~• CITY OF ~., CANNING

Draft Agenda Agenda Briefing

8 June 2021

The information contained in this Agenda is made available free to any member of the public. Subject to copyright restrictions, members of the public may obtain copies of reports, attachments and tabled documents in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 1995. NB: Plans are generally not permitted to be copied due to copyright restrictions.

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM SUBJECT PAGE NO

1. DECLARATION OF OPENING ANNOUNCEMENT OF VISITORS AND DISCLAIMER ...... 5

2. ATTENDANCE ...... 5 2.1 Apologies ...... 5 2.2 Approved Leave of Absence ...... 5

3. DISCLOSURE OF INTERESTS ...... 5 3.1 Declarations of Interest (Financial) ...... 5 3.2 Declarations of Impartiality ...... 5

4. QUESTION TIME FOR PUBLIC ...... 5 4.1 Response to Previous Questions Taken on Notice ...... 5 4.2 Questions from the Public ...... 5

5. ITEMS BROUGHT FORWARD FOR THE CONVENIENCE OF THOSE IN THE PUBLIC GALLERY ...... 5

6. REPORTS OF COMMITTEE MEETINGS ...... 5

7. REPORTS ...... 5 7.1 Office of the CEO ...... 5 7.2 Director Canning Corporate & Commercial ...... 6 CC-025-21 Late Item - Review of Delegations of Authority 2020-2021 ...... 6 CC-026-21 Proposed Pedestrian Access Way Closure and Road Reserve Dedication - Lot 3090 Wirilda Way, Parkwood ...... 7 CC-027-21 Proposed Disposal and Sale of a Portion of No.22 (Lot 301) Elizabeth Street, East Cannington ...... 13 CC-028-21 Award of Contract - Automatic Irrigation System and Pump Station for Whaleback Public Golf Course ...... 20 CC-029-21 Late Item - Monthly Financial Report May 2021...... 28 CC-030-21 Late Item - Budget Review as at 31 May 2021 ...... 29 7.3 Director Canning Development ...... 30 CD-016-21 Submission Jandakot Airport Draft Master Plan 2020 ...... 30 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel and Assessment of Significant Development ...... 44 7.4 Director Canning Environment ...... 72 EN-008-21 Loan Funding Agreement - Willetton Basketball Association ...... 72

Page ii DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

EN-009-21 Sustainability and Environment Advisory Group Meeting Unconfirmed Minutes - April 2021 ...... 80 EN-011-21 Waste Disposal Contract ...... 88 7.5 Director Canning Community ...... 96 CO-002-21 Endorsement of Safe Canning Strategy ...... 96 CO-003-21 Response to Petition - Community Safety in Bentley and St James ...... 102

8. NOTICE OF MOTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION AT THE NEXT ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING ...... 113

9. URGENT BUSINESS...... 113

10. CONFIDENTIAL MATTERS...... 113

11. CLOSURE ...... 113

Page iii G7; DRAFTCITY AGENDA OF CANNING– ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

NOTICE PAPER AGENDA BRIEFING TUESDAY 8 JUNE 2021 MAYOR AND COUNCILLORS I inform you that an Agenda Briefing Meeting will be held in the Council Chambers on 8 June 2021 at 6.00pm. Your attendance is respectfully requested. Yours faithfully,

Friday, 28 May 2021

Athanasios (Arthur) Kyron Chief Executive Officer

AGEND A

If any of the Elected Members have any queries on the Items set out in this Agenda, it would be appreciated if they could contact the relevant Director: 1. Chief Executive Officer 9231 0603 2. Director Canning Corporate and Commercial 9231 0750 3. Director Canning Development 9231 0676 4. Director Canning Environment 9231 0645 5. Director Canning Community 9231 0671

Page 4 DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

1. DECLARATION OF OPENING ANNOUNCEMENT OF VISITORS AND DISCLAIMER

2. ATTENDANCE

2.1 Apologies

2.2 Approved Leave of Absence

3. DISCLOSURE OF INTERESTS

3.1 Declarations of Interest (Financial)

3.2 Declarations of Impartiality

4. QUESTION TIME FOR PUBLIC

4.1 Response to Previous Questions Taken on Notice Nil.

4.2 Questions from the Public

5. ITEMS BROUGHT FORWARD FOR THE CONVENIENCE OF THOSE IN THE PUBLIC GALLERY

6. REPORTS OF COMMITTEE MEETINGS Nil.

7. REPORTS

7.1 Office of the CEO Nil.

Page 5 DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

7.2 Director Canning Corporate & Commercial CC-025-21 Late Item - Review of Delegations of Authority 2020-2021

This late item will be circulated under separate cover.

Page 6 CC-026-21 Proposed Pedestrian Access Way Closure and Road Reserve Dedication - Lot CC-026-21 3090 Wirilda Way, Parkwood

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

CC-026-21 Proposed Pedestrian Access Way Closure and Road Reserve Dedication - Lot 3090 Wirilda Way, Parkwood

PROGRAM: Canning Corporate & Commercial SUB PROGRAM: Land Utilisation FILE REF: Q21/224 REPORT DATE: 27 May 2021 REPORTING OFFICERS: Nicholas Michael - Land Officer Nikki Crook - Leader Land Assets RESPONSIBLE OFFICER: Stephen Cain - Director Corporate & Commercial

Strategic Plan Theme: BUILD - Accessible, pleasing urban spaces that are fit-for-purpose. Community Goal: Safe, well-designed and maintained roads. Council Strategy: Better road safety. Authority/Discretion: Advocacy: When Council advocates on its own behalf or on behalf of its community to another level of government, body or agency.

Attachments: 1. Location Plan - Proposed Road Reservation Dedication – Lot 3090 Wirilda Way, Parkwood (D21/138984).

In Brief: The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s authorisation to request the Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage to permanently close the unconstructed Pedestrian Access Way (PAW) located at Lot 3090 Wirilda Way, Parkwood and formally request the Minister for Land to dedicate the land as a road reserve. The City received a request from the adjoining landowner at 16 Cerberus Avenue, Parkwood to close the PAW and dedicate as road reserve to allow vehicular access for the redevelopment of their site. This PAW is no longer required and is to form part of the Golf Road reservation, as shown in Attachment 1. This will increase the road reserve width from 17m to 20m, which is the more common width of the City’s road reserves. Council is asked to support the Officer’s Recommendation because: 1. The PAW is unconstructed, is no longer required and should form part of the City’s road network. 2. The permanent closure of the redundant PAW will ensure clear and consistent land tenure to allow the redevelopment of the adjoining residential properties. If the Officer Recommendation is not supported: 1. The land tenure will not be consistent and may present complications relating to vehicular access for the future development of the adjoining residential land. 2. The tenure for the PAW land will not accurately represent the current use of this area, as it is currently constructed as part of the road verge.

Page 7 CC-026-21 Proposed Pedestrian Access Way Closure and Road Reserve Dedication - Lot CC-026-21 3090 Wirilda Way, Parkwood

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Requests the Department of Planning, Land and Heritage to permanently close the Pedestrian Access Way at Lot 3090 Wirilda Way, Parkwood. 2. Requests the Minister for Lands, in accordance with Section 52 and 56 of the Land Administration Act 1997, to dedicate Lot 3090 Wirilda Way, Parkwood as a public road reserve.

BACKGROUND 1 Under delegation No.472 – ‘Closure of Right of Ways or Pedestrian Access Ways’ and Delegation No.473 – ‘Dedication of Land as Road Reservation’ the City is authorised to commence the public consultation process required by the Land Administration Act 1997 for a pedestrian access way closure and subsequent road dedication, with a report to be submitted to Council for the final decision following public advertising. 2 In February 2019, the City received a request from the adjoining landowner at 16 Cerberus Avenue, Parkwood to purchase the subject PAW and include the land in the redevelopment of their site. At this time, City officers determined that the subject land should not be sold and should form part of the Golf Road Reserve. 3 In June 2020, the adjoining landowner at 16 Cerberus Avenue, Parkwood lodged a subdivision application with the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) proposing a three survey strata subdivision, with two lots requiring vehicular access from Golf Road. The WAPC has determined to defer the application until the City undertakes the PAW closure and road dedication. 4 Historically the PAW, Lot 3090 Wirilda Way, Parkwood, has never been constructed. This land is Crown Reserve vested in the City of Canning and has been since 1979. The PAW was originally created next to a closed portion of road to maintain pedestrian access, however Golf Road has since been re-opened to provide vehicular and pedestrian access between Cerberus Avenue and Wirilda Way.

Page 8 CC-026-21 Proposed Pedestrian Access Way Closure and Road Reserve Dedication - Lot CC-026-21 3090 Wirilda Way, Parkwood

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

DETAILS 5 The unconstructed PAW has an area of 210m2, is bounded by the Golf Road reservation and two residential zoned properties. The PAW currently forms part of the constructed road verge. 6 Currently the two adjoining residential properties are unable to redevelop as vehicular access is restricted from Golf Road. To allow the redevelopment of the adjoining residential properties, the subject PAW is required to be closed. Both residential properties are zoned Residential R40, which means each property can potentially be subdivided into three lots. 7 Subsequently, the future land comprising the PAW is to be dedicated as road reserve and will form part of the City’s road network. This will increase the width of the Golf Road reservation from 17 metres to 20 metres. The Golf Road reserve at present contains a footpath on the western side therefore pedestrian access will be maintained. Public Consultation 8 In accordance with Section 52(3) of the Land Administration Act 1997 and the WAPC Procedures for Closure of Pedestrian Access Ways – Planning Guidelines (October 2009), consultation is required to be undertaken as part of the PAW closure and road reservation dedication process. 9 The City gave local public notice by advertising the proposal in the Canning Examiner and placing notices for 35 days, from the 17 March 2021 to the 21 April 2021, at the City’s Civic and Administrations Centre, Bentley Library, Canning Library, Riverton Library and Willetton Library. 10 The City also wrote directly to all affected public utility service authorities and to the nearby landowners to provide these parties opportunity to comment. 11 The submissions received have been summarised in the table below:

External Stakeholders Submission received

Public Submissions Nil. Water Corporation No objection. Western Power No objection. Atco Gas No objection.

CONSIDERATIONS

Legal Compliance 12 The PAW closure process is to be undertaken in accordance with the WAPC Procedures for Closure of Pedestrian Access Ways – Planning Guidelines (October 2009). 13 Under the Land Administration Act 1997, Part 5 Section 56 gives power to the Local Government to make a request to the Minister to dedicate crown land as road reserve. It is a requirement of this Act that the proposal be advertised for public comment and that consultation occurs with affected landowners and public utilities. In this regard, the City has undertaken public consultation as stated above in the Details section of the report.

Policy Implications 14 Not applicable.

Page 9 CC-026-21 Proposed Pedestrian Access Way Closure and Road Reserve Dedication - Lot CC-026-21 3090 Wirilda Way, Parkwood

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

Financial Considerations

Business Plan 15 This action is consistent with the City’s Corporate Business Plan 2018‐2021 for the Land Utilisation sub program, which includes undertaking land administration services to meet the broader land assets needs of the City.

Internal Budget 16 The total costs associated with the proposal are not expected to exceed $2,000 for each road closure and will be drawn from the Land Assets budget. These costs will cover initial advertising fees and any survey and lodgement fees required to be paid by the Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage.

Asset Management 17 The City currently maintains this PAW at present. Should the subject land become Road Reserve, the care, control and management will also be undertaken by the City. As Golf Road is already constructed, it is expected the additional land will require minimal maintenance.

Sustainability Considerations 18 The proposed PAW closure will facilitate the redevelopment of the adjoining residential properties which is in accordance with Policy 6 of the City’s Sustainability Policy CM194 – A commitment to building community capital, social sustainability and a thriving local economy.

Consultation 19 The City has undertaken the consultation required in accordance with Section 56 of the Land Administration Act 1997. Further information can be found in the Details section of this report.

Page 10 CC-026-21 Proposed Pedestrian Access Way Closure and Road Reserve Dedication - Lot CC-026-21 3090 Wirilda Way, Parkwood

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

20 Other Considerations or Risks Mitigation/ Consequence Consequence Overall Risk/ Risk/ Opportunity Consequences X = Actions Likelihood Rating Opportunity Request the Department of Enable clear and Planning, Lands Officer consistent land and Heritage Recommendation tenure to support and the approved by the Very High future Minister for Almost Certain Significant Council (positive redevelopment of Lands to close (Opportunity) outcomes) adjoining the PAW and Opportunity A residential dedicate the properties. subject land as road reservation. Gold Road Officer reservation Recommendation This land can no already approved by the longer be used contains a Low Likely Minor Council (negative exclusively for footpath for (Risk) outcomes) pedestrian access pedestrian Risk B purposes. access, which negates this concern. Situation will The current land remain tenure will Officer unresolved. restrict the Recommendation Detail reasons adjoining Medium deferred by the for deferral to Possible Moderate residential (Risk) Council respective land properties from Risk C owner and being able to outline revised redevelop. timeframe. An alternate The current land agreement will need to be Officer tenure will made with Recommendation restrict the respective land High declined by the adjoining Likely Significant owner to (Risk) Council residential address the Risk D properties from being able to outstanding redevelop. land tenure issues.

COMMENT 21 The subject PAW, Lot 3090 Wirilda Way, Parkwood is unconstructed and is no longer required. The subject land is to form part of the Golf Road reservation and City’s road network. The PAW closure and subsequent road dedication is required formalise the outstanding land tenure to facilitate the redevelopment of the adjoining residential properties.

VOTING REQUIREMENT 22 Simple majority.

AGENDA BRIEFING COMMENT 23 Not applicable

Page 11 CC-026-21 Proposed Pedestrian Access Way Closure and Road Reserve Dedication - Lot CC-026-21 3090 Wirilda Way, Parkwood

Item CC-026-21 - Attachment 1Location Plan - Proposed Road Reservation Dedication – Lot 3090 Wirilda Way, Parkwood

Page 12 CC-026-21 Proposed Pedestrian Access Way Closure and Road Reserve Dedication - Lot 3090 CC-026-21 Wirilda Way, Parkwood

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

CC-027-21 Proposed Disposal and Sale of a Portion of No.22 (Lot 301) Elizabeth Street, East Cannington

PROGRAM: Canning Corporate & Commercial SUB PROGRAM: Land Utilisation FILE REF: Q21/242 REPORT DATE: 25 May 2021 REPORTING OFFICERS: Nicholas Michael - Land Officer Chris O'Connor - Leader Land Projects Nikki Crook - Leader Land Assets RESPONSIBLE OFFICER: Stephen Cain - Director Corporate & Commercial

Strategic Plan Theme: LEAD - Accountable, responsible and forward-thinking administration. Community Goal: Effective leadership and good governance. Council Strategy: Prudent financial management and long term financial sustainability. Authority/Discretion: Executive: The substantial direction setting and oversight role of the Council eg adopting plans and reports, accepting tenders, directing operations, setting and amending budgets. Attachments: Nil.

In Brief: This report seeks Council’s approval to accept an offer from WA Sand Supply & Haulage Pty Ltd to purchase a 375m2 portion of Lot 301 (No.22) Elizabeth Street, East Cannington. The City received a request from the adjoining land owner of 26 (Lot 61) Elizabeth Street, East Cannington to purchase a 375m2 portion of 22 Elizabeth Street to include the land within the redevelopment and subdivision of their adjoining site. The subject Lot 301 is owned in freehold by the City and is identified for disposal within the City’s Land Utilisation Plan 2020-2025. Council is asked to support the Officer’s Recommendation because: 1. The subject land is identified for disposal within the City’s Land Utilisation Plan 2020-2025. 2. The sale of the land will facilitate and progress the subdivision and development within the Town Planning Scheme No.21 area. If the Officer Recommendation is not supported: 1. The subject land and the adjoining land will remain vacant and undeveloped until another disposal option is presented to Council. 2. The implementation of Town Planning Scheme No.21 will continue to be delayed and will prevent future development and subdivision within the scheme area.

Page 13 CC-027-21 Proposed Disposal and Sale of a Portion of No.22 (Lot 301) Elizabeth Street, CC-027-21 East Cannington

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. In accordance with Section 3.58(3) of the Local Government Act 1995, authorises the Chief Executive Officer to provide local public notice of the proposed sale of a 375m2 portion of Lot 301 (No.22) Elizabeth Street, East Cannington to WA Sand Supply & Haulage Pty Ltd for the consideration of $95,000. 2. Subject to there being no objections received to Part 1, authorises the Chief Executive Officer to undertake all necessary actions and sign all documentation to complete the land transaction. Should objections be received, the matter shall be referred back to the next available Ordinary Council Meeting. 3. Authorises the allocation of the proceeds of sale to the Land, Building and Development Reserve.

BACKGROUND 1 Lot 301 (No.22) Elizabeth Street, East Cannington is the subject land area and is owned in freehold by the City of Canning. The land parcel has a total land area of 1,758m2 and is bisected by Gerald Road and Wilson Court into three separate portions. 2 The property is located within the City’s Town Planning Scheme No. 21 (TPS21). TPS21 seeks to facilitate and encourage the progressive subdivision and development of land in Queens Park and East Cannington, including the provision of new roads, drainage and parks. TPS21 has been in operation since 1982 and the implementation of the Scheme has been gradual and fragmented, especially within the East Cannington area. All properties within TPS21 are subject to a 5% Public Open Space contribution and in this instance, payment of Scheme Costs. 3 The City has received an expression of interest from the landowner at Lot 61 (No.26) Elizabeth Street, East Cannington to purchase the adjoining portion of Lot 301, with an area of 375m2, to the south- east of Gerard Street. The remaining 1,326m2 and 57m2 portion will be retained by the City and may be potentially sold to the adjoining properties, once these land owners are ready to redevelop

Page 14 CC-027-21 Proposed Disposal and Sale of a Portion of No.22 (Lot 301) Elizabeth Street, CC-027-21 East Cannington

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

4 The subject land area has been identified as a Land Optimisation Opportunity within the City’s Land Utilisation Plan 2020-2025, adopted at the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 15 September 2020. The intended outcome is to dispose of the site by sale to the adjoining owners and is projected to occur between the 2020-2021 and 2021-2022 financial years. 5 The City’s Land Utilisation Plan identifies East Cannington as a Strategic Focus area to assist with facilitating the completion of subdivision and development in accordance with TPS21. An opportunity therefore exists for the City to dispose of a portion of 22 Elizabeth Street as a means of facilitating the completion of development, in particular those roads shown in blue in the map below. 6 TPS21 requires the creation of the road Wilson Court, proposed to be constructed when 22 Elizabeth Street is subdivided. This area is shown on the map below in blue. The road will also require drainage and kerbing, with the road reserve being ceded to the State of Western Australia when completed.

DETAILS 7 WA Sand Supply & Haulage Pty Ltd is seeking to acquire ownership of the 375m2 portion of land from the City’s Lot 301. The purchased portion of the land is to be amalgamated with No.26 Elizabeth Street to facilitate its future development in line with the requirements of TPS21. 8 Currently the adjoining residential property, 26 Elizabeth Street, East Cannington is unable to redevelop due to TPS21 requiring vehicular access to be taken from Wilson Court. Both residential properties are zoned Residential R20, which requires an minimum and average lot area of 350m2 and 450m2, respectively. Therefore the acquisition of the subject property by the prospective buyer will increase the lot yield potential by one. 9 The remaining 1,383m2 balance of Lot 301 is to remain in the City’s ownership and is to be potentially sold to the adjoining properties, when they are ready to redevelop. Any future sale of the remaining land will be taken to Council for approval at this time. Negotiations on 22 Elizabeth Street, East Cannington 10 In December 2020, the City engaged McGees Property Valuations to undertake a valuation report for the prospective land sale. The valuation determined the 375m2 to be worth $95,000. This valuation was undertaken on the basis of the ‘special’ value the subject portion would have to the adjoining property, being 26 Elizabeth Street, East Cannington.

Page 15 CC-027-21 Proposed Disposal and Sale of a Portion of No.22 (Lot 301) Elizabeth Street, CC-027-21 East Cannington

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

11 Special value is an amount that reflects particular attributes of an asset that are only of value to a special purchaser. Special value arises where a property has attributes that make it more attractive to a particular buyer than to any other buyers in the market. In this instance it is McGees opinion the size and shape of the subject property on its own would deter the majority of purchasers unless the lot price was significantly low enough. The potential to amalgamate the subject property into 26 Elizabeth Street, East Cannington would make the site a more attractive prospect to the adjoining owner. 12 After initial discussion around the value of the land, the parties agreed to the following Terms of Offer to the seller: Terms of Offer Purchase Price $95,000.00 (excluding GST) Contract Basis If this offer is accepted, the City will prepare an Offer and Acceptance contract based on the City’s Special Conditions of Sale. a) All subdivision costs are the responsibility of the Buyer. Special Conditions b) The City is required to dispose the property in accordance (Specific) with Section 3.58 (3) of the Local Government Act 1995, which includes the requirement for public notice and approval from Council. Should Council not support the purchase of the land, no further action will be taken and the offer will lapse. c) The Seller (The City) will sign the subdivision application form in the interim to allow the buyer to include the subject portion of land in future subdivision of the adjoining site 26 Elizabeth Street, East Cannington. Council Approval This offer is made subject to the approval of Council. Should the offer be accepted, an item will be presented to the next available meeting for Council’s consideration. 13 City Officers recommend that Council supports the sale of the property at $95,000 as it is consistent with the valuation report as discussed above.

CONSIDERATIONS

Legal Compliance 14 The land purchase will be consistent with the standard Offer and Acceptance process and subject to the 2018 General Conditions – Joint Form of General Conditions for the Sale of Land. 15 The disposal of local government property (including land) is required to conform with Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995. Specifically, if Council intends to dispose of property by means other than auction or tender, local public notice must first be given for a minimum of 14 days from the date that public notice is first given. The local public notice is required to describe the property concerned, give details of the proposed disposition (names of all parties, the consideration to be received by the local government and the market value of the disposition), and invite submissions to be made. Any submissions received must be considered by Council, and the decision and reasons shall be recorded in the minutes of the meeting at which the decision was made.

Policy Implications 16 Policy CM106 Strategic Management of Property Assets provides for the disposition and acquisition of property. Section 3.2 b) of this policy relates to the allocation of the proceeds or revenue from the sale, lease or development of the City’s property. In this regard, the proceeds from the proposed sale

Page 16 CC-027-21 Proposed Disposal and Sale of a Portion of No.22 (Lot 301) Elizabeth Street, CC-027-21 East Cannington

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

are proposed to be allocated to the City’s Land, Building and Development Reserve to fund property acquisitions or projects that will generate either cash flow or long term capital gains, or both. 17 Council is advised that Policy CM106 is under review pursuant to a resolution made by Council at the 15 September 2020 Ordinary Council Meeting (Item CC-050-20 refers). Given the review is not complete, the existing Policy provisions shall be given due regard.

Financial Considerations

Business Plan 18 The proposed sale of this land is consistent with the City’s Corporate Business Plan 2018-2021, which states that Land Utilisation Sub-Program will maximise the use of the City’s landholdings through a comprehensive land audit, identification of surplus land with development potential, prioritising objectives and implementation of City’s strategy. 19 The proposed land sale also aligns with the City’s Land Utilisation Plan 2020-2025, specifically: a) The subject land is identified as a Land Optimisation Opportunity. b) Pursuit of opportunities to deliver outcomes for vacant/undeveloped landholdings. c) Pursuit of opportunities to facilitate the implementation of TPS21 in East Cannington.

Internal Budget 20 The 2020-2021 Financial Year Budget does not budget for ‘Proceeds of Sale of Council Owned Freehold Land’. It is recommended that the $95,000 of proceeds from the proposed sale (less the costs for settlement) be specifically allocated to the City’s Land, Building & Development Reserve. 21 The costs associated with subdividing the subject land out of the parent lot will be borne by the purchaser. Additionally, the Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage (DPLH) has provided City Officers with preliminary advice that the balance of Lot 300 remaining in City ownership is unlikely to have a subdivision condition requiring utility service connections (i.e. water, power, and sewer). It is expected that utility connections will be established when those portions of the lot are sold to adjoining property owners or otherwise developed. On this basis, costs to the City are only expected to include the initial valuation fees, settlement costs and any associated fees and charges – approximately $10,000 in total. As a result the proposal sale will generate an overall net profit of approximately $85,000.

Asset Management 22 The subject land has been identified in the City’s land asset plans as an opportunity to optimise an under-utilised portion of a City land asset since 2012. The land is currently vacant and does not serve a functional purpose other than streetscape and landscaping amenity along Gerard Street frontage. There are no major utilities within the subject land area. 23 Should Council agree to the sale of the land to WA Sand Supply & Haulage Pty Ltd, 22 Elizabeth Street would be reduced in area by 375m2 to 1,383m2. Ownership of the balance of the lot by the City would remain. Any future sale or development of the remaining portion would be required to be taken to Council for approval.

Sustainability Considerations 24 The City’s Sustainability Policy CM194 outlines the eight principles under which the City operates to achieve sustainability. The subject land purchase aligns with Principle 4: A commitment to climate responsive urban development, specifically:

Page 17 CC-027-21 Proposed Disposal and Sale of a Portion of No.22 (Lot 301) Elizabeth Street, CC-027-21 East Cannington

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

a) Undertake land-use planning that takes an integrated, transit-oriented design approach to facilitate accessibility, mobility and appropriate local economic growth. b) Build, maintain and improve our City facilities and assets to ensure operational efficiency and reduce the impact of current and future operations, and ensure the optimal operation by City staff and community users through appropriate education and support.

Consultation 25 No community consultation has been undertaken at this point in time. Should Council agree to the sale, public notice will be provided for 14 days in accordance with section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995.

Other Considerations or Risks 26 Consequence Consequence Overall Risk/ Risk/ Opportunity Consequences Mitigation/ Actions X = Likelihood Rating Opportunity Optimisation of Officer an under- utilised portion Recommendation Provide Council of City owned approved by the with sufficient High land in Likely Significant Council (positive information to (Opportunity) accordance outcomes) support the sale. Opportunity A with the City Land Utilisation Plan 2020-2025.

Officer Purchaser or Recommendation City do not Work approved by the fulfill conditions collaboratively with Medium Possible Moderate Council (negative of sale and purchaser to ensure (Risk) outcomes) development conditions are Risk B does not satisfied. proceed. Officer Provide Council Recommendation Purchaser with business case Medium deferred by the Possible Moderate withdraws to support the (Risk) Council interest in land. Officer Risk C Recommendation. Officer Provide Council Sale does not Recommendation with business case proceed, site High declined by the to support the Likely Significant remains vacant, (Risk) Council Officer loss of income. Risk D Recommendation.

COMMENT 27 The subject site is identified for disposal within the City’s Land Utilisation Plan 2020-2025. Further, the proposed sale is considered to facilitate and progress the subdivision and development within the TPS21 area. 28 The City’s Officer’s note that WA Sand Supply & Haulage Pty Ltd is likely to be the only potential buyer for the subject portion of land as it can be easily amalgamated into the adjoining site 26 Elizabeth Street, East Cannington. The subject portion would deter the majority of other purchasers due to the small land area and irregular shape constraining the site. There is limited value to the City undertaking residential development on the land given its small size and irregular shape.

