Agenda of Council Briefing - 11 September 2018

Council Briefing Agenda 11 September 2018

5 Development Services

5.1 No. 73/288 (Lot: 73; STR: 67450) Lord Street, Highgate - Change of Use From Shop to Unlisted Use (Cigar Bar)

TRIM Ref: D18/100178

Author: Kate Miller, Senior Urban Planner

Authoriser: Luke Gibson, A/Director Development Services

Ward: South

Attachments: 1. Attachment 1 - Consultation and Location Map ⇩

2. Attachment 2 - Development Plans ⇩

3. Attachment 3 - Venue Management Plan ⇩

4. Attachment 4 - Car Parking Assessment and Management Plan ⇩

5. Attachment 5 - Acoustic Report ⇩

6. Attachment 6 - Draft Rules and Regulations ⇩

7. Attachment 7 - Draft Membership Form ⇩

8. Attachment 8 - Administration's Response to Submissions ⇩

9. Attachment 9 - Applicant's Response to Submissions ⇩

10. Attachment 10 - Advice Notes ⇩

Recommendation:

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 a Change of Use from Shop to Unlisted Use (Cigar Club) at No. 73/288 (Lot: 73; STR: 67450) Lord Street, Highgate, in accordance with the plans shown in Attachment 2, subject to the following conditions, and advice notes contained in Attachment 10:

1. Use of Premises

1.1 This approval only relates to the Change of Use from Shop to Unlisted Use (Cigar Bar) as shown on the plans dated 1 May 2018. It does not relate to any other development on the site;

1.2 A maximum of two staff and 60 patrons are permitted on the site at any one time;

1.3 The Unlisted Use (Cigar Bar) shall operate in accordance with the Venue Management Plan dated 5 June 2018 (and all subsequent amendments). The terms and conditions outlined in the Venue Management Plan shall be provided to all members of the facility and also displayed in a prominent location within the entrance area of the venue;

1.4 The hours of operation for the Unlisted Use (Cigar Bar) shall be limited to the following:

· Monday to Saturday: 10.00am to 12.00am (Midnight); and

· Sunday: 10.00am to 5.00pm;

1.5 Prior to use of the development, the ventilation system is to be provided in accordance with the Venue Management Plan. The ventilation system is to operate at all times during the hours of operation of the venue;

2. The development shall maintain an active and interactive relationship and uninterrupted views to Lord Street and Windsor Street, to the satisfaction of the City. Darkened, obscured, mirror or tinted glass or the like is prohibited. Curtains, blinds and other internal or external treatments that obscure the view to Lord Street and Windsor Street are not permitted to be used during the hours of the venue’s operation;

3. All off-street parking is to be available during business hours for all customers and staff. The parking bays are not to be used for storage purposes or the like;

4. All mechanical ventilation systems shall not be visible from the street and surrounding properties, to the satisfaction of the City. Where screening is required, continuous vertical or horizontal opaque material more than 50mm in width, occupying a minimum of three quarters of the total surface area in aggregate; or a surface offering equal or more obstruction to view which does not compromise ventilation, in accordance with the City’s Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form, unless further development approval is obtained;

5. All signage is to be in strict accordance with the City’s Policy No. 7.5.2 – Signs and Advertising, unless further development approval is obtained; and

6. Conditions that have a time limitation for compliance, and the condition is not met in the required timeframe, the obligation to comply with the requirements of the condition continues whilst the approved development exists.

Purpose of Report:

To consider an application for development approval for a Change of Use from Shop to Unlisted Use (Cigar Bar) at No. 73/288 Lord Street, Highgate (subject tenancy).

PROPOSAL:

The application proposes to change the use of the subject tenancy, which is located within a mixed use development, from Shop to Unlisted Use (Cigar Bar). The venue will provide a private meeting place for members to purchase cigars, tobacco products and accessories. The smoking of the cigars and tobacco products is to be contained entirely within the premises and is subject to a separate license issued by the Department of Health under the Tobacco Products Control Act 2006. Air management systems are proposed to be installed within the premises to ensure regular cleanliness and purification of the air and will be released directly from the roof of the building. Specifically, the building contains an air management system that provides exhausts direct to the roof of the building, ensuring zero emissions in the venue. In addition, the applicant’s Venue Management Plan confirms an air management system will be installed inside the venue to purify the air for full air-recycling.

Entry to the Unlisted Use (Cigar Bar) will be strictly limited to members only via swipe card access. No casual admission to the general public is permitted. The premises will operate with two employees at any one time and accommodate a maximum of 60 patrons. The application proposes the following operating hours:

· Monday to Saturday: 10.00am to 12.00am (Midnight); and

· Sunday: 10.00am to 5.00pm.

No external alterations or additions are proposed to the existing building as part of this development application.

The building on the subject site and this tenancy have been designed to minimise noise and music impacts on surrounding areas including the strata complex, as demonstrated in the acoustic design report included as Attachment 5. The measures in the acoustic design report were implemented at the construction stage of the development. Music is proposed to be limited to ‘elevator music’ only as the operator intends to set an ambient style mood for the premises. The integrated music system will be designed for built in speakers acoustically shielded to ensure no impact to the surrounding tenancies and properties and no external speakers are proposed.

Background:

Landowner:	JNI Developments PTY LTD, Avalon Holdings (WA) PTY LTD and Land Surveys PTY LTD
Applicant:	John Italiano
Date of Application:	1 May 2018
Zoning:	MRS: Urban LPS2: Zone: Commercial R Code: Not applicable
Built Form Area:	Transit Corridor
Existing Land Use:	Shop
Proposed Use Class:	Unlisted Use (Cigar Bar)
Lot Area:	2,095m²
Right of Way (ROW):	Yes
Heritage List:	No

The subject tenancy is contained within the building located on the corner of Lord Street and Windsor Street at No. 288 Lord Street, Highgate, as shown on the location map included as Attachment 1. The site is occupied by a six-storey mixed use development comprising 68 multiple dwellings and five commercial tenancies. The site is bound by a mix of commercial uses to the west of Lord Street including offices (Nos. 285 & 287-293 Lord Street), a shop (Nos. 297-299 Lord Street), an eating house, an educational establishment (cooking studio) and unlisted use (catering business) (Nos. 301-307 Lord Street). To the south of Windsor Street, the site is bound by a six-storey mixed use development (No. 280 Lord Street) comprising commercial uses on the ground floor and residential dwellings on the upper floors and grouped dwellings and single houses (Nos. 39-41 and 37 and Nos. 37A Windsor Street). Directly to the north and east of the subject site, is an office building (No. 308 Lord Street) and a community gathering centre (No. 36 Windsor Street), respectively.

The subject tenancy is zoned Commercial under the City’s Local Planning Scheme No. 2 (LPS2). The immediate surrounding properties provide a mix of zones including Commercial, Local Centre and Residential. The Residential density code of the properties on Lord Street and Windsor Street is R100 and R60, respectively.

On 1 May 2018, the City received a development application seeking approval to change the use of the site from Shop to Unlisted Use (Cigar Bar). The applicant’s development plans are included as Attachment 2. In support of the proposal, the applicant has also provided a Venue Management Plan included as Attachment 3, a Car Parking Assessment and Management Plan included as Attachment 4, an Acoustic Report included as Attachment 5, Draft Rules and Regulations included as Attachment 6 and a Draft Membership Form included as Attachment 7.

Details:

Summary Assessment

The table below summarises the planning assessment of the proposal against the provisions of the LPS2 and the City’s 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.

Planning Element	Use Permissibility/ Deemed-to-Comply	Requires the Discretion of Council
Land Use		ü
Parking & Access		ü
Bicycle Parking	ü
Signage	ü

Detailed Assessment

The deemed-to-comply assessment of the element that requires the discretion of Council is as follows:

Land Use

Deemed-to-Comply Standard

Proposal

Local Planning Scheme No. 2

“P” use

Unlisted Use “A” use

Car Parking

Deemed-to-Comply Standard

Proposal

Policy No. 7.7.1 – Non-Residential Development Parking requirements

Car bays

Unlisted Uses have no prescribed parking requirement under Table 1 of the City’s Non-Residential Parking Requirement policy. Notwithstanding, it is considered the proposal will operate in a similar nature to a Club Premises. Therefore, the Club Premises ratio has been applied as follows:

Transit Corridor requires 0.25 car bays per person

Number of persons: 62 (maximum of 60 patrons and 2 staff)

Required car bays: 15.5 (rounds to 16)

The subject tenancy accommodates *two dedicated car bays, equating to a 14 car bay shortfall.

Note: The car parking management plan confirms bays annotated ‘E and ‘F’ are dedicated parking bays for the subject tenancy. Bays annotated A – D are dedicated bays for other tenancies.

The above elements of the proposal do not meet the specified deemed-to-comply standards and are discussed in the Comments section below.

Consultation/Advertising:

Community consultation was undertaken in accordance with the Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015, for a period of 21 days from 15 June 2018 to 5 July 2018. The method of consultation being a sign on site, an advertisement in the local newspaper and 305 letters mailed to all owners and occupiers surrounding to the site (as shown in Attachment 1), in accordance with the City’s Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation.

A total of 17 submissions were received; four supporting the proposal and 13 objecting to the proposal.

The main concerns raised by the submissions are as follows;

· The premises being used for smoking and the health implications associated with the use;

· The appropriateness of the land use adjacent to residential areas;

· Car parking and reliance of on-street parking;

· The hours of operation;

· The odour produced from the smoke affecting the amenity of the surrounding area; and

· The management of the premises.

Administration’s and the applicant’s response’s to the submissions made are provided in Attachment 8 and Attachment 9, respectively.

In addition to the above, the proposal was referred to the Department of Health for comment. In summary, the Department advised that the business will operate in accordance with the Tobacco Products Control Act 2006 and as the business will not be open to the general public smoking is permitted inside the venue.

Design Review Panel (DRP):

Referred to DRP: No

Legal/Policy:

· Planning and Development Act 2005;

· Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015;

· City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2;

· Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation;

· Policy No. 7.7.1 – Non-Residential Development Parking Requirement;

· Public Health Act 1911; and

· Health (Public Buildings) Regulations 1992.

In accordance with Schedule 2 Clause 76(2) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 and Part 14 of the Planning and Development Act 2005, the applicant will have the right to apply to the State Administrative Tribunal for a review of Council’s determination.

Delegation to Determine Applications:

This matter is being referred to Council as the development proposes a new Unlisted Use (Cigar Bar). The Chief Executive Officer has not been delegated the authority to determine Unlisted Use (Cigar Bar) land uses. Additionally, the application received more than five objections through the community consultation undertaken.

Risk Management Implications:

It is Administration’s view that there are minimal risks to Council and the City’s business function when Council exercises its discretionary power to determine a planning application.

Strategic Implications:

The City’s Strategic Plan 2013 - 2023 states:

“Natural and Built Environment

1.1 Improve and maintain the natural and built environment and infrastructure.”

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.

Financial/Budget Implications:

Nil.

Comments:

Land Use

The subject tenancy is zoned Commercial and the surrounding area provides a mix of zones including Commercial, Local Centre and Residential with density codes of R100 and R60 on Lord Street and Windsor Street, respectively. The immediate vicinity surrounding the subject tenancy adjoins a mix of commercial uses and residential properties. For these reasons, it is considered the proposed Unlisted Use (Cigar Bar) will add to the mix of commercial uses within the locality.

In considering the appropriateness of the use, Council shall have regard to the objectives of the Commercial zone, as follows.

· To facilitate a wide range of compatible commercial uses that support sustainable economic development within the City.

· To ensure development design incorporates sustainability principles, with particular regard to waste management and recycling and including but not limited to solar passive design, energy efficiency and water conservation.

· To maintain compatibility with the general streetscape, for all new buildings in terms of scale, height, style, materials, street alignment and design of facades.

· To ensure that development is not detrimental to the amenity of adjoining owners or residential properties in the locality.

The proposed Unlisted Use (Cigar Bar) is considered to provide an alternative land use to the commercial area which is consistent with the LPS2 objectives for a commercial zone which states to facilitate a wide range of compatible commercial uses. Given the context of the subject tenancy and particularly, the Unlisted Use (Cigar Bar) being managed for strict entry to members only, the proposed land use is considered to not pose a detrimental impact on nearby residential and commercial properties. The land use is considered to be consistent with the objectives of a commercial zone, which seeks to facilitate a wide range of compatible commercial uses that support sustainable economic development within the City.

Hours of Operation and Management of Premises

A Venue Management Plan has been submitted to the City and is included as Attachment 3. The Venue Management Plan seeks to outline the general management procedures for the operation of the venue including but not limited to, patron management, noise and amenity management, cumulative impact assessment and waste management.

The Unlisted Use (Cigar Bar) will operate with two employees (including a Venue Manager) and have a maximum capacity of 60 customers. The average venue attendance is proposed to be 50 patrons at any one time. The hours of operation are proposed to be:

· Monday to Saturday: 10.00am to 12.00am (Midnight); and

· Sunday: 10.00am to 5.00pm.

The proposed operating hours are comparable to the operating hours of nearby land uses including a restaurant at 305 Lord Street which operates until 11:00pm, Monday to Saturday. Although the subject tenancy is within close proximity to residential development, guest behaviour will be monitored by venue staff. Additionally, guests are requested to access and egress the venue in a quiet and peaceful manner.

Entrance to the building is via the Lord Street entrance and access will remain exclusive to members only, who will be provided with an individual swipe card upon joining the club. In addition, security protocols including a controlled digital camera will be in operation and monitored during the hours of operation of the venue. Should an issue arise, the following contacts will be available:

· Venue Manager to be contacted using the business telephone;

· Managing Director or representative are to be contacted via mobile phone, should an issue escalate;

· On-call security company can be contacted via business telephone and/or mobile phone; and

· Police, Ambulance or Fire Brigade are to be contacted in the case of an emergency.

As admission to the premises is restricted to club members only and there will be no sale or consumption of alcoholic beverages, the applicant considers the likeliness of anti-social behaviour to be minimal and on-site security is not necessary. Notwithstanding, a Venue Manager will be present on site at all times during operating hours to manage any complaints and/or incidents. Furthermore, any complaints and/or incidents can be escalated as necessary, noting an on-call security company will be contracted to provide additional support as required.

Prior to becoming a member of the Unlisted Use (Cigar Bar), an application form and curriculum vitae is to be submitted. Accepted members are required to sign and accept a copy of the Rules and Regulations. A draft application form and draft rules and regulation is included as Attachments 6 and 7. A summary of the Code of Conduct, which forms part of the Rules and Regulations is as follows:

· Being mindful on the rules of the community and neighbourhood;

· Treat all associated staff with courtesy;

· Respect other guests;

· Encouraging a relaxed and enjoyable social environment; and

· Anti-social behaviour will not be tolerated.

Should a member not adhere with the Rules and Regulations and/or associated Code of Conduct, members can be asked to leave the premises. Alternatively, memberships can be cancelled at the discretion of the Managing Director and/or the Membership Committee.

In support of the above, a complaints register will be maintained by the venue whereby complaints received will be logged and reviewed by management. The applicant has confirmed that management will continually adapt its operational procedures to minimise the likelihood of issues occurring and reoccurring. Anti-social behaviour, will be monitored with particular attention to respect the surrounding area. The venue management plan confirms anti-social behaviour will be referred to the Western Australian Police at the Venue Manager’s discretion. At the close of business, members will be advised by the Venue Manager to exit the premises and move on from the site in a quiet manner.

In summary of the above comments, it is recommended that conditions be imposed on any approval to ensure the development functions within the proposed scope of the Venue Management Plan.

Air Quality Management

The Tobacco Products Control Regulations 2006 prohibit smoking in all enclosed public places, including those on a licensed premises.

A ‘public place’ means:

A place or vehicle that:

a) The public, or section of the public, is entitled to use; or

b) Is open to, or is being used by, the public, or a section of the public, whether on payment of money, by virtue of membership of a club or other body by invitation, or otherwise.

Legal advice obtained by the City confirms the proposed Unlisted Use (Cigar Bar) would not render a ‘public place’ because it would be for the exclusive private use of members and would not be open to members of the public at large. As such, the Unlisted Use (Cigar Bar) is not considered to be a public place for the purposes of the Tobacco Products Control Regulations 2006. The above is confirmed by the comments received by the Department of Health.

Although separate from the public place definition in the Tobacco Products control Regulations 2006 is the definition of a ‘public building’ under the Health Act 1911 as follows.

a) a building or place or part of a building or place where persons may assemble for -

(i) civic, theatrical, social, political or religious purposes;

(ii) educational purposes;

(iii) entertainment, recreational or sporting purposes; and

(iv) business purposes; and

b) any building, structure, tent, gallery, enclosure, platform or other place or any part of a building, structure, tent, gallery, enclosure, platform or other place in or on which numbers of persons are usually or occasionally assembled, but does not include a hospital.

