 2003 be noted;
(iii) a concept plan be prepared showing the various modifications to the road layout as discussed at the workshop noted in (ii) together with streetscape enhancements. Kim Hockley of Connell Wagner and Chris Antill Planning and Urban Design Consultants be engaged to assist in the preparation of the concept plan at an estimated cost up to $3,000;
(iv) the concept plan to be prepared is to be considered by the Council prior to being placed on display for public comment.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 182 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
DES03.03
SWAN LOCATION 12965 RESERVE A45409 – BOLD PARK. CORNER OF OCEANIC DRIVE AND PERRY LAKES DRIVE, CITY BEACH (File Reference: PRO 1620)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To consider the application for planning approval and to forward a recommendation to the Western Australian Planning Commission.
The proposal put forward by the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority is to construct new buildings to accommodate a new administration building for the existing Bold Park administration staff and to establish the Western Australian Ecology Centre. The works are to be located in the north-eastern corner of Bold Park, in the general location of Perry House near Oceanic Drive and Perry Lakes Drive.
BACKGROUND:
BA/DA REFERENCE: 5DA -2003 LANDOWNER: Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority APPLICANT: Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority ZONING: MRS Zoning: Parks and Recreation Town Planning Scheme No.1: Parks and Recreation
MRS Reserve - Statutory Control/Responsibility
The subject land on which the new buildings are to be constructed is reserved under the Metropolitan Region Scheme and (by law) the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No.1 as Parks and Recreation. Accordingly, approval for such lies with the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC). Council must assess the application and provide a recommendation to the WAPC.
Proposed alterations to the Reabold Hill Access Road, evident on this plan, was considered by the Technical Services Committee at its meeting held on11 February 2003 (Item TS03.06). This report considered proposals to build a new two way access road from Oceanic Drive to the Reabold Hill Lookout and forms part of the works associated with the development of the Bold Park Environmental Management Plan.
The recommendation of the Committee in that report supports the proposal in that it is in keeping with the objectives of the management plan and that amendments to access off Oceanic Drive will provide improved vehicle and pedestrian access to the Reabold Hill Lookout and will not disadvantage the existing exit from the Quarry Amphitheatre or the existing traffic access along Oceanic Drive.
Current Proposal:
The proposed development entails the following works:-
• Construction of a new office building to provide new staff accommodation that will replace the existing Bold Park Administration building; • Construction of a new building to house the proposed Western Australian Ecology Centre; and
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 183 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
• Construct a new works depot and storage facility to replace existing. • Construction of two permanent carparks (14 bays and 19 bays) and an overflow carpark with a 38 bay capacity. • Construction of a new access road from Perry lakes Drive that will serve the new buildings and also Perry House. The existing access road off Oceanic Drive to Perry House is to be removed.
The applicant has provided the following information in support of the proposed development:-
“The intended function and purpose of the Ecology Centre is as follows:-
• Provide new staff accommodation, works depot and storage for the ongoing management of Bold Park; • Provide a venue for relevant community groups, environmental and scientific research organisations to conduct their activities; • Provide new facilities for community and teaching opportunities to foster awareness appreciation and support for biodiversity conservation in Bold Park and in general.
The Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority plan to undertake extensive restoration activities to Bold Park which include associated research programs. It is anticipated the completed Ecology Centre will provide opportunities for the promotion of Bold Park as a prime demonstration area for leading urban bushland management and ecological restoration activities both nationally and internationally.
The new administration staff accommodation will replace the existing Bold Park administration building located to the south of Perry House.
The new works depot and storage facility is a reconfiguration in the vicinity of the existing works depot area. This is mainly to achieve a more practical layout, additional vehicle storage and nursery area and to incorporate the proposed new park vehicle access and pedestrian circulation system.
It is envisaged that Perry House will continue to be utilised as the office premises for the WA Wildflower Society and Birds Australia organisations. No significant changes to the existing building are proposed as part of this development application.
It is proposed that the vehicle access off Oceanic Drive to the north-eastern corner of Bold Park will be removed. All vehicle access will be off Perry Lakes Drive via a new access road into the site. The Bold Park Master Plan recommends that the only vehicles to obtain access to Reabold Scenic Drive from this part of the park will be staff, service vehicles for parks and emergency services. The scenic drive up the existing Reabold Hill/Quarry Amphitheatre car park will therefore be predominately for pedestrian and cycle use only.
The existing parking area for 31 vehicles to the east of Perry house will be increased in size to accommodate 57 vehicles. In addition, a Bold Park staff parking area for 14 vehicles is to be provided with an additional 3 short term bays and a disabled parking bay adjacent to the new multi purpose facility. A car drop off area and bus drop off area has also been incorporated into the new traffic circulation system.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 184 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
The approach to site planning and design of the Ecology Centre is intended to minimise the environmental impact to the site and form a sensitive development in keeping with the aims and objectives of the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority. The restoration and re-establishment of the natural Bold Park landscape will be extended into the existing grassed areas around the Ecology Centre precinct.”
CONCLUSION:
The plans indicate that the development as stated by the applicant is in the general area of that currently occupied by Perry House and an area that is currently open grassland. The plans indicate that the proposed dwellings are all single level and are to be constructed without major disturbance to surrounding topography. The Ecology Centre and administration offices together with the existing Perry House will serve to screen much of the view of the workshop and vehicle storage areas from vehicles traveling along Oceanic Drive and Perry Lakes Drive. As stated by the applicant, the design of the buildings are is considered to be sympathetic to the location and the proposed restoration and revegetation of the area will further diffuse the presence of the buildings.
As highlighted earlier in the report, the approval for the said development lies with the Western Australian Planning Commission. The Town does not exercise any development controls over reserved land but is able to make recommendations in respect to any proposal.
In this instance, the proposed use of the land would be considered in keeping with the status of the land and the development and associated works appropriate for the location.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
Moved by Cr Burkett, seconded by Cr MacRae
That in accordance with the provisions of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme, the Council refers the application, submitted by Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority, for new buildings and associated facilities to the THE WESTERN AUSTRALIAN PLANNING COMMISSION with a recommendation for APPROVAL at Reserve A455409 Bold Park, corner Oceanic Drive and Perry Lakes Drive, City Beach, as shown on the application and plans dated 21 January 2003.
Footnote:
The WAPC be advised that Council requests that the following matters be included in any approval that may be issued by the WAPC:-
1. Details be provided of the reconfigured footpath and vehicle access adjacent to Reabold Hill Scenic Drive and Oceanic Drive, with respect to:- - vehicle and pedestrian thoroughfare 2. Full engineering details of the intersection of the new access road and Perry Lakes Drive be provided.
Committee Meeting 18 February 2003
During discussion, Members noted the sensitivity of the site and agreed to add a further condition which would seek to ensure that the decision of the building is sympathetic to the location.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 185 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Amendment
Moved by Cr MacRae, seconded by Cr Burkett
That a further footnote be added to the motion as follows:-
3. Applicant to ensure that the design of the building is sympathetic to the location.
Carried
Members requested that the vote of all those present be recorded:-
For: Crs Burkett, MacRae and McAullay Against: Cr Anderton
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr McAullay, seconded by Cr Burkett
That in accordance with the provisions of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme, the Council refers the application, submitted by Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority, for new buildings and associated facilities to the THE WESTERN AUSTRALIAN PLANNING COMMISSION with a recommendation for APPROVAL at Reserve A455409 Bold Park, corner Oceanic Drive and Perry Lakes Drive, City Beach, as shown on the application and plans dated 21 January 2003.
Footnote:
The WAPC be advised that Council requests that the following matters be included in any approval that may be issued by the WAPC:-
1. Details be provided of the reconfigured footpath and vehicle access adjacent to Reabold Hill Scenic Drive and Oceanic Drive, with respect to:- - vehicle and pedestrian thoroughfare. 2. Full engineering details of the intersection of the new access road and Perry Lakes Drive be provided. 3. Applicant to ensure that the design of the building is sympathetic to the location.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 186 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
DES03.04
PROPOSED SUBDIVISION - UNDERWOOD AVENUE, SHENTON PARK (File Reference: PLA 0073)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To note a proposed subdivision of land located along Underwood Avenue between Selby Street and Brockway Road, Shenton Park. The site is located within the City of Nedlands.
BACKGROUND:
The Western Australian Planning Commission has referred the proposal to the Town as a matter of courtesy and to keep the Town informed of progress of development of the site.
The land is owned by the University of Western Australia which has been seeking to gain approval for the subdivision of the land for eventual redevelopment for some period of time. A number of issues have had to be addressed in relation to the site. These have been in relation to the retention of bush land as it relates to "Bush Forever" and proximity to the Subiaco Waste Water Treatment Plant and its associated Odour issues.
DETAILS:
With the exception of the intersection of Underwood Avenue and Brockway Road, the subject land has no common boundary with the Town. The application which has been submitted proposes the creation of three "Superlots" as the first step toward the eventual development of the land and for the retention of an area of bush land. Prior to the superlots being further subdivided, the upgrade of the Subiaco Waste Water Treatment Plant will be necessary to ensure the development will not be adversely affected by odour.
COMMENT:
From a planning point of view, it is not considered that this proposal raises any issues of relevance to the Town. The land has been the subject of a widespread community campaign to protect the bushland. It has remained predominantly a local issue and one which has not involved the Town of Cambridge.
As such, the Western Australian Planning Commission can be advised that the Town has no comment to offer.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
Moved by Cr Burkett, seconded by Cr MacRae
That the proposed subdivision for the land at Underwood Avenue, Shenton Park (WAPC Ref: 120954) within the City of Nedlands be noted and the Western Australian Planning Commission be advised that the Council has no comment to offer.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 187 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Committee Meeting 18 February 2003
Amendment
Moved by Cr MacRae, seconded by Cr Burkett
That the motion be amended by adding the words “at this stage”.
Carried
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr McAullay, seconded by Cr Burkett
That the proposed subdivision for the land at Underwood Avenue, Shenton Park (WAPC Ref: 120954) within the City of Nedlands be noted and the Western Australian Planning Commission be advised that the Council has no comment to offer at this stage.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 188 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
DES03.05
LOT 3 (NO. 5) STATION STREET, WEMBLEY – RADIOLOGY CENTRE (File Reference: PRO 0285)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To determine the application for planning approval.
BACKGROUND:
BA/DA REFERENCE: 1DA 2003 LANDOWNER: Grandifer Pty Ltd APPLICANT: Windsor Knight Pty Ltd ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme No.1: Residential/Commercial
The site was restricted by an easement to the rear of Lots 1 – 4 Station Street. The easement prevented construction, other than roof cover, to ensure that access remained freely available.
The owner of the land has successfully arranged with the only other landowner (Lot 4) also encumbered by the easement to have it formally removed from the land titles. This now allows full development of the site.
COMPLIANCE:
Land use permissibility Consulting rooms “AA”
POLICY:
Policy Requirements Required Proposed (Residential/Commercial area) Plot ratio 0.5 0.67 Plot ratio (non-residential 33% non-residential 100% non- component) of 0.5 plot ratio residential of 0.67 plot ratio Parking 24 car bays @ 4 10 car bays bays for every consulting room plus bays for conference room
DETAILS:
Lot Area: 751 square metres
Approval is sought for the development of a radiology centre on the above site.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 189 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
The proposal is to demolish the existing residential dwelling and construction of a purpose built two storey commercial building. The building will be constructed from tilt up concrete panels with a flat metal deck roof. On the ground floor there is a reception, two general consulting rooms, two ultra sound rooms, a Cat Scan (CT) room and a CT control room, a screening room, an office and typing area, dark room, 8 change rooms and toilets. The upper floor has a staff lunch room, staff amenity and practice conference room, stationery room, archive room, toilets and a garden deck facing out onto Station Street.
The 10 parking bays are to the front of the building with a single crossover to Station Street. The plans show a 0.6 metre landscaping strip fronting Station Street.
There is no residential component incorporated in the development.
The proposed consulting rooms are defined as an “AA” use (ie a use not permitted unless the Council has granted planning approval.)
Applicant’s Ground For Request
The applicant has provided considerable information in support of the application:
Oldfield Knott Architects Pty Ltd (Architects for the development)
27 December 2002
“Windsor Knight Properties has chosen this property location with SKG to be the tenant of a new building designed specifically for their nature of operation and due to the site’s close proximity to St. John of God Hospital. The siting of the building to the rear of the lot reflects that proportion of the floor plan necessary to satisfactorily accommodate the radiology operation at ground floor level with operatives located either side of a central support/processing node. This enables the facility to be serviced by minimal staff, whilst offering patients, many of who are physically impaired or disabled, the maximum amenity in gaining direct access to a highly visible single point of entry, from carparking directly off the street.
Siting the building as proposed makes the most efficient use of the site area available, being a result of the balance between the setbacks and the need to provide as many carparking spaces as possible on a small site, while minimising internal vehiclar circulation.
We are unable to introduce carparking to the rear of the property, as the vehicular and pedestrian access along the side of the building would result in the balance of the width of the site being too narrow to cater for the nature of SKG’s operation the primary criteria for building selection being ready access at ground floor level with patient services at that same level. Rear parking would require patients to negotiate the length of the site, against oncoming traffic to enter the building at the required one point of control required for the facility’s efficient management of patients.
This point of entry is the focal point of the building, presenting a professional image to the patients it is built to service, and therefore is also the front of the building formally addressing the streetscape into which it will be placed, in the traditional manner.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 190 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Carefully considered landscaping to the front of the site will soften the impact of the proposed carpark, while continuing the diminished scale of the development at street frontage already evident by the use of the adjoining site for carparking. The limited floor space available at ground floor level has caused us to locate all staff amenity/support and southern storage/archival facilities at first floor level, adopting a zero lot line approach to setbacks to the adjoining southern site used for carparking, while minimising the impact of the new building to the residential site on the northern boundary, by stepping the building away from the boundary, and preserving overview amenity by inserting windows into the setback section of the north facing elevation at second storey level, and thereby securing an overview cut off with the lower storey parapet. We also seek to adopt a rear boundary setback of 3040mm, equivalent to the width of the easement that exists along the rear boundary of the subject site.”
Oldfield Knott Architects Pty Ltd
10 January 2003
Please find this supplementary Submission in support of the above D.A application dated 8 January 2003, which specifically addresses the Plot Ratio concession requested in relation to that project.
This development will contribute positively to the built environment in this locale for the following reasons:-
• The land use proposed will enhance the concept of a district service centre of a compatible nature to existing uses, rather than the adhoc infill development typical of this area in the past. The land use proposed, supports the Town of Cambridge’s expressed desire for compatibility between adjacent developments, to promote a convenient distribution of facilities for the community and the further enhancement of this area as a district service centre with a long established Medical theme. • The building proposed is custom designed for the use anticipated, it will be a quality building, discreet in its façade articulation, sensitive to the adjoining properties by utilising generous setbacks, and will be well constructed utilising quality materials and finishes. Accordingly, this development will have integrity within the built environment, and will serve as a fitting benchmark for other like developments, which will eventuate on adjacent sites in the near future. • This site is zoned Residential/ Commercial and the Plot Ratio (PR) for each use differs, ie., residential use would be R60 under the R-Codes, attracting a PR of 0.65., whereas commercial use attracts a PR of 0.5. It should be also noted that a residential building, compliant with both the R-Codes and the defined PR, could be built on this site, and be of a significantly larger scale than the current commercial development before Council for development approval. • The amenity of the area will be preserved due to:- 1. The provision of significantly more parking spaces (10) than is required to support one medical specialist (4), thereby curtailing the need for patients to park in Station Street. This decision is in support of the Town of Cambridge’s Policy in relation to non-residential developments on sites that are zoned for Residential/Commercial, but adjacent to residential buildings. It should be noted that the adjoining single residential property is currently used for storage purposes and the property on the southern boundary is proposed to be used for carparking.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 191 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
2. Landscaping to the street frontage and adjoining residential site will create privacy to the residence and screen the carparking to the front of the site. The use of reflective glass to the street elevation of this building will also reflect the images of the statement trees giving the impression of a very dense planting statement. 3. A conscious design intent to diminish the scale of the development has been adopted, utilising setbacks from both the street frontage and the adjoining residential site.
It should be noted that a component of the total floor area in excess of that permissible under the PR ruling provides staff amenities, educational and archival support only to the radiological clinic operation, all of which is of no commercial advantage to the tenant’s business. This educational building area is achieved at first floor level, well setback from both street frontage and the adjoining residential boundary, discreetly enclosed behind a building façade expressing simplified elegance in a location renown for its commercial brashness.
The provision of these support facilities shall add significantly to the development of this business within a now acknowledged “medical centre” precinct within the Town of Cambridge. The tenant is Australia’s leading medical imaging practice, with a high standard facility within the adjacent St. Johns and it is proposed that this new facility will compliment that. In addition, the recently approved Oncology practice adjoining the site enjoys a close medical liaison with the proposed Radiology facility.
This foregoing approach supports the policy of orderly and proper planning of the locality, while at the same time addressing the conservation of the amenity of the area considering the scale, intensity and design of this proposed building is compatible with the surrounding built residential scale.
A development such as this will be a positive contribution to the higher quality landuse the Town of Cambridge appears to support within its policy statements and accordingly should be supported by the Town of Cambridge using its discretionary powers to support a relaxation of the Plot Ratio controls on this site.”
SKG Radiology (proposed tenant of the development)
2 December 2002 “I confirm that SKG Radiology intends to provide radiology services from the proposed site, with only one consultant (radiologist) operating within the premises. This consultant will be supported by approximately 5 technical staff, who operate the equipment and provide administrative support. We do not plan to have any additional full time consultants on site, as it is a branch being established to operate to a similar size and capacity as our many other metropolitan community branches that have a single radiologist.
We envisage that we will provide paid parking for staff offsite, to ensure that all on-site parking is available for SKG Radiology patients only. As you will be aware from previous developments, patients to our facilities are often impaired/disabled and it is vital for our practice to have easy, accessible and highly visible parking.
With regard to the additional facilities, we require capacity for on-site storage and archiving, along with approximately two offices and a staff amenities room upstairs. The amenities room would double as a meeting room upstairs to cater for SKG’s ongoing staff training needs.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 192 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
We have calculated that the likely maximum number of patients per hour would be eight patients parking per hour.”
Further information was submitted by the applicant after a meeting with Council staff to discuss the proposal.
Windsor Knight Properties (applicant)
20 January 2003
(In part) “The parking issue obviously needs more explanation. In the past two years I have developed two of these facilities with SKG Radiology as the tenant. In each case, the Local Authority has demanded 4 bays per consulting room, similar to the stance you are taking at the moment. The Local Authorities involved are the City of Gosnells and the City of Bunbury and both Councils have very similar wording in their Town Planning Schemes.
Eventually I was able to demonstrate to both Authorities that Radiology Clinics are not like other medical facilities and to treat them as such in terms of parking requirements is not appropriate or equitable.
The fundamental difference between a Radiology Clinic and a conventional medical centre is that a Radiology Clinic is a single consultant practice. I am referring here to Radiology Clinics in suburban situations as opposed to hospital facilities.
A conventional medical premise has a number of consulting rooms that are actually occupied by a consultant who will receive a patient, attend to the patient and the patient will then leave. Such practices can generate large numbers of patient visits per day, and 4 bays per consulting room are well justified.
A Radiology Clinic does not operate in this way. Whilst there may be several rooms with different items of equipment in them, the simple fact remains that the one consultant in attendance must process each patient. Another way to look at the situation is to consider the whole radiology area as one large room (excluding reception, toilets etc.) that could be called one consulting room. The single consultant could then locate several different machines in that one consulting room, and each patient would then be treated at the machine appropriate to their needs.
In other words, Radiology has developed beyond simple X-Ray machines and a single consultant needs different machines to meet the demands of the referring GP’s and specialists.
It is irrelevant that there may be patients waiting in each of these different machine rooms, even if a staff person has prepared them for treatment, because until the single consultant is able to process the patient, the patient’s treatment is not finalised.
My explanation regarding the operation of the Radiology Clinic is not one contrived to avoid Council’s parking requirements, but rather an explanation of the facts.
It must be remembered that Radiology Clinics of this style and size are a very recent phenomena. Until now, radiology in a suburban location was restricted to simple x-ray procedures, utilising small areas of 100-150m2. More complex medical imaging occurred at the larger hospitals. I refer you to the letter provided by SKG in this regard.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 193 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Technology has now moved on and companies like SKG are able to offer an expanded range of medical imaging services in facilities like the one envisaged at 5 Station Street, Wembley. Although the range of services available at these new facilities has increased they are still operated by a single consultant.
I believe Council’s planning scheme has a parking requirement that relates to conventional medical consulting rooms. It was not written with Radiology Clinics in mind and therefore the rigid adherence to the scheme text is unreasonable and unjustified.
As has been explained, SKG will not permit staff to park at this facility and alternative arrangements will be made for them.
I further refer you to the letter from SKG Radiology where they estimate the maximum number of patients per hour to be eight (8). Not all patients will drive and park their own cars on the site and our experience at the other locations is that the car bays provided have never been used to capacity.
SKG is Australia’s leading medical imaging company. It is one of Australia’s top one hundred listed public companies. It would not contemplate leasing this facility if it fell short of the required parking. SKG would not confirm in writing the information they have if it was false or misleading in any way. They would not provide these written comments to the Town of Cambridge to facilitate a development approval that ultimately they found was lacking in any regard.
Regarding the lack of landscaping for screening purposes, I will address this issue and the density to achieve the Council’s requirement, which I assume is to hide the cars parked at the front of the building. In doing so, I would point out that this property is joined on its southern boundary by a car park and faces a car park on the opposite side of the road.
In conclusion I would make the following points.
• We seek your understanding on the parking issue and asked that you appreciate the difference between conventional medical consulting rooms and a modern medical imaging facility in terms of patient usage. There is a vast difference, which the Council’s planning scheme, when it was prepared, would not have been in a position to anticipate and provide for. Please take time to consider the comments from the writer and SKG Radiology on this critical issue. • Our intention is to create a building that the Town of Cambridge, SKG and we will be proud of. Unfortunately the vehicles that park at the front of the building are a fact of life, however we will do all in our power to provide dense screening to the car park element of the proposal.
SKG Radiology
23 January 2003
(In part) “As discussed with you and by the way of clarification, except for some minor general x-ray and dental procedures, every patient is processed by the single consultant operating these rooms. From an operational perspective, SKG Radiology does not assign a staff member to every piece of equipment nor a patient to every consulting room at the same time. These issues are dependant upon the consultant’s work pattern and the particular diagnostic imaging procedures required. I refer you to
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 194 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
our original advice that states that a single consultant will process approximately 8 patients per hour. I also reiterate that our staff will be provided with off-site parking, and SKG Radiology is comfortable that the planned parking sufficiently meets our parking needs for this facility.”
Neighbours Comment
Advertising was not required under the provisions of the town planning scheme.
COMMENT:
West Leederville Planning Precinct (P5)
The property falls within Town Planning Scheme No. 1 Precinct No. 5 (West Leederville). The subject site forms part of the Residential/Commercial zone in this precinct. The Statement of Intent for the Residential/Commercial zone in this precinct states as follows:-
• Combined residential and commercial developments will be permitted within this area. Commercial development cannot occur independently of residential development.
• Buildings will be low scale and setback from all boundaries in landscaped gardens. Control will be maintained over the design of new buildings to minimise potential conflict with combined and adjacent residential development.
• Car parking should be screened from view, well landscaped, and designed in a manner that avoids conflict between residential and non-residential parking.
The development standards for the Residential/Commercial area further require:
• The plot ratio of any building or part thereof used for non-residential purposes cannot exceed 33% of the maximum allowable plot ratio of 0.5.
The intent is for either purely residential or a combination of residential/commercial. The proposal is for 100% commercial. Notwithstanding this, for reasons outlined in this report, it is considered that there is an argument in this case to consider a departure from this statement of intent.
The applicant proposes to use the site for the purpose of a Radiology Clinic which is an ‘AA’ use within the Residential/Commercial zone under Town Planning Scheme No. 1. The classification as an “AA” use ensures that issues such as the appropriateness of the activity and other issues such as adequacy of access and carparking can be addressed in an application for planning approval.
It should also be noted that the general statement of intent for the West Leederville P5 Planning Precinct indicates, in part, that “medical and medical support services will be grouped around the St John of God Hospital rather than expanding in an ad hoc manner along main roads and further eroding established residential areas”. The subject land is located in close proximity to the St John of God Hospital being on the opposite side of Station Street. It should also be noted that the property on the corner of Cambridge Street and Station Street is used for medical purposes. There is some argument that there is already a continuation of medical support services surrounding
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 195 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
St John of God Hospital on Station Street and that the zoning should be amended to reflect this.
The proposed radiology clinic is a commercial (medical) development with no residential component. Therefore, it is necessary to consider the impact of the proposed development on the residential/commercial character of the surrounding area.
Previously, the residential property owners facing Station Street (between Salvado Road and Cambridge Street) have expressed, during past submission periods for the Oncology Centre on the corner of Salvado Road and Station Street, a desire for commercial development to be allowed on the properties due to the poor residential amenity of the locality with commercial development on all sides. This concern is acknowledged and the request for rezoning to reflect medical uses without any residential component for all properties on the west side of Station Street is supported. This could either be done by a Scheme Amendment to zone the land ‘medical’ or by an addition to the policy to note that lots fronting Station Street are not required to incorporate a residential component and could be done now or at the time of a Scheme review.
Council can, however, exercise its discretion to vary the policy for this property, as well as the application currently under consideration. It should be noted that the remainder of the Residential/Commercial zone on Salvado Road should remain.
Plot Ratio
The merits of the residential/commercial mix being 33% of the maximum 0.5 plot ratio have already been discussed above.
The development standards for the precinct specify a maximum plot ratio for the site of 0.5. The proposal shows a plot ratio of 0.67. The ground floor area is 320.0 square metres and the upper floor area is 180.5 square metres. To put the variation to the plot ratio into perspective, the ground floor area alone constitutes a plot ratio of 0.43.
The applicant argues that the plot ratio variation is necessary to accommodate all the facilities and equipment required for the practice. It is agreed that bulky equipment would add to floor space and hence impact on plot ratio.
The upper storey includes a conference room/staff amenities with a floor space of 100.6 square metres. The use of the conference room/staff amenities may be used in addition to the day to day practice of the radiology clinic and without it the plot ratio would be reduced to 0.53.
It is acknowledged that the two storey building bulk from the streetscape is not detrimental to the amenity of the area due to the number of non-residential uses already present in the vicinity.