Page 18 CC-027-21 Proposed Disposal and Sale of a Portion of No.22 (Lot 301) Elizabeth Street, CC-027-21 East Cannington

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

29 The proposed sale price is considered to be consistent with the valuation received for the subject portion of land. The sale will deliver funds to the Land, Building & Development Reserve and assist with growth in its balance. 30 It is recommended that Council approve the sale of the subject portion of land to WA Sand Supply & Haulage Pty Ltd.

VOTING REQUIREMENT 31 Simple majority.

AGENDA BRIEFING COMMENT 32 Not applicable.

Page 19 CC-027-21 Proposed Disposal and Sale of a Portion of No.22 (Lot 301) Elizabeth Street, CC-027-21 East Cannington

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

CC-028-21 Award of Contract - Automatic Irrigation System and Pump Station for Whaleback Public Golf Course

PROGRAM: Canning Corporate & Commercial SUB PROGRAM: Business Canning FILE REF: Q21/256 REPORT DATE: 26 May 2021 REPORTING OFFICER: Nick Wilkinson - Manager Leisure Facilities RESPONSIBLE OFFICER: Stephen Cain - Director Corporate & Commercial

Strategic Plan Theme: LEAD - Accountable, responsible and forward-thinking administration. Community Goal: Effective leadership and good governance. Council Strategy: Prudent financial management and long term financial sustainability. Authority/Discretion: Executive: The substantial direction setting and oversight role of the Council eg adopting plans and reports, accepting tenders, directing operations, setting and amending budgets.

Attachments: 1. Evaluation Report - 25/2020 - Whaleback Irrigation System (D21/35725). (Confidential) 2. Probity Certificate - 25/2020 - Automatic Irrigation System/Pump Station for Whaleback Public Golf Course (D21/102207).

In Brief: This report seeks Council approval to appoint a Contractor to perform the works required to construct the Automatic Irrigation System & Pump Station for Whaleback Public Golf Course. This report summarises the original Tender and Evaluation Process undertaken, and decision making around the declining of the offer received, and then returning to market under a direct negotiation in order to ensure the City achieved a value for money outcome within the adopted budget for these works. The original tender Evaluation Report, containing an in depth analysis of each Respondent and the evaluation panel assessment of the offer, is considered to include commercially sensitive information and as such, has been provided to Council under a separate cover as a Confidential Attachment (refer Large Confidential Attachment 1). An independent Probity Advisor was engaged through the initial tender process, from planning through to evaluation and recommendation phase, in order to review the process but not to assist or engage in decision making. Attachment 2 of this report is a Probity Certificate outlining the Probity Advisors consideration of the process undertaken. Council is asked to support the Officer Recommendation because: 1. This contract will deliver benefits to the City through replacement of aged assets; 2. Water efficiencies with new technology in irrigation system. Less lost time on irrigation failure requiring reactive maintenance leading to other proactive improvements to course. If the Officer Recommendation is not supported, the consequences are likely to be: 1. Risk of irrigation failure leading to loss of grassed areas.

Page 20 CC-028-21 Award of Contract - Automatic Irrigation System and Pump Station for CC-028-21 Whaleback Public Golf Course

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

2. Course closure resulting in loss of business and reputation. 3. Higher costs to irrigation maintenance with old system.

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Accepts the offer presented by NewGround Water Services Pty Ltd as the most advantageous offer to form the contract for the construction of the Automatic Irrigation System and Pump Station at Whaleback Public Golf Course. 2. Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to execute the contract documents.

Relevant Council Resolutions

Council Meeting and Date Report No Decision 1. Approves the continued development of a Whaleback Golf Course Master Plan. 2. Endorses the Community Engagement Plan included as

CC-028-20 Attachment 1. Ordinary Council Meeting Whaleback Golf Course 3. Requests the Chief Executive 16 June 2020 Masterplan Officer to include an allocation

of $1.4 million with the draft 2020-2021 Budget for the replacement of the pump house and irrigation system at the Whaleback Golf Course.

BACKGROUND 1 In the early 1970's a piece of land was put aside as a buffer zone between the then proposed Canning Vale industrial area and the Lynwood and Parkwood housing estates. When viewed from the air, this parcel of land is in the shape of a whale and was subsequently called Whaleback Reserve by the City of Canning. Whaleback Golf Course officially opened in January 1981. The site includes approximately 50Ha of Crown Reserve and 3.5 Ha of freehold land. 2 In 2017, in the face of declining patronage and along with the need to replace ageing course infrastructure and facilities, a project to establish a master plan concept was commenced, with the aim to meet future community needs and expectations for the site whilst ensuring future financially sustainability. 3 The major components of works to be considered are: a) Course renewal works, including irrigation replacement and landscaping. b) Driving Range refurbishment, including roof replacement and being suitable for all weather conditions. c) Community Hub creation, including a multipurpose building and recreational facilities. d) Access Infrastructure, including relocated car parking and new access road.

Page 21 CC-028-21 Award of Contract - Automatic Irrigation System and Pump Station for CC-028-21 Whaleback Public Golf Course

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

4 The City commissioned an external party (New Ground Water Services) to design and develop the specifications for a replacement automatic irrigation system/pump station at Whaleback Public Golf Course. These plans and specifications were then the technical information for the 25/2020 Tender. 5 The project is expected to be split into components, of 9 golf holes at a time, so as to minimise disruption to patrons and to allow the golf course to continue to operate. DETAILS 6 Procurement planning for City Tender 25/2020 for an Automatic Irrigation System & Pump Station for Whaleback Public Golf Course commenced in November, 2020. Planning for this process considered a broad spectrum of requirements, including but not limited to: a) Previous and proposed procurement process. b) Risk analysis. c) Sustainability issues and considerations. d) Market research. e) Evaluation requirements. f) Contract management requirements. 7 A City Procurement Plan, covering all of the above was endorsed by the Director Canning Corporate and Commercial in December 2020. 8 The Tender was compiled based on the information within the procurement plan, and using the adopted City Request Conditions for the tender submission conditions and Australian Standard 2124:1992 for the contract terms and conditions. 9 The Tender was advertised under the Local Government Tenders section in The West Australian newspaper, as required under legislation on Wednesday, 16 December 2020 and released via the City’s TenderLink e-tender portal on the same day. 10 3 addenda were released in relation to the Tender, and related to answering questions received from potential Respondents during the open tender period. 11 The Tender closing date was 2.30pm on 29 January 2021 for a total open tender period of 45 days, greater than the minimum 14 day open tender period required under legislation.

12 The City received a total of 1 submission from the following Respondent: a) NewGround Water Services Pty Ltd 13 The respondent provided details of their Director’s relationships with other entities, as requested by Council. The detail of these relationships is outlined below: Officeholders Name and Title Associated With Any Other Organisations Bruce Scarterfield Scarterfield Pty Ltd Toplife Enterprises Pty Ltd Peter Scotford Vietti Pty Ltd

14 The 1 Respondent addressed the Compliance and Disclosure requirements, and passed through to the qualitative criteria.

Page 22 CC-028-21 Award of Contract - Automatic Irrigation System and Pump Station for CC-028-21 Whaleback Public Golf Course

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

15 The Qualitative Assessment was comprised of the following criteria, as identified in the Request for Tender document: a) Suitability of Proposed Goods at 5% Weighting b) Demonstrated Experience at 20% Weighting c) Specified Personnel at 20% Weighting d) Work Health and Safety at 25% Weighting e) Methodology at 30% Weighting 16 A pre-consensus meeting was called between the three evaluation panel members, the independent Probity Advisor and a Procurement representative, where the process requirements were covered and the Respondent identified. All evaluation panel members completed a Declaration of Confidentiality and Interest, prior to evaluation. 17 The Respondents offer was then individually assessed against the above criteria by the evaluation panel members, who then convened for a consensus meeting with the independent Probity Advisor and a Procurement representative, to determine the final score applied to each criteria for the Respondent. 18 Following the consensus meeting, it was considered the Respondent had addressed the criteria to a high level however it was noted the submitted price exceeded the approved budget by nearly 30%. 19 The high price was considered due to the specifications including ‘value add’ opportunities for Whaleback Public Golf Course, such as laying underground conduit to support electrical services allowing the installation of lighting structures for potential night golfing. 20 As the specifications were not restricted to what the City actually required, and due to the offered price not meeting budgetary limitations and with no other pricing submissions to benchmark against, the offer was considered not to represent value for money to the City or ratepayers. 21 The 1 offer received was then declined as allowed under the Local Government Act 1996 (Functions and General Regulations). 22 The City met with New Ground Water services to consider options within the irrigation project scope that could reduce the cost of the project, however not decrease the operational capacity of the new system. Negotiations on the scope of works to be removed from this project include removal of: a) remedial work for the relay of turf in rough areas. b) electrical conduit for future course lighting and on controlling wire to retic heads. c) weather station d) portable water lines to drinking fountains (4) 23 An alternative option for the design of inlet for water into the pumping house. A wet well suction design changed to a floating suction line. 24 It is intended that the project would be delivered into two phases, with each closing half the course for a period of 7 weeks at a time, allowing for installation of the irrigation for that portion of the course. CONSIDERATIONS

Page 23 CC-028-21 Award of Contract - Automatic Irrigation System and Pump Station for CC-028-21 Whaleback Public Golf Course

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

Legal Compliance 25 Under the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 – Part 4, Division 2, Regulation 11(1), the City is required to publicly invite tenders if the consideration is expected to be in excess of $250,000. This was fully complied with through undertaking the initial tender process. 26 The Local Government Act (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 – Part 4, Division 2, Regulation 18(5) allows that ‘the local government may decline to accept any tender’. 27 Under the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 – Part 4, Division 2, Regulation 11(2)(c)(i), a local government is not required to undertake a public tender where, within the last 6 months ‘the local government has, according to the requirements of the Division, publicly invited tenders for the supply of the goods or services but no tender was submitted that met the tender specifications or satisfied the value for money assessment’.

Policy Implications 28 City Policy AF301 Procurement of Goods and/or Services applied to the original tender process and was fully complied with.

Financial Considerations

Business Plan 29 Business Canning Financial Services, Asset management and Leisure Facilities – Whaleback Golf Course

Internal Budget 30 The current balance of the reserve is $360,000 and projected to be $500,000 by 30 June 2021. 31 For Council consideration in drafting the City’s 2021 – 2022 Annual Budget, it will be proposed to carry forward the capital works program. This may be funded by both reserve and loan funds. The City has factored into its draft budget the impact of the anticipated 14 week closure period on the income the course generates; noting that half the course will close at each phase of the installation.

Asset Management 32 The new irrigation system will be updated on the Assets Management register on completion of the construction phase.

Sustainability Considerations 33 The Control of the new system will allow better watering practices to be set up to ensure a more accurate watering schedule with changes in weather and course conditions allowing irrigation staff to maximise the new systems efficiencies. 34 The City has commenced consideration for Whaleback Golf Course to become a Water Wise Golf Course. This new system will allow through more detailed system data in the measurement for best practice in golf course water management. 35 Environment - Better watering practices will allow more efficient water management on site.

Consultation 36 The impact on the partial closure of 9 holes for the periods of the installation has commenced consultation with the Proprietor of Whaleback Golf Course to plan minimising business interruption and customer satisfaction.

Page 24 CC-028-21 Award of Contract - Automatic Irrigation System and Pump Station for CC-028-21 Whaleback Public Golf Course

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

37 A communication plan for customer impact during the construction phase will be implemented on confirmation of scheduled dates.

Other Considerations or Risks Mitigation/ Consequenc Consequence Overall Risk/ Risk/ Opportunity Consequences X = Actions e Likelihood Rating Opportunity

Officer Quality of playing Programmed Recommendation conditions for system with customers all year ability to approved by the High round. respond to Almost certain Moderate Council (positive opportunity outcomes) extreme Opportunity A weather conditions. Officer Customer complaints Communicati Recommendation during periods of shut ons plan to approved by the Medium down for irrigation customers Council (negative Almost certain Minor installation. Risk outcomes) Booking Risk B system. Officer Schedule in summer Communicati Recommendation months would affect ons plan to Medium deferred by the customer demand. address Possible Moderate Council options to Risk Risk C customers. City would need to redo Prework on Officer the tender. design and Recommendation scope High declined by the Lost time and cost. Risk completed. Likely Significant Council of price escalation with (Risk) Risk D labour and materials pricing increasing.

COMMENT 38 The evaluation panel thoroughly evaluated the original submission in accordance with the evaluation criteria. 39 An independent Probity Advisor was engaged to review the tender documentation from the initial procurement plan through to the final evaluation report, and to witness the pre-consensus and consensus meetings, to ensure a fair, honest and transparent process was undertaken. 40 This report seeks to accept the directly negotiated offer from NewGround Water Services Pty Ltd, and to authorise the Chief Executive Officer to finalise the appointment and establishment of the contract.

VOTING REQUIREMENT 41 Simple majority.

AGENDA BRIEFING COMMENT 42 Not applicable.

Page 25 CC-028-21 Award of Contract - Automatic Irrigation System and Pump Station for CC-028-21 Whaleback Public Golf Course

Item CC-028-21 - Attachment 2Probity Certificate - 25/2020 - Automatic Irrigation System/Pump Station for Whaleback Public Golf Course

Stontons tntemolfon~ Audit and Consulting Ply Ltd lrocing OS PO Box 1908 West Perth WA 6872 Stantons International Auslrolia Chartered Accountants and Consultants Level 2. 1 Walker Avenue West Perth WA 6005 Australia

Tel: +6189481 3188 Fox: +6 189321 1204

ABN : 84 144 581 519 www.slanlons.com.au 8 April 2021

Mr Athanasios Kyron CEO City of Canning 1317 Albany Highway Cannington WA 6107

Dear Mr Kyron,

RE: PROBITY CERTIFICATE - CITY OF CANNING - AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM/PUMP STATION FOR WHALEBACK PUBLIC GOLF COURSE - 25/2020

1. Introduction

This report details our opinion regarding the probity of the processes undertaken in the development of the Request documentation, the management of the proposal preparation phase and the conduct of the evaluation process for the above Request.

This report outlines the involvement of Stantons International (SI) in the process and our opinion that this has been a thorough process that has complied fully with appropriate probity requirements.

2. Involvement of Stantons International

On this occasion, the City of Canning (the City) engaged SI as the probity advisors to the process from the procurement planning stage of the project and we have provided probity support from prior to completion of the development of the Request document through to recommended outcome. As such, we have been involved throughout the process and have been able to make a progressive contribution to the conduct of the process and the review of probity issues.

3. Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this review was to ensure that the evaluation process was administered fairly and impartially to all parties and was consistent with relevant Local Government and City regulations, policies and guidelines.

4. Summary and Evaluation Methodology

In summary, this procurement was structured as a single-stage, open tender process whereby the Request was advertised publicly, allowing any interested party to participate. After the receipt of one submission from a single Respondent, an evaluation process was carried out by an Evaluation Panel in conformity with the Evaluation Handbook document that was developed for the Request. The evaluation process involved individual

Liobility limited by o scheme opproved Member of Russell Bedford lnrernational VM under Professional Standards Legislolion

Page 26 CC-028-21 Award of Contract - Automatic Irrigation System and Pump Station for Whaleback CC-028-21 Public Golf Course

Item CC-028-21 - Attachment 2Probity Certificate - 25/2020 - Automatic Irrigation System/Pump Station for Whaleback Public Golf Course

Stantons International

assessment and scoring of the response, followed by a consensus process and group assessment to identify the Preferred Respondent for recommendation. SI was present at all critical points during the process and observed the process as being conducted in an unbiased manner that was fair to the Respondents at all times.

5. Notable Events

During our review no significant issues were identified that would be likely to have an impact on the outcome of the process from a probity perspective. The process was conducted in a professional and well managed manner at all times.

We note that the single response received was from NewGround Water Services, the organisation that had previously been engaged to develop the design of the irrigation system that was to be delivered under this contract. While only a single submission was received, we are confident that reasonable measures were taken to enable a competitive tendering activity and limit any advantage NewGrounds may have had over their competitors. Furthermore, in evaluating the submission received , the Evaluation Panel requested assurance from an independent Quantity Surveyor (QS), which gave the Panel additional confidence in the value-for-money proposition of the offer received in lieu of a competitive field of offers from other Respondents.

6. Recommendations

No specific recommendations are made to enhance this process.

7. Deviations from Agreed Procedures

No specific recommendations are made to improve the probity of future evaluations such as this.

8. Conclusion

We are satisfied in relation to the following: The Evaluation Panel applied all relevant Local Government and City supply policies and complied with all relevant probity requirements during the evaluation process. It is our opinion that the evaluation process was free from bias and inequity. Documentation supporting the evaluation process provides sufficient evidence for third party review and accurately describes the process undertaken. The process was conducted fairly and equitably.

It is our opinion that the process was fair and equitable and in accordance with the requirements of the Request document and the supporting Evaluation Handbook. Should you wish to discuss any matters raised in this report, please contact the undersigned.

Yours faithfully

Kevin Donnelly Principal, Probity & Procurement

2

Page 27 CC-028-21 Award of Contract - Automatic Irrigation System and Pump Station for Whaleback CC-028-21 Public Golf Course

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

CC-029-21 Late Item - Monthly Financial Report May 2021

This late item will be circulated under separate cover.

Page 28 CC-030-21 Budget Review as at 31 May 2021 CC-030-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

CC-030-21 Late Item - Budget Review as at 31 May 2021

This late item will be circulated under separate cover.

Page 29 CC-030-21 Budget Review as at 31 May 2021 CC-030-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

7.3 Director Canning Development CD-016-21 Submission Jandakot Airport Draft Master Plan 2020

PROGRAM: Canning Development SUB PROGRAM: Regulatory Services FILE REF: Q21/220 REPORT DATE: 27 May 2021 REPORTING OFFICER: Clint Burdett - Manager Healthy Canning RESPONSIBLE OFFICER: Graeme Bride - Director Canning Development

Strategic Plan Theme: LEAD - Accountable, responsible and forward-thinking administration. Community Goal: Innovation, flexibility, and resilience. Council Strategy: Collaborative relationships with stakeholders. Authority/Discretion: Advocacy: When Council advocates on its own behalf or on behalf of its community to another level of government, body or agency.

Attachments: 1. City of Canning Submission Jandakot Airport Master Plan 2020 (D21/173233). 2. ANEF Contour Diagram (D21/153520). 3. Att 3 - Extension of Other Regional Roads Reservation under MRS (D21/175000).

In Brief: Jandakot Airport Holdings Pty Ltd, as the operator of Jandakot Airport, is required under the Airports Act 1996 to prepare a Master Plan every five years. The Master Plan is a 20 year strategic vision for the airport that details how Jandakot Airport will be developed and operated. This report is intended to provide Council the opportunity to consider and endorse a submission on the draft Masterplan 2020. Draft Master Plan 2020 retains the principal concepts of Master Plan 2014 including the provision of the fourth runway and associated taxiways, aviation land use areas, mixed business land use areas and the general access arrangement. This draft Master Plan 2020 is available for a 60 business day public comment period concluding Tuesday 15 June 2021. The City has prepared a submission, given the airport is strategically located on the City’s boundary, with existing flight paths impacting Canning Vale residents and Jandakot Airport Holdings is a key stakeholder in delivering the proposed Jandakot Eastern Link Road. The proposed submission is shown in Attachment 1, of this report. Should Council support the Officer’s Recommendation, the City will have provided a position on the proposed Master Plan, including alignment with the City’s plans to facilitate the construction of the Jandakot Eastern Link Road. Should Council not support the Officer’s Recommendation, the City will miss an opportunity to put forward its position on the Master Plan.

Page 30 CD-016-21 Submission Jandakot Airport Draft Master Plan 2020 CD-016-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Endorses the submission shown in Attachment 1, responding to the Jandakot Airport Draft Master Plan 2020. 2. Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to liaise with the City of Cockburn and Jandakot Airport Holdings in relation to cost contributions to the Jandakot Eastern Link Road, Johnston Road and Acourt Road construction. 3. Requests the Chief Executive Officer write to the Western Australian Planning Commission seeking the initiation of a Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment to extend the Jandakot Eastern Link Road ‘Other Regional Roads’ reservation up to Jandakot Airport Holdings’ Orion Road alignment generally in accordance with Attachment 3.

Relevant Council Resolutions

Council Meeting and Date Report No Decision

Nil.

BACKGROUND

1 Jandakot Airport Holdings is required under the Airports Act 1996 to prepare a Master Plan every five years. The Jandakot Airport draft Master Plan 2020 retains the principal concepts of Master Plan 2014 that was approved by the Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development, the Hon. Warren Truss, on 17 February 2015.

2 The City of Canning’s Local Planning Scheme No. 42 recognises the significance of Jandakot Airport, by establishing a special control area. The Special Control Area objectives are: a) To promote the long term viability of the Jandakot Airport so as to enable its on-going development and operation; b) To prevent unreasonable encroachment of incompatible (noise sensitive) land uses and those activities affected or potentially impacted upon by aircraft noise; c) To provide for appropriately designed and constructed development of low to medium density residential uses within suitable locations within the Special Control Area; and d) To minimise the impact of aircraft noise on existing and future communities within the Special Control Area.

3 The City’s Local Planning Scheme No. 42, Special Control Area for Jandakot Airport, supports the implementation of State Planning Policy No. 5.3 – Land Use Planning in the Vicinity of Jandakot Airport. The objectives of this Policy are to: a) Protect Jandakot Airport from encroachment by incompatible land use and development, so as to provide for its ongoing, safe, and efficient operation; and b) Minimize the impact of airport operations on existing and future communities with particular reference to aircraft noise.

Page 31 CD-016-21 Submission Jandakot Airport Draft Master Plan 2020 CD-016-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

4 Jandakot Airport is a significant infrastructure asset in Western Australia and generates substantial economic benefits to the State and local economy. The City has prepared a submission, shown at Attachment 1 that recognises these benefits and identifies some key issues for the consideration of Jandakot Airport, during the finalisation of the draft Master Plan 2020, including non-aviation development matters, noise impacts, environmental management and transport planning.

DETAILS

5 The Draft Master Plan 2020 retains the principal concepts of Master Plan 2014 including the provision of the fourth runway and associated taxiways, aviation land use areas, mixed business land use areas and the general access arrangement. Regional and Economic Significance

6 The ongoing development and growth of Jandakot Airport will result in the sustained economic significance of the airport operations. Major capital works proposed for the future include the construction of a fourth runway, a minor extension to the primary runway, new road access to the east and continued mixed business development. Jandakot Airport contributes both directly and indirectly to the economy of Western Australia. Forecast Growth

7 Jandakot Airport is one of the busiest general aviation airports in Australia in terms of aircraft movements, having averaged 215,000 movements per annum over the last three years. The Airport could expect to reach the theoretical operating capacity of 460,000 fixed wing and 66,000 helicopter movements per annum within the 20 year planning horizon of this Master Plan. Airport Land Use

8 The Draft Jandakot Airport Master Plan 2020 projects the following land use and proportion of total land area: Bushland 119 hectares (19%); Aviation Operations (includes runways and taxiways and aviation development) - 257 hectares (42%); Mixed Business - 201 hectares (32%); and Roads and Services - 45 hectares (7%). Aviation Development

9 The planned configuration of the airfield at the ultimate development of the Airport includes the following potential new works: a proposed fourth runway I2L/30R, which is to be 990m in length and 18m wide, located parallel to the existing runway 12/30; the extension of runway 06L/24R from 1,392m to 1,600m; and the augmentation of the existing taxiway system to support the runway developments. Local Government Planning Framework

10 The Jandakot Airport estate lies wholly within the boundary of the City of Cockburn. Part of the northern boundary of the estate (Leeming Road and Ken Hurst Park) abuts the southern boundary of the City of Melville, and the western boundary of the City of Canning abuts the north east airport boundary.

11 The continual development of the Airport as envisaged under the draft Master Plan 2020 is consistent with the aims of the City of Cockburn Local Planning Scheme, which seeks to ensure that the development and use of land is appropriate with regard to public amenity, convenience, quality of life, and compatible land uses. This is established by the City of Cockburn’s Local Commercial and Activities Centres Strategy, which identifies Jandakot Airport as a strategic employment centre with a high density of jobs in a single location, where more of the future businesses and jobs are forecast to be located.

Page 32 CD-016-21 Submission Jandakot Airport Draft Master Plan 2020 CD-016-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

Aircraft Movements and Impacts

12 Jandakot Airport operates 24 hours, seven days a week. The Airport has a significant role as a major training base for both local and international pilots. Flying training activities account for approximately 80% of the annual movements conducted at the airport, with some 60% of movements being repetitive ‘touch-and-go’ circuit operations.

13 Figure 4.2, identified within the Draft Masterplan 2020 document, shows the total aviation movements recorded by Airservices Australia for the last 10 years for Jandakot Airport.

FlGURE 4.2 - JANDAKOT A,RPORT TOTAL ANNUAL AIRCRAFT MOVE.MENTS 400,000 350,000 300,000 250,000 200,000 150,000 ■ Helioopt.e.rs

100,000 ■ Fixed Wing 50,000

14 Jandakot Airport movement capacity was assessed in Master Plan 2014 showing the airport’s maximum theoretical operating capacity as 460,000 fixed-wing movements and 66,000 helicopter movements per annum. This has been reviewed and the movement capacity remains the same. The Ultimate Capacity ANEF shows an overall noise footprint of 1600 hectares of land, which is a 7% increase from the ANEF 2034/35 prepared for Master Plan 2014.

15 At an average projected growth rate of 4.0% per annum for fixed-wing movements and 3.4% average growth rate for helicopter movements, the theoretical operating capacity of 460,000 fixed wing and 66,000 helicopter movements identified in this Master Plan could be reached within the 20 year planning horizon.

16 The Airport Act 1996 requires that a master plan include an Australian Noise Exposure Forecast (ANEF) chart and the airport’s plans for managing aircraft noise intrusion in areas forecast to be subject to exposure above the significant ANEF levels. ANEF is endorsed for technical accuracy by Airservices Australia and is the official land use planning reference. There can only be one ANEF in force at a particular time. Under the Act, Jandakot Airport’s ANEF is required to be updated at least every eight years, in conjunction with the Master Plan update.

17 The ANEF chart illustrates noise contours plotted at 20, 25, 30, 35 and 40 ANEF units. The contour plot is the calculated total noise energy at that given point on the ground on an annual average day. The higher the ANEF value, the greater the expected exposure to aircraft noise in that area.

18 An Ultimate Capacity ANEF has been prepared by Jandakot Airport to represent an average day when the airport reaches its maximum aircraft operating capacity (described in Section 4.2 of the Masterplan document). The Ultimate Capacity ANEF was endorsed by Airservices Australia for technical accuracy on 12 March 2021 and is shown at Attachment 2.

19 Airservices Australia is a government-owned corporation that is responsible for airspace management, aviation communications, radio navigation aids, aviation rescue and firefighting services, and aeronautical information. Airservices Australia manages complaints and enquiries about aircraft noise and operations through its Noise Complaints and Information Service. This service is the Australian aviation industry’s main interface for the community on aircraft noise and related issues.