As the premises will be a place where persons assemble for social purposes, it is considered to fall within the definition of ‘public building’ and is therefore subject to the provisions of the Health (Public Buildings) Regulations 1992.

In compliance with these regulations the Venue Management Plan proposes the installation of ventilation systems within the building to ensure the air quality is regulated through the use of air cleaning and purifying units. The proposal involves the provision of a carbon-filtered air management system inside the venue which will purify the air within the tenancy and release exhaust air (being a combination of cleaned air and tobacco smoke) direct into the atmosphere by way of an exhaust fan discharging via the roof of the building. As the exhaust air will contain smoke particles, the applicant will be required to provide a Certificate from a Registered Mechanical Engineer certifying that the installed mechanical services will ventilate the premises in accordance with Australian Standard AS1668.2-2012 - The use of ventilation and air-conditioning in buildings. This standard specifies design requirements for natural ventilation systems and mechanical air handling systems that ventilate enclosed spaces. Compliance with this standard ensures that all mechanical ventilation systems prevent build-up of air contaminants within the building and also ensures appropriate locations and separation601 distances for exhaust outlets. This is reflected in the recommended advice notes.

Noise Impacts

The acoustic report for this proposal was submitted as part of the original development application. The report is based on the commercial premises on the ground floor only, being for offices and eating houses only. The report is not for a ‘club’ type premises and therefore makes no reference to amplified music or general patron noise that may arise from this type of venue.

The Venue Management Plan states ‘background’ music will be played internally which will not be amplified. Additionally, no exterior speakers are proposed and the Venue Management Plan demonstrates how patrons will be managed in terms of behaviour management and complaint management. An amended acoustic report is therefore not considered necessary for this application as the proposed development is consistent with the original acoustic report and management techniques to ensure noise on the street will not affect the residents above.

Notwithstanding the above, an advice note has been recommended for inclusion to notify the applicant that if an increase in the level of music is proposed an acoustic report is to be submitted to the satisfaction of the City’s Health Services, which outlines how they will comply with the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 and the City of Vincent Sound Attenuation Policy.

Visual Impact

The application does not propose any material changes to the external façade of the building, with the exception of one window sign proposed to be attached to the external façade of the entrance door. The proposed window sign satisfies the deemed to comply requirements of the City’s Policy No. 7.5.2 – Signs and Advertising. For these reasons, it is considered the proposed development has no adverse impact on the appearance of the streetscape.

The City’s Policy No. 7.1.1 requires the air management systems to be screened from view from the street and from adjoining properties. A condition will be imposed to ensure the ventilation systems are screened accordingly so as to comply with the deemed to comply requirements of the Policy and minimise visual impact on surrounding development and the streetscape.

Car Parking

In accordance with the City’s Policy No. 7.7.1 – Non Residential Development Parking Requirements, where a use is not listed, the requirement is to be determined by the City on a site specific management plan.

Administration considers the operation of the Unlisted Use (Cigar Bar) to be consistent with a Club Premises. A Club Premises located in a Transit Corridor requires 0.25 car parking bays per person. The application proposes a maximum of 60 patrons at any one time and two employees. The total car parking requirement for the site therefore equates to 15.5 (rounded to 16) car parking bays. The applicant has confirmed that the site accommodates two dedicated car parking bays for the premises. In considering the matter, the following is relevant:

· The applicant has provided a Car Parking Management Plan which demonstrates alternative methods of transport to the subject tenancy.

· The existing mixed use development provides four short term and 13 long term bicycle bays located within the development and available for use by the public.

· The site is approximately 350 metres to a dedicated cycle path which is located on East Parade.

· The subject tenancy is located approximately 250 metres from the East Perth train station.

· The site is located on Lord Street which is a high frequency bus route and is approximately 100 metres from a bus stop.

· The site is situated to allow for on street car parking which is available directly adjacent the subject tenancy from Windsor Street. The on-street car parking on Windsor Street is available at all hours and is regulated to allow for two hour car parking from 8.00am to 5.30pm, Monday to Friday which will ensure consistent movement and availability of car parking spaces for residents and customers in the area during this time.

· The site is located in close vicinity to the East Perth Train Station public car park which is approximately 200 metres from the subject tenancy and accommodates 153 car parking bays. The public car park has a time limitation of four hours on weekdays between 7:30am and 5:30pm. Car parking is otherwise unrestricted outside of the mentioned hours.

· The applicant has provided a Car Parking Assessment and Management Plan, which details the existing parking conditions and a survey of the car bays available as described above and is included as Attachment 4. The car parking survey was undertaken on Friday 3 August 2018 from 9:30am to 10:00pm. The car parking survey identifies there are 340 public car bays within 250m of the subject tenancy. The peak period was identified from 9:30am to 4:00pm, noting an average of 51 bays were available during this period. Off-peak parking was identified from 6:30pm to 10:00pm, noting an average of 239 car parking bays were available during this period.

· The applicant’s Car Parking Assessment and Management Plan also identifies the Unlisted Use (Cigar Bar) is expected to attract fewer users between general business hours and higher attendance after business hours and on weekends. In light of the above information, it is considered sufficient public parking is available within the immediate locality to accommodate the proposed development.

The application demonstrates the subject tenancy provides various options and availability of both public transport facilities and alternate transport options. It is considered that the available car parking, bicycle parking and public transport options available is sufficient to manage the car parking requirements of the Unlisted Use (Cigar Bar) whilst also promoting alternative modes of transport, which is consistent with the objectives of the City’s Policy No. 7.7.1 – Non-Residential Development Parking Requirement. The proposal is therefore acceptable from a car parking perspective.

Public Health Plan

The City’s Public Health Plan 2014-2017 is about implementing strategies to promote healthy and social wellbeing and mental health. The plan reflects the latest analysis of health and wellbeing data, as well as the health priorities of both the State and Federal Governments. Whilst a number of Key Actions advocate the cessation of smoking and the provision of smoke-free environments, Council is required to consider this application on its individual merits, having due regard for the potential impact of the use on the amenity of the local area.

Conclusion

On 1 May 2018, the City received a development application seeking approval for a Change of Use from Shop to Unlisted Use (Cigar Bar) at No. 73/288 Lord Street, Highgate. The applicant submitted a supporting venue management plan and car parking management plan to ensure the safe operation and management of the proposed land use.

Council is required to exercise its discretion with respect to the proposed land use and car parking requirements for the site. The proposal will provide an alternative land use within the Commercial zone and it is considered to be consistent with the objectives of the Commercial zone as set out in LPS2. The venue management plan is considered to maintain residential amenity of nearby residents and ensure the surrounding area is not compromised by the use. The car parking management plan submitted for the site is considered to provide sufficient car parking and transport methods to the site without requiring additional parking facilities or a cash-in-lieu contribution. In light of the above, the proposed Unlisted Use (Cigar Bar) is supported, subject to conditions.

Council Briefing Agenda 11 September 2018

5.2 No. 45/87 (Lot: 45; STR 65963) Bulwer Street, Perth - Proposed Amendment (Operating Hours) to Existing Development Approval for an Eating House

TRIM Ref: D18/113749

Author: Stephanie Norgaard, Urban Planner

Authoriser: Luke Gibson, A/Director Development Services

Ward: South

Attachments: 1. Attachment 1 - Location Map and Previous Consultation Map ⇩

2. Attachment 2 - Development Approval 2015 ⇩

3. Attachment 3 - Development Approval 2018 ⇩

4. Attachment 4 - Acoustic Report and Venue Management Plan ⇩

Recommendation:

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 to amend the existing development approval for an Eating House at No. 45/87 Bulwer Street, Perth (5.2015.350.1), dated 17 November 2015, by modifying Condition 1 to read as follows:

1. The Eating House is only permitted to operate between 7:00am and midnight, every day.

Purpose of Report:

To consider an application to amend the existing development approval for an Eating House at No. 45/87 Bulwer Street, Perth, as it relates to operating hours.

PROPOSAL:

The application proposes to amend the operating hours set by the existing development approval from 7:00am to 10:00pm every day to 7:00am to midnight, every day, which represents an increase of two hours every night.

Background:

Landowner:	Kien Ngo
Applicant:	Andy Ngo
Date of Application:	19 July 2018
Zoning:	MRS: Urban LPS2: Zone: Mixed Use R Code: R80
Built Form Area:	Mixed Use
Existing Land Use:	Eating House
Proposed Use Class:	Eating House
Lot Area:	1,404m²
Right of Way (ROW):	No
Heritage List:	No

The subject site is located at No. 45/87 Bulwer Street, Perth, as shown on the location plan included as Attachment 1. The subject is located adjoining Shops to the east and a Restaurant to the west. A Service Station is located to the north on the opposite side of Bulwer Street and Grouped Dwellings are located to the south on the opposite side of Greenway Street. The broader area is characterised by a mix of commercial, residential and civic uses.

The subject site is zoned ‘Mixed Use’ with a density code of R80 under the City’s Local Planning Scheme No. 2 (LPS2). The subject site comprises of a five-storey mixed-use building consisting of three commercial tenancies located on the ground floor and 44 Multiple Dwellings located on the upper levels. The construction of subject site was conditionally approved by Joint Development Assessment Panel (JDAP) in January 2013. Tenancy No. 45 (the subject tenancy) was originally approved as an Office.

An application to change the use of the subject tenancy from ‘Office’ to ‘Eating House’ was approved by Council on 17 November 2015. A copy of this approval is provided in Attachment 2. The application proposed the following operating hours, which were reinforced by a condition of the development approval:

· 7:00am to 5:00pm, every day; and

· Closed on Public Holidays.

The City received a development application in February 2018 seeking to amend condition 1 of the approval to increase the operating hours to 7:00am to midnight, every day. On 1 May 2018, Council resolved to conditionally approve the extension of the operating hours until 10:00pm only, on the basis that the applicant had not provided an acoustic report to address potential impact on the residential tenancies located above the site. Ultimately, the application provided insufficient information to demonstrate the Eating House was capable of complying with the requirements of the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997, which applies stricter acoustic requirements after 10:00pm where a venue is in proximity to residential development.

A copy of this approval is provided in Attachment 3. The approval was subject to a condition to provide an acoustic report and a venue management plan. The applicant has submitted an acoustic report and venue management plan to the City, which is provided as Attachment 4.

The subject site has been operating as an Eating House since being approved by Council. The City has no records of any complaints being received in relation to the use of the premise as an Eating house. The City has undertaken a site inspection confirming all the conditions of the current development approval have been satisfied.

Details:

Summary Assessment

The table below summarises the planning assessment of the proposal against the provisions of the LPS2. 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.

Planning Element	Use Permissibility/ Deemed-to-Comply	Requires the Discretion of Council
Land Use	ü
Operating Hours		ü

The land use permissibility has previously been approved by Council.

Consultation/Advertising:

Community consultation on the original proposal to increase the operating hours to midnight occurred for a period of 14 days from 24 February 2018 to 10 March 2018. The method of consultation involved a notification being placed in the Perth Voice newspaper and 87 letters being mailed out to all owners and occupiers surrounding to the site, as shown in Attachment 1, in accordance with the City’s Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation.

During this consultation, two submissions were received; one in support and one in objection. The submission received in support noted that the development should comply with the relevant noise requirements, whilst the objection did not provide specific comments as to the nature of the objection.

Administration has not undertaken additional advertising for this development application, given the application proposes the same operating hours that were advertised earlier this year.

Design Review Panel (DRP):

Referred to DRP: No

Legal/Policy:

· Planning and Development Act 2005;

· Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015;

· City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2;

· Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation; and

· Policy No. 7.5.21 – Sound Attenuation.

The application to amend the aforementioned condition of development approval has been made in accordance with Clause 77(1)(b) of Schedule 2 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, which enables an application to be made requesting a local government to amend or delete any condition to which a development approval is subject.

Delegation to Determine Applications:

This matter is being referred to Council as the application proposes to amend an application previously determined by Council.

Risk Management Implications:

It is Administration’s view that there are minimal risks to Council and the City’s business function when Council exercises its discretionary power to determine a planning application.

Strategic Implications:

The City’s Strategic Plan 2013-2023 states:

“Natural and Built Environment

1.1 Improve and maintain the natural and built environment and infrastructure.”

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.

Financial/Budget Implications:

Nil.

Comments:

The sole issue for consideration is the operation of the business between 10:00pm and midnight, particularly in relation to potential noise impacts on the residential tenancies located above the site.

The subject tenancy is located on the ground floor of a mixed-use building with Multiple Dwellings located directly above. The site is located in a mixed-use area containing Offices, a Services Station, Restaurants and Shops. The area surrounding the subject site contains some businesses that have extended operating hours. The Service Station that is located adjacent to the subject site operates on a 24 hour basis, the Restaurant located adjoining the subject site operates until 10:00pm and a nearby Tavern (Brisbane Hotel) operates until midnight.

To support this application, the proponent has submitted an acoustic report and a venue management plan. Administration has assessed these documents and is satisfied that the use is capable of meeting the requirements of the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 during the proposed operating hours and is therefore supported.

Council Briefing Agenda 11 September 2018

5.3 No. 1 (Lot: 21; D/P: 1925) Muriel Place, Leederville - Proposed Alterations and Additions to Single House

TRIM Ref: D18/113743

Author: Emily Andrews, Urban Planner

Authoriser: Luke Gibson, A/Director Development Services

Ward: North

Attachments: 1. Attachment 1 - Consultation and Location Map ⇩

2. Attachment 2 - Development Plans ⇩

3. Attachment 3 - Summary of Submissions ⇩

4. Attachment 4 - Applicant Justification ⇩

5. Attachment 5 - Determination Advice Notes ⇩

Recommendation:

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 Alterations and Additions to Single House at No. 1 (Lot: 21; D/P: 1925) Muriel Place, Leederville, in accordance with the plans shown in Attachment 2, subject to the following conditions, with the associated determination advice notes contained in Attachment 5:

1. This approval is for the proposed alterations and additions to single house as shown on the plans dated 3 August 2018. No other development forms part of this approval;

2. Boundary Walls

The owners of the subject land shall finish and maintain the surface of the boundary (parapet) wall adjoining No. 3 Muriel Place in a good and clean condition upon completion of the development. The finish of the walls are to be fully rendered or face brickwork to the satisfaction of the City;

3. Stormwater

All stormwater produced on the subject land shall be retained on site by suitable means to the full satisfaction of the City;

4. Car Parking and Access

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 the commencement of the development;

5. Landscape and Reticulation Plan

5.1 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 commencement of the development. The plan shall be drawn to a scale of 1:100 and show the following:

· The location and type of existing and proposed trees and plants;

· Areas to be irrigated or reticulated; and

· The provision of 39 percent canopy cover within the street setback area, at maturity;

5.2 All works shown in the plans as identified in condition 5.1 above shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved plans to the City’s satisfaction, prior to commencement of the development and maintained thereafter to the satisfaction of the City at the expense of the owners/occupiers;

6. Fencing

The fencing infill within the 1.5 metre x 1.5 metre visual truncation area of the right of way and Muriel Place are to be 50 percent visually permeable; and

7. External fixtures

All external fixtures and building plant, including air conditioning units, piping, ducting and water tanks shall be located so as to minimise any visual and noise impact on surrounding landowners, and shall be screened from view from the street, and surrounding properties to the satisfaction of the City.

Purpose of Report:

To consider an application for development approval for alterations and additions to the existing single house at No. 1 Muriel Place, Leederville (subject site).

PROPOSAL:

The application proposes additions and alterations to the rear of the existing single house at the subject site. The development incorporates a single storey addition immediately abutting the existing dwelling and extends to a two storey addition towards the rear lot boundary. The vehicular access to the site is proposed from the right of way to the east of the subject site.

Background:

Landowner:	R Edenburg
Applicant:	Urban Box Residential Design
Date of Application:	17 May 2018
Zoning:	MRS: Urban LPS2: Zone: Residential R Code: R60
Built Form Area:	Residential
Existing Land Use:	Dwelling (Single House)
Proposed Use Class:	Dwelling (Single House)
Lot Area:	331m²
Right of Way (ROW):	Yes – 2.7m wide, drained and sealed. Owned by J Holmes, however, there is an easement which enables the RoW to be used for access to the subject site.
Heritage List:	No

The subject site is located at No. 1 Muriel Place, Leederville as shown in the location plan included as Attachment 1. The site is bound by Muriel Place to the north, a ROW to the east and residential properties to the north and south. The subject site and adjoining properties to the south and west are zoned Residential with a density coding of R60 pursuant to Local Planning Scheme No. 2 (LPS2), with the properties to the east on the opposite side of the ROW fronting Oxford Street zoned Mixed Use R100. The subject site has been identified as a Residential Built Form Area subject to the City’s Local Planning Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form (Built Form Policy).

