CITY OF BAYSWATER MINUTES

Transcription

CITY OF BAYSWATER
MINUTES
OF THE
ORDINARY MEETING
OF COUNCIL
29 March 2011
ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
29 MARCH 2011
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ITEM
SUBJECT
PAGE NO
1
OFFICIAL OPENING .............................................................................................1
2
RECORD OF ATTENDANCE, APOLOGIES, ABSENCE AND LEAVE
OF ABSENCE (PREVIOUSLY APPROVED)......................................................1
2.1
Attendance, Apologies and Absence
1
2.2
Leave of Absence (Previously Approved)
2
3
PUBLIC QUESTION TIME ...................................................................................3
4
APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE .................................................11
5
4.1
Applicant: Cr Graham Pittaway
11
4.2
Applicant: Cr Michael Sabatino
11
4.3
Applicant: Cr Alan Radford
11
4.4
Applicant: Cr Marlene Robinson
11
4.5
Applicant: Cr Sonia Turkington
11
4.6
Applicant: Cr Sylvan Albert
11
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES .......................................................................12
5.1
6
12
DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST SUMMARY ....................................................12
6.1
6.2
6.3
7
Ordinary Meeting : 22 February 2011
Disclosures at the Planning and Development Services &
Administration and
12
Disclosures at the Technical Services and Finance & Personnel
Committee
13
Disclosures at the Ordinary Council Meeting
14
URGENT BUSINESS.............................................................................................15
Page i
7.1
8
29 MARCH 2011
Donation – Noranda Junior Cricket Club – Trophy Day
15
PETITIONS.............................................................................................................16
8.1
Cr Michael Sabatino – PAW – Tolworth Way and Irwin Road,
Embleton
16
8.2
Cr Alan Radford – Waltham Reserve
16
8.3
Cr Alan Radford – Letter from Mr and Mrs D M Craig –
Waltham Reserve
16
Cr Alan Radford – Letter from Mr Terry and Mrs Sandra
Carter – Waltham Reserve
16
His Worship the Mayor, Cr Terry Kenyon ,JP - Corella Cull
16
8.4
8.5
9
MOTIONS OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN ...............17
10
NOTICE OF MOTION FOR CONSIDERATION AT THE FOLLOWING
MEETING IF GIVEN DURING THE MEETING.............................................17
11
BUSINESS - PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES &
ADMINISTRATION AND COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE .........18
11.1
Planning and Development Services
24
11.1.1
Council Ratification of Planning Determinations under
Delegated Authority
24
Subdivision and Amalgamation Responses under Delegated
Authority
25
Building Licences Issued under City’s Policy for Single
Residential Development
26
11.1.2
11.1.3
11.1.4
Proposed Garage
Location:
Lot 56, No. 34 McGilvray Avenue, Morley
File No:
DA11-0009
27
11.1.5
Proposed Two (2) Storey Single House
Location:
Lot 804, No. 1A Aughton Street, Bayswater
File No:
DA10-0849
31
11.1.6
Proposed Two (2) Lot Survey Strata Subdivision
Location:
Lot 374, No. 13 Dorking Place, Morley
File No:
SD11-0017
37
11.1.7
Proposed Landscaping and Parking for Consulting Rooms
41
Page ii
Location:
File No:
29 MARCH 2011
Lot 179, No. 175 Whatley Crescent, Bayswater
DA11-0123, SD11-0009
CR TERRY BLANCHARD DECLARED AN IMPARTIAL INTEREST
11.1.8
Proposed Home Occupation
Location:
Lot. 221 No. 26 Weatherill Way, Noranda
File No:
DA11-0107
47
11.1.9
Parking of Commercial Vehicle
Location:
Lot. 222, No. 28 Weatherill Way, Noranda
File No:
DA11-0108
55
11.1.10
Proposed Additions to Existing Factory
Location:
Lot 800, No. 520 Guildford Road, Bayswater
File No:
DA10-0644
61
11.1.11
Proposed Change of Use to Industry and Refurbishment of
Buildings
Location:
Lots 61 & 62, No. 18-20 Sussex Street, Maylands
File No:
DA10-0929
67
11.1.12
Proposed Change of Use to Health Club
Location:
Lot 361, No.70 Walter Road West, Bedford
File No:
DA11-0062
74
11.1.13
Perth Airport Update
80
11.1.14
Update on Prostitution Matters
84
11.1.15
Building Bill 2010
86
11.1.16
2011 National Mainstreet Conference
Location:
Australian Wine Centre, Adelaide
90
11.2
Administration and Community Services
92
11.2.1
Aquatic Facilities Management Report- February 2011
92
11.2.2
City of Bayswater Rangers Services Report – January and
February 2011
94
11.2.3
Section 26 Exemption to Keep Three Dogs at a Premises
96
11.2.4
Non Drying Paint Security Product
99
11.2.5
Bayswater Sports Club Inc. Upper Hillcrest Reserve
Clubrooms
101
11.2.6
City of Bayswater 2011 Scholarship Program
105
11.2.7
WALGA State Council Meeting – February 2011
111
Page iii
11.2.8
12
29 MARCH 2011
2011 National General Assembly of Local Government –
Registration of Delegates and Call for Submissions of Motion
113
BUSINESS - TECHNICAL SERVICES & FINANCE AND PERSONNEL
COMMITTEE.......................................................................................................117
12.1
Technical Services
121
12.1.1
Smoking Local Laws
121
12.1.2
Slade Street Traffic Management
126
12.1.3
Gummery Street Footpath
134
12.1.4
On-Street Parking - Maylands Primary School
Location:
Kelvin Street, Maylands
138
MR DAMIEN MARTIN, ACTING DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES, DECLARED AN IMPARTIAL INTEREST
12.1.5
Underground Power Proposal - Ashfield
141
12.1.6
Budget Amendment - Road Asset Management Software
Absolute Majority Required
144
12.1.7
Rose Avenue Reserve Development Proposal
146
Location:
Cnr Rose Avenue and Railway Parade, Bayswater
12.1.8
Hillcrest Reserve Living Stream
148
12.1.9
Claughton Reserve Concept Plan
152
12.1.10
Swan and Canning River – Draft Priority Plan
163
12.1.11
EMRC Council Meeting - 17 February 2011
168
CR ALAN RADFORD DECLARED AN IMPARTIAL INTEREST
CR BARRY MCKENNA, DEPUTY MAY OR, DECLARED AN IMPARTIAL INTEREST
CR GRAHAM PITTAW AY , DECLARED AN IMPARTIAL INTEREST
12.1.12
Making Cities Liveable Conference
170
12.2
Finance & Personnel
172
12.2.1
Financial Reports for the Period 1 July 2010 to 28 February
2011
172
12.2.2
Accounts Payable as at 22 March 2011
199
12.2.3
Investment Portfolio as at 28 February 2011
202
12.2.4
Donation - 2011 LGMA Women in Local Government
Conference
207
Page iv
12.2.5
29 MARCH 2011
Donation – Alex Murphy – 2011 Australian Rowing
Championships, Adelaide
209
CR BARRY MCKENNA, DEPUTY MAY OR, DECLARED AN IMPARTIAL INTEREST
12.2.6
Donation – Australian Red Cross
211
12.2.7
Donation - Bayswater Petanque Club – City of Bayswater
Petanque Challenge Trophy
213
Donation - Dennis Lillee Sports Foundation for People with
Disabilities
214
Donation - Ion Uili - 2011 Junior Nationals Grid Iron
Tournament, Narrabeen, NSW
216
Donation – Jakob Ratnayeke – National Electric Wheelchair
Sports Games
217
Donation - Marissa Barbaro - 2011 Rotary Youth Leadership
Awards (RYLA) International Seminar - Turkey
219
Donation – Ryan Dhue – Balcatta Soccer Club U16's Team The Great Wall of China Cup, Beijing, China
221
Donation – The International Association of Lions Clubs
District 201W1 - "Razzamatazz"
223
12.2.8
12.2.9
12.2.10
12.2.11
12.2.12
12.2.13
13
REPORTS OF MANAGEMENT/ADVISORY COMMITTEES ....................225
13.1
Security Watch Advisory Committee – 14 March 2011
225
13.1.1
Police Crime Statistics – February 2011
225
13.1.2
Security Watch Status Report – February 2011
229
13.1.3
City of Bayswater CCTV Report – February 2011
230
13.1.4
Graffiti Status Report – January 2011
232
13.1.5
Safety in our Suburbs
235
13.2
Local Emergency Management Committee - 14 March 2011
236
13.2.1
Emergency Management Exercise 2011 Update
236
13.2.2
Perth District Local Emergency Management Plan For The
Provision Of Welfare Support
238
13.2.3
Secondary Emergency Power Supply to Council Buildings
239
13.3
Business Reference Group - 14 March 2011
240
Page v
29 MARCH 2011
13.3.1
Outstanding Business
240
13.3.2
Deputation by Mr Steve Hunt, Chairperson, Autumn River
Festival
242
13.3.3
Bayswater Village Retail Traders Association’s Report
243
13.3.4
Maylands Business Group’s Report
244
CR SY LVAN ALBERT DECLARED AN IMPARTIAL INTEREST
13.3.5
Morley Business Group’s Report
245
13.3.6
Industrial Business Group’s Report
247
13.3.7
Central Eastern Business Association’s Report
249
CR MIKE ANDERTON, JP DECLARED AN IMPARTIAL INTEREST
CR GRAHAM PITTAW AY , DECLARED AN IMPARTIAL INTEREST
13.4
Local Govt Community Housing Program (LGCHP) Tenants
Committee – 16 March 2011
250
13.4.1
Outstanding Business Items Report
250
13.4.2
Local Government Community Housing Program Status
Report
252
13.5
Golf Courses Management – 21 March 2011
254
13.5.1
Maylands Peninsula Golf Course Status Report
Attachment: Maylands Peninsula Public Golf Course Report
254
(Confidential)
13.5.2
Embleton Public Golf Course Status Report
Attachments: Embleton Public Golf Course Report
255
(Confidential)
13.5.3
City of Bayswater Charity Golf Day 2011
256
13.5.4
Sponsorship for Pro Am Golf Tournament
259
13.5.5
Proposed Driving Range Upgrade - Maylands Peninsula Golf
Course
261
13.5.6
Proposed Hard Stand Areas - Maylands Peninsula Golf
263
13.5.7
Capital Project: Raising of 5th Green and Fairway - Maylands
Peninsula Golf Course
264
13.5.8
Request for Reimbursement
266
13.6
Heritage Development Advisory Committee
267
13.6.1
Heritage Grant Application
267
Page vi
Location:
File No:
29 MARCH 2011
Bardon House - Lot 84, No. 17 View Street, Maylands
VIE-4/17
13.6.2
Proposed Two (2) Patio Additions
Location:
Lot 501, No. 10A Mitchell Street, Mount Lawley
File No:
DA11-0013
271
13.6.3
Proposed Two (2) Storey Grouped Dwelling
Location:
Lot 1 No. 122 Eighth Avenue, Maylands
File No:
DA10-0198
274
13.6.4
Proposed Change of Use from Shop to Small Bar
Location:
Lot 55, No. 198 Whatley Crescent, Maylands
File No:
DA11-0058
279
CR MIKE ANDERTON, JP DECLARED A FINANCIAL INTEREST
CR MARLENE ROBINSON DECLARED AN IMPARTIAL INTEREST
14
MAYOR’S REPORT............................................................................................287
15
AFFIXING OF COMMON SEAL ......................................................................289
15.1
16
Authorisation for Affixing of the Common Seal
289
DISCUSSION OF MATTERS BEHIND CLOSED DOORS ...........................290
16.1
290
16.1.1
Status Report - Planning Complaints and Zoning Breaches
290
CR BARRY MCKENNA, DEPUTY MAY OR, DECLARED A FINANCIAL INTEREST
16.2
291
16.2.1
Generations Centre Family House Community Youth Project
291
MR DOUG PEARSON, DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL SERVICES, DECLARED AN
IMPARTIAL INTEREST
16.3
Technical Services
292
16.3.1
Unkempt Property
292
16.3.2
Unkempt Properties
293
CR SALLY PALMER DECLARED A FINANCIAL INTEREST
16.3.3
Tender No. 10-2010 - Lightning Swamp Boardwalk
294
ABSOLUTE MAJORITY REQUIRED
16.4
Finance & Personnel
296
16.5
Reports of Management/Advisory Committees
297
Page vii
16.5.1
Local Government Community Housing Program Committee –
16 March 2011
297
Community Housing Program - Wait List
16.5.2
Golf Course Management Committee – 21 March 2011
Charity Golf Day 2010 Debrief
Location:
Maylands Peninsula Public Golf Course
16.5.1.1
16.5.2.1
17
29 MARCH 2011
298
CLOSURE .............................................................................................................299
Page viii
ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
29 MARCH 2011
CITY OF BAYSWATER
Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Bayswater City Council which took place in the
Council Chambers, City of Bayswater Civic Centre, 61 Broun Avenue, Morley on Tuesday,
29 March 2011.
MINUTES
Prior to the opening of the Ordinary Council meeting, His Worship Mayor, Cr Terry Kenyon,
JP, presented the Council with the 1st Place Trophy that the Bayswater Waves Lifeguards
attained in the Annual Pool Lifeguard Challenge.
His Worship the Mayor also presented to the City a plaque from the Ministry of Sport and
Olympic Committee in Indonesia as part of the Department of Sport and Recreation of WA’s
showcase of Premier Aquatic Facilities, of which Bayswater Waves has been featured as a
highlight in Perth.
1
OFFICIAL OPENING
The Chairperson, His Worship the Mayor, Cr Terry Kenyon, JP, welcomed those in
attendance and declared the meeting open for the ordinary business of Council at 7:02pm.
2
RECORD OF ATTENDANCE, APOLOGIES, ABSENCE AND LEAVE OF
ABSENCE (PREVIOUSLY APPROVED)
2.1
Attendance, Apologies and Absence
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR SYLVAN ALBERT MOVED, CR MARLENE ROBINSON SECONDED that the
following Attendance, Apologies and Absences be accepted:
Members
West Ward
Cr Terry Kenyon, JP, Mayor
Cr Marlene Robinson
Cr Terry Blanchard
Chairperson
Central Ward
Cr Barry McKenna, Deputy Mayor
Cr Michael Sabatino
Cr Sally Palmer
South Ward
Cr Sonia Turkington
Cr Sylvan Albert
Page 1
29 MARCH 2011
North Ward
Cr Mike Anderton, JP
Cr Graham Pittaway, OAM
Cr Alan Radford
Officers
Ms Francesca Lefante
Mr Ted Budzinksi
Mr Doug Pearson
Mr Jeremy Edwards
Mr Damian Martin
Mr Martyn Boyle
Ms Wardia Du Toit
Ms Raylene Vucens
Chief Executive Officer
Director of Finance
Director of Technical Services
Director of Administration and Community Services
A/Director of Planning and Development Services
A/Manager Administration
PA/Director of Technical Services
PA/Director of Administration and Community Services
Public
37
Press
2
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
2.2
Leave of Absence (Previously Approved)
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR SYLVAN ALBERT SECONDED that the
Leave of Absence (Previously Approved) be accepted:
Nil.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Page 2
3
29 MARCH 2011
PUBLIC QUESTION TIME
In accordance with Section 5.24 of the Local Government Act 1995, time is allocated for
questions to be raised by members of the public.
NOTE: HIS WORSHIP THE MAYOR, CR TERRY KENYON, JP WILL PROVIDE A
VERBAL RESPONSE TO QUESTION/S RAISED, WHERE POSSIBLE AT THE
MEETING. ADDITIONAL WRITTEN RESPONSES WILL BE PROVIDED
WHERE ADVISED BY THE MAYOR
Public Question Time commenced at 7:03pm.
The following questions were submitted in writing and verbally:
Ms Andrea Francioli – 144/81 King William Street, Bayswater
Question 1:
How many of the Councillors who support the Slade Street cul-de-sac have tried turning right
onto Guildford Road from Slade Street during peak hours when such a manoeuvre is
extremely difficult?
His Worship the Mayor, Cr Terry Kenyon, JP advised that this matter is up for discussion this
evening.
Question 2:
Will a professional traffic engineer be consulted about the Slade Street cul-de-sac to assess the
risks and side effects? Will the Councillors adjust their positions considering the outcome of
this assessment?
His Worship the Mayor advised that the City of Bayswater's professional engineers will assess
the outcome of all traffic issues within the City and would advise accordingly. The matter is
up for debate this evening and all Councillors have an opportunity to vote.
Question 3:
Why were Ascot Park ratepayers not informed and consulted about the proposed cul-de-sac on
Slade Street when the survey on the 3 month chicanes was sent out?
His Worship the Mayor advised that an Ascot Park resident was on the Committee to provide
input.
Question 4:
Why is the Bayswater Council willing to spend nearly $300,000 on the Slade Street cul-de-sac
just to satisfy a small number of residents, without consulting the 203 ratepayers of Ascot
Park?
His Worship the Mayor advised that Slade Street residents had to endure speed and traffic for
over 20 years and that an Ascot Park resident was on the Committee to assist with the
consultation process.
Page 3
29 MARCH 2011
Question 5:
Will the opinion of 203 Ascot Park ratepayers be given due weight by those Councillors in
favour of the cul-de-sac?
His Worship the Mayor advised that Council considers all ratepayers and information
provided by the City's officers, and it is not about numbers, but rather the safety and best
outcome for all residents concerned.
A copy of Ms Francioli's questions can be located at Appendix 1. Note, a verbal response
given to the question at the meeting.
Mr Mohamed Mifhar Abdul Majeed – 144/81 King William Street, Bayswater
Question 1:
How many ratepayers of Ascot Park were consulted before making the decision to disregard
the successful results on the 3 month chicanes trail on Slade Street?
His Worship the Mayor, Cr Terry Kenyon, JP advised that the City considers all information
received and weighs the outcomes and therefore does not disregard residents concerns. In
addition, a resident representative from the Ascot Park complex was on the Committee.
Question 2:
How many Ascot Park ratepayers said they would prefer a cul-de-sac to the chicane solution?
His Worship the Mayor advised that this was a trial as was the chicane on Slade Street and
the matter is up for discussion this evening.
Question 3:
There are more ratepayers in Ascot Park than all the rest of Slade Street: Why is their opinion
in the matter of the Slade Street cul-de-sac not being given the weight it deserves?
His Worship the Mayor advised that all residents concerns are considered to provide the best
outcomes for all.
Question 4:
The proposed cul-de-sac on Slade Street is over 7 times more expensive than the chicanes
solution: Why is a professional traffic risk assessment not being carried out before considering
a trial of the cul-de-sac?
His Worship the Mayor advised that the most important factor is safety and traffic
management. Ascot Park carried out in-house modifications without any consultation from
Council or Slade Street. Council has received a concern from Slade Street.
Question 5:
Will the Councillors in favour of the Slade Street cul-de-sac change their position if a
professional traffic risk assessment shows that the cul-de-sac will create traffic risk and other
problems for Ascot Park?
His Worship the Mayor advised that Council considers all reports on trails and traffic
management from its Engineers to seek the best outcome for all concerned.
A copy of Mr Abdul Majeed's questions can be located at Appendix 2. Note, verbal responses
given to the questions at the meeting.
Page 4
29 MARCH 2011
Mr Chris Williams - 22 Cook Place, Lesmurdie
Question 1:
In relation to my proposed subdivision and development proposals for 175 Whatley Crescent,
Bayswater, on tonight's agenda, I would like to ask Council if it is prepared to exercise
discretion it has in its Scheme to look at each case on its merits, and recognise by supporting
these proposals that the subject site is presently underutilised as CONSULTING ROOMS for
a SOLE PRACTIONER and has much scope for an increased level of development in a
manner that will not have a detrimental impact on the functionality and amenity of the site, or
on its surrounds, nor likely to create an undesirable precedent elsewhere given the unique
circumstances.
His Worship the Mayor, Cr Terry Kenyon, JP advised this matter is up for discussion this
evening.
A copy of Mr William's question can be located at Appendix 3. Note, a verbal response given
to the question at the meeting.
Mrs Pat Lim - 1 Johnson Road, Maylands
Question 1:
Some months ago, I brought to the attention of the meeting about the fencing around the water
at Tranby Units beside the small shopping centre on Peninsula Road that was badly in need of
repairs.
While the Council has repaired the front fence and put in a new gate for which I am grateful,
can you inform why the side fence was not also repaired before it falls into the water too? I
cannot see why the whole fence was not done all together at the one time. Please attend to
this matter?
His Worship the Mayor, Cr Terry Kenyon, JP advised that he was aware of the front fence
being repaired and would have officers investigate the matter regarding the repair of the side
fence and would provide a written response in relation to this matter.
Question 2:
While Council is allowing all the small street cafes to mushroom up in Eighth Avenue and
Whatley Crescent, Maylands, Mr Mayor who controls the matter of health with all the dirty
coffee mugs etc being left outside to attract the flies when the patrons leave the site. There are
no bins outside either for clients to dispose of their rubbish.
His Worship the Mayor advised that this is under the control of the City's Health Section and
will have them monitor this more regularly. Also the comment in relation to the availability
of bins has been taken onboard.
Question 3:
Mayor Kenyon can you tell me why both Councillors from the Maylands Ward are going to
the same National Main Stream Decision Making Conference on 1 - 4 May for urban
development. Is it so they can each remind the other of what they did not hear or understand?
I would like to have a copy of any report they write which I hope is not just a half a page. I
would like a proper detailed report on the conference content?
His Worship the Mayor advised that Councillors are entitled to attend three conferences
within an election term in accordance with Council Policy and may provide a report to
Council.
Page 5
29 MARCH 2011
Question 4:
Mayor Kenyon, when Councillors make a statement during Council Meetings and it is
incorrect, do they have to make good that statement at any time to keep the records straight.
My reason for this question is I have followed up the research on the 66 peacocks at Tranby
House according to Cr Albert's statement and the fact is there were 10 peacocks and 6 pea
fowls. This factual information has come from more than one source that were all involved
with Tranby House as volunteers and others at the time the peacocks were in-house and
removed.
His Worship the Mayor advised that this matter has been resolved and at times, we all do
forget.
A copy of Mrs Lim's questions and Council’s written response to Question 1 can be located at
Appendix 4. Note, a verbal response was given to the other questions at the meeting.
Mr Samuel Fogarty - 62/81 King William Street, Bayswater
Question 1:
Considering the trial of chicanes was successful, and thereby an equitable, proven, safe, non
disruptive and economical solution to the traffic problem, what compelling reason do we have
to now be considering the cul-de-sac as an alternative?
His Worship the Mayor, Cr Terry Kenyon, JP advised that the matter is up for discussion
tonight and Council will make a resolution and should further input be required, the matter
will be referred back to Council for consideration.
Question 2:
Will there be live monitoring of safety incidences and traffic build up?
His Worship the Mayor advised that this would be up to Council to consider.
Question: 3
Are Councillors considering the loss of property value of Slade Street and Ascot Gardens
residents that a cul-de-sac would introduce?
His Worship the Mayor advised that Council would look at the best interests of all concerned
residents.
Mr Laurie Brew - 25 Addlestone Road, Morley
Question 1:
Due to the trial undertaken in Walter Road West/Embleton Avenue of speed cushions, I can
now sleep however, this morning, the cushions were removed without consultation. There are
safety issues with the roundabout and my neighbour, his fence was continually being damaged
and therefore now, he parks his truck on the verge, as it would cost less to repair the damage.
It is only a matter of time that someone gets seriously injured and with the Coventrys
Development, traffic will only increase.
His Worship the Mayor, Cr Terry Kenyon, JP, advised that Council takes into consideration
all ratepayers concerns and a report on the matter will be presented to Council for further
consideration prior to installation of permanent measures.
Page 6
29 MARCH 2011
Question 2:
Is it cost effective to have the speed cushions and signage removed? Also, signs were
removed and the concrete just left on the verge.
His Worship the Mayor advised that the Council is proactive and that a one month trial was
undertaken. However, a report is coming back to Council on the matter before a decision is
put in place. The comments in relation to the concrete on the verge has been taken onboard.
Mr Ian Frizell - 416 Walter Road West, Morley
Question 1:
As part of the trial, sand bags were put in place however, these obviously are damaged when
vehicles hit them to avoid the speed cushions and will consultation be undertaken with the
residents?
His Worship the Mayor, Cr Terry Kenyon, JP advised a report would be presented to Council
to consider ratepayers comments and a recommendation made by Council and residents
advised accordingly.
Mr Tim Priest - 17 Ardross Way, Noranda
Question 1:
In reference to that part of Noranda currently within the City of Swan, when will the
Bayswater City Officers have completed for Bayswater Councillors a joint draft submission
on the local government boundary matter.
Question 2:
What date will the Bayswater Officers joint submission be presented to a Bayswater
Councillor meeting, and is this City prepared to hold a Special Council Meeting to expedite its
submission to the Local Government Advisory Board, in the interests of Noranda residents.
His Worship the Mayor, Cr Terry Kenyon, JP, advised that the matter is up for discussion at
the April Councillors' Workshop and would provide a written response to these questions.
A copy of Mr Priest's written questions and Council's response can be located at Appendix 5.
Mr Chris Williams - 22 Cook Place, Lesmurdie
Question 1:
In relation to 175 Whatley Crescent, why are the car parking bays considered to be
inappropriate and Council not proposing any changes or more bays.
His Worship the Mayor, Cr Terry Kenyon, JP, advised that the matter is up for debate this
evening.
Page 7
29 MARCH 2011
Mr Tony Green, Bayswater City Residents Association (Inc) - PO Box 1639, Morley
Question 1:
Why does the Waltham Way Reserve upgrade to require 7 light towers when Crimea and
Emberson Reserves have only 2 each?
His Worship the Mayor, Cr Terry Kenyon, JP advised that this is regulated by State
Authorities, the bigger the ball used, the more light required, the smaller the ball used, the
less lights required.
Question 2:
Why are some Councillors with connections to the Morley Eagles Softball Club being allowed
to vote on this issue that will directly advantage the club?
His Worship the Mayor advised that it is the responsibility of each individual Councillor to
declare their interest in matters.
Question 3:
Why cannot the softball activities on Waltham Reserve be transferred to another (more
professional) venue like Crimea or Lightning Park?
His Worship the Mayor advised that Council would need to discuss and consider the matter
and recommendations of the Public Meeting with due consideration for all concerned.
Question 4:
Why, when more than 100 local residents around the Reserve have signed a petition to state
exactly what they want, is the City still sending out officers to do light level checks? Can we
be reassured that Council will listen to us, after the terrible let-down over the liquor licence at
Waltham Reserve?
His Worship the Mayor advised that the Council does listen to its ratepayers and accordingly,
the liquor licence was rejected by Council.
A copy of Mr Green's written questions can be located at Appendix 6. Note, verbal responses
were given to the questions at the meeting.
Mr Harvey Tonkin - 31 Deschamp Road, Noranda
Question 1:
The $19,000 for cameras Council purchased, is this in relation to the bollard cameras at
Crimea Reserve for the donation bins?
His Worship the Mayor, Cr Terry Kenyon, JP, advised that the $19,000 was budgeted for and
the works were not as yet completed. The Mayor advised that it was his understanding that
the bollard cameras at Crimea Reserve are at a cost of $300 each plus $100 for installation.
Page 8
29 MARCH 2011
Question 2:
Since the installation of the cameras at Crimea Reserve, there seems to still be a gradual
increase of rubbish around these donation bins. Will these bins be removed?
His Worship the Mayor advised that unfortunately, within the last seven days, a bollard and
camera had been stolen at Crimea Reserve. However, the bin providers have been proactive
and removed the rubbish. The Council is supportive of the charitable organisations however
a further report will be considered by Council to ensure that the best outcome is achieved for
all concerned.
Mr Brian Blechynden - 181/81 King William Street, Bayswater
Question 1:
Cleanaway require access to Ascot Park each day to deliver large skip bins for rubbish. Are
Councillors sure that a proposal last week to reverse traffic flow in the complex would be
physically possible for these large trucks? If no, then why are we proceeding down this path
without due consideration on the impacts?
His Worship the Mayor, Cr Terry Kenyon, JP, advised that Council has listened to the
concerns of residents however, changes to the internal layout of Ascot Park were undertaken
without Council input and a balanced decision needs to be made. Council is considering to
undertake a further one month trial of a cul-de-sac and would make a recommendation in the
best interests of all concerned.
Question 2:
Some have referred to the fact that the cul-de-sac is "only a trial" and we shouldn't be
concerned about the implications arising from this "trial". Is it reasonable to trial a
fundamental change to the road network affecting 4-5000 people without completion of a risk
assessment?
His Worship the Mayor advised that Council is taking its advice from its professional
engineer.
Question 3:
Are all Councillors 100% certain that the residents living on Slade Street south of the
proposed cul-de-sac are supportive of having their access to Guildford Road restricted?
His Worship the Mayor advised that this comment would be taken onboard.
Question 4:
Council's own survey following the trial of the chicanes found the following;
•
58 responses received from Slade Street, 38 (or 65%) thought the trial was
effective and 28 (or 48%) thought the measures should be permanent;
•
In comparison, only 20 (or 35%) of Slade Street residents thought the trial was
ineffective and only 20 (or 34%) thought this should not be a permanent solution.
Page 9
29 MARCH 2011
Given that speeds reduced to an 85th percentile of 51km/hr and traffic volumes by 34%, why
are Councillors proposing to ignore the majority of Slade Street residents that appear to be in
support of the simple yet effective chicane proposals?
His Worship the Mayor advised that along with Cr Robinson, he attended a Public Meeting of
the Slade Street residents who were unanimous that a cul-de-sac is the preferred option.
Question 5:
Ascot Park residents were not invited to attend the public meeting.
His Worship the Mayor advised that the Public Meeting was not called by Council.
Question 6:
I note that there are a number of roads that link Whatley Crescent/Railway Parade with
Guildford Road as you head towards the City? Is Council proposing to cul-de-sac every street
in this area or are the Slade Street residents somehow different or more important than other
ratepayers?
His Worship the Mayor reiterated that Slade Street traffic concerns have been ongoing for
more than 20 years and the Council would listen to its ratepayers and the advice from its
Engineers to ensure an outcome in the best interests of all is reached.
Resident - 42/81 King William Street, Bayswater
Question 1:
Has consideration been given to Roberts Street traffic movements in relation to safety due to
the location of the school and also hill?
His Worship the Mayor advised that his children both attended St Columbus Primary School
and did not experience any traffic problems. However, the comments would be taken
onboard.
Ms Jeanette Hamilton - 31/81 King William Street, Bayswater
Question 1:
Has the opening of the commercial development on the corner of Slade Street and Guildford
Road impacted on the number of cars using Slade Street?
His Worship the Mayor, Cr Terry Kenyon, JP, referred this question to the Director of
Technical Services, Doug Pearson, who advised that he could recall that the traffic counts
where put out prior to the opening of the development on the corner.
Question 2:
The residents of 75 King William Street can only enter and exit onto King William Street.
Given the proximity of the bus stop and traffic lights, there are safety issues that arise.
Wouldn't putting more traffic into this area, increase the risk of a serious accident occurring?
His Worship the Mayor advised that changes to Ascot Park where undertaken without
Council input.
Page 10
29 MARCH 2011
Question 3:
Around 90% of residents in Slade Street purchased their property after Ascot Park was built.
They would have been aware that traffic from Ascot Park could exit onto Slade Street. Ascot
Park was approved by Council prior to being built. Why is it now that the residents of Ascot
Park are being discriminated against by the current Council because they choose to exit their
property via Slade Street mainly fro safety reasons.
His Worship the Mayor advised that the egress in and out at King William Street from Ascot
Park was changed without consulting Council and the egress onto King William Street would
be safer. However, the matter is up for Council consideration this evening.
Public Question Time was closed at 7:44pm.
4
APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE
4.1
Applicant:
Cr Graham Pittaway
Cr Graham Pittaway has requested leave of absence from 1 May 2011 through to
15 May 2011 inclusive.
4.2
Applicant:
Cr Michael Sabatino
Cr Michael Sabatino has requested leave of absence from 3 April 2011 through to
22 April 2011 inclusive.
4.3
Applicant:
Cr Alan Radford
Cr Alan Radford has requested leave of absence from 15 April 2011 through to 15 May 2011
inclusive.
4.4
Applicant:
Cr Marlene Robinson
Cr Marlene Robinson has requested leave of absence from 1 May 2011 through to
15 May 2011 inclusive.
4.5
Applicant:
Cr Sonia Turkington
Cr Sonia Turkingon has requested leave of absence from 1 May 2011 through to 5 May 2011
inclusive.
4.6
Applicant:
Cr Sylvan Albert
Cr Sylvan Albert has requested leave of absence from 1 May 2011 through to 5 May 2011
inclusive.
Page 11
29 MARCH 2011
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR SALLY PALMER MOVED, CR ALAN RADFORD SECONDED that Leave of
Absence be granted as follows:
Cr Graham Pittaway
from 1 May 2011 to 15 May 2011 inclusive;
Cr Michael Sabatino
from 3 April 2011 to 22 April 2011 inclusive;
Cr Alan Radford
from 15 April 2011 to 15 May 2011 inclusive;
Cr Marlene Robinson
from 1 May 2011 to 15 May 2011 inclusive;
Cr Sonia Turkington
from 1 May 2011 to 5 May 2011 inclusive; and
Cr Sylvan Albert
from 1 May 2011 to 5 May 2011
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
5
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES
5.1
Ordinary Meeting : 22 February 2011
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR SALLY PALMER SECONDED that the
Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on Tuesday, 22 February 2011 which
were distributed, were presented for confirmation as a true and correct record.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
6
DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST SUMMARY
6.1
Disclosures at the Planning and Development Services & Administration and
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR ALAN RADFORD SECONDED that the
following disclosures at the Planning and Development Services & Administration and
Community Services Committee Meeting be accepted:
In accordance with Section 5.60A and 5.65 of the Local Government Act 1995 the following
disclosures of financial interest were made at the meeting:Nil.
In accordance with Section 5.60B and 5.65 of the Local Government Act 1995 the following
disclosures of proximity interest were made at the meeting:Nil.
In accordance with Clause 34C of the Local Government (Administration) Regulations 1996
the following disclosure of interests affecting impartiality were made at the meeting:Nil.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Page 12
6.2
29 MARCH 2011
Disclosures at the Technical Services and Finance & Personnel Committee
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR ALAN RADFORD MOVED, CR SONIA TURKINGTON SECONDED that the
following disclosures at the Technical Services and Finance & Personnel Committee
Meeting be accepted:
the following disclosure of interests affecting impartiality were made at the meeting:Date
Name
Item No.
22 March 2011
Cr Barry McKenna
Item 1.11 – EMRC Council Meeting - 17 February 2011
22 March 2011
Cr Alan Radford
Item 1.11 – EMRC Council Meeting – 17 February 2011
22 March 2011
Cr Barry McKenna
Item 2.5 – Donation – Alex Murphy – 2011 Australian
Rowing Championships, Adelaide
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Page 13
6.3
29 MARCH 2011
Disclosures at the Ordinary Council Meeting
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR SONIA TURKINGTON MOVED, CR SALLY PALMER SECONDED that the
following disclosures at the Ordinary Council Meeting be accepted:
disclosures of financial interest were made at the meeting:Date
Name
Item No.
29 March 2011
Cr Barry McKenna
Item 16.1.1 – Status Report – Planning Complaints
/ Zoning Breaches
29 March 2011
Cr Sally Palmer
29 March 2011
Item 16.3.2 – Unkempt Properties
Cr Mike Anderton, JP Item 13.6.4 – Proposed Change of Use from Shop
to Small Bar
the following disclosure of interests affecting impartiality were made at the meeting:Date
Name
29 March 2011
Cr Graham Pittaway
Item 12.1.11 – EMRC Council Meeting –
17 February 2011
29 March 2011
Cr Alan Radford
17 February 2011
29 March 2011
Cr Barry McKenna
17 February 2011
29 March 2011
Cr Barry McKenna
Item 12.2.5 – Donation – Alex Murphy –
2011 Australian Rowing Championships, Adelaide
29 March 2011
Cr Marlene Robinson
29 March 2011
Mr Doug Pearson
29 March 2011
Cr Terry Blanchard
29 March 2011
Cr Sylvan Albert
29 March 2011
Item No.
Item 13.6.4 – Proposed Change of Use from Shop to
Small Bar
Item 16.2.1 – Generations Centre Family House
Community Youth Project
Item 11.1.7 - Proposed Landscaping and Parking for
Consulting Rooms
Item 13.3.4 – Maylands Business Group’s Report
Cr Mike Anderton, JP Item 13.3.7 – Central Eastern Business Association’s
Report
29 March 2011
Cr Graham Pittaway
Item 13.3.7 – Central Eastern Business Association’s
Report
29 March 2011
Mr Damien Martin
Item 12.1.4 – On-street Parking - Maylands Primary
Schoo
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Page 14
7
29 MARCH 2011
URGENT BUSINESS
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR TERRY BLANCHARD SECONDED that
the Donation – Noranda Junior Cricket Club – Trophy Day item be dealt with as Urgent
Business.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
7.1
Donation – Noranda Junior Cricket Club – Trophy Day
Applicant:
Noranda Junior Cricket Club
Officer:
Director of Finance
Application
To consider an application from Noranda Junior Cricket Club for financial assistance towards
its annual Trophy Day that is being held on Sunday, 3 April 2011.
Background
Noranda Junior Cricket Club - a not-for-profit club - is holding its annual trophy presentation
day at its Deschamp Reserve Club Rooms on Sunday 3 April 2011.
Approximately 85 juniors will be present on the day, together with their parents/supporters.
Each child will receive a trophy. Pizzas will be provided after the presentation.
The Club has extended an invitation to the Mayor to join them for the event.
Comment
Council has been donating to this annual event for the last few years. In March 2010, $200
was donated.
Policy Implications
Nil.
Financial Implications
The Donations allocation of $45,000 in the 2010/2011 Budget has a balance remaining of
$5,552.60.
Voting Requirements
Simple Majority Required.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
(OFFICER’S RECOMMENDATION)
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR TERRY BLANCHARD SECONDED that
Council grants a donation of $200 to the Noranda Junior Cricket Club towards its
annual Trophy Day event to be held on Sunday, 3 April 2011.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Page 15
8
29 MARCH 2011
PETITIONS
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
following petitions at the Ordinary Council Meeting be accepted:
8.1
Cr Michael Sabatino – PAW – Tolworth Way and Irwin Road, Embleton
Cr Michael Sabatino tabled a 50 signatory petition regarding the closure of the Pedestrian
Access Way (PAW) – Tolworth Way and Irwin Road, Embleton due to anti-social behaviour.
A copy of the petition can be located at Appendix 7.
8.2
Cr Alan Radford – Waltham Reserve
Cr Alan Radford tabled a 140 signatory petition seeking Council support to move all softball
activities from Waltham Reserve to Lightning Park Sports Complex and to change Waltham
Reserve from an Active Reserve to a Passive Reserve, including upgrading the existing
children’s playground.
8.3
Cr Alan Radford – Letter from Mr and Mrs D M Craig – Waltham Reserve
Cr Alan Radford tabled a letter from Mr and Mrs D M Craig supporting the proposal to make
Waltham Reserve a Passive Reserve for families and to upgrade the playground equipment for
the children in the area.
8.4
Cr Alan Radford – Letter from Mr Terry and Mrs Sandra Carter –
Waltham Reserve
Cr Alan Radford tabled a letter from Mr Terry and Mrs Sandra Carter supporting the proposal
to make Waltham Reserve a Passive Reserve for families in particular children of the area to
enjoy.
At 7:58pm, Cr Michael Sabatino left the meeting.
8.5
His Worship the Mayor, Cr Terry Kenyon ,JP - Corella Cull
His Worship the Mayor advised of the recent media statements surrounding the Corella
Control Management in which Council provided in principle support for the culling, however,
would rethink its decision to take part in any such activities with the Department of
Environment and Conservation (DEC).
His Worship the Mayor, Cr Terry Kenyon, JP tabled a petition containing approximately
300 signatures (76 signatories being ratepayers) objecting to the recent culling of Corella’s
undertaken by the Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC).
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Page 16
9
29 MARCH 2011
MOTIONS OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN
Nil.
At 8:00pm, Cr Michael Sabatino returned to the meeting.
10
NOTICE OF MOTION FOR CONSIDERATION AT THE FOLLOWING
MEETING IF GIVEN DURING THE MEETING
Nil.
ORDER OF BUSINESS
Items were dealt with in the following order:
•
•
•
•
•
11.1.7 - 11.1.9, 11.2.5 - 11.2.6, 12.1.2 - 12.1.4, 12.1.8 - 12.1.9, 12.1.11 - 12.1.12,
12.2.4 -12.2.5, 13.1.1, 13.2.3, 13.3.4, 13.3.7, 13.6.4;
En Bloc Resolutions of Items: 11.1 - 11.1.6, 11.1.10 - 11.2.4, 11.2.7 - 12.1.1,
12.1.5 - 12.1.7, 12.1.10, 12.2 - 12.2.3, 12.2.6 - 12.2.13, 13.1.2, 13.1.4 -13.2.2,
13.3.3, 13.3.5 - 13.3.6 and 13.4.1 - 13.6.3;
14, 16.1.1, 16.2.1, 16.3.2, 13.1.3, 16.3.3;
En Bloc Resolutions of Confidential Items: 16.3.1, 16.5.1.1 - 16.5.2.1; and
15.1, 17.
Page 17
11
29 MARCH 2011
BUSINESS - PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES &
ADMINISTRATION AND COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE
Application
To inform the Council of the minutes of the meeting of the Planning and Development
Services & Administration and Community Services Committee, which was held on
21 March 2011.
Background
A copy of the minutes of the meeting of the Planning and Development Services &
Administration and Community Services Committee, which was held on 21 March 2011,
follow this report.
Voting Requirements
Simple Majority Required
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
minutes of the meeting of the Planning and Development Services & Administration and
Community Services Committee which was held on 21 March 2011, be received.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY EN BLOC RESOLUTION
Page 18
29 MARCH 2011
FOR INFORMATION ONLY
This page does not form part of the Council Minutes
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES & ADMINISTRATION AND
COMMUNITY SERVICES
21 MARCH 2011
CITY OF BAYSWATER
Minutes of the meeting of the Planning and Development Services & Administration and Community
Services Committee which was held in Council Chambers, City of Bayswater Civic Centre, 61 Broun
Avenue, Morley on Monday, 21 March 2011 commencing at 7:00pm.
NOTE:
Committee recommendations are subject to adoption, or otherwise, at the following Ordinary Meeting of
Council, as recorded in Minutes of that Council Meeting.
M I N U T E S
ATTENDANCE, APOLOGIES, LEAVE OF ABSENCE (PREVIOUSLY APPROVED)
Members
Cr Marlene Robinson
Cr Sylvan Albert
Cr Alan Radford
Cr Graham Pittaway, OAM
Cr Sonia Turkington
Cr Michael Sabatino
Officers
Mr Damien Martin
Mr Joe Gomboc
Mr Martyn Boyle
Ms Siiri Clausnitzer
Mrs Raylene Vucens
Chairperson
Manager of Building Services
A/Manager of Administration Services
PA to Director of Planning and Development Services
PA to Director of Administration and Community Services
Observers
Cr Sally Palmer
Cr Barry McKenna
Apologies
Mr Jeremy Edwards
Leave of Absence
Mr Des Abel
Director of Planning and Development Services
Absent
Nil.
Page 19
29 MARCH 2011
COMMUNITY SERVICES
21 MARCH 2011
DELEGATED AUTHORITY BY COUNCIL
Delegated Authority
There are no items appearing in this Minutes for which the Planning and Development Services &
Administration and Community Services Committee has been granted delegated authority by Council
in accordance with Section 5.23 of theLocal Government Act 1995, however this meeting is open to
the Public but will be closed to receive any deputations.
Terms of Reference
Planning and Development Services:
To consider reports and make recommendations to Council in respect to issues relating to Planning,
Building, Development, Policies, Regulations and enforcement and all other aspects of the Planning
and Development Services of the City of Bayswater.
Administration and Community Services:
To consider reports and make recommendations to Council in respect to issues relating to the delivery
of services within the areas of Administration, Community and Aged, Recreation and Leisure,
Libraries, Ranger and Security Services and all other aspects of the Administration and Community
Services operations of the City of Bayswater.
DECLARATION OF INTEREST
CR ALAN RADFORD MOVED, CR SYLVAN ALBERT SECONDED that the following Disclosures of
Interest Summary at the Planning and Development Services & Administration and Community Services
Committee meeting be considered:
In accordance with Clause 34C of the Local Government (Administration) Regulations 1996 the
following disclosure of interests affecting impartiality were made at the meeting:Nil.
CARRIED
Page 20
29 MARCH 2011
COMMUNITY SERVICES
21 MARCH 2011
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR ALAN RADFORD SECONDED that the Minutes of
the meeting of the Planning and Development Services and Administration and Community
Services Committee held on 14 February 2011, which have been circulated, are presented for
confirmation as a true and correct record.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Deputations are closed to the public.
Committee Recommendation
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR SYLVAN ALBERT SECONDED that the meeting be closed to
the public and the doors were closed.
At 7:03pm, the meeting was closed to the public in order to receive deputations and those present in
the gallery withdrew from chambers.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
DEPUTATIONS
(i)
Location:
File No:
No. 1 - Location Plan and Site Photo
No. 2 – Survey Strata Plan
SD11-0017
Applicant:
Owner:
Officer:
Lisa Previti
Maria Previti
Attachments:
In relation to Item 1.6, Ms Lisa Previti (the Applicant) was in attendance from 7:06pm to
7:12pm speaking against the officer's recommendation. (Refer Page 23).
(ii)
Location:
File No:
No. 1 - Location Plan and Site Photos
No. 2 - Detailed Plans
DA11-0108
Applicant:
Owner:
Officer:
Christopher Blake
Christopher Blake
Attachments:
In relation to Item 1.9, Mr Christopher Blake and Mrs Erica Blake (the Applicants) were
in attendance from 7:33pm to 7:53pm speaking in support of the item. (Refer Page 41).
Page 21
29 MARCH 2011
COMMUNITY SERVICES
21 MARCH 2011
(iii)
Proposed Garage
Location:
File No:
No. 1 - Location Plan and Site Photo
DA11-0009
Applicant:
Owner:
Officer:
Karen Crosswell
Karen Crosswell
Attachments:
In relation to Item 1.4, Ms Karen Crosswell (the Applicant) was in attendance from
7:56pm
to
8:00pm
speaking
against
the
officer's
recommendation.
(Refer Page 13).
(iv)
Location:
File No:
DA11-0108
Applicant:
Owner:
Officer:
Christopher Blake
Christopher Blake
Attachments:
In relation to Item 1.9, Mr Paul Uchanski (owner of No. 13 Weatherill Way), Mr Adam
Uchanski, Mrs Terisa Uchanski and Ms Monika Uchanski were in attendance from
At 7:22pm, Mrs Raylene Vucens withdrew from the meeting.
At 7:27pm, Mrs Raylene Vucens returned to the meeting.
(v)
Location:
File No:
No. 2 - Business Advertisement
DA11-0107
Applicant:
Owner:
Officer:
Denis and Karen Parker
Attachments:
In relation to Item 1.8, Mr Paul Uchanski (owner of No. 13 Weatherill Way), Mr Adam
Uchanski, Mrs Terisa Uchanski and Ms Monika Uchanski remained in attendance until
At the Deputation, Mr Paul Uchanski (Owner of No. 13 Weatherill Way, Noranda) tabled a letter
from Mr Dion Simic, owner of No. 11 Weatherill Way, Noranda. (Refer to Confidential Attachment
No. 3) and a usb flash drive.
Page 22
29 MARCH 2011
COMMUNITY SERVICES
21 MARCH 2011
(vi)
Location:
File No:
DA11-0107
Applicant:
Owner:
Officer:
Attachments:
In relation to Item 1.8, Mr Denis Parker and Mrs Karen Parker (Applicants) were in
attendance from 8.03pm to 8:12pm speaking in support of the item. (Refer Page 33).
CR SYLVAN ALBERT MOVED, CR ALAN RADFORD SECONDED that the meeting be reopened to the public.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
At 8:13pm, those present were invited back into the chambers and the meeting resumed.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES & ADMINISTRATION AND COMMUNITY
SERVICES COMMITTEE DECISION – ORDER OF BUSINESS
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR SYLVAN ALBERT SECONDED to bring forward
Items in the following order: Item 1.6, 1.8 1.9, 1.11, 2.6, 1.16, 3.1.1.
All remaining items were carried by en bloc resolution.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Page 23
29 MARCH 2011
11.1
11.1.1
Council Ratification of Planning Determinations under Delegated Authority
Attachment:
Delegated Authority - 01/02/2011 – 28/02/2011
Officer:
Application
The development applications contained in Attachment 1 have been determined in accordance
with the Scheme requirements, Residential Design Codes and the City’s policies.
Startstrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete
Voting Requirements
Endstrip - This line will not be printed Please do NOT delete
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
(COMMITTEE/OFFICER’S RECOMMENDATION)
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR SALLY PALMER SECONDED that Council
receive the Planning Determinations issued for the period 1 February 2011 to 28
February 2011 by the City’s Director of Planning and Development Services and
Manager of Planning Services in accordance with the City’s Policy – Delegated
Authority, as contained in Attachment No. 1.
Page 24
11.1.2
29 MARCH 2011
Subdivision and Amalgamation Responses under Delegated Authority
Attachment:
Delegated Authority Subdivisions - 01/02/2011 – 28/02//2011
Officer:
Application
The subdivision and amalgamation applications contained in Attachment 1 comply with the
provisions of the City’s Town Planning Scheme No. 24, have been processed accordingly, and
a recommendation returned to the Western Australian Planning Commission.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR SALLY PALMER SECONDEDthat Council
receive the subdivision and amalgamation applications for which comment has been
provided to the Western Australian Planning Commission for the period 1 February
2011 to 28 February 2011, as contained in Attachment No. 1.
Page 25
11.1.3
29 MARCH 2011
Building Licences Issued under City’s Policy for Single Residential
Development
Attachment:
Delegated Authority - 01/02/2011 – 28/02/2011
Officer:
Application
The building applications for single residential development contained in Attachment 1 have
been issued with a building licence in accordance with the Building Code of Australia,
Residential Design Codes and the City’s policies.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
receive the Building Licences issued for single residential development for the period
1 February 2011 to 28 February 2011 by the City’s Building Services Section, in
accordance with the Building Code of Australia, Residential Design Codes and the City’s
policies, as contained in Attachment No. 1.
Page 26
11.1.4
29 MARCH 2011
Proposed Garage
Location:
Attachments: No. 1 - Location Plan and Site Photo
File No:
DA11-0009
Applicant:
Karen Crosswell
Owner:
Karen Crosswell
Officer:
Application
MRS Form One (1) dated 11 January 2011 and plans dated 7 December 2010 have been
received for a proposed garage at Lot 56, No. 34 McGilvray Avenue, Morley.
Council consideration is required as McGilvray road is a distributor road under the City’s
Town Planning Scheme No. 24 (TPS 24), which requires access to be in forward gear. The
proposed garage will allow vehicular access onto McGilvray Avenue to be in reverse gear.
The applicant provided the following justification for the proposal:
1. The proposed area is an improvement on the existing driveway, which currently requires
access onto McGilvray Avenue to be in reverse gear.
2. To provide safe and secure access from the rear of the proposed garage to the existing
dwelling.
3. If the garage is to be relocated to use the common property access leg for reversing, it
would obscure all front windows and necessitate the driveway to run across the entire
front of the existing house. This would radiate additional heat through the front windows
and will not present an aesthetically pleasing streetscape.
Background
Town Planning Scheme No. 24 Zoning:
Residential R20/25
Use Class:
Single House – ‘P’
Lot Area:
732m²
Existing Land Use:
Residential
Surrounding Land Use:
Residential, Drainage Reserve
Size/Nature of Proposed Development:
Garage
Page 27
SCHEME PROVISIONS
Setbacks
Minimum Front (W)
Average Front (W)
Side (N)
Side (S) (Common
property)
29 MARCH 2011
REQUIRED
PROVIDED
4.5m
6.0m
0m
1.0m
4.2m
7.4m
0m
6.2m
50%
60%
Open Space
The Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) approved a two (2) lot survey strata
subdivision at the subject property on 4 February 2010. A condition of the subdivision
approval is for the retained single house to comply with the grouped dwelling requirements of
the Residential Design Codes (R Codes). An advice note on the conditional approval
explained that two (2) car bays were to be constructed prior to the issue of clearance for the
subdivision.
McGilvray Avenue is a distributor road and is a Category ‘B’ under the Metropolitan Road
Hierarchy (MRH). In consultation with local governments, Main Roads created the MRH to
designate the role of all roads and encourage uniform traffic management of roads of the same
type.
Under the MRH, Category ‘B’ roads carry traffic between industrial, commercial and
residential areas of large volumes, which connect to a primary distributor road. These roads
are generally older with a traffic demand in excess of that originally intended.
Comment
Compliance with the Scheme and R Code Requirements
Assessment of the application indicates that the proposed development complies with the
acceptable development provisions of the R Codes, Town Planning Scheme No. 24 (TPS 24)
and Council policy, with the exception of a variation to the front setback and vehicular access
to be in reverse gear.
The applicant proposes to demolish the existing garage to allow for common property to
access the proposed rear lot. There is not sufficient room between the property line and the
existing house to accommodate a garage with a turning area.
Engineering Comment
McGilvray Avenue connects Malaga Drive and Widgee Road to Benara Road and Morley
Drive. Malaga Drive then connects to Reid Highway and Benara Road connects to Tonkin
Highway.
The subject property is adjacent to a ‘T’ junction intersection with Crowhurst Way. It has a 60
kilometre per hour speed zoning and current traffic volume is approximately 6,000 vehicles
per day with an expectation to grow with infill development.
When McGilvray Avenue was first developed the traffic volume was subsequently less than it
is currently. As a result of this, forward gear access to McGilvray Avenue was not required.
McGilvray Avenue is now a Local Distributor Road requiring forward gear access.
It is recommended that reverse access onto distributor roads are to be limited where possible
and future development is to accommodate on site manoeuvring. It is considered that
reversing onto McGilvray Avenue is not desirable at the subject site due to the location near
the ‘T’ junction.
Page 28
29 MARCH 2011
The R Codes acceptable development standards require vehicles to enter the street in forward
gear where the public street to which it connects is designated as a primary distributor, district
distributor or an integrated arterial road.
The current proposal of accessing McGilvray Avenue in reverse gear is not considered to be
appropriate. It is considered that access onto McGilvray Avenue in a forward gear can
reasonably be achieved as part of the redevelopment of the subject property.
Liveable Neighbourhoods
‘Liveable Neighbourhoods’ operates as a development control policy, or code, to facilitate the
development of sustainable communities. Element Two (2) of the Liveable Neighbourhoods
document sets out the approach to determining movement networks, street design and
construction, and public transport. The emphasis is upon connectivity, amenity and integration
to achieve safe, efficient and attractive street networks. Liveable Neighbourhoods state that:
“Vehicles reversing directly out of driveways into the moving traffic stream where ultimate
traffic volume will be over 5,000 vehicles per day should be avoided.”
The current traffic volume on McGilvray Avenue is approximately 6,000 vehicles per day
with an expectation to grow with infill development.
Front Setback
The acceptable development provisions of the R Codes require a garage to have a front
setback of 4.5 metres. The application proposes the garage to have a front setback of
4.2 metres. Whilst the proposal does not comply with acceptable development standards, the
variation is not considered to unduly impact on the adjoining properties or on the streetscape.
Other
The submission from the applicant stated that if the garage is to be relocated to use the
common property access leg for reversing, it would obscure all front windows and necessitate
the driveway to run across the entire front of the existing house. This is not necessarily
considered the case as the proposed garage can be rotated 90 degrees to accommodate for
reversing onto the common property. The garage would not obscure any windows and would
meet acceptable development standards of the R Codes in relation to setbacks. This would
achieve manoeuvring requirements to access McGilvray Avenue in forward gear.
In light of the above, the proposal is recommended for refusal.
Summary
The application proposes a garage that will allow vehicular access to McGilvray Avenue to be
in reverse gear. There are alternative ways to access McGilvray Avenue in forward gear that
can be readily accommodated on the subject property. It is considered that the proposed
garage does not provide for a vehicle manoeuvring area onsite, which is unacceptable. The
proposal is recommended for refusal.
Voting Requirements
Page 29
29 MARCH 2011
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR SALLY PALMER SECONDED that
planning approval for the proposed garage be refused at Lot 56, No. 34 McGilvray
Avenue, Morley for the following reason:
1. The proposal to allow vehicular access into McGilvray Avenue in reverse gear is not
considered to meet the Liveable Neighbourhoods policy, Main Roads requirements
or Residential Design Codes requirements.
Page 30
11.1.5
29 MARCH 2011
Proposed Two (2) Storey Single House
Location:
Lot 804, No. 1A Aughton Street, Bayswater
Attachments: No.1 - Location Plan and Site Photo
File No:
DA10-0849
Applicant:
J Corp
Owner:
Nebojsa Badivuk
Officer:
Application
An MRS Form 1 and plans dated 24 November 2010 have been received for a two (2) storey
single house at Lot 804, No.1A Aughton Street, Bayswater.
Council consideration is required to consider a variation to the average and maximum heights
of the proposed boundary/parapet wall and overshadowing of 28.4% of the neighbouring
property at Lot 805, No. 4A Anzac Street. One (1) objection has been received from the
adjoining landowner at No. 4A Anzac Street.
Background
Town Planning Scheme No. 24 (TPS 24) Zoning:
Residential R17.5/25
Use Class:
Lot Area:
368m²
Existing Land Use:
Vacant
Residential
Two (2) Storey Single House
SCHEME PROVISIONS
Setbacks
SE (Front)
NE
(Secondar
y Street)
NW
(Rear)
SW (Side)
REQUIRED
Min 3.0m
Ave 6.0m
PROVIDED
Min 4.8m
Ave 6.0m
1.5m/1.5m
1.5m/3.0m
1.0m/1.6m
3.4m/3.4m
1.5m/7.2m
0.0m*/2.4m
50%
2 bays
6.0m
9.0m
52.5%
2 bays
5.5m
8.0m
Open Space
Parking
Maximum Wall Height
Maximum Roof Pitch Height
* Objection provided from affected adjoining landowner.
Page 31
PARAPET/BOUNDARY WALL
ACCEPTABLE
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Maximum Wall Height
29 MARCH 2011
REQUIRED
PROVIDED
3.0m
3.7m*
Max. Average Wall Height
2.7m
2.9m
Maximum Wall Length
9.0m
6.2m
* The additional height is concentrated in the feature wall elements at the front and rear of the proposed garage
boundary/parapet wall.
Submission
One (1) objection has been received from the owner of No.4A Anzac Street, Bayswater with
regard to the following proposed variation to the requirements of the Residential Design
Codes (R Codes):
•
•
•
Maximum boundary/parapet wall height up to 3.7m in lieu of the maximum permitted
boundary/parapet wall height of 3.0m;
Average boundary/parapet wall height of 2.8m in lieu of the permitted average
boundary/parapet wall height of 2.7m; and
An overshadowing provision of 28.4% of the neighbouring property at No. 4A Anzac
Street Bayswater in lieu of the permitted 25%.
The neighbouring landowner’s submission also indicated concerns with the following aspects
of the proposal:
•
The location and size of the openings to the upper floor bedroom two (2) and the upper
floor bathroom facing the southwest lot boundary.
The neighbouring landowner has indicated in their submission that the proposed variations
will impact negatively upon the outdoor living area within the property and that the proposed
upper floor openings will unduly affect privacy within the outdoor living area. The applicant
has declined to provide comments in response to the neighbouring landowners concerns.
Comment
Assessment of the application indicates that the proposed single house complies with TPS 24,
the acceptable development standards of the Residential Design Codes (R Codes) and Council
policies with the exception of the maximum and average boundary/parapet wall heights and
the degree of overshadowing.
Boundary/Parapet Wall
The application proposes one (1) boundary/parapet wall abutting the southwest lot boundary
with a maximum height of 3.7m and an average height of 2.8metres and a length of 6.2m. The
acceptable development provisions of the R Codes may permit a maximum height of 3.0m an
average height of 2.7m and a maximum length of 9.0m to one (1) side boundary only.
Although the proposed parapet/boundary wall exceeds the maximum height allowance of the
R Codes by 0.7m this additional height is concentrated within the feature wall elements
located at the front and rear of the proposed garage. These wall elements each measure 0.2m
in width at the front and rear of the wall. The majority of the wall along the boundary has a
height of between 2.6m and 2.75m.
Page 32
29 MARCH 2011
Clause 6.3.2 of the R Codes “Building on the Boundary” requires boundary walls to comply
with the provisions except where otherwise provided for in a local planning policy. The City’s
policy for boundary walls states that any wall within 1.0 metre of a boundary that does not
comply with the acceptable development provisions requires neighbour’s comment. Where an
objection is received the development is required to be determined under the performance
criteria. The relevant performance criteria of the R Codes states:
“Buildings built up to boundaries other than the street boundary where it is desirable to do so
in order to:
• make effective use of space; or
• enhance privacy; or
• otherwise enhance the amenity of the development; and
• not have any significant adverse effect on the amenity of the adjoining property; and
• ensure that direct sun to major openings to habitable rooms and outdoor living areas of
adjoining properties is not restricted”.
The boundary/parapet wall is considered to assist in facilitating the effective use of space
within the subject site. Assessment of the application also indicates that the wall will abut the
neighbouring limestone retaining wall and boundary/parapet wall of the garage at
Lot 805, No. 4A Anzac Street, Bayswater. The proposed garage boundary/parapet wall will be
approximately 1.0m below the natural ground level of the neighbouring site. The proposed
boundary/parapet wall will extend approximately 0.6m beyond the end of the neighbouring
boundary/parapet wall. The remainder of the wall will abut the limestone retaining wall and
dividing fence of Lot 805, No. 4A Anzac Street, Bayswater.
The impact of the wall in respect to its overall bulk and scale is not considered to be
significant particularly as it located below the natural ground level of the neighbouring site
and abuts an existing retaining wall and the neighbouring garage boundary/parapet wall.
Although the proposed wall exceeds the acceptable development provision maximum height
of 3.0m, being up to 3.7m in height the bulk of this additional height is not considered to be of
major consequence as it is concentrated within the feature elements at the front and rear of the
garage. It is considered that the proposed wall will not unduly affect the amenity of the
neighbouring property at Lot 805, No. 4A Anzac Street, Bayswater. Given the above it is
considered that that the proposed variations with regard to maximum and average wall heights
meet the intent of the performance criteria of the R Codes and are recommended for approval.
Overshadowing
The acceptable development criteria of clause 6.9 of the R Codes states that under a R25
zoning a property may not overshadow more than 25% of the neighbouring lot as calculated at
midday on the 21st day of June. Assessment of the proposal indicates that 28.4% of the
neighbouring property will be overshadowed at this time.
As the proposed overshadowing does not comply with the acceptable development criteria it
has been assessed under the relevant performance criteria which states the following:
“Development designed to protect solar access for neighbouring properties taking account
the potential to overshadow:
• outdoor living areas;
• major openings to habitable rooms;
• solar collectors; or balconies or verandahs.”
Page 33
29 MARCH 2011
The submission from the neighbouring landowner indicated concerns that the proposed
development would result in shadow being cast over the outdoor living area within
Lot 805, No. 4A Anzac Street, Bayswater.
Assessment of the application indicates that the area of Lot 805, No. 4A Anzac Street,
Bayswater whereupon shadow from the proposed development would fall contains a roofed
outdoor living area, major openings to the family and dining rooms and solar collectors
located upon the roof of the house. The proposed overshadowing of the neighbour lot is
considered to unduly affect the amenity of the neighbouring property and does not meet the
performance criteria of the R Codes.
Furthermore, it is considered that there are ample opportunities for the applicant to amend the
proposal to comply with the overshadowing provisions of the R Codes, particularly as the
subject site sits at a lower ground level than the neighbouring site. It is also noted that the
proposed single house is setback 3.1m from the secondary street frontage where a setback of
1.5m could be achieved under the acceptable development criteria. Accordingly the proposed
