______CITY OF SUBIACO Attachments Ordinary Council Meeting 14 August 2018
Item C1 Submission on Draft Subiaco Redevelopment Area Heritage Inventory Attachment 1……………………………………………………………………. Attachment 2…………………………………………………………………….
Item C3 Car Park Occupancy Report Attachment 1…………………………………………………………………….
Item C4 Stop Puppy Farming - Local Government Consultation - City of Subiaco Submission Attachment 1……………………………………………………………………. Attachment 2…………………………………………………………………….
REPORT ITEM NO. C1 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 Metropolitan Redevelopment Authority GOVERNMENT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA MR1:I
27 June 2018
Mr Alexander Petrovski Our Ref: MRA-08411 Manager Planning Services Doc Id: A560511 City of Subiaco Contact: Andrew Cumming PO BOX 270 Phone: 6557 0870 SUBIACO WA 6904
Dear Alexander
STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION — DRAFT SUBIACO REDEVELOPMENT AREA HERITAGE INVENTORY
The Metropolitan Redevelopment Authority (MRA) recently adopted a new statutory planning framework, including Subiaco Redevelopment Scheme 2 and a suite of Development Policies, for the Subiaco Redevelopment Area, including the Subiaco East and Subi Centro Project Areas.
In accordance with the Scheme, a draft Heritage Inventory for the Subiaco Redevelopment Area has now been prepared in order to recognise places and precincts of cultural heritage significance. The Heritage Inventory, along with Development Policy 2 — Heritage Places, will complement the statutory planning framework for the Subiaco Redevelopment Area to enable development consistent with Scheme vision and objectives, particularly to retain and enhance Subiaco's sense of place.
In accordance with clause 8.4 of the Scheme, the MRA invites the City of Subiaco to review and make comment on the enclosed draft Heritage Inventory by no later than 10 August 2018, being 42 days from the date of this letter.
Should you have any questions with regard to this matter, please contact Andrew Cumming, MRA Senior Planner on 6557 0870 or via email, [email protected].
Yours sincerely
2,4
Ciara Clarke Manager Statutory Planning
Enc: Draft Subiaco Redevelopment Area Heritage Inventory
HEAD OFFICE GPO Building Level 3, Forrest Place, Perth WA +61 (0)8 6557 0700 E [email protected] P Locked Bag 8, Perth Business Centre, WA 6849 +61 (0)8 9281 6020 w www.mra.wa.gov.au ABN 69 902 571142 Metropolitan Redevelopment Authority GOVERNMENT Or WESTERN AUSTRALIA MR1:1
Heritage Inventory
I muumuus' L II II 11M 0 IMMO; 0 I' r X L J 1, tH
Subiaco Redevelopment Area Draft For Public Consultation June 2018 DOCUMENT CONTROL
ADOPTION DATE:
AMENDMENT NO. ADOPTION DATE DESCRIPTION
(YEAR) (DESCRIPTION)
(YEAR) {DESCRIPTION)
Page 2 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory Metropolitan Redevelopment Authority GMERNNIENT OF Subiaco WESTERN4t)t AUSTRALIA MRR
Heritage Inventory
1. INTRODUCTION 4
2. MANAGEMENT OF PLACES IN THE HERITAGE INVENTORY 7
3. THEMATIC HISTORY OF SUBIACO REDEVELOPMENT AREA 9
4. SUBI CENTRO PROJECT AREA 17
5. LIST OF PLACES IN THE SUBI CENTRO PROJECT AREA 19
6. SUBIACO EAST PROJECT AREA 25
7. LIST OF PLACES IN THE SUBIACO EAST PROJECT AREA 27
Page 3 I/ MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory 1. Introduction THE INVENTORY The Metropolitan Redevelopment Authority (the MRA) is responsible for the urban renewal of the Subiaco Redevelopment Area and proposes to recognise and afford protective measures to those places that have cultural heritage significance. The Subiaco Redevelopment Scheme 2 (the Scheme) empowers the MRA to compile and maintain a list of heritage places, called a Heritage Inventory (HI). The Subiaco HI is a statutory heritage list adopted under the Scheme, similar to a heritage list included within a Local Planning Scheme, that identifies places and precincts of cultural heritage significance that are considered worthy of protection. The Subiaco HI complements the statutory planning framework for the Subiaco Redevelopment Area to protect and enable adaptive reuse and development consistent with the redevelopment objectives set out in the Metropolitan Redevelopment Authority Regulations 2011 (MRA Regulations), particularly to retain and enhance Subiaco's sense of place. The MRA's HI is different to a Local Government Inventory (Municipal Inventory), such as the City of Subiaco's inventory, which is a database that identifies places or precincts of cultural heritage signifciance, but is only for information purposes and has no statutory basis. The places and precincts listed in the HI are supported by a 'thematic history', which identifies the history, stories and events, including Aboriginal history, that have shaped Subiaco and are represented in the built environment. The thematic history is important as it informs the assessment of significance of the places. Whilst the Subiaco Redevelopment Area has undergone much change over successive periods of development, the area still retains a number of places that reflect moments or periods in the local historical timeline. A key objective of the HI is to recognise and protect places of cultural heritage significance, including sites such as the Australia Fine China Precinct, Godfrey House, Subiaco Oval and the Subiaco Oval Gates, which are included on the State Register of Heritage Places, as well as other locally important historical elements of Subiaco.
PLANNING IMPLICATIONS The Subiaco HI has a key role to play in the protection and conservation of local and State heritage. This document is adopted by the Authority under the provisions of the Scheme and, together with the Authority's Development Policy 2 - Heritage Places, will be used in assessment of development applications and planning decision making regarding heritage places in the Subiaco Redevelopment Area.
Page 4 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory STUDY AREA The study area comprises the land within the Subiaco Redevelopment Area, as shown in Schedule 1 of the MRA Regulations and Figure 1 below.
.9;
FIGURE 1 SUBIACO REDEVELOPMENT AREA
Page 5 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory METHODOLOGY The methodology adopted for preparation of the Subiaco HI is generally based on the methodology set out in the Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage Basic Principles for Local Government Inventories (2012) and the Criteria for the Assessment of Local Heritage Places and Areas (2012). These guidelines have been adapted to ensure that this study is consistent with the Authority's planning framework. The essential principles and philosophy of the Australia International Council of Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) Charter for Places of Cultural Heritage Significance (the 'Burra Charter', 2013) are also drawn upon in the determination of heritage values and management levels.
The preparation process involved an examination of the City of Subiaco Local Government Inventory, research data from the Subi Centro project area, heritage assessments undertaken by Greenward Consulting on behalf of the City of Subiaco (2015), desktop review of the Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage InHerit database and advice prepared by Griffiths Architects and Archae-Aus on behalf of the MRA. Each place is assessed in terms of its condition as viewed from the streetscape, which contribute to the degree or 'level' of significance of the place. Each place is graded on the scale of 'Good', 'Fair' or 'Poor'. In accordance with the standard methodology for the preparation of HI's, physical surveys of places within the study area were conducted from the street only and did not include examinations of interior spaces.
Page 6 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory 2. Management of Places in the Heritage Inventory MANAGEMENT CATEGORIES The following terms are used to classify and describe each place listed in the Subiaco HI to enable appropriate management of the place, with details included in the Place Record for each listed place: Statement of Significance Each place includes a Statement of Significance which is a specific and unique description of the key heritage qualities of each place. A place or precinct is deemed to have heritage significance if it meets one or more of the following criteria:
• Aesthetic Value: It is significant in exhibiting particular aesthetic characteristics. For example, it exhibits characteristics of scale, composition, materials, texture and colour that are considered to have value for the local area.
• Historic Value: It is significant in the evolution or pattern of the history of the local district. For example. it is closely associated with the events, developments or cultural phases that have played an important part in the area's history, has a special association with a group or organisation important in shaping the area or is an example of technical or creative achievement from a particular period.
• Scientific (Research) Value: It has demonstrable potential to yield information that will contribute to an understanding of the natural or cultural history of the local district, or it is significant in demonstrating a high degree of technical innovation or achievement. For example, it is a standing structure or archaeological deposit which is an important benchmark or reference site, or it shows qualities of innovation, design skill or originality for its time or context.
• Social Value: It is significant through association with a community or cultural group in the local district for social, cultural, educational or spiritual reasons. For example, the place is one that the community, or a significant part of the community, has held in high regard for an extended period.
Desirable Outcome The Desirable Outcome relates to how a heritage place should be managed with regard to any future development of the place.
Page 7 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory Management Level The Management Level for a place is related to its heritage value and will have significant influence on how the development of a place is to be managed (i.e. its 'desired outcome'). The Management Level is as important as the list of places itself to ensure appropriate future management of all places listed on the HI. The Management Levels are outlined in the following table:
Management Level Description Desired Outcome These places are included or under consideration for inclusion in the State Register of Heritage Places and will be afforded the highest level of protection Level 1 Place or Precinct of State Significance both through the provisions of the Heritage Act, the Scheme and Development Policy 2 - Heritage Places (Development Policy 2).
These places are of local significance in their own right and will be afforded a high level of protection through Level 2 Place of Local Significance the provisions of the Scheme and Development Policy 2. Conservation of these places is highly desirable through adaptive reuse, however proposed partial or full demolition is to be assessed on a case by case basis at the Development Application stage in accordance with the. Redevelopment Scheme and Development Policy Level 3 Place of Lesser Significance 2, including a full heritage assessment and impact statement. Photographic records and interpretation should be included in any redevelopment of the site. These places are historic sites (with or without built features) and should be retained as a record in the Inventory for archival Their significance Level 4 Historic Site or Precinct purposes. should be recognised through interpretation in any redevelopment of the site.
Table 1 - Management Levels for Heritage Places ABORIGINAL HERITAGE SITES The MRA acknowledges the Whadjuk Noongar people as traditional owners of land within the Subiaco Redevelopment Area.
Archae-Aus Consultants undertook research on behalf of the MRA and while there are no registered Aboriginal Sites or Other Heritage Places within the Subiaco Redevelopment Area, it is recognised that there may be physical or ethnographic connections to the area, which have not yet been recorded. In-particular, there are direct and important Aboriginal connections to the Princess Margaret Hospital and Subiaco Oval precincts, with other important and significant sites located within the surrounding area, which indicates the region as a whole was an important place for camping, hunting, water, burials, ceremony and spiritual connections.
Page 8 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory 3. Thematic History of Subiaco Redevelopment Area SUMMARY OF THEMATIC HISTORY
Pre 1827 - Pre-European Contact - Oor-Dal-Kalla History Pre-1827 Subiaco part of the Mooro territory occupied by Yellagonga's family group
Contact 1827-1850 - - Oor-Dal-Kalla History 1827 First contact is made between Yellagonga and his family and the European settlers 1829 European occupation of Western Australia
Yellagonga and his family relocate from Kings Park area and move to the Subiaco area believing the European settlers are 'janga' or the spirit of their ancestors
1850-1894 - New Subiaco - Foundation of Subiaco 1851 New Subiaco founded by Benedictine monks European settlement and expansion quickly brings about the collapse of Yellagonga's family's way of life 1860s Completion of Perth-Fremantle Road (now Stirling Highway)
1881 Perth-Fremantle railway opens 1883 First Subiaco railway station established to east of present station Commonage vested with Perth City Council 1886 First house erected in Subiaco
1894 Smallpox epidemic; cemetery established at end of Broome Road (now Hay Street) Broome Road (now Hay Street) macadamised
Subiaco railway station relocated to current site
1895 - 1945 Subiaco Develops 1895 Land north of Subiaco Road ('Subiaco Estate') was released for settlement 1897 Subiaco proclaimed a Municipality; first council election 1900 Trams operate in Subiaco 1903 Council established electricity supply plant 1904 Land (including the future site of Subiaco Oval) vested with the Subiaco Municipality for recreation purposes, with football and cricket clubs being established in response to the growing population
1905 Subiaco obtains 98 acres of endowment land, originally part of Perth Commonage George Temple Poole designs subdivision for endowment land
Monteith, Clemenger & Co open factory on endowment land (now Price Street) 1906 Subiaco Municipal Council named new park bound by Hamilton Street, Axon Street (now Haydn Bunton Drive), Subiaco Road and Mueller Road (now Roberts Road) Mueller Park, after a Botanist for the Colonial Government
Page 9 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory 1908 First Australian Football match held at Subiaco Oval between Subiaco and Cottesloe 1909 Construction of Old Outpatients Building and opening of Perth Children's Hospital (later Princess Margaret Hospital)
1911 Metters and Whittaker Bros begin operations on endowment land 1913 Godfrey House (located within PMH) completed 1916 Mueller Park renamed Kitchener Park and Subiaco Oval, with Mueller Road renamed Roberts Road due to anti-German sentiment during WWI
1921 Calyx Porcelain Works (later Australian Fine China) opens
1946 - 1980s - Post-War Era 1945 Government takeover of Calyx Works
1948 Arcus Metal Products open on endowment land (now Roydhouse Street) 1949 Perth Children's Hospital renamed Princess Margaret Hospital (PMH) in response to Princess Margaret's visit to Australia
1952 Government Printing Office opens on Station Street 1952 Subiaco Municipality declared a City 1968 Three-tier stand at Subiaco Oval built 1969 Mrs Margaret Clements becomes PMH's first Aboriginal Liaison nurse and PMH establishes Aboriginal Advancement Council; Harry Boan building opens 1976 Whittaker Bros closes Subiaco factory
1980s - 2010's - Changing Cityscape 1986 Metters closes Subiaco factory.
Charles Moore building opens at PMH 1987 West Coast Eagles play first game at Subiaco Oval 1992 City of Subiaco sells some endowment land to implement 'Subiaco 2000' plan 1994 Subiaco Redevelopment Act 1994 enacted 1995 Announcement of Subi Centro State Government urban renewal project 1996 Subiaco Redevelopment Scheme gazetted to transfer planning authority from City of Subiaco to Subiaco Redevelopment Authority (now Metropolitan Redevelopment Authority) 1998 New underground Subiaco Railway Station opened
New grand stands at eastern end of Subiaco Oval completed 2006 Australian Fine China closes
2011 Announcement by Government of new stadium to be constructed at Burswood 2017 Subiaco Oval ceases to operate as Western Australia's major sporting stadium Announcement by Government of new Subiaco East Project, with redevelopment of -PMH, Subiaco Oval and a new high school 2018 PMH closes following opening of new Perth Children's Hospital
Page 10 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory THEMATIC HISTORY OF SUBIACO
Pre-1827 - Pre-European Contact — Oor-Dal-Kalla History The Subiaco Redevelopment Area is within Mooro Territory, which is part of the Whadjuk region of the greater Noongar boodja (country). Noongar boodja ranges from Geraldton to the north of Perth and down to the edge of Esperance in the south-east of Western Australia. Mooro territory was occupied by the Oor- dal-kalla at the time of first contact and comprised a family group led by Yellagonga. 1 Their territory was bounded by the Moore River to the north, Ellen Brook to the east, the Indian Ocean to the west and the Swan River to the south.
Yellagonga's group included his two wives, Yangan and Windan, along with their daughters and their daughters' husbands. 2 The main camp for Yellagonga and his family was at Mt Eliza, approximately 1.3 kilometres east of Subiaco. 3
With the main camp being at Mt Eliza, the Subiaco area would have been a close and vital resource for the Oor-dal-kalla as it was surrounded by wetlands that were formed after sea levels rose during the Holocene period after the last Glacial Maximum. The wetlands include large lakes and swamps of which many have since been drained post European settlement to make way for market gardens and urban expansion. 4 These wetlands, which include Lake Monger, Herdsman Lake and Lake Jualbup (Shenton Park Lake / Dysons Swamp), were considered a key economic resource which provided a range of plant and animal foods. The wetlands were generally utilised during the seasons of Burnoru/Bunuru (February-March), Maggoro/ Makuru (June-July) and Jiba/Djilba (August-September). 5 Early explorers and visitors to Perth describe Aboriginal people using staple plant foods, such as the root of the Cats-tail reed (Typha latifolia), which provided a source of carbohydrate; and the pounded root of the yun-jid/yanjidi, which was made into a damper-like cake. 6 In addition, the lakes provided fish, jilgies (small freshwater crayfish/marron), ducks, turtles and other species.
The Subiaco area was considered to be a place with good 'herbage' which attracted kangaroos that were targeted for hunting; this often involved the kangaroos being driven over the cliff edge at Mooro Katta (Kings Park) down to what is now the old Swan Brewery on Mounts Bay road.'
1827-1850 - Contact — Oor-Dal-Kalla History At the time of European contact (1827 onwards), Yellagonga and his family were moved away from their main areas of economic and social focus, particularly along the ridge at Kings Park and at the foot of Mount Eliza, to marginal camps around the Kings Park ridge. This was largely due to the European settlers taking up residence there, as well as due to Noongar people perceiving the white settlers as the spirits or 'janga' of their own ancestors and, as a consequence, Yellagonga and his family abandoned their camps without hostility.
1 Socio-Economic Anthropological Survey of People of Aboriginal Descent in the Metropolitan Region of Perth, Western Australia. PHD Thesis. Makin, C. 1970; Yellagonga Regional Park, City of Bayswater of Wanneroo Ethnography Position Paper, Department of Planning and Urban Development. Brittain, R. 1990; Chapter 8 'Survival against all odds': The Indigenous population of metropolitan Perth, 1829-2001. ATSIS Research Publications. Green, N. 2013 2 Aboriginal Woman as Providers: The 1830s on the Swan. Aboriginal History. Hallam, S. 1991 3 Yellagonga Regional Park Management Plan. City of Joondalup and City of Wanneroo. Department of Conservation and Land Management, 2003-2013 4 Post-glacial sea-level changes around the Australian margin: A review. Quaternary Science Reviews, Voume 74. Lewis, S et al. 2013 5 A Comparative Study of Indigenous People's and Early European Settlers' Usage of Three Perth Wetlands, Western Australia 1829-1939. Perth Faculty of Education and Arts, Edith Cowan University. Ujim, S. 2012; Broken spears: Aborigines and Europeans in the southwest of Australia. Cottesloe: Focus Education Services. Green, N. 1984 6 Aboriginal Woman as Providers: The 1830s on the Swan. Aboriginal History. Hallam, S. 1991 7 Aboriginal Woman as Providers: The 1830s on the Swan. Aboriginal History. Hallam, S. 1991
Page 11 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory After Yellagonga's group moved from Mount Eliza and Kings Park, they were moved toward Lake Monger to the north of Subiaco and to Lake Jualbup / Dysons Swamp / Shenton Park Lake to the south. 8
1851-1894 - New Subiaco — Foundation of Subiaco Though the Swan River Colony was officially founded in 1829, progress was slow until transportation of convicts began in 1850, and later the discovery of gold in the 1890s. On 5 January 1851, a Benedictine community moved from Guildford to a location 5km west of Perth. The members of the community called the place New Subiaco, after the Italian town, which was the cradle of their order. Later the word 'New' was dropped and the settlement became known as Subiaco. Although the Benedictine community and its monastery represented the first settlement in the neighbourhood, the first house was not erected until about 1886.
European settlement and expansion disrupted ,the Oor-dal-kalla's way of life, with introduced diseases causing a rapid decline in their population. 9 As settlement expanded further, the Oor-dal-kalla were pushed away from the Subiaco area during the 1830s. 10 Seasonal movement and regular burning in the Subiaco area continued for some time. However, the increasing restrictions to land as well as cultural misunderstandings soon created much discord between Noongar people and the settlers. There are a number of early accounts of conflict between Europeans and Noongar people surrounding the Subiaco area, with hostilities reported at Thomas Street, Lake Monger and near an area that is now the West Leederville Train Station. Further, in 1835, Yellagonga's group was evicted from the Lake Monger camp because one of the settlers, Henry Leeder, 'claimed that their fires were a danger to his farms'. " However, this eviction did not last with the women soon returning to the area to hunt frogs and by the 1850s and 1860s, a large camping place was known to exist at the Brandy Keg near Lake Monger as well as at Lake Jualbup. 12 When the Perth-Fremantle railway opened in 1881, a platform erected for the convenience of the monastery was called Subiaco. At first the name 'Subiaco' was applied to the land which is now on the north side of the railway line, but eventually the name was appropriated for the southern portion. When Broome Road (now Hay Street) was macadamised in 1894, Subiaco railway station was relocated westward to its present site near the end of Rokeby Road. Perth Commonage was granted to the Perth City Council from the State Government in 1883. This was land which Perth Council could lease for terms up to 99 years, to private enterprise to raise funds for council business. 13 While there was initially no macadamised road through the area, which included all of what is now Subiaco, the Commonage extended from the western side of Thomas Street across the railway and out to the sea where City Beach is now located. 14 Perth City Council decided in 1894 to create a cemetery at the western end of Broome Road, allocating 180 acres of the Perth commonage. In response, the State Government allocated money for a cemetery road to be macadamised from Perth to what is now Subiaco, then still mostly uninhabited by European people. The road became the main artery to Subiaco and afterwards the highway to Claremont and Fremantle, until
8 Aboriginal Woman as Providers: The 1830s on the Swan. Aboriginal History. Hallam, S. 1991; Yellagonga Regional Park, City of Bayswater of Wanneroo Ethnography Position Paper, Department of Planning and Urban Development. Brittain, R. 1990 9 Yellagonga Regional Park, City of Bayswater of Wanneroo Ethnography Position Paper, Department of Planning and Urban Development. Brittain, R. 1990 10 Yellagonga Regional Park, City of Bayswater of Wanneroo Ethnography Position Paper, Department of Planning and Urban Development. Brittain, R. 1990 11 Lake Monger and its People. Curtin University. Anderson, M. 1996 12 A survey for Aboriginal Sites — Ethnographic Investigations relating to some proposed highway and road developments in the Perth Metropolitan Area, Perth: Main Roads Department. Brown, S. 1983; Perth in my Boyhood. Journal and Proceedings of the Western Australian Historical Society. Kennedy, J. 1927 13 'The Commonage Question.' West Australian 14 October 1901: 3 14 'Perth In the Nineties' West Australian 17 February 1945: 4
Page 12 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory replaced by Stirling Highway.
During the smallpox epidemic in 1894, about 63 bodies were buried in the cemetery area to the north-west of the railway line at Subiaco. It was decided however, to create a new cemetery at Karrakatta, and the reservation of the area on the Perth commonage was revoked. The graves which had been made there were fenced in, and in 1906 the bodies were exhumed and transferred to the Karrakatta Cemetery. 15
1895-1945 — Subiaco Develops A population of 100 in 1895 increased rapidly and in August 1896 had reached 1,300, an indication that Subiaco was the first undeveloped metropolitan district to feel the effects of the Western Australian goldfields gold boom, 16
North Subiaco began to develop as a residential area from the early 1900s. The opening of the railway line established Subiaco as an area both for investors and as a place for people to settle. The land north of Subiaco Road was released as 'Subiaco Estate' in 1895 and the land south of Roberts Road (formerly Mueller Road) was released in 1896. People settled along either side of the railway line, as the more affordable prices made the land accessible to workers.
At an open-air meeting held in 1895 to discuss methods of local control, the first progress association for the district was formed. 17 The first election for a council took place on 29 May 1897, and Henry Doyle was elected the first Mayor. About this time the first official post office was Opened at the corner of Rokeby and Bagot Roads, which served until a new building was erected in 1926.
• In 1897, the need for a children's hospital in Perth was identified and a Crown Grant was made for a Children's Hospital site on Mueller (later Roberts) Road. By 1898, sufficient funds had been raised for the construction of a hospital, and a competition for the design of the hospital was won by G. J. and E. J. Clark. However, when tenders were Called for the construction of the hospital, the tender amount significantly exceeded the amount of funds raised and construction did not eventuate.
In 1907, Charles Moore challenged the government to encourage support for a hospital by offering to match any government contribution pound for pound, an offer that was eventually accepted by the Premier, Newton Moore. The construction of the hospital does not seem to have been supported by prominent townsmen or politicians, except for three notable exceptions, Charles Moore, George Shenton and Harry Boan, but was primarily funded by donations from ordinary Perth residents.
After construction of buildings, including four wards, operating theatre, administrative building, mortuary, laundry and the Old Outpatients Building, the hospital opened on 6 July 1909 and was the first place dedicated to providing medical and surgical care to Western Australian children: The first patient was two- year-old Elliot Mullins who was suffering bronchitis and tonsillitis. Five other .patients were also treated on the first day. The number of patients increased dramatically, with 492 patients admitted to the wards between 1909-10. By 1912-13, this number had increased to 1,125. Attendance of outpatients also rose from 9,616 in 1909-10 to 22,197 in 1912-13.
The hospital was expanded in response to demand, with construction of new wards, Resident Medical 'Officer's Quarters (now known as Godfrey House), new outpatients building and an outpatients department, between 1912 to 1927.
In 1899 negotiations were conducted with the Perth Tramways Syndicate for the extension of the tramway system to Subiaco, and in 1900 the line was extended along Hay Street and Rokeby Road. The council established an electricity supply plant in 1903. Up until this time candles and kerosene lamps had to be used, as the mains of the Perth Gas Company had not been extended to the district. It was decided in 1921 to
15 'A Progressive Suburb.' West Australian 23 September 1932: 25 16 'A Cemetery Which Gave Rise to a City' West Australian 19 September 1952: 2 17 General history of Subiaco adapted from Spillman, Identity Prized, and City of Subiaco Thematic History for the Local Government Inventory
Page 13 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory obtain supplies of electricity in bulk from the Government Electricity Department. 18
In 1904, land including the future site of Subiaco Oval was vested with the Subiaco Municipality for recreation purposes, with football and cricket clubs being established in response to the growing population. This site was formally named Mueller Park in 1906 after a Botanist for the Colonial Government. The football club in Subiaco was established in 1896, with the first match played at SubiacO Oval in April 1906. Subiaco Football Club is associated with Jimmy Melbourne, the first Aboriginal senior Australian Rules football player. He was also the only Aboriginal person from Perth's Native and Half Caste Mission to have served at Gallipoli (Collard, 2015). 18 Other Aboriginal people have connections to Subiaco Oval, including Sir Douglas Nicholls who today's Indigenous round in the Australian Football League (AFL) is named after.