Carparking
The Town Planning Scheme and Policy requires carparking for a consulting room on the basis of 4 bays for every consulting room. It is important to note that parking provision is dependent on the number of rooms as opposed to the number of medical consultants.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 196 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
The plans submitted with the application show 6 rooms which could be potential “consulting rooms.” These are supported by a total of 8 change rooms. Based on 6 consulting rooms the parking requirement is 24 carbays. Ten carbays have been shown on the plans.
It should be noted that the conference room/staff amenities area have not been included in the parking calculation. The applicant has stated that the use of the up- stairs conference room/staff amenities area would be after hours and hence would not impact on the daily parking demand. Nevertheless, the conference room/staff amenities could generate parking demand and hence additional parking bays would normally be required. From discussions with the architects, the conference room could accommodate 10 to 20 people. Hence there is the potential parking demand in addition to the consulting room practice which could be as high as 20 car bays. This will mean the total requirement would be in the vicinity of 44 car bays.
The applicant has stated that the proposal is for a single practitioner only and due to the nature of the business the parking provided would be adequate for the use. There is no disagreement that the operation of the practice is for a single practitioner only. Council’s carparking policy, however, is not based on the number of consultants but on the number of consulting rooms. It is unlikely that of the 6 “consulting rooms” shown on the plan that only one will have a patient at a time. The fact that there are up to 5 technical staff and 8 change rooms suggests that there will be more than one patient attended to at any one time. The issue here is not necessarily that there is only one consultant but that more than one patient can be attended to at anyone time. It is the number of patients that create the greater parking demand.
In the supporting information provided by SKG Radiology, it acknowledges that technical staff are able to perform minor procedures to patients either with or without the radiologist present. This highlights the appropriateness of Council’s parking requirements based on the number of consulting rooms and not based on the number of consultants.
The applicant has also stated that staff will be required to park off-site. Although this may eventuate in practice, it is not a matter that can be taken into consideration when assessing the planning merits of this application. The largest parking area in the vicinity is St. John of God Hospital. In general, parking provision for St. John of God Hospital would not allow for carbays to be taken up by other businesses and there is no evidence of a general oversupply of parking.
For the purposes of the planning assessment, all staff parking and patient parking must be provided on site. Based on the staff numbers provided by the applicant, there would be a parking demand of 6 carbays (1 consultant and 5 technical staff). There are only 10 bays on site.
The applicant has also stated that the expected number of patients per hour based on other practices, would be approximately 8. The parking demand generated from the expected number of patients per hour and the number of staff far exceeds the 10 parking bays provided on site.
Street parking along this section of Station Street is in high demand. It is not considered appropriate or feasible to allow the parking deficiency impact on street parking on Station Street.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 197 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Landscaping
The landscaping provided on site is shown as a 600mm strip in front of the car bays for a length of 12.7 metres. This represents 7.6 square metres.
The Policy provisions for landscaping state:-
4) Landscaping: The landscaped area to be provided should be substantially related to the residential uses.
It is acknowledged that there is no minimum area requirement for landscaping nor is there a residential component associated with the development. It is not however, considered that 7.6 square metres is proportional appropriate for this commercial development. When this matter was discussed with the applicant, there was a commitment to readdress the level of landscaping. This commitment is reflected in the applicant’s subsequent additional information although no amended plans have been submitted.
STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS:
Consideration of this application is consistent with the Town’s Strategic Plan for the provision of orderly planning to enhance the Town’s natural and built environment through effective and responsible use of the town planning scheme.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Nil.
CONCLUSION:
In so far as it is grouping medical uses around St John of God hospital, the proposed use is consistent with the policy statement for West Leederville. However, the intensification of the non-residential component of the development with the demolition of two houses on Station Street (currently not used for residential purposes) means that the policy statement for Residential/Commercial uses on the west side of Station Street needs to be revisited. It is considered that amending the scheme to not require a residential component for these lots is appropriate.
The proposed design and bulk of the building maintains a residential scale and will help the development to blend in with the streetscape. The intended use of the site would complement the existing surrounding uses.
The variations to the plot ratio and carparking are, however, considered excessive. The plot ratio variation could be argued, in isolation, as not detrimentally impacting on the streetscape by virtue of scale, height and bulk. This would be the case if the plot ratio was the only variation. In this case, it is not and therefore all the variations need to be considered as a “package.” A further point on the plot ratio variation is that the Oncology Centre on the adjoining site, although not complying with the residential/commercial mix, maintained a plot ratio below the maximum allowable of 0.5.
The plot ratio variation for this application in some way impacts on the shortfall in carparking. The floorspace configuration making up the plot ratio does not leave enough room for the provision of the required parking bays. An opportunity to provide the required carbays is to have an undercroft parking area.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 198 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Although it is agreed that Council should consider some flexibility in determining the minimum of parking bays on site, the current application discrepancy is too great ranging from 10 carbays on site to a requirement of 24 carbays (potentially 44 car bays if the conference room facility is included.)
By the applicant’s admission, a turnover of 8 patients per hour plus 6 staff carbays would equate to a minimum of 14 carbays. This still does not include additional carbays for the conference room/staff amenities.
In addition, Council needs to be mindful that if the use is approved as submitted with 10 carbays on site, should the use change to some other form of medical practice the parking demand may be even higher causing a greater parking variation.
Based on the points above the proposal is not supported. The applicant should reconsider whether the proposed lot size of the site meets the development needs of the proposal or alternatively consider reducing the size of the development and/or creating an undercroft parking area to increase the number of carbays. As the applicant has already been verbally advised of the planning concerns and has not presented any amended plans and the fact that any changes to the plan would likely be significant, it is considered that a refusal is appropriate.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
Moved by Cr MacRae,
That:-
(i) in accordance with the provisions of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme and the Metropolitan Region Scheme and having regard to the matters it is required to consider by the Schemes generally and in particular as the proposal would be contrary to the orderly and proper planning of the locality by virtue of:-
(a) non compliance with Clause 7.5 of Planning Policy P5 West Leederville namely, plot ratio of any building or part thereof used for non-residential purposes cannot exceed 33% of the maximum allowable plot ratio of 0.5; (b) non compliance with Part 6.0 of Planning Policy Transport, Access and Parking of Planning Policy namely, 4 carbays are required for every consulting room. The shortfall in parking is based on the number of consulting rooms, number of staff and number of expected patients;
the Council REFUSES, the application by Windsor Knight Pty Ltd at Lot 3 (No. 5) Station Street, Wembley as shown on plans dated 8 January 2003;
(ii) the applicant for the proposed Radiology Clinic on Lot 3 (No.5) Station Street, Wembley be advised that:-
(a) in relation to part 1(a) of the recommendation a 100% commercial development without a residential component is supported; (b) the use is supported; (c) the design, scale and bulk of the proposed building from a streetscape perspective is supported.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 199 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Committee Meeting 18 February 2003
The Administration’s recommendation lapsed for the want of a seconder.
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Burkett
That in accordance with Part 4 of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No.1, Council APPROVES the application by Windsor Knight Pty Ltd for a proposed Radiology Clinic on Lot 3 (No. 5) Station Street, Wembley as shown on plans dated 8 January 2003.
During discussion, divergent views were expressed as to the adequacy of the parking provision and the availability of parking in the area in general. The Administration was requested to provide further information on the Oncology Centre located next door, in particular plot ratio and parking compliance, prior to the next meeting of Council.
The motion was then put and lost. The Presiding Member exercised his casting vote against the motion.
The Administration’s original motion refusing the application was then put and carried. The Presiding Member exercised his casting vote in favour of the motion.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
Moved by Cr MacRae, seconded by Cr McAullay
That:-
(i) in accordance with the provisions of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme and the Metropolitan Region Scheme and having regard to the matters it is required to consider by the Schemes generally and in particular as the proposal would be contrary to the orderly and proper planning of the locality by virtue of:-
(a) non compliance with Clause 7.5 of Planning Policy P5 West Leederville namely, plot ratio of any building or part thereof used for non-residential purposes cannot exceed 33% of the maximum allowable plot ratio of 0.5; (b) non compliance with Part 6.0 of Planning Policy Transport, Access and Parking of Planning Policy namely, 4 carbays are required for every consulting room. The shortfall in parking is based on the number of consulting rooms, number of staff and number of expected patients;
the Council REFUSES, the application by Windsor Knight Pty Ltd at Lot 3 (No. 5) Station Street, Wembley as shown on plans dated 8 January 2003;
(ii) the applicant for the proposed Radiology Clinic on Lot 3 (No.5) Station Street, Wembley be advised that:-
(a) in relation to part 1(a) of the recommendation a 100% commercial development without a residential component is supported; (b) the use is supported; (c) the design, scale and bulk of the proposed building from a streetscape perspective is supported.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 200 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Council Meeting 25 February 2003
During discussion, the Mayor advised that the applicants have requested that this matter be withdrawn from Council’s consideration.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 201 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
DES03.06
PROPOSED MOBILE TELEPHONE MICROCELL INSTALLATIONS AGREEMENT (File Reference: PRO 0102)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To determine underlying principles in determining suitable locations for mobile telephone micro cell installations.
BACKGROUND:
REFERENCE: PLA 0052 LANDOWNER: Town of Cambridge APPLICANT: Telstra ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme No.1: various zones
DETAILS:
Telstra proposes to form an agreement with Council to allow micro cell installations to be placed on street furniture which will be predominantly signs such as no parking/parking located within the road reserve. Council has care and control of the road reserves and as such Telstra has approached the Town.
The details of the micro cell installation are outlined in the Applicant’s Grounds for Request section of this report.
No specific location for the micro cells have been identified in the agreement presented to Council.
The agreement sought with the Town is similar to agreements approved by the Town of Vincent and the City of Perth.
The micro cell installations are required to comply with national regulations relating to electromagnetic emissions (EME). The health issues associated with EME is therefore not discussed further in this report.
Applicants Grounds for Request
Telstra has provided the following information to support the proposal.
22 July 2002
“Telstra is proposing to improve the signal strength and call capacity for the Mobile Telephone Network utilising a technology called Micro Cells. A micro cell is a base station which is approximately 450mm X 450mm in size and is designed to be pole mounted, it is used in very high call rate locations to relieve the network and provide call capacity and good signal strengths in very localised areas.
Telstra has been installing this type of equipment under an agreement with the City of Perth in the Perth CBD and more recently, under an agreement with the Town of Vincent, this equipment forms part of the Mobile Telephone network and provides an
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 202 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
unobtrusive means of providing telephone call capacity in high call traffic areas (usually street corners).
The equipment is very low powered and only provides a signal for approximately 250 m from the site and each site forms part of a matrix of micro cell sites which is overlaid by a matrix of the larger macro sites to provide both call traffic capacity and signal strength for the network. Micro cell installations cannot be considered as the replacement technology for the larger macro sites, they can only be considered as an adjunct to the signal provided by macro sites.
To date we have only installed this infrastructure in the Perth CBD and in the Town of Vincent due to availability of equipment, we are now in a position to consider some “other hot spots” where call traffic is very high as suitable locations for micro cell installations, these locations generally are in the Local Authority areas close to the city.
Our arrangement with the City of Perth and The Town of Vincent allows for the use of existing street furniture as mount points for the equipment (namely parking/no parking signs, clearway signs and the like). We also have an arrangement with Main Roads WA for the utilisation of the traffic light poles to mount the antenna (where appropriate) and we have had a special cover manufactured which replaces the existing cover at the top of the traffic light pole and the antenna (which is only approximately 350mm long) mounts under the cover at the top of the traffic light pole.
The equipment is generally mounted behind a parking/no parking sign (the pole is replaced by one which is slightly thicker) and the antenna is mounted on the traffic light pole or the parking sign pole whichever is the most appropriate to provide the best signal path. Our arrangement with the City of Perth and the Town of Vincent extends to their staff changing the pole (we supply the new one) and placing the necessary conduits under the pavement and reinstating the pavement, all at our cost. Our staff install the equipment on the poles.
We would like to consider a similar arrangement with your organisation regarding the use of existing infrastructure in the street rather than placing further poles in the streetscape and possibly the use of your staff to undertake the “make ready” works at our cost (this ensures that the reinstatement is undertaken to your satisfaction).
We have enclosed a copy of photographs of a typical installation and seek your comments as to the suitability of this type of infrastructure within your Local Authority.
At this time no specific locations have been identified but generally high pedestrian/vehicle traffic locations are the areas that would be assisted by this equipment.
We would propose to structure a master agreement with your Authority which would cover the methodology for approval and installation of the equipment and attach a schedule of sites which is updated when new locations are approved.”
COMMENT:
For Council to consider the agreement presented by Telstra the location of micro cells is required. At present, the List of Sites in Schedule 3 of the agreement has no entries. The existing agreements with the Town of Vincent and the City of Perth both have a list of sites as part of the agreement.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 203 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
It is considered important that an overall location plan for the micro cell sites within the Town be dealt with prior to signing the agreement. This will allow for a comprehensive approach to the total number and locations of the micro cell facilities. Once an overall location plan has been endorsed, Council officers can approve each individual site as and when Telstra requires it.
Therefore it would be advantageous to only support the agreement in principle. Council could then list conditions/matters that the agreement needs to cover prior to signing the agreement.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
Consideration of this application is consistent with the Town’s Strategic Plan for the provision of orderly planning to enhance the Town’s natural and built environment through effective and responsible use of the town planning scheme and its principles.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Nil.
CONCLUSION:
Telstra is committed to the installation of micro cell facilities in the Town in a co- operative manner to ensure the most appropriate solution for each proposed site is achieved. Although any additional structures in public spaces are not always considered desirable, it is accepted that these facilities are required. A co-operative approach is important as it enables the Town to ensure that the standard of the facilities provided is of the highest possible standard and should set a precedent should other telecommunication carriers seek to provide the same facilities in the future.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr MacRae
That:-
(i) Council SUPPORTS IN PRINCIPLE the proposal by Telstra to install mobile telephone micro cells;
(ii) subject to the submission of a comprehensive location plan depicting micro cell sites and the street infrastructure requiring modification the Chief Executive Officer be granted delegated authority to approve the micro cell location plan and enter into an agreement with Telstra regarding the future installation of micro cells within the Town subject to:-
(a) compliance with the Telecommunications Act 1997 and the Telecommunications Code of Practice 1997; (b) compliance with relevant Environmental Health and Engineering requirements; (c) the installation of the poles, conduits and footpath reinstatement being undertaken by the Town of Cambridge at Telstra’s full cost; (d) the micro cell unit and poles conforming to the relevant Australian Standards in respect of frangibility upon impact by vehicles and clearance for pedestrians;
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 204 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
(e) the Town being indemnified against any claim that may arise as a result of accident or injury involving the facility (vehicle or pedestrian); (f) any replacement of an existing sign pole by a micro cell and/or if a new location requires the approval of the Executive Manager Technical Services; (g) Telstra being responsible for maintenance and replacement of the micro cell unit, pole and associated equipment in the advent that it is damaged or destroyed; (h) the Town reserving the right to request that a micro cell unit, pole and associated equipment be removed and/or moved at Telstra’s full cost. (i) the agreement being reviewed and renegotiated on an annual basis; (j) should a micro cell become redundant, the street furniture is to be replaced to the Town’s specifications at Telstra’s full cost.
Committee Meeting 18 February 2003
During discussion, Members were prepared to grant delegated authority to the Chief Executive Officer to approve mobile telephone micro cells being located on existing street pole locations only. It was agreed that any application for micro cells requiring a new pole to be located or to be installed on street furniture other than poles should be submitted to Council for determination.
Amendment 1
Moved by Cr MacRae, seconded by Cr Burkett
That clauses (c) and (f) of the motion be amended to read as follows:-
(c) the installation of replacement poles, conduits and footpath reinstatement being undertaken by the Town of Cambridge at Telstra’s full cost;
(f) any replacement of an existing sign pole to accommodate a micro cell requires the approval of the Executive Manager Technical Services.
Carried
Amendment 2
Moved by Cr MacRae, seconded by Cr Burkett
That further clauses be added to the motion as follows:-
• mobile telephone micro cells being located on existing street pole locations only; • any application for mobile telephone micro cells requiring a new pole to be located or to be installed on street furniture other than poles will require the approval of Council.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 205 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr McAullay, seconded by Cr Burkett
That:-
(i) Council SUPPORTS IN PRINCIPLE the proposal by Telstra to install mobile telephone micro cells;
(ii) subject to the submission of a comprehensive location plan depicting micro cell sites and the street infrastructure requiring modification the Chief Executive Officer be granted delegated authority to approve the micro cell location plan and enter into an agreement with Telstra regarding the future installation of micro cells within the Town subject to:-
(a) mobile telephone micro cells being located on existing street pole locations only; (b) compliance with the Telecommunications Act 1997 and the Telecommunications Code of Practice 1997; (c) compliance with relevant Environmental Health and Engineering requirements; (d) the installation of replacement poles, conduits and footpath reinstatement being undertaken by the Town of Cambridge at Telstra’s full cost; (e) the micro cell unit and poles conforming to the relevant Australian Standards in respect of frangibility upon impact by vehicles and clearance for pedestrians; (f) the Town being indemnified against any claim that may arise as a result of accident or injury involving the facility (vehicle or pedestrian); (g) any replacement of an existing sign pole to accommodate a micro cell requires the approval of the Executive Manager Technical Services; (h) Telstra being responsible for maintenance and replacement of the micro cell unit, pole and associated equipment in the advent that it is damaged or destroyed; (i) the Town reserving the right to request that a micro cell unit, pole and associated equipment be removed and/or moved at Telstra’s full cost. (j) the agreement being reviewed and renegotiated on an annual basis; (k) should a micro cell become redundant, the street furniture is to be replaced to the Town’s specifications at Telstra’s full cost.
(iii) any application for mobile telephone micro cells requiring a new pole to be located or to be installed on street furniture other than poles will require the approval of Council.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 206 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
DES03.07
LOT 134 (NO. 41) KINGSLAND AVENUE, CITY BEACH – PROVISIONAL THREE STOREY RESIDENCE (File Reference: PRO 0102)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To determine the application for provisional building approval seeking variations to the requirements of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No.1 and R-Codes.
BACKGROUND:
BA/DA REFERENCE: 695BA -2002 LANDOWNER: Anthony & Pamela-Jayne Kinder APPLICANT: Anthony & Pamela-Jayne Kinder ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme No.1: Residential R12.5
COMPLIANCE:
Non-compliance Required Proposed Wall height - (west front elevation) 6.5 metres to the top of 8.0 metres to the (RDG’s) eaves top of eaves
Privacy – rear balcony (east) 7.5 metres 5.5 metres (R-Codes) measured at a 45 degree angle from the balcony end Privacy – front balconies (west) 7.5 metres 5.5 metres (R-Codes) measured at a 45 degree angle from the balcony end
DETAILS:
Lot Area: 1027 square metres Open Space: 80 per cent
Approval is sought for a three storey residence at the above property. The land slopes up from west to east with contours ranging from 10.3 to 16.1 metres. The lot to the south is currently vacant and no development plans have been submitted for this property at present. The property to the north has an existing two storey residence on it.
The lower ground floor, situated on the lowest western portion of the site, comprises of a garage, workshop, wine cellar and store. The ground floor has living, laundry, toilets, bathroom, study and three bedrooms. On the upper level, there is one bedroom, bathroom and toilets, living, dining, kitchen and balconies to the west, north and east.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 207 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
The house maintains a 7.5 metre front setback from Kingsland Avenue. The rear setback being the east boundary has a 25 metre setback. A minimum setback of 5.1 metres, with the majority of the wall being greater than 7.0 metres, along the north side boundary is maintained for the house. A minimum setback of 2.5 metres, with the majority of the wall being 3.3 metres, is maintained along the south boundary.
Privacy is maintained for the balconies facing west, east and north to adjoining properties through the use of screening and setbacks. The balcony ends have been fully screened to prevent direct overlooking. There are variations to the R-Code Privacy provisions from these balconies in relation to the 45 degree “cone of vision” from the balcony ends. It also should be noted that the affected property to the south is currently vacant. No objections have been submitted from the affected adjoining landowner.
Other windows have either been orientated away from adjoining properties or screened to comply with the Acceptable Criteria of the R-Codes.
The proposal incorporates a height variation to the west elevation being 8.0 metres to the top of the eaves. The overall height of 10.5 metres from natural ground level has been complied with.
The applicant seeks the Council’s approval to vary the wall height and the privacy requirements.
Applicants Grounds for Request
The application was submitted with a covering letter from the applicant outlining in part:-
“We would ask that in considering this application, that consideration be given to;
• Compliance with all other requirements, being setback, overall height and overlooking. • The block containing major height differences. • Large side setbacks (> 7m to the north) will minimise any adverse street aspect. • Numerous other dwellings in the area are of a similar design. Examples for instance on Dampier Avenue where 2 new dwellings have been erected, both 2 storey with undercrofts and both undercrofts have been built up from the road level. • The development of 43 Kingsland (neighbouring property to the south) will occur at a higher ground level than the previous dwelling due to the build up that occurred prior to the block’s sale. • The development will replace the existing dwelling with one that will add value to the suburb.
The applicant has submitted further additional information in relation to site survey levels in line with the method of height calculation required under the Residential Design Codes.
Neighbours Comment:
The two abutting landowners to the north and south of the proposed development were contacted and given 14 days to comment on the variations. Advertising closed on 31 January 2003. No submissions have been received.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 208 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
The landowner from 43 Kingsland Avenue (south) has viewed the plans at Council offices. She did not raise any verbal objections. The landowner at 39 Kingsland Avenue (north) has signed a set of plans noting no objections.
COMMENT:
Wall height – (west)
The application involves a variation to the wall height on the west elevation being 8.0 metres (as measured by the R-Codes) to the top of the eaves in lieu of 6.5 metres.
At the time when the applicant had preliminary discussions with Planning Officers, the determination of building height was from the Residential Design Guidelines (RDG’s). The RDG’s stipulated that natural ground level is the centre point of the house and maximum allowable heights are determined from this level. The applicant used this information to design the house. Based on the RDG calculation of height, the proposal would have had a variation of 1.0 metres to the top of the eaves on the west elevation.
The Residential Design Codes (R-Codes) have now been gazetted which specifies a different method of calculating the height of developments. The R-Codes, in relation to the method of calculating building heights supersedes the RDG’s method. Under the R-Codes, building height is measured “from the natural level immediately below the relevant point on the wall or roof.” Based on this method of calculation, the height to the top of the eaves is 8.0 metres.
The difference in building height is due to the RDG’s using one reference point whereas the R-Codes uses all points along the wall or roof of the house.
In determining whether the variation should be supported or not, the impact on adjoining properties should be taken into consideration. In this case, there are adjoining properties to the north, south and east.
There are no properties directly to the west of the subject site as the land faces Kingsland Avenue and West Coast Highway. The height variation is unlikely to affect the wider streetscape of West Coast Highway as there are many examples of similar residential elevations to the highway.
The landowner on the north side has viewed the plans and not raised an objection. The land to the south is currently vacant and there are no plans currently with Council for consideration.
The residence to the north is orientated to the north-west. The setback from the proposed residence to the northern boundary where the height variation occurs is approximately 14 metres. The height variation is not likely therefore, to adversely impact on the amenity of the northern neighbour. In addition, the northern neighbour has signed off plans acknowledging no objections.
Due to the setback of 25 metres from the rear (east) boundary, it is not likely that the height variation to the west elevation will impact on the rear neighbour.
Other residential approvals previously granted under the RDG’s relating to height measurements are likely to reflect a similar scenario when compared to the new method of calculating height under the revised R-Codes. What needs to be
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 209 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
remembered is that the house, height and bulk has not changed, only the method of calculation.
Under the R-Codes, the height could be increased at the high side (east) and still comply to the 6.5 metre top of eaves requirement. This would have more of an impact to properties on the east side of the development. Under the RDG’s, as the height is referenced from a single point, the height of buildings on the high side of the lot is limited as the natural ground level at this high point is not taken into account.
The proposal meets the Performance Criteria of the R-Codes which states:
3.7.1 Building Height
P1 Building height consistent with the desired height of buildings in the locality, and to recognise the need to protect the amenities of adjoining properties, including where appropriate:-
• adequate direct sun to buildings and appurtenant open spaces; • adequate daylight to major openings to habitable rooms • access to views of significance.
The variation to the building height is therefore supported on the basis of the natural slope of the land, and the minimal impact to the adjoining properties and the streetscape in general.
Privacy – balconies (west and east)
Balconies facing west and east are 5.5 metres from the boundary when measured at a 45 degree angle from the end of the balcony. Although these balconies are screened to prevent direct viewing to the south, they are also required to comply with the 45 degree ‘cone of vision’ which requires a minimum distance of 7.5 metres.
The property to the south is currently vacant and there are no current plans with Council to assess the affect of the variation. The affected neighbour has viewed the proposal at Council Offices and has not lodged any objection.
As such, the Performance Criteria under the R-Codes has been satisfied which states:-
3.8.1 Visual Privacy
P1 Avoid direct overlooking between active habitable spaces and outdoor living areas of the development site and the habitable rooms and outdoor living areas within adjoining residential properties taking account of:- • The positioning of windows to habitable rooms on the development site and the adjoining property;
The privacy variation measured at a 45 degree angle is unlikely to create an adverse impact to the adjoining vacant property and therefore can be supported. In addition, given that the landowner of the vacant land is aware of the balconies, these can be taken into consideration when the property is developed.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 210 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
Consideration of this application is consistent with the Town’s Strategic Plan for the provision of orderly planning to enhance the Town’s natural and built environment through effective and responsible use of the town planning scheme.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Nil.
CONCLUSION:
In assessing whether discretion should be exercised, a suitable balance must be found between contemporary housing design and consideration of the impact of the development on existing (and future) neighbours, and the area in general.
The variations proposed are not dissimilar to those approved by Council in the past and do not constitute an adverse impact on the surrounding neighbours and streetscape, and are therefore supported.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr McAullay, seconded by Cr Burkett
That in accordance with Part 4 of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No. 1, Council APPROVES the application by Anthony and Pamela- Jayne Kinder at Lot 134 (No. 41) Kingsland Avenue, City Beach as shown on plans dated 15 January 2003.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 211 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
DES03.08
LOTS 123 AND 124 (NOS. 231 - 233) CAMBRIDGE STREET, WEMBLEY - PROPOSED GROUPED DWELLING DEVELOPMENT – 13 TWO-STOREY DWELLINGS (File Reference: PRO 0682)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To determine an application for planning approval seeking variations to the requirements of Town Planning Scheme No.1.
