AGENDA

Late Reports

 

Council Briefing

 

9 October 2018

 

Time:	6pm
Location:	Administration and Civic Centre 244 Vincent Street, Leederville

 

 

 

 

Len Kosova

Chief Executive Officer

 

Order Of Business

 

5          Development Services. 4

5.9             LATE REPORT: Relocation of the Leederville Town Centre Taxi Zone [ABSOLUTE MAJORITY DECISION REQUIRED] 4

5.10           LATE REPORT: Amendment No. 2 to Local Planning Scheme No. 2. 15

6          Engineering. 22

6.1             LATE REPORT: Proposed 40km/h Area Wide Speed Zone Trial - Results of Consultation. 22

6.2             LATE REPORT: Minor Parking Restriction Improvements/Amendments. 39

7          Corporate Services. 47

7.1             LATE REPORT: Investment Report as at 30 September 2018. 47

7.3             LATE REPORT: Financial Statements as at 31 August 2018. 57

7.5             LATE REPORT: Variation of Leederville Tennis Club and North Perth Tennis Club leases to enable return of funds held in City's reserve accounts to clubs. 147

7.7             LATE REPORT: Reallocation of 2018/19 Budget Funds - Leederville Town Centre Shared Space [ABSOLUTE MAJORITY DECISION REQUIRED] 152

 

 

5             Development Services

TRIM Ref:                  D18/125458

Author:                     Rana Murad, Place Manager

Authoriser:                Luke Gibson, A/Director Development Services

Attachments:             1.       Attachment 1 - Changes to location of existing Taxi Zone and Pick-up/Set-down Bays in Leederville Town Centre as approved by Council on 19 September 2017 ⇩

2.       Attachment 2 - Summary of Survey Results ⇩

3.       Attachment 3 - Summary of Submissions and Administration's Response ⇩

4.       Attachment 4 - Proposed Pick-up/Set-down Bays in Leederville Town Centre ⇩  

 

Recommendation: That Council: 1.       ADOPTS BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the changes to the parking restrictions shown in Attachment 4, in accordance with the City of Vincent Parking and Parking Facilities Local Law; and 2.       NOTES: 2.1     The relocation of the Leederville Taxi Zone to be adjacent to 666 Newcastle Street and the pick-up/set-down bays as shown in Attachment 4; 2.2     The continuation of the outdoor eating area adjacent to the Leederville Hotel in accordance with the City’s Trading in Public Places Local Law 2008; 2.3     That all subsequent approvals for the outdoor eating area adjacent to the Leederville Hotel will be issued through the City’s online system; and 2.4     The results of the survey undertaken by Administration and the community feedback received and Administration’s comments on this feedback, as shown in Attachments 2 and 3, respectively.

 

Purpose of Report:

To consider the permanent location for the Leederville Taxi Zone and to consider the results of the community consultation relating to Ride Share within the Leederville Town Centre.

Background:

On 19 September 2017, Council resolved to support a trial of the following:

 

·       relocation of the Leederville Taxi Zone from outside of the Leederville Hotel located at 742 Newcastle Street, to 666 Newcastle Street;

·       Ride Share pick-up/set-down locations throughout the Leederville Town Centre as shown in Attachment 1;

·       A public alfresco area in part of the existing Leederville Taxi Zone outside of the Leederville Hotel.

 

In February 2018, these works were completed.

 

 

In September 2018, Administration undertook consultation on the trial to understand the community’s views on the:

 

·       Need for a Taxi Zone in the Leederville Town Centre;

·       Impact and performance of the relocated Taxi Zone and Ride Share pick-up/set-down locations during the trial; and

·       Future use and design of the existing Leederville Taxi Zone area.

 

This process is now complete and the matter is presented to Council for consideration.

Details:

Administration received a total of 18 submissions during the consultation period which raised three key considerations. The survey results and a summary of submissions and Administration’s response are included as Attachment 2 and Attachment 3 respectively. The three key considerations are summarised below:

 

1.       Taxi Zone Relocation

 

The Taxi Zone was historically located outside of the Leederville Hotel however, in February 2018 the City relocated it to be adjacent No. 666 Newcastle Street. The owners of the Leederville Hotel site subsequently, provided temporary furniture and created a public alfresco which is licensed but is available for public use.

 

The results of the community consultation are as follows:

 

·      83.3 percent of the respondents (15) believe that the relocation of the Taxi Zone has been positive for the Leederville Town Centre.

·      66.7 percent of respondents (12) believe that the designated Taxi Zone should remain in its current location outside of No. 666 Newcastle Street.

·      83.3 percent of respondents (15) believe that the current public alfresco should remain.

 

In considering the continuation of the Taxi Zone adjacent to 666 Newcastle Street, the following is relevant:

 

·       The remains to be accessible by Taxi users and drivers however, is located away from major intersections and therefore, there are negligible issues relating to queuing and traffic congestion;

·       The lighting, activity and surveillance of the area make it a safe location for Taxi drivers and users;

·       The location remains to be in direct line of sight from the former Taxi Zone, reducing the risk of Taxi’s continuing to park outside the former Taxi Zone or users not being aware of the new location; and

·       The works associated with the relocation of the Taxi Zone have already been undertaken and therefore, there will be no further disturbances to the users of the Taxi Zone.

 

Based on the above, the current (trial) location of the Taxi Zone is considered to be appropriate and it is recommended that the long-term location of the Taxi Zone remains to be outside of 666 Newcastle Street.

 

2.       Ride Share Management

 

The City implemented pick-up/set-down bays throughout the Leederville Town Centre to formalise a management approach for Ride Share within the precinct. It was indicated to the City by Uber that the Newcastle Street and Oxford Street intersection was the most popular location for pick-up/set-down. Given the existing busy nature of this intersection the pick-up/set-down bays aim to manage pick-up/set-down of patrons throughout the Town Centre to ensure that traffic conflict and congestion is minimised.

 

Administration has been liaising with Uber for several months, seeking to negotiate and enter into an agreement for the funding and installation of ride share totems in the designated pick-up/set-down bays throughout the Town Centre, in accordance with Council’s 19 September 2017 resolution. Uber has indicated that it is not prepared to fund the ride share totems unless they are for the exclusive use of Uber at least six months; during which time other ride share companies would not be permitted to use them. It is not considered appropriate to install infrastructure on the verge that is for the exclusive use of one individual organisation and therefore, Administration has not been able to enter into an agreement with Uber to install Ride Share totems at the designated pick-up/set-down pick-up/set-down locations in the Town Centre.

 

Throughout the community consultation it was evident that the submitters supported Ride Share throughout the Town Centre however, it was also identified that the current signs are an unclear and therefore, the pick-up/set-down being underutilised. Given that the notion of Ride Share is largely supported by the community, it is considered that additional signage can be provided to ensure that the pick-up/set-down bays are clearly identifiable. Further, Administration is able to communicate this to Ride Share operators to allow for the use of the bays.

 

It is proposed to amend some of the existing pick-up/set-down bays as follows:

 

·       Relocate the Vincent Street bay further east on Vincent Street to allow for better vehicle movement in peak periods. The relocation of this bay will minimise any confusion between the no stopping bays and the pick-up/set-down bays along Newcastle Street and change the bay to the west back to what it was before the trial.

·       Relocate the pick-up/set-down bay on Oxford Street to the other side in place of a paid parking bay. The relocation of this bay will ensure that there is no conflict with the loading zone on the western side of Oxford Street and change the bay on the west side of Oxford Street back to what it was before the trial.

·       Change the hours of pick-up/set-down bay on Oxford Street outside of the Luna Cinema and on Newcastle Street from 8:00pm to 8:00am to all day. These bays were identified as having the opportunity of all day pick-up/set-down as no other parking restrictions apply.

 

The proposed locations of the pick-up/set-down bays are shown in Attachment 4.

 

3.       Public Alfresco

 

The public alfresco in front of the Leederville Hotel has been in place since February 2018 and on 1 May 2018 Council resolved to extend the permit to conduct an outdoor eating area in the public alfresco area until 16 October 2018.

 

The public alfresco in front of the Leederville Hotel has been an important component of the Taxi Zone relocation trial as it provides a physical barrier to prevent taxis from stopping in the previous taxi rank space and ensures that members of the public are aware that the Taxi Zone is no longer situated outside of the Leederville Hotel. The public alfresco has allowed for greater activation of the space on Newcastle Street, and as can be seen from the community consultation, has been well received by the community. The additional seating, shade and greenery as a result from the public alfresco is considered to assist in the activation of the Leederville Town Centre and is supported.

 

The City has established an online system for the issuing of permits for outdoor eating facilities and therefore, formal Council approval for these areas is not required.

Consultation/Advertising:

Community consultation was undertaken for a period of two weeks commencing on 7 September 2018 until 21 September 2018 by means of:

 

·       Letters to all residents, landowners and businesses within a 500 metre radius of the Taxi Zone location, in accordance with Council’s resolution dated 19 September 2017;

·       E-mail correspondence sent to ride share providers and taxi companies;

·       Notice and online survey on the City’s Imagine Vincent website;

·       Social media updated; and

·       In person discussions with local business owners.

Legal/Policy:

Clause 1.8 of the City’s Parking and Parking Facilities Local Law requires regulations or prohibitions to vehicle parking to be determined via a resolution of Council.

 

Division 3 – Outdoor Eating Areas of the City’s Trading in Public Places Local Law 2008 requires a person to hold a valid permit prior to conducting or establishing an outdoor eating area.

Risk Management Implications:

Low:    It is considered low risk for Council to modify the existing parking restrictions.

Strategic Implications:

This project is consistent with the following Council Priorities in the Corporate Business Plan 2018/19 – 2021/22:

 

“Accessible City – We want to be a leader in making it safe, easy, environmentally friendly and enjoyable to get around Vincent.”

 

“Thriving Places – Our vibrant places and spaces are integral to our identity, economy and appeal. We want to create, enhance and promote great places and spaces for everyone to enjoy.”

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.

Financial/Budget Implications:

The cost for updated ride share signage will be met through the existing capital budget.

Comments:

Relocation of Taxi Zone

 

The community consultation undertaken by Administration has shown that the majority of respondents support the location of the Leederville Taxi Zone being outside of 666 Newcastle Street and that Ride Share is largely supported in the Town Centre.

 

The location of the Leederville Taxi Zone outside of No. 666 Newcastle Street ensures that issues relating to queuing and illegal parking are mitigated and is accessible by Taxi drivers and users as it is in direct line of sight from the former location. The public alfresco allows for greater activation of this space and it is recommended that the permit for the use of the space as an outdoor eating area is done so through the City’s online system.

 

Ride Share is largely supported in the Town Centre however, it is considered that additional signage is required to ensure that the designated pick-up/set-down bays are understood by Ride Share operators and users. Administration will continue to have discussions with Ride Share operators and the community to make them aware of the pick-up/set-down bays and facilitate greater use of these bays.

 

Proposed Leederville Town Centre Shared Space

 

As identified in the City’s Annual Budget a total of $150,000 has been identified for streetscapes improvement for the Oxford Street and Newcastle Street intersection. In consulting with Leederville Connect it is proposed to develop a shared space on Newcastle Street that will incorporate at-grade paving of a portion of Newcastle Street to allow for a pedestrian friendly environment and enhance walkability in this Town Centre. These works will be complementary to the public alfresco.

 

The shared space project is subject to further detailed design and community consultation and does not form part of this report or the recommendation.

 

 

 

 

 

TRIM Ref:                  D18/104162

Author:                     Stephen Schreck, Strategic Planning Officer

Authoriser:                Luke Gibson, A/Director Development Services

Attachments:             1.       Attachment 1 - Amended Scheme Map ⇩  

 

Recommendation: That Council: 1.       PREPARES Amendment 2 to Local Planning Scheme No. 2 included as Attachment 1, pursuant to Section 75 of the Planning and Development Act 2005; 2.       CONSIDERS Amendment 2 to Local Planning Scheme No. 2 as a basic amendment under Section 34 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015. 3.       FORWARDS Amendment 2 to Local Planning Scheme No. 2 to the: 3.1     Environmental Protection Authority pursuant to Section 81 of the Planning and Development Act 2005; and 3.2     Western Australian Planning Commission within 21 days, pursuant to Section 58 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.

 

Purpose of Report:

To consider the proposed amendment to Local Planning Scheme No. 2 (LPS2) to recode No. 15 Wasley Street, Mount Lawley and No. 24 Wasley Street, Mount Lawley from R40 to R35.

Background:

The City’s (former) Town Planning Scheme No. 1 (TPS1) came into effect in 1998 and included Clause 20(4)(d)(ii) which served to limit development in the Norfolk Precinct to a maximum of two dwellings per lot. LPS2 came into effect on 16 May 2018 and included Clause 26(6) which continued to limit development to a maximum of two dwellings per lot on land coded R40 in the area bounded by Beaufort Street, Fitzgerald Street, Vincent Street and Walcott Street.

 

It is understood that the intent of these provisions was to retain the predominately low-density, single-storey residential development pattern in the area, by permitting and encouraging infill development in the form of subdivision to the rear of the existing dwelling and to discourage greater levels of development in the form of Multiple Dwellings. The City’s Local Planning Strategy and LPS2 broadly aim to concentrate higher density development on the City’s major urban transport corridors, in the City’s town centre and near public transport infrastructure while maintaining and protecting the low to medium density development in established residential suburbs.

 

Despite both the provisions in TPS1 and LPS2, there are a number of properties in the area that have existing development with more than two dwellings per lot. There are a number of reasons for this, including:

 

1.       The definition of a lot in the (former) Town Planning and Development Act 1928 included survey strata lots and therefore, until mid-2006, there was no impediment to approving more than two dwellings where the land had already been subdivided in survey strata lots.

2.       On various occasions, the City used Clause 40 of former TPS1 to vary the relevant scheme provision.

3.       On various occasions, Clause 20(4)(d)(ii) of former TPS1 was not referenced or acknowledged during the approval process.

4.       Lots were subdivided into green titles allowing two dwellings to be built on each of the newly created green title lots.

 

In 2016, a three lot survey strata subdivision was approved over No. 15 Wasley Street, Mount Lawley. This survey strata subdivision retained the original house (Strata Lot 1), and created two additional survey strata lots to the rear (Strata Lots 2 and 3). These were sold to separate parties and in January 2018, development approval was granted for one Grouped Dwelling at No. 15B (Strata Lot 3) Wasley Street, Mount Lawley.

 

In September 2018, the City received an application for one Grouped Dwelling at No. 15A (Strata Lot 2) Wasley Street. In assessing the application against Clause 26(6) of LPS2, the City identified that this development would result in three dwellings being developed on the parent lot.

 

The City obtained legal advice on the matter which confirmed that the definition of a Lot in the Planning and Development Act 2005 does not include a Survey Strata Lot and that for the purposes of Grouped Dwellings, the Lot is the ‘parent lot’, inclusive of all Survey Strata Lots and associated common property. Given the definition of a Lot, Clause 26(6) of LPS2 renders the City unable to approve more than two dwellings on a Parent Lot and is therefore unable to approve the third dwelling being proposed at No. 15A (Strata Lot 2) Wasley Street.

 

In further investigating this issue, Administration identified one other property (No. 24 Wasley Street, Mount Lawley) which has subdivision approval for a three lot strata subdivision with an application for titles having been lodged with Landgate. This subdivision will present the same issue as No. 15 Wasley Street where the third dwelling will not be able to be approved due to the restriction provided by Clause 26(6).

Details:

To address this issue, LPS2 is able to be amended to allow dwellings to be built on the existing lots at No. 15A (Strata Lot 2) Wasley Street and all three survey strata lots proposed for No. 24 Wasley Street. The City has investigated a number of potential options to amend LPS2 and it is recommended that the Parent Lots for No. 15 and No. 24 Wasley Street be recoded from R40 to R35. This would mean that Clause 26(6), which applies the two dwelling restriction only to lots Coded R40, would no longer apply to those sites.

 

The proposed recoding to R35 would have minimal impact on the scale of development in the area whilst allowing the City to approve dwellings on the lots that have been created or are in the process of being created. All of the existing and imminent survey strata lots on both sites meet the minimum site area requirements for R35 and there is minimal difference in the requirements of Table 1 of the R Codes between R40 and R35. In addition, R35 is considered appropriate to meet the intent of the City’s Local Planning Strategy.

 

Under the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, Council is required to consider whether the amendment is basic, standard of complex. In this regard, the proposed amendment is considered basic, for the following reasons:

 

·       Pursuant to Clause 34(b), the proposed amendment is an amendment to the Scheme to ensure that it is consistent with another provision of the Scheme. Clause 16 of LPS2 sets out the objectives of the Residential Zone which includes to provide for a range of housing. In this instance the objective of the Residential Zone is to facilitate residential development and the proposed amendment will allow appropriate residential development on the existing survey strata lot. In this regard, in facilitating the creation of the survey strata lot via the subdivision process, the WAPC would reasonably expect that the lot would be able to accommodate a dwelling.

 

·       Pursuant to Clause 34(e), the proposed amendment will amend LPS2 to be consistent with State Planning Policy 3.1 – Residential Design Codes. It is generally accepted that the purpose of the R Codes is to facilitate the development of appropriate residential housing, including on Survey Strata Lots that were created for that explicit purpose. This amendment will allow the created Survey Strata Lot at No. 15 Wasley Street and the imminent Survey Strata Lots at No. 24 Wasley Street to accommodate dwellings and is therefore consistent with the intent of SPP 3.1.

 

·       Pursuant to Clause 34(i), the proposed amendment is an amendment to the Scheme so that it is consistent with a region planning scheme that applies to the scheme area that will have minimal effect on the Scheme or landowners in the Scheme area. The subject lots are currently zoned Urban in the Metropolitan Region Scheme to allow for residential development. The proposed amendment will align the planning framework to allow residential development consistent with the Urban Zone in the MRS. Further to this, the proposed amendment will have minimal effect on the Scheme or landowners in the Scheme area as only four landowners are affected by the amendment and the development that would be permitted as a result of the amendment is consistent with the scale of development in the broader area and with what could be reasonably expected to occur on a recently created survey strata lot.

Consultation/Advertising:

This amendment is considered to be a basic amendment and does not require advertising under the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.

Legal/Policy:

If Council resolves to prepare the Amendment, the City will forward the Amendment Documentation to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) for its consideration under Section 81 of the Planning and Development Act 2005. Once the EPA is satisfied there are no environmental concerns, the City will forward the Amendment Documentation to the Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage for endorsement by the Western Australian Planning Commission and the Minister for Planning, pursuant to Section 63 of the Regulations.

Risk Management Implications:

It is considered low risk for Council to initiate the proposed amendment.

Strategic Implications:

The City’s Corporate Business Plan 2018/19 – 2022/23 states:

 

“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:

Nil.

Comments:

The proposed amendment to the Scheme is intended to allow the approval of dwellings on existing Survey Strata Lots at Nos. 15 and 24 Wasley Street, Mount Lawley. It is recommended that Council prepares Amendment 2 to LPS2 to recode those lots from R40 to R35.

 

 

 

 

 

6             Engineering

TRIM Ref:                  D18/113815

Author:                     Francois Sauzier, Active Transport Officer

Authoriser:                Andrew Murphy, Director Engineering

Attachments:             1.       Results Summary ⇩

2.       Consultation Leaflet with Area Map ⇩

3.       Survey 1 ⇩

4.       Survey 2 ⇩

5.       Summary of Submissions ⇩  

 

Recommendation: That Council: 1.       NOTES the results of the Community Consultation as summarised in Attachment 1; 2.       AUTHORISES the Director Engineering to progress the implementation of a 40km/h Speed Zone Trial in the southern half of the City of Vincent as shown in Attachment 2; and 3.       ADVISES the respondents of the outcome.

 

Purpose of Report:

To consider the results of the community consultation, specifically targeting residents of the City, to determine the Vincent community’s appetite for the implementation of a 40km/h Speed Zone Trial in the southern portion of the City for the residential streets in the area bounded by Charles, Vincent, Beaufort, and Walcott Streets, Guildford Road, Stanley and Mitchell Streets, Graham Farmer Freeway and Newcastle Street.

Background:

Ordinary Meeting of Council 31 May 2016

 

Council considered a report on a proposed 40km/h area wide speed zone trial in all of the residential streets in the area bounded by Charles, Vincent, Beaufort, and Walcott Streets, Guildford Road, Stanley and Mitchell Streets, Graham Farmer Freeway and Newcastle Street.

 

Following consideration of the report Council made the following decision:

 

“That Council:

 

1.       ADVISES Main Roads WA and the Commissioner of Road Safety that it supports, in principle, undertaking a 40km/h km/h Area Wide Speed Zone Trial in the area bounded by Charles Street, Vincent Street, Beaufort Street, Walcott Street, Guildford Road, Stanley Street and Mitchell Street, as shown in Attachment 1, subject to the State Government, through Main Roads WA, the Office of Road Safety, or other relevant State Agency or Agencies;

 

1.1     partnering with the City of Vincent to undertake community consultation with residents and ratepayers in the affected, area, in accordance with the City’s Consultation Policy, for a minimum period of four weeks;

 

1.2     advertising the proposal to conduct a trial, including the lowering of the existing school zones from 40km/h km/h to 30kph within the trial area;

 

1.3     bearing, or substantially contributing to the funding of all works associated with the consultation, design and, if approved, implementation of the trial;

 

1.4     providing a report, to Council, at the conclusion of the consultation period outlining the comments received and recommendations thereon; and

 

1.5     should the trial proceed, undertaking a formal independent assessment/review of its effectiveness; and

 

2.       NOTES that a further report will be presented, to Council on this matter, once a formal response to recommendation 1, has been received.”

 

Ordinary Meeting of Council 23 August 2016

 

Council considered Progress Report No. 2 and made the following decision:

 

“That Council:

 

1.       NOTES the:

 

1.1     Responses received from both Main Roads WA and the Road Safety Commission to Council’s decision of 31 May 2016, as contained in the report; and

 

1.2     Funds allocated in the 2016/17 Budget of $150,000, for the installation of 40km/h km/h signs/poles, includes a 50% contribution from Main Roads WA which, they have indicated, they will not provide;

 

2.       AUTHORISES the Chief Executive Officer to liaise with Main Roads WA, the Road Safety Commission and other relevant agencies/organisations to:

 

2.1     Prepare a consultation pack to be sent to residents / businesses in the area bounded by Charles, Vincent, Beaufort and Walcott Streets, Guildford Road, Stanley and Mitchell Streets, by no later than 30 November 2016, seeking their views on undertaking a 40km/h km/h Area Wide Speed Zone Trial in streets as shown in Attachment 1; and

 

2.2     Clearly define each agency/organisation’s roles, responsibilities, costs, outcomes and deliverables in undertaking a proposed 40km/h km/h Area Wide Speed Zone Trial; and

 

3.       RECEIVES a further report at the conclusion of the advertising period.”

Details:

The City’s Administration prepared a consultation engagement plan, which prioritised the use of the City’s engagement portal (EHQ), as recently used in the successful IMAGINE Vincent campaign.

 

Consultation Package

 

A consultation leaflet was prepared which provided some background information on the proposed 40km/h Speed Zone Trial, including a map of the proposed trial zone, and directing all respondents to an online survey.  Hard copies for the survey were also made available over the counter of the City’s Administration and Civic Centre while the Customer Service staff were also able to take survey responses over the phone if required.

 

The consultation leaflet can be viewed in Attachment 2.

 

14,000 consultation leaflets were printed with 8000 hand delivered to households in the affected areas; a further 4,500 were mailed to absentee property owners and businesses with the balance available from the City’s facilities including Beatty Park Leisure Centre, City of Vincent Administration and Civic Centre and the Library and Local History Centre.

 

Survey

 

An initial survey was prepared and launched (Survey 1 Attachment 3) on 2 August 2018, with 74 responses received.

 

An additional number of questions and options were subsequently added (Survey 2 Attachment 4) on 8 August 2018, to which 318 responses were received.  To ensure that those who had responded to the initial survey were keep fully informed all respondents (to Survey 1) were emailed advising of the additional questions so as to provide them with the opportunity to respond to Survey 2.  Nine of the original respondents then added additional information.

 

The survey formally closed at 5pm on Wednesday 5 September 2018 and all survey responses from Survey 1 & 2 collated.

 

Survey Results

 

All responses have now been collated with a total of 392 responses being received. 385 (98.2%) of all respondents claim to either live, work or own property in Vincent.

 

All Areas

 

When asked if they support a reduction in speed limit on residential neighbourhood streets, within the trial area, to 40km/h, 225 respondents (57.4%) said YES and 167 respondents (42.6%) NO.

 

When asked what would be the preferred speed limit on residential neighbourhood streets across Vincent, 148 respondents (45.3%) advised they would prefer 40km/h; 126 (38.5%) saw no need to change (retain the default 50km/h limit) and 53 (16.2%) nominated 30km/h as their preferred speed limit.

 

Within the Trial Area

 

298 (76%) of all respondents live or own property within the proposed trial area. Of these respondents, 169 (57%) supported the trial and 129 (43%) did not.

 

For those who support the trial, respondents were asked to nominate from a list of concerns. In order of concern:

 

 

For those who do not support the trial, respondents were asked to nominate from a list of concerns. In order of concern:

 

 

Respondents were asked to rank from 1-5 the following measures to improve safety and amenity of residential streets:

 

 

Summary of Submissions

 

A summary of submissions made by respondents is attached (Attachment 5).

 

Of those who support the trial, the comments included:

 

-     Extend to other areas of Vincent;

-     Reduce the carriageway widths of some streets and include cycle lanes if possible;

-     There are many narrow streets in Vincent where people do speed;

-     Car noise is reduced when traffic speed is slower.

 

Of those who do not support the trial, the comments included:

 

-     A waste of rate payers money;

-     Won’t address the issue;

-     More Police enforcement is necessary;

-     Real issue is inattentiveness of all users.

 

Respondents were also asked if there were other traffic issues. Comments included:

 

-     There are no issues;

-     Provide more safe crossing points on main roads;

-     Slowing traffic on main arteries (i.e. Bulwer Street) will cause frustration and road rage;

-     Increase ranger patrols and fine people parking on pavements;

-     Traffic calming seems ad-hoc;

-     Focus more on maintenance.

 

The Next Phase – Establishment of a Reference Group

 

If the Council decision is that the trial should proceed, a key recommendation from the Road Safety Commission is the establishment of a Reference Group, consisting of representatives of the following key stakeholders involved in Road Safety in Western Australia:

 

-     Road Safety Commission;

-     Main Roads Western Australia;

-     Department of Fire and Emergency Services;

-     Western Australian Local Government Association;

-     Department of Transport;

-     Western Australian Police Service; and

-     Royal Automobile Club WA

 

Monash University Accident Research Centre (MUARC)

 

In addition to the above it is the Road Safety Commission’s intention to engage MUARC to undertake an accredited research project of the trial to ensure that the reporting of the results is of a standard so that any data and recommendations can be applied with confidence across urban areas, albeit within the Perth Metropolitan area or regional centres.

Consultation/Advertising:

A comprehensive marketing plan was produced including the design and distribution of a leaflet, directing respondents to the City’s online engagement portal (EHQ) to complete the survey.  8,000 leaflets were hand delivered to directly affected households and businesses in the trial area and 4,500 were posted to absentee property owners, advising of the survey. Although respondents were encouraged to complete the online survey, surveys could also be filled out over the phone or the counter at the Vincent Administration and Civic Centre

 

The survey period was marketed via the placement of display advertisements in the local papers; 4 vinyl banners placed and rotated around the City over 4 weeks; and the use of the City’s digital marketing channels to promote the survey.

 

The Urban Mobility Advisory Group (UMAG) has been kept informed and consulted upon the trial and this project will be a standing item on the UMAG agenda.

Legal/Policy:

Nil.

Risk Management Implications:

Low:       The risk to the community is considered low as the proposal should lead to reduced traffic speeds and provide a safer environment.

Strategic Implications:

1.         In accordance with the City’s Strategic Plan 2013-2023, Objective 1 states:

2.          

3.         “Natural and Built Environment

4.          

5.         “1.1:   Improve and maintain the natural and built environment and infrastructure

6.          

1.1.5       Take action to improve transport and parking in the City and mitigate the effects of traffic. (d)Promote alternative methods of transport.”

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Lowering of speed limits on roads would result in reduced pollution and improved safety for all users.

Financial/Budget Implications:

The Council has allocated $150,000 in the 2018/19 budget.

 

Main Roads WA are preparing a revised estimated based upon minimising the regulatory signage and line-marking required while ensuring that it complies and is enforceable.  Earlier estimates to install new signage and line marking within the trial area was $150,000.

Comments:

The City has undertaken extensive consultation with the Vincent community to gauge the level of support for the trial of a 40km/h speed zone on local streets, in the south portion of the City in the area bounded by Charles, Vincent, Beaufort, and Walcott Streets, Guildford Road, Stanley and Mitchell Streets, Graham Farmer Freeway and Newcastle Street.

 

A total of 392 responses were received. 298 (76%) of all respondents live or own property within the proposed trial area.  Of these respondents, 169 (57%) supported the trial and 129 (43%) did not.

 

Therefore, in light of the above results it is recommended that Council support the 40km/h Speed Zone Trial and approve the establishment of a Reference Group as the next step in the journey.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TRIM Ref:                  D18/137132

Author:                     Craig Wilson, Manager Asset & Engineering

Authoriser:                Andrew Murphy, Director Engineering

Attachments:             1.       Plan No. 3489-PP-01 ⇩

2.       Plan No. 3486-PP-01 ⇩

3.       Plan No. 3486-PP-02 ⇩

4.       Plan No. 3488-PP-01 ⇩  

 

Recommendation: That Council: 1.       APPROVES the following minor parking restriction improvements and amendments: 1.1     the introduction of a 3P 8am to 6.00 pm Monday to Friday parking restriction on the eastern side of The Boulevarde, Mount Hawthorn between Scarborough Beach Road and Berryman Street, and on the southern side of Berryman Street, Mount Hawthorn from The Boulevarde to the bus zone, as shown on Plan No. 3489-PP-01 (Attachment 1); 1.2     changes to the parking restrictions in Wellman Street, Brisbane Place and Robinson Avenue, Perth as shown on Plan No. 3486-PP-01 & 02, (Attachments 2 and 3); 1.3     an on-road ACROD bay outside No. 23 Pennent Street, North Perth at a location to be determiend by the Director of Engineering, and 1.4     an embayed motorcycle bay in Bulwer Street, Perth, as shown on Plan No. 3488-CP-01 (Attachment 4); and 2.       NOTES that Administration will advise residents and businesses directly impacted by these minor parking restriction improvments and amendments.

 

Purpose of Report:

To consider improvements/amendments to parking arrangements at various locations throughout the City of Vincent as detailed in the report.

Background:

The City regularly receives requests for the introduction of, or changes to, parking restrictions in both residential and commercial areas.  Administration generally undertakes a range of investigations including parking demand and traffic volume surveys to assess traffic and on-street parking conditions.  That data is then used to determine whether new or amended restrictions are warranted to improve parking availability and amenity.  Where changes are considered justifiable a report is then presented to Council for consideration as Administration does not have delegated authority to make such changes.

Details:

A number of parking issues have recently been identified and investigated with details provided below:

 

The Boulevarde and Berryman Streets, Mount Hawthorn

 

In early 2018, the City constructed 13 x 90° angled parking bays including a compliant ACROD bay on the eastern side of The Boulevard between Scarborough Beach Road and Berryman Street as well as a further eight bays on the southern side of Berryman Street from The Boulevard to the bus zone.  These bays effectively doubled the number of parking spaces over that of the existing parallel parking at these specific locations in acknowledgement of the high parking demand at the eastern end of the Mount Hawthorn Town Centre.  In addition, there are 24 x 90° angled parking bays in Berryman Street (northern side) adjacent Braithwaite Park and 48 in Kalgoorlie Street (eastern side) including three ACROD Bays.

 

However, none of the aforementioned bays are ‘time restricted’ and consequently the bays in The Boulevard are frequently fully occupied during the working week.  Both parking demand surveys and anecdotal evidence demonstrate that these bays are likely being used for commuter parking given the convenience of the nearby bus stops servicing the Perth CBD.

 

In addition, the new bays on the southern side of Berryman Street which are located directly opposite an early childhood playgroup are often fully occupied.  Whereas the original bays along the northern side of Berryman Street as well as those in Kalgoorlie Street have an average occupancy rate of 60% which may vary dependent upon activities in the adjacent park (particularly on weekends) and the nearby Mount Hawthorn Primary School.

 

It is proposed to implement 3P time restrictions for the parking bays in The Boulevard, and the southern side of Berryman Street, to provide better amenity and improve parking availability for the adjacent businesses and playgroup (refer to Plan No. 3489-PP-01 – Attachment 1).  This provides a reasonable period to attend surrounding business and community activities. 

 

Streets Surrounding the Perth Mosque

 

The Perth Mosque was established as a place of worship at No. 427 - 429 William Street in 1905.  While various activities take place throughout the week the busiest prayer times are at noon each day, and particularly noon on Fridays.  Given the Mosque’s location within the William Street Activity Centre and its proximity to high-density residential areas the availability of on-street parking during these peak prayer times has become an increasing issue in recent years.

 

The Mayor and Director Community Engagement met with Mosque representatives on 9 August 2018 to better understand the parking challenges being experienced, and the Director Community Engagement and Director Engineering then attended the Mosque (and surrounding streets) on 21 August 2018.  That site visit coincided with Eid ul-Adha, one of most important festivals on the Islamic calendar, and therefore provided a good understanding of the challenges being faced during prayer times.

 

Based upon an assessment of on-street parking restrictions surrounding the Mosque a number of minor amendments are now recommended to improve amenity for Mosque attendees while maintaining parking availability for surrounding residences (refer to Plan No. 3486-PP-01 and 02 – Attachments 2 & 3).  These amendments include:

 

·       Convert the loading zone bay on Robinson Avenue to an additional 1P bay at ALL TIMES to match the adjoining bays.

·       Convert the ‘Resident Only’ bays on Robinson Avenue, between Wellman Street and Brookman Street, to 1P 8am to 6pm Mon to Fri - Resident Only other times, which is in keeping the existing Moir Street restrictions.

·       Convert the unmarked bays on eastern side of Wellman Street (Robinson Avenue end) to 1P bays 8am to 6pm Mon to Fri.

·       Remove the non-compliant on-road ACROD bay and Set Down bay in Brisbane Place, and convert to a 1P 8am to 6pm Mon to Fri - Resident Only other times.

·       Convert the ‘Resident Only’ bays on Brisbane Place to 1P 8am to 6pm Mon to Fri - Resident Only other times

 

In addition, a ‘Parking Around Perth Mosque’ brochure identifying the paid and free parking options in the surrounding area has been prepared by Administration and will be provided to the Mosque so they can distribute to attendees.  That map also identifies bus routes with stops within walking distance of the Mosque.

 

On-Road ACROD Bay No. 23 Pennant Street, North Perth

 

Requests for on-road ACROD bays are only approved where a need has been clearly identified with the onus generally on the applicant in the first instance to demonstrate the need through medical certification or an obvious physical incapacitation, and limited or no opportunity to park off street.  Noting that many internal driveways are, on average, about 3.0m wide and therefore it is often impractical or difficult to enable wheelchair access.  While an on-road ACROD bay is the standard 2.1m parking bay width it provides an opportunity, particularly in low traffic volume residential streets, to use the road space.  The need for an ACROD bay may also be related to the needs of primary carer, who does not live at the property, to pick-up and drop off a person requiring assistance within a reasonable distance of a residence.

The Mayor and Director Engineering recently met with the resident (and his neighbour) at 23 Pennant Street, North Perth, to discuss his accessibility needs.  While Pennant Street has an existing 2P 8.00am to 5.30pm Monday to Friday restriction and on-street parking is generally available there are frequent occasions where the resident’s carer cannot park within a reasonable distance of the house.  As a result, it was agreed that Administration would investigate and seek Council approval for an on-street ACROD bay to be installed.  Both the resident and his carer are eligible for an ACROD permit, adjacent the property.  An ACROD bay is considered a more suitable means of providing an improved amenity over that of other restrictions, such as No Parking or No Stopping restrictions.  It is also available for other motorists if displaying the appropriate ACROD permit.

 

Embayed Motorcycle Parking Bay at No. 326 Bulwer Street, Perth

 

There is a well utilised on-road motorcycle parking bay located outside No. 326 Bulwer Street, Perth which services a number of local businesses at this location.  However given its proximity to the signalised intersection at Bulwer and Fitzgerald Streets, and its location on the exit side of the intersection where two lanes merge into one over a relatively short length of road, it is considered a potentially hazardous location to park a motorcycle.  Further, as the motorcycle parking bay is located next to 1/4P car bays there have been several instances where motorcycles are damaged by vehicles turning into the parallel parking bays.

 

Upon investigation Administration has identified that this motorcycle parking bays should be retained but embayed to make safer for both riders and their property.  This embayment would be constructed immediately adjacent the current motorcycle parking bay location so that it does not impact upon the existing 1/4P bays, and will not result in a loss of the usable footpath space.    The bay (refer to Plan No. 3488-CP-01 – Attachment 4) would encroach approximately 600mm into the footpath, which aligns with the existing signage and Australia Post mailbox.  It is intended that the existing 2P 8.00am to 5.30pm Mon to Fri and 8.00am to 12noon Sat restriction, which is specific to the motorcycle bay be retained.

Consultation/Advertising:

All affected property owners and occupiers will be notified of the parking restriction changes although it should be noted that in each instance the level of amenity for adjacent businesses, residents and visitors will improve.  These is minimal impact upon the wider community.

Legal/Policy:

The City of Vincent Parking and Parking Facilities Local Law 2007 regulates the parking or standing of vehicles in all or specified thoroughfares and reserves under the care, control and management of the City and provides for the management and operation of parking facilities.

Risk Management Implications:

Low:           These proposed parking restriction changes will deliver amenity improvements for residents, businesses, and visitors.

Strategic Implications:

These proposed parking restriction changes align with the following objectives within the City’s Strategic Plan 2013-2023:

 

“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.”

 

1.1.5     Implement the City’s Car Parking Strategy and associated Precinct Parking Management Plans.”

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.

Financial/Budget Implications:

Costs associated with these parking restriction changes will be completed through available funding within the 2018/19 ‘Miscellaneous Traffic Management’ budget.

Comments:

Administration has investigated current parking and traffic management issues at these locations, and it considered appropriate to implement minor improvements and amendments to improve amenity and on-street parking availability.  While significant changes to parking arrangements should await completion of the Integrated Transport Strategy it is necessary for Administration to continue to effectively respond to site-specific issues.  It is anticipated that Administration will present several reports to Council over the coming months to deal with such parking restriction improvements and amendments.

 

 

 

7             Corporate Services

TRIM Ref:                D18/147478

Author:                     Sheryl Teoh, A/Coordinator Financial Services

Authoriser:             Kerryn Batten, Director Corporate Services

Attachments:          1.       Investment Report ⇩  

 

Recommendation: That Council NOTES the Investment Report for the month ended 30 September 2018 as detailed in Attachment 1.

 

Purpose of Report:

To advise Council of the nature and value of investments and the interest earned to date.

Background:

Funds surplus to day to day operational requirements are invested in bank term deposits for various terms, to facilitate maximum investment returns in compliance with good governance, legislative requirements and Council’s Investment Policy No 1.2.4.  Details of investments are attached in Attachment 1.

 

The City’s investment portfolio is diversified across several financial Institutions in accordance with the Investment Policy.

 

There are still a number of 2017-18 year end transactions and adjustments that need to be completed before the year end accounts will be finalised and audited.  Whilst the overall balance of investments and interest earned is not likely to change, the allocations between Municipal, Trust and Reserve funds may need to be adjusted as a consequence of final audit outcomes.

Details:

Total funds held as at 30 September 2018, including on call in the City’s operating account were $44,209,274; compared to $40,305,364 for the period ending 30 September 2017. The increase in total funds is largely due to issuing of rates notices for 2018/2019 a month earlier when compared to the prior year.

 

Total term deposit investments for the period ending 30 September 2018 were $40,651,147 compared to $37,499,275 for the prior month end, and $37,944,911 for the period ending 30 September 2017.

 

Funds under management comparison table:

 

Month	2017/18		2018/19
Ended	Total funds held	Total term deposits	Total funds held	Total term deposits
July	$23,433,728	$21,212,649	$26,826,861	$23,990,516
August	$30,161,860	$27,714,651	$44,327,708	$37,499,275
September	$40,305,364	$37,944,911	$44,209,274	$40,651,147
October	$41,087,462	$38,947,823
November	$41,716,473	$39,482,047
December	$38,768,084	$37,065,389
January	$39,498,741	$36,147,499
February	$39,217,278	$36,665,928
March	$36,377,700	$34,622,001
April	$33,647,074	$31,177,278
May	$30,338,407	$28,712,736
June	$28,409,157	$24,687,341

 

Total accrued interest earned on investments as at 30 September 2018 is:

 

	Adopted Budget	YTD Budget	YTD Actual	% of YTD Budget
Municipal	$420,000	$112,600	$111,487	99.01%
Reserve	$246,060	$68,400	$68,397	100.00%
Sub-total	$666,060	$181,000	$179,884	99.38%
Leederville Gardens Inc Surplus Trust*	$0	$0	$34,969	N/A

 

*Interest estimates for Leederville Gardens Inc Surplus Trust were not included in the 2018/19 Budget as actual interest earned is held in trust and restricted.

Consultation/Advertising:

Nil.

Legal/Policy:

The power to invest is governed by the Local Government Act 1995.

 

6.14.     Power to invest

 

(1)        Money held in the municipal fund or the trust fund of a local government that is not, for the time being, required by the local government for any other purpose may be invested as trust funds may be invested under the Trustees Act 1962 Part III.

(2A)      A local government is to comply with the regulations when investing money referred to in subsection (1).

(2)        Regulations in relation to investments by local governments may — 

(a)    make provision in respect of the investment of money referred to in subsection (1); and

[(b)   deleted]

(c)    prescribe circumstances in which a local government is required to invest money held by it; and

(d)    provide for the application of investment earnings; and

(e)    generally provide for the management of those investments.

 

Further controls are established through the following provisions in the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996:

 

19.       Investments, control procedures for

 

(1)        A local government is to establish and document internal control procedures to be followed by employees to ensure control over investments.

(2)        The control procedures are to enable the identification of —

(a)    the nature and location of all investments; and

(b)    the transactions related to each investment.

 

19C.     Investment of money, restrictions on (Act s. 6.14(2)(a))

 

(1)        In this regulation —

authorised institution means —

(a)    an authorised deposit‑taking institution as defined in the Banking Act 1959 (Commonwealth) section 5; or

(b)    the Western Australian Treasury Corporation established by the Western Australian Treasury Corporation Act 1986;

foreign currency means a currency except the currency of Australia.

 

(2)        When investing money under section 6.14(1), a local government may not do any of the following —

(a)    deposit with an institution except an authorised institution;

(b)    deposit for a fixed term of more than 3 years;

(c)    invest in bonds that are not guaranteed by the Commonwealth Government, or a State or Territory government;

(d)    invest in bonds with a term to maturity of more than 3 years;

(e)    invest in a foreign currency.

 

To further guide the prudent and responsible investment of the City’s funds, Council has adopted the City’s Investment Policy No. 1.2.4, which delegates the authority to invest surplus funds to the Chief Executive Officer or his delegate.

 

Administration has established guidelines for the management of the City’s investments, including the following ratings table:

 

Short Term Rating (Standard & Poor’s) or Equivalent	Direct Investments Maximum % with any one institution		Managed Funds Maximum % with any one institution		Maximum % of Total Portfolio
	Policy	Actual	Policy	Actual	Policy	Actual
A1+	30%	19.0%	30%	Nil	90%	47.4%
A1	25%	5.7%	30%	Nil	80%	5.7%
A2	20%	19.5%	n/a	Nil	60%	46.9%

 

*As per subtotals on Attachment 1

Risk Management Implications:

Moderate:      Funds are invested with various financial institutions with high long term and short term ratings (Standard & Poor’s or equivalent), after obtaining three quotations for each investment. Investment funds are spread across various institutions and invested as term deposits of between one and twelve months, to spread risk.

Strategic Implications:

In keeping with the City’s 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:

Nil.

Financial/Budget Implications:

The financial implications of this report are as noted in the details and comments section of the report.  Overall Administration concludes that appropriate and responsible measures are in place to protect the City’s financial assets and to ensure the accountability of management.

Comments:

Funds for investment have slightly decreased from the previous period due to excess of payments to creditors and other expenditures over cash receipts.

 

The City has obtained a weighted average interest rate of 2.57% for current investments including the operating account; and 2.71% excluding the operating account. The Reserve Bank 90 days Accepted Bill rate for September 2018 is 1.93%.

 

As at 30 September 2018, the City’s total investment earnings excluding the Leederville Gardens Inc. Surplus Trust income is lower than the year to date budget estimate by $1,116 (0.6%).

 

The City’s Investment Policy states that preference “is to be given to investments with institutions that have been assessed to have no current record of funding fossil fuels, providing that doing so will secure a rate of return that is at least equal to alternatives offered by other institutions”. Administration currently uses Marketforce.com to assist in assessing whether a bank promotes non-investment in fossil fuel related entities. 34.46% of the City’s investments were held in institutions considered non-fossil fuel lending by Marketforce.com as at 30 September 2018.

 

Administration notes that Sustainable Platform has been engaged to undertake an accreditation assessment of the City’s sustainability practices and policies and will be providing a high level review of the City’s investments in non-fossil fuel and other relevant industries. This work is expected to trigger a review of the City’s investment policies in the last quarter of this calendar year.

 

This investment report (Attachment 1) consists of:

 

·       Investment performance and policy compliance charts;

·       Investment portfolio;

·       Investment interest earnings; and

·       Current investment holdings.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TRIM Ref:                  D18/145159

Author:                     Sheryl Teoh, A/Coordinator Financial Services

Authoriser:                Kerryn Batten, Director Corporate Services

Attachments:             1.       Financial Statements as at 31 August 2018 ⇩  

 

Recommendation: That Council RECEIVES the financial statements for the month ended 31 August 2018 as shown in Attachment 1.

 

Purpose of Report:

To present the financial statements for the period ended 31 August 2018.

Background:

Regulation 34 (1) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 requires a local government to prepare each month a statement of financial activity reporting on the sources and applications of funds, as set out in the budget.

 

A statement of financial activity report is to be in a form that sets out:

 

·       the annual budget estimates;

·       budget estimates for the end of the month to which the statement relates;

·       actual amounts of expenditure, revenue and income for the end of the month to which the statement relates;

·       material variances between the year-to-date income and expenditure; and

·       other supporting notes and other information that the local government considers will assist in the interpretation of the report.

         

In addition to the above, under Regulation 34 (5) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996, each financial year a local government is to adopt a percentage of value, calculated in accordance with the relevant accounting standard, to be used in statements of financial activity for reporting material variances.

Details:

The following documents, included as Attachment 1 represent the Statement of Financial Activity for the period ending 31 August 2018:

 

Note	Description	Page
1.	Statement of Financial Activity by Program Report and Graph	1-3
2.	Statement of Comprehensive Income by Nature and Type Report	4
3.	Net Current Funding Position	5
4.	Summary of Income and Expenditure by Service Areas	6-64
5.	Capital Expenditure and Funding and Capital Works Schedule	65-77
6.	Cash Backed Reserves	78
7.	Rating Information and Graph	79-80
8.	Debtor Report	81
9.	Beatty Park Leisure Centre Financial Position	82

 

 

 

 

 

The following table provides a summary view of the year to date actual, compared to the adopted and year to date budget.  It should be noted that data is provisional as year-end accounting and audit activities are yet to be completed.

         

Summary of Financial Activity by Program as at 31 August 2018

 

		Adopted Budget	YTD Budget	YTD Actual	Variance	Variance
		2018/19	2018/19	2018/19	2018/19	2018/19
		$	$	$	$	%
REVENUE		23,398,772	4,092,531	4,005,579	(86,952)	-2%
EXPENDITURE		(59,858,331)	(8,863,731)	(6,494,999)	2,368,732	-27%
NET OPERATING EXCLUDING RATES		(36,459,559)	(4,771,200)	(2,489,419)	2,281,781	-48%
OPERATING ACTIVITIES EXCLUDED FROM BUDGET
NON-CASH EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE
	Add Deferred Rates Adjustment	0	0	12,596	12,596	0%
	Add Back Depreciation	10,289,210	1,714,868	0	(1,714,868)	-100%
	(Profit)/Loss on Asset Disposals	(687,908)	(71,690)	0	71,690	-100%
AMOUNT ATTRIBUTABLE TO OPERATING ACTIVITIES		9,601,302	1,643,178	12,596	(1,630,582)	-99%
INVESTING ACTIVITIES
	Non-Operating Grants, Subsidies and Contributions	1,829,854	517,334	418,987	(98,347)	-19%
	Capital Expenditure	(14,789,424)	(2,271,916)	(937,720)	1,334,196	-59%
	Proceeds from Joint Venture Operations	583,333	0	0	0	0%
	Proceeds from Disposal of assets	475,000	86,000	40,551	(45,449)	-53%
		(11,901,237)	(1,668,582)	(478,181)	1,190,401	-71%
FINANCING ACTIVITIES
	Repayments Loan Capital	(1,017,424)	(153,040)	(153,040)	(0)	0%
	Proceeds from New Debentures	428,000	0	0	0	0%
	Transfers from Reserves	1,546,190	237,190	74,463	(162,727)	-69%
	Transfers to Reserves	(1,542,713)	(438,948)	(134,207)	304,741	-69%
		(585,947)	(354,798)	(212,784)	142,014	-40%
	Plus: Surplus/(Deficiency) Brought Fwd 1 July 2018	4,829,483	4,829,483	7,675,410	2,845,928	59%
	Surplus/(Deficiency) Before General Rates	(34,515,958)	(321,919)	4,507,622	4,829,541	-1500%
	Total amount raised from General Rates	34,717,855	34,267,855	33,903,522	(364,333)	-1%
	Restricted Grant	0	0	0	0	0%
NET CURRENT ASSETS at 31 AUGUST  C/FWD - SURPLUS/(DEFICIT)		201,897	33,945,936	38,411,144	4,465,208	13%

 

 

 

Comments on the statement of financial activity as at Attachment 1:

 

Operating Revenue

 

There is a difference in classification of revenue reported by Program and by Nature and Type.  Operating revenue by Program reporting includes ‘Profit on sale of assets’, however this is excluded in the Nature and Type report and ‘Rates’ revenue is added.

 

Revenue by Program is showing a negative variance of 2% ($86,952). This is due to lower revenue in:

 

·       Recreation and Culture $268,565. This variance is deemed to be temporary due to accounting treatment; and

·       General Purpose funding $76,931, mainly due to timing variance on interest revenue $67,330.

 

However, there is higher revenue in:

 

·       Community Amenities - $205,314, largely due to timing difference for additional rubbish services of $167,000 and development application fees which have exceeded year to date budget by $59,071; and

·       Transport - $65,810, in which parking infringements and fines exceeded year to date budget by $112,549 however parking ticket machines usage fees and charges are lower than year to date budget by $61,574.

 

Operating revenue as presented on the ‘Nature and Type’ report (Page 4 of Attachment 1) is showing negative variance of 1%.

 

Operating Expenditure

 

Expenditure by Program is showing a positive variance of 27% ($2,368,732). This is due to:

 

·       Recreation and Culture – underspend of $1,448,855;

·       Transport – underspend of $530,402; and,

·       Education and Welfare – underspend $100,076.

 

Similarly, the operating expenditure listed under the Nature and Type report reflects a corresponding favourable variance of 27%, with the largest variances in:

 

·       Depreciation of non-current assets ($1,714,868 favourable) where the variance is due to the end of year audit not yet being completed. This has limited Finance’s ability to process depreciation in this financial year.

·       Employee costs ($417,691 favourable) where the variance is due to largely timing of the payroll cycle.

 

Transfer from Reserves

 

Transfer from Reserves is aligned with the timing of capital works projects that are reserve funded.

 

Capital expenditure

 

The variance is attributed to timing on commencement of the projects. For further detail, refer to Note 5 on Attachment 1.

 

Transfer to Reserves

 

Transfer to reserves as appropriate have been completed as at 31 August.

 

Opening surplus bought forward (2018/19)

 

The provisional surplus opening balance brought forward from 2017/18 was $7,675,410 against the $4,829,483 budgeted opening surplus balance brought forward. The actual opening surplus figure will change once end of year audit is completed.

 

Closing surplus 2018/19

 

There is currently a surplus of $38,411,144 compared to the year to date budget surplus of $33,945,936. This variance is substantially attributed to the positive variance in operating expenditure and an underspend in capital against budget.

 

An explanation of each report within the Statement of Financial Activity (Attachment 1), along with some commentary, is below:

 

1.         Statement of Financial Activity by Program Report (Note 1 Page 1)

 

This statement of financial activity shows operating revenue and expenditure classified by Program.

 

2.         Statement of Comprehensive Income by Nature and Type Report (Note 2 Page 4)

 

This statement of financial activity shows operating revenue and expenditure classified by Nature and Type.

 

3.         Net Current Funding Position (Note 3 Page 5)

 

Net current assets is the difference between the current assets and current liabilities, less committed assets and restricted assets. This amount indicates how much capital is available for day to day activities.  The net current funding position as at 31 August 2018 is $38,411,144.

 

4.         Summary of Income and Expenditure by Service Areas (Note 4 Page 6 – 64)

 

This statement shows a summary of operating revenue and expenditure by service unit.

 

5.         Capital Expenditure and Funding Summary (Note 5 Page 65 - 77)

 

The following table is a summary of the ‘2018/2019 Capital Expenditure Budget by Program’, which compares year to date budget with actual expenditure to date.  The full capital works program is listed in detail in Note 5 of Attachment 1.

                  

CAPITAL EXPENDITURE	Adopted Budget	YTD Budget	YTD Actual	Remaining Budget
	$	$	$	%
Land and Buildings	2,729,200	401,200	174,896	94%
Infrastructure Assets	7,779,502	1,330,404	732,898	91%
Plant and Equipment	3,085,811	217,401	24,625	99%
Furniture and Equipment	1,194,911	322,911	5,301	100%
Total	14,789,424	2,271,916	937,720	94%
CAPITAL FUNDING	Adopted Budget	YTD Budget	YTD Actual	Remaining Budget
	$	$	$	%
Own Source Funding - Municipal	10,938,380	1,431,392	403,718	96%
Cash Backed Reserves	1,546,190	237,190	74,463	95%
Capital Grant and Contribution	1,829,854	517,334	418,987	77%
Other (Disposals/Trade In)	475,000	86,000	40,551	91%
Total	14,789,424	2,271,916	937,720	94%

         

Note:  Detailed analysis is included on page 65 - 77 of Attachment 1.

 

 

 

 

6.         Cash Backed Reserves (Note 6 Page 78)

 

The Cash Backed Reserves schedule details movements in the reserves, including transfers and funds used, compares actual results with the annual budget.  The balance as at 31 August 2018 is $10,561,040.

 

 

7.         Rating Information (Note 7 Page 79 – 80)

 

The notices for rates and charges levied for 2018/19 were issued on 26 July 2017.

 

The Local Government Act 1995 provides for ratepayers to pay rates by four instalments.  The due dates for each instalment were:

 

First Instalment	31 August 2018
Second Instalment	31 October 2018
Third Instalment	04 January 2019
Fourth Instalment	04 March 2019

 

To cover the costs involved in providing the instalment program the following charge and interest rates apply:

 

Instalment Administration Charge (to apply to second, third, and fourth instalment)	$13.00 per instalment
Instalment Interest Rate	5.5% per annum
Late Payment Penalty Interest	11% per annum

 

Pensioners registered with the City for rate concessions do not incur the above interest or charge.

 

The Rates debtors balance to be collected as at 31 August 2018 is $17,944,551 (this includes deferred rates of $106,965). This represents 50.37% of collectable income compared to 75.99% at the same time last year.

 

8.         Receivables (Note 8 Page 81)

 

Receivables of $3,538,968 are outstanding as at 31 August 2018, of which $3,372,076 has been outstanding over 90 days. This is comprised of:

 

·        $2,736,202 (81.1%) relates to unpaid infringements (plus costs) over 90 days. Infringements that remain unpaid for more than two months are sent to Fines Enforcement Registry (FER), which then collects the outstanding balance and returns the funds to the City for a fee. Administration has recently largely reconciled FER debtors but notes there are still some insignificant variances to be resolved.

 

It is also noted that as part of the 2017/19 audit process, Administration has included a robust and defensible provision for doubtful debts for infringements. This will be finalised in the 2017/18 accounts that will come to Council at the November meeting, and provides more clarity around the likelihood of collection of the receivables carried in our balance sheet.

 

·        $323,087 (9.6%) relates to Cash in Lieu Parking. Some Cash in Lieu Parking debtors have special payment arrangements over more than one year; and

 

·        $61,117 (9.3%) relates to Other Receivables, refer to attachment - page 81.

 

Administration has been following up outstanding items which relate to Other Receivables by issuing reminders when they are overdue and initiating formal debt collection when payments remain outstanding over longer periods of time.

 

 

 

 

9.         Beatty Park Leisure Centre – Financial Position Report (Note 9 Page 82)

 

As at 31 August 2018 the operating deficit for the centre was $97,659 in comparison to the year to date budgeted deficit of $448,095. However it should be noted that depreciation has not been allocated for August 2018 and that this will make a material difference.

 

The cash position showed a current cash deficit of $57,659 in comparison to the year to date budget estimate of a cash deficit of $254,571.

 

10.       Explanation of Material Variances

 

All material variances as at 31 August 2018 have been detailed in the variance comments report in Attachment 1.

 

The materiality thresholds used for reporting variances are 10% and $20,000. This means that variances will be analysed and separately reported when they are more than 10% (+/-) of the year to date budget, where that variance exceeds $20,000 (+/-). This threshold was adopted by Council as part of the budget adoption for 2018/19 and is used in the preparation of the statements of financial activity when highlighting material variance in accordance with Financial Management Regulation 34(1) (d).

Consultation/Advertising:

Not applicable.

Legal/Policy:

Section 6.4 of the Local Government Act 1995 requires a local government to prepare an annual financial report for the preceding year and such other financial reports as are prescribed.

 

Regulation 34 (1) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 requires the local government to prepare each month, a statement of financial activity reporting on the source and application of funds as set out in the adopted Annual Budget.

 

A statement of financial activity and any accompanying documents are to be presented at an Ordinary Meeting of the Council within two months after the end of the month to which the statement relates.

 

Section 6.8 of the Local Government Act 1995, specifies that a local government is not to incur expenditure from its Municipal Fund for an additional purpose except where the expenditure is authorised in advance by an absolute majority decision of Council.

Risk Management Implications:

Low:    Provision of monthly financial reports fulfils a statutory requirement.

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:

Not applicable.

Comments:

All expenditure included in the Financial Statements is incurred in accordance with Council’s adopted budget.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TRIM Ref:                  D18/82872

Authors:                   Meluka Bancroft, A/Manager Governance and Risk

Karen Balm, Senior Community Partner

Authoriser:                Kerryn Batten, Director Corporate Services

Attachments:             Nil

 

Recommendation: That Council: 1.       APPROVES the variation of North Perth Tennis Club Inc.’s lease dated 7 July 2009 of the tennis club and courts located at Woodville Reserve, 10 Farmer Street, North Perth, as follows: 1.1     Delete Item 12 in the Information Table: “Special Conditions – Sinking Fund The Lessee shall make quarterly contributions to a sinking fund to be applied toward future court replacement. These payments shall be $1,000 per quarter. Interest earned on the deposited funds shall accumulate in the sinking fund, for the benefit of the lessee.” 2.       APPROVES the variation of the Leederville Tennis Club Inc.’s lease dated 12 January 2005 of the tennis club and courts located at 150 Richmond Street, Leederville, as follows: 2.1     Delete Special Condition (1) on page 11: “Sinking Fund The Lessee shall make quarterly contributions to a sinking fund to be applied towards the eventual redevelopment or replacement of the water bore and/or pump. These payments shall be $176.08 per quarter. Interest earned on the deposited funds shall accumulate in the sinking fund, for the benefit of the lessee.” 3.       APPROVES BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY, in accordance with section 6.8(1) of the Local Government Act 1995, the unbudgeted expenditure from the following Reserve accounts: North Perth Tennis Club Reserve - $47,992 excl GST; and Leederville Tennis Club Reserve - $11,581 excl GST; to enable the clubs to spend the funds at their discretion, subject to the clubs acknowledging that they are responsible for the cost of future court replacement (North Perth Tennis Club Inc) and future water bore and/or pump redevelopment or replacement (Leederville Tennis Club Inc); 4.       SUBJECT to final satisfactory negotiations being carried out by the Chief Executive Officer, AUTHORISES the Mayor and Director Corporate Services, to affix the common seal and execute the variation of leases in clause 1. and 2. above; and 5.       ADVISES the Leederville Tennis Club Inc and North Perth Tennis Club Inc that the funds as specified in 3. above can be spent at their discretion, subject to any expenditure on asset maintenance or capital works receiving the prior written approval of the City. 6.       NOTES that the North Perth Tennis Club Inc is proposing to resurface its hardcourts in 2019 and the estimated cost is $20,000 and ADVISES the North Perth Tennis Club Inc that it is responsible for this cost.

 

Purpose of Report:

To consider the requests from the North Perth Tennis Club and Leederville Tennis Club for the funds held in the City’s North Perth Tennis Club Reserve and Leederville Tennis Club Reserve accounts to be returned to the clubs, and the leases varied to remove any future obligation for the clubs to contribute to the Reserves.

Background:

North Perth Tennis Club

 

The North Perth Tennis Club currently occupies the tennis courts and clubrooms located at Woodville Reserve, 10 Farmer Street, North Perth, as a monthly tenant pursuant to the holding over provision (clause 14) of the lease dated 7 July 2009 (NPTC Lease). The North Perth Tennis Club continues to pay an annual rent of $980 including GST. The tennis clubrooms is a brick building dating from the 1960’s which also comprises the Multicultural Services Centre of WA’s wellness centre. The Lease expired on 31 March 2016 and Council approved a new lease at its Ordinary Meeting of Council of 7 October 2014 (Item 9.3.2), commencing on 1 April 2015, on the following terms: 

 

1.1     Term:                    five (5) years plus five (5) year option;

1.2     Rent:                     $1,000 per annum plus GST indexed to CPI;

1.3     Outgoings:            to be paid by the Lessee;

1.4     Rates and Taxes:   to be paid by the Lessee;

1.5     Permitted Use:      Sporting Facility; and

1.6     Sinking Fund:        $1,000 per quarter.

 

The City has been in protracted negotiations with the North Perth Tennis Club Inc since 2015 in respect to the finalisation of the lease approved by Council. The negotiations are currently on hold due to negotiations with the state association, Tennis West, and are pending the finalisation of Tennis West’s Strategic Facilities Plan, which is currently in draft format. Administration will take into consideration the recommendations of the plan before continuing negotiations with the North Perth Tennis Club in respect to the new lease.

 

The NPTC Lease provides at Item 12 of the Information Table that the lessee shall make quarterly contributions to a sinking fund to be applied towards future court replacement. The North Perth Tennis Club has made quarterly contributions in accordance with the Lease since 1 April 2009. The City created the North Perth Tennis Club Reserve in accordance with section 6.11 of the Local Government Act 1995 and the contributions received are held in this account. The current balance as at 1 July 2018 is $47,992 excl GST.

 

The NPTC Lease does not expressly provide whether the lessee or lessor is responsible for future court replacement.  Given the exclusive benefit the club members have to use the courts it can be implied that the onus would be on the club to fund any future court replacement. The fact that the NPTC Lease requires the club to contribute to a sinking fund for the purpose of the court replacement does not shift this implied responsibility, and should be viewed as a mechanism to force the clubs to save for the future court replacement. Consequently, regardless of whether the funds remain in the City’s North Perth Tennis Reserve, the club will be responsible for the cost of the replacement of the courts, if deemed necessary by the club. The NPTC is proposing to resurface the hard courts in 2019/20 and the estimated cost is $20,000 and has been formally advised it will be responsible for the cost of doing so.

 

Leederville Tennis Club

 

The Leederville Tennis Club has occupied the tennis clubrooms and tennis courts, which they constructed, at 150 Richmond Street, Leederville since 1924. The Leederville Tennis Club currently occupies the club as a monthly tenant pursuant to the holding over provision of the lease dated 12 January 2005, which expired on 31 August 2014 (LTC Lease). The Leederville Tennis Club currently pays a peppercorn rent.

 

At the Ordinary Meeting of Council of 23 September 2014 Council approved a new lease to the LTC on the following key terms: 

 

1.1       Term:                                  five (5) years plus x2 five (5) year options;

1.2       Rent:                                   $1,025 per annum Incl. GST indexed to CPI;

1.3       Outgoings:                          to be paid by the Lessee;

1.4       Rates and Taxes:                 to be paid by the Lessee;

1.5       Permitted Use:                     Sporting Facility; and

1.6       Sinking Fund:                      $176.08 per quarter.

 

As with the North Perth Tennis Club, the City has been in protracted negotiations with the Leederville Tennis Club in respect to the finalisation of the lease as approved by Council. The negotiations are currently on hold pending the finalisation of Tennis West’s Strategic Facilities Plan.

 

The LTC Lease provides at special condition (1) that the lessee must make quarterly contributions to a sinking fund to be applied towards the eventual redevelopment or replacement of the water bore and/or pump. The Leederville Tennis Club has made quarterly contributions in accordance with the LTC Lease since the lease commenced on 12 January 2005, and the current balance of the Leederville Tennis Club Reserve as at 1 July 2018 is $11,581 excl GST. This balance takes into account a withdrawal of $5,283.74 from the Leederville Tennis Club Reserve in 2018/19 (as part of the budget process) to fund the replacement of the bore motor which the club organised in late 2017/18.

 

The LTC lease provides at page 7 that the “lessee must at all times maintain all pumps, pressure units and equipment used in connection with or ancillary to any sewerage apparatus or any bore or other water supply source in sound and functional order and condition.” While the LTC Lease does not expressly provide that the club is responsible for the eventual replacement or redevelopment of the bore and pump, as the members exclusively benefit from the bore it can be implied that the club would be responsible to fund the eventual replacement or redevelopment.

 

The fact that the LTC Lease requires the club to contribute to a sinking fund for the purpose of the eventual bore or pump replacement or development can be viewed as a mechanism of forced saving, as opposed to a transfer of responsibility. On this basis, regardless of whether the funds remain in the Leederville Tennis Reserve, the club will be responsible for the cost of the future bore and/or pump replacement of redevelopment, if required.

Details:

There is no documented justification for the calculation of the quarterly contributions towards the sinking funds and whether the contributions relate to the eventual cost of the replacement and the expected life of the component. The details of the contributions and the replacement costs are set out below:

 

Club	Current contributions per annum (excl GST)	Current balance as at 1 July 2018 (excl GST)	Replacement cost
Leederville Tennis Club – bore motor / pump replacement (installed 1981)	$975	$11,581	$35,000 for new bore, $15,000 for new pump
North Perth Tennis Club – court replacement	$4,675	$47,992	$13,500 per court (4 hard courts)

 

Given the age of the bore at the Leederville Tennis Club it is expected that it is close to its end of life. In April 2018 the bore motor failed and was replaced by the Leederville Tennis Club. The funds have been withdrawn from the Leederville Tennis Club Reserve to cover the cost. It is expected that the bore will operate for several further years before the motor requires replacement.

 

As stated above, the current leases include no express responsibility for the works the subject of the respective sinking funds. Administration’s view is that as the facilities provide an exclusive benefit to the members, these works should be funded by the clubs. This entails that if the bore/ pump fails or courts require replacement, the clubs will need to organise and fund the work, and can draw on the funds held in the respective Reserve accounts. Returning the funds from the Reserve accounts to the clubs will not shift this responsibility.

 

The clubs have requested that the funds held in the respective Reserve accounts are returned to enable the funds to be invested and spent at each club’s discretion. As stated above, the NPTC is proposing to resurface its hardcourts in winter 2019 and confirmed by email on 3 October 2018 that it would draw on the funds returned from the Reserve account to fund the resurfacing.

 

 

Tennis West, the governing body for tennis in Western Australia, is currently developing a ten year plan that aims to guide the future development and enhancement of tennis facilities and related infrastructure across the state. The plan will identify facility gaps and future development priorities to meet the current and future demand for tennis, and ensure the long term sustainability of venues and clubs.

 

As the plan is currently in draft format, Administration strongly recommends that prior to both Leederville and North Perth Tennis clubs expending funds on capital upgrades, discussions are held with Tennis West to ensure the returned funds are used appropriately and align with the outcomes of the strategic facilities plan.

 

Both clubs, in accordance with the terms and conditions of their current lease, are still required to obtain permission from the City (as the lessor) prior to any alterations to their premises, including, but not limited to, capital works. Therefore the City can ensure that any capital works proposed by the clubs align with the strategic facilities plan.

 

In order for the funds to be returned it is necessary for Council to approve the unbudgeted expenditure and also for the leases to be varied to remove the obligation for each club to make quarterly contributions towards a sinking fund. Administration recommends that this occurs, subject to the clubs acknowledging that they are responsible for the works.

Consultation/Advertising:

Administration has met with both clubs in respect to the return of the funds held in the respective Reserve accounts. Both clubs have requested the return of the funds so that they can invest and spend the funds at their discretion, and acknowledge that the clubs are responsible for funding any future bore or motor replacement or court replacement.

Legal/Policy:

The Local Government Act 1995 (Act) governs the creation of Reserve accounts and expenditure from these accounts. Section 6.11 provides:

 

“(1)     Subject to subsection (5), where a local government wishes to set aside money for use for a purpose in a future financial year, it is to establish and maintain a Reserve account for each such purpose.”

 

Section 6.8 provides that:

 

“(1)       A local government is not to insure expenditure from its municipal fund for an additional purpose except where the expenditure –

 

(a)    Is incurred in a financial year before the adoption of the annual budget by the local government; or

(b)    Is authorised in advance by resolution*; or

(c)    Is authorised in advance by the mayor or president in an emergency.

 

*absolute majority required

 

(1a)      In subsection (1) –

 

Additional purpose means a purpose for which no expenditure estimate is included in the local government’s annual budget.

 

(2)        Where expenditure has been incurred by a local government –

(a)    pursuant to subsection (1)(a), it is to be included in the annual budget for the financial year; and

(b)    pursuant to subsection (1)(c), it is to be reported to the next ordinary meeting of council.”

Risk Management Implications:

Medium:      The leases both provide that the clubs contribute to sinking funds for the purposes of, respectively, eventual bore motor or pump replacement and court replacement. Returning the funds held in the Reserve accounts to the clubs will enable the clubs to independently manage their finances, which aligns with the City’s objective of assisting clubs to operate sustainably and self-sufficiently. As the clubs have acknowledged responsibility for the works it is clear that the City has no responsibility to fund these works in the future.    

Strategic Implications:

In accordance with the objectives of the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2013-2023:

 

“2.1.3    Develop business strategies that reduce reliance on rates revenue

 

(c)        Continue to review leases and commercial contracts to ensure the best return for the City, whilst being cognisant of its community service obligations.

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.

 

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

 

(a)        Continue to adopt best practise 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:

The current balances, as at 1 July 2018, of the two Reserve funds are:

 

·       North Perth Tennis Club Reserve - $47,992 excl GST

·       Leederville Tennis Club Reserve - $11,581 excl GST

 

The proposed return of the funds held in the Leederville Tennis Club and North Perth Tennis Club Reserve accounts is unbudgeted expenditure and therefore in accordance with section 6.8(1) of the Act, Council approval (absolute majority) is required.

Comments:

The Clubs have requested the return of the funds held in the Reserve accounts to enable their own independent management and expenditure of the funds. Administration supports the withdrawal of the funds from the Reserve accounts and return to the clubs provided that the clubs acknowledge that pursuant to the current leases the clubs will be responsible for funding the bore motor and pump replacement and court replacement in the future.

 

It is noted that Administration and Tennis West are currently reviewing tennis club leases and can currently make no commitment in respect to the future use of the respective tennis clubs and terms of future leases, if granted. On this basis it is recommended that the funds are returned so that the funds can be spent by the clubs at their discretion, for the benefit of the club members. It is necessary for the leases to be varied to remove the obligation for the clubs to make quarterly contributions to a sinking fund, and therefore a deed of variation of lease will be required for each lease to delete the respective clauses. Once the deed of variation of lease is duly signed and sealed by all parties the clubs contributions will cease and the funds held in the two Reserve accounts can be returned as a lump sum payment.  

TRIM Ref:                  D18/146730

Authors:                   Meluka Bancroft, A/Manager Governance and Risk

Stephanie Smith, Manager Policy and Place

Authoriser:                Kerryn Batten, Director Corporate Services

Attachments:             1.       Concept designs of Leederville Shared Space ⇩  

 

Recommendation: That Council: 1.       APPROVES BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the reallocation of $135,000 within the 2018/19 budget towards the construction of the Leederville Town Centre Shared Space, corner of Newcastle and Oxford Streets, Leederville; and 2.       NOTES the following budget adjustments to facilitate 1. above:   From To Existing Budget Item: Recycling Expenditure (Opex) $135,000   Existing Budget Item: Oxford/Newcastle Sts Shared Space (Capex)   $135,000

 

Purpose of Report:

To consider approving a budget adjustment to enable operational funds previously allocated in the 2018/19 budget for recycling expenditure to be reallocated to the construction of the Oxford/Newcastle Streets Shared Space (Leederville Town Centre Shared Space Project capital expenditure account).

Background:

In February 2018, the City commenced a trial involving relocation of the Leederville Taxi Zone adjacent to the Leederville Hotel and introduction of pick up/set down bays for ride share management. The area adjacent to the Leederville Hotel was then used as temporary alfresco dining.  The trial period was intended to determine the impacts of the Taxi Zone relocation and community consultation was undertaken in September 2018 to determine the community’s perception and views.  The outcomes of the trial and community consultation results are being presented to Council for consideration as a standalone report in October 2018.

 

Concurrently, an amount of $150,000 was included in the 2018/19 budget for the creation of a shared space at the intersection of Newcastle and Oxford Streets.  This shared space with at grade paving would provide a pedestrian friendly environment while still enabling normal functionality for vehicles travelling along Newcastle and Oxford Streets, and would also provide an area for events throughout the year supported by temporary road closures.  The $150,000 budget included $115,000 municipal funds and $35,000 external contributions based on dialogue with Leederville Connect and local business.

Details:

Administration has prepared more advanced concept designs for the Leederville Town Centre Shared Space (Attachment 1) based upon further site investigations and discussions with Leederville Connect.  This includes extending the shared space to the intersection of Newcastle Street and Carr Place which will deliver significant benefits including additional capacity for activation such as market stalls and alfresco dining, and enable improved pedestrian movement.  The revised cost for the Leederville Town Centre Shared Space is $250,000, and therefore an additional $100,000 will be required to deliver the project.

Furthermore, upon progressing discussions with Leederville Connect and local business it has been identified that any external contributions will remain conditional upon a formal agreement including prioritised access to the Shared Space.  While such a condition may be considered reasonable in return for a capital contribution it is Administration’s preference that the project be completed without any such agreement or associated conditions.  Therefore, it is proposed that a further $35,000 be allocated to deliver the Shared Space project through solely municipal funds.  This will require a total of $135,000 to be reallocated towards the project from within the 2018/19 budget.  

 

Through a recent tender process this financial year the City has changed waste contractors which came into effect from September 2018.  Importantly, that tender achieved a cost saving of approximately $300,000 compared to the 2018/19 budget. Administration proposes that $135,000 subsequently be reallocated from the Recycling expenditure budget item to fund the Leederville Town Centre Shared Space Project.

Consultation/Advertising:

Administration will consult with local businesses and affected residents within the Leederville Town Centre prior to implementation of the Shared Space project.

Legal/Policy:

Under section 6.8(1) of the Local Government Act 1995 a local government is not to incur expenditure from its municipal fund for an additional purpose except where the expenditure –

 

(a)  Is incurred in a financial year before the adoption of the annual budget by the local government; or

(b)  Is authorised in advance by resolution*; or

(c)  Is authorised in advance by the Mayor or President in an emergency

 

* Absolute majority required.

Risk Management Implications:

Low:            The City has accepted the Tender and entered into a new waste contract, and therefore has identified actual cost savings within the 2018/19 budget that can be utilised for the Shared Space project.  

Strategic Implications:

This project aligns with the following objectives within the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2013-2023:

 

“Natural and Built Environment

 

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

 

Community Development and Wellbeing

 

3.1.5     Promote and provide a range of community events to bring people together and to foster a community way of life.”

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.

Financial/Budget Implications:

The total project cost for the Leederville Town Centre Shared Space Project will be $250,000 comprising $115,000 from the existing 2018/19 budget allocation and $135,000 from the Recycling expenditure budget reallocation.

Comments:

The revised Leederville Town Centre Project will deliver an improved outcome for local business and community, and the overall town centre streetscape.  Through the identification of available funding within the existing 2018/19 budget Administration can proceed with project planning and seek to deliver the Shared Space prior to the Leedypalooza and Leedy Streets Open events in early 2019.  By solely funding the project the City will retain complete control on management and use of the space.  It is recommended that Council approve the proposed reallocation of funds to enable the project to be completed this financial year.