In 1905 the Subiaco Municipality was granted its own endowment land, also a part of .the Commonage. This comprised 98 acres (40 ha) and was located to the north of the railway line between Jolimont and Salvado Roads. 28 The first lease was granted to Monteith, Clemenger & Co, to establish a pipe-making foundry (closed 1955), and they were followed by many other applications for land. Subiaco Council subsequently offered a prize of £25 for the best design for a subdivision of the endowment land, to include a mixture of industrial and residential lots. 21 The winner of this competition was prominent Western Australian architect, George Temple Poole. 22 The land immediately north of the railway line thus became Subiaco and the surrounding region's main industrial area until the end of the 20th century. It was an integral part of the landscape and of the community during this time, being the location for many prominent factories in the State's history, including timber workers Whittaker Brothers (1911-72) and the ironworks of Metters Limited (1911-86). Metters moved to Subiaco from the West Perth industrial area. The factory eventually became a very large 'complex, with two blast furnaces and in later years, a modern enamelling plant. The factory produced a variety of metal goods, including domestic and industrial stoves, windmills and grave railings such as those seen in the East Perth pioneers' cemetery. The factory closed and was demolished in 1986. In November 1921, Calyx Porcelain Works (which was later to be known as Australian Fine China) was opened in the industrial land to the north of the railway line. The factory was easily distinguishable by its bottle-shaped chimneys. The machinery was imported from England and a. staff of 60 engaged. Most of the employees were initially unfamiliar with pottery works, so had to be trained by nine experienced men from Stoke-on-Trent. 23
Throughout this period, Aboriginal people were engaged in employment in the Subiaco area. This included examples of entrepreneurship (such as supplying local households with crafted goods) and apprenticeship (such as glassmaking). Further, young Aboriginal people, particularly girls, were institutionalised and placed under the guardianship of the Director of Schools until 21 years of age.
1946-1980s 7 Post-War Era The post-World War II (WWII) period saw a rapid expansion of the metropolitan region due to post WWII reconstruction and mass immigration. Subiaco's industrial area flourished in the immediate post WWII period. This ,was associated with the federal and state governments' post war recovery policies that promoted the manufacture of building supplies and construction work throughout Western Australia, including large public projects.
This post war expansion, together with changing modern trends had a flow on effect to other industries. When Elder Smith began to relinquish parts of their Subiaco sale yards in 1947, the first to take, up this land was Arcus Metal Products. This company operated on the endowment land from 1948 up to the 1980s. The
18 'A Progressive Suburb.' West Australian 23 September 1932: 25 19 Remembering Jimmy Melbourne, A Nyoongar Pioneer. Collard, D. 2015 20 Successful Subiaco.' West Australian 13 May 1905: 3 21 'Subiaco Progressing' Daily News 11 May 1905: 4 22 West Australian 21 June 1905: 6 23 'A Great Local Industry' Sunday Times 18 December 1921: 19
Page 14 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory Arcus company had been established in Subiaco in 1923, specialising in metal work and by the mid-20th century, household white goods.
In the 1940s, the Jolimont section of the industrial area became the location of businesses whose activities included pre-delivery preparation, servicing, repairs, warehousing, and assembly of vehicles. Most of these businesses had left the industrial area by the 1970s/19805 and their properties sold off. During this period, the Perth Children's Hospital was renamed Princess Margaret Hospital (PMH) in response to Princess Margaret's visit to Australia in 1949. Further, in 1969 Mrs Margaret Clements became PMH's first Aboriginal Liaison nurse and PMH established the Aboriginal Advancement Council. This period of growth also allowed new buildings to be constructed at PMH, including a new main ward block in 1969 and a general services block in 1979. Grand stands were also constructed at Subiaco Oval, including the three-tier stand in 1968. and concrete terraces on the Roberts Road side of the ground in 1970. Subiaco was now identified as being mainly residential with some light industry. At the same time, it provided an opportunity for the area to develop as a commercial, workplace and industrial centre that would service the immediate district. This potential became reality largely due to its siting along a major public transport route and having one of the larger railway stations in the metropolitan region.
1980s-2010s — Changing Cityscape Subiaco's population continued to diversify from the 1970s into the 1980s and beyond. 24 This included young, professional couples and families who were attracted to the area because of its character and settled in family-orientated inner-city suburbs like Shenton Park.
One of the most significant events of the 1980s, because of the considerable impact it was to have on the urban landscape, was the shift in the role of the endowment lands, which comprised Subiaco's light- industrial area. As with a range of other activities, the types of works located in this area were affected by the post war building boom and expansion of this industry from the 1960s on. This period saw the acquisition of many smaller, privately owned businesses by big companies. Such companies could operate on a much larger, economical scale and therefore, more competitively. This, together with increasing inner-city land values, led manufacturers to relocate to new, purpose-built industrial estates like. those at Kwinana and Welshpool. This trend was felt at the City's endowment lands. Humes Ltd vacated its site after the sale of its steel and concrete divisions. From the 1970s, Arcus Metal Products, Winterbottom's service centre and yards, and CIG's gas plant left or were bought out. In 1986, within only 20 years of completing its 1966 showrooms, Metters Ltd had closed and its premises were demolished. The last of the manufacturers to operate at the endowment lands was Australian Fine China who was renowned for its Wembley Ware, which ceased production in 2006. Beginning production in 1921, Australian Fine China is said to have been the longest running company in Subiaco's semi-industrial area. Vacating this land made it available for new uses, an opportunity recognised by the State Government: In 1994 the Subiaco Redevelopment Act 7994 was enacted and following this, the State Government announced the Subi Centro project in .1995. This project revolved around redevelopment of underutilised industrial land to create Perth's first 'Transport Orientated Development'. This commenced with demolition • of the old Subiaco Railway Station, sinking of the Fremantle railway line between Haydn Bunton Drive and Hay Street and construction 'of a new underground Subiaco Railway Station, which opened in 1998. This period of diversification and growth also saw changes to Subiaco Oval and redevelopment of PMH. In 1983, the first stage of redevelopment of PMH was completed, including construction of the Patient Services Building. In 1987, the second stage of the redevelopment of PMH was completed, with construction of the Charles Moore building.
24 General history of Subiaco adapted from Spillman, Identity Prized, and City of Subiaco Thematic History for the Local Government Inventory
Page 15 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory In 1986, the West Coast Eagles were formed and joined the Victorian Football League (later to become the Australian Football League). The West Coast Eagles played their first game at Subiaco Oval on 29 March 1987. West Australian's second team, the Fremantle Dockers, entered the Australian Football League (AFL) in 1995 and played home games at Subiaco Oval. Light towers were installed at Subiaco Oval in 1997 to enable night games to be played, with a new grandstand at the eastern end of the ground constructed in 1998 in response to plans for Perth Glory, Western Australia's football (soccer) team, to play home games at the venue. During this period, many other events were held at Subiaco Oval with other sporting teams, including the Western Force (Western Australia's Rugby Union team) using the ground. The Sandover Medal Walk was also established along Roberts Road and Haydn Bunton Drive in 2000 to recognise the best and fairest football player within the Western Australian Football League.
In 2006, Justice Wilcox determined that the Noongar people had maintained a continuous connection with the land and the customs, traditions and laws of their ancestors.
In 2010, the State Government announced that a new Children's hospital was to be built in Nedlands to replace PMH. Construction commenced on the new hospital in 2012. PMH closed in June 2018 following opening of the new Perth Children's Hospital. In 2011, the State Government announced that a new stadium was to be built at Burswood, with AFL games to be relocated from Subiaco along with other major sports and events. The last sporting event was held at Subiaco Oval in November 2017. The new stadium at Burswood Opened in December 2017. The Noongar (Koorah, Nitja, Boordahwan) (Past, Present, Future) Recognition Act 2016, proclaimed on 6 June 2016, recognises the important relationship the Noongar people have with the Noongar lands, and the significant and unique contribution of Noongar people to the heritage, cultural identity, community and of Western Australia. economy . In 2017, a Cultural Compact was signed with the Whadjuk Working Party family representatives, the South West Aboriginal Land and Sea Council and the MRA to talk and work together on major developments throughout the metropolitan area. In 2017, the State Government announced redevelopment of Subiaco Oval, PMH and surrounds and that a new high school would be built at Kitchener Park. To facilitate this, the Subiaco Redevelopment Scheme 2 was gazetted in March 2018, to transfer planning authority from the Western Australian Planning Commission and City of Subiaco, to the Metropolitan Redevelopment Authority. Construction of the new high school commenced in March 2018 with a scheduled completion date of January 2020.
Page 16 II M RA Subiaco Heritage Inventory 4. Subi Centro Project Area
Page 17 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory SALVADO ROAD
ROBERTS ROAD
LEGEND
Project Area Boundary Heritage Value
Level 1 - HAY STREET Place of State Significance - indudes curtilages on State Heritage Register
0 25 SO 100 ISO 250m
FIGURE 2: SUB! CENTRO PROJECT AREA HERITAGE INVENTORY MAP
Page 18 II M RA Subiaco Heritage Inventory 4. List of Places in the Subi Centro Project Area MRA Ref Address Place Name Management Level Page # Cl Hay Street, Price Street, Atkinson Road, Australian Fine China Level 1 — Precinct of State 21 Mouritzen Way, Wunderlich Road and Significance Wembley Court, Subiaco
Page 19 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory Place Record Forms
Page 20 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory - Place Record Form
Australian Fine China Precinct MRA REF No. Cl! HCWA 14465 Other Names: Calyx Porcelain; Bristile Limited; HL Brisbane and Wunderlich Limited
FIGURE 5: ADAPTIVE RE-USE OF FACTORY BUILDINGS ADJACENT TO LOT 206 PRICE STREET, SUBIACO
MANAGEMENT LEVEL
LEVEL 1 — PRECINCT OF STATE SIGNIFICANCE LOCATION Address: Hay Street, Price Street, Atkinson Road, Mouritzen Way, Wunderlich Road and Wembley Court, Subiaco
Land title description: Lot 220 on Deposited Plan 66308 being the whole of the land contained in Certificate of Title Volume 2747 Folio 776 and Lot 9007 on Deposited Plan 40507 being the whole of the land contained in Certificate of Title Volume 2615 Folio 394. Scheme Area: Subiaco Redevelopment Scheme 2 Precinct: Australian Fine China
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
Australian Fine China, Subiaco, formerly a manufacturing complex built in stages in single and two-storey sections constructed of brick and asbestos cement, single-storey toilets and lunch room constructed in stages of brick and tile, a former single storey laboratory constructed in brick and tile, single-storey canteen (later the retail shop) constructed in brick and tile, a single-storey office and wholesale showroom constructed in brick and tile, settling dams, and various lightweight single-storey sheds in a partly landscaped setting, has cultural heritage significance for the following reasons: • the place was the site of production of domestic and industrial pottery, and Wembley Ware, a popular, well- known line of distinctive decorative porcelain unique to Western Australia in the post-World War II period; • the place is a demonstration of Commonwealth and State governments' policies from 1921, whereby they sought to establish new industries in Australia, including the manufacture of china for the domestic market, and of Government assistance to enable the expansion of a secondary industry that in the long run allowed the establishment of one of the foremost porcelain manufacturers in Australia; • as well as representing an important technical achievement for Western Australia, the No. 1 and No. 2 tunnel kilns are unique examples of industrial tunnel kiln design that also have a strong aesthetic appeal; • No. 1 Kiln was the first commercial overhead oil-burning kiln of post-war design to be erected in the world;
Page 21 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory • the place demonstrates a period of commercial pottery production from the early inter-war period to 2006, when it ceased operation; • the place is representative of secondary industry in Western Australia and has particular social and historic value as an industrial place which employed migrant workers from its inception, with a notable proportion of women and girls engaged in manufacture throughout its history; • the place has strong historic links with Christian Mouritzen, who founded the place as the Calyx Porcelain Works and Sir Lance Brisbane who took over the company and made the place a strong subsidiary of the parent company H.L. Brisbane and Wunderlich Limited; and • • the Peppermint Trees and mature plantings leading from Australian Fine China to Hay Street have strong aesthetic appeal and contribute to the collective setting of the Subi Centro area and its streetscapes.
OTHER HERITAGE LISTINGS State Register: Permanent: 07/12/2007 Amended: 28/05/2010
DESIRABLE OUTCOME The precinct is included in the State Register of Heritage Places and will be afforded the highest level of protection both through the provisions of the Heritage, Act and the Scheme. • Note: All development applications for properties on the State Register must be referred to the HCWA.
PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION Place Type: Precinct Architectural Style:' N/A Construction Materials: Remnant fabric is constructed of brick, timber and iron Condition: N/A
General Description: Remnant fabric includes warehouse/factory structures adapted for reuse as shelters within open space and original items salvaged from the precinct including fine china and mechanical equipment.
HISTORICAL NOTES
Date of Construction: 1921 - 2000 Original Use: Light Industrial
Current Use: A mixture of vacant land, open space and mixed use developments Historical Notes:
In the 1920s, in the industrial part of the endowment land, factories that became household names were established, such as Westralian Chemicals Limited (later CIG, BOC), Calyx Porcelain Company (Brisbane & Wunderlich, then Australian Fine China), and concrete and steel pipe manufacturer Humes Ltd. To the immediate north of the railway, Elder Smith set up a major livestock sales yard in 1922. In November 1921, Calyx Porcelain Works was opened, a site which was later to be known as Australian Fine China. The factory was easily distinguishable by its bottle-shaped chimneys. The machinery was imported from England and a staff of 60 engaged. Most of the employees were initially unfamiliar with pottery works, so had to be trained by nine experienced men from Stoke-on-Trent. The place was the site of production of Wembley Ware, a distinctive line of porcelain often featuring Australian motifs that were popular as a decorative genre in the post-WWII era, and which was typical of manufacturers attempts to minimize tax obligations at the time by applying ornate designs to ordinary objects. Government assistance enabled expansion, but the level of indebtedness led to its takeover by the State, which leased it out from 1931. During World War II, profitability improved, especially under H. L. Brisbane and Wunderlich Limited (later renamed Bristile Ltd) which leased and expanded it from 1941, then purchased it in 1945. Its subsequent expansion phases, which enabled the company to become one of the foremost porcelain manufacturers in Australia, have taken place in periods of economic development in Australia.
Page 22 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory Australian Fine China was the last of the manufacturers to operate at the endowment lands, and it ceased production in 2006. Following this, the Subiaco Redevelopment Authority (then Metropolitan Redevelopment Authority) were given responsibility to redevelop the 4.4-hectare site into a.mixed-use development, comprising residential dwellings and retail and commercial land uses.
HISTORIC THEME Unknown
IMPORTANT/SIGNIFICANT ASSOCIATIONS CF Mouritzen (founder of Calyx Porcelain);
Sir HL Brisbane (latter owner of Calyx Porcelain); and Forbes and Fitzhardinge (Architects)
REFERENCES AND/OR OTHER SOURCES OF INFORMATION HCWA Assessment Documentation and Register Entry History of Australian Fine China adapted from Spillman City of Subiaco Thematic History for the Local Government Inventory
Page 23 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory, FIGURE 4: AUSTRALIAN FINE CHINA KILNS C.1921
FIGURE 3: AUSTRALIAN FINE CHINA PUBLIC ARTWORK
Page 24 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory 5. Subiaco East Project Area
Page 25 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory PIA
RAILWAY -
SUBIACO ROAD
ROBERTS ROAD
LEGEND
— Project Area Boundary Heritage Value HAY STREET
• Level 1- Place of State Significance - indudes curtilages on State Heritage Register Level 2- Place of Local Significance Level 3- Place of Lesser Significance Level 4- Historic Site 0 25 50 100 150 250m
FIGURE 6: SUBI EAST PROJECT AREA HERITAGE INVENTORY MAP
Page 26 // M RA Subiaco Heritage Inventory 5. List of Places in the Subiaco East Project Area MRA Ref Address Place Name Management Level Page # El 1 Roberts Road, Subiaco Godfrey House Level 1 - Place of State Significance 29
E2 1 Roberts Road, Subiaco Old Outpatients Building Level 1 - Place of State Significance 32
E3 1 Roberts Road, Subiaco Princess Margaret Hospital Precinct (Former) Level 4 - Historic Precinct 36
E4 304 Roberts Road, Subiaco Subiaco Oval Gates Level 1 - Place of State Significance 39
E5 304 Roberts Road, Subiaco Subiaco Oval Level 1 - Place of State Significance 43
, E6 150 Roberts Road, Subiaco Mueller Park Level 2 - Place of Local Significance 50
E7 118 Subiaco Road, Subiaco White Lodge Level 2 - Place of Local Significance 53
E8 98 Subiaco Road, Subiaco House - 98 Subiaco Road, Subiaco Level 3 - Place of Lesser Significance 55
E9 2 Hamilton Street, Subiaco House -2 Hamilton Street, Subiaco Level 3 - Place of Lesser Significance 57
El 0 44 Subiaco Road, Subiaco House -44 Subiaco Road, Subiaco Level 3 - Place of Lesser Significance 60
Ell 40 Subiaco Road, Subiaco House -40 Subiaco Road, Subiaco Level 3 - Place of Lesser Significance 62
E12 30 Subiaco Road, Subiaco House - 30 Subiaco Road, Subiaco Level 3 - Place of Lesser Significance 64
[13 28 Subiaco Road, Subiaco House -28 Subiaco Road, Subiaco Level 3 - Place of Lesser Significance 66 .
E14 24 Subiaco Road, Subiaco House -24 Subiaco Road, Subiaco Level 3 - Place of Lesser Significance 68
El 5 Fremantle - Perth Railway Reserve West Leederville Railway Footbridge Level 1 - Place of State Significance 70 (Former)
Page 27 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory Place Record Forms
Page 28 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory - Place Record Form
Godfrey House MRA REF No. El / HCWA 05568 Other Names: Chief Resident Medical Officer's Quarters
FIGURE 7: ROBERTS ROAD (NORTH) ELEVATION OF GODFREY HOUSE
MANAGEMENT LEVEL
LEVEL 1 — PLACE OF STATE SIGNIFICANCE LOCATION Address: 1 Roberts Road, Subiaco
Land title description: Lot 903 on Deposited Plan 182676 and Lot 930 on Deposited Plan 183862 Scheme Area: Subiaco Redevelopment Scheme 2 Precinct: Princess Margaret Hospital
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
Godfrey House, a two storey painted brick and iron residence in the Federation Queen Anne Style, has cultural heritage significance for the following reasons: • The place is part of Princess Margaret Hospital, Western Australia's principal children's medical facility from its opening in 1909 until closure in 2018; • The place is one of only two extant buildings from the original phase of development of Princess Margaret Hospital and together with the more recent buildings, Godfrey House and the Outpatients Building (1909) represent the continuing development of Western Australia's main children's hospital; • The place is a fine example of a two storey residential building exhibiting the characteristics of the Queen Anne style, which is skilfully designed to be read on two distinct elevations to give separate identities to the two residential zones accommodated within the building; • The place is a physical demonstration of the status accredited to Chief Medical Officers; • The place is an example of a building designed by the Public Works Department of Western Australia, under the supervision of Chief Architect, Hillson Beasley;
• The place is a rare and intact example of a purpose built residential building providing housing for doctors at a major metropolitan hospital in the twentieth century; and • The place has provided accommodation for many prominent doctors and paediatricians who have worked at Princess Margaret Hospital, including Dr Robert Godfrey, after whom the place is named, who was the Medical Superintendent (and Medical Director) from 1953 to 1979.
Page 29 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory OTHER HERITAGE LISTINGS State Register: Permanent 26/08/2003 Local Government Inventory: Adopted 24/09/2002 Subiaco Heritage List: 22/05/2012
DESIRABLE OUTCOME The place is included in the State Register of Heritage Places and will be afforded the highest level of protection both through the provisions of the Heritage Act and the Scheme.
Note: All development applications for properties on the State Register must be referred to HCWA.
PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION
Place Type: • Individual Building Architectural Style: Federation Queen Anne Construction Materials: Brick, timber and iron
Condition: Poor - Fair General Description: Two-storey painted brick and iron building in the Federation Queen Anne Style
HISTORICAL NOTES Date of Construction: 1913, 1945 and 2001 Original Use: Residential Current Use: Vacant Historical Notes:
Godfrey House was built as the Resident Medical Officer's Quarters for Princess Margaret -Hospital in 1912-13. An additional wing was added in 1945. Dr Godfrey was the Medical Director of the hospital from 1953-1979 and lived in the place with his family for some time. The place was not used as residential quarters after 1974, when Godfrey vacated. It has since been used for a variety of administrative purposes, including Radio Lollipop and Kidsafe. A conservation plan was commissioned in 2001, and conservation works will be undertaken as part of the adaptation of the place for future use. Godfrey House was designed by Hillson Beasley, Chief Architect of the Public Works Department between 1905 and 1917. He was born in England in 1855 and began his professional career in Dover where he was articled to a firm of architects. He worked in London, Oxford, Carlisle and Capetown before arriving in Melbourne in 1885. Beasley arrived in Perth in 1896 and worked as a specification draughtsman with the Public Works Department. In July 1897, Beasley was promoted to Assistant Architect working under the Chief Assistant Architect. He succeeded John Grainger as Chief Architect in 1905. Other prominent buildings by Beasley include Perth Modern School, the Art Gallery of Western Australia, Parliament House and the General Post Office Building.
HISTORIC THEME
Occupations - Residential and Office IMPORTANT/SIGNIFICANT ASSOCIATIONS
Dr Robert Godfrey - Medical Doctor Hillson Beasley - Architect
REFERENCES AND/OR OTHER SOURCES OF INFORMATION Godfrey House Conservation Plan, Heritage & Conservation Professionals, prepared for CAMS, May 2001. HCWA Assessment Documentation and Register Entry City of Subiaco Heritage Inventory (2002) Place Record
Page 30 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory FIGURE 8: WEST ELEVATION OF GODFREY HOUSE
Page 31 8 MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory - Place Record Form
Old Outpatients Building MRA REF No. E2 / HCWA 19873 Other Names: Multi-faith Centre / Chapel
FIGURE 9: SOUTH ELEVATION OF OLD OUTPATIENTS BUILDING MANAGEMENT LEVEL
Level 1 - Place of State Significance LOCATION Address: 1 Roberts Road, Subiaco
Land title description: Lot 903 on Deposited Plan 182676 and Lot 930 on Deposited Plan 183862 Scheme Area: Subiaco Redevelopment Scheme 2 Precinct: Princess Margaret Hospital
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE The Old Outpatients Building, a weatherboard building located at the corner of Hay and Thomas Street, designed in the Federation Bungalow style, has cultural heritage significance for the following reasons: • The place is rare as a surviving weatherboard building erected for a hospital complex in the early 20th century; • The place was part of the first phase of development of the Princess Margaret Hospital for Children, and continued to serve a variety of hospital functions since 1909 until closure in 2018; • The place is a modest and picturesque example of the application of the Federation Bungalow style to a hospital building; and • The place has value for former patients and staff of Princess Margaret Hospital as one of the few examples of the original hospital buildings remaining in the 21st century.
Page 32 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory OTHER HERITAGE LISTINGS Local Government Inventory: Adopted 24/09/2002
DESIRABLE OUTCOME At the time of listing, this property was identified by the HCWA as a place worthy of consideration for inclusion in the State Register of Heritage Places.
As the place is intended to be included in the State Register of Heritage Places it will be afforded the highest level of protection through the provisions of the Scheme and when included in the State Register, the proisions of the Heritage Act.
PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION Place Type: Individual Building Architectural Style: Federation Bungalow Construction Materials: Timber Weatherboard and Iron
Condition: Fair - Good General Description:
Old Outpatients Building is a small timber framed and weatherboard clad building with a custom orb zincalume roof constructed in a simple domestic Federation Bungalow style. The land around the Old Outpatients Building is part paved with bitumen and concrete paving slabs and part landscaped with lawns, bed planters such as Canary Island Palms and Lemon Scented Gums. The building has an irregular rectangular plan form, framed in timber with weatherboard clad walls, timber double hung sash windows with hopper lights over them, part timbered and rendered and pebble dash rendered gables, and steeply pitched roofs covered with a custom orb profile zincalume roofing. The roof features vented gables, pebble dash rendered gables, and restrained decorative timber work. Double hung windows are, in the main, pared up, and have hopper lights over them. The walls also feature high level hooded vents. There are infilled verandahs, attached walkways, ramps, surface mounted services and the like that detract from the presentation of the place.
There is evidence of alterations through time to some of the external fabric, with differing types of weatherboards in various locations, the introduction of air conditioning and other services.
Page 33 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory HISTORICAL NOTES Date of Construction: 1909
Original Use: Medical - Accommodation Current Use: Vacant Historical Notes:
The first Outpatients Building was located on the corner of Hay and Thomas Streets. Erected as part of the 1909 campaign, it was a weatherboard and iron building intended to be only temporary until sufficient funds had been obtained and a new design for the Thomas Street frontage had been agreed. The Outpatients Building had been intended to treat up to 6,000 patients a year, but as early as 1914 the need for a new Outpatients' Department was recognised, due to the large attendance of parents and children. This was listed among other essential buildings then needed, including further accommodation for nurses and a new mortuary room. After World War I, it was said, such an outpatients building was not only inadequate, it was a "constant and burning reproach to our State". Tales of 'suffering children' were regularly in the newspapers to encourage donations for .a new building. Due to significant fundraising by the Ugly Men's Association, a new Outpatients Building was opened in 1921, adjacent to the first weatherboard building.
In 1932, the Old Outpatients' Building was renovated throughout by the Children's Hospital Women's Auxiliary, at their own expense, and converted into their headquarters. Founded in 1930, the Auxiliary originally worked from a room elsewhere in the hospital before needing larger accommodation. The Auxiliary appear to have occupied the Old Outpatients Building until after WWII, when it was converted into a psychiatric clinic by medical superintendent, Dr. A. R. Edmonds. This facility, opened in 1948, was, at the time, the only properly constituted clinic of its kind in the State and the first of any kind to operate in Western Australia since 1930. Staffed by two part-time psychiatrists and one full-time psychologist, the department was to deal with "gross deficiencies" as well as being a consultation clinic. The Old Outpatients building was vacated by various Medico-ancillary services on occupation of the new Out- patient Consultative•Block.in 1965. From then until its dedication as a chapel in 1988, it was utilised as temporary accommodation for a number of different departments including: Hospital administration, Medical Records, Printing Department, Architect and Planning Department, Property Office and as a site office for construction workers.
The Old Outpatients Building was used as a place to go for spiritual reflection, prayer and quiet time, and continued to offer these facilities up until the close of the wider hospital in 2018.
HISTORIC THEME
Social and Civic Activities - Hospital IMPORTANT/SIGNIFICANT ASSOCIATIONS
J. J. & E. J. Clark - Architects Hobbs, Smith and Forbes - Architects REFERENCES AND/OR OTHER SOURCES OF INFORMATION HCWA Assessment Documentation
Page 34 // M RA Subiaco Heritage Inventory FIGURE 10: THOMAS STREET (EAST) ELEVATION OF OLD OUTPATIENTS BUILDING
Page 35 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory - Place Record Form
Princess Margaret Hospital Precinct (Former) MRA REF No. E3 / HCWA 5467 Other Names: Perth Children's Hospital
FIGURE 11: SOUTH ELEVATION OF CHARLES MOORE BUILDING MANAGEMENT LEVEL
Level 4 - Historic Precinct LOCATION Address: 1 Roberts Road, Subiaco
Land title description: Lot 903 on Deposited Plan 12676 Lot 930 on Deposited Plan 183862 Lot 17 on Deposited Plan 1418 Scheme Area: Subiaco Redevelopment Scheme 2 Precinct: Princess Margaret Hospital
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE The place has cultural heritage significance for the following reasons: • The place was the principal children's hospital in the state of Western Australia, opening in 1909 and operating until 2018; • The development of the place to meet the changing needs of the increasing population of the State and the changes in medical care, demonstrates the history of children's health in Western Australia; and • The place is highly valued by patients and their families, hospital staff and members of the community who have been associated with the place throughout its history, and for the role it has played in the provision of health services for children.
