CouncilCouncil MinutesMinutes
2626 NovemberNovember 19961996 TOWN OF CAMBRIDGE
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL 26 NOVEMBER 1996
INDEX OF MINUTES
1. ATTENDANCE 1
2. PRAYER 1
3. APOLOGIES 1
MEMBERS ON LEAVE OF ABSENCE 1
4. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES 2
5. ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE MAYOR WITHOUT DISCUSSION 2
*** QUESTION TIME 2
6. DECLARATIONS OF MEMBERS' INTERESTS 3
7. QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN WITHOUT DISCUSSION 3
8. PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS 3
9. ORDERS OF THE DAY 4
10. COMMITTEE REPORTS 3
TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE 4
TS96.1 City to Sea Greenway 6
TS96.2 West Coast Highway / Hale Road Intersection, City Beach - Report on Parking Resident Survey 17
TS96.3 Kimberley Street, Leederville - Two Hour Parking Restriction 20
TS96.4 Chandler Avenue, Floreat - No Standing Restriction 23
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin TS96.5 Private Laneways - Maintenance Responsibility 24
TS96.6 Depot Facilities 30
TS96.7 Cambridge Street/Birkdale Street - Traffic Accidents 34
TS96.8 School Zone - Traffic Speed Restriction Signs 37
TS96.9 Perry Lakes Stadium - Track Improvement 40
TS96.10 Alternate Chemicals And Methods For Weed Control 42
TS96.11 1996 Town Of Cambridge Garden Awards 45
TS96.12 Technical Services - Project Update 47
POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE 49
PA96.1 Investment Policy 50
PA96.2 Community Projects Financial Assistance (Organisations) - Policy 55
PA96.3 Applications for Assistance to Sport/Recreation Representatives - Policy 63
PA96.4 Local Government Structural Reform 66
PA96.5 Dog Amendment Act 1996 69
PA96.6 Western Suburbs Local Drug Action Group 72
PA96.7 Proposed Locality of West Leederville 73
PA96.8 Delegated Authority - 1996/97 Christmas Recess 75
PA96.9 Annual General Meeting of Electors 79
PA96.10 Performance Review (Statutory): Chief Executive Officer 80
PA96.11 WAMA Member - Bush Fires Board Of WA 81
PA96.12 Two LGA Members - North Metropolitan Regional Development Organisation 83
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin CORPORATE AND CUSTOMER SERVICES 85
CCS96.1 Financial Statements for the Period Ended 30 September 1996 and 31 October 1996 86
CCS96.2 Financial Statements for the Year Ended 30 June 1996 87
CCS96.3 Accounts for Payment 91
CCS96.4 Write Off Penalty Interest - 1995/96 Financial Year 92
CCS96.5 Investment Schedule as at 31 October 1996 95
CCS96.6 Documents Sealed 96
CCS96.7 City Beach Civic Centre - Lease to West Coast Bridge Club (Inc) 97
CCS96.8 City Beach Kiosk No 2 - Request from Lessee for Mobile Vendor Licence to Serve Drinks on The Beach. 113
CCS96.9 Lake Monger and Dodd Street Reserves Proposal for Tandem Skydiving 119
CCS96.10 Sir Thomas Meagher Pavilion, Perry Lakes Stadium Soccer Administration of WA Sub Lease to Perth Glory Soccer Club (Arena Investments Pty Ltd). 122
CCS96.11 Wembley Golf Complex - Fairway Tavern , Variation to Lease 124
CCS96.12 Kiosks 1 and 3 Challenger Parade, City Beach and Floreat Request for Lease 126
CCS96.13 Christmas/New Year Arrangements - Council and Staff 127
CCS96.14 Parking Facilities Local Law - Amendment 131
CCS96.15 1997 Ocean Action Perth 142
CCS96.16 Sponsorship - Youth Project : De-Licensed Night - Floreat Hotel 151
DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES COMMITTEE
DES96.1 10 Northwood Street, West Leederville
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin Additions to Existing Commercial Building 154
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin DES96.2 339 Cambridge Street, Wembley - Reconsideration of Condition - Group Medical Practice 158
DES96.3 3 Tor Place, City Beach - Home Occupation (Office) 161
DES96.4 Proposed Change Of Street Name - Hay Street, Jolimont 164
DES96.5 Metropolitan Region - North West Corridor Omnibus Amendment No. 2 (Proposal 14) - Link Road Stephenson Avenue to Pearson Street 167
DES96.6 Delegated Decisions And Notifications 169
DES96.7 Major Sporting Facilities In The Perth Metropolitan Region Region Discussion Paper Western Australian Planning Commission 171
DES96.8 210 Cambridge Street, Wembley (Consulting Rooms) - Non-Compliance With Planning Approval Conditions 175
DES96.9 Western Suburbs District Planning Committee - Report 178
DES96.10 144 Holland Street, Wembley - Home Occupation (Visual Arts Studio) 182
DES96.11 Land North Of Oceanic Drive - Environmental Management Plan 185
DES96.12 124 Salvado Road, Wembley - Day Centre for the Aged 188
DES96.13 315 and 317 Cambridge Street, Wembley - Six Single Storey Grouped Dwellings 202
DES96.14 Lot 3 The Boulevard, City Beach (Former Shell Service Station Site) - Proposed Single Storey Shopping Centre and Associated Car Parking Areas and Access Roads 206
DES96.15 Native Title Claim - City and Floreat Beaches 220
DES96.16 368 Cambridge Street, Wembley - Four Single Storey Grouped Dwellings 222
DES96.17 Subiaco Oval Management Strategy - Final Draft Report from West Australian Football Commission 229
DES96.18 Commercial Evaluation of Beachfront Facilities
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin - City And Floreat Beaches 248 DES96.19 Building Licence Requiring Approval 256
DES96.20 Building Licences Approved Under Delegated Authority 258
DES96.21 17 Turriff Road, Floreat - Two Storey Residence And Garage 260
DES96.22 Lot 439 No 33 Marapana Road City Beach - Two Storey Addition To Existing Residence 264
DES96.23 73 Blencowe Street, West Leederville - 2 Two Storey Residences 267
DES96.24 88 Branksome Gardens, City Beach - Proposed Front Setback Variation For New Residence 272
DES96.25 Proposed Amendments To Public Building Regulations 274
DES96.26 Lot 4-5 (No.75a) Tate Street, West Leederville - Access To Unauthorised Balcony 282
DES96.27 49 Cromarty Road, Floreat - Additions To Existing Residence 285
DES96.28 10 Clune Avenue, West Leederville - Two Storey Addition 288
DES96.29 School Immunisation Clinics 292
DES96.30 Asbestos And Poisons Collection Day 294
12. MOTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN 296
12.1 Ocean Gardens (Inc) - Commencement of Legal Proceedings 296
13. REPRESENTATION ON STATUTORY AUTHORITIES AND PUBLIC BODIES 298 13.1 WAMA Member - Water Corporation Urban Development Advisory Committee 298
13.2 WAMA Member - Metropolitan Member - Taxi Ranks Committee 300
14. URGENT BUSINESS 303
14.1 Lake Monger Management 303
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 15. CONFIDENTIAL REPORTS 308
16. CLOSURE 308
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
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 26 NOVEMBER 1996 AT 5.34PM
1. ATTENDANCE
Present:
The Mayor Ross J Willcock JP
Councillors Marlene A Anderton David G Berry (from 5.38pm) David A Johnston Corinne MacRae Robina J McConnell A Michael Moore Pauline O'Connor Kerry Smith
Officers: Graham D Partridge, Chief Executive Officer Jason Buckley, Exec Manager Corporate & Customer Services Ian Birch, Exec Manager Development and Environmental Services Kevin Poynton, Exec Manager Technical Services Neil Costello, Manager Customer Services
2. PRAYER
The Mayor took the Chair and the prayer was read by the Chief Executive Officer.
3. APOLOGIES
Nil
MEMBERS ON LEAVE OF ABSENCE
Nil
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 1 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
4. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES
Moved by Cr Smith, seconded by Cr O'Connor
That the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Council held on 15 October 1996 be confirmed.
Carried
Moved by Cr McConnell, seconded by Cr Smith
That the minutes of the Special Meeting of the Council held on 12 November 1996 be confirmed.
Carried
Moved by Cr McConnell, seconded by Cr Moore
That the minutes of the Special Meeting of the Council held on 19 November 1996 be confirmed.
Carried
5. ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE MAYOR WITHOUT DISCUSSION
Nil
*** QUESTION TIME
E M and M P Ryder and Mr Noelting
Question:
Why does the Council find it necessary to grant a temporary one year lease with a three month break clause added
When:
1. Only 11 months ago Kiosk 2 was granted a lease to the year 2000.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 2 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
2. The outcome of the commercial survey for the beachfronts has not been made public yet.
3. That it is a very lengthy procedure before construction goes ahead advertising in local paper measuring public opinion, submitting plans etc.
4. Because of a native title claim at present on the beachfront the Council will consider a new site for further development. Agree to a more reasonable lease i.e. till the year 2000 if building goes ahead.
The above with a further 3 year option if building does not proceed.
Response:
The Chief Executive Officer advised that this matter was to be considered later in the agenda (at Item CCS96.12). He also responded to the question in part by noting that the reason the lease is only recommended for an extension of 12 months is to allow the Council flexibility in its deliberations on the beachfront facilities review.
The Chief Executive Officer referred to a letter previously submitted to the Council by Mr and Mrs Ryder requesting that the Council give further consideration to their lease arrangements.
6. DECLARATIONS OF MEMBERS' INTERESTS
Nil
7. QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN WITHOUT DISCUSSION
Nil
8. PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS
Two petitions were received in relation to:
(i) Proposed road changes in and around Daglish Street, Wembley, signed by 113 petitioners.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 3 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
(ii) Opposition to the extension of parking restrictions to capture Tara Vista and Kavanagh Street, signed by 24 petitioners.
9. ORDERS OF THE DAY
Nil
10. COMMITTEE REPORTS
TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE
The report of the Technical Services Committee Meeting held on 12 November 1996 was submitted as under:-
1. ATTENDANCE
Present : Time of Time of Entering Leaving
Members:
Cr David G Berry (Presiding Member) 5.38pm 7.08pm
Mayor Ross J Willcock 5.38pm 7.08pm Cr David A Johnston 5.38pm 7.08pm Cr A Michael Moore 5.38pm 7.08pm Cr Pauline O’Connor 5.38pm 7.08pm
Observers:
Cr Marlene A Anderton 5.38pm 5.46pm 5.48pm 6.15pm 6.20pm 7.08pm
Officers:
Graham D Partridge, Chief Executive Officer Kevin Poynton, Executive Manager Technical Services Ross Farlekas, Manager Parks and Landscapes Richard Watson, Manager Works and Engineering Denise Ribbands, Administration Officer (Committees)
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 4 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Adjournments: Nil
Time meeting closed: 7.08pm
2. APOLOGIES
Nil
3. LEAVE OF ABSENCE
Nil
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 5 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
REPORTS
TS96.1 CITY TO SEA GREENWAY (File Reference: CMS0057)
BACKGROUND:
The Council at its meeting held on 12 December 1995, resolved that:
“(i) the Council:-
(a) approves in principle the concept of a “greenway” route through the Town to the sea for cyclists and pedestrians;
(b) authorises the Chief Executive Officer to progress negotiations in relation to the project with the Better Cities Secretariat, or its representatives;
(ii) further reports be submitted to the Council advising of the progress of continuing negotiations with the Better Cities Secretariat”
Further, at its meeting held on 27 February 1996, the Council also resolved that:
“(i) the most suitable tender, being that submitted by Mike Maher and Associates for the planning of a City to Sea Greenway at a cost of $11,000, with a Town of Cambridge contribution of $3,666 be accepted;
(ii) the expenditure in (i) above be charged to Budget Item - “Technical Services Consultancies”.”
The Council at its meeting held on 23 April 1996, resolved that:
“(i) the concept for the development of a City to Sea Greenway, prepared by Mike Maher and Associates, be approved;
(ii) the Council APPROVES BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the expenditure of $80,000 as the Town of Cambridge contribution to the project in (i) above, with funds being provided from the Area Improvement Reserve Fund, subject to the provision of contributions to a total of $270,000 from the Commonwealth Better Cities Program and BikeWest;
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 6 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
(iii) Mike Maher and Associates be engaged for the design and contract administration for the City to Sea Greenway project within the Town of Cambridge, in accordance with the agreed concept, for fees calculated at 5 per cent of the contract for works price, with the actual total fee to be approved by the Chief Executive Officer.”
Work then proceeded to the stage whereby public comment has been obtained on the concept, a proposed alignment was identified, most of the detailed design work completed and draft contracts prepared. In addition, confirmation of external funding was received. The project was presented for further discussion at the Technical Services Committee meeting held in July 1996. The item was deferred on the basis of a need for additional information as follows:
confirmation of the area of land for potential excisement from the nursery site (south side); estimate of any potential revenue loss as a result of this excisement; additional detail on proposed alterations to Henderson Park; establishment of City of Nedlands position regarding use of Alderbury Street as a bicycle boulevard.
The discussion also indicated some worth in the conduct of a public meeting at some later stage. The additional information was obtained and is included in this report.
The matter was again considered in August 1996, at Committee and Council meetings, and was referred back for further consideration by the Technical Services Committee in September 1996.
The matter was further considered in October 1996 at both the Technical Services Committee and Council. This consideration involved additional information provided by the project team. No preferred option for a route was identified at the Council meeting, and this information was conveyed to both Bikewest and Better Cities in writing following the meeting.
Key personnel from the Better Cities requested a meeting with the Chief Executive Officer and the Executive Manager Technical Services, as well as representatives from Bikewest, in order to discuss whether any satisfactory route could be identified. This occurred on 4 November 1996, with an outcome of another option for a potential route.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 7 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
This report presents information on this proposed route, together with information on outstanding fees.
It is now appropriate to consider this alternative route, and, address the matter of outstanding fees.
DETAILS:
A Proposed Route
A further alternative for a proposed route was identified at the meeting with Better Cities and Bikewest on 4 November 1996. This route is as follows:
Commence corner Jersey/Salvado (Henderson Park) Proceed west to Salvado/Selby Proceed south to Hay/Selby Recommence corner Underwood/Brookdale Proceed north to Brookdale/Alderbury Street Proceed west to City Beach via Alderbury Street, existing pathway (Oceanic).
A plan of the route is attached to, and forms part of this Agenda.
Key features of this route would be as follows:
Some crossing capability would be required at Underwood/ Brookdale. Construction of the Hay/Selby to Underwood/Brookdale link could occur under separate arrangements later, as part of improvements by Bikewest to the Perth Bicycle Network. Existing funding provisions would apply, utilising previously approved funds.
An associated issue would be the need to consider separate crossings of Selby and Brookdale at agreed locations to assist cyclists who choose to utilise a more direct route via Alderbury Street or Brookdale.
Advantages of the route are as follows:
The route is generally consistent with greenway characteristics. The route is safe, given the low number of crossings, and limited requirements for on-road travel. The route does not directly impact on residential areas.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 8 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The route does not compromise future plans for commercial land east of Jersey, Matthews Netball Centre or the nursery site.
The disadvantages of the route are as follows:
The route lacks continuity, for the short term. The route is relatively indirect from Henderson Park to the ocean.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 9 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Outstanding Fees:
The Town has received an invoice from Mike Maher and Associates for work completed subsequent to the Council resolution on 23 April 1996 for the project planning to proceed. The details of this work are as follows:
Design and documentation of work associated with the agreed concept for the greenway. Project administration, including additional investigations, meeting attendance, site inspections and costing exercises.
These details have been checked by the Town's Administration and Bikewest, and the conclusion is that the nature of these fees is reasonable, given the work undertaken during the period April to October 1996. The amount claimed is $15,347.
Funding Sources
The Better Cities Program Co-ordinator has advised verbally, to be confirmed in writing, that following consideration of the Town's letter seeking a Better Cities contribution to any outstanding fees, the Better Cities Program is not prepared to contribute to these fees, if the project does not proceed, given that the initial concept was endorsed by the Council, and the decision not to proceed with the project was subsequent to this.
Bikewest Position
Bikewest has advised that it would contribute a 25 per cent share of funds for these fees.
Town of Cambridge Position
Funds have been identified for a Town of Cambridge contribution to these fees from the Budget Item "Consultancies - Technical Services", to an amount of $11,510, being the total amount less the Bikewest contribution.
FUTURE PROJECT MANAGEMENT:
In the event of Council approval to the proposed route, the ongoing project management arrangements require confirmation. The existing consultant, Mike Maher and Associates, has completed a significant amount of relevant work. Notwithstanding this, the alternative route does represent a variation to the originally agreed concept. It is recommended that Mike Maher and Associates be engaged for the remainder of
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 10 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
the project, on the basis of their preparedness for the work due to progress to date. However, this engagement should be on the basis of a renegotiated contract, given the change in concept, completed work, and outstanding requirements.
COMMENT:
A further investigation of routes for a City to Sea Greenway has been conducted by the project team, at Better Cities request. This has resulted in the identification of a potentially satisfactory route. A decision is now required on the acceptability of this route.
In addition, outstanding fees, incurred on the project to date, require settlement, together with endorsement of an approach for future project management, if appropriate. It should be noted that any cost sharing arrangement for interim payments is not relevant if the proposed route is approved, given that all payments would be made from the overall project fund.
A suggested course of action for any ongoing project management, if required, is to continue the utilisation of Mike Maher and Associates, on the basis of a renegotiated contract, with due respect to work completed and future work. This is advisable given the change in concept, work completed, interim fees settlement and work required.
It is therefore recommended that:-
(i) a route for the City to Sea Greenway be approved which:
commences at the corner of Jersey Street/Salvado Road (Henderson Park); proceeds west to Salvado Road/Selby Street; proceeds south to Hay Street/Selby Street; recommences at the corner of Underwood Avenue/Brookdale Street; proceeds north to Brookdale Street/Alderbury Street; proceeds west to City Beach via Alderbury Street, along the existing pathway on Oceanic Drive;
(ii) the construction of the Greenway be authorised in accordance with this approved route;
(iii) (a) in the event of non-approval for this route, a payment to Mike Maher and Associates of $15,347, from Budget Item 'Consultancies - Technical Services' be approved,
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 11 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
subject to a contribution from Bikewest of 25 per cent ; or
(b) in the event of approval for this route, approval be given for payment to Mike Maher and Associates of $15,347 from project funds;
(iv) the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to renegotiate a project management contract with Mike Maher and Associates for the remainder of the project, within the overall budget allocation of $350,000 for the project.
Committee Meeting 12 November 1996
During discussion the majority of members agreed that the proposed route for the City to Sea Greenway not be approved.
The Administration was requested to obtain legal advice on the payment of fees to the consultants prior to the next meeting of the Council to be held on Tuesday 26 November 1996.
Accordingly the Committee resolved that it be recommended to the Council that:-
(i) recommendations (i) (ii) and (iv) not be adopted;
(ii) a payment to Mike Maher and Associates of $15,347 from Budget Item 'Consultancies - Technical Services' be considered, subject to a contribution from Bikewest of 25 per cent and the receipt of legal advice to support this action.
FURTHER REPORT (Post Committee Meeting 12 November 1996)
Legal advice was sought from the Town's Solicitors on the matter of payment of fees to the consultants. The content of the response is as follows:-
"We refer to your facsimile dated 13 November 1996 and to your telephone conversation with the writer on 15 November 1996.
We confirm the background to this matter as follows:-
an invitation to tender for consultancy services for the creation of the City to Sea Greenway was published by the Town in February 1996;
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 12 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
at its meeting of 27 February 1996 Council resolved to accept a tender from a consortium headed by Mike Maher & Associates;
by agreement dated 18 April 1996 Mike Maher & Associates were appointed to undertake Stage 1 of the City of Sea Greenway, which was subsequently completed and paid for;
at its meeting on 23 April 1996 Council resolved to engage Mike Maher & Associates to undertake Stage 2 of the City to Sea Greenway in accordance with Clause 5 of the agreement referred to in (c) above;
Mike Maher & Associates have submitted to Council an invoice for work associated with Stage 2 of the City to Sea Greenway in the sum of $15,347; and
The City to Sea Greenway project is now not proceeding.
In these circumstances, our opinion is sought as to whether Council remains liable for the consultancy fees of Mike Maher & Associates.
We note that the invoice received from Mike Maher & Associates has been checked by the Town's Administration and by Bikewest and has been found to be reasonable. Shortly put, in the circumstances described above we can see no grounds for Council refusing to make payment of the invoice whether or not the City to Sea Greenway project proceeds. In particular, having examined the documents provided to us, there is nothing which suggests that payment to Make Maher & Associates in respect of Stage 2 of the City to Sea Greenway was in any way subject to a "success fee" or to the continuation of the project."
Based on this advice, it is now recommended that payment of fees of $15,347 to Mike Maher & Associates, be approved subject to a contribution from Bikewest of 25 per cent.
SUMMARY:
The recommendation for the establishment of a Greenway through the Town of Cambridge was as follows:-
(i) a route for the City to Sea Greenway be approved which:
commences at the corner of Jersey Street/Salvado Road (Henderson Park); proceeds west to Salvado Road/Selby Street; proceeds south to Hay Street/Selby Street;
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 13 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
recommences at the corner of Underwood Avenue/Brookdale Street; proceeds north to Brookdale Street/Alderbury Street; proceeds west to City Beach via Alderbury Street, along the existing pathway on Oceanic Drive;
(ii) the construction of the Greenway be authorised in accordance with this approved route;
(iii) (a) in the event of non-approval for this route, a payment to Mike Maher and Associates of $15,347, from Budget Item 'Consultancies - Technical Services' be approved, subject to a contribution from Bikewest of 25 per cent ; or
(b) in the event of approval for this route, approval be given for payment to Mike Maher and Associates of $15,347 from project funds;
(iv) the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to renegotiate a project management contract with Mike Maher and Associates for the remainder of the project, within the overall budget allocation of $350,000 for the project.
The Technical Services Committee however, at its meeting held on 12 November 1996, recommended to the Council that clauses, (i), (ii) and (iv) not be adopted and that payment to the consultants be subject to legal advice.
Council Meeting 26 November 1996
During discussion, the Mayor agreed to a request from Cr Smith that the Committee recommendations be considered separately.
Moved by Cr Berry, seconded by Cr O'Connor
That recommendations (i), (ii) and (iv) not be adopted.
Discussion ensued in relation to the merits of the proposed route and the lack of continuity provided by "staging" the greenway project.
The motion that the recommendations not be adopted was then put and lost.
Members requested that the vote of all those present be recorded.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 14 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
For: Crs Berry, Johnston, McConnell, O'Connor Against: Crs Anderton, MacRae, Moore, Smith, The Mayor
Accordingly, the Mayor then advised that as the motion to not accept the recommendation had been lost, the proposed route for the Greenway would be adopted.
Cr McConnell then requested advice as to whether this matter would be considered again at any time by the Council. The Executive Manager (Technical Services) advised that the Council process required that tenders for the construction works be submitted for the Council's consideration.
His Worship the Mayor noted that as the proposed route is now to be supported by the Council, part (ii) of the Committee recommendation would lapse as the project funding would provide for consultant's fees.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 15 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The motion as carried is as follows:-
That:-
(i) a route for the City to Sea Greenway be approved which:
commences at the corner of Jersey Street/Salvado Road (Henderson Park); proceeds west to Salvado Road/Selby Street; proceeds south to Hay Street/Selby Street; recommences at the corner of Underwood Avenue/Brookdale Street; proceeds north to Brookdale Street/Alderbury Street; proceeds west to City Beach via Alderbury Street, along the existing pathway on Oceanic Drive;
(ii) the construction of the Greenway be authorised in accordance with this approved route;
(iii) approval be given for payment to Mike Maher and Associates of $15,347 from project funds;
(iv) the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to renegotiate a project management contract with Mike Maher and Associates for the remainder of the project, within the overall budget allocation of $350,000 for the project.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 16 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
TS96.2 WEST COAST HIGHWAY / HALE ROAD INTERSECTION, CITY BEACH - REPORT ON PARKING RESIDENT SURVEY (File Reference: PKG0006)
BACKGROUND:
The Council introduced measures to exclude motorists from parking on the verges immediately adjacent to the Hale Road and West Coast Highway intersection (the intersection) in City Beach. This improved the safety of the area but redistributed the problem to other locations. The concern was that the introduction of further restrictions in nearby streets will only continue to redistribute the problems. As a result a resident survey was conducted.
The survey was to gauge the community’s response to the parking problems being experienced in the vicinity of the intersection.
A number of options were offered for community consideration. The options were:
the introduction of kerbside parking restrictions in Chipping Road, Yaltara Road and other roads as required;
the introduction of verge parking restrictions instead of, or in addition to the kerbside parking restrictions in option 1;
the construction of a parking area in the vicinity of the intersection, at a location yet to be determined.
Residents were asked to complete and return the survey form by 20 September 1996.
In past years, it was decided to exclude parking from the reserves adjacent to the intersection. In addition, a resolution to “revegetate” the reserves was made. Work on this resolution has continued in subsequent years.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil.
DETAILS:
The survey has been conducted and the summary of the survey replies is as follows:
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 17 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
A total of 51 surveys were distributed. There were 23 respondents, 15 indicated their acceptance of one or more of the options presented, 5 disagreed and three did not indicate their preference.
Most respondents provided additional comments and these can be summarised as follows: (number of respondents is indicated for each action)
The construction of a parking area in the vicinity of the intersection. (12) No kerbside parking restrictions be implemented. (7) No verge parking restrictions be implemented. (7) Encourage parking in existing carparks. (5) No parking area be constructed in the vicinity of the intersection. (4) Verge restrictions are also required. (3) Kerbside restrictions are required. (2) Parking should be provided on the beach side of West Coast Highway. There is adequate parking to the north and south. Further restrictions will only redistribute the problems. Issue more parking tickets. Close access to the beach at the intersection. Don’t encourage parking in residential areas other than for local residents. A white centreline should be marked on the bend in Yaltara Road to help control traffic flow. Re-establish access to beach and path opposite No. 36 Yaltara Road.
The varying opinions expressed by the respondents suggest that there is a diversity of issues and solutions.
At this point in time it is considered inappropriate to introduce further parking restrictions on either road or verge. This is due to the inability to isolate any particular location in the area that specifically requires or warrants this action. In addition, parking restrictions would redistribute the issues.
It is considered most appropriate to have the Rangers continue to patrol the intersection for illegal parkers. At the conclusion of the summer months a summary of offenders can be compiled. In conjunction, regular monitoring of the area can be conducted to help determine the impact of the existing restrictions and the extent of the issues.
Whilst the construction of a carpark did receive reasonable support, it also received considerable opposition. Those who supported the idea
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 18 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
did not agree on the location for such a carpark. The most acceptable location would seem to be on the western side of West Coast Highway. This location would have the least impact on residents in the area. It provides easier and safer access to the beach by removing the need for pedestrians to cross West Coast Highway. It could be accessible for motorists travelling in each direction.
The opposition to the construction of a carpark was varied. Among the concerns were:
the impact on the vegetation and the reserves; the impact on the aesthetics of the area; the danger involved in encouraging pedestrians to cross at this busy intersection; the expenditure of ratepayers funds on facilities that would not necessarily benefit the ratepayers.
A suggested carparking area would be accessed approximately 75 metres north of the intersection with a one way flow feeding back onto West Coast Highway 75 metres south of the intersection. It could comprise a single sealed lane with parallel parking on both sides along its length. Construction of such is estimated to cost in the vicinity of $50,000.
COMMENTS:
Rather than making a decision at this point in time it is considered important to further monitor the situation with the concerns of the community in mind. The introduction of any restrictions or construction is considered inappropriate at the moment. This should be reviewed in March 1997 following the summer monitoring and enforcement.
Committee Meeting 12 November 1996
During discussion, Cr Moore requested that appropriate fencing be constructed on the north east corner of West Coast Highway/Hale Road.
Moved by Cr Berry, seconded by Cr O'Connor
That:-
(i) the parking situation in the vicinity of West Coast Highway and Hale Road intersection continue to be monitored and existing restrictions strictly enforced over the summer months;
(ii) consideration be given to the need and associated indicative funding requirement for the construction of a carpark
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 19 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
adjacent to the West Coast Highway/Hale Road intersection on the western side of West Coast Highway.
Carried
TS96.3 KIMBERLEY STREET, LEEDERVILLE - TWO HOUR PARKING RESTRICTION (File Reference: PKG0006)
BACKGROUND:
The section of Kimberley Street between Railway Parade and Cambridge Street is parked out on a daily basis. The motorists who choose to park in this section of road are a combination of residents and their visitors, workers from local businesses and workers from Princess Margaret Hospital.
The current restrictions only cater for the control of football crowds on weekends. From Monday to Friday there are no restrictions.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil.
DETAILS:
This restriction has been requested by an adjacent resident to allow for residents and their visitors who require parking in this area during the day.
The restriction would affect eleven parking spaces. It is thought that this would not inconvenience nearby residents but may inconvenience some of the nearby workers and Princess Margaret Hospital staff.
The proposed two hour parking restriction would be in lieu of the existing unrestricted parking and one hour football parking.
COMMENTS:
The recommendation is in accordance with Council's Policy of providing short term parking restrictions of a duration suitable for the area and the requirements of motorists.
Committee Meeting 12 November 1996
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 20 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
During discussion, the Administration was requested to notify residents on the eastern and western sides of Kimberley Street of the proposed parking restrictions and the availability of permits.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 21 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Moved by Cr Berry, seconded by Cr O'Connor
That a two hour parking restriction be imposed on the eastern side of Kimberley Street, West Leederville, commencing 58.6 metres north of Railway Parade and extending 67.9 metres northwards, operative from 7.00am to 6.00pm in lieu of unrestricted parking and one hour football parking, as shown on Plan E293-96-02, laid on the table.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 22 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
TS96.4 CHANDLER AVENUE, FLOREAT - NO STANDING RESTRICTION (File Reference: PKG0006)
BACKGROUND:
A request to restrict the parking in Chandler Avenue, Floreat, has been received from the adjacent residents.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil.
DETAILS:
The residents are concerned for their safety when exiting the steep drive on their property. This is due to the volume of traffic and the proximity of the property to the corner of Chandler Avenue and Forum Way. Vehicles do park in the existing non restricted area and over the fire hydrant.
The extension of the No Standing zone is intended to improve this problem of restricted vision and therefore allow for the safer passage of traffic.
COMMENTS:
The recommendation is in accordance with Council's Policy to implement parking restrictions designed to remove hazardous conditions.
Moved by Cr Berry, seconded by Cr O'Connor
That the No Standing restriction on the southern side of Chandler Avenue, Floreat, be extended 5 metres eastwards, operative at all times in lieu of unrestricted parking, as shown on Plan E 185-96-01, laid on the table.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 23 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
TS96.5 PRIVATE LANEWAYS - MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY (File Reference: TES0294)
BACKGROUND:
The Town of Cambridge has three kilometres of laneways under its control and approximately nineteen kilometres of laneways under private control.
The former City of Perth carried out limited laneway maintenance in November each year, on private laneways. The aim of this work was to reduce the fire hazard and maintain property access. The old Local Government Act required Ministerial approval prior to Council spending ratepayer funds on these private laneways, or indeed any private property.
The Local Government Act 1995 permits Council to carry out the work under the principle of "Good Government", Section 3.1 and 3.18. The Council budget allocated $20,000 to maintain Council's three kilometres of laneways this financial year. The estimated cost to carry out the work to remove the rubbish and cut the long grass in private laneways is $75,000. There are no surplus funds for carrying out works in private laneways.
DETAILS:
The private laneways in the Town of Cambridge are centred in the West Leederville and Wembley areas. A summary of these laneways is tabulated below:
COUNCIL PRIVATE
Sealed 3.12km 3.34km Unseale 0.23km 15.38km d TOTAL 3.35km 18.72km
Budget $20,000 $0
With the onset of summer, it is evident that the grass and rubbish in the laneways is becoming established. The Council office has received a number of requests to enter the private laneways and carry out remedial work. The normal response is that the laneways that are private should be maintained by the adjacent property owner. Some residents are willing to do this, many are hesitant.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 24 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The private laneways in the Town have been left as residual land in the name of the original subdivider. When the land was first subdivided, the roads were given to Council and the property lots sold for housing. The laneways are now often in the name of the deceased estate. The Local Government Act 1995 has considerably simplified the process for Council to acquire these laneways and this program can continue when funds become available and the planning strategy is established.
The Council has allocated funds for the establishment of a Private Laneway Strategy in the 1996/97 budget. This strategy will consider which laneways Council will require to be kept open and the method of management and development of these laneways. Other laneways may be kept open at the request of the adjacent property owner and be developed as funds become available. The survey will also include a process of prioritising the construction of the rights of way.
A review of the 1996/97 Works Operation Budget shows that the rate of expenditure is on target and the only funds allocated for rights of way is the $20,000 for the maintenance of Council rights of way. No funds have been identified for transfer at this stage.
CONCLUSION:
The former City of Perth did carry out limited maintenance of private rights of way. The Town of Cambridge does not have the funds budgeted for this work, at this stage.
The community have been asked to maintain the laneway at the rear of their property when they have asked Council to assist with this work. Any variation to this direction will require an adjustment of budget funds.
It is therefore recommended that no maintenance of private laneways be carried out by the Council this financial year unless there is a declared health hazard.
Committee Meeting 12 November 1996
During discussion, Members considered the following issues:-
- the expectation of the community in regard to laneway maintenance; - any requirement for laneway maintenance as part of "Good Government";
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 25 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
- the feasibility of maintenance being undertaken by registered landowners; - the potential inclusion of fire hazard, as well as health hazard, as a justification for Council maintenance; - the potential need for additional funds, in the event of Council maintenance of private laneways.
The Administration was requested to investigate the above issues and provide further information to the next meeting of the Council to be held on Tuesday 26 November 1996. Members agreed that the recommendation be submitted to the Council for determination.
FURTHER REPORT (Post Committee Meeting, 12 November 1996)
Further work has been completed following the Committee discussions on the matter of management of private laneways over summer 1996/97. This work has been conducted by the Administration, and included the development of a flow chart for consideration of possible options. During this consideration, the following factors have been assessed.
Methods of Hazard Identification
The factor relates to any exercise which would require an inspection of all laneways to determine the extent of health and/or fire hazards in these laneways, with a related rating system for this extent.
Criteria for Hazard Assessment
Any hazard inspection would require a criteria for assessment. One model is to use a high, medium, low rating on the basis of the height of growth in the laneway.
Asset Ownership
This includes no only the ability to identify a registered owner for a laneway but also the ability to locate a particular owner.
Maintenance Method
This includes consideration of utilisation of internal resources versus an external contractor.
Funding Sources
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 26 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
This includes an examination of any compensated projects within the budget, as well as the availability of funds to support unbudgeted expenditure. Other sources of funding include contributions from laneway owners e.g. the Catholic Church.
Some options have been identified to address the problem of health/or fire hazards in laneways not owned by the Town of Cambridge. These options together with advantages and disadvantages are described below. Options:
Option 1 would be the maintenance of the status quo from a works point of view i.e. no work in private laneways for other than health reasons, together with a request for identified owners to inspect, remove hazards, and report on laneway conditions to the Town. Subsequent work under this option would include the completion of a laneway study and the reflection of the outcomes of this study in budget 1997/98. The advantages of this option are that no additional funds would be expended by the Town in financial year 1996/97. The major disadvantage with this option would be that the extent of hazard removal, particularly fire hazards, would be subject to action undertaken by nominated owners.
Option 2 would be the conduct of a limited one off maintenance exercise using external resources to remove fire hazards in private laneways, in priority order, based on a hazard identification exercise, with cost recovery where possible. The major advantage of this option would be that recognised fire hazards would be removed. The major disadvantage of this option would be that some additional funds would be required.
Option 3 would be to inspect and initiate hazard removal, preferably via registered owners, on an "as advised" basis. This would essentially be a reactive management approach, with the potential for some additional funds to accommodate any lack of action by owners. The advantage of this option would be that some hazard removal would occur, albeit of a piecemeal nature. The major disadvantage of this option would be that some additional funds would be required, to an amount acceptable to the Council.
Summary:
Further work has been conducted on the matter of hazard removal within private laneways, and three options identified for consideration. Guidance from the Council to the Administration
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 27 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
is now required so that this matter can be dealt with in the ensuing summer period.
Moved by Cr Berry, seconded by Cr O'Connor
That no maintenance of private laneways be carried out by the Council this financial year unless there is a declared health hazard.
During discussion, Cr Smith requested that this matter be referred back to the Technical Services Committee for further consideration of the Council's options.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 28 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Moved by Cr Smith, seconded by Cr Johnston
That the item relating to maintenance responsibility for private laneways in the Town of Cambridge be referred back to the Technical Services Committee for further consideration.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 29 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
TS96.6 DEPOT FACILITIES (File Reference: PRO0344)
BACKGROUND:
The Town had previously identified a need to operate a depot facility to support primarily the Technical Services functions of works and parks business, as well as other functions eg. Archive storage. A plan was prepared with key elements being the purchase of land at Lemnos Street, Shenton Park from Department of Land Administration (DOLA), and the subsequent establishment of a depot facility commensurate with the needs of the Town.
The Council at its meeting held on 24 October 1995, resolved as follows:
"That:-
(i) the purchase of Swan Location 12496 (Lemnos Street, Shenton Park) from the Department of Land Administration (DOLA) at a cost of $665,000 plus fees for use as a works depot site for the Town of Cambridge, be approved;
(ii) the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to:-
(a) negotiate with the Water Authority of Western Australia (WAWA) for the purchase of improvements which currently exist on the land;
(b) proceed with the application for the necessary approvals and calling of tenders for the design and construction works required for the establishment of the depot facility;
(iii) the expenditure in (i) and (ii) above be charged to Infrastructure funding."
The purchase of the land was progressed, together with the purchase of improvements from WAWA. The Council at its meeting held on 14 November 1995, resolved as follows:-
"That:-
(i) the most suitable tender being that submitted by Kevin Palassis Architects for the execution of design and contract
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 30 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
administration for the provision of the Town's Depot facility located at Lemnos Street, Shenton Park, for a lump sum of $36,540 be accepted;
(ii) the expenditure in (i) above be charged to Infrastructure Funding."
Following this, the design work proceeded, and tenders were called for various elements of the construction of the depot.
These tenders together with the commensurate Council approval date have been approved as follows:-
Hawk Developments (18 June 1996) $645,200 DJ & MB MacCormick (15 October 1996) $ 64,196
Work has progressed to the stage where the completion of the depot is scheduled for late November 1996, with subsequent transition of staff, plant and equipment from the interim facilities at City of Subiaco Depot and Perry Lakes to occur soon thereafter. It is now appropriate to finalise Council approval for outstanding funding associated with this project.
DETAILS:
The approved Infrastructure Schedule for purchase of items to establish the Town of Cambridge included Item 7.01 - Depot at a projected cost of $1,500,000. A subsequent allocation of $36,400 was obtained to cover rental costs at the interim depot. The current assessment of funds required for this project, based on previous expenditure, current committals and outstanding elements of the project is as follows:
Land - Purchase - Purchase $625,000 - Consultant Support $ 20,000 - Improvements $145,000
Sewerage - Consultant Fees $ 4,700 - Construction $ 63,000
Facilities - Design/Project Management $ 36,000
- Construction Contract $645,200
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 31 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
- Variations $ 56,000
Loose Furniture et al $ 20,000
Miscellaneous $ 70,000
TOTAL $1,684,000
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 32 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Explanatory notes are as follows:
Variations include provision for additional bituminising, landscaping, and building improvements.
Miscellaneous items include hire of City of Subiaco depot, shelving, work benches, drapes, legal fees, self storage hire, surveying, minor equipment, communications.
The funding gap based on the difference between funds required versus available funds has been identified as up to $148,000. Some of these funds had been identified recently, with confirmation of the remainder provided by the project manager at end October 1996.
COMMENT:
The Town has proceeded with the establishment of a depot facility at Lemnos Street, Shenton Park, and this is scheduled for completion late November 1996. The project team, managed by the Executive Manager Technical Services has adopted a stringent approach to the provision of capabilities within this facility. Notwithstanding this, some requirement exists for additional funds in excess of the previously identified infrastructure amount of $1,500,000 - an estimate developed in early 1995, prior to identification of land or associated facilities. It is now appropriate to seek Ministerial approval for these additional funds from Infrastructure.
Moved by Cr Berry, seconded by Cr O'Connor
That an approach be made to Minister for Local Government for additional funds up to $148,000 from within the Infrastructure Account for the establishment of the Council depot.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 33 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
TS96.7 CAMBRIDGE STREET/BIRKDALE STREET - TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS (File Reference: TES0298)
BACKGROUND:
Council has requested that a report be prepared for Committee consideration, discussing the traffic accidents at the intersection of Cambridge Street and Birkdale Street. The report was to identify the speed of traffic travelling eastwards in Cambridge Street as it approached Birkdale Street and the nature of the accidents at the intersection.
DETAILS:
A copy of the traffic accident statistics during the last five years from 1 August 1991 to 31 July 1996, has shown that there were twelve vehicle accidents. There is no clear indication as to the consistent cause of these accidents.
Five of the accidents were involving vehicles colliding at right angles to each other. Two were rear end accidents. One involved a vehicle turning right. One involved a vehicle hitting an object and two were designated as unknown causes. Two of the accidents involved vehicles that were being parked. Ten of the accidents occurred during daylight hours and eleven of the accidents occurred when the pavement was dry. Nine of the accidents involved property damage, two required medical treatment and one person was hospitalised. Six of the accidents involved vehicles travelling eastwards along Cambridge Street and seven of the accidents involved vehicles travelling northwards along Birkdale Street.
The eighty fifth percentile speed is 72kph for traffic travelling eastwards along Cambridge Street. The majority of vehicles travelling eastwards along Cambridge Street were travelling at speeds between 54 and 74kph. It is recognised that the 85% speed is close to the speed that the majority of vehicles recognise as a maximum level. This traffic speed and traffic speed characteristic is not unusual for distributor roads.
COMMENTS:
There is no clear pattern of traffic accidents at the intersection of Cambridge Street and Birkdale Street during the last five years. However, the most frequent occurrence of accident has been the four accidents that occurred in 1996, three of which were in May and one in July.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 34 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Factors contributing to the accidents include the nature of the layout of the road system, that is, the cross road intersection and the fact that this corresponds with a shopping centre where stop/start traffic is not only frequent at the intersection, but also for vehicles that are being parked at the kerb side.
The Traffic Police have been notified of Council's concern and the traffic accident and traffic speed statistics included in this report are familiar to them.
It is proposed that the Technical Services section continue to monitor accidents and traffic patterns at this intersection so that a consistent pattern can be established before preparing a plan for a solution.