The locality predominantly consists of ‘cottage style’ single storey dwellings, however there are also two and three storey developments within the immediate vicinity, with a three storey mixed used development located to the south east of the subject site at Nos. 257- 261 Oxford Street. Although not all of the adjacent properties fronting Oxford Street are currently developed as mixed use developments, these properties are within the Activity Corridor of the Built Form Policy and are permitted a four storey building height.

On 21 May 2018, the City received a development application for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling at the subject site. The development plans are included as Attachment 2.

Details:

Summary Assessment

The table below summarises the planning assessment of the proposal against the provisions of the LPS2, the City’s Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form and the Western Australian Planning Commission’s (WAPC) 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.

Planning Element	Use Permissibility/ Deemed-to-Comply	Requires the Discretion of Council
Street Setback	ü
Building Setbacks		ü
Building Height/Storeys	ü
Open Space	ü
Outdoor Living Areas		ü
Privacy	ü
Parking & Access	ü
Solar Access	ü
Site Works/Retaining Walls		ü
Setback of Garages and Carports	ü
Parking and Access	ü
External Fixtures	ü
Surveillance	ü
Street Walls and Fences	ü
Sight Lines		ü

Detailed Assessment

The deemed-to-comply assessment of the element that requires the discretion of Council is as follows:

Lot Boundary Setbacks
Deemed-to-Comply Standard	Proposal
R Codes Clause 5.1.3 Western boundary Ground Floor porch to dining room requires a 2.0 metre setback	1.059 metres
Outdoor Living Areas
Deemed-to-Comply Standard	Proposal
R Codes Clause 5.3.1 Uncovered outdoor living area of 10.7 square metres	Uncovered area of 10.1 square metres
Site Works and Retaining Walls
Deemed-to-Comply Standard	Proposal
R Codes Clause 5.3.7 and 5.3.8 Fill and retaining to 0.5 metres above natural ground level within 1.0 metre of the lot boundary	Fill and retaining to 0.548 metres above natural ground level within 1.0 metre of the western boundary
Sight Lines
Deemed-to-Comply Standard	Proposal
R Codes Clause 5.2.5 Walls, fences and other structures are to be truncated or no higher than 0.75 metres within 1.5 metres of vehicle access points where a driveway meets a public street and where two streets intersect	Fencing to 1.2 metres in height within 1.5 metres of vehicle access points and where a driveway meets a public street

The above elements of the proposal do not meet the specified deemed-to-comply standards and are discussed in the comments section below.

Consultation/Advertising:

Community consultation was undertaken in accordance with the Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015, for a period of 14 days commencing on 12 July 2018 and concluding on 25 July 2018. Community consultation was undertaken by means of written notification 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, seven submissions were received comprising of two in support and five in objection, with one of the comments received in objection being received after the conclusion of the community consultation period. It is also noted that one of the submissions received in objection contained 10 signatures, with a number of these persons also providing a separate submission.

The main issues raised as part of the consultation relate to:

· Loss of privacy from the proposal by way of windows to the upper floor;

· The proposed building style is not sympathetic to the character of the area;

· The impact of the development to the streetscape of Muriel Place and Bourke Street (to the rear) which currently consist of cottage style homes; and

· Loss of access to sunlight to adjoining properties as a result of the development.

A summary of submissions received and Administration’s response to these is included as Attachment 3.

On 1 August 2018, the applicant, current and future property owners of Nos. 1 and 3 Muriel Place, four adjoining residents from Nos. 96 Bourke Street and 263 Oxford Street, Mayor Cole and City Officers attended a meeting to discuss the concerns of the adjoining residents that were raised during the community consultation period. Following this meeting, the applicant amended the plans to include additional landscaping to the rear boundary in order to assist with mitigating the impact of potential building bulk. It is noted that no other changes were made to the proposed plans. The applicant provided justification in response to the meeting which is included as Attachment 4. Following the additional information being provided regarding the proposal the City notified the adjoining residents of the changes made. No response has been received from these adjoining residents to date.

The applicant also provided a response to the submissions raised which are as follows:

· There are examples of recently constructed additions which are virtually the same in the Leederville area so the design is in keeping with what is being approved and designed in the area;

· The streetscapes of both Muriel Place and Bourke Street are not affected as the addition is not seen from either with the two storey portion at the rear of the property;

· The scale of the development is smaller than what is allowed due to the R60 coding and can be greatly larger;

· There are no overlooking issues to any of the neighbours with no windows that don’t comply with the R Codes;

· There is no outdoor area or habitable rooms that are going to be shaded from natural sunlight and is drastically under the allowed 50 percent overshadowing of the rear property and complies with all aspects of the R Codes; and

· The ROW is for the travel of cars so there is no issue with safety in the lane.

Design Review Panel (DRP):

Referred to DRP: No

Legal/Policy:

· Planning and Development Act 2005;

· Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015;

· City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2;

· State Planning Policy 3.1 – Residential Design Codes;

· Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation; and

· Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form Policy.

In accordance with Schedule 2 Clause 76(2) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 and Part 14 of the Planning and Development Act 2005, the applicant has the right to apply to the State Administrative Tribunal for review of Council’s determination.

It is noted that the deemed-to-comply landscaping standards set out in the Built Form Policy have not been approved by the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC), who have instead issued approval for a modified set of deemed-to-comply landscaping standards that are similar to those set out in the WAPC’s draft Design WA suite of documents. As a result, the assessment will only have ‘due regard’ to these provisions.

Delegation to Determine Applications:

The matter is being referred to Council for determination as the proposal received a total of five objections, with one objection containing 10 signatures.

Risk Management Implications:

It is Administration’s view that there are minimal risks to Council and the City’s business function when Council exercises its discretionary power to determine a planning application.

Strategic Implications:

The City’s Strategic Plan 2013-2023 states:

“Natural and Built Environment

1.1 Improve and maintain the natural and built environment and infrastructure.”

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.

Financial/Budget Implications:

Nil.

Comments:

Lot Boundary Setbacks

The development requires a 2.0 metre setback on the western boundary in accordance with Clause 5.1.3 of the R Codes, with 1.059 metres proposed. The portion of wall subject to the setback departure relates to the existing length of wall on the ground floor and to the north of the proposed boundary wall. The proposed setback departure is a result of the inclusion of a major opening within the existing wall length (Dining Room), which effectively increases how far the wall should be setback from the boundary.

In considering this matter, the following is relevant:

· The setback departure of 0.94 metres is considered to be minor and will not create any additional adverse impact on the amenity of the adjoining property, with the proposed opening not adjacent to any major openings or the outdoor living area of the adjoining property.

· The setback departure does not result in loss of access to direct sun and ventilation to this area.

· Furthermore, the proposed opening complies with visual privacy requirements as the finished floor level of the dwelling adjacent to the window is less than 0.5 metres above natural ground level, with the proposed dining room opening adequately screened by a sufficient dividing fence.

· The proposed length of wall incorporates various materials such as weatherboard cladding, glazing and timber stud walls which are considered to reduce the perception of building bulk to the adjoining landowners. These elements on the ground floor are consistent with the existing dwelling and the surrounding developments.

· The proposed setback departure does not result in any adverse overshadowing to the adjoining property as the orientation of the site ensures that the proposal meets the deemed-to-comply requirements relating to solar access.

Given the above, the proposed setback on the western boundary is considered to meet the design principles of the R Codes.

Outdoor Living Areas

Clause 5.3.1 of the R Codes requires properties with a density coding of R60 to provide a 16 square metre outdoor living area (OLA), with up to one-third of this area permitted to have a permanent roof cover. The development proposes a permanent roof cover of 10.7 square metres in lieu of 10.1 square metres permitted.

The increase of 0.6 square metres to the permitted covered area of OLA is considered to be minor and a negligible impact on the overall site, with the open space area meeting the deemed-to-comply requirements for an R60 property and sufficient canopy coverage provided in accordance with the City’s Built Form Policy. The additional covered area allows for an OLA that is capable of use in various weather conditions and can be used in conjunction with a habitable room of the dwelling. As north is to the front of the subject site, the OLA making use of the northern aspect of the site would result in it being located within the front setback area. The proposed location of the OLA on the eastern boundary will allow for sufficient access to winter sun and ventilation.

In light of the above, it is considered that the proposal satisfies the design principles of the R Codes.

Site Works and Retaining

The development proposes fill and retaining to 0.548 metres to the western boundary in lieu of the deemed-to-comply standard of 0.5 metres, as set out by Clause 5.3.7 and Clause 5.3.8 of the R Codes.

The increase of 0.048 metres to the permitted fill and retaining on the western boundary is the result of the gradual slope in natural ground level increasing from west to east across the site. The fill is respective of the natural ground levels and existing development levels on site.

The development will have a negligible impact on the natural ground level as viewed from the street because the area of increased fill and retaining is greater than 10 metres away from the front lot boundary. The minor departure allows for more effective use of the land without compromising the amenity of the adjoining property.

Given the above, the proposed fill and retaining is considered to meet the relevant design principles of the R Codes.

Sight Lines

The development proposes fencing 1.2 metres high within visual truncation areas in lieu of 0.75 metres, as set out by Clause 5.2.5 of the R Codes.

The proposed fencing is to be 50 percent visually permeable and is therefore considered to provide for unobstructed sight lines both adjacent to the right of way access and the visitor bay located towards the front of the development. As there is a footpath adjacent to the dwelling, the fencing being visually permeable will allow for the safe movement of pedestrians and vehicles.

To ensure that adequate sight lines are maintained, it is recommend that a condition be applied requiring fencing within the 1.5 metre x 1.5 metre visual truncation area be 50 percent visually permeable.

Built Form

A number of the submissions received during the consultation period raised concerns regarding the built form outcome of the proposed upper floor addition at the subject site. The proposed colours, materials and height were considered by some submitters to be not in keeping with the Leederville character and are not aligned with the existing cottage style developments within the immediate area and surrounding streetscape.

Muriel Place is a predominantly intact streetscape which sees cottage style homes setback approximately 7 metres from the front lot boundary. A similar addition to that proposed has been constructed at No. 6 Muriel Place. The property at No. 6 Muriel Place has retained the original dwelling with a contemporary upper floor addition to the rear of the property and is not directly visible from the street. To the rear of the subject site on Bourke Street is similar cottage style developments with both single and two storey developments in close proximity to the subject site. The developments to the east along Oxford Street predominantly are single storey dwellings, with exception of the property at the corner of Bourke and Oxford Streets which is a three storey mixed use development.

The development does not propose to remove the existing cottage dwelling with the additions being to the rear of the existing house. The colours and materials of the dwelling are not restricted in accordance with City’s policies, however the proposed colourbond cladding to the upper floor is considered to be complimentary to weatherboard material of the existing dwelling. At ground level, the proposed colours and materials are to match the existing render and weatherboard cladding. The proposal is not considered to have a negative impact on the character of the area as the proposed upper floor addition is in accordance with the deemed-to-comply heights of the Built Form Policy. Additionally, the upper floor additions will not be directly visible from the Muriel Place streetscape given the 22 metre setback from the street and as evident with a similar development at No. 6 Muriel Place.

Although the rear (southern boundary) setback, overlooking and overshadowing are compliant with the R Codes, the development proposes the planting of two Flowering Plum trees to assist in mitigating the impact of building bulk and increasing the visual amenity to the adjoining properties.

Given the above, the proposed development is considered to be complimentary with the surrounding streetscapes and the City’s intent for development within this area, particularly as it is actively retaining the existing dwelling on site.

Landscaping

The R Codes do not have a requirement for landscaping to single houses, however the City’s Built Form Policy sets out a deemed-to-comply standard of 30 percent canopy coverage within the front setback area for alterations and additions to dwellings. These standards and relevant corresponding design principles are given due regard when assessing and determining this proposal. The proposal provides 39 percent (25.69 square metres) canopy coverage between the front lot boundary and the dwelling. An additional 6.3 square metres of canopy from the trees in the front setback area extend beyond the lot boundary into the verge area and ROW.

The proposal involves the planting of five Flowering Plum (Prunus Ceradifera) trees within the front setback area. The City’s Parks Team has advised that the proposed tree species is consistent with the City’s tree selection tool and is appropriate in the proposed locations. Following from the meeting on 1 August 2018 and in response to the concerns raised, the applicant has also indicated the planting of two Flowering Plum trees along the rear boundary in order to assist with reducing the impact of building bulk as viewed from the adjoining property to the south. In addition to the landscaping provided within the front setback of the property, the subject site allows for 74.9 square metres of deep soil area with 34.7 square metres of this area within the 6 metre front setback area. This area is capable of providing additional trees and canopy coverage across the site should the owners wish to provide additional vegetation in the future.

In light of the above, it is noted that the development complies with requirements of the Built Form Policy as in excess of 30 percent canopy coverage provided within the front setback area.

Conclusion

The proposal requires Council to exercise its discretion in relation to lot boundary setbacks, outdoor living areas, sight lines and site works and retaining. For the reasons outlined in the report, these aspects of the development are considered to satisfy the Design Principles of the City’s Built Form Policy and R Codes respectively. The proposal will not negatively impact the adjoining properties as the lot boundary setback departure incorporates a range of materials in order to mitigate building bulk, and as the proposed departures to the outdoor living area and site works and retaining are minor in nature and will not negatively impact on the streetscape or adjoining residents. Furthermore, the applicant has used contrasting materials and landscaping elements to reduce the impact of building bulk and scale to surrounding residents.

Given the above and as the proposal does not result in an adverse impact on the adjoining properties, it is recommended that the application be approved subject to conditions.

Council Briefing Agenda 11 September 2018

5.5 Amendment to Trees of Significance Inventory - 209 Brisbane Street, Perth

TRIM Ref: D18/36743

Author: Amanda Fox, Strategic Planning Officer

Authoriser: Luke Gibson, A/Director Development Services

Attachments: 1. Attachment 1 - Trees of Significance Inventory - Current ⇩

2. Attachment 2 - 209 Brisbane Street Request for Removal from Inventory ⇩

3. Attachment 3 - 209 Brisbane Street - Arborist Report of Lacebark ⇩

4. Attachment 4 - Trees of Significance Inventory - Proposed (Track Changes) ⇩

5. Attachment 5 - Trees of Significance Inventory - Proposed (Final) ⇩

Recommendation:

That Council AMENDS the City’s Trees of Significance Inventory by deleting the entry for “209 Brisbane Street, Northbridge – Brachychiton discolour (Lacebark)”.

Purpose of Report:

To consider amending the Trees of Significance Inventory by removing the Lacebark (Brachychiton discolour) tree on Lot 209 Brisbane Street, Perth from the City’s Trees of Significance Inventory (the Inventory).

Background:

Trees of Significance Inventory

On 6 May 1997, TP Landscape Architecture was engaged by the City to compile an inventory of significant trees within the City of Vincent. The purpose of the Inventory was to provide a mechanism for the City to recognise valuable trees and to ensure the protection and management of these trees. The project included developing criteria to assess trees for significance and to make recommendations as to the suitability of trees to be included on a new Inventory. At that time, the assessment was limited to sites/trees that had been identified by the City’s Administration or had been nominated by owners of land which accommodated potentially significant trees. As a result of the work, on 22 December 1997, Council resolved to adopt an Inventory which contained 25 sites, including the subject site at No. 209 Brisbane Street, Perth (listed as Northbridge).

Since being introduced, the Inventory has been amended to add two sites and remove two sites. The Inventory currently includes trees located on 25 sites, as shown in Attachment 1.

In 2001, a provision was included in the City’s (then) Town Planning Scheme No. 1 that required the City’s approval for any removal, destruction or interference with any tree listed on the Inventory. This provision has been carried into the City’s current Local Planning Scheme No. 2 by way of ‘Supplemental Provision’ Clause 61(1)(k). Clause 61(1)(k) requires that works to remove, destroy and/or interfere with any tree listed on the Inventory requires development approval.

In June 2013, Council adopted Policy No. 7.6.3 – Trees of Significance, which provides guidance on the nomination and management of trees on the Inventory. This Policy provides criteria as to when a tree may be considered to be significant and worthy of inclusion onto the City’s Trees of Significance Inventory including:

a) outstanding aesthetic quality;

b) outstandingly large height, trunk circumference or canopy spread;

c) commemoration or association with particular historical or cultural events;

d) association with a well known public figure or ethnic group;

e) specimen of great age;

f) outstanding example of a particular species;

g) rare or unusual species;

h) horticultural, genetic or propagative value; or

i) likely to be a remnant or regrowth local native tree.