Page 33 CD-016-21 Submission Jandakot Airport Draft Master Plan 2020 CD-016-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

Ground Transport Plan

20 The draft Master Plan 2020 acknowledges the proposed Jandakot Eastern Link Road is required for the ground transport plan, for a connection through to Ranford Road. Jandakot Airport Holdings proposes to extend Orion Road to meet this connection at the boundary of the airport. The draft Master Plan 2020 assumes that the Jandakot Eastern Link Road will be constructed within the next eight years. The report outlines the contribution Jandakot Airport Holdings has made to road upgrades outside the airport site to the west. The report indicates that discussions will be held with the City of Canning in relation to the road upgrades east of the airport site being the Jandakot Eastern Link Road, but does not commit to a specific contribution towards the works. Environmental Management

21 In accordance with the Act, Jandakot Airport is required to produce a final Master Plan which includes an Environment Strategy. The Jandakot Airport Environment Strategy 2020 (the Environment Strategy) outlines Jandakot Airport’s environment management objectives for the eight year period from 2020 and describes how JAH will meet its environmental obligations as detailed in the Act.

22 A number of environmental factors at the airport are managed through specific management plans and strategies. These include the following: Conservation Management Plan, which includes a Weed Management Plan; Dieback Management Plan; Bushland Rehabilitation and Revegetation guidelines; Feral Animal Management Plan; Bushfire Management Plan; Wildlife Fencing and Underpass Strategy; and Heritage Management Plan; Local Water Management Strategy; Water Efficiency Management Plan; Groundwater Management Plan; Jandakot Airport Offset Plan; and Construction Environmental Management Plan for Clearing and Civil Works. Observations Included Within City Submission

23 Some key observations from the City’s review of the draft Master Plan 2020 and those matters that the City has included within the submission shown at Attachment 1 are: Ground Transport Plan – Jandakot Eastern Link Road

24 The draft Master Plan 2020 identifies the need for the construction of the Jandakot Eastern Link Road connection to Ranford Road. The Jandakot Eastern Link Road has been identified on the Metropolitan Region Scheme as an ‘Other Regional Roads’ reservation. It should be noted that Figure 2.1 in the draft Master Plan 2020 does not reflect the current Metropolitan Region Scheme as Jandakot Eastern Link Road is not shown. The current Jandakot Eastern Link Road ‘Other Regional Roads’ reservation on the Metropolitan Region Scheme would need to be extended to accommodate Jandakot Airport Holdings’ alignment of Orion Road (refer Attachment 3). The current reservation reflects the Orion Road alignment proposed in the Master Plan 2009 and not the Orion Road alignment that was approved in the Master Plan 2014.

25 The first stage of the Jandakot Eastern Link Road will be constructed as part of the Ranford Station Metronet project which includes the installation of traffic signals at its intersection with Ranford Road. The City has submitted the construction of the Jandakot Eastern Link Road – Johnston Road – Acourt Road link for funding under the Main Roads WA Improvement Program. The total cost of the project is estimated to be $6 million. If the City is successful with its grant application it will be received over the 2022/23 and 2024/25 financial years. There is no guarantee that the City will receive the grant and even if it was successful there would still be a shortfall in funding to complete the project.

26 At present Master Plan 2020 includes a commitment that it will contribute to the upgrade of the intersection where Orion Road meets the Jandakot Eastern Link Road. There is however no mention of a contribution for the Jandakot Eastern Link Road itself, despite the Master Plan anticipating its construction within an 8 year horizon and at the ‘ultimate development’ scenario the airport will contribute in excess of 30% of all traffic movements along this section of the Road. It is the City’s

Page 34 CD-016-21 Submission Jandakot Airport Draft Master Plan 2020 CD-016-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

view that based on its direct route to the Airport and its role in supporting the growth of the Airport’s operations (given its commercial and aviation expansion), Jandakot Airport Holdings should make a fair and equitable contribution to this link in addition to the intersection at Orion Road.

27 Portions of Johnson Road and Acourt Court are boundary roads shared with the City of Cockburn and it is considered reasonable that a shared cost arrangement between this local government and the City of Canning would be needed.

28 It is recommended that the draft Master Plan reflect the need for the Airport to co-fund the extension of Jandakot Eastern Link Road. It is also proposed that the City approach both the City of Cockburn and Jandakot Airport Holdings to progress a shared funding arrangement for this infrastructure. Noise Impacts

29 The Masterplan forecasts a potential 110% increase in aeroplane movements to 460,000 plane movements a year, up from the current 215,000 movements a year. This significant increase in the operation of the airport will have a significant impact in terms of noise and expansion of on-ground capacity to accommodate the forecasted movements. It is noted that this is a forecast or prediction and is subject to a range of assumptions and is consistent with the Master Plan 2014 predictions.

30 The aircraft mix at Jandakot Airport includes a large range of aging aircraft types. It is realistic to assume that the older aircraft types will be replaced within the next 20 years, but it is impossible to know what aircraft types they will be replaced with. However, as newer aircraft types are generally much quieter than the older aircraft types, the ANEF calculation using the noise footprints of the current older fleet means that the ANEF likely presents a worse-case scenario. This ANEF is only changing marginally from that reported in the Master Plan 2014.

31 It is noted that there are no changes to the existing published Visual Flight Rules routes or visual waypoints expected as a result of the implementation of this Master Plan, thereby not exposing new areas within residential areas to aircraft noise.

32 In relation to the Ultimate Capacity ANEF, which represents an average day when the airport reaches its maximum aircraft operating capacity, where that contour is located over the City of Canning (through Canning Vale), it is consistent with that reported in 2014.

33 Fly Neighbourly is a voluntary code of conduct for pilots that was introduced at Jandakot Airport in January 2000, which is being retained in this Masterplan. Fly Neighbourly recognises that there are opportunities to reduce the effect of aircraft noise on surrounding communities. The Fly Neighbourly program focuses on pilot education, targeted through the co-operation of major operators, the use of signage and the inclusion of the Fly Neighbourly principles in the En-Route Supplement Australia pilot guide and the Jandakot Airport conditions of access and use. Pilots are expected to undertake operations in a manner which is considerate of local residents. To strengthen the the Fly Neighbourly code, it is the City’s view that it should be reviewed by an independent aviation expert, in cooperation with Air Services and Jandakot Airport on a regular basis to identify opportunities to strengthen this code in terms of reducing noise impacts where possible. Environmental Strategy

34 The Environmental Strategy 2020 for the Jandakot Airport has been updated in this draft Master Plan and will act as a guide for environmental management of the airport for the next eight years. The Master Plan includes an Environment Strategy to meet obligations under Commonwealth and State legislation. It is noted that 119 ha of land will be retained as bushland and management of it set out in the JAH Conservation Management Plan. The long-term preservation of the JAH bushland, part of Bush Forever site 388, is important to maintain ecological linkages for environmentally significant bushland in the Canning Vale and Jandakot area. Threatened flora species Caladenia huegelii and Drakea elastica occur in the area and are limited in distribution and the Banksia Woodland is critical

Page 35 CD-016-21 Submission Jandakot Airport Draft Master Plan 2020 CD-016-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

habitat for two species of Threatened Black Cockatoo Calyptorhynchus latirostris and Calyptorhynchus banksia naso.

35 Further, in its vegetation connectivity modelling, the Western Australian Local Government Association (WALGA) noted that the Perth east west regional ecological linkage, of which Bush Forever 388 is a part of, is already significantly affected by land use changes and clearing.

36 Impacts to the Jandakot Underground Water Protection Control Area (JUWPCA) will be mitigated by the implementation of the Jandakot Airport Local Water Management Strategy. Regular monitoring will be undertaken at monitoring bores across the airport under the Jandakot Groundwater Management Plan monitoring programme. All new developments are to be connected to deep sewer and other infrastructure to be connected by 2024. Planning Implications – Non Aviation Development Strategy

37 Currently the airport accommodates 455,000m² in non-aviation floor space, comprising of 330,000 of warehouse, 80,000 in manufacturing, 40,000m² in office space and 5,000m² in retail floor space. This is proposed to increase significantly under the draft Master Plan to a total of 725,000m² of floor space comprising of 525,000 m² of warehouse floor space, 128,000m² of manufacturing floor space, 67,000m² of office floor space and 5,000m² of retail floor space.

38 The State Government Planning Framework through ‘Perth and Peel and 3.5 million,’ identifies Jandakot Airport as a ‘specialised activity centre’ which provides an important logistical function in the metropolitan area. The State Governments State Planning Policy 4.2 – Activity Centres for Perth and Peel defines ‘Specialised Centres’ as ‘providing opportunities to for the development of complimentary activities, particularly knowledge based businesses’. The expansion plans for Jandakot airport as identified in the Masterplan is in keeping with the State Governments identification of the future role of Jandakot Airport for the South Metropolitan Peel Subregional Framework under Perth and Peel at 3.5 million however the intensity of development proposed will have a significant impact on the surrounding areas.

39 In addition to ‘Perth and Peel at 3.5 million,’ the State Government has a State Planning Policy specifically for the Jandakot Airport. The Objectives of State Planning Policy 5.3 – Planning in the Vicinity of Jandakot Airport, has two primary objectives: a) Protect Jandakot Airport from encroachment by incompatible land use and development, so as to provide for its ongoing safe and efficient operations; and b) Minimise the impact of airport operations on existing and future communities with particular reference to aircraft noise.

40 The operation of the Airport and its expansion will impact planning on the surrounding land. The City’s Local Planning Scheme No. 42 identifies a Special Control Area (SPC2) which provides a buffer in accordance with the State Governments Planning Policy 5.3 – Land use Planning in the vicinity of Jandakot Airport, which restricts development in proximity to the airport in an attempt to minimise the impact of the operation of the airport to the surrounding area. The key restriction is on land use, particularly residential development, with residential development restricted to single residential housing only within the 20 and 25 ANEF contours of the Airport.

CONSIDERATIONS

Legal Compliance

41 The City has no statutory authority with regard to approval of the draft Master Plan 2020, which will be determined under Commonwealth legislation by the relevant Minister.

Policy Implications

42 Not applicable.

Page 36 CD-016-21 Submission Jandakot Airport Draft Master Plan 2020 CD-016-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

Financial Considerations

Business Plan

43 Not applicable.

Internal Budget

44 Not applicable.

Asset Management

45 Not applicable.

Sustainability Considerations

46 Not applicable.

Consultation

47 The City is responding to the public advertising of the Jandakot Airport Master Plan 2020. All residents and interested parties have an ability to lodge a submission.

Other Considerations or Risks

Mitigation/ Consequenc Consequence Overall Risk/ Risk/ Opportunity Consequences X = Actions e Likelihood Rating Opportunity Officer City’s views are Submission sent Recommendation expressed and representing High approved by the Council Almost Certain Moderate must be Council’s (Opportunity) (positive outcomes) considered by position on the Opportunity A Jandakot Airport Master Plan. Officer Recommendation approved by the Council N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A (negative outcomes) Risk B The submission Officer deadline would Submission Recommendation have passed and High conveys the Likely Moderate deferred by the Council City’s views not (Risk) City’s interests. Risk C taken into account. Officer Recommendation City’s views would Submission High Almost Certain Moderate declined by the Council not be known or conveys City’s (Risk) Risk D considered. interest.

COMMENT

48 It is recommended that Council endorse the attached submission (as per Attachment 1) to establish a position on this important strategic planning document.

VOTING REQUIREMENT

49 Simple majority.

AGENDA BRIEFING COMMENT

50 Not applicable.

Page 37 CD-016-21 Submission Jandakot Airport Draft Master Plan 2020 CD-016-21

Item CD-016-21 - Attachment 1 City of Canning Submission Jandakot Airport Master Plan 2020

G; CITY OF CANNING

Doc lD: D21/173233

lSJune 2021

Jandakot Airport Holdings Pty Ltd 16 Eagle Drive Jandakot Airport WA 6164 [email protected]

Dear Mr John Fraser

CITY OF CANNING SUBMISSION · DRAFT PRE LI MINARY MASTERPLAN 2020

The City of Canning welcomes the opportunity to make a submission on the Jandakot Airport Draft Master Plan 2020 (DMP).

It is understood the DMP has been prepared to meet the legislative approvals required by the Commonwealth's Airports Act 1996 and retains the principal concepts of Master Plan 2014 including the provision of the fourth runway and associated taxiways, aviation land use areas, mixed business land use areas and the general access arrangement.

It is acknowledged that the State Government has recognised Jandakot Airport as a vital piece of infrastructure, through Stote Planning Pa/icy 5.3 Land use planning in the vicinity of Jandakot Airport and that the City's Town Planning Scheme No. 42 provides that recognition through provision of a Special Control Area.

The City appreciates that the MDP articulates significant benefits to Western Australia from proposed aviation and non-aviation development.

The following key issues are identified for your consideration:

Non-Aviation Development and Planning

a) The Masterplan forecasts a potential 110% increase in aeroplane movements to 460,000 plane movements a year, up from the current 215,000 movements a year. This significant increase in the operation of the airport w ill have significant impacts in terms of noise and expansion of on-ground capacity to accommodate the forecasted movements.

1317 Albany Highway, Cannington ----~------CANNING.WA.GOV.AU Locked Bag 80, Welshpool WA 6986 P 1300 422 664 0000 @>

Page 38 CD-016-21 Submission Jandakot Airport Draft Master Plan 2020 CD-016-21

Item CD-016-21 - Attachment 1 City of Canning Submission Jandakot Airport Master Plan 2020 Page l 2

b) The Jandakot Airport proposes that the 622 hectares making up the Jandakot Airport area, will comprise of 119 hectares of Bushland (19% of area), 257 hectares of aviation operations (i.e. hangers, runways etc.) representing 42% of the total area, 201 hectares (32 % of total area) of mixed business area, and 45 hectares (7% of area) and roads and services. From its current composition, bushland area is proposed to be contained to accommodate the construction of a fourth runway and extension of an existing runway, in addition to the development of additional land for mixed business type land uses supporting the commercial operation of the airport. Currently the airport accommodates 455,000sq.m in non-aviation floor space, comprising of 330,000sq .m of warehouse, 80,000sq.m in manufacturing, 40,000sq.m in office space and 5,000sq.m in retail floor space. This is proposed to increase significantly under the Masterplan to a total of 725,000sq.m of floor space comprising of 525,000sq.m of warehouse floor space, 128,000sq.m of manufacturing floor space, 67,000sq.m of office floor space and 5,000sq.m of retail floor space.

c) The State Government Planning Framework through 'Perth and Peel and 3.5 million,' identifies Jandakot Airport as a 'specialised activity centre' which provides an important logistical function in the metropolitan area. The State Governments State Planning Policy 4.2 -Activity Centres for Perth and Peel defines 'Specialised Centres' as 'providing opportunities to for the development of complimentary activities, particularly knowledge based businesses'. The expansion plans for Jandakot airport as identified in the Masterplan is in keeping with the State Governments identification of the future role of Jandakot Airport for the South Metropolitan Peel Subregional Framework under Perth and Peel at 3.5 million however the intensity of development proposed will have a significant impact on the surrounding areas.

d) In addition to 'Perth and Peel and 3.5 million,' the State Government has a State Pl anning Policy specifically for the Jandakot Airport. The Objectives of State Planning Policy 5.3 - Land us planning in the vicinity of Jandakot Airport, has two primary objectives:

i. Protect Jandakot Airport from encroachment by incompatible land use and development, so as to provide for its ongoing safe and efficient operations; and ii. Minimise the impact of airport operations on existing and future communities with particular reference to aircraft noise.

e) The operation of the airport and its expansion will impact planning on the surrounding land. The City's Town Planning Scheme No. 42 identifies a Special Control Area (SPC2) which provides a buffer in accordance with the State Governments Planning Policy 5.3 - Land Use Planning in the vicinity of Jandakot Airport, which restricts development in proximity to the airport in an attempt to minimise the impact of the operation of the airport to the surrounding area . The key restriction is on land use, particularly residential development, with residential development restricted to single residential housing only within the 20 and 25 ANEF contours of the airport.

1317 Albany Highway. Cannington CANNING.WA.GOV.AU ------·------·- ---~- Locked Bag 80. Welshpool WA 6986 P 1300 422 664 0000 ®

Page 39 CD-016-21 Submission Jandakot Airport Draft Master Plan 2020 CD-016-21

Item CD-016-21 - Attachment 1 City of Canning Submission Jandakot Airport Master Plan 2020 Page l 3

Ground Transport Plan and the proposed Jandakot Eastern Link Road

a) The draft Master Plan 2020 identifies the need for the construction of the Jandakot Eastern Link Road connection to Ranford Road . The Jandakot Eastern Link Road has been identified on the Metropolitan Region Scheme as an 'Other Regional Roads' reservation. It shou ld be noted that Figure 2.1 in the draft Master Plan 2020 does not reflect the current Metropolitan Region Scheme as Jandakot Eastern Link Road is not shown. The current Jandakot Eastern Link Road 'Other Regional Roads' reservation on the Metropolitan Region Scheme would need to be extended to accommodate Jandakot Airport Holdings' alignment of Orion Road . The current reservation reflects the Orion Road alignment proposed in the Master Plan 2009 and not the Orion Road alignment that was approved in the Master Plan 2014. b) At present Master Plan 2020 includes a commitment that a contribution will be made to the upgrade of the intersection where Orion Road meets the Jandakot Eastern Link Road . There is however no mention of a contribution for the Jandakot Eastern Link Road itself, despite the Master Plan anticipating its construction within an 8 year horizon and at the 'ultimate development' scenario the airport will contribute in excess of 30% of all traffic movements along this section of the Road . It is the City's view that based on its direct route to the Airport and its role in supporting the growth of the Airport's operations (given its commercial and aviation expansion), Jandakot Airport Holdings should make a fair and equitable contribution to this link in addition to the intersection at Orion Road . c) It is recommended that the draft Master Plan reflect the need for the Airport to co­ fund the extension of Jandakot Eastern Link Road .

Aircraft Noise Impacts

a) The Masterplan forecasts a potential 110% increase in aeroplane movements to 460,000 plane movements a year, up from the current 215,000 movements a year. This significant increase in the operation of the airport will have a significant impact in terms of noise and expansion of on-ground capacity to accommodate the forecasted movements. It is noted that this is a forecast or prediction and is subject to a range of assumptions.

b) The aircraft mix at Jandakot Airport includes a large range of aging aircraft types. It is realistic to assume that the older aircraft types will be replaced within the next 20 years, but it is impossible to know what aircraft types they will be replaced with. However, as newer aircraft types are generally much quieter than the older aircraft types, the AN EF calculation using the noise footprints of the current older fleet means that the ANEF likely presents a worse-case scenario. This ANEF is only changing marginally from that reported in the Master Plan 2014.

c) It is noted that there are no changes to the existing published Visual Flight Rules routes or visual waypoints expected as a result of the implementation of this Master Plan, thereby not exposing new areas within residential areas to aircraft noise.

d) In relation to the Ultimate Capacity ANEF, which represents an average day when the airport reaches its maximum aircraft operating capacity, where that contour is located over the City of Canning, through Canning Vale is consistent with that reported in 2014.

1317 Albany Highway, Cannington CANNING.WA.GOV.AU ------~----- Locked Bag 80, Welshpool WA 6986 P 1300 422 664 0000 ®

Page 40 CD-016-21 Submission Jandakot Airport Draft Master Plan 2020 CD-016-21

Item CD-016-21 - Attachment 1 City of Canning Submission Jandakot Airport Master Plan 2020 Page 14

e) Fly Neighbourly is a voluntary code of conduct for pilots that was introduced at Jandakot Airport in January 2000, which is being retained in this Master Plan. Fly Neighbourly recognises that there are opportunities to reduce the effect of aircraft noise on surrounding communities. The Fly Neighbourly programme focuses on pilot education, targeted through the co-operation of major operators, the use of signage and the inclusion of the Fly Neighbourly principles in the En-Route Supplement Australia pilot guide and the Jandakot Airport Conditions of Access & Use. Pilots are expected to undertake operations in a manner which is considerate of local residents. The Fly Neighbourly code should be reviewed independently, in cooperation with Air Services and Jandakot Airport on a regular basis to identify opportunities to strengthen this code in terms of reducing impacts where possible.

Environment Strategy

a) The Environmental Strategy 2020 for the Jandakot Airport has been updated in this draft Master Plan and will act as a guide for environmental management of the airport for the next eight years. The Master Plan includes an Environment Strategy to meet obligations under Commonwealth and State legislation. It is noted that 119 ha of land will be retained as bushland and management of it set out in the JAH Conservation Management Plan. The long-term preservation of the JAH bushland, part of Bush Forever site 388, is important to maintain ecological linkages for environmentally significant bushland in the Canning Vale and Jandakot area . Threatened flora species Caladenia huegelii and Drakea e/astica occur in the area and are limited in distribution and the Banksia Woodland is critical habitat for two species of Threatened Black Cockatoo Calyptarhynchus latirostris and Ca/yptorhynchus banksia naso.

b) Further, in its vegetation connectivity modelling, the Western Australian Loca l Government Association (WALGA) noted that the Perth east west regional ecological linkage, of which Bush Forever 388 is a part of, is already significantly affected by land use changes and clearing.

c) Impacts to t he Jandakot Underground Water Protection Control Area (JUWPCA) will be mitigated by the implementation of the Jandakot Airport Local Water Management Strategy. Regular monitoring will be undertaken at monitoring bores across the airport under the Jandakot Groundwater Management Plan monitoring programme. All new developments are to be connected to deep sewer and other infrastructure to be connected by 2024.

We look forward to your consideration of the City's submission on the DMP. Shou ld you need any clarification or have any questions, please contact Clint Bu rdett, the City's Manager Regulatory Services on 9231 0667.

Yours faithfully

Athanasios (Arthur Kyron) Chief Executive Officer City of Canning

1317 Albany Highway, Cannington CANNING.WA.GOV.AU Locked Bag 80 , Welsh pool WA 6986 P 1300 422 664 0000@

Page 41 CD-016-21 Submission Jandakot Airport Draft Master Plan 2020 CD-016-21

Item CD-016-21 - Attachment 2 ANEF Contour Diagram

FIGURE 8. I - AUSTRALIAN NOISE EX POSURE FORECAST

~~:m mm !m~! mm nnm mm mm mm mm mm! mm mm mm mm U!!!!! mm mm mm mm mms mm mm mm mm imm mm mm mm mm !!!!!!! mm mm mm mm m:m !m5! mm mm mm~ mm mm mm !!!~i!! !~!~!! ii!~!! ::;- mm! u 1mm mm mm "'a. !!!im !!Sm mm u"' ! mnu- mnu- imm mmi mm mm IIIHti HHIII IUIHI Ul

Page 42 CD-016-21 Submission Jandakot Airport Draft Master Plan 2020 CD-016-21

Item CD-016-21 - Attachment 3 Att 3 - Extension of Other Regional Roads Reservation under MRS ,0 l Rt:SUl"Al!ON R(S(RVATIOH J IN)A05 cr ROADS RfS(RYAl(lN R(S(RYATION ~ -9-125/900 ll[CilOHAL !Ocl ROADS lt(<,.O,U,l ROADS 19 li~ BOUl(IAIIY MQO.U:Y t Oltt(R 0110 JOOO BOUlrllAAY lt(CilOHAL ~ lt(li(INAL HRS HOl~S fc,('t[R TATXIN 01111:R S OTtfR IUSH AIRPORT (XISTING ffi:f'OS(O lft'S HRS AlOH(i IOUNlARY RAHFORO tQCATIV( ltOCAtlY( J00.001 PTA [XISTNG FOK[ ~O l.'4 LEGEND OIi._! COMCIPT .... :=:. ;".=:-- - · --··-·- -

Page 43 CD-016-21 Submission Jandakot Airport Draft Master Plan 2020 CD-016-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel and Assessment of Significant Development

PROGRAM: Canning Development SUB PROGRAM: City Planning FILE REF: Q21/250 REPORT DATE: 26 May 2021 REPORTING OFFICER: Sergio Famiano - Manager City Planning RESPONSIBLE OFFICER: Graeme Bride - Director Canning Development

Strategic Plan Theme: LEAD - Accountable, responsible and forward-thinking administration. Community Goal: Innovation, flexibility, and resilience. Council Strategy: Ongoing improvement of governance framework and processes. Authority/Discretion: Legislative: Includes adopting Local Laws, Town Planning Schemes and Policies. Review when Council reviews decisions made by Officers.

Attachments: 1. Draft Review - LP.06 Design review Panel 2019 Track Change Version (D21/164804). 2. Draft Review - LP.06 Design review Panel 2019 Clean Version (D21/164800).

In Brief: The report seeks Council’s adoption of the draft amended Local Planning Policy LP06 – Design Review Panel and Assessment of Significant Developments, for the purposes of public consultation. At its meeting held on 21 June 2016, Council adopted the Local Planning Policy LP.06 – Design Review Panel and Assessment of Significant Developments. The purpose of the Policy is to establish an independent Design Review Panel consisting of members with skill sets in Built Form Architecture, Urban Design and Landscape Architecture to provide design critic and advice on significant Development Applications received for assessment by the City. The intent of the Design Review Panel is to ‘lift’ the quality of design in development proposals to achieve city-wide goals in improving built form design and quality. The Design Review Panel has now been in operation since November 2016 (over 4 years), and has been involved in the assessment of no fewer than 56 Development Applications with a combined value in excess of $320m. The Policy which the Design Review Panel pertains, underwent a minor review in 2019 to ensure compliance with Local Planning Scheme No. 42, and is now due for a major review to ensure the Policy and operation of the Design Review Panel is kept up to date. The City has undertaken a comprehensive review of the Policy to ensure that it is maintained as an up to date and modern and reflects the recently published Design Guide for local governments produced by the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC). Council is asked to support the Officer Recommendation and adopt the amended Local Planning Policy LP.06 for advertising purposes in order to: 1. Reflect a number of recommendations outlined in the recently released WAPC Design Review Guide.

Page 44 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel CD-017-21 and Assessment of Significant Development

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

2. Expand the scope of the Design Review Panel to include key strategic documents such as Structure Plans, Activity Centre Plans and Precinct Plans. 3. Improve the administration, structure and efficiency of the Design Review Panel meetings. Should Council not support the Officer Recommendation the City would miss an opportunity to improve and build upon an existing policy and process which seeks to improve the built form outcomes associated with significant developments throughout the City.

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Advertises the amended Local Planning Policy LP.06 – ‘Design Review Panel and Assessment of Significant Development’ for a period of no less than 21 days in accordance with Schedule 2, Part 2, Division 2, of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015. 2. Refers the amended Local Planning Policy LP.06 – ‘Design Review Panel and Assessment of Significant Development’ to the Department for Planning, Lands and Heritage and City of Gosnells for comment. 3. Notes the proposed increase in fees for a design review assessment and supports them being included in the Fees and Charges Schedule to be considered as part of the draft 21/22 Annual Budget.

Relevant Council Resolutions

Council Meeting and Date Report No Decision MOVED Councillor D Brown, SECONDED Councillor B Kunze:

That Council: 1. Pursuant to Part 2 of the Deemed Provisions (Schedule 2) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 adopts Local Planning Policy LP.06 Design Advisory 21 June 2016 PR-023-16 Committee and Assessment of Significant Developments, with modifications, as provided in Attachment 2 to this report.

