AGENDA

 

 

Ordinary Council Meeting

 

20 August 2019

 

Time:

6pm

Location:

Administration and Civic Centre

244 Vincent Street, Leederville

 

 

 

David MacLennan

Chief Executive Officer

 


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                    20 August 2019

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DISCLAIMER

No responsibility whatsoever is implied or accepted by the City of Vincent (City) for any act, omission, statement or intimation occurring during Council Briefings or Council Meetings.  The City disclaims any liability for any loss however caused arising out of reliance by any person or legal entity on any such act, omission, statement or intimation occurring during Council Briefings or Council Meetings.  Any person or legal entity who acts or fails to act in reliance upon any statement, act or omission made in a Council Briefing or Council Meeting does so at their own risk.

In particular and without derogating in any way from the broad disclaimer above, in any discussion regarding any planning or development application or application for a licence, any statement or intimation of approval made by an Elected Member or Employee of the City during the course of any meeting is not intended to be and is not to be taken as notice of approval from the City.  The City advises that anyone who has any application lodged with the City must obtain and should only rely on WRITTEN CONFIRMATION of the outcome of the application, and any conditions attaching to the decision made by the Council in respect of the application.

Copyright

Any plans or documents contained within this Agenda may be subject to copyright law provisions (Copyright Act 1968, as amended) and that the express permission of the copyright owner(s) should be sought prior to their reproduction.  It should be noted that Copyright owners are entitled to take legal action against any persons who infringe their copyright.  A reproduction of material that is protected by copyright may represent a copyright infringement.


PROCEDURE FOR PUBLIC SPEAKING TIME

The City of Vincent Local Law Relating to Meeting Procedures prescribes the procedure for persons to ask questions or make public statements relating to a matter affecting the City, either verbally or in writing, at a Council meeting.

Questions or statements made at an Ordinary Council meeting can relate to matters that affect the City.  Questions or statements made at a Special Meeting of the Council must only relate to the purpose for which the meeting has been called.

1.    Shortly after the commencement of the meeting, the Presiding Member will ask members of the public to come forward to address the Council and to give their name and the suburb in which they reside or, where a member of the public is representing the interests of a business, the suburb in which that business is located and Agenda Item number (if known).

2.    Public speaking time will be strictly limited to three (3) minutes per member of the public.

3.    Members of the public are encouraged to keep their questions/statements brief to enable everyone who desires to ask a question or make a statement to have the opportunity to do so.

4.    Public speaking time is declared closed when there are no further members of the public who wish to speak.

5.    Questions/statements are to be directed to the Presiding Member and are to be made politely in good faith and are not to be framed in such a way as to reflect adversely or be defamatory on a Council Member or City Employee.

6.    Where the Presiding Member is of the opinion that a member of the public is making a statement at a Council meeting, that does not affect the City, he may ask the person speaking to promptly cease.

7.    Questions/statements and any responses will be summarised and included in the Minutes of the Council meeting.

8.    Where practicable, responses to questions will be provided at the meeting.  Where the information is not available or the question cannot be answered, it will be “taken on notice” and a written response will be sent by the Chief Executive Officer to the person asking the question.  A copy of the reply will be included in the Agenda of the next Ordinary meeting of the Council.

9.    It is not intended that public speaking time should be used as a means to obtain information that would not be made available if it was sought from the City’s records under Section 5.94 of the Local Government Act 1995 or the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act 1992. The CEO will advise the member of the public that the information may be sought in accordance with the FOI Act 1992.

 

RECORDING AND WEBSTREAMING OF COUNCIL MEETINGS

·         All Ordinary and Special Council Meetings are electronically recorded except when the Council resolves to go behind closed doors;

·         All recordings are retained as part of the City's records in accordance with the General Disposal Authority for Local Government Records produced by the Public Records Office;

·         A copy of the recorded proceedings and/or a transcript of a particular section or all of a Council meeting is available in accordance with Policy No. 4.2.4 – Council Meetings – Recording and Web Streaming.

·         Ordinary Meetings of Council and Council Briefings are streamed live on the internet in accordance with the City’s Policy – 4.2.4 - Council Meetings Recording and Web Streaming. It is another way the City is striving for transparency and accountability in what we do.

·         The live stream can be accessed from http://webcast.vincent.wa.gov.au/video.php

·         Images of the public gallery are not included in the webcast, however the voices of people in attendance may be captured and streamed.

·         If you have any issues or concerns with the live streaming of meetings, please contact the City’s Manager Governance and Risk on 08 9273 6538.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                    20 August 2019

Order Of Business

 

1          Declaration of Opening / Acknowledgement of Country. 7

2          Apologies / Members on Leave of Absence. 7

3          (A) Public Question Time and Receiving of Public Statements. 7

(B) Response to Previous Public Questions Taken On Notice. 7

4          Applications for Leave of Absence. 7

5          The Receiving of Petitions, Deputations and Presentations. 7

6          Confirmation of Minutes. 7

7          Announcements by the Presiding Member (Without Discussion) 7

8          Declarations of Interest 7

9          Planning and Place. 8

9.1             No. 161 (Lot: 890; D/P: 413584) Loftus Street, Leederville - Ten Multiple Dwellings (Amendment to Approval) 8

9.2             No. 12 (Lot: 4, S/P: 78266) Nova Lane, North Perth - Single Dwelling. 29

9.3             Nos. 17-39 (Lot: 38-44; D/P: 613) Robinson Avenue, Perth - Alterations and Additions to Hotel (Amendment to Approved - Unauthorised Existing Development) 58

9.4             No. 377 (Lot: 162; D/P: 2630) Walcott Street, Coolbinia - Proposed Four Multiple Dwellings (Amendment to Approved) 82

9.5             No. 11 (Lot: 1; D/P: 12979) Buxton Street, Mount Hawthorn - Proposed Single House. 129

9.6             No. 48 (Lot: 202; D/P: 413236) Egina Street, Mount Hawthorn - Proposed Single House. 175

9.7             No. 48A (Lot: 201; D/P: 413236) Egina Street, Mount Hawthorn - Proposed Single House. 196

9.8             Food Stallholder Fees - Minor Review [ABSOLUTE MAJORITY DECISION REQUIRED] 216

10        Infrastucture and Environment 220

10.1           Minor Parking Restriction Improvements/Amendments. 220

11        Community and Business Services. 226

11.1           Investment Report as at 31 July 2019. 226

11.2           Authorisation of Expenditure for the Period 1 July 2019 to 31 July 2019. 235

11.3           Financial Statements as at 31 July 2019. 257

11.4           Draft Safer Vincent Plan 2019-2022. 334

11.5           Pop-Up Play Consultation Results [ABSOLUTE MAJORITY DECISION REQUIRED] 367

12        Chief Executive Officer 392

12.1           Information Bulletin. 392

12.2           Adoption of Council Election Period Policy. 473

12.3           Annual Corporate Business Plan Review and Update [ABSOLUTE MAJORITY DECISION REQUIRED] 483

12.4           2019 Organisational Review. 558

13        Motions of Which Previous Notice Has Been Given. 572

13.1           Notice of Motion - Cr Dan Loden - Asbestos Awareness. 572


 

14        Questions by Members of Which Due Notice Has Been Given (Without Discussion) 573

Nil

15        Representation on Committees and Public Bodies. 573

16        Urgent Business. 573

Nil

17        Confidential Items/Matters For Which The Meeting May Be Closed. 574

17.1           Chief Executive Officer's Performance and Remuneration Review 2018-2019 and Draft CEO Key Performance Indicators 2019-2020. 574

18        Closure. 575

 

 

 


1            Declaration of Opening / Acknowledgement of Country

“The City of Vincent would like to acknowledge the Traditional Owners of the land, the Whadjuk people of the Noongar nation and pay our respects to Elders past, present and emerging”.

2            Apologies / Members on Leave of Absence

Nil

3            (A)         Public Question Time and Receiving of Public Statements

              (B)         Response to Previous Public Questions Taken On Notice

4            Applications for Leave of Absence

4.1                   Cr Jonathon Hallett requests a leave of absence for the priod 20-25 October 2019 to travel interstate.

5            The Receiving of Petitions, Deputations and Presentations

6            Confirmation of Minutes

Ordinary Meeting - 23 July 2019

7            Announcements by the Presiding Member (Without Discussion)

8            Declarations of Interest


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                    20 August 2019

9            Planning and Place

9.1          No. 161 (Lot: 890; D/P: 413584) Loftus Street, Leederville - Ten Multiple Dwellings (Amendment to Approval)

TRIM Ref:                  D19/105970

Author:                     Karsen Reynolds, Urban Planner

Authoriser:                Joslin Colli, Coordinator Planning Services

Ward:                        North

Attachments:             1.       Location Map

2.       Minutes of the 9 September 2014 Council Meeting

3.       Minutes of the 18 December 2016 Council Meeting

4.       Previously Approved Development Plans  

 

 

Recommendation:

That Council, in accordance with the provisions of the City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2 and the Metropolitan Region Scheme, APPROVES the development application for Ten Multiple Dwellings (amendment to approval) at No. 161 (Lot: 890; D/P: 413584) Loftus Street, subject to the following conditions:

1.       All conditions, requirements and advice notes detailed on development approval 5.2014.311.1 and 5.2016.296.1 granted on 9 September 2014 and 13 December 2016 respectively continue to apply to this approval, except as follows:

1.1     Condition 7 of the development approval is deleted and replaced with the following condition:

7.       Public Art

 

7.1     In accordance with City of Vincent Policy 7.5.13 Percent for Art the application is required to make a public art contribution of $25,000 being one percent of the $2,500,000 through one of the following options:

         Option 1: Owner/Applicant chooses to co-ordinate the Public Art project themselves or by engaging an art consultant

 

Or

 

         Option 2: Owner/Applicant chooses to pay cash-in-lieu. Owner/Applicants who choose Option 2 would receive a 15 percent discount on the Percent for Art contribution.

 

7.2     The owner(s), or the applicant on behalf of the owner(s), shall comply with the City of Vincent Percent for Policy No. 7.5.13 – Public Art:

 

(1)      Option 1 –

         Within 30 days of development approval, obtain approval for the Public Art Project and associated Artist; and

 

         Within 90 days of development approval, install the approved public art project, and thereafter maintain the art work;

 

OR

 

(2)      Option 2 –

         Within 30 days of development approval pay the above cash-in-lieu contribution amount.

 

Purpose of Report:

To consider an application for development approval for an amendment to condition of development approval for ten Multiple Dwellings at No. 161 Loftus Street, Leederville (subject site).

PROPOSAL:

The subject site is located at No. 161 Loftus Street, Leederville, as shown on the location plan included as Attachment 1.

 

At its Ordinary Council Meeting held on 9 September 2014, Council approved an application for Demolition of Existing Single House Construction of Three Storey Multiple Dwelling Comprising 10 Multiple Dwellings and Associated Car Parking subject to conditions at the subject site. The Minutes of the 9 September 2014 Ordinary Council Meeting are included as Attachment 2.

 

A condition of the development approval required a public art contribution to be made in accordance with the City’s Policy No. 7.5.13 – Percent for Public Art (Percent for Public Art Policy). The City’s Percent for Public Art Policy prescribes a minimum of one percent of the total project cost to be allocated to the contribution of public art appurtenant to the development. This equated to a contribution of $29,568, being one percent of the $2,956,800 value of the development. On 17 October 2014 the applicant submitted a statutory declaration that advised the applicant had chosen to pay the cash-in-lieu Percent for Public Art contribution.

 

The development was not substantially commenced within two years of the development approval. A development application for an Extension of the Term of Approval was lodged with the City on 18 July 2016. As part of the application, the applicant advised the City that the cost of development had reduced to $2,500,000 as a result of a change in contractors.

 

The extension of the time development application was approved by Council at its Ordinary Council Meeting on 13 December 2016. As part of the approval, the Percent for Public Art contribution condition was not amended to reflect the reduced cost of development. The Minutes of the 13 December 2016 Ordinary Council Meeting are included as Attachment 3, and the development plans approved by Council are included as Attachment 4.

 

This development application proposes to amend the existing approval by amending Condition 7 that relates to the Percent for Public Art Contribution to reflect the reduced cost of development.

 

The application does not propose any changes to the overall design and built form outcome of the development.

Background:

Landowner:

Patrick Doran-Wu

Applicant:

Patrick Doran-Wu

Date of Application:

1 July 2019

Zoning:

MRS:    Urban

LPS2:   Zone: Residential         R Code: R60

Built Form Area:

Transit Corridor

Existing Land Use:

Dwelling (Multiple)

Proposed Use Class:

Dwelling (Multiple)

Lot Area:

1011m²

Right of Way (ROW):

Yes – 5.0 metres

Heritage List:

No

 

The subject site is bound by Loftus Street to the east, Gawley Street to the north, a ROW to the west, and residential development to the south. A location plan is included in Attachment 1.

 

The subject site and adjoining northern, western and southern properties are zoned Residential R60 under the City’s Local Planning Scheme No. 2 (LPS2) and are located within the Transit Corridor built form area under the City’s Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form. The adjoining properties to the west of the subject site are zoned Residential R40 under LPS2 and are within the Residential built form area.

 

The construction of the ten multiple dwellings was completed in April 2019. The applicant has satisfied all other conditions of approval, and the occupancy permit was approved in May 2019.

Details:

Not applicable.

Consultation/Advertising:

The application has been reviewed against the City’s Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation (Community Consultation Policy) and it was determined that the proposal did not require advertising for the following reasons:

 

·       There is no external changes to the built form of the existing multiple dwelling development previously approved by Council; and

·       The proposed amendment would not have a significant impact on the community, or the economy, lifestyle, amenity and/or environment of any member of the community or community group.

Design Review Panel (DRP):

Referred to DRP:            No

 

The amended development application was not referred to the DRP for comment as the amendments do not result in any built form changes.

Legal/Policy:

·       Planning and Development Act 2005;

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

·       City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2;

·       Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation; and

·       Policy No. 7.5.13 – Percent for Public Art.

 

Should Council refuse the application for development approval, the applicant would have the right to have the decision reviewed in accordance with Part 14 of the Planning and Development Act 2005.

Delegation to Determine Applications:

This matter has been referred to Council in accordance with the City’s Delegated Authority Register as the application is an amendment to a development approval that was determined by Council.

Risk Management Implications:

There are minimal risks to Council and the City’s business function when Council exercises its discretionary power to determine a planning application.

Strategic Implications:

This is in keeping with the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2018-2028:

 

Innovative and Accountable

We are open and accountable to an engaged community.

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.

Financial/Budget Implications:

Nil.

Comments:

The proposal to amend the condition of approval relating to Public Art Contribution is consistent with the reduced cost of development. If approved, the percent for public art contribution would be reduced from $29,568 to $25,000, being 1 percent of the estimated total cost of the development of $2,500,000. The applicant has indicated that they wish to proceed with Option 2 (cash-in-lieu option). This option permits a 15 percent discount to be applied to the amount of $25,000 in accordance with the Percent for Public Art Policy. The resultant cash-in-lieu contribution would be $21,250. The amended condition however allows for either Option 1 or Option 2 of the Percent for Public Art Policy to be chosen by the applicant.

 

The proposal does not result in any external changes or increase to the existing building footprint. The amendment would not have any impact on the surrounding area. It is recommended that Council approves this amended development application.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                                     20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                                     20 August 2019


 


 


 


 


 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                    20 August 2019

9.2          No. 12 (Lot: 4, S/P: 78266) Nova Lane, North Perth - Single Dwelling

TRIM Ref:                  D19/94233

Author:                     Natasha Trefry, Urban Planning Advisor

Authoriser:                Joslin Colli, Coordinator Planning Services

Ward:                        North

Attachments:             1.       Consultation and Location Plan

2.       Development Plans

3.       Streetscape Analysis

4.       Applicant Justification

5.       Determination Advice Notes  

 

 

Recommendation:

That Council, in accordance with the provisions of the City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2 and the Metropolitan Region Scheme, APPROVES, the development application for Single Dwelling at No. 12 (Lot: 4; S/P: 78266) Nova Lane, North Perth in accordance with the plans in Attachment 2, subject to the following conditions, with the associated advice notes in Attachment 5:

1.       Boundary Walls

The owners of the subject land shall finish and maintain the surface of the boundary walls facing No. 12A Nova Lane and No. 10A Nova Lane in a good and clean condition prior to the practical completion of the development and thereafter maintained to the satisfaction of the City. The finish of the walls are to be fully rendered or facebrick to the satisfaction of the City;

2.       Landscaping Plan

2.1     A detailed landscape and reticulation plan for the development site and adjoining road verge, to the satisfaction of the City, shall be lodged with and approved by the City prior to lodgement of a Building Permit. The plan shall be drawn to a scale of 1:100 and show the following:

·       The location and type of proposed trees and plants;

·       Areas to be irrigated or reticulated;

·       The provision of 15 percent of the site area as deep soil zone and 30 percent canopy cover at maturity; and

2.2     All works shown in the plans as identified in Condition 2.1 above shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved plans to the City’s satisfaction, prior to occupancy or use of the development and maintained thereafter to the satisfaction of the City at the expense of the owners/occupiers;

3.       Sight Lines

No walls, letterboxes or fences above 0.75 metres in height to be constructed within the 1.5 metre of where:

3.1     walls, letterboxes or fences adjoin vehicular access points to the site; or

3.2     a driveway meets a public street; or

3.3     two streets intersect; unless otherwise approved by the City of Vincent;

 

4.       Stormwater

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

5.       Car Parking and Access

5.1     The car parking and access areas shall be sealed, drained and paved in accordance with the approved plans and are to comply with the requirements of AS2890.1 prior to occupancy or use of the development;

5.2     Vehicle access points are required to match into existing right of way levels; and

5.3     All new crossovers shall be constructed in accordance with the City’s Standard Crossover Specifications;

6.       Visual Privacy

Prior to occupancy or use of the development, all windows from the Master Suite, Kitchen and Family/Dining area shall be glazed in an obscure material and permanently fixed to comply in all respects with the requirements of Clause 5.4.1 of the Residential Design Codes (Visual Privacy) deemed-to-comply provisions, to the satisfaction of the City;

7.       External Fixtures

All external fixtures, such as television antennas (of a non-standard type), radio and other antennaes, satellite dishes, solar panels, external hot water heaters, air conditioners, and the like, shall not be visible from the street(s), are designed integrally with the building, and be located so as not to be visually obtrusive; and

8.       Detailed Schedule of External Finishes

Prior to the commencement of development a detailed schedule of external finishes (including materials and colour schemes and details) shall be submitted to and approved by the City. The development shall be finished in accordance with the approved schedule prior to the use or occupation of the development.

 

Purpose of Report:

To consider an application for development approval for a single dwelling at 12 Nova Lane, North Perth (subject site).

PROPOSAL:

The application proposes a three storey dwelling to a vacant survey strata lot which has been subdivided. The third storey element of the dwelling compromises a covered stairwell and bathroom, as well as a centrally located terrace with a pergola.

Background:

Landowner:

Graeme and Janice Davis

Applicant:

Dorian Morelli

Date of Application:

12 April 2019

Zoning:

MRS:    Urban

LPS2:   Residential R30/40       R Code: R30/40

Built Form Area:

Residential

Existing Land Use:

Vacant Land

Proposed Use Class:

Single Dwelling

Lot Area:

241m²

Right of Way (ROW):

Yes Nova Lane to the south – 6.8 metre wide, drained and sealed

Heritage List:

No

 

The subject site is bound by Nova Lane to the south, a single storey single house to the north, a two storey dwelling to the east and a vacant lot to the west. Administration notes an application for a three storey dwelling has been submitted for No. 12A Nova Lane (western property) which forms part of the parent lot and is currently vacant. A location plan is included as Attachment 1.

 

The subject site is zoned Residential R30/40 and is affected by Clause 26(1) of City’s Local Planning Scheme No. 2 (LPS2) which states: development will only be permitted to R40 standards where the existing house is retained. The subject site was created through a survey strata subdivision which retained the existing house at No. 11 Mabel Street, North Perth. The application has been assessed against the development requirements of R40.

 

The subject site and surrounding properties are zoned Residential R30/40. The subject site forms part of the Residential Built Form area in accordance with the City’s Policy No. 7.7.1 – Built Form.

 

The application proposes a three storey dwelling, inclusive of an open roof terrace, which addresses Nova Lane. The development plans have been included as Attachment 2. A streetscape analysis of the adjacent and neighbouring dwellings is included, as Attachment 3.

Details:

Summary Assessment

The table below summarises the planning assessment of the proposal against the provisions of the LPS2, the City’s Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form and the State Government’s Residential Design Codes.  In each instance where the proposal requires the discretion of Council, the relevant planning element is discussed in the Detailed Assessment section following from this table.