Moved by Cr Berry, seconded by Cr O'Connor
That the traffic movements and parking habits at the intersection of Cambridge Street and Birkdale Street continue to be monitored, with a view to providing a safer traffic environment.
During discussion, Members asked a number of questions in relation to the intent of the motion and preferred options for traffic control measures.
Amendment
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr McConnell
That the motion be amended by the addition of the following clause:
"liaison be continued with Main Roads W.A. and the Police Service to identify solutions to reduce hazards or dangers at this intersection."
Amendment carried
The amended motion was then put and carried.
The motion, as carried, is as follows:-
That:-
(i) the traffic movements and parking habits at the intersection of Cambridge Street and Birkdale Street continue to be
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 35 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
monitored, with a view to providing a safer traffic environment;
(ii) liaison be continued with Main Roads W.A. and the Police Service to identify solutions to reduce hazards or dangers at this intersection.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 36 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
TS96.8 SCHOOL ZONE - TRAFFIC SPEED RESTRICTION SIGNS (File Reference: TES0102)
BACKGROUND:
Main Roads WA has been carrying out trials to assess the impact of designating restricted speed signs adjacent to schools. In the past, speed reduction signs have been installed where appropriate traffic management devices have been implemented. The traffic management devices have enforced the reduction of speed and the speed zone signs have reinforced the maximum speed. The usual speed limit at such an intersection has been designated at 40kph.
The proposed legislation places speed restriction signs adjacent to schools without the traffic management devices.
DETAILS:
School Zone Concept:
Main Roads WA has proposed a 40kph speed zone around schools. Trials have taken place. The necessary changes to traffic regulations were expected to be finalised in October 1996. It is anticipated that the implementation can now commence.
The installation of the school zone speed signs will be undertaken progressively. It is planned that each school will be approached through the Local Authority before installation begins. A timetable is currently being finalised which will see the installation of school zone precincts at over 300 primary schools during the next fifteen months.
All urban school frontage roads are suitable for the provision of school zone signs with the exception of high traffic volume arterial roads. The school zones are not compatible with the function and characteristics of this type of road. High volumes, high traffic density and competing information signs add to the difficulty of the task of the driver. Further restrictions on this type of road would be contrary to motorists expectations.
Priority for implementation will be based on the age of the children attending each school. Other priority criteria will be vehicle speeds and volumes on adjacent streets. Implementation will be at both Government and Private schools.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 37 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The school zones are in effect speed zones. The installation of school zones on public streets therefore requires the approval of the Commissioner for Main Roads. The sign will include firstly a school zone sign, underneath that will be a 40kph sign and underneath that will be the time at which this 40kph limit will be enforceable.
The proposed operating hours for the school zones will be 7.30am to 9.00am and 2.30pm to 4.00pm, with police enforcing the speed limit. These times will be operative on school days only. Penalties will be the same as currently applied for motorists exceeding the speed limit. At the end of a school zone, there will be a sign indicating end of school zone with a 60kph sign.
The actual lengths of school zones shall be determined from the needs of the individual school. Regard will be given to the type of road, traffic volume, traffic speed and visibility, as well as road condition.
Implementation:
Main Roads WA have provided the following information on implementation of the program:
The scope of work involves provision of 40kph signage. The program will be phased over three years, with Phase One involving signage for 300 schools in the Metropolitan area by end 1997. Schools for Phase One have been selected on a basis of ease for implementation eg. Local road access only. West Leederville Primary is the only school in Town of Cambridge included in Phase One. The cost of the program is $8 million. Legislation is scheduled for approval late November 1996. Details will be issued early December 1996.
COMMENT:
The implementation of school zone with speed restriction signs will be a significant step forward in traffic management. The new legislation indicates that there will not be a need for Council to spend money on traffic devices prior to the implementation of the 40kph speed zone adjacent to schools. This will be a considerable saving for the local authority. The signs will be erected by Main Roads WA during the next fifteen months.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 38 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
This information is forwarded to Council, further to a request by a Councillor. It will support many previous requests from Councillors for traffic speed control signs adjacent to schools throughout the Town.
Moved by Cr Berry, seconded by Cr O'Connor
That the report relating to proposed school zone vehicle speed limit arrangements be noted.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 39 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
TS96.9 PERRY LAKES STADIUM - TRACK IMPROVEMENT (File Reference PRO0069)
BACKGROUND:
The Council at its meeting held on 21 May 1996, considered a Notice of Motion concerning potential improvements to the athletics track at Perry Lakes Stadium. The resolution following this consideration was as follows:
"That the Town of Cambridge accept the $100,000 contribution from the State Government to upgrade and repair the Perry Lakes Athletics Track at a cost not to exceed $100,000."
The responsibility for the progress of this project has been given to the Executive Manager Technical Services. A Working Group comprising representatives of the Ministry of Sport and Recreation and Athletics Association of WA, as well as the Town of Cambridge, was formed.
The Council at its meeting held on 16 July 1996, resolved as follows:
"That:-
(i) the approval for the upgrade of the athletics track at Perry Lakes Stadium, utilising funds of $100,000, provided by the State Government be confirmed;
(ii) the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to appoint a Consultant for the project management of this activity, at a cost of up to $20,000, to be funded from the State Government allocation."
Subsequent to this meeting, the Chief Executive Officer has appointed Gutteridge Haskins and Davey Pty Ltd as the Consultant for the project management of this activity.
The Council, at its meeting held on 20 August 1996, resolved as follows:
"That in accordance with Section 5.43(b) of the Local Government Act 1995, the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to accept the most suitable tender for the improvement to the Perry Lakes Athletics Track, up to a total project cost not exceeding $100,000."
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 40 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DETAILS:
Subsequent to the meeting on 20 August 1996, tenders for the upgrade to the track were received and assessed by the project team. The recommended tenderer was Court Track and Field (WA) Pty Ltd., who submitted a conforming tender for the lump sum of $117,252. Given that this amount, coupled with project management fees, totalled approximately $130,000, a joint approach from Ministry of Sport and Recreation and Athletics WA to the State Government was made for additional funds. Additional funds were approved to an amount of $30,000, representing a total project allocation of $130,000. The recommended tenderer was approved, given the availability of additional funds, due to a need to expedite to project. This report now seeks to obtain Council endorsement to this action. No funding for the project has been provided by the Town of Cambridge.
COMMENT:
The contract has been authorised for the execution of improvements to the athletics track at Perry Lakes Stadium, for a lump sum of $117,252. These funds have been provided separately by the State Government for this work. Work will commence on 4 November 1996, with scheduled completion prior to the Pacific School Games, in December 1996. Funds of $50,000 have been advanced prior to payment of accounts. Council resolution is now required to endorse the expenditure on this project in excess of the previously authorised amount of $100,000.
Moved by Cr Berry, seconded by Cr O'Connor
That the expenditure on the improvement to the Perry Lakes Athletics Track, up to a total project cost not exceeding $130,000, be approved and all costs be borne by the State Government.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 41 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
TS96.10 ALTERNATE CHEMICALS AND METHODS FOR WEED CONTROL (File Reference: TES299)
BACKGROUND:
The Parks and Landscape section has recently been investigating alternatives to the existing methods of weed control which are detailed in the following report.
Currently a non selective herbicide called “Roundup” which contains the active constituent Glyphosate is used to control weeds in the following situations:
Kerblines; footpaths; around the base of trees, fencing and park furniture; garden beds.
DETAILS:
Assessment of Waipuna System
Council was approached recently by the state representative of Waipuna Australia to consider their system for use in the control of vegetation in the above situations. Their method of control uses superheated hot water applied to the foliage and surrounding soil of the unwanted plants. This process destroys the foliage and roots of the plants provided enough contact is made with the hot water.
The advantages of the Waipuna System is that there are no chemicals used and thus can be applied without fear of harming the environment or people. It would be reasonable to assume that there would be less hazards and hence less public concern associated with the use of the hot water treatment as opposed to the use of the Glyphosate based compound.
It should be noted however that Roundup is rated as only slightly toxic and if used according to State Health Authorities poses no risk to human health. All Council operations using this chemical are done according to relevant Council and State Government controls.
The biggest problem with using the Waipuna System is one of being cost effective. The total hourly cost of both the systems are about the same. The chemical method of control is however
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 42 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
approximately 3 to 5 times faster to cover the same area. Initial tests have also shown the Waipuna System requires two applications to attain the same level of control.
The Council currently spends about $100,000 per year using a combination of contractors and Council staff on the application of Roundup. To attain the same level of control the Waipuna System would require the expenditure of $600,000 to $1,000,000.
It is for the above reasons that it is recommended that Council continue to use Roundup for the control of weeds. This being due to it being the most cost effective method when compared with either mechanical means or by the use of the Waipuna System.
Roundup Biactive
Concern has been expressed in various circles recently linking the world wide reduction of amphibian numbers, namely frogs with the widespread use of Roundup. The problem apparently is linked with the surfactants used in the formulation rather than the active constituent which is Glyphosate.
In response to these concerns the manufacturer has produced a new product called Roundup Biactive. It uses the same active constituent but uses different surfactants. This new formulation greatly reduces the possible toxic effects on susceptible species.
The additional cost (2%) for the chemical which when considered in the context of the total spraying operation is insignificant. Council staff are now using this improved formulation. Negotiations are currently under way with the spraying contractor to also use the new chemical.
Ongoing Assessments
As part of its commitment to minimising the use of chemicals, the Parks and Landscape section will follow up the with the operators of the Waipuna System as to any efficiency improvements which will make it comparable with existing methods of weed control. There is continual liaison with both the parks and chemical industries as to alternative chemicals or methods which may further reduce environmental or health concerns and improve efficiencies.
Moved by Cr Berry, seconded by Cr O'Connor
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 43 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
That the report relating to alternative chemicals and methods for weed control be noted.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 44 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
TS96.11 1996 TOWN OF CAMBRIDGE GARDEN AWARDS (File Reference: CVC0015)
BACKGROUND:
The Council at its meeting held on 16 July 1996, approved the establishment of a Garden Competition within the Town, with a funding allocation of $3,000.
Advertisements were placed in the local newspapers and various Council offices, with the closing date for applicants being Friday 27 September 1996.
DETAILS:
Five nominations were received in the following categories:
2 x low maintenance gardens. 2 x high maintenance gardens 1 x heritage garden.
Because of the low number of applicants there was no requirement to short list. All five sites were visited by the Judges on Saturday 19 October 1996.
The judging panel consisted of the following members:
Manager Parks and Landscape - Ross Farlekas Councillor Pauline O'Connor Councillor Corinne MacRae Councillor Marlene Anderton.
Judging was based on various criteria including decorative value and design, layout, health and originality.
In order to maintain high standards and prestige of the competition, applicants had to achieve a mark of at least 75 out of a possible 100 points before they could be considered for a prize.
There were two applicants who scored sufficient points to be considered for first prizes in the categories of Best High Maintenance Garden and Best Low Maintenance Garden. The names of the successful nominations will be announced at a date to be advised.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 45 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
It is therefore recommended that:-
(i) first prize of $200 plus trophy, for Best High Maintenance Garden be awarded to the successful applicant for that category;
(ii) first prize of $200 plus trophy, for Best Low Maintenance Garden be awarded to the successful applicant for that category;
(iii) the costs in (i) and (ii) above be charged to Budget Item "Garden Competition";
(iv) the prizes be presented to successful applicants at a suitable venue to be determined by the Council.
Committee Meeting 12 November 1996
During discussion, Members requested that consideration be given to the revision of the nomination rules for 1997.
It was agreed that the prizes for the 1996 Town of Cambridge Garden Awards be presented to the successful applicants on the occasion of the Annual General Meeting of Electors to be held on Thursday 19 December 1996.
Moved by Cr Berry, seconded by Cr O'Connor
That:-
(i) first prize of $200 plus trophy, for Best High Maintenance Garden be awarded to the successful applicant for that category;
(ii) first prize of $200 plus trophy, for Best Low Maintenance Garden be awarded to the successful applicant for that category;
(iii) the costs in (i) and (ii) above be charged to Budget Item "Garden Competition";
(iv) the prizes be presented to the successful applicants at the Annual General Meeting of Electors to be held on Thursday 19 December 1996 at the Administration/Civic Centre.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 46 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
TS96.12 TECHNICAL SERVICES - PROJECT UPDATE (File Reference: TES0205)
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of this report is to provide updated information on a range of projects associated with the Technical Services business within the Town of Cambridge.
DETAILS:
Project update information is as follows:
Coastal Issues
Staff have undertaken a survey of the Town's coastal area, in the wake of the Gracetown tragedy, and have confirmed that the Town does not possess any hazards associated with unstable dunes at this stage.
Subiaco Redevelopment
Project staff from the Subiaco Redevelopment Authority have advised that no timeframe has been confirmed for any closure of the Hay Street Subway at this stage. Moreover, it is intended that discussions will be held with the Town's Administration prior to establishment of any arrangements concerning revised traffic routing during any subway closure.
Asset Management
The initial investigation has been completed by GHD, and a report on a suggested suite of tasks for execution by the Town in order to establish an asset management system will be provided by 22 November 1996.
West Coast Highway
The landscape revegetation contract for this project was awarded to Landscape Australia Pty Ltd. Landscape works have commenced with effect 6 November 1996. Tube, stock, planting and seeding will commence May/June 1997, when conditions are more favourable. The expected duration of the landscape contract is November 1996 to October 1999.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 47 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Roadwise
Information packages have been distributed to Elected Members on this program, and responses have been sought.
Lake Monger
Discussions have been held with the Centre for Water Research and CSIRO concerning confirmation of concepts for some limited implementation of elements of the Rehabilitation Plan. The next meeting of the Lake Monger Working Group is scheduled for 14 November 1996, commencing at 6.00pm.
Abbotsford Street - Verge Parking
An investigation has commenced on verge parking on the eastern side of Abbotsford Street, West Leederville, based on a recent request. A recommendation will be put to Technical Services Committee following the completion of this investigation.
Local Area Traffic Management
Registrations of interest have been sought from organisations capable of providing support on this project. Registrations close 21 November 1996. A flier to affected sections of the community will be distributed shortly in order to canvass registrations for participants in community consultative groups.
COMMENT:
This information is provided to ensure that Elected Members are conversant with recent developments on a range of projects associated with the Technical Services business.
Moved by Cr Berry, seconded by Cr O'Connor
That the report on the current situation with regard to a variety of Technical Services projects be received.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 48 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
The report of the Policy and Administration Committee Meeting held on 12 November, 1996 was submitted as under:-
1. ATTENDANCE
Present: Time of Time of Entering Leaving
Members:
Cr David A Johnston (Presiding Member) 7.34pm 8.40pm
Mayor Ross J Willcock 7.34pm 8.40pm Cr Marlene A Anderton 7.34pm 8.40pm Cr David G Berry 7.34pm 8.40pm Cr Pauline O'Connor 7.34pm 8.40pm
Observers:
Cr A Michael Moore 7.34pm 8.40pm Cr Kerry Smith 7.34pm 8.40pm
Officers:
Graham D Partridge, Chief Executive Officer Denise Ribbands, Administrative Officer (Committees) Linda Brnjich, Community Development Officer
Adjournments: Nil
Time meeting closed: 8.40pm
2. APOLOGIES
Nil
3. LEAVE OF ABSENCE
Nil
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 49 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
REPORTS
PA96.1 INVESTMENT POLICY (File Reference: POL 0006)
BACKGROUND:
The Council adopted the following policy providing guidelines on the investment of surplus funds at its meeting held on 12 September 1995.
OBJECTIVES
To maximise the interest earning potential of surplus funds held by the Council whilst maintaining a minimal exposure to risk and complying with Section 16 of the Trustees Act 1962.
POLICY STATEMENT
That the Council's surplus funds be invested with any one of the following financial institutions, provided that not more than 25 percent of available funds be placed with any one institution:-
Commonwealth Bank of Australia; Bank West; Westpac Bank; Town & Country Bank National Australia Bank; Advance Bank; ANZ Bank; Bank of Melbourne; Challenge Bank; St George Bank. Home Building Society
An investment report providing details of amounts invested with each institution and outlining financial performance to be provided to the Council at its first meeting of each month.
Due to the acquisition of the Challenge Bank by Westpac, Council resolved on 12 December 1995 that the limits specified in the Investment Policy be determined by the beneficial ownership of the institution concerned. This means that the total amount to be invested with Challenge Bank and Westpac Bank is 25% and not 25% each. This also applies to the ANZ Bank which owns Town & Country Bank.
Council has been approached by the Adelaide Bank, which has recently commenced operations in Western Australia, to include their institution on the Town's Investment list.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 50 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The purpose of this report is to update the Investment Policy and consider the inclusion of the Adelaide Bank on the Investment List.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 51 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The Policy will be amended by incorporating the decision by Council of 12 December 1995 regarding beneficial ownership and the possible addition of the Adelaide Bank to the Investment List.
DETAILS:
The foundation of the Adelaide Bank goes back over 100 years with the establishment of three building societies, Co-op; Hindmarsh and Adelaide Building Societies. These societies merged over time and in 1994 established the Adelaide Bank. The Bank has total assets of $3.12 billion with $2.63 billion (84%) of those assets being Loans, Advances and other receivables. Almost 80% ($2.08 billion) of these loans are held in secured residential mortgages. The town has received a copy of the Adelaide Bank's 1996 Annual Report which is available to Councillors on request.
The Adelaide Bank has only recently opened its offices in Perth but has not opened branches for day to day transactions. Banking services are provided at Australia Post Offices and electronic banking with EFTPOS and Automatic Teller Machines (ATM).
At present Council has investments with six financial institutions as detailed below:-
Amount Financial Institution Invested %
Commonwealth Bank $1,077,912 15.1 Home Building Society $841,098 11.8 Town & Country Bank $1,575,382 22.0 Challenge Bank $1,622,481 22.7 BankWest $1,641,327 22.9 National Australia Bank $400,000 5.6
Prior to investing funds with the Adelaide Bank, the interest rates offered must be considered competitive with the other financial institutions. The Administration's investment strategy is to place investment funds with the institution providing the highest interest rate at the time until the total amount placed with the institution approaches the maximum amount of 25%. Investments will then be placed with the institution with the next highest interest return. Note: A maximum of 15% is placed with Home Building Society.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 52 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 53 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
This strategy ensures that Council receives the highest return in accordance with the Investment Policy at the minimum risk. Funds would only be invested with Adelaide Bank if the interest rate quoted was competitive.
Moved by Cr Johnston, seconded by Cr O'Connor
That:-
(i) The Adelaide Bank be included on Council's authorised list of Investment bodies;
(ii) the Council's Investment Policy be amended as follows:-
OBJECTIVES
To maximise the interest earning potential of surplus funds held by the Council whilst maintaining a minimal exposure to risk and complying with Section 16 of the Trustees Act 1962.
POLICY STATEMENT
That the Council's surplus funds be invested with any one of the following financial institutions, provided that not more than 25 percent of available funds be placed with any one institution determined on the beneficial ownership of the ownership of the institution concerned:-
Commonwealth Bank of Australia; Bank West; Westpac Bank; Town & Country Bank; National Australia Bank; Advance Bank; ANZ Bank; Bank of Melbourne; Challenge Bank; St George Bank. Home Building Society Adelaide Bank
An investment report providing details of amounts invested with each institution and outlining financial performance to be provided to the Council at its next meeting after the end of each month.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 54 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
PA96.2 COMMUNITY PROJECTS FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE (ORGANISATIONS) - POLICY (File Reference: POL 0013)
BACKGROUND:
Due to recent changes within the services provided by the State Government which affect Council, and the large number of requests from community organisations for Council assistance, there have been a number of areas within Corporate and Customer Services that require policy guidelines and review to ensure a contemporary and uniform approach is taken by Council in the process of offering financial assistance to organisations.
It is the intention to review the following policies and incorporate these, with additional new policies, into a Community Projects, Financial Assistance (Organisations) Policy:
Policy 34, Financial Assistance - Organisations Policy 58, Kindergartens - Council Assistance Policy 57, Parent and Citizens’ Associations - Financial Assistance Policy 59, Welfare Donations - Approval of
DETAILS:
The two major areas of change by the State Government affecting Council within the past three years have been:-
WA Alive Funding (formerly the Community Sport and Recreation Facilities Fund:
The introduction of the annual WA Alive funding programme provided by the State Government has offered a planned approach to the funding of community sport and recreation projects within Western Australia and subsequently local government authorities. Local government authorities and community sport and recreation based groups are eligible to apply to the State Government for one third of the total cost of the project. The community group is expected to raise the remaining two thirds of the project cost.
Through this avenue many community groups are requesting financial assistance from Council to meet one third of the total project cost, in addition to that of the State Government’s contribution, to fund their projects. Verbal requests from community groups enquiring about the possibility of receiving Council assistance are received by Council staff on a regular
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 55 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
basis. Within its resources Council may not be able to commit the requested amount of money to community groups making application each year.
At present the only policy pertaining to this issue relates to the establishment of buildings, which provides Council staff and enquiring community groups with limited guidelines to follow. The current Policy No 34, Financial Assistance - Organisations has been circulated for the information of Members.
The introduction of a Council Community Projects, Financial Assistance (Organisations) Policy dealing with the amount of financial assistance Council may grant for a variety of projects, including the establishment of facilities, would assist Council staff in offering guidance to community groups as well as assisting the groups with the financial planning of such projects.
Responsibility of Pre-Primary Centres:
The State Government has now accepted full responsibility for Pre-Primary Centres and has phased in the introduction of the Full time Pre Primary Programme within Western Australia.
Currently all pre-primary centres within the Town are the responsibility of the Education Department under agreement with Council. The services are operated from Council buildings, however Council does not maintain or fund these programmes.
Due to these changes many of the clauses outlined in the current Policy are no longer relevant. Policy No. 58, Kindergartens - Council Assistance has been circulated for the information of members.
Other Council Policies for review which are relevant to the provision of financial assistance to community organisations are Policy No 57, Parent and Citizens’ Associations - Financial Assistance and Policy No 59, Welfare Donations - Approval of have also been circulated.
The Loan Guarantee Assistance section has been included to set guidelines for the requirements from Council when applying for funds from another source other than Council. Council Guarantees are currently available to community groups however, no formal policy has been adopted.
The School Assistance section has not changed from the previously adopted policy.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 56 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Council supports a number of organisations each year through the funding of various projects. At present the funding is made on an adhoc basis and there is a need for a contemporary and unified approach in the provision of financial assistance to community organisations.
The consolidated Policy relating to Financial Assistance for Community Projects is therefore recommended for consideration.
A Loan Guarantee Assistance section has been included in the policy to set guidelines for the requirements from Council when applying for funds from a source other than Council. Council Guarantees are currently available to community groups however, no formal policy has been adopted.
The School Assistance section has not changed from the previously adopted policy.
The Community Projects, Financial Assistance (Organisations) Policy would be seen to replace the previously mentioned existing policies:
Policy 34, Financial Assistance - Organisations Policy 58, Kindergartens - Council Assistance Policy 57, Parent and Citizens’ Associations - Financial Assistance Policy 59, Welfare Donations - Approval of
Moved by Cr Johnston, seconded by Cr O'Connor
That:-
(i) the following Policies be deleted from the Council Policy Manual:-
Policy 34 - Financial Assistance - Organisations Policy 58 - Kindergartens - Council Assistance Policy 57 - Parent and Citizens’ Associations - Financial Assistance Policy 59 - Welfare Donations - Approval of;
(ii) the following policy for Financial Assistance to Community Projects be adopted:-
COMMUNITY PROJECTS FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE (ORGANISATIONS)
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 57 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
OBJECTIVES
To declare the Council's willingness to consider funding sources to sporting, welfare, cultural, musical, educational or other community organisations endorsed by Council and to specify the terms and conditions on which such assistance may be forthcoming.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 58 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
POLICY STATEMENT
Council may consider providing financial assistance to community groups to assist in enhancing the conduct of their chosen activity.
Funding Conditions:
Particulars of the Council’s requirements relative to the granting of all financial assistance within this policy are identified below:-
(a) Applicants must be legally constituted, incorporated bodies and not-for-profit community organisations.
(b) Applications must be made by obtaining the relevant application form from the Council Administration Offices and completed in full prior to submission.
(c) On application a project budget and an audited financial statement from the previous two years must be produced by the organisation.
(d) On completion of the project, where a donation is granted for a specific purpose, for example purchase of equipment, the organisation must provide evidence of expenditure.
(e) On completion of the project, where a donation is in excess of $1,000 a financial statement signed by the Treasurer of the organisation must be produced showing a true and accurate record of the revenue and expenditure pertaining to the project.
(f) Organisations are requested to acknowledge the contributions which are made by the Council.
(g) The Organisation must comply with all Council policies and conditions, and Local Laws relating to the Project.
(h) Organisations must show a financial commitment to the project and have evidence to show the need for the project.
(i) Organisations are encouraged to apply for assistance from alternative funding sources where applicable. (eg. State Government, Lotteries Commission, Healthway).
(j) Funds will not be available for projects that commence before approvals are made.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 59 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The following categories have been identified as areas where Council may provide financial assistance. Specifications particular to each category are indicated below:
1. Facilities Assistance
The following guidelines will apply in considering financial assistance for the provision of facilities for community organisations:-
(a) For projects less than $50,000 financial assistance may be on an equal share basis up to a maximum of $5,000. Applications may be made at any time throughout the year.
(b) For projects greater than $50,000 financial assistance may be limited to 10% of the total project cost. Applications must be made prior to 30 November of each year and successful applicants will be granted funds in the following financial year.
(c) Financial Assistance will only be provided to those organisations whose membership includes representation of at least 40% of Town of Cambridge residents, or the services provided by the group directly benefit a substantial number of Cambridge residents. These aspect will be at the discretion of Council.
(d) Projects must be of a capital nature and financial assistance will not be provided for operational or maintenance items.
(e) Financial assistance will only be provided to each organisation once in every five years, upon request for a Council endorsed project.
(f) Financial assistance will be made available to successful applicants in the financial year following or a later nominated financial period.
(g) Any land owned or vested in the Council being set aside or allocated for the purpose of establishing facilities be conditional upon:-
(i) the land being built on within five years of being allocated, after a feasibility study has been submitted to and approved by the Council;
(ii) the premises being used solely for the direct activities of the organisation (or organisations, where joint
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 60 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
development has been approved) and not to be used or let out on hire to any other group or person without the prior written consent of the Council;
(iii) the building containing essential facilities for the primary purposes of the applicant organisation(s);
(iv) the organisation(s), when and if required by the Council, entering into a lease with the Town of Cambridge, containing terms and conditions approved by the Council relating to occupancy, maintenance and insurance. The lease may or may not require the approval of the Governor;
(v) the area to be leased to comprise the site for the proposed building and unless otherwise agreed, the surrounds to remain under the control, and be the responsibility, of the Council;
(vi) the organisation being encouraged to call for tenders for the project.
2. Loan Guarantee Assistance
If a club or organisation wishes to borrow funds from a source other than Council and requests that Council acts as guarantor Council may consider the request subject to the following:-
(i) The organisation leasing or occupying Council property.
(ii) The submission to Council of the following:-
A copy of the Minutes of a legally constituted meeting of the organisation showing the formal resolution to borrow the funds.
Copies of financial statements for the previous three years.
A copy of the proposed cash flow to repay the loan.
Full details of membership and a copy of the Constitution.
Any other information reasonably required by Council.
3. Welfare Assistance
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 61 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The following guidelines will apply in considering financial assistance for welfare organisations:-
(i) An advertisement will be placed in the relevant community newspapers annually inviting submissions for financial assistance from the Town of Cambridge. (ii) Organisations eligible to apply include those with religious or charitable objectives and/or community based non- profit groups providing a direct service to the residents of the district which demonstrably contribute to the well- being of the residents. The range of service areas considered for donations may include:-
Community Information and Support Services; Youth Services; Employment Services; Migrant Services Services providing emergency relief for low income persons; Aged services Learning Centres;
(iii) Projects can be either one off establishment grants or a grant or donation to assist with service provision and/or purchase of equipment.
(iv) Financial assistance will be made available to successful applicants within the year of application.
4. School Assistance
It is the Council’s belief that it is not its function to provide financial assistance for the development of school facilities, and further that no work of this nature should be carried out by the Council unless the estimated cost of the project is paid in advance.
In light of the above, financial assistance will not be granted for the development of school grounds.
5. Pre - Primary Centres Assistance
(i) In view of the State Government accepting full responsibility for the Pre-Primary Centres, financial assistance will not be granted by Council.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 62 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
(ii) All Pre-Primary buildings established on the Council’s property shall be made the subject of an agreement drawn up by the Town Solicitors defining the conditions of occupation, control and use, and containing the proviso that any moveable property or equipment shall be vested in the Council, and such agreement shall be signed by all parties.
(iii) Plans and specifications for the building shall be first approved by the Council.
Carried
PA96.3 APPLICATIONS FOR ASSISTANCE TO SPORT/RECREATION REPRESENTATIVES - POLICY (File Reference: POL 0013)
BACKGROUND:
Councils are often requested to provide financial support to individuals who are representing the State or Nation in interstate or overseas championships. To facilitate these requests an amount of $1,000 was allocated in the 1996/97 Budget. It is appropriate that an amount of $100 be allocated per successful applicant.
DETAILS:
The program will be advertised at the commencement of the summer and winter seasons. A total of five applicants only will be selected for each round. If there are additional funds available a greater amount than five applicants may be considered in the second round.
The proposed policy is as follows:-
APPLICATIONS FOR ASSISTANCE TO SPORT/RECREATION REPRESENTATIVES
An application from an individual who has been selected to represent the State or Nation in interstate or overseas championships in sport and recreational activities may be granted a donation of $100 towards travel costs incurred in the representation provided:-
1. The applicant is a resident of the Town of Cambridge.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 63 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
2. The application is made in writing, and is supported by documentation from the relevant governing association.
3. No more than one application is received each year from any individual.
4. As the twice yearly rounds of applications may disadvantage some otherwise eligible applicants, retrospective (within 6 months) applications will be considered.
It is also recommended that the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to approve applications provided all necessary criteria are met. A report will be circulated to Elected Members on a regular basis advising of the successful applicants.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 64 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Committee Meeting - 12 November 1996
During discussion, Members agreed that financial assistance will not be provided to applicants whose travel costs are fully reimbursed by another body.
Moved by Cr Johnston, seconded by Cr O'Connor
That:-
(i) the following policy relating to Applications for Assistance to Sport/Recreation representatives, be adopted:-
APPLICATIONS FOR ASSISTANCE TO SPORT/RECREATION REPRESENTATIVES
OBJECTIVES
Declaration of Council’s willingness to consider financial assistance to individuals as specified below to recognise excellence in sport at state level or higher.
POLICY STATEMENT
An application from an individual who has been selected to represent the State or Nation in interstate or overseas championships in sport and recreational activities may be granted a donation of $100 towards travel costs incurred in the representation provided:-
(a) The applicant is a resident of the Town of Cambridge;
(b) The application is made in writing, and is supported by documentation from the relevant governing association;
(c) No more than one application is received each year from any individual;
(d) As the twice yearly rounds of applications may disadvantage some otherwise eligible applicants, retrospective (within 6 months) applications will be considered;
(e) The applicants costs are not fully reimbursed by another body;
(ii) the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to approve applications, provided all necessary criteria are met.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 65 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
PA96.4 LOCAL GOVERNMENT STRUCTURAL REFORM (File Reference: ORG 0027)
BACKGROUND:
As a result of recent media comments attributed to the Minister for Local Government, and statements made by Mr Rob Rowell, Chairman of the Local Government Advisory Board during his recent visit to Albany, the Shire of Albany addressed the structural reform process at its meeting on 25 September 1996.
The Shire of Albany Council expressed its concern that "both the Minister and the Chairman appeared to have adopted preconceived opinions as to what the likely outcome of the structural reform process will be, and in particular the Advisory Board's assessment of the boundaries and service delivery arrangements of the so called "doughnut Councils".
Following considerable deliberation the Shire Council resolved:
"1. That the Shire of Albany write to the Premier, the Minister for Local Government, local members of State Parliament, the Leader of the Opposition and all other Local Government authorities and express its deep concern over comments made by the Minister for Local Government relating to the contents of the Local Government Structural Reform Advisory Committee's report and in particular those comments relating to the so called "doughnut" Councils, which appear to pre-empt the outcome of the Local Government Advisory Board's findings with regard to these Councils.
2. That the Minister for Local Government be requested to:-
(a) explain the intent of his comments with regard to the "doughnut" Councils.
(b) explain why the Minister appears to have adopted his current position with regard to the "doughnut" Councils particularly the Town and Shire of Albany, without waiting for these Councils to respond to the SRAC report in accordance with his own request.
(c) confirm that the Shire of Albany will be given a fair hearing before the Local Government Advisory Board and that the time and expense taken to prepare and submit a report in response to the SARCO Report, in accordance with the Minister's request, is not a futile exercise that will fall on deaf ears.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 66 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
3. That a transcript of the Radio interview between the ABC's John Cecile and Mr Rob Rowell, Chairman of the Local Government Advisory Board be forwarded to the Minister and in view of the
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 67 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
comments made by Mr Rowell, Council express a vote of no confidence in his capacity to Chair the Board in a receptive and unbiased manner.
4. That Council encourage other Councils labelled as "doughnut" Councils, to support this vote of no confidence.
5. That Council seek from the Minister for Local Government an assurance that any changes recommended by the Local Government Advisory Board are put to the Electors of the municipality at the Ballot Box to allow them the fundamental democratic right to a voice in the future of their Shire.
The Chief Executive Officer of the Shire of Albany has now written seeking the support of the Town of Cambridge in ensuring that all Local Governments are given a fair and receptive hearing before the Local Government Advisory Board and that the Minister for Local Government provides the electors of all affected Councils with an opportunity to have a say in the future of their Local Government.
Moved by Cr Johnston, seconded by Cr O'Connor
That:-
(i) the report relating to the statement from the Shire of Albany concerning the Local Government Structural Reform proposals be received;
(ii) the Town of Albany be advised that consideration in regard to the Structural Reform process is a matter for individual local governments and the Town of Cambridge does not wish to make any comment or submissions in relation to other Local Government Authorities at this time.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 68 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
PA96.5 DOG AMENDMENT ACT 1996 (File Reference: LEG 0016)
BACKGROUND:
The Minister for Local Government has advised that the Dog Amendment Act 1996 was passed by Parliament on 27 June 1996 and came into operation on 14 September 1996.
Officers of the Department of Local Government have also been working on consequential amendments to the Dog Regulations with a view to the Amendment Act and the Regulations coming into operation at the same time.
DETAILS:
The amendments to the Act specifically give local governments new powers to act against irresponsible owners and impose tight controls on dangerous dogs.
Local government is now able to declare individual dogs "dangerous" for attacking or repeatedly rushing, threatening or chasing a person, animal or vehicle. A declared dangerous dog must then be muzzled at all times when in a public place. Further restrictions may be imposed such as requiring the dog to be kept in an escape proof enclosure and for all entrances to the premises to have dangerous dog signs displayed.
Owners can appeal to the relevant local government or the Local Court against a dangerous dog declaration.
All maximum penalties under the Act have been substantially increased with the penalty for a dog attack now $10,000 (was $1,000) and for inciting a dog to attack $10,000 and 12 months gaol (was $2,000). The penalty for not complying with a dangerous dog declaration order is $4,000.
Amendments to the Regulations have also substantially increased all modified penalties for which an infringement notice may be issued. The on-the-spot fine for a dog off a leash is now $100. In addition there are various higher modified penalties for dangerous dog offences. It will now be necessary for the Town to re-examine infringement penalty levels for offences committed under the Town of Cambridge Local Law No. 22 relating to dogs. This legislation covers aspects such as
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 69 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
inadequate fencing, dogs on business premises and kennel establishments.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 70 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The Department of Local Government has provided detailed information of these matters when amendments to all householders and local governments.
Moved by Cr Johnston, seconded by Cr O'Connor
That the report relating to the introduction of the Dog Amendment Act 1996 be received.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 71 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
PA96.6 WESTERN SUBURBS LOCAL DRUG ACTION GROUP (File Reference: CMS 0040)
BACKGROUND:
A public meeting, organised by the Rotary Club, was held on Wednesday 9 October, 1996 to explore the opportunity to form a Local Drug Action Group in the western suburbs. The meeting was chaired by Dr Elizabeth Constable MLA, and addressed by Terry Murphy from the Task Force on Drug Abuse, Ministry of the Premier and Cabinet.
Unfortunately the Town of Cambridge was not advised of the meeting and has not received an invitation to attend this or any future meetings. Contact has now been made with the Group seeking that a formal request be submitted for the Council to participate.
The meeting was provided with information about the extent of drug abuse, the State's comprehensive drug abuse control strategy following the recommendations of the Task Force on Drug Abuse, and the role of Local Drug Action Groups.
Discussion highlighted a number of local issues and potential areas of local action which are outlined in the information sheet as circulated. The meeting resolved to form a Local Drug Action Group in the western suburbs and agreed that participants would reconvene on Tuesday 29 October 1996 to plan activities. No advice has been received to date regarding outcomes arising from that meeting.
Moved by Cr Johnston, seconded by Cr O'Connor
That the report on the Western Suburbs Public Meeting to Form a Drug Action Group be received.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 72 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
PA96.7 PROPOSED LOCALITY OF WEST LEEDERVILLE (File Reference: CMS 0052)
BACKGROUND:
At the Development and Environmental Services Committee meeting held on 9 July 1996, a request was made by an Elected Member that West Leederville and not Leederville be used as a locality name by the Council when referring to that area. A subsequent request has also been submitted by a resident of the area as follows:-
We, who live in that area with a school, hall, memorial gardens and a Post Office by that name do not appreciate being included in listings pertaining to a neighbouring township. Insurance companies (including RAC) lump us together with Leederville, to our disadvantage, as Vincent has a high crime rate. We are proud to be part of Cambridge of which we are a forebear on the east flank of new Subiaco…"
DETAILS:
Whilst not necessarily agreeing with all the sentiments contained in the request, the suggestion to formally rename the western end of Leederville is considered to have merit.
Enquiries made with the Geographic Names Committee of the Department of Land Administration reveal that the locality name West Leederville is not presently officially recognised even though there is a post office using that name in Cambridge Street. To further cloud the issue, the Geographic Names Committee have also advised that the West Leederville Railway Station is located in the City of Subiaco.
It is suggested that the area proposed for naming as West Leederville be the area bounded by Loftus Street and the Freeway to the east, with the northern, southern and western boundaries remaining as part Lake Monger Drive, Kavanagh Street, Joseph Street, Cambridge Street, McCourt Street and Railway Parade.
The Geographic Names Committee has advised that the Council will need to endorse a report detailing why the change has been requested, an indication of public attitude to the change and details of consultation with those affected by the change. In order for this process to commence, an indication of support from the Council is required. Should the matter proceed, there will be some expenditure involved in advertising the proposal
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 73 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
and seeking comment from those affected residents and ratepayers.
It is therefore recommended that consideration be given to renaming the portion of Leederville located west of Loftus Street and the Mitchell Freeway and bounded by part Lake Monger Drive, Kavanagh Street, Joseph Street, Cambridge Street, McCourt Street and Railway Parade, as West Leederville.
Moved by Cr Johnston, seconded by Cr O'Connor
That:-
(i) it be recommended that the portion of Leederville located west of Loftus Street and the Mitchell Freeway and bounded by part Lake Monger Drive, Kavanagh Street, Joseph Street, Cambridge Street, McCourt Street and Railway Parade be renamed as West Leederville;
(ii) appropriate action be taken by the Administration to survey residents in the area and prepare a submission to the Geographic Names Committee of the Department of Land Administration seeking the change in locality name from Leederville to West Leederville.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 74 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
PA96.8 DELEGATED AUTHORITY - 1996/97 CHRISTMAS RECESS (File Reference: ADM 0033)
BACKGROUND:
In accordance with the resolution of the Council at its meeting held on 15 October 1996, the Council will be in recess from its last meeting of the year on 17 December 1996 to the first Committee meetings for 1997 to be held on 11 February.
It would therefore be prudent to make arrangements to enable urgent items of business which may arise during that period to be dealt with.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil
DETAILS:
Arrangements made by the Council for the 1995/96 Christmas recess were as follows:
The powers and duties of the Council, with the exception of the power to borrow money or impose rates, were delegated to the Chief Executive Officer provided that:-
(i) the action taken was only in accordance with the officers recommendation;
(ii) a majority of the four Ward members of the respective Wards were in agreement with the recommendation;
(iii) where the recommendation was for an item of business of a general nature, a majority of all elected members were in agreement;
(iv) a report summarising the items of business dealt with by delegated authority be submitted for information to the next Council meeting.
This arrangement worked satisfactorily with no major problems being encountered, however, availability of members is important to this procedure.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 75 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
During the last Christmas recess, it was agreed that the Chief Executive Officer be advised by Councillors individually if they are to be absent and that a contact person be nominated if they wish to be consulted on matters relating to delegated authority.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 76 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The Local Government Act 1995 continues the Council's ability to delegate some powers and duties to the Chief Executive Officer. Section 5.42 states:-
"a local government may delegate to the Chief Executive Officer (by absolute majority) the exercise of any of its powers or the discharge of any of its duties under this Act other than those referred to in Section 5.43 and this power of delegation."
Section 5.43 of the Act specifies those powers and duties unable to be delegated to a Chief Executive Officer. The Act also states that the delegation may be general or as otherwise provided in the instrument of delegation.
Accordingly, it is recommended that in accordance under Section 5.42 of the Local Government Act 1995, the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to exercise the powers and duties of the Council, other than those referred to in Section 5.43, subject to the following:-
(i) the action taken being only in accordance with the officers recommendation;
(ii) a majority of the four Ward members of the respective Wards being in agreement with the recommendation;
(iii) where the recommendation is for an item of business of a general nature, a majority of all elected members being in agreement;
(iv) a report summarising the items of business dealt with by delegated authority be submitted for information to the next Council meeting.
Moved by Cr Johnston, seconded by Cr O'Connor
That in accordance with Section 5.42 of the Local Government Act 1995, the Chief Executive Officer be AUTHORISED BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY, to exercise the powers and duties of the Council, other than those referred to in Section 5.43, of the Act provided:-
(i) the action taken is only in accordance with the officers recommendation;
(ii) a majority of the four Ward members of the respective Wards are in agreement with the recommendation;
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 77 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
(iii) where the recommendation is for an item of business of a general nature, a majority of all elected members are in agreement;
(iv) a report summarising the items of business dealt with by delegated authority is submitted for information to the next Council meeting to be held on 25 February 1997.
Carried BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 78 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
PA96.9 ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING OF ELECTORS (File Reference: ADM 0087)
BACKGROUND:
The Local Government Act requires that a general meeting of the electors of a district is to be held once every financial year.