Tree Located on 209 Brisbane Street, Perth

The subject tree is situated adjacent to the rear and side lot boundary on the southern portion of the property and can be viewed from within the property and from the right of way to the rear. The tree was first included onto the City’s Trees of Significance Inventory in December 1997 as a result of a nomination by the owner of the property at the time. The tree underwent an assessment by consultant TP Landscape Architecture in 1997 and was found to meet the following criteria:

‘Aesthetic value: Aesthetically appealing, complimenting other tree species in the rear garden, providing good contract in shape and form.

Historic value: Important as a cultural feature in the development of the area.

Scientific value: Relatively rare in such an urban environment, contributing a wider understanding of the natural and cultural history of the area.

Social value: Providing excellent shade, colour texture, privacy and appeal to its users.’

In 1998, a three story grouped dwelling development was approved on the adjacent property at No. 207 Brisbane Street, Perth. Around this time, branches of the subject tree were significantly pruned along the fence line by the adjoining owner to accommodate the adjacent development. Since this pruning occurred in 1998, before the adoption of Policy No. 7.6.3 in 2013, there was no requirement for Council approval for the pruning of this tree.

In October 2017, the City received an enquiry regarding the removal of the tree on No. 209 Brisbane Street, Perth from the Inventory. To support the application to remove the tree, the land owner was requested to provide justification and an arborist report in support of the application. The full application, including the arborist report was received by the City on 29 March 2018.

Details:

The following is a summary of the applicant’s justification for removal of the subject tree from the Inventory:

· The tree has been significantly pruned to accommodate the adjoining three storey development at No. 207 Brisbane Street which has significantly compromised the structure of the tree;

· The location and extent of canopy spread of the tree covers and shades much of the 6 metre wide backyard making it difficult to utilise the area;

· The Lacebark species is not a native specimen, being native to NSW not WA, thus is not a significant species worthy of retaining in this area;

· The trees flower pods contain irritant fibres which also carpet the entire backyard in the flowering season making the backyard unusable during part of the year.

The application from the owner which includes a comprehensive justification for the removal of the tree, addressing each of the criteria of Policy No. 7.6.3 is provided in Attachment 2.

The applicant has also provided an assessment of the subject tree from a qualified arborist in support of the application to have the tree removed from the Inventory. The arborist report indicates that the aesthetic form of the tree is somewhat diminished when viewed from the east due to past pruning that has occurred. Although the arborist report indicates that the tree may meet one of the required criteria to be considered for the Inventory, being Aesthetic Quality, it does not meet any of the other criteria that would be required for it to be considered for inclusion onto the Inventory. A copy of the full arborist assessment is provided in Attachment 3.

Consultation/Advertising:

Updates to the Trees of Significance Inventory do not require any advertising.

Legal/Policy:

· City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2; and

· Policy No. 7.6.3 – Trees of Significance.

Risk Management Implications:

Amending the Trees of Significance Inventory is considered low risk.

Strategic Implications:

Nil.

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.

Financial/Budget Implications:

Nil.

Comments:

The City’s Administration has undertaken an assessment of the subject tree in accordance with the Trees of Significance Policy. This included a site visit and visual assessment. The assessment indicated that although the subject tree is considered to be a relatively large specimen in its current location, the original structural shape and form of its canopy has been significantly compromised by pruning on the eastern side.

This pruning has resulted in the tree growing multiple, soft immature branches which is commonly referred to as epicormic regrowth. This has resulted in the new regrowth of the subject tree being generally weaker and more prone to tearing away from the tree resulting in branch failure.

The subject tree has been significantly pruned on the eastern side and lacks good branch and canopy structure. The pruning has resulted in a reduction in the significance of the aesthetic value of the tree, which is a matter that, under the Policy, must be considered. Furthermore, the tree is not considered to meet other criteria which would make it worthy of inclusion onto the Inventory, as follows.

Assessment Criteria	Assessment
Outstanding aesthetic quality	Somewhat meets criteria
Outstandingly large height, trunk circumference or canopy spread	Does not meet criteria
Commemoration or association with particular historical or cultural events	Does not meet criteria
Association with a well known public figure or ethnic group	Does not meet criteria
Specimen of great age	Does not meet criteria
Outstanding example of a particular species	Does not meet criteria
Rare or unusual species	Does not meet criteria
Horticultural, genetic or propagative value	Does not meet criteria
Likely to be a remnant or regrowth local native tree	Does not meet criteria

Based on the above assessment is it considered that, had the tree not already been on the Inventory, it would not be appropriate to add it. As such, its removal from the Inventory is supported.

Conclusion

The Lacebark situated within the lot boundary of No. 209 Brisbane Street, Perth has been assessed by the City’s Administration against the criteria of Policy No. 7.6.3 – Trees of Significance. The tree is a relatively large example of its species, however the tree has undergone significant pruning which has compromised its structural form and canopy spread, reducing its aesthetic significance. The tree is not considered to meet the criteria included in Policy No. 7.6.3 for a tree to be deemed as significant and worthy of retention.

On this basis, it is recommended that Council removes the Lacebark (Brachychiton discolour) tree situated within the lot boundary of No. 209 Brisbane Street, Perth from the City’s Trees of Significance Inventory.

In assessing the abovementioned nomination the City has identified a number of issues with the current approach to identifying and protecting trees of significance, and trees on privately owned land more broadly. The City will further investigate these issues and identify potential methods to address these issues. A report on the matter will be presented to the Council Meeting in November 2018.

Council Briefing Agenda 11 September 2018

5.6 Amendment 1 to Local Planning Policy No. 7.1.1 - Built Form

TRIM Ref: D18/107299

Authors: Tim Elliott, Strategic Planning Officer

Stephanie Smith, Manager Policy and Place

Authoriser: Luke Gibson, A/Director Development Services

Attachments: 1. Attachment 1 - Local Planning Policy No. 7.1.1 - Built Form ⇩

2. Attachment 2 - WA Planning Commission Determination ⇩

3. Attachment 3 - Schedule of Modifications ⇩

4. Attachment 4 - Draft Amended Local Planning Policy No. 7.1.1 - Built Form ⇩

5. Attachment 5 - Draft Amended Local Planning Policy No. 7.1.1 - Built Form (Clean) ⇩

6. Attachment 6 - Draft Amended Appendix No. 16 - Design Guidelines for Perth ⇩

7. Attachment 7 - Draft Amended Appendix No. 18 - Design Guidelines for William Street ⇩

Recommendation:

That Council:

1. PREPARES:

1.1 Amendment 1 to Local Planning Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form included as Attachment 4 pursuant to Clause 5 of Schedule 2 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 for the purpose of advertising for public comment;

1.2 An amendment to Appendix No. 16 – Design Guidelines for Perth included as Attachment 6 pursuant to Clause 5 of Schedule 2 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 for the purpose of advertising for public comment; and

1.3 An amendment to Appendix No. 18 – Design Guidelines for William Street included as Attachment 7 pursuant to Clause 5 of Schedule 2 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 for the purpose of advertising for public comment; and

2. NOTES:

2.1 That the amendments to Local Planning Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form, Appendix No. 16 – Design Guidelines for Perth and Appendix No. 18 – Design Guidelines for William Street will be advertised for a period of 28 days pursuant to Clause 4 of Schedule 2 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 and Item 4.2 of Appendix 3 of Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation; and

2.2 That Administration will give notice of the proposed amendment to the Western Australian Planning Commission pursuant to Clause 4 of Schedule 2 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.

Purpose of Report:

To consider preparing Amendment 1 to Local Planning Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form (Built Form Policy) for the purpose of advertising for public comment.

Background:

The Built Form Policy was adopted by Council on 13 December 2016 (Item 9.1.11) and came into effect on 21 January 2017. A copy of the current Built Form Policy is included as Attachment 1.

As part of the December 2016 resolution, Council noted that Administration would forward a number of provisions relating to landscaping and setbacks to the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) for approval pursuant to Clause 7.3.2 of State Planning Policy 3.1: Residential Design Codes (R Codes). On 8 January 2018, the WAPC resolved to approve the City’s provisions, subject to the City making a number of modifications to the provisions to better align with the provisions of the State Government’s draft Apartment Design Policy. A copy of the WAPC’s decision is included as Attachment 2.

As the City is not required, or able, to make the modifications recommended by the WAPC without an amendment to the Built Form Policy, it is now proposed to broadly address the WAPC’s recommendation through Amendment 1.

In addition, since being adopted by Council, the current Built Form Policy continues to be used to determine development applications. As a result of the implementation of the Built Form Policy, Administration has identified a number of opportunities to clarify the intent of several policy provisions and make a number of administrative modifications to improve the operation of the Policy. Administration is now proposing Amendment 1 to the Built Form Policy to address both the decision of the WAPC and the improvements that have been identified in implementing the Policy.

A draft Amendment was presented to the Council Briefing Session on 14 August 2018 but was withdrawn by the CEO from the 21 August 2018 Council Meeting Agenda. The proposed Amendment was subsequently referred to the Design Review Panel (DRP) for comment. As a result of questions raised during the Briefing Session and feedback received from the DRP, a number of further modifications to the draft Policy have been proposed, as follows:

· Increasing the Deep Soil Area requirement from 10% to 12%, so as to align with draft Design WA;

· Amending the incentive associated with the retention of mature trees which contribute to 30% or more of the required canopy cover on site (to be 10% rather than 8%), so as maintain the previous position of a two percent reduction to the required deep soil area, as related to the above dot point.

· Reducing the Planting Area requirement from 5% to 3%, so as to reflect the increase in Deep Soil Area, while still retaining the overall requirement of 15%;

· Increasing the car park canopy cover requirement from 40% to 60%. The increase factors in the canopy cover generated from the 1.5m planting strip which was previously omitted from the calculation;

· Consolidated the requirements for corner sites, ground floor design, awnings, verandahs and collonades and building design into one set of requirements (Building Design) that applies to all Built Form Areas;

· Including a new requirement for all Built Form Areas for key design elements of the streetscape to be identified by an Urban Design Study, with those elements to be integrated and acknowledged in the development;

· Changing the deemed to comply provision relating to tenancy width from 7.5m-9m to a maximum of 9m. to allow traditional shop front width, fine grain detail and variety in the town centres;

· Providing a maximum awning height of 4m, to ensure awnings are at a suitable height to provide weather protection to pedestrians.

· Increasing the doorway depth range from 0.5m-1m to 0.5m-1.5m, to allow traditional shop entrances;

· Including a new Objective in each Built Form Area to advocate that privacy be addressed through design rather than screening;

· Including a requirement for roof structures that are pitched or visible, to have a maximum solar absorptance rating of 0.6, unless an alternative approach is identified in the Urban Design Study; and

· Changing the Environmentally Sustainable Design requirements to apply as deemed-to-comply provisions and requiring development to achieve an environmental performance rating, rather than only demonstrating that it is capable of achieving that rating.

Details:

1. Canopy Cover

The current Built Form Policy Deemed to Comply Clause C1.7.3 requires 80 percent of rear and side setback areas to be provided as canopy coverage at maturity and Deemed to Comply Clauses C4.10.4 and C5.14.3 require 30 percent of the site area to be provided as canopy coverage at maturity.

The City applied for approval of these requirements from the WAPC under Clause 7.3.2 of the R Codes. The WAPC proposed a modification that the provision be reworded to require Deep Soil Area to be located to enable canopy coverage over the site to be maximised at maturity. The justification for this was that the change is more consistent with draft Design WA, which does not have canopy cover requirements, but focuses on a minimum Deep Soil Area being provided.

This modification is not supported, as it does not add any value to the existing requirement for 15 percent Deep Soil Zone over the site, and it does not directly link to the City’s canopy cover targets. It is important that the original intent of the Built Form Policy is maintained to ensure that new developments have an appropriate amount of canopy coverage to screen large scale development, provide a high amenity environment for neighbouring properties and residents and contribute to broader greening aspirations.

Through implementing the Built Form Policy, Administration has identified a number of improvements that are recommended to be made to the policy provisions including:

· C1.7.3 should apply to lot boundary setback areas at the ground level only. Lot boundary setbacks can be stepped back at higher levels and it would be impractical to require those higher levels to provide canopy coverage due to the difficulty of maintaining appropriate soil depth/quality.

· All percentage canopy cover requirements should be a minimum, whereas currently they are written as an exact requirement.

In reviewing the Policy, the WAPC advocated for a provision that required a minimum number of trees within that Deep Soil Area, depending on the lot size. The justification for this was that the change is more consistent with draft Design WA, which does not have canopy cover requirements, but focuses on a minimum number of trees being provided.

Administration does not support the requirement to move towards specifying the number and size of trees as it would result in a reduced canopy coverage requirement compared to the Built Form Policy. The extent of the variance depends on the size of the lot, the tree types selected and the location of planting. In addition, the method of calculation is significantly more complex than the Built Form Policy’s canopy coverage percentage requirement and does not directly and demonstrably link to the City’s intent of achieving a measurable canopy cover target.

The resulting canopy coverage depends on the specific tree selection and lot size, so the impact of replacing the City’s canopy coverage requirements with requirements for tree planting will differ in each development application. In addition, there is no requirement for the trees to be planted in such a way to maximise canopy coverage of the site so trees may be planted with their canopies overlapping, therefore reducing the overall canopy coverage of the site. This is not an issue with the percentage-based canopy coverage requirement.

The City recommends maintaining the percentage-based canopy cover provisions as they have been successfully implemented and have demonstrated they are able to achieve the desired canopy coverage, with a simpler method of calculation and assessment, than the proposed draft Design WA provisions.

2. Deep Soil Areas

The definition of Deep Soil Zone in the current Built Form Policy does not align with the definition of Deep Soil Area in draft Design WA. The City’s definition specifies a minimum depth of 1m whereas the definition in draft Design WA requires there to be no development above or below. Under the definition of Deep Soil Area in draft Design WA planting on structure would not contribute to the required percentage of site coverage.

Despite this difference it is considered appropriate to align the definition of Deep Soil Zone with draft Design WA’s definition of Deep Soil Area, to be consistent with the draft state planning policy.

As the new definition of Deep Soil Area removes the ability to consider on-structure planting and there may be instances where on structure planting is desirable such as in large scale development where it contributes to the amenity for residents, it is recommended that a new definition and provision be introduced into the Built Form Policy to require this.

Deemed to Comply Clauses C1.7.1, C4.10.1 and C5.14.1 require all properties to provide 15 percent of the development site as Deep Soil Zone. The City applied for approval of this requirement from the WAPC under Clause 7.3.2 of the R Codes. The WAPC proposed a modification to this provision to require 12 percent Deep Soil Area which is supported. To recognise the change in definition and need to provide guidance on the amount of space dedicated to soft landscaping (such as on structure landscaping) it is recommended a new Planting Area requirement be introduced. It was also identified that both a minimum area and minimum dimensions should be specified for both Deep Soil Areas and Planting Areas.

The City also identified that the new definition of Deep Soil Area is more onerous than the definition of Deep Soil Zone, and therefore supports including the 12% Deep Soil Area requirement in accordance with draft Design WA.

3. Tree Retention

While there are existing requirements for providing canopy coverage and incentives for retaining trees, there is no requirement in the Deemed to Comply provisions to retain existing mature trees.

A Deemed to Comply requirement would provide the ability for the City to require the retention of existing trees, and this would provide a beneficial outcome in line with the City’s targets and objectives of the Policy. It is recommended that this be included in the draft Policy.

4. Additions and Alterations

Deemed to comply provision C5.14.10 requires the replacement of lost canopy cover, due to additions or alterations, in the front setback area.

The City applied for approval of this requirement from the WAPC under Clause 7.3.2 of the R Codes.

The WAPC proposed modifications to this provision to require deep soil area in the front setback to maximise canopy coverage at maturity unless an existing mature tree with equivalent coverage was retained anywhere on site.

The City does not support this change as the canopy coverage is not stated within the provision, making the outcome unclear, and will vary depending on the tree species proposed.

It was considered appropriate that where an addition or alteration affects the deep soil area, canopy cover or trees on a site that all landscaping provisions should be complied with to ensure the loss landscaping is suitably offset.

5. Lot Boundary Setbacks

Deemed to Comply Clauses C1.2.5 and C4.3.6 require the following lot boundary setbacks where development is within the non-residential built form areas and adjoins a property which is within the Residential Built Form Area and coded R50 and below:

· 6.5 metres for the ground floor, second and third storey; and

· 12.5 metres setback for the fourth storey and above.

Deemed to Comply Clause C5.3.3 requires the following rear boundary setbacks where development is within the residential built form area and adjoins a property coded R50 and below:

· 6.5 metres for the ground floor, second and third storey; and

· 12.5 metres setback for the fourth storey and above.

The City applied to the WAPC for approval of these clauses under Clause 7.3.2 of the R Codes, with the WAPC proposing to modify this provision to base the required setback on the height of the proposed development, the type of room in the proposed development and the type of room on the adjacent property.