BACKGROUND:
BA/DA REFERENCE: 68DA-2002 LANDOWNER: Saunders and Associates Pty Ltd as Trustee for Ellis Investments Trust APPLICANT: Peter Jodrell Architect ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme No.1: Residential R60
POLICY:
− Residential Design Codes of Western Australia (R Codes) − Draft Town of Cambridge Residential Design Guidelines (RDGs)
COMPLIANCE:
Non-compliance Required Provided Primary street Minimum 4.0 metres Between 3.3 metres and 3.6 setback (R Codes metres to wall of Units 1 to 4 and RDGs) Between 0.7 metres and 2.7 metres to uncovered balconies of Units 1 to 4
Fencing in primary Minimum 80 percent permeable 24 percent permeable street setback area (RDGs)
1.8 metre average height Between 2.0 metres and 3.2 2.0 metre maximum height metres
Plot ratio for single Maximum 60 square metres per 65 square metres for Unit 7 bedroom dwellings dwelling (R Codes)
Wall height Maximum 6.0 metres from Unit 1: 6.9 metres (R Codes and natural ground level to the top Unit 2: 6.5 metres RDGs) of the eaves Unit 3: 6.5 metres Unit 4: 6.2 metres Unit 10: 6.8 metres
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 212 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Fill and retaining Maximum 0.5 metres between Between 0.7 metres and 1.5 walls (R Codes) street alignment and building or metres along front boundary within 3.0 metres of street alignment
Maximum 0.5 metres behind Between 0.5 metre and 1.0 street setback line and within metre on right/west side 1.0 metre of common boundary boundary
Ground floor side Unit 4: 1.5 metres Unit 4: 1.2 metres setback (left/east) Units 4,7 & 9 stores: 1.0 metre Units 4,7 & 9 stores: nil (R Codes) Unit 13: 1.5 metres Unit 13: 1.2 metres to 1.5 metres
Upper floor side Unit 13: between 1.8 metres Unit 13: between 1.2 metres setback (left/east) and 2.0 metres and 2.9 metres and 4.6 metres (R Codes)
Ground floor side Unit 1: 1.5 metres Unit 1: 1.2 metres setback (right/west) Units 1 & 5 stores: 1.0 metre Units 1 & 5 stores: nil (R Codes) Unit 10: 1.5 metres Unit 10: 1.2 metres to 1.5 metres
Upper floor side Unit 10: between 1.9 metres Unit 10: between 1.2 metres setback (right/west) and 2.2 metres and 2.9 metres and 4.6 metres (R Codes)
Visual Privacy (R 4.5 metres from upper floor Unit 5 bedroom 1: 2.0 metres Codes) bedrooms Unit 10 bedroom 3: 2.0 metres Unit 9 bedroom 1: 2.0 metres Unit 13 bedroom 3: 2.0 metres
7.5 metres from unenclosed Unit 1 rear courtyard: 2.8 outdoor active habitable spaces metres elevated more than 0.5 metres Unit 4 rear courtyard: 1.2 above natural ground level metres
DETAILS:
Lot Area: 1822 square metres Open Space: 62 per cent
The proposed development involves the demolition of two existing dwellings facing Cambridge Street that were previously owned by the Water Corporation, and the construction of 13 two-storey dwellings at Lots 123 and 124 (Nos. 231-233) Cambridge Street, Wembley. A mix of nine single-bedroom dwellings and four three-bedroom dwellings are proposed.
The single bedroom dwellings (Units 1 to 9) are proposed to be located at the front and middle of the site, accessed by a common central driveway off Cambridge Street. Units 1 to 4 are proposed to front Cambridge Street, with the common central driveway separating attached Units 1 and 2 from attached Units 3 and 4. Units 5 to 9 are proposed to be located behind Units 1 to 4, separated from the front units by the common driveway.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 213 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
With the exception of Unit 7, the dwellings have identical or mirrored floor plans, with the living areas (including a private courtyard) on the ground floor, and the bedroom and ensuite on the upper floor. One car space is proposed for each single bedroom dwelling. Car parking for Units 1, 4, 5, 7 and 9 is proposed under open carports located behind the front units, car parking for Units 2 and 6 are proposed in an undercroft area under Units 1 and 2, and car parking for Units 3 and 8 are proposed in an undercroft area under Units 3 and 4. A visitor parking bay is proposed on either side of the common driveway, parallel to the Cambridge Street boundary. Whilst the visitor bays will be located within the front setback area, they will be underneath the front balconies of Units 2 and 3 and therefore will not be easily visible from the street.
The three bedroom dwellings (Units 10 to 13) are proposed to be located at the rear of the site, with each dwelling having separate vehicular access from the rear right-of- way. Attached Units 10 and 11 will be separated from attached Units 12 and 13 at the ground level by a central pedestrian access way and visitor car parking bay. The pedestrian access way is proposed so the occupants of the dwellings will be able to walk through the site to reach their letter box on Cambridge Street. Each dwelling has an identical or mirrored floor plan, with the living areas (including a private courtyard) and a double garage on the ground floor, and bedrooms and bathrooms on the upper floor.
The site slopes down approximately 3.5 metres from the south-eastern corner (rear right-of-way) to the north-western corner (Cambridge Street). Due to the difference in levels, the rear three-bedroom Units 10 to 13 are proposed to be at a higher level than the single bedroom Units 1 to 9. Retaining and filling is proposed on the western side boundary, adjacent to Unit 10. The middle Units 5 to 9 are proposed to be at or below the natural ground level. Some excavation work is required for the front Units, as car parking is proposed under these dwellings.
The applicant seeks the Council’s approval for a density bonus for single bedroom dwellings, and to vary the primary street setback and wall height provisions of the Residential Design Codes of Western Australia and the Town’s Residential Design Guidelines, the plot ratio for single bedroom dwellings, site works, side setbacks, visual privacy provisions of the Residential Design Codes of Western Australia, and the fencing provisions of the Town’s Residential Design Guidelines.
Neighbour Comment
Due to the variations to the wall height, side setback, visual privacy and site works provisions listed in the table above, the application was referred to the adjoining owners at Lot 11 (No. 227) Cambridge Street and Lot 12 (No. 237) Cambridge Street. A three-storey development comprising 23 serviced apartments (Cambridge Atrium Serviced Apartments) is located at No. 227 Cambridge Street. A three-storey development comprising 33 units is located at Lot 12 (No. 237) Cambridge Street. No submissions were received from the owners at No. 227 Cambridge Street.
Five individual submissions were received from owners and one submission was received from the Strata Manager representing the owners at No. 237 Cambridge Street. It is important to note that the submissions are based on the original plans submitted. These plans have since been amended by the applicant in order to address some of the issues raised in the submissions. Copies of the submissions have been forwarded to Elected Members for their information. The content of each submission is summarised as follows:
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 214 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
1. Objection:
- The owners of this complex object to the proposed setbacks outlined in your letter due to the impact these setbacks and variations will have on the existing development at 237 Cambridge Street.
The side setbacks of the proposed dwellings are discussed in the ‘side setbacks’ comments below.
2. Objection:
- Unit 10’s upper floor side setback (right/west): the setback required is in the range of 3.9 to 4.8 metres. The plans indicate an average setback of no more than 1.2 metres. With the increased heights of Units 5 and 10 they would tower over my property and place the area in shadow.
Unit 10’s side setback is discussed in the ‘side setback’ comments below.
- Unit 10: the courtyard/outdoor living area would be located very close to mine and with the setback required at 7.5 metres, this is significantly less than that given at 1.2 metres.
The applicant has advised and illustrated on amended plans that Unit 10’s proposed courtyard will be adequately screened to the north and west by a 1.8 metre high screen wall on top of the proposed retaining walls, and is therefore not required to comply with the 7.5 metre privacy setback requirement.
- The upper floor bedrooms of Units 5 and 10 appear to be peering into my own Unit’s window and courtyard with their great height and very small compromised setback. Once again there are privacy and limited sunlight problems.
Unit 5 and Unit 10’s upper floor bedroom windows and Unit 10’s wall height are discussed in the ‘visual privacy’ and ‘wall height’ comments below.
- Retaining wall on the west side is built up significantly above the 1.3 metres (note: should be 0.5 metres) maximum level allowed. As such, Unit 10 would tower unnecessarily over my courtyard. Once again, privacy issues are created.
The fill and retaining wall on the west/right side boundary is discussed in the ‘fill and retaining walls’ comments below.
3. Objection:
- Unit 10’s upper floor side setback (right/west): setback should be in the range of 3.9 metres to 4.8 metres however the proposal is predominantly at 1.2 metres. This raises major concerns for potential privacy problems with the first floor of Unit 10 set to ‘tower’ over my property and further creating a ‘closed environment’ for occupants both in the courtyard and within the unit accommodation itself. It is noted that the first floor plan of Unit 5 appears to have a similar setback problem and this would raise similar concerns to my property.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 215 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Unit 10’s side setback is discussed in the ‘side setback’ comments below. Unit 5 complies with the wall height and side setback requirements.
- Privacy Provisions: Unit 10’s ground floor courtyard: shows a minimum distance of 1.2 metres whereas the requirement is 7.5 metres. This is considered a gross breach of the planning requirements particularly as the ground floor height of my unit would be at a minimum 2.5 metres below the height of this courtyard. This significantly impacts on privacy from noise and vision on both a direct and implied level.
The applicant has advised and illustrated on amended plans that Unit 10’s proposed courtyard will be adequately screened to the north and west by a 1.8 metre high screen wall on top of the proposed retaining walls, and is therefore not required to comply with the 7.5 metre privacy setback requirement.
Unit 10’s wall height and the fill and retaining wall on the west/right side boundary are discussed in the ‘wall height’ and ‘fill and retaining walls’ comments below.
- Privacy provisions: Unit 5’s upper floor bedroom window: setback from the west side boundary is insufficient by 2.5 metres. This presents a serious problem via reduced privacy and importantly also reduced sunlight. Being set high in a north-east position on the first floor of Unit 5 would markedly restrict both winter and summer sun, rendering my unit courtyard with its gardens, obsolete.
Unit 5’s upper floor bedroom window is discussed in the ‘visual privacy’ comments below. Unit 5 complies with the wall height and side setback requirements. In addition, Unit 5 complies with the overshadowing requirements, as overshadowing is calculated at 12 noon on 21 June, when the shadow cast is directly to the south and not over the adjoining properties.
- Privacy provisions: Unit 10’s upper floor bedroom 3 window: setback from the west side boundary is insufficient by 2.5 metres. This presents a serious problem via reduced privacy, made worse by the fact that Unit 10 is retained to a height of 1.8 metres above the natural ground level. This proposed situation simply would not be satisfactory to each property and basic measures such as repositioning built-in robes and windows, a wall screen or horizontal highlight window must be considered at a bare minimum.
Unit 10’s upper floor bedroom windows, Unit 10’s wall height, and the fill and retaining wall on the west/right side boundary are discussed in the ‘visual privacy’, ‘wall height’ and ‘fill and retaining walls’ comments below.
- Retaining walls (west): the retaining wall to the west boundary adjacent to the proposed Unit 10 is shown to exceed the maximum permissible height by 1.3 metres, being to a maximum height of 1.8 metres. Again this breach presents a privacy problem in itself and amplifies other privacy issues raised in relationship to areas such as decreased setbacks and window positioning. Furthermore the natural gradient of the land is of an incline towards the south - south/east hence the Unit 10 region in question is already raised above neighbouring land and in particular my unit. I estimate the first floor slab height of Unit 10 to be around 5 metres higher
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 216 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
once the natural topography, retaining wall and two-storey construction are accounted for.
The fill and retaining wall on the west side boundary and Unit 10’s wall height, side setback, and upper floor windows are discussed in the ‘fill and retaining wall’, ‘wall height’, ‘side setbacks’ and ‘visual privacy’ comments below. Further, the applicant has since reduced the maximum height of the fill and retaining wall on west side boundary from 1.8 metres to 1.0 metres.
1. Objection
- We wish to protest most vigorously at such a proposal mainly on the grounds that we consider there to be far too much undermining of any sort of authority in such situations. There is so little regard for anything or any values which are for the benefit of the public.
Objection is noted. However, it is important to note that if a development does not comply with the acceptable development standards, it still may be supported, if it is found to meet the performance criteria.
2. Objection
- Privacy: we are overlooking the lot and therefore we feel that it would be an invasion of privacy as we are within the focal point of the proposed building site and feel open to the “public gaze”. In particular, to the upper floor side setback, we realise that the range of 3.9 metres to 4.8 metres is not being taken into consideration and that the proposal is predominantly 1.2 metres. We feel that our property would be “boxed in” as a result of this and we are also questioning the availability of natural light for our Unit.
- Privacy from noise and vision: we feel traffic would be congested and our viewing of any “natural” surroundings and space will be blocked by the proposed lot.
Privacy, side setback and height issues are discussed in the ‘visual privacy’, ‘side setbacks’ and ‘wall height’ comments below. The proposed development complies with the overshadowing requirements, as overshadowing is calculated at 12 noon on 21 June, when the shadow cast is directly to the south and not over the adjoining properties. Adequate car parking has been provided for the proposed development.
3. Objection
- We object to all aspects of the proposed development that are at variance with the Town of Cambridge town planning guidelines and requirements, in particular, all those which would lead to the buildings being closer to our property than recommended by the guidelines. As far as we are aware, our property was constructed in accordance with the planning guidelines and we believe that this new development should do likewise.
The side setbacks of the proposed dwellings are discussed in the ‘side setbacks’ comments below. It is also important to note that if a development does not comply with the acceptable development standards, it still may be supported, if it is found to meet the performance criteria.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 217 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Applicant’s Grounds for Request
In response to the issues raised by the adjoining neighbours, the applicant amended the plans and provided the following comments in support of the proposed development:-
- Rear courtyard to Unit 1 has been lowered to reduce fence height at boundary.
- Height of retaining wall along southern end of west boundary has been lowered to 13.35 AHD together with the rear courtyard of Unit 10. This has the effect of reducing the overall height of the boundary wall to a maximum of 2.8 metres. This wall adjoins the existing car parking area of the neighbouring property and will have no negative amenity impact.
- Bedroom 1 windows to Units 10 and 13 have been reduced on their east and west faces to 1 square metre so that these windows overlook car parking areas on both sides and present no privacy or amenity issues.
- Six metre height lines are noted on the elevation drawings and we seek Council’s discretion on the grounds that:- - both adjoining properties are higher than our proposal; - our building has no impact on neighbour’s views; - the site has a substantial slope from front to rear and requires the use of retaining walls to allow full utilisation of the property; - the affected Units (1,2,3,4 and 10) exceed the 6 metre height limit by less than 1.0 metre.
- The front boundary walls are designed in such a way to allow landscaped screening in front of them to avoid any adverse impact they might have on the streetscape. Due to the sloping site and the busy street, our clients are desirous of making these north-facing courtyards as useful and comfortable for the residents as possible.
COMMENT:
Housing Density
Clause 3.1.3 of the R Codes allow a density concession for single bedroom dwellings, which has been applied for with this application. Ordinarily, the area of the subject site would yield at total of ten standard sized dwellings; with a density concession, the site yields four standard sized dwellings and 9 single bedroom dwellings.
The subject site is considered to be an appropriate location for single bedroom dwellings as it is close to shops, public transport and community services and facilities. As such, the density concession should be supported.
Primary Street Setback
The Residential Design Codes of WA require a 4.0 metre setback from the front boundary and the Town’s Residential Design Guidelines allow this setback only to be averaged with Council’s approval. The bulk of the proposed Units 1 to 4 are set back between 4.8 metres and 5.2 metres from the front boundary, however, the
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 218 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
laundry/toilet on the ground floor and ensuite on the upper floor encroach into the setback area a maximum distance of 0.7 metres.
Furthermore, Units 1 to 4 each have uncovered balconies that have a floor level over 0.5 metres above natural ground level located in the front setback area, set back between 0.7 metres and 2.7 metres from the front boundary.
The Town’s Residential Design Guidelines state that variations to the compliance standards relating to front setbacks may be approved by the Council where, in the opinion of the Council, the following performance criteria are met:-
(a) the setback is compatible with the established line and pattern of setbacks in the street; and
(b) a reduction in the setback would not adversely impact on the pattern of development in the street because of the position, shape or topography of the lot.
The adjoining three-storey apartments to the east (No. 227 Cambridge Street) are set back approximately 9.3 metres from Cambridge Street and the adjoining three-storey apartments to the west (No. 237 Cambridge Street) are set back approximately 6.8 metres to the street. These developments appear to be several years old and therefore would have been required to comply with different setback guidelines than what are currently administered. There is really no established setback along Cambridge Street, due to its mix of new and old commercial, residential and medical developments, which all have setbacks ranging from nil to over 10 metres. Across the road from the subject site are shops with a nil front setback and a petrol station on the corner.
The two encroachments into the required 4.0 metre front setback are each approximately 4.7 metres long and 1.6 metres wide and two-storeys high, and the proposed setback would average at 4.0 metres. The balconies located within the front setback area will be partly screened from view by the proposed screen wall along the front boundary.
Overall, the front setback variation will have very little, if any, visual impact on the street and is considered acceptable and should be supported, primarily on the basis that there is no established line or pattern of setback along Cambridge Street.
Fencing in Primary Street Setback
The Town’s Residential Design Guidelines state that fencing in the front setback area should be 80 percent visually permeable above 750 millimetres, with an average height of 1.8 metres and a maximum height of 2.0 metres. The development proposes a high solid wall along the front boundary, ranging in height from 2.0 metres to 3.2 metres.
Variations to the compliance standards relating to walls and fences may be approved by the Council where, in the opinion of the Council, the following performance criteria are met:-
(a) front fences and walls consistent with the existing streetscape character, and
(b) front fences are necessary to ensure: - visual privacy for a sole or main living areas; or - protection from traffic noise on district distributor roads or vehicle headlights emanating from a public street.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 219 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
The main reason why a solid brick wall is proposed is to reduce the level of traffic noise emanating from Cambridge Street. Solid walls are not uncommon along Cambridge Street and both adjoining properties have rendered solid brick walls along their front boundaries.
The wall is proposed to be stepped, with a low brick retaining wall and planter box along the front boundary ranging in height from 0.7 metres to 1.5 metres and a high solid wall behind the planter box. It should be noted that the existing dwellings on the subject site have front yards that are retained to a height of between 500 mm and 1.0 metre above the footpath level.
The high solid wall is proposed to have a mix of finishes which will provide some interest to the streetscape. Further, the planter box offers the opportunity to plant large shrubs that will partially conceal the brick wall and therefore the wall is supported. A condition of approval could be imposed requiring a landscaping plan for the planter box to be submitted with the plans for the building licence, detailing that mature species will be planted, or shrubs that will grow to an adequate height that will conceal the solid brick wall as much as possible.
Plot Ratio for Single Bedroom Dwellings
The R Codes specify a maximum plot ratio area of 60 square metres for a single bedroom dwelling. Whilst proposed Units 1 to 6 and 8 and 9 comply with this requirement, Unit 7 (which does not have the same floor area as the other dwellings) is 65 square metres, 5 square metres larger than the R Codes requirement.
Variations to the R Codes acceptable development standard relating to single bedroom dwellings may be approved by the Council where the following performance criterion is met:
Dwellings that provide limited accommodation, suitable for one or two persons.
Unit 7 appears to be a standard single bedroom home, with one living/dining/kitchen area on the ground floor and one bedroom on the upper floor. Further, the overall plot ratio for the whole site complies with the R Codes. As such, the proposed minor variation to the plot ratio area requirement for single bedroom dwellings should be supported.
Wall Height
Clause 7.3.1 of the Town’s Draft Residential Design Guidelines requires that new development does not exceed a height of 6.0 metres to the top of the eaves at the wall line, measured vertically above the “natural level” immediately below the relevant point on the wall. Five of the thirteen dwellings, Units 1, 2, 3, 4 and 10 propose to exceed this height restriction. The front Units 1 to 4 have difficultly complying with the wall height restriction as basement car parking is proposed underneath the dwellings, resulting in wall heights between 6.2 metres (Unit 4) to 6.5 metres (Units 2 and 3) to 6.9 metres (Unit 1). In addition, the ground level under Unit 10 is proposed to be raised to create a level site and the same finished floor levels for the four rear Units 10 to 13 and therefore the wall height of Unit 10 (maximum 6.8 metres) does not comply with the wall height restriction.
Variations to the compliance standards relating to wall height may be approved by the Council where, in the opinion of the Council, the following performance criteria are met:-
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 220 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
(a) buildings which respect the scale of buildings generally in their vicinity, in terms of their height and bulk and remain subservient to the green streetscape; (b) buildings which are respectful of the predominant character and style of existing development within the locality; (c) where the front of the building facing the street is broken up, presenting a varied and interesting façade to the street, rather than a continuous wall; (d) where the performance criteria contained in Part 3.7.1 P1 of the R Codes are met.
The performance criteria contained in Part 3.7.1 P1 of the R Codes state that new development should meet these criteria:
Building height consistent with the desired height of buildings in the locality, and to recognise the need to protect the amenities of adjoining properties, including, where appropriate:-
- adequate direct sun to buildings and appurtenant open spaces; - adequate daylight to major openings to habitable rooms; and - access to views of significance.
The variations to the wall height restriction for Units 1 to 4 are more of a streetscape issue than an amenity issue for the adjoining properties, as these dwellings face the street and are a distance away from the main bulk of the development on the adjoining properties. The proposed development is located between a three-storey apartment building on the left/east side, at No. 227 Cambridge Street, and a three-storey apartment building on the right/west side, at No. 237 Cambridge Street.
The façade of the front units has been designed to provide interest to the streetscape, with large north-facing windows and a combination of wall finishes (painted pre-cast concrete and harditex or miniorb cladding).
The site area for Unit 10 is proposed to be artificially filled to a level between 0.5 metres and 1.0 metres to create a level site for the proposed rear Units 10 to 13. The natural topography of the site slopes down from the rear to Cambridge Street, and also from the east (left) side to the west (right) side. Two owners of units at No. 237 Cambridge Street that are located close to proposed Unit 10 have objected to the wall height of Unit 10.
Unit 10 is directly adjacent to the main car parking area of No. 237 Cambridge Street, and therefore its height should not impact on the amenity of residents at No. 237 Cambridge Street. As stated previously, Unit 10 complies with the R Codes overshadowing requirement.
The proposed development complies with the overall building height requirement of 10.5 metres, and complies with the R Codes overshadowing requirement, as the adjoining properties are located to the east and west. The proposed development will not block access to views of any significance.
In view of the above comments, it is considered that in the scale and context of the overall development and its locality, the proposed height variations will have minimal impact on the street or adjoining properties, and therefore should be supported.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 221 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Fill and Retaining Walls
The acceptable development standards of the R Codes allow excavation or filling to a maximum height of 0.5 metres between street alignment and building or within 3.0 metres of the street alignment, and within 1.0 metre of a common boundary.
As stated previously, the front wall is proposed to comprise a retaining wall ranging in height between 0.7 metres and 1.0 metre in front of proposed Units 3 and 4, and between 1.2 metres and 1.5 metres in front of proposed Units 1 and 2. The purpose of the retaining wall is to create a relatively level site for the front Units 1 to 4.
An internal retaining wall with a maximum height of approximately 1.0 metre is also required to create the difference in levels between Units 5 to 9 and Units 10 to 14. The development is proposed to step down from the rear of the site, resulting in a finished floor level of 14.00 AHD for Units 10 to 14 and a finished floor level of 12.00AHD for Units 5 to 9.
In addition, fill and a retaining wall ranging in height from less than 0.5 metres to 1.0 metres is proposed along the southern end of the western side boundary. The purpose of the fill and retaining is to create a level site for the rear units 10 to 13.
New development that proposes a variation to the R Codes acceptable development standards relating to site works may be approved by the Council where the following performance criteria are met:
Development that retains the visual impression of the natural level of a site, as seen from the street or other public place, or from an adjoining property.
Given that the proposed high solid wall along the front boundary is considered acceptable (see comments above), it is considered that the proposed variation to the fill and retaining requirements along the front boundary is acceptable and will create a planter box which will soften the impact of the solid wall on the streetscape.
The internal retaining wall separating the rear units from the front units is considered acceptable and necessary for the topography of the site and the internal layout of the development.
Considering the scale of the development, the proposed retaining wall on the western side boundary adjacent to Unit 10, which ranges in height from 0.5 metres to 1.0 metres, is considered acceptable. The length of the retaining wall that is above the 0.5 metre height limit is approximately 7.0 metres long and along a portion of the common boundary that adjoins the car park of No. 237 Cambridge Street.
Side Setbacks
As shown in the compliance table above, the proposed dwellings at the front and at the rear of the site do not comply with the side setback requirements of the R Codes. However, it should be noted that the side setback variations are relatively minor.
Both ground floors of Units 1 and 4 require a 1.5 metre setback from the west/right side boundary and east/left side boundary respectively, as the outdoor living areas attached to the dwellings are elevated more than 0.5 metres above natural ground level and are therefore treated as ‘major openings’; instead a 1.2 metre setback is proposed, representing a variation of 0.3 metres.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 222 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
In addition, the ground floors of Units 10 and 13 require a 1.5 metre setback from the west/right side boundary and east/left side boundary respectively as the wall is greater than 9 metres long. Instead, a setback ranging from 1.2 metres to 1.5 metres is proposed.
The upper floors of Units 10 and 13 also require a greater setback than what is proposed. When the original plans were first assessed, the bedroom 1 window on the side walls for both units 10 and 13 were classed as a ‘major opening’, thus requiring a setback of between 3.7 metres and 4.2 metres for Unit 13 and between 3.9 metres and 4.8 metres for Unit 10. The bedroom 1 window has been modified on the amended plans and is now not classed as a major opening. A condition of approval is also included in this regard, to ensure the window meets the requirements for a minor opening. The required setback is now between 1.8 metres and 2.0 metres for Unit 13, between 1.9 metres and 2.2 metres for Unit 10 and a setback of between 1.2 metres to 2.9 metres to 4.6 metres is proposed.
The stores for Units 4, 7, and 9 are proposed to be located on the left/east side boundary with a parapet wall height of 3.0 metres and the stores for Units 1 and 5 are proposed to be located on the right/west side boundary with a parapet wall height of 3.0 metres.
New development that proposes a variation to the acceptable development standards relating to side setbacks may be approved by the Council where the following performance criteria are met:-
Buildings set back from boundaries other than street boundaries so as to:- - provide adequate direct sun and ventilation to the building; - ensure adequate direct sun and ventilation being available to adjoining properties; - provide adequate direct sun to the building and appurtenant open spaces; - assist with protection of access to direct sun for adjoining properties; - assist in ameliorating the impacts of building bulk on adjoining properties; and - assist in protecting privacy between adjoining properties.
