Source: http://vincent.infocouncil.biz/Open/2019/09/COM_20190910_AGN_4166_AT.HTM
Timestamp: 2020-02-26 00:47:24
Document Index: 669867527

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 10', 'art 9', 'art 10', 'art 3', 'art 3', 'art 4', 'art 3']

Agenda of Council Briefing - 10 00 2019
Council Briefing Agenda 10 September 2019
3 Public Question Time and Receiving of Public Statements. 7
4 Declarations of Interest 7
5 Planning and Place. 8
5.1 No. 12A (Lot: 3; S/P: 78266) Nova Lane, North Perth - Single Dwelling. 8
5.2 No. 12 (Lot: 48; D/P: 1210) Byron Street, Leederville - Proposed Two Grouped Dwellings. 39
5.3 No. 434-446 (Lot: 4 D/P: 42026) Lord Street, Mount Lawley - Change of Use from Warehouse/Showroom to Educational Establishment 90
5.4 Outcomes of Advertising - Mount Hawthorn Town Centre Place Plan. 106
5.5 No. 42 (Lot: 2; D/P: 2136) Woodville Street, North Perth - Proposed Six Multiple Dwellings (Amendment to Approved - Unauthorised Existing Development) 169
6 Infrastucture and Environment 194
6.1 North Perth Common Closure Report 194
6.2 LATE REPORT: Minor Parking Restriction Improvements/Amendments. 199
7 Community and Business Services. 200
7.1 LATE REPORT: Authorisation of Expenditure for the period 1 August 2019 to 31 August 2019. 200
8 Chief Executive Officer 201
8.1 Consideration of Submissions on Acquisition of Luce Lane, North Perth. 201
8.2 Report and Minutes of the Audit Committee meeting held on 27 August 2019. 208
8.3 Information Bulletin. 221
8.4 Public release of the Chief Executive Officer's Key Performance Indicators 2019-2020. 273
8.5 Amendments to Council Delegations [ABSOLUTE MAJORITY DECISION REQUIRED] 275
9 Motions of Which Previous Notice Has Been Given. 437
10 Representation on Committees and Public Bodies. 437
11 Closure. 437
5.1 No. 12A (Lot: 3; S/P: 78266) Nova Lane, North Perth - Single Dwelling
TRIM Ref: D19/100223
Author: Natasha Trefry, Urban Planning Advisor
Authoriser: Joslin Colli, Coordinator Planning Services
2. Development Plans ⇩
3. Summary of Submissions - Administration's Response ⇩
5. Applicant Justification ⇩
6. Determination Advice Notes ⇩
That Council, in accordance with the provisions of the City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2 and the Metropolitan Region Scheme, APPROVES, the development application for Single Dwelling at No. 12A (Lot: 3; S/P: 78266) Nova Lane, North Perth in accordance with the plans in Attachment 2, subject to the following conditions, with the associated advice notes in Attachment 6:
The owners of the subject land shall finish and maintain the surface of the boundary walls facing No. 14 Nova Lane in a good and clean condition prior to the practical completion of the development and thereafter maintained to the satisfaction of the City. The finish of the walls are to be fully rendered or facebrick to the satisfaction of the City;
2. Landscaping Plan
2.1 A detailed landscape and reticulation plan for the development site and adjoining road verge, to the satisfaction of the City, shall be lodged with and approved by the City prior to lodgement of a Building Permit. The plan shall be drawn to a scale of 1:100 and show the following:
· The location and type of proposed trees and plants;
· The provision of 14.6 percent of the site area as deep soil zone and 26.98 percent canopy cover at maturity; and
2.2 All works shown in the plans as identified in Condition 2.1 above shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved plans to the City’s satisfaction, prior to occupancy or use of the development and maintained thereafter to the satisfaction of the City at the expense of the owners/occupiers;
No walls, letterboxes or fences above 0.75 metres in height to be constructed within 1.5 metres of where:
3.1 walls, letterboxes or fences adjoin vehicular access points to the site; or
3.2 a driveway meets a public street; or
3.3 two streets intersect; unless otherwise approved by the City of Vincent;
5. Car Parking and Access
5.1 The car parking and access areas shall be sealed, drained and paved in accordance with the approved plans and are to comply with the requirements of AS2890.1 prior to occupancy or use of the development;
5.2 Vehicle access points are required to match into existing right of way levels; and
5.3 All new crossovers shall be constructed in accordance with the City’s Standard Crossover Specifications;
6. Visual Privacy
Prior to occupancy or use of the development, all privacy screening to balcony/courtyard and balcony 2 shall be visually impermeable and is to comply in all respects with the requirements of Clause 5.4.1 of the Residential Design Codes (Visual Privacy) deemed to comply provisions, to the satisfaction of the City.
7. External Fixtures
All external fixtures, such as television antennas (of a non-standard type), radio and other antennaes, satellite dishes, solar panels, external hot water heaters, air conditioners, and the like, shall not be visible from the street(s), are designed integrally with the building, and be located so as not to be visually obtrusive; and
8. Detailed Schedule of External Finishes
Prior to the commencement of development a detailed schedule of external finishes (including materials and colour schemes and details) shall be submitted to and approved by the City. The development shall be finished in accordance with the approved schedule prior to the use or occupation of the development.
To consider an application for development approval for a three storey single dwelling at No. 12A Nova Lane, North Perth.
The application proposes a single dwelling to a vacant lot which has been subdivided. The development is of a three storey scale.
Michael and Lisa Joyce
LPS2: Residential R Code: R30/40
Yes – Nova Lane. 6.8m drained and sealed
The subject site is bound by Nova Lane to the south, a single storey single house to the north, a two storey dwelling to the west and a vacant lot to the east. Administration notes an application for a three storey dwelling has been approved by Council 20 August 2019 for No. 12 Nova Lane (eastern property) which forms part of the subdivided area and is currently vacant. A location plan is included as Attachment 1.
The subject site is zoned Residential R30/40 and is affected by Clause 26(1) of City’s Local Planning Scheme No. 2 (LPS2) which states: development will only be permitted to R40 standards where the existing house is retained. The subject site was created through a survey strata subdivision which retained the existing house at No. 11 Mabel Street, North Perth. The application has been assessed against the development requirements of R40.
The subject site and surrounding properties are zoned Residential R30/40. The subject site forms part of the Residential Built Form area in accordance with the City’s Policy No. 7.7.1 – Built Form.
The application proposes a three storey dwelling, which addresses Nova Lane. The development plans have been included as Attachment 2.
The table below summarises the planning assessment of the proposal against the provisions of the City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2 (LPS2), the City’s Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form and the State Government’s Residential Design Codes. In each instance where the proposal requires the discretion of Council, the relevant planning element is discussed in the Detailed Assessment section following from this table.
Building Setbacks/Boundary Wall
Building Height/Storeys
Site Works/Retaining Walls
The deemed-to-comply assessment of the elements that require the discretion of Council are as follows:
Lot Boundary Setback
Second Floor: Void – Scullery: 1.5 metres
Third Floor: WIL – Bed 3: 1.3 metres
Second Floor: Void – Scullery: 1.27 metres
Third Floor: WIL – Bed 3: 1.25 metres
Second Floor: Balcony - Laundry: 2.3 metres
Third Floor: Balcony - Master: 1.4 metres
Second Floor: Dining - Laundry: 1.5 metres
Third Floor: Balcony - Master: 1.3 metres
North (rear)
Second Floor: Living – Scullery: 1.1 metres
Second Floor: Living – Scullery: 1.0 metres
Lot Boundary Walls
Average Wall Height: 3.0 metres
Maximum Wall Height: 3.5 metres
Upper Floor (West)
Average Wall Height: 5.6 metres
Maximum Wall Height: 5.16 metres
45 percent open space
39.5 percent open space
2 storey built form area
Permitted Wall Height – 6.0 metres
Permitted top skillion Roof – 7.0 metres
Permitted bottom skillion Roof – 6.0 metres
3 storey dwelling
Proposed wall height – 8.4 metres
Proposed top skillion Roof – 9.1 metres
Proposed bottom skillion Roof – 8.4 metres
60 percent frontage (6.02 metres)
62.5 percent frontage (6.2 metres)
Canopy: 30 percent
Deep Soil: 15 percent
Canopy: 26.98 percent
Deep Soil: 14.6 percent
Other landscaping: 4.2 percent
6.0 metre cone of vision from habitable rooms other than bedrooms and studies
Dining room: 1.5 metres within lot
20 square metres outdoor living area
33 percent (1/3 covered area)
31.5 square metres proposed
47.5 percent covered area
Site Works & Retaining
Retaining walls greater than 0.5 metres in height set back from lot boundaries in accordance with the setback provisions of Table 1.
Excavation or filling within a site and behind a street setback line limited by compliance with building height limits and building setback requirements.
1.2 metre retaining
1.2 metre fill
Community Consultation was undertaken in accordance with the Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015, for a period of 14 days commencing on 28 June 2019 – 12 July 2019. Community consultation was undertaken by means of written notifications with 26 letters being sent to surrounding landowners, as shown in Attachment 1 and a notice on the City’s website. At the conclusion of the community consultation period, one submission objecting to the proposal was received. The main issues raised as part of the consultation relate to the following:
· Visual Privacy to adjacent properties; and
· Boundary wall finish.
A summary of the submissions and Administration’s comments on each issue is included as Attachment 3, with the applicants response to submissions included as Attachment 4. After the advertising period, the applicant revised the proposal to demonstrate a fixed 1.6 metre decorative screen to the second floor balcony (western elevation), which meets the necessary visual privacy screening requirements of the Residential Design Codes. The applicant has also provided additional justification against the built form elements which do not satisfy the deemed-to-comply requirements, included as Attachment 5.
As the proposal sought variations to building height, the proposal was referred to the chair of the Design Review Panel for comment. The comments received in regards to the submitted proposal noted:
· The proposed built form is consistent with the adjoining properties;
· A third storey could be considered if setback from the street; and
· Rather than a skillion roof, a flat roof (3 degrees and sloping to front or back) will have less impact and reduce the height of the building.
The comments from the Chair of the DRP were conveyed to the applicant. The applicant provided amended plans and justification, Attachment 2, to address the comments of the DRP Chair as follows:
· Increased setback of second floor from 1.8 metres to 1.9 metres;
· Increased setback of third storey to 4.1 metres, 2.2 metres behind the second floor below;
· Retention of skillion roof form, to provide consistency with adjacent dwellings;
· Increased street setback of garage;
· Provided additional landscaping in the front setback area; and
· Replaced solid wall screening from second floor balcony to a decorative screening.
· State Planning Policy 3.1 – Residential Design Codes;
· Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form Policy.
The matter is being referred to Council as the application proposes a height of three storeys or more, which does not meet the deemed-to-comply building height.
West: Balcony – Laundry
The application proposes a 1.5 metre setback for a portion of the second floor (balcony to laundry) from the western boundary in lieu of the 2.8 metre deemed-to-comply standard.
The proposed lot boundary setbacks satisfy the relevant design principles for the following reasons:
· The western elevation incorporates articulation through the use of design elements such as openings, mixed window treatments as well as the horizontal and vertical articulation of walls to reduce the scale of the bulk and scale of the building.
· The calculated setback refers to the whole extent of the western boundary wall, inclusive of the lot boundary wall from the balcony to the laundry on the upper floor. If considered independently, the setback of the dining to laundry portion of the wall is significantly reduced and would be compliant.
· The increased setback and stepped approach of the upper floor articulates habitable and non-habitable room of the dwelling from the neighbouring property.
· Landscaping areas along the western boundary assist in creating a soft edge and natural buffer along portions of the western boundary. Mature tree species, Coral Gum and Apple Tree species, assist in screening portions of the development from the adjacent properties and mitigating the imposition of solid walls.
· The development meets the solar access deemed-to-comply requirements. The reduced setback to the western boundary does not result in overshadowing of the adjoining properties.
West: Balcony – Master
The application proposes a 1.3 metre setback for a portion of the third floor (master suite) from the western boundary in lieu of the 1.4 metre deemed-to-comply standard.
· The third storey of the dwelling is located centrally to the building and setback a greater distance from the boundary than the first and second floors of the dwelling. The centrally located upper floor and articulated walls of the third storey reduces the scale of the third storey element and ensures the portion of wall does not have any adverse impact on the amenity of the adjoining property.
· The decorative screen to the western façade along the master bedroom façade provides a decorative feature which is visible from the street and neighbouring properties. The screen detail proposed alongside the balcony and master suite wall reduces the scale and mass of solid blank walls viewed from the street and neighbouring properties.