An annual report is presently being prepared for the 1995/96 financial year, detailing the audited financial accounts for the year, together with a report from the Mayor, the Chief Executive Officer and details of the Town's principal activities for the period.
DETAILS:
It is proposed that the Annual General Meeting of Electors for 1995/96 be held at 5.30 pm on Thursday 19 December 1996. Notice of time, day and place of the meeting must be advertised at least 14 days prior to the meeting. It is proposed that the Annual Report and Annual Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 1996 be received at the meeting.
Moved by Cr Johnston, seconded by Cr O'Connor
That the Annual General Meeting of Electors of the Town of Cambridge be held at 5.30 pm on Thursday 19 December 1996 at the Administration/Civic Centre, 1 Bold Park Drive, Floreat.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 79 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
PA96.10 PERFORMANCE REVIEW (STATUTORY): CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER (File Reference: HRE 0001)
BACKGROUND:
The Chief Executive Officer is employed under a Deed of Contract for a fixed term of five years. The contract requires that an annual performance review be conducted on behalf of the Town, by the Mayor and a Committee of the Council.
Section 5.38 of the Local Government Act 1995 provides that each employee’s performance (including the Chief Executive Officer) is to be reviewed at least once in relation to every year of employment.
The Local Government Act requires all appointments as Senior Officers to be by contract.
Laid on the table for information, are copies of the Duty Statement and Performance Criteria, as they relate to the Chief Executive Officer’s position.
All Local Government in Western Australia are required, pursuant to the Local Government Act 1995, to conduct employee performance reviews for Chief Executive Officers.
It is therefore recommended that the Mayor and a Committee, comprising of two Elected Members, one from each Ward, conduct the Chief Executive Officer’s performance review on behalf of the Council.
Council Meeting 26 November 1996
During discussion, nominations for Committee membership were received for Crs McConnell and O'Connor (Wembley Ward) and Crs Moore and Johnston (Coast Ward). The Mayor then conducted an open ballot which resulted as follows:-
Wembley Ward: Cr McConnell 4 Cr O'Connor 5 Coast Ward: Cr Moore 5 Cr Johnston 4
Moved by Cr Johnston, seconded by Cr O'Connor
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 80 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
That the Mayor and a committee comprising Crs O'Connor and Moore, conduct the Chief Executive Officer's performance review on behalf of the Council.
Carried
PA96.11 WAMA MEMBER - BUSH FIRES BOARD OF WA (File Reference: ORG0088)
BACKGROUND:
Qualifications: Elected Member with an interest and/or experience in bush fire control.
Term: Three (3) years.
Commences: Upon appointment.
Reason for Vacancy: Resignation of current Member
Name of Present Member: Cr Ken Pech (Gnowangerup)
Meetings: Monthly
Location: Bush Fires Board Headquarters 201 Kent Street, Kensington Day/Time Second Thursday on month at 9.00am Meeting Fee: Half day sitting fee and travelling allowance Duration: Three hours
Terms of Reference: The terms of reference are prescribed in the Bush Fires Act.
Committee Membership: . Conservation and Land Management representative . WA Fire & Rescue representative . Police Department representative . Volunteer Association representatives . WA Planning Commission representative
Appointments are conditional on the understanding that nominees and delegates will resign when their entitlements terminates - that is they are no longer elected members or serving officers of Local Government. This ensures that the WAMA representative is always active in Local Government as an elected member or serving officer.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 81 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Moved by Cr Johnston, seconded by Cr O'Connor
That the request for the nomination of a Member to the Bush Fires Board be received.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 82 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
PA96.12 TWO LGA MEMBERS - NORTH METROPOLITAN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT ORGANISATION (File Reference: ORG0111)
BACKGROUND:
Qualifications: Elected Members from Northern Metropolitan Councils with an interest and/or experience in regional economic development initiatives/regional and industrial growth.
Term: One year
Commences: December 1996
Reason for Vacancy: End of term for current members
Name of Present Member: Cr Charlie Gregorini (Shire of Swan) Cr Elizabeth Taylor (Shire of Kalamunda)
Meetings: Location: City of Bayswater (may change) Day/Time First Tuesday every month, 6.00pm Meeting Fee: Sitting Fee and Travel Allowance paid Duration: Approximately two hours
Terms of Reference: As per Constitution and Standing Orders
Committee Membership: Representatives from: . Business . Local Government . Education and Training . Unions . State and Federal Government
Appointments are conditional on the understanding that nominees and delegates will resign when their entitlements terminates - that is they are no longer elected members or serving officers of Local Government. This ensures that the WAMA representative is always active in Local Government as an elected member or serving officer.
Moved by Cr Johnston, seconded by Cr O'Connor
That the request for the nomination of two LGA Members to the Northern Metropolitan Regional Development Organisation be received.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 83 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 84 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
CORPORATE AND CUSTOMER SERVICES
The report of the Corporate and Customer Services Committee Meeting held on 18 November, 1996 was submitted as under:-
1. ATTENDANCE
Present: Time of Time of Entering Leaving
Members:
Cr Michael Moore (Presiding Member) 5.37pm 7.15pm
Cr Corinne MacRae 5.37pm 7.15pm Cr Robina McConnell 5.37pm 7.15pm Cr Kerry Smith 5.38pm 7.15pm
Observers:
Cr Marlene Anderton 5.37pm 6.28pm Cr David Johnston 5.37pm 6.37pm
Officers:
Graham D Partridge, Chief Executive Officer Jason Buckley, Executive Director Corporate and Customer Services Denise Ribbands, Administrative Officer (Committees) Linda Brnjich, Community Development Officer
Adjournments: Nil
Time meeting closed: 7.15pm
2. APOLOGIES
Mayor Ross J Willcock
3. LEAVE OF ABSENCE
Nil
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 85 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
REPORTS
CCS96.1 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD ENDED 30 SEPTEMBER 1996 AND 31 OCTOBER 1996 (File Reference: FIM0026)
BACKGROUND:
The Committee and Management Financial Statements for the period ended 30 September 1996 and 31 October 1996 (as circulated with the notice paper) have now been produced.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil
Committee Meeting 26 November 1996
During discussion, the Administration was requested to report on the October 1996 budget variances to the next meeting of the Council to be held on Tuesday 26 November 1996.
Moved by Cr Moore, seconded by Cr MacRae
That both the Committee and Management Financial Statements for the periods ended 30 September 1996 and 31 October 1996 be received.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 86 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
CCS96.2 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED 30 JUNE 1996 (File Reference: FIN0026)
BACKGROUND:
The Council has now produced its Annual Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 1996.
The statements have been audited but not as yet signed off. A final overview is being carried out by the Audit Partner and Manager. Only minor changes, if any, are envisaged.
Copies of the draft Annual Accounts have been circulated with the Notice Paper.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil
DETAILS:
The accounts provide for Total Equity of $23,287,234 which is made up of an accumulated surplus of $20,830,010 and Reserves of $2,457,224. A summary of the Balance Sheet is provided below:-
1995 1996 Current Assets $4,499,783 $6,034,486 Current Liabilities $1,975,090 $2,769,588
Net Current Assets $2,524,693 $3,264,898
Non Current Assets $11,712,489 $20,090,470 Non Current Liabilities $10,651 $68,134
Net Assets $14,226,531 $23,287,234
Equity Accumulated Surplus $13,618,301 $20,830,010 Reserves $608,230 $2,457,224
TOTAL EQUITY $14,226,531 $23,287,234
A substantial amount of Equity is made up of abnormal items not related to the normal operating activities of the Town during 1995/96. These contributions are detailed below:-
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 87 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
1995 1996 Reserves and Carried Forward Works $1,929,295 0 Fixed Assets within Town prior to 1/7/94 $8,023,109 0 Fixed Assets purchased under $2,936,549 $8,029,176 Infrastructure Account Funds transferred under Minister's Directio - $1,000,000 Fixed assets purchased under Infrastruc - ($101,381) subsequently written off Fixed Assets contributed by Joan Watters - $137,162 Centre $12,888,953 $9,064,957
Plus change in net assets resulting from Operations Before Abnormal Items $1337,578 $41,441 TOTAL EQUITY $14,226,531 $9,106,398
Infrastructure purchases made during 30 June 1996. Infrastructure purchases will continue until all purchases are completed in accordance with the approved list of purchases totalling $12,488,671.
The Operating Statement is summarised below:-
1995 1996 Operating Revenues $9,872,850 *$11,428,978 Operating Expenses $8,535,272 $11,387,537
Change in Net Assets resulting from operations before Abnormal Items $1,337,578 $41,441
Abnormal Items and Extraordinary Items $12,888,953 $9,064,957
Change in Net Assets resulting from Opera $14,226,531 $9,106,398
The Local Government Act requires the Council to carry forward any cash surpluses into the next financial period. In its 1996/97 budget the Council provided for $619,200 to be brought forward as a cash surplus to fund incomplete operating and capital projects. The Management Statements circulated with this Agenda outline the cash surplus as at 30 June 1996 to be brought forward into 1996/97.
This detail is shown on the Rate Setting Statement and is summarised below:-
1995 1996 Sums Required (i.e. expenditure) $10,296,190 *$13,771,882 Sums Available (i.e. revenue) $6,068,868 *$8,183,796 Amount Required from Rates $3,906,462 $5,588,086
Rates Actually Levied $5,812,274 $6,185,309
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 88 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Current Position Surplus $1,905,812 $597,223
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 89 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
* These amounts are net of any cash items such as Depreciation and non cash contributions i.e. assets transferred from the City of Perth.
This means that the Council has $597,223 in surplus funds at 30 June 1996.
The Council has a contingent liability recorded in its accounts of $1,147,599 which represents City of Perth service charges of $914,565 and excess plant hire charges of $233,034 respectively, in dispute.
At this time this dispute has not been resolved and therefore the amount is recorded as a contingent liability against the Town. As such this amount is not recorded in the actual financial statements and is not taken into account within the surplus of $597,223. If the City of Perth wish to claim the disputed Service Agreement and excess plant hire charge amounts from the Town, it will be necessary for them to commence legal proceedings. The Town of Cambridge denies any liability in this regard and has advised the City of Perth accordingly.
Moved by Cr Moore, seconded by Cr MacRae
That:-
(i) the Annual Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 1996 as circulated and laid on the table, be adopted, subject to minor variations;
(ii) the current position surplus of $597,223 be brought forward into the 1996/97 financial period to fund incomplete operating and capital projects.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 90 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
CCS96.3 ACCOUNTS FOR PAYMENT (File Reference: FIN0049)
Moved by Cr Moore, seconded by Cr MacRae
That in accordance with Regulation 13(2) of the Local Government (Financial Managment) 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:-
Municipal Details Amount V400407 Recoup Advance Account V004840-V004869 $29,013.36 V400408 Investment Commonwealth Bank $200,672.26 V400409 Investment Challenge Bank $200,000.00 V400410 Investment Town & Country Bank $200,000.00 V400411 Investment Home Building Society $200,000.00 V400412 Investment BankWest $200,000.00 V400413 Investment Town & Country Bank $200,000.00 V400414 Investment Challenge Bank $200,000.00 V400415 Recoup Advance Account V004870- V004909 $84,231.75 V400416 Recoup Advance Account Wages Transfer (11/10/96 $102,920.77 V400417 Recoup Advance Account V004910- V004966 $55,265.23 V400418 Recoup Advance Account V004967- V005002 $88,918.65 V400419 Recoup Advance Account Wages Transfer (25/10/96 $110,517.93 V400420 Recoup Advance Account V005003- V005164 $341,082.39 V400421 Recoup Advance Account V005165 - V005191 $136,261.84 V400422 Recoup Advance Account Wages Transfer (8/11/96) $101,954.61 V400423 Recoup Advance Account V005192- V005408 $343,268.95 Total $2,794,107.74
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 91 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
CCS96.4 WRITE OFF PENALTY INTEREST - 1995/96 FINANCIAL YEAR (File Reference: FIN0019)
BACKGROUND:
The Council at its meeting held on Tuesday 8 August 1995 resolved that:-
“a penalty of 10% be charged on rates which are outstanding as at 31 January 1996 or three months from the date of the assessment notice, whichever is the later date, also the penalty shall not apply to pensioners.”
Accordingly on 1 February 1996 a 10% penalty was imposed on all rates in arrears as at 31 January 1996 in accordance with Section 550A of the Local Government Act 1960.
It has been brought to the Council’s attention that the incorrect address for the serving of notices was held on Council’s database for various assessments which resulted in both the first Notice of Valuation and Rate and the first Final Rate Notice issued on a number of properties, not being received by the respective ratepayers.
This data was transferred from the City of Perth Computer records incorrectly, and occurred as a result of the change in computer systems by the City of Perth prior to Council taking up the data. Although most of the errors were rectified after the first Notice of Valuation and Rate were issued, it was impossible for the Council to identify which notices were still yet to be received by ratepayers.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil.
DETAILS:
The incorrect address for the serving of notices was held on the following property resulting in the rate notice not being received by the ratepayer and a 10% penalty being imposed on 1 February 1996.
ASSESSMENT NO. PROPERTY ADDRESS PROPERTY PENALTY OWNER AMOUNT 1—415-005600 77 Glengariff Drive N J Lyncy $72.38
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 92 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Floreat WA 6014 TOTAL $72.38
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 93 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
COMMENTS:
It is recommended that as Council held incorrect addresses due to inaccurate data conversion for the serving of rate notices on the above property resulting in the ratepayers not receiving their rate notices, the penalty interest raised on 1 February 1996 totalling $72.38 be cancelled.
It should be noted that rate penalties should not be written off if the property addresses held by the Council were correctly converted from the City of Perth records. Rate penalties levied under the Local Government Act are statutory charges and should not be written off unless the Council was at fault for rate notices not being received.
Moved by Cr Moore, seconded by Cr MacRae
That penalty interest imposed in relation to the property at 77 Glengariff Drive, Floreat raised on 1 February 1996 and totalling $72.38 be written off.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 94 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
CCS96.5 INVESTMENT SCHEDULE AS AT 31 OCTOBER 1996
(FILE REFERENCE: FIN0038)
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of this report is 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).
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 upon the maturity of each investment and then compounded unless the funds are required for Council purposes.
POLICY 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 at its first meeting of each month.
DETAILS:
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 % 1996/97 31/10/96 General $200,000 $55,148 27.6% Reserves $203,600 $41,567 20.4% TOTAL $403,600 $96,715 24.0%
Moved by Cr Moore, seconded by Cr MacRae
That the Investment Schedule as at 31 October 1996 as attached to and forming part of the Notice Paper, be received.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 95 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
CCS96.6 DOCUMENTS SEALED (File Reference: ADM0039)
BACKGROUND:
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.
16 October Registration of the name "Town of Cambridge 1 original 1996 Social Club Inc.
29 October Deed of Variation of Constitution Admitting 7 originals 1996 New Municipalities for Mindarie Regional Council
6 November Wembley Golf Complex Redevelopment of New 2 originals 1996 Course Grassing
Moved by Cr Moore, seconded by Cr MacRae
That it be noted that since 17 October 1996 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 this Notice Paper.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 96 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
CCS96.7 CITY BEACH CIVIC CENTRE - LEASE TO WEST COAST BRIDGE CLUB (INC) (File Reference: PRO0122)
BACKGROUND:
The Council at its meeting held on 26 September 1995, resolved to grant the West Coast Bridge Club a lease for a three year period to allow for a study of the suitability of the West Coast Bridge Club and the City Beach Bowling Club becoming joint tenants of the City Beach Bowling Club and also to investigate other alternatives which may arise.
The Council also resolved that should the investigation and study of alternative accommodation arrangements for the West Coast Bridge Club be found not to be viable, the West Coast Bridge Club then be granted a further lease of the City Beach Civic Centre for a period to be determined by Council.
The Council appointed a Sub-Committee to investigate the viability of other options. The Sub-Committee comprises Crs Anderton and McConnell and the Chief Executive Officer, together with representatives from the City Beach Bowling Club and the West Coast Bridge Club.
The initial lease period of three years provided for a payment of $8,400 per annum or $700 per calendar month. The lessee to assume full responsibility for the internal and external building maintenance, including structural maintenance.
The Council wrote to the West Coast Bridge Club and City Beach Bowling Club and held meetings with the Club’s nominated representatives to determine a strategy and plan the way ahead to complete the proposed investigation.
DETAILS
The Sub-Committee has investigated the following four options for the relocation of the West Coast Bridge Club:
Option 1 an extension to the existing City Beach Bowling Club;
Option 2 a purpose built building on the eastern side of the City Beach Scout Hall;
Option 3 the viability of extending the existing City Beach Civic Centre on the eastern side; and
Option 4 the continuation of the club at the City Beach Civic Centre on a long term lease.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 97 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Prior to proceeding with preliminary investigations, the Sub- Committee established the parameters for determining what needs the West Coast Bridge Club would require when designing a building for their future. The Club advised what size building would be required and the features necessary for the continued successful operation of the club.
The Town’s Administration prepared site plans on each proposal which included the availability of onsite parking to cater for the club’s requirements. This information was presented to the Sub- Committee along with estimates for the construction of the building and parking, to assist in the planning process. It should be noted that each proposed site is owned by the Council and that the price of the land has not been included in the estimated cost of the project.
The estimated cost of constructing the proposed building in each option is as follows;
(1) City Beach Bowling Club Building $ 613,000 Car park $ 200,000 TOTAL $ 813,000
(2) East of City Beach Scout Hall Building $ 613,000 Car park $ 150,000 TOTAL $ 763,000
(3) City Beach Civic Centre-Extension on Eastern side Building $ 813,848 Car park $ 200,000 TOTAL $1,013,848
It would therefore be necessary to apply to the State Government, through the Department of Sport and Recreation, for funding from the WA Alive Funding Grants. In this instance, the applicants can request a grant for the building only and not the cost of providing parking which is considered a separate issue. At a previous meeting held with Mr Campbell from the Ministry of Sport and Recreation it was suggested to the Bridge
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 98 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Club that an application for new premises may not be regarded as a high priority if alternative (albeit leased) facilities were available.
When considering closely all the options available, it was decided by the Sub-Committee, in conjunction with the West Coast Bridge Club, that option four, whereby the Club would remain at the City Beach Civic Centre would be the preferred option to investigate.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 99 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Discussions between the West Coast Bridge Club and the Sub- Committee continued and it was suggested that Council consider entering into a long term lease with the Club. A valuer has been requested to prepare a valuation to determine a suitable rent for the Civic Centre.
The Civic Centre has been occupied by the West Coast Bridge Club for the past ten years and the Club has been responsible for all internal building maintenance. The former City of Perth and more recently the Town of Cambridge have been responsible for the external maintenance of the building, including maintenance of the car park, gardens and surrounding lawn area.
An inspection has been carried out by the Town’s Property Maintenance Officer on the external condition of the Civic Centre and the following works and estimates were provided to bring the building up to an acceptable standard;
(a) Repairs to driveway and car park area $ 2,000
(b) Upgrade building exit signs $ 2,500
(c) Replacement of Stormwater disposal and downpipe $ 4,000
(d) External painting and repairs to building $ 8,000
TOTAL $16,500
The West Coast Bridge Club have occupied the City Beach Civic Centre for in excess of 10 years. Limited use by others has occurred in that period, therefore it would be reasonable for the West Coast Bridge Club to be responsible for the existing and future external building maintenance.
COMMENT:
The Sub-Committee recommends that Council proceed with option four and proceed to enter into a new lease with the West Coast Bridge Club for a period of 10 years with a 10 year option at the City Beach Civic Centre. The Council outdoor staff will continue to maintain the lawn and garden area surrounding the Centre.
The Lease is to commence on 1 November 1996, with all other conditions of the lease be in accordance with the Standard Town of Cambridge lease conditions.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 100 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
It is anticipated that the valuation will be available for consideration at the Committee Meeting to be held on 10 September 1996.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 101 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Committee Meeting 10 September 1996
During discussion, Members expressed concern in relation to the granting of a lease of the City Beach Civic Centre to the West Coast Bridge Club for a period of 10 years with a 10 year option. It was agreed that consideration of this matter be deferred to enable further information to be obtained.
FURTHER REPORT: (Post Committee Meeting 10 September 1996)
The Council at its meeting held on 26 September 1995 resolved to enter into a lease with the West Coast Bridge Club under the following terms and conditions;
(i) (a) the West Coast Bridge Club be granted a lease of the City Beach Civic Centre for a three year period to allow for a study of the suitability of the West Coast Bridge Club and the City Beach Bowling Club becoming joint tenants of the City Beach Bowling Club and also to investigate other alternatives which may arise (for example a purpose built building);
(b) should the investigation and study of alternative accommodation arrangements for the West Coast Bridge Club be found not to be viable, the West Coast Bridge Club then be granted a further lease of the City Beach Civic Centre for a five year period with a five year option for renewal after the initial three year lease;
(c) the Sub-Committee appointed to investigate the viability of other options, to comprise elected members, the Chief Executive Officer and nominated officers of the Town together with representatives from the City Beach Bowling Club and the West Coast Bridge Club;
(d) the Sub-Committee to report back to the Council at regular intervals;
(ii) the terms of the lease to be on the following basis:-
(a) the lease to commence from 1 January 1996;
(b) the lease payments for the first year to be $8,400 per annum or $700 per calendar month, payable in advance;
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 102 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
(c) the lessee to assume all responsibility for internal and external building maintenance, including structural maintenance;
(d) the Council as lessor, may use the premises for its own purposes such as civic functions or the provision of a polling place. The Council may also permit other community groups to utilise the City Beach Civic Centre with the full agreement of the West Coast Bridge Club;
(e) all other conditions of the lease be in accordance with the standard Town of Cambridge lease conditions.
Rental Determination:
The Town’s Administration is now in receipt of a rental valuation, prepared by Kevin Johnson & Associates, a licensed valuer. A copy of that report will be laid on the table for reference if necessary.
Mr Johnson has advised that he inspected the premises, and properties of a similar nature and it was his opinion that in todays market the subject property has a Fair Rental Value for use as a Bridge Club of $26,550 per annum or approximately $510 per week plus outgoings.
Based on the capital value of the building provided by the valuer, the Town’s proposed pricing policy was applied and a fair rental was assessed at $18,715 per annum or approximately $360 per week.
It should be noted that the Council at its meeting held on 26 September 1995 approved to grant a further lease for a five year period with a five year option if alternative accommodation was found not to be a viable option. At recent meetings held between the West Coast Bridge Club and the Sub Committee, Bridge Club representatives requested that Council give consideration to extending the period to a ten year lease with a ten year option.
Accordingly, it is recommended that the West Coast Bridge Club be granted a lease of the City Beach Civic Centre for a further period of 5 years with a 5 year option commencing from the expiration of the existing lease on 1 January 1999, subject to the following terms and conditions:-
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 103 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
(i) on the basis of the valuation received and the Council’s pricing policy, an annual rental of $18,700 be applied.
(ii) the rent be reviewed annually on 1 November and increased in accordance with the Consumer Price Index (all groups Perth) or as otherwise determined by Council;
(iii) the lessee to be responsible for all rates, taxes and outgoings associated with the property and Civic Centre;
(iv) the Council as lessor may use the premise for its own purposes, such as the provision of a polling place, and permit other community groups such as ratepayers associations to use the premise at times required;
(v) the lessee to be responsible for all internal and external maintenance of the building including the car park and external lighting. The Town of Cambridge to maintain irrigation, lawn and garden areas;
(vi) all other conditions of the lease be in accordance with the standard Town of Cambridge Lease;
(vii) the legal costs for the preparation of the lease to be borne by the Lessee;
(viii) in view of the West Coast Bridge Club’s existing tenancy of the City Beach Civic Centre, the Club be required to complete the external maintenance, estimated to be $16,500, as part of the renewal of the lease:-
(a) repairs to driveway and car area;
(b) upgrade building exit signs;
(c) replacement of stormwater and disposal downpipe;
(d) external painting and repairs to the building.
Council Meeting 15 October 1996
During discussion at the Council meeting held on 15 October 1996, this matter was referred back to the Corporate and Customer Services Committee to enable the proposed lease terms and conditions to be further discussed with Bridge Club representatives.
FURTHER REPORT: (Post Council Meeting 15 October 1996)
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 104 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The Sub Committee comprising Cr Anderton, Cr McConnell and the Chief Executive Officer, met with the President of the West Coast Bridge Club, Mr J Utting, and six members of the Club on 22 October and 14 November 1996, to discuss the recommendations under consideration by Council in regard to the future lease of the City Beach Civic Centre to the West Coast Bridge Club.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 105 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Considerable discussion with the representatives of the Bridge Club took place in regard to the eight recommendations contained in the report to Council, with the Bridge Club representatives expressing concern with the $18,700 assessed annual rental and requirement that the Bridge Club complete outstanding maintenance (recommendation (viii) as listed):-
Repairs to driveway and carpark area; Upgrade building exit signs; Replacement of stormwater and disposal drainpipe; External painting and repairs to the building.
The cost of completing the above maintenance is estimated to be $16,500.
The Club representatives also indicated a preference for a longer lease term than recommended. The Bridge Club presented submissions to the Sub Committee to support its requests.
Following discussions with the Bridge Club, the Sub Committee considered the level of the rental in the context of the Town's proposed Pricing Policy and considered that a 'special rental' should be determined for the Bridge Club in view of the valuable community service it provides.
The Sub Committee was of the opinion that the special rental should be on the basis of 50 per cent of the $26,550 rental value determined by the Consultant Valuer, Kevin Johnston and Associates. This would result in an annual rental of $13,275 being payable by the Club.
In regard to the completion of the external maintenance, the Sub-Committee agreed that recommendation (viii) should be deleted and the Town should carry out the required work and bear the cost.
The representatives of the Bridge Club wished to place on record their thanks and admiration for the manner in which the Sub- Committee had communicated with them and considered their request.
The representatives of the Bridge Club agreed to advise the Council in writing of its agreement to the recommendations proposed by the Sub-Committee prior to the meeting of the Corporate and Customer Services Committee meeting to be held Monday 18 November 1996.
The Sub Committee, therefore, recommends the following amendments:-
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 106 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
That:-
(i) on the basis of the valuation received in 1996, a special annual rental of $13,275 plus any Consumer Price Index (CPI) variation as at 1 January 1999, be applied;
(ii) the existing Recommendation (iv) be amended by the inclusion of the words “provided the premises are not required by the Bridge Club”;
(iii) the existing Recommendation (viii) be deleted and be replaced with the following recommendation:-
(viii) (a) The Town agrees BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY to undertake and complete the external maintenance to the City Beach Civic Centre as per the schedule detailed below:-
1. repairs to driveway and car park area; 2. upgrade building exit signs; 3. replacement of stormwater and disposal downpipe; 4. external painting and repairs to building;
(b) The cost of completion the work estimated to be $16,500, be funded from the "Town of Cambridge Endowment Land" Account.
Committee Meeting 18 November 1996
During discussion Cr Smith requested that she be recorded as opposing the clause relating to the use of the premises as it provides almost exclusive use of the City Beach Civic Centre to the Bridge Club.
The Administration was requested to consider providing appropriate external lighting to the building.
Moved by Cr Moore, seconded by Cr MacRae
That the West Coast Bridge Club be granted a lease of the City Beach Civic Centre for a further period of 5 years with a 5 year option commencing from the expiration of the existing lease on 1 January 1999, subject to the following terms and conditions:-
(i) on the basis of the valuation received in 1996, a special annual rental of $13,275 (being 50 per cent of the
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 107 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
commercial valuation in recognition of the beneficial community service provided by the West Coast Bridge Club) plus Consumer Price Index (CPI) variation up to 1 January 1999, be applied;
(ii) after 1 January 1999 the rent be reviewed annually on 1 November and adjusted in accordance with the Consumer Price Index (all groups Perth) or as otherwise determined by Council;
(iii) the lessee to be responsible for all rates, taxes and outgoings associated with the property and Civic Centre;
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 108 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
(iv) the Council as lessor may use the premise for its own purposes, such as the provision of a polling place, and permit other community groups such as ratepayers associations to use the premise at times required, provided the premises are not required by the Bridge Club;
(v) the lessee to be responsible for all internal and external maintenance of the building including the car park and external lighting. The Town of Cambridge to maintain irrigation, lawn and garden areas;
(vi) all other conditions of the lease be in accordance with the standard Town of Cambridge Lease;
(vii) the legal costs for the preparation of the lease to be borne by the Lessee;
(viii) (a) the Town agrees BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY to undertake and complete the outstanding external maintenance to the City Beach Civic Centre as per the schedule detailed below:-
(1) repairs to driveway and carpark area; (2) upgrade building exit signs; (3) replacement of stormwater and disposal downpipes; (4) external painting and repairs to building;
(b) the cost of completing the work, estimated to be $16,500, be funded from the “Town of Cambridge Endowment Land” Account.
During discussion, Cr Berry said that a total of 13 years was an extended period to enter into a lease and that a review of the contract after five years would be preferred.
Amendment
Moved by Cr Berry, seconded by Cr Smith
That the motion be amended by inserting the following words after the words "5 year option":-
"subject to the Council deciding there is no additional or other use for the premises as a result of the Community Needs Survey."
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 109 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The Chief Executive Officer advised Members that as the Council had resolved at its meeting held on 26 September 1995, to grant a lease for a three year period followed by a five year period with the further five year option, a rescission motion would be required before any amendment could be adopted.
Amendment withdrawn
Discussion ensued. Cr Berry queried the condition relating to the use of the premises and suggested that the clause be re-worded.
Amendment
Moved by Cr Berry, seconded by Cr Smith
That Clause (iv) of the motion be amended by deleting the words "provided the premises are not required by the Bridge Club" and substituting the words "arranged in co-operation with the Bridge Club".
Lost
Cr Smith requested that she be recorded as voting in favour of the amendment.
Further discussion ensued. Cr Smith suggested that there is a need for recreation facilities in the area and that this need should be determined in conjunction with the community and the West Coast Bridge Club.
Amendment
Moved by Cr Smith, seconded by Cr Berry
That a further clause be added to the motion as follows:-
(ix) in the interim, the Town work together with the Bridge Club and the community to assess the needs of the community for a recreation facility in the area.
Lost
The original motion was then put and carried BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY.
Cr Smith requested that she be recorded as voting against the motion.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 110 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 111 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The motion as carried is as follows:-
That the West Coast Bridge Club be granted a lease of the City Beach Civic Centre for a further period of 5 years with a 5 year option commencing from the expiration of the existing lease on 1 January 1999, subject to the following terms and conditions:-
(i) on the basis of the valuation received in 1996, a special annual rental of $13,275 (being 50 per cent of the commercial valuation in recognition of the beneficial community service provided by the West Coast Bridge Club) plus Consumer Price Index (CPI) variation up to 1 January 1999, be applied;
(ii) after 1 January 1999 the rent be reviewed annually on 1 November and adjusted in accordance with the Consumer Price Index (all groups Perth) or as otherwise determined by Council;
(iii) the lessee to be responsible for all rates, taxes and outgoings associated with the property and Civic Centre;
(iv) the Council as lessor may use the premise for its own purposes, such as the provision of a polling place, and permit other community groups such as ratepayers associations to use the premise at times required, provided the premises are not required by the Bridge Club;
(v) the lessee to be responsible for all internal and external maintenance of the building including the car park and external lighting. The Town of Cambridge to maintain irrigation, lawn and garden areas;
(vi) all other conditions of the lease be in accordance with the standard Town of Cambridge Lease;
(vii) the legal costs for the preparation of the lease to be borne by the Lessee;
(viii) (a) the Town agrees BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY to undertake and complete the outstanding external maintenance to the City Beach Civic Centre as per the schedule detailed below:-
(1) repairs to driveway and carpark area; (2) upgrade building exit signs; (3) replacement of stormwater and disposal downpipes;
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 112 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
(4) external painting and repairs to building;
(b) the cost of completing the work, estimated to be $16,500, be funded from the “Town of Cambridge Endowment Land” Account.
CCS96.8 CITY BEACH KIOSK NO 2 - REQUEST FROM LESSEE FOR MOBILE VENDOR LICENCE TO SERVE DRINKS ON THE BEACH. (File Reference: PRO0396)
BACKGROUND:
The Council at its meeting held on 14 November 1995 resolved to approve the assigning of the lease of the City Beach Kiosk No 2 to Mr & J Mrs Taylor to 31 March 1997 with a further 3 year option of renewal which would extend the lease term to 31 March 2000.
DETAILS:
The lessee of City Beach Kiosk No 2 has written to the Council seeking approval for a vendor licence to service the beach area from the southern side of the City Beach groyne to the Town of Cambridge border at Swanbourne. It has also been requested that the vendors licence be extended in winter months to include the car park east of Kiosk No 2.
Mr Taylor advised that it was apparent from the past summer season that an improved service was required to aid people on the beach (south of the groyne) because of the distance required to walk to the kiosk.
In his opinion this need is paramount for parents with small children and for older people who find the long walk to obtain refreshments inconvenient and in a lot of cases impossible.
The lessee has also expressed concern that in winter people visiting the beach do not use the kiosk (from the car park) for the following reasons;
(i) the kiosk is not visible from the car park,
(ii) motorists travelling on Challenger Parade cannot see the kiosk from the roadway, thus most do not know the kiosk exists, and
(iii) people are reluctant to walk down to the kiosk in inclement weather.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 113 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The application deals specifically with the area located south of the City Beach groyne to the Town of Cambridge border at Swanbourne beach and east of the car park situated above City Beach Kiosk No 2 as indicated on the plan enclosed.
It is proposed that the mobile service will carry cold drinks, including soft drinks, juices and bottled water. It is also anticipated that ice-creams, chocolate bars, some savoury snacks and a limited supply of 15+ sunscreen will be carried.
An added service of the delivery of sandwiches, rolls etc will be made to patrons who have placed orders at the kiosk on their way to the beach.
The operating hours of the service would be as follows;
1. Beach Service
Summer months only. End of October through to the end of April. Approximately 8.30am - 6.30pm or in the height of summer, as the weather dictates.
2. Carpark Service
Winter months only. End of April through to the end of October. Approximately 8.30am - 6.30pm (customer demand and weather dictates operating hours).
The vehicle that will be used is a customised four-wheel drive mini-motorbike (similar to the motorbike the City Beach Surf Lifesaving Club use for beach patrol). The operator will hold the necessary licence and the motorbike insurance. Public liability insurance will be taken by the lessee. All users of the vehicle will be briefed on safety and environmental issues and advised of the areas not to be traversed by vehicles.
Customers will be encouraged to stow their litter until they can use a bin. The mobile service will offer a litter stowing facility which customers will be encouraged to utilise.
Moved by Cr Moore, seconded by Cr MacRae
That:-
(i) the lessee of the City Beach Kiosk be granted a licence to operate a mobile motorbike service to provide cool drinks, ice-creams, some snacks and sunscreens from the area
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 114 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
located south of the City Beach groyne to the Town of Cambridge border at Swanbourne Beach and east to the car park situated above the City Beach Kiosk No 2 for the period ending 30 April 1997 subject to:-
(a) the lessee obtaining public liability insurance for coverage up to $5 million and providing the Town’s Administration with a copy of certification of insurance;
(b) the lessee providing to the Council a letter of indemnification against any claims arising from the operation of the service;
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 115 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
(b) the signage on the motorbike being that of the business only. The owners are not permitted to display logos of sponsors on the vehicle at any time. No leaflets or advertising material is permitted to be distributed by the operators at the beach;
(c) a fee of $50 per week for the term of the licence;
(ii) a review of the licence, terms and conditions be undertaken by the Administration at the conclusion of the licence period.
During discussion, Cr Moore suggested that the licence fee be reduced to $30 per week for the period 1 December 1996 to 31 March 1997. Cr Smith expressed concern relating to the generation of additional noise on the beachfront.
Amendment
Moved by Cr Moore, seconded by Cr Anderton
That clause (i) of the motion be amended by:-
(i) deleting 30 April 1997 and substituting 31 March 1997; (ii) deleting $50 per week and substituting $30 per week.
Amendment carried
The amended motion was then put and carried.
Cr Smith requested that she be recorded as voting against the motion.
The motion, as carried, is as follows:-
That:-
(i) the lessee of the City Beach Kiosk be granted a licence to operate a mobile motorbike service to provide cool drinks, ice-creams, some snacks and sunscreens from the area located south of the City Beach groyne to the Town of Cambridge border at Swanbourne Beach and east to the car park situated above the City Beach Kiosk No 2 for the period ending 31 March 1997 subject to:-
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 116 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
(a) the lessee obtaining public liability insurance for coverage up to $5 million and providing the Town’s Administration with a copy of certification of insurance;
(b) the lessee providing to the Council a letter of indemnification against any claims arising from the operation of the service;
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 117 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
(c) the signage on the motorbike being that of the business only. The owners are not permitted to display logos of sponsors on the vehicle at any time. No leaflets or advertising material is permitted to be distributed by the operators at the beach;
(d) a fee of $30 per week for the term of the licence;
(ii) a review of the licence, terms and conditions be undertaken by the Administration at the conclusion of the licence period.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 118 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
CCS96.9 LAKE MONGER AND DODD STREET RESERVES - PROPOSAL FOR TANDEM SKYDIVING (File Reference: RES0004)
BACKGROUND:
Glen and Jane Bolton-Bound of Lesmurdie have written a letter to the Town requesting that Council grant approval to their proposal to use Lake Monger and Dodd Street Reserves as landing sites for tandem skydiving.
DETAILS
Glen and Jane Bolton-Bound are the owners of a skydiving business known as City Skydive X-Press. Glen Bolton-Bound has been involved in the sport of skydiving for over 12 years, representing Australia at the 1992 World Championships. He is an Australian Parachute Federation (APA) “A” Class instructor with over 3700 skydives of which over 1200 have been tandem skydives.
Glen Bolton-Bound has on several occasions been responsible for overseeing the safety of student operations of Sydney Skydivers’ Picton Drop Zone in New South Wales (the largest skydiving centre in Australia) and the New South Wales Tandem Skydiving Centre’s Drop Zones at Cessnock and Warnevale.
City Skydive X-Press is a professional tandem skydiving operation aiming at introducing select participants to the sport of skydiving.
The applicants basic objective is to actively promote and engage in Tandem Skydiving Operations into the Perth metropolitan area. They believe the advantages to Council would be the promotion of a fun oriented, clean, tourist attracting sport activity. From their experience, spectators and supporters are drawn to watch the ease and grace of parachute landings.
The applicants have undertaken negotiations with in bound Japanese tour operators with regards to tourist skydiving whilst in Perth. They anticipate a steady flow of business from this source.
City Skydive X-Press if successful, have plans to organise and promote regular fund raising events to benefit local charities or worthy causes. The events would involve skydiving and would be high profile with both electronic and print media exposure.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 119 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The applicants have offered Council remuneration of $50 per day of use. They believe that this is a fair remuneration as they anticipate a small number of customers initially, approximately 10 per week.
They advise that the noise from low flying aircraft will not be a problem to residents as the jump aircraft would be operating over the landing area at or above 10,000 feet.
A landing area of between 250 and 500 square metres is required for approximately 10 minutes per load. The landing area needs to be clear with an established coverage of cut grass free of debris. The landing area would be controlled and kept clear by staff during descent. The descent would only commence when the target controller is satisfied that it is safe to do so, ie when the site is clear and the meteorological conditions are satisfactory.
The APF is the self regulatory body which governs skydiving in Australia. It is directly answerable to the Civil Aviation Safety Authority. The APF has a very comprehensive set of Operational Regulations which each APF member is bound to uphold. The APF also has a strict code of ethics. All APF members, including Tandem Passengers and Target Controllers are covered by Public Liability Insurance to the value of $10 million.
Glen and Jane Bolton-Bound have prepared a comprehensive proposal outlining how they would operate their business and giving guarantees of its safety and advantages to the Town. Lake Monger and to a lesser degree Dodd Street Reserve are areas subject to review as outlined in the Lake Monger Management Plan. A number of issues being considered relate to the environment of the Lake and the surrounding reserve areas.
In the past the former City of Perth and more recently the Town of Cambridge have considered a variety of business options that have been put forward by interested parties. In each instance it has been decided by the Council not to approve the request because of problems associated with increased use of the reserve and the prospective damage to the Lake and wild life. In this instance it is recommended that Council refuse City Skydive X- Press application to utilise portions of Lake Monger and Dodd Street Reserve as a skydiving landing area.
Moved by Cr Moore, seconded by Cr MacRae
That the proposal, submitted by Glen and Jane Bolton-Bound for tandem skydiving onto Lake Monger or Dodd Street Reserve,
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 120 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
not be supported due to problems associated with increased use of the Lake Monger and Dodd Street reserves and the prospective damage to the lake and wildlife.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 121 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
CCS96.10 SIR THOMAS MEAGHER PAVILION, PERRY LAKES STADIUM - SOCCER ADMINISTRATION OF WA SUB LEASE TO PERTH GLORY SOCCER CLUB (ARENA INVESTMENTS PTY LTD). (File Reference: PRO0355)
BACKGROUND:
The Soccer Administration of WA lease an area of approximately 650 square metres at the Sir Thomas Meagher Pavilion at Perry Lakes Stadium for the permitted use of Administrative Offices and Social Club Rooms. A copy of the lease is attached to and forms part of the notice paper.
The former City of Perth entered into a lease with the Soccer Administration of WA for five years with a five year option commencing on 2 March 1992 and expiring on 1 March 1997. If the Soccer Administration wishes to exercise its option the lease will continue for a further five years and expire on 1 March 2002. The rent is $18,995 per annum, payable at $1,582.91 per calendar month, with the lessee being responsible for rates and taxes and variable outgoings, including water and sewerage. All other terms and conditions of the lease are in accordance with the former City of Perth standard lease document.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil.
DETAILS:
The Soccer Administration of WA has forwarded a letter to the Town of Cambridge requesting that approval be granted by the Council to sub lease a portion of its premises to the Administration of the Perth Glory Soccer Club (Arena Investments Pty Ltd).
Soccer is one of the major sports in Western Australia, with numbers of participants increasing by over 8% per annum. Soccer world wide, is the largest player and spectator sport, with 184 countries boasting Soccer as its leading sport. Prior to the introduction of Perth Glory Soccer Club, Western Australia was not represented in the National Soccer Competition.
The Perth Glory Soccer Club was launched in December 1995 and is now competing in the national competition which commenced in September 1996.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 122 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The club requires a state headquarters for soccer where all activities associated with soccer could be administered. Although Perth Glory Soccer Club is privately owned by Arena Investments Pty Ltd, the club is closely affiliated with the Soccer Administration of Western Australia.
The Perth Glory Soccer Club has entered into discussions with the Soccer Administration of WA concerning the sub-leasing of a portion of an area at present leased to that organisation. This area is approximately 80 square metres. The premises will be occupied for the purpose of conducting the business of the Perth Glory Soccer Club.
