Source: http://wanneroo.infocouncil.biz/Open/2013/10/OC_15102013_AGN_AT.htm
Timestamp: 2018-12-19 08:47:37
Document Index: 369113842

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 2', 'art 3', 'art 6', 'art 2', 'art 8', 'art 8']

Agenda of Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 October 2013
Dundebar Road, Wanneroo on Tuesday 15 October, 2013 commencing at 7.00pm.
OC01-10/13 Minutes of Ordinary Council Meeting held on 17 September 2013 1
PT01-09/13 Request for Closure of Public Accessway between Ireland Court and Scutti Place, Koondoola 1
PS01-10/13 Update to Local Planning Policy 4.4: Urban Water Management 2
PS02-10/13 Review of Local Planning Policy 2.6: Ancillary Accommodation 27
Town Planning Schemes & Structure Plans 41
PS03-10/13 Adoption of Amendment No. 6 & 7 to the East Wanneroo Cell 7 Agreed Structure Plan No. 9 41
Development Applications 54
PS04-10/13 Proposed Retrospective Single House (Amendment to DA2010/672) at 9 Rosemount Entrance, Pearsall 54
City Businesses 68
Regulatory Services 68
CB01-10/13 Application to Keep More Than Two Dogs 68
CB02-10/13 Proposed Lease to Wanneroo City Soccer Club (Inc.) over a portion of Lot 555 Crown Reserve 28058, Madeley. 74
Infrastructure Projects 97
IN01-10/13 Budget Variation - 2013/2014 Direct Grant and State Blackspot Grant Funding 97
IN02-10/13 Anchorage Drive, Mindarie - Traffic Management Scheme 100
Program Services 105
CD01-10/13 Disbanding of the Healthy Communities Steering Group 105
Corporate Strategy & Performance 108
CS01-10/13 Warrant of Payments for the Period to 30 September 2013 108
CS02-10/13 Financial Activity Statement for the Period Ended 31 August 2013 166
CS03-10/13 Change of Valuation of Land Method 182
Risk and Business Improvement 186
CS04-10/13 Risk Management Policy 186
Governance 193
CS05-10/13 Donations to be Considered by Council - October 2013 193
CS06-10/13 Proposed Council Meeting Dates for 2014 202
Chief Executive Office 205
Item 9_____ Motions on Notice_ 205
MN01-10/13 Cr Dot Newton – Request for Donation for Local Child for Medical Treatment 205
Item 10____ Urgent Business_ 207
Item 11____ Confidential_ 207
CR01-10/13 SAT Item DR 235/2013 - Reconsideration of Refusal of 'Corner Store' at 1 Balladong Loop, Carramar 207
CR02-10/13 Proposed Acquisition of Lot 166 (484) Kingsway, Landsdale for the Purposes of Future Public Open Space - East Wanneroo Cell 9 207
CR03-10/13 Payment for the Provision of Public Open Space - Lots 59 and 60 Landsdale Road, Landsdale - East Wanneroo Cell 5 Agreed Structure Plan (ASP 7) 207
Item 12____ Date of Next Meeting_ 208
Item 13____ Closure_ 208
That the minutes of Ordinary Council Meeting held on 17 September 2013 be confirmed.
To consider revisions to Local Planning Policy 4.4: Urban Water Management (LPP 4.4) for public consultation in accordance with clause 8.11 of the City’s District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2).
In 2006, the Western Australian Planning Commission finalised State Planning Policy 2.9: Water Resources (SPP 2.9), which was followed by Better Urban Water Management (BUWM) in 2008. BUWM ensures that Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) is considered at all stages of the planning and development process by outlining the information that is required to accompany each type of planning proposal.
LPP 4.4 was adopted by Council at its meeting on 13 November 2012 (Item PS01-11/12). LPP 4.4 incorporates WSUD principles into the City's planning and development approval processes consistent with BUWM. Through the use of LPP 4.4 Administration has identified an inconsistency between the requirements of BUWM and the provisions of LPP 4.4. Administration is proposing that LPP 4.4 be amended to align with BUWM. The amended LPP 4.4 is included as Attachment 1.
The inconsistency between LPP 4.4 and BUWM is confined to Table 2, Section 2, Clause C2 which refers to a "Local Water Management Plan" being approved prior to the lodgement of any subdivision application. However, Section 4.5 of BUWM requires the approval of a "Local Water Management Strategy" prior to the lodgement of a subdivision application.
It is recommended that the reference to the "Local Water Management Plan" in LPP 4.4, Table 2, Section 2, Clause C2 be modified to refer to a "Local Water Management Strategy" instead to ensure consistency with BUWM. No other changes are proposed to LPP 4.4.
In accordance with Clause 8.11.3.1 of DPS 2, it is necessary to advertise a draft policy for public comment for a period of not less than 21 days. As the modification to LPP 4.4 is only a minor typographical change Administration proposes to advertise the revision to LPP 4.4 for a period of 21 days by way of the following:
· Notification in local newspapers for two consecutive weeks; and
· Display at City Libraries, the Civic Centre and on the City’s website.
Administration considers it necessary to amend LPP 4.4, ahead of a full review of the Policy scheduled for 2014, to ensure that the statutory provisions required to be contained in local structure plans reflect BUWM. Although the inconsistency is minor, the current wording refers to a type of document that does not exist and could be misinterpreted as either a Local Water Management Strategy or an Urban Water Management Plan. The proposed modification will eliminate any confusion or misunderstanding that may arise as a result of the existing inconsistency.
This proposed amendment will ensure that LPP 4.4 is consistent with BUWM.
The proposed minor amendment to LPP 4.4 is occurring ahead of the scheduled review of the Policy and will ensure consistency with BUWM.
2013 LPP 4.4 Update
13/156303
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 4
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 8
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 14
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 16
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 27
To consider revisions to Local Planning Policy 2.6 Ancillary Accommodation (LPP 2.6) for public consultation in accordance with clause 8.11 of the City’s District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS 2).
At its meeting on 5 April 2011 (PS01-04/11), Council resolved to adopt Local Planning Policy 2.6: Ancillary Accommodation (existing Policy), which guides assessment and decision-making of applications for Planning Approval for ancillary accommodation. The existing Policy is included as Attachment 1.
A draft revised Local Planning Policy 2.6: Ancillary Accommodation is included as Attachment 2.
Administration has reviewed the existing Policy, in light of the following:
· Review of the existing policy has been scheduled for the 2013 calendar year;
· Difficulty for applicants to meet the requirement for an ancillary accommodation to share services with those of the main dwelling. This requirement is outlined as General Provision 7 of Part 2 of the existing Policy included as Attachment 1.
· A revision to the 'deemed-to-comply' provisions of State Planning Policy 3.1: Residential Design Codes (R-Codes) as they relate to ancillary accommodation, particularly the persons that can occupy the ancillary accommodation.
A revised Local Planning Policy 2.6: Ancillary Accommodation is included as Attachment 2. A 'tracked change' version of the existing Policy highlighting the revisions proposed is included as Attachment 3.