OTHER HERITAGE LISTINGS Local Government Inventory: Adopted 24/6/2002
DESIRABLE OUTCOME This precinct is now a historic site following closure of the hospital. Two buildings (Godfrey House and Old Outpatients Building) have individual historic / architectural merit and should be retained. Other buildings, can be considered for demolition with a Heritage Impact Assessment and should be recognised through interpretation on-site.
Page 36 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION Place Type: Hospital Precinct Architectural Style: Varied Construction Materials: Varied Condition: Fair General Description:
Collection of buildings which operated as the only childrens hospital in Perth since its initial construction in 1909 until closure in 2018.
HISTORICAL NOTES
Date of Construction: 1909 - 2012 Original Use: Hospital Current Use: Vacant Historical Notes:
In 1897, the need for a children's hospital in Perth was identified and a Crown Grant was made for a Children's Hospital site on Mueller (later Roberts) Road. By 1898, sufficient funds had been raised for the construction of a hospital, and a competition for the design of the hospital was won by G. J. and E. J. Clark. However, when tenders were called for the construction of the hospital, the tender amount significantly exceeded the amount of funds raised and construction did not eventuate.
Ten years later in 1907, Charles Moore challenged the government to encourage support for the hospital by offering to match any government contribution pound for pound, an offer that was eventually accepted by the Premier, Newton Moore. The construction of the hospital does not seem to have been supported by prominent townsmen or politicians, except for three notable exceptions, Charles Moore, George Shenton and Harry Boan, but was primarily funded by donations from ordinary Perth residents. The Old Outpatients Building, constructed in 1909, is the oldest part of the Children's Hospital complex and was a purpose designed building, which also housed an operating theatre. Two 20-bed pavilion wards were also built on site. The design of the hospital was based on the cottage plan (pavilion style), the central idea of which was that hospital buildings should be of a domestic scale with separate buildings 'for different types of patients, which would also enable the isolation of diseases.
The hospital opened on 6 July 1909 and was the first place dedicated to providing medical and surgical care to Western Australian children. The first patient was two-year-old Elliot Mullins who was suffering bronchitis and tonsillitis.
The following details the significant historical events of the hospital:
• In 1912-13 a new ward and Resident Medical Officer's' Quarters (now known as Godfrey House) was tendered. The architect was Hillson Beasley, Chief Government Architect. • In 1921 a new Outpatients Department was constructed which was funded by the Ugly Men's Association and replaced a wood and iron structure. • In the 1930s Aboriginal child patients sleep on the hospital verandah. • In 1936 new nurses' accommodation was constructed facing Roberts Road. This was a two-storey brick building, surrounded by a 10-feet verandah and balcony. • In 1938 an infant's ward was constructed. • In 1949, Perth Children's Hospital was renamed Princess Margaret Hospital. • In 1969, Margaret Clements beca,e the first Aboriginal Liaison Nurse and the Aboriginal Advancement Council was established. • In 1978, Princess Margaret Hospital was proclaimed a public hospital.
Page 37 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory • In 1983 the first stage of the redevelopment of the hospital was completed with construction of the Patient Services Building. • In 1987 the second stage of redevelopment was completed with the construction of the Charles Moore building. . HISTORIC THEME
Civic Activities - Hospital IMPORTANT/SIGNIFICANT ASSOCIATIONS Princess Margaret
REFERENCES AND/OR OTHER SOURCES OF INFORMATION City of Subiaco Heritage Inventory (2002) Place Record Heritage Council of Western Australia Preliminary Assessment Documentation Heritage and Conservation Professionals, Godfrey House: Conservation Plan (2001) Spillman, Identify Prized
Page 38 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory FIGURE 12: ROBERTS ROAD (NORTH) ELEVATION OF PRINCESS MARGARET HOSPITAL
FIGURE 13: ROBERTS ROAD (NORTH) ELEVATION OF MAIN ENTRANCE OF PRINCESS MARGARET HOSPITAL
Page 39 /I MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory FIGURE 14: PRINCESS MARGARET HOSPITAL PUBLIC ARTWORK ADJACENT TO MAIN ENTRANCE
7:-?,e-z-,•-sq., • •
4.1•E.I.CLARK rfirWragaiU ARGNITIECTS '0 7WIRCWOR CAMIPASPO MUM •
1111 PUS CMILD*Cfed tIONPIT Al_ 70 OE ,PRECTED AT Th Page 40 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory FIGURE 16: HISTORICAL PHOTOGRAPH OF PERTH CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL ON OPENING (WESTERN MAIL, 12 JUNE 1909) FIGURE 17: HISTORICAL PHOTO OF PERTH CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL, C.1925, SLWA Page 41 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory ROBERTS RD. -CHILDRENS' HOSPITAL ONC)- -PERTH- 40'ta C AN1LLiU HAY 31.7.81 DEPT. LANDS &SURVEYS, CaPLAN NEM FIGURE 18: PERTH CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL SURVEY, C. 1938, LANDS & SURVEYS, N.D. Page 42 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory - Place Record Form Subiaco Oval Gates MRA REF No. E4 / HCWA 5478 Other Names: Subiaco Municipal Reserve; Subiaco Commonage; Mueller Park FIGURE 19: WEST ELEVATION SUBIACO OVAL GATES MANAGEMENT LEVEL Level 1 - Place of State Significance LOCATION Address: 304 Roberts Road, Subiaco Land title description: Lot 12732 on Deposited Plan 219514 Scheme Area: Subiaco Redevelopment Scheme 2 Precinct: Subiaco Oval STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE Subiaco Oval Gates, a single storey limestone and brick construction, designed in the Inter War Art Deco style, ticket office and turnstile building with a Marseilles patterns clay tiled roof, has cultural heritage significance for the following reasons: • the place has been a well-recognised landmark since its construction in 1935; • the place has historic value marking the location of the Western Australian National Football League to Subiaco Oval in the year following opening of the gates; • the place contributes to the community's sense of place, as the main entrance to Subiaco Oval, a well known meeting place and enduring image of Subiaco Oval for thousands of football supporters; and, • the place is a small scale well executed Inter- War Art Deco style building. OTHER HERITAGE LISTINGS State Register: Permanent 24/3/2000 Subiaco Heritage List: 18/12/2012 Local Government Inventory: Adopted 28/2/1995 Page 43 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory DESIRABLE OUTCOME The place is included in the State Register of Heritage Places and will be afforded the highest level of protection both through the provisions of the Heritage Act and the Scheme. :Note: All development applications for properties on the State Register must be referred to HCWA. PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION Place Type: Individual Building Architectural Style: Inter-War Art Deco Construction Material's: Limestone, Brick and Clay Condition: • Good General Description: Subiaco Oval Gates is the main entrance to Subiaco Oval. The two ticket offices and counting office are of limestone and brick construction, whilst the central portion is of brick, and with a roof of Marseilles pattern terracotta tiles. Subiaco Oval Gates is located in the south-west corner of Subiaco Oval on the corner of Haydn Bunton Drive and Roberts Road. The gates are located on the diagonal facing south-west. Subiaco Oval Gates is set well back from the corner with a large area of paving in front of the gates. Subiaco Oval Gates is sited across the south west corner of the site. The two and three storey grandstands constructed from 1979 onwards provide a large scale backdrop to the gates. Subiaco Oval Gates are flanked by brick pier and mild steel construction Picket fences and there is a transportable cabin located to the north of Subiaco Oval Gates. The area immediately around the gates inside the grounds is paved with bitumen. Temporary pipe rail construction races extend from the face of the races into the street. Subiaco Oval Gates is designed in the Inter War Art Deco style. The façade is arranged in an A, B, A, C rhythm and the central bay is further divided into major and minor bays. The principal flanking elements are the symmetrical ticket offices, which are limestone clad with a limestone plinth, plain raised corner stops and a stepped parapet. The limestone is pillow faced and tuck-pointed. The parapets carry timber flagstaffs fixed to the limestone with decorative metal brackets. Street facing planes have pairs of ticketing windows with extended sills supported on corbels. Over these windows there are three arch head windows en-chain. The two ticket offices are linked by six major and two minor turnstile races. The lower portion is made up of brick piers and concrete ring beams are set over the top of the piers. Each race opening is infilled on the street side with pipe framed link mesh infilled gates and there are brackets on the inside face that suggest that there may have been interior gates as well. Above the concrete ring beams, the brickwork extends up in a pier panel arrangement of brickwork and the panels are scalloped between the piers. The top of the brickwork is finished with a rendered coping. The centre of the parapet wall above the gates has a recessed panel with the words 'Subiaco Oval' in bas-relief. The panel is flanked by pairs of blind niches. The counting office is set back from the ticket office plane at the southern end of the gatehouse complex. On the streetside of the counting office, the elevation has a pair of arched head windows en-chain, with a wide sill supported on corbels. The windows are separated by a stylized stone pilaster with an Art Deco styled version of a Corinthian capital. A bronze opening ceremony plaque is set to the right of the windows. All sections of the roof are covered with Marseilles pattern terracotta tiles. The ticket office sections have box gutters -behind the parapets and there are quad eaves gutters over the turnstile races. Windows are timber framed double hung sashes with brick sills. Doors are framed and boarded. Page 44 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory HISTORICAL NOTES Date of Construction: 1935 Original Use: Recreational Current Use: Vacant In 1909, Lady Forrest officially opened Subiaco Oval and Pavilion, which were part of Mueller Park (1906). In 1923, a new pavilion at Subiaco Oval was opened but the existing turnstiles were not adequate for the numbei- of spectators. In 1935, the Subiaco Council considered how the Jubilee of King George V might be commemorated in the town, and resolved that the provision of a modern entry would be appropriate. The architect selected was a local man, Alfred Robert Linus Wright, who had worked in the engineering branch of the Public Works Department for decades, until 1924 when he commenced private practice. The new gates were officially opened in October 1935 by Subiaco's mayor. HISTORIC THEME Recreaticin - Sport IMPORTANT/SIGNIFICANT ASSOCIATIONS A.R Wright — Architect F Hahn - Builder REFERENCES AND OTHER SOURCES OF INFORMATION HCWA Assessrrient Documentation and Register Entry Page 45 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory - Place Record Form Subiaco Oval MRA REF No. E5/ HCWA 11923 Other Names: Subiaco Municipal Reserve; Subiaco Commonage; Mueller Park FIGURE 20: WEST ELEVATION OF SUBIACO OVAL AS VIEWED FROM HAYDN BUNTON DRIVE. MANAGEMENT LEVEL Level 1 - Place of State Significance LOCATION Address: 304 Roberts Road, Subiaco Land title description: Reserve 41874 on Plan 219514 Scheme Area: Subiaco Redevelopment Scheme 2 Precinct: Subiaco Oval STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE The place has cultural heritage significance for the following reasons: • The place is highly valued as the State's first premier league football oval; • The place is a well-known local landmark and is known nationally as the former home of football in this state; • The place is one of the oldest league football ovals in Western Australia and served as the premier football oval in the State from the mid-1930s until 2017; and • The place reflects over 25 years of design to accommodate player and spectator facilities that are visually harmonious, with more recent stands achieving a pleasing and visually distinct composition. Temporary facilities, perimeter fencing, the Subiaco Football Club clubrooms and car parking areas are intrusive. OTHER HERITAGE LISTINGS State Register: Interim 2/3/2018 Local Government Inventory: Adopted 24/9/2002 Subiaco Heritage List: Adopted 18/12/2012 Page 46 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory DESIRABLE OUTCOME The place is included in the State Register of Heritage Places and will be afforded the highest level of protection both through the provisions of the Heritage Act and the Scheme. Note: All development applications for properties on the State Register must be referred to HCWA. PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION Place Type: Individual Building or Group; Other Structure Architectural Style: N/A Construction Materials: Various Condition: Fair-Good General Description: The place consists of a collection of buildings arranged around the playing surface. All structures post-date 1908. Operation of the place as a sporting ground ceased in .November 2017 following the close of the Australian Football League season and expected opening of the Optus Stadium in 2018. HISTORICAL NOTES Date of Construction: 1908 - 1998 Original Use: Social/Recreation - Grandstand/Other Sports Building Current Use: Vacant Historical Notes: On 26 March 1897, Subiaco was proclaimed a municipality. When the population of the district grew rapidly, football and cricket clubs thrived. The council applied for a long-term lease for land at Mueller Road, but when offered a term of only ten years, sought an alternative. George Shenton offered part of Dyson's Swamp (later known as Shenton Park Lake) in West Subiaco for playing fields. Jimmy Melbourne, the first Indigenous Australian to play senior Australian rules football, played for the Subiaco Football Club from 1903 to 1904, with many other Aboriginal people to play at Subiaco Oval throughout its history. The Shenton Park recreation area suffered from regular flooding, so in August 1904, land including.the future site of Subiaco Oval was vested with Subiaco for recreation purposes. In 1906, the site was formally named 'Mueller Park'. On 11 August 1906, it was reported that £350 was being expended on Mueller Park. It was anticipated the oval would be ready for football the next season, but progress was slow, and it was not ready until 1908. In April that year, Subiaco played Cottesloe in a practice football match, the first recorded football game at the new ground. A jarrah grandstand, with change-rooms underneath, was built at a cost of £850, a picket fence was erected around the oval, couch grass was established, sloping banks for spectators created, and trees were planted. In 1916, Subiaco Council decided to rename Mueller Park as 'Kitchener' and the oval appears to have been exclusively referred to as 'Subiaco Oval' from this point. By 1922, the original grandstand had fallen into disrepair, so a new pavilion to accommodate 1,500 people was built at a cost of £6,500 in. 1923. In 1935, the Council decided the provision of a modern entrance to Subiaco Oval would be .appropriate to commemorate the Jubilee of King George V. The architect Was Alfred Robert Linus Wright, and the builder was F. Hahn. The two limestone gate-houses, with the brick entrance way between them, with concrete floors, and with a Marseilles tile roof, were constructed at a cost of £1,000. In June 1968, the West Australian National Football League and Subiaco Council agreed that a new stand should be erected at the western end of Subiaco Oval, for which the Council would raise a loan of $500,000. This was a tiered concrete stand, with three levels of seating to accommodate more than 7,500 spectators. Page 47 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory In 1970, concrete terracing was built on the Roberts Road side of Subiaco Oval to provide seating for 14,000 people. In May 1970, the construction of a new two storey building, comprising a social .hall, dining room, bar areas and sporting facilitie'§, on a site adjoining the existing clubroom's, was approved. In 1986, Western Australia elected to join the Victorian Football League (later Australian Football League), with West Coast Eagles as the State team. The Eagles were based at Subiaco Oval and played their first game at the ground on 29 March 1987. West Australian's second Australian Football League (AFL) team, the Fremantle Dockers, entered the competition in 1995. Although originally based at Fremantle Oval, the team used Subiaco Oval as its home ground for AFL games. In the mid-1990s, the master plan for the re-development of Subiaco Oval included the restoration of the oval gates. In 1995-96, restoration works on the gates included removal of the moulded lettering and most of the original 1935 turnstiles were replaced with new ticket and turnstile fittings. In 1997, installation of lights at Subiaco Oval enabled night games to be played. In October 1998, John Holland was awarded the contract to build the new $33 million grandstand at the eastern end of the ground, to seat 15,000, which also incorporated offices, an indoor swimming pool, changing facilities, function rooms and catering facilities. In 2011, the State Government announced that a new stadium would be built at Burswood, with all major events, including AFL games, to be relocated from Subiaco Oval. In 2015, the AFL announced that the Indigenous round would be named after Sir Douglas Nicholls who played for Fitzroy in the 1930s, including at least one game at Subiaco Oval. This round of AFL celebrates Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culture, with Subiaco Oval playing host to games celebrating this round and seperately, NAIDOC events. The last sporting event at Subiaco Oval was held in November 2017, with the State Government announcing that an oval would be retained for recreational sport and the wider site redeveloped as a mixed use precinct. HISTORIC THEME Social and Civic Activities - Sport, Recreation and Entertainment IMPORTANT/SIGNIFICANT ASSOCIATIONS Harold Krantz - Architect REFERENCES AND/OR OTHER SOURCES OF INFORMATION City of Subiaco Heritage Inventory (2002) Place Record Heritage Council of Western Australia Assessment Documentation Page 48 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory FIGURE 21: EAST ELEVATION OF SUBIACO OVAL AS VIEWED FROM SUBIACO ROAD Page 49 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory - Place Record Form Mueller Park MRA REF No. E6/ HCWA 17469 Other Names: Kitchener Park, Perth Commonage FIGURE 22: MUELLER PARK CENTRAL SPINE FACING SOUTH-WEST MANAGEMENT LEVEL Level 2 - Place of Local Significance LOCATION Address: Reserve 9337 on Plan 2251 Land title description: 150 Roberts Road, Subiaco Scheme Area: Subiaco Redevelopment Scheme 2 Precinct: Mueller Park STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE The place has cultural heritage significance for the following reasons: • Mueller Park's diagonal footpaths with their mature avenue trees are a rare extant example of a public park laid out in the Geometric style during Western Australia's Gold Boom to early Inter-War years, 1890s — 1920s; • Mueller Park has a considerable number of mature plantings dating from its early period of development and some native specimens that were retained in the original designs for the development of the Reserve; • The remnant native species at Mueller Park contribute to the natural landscape; • The range of mature tree species that border Mueller Park enhance the surrounding streetscapes; • The place is closely associated with Alexander Dickson Esson Bruce, Municipal Gardener, 1921-25, who was Assistant Superintendent, Acting Superintendent and Superintendent of Parks and Gardens in Canberra (1925-38) and his leading assistant Joseph 'Joe' Martin, who succeeded him under the title of Head Gardener at Subiaco (1926-42); • The place is an important cultural landscape illustrating the evolution of part of Perth Commonage from the early 1900s to the early 2000s, with passive recreation and active recreation (Subiaco Oval and Kitchener Park) areas, and has the potential to yield information contributing to a wider understanding of the history of human occupation in this locality and the development of park and recreation areas in this State; Page 50 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory • The place contributes to the community's sense of place and it is highly valued by the community as well demonstrated by community protests against proposals to use part of the parkland areas in developing a sporting stadium; and • The naming of Mueller Park commemorates Baron Ferdinand Jakob Heinrich von Mueller, inaugural director of Melbourne Botanic Gardens (1857-73), Australia's pre-eminent botanist. OTHER HERITAGE LISTINGS Local Government Inventory: Adopted 28/2/1995 Subiaco Heritage List: Adopted 18/12/2012 DESIRABLE OUTCOME The place is of local significance in its own right and will be afforded a high level of protection through the provisions of the Scheme. PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION Place Type: Park/Reserve Architectural Style: N/A Construction Materials: N/A Condition: Good General Description: Large, grassed open space with mature trees, lights and benches scattered throughout. The area is fenced by low, pine barriers. There is a central brick paved terrace area and rotunda. A row of Port Jackson Fig Trees line Roberts Road. A row of trees run diagonally from the north east to the south west corners. HISTORICAL NOTES Date of Construction: 1900 Original Use: Park/Reserve Current Use: Park/Reserve Historical Notes: In 1906 Subiaco Municipal Council debated what they should call the new park bounded by 'Hamilton Street, Axon Street (now Haydn Bunton Drive), Subiaco Road and Mueller Road (now Roberts Road)'. Two names were proposed Mueller Park, after a botanist for the Colonial Government, and Prince's Park. The former was chosen. Mueller Park originally comprised the land area which included Subiaco Oval and in the early 1900's housed tennis, croquet, bowls, cricket and football clubs. In 1916, the middle of World War 1, it was decided that a German name was not appropriate, so Mueller Road was renamed Roberts Road (after Lt Col Roberts, a Subiaco councillor then on active duty) and Mueller Park became Kitchener Park (after Lord Kitchener). In 1981 most of the park was retitled back to its original name when the two-tier stand redevelopment of Subiaco Oval was completed. HISTORIC THEME Unknown IMPORTANT/SIGNIFICANT ASSOCIATIONS Baron Ferdinand Jakob Heinrich von Mueller, Botanist REFERENCES AND/OR OTHER SOURCES OF INFORMATION Heritage Assessment of Reserve 9337 (2012) City of Subiaco Heritage Inventory (2003) Place Record Page 51 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory FIGURE 23: MUELLER PARK FACING NORTH ADJACENT TO COGHLAN ROAD FIGURE 24: MUELLER PARK CENTRAL SPINE FACING SOUTH-EAST Page 52 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory - Place Record Form White Lodge - 118 Subiaco Road, Subiaco MRA REF No. Eli HCWA 05481 Other Names: Shirley White Residence; White Lodge FIGURE 25: SUBIACO ROAD (SOUTH) ELEVATION OF 118 SUBIACO ROAD, SUBIACO MANAGEMENT LEVEL Level 2 - Place of Local Significance LOCATION Address: 118 Subiaco Road, Subiaco Land title description: Lot 59 on Deposited Plan 73412 Scheme Area: Subiaco Redevelopment Scheme 2 Precinct: Railway STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE White Lodge has cultural heritage significance for the following reasons: • For its historical value as the long-term family home of prominent local businessman and one time Mayor of Subiaco, Thomas Harold 'Shirley' White. For its historical and aesthetic value as an example of the work of Shirley White, who was active as a plumbing and building contractor in Western Australia from the mid-1890's until his death in 1928. OTHER HERITAGE LISTINGS Subiaco Heritage List: Adopted 21/4/2015 Local Government Inventory: Adopted 21/4/2015 DESIRABLE OUTCOME The place is of local significance in its own right and will be afforded a high level of protection through the provisions of the Scheme. Page 53 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION Place Type: Residential - House Architectural Style: Federation Queen Anne Construction Materials: Brick and corrugated roof sheeting Condition: Good General Description: Asymmetrical plan, gable-hipped roof clad with corrugated metal sheeting and three tall chimneys with rendered projecting caps over painted (formerly tuck-pointed) brickwork. Rough vast rendered eaves panel (over the verandah), finished. with finely detailed .rendered brackets .and decorative panels with a stylised leaf and scroll pattern. Painted brick walls, these originally had tuck-pointed face brickwork to. the main Subiaco Road and White Place facades. Two contrasting rendered stringcourses to the main Subiaco Road and White Place facades - one . at door head height and one at window sill height, the upper stringcourse steps up to frame the head of each door and window opening. The house is set back approximately 6.5m from Subiaco Road and the front .and. western yards have been informally laid out with lawn, shrubs, trees and flower beds. The street boundaries are defined by a high fence with rendered masonry piers and infill panels 'Of slender, spear-topped metal bars. A carport is located at the rear of the house with access to White Lane. HISTORICAL NOTES Date of Construction: 1905 Original Use: Residential Current Use: Residential Historical Notes: This area was laid out as part of the Subiaco Estate in 1885. In c. 1904 Lot 29 and part Lot 28, on the corner of Subiaco Road and Kimberley Street (now White Place), were purchased by "Florence Rose White of Subiaco, Married Woman". In the following year her husband, Shirley White (a local plumbing and building contractor), erected a new family home on the site - known as "White Lodge". At that time the street address was given as 190 Subiaco Road, but it became 118 Subiaco Road when the street numbers were changed in c.1922. White was active in local politics and was elected as a councillor of the Subiaco Council in November 1905, served as Mayor of Subiaco in 1908- 1910 and returned as a councillor in 1915. He also served a term as president of the Master Builders' and Contractors' Association in 1911 and was a long-term and prominent member of the WA Trotting Association. In 1985, 118 Subiaco Road was cleared and the two inter-war houses to the north (facing White Lane) were demolished. The vacant site was then redeveloped with five townhouses, retaining the White's former house on a reduced block. This continued a trend towards high density development along Subiaco Road, which had commenced in the 1960's - 1970's. HISTORIC THEME Unknown IMPORTANT/SIGNIFICANT ASSOCIATIONS Thomas Harold 'Shirley' White — Community Figure REFERENCES AND/OR OTHER SOURCES OF INFORMATION Heritage Assessment of 118 Subiaco Road, Subiaco prepared by Greenward Consulting Page 54 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory - Place Record Form House - 98 Subiaco Road, Subiaco MRA REF No. E8 / HCWA 24292 Other Names: FIGURE 26: SUBIACO ROAD (SOUTH) ELEVATION OF 98 SUBIACO ROAD, SUBIACO MANAGEMENT LEVEL Level 3 - Place of Lesser Significance LOCATION Address: 98 Subiaco Road, Subiaco Land title description: Lot 4 on Strata Plan 12688 Scheme Area: Subiaco Redevelopment Scheme 2 Precinct: Railway STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE The place is of cultural heritage significance for the following reasons: • The place has aesthetic significance as a good example of the architectural style typical of the area and period; and • It has historic significance reflecting the development and settlement of the area. OTHER HERITAGE LISTINGS Local Government Inventory: Adopted 4/2/2003 DESIRABLE OUTCOME Conservation of the place is desirable. Proposed partial or full demolition to be considered at development application stage through the completion of a detailed Heritage Impact Assessment. The place should be photographically recorded prior to any major redevelopment or demolition. Page 55 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION Place Type: Residential - House Architectural Style: Federation Queen Anne Construction Materials: Brick, corrugated iron and timber Condition: Good General Description: Single storey house with tuck pointed brick walls and cream rendered bands. Corrugated iron hipped and gabled roof with timber effect to gable. Asymmetrical façade with double hung timber windows. Face brick chimney with rendered corbelling. Bullnose verandah under separate roof supported by square timber posts with decorative timber frieze. HISTORICAL NOTES Date of Construction: 1905 Original Use: Residential Current Use: Residential Historical Notes: The opening of the railway line established Subiaco as an area both for investors and as a place for people to settle. North of Subiaco Road was released as 'Subiaco Estate' in 1895 and the south of Roberts Road (formerly Mueller Road) was released in 1896. People settled along either side of the railway line as the more affordable prices made the land accessible to workers. HISTORIC THEME Unknown IMPORTANT/SIGNIFICANT ASSOCIATIONS Newman Hall REFERENCES AND/OR OTHER SOURCES OF INFORMATION City of Subiaco Heritage Inventory (2003) Place Record Page 56 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory - Place Record Form House - 2 Hamilton Street, Subiaco MRA REF No. E9/ HCWA 24368 Other Names: Abrevechan (1911) & Hadlow (2015) FIGURE 27: HAMILTON STREET (WEST) ELEVATION OF 2 HAMILTON STREET, SUBIACO MANAGEMENT LEVEL Level 3- Place of Lesser Significance LOCATION Address: 2 Hamilton Street, Subiaco Land title description: Lot 1 on Strata Plan 19866 Scheme Area: Subiaco Redevelopment Scheme 2 Precinct: Railway STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE The place is of cultural heritage significance for the following reasons: • The place is a good representative example of a modest Federation Queen Anne "gentleman's villa", designed to a style and scale suited to the junior professional classes. • The place is a good example of the residential work of architect, Andrew 'Oswald' Wilson, (1866-1950). OTHER HERITAGE LISTINGS Local Government Inventory: Adopted 14/02/2003 Level of Significance Amended 21/4/2015 DESIRABLE OUTCOME Conservation of the place is desirable. Any proposed partial or full demolition may be considered at development application stage through the completion of a detailed Heritage Impact Assessment. The place should be photographically recorded prior to any major redevelopment or demolition. Page 57 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION Place Type: Residential - House Architectural Style: Federation Queen Anne Construction Materials: Brick and Tile Condition: Fair General Description: Asy(-nmetrical plan, gable-hipped roof with gable ends facing west (main façade) and south. Tuck-pointed face brick façade (with a rendered plinth to sill height across part ofthe main facade), two plain rendered string courses, one at window sill height and the other at door head height —the latter stepping up to frame the highlights of the doors and the heads of the Windows. Projecting wing at the northern end of the main facade. Return verandah, commencing at the projecting wing, extending across the rernainder of the façade and returning partway along the the southern side of the house. Three wall niches along return verandah - two along the main (western) façade (either side of the window' bay) and one along the southern side of the house. Modern entrance door framed by original moulded timber architraves. Low waisted stained glass sidelights and stained glass highlights. Shallow projecting window bay .under the main verandah (south of the entrance door), small, high-level window with a curved head, stained glass detailing, and a plain rectangular sill with a curved under-sill panel. HISTORICAL NOTES Date of Construction: 1911 Original Use: Residential Current Use: Residential Historical Notes: A new certificate of title for this site was issued in the name of Henry Arthur Lightfoot in March 1911 and it is known that the family was living there in November of that year, when a newspaper notice was placed to announce the birth of their son at "Abervechan", Kerr Street, Subiaco. In 1914 the site was extended to the east (rear) when Lightfoot also acquired part of Lot 18. Andrew Oswald Wilson, Architect (1866-1950). Widely known by his second name, Oswald Wilson was born in Melbourne and moved to Western Australia in the 1890s. His early work in Western Australia included a number of buildings in the Goldfields (c.1899-1908), including houses, the Women's Christian Temperance Union Girls' Home in Kalgoorlie, Boulder Town Hall, and St Matthews Anglican Church, Boulder. Newspaper advertisements indicate that he then specialised in residential work in Perth, before serving with the Ministry of Munitions in England during WWI. Another local example of his work is 30 Heytesbury Road, which was built as his own home in c.1910. Henry Arthur Lightfoot Henry worked for the Department of Mines from c.1901-1937, spending several years in the goldfields (where he may have been familiar with the work of Oswald Wilson) before taking up a position in the Perth drafting section in c.1909. During this period he represented civil servants in a number of capacities, and in 1935 was elected a life member of the Civil Service Association and "presented with a gold medal as an appreciation of his services for the association since 1903". His name appeared in the newspapers on numerous occasions relating to appointments to various committees and organisations and to his input into issues such as basic wages and superannuation rights for workers, as well as in relation to his active support for the temperance movement. Henry married Nellie Maud Preston in Subiaco in 1906 and they had two children — Sheila (born 1907) and Henry (born 1911). They occupied 2 Hamilton Street as a family home until 1939. By early 1941, 2 Hamilton Street had been purchased as an investment property by Vittorino Da Re, and was occupied for many years by Enid Athalie Parish. 