The Soccer Administration have agreed to sub-lease the premises to Arena Investments Pty Ltd, commencing from 1 November 1995 until 1 March 1997, together with a five year option to renew as per its lease. The rent is to be $3,200 per annum, with the sub lessee being responsible for 20% of the water rates and electricity consumption. All other terms and conditions will be in accordance with the Town of Cambridge standard lease document. The sub-lessee in conjunction with the Soccer Administration will be responsible for all legal costs associated with the preparation and stamping of the lease documents.
Moved by Cr Moore, seconded by Cr MacRae
That:-
(i) approval be granted to the Soccer Administration to sub- lease a portion of its premises to Administration of the Perth Glory Soccer Club (Arena Investments Pty Ltd);
(ii) the sub-lessee (Arena Investments Pty Ltd) in conjunction with the Lessee (Soccer Administration of WA) be responsible for the preparation and stamping of all lease documentation;
(iii) the Mayor and the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to sign and affix the Common Seal of the Town of Cambridge to the lease documents.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 123 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
CCS96.11 WEMBLEY GOLF COMPLEX - FAIRWAY TAVERN , VARIATION TO LEASE (File Reference: RES0044)
BACKGROUND:
A request has been received from the Lessee of the Fairway Tavern at the Wembley Golf Complex to extend the Leased area under the concourse from the centre beam out to the glass partitioning, as per the plan circulated. This request is the result of discussions between the Town’s Administration and the lessee to streamline and define areas of responsibility for cleaning.
DETAILS:
The Town’s Administration has decided to contract out the cleaning of the concourse area at the Wembley Golf Complex. The total area surrounding the building including the lessee’s area has been cleaned by the Town’s staff at the Golf Course on a daily basis. A decision has been made by the Administration to proceed to have the total area cleaned by a private contractor with the lessee being responsible for payment of the cleaning of the leased area of the concourse immediately outside of the tavern.
The lessee has requested that approval be granted for the area under the concourse, from the existing boundary out to the glass partitioning be incorporated into the tavern lease. This area is currently being utilised by patrons to sit and enjoy refreshments after playing golf. In return for the inclusion of this area into the lease the lessee would become responsible for maintenance and cleaning. This would define the areas that are being used and assist with the implementation of a management program.
It is recommended that approval be granted to vary the leased area to incorporate the area under the concourse from the existing leased boundary out to the glass partitioning as shown in the circulated plan.
Moved by Cr Moore, seconded by Cr MacRae
That approval be granted to a variation to the lease of the tavern at the Wembley Golf Complex to include that area under the concourse from the existing lease boundary out to the glass partition, as shown in the circulated plan.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 124 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 125 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
CCS96.12 KIOSKS 1 AND 3 CHALLENGER PARADE, CITY BEACH AND FLOREAT REQUEST FOR LEASE (File Reference: PRO0105 & PRO0256)
BACKGROUND:
The Town has three beach kiosks at in City Beach and Floreat which are leased to separate tenants. No 1 is the main kiosk on the City Beach foreshore which is leased by Mr Noelting. No 3 kiosk is located further north at Floreat Beach and is leased by Mr and Mrs Ryder. Both leases are due to expire on 31 March 1997. In accordance with the terms of the lease both tenants have written requesting that Council give consideration to granting a further 3 year lease with a 3 year option commencing from 1 April 1997.
DETAILS:
The Council at its meeting held on 26 September 1995 requested that the Town’s Administration proceed to engage the services of a consultant to provide a commercial evaluation of beachfront facilities at City and Floreat beaches.
The evaluation was completed and a report was prepared and submitted to the Development and Environmental Services Committee on 8 October 1996. The item was deferred by the committee pending the completion of a current survey of the foreshore boundary to determine if the kiosks are located in that reserve. The survey has been completed and the information will be presented to the Development and Environmental Services Committee at its next meeting.
There are a number of issues and recommendations set out in the commercial evaluation report that need to be discussed and agreed to by Council prior to commencing negotiations for new leases with the existing tenants. Until such time as Council has considered the recommendations made in the report it is recommended that the tenants be granted a temporary lease for an initial twelve month period and to continue on a monthly basis thereafter.
Moved by Cr Moore, seconded by Cr MacRae
That the lessees of both Kiosk No 1 (Mr Noelting) and Kiosk No 3 (Mr and Mrs Ryder) be granted a temporary lease for a period of one year commencing on 1 April 1997 under the existing terms and conditions and including a three month break clause allowing the Council the right to terminate the lease at any time during this period.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 126 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Carried During with the Chief Executive Officer again referred to the letter previously submitted to the Council by Mr and Mrs Ryder requesting that the Council give further consideration to their lease arrangements.
CCS96.13 CHRISTMAS/NEW YEAR ARRANGEMENTS - COUNCIL AND STAFF (File Reference: ADM0059 & ADM0033)
BACKGROUND:
Traditionally, Local Governments put in place specific arrangements for the Christmas/New Year period that not only take account of the public holidays over this time, but also provide opportunities to convey good will and peace to the people directly involved. Also, it is the culmination of a year’s work, a time for reflection and appropriate gestures of appreciation and thanks to be conveyed.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Nil.
DETAILS:
Christmas/New Year Working Arrangements
The last working day before Christmas will be Tuesday 24 December with the office being closed on Wednesday 25 and Thursday 26 December. For the New Year, Wednesday 1 January 1996 is also a public holiday.
Consideration has been given as to whether the Council offices should remain open between Christmas and New Year, especially on the Friday following Boxing Day. In the interests of providing optimum customer service and in keeping with contemporary business practice, it is proposed that it be “business as usual” on these days, with the exception of Christmas Eve. It is intended that, similar to arrangements in 1995, all staff of the Town, including the external workforce, and staff from the Joan Watters Community and Children's Centres, Library, Golf Course and Aquatic Centre, be invited to attend a Staff Christmas function in the reception area of the Town's Administration Centre. Those Council facilities open to members of the public will remain open with appropriate staffing arrangements being made.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 127 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
It is therefore proposed that the Administration Centre be closed at 1.00pm on Tuesday 24 December 1996 to enable the Staff Christmas function to be held. It should also be noted that Thursday 2 January is a holiday in accordance with staff employment awards, however it is a normal business working day and accordingly, the Administration Centre will be open on this day.
It is usual that the Christmas/New Year, period is much quieter than normal trading days. Accordingly, through mutual negotiations and understanding, reduced staff numbers will be in place at these times.
1996/97 Meeting Schedule
At its meeting held on 15 October 1996, the Council resolved to amend scheduled meeting days for the four Standing Committees and the Council.
Meeting days are now as follows:-
Technical Services Committee Second Tuesday of each month 5.30pm
Policy and Administration Committee Second Tuesday of each month 7.30pm
Corporate and Customer Servic Monday before third Tuesday of ea Committee month at 5.30 pm Development and Environmental Third Tuesday of each month Services Committee 5.30pm Council Fourth Tuesday of each month 5.30pm
This schedule has been applied for November however, due to the impending Christmas season, by agreement the December Round has been brought forward by one week. The December Committee and Council meetings will be held as follows:-
Technical Services Committee 5.30pm Tuesday 3 December 1996
Policy and Administration Committee 7.30pm Tuesday 3 December 1996
Corporate and Customer Servic 5.30pm Monday 9 December 1996 Committee Development and Environmental 5.30pm Tuesday 10 December 1996 Services Committee Council 5.30pm Tuesday 17 December 1996
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 128 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The ordinary schedule of meeting dates will be resumed in February 1997 with meeting dates as follows:-
Technical Services Committee 5.30pm Tuesday 11 February 1997
Policy and Administration Committee 7.30pm Tuesday 11 February 1997
Corporate and Customer Servic 5.30pm Monday 17 February 1997 Committee Development and Environmental 5.30pm Tuesday 18 February 1997 Services Committee Council 5.30pm Tuesday 23 February 1997
Elected Members Christmas Function
It has been suggested by several Councillors that the Council hold a Christmas function for Elected Members. It is envisaged that the function could take the form of a modest dinner, where Members and their respective partners could meet in a convivial atmosphere to recognise the end of a busy year for the Council, to reflect upon the achievements of the Council during 1996 and to share hopes and visions for the coming year in a spirit of goodwill and fellowship.
Should the proposal be approved the Chief Executive Officer, together with the Mayor, would make the appropriate arrangements for a date mutually convenient to all concerned.
Moved by Cr Moore, seconded by Cr MacRae
That:-
(i) details relating to staffing arrangements the staff Christmas function and the Council/Committee meeting schedule for the Christmas New Year period be approved;
(ii) a Christmas function for Elected Members and partners be approved and His Worship the Mayor and the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to make suitable arrangements.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 129 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 130 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
CCS96.14 PARKING FACILITIES LOCAL LAW - AMENDMENT (File Reference: LEG0008)
BACKGROUND:
A Working Group comprising the Wembley Ward Members and a number of staff has been meeting over the past twelve months with the agreed aim to:-
"Minimise the impact of football related activity on ratepayers and residents in the West Leederville/Wembley areas, particularly by address of the following:
improved parking arrangements for ratepayers and residents. improved street safety for residents, pedestrians and motorists. reduction of the effects of activity-related noise. minimisation of anti-social behaviour.
The group agreed on an approach which combined the following strategy areas:-
Increased parking restricted areas. Earlier starting times for parking restrictions. Improved infringement detection through the use of additional contract staff and the proposed purchase of hand held electronic infringement devices. Improved permit system.
A further area requiring examination is that of infringement penalty levels contained in the Town of Cambridge Parking Facilities Local Law. These penalties have not been reviewed since they were assumed from the former City of Perth in 1994.
At its meeting held on 23 January 1996, the Council resolved that the strategies of the Working Group be endorsed, including the element relating to "increasing the infringement penalties to the maximum allowable penalty under the Local Government Act". At its meeting held on 12 March 1996, the Council also resolved to "increase the penalties to the maximum allowable i.e. $80.00." These resolutions were not specific in detailing the infringements to which the proposed maximum penalty was to apply.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 131 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
These amendments have been held over awaiting the adoption of a revised infringement notice form and further action in relation to the proposed purchase of the electronic devices.
During subsequent discussions at a reconvened Working Group meeting held on 10 September 1996, the Administration undertook to review all parking infringement levels to reflect the Town's strengthened resolve in relation to illegal parking, particularly in the vicinity of Subiaco Oval on football match days and in the residential areas adjoining the Matthews Netball Centre.
DETAILS:
A review has now been undertaken in relation to penalties applied to a wide variety of parking offences as detailed in the Sixth Schedule of the Local Law. Comparisons have been made, where appropriate, with the penalties of the City of Subiaco, where similar problems exist in relation to activities associated with Subiaco Oval. It is recommended that the Council's previous resolution in relation to maximum allowable penalties be tempered in some cases to retain relativities reflecting the seriousness of each offence.
As a general rule, penalties at the lower end of the scale have been increased from $25 to $30. Those infringements which are most prevalent in the vicinity of Subiaco Oval have been given further consideration in view of the problems being encountered by the Council and the residents of West Leederville and Wembley and the costs involved in policing the parking situation in those areas on Sundays and potentially on Friday nights.
As a result of the exercise to review penalty levels, it became apparent that there are a number of provisions of the existing Local Laws which are not appropriate or will not be applicable in the Town of Cambridge in the foreseeable future. It is recommended that a review of the Local Law be undertaken to rectify any anomalies existing between the Local Law as it was adopted from the former City of Perth and the situation as it exists in the Town of Cambridge.
It will also be noted that penalties for metered areas were included in the Local Law following the restructure of the former City of Perth and subsequent adoption of a standardised parking Facilities By-Law by each of the new Towns. Although the Town has no parking meters installed, it is proposed that these provisions be retained for the time being.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 132 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
In order for the proposed amendments to the Local Law to be enacted, the Local Government Act 1995 requires that the following procedure occur:-
1. Proposed amendments adopted by Council.
2. Statewide public notice of proposed amendments.
3. Copy to Minister.
4. Six week submission period.
5. Consideration of submissions.
6. Local Law amendments made by Council.
7. Gazettal of amendments.
8. Date of operation (14 days after Gazettal).
9. Statewide public notice of amendments.
The following chart details modified penalties presently applied, those applicable to the City of Subiaco (for reference purposes) and those recommended for adoption by the Town of Cambridge.
Existing City of Proposed Clause METERED AREAS Penalty Subiac Penalty o 24(1)(a) Stand at Expired Meter $25 N/A $30 24(1)(b) Stand Longer than Time Allowed (up to ½ $25 N/A $40 hour in excess) 24(1)(b) Stand Longer than Time Allowed (Over ½ $50 N/A $60 hour in excess) 24(1)(c) Stand against a Hooded Meter $40 N/A $40 25(1)(a) Not Stand Parallel to Kerb $25 N/A $30 25(1)(b) Not Stand Close to Kerb $25 N/A $30 25(1)(c) Not Stand Wholly within Metered Space $25 N/A $30 25(1)(d) Stand Vehicle other than Headed in Direction $25 N/A $30 of Movement of Traffic 25(2) Not Stand Wholly within Metered Space $25 N/A $30 (Angle Parking) 26 Stand/Park/Attempt to Stand/Park in $25 N/A $30 Metered Space Already Occupied 27 Return to Metered Space Within One Hour $25 N/A $30 29(a) Unlawfully Stand Vehicle in Stall/Metered $25 N/A $30 Space marked "M/C" 30(a) Stand Longer than Time Allowed (M/C Stall $25 N/A $30 metered or standard sign) 30(b) Stand Longer than Time Allowed (M/C $25 N/A $30 Adjacent Sign)
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 133 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
30(c) Not Stand M/C Wholly within Stall/Metered $25 N/A $30 Space 31 Stand M/C in Stall/Metered Space Not $25 N/A $30 Marked 'M/C'
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 134 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Clause TICKET MACHINE ZONES Existin City of Proposed g Subiaco Penalty Penalty 37(1) Fail to Clearly Display Current Ticket $25 $25 $30 38(1) Stand Longer that Time Allowed $25 $25 $40 39(a)(i) Not Stand Parallel to Kerb $25 $40 $30 39(a)(ii) Not Stand Close to Kerb $25 $40 $30 39(a)(iii) Not Stand Wholly Within Parking Stall $25 $25 $30 39(a)(iv) Stand Vehicle Other Than Headed in $25 $40 $40 Direction of Movement of Traffic 39(b) Not Stand Wholly within Parking Stall (Angle $25 $25 $30 Parking) 43(1) Fail to Display Current Voucher/Ticket $25 $25 $30 44(b) Display Altered/Defaced/Interfered $80 N/A $80 Ticket/Voucher 44(d) Use/Attempt to Use or Validate Voucher in $75 N/A $80 Excess of Authorised Period(s) 44(e) Display Voucher Validated in Excess of $25 N/A $30 Authorised Period(s) 46(a) Stand Motorcycle in other than Motorcycle $25 $25 $30 Parking Stall 46(b) Fail to pay Motorcycle Parking Fee $25 N/A $30
PARKING STATIONS 47(2)(a) Remove Vehicle from Attended Parking $50 $25 $60 Station without Paying Applicable Fee 47(2)(b) Remove Vehicle from Attended Parking $75 N/A $80 Station without Permission (Outside Operating Hours) 48(3) Fail to Display Parking Permit $25 $25 $30 49(1)(a) No Standing (Any Time) $50 $25 $60 49(1)(b) No Standing (Restricted Period) $50 $25 $60 49(2)(a) No Parking (Any Time)_ $40 N/A $40 49(2)(b) No Parking (Restricted Period) $40 N/A $40 49(3) Stand Longer Than Time Allowed (Up to 1 $25 $25 $40 hr of Limit)
PARKING ON ROAD 49(3) Stand Longer Than Time Allowed (Over 1 hr $50 N/A $60 in excess of Limit) 49(b) Not Stand Wholly Within Parking Stall $25 $25 $30 54 Disobey Direction to Move Vehicle $50 $50 $60 55 Unlawfully Display/Trade Goods In A $80 N/A $80 Parking Station 56 Cause Obstruction $40 $25 $40 6(1)(a) No Standing (Any Time) $75 $65 $80 6(1)(b) No Standing (Restricted Periods) $75 $65 $80 6(2)(a) No Parking (Any Time) $40 $50 $60 6(2)(b) No Parking (Restricted Periods) $40 6(3) Stand Longer Than Time Allowed (Up to 1 $25 $25 $40 hr in excess of Limit) 6(3) Stand Longer Than Time Allowed (Over 1 hr $50 $25 $60 in excess of Limit) 7(a) Stand Upon a Median Strip $40 $50 $60 7(b) Unlawfully Stand Adjacent to Median Strip $40 $50 $60 7(c) Stand Upon or Within 9m of a Traffic Island $40 $65 $60
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 135 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
8(1)(a) Not Stand Parallel to Kerb $25 $40 $30 8(1)(b) Not Stand Close to Kerb $25 $40 $30
Clause PARKING ON ROAD Existing City of Proposed Penalty Subiaco Penalty 8(1)(c) Stand Vehicle other than Headed in $25 $40 $40 Direction of Movement of Traffic 8(1)(d) Not Stand Wholly within Parking Stall $25 $25 $30 8(2) Not Stand Wholly within Parking Stall $25 $25 $30 (Angle Parking) 9(1) Stand/Park or Attempt to Stand/Park in $25 $25 $30 Stall Already Occupied 10(a) Stand Within 6m of Intersection $75 $50 $80 10(c) Stand Upon/Over a Footpath/Place of $75 $65 $80 Refuge 11(a) Cause Obstruction (Road) $50 $65 $60 11(b) Cause Obstruction (Entrance/Exit to $75 $65 $80 Premises) 11(c) Obstruct an Intersection $50 $65 $80 12(1) Stand Abreast of Another Vehicle $50 $65 $60 13(1) Unlawfully Stand Upon a Verge $25 $40 $40 14 Stand within 1m of a Pillar Fire Hydrant $40 $50 $40 15(1) Unlawfully Stand Upon a Pedestrian $75 $50 $80 Crossing 16 Return to Time Restricted Area within One $25 $25 $30 Hour (Not across Intersection) 17(2) Stand in Area Restricted to Persons of a $40 $45 $60 Particular Class 17(4) Stand in Area Restricted to Vehicles of a $75 $45 $60 Particular Class 17(A)(8) Unlawfully Stand Vehicle in Work Zone $40 $40 $40 17(A)(8) Not continuously engaged in (Un)Loading $40 $40 $40 Goods in Work Zone 18 Disobey Direction to Move Vehicle $50 $50 $60 19(1) Stand Non-Commercial Vehicle in $40 $40 $40 Loading/Truck Zone 19(1) Not Continuously Engaged in (Un)Loading $40 $40 $40 Goods in Loading/Truck Zone 19(3)(b) Stand Vehicle in Loading Zone More Than $40 $40 $40 15 minutes 21 Stand Upon Public Bus Stand $75 $65 $80 22 Stand Upon Tourist Bus Stand $75 $65 $80
MISCELLANEOUS 69 Unlawfully Stand Upon Private Property $75 $65 $80 77(2) Interfere with/Erase Chalk Marks $75 $65 $80
In accordance with Section 3.12(2) of the Local Government Act 1995, the Mayor read aloud a summary of the purpose and effect of the proposed Local Law amendments:-
"To review modified penalties as detailed in the Sixth Schedule of the Town of Cambridge Parking Facilities Local Law".
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 136 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Moved by Cr Moore, seconded by Cr MacRae
That:-
(i) the Council RESCINDS BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY its resolutions dated 23 January 1996 and 12 March 1996 to apply the maximum penalty allowable under the Local Government Act for parking infringements;
(ii) the following amendments to the Sixth Schedule of the Town of Cambridge Parking Facilities Local Law be adopted in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 1995 advertised for public comment and submitted for further consideration by the Council:-
The existing Sixth Schedule be deleted and replaced with the following:-
Clause METERED AREAS Penalty
24(1)(a) Stand at Expired Meter $30 24(1)(b) Stand Longer than Time Allowed (up to ½ $40 hour in excess) 24(1)(b) Stand Long than Time Allowed (Over ½ $60 hour in excess) 24(1)(c) Stand against a Hooded Meter $40 25(1)(a) Not Stand Parallel to Kerb $30 25(1)(b) Not Stand Close to Kerb $30 25(1)(c) Not Stand Wholly within Metered Space $30 25(1)(d) Stand Vehicle other than Headed in $30 Direction of Movement of Traffic 25(2) Not Stand Wholly within Metered Space $30 (Angle Parking) 26 Stand/Park/Attempt to Stand/Park in $30 Metered Space Already Occupied 27 Return to Metered Space Within One Hour $30 29(a) Unlawfully Stand Vehicle in Stall/Metered $30 Space marked "M/C" 30(a) Stand Longer than Time Allowed (M/C Stall $30 metered or standard sign) 30(b) Stand Longer than Time Allowed (M/C $30 Adjacent Sign) 30(c) Not Stand M/C Wholly within Stall/Metered $30 Space 31 Stand M/C in Stall/Metered Space Not $30 Marked 'M/C'
TICKET MACHINE ZONES 37(1) Fail to Clearly Display Current Ticket $30 38(1) Stand Longer that Time Allowed $40 39(a)(i) Not Stand Parallel to Kerb $30 39(a)(ii) Not Stand Close to Kerb $30 39(a)(iii) Not Stand Wholly Within Parking Stall $30
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 138 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
39(a)(iv) Stand Vehicle Other Than Headed in $40 Direction of Movement of Traffic Clause TICKET MACHINE ZONES Penalty 39(b) Not Stand Wholly within Parking Stall (Angle $30 Parking) 43(1) Fail to Display Current Voucher/Ticket $30 44(b) Display Altered/Defaced/Interfered $80 Ticket/Voucher 44(d) Use/Attempt to Use or Validate Voucher in $80 Excess of Authorised Period(s) 44(e) Display Voucher Validated in Excess of $30 Authorised Period(s) 46(a) Stand Motorcycle in other than Motorcycle $30 Parking Stall 46(b) Fail to pay Motorcycle Parking Fee $30 PARKING STATIONS 47(2)(a) Remove Vehicle from Attended Parking $60 Station without Paying Applicable Fee 47(2)(b) Remove Vehicle from Attended Parking $80 Station without Permission (Outside Operating Hours) 48(3) Fail to Display Parking Permit $30 49(1)(a) No Standing (Any Time) $60 49(1)(b) No Standing (Restricted Period) $60 49(2)(a) No Parking (Any Time)_ $40 49(2)(b) No Parking (Restricted Period) $40 49(3) Stand Longer Than Time Allowed (Up to 1 $40 hr of Limit) 49(3) Stand Longer Than Time Allowed (Over 1 hr $60 in excess of Limit) 49(b) Not Stand Wholly Within Parking Stall $30 54 Disobey Direction to Move Vehicle $60 55 Unlawfully Display/Trade Goods In A $80 Parking Station 56 Cause Obstruction $40 PARKING ON ROAD 6(1)(a) No Standing (Any Time) $80 6(1)(b) No Standing (Restricted Periods) $80 6(2)(a) No Parking (Any Time) $60 6(2)(b) No Parking (Restricted Periods) $60 6(3) Stand Longer Than Time Allowed (Up to 1 $40 hr in excess of Limit) 6(3) Stand Longer Than Time Allowed (Over 1 hr $60 in excess of Limit) 7(a) Stand Upon a Median Strip $60 7(b) Unlawfully Stand Adjacent to Median Strip $60 7(c) Stand Upon or Within 9m of a Traffic Island $60 8(1)(a) Not Stand Parallel to Kerb $30 8(1)(b) Not Stand Close to Kerb $30 8(1)(c) Stand Vehicle other than Headed in $40 Direction of Movement of Traffic 8(1)(d) Not Stand Wholly within Parking Stall $30 8(2) Not Stand Wholly within Parking Stall (Angle $30 Parking) 9(1) Stand/Park or Attempt to Stand/Park in $30 Stall Already Occupied 10(a) Stand Within 6m of Intersection $80
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 139 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
10(c) Stand Upon/Over a Footpath/Place of $80 Refuge 11(a) Cause Obstruction (Road) $60 11(b) Cause Obstruction (Entrance/Exit to $80 Premises)
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 140 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Clause PARKING ON ROAD Penalty 11(c) Obstruct an Intersection $80 12(1) Stand Abreast of Another Vehicle $60 13(1) Unlawfully Stand Upon a Verge $40 14 Stand within 1m of a Pillar Fire Hydrant $40 15(1) Unlawfully Stand Upon a Pedestrian $80 Crossing 16 Return to Time Restricted Area within One $30 Hour (Not across Intersection) 17(2) Stand in Area Restricted to Persons of a $60 Particular Class 17(4) Stand in Area Restricted to Vehicles of a $60 Particular Class 17(A)(8) Unlawfully Stand Vehicle in Work Zone $40 17(A)(8) Not continuously engaged in (Un)Loading $40 Goods in Work Zone 18 Disobey Direction to Move Vehicle $60 19(1) Stand Non-Commercial Vehicle in $40 Loading/Truck Zone 19(1) Not Continuously Engaged in (Un)Loading $40 Goods in Loading/Truck Zone 19(3)(b) Stand Vehicle in Loading Zone More Than $40 15 minutes 21 Stand Upon Public Bus Stand $80 22 Stand Upon Tourist Bus Stand $80
MISCELLANEOUS 69 Unlawfully Stand Upon Private Property $80 77(2) Interfere with/Erase Chalk Marks $80
(iii) the Town of Cambridge Parking Facilities Local Law be reviewed to ensure applicability to existing and future parking conditions and arrangements within the Town.
Carried BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 141 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
CCS96.15 1997 OCEAN ACTION PERTH (File Reference: PRO0089)
BACKGROUND:
Universal Promotions has submitted a proposal for the conduct of the Annual Night Surfing Classic and Ocean Action Perth, to be presented at City Beach from Wednesday 15 to Sunday 19 January 1997.
The annual Beach Classic is in its eighth year and the most recent event, held in 1995 was managed by a local community organisation, the City Beach Surf Riders Club Inc. Universal Promotions (formerly Nisurf Productions) were engaged by the City Beach Surf Riders Club Inc, to assist in the organising of the event.
Council has budgeted $3,000 toward the sponsorship of the event in the current financial year. For the proposed event, Universal Promotions are seeking permission to extend the amount of days and alter the format from previous competitions.
The organisers have submitted a framework of the details of the event however the staging of the event is subject to gaining further sponsorship and continuing close liaison with Council Officers prior to the event.
DETAILS:
The submission put forward proposes quite a large scale event and advocates a return to the original concept, where the night surfing event was supported by other beach orientated activities during the day.
The supporting activities will include jet skiing, sail boarding, masters swimming, canoeing, kite flying, touch football, tee ball, beach cricket, trampolining, frisbee throwing, acrobatics, skateboarding, surf life saving, roller blading, beach fishing, an army reserve display and children’s amusements.
Four vessels will also be anchored approximately 40 metres offshore.
The organisers have requested permission to include the following details in the event:-
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 142 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Extension of Event Period: Historically the event has been staged over a three day period during March. The organisers have requested that the event be extended to a five day period during January. As this is a school vacation period it is likely that a large crowd will be attracted to the area.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 143 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The following times have been requested:-
Wednesday 15, Thursday 16, Friday 17 January 9.00am - 11.30pm Saturday 18 January 8.00am - 11.30pm Sunday 19 January 8.00am - 11.00pm
It is recommended that the extension from a three day event to a five day event be approved. It is recognised however that the utilisation at City Beach during the month of January will cause greater inconvenience to the general public swimmers than during the month of March when the event was staged in previous years.
The issue of an 11.30pm finish has also been pursued with the organisers. It is acknowledged that the 11.30pm finishing time will allow sufficient opportunity for the night surfing events to be undertaken. It is not anticipated that any excessive noise will be generated by activities planned for the event.
Swimming Area: to ensure the best conditions are utilised the organisers have requested that they have flexibility to move the swimming area at City Beach during the competition.
The organisers would liaise with the Beach Inspectors, Rangers and City of Perth Lifesaving Club officers throughout the event.
Ranger Services have been consulted and, as in previous years, this request can be accommodated.
Control Tower: scaffolding and canvas structures will be required to ensure the safety of all participants and spectators.
Retail and Display Marquee: will be situated on the grassed area north-east of the Surf Club. The Parks and Landscape Department have been advised that this display should not cause any adverse effects to the grassed area.
Beach Wall Sponsors Board: to attract sponsorship the organisers will display sponsors boards on the beach wall. The organisers will ensure that this will not affect public access on footpaths and leave no residual damage to the beach wall. The Parks and Landscape Department have
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 144 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
suggested that approval be granted for the sponsors board subject to close liaison with Council staff prior to the event.
Climbing Wall, Abseiling Wall and Flying Fox: will be situated on the grassed area south-east of the Surf Club, professionally installed, storage containers stacked and locked into position. An area of grass will be removed and a concrete foundation laid one week prior to the event.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 145 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Following the event the organisers will ensure that the foundation is removed and new grass laid according to the Parks and Landscape requirements. The Parks and Landscape Department have been consulted and they advise that this activity will not have any adverse effects on the area. Close liaison with Parks and Landscape Services will be required prior to and following the event.
Licensed Area: the organisers have requested an enclosed licensed area for the sale of alcohol over the weekend period of the event:
Friday 6.00pm - 10.00pm Saturday 1.00pm - 10.00pm Sunday 1.00pm - 10.00pm
Although this would assist the organisers in the gaining of sponsorship and income for the event, it is considered that the provision of alcohol at an event of this nature is not necessary. Considering that it will be the peak of the summer season and that there will be many general public users of the beach, as well as participants, it is felt that the sale of alcohol would cause additional security and safety problems over the three days.
It is recommended, as stated in Council's Conditions of Hire - Reserves, that the sale or consumption of alcohol throughout the event be prohibited.
Fire Works Display: dependent on finances, the organisers have requested permission to hold a fireworks display at the southern end of City Beach. The fireworks would be supplied and operated by Cardilli Fireworks who are responsible for the display at the Royal Agricultural Society Show each year.
Environmental Health Services has been consulted and have advised that the display should be directed over the ocean and that the display will be conditional upon meeting the requirements of Council and the Mines Department.
Insurance: event insurance will be taken out prior to the event and copies forwarded to Council.
Safety and Security: the Wembley Police have been advised of the event and first aid facilities will be provided.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 146 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The State Emergency Service is employed during the event to assist in any emergencies and other duties.
A sketch map has been circulated displaying the positioning of all equipment.
Benefits:
The perceived benefits of conducting Ocean Action, Perth are the provision of:-
a safe and healthy lifestyle; the Town of Cambridge and its facilities; City Beach and its recreational value the local City Beach Surf Riders Club; The Town of Cambridge's support of surfing and water based activities in which youth are involved;
as well as
providing a major sporting event annually for spectators; and fostering additional trade for beach kiosk lessees.
CONCLUSION:
The objects of the Beach Classic are to promote the competition, the Council, City Beach and its recreational value and provide the community with the opportunity to participate in safe and healthy pursuits.
The Night Surfing segment is now recognised as a major surfing competition, attracting elite surf board riders such as past World Champion, Tom Carroll.
It is recommended that the 1997 Ocean Action Surfing Competition proceed in the format as proposed, subject to the standard Council Conditions of Hire for Reserves and continued liaison with Council officers and that the Council contributes to sponsorship of the event with its budgeted contribution of $3,000.
It is therefore recommended that:-
(i) approval be given to Universal Promotions to conduct Ocean Action Perth, incorporating the 8th annual Night Surfing Classic at City Beach from Wednesday 15 January to Sunday 19 January 1997 subject to:-
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 147 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
(a) the Council's Conditions of Hire for Reserves being complied with;
(b) continued liaison with Council Officers;
(c) the Town of Cambridge being recognised as a major sponsor of the 1997 Ocean Action Perth event.
(ii) the Council’s contribution to the event be $3,000;
(iii) the expenditure in (ii) above be charged to Budget Item ‘Community Recreation Program - Beach Classic/Night Surfing’;
(iv) the Town of Cambridge being recognised as a major sponsor of the 1997 Ocean Action Perth event.
Committee Meeting 18 November 1996
During discussion, Members agreed that the event commence at 10.30am on Wednesday 15, Thursday 16 and Friday 17 January, and 10.00am on Saturday 18, and Sunday 19 January 1997 to allow the general public access to the beach. It was also agreed that the sale of alcohol during the event be prohibited.
The Administration was requested to ensure that the promoters install appropriate signage advising of the event and to obtain further information on the proposed use of jet skis during the event, prior to the next meeting of the Council to be hold on Tuesday 26 November 1996.
FURTHER REPORT (Post Committee Meeting 18 November 1996)
During discussion on Item No. 8.15 - Ocean Action 1997 at the Corporate and Customer Services Committee meeting held on 18 November 1996, members raised a number of questions in relation to conditions associated with the event including the proposed use of jet skis.
These matters have been discussed with Mr Richard Stone, the event organiser, who advises as follows:
(i) Daily Commencement times will now be Wednesday - Friday 11.00am, Saturday - Sunday 10.00am
(ii) Sale of alcohol will not be permitted on the beachfront.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 148 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
(iii) Appropriate signage will be erected in advance of the event advising of the programme.
(iv) Jet Skis will be used as follows:-
(a) After dark "expression sessions" with only two jet skis operating at any one time will be presented during the night surfing competition. The area will be closed to swimmers.
(b) A round of State Championship will be run under the auspices of Jetsport WA. This is a set course race which will be held in a south westerly direction from the point of Floreat groyne. The race will be marshalled by representatives of the City of Perth Surf Club.
Moved by Cr Moore, seconded by Cr MacRae
That:-
(i) approval be given to Universal Promotions to conduct Ocean Action Perth, incorporating the 8th annual Night Surfing Classic at City Beach from Wednesday 15 January to Sunday 19 January 1997 subject to:-
(a) the Council's Conditions of Hire for Reserves being complied with;
(b) continued liaison with Council Officers;
(c) the Town of Cambridge being recognised as a major sponsor of the 1997 Ocean Action Perth event;
(d) an enclosed area for the sale of alcohol being prohibited;
(ii) the Council’s contribution to the event be $3,000;
(iii) the expenditure in (ii) above be charged to Budget Item ‘Community Recreation Program - Beach Classic/Night Surfing’;
(iv) the Town of Cambridge being recognised as a major sponsor of the 1997 Ocean Action Perth event.
During discussion Members expressed concern relating to the use of Jetskis during the event.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 149 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Amendment
Moved by Cr McConnell, seconded by Cr Smith
That the motion be amended by the addition of a further clause as follows:-
(i) (e) the use of Jetskis for the Ocean Action Perth event not being permitted.
Amendment carried
The amended motion was then put and carried.
The motion as carried is as follows:-
That:-
(i) approval be given to Universal Promotions to conduct Ocean Action Perth, incorporating the 8th annual Night Surfing Classic at City Beach from Wednesday 15 January to Sunday 19 January 1997 subject to:-
(a) the Council's Conditions of Hire for Reserves being complied with;
(b) continued liaison with Council Officers;
(c) the Town of Cambridge being recognised as a major sponsor of the 1997 Ocean Action Perth event;
(d) an enclosed area for the sale of alcohol being prohibited;
(e) the use of Jetskis for the Ocean Action Perth event not being permitted;
(ii) the Council’s contribution to the event be $3,000;
(iii) the expenditure in (ii) above be charged to Budget Item ‘Community Recreation Program - Beach Classic/Night Surfing’;
(iv) the Town of Cambridge being recognised as a major sponsor of the 1997 Ocean Action Perth event.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 150 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
CCS96.16 SPONSORSHIP - YOUTH PROJECT : DE-LICENSED NIGHT - FLOREAT HOTEL (File Reference: PRO0089)
BACKGROUND:
The City Beach High School Chaplain, Mr Paul Bonner, has requested that the Town of Cambridge provide assistance to a project which involves a de-licensed youth night event at the Floreat Hotel. It is anticipated that the youth will be aged between 13 and 18 years old. A total of 600 young people are expected to attend.
Two events are proposed; 19 December 1996 and 24 January 1997.
Should attempts for sponsorship from other sources prove unsuccessful, the organisers have requested that the Town of Cambridge underwrite the cost of transport estimated to be $300 for each night. A condition of de-licensing would be the provision of transport from the venue to the City Railway Station to assist youth returning home by public transport.
DETAILS:
The concept of de-licensing a hotel is to allow young people to be able to enter a hotel to enjoy musical entertainment and companionship in a non threatening environment which is drug and alcohol free. The 'demystifying' process of allowing young people to see what a hotel is like may also prevent later attempts by underage youth to gain entry under normal circumstances.
This proposal has the support of the Western Suburbs Drug and Alcohol Action Group, Floreat Rotary, WA Health Department and the Drug Taskforce, Wembley Police and MLA Elizabeth Constable.
According to the City Beach Chaplain, similar delicensing programs in Melbourne have proved enormously successful and have a strong potential to become self funding.
A budget for the two events is as follows:-
Expenditure Income Music $3,000 Rotary Sponsorship $2,500 Security $800 Health Department $2,500 Wages (Youth Worker) $6,000 Other Sponsorship (as $5,000 yet undetermined)
Buses $600 Ticket Sales (600 X 2 @ $12,000
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 151 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Ticketing (BOCS) $500 $10 per head) Advertising $5,000 Incidentials $2,O00 Total Expenditure $17,900 Total Income $22,000
Any profits from the events would be placed in a Rotary Trust Fund to be spent on alcohol and drug education initiatives within the western suburbs.
A number of corporate sponsors (radio stations, media and drink suppliers) are currently being approached to provide the outstanding sponsorship. To this extent the Community Development Officer has approached Department of Transport to provide the buses for transporting the youth for no charge. The outcome of that request is not known at this time.
COMMENTS:
The organisers of the delicensing proposal have requested that Council support this initiative by providing the expenditure of $600 for transport.
The project is supported by the Wembley Police, City Beach High School, Floreat Rotary, Western Suburbs Drug and Alcohol Action Group, WA Health Department, the Drug Taskforce and MLA Elizabeth Constable.
This is a worthy project which the Council may support (should other funding approaches be unsuccessful). The support would be recognised in all advertising and promotional material.
It is proposed that the provision of $600 be made from Budget Item "Other Community Recreation Programs".
Moved by Cr Moore, seconded by Cr MacRae
That:-
(i) the Town of Cambridge provide $600 to the organisers of the De-license Night at the Floreat Hotel for the hire of transport;
(ii) the expenditure in (i) above be charged to Budget Item "Other Community Recreation Programmes".
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 152 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES COMMITTEE
The report of the Development and Environmental Services Committee meeting held on 19 November 1996 was submitted as under:-
1. ATTENDANCE
Present : Time of Time of Entering Leaving
Members:
Cr Marlene Anderton (Presiding Member) 5.59pm 8.53pm
Mayor Ross Willcock 5.59pm 8.53pm Cr David Berry (Deputy) 5.59pm 8.53pm Cr Corinne MacRae 5.59pm 8.53pm Cr Kerry Smith 5.59pm 8.53pm
Observers: Cr David Johnston 5.59pm 8.09pm Cr Michael Moore 5.59pm 7.43pm
Officers:
Graham Partridge, Chief Executive Officer Ian Birch, Executive Manager, Development and Environmental Services Denise Ribbands, Administrative Officer (Committees)
Adjournments: Nil
Time meeting closed: 8.53pm
2. APOLOGIES
Cr Robina McConnell
3. LEAVE OF ABSENCE
Nil
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 153 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
REPORTS
DES96.1 10 NORTHWOOD STREET, WEST LEEDERVILLE - ADDITIONS TO EXISTING COMMERCIAL BUILDING (File Reference: PRO0131)
BACKGROUND:
DA/BA REFERENCE: 34DA-96 LANDOWNER: Telos Pty Ltd APPLICANT: As above ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme: General Commercial C2
COMPLIANCE:
The proposal complies with the provisions of the Town Planning Scheme with the exception of the front setback. Clause 84 of the Scheme specifies a front setback of 4.5 metres, whereas 2.5 metres is provided.
DETAILS:
Lot Area 486 square metres Gross Floor Area 484 square requiring (For Car Parking metres 10 parking Calc.) bays Floor Area 351.5 square plot ratio (For Plot Ratio metres 0.72 Calc.)
Approval is sought for additions to the existing commercial building at 10 Northwood Street, West Leederville. The proposal involves the construction of a single storey addition of 52.5 square metres for office use alongside the existing building, plus construction of new two storey ablutions and staff amenities at the rear of the building to replace those existing. In addition, two old sheds at the rear of the property are to be demolished and a new ten bays car park provided, and a new awning is to be constructed over the front of the existing building.
The car parking area at the rear of the property is accessed via a short right-of-way off Northwood Street serving only this property and two properties fronting Railway Parade (the French Bakehouse and Sontec buildings).
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 154 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Surrounding land use comprises mixed commercial uses, mainly showroom-warehouse developments.
COMMENT:
As outlined above, a variation is sought only in respect of the front setback of the additions. The development otherwise complies with the relevant Scheme standards. It is considered that the lesser setback of 2.5 metres is able to be supported as the existing building is built to a nil setback, as are other original developments in the surrounding commercial area. In addition, this setback allows for the introduction of some landscaping for the frontage of this development. Therefore, it is considered that there would be no adverse effects on the amenity of the surrounding commercial area as a result of this development.
It is recommended that the Council approves the development. An absolute majority decision is required due to non-compliance with a provision of the Scheme.
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That in accordance with the provisions of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme and the Metropolitan Region Scheme the Council APPROVES BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the application submitted by Telos Pty Ltd for additions to an existing commercial building on Lot 5 (No. 10) Northwood Street, West Leederville, as shown on plans dated 14 October 1996 and amended site plan dated 30 October 1996, subject to:-
(i) the ten bay car parking area and accessway to be sealed, drained, kerbed and marked to the Council’s specifications and satisfaction;
(ii) a detailed landscape and reticulation plan being submitted prior to the issue of a building licence, showing the location and type of proposed trees, shrubs and lawns to be installed. The landscaping and reticulation of the site is to be completed prior to the issue of the Certificate of Classification and maintained thereafter to the satisfaction of the Council;
(iii) the awning structure is to be self-supporting, and in the event that any columns are to be added, these are to be non-structural and located a minimum distance of 750mm from the road kerb face. The submission of an
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 155 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
engineer’s certification confirming the above details will be required at the building licence stage.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 156 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Footnote:
1. The applicant is advised that the building (in particular, all openings and provision of amenities) will be required to comply with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia to the satisfaction of the Council at the building licence stage. Any enquiries should be directed to Council’s Building Services.
2. The applicant is advised that plans should be forwarded to the WA Fire Brigades Board for their approval, and a copy of the approval to be provided prior to the issue of a building licence.