overshadowing variation is not considered to meet the performance criteria of the R Codes.
Condition 1 of the officer’s recommendation requires that the proposal is amended to comply
with the overshadowing provisions of the R Codes.
Visual Privacy
The neighbouring landowner has commented that the openings to the upper floor of the
proposed single house will adversely affect the amenity of the outdoor living area of the
property as occupants of the proposed dwelling may be able to view into these areas.
Assessment of the application indicates that it complies with the privacy provisions of the
R Codes. The opening to bedroom two (2) is not considered to be a major opening as it is
indicated as a highlight opening with a sill height 1.65m above floor level. The other opening
on the upper floor addressing the southwest lot boundary is to a non-habitable room
(bathroom) and is therefore not considered to be a major opening and is not subject to a
privacy setback assessment under the R Codes.
The plans provided indicate that the proposed opening to the bathroom is to have a sliding
window and is to contain obscured infill material. There are no requirements under the
R Codes or the Building Code of Australia to have fixed openings to bathrooms. As such the
proposed opening to the upper floor bathroom is compliant.
Other Matters
The neighbouring landowner has verbally indicated their concern with the proposed location
of the air conditioner compressor unit for the ground floor kitchen. The compressor unit is
indicated as being adjacent to the southwest boundary of the subject site. The landowner has
indicated that noise from the unit may negatively impact upon the outdoor living area within
Lot 805, No. 4A Anzac Street, Bayswater.
Clause 6.10.2 of the R Codes does not prescribe exact locations for external fixtures on
dwellings beyond that they should not be visible from the street and should not be generally
visually obtrusive.
Given the proximity of the compressor to the outdoor living area of
Lot 805, No. 4A Anzac Street, Bayswater it is considered that the applicant should provide an
acoustic report to the City prior to the issue of a building licence. Any recommendations
arising from the report with regard to noise attenuation should be indicated and implemented
in accordance with a building licence approval as required by condition 6 of the officer's
recommendation.
Page 34
29 MARCH 2011
In the event that issues should arise regarding noise from the subject site the City’s
Environmental Health may conduct an investigation as the compressor unit is required to meet
relevant noise requirements.
Summary
Assessment of the application indicates that the application complies with the R Codes,
TPS 24 and City's policy with the exception of the maximum and average wall height of the
proposed garage boundary/parapet wall and the degree of overshadowing of the neighbouring
property. The proposed boundary/parapet wall is considered to meet the performance criteria
of the R Codes and is recommended for approval. The proposed overshadowing of 28.4
percent of the neighbouring lot is considered to unduly affect the amenity of the neighbouring
property and is not supported. The proposal is recommended for approval subject to
conditions, including a condition requiring the proposal to be redesigned to ensure that the
overshadowing meets the acceptable development criteria.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
planning approval be granted for a proposed two storey single house at Lot 804, No. 1A
Aughton Street, Bayswater in accordance with the application DA10-0849 and plans
dated 24 November 2010, subject to the following planning conditions:.
1.
Amended plans being provided to demonstrate overshadowing of no more than 25
percent of the neighbouring property at Lot 805, No. 4A Anzac Street, Bayswater
in accordance with clause 6.9 of the Residential Design Codes to the satisfaction of
the City.
2.
This approval is valid for a period of two (2) years from the date of this letter. If
the development/use, the subject of this approval, is not SUBSTANTIALLY
COMMENCED within two years, the approval shall lapse and be of no further
effect. Where an approval has lapsed, no development/use shall be carried out
without the further approval of the City having first been sought and obtained.
3.
The development shall be carried out only in accordance with the terms of the
application as approved herein, and any approved plan.
4.
The development complying with any details marked in red on the approved plans.
5.
In accordance with the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1960 and
Building Regulations 1989, a building licence must be obtained prior to the
commencement of any building works.
6.
An acoustic report to be provided with respect to the refrigeration compressor
prior to the issue of a building licence and any recommendations contained therein
to be indicated on the approved building licence plans and implemented to the
satisfaction of the City.
Page 35
29 MARCH 2011
7.
This approval does not authorise any interference with dividing fences, nor entry
onto neighbouring land. Accordingly, should you wish to remove or replace any
portion of a dividing fence, or enter onto neighbouring land, you must first come to
a satisfactory arrangement with the adjoining property owner. Please refer to the
Dividing Fences Act 1961.
8.
On completion of construction, all excess articles, equipment, rubbish and
materials being removed from the site and the site left in an orderly and tidy
condition.
9.
The applicant is to make arrangements to the satisfaction of the Water
Corporation for the provision of reticulated sewerage to all lots/units within the
subdivision/development. Where the Water Corporation reticulated sewer is not
available the premises are to be connected to an approved wastewater treatment
system which complies with the requirements of the Treatment of Sewage and
Disposal of Effluent and Liquid Waste Regulations and the Government Sewerage
Policy Perth Metropolitan Region.
10.
Any existing septic system is to be decommissioned to the satisfaction of the City of
Bayswater and in accordance with the Treatment of Sewage and Disposal of
Effluent and Liquid Waste Amendment Regulations (No.2) 1997.
11.
All stormwater and drainage runoff produced onsite is to be disposed of onsite via
the use of soakwells. The size of the soakwells are to be calculated by use of the
formula VOL(m3) = AREA (m2) x 0.0125, where VOL is total storage volume of
soakwells and AREA is total roofed and paved areas. Connection to the City’s
stormwater system, where available, may be permitted as an overflow only if to the
satisfaction of the City of Bayswater.
12.
All vehicle crossings being upgraded, designed and constructed to the satisfaction
City of Bayswater. Payment for the crossover is required prior to the issue of a
building licence.
13.
The existing and/or proposed driveways being constructed with brick paving or
concrete to the satisfaction of the City of Bayswater.
14.
All highlight openings to have a minimum sill height at least 1.65m above floor
level.
15.
The approved parapet/boundary wall and footings abutting the southwest
boundary must be constructed wholly the subject allotment. The external surface
of the parapet/boundary wall shall be finished to a professional standard to
complement the dwelling on the adjoining lot, to the satisfaction of the City of
Bayswater.
Page 36
29 MARCH 2011
At the Planning and Development Services & Administration and Community Services Committee
Meeting:
This item was dealt with as the first item of business.
11.1.6
Location:
No. 2 – Survey Strata Plan
No. 3 - Plan Tabled by Applicant - 21 March 2011
File No:
SD11-0017
Applicant:
Lisa Previti
Owner:
Maria Previti
Officer:
Application
WAPC request for comment and proposed survey strata subdivision plan received on
27 January 2011 have been forwarded to the City for comment on a two (2) lot survey strata
subdivision at Lot 374, No. 13 Dorking Place, Morley. The applicant wishes to keep the
existing dwelling on the proposed front lot (proposed Lot 1) while demolishing and clearing
any buildings or structures remaining on the proposed rear lot (proposed Lot 2).
Council consideration is required as the proposed subdivision involves a significant variation
to minimum lot size.
Background
Residential R20/25
Use Class:
Residential – ‘P’
Lot Area:
782m²
Existing Land Use:
Single House
Residential
Two (2) Lot Survey Strata Subdivision
SCHEME PROVISIONS
REQUIRED
PROVIDED
320m²
419m²
50%
37%
2 car bays
2 car bays
30m²
31.6m²
320m²
280m² (effective area)
Proposed Lot 1
Minimum Lot Area
Open Space
Parking
Outdoor Living Area
Proposed Lot 2
Minimum Lot Area
Page 37
29 MARCH 2011
An adjoining landowner of the property at No. 13 Dorking Place had previously submitted a
formal request to the City in January 2011 which would entail the redevelopment of the verge
area across Dorking Place in order to facilitate visitor parking bays. The verge redevelopment
proposal is considered relevant to this application as the proposed area of works abuts the area
where the access leg will be located for the rear lot. However, it should be noted that The City
was unable to accede with this request as the proposal would have involved parking that was
not in the same direction of the flow of traffic; contravening the Road Traffic Code 2000 and
the City's Parking and Parking Facilities Local Law 2004. In addition, it would have caused
difficulties for rubbish trucks to enter the street and turn around in the cul-de-sac.
Comment
Whilst it is common practice to have the access leg either entirely common property, or
entirely part of the rear lot, the applicant has proposed an access leg which consists of 8.4
metres of common property and 18.0 metres which is devoted to the rear lot.
If viewed as a battleaxe arrangement, where the access leg forms part of the rear lot, the
Residential Design Codes (R Codes) require an area 445m² total with an effective area of at
least 356m² (area excluding the access leg). The proposed rear lot size of 336m² and effective
lot area of 280m² is significantly short of the figures stipulated in the R Codes.
If viewed as a regular lot arrangement, where the access leg is not exclusive to the rear lot, the
R Codes require a minimum area of 320m². This figure is subject to a five (5) percent
variation by the WAPC which allows a minimum of 304m². The effective area of the rear lot
of 280m² is less than the 320m² as stipulated in Table 1 of the R Codes and does not fall
within the five (5) percent variation.
The City is unsupportive of such an arrangement, as the proposal would not meet the
minimum lot areas for either a battleaxe arrangement or for a regular lot arrangement. The
reduced lot area is considered to facilitate development which could lead to a form of housing
which is not consistent with that of the surrounding land and would adversely impact on the
amenity and character of the area.
R Code Requirements for Proposed Lot 1
The applicant has made appropriate arrangements such that proposed lot 1 will be able to
provide two (2) parking bays and a 30 m² outdoor living area. However, it is considered that
the proposed lot 1 will not meet the provisions of the R Codes, with regards to open space,
without significant modifications. Whilst the applicant is proposing modifications to the
dwelling in order to facilitate a three (3) metre accessway, the proposal does not meet open
space requirements. After subdivision, proposed lot 1 will exhibit approximately 37 percent
open space with the existing dwelling remaining. The figure is a considerable variation from
the 50 percent open space permitted for properties zoned R25 (under Table 1 of the R Codes).
This reduced open space is considered to detract from the streetscape and have a negative
impact on the amenity of the area.
Directions 2031
Directions 2031 is the most recent State Government framework which provides strategic
directions on urban growth across the Perth Metropolitan Area. One of the key objectives of
Directions 2031 is to encourage infill development within already developed urban areas. It
should be recognised that the subject site is within an existing urban area and the proposal,
despite being under minimum lot sizes, can be considered as adhering to the strategic
framework of Directions 2031.
Page 38
29 MARCH 2011
Nonetheless, the City considers that the rear lot size is below what is reasonable in terms of
facilitating infill development. The effective area of 280m² is significantly less than what is
stipulated under the R Codes. The proposal is considered to result in lots which are not in line
with the orderly and proper planning of the locality and approval is considered to have a
detrimental impact on the amenity of the surrounding area.
WAPC Recommendation
The WAPC is the determining authority for subdivision. The officer’s recommendation has
therefore included a list of standard conditions for consideration should the WAPC be
prepared to support the application.
Summary
The applicant has applied for a survey strata subdivision which involves an access leg partly
made up of common property and partly allocated to the use of the rear lot. The effective area
of the rear lot is 280m² entails a significant variation to the minimum allowable lot areas. The
reduced lot size is considered to have a detrimental affect on amenity and character of the
area.
The application is therefore recommended for refusal.
Voting Requirements
Officer's Recommendation
1.
The Western Australian Planning Commission be advised that the City of Bayswater
does not support proposed two (2) lot survey strata subdivision at Lot 374, No. 13
Dorking Place, Morley for the following reasons:
(a) The proposed subdivision will result in the creation of a lot where the effective area
of the rear lot does not meet the minimum lot area requirement for areas coded R25.
(b) Approval of the subdivision would set an undesirable precedent for further
subdivision in the locality.
2.
The City to advise that if the Western Australian Planning Commission is prepared to
support the proposal despite the advice of the City of Bayswater, the following
conditions be included on any conditional approval:
(a)
All septic sewer systems including all tanks and pipes and associated drainage
systems (soakwells or leach drains) and any stormwater disposal systems are to be
decommissioned, removed, filled with clean sand and compacted.
(b)
All buildings having necessary clearance from the new boundaries as required by
the relevant town planning scheme.
(c)
All buildings, outbuildings and/or structures (including swimming pools) being
demolished and materials removed from the proposed Lot 2 and common
property.
(d)
The existing dwelling to be retained is to be upgraded to comply with the
requirements of the Residential Design Codes to the satisfaction of the local
government, including but not limited to the following:
(i)
(ii)
The provision and construction of two (2) car bays;
The provision of a permanent enclosed storage facility and adequate provision
for rubbish storage;
Page 39
(e)
29 MARCH 2011
(iii) The provision of an 30m² outdoor living area, with a minimum dimension of
four (4) metres; and
(iv) The provision of adequate stormwater storage within the lot.
The common property access leg achieving a minimum width of 3.0m
unencumbered and clear of any obstructions.
(f)
The common property access way being constructed and drained at the
subdivider’s cost to the satisfaction of the City of Bayswater.
(g)
A 3 (three) metre x 3 (three) metre truncation is to be provided at the junction of
the accessway and the proposed Lot 2.
(h)
Suitable arrangements being made with the City of Bayswater for the provision of
vehicular crossovers to service the lots shown on the proposed plan of
subdivision.
(i)
The existing bitumen crossover to be removed and the verge reinstated to the
Meeting:
Committee Discussion
At the Deputation, Ms Lisa Previti (Applicant) tabled a plan of the subject property.
(Refer to Attachment 3).
The Committee considered the officer's recommendation and decided to defer the item to enable
officers to further consider the revised plan tabled at the meeting.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
(COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION)
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR SALLY PALMER SECONDED that the item
be deferred to enable officer assessment of the amended plan tabled at the Committee
Meeting.
Page 40
11.1.7
29 MARCH 2011
Proposed Landscaping and Parking for Consulting Rooms
Location:
Lot 179, No. 175 Whatley Crescent, Bayswater
Attachments: No.1 - Location Plan and Site Photos
File No:
DA11-0123, SD11-0009
Applicant:
Christopher Williams
Owner:
Christopher Williams
Officer:
In accordance with Section 5.65 of the Local Government Act 1995, Cr Terry Blanchard
declared an impartial interest in this item as the owner is my dentist and therefore, he
knows him. Cr Blanchard remained in the room during voting on this item.
Application
MRS Form 1 and plans dated 23 February 2011 have been received for proposed landscaping
and parking bays for existing consulting rooms at Lot 179, No. 175 Whatley Crescent,
Bayswater. The Western Australian Planning Commission has requested a recommendation
from the City in regard to a proposed three (3) lot survey strata application.
The owner/applicant submitted a subdivision application to the Western Australian Planning
Commission (WAPC). The City received a survey strata plan and a letter requesting comment
from the WAPC on 13 January 2011. The City requested that a development application be
sought in order to demonstrate that the proposal could meet the provisions of TPS 24 with
regards to car parking and landscaping.
Council consideration is required as the proposed subdivision will incur a reduced minimum
lot size, reduced rear setback and variations to landscaping provisions for consulting rooms as
required under Town Planning Scheme No. 24 (TPS 24).
In support of the application, the applicant has advised the following:
• The dental clinic has only one (1) practitioner and is a relatively small operation compared
to that of other medical consulting rooms.
• The reduced lot size of the dental consulting rooms will still provide sufficient area for car
parking.
• The reduced rear set back will not have any impact on existing lots as there is no material
change to the location of the current clinic. The reduced setback will be obvious to any
prospective purchasers of the land.
• The application will lead to an improvement in the current external appearance of the
clinic and an improvement to parking and access.
• The provision of two (2) residential lots will make better use of land which is in close
proximity to public transport and town centre services and facilities.
Background
Residential R25
Use Class:
Consulting Rooms - 'D'
Lot Area:
1,231 m²
Page 41
29 MARCH 2011
Existing Land Use:
Consulting Rooms
Residential and Railway Reserve
Three (3) Lot Survey Strata Subdivision with
Front Lot Retained as Consulting Rooms
SCHEME PROVISIONS
REQUIRED
PROVIDED
6m
1.5m
1.5m
6m
13.5m
3.2m
3.5m
1.24m
1,000m²
320m²
320m²
440m²
306m²
322m²
Maximum Site Cover
30%
28.4%
Plot Ratio
0.3
0.284
Minimum Frontage
20m
19.74m
10% with a 2m strip
along street frontage
12.7% with a 0.2m to 3.2m
strip along street frontage
7 car bays
7 car bays
Setbacks
Front (NW)
Side (NE)
Side (SW)
Rear (SE)
Minimum Lot Area
Lot 1 (consulting rooms)
Lot 2 (residential)
Lot 3 (residential)
Landscaping
Parking
The City of Bayswater granted approval for the construction of dental consulting rooms at the
subject site in November 1971. The rear portion of the consulting rooms has remained
undeveloped for a long period of time as parking has been provided within the primary street
setback area. Whilst there is no limit on the number of practitioners who can be employed,
TPS 24 limits the number of practitioners at any one time to a maximum of two practitioners.
Comment
The application has been considered against the provisions of the City’s Town Planning
Scheme No 24 (TPS 24) and policies, and the Residential Design Codes (R Codes). The main
areas for consideration on this proposal are:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Minimum lot size for medical consulting rooms;
Minimum Lot Frontage;
Rear Setback;
Provision of landscaping along the street frontage.
Minimum Lot Size
TPS 24 stipulates a minimum lot size of 1,000m² for consulting rooms (medical). By
subdividing, the applicant is proposing a minimum lot size of 440m², a variation of 560m².
Page 42
29 MARCH 2011
Clause 8.2.1 of TPS 24 states that Council has the ability to approve variations to the
prescribed minimum lot sizes where it is satisfied that the proposal is consistent with the
orderly and proper planning of the locality, will not adversely impact on the amenity of
existing or future residents or adversely affect the likely future development of the locality.
Whilst there is no change proposed to the consulting rooms' buildings, the reduced lot size is
considered to decrease the future flexibility of uses for the proposed lot. Although the
applicant has agreed to only one (1) practitioner operating from the site at any one time,
consulting rooms generally seek to have a minimum of two (2) practitioners, which can be
considered to be the optimal intensity in a residential context. The existing building contains
four rooms and therefore has the capacity for additional practitioners to operate from the site
in accordance with the Scheme. The reduced lot size of 440m² limits the area available on the
site for the provision of additional parking and service areas, and therefore is considered to
reduce the flexibility of the site for future development.
Rear Setback
The applicant has proposed a rear set back of 1.24 metres in lieu of the allowable six (6)
metres under TPS 24. The six (6) metre rear setback provision is to accommodate an
appropriate distance between the dental consulting rooms and any adjoining land use at the
rear. In this case, the reduced setback is a function of the proposed subdivision configuration,
and it is acknowledged that a significant setback variation is sought to ensure compliance with
the minimum lot sizes and facilitate the creation of two rear residential lots.
By locating the proposed two residential lots with a 1.24 metre setback from the existing
consulting rooms, there is the possibility of impacts to the amenity of future residents living in
close proximity to the consulting rooms from potential noise from air compressors,
delivery/customer vehicles and other activities generally associated with dental consulting
rooms. Whilst there are areas which provide for mixed use development within the City, the
site is located in a solely residential context, and there is the expectation that amenity should
be commensurate with the residential zoning of the site.
The proposed reduced rear setback is considered to have the potential to result in adverse
amenity impacts to the proposed rear residential lots and is not supported.
Landscaping
While the application meets the 10 percent landscaping requirement, a variation is being
sought to the required two (2) metre strip along the street frontage. The applicant has
proposed a strip which is 0.2 metres at the east side of the frontage and extends to 3.2 metres
at the west side of the frontage. The subject allotment is not aligned parallel to the street
which accounts for this deviation. The variation is sought in order to allow appropriate
manoeuvring space for vehicles within the car parking area. The landscaping at the front
meets an average width of 1.7 metres across the lot.
The applicant has provided the City with a landscaping plan which indicates a number of
‘Magnolia Littlegem’ trees and ‘Medium Scrub’ bushes which are considered to partially
screen the parking bays from view of the street and are also considered to positively
contribute to the streetscape.
Car Parking
Parking for consulting rooms is calculated at a rate of five (5) parking bays per practitioner
and one (1) bay per staff member under TPS 24. The applicant has indicated that only one (1)
practitioner will operate at any one time and a maximum of two (2) staff members will be
present at any one time; being one (1) nurse and one (1) receptionist.
The applicant has provided seven (7) parking bays including two (2) tandem staff bays and
one (1) disabled bay, in accordance with Australian Standards.
Page 43
29 MARCH 2011
The City’s Technical Services has advised the proposed parking arrangement results in
difficulties for ingress into the westernmost parking bay as the driver would not be able to
enter this bay in one turn. However, it was also noted that the proposed arrangement is the
most appropriate in terms of providing the correct number of parking bays under TPS 24 and
overall provides a satisfactory outcome for vehicle manoeuvrability in the context of only one
practitioner being permitted.
The proposed parking arrangement on the reduced lot area for the consulting rooms is
considered to meet with the intent of the Scheme requirement, however the reduced lot size
would preclude the site being adapted for additional practitioners and therefore is considered
to limit the future development of the site.
Residential Subdivision of Rear Lots
The applicant is proposing to subdivide the rear of the existing lot into two (2) additional
residential lots. The proposed lot sizes are 306m² and 322m². While the proposed 306m² lot
does not meet the minimum of 320m² as stipulated under the R Codes, it falls within the five
(5) percent variation which can be considered by the WAPC.
The City's Technical Services Department has advised that the proposed lot configuration
would result in vehicular access to proposed Lot 3 which is not considered an acceptable
access arrangement. In this regard, if the development on Lot 2 was constructed first, it would
then be difficult for trucks and construction vehicles to access proposed Lot 3. It is further
considered that without adequate access for construction vehicles, there is the potential to
cause spill-over traffic problems on to proposed Lot 1 and onto Whatley Crescent. Whatley
Crescent is classified as a 'Local Distributor Road' and any spill-over of construction vehicles
or conflict with vehicles entering and leaving the site at the same time could have a significant
impact on vehicular/pedestrian safety and traffic flows on Whatley Crescent.
The creation of the two rear residential lots is considered to limit the ability of the consulting
rooms to be utilized in accordance with the Scheme. Similarly, the current lot configuration
would be problematic for passing of vehicles or delivery vehicles (i.e. removalists). When
combined with the proximity of the lots to the consulting rooms, these factors are considered
to have the potential to unduly impact on the amenity of future residents to the detriment of
the locality.
Based on the above, the proposed subdivision is recommended for refusal.
Summary
The proposal incurs a number of inconsistencies with TPS 24. In particular, the applicant is
proposing a significant variation to the minimum lot size and rear setback for medical
consulting rooms which is considered to have the potential to unduly impact on the amenity of
the surrounding residential area. Whilst the applicant has attempted to ameliorate these issues
and the landscaping and car parking are considered to meet the scheme requirement, the
associated subdivision is considered to result in difficulties with regard to vehicle
manoeuvrability and access for construction vehicles to the rear lots. The proposal is
considered to reduce the ability of the consulting rooms to be adapted for future use which is
considered to adversely affect the future development of the locality.
Page 44
29 MARCH 2011
On balance, the development application is recommended for refusal due to the minimum lot
size, the rear setback and potential for adverse impact to residential amenity. The subdivision
application is also recommended for refusal due to insufficient access arrangement and the
proposed lot configuration which is considered to limit the future flexibility of the consulting
rooms. The officer recommendation has also included a list of recommended conditions
should the WAPC be prepared to support the proposed subdivision application.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR BARRY MCKENNA MOVED, CR MICHAEL SABATINO SECONDED that:
1.
2.
3.
Planning approval be refused for the landscaping, parking and the operation of a
dental surgery on a reduced lot size at Lot 179, No. 175 Whatley Crescent,
Bayswater in accordance with the application and plans dated 23 February 2011,
for the following reasons:
(a) The proposal does not comply with the minimum lot sizes for 'consulting
rooms' under Town Planning Scheme No.24.
(b)
The reduced rear setback does not comply with the minimum rear setback
requirement for 'consulting rooms' under Town Planning Scheme No.24.
(c)
The reduced lot size is considered to adversely affect the likely future
development of the locality.
The Western Australian Planning Commission be advised that the City does not
support the proposed three (3) lot survey strata subdivision for the following
reasons:
(a)
The proposal does not meet the minimum lot size for Consulting Rooms
(medical) as required under Town Planning Scheme No. 24.
(b)
Vehicular access to the rear lots is not in accordance with the City's
standards.
(c)
The proposed lot configuration does not comply with the 6 metre rear
setback requirement for consulting rooms under Town Planning Scheme
No. 24.
The City to advise that should the Western Australian Planning Commission be
prepared to support the proposal despite the advice of the City of Bayswater, the
following conditions be included in any conditional approval:
(a) All septic sewer systems including all tanks and pipes and associated
drainage systems (soakwells or leach drains) and any stormwater disposal
systems are to be decommissioned, removed, filled with clean sand and
compacted.
(b)
All buildings having necessary clearance from the new boundaries as
required by the relevant town planning scheme.
(c)
All buildings, outbuildings and/or structures (including swimming pools)
being demolished and materials removed from the proposed Lot 2, proposed
Lot 3 and common property.
Page 45
29 MARCH 2011
(d)
The common property access way being constructed and drained at the
subdivider’s cost to the satisfaction of the City of Bayswater.
(e)
Suitable arrangements being made with the City of Bayswater for the
provision of vehicular crossovers to service the lots shown on the proposed
plan of subdivision.
(f)
The existing bitumen crossover to be removed and the verge reinstated to the
(g)
Parking and landscaping is to be provided in accordance with the City's
Town Planning Scheme No. 24 to the satisfaction of the City of Bayswater.
(h)
All dwellings being constructed to plate height prior to the submission of the
Deposited Plan.
CARRIED 10/1
FOR:
AGAINST:
Councillors Kenyon, JP, McKenna, Robinson, Sabatino, Palmer,
Turkington, Albert, Anderton, JP , Pittaway and Radford.
Councillor Blanchard.
Page 46
11.1.8
29 MARCH 2011
Location:
Attachments: No. 1 - Location Plan and Site Photos
No. 3 - Letter tabled from Owner of No. 11 Weatherill Way Confidential Attachment
File No:
DA11-0107
Applicant:
Owner:
Officer:
CONFIDENTIAL ATTACHMENT
Application
MRS Form 1 dated 12 February 2011 received for the operation of a home based business at
Lot 221, No. 26 Weatherill Way, Noranda.
Council consideration is required as three (3) objections have been received in relation to the
proposal.
The proposal entails the operation of a home occupation involving the storage of garden bags,
administrative aspects of a garden bag removal service and the use of one (1) four-wheel drive
vehicle and trailer. The original proposal also involved the storage of one (1) rubbish truck on
the property. The applicants have since advised that the truck will be removed from the site
and will not form part of the application.
Background
Town Planning Scheme No. 24 Zoning: Residential - R25
Use Class:
Home Occupation ‘D’
Lot Area:
696m²
Existing Land Use:
Single House
Residential
Operation of a Home Occupation Relating to
Rubbish Removal Business.
The City received email correspondence on 26 October 2010 alleging that a commercial
vehicle is being parked on the property. The complainant alleged that two (2) rubbish removal
vehicles regularly park within the primary street setback of the abovementioned property. It
was further alleged that the vehicles leave between 12.00am (midnight) and 6.00am and that
servicing and repairs have been carried out on at least one (1) of the vehicles.
The City undertook site inspections during the day time of on 18 November 2010 and
1 December 2010 where zero (0) vehicles as described by the complainant were sighted.
Page 47
29 MARCH 2011
As requested by the City, the complainant provided the City with further information on
1 December 2010 which indicated breaches of the City's Town Planning Scheme No. 24
(TPS 24).
The City wrote to the owner of the subject site on 8 December 2010 requesting an application
be sought or otherwise the subject vehicles be removed from the site. The owner provided a
written response on 20 December 2010 which explained how the commercial vehicles met the
provisions of TPS 24.
The City wrote to the owner of the subject property on 31 December 2010 further explaining
the relevant requirements and detailed that approval should also be sought for a home-based
business. The owner responded on 24 January 2011 detailing various ways in which the
business meets the provisions of a home office under TPS 24 (a home office does not require
approval). However, a home office does not permit any activities outside the dwelling or the
parking of vehicles contrary to the scheme.
The City sent a letter on 8 February 2011 requesting an application be sought, or alternatively
all vehicles associated with the business be removed and the home business ceased within
seven (7) days, being on or before 15 February 2011. An application was submitted on 14
February 2011. At the Confidential Council Meeting on 22 February 2011, Council resolved
the following:
"That the item be deferred for one month following consultation with the surrounding
landowners and occupiers and monitoring of the site."
Since the application was submitted, the applicants have made arrangements to park both
trucks off-site. The City has been advised that the vehicle will be removed by
3 April 2011.
Home Based Business
The categories of home-based businesses include home office, home occupation, home
business and cottage industry.
HOME BASED
BUSINESS
Home Office
Home Occupation
Home Business
Cottage Industry
SUMMARY
Solely within the proposed dwelling which has no external impacts on
the neighbourhood; or does not change the appearance of the dwelling.
Business carried out solely by a resident of the site which allows for
limited client visitation.
A home occupation also allows more flexibility than a home office. An
example may be a hairdresser with up to five (5) customers per day.
A home business provides for a resident and up to two (2) non-resident
staff to conduct a business with up to ten (10) client visits per day.
Formal public advertising is required.
“Hands on” business that may involve small-scale arts and crafts.
A cottage industry is carried out solely by a resident of the site and could
involve the use of an outbuilding. An example would be a resident
designing and making jewellery from home.
Page 48
29 MARCH 2011
The proposal can not be considered a home office as it involves the outdoor storage of
materials. The application is therefore considered to fall under the definition of a home
occupation. The TPS 24 definition of home occupation is as follows:
A home occupation means an occupation carried out in a dwelling or on land around a
dwelling by an occupier of the dwelling which —
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
does not employ any person not a member of the occupier’s household;
will not cause injury to or adversely affect the amenity of the neighbourhood;
does not occupy an area greater than 20 square metres;
does not display a sign exceeding 0.2m² in area;
does not involve the retail sale, display or hire of goods of any nature;
in relation to vehicles and parking, does not result in the requirement for a greater
number of parking facilities than normally required for a single dwelling or an increase
in traffic volume in the neighbourhood, does not involve the presence, use or calling of
a vehicle more than 2 tonnes tare weight, and does not include provision for the
fuelling, repair or maintenance of motor vehicles; and
does not involve the use of an essential service of greater capacity than normally
required in the zone.
Submissions
In accordance with TPS 24, the applicants sought comment from the adjoining landowners.
Five (5) letters of non-objection were submitted by applicants. A further three (3) letters of
objection were received by the City. The objections predominately related to the parking of
the commercial vehicle, which was part of the original application. Nonetheless, comments
were also received with relation to the proposed home occupation. Objectors raised the
following issues with the proposed home occupation:
1.
The operation and storage of a rubbish removal business is not in line with the objectives
of a home business and is more reasonably suited to an industrial area.
2.
The operation of a rubbish removal business would result in the potential for unpleasant
odours, presence of insects and other pests and an increased risk of disease.
3.
The parking of commercial vehicles impacts on the amenity of the neighbourhood
through noise and other emissions.
4.
The reversing siren of the vehicles becomes irritating at early hours of the morning.
5.
The vehicles are not effectively screened and are in full view of the public.
6.
The parking of commercial vehicles is not in keeping with the character and amenity of
the area.
7.
The operation of the vehicles has caused loss of sleep, interference to activities, emotional
stress, anxiety and quality of life.
As the applicant has withdrawn the parking of the rubbish truck from this application, points
3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the above summary of objections are not discussed further in this report.
Page 49
29 MARCH 2011
Comment
Assessment of the application indicates that the proposal meets all relevant provisions of
TPS 24 with the exception of three (3) objections being received. The key aspect to note
within this application is the impact of the outdoor storage of materials.
The application primarily involves the administrative work conducted within the dwelling and
is not considered to have any impact to neighbouring properties.
The proposal also encompasses the outdoor storage of garden bags. The storage area is small
(approximately 20m² behind the garage doors) and the bags are not visible from the street or
from other properties. The City’s Environmental Health Services has commented that while
the storage of rubbish could contribute to insects, pests and odours, the storage of empty
garden bags would be unlikely to enhance the risk of these. A condition of the Officer’s
recommendation is that bags containing rubbish are not to be stored on site. This is considered
to ameliorate objectors’ concerns with regards to odours, insects, pests and disease.
With regards to customer visitation, a home occupation allows for a maximum of five (5)
customers per day with no more than one (1) customer at any one time. Given that the
business predominantly entails the delivery of garden bags, the proposal is not considered to
have a significant impact on traffic. The occasional person visiting to make payments is not
considered to be detrimental to amenity.
The storage of bags, administrative work and infrequent customer visits are not considered to
have an adverse impact on the amenity or character of the area.
Storage of Vehicles
There are two (2) large trucks which operate in relation to this business which are not
proposed to be parking on the property. The proposal as it currently stands, primarily entails a
four-wheel drive vehicle and a trailer. A commercial vehicle is defined under TPS 24 as:
“…a vehicle whether licensed or not and which is used in conjunction with a trade or
profession and shall include trailers, tractors and their attachments, buses and earthmoving
machines whether self propelled or not but shall not include a passenger car derivative as
defined by the Vehicle Sales Regulations 1976 (as amended), a van, utility or light truck which
is rated by the manufacture as being suitable to carry loads of up to 1.5 tonnes.”
In accordance with this definition, it is considered that the associated trailer is a commercial
vehicle, while the four-wheel drive vehicle is not.
In relation to the parking of commercial vehicles in residential areas, Clause 8.5.8.1 of TPS 24
states that:
“A person may park one commercial vehicle in the residential zone if all of the following
requirements are met:
a)
No part of the vehicle is parked on any portion of a right of way or public road
contiguous with the lot;
b)
The vehicle forms an essential part of the lawful occupation of an occupant of the
dwelling and that occupation if carried upon the lot does not contravene the Scheme;
c)
The vehicle does not exceed three (3) metres in height or Eight (8) metres in length;
Page 50
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
i)
29 MARCH 2011
The vehicle is not brought to or taken from the lot between the hours of midnight or
6.00am;
Major repairs to the vehicle are not undertaken on the lot;
Any minor repairs, servicing or cleaning of the vehicle are carried out in an area which
is effectively screened from view from outside of the lot;
Operation of the vehicle does not adversely impact on the amenity of the neighbourhood
due to noise or other emissions;
The vehicle is parked behind the front building line; and
The vehicle is effectively screened, through fencing, landscaping, outbuildings or other
measures, from outside the lot and from neighbouring properties”.
The trailer is considered to meet all the relevant provisions of TPS 24 and is therefore
permitted to be parked on the property provided that it continues to operate in accordance with
Clause 8.5.8.1. As the trailer is parked behind the garage; not in view of the public street or
neighbouring properties and are considered to have a minimal impact on the area’s amenity.
While there are no restrictions relating to when the four-wheel drive vehicle can leave the site,
a condition of the Officer's Recommendation is that the trailer must not leave the site between
midnight and 6am.
With regards to the objections, which raised issue with noise and emissions, these vehicles are
not considered to contribute to noise or emissions any more than a regular passenger vehicle.
Other
It should be noted that nothing precludes two (2) rubbish trucks from visiting the site during
standard hours. Trucks, if visiting a property, can be parked on the road for up to two (2)
hours providing that they are parked in accordance with all relevant parking laws. Similarly,
nothing in the approval precludes the subject site being serviced by the rubbish trucks in
accordance with normal waste provisions.
Summary
Assessment of the application indicates that it complies with the provisions of the City's Town
Planning Scheme No. 24 and all relevant City policies with the exception of three (3)
objections from surrounding landowners. The issues raised in these objections related to
impact on residential amenity and the potential risk of insects, pests, odours and disease. The
proposed home occupation entails the storage of empty garden bags located behind the garage
and completely screened from the street and is considered to have a minimal impact on the
amenity and character of the residential area.
The application is therefore recommended for approval subject to conditions.
Voting Requirements
Page 51
29 MARCH 2011
That planning approval be granted for a home occupation (Kardens Garden Bags) at
Lot 221, No. 26 Weatherill Way, Noranda in accordance with the application received
14 February 2011, subject to the following conditions:
1.
2.
The applicant is to hold a valid home occupation licence. Should the licence lapse, the
approval hereby permitted shall be considered as no longer valid.
3.
The development shall comply with the City’s Home Occupation Provisions set out in
Clause 8.5.7 of Town Planning Scheme No. 24 or otherwise notified by the City in
writing.
4.
Nothing in the approval or these conditions shall excuse compliance with all relevant
written laws in the commencement and carrying out of the development.
5.
Any noise generated by the home occupation is not to exceed the levels as set out under
the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997.
6.
A maximum of one (1) advertising sign which does not exceed 0.2m2 and is not
illuminated is permitted on the site. Details of the proposed signage to be submitted to
the City prior to any signage being erected.
7.
No more than one (1) customer visit to the premises at any one time with no more than
five (5) customers to visit the residence per day.
8.
No materials shall be stored within the primary street setback area of the property.
9.
All garden bags stored on site are to be empty of any rubbish.
10.
This approval may not be transferred to any other person or from the land of which it
was granted to another site within the City of Bayswater.
11.
The trailer used in association with this business shall not be brought to or taken from
the site between midnight and 6am.
12.
The trailer shall not be stored within the primary street setback area of the property.
13.
The smaller truck be removed from the premises by 3 April 2011.
Meeting:
Amendment 1
CR SONIA TURKINGTON MOVED, CR SYLVAN ALBERT SECONDED that Condition 9 be
reworded as follows:
9.
No garden bags to be stored on site.
CARRIED 4:3
FOR:
AGAINST:
Councillors Robinson, Turkington, Sabatino, Albert.
Councillors Kenyon, Pittaway, Radford.
Page 52
29 MARCH 2011
Meeting:
Amendment 2
CR SONIA TURKINGTON MOVED, CR SYLVAN ALBERT SECONDED that
Condition 11 be reworded as follows:
11.
No trailer in association with this business shall be stored on site.
CARRIED 4:3
FOR:
AGAINST:
Councillors Kenyon, Pittaway, Radford.
Amendment 3
CR ALAN RADFORD MOVED, CR TERRY KENYON SECONDED that Condition 12 - "The trailer
shall not be stored within the primary street setback area of the property" be deleted.
FOR:
AGAINST:
Councillors Kenyon, Radford, Sabatino.
Councillors Robinson, Turkington, Pittaway, Albert.
LOST 3:4
Amendments 1 and 2 became the Substantive Motion.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR MARLENE ROBINSON MOVED, CR SYLVAN ALBERT SECONDED that
planning approval be granted for a home occupation (Kardens Garden Bags) at Lot 221,
No. 26 Weatherill Way, Noranda in accordance with the application received
14 February 2011, subject to the following conditions:
1.
2.
The applicant is to hold a valid home occupation licence. Should the licence lapse,
the approval hereby permitted shall be considered as no longer valid.
3.
The development shall comply with the City’s Home Occupation Provisions set out
in Clause 8.5.7 of Town Planning Scheme No. 24 or otherwise notified by the City
in writing.
4.
Nothing in the approval or these conditions shall excuse compliance with all
relevant written laws in the commencement and carrying out of the development.
5.
Any noise generated by the home occupation is not to exceed the levels as set out
under the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997.
6.
A maximum of one (1) advertising sign which does not exceed 0.2m2 and is not
illuminated is permitted on the site. Details of the proposed signage to be submitted
to the City prior to any signage being erected.
7.
No more than one (1) customer visit to the premises at any one time with no more
than five (5) customers to visit the residence per day.
8.
No materials shall be stored within the primary street setback area of the property.
Page 53
29 MARCH 2011
9.
No garden bags to be stored on site.
10.
This approval may not be transferred to any other person or from the land of
which it was granted to another site within the City of Bayswater.
11.
No trailer in association with this business shall be stored on site.
12.
The trailer shall not be stored within the primary street setback area of the
property.
13.
The smaller truck be removed from the premises by 3 April 2011.
CARRIED 7/3
FOR:
AGAINST:
Councillors McKenna, Robinson, Palmer, Turkington, Albert,
Anderton, JP and Blanchard.
Councillors Kenyon, JP, Pittaway and Radford
Meeting:
CARRIED 4:3
FOR:
AGAINST:
Councillors Kenyon, Radford, Pittaway.
Page 54
11.1.9
29 MARCH 2011
Location:
File No:
DA11-0108
Applicant:
Christopher Blake
Owner:
Christopher Blake
Officer:
Application
MRS Form 1 and plans dated 12 February 2011 have been received for the storage of a
commercial vehicle at Lot 222, No. 28 Weatherill Way, Noranda.
Council consideration is required for approval to park a commercial vehicle in a residential
area in accordance with Clause 8.5.8.2 of the City's Town Planning Scheme No. 24 (TPS 24).
In support of the application, the applicant has advised the following:
The vehicle does not leave the residence prior to 6.00 am.
The vehicle relates to the occupant’s employment and is used for the carrying of tools,
equipment and materials for bricklaying and construction.
• The vehicle, a Ford Trader truck, is relatively small in size being 2.0 metres in height and
5.8 metres in length.
• The subject vehicle is parked under the carport of the dwelling and is partially screened
from neighbouring properties by vegetation.
Background
•
•
Residential – R17.5/25
Use Class:
Single House - ‘P’
Lot Area:
701m²
Existing Land Use:
Single House
Residential
Parking for One (1) Commercial Vehicle
Compliance Investigation
The City received email correspondence on 26 October 2010 alleging that a commercial
vehicle was being parked on the property. In this correspondence, the complainant alleged that
the owner of the above property was parking a truck with a bobcat on the rear tray and a
trailer attached.
The City undertook a site inspection on 18 November 2010 and 1 December 2010 where no
vehicles as described by the complainant were sited.
Page 55
29 MARCH 2011
The City requested that the complainant provide justification or evidence demonstrating that
there was a potential breach of TPS 24. The complainant provided the City with information
on 1 December 2010 which indicated a breach of TPS 24.
The City also reviewed its aerial photography, taken on 25 October 2010, which demonstrates
two (2) vehicles parked on the subject site, extending beyond the property boundary.
The City wrote to the owner of the subject property on 8 December 2010 requesting that the
site be brought into compliance with TPS 24 by 5 January 2011. The City received written
correspondence from the owner of the subject site on 20 December 2010 which noted that
only one (1) truck was now parked on site as the second truck had been removed. The City
wrote back to the owners of the subject site on 12 January 2011 detailing that the remaining
vehicle did not comply with TPS 24 and requested that the vehicle be removed, or
alternatively, an application submitted.
The City’s Rangers Services undertook a number of inspections throughout January 2011.
During these inspections, one (1) truck was sighted on the south facing driveway. The vehicle
was found on site six (6) times during a two-week investigation. The City has no evidence to
suggest the vehicle left the site between the hours of midnight and 6:00am.
The City sent a letter on 8 February 2011 requesting the remaining commercial vehicle be
removed or an application be sought within seven (7) days, being on or before
15 February 2011. An application was submitted by the owners of the subject property on
14 February 2011. At the Council Meeting held on 22 February 2011, Council considered a
status update with regard to the subject site and resolved as follows:
"That the item be deferred for one month following consultation with the surrounding
landowners and occupiers and monitoring of the site."
Comment
Compliance with Scheme
An assessment of the proposal in accordance with TPS 24 and the City’s policy is provided
below.
Clause 8.5.8.1 of TPS 24 states that:
“A person may park one commercial vehicle in the residential zone if all of the following
requirements are met:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
No part of the vehicle is parked on any portion of a right of way or public road
contiguous with the lot;
The vehicle forms an essential part of the lawful occupation of an occupant of the
dwelling and that occupation if carried upon the lot does not contravene the Scheme;
The vehicle does not exceed 3 metres in height or 8 metres in length;
The vehicle is not brought to or taken from the lot between the hours of midnight or
6.00am;
Major repairs to the vehicle are not undertaken on the lot;
Any minor repairs, servicing or cleaning of the vehicle are carried out in an area which
is effectively screened from view from outside of the lot;
Page 56
g)
h)
i)
29 MARCH 2011
Operation of the vehicle does not adversely impact on the amenity of the neighbourhood
due to noise or other emissions;
The vehicle is parked behind the front building line; and
The vehicle is effectively screened, through fencing, landscaping, outbuildings or other
measures, from outside the lot and from neighbouring properties”.
Clause 8.5.8.2 of TPS 24 states that:
“The Council may, in writing, permit a relaxation of the provisions contained in Clause
8.5.8.1, if in the opinion of Council the proposal will not have an adverse effect on the
amenity and character of the residential area. Prior to permitting such relaxation, Council
shall write to owners and occupiers of surrounding land and invite their comments on the
proposal”.
In accordance with Clause 8.5.8.2 of TPS 24, the City sought comment on the proposal from
adjoining landowners. The City received three (3) letters of objection and eight (8) letters of
non-objection regarding the proposal. A further nine (9) landowners did not respond within
the comment period. Comment was not directly sought from the owners of No. 26 Weatherill
Way, Noranda as they had previously indicated to the City that they had no objection to the
subject vehicle being parked on the property. The objectors raised the following key issues:
•
The parking of these types of vehicles is more appropriately suited to industrial, not
residential areas.
•
The noise and fumes are a health hazard and affects the quiet and peaceful
environment of the street.
•
The objectors can regularly hear the reversing alarm at early hours of the morning.
•
Any approval would set precedents for further parking of commercial vehicles in
residential areas.
•
The continuous coming and going of two (2) commercial vehicles which carry
construction materials is inappropriate.
•
The Ford Transit bus parked on site is another commercial vehicle which carries
significant numbers of people.
Assessment of the application indicates that the storage of the truck complies with all relevant
provisions of Clause 8.5.8.1 of TPS 24 with the exception of the vehicle being screened.
The subject vehicle is parked entirely within the property and forms an essential part of the
occupation of the owners. The truck is within size limits, being 2.0 m in height and 5.8 m in
length. Additionally, the City has no evidence of the truck leaving before 6am or evidence of
any repairs, major or minor, being undertaken on the site.
The plan provided indicates that the vehicle will be stored under the south-facing carport of
the dwelling. The carport is open on all sides except where it abuts the dwelling. Only part of
the truck is visible from the street when the truck is parked under the carport and it is not
considered detract from the character or amenity of the street. Furthermore, the vehicle is
screened from neighbouring properties on the north side of Weatherill Way through
vegetation.
Page 57
29 MARCH 2011
With regard to the operation of the vehicle and its impact on amenity, all three (3) objectors
raised issue with noise associated with the truck. In particular, two (2) of the objectors
commented that the reversing alarm becomes irritating at early hours of the morning. The
applicants have advised that the idling time of the truck is approximately one (1) minute.
Furthermore, the reversing siren only runs for very short periods of time.
All three (3) objectors also commented that the truck contributed to an increase in fumes,
emissions and raised concerns with associated health risks. The City's Environmental Health
Department commented that as long as the vehicle is adequately serviced and is not left
running for extraneous periods of time, the truck poses no threat to the health of the
surrounding landowners.
The applicants have also advised that a small trailer is used from time to time in conjunction
with the business. The trailer is parked under the west-facing carport on the property. The
trailer is of a similar size to that of a domestic trailer. No objection is raised with regards to its
location as it is not considered to be in full view of the street. The trailer meets all other
requirements with regards to the parking of commercial vehicles.
Parking of Van
Two (2) objectors raised concerns with the storage of the van despite the fact is does not form
part of the subject application. The vehicle is excluded from the application as it is not
considered to fall within the Scheme’s definition of a commercial vehicle. TPS 24 defines
‘commercial vehicle’ as the following:
“a vehicle whether licensed or not and which is used in conjunction with a trade or profession
and shall include trailers, tractors and their attachments, buses and earthmoving machines
whether self propelled or not but shall not include a passenger car derivative as defined by
the Vehicle Sales Regulations 1976 (as amended), a van, utility or light truck which is rated
by the manufacture as being suitable to carry loads of up to 1.5 tonnes.”
The owners have informed that the van in question is not used for commercial purposes, but is
used as a passenger vehicle and is also used to drive children to soccer games. Given that its
activities are not commercially related, the van is allowed to be parked in accordance with
normal parking requirements.
However, consideration needs to be given to the combined impact of the van and the truck
which are both proposed to be parked on the property. Although both vehicles are larger than
the average passenger vehicle, their impact is not considered detrimental to the residential
character given that both vehicles are stored neatly under the carport. A condition of the
Officer's Recommendation is that the truck is stored within the carport when parked on the
property.
Summary
The key issue for Council to consider is the impact of the commercial vehicle on the amenity
and character of the residential area. Whilst the vehicle is visible from the street, it is
considered that the storage of the vehicle under a carport will not adversely impact on the
amenity or character of the surrounding area. The vehicle is considered to be of relatively
minor size and is used appurtenant to the occupation of the owners.
Page 58
29 MARCH 2011
The application is therefore recommended for approval subject to conditions.
Voting Requirements
ADDENDUM
–
PLANNING
AND
DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
AND
ADMINSTRATION AND COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING –
21 MARCH 2011
The City received a letter of non-objection
No. 9 Weatherill Way, Noranda on 18 March 2011.
from
the
owners
of
Lot
130,
The letter provides further support for the parking of a commercial vehicle at the
abovementioned property. The total number of letters of non-objection received is now nine
(9). The letter is not considered to change the Officer's Recommendation in any way.
At 8:29pm, Mrs Raylene Vucens, PA/Director Administration and Community Services left
the meeting.
AMENDMENT
CR MICHAEL SABATINO MOVED that a Point 9 be included stating, that the traytop truck is required to be screened and not to be visible from the street.
LAPSED
As no Seconder was received, the amendment Lapsed.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR ALAN RADFORD SECONDED that
planning approval be granted for the storage of one (1) commercial vehicle at Lot 222,
No. 28 Weatherill Way, Noranda in accordance with the application received
14 February 2011, subject to the following planning conditions:
1.
COMMENCED within two (2) years, the approval shall lapse and be of no further
2.
The vehicles hereby permitted shall be limited to a Ford Tray Top, Registration
Number 8SN705 and one (1) small trailer.
3.
The proposal shall be carried out in accordance with the terms of the application
as approved herein and any approved plan.
4.
Any repairs or servicing of the vehicle to be conducted offsite.
Page 59
29 MARCH 2011
5.
The commercial vehicle shall be stored under the south-facing carport when
parked on the property. The trailer shall be parked under the west-facing carport
when parked on the property.
6.
The vehicle is not to be brought to or taken from the lot between the hours of
midnight and 6:00am.
7.
This approval is not transferrable to any other person or from the land of which it
was granted to another site within the City.
8.
This approval does not include any approval for the storage of bobcats, bobcat
trailers or storage trailers.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
At the Planning and Development Services & Administration and Community Services
Committee Meeting:
CARRIED 5:2
FOR:
Councillors Kenyon, Turkington, Pittaway, Albert. Radford.
AGAINST:
Councillors Robinson, Sabatino.
At 9.23pm Miss Siiri Clausnitzer withdrew from the meeting.
Page 60
11.1.10
29 MARCH 2011
Proposed Additions to Existing Factory
Location:
Lot 800, No. 520 Guildford Road, Bayswater
Attachments: No.1 - Location Plan
File No:
DA10-0644
Applicant:
Michael Little Designs
Owner:
Giovanni Di Candilo
Officer:
Application
MRS Form 1 and plans dated 19 August 2010 have been received for proposed additions to
the existing factory at Lot 800, No. 520 Guildford Road, Bayswater.
Council consideration is required as the applicant is seeking variation to the landscaping
requirements of the City’s Town Planning Scheme No. 24 (TPS 24).
The applicant has provided the following justification in support of the proposal:
An average of one (1) metre landscaping strip is provided along the Guildford Road
frontage, which is unable to be increased as there are existing parking bays and driveways.
• Pockets of landscaping have been created within the setback to Guildford Road to help
maintain the streetscape.
• Without the use of a bore, owners must reticulate their landscaping with Scheme water
two (2) to three (3) times per week, putting tremendous pressure on limited water
resources.
• One (1) in four (4) car bays will receive a 1.8 metre mature shade tree.
• Moojebing Street has a three (3) metre landscaped buffer zone, which also consists of
mature shade trees.
• Heavy parking requirements mean that the required number of surplus bays cause a
reduction in area where landscaping could be provided.
• Although there is a reduction in landscaping percentage, a high level of plants and ground
cover by quality landscaping will be provided.
Background
•
General Industry
Use Class:
Factory - 'P'
Lot Area:
9,382m²
Existing Land Use:
Factory
Factory
Additions to Existing Factory
Page 61
SCHEME PROVISIONS
Setbacks
Front
Secondary Street
Side (SW)
Side(SE)
Minimum Lot Area
Maximum Site Cover
29 MARCH 2011
REQUIRED
PROVIDED
13.5m
6.0m
6.0m
6.0m
17.6m
30.5m
10.1m
6.1m
2,000m²
9,382m²
50% Factory
52%
60% Office
Parking
Office
14 bays
(4 bays per
31 bays existing, 76 bays
proposed
100m² GLA)
93 bays
Factory
(2 bays per
100m² GLA)
TOTAL: 107 bays
TOTAL: 107 bays
The existing factory is currently being used as a lay down and cutting area for steel sheets.
The sheets are sourced from new and/or recycled avenues. They are measured and cut on
machines placed in the existing building. The proposed addition will include the same
operational practises as the current factory and will also include a small element of steel
fabrication and welding.
The existing and proposed factory will be serviced by heavy rigid vehicles entering and
exiting the site via the crossover on Moojebing Street. The manoeuvring of a heavy rigid
vehicle is considered to be acceptable providing that no semi trailers are to enter the site. This
has been included as a condition below.
Comment
Compliance with the Scheme
Assessment of the application indicates that the proposal complies with the provisions of
TPS 24 with the exception of landscaping.
The maximum site coverage for a factory is 50 percent and an office is 60 percent. The
proposed site coverage is 52 percent. It is considered that the size and scale of the factory is in
keeping with similar buildings in the immediate vicinity and that the proposed site coverage
will not create an undue impact upon the amenity of the area or on the Moojebing Street or
Guildford Road streetscape.
Landscaping
The relevant development standards of TPS 24 require 10 percent of the site to be landscaped
including a 2.0 metre wide landscaping strip to each street frontage. Council consideration is
required as the overall landscaping area is less than 10 percent of the site and the landscaping
strip to the Guildford Road frontage is less than two (2) metres in width.
Page 62
29 MARCH 2011
As the subject site is 9,382m², TPS 24 requires a total of 938m² of landscaping. The overall
landscaping provided is calculated at 582m², which represents a total of six (6) percent of the
site.
Whilst the landscaping falls short of the TPS 24 requirement, the areas provided are designed
in a manner that enhances the existing streetscape and provides a sufficient buffer between the
built form and the street. Furthermore, the applicant has indicated that mature trees will be
planted and maintained along the Moojebing Street and Guildford Road frontages, which will
further improve the appearance of the development and the streetscape.
The proposal indicates that the landscaping strip to the Guildford Road frontage is an average
of one (1) metre in width with the landscaping strip to the Moojebing Street frontage being an
average of three (3) metres in width. The landscaping plan provided indicates pockets of
landscaping along the Guildford Road frontage with the planting of mature trees. Given this, it
is considered that the reduced width of landscaping along Guildford Road meets the required
performance.
Given the above, it is considered that the proposed landscaping variation will not create an
undue impact upon the amenity of the area or the Moojebing Street or Guildford Road
streetscape. It is considered that the landscaping provided will enhance the proposed
development.
Main Road Comments
The proposal was referred to Main Roads WA for comment as Guildford Road is a Primary
Regional Road. The original plans dated 31 August 2010 indicate that the existing crossover
onto Guildford Road was to be retained. Main Roads responded explaining that the proposal
was unacceptable as restriction of vehicle access to and from Guildford Road exists on the
Certificate of Title for the subject property. Main Roads requested amended plans from the
applicant indicating that the crossover to Guildford Road is to be removed and the verge
reinstated.
Amended plans were submitted to the City on 14 February 2011. The amended plans met the
conditions required by Main Roads. This is considered to be acceptable and Main Roads
conditions have been included on the approval as recommended below.
Summary
An assessment of the proposal indicates that it complies with the R Codes, Town Planning