· The reduced setback does not result in any overlooking of the adjoining western property. The balcony accessible from the master bedroom provides a solid 1.6 metre screen wall, in accordance with the R Codes, to limit the cone of vision to adjacent properties.
· The reduced western boundary setback does not result in variations to the solar access deemed‑to‑comply requirements of the R Codes. The setback allows for access to sufficient sunlight and ventilation to the subject and neighbouring dwelling.
East: Void – Scullery
The application proposes a 1.27 metre setback for a portion of the second floor (void area to scullery) from the eastern boundary in lieu of the 1.5 metre deemed-to-comply standard.
The proposed lot boundary setbacks satisfies the relevant design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes and Built Form Policy and are acceptable for the following reasons:
· The eastern setback on the second floor incorporates articulations, mixed window treatments and render details reduce and mitigate the dwellings actual and perceived bulk.
· The reduced setback provides adequate access to sun and ventilations to the building and the open space area on the ground floor, and to the adjoining property.
· The adjacent eastern property (No. 12 Nova Lane) includes lot boundary walls and an atrium area. The rooms and highlight window treatments along the reduced eastern setback which address the atrium meet the deemed to comply requirements and do not impact the amenity of the adjacent dwelling.
· The balcony area on the first floor of the dwelling is articulation from the neighbouring property, providing a stepped approach and further mitigating perceived bulk to the eastern property and streetscape.
· No major openings from habitable rooms are located on the eastern boundary. The reduced setback does not result in an adverse impact on the neighbouring property in terms of privacy. Consequently, the visual privacy deemed-to-comply requirements are satisfied.
East: Walk in Linen – Bed 3
The application proposes a 1.25 metre setback for a portion of the third floor (walk in linen to Bed 3) from the eastern boundary in lieu of the 1.3 metre deemed-to-comply standard.
· The eastern façade of the proposed dwelling is articulated with contrasting window treatments and glazing to moderate the impact of building bulk on the adjoining property.
· The proposed development meets the deemed-to-comply standards of the R Codes in relation to solar access for adjoining sites. The reduced setback would not result in an undue loss of access to direct sunlight to the adjoining property, and the wall is setback from the boundary to maintain ventilation to the subject and adjacent buildings.
· The reduced setback only applies to a 4 metre portion of the dwelling. The remainder of the eastern boundary on the third storey is articulated and setback to 2.4 metres, meeting the deemed-to-comply requirements.
· The development does not result in any departures from the deemed-to-comply visual privacy requirements of the R Codes in relation to the property to the east.
North: Living - Scullery
The application proposes a 1.0 metre setback for a portion of the second floor (living area to scullery) from the northern boundary in lieu of the 1.1 metre deemed-to-comply standard.
· The proposed development meets the deemed-to-comply standards of the R Codes in relation to solar access for adjoining sites. The reduced setback would not result in an undue loss of access to direct sunlight to the adjoining property, and the wall is setback from the boundary to maintain ventilation to adjacent buildings.
· A 1.0 metre open space/landscaping strip is proposed to the rear of the site that provides a natural buffer from the bordering lot. This open space is also capable of being utilised for additional canopy to the site, which will provide an additional softened landscaping buffer.
· The development does not result in any departures from the deemed-to-comply visual privacy requirements of the R Codes in relation to the property to the north.
Lot Boundary Walls (West)
The application proposes a boundary wall to the west with average wall height, 5.16 metres in lieu of the 3.0 metres deemed-to-comply standard, and a maximum height of 5.6 metres in lieu of the 3.5 metres deemed-to-comply standard.
The lot boundary wall proposed satisfies the relevant design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes and Built Form Policy and are acceptable for the following reasons:
· The existing dwelling to the western of the subject site (No. 14 Nova Lane) has an existing parapet wall on the boundary, which abuts the proposed wall of the subject site. The natural slope of the street and subject site results in a slight increase to the subject wall The 5.6 metre wall height exceeds the existing parapet wall by 1.6 metres (as existing to 4 metres).
· The proposed boundary wall will abut the existing wall and effectively screen the existing parapet wall at No. 14 Nova Lane, it is considered that the boundary wall will largely be screened by the existing dwelling at No. 14 Nova Lane with the proposed balcony to street helping to mitigate the impact of the over height boundary wall.
· The applicants have amended a portion of the second floor boundary wall, abutting the balcony, to a 1.6 metre decorative screen in place of the 1.6 metre solid masonry wall. This revised boundary treatment meets the relevant screening requirements of the R Codes without compromising on bulk. The decorative screening also provides a design feature and point of interest, which is visible from the street. The proposed western boundary wall provides a natural buffer from the dwelling to the neighbouring western property’s carport.
· The majority of the proposed boundary wall is located behind the street setback line of the dwelling, with a large concentration of the boundary bulk located to the rear of the site, not visible from the street.
· Due to the orientation of the lot, the proposed development and boundary wall will not result in overshadowing to the abutting site. The development meets the solar access deemed-to- comply requirements.
· The boundary wall does not incorporate major openings and consequently will not result in overlooking to the adjacent site. The development meets the visual privacy requirements.
· Two storey boundary walls are a prevalent built form within the Nova Lane established streetscape. The scale and materials of the boundary walls – face brick and render finish are consistent colours and materials of other dwellings within the established ROW; as noted in the streetscape analysis provided by the applicant included as Attachment 5.
The application proposes three storeys and a maximum height of 9.1 metres to the top of the skillion roof in lieu of the two storey and maximum top of skillion roof height of 7.0 metres set as a deemed-to-comply standard in the City’s Built Form Policy.
The bottom of the skillion is permitted to 6.0 metres, and is proposed to 8.4 metres. The application also proposes a departure from the wall height requirements, with development proposed to 8.4 metres in lieu of the deemed-to-comply 6.0 metres.
The building height proposed satisfies the relevant design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes and Built Form Policy and is acceptable for the following reasons:
· The third storey and maximum height applies only to the bedrooms of the dwelling, which are all located on the upper floor of the dwelling. The third storey element of the proposal is centrally located to mitigate the imposition of perceived and actual bulk and scale to the northern, eastern and southern properties.
· The central location and increased setback of the upper floor to 4.1 metres creates a tiered built form outcome when viewed from the adjacent properties. The incorporation of highlight windows and articulation of the upper floor reduces the appearance of blank walls to the properties side and rear boundaries.
· Development of a three storey appearance to the street is a prevalent built form within the Nova Lane established streetscape. The built form of the dwelling, with the garage and entry to the dwelling located on the ground floor with living spaces elevated above is clearly demonstrated in the streetscape analysis provided by the applicant included as Attachment 5. Unlike the neighbouring properties, the second and third storey elements of the development are stepped away from the street and from the side boundaries in lieu of the solid box-like built form outcomes currently established in the street. The stepped vertical and horizontal massing of the proposal reduces the perceived bulk.
· The roof line of the dwelling is detailed in a contrast timber to break up the bulk of the roof and wall heights of the dwelling. The timber detailing on the third storey in addition to the large windows from the Master Bedroom ensures the third storey, when viewed from the street, does not present large expanses of solid blank walls.
· The slope of the lot from north to south (front to rear) means the proposed dwelling to the rear sits lower than the retained dwelling and does not impact on the established Nova Lane streetscape character.
· The centrally located portion of the third storey means the development does not add to overshadowing of adjoining properties. The overshadowing proposed meets the deemed-to-comply standards of the R Codes.
· The finished floor levels proposed have been stepped in line with the natural ground levels of the site, to ensure a reduced overall height for the building. The development considers and responds to the natural slope with minimal fill and excavation required.
The City’s Built Form Policy sets out a deemed-to-comply standard of 15 percent deep soil zone and 30 percent canopy cover at maturity. The development provides 14.6 percent deep soil zone and 26.98 percent canopy coverage.
· The applicant has proposed to plant 26 Apple Blossom Hibiscus trees, 3 Apples trees, 1 Coral Gum tree and 1 Judas tree. The proposed tree species are capable of growing and providing 3 to 4 metres of canopy each at maturity. Although some overlap of canopy is proposed, this outcome would still represent a departure from the deemed-to-comply standards but the departure is mitigated by the provision of additional shrubs and species – Kangaroo Paw, Bird of Paradise, Blue Leschenaultia and Albany Woolly Bush to the lot boundaries and the balconies of the proposal which will provide ancillary forms of canopy.
· The landscaping provided to the dwelling will serve to soften the appearance of the proposed dwelling and reduce the overall impact of the building bulk and scale when viewed from Nova Lane. The current provision of landscaping in the proposal is considered to contribute to the reduction of the urban heat island effect, increase urban air quality, provide a greater landscape amenity for the locality and create a sense of open space between the proposed dwelling and neighbouring properties.
· The proposed landscaping includes portions of canopy which extends outside of the lot boundaries, contributing to the provision of landscaping within the broader locality.
· Referral of the current landscaping plan to the City’s Parks team notes the plant stock provided is water wise and well suited to the development given the proportionate size of the site.
· The proposed landscaping reflects the Local Housing Objectives of the Built Form Policy, and is supported, subject to the imposition of a condition requiring the submission of a landscaping plan that provides for a minimum 26.98 percent canopy cover and 14.6 percent deep soil within the bounds of the subject site.
The application proposes 39.5 percent open space in lieu of the 45 percent deemed-to-comply standard.
The proposal is considered to meet the design principles of the Residential Design Codes for the following reasons:
· For the purposes of calculating open space the covered portion of the balcony on the first floor is excluded. It is considered that this space being accessible from a habitable room which provides a total of 30 square metres will be a functional area of open space that is suitably protected from weather to allow use at most times of the year.
· The development is not considered to result in adverse impacts of building bulk to adjoining properties and the street. The design details such as openings, articulation, roof type and colours and materials is considered to reduce impacts of bulk.
· The rear outdoor living areas and open space for the site does provide some contribution to usable and external spaces of the lot as well as sufficient access in/around the site, in accordance with the design principles.
· The applicant proposes a separate area dedicated for external fixtures (i.e. air conditioning units) and clothes drying areas to the rear of the property – screened form adjacent properties and the street. As a result, the proposed outdoor living areas and open space are for the dedicated use of active and/or passive recreation.
· The 5.5 percent variation to the open space requirement equates to only 3.0 square metres. The loss of this area is not considered to unreasonably restrict the use of the open space areas provided.
· The open space calculated includes portions of the alfresco/courtyard area which are accessible and usable more than 0.5 metres (500 millimetres) above the natural ground level and unenclosed spaces. It is also noted balcony 2 on the upper floor, while not calculated as part of the open space as it is a fully enclosed space, would also contribute to additional areas of outdoor living and amenity for use by the residents.
The application proposes a major opening from the dining room on the first floor, with a cone of vision which is contained 1.5 metres within the lot in lieu of the 6.0 metre deemed-to-comply standard.
The application is considered to meet the design principles of the Built Form Policy and the Residential Design Codes for the following reasons:
· The major opening from the dining room is screened by an existing 1.8 metre parapet wall between the subject and adjacent property. The parapet wall satisfies the definition of ‘screening’ as per the R Codes definition and requirements as it is visually impermeable and a height above 1.8 metres.
· As a result from the parapet wall, the cone of vision from the dining room is obscured and does not directly impact the adjacent property.
· The cone of vision from the dining room window does not impact habitable spaces and/or rooms of the neighbouring dwelling. Highlight windows from the ensuite, bath and Bed 3 on the upper floor of the neighbouring dwelling are not impacted in regards to privacy and amenity from the major opening from the dining room.
The application proposes an outdoor living area with 44 percent covered area in lieu of the 33 percent (one third of total area) deemed-to-comply standard.
· The application satisfies the minimum outdoor living area (OLA) requirements, achieving 31.2 square metres, greater than the 24 square metres stipulated by the R Codes.
· The outdoor living area provides the minimum 4 metre dimensions in length and width of the spaces.
· The outdoor living area is accessible from a habitable room, the living room of the dwelling, meeting the deemed-to-comply requirements and ensuring the space provided is accessible and usable for the occupants of the dwelling.
· The outdoor living area is both covered and uncovered, providing an accessible area which can be utilised year round for active or passive use.
· The open nature of the alfresco allows for adequate ventilation to the dwelling while allowing for sufficient exposure to sunlight.
· The proposed dwelling does not compromise the amenity and use of the adjacent properties. The proposed outdoor living area provided meets the visual privacy deemed-to-comply requirements.