2. Pursuant to Part 2 of the Deemed Provisions (Schedule 2) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 revokes Local Planning Policy

Page 45 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel CD-017-21 and Assessment of Significant Development

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

Relevant Council Resolutions

Council Meeting and Date Report No Decision SRS234 Site Analysis Reporting and Design Review Process for Significant Developments, as provided in Attachment 3 to this report.

3. Notes that the City’s officers will: a) Notify those persons who lodged a submission of 1 and 2 (above);

b) Publish a notice of the adoption of Local Planning Policy LP.06 Design Advisory Committee and Assessment of Significant Developments in a newspaper circulating in the Scheme area;

c) Publish a notice of the revocation of Local Planning Policy SRS234 Site Analysis Reporting and Design Review Process for Significant Developments in a newspaper circulating in the Scheme area; and

d) Publish an up-to-date copy of Local Planning Policy LP.06 Design Advisory Committee and Assessment of Significant Developments on the City’s website and ensure that a copy is kept and made available for public inspection during business hours at the City’s administration offices.

4. Endorses public advertising for expressions of interest for membership on the Design Advisory Committee in accordance with the terms of reference contained in Local Planning Policy LP.06 Design Advisory Committee and Assessment of Significant Developments.

Page 46 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel CD-017-21 and Assessment of Significant Development

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

Relevant Council Resolutions

Council Meeting and Date Report No Decision 5. Notes that a further report will be presented to a future Council meeting to provide for Council to ratify selection of Design Advisory Committee members, including the positions of Chair and Deputy Chair.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (9/0) MOVED Deputy Mayor Cunningham, SECONDED Cr Porter,

That Council: 1. Pursuant to Schedule 2, Part 2, Division 2, clause 4 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015 adopts without modifications local planning policies supporting Local Planning Scheme No. 42:

a) LP.01 - Residential Development.

b) LP.02 - Public Consultation of Planning Proposals.

15 October 2019 SD-014-19 c) LP.03 - Developer Funded Public Art.

d) LP.04 - Exemptions from Development Approval.

e) LP.05 - Bentley Regeneration Design Guidelines.

f) LP.06 - Design Review Panel and Assessment of Significant Developments

g) LP.07 - Advertising Signs.

h) LP.09 - Tree Retention and Planting - Development.

i) LP.10 - Incentive-Based

Page 47 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel CD-017-21 and Assessment of Significant Development

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

Relevant Council Resolutions

Council Meeting and Date Report No Decision Development Assessment.

j) LP.11 - Child Day Care Premises in Residential Areas.

k) LP.12 - Outbuildings and Sea Containers in Residential Areas.

l) LP.14 - High Road Right of Carriageway Network.

m) LP.15 - Bentley and Wilson Precincts.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 11/0

BACKGROUND

1 The establishment of a Design Review Panel, reflects the City’s goal to promote design excellence in urban design and built form and also aligns with the State Governments ‘Planning Reform’ agenda which through its Design WA team, promotes the adoption of Design Review Panels by Local Government to support the State Government’s push to promote design quality in new development proposals.

2 Following a period of public consultation and industry consultation, Council at its meeting on the 27 June 2016 adopted Local Planning Policy (LP.06) – Design Review Panel and Assessment of Significant Development’. The Policy outlines the circumstances for when a Design Review Panel is to be convened (i.e. multiple dwelling development greater than 10 dwellings) and sets out the ‘Terms and Reference’ to establish the Design Review Panel, to guide its operation. The Design Review Panel was first convened in November 2016 and since then, there have been over 35 Design Review Panel meetings which have considered no less than 56 major Development Applications with a combined value estimated at $320m. The City of Canning shares the Design Review Panel with the City of Gosnells.

3 On 24 May 2019, the State Government’s Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) adopted the Residential Design Codes (R-Codes) Volume 2 - Apartment Design. The R-Codes Volume 2 – Apartment Design is a performance based document focusing on a number of ‘design principles’ which need to be satisfied as part of the assessment process. Accompanying the R-Codes Volume 2 and also adopted by the WAPC was the Design Review Guide for Local Government’s seeking to adopt a Design Review Panel. The WAPC’s Design WA program supports the establishment of Design Review Panel’s to ensure design assessment is undertaken by an independent panel. Whilst the establishment of the City’s Design Review Panel preceded the WAPC’s Design WA program, the Guidelines adopted by the WAPC provide some additional content for the City’s consideration.

4 The City’s Design Review Panel operates as an independent ‘advisory body’ to the City, which provides advice on the design aspect of a development that is eligible for consideration under the City’s Policy. This includes typically, development that is three storeys or more in height, multiple dwellings and mixed use development that is greater than 10 dwellings and development that may

Page 48 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel CD-017-21 and Assessment of Significant Development

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

be considered by the City to be of a complex nature or would benefit from a design review. The Policy and Design Review Panel has been operating now for almost four years and apart from a minor change to the Policy in November 2019, the Policy and the Panel has not been reviewed to consider if the current arrangements are meeting the City’s expectations.

DETAILS

5 Following a review of the Local Planning Policy LP.06 – ‘Design Review Panel and Assessment of Significant Development’ the following amendments to the Policy is proposed: a) Expand the definition of the scope of the Design Review Panel to include Precinct Plans, Structure Plans and Activity Centre Plans and for clarity purposes specifically reference significant commercial developments and applications that are eligible for determination by the Joint Development Assessment Panel (JDAP); b) Simplify the level of information required by the Applicant to present to the Design Review Panel; c) The introduction of a section clearly outlining the preference for Design Review Panel meetings to occur prior to lodgement of a Planning Application for formal assessment; d) The inclusion of relevant information such as preliminary assessment against the Local Planning Scheme and relevant Local Planning Policies by the applicant for consideration by the Design Review Panel; e) The introduction of a typical design review process flow chart (based on the WAPC Design Review Guide); f) The introduction of a number of changes to the Design Review Panel Terms of Reference including the following: i) Clearer explanation on the; role of the Design Review Panel; ii) Reducing the minimum number of panel members to two for any panel meeting; iii) Selection of panel members to be undertaken by the City rather than the Chair; iv) Requirement for panel members to record their own comments prior to the meeting and submit to the City to assist in minute preparation; and v) Extending the timeframe for the submission of information to the Design Review Panel meeting to 14 days (currently 10 days). vi) Remove the requirement for Council to appoint the Chair and Deputy Chair of the Design Review Panel, instead delegating this task to the City’s administration to improve efficiency and to align with the City’s approach to its other Advisory Groups and typical practices and procedures used by other Local Governments.

6 In addition to the changes proposed to the Policy, the City has also examined the administration of the Design Review Panel including a review of procedures and practices, and has made a number of changes that will improve efficiency and reduce the overall time spent organising and administering Design Review Panel meetings. A copy of the amended Policy (tracked change and clean version) forms Attachments 1 and 2 to this report.

Page 49 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel CD-017-21 and Assessment of Significant Development

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

CONSIDERATIONS

Legal Compliance

7 The principle legislation which sets the broad framework for town planning and therefore consideration of Local Planning Policies is the Planning and Development Act 2005 and subsequent regulations – Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.

8 The relevant section of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 that applies to the advertising of Local Planning Policies by Local Government is Schedule 2, Part 2, Division 2, Clause 4 of the ‘Deemed provisions for Local Planning Schemes’.

9 The ‘Terms and Reference’ detailed in the Policy sets out the administration, role and function of the Design Review Panel. The Design Review Panel is an ‘advisory’ Panel only and does not carry statutory weight as if it were a ‘Committee’ established under the Local Government Act 1995.

Policy Implications

10 The report proposes to amend Local Planning Policy LP.06 – Design Review Panel and Assessment of Significant Development, to provide greater scope for the Panel to consider broader Planning Applications that are of built form or urban design significance. The Policy aims to improve design excellence, and assist the City in its assessment of significant urban design and built form developments.

Financial Considerations

Business Plan

11 The preparation, review and administration of Local Planning Policies is identified as a core service in the City’s Planning Service Business Plan.

Internal Budget

12 Under the City Planning Budget, a total of $55,000 is set aside annually to cover the operation of the Design Review Panel, which is used primarily to cover the cost of employing panel members to carry out the duties and functions of the panel. Currently it is estimated that each meeting which occurs monthly incurs an expense of approximately $4,000 per sitting with additional budget set aside for instances where a second meeting is scheduled within the month which may occur on demand. Currently, the City recoups part of this cost by levying a fee on the Applicant for the Design Review meeting. This fee breakdown is scheduled below and allows for three sittings of the Design Review Panel: a) $147 for development up to $2.5m in value; b) $250 for development with a value between $2.5m and $5m; c) $500 for development in value that is greater than $5m but less than $21.5m; and d) $750 for development that is greater in value than $21.5m.

13 The fee levied is well below the cost for administering the Design Review Panel; this was proposed initially to encourage applicants’ to utilise the Panel prior to lodging significant developments. As Design Review processes are now a common part of the planning process throughout the State, it is proposed that the fees be increased to recoup a larger proportion of the City’s cost (to be considered by Council as part of the 2021/22 Budgets Schedule of Fees and Charges). To this end the following fees are proposed:

Page 50 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel CD-017-21 and Assessment of Significant Development

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

a) $550 for development up to $2.5m in value; b) $650 for development with a value between $2.5m and $5m; c) $800 for development in value that is greater than $5m but less than $21.5m; and d) $950 for development that is greater in value than $21.5m.

14 The proposed increases, whilst appearing significant, are modest against the cost for administering the Design Review Panel.

Asset Management

15 Not applicable.

Sustainability Considerations

16 The amended Local Planning Policy LP.06 – Design Review Panel and Assessment of Significant Development, contributes towards the achievement of the City’s Sustainability objectives as follows: a) Sustainability Principle No.1 (Commitment to Innovation, Leadership and continued improvement) – the amended Policy ensures that the City remains on the leading edge of promoting excellence in design quality in both urban design and built form. b) Sustainability Principle No. 4 (Commitment to climate responsive community development) – The amended Policy will assist the City’s endeavour to improve design, contributing to improved climate responsive and environmentally sustainable development.

Consultation

17 The amended Local Planning Policy LP.06 – Design Review Panel and Assessment of Significant Development has been reviewed in consultation with the City’s Strategic and Statutory Planning teams.

18 If adopted by Council, the amended Local Planning Policy will be advertised for public comment for a period of 21 days. Public advertising will be in the form of a ‘Public Notice’ in the Local Newspaper and a notification on the ‘out for comment’ section of the City’s website. In addition to the public consultation, a copy of the Local Planning Policy will be referred to the Department for Planning, Lands and Heritage and City of Gosnells for comment.

Page 51 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel CD-017-21 and Assessment of Significant Development

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

Other Considerations or Risks

Mitigation/ Consequence Consequence Overall Risk/ Risk/ Opportunity Consequences X = Actions Likelihood Rating Opportunity The amended Officer Policy can be Advertising of Recommendation advertised for the Policy in approved by the High public accordance Likely Significant Council (positive consultation with the (Opportunity) outcomes) before further Planning Opportunity A consideration by Regulations. Council. The Policy clearly articulates the Officer Community and benefits of the Recommendation Development Policy for the approved by the Industry has Community. Medium Unlikely Moderate Council (negative concerns for the The City will (Risk) outcomes) Policy, its communicate Risk B objectives and with the impacts. community during the consultation process. The report Officer clearly Public Advertising Recommendation articulates the of the Local Medium deferred by the benefits of Unlikely Moderate Planning Policy is (Risk) Council amending the delayed. Risk C Local Planning Policy. The Policy amendments The report Officer would not be clearly Recommendation adopted limiting articulates the Medium declined by the Unlikely Moderate the scope of the benefits of (Risk) Council policy to achieve amending the Risk D broader design Local Planning excellence Policy. objectives.

COMMENT

19 The proposed amendments to Local Planning Policy LP.06 – Design Review Panel and Significant Development, follows the first comprehensive review of the Policy and Panel since it commenced operation in November 2016.

20 The Policy aligns with the WAPC’s Design Review Guide with the ‘Terms and Reference’ of the Design Review Panel modelled on the Guide, ensuring maximum efficiency and effectiveness in terms of administration. The City has also reviewed its procedures for preparing for, and administering Design Review Panels which has streamlined the process and achieved a number of efficiencies reducing the time spent by staff in administering Design Review Panel meetings.

21 It is recommended that the changes proposed to the Local Planning Policy LP06 – Design Review Panel and Assessment of Significant Development be adopted for the purposes of public consultation

Page 52 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel CD-017-21 and Assessment of Significant Development

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

and submissions considered prior to final determination of the Policy by Council. As part of the advertising process it is considered necessary and prudent that the Local Planning Policy be referred to the Department for Planning, Lands and Heritage and the City of Gosnells for their consideration and comment.

VOTING REQUIREMENT

22 Simple majority

AGENDA BRIEFING COMMENT

23 Not applicable.

Page 53 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel CD-017-21 and Assessment of Significant Development

Item CD-017-21 - Attachment 1 Draft Review - LP.06 Design review Panel 2019 Track Change Version

Policy

Design Review Panel and Assessment of Significant Title: Code: LP.06 Developments

l. To detail the types of development proposals that will be referred to the Design Review Panel (DRP); 2. Outline the information to be provided by the applicant to enable an assessment by the DRP, and the requirement for the applicant to address the advice provided by the DRP; Pu rpose or Objective: 3. Outline the matters to be considered by the DRP in providing advice to the applicant and the local government on the design quality of the development; and 4. To detail relevant administrative requirements in relation to the operation of the DRP, including the format for the DRP proceedings.

• Planning and Development (Loca l Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015 Reference Documents: • City of Ca nning Local Planning Scheme No. 42

Policy Statement

This policy sets out the parameters for assessment of significant developments within the local government to optimise land use and design quality outcomes.

1 Scope This policy applies to applicants, the City of Canning's (local government's) officers and DRP members in relation to all proposals for significant development that are to be determined by a delegated officer of the local government, the Council or an external decision making authority.

2 Definitions Unless otherwise defined, words and expressions in this policy are as defined in Part 6 of the City of Canning local Planning Scheme No. 42 (the Scheme), the Planning and Development Act 2005, State Planning Policy 7.0 Design of the Built Environment {SPP 7.0), State Planning Policy 7.3- Residential Design Codes of WA (R-Codes), or as defined below:

Delegated Officer An officer of the local government's Statutory Planning function who, under the local government's Delegations Register, has authority to make a determination or recom mendation on the proposed development or planning proposal.

Design Review Assessment Verbal and/or written advice provided by the DR P in the format specified in this policy.

Development Review Panel (DRP) A specia lised group of consultants appointed by the Council in the manner and for the purposes specified in this policy, which provides professional and technical advice to the local government's officers and the Council.

DRP Primary Member DRP members, including the Chair and Deputy Chair, who are invited to attend a DRP meeting.

City of Canning Policy LP.06 - DRP and Assessment of Significant Development Page 1 of9

Page 54 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel and CD-017-21 Assessment of Significant Development

Item CD-017-21 - Attachment 1 Draft Review - LP.06 Design review Panel 2019 Track Change Version

DRP Alternate Member DRP members who may be invited to attend a DRP meeting if a DRP primary member is unavailable for the schedu led DRP meeting.

Significant Development Any proposed development, where at least one of the following criteria applies: a) Multiple dwelling, aA4 mixed use developments, and commercial and shopping centres equal to or in excess of $2.Sm in development value; that caA'lpFise A'ISFe than lQ l:lnits; or b) Development that is three storeys or more in height; or c) Any application that is eligible for consideration by the Development Assessment Panel (or Joint Development Assessment Panel), pursuant to Part 2, Section 5 and 6 of the Planning and Development (Development Assessment Panels) Regulations 2011; or d) Any Precinct Plans, Activity Centre Plans or Structure Plans; or e) Development not of the kind referred to in iteA'IS (1 2) above, but which in the opinion of the delegated officer is: i. Of a complex or contentious nature; ii. Likely to be of significant interest to the community; ii i. Involves unusual or unconventional design elements; or iv. Is likely to benefit from referral to the DRP.

Written Planning Advice The provision of written advice from the local government's Statutory (Pre -Application Requests) Planning function in response to an application for written planning advice on a preliminary development proposal subm itted by a property development company or an individual.

3 Design Review Format

3.1 Information to be provided by the applicant a) In order to gain maximum benefit from a design review assessment the applicant should provide a sufficient amount of information that would enable the DRP to conduct an assessment of the proposal. This should include, pF9¥iee as A'll:lCh infuFA'latien as passil;i le incll:lding, but not limited to, the following: i. Plans and elevations that are legible and to scale with an appropriate level of detail including, but not limited to, dimensions, a north point and site plan; and finishee ilear le·,els; ii. Supporting documentation, including 30 images or perspective drawings; and reports/certifications addressing discretionary matters (if available); iii. A brief statement addressing how the development achieves the relevant design principles listed in Part 5 of this policy; iv. A brief statement on how the DR P's previous comments have been addressed (for developments undergoing a further review); v. A completed Request for Written Planning Advice form or Development Application (DA) form; and vi. Payment of the applicable fee for a Written Planning Advice or Development Application as per the local government's Schedule of Planning Fees and Charges. b) The above-mentioned information is to be submitted to the local government at least 104 days prior to the DRP meeting date, to be advised by the local government's relevant delegated officer.

3.2 Timing for the DRP Meeting A Design Review can take place prior to the formal lodgement of an application for consideration (preferable) or after the subm ission of an application to the City for formal assessment. City of Can ning Po licy LP.06 - DRP and Assessment of Significant Development Page 2 of9

Page 55 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel and CD-017-21 Assessment of Significant Development

Item CD-017-21 - Attachment 1 Draft Review - LP.06 Design review Panel 2019 Track Change Version

3.3 Presentation by the applicant to the DRP

The applicant is to present plans and provide relevant information for the development proposal, in a maximum 10 minute presentation to the DRP (or longer as agreed by the DRP), including: a) The aspirations of the project, contextual understanding and how the project sits within and relates to its surroundings; and b) How the development addresses relevant development requirements, including any variations to 'deemed-to-comply' provisions and the design principles outlined in Part 5 of this policy.

3.4 i:ermat far DRP desigR re\•iew ad•.iiee Design Principles and DRP Advice

The proponent and the Design Review Panel will take into consideration the following design principles (but is not limited to) when assessing a development proposed for apartment and mixed use development as defined in Part 4, SPP 7.0 'Design Principle' from the WAPC's Design Review Guide: A sl!mmary of Elesign review comments anEI recommenElations from the DRP are to be 13roviEleEI to the a13131icant in verbal anEl/or written format. The s1,1mmary will incl1,1Ele aEl,,.ice in relation to a str1,1ct1,1re 13lan or local 13lanning 13olicy (if a1313licable), general comments anEI have regarEI to the following baseEI on SPP 7.0: a) The following 'Design principles': i. Context and character; ii. Landscape quality; iii. Built form and sca le; iv. Functionality and build quality;

V. Sustainability; vi. Amenity; vii. Legibility; viii. Safety; ix. Community; and x. Aesthetics.

b) In addition to principles identified in Clause 3.4 (a), the Design Review Panel will take into consideration the following when assessing a development proposal (apartment, mixed use or otherwise): i. Other relevant State Planning Policies; ii. City's Local Town Planning Scheme; iii. Any Structure Plan or Precinct Plan that is applicable; iv. Any relevant Local Planning Policy and/or Local Development Plan; v. Any other policy, State and Local that is applicable.

c) In its assessment the DRP is required to articulate the following: Design assessment; i. Design strengths, and ii. How the proposal can be improved.

d) The proponents and the DRP will take into consideration the following when assessing a Structure Plan: i. Liveable Neighbourhoods Policy; ii. Design WA documentation reflective of Structure Plan and Neighbourhood design; and ii i. Relevant Federal, State and Local Environment and Planning Policies.

d) On conclusion of its assessment the DRP is to provide at least one of the following recommendations; (at least 1 of the below); i. The design is supported, or City of Can ni ng Po licy LP.06 - DRP and Assessment of Significant Development Page 3 of 9

Page 56 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel and CD-017-21 Assessment of Significant Development

Item CD-017-21 - Attachment 1 Draft Review - LP.06 Design review Panel 2019 Track Change Version

ii. The design is supported and is of sufficiently high quality to meet relevant scheme provisions in re lation to discretionary matters, such as density and plot ratio bonuses or building height (i.e. for Development Proposals), or iii. The design is supported subject to the following conditions, or iv. The design is not supported, or v. As the design is at concept stage only, the plans have not progressed to a stage where a recommendation can be provided.

3.5 Design Review Process The design review process will typically follow the format detailed below:

15 Minutes Chairperson welcomes the panel, introduces City officers and discusses key issues with the proposal - J,.. 5 Minutes Chairperson welcomes and seeks introduction of the proponent team

■ J, 15 Minutes Proponent presents and overview of the proposal

■ J,. 45 Minutes Chairperson invites Panel members to debate and/or provide individual comment on the proposal. J, 5 Minutes Chairperson summarises Panel comments, confirms advice and recommendation

4 Implementation of DRP Design Review Advice by the Applicant and Local Government

a) A Planning Ele¥elapment proposal lodged for a design review by the DRP and/or determination by the responsible decision making authority is to be prepared by the applicant with due regard to the design principles outlined in Clause 5(1) of this pol icy, and previous DRP design review advice (where applicable). b) In making a determination or recommendation on a Planning Elevelapment proposal, the local government's delegated officer will have due regard to the provision of this policy and the DRP design review advice.

5 DRP Terms of Reference

5.1 Context

a) The local government's Statutory Planning function is responsible for processing requests for written planning advice (pre-application requests) and DAs. The provision of written planning advice for pre­ application requests is checked and issued by the local government's delegated officers. Determination City of Canning Policy LP.06 - DRP and Assessment of Significant Development Page4 of9

Page 57 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel and CD-017-21 Assessment of Significant Development

Item CD-017-21 - Attachment 1 Draft Review - LP.06 Design review Panel 2019 Track Change Version

of Planning Applications GA& is made by the responsible decision-making authority, subject to the relevant State Government Instrument of Delegation and/or the local government's Instrument of Delegation. Responsible authorities may include the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC), Metro Central Joint Developm ent Assessment Panel (JDAP), the local government or the delegated officer. b) Processing of pre-application requests and DAs must occur in accordance with the relevant statutory planning requirements. This includes assessing and providing advice on significant developments as per the format specified in this policy. c) The DRP is only advisory in nature and is not a committee established pursuant to Section 5.8 of the Local Government Act 1995.

5.2 Objectives

The DRP will be a key sou rce of advice to the Council, local government officers and applicants in relation to the assessment of significant developments, as per the format specified in this policy.

5.3 Governance

d) Role of the DRP i. To provide expert and technical advice to proponents, City Officers and in relevant circumstances to Council in relation to the design of planning applications listed as 'significant development' in this policy or other applications or proposals as requested by the City. iA Tl=le DRP is establisl=leel far tl=le f:!UFJ:l8Ses ef tl=lis f:)elicy; te f:)re11iele ElesigA assessmeAt feeelback eA Elevelef:)meAt f:!F8f:l8Sals. ii. The DRP performs an advisory function and does not make decisions on proposals. f:)re11ieles f:)refessienal aAEl techAical aelvice in a fermal manAer, te the lecal gevemmeAt's efficers aml tl=le ~ e) Role of the Individual Members i. Each member brings to the role a wea lth of experience and a capacity to add significant value to the opportunities and challenges facing the community, particularly as it relates to the quality of the built form environment. f) Membership i. Membership will comprise of a panel of up to 8& external members. ii. The local government will seek to engage external members so that each DRP meeting will consist of a minimum of 2 4 members from the panel. ii i. The members selected for a DRP will attend as an expert to provide advice and the meetings themselves will be chaired by the nominated Panel member. iv. The local government will engage external members who have an appropriate architecture, landscape architecture, Town Planning or urban design qualification comprising: (a) Particular experience and expertise in 1 or more of the areas of: urban and regional planning, urban design, energy efficient building design and sustainable development; and (b) Relevant skills and experience to provide independent expert advice. (c) Skills and experience in design and design review of major development of the type and scale which the DRP will be required to review. (d) Eligibility for membership to a relevant professional association. g) Cha ir of the Design Review Panel i. The AemiAateEI Cha ir of the DRP will be a member of the DRP panel aAEl ef:)uty Chair will be inviteEI te all ORP meetings, whereb'/ the thirEI anEI feblrth panel member will be se lecteEI by the Cl=lair as eletaileel iA clause 7.3(el)!ii) ef this f:)elic•,'. ii. The Chair of the Design review Panel is to ensure that proceedings are conducted in an orderly and proper manner and within the timeframes set by the Design review format. Where necessary the Chair is to facilitate discussion and responses to questions raised during the review process and to make opening and closing remarks for the review process.

City of Canning Policy LP.06 - DRP and Assessment of Significant Development Page 5 of9

Page 58 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel and CD-017-21 Assessment of Significant Development

Item CD-017-21 - Attachment 1 Draft Review - LP.06 Design review Panel 2019 Track Change Version

In aeeition to tl-:ie aeo~•e, tl-:ie Cl-:iair is to 1-:iaYe e11tensi•1e skills in eesign revie•.v, facilitating ans eirecting professional meetings, aeility to proviee eirect ae'1ice in a collegial ans courteous manner ans aeility to integrate a range of Yiews ans comments.

V. A person wl-:io is currently employee ey tl-:ie local go•,.ernment or wl-:io is an electee memeer is not eligiele for appointment as a memeer oftl-:ie ORP. 1-:l) Cl-:iair ans Oeputy Cl-:iair i. Tl-:ie Cl-:iair ans Oeputy Cl-:iair will ee appointee ey tl-:ie Council. Yi. Tl-:ie Cl-:iair or Oepl:lty Cl-:iair (wl-:iere acting in tl-:ie role of Cl-:iair) is al:ltl-:iorisee to select tl-:ie tl-:iire ORP primary memeer from tl-:ie ORP memeersl-:iip panel for a particular ORP meeting. In selecting tl-:ie tl-:iire ORP primary memeer tl-:ie Cl-:iair is to giYe consieeration to tl-:ie :

T11pe of eeYelopment witl-:i respect to tl-:ie slEills, e11pertise ans l~nowleege of tl-:ie eiEternal memeer; ans

~rei;iuency of an external memeer's atteneance at pre•,.iol:ls meetings, invol11ing tl-:ie Sl:lbject eeYelopment. e) Selection of Panel Members i. The City will select the Design Review Panel members required to undertake a review of the Planning Application. The number of members and their expertise required will be at the discretion of the City but should not be less than 2 members. i) DRP Support i. The City will nominate one of its officers to provide support for administration and note taking.

Local go•,Eecutive Manager City Planning Statutory Planning stating their intention to resign from the DRP. Resignations will be acknowledged by the Execufa•e Manager City Planning Statutory Planning or delegated officer.