2 Hamilton Street was sold by Vittorino Da Re in 1989 and at around this time (at some stage between 1985 and 1995) a new residential development was constructed on the rear portion of the lot, with an access driveway along the southern boundary. The original house was conserved and continues to be used as a private residence. Page 58 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory HISTORIC THEME Unknown IMPORTANT/SIGNIFICANT ASSOCIATIONS Unknown REFERENCES AND/OR OTHER SOURCES OF INFORMATION Heritage Assessment of 2 Hamilton Street, Subiaco, prepared by Greenward Consulting Page 59 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory - Place Record Form House - 44 Subiaco Road MRA REF No. HO / HCWA 24290 Other Names: 1\\\\ FIGURE 28: SUBIACO ROAD (SOUTH) ELEVATION OF 44 SUBIACO ROAD, SUBIACO MANAGEMENT LEVEL Level 3 - Place of Lesser Significance LOCATION Address: 44 Subiaco Road, Subiaco Land title description: Lot 105 on Deposited Plan 30323 Scheme Area: Subiaco Redevelopment Scheme 2 Precinct: Railway STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE The place is of cultural heritage significance for the following reasons: • The place has aesthetic significance as a good example of the architectural style typical of the area and period; and • It has historic significance reflecting the development and settlement of the area. OTHER HERITAGE LISTINGS Local Government Inventory: Adopted 4/2/2003 DESIRABLE OUTCOME Conservation of the place is desirable. Any proposed partial or full demolition may be considered at development application stage through the completion of a detailed Heritage Impact Assessment. The place should be photographically recorded prior to any major redevelopment or demolition. Page 60 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION Place Type: Residential - House Architectural Style: Federation Bungalow Construction Materials: Brick, corrugated iron and timber Condition: Good General Description: Single storey house with tuck pointed brick walls with cream rendered bands. Corrugated iron hipped and gabled roof with timber effect to gable. Asymmetrical façade with double hung timber windows. Rendered and face brick chimney with rendered corbelling. Verandah under separate roof supported on turned timber posts. Brick extension to the rear. HISTORICAL NOTES Date of Construction: 1895 Original Use: Residential Current Use: Residentia!, Historical Notes: The opening of the railway line established Subiaco, as an area both for investors and as a place for people to settle. North of Subiaco Road was released as 'Subiaco Estate' in 1895 and the south of Roberts Road (formerly Mueller Road) was released in 1896. People settled along either.side of the railway line as the more affordable prices made the land accessible to workers. HISTORIC THEME Unknown IMPORTANT/SIGNIFICANT ASSOCIATIONS Unknown REFERENCES AND/OR OTHER SOURCES OF INFORMATION City of Subiaco Heritage Inventory (2003) Place Records Page 61 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory - Place Record Form House - 40 Subiaco Road, Subiaco MRA REF No. Ell I HCWA 24288 Other Names: lelilt. 111111111111111Uov. 117/(//////1/11/16\liWiff(11111(1111(fillIIIIII111111111111111WWWIMMI ,,\\\\1 - FIGURE 29: SUBIACO ROAD (SOUTH) ELEVATION OF 40 SUBIACO ROAD, SUBIACO MANAGEMENT LEVEL Level 3 - Place of Lesser Significance LOCATION Address: 40 Subiaco Road, Subiaco Land title description: Lot 21 on Deposited Plan 89331 Scheme Area: Subiaco Redevelopment Scheme 2 Precinct: Railway STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE The place is of cultural heritage significance for the following reasons: • The place has aesthetic significance as a good example of the architectural style typical of the area and period; and • It has historic significance reflecting the development and settlement of the area. OTHER HERITAGE LISTINGS Local Government Inventory: Adopted 4/2/2003 DESIRABLE OUTCOME Conservation of the place is desirable. Any proposed partial or full demolition may be considered at development application stage through the completion of a detailed Heritage Impact Assessment. The place should be photographically recorded prior to any major redevelopment or demolition. Page 62 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION Place Type: Residential - House Architectural Style: ' Federation Bungalow Construction Materials: Brick, Corrugated Iron and Timber Condition: Good General Description: Double storey house with tuck pointed brick walls. Corrugated iron hipped roof. Symmetrical façade with double hung timber windows and central front door with fanlight and sidelights. Face brick chimney with brick corbelling. Bullnose verandah under separate roof supported on turned timber posts. Upper storey extension to the front section of the house and a ground floor extension to the rear. The house is located behind a face brick and timber picket fence. HISTORICAL NOTES - Date of Construction: Original Use: Residential - Current Use: Residential Historical Notes: The opening of the railway line established Subiaco as an area both for. investors and as a place for people to settle. North of Subiaco Road was released as 'Subiaco Estate' in 1895 and the south-of Roberts Road (formerly Mueller Road) was releaSed in 1896. People settled along either side of the railway line, as the more affordable prices made the land accessible to workers. HISTORIC THEME Unknown IMPORTANT/SIGNIFICANT ASSOCIATIONS Unknown REFERENCES AND/OR OTHER SOURCES OF INFORMATION City of Subiaco Heritage Inventory (2003) Place Record Page 63 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory - Place Record Form House - 30 Subiaco Road, Subiaco MRA REF No. E12 / HCWA 24287 Other Names: \A t ""WW(frilifffnlIM11111)1r »)m 1$ FIGURE 30: SUBIACO ROAD (SOUTH) ELEVATION OF 30 SUBIACO ROAD, SUBIACO MANAGEMENT LEVEL Level 3 - Place of Lesser Significance LOCATION Address: 30 Subiaco Road, Subiaco Land title description: Lot 101 on Deposited Plan 30323 Scheme Area: Subiaco Redevelopment Scheme 2 Precinct: Railway STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE The place is of cultural heritage significance for the following reasons: • The place has aesthetic significance as a good example of the architectural style typical of the area and period; and • It has historic significance reflecting the development and settlement of the area. OTHER HERITAGE LISTINGS Local Government Inventory: Adopted 4/2/2003 DESIRABLE OUTCOME Conservation of the place is desirable. Any proposed partial or full demolition may be considered at development application stage through the completion of a detailed Heritage Impact Assessment. The place should be photographically recorded prior to any major redevelopment or demolition. Page 64 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION Place Type: Residential - House Architectural Style: Federation Bungalow Construction Materials: Brick, Corrugated Iron and Timber Condition: Good General Description: Single storey house with tuck pointed brick walls. Corrugated iron hipped roof. Symmetrical façade with double hung timber windows and central front door. Face brick chimney with brick corbelling. Bullnose verandah under separate roof supported on turned timber posts. HISTORICAL NOTES Date of Construction: 1900 Original Use: Residential . Current Use: Residential . Historical Notes: The opening of the railway line established Subiaco as an area both for investors and as a place for people to settle. North of Subiaco Road was released as 'Subiaco Estate' in 1895 and the south of Roberts Road (formerly Mueller Road) was released in 1896. People settled along either side of the railway line, as the more affordable prices made the land accessible to workers. HISTORIC THEME Unknown IMPORTANT/SIGNIFICANT ASSOCIATIONS Unknown REFERENCES AND/OR OTHER SOURCES OF INFORMATION City of Subiaco Heritage Inventory (2003) Place Record Page 65 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory - Place Record Form House - 28 Subiaco Road, Subiaco MRA REF No. E13/ HCWA 24286 Other Names: FIGURE 31: SUBIACO ROAD (SOUTH) ELEVATION OF 28 SUBIACO ROAD, SUBIACO MANAGEMENT LEVEL Level 3 - PLace of Lesser Significance LOCATION Address: 28 Subiaco Road, Subiaco Land title description: Lot 40 on Deposited Plan 27964 Scheme Area: Subiaco Redevelopment Scheme 2 Precinct: Railway STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE The place is of cultural heritage significance for the following reasons: • The place has aesthetic significance as a good example of the architectural style typical of the area and period; and • It has historic significance reflecting the development and settlement of the area. OTHER HERITAGE LISTINGS Local Government Inventory: Adopted 4/2/2003 DESIRABLE OUTCOME Conservation of the place is desirable. Any proposed partial or full demolition may be considered at development application stage through the completion of a detailed Heritage Impact Assessment. The place should be photographically recorded prior to any major redevelopment or demolition. Page 66 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION Place Type: Residential - House Architectural Style: Federation Bungalow Construction Materials: Brick, Corrugated Iron and Timber Condition: Good General Description: Single storey house with paint over tuck pointed brick walls. Corrugated iron hipped roof. Symmetrical facade with double hung timber windows and central front door. Painted face brick chimney with brick corbelling. Verandah under separate roof supported on square timber posts. A parapet wall runs along the west elevation. HISTORICAL NOTES Date of Construction: 1900 Original Use: Residential Current Use: Residential Historical Notes: The opening of the railway line established Subiaco as an area both for investors and as a place for people to settle. North of Subiaco Road was released as 'Subiaco Estate in 1895 and the south of Roberts Road (formerly Mueller Road) was released in 1896. People settled along either side of the railway line, as the more affordable prices made the land accessible to workers. HISTORIC THEME Unknown IMPORTANT/SIGNIFICANT ASSOCIATIONS Unknown REFERENCES AND/OR OTHER SOURCES OF INFORMATION City of Subiaco Heritage Inventory (2003) Place Record Page 67 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory - Place Record Form House - 24 Subiaco Road, Subiaco MRA REF No. E14 / HCWA 24285 Other Names: FIGURE 32: SUBIACO ROAD (SOUTH) ELEVATION OF 24 SUBIACO ROAD, SUBIACO MANAGEMENT LEVEL Level 3 - Place of Lesser Significance LOCATION Address: 24 Subiaco Road, Subiaco Land title description: Lot 1 on Deposited Plan 7856 Scheme Area: Subiaco Redevelopment Scheme 2 Precinct: Railway STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE The place is of cultural heritage significance for the following reasons: • The place has aesthetic significance as a good example of the architectural style typical of the area and period; and • It has historic significance reflecting the development and settlement of the area. OTHER HERITAGE LISTINGS Local Government Inventory: Adopted 4/2/2003 DESIRABLE OUTCOME Conservation of the place is desirable. Any proposed partial or full demolition may be considered at development application stage through the completion of a detailed Heritage Impact Assessment. The place should be photographically recorded prior to any major redevelopment or demolition. Page 68 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION Place Type: Residential - House Architectural Style: Federation Queen Anne Construction Materials: Brick, Corrugated Iron and Timber Condition: Good General Description:* Single storey house with paint over tuck pointed brick walls. Corrugated iron hipped and gabled roof, timber effect to gable. Asymmetrical façade with a projecting bay with gabled roof and verandah. Timber framed front door with two half sidelights. HISTORICAL NOTES Date of Construction: 1905 Original Use: Residential Current Use: Residential Historical Notes: The opening of the railway line established Subiaco as an area both for investors and as a .place for people to settle. North of Subiaco Road was released as 'Subiaco Estaie' in 1,895 and the south of.Roberts Road (formerly Mueller Road) was released in 1896. People settled along either side of the railway line, as the more affordable prices made the land accessible to workers: HISTORIC THEME Unknown IMPORTANT/SIGNIFICANT ASSOCIATIONS Unknown REFERENCES AND/OR OTHER SOURCES OF INFORMATION City of Subiaco Heritage Inventory (2003) Place Record Page 69 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory - Place Record Form West Leederville Railway Footbridge (Former) MRA REF No. E15/ HCWA 3290 Other Names: FIGURE 33: WEST LEEDERVILLE RAILWAY FOOTBRIDGE PUBLIC ARTWORK MANAGEMENT LEVEL Level 1 - Place of State Significance LOCATION Address: N/A Land title description: Lot 100 on Plan 54404 Scheme Area: Subiaco Redevelopment Scheme 2 Precinct: Railway STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE The place has cultural heritage significance for the following reasons: • The place signifies the location of the last remaining timber footbridges constructed on the Eastern Railway Line around the turn of the century and was the only Queen Post footbridge surviving in Western Australia at the time of inclusion on the State Register of Heritage Places; • The structure previously linked Subiaco and West Leederville over a railway line that physically divided them; and • The structure previously provided access from West Leederville railway station to Subiaco Oval for football games since the opening of the oval in 1909. OTHER HERITAGE LISTINGS State Register: Permanent 15/5/1998 National Trust Classification: Classified 7/8/1995 Local Government Inventory: Adopted 28/2/1995 (Town of Cambridge) DESIRABLE OUTCOME The place is included in the State Register of Heritage Places and will be afforded the highest level of protection both through the provisions of the Heritage Act and the Scheme. Note: All development applications for properties on the State Register must be referred to HCWA. Page 70 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION Place Type: Other Structure Architectural Style: Queen Post Construction Materials: Timber Condition: Good (artwork that is remaining) General 'Description: Remnant fabric of the bridge structure has been incorporated within a public artwork HISTORICAL NOTES Date of Construction: 1897; 1944; 1992-97 Original Use: Transport / Communications (Rail - Other) Current Use: N/A Historical Notes: The structure was built in 1897 and modified a number of times and until its removal was the last remaining of the timber footbridges constructed on the Eastern Railway Line and was the only Queen Post footbridge surviving in Western Australia. The structure linked Subiaco and West Leederville over a railway line that physically divides them. It was replaced with a tunnel and remnants of the bridge were used for an interpretive artwork. HISTORIC THEME Unknown IMPORTANT/SIGNIFICANT ASSOCIATIONS Unknown REFERENCES AND/OR OTHER SOURCES OF INFORMATION Town of Cambridge Heritage Inventory (1995) Place Record Heritage Council of Western Australia Assessment Documentation and Register Entry Page 71 // MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory FIGURE 34: WEST LEEDERVILLE RAILWAY FOOTBRIDGE PUBLIC ARTWORK FIGURE 35: WEST LEEDERVILLE RAILWAY FOOTBRIDGE PUBLIC ARTWORK Page 72 II MRA Subiaco Heritage Inventory Metropolitan Redevelopment Authority WESTERN AUSTRALIA MRR Phone (08) 6557 0700 Facsimile (08) 9281 6020 Email reception@mra wa gov au TWITTER/ @VitalPerth FACEBOOK COM/ perthculturalcentre Postal address Locked Bag 8, Perth Business Centre WA 6849 REPORT ITEM NO. C1 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 DOCUMENTATION OF PLACES FOR ENTRY IN THE REGISTER OF HERITAGE PLACES 1. DATA BASE No. * 2. NAME Kitchener Park Trees (1920s) FORMER NAME Mueller Park Trees 3. LOCATION Coghlan Road and Subiaco Road, Subiaco 4. DESCRIPTION OF PLACE INCLUDED IN THIS ENTRY (Reserve 41874, lot 12732, plan 21954 as shown in LR Volume 3093 Folio 159) 5. LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA City of Subiaco 6. OWNER (State of Western Australia) 7. HERITAGE LISTINGS • Register of Heritage Places: ------• National Trust Classification: ------• Town Planning Scheme: ------• Municipal Inventory: ------• Register of the National Estate: ------ 8. ORDERS UNDER SECTION 38 OR 59 OF THE ACT ------ 9. HERITAGE AGREEMENT ------ 10. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE Kitchener Park Trees, seventeen mature trees planted in the road reserves of Coghlan and Subiaco Roads, Subiaco, has cultural heritage significance for the following reasons: the trees, together with trees on the adjacent Mueller Park, have aesthetic value as they contribute to an impressive leafy avenue on Coghlan Road and the pines create an impressive element in the Subiaco Road streetscape; the place is valued by the community as a group of mature trees in the locality which contribute to the community’s sense of place as demonstrated by the City of Subiaco to place a tree preservation order over these trees and others in the vicinity; Register of Heritage Places Kitchener Park Trees, Subiaco 1 Place Assessed May 2018 Documentation amended: the place has historic value for its association with the former Subiaco Municipal Nursery which was an important element in the maintenance and development of Subiaco’s parks and gardens; the three Aleppo Pines (Pinus halapensis) have historic value for their association with the Australian men and women who served at Gallipoli and the practice following the war of commemorating their service and sacrifice through planting this species of tree. This site is believed to be the first place where the seeds were propagated for distribution around Western Australia, the place has historic value for its association with Alexander Dickson Esson Bruce (1884-1964) head gardener in Subiaco from 1921 to 1926 who was an influential figure in Australian public gardens through his later roles as superintendents of parks and gardens at Canberra and the City of Sydney; and, the place has historic value for its association with the former sports grounds on the site, including bowls, tennis and croquet which all had a strong presence in the community during the 20th century. Register of Heritage Places Kitchener Park Trees, Subiaco 2 Place Assessed May 2018 Documentation amended: 11. ASSESSMENT OF CULTURAL HERITAGE SIGNIFICANCE The criteria adopted by the Heritage Council in November 1996 have been used to determine the cultural heritage significance of the place. PRINCIPAL AUSTRALIAN HISTORIC THEME(S) • 3.11.4 Clearing Vegetation • 4.1.2 Making suburbs • 4.2 Supplying urban services • 7.6.1 Developing local government authorities • 8.1.1 Playing and watching organised sports • 8.1.3 Developing public parks and gardens • 8.8 Remembering the fallen HERITAGE COUNCIL OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA THEME(S) • 302 Rural industry and market gardening • 401 Government and politics • 404 Community services and utilities • 405 Sport, recreation and entertainment • 501 World wars and other wars • 604 Innovators 11. 1 AESTHETIC VALUE* Kitchener Park Trees has significance for their contribution to the streetscape of Coghlan Road and Subiaco Road. The pines and sugar gums on Coghlan Road contribute to an to an impressive leafy avenue on Coghlan Road and the formal linear planting of the pines, parallel to Subiaco Road make an impressive contribution to the streetscape. (Criterion 1.3) Kitchener Park Trees contribute to the aesthetic value of the surrounding urban environment as a continuation of the Mueller Park landscaping which is dominated by similar aged trees which together create a specific character for this portion of Subiaco. (Criterion 1.3) 11. 2. HISTORIC VALUE Kitchener Park Trees is associated with the development of this portion of Subiaco from a simple parkland within a sparsely occupied suburb for working families, to a highly urbanised locality. Throughout the 20th century the place has been associated with sports grounds, a municipal nursery and associated residence, public events and car parking. (Criterion 2.1) The three Aleppo Pines (Pinus halapensis) are valued for their association with the Australian men and women who served at Gallipoli and the practice following * For consistency, all references to architectural style are taken from Apperly, R., Irving, R., Reynolds, P. A Pictorial Guide to Identifying Australian Architecture. Styles and Terms from 1788 to the Present, Angus and Robertson, North Ryde, 1989. For consistency, all references to garden and landscape types and styles are taken from Ramsay, J. Parks, Gardens and Special Trees: A Classification and Assessment Method for the Register of the National Estate, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, 1991, with additional reference to Richards, O. Theoretical Framework for Designed Landscapes in WA, unpublished report, 1997. Register of Heritage Places Kitchener Park Trees, Subiaco 3 Place Assessed May 2018 Documentation amended: the war of commemorating their service and sacrifice through planting this species of tree. This site is believed to be the first place where the seeds were propagated for distribution around Western Australia. (Criterion 2.1) Kitchener Park Trees are closely associated with the establishment of the Subiaco Municipal Tree Nursery in 1921 under the direction of head gardener Alexander Bruce. The nursery and the ongoing tree planting program were supported by the Subiaco Council which had a longstanding commitment to the beautification of the local government authority. (Criterion 2.2) Kitchener Park Trees is closely associated with Alexander Dickson Esson Bruce (1884-1964) head gardener in Subiaco from 1921 to 1926, who subsequently took up the position of Superintendent of Parks and Gardens in Canberra where he oversaw the preparation of planting schemes and the establishment of plants for the new capital and later worked in a similar role for the City of Sydney. (Criterion 2.3) 11. 3. SCIENTIFIC VALUE ------ 11. 4. SOCIAL VALUE Kitchener Park Trees are valued by the community for their continued presence in the streetscape since the 1920s. Because of their location adjacent to Subiaco Oval the trees are well known beyond the Subiaco community. (Criterion 4.1) Kitchener Park Trees are valued by the local community as demonstrated by the level of community interest and concern following the announcement of the development of Kitchener Park which may have an impact on the future of the trees Kitchener Park Trees are valued by the community as a group of mature trees in the locality which contribute to the community’s sense of place. The decision by the City of Subiaco to place a tree preservation order over these trees and others in the vicinity confirms the value of the trees to the community. (Criterion 4.2) 12. DEGREE OF SIGNIFICANCE 12. 1. RARITY Kitchener Park Trees are not rare as a group of mature street trees in an urban area. The remaining three ‘Alleppo Pines’ (Pinus Halpepensis) are rare as examples of the type in a streetscape. (Criterion 5.1) Kitchener Park Trees is rare for demonstrating remnants of a local municipality’s tree nursery. (Criterion 5.2) 12. 2 REPRESENTATIVENESS Kitchener Park Trees demonstrate a common approach to street tree planting practised by local governments in the first half of the 20th century. The trees chosen were not indigenous to the area but their upright and generally uniform growth habit made pine trees and sugar gums a popular choice. (Criterion 6.1) Register of Heritage Places Kitchener Park Trees, Subiaco 4 Place Assessed May 2018 Documentation amended: 12. 3 CONDITION All subject trees appear to be sound and healthy and are good specimens of their type. 12. 4 INTEGRITY Kitchener Park Trees have a high degree of integrity as they continue to serve as street trees and contribute to the streetscape. 12. 5 AUTHENTICITY Kitchener Park Trees have a high degree of authenticity. The page break must be retained at the end of Section 12.5 Register of Heritage Places Kitchener Park Trees, Subiaco 5 Place Assessed May 2018 Documentation amended: 13. SUPPORTING EVIDENCE The documentation for this place is based on the heritage assessment completed by Hocking Heritage Studio; Prue Griffin, historian and Gemma Smith, heritage consultant, in May 20181, with amendments and/or additions by the State Heritage Office and the Register Committee. 13. 1 DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE The 17 mature trees located on two boundaries of Kitchener Park, planted in the road reserves of Coghlan and Subiaco Roads include remnant trees from the period when the site was used by the City of Subiaco as a plant nursery. Other trees are examples of the street tree program undertaken by the City of Subiaco in the early 20th century or are remnants of original vegetation on the site. In the 19th century, Kitchener Park was portion of Reserve 591A or the ‘Perth Commonage’, a term which applied to a large landholding west of the city, including the land bound by Subiaco Road to the north, Mueller Road (later Roberts Road) to the south, Thomas Street to the east and the railway line on the west. 2 Mueller Road was named in honour of Ferdinand Jakob Heinrich von Mueller (1825-1896), inaugural director of Melbourne Botanic Gardens (1857-73), and Australia’s pre-eminent botanist. His contribution was later recognised through the naming of Mueller Park on portion of Reserve 591A. During the 1890s gold boom, the lack of accommodation in the metropolitan area for people heading to the Goldfields saw many camping out around Perth, raising sanitary concerns for the local authorities.3 The Perth City Council, who controlled the site, cleared a large number of tents from the area on numerous occasions.4 The burgeoning population of Subiaco in the 1890s led to widespread support for the establishment of a municipality separate from Perth. On 26 March 1897, the municipality was gazetted, elections were held on 29 May and Board of Health chairperson Henry Doyle was sworn in as the first Mayor on 5 June.5 In July 1897, the Subiaco Council asked the Perth Council to continue Townshend and Hamilton Roads through the Commonage to Subiaco Road, and both these roads and Coghlan Road were made by the early 1900s. In November 1897, Subiaco Council made its first request to the Commissioner for Crown Lands to grant the Municipality power over the part of the Commonage situated in Subiaco to beautify it and utilise it for recreation purposes.6 Despite strong community support it was not until 1904 that Reserve A 9337, Perth Suburban Lots 406 and 446, were vested in the Mayor and Councillors of the Municipality of Subiaco for recreation purposes.7 1 Acknowledgement is extended to historian Robin Chinnery who compiled the documentary evidence for the heritage assessment of Reserve 9337 for the City of Subiaco in 2012. 2 Suburban Allotments near the City of Perth marked out and opened for sale, October 1883, drawn by surveyor George Rotton. SROWA, item 337, cons 3868. 3 The Inquirer and Commercial News, 27 November 1896, p. 14. 4 The Daily News 20 November 1897, p. 3. 5 Spillman, Ken, Identity Prized A History of Subiaco, City of Subiaco, UWA Press, 1985, p. 88. 6 Daily News 22 July 1897; & Inquirer 23 July 1897. 7 Government Gazette 19 August 1904, p. 8. Register of Heritage Places Kitchener Park Trees, Subiaco 6 Place Assessed May 2018 Documentation amended: In the early decades of the 20th century the Subiaco Municipal Council were keen to beautify the suburb with a commitment to the planting of street trees. In 1903, the West Australian reported that; The Council has planted numbers of trees, including peppers, sugar gums, acacias, kurrijongs, and white cedars, and grevillea robusta, in the various streets from year to year, and it is intended to continue this work,. The total number of trees planted to date is 1,400. It is a remarkable fact that of 400 trees planted last year, not a single one died, thus indicating once again the care and interest taken in the ratepayers’ property by the Council and it’s officers.8 By 1905, the number of planted trees had more than tripled9 but in the same year undergrowth was cleared from the area commonly referred to as Mueller-road reserve, which some citizens wanted improved for cricket and football, foreshadowing development of sporting facilities at the western portion of the site.10 In July 1906, the Council resolved to name the park bound by Hamilton and Axon Streets, Subiaco and Mueller Roads, Mueller Park.11 In 1906-07, excavation and filling work was carried out, part of the park was fenced, and grass was planted in planning for cricket and football. Within the eastern portion, hedging was planted along some street boundaries and diagonal footpaths were laid out between Hamilton and Coghlan Road, with a small central circus, and black wattles from Shenton Park were planted along the paths.12 In 1908, football games were played at Mueller Park, nicknamed 'The Sooby Sand Patch'. In 1908-09, between football seasons, a jarrah timber grandstand to seat 550 people with change rooms underneath was built.13 In April 1909, Lady Forrest officially opened Subiaco Oval and Pavilion.14 In 1908, the Western Australian Croquet Association and the Western Australian Tennis Association, began negotiations with Subiaco Council to establish their own facilities at Mueller Park, together with greens for the Bowling Club.15 These facilities and Subiaco Oval were all west of Coghlan Road which effectively demarcated an area of informal parkland to the east, now known as Mueller Park. It is probable that a 1909 photo of a Seventh Day Adventist camp in Mueller Park was taken in this area, in which large mature trees shaded the tents of the campers.16 Information from the Post Office Directors for the early decades of the 20th century indicates that the Subiaco Tennis Club had their courts on the eastern side of the Subiaco Oval and the WA Lawn Tennis Association had their courts on the western side of the oval between Townsend and Axon Streets. In 1911, 8 West Australian, 2 March 1903, p. 3. 9 Spillman, Ken Identity Prized, op cit, p. 132. 10 West Australian 1 & 25 Nov. 1905, p. 15; 25 November, p. 5. 11 West Australian 26 July 1906, p. 9. 12 West Australian 22 & 24 August, 27 Sept. & 22 Dec. 1906, & 7 March, 21 Sept., &14 Nov. 1907. 13 West Australian, 17 April 1909, p. 13-14. 14 Spillman, Ken Diehards: the Story of Subiaco Football Club, 1896-1945, Subiaco Football Club, 1998- 2000, pp. 43-44; and The Football Budget l March 1939, p. 8. 15 West Australian 23 April, 20 August & 23 Dec. 1908. 