The difference between the current setback requirement and the WAPC’s proposed setback requirement depends on the specific development proposed. As an example, a four-storey development in a Town Centre adjoining an R60 property would require a ground, second and third storey setback of 4.5 metres and the fourth storey setback would be 6.5 metres. Under the WAPC’s proposed provision the setback requirement would range from between 6 metres and 9 metres depending on the type of room it faces on the adjoining property. The modification states that it applies where adjoining properties are coded “R50 and below or R60 and above”. Since there is no R-Code between R50 and R60 this requirement will apply to every property that abuts a residential site, rather than providing specific requirements according to the code of the adjoining property. This approach is not supported as it considered that an R80 development next to an R60 site requires a different setback to an R100 development next to an R40 site.

The proposed approach for determining the setback requirement is more complex than the current Built Form Policy as it relies on knowing what sort of room is in the building/s adjoining the development site. In some cases, this information may be unavailable or difficult to obtain. It would also result in a disparity in setbacks based on which site is developed first and the manner in which it is developed. The WAPC’s proposed setback methodology appears to be based on the building separation distances in draft Design WA rather than the setback distances in draft Design WA. Building separation is measured from the wall of the building on an adjoining lot whereas a setback distance is measures from the lot boundary. The result of this is that the proposed setbacks are approximately double those required in draft Design WA, and in most instances greater than those proposed by the City.

The City also identified that where a subject site is a lower or equal coding to an adjoining site the large setback distances apply. It is considered unnecessary for large setback distances to apply as it reduces the development potential of the subject site in order to protect the adjoining site which may be of a higher coding. This would result in a large building separation for the subject site whilst the adjoining site has greater density potential and may impact the lower density subject site. It is recommended that the setback assessment be simplified into a table to clearly convey the applicable setbacks and remove the unintended consequence of large setback distances for similarly coded land.

5. Built Form Area Objectives

The Built Form Policy contains five built form areas, with each area having specific Design Principles and Local Housing Objectives to guide development elements. However, there are no overall objectives for each built form area that explain the intended development outcomes for each area. It is important to guide the overall style of development, as well as providing advice for applicants and the determining authority when using the policy and making design principle assessments. It is recommended that new objectives for each Built Form Area be introduced into the Policy.

6. Building Design, Materials & Finishes

Design Principles P1.6.1, P1.6.2 and P1.6.3 in the current Built Form Policy contain guidance on building design and architectural elements for developments. In addition, Clauses 1.3, 1.4 and 1.5 provide guidance on development on corner sites, ground floor design and development that includes awnings, verandahs and collonades. These requirements require certain building design elements to be included in a proposed development.

The City, on advice of the Design Review Panel, identified that these requirements do not clearly articulate the outcome the City is seeking to achieve as they do not require the development to respond to its unique local context.

To resolve this issue, it is considered appropriate to require that certain information and detail be provided with an application for development approval. This additional information would consist of an Urban Design Study that identifies characteristics of existing development and recommends the incorporation of those characteristics by using a variety of materials, finishes and architectural elements to reduce its impact on adjoining properties and appropriately complement the local area. This method enables the City to conduct a more informed assessment of the building design, rather than simply assessing compliance with Deemed to Comply criteria. It also places a greater onus on applicants to provide sufficient information and to justify the quality of building design, which is considered likely to deliver improved built form outcomes. This is intended to ensure that development complements the local characteristics of an area through appropriate use of materials, finishes and architectural elements to reduce its impact on adjoining properties.

It is also recommended to consolidate the various building design requirements into one section of the Policy on Building Design and apply these design elements to all Built Form Areas.

7. Environmentally Sustainable Design

Clause 1.8 provides Design Principles and Local Housing Objectives requiring development to demonstrate that the proposed development is capable of achieving a number of sustainable design outcomes, however, the current provision does not require the development to actually deliver the recommended sustainable design measures. It is recommended that the City strengthen the current policy provisions to require developments to deliver the relevant sustainable design measures.

Further to this Clauses 4.23.1 and 5.30.1 require the Environmentally Sustainable Design provisions of Clause 1.8 to apply to all development in the Transit Corridor and Residential Built Form Areas, except single houses or grouped dwellings. The City determined that it would be appropriate for these provisions to apply to single houses and grouped dwellings. The review provides landowners with information on how their development may be improved to reduce energy consumption, which is relevant for all new buildings of any scale.

In addition to the abovementioned technical changes to the Built Form Policy there are also a number of minor editorial and administrative changes proposed. A tracked change version of the draft Built Form Policy showing all of the proposed changes is included as Attachment 4 and a clean version of the draft Built Form Policy is included as Attachment 5.

Design Guidelines

The City has a suite of Design Guidelines that outline specific, location-based requirements for development in nine separate planning cells. Where there is an inconsistency between the Design Guidelines and the Policy, the ‘Relationship to Other Documents’ section states that the Design Guidelines prevail. This means that the building heights stated within the Design Guidelines are deemed to comply in these areas and override the building heights stated in the Policy.

Of the nine Design Guidelines, there are two where the heights are inconsistent with the Policy; William Street and Perth. In the remaining seven, the building heights are consistent.

The building height requirement in the William Street Design Guidelines is four storeys and the building height requirement in the Policy is a maximum of six storeys. There is also an inconsistency within the Policy itself between Figure 2 (the building heights map), which refers back to the Design Guidelines being four storeys, and Table 1 (the table describing the building heights), which prescribes a maximum height of six storeys.

The building height requirement in the Perth Design Guidelines is three storeys (six storeys where a site has dual frontage) and the building height requirement in the Policy is a maximum of six storeys. There is also an inconsistency within the Policy itself between Figure 2 (the building heights map), which refers to the Design Guidelines, and Table 1 (the table describing the building heights), which prescribes a maximum height of six storeys for development along the Fitzgerald Street Activity Corridor and Mixed Use Area.

The City’s Local Planning Scheme No. 2 came into effect in May 2018, rezoning a number of properties within the two Design Guidelines areas. The William Street area was rezoned from Commercial to District Centre and the Perth area was rezoned from Residential/Commercial R80 to Mixed Use R160. Due to the inconsistencies between the Policy and the Design Guidelines, and the rezoning, it is considered suitable to review the heights in these areas to align with the Built Form Policy maximum height. It is also recommended to modify the guidance in the Design Guidelines which indicates that development at three storeys is suitable. Instead it is proposed to encourage development up to four storeys to ensure that there is continuity with the design guideline area and development in the immediately surrounding properties which is permitted to a maximum of four storeys.

For the remaining seven Design Guideline areas, it is proposed to remove reference to ‘Design Guideline Areas’ in Figure 2 and prescribe the same building heights as contained within the Design Guidelines. This will consolidate all building heights for the City of Vincent within the Policy.

It should be noted that the above recommended modifications are not a result of a comprehensive review of the guidelines. Administration have undertaken a brief review and consider that the Guidelines satisfactorily respond to the local context, remain relevant and do not require immediate review, as part of this current project. Administration will consider further, more detailed, review of the existing Guidelines as part of the preparation of the 2019/20 Corporate Business Plan.

Consultation/Advertising:

The formal advertising period is pursuant to Schedule 2, Part 2, Clause 4 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 (Regulations). The Regulations outlines a minimum period of advertising of 21 days. The City’s Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation outlines a comment period of 28 days. To satisfy the requirements of the Regulations and the City’s Policy the advertising period will be 28 days and include:

· Written notification to:

o Surrounding local governments;

o Relevant State Government agencies;

o Previous submitters on the City’s Built Form Policy;

o Key industry organisations;

· Written notification to the Western Australian Planning Commission and Department of Planning; Lands; and Heritage regarding the specific departures from the R Codes in accordance with the Regulations;

· Notice in the Perth Voice and Guardian Express once per week for four weeks;

· Notice on the City’s website and social media; and

· Referral to the City’s Design Review Panel.

Legal/Policy:

· Planning and Development Act 2005;

· Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015;

· State Planning Policy 3.1 – Residential Design Codes (R Codes);

· Draft Apartment Design State Planning Policy;

· Local Planning Scheme No. 2;

· Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation; and

· Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form.

Risk Management Implications:

It is considered a lot risk to propose an amendment to the local planning policy for the purpose of advertising for public comment.

Strategic Implications:

Council Priorities 2018/19:

Sensitive Design – Design that ‘fits in’ to our neighbourhoods is important to us. We want to see unique, high quality developments that respect our character and identity and respond to specific local circumstances.

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.

Financial/Budget Implications:

The cost of advertising and implementing this proposal will be met through the existing operational budget.

Comments:

The proposed amendment provides clarity in the policy provisions and resolves issues identified during implementation. Further to this, the draft amendment proposes landscaping and setback provisions which align closer to Design WA whilst maintaining Council’s intent and are considered suitable for the endorsement of the WAPC. Administration recommends that Council adopts the draft amended Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form for the purpose of advertising for public comment.

Council Briefing Agenda 11 September 2018

Council Briefing Agenda 11 September 2018

6.2 Draft Waste Strategy 2018-2023 Public Consultation Feedback

TRIM Ref: D18/117962

Author: Kylie Hughes, Coordinator Waste and Recycling Strategy

Authoriser: Andrew Murphy, Director Engineering

Attachments: 1. Survey Report - Draft Waste Strategy Consultation ⇩

2. Draft Waste Strategy 2018 - 2023 ⇩

Recommendation:

That Council:

1. NOTES the community submissions received in relation to the Draft Waste Strategy 2018-2023 as shown in Attachment 1;

2. ADOPTS the Waste Strategy 2018-2023 with minor amendments as shown in Attachment 2; and

3. ADVISES all respondents of its decision.

Purpose of Report:

To consider the results of the recent community consultation on the City’s Draft Waste Strategy 2018-2023 and to seek Council’s adoption of the Strategy.

Background:

At the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 29 May 2018, Council approved the Draft Waste Strategy 2018-2023 for public comment for 21 days in accordance with the City’s Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation.

Details:

In accordance with Council’s decision at its 29 May 2018 meeting and the City’s Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation, the Draft Waste Strategy 2018-2023 was advertised for public comment for a period of 21 days between 2 July and 31 July 2018. A survey was carried out using the City’s Engagement HQ website and this was promoted to the wider community through the City’s social media channels and under the consultation section of the City’s website.

Consultation/Advertising:

The consultation was undertaken in accordance with the City’s Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation and a detailed summary of the responses are included in Attachment 1.

The City's Waste Strategy consulted on the three underpinning components of the Waste Strategy:

1) City Aims

2) City Approaches

3) City Vision

The Waste Strategy 2018 – 2023 had four responses and a summary of the responses were as follows:

City Aims:

The Draft Strategy proposed the following aims and feedback was invited from the community on the extent of agreement with the below responses required:

AIM	RESPONSE
Achieve zero waste to landfill	50% Strongly agree 25% Somewhat agree 25% Strongly disagree
Increase community engagement	50% Strongly agree 50% Somewhat agree
Improve long-term planning	75% Strongly agree 25% Somewhat agree
Provide cost effective, sustainable, and contemporary waste services	75% Strongly agree 25% Somewhat agree
Work in collaboration, both locally and regionally	75% Strongly agree 25% Somewhat agree

City Approaches:

The Draft Strategy proposed four overarching approaches and feedback was invited from the community on the extent of agreement with the following preferential rankings resulting based on the responses received:

APPROACHES	RESPONSE
Application of the “Waste Hierarchy” in all projects	50% Somewhat agree 25% Strongly agree 25% neither agree or disagree
Working towards zero waste to landfill throughout the implementation	25% Strongly agree 25% Somewhat agree 25% Somewhat disagree 25% Neither agree or disagree
Investigating opportunities for Circular Economy (local solutions for waste management)	50% Neither agree or disagree 25% Strongly agree 25% Somewhat agree
Considering the carbon emissions which result from the management of waste in the City	50% Neither agree or disagree 25% Strongly agree 25% Somewhat disagree

City Vision:

75% of respondents agreed with the Waste Strategy’s Vision of sending zero waste to landfill by 2028, with the balance not agreeing.

Legal/Policy:

Nil.

Risk Management Implications:

Low: The Waste Strategy will establish a plan for increasing resource recovery whilst reducing waste sent to landfill as well as overall waste generation. The strategy will assist the City in taking steps to achieve cost-effective, sustainable and contemporary waste services.

Strategic Implications:

At its Ordinary Meeting held on 6 March 2018, Council endorsed six key priorities derived from the Imagine Vincent Strategic Community Plan (SCP) management exercise. These priorities were subsequently included in the Draft SCP adopted by Council for advertising on 24 July 2018. One of those key priorities is ‘Enhanced Environment’, as the City aims to make the best use of our natural resources for the benefit of current and future generations. The proposed Waste Strategy will contribute to the achievement of this priority.

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Finalisation and implementation of the Draft Waste Strategy 2018 - 2023 will provide guidance to the City for implementation of waste minimisation measures that will support the City to achieve its vision of sending ‘Zero Waste to Landfill’.

Financial/Budget Implications:

There are no financial implications arising directly from the report.

Comments:

The results of the public consultation support the City’s approach to managing its waste. It is therefore recommended that Council adopts the Draft Waste Strategy 2018 - 2023 as shown in Attachment 2.

Council Briefing Agenda 11 September 2018

7 Corporate Services

7.1 Transfer and dedication of lots as road and realignment of local government boundary - Intersection of Charles, Green and Walcott Streets, North Perth

TRIM Ref: D18/52776

Author: Meluka Bancroft, Property Leasing Officer

Authoriser: Kerryn Batten, Director Corporate Services

Attachments: 1. Plan of portion of Lot 230 (No. 566) Charles Street to be dedicated as road ⇩

2. Aerial Plan of Lots 231-234 (No. 568) Charles Street ⇩

3. Plan 2672 showing lots and road intersection ⇩

4. Plan of proposed local government boundary realignment ⇩

Recommendation:

That Council:

1. RECEIVES the request from Main Roads Western Australia dated 26 June 2018 and RESOLVES to request the Minister for Transport; Planning; Lands to dedicate the 12.19m x 3.7m portion of Lot 230 (No. 566) Charles Street, North Perth adjoining Charles Street, as shown in Attachment 1, as a road pursuant to section 56(1) of the Land Administration Act 1997;

2. NOTES that lots 231 - 234 (No. 568) Charles Street, North Perth are owned in freehold by the City and form part of the Charles, Green and Walcott Street intersection;

3. APPROVES the transfer of Lots 231 - 234 (No. 568) Charles Street, North Perth to the Crown (State of Western Australia) for the purpose of dedication as road, pursuant to section 168(5) of the Planning and Development Act 2005;

4. AUTHORISES the Mayor and Director Corporate Services to affix the common seal and execute the Transfer of Land in 3. above;

5. REQUESTS the Chief Executive Officer to review and present a report back to Council on the prospective realignment of the City’s boundary at the intersection of Charles, Green and Walcott Streets, North Perth

Purpose of Report:

For Council to consider the following issues, relating to the intersection of Charles, Green and Walcott Streets, North Perth:

· the dedication of a portion of Lot 230 (No. 566) Charles Street, North Perth, as shown in the plan attached at Attachment 1, as a road, to enable the realignment of the Charles, Green and Walcott Street intersection; and

· the transfer of lots 231 - 234 (No. 568) Charles Street, North Perth, which comprise road and verge, to the Crown (State of Western Australia) so that the lots are dedicated as road and form part of the Charles, Green and Walcott Street road reservations, as shown on the plan included as Attachment 2.

Administration notes that each of these issues should be considered separately, and that the dedication of a portion of Lot 230 has no impact on the realignment of the City of Vincent district boundary.

Background:

The background to each of the issues is discussed in turn below.

Background to Lot 230 Charles Street, North Perth and Main Roads’ request

Lot 230 is privately owned and comprises a brick and tile home with a rear carport which is accessible via a right of way. Main Roads is proposing to upgrade the Charles, Green and Walcott Street intersection in accordance with the Wanneroo Road, Wiluna and Charles Street Intersection Improvement project. In order to realign and upgrade the intersection Main Roads has confirmed that it is necessary for the 3.7m x 12.19m front portion of Lot 230, as shown in Attachment 1, to be compulsorily acquired by Main Roads pursuant to section 161 of the Land Administration Act 1997. The portion proposed to be acquired is within PCA 125. Once compulsorily acquired the land will be issued with a separate lot number and Certificate of Title and can then be dedicated as a road pursuant to section 56(1) of the Land Administration Act 1997. Section 56(1) requires that the local government which the acquired land is within resolves to make the request for the land to be dedicated as road.