 

Planning Element

Use Permissibility/ Deemed-to-Comply

Requires the Discretion of Council

Street Setback

ü

 

Front Fence

ü

 

Building Setbacks/Boundary Wall

 

ü

Building Height/Storeys

 

ü

Roof Form

ü

 

Open Space

ü

 

Outdoor Living Areas

ü

 

Landscaping

ü

 

Privacy

ü

 

Parking & Access

 

ü

Solar Access

ü

 

Site Works/Retaining Walls

ü

 

Essential Facilities

ü

 

External Fixtures

ü

 

Surveillance

ü

 

Detailed Assessment

The deemed-to-comply assessment of the elements that require the discretion of Council are as follows:

 

Lot Boundary Setbacks

Deemed-to-Comply Standard

Proposal

Clause 5.3 of Built Form Policy

 

Roof Terrace (East): 1.4m

 

Lot Boundary Walls

Maximum Height – 3.5m

Average Height – 3.0m

Permitted Length – 15.2m

 

 

Roof Terrace (East): 1.3m

 

Lot Boundary Walls (East)

Maximum Height – 6.9m

Average Height – 6.6m

Proposed Length – 9.9m

(2 storey boundary wall proposed)

 

 

Lot Boundary Walls (West)

Garage

Maximum Height – 3.9m

Average Height – 3.8m

Proposed Length – 6.2m

 

 

Bed 2 – Bed 3

Maximum Height – 3.6m

Average Height – 2.65m

Proposed Length – 9.9m

Western boundary total length: 16.1m

Building Height

Deemed-to-Comply Standard

Proposal

Clause 5.6 of Built Form Policy

 

Permitted Concealed Roof: 7.0 metres

 

 

Proposed Concealed Roof: 9.0 metres

Setback Garages & Carports

Deemed-to-Comply Standard

Proposal

Clause 5.7 of Built Form Policy

 

Garage 0.5m behind building line of dwelling

 

 

Garage 0.3m forward of building line of the dwelling

 

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

Consultation/Advertising:

Community Consultation was undertaken in accordance with the Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015, for a period of 14 days commencing on 28 June 2019 – 12 July 2019. Community consultation was undertaken by means of written notifications with 18 letters sent to surrounding landowners, as shown in Attachment 1 and a notice on the City’s website. At the conclusion of the community consultation period, no submissions were received from the adjacent dwellings who were consulted regarding the proposal.

 

It is noted a variation to the street setback was advertised in error during the 14 day consultation period. Following the advertising period the applicant amended the development proposal by modifying the design and materials of the façade, reducing the size of the roof terrace and providing additional landscaping.  The additional justification provided with the amended plans in regards to the visual privacy from the roof terrace are noted in Attachment 4.

Design Review Panel (DRP):

Referred to DRP:            Yes

 

As the proposal sought variations to building height, the proposal was referred to the Chair of the DRP for comment. The comments received in regards to the proposal noted:

 

·       The proposed design would be suitable, in the context of the surrounding streetscape providing the top level terrace would either:

o   Have open flat pergola (or a louvered/ operable flat pergola);

o   Have a flat (max 3 degreees) translucent roof;

·       Once the terrace roof and portion of stair enclosure (above 1m balustrade level) are treated in any of the above manners, the design and form would be consistent with the adjacent properties.

 

The open nature of the pergola and its flat (concealed) roof form, are measures employed in the design of the third storey element which mitigate bulk and scale in accordance with the DRP Chair comments above and facilitate a built form outcome which is cognisant of the existing streetscape.

Legal/Policy:

·       Planning and Development Act 2005;

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

·       City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2;

·       State Planning Policy 3.1 – Residential Design Codes;

·       Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation; and

·       Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form Policy.

Delegation to Determine Applications:

The matter is being referred to Council as the application proposes a height of three storeys or more, which does not meet the deemed-to-comply building height.

Risk Management Implications:

There are minimal risks to Council and the City’s business function when Council exercises its discretionary power to determine a planning application.

Strategic Implications:

This is in keeping with the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2018-2028:

 

Innovative and Accountable

We are open and accountable to an engaged community.

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.

Financial/Budget Implications:

Nil.

Comments:

Lot Boundary Setbacks

 

Eastern Boundary

 

The application proposes a 1.3 metre setback to the eastern boundary of the roof terrace in lieu of the 1.4 metre deemed-to-comply standard.

 

The proposed eastern setback is considered to satisfy the relevant design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes and Built Form Policy and is considered acceptable for the following reasons:

 

·       The third storey component of the dwelling is located centrally, and stepped away from the parapet wall to the ground and first floor of the dwelling. The stepped approach reduces the vertical massing of the eastern elevation and alleviates the visual impact of the third storey element of the proposal to the abutting eastern property.

·       The eastern elevation incorporates white render, facebrick detailing and a contrasting grey Colorbond roof to ameliorate the actual and perceived bulk of the roof terrace and third storey element. The large glazed openings on the ground floor and the obscured openings to the kitchen and dining on the first floor presents as an open and interactive elevation void of blank solid walls, further assisting reducing the bulk and scale impacts to the eastern lot boundary.

·       The favourable orientation of the site results in no overshadowing and subsequent loss of direct sunlight to the adjacent dwellings.

·       The development does not result in any departures from the deemed-to-comply visual privacy requirements of the R Codes in relation to visual privacy for the adjacent property.

·       The departure to the lot boundary setback is considered very minor in nature and does not impact on the adjacent neighbouring properties in terms of bulk and scale given the scale of the terrace element.

·      Landscaping via canopy and deep soil areas, is incorporated to the roof terrace of the property which helps to soften the building edge when viewed from adjacent properties and Nova Lane.

 

Lot Boundary Walls

 

The application proposes boundary walls to two side boundaries of the lot. The deemed-to-comply provisions permits a boundary wall length of 15.2 metres for the subject lot with an average height of 3 metres and a maximum height of 3.5 metres.

 

The following boundary walls are proposed:

 

Western Boundary

 

The proposal incorporates two sections of boundary wall on the western boundary that are 16.1 metres in lieu of the deemed-to-comply 15.2 metres.  The first portion of boundary wall being the garage proposes departures to the average wall height of 3.8 metres in lieu of the deemed-to-comply 3.0 metre average wall height, and a 3.9-metre maximum wall height in lieu of the deemed-to-comply 3.5 metres. The second portion of the boundary wall bed 2 to bed 3 seeks variations to the maximum wall height 3.6 metres in lieu of the 3.5 metres.

 

The lot boundary walls proposed satisfy the relevant design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes and Built Form Policy and are acceptable for the following reasons:

 

·       The proposed boundary wall is located behind the street setback line of the dwelling, with a large concentration of the boundary bulk located to the rear of the site, not visible from the street.  The boundary walls are of a single storey nature and do not generate or exacerbate mass from the street or adjacent properties.

·       The proposed walls located on the western boundary do not compromise access to direct sunlight for the subject dwelling and do not adversely impact adjoining properties with respect to overshadowing

·       The boundary wall does not incorporate major openings and would not result in overlooking to the adjoining site.

·       Two storey boundary walls are a prevalent built form outcome within the Nova Lane established streetscape. The scale and materials of the boundary walls – face brick and render finish are consistent with colours and materials of other dwellings within the established street. As visible from the streetscape analysis in Attachment 3.

·       The remainder of the dwelling is articulated and incorporates varying materials, to reduce the bulk of the development to the adjacent property.

 

Eastern boundary

 

The application proposes a 9.9 metre lot boundary wall with a maximum height of 6.9 metres and an average maximum height of 6.6 metres in lieu of the deemed to comply 3.5 metres and 3 metres respectively.

 

The lot boundary walls proposed satisfy the relevant design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes and Built Form Policy and are acceptable for the following reasons:

 

·       The two storey boundary wall is setback 3 metres from the ROW on the eastern boundary and abuts a boundary wall on No. 10A Nova Lane which is setback 2 metres from the ROW is 6.9 metres in length and 4 metres in height.

·       The proposed boundary wall would largely screen the existing blank boundary wall at No. 10A Nova Lane with the proposed wall reducing the impact of bulk on the streetscape and providing a better amenity outcome for the occupants of proposed dwelling.

·       The boundary wall extends 3.3 metres longer than the abutting existing parapet wall of No. 10A Nova Lane. The additional length abuts a paved access leg along the boundary of the property with a swimming pool located adjacent to the access leg. The proposed boundary wall does not incorporate any major openings and would not disrupt or diminish the amenity of the neighbouring property.

·       The proposed boundary when viewed from the street would largely be obscured by the existing double storey dwelling with a boundary wall at No. 10A Nova Lane.

·       The proposed boundary wall is proposed to be constructed of a facebrick material, consistent with built form outcomes of the Nova Lane streetscape, and blends in well with the brick finish of the existing boundary wall.

·       The development meets the solar access deemed-to-comply requirements.

·       The remainder of the eastern boundary incorporates a large number of obscured openings which reduces the scale of blank and solid walls to adjacent properties.

 

Building Height

 

The application proposes a height of three storeys with a maximum height of 9.0 metres to the top of the concealed roof in lieu of the two storey and maximum concealed roof height of 7.0 metres set as a deemed‑to‑comply standard in the City’s Built Form Policy.

 

The building height departure relates only to the centrally located stairwell on the third floor of the dwelling. The building height proposed satisfies the relevant design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes and Built Form Policy and is acceptable for the following reasons:

 

·       The third storey and maximum height of 9 metres relates only to the centrally located stairwell roof, which provides access to the roof terrace.

·       The central location of the stairwell means that the portion of the stairwell roof is largely not visible from neighbouring properties or adjacent Nova Lane and does not result in additional bulk to the development.

·       The third storey element of the dwelling is setback 5.2 metres from Nova Lane, resulting in a built form that is generally not visible from the street.

·       Screening to the western side of the third storey roof terrace area ensures that development meets the visual privacy deemed-to-comply aspects of the proposal. This screening provides a level of privacy and amenity to the subject site, as well as the neighbouring properties.

·       The slope of the lot from north to south (front to rear) means the proposed dwelling to the rear sits lower than the retained dwelling and does not impact on the established character of the Mabel Street streetscape.

·       The central location of the stairwell means that this third storey does not result in additional overshadowing of adjoining properties. The overshadowing proposed meets the deemed-to-comply standards of the R Codes.

·       The finished floor levels proposed have been stepped in line with the natural ground levels of the site, to ensure a reduced overall height for the building. The development considers and responds to the natural slope with minimal fill and excavation required.

 

Setback of Garages and Carports

 

The application proposes a garage 300 millimetres (0.3 metres) set forward of the main building line of the dwelling in lieu of 500mm (0.5 metres) setback behind the main dwelling line, as per the deemed-to-comply requirements of the Built Form Policy.

 

The proposed garage setback is considered to satisfy the relevant design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes and Built Form Policy and is considered acceptable for the following reasons:

 

·       The proposal meets the deemed-to-comply requirements in regards to sight lines, and the projection of the garage forward of the main building line does not obscure views.

·       The dwelling provides a clear delineation and visibility of the entrance to the dwelling, which is considered to mitigate the impacts of the garage.

·       The façade of the dwelling incorporates mixed materials – cladding, render and facebrick – as well as articulations to break up the scale and bulk of the proposal.

·       The garage does not obstruct views of dwellings from the street and vice versa.

·       Carports and garages forward of the main dwelling is a common built form outcome to the adjacent properties. As a result the minor projection of the garage is not considered to exacerbate the built form outcome and its presentation to the street.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                                     20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                                     20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                    20 August 2019

9.3          Nos. 17-39 (Lot: 38-44; D/P: 613) Robinson Avenue, Perth - Alterations and Additions to Hotel (Amendment to Approved - Unauthorised Existing Development)

TRIM Ref:                  D19/104296

Author:                     Mitchell Hoad, Senior Urban Planner

Authoriser:                Joslin Colli, Coordinator Planning Services

Ward:                        South

Attachments:             1.       Location Map

2.       Development Plans

3.       Minutes of the 28 June 2016 Council Meeting

4.       Determination Advice Notes  

 

 

Recommendation:

That Council, in accordance with the provisions of the City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2 and the Metropolitan Region Scheme, APPROVES the application for Alterations and Additions to Hotel (Amendment to Approved - Unauthorised Existing Development) at Nos. 17-39 (Lot: 38-44; D/P: 613) Robinson Avenue, Perth, in accordance with the plans shown in Attachment 2 dated 22 July 2019, subject to the following conditions and Advice Notes contained in Attachment 4:

Conditions

1.       This approval is for Alterations and Additions to Hotel (Amendment to ApprovedUnauthorised Existing Development) as shown on the plans dated 22 July 2019. No other development forms part of this approval; and

2.       All conditions and advice notes detailed on development approval 5.2016.86.1 granted on 28 June 2016 continue to apply to this approval.

 

Purpose of Report:

To consider an application for an amendment to a previous development approval for alterations and additions to a Hotel (unauthorised existing development) at Nos. 17-39 Robinson Avenue, Perth (the subject site). A location plan is included in Attachment 1.

PROPOSAL:

The application seeks approval for modifications to the existing Hotel to increase the number of rooms from 121 rooms to 127 rooms. The modifications to the Hotel to accommodate the additional six rooms includes:

 

·       The conversion of the Night Manager room on the ground floor into one additional room (Suite 213);

·       The conversion of a family suite on the ground floor into two separate rooms, resulting in one additional room (Suite 214); and

·       The conversion of the Maids Room on the first floor into four additional rooms.

 

Plans of the development with the additional rooms indicated are included in Attachment 2. The modifications are internal only and do not result in any external changes to the existing façade of the Hotel.


 

Background:

Landowner:

GPR Hotels Pty Ltd

Applicant:

Michael Dryka Architects

Date of Application:

26 June 2019

Zoning:

MRS:    Urban

LPS2:    Zone: Mixed Use R Code: R80

Built Form Area:

Mixed Use

Existing Land Use:

Hotel

Proposed Use Class:

Hotel

Lot Area:

3,106m²

Right of Way (ROW):

No

Heritage List:

No

 

The subject site is bound by Robinson Avenue to the north-east, single storey commercial development to the north-west, single and two-storey residential development to the south-west and two storey residential development to the south-east.

 

The subject site and surrounding land is zoned Mixed Use R80 under the City’s Local Planning Scheme No. 2 (LPS2) and is located within the Mixed Use built form area under the City’s Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form (Built Form Policy), with the exception of the land to the north-west. This land is zoned District Centre under LPS2 and is within the Town Centre built form area.

 

The subject site currently consists of the Great Southern Hotel, which is two to three-storeys in height and has 25 parking bays located on site. The Hotel was approved by Council at its Ordinary Meeting on 9 May 2001. The most recent amendment to the Hotel was approved by Council at its Ordinary Meeting on 28 June 2016. This approval increased the number of rooms from 94 rooms to 121 rooms, and included some modifications to the external façade. The Minutes from this Ordinary Council Meeting, including a copy of the determination notice and plans, are included in Attachment 3.

 

The applicant submitted a request for a Section 40 Certificate of land use approval which is required by the Department of Racing Gaming and Liquor to accompany a Liquor License application. This request included plans which proposed to increase the licensed area from 94 rooms to 127 as shown in the plans in Attachment 2. Administration advised the applicant that approval only exists for 121 rooms on the subject site in accordance with the previous determination by Council, and an amended development application seeking approval for the additional rooms was required to be submitted. Should the development application be approved, the applicant would also be required to submit an application for a retrospective Occupancy Permit with the City for the unauthorised works.

Details:

Summary Assessment

The table below summarises the planning assessment of the proposal against the provisions of the LPS2, Built Form Policy and the City’s policies.  In each instance where the proposal requires the discretion of Council, the relevant planning element is discussed in the Detailed Assessment section following from this table.

 

Planning Element

Use Permissibility/ Deemed-to-Comply

Previously approved

Requires further Discretion

Land Use (only where required)

 

ü

 

Car Parking

ü

 

 

Consultation/Advertising:

Community Consultation was undertaken by the City for a period of 14 days in accordance with the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 from 18 July 2019 to 1 August 2019. The method of advertising included a sign being erected on-site, a newspaper advertisement and a notice on the City’s website in accordance with the City’s Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation.

 

At the conclusion of the consultation period, no submissions were received.

Design Review Panel (DRP):

Referred to DRP:            No

Legal/Policy:

·       Planning and Development Act 2005;

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

·       City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2;

·       Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation; and

·       Policy No. 7.7.1 – Non-Residential Development Parking Requirements.

 

The application to amend an approval can be considered in accordance with Schedule 2, Clause 77(1) (a) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.  Clause 77(2) (b) allows the application to be made during or after the period within which the development must be substantially commenced. Clause 77(4) provides the local government the ability to approve the application with or without conditions or refuse the application.

 

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

Delegation to Determine Applications:

This matter has been referred to Council in accordance with the City’s Delegated Authority Register as the application is an amendment to a development approval that was determined by Council.

Risk Management Implications:

There are minimal risks to Council and the City’s business function when Council exercises its discretionary power to determine a planning application.

Strategic Implications:

This is in keeping with the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2018-2028:

 

Innovative and Accountable

We are open and accountable to an engaged community.

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.

Financial/Budget Implications:

Nil.

Comments:

The application for alterations and additions to the existing Hotel proposes the conversion of existing internal spaces to create an additional six rooms. This increases the total number of rooms from 121 previously approved by Council at its Ordinary Meeting on 28 June 2016 to 127. The proposal does not result in any external changes or increase to the existing building footprint. There are no exemptions for this type of development.

 


 

The existing Hotel currently has 25 on-site parking bays. The most recent application approved by Council in 2016 required 21.08 bays, resulting in a surplus of 3.95 bays. Under the current Policy No. 7.7.1 – Non‑Residential Development Parking Requirements (Parking Policy), the subject application requires three parking bays for the six additional rooms proposed, at a rate of 0.5 bays per room. This results in a surplus of 0.95 parking bays on the subject site.

 

As a result of there being no external changes to the existing building and car parking satisfying the requirements of the Parking Policy, the proposal will not have any impact on the surrounding area. The proposal will continue to contribute towards the supply of tourist accommodation within Perth. It is recommended that Council approves this development application.


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                                     20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                                     20 August 2019


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator



 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                    20 August 2019

9.4          No. 377 (Lot: 162; D/P: 2630) Walcott Street, Coolbinia - Proposed Four Multiple Dwellings (Amendment to Approved)

TRIM Ref:                  D19/100058

Author:                     Dan McCluggage, Urban Planner

Authoriser:                Joslin Colli, Coordinator Planning Services

Ward:                        North

Attachments:             1.       Location and Consultation Plan

2.       Previously Approved Development Plans

3.       Minutes of 30 April 2019 Council Meeting

4.       Proposed Development Plans

5.       Summary of Submissions - Administration's Comments

6.       Summary of Submissions - Applicant's Response

7.       Determination Advice Notes  

 

 

Recommendation:

That Council, in accordance with the provisions of the City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2 and the Metropolitan Region Scheme, APPROVES the application to amend a development approval for Four Multiple Dwellings at No. 377 (Lot: 162; D/P: 2630) Walcott Street, Coolbinia, in accordance with the plans shown in Attachment 4 dated 30 May 2019, subject to the following condition and Advice Notes contained in Attachment 7:

1.       All conditions and advice notes detailed on the development approval 5.2018.423.1 granted on 30 April 2019 continue to apply to this approval, except as follows:

A new Condition 14 is inserted to read as follows:

14.     Prior to occupancy or use of the development, privacy screening with a minimum height of 1.6 metres above the finished floor level of the terrace shall be installed around the perimeter of the roof terrace, in accordance with the plans dated 30 May 2019.

 

Purpose of Report:

To consider an application for development approval for an amendment to the previous approval for four Multiple Dwellings at No. 377 Walcott Street, Coolbinia (subject site).

PROPOSAL:

Council at its Ordinary Council Meeting 30 April 2019, approved a development application for four Multiple Dwellings subject to conditions at the subject site. The development plans approved by Council are included as Attachment 2.

 

The current application proposes to make the following amendments to the previously approved development plans:

 

·       A communal roof terrace area has been added. This roof terrace would be universally accessible from the lift and provided with a 1.6 metre high privacy screen on all sides;

·       The lift roof height has been increased from 10.1 metres to 10.3 metres to cater for the lift head mechanical access. The proposed building height remains compliant with the 11.2 metre deemed‑to‑comply standards of the City’s Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form (Built Form Policy);

·       The setback of the lift wall to the north western lot boundary has been reduced by 0.2 metres;

·       The ground floor Unit 1 and upper floor Unit 4 kitchen wall lengths have been reduced by 0.2 metres;

·       Two windows on the north western elevation have increased in size. These windows remain obscured and fixed and would not result in any departures from visual privacy standards; and

·       One additional tree has been added to unit 1 and the proposed tree species has been changed from Bradford Pear to WA Weeping Peppermint in order to satisfy Condition 2 of the previous development approval.

 

The proposed development plans are included as Attachment 4.

Background:

Landowner:

Building Development Group Pty Ltd

Applicant:

Building Development Group Pty Ltd

Date of Application:

30 May 2019

Zoning:

MRS:    Urban/Other Regional Roads

LPS2:   Zone: Residential         R Code: R60

Built Form Area:

Transit Corridor

Existing Land Use:

Single House

Proposed Use Class:

Multiple Dwellings

Lot Area:

455m²

Right of Way (ROW):

Yes, 5.0 metres wide, drained and sealed

Heritage List:

No

 

The subject site is located at No. 377 Walcott Street, Coolbinia, as shown on the location plan included as Attachment 1. There is an existing Single House on the subject site.