Carried BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 157 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.2 339 CAMBRIDGE STREET, WEMBLEY - RECONSIDERATION OF CONDITION - GROUP MEDICAL PRACTICE (File Reference: PRO 0407)
BACKGROUND:
DA/BA REFERENCE: N/A LANDOWNER: Dr Veling and BAFRA Pty Ltd APPLICANT: Dr Veling and Dr Wilson ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme: Shopping -S2
SITE HISTORY:
The subject site was originally occupied by the Wembley Post Office which was built in 1954.
An application for a Chicken Treat drive in takeaway fast food outlet was refused by the City of Perth in November 1990.
The City of Perth approved on 26 March 1991, an application for a change of use from a Post Office to consulting rooms and office, with the provision of 15 carbays on site subject to; “a suitable permanent barrier being constructed at the Cambridge Street end of the accessway to the Council’s satisfaction”. The applicant requested the reconsideration of this condition on the 18 March 1991 and Council at its meeting on 13 April 1992, resolved to amend the condition to read “The Cambridge Street accessway be used only as an emergency exit and the gates to be closed and locked at all other times”.
DETAILS:
A site inspection of the medical centre on Lot 50 (No.339) Cambridge Street, Wembley, indicated that the gates to the accessway onto Cambridge Street were not closed as required by the previous planning condition.
Following discussions with Council officers, the owners of the medical Centre have requested that the Council rescind the condition requiring that “the Cambridge Street accessway be used only as an emergency exit and the gates to be closed and locked at all other times”. This condition was originally placed on the development as at the time of approval there was no median strip to prevent vehicles travelling east on Cambridge Street from turning right into the accessway. The prohibition of
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 158 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
vehicles turning right into the site was considered important from a traffic management point of view, owing to the proximity of the accessway to the busy Cambridge/Jersey Streets intersection. The median strip has since been lengthened to prevent this situation occurring and vehicles leaving the accessway from Cambridge Street must now turn left.
Due to the change in situation, the owners of the medical centre are requesting that the Council rescind the condition.
COMMENT:
The Administration was requested to investigate the appropriateness of the condition.
Site inspections indicate that the accessway crossover to Cambridge Street is approximately 12 metres from the intersection. The accessway is not clearly visible to all motorists and the median strip has since been lengthened which prevents vehicles travelling east from turning right into the accessway. A no entry sign is present near the accessway. Additionally, the accessway is not the primary access/egress point to the site.
On this basis, it was considered that limited, specific use should ensure adequate safety. The owners have indicated that the accessway is used by the doctors vehicles only, to enable them to attend emergencies when they arise.
CONCLUSION:
The physical change in circumstances (ie the median strip extension) since this condition was originally imposed has largely removed the need for the condition. This factor combined with the fact that the site layout and position of the access, restricts its use for general traffic using the surgery, minimises potential traffic hazards.
It is recommended however, that Council does not rescind the condition as requested by the owners of the subject premises but modify the condition to read, “that the gates situated on the accessway crossover to Cambridge Street, be closed after 6 pm during week days and after 12 noon on Saturdays, when there are no staff vehicles parked in the accessway “. This will ensure that the accessway will not be used as a thoroughfare from Jersey to Cambridge Street.
It is therefore recommended that in accordance with the provisions of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme and
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 159 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Metropolitan Region Scheme the Council does not support the request submitted by Dr F Wilson and Dr J Veling for Council to rescind a condition previously imposed pertaining to the Cambridge Street access on the development at Lot 50 (No. 339) Cambridge Street, Wembley. However the Council is prepared to modify the condition to read:-
“the gates situated on the accessway crossover to Cambridge Street, to be closed after 6.00 pm during week days and after 12 noon on Saturday mornings, when there are no staff vehicles parked in the accessway”.
Committee Meeting 19 November 1996
During discussion, Members agreed not to rescind a condition previously imposed pertaining to the Cambridge Street access on the development at 339 Cambridge Street, and not to modify the condition.
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That in accordance with the provisions of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme the Council does not support the request submitted by Dr F Wilson and Dr J Veling for Council to rescind a condition previously imposed pertaining to the Cambridge Street access on the development at Lot 50 (No. 339) Cambridge Street, Wembley.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 160 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.3 3 TOR PLACE, CITY BEACH - HOME OCCUPATION (OFFICE) (File Reference: PRO0017)
BACKGROUND:
DA/BA REFERENCE: HO020 LANDOWNER: Mr and Mrs Floyd APPLICANT: Mrs Floyd ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme: Residential R12.5
COMPLIANCE:
The proposal complies with the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme.
DETAILS:
The applicant seeks Council approval to use one room of her residence as an office. It is proposed to operate an introduction agency at the residence, with the applicant being the sole operator of the home business. The room in which the home office is to be located is 10.08 sqm in area, and the equipment to be utilised for the business includes a telephone and facsimile. The applicant advises that the operating hours of the home office would be two or three hours per day, and no clients would visit the premises as all work is carried out by phone or fax.
COMMENTS:
Adjoining landowners have been notified of this proposal and given an opportunity to comment. No submissions were received on the proposal. One telephone call was received on the matter but any potential concerns were addressed when given the details of the application.
The proposed home office conforms with the Scheme requirements for home occupations (Scheme Clauses 138A and B refer). The use is unobtrusive and is unlikely to result in any negative amenity effects on the surrounding residential area. The use involves no client visits to the applicant’s premises.
Given the above, it is recommended that the application be approved.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 161 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 162 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That in accordance with the Town of Cambridge Planning Scheme and the Metropolitan Region Scheme, the Council approves the application submitted by Mrs Martine Floyd to operate a home occupation (office) from the dwelling at Lot 25 (No.3) Tor Place, City Beach, as shown on plans received 16 September 1996, subject to:
(i) compliance with the provisions of the Council’s Town Planning Scheme;
(ii) a fresh application for planning consent being submitted for further consideration by Council in the event the use is to continue beyond the limited 12 month approval period;
(iii) no clients visiting the subject premises.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 163 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.4 PROPOSED CHANGE OF STREET NAME - HAY STREET, JOLIMONT (File Reference: TES0128)
BACKGROUND:
The Council recently received a request from a resident regarding problems associated with the street name near his residence, namely Hay Street, Jolimont. The westernmost portion of Hay Street is located to the west of Jolimont Primary School in the small pocket of Jolimont within the Town’s municipal area. This section of Hay Street is in fact a service road off the main carriageway of Hay Street, and continues to become Dakin Street at its western end. The resident advised that persons unfamiliar with the area experience difficulties in locating properties along this section of Hay Street, examples including household service and repair people (including Council’s refuse and recycling contractors), guests and visitors, and emergency services. It has been suggested that this section be renamed Dakin Street, with street numbering continuing from number 38 (the last Dakin Street residence) upwards.
The procedure for change of street name requests is set down by the WA Geographic Names Committee (part of the Department of Land Administration) and involves consultation with affected landowners and residents, consideration by the Council, and submission of a recommendation to the WA Geographic Names Committee, which in turn recommends that the Hon Minister for Lands determines the request accordingly. The Geographic Names Committee does not provide any firm guidelines or criteria for the assessment of road renaming proposals, although the procedure manual states that changes of road name should have broad community support.
COMMENT:
Property owners and residents of the affected portion of Hay Street have been notified and invited to submit comments and suggestions on this proposal. The City of Subiaco and the Postmaster, Wembley Post Office, were also notified. A period of 21 days was provided for submissions to be received, closing Friday 11 October 1996. Fourteen residences are affected by the proposal.
A total of eight submissions have been received, seven in writing and one telephone advice. One written submission is from the City of Subiaco which has no objection to the proposal. Four
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 164 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
submissions support or raise no objection to the proposal, and the other four object to any change. The initiating resident’s correspondence represents a further submission in support of the change in street name.
Key points in support of the proposal are as follows:-
1. The difficulties in locating properties, as outlined above; 2. Renaming to Dakin Street would be relatively uncomplicated given that the existing Dakin Street numbers increase travelling to the west to the U-shaped bend which becomes Hay Street; 3. A similar service road situation exists on the north side of Hay Street almost opposite the subject section. That service road is named Cardigan Terrace.
Key points against the proposal are as follows:-
1. Some residents have experienced no such difficulties as those outlined above; 2. Hay Street is a well-known landmark which is readily located, and renaming this portion may in itself cause an “identity” problem; 3. There would be some time, effort and cost involved in advising change of address, replacing street numbers, and so on; 4. An identical suggestion was raised and considered some years ago, and was rejected by the majority of affected residents.
Excluding the submission from the City of Subiaco, who have no direct interest in this matter, the result of the consultation process is inconclusive as there are four supportive submissions and four objecting ones (including the initiator’s support). On the basis of this result, it is recommended that the request for change of street name be refused. It is considered that while the proposed change of street name appears to have merit, in the absence of strong support from affected residents as required under the Geographic Names Committee procedure, the suggested change should not be made at this stage.
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That the landowners and residents of Hay Street, Jolimont be advised that the Council has considered a request for change of street name and has resolved not to support the request due to
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 165 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
there being no broad majority support for the proposal from affected landowners and residents.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 166 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.5 METROPOLITAN REGION SCHEME - NORTH WEST CORRIDOR OMNIBUS AMENDMENT NO. 2 (PROPOSAL 14) - LINK ROAD STEPHENSON AVENUE TO PEARSON STREET (File Reference:PLA0059)
BACKGROUND:
This (omnibus) amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS) included a range of proposals for the Cities of Stirling and Wanneroo. Of specific interest to the Town of Cambridge was Proposal 14 which related to the western suburbs highway, involving a proposed link road between the highway and Pearson Street.
The Council at it’s Meeting held on 18 June 1996, in response to this MRS Amendment Proposal, resolved as follows:-
“That the Administration be requested to write to the Western Australian Planning Commission highlighting the Council’s total opposition to the concept of a western suburbs highway.”
The WAPC was advised that the impact of a regional traffic route through environmentally important bushland and a major public recreational area (Wembley Golf Course) is totally unacceptable to the Council. It was on this basis that the Council objected to the amendment as proposed.
DETAILS:
The report on the submissions of this amendment to the MRS has been released by the WAPC. With regard to the proposed link road between Stephenson Avenue and Pearson Street (Proposal 14) the WAPC considered that inadequate justification had been put forward to support the relocation of this link road and accordingly it was concluded that the amendment should be modified to delete this proposal. The decision to delete the proposal, however, made no reference to the matter of the overall Stephenson Highway alignment, as raised by the Town.
Gazettal of the amendment is imminent.
COMMENT:
This advice on the WAPC decision is reported to the Council for its information.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 167 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That the report outlining the decision of the Western Australian Planning Commission to delete the proposal for a link road between Pearson Street and Stephenson Avenue as proposed in the amendment, be received.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 168 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.6 DELEGATED DECISIONS AND NOTIFICATIONS (File Reference: ADM0048)
BACKGROUND:
Delegated Decisions
The following items for the month ending 31 October 1996 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:-
Change of use from Warehouse to Office: Lot 1, 15 Harrogate Street, Leederville Vacant Strata subdivision: Lot 233, 426 Cambridge Street, Floreat Subdivision conditions following Ministerial approval: 5 Tilton Terrace, City Beach Temporary advertising balloon (renewal): Gayton Road shops, City Beach Vacant Strata subdivision: Lot 129, 261 Salvado Road, Floreat
Notifications
The following items are notifications of appeals and decisions for Council’s information:-
Appeals received
The following appeals against decisions of Council were lodged with the Minister for Planning during October:-
Wembley Hotel, Cambridge Street, Wembley: Removal of leadlights 204 Railway Parade, Leederville: Proposed Consulting Rooms 326 Railway Parade, Leederville: Proposed Consulting Rooms 127 Herdsman Parade, Wembley: Proposed Shed 10 Carlton Street, Leederville: Single dwelling
No appeals against decisions of Council were lodged with the Minister for Local Government during October.
Appeals determined
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 169 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
No appeals were determined by the Minister for Planning during October. One appeal was determined by the Minister for Local Government; Lot 103 Glen Street, Leederville: Single dwelling - Upheld
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That the report relating to delegated decisions and notifications dealt with under delegated authority for the month ending 31 October 1996, be received.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 170 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.7 MAJOR SPORTING FACILITIES IN THE PERTH METROPOLITAN REGION - DISCUSSION PAPER WESTERN AUSTRALIAN PLANNING COMMISSION (File Reference: PLA0083)
BACKGROUND:
In August of this year the West Australian Planning Commission released a discussion paper on a study into the provision of major sporting facilities in Perth. The study came out of a decision of the (then) State Planning Commission (SPC) in October 1993, agreeing to the expansion of spectator facilities at Subiaco Oval (Town and Country Stand).
The SPC resolved to:-
seek Government support for the preparation of a strategic plan for major sport and recreation developments in the Metropolitan Region. initiate a programme to develop the WACA Ground/Gloucester Park precinct as the Metropolitan Regions multi-purpose sport and entertainment complex.
Submissions on the study have been requested to be received by 11 November 1996, however, contact with the person to whom submissions are to be sent, has confirmed that submissions received after this date will still be considered.
DETAILS:
The report is divided into two parts:-
Part A Strategy for Sport and Recreation Facilities Part B WACA Ground/Gloucester Park Precinct
Part A
The strategy for sport and recreational facilities looks at the following; decision making, international and national facilities, regional sporting facilities, local sport and recreation and development guidelines for multi sport recreation centres (regional centres).
With regard to decision making on the provision of sporting and recreational facilities, particularly major sporting uses, the Ministry for Sport and Recreation is seen as having a pivotal role.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 171 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The Ministry is also seen as a reference source in providing advice on the provision of local sport and recreation facilities. Extensive consultation is recommended with relevant state sporting associations and Local Government Authorities prior to their selection and protection. Existing National/International facilities in the Perth Metropolitan Region are identified in the report. This, of course, includes Perry Lakes Stadium, located in the Town of Cambridge, providing for athletics and also a home for Rugby Union on the adjoining warmup track facility. With regard to athletics, the study recognises that this facility is now in excess of thirty years old and there is a need for major upgrading. This includes works to the track, spectator facilities and communications facilities. It is further noted that the site experiences summer wind patterns which create some difficulties during national and international events. Any refurbishment would have to take this matter into account. No recommendation is put forward as to whether this facility should be retained or not. It is merely stated that if it is to be retained, then considerable investment would be required to bring it up to an acceptable standard.
It is of interest to note that the Perth Superdrome located adjacent to the Town’s boundary, accommodates a number of international sports. This includes; swimming and diving, fencing, boxing, gymnastics, hand ball and volley ball.
With regard to football, the report states that it is unlikely that WA could justify a new football stadium in the future. Subiaco Oval and the WACA are identified as being suitable for all foreseeable future requirements. This conclusion is based on the existing use of the two venues for football, and the recent approval granted by the WAPC for lighting of Subiaco Oval.
New regional sporting facilities are identified for the more outlying areas of the Metropolitan Region, some distance from the Town of Cambridge.
In response to the funding question in providing for major sporting facilities, the report suggests that there should be joint funding, with Local Government providing part of the development costs and the State Government providing the balance. This is proposed on the basis that Local Government’s ratepayers receive an advantage because of the location of a major facility in their midst. This is not, however, always the case, as the Town presently experiences with Subiaco Oval, the Town’s residential community derives virtually no benefit from being in close proximity to the Oval and in fact, experiences
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 172 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
considerable loss of amenity on match days, due to traffic and parking congestion, noise and behavioural problems.
Joint provision of facilities particularly between the Education Department and Local Government is strongly encouraged. Both existing urban areas and new developing residential areas can benefit from cooperation between the Education Department and Local Government. Existing examples are given in the City of Stirling, Shire of Swan and the City of Bayswater.
Part B
The WACA is recognised as a long term venue for cricket and possibly some other sports. It also recognises that given the recent events concerning Subiaco Oval, that it is unlikely there is a long term future for football being played there.
The WA Trotting Association has no plans to leave Gloucester Park. While the Trotting Association remains at this venue, and Trinity College also remains, the WACA/Gloucester Park precinct is limited to the extent to which it can accommodate a new broader range of regional recreational facilities.
The study looked at the need for and location of a major exhibition centre in the precinct. However, while existing uses remain, there would appear to be insufficient land available to accommodate such a centre. Such a centre is envisaged as conducting major concerts, special major functions (like the Edinburgh Tatoo), fireworks displays (eg Australia Day) and large meetings such as political rallies. The report states that the WA Government is working towards the development of a major exhibition/convention centre in the vicinity of Wellington Street. It is not stated exactly where in Wellington Street this might be, however, a likely place would be the former Metropolitan Markets site at the western end of the City.
COMMENT:
The findings of this report have little immediate or direct effect on the Town of Cambridge. The existence of Perry Lakes as the regional athletics venue is merely acknowledged without making any recommendations that it should remain. The expanded use of Subiaco Oval as the home of AFL Football is merely recognised, without any comment on its impacts on surrounding areas.
In responding to this report, it should be pointed out to the WAPC that Perry Lakes Stadium is owned freehold by the Town of
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 173 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Cambridge and that decisions on the future use of this facility remain essentially with the Town. The Town will be investigating a range of options for the future use of the land. In considering this matter the Town has to have regard for the proximity of surrounding residential areas, particularly if the site as a major sporting venue was to be intensified in use.
With regard to Subiaco Oval, the WAPC is reminded that the Town remains firmly opposed to the introduction of night football given the significant disruption to the amenities of its residents that this will bring.
As a general comment, the importance of taking into account the views of local authorities when locating major venues, should be conveyed in the strongest possible terms. This is of particular importance in considering the impact that such uses will have on the amenity of local residents and businesses.
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That the comments contained in the report on the discussion paper - Major Sporting Facilities in the Perth Metropolitan Region, be included in the Council's submission to the Western Australian Planning Commission.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 174 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.8 210 CAMBRIDGE STREET, WEMBLEY (CONSULTING ROOMS) - NON-COMPLIANCE WITH PLANNING APPROVAL CONDITIONS (File Reference: PRO0203)
BACKGROUND:
DA/BA REFERENCE: 93/2049 (PCC) LANDOWNER: Milpo Pty Ltd APPLICANT: Drs Barry White and Graham Guest ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme: Residential R40
DETAILS:
In February 1994, the former Perth City Council granted planning consent for the use of the residence at 210 Cambridge Street, Wembley as two medical consulting rooms. The owners of the site (two psychologists) occupy the premises. As a result of a Councillor enquiry, it became apparent that the site was occupied and operating without compliance with the Council’s approval conditions, which are as follows:-
1. The submission of a detailed landscaping plan to the satisfaction of the City Planner. (Such a plan should include several trees which will be substantial upon maturity.)
2. The redesign of the car parking areas to reduce the amount of paving and increase the amount of area on the site available for site landscaping.
3. A maximum of two consultants practising from the site at any one time.
4. The treatment of the right-of-way being undertaken as proposed in the applicant’s letter dated 11 February 1994.
At the Council’s meeting held on 27 February 1996, the applicants’ request for deletion of condition 4 was refused and the Council directed that the development approval conditions be complied with within 28 days. At the 9 April 1996 meeting, the detailed specification for the laneway paving condition was determined. Further verbal communications with the applicants requesting compliance with planning approval conditions has
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 175 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
culminated in our correspondence dated 5 September 1996 serving notice to carry out the necessary works to ensure the development fully complies with planning approval conditions WITHIN 28 DAYS. Works relating to site landscaping, marking of car parking bays, and laneway paving are required.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 176 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
COMMENT:
At the time of preparing this report (6 November 1996), the consulting rooms development continues to operate in breach of Council’s planning approval conditions. As outlined above, the landowners have been advised and given notice on several occasions, and these notices have not been complied with. The most recent correspondence from the applicants’ (dated 5 November 1996) indicates that site landscaping is about to be completed, and that they are liaising with other property owners having access off the subject laneway with a view to jointly carrying out the laneway improvements. Further advice is to be provided within 3 weeks, by about 30 November.
Given that the Council has reaffirmed its position regarding the approval conditions for this development, the only option available to Council in this case is to pursue enforcement action if compliance is not expedited. It is recommended that the Council resolves to give the site owners a further FINAL notice of 28 days to comply with planning approval conditions, after which time legal proceedings will be commenced for a breach of the Scheme.
The issue of compliance with conditions of approval for this site has previously been considered by the Council.
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That:-
(i) the owners of the consulting rooms development at 210 Cambridge Street, Wembley be given final notice that the property is to fully comply with all conditions of planning approval 93/2049 (as previously advised) within 28 days of the notice being served;
(ii) in the event that the necessary works have not been completed in accordance with (i) above within 28 days, the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to initiate legal proceedings for contravention of the conditions of Council’s planning approval 93/2049.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 177 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.9 WESTERN SUBURBS DISTRICT PLANNING COMMITTEE - REPORT (File Reference: ADM0056)
BACKGROUND:
The last meeting of the Western Suburbs District Planning Committee (WSDPC) was held at the Shire of Peppermint Grove on 19 September 1996. The meeting was attended by Cr MacRae and Ian Birch, Executive Manager, Development and Environmental Services.
DETAILS:
Items considered at the meeting included the following:-
Coastal Policy
The draft framework released by the WAPC for coastal development was discussed. Some comments were put forward to the committee from the Western Suburbs Technical Officers Committee. (The Town of Cambridge considered this matter at its last Council Meeting and comments have been forwarded to the Planning Commission on their draft.)
The Councillor representative from Mosman Park took the opportunity to put forward a suggestion for Western Suburbs Councils to develop a regional approach to planning issues; such as coastal planning policy. Of immediate concern to Mosman Park in this regard is their acceptance of responsibility for public open space resulting from the development of Buckland Hill, which will place a severe strain on their financial and administrative resources. This open space is considered by them to be of a broader regional significance.
The Town of Mosman Park is developing this idea and it is suggested that the Town of Cambridge might monitor its progress and provide input and comment as it considers necessary.
Community Codes
The area representative from the Ministry for Planning advised that the WAPC was in the process of amalgamating, revising and expanding its development control policies to form what would be known as the community codes. The codes would have greatest relevance to newly developing suburbs and communities
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 178 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
although they would also have some reference to subdivisions in existing areas. The Residential Planning Codes would remain separate from the Community Codes. It was anticipated that the codes would be released for comment later this year.
Undergrounding of Perth to Fremantle Railway Line
Three areas were identified as worthy of detailed study - Cottesloe Town Centre, Swanbourne Station and Victoria Street. This proposal is of no direct interest to the Town of Cambridge although it is of interest to note that the proposed undergrounding of the railway at Subiaco has met with some community opposition.
Battleaxe and Pedestrian Accessway Policies
The Ministry advised that the revised policy for battleaxe and pedestrian accessways has now been formally adopted. The Town of Cambridge had commented on the draft, principally to allow greater flexibility for considering battleaxe leg widths and battleaxe lot areas. This was not included in the final policy, although, it is noted that flexibility still exists in the normal subdivision process.
Local Government Compliance with the Metropolitan Region Scheme
The new planning amendment legislation requires that local authorities bring their planning schemes into conformity with the Metropolitan Region Scheme. Specific reference was made to the ‘Fremantle amendment’ to the Region Scheme, which requires some local authorities in the western suburbs to now amend their own schemes. Further, this could require assessment by the Environmental Protection Authority under the new legislation. This will place a financial and resources burden on local authorities and the Ministry for Planning was requested to provide assistance by way of mapping material, at the appropriate scale, to assist in implementing the changes
Appeals to Minister for Local Government
Difficulty experienced by the Town of Cambridge with appeals on development not requiring planning approval, and therefore being dealt with by the Minister for Local Government, was raised. It was apparent that none of the other Member Councils was in this position as they required planning approval for development.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 179 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The Committee agreed to request that in matters of appeals against the Residential Planning Codes, Council Policies and By- laws, concerning residential development, that the Minister for Local Government be given the opportunity to consider advice from the Town Planning Appeal Committee regarding planning matters.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 180 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Freight Transport
The Committee’s view was sought on which form of transport (rail or road) they considered to be important in terms of freight for the metropolitan area. Members agreed that rail transport should take pre-eminence.
Proposed Rail Crossing between Nash Street and Ashton Avenue - Study
The Committee was informed that a consultants brief had been prepared by the Working Group and that submissions would be sought by the end of October. Work on the study was programmed to be completed by the end of January or February next year.
Cr MacRae expressed concern that the City of Subiaco had pre- empted the results of the study by seeking support from the Subiaco Redevelopment Authority for a road link across the railway line at the junction of Aberdare and Railway Roads.
North Fremantle
Members noted that North Fremantle was affected to a large extent by western suburbs planning and policy issues and it was resolved that the WAPC consider that the City of Fremantle nominate an ex-officio member to represent North Fremantle on the WSDPC.
Next Meeting
The next meeting of the WSDPC is scheduled for 21 November 1996 at the Town of Mosman Park.
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That the report relating to the business of the Western Suburbs District Planning Committee be received.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 181 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.10 144 HOLLAND STREET, WEMBLEY - HOME OCCUPATION (VISUAL ARTS STUDIO) (File Reference: PRO0489)
BACKGROUND:
DA/BA REFERENCE: HO021 LANDOWNER: Mrs JE Melentis APPLICANT: Mr AN Melentis ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme: Residential R20
COMPLIANCE:
The proposal complies with the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme.
DETAILS:
The applicant seeks Council approval to use one room of his mother’s residence as a visual arts studio. It is proposed to establish the studio to produce fine art prints and paintings for sale to galleries and dealers. The applicant is the sole operator, and the proposed home business results from a small business course through the New Enterprise Incentive Scheme conducted at Stirling Regional Business Centre. The room in which the home office is to be located is 14 square metres in area, and the equipment to be utilised for the business comprises an etching press, light table, drawing table and paper drawers. The applicant advises that the studio would only be used for art preparation, with there being no storage or distribution of goods at the site. Finished product is to be stored at the applicant’s residence in Hamersley. There would be no visits to the residence in conjunction with the home business.
COMMENTS:
Adjoining landowners and residents have been notified of this proposal and given an opportunity to comment. One telephone submission was received which raises no objection to the proposal.
The proposed home studio conforms with the Scheme requirements for home occupations (Scheme Clauses 138A and B refer). The use is unobtrusive and is unlikely to result in any
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 182 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
negative amenity effects on the surrounding residential area. The use involves no client visits to the applicant’s premises.
Based on the information above, the proposal meets the Scheme guidelines for home occupations and can therefore be supported. In accordance with Council practice, the application is recommended for approval for a period of twelve months, after which time the applicant would have to seek renewal.
It is therefore recommended that in accordance with the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme and the Metropolitan Region Scheme, the Council approves the application submitted by Mr AN Melentis on behalf of Mrs JE Melentis to operate a home occupation (visual arts studio) from the dwelling at Lot 1659 (No 144) Holland Street, Wembley, as shown on plans received 21 October 1996, subject to:-
(i) approval being limited to the size and scope of operation as described in the application for planning approval;
(ii) compliance with the provisions of the Council’s Town Planning Scheme;
(iii) a fresh application for planning consent being submitted for further consideration by Council in the event the use is to continue beyond the limited 12 month approval period.
Committee Meeting 19 November 1996
During discussion, Members noted that the applicant does not reside at the dwelling. It was therefore questioned whether it could be considered as a home occupation.
The Executive Manager, Development and Environmental Services advised that the Planning Scheme does not specifically require the person to actually be living at the place where the home occupation is carried out. The scheme also provides for one other person to be employed other than the occupier of the land.
Members therefore agreed that the applicant be advised of the terms of the scheme in this regard.
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 183 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
That in accordance with the provisions of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme and the Metropolitan Region Scheme, the application submitted by Mr A N Melentis on behalf of Mrs J E Melentis to operate a home occupation (visual arts studio) from the dwelling at Lot 1659 (No 144) Holland Street, Wembley, as shown on plans received 21 October 1996, subject to:-
(i) approval being limited to the size and scope of operation as described in the application for planning approval;
(ii) compliance with the provisions of the Council’s Town Planning Scheme;
(iii) a fresh application for planning consent being submitted for further consideration by Council in the event the use is to continue beyond the limited 12 month approval period;
(iv) no additional persons being permitted to work at the premises as per Clause 138B(1) (a) and (b) of the Town Planning Scheme.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 184 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.11 LAND NORTH OF OCEANIC DRIVE - ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN (File Reference: ENS0106)
BACKGROUND:
Resulting from the Public Environmental Review of Bold Park and Environs and approval for the development of the Town of Cambridge Administration Centre on a former quarry site north of Oceanic Drive, the Minister for the Environment set a number of conditions concerning the environmental protection of the area.
Condition 6 of the Minister’s statement requires the preparation of an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) for landuse in degraded areas north of Oceanic Drive. According to the terms of the condition, the plan was to have been prepared by 9 August 1996.
Whilst Council had budgeted funds for the preparation of this plan, because of the broader issue of Council’s dispute with the State Government over the Deed of Agreement for Bold Regional Park, the preparation of the EMP has not been commenced. The Council has previously resolved to include natural bushland areas north of Oceanic Drive in Bold Regional Park and to rehabilitate existing degraded areas. In these circumstances, as an EMP is also required for the regional park, there seemed to be some sense in preparing just the one plan for the whole area.
Council wrote to the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) in these terms in April 1996. A response to this letter was not received until the end of September 1996. The DEP has not accepted the Town’s submission and insists that the requirements of condition 6 be fulfilled.
COMMENT:
Despite the response from the DEP, it is still contended that there is considerable sense in awaiting the outcome of negotiations with the Government over the creation of Bold Regional Park before addressing this particular condition. It is argued that the establishment of the Town of Cambridge Administration building has introduced no added environmental threat to the area and if anything, its low scale and natural landscaping around the building has actually added value to the area. It is further suggested that the Town’s presence here has actually served to
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 185 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
discourage activity in the area which might be damaging to the environment; such as use of four wheel drive vehicles.
Nevertheless, given the insistence of the DEP, there is nothing to prevent the Town from proceeding with the preparation of the Environmental Management Plan for the subject land. This would be quite independent from, and would not affect the Town’s position with respect to the Bold Regional Park Deed.
It is therefore recommended that the administration prepare of a study brief to seek submissions from suitable consultants to prepare an Environmental Management Plan for the degraded areas north of Oceanic Drive. The EMP is to include proposals for:-
reconstruction of vegetation associations and habitats to link the Limestone heaths and Eucalyptus woodlands to the north and south of the former drive-in site; protection of regionally significant species of vegetation; timing for implementation of the EMP
Within the terms of the Minister’s condition, the EMP is to be prepared in consultation with the DEP and the Kings Park Board.
The Council has a budgeted sum of $20,000 for this project. It is anticipated, however, that the preparation of the EMP would cost considerably less than this figure.
The DEP have requested advice from the Council as to the anticipated completion date of the Environmental Management Plan. To allow time for the selection of a consultant, the preparation of the plan and gaining its final acceptance, it is suggested that a completion date of the end of April 1997 is reasonable.
One matter that continues to stand out as a glaring conflict with the Minister’s conditions for this area, is the Metropolitan Region Scheme alignment for Stephenson Highway. This proposed road carves a path right through the former Skyline Drive-In site and there would have seemed to be little point in rehabilitating this area if it is to be destroyed at a later time by the construction of the road. The Town, of course, remains strongly opposed to this road alignment, particularly having regard to its impact on the important natural bushland of this area.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 186 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
This matter has been raised with the DEP, however, they have not provided any response. It needs to be included for consideration in the preparation of the Environmental Management Plan for the area.
It is therefore recommended that the Administration prepare a study brief in consultation with the Department of Environmental Protection and the Kings Park Board, to seek submissions from suitable consultants to prepare an Environmental Management Plan for degraded areas north of Oceanic Drive as required by Condition 6.4, Landuse Strategy for Bold Park and Environs (635), issued by the Minister for The Environment pursuant to provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1986.
Committee Meeting 19 November 1996
During discussion, Members considered that it was not appropriate to carry out an environmental management plan for the area at this stage whilst the boundaries of the Bold Regional Park remain in question.
It was agreed that the Council write to the Minister for the Environment requesting that the preparation of the environmental management plan be held over until the broad issue of Bold Regional Park is resolved.
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That the Council write to the Minister of the Environment requesting that the preparation of the environmental management plan be held over until the broad issue of Bold Regional Park is resolved.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 187 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.12 124 SALVADO ROAD, WEMBLEY - DAY CENTRE FOR THE AGED (File Reference: PRO 0265)
BACKGROUND:
DA/BA REFERENCE: 27DA -96 LANDOWNER: Sisters of Mercy APPLICANT: Parry and Rosenthal Architects ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme: Residential R40
COMPLIANCE:
The proposal is an unlisted use within the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme and as such there are no specific prescribed standards in the Scheme, however the Scheme does provide general clauses to enable Council to make its determination. The application generally complies with the provisions of Clause 53 relating landscaping, plot ratio, and setback requirements for non residential uses within a residential area.
Particular attention was given to Clause 139 (2) of the Scheme which indicates that the number of car parking spaces to be provided should be determined based on nature of the proposed use. It was considered on the basis of the information provided by the applicant that the 4 car parking spaces would be sufficient as the Senior citizens would be transported to the site via a minibus and the proposed parking space would accommodate the staff and guest speaker requirements.
However, the primary planning consideration in this instance is the appropriateness of a non residential use located mid block of a residential street. This shall be discussed in further detail below.
DETAILS:
Lot area - 832 square metres Plot Ratio - 0.25:1 Open Space - 75 %
Approval is sought for a Day Centre for the Aged at 124 Salvado Road, Wembley. The existing house is to be demolished and a single storey rendered brick building with colorbond roofing is
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 188 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
proposed. The bulk of the building is setback approximately 8 metres from the street alignment.
Plans submitted showing the floor layout includes two large activity rooms, a kitchen/dining area, male and female toilets, hairdressing, office and meeting room.
Provision for four vehicle parking bays is provided at the rear of the property, in addition to a drop off and pick up area. The parking layout is designed in the shape of a crescent which allows a mini bus to do a circuit in forward gear. Sole vehicle access via the right - of - way is also proposed.
Landscaping is proposed within the front setback, along the side boundaries and also at the rear of the building. A relatively large courtyard is also proposed to be provided on the eastern side of the building.
The premises in question addresses Salvado Road and is situated midblock of a residential street block. Opposite the site is land to be developed by the Subiaco Redevelopment Authority.
In support of this application the applicant has provided the following summarised information:-
(i) Hours of Operation - 4 days per week for 5 - 6 hours per day.
(ii) Average number of Seniors - Approximately 13 persons per day.
(iii) Staffing - One Coordinator who will be a senior staff member of the Catherine McAuley Family Centre, and one assistant.
(iv) Car Parking - One Centre vehicle will be part of the new project and be used for collecting participants from their own homes and returning them at the end of each day. Senior attendees will not be driving their own vehicles ( and this will be a condition of attending).
(v) A staff member will park their vehicle at our main Centre to collect and return the transit each day. This would mean that there would be two cars regularly parked behind the building during open days with an extra vehicle when a guest speaker or a supervisor visited.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 189 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
(vi) Activities - The concept is to provide recreational type activities to maintain a person’s individual skills - with cooking, craft activities, education and support for health, maintenance, social interaction, information about community services available to enhance quality of life as well as social outings, and provide general interest groups relevant to individual needs and interests.
(vii) Client Group - Seniors living in the North Metropolitan area who feel isolated within their homes and who require support and assistance with tasks of daily living or those seeking interaction and social stimulation. The applicant has indicated that the intent of the program is to “ provide a service to the seniors in the Town of Cambridge community that will enhance their quality of life and assist in their ability to remain in their homes”.
COMMENT:
Within a Residential R40 zone a Day Centre for the Aged is an unlisted use, requiring the applicant to carry out an advertising procedure in accordance with Clause 37 of the Scheme, prior to the Council determining the application.
Advertising Procedure:
The applicant has completed the advertising procedure, which commenced on 3 September 1996 and concluded on 24 September 1996.
Two letters and one telephone call were received objecting to the proposal. Given the respondents’ close proximity to the site, the comments are considered representative of those most likely to be affected by the proposal.
The main concerns can be summarised as follows:-
(i) The proposal would adversely impact on both the desirability and subsequently the value of adjoining properties;
(ii) The proposal would generate an increase in parking and traffic volumes within in the residential locality. In particular, there was concern that the required parking bays could not be contained on site and that the visitors bays provided for the units at the rear of the property would be utilised by clients or visitors associated with the proposal;
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 190 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
(iii) It was considered that the centre would be classed as a commercial premises and as such should be located in the elsewhere (such as in the new Subiaco Redevelopment Centre. A commercial area is located in close proximity;
(iv) Council needs to retain the unique character of Wembley much of which is represented by the existing older housing stock. Thus, keep the north side of Salvado Road residential.
There is some validity to these comments, although in this particular instance, the nature of the proposed use would be less intensive then that normally associated with non residential uses and as such the amenity of the adjoining residences is less likely to be unduly affected.
Nevertheless, the Council must be mindful of accepting such information on the manner of operations of a program, which are not enforceable and could intensify at a later stage following the establishment of the program or should the property change ownership in the future. Additionally, once a site has been developed for a non residential use, it is exceptionally difficult to revert back to residential.
Scheme provisions:
When assessing applications for non-residential activities in residential zones the Scheme requires that Council must consider the aims and objectives for development in residential zones. Primarily, these require that the amenity of residential area be protected from any interaction between different intensities of uses or incompatible uses.
The draft scheme does provide for a limited number of non residential uses which serve the local residents, where they are small in scale and are not likely to cause any significant disturbance to adjacent residences.
The main concern with this application is the location of a non residential use mid block of a residential street. This is contrary to present planning objectives which are primarily to retain the existing residential integrity of a locality and deter `ad hoc ‘ non residential intrusion within such a locality.
Precedent
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 191 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The Council must be careful that it does not create an undesirable precedent which would allow the proliferation of non residential uses along Salvado Road to the detriment of the established residential parts.
Loss of Residential Land
Although residential lots adjoining busy roads do not offer high levels of residential amenity, it is important to maintain the existing stock of residential land. On a broader (regional) scale, with the increasing demand to house Perth’s rapidly increasing population and the decline in the rates of persons per dwelling, additional housing is required just to keep the local population stable. Given this, Council should exercise caution when determining such applications to ensure that existing available residential land is not unnecessarily eroded.
Under the current zoning, the subject site has the potential to support three grouped dwellings.
Compatibility:
The proposed building addresses Salvado Road and is of a similar scale to the surrounding residential properties. However, the premises would be left vacant at night and on the weekends.
Positive aspects of the proposal:
Notwithstanding the above comments, the application does have some merits including:-
(i) Such a facility would provide a valuable community service.
(ii) The scale of the proposed development is consistent with adjoining residential properties and is located within a medium residential zone.
(iii) Given the nature of the use, the hours of its operation and the anticipated number of clients, the proposed use is less intensive then that normally associated with commercial/community uses and as such would have less impact on the amenity of the adjoining properties.
(iv) The proposal complies with the provisions of Clause 53 relating to building setbacks, plot ratio, and landscaping requirements. Furthermore, sole access is provided off
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 192 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
the right - of - way and there is sufficient vehicle parking provided on site.
This is an unusual request and if Council were to consider approval it should do so with caution and strictly on the basis that the intensity of the use does not increase in the future and that all parking be contained on site. The hairdressing facility would also have to remain for the exclusive use of the Senior citizens participating in the program.
However, the problem with such conditions, is the difficulty associated with monitoring and enforcement. Furthermore, the suggested conditions do not address the primary planning concern which is retaining the residential integrity/amenity of a locality and deterring `ad hoc’ non residential intrusion within such a locality - particularly when the subject site is located mid block.
Alternative location:
As a general rule, non residential activities should not be located mid block of a residential street. It is preferable to have such activities situated to create a buffer between commercial and residential uses, or located at the ends of residential street blocks with frontages to busy roads (to maintain the residential integrity of the street block).
Council decisions to date have been consistent with the need to consolidate commercial and other non residential uses into appropriate areas in order to retain the existing residential amenity and to provide for a variety of housing types close to the city centre.
CONCLUSION:
Clearly, such a facility would provide a valuable community service and the nature of the proposed business is low intensity, which minimises potential adverse impacts on adjoining residential properties.
On balance, however, it is considered that there are not sufficient planning grounds to support the proposal in view of the issues discussed above. As such, it is considered that use of the property for an Aged Day Centre would be contrary to the orderly and proper planning of the locality by permitting the `ad hoc’ incursion of non residential activity into a well established
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 193 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
residential area and may establish an undesirable precedent for further non residential uses along Salvado Road to the detriment of the established residential locality.
It is therefore recommended that the application be refused.
Committee Meeting 8 October 1996
During discussion, Mr M Reutens addressed the Committee in relation to this matter. Members agreed that the proposal would provide a valuable community service, however, in order to retain the existing residential amenity, the majority of members agreed that the application be refused.
The Administration was requested to investigate the matter of provision of facilities for the Aged in the Town and in the course of these investigations to consult with the Catherine McAuley Centre.
His Worship, The Mayor, Ross Willcock and Cr Anderton requested that they be recorded as voting against the motion for refusal.
It was therefore resolved that 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:-
the use of the property as Day Centre for the Aged would represent an ‘ad hoc’ incursion of non residential activity into a residential area and establishing an undesirable precedent for further non residential uses along Salvado Road to the detriment of the established residential locality;
the Council refuses the application submitted by Parry and Rosenthal Architects on behalf of the Sisters of Mercy for the construction of a Day Centre for the Aged on Lot 823 (No.124) Salvado Road, Wembley, as shown on plans submitted and dated 30 August 1996.
Council Meeting - 15 October 1996
During discussion, Cr Anderton requested that this item be referred back to the Committee for further consideration. Cr Anderton requested that representatives of the Council, Home
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 194 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
and Community Care and the Catherine McAuley Centre meet to discuss all the issues associated with this planning application.
Cr McConnell asked if any investigation had been undertaken into the need for aged and frail aged facilities in City Beach and Floreat.
The Council therefore resolved that the item relating to the application for the construction of a Day Centre for the Aged at No. 124 Salvado Road, Wembley be referred back to the Development and Environmental Services Committee for further consideration.
FURTHER REPORT (Post Council Meeting 15 October 1996)
This matter was referred back at the Council meeting held on 15 October 1996 for further investigation particularly in relation to the Community Service issues concerning the application. In this regard the following issues have been considered:-
Demand for Service Location of Facility Funding Requirements Approach to Council for Service Provision Options
Information in relation to these matters has been established after consultations with Catherine MacAuley Centre, Health Department of WA (HACC funding provider), Council staff (including Joan Watters Respite Service staff).
Demand for Service
The Town of Cambridge falls within the Lower North Metropolitan Region for the purpose of the HACC program administered by the Health Department of WA. This region includes the suburbs south of Scarborough Beach Road to the Swan River.
In 1993 the Health Department commissioned an extensive needs analysis study for the North Metropolitan Health Region. A series of benchmarks were established as a result of this study to be used as a basis of funding. The benchmarks detailed a rate per 1000 of HACC target population likely to require a particular HACC service.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 195 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Based on a HACC target population of 22,996 in the North Metropolitan Region, and a benchmark of 25 clients per 1000 people in the HACC target population, it was assessed that the required level of service to meet the benchmark was 575 clients per 1000 for Day Care Centre services. The actual data as at May 1994 indicates that only 423 clients per 1000 were being serviced which demonstrates a shortfall of more than 150 clients per 1000.
HACC funding for services in 1995/96 was determined from the evidence in the gap for the provision of day care services in this study. Another factor which led to the increase in non-current funding in this period was due to a funding imbalance from 1992/93 which previously saw the East Metropolitan Region receive greater amounts of funding. HACC resource allocation models have attempted to redress the funding imbalance since that time. As a result additional funds were allocated to the City of Nedlands to develop a Younger Disabled Centre in Mt Claremont in 1995/96. Town of Cambridge residents have access to this facility.
With the allocation of $250,000 to the Catherine McAuley Centre in this year, it is envisaged that the resource allocation imbalance should now be equalised and that it is unlikely that additional funds will be provided in future years on the basis of a funding imbalance.
The HACC target populations are determined from the 1991 ABS figures using postcodes. The 1996 ABS figures are not available yet but will give a clearer outline particularly in relation to the Town of Cambridge which was not created when the 1991 census figures were produced. The Health Department advise that the combined postcodes of Wembley, Floreat and City Beach demonstrate the highest HACC target population for the North Metropolitan Region. The HACC target population in the Town of Cambridge by postcode is detailed below:
6014 Wembley, Floreat, Jolimont 1,097 6015 City Beach 503 1,600
From these figures it can be interpreted that approximately two thirds (i.e. 1000) of the target population resides in City Beach and Floreat.
The Joan Watters Respite Service is contracted to provide 24,500 hours per year Centre based Day Respite. Evidence from our service indicates that the centre will actually provide in excess of
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 196 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
26,000 hours due to demand for service. At present 70 clients per week are being catered for at Joan Watters however, this number has been decreasing over recent months due to client deaths.
The proposed Day Centre for the Aged in Salvado Road will provide 18,500 hours of service per year.
Location of Facility
In discussions with the Health Department, Catherine McAuley and staff at Joan Watters, it was established that location was not the most critical factor for the provision of the service. Provided the service is within a reasonable distance from the target group, location is not an important consideration. Clients will be transported to the centre by bus or car, and other than reducing travelling time, will not impact on providing services to the target group. Of greater importance is the accessibility of the building in terms of walking distance from the drop off point and steps.
In this instance, the location was determined on the basis that it was the only land available granted to the Catherine McAuley Centre by the Sisters of Mercy. If a site was available closer to the target population than that location would be considered more suitable.
Funding Requirements
The Health Department of WA confirmed that the residential aspect of any Day Centre facility would be a requirement of the funding. If no residential sites were available the Health Department would need to reassess the funding criteria.
Both the Health Department and Catherine McAuley indicated a desire for a high quality of care for their clients and considered a residential environment to be more relaxing and comfortable for the clients.
The funding has been allocated in this financial year for the construction of the facility with operational funds to be provided from 1 July 1997 to commence the operation. The Health Department advised that timing was important and that Catherine McAuley had contracted to meet this time frame.
Approach to Council for Service Provision
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 197 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Councillors requested at the Council meeting information on whether or not the Council had been approached to provide this type of facility.
It is advised that Council did not receive any formal advice of the availability of funding for this type of facility. Therefore, the matter was not considered by Council. The Health Department contacted staff at the Joan Watters Community Centre in April 1996 with a view to determining the possibility of extending the dementia groups operated at the Centre by a further one or two groups. The Centre currently operates three dementia groups. At the time staff advised the Health Department that they did not support this option for the following reasons:
the Joan Watters Community Centre is operating at capacity in its current form;
the Joan Watters Community Centre is not custom built for dementia groups which require secured areas to avoid clients leaving the group without supervision;
dementia clients need special care and are very demanding on staff. Clients need specialist care and the current staff structure is not appropriate.
At the time of these discussions staff were not aware of any additional funding being available. As no written information was received regarding the possibility of extending the service no proposals were put to Council for consideration. If the opportunity of additional funding for the development of a new Day Centre had been raised then an item would have been prepared for Council's consideration. As a result, Council has not developed a position on the provisions of additional Aged Care facilities.
Options
The options available to Council in this matter are:
1. Catherine McAuley Centre to be develop a Day Care Centre for the Aged.
2. Council apply to the Health Department of WA for funding to provide an Aged Care Centre on Council owned land managed by Council staff.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 198 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
3. Council obtain the funding and develop a Centre on Council land and tender out the operations of the Centre.
4. Council provide the land and lease the site to Catherine McAuley to build and operate a Day Care Centre for the Aged.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 199 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Summary:
Evidence indicates that a demand exists for a Day Centre for the Aged to be developed within the Town of Cambridge. As another party has indicated a willingness to provide this service on their own land and the service will be utilised by Town of Cambridge residents the proposal to provide a Day Centre for the Aged is supported from a community service perspective.
It is therefore recommended 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 :-
the use of the property as a Day Care Centre for the Aged would represent an ‘ad hoc’ incursion of non residential activity into a residential area and establishing an undesirable precedent for further non-residential uses along Salvado Road to the detriment of the established residential locality;
the Council refuses the application submitted by Parry and Rosenthal Architects on behalf of the Sisters of Mercy for the construction of a Day Care Centre for the Aged on Lot 823 (No. 124) Salvado Road, Wembley, as shown on plans submitted and dated 30 August 1996;
(ii) in the event that recommendation (i) is adopted by Council, the matter of provision of a Day Care Centre be referred to the next meeting of the Corporate and Customer Services Committee for consideration.
Committee Meeting 19 November 1996
During discussion, divergent views were expressed in relation to whether the application should be approved or refused. The motion for refusal of the application was lost.
Members agreed that the matter of provision of a Day Care Centre be referred to the next meeting of the Corporate and Customer Services Committee for further consideration.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 200 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Council Meeting 26 November 1996
During discussion, Cr Moore said that the development represented a low impact facility for residents in the community.
Moved by Cr Moore, seconded by Cr Anderton
That in accordance with the provisions of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme and the Metropolitan Region Scheme the Council approves the application submitted by Parry and Rosenthal Architects on behalf of Sisters of Mercy for the construction of a Day Centre for the Aged on Lot 823 (No. 124) Salvado Road, Wembley, as shown on plans dated 30 August 1996.
Discussion ensued. Members speaking against the proposal queried the need for an additional facility in the Wembley/West Leederville area and cautioned against ad hoc planning approvals.
The motion was then put and carried.
Members requested that the vote of all those present be recorded.
For: The Mayor, Crs Anderton, Moore, O'Connell, Smith Against: Crs Berry, Johnston,MacRae, McConnell
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 201 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.13 315 AND 317 CAMBRIDGE STREET, WEMBLEY - SIX SINGLE STOREY GROUPED DWELLINGS (File Reference: PRO0464)
BACKGROUND:
DA/BA REFERENCE: 39/96 LANDOWNER: Mr and Mrs Loughnan and Mr and Mrs Beekink APPLICANT: J-Corp Project Pty Ltd ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme: Residential R40
COMPLIANCE:
The proposed development complies with the requirements of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme with the exception of a minor protrusion (250 millimetres) of the carports for the two units addressing Cambridge Street into the front setback. Vehicle parking spaces for each front unit are also located within the front setback, parallel to the street alignment and setback approximately 1.5 metres from the footpath.
The applicant has provided one additional parking space than that required under Clause 3.2.1 of the Residential Planning Codes. Furthermore, the overall lot yield would support seven units, however, six have been proposed.
DETAILS:
Lot Area - 1892 square metres (sum of two lots) Total Floor Area - 800.54 square metres Plot Ratio - 0.42:1 Open Space Provision - 973.94 square metres or 51% Lot Yield - 7 units (6 are proposed)
The applicant has submitted plans for the construction of six single storey (three bedroom) units at 315 and 317 Cambridge Street, Wembley. Units 1 and 2 for each lot have a floor area of 132.97 square metres respectively, and Unit 3 for each lot has a floor area of 134.33 square metres.
Each lot is in separate ownership. Discussions with the applicant indicated that the owners would prefer to enter into a reciprocal right of carriageway with each other to secure vehicle and pedestrian passageway through the centre of the development,
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 202 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
as indicated on the plans dated 24 October 1996, as opposed to amalgamating the lots. As the development is highly integrated with each lot being contingent on the other for vehicular access, it is essential that an easement be placed on each title to secure future access. This should be a condition, prior to the issue of a building licence.
Vehicle access for the front four units is via one crossover onto Cambridge Street and the two rear units will have sole access off the right of way. Lot 60 does not have direct access off the right of way , therefore, vehicles from this unit will have reciprocal right of carriageway over Lot 753 to access the right of way. The right of way is owned by the Roman Catholic Church and as such the applicant has acquired a letter of authorisation from the Church to enable Lot 60 access of the right of way. The right of way is approximately 5 metres in width and the majority of its length is sealed with the exception of the portion in question, the latter of which, will have to be sealed and drained to Council’s specifications.
Courtyards for the front units are located within the front setback, and will be screened by an open view fence. The front units are setback 6 metres from the street alignment.
The front two carports and car bays are situated parallel to Cambridge Street, and are set back approximately 4.250 metres (car port) and 1.5 metres (car bay) respectively from the street alignment. It is this component of the application which requires Council approval.
The two existing rendered brick and tile dwellings (original housing stock) and out buildings will have to be demolished to accommodate the development. An existing sealed tennis court located on Lot 60 will also have to be removed.
COMMENT:
This section of Cambridge Streets supports a variety of medium density developments.
The development complies generally complies with the Town Planning Scheme and the Residential Planning Codes with the exception of the front carport and parking spaces within the front setback.
Clause 1.6.3 of the R Codes enables parking spaces to be located within the street setback with Council approval, provided that there is adequate screening from the street, with a minimum of 1
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 203 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
metre width of landscaping. Plans submitted indicate a 1.5 metre setback from the street alignment, which will be landscaped. The front carports are setback approximately 4.250 metres from the street alignment. In the case of carports, Council Policy No. 7 may permit construction of carports to 300 millimetres from the front boundary.
These variations are considered minor in nature and compatible with the surrounding medium density developments. It is considered that the scale of the development, in addition to an open view front fence and the provision of only one vehicle cross over, will adequately soften the visual impact of the proposal on the existing streetscape. In particular, by providing open view front fences, the spatial relationship between the buildings and the street is maintained. On this basis ,it is recommended that the variation be supported.
In view of the above comments, it is recommended that Council approves the minor variation to the front setback.
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That in accordance with the provisions of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme and the Metropolitan Region Scheme, the application submitted by J-Corp Projects Pty Ltd on behalf of Mr & Mrs Beekink and Mr & Mrs Loughnan to construct six single storey group dwellings on Lots 753 and 60 (Nos. 315 and 317) Cambridge Street, Wembley, as shown on plans submitted and dated 24 October 1996, be approved subject to:-
(i) the owners of Lot 753 and 60 demonstrating to the satisfaction of Council permanent reciprocal rights of access for both owners over the common accessway, prior to the issue of a building licence;
(ii) the location of the refuse disposal bins to be to Council’s Health Services satisfaction, prior to the issue of a building licence;
(iii) the vehicle parking area and common accessway being constructed in accordance with the approved plan, and drained, sealed, kerbed and marked to the specification and satisfaction of Council;
(iv) the right of way to Lot 753, to be drained paved and sealed to the Town of Cambridge requirements, at cost to the owners;
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 204 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
(v) a detailed landscaping and reticulation plan being submitted prior to the issue of a building licence, and showing the location and type of existing and proposed trees and shrubs, lawns to be installed and natural landscape areas to be retained. On such a plan, however, it will not be necessary to show specific landscaping details of the private open space areas. The landscaping of the site is to be completed prior to the issue of the Strata Plan to the satisfaction of the Council;
(vi) a site drainage plan illustrating all stormwater being contained and disposed of on-site to be submitted to Council’s Technical Services satisfaction, prior to the issue of a building licence. Upon approval of this plan, the site shall be drained in accordance with the approved plan.
Footnotes:
1. The issue of a Building Licence is required prior to the commencement of any on site works.
2. The applicant is advised that an application for a demolition licence is required to be submitted for consideration by Council’s Building Services, prior to demolition of existing buildings.
3. A strata plan will not be issued until all Planning Conditions have been complied with.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 205 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.14 LOT 3 THE BOULEVARD, CITY BEACH (FORMER SHELL SERVICE STATION SITE) - PROPOSED SINGLE STOREY SHOPPING CENTRE AND ASSOCIATED CAR PARKING AREAS AND ACCESS ROADS (File Reference: PRO0376)
BACKGROUND:
DA/BA REFERENCE: 26DA-96 LANDOWNER: Strickland Group Pty Ltd APPLICANT: Strickland Group Pty Ltd ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme: Shopping S1
COMPLIANCE:
The proposal generally conforms to the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme, although the majority of the required car parking is to be located on the adjoining Council owned land and the Boulevard road reserve. This matter required the exercise of discretion and specific approval by the Council, and was agreed by Council at its meeting held on 21 May 1996. The proposal also involves a request for an increase in the permitted plot ratio of 0.5:1 under the scheme to 0.57:1.
Lot Area 1518 square metres Net Retail Floor 850 square metres Area Gross Floor 875 square metres Area Plot Ratio 0.57:1 (0.50:1 required) Use Shops - ‘P’ (permitted) Permissibility
The approval of the application as submitted will require an Absolute Majority decision of Council, as the applicant is requesting a variation of plot ratio standards prescribed under the scheme and approval for provision of parking off-site.
SITE HISTORY:
Following vacation of this site by the previous tenants (Shell Service Station) the subject land was offered for sale by Council by tender. The tenders for this land and the development concept plan for this land was considered by Council at it’s Ordinary Meeting held on 21 May 1996. At this meeting it was resolved to accept the tender for the land from the Strickland
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 206 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Group Pty Ltd, and to grant approval in principle to a concept development plan for the land. The key points of this approval were as follows:-
Council approved the use of a portion of Lots 10 and 12 The Boulevard for the provision of car parking bays for the proposed shopping centre at Lot 3, subject to the area being constructed and landscaped to the satisfaction of the Council at the developer’s expense. This land is currently owned by Council and is landscaped,
The ten on-site car parking bays and the front courtyard area of the centre, the service delivery access, car parking bays and accessways located on Lots 10 and 12 were to be redesigned. In particular, the Council resolution referred to the provision of an efficient layout minimising use of the reserve land and linking to existing car parks, and providing adequate landscape screening of parking areas,
the developer was to enter into a Licence Agreement with Council for use of portions of Lots 10 and 12 for car parking.
Further to this resolution, modified plans incorporating two options were submitted to Council for further consideration at its September 1996 meeting. One option involved minimal changes to the existing road arrangements, and access roads constructed at 900 to the Boulevard service road. The other option involved an innovative design concept incorporating a crescent shaped road alignment, incorporating parking within the access road itself. At this meeting Council resolved to approve the crescent design option in principle subject to the following conditions (summarised);
the applicant was to submit written confirmation of agreement to enter into a lease agreement with Council, prepared by Councils Solicitors his costs, and the agreement would address the issue of lease of the car parking areas and access ways proposed to be located on the adjoining Council owned land and The Boulevard road reserve, providing for the parking areas to be maintained to Council’s standard by the applicants;
a number of modifications were required to the site plan including provision of service access to the rear of the shops, delineation of landscaping and road surfaces and paving treatment proposals, redesign of the car parking areas to incorporate all vehicle car parking areas to the south of the
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 207 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
existing shopping centre car park and redesign of the proposed roundabouts and parking areas to accommodate service vehicle access;
referral of the plans to the owners of the existing Gayton Road Shopping Centre for their comment.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 208 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DETAILS:
The plan has been re-submitted based on the requirements noted above, and the applicant has submitted the required written agreement to lease of the land for parking. The concept is the same as that previously granted in principle support by Council, with modifications for access for service vehicles. The current proposal has been modified in a reasonable attempt to accommodate access for service vehicles to the centre, whilst minimising the area of land required for roundabouts and access ways. In order to achieve this, however, access and egress to the site by service vehicles is limited to those travelling to the centre from the west along the Boulevard service road. Such an arrangement would require signage to restrict service vehicles from travelling west along the Boulevard service road, and as such it is a questionable design solution. As a response to this, the applicants have submitted a further design option which utilises an additional service vehicles only access road direct from Landra Gardens.
All design options are discussed later in this report.
Response from the adjoining shopping centre. A written response has been received from the managing agents of the existing adjoining shopping centre in response to Council’s referral of the application to them for comment. The letter states general support for the proposal, however, a number of concerns are raised. These are listed below and discussed;
Issue 1 - Car Parking: The letter raises the following points in respect of the proposal to connect the two parking areas;
(a) the access from the parking areas corresponds with the current exits between parking bays, (b) the levels of the car parks should be the same and stormwater should not be discharged from the new to the existing car park, (c) existing large white gum trees should not be removed for the new car parking area, (d) slow moving vehicles only should use the access between the car parks.
Comment: These points are generally acknowledged. The plan submitted has addressed the issue of the location of the parking accessways. Furthermore, it is standard engineering practice to ensure that all stormwater is contained on the subject site. However, the point must be made here that it is impracticable to install a stormwater drainage system which will ensure that
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 209 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
stormwater never overflows onto the adjoining site. The system will be designed to cater for a standardised percentage of rainfall events, in accordance with normal engineering practice, but overflow will always occur during unpredictable freak rainfall events.
The existing trees are noted on the plans and will be retained. The design of the parking areas will ensure that vehicle speeds within the service roads will remain low.
Issue 2 - Service Vehicles: The letter expresses concern that service vehicles from the new development will create a danger to pedestrians within the existing car park, and on this basis requests that the new centre provide a height restriction bar at the entry to the existing car park, to allow for domestic vehicle access but to restrict access by service vehicles.
Comment: It has not been demonstrated how the existence of service vehicles would create an additional danger to pedestrians, or even if service vehicles would necessarily use the existing access to the shops from the north. In any event, however, it is acknowledged that additional congestion would be caused within the existing car park if used by service vehicles attending the new shopping centre, and that the new centre should be designed so that it is capable of being serviced independently of the existing centre.
Issue 3 - Lease of car parking areas: The letter indicates that two separate leases should be drawn up for the parking areas (one for the Council owned land and one for the road reserve), and that the lease amount should be for at the same rate as paid by the existing shops.
Comment: Although the licenses have not yet been negotiated, this is likely to be the basis on which they will be prepared.
Issue 4 - Location of car parking areas: A number of parking bays were shown on the original plan on land leased by the existing shopping centre, and the letter indicates that this land is occupied by parking for the existing shops.
Comment: This parking area was required to be relocated under part (ii) (d) of Council’s September resolution, and this has been incorporated into the current plans.
Issue 5 - Retaining wall: The letter indicates that Lot 3 is approximately 1.2m higher than the adjoining lot 13, and the
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 210 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
land is retained by an existing retaining wall which is said to be in poor condition.
Comment: The adequacy of this retaining wall will be assessed as part of the eventual building application for the land, as the question of its adequacy is dependant on the nature of the structure eventually built on the land. If deemed to be inadequate, the retaining wall will be required to be replaced as part of the building licence works for the site.
Issue 6 - Connection to the existing shopping centre: The letter states that this matter has been discussed between the owners of the existing centre and the applicants, and advises that the applicants were not prepared to meet the costs of this or compensate the tenant within the existing shops who would have to be relocated as a result.
Comment: Council’s May resolution included a comment regarding the desirability of achieving a physical connection between the proposed and the existing Gayton Road centre, however, when and if this occurs, and the apportioning of cost and compensation required, is entirely a matter for the two owners to resolve between themselves. From the Council’s viewpoint, it would be somewhat disappointing if this connection between the centres was not to eventually occur, as it would significantly enhance the convenience of the centre to its customers and would seem to be in the best interest of both Centre owners.
Issue 7 - Road modifications north of the centre The letter includes comment on the unsatisfactory road carriageway alignments to the north of the Gayton Road shops, and suggests that with increasing development at the site congestion to the north of the centre will be increased. A suggested road modification proposal has been submitted involving the reconfiguration of Gayton Road, Landra Gardens and the Boulevard service road.
Comment: Clearly there is potential for the existing road alignments around the shops to be modified, but in doing so Council will have to give careful consideration to the impacts of road realignment on the amenity of adjoining residential areas, and the costs involved in modifications to the road alignments. It is, however, appropriate to consider this issue at the time of the development and given that a new alternative access to the site will be provided from the south with the construction of the new centre.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 211 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Legal Requirements relating to the licence of the land
Further to the Council’s September resolution on this matter, legal advice has been sought in respect of the legal arrangements required to effect the necessary licenses required to implement this proposal. Council’s solicitors have advised as follows:-
Provisions exist under the Local Government (Uniform Local Provisions) Regulations 1996 to empower the Council to approve the use of portions of the road reserve for parking for the development, subject to Council being indemnified against any claim for damages that may arise as a result of these works. The solicitors advise that a licence (as opposed to a lease) would be the most appropriate means to address the tenure of this land,
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 212 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
With regard to the Council owned land, a licence should also be used, as this effectively grants an approval to the applicant to construct the parking areas on the land, without conferring any proprietary interest in the land.
Compliance with development standards
The plan incorporates the provision of 58 car parking bays, based on the Town Planning Scheme requirement of 1 bay per 15 square metres of gross floor area (total gross floor area is 875 square metres). The subject land is zoned “Shopping S1”. Clause 72(1) of the scheme requires a maximum plot ratio for buildings within this zone of 0.5:1, thus a variation to the Town Planning Scheme would be required to grant approval to the requested plot ratio of 0.57:1. This variation to the scheme is considered to be appropriate on the following grounds:-
the building is of a low scale and has a presentation which is compatible with the surrounding area, sufficient parking is proposed to be provided as part of the development, although the intensity of land use at the shopping centre will increase, access to it via Landra Gardens and Oban Road will be enhanced, thus reducing intensity of access via Gayton Road. The new accesses proposed would be used by patrons of the centre from south of the Boulevard.
Use of road reserve for parking
It is acknowledged that normally commercial development is required to provide all parking within the boundaries of the private land being developed, with road reserve parking being considered as “overspill” parking only. In this case, however, there are no planning objections to the use of road reserve for parking for the following reasons:-
parking can be accommodated within the road reserve without adverse impacts on traffic flow, road capacity or intersection congestion, owing to the location of the centre relative to residential uses parking will not overspill into adjoining residential streets, use of Council land and road reserve for parking is an established principle at the centre as it is used by the existing shops.
The use of road reserve and adjoining Council owned land in this location for car parking is therefore supported.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 213 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 214 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS FOR THE SITE
Background to the design
The design of the vehicle access and parking areas has altered significantly from that originally envisaged by Council’s May resolution on this proposal. The design has evolved from the original concept, which was a conventional design, and used access roads constructed at 900 to the Boulevard service road. The applicants then suggested a variation to this design, which incorporated a crescent shaped access road running around the building, and providing direct circulation between the new and existing centres. This plan had considerable design merit in that it provided an innovative solution to parking and access for the centre, provided in a sympathetic and non-obtrusive manner.
This was recognised at the September Council meeting where the plan was given in principle support over the more conventional right angle based concept. Importantly, however, this in principle support was conditional upon the detail design of the access roads being able to accommodate service vehicles. The fulfilment of this requirement has meant that the design has had to be modified to accommodate the increased turning circles required for service vehicles, creating greater encroachment upon the Council owned land and Boulevard road reserve than previously anticipated. Furthermore, the deign is only capable of being serviced by vehicles approaching from the west. As such, there is some doubt about the workability of this plan, although it’s original design strengths are still evident. As a response to this, the applicants have suggested a further option, utilising the crescent concept, but using a separate access road from Landra Gardens. This option is discussed below. This option, however, requires a greater area of Council land than the others, and creates a significantly different appearance to the development compared to that which may have originally been envisaged by Council. For this reason, the applicants have been requested to represent an earlier design option which is closer in concept to Council’s original resolution on this matter, so that Council may consider the relative merits and weaknesses of both plans.
1. Utilising separate service road access from Landra Gardens (option 1B)
This option has clear advantages in that it creates the best quality presentation of the development to the street, as is minimises the impacts of the parking areas by creating a low intensity crescent shaped parking area around the building. The provision of a specific service access from Landra Gardens also
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 215 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
means that the dimensions of the front parking and access areas can be reduced, in accordance with the original crescent concept, and may provide an opportunity to relieve some of the congestion issues within the existing centre car park. Furthermore, the use of a crescent shaped access road also reflect design principles used at the time when the Games Village was originally developed. In summary there is no doubt that the use of this option would create a development of the highest quality, with sympathetically designed and functional parking, strong circulation links between the existing and proposed centres, excellent opportunities for the provision of landscaping and capable of adequate servicing. The primary drawback is that, due to various design constraints, it has evolved into a significant departure from the concept originally supported by Council in May, and the parameters of the development originally set by Council at that time.
2. Utilising the existing road configuration (Option 2A)
This more conventional plan was originally discounted by Council at its September meeting on the basis that the alternative crescent option presented at the time offered a superior design solution. However, since this resolution, the servicing requirements of the crescent option have proved to require design changes involving increased use of road reserves and Council owned land, and a further separate service access from Landra Gardens. Although it is acknowledged that this option does not provide parking in such a sensitive manner, or create the excellent circulation opportunities between the existing and proposed centres, it does have clear merits in that it minimises the amount of Council owned land and road reserve required, it can be adequately serviced within the existing road alignments, and allows for the provision of some of the vehicle parking areas on site. Furthermore, because it maintains the use of right angles in the access and parking areas, it allows for far more efficient use of land compared to a design based on curves. This meets the particular requirement of Council’s May resolution of minimising the use of Council land for vehicle parking and provision of some parking bays within the subject land itself. In summary, therefore, although the design may not be optimal from an aesthetic viewpoint, and in terms of vehicular circulation around the centre, it is functional and simple, and closely meets the original requirements of Council in accepting the tender for this land.
CONCLUSION:
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 216 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The development proposed (option 1B) represents an imaginative design and a significant enhancement to the presentation, access to and level of service provided at the Gayton Road shops. Whilst variations are being sought from the plot ratio and on-site parking standards required by Council in its previous resolution on this proposal, the development is considered to be acceptable on planning grounds and is supported. Option 1B is recommended, on the basis that it is considered that this provides for the optimal development of the site notwithstanding the fact that some of the parameters for the development set in Council’s May resolution are not met. However, it should be stressed that there are no planning reasons why option 2A (the more conventional right angles based design) could not be approved by Council in the event that it wishes the development of the land to be more in conformity with its original resolution.
Committee Meeting 19 November 1996
During discussion, the Administration was requested to provide further information with regard to the proposed service access road from Landra Gardens and whether this was likely to cause any damage to, or the removal of, any of the existing trees prior to the next meeting of the Council to be held on Tuesday, 26 November 1996.
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That:-
(i) in accordance with the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme and the Local Government (Uniform General Provisions) Regulations 1996 the development of a single storey shopping centre and associated car parking and accesways excluding any advertising signage at Lot 3 The Boulevard, City Beach as shown on the amended plans submitted by the Strickland Group Pty Ltd dated 13 November 1996 and noted as “option 1B” be APPROVED BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY subject to the following conditions:-
(a) prior to the issue of a building licence for the development proposed, the applicant is to enter a licence agreement with Council, to be prepared by Council’s Solicitors at the applicant’s costs, and such agreement shall address the following issues:-
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 217 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
(1) licence to construct and use the car parking areas and access ways proposed to be located on Lots 10 and 12 and within The Boulevard road reserve between the western edge of the west roundabout and the eastern edge of the east roundabout;
(2) the licence will provide for the parking areas and access ways to be maintained to a standard, prescribed by Council’s Chief Executive Officer, by the owners of Lot 3 and to be binding on future owners of this lot;
(b) prior to the issue of a building licence for the development proposed, the applicant shall indemnify Council against any claim arising out of the construction, maintenance or use of the parking areas and access ways in accordance with Regulation 17 of the Local Government (Uniform General Provisions) Regulations 1996;
(c) a detailed landscaping and reticulation plan shall be submitted prior to the issue of a Building Licence, showing the location and type of existing and proposed trees, shrubs and lawns to be installed and existing landscape to be maintained, and to be approved by Council’s Chief Executive Officer. The landscaping areas as shown on this approved plan is to be installed by the applicants within 28 days of practical completion of the development, and thereafter maintained by the applicants to a standard specified by Council’s Chief Executive Officer;
(d) proposed road surfaces, paving treatments, vehicle accessways and service vehicle access as shown on the approved plan, and a total of 58 vehicle parking bays, shall be constructed, drained and thereafter maintained by the applicant to the specifications and satisfaction of Council’s Chief Executive Officer;
(e) the proposed vehicle accessways, parking areas and roundabouts within the Boulevard road reserve shall be designed, constructed and maintained to the specifications and satisfaction of Council’s Chief Executive Officer;
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 218 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
(f) the applicant shall submit a separate signage and advertising plan for approval. Upon approval of this plan by Council’s Chief Executive Officer, no signage or advertising shall be permitted on site other than in accordance with this approved plan, unless a further approval is granted;
(g) all stormwater shall be contained and disposed of on-site to the specifications and satisfaction of Council’s Chief Executive Officer;
(h) refuse storage areas are to be provided and screened from public view to the satisfaction of Council’s Chief Executive Officer;
(ii) the matter of the road carriageway alignments north of the shopping centre raised in the submission from the managers of the existing Gayton Road shops be referred to the Chief Executive Officer for his consideration and later presentation in a further report to Council;
(iii) the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to enter into the necessary licence agreements referred to in part 1 of this resolution and to negotiate an appropriate licence fee based on a valuation of the land.
Carried BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 219 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.15 NATIVE TITLE CLAIM - CITY AND FLOREAT BEACHES (File Reference: PLA0058)
BACKGROUND:
A Native Title claim over the coastline of the Town of Cambridge has previously been reported to Council. This claim has been accepted by the Native Title Tribunal and at some time in the future must be settled between the claimants and interested parties. The claim covers both land owned freehold by the Town and reserve number 16921 vested in the Town. A recent survey of the area shows that a number of existing Council buildings on the beach are located either partially or fully within the reserve area. Whilst the Native Title Claim covers both the reserve area and Council’s freehold land, we are advised that Native Title does not apply to freehold land.
Since the claim was accepted by the Native Title Tribunal earlier this year, there has been no progress on its settlement. Advice from the Native Title Tribunal is that at this stage they are addressing claims on foreshore areas collectively and it is envisaged that the outcome of this work will assist in dealing with individual claims at a later date.
DETAILS:
At the Executive Meeting of the WA Municipal Association for September/October 1996, it was resolved:-
That WAMA request that local governments cooperates with the information exchange, particularly that of a legal nature on the issue of Native Title claims by sending such information as they can to WAMA for distribution to Member Local Governments.
This arose from a Local Government Association Zone request.
COMMENT:
The issue of Native Title Claims is highly topical and one which faces many local authorities in Western Australia. There is no doubt that there an advantage in local government addressing this issue in a collaborative way.
Council has sought and received fairly detailed legal advice from Solicitors McLeod and Co. concerning the general issue of Native Title Claims and addressing specific issues faced by the Town of
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 220 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Cambridge. A copy of this advice has previously been circulated to The Mayor and all Councillors.
In effect the advice indicates that the acceptance of the Native Title Claim restricts what the Council can do on its beachfront reserve unless agreement is reached with the claimant or it is subsequently found that Native Title does not exist. These restrictions would apply to any physical development of the land or disposal or leasing of the land. The advice then goes on to address specific questions raised by the Council concerning the future development of the beachfront and its facilities.
It is not considered that the advice contains information of a sensitive or confidential nature to the Town. It is therefore recommended that a copy of this advice be forwarded to WAMA and that the Town request that they be kept fully informed of any advances made in investigating this matter.
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That:-
(i) the legal advice from McLeod and Co. dated 19 July 1996 concerning the Native Title claim for the coastal areas of City and Floreat beaches be referred to the Western Australian Municipal Association for information;
(ii) the WAMA be requested to keep the Council advised of any progress that is made by WAMA in their investigations into this issue.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 221 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.16 368 CAMBRIDGE STREET, WEMBLEY - FOUR SINGLE STOREY GROUPED DWELLINGS (File Reference: PRO0161)
BACKGROUND:
DA/BA REFERENCE: 40DA-96 LANDOWNER: Mrs Mary Di Nardo APPLICANT: Dawn Holdings P/L and Trento Nominees P/L ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme: Residential R40
COMPLIANCE:
The proposal complies with the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme with the exception of the following:
Required Proposed
Side Setbacks (north) 1 metre Nil (west) 1 metre Nil
Parapet Wall (west) less than 35.6 metres 44.4 metres (length) (length)
Open Space Provision 50 % 44 %
Primary Street Setback 6 metres 5 metres (5.6 metres average)
Parking spaces are also proposed within the front setback of the units.
There are provisions within the Residential Planning Codes which enables Council to consider these variations. It is considered in this instance, that the variations sought could be supported for the reasons outlined further in this report.
SITE HISTORY:
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 222 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
December 1993: Use of existing building as offices refused by former City of Perth. Subsequent appeal to the Minister for Planning dismissed. May 1995: Use of existing building as consulting rooms refused by Council. August 1995: Four two storey grouped dwellings approved by Council. August 1996: Four single storey grouped dwellings approved by Council as part of a survey strata application.
DETAILS:
Lot Area - 1009 square metres Plot Ratio - 0.47:1 (max 0.5:1) Open Space - 44 per cent Private Open Space - 68 square metres (average) per unit
Council approval is sought for the construction of four single storey grouped dwellings at 368 Cambridge Street, Wembley. Each unit comprises of two bedrooms, a study and main living areas, and has a floor area of approximately 119.15 square metres.
The units are partially attached and are oriented to, and have frontage to, Marlow Street. Each unit has a garage (located 4.5 metres from the street alignment) and parking space arranged in tandem within the front setback area.
Front courtyards are proposed for each unit, in addition to slightly smaller private internal north facing courtyards. Plans submitted indicate a 1.8 metre high open view front fence.
The existing dilapidated dwelling on site would be demolished to accommodate the development. A site inspection revealed that three significant mature trees are situated on the eastern boundary.
COMMENT:
The proposal complies with the provisions of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme, and the Residential Planning Codes in respect of plot ratio (0.47:1 proposed), private open space areas, treatment of the front fences and additional facilities. However, several relatively minor variations are being sought which require Council’s consideration.
Surrounding land use and development consists of the following:-
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 223 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
A high-rise apartment block on Cambridge Street adjoins the subject site on the western side. Carports and an accessway for the apartments are located nearest the common boundary.
On the opposite (northeast) corner of Marlow Street is a manse residence adjoining the Our Lady of Victories Church. An accessway off Marlow Street for the Church carpark is opposite the subject site.
A single residence adjoins the subject site on the northern side. The house is approximately 6 metres from the common boundary, a carport and driveway being nearest this boundary. Development further north along Marlow Street consists mainly of single houses and several grouped dwellings. It should be noted that the subject site forms the boundary of the Residential R40 zone (properties along Cambridge Street) and the Residential R 20 zone to the north.
Four single storey grouped dwellings with front setbacks of approximately 3 to 4 metres from Marlow Street, are located on the southwest corner of Cambridge and Marlow Streets.
Front setback variation:
Plans submitted indicate that the proposed grouped dwellings are to be setback approximately 5 metres from the street alignment. A parking space is also proposed within the front setback.
Clause 3.1.2 of the Residential Planning Codes allows the Council to vary the front setback to a minimum of 1.5 metres for 3 or more dwellings arranged side by side and attached where the development would be compatible with that of the surrounding area and not adversely affect the amenity of the locality.
Clause 1.5.8 of the Residential Planning Codes enables the minimum setback from the primary street alignment to be reduced to 3 metres with a 6 metre average. Preliminary calculations indicates a 5.6 metre front setback average (incorporating the main building and the garage) with a minimum 5 metre setback (main building). Although the front setback does not average the 6 metres, the impact is less then if the main building was setback a minimum of 3 metres from the primary street alignment with an average of 6 metres. It is therefore, considered that the proposed front setback is acceptable, given
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 224 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
that the variation amounts to 1 metre in the case of the setback to the buildings/walls of the units (5 metres proposed in lieu of the required 6 metres).
The scale and design of the development being single storey with courtyards located within the front setback and the retention of 3 significant mature trees located on the eastern boundary adjoining Marlow Street will also minimise the impact of the development on the streetscape. Additionally, following discussions with Council staff, the original proposed 1.8 solid screen front fences has been replaced by open view fences in order to maintain the visual relationship between the dwellings and the street.
Clause 1.6.3 of the Residential Planning Codes enables parking spaces with Council approval to be located within the street setback area provided that there is adequate screening from the street.
Given the surrounding land use, in particular that the subject site is located on Cambridge Street between a high rise apartment block and a church and manse, and that a grouped dwelling development exists on the opposite side of Cambridge Street which has lesser front setbacks than proposed, the front setback variation requested in this case is supported from a planning objective.
Side Setback Variations
Clause 1.5.8 (f) of the Residential Planning Codes enables the required setback from a side boundary for any wall to be reduced to nil provided that the length of any such wall in relation to its height does not exceed 2/3 of the length of any common boundary.
The northern boundary adjoining a single residence complies with this standard. However, no comments concerning the parapet walls on the boundary has been received by the adjoining neighbour. It is therefore, recommended that the proposed structures (garage and bedroom 1) on the boundary be setback a minimum of 1 metre.
The western boundary with extensive parapet walls adjoins a high rise apartment block (Floreat Towers). Plan submitted have been signed by the Body Corporate of Floreat Towers and indicated that they have no objection to the parapet walls which abut the parking area for the tower block providing that “the parapet wall is completed to a fair and acceptable standard with
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 225 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
no interruption to parking or damage to cars”. Although the parapet wall is greater in length then that required by the Residential Planning Codes, it can be supported on planning grounds as the design of the proposed development has been to minimise potential overlooking from the adjoining apartment block and to more effectively utilise the available land area to provide more functional private open space per unit.
Open space provision:
Preliminary calculations indicated that the required open space provision over the entire site falls short by 57.14 square metres providing 44 per cent in lieu of the required 50 per cent. However, the development does comply with the private open space provision required for each proposed strata lot and is set aside for the exclusive use of the occupants of each dwelling. Plans submitted also indicate that each dwelling will be provided with an internal north facing courtyard of 16 square metres, in addition to a separate drying area and front courtyard. It is therefore considered that the provision of functional private open space for each dwelling is sufficient to overcome the total shortfall of open space for the entire site.
Discussions with the applicant indicated that the development will be marketed more towards the elderly. This has influenced the scale (single storey) and design layout of the units. Clearly, if a two storey development was proposed, the open space provision would increase but the scale may be more imposing and contribute to other amenity issues.
CONCLUSION:
The Council has discretion to approve the variations, however, in exercising its discretion the Council is required to consider the impact of the development on its surroundings, and be satisfied that it will not prejudice the general intent of its planning provisions for residential areas.
It is considered that the proposal represents an appropriate transition between the existing medium density residential and church and other uses fronting Cambridge Street and lower density residential uses further north along Marlow Street. The proposed grouped dwellings are unlikely to have adverse amenity effects on the surrounding residential area. On this basis, it is considered that the proposal which seeks several minor variations could be supported as all other development standards have been met.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 226 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Approval by an absolute majority is required because of non compliance with the Residential Planning Codes.
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That in accordance with the provisions of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme and Metropolitan Region Scheme the Council APPROVES BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the application submitted by Dawn Holdings Pty Ltd and Trento Nominees Pty Ltd to construct four single storey grouped dwellings at Lot 395 (No.368) Cambridge Street, Wembley, as shown on plans dated 28 October 1996 subject to:-
(i) modified plans being submitted showing the structures on the northern boundary being setback a minimum of 1 metre from the boundary;
(ii) the submission of details of building materials and finishes to be used in the new construction at the building licence application stage;
(iii) the vehicle parking areas and accessway being constructed in accordance with the approved plan, and drained, sealed, kerbed and marked to the specification and satisfaction of Council;
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 227 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
(iv) a detailed landscaping and reticulation plan being submitted prior to the issue of a building licence, and showing the location and type of existing and proposed trees and shrubs, lawns to be installed and natural landscape areas to be retained. On such a plan, however, it will not be necessary to show specific landscaping details of the private open space areas. The landscaping of the site is to be completed prior to the issue of the Strata Plan to the satisfaction of the Council;
(v) the existing mature tree along the eastern side boundary being incorporated in the landscaping plans and retained by the developer to the satisfaction of Council.
Footnotes:
1. The applicant is advised that an application for a demolition licence is required to be submitted for consideration by Council’s Building Services, prior to demolition of existing building.
2. The issue of a Building Licence is required prior to the commencement of any on site works.
3. A strata plan will not be issued until all Planning Conditions have been complied with.
Carried BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 228 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.17 SUBIACO OVAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY - FINAL DRAFT REPORT FROM WEST AUSTRALIAN FOOTBALL COMMISSION (File Reference: PLA0078)
BACKGROUND:
In January of this year the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) granted approval to the Western Australian Football Commission (WAFC) for the installation of lights for night football at Subiaco Oval. The approval limited the number of night games to eight in the first year of operation and provides that this may be increased to ten games in the third year of operation and twelve games in the fifth year of operation, subject to approval of the Planning Commission. The approval was also conditional upon the applicants preparing a comprehensive management strategy for Subiaco Oval, to be approved by the Planning Commission.
The Planning Commission’s decision outlines a range of issues that this management strategy must cover. A copy of the full decision of the Planning Commission is included in the Management Plan (appendix A). The strategy was to be prepared in consultation with the Subiaco Oval Impact Management Committee. This committee was chaired by the Chairman of the WAPC and comprised two representatives from the WAFC, a further representative from the WAPC and the Mayors of the Town of Cambridge and the City of Subiaco. In addition, a Technical Officers Committee was formed to feed information through to the Impact Management Committee. This Committee had wide ranging representation from; football, state government agencies and Subiaco and Cambridge Councils. The Executive Managers, Development and Environmental Services and Technical Services attended from the Town of Cambridge. The Technical Officers Committee was chaired by an officer from the Ministry for Planning.
A working group was formed within this Council, comprising all Wembley Ward Councillors and the Mayor, to consider matters before the Subiaco Oval Impact Management Committee, prior to their meetings.
At the time the application for the lights was before the WAPC for approval, the Council objected to the proposal in the strongest possible terms. In objecting, the Council raised the following concerns:-
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 229 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
the additional detrimental impact on the amenity of residents of Wembley and West Leederville resulting increased intensity of use. concern for the extent to which a management plan can mitigate against this increased loss of amenity. that the WAFC should commit to the development of a Special Events Station at Subiaco Oval (this was considered necessary even without night football). Concern that the continued expansion of Subiaco Oval could lead towards it becoming the Metropolitan Regions major multipurpose sport and entertainment complex, at the expense of the WACA/Gloucester Park precinct, was raised.
The Council submitted that the increasing intensity of the use of Subiaco Oval has grown to intolerable levels in terms of the impact that it has on surrounding (mainly residential) areas.
DETAILS:
The Football Commission has set its programme for the completion of the preparation of the Management Plan for the end of November so that it can be put to the Planning Commission either in December or January. Accordingly, comments on the management plan are requested by the end of this month. The final (completed) management report for Subiaco Oval has now been released by consultants ERM Mitchell McCotter, on behalf of the WAFC. A copy of this draft has been forwarded to The Mayor and all Councillors. In summary, the plan deals with the following:-
Noise
There are various sources of noise which can cause disturbance to surrounding areas. They include; noise from aircraft, noise from crowd cheering, noise from public address systems, as well as noise coming from patrons coming to and leaving the game, both in their vehicles and on foot. Among the management measures outlined in the plan are:-
minimise traffic movements by encouraging public transport; monitor noise levels at various sites outside the ground, including Glen Street in West Leederville, using EPA guidelines.
Crowd Control/Antisocial Behaviour
The Management Plan relies on the involvement and cooperation of the WA Police. A letter from the police offering their support is enclosed with the plan.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 230 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The City of Subiaco have experienced some vandalism after football matches at Subiaco Oval. They are submitting that a minimum of sixteen police should be provided for average attendance matches and this should be increased to up to twenty police for capacity crowds.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 231 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Light Spill
The Department of Environmental Protection have endorsed the tender documents for the installation of the lighting at Subiaco Oval. The successful tenderers were Philips, who claimed experience at other venues around Australia and the rest of the world.
The light spill contour plan, shown in the Management Plan, indicates that properties in the Town of Cambridge would not be greatly affected. Only seven properties, along Railway Parade, fall (partly) within the ten lux contour. Ten lux is considered to be the maximum acceptable lighting intensity in residential areas.
In the Management Plan is an undertaking to conduct an audit of light spill prior to the first night match being played and for any necessary adjustments to be made to the lighting to ensure that it complies with the light spill contour plan contained in the management report.
The plan also refers to a procedure for dealing with complaints from residents.
Impacts of light glare on traffic movement in surrounding streets is indicated as being subject to Main Roads assessment. This assessment is not provided in the Management Report.
Public Transport
The Management Plan proposes the continued promotion and encouragement for supporters to come to the football by public transport; either by train or special bus services. The plan, however, does not accept the development of a Special Events Station (at this stage) nor the use of joint entry ticketing.
The Department of Transport (DoT) has for some time now been promoting joint ticketing and a Special Events Station at the Oval, as a key initiative to encourage the use of public transport and to increase its capacity. In a report on this matter, DoT have indicated that a Special Events Station would be of particular benefit on midweek nights (particularly Friday) by increasing passenger capacity by 3,150 people. At a car occupancy rate of 2.8 persons per car this equates to 1,125 parking spaces. The capacity for public transport to cater for football patrons on weeknights is significantly reduced due to normal commuter demands. DoT have extended an offer to the Football Commission of a joint funding arrangement for the construction of a Special Events Station.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 232 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
A target for continuous improvement in the use of public transport towards 25% of the total crowd is set down in the Management Plan. According to DoT figures, this figure could not be achieved for midweek games, and based on estimated parking availability would have to increase to in excess of 30% for capacity crowds.
The Management Plan suggests that games be scheduled for Friday, Saturday, Sunday and possibly Monday evenings to assess access to the ground.
Parking
Approximately 75% of patrons drive to the football. An estimated 15% of these patrons park north of the railway line. The Management Plan does not fully address the question of carparking supply and demand. It suggests that parking supply is elastic; that is, people will simply park further from the ground if closer spaces are unavailable. Management strategies in the report concentrate on resolving issues of providing for residential and business parking and encouragement of public transport use.
The Town of Cambridge has taken the position that it will determine parking restrictions based purely on the needs and concerns of its residents, not out of consideration for demands for football parking. In this regard, the Council has recently resolved to impose a total ban on football parking in residential streets approximately within one kilometre of Subiaco Oval. The City of Subiaco have adopted a similar ban. Further, a proposal in the Management Strategy to use all of Meuller Park for football parking is not acceptable to Subiaco Council.
If it is found to be necessary, further restrictions will be imposed beyond the existing parking restriction areas.
Traffic
Conflict with the normal midweek commuter peak presents a significant traffic problem which must be resolved. The Management Plan proposes the preparation of a Traffic Management Strategy by the Subiaco Oval Traffic and Parking Committee. Reference is also made to the involvement of the WA Police Service Traffic Branch in the facilitation of traffic flows prior to night football games. No specific mention is made, however, of the role of Main Roads WA who will bear a good deal
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 233 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
of the responsibility with regard to phasing of traffic lights and general control of traffic movement on the major arteries.
The Subiaco Oval Traffic and Parking Committee is a group that meets to discuss operational issues concerning parking and traffic movements on football days at Subiaco Oval. It is attended by police officers, parking officers from the Town of Cambridge and the City of Subiaco and the WAFC. The Town of Cambridge has had limited involvement in this committee as it has tended to focus on traffic and parking in the City of Subiaco.
The plan makes little reference to traffic congestion and access issues in the residential streets of West Leederville and Wembley.
Promotion
The Management Plan commits a sum of $40,000 for promotion. This would be spent as follows:-
Football Transport Guide $15,000 Transport Ticketing $7,000 General Transport $10,000 Promotion Subiaco Business Parking $5,000 Guide Subiaco General $3,000 Promotion
Complaints
A complaint handling procedure is set out in accordance with Australian Standards. Complaints will be handled by the WAFC.
The effectiveness of complaints handling would be reviewed annually by the Subiaco Oval Impact Management Committee.
Implementation
The Management Strategy is to be made accessible to the public, at various locations including Council libraries. In accordance with the conditions of approval, the plan is to be reviewed at the end of each season by the Subiaco Oval Impact Management Committee.
In this section of the report, the management strategies contained elsewhere are repeated in very broad terms. There is no reference to specific performance measures nor suggestion of
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 234 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
any appropriate remedial measures should performance not be satisfactory.
No overall funding commitment is given.
COMMENT:
From the outset, it is important again stress to the Subiaco Oval Impact Management Committee and the WAPC that the Council remains vehemently opposed to the decision to approve lighting at Subiaco Oval. The increased intensity of use of the ground that this approval will bring as well as the added management difficulties brought about by games being played at night, threatens further inconvenience and disturbance to Town of Cambridge residents and businesses in West Leederville and Wembley. The Management Plan as presented by the WAFC does not adequately mitigate against these detrimental impacts.
With regard to the specific issues addressed in the Management Plan, the following comments are provided:-
Noise
It is proposed to reduce noise by minimising traffic movements, through encouraging public transport. Through its rejection of the Special Events Station and joint ticketing, however, it is the Town’s position that the promotion of increased public transport usage is not adequately addressed.
It is not certain that the noise monitoring site in West Leederville (Glen Street) will provide the best indication of noise levels in the area. Monitoring sites should not be confined to those mentioned in the Management Plan. It is suggested that St Leonards Avenue or Blencowe Street might be better locations.
Crowd Control/Antisocial Behaviour
The general view that a police presence around the ground is far more effective than security guards is fully supported.
The issue of the behaviour of football patrons when moving through the residential areas at night time is critical. The WAFC and the Police, must be provide whatever resources are necessary to ensure that antisocial behaviour by football patrons does not occur in the areas surrounding the oval.
Light Spill
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 235 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The Impact Management Committee must be fully satisfied that the audit of the Oval lighting, to be carried out prior to the use of the ground, is thorough and independent. The WAFC must be made to comply with the commitments to light spill levels as shown in the Management Strategy.
Individual complaints about light spill must be thoroughly dealt with by the WAFC. It is suggested that a further resident survey be conducted on the impacts of light spill at the end of the first football season.
The impact of light spill on traffic requires acceptance by Main Roads WA.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 236 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Public Transport
The public transport strategies contained in the Management Plan are not accepted by the Department of Transport, the public transport provider for metropolitan Perth. As such, the plan cannot be accepted by the Town.
The Town has continually supported the concept of a Special Events Station combined with a joint transport and game entry ticket, to promote the increased use of public transport. Given the attendant problems of traffic congestion and carparking, it is essential that if Subiaco is remain the home of AFL Football then supporter access to games is increasingly gained by public transport. With the Special Events Station concept, and joint ticketing, there is the opportunity to greatly increase the capacity and attraction of public transport access to Subiaco Oval. With an ever decreasing parking supply, there will be a greater reliance on public transport for access to the football at Subiaco Oval. The Subiaco Oval Management Strategy does not meet this challenge.
Without a Special Events Station, midweek night football cannot be supported.
Parking
In choosing not to specifically deal with the supply/demand issue for carparking, a fundamental question as to the accessibility of Subiaco Oval to football patrons is unanswered. This raises some concern in that if it is found that once the lights are in place and the WAFC has made this substantial commitment to night football, and it is found that football supporters are having some difficulty in getting to the ground, then extreme pressure will be placed on the local authorities of Subiaco and Cambridge to relent on its established parking schemes.
With regard to parking in residential areas, the responsibility is to clearly to cater for the needs and concerns of its own residents. It is on this basis that the Town will undertake its responsibilities in terms of parking control, not out of consideration for demands for football parking.
Traffic
Any traffic management proposal for pre-game midweek traffic, where there is a conflict with the daily commuter peak, must be developed with the participation and concurrence of Main Road WA.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 237 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The Management Plan does not specifically address the impact of traffic congestion created by football, on Town of Cambridge residents. This is likely to affect accessibility for local residents and to create noise disturbance later in the evening when people are going home from the football. The use of barricades to direct traffic away from local streets should be considered to protect local amenity. The Subiaco Oval Traffic and Parking Committee is a forum of operations people; police, parking officers and the WAFC, and has not authority to set traffic management strategies. Such management strategies must be resolved before night football commences. The role of the Subiaco Oval Traffic and Parking Committee is seen as dealing with “on the ground” operational issues, within the context of the traffic management strategy.
Promotion
The amount of $40,000 set aside for promotion is an extremely small sum in promotional dollar terms and given the size and prominence of football in the community. It can be expected that this money will be consumed very quickly.
Implementation
In this section of the Management Plan there are no performance criteria by which the WAFC can be measured in terms of successfully managing the social impact of night football, nor does it suggest appropriate remedial measures should their performance not be considered to be satisfactory. This leads to a great deal of uncertainty in the minds of those impacted by the use of Subiaco Oval. There should be a set of specific, measurable targets against which the achievements of the Management Strategy can be checked.
It is further considered, that the plans should explicitly outline the overall funding commitment by the WAFC to the implementation of the Management Plan.
CONCLUSION:
The Management Strategy for Subiaco Oval, prepared by consultants on behalf of the WAFC, does not satisfy the concerns raised by Council in its initial consideration of (and opposition to) the installation lights for night football at the Oval. This fundamental point needs to be raised with the WAPC and the WAFC, in addition to the comments raised in this report
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 238 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
concerning specific matters addressed in the Management Strategy.
It is therefore recommended that :-
(i) the Council conveys to the Subiaco Oval Impact Management Committee and the Western Australian Planning Commission the following:-
(a) the final draft of Subiaco Oval Management Strategy prepared by Consultants ERM Mitchell McCotter for the Western Australian Football Commission does not satisfy Council concerns with respect to the impacts that night football will have on West Leederville and Wembley residents. In these circumstances, the Council remains vehemently opposed to the decision to approve lighting at Subiaco Oval. The increased intensity of use of the ground that this approval will bring, as well as added management difficulties brought about by games being played at night, threatens severe inconvenience and disturbance to Town of Cambridge residents and businesses;
(b) With regard to specific issues addressed in the management strategy, the Council comments as follows:-
1. Noise It is not certain that the noise monitoring site identified in West Leederville (Glen Street) will provide the best indication of noise levels in the area. Monitoring sites should not be confined to those mentioned in the Management Strategy. It is suggested that St Leonards Avenue or Blencowe Street might be better locations;
2. Crowd Control/Antisocial Behaviour - Police presence around the ground will be far more effective than security guards to control the behaviour of football patrons. The behaviour of football patrons when moving through residential areas at night time must be effectively controlled. The WAFC and the Police must provide whatever resources are necessary to ensure that antisocial behaviour by football
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 239 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
patrons does not occur in the areas surrounding the Oval;
3. Light spill - The Subiaco Oval Impact Management Committee and the WAPC must be fully satisfied that the audit of Oval lighting to be carried out prior to the use of the ground, is thorough and independent. The WAFC must be made to comply with the commitments to light spill levels as shown in the management strategy. Individual complaints about light spill must be thoroughly dealt with by the WAFC. A further resident survey should be conducted on the impact of light spill at the end of the football season.
The impact of light spill on traffic requires assessment and acceptance by Main Roads WA;
4. Public Transport - The Town cannot support public transport strategies contained in the Management Strategy while they are not accepted by the Department of Transport; the public transport authority for Metropolitan Perth. The Town continues to support the concept of a Special Events Station combined with a joint transport and game entry ticket, to promote the increased use of public transport. There is the opportunity to greatly increase the capacity and attraction of public transport access to Subiaco through these measures. With ever decreasing parking supply, there will be greater reliance on public transport for access to the football at Subiaco Oval. The management strategy does not meet this challenge.
Without a Special Events Station, midweek night football (particularly Friday nights) is unworkable;
5. Parking - In not specifically dealing with supply and demand for carparking
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 240 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
associated with the Oval, the management strategy leaves this fundamental question of accessibility unanswered. This raises some considerable concern in that if it found that once the lights are in place and the WAFC has made this substantial commitment to night football, and it is found that football supporters are having some difficulty in getting to the ground, then extreme pressure will be placed on the local authorities of Subiaco and Cambridge to relent on established parking schemes.
With regard to parking in residential areas, the responsibility of Council is clearly to cater for the needs and concerns of its own residents. It is on this basis that the Town will undertake its responsibilities in terms of parking control, not out of consideration for the demands of football parking;
6. Traffic - Any traffic management proposal, particularly for pre-game midweek traffic, where it conflicts with the daily commuter peak, must be developed with the participation and concurrence of Main Roads WA. The impact of traffic congestion on Town of Cambridge residents is not addressed in the Strategy. This is likely to affect accessibility for local residents and to create noise disturbance later in the evening when people are going home from the football. The use of barricades to direct traffic away from local streets should be considered to protect local amenity.
The Subiaco Oval Traffic and Parking Committee is not the appropriate forum to deal with a Traffic Management Strategy. Traffic Management needs to be addressed by appropriate technical officers from the Town of Cambridge and the City of Subiaco, in consultation with Main Roads WA and the WAFC;
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 241 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
7. Promotion - The amount of $40,000 set aside for promotion is an extremely small sum in promotional dollar terms and given the size and prominence in the community of football, it can be expected that this will not be sufficient;
8. Implementation - Specific, measurable performance criteria need to be set for the WAFC against which the management strategy can be checked. Such criteria need to be spelt out for each of the management issues identified in the strategy. Specific remedial measures and/or penalties should also be outlined in the event that performance commitments are not achieved. A detailed funding commitment by the WAFC to the implementation of the management strategy should be outlined in this section;
(ii) Copies of this submission be forwarded to the City of Subiaco, the Ministry for Planning, the Department of Transport, the Department of Environmental Protection and Main Roads WA.
Committee Meeting 19 November 1996
During discussion, Members expressed dissatisfaction with regard to the way in which complaints were handled by the Football Commission. Members considered that there should be a check on the Football Commission to ensure that complaints were handled satisfactorily.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 242 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
It was also agreed that the WAFC should be advised in the clearest possible terms that the Council does not support the Impact Management Strategy as prepared by consultants ERM Mitchell McCotter for the Western Australian Football Commission.
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That:-
(i) the Council conveys to the Subiaco Oval Impact Management Committee and the Western Australian Planning Commission the following:-
(a) the Council does not support the final draft of Subiaco Oval Management Strategy prepared by Consultants ERM Mitchell McCotter for the Western Australian Football Commission;
(b) the report does not satisfy Council concerns with respect to the impacts that night football will have on West Leederville and Wembley residents. In these circumstances, the Council remains vehemently opposed to the decision to approve lighting at Subiaco Oval. The increased intensity of use of the ground that this approval will bring, as well as added management difficulties brought about by games being played at night, threatens severe inconvenience and disturbance to Town of Cambridge residents and businesses;
(c) with regard to specific issues addressed in the management strategy, the Council comments as follows:-
1. Noise It is not certain that the noise monitoring site identified in West Leederville (Glen Street) will provide the best indication of noise levels in the area. Monitoring sites should not be confined to those mentioned in the Management Strategy. It is suggested that St Leonards Avenue or Blencowe Street might be better locations;
2. Crowd Control/Antisocial Behaviour - Police presence around the ground will be
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 243 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
far more effective than security guards to control the behaviour of football patrons. The behaviour of football patrons when moving through residential areas at night time must be effectively controlled. The WAFC and the Police must provide whatever resources are necessary to ensure that antisocial behaviour by football patrons does not occur in the areas surrounding the Oval;
3. Light spill - The Subiaco Oval Impact Management Committee and the WAPC must be fully satisfied that the audit of Oval lighting to be carried out prior to the use of the ground, is thorough and independent. The WAFC must be made to comply with the commitments to light spill levels as shown in the management strategy. Individual complaints about light spill must be thoroughly dealt with by the WAFC. A further resident survey should be conducted on the impact of light spill at the end of the football season. The impact of light spill on traffic requires assessment and acceptance by Main Roads WA;
4. Public Transport - The Town cannot support public transport strategies contained in the Management Strategy while they are not accepted by the Department of Transport; the public transport authority for Metropolitan Perth. The Town continues to support the concept of a Special Events Station combined with a joint transport and game entry ticket, to promote the increased use of public transport. There is the opportunity to greatly increase the capacity and attraction of public transport access to Subiaco through these measures. With ever decreasing parking supply, there will be greater reliance on public transport for access to the football at Subiaco Oval. The management strategy does not meet this challenge.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 244 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Without a Special Events Station, midweek night football (particularly Friday nights) is unworkable;
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 245 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
5. Parking - In not specifically dealing with supply and demand for carparking associated with the Oval, the management strategy leaves this fundamental question of accessibility unanswered. This raises some considerable concern in that if it found that once the lights are in place and the WAFC has made this substantial commitment to night football, and it is found that football supporters are having some difficulty in getting to the ground, then extreme pressure will be placed on the local authorities of Subiaco and Cambridge to relent on established parking schemes.
With regard to parking in residential areas, the responsibility of Council is clearly to cater for the needs and concerns of its own residents. It is on this basis that the Town will undertake its responsibilities in terms of parking control, not out of consideration for the demands of football parking;
6. Traffic - Any traffic management proposal, particularly for pre-game midweek traffic, where it conflicts with the daily commuter peak, must be developed with the participation and concurrence of Main Roads WA.
The impact of traffic congestion on Town of Cambridge residents is not addressed in the Strategy. This is likely to affect accessibility for local residents and to create noise disturbance later in the evening when people are going home from the football. The use of barricades to direct traffic away from local streets should be considered to protect local amenity.
The Subiaco Oval Traffic and Parking Committee is not the appropriate forum to deal with a Traffic Management Strategy. Traffic Management needs to be addressed
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 246 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
by appropriate technical officers from the Town of Cambridge and the City of Subiaco, in consultation with Main Roads WA and the WAFC;
7. Promotion - The amount of $40,000 set aside for promotion is an extremely small sum in promotional dollar terms and given the size and prominence in the community of football, it can be expected that this will not be sufficient;
8. Implementation - Specific, measurable performance criteria need to be set for the WAFC against which the management strategy can be checked. Such criteria need to be spelt out for each of the management issues identified in the strategy. Specific remedial measures and/or penalties should also be outlined in the event that performance commitments are not achieved;
A detailed funding commitment by the WAFC to the implementation of the management strategy should be outlined in this section;
9. Complaints - In addition to reporting on complaints handling to the Subiaco Oval Technical Officers Committee, the two affected Councils also be notified of this matter;
(ii) Copies of this submission be forwarded to the City of Subiaco, the Ministry for Planning, the Department of Transport, The Department of Environmental Protection and Main Roads WA.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 247 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.18 COMMERCIAL EVALUATION OF BEACHFRONT FACILITIES - CITY AND FLOREAT BEACHES (File Reference: PRO0194)
BACKGROUND:
In December last year, the Council resolved to engage a consultant, Chesterton International, to undertake a commercial evaluation of existing beachfront facilities and identify possible future opportunities at City and Floreat beaches.
The Consultant was required to fulfil the following tasks:-
evaluation of current commercial viability and performance of kiosks; opportunities and scope for improvement of kiosks; assessment of need for and feasibility and desirability of other commercial facilities associated with the beach such as cafes/dining facilities; impacts on other commercial businesses in the Town of Cambridge; identify the most appropriate locations for new facilities; comparison with examples of commercial facilities added to the beachfront at other metropolitan beaches; opportunity for income to the Town.
DETAILS:
The Consultant’s report was submitted to Council earlier this year. A copy was circulated to the Mayor and all Councillors. In the meantime, a Native Title Claim has been lodged for the entire coastal area of the Town of Cambridge. The advent of this claim has delayed the Council’s consideration of the report while its implications on future beachfront development have been assessed.
The Consultant’s report comprises of the following:-
Development Options
Three options are identified for future commercial development at the beachfront:-
Option 1 - replace existing three kiosks with similar but substantially upgraded premises;
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 248 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Option 2 - replace existing facilities with substantially upgraded and expanded facilities including provision for a major restaurant/cafe. Option 3 - expansive long term development strategy including accommodation, shopping, entertainment and tourist facilities.
Review of Existing Facilities
The consultant looks at rental and turnover figures, and services provided, for the three kiosks. Turnover figures show a drop in trade over the five period from 1989 to 1993 for all kiosks and they are seen as being barely viable as they operate at present. Figures for 1994 and 1995 were not available.
Comparable Beachfront/Waterfront Facilities
Four kiosks and six cafe/restaurant facilities located around the metropolitan region have been examined. Ownership, leasing conditions are discussed as well as general commentary on building condition, facilities offered and general commercial attractiveness.
Financial Data
A summary of financial information concerning the three Town of Cambridge kiosks as well as information on other facilities in the metropolitan region is provided.
Sundry Considerations
The report briefly comments on carparking, impact on surrounding residents and impact on local businesses.
Car parking is observed as being adequate for all occasions although the need is seen for better direction to beach goers to park in carparks rather than in surrounding streets. This would assist in alleviating existing impacts on nearby residents.
Otherwise, the beach is considered to be well removed from surrounding residents and businesses and future development of beachfront facilities would have little or no impact.
Report Recommendations
The consultant recommends the following:-
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 249 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
That all three kiosks be demolished and replaced due to their poor physical condition and the level of service that they provide to the public. Replacement facilities to be constructed at the lessees expense; that is, the Town providing ground leases for the sites with facilities being provided by the leaseholder. Kiosk 1 to be replaced with updated facilities and to add a formal cafe/restaurant, either as part of the kiosk building or as a stand alone facility at the northern end of the adjacent car parking area. Kiosk 2 to be replaced with a smaller building with similar facilities but with improved outdoor dining area. Kiosk 3 lease of this area to include the existing grassed area to the south of the kiosk with more family orientated facilities being provided such as barbeques and playgrounds, of a less formal nature.
Native Title Claim on the Coast
The Native Title Claim over the coastline of the Town of Cambridge was reported to Council earlier this year. The claim has now been accepted by the Native Title Tribunal and at some time in the future, must be settled between the claimants and interested parties. The Town has advised the Tribunal of its interest in the Claim and is registered as an interested party together with a number of individuals, Government agencies and another indigenous group.
The Town has sought legal advice concerning the implications of this claim with respect to future management and development of the beachfront and in particular, its effect on future planning for beachfront facilities. A copy of the Town’s solicitors advice has been circulated separately to the Mayor and all Councillors.
In effect, the acceptance of the Native Title Claim restricts what the Council can do on the beachfront unless agreement is reached with the claimant or it is subsequently found that Native Title does not exist. These restrictions would apply to any physical development of the land or disposal or leasing of the land. Preparation of development of future plans for the beachfront would not in itself contravene the provisions of the Act. The legal advice, however, recommends that the Council give serious consideration to approaching the claimants, with a view to settling the question whether the Council might proceed with its contemplated improvements either with the approval of the claimants, or on the basis that the work will be done without prejudice to the ultimate outcome of the Native Title Claim.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 250 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Unfortunately, there is no time limit specified to settle Native Title claims.
The area, the subject of the claim covers both land owned freehold by the Town and Reserve No. 16921, vested in the Town. The reserve follows the shoreline and is included in the endowment under the Endowment Lands Act. The solicitor’s advice indicates that this is a relevant consideration in determining whether or not any native rights have been extinguished.
Lease documents for all three kiosks record them as being located on the reserve.
COMMENT:
The Consultant’s report confirms what most would have observed, that existing beachfront facilities are in generally poor condition and there is significant scope for improved service to beachgoers. There is tremendous potential to greatly improve these facilities and in doing so, to significantly increase the financial return to the Town. In particular, with regard to cafe/dining facilities, the consultant identifies a number of facilities in the metropolitan region which are extremely popular and attractive to the community, and provide a lucrative return to the Council. Such financial return can be reinvested in the future management of the Town’s coastline.
The recommendations put forward in the report proposes a relatively modest future development scenario for the beach in upgrading and slightly expanding existing facilities plus adding a new restaurant/dining facility.
In terms of future management, the Consultant strongly recommends that Council make available ground leases and that future facilities are developed privately. This would greatly reduce the financial risk to Council.
In view of the above comments, it is recommended that the recommendations in the consultant’s report be adopted in principle.
With respect to the Native Title Claim, it is recommended, that having regard to the legal advice received, that the Council commence discussion with the Native Title claimants.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 251 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Committee Meeting 10 September 1996
During discussion, Members agreed that further consideration of this matter was required and the matter be deferred to enable a land survey to be undertaken.
It was therefore resolved that consideration of the following item:-
“That the Council:-
(i) adopts in principle the recommendations of the Consultant’s report on Commercial Evaluation of Beachfront facilities;
(ii) commences consultation with the claimants for Native Title over the beachfront.”
be deferred until a land survey has been completed to establish the boundary between Reserve No. 16921 and land held freehold by the Town.
FURTHER REPORT (Post Committee Meeting 10 September 1996)
The survey as requested by the Committee has now been completed. A copy of the survey plan is appended with this agenda. The survey indicates that the existing kiosks (and surf clubs) are located either wholly within the beach reserve vested in the Council or the lot boundary actually passes through the buildings. In a practical sense, the location of this boundary has had no effect on the construction or operations within these buildings. With the advent of the Native Title Claim over the beach front, however, the demarcation of reserved land and freehold land becomes a pertinent issue. Although the Native Title Claim for this area has been accepted by the Native Title Tribunal as extending over both the reserve and Council owned land, consistent advice has been that Native Title does not exist where land is owned freehold. There is some suggestion, however, that this situation may not apply to freehold crown land and that is the reason given by the tribunal in accepting the claim over the Council owned land. Further enquiries with Council’s solicitors and the Department of Land Administration, indicate that in their opinion Native Title has now been extinguished.
In the circumstances, it is suggested that the Council consider relocating at this stage the three kiosks eastwards so that they fall within the Council owned land. This would avoid any
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 252 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
possible future difficulties that might arise out of the Native Title Claim. The survey indicates that the kiosks would not have to be moved very far to bring them within Council’s land. In addition to this matter, storm damage to the beach in recent years suggests that they should be moved further from the waters edge. This has been a particular threat with regard to Kiosk No. 2 (south City Beach) and Kiosk 3 (Floreat Beach).
If Council agrees in principle to the recommendations of consultants Chesterton International’s report on their evaluation of beachfront facilities, the Council is now in a position to progress this matter further.
Existing leases on kiosks numbers 1 and 3 expire at the end of March 1996. The lease for Kiosk No. 2 also expires in March next year, however, there is an option in the lease to extend for a further three years. Given the early expiry of the leases for Kiosk Nos. 1 and 3, it is an opportune time to begin to plan for new facilities.
The next step in the process is to prepare a concept proposal based on the recommendations from the Chesterton report. This proposal should be prepared along the lines of a business plan, addressing the following:-
site plan showing suggested location of new facilities, having regard to location on Council owned land and convenience, accessibility to beachgoers. type and size of facilities required with resultant ground lease areas. financial analysis/projections.
The preparation of this concept proposal is not seen as a major task, but, will require the specialist expertise of Property Consultants. Given the work that Chesterton International have already carried out, there is considerable advantage in again engaging them to carry out this next stage. They have been approached in this regard and given an outline of the Council’s requirements. They have advised that they would charge $2,000 for the preparation of concept proposal. This is considered to be a reasonable figure and as they have pointed out, the costs involved have been able to be reduced due to their past work on the project. In these circumstances, it is considered that there would be little to be achieved in going to tender for this process. It is therefore recommended that Chesterton be engaged.
On completion of the Consultant’s work, the Council will be in a position to consult with the public on this matter and following
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 253 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
this, go out to tender for the development of one or any number of the facilities.
Committee Meeting 19 November 1996
During discussion, Members agreed that a Working Group be established to analyse the content of the consultants report on “Commercial Evaluation of Beachfront Facilities”.
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That:-
(i) the recommendations of Consultants Chesterton International’s report on “Commercial Evaluation of Beachfront Facilities” be received;
(ii) the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to engage Chesterton International to prepare a concept proposal for the beachfront kiosks, based on the details outlined in this report, at a cost not exceeding $2,000;
(iii) the expenditure in (ii) above be charged to Budget Item “Town Planning and Regional Development - Administration, Special Projects/Consultancies”;
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 254 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
(iv) written confirmation be sought from the solicitors, McLeod and Co. concerning the extinguishment of Native Title over the Council’s freehold land;
(v) a working group be established to analyse the content of Consultants Chesterton International’s report on beachfront facilities and make recommendations to Council on the scope of the report and the recommendations.
Carried
Cr O'Connor left the meeting at 7.42pm and returned at 7.44pm.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 255 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.19 BUILDING LICENCE REQUIRING APPROVAL (File Reference: PRO1098
BACKGROUND:
Application has been received from Multiplex Constructions (WA) Pty Ltd on behalf of St. John of God Health Care System for a Building Licence to construct a new multi-level medical clinic. The project involves the construction of:-
level 0 - carpark; level 1 - carpark, pathology laboratory; physiotherapy and hydrotherapy facility; level 2 - private medical consultation suites; cafe; retail pharmacy; administration offices; nuclear and endoscopic medical facilities; Level 3 - private medical consultation suites and conference facility; Level 4 - operating theatres with supporting facilities; Roof level - plant and mechanical services equipment.
DETAILS:
The building plans have been checked against those granted planning approval and have been found to fully comply.
The plans and specifications have been through a rigorous assessment process by Council’s structural engineering consultant . This has resulted in delays in processing the application due to requests for additional information or the rejection (and subsequent redesign) of some structural aspects.
The responsible Building Surveyor has liaised closely with Fire Brigade officers to ensure all aspects of fire safety have been adequately specified and incorporated into the plans and specifications.
After fully resolving all of the above matters, the Council was in a position to issue a Building Licence. In accordance with adopted practice, as the value of the development (non residential) exceeds $175,000, the matter is referred to the Council for confirmation of approval.
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 256 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
That the action taken by the Chief Executive Officer in issuing a Building Licence to:-
Applicant: St. John of God Health Care System, 175 Cambridge Street, Subiaco.
Builder: Multiplex Constructions (WA) Pty Ltd Occupier: St John of God Hospital and others Description of Works: Construction a new 5 level medical clinic and refurbishment of part of the original structure (adjoining level 4) for operating theatre support facilities Value of Project: $30 million dollars; and subject to compliance with specific conditions and requirements, be confirmed.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 257 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.20 BUILDING LICENCES APPROVED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY (File Reference: ADM0048)
BACKGROUND:
A total of 41 building licences with a combined value of $1,933,299 were approved during the month of October 1996.
Seven preliminary building licences and six demolition licences were also approved.
Comparative figures of the number of licences issued on the same month for last year and the current year are as follows:-
October October 1996 1995
Building 36 41 Licences Sign Licences 0 0 Preliminary 5 7 Building Licences Demolition 8 6 Licences
Value of $1,602,303 1,933,299 Construction
Comparative cumulative figures are as follows:-
July 1995 - July 1996 - October October 1996 1995
Building 133 173 Licences Sign Licences 1 1 Preliminary 18 21 Building Licences Demolition 20 20 Licences
Value of $9,295,037 $10,141,962 Construction
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 258 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That the Schedule of building licences approved under delegated authority for the month of October 1996, as attached to and forming part of the notice paper, be received.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 259 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.21 17 TURRIFF ROAD, FLOREAT - TWO STOREY RESIDENCE AND GARAGE (File Reference: PRO0607)
BACKGROUND:
DA/BA REFERENCE: 503BA-96 LANDOWNER: PC and LK De Bruin APPLICANT: PC and LK De Bruin ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme: Residential R12.5
COMPLIANCE: Required Provided Plot Ratio (Council policy No13) 0.4:1 0.48:1 Front s/b (By law 43) 9m 8.2m (porch only) Secondary Street s/b (Council policy No12) 4.5m 4.5m North side s/b (R-Codes) 1.2m 1.5m House south side s/b (R-Codes) 1.5m 1.5m Garage south side s/b (R-Codes) 1.0m 0.0m
DETAILS:
Lot Area 764 square metres Floor Area 367 square metres (PR 0.48) Total Open 489 square metres (64%) Space
Approval is sought to construct a two storey residence with a separate garage at Lot 3, No 17 Turriff Road, Floreat, consisting of living areas on the ground floor and four bedrooms and two bathrooms on the upper floor. The garage is located at the rear of the dwelling and is proposed to be accessed via Peebles Road. The dwelling is to be constructed of brick walls with colourbond roofing.
Surrounding land use comprises mainly single storey residences.
COMMENT:
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 260 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Plot Ratio:
The Council’s policy is for 0.4:1.0 for the R12.5 area although the R Codes do not specify a maximum. In the past the Council has supported developments exceeding the plot ratio policy in the context of the overall development, its streetscape presentation and the nature and scale of surrounding development. In this case, it is considered that the development’s plot ratio of 0.48 represents an acceptable variation to the Council’s Policy on the following grounds:-
1. reduction of the floor habitable floor area by the amount required to achieve compliance (62 square metres) would not enhance the appearance of the dwelling or significantly reduce its bulk when viewed from the street 2. although the development is of two storeys, the overall size of the residence is such that it would have limited effect on the streetscape, reflected in the total open space provision (64% of the site) and full compliance with the required By-Law 43 setbacks. Furthermore, the proposed ground floor level is about 0.9 metres lower than the existing road boundary line level on Turriff Road.
Garage Location
The garage is proposed to be located at the rear of the dwelling fronting onto Peebles Road. This arrangement, although enabling a high standard of presentation to Turriff Road, presents poorly to Peebles as the garage occupies then entire street frontage onto this road. This is created by the unusual shape of the lot, which has frontages onto both Turriff and Peebles, without actually being located on a corner. This configuration is the legacy of a subdivision of the original corner lot, and creation of a new corner lot which has subsequently been developed with a single storey house. This lot incorporates a solid brick screen wall to Peebles Road. The garage, although not offering a high presentation to this road, is set back in accordance with the secondary street requirements for By-Law 43 under Policy No 12. Furthermore, if the garage were relocated to the front of the dwelling, this portion of frontage would simply be occupied by rear fence, which would have a greater impact on the streetscape compared to the garage. It is, however, recommend that the driveways and crossovers to the garage be reduced to increase the area available for landscaping to enhance presentation to the street.
Garage side setback
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 261 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The garage is proposed to be constructed with a 0m side setback onto the adjoining property. A copy of the plans endorsed with the neighbours consent to this has been received and this variation of the side setback will have no adverse impacts on the appearance of the garage from the street. On this basis this is supported.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 262 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Front Setback
The main part of the residence is setback the required 9m from Turriff Road, however, the porch is proposed to extend 750mm into this area, being setback 8.25m. This is a minor architectural feature and is not a substantial structure, and occupies a small portion of the frontage of the residence. As a consequence of these factors, this minor variation to the front setback is supported.
CONCLUSION:
In summary, it is considered that the requested variation is acceptable from a planning perspective and the proposed residence is therefore recommended for approval. The garage on Peebles Road, although not offering a high presentation to the streetscape, is considered to be acceptable given the constraints imposed by the lot configuration.
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That in accordance with Section 374 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1960 and Clause 34(2AA) of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme the Council APPROVES BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the application for a preliminary building licence submitted by PC and LK De Bruin for a two storey residence at Lot 3, 17 Turriff Road, Floreat, as shown on the plans dated 23 October 1996 subject to the following conditions:-
(i) the development not exceeding a plot ratio of 0.48:1.0 at the working drawing stage;
(ii) the width of the crossover onto Peebles Road being reduced to a maximum of 6 metres.
Carried BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 263 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.22 LOT 439 NO 33 MARAPANA ROAD CITY BEACH - TWO STOREY ADDITION TO EXISTING RESIDENCE (File Reference: PRO0926)
BACKGROUND:
DA/BA REFERENCE: 466BA-96 LANDOWNER: Mr and Mrs J Cardile APPLICANT: Glenview Home Improvements ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme: Residential R12.5
COMPLIANCE:
The proposed additions do not comply with the allowed side setback in the Residential codes or Council Policy No. 13 (Plot Ratio), the maximum plot ratio being 0.4:1.0 in the Residential R12.5 Zone. The proposal has a plot ratio of 0.47:1.0 which exceeds the limit by 55.0 square metres. It is also noted that the proposal may not fully comply with clause 7(a) of By-Law No43 with regard to allowed construction materials. The upper floor is constructed of timber framing with fibre cement sheet cladding. It is proposed to render the existing face brick and to paint finish all externals walls which will give the finished appearance of a totally rendered brickwork surface.
DETAILS:
Required Provided Side setback 2.7 metres 2.0 metres (R Codes) Plot ratio 0.4:1 0.47:1 (Policy No 13)
Approval is sought to construct additions to the existing ground floor and a second storey addition at Lot 439 No 33 Marapana Road, City Beach. The proposal consists of a kitchen, dining and living areas on the ground floor and three bedrooms and two bathrooms and a sitting room on the upper floor. The ground floor additions are to be constructed of double brick walls and the upper floor of timber frame clad with fibre cement sheeting with clay tile roofing to match the existing roof. The subject land has an area of 925 square metres and the dwelling has a floor space (for plot ratio calculation) of 424 square metres. Total open space amounts to 68 percent of the site.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 264 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The proposal is referred to the Council in respect of non- compliance with the Council’s Plot Ratio Policy and a variation to the allowed side setback in accordance with the Residential Codes. The Council’s policy is for 0.4:1.0 for the R12.5 area although the R Codes do not specify a maximum. In the past the Council has supported developments exceeding the plot ratio policy in the context of the overall development, its streetscape presentation and the nature and scale of surrounding development. The surrounding land use comprises mainly of large two storey single residences, many of which have been approved with a plot ratio exceeding the policy requirements for an R 12.5 zoning.
In 1992 an application was submitted to the City of Perth for a second storey addition. The Council at the time, refused the application on the grounds of non compliance with the Residential Codes and comments of objection from the adjoining property owners. The applicant has again approached the adjoining property owners who have again strongly objected to the proposal on the same grounds as their previous objection.
COMMENT:
Plot Ratio
With respect to plot ratio, it is considered that the development’s plot ratio of 0.47 represents an unacceptable variation to the Council’s Policy (amounting to 55.0 square metres). Although the development is of two storeys, at the front elevation, the rear will have an effective height of three storeys as there is an existing granny flat at a lower level that the existing residence therefore the overall size of the residence is such that it would adversely effect the amenity of the surrounding area.
Side setback variation
The proposed side setback is 2.0 metres. The setback required under the residential Codes is 2.7, although the Codes give Council the authority to vary setbacks where it does not adversely affect the amenity of the adjoining property or where there is an agreement from the owner of the adjoining property to vary the setback. In this case the adjoining property owners have objected to the proposal on the grounds of loss of privacy and overshadowing.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 265 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
CONCLUSION:
In summary, it is considered that the requested variations are unacceptable from a planning perspective and the proposed additions is therefore recommended for refusal.
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That in accordance with Section 374 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1960 and Clause 34(2AA) of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme and having regard to matters required and considered under these provisions generally and in particular:-
(i) as the proposal is not in compliance with the setback requirements of the Residential Planning Codes and would allow overlooking of the adjoining property; (ii) having regard to the concerns expressed by the adjoining property owner in this matter; (iii) as the proposal is not in compliance with Council’s Policy No. 13 relating to plot ratio;
the Council refuses the application for a building licence submitted by Glenview Home Improvements on behalf of Mr and Mrs J Cardile for a second storey addition to the existing residence at Lot 439 No 33 Marapana Road City Beach, as shown on plans dated 16 October 1996.
Carried
Cr Anderton left the meeting at 7.47pm and retuned at 7.50pm.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 266 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.23 73 BLENCOWE STREET, WEST LEEDERVILLE - 2 TWO STOREY RESIDENCES (File Reference: PRO0569)
BACKGROUND:
DA/BA REFERENCE: 533BA-96 LANDOWNER: T and E Starke APPLICANT: E M Bollig ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme: Residential R30
COMPLIANCE: Required Provided Development Density 300 m2 per dwelling 323 m2 per dwelling Plot Ratio (Council policy No13) 0.4:1 0.55:1 Front s/b 6m 6m North side s/b: Ground floor 1.0/1.5m 1.0/2.2m North side s/b: First floor 1.5/1.5m 1.5/2.2m South side s/b: Ground floor 1.0/1.5m 1.0/2.2m South side s/b: First floor 1.5/1.5m 1.5/2.2m Balconies 3.0m 2.6m
DETAILS:
Lot Area 647 square metres Floor Area 356 square metres (PR 0.55) Total Open 370 square metres (57%) Space
Approval is sought to construct a 2 two storey single residences with separate garages with access via the rear laneway at Lot 281, 73 Blencowe Street, West Leederville. The dwellings are of modern design, incorporating a glass and rendered frontage to the street. The dwellings will consist of living areas on the ground floor and three bedrooms and two bathrooms on the upper floor. The land is proposed to be subdivided into two green title lots.
Surrounding land use comprises mainly single storey original residences.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 267 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
COMMENT:
Plot Ratio:
The Council’s policy is for 0.4:1.0 for the R30 area although the R Codes do not specify a maximum. In the past the Council has supported developments exceeding the plot ratio policy in the context of the overall development, its streetscape presentation and the nature and scale of surrounding development. In this case, it is considered that the development’s plot ratio of 0.55 represents an acceptable variation to the Council’s Policy on the following grounds:-
1. whilst it is acknowledged that the subject land is surrounded by existing and generally original single storey residences, the development is being proposed is at a density which is complies with the zoning of the land. As such, a reduction of the floor habitable floor area by the amount required to achieve compliance (approx 100 square metres) would not enhance the appearance of the dwellings or significantly reduce its bulk when viewed from the street. Such a reduction could be achieved by a reduction in the number of rooms at the rear of the property, and, as such, the appearance of the dwellings would reman unchanged.
2. the proposed residences are specifically designed to maximise functional private space, and to maintain an open presentation to the street. In this respect the property would be enhanced, as it currently has a solid limestone wall on the front boundary which would be removed as part of the development. Furthermore, the application fully complies with all requirements of the R- Codes in terms of building setbacks.
3. the proposed floor level of the dwellings is about 0.6 metres lower than the existing road boundary line level on Blencowe Street, thus the development will appear to “sit low” on the lot when viewed from the street.
4. when development of a lot occurs in this manner (ie - creation of two dwellings side by side where one previously existed) the existing pattern or “rhythm” of existing development is interrupted (ie - two houses would exist where one once did, and as a consequence the pattern of buildings as they present to the street increases in intensity). However, in this case the physical
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 268 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
joining of the buildings and the fact that vehicular access to the properties will be via a rear laneway (thus there will be no crossovers on the front boundary) will reduce the impacts of this effect.
Balcony setbacks
Clause 4.5.2 of the R-Codes requires that balconies be setback a minimum of 3m from any boundaries. This can be achieved via minor modification to the plans which can be incorporated as a condition of approval.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 269 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Rear laneway access
The double garages for the proposed development will be accessed via the rear laneway between Blencowe St and St Leonards Avenue. The laneway, although not constructed, is trafficable and wide enough for vehicle manoeuvre. There are a number of garages accessing the rear of properties off the laneway in the vicinity of the land, and there are no objections to its use for vehicular access to the development.
Subdivision issues
In order to achieve density compliance with the R-Codes, the land is required to be subdivided into two green title lots prior to the issue of a building licence.
CONCLUSION:
In summary, it is considered that the requested plot ratio variation is acceptable from a planning perspective and the proposed residences are therefore recommended for approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
That in accordance with Section 374 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1960 and Clause 34(2AA) of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme the Council approves the application for a preliminary building licence submitted by E Bollig for 2 two storey residences at Lot 281, (No. 73) Blencowe Street, West Leederville, as shown on the plans dated 1 November 1996 and amended plans dated 6 November 1996 subject to the following conditions:-
(i) the development not exceeding a plot ratio of 0.55:1.0 at the working drawing stage;
(ii) the working drawings to incorporate a modification to increase the setbacks of the balconies to a minimum of 3 metres from the existing side boundaries of the lot;
(ii) lot 281 is to be subdivided into two lots prior to the issue of a Building Licence for the development.
Committee Meeting 19 November 1996
During discussion, Members agreed that the application be refused for the following reasons:-
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 270 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
it exceeds Council’s Policy No. 13 plot ratio in residential areas; the excess plot ratio results in the building bulk being out of character with the streetscape and detrimental to the amenity of surrounding residents.
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That in accordance with Section 374 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1960 and Clause 34 (2AA) of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme the Council refuses the application for a preliminary building licence submitted by E Bollig for 2 two storey residences at Lot 281, (No. 73) Blencowe Street, West Leederville, as shown on the plans dated 6 November 1996 for the following reasons:-
(a) the proposal exceeds Council’s Policy No. 13 plot ratio in residential areas;
(b) the excess plot ratio results in the building bulk being out of character with the streetscape and detrimental to the amenity of surrounding residents.
During discussion, Cr MacRae expressed concern in relation to a number of aspects of the proposal, including whether the stairwell glass is clear or frosted, and the size of second storey windows. Cr MacRae also said the applicant should be encouraged to reduce the plot ratio.
Moved by Cr MacRae, seconded by Cr McConnell
That the item relating to the application for a preliminary building licence at Lot 281 (No.73) Blencowe Street West Leederville be referred back to the Development and Environmental Services Committee for further consideration.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 271 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.24 88 BRANKSOME GARDENS, CITY BEACH - PROPOSED FRONT SETBACK VARIATION FOR NEW RESIDENCE (File Reference: PRO0380)
BACKGROUND:
DA/BA REFERENCE: 534BA-96 LANDOWNER: Mrs Alison Ball APPLICANT: Webb and Brown-Neaves Pty Ltd ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme: Residential R12.5
COMPLIANCE:
The proposed front setback of the residence does not comply with the Endowment Lands By-Law No. 43. In all other respects, the proposed residence complies with Council policies and standards.
Required Proposed Front Setback 7.5 metres 6.0 metres min. 7.5 metres av.
DETAILS:
Lot Area 731 square metres Floor Area 246.9 square metres (PR 0.34) Total Open Space 431 square metres (59%)
Preliminary building approval is sought for development of a new five bedroom, two bathroom residence at No. 88 Branksome Gardens, City Beach. The proposal is referred to Council for determination in respect of the front setback of the dwelling. Under the Endowment Lands By-Law No. 43, dwellings in City Beach should have a front setback of 7.5 metres minimum. In this instance, however, the northernmost front corners of both the residence and the garage encroach slightly into this setback area. This is due to the irregular shape of the lot, which tapers in toward the rear boundary (9.05 metres width), and the residence being located parallel to the tapering boundary.
COMMENT:
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 272 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Given the special circumstances in this case, it is considered that the front setback variation sought is a minor one which is able to be supported for the following reasons:- 1. The irregular lot shape makes it difficult to orient a regular shaped dwelling on the lot and achieve compliance with all setback standards.
2. As highlighted on the plan displayed, only the front northern corners of the dwelling and garage encroach into the prescribed front setback area.
3. The adjoining property on the corner of Bodmin Avenue has its secondary street setback on the Branksome Gardens frontage. This setback is about 3.75 metres, which is somewhat less than the setback proposed.
It should also be noted that the applicant has modified the plan originally submitted following discussions with Council officers to provide a minimum setback of 6.0 metres. The dwelling otherwise fully complies with Council requirements, therefore approval is recommended.
An absolute majority decision is required as a variation is sought to By-law 43.
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That in accordance with Section 374 of the Local Government Act and Clause 34(2AA) of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme the Council APPROVES BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the application for a preliminary building licence for a single storey residence submitted by Webb & Brown-Neaves Pty Ltd at Lot 367 (No. 88) Branksome Gardens, City Beach, as shown on amended plans dated 14 November 1996, subject to the finished floor levels of the building being determined to the satisfaction of the Council at the working drawings stage.
Carried BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 273 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.25 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO PUBLIC BUILDING REGULATIONS (File Reference: ENS 0007)
BACKGROUND:
Amongst other things, the Health (Public Buildings) Regulations 1992 set the criteria to determine the number of people who can occupy public buildings, including licensed premises. The main criteria are:- density ratio of floor area per person. exit width and other egress requirements. toilet facilities. ventilation.
The exit and toilet facility provisions are determined by the Building Code of Australia (BCA).
At present, the floor area density ratio for public buildings and licensed premises is set at one person per square metre. In the past the Health Department of WA has permitted the area across and behind bars to be included in the floor area calculations. However, a recent legal decision has ruled out this method of calculations and the Health Department of WA is concerned that if venues are to be permitted to maintain the current maximum patronage capacities, then amendments to the regulations are required.
Operators of licensed premises and nightclubs have made numerous submissions in the past that denser crowds can be safely permitted in modern venues because:- buildings are required to have better smoke and fire controls; building materials and methods of construction used in modern premises render the buildings more fire resistant; denser crowds can be safely accommodated in many venues; modern venues often have little movable furniture; the existing ratio (one person per square metre) was inadequate; patrons preferred to socialise in crowded venues;
In 1992, a Ministerial Working Group was formed to examine a proposal to allow denser crowds in public buildings. Apparently this group agreed that the current safety standards could be improved and that at the same time, a flexible system to allow denser crowd capacities could be introduced.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 274 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
In an explanatory seminar for Local Government officers and entertainment venue operators, the Health Department of WA and the Ministerial Working Group findings and proposals were discussed. Apparently, the Ministerial Working Group conducted surveys and reviewed legislation that apply to similar venues throughout the world; and their general consensus was that under certain conditions, denser crowds ranging up to two persons per square metre may be able to be safely accommodated.
The Health Department of WA therefore proposes to amend the Public Building Regulations to allow denser crowds in public buildings by the introduction of a series of graduated requirements. The proposal is aimed at encouraging operators of existing entertainment venues to introduce or construct additional safety and egress factors, in return for accommodating a greater number of patrons.
In summary, the proposals introduce four grades of public buildings. The higher the grade of the premises, the greater the number of exits the premises has with low distances of travel from a public area to fire isolated exits, a road or open space. In addition, the proposal introduces compounding factors, or calculations such as:
movable furniture, percentage of loose chairs and furniture, the creation of “person equivalent numbers” (PEN) for the purpose of identifying the area occupied by gaming tables, pool tables, vending machines, etc. emergency evacuation of voice amplification systems that operate independently of any entertainment systems; provision of evacuation plans to be on display in staff and public areas. the requirement to practice evacuation procedures, the training of venue managers in emergency procedures and fire warden duties;
as well as various other structural safety factors.
While the draft amendments contain numerous requirements to significantly improve public safety in licensed venues and nightclubs; the methods of calculating and determining the maximum patronage capacity of such premises is extremely complex and time consuming. Unfortunately, the amendments make no provision for local authorities to recoup inspectorial costs, or the costs involved in the measurements and assessments of premises for approval purposes.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 275 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
A response to the proposals was required by the end of October 1996. Due to the time involved in properly considering and researching the numerous complex issues raised in the draft proposals, a report for Council’s consideration could not be prepared in time to meet the deadline for comment. Accordingly, the Administration submitted a response to the Health Department of WA which included the following comments and recommendations.
SUBMISSION COMMENTS:
Planning and Community Issues
The draft does not address or give any consideration to the effect on local communities and adjacent residential properties that would be subject to increased number of patrons attending and leaving entertainment venues.
It should be recognised that the impacts of these uses on adjoining areas is largely a function of the numbers of patrons who would attend, and as a consequence, an increase in the numbers of patrons at a venue will create a corresponding increase in the impacts on adjoining areas.
Furthermore, most Town Planning Schemes include a ratio for parking requirements for public buildings based on the numbers of patrons attending. Even in cases where the scheme parking ratio is based on floor area, this ratio is originally derived from a standard based on the numbers of people using the building.
It is considered imperative that the Health Department of WA recognise that the increase in patronage of public buildings will have significant impacts and implications for surrounding properties. As a development application is not required for increases in the number of people a public building can accommodate, local authorities do not have any statutory means to address this issue.
Public Safety Issues
Whilst the draft proposal makes some significant improvements in fire safety and evacuation procedures; it ignores, or overlooks other public safety issues, such as:-
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 276 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Crowd surge or crush. The potential to have twice the presently approved patronage premises where a popular band is performing may lead to fatalities as a result of crowd surge and crushing of patrons. History has proved that no matter how many security staff are employed in such circumstances, they are incapable of adequate crowd control, and patrons do get injured.
Physical assault or aggressive behaviour, whether induced by alcohol, drugs or psychological factors (or not), present serious situations, which will be much more difficult to deal with in premises containing up to twice the previously approved patronage.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 277 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The affects of alcohol (and other non-legal substances) on patrons at entertainment venues. Where such substances have been consumed by patrons, their ability to comprehend and react to emergency situations is significantly diminished. As a result, those persons are likely to become an obstructive factor to those wishing to evacuate the premises, as well as a danger to themselves.
It is not good enough to make venue operators responsible for behavioural issues that are almost impossible to counteract, and which result in significant public safety risks. It is better, and more responsible to address and recognise that those behavioural factors mitigate against the proposals to increase patronage densities.
The alarming impression of the proposal is that it is driven to satisfy the business desires of the night club owners and operators. Serious consideration and recognition of significant public safety issues have been overlooked.
Ventilation Issues
It is important to consider that in nightclubs where factors such as high temperature, humidity, odour and close physical contact occur; these factors can lead to situations of individual personal distress and potential aggressive behaviour. These changes in individual physical well being or behaviour have not been considered in the intended thrust of the proposed amendments to the Public Building Regulations. Further such factors are complicated and modified by the intake of alcohol.
It has been the experience of environmental health officers employed by the Town of Cambridge that the patrons of nightclubs and licensed premises tend to consume large amounts of alcohol, and the average patron purchases alcohol rather than a slightly cheaper non-intoxicating liquid. Due to heat within the nightclubs (caused by very poor or obsolete ventilation systems), the intake of alcoholic beverages is high (to compensate for fluid loss), thus leading to altered individual behaviour. Such altered individual behaviour would then frustrate or counter the principal intention of the changes to the Regulations (ie evacuation within 20 seconds).
Local Authority Costs
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 278 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The proposals do not recognise, or attempt to remedy the high administrative and inspectorial costs the current regulations impose on local authorities.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 279 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Many local authorities carry out inspections of night clubs at night so as to ascertain compliance with the regulations when such premises are in active use. The numerous prosecutions of various night club owners bears witness to this fact. Additionally, the administrative and fieldwork involved with measuring premises and inspecting or checking environmental systems to determine their maximum patronage represents significant officer time. However, the cost of carrying out these regulatory functions cannot be recouped.
The Health Act permits the charging of licence and registration fees for Eating houses; accordingly, there should be no reason why a similar arrangement cannot be made for Public Buildings.
SUBMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
Planning and Community Issues
It is recommended that the Health Department of WA approach the Ministry of Planning with a view to those two government departments liaising on this issue, with a view to obtaining agreement to formulating the most appropriate statutory mechanism to ensure that applications to increase the permissible numbers of patrons in public buildings is a proposal which requires development approval. This may be inclusion within the model Town Planning Scheme text, or an amendment to the Town Planning and Development Act.
Adoption of such a model scheme text (or another statutory instrument) would then enable local authorities to consider issues associated with the increased intensity of public building usage under the terms of their Town Planning Schemes and to take into account those matters associated with the impact and increase in intensity would have on adjoining properties when determining such applications.
Public Safety Issues
That the Health Department of WA conduct a serious review of the proposal to amend the Public Building Regulations with a view to making public safety the primary concern of the Regulations; not the interests of night club owners and operators.
Ventilation Issues
That all public buildings used as nightclubs or public entertainment venues, where high levels of patron activity occur
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 280 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
(ie dancing), be required to upgrade their mechanical ventilation systems, or install mechanical ventilation systems, to the standards required by ASHRAE Standard 55-1981.
Local Authority Costs
That the Health Department of WA review the lack of power in the Public Buildings Regulations for local authorities to levy fees or licensing charges, so as to recoup administrative and inspectorial costs.
COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
As the draft proposals raise significant community and planning issues in relation to the potential to increase the intensity of use of places of entertainment and licensed premise, it is considered that the matter should be further investigated.
As previously noted, the Town Planning Scheme provides for parking for public buildings based on a ratio of parking bays to the potential number of patrons. This ratio is generally based on floor area, and is originally derived from a standard based on the numbers of people using the building. Therefore, the proposal to increase patronage by up to twice the presently approved limit will have serious parking and other community impacts.
The concerns raised in this report are echoed by a number of other local authorities. It is therefore recommended that Council seek the assistance and support of WAMA in addressing these concerns to the relevant authorities.
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That:-
(i) the submission to the Health Department of WA on the draft proposed amendments to the Public Buildings Regulations, based on the comments in this report, be confirmed;
(ii) Council write to the Western Australian Municipal Association regarding the planning implications of this proposal and seeking their support for a change in the relevant statutory requirements.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 281 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.26 LOT 4-5 (NO.75A) TATE STREET, WEST LEEDERVILLE - ACCESS TO UNAUTHORISED BALCONY (File Reference: PRO0147)
BACKGROUND:
DA/BA REFERENCE: 444BA-96 LANDOWNER: Mr Renato Di Toro APPLICANT Mr Renato Di Toro ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme: Residential R30
COMPLIANCE:
Balcony setbacks. Required Provided
3.0 metres 1.5 metres
Site History:
The subject property is one of two subdivided lots on Tate Street, West Leederville.
On the 26 November 1993, an Appeal was upheld by the Minister for Planning for the construction of 2 grouped dwellings on the land after a refusal of the plans by the City of Perth. The basis for the refusal of the application was excessive plot ratio.
The approval included pergolas on each dwelling, one on the Northern elevation of 75A Tate Street and the other on the southern elevation of 75 Tate Street.
DETAILS:
The applicant has submitted an application for the removal of two fixed glazed full length windows to the upstairs bedroom and ensuite, and to replace these with full length sliding windows, both these windows overlook the pergola on the North elevation.
On the 4 March 1995, a complaint was received from the adjoining neighbour at 77 Tate street. The nature of the complaint was that the owner of 75a Tate Street was using the roof of the pergola as a balcony to serve the upper level of the building, and that this was an invasion of their privacy. A site inspection was conducted and this was found to be correct.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 282 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
At the time of inspection there was a table and chairs on the balcony which confirmed the adjoining neighbour’s complaint.
The builder, Mr Di Toro, was contacted and a site meeting was held with a Council Building Surveyor. The builder insisted that the balcony was in fact a pergola and that the sliding windows were installed to allow for the installation of furniture to the upper storey. It was pointed out to the builder that the sliding windows were not approved and that they should be removed. On the 28 June 1996, the sliding windows were removed and replaced with the original fixed glazed windows.
The applicant now seeks Council approval to replace the fixed glazed windows with sliding windows.
COMMENT:
The fixed glazed windows are setback approximately 3.8 metres from the northern boundary overlooking the pergola. The main issue associated with this application is the use of the roof of the pergola as a balcony and the potential of overlooking of the adjacent property as discussed below.
Balcony
The plans submitted indicate that approval of these full length sliding glass windows would provide direct access to the roof of the pergola and it would clearly alter the intended use of this structure to that of a balcony. It should be taken into consideration that the required minimum setback as required by clause 4.5.2 of the Residential Planning Codes for a balcony is 3.0 metres. The distance provided is approximately 1.5 metres.
The applicant has suggested that a horizontal rail positioned across the glass doors and widening the position of the timber battens to achieve a spacing of 70 millimetres will prevent the roof of the pergola being used as a balcony. This, however, would be questionable, as the roof of the pergola would still have clear potential to be used as a balcony.
CONCLUSION:
The original proposal was assessed and approved by the Minister for Planning on the basis that the pergola was for providing a shaded area to the occupants on the ground floor. The applicant has, however, clearly demonstrated that by the use of the sliding glass doors, the pergola roof is also being used as balcony for the upper floor.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 283 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Taking into account that the balcony does not meet the minimum setback requirement under the R-Codes and the adjoining neighbour’s concerns of overlooking, refusal is recommended. Committee Meeting 19 November 1996
A deputation comprising Mr R Di Toro addressed the Committee in relation to this matter.
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That in accordance with the provisions of Section 374 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1960 and Section 34(2AA) the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme and having regard to matters required and considered under these provisions generally and in particular:-
(i) as the proposal will allow the existing pergola roof to be used as a balcony which would be contrary to setback requirements of the Residential Planning Codes and would allow overlooking of the adjoining property;
(ii) having regard to the concerns expressed by the adjoining property owner in this matter;
the Council refuses the application for a building licence submitted by Renato Ditoro to alter the windows at a two storey residence on Lot 4-5 Tate Street, West Leederville, as shown on plans dated 27 September 1996.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 284 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.27 49 CROMARTY ROAD, FLOREAT - ADDITIONS TO EXISTING RESIDENCE (File Reference: PRO1134)
BACKGROUND:
DA/BA REFERENCE: 530BA-96 LANDOWNER: Mr and Mrs Webb APPLICANT: Mr Kingsley Pearce ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme: Residential R12.5
COMPLIANCE:
The proposal complies with the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme with the exception of the required front setback as specified in Council’s By Law 43 pertaining to the Endowment Lands and Limekilns Estate, which requires the building to be setback a minimum distance of 9 metres from the street alignment. Plans submitted indicated that the proposed extensions are setback approximately 7.5 metres from the primary street alignment.
The existing carport is also proposed to be extended by 2.5 metres and setback approximately 6.5 metres from the primary street alignment on the common boundary. This is not considered to be an issue as Clause 1.5.5 of the Residential R Codes enables carports to be constructed up to 4.5 metre of the primary street alignment and Council Policy No. 7 may permit construction of carports to 300 millimetres from the front boundary. Current practise has been to support carports to 4.5 metres from the front setback where there is no adverse impact on either the streetscape or the adjoining property. In this instance, the proposal has support from the adjoining owner and being an open structure and located on the side of the residence, maintains the visual relationship between the residence and the street.
DETAILS:
Lot area - 817 square metres Proposed Floor area - 12.54 square metres
Approval is sought for the extension of the existing residence on Lot 1227 (No.49) Cromarty Road, Floreat. Plans submitted
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 285 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
indicated that the existing living room is to be extended by 2.2 metres into the front setback. The extension is 5.7 metres in width and has a proposed floor area of 12.54 square metres. The remainder of the existing building is setback approximately 9.6 metres. The facade of the new additions is to match the existing residence. COMMENT:
The original design concept for Floreat was to be a “Garden Suburb” characterised by expansive lot frontages and deep front setbacks. The front setback standard contained in By-Law 43 is one of the fundamental standards of development within the area which has had a significant impact on its urban form, as all developments are to be set back a minimum of 9 metres from the street alignment.
The proposed extension encroaches 2.2 metres into the front setback to 7.5 metres, in lieu of the 9 metres required under Clause 5 (2) of By-Law 43.
Clause 2B(b) of the By-Law empowers Council to permit a variation to the prescribed standards, in this instance a variation of the standard is supported. The basis for this recommendation is as follows:
The subject site is located on the border of the Town and the City of Stirling and is situated opposite the Edith Cowan University on a busy road. Several high screen front walls are sited along this section of Cromarty Road, which has contributed to altering the character of the area and the intent of By law 43. Consequently, there is no longer an established line of development within the streetscape, as found elsewhere in Floreat.
The residence is one of the few properties along this section of Cromarty Road which has retained a spatial relationship with the street by maintaining an open front yard and locating the carport at the side of the residence. Only a portion of the residence is proposed within the prescribed setback area, the remainder of the existing residence is setback 9.6 metres.
Both adjoining neighbours have indicated on the plans that they have no objection to the proposed extension.
CONCLUSION:
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 286 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
The Council has generally not supported any reduction concerning protrusions within the front setback in the past unless there were clear planning grounds. It is considered in this instance, that there are special circumstances given the existing eclectic streetscape punctuated with several solid screen front fences which have departed from the intent of the Garden City design concept. However, the proposal being considered by the Council still maintains some form of visual relationship between the building and the street. As such, it is recommended that the application be supported.
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That in accordance with the provisions of Section 374 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1960 and the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme the Council APPROVES BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the application for a Preliminary Building Licence submitted by Mr Kingsley Pearce on behalf of Mr and Mrs Webb for additions to the existing residence on Lot 1227 (No. 49) Cromarty Road, Floreat, as shown on plans submitted and dated 31 October 1996.
Carried BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 287 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.28 10 CLUNE AVENUE, WEST LEEDERVILLE - TWO STOREY ADDITION (File Reference: PRO0144)
BACKGROUND:
DA/BA REFERENCE: 443BA-96 LANDOWNER: Mr and Mrs Van Rullen APPLICANT: Summit Constructions ZONING: MRS Zoning: Urban Town Planning Scheme: Residential R30
COMPLIANCE:
The proposed second storey additions comply with the provisions of Residential Codes and the Town planning Scheme, however, do not comply with Council Policy No. 13 (Plot Ratio).
Required Proposed
Plot Ratio (total lot) 0.4:1 0.43:1 Plot Ratio (Strata lot) 0.4:1 0.53:1 (extra 51 Sq m) DETAILS:
The dwelling that is the subject of this application is situated on a strata lot. The adjoining strata lot contains the original residence.
Total lot Area - 745 square metres Strata lot area - 370 square metres Proposed floor Area - 199.0
The proposed addition consists of two bedrooms, a sitting room and a bathroom to the upper floor and the conversion of an existing bedroom on the ground floor into a stair well for access to the upper floor.
COMMENT:
The proposed development is located within a well established residential area consisting predominantly of single residential character housing. The street is elevated providing views of Lake Monger.
The main issue with this application concerns the plot ratio variation which is discussed below:-
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 288 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 289 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Plot Ratio
The subject lot is one of two strata lots located on the corner of St Leonard’s Ave and Clune Avenue, West Leederville. Normally in the case of a Strata development the plot ratio is calculated over the total site area. In this case, however the lots have different street frontages with no common property and could be subdivided into individual lots. Therefore it is not unreasonable to calculate the plot ratio for each lot independently. On this basis, the plot ratio for the lot in question equates to 0.53:1.
Council records confirm that properties in the surrounding area have recently been approved at plot ratios in excess of the 0.4:1, required by Policy No 13.
The general approach taken in the past has been to consider variations to plot ratio in cases where all other development standards are met. In this case the proposal meets all the requirements of the Residential Codes and the Town Planning Scheme and it is not considered that the development would unduly impose on the amenity of adjoining properties or the local area.
CONCLUSION:
The Council has discretion to approve the variations, however, in exercising its discretion the Council is required to consider the impact of the development on its surroundings, and be satisfied that it will not prejudice the general intent of its planning provisions for residential areas.
It is considered that the proposal which seeks a variation in the plot ratio in this instance could be supported as all other development standards have been met.
A site inspection of the existing residence and the surrounding area revealed that the proposal would not unduly impose on the amenity of the adjoining properties or the local area. Approval is therefore recommended.
Committee Meeting 19 November 1996
During discussion, the Administration was requested to obtain comments on the proposal from the adjoining strata owners. Members agreed that the matter be submitted to the Council for determination.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 290 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That in accordance with the provisions of Section 374 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1960 and the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme the Council approves the application for a revised Preliminary Building Licence submitted by Summit Constructions on behalf of Mr and Mrs Van Rullen to construct a second storey addition on Lot 2 No 10 Clune Avenue, West Leederville, as shown on plans dated 26 September 1996, subject to the plot ratio not exceeding 0.53:1.
During discussion, Members requested that the Administration ensure that the implications of the increase in plot ratio associated with this proposal are discussed with the adjoining Strata owners.
Moved by Cr MacRae, seconded by Cr O'Connor
That the item relating to the Preliminary Building Licence application for 10 Clune Avenue, West Leederville, be referred back to the Development and Environmental Services Committee for further consideration.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 291 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.29 SCHOOL IMMUNISATION CLINICS (File Reference: ENS0017)
BACKGROUND:
Immunisation Clinics were conducted to immunise school children in Grade 7 (12 year olds) and teachers who attend primary schools within the Town of Cambridge. The school programme involved the Council’s Medical Officer, Nurse, Environmental Health Officer and Administration Officer visiting each individual school. A total of 7 primary schools were visited over two mornings.
The programme required substantial administration input and planning. Immunisation consent forms were sent to each parent, through the school system. Returned forms, where sorted and individual letters sent to each parent informing them that their child was to be immunised and the date and time the Immunisation Services would be attending their child’s school.
The target of these clinics was to immunise Grade 7 students and teachers, in accordance with the Western Australian Routine Immunisation Schedule. This prescribes the following:- Grade 7 Students (12 year old) require ADT (Adult Diphtheria and Tetanus) Adults require boosters every 7-10 years with ADT (Adult Diphtheria and Tetanus).
Response To Clinics
The Following table shows the number of persons that were immunised by the Council’s school immunisation programme this year and a comparison from the City of Perth Council Service in 1994.
School No Immunised No 1996 Immunised 1994 City Beach Primary School 15 24
Floreat Primary School 26 22
Holy Spirit Primary School 17 12
Kapinara Primary School 7 14
Lake Monger Primary School 6 0
Wembley Primary School 17 18
West Leederville Primary 7 10
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 292 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
School Teachers 6 0
Last year the Council organised two after school immunisation clinics, whereby parents had to bring their children to the clinic. At the two clinics a total of 51 Grade 7 students were immunised. This years school immunisation programme showed nearly a 100% increase in numbers with 95 students immunised.
COMMENT:
The programme was very successful and will be repeated next year. The use of the School’s Immunisation programme maintains public awareness and the need for individuals to maintain their levels of immunity against diseases for which vaccines are available.
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That the report regarding the Council’s school immunisation clinics be received.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 293 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
DES96.30 ASBESTOS AND POISONS COLLECTION DAY (File Reference: ENS 0021)
BACKGROUND:
At its meeting of October 1996, the Council approved the participation in a regional local authority initiative to conduct an asbestos and poisons collection day on Sunday 20 October 1996.
The collection was well attended with over 104 vehicles delivering asbestos-cement products; and over 25 western suburbs residents delivered poisons, disused pharmaceuticals or tyres to the collection site at the Brockway Transfer Station.
The following table summarises materials delivered on the day:-
Local No. of Asbestos Poisons Tyres Authority Vehicles Delivered Delivered Delivere d Cambridge 36 68 48 8 Claremont 8 12 13 1 Cottesloe 14 36 22 0 Peppermint 1 1 0 0 Grove Subiaco 12 29 20 0 Nedlands 28 59 33 3 Mosman 5 13 4 0 Park Total 104 215 140 12
In total, approximately 15 cubic metres of asbestos-cement products were collected on the day. This volume was not anticipated and demonstrates the need for the service.
Over 150 containers of partially used domestic pesticides and herbicides, and disused pharmaceutical’s were delivered. Despite requests to the contrary, a few containers containing mixtures of various products were delivered.
It was obvious from the attendance, which was apparently some 30 percent greater than the previous year, that Cambridge’s participation contributed significantly to the volume of asbestos- cement products and poisons delivered at the collection day.
Additional Costs
Originally, it was intended that the bulk of the poisons were to be recycled with the assistance of the Department of Agriculture
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 294 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
and the Department of Environmental Protection. However, this arrangement has subsequently changed with the Department of Agriculture only accepting organo-chloride poisons. The participating local authorities will now have to bear the additional cost of having the poisons disposed of by a commercial operator.
This will result in additional expenses anticipated to be in the order of $600 to $800 per participating local authority.
Accordingly approval is requested to charge the additional expense, over and above the previously approved expenditure of $300, to budget item Pollution Control
COMMENT
The collection day would not have been possible without the initiative, and combined input and staffing by Environmental Health Officers of the participating western suburbs local authorities. Eleven EHO’s staffed the collection day, including Cambridge’s 3 officers.
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That:-
(i) the report regarding the Council’s participation in the asbestos and poisons collection be received;
(ii) the additional costs to a maximum of $800, being the unanticipated cost of disposing of poisons collected at the Asbestos & Poisons Collections Day be charged to “Budget Item - Pollution Control”.
Carried
11. URGENT BUSINESS
Nil
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 295 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
12. MOTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN
The following motion, of which due notice has been given, is for discussion at the Council meeting to be held on 26 November 1996:-
12.1 OCEAN GARDENS (INC) - COMMENCEMENT OF LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
Submitted by Cr Johnston
The Town has been concerned for some time at the action taken by the City of Perth in agreeing to amend the Constitution in regard to Ocean Gardens (Inc) to relieve itself (and consequently the Town of Cambridge) of the effective control of Ocean Gardens (Inc).
The action taken by the City of Perth has resulted in the senior citizens of the Town not having available to them surplus funds held by Ocean Gardens (Inc), which would be applied towards the provision of facilities, services and benevolent assistance to elderly people residing within the Town of Cambridge.
The City of Perth was aware of the Town’s position in regard to Ocean Gardens (Inc) and its contention that a trust existed prior to the City resolving to amend the Constitution.
The Town has also made representation to the Minister for Local Government, who advised on 2 July 1996 that he was desirous of achieving an equitable outcome and could consider the option of having the City of Perth contribute to the legal cost of a Supreme Court challenge by the Town, if initiated and successful. The Minister indicated that he was considering his final position and would advise the Town further after the Board of Ocean Gardens (Inc) had expressed its opinion in regard to his comments.
As considerable time has elapsed and the Town is no closer to resolving the issue, it is considered that the Council should now commence legal proceedings to resolve this matter.
Moved by Cr Johnston, seconded by Cr McConnell
That the Council:-
(i) commences legal proceedings against the City of Perth and if necessary, the Board of Ocean Gardens (Inc), to remedy changes made to the Constitution of Ocean
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 296 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Gardens (Inc), which disadvantaged the senior citizens of the Town of Cambridge by depriving them of their rightly access to surplus funds held by the City of Perth and Ocean Gardens (Inc) to provide aged facilities within the Town of Cambridge for their benefit;
(ii) appoints Mr Denis McLeod & Co, Barristers and Solicitors, to brief Mr Malcolm McCusker QC, to commence litigation on its behalf;
(iii) in accordance with Section 6.8 of the Local Government Act, AUTHORISES BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY, the expenditure incurred in (ii) above as ‘over budget’ expenditure;
(iv) advises the Hon Minister for Local Government, in writing, of the Council’s decision.
During discussion, Cr Smith suggested pursuing previous legal advice for the Town to make a further approach to the Minister for Local Government to resolve the issue. Cr Moore said that resolution by mediation should be encouraged prior to litigation action. Other Members commented that sufficient opportunities had already been made available to resolve the issue. The Mayor said that there was merit to both prospective courses of action.
The motion was then put and carried BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY.
Members requested that the vote of all those present be recorded.
For: Crs Berry, Johnston, MacRae, McConnell, O'Connor Against: The Mayor, Crs Anderton, Moore, Smith
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 297 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
13. REPRESENTATION ON STATUTORY AUTHORITIES AND PUBLIC BODIES
13.1 WAMA MEMBER - WATER CORPORATION URBAN DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE (File Reference: ORG0088)
BACKGROUND:
Vacancy for WAMA Member- WATER CORPORATION'S URBAN DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Qualifications: Elected Member with relevant engineering/technical experience or significant background in the industry.
Term: Two years
Commences: Upon appointment
Reason for Vacancy: Review of existing Committee due to creation of Water Corporation
Name of Present Member: Cr Peter Marjoram (Kalamunda)
Meetings: Bi-monthly
Location: Water Corporation, 629 Newcastle Street Leederville Day/Time Thursday, 5.30pm - 7.30pm Meeting Fee: N/A Duration: Two hours
Terms of Reference: Provide advice on improving processes associated with the Corporation's involvement in the land development activity. Provide advice on performance indicators the Corporation should adopt, and how the development industry could be better served by the Corporation. Provide representative input to reviews of policies, processes, standards, practices and Corporation performance, particularly as
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 298 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
these impact on land development activities Statewide undertaken and/or administered by private and public entities.
Objectives:
1. The application of Corporation policies, standards (water, sewerage and drainage) and technical services; 2. Administrative procedures and charges associated with all phases of development, whether subdivisional or redevelopment of existing assets on correctly zoned lots; and 3. The Corporation's performance in discharging its related responsibilities.
Committee Membership:
Urban Development Institute of Australia representative Association of Consulting Engineers Australia representative Consulting Surveyors Western Australia (Inc) representative Master Builders Association representative Housing Industry Association representative WAMA representative Civic Contractors Association representative Water Corporate Chairman Water Corporation representative
Appointments are conditional on the understanding that nominees and delegates will resign when their entitlements terminates - that is they are no longer elected members or serving officers of Local Government. This ensures that the WAMA representative is always active in Local Government as an elected member or serving officer.
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That the request for the nomination of a WAMA Member to the Water Corporation's Urban Development Advisory Committee be reviewed.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 299 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
13.2 WAMA MEMBER - METROPOLITAN MEMBER - TAXI RANKS COMMITTEE (File Reference: ORG0088)
BACKGROUND:
Vacancy for WAMA Member- METROPOLITAN MEMBER - TAXI RANKS COMMITTEE
Qualifications: Elected Member or suitably qualified Officer with some experience/knowledge of parking and/or transport issues within the metropolitan area.
Term: Two years
Commences: Upon appointment
Reason for Vacancy: Newly established Commitee
Name of Present Member: N/A
Meetings: Monthly
Location: Taxi Industry Board, 103 Adelaide Terrace, Perth Day/Time TBA - during office hours Meeting Fee: N/A Duration: Approximately 1.5 hours
Terms of Reference: The Committee has been set up by the Taxi Industry Board, which is convened by the Minister for Transport to investigate all issues relating to taxi ranks in the metropolitan area, and recommend changes where necessary.
Committee Membership: Department of Transport Taxi Unit Taxi Industry Board Taxi Companies Taxi Operators Perth City Council WAMA
Appointments are conditional on the understanding that nominees and delegates will resign when their entitlements terminates - that is they are no longer elected members or serving officers of Local Government. This
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 300 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996 ensures that the WAMA representative is always active in Local Government as an elected member or serving officer.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 301 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr Smith
That the request for the nomination of a WAMA Metropolitan Member to Taxi Ranks Committee be received.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 302 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
14. URGENT BUSINESS
14.1 LAKE MONGER MANAGEMENT (File Reference: RES0004)
BACKGROUND:
The Council at its meeting held on 15 October 1996, resolved, interalia, the following:
"(i) That the Lake Monger Management Plan as previously received be endorsed;
(ii) that the Lake Monger Rehabilitation Plan be released for public comment;
(iii) that specialists from the Centre for Water Research and/or CSIRO be engaged for execution of particular work in order to establish the compatibility of the Rehabilitation Plan with potential work to improve the overall water quality of the lake;
(iv) that an approach be made to Main Roads WA to highlight the significance of freeway run off as a contributor to lake pollution and seek some contribution for improvements to the lake.”
The Lake Monger Management Group met on Thursday 14 November 1996, to consider progress on these matters, and other issues associated with Lake Monger. Following this consideration, some proposed actions were identified, and it is now appropriate to seek Council approval for these proposed actions.
DETAILS:
Public Display:
A report was provided on the public comment received through public displays of the Rehabilitation Plan at Lake Monger, Floreat Library and Council Officers. The public had the opportunity to complete a questionnaire to provide feedback on their views concerning the plan.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 303 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
In summary, the plan has been well received. The vast majority of attendees recognised the importance of water quality at Lake Monger, with a majority signalling acceptance of any initiatives by the Town of Cambridge to improve this water quality. In addition, significant support was received for the formation of a Community Volunteer Group for ongoing involvement in the Lake Monger area.
Specialist Support:
The meeting received a report from Executive Manager Technical Services on liaison with Centre for Water Research at UWA, as well as CSIRO. The key elements of this report, some of which have been confirmed in writing by UWA, were as follows:
Centre for Water Research is keen to conduct some work at Lake Monger.
This organisation has submitted a proposal to execute some work in the December/January period, for a fee of approximately $5,000, in order to establish whether progress of the Rehabilitation Plan is reasonable.
CSIRO are not in a position to execute any dedicated work for the Town at Lake Monger at this stage; however, this organisation is keen to participate in any task force or workshop activities, in order to exchange information on Lake Monger.
Main Roads WA Support:
The Group received a report from Dr Mark Goldstone, Main Roads WA, and Mr Denis Stubberfield, Main Roads WA, which had key points as follows:
Main Roads WA are initiating a pilot project for the construction of at least three drain interceptors within the Metropolitan Region, with the likelihood that one such interceptor is to be placed adjacent to the Freeway and Lake Monger, to process all stormwater run-off from parts of the freeway adjacent to Lake Monger.
Main Roads WA recognise their responsibility in terms of treating road run off from those roads that are their responsibility, eg. Mitchell Freeway.
Main Roads WA are prepared to consider other options, in terms of contribution to any effort to remove or treat
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 304 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
existing contamination in the Lake which may have been as a result of freeway construction, or associated Main Roads Department activities.
Proposed Actions:
The Group considered a number of options for proposed further action, and agreed on a preferred course of action as follows:
The conduct of a workshop, involving both Town representatives and representatives from professional agencies (notably UWA and CSIRO) with information on Lake Monger, in order to confirm that progress of the Rehabilitation Plan is consistent with long term water quality improvement of the lake. The workshop to be conducted (Thursday, 12 December 1996, 12 noon - 5.00pm).
The progress of the Rehabilitation Plan, based on endorsement from the Workshop activity, through the following tasks, and as per the dates shown:
- The collection of registrations of interest from organisations capable of execution of work associated with the initial stages of the Rehabilitation Plan (December 1996). - The compilation of a tender package for this work (December, 1996). - The conduct of a tender exercise, for selected organisations based on registrations of interest (January 1997). - The approval of successful tenderer by Council, and subsequent commencement of some work on the Rehabilitation Plan, by Council (February 1997).
Analysis of previous City of Perth documentation associated with the construction of an additional dual use pathway on the eastern side of Lake Monger, in order to ascertain whether this work should proceed. This will potentially affect the availability of funds for rehabilitation work - a sum of $40,000 has been allocated in the 1996/97 budget for construction of the dual use path. This matter will be the subject of a separate consideration.
COMMENT:
The Lake Monger Management Group has identified some further action, as a result of consideration of the information in relation to the public display of the Rehabilitation Plan, advice regarding specialist support and the Main Roads WA position. These actions include the conduct of a workshop, and, if appropriate,
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 305 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
the progress of the tender process in order to identify and engage contractors for the commencement of work on the Rehabilitation Plan beginning with Sections 5 and 6, for which $70,000 has been apportioned in the 1996/97 budget. It is now appropriate for the Council to endorse the proposed actions.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 306 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
Moved by Cr Anderton, seconded by Cr O'Connor
That the Council approve the execution of some work, in Zones 5 and 6, as specified in the Lake Monger Rehabilitation Plan, subject to endorsement of the work's compatibility with general water quality improvements of Lake Monger through the proposed December 12 workshop, in accordance with existing budgetary provisions.
Carried
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 307 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
15. CONFIDENTIAL REPORTS
Nil
16. CLOSURE
There being no further business, His Worship the Mayor thanked those present for their attendance and declared the meeting closed at 8.30pm.
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 308 COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR…………………………………… 26 NOVEMBER 1996 17 DECEMBER, 1996
H:\ceo\mngmnt\96minutes\26Novmin 309