In accordance with Clause 8.11.3.1 (a) of DPS 2, it is necessary to advertise a draft policy for public comment for a period of not less than 21 days. Administration proposes to advertise the revisions to LPP 2.6 for a period of 42 days (in a consistent manner to the way it has advertised other draft local planning policies), by way of the following:
The revisions to LPP 2.6 were presented to the 24 September 2013 Council Forum for Elected Member's information.
The draft revised LPP 2.6 would provide a more contemporary and appropriate approach to the City's assessment and determination of applications for Ancillary Accommodation. The revised policy will also align with recent changes to the R-Codes and will enable a greater variety of housing choices to be provided in the City of Wanneroo. This is particularly the case because the changes will allow traditional 'granny flats' to be built and leased or occupied by persons who are unrelated to the occupants of the main dwelling on the property.
Key elements of the revised Policy are discussed below:
The revised R-Codes included changes to definitions, including those used in the existing policy. Therefore, it is appropriate for the definitions of the revised policy to align with those in the revised R-Codes by:
· Changing the term 'ancillary accommodation' to 'ancillary dwelling'. As DPS 2 lists 'ancillary accommodation' rather than 'ancillary dwelling' as a use class, the term 'ancillary accommodation' is required to be retained in the Policy.
· Incorporating the updated definition of 'plot ratio area' into the draft revised Policy (as included in the revised R-Codes), which was similarly defined as 'plot ratio' in the previous R-Codes and the existing Policy.
Removal of Family Member Provision
Previously, the R-Codes restricted occupation of an ancillary accommodation to only members of the family that occupy the main dwelling on the same site. The revised R-Codes have removed this restriction. Administration welcomes this revision to the R-Codes, and has removed General Policy Provision number 3 of the existing Policy, which imposed the same restrictions on occupancy as the previous R-Codes.
The removal of this requirement from the Policy would encourage more diversity of housing types throughout the City. Promoting a diversity of housing types is a principle outlined in the City's Local Housing Strategy.
Change in Maximum Plot Ratio Area
The revised R-Codes now prescribe a maximum plot ratio area for an 'ancillary dwelling' of 70 square metres. This is an increase from 60 square metres, as outlined in the previous R-Codes and the existing Policy.
Administration proposes to revise the Policy to align with the provision of the revised R-Codes. General Policy Provision number 4 from the existing Policy (General Policy Provision number 3 in the draft revised Policy) has been modified to prescribe the maximum plot ratio area as 70 square metres.
The existing Policy allows ancillary accommodation on lots larger than 4,000 square metres to have a plot ratio area of 90 square metres. The revised policy would increase this to 100 square metres, to maintain the 30 square metre difference in area for ancillary accommodation on different sized lots.
Administration has removed General Policy Provision number 7 from the existing Policy that required services for ancillary accommodation to be shared with those of the main dwelling on a site. This change has been made on the basis that:
· Occupants of ancillary accommodation are no longer required to be members of the family that occupy the main dwelling;
· The requirement for all services to be shared with the main dwelling has been problematic in the past, particularly in rural areas; and
· The provision of servicing is the responsibility of the landowner, and is not a planning consideration.
Inclusion of Conditions and Advice Notes
Administration proposes to include a list of standard conditions and advice notes that may be applied when granting planning approval for ancillary accommodation. The list of conditions and advice notes is proposed to be contained as a new part (Part 3) to the Policy.
The inclusion of standard conditions and advice notes is common within other local planning policies adopted by Council and will introduce greater certainty and consistency in decision-making for ancillary accommodation proposals.
Preparation and adoption of LPP 2.6 is proposed to be carried out in accordance with Clause 8.11.3.1 (a) of DPS 2.
Revised LPP 2.6 will supersede the current Local Planning Policy 2.6: Ancillary Accommodation, and establish new standards for the City to assess and determine applications for planning approval for ancillary accommodation in the City of Wanneroo.
The costs of advertising the draft Policy can be met from the Planning and Sustainability existing operational budget.
Attachment 1 - Current Policy
13/145682
Attachment 2 - Initial Draft of Revised LPP 2.6
13/172164
Attachment 3 - Tracked Change Version of LPP 2.6
13/172165
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 31
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 34
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 37
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 41
To consider submissions received during public advertising of Amendment No's. 6 and 7 to the East Wanneroo Cell 7 Agreed Structure Plan No. 9 (ASP 9) and adoption of the amendments.
Burgess Design Group & Gray & Lewis Land Use Planners
Stoneridge Nominees Pty Ltd & Ms A Ricciardo
Lots 23, 24 & 25 Windsor Road, Lot 101 & 125 Luisini Road, Wangara
On 20 June 2012, Burgess Design Group, representing Stoneridge Nominees Pty Ltd owners of Lot 24 Windsor Road, Wangara submitted Amendment No. 6 to ASP 9. On 31 July 2012, Gray & Lewis Land Use Planners, representing Mrs A Ricciardo owner of Lot 101 Luisini Road, Wangara submitted Amendment No. 7 to ASP 9.
Both amendments propose to rationalise the road network at the north-eastern portion of the Cell area and all the changes proposed in Amendment No. 6 are actually duplicated in Amendment No. 7. Although the amendments could be dealt with as one, the applicants preferred to submit separate applications to deal with these proposed changes.
As both amendments propose modifications to the same local road network, they have been considered and processed concurrently.
On 21 December 2012, a memorandum was sent to all Elected Members advising of the Director Planning and Sustainability's intention to advertise the amendments for public comment, unless otherwise requested to refer the proposals to Council. No such request was received from Elected Members and the amendments were subsequently advertised. Three (3) submissions were received as outlined in the Consultation section of this report.
Amendment No. 6 to the East Wanneroo Cell 7 ASP 9 seeks to rationalise the road network as follows:
1. To delete the proposed link road along the common boundary of Lots 23 and 24 Windsor Road, Wangara; and
2. To realign the road along the common boundary of Lots 24 and 25 Windsor Road, Wangara.
Attachment 1 depicts Amendment No. 6, as advertised.
Amendment No. 7 to the East Wanneroo Cell 7 ASP 9 also seeks to rationalise the road network as outlined above in Amendment 6 and further proposes the following amendments:
1. To delete the proposed road reserve on the western boundary of Lot 101 and the north-western boundary of Lot 125, which intersects with Hartman Drive;
2. To provide a road connection between Windsor Road and Luisini Road along the southern boundary of Lot 101.
Attachment 2 depicts Amendment No. 7, as advertised.
Amendment Nos. 6 and 7 were advertised for a period of 42 days with advertisements placed in the Wanneroo Times on 29 January 2013, notices to adjoining landowners sent on 25 January 2013, and signs also placed on site. The advertising period closed on 12 March 2013 with three (3) submissions being received.
Given the nature of the issues raised, Administration met with the submitters to discuss those issues. Attachment 3 provides a summary of submissions received together with Administration's comments on each.
To clarify the modifications proposed by Amendments 6 and 7 to ASP 9, Administration has prepared a consolidated amendment plan, included as Attachment 4. This attachment also shows Administration's recommended modifications to the local road network following consultation and review of the issues raised.
Each key issue raised by submitters is also illustrated and numbered on Attachment 4 and is further discussed below:
Issue 1 – Realigning of the road reserve along the shared boundary of Lot 24 and Lot 25.
A submitter raised concerns regarding the realignment of the road reserve on the shared boundary of Lots 24 and 25. The submitter was concerned about the legal and public liability issues involved with having a portion (northern verge) of the road reserve on Lot 25 and the remaining road reserve on Lot 24.
Administration considers that realigning this road reserve will enable the development of Lot 24 to occur independently of Lot 25. The entire carriageway is contained within Lot 24 with only the verge on the northern side of the proposed road to be within Lot 25. When Lot 25 is developed in future, the balance of the road reserve (being the northern verge) will be provided to complete the road.
There are not considered to be any legal or public liability concerns regarding the orientation of this road reserve. The positioning of road reserves on shared boundaries is very common in ASP 9 and other Agreed Structure Plans within the City.
Administration is not proposing any change to the alignment of this road reserve and therefore Issue 1 as highlighted on Attachment 4 will remain as proposed.
Issue 2 - Deletion of the proposed road reserve running along the shared boundary of Lots 101, 25 and 125, which intersect with Hartman Drive.
Amendment No. 7 proposes to delete the road reserve planned for the shared boundary of Lots 101, 25 and 125 that intersects with Hartman Drive. The applicant has proposed to delete this road on the basis that the resulting intersection with Hartman Drive is unnecessary given the proximity of two other existing intersections along Hartman Drive. The Luisini Road and Hartman Drive intersection is located approximately 100 metres south, and the Prindiville Drive and Hartman Drive intersection is located approximately 240 metres north of the proposed intersection.
Administration supports the applicant's justification, as the proposed intersection would not meet the separation distance between these existing intersections or enhance the traffic movements of the local road network.
The landowners of Lot 25 have stated that removing this road would impact on the subdivision potential of their property and access to the lot via Hartman Drive. Administration agrees and therefore recommends retaining a portion of the road reserve up-to the shared boundary of Lots 125 and 101. The connection to Hartman Drive, however, is not supported as it would not achieve safe separation distances from the existing intersections (Prindiville Drive and Luisini Road). As a result, the portion of road to be retained will terminate with a cul-de-sac head to prevent access to Hartman Drive.
Administration's proposed modification in response to this issue is illustrated in Attachment 4.
Issue 3 - Proposed Road Reserve located along the southern boundary of Lot 101
Concerns were raised by surrounding landowners relating to the proposed road reserve to be located on the southern boundary of Lot 101. These concerns are summarised as follows:
· There is a level difference between the proposed road reserve and Lot 102. Currently there is an existing 2.5m – 3.0m high retaining wall on the northern side of Lot 102 which would limit vehicular access from the proposed road to this lot; and
· The existing access way and driveway within Lot 102 is located within the proposed truncation of the road reserve and would therefore require relocation.
Administration considers the proposed road reserve along the southern boundary of Lot 101 to be superfluous, because another west-east road reserve is proposed only 200 metres south along the shared boundary of Lots 103 and 104.
Administration recommends deleting the proposed road reserve from the amendment proposal. This would not significantly impact the traffic movements and will have no impact on any future subdivision potential for adjoining properties. This recommended change is depicted in Attachment 4.
In view of the above, Administration recommends that Amendment No. 6 is adopted without changes, and that Amendment No. 7 is adopted in a modified form, as shown in Attachment 5.
Amendment Nos. 6 and 7 have been processed in accordance with the requirements of DPS 2. Clause 9.6.1 of DPS 2 provides that following advertisement of a Structure Plan amendment, Council may refuse to adopt the amendment or resolve that the amendment is satisfactory with or without modifications. It is recommended that Amendment Nos. 6 and 7 to the East Wanneroo Cell 7 Agreed Structure Plan No. 9 be approved with modifications to the advertised proposal so the road network amendment represents that shown in Attachment 5.
These proposals have been assessed in accordance with the Local Planning Policy 4.2: Structure Planning.
Attachment 1 - Amendment No. 6 Structure Plan Amendment Proposal
13/151527
Attachment 2 - Advertised Amendment No. 7 Structure Plan Amendment Proposal
12/156229
13/152532
4View.
Attachment 4 - Consolidated Amendment Proposal Plan
13/172228
5View.
Attachment 5 - Modified Amendment No. 7 Structure Plan Amendment Proposal
13/172157
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 46
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 47
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 48
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 53
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 54
To consider an application for planning approval for the retrospective development of a 'Single House' at Lot 7 (9) Rosemount Entrance, Pearsall.
Jardim Corporation Pearsall Pty Ltd
9 Rosemount Entrance, Pearsall
On 14 June 2010 an application for 16 group dwellings at 18 East Road, Pearsall was lodged with the City (DA2010/672). A locality plan of the subject site is shown in Attachment 1. The proposal incorporated boundary development to two side boundaries, the eastern and southern boundaries, of the development site. The southern boundary of this site adjoined 6 Amberley Way and the eastern boundary adjoined 24 East Road and 15 Amberley Way. The R-Codes permits boundary walls 'as of right' on only one side boundary. This variation was advertised to the affected adjoining properties.
An objection was received from the owners of 24 East Road, Pearsall. In response to the objection the applicant amended the plans to provide a one metre setback from the eastern boundary. On the basis of the amended plans approval was granted on 21 December 2010. Concurrently to application DA2010/672 a subdivision for the site was lodged with the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) consistent with the lot configuration of the development application and was approved by the WAPC, with supportive comment from the City on 10 May 2011. The subdivision created the property which is now known as 9 Rosemount Entrance, Pearsall. A site plan for approved DA2010/672 is shown in Attachment 2.
On 8 May 2013 a certified building application was lodged with the City for a single house at 9 Rosemount Entrance. The building application contained the plans of the development that included a wall to the eastern boundary.
The Building Act 2011 stipulates that the City must check if other authority approvals, including development approvals, have been issued and that the building application is in accordance with these other relevant approvals. If the building application is not in accordance with these other approvals then the City should not grant a Building Permit.
On this basis Regulatory Services review building applications to ensure that a development approval is in place and that it is consistent with that approval. In this instance, however, the changes to the location of the boundary wall was not identified and as such a building permit was issued with a wall on the boundary of 24 East Road.
Subsequent to this building permit, the builders constructed the slab of the dwelling in accordance with the permit being granted which included this boundary wall, rather than the development approval. Through compliance action undertaken by Administration, following an enquiry from the owner of 24 East Road, the building of the dwelling has now been placed on hold. In accordance with the City's District Planning Scheme No. 2 (DPS2) an application for planning approval was lodged on 16 July 2013 (DA2013/998) requesting retrospective approval for the slab constructed along the western boundary to accommodate the proposed boundary wall. Attachment 3 shows the proposed plans for DA2013/998 which is the subject of this report.
The application is for the approval of a 'Single House' at 9 Rosemount Entrance, which now proposes a wall along the eastern boundary. As a result, boundary walls are proposed on both the eastern and western boundaries. Under the R-Codes a boundary wall is permitted 'as of right' on one side boundary. As the wall on the western boundary has already been approved, the western boundary has been designated the 'as of right' boundary.
The eastern boundary wall is setback 1.426m from the southern boundary which adjoins the internal common access leg and 7.334m from the northern lot boundary that adjoins East Road.
The eastern boundary wall falls within the 'deemed-to-comply' provisions of the R-Codes in relation to length and height. The 'deemed-to-comply' provisions permit a boundary wall of a maximum of 9.0m in length with average height of 3.0m and maximum height of 3.5m. The proposed boundary wall is 5.47m in length and 2.68m in height.
Further, the adjoining property, No 24 East Road, has a higher finished ground level and as a result there is an existing retaining wall ranging from 1.1m to 1.49m in height above the finished floor level of the subject lot along the eastern boundary.
Also there is a fence on top of the existing retaining wall. The 1.49m high portion of retaining wall has a 1.8m high fence above it, whilst the 1.1m high retaining wall supports a 1.0m fence on top. Attachment 4 provides an elevation of the existing retaining and fencing in relation to the boundary wall. Attachment 5 is a photo of this existing retaining and fencing, which also indicates the level difference between the properties.
Only a portion of the boundary wall, 1.8m in length, will project a maximum of 0.6m above the fence, with the remainder of the boundary wall screened by the existing retaining and fencing.
There is also vegetation on the adjoining property which will further assist in screening the wall.
Administration referred the application (DA2013/998) for 14 days to the adjoining owner of the eastern property at 24 East Road for comment, with the advertising period finishing on 13 August 2013.
Through discussions with Administration the owner of 24 East Road sought to have the same objection as submitted to DA2010/672 considered as well as providing a new submission received on 7 August 2013.
Both submissions have been taken into consideration with the main issues raised by the submitter including the wall being too close to the boundary, noise, loss of light and ventilation. The concerns raised by the submitter and Administration's response to the submission are provided in Attachment 6.
The submitter also raised concerns as to why the builders should be given another opportunity to apply (and potentially obtain approval for) the boundary wall, when the original application was amended to the 1.0m setback and approved accordingly. In response to this concern, it is noted that the applicant chose to set the wall back off the boundary at the time the original application (DA2010/672) was considered. Further, under DPS2, it is possible to apply for retrospective approval and request support for variations to the provisions of the R-Codes.
Compliance with the Residential Design Codes (Clause 5.1.3)
Under the R-Codes, boundary walls are permitted 'as of right' on one side boundary. In the original application for 16 grouped dwellings (DA2010/672), the site had not been subdivided and the southern boundary was designated as the 'as of right' boundary for the entire site. A wall along the western boundary of 9 Rosemount Entrance was approved as part of this application, as this western boundary was an internal boundary at that stage.
As the site has now been subdivided, 9 Rosemount Entrance can be assessed independently in this development application. The wall along the western boundary is now considered a boundary wall, rather than an internal wall of the development site.
Boundary walls are now proposed on the western and eastern side boundaries. As boundary walls are proposed on two side boundaries the development doesn't meet this 'deemed-to-comply' provision and as such has been assessed against the design principles of Clause 5.1.3 P3.2 of the R-Codes.
As the western boundary wall has already been approved in the original development application (DA2010/682) the eastern boundary wall is required to be considered against the design principles as set out below:
Makes effective use of space for enhanced privacy for the occupant/s or outdoor living areas.
The boundary wall provides an additional usable space within the bedroom and enhances privacy to this habitable room.
Does not compromise the design principle contained in clause 5.1.3 P3.1. These are:
· reduce impacts of building bulk on adjoining properties;
· provide adequate direct sun and ventilation to the building and open spaces on the site and adjoining properties; and
· minimise the extent of overlooking and resultant loss of privacy on adjoining properties.
Due to the level difference, the majority of the proposed boundary wall will be screened by the existing fence, retaining and vegetation. Therefore the boundary wall will have minimal impact on the adjoining property in relation to building bulk, loss of sunlight and ventilation or privacy.
Does not have any adverse impact on the amenity of the adjoining property.
Due to the height of the existing fence and retaining, the boundary wall will not adversely impact the amenity of the adjoining property.
Ensures direct sun to major openings to habitable rooms and outdoor living areas for adjoining properties is not restricted.
Due to the height of the existing retaining and fencing and the vegetation along the boundary, the boundary wall will not restrict sunlight to the adjoining property.
The development and the boundary wall positively contributes to the prevailing development context as many of the lots developed as part of the original 16 grouped dwellings on site have boundary walls on both side boundaries. Further the boundary wall will not be readily visible from East Road and therefore will not impact the prevailing streetscape.
As the proposal is considered to satisfy the relevant design principles of the R-Codes and also will not have a material impact on the adjoining owner's property, it is recommended that the application be approved.
13/161920
Site Plan DA2010/672
13/136516
13/142044
Elevation of Boundary Wall and Existing Retaining and Fencing
13/172727
Photo of Existing Retaining and Fencing
13/137955
6View.
13/136522
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 59
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 60
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 61
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 64
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 65
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 66
Attachment 6 - Summary of Submission – 9 Rosemount Entrance, Pearsall – DA2013/998
Undermining existing retaining wall
This is a civil matter and it is the builder's responsibility to ensure no structural damage is done to the adjoining property.
Total loss of views
The submission does not stipulate what the views are of and where they are achieved from the adjoining site. Regardless the boundary wall will adjoin the existing 1.1m – 1.49m high retaining wall and a standard fence on top of this retaining. Therefore the proposed boundary wall will be predominately screened by this retaining and fencing. Attachment 4 provides an elevation of the existing retaining and fencing in relation to the boundary wall. A 1.8m portion of the proposed boundary wall will project a maximum of 0.6m above this existing fencing and this section will be screened by existing vegetation on the adjoining properties lot. This portion of wall would only restrict views into the subject lot. Given this and that the majority of the boundary wall will not be viewed from the adjoining site, there will be no loss of views.
The submission does not specify exactly what types of noise the objection has concerns with.
However, a boundary wall will consist of no windows and will prevent pedestrian traffic from utilising this part of the site. As a result it is considered the boundary wall will assist in reducing any noise generated from the subject lot.
Notwithstanding this, noise must comply with the Environment Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997, which is not a Planning regulation and any non compliance with this regulation is dealt with by Health Services.
Building too close to Boundary /
Strongly object to nil setback
A boundary wall is permitted as of right if compliant with specific "deemed-to-comply" provisions under the R-Codes. This includes the length being a maximum of 9.0m and the height being an average of 3.0m and maximum of 3.5m.
The proposed boundary wall complies with these dimensions at 5.47m in length and 2.68m in height from the subject lot, and a maximum of 1.6m in height from the adjoining lot. There will only be a portion of boundary wall 1.8m in length and 0.6m in height being visible above the existing fence line. The only component of the 'deemed-to-comply' provision that is proposed to be varied is that boundary walls are proposed on more than one side boundary. The application has been assessed and is considered to comply with the relevant Design Principles of the R-Codes. It is considered that the boundary wall meets the design requirements as only a small portion of the wall will be visible above the existing fence line, the wall will have minimal impact on the adjoining property's amenity, or access to direct sunlight, ventilation or privacy.