 

The subject site has frontages to Walcott Street to the north-east and a right of way (ROW) to the southwest. The site is adjoining a Single House to the south-east and a Single House to the north-west. The property to the north-west has a current development approval for the construction of a two-storey Grouped Dwelling. The broader area is generally characterised by single storey Single Dwellings.

 

The subject site is zoned Residential with a density coding of R60 under the City’s Local Planning Scheme No. 2 (LPS2). The subject site and adjoining properties along Walcott Street are within the Transit Corridor built form area under the City’s Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form (Built Form Policy). Walcott Street is reserved as an Other Regional Road (ORR) under the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The subject site is affected by 1.5 metres of road widening to Walcott Street as per the Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage (DPLH) Land Requirement Plan. The subject site is also subject to the City’s requirement for 0.5 metres of ROW widening.

Details:

Summary Assessment

The previous development application was assessed against the standards of the City’s Built Form Policy and Part 6 of State Planning Policy 3.1: Residential Design Codes (R Codes). The previous development application was approved with departures to the plot ratio, lot boundary setbacks and sight line standards set our under Part 6 of State Planning Policy 3.1 Residential Design Codes.

 

On 18 February 2019, the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) released the documentation for Design WA including State Planning Policy 7.3 Residential Design Codes Volume 2 - Apartments (R Codes Volume 2 - Apartments) which replaced Part 6 of the former R Codes on 24 May 2019. Whilst the R Codes Volume 2 - Apartments did not come into effect until after the previous approval was granted on 30 April 2019, this policy was given due regard during the assessment of the previously approved plans in accordance with clause 67(b) of the deemed provisions of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.

 

Consideration of Element Objectives and Acceptable Outcomes

 

The R Codes Volume 2 – Apartments includes Element Objectives and Acceptable Outcomes for each design element. Proposals are required to demonstrate that the design achieves the Element Objectives for each design element. While addressing the Acceptable Outcomes is likely to achieve the relevant Element Objectives, they are not a deemed-to-comply pathway and the proposal is still to be assessed against the relevant Element Objectives. Where Acceptable Outcomes are not met, proposals may still satisfy the Element Objective via alternative means or solutions.

 

The Element Objectives and/or Acceptable Outcomes that are not achieved in the proposal are as follows:

 

Lot Boundary Setback

Acceptable Outcome

Proposal

R Codes Volume 2 – Clause 2.4 Side and Rear Setbacks

 

A 2.4.1 Minimum Side Setback – 3.0m

 

 

 

Previously Approved

·      Proposed roof common store/lift wall minimum setback of 3.0m to the north western lot boundary.

 

Proposed

·      Proposed roof common store/lift wall minimum setback of 2.8m to the north western lot boundary.

 

An assessment of how the proposal meets the Element Objectives of the R Codes Volume 2 – Apartments is discussed in the Comments section below.

Consultation/Advertising:

Community consultation was undertaken in accordance with the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, for a period of 14 days commencing on 09 July 2019 and concluding on 23 July 2019. The method of consultation being 11 letters mailed to all owners and occupiers immediately adjacent to the subject site (as shown in Attachment 1) and a notice on the City’s website, in accordance with the City’s Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation.

 

At the conclusion of the consultation period, a total of four submissions were received, all in objection to the proposal. The submissions received raised a number of objections relating to aspects of the development which were previously approved and are not proposed to be changed under the current application. The main objections raised in the submissions which were not addressed though the previous application relate to the following matters:

 

·       The impact of the proposed roof terrace on the amenity of the adjoining properties with regard to visual privacy and noise;

·       The visual impact of the proposed roof terrace;

·       Overdevelopment and building size;

·       Parking;

·       Landscaping; and

·       Management of the Communal Roof Terrace.

 

A summary of the submissions received and Administration’s comment is provided in Attachment 5. The applicant’s response to the summary of submissions is provided in Attachment 6.

Design Review Panel (DRP):

Referred to DRP:            No

 

The previous application was referred to the DRP prior to lodgement and referred to the DRP Chairperson after lodgement. The current application was not referred to the DRP as the proposed changes to the previously approved plans would not result in a fundamental change to the building design.

Legal/Policy:

·       Planning and Development Act 2005;

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

·       City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2;

·       State Planning Policy 7.3 – Residential Design Codes Volume 2 - Apartments;

·       Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation; and

·       Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form Policy.

 

Should Council refuse the application for development approval, the applicant would have the right to have the decision reviewed in accordance with Part 14 of the Planning and Development Act 2005.

 

State Planning Policy 7.3 Residential Design Codes Volume 2 – Apartments (R Codes Volume 2 – Apartments

 

The R Codes Volume 2 – Apartments provides comprehensive guidance for the development of multiple dwellings and mixed use development and focuses on improved design outcomes for apartments that are responsive and appropriate to the context and character of the site and locality. This is a performance based assessment and applicants are required to demonstrate that the design achieves the objectives of each design element as well as the overall objectives of the R Codes Volume 2 – Apartments.

Delegation to Determine Applications:

This matter has been referred to Council in accordance with the City’s Delegated Authority Register as the application is an amendment to a development approval that was determined by Council.

Risk Management Implications:

There are minimal risks to Council and the City’s business function when Council exercises its discretionary power to determine a planning application.

Strategic Implications:

This is in keeping with the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2018-2028:

 

Innovative and Accountable

We are open and accountable to an engaged community.

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.

Financial/Budget Implications:

Nil.

Comments:

Setback to the North Western Side Boundary

 

The previous application was approved with departures to the R Codes standards in relation to lot boundary setbacks to the north western and south eastern side boundaries. The Acceptable Outcomes of the R Codes Volume 2 – Apartments Clause 2.4 sets a minimum side setback of 3.0 metres.

 

The previous development approval plans provided a 3.0 metre minimum setback from the roof lift/lobby wall to the north western lot boundary. The current proposal would reduce the minimum setback of this wall from the north western lot boundary to 2.8 metres.

 

The proposed setbacks to the north western side boundary would be consistent with the Element Objectives of the R Codes Volume 2 – Apartments Clause 2.4 Side and Rear Setbacks and would remain acceptable for the following reasons:

 

·       The proposed change to the minimum side setback would not result in a substantive change to the overall aesthetic or appearance of the development.

·       The 2.8 metre setback of the lift/lobby wall to the north western lot boundary would still provide adequate separation between the development and the neighbouring property;

·       The development would still provide adequate articulation in the building façade through stepping in sections of the building in order to reduce the overall bulk of the development as viewed from the adjoining property to the north west and from the street;

·       The development would provide deep soil areas and canopy coverage in accordance with the City’s Built Form Policy; and

·       The proposed roof/lobby wall would be setback 1.9 metres from the north western edge of the roof and would sit centrally within the overall building envelope.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                                     20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                                     20 August 2019


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 




 


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                                     20 August 2019


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 



 


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                                     20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                                     20 August 2019

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                    20 August 2019

9.5          No. 11 (Lot: 1; D/P: 12979) Buxton Street, Mount Hawthorn - Proposed Single House

TRIM Ref:                  D19/83695

Author:                     Natasha Trefry, Urban Planning Advisor

Authoriser:                Jay Naidoo, Manager Development & Design

Ward:                        North

Attachments:             1.       Consultation and Location Map

2.       Development Plans (received 19 March 2019)

3.       Development Plans (received 10 July 2019)

4.       Development Plans (received 31 July 2019)

5.       Summary of Submissions - Administration's Response (Consultation 1)

6.       Justification from Applicant

7.       Summary of Submissions - Administrations Response (Consultation 2)

8.       Determination Advice Notes  

 

 

Recommendation:

That Council, in accordance with the provisions of the City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2 and the Metropolitan Region Scheme, APPROVES the development application for Single Dwelling at No. 11 (Lot: 1: D/P: 12979) Buxton Street, Mount Hawthorn in accordance with the plans in Attachment 4, subject to the following conditions, with the associated advice noted in Attachment 8:

1.       External Fixtures

All external fixtures, such as television antennas (of a non-standard type), radio and other antennaes, satellite dishes, solar panels, external hot water heaters, air conditioners, and the like, shall not be visible from the street(s), are designed integrally with the building, and be located so as not to be visually obtrusive;

2.       Boundary Walls

The owners of the subject land shall finish and maintain the surface of the boundary wall facing 9 Buxton Street in a good and clean condition prior to the practical completion of the development and thereafter maintained to the satisfaction of the City. The finish of the walls are to be fully rendered or facebrick to the satisfaction of the City;

3.       Landscaping Plan

3.1     A detailed landscape and reticulation plan for the development site and adjoining road verge, to the satisfaction of the City, shall be lodged with and approved by the City prior to lodgement of a Building Permit. The plan shall be drawn to a scale of 1:100 and show the following:

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

·       Areas to be irrigated or reticulated;

·       The provision of a minimum of 15 percent deep soil area and 30 percent canopy, as defined by the City’s Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form; and

·       The provision of trees contributing towards canopy coverage within deep soil areas provided and within the front setback area. The tree species are to be in accordance with the City’s recommended tree species list;

3.2     All works shown in the plans as identified in Condition 3.1 above shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved plans to the City’s satisfaction, prior to occupancy or use of the development and maintained thereafter to the satisfaction of the City at the expense of the owners/occupiers;

4.       Visual Privacy

Prior to occupancy or use of the development, all privacy screening to the balcony shall be visually impermeable and is to comply in all respects with the requirements of Clause 5.4.1 of the Residential Design Codes (Visual Privacy) deemed-to-comply provisions, to the satisfaction of the City;

5.       Sight Lines

No walls, letterboxes or fences above 0.75 metres in height to be constructed within the 1.5 metre of where:

5.1     walls, letterboxes or fences adjoin vehicular access points to the site; or

5.2     a driveway meets a public street; or

5.3     two streets intersect; unless otherwise approved by the City of Vincent;

6.       Stormwater

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

7.       Right of Way (ROW) Widening

7.1     The landowner shall remove any landscaping, development or other works and shall seal, drain and grade to match the existing right of way the area within 0.5 metres of the northern boundary of the lot, within 0.5 metres of the western boundary of the lot and the 2.0 metre by 2.0 metre truncation area between the northern and western areas at the time these portions of land are ceded to the City. Any costs associated with the above are the responsibility of the owner/applicant; and

7.2     The 0.5 metre setback to the northern ROW, 0.5 metre setback to the western ROW and 2.0 metre by 2.0 metre truncation setback between the northern and western ROW setback areas referred to in condition 7.1 above, shall be ceded free of cost to the City on subdivision or amalgamation of the land, including Built Strata subdivision;

8.       Outbuildings

The retained outbuilding shall only be used for domestic purposes, associated with the property and not for human habitation;

9.       Crossovers

Prior to the first occupation of the development, redundant or “blind” crossovers shall be removed and the verge and kerb made good to the satisfaction of the City’s Engineering Directorate, at the applicant/owner(s) full expense; and

10.     Colours and Materials Schedule

Prior to the commencement of development a detailed schedule of external finishes (including materials and colour schemes and details) shall be submitted to and approved by the City. The development shall be finished in accordance with the approved schedule prior to the use or occupation of the development.

 


 

Purpose of Report:

To consider an application for development approval for a single house at No. 11 Buxton Street, Mount Hawthorn (subject site).

PROPOSAL:

The application proposes a two storey single house which addresses Buxton Street.

Background:

Landowner:

Louise Black

Applicant:

Design Better Buildings

Date of Application:

19 March 2019

Zoning:

MRS:    Urban

LPS2:   Residential         R Code: Residential R30

Built Form Area:

Residential

Existing Land Use:

Vacant lot (with existing outbuilding)

Proposed Use Class:

Dwelling (single)

Lot Area:

637m²

Right of Way (ROW):

North: 5.03 metre width

West: 5.03 metre width

Heritage List:

N/A

 

The subject site is bound by Buxton Street to the east, a two storey dwelling under construction to the south, and ROW’s to the north and west. A location plan is included as Attachment 1.

 

The surrounding residential developments to Buxton Street and the adjacent ROW are single-storey and two storey single houses. In January 2019, a demolition permit was issued for the subject site with the demolition works undertaken April 2019. The site is now vacant and cleared, aside from an existing outbuilding, located in the south west corner of the site that has been retained and does not form part of the current application. The site is zoned Residential with a density coding of R30. This means that the site has the potential to be subdivided in future.

 

A Character Retention Area nomination has been received for the portion of Buxton Street from Anzac Road to Britannia Road, which includes the subject site. Buxton Street forms part of a broader Mount Hawthorn character retention area (inclusive of portions of The Boulevarde, Kalgoorlie Street and Buxton Street) and was referred to Council at its 30 April 2019 Ordinary Meeting to present the potential area. Administration is engaging with the community to understand the streetscape issues and working collaboratively with the community to discuss potential solutions.

 

The development plans for the proposed dwelling have been included as Attachment 4.

Details:

Summary Assessment

The table below summarises the planning assessment of the proposal against the provisions of the City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2 (LPS2), the City’s Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form and the State Government’s Residential Design Codes Volume 1 (R Codes). In each instance where the proposal requires the discretion of Council, the relevant planning element is discussed in the Detailed Assessment section following from this table.

 


 

Planning Element

Use Permissibility/ Deemed-to-Comply

Requires the Discretion of Council

Street Setback

 

ü

Front Fence

ü

 

Building Setbacks/Boundary Wall

 

ü

Building Height/Storeys

 

ü

Open Space

ü

 

Outdoor Living Areas

ü

 

Landscaping

ü

 

Privacy

ü

 

Parking & Access

 

ü

Solar Access

ü

 

Site Works/Retaining Walls

ü

 

Essential Facilities

ü

 

External Fixtures

ü

 

Surveillance

ü

 

Outbuildings

ü

 

Detailed Assessment

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

 

Street Setback

Deemed-to-Comply Standard

Proposal

Clause 5.2 of Built Form Policy

 

Average street setback: 7.3 metres

 

 

Ground Floor:

5.2 metres to master suite

 

Upper Floor:

5.5 metres to Balcony

6.3 metres to Bed 2

Building Setbacks/Boundary Wall

Deemed-to-Comply Standard

Proposal

Clause 5.1.3 of the R Codes

 

Average height: 3.0 metres

 

 

Average height: 3.15 metres

Building Height

Deemed-to-Comply Standard

Proposal

Clause 5.6 of Built Form Policy

 

Wall height: 6.0 metres

 

 

Wall height: 6.07 metres

Parking and Access

Deemed-to-Comply Standard

Proposal

Clause 5.3.5 of the R Codes

 

Access to on-site car parking spaces to be provided

where available from a right of way available for lawful use to access the relevant lot and which is adequately paved and drained from the property boundary to a constructed street.

 

 

Vehicle access to primary street (Buxton Street)

 

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


 

Consultation/Advertising:

Community Consultation was undertaken in accordance with the Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015, for a period of 14 days commencing on 9 May to 23 May 2019. Community consultation was undertaken by means of written notifications being sent to surrounding landowners, as shown in Attachment 1 and a notice on the City’s website.

 

At the conclusion of the community consultation period, 10 submissions were received, nine of which objected to the proposal and one which was in support. The issues raised as part of the consultation relate to the following:

 

·       Proposed street setback does not preserve or enhance the existing streetscape;

·       Two storey scale of the development is exacerbated by the variations to building height;

·       Perceived overshadowing to adjacent properties and solar panels;

·       Bulk and scale of the development when viewed from the street;

·       Visual privacy from the balcony to neighbouring properties and the street; and

·       Development not being consistent with Character Retention Area nomination for this portion of Buxton Street.

 

The plans that were advertised are included as Attachment 1. A summary of the submissions and Administration’s comments on each issue is included as Attachment 5, with the applicant’s response to the submissions included in justification as Attachment 6.

 

The applicant made changes to the proposal following the advertising period. These changes included:

 

·       Increasing the setback of the upper floor from 5.0 metres to a 5.5 metre balcony setback, 6.2 metres setback to Bed 2 and 6.7 metres for the remainder of the upper floor;

·       Articulating the ground and upper floors. The original plans proposed the ground and upper floors of the dwelling to the same 5.0 metre setback. The ground and upper floors of the proposal were articulated to create a stepped approach;

·       Revising window size and design on the upper floor to the front façade to improve interaction with the street;

·       Incorporating additional mix of colours and materials including contrasting render colours and facebrick detail to the façade; and

·       Revising the roof form from a skillion to pitched roof.

 

A copy of these amended plans are included within Attachment 3 and justification from the applicant in regards to the street setback proposed is included as Attachment 6.

 

The amended plans were advertised to properties that has previously provided submissions and adjacent properties that require consultation under the City’s Policy No. 4.1.5 - Community Consultation. This consultation period was for a period of seven days, commencing on 18 July 2019 to 25 July 2019. Seven submissions were received for the revised proposal including four in objection, one with concerns and two in support. The issues raised during this consultation period related to the following:

 

·       Proposed street setback does not preserve or enhance the existing streetscape;

·       Vehicle safety from the subject lot to the street;

·       Colours and materials of the dwelling; and

·       Surveillance and interaction of the dwelling with the street and neighbouring properties.

 

A summary of the submissions and Administration’s comments for the second round of community consultation is included as Attachment 7.

Design Review Panel (DRP):

Referred to DRP:            Yes

 


 

The application was referred to the City’s DRP Chair for comments following the conclusion of the first round of advertising of the proposal. Comments were sought from the DRP Chair with respect to the appropriateness of the proposed built form outcome in the streetscape context and any opportunities for the applicant to improve the design of the dwelling from this regard. Administration sought written comments from the DRP Chair and also facilitated a meeting with the DRP Chair and the applicant present.

 

The DRP Chair noted the following comments in regards to the proposal:

 

·       The skillion roof design element of the original proposal is removed and replaced with a pitched roof. Together with the detailing of the facades, the windows, roof, colour of walls, the dwelling appears to reflect that of No. 14 Buxton Street and adjacent properties;

·       Increase the vertical and horizontal articulation of the dwelling as a whole to reduce mass and scale;

·       Introduce mixed materials to the front facade which reflect the streetscape;

·       Increase the setback of the upper floor to provide perceived single storey element and scale to dwelling; and

·       The balcony over the garage provides a level of visual relief to the setback.

 

Amended plans were prepared and submitted to the City in response to the DRP Chair comments. A copy of these amended plans are included as Attachment 3. These plans and modifications were then referred back to the DRP Chair for further consideration. The DRP Chair provided the following comments in respect to the revised plans:

 

·       The majority of the upper level floor plate has been recessed by 1.5 metres from the ground level floor plate, providing a 6.7 metre setback from the front boundary (the ground level remains at 5.2 metres setback from the front boundary);

·       The applicant has also articulated the roof scape, producing a stepping effect away from the street. The more traditional articulation of the roofs is in line with many of the older properties within the surrounding area;

·       These two modifications to the upper floor plan and the roof have broken down the mass and scale;

·       The vernacular architectural expression would not have a detrimental impact on the streetscape;

·       The current colour pallet is uncoordinated. The brick wall facing the street should either be increased in area to extend to the entry of the portico, or the applicant could render and paint this section of the building as per the main walls – with only the entry highlighted in a different colour;

·       The colour palette of the development is neutral which aids in consistency with the streetscape. Colours and materials to the side and rear of the building are best left neutral; and

·       In relation to the rear of the building, the upper level is well setback and the lower roof assists with breaking down the mass. What could assist is to make the roof eave overhang the upper level rear wall to soften the rear elevation.

 

In response to the comments from the DRP Chair, the applicant provided amended plans to address the recommendations regarding colours and materials, and the rear elevation of the proposal. The changes include:

 

·       Incorporating highlight windows to the rear of the upper floor;

·       Extending the eaves on the upper floor to the rear; and

·       Facebrick finish to the porch.

 

A copy of these amended plans are included as Attachment 4. This is the development proposal the applicant is seeking approval for.

Legal/Policy:

·       Planning and Development Act 2005;

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

·       City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2;

·       State Planning Policy 7.3 – Residential Design Codes Volume 1;

·       Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation;

·       Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form Policy; and

·       Policy No. 7.5.15 – Character Retention and Heritage Areas.


 

Delegation to Determine Applications:

The matter is being referred to Council as the application received more than five objections during community consultation.

Risk Management Implications:

There are minimal risks to Council and the City’s business function when Council exercises its discretionary power to determine a planning application.

Strategic Implications:

o      This is in keeping with the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2018-2028:

 

Innovative and Accountable

We are open and accountable to an engaged community.

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.

Financial/Budget Implications:

Nil.

Comments:

Street Setback

 

The development proposes a street setback of 5.2 metres to 6.0 metre articulated setback on the ground floor and 5.5 metre to 6.7 metre setback on the upper floor, in lieu of the deemed-to-comply requirement of 7.3 metres. The application was advertised with a 7.92 metre average street setback requirement, this included an additional property in the averaging calculation and was done in error. The correct average street setback requirement of 7.3 metres was confirmed after the conclusion of the first advertising period and was specified in the advertising material for the second community consultation.