As stated previously, the setback variations for the dwellings as detailed above are considered to be relatively minor, most between 0.3 metres and 0.6 metres. The variations should impact on access to sun and ventilation to the proposed dwellings and the adjoining properties, or exacerbate the impact of building bulk on adjoining properties. Overshadowing complies with the R Codes.
It is only the stores that propose a nil setback from the side boundaries. The stores are proposed to have a parapet wall height of 3.0 metres, which is 1.2 metres higher than the proposed dividing wall. The length of the parapet wall on the left/eastern side boundary is 8.0 metres and the length of the parapet wall on the right/western side boundary is 5.5 metres. Clause 3.3.2 – Buildings on Boundary of the R Codes states that walls built up to the boundary that have an average height of 3.0 metres are permitted for two-thirds of the length of the boundary behind the front setback to one side boundary. Therefore, the proposed 3.0 metre high parapet walls which will cover 14 percent of the length of the eastern side boundary and 9 percent of the length of the western side boundary behind the front setback line are considered acceptable.
Overall, in view of these comments, the proposed side setbacks should be supported.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 223 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Visual Privacy
The R Codes require a 4.5 metre setback between upper floor bedroom windows that are ‘major openings’ and a common boundary. The setback from Unit 5’s bedroom window and Unit 10’s bedroom 3 window to the right/west side boundary is 2.0 metres, measured at a 45 degree angle. Two owners at No. 237 Cambridge Street have objected to these windows overlooking their property. In addition, the setback from Unit 9’s bedroom window and Unit 13’s bedroom 3 window to the left/east side boundary is 2.0 metres, measured at a 45 degree angle.
The R Codes also require a 7.5 metre setback for unscreened unenclosed outdoor active habitable spaces elevated more than 0.5 metres above natural ground level and behind the street setback line. The rear courtyard for Unit 1 is proposed to be elevated more than 0.5 metres (maximum approximately 1.0 metre) above natural ground level, within 2.8 metres of the right/west side boundary, and unscreened. In addition, the rear courtyard for Unit 4 is proposed to be elevated more than 0.5 metres (maximum approximately 0.9 metres) above natural ground level, within 1.2 metres of the left/east side boundary, and unscreened.
New development that proposes a variation to the acceptable development standards relating to visual privacy may be approved by the Council where the following performance criteria are met:
Avoid direct overlooking between active habitable spaces and outdoor living areas of the development site and the habitable rooms and outdoor living areas within adjoining residential properties taking account of:-
- the positioning of windows to habitable rooms on the development site and the adjoining property; - the provision of effective screening; and - the lesser need to prevent overlooking of extensive back gardens, front gardens or areas visible from the street.
In relation to the privacy variations from Units 9 and 13 to the left/east side boundary, there is a row of mature trees along the side boundary at No. 227 Cambridge Street, which would serve to partly screen the proposed development from No. 227 Cambridge Street. Even though no owners at No. 227 Cambridge Street have objected to the proposed development, it is considered that Unit 9’s upper floor bedroom window and Unit 13’s upper floor bedroom 3 window should be effectively screened to comply with the R Codes privacy provisions. A condition of approval can be included in this regard.
Likewise, in relation to the privacy variations from Units 5 and 10 to the right/west side boundary, given that owners at No. 237 Cambridge Street have objected and there is no existing mature vegetation that may serve as effective screening, it is considered that Unit 5’s upper floor bedroom window and Unit 10’s upper floor bedroom 3 window should also be effectively screened to comply with the R Codes privacy provisions. A condition of approval can be included in this regard.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 224 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
No specific comments have been received from either neighbours in relation to the rear courtyard areas that are proposed to be raised over 0.5 metres above natural ground level. The rear courtyards will have views into the private areas of both adjoining properties, and therefore should also be effectively screened to comply with the R Codes privacy provisions. A condition of approval can be included in this regard.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
Consideration of this application is consistent with the Town’s Strategic Plan for the provision of orderly planning to enhance the Town’s natural and built environment through effective and responsible use of the town planning scheme.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Nil.
CONCLUSION:
Overall, having regard to the comments outlined in the above report and the scale and context of the overall development, the proposed variations to the front setback, plot ratio for single bedroom dwellings, wall height, site works and side setbacks are relatively minor and will not detrimentally impact on the adjoining neighbours. Whilst the number of variations might appear extensive, individually they are assessed as being supportable.
In terms of privacy, it is recommended that screening be installed on the upper floor bedroom windows and Unit 1 and 4’s rear courtyards that are currently not in compliance with the R Codes acceptable development standards. A condition should also be imposed to ensure that Unit 10 and 13’s upper floor bedroom 1 window on the side walls are minor openings only.
The proposed solid wall is considered acceptable, in order to reduce traffic noise from Cambridge Street, on the proviso that the type of landscaping installed in the planter box will assist in concealing the wall from the street. A condition of approval should be included in this regard.
Furthermore, as the two lots are not yet amalgamated, a condition is included advising that the lots will need to be amalgamated prior to the issue of a building licence.
Overall, it is recommended that the proposed development is supported.
Committee Meeting 18 February 2003
During discussion, the Administration was requested to discuss with the applicant the need for screening of certain upper floor windows.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 225 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr McAullay, seconded by Cr Burkett
That in accordance with the provisions of Part 4 of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No. 1, the Council APPROVES the application for a grouped dwelling development (13 two-storey dwellings comprising 9 single bedroom dwellings at 50% density bonus and 4 three bedroom dwellings) submitted by Peter Jodrell Architect at Lot 123 and 124 (Nos. 231 and 233) Cambridge Street, Wembley, noting the following variations:-
− Primary street setback; − Fencing in primary street setback area; − Plot ratio floor area per single bedroom dwelling, − Site works; − Side setbacks; and − Visual privacy, as shown on the amended site plan and floor plans dated 7 February 2002, amended side elevations dated 30 January 2003, front and rear elevations dated 19 November 2002, subject to the following conditions:-
(i) Lots 123 and 124 (Nos. 231 and 233) Cambridge Street, Wembley shall be legally amalgamated prior to the issue of a building licence.
(ii) the upper floor bedroom window of proposed Unit 5 shall be modified to comply with Clause 3.8.1 - Visual Privacy of the Residential Design Codes of Western Australia;
(iii) the upper floor bedroom window of proposed Unit 9 shall be modified to comply with Clause 3.8.1 - Visual Privacy of the Residential Design Codes of Western Australia;
(iv) the upper floor bedroom 3 window of proposed Unit 10 shall be modified to comply with Clause 3.8.1 - Visual Privacy of the Residential Design Codes of Western Australia;
(v) the upper floor bedroom 1 window of proposed Unit 10 that faces the west side boundary shall be modified to comply with Clause 3.8.1 - Visual Privacy of the Residential Design Codes of Western Australia;
(vi) the upper floor bedroom 3 window of proposed Unit 13 shall be modified to comply with Clause 3.8.1 - Visual Privacy of the Residential Design Codes of Western Australia;
(vii) the upper floor bedroom 1 window of proposed Unit 13 that faces the east side boundary shall be modified to comply with Clause 3.8.1 - Visual Privacy of the Residential Design Codes of Western Australia;
(viii) the ground floor rear courtyard of proposed Unit 1 shall be modified to comply with Clause 3.8.1 - Visual Privacy of the Residential Design Codes of Western Australia;
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 226 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
(ix) the ground floor rear courtyard of proposed Unit 4 shall be modified to comply with Clause 3.8.1 - Visual Privacy of the Residential Design Codes of Western Australia;
(x) details of how the area is to be landscaped (including species and height at maturity) and reticulated shall be submitted and approved by the Town prior to the issue of a building licence. The landscaped areas shall be completed within 28 days of the occupation of the dwellings and maintained to a high standard to the satisfaction of the Town.
Footnote:
1. Approval of this application does not obviate the applicant’s responsibility to liaise with the adjoining property owners to the east and west in respect to the proposed alterations to the existing fencing along the eastern and western side boundary, in accordance with the Dividing Fences Act 1961.
During discussion, Members were advised that following a further site inspection and a review of the conditions, it is considered that conditions (iii) and (vi) may be deleted. Although retaining the conditions would reduce any overlooking, the reason for deleting the conditions is that the area potentially overlooked from the subject windows in Units 9 and 13 is essentially a car parking area (which is partially obscured by some vegetation on the adjoining lot at 227 Cambridge Street). Further it is noted that no submissions were received from the owners of the adjoining property.
In order to address an ongoing concern in relation to privacy and potential for overlooking from the courtyard for Unit 10, it was recommended that a further condition be added to the recommendation.
Amendment
Moved by Cr McAullay, seconded by Cr O’Connor
That the motion be amended by deleting conditions (iii) and (vi) and a further condition (ix) be added as follows:-
(ix) the height of the fence around the courtyard to Unit 10 be increased to a minimum height of 2 metres to further prevent the ability for overlooking into the adjoining property at 237 Cambridge Street, Wembley.
Amendment carried
The amended motion was then put and carried
The motion, as carried, is as follows:-
That in accordance with the provisions of Part 4 of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No. 1, the Council APPROVES the application for a grouped dwelling development (13 two-storey dwellings comprising 9 single bedroom dwellings at 50% density bonus and 4 three bedroom dwellings) submitted by Peter Jodrell Architect at Lot 123 and 124 (Nos. 231 and 233) Cambridge Street, Wembley, noting the following variations:-
− Primary street setback; − Fencing in primary street setback area;
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 227 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
− Plot ratio floor area per single bedroom dwelling, − Site works; − Side setbacks; and − Visual privacy, as shown on the amended site plan and floor plans dated 7 February 2002, amended side elevations dated 30 January 2003, front and rear elevations dated 19 November 2002, subject to the following conditions:-
(i) Lots and 124 (Nos. 231 and 233) Cambridge Street, Wembley shall be legally amalgamated prior to the issue of a building licence.
(ii) the upper floor bedroom window of proposed Unit 5 shall be modified to comply with Clause 3.8.1 - Visual Privacy of the Residential Design Codes of Western Australia;
(iii) the upper floor bedroom 3 window of proposed Unit 10 shall be modified to comply with Clause 3.8.1 - Visual Privacy of the Residential Design Codes of Western Australia;
(iv) the upper floor bedroom 1 window of proposed Unit 10 that faces the west side boundary shall be modified to comply with Clause 3.8.1 - Visual Privacy of the Residential Design Codes of Western Australia;
(v) the upper floor bedroom 1 window of proposed Unit 13 that faces the east side boundary shall be modified to comply with Clause 3.8.1 - Visual Privacy of the Residential Design Codes of Western Australia;
(vi) the ground floor rear courtyard of proposed Unit 1 shall be modified to comply with Clause 3.8.1 - Visual Privacy of the Residential Design Codes of Western Australia;
(vii) the ground floor rear courtyard of proposed Unit 4 shall be modified to comply with Clause 3.8.1 - Visual Privacy of the Residential Design Codes of Western Australia;
(viii) details of how the area is to be landscaped (including species and height at maturity) and reticulated shall be submitted and approved by the Town prior to the issue of a building licence. The landscaped areas shall be completed within 28 days of the occupation of the dwellings and maintained to a high standard to the satisfaction of the Town.
(ix) the height of the fence around the courtyard to Unit 10 be increased to a minimum height of 2 metres to further prevent the ability for overlooking into the adjoining property at 237 Cambridge Street, Wembley.
Footnote:
1. Approval of this application does not obviate the applicant’s responsibility to liaise with the adjoining property owners to the east and west in respect to the proposed alterations to the existing fencing along the eastern and western side boundary, in accordance with the Dividing Fences Act 1961.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 228 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
DES03.09
LOT 11 (NO. 114) NORTHWOOD STREET, WEST LEEDERVILLE - PROPOSED TWO STOREY GROUPED DWELLING (File reference PRO 0608)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To determine the application for building approval seeking variations to the requirements of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No. 1.
BACKGROUND:
BA/DA REFERENCE: 383BA.2002 LANDOWNER: M & T Fowles and I Robotham APPLICANT: Landwise Holdings Pty Ltd ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme No.1: Residential R30
74DA-2001: Planning approval issued for three two storey grouped dwelling development.
3893BA–2002: Building licence issued. Construction advancing to lock up stage
COMPLIANCE:
POLICY: Residential Design Codes (R Codes)
Permissible Discretion Permitted as of Right Proposed Retaining Walls (R Codes) - maximum height 0.5 metres 1.05 metres (max) - setbacks 1.0 metre Nil
DETAILS:
Approval is sought to construct a retaining wall along a portion of the rear boundary of the development situated at Lot 11 (No.114) Northwood Street, West Leederville.
The subject property is currently being developed with three side by side grouped dwellings and the works are associated with the development of drying courts at the rear of the dwellings. The site levels fall across the site from south to north and also from the front of the lot towards the rear of the lot, necessitating some retaining in order to create a level courtyard at the rear of the dwellings. Whilst there are retaining walls proposed along the back of all three dwellings, there is a section of retaining at the rear of the southern dwelling that has a maximum height of 1.05 metres in lieu of the permitted 0.5 metres. The section of the wall that is non-complying measures approximately 1.4 metres in length.
Applicants ground for request:
“We would like to erect a retaining wall on our rear perimeter fence. The retaining wall will assist in soil movement and assist in creating a private courtyard for the rear of the units. A new fence is to be erected on top of this wall to the standard 1800mm height.”
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 229 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Neighbour consultation:
The wall is to be located towards the rear corner of the adjoining property which has its frontage to Caddy Street and accordingly the owner has been notified of the proposal and a 14 day period has been granted for a submission to be made.
At the time of compiling this report, no submission had been received, however, the applicant advises that the owner of that property had previously expressed opposition to the proposal. The likely basis for the objection would be in respect to the cumulative height of the retaining wall and dividing fence (max 2.85 metres) and the concern that this would have an adverse impact on the amenity of her rear garden and courtyard area.
Privacy is not identified as an issue in this instance as it is proposed that a standard 1.8 metre high fence is to be erected atop the retaining wall that would effectively screen the courtyard and dwelling beyond.
COMMENT:
Retaining Walls (R Codes)
The development controls over the height and location of retaining walls are covered under Element 6-Site works, sections; 3.6.1 - A1.4 and 3.62 A2 of the R Codes. The Acceptable Development Standards note that retaining walls over 0.5 metres in height should, in this instance, be screened and set back 1.0 metre from the rear boundary rather than being constructed at the line of the boundary.
Variations to the acceptable development standards are considered under the following two sets of performance criteria:-
3.6.1 – Excavation or fill P1 Development that’s retains the visual impression of the natural level of a site as seen from an adjoining property; and
3.6.2 – Setback of retaining walls P2 Retaining walls designed or setback to minimise the impact on adjoining property.
The variation to the standards set out above are in this instance considered relatively minor, given that the section of retaining wall requiring approval measures only 1.4 metres in length along a 17.7 metre long boundary shared between the two lots. The balance of the retaining walls are to be no more than the permitted 0.5 metres high.
The wall is positioned toward the rear southwest corner of the neighbour’s lot. The balance of the retaining walls are stepped down along the lot following the fall of the site. Whilst the retaining wall will be visible from the neighbours rear garden/courtyard, the overheight section is relatively small in area and is balanced by the rest of the wall being stepped down. No privacy issues arise from the retaining works as a standard height boundary fence is proposed that will screen the drying court and buildings beyond.
The wall is not likely to introduce any direct overshadowing effects into the neighbours yard in that they are located on the neighbours western boundary and the new dwelling is within 2.3 metres of the boundary. The proximity of the dwelling to the boundary
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 230 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
would also make it difficult to set the wall off the boundary 1.0 metre and maintain a functional area. Having regard to the above comments, it is considered that sufficient grounds exists to support the variation in that the extent of retaining works has been kept to a minimum by the applicant and is in a location that minimises the impact on the adjoining neighbour’s property.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
Consideration of this application is consistent with the Town’s Strategic Plan for the provision of orderly planning to enhance the Town’s natural and built environment through effective and responsible use of the town planning scheme.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Nil
Committee Meeting 18 February 2003
During discussion, Members noted that at the time of compiling the report, no written submission had been received from the neighbour, however, an objection had been made verbally by the neighbour to the applicant. As such, the report notes that there is an objection to the proposal.
The advertising period has since expired and no formal submission was lodged by the neighbour with the Town. The applicant has advised that he has spoken to the affected neighbour and she has advised him that she does not object to the wall and this is why no submission was made.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr McAullay, seconded by Cr Burkett
That in accordance with Part 4 of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No.1 the Council APPROVES the application for retaining walls, noting variations to the standard height and setback requirements, submitted by Landwise Holdings Pty Ltd at Lot 11 (No.114) Northwood Street, West Leederville, as shown on the amended plans dated 29 January 2003.
Footnote:-
The applicant be advised that:-
• Approval of this application does not obviate the applicant’s responsibility to liaise with the adjoining eastern property owner in respect to section of the fence to be constructed along the eastern boundary, in accordance with the Dividing Fences Act 1961.
• If the proposed retaining walls are to be constructed by persons other than the current holder of the building licence No.383BA-02, then a new application for a building licence will be required to be submitted together with working drawings and all associated fees.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 231 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
DES03.10
LOT 721 (NO.68B) McCOURT STREET, WEST LEEDERVILLE - PROPOSED TWO STOREY DWELLING (File Reference: PRO 0585)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To determine an application for planning approval seeking variations to the requirements of Town Planning Scheme No.1.
BACKGROUND:
BA/DA REFERENCE: 80DA-2002 LANDOWNER: Kim Marshall APPLICANT: Fernando Faugno ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme No.1: Residential R30
At its meeting held on 23 April 2002, Council granted town planning approval for a two, two-storey grouped dwelling development at Lot 441 (No. 68) McCourt Street, West Leederville. The proposed development consisted of two three-bedroom dwellings both with street frontage and a rear garage and store, mirror-imaged and separated by common parapet walls.
Since planning approval was granted on 23 April 2002, Lot 441 (No. 68) McCourt Street was subdivided, creating two green titled lots in a side by side configuration with narrow 7.6 metre frontages (Lot 722 (No. 68A) McCourt Street, West Leederville, and Lot 721 (No. 68B) McCourt Street, West Leederville). The two lots were then sold to different owners. The new owners have decided to design their own homes independently, and not act upon the plans that were granted planning approval on 23 April 2002. An application to construct a two-storey dwelling on the adjoining Lot 722 (No. 68A) McCourt Street has been submitted to the Town but has not yet been determined as the applicant has advised that amended plans will be submitted in the near future.
POLICY:
− Residential Design Codes of Western Australia (R Codes) − Draft Town of Cambridge Residential Design Guidelines (RDGs)
COMPLIANCE:
Non-compliance Required Provided Roof pitch Primary roofs visible from the Combination of hipped and flat (RDGs) street hipped or gabled, or a roof combination of the two. Pitch between 30 and 40 25 degree pitch of hipped roof degrees for primary roofing visible from the street.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 232 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Wall height Maximum 6.0 metres Between 6.0 metres and 6.4 (RDGs and R metres on north side Codes) Between 6.5 metres and 7.3 metres on south side (parapet wall)
Privacy provisions Minimum 4.5 metre setback for Minimum 3.5 metres from (R Codes) unscreened bedroom windows bedroom 1 window to south/right side boundary
Ground floor side Minimum 1.0 metre for Nil (parapet wall) for proposed setback proposed garage/store garage/store (north/left) Minimum 1.5 metres for Between 1.2 and 1.964 metres (R Codes) proposed dwelling for proposed dwelling
Ground floor side Minimum 1.0 metre for Nil (parapet wall) for proposed setback (south/right) proposed garage/store garage/store (R Codes) Minimum 1.5 metres for Nil (parapet wall) for proposed proposed dwelling dwelling
Upper floor side Minimum 1.5 metres for 1.2 metres for bedroom 2-3 setback (north/left) bedroom 2-3 wall of proposed wall of proposed dwelling (R Codes) dwelling Minimum 2.4 metres for study 1.964 metres for study wall of wall of proposed dwelling proposed dwelling
Upper floor side Minimum between 2.3 metres Nil (parapet wall) for proposed setback (south/right) and 2.6 metres for proposed dwelling (R Codes) dwelling
Delegated Authority
As shown in the table above, the application proposes variations to requirements and guidelines relating to side setbacks and privacy.
Council’s Town Planning Delegations Policy, adopted under Clause 50 of Town Planning Scheme No.1, delegates certain Scheme powers to the Chief Executive Officer (or his nominated officer). The policy states that variations in accordance with Part 3.3 (Boundary Setbacks) of the R Codes and those which do not conform with the acceptable development standards as outlined in Part 3.8 (Privacy) of the R Codes may be supported where the adjoining neighbour has no objection.
In this particular case, the above provisions are satisfied as the adjoining neighbours have expressed no objections to the side setback and privacy variations, and therefore these variations do not require the (elected) Council’s approval and are not discussed further in this report.
DETAILS:
Lot Area: 306 square metres Open Space: 45 per cent
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 233 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
An application has been received proposing the construction of a new, two-storey dwelling at Lot 721 (No. 68B) McCourt Street, West Leederville. As stated previously, the lot has been created following the subdivision of the original land holding which has created two green title lots with narrow 7.6 metre wide frontages. As is typical of these narrow lots, it is the intention to construct the new dwelling up to the southern “internal” boundary of the lot that will match the setback that is proposed for the dwelling on the adjoining Lot 722 (No. 68A) McCourt Street.
The main living areas of the dwelling are proposed for the ground floor, with the bedrooms and study on the upper floor. The footprint of the ground floor corresponds with the upper floor. No balconies are proposed, only windows facing to the street, rear and No. 70 McCourt Street (Wembley Plumbing Service).
The applicant seeks the Council’s approval to vary the roof pitch and wall height provisions of the Residential Design Guidelines.
Neighbour’s Comment
The adjoining neighbour to the north (No. 70 McCourt Street – Wembley Plumbing Service) signed the plans indicating no objections to the proposed development.
The adjoining neighbours to the south (No. 68A McCourt Street) expressed no comment or objection to the variations to the side setback requirements and privacy provisions, but expressed their concern about the proposed wall height variation for the parapet wall, in particular the height at the front of the dwelling. The proposed parapet wall ranges in height from 6.5 metres at the rear to 7.3 metres at the front, in lieu of the required 6.0 metres. The adjoining neighbours are concerned that the 7.3 metre high parapet wall at the front would adversely impact on the appearance of the street frontage of both dwellings. The adjoining neighbours have forwarded preliminary plans of their development, which shows their parapet wall at a height of approximately 6.0 metres at the front of their dwelling.
Applicant’s Grounds for Request
The applicant has provided the following comments in support of the proposed variations to the wall height and roof pitch provisions:
Roof Pitch
The current roof pitch is shown at 25 degrees. Council requirement is for a roof pitch of between 30 and 40 degrees. A shallower pitch has been proposed for the following:-
(a) The buildings to the north (plumber’s office) and directly opposite to the west (liquor store) are both single storey buildings with flat roofs behind parapets. A shallower pitch was therefore considered to be more in sympathy with the scale of these adjoining properties and more closely reflecting the building bulk and streetscape. This is a criteria as outlined in “7.2.1 Building Scale”.
Wall Height
The wall height under the pitched roof complies with Council’s criteria of 6.0 metres. The variations to wall heights are for parapet walls with concealed roofs behind. These walls vary in height on the south from 6.5 metres to 7.3 metres and on the north from 6.0 metres to 6.4 metres. An increase in height has been proposed for the following:
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 234 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
(a) The proposed property to the south also has a similar wall height along its northern boundary. (b) Neighbours to the south have been consulted and they have approved the increase in wall height to the southern walls. This will have no overshadowing impact on their property. (c) An increase in parapet height is required to accommodate air conditioning for flat roofed areas. (d) The natural ground level slopes considerably (2.0 metres) from front to back and is therefore difficult to maintain a constant wall height for the length of the wall.
COMMENT:
Precinct Planning Policy 7.5 P5 –West Leederville
The statement of intent for West Leederville Precinct pertaining to new development notes, in part:-
• Protection of the existing character of development within the locality will be a priority. • New development must be designed in a manner that complements the scale character of this housing and the locality in general. In particular roof pitches, wall and eave heights, building materials, front fences and building location and orientation are important; and • Development should face the street in the traditional manner.
Roof Pitch
Clauses 8.3.7 and 8.3.8 of the Town’s Residential Design Guidelines require that primary roofs visible from the street shall be hipped or gabled, or a combination of the two, and that the pitch of primary roofing visible from the street in West Leederville is between 30 degrees and 40 degrees. The roof of the dwelling that will be visible from the street is proposed to be a combination of a hipped roof with a 25 degree pitch and a flat roof. It is important to note that the plans submitted show a proposed roof pitch of 28 degrees but advice from the applicant confirmed that the proposed roof pitch is 25 degrees.
Variations to the Compliance Standards of the RDGs that relate to architectural character (including roof pitch) may be approved by the Council where, in the opinion of the Council, the following criteria are met:-
(a) buildings which respect the height, massing and roof pitches of existing housing in the street and locality; (b) buildings which have integrity of expression and respect the architectural styles which characterise the locality; and (c) buildings which relate to the palette of materials and colours which are characteristic of housing in the locality.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 235 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
While a lower pitch would possibly reduce the bulk of the development, it is inconsistent with the general pattern of residential development in the street. It is acknowledged that the adjoining plumbing business and liquor store across the road do not have the standard high pitched roofs, however, these commercial buildings were designed to be distinct from the residential development and therefore do not set the precedent for roof pitches for residential development in the street.
The West Leederville precinct and this section of McCourt Street has a defined and readily identifiable style. Whilst the overall height of the building is not questioned, the roof pitch is not considered to complement the streetscape and would be considered to be contrary to the pattern of residential development in this area. It is therefore recommended that the pitch of the hipped portion of the roof that is visible from the street be increased to between 30 and 40 degrees, to meet the Design Guidelines requirement. The flat portion of the roof visible from the street adds interest and is not a significant element of the façade and therefore is acceptable.
Wall Height
Clause 7.3.1 of the Town’s Draft Residential Design Guidelines requires that new development does not exceed a height of 6.0 metres to the top of the eaves at the wall line, parapet or flat roof, measured vertically above the “natural level” immediately below the relevant point on the wall or roof. The dwelling proposes a wall height of between 6.0 metres and 6.4 metres on the northern/left side for a flat roofed section of the dwelling located at the rear of the dwelling, and a height of between 6.5 metres at the rear to 7.3 metres at the front on the southern/right side for the proposed parapet wall.