5.4 Meetings

a) Scheduled Monthly and Special Meetings i. The DRP will meet monthly, or special meetings may be convened to deal with specific issues; ii. A scheduled monthly meeting will be limited to a maximum of three hours duration unless the DRP resolves to extend the meeting to a particular time or the completion of business; and

City of Can ni ng Policy LP.06 - DRP and Assessment of Significant Development Page 6 of 9

Page 59 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel and CD-017-21 Assessment of Significant Development

Item CD-017-21 - Attachment 1 Draft Review - LP.06 Design review Panel 2019 Track Change Version

iii. The location, date and starting t ime for meetings will be advised on the agenda. b) Attendance and Quorum i. The quorum for each meeting will be no less than 2 DRP members. If a quorum is not present within 30 minutes of the time appointed for the commencement ofthe meeting, the meeting shall lapse; ii. The 24 (minimum) primary members, iAclUE:liAg the Chair, Oeputy Chair aAEI thirEI aAEI feurth memeer selected by the City ~ - will be invited to attend a DRP meeting. Where a primary member is unable to attend a meeting, subject to sufficient notice being given, the local government's EMeeutive Manager City Planning Statutory PlaAAiAg, iA liaisoA with the Chair, will invite an alternate member; iii. A member who is unable to attend a particular meeting is to advise the DRP Support and Chair in advance of the meeting date; iv. A member who w ill be absent from more than three successive meetings is to apply in writing the DRP Support and Chair for a leave of absence; v. DRP meetings are not open to members of the public. f) The loeal govemmeAt's EMeeutive MaAager Statutory PlaAAiAg or ElelegateEI offieer will atteAEI the meetiAg to proviEle a eriefiAg to the ORP memeers OR eaeh proposal fer eoAsiEleratioA aAEI will iEleAtify aAy partieular aspeets upoA whieh eommeAts aAEI aElviee are requires. vii. The DRP Support will attend the meeting to record the minutes; and viii. The applicant and their architect, and other relevant specialist involved in the design, will be invited to present their proposal to the DRP at the relevant part of the meeting. c) Agendas and Minutes i. The DRP Support will email a copy of the agenda, development plans and supporting documentation to DRP members at least five working days prior to the date of the meeting; ii. The DRP members will be required to record their comments on a form provided by the DRP support prior to the DRP meeting and submit these comments to the DRP support following the DRP meeting to assist in minute taking; iii. Each meeting shall be properly recorded by the taking of minutes by the DRP Support in the format specified in this policy, along with any other re levant comments and recommendations; iv. The minutes will record consensus agreement on actions and any points of agreement/disagreement. They will not reflect verbatim discussion on issues or matters discussed during debate prior to consensus agreement being reached. At the end of each meeting, following departure of the applicant(s), the Chair will read out the agreed actions and any points of agreement to the meeting to ensure they accurately reflect the consensus view; v. The minutes will be checked and approved by the Chair and distributed to all members and the applicant within five working days after the date of the meeting; and vi. The minutes will be provided to the applicable responsible decision-making authority, with a summary of whether the application ha s addressed the relevant issues or matters.

5.5 Code of Conduct a) Each member of the DRP is required to observe the local government Code of Conduct; b) Members should act in a professional and responsible manner with the information they obtain as a DRP requires openness and honesty to function well; c) Members should feel free to express their opinions and views without fear of recrimination. It is therefore important that members respect each other (often despite differences) and work together to create an open and trusting atmosphere; and d) It is essential for members to accept collective responsibility, and remain loyal to decisions of the DRP, even where they may not have agreed with the final decision.

Ci ty of Can ning Po licy LP.06 - DRP and Assessment of Significant Development Page 7 of9

Page 60 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel and CD-017-21 Assessment of Significant Development

Item CD-017-21 - Attachment 1 Draft Review - LP.06 Design review Panel 2019 Track Change Version

5.6 Confidentiality and Privacy Members may have contact with confidential or personal information retained by the local government. If so, members are required to maintain the security of any confidential or personal information and not access, use or remove any information, unless the member is authorised to do so.

5.7 Conflict of Interest a) All members need to be aware that any conflict of interest needs to be recognised . On receipt of the agenda, if a member has an interest in the matter, then the member is required to declare the interest and a replacement alternate member wil I be called to fill in for that item or meeting. The minutes of the meeting will record the declaration and note the vacancy during discussion. Once the matter has concluded, the Chair will invite the member back into the meeting. If a member is unsure whether they have an interest in a matter, they are encouraged to raise the issue with the senior local government officer in attendance at the meeting; and b) Any person who has a financial and proximity interest in a matter shall exclude themselves from the room and not participate in that part of the meeting.

5.8 Operational Funding and Remuneration a) The DRP is to provide advice in response to the requirements of this policy, which is a statutory planning instrument; b) The local government's operational budget contains funds for engaging members of the DRP; c) Members shall be paid an hourly sitting fee for attendance at DRP meetings (to a maximum of three hours per sitting). The sitting fee shall be based on the duration of the meeting. The fee is to be reviewed annually, in conjunction with the annual review of the local government's Schedule of Fees and Charges; d} The fee for out of meeting costs (initial review of proposal, notes, site visit and travel commitments), shall be set at 1.5 hours (at the hourly sitting fee rate) for each listed DRP meeting, unless extenuating circumstances require add itional time and payment and this is agreed to by the local government prior to the work being undertaken; e) The Chair will be paid an additional hour (at the hourly sitting rate) outside of the meeting to accommodate for their additional responsibilities; and f) If a member of DRP appears on the local government's behalf as an expert witness at the State Administrative Tribunal or to assist in the presentation of the local government's recommendation to a JDAP, the member is to be paid at an agreed hourly rate consistent with the qualifications, experience and professional status of the member.

5.9 Media Protocol Members are not to speak to the media in their capacity as DRP members. In accordance with the local government's media pol icy, the Mayor is the only person permitted to speak to the media on behalfof the local government.

Governance References

. Planning and Development Act 2005; . Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015; Statutory Compliance and . City of Canning local Planning Scheme No. 42.

. 015/141161 - Request for Written Plann ing Advice form; and Process Links . 014/269894- Application for Deve lopment Approval form

City of Canning Policy LP.06 - DRP and Assessment of Significant Development Page 8 of 9

Page 61 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel and CD-017-21 Assessment of Significant Development

Item CD-017-21 - Attachment 1 Draft Review - LP.06 Design review Panel 2019 Track Change Version

Policy Administration

-Program Officer title Date la st approved-

Canning Sustainable Development Director Canning Sustainable Development 15 October 2019 ,_ - - - Version Decision Reference Synopsis Delegation No.

1 SD-014-19 Final adoption

City of Canning Policy LP.06 - DRP and Assessment of Significant Development Page 9 of 9

Page 62 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel and CD-017-21 Assessment of Significant Development

Item CD-017-21 - Attachment 2 Draft Review - LP.06 Design review Panel 2019 Clean Version

Policy

Design Review Panel and Assessment of Significant Title: Code: LP.06 Developments

1. To detail the types of development proposals that will be referred to the Design Review Panel (DRP); 2. Outline the information to be provided by the applicant to enable an assessment by the DRP, and the requirement for the applicant to address the advice provided by the DRP; Purpose or Objective: 3. Outline the matters to be considered by the DRP in providing advice to the applicant and the local government on the design quality of the development; and 4. To detail relevant administrative requirements in relation to the operation of the DRP, including the format for the DRP proceedings.

• Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regu lations 2015 Reference Documents: • City of Canning Local Planning Scheme No. 42

Policy Statement

This policy sets out the parameters for assessment of significant developments within the local government to optimise land use and design quality outcomes.

1 Scope This policy applies to applicants, the City of Canning's (local government's) officers and DRP members in relation to all proposals for significant development that are to be determined by a delegated officer of the local government, the Council or an external decision making authority.

2 Definitions Unless otherwise defined, words and expressions in this policy are as defined in Part 6 of the City of Canning local Planning Scheme No. 42 (the Scheme), the Planning and Development Act 2005, State Planning Policy 7.0 Design of the Built Environment (SPP 7.0), State Planning Policy 7.3- Residential Design Codes of WA (R-Codes), or as defined below:

Delegated Officer An officer of the local government's Statutory Planning function who, under the local government's Delegations Register, has authority to make a determination or recommendation on the proposed development or planning proposal.

Design Review Assessment Verbal and/or written advice provided by the DRP in the format specified in this policy.

Development Review Panel (DRP) A specialised group of consultants appointed by the Council in the manner and for the purposes specified in this policy, which provides professional and technical advice to the local government's officers and the Council.

DRP Primary Member DRP members, including the Chair and Deputy Chair, who are invited to attend a DRP meeting.

City of Canning Policy LP .06- DRP and Assessment of Significant Development Page 1 of9

Page 63 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel and CD-017-21 Assessment of Significant Development

Item CD-017-21 - Attachment 2 Draft Review - LP.06 Design review Panel 2019 Clean Version

DRP Alternate Member DRP members who may be invited to attend a DRP meeting if a DRP primary member is unavailable for the scheduled DRP meeting.

Significant Development Any proposed development, where at least one of the following criteria applies: a) Multiple dwelling, mixed use developments, andcommercial and shopping centres equal to or in excess of $2.Sm in development value; or b) Development that is three storeys or more in height; or c) Any application that is eligible for cons ideration by the Development Assessment Panel (or Joint Development Assessment Panel), pursuant to Part 2, Section 5 and 6 of the Planning and Development (Development Assessment Panels) Regulations 2011; or d) Any Precinct Plans, Activity Centre Plans or Structure Plans; or e) Deve lopment not of the kind referred to above, but which in the opinion of the delegated officer is: i. Of a complex or contentious nature; ii. Likely to be of significant interest to the community; iii. Involves unusual or unconventional design elements; or iv. Is likely to benefit from referral to the DRP.

Written Planning Advice The provision of written advice from the local government's Statutory (Pre-Application Requests) Planning function in response to an application for written planning advice on a preliminary development proposal submitted by a property development company or an individual.

3 Design Review Format

3.1 Information to be provided by the applicant

a) In order to gain maximum benefit from a design review assessment the applicant should provide a sufficient amount of information that would enable the DRP to conduct an assessment of the proposal. This should include, but not limited to, the following: i. Plans and elevations that are legible and to scale with an appropriate level of detail including, but not limited to, dimensions, a north point and site plan; ii. Supporting documentation, including 3D images or perspective drawings; and reports/certifications addressing discretionary matters (if available); iii. A brief statement addressing how the development achieves the relevant design principles listed in Part 5 of this policy; iv. A brief statement on how the DR P's previous comments have been addressed (for developments undergoing a further review); v. A completed Request for Written Planning Advice form or Development Application (DA) form; and vi. Payment of the applicable fee for a Written Planning Advice or Development Application as per the loca l government's Schedule of Planning Fees and Charges. b) The above-mentioned information is to be submitted to the local government at least 104 days prior to the DRP meeting date, to be advised by the local government's relevant delegated officer.

3.2 Timing for the DRP Meeting A Design Review can take place prior to the formal lodgement of an application for consideration (preferable) or after the submission of an application to the City for formal assessment. City of Canning Policy LP.06- DRP and Assessment of Significant Development Page 2 of 9

Page 64 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel and CD-017-21 Assessment of Significant Development

Item CD-017-21 - Attachment 2 Draft Review - LP.06 Design review Panel 2019 Clean Version

3.3 Presentation by the applicant to the DRP

The applicant is to present plans and provide relevant information for the development proposal, in a maximum 10 minute presentation to the DRP (or longer as agreed by the DRP), including: a) The aspirations of the project, contextual understanding and how the project sits within and relates to its surroundings; and b) How the development addresses relevant development requirements, including any variations to 'deemed-to-comply' provisions and the design principles outlined in Part 5 of this policy.

3.4 Design Principles and DRP Advice

The proponent and the Design Review Panel will take into consideration the following design principles (but is not limited to) when assessing a development proposed for apartment and mixed use development as defined in Part 4, SPP 7.0 'Design Principle' from the WAPC's Design Review Guide: a) The following 'Design principles': i. Context and character; ii. Landscape quality; iii. Built form and scale; iv. Functionality and build quality;

V. Sustainability; vi. Amenity; vii. Legibility; viii. Safety; ix. Community; and

X. Aesthetics.

b) In addition to principles identified in Clause 3.4 (a), the Design Review Panel will take into consideration the following when assessing a development proposal (apartment, mixed use or otherwise): i. Other relevant State Planning Policies; ii. City's Local Town Planning Scheme; iii. Any Structure Plan or Precinct Plan that is applicable; iv. Any relevant Local Planning Policy and/or Local Deve lopment Plan; v. Any other po licy, State and Local that is applicable.

c) In its assessment the DRP is required to articulate the following: Design assessment; i. Design strengths, and ii. How the proposal can be improved.

d) The proponents and the DRP will take into consideration the following when assessing a Structure Plan: i. Liveable Neighbourhoods Policy; ii. Design WA documentation reflective of Structure Plan and Neighbourhood design; and iii. Relevant Federal, State and Local Environment and Planning Policies.

e) On conclusion of its assessment the DRP is to provide at least one of the following recommendations:- i. The design is supported, or

City of Canning Policy LP.06- DRP and Assessment of Significant Development Page 3 of 9

Page 65 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel and CD-017-21 Assessment of Significant Development

Item CD-017-21 - Attachment 2 Draft Review - LP.06 Design review Panel 2019 Clean Version

ii. The design is supported and is of sufficiently high quality to meet re levant scheme provisions in relation to discretionary matters, such as density and plot ratio bonuses or building height (i.e. for Development Proposals), or iii. The design is supported subject to the following conditions, or iv. The design is not supported, or v. As the design is at concept stage only, the plans have not progressed to a stage where a recommendation can be provided.

3.5 Design Review Process The design review process will typically follow the format detailed below:

15 Minutes Chairperson welcomes the panel, introduces City officers and discusses key issues with the proposal - J, - 5 M inutes Chairperson welcomes and seeks introduction of the proponent team

■

15 Minutes Proponent presents and• overview of the proposal ■ !. 45 Minutes Chairperson invites Panel members to debate and/or provide individual comment on the proposal

■ J, 5 Minutes Chairperson summarises Panel comments, confirms advice and recommendation

4 Implementation of DRP Design Review Advice by the Applicant and Local Government

a) A Planning proposal lodged for a design review by the DRP and/or determination by the responsible decision making authority is to be prepared by the applicant with due regard to the design principles outlined in Clause 5(1) ofthis policy, and previous DRP design review advice (where applicable). b) In making a determination or recommendation on a Planning proposal, the local government's delegated officer will have due regard to the provision of this policy and the DRP design review advice.

5 DRP Terms of Reference

5.1 Context a) The local government's Statutory Planning function is responsible for processing requests for written planning advice (pre-application requests) and DAs. The provision of written planning advice for pre­ application req uests is checked and issued by the local government's delegated officers. Determination

City of Canning Policy LP.06- DRP and Assessment of Significant Development Page 4 of 9

Page 66 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel and CD-017-21 Assessment of Significant Development

Item CD-017-21 - Attachment 2 Draft Review - LP.06 Design review Panel 2019 Clean Version

of Planning Applications is made by the responsible decision-making authority, subject to the relevant State Government Instrument of Delegation and/or the local government's Instrument of Delegation. Responsible authorities may include the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC), Metro Central Joint Development Assessment Panel (JDAP), the local government or the delegated officer. b) Processing of pre-application requests and DAs must occur in accordance with the relevant statutory planning requirements. This includes assessing and providing advice on significant developments as per the format specified in this policy. c) The DRP is only advisory in nature and is not a committee established pursuant to Section 5.8 of the local Government Act 1995.

5.2 Objectives

The DRP will be a key source of advice to the Council, local government officers and applicants in relation to the assessment of significant developments, as per the format specified in this pol icy.

5.3 Governance a) Role of the DRP i. To provide expert and technical advice to proponents, City Officers and in relevant circumstances to Council in relation to the design of planning applications listed as 'significant development' in this policy or other applications or proposals as requested by the City. ii. The DRP performs an advisory function and does not make decisions on proposals. b) Role ofthe Individual Members i. Each member brings to the role a wealth of experience and a capacity to add significant value to the opportunities and challenges facing the community, particularly as it relates to the quality of the built form environment. c) Membership i. Membership will comprise of a panel of up to eight external members. ii. The local government will seek to engage external members so that each DRP meeting will consist of a minimum of two members from the panel. iii. The members selected for a DRP will attend as an expert to provide advice and the meetings themselves will be chaired by the nominated Panel member. iv. The local government will engage external members who have an appropriate architecture, landscape architecture, Town Planning or urban design qualification comprising: (a) Particular experience and expertise in 1 or more of the areas of: urban and regional planning, urban design, energy efficient building design and sustainable development; and (b) Relevant skills and experience to provide independent expert advice. (c) Skills and experience in design and design review of major development of the type and scale which the DRP will be required to review. (d) Eligibility for membership to a relevant professional association. d) Chair of the Design Review Panel i. The Chair of the DRP will be a member of the DRP panel- ii. The Chair of the Design review Panel is to ensure that proceedings are conducted in an orderly and proper manner and within the timeframes set by the Design review format. Where necessary the Cha ir is to facilitate discussion and responses to questions raised during the review process and to make opening and closing remarks for the review process.

City of Canning Policy LP .06- DRP and Assessment of Significant Development Page 5 of 9

Page 67 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel and CD-017-21 Assessment of Significant Development

Item CD-017-21 - Attachment 2 Draft Review - LP.06 Design review Panel 2019 Clean Version

e) Selection of Panel Members i. The City will select the Design Review Panel members required to undertake a review of the Planning Application. The number of members and their expertise required will be at t he discretion of the City but should not be less than two members. i) DRP Support i. The City will nominate one of its officers to provide support for administration and note taking. ii. The City's officers are not members of the Design Review Panel and do not have any voting rights. iii. The Nominated Support officer will be responsible for: (a) Arranging for administrative support for the DRP, including preparation and distribution of the agenda, notice of meeting and business papers, recording of the minutes, arranging the meeting venue, refreshments and coordinating any presentations; (b) Contacting an alternative DRP member if a primary DRP member is unavailable for the scheduled meeting; and (c) Contacting DRP members in certain circumstances requesting written feedback in relation to minor alterations to plans or subsequent questions/clarifications from the applicant as a result of feedback previously issued by the DRP. j) Term of Office i. The term of appointment for any new member shall be 2 years; ii. A member may be nominated for re-appointment upon the expiry of their term; and iii. Should a vacancy occur during the term of office, the process to fill the causal vacancy will follow the normal process for appointments. k) Resignation A DRP member may resign at any time. The resignation must be in writing and addressed to the local government's Manager City Planning stating their intention to resign fromthe DRP. Resignations will be acknowledged by the Manager City Planning or delegated officer.

5.4 Meetings a) Scheduled Monthly and Special Meetings i. The DRP will meet monthly, or special meetings may be convened to deal with specific issues; ii. A scheduled monthly meeting will be limited to a maximum of three hours duration unless the DRP reso lves to extend the meeting to a particular time or the completion of business; and iii. The location, date and starting time for meetings will be advised on the agenda. b) Attendance and Quorum i. The quorum for each meeting will be no less than 2 DRP members. If a quorum is not present within 30 minutes of the time appointed for the commencement of the meeting, the meeting shall lapse; ii. The 24 (minimum) primary members, selected by the City Gl:la+f, will be invited to attend a DRP meeting. Where a primary member is unable to attend a meeting, subject to sufficient notice being given, the local government's Manager City Planning will invite an alternate member; iii. A member who is unable to attend a particular meeting is to advise the DRP Support and Chair in advance of the meeting date; iv. A member who will be absent from more than three successive meetings is to apply in writing the DRP Support and Chair for a leave of absence; v. DRP meetings are not open to members of the public. vii. The DRP Support will attend the meeting to record the minutes; and viii. The applicant and their architect, and other relevant specialist involved in the design, will be invited to present their proposal to the DRP at the relevant part of the meeting.

City of Canning Policy LP.06- DRP and Assessment of Significant Development Page 6 of 9

Page 68 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel and CD-017-21 Assessment of Significant Development

Item CD-017-21 - Attachment 2 Draft Review - LP.06 Design review Panel 2019 Clean Version

c) Agendas and Minutes i. The DRP Support will email a copy of the agenda, development plans and supporting documentation to DRP members at least five working days prior to the date of the meeting; ii. The DRP members will be required to record their comments on a form provided by the DRP support prior to the DRP meeting and submit these comments to the DRP support following the DR P meeting to assist in minute taking; iii. Each meeting shall be properly recorded by the taking of minutes by the DRP Support in the format specified in this policy, along with any other relevant comments and recommendations; iv. The minutes will record consensus agreement on actions and any points of agreement/disagreement. They will not reflect verbatim discussion on issues or matters discussed during debate prior to consensus agreement being reached . At the end of each meeting, following departure of the applicant(s), the Chair will read out the agreed actions and any points of agreement to the meeting to ensure they accurately reflect the consensus view; v. The minutes will be checked and approved by the Chair and distributed to all members and the applicant within five working days after the date of the meeting; and vi. The minutes will be provided to the applicable responsible decision-making authority, with a summary of whether the application has addressed the relevant issues or matters.

5.5 Code of Conduct

a) Each member of the DRP is required to observe the local government Code of Conduct; b) Members should act in a professional and responsible manner with the information they obtain as a DRP requires openness and honesty to function well; c) Members should feel free to express their opinions and views without fear of recrimination. It is therefore important that members respect each other (often despite differences) and work together to create an open and trusting atmosphere; and d) It is essential for members to accept col lective responsibility, and remain loyal to decisions of the DRP, even where they may not have agreed with the final decision.

City of Canning Policy LP.06- DRP and Assessment of Significant Development Page 7 of9

Page 69 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel and CD-017-21 Assessment of Significant Development

Item CD-017-21 - Attachment 2 Draft Review - LP.06 Design review Panel 2019 Clean Version

5.6 Confidentiality and Privacy Members may have contact with confidential or personal information retained by the local government. If so, members are required to ma intain the security of any confidential or persona l information and not access, use or remove any information, unless the member is authorised to do so.

5. 7 Conflict of Interest a) All members need to be aware that any conflict of interest needs to be recognised . On receipt of the agenda, if a member has an interest in the matter, then the member is required to declare the interest and a replacement alternate member will be called to fill in for that item or meeting. The minutes of the meeting will record the declaration and note the vacancy during discussion. Once the matter has concluded, the Chair will invite the member back into the meeting. If a member is unsure whether they have an interest in a matter, they are encouraged to raise the issue with the senior local government officer in attendance at the meeting; and b) Any person who has a financial and proximity interest in a matter shall exclude themselves from the room and not participate in that part of the meeting.

5.8 Operational Funding and Remuneration

a) The DRP is to provide advice in response to the requirements of this policy, which is a statutory planning instrument; b) The local government's operational budget contains funds for engaging members of the DRP; c) Members shall be paid an hourly sitting fee for attendance at DRP meetings (to a maximum of three hours per sitting). The sitting fee shall be based on the duration of the meeting. The fee is to be reviewed annually, in conjunction with the annual review of the local government's Schedule of Fees and Cha rges; d) The fee for out of meeting costs (initial review of proposal, notes, site visit and travel commitments), shall be set at 1.5 hours (at the hourly sitting fee rate) for each listed DRP meeting, unless extenuating circumstances require additional time and payment and this is agreed to by the local government prior to the work being undertaken; e) The Chair will be paid an additional hour (at the hourly sitting rate) outside of the meeting to accommodate for their additional responsibilities; and f) If a member of DRP appears on the local government's behalf as an expert witness at the State Administrative Tribunal or to assist in the presentation of the local government's recommendation to a JDAP, the member is to be paid at an agreed hourly rate consistent with the qualifications, experience and professional status of the member.

5.9 Media Protocol Members are not to speak to the media in their capacity as DRP members. In accordance with the local government's media policy, the Mayor is the only person permitted to speak to the media on behalfof the local government.

Governance References

Planning and Development Act 2005; Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015; Statutory Compliance and City of Canning Local Planning Scheme No. 42.

D15/141161- Request for Written Planning Advice form; and Process Links D14/269894-Application for Development Approval form

City of Canning Policy LP.06- DRP and Assessment of Significant Development Page 8 of 9

Page 70 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel and CD-017-21 Assessment of Significant Development

Item CD-017-21 - Attachment 2 Draft Review - LP.06 Design review Panel 2019 Clean Version

Policy Administration

Program IOfficer title 1 Date last approved

Canning Sustainable Development Director Canning Sustainable Development Iis October 2019

Version Decision Reference Synopsis 1 Delegation No. 1 SD-014-19 Final adoption I

City of Canning Policy LP .06 - DRP and Assessment of Significant Development Page 9 of 9

Page 71 CD-017-21 Proposed Amendment of Local Planning Policy (LP.06) - Design Review Panel and CD-017-21 Assessment of Significant Development

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

7.4 Director Canning Environment EN-008-21 Loan Funding Agreement - Willetton Basketball Association

PROGRAM: Canning Environment SUB PROGRAM: Office of Canning Environment FILE REF: Q21/239 REPORT DATE: 27 May 2021 REPORTING OFFICER: Warren Bow - Director Canning Environment RESPONSIBLE OFFICER: Warren Bow - Director Canning Environment

Strategic Plan Theme: CONNECT - An inclusive , safe and vibrant community. Community Goal: Viable community groups, clubs and organisations. Council Strategy: Collaboration and partnerships making better use of limited resources and facilities. Authority/Discretion: Executive: The substantial direction setting and oversight role of the Council eg adopting plans and reports, accepting tenders, directing operations, setting and amending budgets. Attachments: Nil.

In Brief: The City of Canning (the City), in conjunction with the Willetton Basketball Association (Inc) (WBA) will have invested more than $16M to deliver the Willetton Sports Precinct (WSP) at Burrendah Park by the end of 2021. Central to the WSP is Willetton Stadium which was funded by the Federal and State Governments, WBA and the City of Canning, which enabled the City to prepare and implement the Burrendah Park Ancillary Works (BPAW) project. These public civil and building works were required around the Stadium to support the expanded building footprint with fire and essential services access, parking for the Stadium, and to provide alternative areas or facilities for sports groups affected or displaced by the Stadium project. Resolutions by Council in December 2016, October 2018 and April 2019 supported the City’s financial contribution to the Willetton Stadium project, the latter resolution approving the use of the City’s approved liquidity facility to cover the WBA’s cash flow deficits during construction of the stadium. In considering the request by WBA in relation to the cash flow deficit during construction, Council was requested to enable the short term lending facility to remain in place for 12 months after construction was complete, with the understanding that any outstanding balance would be converted to a loan. The outstanding balance has now been determined, and Council is requested to approve a loan for the WBA for a period of ten years. Council is asked to support the Officer’s Recommendation as it will crystallise the financial arrangements between the City and WBA, giving both parties certainty and enable the financing arrangements between the parties relating the Willetton Stadium to be finalised. If the Officer’s Recommendation is not supported the WBA would be required to obtain alternate financing arrangements to repay their outstanding balance to the City, which carries the potential for both organisations to sustain reputational damage given the previous resolutions of Council pertaining to this matter.