16 Western Mail 10 April 1909, p. 29. Register of Heritage Places Kitchener Park Trees, Subiaco 7 Place Assessed May 2018 Documentation amended: the WA Lawn Tennis Association erected new buildings and new lawns were established at the Tennis Association’s facility on the western side of the oval,, where State championships and Inter-State matches were played in the pre-war years.17 During World War I, there was increasing anti-German sentiment and in July 1916, when Subiaco Council considered renaming Mueller Park and Mueller Road, all but one councillor supported it. Following discussion, it was agreed to rename the park Kitchener, after Lord Kitchener Secretary of State for War in the British Cabinet18 who died in June 1916, and Roberts Road was named as “a compliment” to serving Lieutenant-Colonel Stephen Richard Harricks Roberts (1874-1943), elected as an East Ward councillor in 1914.19 In 1919, it was reported in the local press that a pine tree hedge was proposed for the weather-side of the tennis courts.20 Prior to the establishment of municipal nurseries, the State Government Nursery at Hamel was the source of seeds and seedlings for distribution around the state. Pinus pinaster seeds for the hedge alongside the WA Lawn Tennis Association courts were sought from the State Nursery by the Forests Department in order to support what was noted as ‘an experimental plantation at Kitchener Park’.21 In mid-1920, the State Nursery was unable to supply the request for five pounds of seed because all the stock had been sent to Ludlow. An alternative request for 100 seedlings of pinus pinaster was made to the State Nursery, but this was also unable to be fulfilled. In August 1920, the Deputy Conservator of Forests was able to supply the WA Tennis Association a sack of seeds from a supply which had been received from France.22 It is likely that the trees were planted shortly thereafter on the eastern side of Axon Street shielding the courts of the WA Lawn Tennis Association. An aerial photograph in 1942 shows the trees well established in this location.23 In 1921, Alexander Dickson Esson Bruce (b. Scotland, 1884, arr. 1910, d. 1967), a highly qualified gardener, trained in horticulture in Edinburgh, who had worked in Cheshire, before becoming Curator of Parks and Gardens at Fremantle, was appointed Municipal Gardener at Subiaco.24 As there were only a few flowering and ornamental plants being raised in the garden by the Council Chambers, ‘he found himself in much the same position as a chef without a kitchen’, and to meet increasing requirements of the Municipality ‘something on a much larger scale 17 West Australian 20 May 1911; Daily News 1 Nov. 1912; & Sunday Times 2 Feb. 1913. 18 Field Marshall Horatio Herbert Kitchener, 1st Earl of Kitchener (1850-1916) was a senior British Army officer and colonial administrator who won notoriety for his imperial campaigns, most especially during the Second Boer War, and later played a central role in the early part of the First World War. Kitchener was travelling to Russia on board the HMS Hampshire to attend negotiations when the ship struck a German mine near the Orkney Islands with the resulting loss of 737 lives in June 1916. 19 Daily News 27 July 1916, p. 8. 20 West Australian 25 June & 27 Sept. 1919, p. 5 & p. 9. 21 Letter from Deputy Conservator of Forests to Manager of State Nursery, Hamel, 25 June 1920, in File ‘Pines re Experimental Planting of at Kitchener Park, item 1920/0990, AU WA S3116- cons 934, SROWA, folio 1. 22 Correspondence in in File ‘Pines re Experimental Planting of at Kitchener Park, item 1920/0990, AU WA S3116- cons 934, SROWA. 23 Aerial photograph 1942 24 Oxford Companion to Australian Gardens Oxford University Press, Melbourne, 2002, p. 110; Register of Heritage Places Kitchener Park Trees, Subiaco 8 Place Assessed May 2018 Documentation amended: and more definite purpose was required’.25 He selected a neglected area (about half an acre) in ‘a somewhat sequestered spot near the tennis courts at Kitchener Park’, for the nursery, and the Council agreed.26 He used timber pickets salvaged from Shenton Park for fencing, and old timber from the electric lighting offices and discarded iron and glass for an ‘up-to-date conservatory’ for propagation beds.27 The establishment of the nursery was noted as a worthy achievement in the local press. A wise accomplishment in this regard has been the establishment of an up-to- date nursery at Kitchener Park. There is also a small shade house, and additions, and the installation of a glass house is mooted. Here there are 3,000 seedling trees on hand. Besides the many rows of young ornamental trees there are a number of garden plots being cultivated. Of particular interest is a thriving bed of cotton in the podding stage. The plants are particularly well advanced. One plant chosen at random bore 28 pods, and it was only 2ft high. The seeds were supplied by the Department of Agriculture. An experimental plot of tobacco, containing 10 named varieties, is also of healthy appearance, while there, are hundreds of other seedlings, and other experimental plots being attended by Mr. Bruce. In toto, about 40 varieties of trees and shrubs are under cultivation. The council has set a worthy example in conducting its own nursery.28 The location of the nursery was convenient as the residence for the caretaker or head gardener was adjacent to this site, north east of the oval and accessed from Subiaco Road. It has not been established when the home was built, however in 1906 Mr George Harber was appointed to the position of caretaker at the oval with quarters, water and light provided, when installed.29 A date of construction c1906 is consistent with the style demonstrated in a photograph of the caretaker’s residence and the period in which the oval was being established.30 The residence was extant until the 1950s when it was demolished to allow for the extension of the Subiaco Oval.31 By August 1923, the nursery (in the north west corner of the present day Kitchener Park) was able to supply all the flowers, shrubs, plants and trees for parks, gardens, streets, recreation and play grounds in the district, and an experimental planting of cotton was giving excellent results. Bruce also had good results from an experimental plot of tobacco and the Department of Agriculture, which was working towards establishing tobacco growing, asked him to raise 5,000 plants from selected seed for distribution to various parts of the State.32 Bruce’s significant role in development of parks and gardens at Subiaco is well known, and his subsequent work in Canberra as Assistant Superintendent 25 West Australian 7 August 1923, p. 8. 26 West Australian 26 Nov. 1921, p. 10, 6 Jan. 1922, p. 8, & 7 August 1923, p. 8. 27 West Australian 7 August 1923, p. 8. 28 The Daily News, 12 March 1923, p. 7. 29 The West Australian, 2 June 1906, p. 7. 30 Caretakers Residence, c1932, Subiaco Museum, item P89.55 31 Information from the Subiaco Museum, in correspondence to Prue Griffin, 2 May 2018. 32 ibid, 7 August 1923; & Western Mail 23 August 1923, p. 29. Register of Heritage Places Kitchener Park Trees, Subiaco 9 Place Assessed May 2018 Documentation amended: (1925), Acting Superintendent (1926) and Superintendent of Parks and Gardens (1928-38) has left an enduring legacy.33 In 1923, the Council agreed to a request from Subiaco Tennis Club to plant trees in the vicinity, and Bruce was instructed to plant a row of pines along the length of Coghlan Road and a double row along Roberts Road. No plans or details of these or any other plantings at Kitchener Park under Bruce’s direction have been located to date. The pines remaining on the west side of Coghlan Road, between Roberts Road and Subiaco Road are likely to be remnants of this planting program. In 1924, a program of seed and plant transfer was in place between Subiaco and the Imperial War Graves at Gallipoli through a connection between a staff member at the Imperial War Graves Commission, Captain Bennett-Jones who had family living in Subiaco. The council, under the direction of Mr Bruce, forwarded seeds of acacias, eucalypts, grevilleas and other Australian trees to Gallipoli.34 It is probable the nursery at Kitchener Park was the location for the compilation of the seeds prior to transport. In January 1925, Captain Bennett-Jones visited the Subiaco Municipal Council with news of the program. He mentioned that, ‘some of the more hardy varieties included in the council’s collection and planted in clumps were thriving at a satisfactory rate and would encourage an extension of planting operations at Gallipoli and elsewhere.’35 This observation was tempered by a letter received from Mr Robert Kett, the horticultural officer at Gallipoli who stated that all the seeds sent by Mr A. E. Bruce had germinated but a harsh winter meant many of the seedlings did not survive.36 Mayor R. A. Robinson said that the seeds forwarded by the council were the first sent from Australia for planting on the graves of our soldiers in the cemeteries at Gallipoli.37 In June 1925, further information about the success of the Australian plants at Gallipoli was received by the Subiaco Municipal council from Captain Rule-Jones another officer at the Imperial War Graves, whose parents lived in Subiaco. He wrote; ….. the plants arrived in excellent condition and 90 per cent were growing – some making remarkable progress, especially those placed in framed – says: “A large roomy glass house is being erected for the reception of the more tender varieties and it is anticipated that a very attractive display will be made all through the year, as the plants will be protected against the first snow and hail of winter. This year the winter has been exceptionally mild – quite spring like – and all plant life is flourishing. … So far they are the only Australian trees growing on the Gallipoli Peninsula, and to your town belongs the credit of being the first to introduce the eucalyptus, wattles, cotton palms and other characteristic vegetation to Turkey. Eucalypts are now growing in the Anzac and three other cemeteries, where Australian soldiers are buried and all the buildings were constructed under the supervision of Australian and New Zealand N.C.O.’s who 33 Oxford Companion to Australian Gardens, op. cit. 34 West Australian, 19 January 1925, p. 11. 35 West Australian, 19 January 1925, p. 11. 36 West Australian, 19 January 1925, p. 11. 37 West Australian, 19 January 1925, p. 11 Register of Heritage Places Kitchener Park Trees, Subiaco 10 Place Assessed May 2018 Documentation amended: fought here in 1915 and it is now left for an Australian from Subiaco to be in charge.38 It is apparent that a reciprocal program was in place for receiving seeds from Gallipoli. In September 1925, the town of Bunbury announced that they had received two ‘Gallipoli pines’ from the City of Subiaco for planting at the Bunbury Anzac Memorial Park. In correspondence from the Subiaco Town Clerk it was stated that; …. These pines were raised in our municipal nursery by our head gardener (Mr A. E. Bruce) from seeds gathered at Anzac, Gallipoli, by the horticultural expert attached to the Imperial War Graves commission and brought out to us by Captain Rule-Jones, who is now in charge of the commission work at Gallipoli, and is a son of one of the Subiaco ratepayers. The seeds were brought to us in December 1922, and were immediately sown. They are a variety of Cyprus, but unfortunately we do not know the botanical name. I might mention that the seeds were sent out to us in return for seeds of Australian trees and plants which were forwarded to Gallipoli, the plants propagated from which we are now advised, surround the Australian graves in Gallipoli.39 The association between the pine trees at Gallipoli and the Australian services was in part due to the major offensive launched on 6 August 1915. The 1st Australian Infantry Division attacked Plateau 400 on Gallipoli. These ridges, once covered with the Aleppo pine, had been cleared to provide cover for the Turkish trenches, leaving just one, solitary pine. The area became known as Lone Pine Ridge. After three days of brutal fighting the ANZACs succeeded in capturing the enemy trenches, but this bloody action cost the Australians 2,000 men. The Turks’ losses were estimated at 7,000. After the battle, Lance Corporal Benjamin Charles Smith, 3rd Battalion AIF, collected several pine cones from the branches used to cover the Turkish trenches. He sent the cones home to his mother, Jane McMullin, in remembrance of his brother Mark, who had died in the fighting on 6 August. From one of these cones Mrs McMullin sowed several seeds, and successfully raised two seedlings. One was planted in Inverell, where both her sons had enlisted. The other was presented to the Australian War Memorial, to be planted in the grounds in honour of all the sons who fell at Lone Pine.40 Apart from the McMulllin seeds described above, many seeds were gathered and trees were planted at memorial sites around Australia. This species of tree has adapted readily to the Australian environment and is now considered a weed in some parts.41 38 West Australian, 16 June 1925, p. 6. 39 The South Western Times, 3 September 1925, p. 4. The pines from Gallipoli were identified as Pinus Halpensis by consulting Arboriculturist, Jonothan Epps in a letter to Subiaco Resident Linda Rogers in March 2018. 40 Lone Pine Seedlings, webpage, Australian War Memorial, https://www.awm.gov.au/shop/lone-pine- seedlings accessed May 2018. Other sources indicate that the species which actually endemic to the Gallipoli ridges was Pinus brutia. See ‘Lone Pine Puzzle’ Quadrant online. https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2014/08/lone-pine-puzzle/ 41 Alleppo Pine, data sheet, Natural Resources Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges, http://www.naturalresources.sa.gov.au/adelaidemtloftyranges/plants-and-animals/pest-plants-and- animals/pest-plants/aleppo-pine accessed May 2018. Register of Heritage Places Kitchener Park Trees, Subiaco 11 Place Assessed May 2018 Documentation amended: The Pinus halepensis seed propagation program by Bruce is likely to have been similar to other programs undertaken around Australia to commemorate the service men and women of World War One. In 1926, Bruce’s resignation to take up a Commonwealth position in Canberra, was ‘a severe loss’ to Subiaco, but appointment of Joseph ‘Joe’ Martin, his leading assistant for two years, as his successor, ensured ‘the work’ continued ‘uninterruptedly’. As Head Gardener (1926-42), Martin (b. Scotland, 1889, d. 1958)42 was responsible for major improvements to the parkland area of Kitchener Park. By January 1926, Subiaco had more than 120 acres of parks and gardens, including the Oval, and Kitchener Park, with its tennis courts, bowling greens, croquet lawns and parkland.43 Tennis was growing in popularity, and to meet an increasing demand Subiaco Council converted the second croquet lawn at Kitchener Park to tennis courts available for public hire from around Easter.44 In 1926-7, grubbing and clearing at Kitchener Park included removal of ‘many of the deformed jarrah trees’, before ornamental shrubs and trees were planted, and concrete posts and galvanised piping replaced the timber picket fences.45 In January 1928, comment was made in the local press that an opportunity was missed by the Subiaco Council when the trees planted at Kitchener Park, Norfolk Island Pines (Pinus pinaster) on one avenue and Sugar Gums (Eucalyptus cladocalyx) on the other, whilst hardy and symmetrical where not the distinctive local species.46 It is not entirely clear where these plantings were but is likely to refer to the diagonal foot paths through the present day Mueller Park. One of these paths retains a significant number of Norfolk Island Pine trees. The other has a predominance of peppermint trees. Nevertheless this program of planting may be consistent with planting of Sugar Gums on Coghlan Road and the Norfolk Island Pines on Subiaco Road. In spring 1928, further trees were planted at Kitchener Park, principally those indigenous to Western Australia, and a 30 feet wide strip of couch grass was planted around the park.47 This information indicates the planting was in the present day Mueller Park. In 1938, a reticulation scheme, with a well, pump and overhead tank, was provided to supply water to the Council nursery, Kitchener Park Bowling Club, the Municipal tennis courts and croquet lawns.48 In 1939, the Council refused a request from the WAFL to use the ‘tree area ‘at Kitchener Park for car parking associated with use of Subiaco Oval.49 An aerial photo shows the sporting facilities and the parkland.50 42 Oxford Companion Australian Gardens, ibid, p. 402. 43 West Australian 9 Jan. 1926, p. 8. 44 West Australian 19 Jan. & 3 March 1926, p. 8 & p. 13 respectively. 45 West Australian 1 June, 7 & 19 July, 5 Oct. & 16 Nov. 1927, p. 10, p. 15, p. 14, p. 16 & p. 6 respectively 46 Sunday Times, 8 January 1928, p. 3. 47 Sunday Times 8 Jan. 1928, p. 6. 48 West Australian 5 Jan. 1939, p. 7 & 17 July 1944. 49 West Australian 25 May 1939, p. 6. 50 SLWA Online Image 041,356PD, 1939. Register of Heritage Places Kitchener Park Trees, Subiaco 12 Place Assessed May 2018 Documentation amended: Through the post-war period, the parkland area of Kitchener Park continued to be a well-used and much appreciated green space in Subiaco. The bowling greens and tennis courts continued to be well patronised by the Subiaco Community. Each of these clubs had clubrooms on the site and Subiaco Oval underwent development in this period with the reshaping of the spectator mounds on the east and southern sides of the oval. The Subiaco Tennis Club, the Kitchener Park Bowling Club and the Municipal nursery continued to share the grounds between the Subiaco Oval and Coghlan Road. It appears that sometime during the 1950s the Subiaco Tennis Club relocated and the Kitchener Park Bowling Club took over the former tennis courts and created new greens. Information from aerial photographs suggests that the municipal nursery ceased operating from this site in the late 1940s. The caretaker’s residence was demolished in the 1950s.51 The Kitchener Park Bowling club built new clubrooms in the centre of Kitchener Park c196552 and had four greens and a clubhouse on the site until the 1980s. The monthly reports of the City of Subiaco’s Superintendent of Parks and Gardens from 1962 to 1974 describes the works undertaken at Kitchener Park Reserve.53 During this period, Kitchener Park referred to all the land east of Subiaco Oval to Hamilton Street. Despite the lack of clarity as to where works were undertaken it appears that apart from the area designated for the Kitchener Park bowling club the site was used for carparking. The grass was rotary hoed, graded, top dressed and treated with insecticides and weed killers. Any references found to the trees on the boundaries in Coghlan Road and Subiaco Road relates to pruning the trees or removal.54 The ongoing issues of tree pruning were minimised from the early 1980s as the City of Subiaco set in motion the process for providing underground power within the city.55 In 1981, the name Mueller Park was restored to the portion of the Park east of Coghlan Road, and a memorial to commemorate this was unveiled in the centre of the park on 19 November that year. In 2016, consulting arboriculturist, Jonathan Epps reviewed the condition, age and general health of some of the trees in Coghlan Road and Subiaco Road as new underground water pipes were being installed.56 His conclusion was that all the trees appeared to be sound, healthy and good specimens of their type. In 2017, the WA State Government announced that a new local intake school would be built on Kitchener Park and works commenced in 2018. In March 2018, the City of Subiaco Council listed 23 trees near Kitchener Park on a Tree Preservation Order to flag to the State Government that every effort should be made to preserve the trees be considered. This decision was informed by 51 Information from the Subiaco Museum, in correspondence to Prue Griffin, 2 May 2018. 52 Subiaco Bowling Club Plans, Cons 5094, items 1094, 1090E, 1090A, 1090, SROWA. 53 Correspondence – Superintendent Parks and Gardens Reports, City of Subiaco, SROWA, AU WA S4400- Cons 1898 item 44. 54 Correspondence – Superintendent Parks and Gardens Reports, City of Subiaco, SROWA, AU WA S4400- Cons 1898 item 44. Reports from 1962 to 1974. 55 Spillman, Ken, Tales of a Singular City Subiaco since the 1970s, City of Subiaco, 2006, pp 125-132. 56 Letter from Jonathan Epps to Dr Linda Rogers, 26 March 2018. Register of Heritage Places Kitchener Park Trees, Subiaco 13 Place Assessed May 2018 Documentation amended: community submissions and was supported by City of Subiaco Technical Services Department.57 13. 2 PHYSICAL EVIDENCE Kitchener Park Trees are designated as 17 trees located in the road reserve adjacent to the northern and eastern boundaries of Kitchener Park, 304 Roberts Road Subiaco. It is noted that there are other trees in close proximity which are within the Kitchener Park property boundary. The mature trees which are part of this assessment and those alongside within the boundaries of Kitchener Park and on the eastern side of Coghlan Road form an impressive grouping in the streetscape. The avenue of trees on Coghlan Road join above the road and create a leafy green tunnel for approximately half of the length of Coghlan Road between Roberts Road and Subiaco Road. Kitchener Park Trees include trees of three species designated as follows: 10 Pinus pinaster common name Maritime Pine, four in Coghlan Road reserve and six in Subiaco Road reserve. 3 Pinus Halapensis common name Aleppo Pine, located within the Subiaco Road reserve 4 Eucalyptus cladocalyx common name Sugar gum, located in the Coghlan Road reserve. The pine trees are similar in appearance and require a specialist to determine differences. Information from the City of Subiaco states that the three Aleppo Pines are located within the Subiaco Road reserve.58 The pine trees on Subiaco Road are planted in alignment at roughly equal distance spacing creating a formal alignment, parallel to Subiaco Road. The Maritime pines on Coghlan Road are set back further from the road with the four sugar gums in front. Both groups of trees of the same species are in an approximate line although spacing between the trees is irregular. All trees are designated as being in good condition. The pines appear to be of roughly similar sizes indicating they were planted at similar times. The sugar gums are varied in size. The tree closest to the corner of Coghlan and Subiaco Roads in notably smaller than the other examples which is likely to be as a result of lopping as its trunk is of a similar size. 13. 3 COMPARATIVE INFORMATION There are 21 places included on the State Register of Heritage Places that have been designated with the place type ‘tree’. Reviewing these places indicates that the majority of these places are included because of their proximity or association with other buildings or elements. 57 City of Subiaco Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 13 March 2018, p39-40, http://www.subiaco.wa.gov.au/getattachment/d7578455-e007-4a57-b5f1-48ceb6df08f8/Ordinary- Council-Meeting-13-3-2018 , accessed May 2018. 58 Information from the City of Subiaco Technical Services. Register of Heritage Places Kitchener Park Trees, Subiaco 14 Place Assessed May 2018 Documentation amended: Only one place that is included only as an avenue of trees in its own right. Place 4367 Moreton Terrace & Point Leander Drive Fig Trees, Dongara. These two avenues of fig trees on either side of Moreton Terrace and Point Leander Drive were planted from 1906 and form an impressive canopy within the Dongara townsite. As trees within the avenue have been removed new trees have replaced them creating a continuity of the streetscape which is valued in the community. This is the only group of trees included on the State Register of Heritage Places without reference to other elements. Other groups of trees have been included and contribute to the cultural heritage value of designated places. Of particular comparison are those places which include pine trees. Place 5054 Norfolk Pine Trees, Esperance. These pine trees planted in 1896 and 1897 in Andrew and Dempster Streets in the centre of the Esperance townsite are part of the parent place 18402 Esperance RSL Building, Norfolk Island Pines and War Memorial. The trees are the State’s earliest surviving row of Norfolk Island Pines, which are characteristic of Esperance town centre. They have a close relationship with Place 4367 above. Place 9531 Yanchep National Park Avenue of Trees, within the State Registered Yanchep National Park Precinct Place 4151 is an avenue of mature ‘ghost gums’ (Corymbia aparrerinja) planted on either side of Wanneroo Road, north of Lacey Road to the junction with Yanchep Beach Road. The trees are believed to have been planted around the time the park was established in the 1930s. Place 23834 Olive Trees, Subiaco, several mature olive trees are located within the grounds of the State Registered Place 2231 Catherine McAuley Centre. These trees originate with the plantings undertaken by the Benedictine Monks who established the property in the mid-19th century. Although the trees may not necessarily be those originally planted they are mature trees associated with the original occupants of the place. Of less direct comparison to the Kitchener Park trees are the solitary trees which have been recognised within State Registered Places. Place 4344 WA Christmas Tree, Albany is included in the entry for place 15756 Albany Memorial Park Cemetery. The WA Christmas Tree, Nuytsia Floribunda, within the cemetery is a good example of the species and has been recognised by the National Trust. Place 177966 Moreton Bay Fig Tree - Wireless Hill is located within the State Registered Place 3518 Wireless Hill Park. Place 9009 Jarrah Tree, Armadale this tree has been included on the State Register of Heritage Places as a remarkable and rare example of the species, Eucalyptus Marginata, within the metropolitan area on the corner of Third Road and Church Avenue Armadale. The tree was within the grounds of the Armadale Primary School until 1987. Place 25111 Boundary Tree, Swan Locations 4 and 5, Baskerville this tree a large Flooded Gum (Eucalyptuys rudis) is rare as a known extant example of a tree used as a boundary marker that still serves its original purpose. The tree was designated as a marker in 1829 for some of the earliest land divisions in the Swan River Colony. Register of Heritage Places Kitchener Park Trees, Subiaco 15 Place Assessed May 2018 Documentation amended: Place 4351 Blue Atlas Cedar Tree, Bridgetown this mature tree contributes to the setting of Place 0241 Bridgedale, Bridgetown established in the mid-19th century. Place 23903 Eucalyptus Citriodora Tree this Lemon Scented gum was planted c1892 and has been identified within the register entry for Place 0150 St Mary’s Anglican Church Precinct Beverley is a landmark tree which contributes to the history and landscape of the church buildings. Place 23789 Tree at Old Fish Cannery is an unusual twisted tree, Eucalyptus platypus, located adjacent to the former cannery building in Norseman Road Chadwick in the Shire of Esperance. It has been identified for its unusual form which is a landmark in the district. Place 0693 Prison Boab Tree this large tree Adansonia gregorii is part of Place 7214 Derby Town Commonage, and is believed to be 1500 years old. The tree has indigenous significance and has been a tourist attraction for many decades. Place 14309 Peace Pine Tree at District Hospital, this Norfolk Pine is located on the corner of Horsley and Scotsdale Roads Denmark within the grounds of the Place 14171 Denmark District Hospital. The tree was planted in 1918 to mark the end of World War One. Place 10323 Palm Trees are located within the grounds of Place 0805 Woodlawn a residential property, 208 Canning Highway East Fremantle. The trees are part of the extensive mature planting on the property. Place 0841 Proclamation Tree and Marmion Memorial, cnr Adelaide and Parry Streets Fremantle. This large Morton Bay Fig Tree was planted in 1890 to commemorate the granting of responsible government to the colony of Western Australia. Place 4387 English Oaks, Tranby House these mature trees, Quercus robur, are located within the grounds of Place 2411 Tranby House. Place 2047 Moreton Bay Fig Tree, Royal Perth Hospital is part of Place 4289 Royal Perth Hospital Heritage Precinct. The tree is believed to have been planted c1900 and is an impressive element in the streetscape. Place 4380 Port Jackson Fig, Mount Newman House this large and imposing tree located on St Georges Terrace is included within the entry for Place 2119 Cloisters. The tree was planted in 1887. Place 4379 Olive Tree within the entry for Place 2095 Government House and Grounds. Place 4353 Moreton Bay Fig Tree and Charterhouse Site, Bunbury within the entry for Place 0383 St Mark’s Anglican Church. The tree marks the site of home built for Reverend Wollerston, known as ‘Charterhouse’ and was planted in the 1870s. In addition to those places included on the State Register a search of places designated as ‘tree’ place type and including the word ‘pine’ in their name revealed 34 additional places. Many of these places were groups of Norfolk Island pine trees used as street trees which have become landmarks in the streetscape but have little other cultural heritage value. From the available information those places with pine trees which have some other values associated them are the following: Register of Heritage Places Kitchener Park Trees, Subiaco 16 Place Assessed May 2018 Documentation amended: Place 15620 Gallipoli Pine, located at Mount Clarence Albany was planted in 1974 to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the departure from Albany of the troopships to Egypt. Place 4388 Norfolk Island Pine Trees, Rankin Garden, this group of 9 trees partially intersects with the Subiaco Fallen Soldiers' Memorial curtilage were planted in 1899. These trees within the City of Subiaco were not planted under the head gardener Mr A.E. Bruce but would have been monitored by him during his tenure. Place 17015 Norfolk Island Pine Trees Hope Road cnr North Lake Road Bibra Lake are associated with the dairy industry and the Dixon family who planted the trees c1900. Place 3218 Rockingham Hotel Trees, these trees are associated with plantings undertaken to create a lush garden setting for visitors to Rockingham in the Inter war period. 13. 4 KEY REFERENCES ------ 13. 5 FURTHER RESEARCH ------ Register of Heritage Places Kitchener Park Trees, Subiaco 17 Place Assessed May 2018 Documentation amended: REPORT ITEM NO.C3 ATTACHMENT NO 1 CITY OF SUBIACO CAR PARK OCCUPANY JANUARY 2018 TO JULY 2018 Table 1 Average Car station occupancy 2018/2019 fees and charges All day car stations where 100% occupancy is desired Hamilton Street CS 1* 83% $2.50 per hour, $18 all day York Street CS 2* 78% $2.50 per hour, $15 all day York Street CS 3* 60% $2.50 per hour, $17 all day Subiaco Road CS 5* 51% $2.50 per hour, $18 all day Olive Street CS 7 72% $2.50 per hour, $15 all day Roberts Road CS 19* 64% $2.50 per hour, $18 all day Thomas Road CS 20* 65% $2.50 per hour, $16 all day York Street CS 64* 73% $2.50 per hour, $17 all day Theatre Gardens CS 9 98% $2.50 per hour, $15 all day Jersey Street CS15 26% $1.50 per hour, $4 all day Onslow Road CS 17 44% $1.80 per hour, $10 all day Derby Road CS 18 79% $1.80 per hour, $12 all day Roydhouse Street CS 28 47% $2.50 per hour, $12 all day Nicholson Road CS 32 74% $2.50 per hour, $4 all day Railway Road CS 41 38% $2.50 per hour, $14 all day Stubbs Terrace CS 42 86% $1.50 per hour, $10 all day Stubbs Terrace CS 70 37% $1.50 per hour, $6 all day 1 hour - Free 2 hours – $3.60 3 hours - $6.00 4 hours - $8.40 5 hours - $10.80 6 hours - $13.20 7 hours - $15.60 Hay Street CS 22 44% 8 hours - $18.00 (all day) Note: car stations marked with * are subject to changes associated with the Subiaco East Parking Precinct Plan. Table 2 Proposed 2018/2019 Car station Average occupancy fees and charges Car stations where 85% occupancy is desired Roberts Road CS 63 73% 3 hour parking, $3 per hour 2 hour parking, $3.60 per hour, Barker Road CS 11 59% first hour free 2 hour parking, $3.60 per hour, Park Street CS 12 73% first hour free Rowland Street CS 13 97% 3 hour free parking 1 hour - Free 2 hours – $3.60 3 hours - $6.00 4 hours - $8.40 5 hours - $10.80 6 hours - $13.20 7 hours - $15.60 Forrest Street CS 14 64% 8 hours - $18.00 (all day) Churchill Avenue CS 23 35% 2 hour parking, $3.60 per hour 30 minute parking, $2 per 30 Subiaco Square Road CS 61 67% minutes 1 hour - Free 2 hours – $3.60 3 hours - $6.00 4 hours - $8.40 5 hours - $10.80 6 hours - $13.20 7 hours - $15.60 Railway Road CS 62 80% 8 hours - $18.00 (all day) REPORT ITEM NO.C4 ATTACHMENT NO 1 City of Subiaco Submission STOP PUPPY FARMING Local government consultation 1 1. Stop Puppy Farming 1.4 Cost Recovery Questions 1. What mechanisms should local governments use to collect funds to cover the costs associated with enforcing the new provisions under the Dog Act? (multiple options can be selected): ☐ By charging dog registration and dog breeder registration fees at a level to recover these costs and increasing fines to recover enforcement costs • The fees are currently quite low and the proposed changes will involve increased administrative costs. However, fees should not be dramatically increased as this would increase the risk of dog owners trying to avoid registration and could cause hardship. • Increased fines will help cover enforcement costs as well as providing an incentive to comply with the new requirements. 