Scheme No. 24 and Council Policy with the exception of the variation to landscaping. The
proposed is considered to achieve the aims of providing a high quality development, which
enhances the existing streetscape and provides a sufficient buffer between the built form and
the street. Based on the above, the proposal is recommended for approval subject to
appropriate conditions.
Voting Requirements
Page 63
29 MARCH 2011
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
planning approval be granted for the proposed addition to the existing factory at Lot
800, No. 520 Guildford Road, Bayswater in accordance with the application dated
19 August 2010, subject to the following planning conditions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Building Regulations 1989, a building licence application must be obtained prior to
the commencement of any building works.
5.
The proposal is to comply with the Building Code of Australia Volume 1 2010.
6.
portion of a dividing fence, or enter onto neighbouring land, you must first come to a
satisfactory arrangement with the adjoining property owner. Please refer to the
7.
A Geotechnical Report covering the development area being prepared by a suitably
qualified practitioner at the applicant’s cost, to the satisfaction of the City of
Bayswater. The report is to be lodged with the building licence application, together
with certification from a Structural Engineer that the design is suitable for the site
conditions as outlined in the Geotechnical Report.
8.
The extension and/or alterations shall be in complementary materials, colours and
design with the existing building(s) to the satisfaction of the City of Bayswater.
Details to be submitted for approval with the building licence application.
9.
A separate ‘Schedule of Colours and Materials’ shall be submitted for approval of
the City of Bayswater, prior to the issue of a building licence.
10.
A separate ‘Schedule of Improvements’ for upgrading of the existing onsite
building(s) shall be submitted for approval of the City of Bayswater, prior to the
issue of a building licence.
11.
On completion of construction, all excess articles, equipment, rubbish and materials
being removed from the site and the site left in an orderly and tidy condition.
12.
Landscaping and reticulation must be completed in accordance with an approved
detailed landscape plan(s) prior to occupation of the development and thereafter
maintained to the satisfaction of the City of Bayswater.
Page 64
29 MARCH 2011
13.
All stormwater and drainage runoff produced onsite is to be disposed of onsite via the
use of soakwells. The size of the soakwells are to be calculated by use of the formula
VOL(m3) = AREA (m2) x 0.0125, where VOL is total storage volume of soakwells and
AREA is total roofed and paved areas. Connection to the City’s stormwater system,
where available, may be permitted as an overflow only if to the satisfaction of the
City of Bayswater.
14.
The vehicle parking area shall be sealed, kerbed, drained and line marked in
accordance with the approved plans and specifications and shall be thereafter
15.
City of Bayswater. Payment for the crossover is required prior to the issue of a
building licence.
16.
The existing and/or proposed driveways being constructed with brick paving to the
17.
No vehicle access shall be permitted on to Guildford Road reserve from Lot 800.
18.
Redundant driveways are to be removed and the verge reinstated to the satisfaction
of the City of Bayswater.
19.
No earthworks are to encroach on the Guildford Road reserve.
20.
No vehicles larger than heavy rigid vehicles are to service the subject site.
21.
Any industry derived liquid waste is to be disposed of in accordance with the
Environmental Protection (Liquid Waste) Regulations 1996 and/or the requirements of
the Water Corporation, Water and Rivers Commission, Department of
Environmental Protection and the Manager Environmental Health
22.
Appropriate measures shall be implemented to prevent or control dust in accordance
with the Dust Control Guidelines produced by the Department of Environmental
Protection or as directed by the Manager Environmental Health.
23.
The noise generated by construction or operational activities is not to exceed the
levels prescribed under the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 .
24.
The applicant is to make arrangements to the satisfaction of the Water Corporation
for the provision of reticulated sewerage to all lots/units within the
subdivision/development.
25.
The existing septic system(s) is to be decommissioned to the satisfaction of the City of
Bayswater and in accordance with the Treatment of Sewage and Disposal of Effluent
and Liquid Waste Amendment Regulations (No. 2) 1997 (refer to Footnote F5).
26.
Sanitary conveniences and a shower facility are to be provided in accordance with the
provisions of the Building Code of Australia, Health Act 1911 and the Occupational
Safety and Health Regulations.
27.
A bin area is to be provided of not less than ten (10) square metres and with a
permanent water supply and drainage facility for washdown. The bin area is to be
screened by a gate and brick walls or other suitable material to a height of not less
than 1.8 metres. The bin area shall be accessible via a suitably constructed service
road that will allow heavy vehicle movement.
Page 65
29 MARCH 2011
28.
Compliance with the Health (Air Handling and Water Systems) Regulations 1994
and relevant Australian Standards e.g. AS 1668.2 ‘the use of mechanical ventilation
and air-conditioning in buildings’ and AS 3666.1 1995 ‘Air-handling and water
systems of buildings – microbial control Part 1: Design, installation and
commissioning’.
29.
Ventilation is to comply with the requirements of the Sewerage (Lighting,
Ventilation and Construction) Regulations 1971 and the Building Code of Australia.
30.
Compliance with the Explosives and Dangerous Goods Act 1961 and the Explosive
and Dangerous Goods (Handling and Storage) Regulations 1992.
31.
Compliance with the requirements of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 1984
and Regulations and any relevant standards and policies.
32.
The applicant to enter into a legal agreement with the City of Bayswater and/or the
owner of Lot 801, Nos. 524-526 Guildford Road, Bayswater to provide a reciprocal
right-of-access easement in gross for vehicular and pedestrian movement, between
the lots, together with drainage where applicable. The agreement must be executed
by the applicant prior to the approval of a building licence.
Page 66
29 MARCH 2011
Meeting:
At 9.27pm Miss Siiri Clausnitzer returned to the meeting.
11.1.11
Proposed Change of Use to Industry and Refurbishment of Buildings
Location:
Lots 61 & 62, No. 18-20 Sussex Street, Maylands
Attachments: No. 1 - Location Plan & Site Photo
No. 2 - Development Plans
File No:
DA10-0929
Applicant:
Site Architecture
Owner:
Bakana Pty Ltd
Officer:
Application
MRS Form 1 and plans dated 23 December 2010 have been received for a change of use from
'warehouse' to 'industry' and refurbishment of the existing buildings at Lots 61 & 62,
Nos. 18-20 Sussex Street, Maylands. The proposed use involves the processing of paper,
including cutting, folding and gluing to produce products such as cartons, presentation folders
and marketing displays.
Council consideration is required as the applicant is seeking a variation to the car parking,
landscaping and site coverage/plot ratio requirements of Town Planning Scheme No. 24
(TPS 24) and to consider the adjoining property owners submission regarding the proposed
parapet wall.
The applicant proposes the following reinstatement and refurbishment work to the existing
buildings on the site:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Upgrading of the existing Sussex Street façade including renewing/reinstating existing
windows, repairing damaged/cracked masonry and painting the façade;
Establishing a new shopfront/office entry towards the front of the accessway.
Refurbishment of the office area with paint, new carpet, ceiling installation and insulation.
Replace the numerous dilapidated timber/steel framed roofed areas in the central building
with a single steel framed roof structure.
Refurbish the existing toilets to meet BCA requirements.
Install new parapet/screen wall on the rear boundary and to an existing toilet.
The applicant has provided the following information in support of the application:
•
•
•
•
•
The business will operate from 8am-4pm, Monday-Friday. A second shift will operate
between 4pm-10pm when needed.
A maximum of 9 full time staff will be on site at the one time.
Work activities during the late shift will be restricted to activities of a low noise nature
with 3 staff on site.
The site is located approximately 350 metres from the Meltham train station. The owners
anticipate that the train station will be well utilised by staff.
6 parking bays are provided for on the site (5.6m x 2.6m for standard bays and 5.6m x
3.2m for disabled bays). The proposed access way is 5.2m in width.
Page 67
29 MARCH 2011
The upgrade of the existing buildings includes amending a portion of the existing
warehouse to create a loading bay on the site.
• Deliveries will be made by a one (1) tonne utility vehicle or small van similar to a
standard size car.
Background
•
General Industry
Use Class:
Industry – ‘P’
Lot Area:
1,170 m2 (comprising 2 lots)
Existing Land Use:
Warehouse
Industrial, Residential
Encompasses Existing Building Footprint
SCHEME PROVISIONS
REQUIRED
PROVIDED
13.5m
0m
0m
6.0m
0m*
0m
3.0m
0m**
1,000m²
1,170m²
Maximum Site Coverage
50%
71%
Maximum Plot Ratio
0.5
0.71
18 car bays
6 car bays
10% plus 2m wide strip
provided to street frontage.
No landscaping provided on
site.
Setbacks
Front (SW)
Side (NW)
Side (SE)
Rear (NE)
Minimum Lot Area
Parking
Landscaping
* Existing building setback
**Submission received from neighbour
Comment
Assessment of the application indicates that it complies with the provisions of TPS 24 and the
City’s policies with the exception of the car parking, landscaping and site coverage/plot ratio
requirements of the scheme.
Appropriateness of Use
The site is zoned ‘General Industry’ under the provisions of TPS 24. The proposed use of
‘Industry’ is listed as a Permitted use under TPS 24 and is defined as follows:
“…the carrying out of any process in the course of trade or business for gain, for and
incidental to one or more of the following:
(a)
the winning, processing or treatment of minerals;
Page 68
(b)
(c)
(d)
29 MARCH 2011
the making, altering, repairing, or ornamentation, painting, finishing, cleaning,
packing or canning or adapting for sale, or the breaking up or demolition of any
article or part of an article;
the generation of electricity or the production of gas;
the manufacture of edible goods;
and includes, when carried out on land upon which the process is carried out and in
connection with that process, the storage of goods, any work of administration or accounting,
or the wholesaling of, or the incidental sale of goods resulting from the process, and the use
of land for the amenity of persons engaged in the process; but does not include;
(i)
the carrying out of agriculture;
(ii)
on-site work on buildings or land; and
(iii) in the case of edible goods the preparation of food for retail sale from the premises.”
The use will also incorporate an office fronting Sussex Street for administrative and design
purposes. An office is a permitted use in the general industry zone.
The proposed use will service the printing industry with the supply of print finishing services.
Work activities on site will include cutting, folding and gluing of paper based material to
produce products such as cartons, presentation folders and marketing displays. The bulk of the
work will be completed using automated and manually operated machinery of a low noise
nature. The product is then collected by the client for distribution.
The site is surrounded by residential zoned properties to the south west of Sussex Street and to
the rear of the property (along Salisbury Street). Given that the proposed works on site are of
a low noise nature, the use is considered an appropriate intermediary use in the proposed
location. The proposed use is not considered to have an undue impact on the adjoining
residential properties amenity.
Parking and Delivery Vehicles
Under the provisions of TPS 24, 18 car parking bays are required. The application proposes
six (6) bays.
The applicant has provided the following justification for the Council to consider a variation
to the scheme provisions:
•
•
•
“A maximum of nine (9) people will work on the site at the one time.
The site is located approximately 350m from Meltham Train Station and as a result, the
owners anticipate that this added convenience will be utilised by some staff.
A loading bay is provided on site to accommodate a one (1) tonne utility vehicle or small
van up to a maximum 6.1 metre long wheel base.”
In addition to the above justification, the applicant has proposed bicycle parking facilities on
site for staff use.
As the warehouse was constructed under a previous scheme with different car parking
requirements, there is currently a shortfall of 13 parking bays under TPS 24 standards for the
approved warehouse. Through amendments to the existing building, the shortfall in parking is
proposed to be reduced to 12 parking bays. There is no opportunity for additional parking to
be provided. Based on the above, the number of parking bays provided to service the site is
considered sufficient.
Page 69
29 MARCH 2011
All deliveries will be accommodated within the loading bay on the site by commercial
vehicles with a maximum wheelbase of 6.1m. Paper waste recycling/removal from the site
will be managed by the owners.
It is considered that the applicant has maximised the number of parking bays and provided
adequate servicing arrangements taking into account the constraints of the existing buildings
on the site.
Landscaping
TPS 24 requires 10 percent of the site area landscaped with a 2 metre strip along the street
frontage. The site currently contains no landscaping with the existing buildings having a nil
setback from Sussex Street. Given that the proposal utilises the existing building footprint,
there is no opportunity to provide additional landscaping on the site. The proposed variations
to the landscaping provisions of TPS 24 are not considered to have an undue impact on the
amenity of the locality.
Site Coverage/Plot Ratio
The applicant has sought Council discretion for the larger site coverage for the development.
The application proposes site coverage of 72 percent in lieu of the 50 percent requirement and
a plot ratio of 0.72 as opposed to 0.5 permitted under the scheme. As the existing warehouse
was constructed under a previous scheme with different development standards, there is now a
variation proposed to site coverage/plot ratio under the current TPS 24 standards. As stated
above, the application proposes to refurbish and modify the existing buildings to suit the
proposed use. The proposal will effectively reduce the existing building footprint given that
the rear canopy will be removed to allow for additional parking.
The variations to the scheme standards for plot ratio and site coverage are not considered to
unduly impact the visual amenity of the adjacent residential properties. In addition, the
applicant is proposing to refurbishing the existing Sussex Street façade and reinstating the
main workshop roof to an appropriate standard. The proposed refurbishment is considered to
improve the impact of the existing building on the Sussex Street streetscape.
Parapet/Boundary Wall
The rear property boundary abuts residential zoned land. There is an existing parapet wall
13.0m in length to a maximum height of 6.8m along the rear boundary abutting
9A Salisbury Street, Bayswater.
The application proposes to extend the parapet wall on the rear boundary by 3.9m in length to
a height of 3.4m. A 0.9m length of the proposed extended parapet wall is required to upgrade
the existing toilets. The remaining 3.0 metre length will provide a screen wall adjacent to the
bin area.
TPS 24 industrial provisions require parapet walls abutting residential land to be setback a
minimum of 6.0m from the adjoining property. Given the proposed variation, the application
was referred to the affected neighbour for comment.
The neighbouring property owners lodged a submission objecting to the height of the parapet
wall on the basis that there will be an adverse impact on light entering the dwelling. The
submitter indicated that a 2.0 metre high parapet wall would be a suitable compromise.
The applicant has agreed to reduce the height of the 3.0m long screen wall to 2.0 metres in
height. It should be noted that the 0.9 metre long parapet wall extension abutting the toilet
cannot be reduced to 2.0 metres due to Building Codes of Australia requirements.
Page 70
29 MARCH 2011
It is recommended that a condition of any approval should restrict the height of the screen
wall to a maximum height of 2.0 metres. It is considered that the proposed wall does not
unduly affect the amenity of the neighbouring property.
Asbestos Management
The adjoining neighbour also raised concerns with disruption to the existing roof causing
asbestos particles to become airborne during the redevelopment works.
The City’s Health Services have advised that the applicant is required to obtain a demolition
licence prior to works being undertaken on the site. Details are required to be provided with
the demolition licence on how the asbestos removal will be managed. Furthermore, under
Worksafe legislation, a licensed contractor is necessary when asbestos is being removed from
the site.
Summary
An assessment of the proposed change of use indicates that it complies with the Residential
Codes, Town Planning Scheme No. 24 and the City's policies with the exception of variations
to the car parking, landscaping and site coverage/plot ratio provisions of the scheme. The
application proposes to refurbish and reinstate the existing building including installing a
screen wall on the rear boundary abutting a residential zoned property. The applicant has
agreed to reduce the height of the screen wall to 2.0 metres following a submission from the
affected neighbour.
The variations to Town Planning Scheme No. 24 have arisen due to the existing buildings
being constructed under a previous scheme. Development of the site is constrained due to the
location and size of the existing buildings. Notwithstanding, the proposed provision of six (6)
parking bays on the site is considered appropriate to service the intended use.
The proposal is recommended for approval, subject to appropriate conditions.
Voting Requirements
That planning approval be granted for the proposed change of use from warehouse to Industry
and refurbishment of the existing buildings at Lot 61 & 62, No. 18-20 Sussex Street,
Bayswater, in accordance with the application and plans dated 23 December 2010, subject to
the following planning conditions:
1.
2.
3.
This approval is valid for a period of two (2) years from the date of this letter. If the
development/use, the subject of this approval, is not SUBSTANTIALLY
COMMENCED within two years, the approval shall lapse and be of no further effect.
Where an approval has lapsed, no development/use shall be carried out without the
further approval of the City having first been sought and obtained.
The north eastern screen/boundary wall being modified to a maximum height of 2.0
metres as marked in red on the approved plans to the satisfaction of the City of
Bayswater.
Page 71
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
29 MARCH 2011
must be constructed wholly within the subject allotment. The external surface of the
parapet/boundary wall shall be finished to a professional standard to complement the
dwelling on the adjoining lot, to the satisfaction of the City of Bayswater.
This approval does not authorise any interference with dividing fences, nor entry onto
neighbouring land. Accordingly, should you wish to remove or replace any portion of a
dividing fence, or enter onto neighbouring land, you must first come to a satisfactory
arrangement with the adjoining property owner. Please refer to the Dividing Fences Act
1961.
In accordance with the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1960 and the
where available, may be permitted as an overflow only if to the satisfaction of the City of
Bayswater.
Sanitary conveniences and a shower facility are to be provided in accordance with the
provisions of the Building Code of Australia, Health Act 1911 and the Occupational Safety
and Health Regulations.
The existing septic system(s) is to be decommissioned to the satisfaction of the City of
Bayswater and in accordance with the Treatment of Sewage and Disposal of Effluent and
Liquid Waste Amendment Regulations (No2) 1997.
Asbestos products are to be handled and disposed of in accordance with the Health
(Asbestos) Regulations 1992; AS 2601 - 1991 'Demolition of Structures' and NOHSC 3002
(1988) 'Guide to the Control of Asbestos Hazards in Buildings and Structures'.
The applicant is to make arrangements to the satisfaction of the Water Corporation for the
provision of reticulated sewage to all lots/units within the subdivision/development.
Any onsite signage to be installed in accordance with the City’s Signage Policy to the
Provision must be made for access and facilities for use by people with disabilities in
accordance with the Building Code of Australia and AS 1428.1.
Any onsite signage to be installed in accordance with the City’s Signage Policy to the
The noise generated by construction or operational activities is not to exceed the levels
prescribed under the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997.
Compliance with the City of Bayswater Health Local Laws.
No storage of materials are permitted to be stored outside of the buildings or the
approved bin store areas.
Page 72
29 MARCH 2011
Committee Meeting:
The Committee considered the officer's recommendation and decided that the application for the
proposed change of use be refused as the application was not compliant with scheme standards.
The recommendation was amended as follows:
That the application for the proposed change of use from 'warehouse' to 'industry' and refurbishment
of the existing buildings at Lot 61 & 62, No. 18-20 Sussex Street, Bayswater, in accordance with the
application and plans dated 23 December 2010, be refused on the following grounds:
• Non compliance with scheme standards in relation to front and rear set back, car parking, site
parking, site ratio and landscaping.
At 9:37pm Cr Graham Pittaway withdrew from the meeting.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
application for the proposed change of use from 'warehouse' to 'industry' and
refurbishment of the existing buildings at Lot 61 & 62, No. 18-20 Sussex Street,
Bayswater, in accordance with the application and plans dated 23 December 2010, be
refused on the following grounds:
• Non compliance with scheme standards in relation to front and rear set back, car
parking, site parking, site ratio and landscaping.
Page 73
11.1.12
29 MARCH 2011
Proposed Change of Use to Health Club
Location:
Lot 361, No.70 Walter Road West, Bedford
Attachments: No.1 - Location Plan and Site Photos
No.2 - Detailed Plans
File No:
DA11-0062
Applicant:
D. Johnson
Owner:
H and C Vassileff
Officer:
Application
MRS Form 1 and plans dated 31 February 2011 have been received for a proposed change of
use to a health studio and associated signage at Lot 361, No.70 Walter Road West, Bedford.
The proposal comprises the use of the existing vacant premises with minor internal alterations
and the addition of specific signage at the front and rear of the building.
Council consideration is required for the following matters:
a)
The use of ‘health studio’ is listed as a discretional land-use under the provisions of
Town Planning Scheme No.24 (TPS 24);
b)
To consider a shortfall in the number of parking bays required for the site; and
c)
To consider a variation to the landscaping requirements under TPS 24.
Background
Business
Use Class:
Health Studio – ‘D’
Lot Area:
1,094 m²
Existing Land Use:
Commercial building (vacant)
Showroom, Shop, Office
Proposed Health Studio with Signage
SCHEME PROVISIONS
REQUIRED
PROVIDED
13.5 metres
0 metres
0 metres
0 metres
6.1 metres*
0 metres *
3.0 metres*
18.5 metres*
Parking
21 parking bays
19 parking bays**
Landscaping
10% and 2 metre
strip along street
frontage
Four (4) semi-mature
shrubs**
Setbacks
Front (NW)
Side (SW)
Side (NE)
Rear (SE)
‘*’ denotes existing building setbacks.
‘**’ denotes variation proposed to TPS 24 requirement.
Page 74
29 MARCH 2011
The site is currently vacant and was previously used as a local branch of the Commonwealth
Bank of Australia.
The application proposes to use the site as a gymnasium which operates on a 24 hour per day,
seven (7) days per week arrangement. The activity will provide one staff member Monday to
Thursday 8.30am to 11.30am and 4pm to 7pm, Fridays 8.30am to 11.30am and Saturdays
from 8am until 12pm.
There exists an informal access point which links the rear car park of the subject site with the
adjoining car park at the Bedford Fair Shopping Centre at Lot 11, No.215-217 Grand
Promenade, Bedford. In 1996 planning approval was granted for a restaurant with 346 seats
maximum capacity at Lot 501, No. 68 Walter Road West, Bedford (currently operating as
'City Farmers'). In order to comply with the parking requirements under the Scheme,
agreements were reached with landowners of adjoining sites which included Lot 361, No.70
Walter Road West, Bedford (subject site). The agreement between the properties lapsed in
2003 therefore no further link exists between the subject site and the adjoining properties at
Lot
361,
No.70
Walter
Road
West,
Bedford
and
Lot
11,
No.215-217 Grand Promenade, Bedford.
At the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 26 October 2010 Council resolved to set aside funds
to construct additional on-street parking bays in nearby Rosebery Street and Salisbury Street.
These additional verge parking bays are currently under construction.
Comment
Compliance with Scheme Requirements
The proposal has been assessed against the provisions of the City’s TPS 24, Council Policy
and Local Laws and complies with all requirements with the exception of the proposed use
which is discretional under TPS 24, and to consider a shortfall in car parking bays.
The subject site is zoned ‘urban’ under the provisions of the Metropolitan Region Scheme and
zoned ‘business’ under the provisions of the City’s TPS 24. Under the ‘business’ zoning, a
health studio is listed as a discretional use, which indicates that Council is required to be
satisfied that the activity will not unduly impact on the amenity of the surrounding area.
The site is located within a local commercial strip development and has direct frontage to
Walter Road West. There are four (4) parking bays located at the front of the property and
fourteen (14) additional parking bays at the rear of the site. The gymnasium is proposed to
operate on a 24 hours per day, seven days per week arrangement, with a staff member being in
attendance during peak times. The existing building is located 40 metres from the nearest
residential property in Rosebery Street and is surrounded by commercial properties.
The proposed use will increase activity in the area, particularly outside of standard business
hours. Increased activity outside of standard business hours is considered to add to the
vibrancy of an area, and provides increased opportunities for passive surveillance from
additional vehicle and pedestrian movements in the area. The increase in vehicle and
pedestrian movements in the vicinity of the site are deemed to be commensurate with the
business zoning and is not considered to unduly affect the amenity of adjoining businesses
and residential dwellings.
Whilst it is acknowledged that the proposal will increase general activity in the area, the
property is currently vacant and the proposed use is considered add to the variety of uses
available to residents in the area.
Page 75
29 MARCH 2011
The proposed health studio is considered to compliment existing business activities in the area
by providing increased opportunities for passive surveillance with the extended hours of
operation. Although the proposal will increase activity in the area the health studio will add to
the variety of land uses in the immediate area and provide a service to local residents and is
considered to meet with the objectives of TPS 24.
Car Parking
The proposal provides a total of nineteen (19) parking bays within the site. Under the
provisions of TPS 24, the proposal is required to provide twenty-one (21) parking bays to
comply with the Scheme requirement.
In support of the proposed parking shortfall, the applicant has provided the following
information:
• It is envisaged that up to 80% of clients would be within a 3km radius of the site,
therefore a proportion of these persons would walk to the proposed gymnasium.
• No group classes are proposed as part of the proposed activity, which reduces the parking
demand and therefore potential impact from large numbers of persons arriving at one
time. No crèche, pools or ancillary services are proposed in the application.
• The proposal provides parking at a rate of 1 bay per 16m², which is relatively compliant
with the Scheme requirement of 1 bay per 15m².
• The 24 hour availability of the proposed activity would spread the parking demand over a
longer timeframe.
The application proposes a car parking shortfall of two (2) bays, which equates to a 9.5%
reduction from the TPS 24 requirement. The site is located within a local commercial strip
development along Walter Road West, and near the residential areas of Bedford, Dianella and
Inglewood.
The 24-hour availability of the proposed gymnasium is considered to alleviate some demand
for parking bays during peak times, which are considered to be between 7.00am to 11.00am in
the morning and 4.00pm to 8.00pm in the evening. In addition, no group classes, crèche or
other similar type ancillary services are proposed to be provided, which is considered to
further reduce the demand on existing parking facilities. Furthermore, it is considered that a
proportion of clients would likely walk to the premises which would further assist in reducing
parking demand.
The City's Technical Services has indicated no objection to the proposal subject to conditions
being imposed to upgrade the line marking of parking bays on the site and to allocate one (1)
disabled parking bay at the front of the building. Conditions to this effect are included in the
officer recommendation.
The relaxation of the TPS 24 parking standards in this instance is not considered to unduly
affect the amenity of the existing area. A condition which prevents group classes or activities
from being undertaken from the site is included in the officer recommendation.
Connection to Adjoining Car Park
There is an existing access point between the rear corner of the subject site and an adjoining
privately owned carpark to the Bedford Fair Shopping Centre at Nos.215-217 Grand
Promenade, Bedford.
The access point extends across the corner of the adjoining property at No.68 Walter Road
West, Bedford (City Farmers) and arose from a previous planning approval issued in 1996
which has since expired. A review of the City’s records including title searches indicates no
formal arrangement by way of legal agreement or similar mechanism on the certificates of
title for the subject property or for the adjoining properties.
Page 76
29 MARCH 2011
The retention of the informal access point would result in the loss of two additional parking
bays for the proposal, which are proposed to be located where the access point links with the
adjoining Bedford Fair Shopping Centre. The deleted parking bays increase the parking
shortfall from two (2) bays to four (4) bays (equates to a 19 percent parking shortfall).
The City’s Technical Services has recommended that the informal access point between the
subject site and the adjoining Bedford Fair Shopping Centre be maintained as it presently
stands. However, this approach could be problematic given there is currently no evidence of a
formal arrangement being in place on the certificates of title which supports the retention of
the access point. Whilst it is acknowledged that there is some informal use of the access point
by vehicles and pedestrians, given there is no formal mechanism which supports the informal
arrangement. It is not possible to include linkages to other properties as these properties do
not form part of the current application.
Given that it is not possible to includes linkages to other properties which are not part of the
current application, and as the previous planning approval and associated parking agreement
has since expired, it is considered that the rear car parking area be approved as indicated on
the plans, which in effect would delete the informal access point.
On this basis, it is considered that the rear car parking area be approved as indicated on the
proposed development plans.
Landscaping
The applicant is seeking a variation to the landscaping requirements outlined in TPS 24. The
proposal is required to provide 10% of the site area as landscaped open space. The entire site
comprises primarily of hard stand parking and pedestrian areas, and a review of previous
approvals indicates that landscaping was not included at the time of the original building
approval. It is considered appropriate that some form of dispensation could be considered
given the existing context of the site.
Whilst it is difficult to find suitable areas where landscaping could be installed without unduly
affect vehicle manoeuvrability and/or pedestrian safety, is considered appropriate that some
form of landscaping be provided to provide a ‘soft’ buffer between the building and the street.
In this regard the applicant has agreed to provide four (4) large potted semi-mature trees to be
located on the pedestrian path immediately at the front of the building, beneath the existing
awning. By imposing a condition to this effect, it is considered that the proposed landscaping
provides a ‘soft’ buffer between the building and street, without unduly affecting pedestrian
access, and considered to provide an appropriate setting for the building, which is deemed to
meet with the intent of the scheme requirement.
Signage
The application proposes a variety of signage to distinguish the building and the activity. The
proposed signage includes the following:
1 x verandah sign;
1 x horizontal sign;
4 x wall signs; and
4 x lifestyle murals.
The signage is proposed along the front of the building, which includes information signage
relating to operating hours and staff contact details along with directional signage relating to
parking areas at the rear of the site.
Page 77
29 MARCH 2011
The proposed signage has been assessed against the provisions of the City’s Signage Policy
TP P 5.2 and complies with all requirements of the policy. No objection is raised to the
proposed signage.
Summary
An application received for a proposed health studio (gymnasium) proposes variations to the
number of car parking bays and landscaping as required by Town Planning Scheme No.24.
The use is considered to provide increased opportunities for passive surveillance through the
proposed extended operating hours and whilst it is acknowledged that there will be some
increase activity in the area, it is considered that the proposed health studio will add to the
variety of land uses in the Walter Road West commercial strip.
The reduced number of parking bays is considered to be sufficient as the gymnasium is
proposed to operate on a 24 hours per day, seven days per week arrangement and does not
propose any group classes or ancillary functions which would involve large numbers of
patrons arriving at one time. A proportion of patrons are likely to walk to the site from
surrounding suburbs.
There exists an informal access point resulting from a previous planning approval in 1996
which has since expired. The access point links the rear of the subject site to the adjoining
Bedford Fair Shopping Centre carpark which is not indicated on the certificate of titles for
either property. Each individual property has sufficient access to a public road and it is
considered appropriate that the access link will be removed as part of the proposal.
Although the existing building was approved without landscaping areas, the applicant has
agreed to provide four (4) semi-mature potted shrubs immediately in front of the building.
The provision of the four semi-mature potted shrubs is considered to meet with the intent of
the scheme requirement.
On this basis, the application is recommended for approval, subject to appropriate conditions.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
planning approval be granted for a change of use to health studio and associated signage
at Lot 361, No.70 Walter Road West, Bedford in accordance with the application DA110062 and plans dated 31 January 2011, subject to the following planning conditions:
1.
The applicant/owner incorporating one (1) disabled parking bay at the front of the
building in accordance with the Australian Standards, to the satisfaction of the
City of Bayswater.
2.
The applicant/owner providing four (4) semi-mature potted shrubs directly
adjacent to the building, located to provide appropriate clearance for pedestrians,
to the satisfaction of the City of Bayswater.
3.
The vehicle parking area shall be sealed, kerbed, drained and line-marked in
accordance with the approved plans and specifications and shall be thereafter
Page 78
29 MARCH 2011
4.
without the further approval of the City having first been sought and obtained;
5.
6.
7.
8.
portion of a dividing fence, or enter onto neighbouring land, you must first come to
9.
condition.
10.
levels prescribed under the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997.
11.
Sanitary Conveniences are to be provided in accordance with the provisions of the
Building Code of Australia.
12.
Compliance with the Health (Air Handling and Water Systems) Regulations 1994
and relevant Australian Standards eg AS 1668.2 “the use of mechanical ventilation
and air conditioning in buildings” and AS 3666 “Air-handling and water systems
of buildings –microbial control part 1: Design, installation and commissioning”.
13.
Ventilation is to comply with the requirements of the Sewerage (Lighting,
Ventilation and Construction) Regulations 1971 and the Building Code of Australia.
14.
Compliance with the City of Bayswater Health Local Laws.
15.
The building is to be registered and certified as a public building with the
Environmental Health Section of the City of Bayswater, in accordance with the
Health (Public Buildings) Regulations 1992.
16.
No storage or display of goods outside the building to the satisfaction of the
City of Bayswater.
17.
Any onsite signage to be installed in accordance with the City’s Signage Policy to
the satisfaction of the City of Bayswater.
18.
A bin area is to be provided of not less than 10 square metres and with a
permanent water supply and drainage facility for washdown. The bin area is to be
screened by a gate and brick walls or other suitable material to a height of not less
than 1.8 metres.
Page 79
11.1.13
29 MARCH 2011
Perth Airport Update
Attachments: No. 1 - Productivity Commission Issues Paper
No. 2 - Commonwealth Government Response to Senate
Inquiry
No. 3 - National Aircraft Noise Ombudsman's Report
Officer:
Application
To update Council on three (3) matters associated with Perth Airport:
1.
The Productivity Commission's Issues Paper entitled 'Economic Regulation of Airport
Services';
2.
The Commonwealth Government Response to the "Senate Rural and Regional Affairs
and Transport References Committee Inquiry Report on the Effectiveness of Airservices
Australia's Management of Aircraft Noise"; and
3.
The National Aircraft Noise Ombudsman's Report on a 'Review of Complaints
Handling - Airservices Australia February 2011'.
Background
The City of Bayswater became a member of the Perth Airports Municipalities Group (PAMG)
in September 2008. The City's representative delegate at these meetings is His Worship the
Mayor, Councillor Terry Kenyon, with the Deputy Mayor, Councillor Barry McKenna and
Councillor Alan Radford as deputy delegates. The Chief Executive Officer also attends as the
City’s technical officer.
Through participation and membership on this group the City has been able to:
1.
2.
3.
Directly raise issues of concern about aviation operations that impact on the local
community;
Be given regular updates on matters affecting aviation at Perth Airport; and
Provide input to improve and increase communication with the community about these
matters.
A Senate Committee held an inquiry in 2010 into the effectiveness of Airservices Australia’s
management of aircraft noise. The PAMG made a submission to the inquiry on behalf of
member councils, including the City of Bayswater. His Worship the Mayor provided
comments to the PAMG on behalf of the City. The main points of the City’s submission were
as follows:
•
•
•
•
Residents have contacted the City of Bayswater to complain that there have been
significant changes to flight paths and that aircraft-related noise levels have increased
over the past 12 months;
Residents also state that there has been no information available on these issues;
The City is of the opinion that Airservices Australia has not conducted an effective,
open and informed public consultation strategy with communities affected by aircraft
noise. Many local residents have not heard of Airservices Australia and have not been
adequately informed of changes to flight paths and aircraft-related noise issues; and
Many of the community complaints have been directed to local governments rather than
Airservices Australia.
Page 80
29 MARCH 2011
Comment
This report provides an overview of three (3) matters associated with Perth Airport:
1.
2.
3.
The Productivity Commission's Issues Paper entitled 'Economic Regulation of Airport
Services';
The Commonwealth Government Response to the 'Senate Rural and Regional Affairs
and Transport References Committee Inquiry Report on the Effectiveness of Airservices
Australia's Management of Aircraft Noise'; and
Handling - Airservices Australia February 2011'.
Productivity Commission Inquiry
The City received correspondence on 31 December 2010 from the Honourable Anthony
Albanese, the Commonwealth Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, advising of a
forthcoming Productivity Commission inquiry into the economic regulation of airport services
across Australia. The inquiry is primarily investigating economic and regulatory issues
associated with airports, including (but not limited to):
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Whether the existing regulatory regime is effective in deterring potential abuses of
market power by airport operators;
The effectiveness of the monitoring regime conducted by the Australian Competition
and Consumer Commission (ACCC);
Whether the current regime impacts on the ability of airports to price, operate and invest
in airport infrastructure in an efficient and timely manner;
The quality of service at major Australian airports; and
Any improvements or enhancements that could be made to the existing regime.
The inquiry is also examining the provision of passenger transport services at and surrounding
the main passenger airports operating in major Australian cities, which is likely to be the main
area of interest for the City given Council’s previous support for a rail link from Bayswater
train station to Perth Airport.
Information on the Productivity Commission's Issues Paper entitled 'Economic Regulation of
Airport Services' was forwarded to councillors in a memorandum dated 7 January 2011 and is
provided in Attachment No. 1.
The Productivity Commission met with the PAMG at its meeting held on 15 March 2011,
mainly in relation to land transport and access issues at Perth Airport. The main issues
discussed at the PAMG meeting were the major road upgrades to Great Eastern Highway,
Leach Highway and Horrie Miller Drive as outlined in the 'Gateway WA' project to improve
access to and from the airport.
There were no major issues raised at the PAMG meeting held on 15 March 2011 that directly
affect the City. The PAMG will be providing a response to the Productivity Commission on
behalf of member councils.
Commonwealth Government Response to Senate Inquiry
The Senate requested the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee
report on the effectiveness of Airservices Australia's management of aircraft noise at major
airports across Australia. The Senate Inquiry was prompted by concerns about aircraft noise
across Australia and the responsiveness of Airservices Australia to complaints made by the
community.
Page 81
29 MARCH 2011
The Committee made a number of recommendations to ensure that communication and
complaint handling procedures are further strengthened and the Commonwealth Government
has responded to the recommendations by noting or supporting the recommendations. The
Commonwealth Government's responses are provided in Attachment No. 2. The two (2)
major points to note are that:
1.
2.
The Commonwealth Government has reaffirmed the independence of Aircraft Noise
Ombudsman to represent any concerns from local communities; and
The Commonwealth Government does not support the Committee's recommendation
that the (Federal) Minister for Environment Protection, Heritage and the Arts review
recent changes to flight paths around Perth Airport and the impact that the flight path
change may have had on local communities.
There are no actions required at this stage from the City on the Commonwealth Government's
response to the Senate Inquiry.
Ombudsman's Review of Airservices Australia Complaints Handling
The Commonwealth Government, in accordance with direction provided in the National
Aviation White Paper, appointed a national Aircraft Noise Ombudsman on 1 September 2010.
The Ombudsman has produced a report on Airservices Australia complaint handling
procedures (Refer to Attachment No. 3). The report found the Airservices Australia has
improved its complaint handling procedures and communication with the general public. It
notes that 'WebTrak' is a world's best practice online tool for delivering dynamic information
regarding aircraft operations around major Australian airports. The report also makes further
recommendations to improve practices and better protect and inform local communities.
The greater transparency and accountability provided by the Aircraft Noise Ombudsman is a
positive for local communities and is supported by the City.
It appears that greater community interest and pressure in recent years has led to significant
changes and improvements to the Airservices Australia's procedures and the Commonwealth
Government's management of major airports and aircraft noise procedures in particular. This
is a positive move and the greater transparency and accountability now provided is likely to
mean that local communities' concerns can be better addressed.
Summary
No action is required from the City at this stage.
Nil.
Policy Implications
Nil.
Voting Requirements
Page 82
29 MARCH 2011
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
associated with Perth Airport:
1.
Productivity Commission's Issues Paper entitled 'Economic Regulation of Airport
Services' dated January 2011;
2.
The Commonwealth Government Response to the 'Senate Rural and Regional
Affairs and Transport References Committee Inquiry Report on the Effectiveness
of Airservices Australia's Management of Aircraft Noise' dated February 2011;
and
3.
Handling - Airservices Australia' dated February 2011.
Page 83
11.1.14
29 MARCH 2011
Update on Prostitution Matters
Officer:
Application
To provide an update on the current and potential future legislation relating to prostitution in
Western Australia and an overview of the alleged operation of brothels in the City of
Bayswater.
Background
The previous State Labor Government sponsored the Prostitution Amendment Act 2008,
which sought to decriminalise prostitution and generally devolve regulation and compliance
issues to local authorities to be mainly dealt with as a land use planning matter. The City and
many other local governments had concerns about the proposed legislation, particularly
enforcement and compliance issues. The Act received royal assent, but was never officially
promulgated in Parliament (it never became law).
The principal statute governing prostitution in Western Australia therefore remains the
Prostitution Act 2000 (WA). This Act mainly deals with street soliciting, offences involving
children in relation to prostitution, advertising and sponsorship.
Comment
The City has received from time to time allegations of potential brothels, with one persistent
case being the property at Lot 482, No. 115 Garratt Road, Bayswater. On 29 December 2008
the City sent a letter to the Western Australian Police Commissioner requesting police
assistance in investigating the matter. The Western Australian Police has advised that it is
difficult to police prostitution-related issues given current legislative and regulatory issues,
with matters generally only investigated where there is evidence of the involvement of
juveniles, drugs, organised crime or sexual servitude
It is also difficult for the City to investigate prostitution-related matters, with gathering
evidence a particular issue.
There are no simple solutions to this issue. It is understood that other local governments also
currently consider the issue problematic, particularly in terms of investigation, compliance
and enforcement where alleged brothels operate in residential areas.
The City understands that the State Liberal/National Government is investigating new
legislation to regulate brothels and the prostitution industry.
The Attorney-General, The Honourable Christian Porter, gave a speech to the Legislative
Assembly on 25 November 2010 outlining the Western Australian Government’s intent to
introduce new legislation to Parliament in 2011 to better control prostitution-related issues.
The purpose of the Bill is to enable the Government to control sexual service business in
Western Australia through a licensing and enforcement regime including:
1.
2.
The licensing of all sex workers and those profiting from the activities of sex workers
by the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor;
Prostitution will not be allowed in residential areas (it is to be located at least 100 metres
from residential dwellings) or close to protected places such as schools (to be located at
least 200 metres from protected places);
Page 84
3.
4.
29 MARCH 2011
A planning application would need to be made to the relevant local governments in
accordance with town planning scheme requirements. The Minister for Planning would
determine applications for brothels after taking into account the local government’s
recommendations on the application; and
Police would be given powers to investigate and prosecute unlicensed brothels or those
that did not have the relevant planning approval from a local government. It was stated
in the speech to Parliament that local governments “will not assume responsibility for
investigating or closing in appropriately located or unlawful premises”.
If the buffers noted in the Attorney-General’s speech are mirrored in the upcoming bill,
prostitution and potential brothels would be limited in the City by legislation to only part of
the Bayswater Industrial Area.
The Western Australian Local Government Association (WALGA) has informally advised
that the Attorney General’s Office has set up a Senior Officers Group which included
stakeholders (WA Police, Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor, Department of Child
Protection, Department of Health etc). WALGA was also part of this group. The matters
discussed in the preparation of drafting instructions have not been available for broader
discussion and/or consultation to date. WALGA has advised that it will engage with local
governments when it is appropriate to do so.
A report would be referred to Council advising the detail of the new Bill when it is made
publicly available.
Summary
The State Government intends to introduce new legislation to Parliament in 2011 to better
control prostitution-related matters. The purpose of the Bill is to enable the State to control
sexual service business in Western Australia through a licensing and enforcement regime.
Prostitution will not be allowed in residential areas or close to protected places such as
schools.
A report would be referred to Council detailing and advising of the implication of the new Bill
when it is made publicly available.
Nil.
Policy Implications
Nil at present.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
note the information in this report in relation to the proposed new Bill to govern
prostitution-related matters in Western Australia.
Page 85
11.1.15
29 MARCH 2011
Building Bill 2010
Attachments: No. 1- Proposed Building Bill 2010
No. 2 - WALGA Position
Officer:
Application
To brief the Council on the proposed discussion paper prepared by WALGA on the new
Building Bill 2010.
Background
On 25 November 2010 WALGA sent an information circular to all member councils inviting
comments on the new Building Bill 2010.
The Building Bill 2010 (the ‘Bill’) sets out the process for setting building standards and
ensuring these standards are met through a system of certifying compliance; granting building,
demolition and occupancy permits; inspecting building work and reporting on maintenance of
essential services in buildings. It also regulates construction on boundaries and provisions that
apply to existing buildings, and provides for enforcement of standards and processes by
permit authorities. Local government remain the permit authority for most buildings, but the
State is also made a permit authority with jurisdiction across the whole State and there is
provision for special permit authorities if needed.
The Bill that replaces Parts VIII, IX and XV of the Local Government (Miscellaneous
Provisions) Act 1960 that deals with private swimming pool safety barriers; smoke alarm
installation into existing dwellings; the setting of building standards; licences for the erection,
modification or demolition of buildings and other structures; enforcement of building control;
accreditation of building surveyors, and the Building Regulations 1989.
The Bill consolidates the framework for prescribing design, construction and maintenance
standards; approving building proposals, and certifying compliance with the relevant building
standards and codes in the interests of community safety and health.
In early 2010 the City of Bayswater hosted a forum for the Australian Institute of Building
Surveyors WA Chapter (AIBSWA) to review draft No. 3 of the Bill. The current draft
available is draft No. 16. The Bill has been introduced into parliament and has the second
reading. At the time that the Bill was introduced, no comment period had been permitted on
Part 6 - 'Work Affecting Other Land' and Part 8 - 'Enforcement'.
The Bill is segregated into 15 parts. The wording in some places is open in that regulations
when drafted will address these issues such as fees. The Bill enables fees to be charged the
rate etc will be regulated. Also the layout of the Bill is not simple to use as there are
definitions spread all throughout the document and not listed in separate definition section or
part.
The intent of the Bill is to give the head of power to enable matters to be done and the
regulations will be the day to day operation of the proposed Building Bill.
Page 86
29 MARCH 2011
Comment
The Bill will cover all buildings within Western Australia, introduce permit issuing
authorities, enable private certification and is designed to streamline and clarify the building
process, including:
Whole of state coverage;
All buildings to be covered, including those owned by the Crown;
Giving a clearer definition of what buildings are exemptions from the building permit
process;
• Nominating Permit Authorities - confirms local government's role in issuing building
permits, and enables State Government or special permit authorities to be able to issue
building and occupancy permits and to enforce building control;
• Enabling private registered building surveyors to certify design compliance;
• Introducing separate and streamlined processes for approving domestic and commercial
buildings;
• Retaining the option for owners to use the current local government combined
certification and permit issuing function for residential houses and minor building work
(class 1 and 10);
• Taking a risk-based approach to inspection requirements so that registered building
professionals require less independent checking than lay designers and owner-builders;
• Providing a clear end-point to the construction process, and certification that the building
complies with the building permit issued;
• Registering a wider range of industry practitioners to certify compliance;
• Implementing a nationally agreed accreditation framework for building surveyors; and
• Implementing a process for the assessment and approval of building works carried out
without a building permit.
The outcome of these reforms is intended to be a more responsive and contemporary building
regulatory system that meets the changing needs and aspirations of all building industry
participants and consumers.
•
•
•
The proposed bill will require the local governments to consider how it resources the process
of issuing permits and assessing applications.
Processes
Building Permits
The process set out in the Bill is separated into two (2) streams of permits:
1. Certified permit: This is when the documentation in an application has been accessed by
an independent Building Certifier. The Certifier will be ensuring the documents comply
with the Building Code of Australia before the issuance of a permit. This permit is to be
issued within 14 days of the application being received. In this timeframe, the local
government is required to carry out any necessary internal checks, including but not
limited to:
• Planning;
• Crossovers;
• Health;
• Drainage; and
• Heritage.
Page 87
29 MARCH 2011
The local government has three (3) functions in the proposed process:
1. Issuing of permits;
2. Assessment for Class 1 and 10 buildings; and
3. Compliance.
When dealing with Issuing permits, application can only be either:
• Certified applications for all Class of buildings, or
• Uncertified applications for Class 1 and 10 buildings.
4. Uncertified Permit: This is when the documentation in an application has not been
accessed by an independent Building Certifier. The local Government is required to
provide a service for Class 1 and 10 buildings (Dwellings and Sheds etc) similar to the
current process where an applicant can present documentation with no certification and
have it accessed and Certified and then a permit issued. The time frame for this process is
35 days as is the case under current legislation.
The Local Government in the role of the permit issuing authority will not be able to accept
non certified applications for Building Permits for Class 2 to 9 buildings (Commercial). This
means that if the Local Government wishes to provide a service to certify Class 2 to 9
buildings then if will need to compete in the open market for this service, therefore it is
anticipated that on top of the reduced fees for receiving applications that the income from the
commercial and some residential is going to be reduced. The perceived view of requiring the
Local Government to provide the assessment service for the Class 1 and 10 buildings is so
that the small developers and patios can be carried out.
Failure to issue the Building Permit within 14 days is a deemed refused. If the application is
found to be deficient in required information then the local Government may:
1. Reject the application and retain the fees, or
2. Request additional information. If the information is not submitted within 21 days the
application can be rejected and the fees retained.
In the event that the local government does not deal with the application within 14 days, the
application is deemed refused and 50 percent of the fee is to be refunded. Please see
Attachment No. 1 for a tabled explanation of the proposed Bill.
The programmed timeline for reform implementation is as follows:
• Pass through Parliament in Autumn 2011;
• Commencement May/June 2011; and
• Phased implementation over 12 months.
WALGA Position.
At the WALGA State Council meeting 18 February 2011 the following motion was adopted
unanimously:
"That:
1.
A detailed submission outlining Local government main areas of concern highlighted in
this report be developed for a final approval by WALGA President and submitted to the
Minister for Finance; Commerce and Small Business and the Building commission on the
Building Bill 2010.
2.
The Minister be advised that the Local Government is sup portative of the modernization
of the building legislation in WA and will work with the Government to achieve this;
Page 88
29 MARCH 2011
3.
WALGA requests the Minister postpone future debate on the Building Bill 2010 in the
Parliament, to enable the matters identified by Local Government and other stakeholders
to be addressed in the Bill and through the presentation of associated regulations; and
4.
WALGA requests the Building commission work in partnership with the sector, in the
refinement of the Bill and development of the regulations in the preparation of an
implementation strategy for the transition to the new building approvals system."
WALGA outline seven (7) main areas of concern. These are detailed in Attachment No. 2.
Summary
The proposed new Building Bill is an improvement to the existing building-related legislation
as it enables local governments to deal with issues it cannot deal with under current
legislation, for example, the removal of fences without authorisation.
The main concern is that there is confusion as to what exactly the local government role is to
be particularly in the enforcement area. There also may be an additional role for the local
government to undertake audits of applications being submitted.
Policy Implications
Policies may need to be developed following promulgation of the new building legislation,
however this will depend on the provisions of the final Building Bill and any associated
regulations and guidelines and advice notes.
Nil.
Voting Requirements
ADDENDUM – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING –29 MARCH 2011
At the Planning and Development Services and Administration and Community Services
Committee meeting held on Monday, 21 March 2011, the information in the 'Income' field of
Attachment No. 1 (Proposed Building Bill) was incorrect.
The correct figures are shown below:
Item
Income (approximate reduction of 47%)
Current
$475,890
Uncertified
$138,468
Certified
$114,720
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
City’s response to the WALGA discussion paper be as per the officer's
recommendations as set out in Attachment 2 of this report.
Page 89
11.1.16
29 MARCH 2011
2011 National Mainstreet Conference
Location:
Australian Wine Centre, Adelaide
Attachments: Conference Programme
Officer:
Application
To advise Council of the 2011 National Mainstreet Conference, to be held at the Australian
Wine Centre, Adelaide from 1 May 2011 - 4 May 2011.
Background
The National Mainstreet Conference, brings together decision makers and those interested in
developing main streets, town centres and precincts to benefit communities, tourism and
urban development.
Following the impetus of the 8th National Mainstreet Conference being awarded to Adelaide
the local organising committee have developed Mainstreet SA. The South Australian branch
of Mainstreet Australia intends to deliver services to the local Community Business Centres
through the 2011 conference and beyond.
Mainstreet Australia represents local business groups, centre coordinators, economic
development practitioners and individuals who share a commitment to promoting and
developing Mainstreets across Australia.
Comment
The key theme of the conference is 'Everything Old is New Again'. Case studies, panel
sessions, keynotes and presentations and study tours will build on this through the following
subthemes:
•
•
•
•
Management
Marketing
Business Development
Placemaking
The ideas generated, information gathered and viewpoints debated throughout the event will
culminate, for the first time at a Mainstreet Conference, in an interactive Masterclass which
will be held on the final day.
The Conference registration brochure and program are included as an attachment to this
report. The Conference program will include:
• Renowned invited domestic and international keynote speakers.
• Concurrent sessions and tours on mainstreet revitalisation, the role of government in
managing mainstreets, reinvigorating streetscapes, public transport, urban renewal, public
art and urban design..
The conference will provide a useful reference tool for the City’s key strategic planning
projects, such as the Local Housing Strategy, Morley City Centre Masterplan and the
Maylands and other Town Centres Studies.
Page 90
29 MARCH 2011
It is not proposed to send any of the City's officers at this stage.
Summary
The 2011 Mainstreet National Conference with the theme 'Everything Old is New Again' is to
be held at the Australian Wine Centre, Adelaide from 1 May 2011 - 4 May 2011.
Policy Implications
Council Policy No.EO-P05 Travel and Accommodation provides the arrangements for the
reimbursement of conference travel and accommodation expenses for Elected Members and
Officers in accordance with the Local Government Act 1995.
Council Policy EO-P22 Conference/Seminar Attendance – Elected Members establishes the
parameters for the attendance of Elected Members at interstate and regional Western
Australian conferences. Each Elected Member is eligible to attend up to three (3) conferences
for the period covering the bi-annual elections.
The estimated cost associated with attendance at the conference is $3,000 per attendee and
would be funded through the respective conference accounts.
Voting Requirements
Officer Recommendation
That Council approve the attendance and associated costs of Cr _______ at the 2011
Mainstreet National Conference to be held at the Australian Wine Centre, Adelaide from
1 May 2011 - 4 May 2011 inclusive.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
approve the attendance and associated costs of Cr Barry McKenna,
Cr Sonia Turkington and Cr Sylvan Albert at the 2011 Mainstreet National Conference
to be held at the Australian Wine Centre, Adelaide from 1 May 2011 - 4 May 2011
inclusive.
Page 91
29 MARCH 2011
11.2
11.2.1
Aquatic Facilities Management Report- February 2011
Attachments: Aquatic Facilities Management Report – February 2011
Officer:
Application
To consider the report of activities and operations at the City of Bayswater aquatic facilities
for February 2011.
Background
The aquatic facilities management report outlines the statistics, programs and operations of
the centre to allow the council to make effective and informed decisions on the services
Bayswater Waves provides the community.
A copy of the report and operations undertaken in the month of February 2011 is attached.
(Refer to Attachment No. 1).
Comment
Bayswater Waves mission statement;
"To enrich community life and enhance the wellbeing of people of all ages, particularly the
residents of the City of Bayswater, by providing high quality leisure facilities and services.”
Bayswater Waves operating hours are:
Monday to Friday
5:30am to 8:30pm
Saturday to Sunday
7:30am to 7:00pm
Maylands Waterland operating hours are from 1 November 2010 through to April 2011:
Monday to Sunday
10:00am to 5:00pm
Usage
Figures for this month have again continued along similar trends with the aquatic department
exceeding last year's numbers. The swim school department has also continued to generate
great participation numbers in there learn to swim programs and have also received great
feedback and support from the wider community towards water safety and awareness
initiatives.
Programs