Background to Lots 231 – 234 Charles Street, North Perth

The details of the Lots, which are all owned by the City in fee simple, are as follows:

*Lot*	*CT – Vol Fol*	*LPS No. 2 Zoning*	*MRS Zoning*	*Current use*	*Area*
231	1574 - 095	R60-R100	Other regional road reservation	Road verge	414m²
232	1566 - 298	R60-R100	Other regional road reservation	Road	256m²
233	1566 - 298	Parks and Recreation	Urban	Road verge	9m²
234	1566 - 298	Parks and Recreation	Urban	Road verge	313m²

Lots 231-234 were created in 1904 by Plan 2672, which was the subdivision of a portion of Swan Location 707. The lots were privately owned. In 1946 lots 232, 233 and a portion of lot 234 were compulsorily taken and set aside for the purpose of ‘extension of Green Street, Mount Hawthorn’. The compulsory acquisition was gazetted on 11 January 1946, with the gazette providing that the ‘land shall vest in the City of Perth for an estate in fee simple in possession for the public work herein expressed.’ A new Certificate of Title was subsequently issued showing that Lots 232-234 were in the ownership of the City of Perth.

Lot 231 was privately owned until 1952 when it was sold to the City of Perth for the sum of 350 pounds. There is no record of the reason the City of Perth acquired Lot 231.

The extension of Green Street and realignment of the Charles, Wanneroo, Green and Walcott Street intersection did not occur until 1980. The realignment resulted in portions of lots 231- 234 being dedicated as road, as shown in the portion of Plan 2672 attached at Attachment 3. The portions of these lots not dedicated remained in the freehold ownership of the City of Perth, and are now in the freehold ownership of the City of Vincent.

The Lots are currently used in connection with the intersection and therefore it is appropriate that the remaining portions of these lots are also dedicated as road, so that they form part of the Charles, Green and Walcott Street road reservation.

Lots 231 and 232 are zoned ‘Residential R60-R100’ while lots 233 and 234 are currently reserved ‘Parks and Recreation’ pursuant to the City’s Local Planning Scheme No. 2. If these lots are dedicated the City will remove the ‘Residential R60-R100’ and ‘Parks and Recreation’ reservation through an amendment to the Local Planning Scheme No. 2.

In 1995 Charles Street was by proclamation declared a highway in accordance with section 13 of the Main Roads Act 1930. The declaration as published in the Government Gazette 11 August 1995 provided that the footpaths were excluded from the proclamation, and therefore pursuant to section 13(2) of the Main Roads Act 1930 Main Roads is responsible for the care, control and management of the road area, while the City is responsible for the footpath and verge areas adjacent to Charles Street. The section of Charles Street between Green and Carr streets is currently reserved ‘urban’ pursuant to the Metropolitan Region Scheme. However, since its proclamation as a highway in 1995, the Western Australian Planning Commission has resolved that this section is declared a Planning Control Area (PCA 125). PCA 125 ensures that no future development occurs on the land until it is reserved as a ‘primary regional road reservation’ under the Metropolitan Region Scheme.

The section of Charles Street at the intersection of Green and Walcott Streets is reserved ‘other regional road reservation’ under the Metropolitan Region Scheme. Charles Street becomes Wanneroo Road at this intersection, and is reserved under the Metropolitan Region Scheme as ‘urban’ until the intersection with London Street, from which point it is ‘primary regional road reservation.’ Notwithstanding the reservation, due to the proclamation of Charles Street and Wanneroo Road as highways Main Roads is responsible for the road area, and the City is responsible for the footpath and verge areas.

Local Government boundary realignment

In connection with the above processes, it has come to Administration’s attention that the local government boundary does not currently align with the road intersection, and therefore management of the footpaths and verge of Charles Street (Wanneroo Road) on the City of Stirling side of the Green, Walcott and Charles Street intersection is the responsibility of the City, which is anomalous. If the local government boundary is aligned with Green Street, as shown marked in yellow in the plan attached at Attachment 4, this would formalise control and management of the road reservations. Realigning the local government boundary with Green Street would not impact local government rates as the land is not rateable (currently City’s freehold land and road reserve).

A separate formal process will need to be initiated to consider and pursue any changes to the City’s local government boundary and this is reflected in recommendation 5.

Details:

The details of each of the issues is discussed in turn below.

Compulsory acquisition and dedication of portion of Lot 230

Administration has reviewed Main Roads’ Wanneroo Road, Wiluna and Charles Street Intersection Improvement project and has no issues with the proposed realignment and upgrade of the Charles, Green and Walcott Street intersection. The proposed acquisition of the portion of Lot 230 adjacent to Charles Street is consistent with the intersection realignment and PCA 125.

Administration notes that Main Roads has the delegated power to acquire land pursuant to the Land Administration Act 1997, but cannot request land to be dedicated as a road. An alternative means of land being acquired as a road is a freehold subdivision process pursuant to section 168(5) of the Planning and Development Act 2005. Pursuant to section 168(5) the land becomes road upon the registration of the plan of subdivision depicting a portion of the lot as road. This process is not practical for Main Roads due to the scale, timing and nature of the proposed intersection upgrade and realignment.

Consequently Main Roads will be acquiring a portion of Lot 230 in accordance with its power under the Land Administration Act 1997. Once the portion of Lot 230 is compulsorily acquired for inclusion as part of the road reserve the land can be dedicated as road pursuant to section 56(1)(a) of the Land Administration Act 1997. Section 56(1) provides that the relevant local government must resolve to request the Minister that the portion of land acquired for use as road be dedicated. Upon dedication the land will form part of the Charles Street road reservation and will be the responsibility of Main Roads as it is within PCA 125.

In its letter dated 26 June 2018. Main Roads has requested that Council resolve to make this request at its next Council Meeting, as this will enable the acquisition and subsequent dedication of the land to proceed. Main Roads has confirmed that it will manage the acquisition and dedication process and indemnify the City against any costs and charges that may arise as a result of the dedication. As Main Roads is managing the processes, and the City is only required to resolve to make a request for the portion of Lot 230 to be dedicated as road, it is not anticipated that the City will incur any costs or charges.

Transfer and Dedication of Lots 231-234

Main Roads contacted the City in early 2018 in respect to the dedication of lots 231-234 as road reserve on the basis that the lots currently form part of the road intersection. In order to dedicate the lots as road pursuant to section 168(5) of the Planning and Development Act 2005 a Transfer of Land needs to be prepared and registered at Landgate. No consideration is payable, and note 4, which refers to the consideration, of the Transfer of Land will provide:

“No monetary consideration. In order that the above land be dedicated as road pursuant to section 168(5) of the Planning and Development Act 2005.”

As Charles Street is under the responsibility of Main Roads and Main Roads has delegated authority to sign documents on behalf of the State of Western Australia in respect to road reserves within their care, control and management, Main Roads can sign the Transfer of Land.

It will be necessary for the City to provide the Certificate of Titles for the Lots and complete a Verification of Identity in order to effect the transfer. The State Solicitors Office, on behalf of Main Roads, will prepare the required Transfer of Land and arrange lodgement at Landgate. Pursuant to the City’s Policy No. 4.1.10 ‘Execution of Documents’ the Mayor and Director Corporate Services are required to execute the Transfer of Land and affix the City’s common seal. Therefore the Mayor and Director Corporate Service’s signatures will need to be verified in accordance with the Landgate requirements. Administration engaged suitably qualified lawyers, HLW Ebsworth, to verify the Mayor and Director Corporate Service’s identity on 20 July 2018. This verification can be used in future land transactions that occur within two years of the date of the verification.

Consultation/Advertising:

Administration has discussed and reached consensus with Main Roads and the Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage (Department) in respect to the proposed transfer and dedication of the Lots.

As the proposed transfer is to the Crown (State of Western Australia) there is no requirement for the City to advertise or provide public notice of the disposition.

Legal/Policy:

Dedication of land acquired for use as a road:

Section 56 of the Land Administration Act 1997 sets out the process for dedicating land as road and provides:

“(1) If in the district of a local government –

(a) land is reserved or acquired for use by the public, or is used by the public, as a road under the care, control and management of the local government; or

(b) in the case of land comprising a private road constructed and maintained to the satisfaction of the local government –

(i) the holder of the freehold in that land applies to the local government, requesting it to do so; or

(ii) those holders of the freehold in rateable land abutting the private road, the aggregate of the rateable value of whose land is greater than one half of the rateable value of all the rateable land abutting the private road, apply to the local government, requesting it to do so;

(c) land comprises a private road of which the public has had uninterrupted use for a period of not less than10 years;

and that land is described in a plan of survey, sketch plan or document, the local government may request the Minister to dedicate that land as a road.

Dedication of land by Transfer:

Section 168(5) of the Planning and Development Act 2005 sets out the process for transferring lots owned in freehold to the Crown and dedicating the land as road and provides at sub section 5:

“(5) When a portion of land is transferred to the Crown or a local government for the purpose of extending or adding to a road, the transferred portion is to be taken –

(a) to be dedicated to the public use; and

(b) to form part of the road,

as and from the date of registration of the transfer.”

Signing of Transfer of Land:

The City’s Policy No. 4.1.10 ‘Execution of Documents’ provides the following in respect to Category 1(A) documents:

“Category 1(A) documents require a specific resolution of Council to sell, lease or enter into an agreement as well as an authority to affix the seal. These documents will be executed be having the common seal affixed under authorisation of Council with the affixing of the common seal in the presence of and being attested to by the Mayor and CEO or pursuant to section 9.49A(3)(b) of the Local Government Act, the Mayor and a senior employee authorised by the CEO to do so.

Risk Management Implications:

Medium: Lots 231-234 currently comprise road and verge and are treated as if they are part of the road reserve, which is under the care, control and management of Main Roads. The lots are currently owned in freehold by the City, which creates uncertainty in respect to the repair, maintenance and upgrade of the lots, as well as liability for any damage arising in connection with the use of the Lots. Transferring the lots to the Crown so that they are dedicated as part of the road resolves these issues.

The proposed acquisition and dedication of a portion of Lot 230 will be managed by Main Roads and does not raise any risks for the City.

Strategic Implications:

The City’s Strategic Community Plan 2013-2017 includes the following as strategic objectives:

“1.1.4 Enhance and maintain the City’s infrastructure, assets and community facilities to provide a safe, sustainable and functional environment.

1.1.5 Take action to improve transport and parking in the City and mitigate the effects of traffic.”

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

N/A

Financial/Budget Implications:

The State Solicitors Office will arrange for the preparation and registration of the Transfer of Land on behalf of Main Roads. Administration will review and arrange execution of the Transfer of Land and therefore the only costs payable by Administration will be those associated with the Verification of Identity process. The cost for the City’s signatories to be verified by a legal practitioner and for a letter of verification to be drafted to satisfy the Landgate Verification of Identity standard is $100. The verification can be used for future land transactions which occur within two years of the date of the verification.

No consideration is payable for the transfer of the Lots to the Crown (State of Western Australia). There are also no cost implications associated with Council resolving to request that the Minister dedicate a portion of Lot 230 as road pursuant to section 56(1) of the Land Administration Act 1997.

Comments:

Compulsory acquisition and dedication of portion of Lot 230

Administration recommends that Council resolve that the portion of Lot 230 adjacent to Charles Street, as shown in the plan attached at Attachment 1, is dedicated as road pursuant to section 56(1) of the Land Administration Act 1997. This will enable the compulsory acquisition and dedication of the land to proceed, which is required for the intersection realignment and upgrade.

Transfer and Dedication of Lots 231-234

The realignment of the Charles, Wanneroo, Green and Walcott street intersection in 1980 resulted in portions of lots 231-234 being dedicated as road. The remaining portions currently comprise road and verge and therefore it is appropriate for these remaining portions of the lots to also be dedicated as road pursuant to section 168(5) of the Planning and Development Act 2005. The dedication will formalise the repair, maintenance and upgrade of the road intersection, including the verge areas, and facilitate future road widening.

Realigning district boundary

Administration recommends that a review be undertaken into realignment of the City’s district boundary to coincide with the road intersection, as it will formalise control and management of the road reservations. Administration will need to consult with the City of Stirling prior to providing a report to Council on the matter.

Council Briefing Agenda 11 September 2018

7.4 Authorisation of Expenditure for the Period 25 July 2018 to
21 August 2018

TRIM Ref: D18/123473

Author: Nikki Hirrill, Accounts Payable Officer

Authoriser: Kerryn Batten, Director Corporate Services

Attachments: 1. Payments by EFT and BPAY August 18 ⇩

2. Payments by Cheque August 18 ⇩

3. Payments by Credit Card August 18 ⇩

Recommendation:

That Council RECEIVES the list of accounts paid under delegated authority for the period 25 July 2018 to 21 August 2018 as detailed in attachment 1, 2 and 3 as summarised below:

Cheque Numbers 82406 - 82415		$3,821.58
Cancelled cheques		$0.00
EFT and BPAY Documents 2277 - 2291		$2,717,263.65
Payroll		$1,205,422.50

Direct Debits
· Lease Fees	$385.00
· Loan Repayments	$148,536.27
· Bank Fees and Charges	$26,805.76
· Credit Cards	$5,257.63
· Superannuation	$11,930.22
Total Direct Debit		$192,914.88
Total Accounts Paid		$4,119,422.61

Purpose of Report:

To present to Council the expenditure and list of accounts paid for the period 25 July 2018 to 21 August 2018.

Background:

Council has delegated to the Chief Executive Officer (Delegation No. 1.14) the exercise of its power to make payments from the City’s Municipal and Trust funds. In accordance with Regulation 13(1) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 a list of accounts paid by the Chief Executive Officer is to be provided to Council, where such delegation is made.

The list of accounts paid must be recorded in the minutes of the Council Meeting.

Details:

The Schedule of Accounts paid for the period 25 July 2018 to 21 August 2018, covers the following:

FUND	CHEQUE NUMBERS/ PAY PERIOD	AMOUNT
Municipal Account (Attachment 1, 2 and 3)
Cheques	82406 - 82415	$3,821.58
Cancelled Cheques		$0.00
EFT and BPAY Payments	2277 - 2291	$2,717,263.65
Sub Total		$2,721,085.23

Transfer of Payroll by EFT	26/07/18 Ad hoc	$1,569.47
	07/08/18	$594,656.78
	21/08/18	$609,196.25
	August 2018	$1,205,422.50

Bank Charges and Other Direct Debits
Lease Fees		$385.00
Loan Repayments		$148,536.27
Bank Charges – CBA		$26,805.76
Credit Cards		$5,257.63
Superannuation		$11,930.22

Total Bank Charges and Other Direct Debits (Sub Total)		$192,914.88

Total Payments		$4,119,422.61

consulting/advertising:

Not applicable.

Legal/Policy:

Regulation 12(1) and (2) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 refers, i.e.-

12. Payments from municipal fund or trust fund, restrictions on making

(1) A payment may only be made from the municipal fund or the trust fund —

· if the local government has delegated to the CEO the exercise of its power to make payments from those funds — by the CEO; or

· otherwise, if the payment is authorised in advance by a resolution of Council.

(2) Council must not authorise a payment from those funds until a list prepared under regulation 13(2) containing details of the accounts to be paid has been presented to Council.

Regulation 13(1) and (3) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 refers, i.e.-

13. Lists of Accounts

(1) If the local government has delegated to the CEO the exercise of its power to make payments from the municipal fund or the trust fund, a list of accounts paid by the CEO is to be prepared each month showing for each account paid since the last such list was prepared -

· the payee’s name;

· the amount of the payment;

· the date of the payment; and

· sufficient information to identify the transaction.

(3) A list prepared under sub regulation (1) is to be —

· presented to Council at the next ordinary meeting of Council after the list is prepared; and

· recorded in the minutes of that meeting.

Risk Management Implications:

Low: Management systems are in place which establish satisfactory controls, supported by the internal and external audit functions.

Strategic Implications:

Strategic Plan 2013-2023:

“4.1 Provide good strategic decision-making, governance, leadership and professional management:

4.1.2 Manage the organisation in a responsible, efficient and accountable manner;

(a) Continue to adopt best practice to ensure the financial resources and assets of the City are responsibly managed and the quality of services, performance procedures and processes is improved and enhanced.”

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Not applicable.

Financial/Budget Implications:

All Municipal Fund expenditure included in the list of payments is in accordance with Council’s Annual Budget.

Comments:

If Councillors require further information on any of the payments, please contact the Manager Financial Services.

Council Briefing Agenda 11 September 2018

8 Community Engagement

8.1 New Draft Policy No. 3.10.3 - Street Activation

TRIM Ref: D18/55558

Author: Karen Balm, Senior Community Partner

Authoriser: Michael Quirk, Director Community Engagement

Attachments: 1. Attachment 1 - Current Policy No. 2.2.7 - Street Parties ⇩

2. Attachment 2 - Draft Policy No. 3.10.3 - Street Activation ⇩

Recommendation:

That Council;

1. RECEIVES the new Draft Policy No. 3.10.3 – Street Activation;

2. AUTHORISES the Chief Executive Officer to advertise the new Draft Policy No. 3.10.3 – Street Activation for public comment for a period of 21 days inviting written submissions in accordance with Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation; and

3. NOTES that a further report will be submitted to Council at the conclusion of the public comment period in regards to any written submission being received.