The development proposes a 6.2 metre garage width (inclusive of garage and supporting structures). The R Codes notes garage width may be increased to 60 percent of the lot frontage where an upper floor or balcony extends the full width of the garage. The alfresco area on the second floor meets this provision. The proposed garage width accounts for 62.5 percent on the frontage in lieu of the 60 percent permitted.
· The subject site provides access from a right of way, Nova Lane as the primary access point to the subject lot. The lot only has a 10-metre frontage, and any proposed double garage, which require a 5.4 metre minimum width, will exceed over 50 percent of the lot frontage.
· The applicant has revised the proposal to increase the setback of the garage to Nova Lane. The revised setback mitigates the imposition of bulk from the garage to the street.
· The revised plans set the garage back further from the street and kept the upper floor cantilevered either side of the garage with pillars. This pillar detail creates a verandah element across the front of the lot, which is considered to mitigate and manage any bulk from the garage.
· The upper floor of the dwellings project forward of the ground floor which helps to alleviate the dominance of the garage on the ground floor.
· Landscaping is incorporated into the front setback of the dwelling, to soften the presentation of the dwelling to the street.
· The proposal maintains a clear and defined access to the dwelling, which is not impeded by the garage. In addition, the dwelling maintains suitable street surveillance to the public realm, via major openings from the balcony/courtyard and the master suite.
· The materials of the dwelling– contrasting brick, render and concrete on the façade along with a number of openings to the streets – help to break up the façade of the dwelling and encourage an active façade and reduce the impact of the garage width.
Site Works and Retaining
The application proposes site works (fill) and retaining of 1.2 metres to the rear of the site. The application is considered to meet the design principles of the Built Form Policy and the Residential Design Codes for the following reasons:
· The natural slope of the site sees a 1.6 metre level change from the front to the rear of the lot. The front boundary of the dwelling which addresses Nova Lane is the lowest point of the lot. No site works or retaining to the street are proposed.
· Retaining and fill are located to the rear of the site; the works will not be visible from the street (Nova Lane) and will not impact the streetscape.
· The retaining takes a stepped approach in line with the natural slope of the site from the front to the rear, mitigating the level of retaining required while facilitating a level site.
· The proposed retaining and site works seeks to provide a suitable finished floor level for the whole of the dwellings living spaces, as well as a flatter grade for open space of the site.
· The proposed retaining and site works do not impact the amenity and visual privacy of the adjoining properties as the deemed to comply requirements of the R Codes are satisfied.
· The application proposes a standard fence height (1.8 metres) above the proposed retaining which will ensure the privacy of the subject and adjacent properties.
5.2 No. 12 (Lot: 48; D/P: 1210) Byron Street, Leederville - Proposed Two Grouped Dwellings
TRIM Ref: D19/113937
Attachments: 1. Location and Consultation Plan ⇩
2. Development Plans (received 25 January 2019) ⇩
3. Development Plans (received 13 May 2019) ⇩
4. Development Plans (received 29 July 2019) ⇩
5. Applicant Justification and Supporting Imagery ⇩
6. Summary of Submissions - Administration's Response ⇩
7. Determination Advice Notes ⇩
That Council, in accordance with the provisions of the City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2 and the Metropolitan Region Scheme, APPROVES the application for Two (2) Grouped Dwellings at No. 12 (Lot: 48; D/P: 1210) Byron Street, Leederville, in accordance with the plans shown in Attachment 4, subject to the following conditions, with the associated determination advice notes in Attachment 7:
The owners of the subject land shall finish and maintain the surface of the boundary wall facing Nos. 10 and 10A Byron Street in a good and clean condition prior to practical completion of the development to the satisfaction of the City. The finish of the boundary walls is to be fully rendered or face brickwork to the satisfaction of the City;
2.1 The car parking and access areas shall be sealed, drained and paved in accordance with the approved plans and are to comply with the requirements of AS2890.1 prior to occupancy or use of the development;
2.2 Vehicle access points are required to match into existing right of way levels; and
2.3 All new crossovers shall be constructed in accordance with the City’s Standard Crossover Specifications;
3. External Fixtures
All external fixtures, such as television antennas (of a non-standard type), radio and other antennaes, satellite dishes, solar panels, external hot water heaters, air conditioners, meter boxes and the like, shall not be visible from the street or are to be integrated with the design of the building, to the satisfaction of the City;
4. Landscaping Plan
4.1 Detailed landscape and reticulation plan for the development site and adjoining road verge, to the satisfaction of the City, shall be lodged with and approved by the City prior to commencement of the development. The plan shall be drawn to a scale of 1:100 and show the following:
· The provision of a minimum of 13.8 percent of the site area as deep soil zone and 27.2 percent canopy cover at maturity, as defined by the City’s Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form;
· The Bottlebrush Tree located in the verge is to be removed and replaced with a minimum 100 litre Jacaranda Tree in the location as depicted in the approved plans. All associated costs for the removal and replacement of the tree is to be borne by the applicant; and
4.2 All works shown in the plans as identified in condition 4.1 above shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved plans to the City’s satisfaction, prior to occupation or use of the development and shall be maintained thereafter to the satisfaction of the City at the expense of the owners/occupiers;
Prior to occupation or use of the development, all privacy screening to the southern boundary of the alfresco of Residence A shall be visually impermeable and is to comply in all respects with the requirements of Clause 5.4.1 of the Residential Design Codes (Visual Privacy) deemed‑to‑comply standards, to the satisfaction of the City;
7. Colours and Materials Schedule
8. Sight Lines
No walls, letterboxes or fences above 0.75 metres in height shall be constructed within 1.5 metres of where:
8.1 walls, letterboxes or fences adjoin vehicular access points to the site; or
8.2 driveway meets a public street; or
8.3 two streets intersect; unless otherwise approved by the City of Vincent.
9. Garage Door Design
The garage door for Residence A shall be perforated. Plans depicting details of the garage door, including materials and colours, shall be submitted to and approved by the City prior to the use or occupation of the development.
To consider an application for development approval for two grouped dwellings at No. 12 Byron Street, Leederville (subject site).
The application proposes two two-storey grouped dwellings in a battle-axe arrangement with vehicle access provided from Byron Street.
Gavin and Sue Brackenreg and Peter and Melanie Rowe
LPS2: Residential R Code: R30
The subject site is currently vacant and bound by Byron Street to the west, a single storey house to the north, four two-storey grouped dwellings to the south and three-storey multiple dwellings at No. 185 Loftus Street to the east. The surrounding area is generally characterised by a mix of building types that are single and double storey dwellings. A location plan is included as Attachment 1.
The subject site is zoned Residential with a density coding of R30 under the City’s Local Planning Scheme No. 2 (LPS2). The subject site and the adjoining properties to the north and south are within the Residential built form area under the City’s Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form (Built Form Policy). The properties to the rear (east) of the subject site are zoned Residential R60 under LPS2 and are located within the Transit Corridor built form area.
The site slopes down by approximately 3 metres from the street boundary of Byron Street (west) to the rear of the property (east). A sewer line also transects the site in a north-south orientation towards the rear.
The site is capable of being subdivided into two lots. There is no current application that has been lodged for subdivision or previously approved subdivision for the site.
The proposed development plans are included as Attachment 4.
The table below summarises the planning assessment of the proposal against the provisions of the City’s LPS2, the Built Form Policy and the State Government’s Residential Design Codes (R Codes). In each instance where the proposal requires the discretion of Council, the relevant planning element is discussed in the Detailed Assessment section following from this table.
Landscaping (R Codes)
Clause 5.2 of Built Form Policy
Average street setback: 5.0 metres
Ground Floor: 4.3 metres
Upper Floor: 3.8 metres
Building Setbacks/Boundary Walls
Clause 5.1.3 of the R Codes
Alfresco (East): 2.0 metres
Walk In Robe – Ensuite (South): 1.5 metres
Master - Bed 4 bulk (South): 2.8 metres
Alfresco (South) : 2.3 metres
Alfresco: 1.8 metres
Walk In Robe – Ensuite: 1. 2metres
Master - Bed 4 bulk: 1.2 metres
Alfresco: 1.2 metres
Alfresco (North): 1.0 metres
Bed 3 – Ensuite (South) : 1.9 metres
Family to Alfresco (East): 4.5 metres
Ensuite to Master (East): 4.5 metres
Alfresco: 0.5 metres
Bed 3 – Ensuite : 1.2 metres
Family to Alfresco: 1.5 metres
Ensuite to Master: 1.2 metres
Entry – Stairs (Internally facing to access leg)
Average Height: 6.35 metres
Maximum Height: 6.6 metres
Length: 10.0 metres maximum
Garage – Laundry
Average Height: 3.35 metres
Maximum Height: 3.6 metres
Length: 8.49 metres
Average Height: 3.0 metres
Maximum Height: 3.5 metres
Length: 18.06 metres
Linen – Family
Average Height: 3.14 metres
Maximum Height: 3.4 metres
Length: 10.9 metres
Clause 5.6 of Built Form Policy
Permitted Wall height – 7.0 metres
Permitted Pitch Roof – 9.0 metres
Proposed Wall Height – 7.1 metres
Proposed Pitch Roof - 9.2 metres
Clause 5.14 of Built Form Policy
Canopy – 30 percent
Deep Soil – 15 percent
Canopy – 27.2 percent
Deep Soil – 13.8 percent
Clause 5.4.1 of Residential Design Codes
Alfresco (South): 7.5 metre cone of vision
Alfresco: 2.7 metre cone of vision in lot
Site Works/Retaining
Clause 5.3.7 and 5.3.8 of Residential Design Codes
1.5 metres retaining to rear of dwelling
0.5 metre excavation to front of dwelling
1.0 metre fill to rear boundary
0.6 metre retaining to rear boundary
Clause 5.4.4 of Residential Design Codes
An enclosed lockable storage area, constructed in a design and material matching the dwelling where visible from the street, accessible from outside the dwelling, with a minimum dimension of 1.5m where provided external to the garage and 1m where provided within a garage and an internal area of at least 4 square metres, for each grouped dwelling.
Store – 0.8 metre internal dimension
The above elements of the proposal does not meet the specified deemed-to-comply standards and is discussed in the Comments section below.
Community Consultation was undertaken in accordance with the Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015, for a period of 14 days commencing on 17 May 2019 – 31 May 2019. Community consultation was undertaken by means of written notifications with 22 letters sent to surrounding landowners, as shown in Attachment 1 and a notice on the City’s website. The plans that were advertised are included in Attachment 3.
At the conclusion of the community consultation period, eight submissions were received all of which objected to the proposal. The issues raised as part of the consultation relate to the following:
· Setbacks are not consistent with the streetscape;
· Perceived building bulk and scale to adjacent properties;
· Perceived solar access and overshadowing of southern property;
· Lack of landscaping; and
· Site works and retaining not appropriately responding to the site.
The applicant provided written justification to address the above comments, as well as revised plans which sought to address community concerns. The amended plans and written justification are provided as Attachment 4 and Attachment 5 respectively.
The application was referred to the City’s DRP Chair for comments following the conclusion of the advertising of the proposal. The plans referred for comment are included in Attachment 3. Comments were sought from the DRP Chair with respect to the appropriateness of the proposed built form outcome in the streetscape context and any opportunities for the applicant to improve the design of the dwelling. The following comments on the proposal are as follows:
· The site planning is logical and well considered;
· The level change between the street driveway and residences is too abrupt and needs greater integration;
· The front façade can be improved by having the entry door closer to the street and by providing shade elements to the windows, either vertically or horizontally of louvre/perforated elements;
· Garage door addressing the streetscape would benefit if the door was perforated rather than solid; and
· The aesthetics is in line with most recent additions to the street, but to tie in with the older properties the applicant should consider using darker wall materials to bring in the earth tones of the roofs and walls.
In response to the comments received from the DRP Chair and community consultation, the applicant provided amended plans which included the following changes:
· Reduced the setback of the porch and entry of Residence A to the street from 11.5 metres to 10.0 metres;
· Increased the street setback of upper floor of Residence A from 3.3 metres to 3.8 metres;
· Incorporated window treatments and shading features to the façade of Residence A;
· Additional landscaping and tree species to all boundaries of the lot as well as within the street setback area;
· Revised garage door treatment of Residence A from a solid door to a permeable perforated material; and
· Introduced dark materiality of the window treatment to interpret the darker materials of neighbouring dwellings.
These amended plans were referred back to the DRP Chair. The DRP Chair advised that all of the comments and recommendations made have been addressed by the applicant and results in an acceptable built form outcome. A copy of these amended plans is included as Attachment 4. This is the development proposal the applicant is seeking approval for.
· State Planning Policy 7.3 – Residential Design Codes Volume 1;
The matter being referred to Council as the application received more than five objections during community consultation.
The development proposes a street setback of 4.3 metres to the ground floor and 3.8 metres to the upper floor of Residence A, in lieu of the deemed to comply requirement of 5.0 metres.
The City received submissions which raised concerns with the street setback of the development during community consultation regarding preservation of the streetscape, dominance of the dwelling to the street and interaction of the dwelling with the street.
The applicant’s justification for the street setback is summarised as follows:
· The garage of the dwelling (Residence A) is in line with the garage of the neighbouring southern property as well as other properties in the street; and
· The setback of the upper floor has been amended from a 1 metre overhang of the ground floor to a 0.5 metres articulation. The articulation breaks up the materials, adding to the streetscape. The upper floor setback reduces the impact of the garage on the streetscape.
The proposed street setback satisfies the relevant design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes and Built Form Policy for the following reasons:
· The dwelling is well articulated. The dwelling provides vertical separation between the ground floor and upper floor. The dwelling also provides horizontal articulation with varied setbacks of the dwelling along the ground floor and upper floor. Breaks, indentations and recesses in the building façade would assist in reducing the mass and scale of the development as it presents to the street. The positioning of windows (major openings) on the ground and upper floors of the dwelling, and window projections would ensure that there are minimal areas of blank, solid walls to ameliorate the impacts of building bulk. The articulation and major openings addressing Byron Street would facilitate passive surveillance of the street;
· The dwelling incorporates a mix of materials including face brick, render, cladding and perforated brick treatment (breeze blocks). This provides visual interest to the façade of the dwelling which assists in mitigating the bulk and scale of the development to the street. The materials incorporated are consistent with and reinterpreted from the existing streetscape. This contributes towards preserving and enhancing the streetscape character;
· The two-storey dwelling proposed would extend for a width of 7.9 metres. The lot is 12.0 metres wide. This means that the dwelling would occupy approximately 65 percent of the lot width as viewed from the street and would result in a modest contemporary development that is not a dominant built form in the locality;
· The ground floor of the dwelling is setback 4.3 metres from the street boundary which is in line with the building on the adjacent southern property of No. 10 Byron Street, reducing the dominance of the building when viewed from the street. The first floor of the dwelling being set forward of the ground floor would assist with reducing the dominance of the garage. Landscaping within the front setback and a mix of materials (longline cladding and box window treatments) to the upper floor of the dwelling would also assist to ameliorate the impact of the dwelling being set forward of the street setback requirement;
· The garage door is proposed to be treated in a perforated material which would assist in moderating building bulk. The garage also would occupy less than 50 percent of the lot frontage which ensures the garage is not dominant or imposing on the streetscape;
· Neighbouring properties within the Byron Street streetscape incorporate alterations and additions inclusive of street walls and fences and carports within the street setback area. The proposed dwelling does not propose additions or structures within the street setback or forward of the dwelling, which facilitates an open street setback area which is enhanced by landscaping. The proposal incorporates deep soil and canopy coverage within the street setback including a Magnolia Grandiflora Tree and Pyrus Calleryana (Callery Pear) trees. There are also additional areas of landscaping and vegetation within the front setback that do not qualify as deep soil area, but would also contribute to urban greening. The landscaping, canopy and deep soil would soften the appearance of the dwelling and would contribute to the amenity of the street;
· The proposed setback does not does not inhibit reversing sight lines from the dwelling to Byron Street; and
· The revised development plans submitted by the applicant incorporates changes to address the DRP Chair’s comments to result in a development that is appropriate in its setting.
Lot Boundary Setbacks/Lot Boundary Walls
The application proposes departures to the deemed-to-comply side and rear lot boundary setbacks for Residence A and Residence B, as well as departures to boundary walls.
The City received submissions raising concern with the impact of perceived adverse and unnecessary building bulk when viewed from the adjoining properties, reduced setback contributing to loss of direct sun and light to major openings, in addition to concerns with the usable open space of the lot.
The applicant’s justification for the lot boundary setbacks are summarised below:
· Lot boundary walls and setbacks are consistent with and based upon the neighbouring property; and
· Attached images (as per Attachment 5) demonstrate the setbacks and context of adjacent development.
The proposed lot boundary setbacks are considered to satisfy the relevant design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes and Built Form Policy and considered acceptable for the following reasons:
The R Codes set a 2.0 metre deemed-to-comply setback for the ground floor alfresco to the eastern lot boundary. A 1.8 metre setback is proposed.
· The adjacent eastern boundary of the dwelling is adjacent to the car parking area and carport of Residence B. As the alfresco is an open structure this reduces the perceived and actual bulk of the alfresco setback and does not impact on any active habitable spaces of the adjoining dwelling; and
· The proposed setback does not incorporate any major openings and does not result in any overlooking or loss of privacy and would not disrupt or diminish the amenity of the neighbouring property.
The proposal seeks consideration for variations to the lot boundary setback deemed-to-comply setbacks along the southern boundary, to the ground and upper floor. The departures are as follows:
· Alfresco (Ground Floor): 1.2 metre lot boundary setback in lieu of 2.3 metre deemed-to-comply setback;
· Walk In Robe – Ensuite (Upper Floor): 1.2 metre lot boundary setback in lieu of 1.5 metre deemed-to-comply setback; and
· Master – Bed 4 bulk (Upper Floor): 1.2 metre to 1.7 metre lot boundary setback in lieu of 2.8 metre deemed-to-comply setback.
The southern boundary setbacks satisfy the relevant design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes and Built Form Policy for the following reasons:
· The southern elevation incorporates render, white cladding, facebrick detailing and Colorbond roof to ameliorate the actual and perceived bulk of the boundary setback. The openings on the ground floor and the highlight window openings to the bedrooms and sitting room on the upper floor presents as an interactive elevation void of blank solid walls. The use of various finishes and openings ensure the development does not present solid and blank walls and reduces the actual and perceived building bulk to neighbouring adjoining property;
· There are no major openings to the southern façade of the neighbouring property and the reduced setback and boundary walls do not result in any adverse overlooking and subsequent loss of privacy to the southern adjoining properties. Landscaping along the southern boundary – Ficus Lyrata species - provides natural screening that further obscures the cone of vision to the neighbouring property given it is capable of growing to 10 metres in height and dense foliage at maturity;
· The reduced setbacks along the southern boundary does not detract from access to direct sun and ventilation to the building and open spaces to the subject lot and adjoining properties as required under the R Codes;
· The alfresco area of Residence A does not abut any major openings to the adjoining property at No. 10 Byron Street, and as a result the reduced setback does not impact the amenity of the neighbouring dwelling;
· The reduced southern boundary setback does not impose bulk and scale on usable active spaces of the dwelling given the compliant height of the alfresco; and
· The alfresco is an open structure, and as a result the lack of solid walls or buildings reduces the perceived and actual bulk of the alfresco setback.
The R Codes set a 1.0 metre deemed-to-comply setback to the alfresco on the northern lot boundary. A 0.5 metre setback is proposed. The proposed northern boundary setbacks satisfy the relevant design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes and Built Form Policy for the following reasons:
· The alfresco area is an open sided structure that does not impose solid bulk to the neighbouring dwelling and the open nature of the structure allows for adequate separation of the development to the neighbouring lot;
· The alfresco area directly abuts outbuilding structures on the northern property. The reduced setback does not result in bulk and scale to habitable rooms or active habitable spaces; and
· The alfresco satisfies the deemed-to-comply requirements in regards to visual privacy.
The R Codes set a 1.9 metre deemed-to-comply setback to upper floor wall from bed 3 to the ensuite on the southern boundary. A 1.2 metre setback is proposed. The proposed southern boundary setbacks satisfy the relevant design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes and Built Form Policy for the following reasons:
· The southern façade incorporates a large window to the bathroom and highlight windows for Bed 2 and Bed 3 to reduce the perception of blank solid walls and reduce perceived bulk and scale impacts;
· The wall is adjacent to a two storey development on the southern lot, which does not contain any major openings from habitable rooms. The building setback proposed would not impact the amenity and use of habitable rooms of the neighbouring dwelling;
· The openings along the southern elevation satisfy the deemed-to-comply visual privacy requirements; and
· The setback allows for sufficient access to direct sunlight and ventilation of the dwelling, and complies with the solar access requirements for the southern property.
The Built Form Policy sets a 4.5 metre deemed-to-comply rear setback for development adjoining properties R60 and above. A 1.5 metre setback is proposed to the ground floor, and a 1.2 metre setback to the upper floor of the dwelling. The proposed rear boundary setbacks satisfy the relevant design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes and Built Form Policy, and is acceptable for the following reasons:
· The rear elevation incorporates mixed materials such as cladding, render and louvre window treatments to the ground and upper floors to provide visual interest and reduce the appearance of solid, blank walls;
· The reduced lot boundary setback does not exacerbate impacts of overlooking on the adjacent property as no major openings from habitable rooms are proposed. The proposed setback does not result in an adverse impact on the neighbouring property in terms of visual privacy;
· The development meets the deemed-to-comply requirements in regards to solar access, and the reduced rear boundary setback does not result in unacceptable overshadowing to the adjoining southern property; and
· The rear of the site is affected by a sewer line which horizontally transects the lot, limiting the possible building footprint of the dwellings. The proposed rear boundary setback of Residence B is in response to this constraint.
The application proposes boundary walls to two side boundaries of the lot, one of which is an internal lot boundary wall facing the vehicular access leg. The deemed-to-comply provisions permit a boundary wall length of 18.06 metres, with an average height of 3 metres and a maximum height of 3.5 metres. The acceptability of the boundary walls proposed are detailed below.
Northern Lot Boundary
Residence A proposes a 10.0 metre boundary wall from the entry to the dining room. The wall length complies with that permitted, but the two-storey wall proposed is an average wall height of 6.35 metres and a 6.6 metre maximum wall height, in lieu of the deemed-to-comply 3.0 metre average wall height and maximum wall height of 3.5 metres, respectively. The lot boundary wall proposed satisfies the relevant design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes and Built Form Policy and are acceptable for the following reasons:
· The proposed boundary wall is located behind the street setback line of the dwelling, with the majority of the boundary bulk located to the centre of the lot and not prominently located as viewed from the street. The boundary wall is of a two-storey nature which incorporates a round window and cladding to the upper storey, and is separated from the adjoining property to the north by the 4.0 metre access leg to reduce the perception of bulk and mass;
· The boundary wall meets the deemed-to-comply requirements in regards to the length of the wall. The ground floor boundary wall is 10.0 metres in length which reduces to 8.0 metres on the upper floor. The compliant length of boundary wall assists in mitigating the mass and scale of the boundary wall. This is further mitigated by the inclusion of landscaping along the northern boundary to provide a softened building edge, with the Ficus Lyrata species along the boundary which is capable of growing to a height of 10 metres at maturity that would provide screening above the dividing fence between the properties;
· The boundary wall abuts the vehicle access of the property to Residence B, and does not abut any active habitable spaces or rooms. As a result the building bulk does not impact any neighbouring properties;
· The proposed wall is located on the northern boundary and does not compromise access to direct sunlight for the subject dwelling, or adversely impact adjoining properties with respect to overshadowing;
· The boundary wall does not incorporate major openings and would not result in overlooking to the adjoining site; and
· The remainder of the dwelling is articulated and incorporates varying materials such as cladding, render and face brick to reduce the bulk of the development to the adjacent property.
Southern Lot Boundary
Residence A proposes an 8.49 metre long boundary wall from the garage to the laundry that meets the permitted wall length. The wall proposes average wall height is 3.35 metres and 3.6 metre maximum wall height in lieu of the deemed-to-comply 3.0 metre average wall height and 3.5 metres maximum wall height, respectively. The lot boundary wall proposed satisfies the relevant design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes and Built Form Policy and is acceptable for the following reasons:
· The proposed boundary wall directly abuts the boundary wall (garage) of the neighbouring dwelling to the south. The proposed boundary wall is not located forward of the existing boundary wall, providing a consistent street setback presentation and view to the street. The wall being located so that it abuts an existing boundary wall would assist in mitigating perceived bulk associated with an otherwise solid blank boundary wall visible from the street;
· The boundary wall is of a single storey nature and does not generate or exacerbate mass from the street or adjacent properties;
· The remainder of the dwelling to the upper floor is articulated and incorporates varying materials, render and cladding to reduce the bulk of the development to the adjacent property. The materials provided break up the appearance of the walls when viewed from the adjoining properties and the street;
· The boundary wall is proposed to be constructed and finished with facebrick, consistent with built form outcomes of the Byron Street streetscape;
· The proposed wall is located on the southern boundary and does not compromise access to direct sunlight for the subject dwelling, or adversely impact adjoining properties with respect to overshadowing. This is because it is proposed to abut an existing boundary wall on the adjoining southern property of similar dimension; and
· The boundary wall does not incorporate major openings and would not result in overlooking to the adjoining site.
Residence B proposes a 10.9 metre boundary wall from the linen to the family room. This meets the permitted wall length. The average wall height is 3.14 metres and 3.4 metre maximum wall height in lieu of the deemed-to-comply requirement of 3.0 metre average wall height and 3.5 metres maximum wall height, respectively. The lot boundary wall proposed satisfies the relevant design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes and Built Form Policy and are acceptable for the following reasons:
· The proposed boundary wall is located behind the street setback line of the dwelling, which is obscured by the front dwelling (Residence A). The boundary wall is of a single storey nature and does not generate or exacerbate mass as viewed from the street or adjacent properties;
· The remainder of the dwelling to the upper floor is articulated and incorporates varying materials, render and cladding to reduce the bulk of the development to the adjacent property. The materials provided break up the appearance of the walls when viewed from the adjoining property;
· The boundary wall meets the deemed-to-comply requirements in regards to length and maximum wall height. The compliant elements of the boundary wall mitigate the mass and scale of the boundary wall;
· The proposed boundary wall is proposed to be constructed and finished in face brick, consistent with built form outcomes of the Byron Street streetscape;
· The proposed wall is located on the southern boundary and does not compromise access to direct sunlight for the subject dwelling, or adversely impact adjoining properties with respect to solar access compliance; and
Residence A proposes a height of two storeys and a maximum height of 9.2 metres to the top of the pitched roof in lieu of the maximum roof height of 9.0 metres set as a deemed-to-comply standard in the City’s Built Form Policy. The wall height of Residence A is also proposed to 7.1 metres in lieu of 7.0 metres permitted under the Built Form Policy.
The City received submissions raising concerns with the building height of the proposed dwellings, in regards to the interaction of the dwellings with the streetscape, the emphasis of the building height on lot boundary setbacks and solar access, as well as concerns the development has not responded to the topography of the lot.
· The maximum roof height that exceeds the Built Form Policy requirements affect the rear portion of the Residence A dwelling. The remainder of the dwelling satisfies the building height requirements;
· The increase in height is attributed to the natural ground level of the site which slopes down by approximately 3 metres from the street boundary (western boundary) to the rear of the property (eastern boundary), with the lowest portion of the site being located to the north-east portion of the site to the rear. The slope down of the lot from the front to rear means the proposed dwelling to the rear (Residence B) sits lower than the dwelling closest to Byron Street (Residence A) reducing the impact of the dwelling on the established Byron Street streetscape character;
· The development incorporates a range of materials including brickwork, render and cladding which are featured materials in the immediate streetscape. The development also incorporates concealed feature walls to the roof form and provides articulation through varying setbacks when viewed from the street and adjoining properties. The materials and finishes address the character of the site context. The heights proposed are consistent with existing two storey dwellings within the locality. The provided articulation, design and materials provided to the façade relate to the surrounding context and provide design detail that address comments and suggestions made by the City’s DRP;
· The upper floor of Residence A incorporates major openings and highlight windows which provide access to sunlight and ventilation, and meets the deemed-to-comply solar access requirements;
· The finished floor levels proposed have been stepped in line with the natural ground levels of the site to ensure a reduced overall height for the building. The development considers and responds to the natural slope with limited fill and excavation required to the street and setback area; and
· The dwelling is located within a two-storey built form area and the proposed dwellings are consistent with this built form outcome intended for the area.
In addition to the deemed-to-comply standards of the R Codes, the application has also been assessed against the landscaping provisions of the Built Form Policy that sets out additional deemed-to-comply standards. The deemed-to-comply landscaping standards set out in the Built Form Policy have not yet been approved by the WAPC and as such, these provisions are given due regard in the assessment of the application.
The Built Form Policy requires 15 percent of the site to be provided as deep soil zone and 30 percent of the site provided as canopy coverage at maturity. The application proposes 13.8 percent deep soil zone and 27.2 percent canopy coverage at maturity. The landscaping proposed satisfies the relevant design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes and Built Form Policy and is acceptable for the following reasons:
· The application proposes trees within the rear setback area abutting the eastern lot boundary which would soften the appearance of the development from the adjoining property;
· The application proposes trees within the street setback area which would soften the appearance of the development as viewed from the street;
· The development also proposes 6.5 percent additional landscaping areas which do not meet the minimum 1 metre minimum dimension to qualify as deep soil area, but still contributes to meaningful landscaping on site. This landscaping, located in the front setback area and to the lot boundaries, provides additional landscaping amenity for the site which positively contributes to the presentation of the dwelling to the street and adjacent properties;
· The proposed landscaping would provide increased amenity for the future occupants of the site and the surrounding area;
· The proposal would contribute to canopy cover provision;
· The application proposes ground cover landscaping along the street boundaries in conjunction with the mature canopy coverage within the street setback area; and
· The proposed landscaping does not negatively impact the use and activation of outdoor living areas and open space of the site. The landscaping within the front setback area and from the access leg of the lot to Residence B provides a softened building edge and does not impede surveillance between the dwellings and the street.
The dwelling proposes departures from the deemed-to-comply requirements in regards to visual privacy from the alfresco of Residence A. The City received submissions raising concerns in regards to visual privacy from the proposed dwellings, in regards to the use and extent of screening elements.
The setback of the alfresco to the southern property boundary is 2.7 metres in lieu of the minimum setback of 7.5 metres set as a deemed-to-comply standard in the R Codes. This is because there is greater than 0.5 metres of fill for the alfresco to address the slope of the site. The visual privacy from the alfresco to the adjacent southern property satisfies the relevant design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes and Built Form Policy and is acceptable for the following reasons:
· There are no major openings in the adjoining property that face the proposed development that would be impacted by the cone of vision. This is because these windows from the southern property at No. 10 Byron Street that face the subject site and are within the cone of vision are all minor openings (highlight windows or openings from non-habitable rooms). Only one major opening from a bedroom of No.10 Byron Street is located on the ground floor, which is not impacted by the cone of vision;
· Landscaping along the southern boundary provides natural screening that further obscures the cone of vision to the neighbouring property as the species selection, Ficus Lyrata, provides natural screening that further obscures the cone of vision to the neighbouring property and above the existing dividing fence given it is capable of reaching a maximum height of 10 metres at maturity; and
· There are no major openings proposed in the southern façade of the dwelling and the reduced setback and boundary walls do not result in any adverse overlooking and subsequent loss of privacy to the southern adjoining properties.
The proposal seeks departures to the deemed-to-comply requirements of the R Codes in regards to site works and retaining to the two proposed dwellings.
The City received submissions raising concerns in regards to site works and retaining to the proposed dwellings, in regards to the impact of works to future dividing fence heights, a perceived sense of confinement, as well as contributing towards non-compliant building setbacks and building height.
The applicant’s justification for site works and retaining is summarised below:
· The retaining and works are in response to the steep slope of the site from the front to rear of the lot; and
· Retaining wall material has been amended to be built from breezeblocks in lieu of all brickwork to enhance the experience and appearance of the façade from Residence B.
To account for the slope of the site, the front portion of Residence A is proposed to be cut from the natural ground level up to approximately 0.5 metres, while the rear half of Residence A is proposed to be filled up to a maximum of approximately 1.0 metre from natural ground level. As a result of the site works, a 1.5 metre high retaining wall is proposed to manage the grade difference on site from the alfresco area of Residence A to the carport area of Residence B.
The retaining walls and site works to Residence A satisfy the relevant design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes and Built Form Policy and are acceptable for the following reasons:
· The proposal respects the levels of the lot at the street alignment;
· The development considers and responds to the natural features of the site by stepping down the proposed finished floor level of Residence A from the front to the rear;
· The site works within the front setback area provides a more level pedestrian approach to the site and legible access to the entry point of the dwelling; and
· The proposed works would facilitate safe vehicular access to the dwellings on site by managing the slope of the land.
Residence B proposes a maximum of 0.61 metres of retaining above natural ground level to the north eastern corner of the dwelling (to the rear). The portion of retaining above 0.5 metres is proposed to the lot boundary. The retaining wall to Residence B is considered to satisfy the relevant design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes and Built Form Policy and is acceptable for the following reasons:
· The retaining walls are proposed at a height of 0.61 metres at its maximum height before tapering down to 0.43 metres in the south eastern corner of the lot. The retaining walls are required to provide support of the proposed different ground levels between the subject property and the neighbouring property;
· The retaining is stepped in line with the natural slope of the site and ensures a consistent level of the lot when viewed from the adjacent rear property (facing Loftus Street);
· Retaining and the subsequent dividing fence ensure a suitable screening and fencing between the affected lots. The landscaping to the rear boundary provides a natural buffer for the proposed retaining; and
· The proposed site works and retaining walls are not visible from the street and would not pose an undue impact on the locality.
Residence A proposes an internal storeroom area contained within the garage of the dwelling. The internal store meets the minimum 4 square metre requirement. External to the dwelling, contained within the vehicle access area the store is 4.17 square metres, and enclosed. The store area has a minimum dimension of 0.8 metres, less than the 1 metre internal dimension required. The proposed store area satisfies the relevant design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes and Built Form Policy and is acceptable for the following reasons:
· The storage area is enclosed within the garage, which is secure and lockable as required;
· The store is easily accessible from the garage, as well as the entry of the dwelling and is considered to be in a location that is convenient for the residents; and
· The internal store area is not visible from the street, and does not detract from the dwelling or the built form of the street.
5.3 No. 434-446 (Lot: 4 D/P: 42026) Lord Street, Mount Lawley - Change of Use from Warehouse/Showroom to Educational Establishment
TRIM Ref: D19/116479
3. Parking Management Plan ⇩
4. Determination Advice Notes ⇩
That Council, in accordance with the provisions of the City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2 and the Metropolitan Region Scheme, APPROVES the application for the proposed Change of Use from Warehouse/Storage to Educational Establishment at Nos. 434-446 (Lot: 4; D/P: 42026) Lord Street, Mount Lawley, in accordance with the plans provided in Attachment 2, subject to the following conditions, with the associated determination advice notes in Attachment 4:
1.2 The maximum number of persons attending the Educational Establishment at any one time shall be limited to 12 persons; and
1.3 The hours of operation for the Educational Establishment shall be limited to the following operating hours:
· Monday to Friday: 8:00am to 4:00pm; and
· Saturday and Sunday: 8:00am to 4:00pm;
The Parking Management Plan approved as part of this application shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City prior to the use or occupation of the development; and
Any new signage that does not comply with the City’s Policy No. 7.5.2 – Signs and Advertising shall be subject to a separate Planning Application and all signage shall be subject to a Building Permit application, being submitted and approved prior to the erection of the signage.
To consider an application for development approval for a change of use from Warehouse/Showroom to Educational Establishment at Suite 2, Nos. 434-466 Lord Street, Mount Lawley (the subject site).
The application proposes a change of use to an Educational Establishment at the subject site for the purpose of a training room for short courses offered to professionals when they are unable to secure an appropriate training space. The space will accommodate no more than 12 people at any one time. The proposed hours of operation are Monday to Friday, 8:00am to 4:00pm. Occasionally classes will operate within these hours on weekends. The proposal does not involve any external modification to the building.
Prefama Pty Ltd
RTO Solutions Pty Ltd
MRS: Urban; Other Regional Road
Educational Establishment ‘D’
3018 square metres
Yes – City of Vincent, 5.3 metres
The subject site is Nos. 434-446 Lord Street, Mount Lawley. The site is zoned Commercial under the City’s Local Planning Scheme No. 2 (LPS2) and located within the Transit Corridor under Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form (Built Form Policy).
The site is bordered by a commercial zoned property to the north, a laneway to the east, residential zoned properties to the south and Lord Street and Guilford Road to the west. The land on the opposite side of the laneway is zoned commercial and the land on the opposite side of Lord Street and Guilford Road is Reserve – Public Purpose in accordance with LPS2, in which the North Metropolitan TAFE and Department of Corrective Services Youth Justice Services and Youth Justice Psychological Services is located. The land on the opposite corner of Walcott Street and Lord Street is zoned Local Centre in accordance with the City of Stirling Local Planning Scheme No. 5 (LPS5). A location map is provided in Attachment 1.
The Metropolitan Redevelopment Authority formerly East Perth Redevelopment Authority approved an application for nine Showroom/Warehouses and 23 car parking bays at the subject site in 1984. Council at its meeting 27 August 2002, approved a change of use application from nine Showroom/Warehouses to five Showroom/Warehouses, Shop, Eating House and 41 car parking bays. These car parking bays were spread over Nos. 434-446 Lord Street and the abutting property at No. 139 West Parade, Perth. There was a surplus of 0.36 car parking bays as part of this application. The car parking bays are accessible from Lord Street and the Right of Way (ROW).
The applicant currently utilises Units 3 and 4, Nos. 434-446 Lord Street, Perth as Offices and proposes to expand into Unit 2 of the subject site for use as Educational Establishment. The current development application for Educational Establishment does not propose any changes to the external façade of the building. There is no proposed signage as part of this application. The proposed use has exclusive use of two bays on the subject site, these are secured through the lease agreement for Units No. 2, 3 and 4, access to the remainder of car parking bays on the site for visitor parking is on a first come basis. The Development Plans and additional information are in Attachment 2.
The table below summarises the planning assessment of the proposal against the provisions of the City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2 (LPS2), the City’s Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form and Policy No. 7.7.1 – Non-Residential Development Parking Requirements. In each instance where the proposal requires the discretion of Council, the relevant planning element is discussed in the Detailed Assessment section following from this table.
City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2
‘P’ Use
‘D’ Use
Policy No. 7.7.1 – Non-Residential Development Parking Requirements
No deemed-to-comply standard under Table 1 of the Policy
2 bays located on-site for the exclusive use of the suite, through a lease agreement
16 visitor bays located on-site for the shared use of all suites
The above elements of the proposal do not meet the specified deemed-to-comply standards and is discussed in the comments section below.
Community consultation was undertaken in accordance with the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, for a period of 14 days between 10 July 2019 and 24 July 2019. The method of consultation being 13 letters mailed to all owners and occupiers adjacent to the site, as shown in Attachment 1, in accordance with the City’s Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation.
The City received one submission in support of the application.
· Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form; and
· Policy No. 7.7.1 – Non-Residential Development Parking Requirements.
LPS2 was gazetted and became operational on 16 May 2018. The subject site is zoned Commercial. LPS2 includes the following objectives for the Commercial zone:
The proposal is being presented to Council for determination given the use Educational Establishment is not within Table 1 of the Local Planning Policy No. 7.7.1 Non-Residential Development Parking Requirements.
The subject site is zoned Commercial and Other Regional Road Reserve. The locality is characterised by a number of commercial uses, including Office, Educational Establishment and Warehouse/Showroom and Single Houses.
The proposed use is consistent with the objectives of the commercial zone for the following reasons:
· The surrounding sites are zoned District Centre under the City of Stirling Local Planning Scheme No. 5 and Reserve – Public Purpose under the LPS2;
· The intensity of the use would not detrimentally impact on the surrounding commercial businesses due to noise, odour or vehicle trips generated;
· The type of use would be compatible with the surrounding commercial and residential land uses, with operations proposed to be contained within normal business hours and would not result in an unreasonable amount of noise;
· The land use would encourage additional patronage to the subject site, resulting in economic growth for surrounding commercial land uses;
· The use is not proposing any glazing or signage that would restrict passive interaction with the public realm; and
· Conditions of approval have been recommended to ensure that the scale of the use remains low to ensure there would be no detrimental impact on the surrounding land uses in relation to vehicle trips generated and noise.
Car parking requirements for an Educational Establishment are determined by the City on a site specific Parking Management Plan in accordance with Policy No. 7.7.1 Non-Residential Development Parking Requirements. The submitted Parking Management Plan is included in Attachment 3. The subject site has 23 line marked car parking bays accessible to visitors to the proposed Educational Establishment, two for the exclusive use of Units 2, 3 and 4, and access to 21 car parking bays on-site for use as visitor parking.
The Parking Management Plan proposes to utilise the existing car parking facilities on-site, on-street and off‑street public car parking facilities and existing public transport options. The subject site has access to four high frequency bus routes within 75 metres and is 570 metres from Mount Lawley Train Station and 650 metres from East Perth Train Station.
The Parking Management Plan promotes the use of the public transport by including public transport options and advertising end of trip facilities in the confirmation letters and on their website. The transport options and Parking Management Plan are considered appropriate for the use on the subject site, given:
· Educational Establishment use is considered small in scale, with a maximum of 12 students and facilitators on-site at any one time;
· The operating hours are not any more intense than the existing Showroom/Warehouse;
· There are four of high frequency bus routes, and the subject site is located close to Mount Lawley and East Perth Train Station;
· There are a large number of visitor car parking bays on-site, which currently have a low occupancy rate; and
· The organisation promotes alternative modes of transport, including public and active transport modes, and has end of trip facilities available on-site.
5.4 Outcomes of Advertising - Mount Hawthorn Town Centre Place Plan
TRIM Ref: D19/117458
Jordan Koroveshi, A/Manager Policy & Place
Authoriser: Stephanie Smith, A/Executive Director Planning and Place
Attachments: 1. Advertised Draft Volume 3 - Mount Hawthorn Town Centre Place Plan ⇩
2. Summary of Submissions ⇩
3. Volume 3 - Mount Hawthorn Town Centre Place Plan ⇩
1. ADOPTS Volume 3: Mount Hawthorn Town Centre Place Plan; and
2.1 the submissions received in relation to the advertising of the draft Volume 3: Mount Hawthorn Town Centre Place Plan and ENDORSES Administration’s reponses to those submissions, included as Attachment 2; and
2.2 that Administration will publish a notice of the approval of Volume 3: Mount Hawthorn Town Centre Place Plan, included as Attachment 3, on the City’s website and social media platforms and will notify the Mt Hawthorn Hub and all those who made submissions on the document.
To consider the outcomes of community consultation and to adopt Volume 3: Mount Hawthorn Town Centre Place Plan (MHTCPP).
Council endorsed the draft MHTCPP for the purposes of advertising for public comment at its meeting on 25 June 2019 (Item 9.6). The documents were advertised between 17 July 2019 and 21 August 2019. During the advertising period, a notice was published on the City’s website, social media and in a local newspaper, postcards were delivered to Mount Hawthorn Town Centre businesses and discussed the draft Place Plan at the Mt Hawthorn Hub executive meeting on 23 July 2019. Copies of the document were displayed at the Administration and Civic Centre and Library and the Mt Hawthorn Hub was contacted and invited to comment. A copy of the advertised draft document is included as Attachment 1.
The City received 15 submissions during the advertising period. Submissions were generally supportive of the intent and initiatives of the MHTCPP and made detailed comments relating to the delivery of the specific actions. These comments will be considered when each action is progressed.
As a result of the submissions it is proposed to make five modifications to the document, including to:
1. Modify Item 1.1 to clarify that the City will investigate implementing WiFi in key locations in the town centre, rather than the town centre as a whole;
2. Modify Item 1.7 to clarify that lighting improvements are intended to be made to both laneways between Flinders Street and Oxford Street;
3. Modify Item 2.6 to clarify that the City intends to advocate for the extension of the 40km/h zone along Scarborough Beach Road, both east past Edinboro Street and west to meet the 40km/h school zone;
4. Modify Item 3.1 to clarify that the rationalisation and upgrade of street furniture and street art will be included in the Streetscape Audit; and
5. Update the image on page three.
A summary of all the submissions and Administration’s responses are included as Attachment 2.
If adopted, further consultation would take place as required when completing each of the actions within the MHTCPP.
It is considered low risk to adopt a Place Plan.
The Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework outlined by the Local Government (Administration) Regulations 1996 requires the City to adopt a Strategic Community Plan and a Corporate Business Plan (CBP) to be supported by the Annual Budget and a range of informing strategies. If approved by Council the MHTCPP will be an informing strategy to the City’s CBP and Annual Budget.
Since the decision to finally adopt the MHTCPP will be made during the ‘Election Period’ as defined within the Council Election Period Policy, the requirements of that policy must be considered. The adoption of the MHTCPP is not considered a ‘Major Policy Decision’ as it does not depart from the Council’s stated strategic direction, as demonstrated below, and it is largely identical to the draft MHTCPP adopted for advertising on 25 June 2019. As such, it is appropriate for the sitting Council to make this decision during the ‘Election Period’.
We are recognised as a City that supports local and small business.
The MHTCPP enables an integrated, holistic, place-based approach to town centre management. Place planning focuses on integrating good environmental, economic and social outcomes that improve the sustainability and liveability of the City’s town centres. This approach focuses on promoting liveability and walkability by improving the pedestrian environment with small and large scale urban design improvements, greening and prioritising active transport modes over private car use.
The City’s Sustainable Environment Strategy 2019-2024 (SES) informed the development of the MHTCPP and the MHTCPP responds to key opportunities and strategies outlined in the SES including:
· No. 6. Energy (MHTCPP Item 1.5 & 1.6 – LED Street Lighting & Car Parking Lighting Improvements);
· No. 2. Transport (MHTCPP Item 2.1, 2.5 & 2.6 – Intersection Improvements & Reduces Speeds);
· No. 8. Transport (MHTCPP Item 2.5 & 2.6 – Reduced Speeds); and
· No. 1 Urban Greening & Biodiversity (MHTCPP Item 1.3, 2.4, 3.1 & 3.4 – Town Centre Greening including Axford Park Upgrade to provide additional POS, Oxford Street North Upgrade and Streetscape Audit to increase planting and canopy cover and Underground Power to allow for increased canopy cover).
Key initiatives identified for the 2019/20 financial year in the draft MHTCPP have been included in the 2019/20 budget. Other initiatives identified in future financial years will be included as part of future budgets.
MHTCPP will align the City’s activities with a clear future direction for the area that is informed by the community. The ongoing review of the document will ensure that the City’s service delivery in the town centre keeps pace with emerging trends and community aspirations and ensures that Mount Hawthorn Town Centre continues to thrive. The City will continue to work closely with the Mt Hawthorn Hub to support the continued improvement of their Action Plan, which will continue to inform the MHTCPP.
5.5 No. 42 (Lot: 2; D/P: 2136) Woodville Street, North Perth - Proposed Six Multiple Dwellings (Amendment to Approved - Unauthorised Existing Development)
TRIM Ref: D19/122288
Author: Karsen Reynolds, Urban Planner
2. Minutes of 26 June 2018 Council Meeting ⇩
3. Previously Approved Development Application Plans and Perspectives ⇩
4. Proposed Development Plans ⇩
That Council, in accordance with the provisions of the City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2 and the Metropolitan Region Scheme, APPROVES the development application for Six Multiple Dwellings (amendment to approval) at No. 42 (Lot: 2; D/P: 2136) Woodville Street, North Perth subject to the following conditions:
1. All conditions, requirements and advice notes detailed on development approval 5.2018.81.1 granted on 26 June 2018 continue to apply to this approval, except as follows:
1.1 Condition 11 of the development approval is deleted and replaced with the following condition:
Prior to occupancy or use of the development, privacy screening to first floor balconies shall be upward facing aluminium louvres to height of 1.7 metres above the balcony finished floor levels, and shall comply in all respects with the requirements of Clause 5.4.1 of the Residential Design Codes (Visual Privacy) deemed to comply provisions, to the satisfaction of the City.
To consider an application for development approval for an amendment to approval for six Multiple Dwellings at No. 42 Woodville Street, North Perth (subject site).
The subject site is located at No. 42 Woodville Street, Leederville, as shown on the Location Plan included as Attachment 1.
At its Ordinary Council Meeting held on 26 June 2018, Council approved a development application for Six Multiple Dwellings subject to conditions at the subject site. The Minutes of the 26 June 2018 Ordinary Council Meeting are included as Attachment 2, and the previously approved development plans and perspectives are included as Attachment 3.
Condition 11 of the development approval required the first floor balcony privacy screens to be provided as timber screens or opaque glass screens, at a height of 1.7 metres above the balcony finished floor levels.
Following a compliance investigation, the City received a development application on 19 June 2019 seeking the amendment to the material of the first floor privacy screens.
The proposal seeks to amend the approved material of the privacy screens to aluminium louvres in a charcoal colour. The location and height of the privacy screens are not proposed to change from the previous approval. The height and location of the privacy screens comply with the previous development approval, as confirmed on-site by Administration.
The development plans of the proposal are included as Attachment 4.
Italiano Property Group Pty Ltd
LPS2: Zone: Residential R Code: R40
Dwelling (Multiple)
The subject site is bound by Woodville Street to the west and residential dwellings to the north, south and east. The development has replaced a single storey single house on the subject site. The site adjoins double storey single houses to the rear; single storey and double storey dwellings to the north; and a single storey dwelling to the south. There are a number of single storey dwellings located on the opposite side of Woodville Street.
The subject site and the immediate adjoining properties are zoned Residential with a density code of R40 under Local Planning Scheme No. 2 (LPS2). The site is within a Residential Built Form Area, subject to the City’s Local Planning Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form.
The construction of the six multiple dwellings was completed in May 2019. The applicant has satisfied all other conditions of approval, and the occupancy permit was approved in May 2019. Approval for a strata subdivision has been granted and new lots 1-6 on strata plan 80602 has been created.
The application has been reviewed against the City’s Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation (Community Consultation Policy) and it was determined that the proposal did not require advertising for the following reasons:
· As part of the application submission, the applicant provided letters from all landowners directly north of the subject site. The letters submitted support the change in privacy screen material to aluminium louvers that face upwards. The adjoining northern properties are the only properties directly impacted by the change in material. The City has confirmed that screens shown on the proposed development plans, match the description of screens within the letters of support;
· The amended proposal does not propose any additional departures to the deemed-to-comply requirements of the City’s LPS2, the Built Form Policy or the R Codes to those previously approved; and
· The proposed amendment would not have a significant impact on the community, or the economy, lifestyle, amenity and/or environment of any member of the community or community group.
The application was referred to the Chairperson of the City’s DRP on 8 August 2019 for comment. Comments received from the Chairperson advised that the aluminium louvers are a better screening solution for the balconies as they would provide for greater ventilation and would allow for greater sunlight into the balconies. For these reasons, the Chairperson advised the change in material from obscure glass to louvres should be supported.
This matter has been referred to Council in accordance with the City’s Delegated Authority Register as the original development application was determined by Council.
Visual Privacy Screens
The proposal to amend the first floor balcony privacy screens meets the deemed-to-comply standards of the R Codes Clause 5.4.1 Visual Privacy. The change in material provides better amenity to the apartments than previously approved by providing for greater sunlight and ventilation into the first floor balconies. The colour of the screens are consistent with the approved colours and materials schedule for the development and provide a greater contribution to the overall built form outcome of the development. The amended screens are also consistent with colours and materials that exist within the Woodville Street streetscape. The City received neighbour consent from properties directly affected by the change in material.
For these reasons, the amended material would not have any adverse impact on the amenity of the subject site and surrounding area. It is recommended that Council approves amendment to condition 11 of the approval to reflect the amended material.
6 Infrastucture and Environment
6.1 North Perth Common Closure Report
TRIM Ref: D19/126462
Stephanie Smith, A/Executive Director Planning and Place
Attachments: 1. North Perth Common - Project Closure Report ⇩
1. NOTES the project closure report for North Perth Common included as Attachment 1.
To consider the project closure report for North Perth Common included as Attachment 1.
At the Council Meeting on 26 July 2016 the City commenced a project to develop a new public space in the North Perth Town Centre. During January 2017 the City undertook engagement with the local community to understand community views on the location and use of the future public space. At the Council Meeting on 25 July 2017 the City agreed that the location of the new public space would be at the corner of View Street and Fitzgerald Street.
As part of implementing the project the City accepted a grant of $250,000 from the State Government and created the North Perth Town Centre Public Open Space Working Group comprising of the Local Member, Council Members, members of the City’s Design Review Panel and members of local Town Team, North Perth Local.
During 2017/18 the City developed the concept plan for North Perth Common and during 2018/19 delivered the construction of the space with the opening event being held in June 2019.
The City has a Project Management Framework that requires the preparation of a Project Closure Report for major projects. The Project Closure Reports are used to formally close a project, transfer ownership of any ongoing tasks, communicate any recommendations and share any lessons learned. A copy of the Project Closure Report for North Perth Common is included as Attachment 1.
The Project Closure Report is an administrative document for the City to ensure that the project is formally closed and operationalised. No consultation on the Project Closure Report is required.
It is considered low risk for Council to note a project closure report.
North Perth Common was completed within the allocated budget.
North Perth Common was completed within time, scope and budget and is considered to be an overall success.
6.2 LATE REPORT: Minor Parking Restriction Improvements/Amendments
REPORT TO BE ISSUED PRIOR TO COUNCIL BRIEFING – 10 September 2019
7.1 LATE REPORT: Authorisation of Expenditure for the period 1 August 2019 to 31 August 2019
REPORT TO BE ISSUED PRIOR TO COUNCIL BRIEFING 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
8.1 Consideration of Submissions on Acquisition of Luce Lane, North Perth
TRIM Ref: D19/113280
Author: Daniel Janssen, Land Projects Officer
Attachments: 1. Luce Lane - Aerial image of private right of way - Lot 66 on Deposited Plan 4613 ⇩
2. Diagram 4613 annotated to identify Lot 66 ⇩
3. Summary of submissions and Administration's response ⇩
1. CONSIDERS the submissions and Administration’s responses regarding the proposed acquisition of Luce Lane in North Perth as at Attachment 3;
2. In accordance with Section 52(1)(b) of the Land Administration Act 1997, REQUESTS the Minister for Lands to acquire the private right of way being Lot 66 on Diagram 4613, as shown in Attachment 1, and known as Luce Lane; and
3. REQUESTS the Minister for Lands to reserve Luce Lane as a reserve for the purposes of a public right of way and place the care, control and management of the reserve in the City of Vincent pursuant to sections 41 and 46(1) of the Land Administration Act 1997.
For Council to consider the proposed acquisition of Luce Lane, North Perth, located between Monmouth, Venn and Walcott Streets as shown in the plan at Attachment 1, and consider the public submissions summarised in Attachment 3.
At the 12 February 2013 Ordinary Meeting of Council (Item 9.2.13), Council resolved that Administration commence the acquisition process of the right of way known as Luce Lane under Section 52(1)(b) of the Land Administration Act 1997 (Act).
Luce Lane is a privately owned right of way held by a deceased estate, and therefore is the responsibility of the Public Trustee. It is legally defined as Lot 66 on Diagram 4613, and being the land comprised in Certificate of Title Volume 666 Folio 27.
In accordance with the 12 February 2013 resolution, and Regulation 6 of the Land Administration Regulations 1998 (Regulations), Administration has commenced the acquisition process by providing public notice to:
· The Public Trustee;
· Adjoining land owners; and
· Public utility providers with infrastructure within Luce Lane.
Pursuant to section 52(3) of the Act, Administration provided public notice and invited submissions for a period in excess of 30 days. Public notice was provided on the City’s notice boards, on the website from 18 June 2019, and in newspapers the Guardian on 18 June 2019, and in the Perth Voice on 22 June 2019, with submissions closing 26 July 2019.
Administration received four objections. The concerns were related to the negative impacts to adjacent landowners in the event of significant increases in traffic in Luce Lane.
Administration does not expect the use of Luce Lane to change, or for an increase in traffic using Luce Lane to occur as a result of the proposed acquisition. The submissions and administration’s responses are summarised at Attachment 3.
In accordance with the requirements of regulation 6 of the Regulations, Administration will provide to the Minister for Lands the following:
· Written confirmation that Council has resolved to make the request, as per the above recommendation 2 (Regulation 1(a)).
· A statement outlining the reason for the proposed acquisition, which is that the acquisition of Luce Lane is consistent with the City’s approach of formalising responsibility for maintenance and upgrade of all right of ways within the City (Regulation 1(b)).
· A sketch indicating the land to be acquired (Attachement 2)(Regulation 1(c)).
· Copies of letters sent to notify landowners, adjoining landowners, and utility providers, requesting submissions or comments (Regulation 1(d)).
· A summary of submissions received, and responses from Administration (Attachment 3) (Regulation 1(e)).
Luce Lane is encumbered by an easement secured by caveat number H028406. The caveat is held by the landowner at Lot 297 (No.92) Monmouth Street, North Perth, and provides the landowner with access rights over Luce Lane. The proposed acquisition and reservation will ensure that Lot 297 benefits from continued access over Luce Lane.
Section 52(5)(b) of the Act provides that when a right of way is acquired it will be freed from all encumbrances and becomes Crown Land. Therefore, Lot 297 (No.92) Monmouth Street would continue to have rights of access over Luce Lane.
52. Local government may ask the Minister to acquire as Crown land certain land in district
(1) Subject to this section, a local government may request the Minister to acquire as Crown land –
(b) any private road;
within the district of the local government.
(2) A request made under subsection (1) is to be accompanied by –
(a) a plan of survey or sketch plan –
(i) showing the subject land; and
(ii) approved by the Planning Commission;
copies of all objections lodged with the local government during the period referred to in subsection (3)(b)(i).
(3) Before making a request under subsection (1), a local government must –
(a) take all reasonable steps to give notice of that request to —
(i) the holder of the freehold in the subject land unless the local government holds that freehold; and
(ii) the holders of the freehold in land adjoining the subject land unless the local government holds that freehold; and
(iii) all suppliers of public utility services to the subject land;
(b) in the case of —
(i) alienated land referred to in subsection (1)(a) or a private road referred to in subsection (1)(b), state in the notice a period of not less than 30 days from the day of that notice during which period persons may lodge objections with it against the making of that request; or
(ii) any land referred to in subsection (1)(c), advertise or take such steps as may be prescribed to notify interested persons of an intention to make the request and state in the notification a period of not less than 30 days from the day of that notification during which period persons may lodge objections with it against the making of that request.
(4) The Minister may, on receiving a request made under subsection (1), the accompanying plan of survey or sketch plan referred to in subsection (2)(a) and copies of all objections referred to in subsection (2)(b) —
(a) by order grant that request; or
(b) direct the local government to reconsider that request, having regard to such matters as he or she thinks fit to mention in that direction; or
(c) refuse to grant that request.
(5) On the registration of an order made under subsection (4)(a), the subject land —
(a) ceases to belong to the holder of its freehold; and
(b) is freed from all encumbrances; and
(c) becomes Crown land.
(6) Subject to subsection (7), compensation is payable under Part 10 to any holder of the freehold in the subject land who suffers loss on the registration of an order referred to in subsection (5) as if that loss resulted from a taking under Part 9.
(7) A person with an interest in land that is a private road (including a person who has the benefit of an easement created under section 167A of the TLA) the subject of an order under subsection (4)(a) who suffers loss on the registration of the order is not entitled to compensation under Part 10.
Land Administration Regulations 1998
6. Procedures to be followed by local government before requesting acquisition of private road (Act s.52(1)(b))
(1) Before requesting the Minister under section 52(1)(b) of the Act to acquire as Crown land any private road (the subject land), a local government –
(a) must give to the Minister written confirmation that the local government has resolved to make the request, details of the date when the relevant resolution was passed and any other information relating to that resolution that the Minister may require; and
(b) must give to the Minister written reasons as to why the local government proposes to request the Minister to acquire the subject land; and
(c) must give to the Minister and to the persons given notice under section 52(3)(a) of the Act a sketch plan showing the proposed future disposition of the subject land after it has been acquired; and
(d) must give to the Minister written advice that the local government has taken all reasonable steps to identify the persons who are required to be given notice under section 52(3)(a) of the Act; and
(e) must give to the Minister —
(i) copies of any submissions (other than objections given under section 52(2)(b) of the Act) relating to the proposed request to acquire the subject land that, after complying with the requirements to give notice and advertise under section 52(3) of the Act, the local government has received; and
(ii) the local government’s comments on those submissions; and
(f) must give to the Minister written confirmation that the local government has complied with section 52(3) of the Act.
Low: Acquiring Luce Lane will formalise management of the laneway. It is currently in good condition, paved and partially drained. No immediate expenditure is required for maintenance.
Luce Lane will be included in the City’s laneway maintenance and upgrade program. However, there will be no immediate cost implications.
8.2 Report and Minutes of the Audit Committee meeting held on 27 August 2019
TRIM Ref: D19/125974
Author: Sharron Kent, Council Support Officer
Attachments: 1. Minutes of the Audit Committee - 27 August 2019 ⇩
1. RECEIVES this report from the Audit Committee meeting of 27 August 2019; and
2. APPROVES the recommendations of the Audit Committee as set out in the Minutes of the
27 August 2019 meeting (Attachment 1).
To report to Council the proceedings of the Audit Committee at its meeting held on 27 August 2019 in accordance with clause 2.21(1) of the City’s Meeting Procedures Local Law 2008.