2. Should fees used to cover the costs incurred by local governments to enforce the Dog Act be consistent across the State, or should local governments be able to set their own fees? ☐ Fees should be consistent across the State • Consistency across the State is appropriate but the fees should be reviewed regularly and increased if necessary. 3. Is charging cost recovery likely to have any adverse impacts for your community? ☐ Unsure • As the costs are not yet established it is difficult to say whether cost recovery is likely to have adverse impacts. It should be noted that registration fees are a relatively small proportion of the costs of dog ownership. Other costs, such as vaccination, de-sexing and microchipping, are likely to be significantly higher than the fees for registration. However, the community is currently experiencing cost of living pressures and an increase in fees may pose difficulties for current dog owners or discourage dog ownership for low income earners. In any fee changes the 50% concessional rate should be retained. 4. Are there benefits in your local government subsidising registration costs? ☐ No • The City of Subiaco is not currently in a position to subsidise registration costs. 1 3. Mandatory De-sexing for Non-Breeding Dogs 3.3 Age of mandatory de-sexing Questions 1. Should mandatory dog de-sexing apply to all dogs, including existing dogs, or just dogs born after a particular date? ☐ All existing dogs, with a phase in period for when existing dogs must be de- sexed • The process should be similar to that employed to introduce compulsory micro- chipping. 3.4 Age for registration, microchipping and de-sexing Questions 2. Please indicate your preference for the following: ☐ Option 1 – registration, microchipping and de-sexing by six months • Having a single age requirement for registration, micro-chipping and sterilisation is the most simple and user-friendly option for both dog owners and local governments. • A multi-step process requiring follow up creates too many opportunities for non- compliance and additional administrative burden. • While this does mean that dogs under the age of six months may not be able to be identified by registration or microchip this must be balanced against the disadvantages of the other options. • If appropriate for the individual dog, de-sexing and/or microchipping can take place earlier than six months, with the evidence provided upon subsequent registration of the dog. For example, micro-chipping could be carried out at the same time as booster vaccinations at 12 or 16 weeks of age. • Dog owners can be encouraged to take additional care with the control of unregistered puppies. From 1 July 2018 South Australian veterinarian practices will be responsible for updating a centralised dog registration database when a dog is de-sexed. This would replace the need to issue a sterilisation certificate. 3. Would you support this approach? ☐ Yes • Veterinarians currently provide a certificate or letter confirming they have carried out the sterilisation procedure. The dog owner then supplies this to the city to be entered in our records. Allowing veterinarians to update the database directly would simplify this process, removing any onus on the dog owner and the local government without increasing the workload for veterinarians. 2 • This is premised on the assumption that the database would be reasonably easy to use, so that updating a dog’s record would not take longer than currently taken to create the certificate or draft a letter. 3.5 Additional possible exemptions from de-sexing Questions 4. Should livestock working dogs be exempt as a class from mandatory dog de-sexing? ☐ Unsure • As a metropolitan local government, the City of Subiaco does not have expertise in this area. 5. If working dogs are required to be de-sexed by a particular age, at what age should working dogs be required to be de-sexed? • As a metropolitan local government, the City of Subiaco does not have expertise in this area. 6. How could this be enforced? • As a metropolitan local government, the City of Subiaco does not have expertise in this area. • It seems appropriate to require that, in order for any exemptions or allowances to apply, the dog should be registered in the local government area in which the primary producer or rural property is located. 3.7 Enforcement Questions 7. Who do you believe is best placed to monitor compliance with de-sexing? ☐ Local Governments • As the authority responsible for processing and issuing registrations it is appropriate that local governments check that the requirements for registration are met. Under the proposed amendments, this would include confirming that the owner can provide evidence of sterilisation. 3 4. Centralised Registration System 4.4 Access to the System Questions 1. Are any other authorities or groups that should have access to the system? • If not already captured in ‘Local governments and State government authorities’ the WA Police should have access to the system. 2. What type of access should they have? • The same access as ‘Local government and State government authorities’ 3. What information on a dog owner should a member of the public be able to view to ascertain if the dog owner is a registered dog breeder? (more than one option can be selected) ☐ Whether the dog owner is a registered dog breeder • This information is required so that members of the public can ensure they are purchasing a dog from a registered breeder. Any additional information is unnecessary and raises privacy concerns. 4.5 Additional information Questions 4. Would it be beneficial for your local government if cat and cat breeder registrations were also transitioned to the centralised registration system? ☐ Yes 5. How would transitioning cat and cat breeder registrations to a centralised registration system be beneficial to your local government? ☐ Consistency with centralised dog registrations 6. Would any of the following additional information be useful for your local government? ☐ Approved kennel establishments ☐ Dog management facilities ☐ Pet shops that sell or transfer dogs ☐ Dangerous dogs ☐ Dog owner’s subject to Court orders or convicted of particular offences ☐ Dogs that have been seized by the local government ☐ Dogs involved in a dog attack ☐ Dogs that have not been controlled by the owner ☐ Dogs that have caused a nuisance or are subject to a nuisance complaint 4 ☐ Dogs that are subject to a destruction order • All of the listed information would be useful for compliance activities. In particular, the first three items would be necessary to monitor compliance with the proposed new requirements. • It is currently quite easy for owners of dangerous dogs (declared) to move into a new local government area and fail to disclose that their dog has been declared to be dangerous when applying for a new registration. The inclusion of this information on the register would prevent this. 7. What additional costs would including this information in the system create for your local government? ☐ Processing the additional information • There would be a cost involved in processing the additional information, but this would typically be entered in the city’s record system in any case. However, the major advantages of the inclusion of this information would be the ability to view information entered by other local governments and the courts. • There would not be a cost associated with ongoing monitoring of this information as the city would only access the information in the case of a complaint. 8. Would it be easier for your local government to process and record kennel establishment licences through the system? ☐ Unsure • The City of Subiaco does not currently have any approved kennel establishments. 4.6 Dog registration information Questions – All 9. Please indicate if you think any of the additional information should be included on a dog’s registration: ☐ information on whether the dog is used as a livestock working dog • Unsure. If the option to exempt livestock working dogs from sterilisation is pursued then it may be necessary to include this information. ☐ information on whether the dog is used as an assistance dog • Yes. This affects the cost of registration and should be recorded. It can also be useful if the local government receives complaints about the dog being allowed or denied access to venues. 5 4.7 Updating dog registration information Questions 10. Do you think veterinarians should be able to update and input dog’s microchip and sterilisation details into the system? ☐ Yes • Veterinarians currently provide a certificate or letter confirming they have carried out the sterilisation/microchipping procedure. The dog owner then supplies this to the city to be entered in our records. Allowing veterinarians to update the database directly would simplify this process, removing any onus on the dog owner and the local government without increasing the workload for veterinarians. • This is premised on the assumption that the database would be reasonably easy to use, so that updating a dog’s record would not take longer than currently taken to create the certificate or draft a letter. 11. Should it be a mandatory requirement for veterinarians to input this information into the system, or optional for veterinarians to input this information? ☐ Optional • While a mandatory requirement for veterinarians to input this information would reduce the workload for local governments, the City of Subiaco does not have knowledge of the capacity of veterinarians to undertake this function. Capacity is likely to vary between practices and this may be an unacceptable burden in some cases. • It should be noted that if it is optional for veterinarians to input this information, this may cause confusion for dog owners, who may be unsure whether their vet provides this service. • If it is optional, some form of incentive or encouragement should be provided to veterinarians so that a sufficient number agree to input the information. As a minimum, support and education on using the new database must be provided. 12. Do you perceive any benefits in veterinarians undertaking this role? • The accuracy of information on the register is likely to be improved if veterinarians undertake this role. As the group carrying out the procedures they have first-hand knowledge of the veracity of the information entered. Local governments currently rely on documentation provided by the dog owner and do not have the capacity to verify the information. • This would significantly simplify the registration procedure for local governments, which could mean that registration fees would not need to be increased as much to allow for cost recovery. Much more detailed information on the proposed system would be required before this could be confirmed. 6 13. Please indicate what other information you think veterinarians should be able to update or access on the system? ☐ Search for the identity of a dog and its owner • Lost or wandering dogs are sometimes brought to veterinarians. It would be useful for them to able to search for the identity of a dog and its owner to aid in returning the dog to the owner or appropriate person. ☐ Enter vet specific information on any registered animal • There are potential benefits to this function but it is not necessary. Recording vet information on the register could function as a central record of a dog’s medical information, in the same way as the ‘My Health Record’ is intended to function for people. When combined with the registration of breeders, it could also possibly provide a resource for tracking hereditary conditions or poor health outcomes that may be associated with breeder practices. ☐ Report and enter details of animal incidents such as dog attacks • Vets are likely to be the first point of contact for the owner of a dog that has been attacked. If information about the injuries is entered at this time it can be relied on in any subsequent investigation. ☐ Report dog deaths • The deaths of registered dogs are rarely reported to the local government. Veterinarians will often be involved in the end of life treatment or euthanasia of a dog so it is sensible that they are able to report these deaths. This would improve the accuracy and utility of the database. 4.8 Transition existing dog registers Questions 14. Please indicate your preference for the following: ☐ Option 2 – Local governments manually enter lifetime dog registrations into the centralised registration system. • Manual entry is preferred as the resources required and the result can be predicted with reasonable certainty. The time and funding required to successfully develop data migration software for each type of software used by local government is uncertain but likely to be substantial. There is no guarantee that local governments with a less common or incompatible register would not ultimately have to enter data manually anyway. • Manual entry provides an opportunity for local governments to review lifetime registrations which will need to provide evidence of sterilisation and those where it is likely that the dog is deceased. 7 • The City of Subiaco does not have as many lifetime registrations as larger local governments. It is acknowledged that manual entry of large amounts of data may be problematic. 15. Are there other options for transferring existing dogs onto the centralised system? • Not aware of other options. 16. Which of the following would you support to cover the costs of migrating existing data? ☐ an increase in the registration fee • This cost should be considered as part of the total cost of the proposed changes and recovered through increased registration fees. One option is that existing lifetime dog registrations are not transferred to the new system and local government registers would need to be retained for at least a 15-year period following the launch of the centralised system and authorities would have to refer to both the centralised system and individual local government dog registers. 17. Should lifetime dog registrations be transferred to the new system? ☐ Yes • Duplication should be avoided where possible. It would be very inefficient to maintain and refer to two registers, and would increase the risk of errors. 18. Please indicate your local government district and the software you currently use for your dog register: a) Local government district: City of Subiaco b) Dog register software: Civica 19. Please indicate if the software used for your local government dog register is the same as the software used for your local government’s cat register: ☐ Yes 20. Have you modified the software you currently use? ☐ No 21. Is your local government easily able to identify lifetime dog registrations in your dog register? ☐ Yes • With the qualification that registrations of deceased dogs, where the owner has not notified the city, may be included. 22. How many lifetime dog registrations does your local government currently have? 679. This figure may include deceased dogs. 8 23. Does your local government have the capacity to extract data from your dog register software and provide the extracted data in an Excel spreadsheet? ☐ Yes 4.9 Application and approval – dog breeder registration Questions 1. What information do you think a dog breeder should provide when applying for breeder registration or renewal? ☐ The number of dogs being kept on the premises ☐ A description of the facilities ☐ The breed of dogs ☐ Whether a person has been convicted of an offence under the Dog Act, Cat Act, Animal Welfare Act or a dog or cat local law. ☐ Certification that they comply and will continue to comply with animal breeding, housing and husbandry standards 2. What do you think local governments should take into account when considering a dog breeder application or renewal? ☐ The number of dogs being kept on the premises ☐ The breed of dogs ☐ Convictions under the Dog Act, Cat Act, Animal Welfare Act, or a dog or cat local law The Dog Act allows a dog registration officer from the local government, with the consent of the owner or occupier, to enter and inspect premises to ascertain whether a dog will be effectively confined on the premises. It is a condition of dog registration that a dog must be effectively confined to the premises in which it is kept. 3. Should local governments have the power to enter and inspect premises of a dog breeder, or premises that are subject to a dog breeder application or renewal? ☐ Yes 4. In what situations should a local government be able to enter and inspect premises of a dog breeder of that are subject to a dog breeder application or renewal? ☐ Where the dog breeder owns more than a certain number of dogs, or owns a kennel establishment 9 4.10 Conditions – dog breeder registration Questions 5. Please specify any additional conditions with which dog breeders should comply: • None proposed. 6. On what grounds do you believe a local government could cancel a dog breeder registration? ☐ The dog breeder is convicted of an offence under the Dog Act, Cat Act, Animal Welfare Act, or a dog or cat local law ☐ The dog breeder is convicted of an offence under Australian Consumer Law in relation to dogs they have sold or transferred ☐ Failing to provide their dog owner number on the microchips of the puppies that they breed ☐ Keeping more than the approved number of dogs on the premises • The above grounds are clear, can be proven or documented and are relevant to the objective of the proposed changes. The other proposed ground, failing to provide their dog owner number when advertising or transferring a dog, would require a workable definition of ‘advertising’. 4.11 Exemptions – dog breeder registration Livestock working dogs Questions 7. Should primary producers in WA be exempt from registering as dog breeders where they breed and transfer livestock working dogs to other primary producers? ☐ Unsure • As a metropolitan local government, the City of Subiaco does not have expertise in this area. 8. Should primary producers in WA be exempt from registering as dog breeders where they breed and transfer livestock working dogs to any person? ☐ Unsure • As a metropolitan local government, the City of Subiaco does not have expertise in this area. 10 Dog breeders registered with recognised breeding associations Questions 9. Should particular dog breeders that are members of particular dog breeding associations be exempt from registering with the Government as dog breeders? ☐ No • In order for the proposed changes to be effective, all breeders should be registered. In South Australia, dog breeder registration has recently been introduced. Members of Dogs SA (the Dogs West equivalent) are not exempt from registering as dog breeders, but Dogs SA are responsible for inputting and maintaining their member’s details into the dog breeder register. The membership number issued by Dogs SA is also used as the Government dog breeder registration number. 10. Should recognised dog breeder associations in WA be responsible for inputting the details of their members into the Government’s dog breeder register on the centralised registration system? ☐ Yes • Dog breeder associations already collect information from dog breeders as a requirement for membership. If the associations input the details into the centralised system this reduces the administrative burden on local governments and dog breeders without unduly increasing the burden on associations. • Dog breeder associations can deliver information about new requirements to their members and support them in adjusting to the new system. They will be able to do so most effectively if they are involved in the implementation. 11. What do you perceive to be the benefits of recognised dog breeder associations inputting their members details into the Government’s dog breeder register? (You may select more than one option) ☐ Avoids duplication for dog breeders who would otherwise need to register with both associations ☐ Potentially lessens the administrative burden on local governments ☐ Ensures that dog breeders registered with dog breeder associations are also registered with the Government and can be traced on the Government system 12. What obligations should there be on recognised dog breeder associations that input their members details into the Government’s dog breeder register? (you may select more than one option) ☐ Recognised dog breeder associations must update any change of their member’s details within seven days of being notified of the change 11 ☐ Recognised dog breeder associations must notify the relevant local government when a dog breeder is no longer a member of their association ☐ Recognised dog breeder associations must notify the relevant local government if a member’s membership of their association is cancelled by the association ☐ Recognised dog breeder associations must notify relevant enforcement agencies where they find evidence that one of their members is not complying with the requirements under the Dog Act, Animal Welfare Act or a relevant dog local law • These obligations are all reasonable. The associations are not required to proactively monitor or seek out information, just to pass on information once they have received it. The information is relevant to the registration of dog breeders. 4.12 Transferring a dog Providing information when transferring a dog Questions 13. Are there other ways to monitor or ensure dog advertisements comply with the requirement to provide both the dog owner number and dog’s microchip number? Please specify: • Dog advertisements could take many forms and appear in many traditional and non-traditional (social) media. Educating members of the public and encouraging them to report non-compliant advertisements seems the most effective way to deal with this. Animal welfare groups, breeders associations and other interested parties may take a more active approach to monitoring particular types or sources of advertising. It is unlikely that any enforcement agency can review all dog advertisements so a complaint based model is recommended. 14. What agency could be responsible for prosecuting dog owners and breeders that do not comply with the transfer and advertisement requirements? ☐ Department of Local Government, Sport and Cultural Industries ☐ Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development ☐ Consumer Protection WA ☐ RSPCA ☐ Unsure ☐ Other – please specify: • Any of the above, dependent on resourcing and capacity. 15. What is your agency’s capacity (considering benefits, issues and costs) to enforce these requirements? ☐ Limited to no capacity 12 • It is difficult to comment without more information. Enforcement of these provisions will be dependent on a clear definition of advertisement and the point at which the dog owner number and dog microchip number must be provided. Where a sale or transfer may involve extended informal communication between parties it may be difficult to determine when or if an offence has occurred. No record of an advertisement may exist by the time an investigation is commenced. The more complex or uncertain the issues of law and fact, the higher the cost of prosecution will be. • The advertising, sale and transfer of goods is not an area in which local government currently has involvement or expertise. 4.13 Enforcement Questions 8. To ensure dog breeders are complying with the requirements under the Dog Act, would your local government prefer to: ☐ investigate non-compliance upon complaint (This will not include investigating compliance with the Mandatory Standards for Dog Breeding, Housing, Husbandry, Transport and Sale). 9. Are the current fines under the Dog Act sufficient to cover the cost of investigating and enforcing non-compliance? • The current fines are sufficient to cover the cost of investigating and enforcing non-compliance with the Dog Act as it is now. The proposed changes have the potential to significantly increase the cost of investigating and enforcing non- compliance and the current fines would no longer be sufficient. Enabling enforcement Questions 1. Please indicate what reports would assist local governments in enforcing the requirements under the Dog Act: ☐ Dog owners that have not renewed their dog registration ☐ Dog owners that have not renewed their annual dog breeder registration ☐ Dogs that are not de-sexed ☐ Premises where the number of dog exceeds the limit ☐ Number of dogs owned by a dog owner that exceeds the limit that can be kept on a single premises • All of the listed reports would assist. 2. What other reports would assist local governments to monitor and enforce the existing and proposed provisions under the Dog Act? • None suggested at this time. With more information on the proposed provisions and information to be contained in the register, other reports may be suggested. 13 14 5. Transitioning Pet Shops to Adoption Centres 5.3 Accreditation of rescue organisations and shelters Questions 1. Should accredited rescue organisations and shelters be monitored? ☐ Yes 2. How should they be monitored? ☐ Audits 3. Do you believe your agency should have a role in accrediting rescue organisations and shelters? ☐ No • Accreditation suggests compliance with the proposed animal welfare standards under the Animal Welfare Act. Local government is not the appropriate agency to assess compliance with these standards. 4. If you answered yes, what would this role be? • Not applicable. 5.7 Enforcement Questions 5. Should pet shops have to register with a relevant authority if they sell dogs? ☐ Yes • This is necessary to facilitate the efficient and effective implementation of the proposed changes. 6. Should it be an offence to fail to register? ☐ Yes 7. What information and records should a pet shop maintain to ensure compliance with the pet shop provisions can be monitored? ☐ Records of where dogs have been sourced from • This must be recorded so that it can be provided to the new owners to allow them to register their dog. ☐ Details of new owners • These details can be used if required to check whether a puppy has subsequently been registered and to confirm that the pet shop is no longer responsible for the dog. ☐ Details of health and behaviour checks • As a health and behaviour check will be required under the proposed changes, records of this check should be kept. 15 8. What information and records should a rescue organisation and shelter maintain to ensure pet shops can be monitored and information verified? • Records of health and behaviour checks. • Records of shop to which each dog is supplied. 9. How should a pet shop be monitored for compliance? ☐ Option 4 – Audited and inspected upon complaint 16 REPORT ITEM NO.C4 ATTACHMENT NO 2 STOP PUPPY FARMING Local Government Consultation June 2018 1 Table of Contents Having your say ______4 Stop Puppy Farming ______5 Mandatory De-sexing for Non-Breeding Dogs ______11 Centralised Registration System ______18 Transitioning Pet Shops to Adoption Centres ______43 2 June 2018 Department of Local Government, Sport and Cultural Industries Gordon Stephenson House, 140 William Street, Perth WA 6000 GPO Box R1250, Perth WA 6844 Telephone: (08) 6551 8700 Fax: (08) 6552 1555 Freecall: 1800 620 511 (Country only) Email: [email protected] Website: www.dlgsc.wa.gov.au/stoppuppyfarming Translating and Interpreting Service (TIS) – Telephone: 13 14 50 3 Having your say This paper is designed for local government to discuss the recommended actions and proposed implementation process of the stop puppy farming proposals. The feedback provided will assist in informing the government on the role of local government in supporting the implementation of the stop puppy farming provisions and identify the resource requirements. The Department is committed to working with local government to stop puppy farming. We are working with WALGA and Local Government Professionals to ensure this discussion paper reflects the information you need to make a considered response and tell us what these initiatives mean for the business of local government. The review of the Cat and Dog Act is likely to commence in the next financial year, which presents an opportunity for us to start thinking about our ‘companion animals’ and how they should be managed, and the process costed. Given the Stop Puppy Farming initiatives will require an amendment to the Dog Act it’s timely to turn our minds to what this may look like. As such, the Department is partnering with WALGA and Local Government Professionals to develop a cost modelling project. The purpose of this project will be to collect current information about the costs to your council to implement the Dog Act and what you believe may be the costs to implement the Stop Puppy Farming initiatives. 4 Stop Puppy Farming 1.1 Introduction The Western Australian Minister for Local Government has committed to introducing the necessary legislative provisions to stop puppy farming and improve the health and wellbeing of all dogs in Western Australia. While there are already legislative powers to investigate and prosecute those who mistreat their animals, legislation relevant to puppy farming is needed to facilitate the investigation and prosecution of puppy farming in WA. The RSPCA defines ‘puppy farming’ as intensively breeding dogs under inadequate conditions that fail to meet the dogs’ behavioural, social and/or physiological needs.1 The issue with puppy farming is that dogs bred in inadequate conditions, or used for breeding in inadequate conditions, can suffer from a range of health and behavioural issues. The other issue is that puppy farming is resulting in too many dogs being bred that do not have homes. Currently, the management of puppy farms is through a two-pronged approach. The Dog Act 1976 provides for the responsible management of all dogs in Western Australia. The Act is administered and enforced by local governments and provides for the control and registration of dogs, the ownership and keeping of dogs and the obligation and rights of dog owners. The Dog Act requires that all dogs are registered and places certain limits on the number of dogs a person can have at any property. This Act therefore impacts on puppy farming by limiting dog numbers. The other legislation used to manage puppy farms is the Animal Welfare Act 2002 (Animal Welfare Act) which provides for the protection of animals from cruelty. This piece of legislation covers the treatment of the animals on a puppy farm. There is currently no legislation which deals specifically with the overbreeding of dogs in Western Australia or encourages responsible breeding. In May 2016, the WA Labor Government released its Stop Puppy Farming Policy. The Policy outlines a number of measures to stop the overbreeding of dogs, covering changes to both the Animal Welfare Act (mandatory standards) and to the Dog Act (other initiatives). These measures include: 1 RSPCA, What is a puppy farm? http://kb.rspca.org.au/What-is-a-puppy-farm_322.html 5 • the transition of pet shops into adoption centres that will only sell puppies and dogs from approved rescue organisations and animal shelters; • mandatory de-sexing of dogs unless an exemption is requested for breeding purposes or for reasons stated by a registered veterinarian; • a centralised registration system to ensure every dog and puppy can be identified at the point of sale or adoption, including in advertisements for sale; and • mandatory standards for dog breeding, housing, husbandry, transport and sale. Consultation with the community on the impact and implementation of these measures is currently being undertaken. Community members can provide their feedback through a variety of means including undertaking an online survey, submitting a written response, or attending a community workshop. Consultation with the local government sector is being undertaken in a separate process. The Department is working with WALGA to consult with the sector on how these measures can be implemented and what the impact will be on local governments. 1.2 Local Government’s Role Recent publicly available research indicates that between 34%-42% of households in Western Australia own a dog which compares to the national average of 38%23. With the number of households in Western Australia estimated to be 938,000, this suggests there are in the range of 320-390,000 dogs in the State. A survey of local governments conducted by the Department of Local Government, Sport and Cultural Industries has indicated that approximately 345,000 dogs are registered with local governments in Western Australia. Averaging these estimates provides a dog population of around 350,000. The Government has commissioned research and consulted on ways to prevent puppy farming, and reduce the number of unwanted dogs that are either euthanised, surrendered or abandoned. The most pragmatic approach to achieve the key objectives is to amend to the Dog Act. Currently, Local Governments are responsible for administering and enforcing the provisions of the Dog Act in their district. 2 Animal Medicines Australia, Pet Ownership in Australia 2016. Note that the sample size for this report is small and, therefore, the results may not be accurate. 3 Doggone it: pet ownership in Australia, Roy Morgan Research 2014. 6 Amendments to the Dog Act are being considered that would impose additional responsibilities on local government authorities, including: • enforcing the mandatory dog de-sexing requirement (by taking action against owners when this comes to the local government’s attention); • processing dog breeder applications; • enforcing the dog breeder registration requirement; • inputting information into a centralised registration system, as opposed to the local government’s own dog register. It is proposed that the State will develop a centralised registration system that is used by all local governments. For local government this means instead of maintaining individual dog registration databases, local government will continue to be responsible for processing of dog registrations and uploading the registrations to a centralised system. We are working with the local government sector to undertake economic modelling to anticipate what these costs may look like. The costs that will be evaluated include: • costs associated with enforcing the provisions (as itemised above); • costs associated with transitioning local governments to a centralised registration system; • costs involved with assisting communities to comply with the new provisions, for example, assisting remote communities to access veterinary services to de-sex dogs by the mandatory age; • costs of prosecution and defending appeals to prosecution; and • scoping the capacity and costs of local governments being the agency responsible for enforcing the requirement that pet shops only source dogs from accredited rescues and shelters. 1.3 Other Enforcement Agencies Consideration is being given to which authority or agency should be responsible for enforcing other aspects of these proposals, such as: • the requirement that pet shops only source and sell dogs from accredited rescue organisations or shelters; • the requirement to provide particular information when advertising and/or transferring a dog. The Government’s commitment to introduce mandatory standards for dog breeding, housing, husbandry, transport and sale (the standards) is being progressed by the 7 Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development (DPIRD) the agency responsible for administering the Animal Welfare Act 2002. Amendments to the Animal Welfare Act are currently before Parliament. If these amendments are adopted, animal standards will be able to be adopted under the Animal Welfare Act, including the mandatory standards for dog breeding, housing, husbandry, transport and sale. DPIRD will undertake consultation on the standards once they have been drafted. Their enforcement will be a matter to be determined at that stage. Currently the Animal Welfare Act is enforced by inspectors appointed under the Animal Welfare Act. Local governments therefore do not have the power to enforce the standards unless they have employees who are inspectors appointed under the Animal Welfare Act. The local government will be able to refuse or cancel dog breeder registrations where a breach of the Animal Welfare Act or the standards is found. At this stage, local governments will not be responsible for determining if a breeder is compliant with the standards when approving dog breeder registrations, but will need to ensure the owner has made a declaration that they are compliant with the standards. 1.4 Cost Recovery The proposed initiatives are also about working towards improving services to the community. While efficiencies will be realised, local governments may incur costs in undertaking these additional responsibilities. The Department is working with WALGA and LG Professionals to develop a cost recovery methodology to ensure appropriate fees can be set for local governments to recover these costs. Currently, local government collect dog registration fees that contribute to local government costs. The State Government is responsible for setting dog registration fees which apply to all local government jurisdictions – these have been set after surveying local governments as to their costs. It is proposed that local governments could recover costs through the following fees: • dog registration fees; • dog breeder registration fees; • kennel establishment fees. 8 The amount of these fees would be based on recovering costs for local governments. Questions 1. What mechanisms should local governments use to collect funds to cover the costs associated with enforcing the new provisions under the Dog Act? (multiple options can be selected): ☐ By charging cost-recoverable dog registration and dog breeder registration fees to cover all costs ☐ By charging dog registration and dog breeder registration fees at a level to recover these costs and increasing fines to recover enforcement costs ☐ Other – please specify: ______ 2. Should fees used to cover the costs incurred by local governments to enforce the Dog Act be consistent across the State, or should local governments be able to set their own fees? ☐ Fees should be consistent across the State ☐ Fees should be set by the individual local government and apply to their district only ☐ Unsure ☐ Other – please specify: ______ 3. Is charging cost recovery likely to have any adverse impacts for your community? ☐ No ☐ Yes ☐ Unsure ☐If yes, please provide details: ______ 4. Are there benefits in your local government subsidising registration costs? ☐ No ☐ Yes ☐ Unsure ☐If yes, please provide details: ______ 9 10 Mandatory De-sexing for Non- Breeding Dogs 3.1 Introduction Currently, dogs are not required to be de-sexed in Western Australia. Owners are encouraged to de-sex their dogs, and owners of de-sexed dogs pay a lower dog registration fee than owners of other dogs. A recent survey of Western Australian local governments, with 43 out of 137 local governments responding, found that 82% of registered dogs were de-sexed. The additional consultation in this document focuses on the following elements of implementation: • Age of mandatory de-sexing • Age for registration and microchipping • Additional exemptions • De-sexing vouchers • Enforcement 3.2 Objective The objective of mandatory dog de-sexing is two-fold: • to prevent unwanted litters being bred • to prevent puppy farmers from breeding dogs unless they are registered breeders. The primary objective of mandatory dog de-sexing is to reduce the number of unwanted dogs being born that are then either euthanised, abandoned, or surrendered to dog rescues or shelters. Uncontrolled and unrestricted breeding of dogs can lead to dogs being overbred and contribute to the unwanted dog population. Mandatory de-sexing will help to ensure there is no unintended breeding of dogs. Dog owners will be required to de-sex their dog unless they register as a dog breeder. 11 The objective is to stop indiscriminate breeding, and only allow people that are registered breeders to breed dogs, so they can be identified and traced. 3.3 Age of mandatory de-sexing The Dog Act will be amended to require all dogs to be de-sexed by the time they reach a particular age. This age is yet to be determined. Option 1: Mandatory dog de-sexing by three months of age One option is to require all dogs to be de-sexed by three months of age. This would be consistent with the current requirement for registration and microchipping and with the age for de-sexing dangerous (restricted breed) dogs. Dogs are generally unable to breed before the age of three months so this age eliminates the risk of unwanted puppies being born. Exemptions issued by veterinarians are proposed for dogs that are too young to be de-sexed. Dogs to be used for breeding would also be exempt. Option 2: Mandatory dog de-sexing by six months of age Another option is to require all dogs to be de-sexed by six months of age. Opinions differ on the best age for de-sexing with many veterinarians preferring not to de-sex a dog until it is close to six months old. Both male and female dogs are generally able to breed by six months, with the females of smaller breeds becoming sexually mature by four months. Larger breeds may not be sexually mature for a year or more. South Australia and the Australian Capital Territory have introduced mandatory dog de-sexing by six months old. Questions 1. Should mandatory dog de-sexing apply to all dogs, including existing dogs, or just dogs born after a particular date? ☐ All existing dogs, with a phase in period for when existing dogs must be de- sexed ☐ Only dogs born after a particular date ☐ Unsure 12 3.4 Age for registration, microchipping and de-sexing Currently dogs are required to be registered and microchipped by the time they are three months old. The following addresses possible ways to deal with registration and microchipping if the requirement for de-sexing is set at six months or an age that is greater than three months. Option 1 – Registration, microchipping and de-sexing by six months Under this option, the Dog Act would be amended so that registration, microchipping and de-sexing must be completed by the time a dog reaches six months of age. The benefits include: • enabling local governments to sight evidence of microchipping and de-sexing at the time of registration • administrative efficiency for local governments • less confusion for owners, which would increase compliance • convenience for dog owners in being able to have their dog microchipped and de-sexed in the same veterinarian visit. The key disadvantage is the inability to identify dogs (either by registration records or microchips) before six months. This may result in dogs not being returned to owners and being sent to the pound and/or a dog rescue or shelter. This would also result in a three month delay in revenue collection for local governments. Option 2 – Limited registration at three months; full registration on de-sexing This option proposes the following: • the retention of the current provisions under the Dog Act requiring dogs to be registered and microchipped by three months of age, and • a short-term registration (three months) for dog owners registering a dog that has not been de-sexed. This allows dogs to be identified from three months of age but provides an additional administrative burden on both the owner and the local government in having to register a dog twice. Furthermore, local governments would need to follow up when people do not re-register their dogs at 6 months incurring further costs to local governments. 13 Option 3 – Registration at three months; onus on owner to advise when dog de-sexed Under this option, the owner would be responsible for notifying the relevant local government once their dog was de-sexed. The owner would need to provide a copy of the sterilisation certification to the local government – this could be done by email or attached to an electronic form. The local government would then update the registration database. This would create an additional administrative burden on local governments. Owners of dogs that had their dog de-sexed after registering their dog would be eligible for a refund of a portion of their dog’s registration fee, to account for the fact that the dog is now de-sexed. This would create an additional administrative burden on local governments in having to conduct refunds. Questions 2. Please indicate your preference for the following: ☐ Option 1 – registration, microchipping and de-sexing by six months ☐ Option 2 – limited registration at three months; full registration on de-sexing ☐ Option 3 – registration at three months; onus on owner to advise when dog de-sexed Please provide reasons for your preference: ______ From 1 July 2018 South Australian veterinarian practices will be responsible for updating a centralised dog registration database when a dog is de-sexed. This would replace the need to issue a sterilisation certificate. 3. Would you support this approach? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unsure Please provide reasons for your response: ______ 3.5 Additional possible exemptions from de-sexing 14 Exemptions from mandatory de-sexing will apply for health and welfare reasons as assessed by a veterinarian, and if the dog owner is a registered dog breeder. Dog breeders will be required to register with their local government. Dog breeder registration is discussed in more detail in the Centralised Registration System section of this paper. Livestock working dogs Livestock working dogs require particular traits, with dogs that demonstrate these traits being bred to ensure that future working dogs also have these particular traits. Livestock working dogs are generally only used for breeding once the dog has a proven ability as a working dog, usually by two to three years of age. If a primary producer is required to de-sex their dog at an early age, they will not be able to assess whether a dog has the desirable traits and should be used for breeding. Mandatory de-sexing could reduce the working dog gene pool. On the other hand, unintended breeding could result in unwanted dogs. Questions 4. Should livestock working dogs be exempt as a class from mandatory dog de-sexing? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unsure Please provide reasons for your preference: ______ 5. If working dogs are required to be de-sexed by a particular age, at what age should working dogs be required to be de-sexed? 6. How could this be enforced? Dogs held by persons registered with recognised breeding associations Consideration is being given to exempting members of recognised dog breeding associations from having to de-sex their dogs. 15 3.6 Transferring dogs Dog breeders and dog owners will be required to de-sex any dog transferred to another person unless: • the new owner is a registered breeder • the new owner is a member of a recognised association or organisation that is exempt from the mandatory de-sexing requirement • the dog is exempt by a veterinarian from being de-sexed on health grounds (unless the exemption is because the dog is too young to be de-sexed) • the dog is too young to be de-sexed and is accompanied by a prepaid de- sexing voucher. Requiring dog owners and breeders to de-sex a dog before it is transferred will ensure there is compliance with the de-sexing requirements. In cases where a dog is too young to be de-sexed, it is proposed that a breeder or owner transferring a dog provide the new owner with a pre-paid voucher that will at least partially cover the cost of de-sexing. This aligns with the requirements in the Cat Act. The cost of having a dog de-sexed varies greatly, depending on such factors as the age and weight of the dog. The voucher could be set at a particular amount with the new owner paying any additional amount. One of the matters to be considered is how these vouchers could be used at veterinarian practices other than the issuing one. This is important for owners who source their dogs from places far from their homes. 3.7 Enforcement It is necessary to consider how mandatory dog de-sexing will operate alongside the current requirements under the Dog Act; and how local governments can efficiently monitor compliance. Currently, local governments are responsible for monitoring and enforcing compliance with the following requirements under the Dog Act: • dogs to be registered with the local government by the age of three months • dogs to be microchipped by the age of three months. Local governments check compliance with the microchipping requirement at the point of registration. A local government can refuse to register a dog that is not 16 microchipped and it is an offence for a person to keep a dog over the age of three months if it is not registered. Effectively, an owner must have their dog microchipped before they can register a dog with their local government. Owners of certain dangerous dogs are currently required to de-sex their dogs. A dog owner is required to provide a dog sterilisation certificate issued by a veterinarian as evidence that the dog is de-sexed. Alternatively, a dog’s de-sexed status can be checked by the local government by viewing a sterilisation tattoo on the dog’s ear, although this method of marking a dog is now rare. Local governments would appear to be the relevant authority responsible for monitoring and enforcing the compliance of mandatory dog de-sexing, especially at the point of registration. Local governments would be responsible for: • checking a dog’s de-sexed status when processing dog registrations; • enforcing the mandatory dog de-sexing requirement against non-compliant owners. Currently, owners who register de-sexed dogs with their local government pay a lower registration fee than owners of dogs that are not de-sexed, creating an incentive for owners to de-sex their dog. It is proposed to maintain a lower registration fee for de-sexed dogs to further incentivise de-sexing. Economic modelling will be undertaken to assess the costs that local governments will incur as a result of enforcing these requirements. Questions 7. Who do you believe is best placed to monitor compliance with de-sexing? ☐ Local Governments ☐ Other – please specify: ______ Please provide reasons for your preference: ______ 17 Centralised Registration System 4.1 Introduction A key element of the McGowan Government’s Stop Puppy Farming commitment is the introduction of an online centralised dog registration system in Western Australia. The centralised registration system will be used to identify every dog or puppy by recording: • dog registrations • dog breeder registrations • any change in ownership of dogs or puppies. The Dog Act will be amended to make it a requirement to register on the system and update particular information on the system within seven days of the change occurring. The additional consultation in this document focuses on the following elements of implementation: • General o Access to the system o Additional information to be included in the system • Dog Registrations o Dog registration information to be included in the system o Updating dog registration information in the system o Transitioning existing dog registers • Dog Breeder Registrations o Application and approval of dog breeder registrations o Conditions of dog breeder registration o Exemptions • Transferring a dog 4.2 Current situation Local Governments Currently under the Dog Act, the local government is responsible for keeping a record of dogs registered in their district. The dog register is specific only to that local government district (unless two or more local governments work together to maintain a joint system). This can create difficulties in identifying lost dogs from different local government districts, particularly if a dog’s microchip information has not been updated with the current owner’s details. 18 The local government is responsible for processing dog registration applications and can refuse to register a dog on specific grounds, such as when a dog is not microchipped. The local government issues each dog registered in their district with a registration number and a registration tag. Dog breeders Dog breeders in Western Australia are not currently required to register as ‘dog breeders’. They are, like all dog owners, required to register their dogs with their local government. They are also required to obtain an exemption or kennel establishment licence if they keep more dogs on any one premises than is permitted. 4.3 Objective Currently, the difficulty in identifying puppy farms hinders the enforcement and prosecution of relevant legislation against puppy farmers. Centralised Registration System The centralised registration system is a tool which will allow authorities to identify and monitor all dog breeders and dog owners for compliance with legislative requirements. Members of the public will be educated about sourcing their new dog or puppy from breeders who are registered and who supply the dog’s microchip number and the seller’s dog owner number. The centralised registration system is the tool that will allow members of the public to verify if a dog breeder is registered, to allow them to source dogs and puppies from registered dog owners and dog breeders. Dog Breeder Registration Dog breeder registration will allow authorities to identify dog breeders so they can be monitored for compliance with legislative requirements. If a dog breeder is not breeding dogs in accordance with the Dog Act, any relevant Dog Local Law, the Animal Welfare Act or the mandatory standards for dog breeding, housing, husbandry, transport and sale, the local government will be able to cancel the dog breeder registration and require that their dogs be sterilised in accordance with the Dog Act to ensure they can no longer breed dogs. 19 Breaches of the standards would be pursued under the Animal Welfare Act, with breeders’ subject to prosecution and fines under that Act. Only an animal welfare inspector can determine if a standard has been breached. Recording the breeder’s dog owner number on a dog’s microchip database will allow authorities to trace a dog back to its breeder if issues with puppies or dogs are identified, such as genetic health concerns. 4.4 Access to the System View and View and Limited dog Search for update own update all breeder dogs on the information* information verification system information** Dog owners X Dog breeders X Local X X X X governments and State government authorities Members of the X public Dog X X X management facilities and recognised dog shelters and rescues *Dog owners would be able to update certain information (not all information) of their registration such as a change of address or changes to other contact details. Dog owners could also update the status of their dog, including updating its status to ‘missing’ or ‘deceased’. **As a minimum, the information on the dog owner that will be shown to a member of the public will include: • their name; • their postcode; • their unique dog owner number; and • their dog breeder registration status. 20 Questions 1. Are any other authorities or groups that should have access to the system? ☐ Yes – please specify below. ☐ No ☐ Unsure Please specify: ______ 2. What type of access should they have? ☐ View their own records ☐ Update their own records ☐ View all records ☐ Update all records ☐ Approve changes to records 3. What information on a dog owner should a member of the public be able to view to ascertain if the dog owner is a registered dog breeder? (more than one option can be selected) ☐ A dog owner’s name ☐ A dog owner’s postcode ☐ A dog owner’s number ☐ Whether the dog owner is a registered dog breeder ☐ Other – please specify: ______ 4.5 Additional information The breadth of information recorded on the centralised registration system will affect how it can be used, and by whom it can be used. It is also likely to affect the cost. There is the potential to record additional information on the centralised registration system, including the following: • A register of approved kennel establishments in Western Australia (including the ability to apply for a kennel establishment licence on the system) • A register of dog management facilities in Western Australia • A register of pet shops transferring and selling dogs in Western Australia • A register of dangerous dogs (declared and restricted breed) • Information on particular dog owners, such as dog owners that are subject to a court order or have been convicted of offences under: 21 o the Dog Act o a dog local law or by-law o the Animal Welfare Act • Information on dogs: o that have been seized by the local government at any time o that have been involved in a dog attack o that have not been controlled by their owner in accordance with the Dog Act o that have caused a nuisance or are subject to a nuisance complaint o that are subject to a destruction order • Information to inform compliance with the standards for dog breeding, housing, husbandry, transport and sale. The benefit of keeping this information is that these facilities, businesses, dogs and dog owners could be more readily identified and monitored by relevant authorities. The inclusion of this additional information could result in additional costs, including: • costs associated with creating a system that included and stored this additional information • costs to particular stakeholders who would be responsible for uploading this information • costs to local governments in processing this information • costs to relevant enforcement authorities in monitoring this information. Dog registration fees, and dog breeder registration fees would need to accommodate these costs. Cat Registration Currently under the Cat Act 2011, local governments are responsible for: • processing cat registration applications; • approving cat breeder applications; and • maintaining a register of cats in their district. As with dog registers, cat registers are specific only to that local government district (unless two or more local governments work together to maintain a joint system). Questions 4. Would it be beneficial for your local government if cat and cat breeder registrations were also transitioned to the centralised registration system? 22 ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unsure 5. How would transitioning cat and cat breeder registrations to a centralised registration system be beneficial to your local government? ☐ Administrative efficiency ☐ Consistency with centralised dog registrations ☐ No requirement to maintain own register ☐ Other – please specify: ______☐ It would not be beneficial – please specify: ______ 6. Would any of the following additional information be useful for your local government? ☐ Approved kennel establishments ☐ Dog management facilities ☐ Pet shops that sell or transfer dogs ☐ Dangerous dogs ☐ Dog owner’s subject to Court orders or convicted of particular offences ☐ Dogs that have been seized by the local government ☐ Dogs involved in a dog attack ☐ Dogs that have not been controlled by the owner ☐ Dogs that have caused a nuisance or are subject to a nuisance complaint ☐ Dogs that are subject to a destruction order ☐ Other information – please specify: ______ Please indicate why you think it would be useful: ______ 7. What additional costs would including this information in the system create for your local government? ☐ Processing the additional information ☐ Monitoring the additional information ☐ Other: ______ 8. Would it be easier for your local government to process and record kennel establishment licences through the system? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unsure 23 Please give your reasons: ______ 4.6 Dog registration information The breadth of information recorded on the centralised registration system will affect how it can be used, and by whom it can be used. It is also likely to affect the cost. General information Dog registration information that will be kept on the centralised registration system will include: • Current information requirements: the information a dog owner must currently provide to register a dog in Western Australia is set out under Form 4 of Schedule 1 of the Dog Regulations 2013. This includes information on the following: o dog owner details, including their address and contact details o whether the dog can be effectively confined to the premises o dog details, including age, breed, microchip details, whether the dog is a commercial security dog or a dangerous dog o the number of dogs on the premises o information on any previous convictions for offences against the Dog Act, Cat Act or Animal Welfare Act o a declaration that the information in the application is true and correct • In addition, dog owners will be required to provide: o further information on their dog’s sterilisation status o their unique dog owner number (if known, otherwise they will be issued with one) o the dog owner number of the dog’s breeder (if known). This is the minimum level of dog registration information that will be stored on the centralised registration system. Questions – All 9. Please indicate if you think any of the additional information should be included on a dog’s registration: ☐ information on whether the dog is used as a livestock working dog 24 Questions – All ☐ information on whether the dog is used as an assistance dog Please indicate why you think this information will be beneficial: ______ 4.7 Updating dog registration information The online centralised registration system will have the capacity to allow a range of users to register and update information recorded on the system in Western Australia. Verification of some of the information recorded on the system will need to be undertaken to ensure the information is accurate, such as the sterilisation status of a dog. The following users will be able to register a dog on the centralised registration system: • dog owners • local governments on behalf of dog owners (registrations made in person or hard copy form) • dog shelters and rescue organisations • dog management facilities. The following stakeholders will be able to use the system to register as a dog breeder on the centralised registration system: • dog owners (who wish to breed from their dog) • local governments on behalf of dog breeders (registrations made in person or hard copy form) • dog shelters and rescue organisations • dog management facilities. Local governments will be responsible for approving dog and breeder registrations in their district. The registration will not be complete until approved by the local government. In the process of approving dog registration applications, local governments can verify the microchip and de-sexing details through, for example, examining the dog’s sterilisation certificate. Potential Role for Veterinarians 25 Another possible option is that veterinarians be required to update the system with a dog’s de-sexed and microchip information. In South Australia and New South Wales, veterinarians are able to update their centralised system with a dog’s microchip details. The advantages of this are: • a veterinarian can verify the de-sexing and microchipping of the dog without a local government having to examine a sterilisation certificate • this is likely to be a more accurate and reliable method • local governments can quickly process dog registrations as they do not have to confirm the microchip and de-sexing details (unless not already entered) • the information is verified and entered in the system at the point of microchipping and de-sexing, meaning there is no delay in updating this information. This will create a cost to veterinarian practices who will need to expend time and resources on undertaking this function. Veterinarians will not be responsible for ensuring dog owners comply with the microchipping and de-sexing requirements. They will also not be obliged to notify a local government of a dog owner’s non-compliance with the requirements. Under this proposal, a veterinarian will be able to update a registered dog’s details. If the dog is not registered prior to the veterinarian undertaking the microchipping and/or de-sexing, the veterinarian will still be able to enter the dog’s microchip details and sterilisation status into the centralised registration system. Owners will then be responsible for searching the system for the microchip details of their dog, and completing their registration. Reports could be generated to show dogs that have been entered in the system by veterinarians, but have not been registered by their owner. Local governments would then be able to identify dog owners that have not registered their dog in accordance with the Dog Act. Questions 10. Do you think veterinarians should be able to update and input dog’s microchip and sterilisation details into the system? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unsure 26 Please indicate why it would be useful: ______ 11. Should it be a mandatory requirement for veterinarians to input this information into the system, or optional for veterinarians to input this information? ☐ Mandatory ☐ Optional ☐ Not applicable Please provide reasons for your preference: ______ 12. Do you perceive any benefits in veterinarians undertaking this role? 13. Please indicate what other information you think veterinarians should be able to update or access on the system? ☐ Enter a dog registration on an owner’s behalf ☐ Search for the identity of a dog and its owner ☐ Enter vet specific information on any registered animal ☐ Report and enter details of animal incidents such as dog attacks ☐ Report dog deaths ☐ Other – please specify: ______ 4.8 Transition existing dog registers Introducing a centralised registration system will mean the information in the existing local government dog registers will need to be transferred to the central register. This could be phased in over a number of years. Local governments currently use at least five different registration systems, ranging from a sophisticated purpose-built database to a spreadsheet. A survey of local governments, with 53 local government respondents, found that 68% used Synergy, 13% used Civica, 8% used TechnologyOne, 8% used Pathway and 2% used an Excel spreadsheet. Annual dog registrations It is proposed that annual dog registrations will be transferred to the centralised system from the local government systems on renewal. Under the Dog Act, annual dog registrations expire on 1 November of every year. 27 Once the centralised registration system is developed and launched, annual dog registrations will be incorporated into the centralised registration system by requiring dog owners to renew their annual dog registration through the centralised system. Essentially, dog owners that have registered their dogs annually will be captured when they renew their dog registration. Three year dog registrations Similar to annual dog registrations, owners that have registered their dog for a period of three years will be transferred to the centralised system when they renew their dog’s registration. As for annual registrations it will be the owner’s responsibility to enter their data into the new system at the time of re-registration. This means that it will take the centralised system three years to incorporate the three-year period dog registrations. Lifetime dog registrations Lifetime dog registration means the owner never has to renew their dog’s registration. As such, their dog’s registration cannot be recorded on the centralised dog registration system through the renewal of the registration. There are three options to capture lifetime dog registrations on the centralised system: Option 1: Software Data migration software could be created to transfer the information in each local government’s register to the centralised system. Software created to transfer dog registration information from local government systems to the centralised system would need to be specific to each type of software system the local governments currently use. It is not known if local governments using the same registration system have it configured in the same way. The expense of creating data migration software for each system would be significant, and adequate time would be needed to develop the data migration software for each type of registered software used by local governments. Dog registration fees would potentially have to increase to cover the costs of funding the data migration software or a one-off registration charge apply for registrations on the new system. The disadvantage with this option is that the cost is also borne by 28 new dog owners, as opposed to just the existing dog owners whose data is being migrated. Owners with life-time registration would bear none of the costs. Option 2: Manual entry Another option is to manually transfer the lifetime dog registrations to the centralised system. This would require local government staff to enter the information. It would also mean that local government resources would be used on transferring information as opposed to undertaking other local government duties. It would, however, mean that local governments would no longer have to manage a dual system of registrations so there would be time and cost savings in the medium and longer term. Sufficient time would also need to be provided to allow local governments to transfer the information – this could be three years in line with the transition of the three-year registrations. Option 3: Owner’s responsibility Another option is to make it the responsibility of existing owners to re-register under the new centralised system. Local governments could identify lifetime registrations on their system and send letters and information to owners with lifetime dog registrations instructing them to re-register their dog on the centralised system. There would be no charge for this process. Upon re-registering online, owners would complete a specific registration form identifying them as a dog owner with an existing lifetime dog registration. Local governments could confirm this against their existing register and waive the registration fee. If a person does not have online access, the local government could process the re- registration on the owner’s behalf. Currently, owners with a lifetime dog registration are not required to update a local government when their dog dies. Local governments are likely to therefore have active registrations for dogs that have passed away. One advantage of owners re- registering their lifetime dog registrations is that the register will not be updated with deceased dogs. There is a risk that owners will not undertake the re-registration and may not re- register their dog. 29 Questions 14. Please indicate your preference for the following: ☐ Option 1 – Develop and provide data migration software to transfer lifetime dog registrations to the centralised registration system. ☐ Option 2 – Local governments manually enter lifetime dog registrations into the centralised registration system. ☐ Option 3 – Owners re-register their lifetime dog registration on the centralised registration system. Please indicate reasons for your preference: ______ 15. Are there other options for transferring existing dogs onto the centralised system? 16. Which of the following would you support to cover the costs of migrating existing data? ☐ an increase in the registration fee ☐ a one-off payment by dog owners ☐ other ☐ none One option is that existing lifetime dog registrations are not transferred to the new system and local government registers would need to be retained for at least a 15- year period following the launch of the centralised system and authorities would have to refer to both the centralised system and individual local government dog registers. 17. Should lifetime dog registrations be transferred to the new system? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unsure 18. Please indicate your local government district and the software you currently use for your dog register: a) Local government district: ______b) Dog register software: ______ 19. Please indicate if the software used for your local government dog register is the same as the software used for your local government’s cat register: ☐ Yes ☐ No 30 ☐ Unsure 20. Have you modified the software you currently use? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unsure 21. Is your local government easily able to identify lifetime dog registrations in your dog register? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unsure 22. How many lifetime dog registrations does your local government currently have? 23. Does your local government have the capacity to extract data from your dog register software and provide the extracted data in an Excel spreadsheet? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unsure 4.9 Application and approval – dog breeder registration A dog breeder will be broadly defined under the Dog Act, and will include any owner who has a dog that is not de-sexed, except if the dog is not de-sexed on health grounds. The requirement to register as a dog breeder will come into effect once the centralised registration system is operational. While it is envisaged that a majority of breeders will be registered prior to their dog having puppies, dog owners that are not registered will need to register as a breeder within seven days of the birth of puppies and/ or before the puppies are transferred to another person. This will ensure the local government has adequate time to process and approve the dog breeder registration application before the puppies are potentially transferred to another owner. 31 The information supplied by dog breeders at registration will impact the ability of the local governments to make an informed decision on approval of dog breeder registration. The information cat breeders must provide when applying for approval to breed cats includes: • the breeder’s details, including address and contact details • the cat’s details, including microchip details • questions in relation to the breeding of the cat, including the number of cats being kept on the premises, a description of the facilities, and whether they are a member of one of the listed organisations • the requirement to provide details of any previous convictions against the Cat Act, Dog Act or Animal Welfare Act • a declaration that the information provided is true and correct. It is proposed that similar information is provided when dog breeders apply for dog breeder registration. Instead of providing information on the premises and facilities, it is proposed that dog breeders would need to indicate and certify that they were compliant with any minimum standards for dog breeding, housing and husbandry (once they came into effect). Breeders will be required to renew their dog breeder registrations annually. Registered breeders will also be required to update any change to their information within seven days. Questions 1. What information do you think a dog breeder should provide when applying for breeder registration or renewal? ☐ The number of dogs being kept on the premises ☐ A description of the premises where the dogs are being kept ☐ A description of the facilities ☐ The breed of dogs ☐ Whether a person has been convicted of an offence under the Dog Act, Cat Act, Animal Welfare Act or a dog or cat local law. ☐ Certification that they comply and will continue to comply with animal breeding, housing and husbandry standards ☐ Other – please specify: ______ 2. What do you think local governments should take into account when 32 Questions considering a dog breeder application or renewal? ☐ The number of dogs being kept on the premises ☐ The breed of dogs ☐ Convictions under the Dog Act, Cat Act, Animal Welfare Act, or a dog or cat local law ☐ Other – please specify: ______ The Dog Act allows a dog registration officer from the local government, with the consent of the owner or occupier, to enter and inspect premises to ascertain whether a dog will be effectively confined on the premises. It is a condition of dog registration that a dog must be effectively confined to the premises in which it is kept. 3. Should local governments have the power to enter and inspect premises of a dog breeder, or premises that are subject to a dog breeder application or renewal? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unsure 4. In what situations should a local government be able to enter and inspect premises of a dog breeder of that are subject to a dog breeder application or renewal? ☐ Where the dog breeder owns more than a certain number of dogs, or owns a kennel establishment If yes, how many? ☐ No ☐ Unsure 4.10 Conditions – dog breeder registration Dog breeders registered with the government will be required to comply with particular conditions. This will include legislative requirements relating to information that must be provided when transferring a dog and the requirement to update a dog’s microchip database details with the breeder’s dog owner number. Dog breeders will also be required to comply with the requirements under the Dog Act, Cat Act and Animal Welfare Act and the mandatory dog breeding standards and guidelines when they are introduced under the Animal Welfare Act. 33 Registered dog breeders will also be required to notify the local government if any details of their dog registration changes. Dog numbers The number of dogs a dog breeder can keep on their premises will remain consistent with the current requirements under the Dog Act. Currently local governments, through the adoption of local laws, can limit the number of dogs ordinarily kept on premises that are aged over three months to any number between two and six. If a person would like to keep more than the permitted number of dogs, they must apply for a kennel licence from their local government. Under the Cat (Uniform Local Provisions) Regulations, members of certain cat associations are allowed to have three times the number of cats allowed on premises. This provision was introduced for cats as there were no existing limits on cat numbers before the introduction of the Cat Act. Dog breeders who are members of certain dog associations will not be able to keep more dogs than the limits set by their local government. It is possible that the standards for dog breeding, housing, husbandry, transport and sale will consider setting limits on the number of breeding dogs a person can own. This will be considered during consultation on the standards. Questions 5. Please specify any additional conditions with which dog breeders should comply: 6. On what grounds do you believe a local government could cancel a dog breeder registration? ☐ The dog breeder is convicted of an offence under the Dog Act, Cat Act, Animal Welfare Act, or a dog or cat local law ☐ The dog breeder is convicted of an offence under Australian Consumer Law in relation to dogs they have sold or transferred 34 Questions ☐ Failing to provide their dog owner number on the microchips of the puppies that they breed ☐ Failing to provide their dog owner number when advertising or transferring a dog ☐ Keeping more than the approved number of dogs on the premises ☐ Other – please specify: ______ 4.11 Exemptions – dog breeder registration Livestock working dogs In Queensland, primary producers that own and breed livestock working dogs are exempt from registering as dog breeders where they sell or transfer puppies they have bred to other primary producers. If a primary producer sells or transfers a puppy they have bred to someone who is not a primary producer, then they are required to register as a dog breeder, and supply their dog breeder registration number. Queensland legislation defines a primary producer as meaning a person who is primarily engaged in the occupation of a – (i) dairy farmer; or (ii) wheat, maize, or cereal grower; or (iii) cane grower; or (iv) fruit grower; or (v) grazier; or (vi) farmer, whether engaged in general or mixed farming, cotton, potato, or vegetable growing, or poultry or pig raising; and includes a person engaged in primary production. A working dog is defined as meaning a dog that is usually kept or proposed to be kept on rural land by an owner who is a primary producer, or a person engaged or employed by a primary producer; and is used primarily for the purpose of— (i) droving, protecting, tending, or working, stock; or (ii) being trained in droving, protecting, tending, or working, stock. 35 Questions 7. Should primary producers in WA be exempt from registering as dog breeders where they breed and transfer livestock working dogs to other primary producers? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unsure Please provide reasons for your response: ______ 8. Should primary producers in WA be exempt from registering as dog breeders where they breed and transfer livestock working dogs to any person? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unsure Please provide reasons for your response: ______ Dog breeders registered with recognised breeding associations There are dog breeders in WA that are members of non-Government dog breeding organisations and associations. Dogs West, as an example, is a pedigree breeding association in Western Australia whose members are required to abide by a Code of Ethics. Following the introduction of the centralised registration system, members of Dogs West will be required to register as a dog breeder with the Government. Questions 9. Should particular dog breeders that are members of particular dog breeding associations be exempt from registering with the Government as dog 36 Questions breeders? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unsure Please provide reasons for your response: ______ In South Australia, dog breeder registration has recently been introduced. Members of Dogs SA (the Dogs West equivalent) are not exempt from registering as dog breeders, but Dogs SA are responsible for inputting and maintaining their member’s details into the dog breeder register. The membership number issued by Dogs SA is also used as the Government dog breeder registration number. 10. Should recognised dog breeder associations in WA be responsible for inputting the details of their members into the Government’s dog breeder register on the centralised registration system? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unsure Please provide reasons for your response: ______ 11. What do you perceive to be the benefits of recognised dog breeder associations inputting their members details into the Government’s dog breeder register? (You may select more than one option) ☐ Creates consistency between registers ☐ Avoids duplication for dog breeders who would otherwise need to register with both associations ☐ Potentially lessens the administrative burden on local governments ☐ Ensures that dog breeders registered with dog breeder associations are also registered with the Government and can be traced on the Government system ☐ Other – please specify: ______ 12. What obligations should there be on recognised dog breeder associations that input their members details into the Government’s dog breeder register? (you may select more than one option) ☐ Recognised dog breeder associations must update any change of their member’s details within seven days of being notified of the change 37 Questions ☐ Recognised dog breeder associations must notify the relevant local government when a dog breeder is no longer a member of their association ☐ Recognised dog breeder associations must notify the relevant local government if a member’s membership of their association is cancelled by the association ☐ Recognised dog breeder associations must notify relevant enforcement agencies where they find evidence that one of their members is not complying with the requirements under the Dog Act, Animal Welfare Act or a relevant dog local law ☐ Other – please specify: ______ 4.12 Transferring a dog Dog breeders and dog microchip information Under the new centralised registration system, every owner that registers a dog will be issued with a ‘dog owner number’ that is unique to the owner. Effectively, every dog owner will have an identification number. A dog breeder will be required to record their details and their unique ‘dog owner number’ alongside the microchip details of every puppy bred from their dog/s. This will ensure that the breeder’s details are permanently recorded for each dog. Microchip implanters will be required to provide the following information to the microchip company: • Information on the dog breeder that owns and bred the dog’s mother: o Their ‘dog owner number’ o Their name, address and contact details • If known, information on the dog breeder that owns the dog’s fathers: o Their ‘dog owner number’ o Their name, address and contact details Microchip database companies will be required to record and retain this information alongside the microchip information of a dog. 38 Providing information when transferring a dog Any person who sells, gives away, transfers or advertises a dog will be required to provide their ‘dog owner number’ and the dog’s microchip number. Both numbers must be provided in any advertisement that advertises dogs or puppies for sale. This will assist in tracking a dog, and identifying where a dog has come from. Furthermore, if the person selling, giving away, transferring or advertising a dog claims to have bred the dog, a consumer can verify if they are a registered breeder on the centralised registration system by searching the ‘dog owner number’ provided by the breeder. Consumers will be educated about only sourcing dogs from dog owners that provide their dog owner number and the dog’s microchip number. This will help members of the public source dogs and puppies from registered dog breeders that can be identified and held accountable. If a person has not bred a dog and transfers a dog, they must still provide their dog owner number and the dog’s microchip number, to ensure authorities can identify and trace where a dog has been sourced from. To monitor compliance with this requirement, members of the public will be encouraged to report non-compliant advertisements to an enforcement agency. Questions 13. Are there other ways to monitor or ensure dog advertisements comply with the requirement to provide both the dog owner number and dog’s microchip number? Please specify: 14. What agency could be responsible for prosecuting dog owners and breeders that do not comply with the transfer and advertisement requirements? ☐ Department of Local Government, Sport and Cultural Industries ☐ Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development ☐ Consumer Protection WA ☐ RSPCA ☐ Unsure ☐ Other – please specify: ______ 15. What is your agency’s capacity (considering benefits, issues and costs) to enforce these requirements? ☐ Full capacity 39 Questions ☐ Some capacity ☐ Limited capacity ☐ No capacity Jurisdictional issues Dog breeders and dog owners outside of WA are not subject to the requirement to have a dog owner number. If they sell, advertise or transfer a dog to a person in WA, they will not be able to comply with the requirement to provide a dog owner number. If the transaction occurs outside of WA, then the transaction is not subject to WA law and the requirement to provide such details. If the transaction occurs within WA, then this will be an issue. For dog breeders and dog owners that reside outside the State and need a dog owner number to advertise and transfer dogs in WA, they will still need to apply for an ‘interstate dog owner number’. Such applications will need to be made to a central agency, most likely the Government Department responsible for administering the Dog Act. Online advertisements posted online outside of WA, but that are shown and advertised within WA also present a unique issue with enforcing the requirements. These issues are under consideration by the Department. 4.13 Enforcement Local governments will be required to enforce the requirement that dog breeders, and owners of dogs that are not de-sexed unless they are exempt, are registered. Enforcement will involve: • Processing dog breeder applications; • Cancelling dog breeder registrations where non-compliance with the dog breeder conditions is discovered; • Investigating dog breeding by unregistered dog breeders; • Prosecuting or fining an unregistered dog breeder. The expectation is that local governments will investigate non-compliance with the dog breeder requirements upon complaint. This could include inspecting premises to determine compliance with the Dog Act, including whether a dog owner is breeding dogs without being registered, or keeping more than the number of dogs allowed on 40 their premises. It is not proposed that this will include investigating compliance with the mandatory standards for dog breeding, housing, husbandry, transport and sale as the standards are not being introduced under the Dog Act. Economic modelling will be undertaken to assess the costs that local governments will incur as a result of enforcing these requirements. Questions 8. To ensure dog breeders are complying with the requirements under the Dog Act, would your local government prefer to: ☐ investigate non-compliance upon complaint ☐ undertake a regular inspection regime ☐ unsure (This will not include investigating compliance with the Mandatory Standards for Dog Breeding, Housing, Husbandry, Transport and Sale). 9. Are the current fines under the Dog Act sufficient to cover the cost of investigating and enforcing non-compliance? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unsure Enabling enforcement The centralised registration system is intended to make it easier for local government authorities to identify dog owners and dog breeders across the State. The centralised registration system could also assist in monitoring and enforcing the current and proposed requirements under the Dog Act. The system could potentially be designed to generate reports to identify specific information for each local government such as: • dog owners that have not renewed their dog registration, or annual dog breeder registration; • dogs that are not de-sexed or that are exempt from de-sexing; 41 • the number of dogs kept on a single premises that exceeds the limit, or dog owner’s that own more dogs than the limit on a single premises so they can be monitored for compliance. Questions 1. Please indicate what reports would assist local governments in enforcing the requirements under the Dog Act: ☐ Dog owners that have not renewed their dog registration ☐ Dog owners that have not renewed their annual dog breeder registration ☐ Dogs that are not de-sexed ☐ Premises where the number of dog exceeds the limit ☐ Number of dogs owned by a dog owner that exceeds the limit that can be kept on a single premises 2. What other reports would assist local governments to monitor and enforce the existing and proposed provisions under the Dog Act? 42 Transitioning Pet Shops to Adoption Centres 5.1 Introduction As detailed in the Stop Puppy Farming Consultation Paper, it is intended to amend the Dog Act 1976 (the Dog Act) so that pet shops will only be able to source puppies and dogs for sale from ‘properly accredited’ rescue organisations or shelters. The areas of implementation on which further input is sought are: • the accreditation of rescue organisations or shelters; • the assessment of the health and behaviour of dogs; • the period to transition pet shops to adoption centres; • the arrangements that will need to be developed between pet shops and rescue organisations and shelters; and • enforcement, including who will be responsible and how enforcement will be undertaken. 5.2 Objective The objective of transitioning pet shops to adoption centres is to help break the supply chain with puppy farms and to address the homeless dog problem. Puppy farming….is a covert industry that relies on hiding the true circumstances of how puppies are raised from buyers. Because of this, puppy farmers rely on pet shops, online sales, newspapers, and markets to sell puppies.4 Purchasing a dog from a pet shop means that the consumer is unable to trace, or know with any certainty, from where a dog was sourced. Restricting pet shops to only sourcing dogs from dog rescues and shelters will mean that a potential outlet for puppy farms is closed. People looking to purchase or acquire a puppy will either need to purchase a puppy directly from the source (directly from a dog breeder) or purchase or adopt an abandoned or surrendered dog from a pet shop, dog rescue or shelter. 4 Page 3, Steering Committee Report - Puppy Farming in Western Australia: why this trade needs to end and recommendations to achieve this, November 2015, Appendix 1. 43 Consumers will be educated about sourcing puppies only from dog breeders registered on the centralised database and will be encouraged to visit the dog breeder and view the conditions in which the puppy was bred and reared. This will ensure that consumers are not purchasing dogs from ‘puppy farms’, or at the very least will assist in tracing dogs to irresponsible breeders if issues with the puppy arise. Consumers that purchase an abandoned or surrendered dog from a pet shop will assist in reducing the number of unwanted dogs that are either euthanised or kept at rescue or shelter facilities. 5.3 Accreditation of rescue organisations and shelters Under the new proposals, pet shops will only be able to source puppies and dogs for sale from ‘properly accredited’ rescue organisations or shelters. Dog rescue organisations and shelters will be accredited by the State Government. Questions 1. Should accredited rescue organisations and shelters be monitored? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unsure ☐ Depends on the following factors (please specify): ______ 2. How should they be monitored? ☐ Audits ☐ Inspections ☐ Annual reporting ☐ Unsure ☐ Not applicable – they should not be monitored ☐ Other: ______ 3. Do you believe your agency should have a role in accrediting rescue organisations and shelters? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unsure ☐ Depends on the following factors (please specify): ______ Please specify reasons for your response: ______ 44 Questions 4. If you answered yes, what would this role be? 5.4 Assessment of the health and behaviour of dogs The origins of dogs in rescue organisations and shelters is generally unknown. To provide confidence to potential new owners, it is intended that every dog supplied to a pet shop must pass a health and behavioural assessment. Pet shops will need to ensure that each dog has a health and behavioural certificate. 5.5 Transition period Pet shops will be gradually transitioned into adoption centres to allow time for pet shops to make arrangements with dog rescue organisations and shelters. Option 1 – Two year transition Under this option, pet shops will be transitioned within two years of the legislation coming into effect. In the interim, pet shops will be able to source puppies and dogs as they currently do. Option 2 – Five-year transition Under this option, pet shops will be transitioned within five years. From date of amendment to the Where pet shops can source dogs: Dog Act 0 to 2 years Pet shops can source dogs from a dog breeder registered as such on the centralised database. 2 to 5 years Pet shops selling dogs will be required to source dogs from accredited dog rescues and shelters, but can still also source dogs from registered breeders. 5 years onwards Pet shops can only source dogs from accredited dog rescues and shelters. 45 5.6 Arrangements between pet shops and rescue organisations and shelters It is likely that pet shops will need to form arrangements with accredited dog rescue organisation and shelters to ensure the responsible supply of dogs. Pet shops and rescue organisations have been asked to provide feedback on what those arrangements should cover, for example, where the dog will be housed. 5.7 Enforcement It is estimated that there are approximately 15 pet shops in Western Australia that sell puppies and dogs. After the transition period, pet shops will need to be monitored to ensure they are only sourcing dogs from accredited dog rescue organisations and shelters. Furthermore, during the transition period pet shops would need to be monitored to ensure they are only sourcing dogs from registered dog breeders (following the introduction of dog breeder registration). Pet shops could be monitored in a number of ways: Option 1 – Public monitoring Pet shops would be required to display a certificate confirming the source of the dog is from an accredited rescue organisation or shelter. The public could report pet shops to an enforcement agency that are not providing a certificate verifying the dog’s source. Option 2 – Inspections An enforcement agency would be responsible for inspecting pet shops that sell dogs, whether randomly or periodically, and require the pet shop to provide information upon request. Option 3 – Audits Pet shops would be required to be audited by a particular enforcement agency, whether periodically or randomly. Option 4 – Audited and inspected upon complaint The enforcement agency would inspect and audit a pet shop only where concerns were raised about the pet shops compliance with the laws. 46 The type of enforcement undertaken will assist in informing what agency is best placed to undertake enforcement. The capacity and resources of the agency would also need to be considered. Questions 5. Should pet shops have to register with a relevant authority if they sell dogs? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unsure 6. Should it be an offence to fail to register? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unsure 7. What information and records should a pet shop maintain to ensure compliance with the pet shop provisions can be monitored? ☐ Records of where dogs have been sourced from ☐ Details of new owners ☐ Details of health and behaviour checks ☐ Other – please specify: ______ 8. What information and records should a rescue organisation and rescue maintain to ensure pet shops can be monitored and information verified? 9. How should a pet shop be monitored for compliance? ☐ Option 1 – Public monitoring ☐ Option 2 – Inspections ☐ Option 3 – Audits ☐ Option 4 – Audited and inspected upon complaint ☐ Other – please specify: ______ 47