 

The City received submissions which raised concerns with the street setback of the development during community consultation regarding preservation of the streetscape, and the dominance of the development at a reduced street setback and interaction of the dwelling with the street.

 

The applicant’s justification for the street setback is summarised as follows:

 

·       Street setback of dwelling has been increased to reflect that of the directly adjacent properties;

·       The lot is capable of subdivision and the large area of open space to the rear of the property provides sufficient areas for outdoor recreation;

·       The current front setback area reduces the extent of lawn and garden to assist in water conservation; and

·       The articulation and use of contrasting materials enhance the streetscape.

 

The proposed setback satisfies the relevant design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes and Built Form Policy, and is acceptable for the following reasons:

 

·       The development is well articulated by way of the following:

o   The site is located within the Residential built form area under the Built Form Policy and permits two storey building heights. The dwelling provides vertical separation with the upper floor being setback behind the ground floor. The dwelling also provides horizontal articulation with varied setbacks of the dwelling along the ground floor and upper floor. This reduces the mass and scale of the development as it presents to the street;


 

o   The dwelling incorporates a stepped approach in order to provide depth. This includes major openings to reduce blank and solid walls, minor projections from the porch and balcony, eaves and ancillary roof forms. This provides additional design elements to ameliorate the impacts of building bulk;

o   The proposal incorporates multiple major openings to the upper floor of the dwelling from the balcony/sitting room, bed 2, bed 3 and bed 4. The balcony, which projects over the garage on the ground floor and that extends for the majority of the garage door width, assists to reduce the appearance and dominance of the garage as viewed from the street. The balcony projection also provides a greater level of passive street surveillance which consequently allows for a greater level of street interaction; and

o   The dwelling includes varying materials, finishes and colours, such as render, red brick and white window trim details. This provides visual breaks and clearly distinguishes one part of the dwelling from another. The positioning of windows and balconies on the ground and upper floor of the dwelling also ensures that areas of the building façade that present as blank solid walls are minimised. These design approaches create visual interest and further assist to reduce the impact of building bulk of the development on the streetscape;

·       The proposal incorporates a range of materials and finishes including elements of render, red brick and white window trim details. The City’s Built Form Policy does not provide prescriptive guidelines in regards to roof and wall colours of dwellings in Residential built form areas. The streetscape is variable, the proposed grey render finish, white colorbond pitch roof and red brick accents are building characteristics that are common in the immediate locality and have been reinterpreted in the development. The dwelling incorporates features, colours and materials found in the streetscape in order to contribute a contemporary two-storey development that maintains and enhances the visual elements of the street. This results in a two storey scale development that is not a dominant built form outcome in this portion of Buxton Street, acknowledging that two storey dwellings are permitted within the locality. The design is sympathetic to and compatible with the area, and preserves and enhances the visual character of the existing streetscape and broader locality;

·       The proposal is compliant with the landscaping requirements of the Built Form Policy and incorporates deep soil and canopy within the front setback area, which includes an Olive Tree and Chinese Tallow tree, in addition to the existing street tree (Jacaranda tree). The provision of landscaping within the front setback area provides some screening to the development as well as ameliorates the bulk and scale of the development as viewed from the street. This landscaping would soften the appearance of the dwelling and would contribute to the amenity of the street;

·       The portion of Buxton Street that this proposal sits within contains a mix of dwelling styles that have been constructed at different periods of time. The proposed dwelling and street setback are appropriate and consistent with the adjacent properties given the stepped nature of the dwelling, pitched roof form, upper floor setbacks and incorporation of landscaping within the front setback area. The streetscape character of Buxton Street is further detailed under the ‘Character Retention Area Nomination’ section below;

·       Neighbouring properties within the Buxton Street streetscape incorporate structures within the street setback area including street walls and fences, and carports. The proposed dwelling does not propose these structures within the street setback which facilitates an open street setback area with landscaping; and

·       The revised development plans submitted by the applicant incorporates the DRP Chair’s comments to reduce the massing and bulk of the dwelling, and to incorporate materials that are characteristics of the Buxton Street established streetscape.

 

Lot Boundary Setbacks (Lot Boundary Walls)

 

The average height of the southern lot boundary wall to the garage is proposed at 3.15 metres in lieu of the deemed-to-comply 3.0 metre average.

 

The City received submissions raising concerns with the southern lot boundary wall to the garage, in regards to the visibility and impact of the boundary wall to the streetscape and the wall appearing unattractive to the street.

 


 

The applicant’s justification for the lot boundary wall is summarised below:

 

·       The scale of the lot boundary wall has been reduced from that initially proposed. The maximum wall height has been reduced from 3.7 metres to 3.3 metres, while the average wall height is also reduced from 3.5 metres to 3.15 metres.

·       The boundary wall only seeks a variation due to the natural slope of the site which is at its lowest on the southern boundary, where the garage boundary wall is located.

 

The lot boundary wall satisfies the relevant design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes and Built Form Policy, and is acceptable for the following reasons:

 

·       The proposed wall meets the deemed-to-comply requirements for the length of the wall. The length of wall proposed is 6.9 metres in lieu of the permitted 17.7 metres. This assists with reducing the scale and impact of the boundary wall as viewed from the adjacent property and street;

·       The garage wall abutting the neighbouring southern property is to an area of open space and an access leg to the rear and side boundaries of the site; and

·       The proposed wall is located on the southern boundary and does not compromise access to direct sunlight for the subject dwelling and does not adversely impact adjoining properties with respect to overshadowing as the deemed-to-comply solar access requirement is met.

 

Building Height

 

The wall height of the dwelling to the south-eastern portion is proposed to 6.07 metres in lieu of the 6.0 metre deemed-to-comply requirement.

 

Concerns were raised in submissions regarding the height of the building, including its consistency with the existing streetscape in terms of scale and roof form, concerns over access to light and ventilation for adjacent properties, as well as the impact of the second storey element to the streetscape. The application was submitted with departures to deemed-to-comply requirements of both wall height and roof height of the dwelling. The applicant has since revised the proposal to meet the roof height deemed-to-comply requirements and reduce the wall height.

 

The applicant’s justification for the building height is summarised below.

 

·       The initial building height was noted against the levels of the street boundary. The revised levels of the site reduce the building height scale and impacts;

·       Building bulk has been greatly reduced with the skillion roof replaced with a pitched roof; and

·       Variations to building height for the remainder of the dwelling have been eliminated in revised plans for the proposal.

 

The proposed building height satisfies the relevant design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes and Built Form Policy, and is acceptable for the following reasons:

 

·       The 0.07 metre departure to the deemed-to-comply requirement applies only to a portion of the development, being the south-east of the front façade. This is as a result of the natural slope of the site, with the natural ground level of the site sloping down from approximately 11.5 at the north-western portion of the proposed building to 10.5 at the south-eastern portion of the proposed building. The remainder of the dwelling meets the deemed-to-comply building height requirements and does not result in height departures across the site;

·       The proposal satisfies the deemed-to-comply requirements for roof height of the dwelling;

·       The southern boundary of the dwelling is articulated and stepped from the boundary to mitigate bulk and scale to adjacent properties and the streetscape;

·       The dwelling meets the visual privacy and solar access deemed-to-comply requirements;

·       The wall height of the dwelling is in response to the site level affecting the south-eastern portion of the lot. Limited fill is proposed and the site works deemed-to-comply requirements are satisfied; and

·       The dwelling is located within a two-storey built form area and the proposed dwelling is consistent with this permitted built form outcome.

 


 

Parking and Access

 

The application proposes vehicle access from the primary street, Buxton Street, in lieu of from the right of way. The proposed vehicle access to the site satisfies the relevant design principles of the R Codes and is acceptable for the following reasons:

 

·       The vehicle access to the site is the same location as the previous dwelling on the lot.

·       The proposed access point from Buxton Street would not be out of character with the existing streetscape which includes a number of garages and carports such as those at No. 9 Buxton Street and No. 14 Buxton Street to the south and east of the subject site. These garages are setback 6.0 metres and 6.1 metres from the lot boundary respectively, consistent with the 6.0 metres that is proposed in the subject application. It is also noted carports are located within the front setback of lots in the locality. This includes No. 7 Buxton Street, a double carport which is setback approximately 1.5 metres from the street boundary;

·       Buxton Street is identified as an ‘access road’ which is the lowest category road under the Main Roads road hierarchy. The R Codes permit vehicle access from access roads and the proposed vehicle access for the subject development would not result in an unsafe access arrangement for ingress and egress from the site;

·       The vehicle access ensures pedestrian and vehicle access safety, as the proposal meets the deemed-to-comply requirements in regards to sight lines, with no structures greater than 0.75 metres located within the 1.5 metre truncation area;

·       The 5.0 metre driveway width at the lot boundary is less than the 6 metre width allowable under the deemed-to-comply requirements of the R Codes. The design of the driveway reduces the width of access points on the streetscape. The reduced driveway width also allows for additional landscaping within the front setback area, consequently reducing the hardstand areas;

·       The tapered driveway to the southern boundary provides a 0.6 metre to 0.8 metre side boundary setback to meet the deemed-to-comply requirements of the R Codes and assist in the reduction of vehicle access points; and

·       The proposed vehicle access width allows for the provision of deep soil areas and trees that would contribute to mature canopy coverage within the street setback area. This would contribute positively to the streetscape and reduce the impact of vehicle access points.

 

Landscaping

 

In addition to the deemed-to-comply standards of the R Codes, the application has also been assessed against the landscaping provisions of the Built Form Policy that sets out additional deemed-to-comply standards. The deemed-to-comply landscaping standards set out in the Built Form Policy have not yet been approved by the WAPC and as such, these provisions are given due regard in the assessment of the application.

 

The Built Form Policy requires 15 percent of the site to be provided as deep soil zone and 30 percent of the site provided as canopy coverage at maturity. The application proposes 15.9 percent deep soil zone and 31.3 percent canopy coverage at maturity. In relation to landscaping:

 

·       The application proposes trees within the rear setback area abutting the northern lot boundary which would soften the appearance of the development from the adjoining property;

·       The application proposes two trees with large canopy coverage – Chinese Tallow and Olive Tree within the street setback area, which would soften the appearance of the development from the street;

·       The proposal retains the existing mature Jacaranda tree in the verge area abutting the proposed development. The retained tree contributes to canopy cover in the area;

·       The proposed landscaping includes portions of canopy which extend outside of the lot boundaries, contributing to the provision of landscaping within the broader area;

·       The proposed landscaping would provide increased amenity for the future occupants of the site and the surrounding area;

·       The application proposes ground cover landscaping along the street boundaries in conjunction with the mature canopy coverage within the street setback areas; and

·       The proposed landscaping does not negatively impact the use and activation of the ROW as would not impede surveillance between the subject dwelling, Buxton Street and the abutting ROW's.

 


 

ROW Widening

 

The subject site is bordered by ROW’s to the northern and western boundaries of the lot. Both ROW’s are 5.03 metres in width and are in the ownership of the City.

 

The 6.0 metre ROW width standard included in the Western Australian Planning Commission’s (WAPC) Planning Bulletin 33 (PB33) would require a widening of 0.5 metres to be provided along the northern and western boundaries of the lot. The widening does not impact on any active open space and can be accommodated within the currently proposed development. PB33 notes widening is to facilitate sufficient vehicle manoeuvring of 6.0 metres for vehicles to enter and exit a lot.

 

The applicant is aware of the need for ROW widening in the future should the lot be subdivided. At this time, the City would review the proposed subdivision and seek to cede the 0.5 metre ROW widening portions to the western and northern boundaries of the subject lot.

 

Character Retention Area Nomination

 

The City has received a Character Retention Area nomination for the portion of Buxton Street from Anzac Road to Britannia Road, Mount Hawthorn. This area includes a total of 13 dwellings. The nomination has been amalgamated with other precincts within the Mount Hawthorn area to provide a collective of character retention precincts. While the Character Retention nomination has not been presented to Council, Administration has given due regard to the objectives of Policy No. 7.5.15 – Character Retention and Heritage Areas (Character Retention Policy) in the assessment of the subject proposal.

 

The Character Retention Policy notes that the characteristics of streetscapes can encompass, but are not limited to “architectural style, built form, building materials, front fencing and vegetation and includes the non-physical elements including front setback distances, the spacing of dwellings (side setbacks), and how these elements relate to the area”.

 

The application is consistent with the objectives of the Character Retention Policy in terms of the dwelling’s built form, presentation to the street and the impact of development on the neighbouring properties. The applicant has amended the design of the proposal to reflect the identifiable and key streetscape character of Buxton Street. The changes undertaken include:

 

Roof Form

 

·       The proposal has been amended from a skillion roof to a pitched roof. The roof form of the dwelling is consistent with not only the adjacent properties but the streetscape as a whole; and

·       All dwellings within the established Buxton Street streetscape have pitched roof forms, and the pitch roof form of the subject property provides a level of consistency and continuity which aids in the preservation and enhancement of the streetscape.

 

Colours and Materials

 

The dwelling incorporates a mix of materials which are characteristic of and are consistent with the established Buxton Street streetscape. The dwelling incorporates red brick as well as grey and white render detailing. These materials are consistent with the older dwellings, more recent developments, as well as alterations and additions such as street walls and fences which have been undertaken to adjacent dwellings.

 

Building Bulk and Scale

 

·       The application has set back the upper floor of the dwelling to create a stepped approach which creates depth and separation of the upper floor from the ground floor. Vertical and horizontal separation of the ground and upper floors of the dwelling through the incorporation of major openings to reduce blank and solid walls, minor projections from the porch and balcony, eaves and ancillary roof forms, reduces the mass and scale of the development as it presents to the street. In addition, the dwelling incorporates varying materials, finishes and colours, such as render, red brick and white window trim details to create visual interest and further assist to reduce the impact of building bulk and scale of the development on the streetscape; and

·       The minor projection of the balcony over the garage on the ground floor extends for the majority of the garage door width, which assists in the reduction of garage dominance as viewed from the street. The balcony projection also provides a greater level of passive street surveillance which consequently allows for a greater level of street interaction.


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                                     20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019


 


 


 


 


 


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019


 


 


 


 



Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019


 


 


 


 



Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                                     20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                                     20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                    20 August 2019

9.6          No. 48 (Lot: 202; D/P: 413236) Egina Street, Mount Hawthorn - Proposed Single House

TRIM Ref:                  D19/101127

Author:                     Clair Morrison, Urban Planner

Authoriser:                Jay Naidoo, Manager Development & Design

Ward:                        North

Attachments:             1.       Consultation and Location Map

2.       Development Plans

3.       Summary of Submissions - Administration's Response

4.       Determination Advice Notes  

 

 

Recommendation:

That Council, in accordance with the provisions of the City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2 and the Metropolitan Region Scheme, APPROVES the application for the proposed Single House at No. 48 (Lot: 202; D/P: 413236) Egina Street, Mount Hawthorn, in accordance with the plans in Attachment 2, subject to the following conditions, with the associated determination advice notes in Attachment 4:

1.       Simultaneous Construction

1.1     The owners must enter into a legal agreement with the City of Vincent drafted by the City’s solicitors at the expense of the owners which is to:

1.1.1  Require the owners to construct and complete the Single House simultaneously with the Single House approved on 20 August 2019 for the adjoining lot at No. 48A Egina Street, Mount Hawthorn;

1.1.2  Provide that the Single House must not be occupied until the Single House at No. 48A Egina Street, Mount Hawthorn is completed; and

1.1.3  Entitle the City to lodge an absolute caveat against the certificate of title for No. 48 Egina Street, Mount Hawthorn preventing its disposal until the person to whom it is disposed enters into an agreement with the City to abide by the agreement with the owners;

1.2     Works relating to the single house must not be commenced until the agreement in condition 1.1 has been executed by the owners and the City; and

1.3     The owners must abide by the terms of the agreement referred to in condition 1.1;

2.       Boundary Walls

The owners of the subject land shall finish and maintain the surface of the boundary (parapet) walls facing No. 46 Egina Street in a good and clean condition prior to occupation or use of the development. The finish of the walls is to be fully rendered or face brickwork to the satisfaction of the City;

3.       External Fixtures

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

 

4.       Stormwater

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

5.       Landscaping

5.1     A detailed landscape and reticulation plan for the development site and adjoining road verge to the City’s satisfaction is be lodged with and approved by the City prior to commencement of the development. The plan shall be drawn to a scale of 1:100 and show the following:

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

·       Areas to be irrigated or reticulated; and

·       A canopy cover of at least 21.8 percent;

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

6.       Schedule of External Finishes

Prior to commencement of development a detailed schedule of external finishes (including materials and colour schemes and details) shall be submitted to and approved by the City. The development shall be finished in accordance with the approved schedule prior to the use or occupation of the development.

 

Purpose of Report:

To consider an application for development approval for a two-storey Single House at No. 48 Egina Street, Mount Hawthorn (the subject site).

PROPOSAL:

The application proposes the construction of a two-storey Single House at the subject site.

Background:

Landowner:

Colin Roe and Corinne Roe

Applicant:

Urbanista Town Planning

Date of Application:

17 May 2019

Zoning:

MRS:    Urban

LPS2:   Zone: Residential         R Code: R30

Built Form Area:

Residential

Existing Land Use:

Vacant

Proposed Use Class:

Single House

Lot Area:

306m2

Right of Way (ROW):

No

Heritage List:

No

 

The subject site is bound by Egina Street to the west, Single Houses to the south and east, and a vacant green title lot to the north (No. 48A Egina Street), as shown on the location plan included as Attachment 1. Egina Street and the broader area surrounding the subject site is characterised by one and two-storey Single Houses.

 


 

The subject site is currently a vacant lot that has been cleared in preparation for development. The subject site is one of two green title lots created as a result of subdivision approval issued by the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) on 28 February 2017. The City issued a clearance for the subdivision approval on 24 July 2018. The City was notified on 29 January 2019 that the Deposited Plan and Certificate of Title had been issued by Landgate.

 

Previous Development Application

 

At its Ordinary Meeting on 16 October 2018, Council considered a development application for two Grouped Dwellings at the parent lot of the subject site, No. 48 (Lot: 5; D/P: 14389) Egina Street. Council resolved to refuse the application for the following reasons:

 

1.       The development does not satisfy the design principles of Clause 5.1.2 (Street Setback) of the Residential Design Codes or Clause P5.2.1 of the Built Form Policy, as the setback to the primary street is not consistent with, and will have a detrimental impact on, the established streetscape.

 

2.       The development does not satisfy the design principles of Clause 5.2.1 (Setback of garages and carports) of the Residential Design Codes or Clause P5.7.2 of the Built Form Policy, as the visual dominance of the proposed garages compromise the character and the existing streetscape.

 

The applicant sought a review of this decision by the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) on 26 October 2018. Pursuant to Section 31 of the State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004, the SAT invited the Council to reconsider its decision. Prior to the application for reconsideration being presented to Council, Administration was provided with a copy of the Deposited Plan and Certificate of Title for the subdivided lots (No. 48A (Lot 201) Egina Street and No. 48 (Lot 202) Egina Street) by the applicant on 29 January 2019. As a result, the application presented to Council for reconsideration was for two Single Houses, rather than two Grouped Dwellings. Council reconsidered amended plans at its Ordinary Meeting on 5 February 2019 where it resolved to refuse the application for the following reasons:

 

1.       As a consequence of the bulk, scale and dominating appearance of the proposed garages of the single houses, the proposed development:

 

(a)      is not compatible with the established residential area in which it is located and is, therefore, inconsistent with an objective of the Residential zone under the Scheme;

(b)      is not compatible with its setting (clause 67(m) of the deemed provisions in schedule 2 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015); and

(c)      would have an adverse impact on the amenity of the locality (clause 67(n) of the deemed provisions).

 

2.       Contrary to an objective of the Residential zone under the Scheme, the design of the proposed development is contrary to sustainability principles because:

 

(a)      the landscaping design would restrict solar access and ventilation to private open space areas of the single houses; and

(b)      the building design, including a two storey boundary wall, would restrict solar access and ventilation to No. 48 Egina Street, Mount Hawthorn.

 

3.       The matters referred to in paragraphs 2(a) and (b) would have an adverse impact on the amenity of the occupants of the proposed development.

 

4.       Adequate landscaping on-site has not been provided to reduce the impact of the proposed development on adjoining properties and the streetscape (clause 67(p) of the deemed provisions).

 

Following Council’s decision, the SAT dismissed the applicant’s application for review. This was on the basis that Landgate had issued the Deposited Plan and Certificate of Title for the two green title lots at No. 48A (Lot 201) Egina Street and No. 48 (Lot 202) Egina Street. SAT determined that this meant that Lot 5 (being the parent lot) no longer existed and a decision could not be made on the development application.