Purpose of Report:

To receive the new Draft Policy No. 3.10.3 – Street Activation and seek authorisation to advertise for public comment.

Background:

The City’s policies are reviewed at regular intervals to ensure that they reflect current legislative and regulatory requirements, align with best practice across the Local Government sector, and meet the expectations of Council Members and ratepayers. Policy No. 2.2.7 – Street Parties was adopted in December 1999 and a revised Policy was then adopted in December 2011 (Attachment 1), and therefore a comprehensive review was overdue. In addition, the increased closure and activation of streets throughout Vincent for festivals and events required consideration of more contemporary policy that better aligns with community expectations.

Upon review, it has been determined that the existing Policy No. 2.2.7 – Street Parties contains a broad range of administrative practices that are no longer deemed relevant many of which have been superseded by other policy and regulatory changes. Given the extent of changes necessary to make the existing Policy effective it was determined more appropriate for a new Policy to be prepared that can then be considered by Council and released for public comment.

Details:

The new draft Policy No. 3.10.3 – Street Activation (Attachment 2) has been prepared for the purposes of supporting the activation of local streets through activities that strengthen community participation and connection, supporting festivals and events that activate main streets and Town Centres, and ensuring the safe management of activities and events taking place on streets. A broad range of advice and information has informed the new Policy including:

· Review of current Policy No. 2.2.7 – Street Parties

· Review of Main Roads Western Australia ‘Traffic Management for Events Code of Practice’ (2015)

· Evaluation of the Leedy Streets Open initiative within Leederville Town Centre in 2017 and 2018

· Evaluation of the Rae Street Play Street initiative supported by Council through the 2017/18 Community Budget Submission process

· Feedback from Council Members

· Review of similar policies and practices across other Local Government Authorities including the City of South Perth, Bayside City Council and Glen Eira City Council (Victoria), Burwood Council (New South Wales) and City of Burnside and City of Mitcham (South Australia)

Key elements of the new draft Policy are as follows:

Street Activation Categories

The extent of planning and approvals required for street activation varies depending upon the scale of the activity, and therefore three different categories are included within the Policy. A key focus of the Policy is to simplify and better articulate the approval requirements associated with smaller scale street activations compared to larger scale street activations.

The Open Streets category addresses small to medium scale events generally held on local roads with street activations organised by local residents and community groups. The Open Streets – Local sub category relates to small scale events such as street parties, neighbourhood gatherings and ‘play street’ type activities. These events generally attract less than 500 people, only involve closure of a section of a local road not including an intersection/traffic control signals/bus routes, and they are likely to be invite only rather than being open for attendance by the broader community. Such events will require an Order for a Road Closure from WA Police, however a bespoke Traffic Management Plan will generally not be required as the City has prepared a range of Traffic Control Diagrams that can be utilised.

The Open Streets – Neighbourhood sub category relates to medium scale events such as a Christmas Party or Neighbourhood Halloween Trick or Treat Party. These events generally attract up 1,500 people, may simply involve closure of a section of a local road, may involve a larger closure impacting an intersection/traffic control signals/bus routes, and they are likely to be open for attendance by residents from the surrounding neighbourhood. Such events will require an Order for a Road Closure for WA Police although the extent of Traffic Management Plan requirements will vary depending on the extent of the road closure. Where the road closure is limited and does not impact an intersection/traffic control signals/bus routes the City’s Traffic Control Diagrams can be utilised.

The Major Street Activation category relates to large scale events with high attendances that require the closure of key roads and/or require multiple road closures. This includes events such as Street Festivals, cycling races and fun runs. These events require considerably more planning and approvals including an Order for a Road Closure from WA Police, Temporary Suspension of the Road Traffic Act/Regulations from WA Police, Traffic Management Plan prepared by a suitably accredited company, Event Approval from the City of Vincent. Main Roads approval will also be required for any road closure impacting Main Roads controlled roads.

Street Activation Support and Resources

Importantly, while the new draft Policy provides the regulatory basis for street activations a range of supporting resources have been prepared by Administration to assist with policy implementation. This includes City endorsed Traffic Control Diagrams that can be utilised for small scale events, road closure neighbour consent forms, event invitation templates, and street party checklists. Road closure equipment and Ranger support can also be provided to street activations, particularly within the Open Streets category, subject to availability.

Policy No. 3.10.11 – Community Funding was adopted by Council in April 2017 with street activation type activities generally supported through Seeding Grants and Community Support Grants as well as Festivals and Events Sponsorship. The availability of such funding is now directly referenced within the new draft Policy.

To facilitate street activations, particularly within the Open Streets category, Administration has confirmed the ability for the City to provide unincorporated event organisers with liability protection through Public Liability Insurance of up to $20 million. Such coverage remains subject to the organiser adhering to specific terms and conditions.

Consultation/Advertising:

It is proposed that the new draft Policy be advertised for public comment for a period of 21 days inviting submissions in accordance with Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation.

Legal/Policy:

Various legislation, regulations and codes impose statutory requirements on organisers of events that impact streets and traffic. This includes the Roads Traffic Act 1974, Road Traffic (Administration) Act 2008, Road Traffic (Events on Roads) Regulations 1991, Road Traffic Code 2000, Public Meetings and Processions Regulations 1984, Order for a Road Closure, and Main Roads Western Australia Traffic Management for Events Code of Practice 2015. These various requirements have been considered and referenced when preparing the new draft Policy.

While the City of Vincent, through this draft new Policy, will play a key role in facilitating street activations there are other agencies such as WA Police and Main Roads Western Australia that will determine specific requirements. For example, the Order for a Road Closure determined by WA Police requires the applicant to indicate that two-thirds of the occupiers affected are in favour of the proposed road closure. As such, that requirement has been included within the new draft Policy as a key element to obtaining a road closure.

Risk Management Implications:

Low: Adoption of this Policy will provide clear direction to Administration on matters that require the application of Council discretion or the exercise of a function under which authorisation may, or is to, be given or give direction to the City to align with community values and aspirations. Preparation of the Policy has included due regard of legislation, regulations, codes and public liability risks as they relate to events that impact streets and traffic.

Strategic Implications:

The new draft Policy aligns with the following objectives within the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2013-2023:

‘3.1.6 Build capacity within the community for individuals and groups to meet their needs and the needs of the broader community

(a) Build the capacity of individuals and groups within the community to initiate and manage programs and activities that benefit the broader community, such as the establishment of “men’s sheds”, community gardens, toy libraries and the like.’

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.

Financial/Budget Implications:

Sufficient funding for street activation support and resources has been included within the City’s 2018/19 operating budget including community funding, street activation kits and checklists, games and equipment, and public liability insurance coverage. The provision of specific road closure equipment and Ranger support/parking control will remain subject to availability.

Comments:

The review of Policy No. 2.2.7 – Street Parties identified a range of administrative practices that are no longer relevant or practicable and do not actively support street activations particularly at the local and neighbourhood level. The new draft Policy No. 3.10.3 – Street Activations has been prepared in recognition that our streets are increasingly being utilised as locations for a wide range of activities and events, and in recognition that the City of Vincent broadly supports such activation of the public realm. The Policy endeavours to provide a simplified approach to street activations (and road closures) with improved clarity on the level of planning and approvals required subject to the scale of the event.

Following Council consideration of the new draft Policy it is proposed to advertise for public comment seeking written submissions. Any submissions received will be considered with the Policy then presented to Council again for adoption at which point the existing Policy No. 2.2.7 – Street Parties can be rescinded.

Council Briefing Agenda 11 September 2018

8.2 Adoption of Policy No. 4.1.30 - Recognition of Noongar Boodjar Culture and History through Welcome to Country and Acknowledgement of Country

TRIM Ref: D18/102100

Author: Gayatrii Surendorff, Community Partner

Authoriser: Michael Quirk, Director Community Engagement

Attachments: 1. Draft Policy No. 4.1.30 - Recognition of Noongar Boodja, Culture and History Through Welcome to Country and Acknowledgement of Country (Tracked Changes Version) ⇩

2. Draft Policy No. 4.1.30 - Recognition of Noongar Boodja, Culture and History Through Welcome to Country and Acknowledgement of Country (Final Version) ⇩

Recommendation:

That Council;

1. NOTES the responses received following public advertising of draft revised Policy No. 4.1.30 – Recognition of Noongar Boodjar, Culture and History through Welcome to Country and Acknowledgement of Country;

2. ADOPTS draft revised Policy No. 4.1.30 – Recognition of Noongar Boodjar, Culture and History Through Welcome to Country and Acknowledgement of Country; and

3. ADVISES submitters of its decision.

Purpose of Report:

To adopt Policy No. 4.1.30 – Recognition of Noongar Boodjar, Culture and History Through Welcome to Country and Acknowledgement of Country following the recent public comment period.

Background:

Administration in collaboration with Council’s Reconciliation Action Plan Working Group recently completed a comprehensive review of the existing Policy No. 4.1.30 – Protocols for Acknowledgement and Welcome to Country to Recognise Aboriginal Culture and History. While the policy intent and scope remain relevant numerous amendments were proposed to better reflect contemporary practices and to include appropriate terminology. The draft revised Policy No.4.1.30 - Recognition of Noongar Boodjar, Culture and History Through Welcome to Country and Acknowledgement of Country was considered at the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 26 June 2018 where it was resolved that Council:

“1. AUTHORISES the Chief Executive Officer to advertise Draft Policy No. 4.1.30 – Recognition of Noongar Boodjar, Culture and History Through Welcome to Country and Acknowledgment of Country for public comment for a period of 21 days inviting written submissions in accordance with Council Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation;

2. NOTES that a further report will be submitted to Council at the conclusion of the public comment period in regard to any written submission being received.”

Details:

Public advertising of the draft revised Policy No.4.1.30 - Recognition of Noongar Boodjar, Culture and History Through Welcome to Country and Acknowledgement of Country has been undertaken in accordance with Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation with two submissions received, as follows:

	Comments Received	Administration Response
1.	The Policy should be titled ‘Welcome to Country and Acknowledgement of Traditional Ownership Guidelines and Protocols for the City of Vincent’.	The name of this Policy has purposefully been changed to ‘Recognition of Noongar Boodjar, Culture and History through Welcome to Country and Acknowledgement of Country’ to include Noongar language and highlight the importance of recognising Noongar culture, land and history. The existing Policy name as well as the recommendation received through public comment are both considered suitable, however Administration believes that the new name as advertised shows respect to Noongar culture and tradition and encourages the use of Noongar language within the organisation and wider community. As such, it is recommended that the proposed Policy name remains unchanged.
2.	The ‘Welcome to Country’ component should be placed before the ‘Acknowledgment of Country’ within the Policy.	This change has merit and Administration recognises the value of placing the ‘Welcome to Country’ section before the ‘Acknowledgement of Country’ section. The draft revised Policy has been amended accordingly.
3,	The Policy should include the following headings/components ‘Purpose of this Policy’, ‘When should a Welcome to Country or Acknowledgement of Traditional Ownership be used?’, ‘Why arrange for a Welcome to Country and Acknowledgment of Traditional Ownership?’, ‘Observation of Aboriginal protocols’, and ‘Who to ask regarding the Welcome to Country?’	Administration acknowledges the importance of providing a practical understanding of the Policy to assist with effective implementation. Rather than including all of the headings/components within the Policy itself Administration is already preparing a separate Welcome to Country and Acknowledgement to Country supporting document to serve that purpose.
4.	The Policy should include a component discussing ‘Who to ask regarding the Welcome to Country?’ and ‘Payment and gratuities.’	Administration acknowledges the importance of providing practical advice and direction to assist with effective implementation of the Policy. Rather than including this information within the Policy itself Administration is already preparing a separate Welcome to Country and Acknowledgement to Country supporting document to provide such guidance.
5.	The Policy should include an index	Given the cultural significance and educational importance of this Policy it is considered that the document should be read in its entirety. However, to ensure consistency with other Council Policy documents an index has now been included.

The draft revised Policy No. 4.1.30 – Recognition of Noongar Boodjar, Culture and History Through Welcome to Country and Acknowledgement of Country has now been amended to reflect comments recent during the public advertising period. Attachment 1 demonstrates the extent of changes to the existing Policy whereas Attachment 2 provides a final version of the draft revised Policy.

Consultation/Advertising:

The draft revised Policy No. 4.1.30 – Recognition of Noongar Boodjar, Culture and History Through Welcome to Country and Acknowledgement of Country was advertised for public comment from 9 to 31 July 2018 on the City’s Imagine Vincent Community Consultation Portal and through a public notice in the Perth Voice newspaper.

Legal/Policy:

Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation requires Administration to undertake formal community consultation when a decision is likely to have significant impact on a particular individual or group in the community. Any new policy or significant policy amendments are to be advertised through a public notice for a 21 day period.

Risk Management Implications:

Low: Administration has completed a comprehensive review of Policy No. 4.1.30 – Recognition of Noongar Boodjar, Culture and History Through Welcome to Country and Acknowledgment of Country in order to determine its relevance and responsiveness to the community.

Strategic Implications:

The draft revised Policy aligns with the following objective within the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2013-2023:

3. Community Development and Wellbeing

3.1 Enhance and promote community development and wellbeing

3.1.1 Celebrate, acknowledge and promote the City’s cultural and social diversity

4. Leadership, Governance and Management

4.1 Provide good strategic decision making, governance, leadership and professional management

4.1.5 Focus on stakeholder needs, values, engagement and involvement

The City’s ‘Reflect’ Reconciliation Action Plan includes a number of specific actions to raise understanding of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island protocols including the review of existing Policy No. 4.1.30 – Protocols for Acknowledgement and Welcome to Country to Recognise Aboriginal Culture and History.

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.

Financial/Budget Implications:

Nil.

Comments:

The existing Policy No. 4.1.30 - Protocols for Acknowledgement of Country and Welcome to Country to Recognise Aboriginal Culture and History was adopted in November 2010 and while it has led to improved recognition of Aboriginal people a comprehensive Policy review was required. Administration has completed that review in accordance with the specific action in the City’s ‘Reflect’ Reconciliation Action Plan and in collaboration with Council’s Reconciliation Action Plan Working Group.

It is recommended that Council adopts the revised Policy No. 4.1.30 Recognition of Noongar Boodjar, Culture and History Through Welcome to Country and Acknowledgment of Country.

Council Briefing Agenda 11 September 2018

8.3 Minor Amendment - Policy No. 3.10.11 - Community Funding

TRIM Ref: D18/114223

Author: Carla Stevens, Community Partner

Authoriser: Michael Quirk, Director Community Engagement

Attachments: 1. Draft Amended Policy No. 3.10.11 - Community Funding ⇩

Recommendation:

That Council AMENDS Policy No. 3.10.11 – Community Funding to include Female Sports Participation Grants as reflected in Attachment 1.

Purpose of Report:

To amend Policy No. 3.10.11 – Community Funding Policy to specifically include a funding category that supports initiatives to improve sports participation by women and girls within the City of Vincent as per the recent Council resolution.

Background:

At the Ordinary Council Meeting on 24 July 2018 in response to a Notice of Motion from Cr Gontaszewski it was resolved to implement a range of initiatives to improve participation and accessibility by women and girls at City of Vincent sportsgrounds and associated facilities. That resolution specifically included:

“2.3 Review and amend Council Policy No. 3.10.11 – Community Funding to provide local sporting clubs with access to funding that supports targeted programs, equipment, training and polices.”

To enable immediate implementation of that initiative Administration has completed a review and prepared a minor amendment to the Policy for Council consideration.

Details:

When determining the range of initiatives to improve sport participation by women and girls the availability of funding to assist local sporting clubs was identified by Administration as an important strategy. Many local sporting clubs are seeking to increase and diversify their membership although the availability of resources and funding is regularly identify as a barrier. Based upon dialogue with the Department of Local Government, Sport and Cultural Industries and review of other Local Government practices a new ‘Female Sports Participation Grants’ category has been prepared for inclusion within Policy No. 3.10.11 – Community Funding.

The intent of that new grant category is to assist local sporting clubs and State Sporting Associations with the implementation of activities, programs or projects that promote and encourage participation of women and girls in sport. It is proposed that funding of up to $2,000 be made available for each individual activity, program or project. Eligible initiatives may include:

· Costs associated with the establishment of activities, programs, competitions or new teams;

· Specific equipment required by female participants to take part in sport;

· Coaching accreditation;

· Umpire training; and

· Costs associated with developing gender equity strategies, policies or codes of conduct.

This new grant category has now been included within an amended Policy no. 3.10.11 – Community Funding (Attachment 1). As with all grant types under this Policy an information package comprising standard guidelines, assessment criteria and application has been prepared by Administration. The availability of this grant category will be communicated to local sporting clubs and State Sporting Associations as part of the marketing campaign that recognises local sportswomen, coaches, officials and clubs while also providing a platform for consultation with local women and girls regarding current barriers to participation. The implementation of that marketing campaign is another specific initiative endorsed by Council in response to the recent Notice of Motion.

Consultation/Advertising:

Nil.

Legal/Policy:

Council Policy No. 4.1.1 – Policy Manual – Adoption and Review of Policies enables minor amendments to existing policies to be carried out via the standard reporting process in the Agenda for Ordinary Council Meetings. Given the recent Council resolution supporting this new funding category, and the nature of this policy change, it is considered to be a minor amendment. Public comment will not be sought.

Risk Management Implications:

Low: Adoption of this policy amendment will provide clear direction to Administration on matters that require the application of Council discretion or the exercise of a function under which authorisation has been given.

Strategic Implications:

The inclusion of a Female Participation in Sport grant within the existing Community Funding Policy aligns with the following action in the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2013 – 2023:

‘3.1.6 Build capacity within the community for individuals and groups to meet their needs and the needs of the broader community

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.

Financial/Budget Implications:

An amount of $437,500 has been included within the 2018/19 operating budget to fund the various grant types within Policy No. 3.10.11 – Community Funding that are managed by the Community Engagement Directorate. Rather than increasing the budget amount for the proposed Female Sports Participation Grants it is considered appropriate to simply manage the overall community grants budget allocation based upon applications that are received. That same approach has been applied for the new Youth Development Grants and will be applied for the proposed funding support towards Street Activations. Should community demand exceed the funding available this can be considered through the 2018/19 Budget Review and/or when preparing the 2019/20 budget.

Comments:

The proposed Female Sports Participation Grants directly align with Council’s recent resolution to improve sports participation and accessibility by women and girls, and given the minor nature of this amendment as well as the availability of existing funding, it is recommended that Policy No. 3.10.11 – Community Funding simply be amended.

Council Briefing Agenda 11 September 2018

8.4 2018/19 Community Sporting and Recreation Facilities Fund Small Grants Application - Leederville Oval Master Plan

TRIM Ref: D18/122770

Author: Wayne Grimes, Senior Community Projects Officer

Authoriser: Michael Quirk, Director Community Engagement

Attachments: Nil

Recommendation:

That Council APPROVES the Community Sporting and Recreation Facilities Fund Small Grants submission to the Department of Local Government, Sport and Cultural Industries for $25,000 towards the Leederville Oval Master Plan.

Purpose of Report:

To seek Council approval of a $25,000 funding submission to the Department of Local Government, Sport and Cultural Industries Community Sporting and Recreation Facilities Fund Small Grants Round for the Leederville Oval Master Plan.

Background:

Local Government Authorities and not-for-profit sport/recreation organisations are eligible to apply for CSRFF grants aimed towards increasing participation through the development of basic infrastructure. The Department of Local Government, Sport and Cultural Industries (DLGSCI) offers funding three times annually. One round of ‘Annual and Forward Planning Grants’ reported to Council in September and two rounds of ‘Small Grants’ reported to Council in March and August.

The CSRFF Small Grants allow eligible clubs, groups and local government authorities the opportunity to apply for grant funding to assist with smaller projects that have a total cost of $200,000 or less. Approximately $750,000 is allocated towards each of the two small grant rounds (winter and summer) with the maximum grant offered being one third of the total estimated project cost up to a maximum of $66,666 (excluding GST). Any applications for the current CSRFF Small Grants needed to be submitted to the relevant Local Government Authority in July/August 2018 for assessment and Council approval.

The applications are then assessed by DLGSCI and rated as either:

A Well planned and needed by municipality

B Well planned and needed by applicant

C Needed by municipality, more planning required

D Needed by applicant, more planning required

E Idea has merit, more planning work needed

F Not recommended

Successful/unsuccessful applicants are then notified by DLGSCI in November 2018.

Details:

The Leederville Oval Master Plan is the only application being submitted by the City of Vincent for the current CSRFF Small Grants Round.

Leederville Oval Master Plan

Leederville Oval is located at 246 Vincent Street, Leederville and has served the community as a park and sporting venue for more than 100 years. It currently accommodates both East Perth and Subiaco Football Clubs, and attracts more than 50,000 visitors each year for football activities and community events. The site comprises a wide range of infrastructure including football club and function facilities, grandstand, covered spectator seating, limestone tiered seating, floodlighting, scoreboard, car parking, public toilets, internal path network, playing field, and perimeter fencing. Given the ageing infrastructure at Leederville Oval, changing community demands and the imperative to maximise use of public open spaces it has been determined necessary to prepare a Master Plan in 2018/19.

This Master Plan will provide a clear direction for the future development and management of Leederville Oval taking into account its historical character and functionality, community expectations and needs, emerging issues and trends, and development opportunities. Location of the Oval within the Leederville Town Centre and proximity to the Leederville Train Station will be key considerations as will alignment of the Master Plan with the soon to be progressed Leederville Activity Centre Plan.

A number of predatory studies have already been completed to inform the Master Plan including an Asset Condition Audit, Energy Audit, WAFL Economic Impact to the Leederville Town Centre Study, and Floodlighting Condition Audit and Upgrade Options Report. Administration has also progressed dialogue with key stakeholders including the DLGSCI, WA Football Commission, East Perth Football Club and Subiaco Football Club.

The Master Plan will provide Council with a coordinated and strategic approach for this important community asset including a prioritised implementation plan based upon existing and future facility development opportunities. Given the regional significance of Leederville Oval, and inclusion of the Master Plan in the City’s Corporate Business Plan 2018/19 – 2021/22, this application has been assessed as “A – well planned and needed by municipality” using the CSRFF Guidelines and key principles.

Consultation/Advertising:

The City has been liaising with the WA Football Commission and both East Perth Football Club and Subiaco Football Club regarding the future of Leederville Oval. Preparation of the Master Plan will include extensive engagement with a range of key stakeholders and the broader community through a project specific Stakeholder Engagement Plan.

Legal/Policy:

Nil

Risk Management Implications:

Low: The Leederville Oval Master Plan project has been included within the City’s Corporate Business Plan 2018/19 – 2021/22, and the 2018/19 operating budget includes funding contributions from the WA Football Commission and DLGSCI. This CSRFF Small Grants application is necessary to avoid any negative impact to the operating budget.

Strategic Implications:

The Leederville Oval Master Plan aligns with the following objectives within the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2013-2023:

1. Natural and Built Environment

1.1 Improve and maintain the natural and built environment and infrastructure

1.1.4 Enhance and maintain the City’s infrastructure, assets and community facilities to provide a safe, sustainable and functional environment

1.1.6 Enhance and maintain the City’s parks, landscaping and the natural environment

2. Economic Development

2.1 Progress economic development with adequate financial resources

2.1.2 Develop and promote partnerships and alliances with key stakeholders

In addition, the City’s Corporate Business Plan 2018/19 – 2021/22 includes the specific action to prepare and implement the Leederville Oval Master Plan (item 4.4).

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Nil

Financial/Budget Implications:

The 2018/19 operating budget includes an amount of $90,000 to prepare the Leederville Oval Master Plan including $30,000 municipal funds and $60,000 from external funding sources. An amount of $25,000 has been secured from the WA Football Commission and $25,000 is now being sought from the DLGSCI as the maximum CSRFF grant amount for strategic planning studies is $25,000. Administration will determine whether additional municipal funding or project scope review is required upon CSRFF announcements being made in November 2018.

Comments:

Preparation of the Leederville Oval Master Plan is a vitally important project and has been included within the City’s Corporate Business Plan 2017/18 – 2020/21. This CSRFF Small Grants Round application seeks funding support from the DLGSCI given the regional significance of Leederville Oval and its key role over many decades in accommodating sport and recreation activities. A strategic planning study such as a Reserve Master Plan is an eligible project under the CSRFF Guidelines. It should be noted that given the CSRFF Small Grants Round deadlines the Leederville Oval Master Plan application has already been submitted to the DLGSCI pending Council decision making.

Council Briefing Agenda 11 September 2018

8.5 Review of Western Central Local Emergency Management Arrangements

TRIM Ref: D18/106225

Author: Paul Morrice, Team Leader Ranger Administration

Authoriser: Michael Quirk, Director Community Engagement

Attachments: 1. Draft Local Emergency Management Committee Arrangement - June 2018 ⇩

2. City of Vincent Local Emergency Recovery Plan - July 2018 ⇩

3. Local Emergency Management Plan for the Provision of Welfare Support Perth and Fremantle Districts ⇩

Recommendation:

That Council:

1. ADOPTS the Western Central Local Emergency Management Arrangements (June 2018) in accordance with Part 3, Division 2 of the Emergency Management Act 2005;

2. APPROVES the City of Vincent Local Emergency Recovery Plan (July 2018);

3. AUTHORISES the Chief Executive Officer to endorse the City of Vincent Local Emergency Recovery Plan (July 2018); and

4. NOTES the Local Emergency Management Plan for the Provision of Welfare Support – Perth and Fremantle Districts (May 2017)

Purpose of Report:

To adopt the Western Central Local Emergency Management Arrangements (June 2018) and approve the City of Vincent Local Emergency Recovery Plan (July 2018).

Background:

The Emergency Management Act 2005 establishes the roles and responsibility of local government in relation to emergency management. The three main responsibilities under the Act being:

· To establish and support a local emergency management committee;

· To ensure that local emergency management arrangements are prepared, reviewed and maintained for its district; and

· To manage Recovery following an emergency affecting the community in its district.

Eight local governments from the Central Metropolitan Police District have combined to form the Western Central Local Emergency Management Committee (WCLEMC) thus completing the requirement of local government to establish a local emergency management committee. The WCLEMC consists of Representatives from the Cities of Vincent/Nedlands/Subiaco the Towns of Cambridge/Claremont/Cottesloe/Mosman Park and the Shire of Peppermint Grove. WCLEMC also includes representation from WA Police, Department of Fire and Emergency Services, Department of Health, Department of Communities, Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions, State Emergency Service, Office of Emergency Management, and Australian Red Cross. This regional structure has been approved by the State Emergency Management Committee. Responsibility for convening, resourcing and hosting meetings rotates between the eight local government members on a two-year cycle and is currently with the Town of Claremont.

The WCLEMC, on behalf of the eight local governments, and within the framework and guidelines set out in the Emergency Management Act 2005 and State Emergency Management policies and procedures, maintain a consolidated set of local emergency management arrangements. These have recently been reviewed by the WCLEMC and Council adoption is now required in accordance with Part 3 Division 2 of the Emergency Management Act 2005. This recent review was triggered given the City of Subiaco boundary adjustment through the City of Perth Act 2016.

While each local government is required to ensure the preparation of local emergency arrangements this responsibility is effectively discharged through the establishment and operations of the WCLEMC. Respective local governments do not therefore have a direct role in the development of the local emergency arrangements, albeit the Act and associated policies require their approval by the local government.

Details:

WCLEMC has completed a review of the existing local emergency arrangements and identified that associated plans are unnecessarily lengthy that makes the identification of key information more difficult. The review was undertaken guided by the following principles:

· Use of simple language and text

· Use of tabulation rather than lengthy text where appropriate

· Avoid duplication of information contained in other documents that are readily accessible

· Inclusion of key references, contacts and resource lists

· Recovery planning to be the responsibility of the individual local governments

The Local Emergency Management Arrangements outline the responsibilities of individual stakeholders as well as defining potential hazards and hazard management agencies, and cover the following key elements:

· Part One Introduction

· Part Two Planning

· Part Three Response

· Part Four Recovery

· Part Five Exercising and Reviewing

· Part Six Appendices, including schedules of resources, contact detail, risk treatment plans, special needs groups, contacts and resources, Local Recovery Plans and detail of nominated Local Recovery Coordinators and their contact numbers.

The revised Local Emergency Management Arrangements 2018 have now been completed and assessed against the State Emergency Management Committee compliance checklist. It is necessary for the Arrangements to be formally approved by each local government prior to submission to the District Emergency Management Committee.

Notably, in the event of an emergency within Vincent’s boundaries it may be necessary to commit resources (physical, financial or human) to support the activities of the relevant Hazard Management Agency. Based on the emergencies deemed most likely to occur within an inner-City area the Hazard Management Agency is expected to be WA Police, Department of Fire and Emergency Services or the Public Transport Authority. Although through a Partnering Agreement (Appendix 10 within Attachment 1) each of the member local governments have agreed to assist each other in the event of an emergency that exceeds the capacity of the impacted district.

The Director Community Engagement is the City’s emergency contact and will be directly contacted by the Local Emergency Coordinator to attend the Incident Support Group to assist with the provision of support services, and then to make the transition to recovery after the emergency event has been contained or controlled.

The City’s Local Emergency Recovery Plan

Under Section 36(b) of the Emergency Management Act 2005, it is a function of local government to manage recovery following an emergency affecting the community in its district. The City of Vincent is obligated to maintain a Local Emergency Recovery Plan to compliment the abovementioned WCLEMC Emergency Management Arrangements for reference in case of a declared emergency. The Plan is to be submitted to the State Emergency Management Committee to support both WCLEMC arrangements and broader State Emergency Management Arrangements.

Administration has completed a review of the Plan that was originally prepared in 2009 and most recently updated in 2015. The key purpose of the Plan is to identify arrangements for effectively managing recovery at a local level including key roles and responsibilities, and the framework for recovery operations. The revised City of Vincent Local Emergency Recovery Plan (Attachment 2) has now been completed and assessed against the State Emergency Management Committee compliance checklist.

The Plan is to be read in conjunction with the revised Western Central Local Emergency Management Arrangements 2018 and existing Local Emergency Management Plan for the Provision of Welfare Support Perth and Fremantle Districts (Attachment 3).

The Plan requires approval and endorsement by the Council prior to being formally tabled at the WCLEMC to form part of the Western Central Local Emergency Management Arrangements, and a copy will then be provided to the State Emergency Management Committee.

Consultation/Advertising:

The Western Central Local Emergency Management Arrangements 2018 and City of Vincent Local Emergency Recovery Plan 2018 have been prepared in collaboration with WCLEMC and included consultation with a broad range of key stakeholders. Upon adoption these local emergency management arrangements will be include on the City’s website and remain available at Council’s Administration and Civic Centre.

Legal/Policy:

The Emergency Management Act 2005 requires local governments to complete three specified functions:

· Establish and support local emergency management committees.

· Ensure the preparation of Local Emergency Management Arrangements.

· Plan for and be responsible for Local Recovery Arrangements.

Although review of the Arrangements will be a continuous process, adoption of the revised Western Central Local Emergency Management Arrangements 2018 and City of Vincent Local Emergency Recovery Plan 2018 will ensure the City remains compliant with this legislation.

Risk Management Implications:

High: In the event of an emergency affecting the local area it is vitally important that the City of Vincent remains equipped to fulfil its emergency management obligations which may vary based on the type of emergency event as well as its scale, risk and severity. Planning and preparation is necessary to enable responsiveness based upon clear roles and responsibilities, and clear emergency arrangements remain a legislative requirement for local government.

Strategic Implications:

These plans align with key objectives within the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2013 – 2017 as follows:

1. Natural and Built Environment

1.1 Improve and maintain the natural and built environment and infrastructure

1.1.4 Enhance and maintain the City’s infrastructure, assets and community facilities to provide a safe, sustainable and functional environment

2. Leadership, Governance and Management

1. 4.1 Provide good strategic decision-making, governance, leadership and professional management

2. 4.1.2 Manage the organisation in a responsible, efficient and accountable manner

3. 4.1.4 Plan effectively for the future

4. 4.1.5 Focus on stakeholder needs, values, engagement and involvement

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Nil

Financial/Budget Implications:

Costs associated with the preparation of the Western Central Local Emergency Management Arrangements 2018 and City of Vincent Local Emergency Recovery Plan 2018 have been met within the City’s 2018/19 operating budget. Subject to the type of emergency encountered a range of existing City resources will be utilised although there may be instances where expenditure from the municipal fund not included in the annual budget may be required.

Section 6.8(1)(c) of the Local Government Act 1995 will apply in such circumstances whereby expenditure may be authorised in advance by the Mayor in an emergency. The City’s insurance coverage may enable the recovery of some costs associated with the Response and Recovery phases of an emergency event.

Comments:

The Western Central Local Emergency Management Arrangements have been reviewed and prepared to ensure that the City of Vincent community is appropriately prepared for and protected from both natural and man-made emergencies. Council adoption of the Western Central Local Emergency Management Arrangements 2018 and City of Vincent Local Emergency Recovery Plan 2018 will ensure that an effective framework is in place in the event of an emergency.