Variations to the Compliance Standards relating to wall height may be approved by the Council where, in the opinion of the Council, the following criteria are met:-
(a) buildings which respect the scale of buildings generally in their vicinity, in terms of their height and bulk and remain subservient to the green streetscape; (b) buildings which area respectful of the predominant character and style of existing development within the locality; (c) where the front of the building facing the street is broken up, presenting a varied and interesting façade to the street, rather than a continuous wall; (d) where the performance criteria contained in Part 3.7.1 P1 of the R Codes are met.
The performance criteria contained in Part 3.7.1 P1 of the R Codes state that new development should meet these criteria:
Building height consistent with the desired height of buildings in the locality, and to recognise the need to protect the amenities of adjoining properties, including, where appropriate:- - adequate direct sun to buildings and appurtenant open spaces; - adequate daylight to major openings to habitable rooms; and - access to views of significance.
The proposed wall height (maximum 6.4 metres in lieu of the required 6.0 metres) on the northern/left side for a flat roofed portion of the dwelling at the rear is considered to
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 236 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
be acceptable and will not impact on the provision of adequate sun to the adjoining property to the north (No. 70 McCourt Street).
It is also agreed that the height of the parapet wall on the southern/right side should not result in an overshadowing issue for the adjoining property to the south (No. 68A McCourt Street), as the owners of No. 68A McCourt Street are designing their dwelling to have a relatively similar parapet wall location and length as the proposed dwelling at No. 68A McCourt Street. The concerns that the adjoining owners at No. 68A McCourt Street have raised about the proposed parapet wall height primarily relate to the appearance of the dwellings from the street.
The owners of No. 68A McCourt Street are proposing a parapet wall approximately 6.0 metres high for their dwelling which will abut the 7.3 metre high parapet wall proposed for the dwelling at No. 68B McCourt Street. Whilst it may be beneficial for the streetscape to have some variety in height, particularly for narrow lot developments, a difference of 1.3 metres is significant. The natural topography of the lot has a slight slope from right (south) to left (north), and therefore the dwelling at No. 68B McCourt Street should be lower than the dwelling at No. 68A McCourt Street. Whilst it is understood that the land also slopes down from the rear to the front, which has resulted in higher wall heights at the front of the dwelling, the site is currently vacant and therefore the development should be designed to fit within the relevant guidelines and requirements. Further, the grouped dwelling development that was approved on 23 April 2002 complied with the wall height requirement of 6.0 metres.
The Town’s Town Planning Delegation Policy allows Council Officers to approve a minor variation to the wall height requirement (5 percent of the expressed standard), in this case, 6.3 metres in lieu of the required 6.0 metres. Given that an objection has been received from the neighbour but the neighbour has not indicated a particular height that would be acceptable, and that there is no compelling reason to support the proposed 7.3 metre high parapet wall, it is recommended that Council does not support the application unless the height of the parapet wall is reduced to 6.3 metres.
Having said this, there may be some scope in this particular case to accept a wall slightly higher than 6.3 metres, subject to agreement between the two neighbours and to the satisfaction of the Town. Whilst no precise height can be prescribed, a figure within 500 millimetres of the agreed height of 6.3 metres would seem acceptable. The applicant and neighbour have both been advised by Council officers to discuss the height of the proposed parapet wall between themselves and perhaps come to an agreement on a height that would be more compatible with the proposed dwelling on the adjoining lot and the streetscape in general.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
Consideration of this application is consistent with the Town’s Strategic Plan for the provision of orderly planning to enhance the Town’s natural and built environment through effective and responsible use of the town planning scheme.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Nil.
CONCLUSION:
Having regard to the comments outlined in the above report, it is considered that insufficient reasons exist to support the proposed variations to the roof pitch and wall
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 237 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
height. It is considered that the roof pitch and parapet wall height could be amended to be in conformity with the streetscape and policy requirements without unduly compromising the overall integrity of the design.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr McAullay, seconded by Cr Burkett
That:-
(i) the applicant be advised that Council is not prepared to approve the application submitted by Fernando Faugno for a two-storey dwelling at Lot 721 (No. 68B) McCourt Street, West Leederville as shown on the plans dated 30 December 2002 in its present form, as the proposed development would prejudice the orderly and proper planning of the locality by virtue of its:-
(a) non-compliance with Clause 7.3.1 of the Town of Cambridge Residential Design Guidelines wall height requirement; and
(b) non-compliance with Clauses 8.3.8 of the Town of Cambridge Residential Design Guidelines roof pitch requirement;
(ii) the Council would be prepared to give favourable consideration to amended plans incorporating the following modifications:-
(a) the roof pitch increased to between 30 and 40 degrees; and
(b) the height of the parapet wall on the southern (right) side boundary reduced to 6.3 metres or such other height agreed by the neighbour up to a maximum height of 6.8 metres.
(iii) in accordance with Part 4 of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No. 1, Council by an ABSOLUTE MAJORITY authorises the Chief Executive Officer to approve the application for a two-storey dwelling at Lot 721 (No. 68B) McCourt Street, West Leederville subject to the plans being amended in accordance with (ii) above.
Carried by an ABSOLUTE MAJORITY
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 238 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
DES03.11
LOT 1418 (NO.86) NANSON STREET, WEMBLEY – PROVISIONAL ADDITIONS AND ALTERATIONS (File Reference: PRO 0850)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To determine an application for building approval seeking variations to the requirements of the Residential Design Codes.
BACKGROUND:
BA/DA REFERENCE: 735BA-2002 LANDOWNER: Shannon Yujnovich APPLICANT: Shannon Yujnovich ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme No.1: Residential R20
POLICY: Residential Design Guidelines
COMPLIANCE:
Non – compliance Required Proposed Side setback (north) 1.0 metres to the side nil (R-Code) boundary
DETAILS:
Lot area: 645 square metres
Approval is sought for an extension to the existing garage on the subject property. Plans show the addition will be to the north side of the house with a nil side setback. The boundary wall will be 7.5 metres in length and the existing boundary fence will remain. The extension will widen and lengthen the garage. A storeroom will be incorporated to the rear of the garage.
The extension of the garage will not alter the front setback which is currently 9.0 metres. The existing house is set back 7.4 metres from the front boundary. The existing side setback to the garage is 1.2 metres.
Under the Acceptable Criteria of the R-Codes for boundary walls clause 3.3.2 states:-
A2. Except where otherwise provided for in an adopted Local Planning Policy, walls built up to a boundary behind the front setback line within the following limits, subject to the overshadowing provisions of Element 9:-
ii) In areas coded R20 and R25, walls not higher than than 3.0 metres with an average of 2.7 metres up to 9 metres in length up to one side boundary.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 239 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
The proposal complies with the detail of the Acceptable Criteria being no more than 3.0 metres in height and not more than 9 metres in length. Normally, the application would be approved “as of right.” Under Council Policy, however, any boundary wall proposal requires the affected adjoining landowner to be notified and the opportunity for comment be given.
Applicants Grounds For Request
The applicant has submitted the following letter to support her request:-
“Further to my application I would like to inform you of my intention to carry out the following:-
1. The existing super 6 fence will be retained, the new wall will be built along side of it. 2. If the Council requires it the length of the proposed adjoining boundary wall can be reduced at the rear of the garage so that it will be 6 metres instead of 7.5 metres. 3. If the Council requires the brick exposed above the fence it can be rendered and painted beige or any colour the Council or the adjoining neighbour wishes. 4. If the Council requires the brickwork exposed above the fence can have some glass bricks fitted in order to break down the barriers. 5. Should the Council have any further suggestions to modify the extension, I would be more than happy to look at these.
In support of my renovation plan, I would also like to bring to your attention the fact that many surrounding homes in Wembley, have had similar extensions to the original garages. My application is not unlike any of these.
I have recently purchased this 1930’s home as my first home of which I am extremely proud. I am strongly committed to retaining the original character of the house.”
COMMENT:
Advertising
The side setback variation was advertised to the affected adjoining landowner. An objection was received on 12 January 2003. The objection outlines:-
“Further to your letter of 3 January, I wish to object to the proposed extension on the following grounds:-
1. By building on the fenceline the garage wall will only be some 60 centimetres from the gutter of my home. I consider this to be a probable fire hazard. 2. The extension will create restriction of air flow down the side of my residence. 3. I have a concern that the extension will affect the market value of my property.
I have resided at this address for 49 years and I trust you will take this these comments into consideration when making your decision.”
Side setback (north)
Table 2a of the Residential Design Codes (R-Codes) requires a minimum setback of 1.0 metres in this instance. Under the Performance Criteria of the R-Codes, it states:-
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 240 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
3.3.2 Buildings on Boundary
P2 Buildings built up to boundaries other than the street boundary where it is desireable to do so in order to:-
• Make effective use of space; or
• Enhance privacy; or
• Otherwise enhance the amenity of the development; and
• Not have any significant adverse affect on the amenity of the adjoining property; and
• Assist in amerliorating the impacts of building bulk on adjoining properties; and
• Ensure that direct sun to major openings to habitable rooms and outdoor living areas of adjoining properties is not restricted.
The application complies to the technical requirements of the R-Code Acceptable Criteria being less than 3.0 metres high and not more than 9.0 metres in length. Under Council Policy the proposal was advertised for comment and an objection was received. Assessment of the Performance Criteria is thus required.
Based against the Performance Criteria listed above, the application does make effective use of space as the existing garage dimensions make it difficult to accommodate modern vehicles. The garage extension also enhances the amenity of the development and maintains direct sunlight to major openings and outdoor living areas of adjoining properties by virtue of the proposal taking place on the north boundary of the subject site.
It is not likely that the proposed boundary wall will have a significant adverse effect on the amenity of the adjoining property due to:-
1. The existing fence being retained along the boundary. This will mean that a 0.8 metre portion will be visable above a standard 1.8 metre high boundary fence. 2. There would be only a marginal difference between having the 0.8 metre section above the fence and 7.5 metres long, either on the boundary or 1.0 metre from the boundary. 3. The proposal would otherwise comply with the Acceptable Criteria of the R- Codes and “be approved as of right.” 4. In relation to the points of objection the garage extension would have to comply with the Building Code of Australia in relation to fire rating. There is no planning evidence or criteria to determine the application based on air flow being restricted or that there will be a loss of property value. 5. Extension of the width of the garage is not possible without a boundary wall as it is already 1.2 metres from the side boundary.
The setback variation will not compromise the amenity of the adjoining property and satisfies the Performance Criteria of the R-Codes and is thus supported.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 241 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
Consideration of this application is consistent with the Town’s Strategic Plan for the provision of orderly planning to enhance the Town’s natural and built environment through effective and responsible use of the town planning scheme.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Nil
CONCLUSION:
The setback variation proposed complies with the Performance Criteria specified in the R-Codes. In view of these comments the current application should be approved.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr McAullay, seconded by Cr Burkett
That in accordance with the provisions of Part 4 of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No. 1, the Council APPROVES the application submitted by Shannon Yujnovich, for an extension to the existing garage with a side setback variation at Lot 1418 (No.86) Nanson Street, Wembley as shown on the plans dated 18 December 2002 subject to:-
(i) the existing boundary fence to remain where it abuts the boundary wall;
(ii) the boundary wall section visable above the fence from the adjoining property to be rendered and painted in a colour to blend with the existing fence.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 242 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
DES03.12
LOT 237 (NO. 106) GRANTHAM STREET, FLOREAT - PROPOSED COLORBOND SHED (File Reference: PRO 0794)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To determine the application for building approval.
BACKGROUND:
BA/DA REFERENCE: 43 BA / 2003 LANDOWNER: Mr Bob Laurenson APPLICANT: Highline Building Constructions ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme: Residential R12.5
COMPLIANCE:
Non-compliance Required Proposed (Local Law 43) • Area not to exceed • 12.99 square 12 square metres metres
DETAILS:
Approval is sought for a colorbond shed to be constructed at the rear of the existing house at Lot 237 (No. 106) Grantham Street, Floreat. The shed is located 0.5 metres from the rear boundary and 0.5 metres from the side boundary, which is 0.5 metres short of the required setback set out in the Residential Design Codes. The affected neighbours have been consulted and approve of this variation.
The shed is 12.97 square metres in area, which exceeds the maximum allowable area under Local Law 43 of twelve square metres for an outbuilding.
The applicant seeks the Council’s approval to vary the floor area for an outbuilding (shed) under Local Law 43.
COMMENT:
While the applicant’s proposal does not comply with Local Law 43, only a minor variation (0.97 square metres) is being sought. It is also noteworthy that under the Residential Design Codes, outbuildings shall not exceed a maximum floor area of 60 square metres – a requirement that this application easily meets. The shed will not be visible from the street or overly obtrusive when viewed from surrounding properties.
CONCLUSION:
It is recommended that the Council exercises its discretion and approve this application. An Absolute Majority decision of Council is required where discretion is exercised under the provisions of Local Law 43.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 243 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
Moved by Cr Burkett, seconded by Cr Anderton
That in accordance with the provisions of Part 4 of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No. 1 and Local Law 43 (Buildings on Endowment Lands and Limekilns Estate) the Council APPROVES BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the application for a colorbond shed submitted by Highline Building Constructions, at Lot 237 (106) Grantham Street, Floreat, as shown on plans dated 19 January 2003, which has the following variations:-
• Side setbacks, and • Area of an outbuilding,
subject to the following condition:-
(i) the shed is not to be constructed in zincalume or white steel sheeting.
Carried by an ABSOLUTE MAJORITY
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 244 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
DES03.13
LOT 164 (NO. 16) TALGARTH WAY, CITY BEACH – PROPOSED ADDITIONS AND ALTERATIONS (File Reference: PRO 1527)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To determine the application for preliminary approval seeking variations to the requirements of Town Planning Scheme No. 1.
BACKGROUND:
BA/DA Reference: 712BA-2002 LANDOWNER: Ms N. Berry APPLICANT: Fiona Robson ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme No. 1: Residential R12.5
POLICY:
− Residential Design Codes of Western Australia (R Codes) − Draft Town of Cambridge Residential Design Guidelines (RDGs)
COMPLIANCE:
Non-compliance Required Provided Primary Street 7.5 metres Between 1.05 metres and 1.4 Setback (TPS No. 1 metres and RDGs) Visual Privacy 7.5 metre setback from Between nil and 7.5 metres (R Codes) proposed unscreened deck that is partly elevated over 0.5 metres above natural ground level to common boundary Side setback 1.0 metre for proposed Nil for proposed outdoor (left/west) outdoor living area living area (R Codes) 1.5 metres for proposed 1.0 metre for proposed living living room room
Delegated Authority
As shown in the table above, the application proposes variations to requirements relating to side setbacks. Council’s Town Planning Delegations Policy, adopted under Clause 50 of Town Planning Scheme No.1, delegates certain Scheme powers to the Chief Executive Officer (or his nominated officer). The policy states that variations in accordance with Part 3.3 (Boundary Setbacks) of the R Codes may be supported where the adjoining neighbour has no objection.
In this particular case, the above provisions are satisfied as the adjoining neighbour has indicated no objection to the side setback variations and therefore, these variations do not require the (elected) Council’s approval. As such, the variations are not discussed further in this report.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 245 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
DETAILS:
Lot area: 1004 square metres Open space: 71 percent
Approval is sought for additions and alterations to the existing dwelling at Lot 164 (No. 16) Talgarth Way, City Beach. The lot is an irregular shape, being located at a bend in Talgarth Way. The existing dwelling stretches almost the full frontage of the lot. The dwelling has an existing two-storey component facing Talgarth Way. The proposed additions and alterations are single-storey and include:-
- removing the existing double carport and storeroom on the western side of the dwelling in order to extend the dwelling and create a living room and a double garage with a roller door in front of the new living room;
- removing the existing pergola at the rear of the dwelling in order to create a new roofed outdoor area at the rear of the dwelling on the western side, adjacent to the existing pool;
- increasing the height of the dividing wall on the western side boundary, between the subject property and the adjoining No. 36 Talgarth Way; and
- removing the existing 1.5 metre high brick screen wall adjacent to the pool at the rear of the property, in order to provide a new deck adjacent to the pool at the rear of the property.
The applicant seeks the Council’s approval to vary the primary street setback requirement of Town Planning Scheme No. 1 and privacy provisions of the R Codes.
Neighbour’s Comment
Due to the proposed variations to the front and side setback requirements, the application was referred to the adjoining neighbour to the west (No. 36 Talgarth Way) for comment. The adjoining neighbour to the west has indicated no objection to the proposed side setbacks and the front setback.
The original plans submitted with the application did not indicate the finished level of the proposed deck adjacent to the pool at the rear of the property and therefore the deck was not identified as a privacy issue and was not referred to the adjoining neighbours for comment. Revised plans submitted showed that portions of the proposed deck would be greater than 0.5 metres above natural ground level and therefore should comply with the privacy provisions. The applicant was advised that neighbour’s comment was required for the proposed deck or the proposed deck was required to be screened in accordance with the R Codes. Due to time limitations, the applicant requested that a condition be imposed requiring the deck to be screened in accordance with the R Codes to avoid requiring neighbour’s comment.
Applicant’s Grounds For Request
The applicant has provided the following comments in support of the variation to the primary street setback requirements of Town Planning Scheme No. 1 for the proposed garage:-
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 246 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
• The nature/shape of the site and the position of the existing residence pose significant limitations for development. Two of the four boundaries are street frontage, and discussion with Council officers during sketch design stage mooted the possibility of one of these boundaries, in this case the boundary of 38.66 metres, being deemed to be “secondary street”. Given the nature of the owner’s brief (ie. to provide additional living space, provide a lockable double garage and increased outdoor entertaining area adjacent to the swimming pool), and the site constraints, the current proposal was determined after investigating a number of alternatives over many months.
• There is a considerable verge width along both street boundaries (approximately 6-7 metres generally). This means that the position of the proposed garage will have negligible impact on sight lines for vehicles either travelling along Talgarth Way or using the driveway/garage of the property.
• The existing residence is sited such that the street elevation is very broad and the proposed position of the garage will have no negative impact on the street appeal of the existing residence in that there will be no “blocking” of the view of the house from the street. In fact, the proposal will provide a distinct and desirable contrast in setback from the existing house providing increased interest in the variation of light and shade to the existing elevation as well as providing the opportunity for significant improvements to landscaping.
• The owners are very keen to provide a garage (as opposed to a carport) in order that they may have secure parking for their vehicles. The provision of a garage is consistent with the majority of dwellings in Talgarth Way, with approximately 85 percent of dwellings having enclosed garages. Two of these appear to have setbacks to Talgarth Way of approximately 1200 mm to 1500 mm and one existing garage door is built into the front (Talgarth Way) boundary wall.
COMMENT:
Primary Street Setback
Under Clause 20 (1) (a) of Town Planning Scheme No. 1, the minimum required primary street setback for the proposed garage is 7.5 metres, a setback of between 1.05 metres and 1.4 metres is proposed.
The Town’s Residential Design Guidelines (RDG’s) allow Council to approve variations to the Compliance Standards relating to street setbacks where, in the opinion of the Council, the following criteria are met:-
(a) the setback is compatible with the established line and pattern of setbacks in the street; (b) the reduction in the setback would not adversely impact on the pattern of development in the street because of the position, shape or topography of the lot; and (c) visual separation is maintained between buildings and adjoining properties.
The lot is an irregular shape, with two of its four boundaries being street frontages, and is not part of a long streetscape as it is located on a bend in Talgarth Way. The existing dwelling complies with the primary street setback requirement. The two boundaries that are street frontages are 38.66 metres long and 16.21 metres long.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 247 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
The dwelling predominantly fronts the 38.66 metre long boundary and both vehicular access points to the dwelling are taken from this boundary. Further, the garage is proposed to face this frontage. The R Codes define primary street as the sole or principal public road that provides access to a site. Given the above, it is reasonable to assume that the 38.66 metre long boundary is the primary street frontage.
However, it could also be argued that this boundary is the secondary street frontage as the RDGs state that where a dwelling exists, the primary street setback area shall be defined as that which incorporates the greater distance from the dwelling to the boundary. The distance from the dwelling to the 16.21 metre long boundary is greater than the distance from the dwelling to the 38.66 metre long boundary. In any case, the garage would not comply with the secondary street setback requirement of 3.75 metres.
The inability of the proposed garage to comply with the primary street setback requirement of 7.5 metres relates to the irregular shape of the lot, the position of the existing dwelling and the proposal to increase the living space of the dwelling by encroaching into the area currently occupied by the carport. If the garage was located where the existing carport is located, then the setback of the garage would be closer in compliance - between 4.7 metres and 5.5 metres – and more acceptable than the 1.05 metre to 1.4 metre setback proposed.
The streetscape of Talgarth Way is varied, with examples of high solid walls with attached garages encroaching in the primary street setback area. In the immediate vicinity of the subject site, however, the properties generally comply with the setback requirement and have their front yards open to the street. The subject site does not have a fence along its street boundaries, instead has its front lawn extending to the kerb. Therefore, the impact of the garage on the streetscape would be more pronounced than if the subject site was already fully enclosed by a solid wall.
Overall it is considered that the setback variation is too significant to support and the proposed setback of the garage would not be compatible with the established line and pattern of setbacks in the immediate vicinity. It is considered that an open carport would be more appropriate than a garage. Whilst the proposed 1.05 metre setback would be less than the 3.0 metre minimum required setback for carports in City Beach, it would be closer in compliance and, being an open structure, have a less detrimental impact on the streetscape.
Visual Privacy
A new deck is proposed at the rear of the property, adjacent to the existing swimming pool. The finished level of the deck is proposed to be, in part, greater than 0.5 metres above natural ground level, unscreened and set back from the common boundaries a distance of between nil and 7.5 metres. As portions of the deck are proposed to be greater than 0.5 metres above natural ground level, the privacy provisions of the R Codes apply, requiring the deck to be screened or set back at least 7.5 metres from the common boundaries. The proposed level of the deck was not identified on the original plans submitted and therefore the neighbours were not consulted on the proposed deck. Due to time constraints, the applicant has requested that a condition be imposed requiring the deck to be screened in accordance with the R Codes, to avoid requiring neighbour’s comment.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 248 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
Consideration of this application is consistent with the Town’s Strategic Plan for the provision of orderly planning to enhance the Town’s natural and built environment through effective and responsible use of the town planning scheme.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Nil.
CONCLUSION:
Whilst the shape of the lot and the position of the existing dwelling limit the potential for additions and alterations, the proposed setback variation for the double garage is considered to be too significant to warrant an approval. The proposed garage would not be in keeping with the streetscape or established setbacks in the immediate vicinity of the property. It is considered that an open carport is a more appropriate structure in the location of the proposed garage and would have a less detrimental impact on the streetscape.
Further, considering that the neighbours have not had the opportunity to comment on the proposed deck at the rear, the deck should be required to be screened in accordance with the R Codes or provide opportunity to comment, given the proposed recommendation.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr McAullay, seconded by Cr Burkett
That:
(i) the applicant be advised that Council is Not Prepared To Approve the application submitted by Fiona Robson for additions and alterations at Lot 164 (No. 16) Talgarth Way, City Beach, in its present form, for the following reasons:-
• non-compliance with Clause 20 (1)(a) of Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No.1 relating to primary street setback;
• non-compliance with Clause 3.8.1 of the Residential Design Codes of Western Australia relating to visual privacy;
(i) the Council would be prepared to give favourable consideration to amended plans incorporating the following modifications:-
• the proposed garage being replaced with a carport, open on all sides except where attached to the dwelling;
• the proposed deck being screened in compliance with Clause 3.8.1 - Visual Privacy of the Residential Design Codes of Western Australia;
(ii) in accordance with Part 4 of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No. 1, Council BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY authorises the Chief Executive Officer to APPROVE the application for additions and alterations
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 249 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
at Lot 164 (No. 16) Talgarth Way subject to the plans being amended in accordance with the changes referred to in (ii) above.
Carried by an ABSOLUTE MAJORITY
Footnote:
1. Approval of this application does not obviate the applicant’s responsibility to liaise with the adjoining property owner to the west in respect to the proposed alterations to the existing fencing along the western side boundary, in accordance with the Dividing Fences Act 1961.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 250 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
DES03.14
PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN ACCESS WAY CLOSURE – PORTION OF WEST LEEDERVILLE PRIMARY SCHOOL - LOT 0 ON PLAN 1514 GLEN STREET, WEST LEEDERVILLE (File Reference: PRO 0214)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To consider a proposal to close a pedestrian access way.
BACKGROUND:
LANDOWNER: The Crown (managed by Education Department of Western Australia) APPLICANT: Education Department of Western Australia ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme No.1: Public Purpose (Primary School)
The proposal to close the above mentioned pedestrian access way was considered at the Council meeting held on 27 August 2002 where it was decided that:-
(i) pursuant to Section 52 of the Land Administration Act 1997, closure procedures for the pedestrian access way Lot 0 on Plan 1514 Glen Street, West Leederville be initiated;
(ii) at the conclusion of the advertising period, the proposal be referred back to Council for consideration of any submissions received;
(iii) the applicant will be required to meet the administration and advertising costs associated with the pedestrian access way closure. This fee will be $500.00 and will be required to be paid prior to advertising the proposed pedestrian access way closure.
DETAILS:
A request for closure of the pedestrian access way located adjacent to Glen Street was received by the Town on 31 May 2002.
The access way is a designated pedestrian access way (PAW), owned by the ‘Crown’, under the care, control and management of the Education Department. Pedestrian access ways are created as a consequence of subdivision development and are neither public roads nor private streets. They are created under section 20A of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928.
The access way previously formed part of a larger PAW which has since been closed and the status changed. This PAW ran north-south and was located directly adjacent, and parallel, to Glen Street and joined up with a recently sealed laneway which is still in existence and runs east-west, joining Glen Street and Lesser Street, behind the lots that front Cambridge Street.
The access way is known as Lot 0 on Plan 1514 and is 10 metres long and 3.02 metres wide. It is zoned ‘Public Purpose (Primary School) and fronts onto Glen Street and forms part of the Glen Street verge (a location map is attached).
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 251 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Applicant’s Grounds for Request
The Education Department of WA wishes to excise a small portion of the south side of the West Leederville Primary School Reserve and dispose of it by amalgamating it with the adjoining residential properties (No. 9 Lesser Street and No. 10 Glen Street). Prior to commencing proceedings to excise this land, the PAW, which forms part of this land, is required to be closed.
The area proposed to be excised was previously used as a walkway linking Glen Street and Lesser Street, however, it is not a designated PAW. Following security and privacy concerns, access to this walkway was precluded by installing gates and planting ground cover. The area now effectively forms part of the landscaping of the adjoining two properties.