 


 

Current Development

 

Following the dismissal of the SAT review, the applicant submitted two separate development applications for Single Houses at the subject site and at No. 48A Egina Street, Mount Hawthorn. The plans that form the subject development application for a Single House do not vary from those determined by Council at its Ordinary Meeting of Council held 5 February 2019 and are contained in Attachment 2.

 

The development application for a Single House on No. 48A Egina Street is also on this Ordinary Meeting agenda for Council’s consideration and determination. Administration has assessed each application independently from one another.

Details:

Summary Assessment

The table below summarises the planning assessment of the proposal against the provisions of the City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2 (LPS2), the City’s Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form (Built Form Policy) and the State Government’s Residential Design Codes (R Codes – Volume 1).  In each instance where the proposal requires the discretion of Council, the relevant planning element is discussed in the Detailed Assessment section following from this table.

 

Planning Element

Use Permissibility/ Deemed-to-Comply

Requires the Discretion of Council

Land Use

ü

 

Street Setback

ü

 

Building Setbacks/Boundary Wall

 

ü

Building Height/Storeys

ü

 

Open Space

ü

 

Outdoor Living Areas

ü

 

Landscaping (R Codes)

ü

 

Privacy

ü

 

Parking & Access

ü

 

Bicycle Facilities

ü

 

Solar Access

ü

 

Site Works/Retaining Walls

ü

 

Essential Facilities

ü

 

External Fixtures

ü

 

Surveillance

ü

 

Detailed Assessment

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

 

Lot Boundary Walls

Deemed-to-Comply Standard

Proposal

Built Form Policy Clause 5.3 Lot Boundary Setbacks

 

Where the wall abuts an existing or simultaneously constructed wall of a similar of greater dimensions; or

 

Boundary walls to a maximum height of 3.5 metres and average height of 3 metres for up to two-thirds of the lot boundary behind the front setback.

 

 

 

Northern Lot Boundary Wall

Average Height – 4.75 metres

Maximum Height – 6.0 metres

 

No existing boundary wall on adjoining site and no boundary wall proposed to be simultaneously constructed as part of this application.

 

The above element of the proposal does not meet the specified deemed-to-comply standards and is discussed in the Comments section below.

Consultation/Advertising:

Community consultation was undertaken in accordance with the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 (Regulations 2015), for a period of 14 days commencing on 10 June 2019 and concluding on 25 June 2019. Community consultation was undertaken by means of written notification being sent to surrounding landowners, as shown in Attachment 1 and a notice on the City’s website.

 

In response to community consultation, eight submissions were received, all objecting to the proposed development. Concerns raised during the community consultation period relating the proposed Single House are as follows:

 

·       The bulky nature of the development as a result of the lot boundary wall height and landscaping;

·       The proposal does not reflect the established streetscape and characteristics of Egina Street;

·       The proposed double garage is not subservient to the dwelling and dominate the street façade and are not a favourable outcome for the street;

·       The cumulative impact of bulk, height, scale and appearance of the proposal is not compatible with the surrounding houses and is not compatible with its setting;

·       The proposed balcony is not set back far enough and increases the visual bulk of the dwelling by bringing floor space out towards the street, and does not reflect the existing streetscape characteristics;

·       The proposal is not consistent with maintaining the character of Mount Hawthorn; and

·       There is inadequate landscaping which does not reflect the existing character of the street nor create a sense of open space between buildings.

 

A summary of the submissions received and Administration’s response is included as Attachment 3. The applicant has not provided any response to the summary of submissions.

Design Review Panel (DRP):

Referred to DRP:            No.

Legal/Policy:

·       Planning and Development Act 2005;

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

·       City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2;

·       State Planning Policy 7.3 – Residential Design Codes Volume 1;

·       Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation; and

·       Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form Policy.

 

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

 

The deemed-to-comply landscaping standards set out in the Built Form Policy have not been approved by the WAPC. The WAPC has issued approval for a modified set of deemed-to-comply landscaping standards that are similar to those set out in Residential Design Codes Volume 2 – Apartments (R Codes Volume 2 – Apartments) but which have not been approved by Council. As a result, the assessment would only have ‘due regard’ to those deemed-to-comply standards relating to landscaping approved by Council in the Built Form Policy.

Delegation to Determine Applications:

This application is being presented to Council as it received more than five objections during community consultation.


 

Risk Management Implications:

There are minimal risks to Council and the City’s business function when Council exercises its discretionary power to determine a planning application.

Strategic Implications:

This is in keeping with the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2018-2028:

 

Innovative and Accountable

We are open and accountable to an engaged community.

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.

Financial/Budget Implications:

Nil.

Comments:

Simultaneous Construction of Dwellings

 

The proposed Single House presents the same built form as the southern dwelling in the previously refused development application for two Single Houses at No. 48 (Lot: 5; D/P: 14389) Egina Street, Mount Hawthorn. Administration previously supported the proposed lot boundary walls as the dwellings formed part of one application, and Administration contemplated the simultaneous construction of the dwellings and lot boundary walls via a planning condition of approval. This was to ensure compliance with the deemed-to-comply standards of the R Codes Volume 1 relating to lot boundary walls.

 

The proposed two-storey northern lot boundary wall constructed independently would fail to meet the relevant design principles relating to lot boundary walls and would adversely impact the adjoining neighbour (No. 48A Egina Street) and the streetscape.

 

The applicant has provided confirmation that the landowners intend to simultaneously construct the proposed Single House with the dwelling proposed on the adjoining property No. 48A Egina Street if approved. Administration has sought legal advice that confirms that the simultaneous construction of both single houses would be possible by requiring the landowners to enter into a legal agreement with the City. Pursuant to the approval of the proposed development on the subject site and No. 48A Egina Street, the owners would be required to enter into a legal agreement with the City to simultaneously construct the single houses. This legal agreement would also allow for the City to lodge a caveat over the land to prevent the land from being sold unless the prospective purchaser also agrees to the terms of the legal agreement for the simultaneous construction of the dwellings. This would provide protection to the City and would ensure that the two-storey northern lot boundary wall would not be constructed independently that would otherwise adversely impact the adjoining landowner at No. 48A Egina Street and the streetscape. Conditions of approval have been recommended to address this matter.

 

Assessment of the lot boundary wall has been undertaken on the basis of the northern boundary wall being simultaneously constructed with the abutting southern boundary wall proposed for No. 48A Egina Street. This is detailed further below.

 

Lot Boundary Walls

 

The proposal incorporates a northern lot boundary wall with an average height of 4.75 metres and maximum height of 6.0 metres, in lieu of the Built Form Policy deemed-to-comply standard of 3.0 metre average height and 3.5 metre maximum height. The lot boundary wall extends for a total of 20.4 metres behind the street setback line.

 


 

The lot boundary wall satisfies the design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes Volume 1 and Built Form Policy, respectively, for the following reasons:

 

·       The boundary wall is internally facing between Nos. 48A and 48 Egina Street;

·       The boundary wall is located adjacent to a two-storey wall of the proposed dwelling at No. 48A Egina that does not contain any major openings. This means that the proposed boundary wall would not impact on any habitable areas of the adjoining property;

·       The boundary wall is not located adjacent to the outdoor living area of No. 48A Egina. This means that it would not impact on the amenity of the outdoor living area; and

·       The overshadowing created from the boundary wall would fall on the subject site itself. This would not impact on access to sunlight for any habitable areas or to the outdoor living area.

 

Landscaping

 

The proposal results in canopy cover of 21.8 percent of the subject site in lieu of the deemed-to-comply requirement of 30 percent. The landscape plan presents two trees in the street setback area, one Chinese Tallow and one Crepe Myrtle, which grow to a height of approximately 8.0 metres at maturity. The plan also incorporates three trees in the rear yard, one Magnolia tree and two Flowering Plum trees, which grow to a height of approximately 3.0 metres and 4.0 metres, respectively. The proposed species and location of landscaping satisfies the local housing objectives of the Built Form Policy for the following reasons:

 

·       The provision of canopy cover for 21.8 percent of the site area would provide an increased urban air quality and reduce the impact of the urban heat island effect within the City;

·       The location of landscape and the size of chosen species at maturity presents a demonstrated contribution to the greener landscape amenity within the City;

·       The proposed tree species are consistent with the City’s tree selection tool and are capable of growing to a substantially greater height and canopy than that shown on the development plans. This may impact on the viability of the trees given the trees are proposed to be planted within close proximity to each other. This would maximise canopy coverage onsite;

·       The location of landscaping within the street setback area and to the rear of the property assists in reducing the impact of the Single House on the public realm and adjoining residential lots; and

·       The proposed landscaping would provide landscape amenity for residents of the subject site and adjoining residents.

 

Concerns raised During Community Consultation

 

Garage

 

The proposal presents a double garage to the street. The proposed garage satisfies the deemed-to-comply standard of Clause 5.7 Setback of Garages and Carports as it is set back more than 0.5 metres behind the building line of the dwelling. The proposal is not subject to assessment against Clause 5.2.2 Garage Width of the R Codes – Volume 1 as it is not located within 1.0 metre of the building.

 

Streetscape and Character

 

The proposal has been assessed against the relevant matters to be considered under Clause 67(m) and (n) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 relating to the compatibility of the setting and amenity impacts on the character of the locality. Egina Street is characterised by single and two-storey Single Houses that present double garages to the street. There are no examples of double garages that occupy greater than 50 percent of the lot width. There is potential for the creation of lots through subdivision that comply with the planning framework and that have a side-by-side lot configuration, including along Egina Street. This is relevant when considering the future streetscape character of Egina Street.

 

The façade of the development to the street incorporates design elements and characteristics that are compatible with Clause 67(m) and (n) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 for the following reasons:

 

·       The street is characterised by Single Houses with double garages, with a significant number of garages being in line or in front of the dwelling;

·       The materials and design elements used in the street façade, including facebrick, render and pitched roof reflect common characteristics and design elements along Egina Street;

·       The cumulative effect of the street setback, proposed canopy coverage and inclusion of an open-faced balcony to the street façade assists in mitigating the overall impact of building bulk and scale; and

·       The proposed garage would not result in an adverse impact on the use or amenity of the adjoining southern lot given the garage is setback behind the alignment of the porch at neighbouring property No. 46 Egina Street and overshadowing to this property complies with the deemed-to-comply requirement of the R Codes Volume 1. The proposed garage is also located behind the balcony on the subject site.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                                     20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019


 


 


 


 




Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                                     20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                    20 August 2019

9.7          No. 48A (Lot: 201; D/P: 413236) Egina Street, Mount Hawthorn - Proposed Single House

TRIM Ref:                  D19/101126

Author:                     Clair Morrison, Urban Planner

Authoriser:                Jay Naidoo, Manager Development & Design

Ward:                        North

Attachments:             1.       Consultation and Location Map

2.       Development Plans

3.       Summary of Submissions - Administration Response

4.       Determination Advice Notes  

 

 

Recommendation:

That Council, in accordance with the provisions of the City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2 and the Metropolitan Region Scheme, APPROVES the application for the proposed Single House at No. 48A (Lot: 201; D/P: 413236) Egina Street, Mount Hawthorn, in accordance with the plans in Attachment 2, subject to the following conditions, with the associated determination advice notes in Attachment 4:

1.       Simultaneous Construction

1.1     The owners must enter into a legal agreement with the City of Vincent drafted by the City’s solicitors at the expense of the owners which is to:

1.1.1  Require the owners to construct and complete the single house simultaneously with the Single House approved on 20 August 2019 for the adjoining lot at No. 48 Egina Street, Mount Hawthorn;

1.1.2  Provide that the Single House must not be occupied until the Single House at No. 48 Egina Street, Mount Hawthorn is completed; and

1.1.3  Entitle the City to lodge an absolute caveat against the certificate of title for No. 48A Egina Street, Mount Hawthorn preventing its disposal until the person to whom it is disposed enters into an agreement with the City to abide by the agreement with the owners;

1.2     Works relating to the Single House must not be commenced until the agreement in condition 1.1 has been executed by the owners and the City; and

1.3     The owners must abide by the terms of the agreement referred to in condition 1.1;

2.       Boundary Walls

The owners of the subject land shall finish and maintain the surface of the boundary (parapet) walls facing Nos. 48 and 50 Egina Street in a good and clean condition prior to occupation or use of the development. The finish of the walls is to be fully rendered or face brickwork to the satisfaction of the City;

3.       External Fixtures

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

 

4.       Stormwater

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

5.       Landscaping

5.1     A detailed landscape and reticulation plan for the development site and adjoining road verge to the City’s satisfaction is be lodged with and approved by the City prior to commencement of the development. The plan shall be drawn to a scale of 1:100 and show the following:

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

·       Areas to be irrigated or reticulated;

·       A canopy cover of at least 23.2 percent; and

·       A minimum of one Weeping Peppermint tree of a 45 litre capacity shall be planted within the road verge as shown in the development approval plans.

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

6.       Schedule of External Finishes

Prior to commencement of development a detailed schedule of external finishes (including materials and colour schemes and details) shall be submitted to and approved by the City. The development shall be finished in accordance with the approved schedule prior to the use or occupation of the development.

 

Purpose of Report:

To consider an application for development approval for a two-storey Single House at No. 48A Egina Street, Mount Hawthorn (the subject site).

PROPOSAL:

The application proposes the construction of a two-storey Single House at the subject site.

Background:

Landowner:

Colin Roe and Corinne Roe

Applicant:

Urbanista Town Planning

Date of Application:

17 May 2019

Zoning:

MRS:    Urban

LPS2:   Zone: Residential         R Code: R30

Built Form Area:

Residential

Existing Land Use:

Vacant

Proposed Use Class:

Single House

Lot Area:

307m2

Right of Way (ROW):

No

Heritage List:

No

 

The subject site is bound by Egina Street to the west, Single Houses to the north and east, and a vacant green title lot to the south (No. 48 Egina Street), as shown on the location plan included as Attachment 1. Egina Street and the broader area surrounding the subject site is characterised by one and two-storey Single Houses.

 


 

The subject site is currently a vacant lot that has been cleared in preparation for development. The subject site is one of two green title lots created as a result of subdivision approval issued by the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) on 28 February 2018. The City issued a clearance for the subdivision approval on 24 July 2018. The City was notified on 29 January 2019 that the Deposited Plan and Certificate of Title had been issued by Landgate.

 

Previous Development Application

 

At its Ordinary Meeting on 16 October 2018, Council considered a development application for two Grouped Dwellings at the parent lot of the subject site, No. 48 (Lot: 5; D/P: 14389) Egina Street. Council resolved to refuse the application for the following reasons:

 

1.       The development does not satisfy the design principles of Clause 5.1.2 (Street Setback) of the Residential Design Codes or Clause P5.2.1 of the Built Form Policy, as the setback to the primary street is not consistent with, and will have a detrimental impact on, the established streetscape.

 

2.       The development does not satisfy the design principles of Clause 5.2.1 (Setback of garages and carports) of the Residential Design Codes or Clause P5.7.2 of the Built Form Policy, as the visual dominance of the proposed garages compromise the character and the existing streetscape.

 

The applicant sought a review of this decision by the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) on 26 October 2018. Pursuant to Section 31 of the State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004, the SAT invited the Council to reconsider its decision. Prior to the application for reconsideration being presented to Council, Administration was provided with a copy of the Deposited Plan and Certificate of Title for the subdivided lots (No. 48A (Lot 201) Egina Street and No. 48 (Lot 202) Egina Street) by the applicant on 29 January 2019. As a result, the application presented to Council for reconsideration was for two Single Houses, rather than two Grouped Dwellings. Council reconsidered amended plans at its Ordinary Meeting on 5 February 2019 where it resolved to refuse the application for the following reasons:

 

1.       As a consequence of the bulk, scale and dominating appearance of the proposed garages of the single houses, the proposed development:

 

(a)      is not compatible with the established residential area in which it is located and is, therefore, inconsistent with an objective of the Residential zone under the Scheme;

(b)      is not compatible with its setting (clause 67(m) of the deemed provisions in schedule 2 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015); and

(c)      would have an adverse impact on the amenity of the locality (clause 67(n) of the deemed provisions).

 

2.       Contrary to an objective of the Residential zone under the Scheme, the design of the proposed development is contrary to sustainability principles because:

 

(a)      the landscaping design would restrict solar access and ventilation to private open space areas of the single houses; and

(b)      the building design, including a two storey boundary wall, would restrict solar access and ventilation to No. 48 Egina Street, Mount Hawthorn.

 

3.       The matters referred to in paragraphs 2(a) and (b) would have an adverse impact on the amenity of the occupants of the proposed development.

 

4.       Adequate landscaping on-site has not been provided to reduce the impact of the proposed development on adjoining properties and the streetscape (clause 67(p) of the deemed provisions).

 

Following Council’s decision, the SAT dismissed the applicant’s application for review. This was on the basis that Landgate had issued the Deposited Plan and Certificate of Title for the two green title lots at No. 48A (Lot 201) Egina Street and No. 48 (Lot 202) Egina Street. SAT determined that this meant that Lot 5 (being the parent lot) no longer existed and a decision could not be made on the development application.

 


 

Current Development Application

 

Following the dismissal of the SAT review, the applicant submitted two separate development applications for Single Houses at the subject site and at No. 48 Egina Street, Mount Hawthorn. The plans that form the subject development application for a Single House do not vary from those determined by Council at its Ordinary Meeting of Council held 5 February 2019 and are contained in Attachment 2.

 

The development application for a Single House on No. 48 Egina Street is also on this Ordinary Meeting agenda for Council’s consideration and determination. Administration has assessed each application independently from one another.

Details:

Summary Assessment

The table below summarises the planning assessment of the proposal against the provisions of the City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2 (LPS2), the City’s Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form (Built Form Policy) and the State Government’s Residential Design Codes (R Codes – Volume 1).  In each instance where the proposal requires the discretion of Council, the relevant planning element is discussed in the Detailed Assessment section following from this table.

 

Planning Element

Use Permissibility/ Deemed-to-Comply

Requires the Discretion of Council

Land Use

ü

 

Street Setback

ü

 

Building Setbacks/Boundary Wall

 

ü

Building Height/Storeys

ü

 

Roof Form

ü

 

Open Space

ü

 

Outdoor Living Areas

ü

 

Landscaping (R Codes)

ü

 

Privacy

ü

 

Parking & Access

ü

 

Bicycle Facilities

ü

 

Solar Access

 

ü

Site Works/Retaining Walls

ü

 

Essential Facilities

ü

 

External Fixtures

ü

 

Surveillance

ü

 

Detailed Assessment

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

 

Lot Boundary Walls

Deemed-to-Comply Standard

Proposal

Built Form Policy Clause 5.3 Lot Boundary Setbacks

 

Where the wall abuts an existing or simultaneously constructed wall of a similar of greater dimensions; or

 

Boundary walls to a maximum height of 3.5m and average height of 3m for up to two-thirds of the lot boundary behind the front setback.

 

 

Southern Lot Boundary Wall

Average Height – 4.75m

Maximum Height – 6.0m

 

 

No existing boundary wall on adjoining site and no boundary wall proposed to be simultaneously constructed as part of this application.


 

Solar Access for Adjoining Sites

Deemed-to-Comply Standard

Proposal

R Codes – Volume 1 Clause 5.4.2 Solar Access for Adjoining Sites

 

35% overshadowing onto southern adjoining property.

 

 

 

60% overshadowing onto southern adjoining property.

 

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

Consultation/Advertising:

Community consultation was undertaken in accordance with the Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015 (Regulations 2015), for a period of 14 days commencing on 10 June 2019 and concluding on 25 June 2019. Community consultation was undertaken by means of written notification being sent to surrounding landowners, as shown in Attachment 1 and a notice on the City’s website.

 

In response to community consultation, 10 submissions were received, all objecting to the proposed development. Concerns raised during the community consultation period relating to the proposed Single House are as follows:

 

·       The bulky nature of the development as a result of the lot boundary wall height and landscaping;

·       The proposal does not reflect the established streetscape and characteristics of Egina Street;

·       The proposed double garage is not subservient to the dwelling and dominate the street façade and are not a favourable outcome for the street;

·       The cumulative impact of bulk, height, scale and appearance of the proposal is not compatible with the surrounding houses and is not compatible with its setting;

·       The proposed balcony is not set back far enough and increases the visual bulk of the dwelling by bringing floor space out towards the street, and does not reflect the existing streetscape characteristics;

·       The proposal is not consistent with maintaining the character of Mount Hawthorn;

·       There is inadequate landscaping which does not reflect the existing character of the street nor create a sense of open space between buildings; and

·       There is overshadowing onto the southern lot.

 

A summary of the submissions received and Administration’s response is included as Attachment 3. The applicant has not provided any response to the summary of submissions.

Design Review Panel (DRP):

Referred to DRP:            No

Legal/Policy:

·       Planning and Development Act 2005;

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

·       City of Vincent Local Planning Scheme No. 2;

·       State Planning Policy 7.3 – Residential Design Codes Volume 1;

·       Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation; and

·       Policy No. 7.1.1 – Built Form Policy.