· liaise with the local government’s internal and external auditors so that Council can be satisfied with the performance of the local government in managing its affairs.
At its meeting on 27 August 2019, the Audit Committee considered three agenda items as follows:
5.1 Office of the Auditor General’s Performance Audit 2019 – fraud prevention in local government – findings and recommendations
5.2 Review of the City of Vincent audit log
5.3 Payroll internal audit findings
A summary of each item is below:
The Office of the Auditor General (OAG) conducted a fraud prevention in local government performance audit in 2019. The objective of this audit is to assess if local governments are taking appropriate steps to prevent fraud.
Initially, all 148 local government entities were provided an opportunity to respond to a questionnaire that explored fraud preparedness at a high level. The City of Vincent was one of five local government entities then selected for a detailed review.
The Western Australian Auditor General’s report, ‘Fraud prevention in local government’, was tabled in Parliament on 15 August 2019 and makes recommendations for fraud management in local government. The City will take a number of actions to address the findings and recommendations of this report. These actions will be added to the City’s Audit Log.
This report provided an update on the status of all outstanding items in the City’s Audit Log. The Audit Log tracks all open audit items from audits and reviews, until closure, and provides a summary of the progress made against the management actions.
Five items identified during the 2018/19 statutory audit are recommended for closure this month:
· IA: 2015/3.2.3 – Internal Audit 2015 - Payroll
· EIA: 2019/2 – Review of reconciliation of payroll to the general ledger
· EIA: 2019/3 – Independent review of journals
· EIA: 2019/4 – Dating of purchase orders after invoice date
· EA: 2018/8 – Asset Sustainability Ratio
The City engaged Butler Settineri to undertake the payroll internal audit as part of the internal audit program. This report considered the results of the Payroll internal audit review report that was undertaken in May 2019.
The objective of the audit was to perform an independent review of the operations and effectiveness of systems and practices, as a service to both management and the Council, to report factual findings from the procedures undertaken and to provide recommendations for improvements to systems and practices. Testing of samples covering the period 1 July 2018 to 31 December 2018 was undertaken in some cases, in addition to discussing the current payroll procedures and practices in place with management and employees.
Administration’s management responses have been reviewed and accepted by the internal auditor.
Once the Audit Committee has received the audit report and endorsed the management comments then the findings and associated actions will be added to the City's audit log and actioned accordingly.
The Audit Committee Terms of Reference governs the functions, powers and membership of the Audit Committee.
Low: Reporting the outcomes of the Audit Committee meeting on 27 August 2019 to Council aligns with good corporate governance.
8.3 Information Bulletin
TRIM Ref: D19/126475
Attachments: 1. Minutes of Safer Vincent Advisory Group Meeting held on 24 July 2019 ⇩
2. Confirmed Minutes of the Design Review Panel Meeting held on 24 July 2019 ⇩
3. Confirmed Minutes of the Design Review Panel Meeting held on 14 August 2019 ⇩
4. Minutes of the Tamala Park Regional Council Meeting held on 15 August 2019 ⇩
5. Street Tree Removal Information ⇩
6. Statistics for Development Applications as at August 2019 ⇩
7. Register of Legal Action and Prosecutions Monthly - Confidential
8. Register of Legal Action - Orders and Notices Quarterly - Confidential
9. Register of State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) Appeals – Progress Report as at 28 August 2019 ⇩
10. Register of Applications Referred to the MetroWest Development Assessment Panel – Current ⇩
11. Register of Petitions - Progress Report - September 2019 ⇩
12. Register of Notices of Motion - Progress Report - September 2019 ⇩
13. Register of Reports to be Actioned - Progress Report - September 2019 ⇩
That Council RECEIVES the Information Bulletin dated August 2019.
8.4 Public release of the Chief Executive Officer's Key Performance Indicators 2019-2020
TRIM Ref: D19/128382
Attachments: 1. CEO Key Performance Indicators for 2019 - 2020 ⇩
That Council APPROVES the publication of the Chief Executive Officer’s Key Performance Indicators for 2019 – 2020 as adopted at the 20 August 2019 Council meeting, at Attachment 1.
To consider the publication of the Chief Executive Officer’s (CEO) Key Performance Indicators for 2019 – 2020 (CEO KPIs).
At its meeting held on 20 August 2019, in confidential session, Council approved the proposed CEO KPIs, at Attachment 1. The Council decision to approve the CEO KPIs is included in the minutes of that Council meeting, but the CEO KPIs are not currently publicly available.
To ensure the City remains a leader in good governance, transparency and accountability, and to align with the City’s Strategic Community Plan innovative and accountable objectives it is recommended that the CEO KPIs are published on the City’s website. This will enable the community to better understand the City’s priorities in service and project delivery over the next year.
There is no statutory requirement to publish the CEO KPIs. The City’s Policy 4.2.16 – CEO Annual Performance Review requires a review the CEO’s KPI’s to be conducted as part of the performance review. It does not require the CEO KPIs to be made public.
Low: The CEO KPIs govern the City’s service and project delivery over the next year and publication increases accountability and transparency for the community.
8.5 Amendments to Council Delegations
TRIM Ref: D19/128393
Attachments: 1. Council Delegations Register 2019/20 (in mark up) ⇩
2. Legal Advice - Council Delegations and Authorisations - Confidential
3. OAG's Audit Results Report 2017-18 - Financial Audits of Local Government Entities ⇩
1. APPROVES BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the following amendments to the Council delegations, as shown in mark up in the Council Delegations Register at Attachment 1;
1.1 amendment of delegation 4.4 to include reference to section 112(2) Building Act 2011, which sets out what a building order can require a person to do;
1.2 inclusion of a new delegation to enable the CEO to commence prosecutions for any offences under the Building Act 2011;
1.3 amendment of delegation 10.1 to allow apointment of designated officers under the Tobacco Products Control Act 2006 and Criminal Procedures Act 2004;
1.4 inclusion of a new delegation to allow the CEO to enforce compliance with a planning direction notice issued under section 214 of the Planning and Development Act 2005;
2. REVOKES BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY delegation 2.1.1 - Delegation to audit and risk committee; and
3. NOTES that the following amendments will be made to the Council Delegations Register as shown in mark up at Attachment 1:
3.1 appointment of authorised persons under the Caravan Parks and Camping Grounds Act 1995 (Delegation 15.1) will be removed, as this Act is not relevant to the City; and
3.2 issue of certificates under sections 39 and 40 of the Liquor Control Act 1988 (Delegation 16.1) will be removed as this is an administrative function.
To consider amendments to the City's Council Delegations Register (Register) in accordance with the legal advice at Attachment 2 and to revoke the delegation of a duty to the City’s Audit Committee.
The City is required to review its delegations from Council to the Chief Executive Officer annually. The City completed this review in June 2019. At its 25 June 2019 Meeting (Item 12.5) Council resolved as follows:
1. RECEIVES the annual review of the delegations made by Council to the Chief Executive Officer in accordance with section 5.46(2) of the Local Government Act 1995; and
2. DELEGATES BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the local government functions listed in the City’s Council Delegations Register 2019/20 included as Attachment 1.”
As part of the review Administration identified some inconsistencies with the delegations under the Building Act 2011, Tobacco Products Control Act 2006 and issuing notices under the Planning and Development Act 2005. The City requested legal advice on these issues, which was received on 25 June 2019, and is at Attachment 2.
In accordance with the legal advice, Administration is proposing amendments to delegations 4.4 and 10.1 and the inclusion of two new delegations, as shown in mark up in Attachment 1.
As part of the review Administration also recommended the delegation of the duty to meet with the City’s auditor to the Audit Committee, in accordance with section 7.12A of the Local Government Act. The implications of this delegation were not raised with Council at the 25 June Meeting.
The following amendments to Council delegations are proposed:
Delegation 2.1.1
The purpose of this delegation is to enable the Audit Committee to meet with the City’s auditor on behalf of the Council. It is a statutory requirement for the auditor to meet with Council each year in accordance with section 7.12A of the Local Government Act 1995 (Act), unless the duty is delegated to the Audit Committee. Section 5.23(b) of the Act requires all meetings of any committee to which a local government power or duty has been delegated to be open to members of the public. Therefore the delegation of this duty to the Audit Committee means the Audit Committee meetings must be open to the public, in accordance with the Local Government Administration Regulations 1996. This contradicts the current Audit Committee meeting process.
An open Audit Committee would change the nature of the Audit Committee. The meetings would need to include public question time, the agenda would need to be published and the meeting closed for confidential matters. While publishing the agenda increases transparency, it would result in a higher level of scrutiny being applied to the reports, and could lead to a majority of reports and attachments being confidential. This would result in more administrative work. Open meetings would change the nature of the discussions, and could impact the comments made by committee members, especially the external members. The likelihood is that meetings would have a public question time followed by the consideration of a number of items behind closed doors, which would not result in greater transparency.
The Office of the Auditor General’s ‘Audit Results Report 2017-18 - financial audits of local government entities’, at Attachment 3, recommends that an in-depth audit exit meeting is held with the audit committee in advance of the Council meeting, to provide the auditor with the opportunity to highlight key issues and for the CEO to comment on and discuss the findings. A public meeting would not facilitate this. Furthermore, the report recommends that the exit meeting includes only a few council members, rather than the entire Council.
The minutes of each Audit Committee are presented to Council for adoption, and therefore become part of the public record. It is recommended that delegation 2.1.1 be revoked.
Delegation 4.4
Section 127(1) of the Building Act 2011 provides that a local government may delegate its powers under the Building Act 2011 to a local government employee. Delegation 4.4 of the City’s Council Delegations Register contains the delegation of power to the CEO in relation to sections 110, 111, 117, 118 and 133 of the Building Act 2011.
Section 112(2) of the Building Act 2011 sets out what a building order can require a person to do. The current Council Delegations Register does not reference this, and therefore it should be included as part of the delegation, as recommended by part 3.2(a) of the legal advice.
New Delegation 4.10
Section 133 of the Building Act 2011 permits a local government to prosecute for an offence against the Building Act 2011.
Delegation 4.4 of the City’s Council Delegations Register delegates the power to prosecute for non-compliance with a building order to the CEO. The Council Delegations Register does not delegate the power to prosecute for any other offence against the Building Act 2011.
In accordance with part 3.2(c) of the legal advice Administration recommends the addition of a separate delegation to enable the CEO to commence prosecutions for any other offences against the Building Act 2011.
Delegation 10.1
Section 77 of the Tobacco Products Control Act 2006 enables a local government to appoint a person to be a restricted investigator. It is recommended that the Council Delegations Register is amended to include this delegation, to enable the CEO to appoint a restricted investigator.
In order for the CEO to appoint officers as authorised officers for the purposes of the Tobacco Products Control Act 2006 a designation needs to be made in accordance with section 24 of the Public Health Act 2016. Similarly, to enable the CEO to appoint authorised officers for the purpose of the Criminal Procedure Act 2004 a designation needs to be made in accordance with section 24 of the Public Health Act 2016. Part 4.1 of the legal advice addresses this.
In accordance with the legal advice it is recommended that delegation 10.1 be amended to reference the Public Health Act 2016 as the source of power to enable the designation of an authorised officer for the purposes of the Tobacco Products Control Act 2006 and Criminal Procedure Act 2004.
New Delegation 17.1.3
There is not currently a delegation under section 215 of the Planning and Development Act 2005 to allow the CEO to enforce compliance with a planning direction notice issued under section 214.
In accordance with part 3.1(a) of the legal advice it is recommended that a new delegation is included under sub sections 215(1) and (2).
Removal of Delegation 15.1
As there are no caravan parks or camping grounds within the City of Vincent this delegation is not required.
Removal of Delegation 16.1
The Liquor Control Act 1988 provides that the local government may issue certificates pursuant to sections 39 and 40 of this Act. The section 39 certificate is to confirm that the premises complies with all relevant legislative requirements, and the section 40 certificate relates to changing a condition of use of the premises. As this is an administrative function delegation to the Chief Executive is not required.
Section 5.46(2) of the Local Government Act requires Council to review its delegations at least once every financial year.
Medium: The prosed amendments to the Council Delegations Register will correct issues previously identified in the Council delegations register, and align with the legal advice obtained by the City. It will also ensure alignment with the current Audit Committee meeting process.
10 Representation on Committees and Public Bodies