Advertising Process
The proposed PAW closure was advertised for a period of 49 days, from 24 December 2002 until 10 February 2003. Notification of, and request for comments on, the proposed PAW closure was undertaken as follows:-
• letters were sent to affected landowners in Glen Street and Lesser Street on 24 December 2002; • letters were sent to relevant service authorities, being the Department of Land Administration, Water Corporation, Western Power Corporation, Telstra Corporation, Alinta Gas Networks, Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Valuer General’s Office, on 24 December 2002; and • a notice was placed in the 11 January 2003 edition of The Cambridge Post newspaper.
A total of six submissions were received during the advertising period. Five submissions were from service authorities, and one submission was from the adjoining landowner at No. 10 Glen Street. The main comments of these submissions are summarised below:-
1. Water Corporation: No objections. There are no services within this area.
2. Western Power Corporation: No objections.
3. Telstra Corporation: There are no assets in the vicinity and therefore there are no objections to the proposal. Telstra would appreciate confirmation when this closure proceeds in order to update its cadastre records.
4. Alinta Gas Networks: Providing existing property boundaries and levels are maintained, mains will not be affected. It should be noted that gas services may exist to supply individual properties and their existence should be anticipated and every care taken to locate and protect them prior to and during excavation work. Alinta Gas Networks has no proposed work which will require amendment to your works.
5. Valuer General’s Office: No objections and provided the market value of the PAW (Note: the Town did not request a valuation of the PAW).
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 252 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
6. No. 10 Glen Street: No objections to the land being closed as a PAW. This land sits at the end of a narrow, dead end street (Glen Street). As such, any car that enters the street utilises this piece of land in order to conduct a three point turn in order to exit. The land was originally a crossover to a pre-existing residential property and now represents nothing more than a patch of dirt. With the above mentioned vehicular activity, the land is somewhat of an eyesore to the residents in our street. Therefore, we would like to request that Council consider ‘tidying up’ this parcel of land as part of the approval. Whether this is a condition of closure (to the Education Department’s request), or part of Council’s general maintenance budget is, naturally, at your discretion.
COMMENTS:
The submissions received during the advertising period raised no objections to the proposed closure. In relation to the comments received by the adjoining landowner at No. 10 Glen Street, the PAW is part of West Leederville Primary School and therefore the school is responsible for its maintenance. It is recommended that Council advises the Education Department to maintain the land in a neat and tidy condition.
Overall, given the size and location of the PAW, the proposed closure should not have a detrimental impact on local pedestrian/cycle connectivity and safe access to neighbourhood facilities. Instead, it will allow for the excision of an area of land from the school that is currently fenced in with two adjoining residential properties. Excision will allow this land to be formally amalgamated with the adjoining residential properties and rezoned from ‘Public Purposes – Primary School’ to ‘Residential R40’. It should be noted that the Education Department would be required to meet the costs associated with this rezoning. In addition, the owners of the adjoining residential properties have expressed an interest in acquiring this land, subject to negotiation with the Education Department.
CONCLUSION:
It is considered that the Council should proceed to request that the Hon. Minister for Lands (Minister for Planning and Infrastructure) close the pedestrian access way as initially proposed.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr McAullay, seconded by Cr Burkett
That:-
(i) the Hon. Minister for Planning and Infrastructure be requested to approve the closure of the pedestrian access way Lot 0 on Plan 1514 Glen Street, West Leederville;
(ii) the Education Department of Western Australia be requested to maintain the pedestrian access way Lot 0 Plan 1514 Glen Street, West Leederville, in a neat and tidy condition;
(iii) the Education Department be advised that it is required to meet the costs associated with rezoning the land from “Public Purposes – Primary School” to “Residential R40’.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 253 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
DES03.15
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN CODES (File Reference: PLA 0064)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To consider the adoption, modification and/or deletion of various policies following the gazettal of the 2002 Residential Design Codes.
BACKGROUND:
The Council at its meeting held on 19 November 2002 decided:-
That in response to the gazettal of the Residential Design Codes on 4 October 2002:-
(i) the following modified policies (attached) be advertised in accordance with clause 48 of Town Planning Scheme No.1.
2.6 Town Planning Delegation 3.9 Residential Design Guidelines 8.1 Land subdivision under the Town Planning and Development Act
(ii) the following polices be revoked in accordance with clause 48 of Town Planning Scheme No.1:-
3.2 Ancillary Accommodation 3.3 Aged and Dependent Persons' Dwellings
(iii) the following policies be retained without modification:-
5.2 Communications Antennae 8.2 Land subdivision under the Strata Titles Act
(iv) reference to the "Residential Planning Codes" be deleted and substituted with the words "Residential Design Codes" wherever it appears in the policy manual. The amended wording be advertised in accordance with clause 48 of Town Planning Scheme No. 1.
DETAILS:
The policies were advertised as required under clause 48 of Town Planning Scheme No. 1. This was achieved by placing advertisements in The Post newspaper on two occasions and also placing details on the Town's website.
Two enquiries were made during the advertising period but no submissions were received at the close of advertising.
Whilst no submissions were received, the policies were reviewed further and several matters have arisen which warrant consideration for further amendment. The amendments proposed are minor and do not materially affect the policies. They are discussed in further detail later in this report.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 254 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
COMMENT:
As noted in the previous report to Council, the need to review various policies came about due to the gazettal of the 2002 Residential Design Codes. Apart from the minor amendments already mentioned, the policies as advertised for amendment or revocation can be adopted for final approval.
Following is a comment on the status of each of the policies:-
Policies advertised as being amended:-
2.6 Town Planning Delegation
This policy did not in fact require advertising as the process for delegation of powers (Clause 50 of Town Planning Scheme No.1) is different to those for other policies under the Town Planning Scheme (Clause 48). This policy is therefore already in effect.
3.9 Residential Design Guidelines
As noted above a number of matters have been identified as warranting further amendment in this policy. These amendments are discussed as follows:-
Two Clauses were added to the Town’s policy 8.1 Land subdivision under the Town Planning and Development Act, in response to concerns about the impact of ‘down the middle’ subdivision in certain parts of the R20 area of Wembley. Clause 1(g) of Policy 8.1 states:-
In the R20 area of the P4 Wembley Precinct unless a lot has alternative vehicular access (right of way or side street), Council will not support subdivision which divides a lot into two new lots located alongside one another with roughly equal street frontages.
Clause 1(h) states:-
Variations to this requirement will only be considered where the development of the new lots is designed and constructed so that the off street parking takes up no more than the 40% of the new lot frontage and in this case, new development will have to be constructed to at least plate height before subdivision will be cleared.
It is proposed to also include these provisions within the Residential Design Guidelines under Section 5 Streetscape, to ensure added visibility for those seeking to develop land in that area.
Boundary Walls
Another matter to be considered relates to boundary setbacks, Clause 6.3 - Compliance Standards. Sub-clause 6.3.1 requires that all boundary wall setbacks be considered as requiring the Council to exercise discretion and requiring consultation. For this purpose, reference is made to Part 3.3.2 A2 of the R-Codes. Following further consideration of the matter, it is recommended that Part 3.3.2 A2(i) be excluded from the need to exercise discretion and consultation. The ability for walls to be constructed abutting an existing boundary wall is an acceptable circumstance. That is this section will enable a wall to be constructed without the need for discretion to be exercised or consultation to occur where it abuts a wall of similar dimensions on an adjoining property.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 255 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
8.1 Land subdivision under the Town Planning and Development Act
Further review of the Residential Design Codes and this policy has raised the question of the need to retain clause 3 of this policy in light of part 2.3.3 of the Residential Design Codes. Part 2.3.3 requires planning approval for the erection of a single house on any lot smaller than 350m2. Previously, the Western Australian Planning Commission (who is the responsible authority for subdivision approvals) required that a development application be submitted to the local authority prior the clearance of any subdivision proposing lots of 350m2 or less. This process often resulted in applications being submitted merely to satisfy the condition of subdivision approval.
The change introduced by part 2.3.3 is beneficial and goes some way toward requiring development approval for all single houses which the Town has previously sought to do under its Town Planning Scheme.
Clause 3 of the policy sought to achieve what part 2.3.3 has now introduced and for this reason it is recommended that the clause is deleted from Policy 8.1. As this is consistent with the Residential Design Codes, it is not considered necessary to advertise this change
In relation to clause 1(h) of Policy 8.1, there is a requirement for new development to be constructed to plate height before subdivision is cleared. The requirement was included as a means of ensuring that development approved in association with a subdivision application is the one actually constructed. In practice, this can be difficult to achieve as the Western Australian Planning Commission can approve a subdivision application without any such condition or requirement. Alternatively, an application to construct dwellings can be submitted to the Town without any subdivision application being submitted at all.
Ultimately, the Town has the ability to deal with development matters under the provisions of its Town Planning Scheme and building regulations. The question of inequity also arises as requiring construction to plate height could potentially prevent an owner merely subdividing their property and then disposing of it.
Having reviewed clause 1(h), it is recommended that the requirement for development to be constructed to plate height before subdivision clearance be deleted. The modification of this clause is not considered to detrimentally effect the ability to develop within the Town and therefore it is not deemed necessary to advertise this matter separately.
Policy 8.2 Subdivision under the Strata Titles Act
The clause referring to the requirement to construct to plate height is also contained within Policy 8.2 Subdivision under the Strata Titles Act at clause 1(g). In keeping with the same reasoning for deleting reference to the requirement in Policy 8.1, it is recommended that Policy 8.2 be similarly amended. Although Policy 8.2 was not advertised at all as there was no amendment proposed previously, it is not considered necessary to advertise this change as discussed above in relation to Policy 8.1.
Policies advertised to be revoked:
3.2 Ancillary Accommodation
This policy may be revoked as advertised.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 256 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
3.3 Aged and Dependent Persons' Dwellings
This policy may be revoked as advertised.
Jersey Street Residential Design Guidelines
The Jersey Street Residential Design Guidelines whilst being incorporated into the main Town of Cambridge Residential Design Guidelines were the subject of a separate report to Council (Item DES02.176 refers - November 2002). The Jersey Street Guidelines whilst being advertised as part of the Residential Design Guidelines have also been advertised separately. The Jersey Street Residential Design Guidelines were granted approval under delegated authority granted by Council at its meeting held on 17 December 2002 to deal with business arising during the 2002/03 Christmas/New Year recess period. The guidelines as adopted can be included into the general Residential Design Guidelines.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
The review of the policies relating to residential development is a necessary task in light of the gazettal of the new Residential Design Codes. This is consistent with the Town's Strategic Plan for the provision of orderly planning to ensure that the Town's unique character and environment is protected through responsible use of the town planning scheme.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The preparation, advertising and adoption of existing and new policies will involve some expenditure. Funding is available in the budget to accommodate such expenses.
CONCLUSION:
The purpose of this report is to adopt for final approval the policies as advertised with some amendments. The review of policies is an important practice to ensure that they remain current and relevant. The policies which have been reviewed have been done so with this in mind.
The gazettal of the Residential Design Codes in October 2002 required that the Town respond to the new residential development requirements. This was necessary to ensure that the town's policies were up to date and reflected the Council's preferred position in terms of residential development throughout the Town.
The amendments discussed in this report to the advertised policies have been made following further consideration and as a further refinement. It is recommended that the policies be adopted for final approval.
A copy of the amended Residential Design Guidelines and Subdivision policies are circulated with this agenda. Please note changes have been highlighted with italic text and text which is to be deleted is shown but has a line striking through it.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 257 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr McAullay, seconded by Cr Burkett
That pursuant to Clause 48 of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No.1, Scheme Text:-
(i) the revised Residential Design Guidelines (Policy 3.9), revised Policy 8.1 – Land subdivision under the Town Planning and Development Act and Policy 8.2 Subdivision under the Strata Titles Act, as attached to this agenda, to be included in Town Planning Scheme No. 1 Policy Manual be adopted with the following amendments:-
Residential Design Guidelines
Section 5.2 Guidance Notes
Following the heading "Landscaping" and its associated text a new heading and text be inserted as follows:-
"Subdivision
Subdivision of original lots in a side by side configuration can impact on streetscape appearance when subsequently developed. In the Wembley Precinct, the Council has recognized this situation and therefore requires that careful consideration be given to how properties are subdivided to ensure that the streetscape is not compromised by subsequent development.
If there is only sufficient width to create two narrow lots, unless access is available from a rear laneway or other alternative apart from the front subsequent development may seek to establish parking in the front of the lots which is contrary to creating dwellings which address the street. Outcomes where for example only a double garage and little else address the street is strongly discouraged."
A new section 5.11 be inserted as follows:-
"5.11 Compliance Standards – Subdivision
Development which meets these standards, in addition to the requirements of the R-Codes, will be approved by the Council. Where no standard is prescribed, the requirements of the R-Codes shall prevail.
Wembley
5.11.1 In the R20 area of the P4 Wembley Precinct unless a lot has alternative vehicular access (right of way or side street), Council will not support subdivision which divides a lot into two new lots located alongside one another, with roughly equal street frontages."
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 258 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
A new section 5.12 be inserted as follows:-
"5.12 Performance Criteria – Subdivision
Variations to the Compliance Standards will only be approved by Council where, in the opinion of the Council the following criteria are met:
where the development of the new lots is designed and constructed so that the off street parking takes up no more than 40 per cent of the new lot frontage." Clause 6.3.1 be modified by adding after the word R-Codes, the following words:- "(with the exception of 3.3.2 A2i)"
Policy 8.1 Land subdivision under the Town Planning and Development Act
Deleting from clause 1(h) the following words:-
"and in this case, new development will have to be constructed to at least plate height before subdivision will be cleared"
Deleting Clause 3 in its entirety
Policy 8.2 Subdivision under the Strata Titles Act
Deleting from clause 1(g) the following words:-
"and in this case, new development will have to be constructed to at least plate height before subdivision will be cleared"
(ii) Policy 3.2 Ancillary Accommodation and Policy 3.3 Aged and Dependant Persons' Dwellings be revoked;
(iii) reference to the "Residential Planning Codes" be deleted and substituted with the words "Residential Design Codes" in the Town Planning Scheme No. 1 Policy Manual;
(iv) the policies be advertised and copies provided as required under sub clause 48(5).
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 259 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
DES03.16
TOWN PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT NO. 11 – INTRODUCE LOCAL ZONING TO LAND GENERALLY OCCUPIED BY CITY BEACH BOWLING CLUB, CITY BEACH SCOUT HALL AND FORMER QUARRY – LOTS 723, 724 THE BOULEVARD, CORNER KALINDA DRIVE, CITY BEACH (File Reference: PLA0037)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To initiate an amendment to Town Planning Scheme No. 1 to introduce a local zoning to the land generally occupied by the City Beach Bowling Club, City Beach Scout Hall and former quarry site. The land has recently been transferred from Parks and Recreation Reserve under the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS) to Urban Zone.
BACKGROUND:
After a process which took over two years, in December 2002 the MRS was finally amended lifting the Parks and Recreation Reservation over the subject land, as well as Perry Lakes Stadium. The MRS amendment for the subject land was in response to a proposal for the amalgamation of the City Beach and Floreat Bowling Clubs. The proposal is for the upgrading of facilities at the Floreat Bowling Club (plus other sporting facilities), to be funded by the development of the land being vacated at City Beach. The new club is to be known as the Cambridge Bowling Club. As part of this process, the Council is now required to introduce suitable zoning/s into its own Town Planning Scheme No. 1.
With regard to the existing Scout Hall, Council has agreed for it to be replaced with a new facility at Alderbury Reserve. Construction is expected to commence within the next financial year.
Regarding the former quarry site, this was specifically excluded from Bold Park when it was created in 1995.
At the December 2002 Council Meeting, in relation to this matter, it was decided as follows:-
That:-
(i) following completion of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No. 1 amendment to reflect urban zoning of the City Beach Bowling Club site and adjacent land and subdivision plans for the land being developed, works as approved by Council for the Floreat Sporting Precinct Master Plan be implemented;
(ii) all architectural design works and costings associated with the Floreat Sporting Precinct Master Plan be proceeded with concurrently with the completion of the amendment to the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No. 1;
(iii) a further report be prepared for Council outlining funding options, with or without the need to raise bridging finance, for the Floreat Sporting Precinct Master Plan.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 260 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
DETAILS:
Lots 723 and 724 are held in freehold title by the Town of Cambridge. Lot 724, which defines the Bowling Club site, has an area of 1.9689 Ha and is located on the corner of Kalinda Drive and The Boulevard. Lot 723 which takes in the Scout Hall and former Quarry Site, has an area of 5.2876 Ha. The total area of the two lots is 7.2565 Ha.
For the purposes of future land use, the subject land can be divided into two distinct sections. Essentially, a former limestone quarry and previously a landfill site, is to be divided off from the remainder of the land. An approximate boundary has been defined at this stage and a more exact boundary will be established by land survey prior to finalisation of the Scheme Amendment.
The western section of the site, comprising all of Lot 724 and part of 723, accommodates the Bowling Club, Scout Hall and associated carpark. An access road from The Boulevard serving the Ocean Gardens Retirement Village and parking area crosses the site. The site has an area of approximately 4.8 Ha.
The disused limestone quarry on the eastern part of the site has been used for landfill. A preliminary geotechnical and environmental study carried out for the quarry site revealed the presence of uncontrolled fill with some deleterious material present. The extent of the contamination, however, was not conclusively identified and further geotechnical and environmental investigations are required before any type of development can be proposed for the site. The area of the quarry site is approximately 2.4 Ha.
The overall site is also identified in the Minister for the Environment’s Land Use Strategy for Bold Park and the Environs (Statement 381), although the Minister’s conditions relate primarily to the Quarry Site. Environmental Management plans prepared by the Town in 2001, generally satisfied the Minister’s conditions and the Town was advised that “development can commence”. More recently, Council wrote to the Department of Environmental Protection concerning its intended rezoning of the subject land. The response from the DEP advised that Council’s proposal was considered to be in compliance with the Minister’s condition and that the rezoning can proceed.
PROPOSED ZONING
Given the unresolved state of the former quarry site (due to the landfill that occurred there), it is necessary to split the overall land into two zones.
1. Former Quarry Site
As outlined above, this site must be subjected to detailed geotechnical and environmental assessment before determining any future use there. At this point in time, Council has no particular intentions for this land. Future use of the land will depend firstly upon the outcome of the geotechnical/environmental assessment. Further, at least some of the land would be considered for additional parking to serve possible future expansion of the Bold Park Aquatic Centre.
It is therefore proposed to introduce an amendment to the Town Planning Scheme which will, in effect, postpone any planning decision on that land until the abovementioned matters are resolved.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 261 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
2. Residential Zone
The balance of the land has generally been considered as appropriate for residential development. The site offers views to the ocean and across Bold Park and Wembley Golf Course back to the City. This aspect, together with its proximity to shopping and outstanding recreational facilities (Bold Park, Bold Park Aquatic Centre, Wembley Golf Course and the beach), as well as to public transport, with bus routes along The Boulevard and Kalinda Drive, makes it a prime site for housing.
For some time now, submissions have come forward from the community for Council to make provision for smaller lot housing in City Beach and Floreat. Generally, this has been in the form of seeking an amendment to the existing R12.5 zoning in both City Beach and Floreat so that it would allow (to a degree) for the subdivision of certain lots. Council’s response has been to resist such proposals and in coming to its decision, has identified the possibility of introducing smaller lots in existing Council owned land parcels which are presently not developed for residential purposes. The subject land offers such an opportunity. The demand for smaller lot housing has mostly come from existing City Beach and Floreat residents who have been in the area for many years and have seen their families grow up and leave the family home. These homes, and the lots on which they stand, no longer suit their owners and they are seeking the opportunity to remain in the area but on something smaller. Whilst seeking an alternative form of accommodation, many of these people are still relatively young and wish to retain an independent lifestyle, rather than enter a retirement village.
Having regard to all of the above, the objective behind the zoning of this site is to offer a variety of housing densities within the range R20-R30. This would offer lots generally between 300 square metres and 500 square metres (plus) in size. It is proposed to provide for a density distribution of approximately equal proportions between R20 and R30.
In addition, consideration is given to the introduction of some aged and dependent persons accommodation as defined in the Residential Design Codes of WA. The provisions of the R Codes provide that such development should be occupied by persons over the age of 55 or be a dependent person, the units must be specifically designed to accommodate such persons and be no greater than 100 square metres in area. Where such accommodation is proposed, Council has the discretion to allow for a density bonus of up to 50 percent (eg 200 m2 lots for R30). It is proposed that at least two sites for aged and dependent persons dwellings be provided, catering for a minimum of five units (as required by the R Codes) on each site.
Seniors’ Needs Study
A Seniors’ Needs Study was endorsed by the Council in May 2001. The study identifies a number of strategies to be put in place for seniors, including ‘Housing Options’. The options include:-
• When reviewing and preparing Town Planning policies and building guidelines, ensure that these enable a range of housing options including self care units, retirement complexes, nursing homes and hostels. • Take into account seniors housing needs in the development of a Housing Strategy for the Town, and through this strategy, promote community awareness of seniors’ housing needs, particularly the need for more manageable block sizes, while also highlighting the high value seniors place on being able to remain in the Town and the need for community acceptance to achieve this.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 262 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
• Identify Council land holdings and partnership opportunities that would be suitable for the development of seniors’ housing. • In future planning for the Town consider:- - opportunities to increase the availability of smaller lot sizes for seniors’ housing;
In the Council decision concerning the study, the following objective for ‘Housing Options’ was adopted:-
Facilitate the planning and development of appropriate housing choices, reflecting the changing needs of the ageing population so that the Town’s seniors can remain in the Town.
The zoning as proposed will facilitate the provision of housing choice.
Lot Yield
Based on the above, depending on the final subdivision design, a lot yield somewhere between 70 and 100 lots can be anticipated.
SCHEME AMENDMENT
A draft Scheme Amendment proposal is attached to this agenda. In order to accommodate the above zoning proposals, a new section is to be added to the Town Planning Scheme text; Part 7 – Special Control Areas. Special Control Area 1 (SCA1) will relate to the subject land. Within the SCA1, two zones are identified: ‘Development Zoned Area’ (Former Quarry Site) and ’Residential Zoned Area’ (remainder of the land). In adopting this approach, it allows the Council to require the submission of an Outline Development Plan (ODP) for the two sites prior to any further subdivision or development approvals being considered by the Council.
In the case of the former Quarry Site (Development Zoned Area), draft Clause 56 (2) Planning Objectives (b), the ODP will not be approved until detailed environmental and geotechnical investigation has been carried out and it is established that environmental conditions outlined in the Minister for the Environment’s Land Use Strategy for Bold Park and the Environs (Statement 381) will be satisfied.
With regard to the Residential Zoned Area, the planning objectives specify a split residential density coding which produces a spread of residential densities. Proposed Clause 56 (5) Outline Development Plan for Residential Zoned Area, goes on to define the mix of R20 and R30 codings as being of equal division, however, discretion is given to the Council to approve a variation of the proportions by up to 10 percent, ie 40 percent/60 percent mix. Further, the draft provisions specify a minimum of 10 units being designated for aged and dependent persons dwellings. In addition to the above draft Clause, it is proposed to introduce a schedule to the Scheme Text (Schedule 7) which will outline the provisions for the preparation and approval for an ODP. As the preparation of the ODP precedes subdivision stage, it is proposed that, in addition to being adopted by the Council, the approval of the WAPC is also required.
The draft Scheme Amendment has been prepared in consultation with the Town’s Solicitors and follows a draft that has been prepared for the Western Australian Planning Commission for inclusion in their model Scheme Text.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 263 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Scheme Amendment Procedure
Once Council has agreed to initiate an amendment to its Town Planning Scheme No. 1, the Scheme Amendment procedure is as follows:-
• The Scheme Amendment documentation is sent to the Department of Environmental Protection to determine if DEP assessment is required. Note 1: recent advice from the DEP concerning this land would indicate that they will not require environmental assessment for the scheme amendment as proposed. Note 2: consent to advertise is not required from the WAPC as the Scheme Amendment is consistent with the MRS and State Planning Policies, and is for a relevant planning purpose as set out in the Town Planning and Development Act 1928. However, in proceeding to advertise, the WAPC is notified of the proposed amendment. • The amendment is advertised for a period of 42 days, through an advertisement in the local community newspaper and letters to affected owners and occupiers, service authorities and adjoining local authorities. • Council reviews the amendment and, based on any submissions received, determines whether to support the amendment, with or without modification, or not to proceed with it. • A summary of any submissions received and Council’s recommendation on the amendment is forwarded to the WAPC for their consideration. • The WAPC will then forward its recommendation on to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for determination.
Advertising
In addition to the usual statutory requirements for advertising a Town Planning Scheme Amendment, it is proposed to place at least two signs on the site (one facing Kalinda Drive and one facing The Boulevard, and to notify residents in writing, including residents of the Ocean Gardens Retirement Village. It is noted that the draft Scheme provisions require the advertising of the ODP.
Town Planning Scheme Policy Manual
Section 7 of the TPS Policy Manual contains ‘Precinct Planning Policies’. The subject land falls within P2 Reabold Precinct. This policy will have to be amended to reflect the proposed amendment to the TPS.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
This proposed amendment to Town Planning Scheme No. 1 is consistent with Council’s targets relating to economic development and environmental, urban planning and infrastructure as outlined in its strategic plan.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The eventual development of this land will realise a considerable capital return to the Town. Some of this money (approximately $5 million) has been identified for funding the upgrading of the Floreat Sporting Precinct.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 264 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Costs incurred in amending the Town Planning Scheme form part of overall development costs which the Council will have to meet before it is in a position to dispose of land. To continue to meet these costs, it is proposed that Council authorises up to $50,000 in unbudgeted expenditure. This unbudgeted expenditure can be funded from the Endowment Lands Account where it can later be recouped from the land sale.
CONCLUSION:
Now that the MRS Reserve for Parks and Recreation has been lifted over the subject land, it is encumbent upon the Council to introduce appropriate zoning/s into its Town Planning Scheme No. 1. The approach taken in this instance is to defer any development decisions on part of the land (former quarry site) and to introduce provisions which will direct the future subdivision and development of the remaining land to yield a variety of lot sizes within the scope of residential densities R20 and R30 and in doing so, providing an alternative to what might be described as the typical City Beach or Floreat property.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
Moved by Cr Burkett, seconded by Cr MacRae
That:-
(i) pursuant to Section 7 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 (as amended), the Council resolves to prepare amendment No. 11 to Town Planning Scheme No. 1 by:-
(a) zoning the land formerly occupied by a limestone quarry and located in part of Lot 723 The Boulevard, City Beach as ‘Development Zoned Area’;
(b) zoning the remainder of Lot 723 and all of Lot 724 , The Boulevard, City Beach, accommodating the City Beach Bowling Club and Scout Hall, as ‘Residential Zoned Area’;
(c) introducing a new part to the Scheme Text:– Part 7 – Special Control Areas and under that part, add Clause 56 Special Control Area No. 1 – Lots 723 and 724 The Boulevard (“Kalinda Development Area”) and in relation to Part 7, including a new schedule in the Scheme Text: Schedule 7 Provisions for Outline Development Plans;
(d) the contents of these amendments are generally described in the draft Scheme Amendment proposal as attached to this agenda;
(ii) the Town Planning Scheme Policy Manual be amended to reflect this Scheme Amendment;
(iii) the Scheme Amendment be advertised in accordance with the Town Planning regulations 1967 (as amended) and in addition to those requirements, at least two signs advertising the amendment be placed on site and that surrounding property owners be notified of the proposal, including the residents of the adjoining Ocean Gardens Retirement Village.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 265 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
(iv) an amount of up to $50,000 to continue to meet development costs for this project be authorised by AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY as unbudgeted expenditure in accordance with S6.8 of the Local Government Act 1995, The costs are to be funded from the Endowment Lands Account and recouped from the proceeds of the land sale.
Committee Meeting 18 February 2003
During discussion, Members agreed that an information sheet be prepared outlining the process involved in amending the Town Planning Scheme to introduce local zoning to the land generally occupied by the City Beach Bowling Club, City Beach Scout Hall and former quarry site.
It was also agreed that it was unnecessary to state that development costs would be recouped from the proceeds of the land sale.
Amendment
Moved by Cr Burkett, seconded by Cr Anderton
That clause (iv) of the motion be amended by deleting all words following “Account”.
Carried
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr McAullay, seconded by Cr Burkett
That:-
(i) pursuant to Section 7 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 (as amended), the Council resolves to prepare amendment No. 11 to Town Planning Scheme No. 1 by:-
(a) zoning the land formerly occupied by a limestone quarry and located in part of Lot 723 The Boulevard, City Beach as ‘Development Zoned Area’;
(b) zoning the remainder of Lot 723 and all of Lot 724 , The Boulevard, City Beach, accommodating the City Beach Bowling Club and Scout Hall, as ‘Residential Zoned Area’;
(c) introducing a new part to the Scheme Text:– Part 7 – Special Control Areas and under that part, add Clause 56 Special Control Area No. 1 – Lots 723 and 724 The Boulevard (“Kalinda Development Area”) and in relation to Part 7, including a new schedule in the Scheme Text: Schedule 7 Provisions for Outline Development Plans;
(d) the contents of these amendments are generally described in the draft Scheme Amendment proposal as attached to this agenda;
(ii) the Town Planning Scheme Policy Manual be amended to reflect this Scheme Amendment;
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 266 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
(iii) the Scheme Amendment be advertised in accordance with the Town Planning Regulations 1967 (as amended) and in addition to those requirements, at least two signs advertising the amendment be placed on site and that surrounding property owners be notified of the proposal, including the residents of the adjoining Ocean Gardens Retirement Village;
(iv) an amount of up to $50,000 to continue to meet development costs for this project be authorised by AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY as unbudgeted expenditure in accordance with section 6.8 of the Local Government Act 1995, The costs are to be funded from the Endowment Lands Account.
During discussion, Cr Anderton requested that she be provided with the information regarding smaller lot housing in City Beach and Floreat.
Carried by an ABSOLUTE MAJORITY
Members requested that the vote of all those present be recorded:-
For: Mayor Willcock, Crs Burkett, MacRae, McAullay, O’Connor, Pinerua, Smith Against: Cr Anderton
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 267 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
DES03.17
STEPHENSON HIGHWAY RESERVE REVIEW – MINISTER’S RESPONSE (File Reference: ADM0080; PLA0030)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To respond to recent advice received from the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure and to reaffirm Council’s position on the matter of the Stephenson Highway Reserve.
BACKGROUND:
The Town of Cambridge initiated the formation of the Western Suburbs Highway Working Group in 1996. Even before that time, the City of Perth had lobbied for the deletion of the Stephenson Highway Reserve through Wembley Golf Complex and Bold Park. Over the course of the years, the Working Group has strived to have the Metropolitan Region Scheme reviewed in relation to Stephenson Highway. The effort of the working group, culminated in the Nelson English report in 1999. The release of the Nelson English report by the working group was instrumental in convincing the Minister for Transport (at the time) to undertake a review of the ‘Western Suburbs Highway’ as it extends from the Mitchell Freeway in Stirling through to Fremantle.
The Minister for Transport’s review was carried out in two parts: Stephenson Highway and Fremantle to Cottesloe. While separating the two sections of the road, it was acknowledged that they form part of the one major traffic artery.
The matter of Stephenson Highway was last considered by the Council in June 2002. A notice of motion was put before the Council and was adopted as follows:-
That:-
(i) in view of the proposal to delete the Fremantle Eastern Bypass from the Metropolitan Region Scheme and in view of previous investigations supporting the removal of the Stephenson Highway Metropolitan Region Scheme Reservation through Bold Park and the Wembley Golf Complex, the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure be requested to proceed with the removal of the Bold Park and Wembley Golf Complex Metropolitan Region Scheme Road Reservations;
(ii) the request in (i) above be supported by the following notes:-
• the Town of Cambridge was the initiator of the Western Suburbs Highway Review with the Town’s primary aim to have the Stephenson Highway Metropolitan Region Scheme reservation through the Town of Cambridge deleted;
• the Town of Cambridge contributed approximately $25,000 towards the study. Mayor Willcock chaired the Western Suburbs Highway Review Committee;
• the City of Fremantle and the Towns of Claremont and Cottesloe formed the basis of the Western Suburbs Highway Review Committee;
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 268 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
• Mr Nelson English of Nelson English, Loxton and Andrews Consultant Traffic Engineers from Victoria, who had no association with the authorities dealing with traffic planning in Western Australia, was engaged to ensure a fully independent review was undertaken;
• the Nelson English Report came to the conclusion that the retention of the Stephenson Highway Reservation could not be justified from a transport, land use or environment perspective;
• the Nelson English Report was submitted to the Government, which prompted the Minister for Transport to initiate a Government review;
• the Department of Transport review was into the Fremantle/Cottesloe link and the Stephenson Highway link;
• the Department of Transport, by and large, concurred with the Nelson English conclusions and recommended that the Stephenson Highway reservation within the Town of Cambridge be removed (West Coast Highway to Empire Avenue);
• since the change of Government, the Department of Transport report has been held in abeyance, pending the outcome of the Freight Network Review;
• the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure has, however, taken steps to remove the Fremantle Eastern Bypass reservation from the Metropolitan Region Scheme;
(iii) the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority be advised of the Council’s decision to request the removal of the Stephenson Highway Reserve from the Metropolitan Region Scheme and request its support to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for its removal;
(iv) the deletion of the Stephenson Highway be put forward for inclusion in the forthcoming omnibus amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme for the Western Suburbs.
RECENT EVENTS
The abovementioned decision of the Council was conveyed to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure soon after the June Council Meeting of last year. The Council has only recently received a response from the Minister which states:-
It is the Minister’s intention that a comprehensive assessment of the Stephenson Highway Reservation be pursued, involving extensive community consultation. However, at this point in time there is a significant amount of work being done by the Department of Planning and Infrastructure on road network planning issues, particularly focussed on the southern metropolitan corridor, so I do not envisage the Stephenson Highway Review commencing until at least the latter half of 2003.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 269 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Member for Innaloo
Prior to the Minister’s response, reports appeared in the press late last year on this issue. The Member for Innaloo had raised the matter in Parliament, supporting the retention of the proposed Stephenson Highway Reserves. The Member argued that:-
“It is imperative that the road reserves are retained, because without them Scarborough will be forever wrecked and doomed to the huge traffic flows that will pass through the intersection of Scarborough Beach Road and West Coast Highway.
City of Stirling
On 31 December 2002, in response to the development plan for Edith Cowan University and the required amendment to the MRS to change the land from University Reserve to Urban Zone, the City of Stirling wrote to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure, with a copy to the Town of Cambridge, advising as follows:-
At its meeting of 29 October 2002 Council resolved:-
(i) that the Edith Cowan University Development Team, Department of Planning and Infrastructure in the Town of Cambridge be advised that the City of Stirling:-
• SUPPORTS the retention of the Stephenson Highway Reserve between Pearson Street and Empire Avenue; • As no objection to the construction of a downgraded road, say two (2) single carriageways and median divided in the Stephenson Reserve between Pearson and Empire Avenue provided the costs of this road construction are not borne by the City and, further • That this link will greatly assist access in the proposed Edith Cowan University Development and Newman College, without redirecting regional traffic into local roads within Cambridge or Stirling; • Does not favour an internal link road being constructed within the proposed Edith Cowan University Development Site with any distributor function to serve as a de facto ‘downgraded’ Stephenson Highway between Pearson Street and Empire Avenue; • Does not agree with the Town of Cambridge point of view that regional traffic should continue to use either Hale Road and West Coast Highway or Pearson Street in lieu of the construction of a ‘downgraded’ distributor function road in the Stephenson Reserve between Pearson Street and Empire Avenue; • Strongly BELIEVES that Stephenson Avenue, in the agreed form, be constructed in conjunction with the redevelopment of Edith Cowan University site between Pearson Street and Empire Avenue; • SUPPORTS the general road system proposed for the Edith Cowan University Development in terms of the linking of new roads with the adjoining road systems in Pearson Street and Cromarty Road;
(ii) That petitioners against access to Cromarty Road under a proposal for redevelopment of Edith Cowan University Churchlands Campus be advised a requirement for subdivision application to the City of Edith Cowan University will be a detailed traffic modelling and impact assessment report addressing all traffic issues.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 270 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
The second dot point in the above resolution would seem to be not entirely at odds with the Town of Cambridge’s position. The Town’s decision on the ECU development is outlined below, and with specific regard to Stephenson Highway, between Empire Avenue and Pearson Street, reference is made to point (ii)(a) of that decision.
Town of Cambridge
The Town’s response to the ECU proposal as decided at the Council Meeting of 24 September 2002, was as follows:-
That:-
(i) in response to invitations for submissions regarding the proposed redevelopment of the Edith Cowan University site, the ECU development team be advised as follows:-
(a) as previously advised, the proposed redevelopment of the ECU site for residential purposes is supported in principle;
(b) the north/south road connecting Pearson Street with Cromarty Road, with a staggered t-junction within the middle of the site, is not supported, as it is considered that this will establish a district link through to the Floreat Forum and beyond, thereby, feeding traffic through the residential precinct of north Floreat, primarily along the alignment of Kirkdale Avenue. Further, it is Council’s view that connections to the subdivision area should be taken from the established district road network ie Pearson Street and Empire Avenue. Council is opposed to any road connection from the proposed subdivision onto Cromarty Road. Access to the primary school from Cromarty Road should remain as it currently is;
(ii) the ECU development team, as well as the Department of Planning and Infrastructure and the City of Stirling, be advised as follows:-
(a) the creation of a link road connecting Pearson Street with Empire Avenue, along the existing Stephenson Highway Reserve, serving surrounding residential precincts and connecting attractors such as Innaloo and Osborne Park in the north and Floreat Forum and Herdsman Markets in the south, will obviate the need for the construction of Stephenson Highway;
(b) it is envisaged that the internal link road would perform a local distributor function. Regional traffic should continue to use either Hale Road and West Coast Highway or Pearson Street;
(c) the downgrading of the Stephenson Highway Reserve to a single lane each way will greatly enhance links to the proposed ECU development with Newman College and the recently established residential area to the north.
Perth Regional Planning Committee (WAPC)
On the 12 November 2002, the Perth Region Planning Committee, a sub-committee of the WAPC, considered a proposed major amendment to the MRS for the Edith Cowan University Campus. The outcome of that meeting is recorded in the minutes as follows.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 271 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Proposed Major Amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme Edith Cowan University Campus
Some discussion took place on the road issues associated with future residential development on the ECU site, with particular reference to the possibility of including the resolution of the Stephenson Highway reservation alignment/extent within the proposed MRS Amendment. It was noted that while the WAPC Transport Committee did not support such inclusion, the NWDPC had formally requested the linking of the Urban rezoning and resolution of Stephenson Highway so that they are dealt with jointly as part of the one MRS amendment.
It was agreed to proceed with the Amendment as proposed but that DPI be asked, as a separate exercise, to give further consideration to the present alignment and width of the Stephenson Highway Primary Regional Road Reservation.
Resolved:
(1) To amend the Metropolitan Region Scheme as provided for in Section 33 of the Metropolitan Region Town Planning Scheme Act in accordance with the attached draft Amendment Report and Figure.
(2) To refer the proposed Amendment to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for noting.
(3) To refer the proposed Amendment to the Environmental Protection Authority in accordance with Section 33E of the Metropolitan Region Town Planning Scheme Act for advice as to whether an environmental assessment of the Amendment is required.
(4) If no environmental assessment is required, to forward the Amendment to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for her approval to submissions being sought under Section 33 of the Metropolitan Region Town Planning Scheme Act.
(5) Subject to the Minister granting her consent to public submissions being sought, to:-
(a) deposit the amendment for public inspection during ordinary business hours at the Albert Facey House office of the Department of Planning and Infrastructure, the Town of Cambridge, the Cities of Stirling, Perth and Fremantle and the State Reference Library;
(b) publish a notice of the amendment at least three times in each of the following publications: the Government Gazette, The West Australian, The Sunday Times and relevant local community newspapers circulating the region, setting out the purpose of the amendment, where and at what times the amendment may be inspected and notifying any person who wishes to make submissions on any provisions of the amendment to lodge a written submission on the form prescribed by the Commission;
(c) refer copies of the amendment for comment during the advertising period to:-
(i) the City of Stirling and Town of Cambridge; and
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 272 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
(ii) Main Roads WA, Water Corporation, Water and Rivers Commission, Department of Education, Western Power, Department of Land Administration, Department of Indigenous Affairs and Alinta Gas; and
(iii) affected local Members of Parliament.
(6) To request the Department for Planning and Infrastructure, as a separate task, to investigate and report on the need for Stephenson Highway Primary Regional Road Reservation on its present alignment.
EDITH COWAN UNIVERSITY DEVELOPMENT
The amendment to the MRS for ECU has not been advertised at this stage. When it is, the Town will have further opportunity to comment on this proposal.
STEPHENSON HIGHWAY REVIEW – DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT 2001
With regard to the Minister’s response to the Council submission in June last year, it is difficult to understand why a further comprehensive assessment should be pursued. In view of the response, it is worth revisiting the recent review carried out for the (then) Minister for Transport.
The Department of Transport Review was carried out under the direction of a Steering Committee comprising: the Director General of Transport, Commissioner Main Roads Western Australia, Chief Executive Officer, Ministry for Planning, as well as the Mayors of Cambridge, Stirling, Claremont and Nedlands. The project goal was to determine if all or part of the Stephenson Highway regional road reservation can be deleted from the Metropolitan Region Scheme. The major considerations to be taken into account included:-
• Environmental Issues, including noise impacts; • Future travel needs from a local government and regional perspective including the effect of induced traffic and the movement of freight; • The economic advantages and disadvantages of building the road; • Landuse compatibility and integration; • The needs of the local and wider community; • The social impacts resulting from either providing or not providing for the road;
Main Roads traffic modelling was used to assess future traffic scenarios and extensive public consultation was undertaken throughout the course of the study.
With regard to consultation ‘key stakeholder’ groups were involved including:-
• Local residents; • The broader community; • The local business community; • Local Government; • State Government.
An initial consultation was conducted as an open call for comment on the Stephenson Highway Review, advertised in the West Australian and those community newspapers with circulation in the western suburbs. A total of 348 responses were received relating the Stephenson Highway Review. Of these responses, over 70% (252 responses) supported removal of the Stephenson Highway, with a large proportion
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 273 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
making particular mention of the section through Bold Park and the Wembley Golf Course.
A Community Reference and Liaison Group (CRLG) comprising a wide cross section of the community was also assembled at the outset of the study and was instrumental in providing a representative voice as the basis for ongoing consultation. Each local Council was invited to nominate three members of the CRLG and several other members were invited by Transport to represent wider community interests. The members included representatives from local business, sporting clubs, local residents, educational institutions, and special interest groups such as the Conservation Council, freight groups and Bicycle Action Groups.
The CRLG was asked to consider a number of propositions, among these were:-
• The Stephenson Highway Road Reservation between Pearson Street and Empire Avenue should remain in the Metropolitan Region Scheme at this time;
This proposition received more support than opposition with 50% either supporting it or strongly supporting it, 26% opposing it with the remainder being unsure or neither supporting or opposing.
• The Stephenson Highway Road Reservation between Empire Avenue and West Coast Highway should be removed from the Metropolitan Region Scheme;
This proposition received a significant majority agreement with 65% either supporting it or strongly supporting it. 29% opposing it, with the remainder being unsure or neither supporting or opposing it.
Additional consultation occurred through:-
• A series of media statements; • Advertisements in the general press; • Public displays; • A Stephenson Highway web page as part of Transport’s internet site; • Meetings with stakeholder groups.
Study Conclusions
The conclusions of the study are outlined as follows:-
In this study the need for the Stephenson Highway road reservation has been reviewed. In conducting the review a comprehensive community consultation exercise has been undertaken involving all key stakeholders as well the wider community. In addition to the consultation, a range of technical issues have been addressed including traffic demand, engineering feasibility, the impact on the environment and noise levels, and freight use. Social and economic considerations have also been taken into account.
The conclusions that have been drawn from the finding of the community consultation and the assessment of technical issues are given below:-
(a) A strong need does not exist to construct a highway through Bold Park and the Wembley Golf Course. Given the environmental and social concerns associated with the construction of such a road, a case exists for recommending that this
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 274 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
part of the regional road reservation be deleted from the Metropolitan Region Scheme.
(b) A road connection is likely to be needed between Pearson Street and Empire Avenue for local traffic distribution and to provide access to schools and other facilities, and to alleviate through traffic on Cromarty Road. The alignment of this road and its function and scale would be best determined in connection with the planned development of Edith Cowan University land.
(c) A case exists for retaining the road reservation parallel to Pearson Street if Pearson Street is downgraded to a local access road.
(d) A road connection between Jon Sanders Drive, Scarborough Beach Road, and the Mitchell Freeway is required. Studies are being conducted to assess the complex land use, built form and road network connection issues in the Innaloo and Osborne Park areas.
(e) It will be necessary for the Western Australian Planning Commission to initiate a MRS amendment process to allow removal of the section of the Stephenson Highway road reservation between Empire Avenue and West Coast Highway.
SUMMARY
Throughout the course of Council’s effort to have the Stephenson Highway alignment in the MRS reviewed, there has never been a strong case (either technically or socially) for its retention (at least as it exists within the Town). Indeed, it is fair to say that, particularly regarding the southern half of the reservation, the opposite would be the case. This is no more evident than in the recent Department of Transport Review.
Regarding the section of Stephenson Highway between Empire Avenue and West Coast Highway, the argument for its complete removal from the MRS is compelling. The section between Empire Avenue and Pearson Street, at the very least, needs to be reviewed in terms of its classification under the MRS and its reservation width. At most, it would seem that its function would serve as a local distributor road and does not need to be defined as a ‘Primary Regional Road’.
In the weight of all the above evidence, it is disappointing that the review of this road alignment continues to be put off. In view of the recent response from the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on this matter and recent statements from the City of Stirling, it is appropriate that the Town, again, asserts its position. Certainly, the Town would be keen to see that the Stephenson Highway Review is commenced this year as outlined in the Minister’s letter.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr McAullay, seconded by Cr Burkett
That:-
(i) the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure be thanked for her response to the Council’s letter of June last year and be advised of the Council’s position as follows:-
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 275 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
(a) the argument for the deletion of the Stephenson Highway Regional Road Reservation from the Metropolitan Region Scheme between Empire Avenue and Oceanic Drive is compelling. This is no more evident than in the recent Department of Transport Review 2001 carried out for the (then) Minister for Transport;
(b) in view of the comprehensive nature of the DoT Review (including extensive public consultation) the Town questions the need for any further review;
(c) in the circumstances, it is requested that rather than a review, that, at least for the portion of Stephenson Highway between Empire Avenue and West Coast Highway, the WAPC proceed to an amendment proposal to the MRS (as concluded in the DoT study;
(d) in reference to the advice that the matter of Stephenson Highway is not likely to be addressed until at least the latter half of 2003, the Town of Cambridge has expended considerable resources, together with other local authorities, on the Western Suburbs Highway route in seeking to have the MRS reviewed. It is considered only reasonable, given the length of time that has elapsed and the considerable body of evidence that has been brought forward, that this matter should be given priority;
(e) with regard to the section of Stephenson Highway between Empire Avenue and Pearson Street, the Town remains firmly convinced that any road that might follow this alignment should be no more than a link serving surrounding residential precincts and connecting attractors such as Innaloo and Osborne Park in the north and Floreat Forum and Herdsman Markets in the south. It would seem appropriate and an opportune time to consider the relevance of this link to the MRS as part of the proposed development for the Edith Cowan University Campus;
(ii) the City of Stirling be thanked for their letter of 31 December 2002 and be advised as follows:-
(a) the Town of Cambridge acknowledges that there are differences between it and the City of Stirling on the retention of Stephenson Highway in the Metropolitan Region Scheme as a Primary Regional Road. The Town has always held the position that the southern part of the road, particularly as it extends through the Town of Cambridge, cannot be justified either in transport, environmental or social terms. As such, the Council will continue to press for its removal from the MRS in the strongest possible way;
(b) regarding the portion of Stephenson Highway between Empire Avenue and Pearson Street, the Town refers to its decision concerning the Edith Cowan University Development proposal, as conveyed to the City last year. Having regard to the second point of your Council’s resolution of 29 October 2002, there would seem to be some common ground concerning the nature of this link. The Town would look forward to working with the City in resolving this matter throughout the full course of the development approval process for the ECU site;
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 276 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
(iii) the abovementioned advices be forwarded to the Western Australian Planning Commission, Edith Cowan University Development team and Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority for information.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 277 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
DES03.18
INFORMATION REPORT – CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLANS (File Reference: PLA0053)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To report back and provide information on the methods proposed by the Administration to control construction processes on various sites within the Town.
BACKGROUND:
At the Development and Environmental Services Committee meeting held on November 2002, during general business, issues associated with the development of a property in Boscombe Avenue, City Beach were raised. At that time, concern was expressed regarding the method of construction (tilt up panels) and comment was made that this type of construction is more akin to industrial construction rather than normal residential due to the number of cranes constantly on site, low loaders delivering panels to site and the large team of workers required to install the panels.
The Administration was requested to investigate this matter.
POLICY:
The Council has no formal policy to control the methods of constructing buildings within the Town as this would be contrary to the Building Code and Building Regulations.
Further, there are various State regulations and Council local laws that can be used to control some of the processes involved in construction on smaller lots or commercial properties in regards to traffic control, temporary road closures, noise control, obstruction and use of verges and parks, etc.
DETAILS:
Although the use of the tilt up construction method for residential construction is relatively new to Western Australia, tilt up construction itself has been practised in Australia since the mid 1980’s. There have been at least three commercial buildings recently erected in the Town that employed tilt up construction technology. One set of units in Cambridge Street were also built using tilt up technology (although they were later demolished when the builder went bankrupt).
In the latter part of 2002, the Minister for Consumer and Employment Protection and Training announced a draft Code of Practice for safety issues in the tilt up and pre-cast construction industry. As a result of accidents in the tilt up construction industry, safety issues have become more paramount and the use of safety whistles, longer periods of crane noise from hoisting, as well as stabilising pre-cast panels in place, has now taken place. This has obviously had some impact on tilt up construction projects being undertaken within the Town.
COMMENT:
Consultation with other local governments in the western suburbs revealed that none have had any problems in regards to residential tilt up construction. Many noted that tilt up construction was less intrusive than normal brick construction because the shorter construction period.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 278 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
The City of Subiaco have advised that there is a considerable amount of tilt up construction taking place for both residential and commercial buildings that are two to three storeys high. Subiaco have not received any noise complaints regarding tilt up construction.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
To provide a safe environment through development and operational practises, and to ensure that the Town’s risk management strategy includes systems to monitor and prevent exposure to risk.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Nil
CONCLUSION:
As a result of the issues and problems that have taken place, the Administration has developed a guide entitled “Information Sheet – Construction Management Plans”, as attached to this report that is freely available for use by developers and builders.
The Administration will require the submission of a Construction Management Plan where a developer or builder proposes to build on a small site, build on sites that have limited or restricted space for the storage of building materials and ancillary construction buildings, build using tilt-up construction, or build a commercial building.
The Construction Management Plan will be required to be submitted with the Building Licence Application and will be assessed on an individual basis. The amount of detail required will depend on the nature and locality of the site and the complexity of the project.
Authority to require the submission of Construction Management Plans is contained within Regulation 11 (1) (a) (ix) of the Building Regulations 1989 which states:-
“Every builder making application for a building licence shall deposit with the building surveyor any other information that the building surveyor may require, all clearly figured and dimensioned.”
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
Moved by Cr Burkett, seconded by Cr MacRae
That the Administrative process of requiring the submission of Construction Management Plans where an applicant, developer or builder proposes to build on small sites, build on sites with restricted or limited space for the storage of building materials and ancillary construction buildings, built using tilt-up construction or build a commercial building be endorsed.
Committee Meeting 18 February 2003
During discussion, Members agreed that the item be deferred to enable the information sheet to be reviewed to be made more specific in relation to the restrictions to be placed on builders and to give the requirements greater authority than simply an information sheet.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 279 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr McAullay, seconded by Cr Burkett
That the item relating to Information Report – Construction Management Plans be deferred.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 280 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
DES03.19
SOUTHPORT STREET PLANNING STUDY (File Reference: PLA 0084)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To adopt the Southport Street Planning Study and determine the next steps toward the implementation of the plan.
BACKGROUND:
The Council at its meeting held in December 2001, resolved to initiate a report into the future development options in the Southport Street Commercial Precinct. A brief was drawn and expressions of interest from suitably qualified persons were called for, following which Mr Chris Antill of Chris Antill Planning and Urban Design Consultant was appointed to undertake the task.
The primary objective of the study was to:-
“Enhance the Southport Street Commercial precinct through appropriate town planning measures, streetscape and traffic management improvements, which will encourage and enhance development that will serve to raise the profile of the precinct, facilitate greater development options and capitalise on the precincts locational advantages.”
PROGRESS TO DATE:
• The consultant commenced the study with a literature review and collection of relevant data. This has been supplemented by site inspections and interviews with commercial property agents familiar with the area.
• A survey “feedback” form was then distributed to each landowner in the area asking questions regarding parking, land use, streetscape amenity, pedestrian safety and the like.