The swim school Term 1 commenced in February very successfully, with 1,528 participants.
Projects
The Aquatic Facility had a notable achievement during February 2011:
1.
Two teams of lifeguards were entered into the annual Royal Life Saving Society Pool
Lifeguard Challenge on 17 February. The teams were awarded 1st and 8th place. This
is the second time a City of Bayswater team has won the Lifeguard Challenge. More
information is included in Attachment 1.
Page 92
29 MARCH 2011
Policy Implications
Nil.
Nil.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
report of activities and operations for the City of Bayswater’s aquatic facilities for
February 2011 be received.
Page 93
11.2.2
29 MARCH 2011
City of Bayswater Rangers Services Report – January and February 2011
Attachments: No. 1 - Ranger Services Management Report – January 2011
No. 2 - Ranger Services Management Report – February 2011
Officer:
Application
To provide Council with information about the activities of City of Bayswater Ranger
Services for January 2011 and February 2011 in order for Council to make informed decisions
about the service provided.
Background
Statistics relating to Ranger Services have been presented to Council previously by providing
a spreadsheet of Action Request types and a brief description of activities or issues arising.
The intent of the Ranger Services report is to provide Council with information about the
service in order to be kept informed on the issues and application of the service.
Ranger Services deals with action request and administer laws relating to specific legislation
in order to maintain and improve community safety. The various Legislation rangers
administer include the Dog Act 1976, the Litter Act 1976, the Bush Fires Act 1954, the
Control of Vehicles (Off-road Areas) Act 1978, the Local Government Act 1995 and the City
of Bayswater Local Laws.
Rangers also act as eyes on the street and report any illegal activity to police.
The City’s Ranger Services are located at 25 King Street. The office is open to the public
Monday to Friday 8:30am to 5:00pm.
Community Rangers are on duty from:
7:00am to 9:00pm Monday to Friday
9:00am to 5:00pm Saturday and Sunday
Comment
The Ranger Services Management Reports (Refer to Attachment Nos. 1 and 2) reflects the
work carried out by rangers throughout the months of January 2011 and February 2011.
During January 2011 rangers received 227 Action Requests relating to ranger activities with
76 of those relating to animals (dogs) and 117 relating to parking. These are the highest two
area of complaint. Fire hazard inspections were in the most part completed with a few
remaining properties requiring additional work.
During February 2011 rangers received 224 Action Requests relating to ranger activities with
65 of those relating to animals (dogs) and 125 relating to parking. These are the highest two
area of complaint.
During the Fire Season of 2010 - 2011, 597 properties were identified as potential hazards and
the owners contacted. Final inspections began on 1 December 2010 and where the hazard was
not been removed, the City issued infringement notices removed the hazard. Costs are
recovered from the land owner.
Page 94
29 MARCH 2011
Fire breaks must be maintained until 30 April 2011. Up until 30 April 2011, rangers will
continue to monitor any properties for regrowth that may cause a hazard.
Policy Implications
Nil.
Nil.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
Ranger Services Management Report for January and February 2011 be received.
Page 95
11.2.3
29 MARCH 2011
Section 26 Exemption to Keep Three Dogs at a Premises
Attachments: No. 1 - Application Form (Confidential Attachment)
No. 2 - Ranger Report (Confidential Attachment)
Officer:
Application
To seek Council approval for the keeping of more than two (2) dogs at 81 River Road,
Bayswater in accordance with the provisions of the Dog Act 1976.
Background
On 20 December 2010, an application was submitted to the City of Bayswater under
Section 26 of the Dog Act 1976 seeking approval to keep three dogs at 81 River Road,
Bayswater (Refer to Confidential Attachment No. 1).
The dogs subject to the application are:
1) 12 year old Sterilised Male Dalmatian that suffers from blindness.
2) 7 year old Female Sterilised German Shepherd in good health.
3) 8 year old Sterilised Female Doberman that suffers from spondylolisthesis.
Spondylolisthesis is a condition in which a bone (vertebra) in the lower part of the spine slips
out of the proper position onto the bone below it.
The provisions of the Dog Act 1976 provide that a local government may limit the number of
dogs kept at a premises by establishing a Local Law. The City of Bayswater has set a limit
for the number of dogs normally kept at a premises as two (2) dogs. This limit is set out in the
City of Bayswater Local Laws Relating to Dogs, Clause 2(2).
If a person seeks to keep more than two (2) dogs at a premises but not more than six (6) dogs,
that person may make an application to the City of Bayswater for consideration to keep those
dogs on the premises.
The occupier of 81 River Road, Bayswater has made such an application to the City of
Bayswater to keep three (3) dogs at 81 River Road, Bayswater.
Council may either approve the application with various conditions, or reject the application.
The application process requires consultation with immediate neighbours and a total of
thirteen (13) survey letters were sent out. In addition to this, a Ranger has conducted a site
inspection of the property to ensure that provisions exist for keeping more than the prescribed
numbers of dogs.
If an application is rejected or the applicant is aggrieved by the conditions imposed by the
City of Bayswater, the applicant may apply to the State Administrative Tribunal for a review
of the decision.
Page 96
29 MARCH 2011
Comment
1. On 20 December 2010, an application was submitted to the City of Bayswater under
Section 26 of the Dog Act seeking approval to keep three dogs at 81 River Road,
Bayswater Bayswater (Refer to Confidential Attachment No. 1).
2. The dogs are older dogs and one is blind. The (8) eight year old Doberman dog suffers
from spondylolisthesis which is a condition in which a bone (vertebra) in the lower part of
the spine slips out of the proper position onto the bone below it. This apparently limits the
animal's movement.
3. After receiving the application, City of Bayswater Rangers made enquiries at and within
50 metres around the property. Thirteen (13) survey letters were sent by the City of
Bayswater Rangers and Security seeking comments in relation to the application.
4. The property at 81 River Road, Bayswater was inspected at the invitation of the owner for
the purpose of assessing the application. As a result of the inspection the investigating
officer provided a report on his findings (Refer to Confidential Attachment No. 2).
5. Five (5) responses were received by the City of Bayswater as a result of the survey. Of
those four (4) respondents supported the application and 1 objected to the application.
6. The objection to the application is based on the respondent’s allegation that the dogs from
the property bark when people walk along Claughton Reserve (an adjoining property) and
that the dogs have previously escaped from the property and wandered into neighbouring
properties.
City of Bayswater records indicate that no warnings, infringement notices or prosecutions
have been recorded against the owners of the dogs for this property.
The property is a 1,000 square metre block having a combination of 1.8m high chain mesh
and wooden fencing. There are two gates to the yard and both are in good condition.
The investigating officer that attended the premises has formed the view that the yard area is
sufficient in size to hold and contain the three dogs. The yard is clean and there are no smells
or signs of excreta.
It is recommended that should Council consider approving the keeping of more than the
prescribed number of dogs at the property, that the following conditions be considered:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
The City of Bayswater grants an approval to the applicant that permits the keeping of
three (3) dogs indentified in the application.
The dog owner maintains the premises in a clean and satisfactory condition free of
vermin, parasites and animal excrement.
The dogs have access to a grassed area of not less than 25 square meters.
No offences are recorded against the owner or any person in charge of the dogs kept at
the premises.
Council may review the approval at any time.
Page 97
29 MARCH 2011
Policy Implications
Nil.
Nil.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR SALLY PALMER SECONDED that the City
of Bayswater grants the approval to the applicant that permits that keeping of three (3)
dogs indentified in the application, subject to the following conditions:
a)
The dog owner maintains the premises in a clean and satisfactory condition
free of vermin, parasites and animal excrement.
b)
The dogs have access to a grassed area of not less than 25 square metres.
c)
No offences are recorded against the owner or any person in charge of the
dogs kept at the premises.
d)
Council may review this approval at any time.
Page 98
11.2.4
29 MARCH 2011
Non Drying Paint Security Product
Attachments: Paint on Security - Product Brochure
Officer:
Refer:
Item 13.2.6: OCM 22/02/11
Application
To provide Council with information and research about a non-drying paint that is used as a
graffiti prevention strategy and anti-climb/vandal initiative.
Background
At the Security Watch Advisory Committee (SWAC) meeting held on 14 February 2011 a
member presented a late item discussing a product that could potentially be used to deter
criminal damage (Graffiti) on walls and buildings (Refer to Attachment No. 1).
This product is called Non Drying Paint. This is also referred to as Anti-Vandal Paint. Non
drying paint consists of a thick oily coating that is applied with a hard bristled brush. The
paint has an effective life of between one (1) and three (3) years at which time it is
recommended by the manufacturers to repaint the surface.
The SWAC discussion on this item requested that a separate report be placed before Council
for consideration of use of this or similar products as a graffiti prevention initiative.
The City of Bayswater currently spends between $160,000 and $170,000 in removing graffiti
from private and public areas in the City. This financial year to date has resulted in the City
spending $78,684 in graffiti removal.
Comment
Non drying paint has been available on the market and used extensively in Britain since 2005.
Application of the product is usually above a height of 2.4 metres in conjunction with a sign
that notifies would be offenders of the presence of the paint.
When a person touches the paint its compound sticks to the clothing or body parts that touch
the surface area of the paint.
Contemporary crime prevention often makes reference to Crime Prevention Through
Environmental Design (CPTED). This approach to crime reduction strategies suggests that
by making it more difficult for offenders to commit an offence using building type and
environmental design it reduces the likelihood of the offence occurring.
An analysis of the graffiti attacks on Council property indicates that there is no graffiti
removed by our graffiti removal team that is above 2.4 metres. There are some incidents
where graffiti occurs over 2.4 metres however this is generally found on private land. Should
incidents be found at these heights this product could be recommended to property owners as
a preventative strategy or for applying to City of Bayswater property.
The product is available in 4 colours being black, dark green, beige and dark brown.
Page 99
29 MARCH 2011
Policy Implications
Nil.
Nil.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
product information be noted and provided to the City of Bayswater graffiti removal
staff.
Page 100
11.2.5
29 MARCH 2011
Bayswater Sports Club Inc. Upper Hillcrest Reserve Clubrooms
Officer:
Application
To advise Council that current members of the Bayswater Sporting Club Inc. have expressed
concerns verbally that an Annual General Meeting has not been called in accordance with the
constitution of the Bayswater Sporting Club Inc.
Background
The Bayswater Sports Club Inc currently leases the Upper Hillcrest Reserve Clubrooms on
Coode Street, Bayswater. The period of lease is for 21 years and this commenced on
1 January 1999 with an expiry of 31 December 2020. The Lease also has an option of
renewal of a further 21 years
The Bayswater Sports Club Inc (Association) comprises of the following two clubs:
1.
2.
Bayswater Football Club who’s playing season spans from April to September (winter).
According to the City’s records, the Club comprises of two senior teams that train on
Tuesday and Thursday evenings with the match day being held on Saturday.
Bayswater Postels Cricket Club Inc. who’s playing season is from October to March
(summer). According to the City’s records, the Club comprises of 3 senior teams that
train on Tuesday and Thursday evenings with their match day being held on the
Saturday.
Members of the club have expressed concern to officers that Bayswater Sports Club Inc. has
not fulfilled the requirement of their club constitution by holding an Annual General Meeting
for the financial year 2010 by the required date specified in the club constitution (31 August
2010 or within three months after). Bayswater Sporting Club has outstanding fees due to the
City ($1,522) for refuse rates for the financial years 2009/2010 and 2010/2011.
The lease agreement between the City and Bayswater Sports Club requires the Sports Club to
duly and punctually pay all rates, taxes, assessments, impositions and outgoings (clause 4C),
and comply with and obey the provisions of and all lawful valid regulations, notices, orders
and local laws (clause 4D). Officers have written to Bayswater Sports Club Inc. on five (5)
occasions this current financial year requesting payment of outstanding fees and spoken to the
club president on three (3) occasions. To date, the outstanding amount still remains unpaid
and this constitutes a breach under clause 4C.
The lease granted by the City in 1999 is to Bayswater Sports Club Inc. One of the
requirements as an incorporated Association is to have a formal constitution in place. The
Bayswater Sports Club Inc. constitution appears to have been in place since the clubs
development in 1999. It also appears that his constitution has not been reviewed since its
original adoption by the Association. The club constitution exists to regulate the overall
management of the club, providing rules for important business matters such as management
committee elections, meetings, and financial records and management.
Between 2005 - 2010 the City has written to the Bayswater Sports Club on six (6) occasions
as a result of complaints received from residents in relation to excessive noise and anti-social
behaviour coming from in and around the clubrooms.
Page 101
29 MARCH 2011
10 letters have been sent from the City highlighting areas of building maintenance and
cleanliness to be addressed as per the lease agreement, and the City has intervened and
conducted meetings between the member clubs of the association to address financial affairs
and outstanding debts between the member clubs.
In addition during 2009 the City provided the services of an external facilitator to Bayswater
Sports Club Inc. to assist with the AGM process and to ensure the AGM was conducted as per
the terms of the club constitution.
The City has received ongoing verbal complaints from Bayswater Sports Club members
reporting that the club has again not conducted the 2010 AGM as required by the club
constitution. Allegations have also been made that the club have not maintained their PO Box
address and appropriate Liquor License for the premises.
Officers have maintained ongoing communication with the president of Bayswater Sporting
Club since October 2010 and requested that the due AGM is conducted as per the constitution.
The AGM was due by November 2010 and has not yet taken place. In recent discussion with
the club president Officers requested that an AGM is duly advertised and conducted by 28
February 2011. None of these requests have been actioned and the Association has failed to
call an AGM for 2010.
Comment
The City has a number of options to consider in addressing the situation of Bayswater
Sporting Club Inc.
Upper Hillcrest Reserve is a significant active reserve catering for WA Cricket Association
league turf cricket as well as local league cricket played within the Perth Cricket Association
during the summer season. Bayswater Football Club, which is the oldest Football Club within
the Perth Metropolitan area train and play on the reserve during winter. The reserve is used
extensively by a number of local schools and offers a range of passive recreational facilities to
the wider community including play equipment, gazebo, practice nets and passive lighting
which allows year round walking and exercise opportunity.
The current situation can be deemed as a breach of lease and the City has the following
options:
1.
Issue a formal written warning to Bayswater Sports Club Inc.
Council can issue a formal written warning to the club, giving notice to the club to
comply with the terms of the lease, pay all outstanding fees due to the City and to
conduct an Annual General Meeting as per the requirement of the club constitution by
29 April 2011.
Advantages
A formal written warning provides Council an opportunity in the future, should the
club not act upon a formal written warning to consider terminating the lease under
clause 9 of the lease - default by lessee. A written notice provides the club an
opportunity to reassess and rectify any constitutional shortfall.
Disadvantages
This approach has been used many times in the past and the Association may not take
the matter seriously.
Page 102
2.
29 MARCH 2011
The City offer assistance to convene and deliver an AGM as per the constitution of the
Club.
Council may wish to offer assistance to the club to ensure the requirement of the
constitution is met. As part of the process a review of the club constitution could be
undertaken in order to ensure a viable and sustainable future committee structure.
Advantages
The City is able to offer assistance through our Club Development Officer and work
with the club to establish improved club governance and management practices. An
opportunity exists to review and update the club constitution in line with Department
of Commerce guidelines to incorporated associations.
Disadvantages
The City has previously engaged an independent facilitator to conduct the required
club AGM in 2009 with the aim of all constituent clubs working towards a positive
outcome.
3.
Terminate Lease Agreement
Council could take steps to terminate the lease agreement and pursue alternative lease
or letting arrangements for the premises.
Advantages
A new lessee could be sought to benefit all users of the reserve and the surrounding
community. Alternatively the facility may be let to community groups as a
community hall for hire for short term regular usage similar to Beaufort Park Hall and
Bayswater Drill Hall. Constituent clubs associated to Upper Hillcrest Reserve could
hire and access the hall and social facilities as required after training and match-play.
Disadvantages
Council may incur additional costs associated with the facility such as utility outgoings
and minor maintenance which are currently borne by the lessee.
Summary
In light of the history of events associated with Bayswater Sports Club Inc. and constituent
clubs this matter is referred to Council for consideration and direction.
Policy Implications
Nil.
Nil.
Voting Requirements
Page 103
29 MARCH 2011
Committee/Officer’s Recommendation to Council
That:
1.
The City issue a formal written warning to Bayswater Sports Club Inc. giving notice to
the club to comply with the terms of the lease, pay all outstanding fees due to the City
and to conduct an Annual General Meeting as per the requirement of the club
constitution by 29 April 2011.
2.
The City offer assistance to Bayswater Sports Club Inc. to convene and deliver an AGM
as per the constitution of the Club.
3.
A progress report be presented back to Council in May 2011.
Council Discussion
The Council discussed this item and believed that a point 4 should be added to the resolution
to ensure that users of the facility return any loose objects to the club rooms after use to deter
anti-social behaviour.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR TERRY KENYON, JP MOVED, CR MARLENE ROBINSON SECONDED that:
1.
The City issue a formal written warning to Bayswater Sports Club Inc. giving
notice to the club to comply with the terms of the lease, pay all outstanding fees due
to the City and to conduct an Annual General Meeting as per the requirement of
the club constitution by 29 April 2011.
2.
The City offer assistance to Bayswater Sports Club Inc. to convene and deliver an
AGM as per the constitution of the Club.
3.
A progress report be presented back to Council in May 2011.
4.
Any loose objects removed from the building are required to be returned
immediately after use back to the building.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Page 104
29 MARCH 2011
Committee Meeting:
At 9:41pm Cr Graham Pittaway returned to the meeting.
11.2.6
City of Bayswater 2011 Scholarship Program
Officer:
Application
To seek Council approval to:
1.
Initiate the City of Bayswater 2011 Scholarship Program.
2.
Seek nominations for appointment of the selection committee to conduct
interviews/auditions for the scholarships.
Background
The first Education Scholarship was presented in November 1986, when the Morley Citizens
Club (Inc) set up a trust fund, in perpetuity with the City to provide for a Scholarship.
Additional Scholarships have since been introduced and provided by the City of Bayswater to
its residents.
The Scholarship Programme encourages the students residing within the City, to achieve and
participate in their chosen field of study or activity.
In 2010, the following Scholarships were made available:
Scholarship
Education (Achievement)
Awarded to assist students further their studies.
Education (Assistance)
Music (Primary / Secondary)
Visual Arts
Awarded to assist students to further their studies in the
visual arts (visual arts include painting, illustrating,
sculpture, fine crafts and photography).
Sport / Sports Officials
Awarded to assist students attain excellence in their
chosen sport and to assist an individual progress their
involvement, training and development as a Sports
Official.
Local Sport Representation
Awarded to assist student to participate in local sports.
Scholarship
Amount
$1,200
Number of
Scholarships
3
$1,200
3
$1,200
3
$1,200
3
$1,200
3
$ 500
3
Comment
The City of Bayswater 2011 Scholarship Programme will be advertised through local
newspapers during the months of April and May 2011. Posters will be displayed on notice
boards located at the Civic Centre, Max Tulley (Galleria Office), Libraries and the City's
website. Application packages will be made available at these locations and also available on
the City's website.
Page 105
29 MARCH 2011
It is suggested that the closing date for the City of Bayswater 2011 Scholarships be advertised
as 31 May 2011.
Councillors and professionals from various fields are nominated to a Selection Committee,
who then interview and determine the winners of each scholarship.
Completed application packages will be made available to the members of the Selection
Committee accompanied with interview dates and times. The number of scholarship
applications will determine the interview schedule.
A special presentation ceremony, at which certificates and cheques are presented to the
winners is proposed for a date and time to be determined by His Worship the Mayor.
Policy Implications
Education
Visual Arts
Sport
Local Sports Representation
Music
Policy No. AD-P09
Policy No. AD-P12
Policy No. AD-P11
Policy No. AD-P15
Policy No. AD-P10
The following table represents the 2010/2011 Budget allocation for Scholarships.
Account No.
Category
2011
Budget
2092004379
Education
$12,000
2083254406
Visual Arts
$3,600
2083234379
Sport / Officials / Local
Sport
$5,100
2083204379
Music
$3,600
TOTAL
$24,300
Voting Requirements
That:
1.
The closing date for the City of Bayswater 2011 Scholarship applications to be
advertised as 31 May 2011.
2.
Officers invite a representative from the Education Department, representatives from
the Morley Citizens Club (Inc), a music adjudicator and a professional from the field
of art to participate as Selection Committee Members for the 2011 City of Bayswater
Scholarships.
Page 106
3.
29 MARCH 2011
The City of Bayswater 2011 Scholarship Programme be approved as follows:
Category
Number of
Scholarships
Scholarship
Amount
Total
Scholarship
3
$1,200
$3,600
3
$1,200
$3,600
3
$1,200
$3,600
Visual Arts
3
$1,200
$3,600
Sport / Sports Official
3
$1,200
$3,600
3
$ 500
$1,500
TOTAL
$19,500
4.
The interviews/auditions to be conducted at a date and time determined by
His Worship the Mayor.
5.
The following Councillors be nominated to sit on the 2011 Scholarships Selection
Committees:
Education (Achievement and Assistance)
Cr _____________
Cr _____________
Cr _____________
Visual Arts
Cr _____________
Cr _____________
Cr _____________
Sport / Local Sport Representation
Cr _____________
Cr _____________
Cr _____________
Music
Cr _____________
Cr _____________
Cr _____________
6.
All Councillors be nominated as deputies for all Selection Committees.
7.
The winners of the City of Bayswater 2011 Scholarships remain confidential until
announced at the Scholarship Presentation Evening.
8.
The Presentation Evening to be held at the City of Bayswater Civic Centre, Embleton
Room at 7:00pm at a date and time to be determined by His Worship the Mayor.
Page 107
29 MARCH 2011
Committee Meeting:
The Committee considered the officers recommendation and nominated Councillors for each
of the Scholarship Selection Committees. Point 5 of the recommendation was amended as
follows:
5.
Committees:
• Cr McKenna
• Cr Sonia Turkington
Visual Arts
• Cr Marlene Robinson
• Cr Sally Palmer
• Cr Mike Sabatino
• Cr Terry G Kenyon, JP
• Cr Alan Radford
Music
• Cr Sylvan Albert
Committee Recommendation to Council
That:
1.
2.
Officers invite a representative from the Education Department, representatives from
the Morley Citizens Club (Inc), a music adjudicator and a professional from the field
of art to participate as Selection Committee Members for the 2011 City of Bayswater
Scholarships.
3.
Category
Number of
Scholarships
Scholarship
Amount
Total
Scholarship
3
$1,200
$3,600
3
$1,200
$3,600
Music (Primary /
Secondary)
3
$1,200
$3,600
Visual Arts
3
$1,200
$3,600
3
$1,200
$3,600
3
$ 500
$1,500
TOTAL
Page 108
$19,500
29 MARCH 2011
4.
5.
Committees:
Cr Barry McKenna
Cr Sonia Turkington
Cr _____________
Cr Sally Palmer
Cr Michael Sabatino
Visual Arts
Cr Marlene Robinson
Cr Terry G Kenyon, JP
Cr Alan Radford
Cr _____________
Music
Cr Sylvan Albert
Cr _____________
Cr _____________
6.
7.
8.
The Presentation Evening to be held at the City of Bayswater Civic Centre, Embleton
Room at 7:00pm at a date and time to be determined by
AMENDMENT
CR BARRY MCKENNA MOVED, CR TERRY KENYON, JP SECONDED that the
Scholarships amount be increased from $1,200 to $1,500 and the Local Sports
Representation scholarship amount be increased from $500 to $750 and accordingly,
Point 3 be amended to read as follows;
3.
Category
Number of
Scholarships
Scholarship
Amount
Total
Scholarship
3
$1,500
$4,500
3
$1,500
$4,500
Music (Primary /
Secondary)
3
$1,500
$4,500
Visual Arts
3
$1,500
$4,500
3
$1,500
$4,500
Local Sports
Representation
3
$ 750
$2,250
TOTAL
The Amendment was put and
$24,750
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
The Amendment became part of the Substantive Motion.
Page 109
29 MARCH 2011
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR BARRY MCKENNA MOVED, CR TERRY KENYON, JP SECONDED that:
1.
2.
Officers invite a representative from the Education Department, representatives
from the Morley Citizens Club (Inc), a music adjudicator and a professional from
the field of art to participate as Selection Committee Members for the 2011 City
of Bayswater Scholarships.
3.
Category
Number of
Scholarships
Scholarship
Amount
Total
Scholarship
3
$1,500
$4,500
3
$1,500
$4,500
3
$1,500
$4,500
Visual Arts
3
$1,500
$4,500
3
$1,500
$4,500
3
$ 750
$2,250
TOTAL
$24,750
4.
5.
Committees:
Cr Barry McKenna
Cr Sonia Turkington
Mayor Terry Kenyon
Visual Arts
Cr Marlene Robinson
Cr Michael Sabatino
Cr Sally Palmer
Cr Terry G Kenyon, JP
Cr Alan Radford
Cr Mike Anderton
Music
Cr Sylvan Albert
Cr Sally Palmer
Cr Terry Blanchard
6.
7.
8.
The Presentation Evening to be held at the City of Bayswater Civic Centre,
Embleton Room at 7:00pm at a date and time to be determined by
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY WITH AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY
Page 110
11.2.7
29 MARCH 2011
WALGA State Council Meeting – February 2011
Attachments: No. 1 - East Metropolitan Zone Minutes - 10 February 2011
No. 2 - WALGA State Council Minutes – 18 February 2011
Officer:
Application
To advise Council of:
1.
The Minutes from the WALGA East Metropolitan Zone and WALGA State Council.
2.
The outcomes of the East Metro Zone workshop.
Background
1.
The City of Bayswater is part of the East Metropolitan Zone meeting. The City’s
representatives at this meeting are Mayor Terry Kenyon, JP Cr Barry McKenna,
Cr Alan Radford, with the Chief Executive Officer attending as a non-voting delegate.
2.
The East Metropolitan Zone representatives on WALGA State Council are Mayor
Terry Kenyon, and Mayor Glenys Godfrey (City of Belmont).
Comments
East Metropolitan Zone meeting was held on Thursday, 10 February 2011. The key matters
discussed at the meeting were:• Presentation by Telstra
• WALGA State Council Agenda and recommendations in relation to:o Proposed changes to the Local Government Act;
o Development Assessment Panels;
o Safe system principles for Local Governments;
o WALGA discussion paper on Review of State Council and the Zone committee. It
was resolved that a workshop be held to discuss and determine how better to utilise
the Zone.
The East Metropolitan Zone meeting minutes are attached (Refer to Attachment No. 1).
The WALGA State Council meeting was held on 1 December 2010 and the minutes of that
meeting have been distributed separately to Council for information.
The Zone Workshop was held on Thursday 24 February 2011 to discuss the role, direction
and effective use of the Zone by member council representatives in gaining opportunities for
the region. The workshop outcomes discussions are contained in Attachment 2.
(Refer to Attachment No. 2).
Policy Implications
Nil.
Nil.
Voting Requirements
Page 111
29 MARCH 2011
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR SALLY PALMER SECONDED that the East
Metropolitan Zone Meeting Minutes of 10 February 2011 and WALGA State Council
Minutes of 18 February 2011 be received.
Page 112
11.2.8
29 MARCH 2011
2011 National General Assembly of Local Government – Registration of
Delegates and Call for Submissions of Motion
Attachments: No. 1 - Invitation to the National Local Government Events
No. 2 - Letter from ALGA - Constitution Recognition
No. 3 - Letter from ALGA - Motions
Officer:
Application
To consider:
1. The attendance of the Mayor and the Chief Executive Officer at the 2011 National
General Assembly of Local Government to be held in Canberra between 19 and 22 June
2011.
2. Any motions that they city wants to put forward for discussions at the Australian Local
Government Association convention. The closing date for submissions of motion is
Saturday, 30 April 2011.
3. The ALGA request for local Councils to pass a resolution endorsing the position that a
referendum be held by 2013 to change the Constitution to allow direct funding of local
government bodies by the Commonwealth Government and also to include local
government in any new Preamble to the Constitution if one is proposed.
Background
Council has annually supported sending representatives to attend and participate in the
Australian Local Government Association - National General Assembly of Local
Government. The forum focuses on progressing issues that impact local governments
nationally. the main ones being direct federal funding to local governments and constitutional
recognition. In addition, Council is actively involved with WALGA via the East Zone
meetings, with Mayor Terry Kenyon on the State Council. WALGA is the local
representative body dealing and progressing state based local government sector issues.
Comment
National General Assembly (NGA)
The Australian Local Government Association (ALGA) is the national voice of Local
Government and represents over 560 Councils across the country.
Key activities of ALGA include representation of local government on national bodies and
ministerial councils, providing submissions to government and parliamentary inquiries,
raising the profile and concerns of local government at the national level and providing
forums for local governments to guide the development of national local government policies.
ALGA's strategic priorities are:
• Strengthening local government finances
• Sustaining local roads, transport and other infrastructure
• Improving natural and built environmental outcomes
• Enhancing regional equity and regional development
• Building capacity and sustainability in local communities
• Connecting member associations and the Local Government sector
• Engaging effectively in Australian Government processes.
Page 113
29 MARCH 2011
This years NGA theme will be ‘Growing with our Community – Partnership, Place and
Position.’ The NGA theme reflects current issues being debated nationally and priority issues
facing local government and aims to stimulate ideas about new ways of doing business to
meet the needs of local people and their communities.
The program is currently being developed with a range of speakers. Federal ministers and
political leaders invited include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
The Governor-General of Australia, Her Excellency Ms Quentin Bruce AC;
The Prime Minister, the Hon Julie Gillard MP;
The Leader of the Opposition, the Hon Tony Abbott MP;
The Minister for Regional Australia, Regional Development and Local Government,
the Hon Simon Crean MP;
The Shadow Minister for Regional Development, Local Government and Water,
Senator Barnaby Joyce;
The Leader of the Australian Greens, Senator Bob Brown
Constitutional Recognition
One of the key national Local Government issues being advocated for by the Australian Local
Government Association is constitutional recognition.
The campaign for constitutional recognition of Local Government continues to move forward
with ALGA devoting considerable resources over the past three years to develop the case for
constitutional reform and the need for reform.
Previous assemblies have passed resolutions:
1. Calling for more infrastructure and general purpose funding to be provided by the
Australian Government to Local Government, and;
2. Seeking constitutional recognition of local government via a special assembly held in
Melbourne in December 2008. These resolutions have developed the Local Government
case for more funding and recognition by the Federal Government to ensure increased
investment in community infrastructure.
This year at the NGA, ALGA has requested that Council pass a resolution endorsing the
position that a referendum be held by 2013 to change the Constitution to allow direct funding
of local government bodies by the Commonwealth Government and also to include local
government in any new Preamble to the Constitution if one is proposed.
The form of financial recognition of local government proposed by ALGA, which will not
impact on the relationship between councils and state governments, has been endorsed by
WALGA and all other state and territory local government associations.
ALGA believes it is now important that this position also be endorsed by all councils to
demonstrate to Federal and state governments, oppositions and political parties that the
position has widespread support within local government.
Opportunities to directly access and obtain federal funds provides significant benefit to
enhance local programmes and projects, such as the City of Bayswater success in securing
funding directly from the Federal Government of $10M through the federal economic
stimulus package in 2009, in particular through the Regional and Local Community
Infrastructure Strategic Programme 2009.
Page 114
29 MARCH 2011
Motions
As is normal practice at the National General Assembly, ALGA is calling for motions for
discussion at the 2011 NGA under this years theme of ‘Growing with our Community –
Partnership, Place and Position'.
To be eligible for inclusion in the NGA Business Papers, motions must follow the principles:
1.
Fall under one of the themes – Partnership, Place, and Position;
2.
Be relevant to the work of local government nationally; and
3.
Complement or build on the policy objectives of state and territory associations.
Accordingly Council direction is sought on whether there are any motions that the City of
Bayswater wants raised at this National General Assembly.
Australian Council of Local Government (ACLG)
Normally the ACLG is held at the end of the National General Assembly, however to date no
details are available on whether this will occur.
The Prime Minister and Minister Anthony Albanese invited all Australian Mayors to attend
the first meeting of the new Australian Council of Local Government in Canberra on 18
November 2008. This pivotal meeting and the establishment of the Council marks the
beginning of the Federal Government building a stronger relationship with local government
and local communities across Australia.
To assist with this process and to ensure Councillors have information on local government's
national position, ALGA has developed a set of background fact sheets. The fact sheets cover
the issues and work that local government has been undertaking at a national level through
debate and discussion at the National General Assembly, and through ongoing relationship
and representations to the Federal Government.
Policy Implications
Policy EO-PO5.
Policy EO-P22.
The approximate costs associated with attendance, including registration, events, airfares and
accommodation, are approximately $3,200.
Voting Requirements
Page 115
29 MARCH 2011
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR SALLY PALMER SECONDED that:
1.
Council approves the attendance and associated costs of the Mayor, Cr Terence
Kenyon, JP and Chief Executive Officer, Francesca Lefante, at the 2011 National
General Assembly of Local Government to be held in Canberra between 14 and 17
June 2010 in accordance with Council Policy EO-PO5.
2.
In the event that a 4th Annual Australian Council of Local Government is held in
Canberra at the end of the National General Assembly, that the Mayor be
authorised to attend.
3.
City of Bayswater supports the position on the Australian Local Government
Association (ALGA) position that a referendum be held by 2013 to change the
Constitution to allow direct funding of local government bodies by the
Commonwealth Government and also to include local government in any new
Preamble to the Constitution if one is proposed.
4.
The following City of Bayswater motions be raised at the ALGA national General
Assembly:
(a)
(b)
The City support constitutional recognition as indicated in point 3.
Any other motions identified by Council.
Page 116
12
29 MARCH 2011
BUSINESS - TECHNICAL SERVICES & FINANCE AND PERSONNEL
COMMITTEE
Application
To inform the Council of the minutes of the meeting of the Technical Services and Finance &
Personnel Committee which was held on 22 March 2011.
Background
A copy of the minutes of the meeting of the Technical Services and Finance & Personnel
Committee which was held on 22 March 2011 follow this report.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
(OFFICER’S RECOMMENDATION)
minutes of the meeting of the Technical Services and Finance & Personnel Committee
which was held on 22 March 2011, be received.
Page 117
29 MARCH 2011
TECHNICAL SERVICES & FINANCE & PERSONNEL
COMMITTEE MINUTES
21 MARCH 2011
CITY OF BAYSWATER
Minutes of the meeting of the Technical Services and Finance & Personnel Committee which was
held in Council Chambers, City of Bayswater CivicC, 61 Broun Avenue, Morley on Tuesday,
22 March 2011 commencing at 7:00pm.
Committee Recommendation to Councils are subject to adoption, or otherwise, at the following Ordinary Meeting of Council,
as recorded in Minutes of that Council Meeting.
MINUTES
ATTENDANCE, APOLOGIES, LEAVE OF ABSENCE (PREVIOUSLY APPROVED) &
ABSENCE
Members
Cr Barry McKenna, Deputy Mayor
Cr Mike Anderton, JP
Cr Sally Palmer
Cr Alan Radford
Cr Marlene Robinson
Cr Sonia Turkington
Observers
Cr Sylvan Albert
Officers
Mr Ted Budzinski
Mr Doug Pearson
Mr James Riley
Mr Ivan Jakicevic
Mr Martyn Boyle
Mr Jeremy Maher
Ms Carol Newport
Ms Wardia Du Toit
Chairperson
Deputising for Cr Terry Blanchard
Deputising for Cr Michael Sabatino
Until 8:29pm
Director of Finance
Manager Environmental Health
Technical Manager
A/Manager Administration Services
Environmental Coordinator
PA/Director of Finance
PA/Director of Technical Services
Apologies
Cr Terry Blanchard
Absent
Cr Michael Sabatino
Public
2
Press
Nil.
Page 118
29 MARCH 2011
COMMITTEE MINUTES
21 MARCH 2011
DELEGATED AUTHORITY / TERMS OF REFERENCE
Delegated Authority
There are no items appearing in this Minutes for which the Technical Services and Finance &
Personnel Committee has been granted delegated authority by Council in accordance with Section 5.23
of the Local Government Act 1995, however this meeting is open to the Public but will be closed to
receive any deputations.
Terms of Reference
Technical Services:
To consider reports and make recommendations to Council in respect to issues relating to the delivery
of services within the areas of Engineering, Parks and Gardens, Environmental Health and the
Environment, Technical Design and all other aspects of the Technical Service operations of the City of
Bayswater.
Finance and Personnel:
To consider reports and make recommendations to Council in respect to statutory and management
financial reporting, accounts payable/receivable, investments, donations, capital proposals, budget
reviews, loan submissions, insurance, recreational facilities managed under contract by the YMCA,
personnel issues and all other Finance and Personnel operations of the City of Bayswater.
DECLARATION OF INTEREST
In accordance with Clause 34C of the Local Government (Administration) Regulations 1996 the
following disclosure of interests affecting impartiality were made at the meeting:Date
Name
Item No.
22 March 2011
Cr Barry McKenna
Item 1.11 – EMRC Council Meeting - 17 February 2011
22 March 2011
Cr Alan Radford
Item 1.11 – EMRC Council Meeting – 17 February 2011
22 March 2011
Cr Barry McKenna
Item 2.5 – Donation – Alex Murphy – 2011 Australian Rowing
Championships, Adelaide
CR SALLY PALMER MOVED, CR ALAN RADFORD SECONDED that the minutes of the
meeting of the Technical Services & Finance and Personnel Committee meeting held on
Tuesday, 15 February 2011, which were circulated, were confirmed as a true and correct record.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Page 119
29 MARCH 2011
COMMITTEE MINUTES
21 MARCH 2011
Item 1.5 was dealt with prior to Deputations.
DEPUTATIONS
Deputations are closed to the public.
COMMITTEE RESOLUTION
CR SALLY PALMER MOVED, CR MARLENE ROBINSON SECONDED that the meeting be closed to
the public and the doors were closed.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
At 7:18pm, the meeting was closed to the public in order to receive deputations and members of the
public present (2) in the Gallery left the Chambers.
(i)
Officer:
In relation to Item 1.2, Mrs Branka Radanovich and Mrs Joanne Brabazon from the Slade Street Local
Area Traffic Management Group including Mr Glenn Cookson, Slade Street resident, were in
attendance at the meeting from 7:18pm until 7:32pm.
(ii)
Officer:
In relation to Item 1.2, Mr Mr Brian Blechynden, member of the Slade Street Local Area Traffic
Management Working Group and Mr Sam Forgarty, a resident from Ascot Park, were in attendance at
the meeting from 7:33pm until 7:51pm.
COMMITTEE RESOLUTION
CR TERRY KENYON, JP MOVED, CR ALAN RADFORD SECONDED that the doors be reopened to
the public.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
At 7:58pm, the members of the public present (6) were invited back into the Chambers and the
meeting resumed.
Item 1.2 was dealt with after Deputations.
ORDER OF BUSINESS
Items of business were dealt with in the following order;
1.1, 1.4, 1.5, Deputations (i and ii), 1.2, 1.3, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 1.11, 2.1, 2.5, En bloc Recommendations
(1.6, 1.10, 2.2 to 2.4 and 2.6 to 3.2) and 4.1 to 4.2.
Page 120
29 MARCH 2011
At the Technical Services and Finance & Personnel Committee Meeting:
This Item was dealt with prior to receiving Deputations.
12.1
Technical Services
12.1.1
Smoking Local Laws
Attachments: Aerial of Robert Thompson Reserve
Officer:
Application
For Council to consider creating new Local Laws within the City of Bayswater that will
further restrict smoking in public places and in particular at Robert Thompson Park in
Noranda.
Background
At the Ordinary Meeting of Council conducted on 1 February 2011 it was unanimously
resolved that Council place signs on the shelters and on the posts with other signs around the
playground at Robert Thompson Park that will inform the park users that smoking is
prohibited within 10 metres of the children’s playground area.
This resolution has subsequently been actioned by staff from Council’s Environmental Health
Section. It was also unanimously resolved at the same meeting that Council, at its next
workshop, examine the idea of making a local law that will enable Council to prohibit
smoking in certain areas. Council staff to draft the local law to present to the workshop
complete with any benefits or problems they may see.
A discussion paper was subsequently prepared by Council’s Environmental Health staff and
presented for discussion at the Council workshop conducted on the 8 March 2011.
Following the workshop, this item has been prepared for Council to formally consider the
matter on any further action considered necessary to protect children in Council playgrounds
from the impact of passive smoking on their health.
In 2006 the State Government implemented new legislation to further control smoking within
Western Australia. This legislation is known as the Tobacco Products Control Act 2006 and
the Tobacco Products Control Regulations 2006.
The main objectives of this legislation are to:•
•
•
•
Limit the sale and supply of tobacco products and implements to young persons;
Regulate the sale and promotion of tobacco products;
Prohibit the sale of products that resemble tobacco products; and
Reduce the exposure of people to tobacco smoke from tobacco products smoked
by other people.
Page 121
29 MARCH 2011
In order to reduce the exposure of people to second-hand tobacco smoke further regulatory
amendments under the Tobacco Products Control Act 2006 were introduced on the 22
September 2010. The legislation now prohibits smoking in the following instances:SECTION
LEGISLATION
10
Regulations
107A
Act
107B
Act
107C
Act
107D
Act
OFFENCE
FINE
Smoking within an
enclosed
public
$1,000
space or within 5m
of an entrance.
Smoking between
$1,000
the
flags
at
beaches.
Smoking in outdoor
$2,000
eating areas that (smoker &
have not been occupier of
designated
for premises
smoking.
are liable )
Smoking
within
10m of playground
$1000
equipment.
Smoking in or on a
vehicle if an under
$1000
17 year old is
present.
MODIFIED
PENALTY
DATE OF
IMPLEMENTATION
$300
31/7/2006
$200
22/9/2010
$300
22/9/2010
$200
22/9/2010
$200
22/9/2010
This state-wide legislation is deemed to be effective in balancing the rights of smokers and the
health impacts on the community from second-hand smoke.
Nevertheless section 107E of the Tobacco Products Control Act 2006 states:-.
“Nothing in section 107A, 107B or 107C is intended to limit the power conferred on a local
government by the Local Government Act 1995 or any other Act to make local laws about
matters mentioned in those sections.”
Therefore a Local Government still has the ability to create new local laws in accordance with
Section 3.5 of the Local Government Act 1995, to further control smoking within its
jurisdiction.
Section 3.5 (1) of the Local Government Act 1995 states:“A local government may make local laws under this Act prescribing all matters that
are required or permitted to be prescribed by a local law, or are necessary or
convenient to be so prescribed, for it to perform any of its functions under this Act.”
Comment
The WA Department of Health’s Tobacco Control Section has advised that very few Western
Australian Local Government Authorities have implemented new Local Laws regarding
smoking and those which have done so, relate to smoking prohibitions for alfresco dining
areas (eg. City of Perth) and public beaches (eg. City of Joondalup).
Page 122
29 MARCH 2011
The Tobacco Control Section is unaware of any Western Australian Local Government
Authorities that have introduced Local Laws that restrict smoking from an entire park or
reserve. However they did advise that there are instances where certain community and
sporting events have been made “smoke free” as a result of sponsorship arrangements through
“Smoke-Free WA”.
In documentation obtained from the City of Joondalup, they have estimated their initial costs
for implementing their local law for “smoke free” beaches to be:•
•
•
•
$5,000 for the cost of lawyer’s fees for wording the Local Law;
$120 for the cost of producing and erecting each sign (total cost of $10,800);
$86,801 for the cost of policing (Officer’s time); and
$42,400 for the purchase and operation of a vehicle.
As the City of Bayswater does not have any public beaches or significant alfresco dining
areas, the main issue of concern is Section 107C of the Tobacco Products Control Act 2006,
which relates to children’s playground equipment.
Section 107C appears to have taken into account the health impacts from second-hand tobacco
smoke, by restricting smoking within 10m of children’s playground equipment, which is in a
public place.
The Tobacco Control Section has advised however that the definition of “children’s
playground equipment” does not incorporate the whole playground area (ie. perimeter). It
refers only to physical playground equipment for use solely by children (ie. swings, slides
etc.). Therefore this definition does not capture places like skate parks, bike paths and
basketball courts which are frequented by adults and children.
Therefore at the Robert Thompson Park in Noranda, the 10m exclusion would only apply
from the children’s “play equipment” and not the bike paths, even though they are intended to
be used by children. The aerial photo of Robert Thompson Park (refer Attachment 1) shows
an example of the 10m exclusion area from a piece of children’s playground equipment.
Section 107C does enable Local Governments to erect signs around children’s playgrounds to
warn the public of the 10m restriction and also appoint Environmental Health Officers or
additional officers (ie. Rangers) to assist with enforcement.
The Tobacco Control Section will supply various sized stickers that can be used as “signage”.
These can be placed on existing signs, bins and shelters, however if new signs need to be
manufactured, this is at the expense of the Local Government.
The total cost of implementing a new local law (ie. signage and policing) can be quite
significant; therefore it is important to consider whether the current legislation is effective.
In accordance with Council’s resolution, the City of Bayswater’s Environmental Health
Section has arranged for new signage to be installed at the Robert Thompson Park to advise
the public of the 10m smoking restriction from the play equipment. It is proposed that further
signage will be placed at other playgrounds if the need arises.
Page 123
29 MARCH 2011
Although the health impacts associated with smoking are well documented and are common
knowledge, it would be prudent to consider that there may be dissent from the public if they
feel that there is a breach of their personal liberties.
Certain people may feel that the current legislation is adequate in protecting others from
second-hand tobacco smoke and that further prohibitions are unnecessary or unreasonable.
The following options are available to Council:1)
2)
Continue enforcing the current legislation;
Introduce a Local Law to prohibit smoking in certain public areas such as Robert
Thompson Park;
Increase the 10m restriction at Robert Thompson Park, to include some of the bike
paths immediately surrounding the playground area.
3)
The following are examples of potential wording for a Local Law:•
‘A person shall not smoke within Robert Thompson Park.’
•
‘A person shall not smoke within ‘x’metres of the children’s playground
equipment at the Robert Thompson Park.’
•
‘A person shall not smoke within any park or reserve within the City of
Bayswater.’
•
‘A person shall not smoke within ‘x’metres of children’s playground equipment at
all parks and reserves within the City of Bayswater.’
•
‘A person shall not smoke within ‘x’ meters of a public place within the City of
Bayswater that is used for recreational purposes.’
If smoking is prohibited within the Robert Thompson Park or any other park/ reserve within
the City of Bayswater, it would be important to consider prohibiting smoking around the
perimeter of the park/ reserve also.
It is likely that smokers will relocate to the perimeters of the parks/ reserves and children may
be exposed as they are entering or exiting a park/ reserve. Therefore this could in fact defeat
the aim of not exposing children to second-hand tobacco smoke.
For instance dot point 1 mentioned above could be altered to:“A person shall not smoke within Robert Thompson Park or on the adjoining council
verge.”
Nevertheless it should be noted that no complaints regarding smoking near playgrounds have
been received by the City of Bayswater, since the new regulatory amendments were
introduced. As the current legislation appears to be adequate, it may be unnecessary to
allocate further money and resources to further regulate this issue.
Page 124
29 MARCH 2011
However should significant issues arise or if there is evidence that the 10m restriction is
inadequate in protecting people from second-hand tobacco smoke, this matter could then be
further reviewed and the option of a new Local Law considered.
Policy Implications
Nil.
Costs associated with developing and policing a new Local Law.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
1.
Council continues to enforce the new regulatory amendments introduced on the
22 September 2010 to control smoking in WA, which restricts smoking within 10m
of all children’s playground equipment.
2.
Council’s Environmental Health Section monitors the effectiveness of the new
regulatory amendments and reports to Council if serious non-compliance issues
arise regarding smoking within 10m of children’s playground equipment.
At the Technical Services and Finance & Personnel Committee:
Item 1.4 was dealt with after this Item.
Page 125
29 MARCH 2011
Deputation (i) and (ii) were received prior to this Item.
12.1.2
Attachments: Issues and Suggestions from Submissions
Statistical Results of Survey
Traffic Volumes and Speed Data
Origin and Destination Survey
Working Party Notes
Slade Street Action Group Minutes - 18.01.11
Addendum - Tabled Correspondence
Addendum - Tabled Email
Addendum - Emails from Residents
Officer:
Refer:
Item 12.3 OMC 14.04.09
Item 12.5 OMC 09.06.09
Item 12.1.12 OMC 24.08.10
Application
To allow Council consideration of the results of the traffic management trial undertaken in
Slade Street and a portion of Whatley Crescent, Bayswater.
Background
In considering the recommendation of the Slade Street Local Area Traffic Management
(SSLATM) Working Group, Council resolved as follows at the Ordinary Meeting of Council
of 24 August 2010;
“That Council:
1.
Receives the Slade Street Traffic Management Report.
2.
Authorise the Director of Technical Services to initiate a three month trial of
traffic management treatments in Slade Street and Whatley Crescent/Newton
Street generally in accordance with Drawing Nos. 33/09a and 35/09.
3.
Seek public comment from residents in the study zone following the completion of
the trial.
4.
Consider a comprehensive report in relation to a technical assessment of the trial
and the results of the public consultation following the completion of the trial in
liaising with the Slade Street Working Group.
5.
The Local Area Traffic Management (LATM) report include an origin and
destination survey prior to the trial taking place and that if there is a requirement
for funds for the computer program, that funds be taken from the traffic
management account.”
In accordance with the above recommendation, a three month trial was undertaken
commencing on 29 September 2010 and finishing 24 December 2010.
Following the trial, a survey was circulated to 698 properties in the affected area and 195
submissions were returned.
Page 126
29 MARCH 2011
Trial Results
(a)
Public Comment
A spreadsheet detailing the comments received was presented to Councillors under
separate cover.
A summary of the main issues and suggestions raised in the submissions received is
enclosed as Attachment 1.
Attachment 2 details the statistical results of the survey.
(b)
Traffic Data
Attachment 3 details traffic volume and speed data for traffic within the study area
before, during and after the trial for comparison purposes. Attachment 4 is an origin
and destination survey for Slade Street, indicating the level of through traffic before and
during the trial.
(c)
Working Party Consultation
The notes from the Working Party Meeting held to discuss the results of the trial are
Trial Analysis
The high level of surveys returned (30%) indicated that the traffic management issues is a
considerable concern for residents in the study area.
The traffic statistics collated (Attachment 3) indicate that there was a marked reduction in
traffic during the trial as detailed below.
PRE TRIAL
DURING TRIAL
STREET
VOLUME
(Vehicles)
SPEED
(km/hr)
VOLUME
(Vehicles)
SPEED
(km/hr)
Slade Street
1,324
63
871
51
Whatley Crescent
1,880
65
1,226
54
REDUCTION
VOLUME
(Vehicles)
SPEED
(km/hr)
453
(34%)
654
(35%)
12
(19%)
11
(17%)
Similarly, as detailed in Attachment 4, through traffic volumes were generally in the order of
65%less during the trial.
Page 127
29 MARCH 2011
The following comments are provided in relation to the main issues raised in the submissions
received;
ISSUES
Size of bumps (Whatley
Crescent)
COMMENTS
The humps used were the standard size manufactured in
accordance with Australian Standards. Slightly higher
humps were used to meet MRWA requirements as there
are no central islands.
2.
No. of devices (Slade Street and
Whatley Crescent)
Should Council resolve to proceed with the devices in
either street, the number of devices could be decreased
and more installed if necessary following monitoring of
the situation.
3.
Noise issues associated with As is the case with the majority of traffic management
devices (Slade Street and treatments available, there is always some degree of
Whatley Crescent)
disbenefit associated with any particular treatment (i.e.
noise, loss of access/connectivity etc.). Typically, noise
issues associated with speed humps are worse than those
associated with other treatment types.
4.
Increase in traffic in other streets Traffic counts undertaken indicate that this was not the
case. There may however have been increases initially as
traffic adjusted to the trial.
5.
Flow conflicts and speeding
through (Slade Street)
Similar devices are used elsewhere with few problems.
Formalisation of devices would reduce this concern.
6.
Inconvenience to road users
Travel time disruption would be minimal and needs to be
balanced against local community needs.
7.
Question of need
Community support is evidenced by survey.
8.
Whatley Crescent/King William
Street (right turn arrow)
This matter has previously been considered by Main
Roads WA and is not feasible due to geometry, pedestrian
phases and proximity to Railway Parade traffic signals.
9.
Speed between devices (Slade
Street)
Would need to be monitored. Not evident from traffic
counts during trial.
10.
Parking near slow points
Could be controlled by parking restrictions.
11.
Lighting (Whatley Crescent)
Would be improved in vicinity of traffic control devices
as part of project.
12.
Whatley Crescent/Cobden Street
intersections
Intersection has been reviewed and adequate sight
distance is available.
13.
Rubbish Truck (Slade Street)
Similar devices exist in other streets and no problems
have been reported.
14.
Classification of Slade Street
Changing classification alone will have no effect on
traffic characteristics. Any change in road classification
needs to be undertaken with due consideration to the
adjoining road network and any associated impacts.
15.
Property access near devices
Can be reviewed.
1.
Page 128
29 MARCH 2011
The overall survey statistics (Attachment 2) indicate the 58.5% and 58.8% of respondents felt
that the traffic treatments were effective in Slade Street and Whatley Crescent respectively.
Considering the responses from residents of Slade Street and Whatley Crescent alone, 58% of
Slade Street residents and 77% of Whatley Crescent residents supported the implementation
of the trialled treatments on a permanent basis.
With regard to Slade Street, a number of respondents in the street indicated their preference
for a cul-de-sac at the Guildford Road end of Slade Street. In total, there were 24, of these, 8
supported the trialled treatments and 16 were against.
In relation to other comments within the area, there were 79 responses with 36.2% responding
no effect and 47.5% responding a negative effect. As detailed above, this may have been
associated with initial traffic increases in adjoining streets on the implementation of the trial.
In regards to the noise associated with speed cushions being located adjacent to 41 and 43
Whatley Crescent, the residents were adamant that they did not want them there.
As detailed in Attachment 5, the trial results were considered by the SSLATM Working Group
and whilst it was acknowledged by the community members of the group that the trial had
reduced vehicle volumes and speed, it was their firm opinion that the majority of Slade Street
residents still preferred the cul-de-sac/slip road option (Option 2 from the original Working
Party report) and they recommended that this option be implemented by Council.
In addition, a public meeting of the Slade Street Action Group was held on 18 January 2011.
This meeting was convened by the Slade Street residents and was attended by Mayor Kenyon
and Cr Robinson. Minutes of the meeting are enclosed as Attachment 6.
As detailed in the Action Group and Working Party Minutes (Attachments 5 and 6), concern
was expressed in relation to the current access/egress arrangements for the 'Ascot Gardens'
units. Currently, the units are accessed via a crossover on King William Street and exit is via
the crossover on Slade Street. It has been claimed that the King William Street crossover was
originally a two-way access and the change to a one-way system has resulted in significantly
more traffic from the units utilising Slade Street.
City officers have reviewed original building plans and approvals and have not been able to
identify any indication of the proposed traffic flow within the development or any restrictions
on access/egress from either of the two crossovers.
In addition, any potential reduction in vehicles utilising Slade Street should access/egress be
allowed from the King William Street crossover is unknown and as any traffic management
treatments are designed to promote appropriate vehicle speeds regardless of the traffic
volume, this issue is not considered to be of major importance when considering applicable
treatment options.
Page 129
29 MARCH 2011
Comment
The results of the trial clearly show that the traffic management treatments trialled were
effective with a reduction in traffic volumes and speeds. However, the community members
in the Working party still believe that there is majority support from Slade Street residents for
the implementation of the preferred cul-de-sac option.
Whilst this may be the case, the survey undertaken indicated a majority support from Slade
Street residents that responded to the survey for implementation of traffic treatments as
trialled. Notwithstanding this, it may be that residents would prefer other options however as
they were not trialled, they did not necessarily comment on other options.
In regards to Whatley Crescent and Newton Street, it is recommended that should Council
resolve to implement traffic treatments, the speed cushions in front of 41 and 43 Whatley
Crescent be deleted due to adjacent residents concerns. In this instance, a lane restriction is
proposed by installing a central median island in the vicinity.
The options available to Council would appear to be;
Option 1:
Implement traffic calming as per trial;
(a)
(b)
Slade Street; and
Whatley Crescent with removal of speed cushions in front of 41 and
43 and installation of central median island in the vicinity.
Option 2:
Undertake a trial of an alternate option. As detailed in the report, there is a
level of support for the cul-de-sac option. Trialling of this option would
allow a full assessment of any impacts on residents and on adjoining
streets associated with the closure of Slade Street.
Option 3:
Implement an alternate option. As detailed in the report, there is a level of
support for the cul-de-sac option. Should Council wish this or an alternate
option could be implemented, however, this is not recommended as the
effects associated with alternate options have not been fully investigated to
date.
Undertake a further survey to determine the level of support for the cul-desac/slip road option (Option 2 from the original Working Party report) as
approved to the trialled option.
Policy Implications
Nil.
Council allocated $200,000 on the current budget for traffic management works in the study
area. Expenditure to date is approximately $30,000.
Option 4:
Page 130
29 MARCH 2011
The cost estimates for each option are as follows;
Option 1:
(a) Slade Street - $62,000; and
(b) Whatley Crescent - $100,000.
Option 2:
Trialling of cul-de-sac option would cost in the order of $10,000 to
$20,000.
Option 3:
Implementation of preferred cul-de-sac option $286,000.
Option 4:
Undertake a further survey to determine the level of support for the cul-desac/slip road option (Option 2 from the original Working Party report) as
approved to the trialled option - $1,000.
Summary
As detailed in the above report, the trialled traffic treatment achieved considerable reductions
in vehicle numbers and speeds in Slade Street and Whatley Crescent. In addition to this, the
survey results indicated a majority support for implementation of the trialled treatments.
Notwithstanding the above, there is still community support, particularly from a number of
Slade Street residents for a cul-de-sac to further limit vehicle numbers within the street. The
level of support for this option as opposed to the trialled option is unclear at this stage.
Notwithstanding this community support, Council would need to consider potential adverse
impacts associated with a cul-de-sac option (i.e. traffic increases on other roads, loss of
network connectivity). Whilst numerous residents throughout the City would like to live in a
cul-de-sac, the simple fact is that there needs to be some level of connectivity in the road
network and this needs to be considered when road closure options, such as this, are put
forward.
Accordingly, should Council feel that the cul-de-sac option is the preferred option it is
recommended that it be trialled in the first instance. Alternatively, Council could undertake a
further survey as detailed in Option 4 to further gauge the level of support for the cul-de-sac
option.
With respect to Whatley Crescent, support for the implementation of the trialled option is
relatively high, however, it is considered that this option should only be implemented in
conjunction with the final approved treatment for Slade Street to avoid any traffic increases in
Slade Street in the interim.
Similarly, should Council wish to trial an alternate option in Slade Street, it may be advisable
to do this with the treatments in Whatley Crescent to ensure an accurate representation of
traffic movement changes.
From a strictly technical view point, the trial is considered successful as it achieved
considerable traffic volume and speed reductions and can be implemented for a relatively low
cost. On this basis, officers would normally recommend the implementation of the trialled
treatment, however, given the high level of community interest in this matter, the option of a
further survey may be warranted to clarify the wishes of the community.
Page 131
29 MARCH 2011
Voting Requirements
That Council undertake a further survey within the Slade Street Local Area Traffic Management study
area to gauge the level of support for the cul-de-sac/slip road option (Option 2 from the original
Working Party report) or other alternatives as opposed to the trialled option.
ADDENDUM – TECHNICAL SERVICES
COMMITTEE MEETING – 22 MARCH 2011
AND
FINANCE
&
PERSONNEL
Mr Glenn Cookson and Mrs Branka Radanovich presented a Deputation to the Committee
and tabled correspondence (refer Attachment 7) in support of the cul-de-sac, Option 2, for
Slade Street.
Mr Brian Blechynden presented a Deputation to the Committee and tabled an email (refer
Attachment 8) in support of the trialled traffic treatments to be implemented.
The Committee changed the Officer's Recommendation to conduct a further one month trial to gauge
the level of support for a cul-de-sac in Slade Street as per the original Working Group report and
conduct public consultation within the study zone to access the practicality and community support for
this option.
ADDENDUM – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING –29 MARCH 2011
1.
An error in the statistics provided in the report has been identified.
With respect to Attachment 4, it was reported that through traffic volumes were
generally in the order of 65% less during the trial.
The actual reduction in volume is in the order of 57%.
2.
Further to the Technical Services and Finance & Personnel Committee Meeting held on
22 March 2011, the following emails have been received from residents regarding Slade
Street Traffic Management (refer Attachment 9);
•
•
•
•
•
Mr Huixuan Andrew Huang and Ms Yan Christina Qin;
Ms Marina Ivanic;
Ms Catherine Vanderham;
Mr David and Mrs Carol Solosy; and
Mr Alan Howard.
That Council:
1.
Authorise the Director of Technical Services to initiate a one month trial of a cul-de-sac
option (back-to-back cul-de-sac without slip road) for Slade Street in conjunction with
the proposed traffic treatments for Whatley Crescent (in accordance with Plan No.
35/09 with removal of the speed cushions in front of 41 and 43 and installation of a
central median island in the vicinity), with a view to assessing the viability of Option 2
from the original Working Party report.
Page 132
29 MARCH 2011
2.
Seek public comment from residents in the study zone following the completion of the
trial.
3.
Consider a comprehensive report in relation to a technical assessment of the trial and
the results of the public consultation following the completion of the trial in liaison with
the Slade Street Working Group.
FOR:
AGAINST:
CARRIED: 5/2
Councillors McKenna, Kenyon, JP, Robinson, Palmer and Radford
Councillors Turkington and Anderton, JP
At 8:48pm, Mrs Raylene Vucens, PA/Director Administration and Community Services returned to
the meeting.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR MARLENE ROBINSON MOVED, CR TERRY KENYON, JP SECONDED that
Council:
1.
Authorise the Director of Technical Services to initiate a one month trial of a culde-sac option (back-to-back cul-de-sac without slip road) for Slade Street in
conjunction with the proposed traffic treatments for Whatley Crescent (in
accordance with Plan No. 35/09 with removal of the speed cushions in front of 41
and 43 and installation of a central median island in the vicinity), with a view to
assessing the viability of Option 2 from the original Working Party report.
2.
Seek public comment from residents in the study zone following the completion of
the trial.
3.
Consider a comprehensive report in relation to a technical assessment of the trial
and the results of the public consultation following the completion of the trial in
liaison with the Slade Street Working Group.
CARRIED 6/5
FOR:
AGAINST:
Councillors Kenyon, JP, McKenna, Robinson, Palmer, Pittaway and
Radford.
Councillors Sabatino, Turkington, Albert, Anderton, JP and
Blanchard.
Page 133
12.1.3
29 MARCH 2011
Gummery Street Footpath
Attachments: Original Footpath Alignment
Proposed New Footpath Alignment
Officer:
Application
For Council to consider amending the alignment for the proposed footpath construction in
Gummery Street between Catherine Street and Coode Street, Bedford.
Background
As part of the 2010/2011 Budget, Council allocated $55,745 for the provision of a new
1.2 metre footpath along Gummery Street from Catherine Street to Coode Street, Bedford
(Account No. G23100).
The project was nominated for budget consideration to provide access for a disabled resident
in the street. Council’s Policy EG-P04, ‘Footpaths – Located within Road Reserves’, defines
the location of footpaths within the Council verge as follows;
“1.
Unless precluded by adverse verge levels, prohibitive obstacles or for reason of
sustainable "invasion of privacy", all new strip footpaths, dual-use paths and
footpaths that are constructed or reconstructed within road reserves, shall be
located adjacent to the property line.
"Invasion of privacy" considerations shall be deemed to apply where the living
quarters of a residential building are located less than 4 metres from the property
boundary and the boundary has either no fence or lacks an enclosed fence at least
1800mm in height above the proposed footpath level.
2.
Where a narrow strip of verge remains between a newly installed footpath or dual
use path and the road kerb, that section shall be brick paved. The width of the
narrow strip shall be at the discretion of the Director of Technical Services.”
In accordance with the above, the selected alignment was situated adjacent to the property
boundary along the west side of the street, Catherine Street to the bend, and then for the
section on the southern side, from the bend to Coode Street to primarily link the small park
and residents with the network (refer Attachment 1).
Prior to commencement of the footpath construction, in accordance with current protocols
correspondence advising of the project was forwarded to residents on both sides of the street.
This resulted in concerns being raised from a number of residents regarding the alignment of
the path, the damage to the streetscape and the potential invasion of privacy. Seven letters
from affected residents were received expressing their concerns which are summarised as
follows;
ADDRESS
5 Gummery
ISSUES
PROPOSED ACTION
• Damage/removal of landscaped garden • Construct path on kerb line.
area and total streetscape; and
• Negative impact on environment to
remove significant trees; and
• Closeness of footpath impacts on privacy.
Page 134
ADDRESS
25 Gummery
33 Gummery
39 Gummery
43 Gummery
45 Gummery
56 Gummery
58 Gummery
275 Coode
ISSUES
29 MARCH 2011
PROPOSED ACTION
• Due to construction on the boundary,
considerable modification to existing
reticulation system will be required.
• Increased noise;
• Loss of privacy;
• Loss of amenity and enjoyment;
• Damage to existing gardens; and
• Increased maintenance and watering
costs.
• Would like large ‘Black Boy’ outside
fence line to remain where it has grown.
• Footpath to be moved.
• Privacy;
• Impact on the streetscape of the street;
• Modifications to garden beds and
reticulation systems;
• Small section of footpath that connects to
Coode Street would be too close to homes
and invade privacy and also requires
crossing the road to connect to other path
in street.
• Recently completed construction and
spent in excess of $25,000 on landscaping
front gardens and verge; and
• Design should match the majority of the
street and therefore continue along the
same alignment instead of stop at the park
and then move across the street. This
would make it safer at a reasonably blind
corner.
• Object to the path crossing over the street
on the corner opposite the clubrooms –
dangerous for disabled and pedestrians;
• Privacy
issues
for
property
at
56 Gummery;
• Existing path coming from Clarence
Street and pedestrians would have to
cross a blind corner.
• Object to the path crossing over the street
on the corner opposite the clubrooms –
dangerous for disabled and pedestrians;
• Privacy
issues
for
property
at
56 Gummery;
• Existing path coming from Clarence
Street and pedestrians would have to
cross a blind corner.
• Construct path on kerb line.
• Construct path on kerb line;
and
• Section of path that connects
to Coode Street to be on the
park side.
• Footpath to continue along
current alignment and join
on park side of Gummery
Street.
park side; and
• Existing
footpath
on
Clarence Street cross over on
blind corner can be avoided
if path is kept on same side.
park side; and
• Existing
footpath
on
Clarence Street cross over on
blind corner can be avoided
if path is kept on same side.
It is important to note, that although concerns were raised, residents did not object to the
construction of a path in Gummery Street.
Page 135
29 MARCH 2011
Comment
Council’s policy requires the construction of the footpath adjacent to property boundaries to
enhance safety by providing the maximum available separation between the footpath and
roadway. Also, on bin collection days, pedestrians are not obstructed with bins placed on the
path.
Whilst the most ideal location for the path would be adjacent to property boundaries, in
accordance with Council’s Policy, the Council has in the past varied path alignments for
various reasons.
To accommodate residents in the section from Catherine Street to the bend, the path can be
placed on the kerb line however, the path would be required to be widened to 1.5 metres to
allow a levelled section of footpath where it meets property crossover aprons. Consequently,
this would incur additional costs however, this could be accommodated within savings from
the construction of other paths already completed.
A 1.2 metre path could be accommodated for the section from the bend to Coode Street within
RA Cook Reserve (refer Attachment 3). The proposed internal alignment would provide
connection (pram ramps) to the adjacent roadway and building on the reserve to facilitate
universal access (disabled, prams etc.) and trees within the reserve would not be impacted.
Adjustments to existing reticulation where the path will be located would be minimal,
however, park reticulation would spray over the path in the early hours of the morning.
The following options would appear to be available to Council;
Option 1:
Proceed with the proposed footpath as per Council’s Policy. This option
will meet opposition from residents in the street.
Option 2:
Realign the footpath to the kerb line from Catherine Street to the bend
and align the footpath within RA Cook Reserve from the bend to
Coode Street.
Option 3:
Not proceed with the construction of a footpath in Gummery Street. This
option may set an undesirable precedent where similar requests to not
install footpaths are received.
In general, the provision of footpaths in residential streets is seen as a positive action by the
community as it enhances pedestrian/cyclist safety, promotes healthy activity and has the
potential to move the reliance on motor vehicles for local trips. However, the positives need
to be balanced against potential removal of landscaped verge treatments, removal or heavy
pruning of street trees and residents concerns in relation to privacy.
Ideally, footpaths should be provided at subdivision stage, so residents are aware that their
property will be adjacent to a footpath from the start, however, this is not possible when
retrofitting footpaths in established areas.
There is likely to be some form of opposition or concern to new footpath construction in most
cases however, this needs to be balanced against the needs of the community as a whole. As
traffic volumes in the subject streets are low, the advance safety impacts associated with
locating the path on the kerb line are lessoned, therefore, it is recommended that Option 2 to
be considered by Council.
Page 136
29 MARCH 2011
Policy Implications
Council’s Policy EG-P04, ‘Footpaths – Located within Road Reserves’, defines the location
of footpaths within the Council verge
The section of footpath from Catherine Street to the bend on Gummery Street, would be
required to be widened to 1.5 metres and therefore would incur additional costs. However, it
is believed that these costs can be accommodated from savings from other construction of
paths already completed.
Voting Requirements
At 8:19pm, Cr Mike Anderton, JP left the meeting.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR TERRY KENYON, JP MOVED, CR BARRY MCKENNA SECONDED that
Council advise affected residents that the proposed Gummery Street footpath
construction will be relocated as follows;
i)
1.5 metre footpath located on the kerb line from Catherine Street to the
RA Cook Reserve bend; and
ii)
1.2 metre footpath located within RA Cook Reserve from the Catherine
Street bend to Coode Street.
CARRIED 9/2
FOR:
AGAINST:
Councillors Kenyon, JP, McKenna, Robinson, Sabatino, Albert,
Anderton, JP, Palmer, Pittaway and Radford.
Councillors, Turkington and Blanchard.
Page 137
29 MARCH 2011
Item 1.1 was dealt with prior to this Item.
12.1.4
On-Street Parking - Maylands Primary School
Location:
Kelvin Street, Maylands
Attachments: Drawing No. 50/09
Applicant:
Maylands Primary School
Officer:
MR DAMIEN MARTIN, ACTING DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES, DECLARED AN IMPARTIAL INTEREST
In accordance with Section 5.65 of the Local Government Act 1995, Mr Damien Martin
declared an impartial interest in this item as his son attends Maylands Primary School.
Mr Martin remained in the room during voting on this item.
Application
For Council to consider as part of the 2011/2012 budget deliberations, the conversion of
existing parallel parking into 45 degree angled parking bays in Kelvin Street, Maylands.
Background
In 2009, the Maylands Primary School through its respective Ward Councillors requested the
provision of extra on-street parking along the Kelvin Street frontage of the school.
Currently, along the north side of Kelvin Street, there is a ‘Kiss and Ride’ set-down area and
20 parallel parking bays. A budget allocation of $10,000 was included in the 2009/2010
budget for parking improvements. In discussions with school representatives, they expressed
their concern that there is not sufficient parking to accommodate the parents attending the
school and therefore have requested the possibility of converting the parallel parking bays into
45 degree angled parking to allow for more parking bays to be created. This change was well
beyond the available funding.
A design was undertaken with the view of maximising the on-street parking. The enclosed
Drawing No. 50/09 (refer Attachment 1) indicates that the proposed ‘Kiss and Ride’ remain
however, the parallel bays be converted to 45 degree bays being the maximum possible given
width of the existing Kelvin Street parallel parking.
The angled parking would increase the original 20 bays to 35 allowing an additional 15 bays
for parking at an estimated cost of $160,000. Funding for this project was considered during
the 2010/2011 budget deliberations however, due to budget constraints, the project was
withdrawn for this financial year.
Comment
The proposed design has been discussed with the school and they are in support of the design
and aware that it is subject funding.
The additional bays would improve the current lack of parking however, widening of the
north side of Kelvin Street would be required along with drainage modification and verge
infill.
Page 138
29 MARCH 2011
As Councillors may recall, the Council considered a similar request from Bayswater Primary
School for the construction of additional parking and at the Ordinary Council Meeting on
14 December 2010 resolved as follows;
"That:
1.
Council approve the provision of carparking for the Bayswater Primary School
within the unmade road reserve of Leake Street.
2.
All associated costs be funded by the Department of Education on an ‘at cost’
basis."
As can be seen in the Bayswater Primary instance, the Education Department, as the generator
of the traffic, assumed responsibility for the necessary parking upgrade. To date, there has
been no indication of any funding contribution towards the proposed improvements at the
Maylands Primary School. In respect to Council contributions to parking facilities at schools
within the City of Bayswater, Policy EG-PO8 applies and reads as follows;
"Where a school has given a firm commitment to contribute at least matching funds,
with Council, the Director of Technical Services will report to Council for a budget
allocation not exceeding $35,000, for parking facilities at the school in accordance with
Section 3.1 of the Local Government Act 1995, for good governance and conditional
that the City of Bayswater workforce carrying out the works."
Policy Implications
Council's Policy EG-PO8, Council Contribution to Parking Facilities at Schools within the
City of Bayswater of Bayswater , provides guidelines for the contribution of funds for parking
facilities within the City.
As detailed above, funding of $160,000 would need to be sourced for this project.
Voting Requirements
That subject to confirmation from the Department of Education of at least a matching
contribution towards parking improvements adjacent to Maylands Primary School, Council
considers an allocation of up to $35,000 towards the project during the formulation of the
2011/2012 budget.
The Committee amended the Officer Recommendation to increase the considered allocation from
$35,000 to $70,000.
Amendment
CR SONIA TURKINGTON MOVED, CR TERRY KENYON, JP SECONDED that the allocation to be
considered be amended from $35,000 to $70,000.
CARRIED: 6/1
FOR:
Councillors McKenna, Kenyon, JP, Robinson, Turkington, Palmer and
Anderton, JP
AGAINST: Councillor Radford
Page 139
29 MARCH 2011
That subject to confirmation from the Department of Education of at least a matching contribution
towards parking improvements adjacent to Maylands Primary School, Council considers an allocation
of up to $70,000 towards the project during the formulation of the 2011/2012 budget.
AMENDMENT
CR TERRY KENYON, JP MOVED, CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY SECONDED that an
amendment be made to the allocation to be considered from $70,000 to $35,000.
CARRIED 8/3
the Amendment became part of the Substantive Motion.
FOR:
AGAINST:
Councillors Kenyon, JP, McKenna, Robinson, Anderton, JP, Palmer,
Blanchard, Pittaway and Radford.
Councillors, Turkington, Albert and Sabatino.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR TERRY KENYON, JP MOVED CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY SECONDED that
subject to confirmation from the Department of Education of at least a matching
contribution towards parking improvements adjacent to Maylands Primary School,
Council considers an allocation of up to $35,000 towards the project during the
formulation of the 2011/2012 budget.
CARRIED 10/1
FOR:
AGAINST:
Councillors Kenyon, JP, McKenna, Robinson, Palmer, Turkington,
Albert, Anderton, JP , Pittaway, Radford, and Blanchard.
Councillors Sabatino.
CARRIED: 6/1
FOR:
Councillors McKenna, Kenyon, JP, Robinson, Turkington, Palmer and
Anderton, JP
AGAINST: Councillor Radford
Page 140
12.1.5
29 MARCH 2011
Underground Power Proposal - Ashfield
Attachments: City of Bayswater Proposed Area of Inclusion
Officer:
Refer:
Item 13.2.6 OMC 22.11.05
Item 13.2.2 OMC 26.09.06
Application
To allow Council consideration of involvement in an underground power project by the Town
of Bassendean for the Ashfield area which includes a number of properties within the City of
Bayswater on boundary roads.
Background
Correspondence has been received from the Town of Bassendean advising that they have been
successful in the Expression of Interest process under Round 5 of the State Underground
Power Program (SUPP) for the undergrounding of power in the Ashfield area.
There were 89 Expression on Interest applications applied for by 19 Councils from around
Western Australia and in late December 2010 the Minister for Energy, Peter Collier released a
media statement advising that the Ashfield was successful in the expression of interest
process.
The Town's Expression on Interest application identified that Ashfield was a disadvantaged
area and as such a 35% cost subsidy could be applied bringing the average cost per ratepayer
to an estimated $3,900.
The Town of Bassendean intends to initially fund the rate payer contribution by raising a loan
and then levying the ratepayer with a specified area rate or a service charge. The preferred
option is to use the specified area rate as it allows for the application of rebates and
deferments that are made available to ratepayers who are eligible under the Rates and
Deferment Act.
As part of the Expression on Interest application process, the Western Power/Office of Energy
Steering Committee arranged for an independent consulting firm to conduct an Ashfield
ratepayer survey and 72.9% of respondents indicated they were in favour of underground
power and prepared to contribute financially.
The proposed timeframe for the project is as follows;
ITEM
DATE
Advise to Property Owners (Town of Bassendean)
Transformer / Switchgear sign off by Local Government
Project Design finalised
Preliminary Budget including direct costs
Council financial modelling and cash process finalised
Contract agreement costs factored into final budget
Agreement & Final Budget approved
Agreement signed by all parties and financing/cash process
Project start
Page 141
March 2011
May 2011
June 2011
June 2011
July 2011
October 2011
November 2011
December 2011
January 2012
29 MARCH 2011
The area of the proposed project is shown in Attachment 1 and as can be seen, it involves
boundary roads with the City of Bayswater being portions of Pearson Street, Jacqueline Street
and Moojebing Street. Accordingly, should the project proceed in its current form, residents
that are in the City of Bayswater side of these boundary roads would need to be involved.
Subject to final design, this would involve approximately 34 properties within the City of
Bayswater.
The Town of Bassendean are now seeking to come to some form of financial arrangement
with the City of Bayswater to enable collection of the necessary cost contribution from the
City of Bayswater residents involved.
Comment
Whilst the independent survey showed a high level of support and willingness to contribute
amongst Town of Bassendean residents in the subject area, the level of support from City of
Bayswater residents is unclear. It may be that City of Bayswater residents are equally as
supportive however this requires confirmation.
As Councillors may be aware, the City was involved in a similar project for the Mount
Lawley area with the Town of Vincent and at the Ordinary Meeting of Council of
26 September 2006, Council resolved as follows;
“That:
1.
the Town of Vincent be requested to confirm that the funding for the
Highgate East Project is to be generated by Service Charge and in accordance
with Section 6.38 (6) of the Local Government Act 1995 any funds unspent on
completion of the project contract be returned proportionately to the contributors;
2.
subject to satisfactory response from the Town of Vincent regarding the Service
Charge, the City of Bayswater’s contribution to the Highgate East Project be
secured by upfront payment or ten annual repayments of a State Treasury Loan by
the City of Bayswater ratepayers within the project area; and
3.
the project participants be advised of the increase in the contract cost and any
potential savings if the project is completed to budget and subject to the response
the Council reconsider its participation in the project.”
The above resolution was adopted once the City has surveyed its residents in the affected area.
When the Mount Lawley residents were surveyed, they were offered payment options of
upfront payment or a 10 year loan at State Treasury rates.
It would appear that the following options are available to Council;
Option 1:
Advise the Town of Bassendean that the City of Bayswater does not wish
to participate in the project.
Option 2:
Advise the Town of Bassendean that the City of Bayswater supports the
project and fund the necessary contribution ($160,000) from municipal
funds.
Page 142
Option 3:
29 MARCH 2011
Advise the Town of Bassendean that the City of Bayswater supports in
principle the involvement of the subject City of Bayswater residents in the
project subject to a favourable response from the landowners involved in
relation to support for the project and willingness to contribute financially.
In view of the benefits associated with the undergrounding of power, it is recommended that
Option 3 be pursued.
Policy Implications
Council’s Policy No. EG-P09 Underground Power states:
“Council shall seek
City of Bayswater.
to
progressively
underground
power
throughout
the
•
At the discretion of the Council upon receipt of a resident initiated application,
the Director of Technical Services shall prepare a costing for undergrounding
power for that specific location.
•
At the direction of Council submissions shall be made periodically to the State
Underground Power Programme (SUPP).
Underground power shall be provided in all new subdivisions.”
As detailed in the report, if Council participates in the project, a financial contribution of
approximately $160,000 will be required for the City of Bayswater during the 2011/2012
financial year. This can be funded by Council or recouped from the residents involved as is
normally the case with these projects.
Voting Requirements
•
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
Council:
1.
Advise the Town of Bassendean that Council supports the inclusion of portions of
Pearson Street, Jacqueline Street and Moojebing Street in the State Underground
Power (SUPP) Round 5 project in principle, subject to a favourable response from
City of Bayswater landowners involved.
2.
Survey the affected landowners to ascertain the level of support and willingness to
contribute to the Town of Bassendean’s Round 5 SUPP in the Ashfield Area.
Deputation (i) was dealt with after this Item.
Page 143
12.1.6
29 MARCH 2011
Budget Amendment - Road Asset Management Software
Officer:
Application
To seek Council approval to amend the budget to accommodate a software upgrade to the
City’s Road Asset Management Software (RoadPak) to comply with new Main Roads
Western Australia (MRWA) input/output data protocols.
Background
MRWA periodically requires information from Local Authorities on the quantity, extent and
make-up of their road network. This information is used to determine State and Federal grant
funding and align inventories. The City stores all Road infrastructure details within the
RoadPak application and in the past utilised the freely available ROMAN1 application as the
data exchange protocol between the RoadPak database and the MRWA - IRIS database.
ROMAN1 will be made redundant this year and replaced with ROMAN2, which incurs
annual subscription fees. The City will not be moving to ROMAN2 at this stage due to the
advanced state of the RoadPak system which already has all the functionality of the
ROMAN2 purchase.
Accordingly, software modifications are necessary for the RoadPak software to allow City to
staff to comply with MRWA data transfer requirements.
Comment
The City’s RoadPak database has been managed to a very high level over the years; it
provides all the required asset inventories, condition ratings, valuations and auditing
functions, accurately and at a vastly cheaper annual subscription fee than the proposed
ROMAN2 system. It also has a live link directly into the City’s corporate spatial viewer.
MRWA have provided the City with the IRIS – Local Government Interface Requirement
Manual and after analysis by City staff, RoadPak requires modifying to comply. Funds were
not allocated in the 2010/2011 budget to facilitate this work. Loftus the provider of the
RoadPak software have also analysed the manual and have advised that to include the
input/output protocol functions within the RoadPak application will cost $7,800 excluding
GST.
Policy Implications
Nil.
The allocation for RoadPak software annual maintenance is included as a component of
Account No. 430000-4271 – Spatial Software/Data Maintenance.
The shortfall in funding can be accommodated from forecast savings in Account No. G33300
– Purchase of Wide Format Printer as savings have been affected in this area.
It is therefore proposed to amend the budget to facilitate the RoadPak Software upgrade.
Page 144
29 MARCH 2011
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
amend its 2010/2011 budget in accordance with the following table:
Account
4300004271
G33300
Description
Spatial Software / Data
Maintenance
Purchase Wide Format
Printer
Original
Budget
Revised
Budget
Surplus/
Deficit
$93,725
$100,492
-$6,767
$74,630
$67,863
$6,767
Net Effect
NIL
WITH AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY
Page 145
29 MARCH 2011
This Item was dealt with after Item 1.3
12.1.7
Rose Avenue Reserve Development Proposal
Location:
Cnr Rose Avenue and Railway Parade, Bayswater
Attachments: Minutes Rose Avenue Reserve Community Group Meeting 15.02.11
Revised Development Plan
Revised Program Rose Avenue Reserve
Applicant:
Friends of Rose Avenue Park
Officer:
Refer:
Item 12.1.7 OMC 27.04.10
Item 12.1.1 OMC 22.06.10
Item 12.1.4 OMC 24.08.10
Application
To seek Council’s consideration of a revised proposal for development and management of
Rose Avenue Reserve, Bayswater.
Background
At the Ordinary Meeting of Council of 22 June 2010, Council resolved;
“That Council:
1.
Consider an allocation on the draft 2010/2011 capital works program of $20,000
for the limited development of the Rose Avenue reserve, Bayswater as a
community garden.
2.
Finalise with the Friends of Rose Avenue Park (FORAP) a detailed design and an
agreement for management of Rose Avenue Reserve, Bayswater, prior to
construction.
3.
Initiate subdivision and amalgamation process to amend the boundary of reserve
23080 to separate the portion of roadway that currently exists within the reserve.”
The Rose Avenue Reserve community garden proposal was initiated by Rose Avenue resident
Greg Smith in November 2009 and refined in further discussions with Officers, over the
months prior to Council’s resolution of 22 June 2010.
Funds of $20,000 for the limited development of Rose Avenue Reserve at the corner of
Railway Parade and Rose Avenue, Bayswater were allocated in the City’s capital
improvement program 2010/2011 as project G24900 – 6999. Rose Avenue Reserve is an
unirrigated park of 750m2 (including verges), of dry grass and a mix of mature and semimature trees including resident planted fruit trees. The City has in place a program for
mowing the grass surface, mulching tree surrounds and removing litter.
A meeting between the City’s Manager for Gardens and Landscaping and 6 of the 8 residents
of Rose Avenue was held on 15 February 2011. A copy of the minutes of that meeting is
Page 146
29 MARCH 2011
Comment
At the Rose Avenue Reserve community group meeting of 15 February 2011, residents
resolved not to pursue the concept of a community garden and to instead have the park
developed as a green public open space. The majority of attendees felt that they were unable
to provide the support required of a community managed garden project. The group agreed on
the development of the reserve as an open parkland for general public access and use as a
recreation area.
Attachment 2 shows the agreed revised sketch plan proposal and a revised program and
estimate of works for Rose Avenue Reserve is enclosed as Attachment 3.
Policy Implications
Nil.
An amount of $20,000 as project number G24900 – 6999 is included in the 2010/2011 capital
improvement program. These funds are sufficient to complete the project as revised by the
Friends of Rose Avenue Park (FORAP). Monies that may be required for more
comprehensive interpretive signage and additional tree planting may be submitted to Council
for consideration for inclusion in the 2011/2012 capital improvement program.
Voting Requirements
That Council approve the revised development plan of the Rose Avenue Reserve, Bayswater
as an irrigated, treed and fenced open public parkland.
At 8:22pm, Cr Mike Anderton, JP returned to the meeting.
The Committee changed the Officer's Recommendation as it believed that consideration also needs to
be given to upgrading Halliday Park in conjunction with the Rose Avenue improvements to allow for
improved lighting, security and safety in Halliday Park to deter anti-social behaviour in the park.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
(COMMITTEE/RECOMMENDATION)
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR SALLY PALMER SECONDED that this
item be deferred to seek further information to incorporate the Rose Avenue
development with Halliday Park improvements, including the undertaking of
community consultation with affected residents prior to the commencement of any
works.
Page 147
12.1.8
29 MARCH 2011
Hillcrest Reserve Living Stream
Attachments: Species List
Water Corporation Example Maintenance Plan
Revegetation Plan
Maintenance Plan
Officer:
Refer:
Item 12.1.8 OMC 24.08.10
Item 12.1.3 OMC 01.02.11
Application
For Council to consider comments received following consultation with affected residents
regarding the development of the Hillcrest Living Stream Project.
Background
As part of the site redevelopment of Chisholm Catholic College, the school was granted
approval to build a carpark over the previously existing Paterson Street Living Stream. The
stream was constructed by the community using Local, State and Federal funding. The
carpark construction was highly controversial in the community and as part of the planning
approvals; a requirement was that the College and the Water Corporation contribute $50,000
towards the construction of a replacement living stream in another location. It is important to
note, that the community expectation was that the location of the Living Stream be the Lower
Hillcrest Drainage site.
A report was presented to the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 24 August 2010 and in
considering this matter, Council resolved that;
“1.
The Living Stream - Hillcrest Reserve Drainage Line project update report be
received.
2.
Natural Area Management Services (NAMS) be requested to develop a Draft
Concept Plan for consideration and approval by the Council and Water
Corporation prior to the commencement of the project.”
Subsequently, at its meeting of 1 February 2011, Council was presented with the detailed
design options for the living stream and resolved as follows;
“That Council:
1.
Supports in principle Concept 1 as designed by Natural Area Management
Services (NAMS) for the design of the Hillcrest Drainage Reserve Living Stream.
2.
Seeks comments from residents abutting the Hillcrest Drainage Reserve in
relation to Concept 1.
3.
Seeks Water Corporation formal approval for the construction of Option 1 for
biodiversity and aesthetic outcomes.
4.
Advises the Water Corporation and Swan River Trust of its decision.”
Page 148
29 MARCH 2011
Community Consultation
Comments were received from six local residents with the general issues of concern being
summarised as follows;
CONCERN
ANSWER
The type of species being planted A mixture of shrubs and trees are proposed to be planted within Evans
due to concerns views of the oval Place Reserve. The trees will be planted in the centre of the reserve to
may be lost.
limit problems with residential fences. Shrubs and rushes are proposed
to be planted along the drainage line, ensuring an adequate buffer zone
and access areas are left for the Water Corporation to undertake
maintenance.
The aesthetics and biodiversity of the area will be improved as local
native species (refer Attachment 1) are being planted and the weeds are
being cleared.
The maintenance of existing trees Maintenance of the entire drainage line will ensure that any existing
at the end of the drain on Drake vegetation is also addressed.
Street due to concerns regarding
overgrowth.
Safety
concerns
regarding The existing fencing will be removed whilst works are in progress,
fencing of the site, particularly however temporary fencing will be erected. Once the works are
Evans Place Reserve.
completed the Water Corporation will install permanent black chain
mesh.
Water Corporation Approval
The Water Corporation has issued approval for the project to proceed subject to;
“1.
The design is in accordance with the criteria outlined for Design 1 of the
November 2010 report prepared by Natural Area Consulting. (Note: The existing
wooden toe protection is to be retained and the area between to remain clear of
vegetation, this includes all typha.
2.
A Maintenance Plan/Agreement being established between the City of Bayswater
and the Water Corporation. (Note: It is recommended the enclosed Maintenance
Plan for Anvil Way Compensating Basin Improvement Project is used as a
template for this (refer Attachment 2).
3.
Clearance to Work Permit (or Asset Protection – Risk Assessment) is arranged
prior to the commencement of work with Steve Ellis on 9423 7803. (Note: The
Maintenance Plan/Agreement will need to be signed off prior to the
commencement of work).”
In accordance with the Water Corporation’s approval, NAMS has completed a detailed
revegetation plan (refer Attachment 3) and a maintenance plan (refer attachment 4) for the
Hillcrest Reserve Living Stream.
Comment
Should Council wish to proceed with the living stream project, it is suggested that the
proposed revegetation and maintenance plans are endorsed and the Water Corporation and
Swan River Trust notified accordingly.
Page 149
29 MARCH 2011
The following options are provided for Council’s consideration;
Option 1:
Council endorse the proposed revegetation and maintenance plans.
Council endorse the proposed revegetation and maintenance plans subject
to the provision that the trees are replaced with low shrubs only in Evans
Place to address residents concerns regarding the loss of views.
Policy Implications
Option 2:
•
Bayswater Brook Project; and
•
Swan and Canning Rivers Management Act.
Funding is currently available in the 2010/2011 Budget to proceed with the project. However,
Council would be required to budget approximately $2,500 annually for the maintenance of
the living stream.
Voting Requirements
At the Technical Services and Finance Personnel Committee:
At 8:29pm, Cr Sylvan Albert left the meeting and did not return.
That:
1.
Endorse the revegetation and management plans for the Hillcrest Reserve Living Stream
Project as prepared by Natural Area Management Services (NAMS) subject to;
(a)
the replacement of trees with low shrubs only in Evans Place to address residents
concerns regarding the loss of views; and
(b)
any minor amendments, if required, by Swan River Trust and the Water
Corporation being included.
2.
Advise the Water Corporation, Swan River Trust and residents abutting the Hillcrest
Drainage Reserve Living Stream of the commencement of the proposed construction
works.
3.
Consider an allocation of $2,500 in the 2011/2012 budget for the annual maintenance of
the Hillcrest Reserve Living Stream.
At the Technical Services and Finance Personnel Committee:
The Committee changed the Officer's Recommendation as it believed that the project does not
represent the true attributes of a 'living stream' and accordingly renamed the project to the 'Hillcrest
Reserve Stream Project'.
Page 150
29 MARCH 2011
At 9:48pm, Cr Mike Anderton, JP left the meeting.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR SALLY PALMER MOVED, CR BARRY MCKENNA SECONDED that Council:
1.
Endorse the revegetation and management plans for the Hillcrest Reserve Stream
Project as prepared by Natural Area Management Services (NAMS) subject to;
a)
the replacement of trees with low shrubs only in Evans Place to address
residents concerns regarding the loss of views; and
b)
any minor amendments, if required, by Swan River Trust and the Water
Corporation being included.
2.
Advise the Water Corporation, Swan River Trust and residents abutting the
Hillcrest Reserve Stream Project of the commencement of the proposed
construction works.
3.
Consider an allocation of $2,500 in the 2011/2012 budget for the annual
maintenance of the Hillcrest Reserve Stream.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Page 151
12.1.9
29 MARCH 2011
Claughton Reserve Concept Plan
Officer:
Application
For Council to consider the results of the community consultation undertaken on the
Claughton Reserve Draft Concept Plan.
Background
Council initially endorsed a plan to build a floating jetty, carpark and install lighting at
Claughton Reserve. The installation of the infrastructure has since become a divisive issue for
the area.
Following a Special Electors' Meeting, Council resolved to cease all works at Claughton
Reserve until a Management Plan was developed for the area. In developing a concept plan,
the City has conducted public surveys, public workshops and background development design
studies.
During the consultation phases detailed above, the areas of greatest contention are the
proposed jetty and the already built carpark. Accordingly, these issues have been given more
consideration in the plan as they are the most controversial. Additionally, there were a total of
fourteen key issues identified through the consultation process.
Originally, concern was raised by the Friends of Claughton Reserve regarding the original
lack of community consultation regarding the works at Claughton Reserve. In response to
this, an exhaustive community consultation plan was developed to run parallel with the
concept plan development.
At the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 23 November 2010, Council considered the Draft
Concept Plan for Claughton Reserve and resolved that:
1.
The Claughton Reserve Draft Concept Plan report be received.
2.
Council undertake community consultation on the Claughton Reserve Draft
Concept Plan, including the provision of a jetty, for the period December 2010
until the end of January 2011.
3.
Council inform the Friends of Claughton Reserve, Swan River Trust, Recreational
Boating WA, South West Aboriginal Land and Sea Council, other key stakeholders
and any party who has previously forwarded a submission, of the consultation
period.
4.
An advertisement be placed in the Eastern Suburbs Reporter and a sign be placed
on site advising the public of the community consultation period for Claughton
Reserve.
5.
A further report be presented to Council for consideration following community
consultation."
Page 152
29 MARCH 2011
Community Consultation
In accordance with the above recommendation, community consultation was undertaken and
submissions received. These comments have been provided under separate cover.
Despite the community consultation process using a number of request mechanisms, the
community response was limited. There were eight responses from the general community,
and additionally responses from the Friends of Claughton Reserve, Swan River Trust and
Boating WA respectively.
There has been a large degree of community consultation associated with this project to date
and it may be that the majority of the community feel that they have already voiced their
opinion in previous responses or forums, such as the Special Electors' Meeting, Claughton
Reserve Community Surveys and Claughton Reserve Public Meeting, which have been
incorporated into the Claughton Reserve Draft Concept Plan (provided to Councillors under
separate cover).
Analysis of Community Responses
It was important to note that there were a number of overarching comments made by people
regarding the plan which included;
General Comments
Positive Comments
•
"We are very supportive of the current draft precinct plan for the development of
Claughton Reserve (with some exceptions)."
•
"Delighted to see such consideration taken to meet the needs and concerns of all
users of the reserve."
•
"Congratulations on incorporating the feedback from the public consultation
conducted by the City in 2009/2010. Pulled together views in a consecutive and
workable concept."
•
"It is good Council have made a good effort on consultation with the community."
•
"Looking forward to seeing the final plan and its implementation."
•
"The City of Bayswater is to be congratulated for the foresight to upgrade the
boating facilities, as many Council's just ignore them."
Negative Comments
•
"Dismayed that the Council continue to propose the construction of a 28 metre
boat jetty at Claughton reserve. To proceed with this short sighted proposal is
paramount to environmental vandalism and should not be tolerated."
•
"While I welcome some changes, I do object to some of the reasoning behind this."
Page 153
29 MARCH 2011
Analysis of Comments Received based on 14 Key Points of Concept Plan
= Supports Solution
ISSUE
SWAN
RIVER
TRUST
= Disagrees with solution
BOATING
WA
COMMUNITY
RESPONSES
NC = No Comment in response
FRIENDS OF
CLAUGHTON
RESERVE
THREE MOST CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES
3-
Install a jetty
Boating
Facility
Carpark
Option 4
(inverted)
N/C
Install Bollard
Lighting
BUILT ENVIRONMENT
N/C
Install
Car
park Space at
picnic area
N/C
(0- Against)
Option 3
1 person
N/C
Option 4
1 person
2-
N/C
N/C
Option 4
(Recommends
carpark should be
under Tonkin bridge)
OFFICER
COMMENT
BASED ON
CONSULTATION
Include installation
of jetty.
Include redesign of
carpark per Option
4 of plan.
Against Flood
Lightning
of bollard lighting.
No
Immediate
Action, (Long term
option).
Not an immediate
request. Consider a
boardwalk in the
long term to limit
river riparian zone
damage by people.
Include replacing
toilets with sewer
connection.
Include Relocation
of reserve access
road.
Lobby
DPI
to
resume land.
Water
Sensitive
Urban Design
Installing
a
Boardwalk
N/C
N/C
N/C
Identifies that this is
the high use area of
reserve, but not a
problem
N/C
N/C
N/C
No Comment
Installing new
toilets
N/C
N/C
4-
Relocation of
Access
(Strongly
Supported)
N/C
4-
1-
N/C
Riverlink
Connection
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
N/C
Restoration of
Riverbank
N/C
N/C
Restoration of
Melaleuca
Wetland
N/C
N/C
Turning
flooded area
into wetland
SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT
N/C
Infrastructure N/C
to
prevent
hooning
N/C
Installation of N/C
Additional
Bins
2- - Upgrade
Toilets/Connect to
sewer
(Various alternatives
should be considered)
-
2- 2- 1- Include WSUD in
car park re-design.
Include restoration
of the riverbank.
Include restoration
of the Melaleuca
Wetland.
Include change of
flooded area into
Wetland.
1- NC
Do not install at
this time.
2- NC
of additional bins
Page 154
29 MARCH 2011
Comments Received that have Not been Considered in the Previous Studies/Consultation
Within the comments received, most comments have already been discussed at officer level in
the Claughton Reserve Draft Concept Plan. Below are responses to additional questions
which have not been covered in the previous analysis.
Respondent
Comment:
Officer Response:
Comment:
Officer Response:
Respondent
Comment:
Officer Response:
Swan River Trust
Removal of car bays from the river side to create a larger foreshore
buffer.
Removing the river half of the car park would be the best
environmental response. This would however leave the remaining
parking flooded in winter
The project could qualify for riverbank funding
After further discussion with the Swan River Trust the only element
of the project that would fit the riverbank funding criteria would be
the restoration of the natural environment features such as the
foreshore restoration.
Friends of Claughton Reserve
With reference to the Swan River Trust Report, FILE number SRT
2943 10 March 2008, Annotated: 2.1,5.19 and 5.20. These points
state that the river is too shallow for the proposed jetty. Boats using
the jetty will disturb the riverbed and cause heavy metals and
nutrients to rise, and contaminate the water causing significant
pollution problems
The length of the jetty has been chosen with due regard to impact
of the structure and the depth needed for boat launching in effect a
balance was made to ensure that a modest size structure was
chosen.
It is suggested that by installing the current jetty design, riverbank
disturbance will be reduced. This is due to the fact that boat users
will have to use less engine thrust and be in deeper water when
launching and retrieving their boats than the current situation.
Comment:
Advice from the Swan River Trust cannot be depended upon to
ensure the good environmental health of the river. In this task they
have failed miserably. Given the Swan River Trusts poor record in
managing the health of the river its advice cannot be relied upon in
this instance
Swan River Trust At the time, the Trust considered that a floating jetty at Claughton
Response
Reserve would enhance public use, access and enjoyment of the
river at an established recreation site. Whilst all development on
the river has an impact, the impact needs to be balanced against
the recreation, access needs of the wider community. It is
considered that, provided appropriate construction management
techniques are employed and a maintenance regime is
implemented, the jetty would have a minimal impact on the natural
environment and should be supported.
Comment:
SRT2493 clearly states the dimensions of the proposed jetty as being
17 metres long with an L shape projection of 11 metres with a total
length of 28 metres.
Page 155
29 MARCH 2011
Respondent
Officer Response:
Friends of Claughton Reserve (Continued)
The jetty's length across the river will be 17 metres long with an L
shape addition at the end of 11 meters. This distance will start
further inland than the river's edge. The 17 metres was advised as
the maximum distance the jetty would protrude out into the river.
Respondent
Comment:
Officer Response:
Community Member
Ensure that the area stays as dogs off lead
The area currently has dogs off lead and a dogs on lead area. The
status quo will remain, however may need further consideration at
a later date.
Respondent
Comment:
Community Member
Request that the City considers including a community garden into
Claughton reserve as phase two.
Claughton reserve is located on the river, its location would likely
not be appropriate for a community garden, in terms of managing
nutrient outputs and weeds.
Officer Response
Comment
Finalising the Concept Plan
The Draft Concept Plan has various elements of social, economic and environmental
consideration. Officers are now seeking Council’s direction on finalising the concept plan.
From Council’s previous resolution, the study was to consider all environmental, social and
infrastructure issues pertaining to the reserve. As such, potential solutions to all of the key
issues raised by the community thus far have been included. Therefore, should Council adopt
to implement all of these, funding of approximately $1.2M would be required, however, these
works could easily be staged.
At present, the cost of the jetty is fully budgeted and the cost of the river restoration could
attract 50% Riverbank Funding from the Swan River Trust. At Officer level, there is an
expectation that the possibility of attracting a grant for the remainder of the proposals is low,
and they would likely need to be funded by the Council.
It should be noted that the grant for the jetty has been outstanding for some time and Council
runs the risk of losing this funding if the project is not progressed in the current financial year.
In keeping with the Council endorsed community consultation plan, the purpose of this report
was to adopt a final concept plan for Claughton Reserve. As part of the development of this
plan, there were issues that arose that were controversial and issues where a general consensus
was achieved.
The 14 key issues have been categorised into;
A.
B.
C.
General Agreement;
General Agreement with a cost; and
Controversial Issues.
General Agreement. Key Points A
•
Water Sensitive Urban Design (for car park);
Page 156
•
•
•
•
•
•
29 MARCH 2011
Install a boardwalk along the land edge of the river;
Install new toilets;
Restoration of the riverbank;
Restoration of the Melaleuca wetland;
Returning flooded area into wetland; and
Installation of additional bins.
General Agreement (with high cost/political implications points). Key Points B
•
•
•
Install Carpark Space at Picnic Area - the picnic area has been identified as
broadly needing management for parking. If the access road is relocated,
formalised parking will be included as part of the road;
Relocation of Access - the road access currently dissects the reserve, taking up the
best area of the reserve and creating a hazard between the toilets, playgrounds and
the river. This idea was accepted by the community; however has a high estimated
cost of $380,000; and
River Link Connection - there is general community desire to have access along
the length of the river. The option would be to lobby the DPI to resume the front
of the final property to enable a pathway to connect though to Ashfield Parade.
Controversial Issues. Key Points C
•
•
•
Install a Jetty at the Boat Ramp - the jetty installation has been the most controversial
and examined element of this project. Officers have presented various information as
to why the jetty should be installed. The Friends of Claughton Reserve have presented
various information as to why the jetty should not be installed.
Based on the management issues examined for the site and most recent survey
response it is the Officer's recommendation that the jetty be installed.
Redesign Carpark - the carpark was the second most controversial issue. It is
suggested that based on the community consultation and contemporary practices in
relation to carpark design that the car park be redesigned as per option 4 of the Draft
Claughton Reserve Concept Plan. This option is more in keeping with the normal use
of the area. This action will cap the number of users of the area, but will also likely
create parking problems during the busiest days of the year, such as Australia Day.
Install Lighting - it appears that in general the community has accepted the suggestion
of bollard lighting as a more acceptable compromise between the options available. It
should be noted however, that although this design will still aid prevention of crime,
such as antisocial behaviour, more than no lighting would, it will possibly not be as
successful as the previously recommended pole lighting.
The Friends of Claughton Reserve have highlighted that they are against the flood
lighting over the boat ramp. It is suggested that the flood lighting is an important
safety requirement for people launching and retrieving their boats at dawn and dusk
and should remain in the plan. Additionally, this would only be one light and would
have minimal effect on bird breeding, considering that the reserve and its surrounds
have other forms of light pollution such as that from housing, street lighting and the
additional lights and noise from Tonkin Highway.
Page 157
•
29 MARCH 2011
Infrastructure to prevent hooning - if the road access is redirected the design will
include elements to deter hooning.
Budget and Approval Considerations
Post the Council resolution the only element of the concept plan which is currently budgeted
for is the jetty. The jetty has received Swan River Trust approval until the 11 May 2011,
however, will likely need a further extension of time.
The jetty will require Section 18 Approval. The Indigenous consultation and anthropological
studies have been undertaken and an application is ready to be submitted if the jetty is
approved. It is expected that it would take approximately 4-6 months to install the jetty
considering approval and construction timeframes.
Other Elements of the Concept Plan
The other elements of this project have not been budgeted for and some elements will need
approval under Section 18 Approval from the Department of Indigenous Affairs and Form 1
approval from the Swan River Trust.
In considering the above, the Council may wish to consider the following options;
Option 1:
Comprehensive plan incorporating all
infrastructure concerns identified.
environmental,
social
and
To respond to all environmental, social and infrastructure concerns, would
cost approximately $1.2M incorporating the 14 key issues (A, B and C) as
follows;
2010/2011 - Fully Budgeted
• Jetty installation.
2011/2012 - $364,500
• Install new self cleaning toilets ($100,000)
• Installation of additional bins
($1,000)
• The adopted elements of the plan be investigated/costed in
detail
($40,000 + Officer time)
• The City apply for SRT and DIA approval for the Draft
Concept Plan ($30,000)
• Fauna Box's be installed ($10,000)
• Riverbank funding be sought for the foreshore restoration
works (Officer time)
• Restoration of the Melaleuca wetland begins ($12,500)
• Returning flooded area into wetland begins ($12,500)
• Seating upgrade ($40,000)
• Playground upgrade ($60,000)
• Barbeque upgrade ($48,500)
• Tree planting ($10,000)
Page 158
29 MARCH 2011
2012/2013 - $680,000
• That the Car park be re-constructed as per option 4 ($30,000)
• That the access road be re-diverted as per option 2 ($380,000)
• That the Water Sensitive Urban Design be included as part of
the car park design ($50,000)
• Restoration of the riverbank ($120,000)
• Bollard Lighting ($50,000)
• Indigenous Artwork ($25,000)
• Restoration of the Melaleuca wetland ($12,500)
• Returning flooded area into wetland ($12,500)
2013/2014 - $150,000
• Install a boardwalk between the pathway and river.($150,000)
Option 2:
This option is a fiscally restrained version based on the key controversial
issues.
Costs associated with core issue responses is approximately $416,000 and
would include;
• Jetty installation.
2011/2012 - $166,000
• Installation of additional Bins
($1,000)
• The adopted elements of the plan be investigated/costed in
detail (Officer time)
• The City apply for SRT and DIA approval for the Draft
Concept Plan ($30,000)
• Riverbank funding be sought for the foreshore restoration
works (Officer time)
• Tree Planting ($10,000)
2012/2013 - $275,000
• That the Car park be re-constructed as per option 4 ($30,000)
• That the Water Sensitive Urban Design be included as part of
the car park design ($50,000)
• Restoration of the riverbank begins ($120,000)
Option 3:
No jetty installation. This option would be the same as Option 1 or Option
2 minus the jetty Installation. However, the City may be requested to
refund the monies used during the car park construction and design.
Page 159
Option 4:
29 MARCH 2011
Limited response. This option would include the following at an
approximate cost of $150,000;
• Jetty installation only.
2011/2012 - $150,000
Policy Implications
Department of Planning and Infrastructure's Recreational Boating Facilities
Scheme in Western Australia Study,
•
Swan River Trust (SRT) Best Management Practices.,
•
Swan and Canning Rivers Management Act, and
•
Aboriginal Heritage Act
The 2010/2011 Budget has an allocation for the installation of a jetty at Claughton Reserve
and 50% of the funding for the cost of river restoration may be applied for through the Swan
River Trust as part of its of riverbank funding. Costs associated with each Option are as
follows;
•
Option 1:
$1,200,000;
Option 2:
$416,000;
Option 3:
Same as Option 1 and 2, however there may be an additional cost that may
need to be paid back to the boating grant scheme; and
Option 4:
$150,000
As detailed in the report, the options can be staged over a number of financial years.
Voting Requirements
That Council:
1.
Adopts Option 2 for the Claughton Reserve Concept Plan.
2.
Advise all stakeholders that have provided written feedback or attended the workshops
of Council's decision.
3.
Considers an allocation for the staged development of Claughton Reserve in accordance
with the Claughton Reserve Concept Plan during the formulation of Council's
2011/2012 budget.
Page 160
29 MARCH 2011
At the Technical Services and Finance &Personnel Committee Meeting:
The Committee changed the Officer's Recommendation to include the prioritising of the construction
of the jetty as this has been an ongoing matter and the launching facilities at the reserve are being
used currently.
Amendment
CR SONIA TURKINGTON MOVED, CR TERRY KENYON, JP SECONDED that a Point 4 be added
to read:
4.
Undertake the jetty installation works as a priority.
CARRIED: 5/2
FOR:
AGAINST:
Councillors McKenna, Kenyon, JP, Turkington, Palmer and Radford.
Councillors Robinson and Anderton, JP.
AMENDMENT
CR TERRY BLANCHARD MOVED CR MICHAEL SABATINO SECONDED that an
amendment be made to Point 1 of the recommendation to read, that Council:
1.
Adopts Option 2 for the Claughton Reserve Concept Plan, except the jetty not to
be located directly adjacent to the boat ramp and that a floating finger-jetty be
constructed where the old fishing jetty was located such that boats can be accessed
by the disabled and elderly.
LOST: 3/7
The Amendment did not become part of the Substantive Motion.
FOR:
AGAINST:
Councillors Sabatino, and Blanchard.
Councillors, Kenyon, JP, McKenna, Robinson, Turkington, Albert,
Palmer, Pittaway and Radford.
Page 161
29 MARCH 2011
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR BARRY MCKENNA MOVED, CR SONIA TURKINGTON SECONDED that
Council:
1.
Adopts Option 2 for the Claughton Reserve Concept Plan.
2.
Advise all stakeholders that have provided written feedback or attended the
workshops of Council's decision.
3.
Considers an allocation for the staged development of Claughton Reserve in
accordance with the Claughton Reserve Concept Plan during the formulation of
Council's 2011/2012 budget.
4.
Undertake the jetty installation works as a priority.
CARRIED 7:4
FOR:
AGAINST:
Councillors, Kenyon, JP, McKenna, Turkington, Albert, Palmer,
Pittaway and Radford.
Councillors, Robinson, Sabatino, Anderton, JP and Blanchard.
At the Technical Services and Finance &Personnel Committee Meeting:
CARRIED: 5/2
FOR:
AGAINST:
Councillors McKenna, Kenyon, JP, Turkington, Palmer and Radford.
Councillors Robinson and Anderton, JP.
Page 162
12.1.10
29 MARCH 2011
Swan and Canning River – Draft Priority Plan
Attachments: Draft Plan
Officer:
Application
For Council to consider endorsing the Western Australian Local Government Association’s
(WALGA) ‘Draft Priority Plan for Investment in the Swan Canning Catchment’ developed on
behalf of the Swan Canning Policy Forum.
Background
The WALGA established a Swan Canning River Policy Forum in February 2010 to unite the
21 Councils (C21) that adjoin the river on common issues affecting the Swan-Canning River
System. The focus of the forum is to provide a united approach by local government;
•
•
•
For advocacy and action on water quality improvements in the iconic Swan and
Canning Rivers;
To source, secure sustainable funding at both a State and Federal level for water
quality (health of the river) and foreshore infrastructure asset maintenance and
riverbank stabilisation; and
Delivering tangible, sustainable mechanisms for local government to manage
assets and improve water quality in the catchment.
The forum has been pursuing a business case for a sustainable funding mechanism for water
quality improvements and infrastructure renewal and the development of a communication
strategy to gain local community support that will result in;
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Improved water quality in rivers, waterways and groundwater;
Improved condition of built and natural foreshore areas through implementation of
best practice;
Improved stormwater management to best practice standards;
Increased community awareness about the water quality issues in the Catchment;
Behaviour change influenced to reduce nutrients and contaminants reaching
waterways;
Water quality considerations integrated into land use planning processes;
Current and future development maintaining or improving water quality;
Increased trust, collaboration and understanding between key stakeholders;
Improved river resilience to manage climate change impacts; and
Clarity on the roles and responsibilities of relevant stakeholders.
In May 2010, Mayor Kenyon, JP advised the WALGA forum of the outcomes of his meetings
with Federal Members on impacts and issues relating to the financial burden on local
governments left to tackle:
•
•
foreshore erosion and rehabilitation; and
landfill site management/remediation.
Page 163
29 MARCH 2011
Accordingly, to entrance the potential for Federal funding, the WALGA commenced
undertaking investigations into the opportunity of Natural Heritage listing of the SwanCanning River System.
The ‘Draft Priority Plan for Investment in the Swan Canning Catchment’ is enclosed as
Attachment 1. The plan details many impacts on the river from toxins, climate, nutrients,
algal blooms, reduced rainfall and clearing of land. However, the plan also recognises
opportunities to redress issues including drainage, wetland improvements, community
education, infrastructure design, river protection infrastructure and water reform to improve
water quality.
At this stage, there is no financial contribution required, rather the focus on seeking
recognition from the highest levels of Government and therefore funding to major
stakeholders to support their efforts in water quality improvement of the Swan Canning
Rivers.
The plan indicates that approximately $23.2M was being spent by Local Governments (C21)
on the Riverpark in 2009/2010 and the current investment into Riverpark management is
estimated at $72.36M annually. The plan also acknowledges Local Government as the
biggest collective investor in the Riverpark.
Comment
The plan proposes a structure under the State Government with Local Government, the Swan
River Trust (SRT), Water Corporation, Department of Water and research bodies taking equal
places under a trust. All departments and organisations have contributed to the development
of the plan and are prepared to endorse the ‘Draft Priority Plan’.
The model is based on the principle that the community should share in the responsibility for
protecting ‘high value’ environments. The Water Corporation would collect the funds which
would be made available through the Trust for investment into water quality improvement
projects. The model has been successfully implemented in other States.
For example, there are an estimated 653,349 residential dwellings in the Perth metropolitan
area. The Water Corporation currently charges a minimum rate of $75.45 the 260,000
residential properties. Applying a rate to the remaining 393,349 residential properties at the
minimum charge of $75.45 would generate well over $30M annually. With consideration for
higher GRV properties and the inclusion of industrial and commercial, this would be expected
to generate $56M annually under current costing structures.
This funding is proposed in addition to current investments. With matching requirements, this
could reduce time for Priority 1 projects to 16 years compared to the projected 63 years under
the current Riverbank Program and allow allocations for remediation of disused landfill sites.
Page 164
29 MARCH 2011
There are a number of opportunities to develop a sustainable funding mechanism for water
quality improvement. A combination of methods could be used to help achieve the stated
objectives and the plan suggests the following other possible revenue streams;
Healthy Catchment Rate:
Term for ‘drainage rate’ can be used for an array of activities
which will achieve water quality improvement. The drainage
rate can be calculated, collected and administered in a number of
ways.
Collected by the Water Corporation and then
administered by a central body who distributes to Local
Government, Water Corporation, Swan River Trust, catchment
and community groups is the preferred model.
Developer Contributions:
To be calculated using the average cost of remediation for
nutrient concentrations.
Stakeholder Investment:
It is envisaged that stakeholders will contribute up to 50% of the
total costs for this project, including Local Government.
Boat Levy:
Additional levy for boat owners which is used to improve water
quality. Collected by Department of Fisheries and administered
by the Department of Water.
Speeding Fine for Boats:
Revenue raised through enforcement could be put towards water
quality and foreshore rehabilitation works.
Business as Usual:
Low level of investment leading to continuing water quality
problems, aging and deteriorating shoreline and drainage
infrastructure.
For the City and Local Government in general, the key for future success seems to be the
Healthy Catchment Rate however, further investigation is required to ensure the model is
sustainable and robust.
Business as Usual, is no longer an option, but the need for a strategic and integrated approach
to funding is necessary. Stronger partnerships and cooperation between agencies would need
to emerge to allow State Government to lead and make the initiative work.
As part of the policy forum outcomes, WALGA developed the ‘Discover your River’s
Campaign”, a communication strategy to raise the profile of the river and create community
awareness regarding waterway health. WALGA have gained support from the Community
Newspaper Group to sponsor this campaign and run a series of feature stories in relation to the
river. The C21 Local Governments are also encouraged to be part of the campaign.
The campaign was officially launched on 21 October 2010 at the Canning Eco Centre with the
C21, Mayors and Presidents, signing the Local Government Charter for the Swan and
Canning River System.
Page 165
29 MARCH 2011
The future impacts on the City could be in the areas of;
•
•
•
•
asset management;
water quality improvement works;
policy change; and
financial implications with the expectation that stakeholders would match funds
for works.
The recommendations of the Plan are;
1.
The State Government work with key stakeholders to develop an equitable and ongoing
funding mechanism to improve the health of the Swan Canning Catchment and river
assets.
2.
Local Government develop stormwater quality management plans to improve asset
management and implement current best practice for integrated water management.
3.
Water Corporation develop stormwater quality management plans and report on water
quality within main drains and capital works programs and implement current best
practice for integrated water management.
4.
The State Government increase funding for the Swan River Trust in future State
budgets.
5.
A partnership agreement is signed by all statutory stakeholders to commit to water
quality improvement and to clarify roles and responsibilities.
6.
Water quality targets/guidelines are established for new development and enforced
through the planning system or Department of Water.
7.
A compulsory nutrient offset scheme is developed.
8.
The State water reform Agenda include water quality management provisions for
drainage services providers and mechanisms to reduce transfer of nutrients and
contaminants to water bodies.
9.
Expand the Infill Sewerage Program to include industrial areas and currently unsewered
urban areas.
10.
Require stronger fertiliser regulation for the agricultural sector through the Feriliser
Action Plan and stronger emphasis on soil amendments and training in rural areas.
The City provided comments on the draft Plan and the following responses were received;
COMMENT
RESPONSE
There is insufficient emphasis on
foreshore stabilisation, which is believed
to be one of the original intent of the
Forum Group.
Almost one fifth of the total revenue is
allocated to shoreline protection through the
Riverbank Program, which includes foreshore
stabilisation.
An additional line item
‘Waterway Protection’ has also been included
in the allocation table.
Local
Government
has
demonstrated
commitment and political will to address
stormwater quality where the Water
Corporation is not mandated to do so.
Recommendation 3 has been expanded to
ensure Water Corporation also implements best
practice.
The report also seems to focus heavily on
Local Governments’ responsibility for
stormwater management whereas the
responsibility of the State Government
(Water Corporation) in stormwater
management
is
not
as
strongly
emphasised.
Page 166
29 MARCH 2011
COMMENT
RESPONSE
In relation to Recommendation 3, it is
considered that the Water Corporation
should be required to implement current
best practice (as per Recommendation 2)
not just report on water quality.
The need for a Healthy Catchments Trust
may not be necessary with organisations
already working in this role such as Swan
River Trust and Department of Water.
If however, the Forum Group has a wider
focus, the funding should also assist fund
bush
forever
riparian
vegetation
restoration and management on the river
foreshore, for example, at Bardon
Park/Berringa Park
This recommendation has been expanded to
include implementation of best practice.
This is a potential option and would be
determined by the State Government.
This would be considered if research
indicated it was a priority.
The Forum seeks endorsement of the draft plan and acknowledges that many of the options
are outside the jurisdiction of Local Government. It is suggested that Council endorse the
‘Draft Plan’ and the intent of the plan to lobby State and Federal Governments.
Policy Implications
Policies would need to be reviewed in relation to land use planning polices and processes.
At this stage, there is no financial contribution required however, there is an expectation that
stakeholders would be required to match funds for works. In some instances, this could be
accommodated in the City’s annual budget process.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
endorses and supports the recommendations contained within the ‘Draft Priority Plan
for Investment in the Swan Canning Catchment’, to increase State Government funding
to improve water quality and rehabilitation of the Swan and Canning Rivers.
Page 167
29 MARCH 2011
This Item was dealt with after Item 1.9.
12.1.11
EMRC Council Meeting - 17 February 2011
Attachments: City of Bayswater Delegate's Report
EMRC - Abridged Council Minutes - 17 February 2011
Officer:
In accordance with Section 5.65 of the Local Government Act 1995, Cr Alan Radford declared an
impartial interest in this item as he is a member of the EMRC. Cr Radford remained in the room
during voting on this item.
CR BARRY MCKENNA, DEPUTY MAYOR, DECLARED AN IMPARTIAL INTEREST
In accordance with Section 5.65 of the Local Government Act 1995, Cr Barry McKenna declared an
impartial interest in this item as he is a Deputy Delegate at the EMRC. Cr McKenna remained in the
room during voting on this item.
In accordance with Section 5.65 of the Local Government Act 1995, Cr Alan Radford
declared an impartial interest in this item as he is a member of the EMRC. Cr Radford
remained in the room during voting on this item.
In accordance with Section 5.65 of the Local Government Act 1995, Cr Barry McKenna
declared an impartial interest in this item as he is a Deputy Delegate at the EMRC.
Cr McKenna remained in the room during voting on this item.
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY, DECLARED AN IMPARTIAL INTEREST
In accordance with Section 5.65 of the Local Government Act 1995, Cr Graham Pittaway
declared an impartial interest in this item as he is the Chairman of the EMRC. Cr Pittaway
Application
To allow Council consideration of the recent Minutes from the Eastern Metropolitan Regional
Council (EMRC).
Background
A Council Meeting of the EMRC was held on 17 February 2011, Cr Graham Pittaway
(Chairperson), Cr Alan Radford and the Director of Technical Services were in attendance.
A Delegates Report listing items with implications for the City of Bayswater is Attachment 1
and the Abridged Minutes form Attachment 2.
Policy Implications
Nil.
Page 168
29 MARCH 2011
As detailed in the Delegates Report.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR SONIA TURKINGTON MOVED, CR SALLY PALMER SECONDED that the
Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council’s (EMRC) Delegate’s Report and Abridged
Council Minutes of the Meeting of 17 February 2011 be received.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Page 169
12.1.12
29 MARCH 2011
Making Cities Liveable Conference
Attachments: Registration Brochure
Officer:
Application
To advise Councillors of the 4th Making Cities Liveable Conference to be held at the
Outrigger Little Hastings Street Resort & Spa, Noosa, Queensland from 28 to 29 July 2011.
Background
The 4th Making Cities Liveable Conference, as part of the Alliance for Healthy Cities, will be
a platform for Government and Industry professionals to discuss causes, effects and solutions
that relate to population health, sustainability, natural resource management, transport, climate
change and urban design.
The conference will focus on a variety of themes and topics;
•
Managing Population and Economic Growth in Healthy Cities;
o
o
o
Intensification of Regional Cities and Places;
Impacts of buying local on Community Sustainability; and
Green Principles Green Design - the Future for Viable Healthy Cities.
•
Coastal Urbanisation - Rapid Development Affecting Sense of Place;
•
Climate Change Adaption;
o
o
o
o
•
Renewable Energy;
Community Engagement;
Natural Resource Management; and
Waste Reuse Technologies.
Links between Environmental Sustainability and Human Health - the Co-benefits
Framework;
o
o
o
o
Population Health Management - Immunisation, Bio security, Food Safety
and Epidemic Control;
Managing Communicable Disease Outbreaks - Health Security;
Child-friendly Cities - Physical Environments in our Cities and
Neighbourhoods; and
Disaster Management - Public Welfare - Recovery and Rebuild.
•
Technology and its Place in Healthy Cities; and
•
Managing Legislation and Policy to achieve Healthy Cities.
A copy of the conference registration brochure is enclosed as Attachment 1, however, at this
stage, the full conference program has not yet been released.
Page 170
29 MARCH 2011
Comment
At this stage, the Senior Management Group has not approved for the attendance of an officer
to the 4th Making Cities Liveable Conference and will await the release of the full conference
program prior to deciding if it is appropriate to send an officer. It is recommended that
Council gives consideration to nominating an Elected Member to attend.
Policy Implications
Council Policy EO-P05 Travel and Accommodation, provides the arrangements for the
reimbursements of conference travel and accommodation expenses for Elected Member/s and
officers in accordance with the Local Government Act 1995.
Council Policy EO-P22 Conference/Seminar Attendance – Elected Members, establishes the
parameters for the attendance of Elected Members at interstate and regional Western
Australian conferences. Each Elected Member is eligible to attend up to three (3) conferences
for the period covering the bi-annual elections.
The cost associated with attendance of an Elected Member and any officer attendees is in the
order of $3,500 per attendee and would be funded through the respective conference accounts.
Voting Requirements
That approval be granted for the attendance and associated costs of Cr __________________ at the 4th
Making Cities Liveable Conference to be held in Noosa, Queensland from 28 to 29 July 2011.
That approval be granted for the attendance and associated costs of Cr Sally Palmer and
Cr Mike Anderton, JP at the 4th Making Cities Liveable Conference to be held in Noosa, Queensland
from 28 to 29 July 2011.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR BARRY MCKENNA MOVED, CR SALLY PALMER SECONDED that approval
be granted for the attendance and associated costs of Cr Sally Palmer,
Cr Mike Anderton, JP and Cr Alan Radford at the 4th Making Cities Liveable
Conference to be held in Noosa, Queensland from 28 to 29 July 2011.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Page 171
29 MARCH 2011
12.2
Finance & Personnel
12.2.1
Financial Reports for the Period 1 July 2010 to 28 February 2011
Officer:
Director of Finance
Application
To inform Council of the financial reports and Budget Review for the period 1 July 2010 to
28 February 2011.
Background
The financial statements for the reporting period are submitted in the form of :
o Financial Activity Statement Report
o Net Current Asset Position
o Reserve Fund Statement
o Summary Schedule of Divisional Financial Activity
o Divisional Summaries.
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT REPORT – 1 JULY 2010 TO 28 FEBRUARY 2011
At a Glance
2010
2011
Total income
$45,387,073
$50,008,611
Total expenditure
$29,423,800
$29,963,067
Capital works expended
$5,476,050
$13,021,686
4.89%
5.78%
Average interest rate on earnings
Financial results for the period ending 28 February are within budget estimates and compare
favourably to the same period last financial year.
Divisional Highlights
•
Chief Executive Office
The division is operating well within budget estimates with cost savings occurring within
the occupational Health and Safety and Human Resources areas.
•
Administration & Community Services
The revenue in this division is slightly ahead of budget. This is mainly due to Bayswater
Waves income.
Expenditure
- There are no significant variations to budget and overall expenditure is
well within budget.
Page 172
•
29 MARCH 2011
Planning & Development Services
Revenue
- Planning revenue is slightly below budget with Building Applications
slightly exceeding budget.
Expenditure
- The core area of expenditure in this division is the maintenance and
upkeep of properties. Currently total levels of expenditure are on
budget with minor higher-than-budget variations in e.g. General
Building Maintenance.
Overall the balance of expenditure in this area is on budget.
•
•
Technical Services
Revenue
- The main revenue stream in this division is Sanitation Income. This is
in line with budget.
Expenditure
- The division is operating at slightly above year-to-date budget, in
particular in the Ground Maintenance area. Efforts will be made to
curtail spending in this area, however minimum service levels still need
to be maintained.
Financial Services
The revenue in this division is mainly rates income which is on budget.
Overall expenditure is also in line with budget.
Policy Implications
Nil.
Nil.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
financial reports for the period 1 July 2010 to 28 February 2011 be received.
At the Technical Services and Finance and Personnel Committee Meeting:
Item 2.5 was dealt with after this Item
Page 173
29 MARCH 2011
CITY OF BAYSWATER
FINANCIAL ACTIVITY STATEMENT REPORT
FOR THE PERIOD 1 JULY 2010 TO 28 FEBRUARY 2011
% OF YEAR
REVENUE
General Purpose Funding
Law Order & Public Safety
Health
Welfare & Education
Housing
Community Amenities
Recreation & Culture
Transport
Economic Services
Other Property & Services
LESS
OPERATING EXPENDITURE
Governance/Admin
Law Order & Public Safety
Health
Welfare & Education
Housing
Community Amenities
Transport
Economic Services
Other Property & Services
ADOPTED
BUDGET 2010-2011
ACTUAL
32,007,554
155,700
111,848
8,156,527
75,400
8,910,425
5,330,892
332,081
651,500
52,000
$55,783,927
30,621,921
114,996
90,807
4,708,602
56,269
8,801,621
3,852,481
256,721
468,706
46,380
$49,018,504
95.67
73.86
81.19
57.73
74.63
98.78
72.27
77.31
71.94
89.19
87.87
515,423
4,521,159
1,875,514
1,300,383
8,655,811
102,858
9,771,266
20,812,027
4,224,101
1,555,601
1,789,508
$55,123,651
361,531
2,602,374
1,226,274
765,605
4,935,391
77,504
6,500,534
13,192,488
2,959,489
859,371
754,106
$34,234,667
70.14
57.56
65.38
58.88
57.02
75.35
66.53
63.39
70.06
55.24
42.14
62.11
843,737
7,587,766
744,702
552,476
ADD
CONTRIBUTIONS/GRANTS FOR THE
DEVELOPMENT OF ASSETS
Transport
Funding for Operations
437,631
$9,176,205
$990,107
$9,836,481
$15,773,944
ADD
DISPOSAL OF ASSETS
RESERVES MOVEMENT
PRINCIPAL LOAN RECOVERIES
EMPLOYEE PROVISIONS
DEPRECIATION
$414,500
$4,147,020
$58,480
$69,500
$6,407,400
$11,096,900
$4,271,600
$5,109,958
$310,752
$486,278
$41,328
CAPITAL EXPENDITURE
$30,725,573
$13,332,438
LESS
REPAYMENT OF DEBT
PROFIT/LOSS ON DISPOSAL OF ASSETS
OPENING BALANCE
CLOSING BALANCE
%
BUDGET
$61,480
($467,296)
$42,314
$30,319,757
$13,374,752
$9,872,975
$486,599
$10,172,099
$17,681,249
Explanation of expenditure greater than 10% of the average monthly estimates
Nil
Page 174
66.85%
29 MARCH 2011
NET CURRENT ASSET POSITION AS AT 28 FEBRUARY 2011
2010/2011
2009/2010
SURPLUS SUMMARY REPRESENTED BY
CASH AT BANK AS AT 28 FEBRUARY 2011
$18,178,961
$25,359,903
$5,708,526
$10,165,139
STOCK
$127,750
$158,953
PREPAID EXPENSES
$139,008
$330,216
$24,154,245
$36,014,211
$352,998
$216,564
DEBTORS/INCOME DUE NOT RECEIVED
G.S.T. CLEARING ACCOUNT
(Cleared at time of lodging B.A.S. return )
FIRE & SERVICES LEVY
CREDITORS
Deferred Movement - Pensioners/Other
Aged Persons Homes
BALANCE AS AT 28 FEBRUARY 2011
As Per Summary of Divisional Activity
($564,643)
($4,042,409)
($473,351)
($2,564,240)
($54,538)
($16,012)
$9,180,571
$5,322,871
$29,026,224
$38,500,043
$3,592,549
$7,752,426
$7,938,870
$3,836,345
$17,681,249
$26,724,828
LESS RESTRICTED ASSETS
RESERVES - GENERAL
RESERVES/RESTRICTED - AGED
CLOSING BALANCE AS AT 28 FEBRUARY 2011
AS PER FINANCIAL ACTIVITY REPORT
Page 175
Page 176
$
13,701
73,298
Maylands Waterland
Gratuity Reserve
4,630,479 $
1,682
Bayswater Aquatic Centre Replacements
Total Municipal Operations
39,199
3,200,925
Alma Venville Rec Centre
Major Capital Works
Morley Recreation Centre
786,047
Workers Compensation
4,078,827 $
73,298
13,701
1,682
39,199
2,532,029
786,047
111,131
102,244
Building Upgrade
216,446
71,013
216,460
26,970
102,276
105,035
Plant & Equipment
Long Service Leave
1,163
102,276
Bore & Reticulation
Grounds Facilities Lighting
93,484
OPENING BALANCE
01-Jul-10
Budget
Acual
Property Building & Equipment
TITLE
149,923 $
2,932
548
61
1,568
90,000
31,442
4,090
8,658
6,885
3,739
145,050 $
2,774
518
63
1,483
88,498
29,748
4,067
2,687
8,191
1,018
3,841
2,162
INTEREST
EARNED
Budget
Actual
1,435,896 $
325,896
1,000,000
110,000
TRANSFERS
TO RESERVES
Budget
Actual
-
$
4,947,477 $
40,767
3,492,290
98,920
1,000,000
219,000
96,500
631,328 $
526,914
14,759
3,155
86,500
717,169 $
76,230
14,249
1,743
0
-544,365
817,489
16,301
71,013
225,104
26,970
161
12,274
Budget
Budget
Actual
BALANCE
REQUIREMENTS
RESERVE FUND BUDGET 2010-2011
28-Feb-11
20,697
3,592,549
76,072
14,219
1,745
40,682
2,093,613
815,795
100,439
73,700
224,637
27,988
102,962
Actual
BALANCE
29 MARCH 2011
29 MARCH 2011
SUMMARY SCHEDULE OF DIVISIONAL FINANCIAL ACTIVITY
AS AT 28 FEBRUARY 2011
BUDGET (Revised)
INCOME
EXPENDITURE
ACTUAL
INCOME
EXPENDITURE
Chief Executive Office
Aged Persons Homes
Technical Services
Financial Services
$9,500
$7,525,709
$6,228,459
$9,125,501
$10,467,215
$31,982,954
$2,500,393
$12,019,775
$4,971,984
$4,748,062
$19,979,096
$4,019,095
$1,432
$5,284,867
$3,391,387
$882,297
$9,792,945
$30,655,683
$1,281,194
$7,209,971
$2,861,422
$2,800,710
$13,449,490
$2,360,280
TOTAL ALL OPERATING
$65,339,338
$48,238,405
$50,008,611
$29,963,067
OPERATING
CAPITAL
Aged
Technical Services
Financial Services - Recreation Centres,Computing
Plant Trades
$450,245
$8,980,758
$127,894
$3,551,090
$222,451
($414,500)
($310,752)
$29,950,574
TOTAL ALL CAPITAL
TOTAL FROM OPERATIONS
$65,339,338
GENERAL OPENING BALANCE 1 JUL 10
$13,759,549
$4,485,370
- AGED PERSONS HOMES
$848,161
$18,572,797
$282,000
10,192,474
$469,642
$78,188,979
$13,021,686
$50,008,611
$42,984,753
$13,224,852
$8,778,500
CLOSING BALANCE 28 FEBRUARY 2011
$29,026,224
CLOSING BALANCE 30 JUNE 2011 (Adopted Budget)
Aged Persons Homes
$1,682,436
$3,709,842
BORROWINGS
Principal Loan Repayments - General
Principal Loan Recoveries
TOTAL
$61,480
$42,314
$58,480
$58,480
$61,480
$41,328
$41,328
$42,314
$83,642,737
$83,642,737
$72,053,291
$72,053,291
Page 177
Last Year
Income
Expenditure
$45,387,073 $34,899,850
29 MARCH 2011
BUDGET 2010-2011
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICE
28-Feb-10
244
8
% OF YEAR
Description
Revised Budget
Actual
Committed
Total
66.85%
%
Operating Income
SS10100
Members of Council
Total Operating Income
-$9,500
-$1,432
$0
-$1,432
-$9,500
-$1,432
$0
-$1,432
15.07%
15.07%
$826,246
$1,091,391
$500,443
$82,313
$604,011
$378,648
$282,982
$15,553
$24,012
$261
$2,552
$0
$628,023
$378,909
$285,534
$15,553
76.01%
34.72%
57.06%
18.89%
Total Operating Expenditure
$2,500,393
$1,281,194
$26,825
$1,308,019
52.31%
Total Chief Executive Office
$2,490,893
$1,279,762
$26,825
$1,306,587
52.45%
Operating Expenditure
SS10100
Members of Council
SS10120
Chief Executive Officer's Office
SS10200
Human Resources
SS10210
Occupational Health & Safety
Maintenance Costs
Page 178
29 MARCH 2011
BUDGET 2010-2011
ADMINISTRATION & COMMUNITY SERVICES
28-February-2011
244
8
% OF YEAR
Description
Revised Budget
Actual
Committed
Total
66.85%
%
Operating Income
SS10300
General Administration
SS10301
Records Administration
SS10400
Rangers
SS10405
Security Watch
SS10410
Animal Control
SS10420
Parking Facilities
SS10600
Bayswater Waves
SS10610
Maylands Waterland
SS10700
Bayswater Library
SS10705
Maylands Library
SS10710
Morley Library
SS10801
Other Recreation & Sport
SS10805
Embleton Golf Course
SS10810
Maylands Golf Course
SS11000
Community Programmes
SS11105
Bayswater Senior Citizens
SS11106
Morley Senior Cits
SS11107
Maylands Autumn Ctre
SS11110
Bayswater Podiatry
SS11111
Morley Podiatry
SS11112
Maylands Podiatry
SS11115
Community Housing
SS11125
Youth Services
SS11130
Community Bus
SS11145
Other Community Services
SS11210
Other Admin & Comm Service
SS11300
HACC Program - Assessment
SS11301
Meals on Wheels
SS11302
Adult Day Services
SS11303
Aged in Home Care
SS11305
BLIS
SS11306
Social Support Prg
SS11307
HACC Program Transport
SS11308
Food Preparation
SS11310
Counselling Support
SS11311
Client Care
SS10800
Recreation & Sport
SS11115
Community Housing
SS11120
Rental Council Properties
SS11201
Pre-Schools
SS11600
Other
Total Operating Income
-$48,200
$0
-$32,500
$0
-$84,600
-$66,500
-$2,910,035
-$155,500
-$6,300
-$12,850
-$26,150
-$195,776
-$425,000
-$1,125,000
-$147,500
-$9,500
-$20,200
-$8,000
-$23,400
-$34,000
-$9,500
-$1,000
$0
-$3,000
-$11,000
-$20,000
-$174,128
-$305,000
-$240,000
-$268,500
-$153,000
-$255,300
-$179,000
-$105,300
-$80,000
-$11,000
-$272,570
-$61,700
-$12,700
-$32,000
$0
$22,498
-$510
-$13,315
-$10,000
-$57,442
-$32,808
-$2,222,773
-$134,067
-$5,102
-$9,202
-$17,750
$6,507
-$277,087
-$769,738
-$138,178
-$4,763
-$3,914
-$8,079
-$8,887
-$15,314
-$6,188
-$722
-$1,000
-$721
-$5,127
-$41,840
-$35,599
-$186,773
-$207,064
-$200,437
-$142,406
-$156,465
-$137,325
-$83,609
-$67,230
-$8,605
-$233,559
-$43,740
-$11,807
-$13,743
-$982
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$22,498
-$510
-$13,315
-$10,000
-$57,442
-$32,808
-$2,222,773
-$134,067
-$5,102
-$9,202
-$17,750
$6,507
-$277,087
-$769,738
-$138,178
-$4,763
-$3,914
-$8,079
-$8,887
-$15,314
-$6,188
-$722
-$1,000
-$721
-$5,127
-$41,840
-$35,599
-$186,773
-$207,064
-$200,437
-$142,406
-$156,465
-$137,325
-$83,609
-$67,230
-$8,605
-$233,559
-$43,740
-$11,807
-$13,743
-$982
-$7,525,709 -$5,284,867
$0
-$5,284,867
Page 179
-46.68%
40.97%
67.90%
49.34%
76.38%
86.22%
80.98%
71.61%
67.88%
-3.32%
65.20%
68.42%
93.68%
50.14%
19.38%
100.99%
37.98%
45.04%
65.14%
72.19%
24.05%
46.61%
209.20%
20.44%
61.24%
86.28%
74.65%
93.08%
61.29%
76.72%
79.40%
84.04%
78.23%
85.69%
70.89%
92.97%
42.95%
70.22%
29 MARCH 2011
BUDGET 2009-2010
28-February-2011
8
% OF YEAR
Description
Revised Budget
Actual
Committed
Total
66.85%
%
SS10300
SS10301
SS10400
SS10405
SS10410
SS10420
SS10600
SS10610
SS10700
SS10705
SS10710
SS10750
SS10800
SS10801
SS10805
SS10810
SS11000
SS11100
SS11105
SS11106
SS11107
SS11110
SS11111
SS11112
SS11115
SS11125
SS11130
SS11140
SS11145
SS11200
SS11210
SS11300
SS11301
SS11302
SS11303
SS11305
SS11306
SS11307
SS11308
SS11310
SS11311
General Administration
Records Administration
Rangers
Security Watch
Animal Control
Parking Facilities
Bayswater Waves
Maylands Waterland
Bayswater Library
Maylands Library
Morley Library
Maylands Multipurpose Centre
Recreation & Sport
Other Recreation & Sport
Community Programmes
Community Services Administration
Morley Senior Cits
Maylands Autumn Ctre
Bayswater Podiatry
Morley Podiatry
Maylands Podiatry
Community Housing
Youth Services
Community Bus
Community Events
Other Community Services
Education
Other Admin & Comm Service
HACC Program - Assessment
Meals on Wheels
Adult Day Services
Aged in Home Care
BLIS
Social Support Prg
HACC Program Transport
Food Preparation
Counselling Support
Client Care
$1,021,483
$375,281
$269,255
$1,013,000
$225,826
$198,696
$3,221,293
$158,403
$418,632
$439,853
$782,184
$20,000
$5,700
$616,316
$123,950
$128,000
$380,000
$185,510
$45,980
$45,317
$43,653
$22,480
$21,000
$18,800
$62,875
$199,500
$29,400
$136,500
$11,000
$13,210
$15,450
$211,449
$340,562
$270,672
$307,670
$188,604
$79,711
$105,162
$123,822
$77,068
$66,508
$655,489
$222,847
$185,275
$651,454
$128,786
$110,639
$2,039,775
$95,954
$257,408
$269,256
$470,886
$0
$3,441
$352,763
$92,590
$48,815
$216,022
$109,426
$29,206
$28,967
$26,991
$7,349
$12,693
$8,176
$55,144
$100,439
$15,062
$105,101
$6,081
$4,810
$236
$51,482
$171,992
$156,809
$142,062
$101,681
$80,968
$86,232
$51,350
$43,672
$12,642
$19,746
$5,602
$6,449
$737
$2,938
$0
$81,378
$26,085
$15,333
$11,978
$18,178
$0
$0
$9,282
$0
$500
$17,327
$414
$149
$0
$0
$6,527
$14,467
$2,851
$0
$4,023
$535
$0
$0
$0
$4,985
$0
$25,175
$1,305
$0
$1,724
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$675,235
$228,450
$191,724
$652,191
$131,724
$110,639
$2,121,153
$122,039
$272,741
$281,235
$489,064
$0
$3,441
$362,045
$92,590
$49,315
$233,349
$109,839
$29,355
$28,967
$26,991
$13,876
$27,160
$11,027
$55,144
$104,462
$15,597
$105,101
$6,081
$4,810
$5,221
$51,482
$197,167
$158,115
$142,062
$103,404
$80,968
$86,232
$51,350
$43,672
$12,642
66.10%
60.87%
71.21%
64.38%
58.33%
55.68%
65.85%
77.04%
65.15%
63.94%
62.53%
0.00%
60.38%
58.74%
74.70%
38.53%
61.41%
59.21%
63.84%
63.92%
61.83%
61.73%
129.33%
58.65%
87.70%
52.36%
53.05%
77.00%
55.28%
36.41%
33.80%
24.35%
57.89%
58.42%
46.17%
54.83%
101.58%
82.00%
41.47%
56.67%
19.01%
$12,019,775
$7,209,971
$277,688
$7,487,659
62.29%
$4,494,066
$1,925,113
$277,688
$2,202,792
Maintenance Costs
Total Operating Expenditure
Total Admin & Community
Services
Page 180
29 MARCH 2011
OPERATING INCOME
8000000
7000000
6000000
Budget
5000000
Progressive Actual
4000000
Straight Line
3000000
2000000
1000000
0
E
J UN
MAY
IL
A PR
UAR
CH
MAR
R
FEB
Y
UAR
J AN
Y
ER
EMB
D EC
ER
EMB
NO V
BER
BER
TEM
O
OCT
SEP
UST
AUG
JULY
16000000
14000000
Budget
12000000
Straight Line
10000000
Progressive Actual
8000000
6000000
4000000
2000000
0
E
J UN
IL
MAY
APR
H
R
RUA
Y
UAR
Y
ER
EM B
ER
EM B
C
MAR
F EB
J AN
DEC
NOV
R
O BE
US T
BE R
TEM
OCT
SEP
AUG
JULY
Page 181
29 MARCH 2011
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMME 2010-2011 - ADMINISTRATION & COMMUNITY SERVICES
AS AT
28-Feb-11
REVISED BUDGET
ACTUAL
COMMITTED
TOTAL
CARRIED FORWARD WORKS
Sub Section: SS18000 - Furniture & Equipment
F10000
Honour Board
Sub Total
$4,920
$0
$0
$0
$4,920
$0
$0
$0
$1,667
$0
$0
$0
$1,667
$0
$0
$0
$23,446
$0
$0
$2,175
$28,618
$6,818
$0
$0
$0
$2,457
$0
$140
$23,446
$0
$0
$4,632
$28,618
$6,958
$70,350
$61,057
$2,597
$63,654
$1,029
$4,881
$524
$0
$2,157
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$2,157
$0
$6,434
$2,157
$0
$2,157
$10,000
$0
$0
$0
$10,000
$0
$0
$0
Sub Section: SS18015 - Ranger & Security Services
F10200
Dog Exercise Signs City Wide
Sub Total
Sub Section: SS18020 - Recreation Development
D11700
F10900
F11200
F11300
F11400
F11500
Frank Drago Pitch and Lighting
CSRFF
upgrade
successful application, Council$12,028
resolution April 07 ?
Bayswater Bowling Club Lighting Improvemts
$5,400
Maylands Bowling Club Auto Retic to Greens A and B
$1,138
Noranda Sporting Complex
Upgrade Floodlighting to Australian Standard
$15,000
Houghton Reserve
Upgrade Floodlighting to Australian Standard
$27,613
Robert Thompson ReserveNew Playground Installation
$9,171
Sub Total
Sub Section: SS18070 - Public Open Space Capital Development
C17100
C17500
C17600
POS Silverwood Reserve
POS Puntie Cres Reserve
POS Anchorage Park Resv
Sub Total
Sub Section: SS20150 - Community Services - Capital
F33800
Noranda Senior Citizens Feasibility
Sub Total
Sub Section: SS20180 - Security Services
E25300
2 x Bollard camera packs inclusive of installatio
$18,960
$0
$0
$0
Sub Total
$18,960
$0
$0
$0
Sub Total Cfwd Works
$112,331
$63,214
$2,597
$65,811
Page 182
29 MARCH 2011
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMME 2010-2011 - ADMINISTRATION & COMMUNITY SERVICES
28-Feb-11
AS AT
REVISED BUDGET
ACTUAL
COMMITTED
TOTAL
New Asset
G11000
G11100
G11200
Hillcrest Park
Crimea Reserve
Noranda Little Athletics
Turf Wicket,3 Practice Wicket
Home Run Fence
Timing Equipment
$20,000
$10,000
$15,000
$0
$0
$13,636
$14,221
$0
$0
$14,221
$0
$13,636
Sub Total
$45,000
$13,636
$14,221
$27,857
G10100
$30,000
$0
$0
$0
Sub Total
Sub Section: SS20190 - Maylands Waterland - Equipment
$30,000
$0
$0
$0
G12100
G12200
G12300
$3,550
$5,995
$14,860
$3,237
$4,355
$9,800
$0
$0
$0
$3,237
$4,355
$9,800
$24,405
$17,391
$0
$17,391
Security Services - Asset Replacement
Replacement and repair of fencing secur
$32,000
$4,698
$4,698
$9,397
$32,000
$4,698
$4,698
$9,397
Noranda Netball Court Resurface
$267,776
Skateparks - Wotton & Crimea
Maintain & Repair
$20,000
Upper Hillcrest Reserve, Deschamp
Cricket Pitch
Reserv
& Net&Upgrades
Pat O'hara Reserv$10,000
Playground Equipment Maintain & Repair
$205,000
Playground Equipment Arbor Park/Browns Lake
$65,000
$149,960
$3,036
$2,894
$173,645
$73
$20,810
$4,240
$5,588
$12,775
$65,000
$170,770
$7,276
$8,482
$186,420
$65,073
$567,776
$329,608
$108,413
$438,021
$10,880
$10,769
$15,000
$8,445
$9,182
$0
$0
$0
$0
$8,445
$9,182
$0
$36,649
$17,626
$0
$17,626
$0
$4,071
$0
$4,071
Sub Total
$0
$4,071
$0
$4,071
Sub Total New Works
$735,830
$387,031
$127,332
$514,364
Grand Total
$848,161
$450,245
$129,929
$580,174
Community Sensory Garden
Maylands Waterland
Maylands Waterland
Maylands Waterland
Install new Defibrillator
New automatic pool cleaner
Install new park table settings
Sub Total
Asset Replacement/Improvement
Sub Section: SS18015 - Ranger & Security Services
G10000
Sub Total
G10200
G10400
G10500
G10800
G35400
Sub Total
Sub Section: SS18030 - Bayswater Waves - Furniture & Equipment
G11600
G11700
G11800
Bayswater Waves
Bayswater Waves
Bayswater Waves
Sauna refurbishment
Pool Inflatable
Security Camera System
Sub Total
G33700
HACC - Dishwasher
Page 183
29 MARCH 2011
BUDGET 2010-2011
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
244
28-Feb-11
8
% OF YEAR
66.85%
%
2010/2011
Revised Budget
YTD Actual
Committed
-7,560,000
-914,001
-651,500
-19,634
-394,820
-467,842
0
0
0
-19,634
-394,820
-467,842
0.26%
43.20%
71.81%
-$9,125,501
-$882,297
$0
-$882,297
9.67%
262,600
290,500
450,200
499,080
710,771
157,273
10,290
75,000
1,275,085
1,017,263
243,698
177,284
330,005
211,782
370,077
152,955
5,880
12,555
698,535
597,939
35,570
20,618
12,341
30,319
0
0
0
0
32,273
4,197
279,268
197,902
342,346
242,101
370,077
152,955
5,880
12,555
730,808
602,136
106.35%
68.12%
76.04%
48.51%
52.07%
97.25%
57.15%
16.74%
57.31%
59.19%
Expenditure Sub Total
$4,748,062
$2,800,710
$135,319
$2,936,029
61.84%
Total Planning & Development Services
-4,377,439
1,918,413
135,319
2,053,732
Description
Total_1
Operating Revenue
SS11700 - Planning & Building Services
SS13500 - Planning Department
SS13600 - Building Department
Revenue Sub Total
700 - Building Maintenance
750 - Special Building Mntce
800 - Cleaning Maintenance
900 - Preventative Maintenance
4123 - Electricity Charges
4125 - Water
4126 - Gas
SS11700 - Planning & Building Services
SS13500 - Planning Department
SS13600 - Building Department
Page 184
29 MARCH 2011
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
PLANNING & BUILDING ORDINARY INCOME
(Excludes Capital Income)
1800000
1600000
1400000
1200000
Budget
Straight Line
1000000
Progressive Actual
800000
600000
400000
200000
0
E
J UN
MAY
IL
A PR
UAR
CH
MAR
R
FEB
Y
UAR
J AN
Y
ER
EMB
D EC
ER
EM B
NO V
BER
ST
BER
TEM
O
OCT
SEP
U
AUG
JULY
5000000
4500000
4000000
Budget
3500000
Straight Line
3000000
Progressive Actual
2500000
2000000
1500000
1000000
500000
0
E
JUN
MAY
IL
APR
CH
MAR
ARY
Y
R
MBE
R
MBE
R
RUA
FEB
U
JAN
E
DEC
E
NOV
BER
BER
T EM
O
OCT
SEP
UST
AUG
JULY
Page 185
29 MARCH 2011
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMME 2010-2011 - PLANNING & BUILDING SERVICES
AS AT 28 FEB 2011
REVISED BUDGET
ACTUAL
COMMITTED
TOTAL
Sub Section: SS19010 - Bayswater Waves Building Improvements
C40200
F18600
Bayswater Waves - Major Improvements
Upgrade showers – entire centre
Bayswater Waves
$12,702
$6,596
$12,702
$6,596
$0
$0
$12,702
$6,596
$19,298
$19,299
$0
$19,299
$0
$30,537
$207,000
Design & Documentation
$30,000
$51,988
Upgrade external facade
$50,000
New sign at front of building
$2,000
New airconditioner
$10,000
Repair damp in wall outside changerooms$2,000
Redirect drainage above
$5,560
Airconditioner in office
$7,773
Repair post
$17,112
Upgrade Entry Statement
$50,000
$29,557
$0
Floor - Grant
$75,000
$0
$0
$0
$0
$52,456
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$9,750
$11,970
$0
$33,368
$0
$0
$0
$0
$11,757
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$64,213
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$9,750
$11,970
$0
$33,368
$568,527
$107,545
$11,757
$119,302
$96,721
$0
$46,182
$25,486
$20,000
$20,000
$15,898,026
$0
$283
$37,000
$24,514
$0
$0
$8,635,111
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$5,288,591
$0
$283
$37,000
$24,514
$0
$0
$13,923,702
Sub Total
$16,106,415
$8,696,908
$5,288,591
$13,985,498
$16,694,240
$8,823,751
$5,300,348
$14,124,099
Sub Total
Sub Section: SS19020 - Building Construction/Upgrades
D35900
D36400
E11100
E15700
E16000
F14500
F14600
F15600
F15900
F16000
F17300
F17400
F17600
F34400
F34600
F34800
Strutt Way Resv
Claughton Reserve Reserve - Toilets
Halliday Reserve upgrade
Strutt Reserve
Building Audit
Halliday Park
Bayswater Library
Drill Hall
Maylands Sport & Recreation Club
Asbestos Management Plan
Works Depot - Air Conditioning Units
Bayswater SES
Clubroom Upgrade
Sub Total
Sub Section: SS19030 - Major Capital Works
C32300
C32400
D12600
F13900
F32800
F32900
Z10000
Henley Brook - Consulting
Maylands Town Centre Upgrade
Town Planning Schemes
Bayswater/Maylands Town Centres
Beechboro Rd Drake st
Walter Rd/Grand Prom
Heritage Trails
Design
Investigate
Page 186
29 MARCH 2011
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMME 2010-2011 - PLANNING & BUILDING SERVICES
AS AT 28 FEB 2011
REVISED BUDGET
ACTUAL
COMMITTED
TOTAL
New Asset
G17400
Bayswater Waves
Installation of automatic doors to gym entrance
$6,800
$6,800
$0
$6,800
$0
$1,075
$0
$0
$35,000
$0
$2,761
$1,631
$0
$0
$0
$5,000
$32,773
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$6,250
$887,554
$40,467
$44,023
Replacement of carpets to upper level of $18,000
gym
Installation of new lap time clock
$1,500
Gym Floor
$20,000
$0
$0
$16,309
$0
$2,400
$0
$39,500
$16,309
$2,400
96 Slade Street
Upgrade kitchen facility
$17,000
Bayswater Bowling Club
Replace carpets
$20,000
Bayswater Bowling Club
Kitchen upgrade
$7,000
Bayswater Petanque Club
Replace two (2) cracked kitchen bench tops
$6,500
Carramar Community Centre
Kitchen upgrade
$10,000
Depot
Communication shed
$25,000
Dog Pound
Insulation of ceiling to kennel area
$4,283
Halliday House
Provide roller door to outbuilding and gutter
$10,000
guard
Hampton Park Kindergarten
Replace ceiling
$7,000
Maylands Autumn Centre
Replacement of floor covering
$35,000
Internal painting of the Centre
$15,000
96 Slade Street
Provide new shelter to replace deteriorated$7,273
patio
Tara Street Centre
Replacement of existing dangerous shelter$9,812
Upper Hillcrest
Replacement of external doors
$10,000
Floor cover to store
$4,500
Hairdresser equipment
$2,500
Bedford Bowling Club
Replace perimeter fencing
$19,000
Bedford Bowling Club
Upgrade power board and rewire buildings
$80,000
External paving
$10,000
Les Hansman - Building Works
$285,000
Morley Sport & Rec - Emergency Power Upgrade
$17,000
Strutt Reserve - Demolition
$15,311
Deschamp Resv - Noranda Cricket ClubPatio Extension
$8,000
Robert Thompson Reserve - Toilet Upgrade
$8,000
Shearn Park Disability Access Toilet Block
$33,000
$614
$239
$10,306
$0
$0
$6,827
$4,283
$6,759
$0
$0
$0
$7,273
$6,927
$0
$2,914
$0
$20,456
$0
$1,688
$0
$0
$10,000
$11,760
$0
$3,384
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$15,440
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$3,945
$666,179
$93,431
$41,630
$25,000
$53,524
$200,000
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
Sub Total
$278,524
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
Sub Total New Works
$1,878,557
$157,007
$88,053
$245,060
Grand Total
$18,572,797
$8,980,758
$5,388,401
$14,369,159
Sub Total
$6,800
G16100 Bayswater Senior Citizens
Dishwasher
$2,000
Airconditioningto kitchen
$6,000
G16200 Bayswater Bowling Club
G16300 Drill Hall
Installation of reverse cycle air conditioning
$32,773
Installation of reverse cycle air conditioning
$30,000
G16400 Filipino Club
G16500 Maylands Multipurpose Centre
Construction and fitout of new facility
$0
G16600 Sensis Building
Fitout
$800,000
G16700 Robert Street Out of School Care
Provide water fountain and children's hardstand
$1,631play area
G34700 Lightning Park - Pavilion Blinds
$8,000
G34800 Morley Sporting Club - Heating
RA Cooke Resv
$7,150
Sub Total
$6,800
$0
$6,800
$1,075
$5,000
$32,773
$35,000
$0
$2,761
$1,631
$0
$6,250
$0
$84,490
G17000
G17100
G17300
Bayswater Waves
Bayswater Waves
Bayswater Waves
Sub Total
$0
$2,400
$16,309
$0
$18,709
G14000
G14100
G14200
G14300
G14400
G14500
G14600
G14700
G14800
G14900
G15000
G15200
G15300
G15400
G15500
G15600
G15700
G15800
G15900
G33400
G33500
G33800
G34900
G35000
G35500
Sub Total
Sub Section: SS19030 - Major Capital Works
G13500
Bayswater Town Centre Heritage Trail
G13700 Aviation Park
G13800 Albion
Page 187
$1,684
$0
$7,680
$2,556
$10,325
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$614
$239
$10,306
$0
$0
$22,267
$4,283
$6,759
$0
$0
$0
$7,273
$6,927
$3,945
$2,914
$1,684
$20,456
$7,680
$4,244
$10,325
$0
$10,000
$11,760
$0
$3,384
$0
$135,061
29 MARCH 2011
DIVISIONAL BUDGET 2010-2011
TECHNICAL SERVICES
8
28-Feb-11
Budget 2008/2009
% OF YEAR
244
Actual
Committed
-12,600
-247,517
-50,600
-20,000
-80,248
0
0
-2,000
-2,069,235
-7,082,480
-506,200
-394,744
-1,591
-29,506
0
-40,524
-3,924
-57,597
-18,229
-13,472
-6,750
-1,222,383
-7,639,428
-337,969
-422,899
-265
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-29,506
0
-40,524
-3,924
-57,597
-18,229
-13,472
-6,750
-1,222,383
-7,639,428
-337,969
-422,899
-265
337.50%
59.07%
107.86%
66.77%
107.13%
16.68%
SUB TOTAL
-$10,467,215
Expenditure
100
General Maintenance
3,077,914
300
Median Maintenance
508,285
400
Grounds Maintenance
4,866,106
540
Verges
260,400
560
Roundabouts
170,797
570
Entry Statements
8,160
SS11610 TennisCourt/Wicket
11,050
SS11905 Health - Other
110,300
SS11906 Sustainable Environment Services
601,510
SS11910 BVES
48,400
SS11911 Mat&Infant Hlth Ctres
4,000
SS11915 Prevent SVC. Immunisation
84,428
SS11916 Prevent SVC. Administration
802,727
SS12000 Public Works
-17,320
SS12001 Plant Operation
17,320
SS12100 Tech Serv Administration
663,385
SS12101 Depot
135,475
SS12110 Other Technical Services
50,000
SS13200 Sanitation - Domestic
6,955,250
SS13205 Recycling
504,700
SS13206 Sanitation - Commercial
378,214
SS13207 Litter Control
340,121
SS13208 Environmental Maintenance
36,500
SS13900 GIS
361,374
Maintenance Costs
-$9,792,945
$0
-$9,792,945
93.56%
2,048,638
222,746
3,634,090
65,036
62,795
8,213
-865
105,432
350,944
33,932
2,339
38,431
490,627
-44,004
-11,806
424,265
106,112
45,206
4,723,725
332,584
251,572
313,715
8,956
237,003
156,346
3,051
88,676
250
6,941
0
756
26,390
43,059
0
0
2,064
683
19,055
15,588
4,061
9,953
12,075
0
0
0
1,364
2,960
490
2,204,983
225,796
3,722,766
65,286
69,736
8,213
-109
131,822
394,004
33,932
2,339
40,495
491,310
-24,950
3,782
428,326
116,065
57,281
4,723,725
332,584
251,572
315,078
11,916
237,493
71.64%
44.42%
76.50%
25.07%
40.83%
100.65%
-0.99%
119.51%
65.50%
70.11%
58.48%
47.96%
61.21%
144.05%
21.83%
64.57%
85.67%
114.56%
67.92%
65.90%
66.52%
92.64%
32.65%
65.72%
$393,759 $13,843,445
69.29%
$393,759
42.58%
Description
Total
66.85%
%
Income
SS11905
SS11906
SS11910
SS11915
SS11916
SS12000
SS12001
SS12100
SS12110
SS13200
SS13205
SS13206
SS13900
Health - Other
Sustainable Environment Services
BVES
Prevent SVC. Immunisation
Prevent SVC. Administration
Public Works
Plant Operation
Tech Serv Administration
Other Technical Services
Sanitation - Domestic
Recycling
Sanitation - Commercial
GIS
SUB TOTAL
TOTAL TECHNICAL SERVICES
$19,979,096 $13,449,686
$9,511,881
$3,656,741
Page 188
$4,050,501
234.17%
0.00%
80.09%
19.62%
71.77%
29 MARCH 2011
TECHNICAL SERVICES
25000000
20000000
Budget
15000000
Progressive
Actual
Straight Line
10000000
5000000
0
JUNE
IL
MAY
APR
RUA
CH
MAR
FEB
RY
ER
ER
Y
EMB
EMB
ER
BER
UAR
J AN
DEC
NOV
O
OCT
EMB
UST
SEPT
AUG
JULY
Page 189
29 MARCH 2011
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMME 2010-2011 - TECHNICAL SERVICES
AS AT 28 FEB 11
REVISED BUDGET
ACTUAL
COMMITTED
TOTAL
Sub Section: SS20000 - Arterial Road Construction
F18900
F19000
F20100
Walter Rd to Morley Drive
Wellington Rd
Resurfacing
Crimea Street
Morley Dve to Wonga
Sub Total
323,456
100,000
0
5,403
12,373
10,965
0
25,283
0
5,403
37,656
10,965
$423,456
$28,740
$25,283
$54,023
94,129
6,429
2
15,000
0
1,584
2,938
16,831
90,968
1,846
0
0
33
945
2,982
0
1,364
0
0
0
0
572
0
18,501
92,332
1,846
0
0
33
1,518
2,982
18,501
$136,913
$96,774
$20,437
$117,211
15,754
21,474
10,000
16,000
200,626
600
425
0
0
129,710
0
0
0
0
58,300
600
425
0
0
188,010
$263,854
$130,735
$58,300
$189,035
12,296
43,815
20,293
42,792
93,132
31,297
49,587
60,000
53,329
10,000
130,000
0
0
5,317
4,364
0
19,074
0
0
915
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,750
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5,317
4,364
0
21,824
0
0
915
0
0
$546,541
$29,670
$2,750
$32,420
15,000
78,777
30,000
10,000
200,000
0
48,000
8,754
0
18,742
1,491
34,443
0
28,549
9,665
0
2,335
0
632
0
0
18,419
0
21,077
1,491
35,075
0
28,549
$381,777
$91,978
$12,632
$104,610
75,571
3,667
13,167
17,248
0
2,864
10,455
5,000
5,940
0
13,167
23,252
120
1,800
0
0
21,447
0
0
0
0
1,063
0
1,721
27,387
0
13,167
23,252
120
2,863
0
1,721
$127,972
$44,279
$24,231
$68,510
Sub Section: SS20030 - Base Grant Road Reconstruction
D20900
D21000
E19200
E19300
F20600
F20800
F21000
F21400
Kirkham Hill Tce
East st to Peninsula
Peninsular Rd
Guildford to 6th
Coode St (Extra Funds)
Thomas St ROW Lighting
Johnsmith St
(Crimea To Broun)
Stone St
(Kelvin to McGann)
McGann St
(Queen to Stone )
Roberts St
(Guildford To Neville)
Sub Total
Sub Section: SS20060 - Parks Development
C78900
C92800
E22500
E22600
F29000
Parks Development-Gobba Lake 05/06
Maylands Foreshore
Aviation Park
Kelvin,Swanview Lookout
Maylands Bowling Club Irrigation Upgrade
Sub Total
Sub Section: SS20070 - Environmental Development
C78100
D31400
D31700
D36600
E23800
E24000
E25400
E33800
F30800
F30900
F31000
Parks Development-Foreshore Restoration
Lightning Swamp
Tranby
Chisolm College
Drainage
Bayswater Brook
Water quality improvement
Eric Singleton Bird Sanctuary
Swan Lake Restoration Project
Lighting Swamp - Boardwalk
Swan Lake restoration
Lightning Park Concept Plan
Solar Cities
Solar Panels
Sub Total
Sub Section: SS20080 - Traffic Management
D31100
D31300
D35700
F30500
F30600
F33400
F34700
Kirkham Hill Tce/Elizabeth
Russell/Catherine R/B
Kirkham Hill Tce/Watson Place
Traffic Management
Roadwise
Traffic Management
Slade STREET
Salisbury Street
Anti Hoon Speed Humps
Sub Total
Sub Section: SS20110 - Other Technical Services Capital
C91200
D12900
E23700
E24600
E32100
F31900
F32400
F34200
Claughton Reserve Jetty/Car Park
Administration Centre Pond
Entry Statements
Depot Storage - Asphalt
Crossovers
Sundry Works
WAAMI Programme
Bore Installation - Lightning Park
Sub Total
Page 190
29 MARCH 2011
AS AT 28 FEB 11
REVISED BUDGET
ACTUAL
COMMITTED
TOTAL
Sub Section: SS20120 - Works Bfwd Technical Services Grants
C59500
Claughton Res-Access Rd 05/06
Sub Total
25,999
4,238
0
4,238
$25,999
$4,238
$0
$4,238
100,300
87,295
0
0
0
0
0
0
$187,595
$0
$0
$0
Sub Section: SS20130 - Works Bfwd Other Technical Services
C92400
C92500
Riverside Gardens Jetty - 05/06
Transby House Jetty - 05/06
Sub Total
Sub Section: SS20135 - Golf Course Development - Embleton
D33400
Replacement Green Keepers Shed
169,586
1,654
1,136
2,790
$169,586
$1,654
$1,136
$2,790
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
$0
$0
$0
$0
67,070
5,982
847
6,829
Sub Total
$67,070
$5,982
$847
$6,829
$2,330,763
$433,591
$145,616
$579,208
Sub Total
Sub Section: SS20165 - Golf Course Development - Maylands Peninsula
D34100
D34200
D34300
F32300
Lift Bottom Tier 5 th Green
Fence Storage Compound Survey Boundry
Reticulation Upgrade
Golf Course Development
Sub Total
Sub Section: SS20170 - Public Open Space - Tech Services
C17800
POS Gobba Lake
Page 191
29 MARCH 2011
AS AT 28 FEB 11
REVISED BUDGET
ACTUAL
COMMITTED
TOTAL
New Asset
Sub Section: SS20050 - Footpath/Slab Replacement Programme
G23000
G23100
G23200
Illingbridge-Spruce To Emberson-New Path Disabled
Gummery/Clement Sts-New Path- Disabled
Disability Acess Morley
Sub Total
0
55,745
20,255
0
0
3,967
0
0
0
0
0
3,967
$76,000
$3,967
$0
$3,967
97,000
45,000
88,622
15,511
3,690
0
92,312
15,511
$142,000
$104,133
$3,690
$107,823
4,000
3,400
0
3,400
$4,000
$3,400
$0
$3,400
80,000
69,218
19,322
88,540
$80,000
$69,218
$19,322
$88,540
10,000
5,000
0
0
0
0
0
0
$15,000
$0
$0
$0
20,000
10,000
0
9,926
21,048
0
21,048
9,926
$30,000
$9,926
$21,048
$30,974
Sub Section: SS20061 - Bore & Reticulation Development
G23400
G23600
Waltham Reserve
Beaufort Park
Replace Irrigation System
Replace Irrigation System
Sub Total
G25500
Solar Cities
Sub Total
G32000
Street Lighting
Sub Total
G34100
G34200
Signage
Portable Toilet Facility
Sub Total
Sub Section: SS20200 - GIS Capital
G33100
G33200
GPS Fleet devices programme
Purchase of a Spatial Development Server
Sub Total
Page 192
29 MARCH 2011
AS AT 28 FEB 11
REVISED BUDGET
ACTUAL
COMMITTED
TOTAL
Sub Section: SS20000 - Arterial Road Construction
G18200
G18300
King William Road - Whatley
Resurfacing
to Nanhob
Beechboro Rd Sth - Coode
Resurfacing
To Railway
60,000
47,000
0
44,684
0
0
0
44,684
Sub Total
$107,000
$44,684
$0
$44,684
200,000
0
0
0
Sub Total
$200,000
$0
$0
$0
1,921
64,854
86,034
1,921
19,504
0
3,843
84,359
86,034
$1,920,000
$152,809
$21,426
$174,235
100,298
250,209
8,694
180,055
0
19,648
8,694
199,703
$350,507
$188,749
$19,648
$208,397
34,800
29,000
21,750
10,150
24,650
9,450
55,100
98,000
56,000
56,550
10,580
68,000
15,120
15,950
17,690
4,200
15,220
2,320
10,000
36,400
8,260
8,120
12,900
13,500
5,220
5,510
27,700
0
0
0
0
22,947
8,806
46,871
0
0
0
0
45,569
23,342
8,153
13,834
0
9,587
3,548
13,036
26,463
8,096
7,634
9,519
10,243
6,236
5,545
17,040
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3,994
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
22,947
8,806
46,871
0
0
0
0
45,569
23,342
8,153
13,834
0
13,580
3,548
13,036
26,463
8,096
7,634
9,519
10,243
6,236
5,545
17,040
Sub Total
$672,140
50,824
11,970
42,191
$286,467
48,038
10,972
0
$3,994
0
0
0
$290,461
48,038
10,972
0
Sub Total
$104,985
$59,010
$0
$59,010
Sub Section: SS20010 - Black Spot
G18400
Walter Wellington Right Turn Arrow
Sub Section: SS20015 - Other Road Construction
G18000
G21800
G21900
Wellington Road Duplication
Coventry Development 50% Council 1,750,000
Contribution
Stuart/Alma/Crawford/York
Upgrading
no 82 ROWs
80,000
Stuart/Alma/Crawford/Railwayno
Upgrading83ROWs
90,000
Sub Total
Sub Section: SS20020 - Other Road Grants
G18100
G35600
King William Road - Whatley
Resurfacing
to Nanhob
Grand Prom - Beaufort to
Resurfacing
Railway
Sub Total
Sub Section: SS20030 - Base Grant Road Reconstruction
G18500
G18600
G18700
G18800
G18900
G19000
G19100
G19200
G19300
G19400
G19500
G19600
G19700
G19800
G19900
G20000
G20100
G20200
G20300
G20400
G20600
G20700
G20800
G20900
G21000
G21100
G33600
Adelphi St (Shaftesbury to Hester)
Hester (Adelphi to Coode)
Haddril St (Hester to Coode)
Lawrence St ( Belham to Patterson)
Mirador Pl
Bunya Rd- COS
Roberts St (Whatley to Almondbury)
Smith (Light to Wellington)
50% Contribution to City of Stirling
Central Ave (Peninsula to Elizabeth)
Ferguson St (Whatley to Guildford)
Second Ave (Whatley to Guildford)
Bunya Rd (Widgee to Bramwell)
50% Cont to City of Stirling
Clavering Rd (Durham to Railway)*
Tuart Pl (Bottlebrush to Cul-de-sac)
Peppermint Pl (Bottlebrush to Cul-de-sac)
Marri Ct
Rivergum Pl
Myrtle Ct
Hinsley Pl
Grose Wy
Donahue Cl
Hadley Pl
Keane Ct
Mcness Ct
Key Pl
Bower Pl
Gullan Close
G21600
G21700
G40100
Hollister Wy
Gough Pl
Reo - Cullen to Mooney
Page 193
29 MARCH 2011
AS AT 28 FEB 11
REVISED BUDGET
ACTUAL
COMMITTED
TOTAL
Sub Section: SS20050 - Footpath/Slab Replacement Programme
G22000
G22100
G22200
G22400
G22500
G22600
G22700
G22800
G22900
Bayview
Catherine Street
Kelvin Street
Seventh
Veitch
View Street
Maylands Yacht Club
Sixth Ave
Hubert
Drake Street
Roseberry to Salisbury
15,372
13,048
9,072
403
8,344
18,820
10,000
15,000
5,000
0
7,607
0
0
6,597
14,283
5,377
12,431
2,671
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,466
0
0
7,607
0
0
6,597
14,283
5,377
14,898
2,671
$95,059
$48,966
$2,466
$51,432
30,000
20,000
10,000
13,100
43,000
20,000
25,039
0
0
0
0
0
2,750
0
0
0
0
0
27,789
0
0
0
0
0
$136,100
$25,039
$2,750
$27,789
Bore Cubicle Replacement
Replace
Program
redundant/dangerous bore cubicles
55,000
34,600
Bore Pump Inspection Program
Inspect bore pumps to ensure continued80,000
functions
54,862
Turbine Replacement Program
Kirkpatrick Reserve, Crowhurst Reserve,
225,000
Battersea Reserve an
175,141
8,007
1,408
17,274
42,608
56,270
192,414
Kerbline at Seventh Avenue
Crossover at 3 Veitch Street
Fourth to Central
Penninsular
No 8
Sub Total
Sub Section: SS20060 - Parks Development
G24300
G24400
G24600
G24700
G24800
G24900
Install Park Shelters - Several Locations
Pat O'Hara Reserve
Reserve and car park upgrade
Strutt Reserve
Garden improvements
Coode Street
Streetscape
Hollett Reserve
Rose Avenue Park
Community Park Development
Sub Total
Sub Section: SS20061 - Bore & Reticulation Development
G24000
G24100
G24200
Sub Total
$360,000
$264,603
$26,689
$291,292
50,000
178,714
84,000
20,000
17,675
20,222
0
9,220
0
23,778
0
0
17,675
44,000
0
9,220
$332,714
$47,117
$23,778
$70,895
20,000
20,000
100,000
100,000
11,344
15,642
1,601
19,067
909
0
579
0
12,254
15,642
2,179
19,067
Sub Total
$240,000
$47,654
$1,488
$49,142
Entry Statements
PAW Gates and various reserve lighting
Street Sign Upgrade
Bus Shelters
Sundry Works
Crossovers
Golf Course Development
WAAMI Programme
Replace Lighting at Clarkson Reseve Carpark
Della Rd - Gate,Bollards,Signage
Della Rd
Bayswater Bowling ClubRepair Greens
20,000
8,000
40,000
72,000
20,000
420,000
14,234
15,000
40,000
15,000
28,000
14,046
288
35,116
35
7,512
249,186
4,250
0
0
0
25,455
4,201
0
482
49,075
0
42,460
0
0
0
13,550
0
18,247
288
35,598
49,110
7,512
291,647
4,250
0
0
13,550
25,455
Sub Total
$692,234
$335,888
$109,769
$445,657
G25300
G25400
G34400
G34600
Baigup Wetland Rehabilitation Project
Bath Street Foreshore Stabilisation
Swan River Trust - Bath St Jetty River W
Lake Bugana Aerator/Fountain
Sub Total
Sub Section: SS20080 - Traffic Management
G25000
G25100
G25200
G34500
Traffic Management
General
TMP Paving
Traffic Management Study
Roseberry/Salisbury Street Parking Modifications
G23700
G25600
G25800
G31800
G31900
G32100
G32300
G32400
G32500
G35100
G35200
Page 194
29 MARCH 2011
AS AT 28 FEB 11
REVISED BUDGET
ACTUAL
COMMITTED
TOTAL
Sub Section: SS20135 - Golf Course Development - Embleton
G35300
Embleton Golf Course Netting
55,000
0
0
0
$55,000
$0
$0
$0
5,850
0
0
0
5,850
0
$34,000
$5,850
$0
$5,850
1,814,500
1,089,928
247,108
1,337,036
$1,814,500
$1,089,928
$247,108
$1,337,036
Lift Bottom Tier 5 th Green & possible Fairway
Removal of Typha from Lake on 5th
Facility Replacement
40,000
15,000
5,000
0
0
0
3,549
0
0
3,549
0
0
Sub Total
$60,000
$0
$3,549
$3,549
74,630
66,888
0
66,888
Sub Total
$74,630
$66,888
$0
$66,888
Sub Total New Works
$7,595,869
$2,854,297
$506,724
$3,361,021
Grand Total
$9,926,632
$3,287,888
$663,300
$3,951,188
Sub Total
Sub Section: SS20140 - Health Dept Capital
G32600
G32800
Environmental Health Replace vaccine fridge and power backup
9,000
supply
Environmental Health Noise Meter
25,000
Sub Total
Sub Section: SS20160 - Plant & Equipment
G33000
Plant Replacement
Sub Total
G33900
G34000
G34300
Sub Section: SS20200 - GIS Capital
G33300
Purchase Wide Format Printer
Page 195
29 MARCH 2011
FINANCIAL SERVICES
8
BUDGET 2010-2011
28-February-2011
244
% OF YEAR
Committed
TOTAL
66.85%
Revised Budget
Actual
-700
-355,000
-25,059,778
-3,557,720
-308,000
-315,000
-18,100
-2,368,656
-234
-223,320
-25,067,580
-3,556,433
-162,990
-324,242
-13,205
-1,307,678
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-$234
-$223,320
-$25,067,580
-$3,556,433
-$162,990
-$324,242
-$13,205
-$1,307,678
33.46%
62.91%
100.03%
99.96%
52.92%
102.93%
72.96%
55.21%
-$31,982,954
-$30,655,683
$0
-$30,655,683
95.85%
-$31,982,954
-$30,655,683
$0
-$30,655,683
95.85%
443,300
16,483
295,504
10,976
0
0
$295,504
$10,976
66.66%
66.59%
$459,783
$306,480
$0
EDP - General
160,191
EDP - Communication
6,500
EDP - Eastern Metro Regional Council
31,627
Galleria Morley Shop
132,822
Computer Services
866,878
Financial Services Administration
1,518,686
Rates
314,301
Stock Clearing Accounts
0
Suspense
0
Other Financial Services
258,217
Fire prevention
85,000
71,987
905
30,488
101,073
566,641
871,211
221,427
-1,503
-113,015
163,398
80,092
5,888
0
0
1,632
48,775
4,706
44,010
48.61%
13.92%
96.40%
77.33%
70.99%
57.68%
84.45%
0
90,445
0
$77,875
$905
$30,488
$102,705
$615,416
$875,917
$265,437
-$1,503
-$113,015
$253,843
$80,092
0
184,190
2,606
58,491
0
0
$2,606
$58,491
31.76%
$3,558,412
$2,053,800
$195,456
$2,249,257
63.21%
$4,018,195
$2,360,280
$195,456
$2,555,737
63.60%
Description
%
Operating Income
235700
235600
235813
235912
236012
236100
236300
250000
Galleria Morley Shop
Financial Services Administration
Levy
Minimums
Interims
Other Rates
Morley Sport & Rec Centre
Other Financial Services
Total Revenue
235700 Insurance
250100 Workers Comp Premium
201201
201202
201101
235700
F11402
F11902
F14401
999700
999600
252400
201501
236200 AlmaVenville RecCtre
236300 Morley Sport & Rec Centre
TOTAL EXPENDITURE
Page 196
98.31%
94.23%
29 MARCH 2011
FINANCIAL SERVICES
ALL INCOME
35000000
30000000
25000000
Budget
Progressive Actual
20000000
15000000
10000000
5000000
0
E
JUN
MAY
CH
IL
A PR
MAR
R
RUA
F EB
Y
UAR
JAN
Y
ER
EM B
D EC
R
ER
EM B
NO V
BER
TEM
O BE
O CT
SEP
U ST
AUG
JULY
4500000
4000000
3500000
Budget
3000000
Straight Line
Progressive Actual
2500000
2000000
1500000
1000000
500000
0
E
JUN
MAY
CH
IL
APR
MAR
R
RUA
FEB
Y
R
MBE
R
MBE
ER
R
Y
UAR
JAN
E
DEC
E
NOV
B
TEM
O BE
O CT
SEP
UST
AUG
JULY
Page 197
29 MARCH 2011
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMME 2010-2011 - FINANCIAL SERVICES
Carried Forward Works
REVISED BUDGET
ACTUAL
COMMITTED
TOTAL
Sub Section: SS18010 - Computer Development
E10300
F10300
COMPUTING
COMPUTING
$12,168.00
$29,474.00
$14,834.01
$31,544.81
$278.41
$0.00
$15,112.42
$31,544.81
Sub Total
$41,642.00
$46,378.82
$278.41
$46,657.23
$41,642.00
$46,378.82
$278.41
$46,657.23
$8,000.00
$18,500.00
$30,000.00
$100,000.00
$8,210.63
$0.00
$13,465.17
$72,745.43
$0.00
$4,938.93
$8,000.00
$6,728.00
$8,210.63
$4,938.93
$21,465.17
$79,473.43
$156,500.00
$94,421.23
$19,666.93
$114,088.16
$18,000.00
$50,000.00
$18,500.00
$34,148.99
$16,747.58
$23,755.00
$0.00
$28,652.26
$0.00
$34,148.99
$45,399.84
$23,755.00
$86,500.00
$74,651.57
$28,652.26
$103,303.83
Morley Sports & Recreation
Building
- YMCA
Improvements - Toilets Wellington
$140,000.00
Room,Lower Courts
$7,000.00
Matting
- YMCA
Floors
$20,000.00
$0.00
Signage
- YMCA
$25,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$7,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
Data works Licence Fees
New Asset
G10304
G10305
G10306
G10307
Helpdesk Software
High Speed Fibre Network - Olive Tree Ho
City of Bayswater Intranet
PC Replacement
Sub Total
G10301
G10302
G10303
Update Network Infrastructure
Minutes and Agenda Software
Replace Aged Servers
Sub Total
Sub Section: SS30000 - YMCA Managed Rec Centres
G12800
G12900
G13000
Sub Total
$185,000.00
$7,000.00
$0.00
$7,000.00
Sub Total New Works
$428,000.00
$176,072.80
$48,319.19
$224,391.99
Grand Total
$469,642.00
$222,451.62
$48,597.60
$271,049.22
Page 198
12.2.2
29 MARCH 2011
Accounts Payable as at 22 March 2011
Attachments: Schedule of Accounts Submitted 22 March 2011 for
Treasurer's Advance A/c
Officer:
Director of Finance
Application
To consider the schedule of accounts to be paid as at 22 March 2011.
Background
CERTIFICATE OF TREASURER
SUMMARY OF SCHEDULE OF ACCOUNTS PAID
FUND
ELECTRONIC FUND
TRANSFERS
TREASURER’S ADVANCE
ACCOUNT FUND,
INCLUDING ELECTRONIC
FUND PAYMENTS
VOUCHER NO.
AMOUNT
CANCELLED
CHEQUES FROM
PREVIOUS MONTH
$ 2,504,621.78
164617 - 165128
EF000175-196
$5,004,553.35
160076
160254
162740
163207
163649
164045
164136
164612
$21,775.44
which was submitted to each member of the Technical Services and Finance and Personnel
Committee on 17 March 2011 has been checked and is fully supported by vouchers and
invoices which are submitted herewith and which has been duly certified as to the receipt of
goods and the rendition of services and as to prices, computations, and costings and the
amounts shown are due for payment.
TOTAL OF ALL OTHER ACCOUNTS OUTSTANDING AS AT 28 FEBRUARY 2011
TREASURER’S ADVANCE ACCOUNT FUND
________________________________
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
Page 199
$1,695,380
29 MARCH 2011
CERTIFICATE OF CHAIRPERSON
SUMMARY OF SCHEDULE OF ACCOUNTS PAID
FUND
ELECTRONIC FUND
TRANSFERS
TREASURER’S ADVANCE
ACCOUNT FUND,
INCLUDING ELECTRONIC
FUND PAYMENTS
VOUCHER NO.
AMOUNT
CANCELLED
CHEQUES FROM
PREVIOUS MONTH
$ 2,504,621.78
164617 - 165128
EF000175-196
$5,004,553.35
160076
160254
162740
163207
163649
164045
164136
164612
$21,775.44
which was submitted to each member of the Council on 17 March 2011 has been checked and
is fully supported by vouchers and invoices which are submitted herewith and which has been
duly certified as to the receipt of goods and the rendition of services and as to prices,
computations, and costings and the amounts shown are due for payment.
TOTAL OF ALL OTHER ACCOUNTS OUTSTANDING AS AT 28 FEBRUARY 2011
TREASURER’S ADVANCE ACCOUNT FUND
$1,695,380
_____________________________________
CHAIRPERSON
Policy Implications
Nil.
Nil.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
Schedule of Accounts be passed for payment.
Page 200
29 MARCH 2011
WESTPAC BANK ELECTRONIC FUND TRANSFERS TO WESTPAC ACCOUNTS
01 February 2011
Date
to
28 February 2011
Amount
Details
MUNICIPAL FUND
01/02/2011
62,938.01
To Advance Account
02/02/2011
30,191.29
To Advance Account
03/02/2011
45,909.01
To Advance Account
04/02/2011
97,296.59
To Advance Account
07/02/2011
92,536.81
To Advance Account
08/02/2011
73,613.02
To Advance Account
09/02/2011
20,663.57
To Advance Account
10/02/2011
34,868.76
To Advance Account
11/02/2011
47,040.95
To Advance Account
14/02/2011
141,650.65
To Advance Account
15/02/2011
110,676.36
To Advance Account
16/02/2011
92,282.74
To Advance Account
17/02/2011
426,767.10
To Advance Account
18/02/2011
0.00
To Advance Account
21/02/2011
347,797.40
To Advance Account
22/02/2011
129,761.61
To Advance Account
23/02/2011
83,879.53
To Advance Account
24/02/2011
118,748.28
To Advance Account
25/02/2011
87,860.53
28/02/2011
356,100.56
$ 1,956,621.68
To At Call Account
To Advance Account
To Advance Account
Total
09/02/2011
584,378.52
Wages
14/02/2011
139,485.00
ATO - PAYG
23/02/2011
548,000.10
Wages
TREASURER'S ADVANCE ACCOUNT
$
548,000.10
Total
TOTAL
$ 2,504,621.78
Page 201
12.2.3
29 MARCH 2011
Investment Portfolio as at 28 February 2011
Officer:
Director of Finance
Application
To present the investment portfolio as at 28 February 2011 for Council consideration.
Background
Comparison of Council’s investments with previous year:
28 February 2011
Average
Rate
%
%
$
Average
Rate
%
%
28,526,721
5.78
91.49
33,368,519
4.89
91.18
3,415,721
$31,942,442
6.14
8.51
100.00%
3,230,571
5.26
8.82
$
General
Trust
Total
28 February 2010
$36,599,090
Council’s investments are currently placed with financial institutions as follows :
Banks
Westpac
Bankwest
ANZ Bank
NAB
Bendigo Bank
Total
Amount Invested
$
7,348,388
9,561,514
3,736,922
8,456,252
2,839,366
$31,942,442
Page 202
% Invested
23.01%
29.93%
11.70%
26.47%
8.89%
100.00%
100.00%
Page 203
29 MARCH 2011
Page 204
29 MARCH 2011
Page 205
29 MARCH 2011
29 MARCH 2011
INTE REST EARN INGS FOR Y EAR 2 010/ 2011
Date:
2 8-Feb-11
M ONTHLY PROGRES SI VE INTEREST E ARN INGS
P ercentage of year elapsed :
M onth
Municipal
Reserve
T otal
Progressi ve %
of Budget
Jul-10
59,187
19,745
78,932
7.64
Aug-10
114,089
38,890
152,979
14.80
Sep-10
231,523
56,490
288,013
27.87
Oct-10
317,439
74,757
392,196
37.95
N ov-10
407,864
92,769
500,633
48.45
D ec-10
518,599
110,397
628,996
60.87
Jan -1 1
608,643
129,032
737,675
71.39
F eb-11
695,496
145,050
840,546
81.34
M ar-11
Apr-11
May-11
Jun -1 1
FU LL YEAR BUD GET ESTIM AT ES
Municipal
BU DGET $
708,374
Reserve
$
325,000
T otal
$ 1,033,374
Policy Implications
These investments have been apportioned as per the City’s Investment Policy, as follows :
“(b)
Counterparty credit framework (diversification) - the amount invested with any one
*institution should not exceed the following percentages (restricted by the institution’s credit
rating) so that single entity exposure is limited:
* institution is defined as including wholly owned subsidiaries
S&P
Long-Term Rating
S&P
Short-Term Rating
AAA
AA
A
BBB+
A-1+
A-1
A-2
A-2
Direct Investment
Maximum
%
45%
35%
10%
10%
Nil.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
report on the investment portfolio as at 28 February 2011 be received.
Page 206
12.2.4
29 MARCH 2011
Donation - 2011 LGMA Women in Local Government Conference
Attachments: Sponsorship request letter
Applicant:
Local Government Manager’s Association
Officer:
Refer:
Item 12.2.4 : OCM : 23.2.10
Application
To consider financial assistance to LGMA’s 2011 Women in Local Government Conference
that is being held 2 - 3 June 2011 at Scarborough.
Background
Local Government Manager’s Association (LGMA) supports the continuing professional
development of those within the sector. Following the success of the 2010 Year of Women in
Local Government, it is intended to build on this, increase delegate numbers and develop
programs that are both topical and engaging.
The 2011 Conference has been specifically tailored for the professional development of
women aspiring to be leaders in local government. It will also provide an excellent
opportunity for delegates to develop relationships and network with colleagues in the industry.
The event does not attract support from commercial sponsors, therefore local governments are
being approached for specific support. Sponsorship will allow a reduction in registration
costs, thereby increasing the attendance numbers for the benefit of all.
Sponsorship is set as follows:
o
o
$1,000
$500
Major sponsor
Support sponsor
The venue will be Rendezvous Hotel, Scarborough.
Comment
Council supported this initiative in 2010 by becoming a major sponsor of this conference.
Policy Implications
Nil.
$5,552.60.
Voting Requirements
Page 207
29 MARCH 2011
Committee/Officer Recommendation to Council
That Council be a major event sponsor of the LGMA 2011 - Women in Local Government Conference
which is being held 2 - 3 June 2011 at the Rendezvous Hotel, Scarborough, at a cost of $1,000.
AMENDMENT
CR ALAN RADFORD MOVED CR TERRY KENYON, JP SECONDED that the
recommendation be amended from $1,000 to $500 for Council to be a Support Sponsor.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR ALAN RADFORD MOVED, CR TERRY KENYON, JP SECONDED that Council
be a Support Sponsor of the LGMA 2011 - Women in Local Government Conference
which is being held 2 - 3 June 2011 at the Rendezvous Hotel, Scarborough, at a cost of
$500.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Page 208
29 MARCH 2011
Item 2.1 was dealt with prior to this Item.
12.2.5
Donation – Alex Murphy – 2011 Australian Rowing Championships,
Adelaide
Applicant:
Alex Murphy
Officer:
Director of Finance
In accordance with Section 5.65 of the Local Government Act 1995, Cr Barry McKenna declared an
impartial interest in this item as he taught Alex Murphy. Cr McKenna remained in the room during
voting on this item.
In accordance with Section 5.65 of the Local Government Act 1995, Cr Barry McKenna
declared an impartial interest in this item as he taught Alex Murphy. Cr McKenna
Application
To consider an application for financial assistance that has been received from Alex Murphy
who was selected to participate at the 2011 Australian Rowing Championships.
Background
Alex Murphy is 19 years of age, a resident of the City and works part-time.
He has been rowing with the ANA Rowing Club for the past two years and is a member of its
Elite Athlete Squad.
Alex was selected to compete at the 2011 Australian Rowing Championships which were held
in Adelaide from 7 to 13 March and won a Bronze medal in the U23 Lightweight Mens'
Double Scull event.
Costs to compete in the championships amounted to approximately $1500 and the applicant is
seeking financial assistance towards these costs.
Comment
Alex Murphy has not sought financial assistance from Council in the past.
Policy Implications
Nil.
$5,552.60.
Voting Requirements
Page 209
29 MARCH 2011
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR MARLENE ROBINSON SECONDED that
Council grants a donation of $200 to Alex Murphy, a resident of the City, towards the
expenses he incurred in travelling to Adelaide as a member of ANA Rowing Club’s Elite
Athlete Squad that competed at the 2011 National Rowing Championships which were
held from 7 to 13 March.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Page 210
12.2.6
29 MARCH 2011
Donation – Australian Red Cross
Applicant:
Australian Red Cross
Officer:
Director of Finance
Application
To consider an application which has been received from Australian Red Cross for financial
support towards its annual Red Cross Calling fundraising appeal.
Background
Australian Red Cross is planning its annual Red Cross Calling fundraising campaign to
support its work in helping vulnerable people and responding to emergencies, wherever they
may happen.
All over Australia volunteers assist by doorknocking, holding a collection at work, running
stalls, organising fundraising events and encouraging their family and friends to give.
This month Red Cross members, schools and community groups across Australia will again
be holding events and doorknocking.
Comment
In the past, Council has made the following donations to Australian Red Cross and Australian
Red Cross Western Australia :
October 1998 - $100
September 2001 - $1,048.42 - to the American tragedy.
September 2002 - $100 - to the Australian Red Cross Tracing Service.
January 2005 - $5,000 - towards the Tsunami appeal.
February 2009 - $20,000 towards the Victorian Bushfire Appeal.
August 2009 - $150 towards its ongoing fundraising campaign
January 2010 - $5,000 towards the Haiti Earthquake Appeal
August 2010 - $2,500 towards the Pakistan Floods
Policy Implications
Nil.
$5,552.60.
Voting Requirements
Page 211
29 MARCH 2011
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
grants a donation of $200.00 to Australian Red Cross towards its annual Red Cross
Calling fundraising appeal in acknowledgement of the great work that the organisation
carries out in the community.
Page 212
12.2.7
29 MARCH 2011
Donation - Bayswater Petanque Club – City of Bayswater Petanque
Challenge Trophy
Applicant:
Bayswater Petanque Club
Officer:
Director of Finance
Application
To consider an application for financial assistance towards the 2011 City of Bayswater
Petanque Challenge Trophy event which will be held on Sunday 15 May at Wotton Reserve,
Embleton.
Background
The Bayswater Petanque Club Inc has requested financial assistance from Council towards
staging the annual City of Bayswater Petanque Challenge Trophy event which this year will
be held on Sunday 15 May.
A mini petanque tournament will be held, followed by a barbeque lunch.
The Club would be grateful for financial assistance towards the lunch expenses.
The Mayor, Councillors and their partners have been invited to attend the event, along with
their guests.
Comment
For the last ten years, Council has resolved to donate $400 towards this event.
Policy Implications
Nil.
$5,552.60.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR SALLY PALMER SECONDED that at
Council grants a donation of $400 to the Bayswater Petanque Club towards the staging
of its 2011 City of Bayswater Petanque Challenge Trophy event which will be held on
Sunday 15 May at Wotton Reserve, Embleton.
Page 213
12.2.8
29 MARCH 2011
Donation - Dennis Lillee Sports Foundation for People with Disabilities
Applicant:
Dennis Lillee Sports Foundation for People with Disabilities
Officer:
Director of Finance
Application
To consider an application for financial assistance towards its current fundraising appeal that
has been received from Dennis Lillee Sports Foundation for People with Disabilities.
Background
Dennis Lillee Sports Foundation for People with Disabilities, a not-for-profit charitable
organisation, is seeking financial assistance from Council towards its current fundraising
appeal.
The Foundation supports sporting activities for children with disabilities. These children are
either intellectually disabled, amputees, blind or deaf, and the Foundation gives them a chance
to participate in events that other children may take for granted. It also has adaptive
equipment demonstrations, expo’s, school activities and education sessions for teachers,
parents and carers.
Throughout the first term a variety of different modified carnivals will be run. All schools
participating will get a chance to host the carnivals and all surrounding schools will attend.
The carnivals give the children with all abilities the chance to participate in sport and
encourage social interaction with their peers. They will include high support needs Aquatics,
Boccia and Mini adaptive carnivals.
20 to 30 participants are expected to attend the "High Support Needs Carnivals" with 70 to
100 expected to attend the Boccia/Mini carnivals.
The Foundation would like to raise $25,000 through its current fundraising appeal to provide
children with disabilities across the state with a range of increased opportunities in their
school holidays.
Comment
In May 2005, October 2008 and August 2009 Council donated $150 to the Foundation and in
April 2010 $200 was donated.
Policy Implications
Nil.
$5,552.60.
Voting Requirements
Page 214
29 MARCH 2011
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
grants a donation of $200 to Dennis Lillee Sports Foundation for People with Disabilities
towards its current fundraising appeal” for West Australian children with disabilities
having high support needs.
Page 215
12.2.9
29 MARCH 2011
Donation - Ion Uili - 2011 Junior Nationals Grid Iron Tournament,
Narrabeen, NSW
Applicant:
Ion Uili
Officer:
Director of Finance
Application
To consider an application for financial assistance that has been received from Ion Uili who
has been selected to participate at the 2011 Junior Nationals Grid Iron Tournament being held
in Narrabeen, NSW.
Background
Ion Uili is 16 years of age, a resident of the City and works as a labourer for a recycling
organisation.
He has been selected to represent Western Australia in the 2011 Junior Nationals Squad which
is competing at the Academy of Sport and Recreation in Narrabeen, NSW. The tournament
will run from 16 to 24 April 2011.
The approximate cost of Ion’s trip is $1,500 including tournament fee, flights and team
merchandise and the applicant is seeking financial assistance from Council in this regard.
Comment
Ion Uili has not sought financial assistance from Council in the past.
Policy Implications
Nil.
$5,552.60.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
grants a donation of $200 to Ion Uili, a resident of the City, towards the expenses he will
incur in travelling to Narrabeen, NSW to represent Western Australia at the 2011
Junior Nationals Grid Iron Tournament being held between 16 and 24 April.
Page 216
12.2.10
29 MARCH 2011
Donation – Jakob Ratnayeke – National Electric Wheelchair Sports Games
Applicant:
Jakob Ratnayeke
Officer:
Director of Finance
Application
To consider an application for financial assistance that has been received from Jakob
Ratnayeke who has been selected to represent Western Australia in the 2011 National Electric
Wheelchair Sports Games.
Background
Jakob Ratnayeke is 17 years of age, a resident of the City and is currently in year 12 at
Shenton College in Shenton Park.
Jakob was born with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy which means he is unable to produce any
new muscle.
He has been selected to represent Western Australia in the 2011 National Electric Wheelchair
Sports Games (NEWS) being held at Lake Narabeen, near Sydney, in April 2011. Jakob will
compete in power wheelchair soccer, rugby and hockey.
To compete in NEWS, all athletes must have a Neuromuscular condition and must use an
electric wheelchair for mobility. The Western Electric Sporting Association Inc has a longterm commitment to helping people with disabilities as it acknowledges that competition and
challenge are healthy and necessary aspects of life.
The total cost for travel and accommodation at the New South Wales Academy of Sport is
$2,300 for Jakob and a personal carer. The Association is busy fundraising with a lapathon
and quiz night to contribute towards this cost and all State Team players are required to
contribute an amount of $500. Jakob is seeking financial assistance from Council towards this
amount.
Comment
Jakob Ratnayeke has not sought financial assistance from Council in the past.
Policy Implications
Nil.
$5,552.60.
Voting Requirements
Page 217
29 MARCH 2011
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
grants a donation of $200 to Jakob Ratnayeke, a resident of the City, towards the
expenses he will incur in travelling to Lake Narabeen, NSW to represent Western
Australia in power wheelchair soccer, rugby and hockey at the National Electric
Wheelchair Sports games being held in April 2011.
Page 218
12.2.11
29 MARCH 2011
Donation - Marissa Barbaro - 2011 Rotary Youth Leadership Awards
(RYLA) International Seminar - Turkey
Applicant:
Marissa Barbaro
Officer:
Director of Finance
Application
To consider an application for financial assistance that has been received from Marissa
Barbaro who has been selected to participate at the 2011 Rotary Youth Leadership Awards
(RYLA) International Seminar being held in Turkey in April.
Background
Marissa Barbaro is 19 years of age, a resident of the City, and a student at the University of
WA.
She has been selected to attend the 2011 Rotary Youth Leadership Awards (RYLA)
International Seminar which is to be held in Turkey from 21 to 25 April, concluding with the
Gallipoli Dawn Service.
The seminar is organised for young people endorsed by local Rotary Clubs, and Marissa has
been nominated by the Morley Rotary Club.
The aim of the seminar is to take lessons from history and permanently install meanings of
peace, brotherhood and human rights in the minds of the younger generations.
After having visited the Western Front (France and Belgium) in 2009, Marissa's interest in the
World Wars and the ANZAC Legend became paramount. The sight of rows upon rows of
graves brought home the effects of war. She now believes that it is her responsibility to pass
on what she has seen and experienced to promote peace throughout the world.
Upon returning from the Western Front she was invited to address a number of community
groups including the Rotary, RSL, Lions and school groups. She was also asked to be the
Keynote Speaker at the Bellevue RSL on Anzac Day and is therefore looking forward to
attending the seminar in Turkey to gain knowledge and share her past experiences.
Participants are required to pay for their own flights to Turkey as well as a fee to cover the
costs of running the seminar. These amount to $2,300 and Marissa would be grateful for any
assistance that the Council could give towards these costs.
Comment
In June 2007, Council granted a donation of $150 to Marissa when she competed with the
International State Little Athletics Team at a competition held that month in Kuala Lumpur.
Policy Implications
Nil.
Page 219
29 MARCH 2011
$5,552.60.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
grants a donation of $200 to Marissa Barbaro, a resident of the City, towards the
expenses she will incur in travelling to Turkey in April to attend the 2011 Rotary Youth
Leadership Awards (RYLA) International Seminar, which will include participating in
the Gallipoli Dawn Service.
Page 220
12.2.12
29 MARCH 2011
Donation – Ryan Dhue – Balcatta Soccer Club U16's Team - The Great Wall
of China Cup, Beijing, China
Applicant:
Ryan Dhue
Officer:
Director of Finance
Application
To consider an application for financial assistance that has been received from Ryan Dhue
who has been selected to play with the Balcatta Soccer Club's Under 16's team in The Great
Wall of China Cup tournament being held in Beijing, China.
Background
Ryan Dhue is 15 years of age, a resident of the City, and attends Chisholm Catholic College.
Balcatta Soccer Club is fielding an U16's and U18's team in the Great Wall of China Cup
tournament being held in Beijing, China from 15 to 25 July 2011 and Ryan has been selected
in the U16's team.
The Club invited players from all over Western Australia to participate in the selection
process which was advertised statewide in 'The West Australian' and through the State's
governing body for soccer. The team was selected over a number of weekends by fullyqualified coaches and finals selection was based on skill, attitude, commitment and team
spirit.
The Balcatta Soccer Club will be representing Australia at the opening ceremony and its
teams will play against international soccer teams from all over the world, and players will
attend cultural events such as learning basic Chinese, Kung Fu, tour the Great Wall,
Tiananmen Square and the Forbidden City. All of these elements combined will give the
youth soccer team a great travel and soccer experience.
Comment
Ryan Dhue has not sought financial assistance from Council in the past.
Policy Implications
Nil.
$5,552.60.
Voting Requirements
Page 221
29 MARCH 2011
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
grants a donation of $200 to Ryan Dhue, a resident of the City, towards the expenses he
will incur in travelling to Beijing, China as a member of the Balcatta Soccer Club's
U16's team which will compete in the Great Wall of China Cup tournament being held
from 15 – 25 July 2011.
Page 222
12.2.13
29 MARCH 2011
Donation – The International Association of Lions Clubs District 201W1 "Razzamatazz"
Applicant:
The International Association of Lions Clubs District 201W1
Officer:
Director of Finance
Application
To consider an application for financial assistance to the International Association of Lions
Clubs District 201W1 towards its annual "Razzamatazz" event.
Background
Lions Clubs District 201W1 (which represents the 32 Lions Clubs north of the river) annually
hosts a live theatre event entitled "Razzamatazz" for the disadvantaged children of Perth.
This year, at least four 90-minute shows will be held on Wednesday 11 May at the Perth
Concert Hall. Five shows will be held if possible.
Over 4,000 disadvantaged children from the local community, e.g. foster children, special
needs children, Heart Kids and children from many other community support groups will
attend the event, including approximately :
•
•
80 children from Durham Road Special School
20 children from Hillcrest Primary School.
The Association is hoping to have young disabled adults who reside in group homes within
the City of Bayswater attend.
Lions Clubs District 201W1 has a special interest in helping children in Western Australia
who are suffering from illness, and has had a longstanding involvement with Princess
Margaret Hospital for Children, in particular King Edward Memorial Hospital Women's and
Infant Research Foundation.
Proceeds from the event will be donated towards :
•
•
•
•
King Edward Memorial Hospital Women's and Infant Research Foundation
The Lions Hearing Foundation
The Lions Save Sight Foundation
Various other associations.
The organisation is selling five (5) tickets for $250, ten (10) tickets for $500 and fifteen (15)
for $750.
Comment
In 2004 financial assistance of $250 was granted towards sending a group of autistic children
from Hillcrest Primary School to the Film Festival.
Page 223
29 MARCH 2011
In February 2005, December 2005, February 2007, May 2008, March 2009 and March 2010,
$250 was donated towards sending a group of local disadvantaged children to the Annual
Film Festival or "Razzamatazz" live theatre event, which it has become since 2007.
Durham Road School has had a long-standing relationship with this organisation and has
praised them for their involvement with the disadvantaged children at the school.
Policy Implications
Nil.
$5,552.60.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
grants a donation of $250 (including GST) to Lions Clubs District 201W1 towards its
"Razzamatazz" event being conducted on Wednesday 11 May at the Perth Concert Hall
for special needs, disabled and disadvantaged children of Western Australia.
Beneficiaries of the proceeds will be Princess Margaret Hospital, in particular King
Edward Memorial Hospital Women's and Infant Research Foundation, The Lions
Hearing Foundation, The Lions Save Sight Foundation and various other associations.
TECHNICAL SERVICES AND FINANCE & PERSONNEL COMMITTEE DECISION – EN BLOC
CR MIKE ANDERTON, JP MOVED, CR SALLY PALMER SECONDED to en bloc the
Committee/Officer Recommendation to Council of Items 1.6, 1.10, 2.2 to 2.4 and 2.6 to 3.2.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Page 224
29 MARCH 2011
13
REPORTS OF MANAGEMENT/ADVISORY COMMITTEES
13.1
Security Watch Advisory Committee – 14 March 2011
13.1.1
Police Crime Statistics – February 2011
Officer:
Police Officers
Application
To receive the Verbal Police report for the month of February 2011.
Background
Crime statistics for the City of Bayswater are presented to the Advisory Committee on a
monthly basis. In addition, Officers in Charge of the Bayswater and Morley Police Stations
provide a verbal report on crime trends within the West Metropolitan Police Districts.
Comment
Verbal reports on activities during the month of February 2011 in the following areas will be
presented at the meeting:
• Bayswater Police
• Morley Police
Policy Implications
Nil.
Nil.
Voting Requirements
The verbal Police reports by the Officers of the Bayswater and Morley Police stations for the
month of February 2011 be received.
Page 225
29 MARCH 2011
At the Security Watch Advisory Committee Meeting:
Sgt. Pam Bayley provided a verbal report of fortnightly statistics, as noted below:
Incidents – February 2011 (2 week period)
Bayswater
Burglaries
19
Stolen motor vehicles
2
Robberies
Noranda
Morley
2
8
14
It was agreed by the Committee that the Crime Statistics Report for the month of February 2011 would
be
submitted
by
Sgt
Brayley
and
included
in
the
Minutes
of
14 March 2011. The Monthly Police Crime Statistics are note below:
Police Crime Statistics - February 2011
Residence
Business
Total
Burglary and Commit Offence - Morley
24
9
33
Burglary and Commit Offence - Noranda
7
1
8
Burglary and Commit Offence - Bayswater
26
6
32
Burglary and Intent Offence - Morley
7
3
10
Burglary and Intent Offence - Noranda
4
3
7
Burglary and Intent Offence - Bayswater
5
3
8
Steal Motor Vehicle -
Total
Morley
5
Noranda
2
Bayswater
6
In recent months, the number of convictions has increased as a result of DNA testing from stolen
motor vehicles.
There has been an increase in anti-social behaviour surrounding the Bayswater Hotel specifically
related to a large number of youths who congregate around the premises and at Halliday Park.
Various options were discussed to reduce the anti-social behaviour in this area such as:
• Utilising camera footage from the Bayswater Train Station
• Installing CCTV cameras at Rose Avenue
• Dedicated telephone contact with the Police Shift Supervisor
• Extend lighting operation times at Halliday Park
• Install lighting at the Gazebo area located at Halliday Park
• Ongoing use of CCTV in mobile security vehicles.
Page 226
29 MARCH 2011
The Committee discussed the officer's recommendation and following the Committee's discussion
regarding the anti-social behaviour at the Bayswater Hotel and Halliday Park, added several points
as follows:
2.
The Crime Statistics Report for the month of February 2011 be submitted by Police Officers
and included in the Minutes of 14 March 2011.
3.
The City write to the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor to advise of the current
situation involving youth and alcohol at the Bayswater Hotel.
4.
The City write to the Commissioner of the Western Australia Police to advise of the current
situation involving youth and alcohol at the Bayswater Hotel and to seek additional local
Police assistance during peak problem times.
5.
Officers from the City of Bayswater and the Security Watch Advisory Committee, including
local Police, conduct a Security Risk Audit at Halliday Park to identify the anti-social issues
in the area.
6.
A further report detailing the results of the Security Risk Audit Report to be submitted to a
future Security Watch Advisory Committee meeting.
That:
1.
The verbal Police reports by the Officers of the Bayswater and Morley Police stations
for the month of February 2011 be received.
2.
The Crime Statistics Report for the month of February 2011 be submitted by Police
Officers and included in the Minutes of 14 March 2011.
3.
The City write to the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor to advise of the
current situation involving youth and alcohol at the Bayswater Hotel.
4.
The City write to the Commissioner of the Western Australia Police to advise of the
current situation involving youth and alcohol at the Bayswater Hotel and to seek
additional local Police assistance during peak problem times.
5.
Officers from the City of Bayswater and the Security Watch Advisory Committee,
including local Police, conduct a Security Risk Audit at Halliday Park to identify the
anti-social issues in the area.
6.
A further report detailing the results of the Security Risk Audit Report to be submitted
to a future Security Watch Advisory Committee meeting.
AMENDMENT
CR SALLY PALMER MOVED, CR TERRY KENYON, JP SECONDED an
amendment to Points 3 and 4 of the recommendation to read that:
3.
His Worship the Mayor, Cr Terry Kenyon, JP write to the Department of
Racing, Gaming and Liquor to advise of the current situation involving youth
and alcohol outside the Bayswater Hotel.
4.
His Worship the Mayor, Cr Terry Kenyon, JP write to the Minister and
Commissioner of the Western Australia Police to advise of the current situation
involving youth and alcohol outside the Bayswater Hotel and to seek additional
local Police assistance during peak problem times.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Page 227
29 MARCH 2011
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR SALLY PALMER MOVED, CR TERRY KENYON, JP SECONDED that:
1.
The verbal Police reports by the Officers of the Bayswater and Morley Police
stations for the month of February 2011 be received.
2.
The Crime Statistics Report for the month of February 2011 be submitted by
Police Officers and included in the Minutes of 14 March 2011.
3.
His Worship the Mayor, Cr Terry Kenyon, JP write to the Department of
Racing, Gaming and Liquor to advise of the current situation involving youth
and alcohol outside the Bayswater Hotel.
4.
His Worship the Mayor, Cr Terry Kenyon, JP write to the Minister and
Commissioner of the Western Australia Police to advise of the current situation
involving youth and alcohol outside the Bayswater Hotel and to seek additional
local Police assistance during peak problem times.
5.
Officers from the City of Bayswater and the Security Watch Advisory
Committee, including local Police, conduct a Security Risk Audit at Halliday
Park to identify the anti-social issues in the area.
6.
A further report detailing the results of the Security Risk Audit Report to be
submitted to a future Security Watch Advisory Committee meeting.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Page 228
13.1.2
29 MARCH 2011
Security Watch Status Report – February 2011
Attachment:
1. Security Watch Management Report – February 2011
Officer:
Director Administration and Community Services
Application
To consider the status report on the Security Watch Services Statistics for the month of
February 2011 and make recommendations to Council based on the information provided.
Background
Security Watch Services Statistics for the City of Bayswater are presented to the Advisory
Committee on a monthly basis. Statistics are summarised from the official incident reports
and presented as a graphical representation with any relevant information that explains
variation to the expected outcomes.
Staff register Action Requests against categories that were developed when the City of
Bayswater Security Watch Services were introduced. Graffiti has been added to the report as
it reflects the number of graffiti incidents reported by security officers.
Comment
Security Watch Action Requests
City of Bayswater Security Watch dealt with 536 security related action requests throughout
February 2011. In the current financial year to date the City of Bayswater Security Watch
Service has dealt with a total 4916 Action Requests, an increase of 3222 for same period last
year of these Action Requests 2589 were as a result of Graffiti reports to Technical Services.
The Security Watch Management Report is (attached).
Policy Implications
Nil.
Nil.
Voting Requirements
Rangers and Security Services attended a medical emergency at a Senior Citizens Centre. Officers
viewed from outside the premises, that a resident had collapsed inside the home. Officers contacted
ambulance services and the resident is recovering.
Criminal Damage (Graffiti) is removed by the City of Bayswater from property within the City of
Bayswater. Graffiti reports are 1% lower than the 5 year average for the month of February and
represents a 32% reduction from the same period last year. The rolling five year average reduction in
graffiti or criminal damage is 16%.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
Security Watch Services Report for the month of February 2011 be received.
Page 229
29 MARCH 2011
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR SALLY PALMER MOVED, CR TERRY KENYON, JP SECONDED that this item be
moved to the end of the meeting and dealt with behind closed doors.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
13.1.3
City of Bayswater CCTV Report – February 2011
Attachment:
1. Confidential Attachment – CCTV Location Report
Officer:
Application
To inform the Security Watch Advisory Committee of the current status of Closed Circuit
Television (CCTV) installations within the City of Bayswater.
Background
Closed Circuit Television units have been installed within the City at various locations (refer
to Confidential Attachment No. 1). A majority of the locations are relevant to City of
Bayswater infrastructure where anti-social behaviour has been identified as an ongoing issue.
Comment
Bollard cameras as detailed in the CCTV Location Report have recently been damaged and
destroyed by vandals. These cameras will not be replaced.
Policy Implications
Nil.
Nil.
Voting Requirements
Council had resolved not to replace bollard cameras once damaged. Alternative camera options to be
determined on a case by case basis.
The Committee discussed excessive rubbish in and around donation bins located within the City. It
was suggested that additional rubbish receptacles be considered to help reduce the waste in these
areas.
CCTV equipment has been ordered for various Council buildings.
A recent grant application for CCTV was not successful and therefore funding in the 2010/2011
budget was not considered by Council. A CCTV Strategy will be developed to support future grant
applications.
The City Officers continue to promote the Blue Iris Program to local businesses via the website,
editorials and media.
The option of permanent public cameras was discussed as an alternative to CCTV.
Page 230
29 MARCH 2011
That the City of Bayswater CCTV Report – February 2011 be received.
Council Discussion
The Council discussed the Security Watch Advisory Committee Minutes of 14 March 2011
and changed the Committee Discussion in relation to donation bins and amended the wording
to refer to sourcing alternate solutions for the disposal of rubbish located around donation
bins.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR SALLY PALMER MOVED, CR MIKE ANDERTON, JP SECONDED that the City
of Bayswater CCTV Report – February 2011 be received subject to the ‘Committee
Discussion’ being amended to include alternate solutions to the disposal of rubbish
where donation bins are located within the City.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Page 231
13.1.4
29 MARCH 2011
Graffiti Status Report – January 2011
Officer:
Director Technical Services
Application
To receive the in-house Graffiti Programme report for January 2011.
Background
Council at its Ordinary Meeting of 26 August 2003 resolved that the Director of Technical
Services be authorised to undertake the City’s graffiti removal programme utilising in-house
resources. The in-house Graffiti Programme finally commenced at the beginning of October
2004 and a monthly report was presented to the Security Watch Committee detailing the
reporting and removal of the graffiti.
In consideration of the continual growth of the programme also incorporating political, social
and educational components, as well as the importance of removing the graffiti vandalism at
the earliest juncture, the Senior Management Group considered it appropriate that the Security
Watch (reporting) element stay in that forum and the balance of the programme be transferred
onto the Technical Services Agenda. It is also recommended that the minutes of this report
then be included in the Security Watch Agenda as information only.
The Graffiti Programme Status Monthly Report will include details on the following:
1.
Monthly Graffiti Removal
2.
Trends in Graffiti Vandalism Targets
3.
Current Graffiti Issues.
Comment
Between 1 January and 31 January 2011, a period of approximately four weeks, 214 works
requests for graffiti removal have been actioned.
GRAFFITI
Commercial Properties Removed
(fences and shopfronts on boundary)
Residential Properties Removed
(fences)
Public Utilities Removed
(bus stops, power poles)
Public Utilities Not Removed
(inside fenced areas, path on Railway
property - WAWA etc)
City of Bayswater Removed
(buildings, fences, street furniture, bus stops)
TOTAL
AUG
2010
SEPT
2010
OCT
2010
NOV
2010
DEC
2010
JAN
2011
69
69
36
62
46
48
57
61
51
67
58
37
107
96
71
134
74
27
0
0
0
0
0
0
142
96
136
135
111
102
375
322
294
398
289
214
Page 232
29 MARCH 2011
Trends
This month there has been a decrease in graffiti vandalism (26% on the previous month).
Comparison of Graffiti Reports
January (%)
Commercial
Properties
Removed
Residential
Properties
Removed
Public Utilities
Removed
22.4%
47.7%
17.3%
0.0%
12.6%
Public Utilities
Inaccessable
City of
Bayswater
Removed
City of Bayswater infrastructure (47.7%) and commercial properties (22.4%) have dominated
the targets for graffiti vandals in the month of January, residential properties (17.3%) were
next worst hit, followed by public utilities (12.6%) with no public utilities inaccessible.
In January 2011, City of Bayswater staff cleaned graffiti off 27 public utility infrastructures
which was a decrease (44 events) on the previous month. The breakdown was as follows:
Main Roads WA
Western Power
Telstra
TOTAL
12
14
1
27
Policy Implications
Council’s Policy EG-P09 Graffiti Vandalism provides the direction for Council’s campaign
against the graffiti vandals. It includes many strategies to contain the graffiti vandal’s
activities from educational programmes to cleaning crews to providing a cash reward for
information which leads to a successful prosecution.
Page 233
29 MARCH 2011
The cost of the graffiti removal service in the past seven years and including this year to date
is as follows:
Budget Year
2003/2004
2004/2005
2005/2006
2006/2007
2007/2008
2008/2009
2009/2010
2010/2011
Budget
$138,000
$100,000
$ 80,000
$103,000
$150,000
$160,000
$170,000
$160,000
Expenditure
$ 138,000
$ 78,278
$ 99,307
$ 137,940
$ 165,723
$ 160,641
$ 169,827
$ 83,531
Percentage Spent
100%
78%
124%
134%
110%
100%
100%
52%
There have been 2,243 incidents of removed graffiti in 2010/2011 and the expenditure
correlates to $37.24 per incident of graffiti removal. The cost per incident has remained
below $40.
Voting Requirements
The Graffiti report indicates that the 5 year average has reduced by 16%, which is an excellent result.
Positive public comments have been received by Cr Sylvan Albert regarding the City's graffiti
response rate which is reflective of the City's commitment to reducing graffiti vandalism and the
success of various anti graffiti strategies implemented by the Commissioner of the Western Australian
Police.
It was brought to the Committee's attention that a local publication had been distributed to residents
of the City and that within this publication, the details for Rangers and Security was incorrect. The
City of Bayswater is not responsible for this publication, however Officers will contact the publisher to
advise the correct details for future publications.
At 12:51pm Cr Terry Kenyon, JP withdrew from the meeting.
At 12:54pm Cr Terry Kenyon, JP returned to the meeting.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR SALLY PALMER SECONDED that that the
Graffiti Programme Status Report for the period 1 January to 31 January 2011 be
received.
Page 234
13.1.5
29 MARCH 2011
Safety in our Suburbs
Officer:
Application
The City has recently participated in a documentary that was screened on Channel 9 titled
Safety in our Suburbs.
The component related to the City of Bayswater community security patrols was viewed by
the Committee.
The Committee agreed that the documentary was a positive and effective way to promote the
City's Services.
At the Security Watch Advisory Committee
At 1:07pm Cr Terry Kenyon, JP withdrew from the meeting and did not return.
Page 235
13.2
Local Emergency Management Committee - 14 March 2011
13.2.1
Emergency Management Exercise 2011 Update
Officer:
Emergency Management Project Officer
Refer:
Item 1.2 LEMC Meeting 06 December 2010
29 MARCH 2011
Application
To update the Local Emergency Management Committee of progress towards the
development of the 2011 City of Bayswater Emergency Management Exercise.
Background
The City of Bayswater has completed an organisation-wide Business Continuity Plan (BCP)
specifically for pandemics. This involved the identification of essential functions and services
that are required to continue during a pandemic and the development of action response plans
for each Council department in the event of 50% staff loss. The final plan provides the stepby-step actions to be taken during a pandemic for each department’s critical
functions/services.
The City of Bayswater and the City of Stirling share the hosting of the annual emergency
exercise on a yearly rotational basis for the West Metropolitan district. The City of Bayswater
is due to host the next Emergency Management Exercise in May 2011. This year’s exercise
will test the efficiency of the Business Continuity Plan (Pandemics) and will involve
identifying any gaps or weaknesses in the plan.
To develop the exercise, a working group consisting of the following members has been
established:
• Binh Luong, Senior Environmental Health Officer;
• Sandra Sewell, Emergency Management Project Officer;
• Mr Tony Green and LEMC Community representatives;
• Mr Ash Smith, Bayswater State Emergency Services;
• Beverley Bridgland, Manager Community Services; and
• Bob Phipps, City of Stirling.
Comment
The Emergency Management Exercise Working Group will meet on a regular basis to develop
the exercise. A desktop scenario that tests the BCP in a mock situation involving a pandemic
will be finalised. The first meeting took place on Wednesday 9 February 2011.Various
internal staff and external stakeholders will be invited to the exercise which is expected to be
held in the Embleton Room at the Civic Centre on 31 May 2011.
Policy Implications
State Emergency Management Committee (SEMC) Policy No. 2.5 requires the Local
Governments ensure that their arrangements are exercised annually. Exercises may be
undertaken in conjunction with other emergency management agencies or the local
government alone (Section 45).
Page 236
29 MARCH 2011
There will be minimal costs associated with the exercise as it will be undertaken and
developed “in-house”.
Voting Requirements
At the Local Emergency Management Advisory Committee Meeting:
Mr Tony Green commented that it was commendable that Mr Binh Luong was assisting the Emergency
Management Project Officer with the planning for the Emergency Exercise.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR SALLY PALMER SECONDED that that the report
titled 'Emergency Management Exercise 2011 Update' be received.
Page 237
13.2.2
29 MARCH 2011
Perth District Local Emergency Management Plan For The Provision Of
Welfare Support
Member:
Mr Joanne Bennett
Application
To advise Council of a draft plan specific to the City of Bayswater for the Perth District
Emergency Management Plan For The Provision Of Welfare Support.
Background
Ms Joanne Bennett a Local Emergency Management Committee (LEMC) who is employed
by the Department of Child Protection, has previously worked on a Welfare Support Plan with
assistance from former City of Bayswater Manager of Community Services Ms Carol
Wainwright. The plan known as the Perth District Emergency Management Plan For The
Provision Of Welfare Support is almost complete and the draft was presented to the
Committee for comment.
Comment
The plan is specific to the City of Bayswater and is a complimentary plan to the City of
Bayswater Local Emergency Management Arrangements.
A meeting has been arranged with a small group of LEMC members to check the plan for
terminology and editing before the final draft is submitted. It was suggested that names that
are listed in the plans may be better listed as job titles. Job titles do not change however the
people in those positions do change from time to time. It was also suggested that having a
phone specific for those positions would provide continuity in the event that the welfare plan
needs to be actioned.
There was also a suggestion that facilities be listed in the plan for further places such as
motels that may be used when a small number of people need evacuation, and do not require
the use of a whole planned evacuation centre. For example, it would not be at all practical to
cancel a booking for an aerobics class at the Morley Recreation Centre if the evacuation only
involves a relatively small group of people.
As there are no motels or caravan parks within the City of Bayswater it may be necessary to
look at places that are close to our border such as Belmont and the City of Swan to provide
emergency evacuation centres for small groups of people
Policy Implications
Nil
Nil
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR SALLY PALMER SECONDED that that
any amendments to the draft Perth District Local Emergency Management Plan For The
Provision Of Welfare Support be forwarded to Ms Bennett by 30 April 2011.
Page 238
13.2.3
29 MARCH 2011
Secondary Emergency Power Supply to Council Buildings
Officer:
Emergency Management Project Officer
Application
To advise Council of the status of the secondary power supply to the City's buildings.
Background
A feasibility study was undertaken by the former Coordinator Environmental Health Mr
Glenn Sargeson to provide electrical hard wiring to the Morley Recreation Centre so that a
generator may be plugged in during a power failure in the event of an emergency. This would
allow for the operation of air conditioning and refrigeration while the building is being used as
an emergency evacuation centre.
Comment
An update was given to the Committee members by Emergency Management Project Officer
Mrs Sandra Sewell regarding a secondary emergency power supply for the Morley Recreation
Centre. It has been previously identified that it is necessary to have an evacuation centre both
north and south of the Civic Centre that is hard wired to enable a generator to be plugged in.
The City will not be purchasing a generator but instead has an agreement with a hire company
to get a priority generator in the event of an emergency. Money has been allocated in the
current budget for this purpose. It has been ascertained that electrical quotations still need to
be done in order to complete this project. Electrical plans have been forwarded to the Manager
of Building Services Mr Joe Gomboc who will arrange the quotations.
The new Multi Purpose Centre in Maylands will also be wired this way during construction
and as such will be able to use refrigeration and air conditioning should the City lose power
during an emergency. This is of particular importance to vulnerable people such as the elderly
and those in poor health.
Discussion also took place regarding a secondary power source being made available for the
Civic Centre. Planning for the Emergency Exercise has identified that a loss of power to the
Civic Centre during an emergency would pose a significant issue.
Nil.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR ALAN RADFORD MOVED, CR SALLY PALMER SECONDED that the report
titled ' Secondary Emergency Power Supply to Council Buildings' be received.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Page 239
13.3
Business Reference Group - 14 March 2011
13.3.1
Outstanding Business
29 MARCH 2011
Application
To discuss any outstanding business.
Policy Implications
Nil
Nil
Voting Requirements
At the Business Reference Group Meeting:
Group Discussion
Mr Greg DaRui from the Bayswater Village Retail Traders Association raised the following issues :
•
Issue:
When will the Bayswater Town Centre Master Plan be done which will address some of the
following issues :
car parking; and
streetscape?
Response:
This will be included in the Draft 2011/2012 Budget for Council consideration, the outcome of
which will be known in early July 2011.
•
Issue:
Provision of signs to direct shoppers to the carpark on Whatley Crescent.
Response:
This is currently being arranged and will be installed as soon as possible.
•
Issue:
Lack of public toilets and parking.
Response:
This matter has been raised with the Public Transport Authority. The Mayor has also offered that
he is more than happy for a representative from Bayswater Village Retail Traders Association to
accompany him as a deputation to the next meeting he has with the Minister.
•
Issue:
Traffic calming near the ramp on Whatley Crescent.
Response:
This was considered during the 2010/2011 budget deliberations and deferred for reconsideration
in the 2011/2012 Budget deliberations.
Issue:
The provision of a footpath on a section of Whatley Crescent.
Response:
This was considered during the 2010/2011 budget deliberations however was not included due to
funding restraints. It will be revised and reconsidered in the 2011/2012 Budget.
•
Page 240
29 MARCH 2011
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
(GROUP/OFFICER’S RECOMMENDATION)
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR SALLY PALMER SECONDED that that the
report on outstanding business be noted.
Page 241
13.3.2
29 MARCH 2011
Deputation by Mr Steve Hunt, Chairperson, Autumn River Festival
Officer:
Director of Finance
Application
To provide the Committee with a status update on the Autumn River Festival.
Background
This year the event is in its 12th year. It attracts approximately 10,000 spectators who enjoy
the free activities at Riverside Gardens. There will be some 80 stall holders from both
commercial and community groups. The day is a fun-filled family event with live bands, face
painting, Bouncy Castles and roving entertainment. Another attraction is the “Artist on the
Walkpath” - an array of local artists who have sculptured art to fit into the surroundings.
This year the event will be held on Sunday, 3 April 2011.
Policy Implications
Nil
Nil
Voting Requirements
Group Discussion
Mr Hunt presented to the group the history of the Autumn River Festival. He further described in
detail the event, stressing that this is a community-based event. He encouraged business participation,
even though the festival is only 3 weeks away and also requested that businesses consider getting
involved in next year's event. An offer was made that if businesses were interested, their advertising
material could be inserted in showbags to be handed out at the event.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
deputation by Mr Steve Hunt be noted.
Page 242
13.3.3
29 MARCH 2011
Bayswater Village Retail Traders Association’s Report
Attachments: Minutes of 14 December 2010 Meeting
Officer:
Director of Finance
Application
To present for discussion the report of the Bayswater Village Retail Traders Association.
Background
The Bayswater Village Retail Traders Association’s representative, Mr Greg DaRui, gave a
brief overview of recent activities.
Comment
The Association’s last meeting was held on 14 December 2010 (refer Attachment 1).
The issue of Lead On management of the event was also discussed.
Policy Implications
Nil
Nil
Voting Requirements
Group Discussion
Mr DaRui advised of the trader group's concerns at the level of Council funding towards the street
festival, e.g. for the insurance, traffic management, advertising, etc. as well as expressing some doubt
as to whether the Bayswater Village Retail Traders Association would hold another street festival.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
report on the recent activities of the Bayswater Village Retail Traders Association be
received.
Page 243
13.3.4
29 MARCH 2011
Maylands Business Group’s Report
Officer:
Director of Finance
CR SYLVAN ALBERT DECLARED AN IMPARTIAL INTEREST
In accordance with Section 5.65 of the Local Government Act 1995, Cr Sylvan Albert
declared an impartial interest in this item as he is the Chairman of the Maylands Business
Association. Cr Albert withdrew from the meeting at 10:27pm.
Application
To present for discussion the report of the local Maylands Business Group.
Background
The Maylands Business Group’s representative, Mr Dominic Cuscuna, gave a brief overview
of recent activities.
Comment
At the time of preparing the Agenda, the latest minutes of the Maylands Business Group were
not available.
Policy Implications
Nil
Nil
Voting Requirements
Group Discussion
The issues of lack of parking and public toilets were raised. The Director of Finance advised that
these matters had been raised with the Public Transport Authority.
Mayor Kenyon also advised that he is more than happy for a representative from the Maylands
Business Group to accompany him as a deputation to the next meeting he has with the Minister.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR ALAN RADFORD MOVED, CR MIKE ANDERTON, JP SECONDED that the
report on the recent activities of the Maylands Business Group be received.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
At 10:28pm, Cr Albert returned to the meeting.
Page 244
13.3.5
29 MARCH 2011
Morley Business Group’s Report
Officer:
Director of Finance
Application
To present for discussion the report of the Morley Business Group.
Background
The Morley Business Group’s representative, Mr Mark Whitehouse, gave a brief overview of
recent activities.
Comment
At the time of preparing the Agenda, the latest minutes of the Morley Business Group were
not available.
Policy Implications
Nil
Nil
Voting Requirements
Group Discussion
Issues raised were :
•
Mr Mark Whitehouse and the City's representative making contact with businesses in Morley
•
The Community Safety and Crime Prevention Plan in the context of City of Bayswater security
patrols.
It was advised that the City's representative will make arrangements to meet with Mr Whitehouse and
start visiting Morley businesses.
On the issue of the Community Safety and Crime Prevention Plan, this will be discussed at the Council
Workshop in April.
The issue of the business data base was also raised.
It was advised that some six years ago, the City's Economic Development Officer partially completed a
data base of businesses within the district. This was carried out by door-knocking. (This data base is
still available although some of it could be out of date.)
As this process was very time-consuming, a decision was made to purchase a Yellow Pages data base
at a cost of $3,000 per annum which was more cost effective. This data base was maintained for some
three years. Monitoring revealed that the data base only received on average one or two hits per
week. A business decision was then made to discontinue this service on cost efficiency grounds.
It should also be noted that Council maintains a rates data base.
In the event of Council wishing to conduct a mail out, the practice is to either use its rates data base,
the old existing data base, or an agency business data base.
Page 245
29 MARCH 2011
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
report on the recent activities of the Morley Business Group be received.
Page 246
13.3.6
29 MARCH 2011
Industrial Business Group’s Report
Attachments: Minutes of the Meeting of 18 November 2009
Officer:
Director of Finance
Application
To present for discussion the report of the local Industrial Business Group.
Background
The Industrial Business Group’s representative, Mr Giuseppe Rechichi, gave a brief overview
of recent activities.
Comment
The minutes submitted by the Group are dated 18 November 2009 (refer Attachment 1). No
others were supplied by the Group.
Policy Implications
Nil.
Nil.
Voting Requirements
Group Discussion
•
Entry Statements in the Industrial Area
It was advised that the budget for entry statements in 2009/2010 was $10,000 and that it was all
spent on the major entry statement at the corner of King Street and Beechboro Road which
comprised roadworks, verge work, signage and gardening works.
This work was completed in February 2010.
•
Business Signage
It was advised that an audit of all business signage was completed in August 2010 and reported to
the Council in that month.
The matter of the removal of old signage was considered in the 2010/2011 Budget however it was
a low priority item and no funds were allocated for this project.
•
Lighting and Cameras in the Industrial Area
Following on from the Manager Rangers and Security's presentation to the Trader Group in
October 2010 on the proposed Community Safety and Crime Prevention Plan, he mentioned at the
meeting that the plan would make it easier for the City to get grant funding.
It should be noted that most grant funding normally requires a co-contribution towards a project
from another party be this Council or the business community, or both.
Page 247
29 MARCH 2011
Group Discussion
During the presentation it was requested that the business community provide input on the draft
Community Safety and Crime Prevention Plan. To date there has been no response to this
request.
Further, the Community Safety and Crime Prevention Plan is scheduled to be considered at a
Council workshop being held in April, the outcome of which will be taken to a full Council
meeting for consideration.
•
Administrative support for the Industrial Group
Comment was made that the industrial group has reduced from about ten members to two, mainly
due to the lack of Council support.
It should be noted that the purpose of the common interest group set up (in the case of the
Industrial Group- the Industrial Group) was to foster closer ties to the businesses in the districts,
in order to assist in the sharing of ideas, cross trading and to provide information to Council to
enable an understanding of the issues in the relevant areas of the City.
Council has also encouraged the groups to incorporate.
As with all the groups, Council assistance initially was in the form of secretarial support and
provision of a meeting place to enable the establishment of the group, then for the group to be
fully self-supporting.
The Industrial Group had been advised of this on many occasions.
It is really up to your Committee to ensure the group works effectively.
•
Business Data Base
Some six years ago, the City's Economic Development Officer partially completed a data base of
businesses within the district. This was carried out by door-knocking. (This data base is still
available although some of it could be out of date.)
As this process was very time-consuming, a decision was made to purchase a Yellow Pages data
base at a cost of $3,000 per annum which was more cost effective. This data base was maintained
for some three years. Monitoring revealed that the data base only received on average one or two
hits per week. A business decision was then made to discontinue this service on cost efficiency
grounds.
It should also be noted that Council maintains a rates data base.
In the event of Council wishing to conduct a mail out, the practice is to either use its rates data
base, the old existing data base, or an agency business data base.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
report on recent activities of the Industrial Business Group be received.
Page 248
13.3.7
29 MARCH 2011
Central Eastern Business Association’s Report
Officer:
Director of Finance
In accordance with Section 5.65 of the Local Government Act 1995, Cr Mike Anderton, JP
declared an impartial interest in this item as he is a member of CEBA. Cr Anderton, JP
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY, DECLARED AN IMPARTIAL INTEREST
In accordance with Section 5.65 of the Local Government Act 1995, Cr Graham Pittaway
declared an impartial interest in this item as he a Life Member of the Morley Business
Association now known as CEBA. Cr Pittaway remained in the room during voting on this
item.
Application
To present for discussion the report of the Central Eastern Business Association.
Background
The Central Eastern Business Association’s representative, Mr Peter Gardner, gave a brief
overview of recent activities.
Policy Implications
Nil.
Nil.
Voting Requirements
Group Discussion
Mr Gardner advised that :
1.
2.
this year is CEBA'S 40TH Anniversary; and
the Small Business Awards will be held on Friday 29 July 2011.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR TERRY KENYON, JP MOVED, CR ALAN RADFORD SECONDED that the
report on the recent activities of the Central Eastern Business Association be received.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Page 249
29 MARCH 2011
13.4
Local Govt Community Housing Program (LGCHP) Tenants Committee –
16 March 2011
13.4.1
Outstanding Business Items Report
Officer:
Application
To present information from the Outstanding Business Items from the previous Local
Government Community Housing Program (LGCHP) Management Committee meeting held
on the 16 September 2010.
Background
Outstanding business items are presented to Council to ensure that all recommendations or
discussions are completed.
Any changes or upgrades for this joint venture program must be forwarded to the Department
of Housing for ratification.
Comment
The current outstanding items are presented from the Local Government
Community Housing Program (LGCHP) Management Committee meeting held on
16 September 2010, are as follows:
1.
The Manager, Gardens and Landscaping has presented the following details to
refurbish the front gardens as a water wise garden at the Francis Street, Bayswater
complex:
• Site preparation
$ 6,650
• Project construction $ 6,350
• Total costs
$13,000
2.
The Officer liaised with the Department of Housing and the following information was
requested:
The garden information presented at this meeting and endorsed by Council will be
presented to the Department of Housing for approval. A Financial Statement
(providing Surplus amounts) must be included with this request for the 2011 – 2012
Community Housing Program budget.
Policy Implications
CS-PO5
Income (rent) received from the tenants’ is used to fund all costs for this program
Voting Requirements
Page 250
29 MARCH 2011
That:
1.
The information presented in the Outstanding Business Items Report be received.
2.
The request to refurbish the front gardens at the Francis Street complex be forwarded
to the Department of Housing for ratification.
At the Local Govt Community Housing Program (LGCHP) Management Committee Meeting:
The Committee discussed the partnership arrangement with the Department of Housing and the
requirement to ratify expenditure of surplus funds for the refurbishment of the gardens of six (6) units
located at Francis Street, Bayswater.
The Committee considered this item and changed the officer recommendation to include a third point
to seek ratification from the Department of Housing for the refurbishment of the gardens of six (6)
units located at Francis Street, Bayswater.
3.
Upon ratification from the Department of Housing, Council consider the allocation of $13,000
from account number SS111115, Community Housing Program, for the refurbishment of the
garden for six (6) units located at Francis Street, Bayswater.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
1.
The information presented in the Outstanding Business Items Report be received.
2.
The request to refurbish the front gardens at the Francis Street complex be
forwarded to the Department of Housing for ratification.
3.
Upon ratification from the Department of Housing, Council consider the allocation
of $13,000 from account number SS111115, Community Housing Program, for the
refurbishment of the garden for six (6) units located at Francis Street, Bayswater.
Page 251
13.4.2
29 MARCH 2011
Local Government Community Housing Program Status Report
Attachments: No. 1 - File Notes from Building Services
No. 2 - 2011 Building and General Maintenance Schedule
No. 3 - Financial Statement (Confidential Attachment)
Officer:
Application
To provide a status report on the activities of the Community Housing Program (CHP) for the
period September 2010 to February 2011.
Background
All areas of the Community Housing program have been brought to the attention of this
Committee for discussion and recommendation.
Comment
1
Tenancies
1.1
Income Assessment and Rent Reviews
Income Assessment and Rent Reviews were completed in February 2011. The Australian
Taxation Office Market Value Figures for a two bedroom unit is $440.63 per fortnight. This
amount is 75% of the market rent and used in the Rent Setting Formula prepared by the
Community Housing Coalition of WA (CHCWA) to meet the requirements of the Department
of Housing Rent Setting Policy. Rent is calculated by using 25% of a tenant’s total income.
Tenants have been informed of their new rent payments, reminded to update their direct debit
payment amounts and to complete a new Commonwealth Rent Assistance Application Form
at Centrelink. This review has been conducted for all the tenants at Francis and Haddrill
Street units and the next Income Assessment and Rent Review will take place in February
2012 or when a tenant’s income changes.
1.2
Breaches
There were no breaches during this period.
1.3
Termination of Tenancies
There was one termination of Tenancy during this period.
1.4
Changes in occupation of properties
There was one change in occupation of properties during this period.
1.5
Current Wait List and new applications
There are four applicants on the wait list. Two applicants have been interviewed, assessed and
placed on the wait list. Two applicants are being processed during March 2011. The
Department of Housing and the Salvation Army will assist with providing contact details for
new applicants when required.
Page 252
29 MARCH 2011
1.6
Department of Housing
Property Inspection Reports for November 2010 were completed by the Building Services
Officer. A copy of the property inspections reports were sent to the Department of Housing
on 15 November 2010.
A copy of the Financial Report was completed by a Financial Services Officer and sent to the
Department of Housing as part of the agreement for this Joint Venture Housing Program.
2.
Property and Maintenance
2.1
Property inspections
Property inspections were carried out in November 2010 by a Building Services Officer and
the Senior Community Development Officer.
2.2
Tenant Maintenance requests
Council staff action all maintenance requests from the tenants within a week and priority
requests were completed within 24 hours. (Refer to Attachment No. 1).
2011 Annual maintenance schedule has been included (refer to Attachment No. 2) and will be
completed as listed.
• The gutters are cleaned and the removal of bore stains from the buildings is completed
when necessary.
2.3
Garden maintenance
A two year garden contract is in place with a local company from 1 November 2010 to 31
October 2012. Council procurement process was undertaken in completing this task.
3
Financial Status
3.1
Budget Report
Expenses associated with the Community Housing Program relate to the running of the
program and general maintenance works.
All maintenance issues reported
during this period have been completed. A Financial Statement of Operating Income
and Expenditure has been completed by a Financial Services Officer
(refer to Confidential Attachment No. 3).
3.2
Rental Arrears
There are no rental arrears to report for this period. Most tenants have selected direct debit
payments with Centrelink or their bank.
Policy Implications
CS-PO6.
Rental income is used for the financial implications related to all costs for the Community
Housing Program including gardening services and general maintenance requests received
from the tenants.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
Local Government Community Housing Program Status Report for September 2010 to
February 2011 be received.
Page 253
29 MARCH 2011
13.5
Golf Courses Management – 21 March 2011
13.5.1
Maylands Peninsula Golf Course Status Report
Attachment:
Maylands Peninsula Public Golf Course Report
(Confidential)
Officer:
Application
To provide the Management Committee with a status report for the Maylands Peninsula
Public Golf Course.
Background
Maylands Peninsula Public Golf Course is managed on behalf of the City of Bayswater by
Golf Oracle by Management Agreement for a five (5) year period from September 2010.
Comment
The Golf Course Manager, Mr Nigel Williams of Golf Oracle, has prepared a confidential
report (Refer to Attachment No. 1) detailing the Golf Courses financial performance and a
status report on some of the Capital works undertaken and works proposed by Golf Oracle.
Policy Implications
Nil.
Nil.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
status report for Maylands Peninsula Public Golf Course to the Golf Course
Management Committee 21 March 2011 be received.
Page 254
13.5.2
29 MARCH 2011
Embleton Public Golf Course Status Report
Attachments: Embleton Public Golf Course Report (Confidential)
Officer:
Application
To provide the Management Committee with a status report of the operating budget and
attendance figures for the Embleton Public Golf Course.
Background
Embleton Public Golf Course is managed on behalf of the City of Bayswater by Golf Oracle
by Management Agreement for a five (5) year period from September 2010.
Comment
The Golf Course Manager, Mr Nigel Williams of Golf Oracle, has prepared a confidential
report (refer to Confidential Attachment No. 1) detailing the Golf Courses financial
performance and a status report on attendances and comparisons to previous years.
Policy Implications
Nil.
Nil.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
status report for Embleton Public Golf Course to the Golf Course Management
Committee 21 March 2011 be received.
Page 255
13.5.3
29 MARCH 2011
City of Bayswater Charity Golf Day 2011
Officer:
Application
To consider the management of the City of Bayswater 2011 Charity Golf Day
Background
The City’s annual Charity Golf Day is held in October at the Maylands Peninsula Public Golf
Course. The event raises funds for the St Vincent de Paul Society and Salvation Army. All
generated surplus from the event is divided between the two beneficiaries.
The table below provides a list of available sponsorship opportunities.
Sponsorship
Post Match Player Meal
Hole In One Competition
Player Golf Carts
Golf Balls (Logo)
Player Caps
Player Information Bags
Pre Game Snacks
Auctioneer
Hole Sponsorship x 16
Total Available Sponsorship
Value Inc GST
$4,400
$3,850
$3,850
$1,500
$1,000 plus 120 branded caps
$1,000 plus 120 branded bags
In Kind Donation for 1 x Hole Sponsored
Time in Kind for 1 x Hole Sponsored
$ 500 per Hole
$23,600
In addition to the above sponsorship opportunity income is raised through player entries
amounting to 120 Players @ $110 per Player = $13,200 potential income.
A post event auction and raffle is held during the player meal presenting an opportunity to
auction donated or discounted goods and services from businesses. The auction and raffle
raise on average $2,000.
Comment
The event is managed and administered by officers in conjunction with Golf Oracle. The
current event management is effective in facilitating the on course competition, pre and post
event catering and player administration, however it is considered that the current
management arrangement may not be maximising all opportunities in approaching and
securing donations from the business community.
In order to maximise the fund raising opportunities of the event the Golf Course Management
Committee may wish to consider the following options:
Page 256
29 MARCH 2011
Option 1
Establish a Charity Golf Course Sub Committee to provide a broad depth of skills and
contacts to deliver a successful event. Suggested format for the committee would be:
2 x City of Bayswater Councillors
Manager Maylands Peninsula Golf Course (Golf Oracle)
City of Bayswater Events Officer
Representation from Central Eastern Business Association (CEBA)
The sub committee may wish to meet monthly or as required for the six months pre-ceding the
October event.
Option 1 provides the advantage of combined skills and improved access to the business
community through CEBA. Any disadvantage may be the additional time commitment
required to convene and attend meetings.
Option 2
Officers continue to manage the event in conjunction with Golf Oracle.
Option 2 maintains the current arrangement and may not be effective in engaging with the
business community to maximise the sponsorship and fund raising potential of the event.
Option 3
Engage the services of a professional event management company to manage the event on
behalf of the City.
Option 3 should ensure a successful event outcome and increase the fundraising potential of
the event, however a management fee would be payable to any external management
organisation and may reduce the overall net surplus of the event.
Officers recommend Option 1 - to establish a Charity Golf Course Sub Committee.
The Golf Course Management Committee has not been granted delegated authority to make
decisions on behalf of Council. Any recommendations at the Golf Course Management
Committee will be referred to the next Ordinary Council Meeting for consideration.
Policy Implications
Nil.
Nil.
Voting Requirements
Page 257
29 MARCH 2011
That:
1.
The Golf Course Management Committee form a City of Bayswater Charity Golf Day
Sub Committee to comprise of:
a) Two (2) City of Bayswater Councillors;
b) Manager Maylands Peninsula Golf Course (Golf Oracle);
c) City of Bayswater Events Officer; and
d) Representative from Central Eastern Business Association (CEBA).
At the Golf Course Management Committee Meeting:
The Committee considered this item and changed the officer recommendation to allow one Councillor
on the City of Bayswater Charity Golf Day Sub Committee. The recommendation was amended as
follows:
The Committee recommendation that the Golf Course Management Committee form a City of
Bayswater Charity Golf Day Sub Committee to comprise of:
a)
b)
c)
d)
One (1) City of Bayswater Councillors;
Manager Maylands Peninsula Golf Course (Golf Oracle);
City of Bayswater Events Officer; and
Representative from Central Eastern Business Association (CEBA).
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR SALLY PALMER SECONDED that the Golf
Course Management Committee form a City of Bayswater Charity Golf Day Sub
Committee to comprise of:
a) One (1) City of Bayswater Councillors;
b) Manager Maylands Peninsula Golf Course (Golf Oracle);
c) City of Bayswater Events Officer; and
d) Representative from Central Eastern Business Association (CEBA).
Page 258
13.5.4
29 MARCH 2011
Sponsorship for Pro Am Golf Tournament
Officer:
Application
To consider a sponsorship request from Golf Oracle to support the third annual Pro - Am Golf
Tournament at the Maylands Peninsula Public Golf Course on 5 May 2011.
Background
Maylands Peninsula Golf Course has promoted two successful Pro - Am Golf Tournaments
on 13 May 2009 and 5 May 2010. The 2010 event was awarded Professional Golf Association
(PGA) Pro - Am Tournament of the Year.
In previous years the City of Bayswater has sponsored the event to the value of $7,500.
Stratco is the Primary Sponsor for the 2011 event.
Golf Oracle promote the event with the support of the City to raise the profile of both the
Maylands Peninsula Golf Course and the City of Bayswater.
Golf Oracle do not gain financially from the event reporting a net loss of $9,000 for the 2009
event and $3,000 for the 2010 event.
Comment
Golf Oracle request that Council consider the following options:
1.
2.
3.
Sponsor the 2011 event to the value of $7,500
Sponsor the 2011 event to the value of $2,500 as a Gold Sponsor.
Sponsor benefits include: Signage rights to a tee and green, Logo on sponsors
acknowledgement board, 6 x player entry, post match dinner and drinks.
Sponsor the 2011 event to the value of $1,500 as a Silver Sponsor
Sponsor benefits include: Signage rights to a Tee and green, Logo on sponsors
acknowledgement board, 3 x Player entry, post match dinner and drinks.
Currently no budget allocation exists to accommodate any sponsorship request to support the
2011 event. Council allocated a budget of $30,000 for Skatepark Events (budget code
2081054317) in the 2010/2011 budget and skate events have been delivered $10,000 under
budget. Accordingly surplus funds could be utilised to sponsor the 2011 Pro-Am
Tournament.
Council may:
• Utilise surplus funds from the Skatepark Events budget - 2081054317.
• Refer the sponsorship request to Council via the donations process.
• Recommend not to sponsor the Pro Am Tournament in 2011.
Policy Implications
Nil.
Page 259
29 MARCH 2011
Currently no budget allocation exists to accommodate the sponsorship request. The surplus of
$10,000 from the Skatepark Event budget 2081054317 could be utilised.
Voting Requirements
That Council utilise surplus funds from the Skatepark Events Budget 2081054317 to support
the 2011 Maylands Peninsula Golf Course Pro - Am Tournament to the value of $7,500.
At the Golf Course Management Committee Meeting:
The Committee is in support of the Pro-Am Tournament to the value of $7,500, however the
recommendation was amended to remove reference to the events budget account.
The recommendation was amended as follows:
The Committee recommendation that Council support the 2011 Maylands Peninsula Pro-Am
Tournament to the value of $7,500.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
support the 2011 Maylands Peninsula Pro-Am Tournament to the value of $7,500.
Page 260
13.5.5
29 MARCH 2011
Proposed Driving Range Upgrade - Maylands Peninsula Golf Course
Attachments: No. 1 - Letter from Golf Course Operator
No. 2 - Proposed Facility Site
No. 3 - Proposed Structure
Officer:
Application
To allow Committee consideration of a proposal from the Golf Course Operator to upgrade
the driving range at the Maylands Peninsula Golf Course.
Background