 

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

 


 

The deemed-to-comply landscaping standards set out in the Built Form Policy have not been approved by the WAPC. The WAPC has issued approval for a modified set of deemed-to-comply landscaping standards that are similar to those set out in Residential Design Codes Volume 2 – Apartments (R Codes Volume 2 – Apartments) but which have not been approved by Council. As a result, the assessment would only have ‘due regard’ to those deemed-to-comply standards relating to landscaping approved by Council in the Built Form Policy.

Delegation to Determine Applications:

This application is being presented to Council as it received more than five objections during community consultation.

Risk Management Implications:

There are minimal risks to Council and the City’s business function when Council exercises its discretionary power to determine a planning application.

Strategic Implications:

This is in keeping with the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2018-2028:

 

Innovative and Accountable

We are open and accountable to an engaged community.

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.

Financial/Budget Implications:

Nil.

Comments:

Simultaneous Construction of Dwellings

 

The proposed Single House presents the same built form as the northern dwelling in the previously refused development application for two Single Houses at No. 48 (Lot: 5; D/P: 14389) Egina Street, Mount Hawthorn. Administration previously supported the proposed lot boundary walls and extent of overshadowing, for the following reasons:

 

·       The dwellings formed part of one application, where Administration contemplated the simultaneous construction of the dwellings and lot boundary walls via a planning condition of approval. This was to ensure compliance with the deemed-to-comply standards of the R-Codes Volume 1 relating to lot boundary walls; and

·       The extent of overshadowing from No. 48A Egina Street would primarily fall onto the adjoining lot boundary wall, which contained no major openings, nor would the overshadowing have fallen onto any outdoor living areas or solar collectors.

 

The proposed two-storey southern lot boundary wall constructed independently would fail to meet the relevant design principles relating to lot boundary walls and extent of overshadowing, and would adversely impact the adjoining neighbour (No. 48 Egina Street) and the streetscape.

 

The applicant has provided confirmation that the landowners intend to simultaneously construct the proposed Single House with the dwelling proposed on the adjoining property No. 48 Egina Street if approved. Administration has sought legal advice that confirms that the simultaneous construction of both single houses would be possible by requiring the landowners to enter into a legal agreement with the City. Pursuant to the approval of the proposed development on the subject site and No. 48 Egina Street, the owners would be required to enter into a legal agreement with the City to simultaneously construct the single houses. This legal agreement would also allow for the City to lodge a caveat over the land to prevent the land from being sold unless the prospective purchaser also agrees to the terms of the legal agreement for the simultaneous construction of the dwellings. This would provide protection to the City and would ensure that the two-storey southern lot boundary wall would not be constructed independently that would otherwise adversely impact the adjoining landowner at No. 48 Egina Street and the streetscape. Conditions of approval have been recommended to address this matter.

 

Assessment of the lot boundary wall has been undertaken on the basis of the southern boundary wall being simultaneously constructed with the abutting northern boundary wall proposed for No. 48 Egina Street. This is detailed further below.

 

Lot Boundary Walls

 

The proposal incorporates a southern lot boundary wall with an average height of 4.75 metres and maximum height of 6.0 metres, in lieu of the Built Form Policy deemed-to-comply standard of a 3.0 metre average height and 3.5 metre maximum height. The lot boundary wall extends for a total of 20.4 metres behind the street setback line.

 

The lot boundary wall satisfies the design principles and local housing objectives of the R Codes Volume 1 and Built Form Policy, respectively, for the following reasons:

 

·       The boundary wall is internally facing between Nos. 48A and 48 Egina Street;

·       The boundary wall is located adjacent to a two-storey wall of the proposed dwelling at No. 48 Egina that does not contain any major openings. This means that the proposed boundary wall would not impact on any habitable areas of the adjoining property;

·       The boundary wall is not located adjacent to the outdoor living area of No. 48 Egina. This means that it would not impact on the amenity of the outdoor living area; and

·       The overshadowing created from the boundary wall would fall on the roof and two-storey dwelling wall with no major openings of No. 48 Egina Street. This would not impact on access to sunlight for any habitable areas or to the outdoor living area.

 

Solar Access for Adjoining Sites

 

The proposed development results in 60 percent overshadowing to the adjoining southern lot (No. 48 Egina Street) in lieu of the R Codes Volume 1 deemed-to-comply standard of 35 percent. The extent and location of overshadowing satisfies the design principles for the following reasons:

 

·      The shadow cast by No. 48A Egina Street would primarily fall on the common boundary wall and building walls with no major openings of No. 48 Egina Street. This means that the building would not overshadow any major openings to habitable rooms or the outdoor living area of No. 48 Egina; and

·      The application does not propose solar panels and therefore the overshadowing would not impact on any solar collectors.

 

Landscaping

 

The proposal would result in canopy cover of 23.2 percent of the subject site in lieu of the deemed-to-comply requirement of 30 percent. The landscape plan presents two trees in the street setback area, one Chinese Tallow and one Crepe Myrtle, which grow to a height of approximately 8.0 metres at maturity. The plan also incorporates three trees in the rear yard, one Magnolia tree and two Flowering Plum trees, which grow to a height of approximately 3.0 metres and 4.0 metres, respectively. The proposed species and location of landscaping satisfies the local housing objectives of the Built Form Policy for the following reasons:

 

·       The provision of canopy cover for 23.2 percent of the site area would provide an increased urban air quality and reduce the impact of the urban heat island effect within the City;

·       The location of landscape and the size of chosen species at maturity presents a demonstrated contribution to the greener landscape amenity within the City;

·       The proposed tree species are consistent with the City’s tree selection tool and are capable of growing to a substantially greater height and canopy than that shown on the development plans. This may impact on the viability of the trees given the trees are proposed to be planted within close proximity to each other, this would maximise canopy coverage onsite;

·       The location of landscaping within the street setback area and to the rear of the property assists in reducing the impact of the Single House on the public realm and adjoining residential lots; and

·       The proposed landscaping would provide landscape amenity for residents of the subject site and adjoining residents.

 

The application proposes the removal of a recently planted Weeping Peppermint tree in the verge of the property to facilitate vehicular access. Transplanting this tree is not possible as it would be unlikely to survive. The applicant has shown a replacement street tree to be planted in the verge of the property.

 

Concerns Raised During Community Consultation

 

Garage

 

The proposal presents a double garage to the street. The proposed garage satisfies the deemed-to-comply standard of Clause 5.7 Setback of Garages and Carports as it is set back more than 0.5 metres behind the building line of the dwelling. The proposal is not subject to assessment against Clause 5.2.2 Garage Width of the R Codes – Volume 1 as it is not located within 1.0 metre of the building.

 

Streetscape and Character

 

The proposal has been assessed against the relevant matters to be considered under Clause 67(m) and (n) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 relating to the compatibility of the setting and amenity impacts on the character of the locality. Egina Street is characterised by single and two-storey Single Houses that present double garages to the street. There are no examples of double garages that occupy greater than 50 percent of the lot width. There is potential for the creation of lots through subdivision that comply with the planning framework and that have a side-by-side lot configuration, including along Egina Street. This is relevant when considering the future streetscape character of Egina Street.

 

The façade of the development to the street incorporates design elements and characteristics that are compatible with Clause 67(m) and (n) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 for the following reasons:

 

·       The street is characterised by Single Houses with double garages, with a significant number of garages being in line or in front of the dwelling;

·       The materials and design elements used in the street façade, including facebrick, render and pitched roof reflect common characteristics and design elements along Egina Street;

·       The cumulative effect of the street setback, proposed canopy coverage and inclusion of an open-faced balcony to the street façade assists in mitigating the overall impact of building bulk and scale; and

·       The proposed garage would not result in an adverse impact on the use or amenity of the adjoining northern lot given the garage abuts the existing double garage on No. 50 Egina Street. The proposed garage is located behind the front of this garage on the adjoining property and is located behind the proposed balcony on the subject site.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                                     20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019


 


 


 




Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                                     20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                    20 August 2019

9.8          Food Stallholder Fees - Minor Review

TRIM Ref:                  D19/107639

Author:                     Mark Fallows, Manager Regulatory Services

Authoriser:                Stephanie Smith, A/Executive Director Planning and Place

Attachments:             Nil

 

Recommendation:

That Council:

1.       APPROVES BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the amendment to the Schedule of Fees and Charges 2019/20, pursuant to section 6.16 of the Local Government Act 1995, to:

1.1     Reduce the ‘Food Stallholders: Annual Permit – Medium or High Risk’ fee from $390.00 to $130.00; and

1.2     Amend the heading of the ‘Food Stallholders Annual (venue specific including markets)’ fee to read ‘Food Stallholders Annual (applies to all markets/venues)’;

2.       APPROVES BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the reallocation of $6,205.00 within the 2019/20 Budget;

3.       NOTES the following budget adjustments to facilitate 2. above:

 

From

To

Existing Budget Item: Programmes: Events

$6,205.00

 

Existing Budget Item: Temporary Food Fees

 

$6,205.00

 

4.       NOTES that local public notice of the amendment to the Fees and Charges 2019/20 will be advertised in accordance with section 6.19 of the Local Government Act 1995.

 

Purpose of Report:

To consider amending the Fees and Charges 2019/20 to:

 

1.       Reduce the Food Stallholder Annual Permit fee; and

 

2.       Amend the heading so that the annual fee applies to all markets/venues.

Background:

The City currently conducts a food business assessment program to monitor and enforce food safety standards in accordance with the Food Act 2008. This program includes food business registration/notification, a desktop risk assessment, sampling and on-site inspections and applies to all food businesses including those that operate at a fixed premises and those that operate mobile premises. The number and nature of sampling and inspections is dependent on the risk profile of each food business. On average the City conducts two random inspections annually for each food business.

 

Currently this program applies to 566 food businesses in fixed premises, plus a number of food businesses that attend approximately 40 events each year across the City and two established markets that currently operate being Kyilla Community Farmers Market and Mount Hawthorn Hawkers Market. This program ensures that food businesses are operating in accordance with the Food Act 2008.

 


 

The cost for delivering this service is recovered by charging fees that are set out in the Fees and Charges 2019/20. The City currently charges two categories of fee. One fee applies to food businesses at fixed premises and the other is for food stallholders, such as food vans that operate at markets and events. The stallholder fee is applied to individual food businesses on an annual venue specific basis for markets and/or on a once-off basis for events. The exact fee paid depends on the risk level for the individual food business. A schedule of the specific fees in included below:

 

Fee Type

Fee Amount

Food Stallholders – Annual (venue specific including markets)

 

Annual Permit – Medium or High Risk

$390.00

Annual Permit – Low Risk

$130.00

Not-for-profit/Charitable Organisations (i.e. fundraising events)

Nil

Food Stallholders – Event Based (e.g. festivals, miscellaneous)

 

Application (assessment only) For a maximum of four occasions in any 12 month period (Food stalls that do not require an inspection)

$50.00

Medium or High Risk

$80.00

Low risk

$60.00

Not-for-profit/Charitable Organisations (i.e. fundraising events)

Nil

Fixed Premises

 

Annual Assessment - High Risk

$640.00

Annual Assessment - Medium Risk

$530.00

Annual Assessment - Low Risk

$200.00

 

The Kyilla Primary and Pre Primary Parents and Citizens Association Inc. (Kyilla P&C), operator of the Kyilla Community Farmers Market, have expressed concerns that the current food stallholder venue specific fee does not encourage food businesses to participate in the market as it is not in parity with the fees charged by other local governments. In addition, as it is venue specific this means that businesses are required to pay the fee for each market venue they attend. Currently this means that a business would need to pay the fee to attend both the Kyilla Community Farmers Market and the Mount Hawthorn Hawkers Market. As a result of these issues the City has completed a minor review of the relevant fees and charges.

Details:

The City reviewed the annual food stallholder fees charged by nine neighbouring and similar sized local governments. All local governments provide an equivalent food business assessment service. The following table provides a breakdown of fees charged by local governments:

 

Fee Amount

Number of Local Governments

No charge

2

$1 - $100

3

$101 - $200

1

$201 - $300

1

$301 - $400

1

$400+

1

 

Annual fees charged ranged from no charge to $450.00, with an average fee of $155.00. This compares to the City’s annual fee of $390.00 for Medium and High risk food businesses and $130.00 for Low risk food businesses. All other local governments charge a uniform fee for all food businesses, and do not vary the fee based on a food business risk profile.

 

Some local governments elected to charge a lower fee or to charge no fee to encourage food businesses to attend at local markets. No other Local Government charges a venue specific fee. The City’s Medium and High risk fee is the second highest and is greater than 200% above the benchmark average.

 

In response to the results of this review it is recommended that the City amend its fees for food business as follows:

 


 

1.       Reduce the ‘Food Stallholders: Annual Permit – Medium or High Risk’ fee from $390.00 to $130.00. This reduction would result in an across-the-board fee of $130.00 for all food businesses operating at markets, and be closely aligned to the local government average fee.

 

2.       Amend the heading of the ‘Food Stallholders Annual (venue specific including markets)’ fee to read ‘Food Stallholders Annual (applies to all markets/venues)’. The effect of removing a venue specific fee will remove duplication of services if a food business operates at more than one market. This is dependent on the food business using the same stall design and activities for all markets which can be checked and agreed to through submission of a plan at the time of application for a permit. Currently three food businesses operate at both markets.

Consultation/Advertising:

The City has sought feedback from Kyilla P&C and Heart Inspired Events, operator of Mount Hawthorn Hawkers Market, of the proposed changes. Both organisations support the changes. Further community consultation is not required.

Legal/Policy:

·       Food Act 2008; and

·       Local Government Act 1995.

 

Pursuant to section 6.17 of the Local Government Act 1995 in determining the amount of a fee or charge for a service a local government is required to take into consideration:

 

(a)      the cost to the local government of providing the service or goods; and

 

(b)      the importance of the service or goods to the community; and

 

(c)      the price at which the service or goods could be provided by an alternative provider.

Risk Management Implications:

Low:  It is considered low risk for the City to amend its fees and charges.

Strategic Implications:

This is in keeping with the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2018-2028:

 

Thriving Places

We are recognised as a City that supports local and small business.

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.

Financial/Budget Implications:

The estimated decrease in revenue of the proposed fee reduction, based on 2018/2019 market attendance would be $6,205.00. This would involve revenue from Kyilla Community Farmers Market food businesses being reduced from $3,722.48 to $2,747.48. The reduction in revenue from Mount Hawthorn Hawkers Market would be reduced from $8,371.67 to $3,141.67. This estimate assumes no changes to the number of current food businesses at these markets. The impact on revenue would be less if more food stallholders are attracted by the reduced fee and if other proposed markets commence.

 

Both the Kyilla Community Farmers Market and the Mount Hawthorn Hawkers Market provide a valuable service to the local community and activate the City’s local spaces. On this basis it is recommended that this decrease in revenue be met through the existing budget allocation for events and activation of the City’s public spaces.

 

The City is also exploring ways to reduce the cost to provide this service through its good working relationship with both operators. Strategies can be developed which place responsibility on market operators to conduct a basic check of food businesses and report back to the City on a regular basis. Information sharing with other local governments on food business compliance can also assist to reduce costs.

 

The effect of removing a venue specific condition would have no budgetary impact.

Comments:

The proposed changes to the annual market food stallholder fee would bring the City in line with comparable local governments. The City’s current and proposed markets support a connected community and thriving places, and the report recommendation recognises this outcome. A more detailed and comprehensive review relating to food stallholder fees would occur as part of 2020/2021 budget planning.

  


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                    20 August 2019

10          Infrastucture and Environment

10.1        Minor Parking Restriction Improvements/Amendments

TRIM Ref:                  D19/98072

Author:                     Craig Wilson, Manager Asset & Engineering

Authoriser:                Andrew Murphy, Executive Director Infrastructure and Environment

Attachments:             1.       Plan No. 3529-PP-01

2.       Plan No. 3530-PP-01

3.       Plan No. 3531-PP-01  

 

Recommendation:

That Council:

1.       APPROVES the following minor parking restriction improvements and amendments:

1.1     install a ‘yellow’ No Stopping zone in Shakespeare Street, Leederville, opposite Aranmore Catholic College, Plan No. 3529-PP-01 (Attachment 1);

1.2     remove an on-road parking space in Scott Street, Leederville, corner Bourke Street, Plan No. 3530-PP-01 (Attachment 2); and

1.3     convert the exclusive Taxi Zone in Grosvenor Road, adjacent the Flying Scotsman Tavern, to a Loading Zone during the day, 6.00am to 6.00pm, and Taxi Zone at night 6.00pm to 6.00am, Monday to Sunday, Plan No. 3531-PP-01 (Attachment 3).

 

Purpose of Report:

To consider improvements and 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:

 

Proposed ‘yellow’ No Stopping Zone, Shakespeare Street, Leederville

 

The above location is on the eastern side of Pennant Street, between Franklin and Salisbury Streets, directly adjacent the Aranmore Catholic College/St Mary’s Church.

 

Shakespeare Street is a Safe Active Street (SAS) (formerly Bike Boulevard) and a school zone with a 30kph posted speed limit. The section of road in question is a primary drop off/pick-up point for the college, and as would be expected, heavily congested during the morning and afternoon peak periods.

 


 

A Road Safety Audit commissioned by the Department of Transport (for Stage II of the SAS) listed this portion of the route as potentially hazardous for pedestrians and cyclists alike due the nature of the erratic parking practices around school zones, particularly during the peak periods.  There is 90° angled parking along the western side of Shakespeare Street that services both the college, during the week, and the church on weekends.  If a vehicle is parked on the eastern side, as frequently happens, it makes it both difficult to reverse from the bays and obstructs a drivers view of approaching traffic.  Further, in recognition of the ‘parking issues’ the residents along the eastern side of the street have had the City endorsed ‘No Parking on Verge’ signs installed.

 

The recommended action is to make the eastern side a yellow ‘No Stopping’ zone from the Right of Way (the northern end of St Mary’s) to Franklin Street as shown on Plan No. 3529-PP-1 (Attachment 1)

 

Proposed Removal of an On-road Parking Space in Scott Street, Leederville.

 

The above location is on the western side of Scott Street, north of Bourke Street, and specifically relates to first on-road parking space closest the intersection.

 

Scott Street is a continuation of the Shakespeare Street Safe Active Street (SAS) and has a 30kph posted speed limit. The road pavement is relatively narrow at 6.2m wide with limited passing opportunities when a vehicle is parked (legally) on the western side.

 

Scott Street has a marked morning peak period, in part related to school traffic (Aranmore Catholic College) with the traffic flow predominately south bound. As a result, northbound traffic commonly has to pause when entering Scott Street, from Bourke Street, until there is a clear path of travel.  If more than one vehicle is waiting, the rear end of the second vehicle often protrudes into Bourke Street.

 

A Road Safety Audit commissioned by the Department of Transport (for Stage II of the SAS) listed this location as a potential hazard for pedestrians, cyclists and motorists alike.

 

The recommended action is to make the first 5.0m part of the No Stopping zone as shown on Plan No. 3530-PP-1 (Attachment 2).  While individual bays are not marked in residential streets, it still allows compliant parking for two standard vehicles.

 

Proposed Dual-purpose Parking - Loading and Taxi Zone, Grosvenor Road, Mt Lawley

 

The above location is on the northern side of Grosvenor Road adjacent the Flying Scotsman Tavern (639-643 Beaufort Street), which is currently a dedicated taxi zone (other than a minor portion reserved for motorcycles closest to Beaufort Street).

 

For a majority of the daylight hours the taxi zone is not required and therefore the space underutilised.  Further, there are few loading zones within the precinct, and for which the City has received requests.

 

In addition, works are due to commence shortly on the redevelopment/refurbishment of the heritage listed Alexander Building located on the corner of Beaufort and Walcott Streets.  As a consequence, the public car park behind the building will be disrupted, and access restricted, during construction.  This will in-turn limit the ability of logistics companies and suppliers to deliver to the various businesses within the Alexander building, particularly as there is no parking on either the Beaufort or Walcott Streets frontages.

 

Therefore it is proposed that the 24/7 taxi zone is changed to serve a dual-purpose, loading zone during the day and taxi zone at night, when there is an established service demand.

 

The loading zone would not only provide an amenity to the aforementioned businesses but also that of the adjacent IGA Supermarket and Tavern.

 

The recommended action is to change the existing taxi zone to a Loading Zone from 6.00am to 6.00pm and a Taxi Zone from 6.00pm to 6.00am (Monday to Sunday), as shown on Plan 3531-PP-1 (Attachment 3).


 

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 the adjacent residents and businesses will improve.  There 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 their visitors.

Strategic Implications:

This is in keeping with the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2018-2028:

 

Accessible City

 

We have better integrated all modes of transport and increased services throughout the City.

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.

Financial/Budget Implications:

Costs associated with these parking restriction changes will be completed utilising existing funding from the appropriate signage and line-marking budgets.

Comments:

Administration has investigated current parking and traffic management issues at these locations and it is appropriate to implement minor improvements and amendments as both a road safety, amenity and service delivery improvement.  While more 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 continue to present parking reports to Council to deal with current parking issues.