Loss of Natural Light & Ventilation
As discussed above, given the level difference between the existing properties, the boundary wall will match the height of the existing retaining and fencing along this eastern boundary, with only a small portion of the wall projecting above the fence height. As a result the boundary wall will not result in loss of light or ventilation to the adjoining property.
This is not a planning consideration.
Noise of air conditioner
The air conditioner unit is proposed on the western side of the subject lot and will not be adjacent the submitters property.
Notwithstanding this, the air conditioning unit must comply with Environment Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997, and is not governed by Planning Legislation. Any non-compliance with this regulation is dealt with by Health Services.
If the nil boundary variation is passed submitter has requested a new boundary fence 1.85 high color bond paid for by the owner of the Rosemount property
All boundary fencing is governed by the Dividing Fences Act 1961 and the request for a new fence will need to be resolved between the affected landowners. Notwithstanding this, the proposed boundary wall will be screened by the existing boundary fence.
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 68
To consider eight applications for an exemption under section 26(3) of the Dog Act 1976 to keep more than two dogs.
Clause 14 of the City of Wanneroo Animals Local Law 1999 (Amendment 2008 GG 508) stipulates:
“A person shall not keep or permit to be kept on any premises more than:
a) 2 dogs over the age of 3 months and the young of those dogs under that age; or
b) 6 dogs over the age of 3 months and the young of those dogs under that age if the premises are situated on a lot having an area of 4 hectares or more,
unless the premises are licensed as an approved kennel establishment or have been granted exemption pursuant to section 26(3) of the Dog Act and have planning approval under the town planning scheme.”
The following applications have been made under the Dog Act 1976 and are submitted for consideration:
Description of Dogs
6 Noel Court, Wanneroo
1. Male Sterilised brindle Staffy
2. Female Unsterilised brindle Staffy
3. Male Sterilised tan Staffy X
37 Anna Place, Wanneroo
1. Male Sterilised gold Maltese X
2. Male Sterilised black Shih-Tzu
3. Male Sterilised white Poodle X
21 McPharlin Avenue, Quinns Rocks
1. Male Sterilised black/tan Huntaway
2. Female Sterilised black/tan German Shepherd X
3. Female Unsterilised black Kelpie X
40 Polglase Fairway, Clarkson
1. Male Unsterilised white Bull Terrier
2. Female Sterilised white Bull Terrier
3. Female Sterilised tan/white Jack Russell
4. Male Unsterilised white Bull Terrier
157 Lakelands Drive, Gnangara
1. Male Sterilised tan Ridgeback
2. Female Sterilised tan Ridgeback
3. Female Sterilised brindle Staffy X
20 Whitecap Street, Yanchep
1. Female Unsterilised white Bull Terrier
2. Female Unsterilised black/tan Doberman
3. Female Unsterilised tan Chihuahua
8 Bantry Bend, Mindarie
1. Male Sterilised fawn Chihuahua
2. Female Sterilised tan Chihuahua
3. Male Sterilised tan/white Chihuahua
4. Female Sterilised tan Chihuahua
1. Male Sterilised brindle Mastiff
2. Male Sterilised gold Golden Retriever
3. Female Sterilised gold Golden Retriever
Rangers have inspected the aforementioned properties to ensure means exist on the premises at which the dogs will ordinarily be kept for effectively confining the dogs within the premises.
Property Zonings
10119m2
Where applications have been received by the City to keep more than two dogs, residents immediately adjoining the applicant’s property in question are consulted by letter to ascertain if they have any objections.
On this occasion the following objections have been received:
Number of Objection Forms Received
Number of neighbours consulted
In considering these applications for exemption, the following two options are available:
a) Council may grant an exemption pursuant to Section 26(3) of the Dog Act 1976 subject to conditions; or
b) Council may refuse permission to keep more than two dogs.
Application One: 6 Noel Court, Wanneroo
The applicant is seeking permission from the City to keep three dogs at 6 Noel Court, Wanneroo. The applicant would like to keep three dogs at the property as he has had the dogs as part of his life for two and a half years.
The application was made following an investigation into a dog attack in June 2013 that involved one of the applicant's dogs. During the investigation it became evident the applicant had three unregistered dogs on their property and as such they were required to register two immediately, and submit an application to keep the third. The Administration will not register more than two dogs on a property unless the owner has the approval of Council to keep more than two dogs.
A Ranger has inspected the property and confirmed it is adequate for the confinement and exercise of the dogs as per Clause 13 of the City of Wanneroo Animals Local law 1999. The dogs are kept in a medium sized yard and sleep in the house at night.
Upon consultation with neighbouring properties one objection was received regarding barking and yapping made by the dogs on the property.
A check of the City's records reveal that prior to this application, one complaint had been lodged with regard to unregistered dogs at this property. The Administration was already dealing with this matter as a result of the dog attack mentioned above.
It is recommended that an exemption under section 26(3) of the Dog Act 1976 be granted.
Application Two: 37 Anna Place, Wanneroo
The applicant is seeking permission from the City to keep three dogs at 37 Anna Place, Wanneroo. The applicant would like to keep three dogs at the property as she purchased two puppies from the same litter as the breeder could not find a buyer for the second puppy.
A Ranger has inspected the property and confirmed it is adequate for the confinement and exercise of the dogs as per Clause 13 of the City of Wanneroo Animals Local law 1999. The dogs are kept in a large sized yard and sleep in the house at night.
Upon consultation with neighbouring properties one objection was received regarding barking and yapping and other unspecified nuisances made by the dogs on the property.
A check of the City’s records reveals that prior to this application being made no complaints had been received by the City regarding this address.
Application Three: 21 McPharlin Avenue, Quinns Rocks
The applicant is seeking permission from the City to keep three dogs at 21 McPharlin Avenue, Quinns Rocks. The applicant would like to keep three dogs at the property as she is living at her sister's house until she finds alternative accommodation.
A Ranger has inspected the property and confirmed it is adequate for the confinement and exercise of the dogs as per Clause 13 of the City of Wanneroo Animals Local law 1999. The dogs are kept in a large sized yard and sleep in an area under the house at night and no objections were received during the consultation process.
A check of the City’s records reveals that prior to this application being made three complaints had been received by the City regarding this address. One in April 2012 which was a minor dog attack where no injuries were sustained and two complaints of dogs wandering in May 2013 and June 2013 which were rectified when the occupants fixed a small gap in their fence.
Application Four: 40 Polglase Fairway, Clarkson
The applicant is seeking permission from the City to keep four dogs at 40 Polglase Fairway, Clarkson. The applicant would like to keep four dogs at the property as one of the puppies from their litter was born with a disability and couldn't be sold and then they came into possession of a Jack Russell after a family member passed away.
A Ranger has inspected the property and confirmed it is adequate for the confinement and exercise of the dogs as per Clause 13 of the City of Wanneroo Animals Local law 1999. The dogs are kept in a medium sized yard and sleep in the house at night and no objections were received during the consultation process.
Application Five: 157 Lakelands Drive, Gnangara
The applicant is seeking permission from the City to keep three dogs at 157 Lakelands Drive, Gnangara. The applicant would like to keep three dogs at the property as she rescued the third dog from the RSPCA and didn't realise that there was a restriction on dog numbers within the City of Wanneroo.
A Ranger has inspected the property and confirmed it is adequate for the confinement and exercise of the dogs as per Clause 13 of the City of Wanneroo Animals Local law 1999. The dogs are kept in a large sized yard and sleep in the house and in kennels at night and no objections were received during the consultation process.
Application Six: 20 Whitecap Street, Yanchep
The applicant is seeking permission from the City to keep three dogs at 20 Whitecap Street, Yanchep. The applicant would like to keep three dogs at the property as she took on the Chihuahua puppy after its leg had to be amputated and the owner wanted to euthanize her.
Application Seven: 8 Bantry Bend, Mindarie
The applicant is seeking permission from the City to keep four dogs at 8 Bantry Bend, Mindarie. The applicants would like to keep four dogs at the property as they are a large part of their family, they already have two here, however they need permission to bring the other two over from the United Kingdom.
Application Eight: 12 Galatea Grove, Two Rocks
The applicant is seeking permission from the City to keep three dogs at 12 Galatea Grove, Two Rocks. The applicant would like to keep three dogs at the property as she looks after her son's dog as he's a FIFO worker.
A Ranger has inspected the property and confirmed it is adequate for the confinement and exercise of the dogs as per Clause 13 of the City of Wanneroo Animals Local law 1999. The dogs are kept in a large sized yard and sleep in the house at night and no objections were received during the consultation process.
A check of the City’s records reveals that prior to this application being made one complaint had been received by the City regarding this address. The complaint was an alleged barking dog complaint lodged in June 2013, which was finalised in August 2013 after it was discovered that the dogs had been barking whilst the owners had been away on holidays.
The exemptions sought to Council’s Animals Local Law 1999 are permissible under Section 26(3) of the Act.
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 74
To consider a new Lease over a portion of Crown Reserve 28058, Lot 555, Kingsway, Madeley to the Wanneroo City Soccer Club (Inc.) (WCSC) for its continued use of a purpose built clubroom, storage container and shed.
The WCSC currently leases a portion of Crown Reserve 28058, portion of Lot 555 on Deposited Plan 64232 being the whole of the land comprised in Certificate of Title Volume LR3158 Folio 501 (refer to Attachment 1) and otherwise known as the Kingsway Regional Sporting Complex (the Complex)
Crown Reserve 28058 is a category “C” reserve vested in the City for “Recreation” purposes under a Management Order with power to lease for a term not exceeding 21 years, subject to the consent of the Minister for Lands.
The land is currently zoned as "Parks & Recreation" under the Metropolitan Region Scheme and "Regional Parks & Recreation" in the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No.2.
The WCSC is a well utilised Western Australian amateur soccer club that operates from a purpose built clubhouse and change room facility constructed circa 1974. The WCSC currently plays in the State, Junior, Masters and Metro leagues and has a total of 176 junior players and 76 senior players. In 2012, the WCSC had 57% of its senior and junior members living within the City.
The City’s ten (10) year peppercorn Lease with the WCSC expired in October 2004. Subsequently, the Lease has been held over with the WCSC becoming a monthly tenant on the same terms and conditions of the expired Lease. The existing held over Lease was negotiated prior to the adoption of the City’s current Tenancy Policy.
The existing held over Lease is an old document with limited detail that lacks the clarity of the City's current standard Lease document. A new Lease will clarify the WCSC’s responsibilities to maintain its leased premises to the required standards. This will provide consistency with the City's other “Sporting Club” tenants throughout the City.
Under the City’s current Tenancy Policy, the WCSC is categorised as a “not-for-profit” entity and Leases are to be negotiated at no cost to the City.
Administration and the WCSC have negotiated a Lease to incorporate the footprint of the clubroom building along with a sea container and external shed subject to Council and Minister for Lands approval on the following essential terms:
Clubroom, sea container and external shed as shown hachured on the plan (refer to Attachment 1)
Clubrooms and storage and uses reasonably ancillary thereto.
The Lessee will be responsible for all rates (including Council rates & Water rates), taxes, assessments, impositions and outgoings for water consumption, electricity, gas, and telephone/broadband used in relation to the Premises whether billed directly or otherwise.
Provision of Audited Accounts
Historically, the following factors have contributed to the delay in negotiating a new Lease with the WCSC:
1) The delay in the Kingsway Infrastructure upgrade. Now complete;
2) The deteriorating standard of the clubhouse and change room facility which was not maintained to the required standard by the WCSC and resulted in the City funding and completing a $245,000 re-fit of the club premises in 2012 as part of the City’s commitment to the Building Asset Renewal Program; and
3) Previous outstanding WCSC debt. These debts have now been cleared in full:
· At the Ordinary Council Meeting of 11 October 2011, Resolution MN01-10/11, Council resolved to write off $18,000 of WCSC debt in recognition of the value of floodlighting that the WCSC had installed at the Complex in 1998. This offset was applied against the WCSC's outstanding seasonal team and ground fees, utilities and insurance fees and Council Rates debt as at 2011;
· Further Council Rates and Emergency Services Levy arrears of $3,179.59 were paid off in full by the WCSC in August 2013;
· Further outstanding ground fee arrears of $2,500 were paid off in full by the WCSC in May 2013;
· A floodlight upgrade in 2011 that was documented in a Memorandum of Understanding and cost $22,156 was paid off in full by the WCSC in May 2013; and
· Building Insurance Premiums are up to-date.
The essential terms of the proposed new Lease have been prepared in consultation with the WCSC.
Community Facilities supports the terms of the proposed new Lease.
Administration has received in-principle consent to the essential terms of the proposed new Lease from the Department of Lands (DOL) on behalf of the Minister for Lands pursuant to Section 18 of the Land Administration Act 1997.
The new WCSC Management Committee (the Committee) has worked extensively with Administration over the past 12 months to negotiate the terms of the proposed new Lease. The WCSC has proved itself to be a more pro-active, organised and efficient entity with a clear strategic goal and all outstanding debt with the City has been serviced in full. In addition, the WCSC has compiled a Business Plan 2013-15 (refer to Attachment 2) that details the immediate short to medium term plans of the WCSC. The Business Plan also lists a SWOT analysis, a business planning and a financial management section that illustrates that the WCSC has become a more professional entity.
Administration believes that the WCSC now has the required administrative structure and policies and procedures in place to manage the proposed new Lease in accordance with the City’s existing Tenancy Policy. The WCSC has proven to be a more proactive and positive entity in Lease and debt recovery negotiations despite being a volunteer organisation with somewhat limited resources. The WCSC is now looking to incorporate ladies soccer into its itinerary and commence upgrades to its change room facilities in order to allow female players to co-exist on site, increasing the clubs community appeal.
The City has been a major creditor of the WCSC and has shown its commitment to the future of the WCSC by investing a considerable financial sum on both ground and building upgrades at the Complex. The Committee has been reminded of its responsibilities to its membership in ensuring the WCSC's ongoing sustainability (including its maintenance and financial responsibilities) and that it has clear obligations in this regard under the Associations Incorporations Act 1997.
Due to the WCSC's previous history of bad debt as outlined in the 'Detail' section of this report, it is an essential requirement of the proposed new Lease that the WCSC submits its audited financial accounts to the City on an annual basis for the duration of the proposed Lease term. Failure to adhere to this requirement will result in the WCSC being in breach of its Lease, enabling the City to terminate the Lease.
The WCSC has been reminded that the City offers Club Development Seminars and Workshops to assist clubs with their ongoing operations and governance.
Administration is confident that the WCSC is now in a much improved financial position and able to service the full term of the proposed Lease.
The proposed Lease is considered an exempt disposition under Regulation 30(2)(b) of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996, which states:
The objectives of the WCSC as per its constitution are as follows:
· To foster the game of Association Football (Soccer) and to provide facilities for the playing of the game;
· To promote and encourage the playing of Junior and Senior Football (Soccer) in accordance with the laws of the game as laid down from time to time by the Federation Internationale de Football Association (FIFA); and
· To provide recreational and sporting facilities for its members, to encourage the game of Football (Soccer) in its district and to promote good fellowship amongst its members.
The WCSC is a sporting entity and therefore an exempt disposition under Regulation 30(2)(b) of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996.
The proposed Lease has been negotiated in accordance with the City’s Tenancy Policy.
In recognition of the benefit to the community provided by the WCSC the lease fee applicable will be $1 per annum (peppercorn). The WCSC will be responsible for the cost of cleaning, repairs, maintenance, insurance, rates and taxes and all other outgoings associated with the leased premises.
12/59444
Attachment 2 Business Plan 2013-15
13/152647
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 79
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 80
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 97
To consider additional Direct Grant funding and an offer of additional State BlackSpot grant funding to the approved 2013/2014 Capital Works Budget.
As part of the 2013/2014 Capital Works Budget process an allowance of $420,000 in Direct Grant funding was included as a funding contribution to the Road Resurfacing Program, with this figure based on the 2012/2013 funding, including an allowance for escalation. Main Roads WA (MRWA) has since adoption of the City's 2013/2014 Capital Works Budget confirmed (and paid out) an approved Direct Grant of $456,356. As a consequence, an additional sum of $36,356 has been received by the City.
In 2012 the City made nine submissions to MRWA for BlackSpot funding through the Nation Building (100% funding) and State (67% funding) programs (Item IN04-08/12 refers). Of the submissions made, one was successful in securing Nation Building BlackSpot funding while four were successful in securing State BlackSpot funding, with these projects noted as follows:
Nation Building BlackSpot Funding
· Marangaroo Drive/Highclere Boulevard, Marangaroo (PR-2638) – Upgrade street lighting to Australian Standard AS1158.
State BlackSpot Funding
· Franklin Road, Jandabup (PR-2641) – improvement of road delineation by installing edge lines and raised pavement markers.
· Trichet Road, Jandabup (PR-2642) – improvement of road delineation by installing edge lines and raised pavement markers.
· Old Yanchep Road (Ziatus Road to Wattle Avenue), Pinjar (PR-2598) – first stage of two to realign bends to cater for an 80km/h design speed, construct batters, seal road shoulders, install edge lines and separation line with raised pavement markers.
· Marangaroo Drive/The Avenue, Alexander Heights (PR-2640) – removal of the right turn filter for right turn movements from Marangaroo Drive into The Avenue.
The Direct Grant was fully allocated to the 2013/2014 Road Resurfacing Program (PR-1087), with the additional funding received increasing the budget allocation to this program from $2,132,044 to $2,168,400.
MRWA, through email advice received dated 3 September 2013, has also offered through the State BlackSpot Program to fund a further City project, for the installation of skid resistant treatment to through movement at the Marmion Avenue/Quinns Road intersection (ie: on the northern and southern approaches on Marmion Avenue only), Quinns Rocks.
Given the State BlackSpot Program only offers a two-thirds contribution (ie: in this instance funding of $46,667), a further one-third contribution (ie: $23,333) is therefore required from the City. As MRWA sought advice in confirmation (or otherwise) by 6 September 2013, tentative acceptance was provided but it was noted that formal consideration would still need to be sought from Council in order to formalise acceptance.
Receipt of the additional Direct Grant of $36,356 is acknowledged, thus increasing the budget allocation of the 2013/2014 Road Resurfacing Program (PR-1087).
Administration recommends acceptance of the $46,667 grant offered through the State BlackSpot Program for the installation of skid resistant treatment to the Marmion Avenue/Quinns Road intersection. However, this will require additional funding of $23,333 from the City's own funding sources in order to formally accept the offer presented. In this regard, it is proposed that the municipal funding made available in the Road Resurfacing Program as a consequence of the additional Direct Grant received be utilised in part as the City's one-third contribution for the additional State Blackspot project as offered by MRWA.
This budget variation is in compliance with Part 6 – Financial Management of Local Government Act and Part 2 – General Financial Management of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996.
The offer by MRWA only commits two-thirds of the overall budget of $70,000 required to undertake the works associated with the installation of skid resistant treatment to the Marmion Avenue/Quinns Road intersection and therefore additional funding of $23,333 from the City's own funding sources is required in order to formally accept this offer.
Given the increase in Direct Grant and the subsequent increase in funding allocated to the 2013/2014 Road Resurfacing Program (PR-1087) it is proposed to transfer $23,333 in municipal funding from the Road Resurfacing Program available to the Marmion Avenue/Quinns Road State Blackspot project offered by Main Roads WA. This would then result in an increase due to receipt of additional Direct Grant of $13,023 against the Road Resurfacing Program, with a revised new total of $2,145,067.
Should Council endorse this proposal then a project number will need to be allocated for subsequent rollout of the project.
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 100
To consider a proposed Traffic Management Scheme (TMS) to address speeding issues and pedestrian crossing facilities along Anchorage Drive, Mindarie.
Council at its meeting 11 December 2012 considered Item No IN08-12/12 - Anchorage Drive, Mindarie - Speed zoning and pedestrian crossings, in response to complaints from residents and enquiries from Elected Members regarding the speed of traffic along Anchorage Drive (south) and the danger to pedestrians and resolved as follows:
" 1. ENDORSES the use of traffic treatments and landscaping to create a lower speed environment on Anchorage Drive, Mindarie, from Ocean Falls Boulevard to Rosslare Boulevard with the intent of encouraging greater than 85% percentile compliance with the current posted speed limit of 60km/h;
2. REQUESTS Administration to prepare detailed concept plans and costing for Council's consideration by the June 2013 meeting including;
a) The installation of three pedestrian facilities on Anchorage Drive as per Attachment 2 (TRIM 12/3645);
b) The installation of street trees between Ocean Falls Boulevard and Swansea Boulevard;
c) Extension of the existing boulevard treatment from Mariners View/Toulon Way to Swansea Boulevard, including the installation of street trees;
d) Provision of on street parking on Anchorage Drive, north of Toulon Way; and
3. ADVISES respondents to the community consultation of Council's decision."
Refer to Attachment 1 for a location map of the area of interest.
The proposed TMS for Anchorage Drive to address the resolutions of Council is shown on City of Wanneroo Drawing No. 2916-1-0 (refer Attachment 2).
The TMS consists of installing:
· A planted raised and red asphalt median between Swansea Promenade/Honiara Way and Rosslare Promenade/Fairport Vista;
· Street trees on existing median islands between Ocean Falls Boulevard and Swansea Promenade;
· Parking embayments on the west side of Anchorage Drive adjacent to 1/8 Toulon Circle;
· Three pedestrian crossings along Anchorage Drive to the south of Ocean Falls Boulevard, south of Alexandria View and west of Rothesay Heights adjacent to Kanda Place cul de sac; and
· Footpath connections along the east side of Anchorage Drive between the proposed pedestrian crossings south of Ocean Falls Boulevard and south of Alexandria View and along the north side of Anchorage Drive between Kanda Place and the existing footpath west of Rothesay Heights.
As part of the preparation of the report to Council in December 2012 Item (No IN08-12/1212 refers) two concurrent community consultations were conducted to assess the level of support for the provision of pedestrian facilities and a reduction in speed on Anchorage Drive.
Survey letters were mailed to 250 owners and occupiers within the pedestrian catchment areas to obtain feedback on the provision of pedestrian facilities along Anchorage Drive.
In addition to feedback sought from owners and occupiers within the pedestrian catchment areas, feedback was sought from the wider community regarding a reduction in speed limit along Anchorage Drive. To advise residents of the proposal, four signs were erected on Anchorage Drive, and advertised in the North East Link and on the 'your say' section of the City's Website.
No further community consultation was carried out prior to preparing this report.
The construction of the pedestrian crossings at Anchorage Drive and associated pathway connections are considered a high priority and funding has been approved on the 2013/2014 Pathways Program for the implementation of these works.
The proposed planted raised and red asphalt median between Swansea Promenade/Honiara Way and Rosslare Promenade/Fairport Vista will reduce the effective traffic lane width to 3.0m and the planted trees will provide a low speed environment along Anchorage Drive. Administration considers that the proposed treatments will change the road environment to encourage 85th percentile speed compliance with posted the speed limit of 60 Km/h.
The proposed TMS will restrict motorists (residents, visitors and others) from parking on the carriageway of Anchorage Drive which will be subject to the following Local Law:
Parking and Parking Facilities Local Law 2003 Part 8 Clause 68 (6)
"If the carriageway has a continuous dividing line or a median strip, the vehicle shall be positioned at least 3 metres from any continuous line or median strip, unless otherwise indicated by information on or with a parking control sign."
The City's Parking and Parking Facilities Local Law 2003 Part 8 Clause 68 (6) is applicable to the proposed TMS as it will result in the banning of parking on the carriageway: "If the carriageway has a continuous dividing line or a median strip, the vehicle shall be positioned at least 3 metres from any continuous line or median strip, unless otherwise indicated by information on or with a parking control sign."
The indicative costs for the implementation of the traffic treatments outlined in the proposed TMS are summarised below.
· Pedestrian crossings and associated footpaths connections - $80,000.
Funding has been approved in the 2013/2014 Pathways Program for the construction of these pedestrian crossings and associated pathway connections (Refer Project No. PR-2592 – Pedestrian Crossings Anchorage Drive, Mindarie).
· Planted raised and red asphalt median, parking embayments and tree planting - $290,000. There is currently no funding allocation for these works in the 10 year Traffic Treatments Capital Works Program.
Location map of Anchorage Drive, Mindarie
12/140833
Concept drawing of proposed traffic management treatments - Drawing 2916-1-0
13/166794
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 103
AERIAL VIEW – Anchorage Drive, Mindarie
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 104
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 105
To consider disbanding the Healthy Communities Steering Group.
Council formed the Healthy Communities Steering Group on 29 June 2010. The Terms of Reference of the Steering Group stated that the purpose of the group was:
"To bring together key community stakeholders to provide strategic advice, support and direction to the planning, implementation and evaluation of the project."
In November 2009 the City of Wanneroo (the City) was selected from 42 Local Governments to apply for the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing (DOHA) Healthy Communities Initiative (HCI) funding to implement "lifestyle modifications programs for at risk adults who are not predominantly in the paid workforce". The City's submission to implement a Healthy Communities Program (the program) was rewarded with $976,172 of funding from 2010-2013.
The City launched the program in 2010, comprising a suite of free physical activity and nutrition workshops for those at high risk of developing chronic health diseases. The program initially commenced in the south ward suburb of Girrawheen, recognising as having a high proportion of residents experiencing socio-economic disadvantage. The program expanded over the subsequent years and now operates from nine locations in all City wards.
In 2010 the City formed the Healthy Communities Steering Group (HCSG), consisting of key external stakeholders, community and elected members. The HCSG continues to operate, and has driven a number of key initiatives, including research undertaken in partnership with North Metro Public Health Unit (NMPHU), the City’s first Community Health and Wellbeing Policy, and the development of the City's first Local Public Health Plan (LPHP), currently in draft. The creation of this Steering Group was a contractual obligation as part of the grant conditions, but also provided an important opportunity to guide the implementation of the Healthy Communities Initiative in a process that is entirely consistent with the City’s own community engagement principles.
With the DOHA funding now having concluded in June 2013, the City has made a strong commitment to prioritising health and wellbeing as core business with Council adopting the City's first Community Health and Wellbeing Policy in December 2012, the establishment of a Healthy Communities sub unit, and proceeding with the development of the City's first Public Health Plan.
At the Healthy Communities Steering Group meeting held on 23 September 2013, the following consensus was resolved:
"1. DISBANDS the Healthy Communities Steering Group as it has fulfilled its Terms of Reference following the completion of the Healthy Communities Initiative grant; and
2. SUPPORTS the establishment of an informal Public Health Plan advisory network to support consultation with community and stakeholders specific to each of the actions."
The work undertaken by the Healthy Communities Steering Group has made a significant contribution to the success of the Healthy Communities Initiative. The diversity of the proposed Public Health Plan actions requires timely consultation with industry specific stakeholders. Therefore, an informal Public Health Plan advisory network is proposed in replacement of the existing Healthy Communities Steering Group to support consultation with the community, industry stakeholders and Elected Members specific to each action.
Further investigation will be undertaken by Administration to determine the most appropriate governance model to support the proposed Public Health Plan advisory network and the overall implementation and evaluation of the Public Health Plan.
It should be remembered that the proposed Public Health Plan will report to Council annually on its progress and other related matters will be communicated to elected members at the informal Community Development briefing sessions and Council Forum as appropriate.
CITY OF WANNEROO Agenda OF Ordinary Council Meeting 15 October, 2013 108
Presentation to the Council of a list of accounts paid for the month of September 2013, including a statement as to the total amounts outstanding at the end of the month.
The following is the Summary of Accounts paid in September 2013.
At the close of September 2013 outstanding creditors amounted to $202,093.18.
The list of payment (cheques and electronic transfers) and the end of month total of outstanding creditors for the month of September 2013 is presented to the Council for information and recording in the minutes of the meeting, as required by the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996.