Correspondence has been received from the Golf Course Operator (Attachment 1) seeking
Council support for the construction of a shelter and artificial turf tees at the driving range at
the Maylands Peninsula Golf Course.
As Committee members may be aware, the popularity of the driving range at the Maylands
Peninsula Golf Course has increased steadily over the last few years. In order to further
enhance this popularity and to provide more suitable conditions for all weather use of the
driving range, the current operator proposes to construct a shelter on the driving range.
The roofed shelter would provide protection from the elements and would incorporate an
artificial turf tee area to facilitate greater usage of the driving range.
The Golf Course operator has advised that the total project would cost in the order of $77,000
and a Council contribution of $27,000 towards the project is being sought. Attachment 2
shows the proposed site of the facility and Attachment 3 details the proposed structure.
Comment
Increased utilisation of the driving range at Maylands Peninsula Golf Course has benefits for
both the operator and Council as it increases the income stream to both parties. The potential
income increase for Council needs to be balanced, however, against potential maintenance
cost increases associated with greater utilisation of the facility. As numbers increase at the
driving range, the maintenance of a grass tee off area will become more and more of an issue
as recovery times for the grass would be limited.
The introduction of the proposed facility with artificial turf tee areas would take the pressure
off the remaining grassed tee area to a large degree.
To facilitate the construction of the shelter and artificial turf area, formal planning approval
from the City and the Swan River Trust would be necessary.
Policy Implications
Nil.
Page 261
29 MARCH 2011
As detailed in the report, a contribution of $27,000 towards the project is being sought from
Council. Given the total project cost, the potential for greater utilisation (and hence income)
and reduced maintenance costs, the required Council contribution is considered to represent
good value to the Council.
With respect to the provision of the required funds, it is highly likely that the necessary
approval processes will take a minimum of three months and therefore, the Council
contribution would not be required until the 2011/2012 financial year.
Voting Requirements
ABSOLUTE MAJORITY REQUIRED.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
1.
Support in principle the provision of a shelter and artificial turf area at the
Maylands Peninsula Golf Course driving range subject to the attainment of
relevant approvals from the City of Bayswater and Swan River Trust.
2.
Allocate $27,000 on its 2011/2012 Budget as a contribution towards a shelter and
artificial turf tee area at the driving range.
Page 262
13.5.6
29 MARCH 2011
Proposed Hard Stand Areas - Maylands Peninsula Golf
Attachments: Proposed Hardstand Areas
Officer:
Application
To allow Committee consideration of a proposal to provide formal hard stand areas for golf
cart access adjacent to the tavern area and for material deliveries adjacent to the Greenkeepers
shed at the Maylands Peninsula Golf Course.
Background
Over time, the City's operational staff at the Maylands Peninsula Golf Course have expressed
concerns in relation to the maintenance of grassed areas that are regularly used by golf carts.
In order to overcome the maintenance problems being experienced in the area between the
cart shed and the pathway system, it is proposed to provide a hard stand (concrete) area for the
area detailed above.
In addition, the Council's Greenkeeper has experienced a need for a concrete hardstand area
near the Greenkeepers shed for the storage of sand.
Comment
It is proposed to provide hardstand areas in the locations detailed above as shown on
(Attachment 1).
Policy Implications
Nil.
The cost of providing hardstand for the two areas identified is approximately $6,000. Council
allocated $15,000 for removal of typha from the wetland adjacent to the 5th green and this
work has been undertaken under budget. Accordingly, the remaining surplus funds can be
utilised for the provision of the hardstand areas.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
utilise surplus funds from the removal of typha from the wetland on the 5th Green for
the provision of concrete hardstand areas adjacent to the tavern and the Greenkeepers
shed at the Maylands Peninsula Golf Course.
Page 263
13.5.7
29 MARCH 2011
Capital Project: Raising of 5th Green and Fairway - Maylands Peninsula
Golf Course
Attachments: Proposed Area of Fill
Officer:
Application
To allow Committee consideration in relation to the proposed works to raise the 5th Green and
Fairway at Maylands Peninsula Golf Course (MPGC).
Background
Funds have been included in Council's current 2010/2011 budget to facilitate improvements to
the fifth green and fairway at MPGC. This project has been under consideration for a number
of years and involves lifting the lower part of the 5th green and a portion of the fairway. The
proposed works would alleviate seasonal flooding of the area which can lead to damage to the
fairway from golf carts.
It would appear that the fairway on the 5th green was not constructed to the same standard as
the rest of the course and the soil profile and root zone of the turf are poor.
Comment
As detailed above, funds ($40,000) have been included in Council's current budget for
improvements on the 5th green and fairway. Investigations have been undertaken and the
proposed area of fill is detailed on Attachment 1.
A minor retaining wall between the green and the adjacent lake would also be incorporated.
The construction phase of this project is likely to take in the order of seven to ten days. It
should be noted however, that due to the returfing requirements of the project, it is envisaged
that the 5th hole would need to be out of action for a period of approximately six weeks.
In brief discussion with the golf course operator, he has expressed concern in relation to the
fifth hole being out of operation for the envisaged timeframe and this is understandable, given
the disruption to the facility as an 18 hole golf course and associated loss of income for the
operator and Council.
As mentioned above, the proposed works are intended to improve the durability of the course
during wetter periods and the subject works have been discussed from as far back as 2006 and
possibly earlier. Notwithstanding problems that have occurred in this area due to inundation,
it should be noted that during the drier winter last year, the problem was not as prominent.
The following options would appear to be available;
Option 1:
Proceed with the works as proposed.
As detailed, this would cause significant disruption to operations in the
short term, however, long term operations should be improved and the
necessity of any course closure associated with the 5th green reduced.
Option 2:
Not proceed with the proposed works. This option would not result in
the considerable disruption to course operations however, there will be
ongoing disruptions associated with inundation and potentially the need
to restrict access to this part of the course from time to time.
Page 264
29 MARCH 2011
Given the concerns detailed above, it may be appropriate to defer the proposed works on the
5th green and reallocate the budgeted funds. Considering both the Maylands and Embleton
Golf Courses, limited work has been done in relation to the replacement of aging reticulation
systems. As a result, the irrigation systems are in need of constant maintenance, are not
efficient and in a number of cases, do not provide even coverage to the relevant turf areas.
Accordingly, it may be more appropriate to utilise the budgeted funds for reticulation
upgrades at Maylands Golf Course.
Policy Implications
Nil.
As detailed in the report.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
not undertake works at the Maylands Peninsula Golf Course (MPGC) to raise a portion
of the 5th green and fairway at this stage, and utilise the available funds for reticulation
upgrades at the course.
Page 265
13.5.8
29 MARCH 2011
Request for Reimbursement
Application
Golf Oracle has requested the reimbursement of $7012.27 for the replacement of a Gas Fan
Forced Industrial Oven.
Background
The current oven failed and immediate replacement was required to serve booked functions.
Golf Oracle are aware that the City should be notified in advance and approve asset
replacement.
As detailed in the report.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
1.
The reimbursement to Golf Oracle of $7,012.27 for the replacement gas oven be
approved.
2.
All future asset replacement requests are directed through the City.
Page 266
29 MARCH 2011
13.6
Heritage Development Advisory Committee
13.6.1
Heritage Grant Application
Location:
Bardon House - Lot 84, No. 17 View Street, Maylands
No. 2 – Supporting Information Indicating Areas Requiring
Maintenance Work
No. 3 - Quotations (Confidential Attachment)
File No:
VIE-4/17
Applicant:
Debra Flower
Owner:
Debra Flower
Officer:
CONFIDENTIAL ATTACHMENTS
Application
A heritage fund application dated 4 February 2011 and additional information
have been received for brick tuckpointing on a heritage-listed property at Lot 84, No.17 View
Street, Maylands. The applicant has requested a maximum contribution of $1,200 from the
City. Council consideration is required as the applicant has applied for funding assistance
through the City’s Heritage Incentive Scheme.
Tuckpointing is the practice of applying coloured mortar to the grouted areas on brick walls in
order to create a fine lined appearance. The practice of tuckpointing was common in the
nineteenth and early twentieth centuries and is consistent with the architectural style of
Bardon House.
Background
Residential R30
Use Class:
Lot Area:
507m²
Existing Land Use:
Single House
Residential
Tuck pointing of existing brickwork
The subject site is a 'Classification 2' property on the City’s Municipal Heritage Inventory
(MHI), and is included on the City of Bayswater Scheme List of Heritage Places. The building
is described (in part) in the MHI as follows:
“An imposing single storey house of brick with a tiled hip roof, return verandahs and a small
portico over the entry steps. It has triple banked casement windows grouped in banks of three.
The verandah is simply detailed with elegant post brackets…
Historical Notes: A good example of war time suburban settlement with high aesthetic value.
The land was bought by F W Bardon, a former president of the Shire of Perth, in 1912.The
house was valued at 132 pound 10 shillings.
Page 267
29 MARCH 2011
The land remained in the Bardon family from the time of its construction until 2003. The
house is authentic and has had little remodelling. Bardon Park is named after this property
and its occupants.”
The northeast grounds of the subject site have been subdivided into residential lots since 2003.
The current landowner has obtained development approvals in 2004 and 2009 for carport and
front boundary fence additions and renovations respectively. The property is currently being
advertised for sale.
Council adopted the Heritage Fund Policy at its meeting on 24 October 2006. The City has set
aside funds with the intention that the funds will be used for the maintenance and
improvement of heritage listed buildings.
The abovementioned policy offers funding for residential and non-residential properties up to
the value of $4,000 per property, but not exceeding 50 percent of the total cost of approved
works (excluding GST). The City’s 2010-11 Budget allocated $60,000 for the Heritage
Incentive Scheme. There is currently $37,350 remaining unallocated in the budget.
Comment
The applicant has requested that the City contribute funding of $1,200 for the work quoted for
a total up to $2,400 (excluding GST). The applicant has provided two (2) quotations for the
proposed work. One quotation values that works at $1,600 (excluding GST) and the other at
$2,400 (excluding GST). The applicant has indicated their preference for the higher of the two
quotations. As per the ‘Heritage Grant Policy’, the City can only grant 50 percent of the cost
of works which is $1,200. A copy of the two (2) quotes for the tuck pointing is attached
(Refer to Confidential Attachment No.3).
The proposed tuckpointing work to the exterior of the building is considered to amount to
restoration work, which is permitted to be eligible for a grant subsidy in accordance with the
City's policy. It is considered that it will improve the external appearance of the building
without taking away its original elements. The proposed brick tuckpointing work is
considered to be consistent with the style of the existing building. The grant request is
recommended for in principle approval.
Unauthorised Carport Door
A site inspection undertaken by the City’s Planning Officer has indicated that the existing
carport structure approved by Council at its ordinary meeting of 14 December 2004 has been
fitted with a predominately solid awning door. The door was not indicated on the approved
plans. It is considered that the door is not consistent with the heritage fabric of the building.
The City requests that Council requests that landowner to remove the unauthorised carport
door within 28 days of its determination. It is considered that the release of funds to undertake
the proposed works should be withheld until the matter is satisfactorily resolved. The
landowner should also be advised to fully disclose the requirement to comply with the terms
of the planning approval issued by Council on 14 December 2004 to any potential purchasers
of the property. Should the carport door not be removed the City may request Council to
initiate legal action.
Summary
The applicant has requested that the City contribute funding of $1,200 to help complete the
maintenance
works
quoted
for
a
total
of
$2,400
(excluding
GST).
Page 268
29 MARCH 2011
A maximum grant of $1,200 (50 percent of cost of works excluding GST) is considered to
comply with the City’s ‘Heritage Fund Policy’ No. TP-P 6.3 and would serve to enhance an
important heritage listed building. It is recommended that the Council grant up to $1,200
towards the works.
Policy Implications
The expenditure of the Heritage Incentive Scheme is based on the provisions of the ‘Heritage
Fund Policy’ No. TP-P 6.3. Clause 2 (a) of the Policy states the following:
“The following works are eligible for funding:
a)
b)
The painting or repainting of appropriate surfaces on the outside of the building. This
does not include painting over previously unpainted exposed brickwork or other
materials;
Appropriate restoration works, building conservation works, veranda reconstruction,
repair of walls or windows and the improvement of roof drainage…”.
These elements of the funding request are considered to comply with the City’s ‘Heritage
Fund Policy’ No. TP-P 6.3.
The City’s 2010-11 budget contains $60,000 for the Heritage Incentive Scheme. To date, four
(4) applications for $4,000 (No.140 Eighth Avenue, Maylands), $3,680 (No.6 Hamilton
Street, Bayswater) $2,900 (No. 35 Eighth Avenue Maylands), $1,300 (5/89 Whatley Crescent)
have been approved by the City for heritage funding in the 2010-11 budget period. Three (3)
applications also remain outstanding for works approved by Council in the 2009-10 financial
year totalling $10,770.
A total of $37,350 is therefore available in the current budget for the Heritage Incentive
Scheme. The City has received a request for heritage funding from the owner of the subject
property to the maximum value of $1,200. The applicant obtained two quotes for the subject
works with the lowest quote being $1,600 (excluding GST). The applicant has indicated that
they would prefer the works to be undertaken in accordance with the more expensive quote of
$2,400 (excluding GST). The requested contribution from the City is 50 percent of the more
expensive quoted works, which is in accordance with the City’s policy. The City is able to
grant a maximum of $1,200 towards works.
Voting Requirements
That:
1.
Council approve the allocation of funding from the 2010-11 Heritage Incentive Scheme
for the tuckpointing works to the heritage listed building at Lot 84,
No. 17 View Street, Maylands.
2.
That Council request the landowners to either remove the unauthorised carport door
within 28 days of its determination.
Page 269
29 MARCH 2011
At the Heritage Development Advisory Committee Meeting:
The Committee considered the officer's recommendation and proposed that Condition 2 be reworded
as follows:
2.
That Council request the landowners to either remove the unauthorised carport door within
28 days of its determination or make an application to the City.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
1.
Council approve the allocation of funding from the 2010-11 Heritage Incentive
Scheme for the tuckpointing works to the heritage listed building at Lot 84,
No. 17 View Street, Maylands.
2.
That Council request the landowners to either remove the unauthorised carport
door within 28 days of its determination or make an application to the City.
Page 270
29 MARCH 2011
At 5:37pm, Cr Sally Palmer arrived at the meeting.
13.6.2
Proposed Two (2) Patio Additions
Location:
Lot 501, No. 10A Mitchell Street, Mount Lawley
File No:
DA11-0013
Applicant:
Great Aussie Patios
Owner:
Andrew Hall and Kristina Ferraz
Officer:
Application
MRS Form 1 and plans dated 1 January 2011 and revised plans dated 3 February 2011 have
been received for two (2) proposed patio additions to the existing dwelling at Lot 501,
No. 10A Mitchell Street, Mount Lawley.
The proposal comprises one patio on the east side of the property and one patio on the west
side of the property.
Council consideration is required as the subject property is located in a Character Protection
Area (Mount Lawley). The property is not listed on the City’s Municipal Heritage Inventory
(MHI).
Background
Residential R20
Use Class:
Single House - ‘P’
Lot Area:
506m²
Existing Land Use:
Single House
Residential
Two (2) Patio Additions
SCHEME PROVISIONS
Setbacks
Open Space
* denotes non-objection
West
East
North
REQUIRED
PROVIDED
1.5 m
1.5 m
1m
1 m*
1 m*
12 m
50 %
58 %
Page 271
29 MARCH 2011
Comment
Character Protection Area
The subject property is situated in the City’s Character Protection Area (CPA) No. 3. The
CPA guidelines are to assist owners and developers with the design of alterations, additions or
development in areas assessed as having particular character significance. The guidelines are
intended to ensure that development is ‘sympathetic to the local historic character’. An
assessment against the City’s CPA guidelines is provided below.
Plan Form
The proposal is consistent with the rectangular plan form of the existing dwelling and is
aligned parallel to the street.
Walls
Both patios are open on all sides, except to the extent where they abut existing walls. No new
walls are proposed as part of this application.
Roof Form
The patio on the west side of the lot is a hipend patio. The patio on the east side of the lot is a
pyramidal patio. Both patios are proposed to have roof pitches of 22 degrees. While the
proposed roof pitch is less than the 25 to 30 degrees stipulated in the CPA guidelines, this is
not considered to have a significant effect on the character of the dwelling. Furthermore, the
patios are not visible from the street and are therefore not considered to unduly impact on the
streetscape. The design incorporates zinc coloured roofing, which is consistent with the
existing dwelling and is consistent with the CPA guidelines.
Openings
No new openings are proposed as part of the application. Both patios are open and therefore,
the existing openings (windows and doors) are not affected.
Garages
The proposal does not make provision for any garage or carport.
Fencing
The proposal does not make provision for any new or additional front fencing.
Colours
The applicant has indicated that posts and framework for the proposed patios will be
‘surfmist’ in colour. This colour is considered consistent with the finishes on the existing
dwelling and is considered to complement the dwelling.
Compliance with the Scheme and R Code Requirements
Assessment of the application indicates that the proposed development complies with the
acceptable development provisions of the City’s Town Planning Scheme No. 24 (TPS 24) and
policies, and Residential Design Codes (R Codes) with the exception of variations to
boundary setbacks.
Boundary Setbacks
Both patios are measure 2.5 metres in height and both adjoin an existing wall of the dwelling.
The total wall length on the west side, including the patio, is proposed to be 28 metres. The
total wall length on the east side, including the patio, is proposed to be 15.5 metres. Under the
provisions of the R Codes, structures greater than nine (9) metres in length require a setback
of 1.5 metres. The proposed setback to both boundaries is 1.0 metre. The relevant
performance criteria of the R Codes state the following:
“P1
Buildings setback from boundaries other than street boundaries so as to:
Page 272
•
•
•
•
•
•
29 MARCH 2011
provide adequate direct sun and ventilation to the building;
ensure adequate direct sun and ventilation being available to adjoining
properties;
provide adequate direct sun to the building and appurtenant open spaces;
assist with protection of access to direct sun for adjoining properties;
assist in ameliorating the impacts of building bulk on adjoining properties; and
assist in protecting privacy between adjoining properties.”
Both patios are considered to meet the abovementioned performance criteria of the R Codes.
The proposed patios are open and are not large enough to assist in overlooking or the hinder
the amount of sunlight to the subject and neighbouring properties.
With regard to the impact on adjoining properties, a letter of non-objection was received from
the owners of Lot 502, No. 10 Mitchell Street, Mount Lawley regarding the patio on the east
side. The City sought comment from the owner of Lot 42, No. 12 Mitchell Street, Mount
Lawley regarding the setback of the patio on the west side. No objection was been received
from this landowner within the comment period.
Summary
With respect to the CPA guidelines, it is considered that the proposal meets with the elements
described, and will not unduly impact on the streetscape and character of the area. The
proposed boundary setback variations received no objections and are considered to meet with
the performance criteria.
Given the above, the proposed patios are recommended for approval subject to standard
conditions.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
planning approval be granted for proposed two (2) patios at Lot 501,
No. 10A Mitchell Street, Mount Lawley, in accordance with the application dated 1
January 2011 and revised plans dated 3 February 2011, subject to the following
planning conditions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Page 273
13.6.3
29 MARCH 2011
Location:
Lot 1 No. 122 Eighth Avenue, Maylands
File No:
DA10-0198
Applicant:
K. Tombouloglou
Owner:
K. Tombouloglou
Officer:
Application
MRS Form 1 dated 19 March 2010 and revised plans dated 25 November 2010 have been
received for a proposed two storey grouped dwelling at Lot 1, No122 Eighth Avenue,
Maylands.
The proposal comprises the construction of a single two (2) storey grouped dwelling with
direct vehicular access onto Eighth Avenue. There are two existing strata lots at the rear of
the subject site which are accessed by a common property driveway along the south east
boundary.
Council consideration is required for the following matters:
a)
The site is located within Character Protection Area No.1 – Maylands North
(CPA 1) therefore Council is required to be satisfied that the design meets with the
Character Protection Guidelines.
b)
It is recommended that the design be altered to facilitate the provision of a straight
crossover without obstruction.
Background
Medium and High Density Residential R40
Use Class:
Grouped Dwelling - ‘P’
Lot Area:
287m²
Existing Land Use:
Vacant
Grouped Dwellings
SCHEME PROVISIONS
Setbacks
Front (SW)
Side (NW)
Side (SE)
Rear (NE)
Maximum Site Cover
Parking
REQUIRED
PROVIDED
2m min, 4m average
0m, 1.2m
1-1.5m, 1.2m
1.5m/1.5m
3.3m, 4m/3.5m,4m
0m, 1.2m
1-1.5m, 1.5m
2.75m, 2.75m
45%
45%
2 bays
2 bays
Page 274
PARAPET/BOUNDARY WALL
ACCEPTABLE DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS
29 MARCH 2011
REQUIRED
PROVIDED
Maximum Wall Height
Maximum Average Wall Height
3.5m
2.8m
3.0m
2.7m
Maximum Wall Length
9.5m
7.5m
Comment
Character Protection Area
The subject property is located within Character Protection Area No. 1 – Maylands North.
The Character Protection Area (CPA) guidelines are intended to assist owners and developers
with the design of alterations, additions or development in areas assessed as having particular
heritage significance. The guidelines are intended to ensure that development is ‘sympathetic
to the local historic character’. An assessment of the application against each element of the
CPA guidelines is provided below.
Plan Form
The form of the dwelling as seen from the street reads as a parallel frontage with a strong
balcony element incorporated along the frontage of the dwelling. The proposed setbacks are
consistent with adjoining grouped dwelling developments. This element is considered to be
consistent with the intent of the CPA guidelines.
Walls
The walls of the dwelling will be constructed of cream rendered brick with contrasting red
brick banding along the front and side elevations which is considered to meet with the intent
of the CPA guidelines.
Roof Form
The design indicates a corrugated iron painted roof with a proposed roof pitch of 30 degrees.
The roof is considered to be consistent with the CPA guidelines.
Openings
Openings of the dwelling have a predominantly vertical emphasis. This element is considered
to be consistent with the CPA guidelines.
Garages
The garage for the proposal is not considered to be a dominant element of the design as it is
setback 1.2 metres behind the upper floor balcony. The garage is not considered to detract
from the amenity of the streetscape or the presentation of the dwelling. This element is
considered to be consistent with the CPA guidelines.
Fencing
The front fence is proposed to be cream rendered brickwork with a solid portion to up
0.6 metres in height and open style infill panels above to 1.8 metres. The fence colour is
consistent with proposed colour of the dwelling and is not considered to detract from the
amenity of the streetscape. The fence is considered to meet with the intent of the CPA
guidelines. As per the above CPA assessment, the proposal is considered to be sympathetic to
the character of the area. The proposal is not considered to unduly affect the character
qualities of the area.
Page 275
29 MARCH 2011
Compliance with Scheme and Residential Design Code Requirements
The application has been assessed against the provisions of the City’s Town Planning Scheme
24 (TOS 24), the Residential Design Codes (R Codes) and the City's policies, and is
considered to meet with all requirements with the exception of the location of the proposed
garage and the implications with the existing street verge tree.
Garage Location
The application proposes the garage in a location which results in the crossover being in close
proximity to the existing street verge tree. The garage also includes an internal storeroom
which is positioned on the left side of the garage, and abuts the boundary with the adjoining
grouped dwelling development at No.124 Eighth Avenue, Maylands. The plans show the
crossover being tapered to provide a one (1) metre clearance to the street tree, which the
applicant believes is sufficient.
The explanatory guidelines of the R Codes state that crossovers are required to be aligned at
right angles to the street and to be designed for vehicles to safely manoeuvre into the street
without obstruction. The City’s Technical Services has advised that crossovers should have a
straight alignment and not be tapered around obstructions, as this is considered to have safety
implications with regard to vehicle egress. The tapered crossover results in the crossover not
being aligned straight, and is not therefore in accordance with the City’s standard crossover
specifications. Futhermore, the City’s Parks and Gardens has advised that the health of
existing trees which are located in close proximity to new crossovers can be potentially
affected by the installation of new crossovers.
The City has recommended that the design be altered to provide a straight crossover without
obstruction. By shifting the storeroom to the opposite side of the garage, the crossover is able
to be moved a further 1 metre away from the street tree. This recommended change enables a
straight driveway and crossover to be achieved and provides for safe vehicle egress in
accordance with the Technical Services' recommendation. Whilst it is acknowledged that the
recommended alteration will increase the length of the parapet wall on the boundary with the
adjoining property, the total length still complies with the acceptable development standards
and the impact is considered minimal as the wall abuts a common driveway on the adjoining
property.
The applicant has advised the City that the recommended design change is acceptable and no
objection is raised to the inclusion of a condition to this effect.
Summary
An application for a two storey grouped dwelling proposes cream coloured rendered walls
with red brick banding and cream coloured front fence, which are not considered to detract
from the amenity of the streetscape. The design and presentation of the dwelling is
considered to meet with the intent of the Character Protection Guidelines and not considered
to unduly affect the Eighth Avenue streetscape.
The application proposes a tapered crossover which does not comply with the standard
crossover specifications.
The City is of the view that the tapered crossover is not safe and could be avoided by placing
the storeroom on the opposite side of the garage, which enables a straight crossover to be
installed. The applicant has agreed to this condition being included, therefore a condition to
this effect is included in the officer recommendation.
The application is recommended for approval subject to conditions.
Page 276
29 MARCH 2011
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
planning approval be granted for proposed two (2) storey grouped dwelling at Lot 1,
No.122 Eighth Avenue, Maylands in accordance with the application
DA10-0198 and revised plans dated 25 November 2010, subject to the following planning
conditions:
1.
The applicant to submit revised plans showing the garage parapet wall abutting
the boundary, and the storeroom being located along the side of the garage
adjacent to the ‘entry’ as denoted on the proposed plans, to the satisfaction of the
City of Bayswater.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
portion of a dividing fence, or nter onto neighbouring land, you must first come to
7.
The approved boundary/parapet walls and footings abutting the boundaries must
be constructed wholly within the subject allotment. The external surfaces of the
boundary/parapet walls shall be finished to a professional standard to complement
the dwelling on the adjoining lot, to the satisfaction of the City of Bayswater.
8.
condition.
9.
The applicant is to make arrangements to the satisfaction of the Water
Corporation for the provision of reticulated sewerage to all lots/units within the
Page 277
29 MARCH 2011
10.
Bayswater and in accordance with the Treatment of Sewage and Disposal of
Effluent and Liquid Waste Amendment Regulations (No.2) 1997.
11.
All stormwater and drainage runoff produced onsite is to be disposed of onsite via
the use of soakwells. The size of the soakwells are to be calculated by use of the
formula VOL (m3) = AREA (m2) x 0.0125, where VOL is total storage volume of
soakwells and AREA is total roofed and paved areas. Connection to the City’s
stormwater system, where available, may be permitted as an overflow only if to the
12.
of the City of Bayswater. Payment for the crossover is required prior to the issue
of a building licence.
13.
The existing and/or proposed driveways being constructed with brick paving or
concrete to the satisfaction of the City of Bayswater.
Page 278
13.6.4
29 MARCH 2011
Proposed Change of Use from Shop to Small Bar
Location:
Lot 55, No. 198 Whatley Crescent, Maylands
File No:
DA11-0058
Applicant:
Alannah MacTiernan
Owner:
Alannah MacTiernan and Anthea MacTiernan
Officer:
In accordance with Section 5.65 of the Local Government Act 1995, Cr Marlene Robinson declared an
impartial interest in this item as she knows the applicant, Alannah MacTiernan.
In accordance with Section 5.65 of the Local Government Act 1995, Cr Mike Anderton, JP declared
an impartial interest in this item as he knows the applicant, Alannah MacTiernan.
CR MIKE ANDERTON, JP DECLARED A FINANCIAL INTEREST
In accordance with 5.60A and 5.65 of the Local Government Act 1995,
Cr Mike Anderton, JP declared a financial interest in this item as he knows the applicant,
Alannah MacTiernan and the family. Cr Anderton, JP withdrew from the meeting at
10:30pm
In accordance with Section 5.65 of the Local Government Act 1995, Cr Marlene Robinson
declared an impartial interest in this item as she knows the applicant,
Alannah MacTiernan. Remained in the room during
Application
MRS Form 1 dated 1 February 2011 and further plans dated 4 March 2011 have been received
for a proposed change of use from shop to small bar with associated signage, demolition and
building works at Lot 55, Nos. 198-202 Whatley Crescent, Maylands.
The City’s Town Planning Scheme No. 24 (TPS 24) does not currently have a use class or
definition for small bar, although there is such a definition in the Model Scheme Text (MST).
The most relevant use class in TPS 24 at present is considered to be tavern.
Council consideration is required as:
1.
2.
The closest use class of ‘tavern’ is listed as a discretionary use in a ‘business’ zone; and
The proposed change of use will result in a parking shortfall of nine (9) car bays.
Page 279
29 MARCH 2011
Background
Business
Use Class:
Small Bar (Tavern) – ‘D’
Lot Area:
781m²
Existing Land Use:
Shop
Commercial and Residential
Change of Use to Small Bar (Tavern) and
Associated Signage, Demolition and Building
Works
SCHEME PROVISIONS
Parking* (* - refer to comments on parking
REQUIRED
PROVIDED
13 bays*
4 bays*
provision)
The subject site is listed as a ‘Classification 2’ in the City’s Municipal Inventory of Heritage
Places. The ‘Classification 2’ management category states in part that:
“Sites have considerable local importance and will generally include public or community
buildings, commercial buildings and residential dwellings of exceptional significance.
Demolition of these places would generally not be supported. Landowners are encouraged to
conserve the integrity, authenticity and condition of the site’.
The site is also part of the State Heritage Registered ‘Whatley Group’ of shops. The
application was referred to the Heritage Council of Western Australia for comment. The
Heritage Council advised that the proposal is supported, subject to a photographic record
being prepared of the site.
Legislative amendments to the Liquor Control Act 1988 were made in 2006 to provide for a
new liquor licensing category designated as small bar. The objectives of the legislative
changes included providing more choice for consumers (but not necessarily more licensed
venues), greater levels of innovation within the liquor and hospitality industries, a boost to the
small business sector and creating a safer liquor environment that is not limited to large,
“beer-barn” establishments.
A small bar has been defined by the Western Australian Planning Commission in the MST as:
“… premises licensed as a small bar under the Liquor Control Act and used to sell liquor for
consumption on the premises, but not including the sale of packaged liquor; and with the
number of persons who may be on the licensed premises limited to a maximum of 120”.
The MST definition noted above is to be included in TPS 24 as proposed in Amendment No.
45 (the Maylands Activity Centre Zone amendment). As noted in the definition, small bars do
not allow for the sale of packaged liquor (i.e. – they cannot operate as a liquor store).
Page 280
29 MARCH 2011
Small bars are currently operating in other local government areas such as the City of Perth
and Town of Vincent. They have been found to be relatively safe establishments with less
potential for anti-social behaviour.
Council approved a change of use application for a small bar at Lot 46, No. 188 Whatley
Crescent, Maylands at its Ordinary Meeting held on 27 July 2010.
Comment
The application proposes:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
A change of use from shop to small bar (tavern);
The demolition of a brick outhouse and a corrugated iron shed (both supported by the
Heritage Council);
The construction of a new kitchen and toilet block;
The internal fit out of the existing shop at No. 198 Whatley Crescent; and
The erection of one (1) verandah sign and one (1) sign on the window of the site.
The applicant has advised that the proposal would consist of an “old style European bar”,
with experienced chefs serving “simple and seasonal European style dishes matched with
carefully selected local and European wines and beers. The bar will cater to a clientele who
have a real interest in quality food and wine. Swallow strives to be a true ‘local’ where people
feel drawn to visit once or twice a week for an after work drink or bite to eat in an intimate
environment with soft tunes conducive to good conversation”.
The proposed hours of trade would initially extend from 4.00pm to midnight from Monday to
Saturday and 10.00am to 10.00pm on Sunday.
Assessment of the application indicates that it complies with the provisions of TPS 24 and the
City’s policy, with the exception of the use class of small bar (tavern) being listed as a
discretionary use in a business zone and a shortfall in the on-site car parking provided of nine
(9) car bays.
Heritage
The Heritage Council has advised that the proposal is supported from a heritage perspective,
including the proposed demolition of a brick outhouse and a corrugated iron shed on the site.
These structures are later additions and are not considered to be an integral part of the heritage
of the site.
It is considered that the proposed redevelopment and use of the site would serve to
complement and enhance the heritage of the site. It would also serve to provide greater public
access to the site and help to increase public awareness of the history of Maylands.
The Heritage Council recommended that a condition be required for a photographic record of
the site to be prepared prior to any demolition or development of the site, which is included in
the recommended approval conditions.
The subject site is located in the proposed Main Street Precinct of the future Maylands
Activity Centre Zone. Council granted final approval to TPS 24 Amendment No. 45 at its
Ordinary Meeting held on 1 February 2011.The amendment has been referred to the Western
Australian Planning Commission to seek final approval from the Minister for Planning.
Page 281
29 MARCH 2011
A key objective of the Maylands Activity Centre Zone is to create an attractive and
sustainable urban town centre that is a vibrant, desirable and safe place to live, work and
socialise. It is considered that the proposed small bar would support the future zone’s
objectives and contribute to making the town centre a vibrant and desirable place to live, work
and socialise. Furthermore, the amendment proposes that a small bar be a permitted use in the
Main Street Precinct.
It is also considered that the proposed use would add to the night-time economy. Uses such as
restaurants and small bars encourage after-hours activity and promote passive and active street
surveillance, which can increase the perception of safety in the town centre at night.
Given the above, the proposed small bar use is considered appropriate for the area.
It is recommended as a condition of approval that the applicant prepare a detailed
management plan to addresses potential issues such as the control of noise, anti-social
behaviour, disposal of rubbish and any other appropriate matters to the satisfaction of the
City. It is anticipated that these matters can be adequately addressed by the applicant.
Car Parking
The subject site does not currently have formalised parking constructed, however, it is
considered there is enough space for six (6) car parking bays.
The site is proposed to incorporate a number of uses for the purposes of calculating car
parking, including:
1.
2.
3.
Two (2) existing shops of approximately 65m² in total;
An existing residential dwelling (the historic stationmasters house); and
The proposed small bar and courtyard area of 76m².
The two (2) existing shops would require parking to be provided at a ratio of six (6) bays per
100m² as per the standards of TPS 24. Given the existing shops have a floorspace of
approximately 65m² in total, this equates to a requirement for four (4) on-site car parking bays
as per the scheme standards.
The existing stationmasters dwelling would be assessed in accordance with Clause 7.3.3 of the
Residential Design Codes given that it is located within an indentified activity centre. Clause
7.3.3 would require a minimum of one (1) car bays for the existing dwelling.
There are no development standards for the use class of small bar in TPS 24. The closest
relevant standard is considered to be ‘restaurant’ given the relatively small-scale nature of the
proposal with customers seated at tables and the focus on quality food, as opposed to a tavern,
which generally accommodates a larger number of people and which is a more intensive land
use. A tavern would require 1 car bay for every 5m² of bar or public areas as per TPS 24 (or
15 car bays for the subject proposal). The ‘restaurant’ development standard requires on-site
car parking to be provided at a ratio of 10 bays per 100m². The proposed plans show an
approximate small bar and courtyard area of 76m², which would require a total of eight (8)
on-site car bays to be provided as per TPS 24 standards.
A total of 13 on-site car bays would be required across the whole site as per the standards of
TPS 24, while the application proposes four (4) on-site car bays, which is an indicative
shortfall of nine (9) car bays. The current on-site car parking shortfall is calculated to be one
(1) car bay.
Page 282
29 MARCH 2011
In support of the proposed car parking shortfall, the applicant has advised that:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
The peak time of activity at the small bar will occur at a time when there is lower
parking demand for adjacent parking facilities at Maylands train station and adjacent onstreet car parking;
The subject site is well serviced by public transport routes and taxis, ameliorating
potential parking issues;
Driving to places such as small bars should be discouraged (in-principle) to help prevent
the potential for drink-driving;
The parking provided is expected to cater for staff needs; and
Council has approved parking shortfalls at other nearby sites, particularly the Match
Maymont site at Lot 250, Nos. 178-192 Whatley Crescent and Nos. 70-88 Eighth
Avenue, Maylands (where a total parking shortfall of 40 bays has been approved).
The proposed parking shortfall is also supported by the following justifications:
1.
The subject site is on the City’s Heritage List. Clause 5.5 of TPS 24 allows Council to
vary any development standard specified in the scheme for sites included on the
Heritage List to facilitate the conservation of a heritage place. It is considered that the
parking provided would help to enhance the heritage of the site;
2.
The application proposes three (3) on-site car bays to service the three (3) shopfronts on
the site (including the proposed small bar). There is potential for reciprocal parking
arrangements given that the site has one (1) landowner and because the peak trading
period for the small bar would be outside normal business hours;
3.
The subject site is located in a town centre environment where it is expected that some
patrons will visit the small bar in combination with engaging in other activities in the
town centre, such as shopping, employment, accessing local services or visiting the new
multipurpose centre in Maylands etc. Multiple purpose visits to the town centre can
mean that the total number of vehicle trips to the town centre requiring car parking to be
provided can potentially be reduced; and
4.
The town centre location also means that it is relatively accessible for pedestrians.
The City has prepared a draft parking policy for the TPS 24 area (approved by Council for
public advertising at its Ordinary Meeting of 1 February 2011), which provides parking
dispensation for developments in town centres, such as the subject proposal.
The draft policy recommends a 50% parking dispensation for 'food and entertainment' and
small 'retail' uses to encourage such uses to locate in town centres and contribute to active and
vibrant streetscapes. If the proposal were to be assessed under the draft parking policy, the onsite parking requirement would reduce from 13 bays to 7 bays, which would reduce the
parking shortfall to three (3) car bays.
The City has also prepared a draft cash in lieu of car parking policy (approved by Council for
public advertising at its Ordinary Meeting of 1 February 2011), which details when and how
cash in lieu of car parking payments can be sought. Cash in lieu contributions would be based
on parking shortfalls assessed in accordance with a relevant parking policy or the scheme
requirements. In this case, given that there is an indicative shortfall of three (3) cars bays
when assessed against the draft parking policy for the TPS 24 area, the draft cash in lieu of car
parking policy would require a $30,000 cash in lieu of car parking payment (three (3) bays
shortfall x $10,000 per car bay).
Page 283
29 MARCH 2011
It is not considered that cash in lieu of car parking could be sought in this case as Council has
not given final approval to the draft cash in lieu of car parking policy and the necessary
mechanisms are therefore not in place. The application was also made prior to the introduction
of cash in lieu of car parking provisions.
There are no objections to the proposed on-site parking provision.
Right of Way Widening
In accordance with the City’s Right of Way Study, Roxy Lane is required to be widened to 6.0
metres as per the Western Australian Planning Commission’s requirements. A 1.5 metre right
of way widening has been noted on the plans and a condition for the right of way widening is
part of the recommended approval conditions.
Future Redevelopment of the Rear of the Site
The applicant has provided indicative plans for the redevelopment of the rear of the site in
accordance with the provisions of the future Maylands Activity Centre Zone. The plans have
been provided principally to support the small bar application and demonstrate how issues
such as car parking and vehicular access can be achieved on the site.
Given the plans are indicative only, a full development assessment has not been undertaken.
Notwithstanding, it is considered that the indicative plans would demonstrate a high degree of
compliance with the future Main Street Precinct special control areas provisions and would,
for example, comply with on-site car parking requirements by providing a minimum of one
(1) car bay per dwelling in accordance with the new Clause 7.3.3 of the Residential Design
Codes (R Codes).
The applicant has advised that a development application will be lodged with the City in the
future for the redevelopment of the rear of the site in accordance with the future Maylands
Activity Centre Zone provisions.
Summary
It is considered that the proposed small bar would serve to complement and enhance the
heritage of the site. The proposal would support the future Maylands Activity Centre Zone’s
objectives and contribute to making the town centre a vibrant and desirable place to live, work
and socialise. Uses such as restaurants and small bars also encourage
after-hours activity and promote passive street surveillance.
The applicant has also provided indicative plans for the redevelopment of the rear of the site.
While a full development assessment has not been undertaken as the plans for the rear of the
site are indicative only, it is considered that the initial plans would demonstrate a reasonable
degree of compliance with the Main Street Precinct provisions of the future Maylands
Activity Centre Zone.
The proposal is recommended for approval, subject to conditions.
Voting Requirements
Page 284
29 MARCH 2011
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR SONIA TURKINGTON MOVED, CR SYLVAN ALBERT SECONDED that
planning approval be granted for the proposed change of use from shop to small bar
(tavern) with associated signage, demolition and building works at Lot 55, Nos. 198-202
Whatley Crescent, Maylands, subject to the following planning conditions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
The applicant is to make arrangements to the satisfaction of the Water Corporation
for the provision of reticulated sewerage to all lots/units within the
Bayswater and in accordance with the Treatment of Sewage and Disposal of Effluent
and Liquid Waste Amendment Regulations (No.2) 1997.
where available, may be permitted as an overflow only if to the satisfaction of the
City of Bayswater.
The hours of operation of the small bar shall be limited to 7.00am to 12:00am
(midnight) Monday to Saturday and 7:00am to 10:00pm on Sunday, inclusive.
Packaged liquor shall not be sold at the premises.
A detailed management plan that addresses the control of noise, anti-social
behaviour, disposal of rubbish and its collection, litter and any other matters
associated with the development shall be submitted to and approved by the City
prior to the first occupation of the development, and thereafter implemented and
maintained to the satisfaction of the City.
Any onsite signage to be installed in accordance with the City’s Signage Policy to
the satisfaction of the City of Bayswater.
levels prescribed under the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997.
Page 285
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
29 MARCH 2011
The vehicle parking area shall have a minimum of four (4) on-site car bays to be
sealed or paved, kerbed, drained and line marked in accordance with the approved
plans and specifications and shall be thereafter maintained to the satisfaction of
the City of Bayswater.
The provision of a suitably screened refuse bin area to the satisfaction of the City
of Bayswater.
The Roxy Lane right of way being widened by 1.5 metres along the full frontage of
the land the subject of this application by the applicant/owner transferring the
land required to the Crown free of cost for the purpose of widening the right of
way.
The section of the Roxy Lane right of way widened in accordance with this
approval, is to be constructed and drained at the full cost of the applicant/owner.
A Photographic Record is to be prepared, as per the Heritage Council of Western
Australia’s 'Guide to Preparing An Archival Record', prior to the commencement of
demolition and/or building works. The Photographic Record is to be submitted to
the Office of Heritage for its records.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
COUNCIL RESOLUTION - EN BLOC RESOLUTION
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR SALLY PALMER SECONDED to en bloc
the Committee/Officer Recommendations to Council items 11.1 - 11.1.6, 11.1.10 - 11.2.4,
11.2.7 - 12.1.1, 12.1.5 - 12.1.7, 12.1.10, 12.2 - 12.2.3, 12.2.6 - 12.2.13, 13.1.2, 13.1.4 -13.2.2,
13.3.3, 13.3.5 - 13.3.6 and 13.4.1 - 13.6.3 and those items requiring an Absolute Majority,
be carried with an Absolute Majority.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Page 286
14
29 MARCH 2011
MAYOR’S REPORT
His Worship the Mayor, Cr Terry Kenyon, JP provided the Mayoral report on the following
events;
•
•
BOOMSHANKA - SATURDAY, 26 FEBRUARY 2011
o
Skateboarding and BMX riding continues to be a popular, fast growing
activity with youth within our communities – and because of that
Boomshanka has become bigger, more challenging and grown in popularity.
o
Wotton Skate Park has proven itself to be a great venue to showcase local
talent and continues to provide a safe venue for our BMX and skateboard
enthusiasts.
o
Thanks to Cr Robinson, the Skatepark Committee and the City of Bayswater
staff for putting together a great event.
ART EXHIBITION OPENING – “THE LONG MARCH”- FRIDAY,
4 MARCH 2011
o
In 2011 we celebrate the 100th anniversary of International Women’s Day, a
global day celebrating the economic, political and social achievements of
women past, present and future.
o
On Friday, 4 March an art exhibition titled “The Long March” was held in
dedication of this celebration.
o
Unfortunately, I was unable to attend this exhibition opening, however the
CEO, Cr Palmer and Cr Turkington attended and said it was a great night
with some fantastic pieces of artwork on show created by some extremely
talented women, many of which were contributed by local artists from the
DoC Gallery.
o
My congratulations and special thanks to Rona Chadwick and all of the
artists and people involved in organising and coordinating this exhibition,
held to commemorate a very special and important event.
•
EVENING ON THE PARK - 11 MARCH 2011
•
JAZZ CONCERT - 12 MARCH 2011
o
I would like to thank the City's staff for organising two fantastic events on
the weekend of the 11 and 12 March.
o
The first being a and Evening in the Park with music and free activities
provided such as face painting and competitions for the whole family to
enjoy and the other being a Jazz Concert at the Maylands Peninsula Golf
Course These events were well attended and everyone there had a great
time. Thanks to the City's Manager Library Services, Terry Fay and to our
Events Officer Antoinette McIntosh for organising these great events.
Page 287
•
•
•
REGIONAL CYCLE
21 MARCH 2011
NETWORK
29 MARCH 2011
MASTER
PLAN
FORUM
-
o
The City of Bayswater was proud to provide a forum for the Regional
Integrated Transport Strategy Action Plan which places a strong emphasis
on increasing the accessibility for walking and cycling in Perth’s eastern
region in alignment with the activity centres component of the state
government’s spatial planning strategy, directions 2031.
o
The partnership we have formed between Curtin University, the EMRC and
the six Council’s of Perth’s eastern region, is a strong approach which
brings together a process that is replicated across the region. The process
engages with our community in a meaningful way to develop a regional plan
for cycle infrastructure that suits our needs.
o
Thank you to those members of the local community that attended and
participated as the input from this forum will be a key component of
information for the development of the Regional Cycle Network Master
Plan.
NEIGHBOURHOOD DAY
o
Neighbourhood Day is Australia’s annual celebration of community,
bringing together the people next door, across the street or across the park
for a beer, a barbie or just a cuppa.
o
Last week the City organized morning tea at two of our aged care facilities Mertome Retirement Village and the City of Bayswater Hostel.
o
It is the perfect occasion to say thanks for being a great neighbour and for
being there when you needed them the most.
IN APPRECIATION
I would like to thank;
o
Activ Foundation for inviting me to their 60th anniversary celebrations as
their Vice Patron. Back in 1951 a small group of families came together
with the common goal of providing opportunities for their children with
disabilities. Sixty years on, Active has become one of the largest disability
service providers in WA.
o
I would like to thank the Bethlehem Lutheran Church in Morley for inviting
me to officially welcome members of their congregation to Morley.
o
A great evening was enjoyed by all at the Patrons and Sponsors Evening for
the Bayswater Tennis Club - thank you to the Club's members for all the
hard work they put in throughout the year.
o
Thank you to the Bedford Morley RSL for inviting me to share afternoon tea
with their members.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank my fellow Councillors for attending functions on
behalf of myself and the City of Bayswater.
Page 288
29 MARCH 2011
15
AFFIXING OF COMMON SEAL
15.1
Authorisation for Affixing of the Common Seal
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
approval be granted for affixing of the Common Seal to the following documents:
Document Details
Withdrawal of Caveat - 50 River Road,
Bayswater.
Building Agreement - Lotterywest Maylands Multipurpose Centre
Withdrawal of Caveat - 6 Rivergum
Place, Morley
Withdrawal of Caveat - 31 Hollister
Way, Noranda
Section 70A Notification - Lots 6-10
Strata Plan 62630 - 115 Leake Street,
Bayswater
No. of
Documents
1
Council
Resolution
N/A
For Approval
or Ratification
Approval
1
Ratification
1
Item 8.1 SCM
08.03.10
N/A
1
N/A
Approval
1
N/A
Approval
Approval
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Page 289
29 MARCH 2011
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR TERRY BLANCHARD MOVED, CR BARRY MCKENNA SECONDED that the
meeting be closed to the public.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
At 10:39pm, the doors were closed to the public and those members of the public present
withdrew from the meeting..
16
DISCUSSION OF MATTERS BEHIND CLOSED DOORS
16.1
16.1.1
Status Report - Planning Complaints and Zoning Breaches
Attachments: Status Report – Planning Compliance
Officer:
Director of Planning and Development Services
CONFIDENTIAL ITEM
CR BARRY MCKENNA, DEPUTY MAYOR, DECLARED A FINANCIAL INTEREST
In accordance with Section 5.60A and 5.65 of the Local Government Act 1995,
Cr Barry McKenna declared a financial interest in this item as his wife is a part owner of a
property which is directly opposite a property mentioned in the report. At 10:40pm,
Cr McKenna withdrew from the meeting.
Application
To advise Council of the status of unauthorised planning activities within the City.
In accordance with Section 5.23 (2) of the Local Government Act 1995, the meeting is closed
to members of the public for this item as the following sub-section applied:
(b) The personal affairs of any person.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR ALAN RADFORD MOVED, CR MIKE ANDERTON, JP SECONDED that Council
receive this status report on the complaints regarding unauthorised planning activities,
as contained in Attachment No. 1.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
At 10:40pm, Cr McKenna returned to the meeting.
At 10:40pm, Mrs Raylene Vucens, PA/Director Administration and Community Services,
left the meeting.
Page 290
29 MARCH 2011
16.2
16.2.1
Generations Centre Family House Community Youth Project
Officer:
Refer:
Item 11.1: OCM 12.05.2009
Item 10.1.8: OCM 29.01.2002
CONFIDENTIAL ITEM
MR DOUG PEARSON, DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL SERVICES, DECLARED AN
IMPARTIAL INTEREST
In accordance with Section 5.65 of the Local Government Act 1995, Mr Doug Pearson,
Director of Technical Services, declared an impartial interest in this item as his daughter is
a participant in the Generations Centre Youth Program. Mr Pearson remained in the room
during voting on this item.
Application
To seek Council endorsement for the renewal of a lease agreement with Generations Centre
for the Council owned premises located at Property No. 3298 located in Bayswater. The
period requested is for two (2) years from 1 June 2011 to 31 May 2013.
In accordance with Section 5.23(2) of the Local Government Act 1995, the meeting is closed
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR TERRY KENYON, JP MOVED, CR MARLENE ROBINSON SECONDED that
this item be deferred.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Page 291
16.3
Technical Services
16.3.1
Unkempt Property
Officer:
29 MARCH 2011
CONFIDENTIAL ITEM
Application
To seek Council’s endorsement of the issuing of a Notice to the owners of a property in
Bayswater to permanently remove all disused materials, rubbish and excess vegetation from
the property.
(b)
The personal affairs of any person.
(d)
Legal advice obtained, or which may be obtained, by the local government and
which relates to a matter to be discussed at the meeting.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR MIKE ANDERTON, JP MOVED, CR MARLENE ROBINSON SECONDED that:
1.
Council endorses the issuing of a Notice to the owners of 10 Rosebery Street
Bayswater under the provisions of Section 3.25 of the Local Government Act 1995,
requiring them to permanently remove from their property all disused items,
excess vegetation and rubbish within a period of 30 days, to the satisfaction of
Council’s Manager Environmental Health.
2.
Should the terms of the Notice not be complied with, Council engage contractors
under the provisions of Section 3.26 (2) of the Local Government Act 1995, to
undertake the required works.
3.
All costs to the City of Bayswater associated with undertaking the terms of the
Notice, to be recovered from the owners of 10 Rosebery Street Bayswater in
accordance with Section 3.26 (3) of the Local Government Act 1995.
Page 292
16.3.2
29 MARCH 2011
Unkempt Properties
Officer:
CONFIDENTIAL ITEM
CR SALLY PALMER DECLARED A FINANCIAL INTEREST
In accordance with 5.60A and 5.65 of the Local Government Act 1995, Cr Sally Palmer
declared a financial interest in this item on Monday,(28 March 2011), her company,
through a colleague, has been invited to discuss the future of the property owner.
Cr Palmer withdrew from the meeting at 10:43pm.
Application
To seek Council’s endorsement of the issuing of Notices an owner in Bayswater in relation to
his unclean house and unkempt properties.
(b)
The personal affairs of any person.
(d)
Legal advice obtained, or which may be obtained, by the local government and
which relates to a matter to be discussed at the meeting.
Voting Requirements
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR MARLENE ROBINSON MOVED, CR SONIA TURKINGTON SECONDED that:
1.
The Council endorses the issuing of Notices under the provisions of Section 3.25 of
the Local Government Act 1995, requiring Mr Ernesto Iuculano, the owner of
53 Milne Street Bayswater and 408 Guildford Road Bayswater to permanently
remove from his properties all disused items, shipping containers, unregistered
vehicles, excess vegetation and rubbish within a period of 90 days, to the
satisfaction of Council’s Manager Environmental Health.
2.
The Council endorses the issuing of a Health Notice under the provisions of Section
139 of the Health Act 1911, requiring Mr Ernesto Iuculano to render clean his
house at 53 Milne Street Bayswater within 90 days, to the satisfaction of the City of
Bayswater’s Manager Environmental Health.
3.
Should the terms of the Notices not be complied with, Council engage contractors
under the provisions of Section 3.26 (2) of the Local Government Act 1995 and/ or
Section 140 (1) of the Health Act 1911, to undertake the required works.
4.
All costs to the City of Bayswater associated with undertaking the terms of the
Notices, to be recovered as a debt due from Mr Iuculano in accordance with
Section 3.26 (3) of the Local Government Act 1995 and/ or Section 140 (1) of the
Health Act 1911.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
At 10:44pm, Cr Palmer returned to the meeting.
Page 293
16.3.3
29 MARCH 2011
Tender No. 10-2010 - Lightning Swamp Boardwalk
Officer:
CONFIDENTIAL ITEM
In accordance with Section 5.65 of the Local Government Act 1995, Cr Terry Blanchard
declared an impartial interest in this item as one of the tenderers, sponsored the Institute of
Public Works Engineers Australia's (IPWEA) State Conference in March 2011 and he is
the immediate past President of the IPWEA. Cr Blanchard remained in the room during
voting on this item.
Application
For Council to reconsider submissions received for Tender No. 10-2010 for the supply and
installation of a boardwalk at Lightning Swamp, Noranda.
(c)
A contract entered into, or which may be entered into, by the local government
and which relates to a matter to be discussed at the meeting
(e) (ii) A matter that if disclosed, would reveal information that has a commercial
value to a person.
Voting Requirements
Page 294
29 MARCH 2011
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR ALAN RADFORD SECONDED that
Council:
1.
Award Tender No. 10-2010 - Lighting Swamp Boardwalk to Firma Industries
Option 2 for a 75m boardwalk at Lightning Swamp in accordance with the tender
specification.
2.
Amends the 2010/2011 Budget as follows;
Account
E33800
F15900
F1600
F17300
F17400
C10200
G34600
3.
Description
Lightning Swamp Boardwalk
Embleton Golf Course - Repair
Damp Wall Outside Changeroom
Embleton Golf Course - Redirect
Drainage
Maylands Golf Course Airconditioner in Office
Maylands Golf Course - Repair
Posts to Verandah
Noranda Netball Court
Resurfacing
Lake Bungana Fountain
Original
Budget
$60,000
$2,000
Revised
Budget
$110,501
$0
Surplus/
Deficit
-$50,501
$2,000
$5,560
$0
$5,560
$7,773
$0
$7,773
$17,112
$0
$17,112
$241,230
$226,204
$15,026
$20,000
$16,970
Net Effect
$3,030
NIL
Officers continue to seek funding opportunities to complete the boardwalk to its
original 100m length.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY
COUNCIL RESOLUTION – CONFIDENTIAL EN BLOC RESOLUTIONS
CR GRAHAM PITTAWAY MOVED, CR SALLY PALMER SECONDED to en bloc
the following Committee/Officer Recommendations to Council of Confidential Items
16.3.1, 16.5.1.1 - 16.5.2.1 and those items requiring an Absolute Majority, be carried
with an Absolute Majority.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Page 295
16.4
Finance & Personnel
Nil.
Page 296
29 MARCH 2011
29 MARCH 2011
16.5
Reports of Management/Advisory Committees
16.5.1
Local Government Community Housing Program Committee – 16 March 2011
16.5.1.1
Community Housing Program - Wait List
Officer:
CONFIDENTIAL ITEM
Application
For the Committee to assess the Community Housing Program Wait List and select a tenant
for the next available vacancy.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR MIKE ANDERTON, JP MOVED, CR MARLENE ROBINSON SECONDED that
1.
The recommendation as contained in the attached “Confidential” Report is
accepted.
2.
No applicant be selected for the next tenancy until further information is received.
Page 297
29 MARCH 2011
16.5.2
Golf Course Management Committee – 21 March 2011
16.5.2.1
Charity Golf Day 2010 Debrief
Location:
Maylands Peninsula Public Golf Course
Officer:
CONFIDENTIAL ITEM
Application
To update the Golf Course Management Committee on the outcome of the 2010 Charity Golf
Day.
(e) (ii) A matter that if disclosed, would reveal information that has a commercial
value to a person.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
CR MIKE ANDERTON, JP MOVED, CR MARLENE ROBINSON that:
1.
The report on the City of Bayswater 2010 Charity Golf Day be received.
2.
The 2011 City of Bayswater Charity Golf Day be held on Thursday,
27 October at Maylands Peninsula Golf Course.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
meeting be re-opened to the public.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
At 10:47pm, the meeting was re-opened to the public, however, no members of the public
returned to the meeting.
Page 298
17
29 MARCH 2011
CLOSURE
THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO DISCUSS, THE CHAIRPERSON,
HIS WORSHIP THE MAYOR, CR TERRY KENYON, JP, DECLARED THE
MEETING CLOSED AT 10:48PM.
Page 299

CITY OF BAYSWATER MINUTES

Transcription

Similar documents

Free Quote D3

Save on Parking Expenses with TransitChek

Scanned Document - Covenant Health

Ref: SB0160 Sun and Mountains Near the Sea, Busot Alicante

Parking Parking

Ah-Nab-Awen Park - City of Grand Rapids

Directions to UCSD Extension K-12 Facility Located at: 6256

BRP Flyer - III_13-ENG.indd

LTL Holiday Special Dec 15

mo rd red walzem road front entrance