Page 72 EN-008-21 Loan Funding Agreement - Willetton Basketball Association EN-008-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

EN-008-21 COUNCIL DECISION MOVED Cr Spencer-Teo, SECONDED Ponnuthurai, that Council: 1. Approves the establishment of a loan to Willetton Basketball Association Incorporated as the borrower, of up to $253,157. 2. Approves the budget amendment to the 2020/2021 budget by allocating $253,157 from Municipal Funds, pursuant to Section 6.8 of the Local Government Act 1995. ** 3. Authorises the Mayor and Chief Executive Office to affix the common seal to a Deed of Loan between the City of Canning and the Willetton Basketball Association Incorporated, on terms that are consistent with the Key Terms outlined in this report. **Absolute Majority Required Cr Spencer-Teo moved an Amendment to the Motion, that the wording “subject to the term of the loan being one year” be added to the end of Part 3. Cr Kunze seconded the Amendment. Cr Barry spoke on the Amendment but did not confirm if he was in support or against the Amendment. Cr Ponnuthurai spoke against the Amendment. Cr Kunze raised in accordance with clause 9.15(1) of the Standing Orders Local Law that an alteration to the Amendment be made that reads “subject to the term of the loan being three years”. The Mover had no objection to this change, however Cr Ponnuthurai objected and in accordance with clause 9.15(2) Standing Orders Local Law no alteration occurred. Cr Holland raised in accordance with clause 9.15(1) of the Standing Orders Local Law that an alteration to the Amendment be made that reads “subject to the term of the loan being five years”. The Mover agreed to the change and with no objection from the Seconder or any other Member the change was made to the Amendment to read: “subject to the term of the loan being five years”. AMENDMENT MOVED Cr Spencer-Teo, SECONDED Cr Kunze, that the following wording be added to the end of Part 3 as follows: 3. Authorises the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer to affix the common seal to a Deed of Loan between the City of Canning and the Willetton Basketball Association Incorporated, on terms that are consistent with the Key Terms outlined in this report, subject to the term of the loan being five years. Cr Saberi advised she would move a procedural motion to adjourn the matter to the Ordinary Council Meeting in June 2021 as she felt discussions with the Willetton Basketball Association should occur regarding the change of loan term from 10 years to 5 years, before Council considered the matter. PROCEDURAL MOTION MOVED Cr Saberi, SECONDED Deputy Mayor Jacobs that item EN-008-21 be adjourned to the Ordinary Council Meeting in June 2021. CARRIED 9/1

Page 73 EN-008-21 Loan Funding Agreement - Willetton Basketball Association EN-008-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

Relevant Council Resolutions

Council Meeting and Date Report No Decision SUBSTANTIVE MOTION MOVED Cr Jacobs, SECONDED Cr Kunze, that Council: 1. In accordance with the 2018-2019 Budget, authorises the Chief Executive Officer to enter into a Loan Agreement with WA Treasury Corporation for $2,200,000 (ex GST) for the purpose of funding a direct grant for the Willetton Basketball Association Stadium Expansion Project. 2. In accordance with section 6.20(2) (a), give local public notice of its intention to amend the purpose and description of the City’s Liquidity Facility with West Australian Treasury Corporation contained within the SCM 4 April 2019 EN-006-19 2018-2019 Budget from ‘Capital Works City Centre’ to ‘Capital Works Infrastructure’. 3. Approves the use of the City’s approved Liquidity Facility with West Australian Treasury Corporation to loan Willetton Basketball Association up to $3,000,000 (ex GST) to cover cash flow deficits during the construction of the Willetton Basketball Association Stadium Expansion Project. 4. Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to execute documents with West Australian Treasury Corporation to activate the City’s Liquidity Facility as approved in the 2018-2019 Budget and mentioned in Item 2 above. CARRIED BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY 9/1 MOVED Cr Holland, SECONDED Cr Jacobs, that Council: 1. Authorises the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer to affix the Common Seal to the following deeds between the City and Willetton Basketball Association: a) Deed of Agreement to Fund and Lease. b) Deed of Surrender of Existing Lease. c) Deed of Construction Period Lease. d) Deed of Surrender of Construction Period Lease. SCM 3 October 2018 EN-031-18 e) Deed of Operations Period Lease. On terms consistent with the Key Terms attached (Attachment 1 refers) to this report to Council, and advice provided by the City’s solicitors. 2. Authorises the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer to affix the Common Seal to a Deed of Loan between the City and Willetton Basketball Association, on terms consistent with those identified in legal advice provided to Council, and as otherwise advised by the City’s solicitors.

Page 74 EN-008-21 Loan Funding Agreement - Willetton Basketball Association EN-008-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

Relevant Council Resolutions

Council Meeting and Date Report No Decision CARRIED BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY (9/2)

MOVED Deputy Mayor Holland, SECONDED Cr Brown: That Council: a) Endorses the City of Canning to support any State and/or Federal Funding Applications made by the Willetton Basketball Association for an expansion of the Association’s Willetton premises. b) Subject to the Willetton Basketball Association contributing at least $800,000, the City will contribute one quarter of the balance up to a maximum of 25% or $2.2 million. c) Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to convey Council’s support to the State and/or SCM 20 December 2016 - Federal Government to consider funding the balance of the Project after taking into consideration Council’s commitment and the funds provided by the Willetton Basketball Association. d) Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to investigate and report back to Council any other financial options available to Council, should the Willetton Basketball Association’s State and/or Federal application be successful. e) Authorises Council Officers to continue to provide assistance to the Willetton Basketball Association in relation to State and/or Federal funding applications. MOTION CARRIED (7/3)

BACKGROUND

1 The Willetton Basketball Stadium Expansion Project (now known as Willetton Stadium) was successfully completed in February 2020 under the project management of WBA with funding from all tiers of Government in addition to funding provided by WBA themselves.

Page 75 EN-008-21 Loan Funding Agreement - Willetton Basketball Association EN-008-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

2 The Willetton Stadium is the centrepiece of the Willetton Sports Precinct and has enabled the delivery of the Council-endorsed Burrendah Park Ancillary Works (BPAW) project in addition to other sporting renewal projects. In total, over $16 Million will be invested in WSP by the end of 2021 comprising -

PROJECT VALUE STATUS Willetton Stadium $10,420,000 Complete Willetton Bowling Club - synthetic greens $520,000 Complete Community Piazza – Stage 1 $568,000 Complete Southern Carpark (inc lighting and landscaping) $650,000 Complete Burrendah Park (North) – amenities upgrade $430,000 Complete Willetton Netball/Tennis Club Pavilion - upgrade $260,000 Complete Community Piazza – Stage 2 $1,600,000 To be completed - July 2021 Pop-Up Skate Facility $105,000 Complete Burrendah Park – Southern Changerooms – Stage I $130,000 To be completed – June 2021 Willetton Bowling Club – perimeter fence $250,000 To be completed – December 2021 Burrendah Park (South) and Burrendah Park $875,000 To be completed – December (Central) – Sportslighting and Passive Lighting 2021 Northern Carpark - overflow $70,000 To be completed – December 2021 BPAW – various (skate park relocation, $320,000 To be completed – December interconnecting carpark works, signage, CCTV, 2021 supporting works, painting)

3 Future planned works at the WSP that are subject to future budget* allocations include –

PROJECT VALUE YEAR FOR COMPLETION* Burrendah Park – Southern Changerooms – Stage I $450,000 2022 Burrendah Park (North) - Sportslighting $425,000 2022 Active Laneway $750,000 TBC

4 Complementary to the above works is the City’s streetscape upgrade of Burrendah Boulevard, funded by the State Government and City to the value of over $1.25 Million.

DETAILS

5 Since December 2016, Council has supported the Willetton Stadium project through various resolutions, and was a proud partner in delivering the project on time and on budget in early 2020.

6 During the preliminary discussions in mid-2018 relating to project management methodology and delivery; the WBA approached the City, and ultimately Elected Members at the Strategic Issues Briefing (SIB) of 4 September 2018, in relation to potential cash flow issues identified during the construction of Willetton Stadium. The cash flow issues arose primarily due to the timing of the grant funding and acquittal processes associated with Federal Government funding to WBA. WBA

Page 76 EN-008-21 Loan Funding Agreement - Willetton Basketball Association EN-008-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

requested the City’s assistance to address their cash flow issues over the construction phase of the project through the establishment and use of short term loan facility.

7 At the aforementioned SIB, and then within the Council report on the matter to the Special Council Meeting of 4 April 2019, it was flagged that at the conclusion of the Willetton Stadium project that the lending facility would remain in place for 12 months, and that any outstanding monies utilised by WBA during the project to assist in their cash flow matters would be converted to a loan; notionally with a repayment period over ten years.

8 The proposed ‘Key Terms’ for the Deed of Loan include - a) Loan amount - Up to $253,152. b) Duration - Up to 10 years. c) Purpose – Repayment, to the City of Canning, of the outstanding balance of the short term financing obtained by the Willetton Basketball Association Inc and incurred at the conclusion of Willetton Stadium project. d) Interest – 1.89% (including the State guarantee fee of 0.7%) Equivalent to rate that Western Australian Treasury Corporation would have charged on a 10 year loan as at 30 June 2020). e) Scheduled number of payments – 20.

9 It is noted that the WBA have agreed to the above Key Terms, and have already begun to make payments based in the proposed Key Terms to reduce the outstanding balance of monies owed via their use of the City’s lending facility during construction of Willetton Stadium.

CONSIDERATIONS

Legal Compliance

10 Not applicable.

Policy Implications

11 Nil.

Financial Considerations

Business Plan

12 Not applicable.

Internal Budget

13 The City provided a short term lending facility to WBA during the financial year 2019-2020 to address the issue of cash flow shortfalls during construction of Willetton Stadium.

14 The short term funding to WBA was provided by way of drawing funds from the City’s short term liquidity facility with Western Australian Treasury Corporation (WATC).

15 As at 30 June 2020, the City had fully repaid the short term loan drawn from WATC. However, WBA could not return the full amount leaving an outstanding balance of $285,000 as at 30 June 2020.

16 As per cashflow projections submitted by WBA, it was expected that WBA would have fully repaid the outstanding loan by August 2020 thereby not having any impact on the budget for the year 2020-2021.

17 WBA has since approached the City to convert this into a long term loan payable over 10 years. They have already made payment of two instalments during the current financial year (2020/2021) leaving a current outstanding balance of $253,157.

Page 77 EN-008-21 Loan Funding Agreement - Willetton Basketball Association EN-008-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

18 In the absence of any matching borrowing or availability of funds within the Community and Sporting Facility reserve, the outstanding balance of $253,157 will have to be funded from Municipal funds - thus increasing the existing budget deficit by the same amount.

19 If Council approves the request of this budget amendment, the cumulative budget deficit as at the end of this financial year will increase to $1,996,743.

Asset Management

20 Not applicable.

Sustainability Considerations

21 The new Sustainability policy was adopted 18 June 2019. The City is now working towards determining a set of City-wide targets, which will provide measurable criteria for sustainability progress assessment.

22 In advance of these targets having been developed by the City and endorsed by Council, this project addresses the following Sustainability Policy CM194 commitments: a) ‘Commitment 6: A commitment to building community capital, social sustainability and a thriving local economy.’ The City’s support of the WBA to enable the construction of the Willetton Stadium has significantly enhanced the sustainability of the WBA and provide a short term stimulus and enduring benefit for the local economy.

Consultation

23 Not applicable.

Other Considerations or Risks Conseq Conseque uence Overall Risk/ Risk/ Opportunity Consequences Mitigation/ Actions X nce = Likelih Opportunity Rating ood Council reputation and Officer Recommendation Actions to implement relationship with WBA. approved by the Council Consequence A – High WBA has flexibility, Almost Certain Significant (positive outcomes) Approve the provision (Opportunity) security and ability to Opportunity A of the Loan to WBA. repay early. Officer Recommendation WBA delays or defaults Maintain good working approved by the Council Medium on loan repayments- relationship with WBA Unlikely Significant (negative outcomes) incurring costs to and City strong loan (Risk) Risk B Council. account management. Ensure Report and Loan Officer Recommendation Further uncertainty to documentation (or key Medium deferred by the Council WBA and the City details) are prepared Possible Moderate (Risk) Risk C account management and reviewed prior to process for funds. issue to Elected Members. The WBA will be required to seek commercial funding to Ensure loan documents Officer Recommendation repay the City funds– have legal / financial High declined by the Council loss of reputation with review and have Almost Certain Significant (Risk) Risk D WBA / community – agreement on key interest funds paid to terms with WBA prior commercial entities to decision by Council. could have gone into sports provision.

Page 78 EN-008-21 Loan Funding Agreement - Willetton Basketball Association EN-008-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

COMMENT

24 Since December 2016 when Council resolved to support the Willetton Stadium project, the City has worked closely in various guises (landowner, lessor, planning and other statutory authority, funding partner, project management/assurance) with the WBA.

25 WBA undertook the successful delivery of Willetton Stadium project via their own project management resources in conjunction with the City; with both direct funding from the City, and also the ability to access a lending facility established by the City to deal with WBA’s cash flow issues over the duration of the project. WBA did so on the understanding that any monies outstanding at the conclusion of the project would be converted to a loan, notionally to be paid back over a ten year period.

26 WBA have commenced paying back the monies outstanding. This report seeks Council’s support to formalise the arrangements and consolidate the outstanding monies into a loan between the City and WBA.

27 The City does not currently have a Policy to guide the response to this request for loan funds, although it should be noted that it is likely WBA feel the City would support their request. It is not uncommon for the City to enter into loan funding agreements of varying durations with community and sporting groups to assist them to undertake works.

VOTING REQUIREMENT

28 Absolute majority, in accordance with Section 6.8 of the Local Government Act 1995.

AGENDA BRIEFING COMMENT

29 A number of queries were raised by Elected Members in relation to this report at the Agenda Briefing Meeting of 11 May 2021 – these are addressed below.

30 The Willetton Basketball Association (Inc.) (WBA) did not seek a rental abatement, either through the program offered by Council or as may have been considered under the Commercial Tenancies (Covid-19 Response) Act 2020. It should be noted that under their current leasing arrangements, their annual rental is $2,517.77 inclusive, which is based on their historical arrangements for the old stadium which were maintained throughout the construction period.

31 The agreed rental under the new lease will be $15,000 per annum + GST, which was previously been endorsed by Council in October 2018.

32 WBA did receive a rates concession from the City of Canning which has a value of $51,499.98. This was reported to the Council via report CC-049-20 adopted at the Special Council Meeting dated 30 July 2020 as part of the budget adoption process. 33 The City will not be further borrowing money to fund the proposed loan to the WBA. Paragraphs 14-15 and 19 of this report deal with the way in which the City has already funded the liability borne by WBA and how this loan will impact City’s budget position.

Page 79 EN-008-21 Loan Funding Agreement - Willetton Basketball Association EN-008-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

EN-009-21 Sustainability and Environment Advisory Group Meeting Unconfirmed Minutes - April 2021

PROGRAM: Canning Environment SUB PROGRAM: Sustainability FILE REF: Q21/222 REPORT DATE: 26 May 2021 REPORTING OFFICERS: Melanie Bainbridge - Sustainability Leader Dion Johnson - Manager Parks and Place Improvement Canning RESPONSIBLE OFFICER: Warren Bow - Director Canning Environment

Strategic Plan Theme: LEAD - Accountable, responsible and forward-thinking administration. Community Goal: Effective leadership and good governance. Council Strategy: Open and transparent to the community and stakeholders. Authority/Discretion: Noting: Includes items provided to Council for information purposes only that do not require a decision of Council.

Attachments: 1. Sustainability and Environment Advisory Group (SEAG) Unconfirmed Minutes - April 2021 (D21/150351).

In Brief: The Sustainability and Environment Advisory Group (SEAG) held a regular meeting on Thursday, 29 April 2021. Attached for information are the Unconfirmed Minutes from this meeting (refer Attachment 1). There are no actions that require Council resolutions.

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION That Council receives the Unconfirmed Minutes of the Sustainability and Environment Advisory Group meeting held on Thursday, 29 April 2021. (Refer Attachment 1).

Relevant Council Resolutions

Council Meeting and Date Report No Decision That Council: 1. Endorses the review undertaken of the City’s Business, Community, and Sustainability and Environment Advisory Groups. 2. Endorse the removal of Elected Members as Council appointed OCM 17 October 2017 CC-024-17 nominees to the City’s Advisory Groups effective from 17 October 2017. 3. Approves the Chief Executive Officer being responsible for the appointment of community representatives to the City’s Advisory Groups, as the attached to this report, to be effective from 17 October 2017.

Page 80 EN-009-21 Sustainability and Environment Advisory Group Meeting Unconfirmed EN-009-21 Minutes - April 2021

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

Relevant Council Resolutions

Council Meeting and Date Report No Decision 4. Adopts the revised Terms of Reference for the City’s Advisory Groups, as attached to this report, to be effective from 17 October 2017. That Council: 1. Approves the recommended appointments to the Sustainability and Environment Advisory Group, Business Advisory Group, and Community Advisory Group, as outlined in this report. 2. In accordance with (1) above, authorise the Chief Executive Officer to provide written advice to all nominees as to the outcome of their nomination. OCM 17 May 2016 CD-005-16 3. Councillor appointment to the Sustainability and Environment Advisory Group, Business Advisory Group, and Community Advisory Group, are determined at the Ordinary Council Meeting of Tuesday 10 May 2016, following the receipt of submissions by the Chief Executive Officer. 4. Endorses work to continue, to fill any vacant community positions on the Advisory Groups. That Council: 1. Authorises the establishment of Business, Community, and Sustainability and Environment Advisory Groups. 2. Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to OCM 10 December 2015 CE-019-15 commence advertisement and expressions of interest for Advisory Group Members. 3. Receives a report on the nominations received for the respective Advisory Group. That Council: 1. Authorises the development and distribution of a discussion and comment paper to gauge community interest in the establishment of Advisory Committees to Council. 2. Includes a statement in the discussion OCM 16 June 2015 CE-010-15 paper to the effect that membership of any such Committees would be by appointment of the incoming elected Council after the October 2015 elections. 3. Receives a report and recommendations that arise from the results of the community consultation in due course.

Page 81 EN-009-21 Sustainability and Environment Advisory Group Meeting Unconfirmed EN-009-21 Minutes - April 2021

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

BACKGROUND 1 The Sustainability and Environment Advisory Group (SEAG) was established in mid-2016 as an Advisory Group to Council on matters relating to sustainability and the environment. The most recent meeting of SEAG was held on Thursday, 29 April 2021.

DETAILS 2 An item was raised by a SEAG member on considering the Uluru Statement from the Heart, and whether adopting the statement had been discussed by Council. Sarah Janali, Manager Community and Culture was invited to speak to the SEAG about the current progress of the Reconciliation Action Plan, and actions being taken. 3 An item was raised by a SEAG member on the review of the Cat Act 2011 and the influence that Council might have on its progress. Clint Burdett, Manager Regulatory Services was invited to address current progress and consultation outcomes. SEAG members requested the City of Canning’s (the City) Administration to write to the State Government conveying the consultation outcomes and requesting the Cat Act 2011 be reviewed. 4 An item was raised by a SEAG member on cycling infrastructure around the City. Ben Moore, Manager Transport and Sustainability Engineering and Owen Clark, Engineering Technical Officer were invited to present on the City’s Cycling and Walking Plan, and Integrated Transport Strategy. This presentation included current and planned infrastructure improvements and the need for a community bicycle user group or similar to support community feedback into the development. The Nicolson Road / Metcalfe Road project was also discussed. 5 A sustainability update was provided, covering major City projects designed to drive down energy and emissions, and engage the community in sustainability action. 6 The End of Terms for current members; Leanne Robb (Chairperson), Natasha Hurley-Walker, Michelle Tan and Sian Mawson and the selection process for new members was discussed. Thanks were given to exiting members who have contributed greatly to the group over the past two years. 7 A brief update on the Kent Street Precinct Plan was requested and provided to the group.

CONSIDERATIONS

Legal Compliance 8 The Advisory Group operates under the Terms of Reference adopted by Council at the 17 October 2017 Ordinary Council Meeting. An Advisory Group Governance Guide (the Guide) has been developed by the Governance team, which outlines the processes and procedures to ensure each group functions effectively. The Minutes comply with the requirements of the Guide.

Policy Implications 9 Not applicable.

Financial Considerations

Business Plan 10 Not applicable.

Internal Budget 11 Not applicable.

Page 82 EN-009-21 Sustainability and Environment Advisory Group Meeting Unconfirmed EN-009-21 Minutes - April 2021

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

Asset Management 12 Not applicable.

Sustainability Considerations 13 The new Sustainability Policy was adopted 18 June 2019. The City is now working towards determining a set of City-wide targets, which will provide measurable criteria for sustainability progress assessment. 14 In advance of these targets having been developed by the City and endorsed by Council this project addresses the following Sustainability Policy CM194 commitments: a) Commitment 6: A commitment to building community capital, social sustainability and a thriving local economy is addressed by the community networks established by SEAG members, providing information and raising issues via SEAG. b) Commitment 8: A commitment to developing partnerships and increasing participation in local, state, national and international sustainability opportunities, by utilising best practice approaches to their meetings and providing comment on sustainability and environmental matters.

Consultation 15 Following the election of a new Council in October 2015, Elected Members expressed a desire to engage with various sectors of the Community. Advisory Groups were established as one method of engagement. Nominations were invited from the Canning community in a widespread media campaign, and the Advisory Groups were formed in mid-2016. 16 A review of the Advisory Groups Terms of Reference took place, and the amended Terms of Reference were adopted at the 17 October 2017 Ordinary Council Meeting.

Other Considerations or Risks 17 Not applicable.

COMMENT 18 SEAG members will canvas networks and seek input on the development of a bicycle user group or similar community led feedback mechanism for future cycling interventions. 19 The next meeting of the SEAG is scheduled for Thursday, 29 April 2021 at the Canning River Eco Education Centre, if COVID-19 restrictions permit. Elected Members may attend if they wish. SEAG has opted to meet every two months and continues to perform at a high level. SEAG members continue to provide City Officers with significant input into relevant strategy and policy development and offer a conduit for community feedback on sustainability and environment topics.

VOTING REQUIREMENT 20 Simple majority.

AGENDA BRIEFING COMMENT 21 Not applicable.

Page 83 EN-009-21 Sustainability and Environment Advisory Group Meeting Unconfirmed EN-009-21 Minutes - April 2021

Item EN-009-21 - Attachment 1Sustainability and Environment Advisory Group (SEAG) Unconfirmed Minutes - April 2021 4 of 1 Page y y y y A A y y Attendance (NHW) (SJ) (JM) Walker (CK) - (SM) (KG) (MT) er Tan Hurley Johnston Mclaren (KT) Kennedy George Member Member Memb Member Member Member Member Member Minutes Mawson Lim ire Name KT Michelle Natasha Kellie Stephen Sian SEAG SEAG SEAG SEAG SEAG SEAG SEAG Cla Jaylene SEAG (SEAG) y y y y y y y y Group Attendance Advisory 2021 Online Improvement April Traffic Environment 29 Place - Taker) Canning/ Culture and Sustainability of and Officer and (CB) (MB) (SJ) (OC) and Services (BM) Parks {Minute li ity (Chairperson) 6.00pm City Thursday rt CANNING ead (DJ) Clark (AC) Jana (LR) L Officer Burdett Moore Technical OF Manager Commun Transpo Bainbridge Crick Regulatory Robb Owen Sarah Ben : Clint - - - nability Member i Johnson : CITY Melanie Leanne Name Dion Manager Manager Manger Executive Engineering SEAG Guest Guest Guest: Guest Annette Sustainability Susta Location Date: Sustainability Attendees: Time G;

Page 84 EN-009-21 Sustainability and Environment Advisory Group Meeting Unconfirmed Minutes - April EN-009-21 2021

Item EN-009-21 - Attachment 1Sustainability and Environment Advisory Group (SEAG) Unconfirmed Minutes - April 2021 s s. to or set the the and and and laws with doe from traffic of would like would around they project group of currently one members local consistent s City also is current A a Heart . user review working conveying Development. Learnings types The for and , . Community . the ial various was Australia would questions requirements and July law Init for bicycle committee . investigate We Plan) a from . for and planning . widening regarding Did specific local funding property interventions including; such Government Land a . Learning Action to received road , June Calling the some Reconciliation Statement State mechanisms 2021 . from create cats was of by proposed planned ng potential questions completed 25 to the convened is around of Uluru Government. the to and other delivery includi - plan feedback Employment throughout The confining being (Reconciliation comment community co . State governed to, write and , uding February Custodians - of and is number as concerns . and current each the the RAP incl A Government Plan as in l groups by and Plan review 2018) Roads sites), ss. volume given Loca Thursday government. SJ Reflect responded Traditional law engagement endorsement to knowledge on Walking ion updated Main reviewed. advised other and administration working the launching proce the state and for (around s Sustainability the ' local as be and held and interventions. SM and - the are also power of Act Dec significant consideration , City Act and to a pment posed in DoT Presentat regularly Group internal the Cat , lo who . other the part Cat capture community is Cycling Bridge some completed review and meeting Council. lan the to as City were give s the P deve and for the that t by of Three ' has May/June Council present. which the . people given for in s future and to Reference consultation hoping Environment City . process, and plan ucture previou doesn s up was , Greenfield i review any Walking initiative request RAP . focus the Timeline proces The requesting in that the Act to put past Council consultation ject RAP Noangar between . (i.e of Land : and that team s of to infrastr endorsement and pro RAP captured Cat recent like of future with both page Community some , for transport the the he results to through t journey run - been Cycling part Whadjuk interface Innovate upgrade would for web minutes around : Avenue the been as link Australia Elders Transport incorporated transport active the the outcomes ssue the have i ta re the being minutes Development, be has s support received of City's on sha and and City's taking ld thi planned to active iscussion to Presented project D Committee the Centenary The There wou timeframes SJ Reconciliation : respects considered : : : : Confirmed routes, message be realities Economic Reconciliation the future that Workshops support SJ similar around consultation calming CB SM: OC OC: Act working via The SM our acknowledge Action ------We MINUTES - Confirmation pay Q&A Traffic nability - i Teams) Plans Culture MS Susta and Officer Services and (via and Heart Technical s Regulatory the Community Transport Infrastructure from Minute of Manager Manager Engineering Manager : Walking , Review and Clark, Statement Janali, ITEMS Burdett, Moore Act Ben Uluru Engineering Cycling Owen Clint Welcome Sarah Cat Confirmation . 1 2. 5. 3. AGENDA AGENDA 4.