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                                     20 August 2019

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator 


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                    20 August 2019

11          Community and Business Services

11.1        Investment Report as at 31 July 2019

TRIM Ref:                D19/115413

Author:                     Nirav Shah, Coordinator Financial Services

Authoriser:             John Corbellini, A/Executive Director Community and Business Services

Attachments:          1.       Investment report July 2019  

 

Recommendation:

That Council NOTES the Investment Report for the month ended 31 July 2019 as detailed in Attachment 1.

 

Purpose of Report:

To advise Council of the nature and value of the City’s investments as at 31 July 2019 and the interest earned year to date.

Background:

The City’s surplus funds are invested in bank term deposits for various terms to facilitate maximum investment returns in accordance to the City’s Investment Policy (No. 1.2.4).

 

Details of the investments are included in Attachment 1 and outline the following information:

 

·       Investment performance and policy compliance charts;

·       Investment portfolio data;

·       Investment interest earnings; and

·       Current investment holdings.

Details:

The City’s investment portfolio is diversified across several accredited financial institutions.

 

As at 31 July 2019, the total funds held in the City’s operating account (including on call) is $32,209,493, compared to $26,826,861 for the period ending 31 July 2018.

 

In addition, total term deposit investments for the period ending 31 July 2019 has increased to $26,105,854 compared to last year’s amount of $23,990,516. 

 

Funds relating to trust monies have been transferred to the City’s Municipal account. This is in accordance to a position paper published by the Office of the Auditor General (OAG) in July 2019. The legal advice obtained by the OAG, states that unless agreements are in place which require local governments to hold funds in trust, all other bond monies should not be held in the trust fund account.

 

The following table shows funds under management for the previous and current year:

 


 

Month

2018/19

2019/20

Ended

Total funds held

Total term deposits

Total funds held

Total term deposits

July

$26,826,861

$23,990,516

$32,209,493

$26,105,854

August

$44,327,708

$37,499,275

 

 

September

$44,209,274

$40,651,147

 

 

October

$44,463,021

$41,180,325

 

 

November

$44,188,761

$42,678,504

 

 

December

$40,977,846

$38,667,039

 

 

January

$42,109,674

$35,225,189

 

 

February

$44,227,308

$36,178,794

 

 

March

$39,157,958

$32,739,750

 

 

April

$36,427,902

$31,019,902

 

 

May

$33,384,520

$29,469,158

 

 

June

$30,503,765

$25,613,648

 

 

 

Total accrued interest earned on investments as at 30 June 2019 is:

 

 

Annual Budget

YTD

Budget

YTD

Actual

% of YTD Budget

Municipal

$420,000

$35,000

$16,001

45.72%

Reserve

$278,688

$23,224

$24,529

105.62%

Sub-total

$646,060

$58,224

$40,530

69.61%

 

Leederville Gardens Inc. Surplus Trust*

$0

$0

$10,414

N/A

 

*Interest estimates for Leederville Gardens Inc. Surplus Trust were not included in the 2019,/20  Budget as actual interest earned is held in trust that is restricted.

 

The City has obtained a weighted average interest rate of 2.05% for current investments including the operating account and 2.30% excluding the operating account. The Reserve Bank 90 days accepted bill rate for July 2019 is 1.11%.

 

Sustainable Investments

 

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 Marketforces.org.au to assist in assessing whether a bank promotes non-investments in fossil fuel related entities.

 

As at 31 July 2019, 6.68% of the City’s investments are held in financial institutions considered to be investing in non-fossil fuel related activities.

 

Administration has established guidelines for the management of the City’s investments, including maximum investment ratios as shown in the following 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

Current position

Policy

Current position

Policy

Current position

  A1+

30%

27.4%

30%

Nil

90%

75.3%

A1

25%

3.1%

30%

Nil

80%

3.1%

A2

20%

18.1%

n/a

Nil

60%

21.6%

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 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.

 

Council has delegated the authority to invest surplus funds to the Chief Executive Officer or his delegate to facilitate prudent and responsible investment.

Risk Management Implications:

Low:       Administration has developed effective controls to ensure funds are invested in accordance with the City’s Investment Policy. This report enhances transparency and accountability for the City’s investments.


 

Strategic Implications:

This is in keeping with the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2018-2028:

 

Innovative and Accountable

Our resources and assets are planned and managed in an efficient and sustainable manner.

Our community is aware of what we are doing and how we are meeting our goals.

Our community is satisfied with the service we provide.

We are open and accountable to an engaged community.

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.

Financial/Budget Implications:

The financial implications of this report are as noted in the details section of the report. Administration is satisfied that appropriate and responsible measures are in place to protect the City’s financial assets.


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                    20 August 2019

11.2        Authorisation of Expenditure for the Period 1 July 2019 to 31 July 2019

TRIM Ref:                D19/114646

Author:                     Nikki Hirrill, Accounts Payable Officer

Authoriser:             John Corbellini, A/Executive Director Community and Business Services

Attachments:          1.       Payments by EFT, BPAY and Payroll July 19

2.       Payments by Cheque July 19

3.       Payments by Direct Debit July 19  

 

Recommendation:

That Council RECEIVES the list of accounts paid under delegated authority for the period 1 July 2019 to 31 July 2019 as detailed in Attachments 1, 2 and 3 as summarised below:

 

EFT and BPAY payments, including payroll

 

$5,393,240.50

Cheques

 

$38,900.72

Direct debits, including credit cards

 

$321,296.50

 

 

 

Total payments for July 2019

 

$5,753,437.72

 

Purpose of Report:

To present to Council the expenditure and list of accounts paid for the period 1 July 2019 to 31 July 2019.

Background:

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

 

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

Details:

The Schedule of Accounts paid for the period 1 July 2019 to 31 July 2019, covers the following:

 

FUND

CHEQUE NUMBERS/

BATCH NUMBER

AMOUNT

Municipal Account (Attachment 1, 2 and 3)

 

EFT and BPAY Payments

2427 – 2444 (not including 2443)

$4,153,697.02

Payroll by Direct Credit

July 2019

$1,239,543.48

Sub Total

 

$5,393,240.50

 

 

 

Cheques

 

 

Cheques

82526 - 82534

$41,010.72

 

 

 

Cancelled cheques

81761, 81882 and 82511

-$2,110.00

Sub Total

 

$38,900.72

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Direct Debits, including credit cards

 

 

Lease Fees

 

$90,541.72

Loan Repayments

$198,741.21

Bank Charges – CBA

 

$25,792.01

Credit Cards

 

$6,221.56

Sub Total

 

$321,296.50

 

 

 

Total Payments

 

$5,753.437.72

consulting/advertising:

Not applicable.

Legal/Policy:

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

13.     Lists of Accounts

 

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

·       the payee’s name;

·       the amount of the payment;

·       the date of the payment; and

·       sufficient information to identify the transaction.

 

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

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

·       recorded in the minutes of that meeting.

Risk Management Implications:

Low:    Management systems are in place which establish satisfactory controls, supported by the internal and external audit functions. Financial reporting to Council increases transparency and accountability.


 

Strategic Implications:

This is in keeping with the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2018-2028:

 

Innovative and Accountable

Our resources and assets are planned and managed in an efficient and sustainable manner.

Our community is aware of what we are doing and how we are meeting our goals.

Our community is satisfied with the service we provide.

We are open and accountable to an engaged community.

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Not applicable.

Financial/Budget Implications:

All municipal fund expenditure included in the list of payments is in accordance with Council’s annual budget.

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                                     20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                                     20 August 2019

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                                     20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                    20 August 2019

11.3        Financial Statements as at 31 July 2019

TRIM Ref:                  D19/116809

Author:                     Nirav Shah, Coordinator Financial Services

Authoriser:                John Corbellini, A/Executive Director Community and Business Services

Attachments:             1.       Monthly financial statements as at 31 July 2019  

 

Recommendation:

That Council RECEIVES the financial statements for the month ended 31 July 2019 as shown in Attachment 1.

 

Purpose of Report:

To present the statement of financial activity for the period ended 31 July 2019.

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 including the sources and applications of funds, as compared to the budget.

 

Please note there are a number of year end transactions and adjustments that need to be completed before the year end accounts are finalised and audited, hence, the balances provided in this report are provisional and subject to change.

Details:

The following documents, included as Attachment 1, comprise the statement of financial activity for the period ending 31 July 2019:

 

Note

Description

Page

 

 

 

1.

Statement of Financial Activity by Program Report and Graph

1-3

2.

Statement of Comprehensive Income by Nature or Type Report

4

3.

Net Current Funding Position

5

4.

Summary of Income and Expenditure by Service Areas

6-61

5.

Capital Expenditure and Funding and Capital Works Schedule

62-67

6.

Cash Backed Reserves

68

7.

Rating Information and Graph

69-70

8.

Debtors Report

71-72

9.

Beatty Park Leisure Centre Financial Position

73

 

Comments on the Statement of Financial Activity (as at Attachment 1):

 

Operating revenue is reported separately by ‘Program’ and ‘Nature or Type’ respectively. The significant difference between the two reports is that operating revenue by ‘Program’ includes ‘Profit on sale of assets’ and the report for ‘Nature or Type’ includes ‘Rates revenue’.

 

Revenue by Program is tracking higher than the year to date budgeted revenue by $248,219 (12%). The following items materially contributed to this position: -

 

·       Recognition of monies transferred from trust to reserve for contributions relating to Percent for Art, $260,240 (Community Amenities).

 

 

 

 

 

Revenue by Nature or Type is tracking higher than the budgeted revenue by $243,911 (0.7%). The following items materially contributed to this position: -

 

·       ‘Operating grants, subsidies and contributions’ reflects a budget to actual surplus of $243,236 that is materially contributed from the receipt of monies from percentage of art contributions ($260,240). 

 

Expenditure by Program reflects an under-spend of $1,885,619 (42.7%) compared to the year to date budget. The following items materially contributed to this position: -

 

·      Reversal accrual of $240,000 relating to works completed in the last financial year on the Integrated Transport plan project has contributed to a favourable variance in this month (Community Amenities).

·      The remainder is due to timing variances of works and reversal of accrual amounts relating to expenditure for works completed in the last financial year.

 

Expenditure by Nature or Type reflects an under-spend of $1,885,621 (42.7%) compared to the year to date budget. The following items materially contributed to this position: -

 

·       Materials and contracts reflects an under-spend of $834,031. This favourable variance is largely contributed by timing variances of works and reversal of accrual amounts relating to expenditure for works completed in the last financial year. 

·       ‘Other expenditure’ reflects an under-spend of $768,149. This favourable variance is largely contributed by timing variances of works and reversal of accrual amounts relating to expenditure for works completed in the last financial year. 

 

Opening Surplus Bought Forward – 2019/20

 

The provisional surplus position brought forward to 2019/20 is $7,857,741 compared to the adopted budget surplus amount of $5,929,991. The actual opening surplus figure will be adjusted once the end of year audit has been finalised.  

 

Content of Statement of Financial Activity

 

An explanation of each report in 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 or Type Report (Note 2 Page 4)

 

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

 

4.         Summary of Income and Expenditure by Service Areas (Note 4 Page 6 – 61)

 

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

 

5.         Capital Expenditure and Funding Summary (Note 5 Page 62 - 67)

 

The full capital works program is listed in detail in Note 5 of Attachment 1.

 

 

 

 

 

6.         Cash Backed Reserves (Note 6 Page 68)

 

The cash backed reserves schedule provides a detailed summary of the movements in the reserves portfolio, including transfers to and from the reserve. The balance as at 31 July 2019 is $12,910,913.

 

7.         Rating Information (Note 7 Page 69 – 70)

 

The notices for rates and charges levied for 2019/20 were issued on 19 July 2019.

 

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

 

First Instalment

26 August 2019

Second Instalment

29 October 2019

Third Instalment

07 January 2020

Fourth Instalment

10 March 2020

 

Total rates collected, as at 31 July 2019 is $4,420,195. Furthermore, the outstanding rates debtors balance as at 31 July 2019 is $38,379,838 including deferred rates ($116,936).

 

8.         Receivables (Note 8 Page 71 - 72)

 

Trade receivables outstanding as at 31 July 2019 is $2,106,164 of which $2,072,037 has been outstanding for over 90 days.

 

Administration has been regularly following up all outstanding items by issuing reminders when they are overdue and subsequently initiating a formal debt collection process when payments remain outstanding for long periods of time.

 

Below is a summary of the significant items that have been outstanding for over 90 days:

 

·        $1,489,276 (71.9%) relates to unpaid infringements (plus costs) over 90 days. Infringements that remain unpaid for more than two months are sent to the Fines Enforcement Registry (FER), which then collects the outstanding balance on behalf of the City for a fee.

 

Due to the aged nature of some of the unpaid infringements, the provision for doubtful debts has been increased this year and an amount of $1,066,403 has been transferred to long term infringement debtors (non-current portion).

 

Please note this provisional amount is subject to change as Administration ascertains the realistic probability of recovering the long outstanding monies owed to the City. This exercise is in accordance to the requirements outlined in Australian Accounting Standards Board 9 Financial instruments.

 

·        $200,766 (9.7%) relates to cash in lieu of car parking debtors. In accordance with the City’s Policy 7.7.1 Non-residential parking, Administration has entered into special payment arrangements with long outstanding cash in lieu parking debtors to enable them to pay over a fixed term of five years.

 

9.         Beatty Park Leisure Centre – Financial Position report (Note 9 Page 73)

 

As at 31 July 2019, the operating surplus for the centre is $171,987 compared to the year to date budgeted deficit amount of $70,387.

 

10.       Explanation of Material Variances (Note 4 Page 6 – 61)

 

The materiality thresholds used for reporting variances are 10% and/or $20,000 respectively. This means that variances will be analysed and separately reported when they are more than 10% (+/-) of the year to date budget or where that variance exceeds $20,000 (+/-). This threshold was adopted by Council as part of the budget adoption for 2019/20 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).

 

In accordance to the above, all material variances as at 31 July 2019 have been detailed in the variance comments report in Attachment 1.

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 other financial reports as prescribed.

 

Regulation 34 (1) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 requires the local government to prepare a statement of financial activity each month, 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 to Council fulfils relevant statutory requirements and is consistent with good financial governance.

Strategic Implications:

Reporting on the City’s financial position is aligned with the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2018-2028:

 

Innovative and Accountable

Our resources and assets are planned and managed in an efficient and sustainable manner.

Our community is aware of what we are doing and how we are meeting our goals.

Our community is satisfied with the service we provide.

We are open and accountable to an engaged community.

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Not applicable.

Financial/Budget Implications:

Not applicable.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                    20 August 2019

11.4        Draft Safer Vincent Plan 2019-2022

TRIM Ref:                  D19/101175

Authors:                   Karen Balm, Senior Community Partner

Cara Finch, Community Partner – Community Safety

Authoriser:                Sandra Watson, Manager Community Partnerships

Attachments:             1.       Draft Safer Vincent Plan 2019-2022 - Community Consultation Comments

2.       Draft Safer Vincent Plan 2019-2022  

 

Recommendation:

That Council:

1.       NOTES the responses received during the draft Safer Vincent Plan 2019-2022 public comment period; and

2.       ADOPTS the Safer Vincent Plan 2019-2022 (Attachment 2) and NOTES that the Plan will be subject to further formatting, styling and graphic design as determined by the Chief Executive Officer prior to publication.

 

Purpose of Report:

To seek Council adoption of the Safer Vincent Plan 2019-2022.

Background:

In 2018, the City undertook an extensive review of the Safer Vincent Community Safety and Crime Prevention Plan 2015-2018, as well as analysing the thoughts and ideas related to community safety that were captured in the Imagine Vincent campaign. Administration also engaged with key stakeholders including relevant City staff, WA Police Force, Nyoongar Outreach Services and the Safer Vincent Advisory Group (SVAG) and sought their advice, input and guidance on the development of the draft Safer Vincent Plan 2019-2022 (the ‘Plan’).

 

The draft Plan builds upon the strategies and objectives within the previous Plan and aims to:

 

·       Provide the community with an overview of current local community safety priorities; and

·       Promote strong community partnerships and connections that contribute to positive community safety outcomes within the City.

 

Three key themes emerged from the review and consultation process that underpin a range of actions and deliverables:

 

·       Safer spaces;

·       Community connection; and

·       Crime prevention.

 

The Plan highlights streamlined and strengthened key priorities in order to address the ongoing challenges related to the prevention and policing of crime. Additionally, the inclusion of support to organisations working with people experiencing homelessness, along with collaboration with the City Homelessness Framework Committee are seen as key imperatives to ensuring a holistic approach is taken when addressing the complex issue of homelessness.


 

Details:

At the Ordinary Council Meeting of 28 May 2019, it was resolved that Council:

 

1.         “1.      RECEIVES the draft Safer Vincent Plan 2019-2022;

2.         2.       AUTHORISES the Chief Executive Officer to advertise the draft Safer Vincent Plan 2019-2022 forpublic comment for a period of 21 days inviting written submissions in accordance with Council Policy No. 4.1.5 – Community Consultation;

3.         3.       NOTES that a further report will be presented to the Ordinary Council Meeting in July 2019 detailing any submissions received during the public comment period; and

4.         4.       NOTES that the draft Safer Vincent Plan 2019-2022 will be subject to further formatting, styling and graphic design as determined by the Chief Executive Officer prior to publication.”

 

Public advertising of the draft Safer Vincent Plan 2019-2022 has been undertaken in accordance with Police 4.1.5 – Community Consultation.

 

37 visitors to the EHQ website viewed the draft Plan during the consultation period and of these, nine (9) responses were received through EHQ and a further seven (7) responses were received as written correspondence.

 

In addition, verbal feedback was received from a number of internal and external stakeholders. Feedback of an administrative nature (i.e. changes to the responsible work area) has not been included in the consultation notes.

 

Of note, is WA Police Force’s recommendation in relation to the value of displaying the crime statistics for each suburb. The WA Police Force recommend that:

 

·       Crime categories relating to domestic offences and those which fall outside the scope of the jurisdiction of local government (ie. Homicide, Sexual Offences, Assault (Family), Threatening Behaviour (Family), Deprivation of Liberty and Breach of Violence Restraining Order should be removed from the statistics;

·       As crime trends for each individual suburb are very similar, suburb-specific data could be removed and replaced with data and commentary which clearly shows the offence types which are a priority within the City as a whole; and

·       Further commentary around the higher crime rates in the suburb of Perth, which is shared with the City of Perth, should be provided to provide greater context.

 

Representatives from the WA Police Force have also suggested that the Commander, Metro Region North could provide a general summary about crime trends and priority offences in the Plan to further demonstrate the City’s collaborative approach to community safety and crime prevention.

 

Based on the submissions received, Administration believes that most of the areas of concern will be addressed through existing actions and deliverables, with the following minor amendments:

 

·       Inclusion of an ‘About this Plan’ section to further clarify the objectives of the Safer Vincent Plan; and its link to the City’s existing strategies and planning framework;

·       Place a greater emphasis on the key themes, actions and deliverables outlined in the Plan by moving the current location of the crime statistics to the end of the document as supporting information; and

·       The inclusion of a new deliverable relating to the City’s commitment to the provision of services such as Outreach Workers predominantly at Weld Square.

Consultation/Advertising:

Preparation of the draft Safer Vincent Plan 2019-2022 was based upon a variety of inputs and feedback, including:

 

·       An analysis of the thoughts and ideas related to community safety, captured in the Imagine Vincent community engagement campaign from local residents, businesses, community organisations and visitors;


 

·       Feedback from key stakeholders including:

o   WA Police Force

o   Nyoongar Outreach Services

o   Safer Vincent Advisory Group

·       An analysis of available crime statistics and other available data.

 

Following Council endorsement, the draft Plan was released for community consultation from 25 June 2019 until 16 July 2019 and advertised during this period as follows:

 

·       A news story on the City’s website on 25 June, launching the draft Safer Vincent Plan community consultation;

·       A comprehensive social media campaign (Facebook) commencing on 25 June 2019, advising that the draft Safer Vincent Plan 2019-2022 was open for comment, and promoting the three key focus areas of the draft Plan, along with promotion of the City’s existing and proposed community safety initiatives;

·       Social media posts on Twitter and LinkedIn on 25 June 2019;

·       Promotion through the Perth District – WA Police Force Facebook page on 25 June 2019 (reach of over 31,000 followers); and

·       A link to the City’s online community engagement portal (EHQ) sent to community networks and stakeholders including WA Police Force, Nyoongar Outreach Services and the City’s Advisory Groups.

 

Direct engagement with a number of key internal and external stakeholders also took place during the consultation period.

 

The submissions received have been detailed in Attachment 1.

Legal/Policy:

Nil.

Risk Management Implications:

Low:       While there is no legislative requirement to adopt a Community Safety and Crime Prevention Plan, it is important to promote a collaborative, holistic and whole of community approach to community safety and crime prevention within the City of Vincent.

Strategic Implications:

This is in keeping with the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2018-2028:

 

Connected Community

We have enhanced opportunities for our community to build relationships and connections with each other and the City.

 

We are an inclusive, accessible and equitable City for all.