• An analysis was then reproduced in a series of illustrated plans and opportunities for addressing the identified problems were explored.
• A suggested range of options and a draft concept plan was then put to representative group of landowners, who met with consultants and staff members from the Town, held at the Council offices one evening. These invited representatives were from those who had taken the opportunity to respond to the survey mail out. Preliminary concepts were well supported and additional matters were raised for consideration by landowners and their representatives.
• The collective responses from landowners at that meeting were then assessed and a draft “preferred option” selected for general community comment. Feedback received from the second round of general consultation was then taken into account and the consultants have produced their recommended preferred plan that is now put to the Council for their consideration.
It is important to recognise that certain aspects of the recommendations contained within the report at this time are at the “concept stage” and the proposals contained with the report have not been fully costed.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 281 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Additionally, fine detail feature surveys are required in respect to road treatments and proposed streetscape enhancements and undoubtedly these will have some implications as to the extent that some of the recommendations can be implemented. Also, further consideration will be given to any proposed amendments to development standards prior to their implementation.
At this time, the Council is requested to consider the outcomes of the study and determine if they are agreeable to the proposals contained within it. If the Council is supportive of the general recommendations then further investigations will be undertaken to cost the various proposals so that Council will have a clear understanding of the financial commitment and an indicative time line required to implement the plan.
OVERVIEW OF REPORT:
The report incorporates a site analysis of the study area, having regard for the following:-
• Land use and activities; • Access (Movement, parking and circulation); • Streetscape and environment; and • Urban design and built form.
A series of opportunities pertaining to these various issues have been identified and development options explored, culminating in a series of recommendations detailed in the final plan.
Summary of findings
The report recommends that the Town encourages and promotes the Southport Street Commercial Precinct as a more urban, mixed use, but predominately commercial area, offering an attractive alternative to other nearby commercial precincts such as Leederville, east of the freeway, east Subiaco, West Perth and Subi Centro.
It is recommended the Town should initially promote the precinct through the introduction of peripheral “entry statements”, by adopting a suitable brand name and by introducing appropriate new town planning controls and design guidelines. In the medium to long term, the Town should support the precincts future development by the introduction of appropriate physical improvements to the public domain.
Specific findings have been made in respect to the following;
Land use, Activity, Planning Controls and Incentives
The report recommends the area should be promoted as a mixed use, but predominately commercial/service retail precinct where residential use may be accommodated as a supplementary use.
Property owners in Oxford Close in particular, should be encouraged to develop appropriately designed buildings with mixed uses. Cafes, small restaurants and local service retail uses could be encouraged at ground level, with office and residential uses at the first floor and above. Incentives should be provided within the Town Planning Scheme to encourage residential development as part of new development.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 282 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Residential areas
The existing extent and R Coding of the residential area within the study are considered appropriate. The eventual undergrounding of power lines will increase opportunities to improve street tree planting and enhance the residential amenity.
Design and development guidelines
A revised set of development guidelines are suggested for the study area.
The objective is to develop a more urban precinct with a strong recognisable identity and encourage small to medium scale developments of a type and character appropriate to the precinct and specifically appropriate to the desirable character of each street.
The proposed guidelines promote a higher quality of development that over a period of time will serve to enhance the aesthetic quality and function of the area. This will be achieved by introducing new standards for development covering issues such as plot ratio controls, building form and height and the like.
Oxford Close
Oxford close has been identified as a street of special significance in the precinct. Its physical dimension, low traffic volumes lends itself to appropriate streetscape enhancement which will increase the priority of pedestrians over vehicle and the greening of its expansive hard surfaces. The street has potential to be promoted as the “café” strip of the precinct and residential uses at first floor and above will be encouraged.
Southport Street
Southport Street is a major traffic carrier and will continue to perform this function for the foreseeable future.
As such, new development should be encouraged that reduces the number and width of crossovers to the street and rear laneways should be used for access wherever possible.
Loftus Street, Cambridge Street and Railway Parade.
These streets especially Loftus Street are high traffic volume streets which form three of the margins of the precinct. It is important for the improvement of the precincts image that new development presents well to passing motorists and pedestrians.
Particular attention is to be given to any development located on these streets to the following elements:-
• Vehicle access • Façade, scale, form and design • Advertising signage • Colours and details
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 283 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Plot ratio
Buildings to have a maximum plot ratio of 1:1, except where a mixed-use development comprising commercial and residential uses is proposed. In this instance, the maximum plot ratio may be increased to 1.5:1 provided that in any development not more than 25 per cent of the excess relevant floorspace will be used for non-residential purposes.
Building height
All new buildings to be preferably at least two storeys in height above natural ground level in order to promote a strong urban form. Corner buildings should preferably be three storeys in height above the natural ground level.
Major Intersection Treatments
Southport Street/Railway Parade
Whilst both a roundabout and traffic lights for this intersection have been ruled out due to space constraints, there is however, sufficient room on Railway Parade for two lanes to pass at this point. It is recommended that formal channelisation and road marking be investigated. (A small number of kerbside car parking bays on railway Parade would be need to be removed to facilitate this)
Southport Street/Cambridge Street
Whilst traffic congestion is experienced at this intersection during the morning and afternoon peak periods, the intersection copes well with traffic during the rest of the day. The intersection is physically constrained by existing properties and there is little scope for layout improvements. Signal timing and phasing could possibly be improved, but these are also constrained by being part of the SCAT system (i.e.; the signals are linked together with other intersections by Main Roads).
Loftus Street/Cambridge Street
The short left turn lane in Loftus Street travelling north which turns in to Cambridge Street is easily blocked by traffic queuing in Loftus Street. There appears to be an opportunity to provide some additional length to this lane which would be of benefit to the movement. Any improvements to this movement would also be of benefit to Railway Parade, as it would attract traffic which is currently using Railway Parade and Southport Street to reach the freeway.
Note: Technical Services have recently explored this option, however, due to land resumption requirements and the need for alterations to the existing underpass, the proposal is not considered to be feasible.
Public / Civic works
Undergrounding of power lines
It is recommended that all powerlines within the precinct be placed underground as a matter of priority. This will provide opportunities to introduce street trees which are presently few in number. This will in turn reduce the harshness of the streetscape, improve the quality of the street environment and lift the overall image of the precinct.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 284 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Street lighting should also be addressed at this time throughout the precinct, as some areas have none at present.
The undergrounding of powerlines can be carried out in stages if necessary and if funds are limited. The priority streets or sections identified are:-
1. Oxford Close 2. Southport Street (southern end) 3. Cambridge Street 4. Southport Street (northern end)
Enhancement of the Oxford Close streetscape
Oxford Close should be upgraded in a manner which reflects the potential to function as a low traffic volume, café/service retail strip.
The measures proposed include:-
• undergrounding of powerlines • 30 degree angle parking on both sides • removal of redundant crossovers • planting of street trees within the road space • new paving, lighting and rubbish bins
Enhancement of the Southport Street streetscape
Southport Street should be upgraded in a manner which reflects its existing and continuing function as an important traffic route, but at the same time allows the streets amenity deficiencies and traffic safety problems to be addressed.
The measures proposed include:-
• undergrounding of powerlines • The introduction of nibs to protect cars parked in parallel on both sides of the street • removal of redundant crossovers • planting of street trees within the road space • new paving, lighting and rubbish bins
Street tree planting
In addition to Southport Street and Oxford Close, all streets within the study area should be reassessed in terms of their capacity to accept a higher level of street tree plantings. Railway Parade and Cambridge Street in particular are important “public faces” for the precinct and require closer attention and the allocation of additional resources to improve their amenity and appearance.
Provision of an off-street public carpark
The Town should investigate the feasibility of acquiring a portion of land near the northern end of Southport Street, adjacent to the freeway. It is estimated that approximately 50-60 car parking bays could be provided as a consequence. Consideration would need to be given to charging motorists a fee for its use and/or introducing some specific means of ensuring that workers and visitors to the Southport Street commercial precinct receive priority access to the parking area.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 285 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
At the same time, the town should also consider the role of the existing public carpark adjacent to the Town Hall, to ensure there is a desirable balance in satisfying the reasonable parking needs of workers in the area and central city commuters.
Note: Consideration as to how this acquisition is funded, including contributions by property owners will need to be given.
Cyclist and Pedestrian Needs
Recommendations are made to enhance linkages to and through the precinct that include:-
• A formal footpath be provided to link the shared path on the north side of Cambridge Street with Loftus Street; • Upgrading the appearance and security of the existing underpass beneath Loftus Street, together with its approaches by - - Upgrading lighting at both ends of the tunnel; - Weatherproofing the skylight and increasing ventilation; - Shifting the existing stairs on the western side northwards and widening the western tunnel entrance as much as possible; - Introduction of appropriate plantings - Ensuring new development of the vacant sites at each end of the tunnel provides windows or other openings which have a clear view of the tunnel to increase casual surveillance.
Existing Council owned vacant site bordered by Oxford Close, Railway Parade and Loftus Street.
It is recommended that this site be upgraded into a small park by the following actions:-
• Removal of all but one or two of the palms that presently dominate the space • Retention of healthy young trees and introduction of one or two more on the northern edge of the space • Introduction of grass and simple paving with some benches and lighting; • Construction of a small entry statement on the south eastern corner
Upgrading of Rear Lane way System
The rear laneways lying within the street block bounded by Southport Street, Harrogate Street, Oxford Close and Railway Parade are an important asset to the area in terms of parking, access and servicing. They should be upgraded by improving drainage, paving, traffic calming and lighting and perhaps by extending the laneway northwards through to Harrogate Street should the opportunity arise some time in the future.
Precinct Image
In the short term while the Town is putting together a programme of civic works for the precinct, it is recommended that the Town, in conjunction with the landowners and traders arrive at a distinctive name for the precinct.
The name should become part of the common usage both in Council operations and gradually throughout the business and real estate communities.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 286 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
It also should be promoted through the introduction of simple low scale entry statements located on the precinct’s periphery, such as the corners of Loftus Street and Cambridge Street and Loftus Street and Railway Parade.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
There are a number of recommendations contained that if carried out, will commit the Town to significant capital expenditure. Significant expenditure will be required to implement streetscape improvements such as undergrounding of power lines, modifications to road and pedestrian networks and the acquisition of land for the public carpark.
Should the Council agree in principle to the recommendations outlined in the report, then further investigation will be needed to identify the costs involved with these works.
Other aspects such as the implementation of the recommended Planning Controls can be implemented by way of amendments to Town Planning Scheme No.1, without significant cost and can be accommodated within the planning operating budget.
Having regard to the above, there will be an immediate cost for the preparation of a report to investigate costing estimates for the implementation of the plan. A budget allocation of $1500.00 is visualised for the preparation of this report.
This report is to be provided by the end of March 2003 to enable consideration of the costing estimates in April 2003 so that it can be considered in the 2003/2004 financial budget.
The report can be funded from the Planning Operating Budget, Item 410/75 Special Projects Consultancies.
CONCLUSION:
The consultant has now completed the project in terms of the requirements of the brief. The study has involved quite extensive public consultation and the recommendations within the report have been enthusiastically accepted by the group of landowners and business operators within the precinct.
One of the intentions of the brief was for the consultant to provide a report that would enable the Town to identify the possible future opportunities for the precinct that will help the Council identify the way forward.
Implementation of the plan, if accepted, can take place over time, some as special projects, some as part of comprehensive redevelopments of private land, but most improvements relating to the public domain can be achieved as part of Council’s normal annual maintenance and upgrading programmes. The proposed Design and development guidelines can be adopted relatively quickly, if supported by the relevant landowners.
It is recommended that the study can be adopted by the Council.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 287 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
Moved by Cr Burkett, seconded by Cr Anderton
That:-
(i) the Southport Street Commercial Precinct, Planning and Land Use Study, dated December 2002, prepared by Chris Antill and Associates be adopted; (ii) Chris Antill Planning and Urban Design Consultant be appointed to prepare a report outlining a programme for the implementation of the recommendations of the study and that such programme contains costing estimates for all aspects of the proposal, at a cost of $1500.00;
(iii) the cost of preparing the above report be charged to Budget Item, 410/75 - Special Projects Consultancies;
(iv) those persons who have made submissions on the study and attended the workshop held at Council offices on 21 October 2002, be advised of Council’s decision.
Committee Meeting 18 February 2003
During discussion, Members suggested that the item be deferred for one month to allow more time to consider the study.
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr McAullay, seconded by Cr Burkett
That the item relating to Southport Street Planning Study be deferred for one month.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 288 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
DES03.20
DELEGATED DECISIONS AND NOTIFICATIONS (File Reference: ADM0048)
PURPOSE OF REPORT
To report on matters that have been dealt with under delegated authority and notify the Council of other proceedings in relation to Planning and Building Services.
DELEGATED DECISIONS
The following items (for the months of December 2002 and January 2003) have been dealt with under delegated authority, in accordance with Council’s policy, as they were deemed to comply in all respects with the requirements of the Town Planning Scheme and Council Policy:-
• Amalgamation - 231-233 Cambridge Street, Wembley; • Signs - 95 The Boulevard, Floreat; • Signs - 5 Howtree Place, Floreat • Dry store - 445 Cambridge Street, Floreat
The following item was approved under delegated authority granted by the Council at its meeting held on 17 December 2002 to deal with business arising during the 2002/03 Christmas/New Year recess period.
• Adoption of the Jersey Street Residential Design Guidelines:-
(Refer also to Policy and Administration Committee Item PA03.01).
As part of the process of adopting the Guidelines, a number of amendments were made. The amendments were made essentially in response to the submissions received, some other minor changes were made following a review and reconsideration of the guidelines after the advertising period. These changes were administrative in nature. It was suggested by a Councillor that the changes made to the final version of the Guidelines should have been included in the recommendation prepared with the report circulated for consideration. As the guidelines were approved by a majority of Councillors, the change was not made at the time. For the purposes of clarity, attached to this agenda is a copy of the Design Guidelines as approved, with the changes made being highlighted.
The major changes as a result of submissions received are as follows:-
Section 4.3 - in response to the submission from the Subiaco Redevelopment Authority the following point was added to satisfy the suggestion to encourage greater emphasis on the relationship of future dwellings to the rear access lane.
• To promote activity at the rear of the lots, the provision of living space within the roof space (loft) above the garage will be encouraged (refer Figure 3). Windows and balconies with outlook to the rear will add to the activity and security in this area. As above, privacy provisions of the R Codes apply.
Section 4.4 - in response to the submission from Riverstone the following wording in relation to energy efficiency requirements of the Building Code of Australia were added:-
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 289 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
• The provisions of the Building Code of Australia Part 3.12 Energy Efficiency or the Performance Requirements under Part 2.6 are to be complied with. (These provisions are due to come into practice in Western Australia on 1 July 2003).
As noted in the previous report to Council (19 November 2002) on this matter, various figures would be included into the Guidelines to assist with their interpretation. Four figures were included, being:-
Figure 1 - Development Parameters; Figure 2 - Example of building footprint; Figure 3 - Datum Heights; Figure 4 - Lofts/studios above garages.
A final copy of the Guidelines has previously been circulated.
NOTIFICATIONS
The following items are notifications of appeals and decisions for Council’s information:-
Appeals received
No appeals were lodged against a decision of the Council during December 2002 or January 2003.
Appeal determinations
The following Building Appeal was dealt with by the Minister for Local Government and Regional Development in a letter dated 9 January 2003.
Property: 65 Donegal Road, Floreat
Reason for Appeal: Refusal by the Building Surveyor to approve an application for a Building Licence to construct a Swimming Pool in June 2002.
Decision: The matter was considered by the Minister following investigation by the Department’s Building Control section. The Minister supported the Building Surveyor’s decision to refuse the application as the proposed barriers associated with the proposed swimming pool did not comply with the requirements of the Building Regulations 1989, Part 10, and the applicant could not demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Town, that the swimming pool would comply with the Regulations when constructed as there was direct access to the pool by way of an external door.
Implications: The dismissal of this appeal confirms the Administration’s position that all building applications for private swimming pools must include all construction specifications and details (whether proposed or existing) that relate to the installation of isolation fencing. This information is required in order that the building surveyor can make an informed decision on the status of the building and associated doors, windows and other structures that may impinge on the safety requirements relating to the installation of isolation barriers around private swimming pools.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 290 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr McAullay, seconded by Cr Burkett
That the report on delegated decisions and notifications dealt with under delegated authority for the period ending 31 January 2003, be received.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 291 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
DES03.21
BUILDING LICENCES APPROVED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY (File Reference: ADM0048)
PURPOSE OF THE REPORT
To provide monthly statistics and comparative data of building licences approved under delegated authority in December 2002 and January 2003.
BACKGROUND:
Listed hereunder are the total numbers of licences issued in the month of December 2002 and January 2003. Also shown are the comparative figures of the number of licences issued on the same month of the previous year.
December 2002 December 2001 Building Licences 47 22 Sign Licences 2 0 Preliminary Building 9 5 Licences Demolition Licences 4 4
Value of Construction $5,142,171 $2,076,553
January 2003 January 2002 Building Licences 38 46 Sign Licences 0 0 Preliminary Building 4 1 Licences Demolition Licences 3 3
Value of Construction $4,141,356 $15,945,629
COUNCIL DECISION: (COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr McAullay, seconded by Cr Burkett
That the Schedule of Building and Demolition Licences approved under delegated authority for the months of December 2002 and January 2003, as attached to and forming part of the notice paper, be received.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 292 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
8. REPORTS FROM DELEGATES: COMMITTEES AND WORKING GROUPS
8.1 Coastal Management Advisory Group
Nothing further to report
8.2 Western Suburbs District Planning Committee
Nothing further to report
9. GENERAL BUSINESS
9.1 Lot 319 (No 19) Kinkuna Way, City Beach
Cr Burkett requested information on the compliance of the proposed development at 19 Kinkuna Way, City Beach in relation to the approval granted by the Town Planning Appeals Tribunal.
9.2 67 Ruislip Street, West Leederville
Cr MacRae requested that an update report on the status of the property at 67 Ruislip Street, West Leederville be submitted to the next Committee meeting.
9.3 Development Plans with Agendas
Cr Smith queried the need for the production of full size development plans with the Committee Agenda.
It was agreed that a site plan, preferably A4, was sufficient.
9.4 Swimming Pool Vacuum Cleaners
Cr Smith requested that a report be submitted to the next Committee meeting on noise emanating from swimming pool vacuum cleaners.
10. CLOSURE
There being no further business, the Presiding Member thanked those present for their attendance and declared the meeting of the Development and Environmental Services Committee closed at 9.04 pm.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\E DES.doc 293 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
10. ELECTED MEMBERS MOTIONS OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN
Nil
11. REPRESENTATION ON STATUTORY AUTHORITIES AND PUBLIC BODIES (File Reference ORG0088)
PURPOSE OF REPORT;
To seek nominations for Council representation on various statutory authorities and public bodies.
BACKGROUND:
The WA Local Government Association invites Member Councils to submit nominations for appointment to various bodies as vacancies arise.
DETAILS:
The Council has been invited to submit nominations for the following appointments:-
• FESA Consultative Committees - Bush Fire Service (BFS) and Fire and Rescue Service (FRS) • FESA Emergency Services Levy Capital Grants Committees – Bush Fire Brigade Capital Grants Committee and State Emergency Service Capital Grants Committee • Local Government Advisory Board • Road Safety Council
Details of the above vacancies are attached to and form part of the notice paper.
COUNCIL DECISION: (ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr Smith, seconded by Cr Burkett
That:-
(i) the request for the nomination of:-
• FESA Consultative Committees - Bush Fire Service (BFS) and Fire and Rescue Service (FRS) • FESA Emergency Services Levy Capital Grants Committees – Bush Fire Brigade Capital Grants Committee and State Emergency Service Capital Grants Committee • Local Government Advisory Board • Road Safety Council
be received;
(ii) consideration be given to the nomination of a representatives as detailed in (i) above.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\F Item 10 onwards.doc 294 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Amendment
Moved by Cr Smith, seconded by Cr Burkett
That the motion be amended to read as follows:-
That:-
(i) the request for the nomination of:-
• FESA Consultative Committees - Bush Fire Service (BFS) and Fire and Rescue Service (FRS) • FESA Emergency Services Levy Capital Grants Committees – Bush Fire Brigade Capital Grants Committee and State Emergency Service Capital Grants Committee • Road Safety Council
be received;
(ii) His Worship the Mayor be nominated as a representative of the Local Government Advisory Board.
Amendment carried
The amended motion was then put and carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\F Item 10 onwards.doc 295 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
LATE ITEMS
12.1
MINDARIE REGIONAL COUNCIL – LANDFILL GAS AND POWER CONTRACT (File Reference: PRO1486)
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To endorse the progress of administration arrangements by the Mindarie Regional Council in relation to progressing a contract for Landfill Gas and Power Generation and to agree to the creation of a sub lease on Lot 118 for the construction of facilities in accordance with the contract.
BACKGROUND:
Mindarie Regional Council, at its meeting held in August 2001, resolved as follows:
“That the Council:
(i) accept the tender submitted by Landfill Gas & Power for the construction of landfill gas management infrastructure, and the operation and maintenance of this capability, at nil cost, with key characteristics of the contract arrangements as follows:
a) Nil cost for landfill gas infrastructure installation, operation and maintenance.
b) Royalty payments to be on the basis of 3% of electricity sales revenue and 50% of Renewable Energy Certificate sales.
c) Gas pipe work to be below ground.
(ii) authorise the Chief Executive Officer to manage the co-ordination of the construction of this capability, in conjunction with the construction of a progressive final cap on the Stage One landfill.
(iii) Note the role of Halpern Glick Maunsell as project Superintendent, for construction and operation phases.”
A further report was considered at the Mindarie Regional Council meeting held on 29 August 2002 in relation to progressingthis contract and presenting a Draft Business Plan for adoption by the Mindarie Regional Council.
The work on this project had been postponed until now, due to the need to validate the existing head lease for land at Tamala Park. This was a pre requisite to the establishment of a sub lease for land required from Mindarie Regional Council or the land owner group by Landfill Gas & Power (LFGP) for the siting of a power station. The validation of the lease exercise has proceeded to a point where further work associated with the landfill gas project should be commenced as soon as possible.
The Mindarie Regional Council at its meeting held on 29 August 2002, resolved as follows:-
“That the Council endorse the draft Business Plan for management of landfill gas.”
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\F Item 10 onwards.doc 296 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
A further report was considered by the Mindarie Regional Council on 20 February 2003, relating to the advertising associated with the Business Plan, and in order to finalise the Landfill Gas Extraction Contract. At this meeting the Mindarie Regional Council resolved as follows:-
That:-
(i) Council adopt the Management of Landfill Gas – Business Plan as advertised and previously presented
(ii) it be noted that the advertising of a sub lease has been conducted in accordance with Section 3.58, Local Government Act 1995
(iii) Council approve the final draft Contract for the Landfill Gas Facility at Tamala Park with Landfill Gas and Power Pty Ltd subject to concurrence by owners of Lot 118
(iv) the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to amend this Contract to reflect any final minor changes prior to signature.
DETAILS:
On 7 January 2003, a letter was received from the Chief Executive Officer of the Mindarie Regional Council requesting that the Town, as part owner of the Tamala Park land, endorses the Landfill Gas and Power proposal. An extract from the letter is as follows:
“The MRC is entering into a contract with Landfill Gas and Power to extract gas from the landfill in order to comply with its operating approvals. The extracted gas will be used to generate green electricity for distribution by Western Power Corporation’s assets. This will generate income for both Landfill Gas and Power and Council.
This matter was considered by the owners at a meeting held on 9 December 2002. The outcome was that each member Council would ratify the decision to endorse the MRC’s action to enter into the contract. With the pending completion of Stage One south landfill within the next two weeks, it is important that this matter be dealt with by your Council at its earliest meeting in 2003.
The MRC is wanting to sign a contract with Landfill Gas and Power by mid February 2003 and written endorsement from your Council by then would be appreciated.”
The progress of this contract has been presented to the Mindarie Regional Council in report 9.2.6 Tech. Com. Item 6 on 20 February 2003, and a full copy of that report is an attachment to this report.
COMMENTS:
As requested by the Mindarie Regional Council, it is recommended that Council endorses the Mindarie Regional Council’s action to enter into a contract with Landfill Gas and Power to extract gas from the Tamala Park landfill at the location as shown on the attached Plan ‘A’ and advises the Mindarie Regional Council of its resolution.
The Town also is required to endorse action as an owner of Lot 118, that, it is acceptable to amend the existing lease with the Mindarie Regional Council to allow the Landfill Gas and Power contract to be finalised.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\F Item 10 onwards.doc 297 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
This proposal will result in an additional revenue stream for the Mindarie Regional Council via royalties from the sale of electricity produced, using landfill gas and lease fees for the land based on 3% of electricity sales revenue and 50% of renewable Energy Certificate sales.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
This proposal is in conformance with the following Economic Development Strategy.
“Goal: To defray some of the Town’s expenditure on facilities, particularly regional, by assessing opportunities for cost recovery to reduce costs to ratepayers.”
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS:
Nil for the Town.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION:
Nil for the Town.
SUMMARY:
The Mindarie Regional Council has previously accepted a contract from Landfill Gas and Power to generate electricity from gas at the Tamala Park landfill site. Administrative and statutory arrangements have now been finalised by the Mindarie Regional Council and the contract is ready for execution. Formal execution, however, requires the Town’s endorsement of the contract arrangements and consent as part owner of Lot 118 that an amendment to the land lease with the Mindarie Regional Council to create a sub lease for the contract will be allowed.
It is recommended that these approvals be given.
COUNCIL DECISION: (ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION)
Moved by Cr Burkett, seconded by Cr MacRae
That the Council:-
(i) endorses the Mindarie Regional Council’s action to enter into a contract with Landfill Gas and Power to extract gas from the Tamala Park landfill site at the location as shown on the attached plan ‘A’;
(ii) advises the Mindarie Regional Council of its decision;
(iii) endorses action as joint owner to allow an amendment to the Mindarie Regional Council lease on Lot 118 to allow creation of a sub lease for the landfill gas contract.
Carried
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\F Item 10 onwards.doc 298 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
Cr Anderton left the meeting at 8.31 pm
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\F Item 10 onwards.doc 299 COUNCIL 25 FEBRUARY 2003 MAYOR…………………………………………………………
13. CONFIDENTIAL REPORTS
Nil
14. CLOSURE
There being no further business, His Worship the Mayor thanked those present for their attendance and declared the meeting closed at 8.32 pm.
H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\03 MINUTES\February 2003\F Item 10 onwards.doc 300