Page 85 EN-009-21 Sustainability and Environment Advisory Group Meeting Unconfirmed Minutes - April EN-009-21 2021

Item EN-009-21 - Attachment 1Sustainability and Environment Advisory Group (SEAG) Unconfirmed Minutes - April 2021 l t to to to be on tell on. - s i loca food i se good i to series to works Water and efforts reduce a for are CYC interview to th All i more , . on kely . ons, early i i expert l w engagemen at gns i conversat is areas developed too now/ des ng IPR so on Engineering i nvolved i WALGA ng i - residents nicate i roadway s, . looking u project, be organisat research th Conference be i . of w outdoor are mm to year given r WADI/ o Plan i ng support i es 2020 shortlist i consultat We e c Transport shared ons the the - range l. i h external to congested t October a the work se and conversation i in in , financial th into iona ess , t i l t t apply w from that localised new to progress opportunit program t complex, feed Procurement presentat erna maxim s . t budge safer, impac process n to support on . i the Po a t to that s s a and . i i partner in led tment i fied as t targets i i feedback Change to applied could that current MoU semester ed is minimal ensure s updated tracker well dent of Recru i that to great . earnest s SEAG Mid responded Draft procuremen in have Looking . of . propo light . - a SEAG community . program Behaviour mpact the practice i . in ng the all BM will i ses funded impacts start of up back s . was t t planning group keep the ng s Project but i best . to ar on n responded the , start energy i t i pend the at homes this ll nto Will king ons to i a s a project i r if progre . t will On co considered BM s and is i . 100 ra t wo ensure . rojects i member i - p P Th , project budget build i Lotterywes in if . to . e consultat group l h a 3 program? being 2022 - design s Insp - and add water on c progressing i i WALGA financial year ng and ng i as all , i year, s n 2 , currently preferable l i n value i ect i j Trace this Fernda publ owner be of check Project work land and & SEAG Retrofit waste Lane) outl Pro vegetat of for . be development Counc Participating and l financial Conference son on ect ng onal . Improvement l in eted i i j FAR sense l with would Climate Crown t {hopefully) i Wi CREEC across to pro PPA . extent would / the Tracker. Light to as Place YourMove t World and comp about i . coming LGs / ganisat the tious) , s & impacts i y r considered further l h week s into o t currently t habitat. i on impact - red t participating the about be Curtin i Your Street WALGA CCN w Impact exist amb DWER limi - - - - Weymouth/ - all Park next process, , look for and . onboarding ed will r s rolled-out cross to engage current onal i t enqu by and s Projec i a h workshop Rob . t you shops to be with s k n: ve i i per enqui Update Changing Update Presented Update Update to Update Ye week/ currently made ely agenda Did : BM : : : : : : : Ba : finalised s wor : a : agreed {FRED/ {creat not be KT in production programs undertaken BM MT MB MB MB MB MB MB MB Internal If whether their the of develop clo are around CCN Cr Corporation on i - - Act ------lity i nab i Susta Project and Road Transport Update Manager , Road/Metcalfe Moore cholson i Ben N Engineering Sustainability . 7 6.

Page 86 EN-009-21 Sustainability and Environment Advisory Group Meeting Unconfirmed Minutes - April EN-009-21 2021

Item EN-009-21 - Attachment 1Sustainability and Environment Advisory Group (SEAG) Unconfirmed Minutes - April 2021 ll as the wi and funds to t i both and 00pm 00pm 00pm . . . year Australia 6 6.00pm 6 6 comm - - - - /Completed to this ontributions . community 2021 2021 2021 2021 c Western to aiming in June June June s June k contracts Williams 24 24 24 24 ave Completion excellent , , , h ng wor i for day . we the their t Rachel rs represented of Award tha for . Date Thursday Thursday Thu Thursday, and ably Agenda Tan some MB in track , has the DJ to action helle with programs have . of ic who pump M the we mate nutes Delay i and i of weeks and cl Robb, r. m ; 2 that park consisted yea our the some esses. next . dog on Walker Leanne $500,000. - , Panel from y the . progr le programs around in financial n Group over thank buffer ig Hur the . arising with to next des program. dentified on information works going? -i as like on applicants de i for wetland d Natasha Reference l agendas , matters ; agendas. Plan action some all working SEAG and re wou to l completed nct add i are future nformat with be futu i d out required upgrade climate Mawson to provide Prec to to is an 00pm go Group Community . please to our 6 applications lia to Sian some - to ; further confidentia MB 12 Street tra arising arising s could - link projects sewerage tters approval 2021 Au Chair Advisory around le Kent we provide - the engage if is process 5 share and The meeting Matters June d to with to Matters l: on to g l forward i 24 vacancies ske How A in , Ministers Western SJ program. BM MB Add Action : A 5 Next deliver Add / : : : : day DJ to SJ carry SM DJ DJ: member Select group. Selected s on work 0pm ti J .3 are . Ac S Action 7 . . . AC Thur MB BM Owner on i ct ele S n o e t a Project Trace) Upd d n Road a Bainbridge s r e Statement (Climate mb e Melanie Heart M s Report r r and fo the ness Road/Metcalfe lity s i i on Date Bus s from nab Membe i Term Business Johnson of Closed New Items Item Nichol Uluru Susta Other Meeting End Dion of Other . . 2 Meeting Next No. 1. 3 4. 9. 8. Action

Page 87 EN-009-21 Sustainability and Environment Advisory Group Meeting Unconfirmed Minutes - April EN-009-21 2021

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

EN-011-21 Waste Disposal Contract

PROGRAM: Canning Environment SUB PROGRAM: Clean Canning FILE REF: Q21/226 REPORT DATE: 26 May 2021 REPORTING OFFICERS: Oliver Bennetto - Manager Clean Canning Operations Anita Amprimo - Manager Clean Canning RESPONSIBLE OFFICER: Warren Bow - Director Canning Environment

Strategic Plan Theme: LEAD - Accountable, responsible and forward-thinking administration. Community Goal: Effective leadership and good governance. Council Strategy: Prudent financial management and long term financial sustainability. Authority/Discretion: Executive: The substantial direction setting and oversight role of the Council eg adopting plans and reports, accepting tenders, directing operations, setting and amending budgets.

Attachments: 1. FM.O31.51 Formal Quotation Evaluation Report - Waste Disposal (D21/128858). (Large Attachments) (Confidential) 2. Probity Certificate - City of Canning - Waste Disposal Services (D21/141352).

In Brief: This report seeks Council approval to appoint a Contractor in response to the City of Canning’s (the City) Request for Tender FM.O31.51 for Waste Disposal. This report summarises the Tender and Evaluation Process undertaken, and the reasoning behind the recommendation for the selected Respondents. The Evaluation Report, containing an in depth analysis of each Respondent and the evaluation panel assessment of their offer, is considered to include commercially sensitive information and as such, has been provided to Council under a separate cover as a Confidential Attachment (refer Confidential Attachment 1). An independent Probity Advisor was engaged through the tender process, from planning through to evaluation and recommendation phase, in order to review the process but not to assist or engage in decision making. Attachment 2 of this report is a Probity Certificate outlining the Probity Advisors consideration of the process undertaken. Council is asked to support the Officer Recommendation because: 1. The Respondent has provided the lowest price per tonne rate of the four respondents. 2. The Respondent provides the shortest trip time from the City, resulting in efficiencies and a reduction in the whole of life costs for the City’s Waste Fleet. 3. The Respondent addressed the Qualitative Requirements to a very high standard. If the Officer Recommendation is not supported, the consequences are likely to be: 1. The City will be out of contract for the disposal of general waste and may incur higher costs for a temporary arrangement to dispose of waste.

Page 88 EN-011-21 Waste Disposal Contract EN-011-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Accepts the Tender submitted by the City of Cockburn as the most advantageous Tenderer to form the contract for waste disposal for an initial contract term of one year, with two options to extend the term, with each option having a duration of up to six months.

2. Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to execute the contract documents.

Relevant Council Resolutions

Council Meeting and Date Report No Decision

Not applicable.

BACKGROUND 1 Approximately 37,000 tonnes of post-consumer waste is collected from properties across the City of the Canning (the City). 2 The City’s current Waste Disposal contract with the Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council expires on the 30 June 2021 with no further extension options. 3 A decision was made not to negotiate directly with the current supplier, Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council for a short term contract, but to assess the market to ensure disposal costs are at current market rates. 4 The City sought submissions for the receival of post-consumer waste material delivered by, or on behalf of, the City. This contract will be a transitional arrangement prior to the City commencing delivery of post-consumer waste in accordance with the Avertas Energy (Waste to Energy) contractual arrangements in mid-2022. 5 The contract is to be offered for a one year term with two six month extension options. 6 The resultant contract will be awarded to a single supplier to satisfy all requirements. 7 The City requested submissions from the following Local Government Authorities’ for landfilling the City’s waste: a) Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council, b) City of Armadale, c) City of Cockburn, and d) City of Rockingham.

Page 89 EN-011-21 Waste Disposal Contract EN-011-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

DETAILS 8 Procurement planning for the Tender commenced in February 2021. Planning for this process considered a broad spectrum of requirements, including but not limited to: a) Previous and proposed procurement process. b) Risk analysis. c) Sustainability issues and considerations. d) Market research. e) Evaluation requirements. f) Contract management requirements. 9 A City Procurement Plan, covering all of the above was endorsed by the Director Canning Environment. 10 The Tender was compiled based on the information within the procurement plan, and using the adopted City Request and General Conditions of Contract for the tender submission conditions. 11 Eight addenda were released in relation to the Tender, and related to answering questions received from potential Respondents during the open tender period. 12 The Tender closing date was 2.30pm on 14 April 2021, for a total open tender period of five days, greater than the minimum 14 day open tender period required under legislation. 13 The City received a total of four submissions from the following Respondents: a) City of Armadale – Ms Joanne Abbiss; b) City of Cockburn – Mr Tony Brun; c) City of Rockingham – Mr Michael Parker; and d) Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council – Mr Marcus Geisler. 14 The four Respondents addressed the Compliance and Disclosure requirements and passed through to the qualitative assessment. 15 The Qualitative Assessment was comprised of the following criteria, as identified in the Request for Tender document: a) Price – 70% weighting. b) Landfill Capacity – 10% weighting. c) Work Health and Safety – 10% weighting. d) Business Continuity Planning – 10% weighting. 16 A pre-consensus meeting was called between the three evaluation panel members, the independent Probity Advisor and a Procurement representative, where the process requirements were covered and the Respondents identified. All evaluation panel members completed a Declaration of Confidentiality and Interest prior to evaluation. 17 Respondent offers were then individually assessed against the above criteria by the evaluation panel members, who then convened for a consensus meeting with the independent Probity Advisor and a Procurement representative, to determine the final score applied to each criteria for each Respondent. 18 Following the consensus meeting, it was considered the recommended Respondent had addressed the criteria to a very high standard level and at a competitive pricing structure, and was considered to best represent value for money for the City.

Page 90 EN-011-21 Waste Disposal Contract EN-011-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

19 The recommended Respondents provided details of their Director’s relationships with other entities, as requested by Council. The detail of these relationships is outlined below:

City of Cockburn Associated With Any Other Organisations Officeholders Name and Title

Tony Brun – Chief Executive Officer Curtin University

CONSIDERATIONS

Legal Compliance 20 Under the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996, Part 4, Division 2, Clause 11(2)(e), Tenders do not have to be publicly invited according to the requirements of this Division if the goods or services are to be supplied by or obtained through the government of the State or the Commonwealth or any of its agencies, or by a local government or a regional local government. 21 The above provisions enabled the City to request submissions from other Local Government Authorities’ for landfilling the City’s waste.

Policy Implications 22 City Policy AF301 Procurement of Goods and/or Services applies to this procurement process and has been fully complied with.

Financial Considerations

Business Plan 23 The activities and the expenditure are covered within the Clean Caning – Annual Business Plan.

Internal Budget 24 Sufficient budget allocations have been made in the draft 2021/2022 budget under the cost centres of 4050 and 4060 for to meet the financial requirements of this waste disposal contract.

Asset Management 25 The City has no interests in the ongoing liability for the landfill site at which the waste is to be disposed of. 26 The City’s waste fleet will transport the waste to the Respondents landfill site. There is a decrease in fleet running costs including maintenance as a result of the reduced travel distance.

Sustainability Considerations 27 The new Sustainability policy was adopted 18 June 2019. The City is now working towards determining a set of City-wide targets, which will provide measurable criteria for sustainability progress assessment.

Page 91 EN-011-21 Waste Disposal Contract EN-011-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

28 In advance of these targets having been developed by the City and endorsed by Council, this project addresses the following Sustainability Policy CM194 commitments: a) Commitment 3: A commitment to responsible resource management and impact reduction. The City is engaging with only providers who have licenced, and appropriately constructed landfill sites. This ensures that the Waste generated by the City is disposed of responsibly and with minimum impact to the environment. The reduced transportation distances will result in a reduction of fossil fuel use and CO2 emissions emitted from the Waste Fleet.

Consultation 29 Not applicable.

Other Considerations or Risks Mitigation/ Consequence Consequence Overall Risk/ Risk/ Opportunity Consequences X = Actions Likelihood Rating Opportunity Market competitive Form new Officer disposal costs. contract. Recommendation approved by the Secured contract Utilising the Very High Almost Certain Major Council (positive for disposal of most efficient (Opportunity) outcomes) waste. road transport Opportunity A Reduced life cycle links to the costs of the City’s landfill site. waste fleet. The City has taken a conservative Officer The City not being approach Recommendation able to generate through the approved by the the minimum Medium procurement Unlikely Significant Council (negative 30,000tonne the (Risk) process to allow outcomes) pricing is based flexibility with Risk B on. the number of tonnes delivered. The City would be out of contract Officer with a waste Provide Council Recommendation disposal site. with sufficient Extreme deferred by the information to Almost Certain Significant Higher waste (Risk) Council make a decision disposal costs if Risk C without the spot need to defer. arrangements are required. The City would be out of contract Officer with a waste Provide Council Recommendation disposal site. with sufficient Extreme declined by the Almost Certain Significant Higher waste information to (Risk) Council disposal costs if make a suitable Risk D spot decision. arrangements are required.

Page 92 EN-011-21 Waste Disposal Contract EN-011-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

COMMENT 30 The evaluation panel have thoroughly evaluated the submissions in accordance with the Evaluation Criteria, in order to determine the recommended Respondent and consider this Respondent is best suited to provide value for money to the City.

31 An independent Probity Advisor was engaged to review all tender documentation from the initial procurement plan, through to the final evaluation report, and to witness the pre-consensus and consensus meetings, to ensure a fair, honest and transparent process was undertaken.

32 This report recommends that Council accept the tender submission from the preferred Respondent, and to authorise the Chief Executive Officer to finalise the appointment and establishment of the contract for Waste Disposal.

VOTING REQUIREMENT 33 Simple majority.

AGENDA BRIEFING COMMENT 34 Not applicable.

Page 93 EN-011-21 Waste Disposal Contract EN-011-21

Item EN-011-21 - Attachment 2 Probity Certificate - City of Canning - Waste Disposal Services

Slonlons lnlernolionol Audit ond Consulting Ply lid PO Box 1908 troding OS West Perth WA 6872 Stantons International Austro lia Chartered Accountants and Consultants Level 2, 1 Walker Avenue West Perth WA 6005 Australia

Tel: +6189481 3188 fox: +6189321 1204

A BN: 84 144 581 519 www.sta ntons.com.ou 10 May 2021

Mr Athanasios Kyron CEO City of Canning 1317 Albany Highway Cannington WA 6107

Dear Mr Kyron,

RE: PROBITY CERTIFICATE - CITY OF CANNING - WASTE DISPOSAL - FM.O31.51

1. Introduction ·

This report details our opinion regarding the probity of the processes undertaken in the development of the Request documentation, the management of the proposal preparation phase and the conduct of the evaluation process for the above Request.

This report outlines the involvement of Stantons International (SI) in the process and our opinion that this has been a thorough process that has complied fully with appropriate probity requirements.

2. Involvement of Stantons International

On this occasion, the City of Canning (the City) engaged SI as the probity advisors to the process from the procurement planning stage of the project and we have provided probity support from prior to completion of the development of the Request document through to recommended outcome. As such, we have been involved throughout the process and have been able to make a progressive contribution to the conduct of the process and the review of probity issues.

3. Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this review was to ensure that the evaluation process was administered fairly and impartially to all parties and was consistent with relevant Local Government and City regulations, policies and guidelines.

4. Summary and Evaluation Methodology

In summary, this procurement was structured as a single-stage, closed tender process whereby the Request was issued directly to a number of other Local Government entities with waste disposal capability, which obviated the requirement for public tender under the Local Government Act. After the receipt of submissions from the Respondents, an evaluation process was carried out by an Evaluation Panel in conformity with the Evaluation Handbook document that was developed for the Request. The evaluation

Uobiity limited by o scheme opp,oved Mem ber of Russell Bedford Jnternationol FEM under Professk>nol SlondardJ l egistotion

Page 94 EN-011-21 Waste Disposal Contract EN-011-21

Item EN-011-21 - Attachment 2 Probity Certificate - City of Canning - Waste Disposal Services

Stantons International

process involved individual assessment and scoring of the responses, followed by a consensus process and group assessment to identify the Preferred Respondent for recommendation. SI was present at all critical points during the process and observed the process as being conducted in an unbiased manner that was fair to the Respondents at all times.

5. Notable Events

During our review no significant issues were identified that would be likely to have an impact on the outcome of the process from a probity perspective. The process was conducted in a professional and well managed manner at all times.

6. Recommendations

No specific recommendations are made to enhance this process.

7. Deviations from Agreed Procedures

No specific recommendations are made to improve the probity of future evaluations such as this.

8. Conclusion

We are satisfied in relation to the following: The Evaluation Panel applied all relevant Local Government and City supply policies and complied with all relevant probity requirements during the evaluation process. It is our opinion that the evaluation process was free from bias and inequity. Documentation supporting the evaluation process provides sufficient evidence for third party review and accurately describes the process undertaken. The process was conducted fairly and equitably.

It is our opinion that the process was fair and equitable and in accordance with the requirements of the Request document and the supporting Evaluation Handbook. Should you wish to discuss any matters raised in this report, please contact the undersigned.

Yours faithfully

Kevin Donnelly Principal, Probity & Procurement

2

Page 95 EN-011-21 Waste Disposal Contract EN-011-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

7.5 Director Canning Community CO-002-21 Endorsement of Safe Canning Strategy

PROGRAM: Canning Community SUB PROGRAM: Community Safety FILE REF: Q21/162 REPORT DATE: 27 May 2021 REPORTING OFFICER: Shane Mallon - Manager Community Safety RESPONSIBLE OFFICER: Sarah McQuade - Director Canning Community

Strategic Plan Theme: CONNECT - An inclusive , safe and vibrant community. Community Goal: A safe and healthy community. Council Strategy: Clean and safe public spaces. Authority/Discretion: Executive: The substantial direction setting and oversight role of the Council eg adopting plans and reports, accepting tenders, directing operations, setting and amending budgets.

Attachments: 1. DRAFT Safe Canning Strategy (D20/134408). (Large Attachments) 2. DRAFT Safe Canning Strategy Implementation Action Plan 2021-2022 (D21/2127). (Large Attachments) 3. 2020 Community Safety Survey Outcomes Report (D21/102099). (Large Attachments) 4. Community Safety and Crime Prevention Plan 2016-2020 Evaluation Report (D21/102096). (Large Attachments)

In Brief: This report seeks Council’s endorsement of the Safe Canning Strategy (the ‘Strategy’). The Strategy (Attachment 1) has been developed through extensive community and stakeholder consultation, in conjunction with analysis of local crime statistics and demographics. The Safe Canning Strategy - Implementation Action Plan (‘IAP’) 2021-2022, has been developed concurrently and is included as Attachment 2. These documents maintain the City's ongoing commitment to strengthen community and foster partnerships in order to improve safety and reduce anti-social behavior. As with previous Community Safety and Crime Prevention (‘CSCP’) plans, the Strategy provides an overarching framework, however identified actions are documented separately in the IAP. The IAP will be reviewed annually, and will be based on yearly consultation that will allow for greater flexibility, and ensure identified changes and emerging community safety issues can be addressed in a timelier manner than the previous four year fixed term period. Council is asked to support the Officer’s Recommendation because: 1. Endorsing the Safe Canning Strategy will provide strategic direction and guidance for the City’s community safety priorities. 2. The Strategy provides a framework for collaborative action to improve safety and reduce anti-social behavior, supporting a connected and safe community for all. If the Officer’s recommendation is not supported:

Page 96 CO-002-21 Endorsement of Safe Canning Strategy CO-002-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

1. The intended outcomes of the Strategy may not be achieved.

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION That Council adopts the City of Canning Safe Canning Strategy as referred to in Attachment 1.

Relevant Council Resolutions

Council Meeting and Date Report No Decision

Community Safety and Crime OCM 15 November 2016 CD–010-16 Prevention Plan 2016-2020 Endorsed by Council

BACKGROUND

1 Traditionally local governments, including Canning, have developed fixed term CSCP Plans generally covering a four year period. The City’s previous CSCP Plan covered the period 2016-2020.

2 This approach provided limited flexibility or opportunity for ongoing consultation and review to meet emerging community safety issues and trends.

3 At the conclusion of the CSCP Plan in late 2020, the City conducted an internal review to evaluate outcomes and achievements (refer Attachment 3).

4 In October 2020, the City launched the 2020 Community Safety Survey (Survey). Consultation outcomes (refer Attachment 4), together with analysis of local crime statistics and demographics informed the development of the Strategy and supporting IAP.

5 As part of the Survey, the City also sought feedback regarding the CSCP Plan, including formatting, structure, and its overall effectiveness to address local safety concerns and priorities.

6 This feedback helped inform the new Strategy.

DETAILS

7 The Strategy is intended to enable a less rigid framework that guides the City’s ongoing community safety priorities.

8 The Strategy captures the various elements of community safety within three core focus areas, namely People, Places and Partnerships, where Council can play a key role in bringing about greater safety outcomes.

9 The Strategy is aligned with the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2017-2027, and supports the objectives of other key strategies and plans to facilitate collaborative action externally and across the organisation.

10 The implementation of initiatives and programs that enhance community safety will be achieved through the delivery of the annual IAP.

11 The IAP and its ongoing review comprises several key steps, which together form the Safe Canning Strategy Cycle, as detailed below:  Consult Whilst previously conducted every four years, the Strategy supports ongoing consultation and stakeholder engagement to inform an annual IAP and ensure the community’s safety concerns and changes in local crime trends are effectively captured and considered.  Prioritise

Page 97 CO-002-21 Endorsement of Safe Canning Strategy CO-002-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

Setting of priority actions will be determined through ongoing consultation with our community and key stakeholders regarding perceptions of safety. Consideration of factors such as changes to local crime trends, demographic and census data will also influence actions and their priority, and help to inform the IAP and success outcomes.  Implement Identified actions will be assigned to one or more of the core focus areas (People, Place, Partnerships) within the IAP.  Report A yearly Community Safety Report Card will provide a progress summary of the IAP, including key achievements and completed actions. A dedicated Community Safety engagement portal and document depository will be developed to improve accessibility to IAP outcomes.

12 The Strategy Cycle will ensure our focus remains relevant and meets community expectations and changes to local issues.

CONSIDERATIONS

Legal Compliance

13 Not applicable.

Policy Implications

14 Not applicable.

Financial Considerations

Business Plan

15 Business Plan 21 – Community Safety

Internal Budget

16 Delivery of actions identified in the IAP will be funded through the annual ‘Property Surveillance and Security Levy’ (‘Levy’) as part of the City’s annual operational budget for Crime Prevention and Community Safety. The current Levy is set at $56.30 per household which equates to $2,351,398 per year (2020-2021 Budget) and funds the delivery of the City’s round the clock Community Safety Service.

17 Current total budget allocation for the delivery of Community Safety Initiatives is $15,500. It is anticipated the pre-COVID budget allocation of $20,000 will be reinstated for the 2021-2022 financial year.

18 As in previous years, wherever possible, external grant funding opportunities will be sourced to help fund the proposed actions and projects identified in the IAP.

19 Proposed projects that cannot be funded via existing budgets, external grant funding opportunities or a combination of both, will be considered as part of the annual budget preparation process.

20 For the 2020-2021 period, the City allocated a total of $3,657,372 on community safety, of which 64% was funded through the annual Property Surveillance and Security Levy.

Asset Management

21 Not applicable.

Page 98 CO-002-21 Endorsement of Safe Canning Strategy CO-002-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

Sustainability Considerations

22 The Plan supports Principle 4 of the City’s Sustainability Policy CM194, to reduce and eventually eliminate “conditions that systematically undermine people’s ability to meet their basic human needs. Providing people the freedom to live and work in a safe and protected environment.” Safety and security are inherently basic human needs.

Consultation

23 The 2020 Community Safety Survey (the ‘Survey’) was conducted to aid in the evaluation of the CSCP 2016-2020 and inform the direction and priorities of the Strategy and supporting IAP.

24 Consultation aligned with Community Safety Month activities which ran throughout the month of October with the theme of “Let’s talk Community Safety!”

25 The Survey opened on Thursday 1 October 2020, via the City’s YourSay website. Hard copies were promoted at Community Safety Month events throughout October, and available at all City Library, Leisure Facilities, Administration and the Cannington Police Station via Community Safety Stations. To assist participants, the YourSay project page provided a list of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ’s), along with the following documents: CSCP Plan; CSCP Plan highlights and major achievements infographic; and A summarized overview of actions delivered throughout the term of the CSCP Plan.

26 A calendar of events was created, which saw the City’s Community Safety team conduct a total of eighteen ‘meet and greet’ events held at local shopping centres, Kent Street Weir, Libraries and senior’s centres, along with informal workshops with students at Cannington Senior College and Sevenoaks Senior High School.

27 These events enabled face to face engagement and provided an additional layer of engagement with the community whilst promoting participation in the Survey and gathering responses. Over 280+ meaningful engagements were recorded.

28 Upon the closure of the Survey at 5.00pm on Saturday, 31 October 2020, the dedicated YourSay page received a total of 2,000 visits and 343 submissions.

29 This represents a 79% increase (151) from the 192 responses received during the last Community Safety survey in 2015. Promotion of the Survey was extensive and included: City website landing page and digital banners; Social media channels such as Facebook, Instagram & LinkedIn, resulting in a final reach of 46,537 people; The City’s In-Focus and Business In-Focus E-Newsletters; Local newspapers and media releases; Community Safety Stations; Features on Library and Leisureplex TV screens; City’s four LED advertisement screens at Whaleback Golf Course, Wharf Street, Cannington and Riverton Leisureplexes; and External email signatures.

Page 99 CO-002-21 Endorsement of Safe Canning Strategy CO-002-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

30 Promotion of Community Safety Month ‘meet and greet’ events played an important part in reaching out to our community, to ensure participation and representation of the less digitally literate members within the community.

31 All relevant comments and feedback were considered and incorporated into the draft Strategy as appropriate.

32 The draft Strategy and IAP was released for comment on Wednesday 7 April 2021, via the City’s YourSay website and was promoted extensively across the various communication platforms as detailed in point 30 above.

33 The City received feedback from 30 respondents, all of which were considered and incorporated into both the Strategy and IAP where appropriate. Other Considerations or Risks Risk/ Consequence Consequen Overall Risk/ Consequences Mitigation/ Actions X = Opportunity Likelihood ce Rating Opportunity Improved community safety Officer and perception of safety Recommendation (both actual and perceived) Once endorsed approved by the achieved as a result of the High commence promotion Likely Moderate Council (positive Strategy’s less restrictive (Opportunity) and delivery of the IAP. outcomes) approach to reporting, Opportunity A evaluating and delivery of the supporting IAP. Review of Officer communication and Recommendation Failure to improve perception marketing plan. approved by the Low of safety (both actual and Further consultation to Rare Significant Council (negative (Risk) perceived) and deliver IAP create greater outcomes) outcomes. awareness and enhance Risk B community safety outcomes.

Officer Community and Recommendation Stakeholder Lack of Strategic direction Low deferred by the consultation. Likely Significant resulting in inability to deliver (Risk) Council IAP actions. Extensive research. Risk C Industry benchmarking

Officer Community and Recommendation Stakeholder Lack of Strategic direction High declined by the consultation. Likely Significant resulting in inability to deliver (Risk) Council IAP actions. Extensive research. Risk D Industry benchmarking.

COMMENT

34 Endorsement of the Strategy will provide a strategic framework to guide the direction, priority and delivery of community safety programs and initiatives.

35 The IAP will be an annual process to ensure our focus remains live and fluid throughout the Strategy’s lifetime.

VOTING REQUIREMENT

36 Simple majority.

Page 100 CO-002-21 Endorsement of Safe Canning Strategy CO-002-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

AGENDA BRIEFING COMMENT

37 Not applicable.

Page 101 CO-002-21 Endorsement of Safe Canning Strategy CO-002-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

CO-003-21 Response to Petition - Community Safety in Bentley and St James

PROGRAM: Canning Community SUB PROGRAM: Community Safety FILE REF: Q21/248 REPORT DATE: 27 May 2021 REPORTING OFFICER: Shane Mallon - Manager Community Safety RESPONSIBLE OFFICER: Sarah McQuade - Director Canning Community

Strategic Plan Theme: CONNECT - An inclusive , safe and vibrant community. Community Goal: A safe and healthy community. Council Strategy: Clean and safe public spaces. Authority/Discretion: Noting: Includes items provided to Council for information purposes only that do not require a decision of Council.

Attachments: 1. Petition regarding community safety in Bentley and St James - Tabled 20 April OCM (D21/87947). (Confidential) 2. Detailed Deomographic Summary and Crime Rates of Bentley and St James (D21/151113).

In Brief: At the Ordinary Council Meeting on 20 April 2021, the City received a Petition requesting additional measures be implemented in Bentley and St James to address crime and improve community safety. Of the proposed measures outlined by the Petitioners, the majority fall outside the remit of Local Government and instead sit within the purview of WA Police and the Department of Communities. However, the City, as a Local Government Authority, is well placed to support localised community safety strategies, and to facilitate the connection between government agencies. To this end, the City has facilitated meetings both with the lead petitioners to further understand their concerns, as well as representatives from WA Police, Crime Stoppers, the Department of Communities, and the Mayor and Mason Ward Councillors, to consider the issues/concerns raised and to implement measures to address these concerns where possible. This report outlines the City’s actions in response to the Petition regarding crime in the Bentley and St James area. Council is asked to receive the report and note the actions.

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION That Council receives this report and notes the proposed actions detailed in response to the Petition received at the 20 April 2021 Ordinary Council Meeting, regarding safety within Bentley and St James.

Page 102 CO-003-21 Response to Petition - Community Safety in Bentley and St James CO-003-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

Relevant Council Resolutions

Council Meeting and Date Report No Decision

Ordinary Council Meeting, 20 Section 8 - Receiving of petitions, The Petition be received and a April 2021 presentations and deputations report prepared for Council.-

BACKGROUND 1 At its Ordinary Council Meeting on 20 April 2021, the City received a signed Petition requesting that additional community safety measures be implemented in the suburbs of Bentley and St James. 2 Since mid-April 2021, the City has coordinated several meetings with the lead petitioners to further discuss their concerns. Attendance at the meetings has included a group of Bentley/St James residents, the Mayor and Mason Ward Councillors, as well as representatives from the City’s Community Safety team, other relevant City staff, the WA Police Force, Crime Stoppers and the Department of Communities. 3 These meetings have been held to further understand the issues and concerns of Bentley/St James residents and to implement measures to address these concerns where possible.

DETAILS 4 Whilst the primary responsibility for law enforcement and crime prevention rests with State Government agencies, Local Government is well placed to support localised community safety strategies. 5 The core areas of concern raised in the Petition include; alleged incidents of drug use, theft, intimidation/threats of violence, derelict front yards/verges and glass smashed over footpaths, parks and common areas. 6 The Petition detailed twelve (12) suggested solutions. It should be noted that the majority of proposed solutions fall outside the remit of Local Government. Each suggested solution, responsibility, potential actions and relevant commentary are detailed at items 11-18 and 32-35. 7 Research indicates there is a correlation between the demographics of a particular area and crime trends. Crime statistics, population density, employment rate, education and socio economic indexes for areas (SEIFA), are factors that may influence or contribute to levels of crime and a community’s overall feelings of safety. 8 A lower SEIFA number indicates a higher level of disadvantage. Of the 14 suburbs in the City of Canning, Bentley has the lowest SEIFA score of 921.8 and St James the 10th lowest, with a score of 991.1 (ABS data 2016). A more detailed overview of demographics, reported crime and City complaint statistics can be found at Attachment 2. 9 The proposed Safe Canning Strategy has been presented to Council for endorsement as part of this agenda (CO-002-21). The Strategy was developed through extensive community and stakeholder consultation, analysis of local crime statistics and demographics. The Strategy is supported by the Implementation Action Plan (IAP) 2021-2022. These documents reaffirm the City’s ongoing commitment to strengthen communities and partnerships in order to improve safety and target anti- social behaviour, as well as the various issues that underpin them in our community. 10 The community were consulted twice throughout the development of the Strategy. The first consultation period was held throughout October 2020 during Community Safety Month. The City also promoted the consultation at Bentley Plaza during this period to encourage responses from local residents and businesses. The City received 354 responses, 8.7% of which were from Bentley and St James residents. Bentley/St James residents equate to 10.9% of the City of Canning’s total

Page 103 CO-003-21 Response to Petition - Community Safety in Bentley and St James CO-003-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

population. The second community consultation period was conducted in April 2021, and specifically sought feedback on the draft Safe Canning Strategy and Implementation Action Plan. The City received feedback from 30 respondents, all of which were considered and incorporated into both the Strategy and IAP where appropriate. RESPONSE TO SUGGESTED PETITION SOLUTIONS – CITY OF CANNING 11 Whilst the majority of recommendations in the Petition fall outside the remit of Local Government, there are some that can be supported by the City. These include street lighting, CCTV and community meetings/ neighbourhood committees. 12 Increased street and park lighting: The majority of street lighting within the City is supplied and owned by Western Power. The City routinely reports faulty lighting to Western Power and encourages residents to do the same. Requests for upgraded or additional lighting are ordinarily made via the City’s website. The City will investigate the Petition request and should it be determined that upgraded or additional street lighting is warranted, an application will be made to Western Power. The City has requested more specific information from the lead petitioners to help further progress this request. 13 The City is due to commence the St James Network Renewal Underground Project Pilot later this year, which will see the upgrade of power and lighting throughout the suburb. Works are also planned to improve the area and lighting around Hillview Park in Bentley later this year. Additionally, consideration is being given to a Local Government consortia project, in partnership with Western Power, which would enable a citywide replacement of current lighting infrastructure with LED lights, and significantly improve illumination of the public realm. This proposal will be presented to Council via a Strategic Issues Briefing later this year. 14 The City also offers a Security Incentive Scheme, which is a rebate to help residents improve their level of security by installing security devices. Under the scheme, residents can apply to install sensor lighting on residential properties up to the value of $120. The next round of the Security Incentive Scheme will be open in the new financial year. 15 Increased CCTV in problem areas: The City has existing fixed CCTV systems in and around the Bentley Library Hub. Additionally, the new Hillview community building will see the installation of a number of external CCTV cameras covering the Hub area. Moreover, the development of the Hillview Hub will enable improved passive surveillance through increased community facility use. In response to the Petition, the Department of Communities installed additional CCTV cameras around Waabiny Park on 18 May 2021. 16 The City actively deploys mobile CCTV trailers and a Variable Message Sign Board encouraging people to report crime and antisocial behaviour. Deployment within these areas has increased as a direct response to the Petition. In light of the information and locations provided by the petitioners, the CCTV trailers have most recently been deployed at Chapman Park, Warwick Park, Bentley Hub and Wyong Reserve. Residents are also encouraged to apply for the Security Incentive Scheme to install their own CCTV systems. Rebates for CCTV are available up to the value of $200. 17 More Community Meetings: The Petition recommended regular meetings between residents, Council, Police and the Department of Communities, which the City has subsequently coordinated. In January 2021, the City partnered with the Town of Victoria Park to deliver a ‘Suburb Safety Session’ in Bentley. A second ‘Suburb Safety Session’ is scheduled for St James in June 2021. Suburb Safety Sessions form part of the Safe Canning Strategy Implementation Action Plan (IAP). The intent is to deliver sessions in response to reported crime and safety issues within a community or on request. 18 Active Neighbourhood Committee: Since 2001, the City has supported the Canning Neighbourhood Watch (NHW) group, who meet bi-monthly with the WA Police Force and City Officers. Through meetings with the lead petitioners and representatives from the Bentley/St James communities, it became apparent there was a lack of awareness of this the NHW Program. In response, information

Page 104 CO-003-21 Response to Petition - Community Safety in Bentley and St James CO-003-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

about the program and an open invitation to join the group has been extended to the lead petitioners and Bentley/St James residents. In the new financial year, the City will be reviewing the Neighbourhood Committee model to ensure it is meeting community expectations and best practice community impact. OTHER RELEVANT CITY INITIATIVES 19 The City offers a number of other initiatives and services that are intended to enhance safety and security and perceptions of safety within Bentley and St James. 20 The City provides a Ranger and Community Safety Service (RCSS) which operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week in an effort to deter antisocial behaviour and increase feelings of safety. The RCSS also offers a Holiday Watch Service, whereby residents going on holiday can request more regular patrols of their property at no extra cost. 21 In response to the Petition, the RCSS have increased patrols in the identified areas to deter antisocial behaviour and improve perceptions of safety within the local community. Furthermore, the RCSS team have been attending the Bentley 360 Community Dinners where possible to help raise the profile of the RCSS and break down barriers within the area. 22 It should be noted that the City has a well-established public maintenance program which responds to reports of broken glass, litter and illegal dumping, graffiti, damage to City infrastructure, fallen trees and maintenance of footpaths, parks and reserves. 23 The City operates a verge mowing program and maintains an unkempt verge register. Residents, who are unable to maintain the verge themselves should contact the City requesting to be added to the register. This program is undertaken to reduce fire fuel loading and to reduce any potential sightline risks. 24 The City encourages residents to take pride in the appearance of their own properties and adjoining verges. As an example, the City recently ran a native water-wise verge makeover competition with Greening Australia as an incentive for improved amenity, with the winners of the competition receiving a verge makeover. 25 In partnership with the Department of Communities, the City is upgrading seven parks within Bentley through the Bentley Parkscapes Program, which includes; Sill Park, Hillview Park, Chapman Park, Ashburton Park, Wyong Reserve, Warwick Park and Dumond Park. Works are expected to be complete by June 2023. 26 Additionally, the City is currently running a Business Graffiti Removal Incentive Program which aims to encourage reporting and removal of graffiti from businesses and commercial premises, following the best-practice response to graffiti prevention of rapid removal. The City also provides graffiti removal kits to residents and businesses free of charge. 27 Other recent events and activities within the subject area include, Ranger Buddy attending the Walk Safely to School Day on 14 May at Bentley Primary School, as well as promotion of the Gone in Less than 60 Seconds campaign, targeting theft from motor vehicles scheduled for June 2021 at Bentley Plaza. 28 Additionally, the City offers assorted safety information and resources including property marking kits for residents. Community safety messaging is distributed via the City’s website, In Focus ENewsletters, social media platforms, Community Safety Stations, electronic sign boards and letterbox drops initiatives in collaboration with Police. Hard copy versions of the City’s Welcome Pack have been given to the lead petitioners for distribution to Bentley and St James residents. The City also recognises Community Safety Month each year, attends pop up events in response to reports and crime trends and offers school presentations by Constable Care and Ranger Buddy to local primary and secondary schools.

Page 105 CO-003-21 Response to Petition - Community Safety in Bentley and St James CO-003-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

29 The City continues to support local primary schools who participate in the Safety House Program, which offers a place of safety for children when they are away from the security and comfort of their home and school environment. The City offers financial support to new schools joining the Safety House Program, participating schools to cover the annual affiliation fee and for activities associated with the program. RESPONSE TO SUGGESTED PETITION SOLUTIONS – OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES 30 Five (5) of the 12 recommended solutions detailed within the Petition are the responsibility of the WA Police Force, these include: a) Police substation in Bentley and St James; b) Dedicated police to the area; c) More Police Officers; d) Increased community confidence in Police attendance; and e) A dedicated portal for reporting crime. Accordingly, a meeting was held between local police and City Officers on 14 May and, on their advice, the Petition has been forwarded to the Minister for Police for further consideration. 31 Two (2) of the recommended Petition solutions are the responsibility of the Department of Communities. These include mandatory requirements for public housing tenants; and more oversight of problem tenants. The Petition has been forwarded to the Department of Communities and the Minister for Housing for their consideration. A senior Department representative has attended two of the meeting facilitated by the City since the petition was received. 32 Medically Supervised Injection Centre (MSIC): The suggestion of a MSIC has been referred to the Department of Heath for their consideration. These types of clinics are currently being trialled and evaluated in Victoria and New South Wales with mixed responses. There are no MSIC’s in Western Australia, however there are agencies and programs that provide sterile syringes located in Perth, West Perth and Fremantle. There is also a mobile syringe exchange program managed by the WA AIDS Council that services the Perth metropolitan region. 33 The City of Canning provides sharps disposal units in some public toilets which are emptied as required. It is the City’s experience that needles are discarded indiscriminately, regardless of whether bins are installed or not. The City responds to reports of discarded needles in public places and disposes of them correctly. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS 34 Through subsequent community meetings, it has become evident that there is a lack of awareness regarding the role and function of Local Government and availability of services and resources the City can provide. The City is working with community members to increase awareness in this area. 35 Furthermore, there has been a prevalent misconception that posting incidents on social media negates the need to report crime to the Police. As Police statistics are based on reported crime, this contributes to a disparity between the level of reported and actual crime. In response, the City is increasing promotion regarding the importance of reporting crime through the correct reporting lines.

Page 106 CO-003-21 Response to Petition - Community Safety in Bentley and St James CO-003-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

CONSIDERATIONS

Legal Compliance 36 Not applicable.

Policy Implications 37 Not applicable.

Financial Considerations

Business Plan 38 Business Plan 21 – Community Safety.

Internal Budget 39 Actions identified as falling within the responsibility of the City will be delivered within existing operational budgets.

Asset Management 40 Not applicable.

Sustainability Considerations 41 Response to the Petition, including actions undertaken and planned, supports Principle 4 of the City’s Sustainability Policy CM194, to reduce and eventually eliminate “conditions that systematically undermine people’s ability to meet their basic human needs. Providing people the freedom to live and work in a safe and protected environment.” Safety and security are inherently basic human needs.

Consultation 42 The City has liaised with the lead petitioners, members of the Bentley and St James communities, the WA Police Force and Department of Communities. This includes both face to face meetings and email correspondence. The lead petitioners have and will continue to be updated of any progress on the matters detailed in this report.

Page 107 CO-003-21 Response to Petition - Community Safety in Bentley and St James CO-003-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

Other Considerations or Risks Mitigation/ Consequence Consequence Overall Risk/ Risk/ Opportunity Consequences X = Actions Likelihood Rating Opportunity Improved community safety Officer Commence and perception of Recommendation /continue safety in approved by the liaison with key High Bentley/St James Likely Moderate Council (positive stakeholders (Opportunity) achieved as a outcomes) and delivery of result of Opportunity A agreed actions. implementing response actions. Continued communication and review of deliverable Officer actions Recommendation Failure to improve approved by the community safety Further Medium Possible Significant Council (negative and perception of consultation to (Risk) outcomes) safety in Bentley/ create greater Risk B St James. awareness and enhance community safety outcomes. Engagement with lead Reputational Risk petitioners, Officer local residents, Recommendation Failure to improve WA Police Force Low deferred by the community safety Possible Significant and (Risk) Council and perception of Department of Risk C safety in Bentley/ Communities to St James. seek opportunities to resolve issue. Reputational Risk Engagement with lead Failure to meet petitioners, community Officer local residents, expectations and Recommendation WA Police Force improve High declined by the and Possible Significant community safety (Risk) Council Department of and perception of Risk D Communities to safety in Bentley/ seek St James. opportunities to resolve issue.

COMMENT 43 The recommendations made in the Petition have been reviewed, and realistic solutions applied where possible.

VOTING REQUIREMENT 44 Simple majority.

AGENDA BRIEFING COMMENT 45 Not applicable.

Page 108 CO-003-21 Response to Petition - Community Safety in Bentley and St James CO-003-21

Item CO-003-21 - Attachment 2 Detailed Deomographic Summary and Crime Rates of Bentley and St James of 1 to a of a ation l a from City and (50%). . at of Perth, City . grow had lower 60 spoke r and the popu slander a to I people the . a in t home . ) City 18) s of of 34 . who hectare large English education and aged at ng had English lia . i overseas Greater has increase 2041. a is % Strait disengaged The 7 liv in per . . an than foreca City and and City % (under 39 is are born people is Austra workers English tertiary persons were Canning Torres Perth (1.6 the The speaking of ion other of population This education 2021 t of persons were . in than 5,366 and people, who people on young , children i 1.0% 49 and Canning, . City a_g_e 2020 Western of 2041 of is 2016 Greater of 94,130. n 14 popula in other 2016 difficulty is in ia the by Canning on language 's young between of i people , In a City proport 1% than . . % of of current 3 City med Aboriginal COMPARISON 2016 the .9% 124,955 25.33 older density and employment 6 City Canning Canning larger percentage language populat home proportion lower reported percentage independence In In spoke 45,358 The The The The of in of of is of y t i to CANNING In from C a James James OF the density . St Islander proportion change St . language home. ) percentage a proportion 31 in forecast a of spoke % at is is than CITY reported is 2041. larger Strait . on disengaged {42 lower . i A a larger living der a lower l This spoke and a education and are a o population . people home James English James and a ry and or , Torres of St at hectare English were had St ia WITH who populat had education. 2041. 2021 n %. % overseas 60 i 18) has of than 3 and people people . per by tert who 0.7 and a_g_e 32 2020 of is born English tion James aged people other la workforce speaking StJames James JAMES St (under 3,610 young between , St persons 134 people than to ST % were of ing. James, , popu median Aboriginal current % James persons young 2016 St 213 0 . , In In 17.47 1 2016 2,938. 2016 language percentage independence population The The The The grow other difficulty of of employment St children 8 31.49 Cann AND s of in i of n I . . a to a s r a older has BENTLEY change and Bentley Islander yea density Bentley . a or language home. ) ey e, l in 2041. l is a of 28 proportion % education forecast at spoke 60 reported workforce FOR is is Strait . disengaged on (61 lower . i and Bent This peop living . a sh education. i lower spoke aged are ng home i a English tertiary young population people DATA 2021 and Torres aged Bentley a at and 2041. Engl hectare were Bentley of of who of populat n had overseas i e Cann 18) than of l y and has lish people per 9% persons . who 1.6%. of le on a_g_e 2020 i is of 54 Eng born oyment peop between at l other l speaking City y, (under Bent 10,975 by on % young i le Bentley percentage percentage persons 586 people than to . were of emp the , independence current median popu Aboriginal 77 % 28.24 2016, Bent . 229 8 . , han DEMOGRAPHIC 23 5 proport Bentley In In t 2016 2016 and of other difficulty children 7,370 larger larger language population 4 from The The The The grow 1: at TABLE diverse Youth currently density and spoken composition home linguistically Language Population Disengaged Population Population Age Culturally forecasting Demographic Demographic • • • • • • • Population Local Local

Page 109 CO-003-21 Response to Petition - Community Safety in Bentley and St James CO-003-21

Item CO-003-21 - Attachment 2 Detailed Deomographic Summary and Crime Rates of Bentley and St James a to 2 is n i aged . had are ng . due , and i % per s ng r e 555 one i 12 l r , e 3.4 reported couples ndance ive $377 cation l Cann $1 e . people households home fi mo old is are were s the are i Cann . and r of Year of of att , o medium day % of - ty are of i % % weekly quali is Perth their ity rent . 20 repayments 2 5 C to Canning % City s 2016 % . . - . eted 5 500 ty 9 l an , . i i City of vately 23 63 in i C the (3 the Canning , , day 2016 $2 pr in degree the ther ing in in owned ng . univer households in med of City i r comp the Greater s eir median s y ng h in d children i ll fu of t in mortgage the The A hou people fu had % in Cann Canning oyed . than come n l rent i . Higher al n p n or 65 ncome i l i of of i e Current weekly , . or residents people . he 3174 dr 2016. on) without weekly ty ty soc years l ing i i i an households househol housing , s ng of of were i City C C 5 n higher and in unemp i 1 chi density , , of of % % % 2 9 3 ability 2016 . the the . . the % % s %. 2016 24 29 22 school $447 di over earned 35 9 couples household needing purcha high populat Bachelor Median In In In In were 10 with were week p_erson an 15 . are and . g , ation) , % ncome l their i in 4 . lin one %. arned couples k l in over Bachelor 9 e $346 2016 12 a . popu home were s older are n i are were wee is i . and help schoo medium s aged ds , had % l the are is on s i per 12 their rent repayments 28 . household of 2016 % . at James 4 Jame c disability n % ear i St 5 Jame people households Y St . needing to James more . Perth privately dren n d ng househo n i St (3 i owned il of of attendance St si median s. weekly or qualifi n e ng of l 414, i ch % % i due further in mortgage 2016 ity 2 3 1, an % . . s i A fully hou n $ 500 l i , dents ng 20 64 rent 47 i Greater a peop is reported or lives si i ver , i thout $2 weekly complete s, s i degree med ity. re people oc e 99 r ng dren. un weekly w s i of l household ns households hous , day than he were s of of - and had in .T chi James Jam James, de , James Jame of of to % % % - 8 Highe 2016 St St St . St St % % th gh i i n n ncome Median In In In In 12.4 2016 20 38 32.0 unemployed h i i i purchas higher were w years $485 or day couple 30 Current p_erson . an . % 15 are , , 2 and $336 . . ng in i s % i lone 12 couples um over Bachelor to 2016 i 23 earned needing home a older are were is week chool in r are rent . i s were the due med % aged are had . an per 12 of the i is household 28 repayments . % 2016 % lives 4 063 n ople , 9 vately, and reported i . i med Bentley e Bentley Year more $1 p households . (3 Perth pr day ey ldren. in l Bentley - in owned i . households attendance is weekly Bentley of of or qualification n to i ch further - of in mortgage 2016 % % ity an e i Bent s 7 7 weekly A housing fully . . 500 % in . l people , dents day renting eholds in . Greater a or ver si s 68 i 12 32 i thout $2 med the Bentley ty completed i , , , degree re peop l . si 271 ng n weekly w un soc of i ey ey ey hou households housing , their l l l ty than si were of of n The and li had i children in . den , of of % % % 2 6 p abi Higher 2016 l Bent Bent Bent . . % % s ncome ncome 28 2016 purcha Median In In In In 15 16 $397 or di 64 couples Current unemployed high higher he population) i i with were 42.9 years p_erson Status Income & assistance connectivity for renting/owning Need Education Households Employment Household Internet Qualifications Demographic Demographic Demographic • • • • • • Local Local Local

Page 110 CO-003-21 Response to Petition - Community Safety in Bentley and St James CO-003-21

Item CO-003-21 - Attachment 2 Detailed Deomographic Summary and Crime Rates of Bentley and St James . 3 the ing v the the 2021. li Job (10.1%) at of were 2021} premises estern ng City retail i March W {4.8% in burglary 0; the . March other receiving , Cann from - 9 989.5 . . population) in 986 : , connection 2 ds 1026 l the from : were 4 2020 bs: 1060 . r vehicle across of stealing (January from ing Allowance 998 5 Perth . : internet 7 Subu Welshpool . 3 March types 1076.4 househo . 7 stealing 5 motor (4.8% .1 Cann . : an ton n 1081.9 966.6 1 i Leeming: Youth : 1024 of me quarter 986 : 1015.0). i 10 991 ing 1041.5 - increase and damage, : : : 921.8 Vale 3248 1076 from on} Park- 1001.2 cr i have s: : {Greater and g. : Canning : an last City people 0 in ing, . Cann is of ley five not l 2016, the the Jame verton: i id 1023 dwell d dwell Queens Cannington: City Canning in premises populat Parkwood Ferndale Lynwood Bentley East R Rossmoyne In In Wilson Willetton top stealing Seeker She St Australia 4,094 This of the h of ing iving the l City , {13.4%) at Marc 2021} (6.2% n receiv the i other drug were in . James of 934 damage were St from population) 2020 James in connection owance from icle, l suburb St the Al James n veh i of stealing (January-March possession March % , 7 internet in . Youth increase and types son/St ing motor l l (7 an households an and advantaged quarter is dwel 155 . from crime have last people ses. most ing} ing l five population) Seeker not 1h the 2016, Bentley/Wi n In In 1,159 2021.This burglary paraphernalia premi i top the Job stea did dwelling 999.1 Cann (10 City , 2021} were the were lowance from l A March in burglary in damage March , Bentley other James - Bentley population) Youth in increase internet in suburb the an from an on/St and vehicle of is ls premises, {January types dwelling. % population) 7 have the motor retail (7. Seeker stealing the households crime not at advantaged of quarter d Job 2021.This i and 389 from from Bentley/Wi d five ing) , last people ng most in i (6.2% 2016 Cann the March tealing In In 1,159 stealing s 2020. {14th {14.6%) of dwell connection 921.8 934 in receiving premises. living the top the ers b e ased v i b t ess a l c num l i Trends re area & vantage, he an mean t d lower . of econom census isa . - ers d b of age m t socio Statistics nu Trends more measures of range a FA I evel Local disadvan disadvantage Crime (reported) l higher mean SEIFA SE on characteristics

Page 111 CO-003-21 Response to Petition - Community Safety in Bentley and St James CO-003-21

Item CO-003-21 - Attachment 2 Detailed Deomographic Summary and Crime Rates of Bentley and St James 4 of reports City 259 the thin i were w 1465. reported offences there was of , behaviour l period quarter number l . this last tota antisocia the he of during Canning In T % of 9 . 1 of of ty accounts i reports ty tutes i i C 5 C offences d the the which const were 82, This reporte within within r. there was of , ou i crime reports all period quarter behav number of l . ial this total % last n_g_ i ing. oc tota 5.5 is the the In for The during ant of Cann Cann of the City reports the within 22 offences constitutes which thin s i , w were crime Thi 219 . all reported of our there i was of , % reports 9 . od . i 14 behav in_g_ total per quarter number for . the this Cann last of ing of total % antisocial the In of accounts during 8.4 Cann City The

Page 112 CO-003-21 Response to Petition - Community Safety in Bentley and St James CO-003-21

DRAFT AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2021

8. NOTICE OF MOTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION AT THE NEXT ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING Nil.

9. URGENT BUSINESS

10. CONFIDENTIAL MATTERS Nil.

11. CLOSURE

Page 113