 

 

Thriving Places

Our town centres and gathering spaces are safe, easy to use and attractive places where pedestrians have priority.

Innovative and Accountable

 

Our community is aware of what we are doing and how we are meeting our goals.

We are open and accountable to an engaged community.

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.

Financial/Budget Implications:

Specific actions and deliverables within the draft Safer Vincent Plan 2019-2022 will be delivered through allocations in the 2019/20 operating budget and subsequent budgets subject to Council consideration. Administration will also seek grant funding through the Federal and State Government as opportunities arise.

Comments:

The actions and deliverables detailed within the Plan address the areas of concern raised in public submissions.


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                                     20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                                     20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                    20 August 2019

11.5        Pop-Up Play Consultation Results

TRIM Ref:                  D19/120805

Author:                     Philippa Baker, Community Projects Officer

Authoriser:                John Corbellini, A/Executive Director Community and Business Services

Attachments:             1.       Location Pop-Up Play Trial - Woodville Reserve

2.       Location Pop-Up Play Trial - Britannia Reserve

3.       Location Pop-Up Play Trial - Beatty Park Reserve

4.       Summary Graphs and Consultation Responses  

 

Recommendation:

That Council:

1.       NOTE the results of the community consultation received to date on the City’s Pop-Up Play initiative included in Attachment 4;

2.       APPROVES the ongoing use and improvements of the Woodville Reserve creative play space and Britannia Reserve pump track and bike trail;

3.       AUTHORISES BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the reallocating of $40,000 within the 2019/20 Budget toward the overall Public Open Space Strategy 2018 Implementation budget; and

4.       Notes the following budget adjustments to facilitate 3. above:

Existing Budget Item

From

To

Playgrounds for under 4 year olds

$40,000

 

Public open space strategy implementation

 

$40,000

 

5.       NOTES that the following projects have been prioritised for implementation during this financial year in accordance with the Public Open Space Strategy Implementation budget included in the 2019/20 Budget:

·      Potential road to park and road reserve conversion in the vicinity of Brady, Powis, Jugan and Bonnievale streets, Mount Hawthorn (subject to further planning);

·      Active play and sports zone at Birdwood Square (subject to further planning);

·      Netball/basketball ring at Charles Veryard Reserve;

·      BBQ installation at Britannia Reserve;

·      Lighting installation at Leake/Alma Street Reserve; and

·      Amenity upgrades and replacements to meet minimum levels of service, including pop up play program initiatives.

 

Purpose of Report:

To review the community consultation feedback conducted during the trial of pop-up play infrastructure at Woodville Reserve and Britannia Reserve and authorise the reallocation of funds for two under 4 year old playgrounds to the general Public Open Space Strategy Implementation budget.

Background:

A lack of outdoor play equipment, particularly for older children, was identified as a gap in the City’s recently completed Public Open Space Strategy 2018. The independent visual audit of the City of Vincent’s public open space found a distinct lack of play equipment for older children and teenagers with the majority of the City’s play infrastructure focused towards toddlers and young children.

 

The City has received a number of suggestions regarding older children and teenager play facilities, including through:

 

·      The City of Vincent’s Public Open Space Strategy 2018 itself;

·      The Imagine Vincent Community engagement campaign, where a number of children requested more challenging nature based play and play equipment for older children; and

·      Community budget submissions received over the previous three financial years, which requested nature play, playground upgrades and investment in pump tracks and bike trails.

 

Following the adoption of the Public Open Space Strategy in late 2019 the City began a trial of various low cost, low scale pop up play opportunities for older children and teenagers that aligned with these suggestions from the community. Specific areas were selected to accommodate for the children and young people demographic that was identified as under catered for within the Public Open Space Strategy 2018. The amenities included were then developed in consultation with children and young people to create a sense of ownership to meet community demand. The trial included the following:

 

·      A creative play space at Woodville Reserve, as shown in Attachment 1;

·      A pump track and bike trail at Britannia Reserve as shown in Attachment 2; and

·      A sand pyramid and nature play at Beatty Park Reserve, as shown in Attachment 3.

 

The trials were all removable, expandable or able to be used in alternate locations depending upon the feedback received. The trial also provided an opportunity to seek community feedback to inform permanent older children and teenager play facilities in the future.

 

Further pop up play initiatives are currently being rolled out in the form of nature play at Birdwood Square and a parkour demonstration project, which occurred at North Perth Common and is being installed in front of the Loftus Community Centre.

Details:

The Woodville Reserve creative play space was proposed for pop up play as this space was already an informal play area developed over time. The initiative was proposed to improve this space’s function, increased its safety and add to the resources available. The upgrades were developed in collaboration with local children. The safety of the site was improved by removing dangerous sharp objects and nails and resources were improved through increased natural resources such as logs and sand based on input from local children.

 

The Britannia Reserve pump track and bike trail was proposed as a pop up play initiative as it was highlighted in the 2012 Britannia Reserve Master Plan as a recreation node with ‘training trike track’. The Bike Trail location was chosen because it was the furthest area away from residents thereby minimising any impact or noise issues that residents feel may happen. The location also did not impact on any of the sporting clubs / teams that use the active reserve area.

 

The pump track and bike trail was developed through consultation involving local children, adults, Administration staff and a representative from invited local bicycle shops (My Ride Perth Central). The group were involved in a workshop where they provided suggestions as to the design of the pump track and bike trail. The City combined this input with what was appropriate for the site and would fit within a low cost budget and produced a final design.


 

Consultation/Advertising:

Consultation was conducted throughout the pop-up play trial and included an online anonymous survey that was launched on 20 May 2019 and which closed for the Woodville Reserve and Britannia Reserve pop up play initiatives on 12 August 2019.  The following promotion linked readers to the online survey:

 

·      Social media and website promotion;

·      Features in May, June and July editions of the City’s e-newsletter;

·      Local newspaper advertisements – features in May, June and July edition of the City’s full-page Council News;

·      Two media releases – the first for project launch and Woodville Reserve Pop Up Play (in May) and the second for the Pop Up Play at Britannia Reserve (in July);

·      Eco-sign displayed out the front of Vincent Administration Building in May/June;

·      A6 postcard, distributed at City events across May-July (North Perth Common launch, Kaya Wandjoo Festival);

·      A0 ACM sign displayed at Woodville Reserve Pop Up Play, and Beatty Park Reserve Pop Up Play;

·      Information bulletins delivered to residents surrounding each Pop up Play site (Woodville Reserve, Beatty Park Reserve, Britannia Reserve);

·      Pop up engagement sessions at North Perth Common launch event, Kaya Wandjoo Festival and Britannia Reserve Pump Track launch; and

·      Two engagement sessions, at Woodville Reserve and Britannia Reserve where local children discussed what they wanted out of pop-up play.

 

The online survey asked whether the community wanted to see more pop up play, asked for feedback on the pop up play at Woodville Reserve and the proposed pop up play at Britannia Reserve and asked for survey participant’s preferences and ideas.

 

Between 20 May 2019 and 12 August 2019 the City received 145 responses to the online survey. Over 91 percent of respondents stated that they would like to see more pop up play equipment in the City of Vincent.

 

All of the 12 survey responses received regarding the Woodville Reserve pop up play initiative were positive.

 

Of the 111 comments received in relation to the Britannia Reserve Pop Up pump track and bike trail, 101 (91%) indicated that they were supportive, seven (6%) indicated that they were not supportive and three (3%) did not indicate their level of support but had suggestions.

 

In relation to the preferences for future pop up play, a total of 140 response were received with bmx pump tracks ranking the highest followed by obstacle courses, parkour equipment/courses and sand pyramids, out of those four options. Other than these four suggestions, the ideas for pop up play focused mainly on bike tracks and skate infrastructure with the following ideas also being suggested:

 

·      Informal play – stick huts, scrap materials, cubby building, nature play, muddy play, kids version of men’s shed;

·      Dog exercise areas;

·      Disc golf;

·      Giant puzzles;

·      Circus skills/games/activities;

·      Ziplines;

·      Open air theatre;

·      School yard games, sand pyramids and chalk drawing in town centres;

·      Basketball rings; and

·      Water park.

 

The results of the online survey, including all of the comments and suggestions, are included in Attachment 4.

 

Attendees at the launch of the pump track and Britannia Reserve, the Kaya Wandjoo NAIDOC week festival and North Perth Common opening provided the following preferences for further investment in play opportunities.

 

Rank

Type of play

Pump Track Launch

Kaya Wandjoo NAIDOC Week Festival

North Perth Common

Total

1

Pump Track

19

12

5

36

2

Parkour

15

12

5

32

3

Climbing and Bouldering

12

9

5

26

4

Obstacle Course

9

5

4

18

5

Nature Play

4

6

6

16

6

Swings and Ropes

4

5

3

12

TOTAL

63

49

28

140

 

Other suggestions included:

 

·       Basketball court/hoops

·       Art and craft play

·       BMX jump park

·       Mazes

·       Water park

·       Skate park

·       Tree climbing

·       Ninja warrior course

·       Trails

·       Laser beam convention

·       Abseiling

·       Cubby building

·       Soccer goals

·       More lighting at Britannia

 

Those submitters and survey participants who provided their contact details have been advised of this Council Report and the survey page on the City’s website has been updated to advise that the results of the survey are being presented to Council at this meeting.

Legal/Policy:

Public Open Space Strategy;

Policy No.2.1.6 – Parks and Reserves – Playgrounds, Barbeques, outdoor exercise equipment and lights;

Policy No.4.1.4 – Community Consultation.

Risk Management Implications:

Low:       The pop-up play initiatives are low cost, low scale and able to be removable, expandable or used in alternate locations, ensuring the financial and reputational risk is minimised.

 

Australian Standard AS 4685 – Playground Equipment & Surfacing

 

Play is a significant aspect of children’s lives through which they develop and demonstrate knowledge, skills, concepts and dispositions. It is an important context for all aspects of children’s learning and development including problem-solving, social-emotional development, the acquisition and mastery of physical skills, self-awareness, imaginative abilities, exploration of natural environments, and relaxation. Consideration of play provision should not be limited to formally-equipped areas but also extend to natural elements. Provision should also be made to cater for the needs and interests of users of all abilities.

 

The management of risk in a playground is the responsibility of all involved in the provision of play, including designers, manufacturers and operators. It should be recognized that risk-taking is an essential feature of play provision and of all environments in which children legitimately spend time playing. Play provision aims to offer children the chance to encounter acceptable risks as part of a stimulating and challenging learning environment. Play provision should aim at managing the balance between the need to offer risk and the need to keep children safe from serious harm.

 

5.         Nature Play

 

AS 4685.0 now includes Nature Play. Nature Play is defined in the Australian Standards as:

 

The elements of a playground consisting of natural, non-manufactured items that are incorporated into the playground, including items such as logs, boulders, living plant materials, and surfaces, changes of level and other landscape elements.

 

It should be recognized that risk-taking is an essential feature of play provision and of all environments in which children legitimately spend time playing. Play provision aims to offer children the chance to encounter acceptable risks as part of a stimulating and challenging learning environment. Play provision should aim at managing the balance between the need to offer risk and the need to keep children safe from serious harm.

 

Natural elements incorporated into playgrounds are inherently diverse and open-ended, and many offer the benefit that children can manipulate them for their own play purposes. Such nature-based play environments can help build creativity, imagination, and problem solving skills. Unlike manufactured products and materials, natural elements are not necessarily predictable. They therefore increase the likelihood of children developing risk management skills as they negotiate natural environments, and build resilience through exposure to falls and minor injuries as they learn to adapt their behaviour to the setting.

 

The requirements of AS 4685 shall apply to natural play elements incorporated into a playground, however compliance with some aspects of this Standard may be difficult to achieve without compromising their inherent value or benefits.

 

Where the contents of this Standard do not apply directly to natural elements, a risk benefit assessment may be required to determine the suitability of such elements. For example, while it may not be practical or desirable to place barriers or handrails on a log or boulder, the following requirements should still be addressed: corresponding to the hc;

 

• The impact area should be free of obstacles that could cause injury;

• Hazardous situations that may cause entrapment should be avoided; and

• Consideration should be given to preventing easy access to hazardous situations.

 

NOTE 1: The use of a risk benefit assessment does not allow designers to simply replace manufactured items with natural elements in an effort to avoid the requirements of the Standards.

 

Designers and operators should consider the local context of each play setting in weighing up the risks and benefits associated with the use of natural materials. Where children have few opportunities to explore and play in nature, the benefits of nature play might be given additional weighting even when they are associated with some risks.

 

NOTE 2: This is especially applicable to the management of loose elements in playgrounds.

 

Playing with branches, pebbles and other loose items offers significant benefit to children, and school and park managers should consider strategies to manage such activities rather than deny them.

Strategic Implications:

This is in keeping with the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2018-2028:

 

Enhanced Environment

Our parks and reserves are maintained, enhanced and well utilised.

 

Connected Community

Our community facilities and spaces are well known and well used.

 


 

Innovative and Accountable

Our community is aware of what we are doing and how we are meeting our goals.

Our resources and assets are planned and managed in an efficient and sustainable manner.

We are open and accountable to an engaged community.

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS:

The trials of pop-up play at Britannia Reserve and Woodville Reserve were implemented on space designated as public open space, in areas which maximises the types of uses for a variety of users. Low cost and nature play elements were created using natural resources as much as possible.

Financial/Budget Implications:

Pop up play initiatives were funded through the 2018/19 Public Open Space Implementation budget and the City’s operational budget. All works were undertaken within budget. 

 

As part of Administration’s planning for the delivery of the 2019/20 Budget, it was noted that an amount of $40,000 was carried forward into the 2019/20 capital budget from the 2018/19 financial year to install 2 playgrounds for under 4 year olds, one in the south ward and one in the north ward. As discussed in the Background of this report, the visual audit conducted as part of the Public Open Space Strategy development indicated that play equipment for older children was a significant gap and that younger children are already well catered for in the City of Vincent. It is proposed that this $40,000 budgeted amount is reallocated to the Public Open Space Strategy Implementation budget so that it can then be utilised for public open space works that cater for a variety of ages in line with the consultation results and to fill identified gaps in children and youth infrastructure across the City.

Comments:

The results of the consultation indicated strong community support for both more pop-up play trials and the existing pop up play spaces at Woodville and Britannia reserves, given their proven ability to provide engaging and exciting play opportunities for children and youth.

 

Britannia Reserve Pump Track and Bike Trail

 

The majority of feedback received during the trial indicated strong support for the pump track and bike trail and the high volume of usage.

 

Concerns highlighted in community feedback related to:

 

·      Impacts on the environment due to the trail being located among trees and the potential for conflict with tortoises;

·      Conflicts between bike riders and other users of the park, including dogs and walkers, due to the trail being located in proximity to an off leash dog area and footpaths where park users walk; and

·      Safety concerns with the design of the tracks and low hanging vegetation.

 

Impacts on the Environment

 

No trees were removed as part of the pump track and bike trail, with the track route planned around the trees, maintaining the valuable purposes they provide to the community. Minimal tree pruning and weed removal (predominantly of dead material that may pose a hazard) was required.

 

In regards to a concern that the tortoise and local fauna population would have a safe access from Lake Monger removed, the only access the tortoises have currently to Britannia Reserve is through a long drain which runs under the freeway for over 75 metres. A fence currently runs the length of Britannia Reserve adjacent to the freeway which also prevents tortoises from accessing the reserve unless sections of the fence are damaged. The implementation of a pump track and bike trail would not pose significant threat to the tortoises as they do not currently have safe access due to these existing restrictions.

 


 

Conflicts between users

 

A number of concerns have been raised regarding the additional number of bicycles riders using Britannia Reserve and the risk to both pedestrians walking on the reserves paths and dogs using the off-the-lead area conflicting with these bicycles. Britannia Reserve is large reserve with adequate space to cater for all types of people and various types or recreation. A number of improvements have been and are proposed to be made to ensure the potential for conflict between these uses is minimised, including the following:

 

·      Logs, provided from Main Roads free of cost, used to physically separate the sealed dual-use pathway from the dirt path in the areas where concern has been raised regarding bikes using footpaths;

·      Limestone treatment of the bike trail north, beyond the back of Litis Stadium up to the end of Federation Street, and south, beyond the edge of the pump track down to the end of Bourke Street, to direct older children and teens off the pathways within Britannia Reserve. Bike riders are more likely to choose this limestone bike trail to access the area, as it will be a more fun and challenging ride than using the Britannia Reserve paths, thus reducing an amount of conflict on the sealed pathway;

·      Discrete use of signage to direct riders to the areas of lowest conflict and make bike riders on the dirt track aware of the other users on the pathway; and

·      Ongoing monitoring of the interaction between both bike riders and other park users and improvements as required.

 

It is proposed that whilst some resistance from the community due to the conflicts with current users, the size of the reserve is more than sufficient to cater to a wide range of users for a variety of purposes and the pump track and mountain bike trail is recommended to be retained for ongoing use.

 

Safety

 

The safety of the track has been assessed by the City’s engineers and parks teams. This includes branches overhanging the track. Branches have been retained where they were considered safe, with low branches painted red so that it is more visible to users of the track.

 

If the track becomes permanent, the City will make continual safety improvements based ongoing advice from experts, engagement with the users and consultation with the local community. 

 

Woodville Reserve Creative Play Space

 

All of the feedback received during the Woodville Reserve pop up trial indicated strong support for the creative play space.

 

Of the feedback received, comments included that the City could provide more resources that kids are able to utilise and that the City should not over-engineer the space. It is recommended that the site remain an informal place space where its purpose is determined by the users, the children and young people.

 

It is recommended based on these results to approve the ongoing use of this site in its current form, working with the children and young people to consult them on any further resource needs and determine any changes or expansion depending on use and demand.

 

Future Pop-Up Play

 

The trial of pop-up play at Woodville Reserve and Britannia Reserve has provided an opportunity for the City to provide creative play infrastructure to the children and youth within the City and conduct simultaneous community consultation to inform future pop-up play investment.

 

These trial sites are recommended to be retained as creative play sites based on the positive feedback received by the community.

 

It is recommended that future creative play and pop-up play infrastructure is delivered through the Public Open Space Strategy Implementation budget and prioritised by:

 

·      Implementing in areas that have gaps in provision of youth infrastructure;

·      Basing initiates on results of community consultation to date as to the type of play; and

·      Installing infrastructure that is low cost, low scale and removable, expandable or able to be used in alternate locations.

 

The other upgrades proposed across the City as part of the Public Open Space Strategy implementation program budget are detailed below:

 

·      Potential road to park and road reserve conversion in the vicinity of Brady, Powis, Jugan and Bonnievale streets, Mount Hawthorn (subject to further planning); and

·      Active play and sports zone at Birdwood Square (subject to further planning).

 

Council and the community will be consulted with on any major capital works before any plans are finalised or works occur. 

 

Other smaller upgrades and improvements include:

 

·      Netball/basketball ring at Charles Veryard Reserve;

·      BBQ installation at Britannia Reserve;

·      Lighting installation at Leake/Alma Street Reserve; and

·      Amenity upgrades and replacements to meet minimum levels of service, including pop up play program initiatives at various reserves.

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                                     20 August 2019

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                                     20 August 2019

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                    20 August 2019

12          Chief Executive Officer

12.1        Information Bulletin

TRIM Ref:                  D19/77507

Author:                     Emma Simmons, Governance and Council Support Officer

Authoriser:                David MacLennan, Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:             1.       Unconfirmed Minutes of the Urban Mobility Advisory Group meeting held on 11 March 2019

2.       Unconfirmed Minutes of the Urban Mobility Advisory Group meeting held on 15 April 2019

3.       Unconfirmed Minutes of the Urban Mobility Advisory Group meeting held on 27 May 2019

4.       Confirmed Minutes of the Design Review Panel Meeting held on 5 June 2019

5.       Confirmed Minutes of the Design Review Panel Meeting held on 3 July 2019

6.       Confirmed Minutes of the Design Review Panel Meeting held on 10 July 2019

7.       Unconfirmed Minutes of the Children and Young People Advisory Group Meeting held on 1 July 2019

8.       Unconfirmed Minutes of the Reconciliation Action Plan Working Group Meeting held on 1 July 2019

9.       Minutes of Mindarie Regional Council Meeting held on 4 July 2019

10.     Street Tree Removal Information

11.     Statistics for Development Applications as at July 2019

12.     Ranger Statistics for 1 January 2019 to 30 June 2019

13.     Parking Infringement Write-Offs - 1 January 2019 to 30 June 2019

14.     Register of Legal Action and Prosecutions Monthly - Confidential  

15.     Register of State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) Appeals – Progress Report as at 1 August 2019

16.     Register of Applications Referred to the MetroWest Development Assessment Panel – Current

17.     Register of Applications Referred to the Design Review Panel – Current

18.     Register of Petitions - Progress Report - August 2019

19.     Register of Notices of Motion - Progress Report - August 2019

20.     Register of Reports to be Actioned - Progress Report - August 2019  

 

Recommendation:

That Council RECEIVES the Information Bulletin dated July 2019.

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda                                                                      20 August 2019

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda