Docstoc

JASON BUCKLEY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER - Town of Cambridge

Document Sample
JASON BUCKLEY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER - Town of Cambridge Powered By Docstoc
					MAYOR AND COUNCILLORS
TOWN OF CAMBRIDGE



NOTICE OF ORDINARY MEETING OF THE COUNCIL

An Ordinary Meeting of the Council will be held at the Council’s Administration/Civic Centre, 1 Bold Park
Drive, Floreat, on Tuesday 23 February 2010 at 6.00 pm.

Yours faithfully



JASON BUCKLEY
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

18 February 2010

*******************************************************************************************************

VISION - CREATING COMMUNITIES OF CHOICE
To create communities of choice and to improve the features of the community that reflect why people choose
to live, work, shop, socialise and recreate in their neighbourhood.

BUSINESS PHILOSOPHY
To make decisions in the interests of both current and future generations based on the following ideals:

      To develop productive relationships with industry, the State Government and other Local Governments
       to deliver improved cost effective services;
      To strive to meet the needs of our communities through strong community consultation, engagement
       and collaboration;
      To embrace the principles of sustainability in our decision making to balance the needs of both current
       and future generations through environmental protection, social advancement and economic prosperity;
      To continually improve our services through planning, adaptability and careful management of risks.

VALUES
In everything we do, we will seek to adhere to a set of values that guides our attitudes and behaviours:

      Friendly and Helpful
      Teamwork
      Creativity
      Integrity.

ABOUT OUR LOGO
The swan is representative of our state of Western Australia, and particularly of our very own Lake Monger.
The graceful arc of the swan’s neck, integrated with the letter “C” is distinctive in its representation of the Town
of Cambridge. The swan is centred in a diamond shape that symbolises prosperity. The upper green triangle
denotes our beautiful parks with the peak representing Reabold Hill. The lower blue triangle represents our
ocean and lakes. On a broader scale, the colours of blue and green represent strength and reliability. The
logo is contemporary in design whilst maintaining a classical appeal.
                                      BUSINESS




Disclaimer




1.    Opening

2.    Attendance

3.    Public Question Time

4.    Petitions

5.    Deputations

6.    Applications for Leave of Absence

7.    Confirmation of Minutes

      Ordinary Meeting of Council                            22 December 2009

8.    Announcements by the Mayor without Discussion

9.    Committee Reports

      Development Committee                                   16 February 2010
      Infrastructure and Community Committee                   9 February 2010
      Governance and Corporate Committee                      15 February 2010
      Audit Committee                                         15 February 2010

10.   Council Reports

11.   Urgent Business

12.   Motions of Which Notice has been Given

13.   Confidential Reports


14.   Closure




Visitors are reminded that mobile phones should be turned off during Council meetings
                         DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
                                 16 FEBRUARY 2010
                               ORDER OF BUSINESS

1.    DECLARATION OF OPENING

2.    RECORD OF ATTENDANCE/APOLOGIES/LEAVE OF ABSENCE

3.    PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

4.    DEPUTATIONS AND PETITIONS

5.    CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

6.    DECLARATION OF MEMBERS' INTERESTS

7.    REPORTS

      DEVELOPMENT

      DV10.1      Lot 498, 499, 500 (Nos. 330-334) Railway Parade, West Leederville -
                  Consulting Rooms (Group) - 34 Practitioners - Referred Back                     3
      DV10.2      Lots 9, 10 and 24 (No. 48-50) Oxford Close, West Leederville - Four Storey
                  Office Building and Cafe                                                       15
      DV10.3      Lot 1 (No. 5) Wollaston Road, City Beach - Alterations and additions to
                  Educational Establishment (Wollaston Theological College)                      20
      DV10.4      Lot 7 (No. 4) Argyle Street, West Leederville - Two Storey Dwelling            23
      DV10.5      Lot 177 (No. 33) Barrett Street, Wembley - Two Storey Dwelling                 26
      DV10.6      Strata Lot 2 (No. 291A) Salvado Road, Floreat - Additions and Alterations
                  to Grouped Dwelling                                                            30
      DV10.7      Lot 3 (No. 3) Camborne Avenue, City Beach - Additions to Single Dwelling       33
      DV10.8      Lot 242 (No. 49) Hesperia Avenue, City Beach - Patio to Existing Dwelling      36
      DV10.9      Lot 525 (No. 19) Gali Lane, City Beach - Removal of Privacy Screens            40

      ADMINISTRATION/POLICIES

      DV10.10     Lot 2 (No.151) Gregory Street, Wembley - State Administrative Tribunal
                  Mediation for Two Storey Dwelling with Undercroft                              43
      DV10.11     Proposed Amendment to the Residential Design Codes To Incorporate a
                  Multi Unit Housing Code                                                        47
      DV10.12     PIA International Planning Conference 2010 - Christchurch, New Zealand         52
      DV10.13     West Leederville Town Hall Car Park L20 - Amendments To Parking
                  Restrictions and Fees                                                          54
      DV10.14     Parking Ticket Machines, Oxford Close/Harrogate Street Precinct -
                  Adoption Of Parking Fees and Amendments To Parking Restrictions                59
      DV10.15     Delegated decisions and notifications for December 2009 and January
                  2010                                                                           66
      DV10.16     Building Licences Approved Under Delegated Authority                           69


8.    CLOSURE



MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                         (i)
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE OF THE TOWN OF
CAMBRIDGE HELD AT THE ADMINISTRATION/CIVIC CENTRE, 1 BOLD PARK DRIVE,
FLOREAT ON TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010.

1.    DECLARATION OF OPENING

      The Presiding Member declared the meeting of the Development Committee open at
      6.01 pm.

2.    RECORD OF ATTENDANCE/APOLOGIES/LEAVE OF ABSENCE

      Present :                                                    Time of    Time of
                                                                   Entering   Leaving

      Members:

      Cr Corinne MacRae (Presiding Member)                         6.01 pm     6.58 pm
      Cr Otto Pelczar                                              6.01 pm     6.58 pm
      Cr Hilary Pinerua                                            6.01 pm     6.58 pm
      Cr Julie Watson                                              6.01 pm     6.58 pm

      Observers:

      Nil

      Officers:

      Ian Birch, Director, Development and Sustainability
      Stevan Rodic, Manager Development
      Denise Ribbands, Administration Officer (Governance)

      Adjournments:                                                               Nil

      Time meeting closed:                                                    6.58 pm

      APOLOGIES/LEAVE OF ABSENCE

      Nil

3.    PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

      Nil

4.    DEPUTATIONS AND PETITIONS

      Item DV10.01      Hootan Golestani, on behalf of applicant
      Item DV10.08      Helen Shields, neighbour
      Item DV10.10      Brent Shulman, on behalf of owner




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                  1
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010




5.    CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

      Moved by Cr Pinerua, seconded by Cr Pelczar

      That the Minutes of the Ordinary meeting of the Development Committee held on
      15 December 2009 as contained in the December 2009 Council Notice Paper be
      confirmed.

      Carried           4/0

6.    DECLARATION OF MEMBERS' INTERESTS

      Nil

7.    REPORTS




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                              2
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010




DV10.1      LOT 498, 499, 500 (NOS. 330-334) RAILWAY PARADE, WEST LEEDERVILLE -
            CONSULTING ROOMS (GROUP) - 34 PRACTITIONERS - REFERRED BACK



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To consider an application for consulting rooms (group) seeking variation to the requirements of
the Town Planning Scheme No. 1 Policy Manual with respect to plot ratio and car parking.

BACKGROUND:

BA/DA REFERENCE:                          0336DA-2009
LANDOWNER:                                Nicoll Nominees Pty Ltd
APPLICANT:                                Modus Project Management
ZONING:                                   Medical
USE CLASS:                                Consulting Rooms (Group) - ‘AA’ - Not permitted
                                          without Council approval
LAND AREA:                                1770.5m2

An application was previously considered by Council in February 2009 for twenty consulting
rooms and 4 multiple dwellings (Item No. DV09.3). The proposed four storey building was
approved with a plot ratio of 1.415:1.0.

DETAILS:

Development Description

    The subject site is three rectangular shaped lots bounded by McCourt Street to the west,
      Railway Parade to the south and Turvey Lane to the east.
    A single storey dwelling exists on each of the lots, with the Leederville Fire Station
      situated at the north portion of the westernmost lot (Lot 500). The fire station is listed
      under the Town’s Municipal Heritage Inventory.
    Residential dwellings exist east of the subject site (across Turvey Lane) and a residential
      property adjoins the site to the north, although the lot is zoned ‘Medical’.
    The land slopes up from south to north by approximately 2.0 metres.
    The site is considered prominent, being located on a corner, on the edge of the medical
      zone and within close proximity to Subiaco.
    Turvey Lane is a sealed, 6.0 metres wide Council owned right-of-way (ROW).
    Railway Parade is classified as a District Distributor (B).
    The applicant proposes basement and ground floor car parking, with a consulting room
      on the ground floor at the corner of Railway Parade and McCourt Street. Three levels of
      consulting rooms are proposed above.
    The fire station is to be retained and restored, with its future use subject to further
      investigation and consultation with Council.
    The building reaches 21.2 metres in height at the corner of Railway Parade and McCourt
      Street (as viewed from the street), but the height is reduced and building set back
      towards the northern and eastern boundaries.
    Thirty-four consulting rooms are proposed.
    A plot ratio of 1.87:1.0 is proposed.




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                           3
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010



Applicant Submission

The application proposes to accommodate specialist medical practitioners and associated
disciplines. No general practitioners are planned to be included in the development.

The recently approved proposal included a residential component but advice from several
interested parties was that the inclusion of residential dwellings in the development was
inappropriate and offers would be withdrawn if the residential component was not removed.

Building Design

The site has quite significant exposure on such a prominent corner, particularly from the
southern approach crossing the rail line. The proposed development is highest at this corner
but steps down and is setback along Turvey Lane and the northern boundary in order to
mitigate the visual impact of the building on neighbouring residential properties. The overall
design concept was to create a strong and lively form.

Car Parking

Typically in such developments, the car parking needs vary on a daily basis. In many instances
a specialist consultant will spend time between office and surgery, consulting on some days
and in operating theatre on other days. Generally patient appointments take on average half an
hour. Taking into account overruns, the parking time would likely be approximately 45 minutes.
Therefore 38 parking bays can accommodate approximately 51 visits per hour or over a period
of 8.00am to 6.00pm, 510 visits per day. This is considered more than adequate.

We are aware Council is also reviewing the car parking requirement and that, given the
proximity to Subiaco Rail Station, and also that street parking and end-of-trip facilities are
available, it is considered that the parking provided is adequate.

Traffic

Based on the operational characteristics, it is estimated that the proposed development would
generate 1297 daily vehicle trips and approximately 130 PM peak hour trips during a typical
weekday. The traffic assessment undertaken demonstrates that the traffic generated by the
proposed development can be accommodated by the surrounding road network and will not
have an adverse impact on the existing traffic operations.

Neighbour Submission

The application was advertised to the northern adjoining neighbour at 6 McCourt Street and
residential properties east of the subject site at 328 and 326 Railway Parade, and 1, 1A, 1B
and 3A Tate Street. One submission was received from the owners of 1 Tate Street and is
summarised below.

There is no reason for Council to change the plot ratio or even contemplate a three or four
storey building. The building bulk and intensity of the site would be preposterous. This
application has no redeeming features.

Turning right from McCourt or Tate Street into Railway Parade at the moment is difficult and
dangerous. Traffic builds up at the bridge during peak times and cars turn left into Turvey Lane
and Tate Street to turnaround and head right on Railway Parade. A variation in car parking will
impact the traffic catastrophically.



MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                          4
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


I have a huge problem with the size and scale of the building, where else are you allowing four
storey developments to overshadow established homes? What rights do long standing
residents of West Leederville have in the say of these massive, greedy developments which
impact so much on our life-style and property values?

Comment

Land Use

The subject lot is zoned ‘Medical’ under the Town Planning Scheme No. 1. Policy 6.5 of the
Town Planning Scheme Policy Manual prescribes the land use and development standards for
all development in this precinct and has been used to assess the application. In the ‘Medical’
precinct, consulting rooms are ‘AA’ uses, meaning that they are not permitted unless Council
has granted planning approval.

The subject lot is situated on the south-east corner of the ‘Medical’ precinct. St John of God
Hospital is directly west of the site and there are several medical practices to the north.
Although it is zoned ‘Medical’, the northern adjoining property contains an existing residential
dwelling and to the east of the site, across Turvey Lane, land is zoned Residential R30.
Therefore, while the use of consulting rooms is considered compatible with the precinct and
surrounding land uses, the impact of the development on the residential zone to the east
should be taken into careful consideration.

Building Design

The proposed building presents a generally monolithic structure to the street, having flat roof
sections of varying heights which are clad in either black, charcoal, silver or white finishes. The
bulk of the building is concentrated around the south-western corner of the lot, with a reduction
in height towards the northern and eastern boundaries.

Policy 6.5 states that Council shall determine maximum building heights, taking into
consideration such matters as the scale and building height of nearby development, the
proximity of heritage places and impact on streetscape. The maximum height of the building is
21.2 metres, as viewed from the street, at the corner of Railway Parade and McCourt Street.
The height of the building steps down marginally toward the northern boundary, with an
average height of 15.8 metres, set back 2.7 metres. While this height is significantly greater
than what has been approved by Council in the past, the northern adjoining neighbour has
verbally advised that he has no objection to the scale of the development and, furthermore, it is
considered that the height provides a transition towards the existing and likely future proposed
one and two storey heights of medical practices further north on McCourt Street.

The building height and setback along the eastern façade is particularly important due to its
proximity to residential properties across Turvey Lane. The ground and second floor of the
proposed building have a nil setback to Turvey Lane but the third and fourth floors are set back
3.0 metres and 6.0 metres respectively. While heights vary due to the ‘layered’ effect of the
building, the average height of the elevation is 16.0 metres. The first floor is an average of
8.4 metres in height, and at its highest point, the façade reaches 19.0 metres.

While there is no requirement to calculate setbacks as per the Residential Design Codes of WA
(R Codes), if the building was to be assessed, it would require an 8.0 metres setback. Taking
into account Turvey Lane, the upper floors provide a 12.0 metres setback. In addition, it is not
considered that the proposal will have a significant adverse effect on residential properties to
the east in terms of overshadowing due to the north-west orientation of the lot.




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                             5
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


The building setbacks are therefore considered to minimise the building bulk presented to the
residential zone to the east.

Plot Ratio

Policy 6.5 states that in the ‘Medical’ precinct the plot ratio should not exceed 1.0:1.0. Clause
27 of the Town Planning Scheme also allows for an increase of 10 percent from the specified
maximum if a development conserves or enhances a place which has been declared by
Council to be significant and worthy of conservation. As the fire station is to be retained, this
equates to 1.1:1.0. The proposal seeks a plot ratio of 1.87:1.0.

Council has in the past considered variations to plot ratio where a high standard of building
design and amenity for surrounding areas is maintained by the development. In this instance,
the applicant has agreed to several amendments suggested by the Town in order to alleviate
the impact on surrounding residential uses and present a more accessible urban form at street
level. This included increased setbacks for the upper floors to the eastern boundary and a
concourse with street level access provided at the McCourt Street/Railway Parade corner. The
resulting reduction in overall building bulk and provision for a more open, active street frontage
enables the building to sit more comfortably within its surrounds.

The location of the site is also to be taken into consideration when determining plot ratio. While
the site is not necessarily unique, its prominence on the corner combined with its close
proximity to activity nodes such as Subiaco Oval, Subiaco Town Centre and St John of God
Hospital mean that it does provide the opportunity to present a strong urban form which
interacts with the street.

For the reasons above, the plot ratio is considered acceptable and is supported.

Car Parking

                       Provision                       Required       Provided
Scheme                 4 bays per consulting room      136 bays       91 bays
Provisions                                                            44 bays (48.4%) in a tandem
                                                                      configuration
Draft Scheme           4 spaces/practitioner for the   72 bays
Provisions             first 2 practitioners and 2     57 bays with
Currently advertised   spaces/practictioners           concessions
for public comment     thereafter
                       Concessions for public
                       transport accessibility,
                       walkability and end-of-trip
                       facilities


It is considered that the Town’s Draft Off-Street Parking policy is a more relevant measure for
determining an adequate amount of car parking for the proposal. The policy has greater
consideration for issues such as the sharing of administration staff that occurs within group
practices and is at greater parity with other local authority provisions. In addition, changing the
requirement to ‘per practictioner’ is consistent with the Town Planning Scheme definition for
consulting rooms, which minimises confusion.

If the current proposal was subject to the draft policy, the development would only require 72
car bays, exclusive of any concessions. Inclusive of concessions for the proposal’s proximity to
public transport and end-of-trip facilities, the development would only require 57 bays, 34 bays
less than what the applicant has prescribed based on market wants.


MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                             6
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010



In considering an acceptable provision for car parking, the following issues should also be
taken into account:

    The provision of end-of-trip facilities and proximity to public transport. While it is not
      suggested that sick or injured patients will necessarily cycle or catch public transport to
      the centre, the site is within 500 metres of the West Leederville train station and provides
      a significant opportunity for staff to utilise sustainable modes of transport.

    Tandem parking. The proposal contains a large percentage of tandem parking which is
      generally not encouraged. In this instance, however, it is considered that the tandem
      configuration can suitability accommodate staff of the centre provided that proper parking
      management is put in place

Therefore, having regard to the Town’s Draft Off-Street Parking policy and the proximity of the
subject site to public transport, the parking proposed is supported.

Traffic Management

This area already experiences traffic congestion. This development will add to that congestion,
however, the traffic report demonstrates that the area will continue to function at a similar level.

Provision of an entry-only access from McCourt Street, in addition to access from Turvey Lane
will assist in dispersing traffic accessing the development. Widening of the Turvey Lane entry to
Railway Parade, however, will be required in order to enable smoother entry into the right-of-
way when turning left.

Fire Station

Whilst the former fire station building is to be restored, it is considered that its conversion to
consulting rooms would not be complimentary to its heritage status.

Alternative uses have been discussed with the applicant. Residential might be a more suitable
use, however, its location with a busy medical area will reduce its attraction. Other uses
considered, such as a café, are not permitted under the ‘Medical’ zone and would therefore
require an amendment to the Town Planning Scheme.

The applicant has indicated their willingness to pursue uses for the fire station which are not
included in the Town Planning Scheme, but do not wish for any Scheme amendment to
preclude an approval for the medical centre itself. The fire station has therefore been excluded
from this application and will require a subsequent application to be submitted by the applicant
to the Town.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

There are no policy or statutory implications related to this report. The proposal was assessed
against the provisions of the Residential Design Codes (R Codes), Town Planning Scheme
No.1, and the Town Planning Scheme Policy Manual.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no financial implications related to this report.




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                              7
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

Consideration of this application is consistent with the Town's Strategic Plan 2009-2020 for the
priority area 'Planning for our Community'.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

This matter has been assessed under the Community Consultation Policy. The requirements
for consultation have been satisfied under the statutory provisions of the Town Planning
Scheme.


SUMMARY:

The proposed use of the site is consistent with the general intent of the ‘Medical’ zone, but,
careful attention is required by Council regarding the impact of the building on residential
properties to the east. This relates to both the height and scale of the building and its setback to
the eastern boundary. The setbacks of the building at the third and fourth floors, together with
the separation provide by the 6.0m wide Turvey Lane, are considered adequate to minimise the
impact on the amenity of residential properties east of the subject site.

The plot ratio of the proposed development is substantially greater than that prescribed in the
Town Planning Scheme Policy Manual for this area (79% greater). The building, however, has
been designed to provide a strong built form on a prominent corner site, while maintaining
reduced bulk and scale where it presents to neighbouring properties to the east and north. The
built form is consistent with that of the St John of God Hospital on the opposite side of McCourt
Street. Further, in accordance with heritage provisions in the Town Planning Scheme,
consideration is given to the retention of the former fire station, listed in the Town’s Municipal
Heritage Inventory. As noted in the background section of this report, Council previously
approved a development on the site with a plot ratio of 38% greater than the Scheme provision.

ATTACHMENTS:

Nil.

Committee Meeting 15 December 2009

During discussion, the Administration was requested to provide further information on the
possibility of seeking a cash in lieu contribution for parking from the applicant.

FURTHER REPORT (Post Committee Meeting 15 December 2009)

During Committee's consideration of this item, it was queried whether a cash in lieu contribution
should be sought in regard to the proposed parking numbers, which fall short of the Town's
current parking policy.

This matter is somewhat complicated by the fact that the Town has recently adopted a draft
review of its parking policy and this draft is currently being advertised for public comment. The
new draft policy proposes a reduction in the required number of parking bays for large group
practices such as this. Current scheme provisions were considered too onerous and out of
date. The consulting rooms group parking requirements were reviewed and changed to be
consistent with other local governments in the metropolitan area.

The draft parking policy will be presented to Council for final adoption, taking into consideration
the comments received from the public advertising period, in February next year.


MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                              8
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010



The parking provision for the development as outlined in the Council report is as follows:-

                 Provision                       Required           Provided
Scheme           4 bays per consulting room      136 bays           91 bays
Provisions
                                                                    44 bays (48.4%) in a tandem
Draft Scheme     4 spaces/practitioner for the   72 bays            configuration
Provisions       first 2 practitioners and 2
                 spaces/practitioners            57 bays with
Currently        thereafter                      concessions
advertised for
public           Concessions for public
comment          transport accessibility,
                 walkability and end-of-trip
                 facilities


Notwithstanding the somewhat confusing situation that we have at the moment with regard to
parking requirements, it is very evident that parking in this section of McCourt is already at a
premium. Apart from recently installing parking meters in McCourt Street, there are no specific
plans to undertake any further works to try to improve the parking situation. The only
opportunity to improve parking would be to introduce angled parking (preferably 90 degrees)
into McCourt Street. This could be undertaken, however, it would affect other works
programmes already scheduled by the Town.

If money is to be sought from the applicant, as a condition of development approval, this could
be held in trust until such time as future works were to be undertaken.

Should Council add a condition in this regard, the sum of the contribution will have to be
determined, based on the current parking policy. This proposal has a shortfall 45 bays under
the current policy. The cost of providing angled parking in the street, generally works out at
around $5,000 per bay, although this can vary depending on the particular physical
circumstances in the street. At $5,000 per bay, the 45 bay shortfall equates to $225,000.

Aside from the question of parking provision for the development, with respect to seeking a
cash contribution towards public infrastructure from the developer, consideration might also be
given to the requested plot ratio for the development. The applicant is seeking a plot ratio of
1.87:1, whereas the TPS policy specifies a plot ratio 1:1, plus an additional 0.1:1 for retention of
the fire station. This equates to an additional 1,360 square metres of floor area. It is not unusual
for local government to seek contributions to public infrastructure/facilities where a developer
seeks floor area additional to Town Planning Scheme provisions. The principle is that the
community shares in the benefit achieved by the developer in getting a larger, more valuable
building.

Council has received a contribution from the developer of the Australian Post building at No. 1
Cambridge Street, towards landscaping treatment in the road verge adjacent to the building.
Further, Council recently approved the development on the corner of Railway Parade and
Loftus Street, with a plot ratio substantially greater than the TPS, on condition that the
developer undergrounds the power lines adjacent to the building, at his expense.

In this particular case, there is no specific identified project, however, as indicated above, if
Council was to seek a contribution from the developer, this could be held in trust for future
public improvements in the area. This might be parking improvements, streetscape
improvements or contributing towards undergrounding the power lines. If a contribution is to be


MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                              9
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


sought on this basis, Council would have to determine what would be a suitable sum. Aside
from the abovementioned reference to the cost of providing on street parking bays, there has
been a practice in some local governments, both here and around the world, in requesting a
contribution of 1 percent of the development cost of the building being contributed towards the
provision of public art. In this case, 1 percent of the development cost equates to $100,000.

State Planning Policy 3.6 – Developer Contributions for Infrastructure (gazetted November
2009) allows development contributions to be agreed voluntarily between a developer and a
local government authority. However, any condition for a developer contribution as part of a
development approval should be consistent with the principles outlined in Section 5.2 of the
Policy. These principles, for example, include need and the nexus, transparency, equity and
certainty. So in formulating any condition the Town must be clear in what the contribution is for
and how it relates to the development.

Should Council decide to add a condition to the development approval, along the lines of the
above, the following wording is suggested:

The applicant paying a cash contribution of <insert sum> to the Council, to be held in trust for
future improvement works in this section of McCourt Street, between Cambridge Street and
Railway Parade.

COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

That, in accordance with Part 4 of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No. 1,
Council APPROVES the application for a specialist medical centre submitted by Modus Project
Management at Lots 498, 499 and 500 (No. 330-334) Railway Parade, West Leederville as
shown on the amended plans dated 3 December 2009, subject to the following conditions:-

(i)     the lots being amalgamated into one lot on the certificate of title prior to the issue of the
        building licence;

(ii)    preparation and implementation of a Bin/Waste Management Plan indicating the storage
        method and collection details prior to the issue of the building licence to the satisfaction of
        the Town;

(iii)   a Construction Management Plan being submitted detailing how the construction of the
        development will be managed in order to limit the impact on the surrounding area. The
        plan will need to ensure that adequate space is provided within the subject site for the
        parking of workers’ vehicles on site and how traffic management will be undertaken. The
        Construction Management Plan shall be submitted and approved by the Town prior to the
        issue of the building licence;

(iv)    a Conservation Plan for the Leederville Fire Station being submitted and approved by the
        Town prior to the issue of the building licence. The conservation plan should explain the
        heritage significance of the place, provide a clear statement of the conservation policy
        and include detailed proposals for the care, use, interpretation, management,
        maintenance and security of the building;

(v)     a Parking Management Plan being submitted detailing the operation of the car park,
        including the management of tandem bays, reciprocal rights and general traffic flow;

(vi)    details of any signage on the site being subject to a separate development application;

(vii) a maximum of thirty-four (34) practitioners operating from the premises at any one time;



MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                                10
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


(viii) a 6.0 metres x 6.0 metres truncation being provided on the corner of McCourt Street and
       Railway Parade;

(ix)   a 3.0 metres x 3.0 metres truncation being provided on the corner of Railway Parade and
       Turvey Lane;

(x)    the application does not include the use of Leederville Fire Station situated on Lot 500
       and is subject to separate approval from Council.

Footnote:

With regard to Condition (x), the applicant be advised to liaise with Council officers regarding
the proposed future use of Leederville Fire Station.

Council Meeting 22 December 2009

During discussion, Cr MacRae expressed concern with regard to the adequacy of the proposed
parking provision given the nature of the development for individual consulting practices and
the existing parking congestion in McCourt Street and the St John of God medical precinct in
general. As such, it was suggested that further consideration needed to be given by the
applicant to either decrease the size of the development or increase on-site parking. Cr
MacRae noted that a recent approval for the same site had a lower plot ratio and included a
residential component. Concern was also expressed regarding the bulk of the development
particularly in regard to the façade treatment.

COUNCIL DECISION

That the item relating to Lot 498, 499, 500 (No. 330-334) Railway Parade, West Leederville be
referred back to the Development Committee for further consideration.

FURTHER REPORT (Post Council Meeting 22 December 2009)

Subsequent to Council’s meeting, the applicant has held numerous meetings with
Administration officers in order to address the concerns raised. Amended plans have been
submitted which increase car parking, decrease the number of consulting rooms and alter the
design and façade of the building.

The following comments are made in respect to the revised plan.

Building Design

In response to concerns raised regarding the bulk presented to residential properties to the
east, the applicant has reduced the eastern wall height by approximately 2.5 metres. Wall
heights have also been reduced slightly on the western elevation but a majority of panels
remain the same height in order to screen plant material located on the roof of the building.

The applicant has also attempted to address the building’s interaction with the street by
wrapping the ground floor consulting room around to the southern elevation and increasing the
glazing presented along the McCourt Street and Railway Parade ground floor elevations.

The revised plan presents a more active frontage to the streets and reduces the building bulk
presented to residential properties to the east.




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                         11
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


Car Parking

The revised plans include an additional level of car parking which has increased the number of
car bays from the previously provided 91 bays to 110 bays. The applicant has also reduced the
number of consulting rooms from 34 to 32, thereby reducing the current Scheme provision for
car parking from 136 bays to 128 bays. The revised car parking arrangement therefore
represents a 14 percent variation on the current Scheme provisions.

The applicant is seeking variation to the Scheme provision for car parking based on the ability
to provide end-of-trip facilities and the lot’s proximity to high frequency public transport. It is
recognised that while patients generally may not utilise these services, the opportunity exists
for staff to make use of alternative modes of transport.

The parking area has a number of bays in tandem arrangement and as the area will be shared
between staff and visitors for a number of tenancies, it will be necessary for the applicant to
provide and adhere to a parking management plan.

Plot Ratio

Although the number of consulting rooms proposed has been reduced in the revised proposal,
the increase in the net lettable area (NLA) of the ground floor tenancy has resulted in a slightly
higher plot ratio. The increase of 25.9m2 has therefore resulted in a plot ratio revision from
1.87:1.0 to 1.89:1.0.

As the additional NLA is contained within the originally proposed structure, the plot ratio will not
have any significant affect on building scale or bulk in relation to surrounding properties.

ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Pelczar, seconded by Cr Pinerua

That, in accordance with Part 4 of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No. 1,
Council APPROVES the application for 32 consulting rooms submitted by Modus Project
Management at Lots 498, 499 and 500 (No. 330-334) Railway Parade, West Leederville as
shown on the amended plans dated 3 February 2010, subject to the following conditions:-

(i)     the lots being amalgamated into one lot on the certificate of title prior to the issue of the
        building licence;

(ii)    preparation and implementation of a Bin/Waste Management Plan indicating the storage
        method and collection details prior to the issue of the building licence to the satisfaction of
        the Town;

(iii)   a Construction Management Plan being submitted detailing how the construction of the
        development will be managed in order to limit the impact on the surrounding area. The
        plan will need to ensure that adequate space is provided within the subject site for the
        parking of workers’ vehicles on site and how traffic management will be undertaken. The
        Construction Management Plan shall be submitted and approved by the Town prior to the
        issue of the building licence;

(iv)    a Conservation Plan for the Leederville Fire Station being submitted and approved by the
        Town prior to the issue of the building licence. The conservation plan should explain the
        heritage significance of the place, provide a clear statement of the conservation policy
        and include detailed proposals for the care, use, interpretation, management,
        maintenance and security of the building;


MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                                12
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010



(v)    a Parking Management Plan being submitted detailing the operation of the car park,
       including the management of tandem bays, operation of staff and visitor bays, reciprocal
       rights and general traffic flow;

(vi)   the operation of, and adherence to the Parking Management Plan;

(vii) any signage on the site being subject to a separate development application;

(viii) a maximum of thirty-two (32) practitioners operating from the premises at any one time;

(ix)   a 6.0 metres x 6.0 metres truncation being provided on the corner of McCourt Street and
       Railway Parade;

(x)    a 3.0 metres x 3.0 metres truncation being provided on the corner of Railway Parade and
       Turvey Lane;

(xi)   the application does not include the use of Leederville Fire Station situated on Lot 500
       and is subject to separate approval from Council.

Committee Meeting 16 February 2010

During discussion, with respect to the proposed additional plot ration and the shortfall in
parking, in relation to the Town Planning Scheme provisions, Members queried whether a
financial contribution should be made by the developer to the Town to assist in the funding of
future improvements in the public realm. As the developer would benefit from Council
exercising its discretion, it was considered not unreasonable that the broader community also
gets some benefit.

The Administration was requested to provide further information on the matter of developer
contributions prior to the next meeting of Council.

Amendment

Moved by Cr MacRae, seconded by Cr Watson

That clause (v) of the motion be amended by adding the words "the car parking not being
accessible to the public after hours" following the word "including".

Amendment carried             4/0

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:

That, in accordance with Part 4 of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No. 1,
Council APPROVES the application for 32 consulting rooms submitted by Modus Project
Management at Lots 498, 499 and 500 (No. 330-334) Railway Parade, West Leederville as
shown on the amended plans dated 3 February 2010, subject to the following
conditions:-

(i)    the lots being amalgamated into one lot on the certificate of title prior to the issue
       of the building licence;

(ii)   preparation and implementation of a Bin/Waste Management Plan indicating the
       storage method and collection details prior to the issue of the building licence to
       the satisfaction of the Town;


MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                          13
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010



(iii)   a Construction Management Plan being submitted detailing how the construction
        of the development will be managed in order to limit the impact on the surrounding
        area. The plan will need to ensure that adequate space is provided within the
        subject site for the parking of workers’ vehicles on site and how traffic
        management will be undertaken. The Construction Management Plan shall be
        submitted and approved by the Town prior to the issue of the building licence;

(iv)    a Conservation Plan for the Leederville Fire Station being submitted and approved
        by the Town prior to the issue of the building licence. The conservation plan
        should explain the heritage significance of the place, provide a clear statement of
        the conservation policy and include detailed proposals for the care, use,
        interpretation, management, maintenance and security of the building;

(v)     a Parking Management Plan being submitted detailing the operation of the car
        park, including car parking not being accessible to the public after hours, the
        management of tandem bays, operation of staff and visitor bays, reciprocal rights
        and general traffic flow;

(vi)    the operation of, and adherence to the Parking Management Plan;

(vii) any signage on the site being subject to a separate development application;

(viii) a maximum of thirty-two (32) practitioners operating from the premises at any one
       time;

(ix)    a 6.0 metres x 6.0 metres truncation being provided on the corner of McCourt
        Street and Railway Parade;

(x)     a 3.0 metres x 3.0 metres truncation being provided on the corner of Railway
        Parade and Turvey Lane;

(xi)    the application does not include the use of Leederville Fire Station situated on Lot
        500 and is subject to separate approval from Council.

Carried           4/0




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                      14
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010




DV10.2      LOTS 9, 10 AND 24 (NO. 48-50) OXFORD CLOSE, WEST LEEDERVILLE -
            FOUR STOREY OFFICE BUILDING AND CAFE



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To consider an application for a four storey office building and café seeking variations to the
requirements of Town Planning Scheme No. 1 (TPS 1) with respect to car parking and plot
ratio.

BACKGROUND:

BA/DA REFERENCE:                          410DA-2009
LANDOWNER:                                Sacha Grewal
APPLICANT:                                John L. Silbert & Associates Architects
ZONING:                                   MRS: Urban
                                          TPS 1: Commercial
USE CLASS:                                Restaurant/Office - 'AA" (not permitted without Council
                                          approval).
LAND AREA:                                303, 216, 303 square metres - 822 square metres total

At its meeting on 28 April 2009 (Item DV09.28) Council refused an application for a motor
vehicle carwash on the subject site as it was considered that the use would have a detrimental
impact on traffic volumes and movements within the West Leederville precinct, and more
particularly, within the northern end of Oxford Close and that the use of a 'Motor Vehicle Wash'
was not considered suitable in this location and would have a negative impact on the amenity
of the area.

The applicant subsequently submitted an application for review of this decision with the State
Administrative Tribunal but, following a number of meetings and discussions with Council
officers, resolved to withdraw from the appeal process and submit the current application
instead.

DETAILS:

Development Description

    Subject site has three street frontages to Oxford Close, Harrogate Street and Cambridge
      Street, West Leederville and is currently used as a private fee-paying carpark with 33
      carbays (approval granted under delegated authority in 2005) accessed via Oxford Close.
    Proposal consists of an underground level of carparking, a ground level of parking with a
      cafe on the corner of Oxford Close and Harrogate Street and three levels of office space.
      The building subsequently appears as a four storey building.
    The proposed building is modern in design with extensive glazing on the elevations facing
      Oxford Close, Harrogate Street and Cambridge Streets. The building's main entry
      statement is facing Oxford Close with the corner facing cafe being expansive and open to
      the street.
    Pedestrian and vehicular access to the site is proposed from Oxford Close and Harrogate
      Street with the entry/exit point to the undercroft parking being via Harrogate Street and
      entry/exit to the ground floor parking being via Oxford Close.




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                          15
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010



Applicant's Submission

Prior to commencing this project design we have had extensive discussions with the adjoining
owner to endeavour to do a joint venture that would produce a better building result for both
sites. Unfortunately, we were not able to do this and consequently there are some site
limitations to achieve a financially viable design.

Design

    Designed to provide a street presence to all three street frontages with each elevation
      paying respect to a difference in function, sun control and façade treatment providing
      interest to the streetscape design.
    Level differential between streets and access for disabled required a ramp entry to the
      upper ground floor and a 'local café/'coffee bar' has been incorporated in the front of the
      building together with its own toilet facilities.
    All elevations will have sun control louvers supported on sculptural pipe framework for
      energy savings on the air conditioning and varied colours will be applied to both pipe
      framing and louvre blades to give variety to the street design.
    Construction will be precast concrete floors, concrete columns and powdercoat aluminium
      window/wall on concrete upstand spandrel panels.

Carparking

    A total of 39 carbays have been shown together with 16 bike racks and end of journey
      Male and Female changeroom/toilets.
    The site is located on Cambridge Street which is a major bus route and within a short
      walk to Loftus Street and the nearby train station.
    On this basis we seek Council dispensation for approving the floor space/carparking ratio
      shown on the plans.

Comment

Land Use

The subject site is zoned 'Commercial' under Town Planning Scheme No. 1 and falls within the
West Leederville Planning Precinct. Policy 6.5 of the Town Planning Scheme Policy Manual
prescribes the development standards for commercial areas and, more specifically, the
Southport Street Commercial Area (of which this lot forms part).

There is a mix of commercial buildings in the West Leederville precinct so the proposed office
and restaurant uses are considered compatible with the surrounding land uses. The inclusion
of a café (restaurant use) at ground level ensures some level of activity and interest on the
streetscape. The area is undergoing redevelopment and development such as this will be
encouraged through the implementation of the West Leederville Planning Urban Design Study
(West Leederville Study).

Building Design

The proposed building is rectangular with a curved north-eastern corner facing Cambridge
Street. The main entry is under an awning on the corner of Oxford Close and Harrogate
Streets. The design is modern with a variety of building materials including concrete panels,
glazing, louvers and awnings. The precinct policy does not specify any particular building
design, apart from requiring building to provide awnings/verandahs over the footpath, which is
what is proposed with this development.


MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                          16
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


The overall height of the building is approximately 14 metres (four storeys). A height limit is not
stated in the precinct policy, however, the policy states that new development, particularly
where located on a prominent corner should be a minimum of 9.0 metres in height. At present,
the majority of existing buildings in the locality are between two and four levels and therefore
the proposal can be considered to be consistent with development in the locality.

Active frontages are orientated towards Oxford Close and the ground level parking along
Harrogate Street will be screened by walls and ventilation grills.

Plot Ratio

The precinct policy allows a plot ratio of 1:1 in the Southport Street Commercial area. The
plans submitted show a plot ratio of 2.3:1. Whilst this may seem a major variation to what is
permissible, the following should be taken into account:-

    The subject site falls within the study area for the West Leederville Study. The Council, at
      its meeting in June 2009, adopted Stage One of the Study which allowed for targeted
      change to the built form in the eastern activity node. This allows for buildings of 3 to 8
      storeys within this area. In addition, this development supports the potential of a
      transport-oriented development with its close proximity to public transport (both bus and
      train) and provision of end of trip facilities.
    The study suggests that providing built form development controls rather than plot ratio
      controls will result in more visually attractive and economically viable developments.
    The provision of the café at ground level and on the corner of Oxford Street and
      Harrogate Street will help activate the streetscape to attract and channel pedestrians
      between Leederville train station and West Leederville commercial area.
    Last year, Council approved an office development at 3 to 5 Loftus Street with a plot ratio
      of up to 3.23:1 mainly because it was an iconic building with great exposure. This lot has
      high exposure along Cambridge Street and is one of the first properties seen as you enter
      the Town from the east.

For the reasons mentioned above, the plot ratio variation is supported.

Car Parking

Use                               Scheme Provision                  Proposed
Restaurant (café)                 1 bay for every 4.5m2 of          39 car bays provided
                                  seating area.                     16 bicycle bays provided and
                                  42 sqm of seating area so 9       end of trip facilities
                                  bays
Office                            1 bay per 30 m2 NLA
                                  1800 square metres of office
                                  so 60 bays required

                                  TOTAL: 69 car bays required

The applicant is proposing a shortfall of 30 car bays in the total number of car bays required
under Policy 6.1 Off Street Parking of the Town Planning Scheme Policy Manual. In respect of
the variation proposed the following points are made:-

    Under the proposed Draft Parking Policy, concessions to parking may be given for
      developments that meet certain criteria in relation to the provision of end of trip facilities,
      as well as proximity to public transport and walkability. Based on the draft Policy, this
      development is designed and located so that it could attract approximately a 50%
      concession on parking requirements. It provides end of trip facilities (15% concession), is


MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                              17
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


      in close proximity to a train station (20% concession), meets walkability criteria (6%) and
      is located next to Cambridge Street which services at least five different bus routes (10%
      concession).
    Whilst 9 car bays are required for the café, it is probable that the majority of the patrons
      of the café will walk to the premises from surrounding businesses or within the building
      itself, thereby reducing the need for carparking to be provided for it.
    The provision of 1 bay per 30 square metres of floor area for offices, without offering
      concessions for use of alternative transport modes, is considered to be fairly onerous for
      an activity centre promoting transport oriented development.

For the reasons mentioned above, the car parking variation is supported.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

There are no policy or statutory implications related to this report. The proposal was assessed
against the provisions of the Town Planning Scheme No.1,), the Town's Policy Manual, the
West Leederville Planning and Urban Design Study and Draft Parking Policy.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no financial implications related to this report.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

Consideration of this application is consistent with the Towns Strategic Plan 2009-2020,
specifically priority area “Planning for Our Community’ and the goals of ‘attractive and diverse
shopping and business areas’ and ‘transport choice’.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

There are no requirements for consultation under the statutory provisions of the Town Planning
Scheme No.1.


SUMMARY:

The proposed development is located on a prominent site visible from Cambridge Street and
forms part of the entry into the Town. The scale of the development is therefore not considered
out of place. It has excellent access to public transport with proximity to Leederville and City
West train stations and bus network along Cambridge Street.

The proposed land uses of 'restaurant' and 'office' are consistent with the commercial zoning of
the site. The proposed development encourages activity along Oxford Close of which has been
identified in the draft Part 2 Detailed Planning for the West Leederville Study as suitable for
‘main street’ development.

Whilst the additional plot ratio and shortfall in carparking may be considered significant under
current policies, both the Town's carparking policy and the planning provisions for this area are
currently under review. The proposed development is consistent with other approvals in the
locality, the intentions of the draft Parking Policy and the planning principles being developed
under the West Leederville Study.




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                           18
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


Overall, it is considered that the proposed development is consistent with the objectives of the
Town Planning Scheme and with the future planning for the West Leederville Planning Precinct
and is therefore supported.

ATTACHMENTS:

Nil.

Committee Meeting 16 February 2010

During discussion, Members noted that the further information requested in the previous item
(Item DV10.1) should also address this application.

COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Watson, seconded by Cr Pinerua

That, in accordance with Part 4 of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No. 1,
Council APPROVES the application for a four storey office building submitted by John.
L. Silbert and Associates at Lots 9, 10 and 24 (No. 48-50) Oxford Close, corner Harrogate
Street, West Leederville as shown on the amended plans dated 12 January 2010 subject
to the following conditions:-

(i)     the amalgamation of Lots 9, 10 and 24 Oxford Close prior to the issue of a issue of
        building licence;

(ii)    a Parking Management Plan being submitted prior to the issue of a building licence
        detailing the operation of the car park, including the management of tandem bays,
        staff and visitor allocation and general traffic flow;

(iii)   the operation of, and adherence to the Parking Management Plan;

(iv)    preparation and implementation of a Bin/Waste Management Plan indicating the
        storage method and collection details prior to the issue of a building licence to the
        satisfaction of the Town;

(v)     details of any signage on site being subject to a separate development application;

(vi)    a Construction Management Plan being submitted detailing how the construction
        of the development will be managed in order to limit the impact on the surrounding
        area. The plan will need to ensure that adequate space is provided within the
        subject site for the parking of worker's vehicles on site and how traffic
        management will be undertaken. The Construction Management Plan shall be
        submitted and approved by the Town prior to the issue of a building licence;

(vii) the bicycle parking facilities and employee 'end-of-journey' facilities (including bike
      lockers) being provided and maintained to the satisfaction of the Town. Details to
      be confirmed at building licence stage.

Carried            4/0




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                         19
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010




DV10.3      LOT 1 (NO. 5) WOLLASTON ROAD, CITY BEACH - ALTERATIONS AND
            ADDITIONS    TO  EDUCATIONAL   ESTABLISHMENT    (WOLLASTON
            THEOLOGICAL COLLEGE)



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To consider an application for alterations and additions to the existing Educational
Establishment (Wollaston Theological College) requiring assessment under Town Planning
Scheme No. 1 (TPS 1).

BACKGROUND:

BA/DA REFERENCE:                          338DA-2009
LANDOWNER:                                Perth Diocesan Trustees
APPLICANT:                                Perth Diocesan Trustees
ZONING:                                   MRS: Urban
                                          TPS 1: Special Use Zone
LAND AREA:                                19,628 square metres

DETAILS:

Development Description

The proposal involves the following:-

    partial demolition of redundant two storey bedroom accommodation;
    conversion of existing small conference room into toilet facilities;
    new shade membranes over the existing internal courtyard;
    new feature wall panels;
    conversion of existing office into reception room;
    upgrading landscaping (hard and soft) to courtyard area in front of chapel;
    re-surfacing of car park areas, Wollaston Road and Le Fanu Place.

Applicant Submission

Wollaston Theological College was developed in the 1950's as the principal education centre
for the Diocese of Perth. For over 40 years, priests and lay preachers have received
theological training and in more recent times the venue has been developed as a small scale
theological conference venue/meeting spaces for Anglican agencies, parishes and allied
groups. Whilst originally sleeping accommodation was provided, this requirement has
diminished hence the proposal to demolish this part of the complex.

The long term plan for the venue is to construct a new conference facility building where the
two storey accommodation building is currently located. This new building is not part of this
development application but a master plan has been provided for information purposes. At this
stage it is anticipated that a development application for the conference building will be
submitted in 2011.

Discussions with the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority has revealed that these works are
acceptable and will no detract from the character and natural bush setting of Bold Park.


MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                      20
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


Comment

Wollaston Theological College is a Special Use Zone as specified under Clause 14 and listed in
Schedule 3 of Town Planning Scheme No. 1.

The Special Use zone allows for Lot 1 Wollaston Road, City Beach to be used by Wollaston
Theological College and ancillary buildings and facilities which, in the opinion of the Council,
are ancillary to the purposes of the Theological College. All development standards/conditions
for the site are as determined by the Council. These standards are detailed under Policy 6.2:
Precinct P2: Rebold. The policy generally describes development standards for the site such
as:-

    Buildings should be well set back from the boundary of Bold Regional Park with
      generously landscaped surrounds;
    New development and extensions should have particular regard to protect views within
      Bold Park;
    Buildings should complement the surrounding bushland as parking should be well
      screened.

The additions and alterations proposed as part of this application relate fully to the Wollaston
Theological College and are primarily rationalisation and upgrading of existing facilities. The
alterations are to improve the existing facilities largely by giving them a facelift. The two storey
accommodation is to be removed and replaced with landscaping. The proposal is considered
to meet with the requirements of the Special Use zoning and can be supported.

It is noted that the Master Plan is included in the application for information purposes only and it
is not intended that support for the current application gives approval for the overall Master
Plan. This will be best considered as part of the application for the conference centre in 2011.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

There are no policy or statutory implications related to this report. The proposal was assessed
against the provisions of the Residential Design Codes (R Codes), Town Planning Scheme
No.1, Town's Residential Design Guidelines (RDGs) and the Town's Policy Manual.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no financial implications related to this report.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

Consideration of this application is consistent with the Town's Strategic Plan 2009-2020 for the
priority area 'Planning for our Community'.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

This matter has been assessed under the Community Consultation Policy. The requirements
for consultation have been satisfied under the statutory provisions of the Town Planning
Scheme.


ATTACHMENTS:

1.    Nil.


MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                             21
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010




COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Pinerua, seconded by Cr Pelczar

That:-

(i)    in accordance with Part 4 of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No. 1,
       Council APPROVES the application for additions and alterations to the Educational
       Establishment (Wollaston Theological College) as submitted by Perth Diocesan
       Trustees at Lot 1 (No. 5) Wollaston Road, City Beach as shown on the plans dated
       23 October 2009;

(ii)   the applicant be advised that this approval does not constitute an approval to the
       overall Master Plan.

Footnote:

The applicant is advised to liaise with the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority with
respect to resurfacing the emergency access road off Le Fanu Place.

Carried           4/0




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                   22
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010




DV10.4      LOT 7 (NO. 4) ARGYLE STREET, WEST LEEDERVILLE - TWO STOREY
            DWELLING



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To consider an application for a two storey dwelling requiring assessment under the
performance criteria of the Town Planning Scheme Policy Manual in respect of roof pitch.

BACKGROUND:

BA/DA REFERENCE:                           361DA-2009
LANDOWNER:                                 Gordon Hobday and Pirkko Ikonen
APPLICANT:                                 Ian Dewar & Associates Architects
ZONING:                                    Residential R40
USE CLASS:                                 Dwelling (single) - ‘P’ - Permitted
LAND AREA:                                 415 square metres

DETAILS:

Development Description

-     Two storey dwelling proposed with the ground floor being an undercroft to the rear of the
      dwelling due to the slope of the land.
-     Lot slopes down from the front (south) to rear (north) by approximately 2.0 metres.
-     Dwelling is proposed to have a pitched roof where visible from the street and a flat roof at
      the rear. The main roof pitch at the front is a 21.5 degree pitch sloping away from the
      street. A gabled roof section with a pitch of 30 degrees also faces the street.

Delegated Authority

The Town’s Delegation of Authority Policy delegates certain powers to the Director
Development and Sustainability and Manager Development to determine minor variations to
the acceptable development provisions.

Variations to the side setback and visual privacy are proposed. These issues, subject to a
minor modification to the kitchen window, meet the relevant performance criteria and have
been advertised to adjoining neighbours with no objections being received. These variations
are therefore not discussed further in this report.

An assessment against the performance criteria for all variations has been prepared by the
Administration and is available to elected members on request.

Applicant Submission

    The proposal is to build a new house which is similar to the existing in its presentation to
      the street but which is two storey at the rear where the lower level will relate closely to the
      existing highly developed landscaped.
    Roof lines at the front are traditional to reflect the existing streetscape. Low pitched roofs
      at the rear have the purpose of reducing the impact of the two storey portions of th house
      on neighbouring properties.



MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                              23
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


Assessment Against the Performance Criteria

Roof Pitch

                                    Proposed                  Acceptable Development Provision
Roof Pitch Wembley                      21.5 degrees          Primary roofs visible from the street
                                                              to be hipped and/or gabled with a
                                                              pitch of 30 – 40 degrees

Performance Criteria:

    Buildings which respect the height, massing and roof pitches of existing housing in the
      street and immediate locality;
    Buildings which respect the architectural styles which characterise the immediate locality;
      and
    Buildings which relate to the palette of materials and colours are characteristic of housing
      in the immediate locality.


The applicant proposes to construct a two storey dwelling which appears as a single storey at
the front due to the slope of the land. There are two pitched roof sections visible from the
street. The main roof has a 21.5 degree pitch that pitches away from the street and the other
roof section facing the street is a gabled roof that has a pitch of 30 degrees in keeping with the
policy requirement. The section of roof that does not meet the roof pitch requirements is
behind the gable end and, as it pitches away from the street, the impact of the lower pitch is
reduced.

The proposed dwelling reflects the character of the street in terms of its scale and the building
materials proposed so that it is respectful of the 'West Leederville' character of timber and brick
cottages with metal deck roofing with this style being predominant in Argyle Street.

It is considered that the proposal complies with the relevant performance criteria and can be
supported.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

There are no policy or statutory implications related to this report. The proposal was assessed
against the provisions of the Residential Design Codes (R Codes), Town Planning Scheme
No.1, and the Town Planning Scheme Policy Manual.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no financial implications related to this report.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

Consideration of this application is consistent with the Town's Strategic Plan 2009-2020 for the
priority area 'Planning for our Community'.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

This matter has been assessed under the Community Consultation Policy. The requirements
for consultation have been satisfied under the statutory provisions of the Town Planning
Scheme.

MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                             24
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010




ATTACHMENTS:

1.    Nil

COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Pinerua, seconded by Cr Watson

That, in accordance with Part 4 of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No. 1,
Council APPROVES the application for a two storey dwelling submitted by Ian Dewar
Architects at Lot 7 (No. 4) Argyle Street, West Leederville as shown on the plans dated
2 November 2009 subject to the following condition:-

(i)   the kitchen window facing west being modified to comply with the acceptable
      development provisions of part 6.8.1 Visual Privacy of the Residential Design
      Codes of Western Australia.

Carried           4/0




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                 25
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010




DV10.5      LOT 177 (NO. 33) BARRETT STREET, WEMBLEY - TWO STOREY DWELLING



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To consider an application for a two storey dwelling requiring assessment under the
performance criteria of the Residential Design Codes (R Codes) and Town Planning Scheme
Policy Manual in respect of roof pitch, buildings on the boundary and building height.

BACKGROUND:

BA/DA REFERENCE:                          0315DA-2009
LANDOWNER:                                Mr Konrad Hull & Ms Sonja Wiliams
APPLICANT:                                Building Corporation Pty Ltd
ZONING:                                   Residential R30
USE CLASS:                                Dwelling (single) - ‘P’ - Permitted
LAND AREA:                                728m2

DETAILS:

Development Description

    Rectangular parent lot, with a two storey dwelling proposed on the eastern half of the lot,
      split directly down the middle.
    The resulting lot on which the proposed dwelling is to be situated has a frontage of
      8.05 metres and length of 45.26 metres.
    The lot slopes downward from front to rear by approximately 2.2 metres.
    Creech Lane, a 5.0 metres wide, sealed, Council owned right-of-way adjoins the lot to the
      south.
    Access is proposed off Creech Lane.

Delegated Authority

The Town’s Delegation of Authority Policy delegates certain powers to the Director
Development and Sustainability and Manager Development to determine minor variations to
the acceptable development provisions.

Variations to planning provisions regarding landscaping, street walls and fences and buildings
on the boundary (west) are proposed. These variations are considered to meet the relevant
performance criteria and are not discussed further in this report.

An assessment against the performance criteria for all aforementioned variations has been
prepared by the Administration and is available to elected members on request.

Applicant Submission

The majority of the streetscape has a pitched roof.

The neighbours concerns relating to setbacks make mention to the living and alfresco area
which are in compliance with setback requirements. In addition, all setbacks are of a minor
department. The lot is also only 8.0m wide and we have tried to comply with all setbacks as
best as possible.


MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                          26
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010



Neighbour Submission

The application was advertised to the eastern adjoining neighbour at 31 Barrett Street for their
comment. A submission was received and is summarised below:-

I object in the strongest possible terms. I believe that the living area and I assume the outdoor
alfresco area being moved so close to my boundary will subject me to an increased noise level,
removing the peace and quiet I currently enjoy.

Every new development seems to exceed planning requirements relating to setbacks and
height, and I believe Council should be looking after my interests by simply policing the rules.

Since advertising, the applicant has amended the plans in order to bring the upper floor setback
variations into compliance with the acceptable development provisions.

Assessment Against the Performance Criteria

Roof Pitch

                  Proposed                     Acceptable Development Provision
 Roof Pitch       Some flat roof sections      Primary roofs in Wembley which are visible from
                                               the street to be pitched between 22-35 degrees

 Performance Criteria:

      Buildings which respect the height, massing and roof pitches of existing housing in the
        street and immediate locality;

      buildings which respect the architectural styles which characterise the immediate
        locality; and

      buildings which relate to the palette of materials and colours are characteristic of
        housing in the immediate locality.


The proposed dwelling presents a single pitched roof to the street. The dwelling has a number
of flat roofs further toward the south of the lot which are slightly visible from the street. The
implementation of flat roofs towards the rear of dwellings is not uncommon within the
immediate locality and the style and massing of the proposed dwelling is considered similar to
many other existing dwellings along Barrett Street. The variation is therefore considered to
meet the performance criteria and is supported.

Building Height

                     Proposed                           Acceptable Development Provision
 Roof Height         7.45 metres at the south-west      Maximum flat roof height of 7.0 metres
                     corner of the dwelling             above natural ground level

 Performance Criteria:

 Building height consistent with the desired height of buildings in the locality, and to recognise
 the need to protect the amenities of adjoining properties, including, where appropriate:




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                             27
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


      adequate direct sun to buildings and appurtenant open spaces;
      adequate daylight to major openings to habitable rooms; and
      access to views of significance.


The portion of flat roof which exceeds the acceptable development provision is located at the
south-west corner of the proposed dwelling toward the centre of the parent lot. The over height
portion of roof is due to a dividing parapet wall and is confined to a small section where the
natural ground level slopes down towards the south.

Due to the north-south orientation of the lot, the over height portion of roof will not significantly
add to the amount of shadow cast by the dwelling. As the vast majority of the dwelling falls
within the acceptable development provisions, it is also considered the roof height variation will
significantly contribute towards a lower standard of amenity for either of the adjoining
properties.

The variation is therefore considered to meet the performance criteria and is supported.

Buildings on the Boundary

                               Proposed                       Acceptable Development Provision
 Boundary Setback (East)       Nil setbacks to garage and     1.0 metres to both
                               side screen wall

 Performance Criteria:

 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;
      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.


Due to the minimal width of the lot, a garage with a boundary wall to the east is proposed in
order to gain vehicular access from the rear right-of-way. Access from the right-of-way is
encouraged in order to minimise vehicular activity along Barrett Street and enhance the
streetscape.

The garage is considered to make effective use of space and will enhance privacy between
adjoining properties. The garage is single storey in height and fronts toward a disused south-
west corner of the eastern adjoining lot. It is therefore not considered that it will impact on the
amenity or provision of direct sun to the adjoining property.

The side screen wall is 3.4 metres high but is only 0.2 metres wide (as viewed from the eastern
adjoining property) as it acts to screen views from the street down the side of the dwelling. It is
therefore not considered that the screen wall will have any significant adverse impact on the
eastern neighbour in terms of the provision of direct sun or building bulk.

Concerns raised by the neighbour regarding setback intrusions relate more to the rear alfresco
area which is compliant with the acceptable development provisions. As such, and for the



MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                              28
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


reasons above, the variations are considered to meet the performance criteria and are
supported.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

There are no policy or statutory implications related to this report. The proposal was assessed
against the provisions of the Residential Design Codes (R Codes), Town Planning Scheme
No.1, and the Town Planning Scheme Policy Manual.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no financial implications related to this report.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

Consideration of this application is consistent with the Town's Strategic Plan 2009-2020 for the
priority area 'Planning for our Community'.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

The requirements for consultation have been satisfied under the statutory provisions of the
Town Planning Scheme.


SUMMARY:

The roof design proposed is similar to many existing dwellings within the street and, as the
dwelling presents a pitched roof to the street, is supported.

The section of roof which exceeds the acceptable development provision is confined and is
centeral to the lot. As such it is considered that the roof will not significantly impact on the
provision of direct sun or amenity to either adjoining property.

The boundary walls proposed are not considered to impact on the amenity or provision of direct
sun or ventilation to the eastern adjoining property and make effective use of space given the
lot’s minimal width. The setback variations are therefore supported.

ATTACHMENTS:

Nil.

COMMITTEE AND ADMINSTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Pinerua, seconded by Cr Watson

That, in accordance with Part 4 of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No. 1,
Council APPROVES the application for a two storey dwelling by Building Corporation
Pty Ltd at Lot 177 (No. 33) Barrett Street, Wembley as shown on the amended plans
dated 8 February 2010, subject to the following condition:-

(i)    the surface finish of all boundary walls facing adjoining properties being rendered,
       painted or face brickwork to the satisfaction of the Town.

Carried           4/0


MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                         29
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010




DV10.6      STRATA LOT 2 (NO. 291A) SALVADO ROAD, FLOREAT - ADDITIONS AND
            ALTERATIONS TO GROUPED DWELLING



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To consider an application for alterations and additions to a single storey rear strata dwelling
under the Performance Criteria of the Residential Design Codes in respect of buildings on the
boundary.

BACKGROUND:

BA/DA REFERENCE:                          0331DA-2009
LANDOWNER:                                Lawrence Wesley
APPLICANT:                                Lawrence Wesley
ZONING:                                   MRS: Urban
                                          Town Planning Scheme No. 1: Residential R15
USE CLASS:                                Dwelling (grouped) - 'AA' - existing
LAND AREA:                                460m2

DETAILS:

Development Description

    Existing dwelling is a rear strata with a double garage.
    Proposal is to convert a garage to master bedroom and construct a WIR and ensuite, with
      a boundary wall to the rear yard of the front strata dwelling.
    The height of the boundary wall is 2.44 metres and the length 4.63 metres.
    Tandem carparking, in lieu of the double garage, is proposed along the eastern side of
      the dwelling.

Applicant Submission

1.    Considered adding a two storey addition but felt impact on neighbours would be too
      extensive.
2.    Prefer to make use of available space and construct WIR Life to build on the boundary
      because we believe it to very effective use of space enabling us to add additional storage
      in an unused and unusable space.
3.    Design will have minimal impact on surrounding neighbours as much of structure is
      existing.
4.    Less impact than adding a second storey and likely to improve privacy and reduce noise.

Neighbour Submission

A submission, received from the neighbour in the front strata dwelling (No. 291 Salvado Road)
is summarised as follows:-

1.    The proposed development, namely the boundary wall, would unduly affect my amenity in
      terms of noise and issues resulting to use of my back courtyard.
2.    Subject property is quite elevated and a creeper has been established on lattice work to
      allow privacy. Should owners development with no setback to new rooms the lattice work
      and creeper will be in danger of collapsing, enabling my property to be overlooked.

MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                         30
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


3.    I purchased my property on basis that existing strata dwellings involved a 1 metre
      setback and believe development will affect my resale value.

Assessment Against the Performance Criteria

Buildings On Boundary

                                    Proposed                  Acceptable Development Provision
Boundary Setback – north side       Nil                       1.0 metre

Performance Criteria:

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;
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 proposed boundary wall makes effective use of space and provides privacy to the subject
property and the neighbour in the front strata dwelling. The boundary wall will not impact on
access to direct sun for the applicant or the front neighbour given the boundary wall will be
located south of the front strata dwelling and not in a position that will affect the applicants main
living areas. The impact of the boundary wall on the neighbour at the front in terms of building
bulk is not considered significant given the wall will be single storey and is to be constructed
behind the existing dividing fence.

The neighbour at the front has objected to the boundary wall on the grounds that it will
adversely affect her amenity, result in loss of privacy, loss of vegetation along the existing
boundary fence, result in increased noise and devalue her property. Overall, these concerns
have been dealt with above, however, it is noted that she is concerned about damage to an
existing creeper located along the dividing fence at the rear of her strata property. In response,
the applicant has advised that care will be taken when constructing the boundary wall to not
damage the creeper and is prepared to provide additional lattice along the neighbours side to
address this issue.

Overall, the boundary wall is considered to meet the performance criteria for the following
reason:-

    the boundary wall makes effective use of space and does not have any significant impact
      on the amenity of the adjoining property.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

There are no Policy or Statutory Implications related to this report. The proposal was assessed
against the provisions of the Residential Design Codes (R Codes), the Town Planning Scheme
Policy Manual and Town Planning Scheme No. 1.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no financial implications related to this report.


MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                              31
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010




STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

Consideration of this application is consistent with the Town’s Strategic Plan 2009-2020 for the
priority area ‘Planning for our Community’.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

The requirements for consultation have been satisfied under the statutory provisions of the
Town Planning Scheme.


ATTACHMENTS:

Nil

COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Watson, seconded by Cr Pelczar

That, in accordance with Part 4 of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No. 1,
Council APPROVES the application for additions and alterations to a grouped dwelling
submitted by Wesley Lawrence at Strata Lot 2 (No. 291A) Salvado Road, Floreat as
shown on the plans date 21 October 2010 subject to the following condition:-

(i)   the surface finish of the boundary wall facing the adjoining property to the north
      being rendered, painted or face brickwork to the satisfaction of the Town;

Footonote:

The applicant to liaise with the neighbour to the north to ensure that damage to the
existing garden is minimised.

Carried           4/0




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                         32
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010




DV10.7      LOT 3 (NO. 3) CAMBORNE AVENUE, CITY BEACH - ADDITIONS TO SINGLE
            DWELLING



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To consider an application for a conversion of the existing carport to a garage requiring
assessment under the performance criteria of the Residential Design Codes (R Codes) in
respect to setback of buildings generally.

BACKGROUND:

BA/DA REFERENCE:                          0346DA-2009
LANDOWNER:                                S R Gicquel and C F Gicquel
APPLICANT:                                Amarex Pty. Ltd.
ZONING:                                   Town Planning Scheme No. 1 – Residential R12.5
USE CLASS:                                Dwelling (single): existing
LAND AREA:                                1012m2

DETAILS:

Development Description

    A three car garage utilising the existing double carport;
    A new single garage is set back 7.5 metres from the front boundary;
    The double garage will be extended from the original carport, and will be set back 5.62
      metres from the front boundary.
    Both garages will be brick with garage doors and have metal roofs.

Applicants Submission

    The proposed double garage has been designed to maximise the available area in front
      of the existing house to accommodate a 4WD vehicle being 4.81 metres in length.
    The proposed single garage has been setback to the required 7.5 metre front setback to
      lessen the impact of the proposed double garage.
    The new crossover will be the maximum 6.0 metres wide directly in front of the double
      garage as shown on the site plan.
    No front fence will be built on the front boundary.
    The landscaping area shall be 83% within the front setback area.
    The proposed double garage and single garage have been setback as to not detract from
      the character of the streetscape.
    The proposed building works and landscaping will contribute to the desired streetscape.

Assessment against the Performance Criteria

Setback of Buildings Generally

                                   Proposed                Acceptable Development Provision
Front setback - southeast          5.62 metres to double   7.5 metres
                                   garage



MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                         33
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


Performance Criteria:

Buildings set back from the street boundaries an appropriate distance to ensure they:
     contribute to the desired streetscape;
     provide adequate privacy and open space for dwellings; and
     allow safety clearances for easements for essential service corridors.

The garage will utilise the existing carport but, due to the minimum internal dimensions
required, will extend forward of the existing structure by approximately 1.0 metre. The garage
will be of a design and materials that match the existing dwelling.

The section of Camborne Avenue where the subject site is located only consists of four lots,
with the lots to the north and south being corner lots, with secondary setbacks to Camborne
Avenue. The street has a slight hill. Although the garage will be located within the primary
street setback area, it is not considered that its impact will be detrimental to the streetscape, as
the existing streetscape is not an open streetscape, and the proposed setback will be
consistent with the other setbacks evident on the adjoining properties.

The corner lots to the north and the south are well screened by mature vegetation, and provide
screening to the proposed garage when looking up or down the street. The adjoining property
directly to the north contains an open style carport approximately 2.0 metres from the front
boundary.

The application proposes more than the required front landscaping, therefore ensuring an
attractive and green streetscape. The landscaping will also ensure that the garage does not
dominate the dwelling.

Overall, the setback of the garage is considered to meet the performance criteria for the
following reason:-

    minimal impact on the existing streetscape.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

There are no policy or statutory implications related to this report. The proposal was assessed
against the provisions of the Residential Design Codes (R Codes), Town Planning Scheme
No.1 and the Town Planning Scheme Policy Manual.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no financial implications related to this report.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

Consideration of this application is consistent with the Town’s Strategic Plan 2009-2020 for the
priority area ‘Planning for our Community’.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

The requirements for consultation have been satisfied under the statutory provisions of the
Town Planning Scheme.




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                             34
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


ATTACHMENTS:

Nil

COMMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Pelczar, seconded by Cr Pinerua

That, in accordance with Part 4 of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No. 1,
Council APPROVES the application for a additions to a single storey dwelling submitted
by Amerex Pty. Ltd. at Lot 3 (No. 3) Camborne Avenue, City Beach as shown on the
plans dated 21 December 2009 subject to the following condition:-

(i)   the roof material not to be zincalume or off-white (‘Surfmist’) Colorbond.

Carried           4/0




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                 35
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010




DV10.8      LOT 242 (NO. 49) HESPERIA AVENUE, CITY BEACH - PATIO TO EXISTING
            DWELLING



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To consider an application for a patio requiring assessment under the performance criteria of
the Residential Design Codes in respect of rear setback.

BACKGROUND:

BA/DA REFERENCE:                          0652BA-2009
LANDOWNER:                                J Ghossein
APPLICANT:                                Westral Outdoor Centre
ZONING:                                   MRS Zoning: Urban
                                          Town Planning Scheme No. 1: Residential R12.5
USE CLASS:                                Single dwelling ‘P’ – permitted in residential zone
LAND AREA:                                1138m2

DETAILS:

Development Description

    Property developed with two storey dwelling.
    Much of the proposed patio will fall within the 6.0 metre rear setback area. Patio to be
      attached to dwelling and set back a distance ranging from 1.0 metre to 3.0 metres from
      the rear lot boundary.
    Backyard of subject property is cut in at the rear with a 3.68 metre high retaining wall with
      a 1.8 metre high fence on top.

Applicant Submission

1.    The extra roof cover of patio will have minimal impact on additional shading to the house.
2.    The roof cover does not affect shading to the adjoining property nor is ventilation affected
      as patio is open on three sides.
3.    Building will still get adequate exposure to sun as bulk of wall and roof areas are not
      affected by patio cover.
4.    Patio is no higher than house fascia and could not be considered as building bulk in
      comparison to existing house roof height.

Neighbour Submissions

The rear boundary of the subject property abuts two properties fronting Lentara Crescent. Both
neighbours were written to and both objected to the proposal. Neighbours to the side were also
written to with no comments received.

Submission received from owners of 22 Lentara Crescent, City Beach (rear and south west of
the subject property):-

1.    Strongly object to patio given the R Codes states that a 6.0 metre minimum rear setback
      is required.



MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                              36
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


2.    Deviations from requirements are not orderly, the patio would increase visual disturbance
      created already by white block building and would create an unacceptable precedent
      which could see other buildings encroaching on this setback area.
3.    Most concerned about the precedent that any reduction in the setback would create for
      future development.
4.    Rear of 49 Hesperia is white and the plans indicate colour to patio roof will be white.
      Reflecticvity is an issue is likely to be worse should this construction go ahead.
5.    None of the council guidance in this area supports approval of patio. Our visual
      enjoyment would be significantly affected and we oppose Council going against it sown
      guidelines.

Submission from owner of 20 Lentara Crescent, City Beach (rear and south east of the subject
property):-

1.    As a matter of principle building regulation should be observed, which means there
      should be a 6.0 metre minimum rear setback.
2.    A precedent could be established if this rule not adhered to.
3.    The mode of construction and base chosen as ground level not clearly stated.
4.    Existing retaining wall of 2700mm along the south west boundary and 2500mm along the
      north east boundary.
5.    Since construction of retaining wall owners of 49 Hesperia have constructed a raised
      garden adjacent to wall if the secondary wall is be moved to accommodate patio then this
      may undermine structural integrity of retaining wall.
6.    Understand patio is to be 2600mm height. If level is same as back door then objection
      remains valid, even more so if they choose to use the raised constructed garden as zero
      level.

Assessment Against the Performance Criteria

                                   Proposed                 Acceptable Development Provision
Rear Setback                       1000mm ranging to        6.0 metres
                                   3.0 metres

Performance Criteria:
Buildings set back from boundaries other than street boundaries so as to:
 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.


The subject property slopes significantly up from the road reserve to the rear (eastern
boundary). The backyard of the subject property cuts into the rear boundary. A 3.68 metre high
retaining wall, with a 1.8 metre high fence on top of it, divides the subject property from the
property at the rear (No. 20 Lentara Crescent).

The proposed patio is to be attached to a laundry wall and supported by two metal posts
attached to an existing garden retaining wall. The rear setback area is developed with raised
garden beds, a pizza oven, lawn and paving and is accessed from the dwelling’s meals area.
The applicant has advised that the patio will provide cover for the pizza oven and outdoor living
activities. As such, it represents a second outdoor living area as the dwelling has a pool and
large deck at the front that is also used for outdoor living.



MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                          37
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


The proposed patio will not have any impact on access to sunlight or ventilation for either the
subject property or neighbours as it will be located below the level of the rear boundary fencing
of 20 Lentara Crescent. In addition, the patio will provide privacy to the owners from the
properties to the rear which are situated on a higher level.

The structural integrity of the existing retaining wall will be determined by the design of the
footing of the patio by a structural engineer as part of the building licence.

As the patio roof pitch is less than 5% the proposed roof colour, 'Pearl', is permitted under
Local Law 43. Due to height difference between the top of the patio and rear boundary
retaining and fence there will be no glare created from the patio.

Overall, the location of the patio in the rear setback area is considered to meet the performance
criteria for the following reasons:-

    the patio does not create building bulk or impact on direct sun and ventilation to the
      adjoining properties.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

There are no policy or statutory implications related to this report. The proposal was assessed
against the provisions of the Residential Design Codes (R Codes), Town Planning Scheme
No.1, Town's Residential Design Guidelines (RDGs) and the Town Planning Scheme Policy
Manual.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no financial implications related to this report.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

Consideration of this application is consistent with the Town's Strategic Plan for the provision of
orderly planning to enhance the Town's natural and built environment through effective and
responsible use of the Town Planning Scheme.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

The requirements for consultation have been satisfied under the statutory provisions of the
Town Planning Scheme.

ATTACHMENTS:

Nil




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                            38
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010



COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Pinerua, seconded by Cr Watson

That, in accordance with Part 4 of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No. 1,
Council APPROVES the application for a patio submitted by Westral Outdoor Centre at
Lot 242 (No. 49) Hesperia Avenue, City Beach as shown on the plans dated 24 November
2009.

Carried           3/2

For:              Crs MacRae (Casting Vote) and Watson
Against:          Crs Pelczar and Pinerua




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                              39
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010




DV10.9      LOT 525 (NO. 19) GALI LANE, CITY BEACH - REMOVAL OF PRIVACY
            SCREENS



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To consider an application for a single storey dwelling requiring assessment under the
performance criteria of the Residential Design Codes (R Codes) in respect to visual privacy for
the upper terrace.

BACKGROUND:

BA/DA REFERENCE:                          0053DA-2008
LANDOWNER:                                Oswald Homes (1972) Pty. Ltd.
APPLICANT:                                Oswald Homes (1972) Pty. Ltd.
                                          ZONING: Town Planning Scheme No. 1 – Residential
                                          R30/40 (Special Control Area 1)
USE CLASS:                                Dwelling (single): “P” (Permitted)
LAND AREA:                                417m2

An application was received by the Town to construct a three-storey dwelling on the above
property. The application was approved 3 July 2008 and has since been built.

The application was assessed against the Ocean Mia Design Guidelines and the R-Codes.
Approval was given by the estate’s planning consultant. In respect of visual privacy, the
standards of the R-Codes are applicable. In addition, the Guidelines state in respect of
overlooking the following:-

      Upper floors may take advantage of views generally, but windows and balconies
      are not permitted where their position will directly overlook neighbour courtyards.

The application was approved with a fixed obscured screen to the northern and western
elevations of the upper terrace. The amended plans are for the removal of this screen.

DETAILS:

Development Description

    A three-storey dwelling has been constructed fronting The Boulevard with vehicle access
      off Gali Lane;
    The roof terrace above the upper level is currently unscreened;
    The terrace is setback approximately 3.4 metres from the western boundary; and

Applicants Submission

    Now that the house has been constructed on Lot 531 Gali Lane it is possible to see that
      the second floor terrace will not cause any adverse effect to the amenity or privacy of the
      adjoining property from overlooking without the privacy screening installed;
    Due to the height and setback of the terrace it is not possible to look directly into or at the
      ground level of Lot 530.
    We wish to remove the privacy screening to obtain the view that the terrace was
      designed to achieve to maximise the value of the property.

MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                              40
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


    We believe that removing the screening will not cause overlooking directly into the
      adjoining Lot 530 and will not cause an adverse effect on the privacy or amenity of the
      adjoining property.

Neighbour Submission

    The removal of the screens would expose our private courtyard on the eastern side, as
      per council requirements to overlooking, and would be an invasion of our visual privacy.
    The screens which are the subject of the application are on the open top floor of the
      house and encompass an alfresco area, barbecue, bar and outdoor spa. By its very
      nature it is likely to be a lively and much used noisy entertaining area.
    Exposure of our courtyard and the rooms surrounding it to overlooking and proximity
      discomfort is opposed by my wife and I.

Assessment against the Performance Criteria

Visual Privacy

                                   Proposed                Acceptable Development Provision
Setback of terrace from western    3.4 metres              7.5 metres
boundary

Performance Criteria:

Direct overlooking of active habitable spaces and outdoor living areas of other dwellings is
minimised by building layout, location and design of major openings and outdoor habitable
spaces, screening devices and landscape, or remoteness.

Effective location of major openings and outdoor active habitable spaces to avoid overlooking is
preferred to the use of screening devices or obscured glass.

Where these are used, they should be integrated with the building design and have minimal
impact on residents’ or neighbours’ amenity.

Where opposite windows are offset from the edge of one window to the edge of another, the
distance of the offset should be sufficient to limit views into adjacent windows.


The applicant proposes not to provide the privacy screens on the western and northern
elevations of the upper terrace. Due to the setback of the roof terrace (3.4 metres from the
western boundary) and the first floor roof below built up to the western boundary, there are no
viewing angles to any habitable spaces or major openings on the adjoining lot, which is
currently under construction. The boundary wall and roof of the adjoining property (Lot 530) are
going to be the only areas within view of the terrace, as can be seen in the site photos and the
elevations provided by the applicant.

Overall, the setback of the terrace from the western boundary (unscreened) is considered to
meet the performance criteria for the following reason:-

    there will be minimal impact on the amenity of the adjoining property as there will be no
      overlooking of active habitable spaces or major openings.




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                         41
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

There are no policy or statutory implications related to this report. The proposal was assessed
against the provisions of the Residential Design Codes (R Codes), Town Planning Scheme
No.1 and the Town Planning Scheme Policy Manual.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no financial implications related to this report.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

Consideration of this application is consistent with the Town’s Strategic Plan 2009-2020 for the
priority area ‘Planning for our Community’.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

The requirements for consultation have been satisfied under the statutory provisions of the
Town Planning Scheme.


ATTACHMENTS:

Nil

COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Watson, seconded by Cr Pinerua

That, in accordance with Part 4 of the Town of Cambridge Town Planning Scheme No. 1,
Council APPROVES the amended application proposing the removal of the privacy
screens on the roof terrace submitted by Oswald Homes (1972) Pty. Ltd. at Lot 531 (No.
19) Gali Lane, City Beach as shown on the plans dated 18 November 2009.

Carried           4/0




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                         42
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010




DV10.10      LOT 2 (NO.151) GREGORY STREET, WEMBLEY - STATE ADMINISTRATIVE
             TRIBUNAL MEDIATION FOR TWO STOREY DWELLING WITH UNDERCROFT



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To consider a revised proposal for a two storey dwelling with undercroft under direction from
the State Administrative Tribunal and, more specifically, to consider variations to the acceptable
development provisions of the Residential Design Codes (R Codes) and Town Planning
Scheme Policy Manual relating to fill and building height.

BACKGROUND:

BA/DA REFERENCE:                          0082DA-2009
LANDOWNER:                                Mrs Daniela Ambrosino
APPLICANT:                                Brent Shulman Architects
ZONING:                                   Residential R20
USE CLASS:                                Dwelling (single) - ‘P’ - Permitted
LAND AREA:                                653m2

The original application was considered by Council at its meeting held 24 November 2009 (Item
DV09.111). The application was refused for the following reasons:-

(i)     The proposal does not meet the performance criteria of Clause 6.3.1 Buildings Setback
        from the Boundary of the Residential Design Codes of WA;
(ii)    the proposal does not meet the performance criteria of Clause 6.6.1 Excavation or Fill of
        the Residential Design Codes of WA;
(iii)   the proposal does not meet the performance criteria of Clause 6.7.1 Building Height of
        the Residential Design Codes of WA;
(iv)    the proposal does not meet the performance criteria of Clause 6.9.1 Solar Access for
        Adjoining Sites of the Residential Design Codes of WA;
(v)     the proposal does not meet the performance criteria of Clause 6.2.7 Roof Pitch of Policy
        3.1, Town Planning Scheme Policy Manual;
(vi)    the proposal would have a detrimental impact on the southern adjoining owner at 149
        Gregory Street and the existing and desired character of the streetscape.

The applicant has subsequently submitted a request to the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT)
for this decision to be reconsidered. An initial directions hearing has been held and the
applicant has agreed to amend the plans and seek mediation with the Town. The amended
plans submitted are subject to this report.

The original application was advertised to the northern and southern adjoining property owners,
both of whom objected to the proposal. Both neighbours have been notified of the amendments
and advised that the matter will be considered at the February Development Committee.

DETAILS:

Development Description

      Two storey dwelling proposed with a large undercroft which utilises access from the rear
        right-of-way (ROW).



MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                           43
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


          Lot slopes down from the east to west by approximately 1.1 metres and from the north to
            south by approximately 0.5 metres. The lot is situated on the side of a hill, with the
            existing property having a finished floor level (FFL) 0.56 metres higher than the southern
            adjacent dwelling and 0.8m lower than the northern adjacent dwelling.
          A retaining wall was approved by the Town in January 2004 along the southern
            boundary, towards the rear of the lot. Although the approval resulted in a large brick wall
            between 151 and 149 Gregory Street, the natural level of the rear outdoor area was only
            raised by an average of 1.0 metres along the southern boundary.
          There is a small portion along the southern boundary adjacent the existing dwelling which
            was not filled in order to maintain access to a cellar.

Amended Plans

The applicant has submitted amended plans which vary from the original plans in two
significant ways which are outlined below:-

          the flat roof has been replaced with a pitched roof at 25 degrees; and
          the upper floor has been amended so that the bulk of the building is concentrated further
            toward the north of the lot.

The amendments have resulted in a number of previously identified variations now complying
with the acceptable development provisions. These include roof pitch, solar access and
buildings setback from the boundary. As these variations no longer require assessment against
the performance criteria, they do not require Council consideration and will not be discussed
further.

Assessment Against the Performance Criteria

Building Height

                           Proposed                             Acceptable Development Provision
 Wall Height               9.71m at south side of dwelling      6.5m above natural ground level

 Performance Criteria:

 Building height consistent with the desired height of buildings in the locality, and to recognise
 the need to protect the amenities of adjoining properties, including, where appropriate:

           adequate direct sun to buildings and appurtenant open spaces;
           adequate daylight to major openings to habitable rooms; and
           access to views of significance.


Building heights have been amended from the original application by focusing the bulk of the
upper floor toward the northern side of the lot where the natural ground level is higher. In
comparison to the 9.5 metres heights proposed in the original application, all wall and roof
heights now comply with the acceptable development provisions with exception to a feature
wall (architectural feature) on the southern side of the dwelling. The wall is only 2.2 metres
wide and is not considered to impact negatively on neighbours or the streetscape and as such
meets performance criteria.

Fill

                          Proposed                        Acceptable Development Provision
 Fill                     1.827 metres at southern        Maximum 0.5 metres above NGL or


MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                                44
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


                     boundary                          setback in accordance with Table 2A

 Performance Criteria:

 Development that retains the visual impression of the natural level of the site, as seen from
 the street or other public place, or from an adjoining property.


The maximum height of fill proposed by the applicant at the southern boundary of the lot has
not been altered from the original submission, being 1.827 metres above the existing ground
level. As stated previously, fill in this area is not considered unreasonable as there is an
irregular ‘dip’ in the level of the ground at this point, most probably created to allow access to
an undercroft room and the fill will assist in coordinating levels at the front and rear of the
property. The applicant has, however, lowered the amount of fill at one portion of the proposed
walkway (adjacent the games room) by 0.257 metres, meaning the amount of bulk presented to
the neighbour is lessened to some degree.

It should be noted that, in the original application, the southern adjoining owner objected on the
basis of the fill’s height, scale and visual impact. Notwithstanding this objection, it is considered
that the reduction in fill and overall building height will reduce the impact on the neighbour’s
amenity to some degree and that filling the current ‘dip’ in ground levels is practical and
reasonable. The variation is therefore considered to meet the performance criteria and is
supported.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

There are no policy or statutory implications related to this report. The proposal was assessed
against the provisions of the Residential Design Codes of WA, Town Planning Scheme No.1,
and the Town Planning Scheme Policy Manual.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no financial implications related to this report.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

Consideration of this application is consistent with the Town's Strategic Plan 2009-2020 for the
priority area 'Planning for our Community'.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

This matter has been assessed under the Community Consultation Policy. The requirements
for consultation have been satisfied under the statutory provisions of the Town Planning
Scheme with regard to the original application.

ATTACHMENTS:

Nil.




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                              45
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010



COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Pinerua, seconded by Cr Pelczar

That:-

(i)   the State Administrative Tribunal be advised that the Town supports the amended
      plans dated 27 January 2010 for a two storey dwelling with undercroft at Lot 2 (No.
      151) Gregory Street, Wembley, subject to the following conditions:-

      (a)   the surface finish of all boundary walls facing adjoining properties being
            rendered, painted or face brickwork to the satisfaction of the Town;

      (b)   a 1.5 metres x 1.5 metres truncation being provided on the northern side of
            the access ramp where it meets the right-of-way; and

      (c)   all areas marked in red as landscaping on the approved plans being
            developed to the satisfaction of the Town and maintained thereafter.

Carried           4/0




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                   46
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010



DV10.11     PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE RESIDENTIAL DESIGN CODES TO
            INCORPORATE A MULTI UNIT HOUSING CODE



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To inform the Council of the Department of Planning's proposed amendments to State Planning
Policy 3.1 - Residential Design Codes to incorporate Multi Unit Housing Code provisions, and
to provide comment to the Department of Planning on these.

BACKGROUND:

The Department of Planning has prepared a proposed amendment to the Residential Design
Codes of Western Australia (R Codes) to incorporate Multi Unit Housing Code provisions. The
new provisions will provide additional guidance in the development and assessment of multiple
dwellings and the residential component of mixed use developments within Western Australia.

The Town has been invited to comment on the proposed amendments to the R Codes to
include the new Multi Unit Housing Codes. A Discussion Paper and Explanatory Guidelines for
the Multi Unit Housing Code were provided which outline the key considerations in the
development of the draft code and the rationale for the proposed provisions.

The Minister for Planning has approved a 2 month public advertising period for the proposed
amendment to the R Codes, with submissions originally closing on 22 January 2010. This has
been extended to 22 February 2010 to ensure that the community has adequate opportunity to
provide feedback prior to the amendment being finalised.

DETAILS:

It is proposed to amend State Planning Policy 3.1 - Residential Design Codes (Variation 1) (R
Codes) to incorporate Multi Unit Housing Code provisions. Accordingly, these provisions will
have effect through the R Codes that are adopted under Town Planning Scheme No. 1.

The objectives of the Multi Unit Housing Code are:-

    "to expand the permissible range of housing within individual residential codings, so as to
      more effectively meet the housing needs of the community;
    To facilitate the development and redevelopment of existing housing sites;
    To reduce the disincentive for smaller dwellings in favour of increased diversity of
      housing within a framework of form-based design guidance;
    To improve the standard of design for multi-unit housing, and encourage the development
      of housing with performance standards appropriate to form; and
    To build the capacity of local government to interpret and apply new methods for
      assessment and promotion of multi-unit housing and mixed-use development'.

Review of the R Codes and consultation with stakeholders revealed that the R Codes did not
encourage multiple dwelling developments on lots in medium density areas (ie R30 to R60).
This was not only on the basis of the restrictions imposed by Table One of the R Codes but
also the restrictions in housing form as set out in Part 6 of the Codes. According to the
Discussion Paper 'in effect the R Codes provisions, in their present form, do not recognise the
differing housing forms and the need to provide different built-form outcomes which are
appropriate to their context'. Hence there has been a disincentive for this form of housing in
medium density areas.

MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                          47
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010



The review recognised the need to have two separate parts to the R Codes, one which applies
to single houses and grouped dwellings and one which applies to multiple dwellings and mixed
use developments. The Multi Unit Housing Codes would apply to multiple dwellings in areas
coded R30 and above and, whilst multiple dwellings could still be developed in lower density
areas, they would take on a form closer to a grouped dwelling and comply with the same
provisions. In the R30 to R60 zones, there will be a mixture of grouped dwellings and multiple
dwellings. The new code has been careful to ensure that there are no particular limitations in
the building form that would favour one housing type over the other, whilst being cognisant of
the need to protect the amenity and suburban context that is generally present in areas with
these codings.

Proposed Multi Unit Housing Code

Minimum Site Area

It has been recognised that the combination of plot ratio and minimum site areas was overly
restrictive in realising built form. Minimum site area requirements create a significant
disincentive to multiple dwelling developments by limiting the number of dwellings allowable
within a development. In addition, this control impacts on the ability to deliver smaller
dwellings. In order to provide a diversity of unit sizes within a multiple dwelling development, it
was considered that the minimum site area requirements should be removed. Further, as
multiple dwelling developments are subdivided by built strata applications, the imperative to
provide a subdivision control on this form of development by creating minimum site area
requirements, was not considered necessary.

Minimum Frontage

The minimum frontage requirement currently applies to land contained within the R2 to R30 R-
Code density control areas, and is applied concurrently with the minimum site area per dwelling
requirement. The rationale behind it was to encourage multiple dwelling development on lots
that lend themselves to this type of development.

This control however, in tandem with minimum site area controls, was considered to be overly
complex and prescriptive, especially when compared with the controls as they apply to grouped
dwellings.

Plot Ratio

Plot ratio controls are presently applied in tandem with minimum lot size requirements to land
contained within all areas with an R Coding above R30 which is overly prescriptive and
complex. The application of a plot ratio requirement alone is therefore considered to be the
most logical and measureable approach to controlling built form outcomes. Plot ratio will work
concurrently with setbacks, height, car parking, and other controls in defining the built form that
is appropriate for any given allotment.

Maximum site cover

This is a new provision which will only affect multiple dwelling developments. The existing
requirement for a minimum open space will be removed from these zones, thereby also
removing the requirement for communal open space, as it is considered that this space was an
onerous constraint and often under-utilised. Maximum site cover is assigned only in the
medium density areas per the existing R Code requirements. In the higher coded areas, the
setback requirements combined with plot ratio will largely dictate the site cover requirements.
This is considered appropriate within the 'urban' setting of higher density areas.


MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                            48
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010




Boundary Setbacks

The street boundary setback will be retained but the requirement for a secondary street setback
has been removed, as in many situations the secondary street can be of equal importance and
the development form of multiple dwellings can have more potential to address to adequately
address both street frontages when compared to single or grouped dwellings.

Side/rear boundary setback requirements have been removed in an attempt to simplify this
design element and ensure a more realistic setback requirement for taller buildings. These are
dealt with in a separate table in the new Codes but do not supersede any controls that are
defined in planning strategies or the Scheme.

Height

Height has been included in the new code to more appropriately tie in with development
intensity. It moves the Codes to being more about the built form of a development rather than
the number of units within a particular development. It should be noted that the new proposed
maximum height provisions do not supersede any height controls which are defined in planning
strategies or schemes.

The Town may, however, wish to consider reviewing its height requirements for multiple
dwellings in higher densities as the current policy limits development to two storey.

Activity Centre (R-AC) coding

The new R-AC codes replaces the current inner city coding (R-IC coding) and affects areas in
or close to activity centres. The R-AC codes seek to allow for more targeted density in certain
locations and improve the operation of mixed use development outcomes. There is a sliding
scale of R-AC areas from R-AC0 to R-AC4, which allows for more targeted use by Councils,
appropriate to the location and desired form.

Whilst the Town does not currently have any areas with the R-IC coding, the new R-AC codes
may be something that is considered for any rezoning that may occur as part of the West
Leederville Planning and Urban Design Study.

Performance Based Assessment

The new code seeks to encourage the use of performance based assessment, by promoting
the application of performance criteria by both developers and Councils. Explanatory
guidelines provide guidance as to the rationale behind the performance criteria, as well as
providing examples of good design outcomes. These are separate to the existing explanatory
guidelines in the Codes which will remain unchanged for single houses and grouped dwelling
developments.

Comment

    The removal of minimum lot areas is supported on the basis that it provides more
      flexibility for innovative design for multi unit developments.
    Proposed changes to plot ratio are minimal and potentially only affect multiple dwellings
      in an R30 coded area and are therefore supported.
    In any case, plot ratio is not considered necessary as development can be adequately
      controlled through height limits, setbacks and site cover.



MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                        49
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010



    The introduction of maximum site cover will have minimal effect as it will be 50% of the lot
      area which is the same as the existing open space requirement under the Codes. The
      only difference will be the removal of the requirement for communal open space, but this
      is often under-utilised and modern trends would suggest that providing individual units
      with greater courtyard or balcony space would be preferable in any case;
    Proposed height provisions will not be applicable to the Town as they do not supersede
      any height controls which are defined in planning strategies or Schemes.
    Proposed setback and boundary wall provisions are supported as they more suitably
      address this type of development (than the current provisions) and, in any event,
      comments of adjoining neighbours will still be taken into consideration under current
      Council policies and procedures;
    Reference is made in the proposed Codes for permanent vertical screening of 1.7 metres
      to be provided as a means of satisfying Visual Privacy requirements. This is inconsistent
      with the current R Codes provisions which refers to windows with a sill height of 1.6
      metres or greater above floor level not needing to comply with Visual Privacy
      requirements. It is considered that the two requirements should be consistent.
    In terms of the impact of the Multi Unit Housing Code on the R30/40 areas of Town of
      Cambridge, it is considered unlikely that it will be applied too often with infill in these
      areas due to lot size constraints. Development will be primarily controlled through height
      constraints and the Town will need to review these to provide greater flexibility for multiple
      dwelling development.
    The new R-AC codes may be applicable for rezoning that may occur as part of the West
      Leederville Planning and Urban Design Study. It is noted that the Codes allow for the
      Town to adopt specific controls such as for height for R-AC coded areas.



POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

The adoption of the new Multi Unit Housing Code and Explanatory Guidelines will have an
implication on the statutory provisions of the Residential Design Codes.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no financial implications related to this report.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

Consideration of this application is consistent with the Town's Strategic Plan 2009-2020 for the
priority area 'Planning for our Community'.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

This matter has been assessed under the Community Consultation Policy. The matter is an
issue currently being advertised by the Department of Planning and does not require further
advertising by the Town. The public can make comment directly to the Department of
Planning.


SUMMARY:

The proposed Multi Unit Housing Code and Explanatory Guidelines are a set of statutory
provisions which have been created in order to promote and encourage the development of
multiple dwellings and mixed use developments for medium to high density areas. It is logical


MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                             50
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


there should be a separate set of development guidelines for multiple dwellings than for
grouped dwellings and single houses which are a completely different built form with multiple
entry levels. It is anticipated that they may provide greater flexibility to development of a
greater range of housing types by encouraging development to be more about built form and
less about the number of dwellings permissible on any given site.

ATTACHMENTS:

1.     Nil.

ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Watson, seconded by Cr Pinerua

That the Department of Planning be advised that Council notes the proposed Multi Unit
Housing Code and Explanatory Guidelines and supports their general intent to provide greater
opportunity for housing diversity with greater emphasis on built form controls.

Committee Meeting 16 February 2010

During discussion, concern was expressed regarding the plot ratio provision in R30 coded
areas which was considered to be too high and could result in building bulk which is out of
scale in those areas.

Amendment

Moved by Cr MacRae, seconded by Cr Pinerua

That a further clause be added to the motion as follows:-

(ii)   expresses concern regarding the plot ratio and open space standards for R30 coding and
       the subsequent impact on built form in these areas. It is the Council's view that a
       graduation of building bulk is required as density increases.

Amendment carried             4/0

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:

That the Department of Planning be advised that Council:-

(i)    notes the proposed Multi Unit Housing Code and Explanatory Guidelines and
       supports their general intent to provide greater opportunity for housing diversity
       with greater emphasis on built form controls:

(ii)   expresses concern regarding the plot ratio and open space standards for R30
       coding and the subsequent impact on built form in these areas. It is the Council's
       view that a graduation of building bulk should occur as density increases.

Carried           4/0




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                       51
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010




DV10.12     PIA INTERNATIONAL PLANNING CONFERENCE 2010 - CHRISTCHURCH,
            NEW ZEALAND



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To obtain authority for an officer to attend the forthcoming 2010 PIA International Planning
Conference to be held in Christchurch, New Zealand.

BACKGROUND:

The 2010 International Planning Conference will be held in Christchurch, New Zealand from 20
April to 23 April 2010. The conference is being jointly hosted by the New Zealand Planning
Institute and the Planning Institute of Australia. The Planning Institute of Australia is the peak
body that represents professions involved in planning cities, towns, regions and places and
brings together the disciplines of economic development, environmental planning, planning law,
social planning, transport planning, urban design and urban and regional planning.

DETAILS:

The theme of the 2010 PIA International Planning Conference is ‘Planning Pathways to the
Future’ and will explore future directions for planning and what pathways we need to take in
order to change the way we plan, work and live in response to global issues. The conference
will consider sustainable, environmentally aware and economically responsible development at
local, national and international levels.

The programme includes keynote speakers with a range of professional experience
representing various organisations from around the world, including Australia, New Zealand
and the United States of America. To accompany the keynote speakers, the conference also
includes a series of concurrent sessions presenting papers under the broad themes of
Governance, Quadruple Bottom Line, Raising the Bar and Sustainable Infrastructure, or as an
alternative, a series of mobile workshops touring Christchurch. On the final day, conference
attendees are invited to participate in one of twelve field trips exploring planning projects that
are being implemented within Christchurch and its surrounding regions.

The Town's Planning Department is currently undertaking a review of the Town Planning
Scheme. A key component of the Scheme Review is the preparation of a Local Planning
Strategy which will need to set out the long-term planning directions (under the key focus areas
of housing, transport/parking, commercial/activity centres and recreation) for the Town. The
theme of the conference ‘Planning Pathways to the Future’ and the topics to be covered
(including urban renewal, climate change, urban density, transport network planning and
sustainable residential development as examples) are very much relevant to the preparation of
the Local Planning Strategy and subsequent Scheme review. The conference will provide an
international perspective of how planning can help to achieve urban sustainability.

It will also provide an opportunity to visit the Garden City of Christchurch and examine first
hand the implementation of planning responses to current community challenges, including
water management, urban expansion, changing recreational and transport issues and the rapid
growth of suburban shopping malls and business parks.




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                           52
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


It is proposed that a Senior Planning Officer, Heidi Taylor, to attend the conference. Heidi is
working on our strategic matters for the Town and is the principle officer responsible for
progressing the Town Planning Scheme Review.

In accordance with Council Policy, there is opportunity for an Elected Member to also attend.

A copy of the conference programme is circulated.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

Policy No. 1.1.3 - Conference Attendance - Representation and Expenses

Part (ix) of the abovementioned policy requires Elected Members and staff to circulate a report
containing information or material of interest or relevance within six weeks following the
conference.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

Funds are available for attending the conference from Budget Item – Planning: Town Planning
Scheme Review. Attendance registration, travel, accommodation and incidental costs require a
budget of approximately $4,000 per delegate.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

Attendance at the conference supports the vision of the Strategic Plan 2009- 2020 of creating
communities of choice. The Strategic Plan's goals for housing choice, transport choice and
sustainability are very much related to the topics being covered at the conference.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

This matter has been assessed under the Community Consultation Policy. In accordance with
the assessment criteria it was rated at Level 1, for which no community consultation is required.

ATTACHMENTS:

Nil

ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

That:-

(i)    an interested Elected Member and a Senior Planning Officer be authorised to
       attend the 2010 PIA International Planning Conference to be held in Christchurch,
       New Zealand from 20 April to 23 April 2010 at an approximate cost of $4,000 per
       person;

(ii)   the expenditure in (i) above be funded from Budget Item - 'Planning : Town
       Planning Scheme Review'.

Committee Meeting 16 February 2010

Members agreed that the item be submitted to Council for determination.



MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                          53
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010




DV10.13     WEST LEEDERVILLE TOWN HALL CAR PARK L20 - AMENDMENTS TO
            PARKING RESTRICTIONS AND FEES



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To amend the timed parking restrictions in the West Leederville Town Hall car park by
increasing the paid parking period to allow a major portion of the car park available for all day
paid parking; and to adopt new fees.

BACKGROUND:

The Development Committee meeting held on 18 August 2009 considered a report that
proposed changes to parking restrictions and also proposed that a major portion of the car park
be reserved for pre-paid all day parking for local business employees.

During discussion, Committee Members requested further information on the number of
potential users of the car park and how users would be managed equitably. It was suggested
that pre-payments for 6 or 12 months could be considered as Council would then not be
financially disadvantaged should the users decide not to take up their entitlement.

Committee Members agreed that the item be deferred to enable further information to be
obtained.

DETAILS:

Community Survey

As a result of Council deliberation in September, a survey form was delivered by Mailpost to
approximately 500 local businesses in the West Leederville area. A total of 56 survey forms
were completed and returned to the Town.

Assessment of the information provided in those 56 survey responses is summarised below:-

1. In response to the question:
Approximately how many employees use on-street parking for their private vehicles?
The responses indicate that a minimum of 119 vehicles are parked on-street at any one time.

2. In response to the question:
If all day paid parking was made available at the West Leederville Town Hall car park, would
employees make use of such parking ?
30 respondents replied NO; 21 respondents replied YES and 2 respondents replied YES, but
dependent on cost.

3. In response to the follow-on question to that above:
If yes, how many employees would make use of such parking ?
The responses indicated that a total of 98 people would make use of all day paid parking.

4. In response to the question:
If reserved parking was made available, would employees be prepared to prepay for reserved
parking for up to six months?



MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                          54
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


34 respondents replied NO; 17 respondents replied YES and 4 respondents replied YES, but
dependant on cost.

The results of the survey indicate about 40% support for all day parking for local business
employees, with a potential requirement for approximately 98 vehicles. However, the
responses clearly indicate that potential car park patrons are not prepared to prepay for
reserved parking.

Timed Parking Restriction

Following the installation of the 4 hour parking restriction, observation of this car park over the
past 21 months has consistently revealed that this asset is now under-utilised, to the extent
that, on most week days, there are between 4 and 10 vehicles in the car park at any one time.
Analysis of the nine months of revenue from the parking ticket machine also confirms that this
facility is under-utilised, with use averaging 7.7%.

In order to maximise the use and viability of this car park and to accommodate the potential for
all day parking for employees of the two nearby commercial areas, namely the Rosslyn Street
precinct and the Southport Street precinct which are within a reasonable walking distance, it is
recommended that the 48 parking bays located in the northern, central and eastern sections of
this car park be made available for all day (10 hours) paid parking during the period 7am to
5pm, Monday to Friday.

The remaining 14 parking bays, plus the 2 disabled parking bays, located on the western
section of the car park (adjacent to the Memorial Gardens) should be maintained as 4 hour
ticket parking to satisfy the demand for short term parking by patrons of local businesses and
visitors to the nearby hospital, but with the paid parking period being extended to "7am to
10:00pm all days", so as to ensure those utilising this car park during evenings, weekends or
during events at Subiaco Oval pay for parking.

Accordingly, it is recommended that the Council adopt the following parking restrictions:-

1.    "4 hour Ticket, 7am to 10pm, All days" for the 14 parking bays located on the western
      section of the West Leederville Town Hall car park (adjacent to the Memorial Gardens),
      so as to provide short term parking for customers of nearby businesses and those
      attending the adjacent hospital;
2.    "10 hour Ticket, 7am to 5pm, Monday to Friday" and "Ticket Parking, 5pm to 10pm,
      Monday to Friday; 7am to 10pm, Saturday, Sunday and Public Holidays" for the 48
      parking bays located in the northern, central and eastern sections of the West Leederville
      Town Hall car park.

The attached plan of this car park depicts the recommended changes.

Parking Fees

The primary objective of a parking facility owner in establishing parking fees, is to cover costs
and earn a reasonable return on investment.

However, from a local government perspective, this objective must be balanced against
community based needs so that short term parking fees do not have an adverse impact on the
economic viability of adjacent shopping areas, such as the desire to preserve parking capacity
for local shoppers or local business clients, and to ensure parking fees are commensurate with
similar facilities in other local government areas given the relative demand for available parking
spaces.




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                            55
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


The notion of a free parking period for short term users, such as the first hour free, has been
considered. This system, although in essence a practical idea, has the potential to be abused
by those persons who require long term parking and, as a result, move their cars to another
space within the time limit to avoid an infringement notice. Only one local government offers a
free parking period in their paid parking facility, however, abuse of that system has resulted in
the installation of a timing system to monitor and deter that abuse.

The fees charged for paid parking at facilities operated by other metropolitan local governments
are detailed in the following table. This table also identifies the average hourly and daily
parking rate.
                                                     Ave Fee per   Ave Fee per
           LGA                Parking Fees               hr            day
Fremantle - per hr            $0.80 to $1.50            $1.30
Fremantle - per day             $6 to $10                             $8.00
Fremantle - per night             $2.00                 $2.00
Subiaco - per hr               $1 to $1.33              $1.20
Subiaco - per day                $6 to $9                             $8.00
Vincent - per hr                  $1.90                 $1.90
Vincent - per day                $11.00                              $11.00
Vincent - per night               $8.50
South Perth - per hr              $1.50                 $1.50
South Perth - per day            $10.00                              $10.00
Melville - per hr                 $1.00                 $1.00
Melville - per day                $6.00                               $6.00
Joondalup - per hr                $0.80                 $0.80
Joondalup - per day               $3.00                               $3.00
                           Average Day Fee =            $1.28         $7.67

Based on the average of the fees charged by other local authorities, it is recommended that the
following parking fees for West Leederville Town Hall car park be adopted:-
1.    30 cents per 15 minutes, $1.20 per hour;
2.    $8.00 for 10 hours Monday to Friday.

The proposed $8 fee for 10 hours (ie working day) equates to the average charged in
neighbouring Subiaco although it is noted that in Leederville, the daily fee is $11.00. It is
considered reasonable that the Town commence with a fee of $8.00. Dependent of usage, this
fee can be reviewed.

Hall Hirers

The conflict between hirers of the West Leederville Town Hall and those requiring parking to
attend Subiaco Oval events can be resolved by agreeing that hirers of the hall have exclusive
and free access to the western half of the car park for hall bookings that occur on weekends,
public holidays or after 5:00 pm on weekdays.

This would maintain the existing practice and would be managed by the Town's Rangers
erecting the bollard at the entry to the western side of the car park and placing traffic cones
across the northern end of the car park to demarcate the exclusive parking area.




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                          56
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


Line Marking

The line marking of the parking bays in this car park was last undertaken about 6 years ago.
The current state of the line marking is poor and the markings in the disabled parking bays do
not comply with current standards. Therefore it is considered appropriate that this car park be
re-marked.

In undertaking the re-marking, it is recommended that the 'no parking area' in the north east
corner of this car park be removed and motor cycle bays be marked instead.

The cost of remarking the car parking, including adding text on the car park surface to identify
parking limits has been estimated at $2,000.

West Leederville Planning Study

This study identifies future upgrading of the general area around the Town Hall ('Community
Node') as well as a possible pedestrian/transit link through the adjoining land to the Leederville
Station.

Council is yet to conclude the planning for the area, however, in relation to this current proposal
it should be noted that at some future time, the existing car park is likely to be redeveloped (and
possibly relocated). Further, as the study area develops, it is envisaged that any public parking
in the area would revert to short-stay.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

The proposed parking restriction amendments are in accordance with Council Policy No. 5.2.22
(i)(b) - parking restrictions shall be reviewed when considered necessary by the Town.

Any proposal to change parking restrictions or time limits requires a formal decision by the
Council as required by Clause 2.1 of the Town's Parking Local Law.

The proposals to modify fees requires compliance with Section 6.19 and 6.19 of the Local
Government Act 1995.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

It is recommended that the estimated cost of $2000 to re-mark the parking bays at an be
funded by the reallocation of $2,000 from Capital Budget Item C0953 - Parking Ticket Machines
to Budget Item Parking - Ticket Machine Operations (there is a large surplus in Capital Budget
Item C0953 as a result of discounted supply and installation costs).

The estimated cost of new signage is $900, which will be charged to Budget Item - Road Name
Signs and Parking Signs.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

The proposed provision of all day parking for local businesses and the proposed changes to
parking restrictions are consistent with the Strategic Plan 2009-2020 goals of:- community
infrastructure facilities that are well used and maintained; and financial sustainability.




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                            57
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

This matter has been assessed under the Community Consultation Policy. In accordance with
the assessment criteria it was rated at Level 1, for which no community consultation is required.

However, local businesses have been surveyed and have provided their comments.

ATTACHMENTS:

1.      West Leederville Town Hall Car park L20 - Plan E 303 09 02.

COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Watson, seconded by Cr Pinerua

That by an ABSOLUTE MAJORITY:-

(i)     the 48 parking bays located in the northern, central and eastern sections of the
        West Leederville Town Hall car park L20 be designated as "10 hour Ticket , 7am to
        5pm, Monday to Friday" and "Ticket Parking, 5pm to 10pm, Monday to Friday; 7am
        to 10pm - Saturday, Sunday and Public Holidays";

(ii)    the 14 parking bays located on the western section of the West Leederville Town
        Hall car park L20 (adjacent to the Memorial Gardens) be designated as "4 hour
        Ticket - 7:00am to 10:00pm, All days";

(iii)   the fees for parking at the West Leederville Town Hall car park L20 be:-
        (a) 30 cents per 15 minutes ($1.20 per hour); and
        (b) $8.00 for 10 hours - Monday to Friday;

(iv)    the West Leederville Town Hall car park L20 be re-marked, including the creation of
        motor cycle parking bays in the north eastern section of the car park, at an
        estimated cost of $2,000, the un-budgeted costs being funded by the reallocation
        of the cost from Capital Budget Item C0953 - Parking Ticket Machines to Budget
        Item Parking - Ticket Machine Operations;

(v)     the cost of installing new signage to indicate the restrictions in (i) and (ii) above be
        funded from Budget Item - Road Name Signs and Parking Signs;

(vi)    hirers of the West Leederville Town Hall be granted exclusive and free access to
        the western half of the West Leederville Town Hall car park for hall bookings that
        occur on weekends, public holidays or after 5:00pm on weekdays only;

(vii) in accordance with the requirements of Sections 6.16 and 6.19 of the Local
      Government Act 1995, local public notice be given of the adoption and effective
      date of fees detailed in (iii) above;

(viii) the survey respondents be advised of the Council's decisions in (i) to (iii) above.

Carried            4/0




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                          58
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010




DV10.14     PARKING TICKET MACHINES, OXFORD CLOSE/HARROGATE STREET
            PRECINCT - ADOPTION OF PARKING FEES AND AMENDMENTS TO
            PARKING RESTRICTIONS



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To adopt fees for paid parking in Oxford Close, Harrogate Street, MacEwan Street and the
eastern section of Railway Parade (east of Abbotsford Street); and to amend the parking
restrictions in Oxford Close and Harrogate Street.

BACKGROUND:

At its meeting on 23 June 2009, the Council considered report DV09.53 Proposed Installation
of Parking Ticket Machines - Oxford Close Precinct and decided:

" That:-
(i)   a total of 12 Hectronic Citea parking ticket machines be purchased from Wilson
      Technology Solutions in accordance with Contract C16-07 at a total estimated cost of
      $163,500;
(ii) an amount of $172,000 be considered in the 2009-2010 Budget and be funded from the
      Area Improvement Reserve to fund the total acquisition costs for (i) above, plus the costs
      of the relevant signage, bollards and concrete hardstands;
(iii) provision be made in the 2009-2010 budget for the employment of a full time Parking
      Patrol Officer, pro-rata from the time the 12 new ticket machines are installed;
(iv) an amount of $15,000 be allocated in the 2009-2010 Budget for the purchase of a small
      vehicle for use by the Parking Patrol Officer;
(v) the 12 parking ticket machines be installed as follows:-
      (a) Oxford Close - 6 ticket machines;
      (b) Harrogate Street - 4 ticket machines;
      (c) Railway Parade (south side, east of Abbotsford Street) - 2 ticket machines. "

The 12 ticket machines, plus the one additional ticket machine approved to be purchased by
the Council at its meeting in August 2009, have been delivered from Germany and are currently
being set up by Wilson Technology Solutions pending installation.

Accordingly, it is appropriate to adopt parking fees and to review the operational parking
restrictions prior to the installation of the ticket machines in this area.

DETAILS:

Amendments To Parking Restrictions

1.    Harrogate Street, between Oxford Close and Southport Street

It is recommended that the current "2 Hour, 8am to 5:30pm, Monday to Friday" be amended to
"Two hour Ticket, 8am to 5:30pm, Mondays to Fridays; and 8am to 12 noon, Saturdays" and
"Ticket Parking, 5:30pm to 10pm, Monday to Friday; 12 noon to 10pm, Saturday, Sunday and
Public Holidays".
This will require those attending events a Subiaco Oval to pay for parking during night and
weekends.



MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                         59
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


2.    Harrogate Street, between Oxford Close and Cambridge Street

As a result of the improvement and upgrading works carried out in 2009, about 28 right angled
parking bays have been created on the northern and southern verges of Harrogate Street,
between Oxford Close and Cambridge Street. Currently, these parking bays do not have any
restrictions and are used for all day parking.

It is recommended that "10 hour Ticket , 7am to 10pm, All days" parking restriction be applied
to all parking bays on the northern and southern side of Harrogate Street, between Oxford
Close and Cambridge Street. This will satisfy some of the local demand for all day parking,
whilst requiring those attending events a Subiaco Oval to pay for parking at night and
weekends.

3     Oxford Close, east side between Railway Parade and Harrogate Street

It is recommended that the current "2 Hour, 8am to 5:30pm, Monday to Friday" be amended to
"Two hour Ticket, 8am to 5:30pm, Mondays to Fridays; and 8am to 12 noon, Saturdays" and
"Ticket Parking, 5:30pm to 10pm, Monday to Friday; 12 noon to 10pm, Saturday, Sunday and
Public Holidays".
This will require those attending events a Subiaco Oval to pay for parking at night and
weekends.

4.    Oxford Close, west side between Railway Parade and Harrogate Street

The current parking restrictions in this section of Oxford Close range between a small section of
10 minute parking, with the remainder being 30 minute parking (to the Harrogate St
intersection).

Operation experience in the enforcement of these restrictions has shown that very short timed
parking restrictions in high demand areas, such as Oxford Close, requires regular patrolling and
thus demands fairly intensive resourcing if the objective of availability of public parking is to be
achieved. For example, to maximise the availability of on-street parking, the current 10 and 30
minute parking restrictions require almost constant surveillance and 'tyre chalking' which is very
difficult to achieve.

It is recommended that a "One hour Ticket, 8am to 5:30pm, Mondays to Fridays; 8am to 12
noon - Saturdays" with "Ticket Parking, 5:30pm to 10pm, Monday to Friday; 8am to 10pm,
Saturday, Sunday and Public Holidays" parking restrictions be applied on the west side of
Oxford Close, between Railway Parade and Harrogate Street. This will require those attending
events a Subiaco Oval to pay for parking at night and weekends.

It is noted that the survey of local businesses carried out by the Administration in October 2007
indicated support from 66% of respondents to the possibility of one hour parking restrictions in
Oxford Close. This is a more adequate and equitable parking time period to allow patronage of
local food businesses at meal times, as well as to allow the public a reasonable time period to
attend local businesses and medical services.

5.    Oxford Close, north of Harrogate Street

It is recommended that the current "2 Hour, 8am to 5:30pm, Monday to Friday" be amended to
"Two hour Ticket, 8am to 5:30pm, Mondays to Fridays; and 8am to 12 noon, Saturdays" and
"Ticket Parking, 5:30pm to 10pm, Monday to Friday; 12 noon to 10pm, Saturday, Sunday and
Public Holidays".
This will require those attending events a Subiaco Oval to pay for parking at night and
weekends.


MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                             60
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010



6.    MacEwan Street;

As there are only two marked parking bays in this street, it is recommended that the current
"Two Hour, 8am to 5:30pm, Monday to Friday" parking restriction be maintained.

PARKING FEES

The fees charged for paid parking at facilities operated by other metropolitan local governments
are detailed in the following table. This table also identifies the average hourly and daily
parking rate.
                                                     Ave Fee per   Ave Fee per
            LGA               Parking Fees               hr            day
 Fremantle - per hr           $0.80 to $1.50            $1.30
 Fremantle - per day            $6 to $10                             $8.00
 Fremantle - per night            $2.00
 Subiaco - per hr              $1 to $1.33              $1.20
 Subiaco - per day               $6 to $9                             $8.00
 Vincent - per hr                 $1.90                 $1.90
 Vincent - per day               $11.00                              $11.00
 Vincent - per night              $8.50
 South Perth - per hr             $1.50                 $1.50
 South Perth - per day           $10.00                              $10.00
 Melville - per hr                $1.00                 $1.00
 Melville - per day               $6.00                               $6.00
 Joondalup - per hr               $0.80                 $0.80
 Joondalup - per day              $3.00                               $3.00
                           Average Day Fee =            $1.28         $7.67

Based on the average of the fees charged by other local authorities, it is recommended that the
following parking fees in Oxford Close, Harrogate Street, Bermondsey Street and the eastern
section of Railway Parade (east of Abbotsford Street) adopted:-
1.    30 cents per 15 minutes ($1.20 per hour);
2.    $8.00 for 10 hour ticket zones.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

The proposed parking restriction amendments are in accordance with Council Policy No. 5.2.22
(i)(b) - parking restrictions shall be reviewed when considered necessary by the Town.

Any changes to parking restrictions or time limits requires a formal decision by the Council in
accordance with the requirements of Clause 2.1 of the Town's Parking Local Law.

The proposals to change existing, and to impose additional fees requires an absolute majority
decision by the Council so as to comply with Section 6.19 and 6.19 of the Local Government
Act 1995.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

The estimated cost of new signage is $1300, which will be charged to Budget Item - Road
Name Signs and Parking Signs.


MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                         61
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010




STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

The proposed provision of paid parking and the proposed changes to parking restrictions are
consistent with the Strategic Plan 2009-2020 goals of community infrastructure facilities that
are well used and maintained; and financial sustainability.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

This matter has been assessed under the Community Consultation Policy. In accordance with
the assessment criteria it was rated at Level 1, for which no community consultation is required.

However, local businesses were surveyed in October 2007 and have provided their comments.

ATTACHMENTS:

Nil

ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

That by an ABSOLUTE MAJORITY:-

(i)     "Two hour Ticket, 8am to 5:30pm, Mondays to Fridays; and 8am to 12 noon, Saturdays"
        and "Ticket Parking, 5:30pm to 10pm, Monday to Friday; 12 noon to 10pm, Saturday,
        Sunday and Public Holidays" parking restrictions be applied to Harrogate Street, between
        Oxford Close and Southport Street;

(ii)    "10 hour Ticket, 7am to 10pm, All days" parking restrictions be applied to Harrogate
        Street, between Oxford Close and Cambridge Street;

(iii)   "Two hour Ticket, 8am to 5:30pm, Mondays to Fridays; and 8am to 12 noon, Saturdays"
        and "Ticket Parking, 5:30pm to 10pm, Monday to Friday; 12 noon to 10pm, Saturday,
        Sunday and Public Holidays" parking restrictions be applied to Oxford Close, east side
        between Railway Parade and Harrogate Street;

(iv)    "One hour Ticket, 8am to 5:30pm, Mondays to Fridays; 8am to noon - Saturdays" with
        "Ticket Parking, 5:30pm to 10pm, Monday to Friday; 8am to 10pm, Saturday, Sunday and
        Public Holidays" parking restrictions be applied on the west side of Oxford Close,
        between Railway Parade and Harrogate Street.

(v)     "Two hour Ticket, 8am to 5:30pm, Mondays to Fridays; and 8am to 12 noon, Saturdays"
        and "Ticket Parking, 5:30pm to 10pm, Monday to Friday; 12 noon to 10pm, Saturday,
        Sunday and Public Holidays" parking restrictions be applied to Oxford Close, north of
        Harrogate Street;

(vi)    the current "Two Hour, 8am to 5:30pm, Monday to Friday" parking restriction be
        maintained in MacEwan Street, and the word " Ticket" be applied to relevant parking
        signs;

(vii) parking ticket machine fees in Oxford Close, Harrogate Street, MacEwan Street and the
      eastern section of Railway Parade (east of Abbotsford Street) be:-
      (a) 30 cents per 15 minutes ($1.20 per hour); and
      (b) $8.00 for 10 hours.



MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                          62
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


(viii) the cost of installing new signage to indicate the restrictions in (i) to (v) above be funded
       from Budget Item - Road Name Signs and Parking Signs;

(ix)    businesses in Oxford Close, Harrogate Street, MacEwan Street and the eastern section
        of Railway Parade (east of Abbotsford Street) be advised of the installation of parking
        ticket machines in those streets.

FURTHER REPORT:

Members were advised that two recommendations have been omitted from the report. The
recommendations relate to the parking restrictions and fees for the new ticket machine to be
installed in Salvado Road on the north side of Salvado Road (between 1 Station Street and 40
Salvado Road), immediately west of Station Street.

It is recommended that further clauses be added to the motion as follows:-

(vii) the current "Two Hour, 8am to 5:30pm, Monday to Friday" parking restriction be
      maintained on the north side of Salvado Road (between 1 Station Street and 38 Salvado
      Road), immediately west of Station Street, and the word " Ticket" be applied to relevant
      parking signs;

(viii) parking ticket machine fees in Salvado Road (between 1 Station Street and 38 Salvado
       Road), immediately west of Station Street be 50 cents per 15 minutes ($2.00 per hour).

ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Watson, seconded by Cr Pinerua

That by an ABSOLUTE MAJORITY:-

(i)     "Two hour Ticket, 8am to 5:30pm, Mondays to Fridays; and 8am to 12 noon, Saturdays"
        and "Ticket Parking, 5:30pm to 10pm, Monday to Friday; 12 noon to 10pm, Saturday,
        Sunday and Public Holidays" parking restrictions be applied to Harrogate Street, between
        Oxford Close and Southport Street;

(ii)    "10 hour Ticket , 7am to 10pm, All days" parking restrictions be applied to Harrogate
        Street, between Oxford Close and Cambridge Street;

(iii)   "Two hour Ticket, 8am to 5:30pm, Mondays to Fridays; and 8am to 12 noon, Saturdays"
        and "Ticket Parking, 5:30pm to 10pm, Monday to Friday; 12 noon to 10pm, Saturday,
        Sunday and Public Holidays" parking restrictions be applied to Oxford Close, east side
        between Railway Parade and Harrogate Street;

(iv)    "One hour Ticket, 8am to 5:30pm, Mondays to Fridays; 8am to noon - Saturdays" with
        "Ticket Parking, 5:30pm to 10pm, Monday to Friday; 8am to 10pm, Saturday, Sunday and
        Public Holidays" parking restrictions be applied on the west side of Oxford Close,
        between Railway Parade and Harrogate Street;

(v)     "Two hour Ticket, 8am to 5:30pm, Mondays to Fridays; and 8am to 12 noon, Saturdays"
        and "Ticket Parking, 5:30pm to 10pm, Monday to Friday; 12 noon to 10pm, Saturday,
        Sunday and Public Holidays" parking restrictions be applied to Oxford Close, north of
        Harrogate Street;




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                             63
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010



(vi)    parking ticket machine fees in Oxford Close, Harrogate Street, MacEwan Street and the
        eastern section of Railway Parade (east of Abbotsford Street) be:-
        (a) 30 cents per 15 minutes ($1.20 per hour); and
        (b) $8.00 for 10 hours.

(vii) the current "Two Hour, 8am to 5:30pm, Monday to Friday" parking restriction be
      maintained on the north side of Salvado Road (between 1 Station Street and 38 Salvado
      Road), immediately west of Station Street, and the word " Ticket" be applied to relevant
      parking signs;

(viii) parking ticket machine fees in Salvado Road (between 1 Station Street and 38 Salvado
       Road), immediately west of Station Street be 50 cents per 15 minutes ($2.00 per hour);

(ix)    the current "Two Hour, 8am to 5:30pm, Monday to Friday" parking restriction be
        maintained in MacEwan Street, and the word " Ticket" be applied to relevant parking
        signs;

(x)     the cost of installing new signage to indicate the restrictions in (i) to (v) above be funded
        from Budget Item - Road Name Signs and Parking Signs;

(xi)    businesses in Oxford Close, Harrogate Street, MacEwan Street and the eastern section
        of Railway Parade (east of Abbotsford Street) be advised of the installation of parking
        ticket machines in those streets.

Committee Meeting 16 February 2010

Amendment

Moved by Cr MacRae, seconded by Cr Watson

That clause (iv) of the motion be amended to read as follows:-

(iv)    "One hour Ticket, 8am to 5:30pm, Mondays to Fridays; 8am to noon - Saturdays" with
        "Ticket Parking, 5:30pm to 10pm, Monday to Friday; 8am to 10pm, Saturday, Sunday and
        Public Holidays" parking restrictions be applied on the west side of Oxford Close,
        opposite McEwan Street to Harrogate Street.

Amendment carried               4/0

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:

That by an ABSOLUTE MAJORITY:-

(i)     "Two hour Ticket, 8am to 5:30pm, Mondays to Fridays; and 8am to 12 noon,
        Saturdays" and "Ticket Parking, 5:30pm to 10pm, Monday to Friday; 12 noon to
        10pm, Saturday, Sunday and Public Holidays" parking restrictions be applied to
        Harrogate Street, between Oxford Close and Southport Street;

(ii)    "10 hour Ticket, 7am to 10pm, All days" parking restrictions be applied to
        Harrogate Street, between Oxford Close and Cambridge Street;

(iii)   "Two hour Ticket, 8am to 5:30pm, Mondays to Fridays; and 8am to 12 noon,
        Saturdays" and "Ticket Parking, 5:30pm to 10pm, Monday to Friday; 12 noon to



MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                              64
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


       10pm, Saturday, Sunday and Public Holidays" parking restrictions be applied to
       Oxford Close, east side between Railway Parade and Harrogate Street;

(iv)   "One hour Ticket, 8am to 5:30pm, Mondays to Fridays; 8am to noon - Saturdays"
       with "Ticket Parking, 5:30pm to 10pm, Monday to Friday; 8am to 10pm, Saturday,
       Sunday and Public Holidays" parking restrictions be applied on the west side of
       Oxford Close, opposite McEwan Street to Harrogate Street;

(v)    "Two hour Ticket, 8am to 5:30pm, Mondays to Fridays; and 8am to 12 noon,
       Saturdays" and "Ticket Parking, 5:30pm to 10pm, Monday to Friday; 12 noon to
       10pm, Saturday, Sunday and Public Holidays" parking restrictions be applied to
       Oxford Close, north of Harrogate Street;

(vi)   parking ticket machine fees in Oxford Close, Harrogate Street, MacEwan Street and
       the eastern section of Railway Parade (east of Abbotsford Street) be:-
       (a) 30 cents per 15 minutes ($1.20 per hour); and
       (b) $8.00 for 10 hours;

(vii) the current "Two Hour, 8am to 5:30pm, Monday to Friday" parking restriction be
      maintained on the north side of Salvado Road (between 1 Station Street and 38
      Salvado Road), immediately west of Station Street, and the word " Ticket" be
      applied to relevant parking signs;

(viii) parking ticket machine fees in Salvado Road (between 1 Station Street and 38
       Salvado Road), immediately west of Station Street be 50 cents per 15 minutes
       ($2.00 per hour);

(ix)   the current "Two Hour, 8am to 5:30pm, Monday to Friday" parking restriction be
       maintained in MacEwan Street, and the word " Ticket" be applied to relevant
       parking signs;

(x)    the cost of installing new signage to indicate the restrictions in (i) to (v) above be
       funded from Budget Item - Road Name Signs and Parking Signs;

(xi)   businesses in Oxford Close, Harrogate Street, MacEwan Street and the eastern
       section of Railway Parade (east of Abbotsford Street) be advised of the installation
       of parking ticket machines in those streets.

Carried           4/0




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                      65
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010




DV10.15     DELEGATED DECISIONS AND NOTIFICATIONS FOR DECEMBER 2009 AND
            JANUARY 2010



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To report on matters which have been dealt with under delegated authority and notify the
Council of other proceedings in relation to Development and Sustainability matters.

DETAILS:

The following items (for the months of December 2009 and January 2010 have been dealt with
under delegated authority, in accordance with Council’s policy, as they were deemed to comply
in all respects with the requirements of the Town Planning Scheme and Council Policy:-

    Patio - 22 Perina Way, City Beach
    Two storey dwelling - 65 Branksome Gardens, City Beach
    Two storey dwelling - 45 Dampier Avenue, City Beach
    Two storey dwelling - 41 Sudbury Way, City Beach
    Two storey dwelling - 23 Pindari Road, City Beach
    Two storey dwelling - 4 Alba Lane, City Beach
    Two storey dwelling - 8 Alba Lane, City Beach
    Patio - 7 Templetonia Crescent, City Beach
    Additions and alterations to existing dwelling - 10 Tumut Road, City Beach
    Patio - 5 Camborne Avenue, City Beach
    Additions and alterations to existing dwelling - 93 Empire Avenue, City Beach
    Patio - 8/1 Kilpa Court, City Beach
    Shade Sail - 5 Camborne Avenue, City Beach
    Alfresco - 17 Marimba Crescent, City Beach
    Single storey dwelling - 48 Dumfries Road, Floreat
    Single storey dwelling - 9 Pearson Place, Floreat
    Additions and alterations to existing dwelling - 6 Louth Road, Floreat
    Carport extension - 32 Dumfries Road, Floreat
    Additions and alterations to existing dwelling - 24 Linden Gardens, Floreat
    Single storey dwelling - 3 Ferndale Street, Floreat
    Pergola - 319 Salvado Road, Floreat
    Two storey dwelling - 285 Salvado Road, Floreat
    Above ground swimming pool in strata complex - 433B Cambridge Street, Floreat
    Patio - 292 Salvado Road, Floreat
    Additions and alterations to existing dwelling - 2A Dumfries Road, Floreat
    Additions and alterations to existing dwelling - 4 Roscommon Road, Floreat
    Additions and alterations to existing dwelling - 100 Grantham Street, Floreat
    Change of Use (Consulting Rooms to Shop and Educational Establishment) - 350
      Cambridge Street, Wembley (Cambridge Forum)
    Garage and carport addition - 17 Collier Street, Wembley
    Commercial sign - 58A-D Grantham Street, Wembley
    Additions and alterations to existing dwelling - 33 Gregory Street, Wembley
    Garage - 3 Daglish Street, Wembley
    Patio - 176A Salvado Road, Wembley
    Additions and alterations to existing dwelling - 124 Harborne Street, Wembley


MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                      66
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


    Additions and alterations to existing dwelling - 215 Harborne Street, Wembley
    Additions and alterations to existing dwelling - 159 Daglish Street, Wembley
    Additions and alterations to existing dwelling - 16 Bath Street, Wembley
    Two storey dwelling - 128 McKenzie Street, Wembley
    Retrospective approval (Patio) - 26 Barrett Street, Wembley
    Two storey dwelling - 130 Holland Street, Wembley
    Additions and alterations to existing dwelling - 17 Essex Street, Wembley
    Two storey dwelling - 51A Simper Street, Wembley
    Carport - 64 Keane Street, Wembley
    Additions and alterations to existing dwelling - 2 Drew Street, Wembley
    Carport - 48 Connolly Street, Wembley
    Single storey dwelling - 15 Bath Street, Wembley
    Patio - 10/145 Herdsman Parade, Wembley
    Additions and alterations to existing dwelling - 74 Pangbourne Street, Wembley
    Additions and alterations to existing dwelling - 94 McKenzie Street, Wembley
    Additions and alterations to existing dwelling - 88 Daglish Street, Wembley
    Patio - 14 Keane Street, Wembley
    Two storey dwelling - 31 Brighton Street, West Leederville
    Two storey grouped dwelling - 59 Kimberley Street, West Leederville
    Second storey addition to existing dwelling - 11A Lake Monger Drive, West Leederville
    Front fence - 14 Joseph Street, West Leederville
    Second storey additions and alterations to existing dwelling - 129 Blencowe Street, West
      Leederville
    Two storey dwelling - 2A Warwick Street, West Leederville
    Studio addition to existing dwelling - 34 Blencowe Street, West Leederville
    Fee Paying Car park - 10 Oxford Close, West Leederville
    Garage - 59 Kimberley Street, West Leederville

The following items were referred to the Western Australian Planning Commission with a
recommendation for approval:-

    Two lot survey strata - 179 Jersey Street, Wembley
    Two lot subdivision - 25 Keane Street, Wembley
    Two lot subdivision - 23 Marlow Street, Wembley

The following items are notifications of applications for review and decisions for Council’s
information:-

Applications for Review (Appeals) - received

The following applications for review were lodged with the State Administrative Tribunal against
decisions of the Council during December 2009 and January 2010:

Property:      Lot 193 (No. 37) Dampier Avenue, City Beach

Proposal:      Vergolas

The Council at its meeting held on 22 December 2009 decided to refuse the retrospective
application for two vergolas on the subject property.

The applicant subsequently submitted an application for review of this decision to the State
Administrative Tribunal (SAT). A Directions Hearing was held on 3 February 2010 at which it
was directed that an on-site mediation session be held on 4 March 2010.


MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                         67
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010


Property:      Lot 193 (No. 151) Gregory Street, Wembley

Proposal:      Two storey dwelling with undercroft garage

See report DV10.(insert number) for more information


Applications for Review (Appeals) - determined

Property:      Lot 286 (No. 25) Newry Street, corner Birkdale Street, Floreat

Proposal:      Child Minding Centre

As a result of the amended plan being approved by the Council at its meeting on 22 December
2009, the application for review against the original decision of the Council at its meeting on
13 October 2009 was withdrawn from the State Administrative Tribunal.

Prosecution Outcome

Defendant:     Mr C Saliba.

Property:      67 Ruislip Street, West Leederville.

In accordance with the Council's decision in December 2008, the third prosecution against Mr
Saliba was heard in the Perth Magistrates Court on 26 November 2009.

The defendant's application to have the hearing adjourned, based on his SAT appeal against
the Town's Section 409A Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act Notice, was
dismissed, after the Court was informed that the Notice had formally been rescinded by the
Council.

The defendant's follow-on application to have the hearing adjourned on the basis that he was
not prepared for the hearing, he needed to seek legal advice and he needed to obtain
witnesses. This application was dismissed, on the basis that the defendant had four and a half
months in which to obtain advice and arrange for witnesses.

The defendant maintained his plea of not guilty to the charge, and the subsequent hearing
occupied almost a full day of the Court's time. Following evidence given by the Manager
Compliance and cross examination by the defendant, the Court found the charge proved.

In view of sentencing submissions made on behalf of the Town, the Court imposed a fine of
$4,500.00, together with a daily penalty of $500.00 for each of the 371 days in the prosecution
period and costs of $5,000.00. Thus, Mr Saliba has to pay a total of $195,000.00 in fines and
costs. A memorial will be placed on the land to ensure the fines and costs are recovered.

COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Watson, seconded by Cr Pinerua

That the report on Delegated Decisions and Notifications dealt with under delegated
authority for the period ending 31 January 2010 be received.

Carried           4/0




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                        68
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2010



DV10.16     BUILDING LICENCES APPROVED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY



PURPOSE OF THE REPORT

To provide monthly statistics and comparative data of building licences approved under
delegated authority in December 2009 and January 2010.

BACKGROUND:

Listed below are the total numbers of licences issued in the month of December 2009 January
2010. Also shown are the comparative figures of the number of licences issued on the same
month of the previous year and year to date totals.

                                  December           December      Year 2009     Year 2008
                                    2009               2008
Building Licences                     50                49            593           620
Provisional Building Licences          0                1              3            55
Demolition Licences                   16                4             75            87
Building Approval Certificates         0                2              8            19

Value of Construction            $16,535,426         $9,997,275   $138,034,035 $143,470,590



                                   January            January     Year to Date   Year to Date
                                    2010               2009          2010           2009
Building Licences                      43                36            43            36
Provisional Building Licences          0                 2             0             2
Demolition Licences                    9                 5             9             5
Building Approval Certificates         2                 0             2             0

Value of Construction            $16,010,103         $5,315,909   $16,010,103    $5,315,909



COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Pinerua, seconded by Cr Watson

That the Schedule of Building and Demolition Licences approved under delegated
authority for the month of December 2009 and January 2010, as attached to and forming
part of the notice paper, be received.

Carried           4/0




MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 16 FEBRUARY 2010                                        69
       INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
                                 9 FEBRUARY 2010
                              ORDER OF BUSINESS

1.   DECLARATION OF OPENING

2.   RECORD OF ATTENDANCE/APOLOGIES/LEAVE OF ABSENCE

3.   PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

4.   DEPUTATIONS AND PETITIONS

5.   CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

6.   DECLARATION OF MEMBERS' INTERESTS

7.   REPORTS

      INFRASTRUCTURE

     IC10.1      Waste Management - Policy Review                                        4
     IC10.2      Submissions for the State and National Black Spot Grants 2010/2011     10
     IC10.3      Kerbside Parking Restrictions - Minor Amendments at Station Street and
                 Connolly Street                                                        16

      COMMUNITY

     IC10.4      Bold Park Aquatic Centre Proposed Winter Operational Hours            19
     IC10.5      Hiring of Entertainment DVD's - Cambridge Library                     23
     IC10.6      Cambridge Library - Introduction of Overdue Loan Fines                26


8.   CLOSURE




MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                     I
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
OF THE TOWN OF CAMBRIDGE HELD AT THE ADMINISTRATION/CIVIC CENTRE, 1
BOLD PARK DRIVE, FLOREAT ON TUESDAY 9 FEBRUARY 2010.

1.   DECLARATION OF OPENING

     The Presiding Member declared the meeting of the Infrastructure and Community
     Committee open at 6.03 pm.

2.   RECORD OF ATTENDANCE/APOLOGIES/LEAVE OF ABSENCE

     Present :                                                       Time of       Time of
                                                                     Entering      Leaving

     Members:

     Cr Julie Watson (Presiding Member)                              6.03 pm         7.10 pm
     Cr Rod Bradley                                                  6.03 pm         7.10 pm
     Cr Sonia Grinceri                                               6.03 pm         7.10 pm
     Cr Tracey King                                                  6.04 pm         7.10 pm

     Observers:

     Cr Alan Langer
     Cr Hilary Pinerua

     Officers:

     Chris Colyer, Director Infrastructure
     Cam Robbins, Director Community Development
     Al Valvasori, Manager Infrastructure and Engineering
     Jon Bell, Manager Infrastructure Works
     Denise Ribbands, Administration Officer (Governance)

     Adjournments:                                                                       Nil

     Time meeting closed:                                                           7.10 pm

     APOLOGIES/LEAVE OF ABSENCE

     Nil

3.   PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

     Mr Tim Silbert, Kimberley Street, West Leederville
     Re: Item IC10.2 - Submissions for the State and National black Spot Grants
     2010/2011

     Question

     Around 2003 council made an undertaking to deal with rat running and traffic problem in
     the West Leederville area specifically Kimberley Street prior to development of Coles
     supermarket. At this time the then traffic engineer Mr Richard Watson confirmed that the



MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                        1
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010


     traffic data confirmed rat running was evidenced to be occurring. The Supermarket was
     completed and the traffic problem had not been addressed.

     Ultimately the traffic treatments were undertaken that had little if any effect on Rat running
     but appeared to push traffic onto other local streets - these treatments were undertaken
     with the assurance that should rat running still be a problem it would be addressed.

     A letter was sent to the CEO to be forwarded to council members analyzing the traffic
     data obtained following these treatments and highlighting that the total numbers of cars
     into and out of the suburb was essentially unchanged with a variation in the vicinity of
     around 80 cars out of almost 4000 vehicles recorded - no response to this was ever
     received nor was it ever acknowledged.

     Subsequent to this in around October/November last year a submission was made to
     council in the form of an open letter to council members with a copy forwarded to council
     requesting a response. Council has previously suggested a community based response
     was desirable hence the impetuous for the submission. Again no reply has been received
     although on this occasion the advice provided at a council meeting indicated that the
     matter would be considered and the document was forwarded to the traffic consultants. At
     this time in the questions to council I requested a written response that again has not
     been received.

     On the agenda tonight is a submission for Black spot funding, this submission predates
     the open letter to council and advice that the submission I provided would be considered.
     The treatment at Lake Monger Drive and Kimberly Street appears to conflict with the
     proposal to manage traffic through the area and is likely to have the converse effect by
     tacitly encouraging increased traffic in the local streets.

     Can members advise

     1.    Why this was not raised when the open letter to council was submitted as its
           omission from discussion despite being known to council suggests a dismissive
           attitude to any attempt by resident and ratepayers to submit proposals and
           essentially contempt for ratepayers?

     2.    Why council continues to demonstrate a desire to make local streets attractive for
           rat runners and other non-residential traffic? The argument that it is only intending
           to promote safety is misleading on two accounts - firstly it makes it even easier for
           traffic to bypass the three traffic lights at Southport Street by encouraging more
           traffic through the suburb and secondly with the significant accidents being "rear
           enders" it does little to solve the problems with encouraging greater vehicle
           numbers leading to potentially greater numbers of vehicle interactions and may in
           fact promote an increase in other even more unfavourable vehicle interactions.

4.   DEPUTATIONS AND PETITIONS

     Nil




MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                                2
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010


5.   CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

     Moved by Cr Bradley, seconded by Cr Grinceri

     That the Minutes of the Ordinary meeting of the Infrastructure and Community
     Committee held on 8 December 2009 as contained in the December 2009 Council
     Notice Paper be confirmed.

     Carried           4/0

6.   DECLARATION OF MEMBERS' INTERESTS

     Nil

7.   REPORTS




MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010              3
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010




IC10.1      WASTE MANAGEMENT - POLICY REVIEW



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To endorse revisions to Council Policies No's. 5.3.1, 5.3.2 and 5.3.3. The revisions are as a
consequence of Council decisions in 2009.

BACKGROUND:

The Council has previously considered policy reviews in July 2009 in report IC09.59. This
review incorporated a previous decision of Council to allow all residential and commercial
properties to have their 120L recycle bin exchanged for a 240L recycle bin at nil cost. The
review of the policies was deferred in July 2009 to enable the Administration to assess an
option of providing a 120L MGB in lieu of a 240L MGB for collection of domestic general/green
waste which was to allow for a differential waste disposal levy/fee to be considered. This
option was aimed at providing a financial and sustainability incentive for households and
businesses to increase recycling of waste products and reduce the tonnage of general/green
waste which has to be disposed of to landfill or resource recovery facilities.

In July 2009, Council considered an annual review of fees and charges for the 2009/10 Budget
(Item IC09.60). The report considered the implementation of a differential waste disposal fee
and the following Council decision was adopted:-

"That:-

(i)   the following fees and charges be adopted for additional bins, non-rateable and rate
      exempt properties for the 2009/2010 financial year:-

      (a)   General Waste Collection:

                Domestic collection of additional 240 litre general waste bin on a weekly basis
                  - $250.00 (inc GST) per bin per year;

                Commercial collection of additional 240 litre general waste bin on a weekly
                  basis - $267.00 (inc GST) per bin per year;

                Supply additional 240 litre bins - $65.00 plus GST;

      (b)   Recyclable Collection:

                Domestic collection of additional 240 litre waste bins on a fortnightly basis at
                  $91.00 (inc GST) per bin per year;

                Exchange of 120 litre Recycle Bin for 240 litre Recycle Bin as a once off
                  charge of $Nil;

                Supply additional 240 litre bins in excess of policy - $65.00 plus GST;




MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                               4
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010



(ii)    Council approves expenditure of $305,000 to be funded from the Waste Management
        Reserve, for replacement of all 120 litre recycle bins (estimated at 4,341) with a yellow
        lidded 240 litre bin for recycling;

(iii)   a compulsory Waste Fee on general waste bins levied under the Health Act 1911 in
        accordance with policies 5.3.1, 5.3.2 and 5.3.3 be set at the following rates for the
        2009/2010 financial year:-

        (a) 240 Litre Domestic Bin             $70 per assessment;

        (b) 120 Litre Domestic Bin             $10 per assessment;

(iv)    Council endorses engagement of a Waste Minimisation Officer to actively assist in
        management of waste within the Town;

(v)     a further report be presented assessing:-

           the requirement for a dedicated green waste collection including a review of the
             existing twice yearly verge collection service;

           options for setting of a Waste Fee for the 2010/2011 Budget. To include a split fee
             for 240 litre/120 litre bins and to include all collection, management and disposal
             costs;

           changes required to policies 5.3.1, 5.3.2 and 5.3.3".

In December 2009, Council considered a separate review of applicable fees for provision of a
120L bin for general/green waste and the decision was for a fee of $190 per annum (inc GST)
to be applied (Item IC09.110). This new fee was aimed at rate exempted and non-rateable
properties.

DETAILS:

Following the July 2009 Council decision, the following issues have been finalised.

1.      In the first two weeks of November 2009, all 120L recycle bins were replaced with a 240L
        recycle bin. The early data of collection statistics shows a significant increase in
        collected recycle material which is expected to be maintained.

        Average fortnight collection data:-

        Before exchange (Oct 2009) = 128 tonnes
        After exchange (Dec 2009) = 158 tonnes

        Over the same period Oct/Dec 2008 = 128 to 142 tonnes.

        The actual increase will require some time to stabilise as seasonal fluctuations always
        show up over Christmas periods.

        A second waste comparison has been made by analysing total waste collected ie.
        general/green waste over a three week period and recyclable material over four weeks
        (two collection fortnights). This analysis was made over the Christmas periods of 2008
        and 2009. The comparison shows:-



MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                              5
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010


               Week             2008               Week                2009
                                                                                    Variances
           Commencing         Domestic         Commencing            Domestic
            22/12/2008           213            21/12/2009              180
            29/12/2008           192            28/12/2009              172
             5/01/2009           180             4/01/2010              184
                                 585 T                                  536 T       - 49 Tonne
                               Recycle                                Recycle
            19/12/2008           143            18/12/2009              170
             2/01/2009           131             1/01/2010              157
                                 274 T                                  327 T       + 53 Tonne
       Total Tonnages            859 Tonne                              863 Tonne    + 4 Tonne

      This summary demonstrates similar tonnages were generated over the same Christmas
      periods in 2008 and 2009 and that an extra 53 tonne (+19.3%) of recycle material was
      collected. This translates to a saving in Mindarie Regional Council disposal fees of
      $120.50 x 49 tonne = $5,904.50.

2.    Council adopted a compulsory Waste Fee on general waste bins set at:-

            $70 per assessment for 240L MGB on rateable properties
            $10 per assessment for 120L MGB on rateable properties

      This fee was levied along with rate notices and property owners who wished to receive a
      rebate of $60 were requested to advise Council they wished to have the existing 240L
      general/green waste bin exchanged for a 120L general/green waste bin.

      As at 2 February 2010, the following response has been received:-

      Total Applications                                     1,615

      Approved Applications - Single Residential               869
      Approved Applications - Multi-Residential                684
      Cancelled (changed opinion)                               38
      Application Under Review                                  10
      Refused (property non-rateable)                           14
                                                             1,615

      Total Approved Rebates                                 1,553

      When the July 2009 report was prepared and an assessment of the compulsory waste
      fee was made, calculations modelled 2,000 assessments which produced nil disposal
      savings and 3,000 assessments producing 4 to 6kg in disposal savings.

      A total of 10,822 assessments was allowed for and based on the current data showing
      1,553 assessments will have a 120L bin, a further review of this compulsory waste fee
      can now be commenced.

3.    Council endorsed the appointment of a Waste Minimisation Officer. This position was
      filled in January 2010 when Mr Brice Campbell commenced with the Town of Cambridge.

Further Reports Requested

1.    Changes to Policies No's. 5.3.1, 5.3.2 and 5.3.3.




MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                               6
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010


      The proposed revisions of the three policies are presented in the report attachment. The
      revisions incorporate all recent Council decisions and have been drafted to allow for
      management of the new compulsory waste levy. Specific attention has been given to the
      allocation of "as of right" capacity to each category of property. In short residential
      properties from single to four units per property are allocated 1 x 240L MGB
      general/green waste capacity per unit and 1 x 240L MGB recycle per unit capacity. A
      second 240L recycle bin is available at nil cost. Properties can apply for the 120L MGB
      general/green waste bin to replace the 240L bin.

      Where the residential units (Strata or Non Strata) have five or greater units per property,
      the allocation "as of right" is:-

         1 x 240L general/green waste bin per 2 units
         1 x 240L recycle bin per unit

      All bin requirements require an individual assessment to ensure the balance of bins is
      correct.

2.    Options for setting a compulsory waste fee for the 2010/11 Budget. This is to include a
      split fee for 240L and 120L bins and is to include:-

         Collection Costs (by contractors)
         Management Costs (by Town and contractors)
         Disposal Costs (from Mindarie Regional Council)

      This analysis has not commenced as it was considered the review required to have the
      following input data:-

      1.   Number of 120L bins and 240L bins per rateable property.
      2.   Information from Mindarie Regional Council on the waste disposal fees likely to be
           adopted for the 2010/11 Budget year. This fee review by the MRC would include
           the full impact of the landfill levy of $28 per tonne effective 1 January 2010 and a
           review of costs associated with the Resource Recovery Facility (RRF) at Neerabup.

3.    The requirement for a dedicated green waste collection including a review of the existing
      twice yearly collection service. This report is still in preparation.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

This report reflects revisions to existing Council Policies No's. 5.3.1, 5.3.2 and 5.3.3.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no Financial Implications related to this report.

The policy revisions reflect existing management practice.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

These policy reviews relate to the Town's Strategic Plan 2009-2020 as follows:-

Community
-   to provide quality services to meet identified needs and expectations.



MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                              7
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010


Natural and Built Environment
-     to provide sound and sustainable environmental management;
-     to improve waste management and strategies in line with State Government's
      management practices.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

No community consultation has taken place as the review of these policies reflects previous
Council decisions.

SUMMARY:

In 2009, several decisions were made by Council relating to waste management which has
required a review of existing policies. The policies, as attached, reflect the current
management practice following the Council decisions.

Additionally in 2009, Council requested further reports relating to options for setting a
compulsory waste fee for 2010/11 and in relation to introducing a dedicated green waste
collection service. Both of these reports will be presented in the future as specific information
relevant to these proposals is still to be provided.

Details relating to the current twice yearly verge collection and the proposed costs associated
with provision of a dedicated 240L MGB for fortnightly collection, were presented in July 2009
and are again provided in the report attachment for reference. In order to finalise this report,
two issues require finalisation or clarification as follows:-

1.    The Mindarie Regional Council is commencing in February 2010, a Strategic Waste
      Minimisation trial collection of "wet" and "dry" bins. This trial is being conducted in
      Cambridge. The trial details were presented to Council in August 2009 in report IC09.70.
      The results of this trial will be considered by the Mindarie Regional Council to assess the
      quality of available organic and inorganic waste streams such that appropriate additional
      resource recovery facilities can be established.

2.    The existing Resource Recovery Facility at Neerabup, operated by the Mindarie Regional
      Council, commenced operation in July 2009 and following six months of operation, an
      investigation is underway into the waste composition delivered to site. It is evident waste
      diversion targets of 70% may be affected by the waste composition as the organic
      fraction is lower than anticipated. The potential outcome requiring Mindarie Regional
      Council clarification is related to the interpretation of an exemption from delivering green
      waste on the basis it is classified as "recyclable material". The issue of waste
      composition for resource recovery facilities, and the requirement to have high organic
      content, is not specific to the MRC facility. It is a known variable at all facilities where
      high waste diversion is required and compost produced.

ATTACHMENTS:

1.   Revised Policy No. 5.3.1.
2.   Revised Policy No. 5.3.2.
3.   Revised Policy No. 5.3.3.
4.   Summary of Recycle Tonnages.
5.   Green Waste Collection Review (Data from July 2009).




MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                               8
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010


COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Grinceri, seconded by Cr King

That Policies Nos. 5.3.1, 5.3.2 and 5.3.3, as presented in the attachments, be adopted.

Carried          4/0




MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                        9
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010




IC10.2     SUBMISSIONS FOR THE STATE AND NATIONAL BLACK SPOT GRANTS
           2010/2011



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To consider and endorse submissions for the State and National Black Spot Grants in the
2010/2011 financial year.

BACKGROUND:

Main Roads WA invited submissions in July 2009 from Local Government authorities for the
2010/2011 Black Spot Program. The submissions were to be for locations that have a high
crash history and are located at an intersection or along a short section of road. This program
puts an obligation on the local authority to investigate possible improvements for the roads
under their control.

The National Black Spot Grants are funded by the Federal Government. The submissions for
the National Black Spot Grants must satisfy two criteria:-

    A crash history of at least three casualty crashes during the five year period 2004 – 2008
      inclusive;
    A Benefit to Cost Ratio (BCR) of 2 or greater for the proposed treatment.

The State Government Black Spot Grants are funded as 2/3 grant and 1/3 Local Government
contribution. The submissions for the State Black Spot Grants must satisfy two criteria:-

    A crash history of at least five crashes during the five year period 2004 – 2008 inclusive;
    A Benefit to Cost Ratio (BCR) of 1 or greater for the proposed treatment.

The submissions from all Councils are ranked in accordance with the Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR)
and the projects with the highest BCR ratios are funded. The BCR is determined by:

         BCR = The benefit of the project in reducing the cost of crashes over 5 years
                            The cost of the project over 5 years.

Main Roads WA provided the Town with a CD-ROM titled CRASHtool 2008 to assist in selecting
suitable projects. The information contained on the disk included:-

   A list of intersections and road sections on local authority roads that have sufficient
     crashes to qualify for either state or national blackspot grants;
   A spreadsheet that calculates the BCR for proposed treatments;
   A list of crash types and the estimated cost to the community of these crashes in terms of
     vehicle repair, medical cost and rehabilitation of the injured people. The three most
     expensive accident types are those that involve fatalities, pedestrians or vehicles colliding
     at right angles to each other. A casualty crash is defined as one where people require
     hospitalisation or medical treatment.

The treatment (or treatments) selected for each location must address the safety problem in the
most cost-effective manner. Some typical treatments for black spot intersections and black
spot sections are:-

    Road realignment;
    Signing and delineation improvement;


MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                                  10
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010


    Installation of roundabout – appropriate for right angle crashes;
    Installation of traffic signals – appropriate for right angle crashes;
    Installation of pedestrian signals – appropriate for pedestrian crashes;
    Installation of advanced amber flashing warning signals;
    Improvement to existing signalised intersections – such as larger signal aspects or LED
      signal lamps;
    Installation of splitter or traffic island;
    Hazard removal and protection;
    Installation/upgrading of street lighting – appropriate for pedestrian crashes at night;
    Skid resistant surfacing – appropriate for rear end crashes;
    Re-aligning Y intersections to between 70 and 90 degrees;
    Passing lanes at T intersections – appropriate for rear end crashes;
    Speed control measures;
    Improve sight lines.

DETAILS:

Attached to this report is a list of intersections and road sections within the Town that meet the
criteria for Black Spot Grant applications. For each location, the recorded number of crashes,
the existing treatment, a proposed treatment and the estimated BCR for the treatment has been
included.

An assessment of these locations was carried out by the Town's technical officers. This
resulted in a total of twelve applications being submitted to Main Roads WA for Black Spot
funding consideration.

Advice was received from MRWA in November 2009 that following an independent audit of all
submissions, nine of the projects presented by the Town would be recommended for funding
under the Black Spot program. Five of the projects could also be eligible for National Funding
for the full cost of construction, but would be subject to budgetary limits and ministerial
approval.

The following table summarises a description of the projects submitted for the 2010/2011 Black
Spot program, together with the construction cost estimate of each project and the required
Council contribution. Should any of the projects eligible for National funding not be approved
due to budgetary limitations, they would still most likely be approved for State grants which
would then be subject to the Town contributing one third of the construction costs.




MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                               11
                                                                                                                             Post
                                                                                                  Funding by                         Submitted
                                                                                     Council                                audit
           Intersection                        Project Description                                  BSPOT      Total Cost            for Nation                             Comments
                                                                                   Contribution                             BCR/
                                                                                                   Program                            Funding
                                                                                                                            RRCR
 Projects Recommended for Funding by Blackspot Program
                                                                                                                                                  Likely to attract Nation Building funds. Conversion of existing
                                     Modify Traffic Control Signals. Replace                                                                      signals to LED signals on mast arms to improve visibility of
      Cambridge     Southport
  1                                  signals with LED signals.                                0      105,000     105,000     18.23       Y        the signals. Replaces existing project on Town's 2009
      Street        Street
                                     Install Overhead Mast Arms                                                                                   Budget ($25,000) for addition of pedestrian crossing phase at
                                                                                                                                                  these traffic signals.
                                     Replace signals with LED signals.
                                     Install Overhead Mast Arms on all                                                                            Likely to attract Nation Building funds. Conversion of existing
      Cambridge     Harborne
  2                                  approaches                                               0      180,000     180,000      7.31       Y        traffic signals to signals on mast arms to improve visibility of
      Street        Street
                                     Upgrade lighting as part of underground                                                                      signals.
                                     power requirements
                                     Install intersection islands in Station
      Cambridge                                                                                                                                   Likely to attract Nation Building funds. Addition of traffic
  3                 Station Street   Street                                                   0       45,000       45,000     4.93       Y
      Street                                                                                                                                      islands in Station Street.
                                     Reinforce priority
                    Brookdale St,                                                                                                                 Likely to attract Nation Building funds (If not then, Council
      Howtree
  4                 Oceanic Dr,      Install roundabout                                       0      510,000     510,000      3.79       Y        contribution is $170,000). Replaces existing traffic signals
      Place
                    Floreat Ave.                                                                                                                  with large roundabout with 5 entries.
      Lake                           Install speed platform on Kimberley
                    Kimberley                                                                                                                     Likely to attract Nation Building funds. Addresses the large
  5   Monger                         Street to improve sight distance                         0       39,000       39,000     3.64       Y
                    Street                                                                                                                        number of rear end crashes in Kimberley Street.
      Drive                          Install painted right turn lane
                                     Install intersection islands in
                                     Pangbourne (south)
      Grantham      Pangbourne                                                                                                                    Traffic island in Pangbourne Street, south side of Grantham
  6                                  Reinforce Priority with central sign -               7,000       14,000       21,000     3.06       N
      Street        Street                                                                                                                        Street
                                     consider change to Stop as part of
                                     detailed design
                    Ellerby Street
                                     Replace signals with LED signals                                                                             Improves visibility of traffic signals. Improves sight lines for
      Herdsman      & Jon
  7                                  Reduce radius on left turn slip lane (east          30,000       60,000       90,000     2.67       N        motorists turning left from Jon Sanders Drive. Improves
      Parade        Sanders
                                     approach)                                                                                                    pedestrians crossing Herdsman Parade at signals.
                    Drive
                                                                                                                                                  Removal of Radiata Pine trees on southern verge of Oceanic
      Perry Lakes   Oceanic          Improve sight distance by clearing verge                                                                     Drive and east of Perry Lakes Drive. Together, the three
  8                                                                                       3,000        6,000        9,000     2.19       N
      Drive         Drive            - remove 3 large pines                                                                                       trees have created a small blind spot for motorists to
                                                                                                                                                  approaching traffic.
      Cambridge     St Leonards      Install intersection islands in St Leonards                                                                  Traffic island in St Leonards to separate turning traffic and
  9                                                                                      14,000       28,000       42,000     1.63       N
      Street        Avenue           Reinforce priority                                                                                           install additional regulatory signs.
                                     Total                                               54,000      987,000    1,041,000

 Projects Not Recommended for Funding due to low Benefit Cost Ratio
                                                                                                                                                  Proposed as second stage to the 2009 Blackspot Project at
      Selby         Herdsman         Install protected right turn pocket
 10                                                                                      28,000       56,000       84,000     1.48       N        intersection of Grantham Street / Selby Street. To be
      Street        Parade           Seagull island in median
                                                                                                                                                  considered for funding 100% by Town in 2010/2011 Budget.
      The                                                                                                                                         Proposed to improve visibility of the traffic signals. These
 11                 Selby Street     Replace signals with LED signals                    12,000       24,000       36,000     1.42       N
      Boulevard                                                                                                                                   signals will be left for MRWA to replace in the future.
      Kimberley     Railway          Install roundabout
 12                                                                                      66,667      133,333     200,000      1.41       N        Part-funded on the 2009/2010 Budget.
      Street        Parade           Upgrade Lighting



MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                                                     12
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010

The most significant project on the list is the construction of a roundabout at the intersection of
Oceanic Drive and Birkdale Street / Howtree Place at an estimated cost of $510,000. A report
on this proposal was considered by Council at its meeting of 10 April 2007. A copy of this
report and schematic Plan No. E301-07-01 indicating how a roundabout could be
accommodated is attached to this report. Included in the 2007 report were comments on the
advantages of a roundabout at this intersection for the reduction of accidents and the benefits
resulting from more efficient traffic flows, especially in peak times.

Approval of this project by MRWA will include a condition that all funds be recouped by 30 June
2011. This timeline can be extended by six months if it can be shown that the project is
substantially complete by this time. It is considered that with early planning, the work can be
carried out by the Town's workforce within the required time.

The project, to improve the sight lines at the intersection of Perry Lakes Drive and Oceanic
Drive, will require the removal of three significant Radiata Pine trees. Their location close to
the road kerb in Oceanic Drive impedes the view of approaching vehicles for motorists wishing
to enter from Perry Lakes Drive. A diagram indicating the sight line impairments at the
intersection is attached to this report.

It is recommended that all Black Spot projects approved for funding, either under State or
Federal grants, be accepted and the necessary provision be made in the 2010/2011 Draft
Budget submission for the required contribution by the Town to the cost of construction.

Should any project be considered premature or not viable when detailed designs are completed
and public consultation is carried out, the Town can, at that stage, advise MRWA of its intention
not to proceed. These projects could be presented again in future Black Spot funding
submissions, however, there is no guarantee that the request would be successful at that time.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

This recommendation is in accordance with Council Policy to improve the road amenity in the
district where practical. Main Roads WA and the Public Transport Authority approval, where
applicable, will be required prior to commencing construction.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

The final outcome of whether the submissions are successful is expected to be advised by
March 2010 and Council may consider whether to accept the grant funding and progress the
project.

Of the nine projects recommended for the Black Spot program, five qualify for National funding
of the full cost of construction. If any are not selected for this program, then Council would be
required to contribute one third of the costs through the State program and possibly additional
funds, if required, to carry out additional associated works not eligible for Black Spot grants.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

The Town's Strategic Plan 2009-2020 includes the goals of providing:-

-     services that meet the needs of ratepayers, residents and their visitors that assist with
      personal and community safety, and;
-     community infrastructure and facilities that are well used and maintained through the
      improvement of Transport Infrastructure (roads, footpaths etc).



MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                               13
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

This project has been assessed under the Community Consultation Policy. In accordance with
the assessment criteria it is rated at 30 points (out of 100), which provides for Level 1
consultation.

Level 1 consultation (score 0 - 40) states that no specific consultation is required other than the
investigative and assessment process undertaken by Council staff.

ATTACHMENTS:

1.     Plan No. E301-07-01 - Oceanic Drive Roundabout.
2.     Sketch Plan for Oceanic Drive/Perry Lakes Drive Intersection.
3.     2010/2011 State Black Spot Program.
4.     Report IN07.21 - April 2007.

ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Bradley, seconded by Cr King

That:-

(i)      the 2010/2011 Federal and State Black Spot grant submissions for the following projects
         be endorsed:-

            Cambridge Street / Southport Street - traffic signal modifications;
            Cambridge Street / Harborne Street - traffic signal modifications and street lighting;
            Cambridge Street / Station Street - intersection splitter island installation;
            Howtree Place / Brookdale Street / Oceanic Drive - roundabout construction;
            Lake Monger Drive / Kimberley Street - speed reducing plateau installation;
            Grantham Street / Pangbourne Street - install intersection island and signage;
            Herdsman Parade / Ellerby Street / Jon Sanders Drive - traffic signals upgrade;
            Perry Lakes Drive / Oceanic Drive - improve sight distance by tree removal;
            Cambridge Street / St Leonards Avenue - install intersection island;

(ii)     the funding contribution required for all approved Black Spot projects be included for
         consideration in the 2010/2011 Draft Budget submission to Council.

Committee Meeting 9 February 2010

Amendment

Moved by Cr Watson

That Lake Monger Drive/Kimberley Street- speed reducing plateau installation project be
deleted from the 2010/2011 Federal and State Black Spot grant submissions.

Amendment lapsed for want of a seconder.




MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                                     14
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010

Amendment

Moved by Grinceri, seconded by Cr King

That a further clause be added to the motion as follows:-

(iii)   the Cambridge Street/Birkdale Street intersection be investigated for possible inclusion in
        a future Black Spot funding application.

Amendment carried              3/1

For:               Crs Bradley, Grinceri and King
Against:           Cr Watson

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:

That:-

(i)     the 2010/2011 Federal and State Black Spot grant submissions for the following
        projects be endorsed:-

           Cambridge Street / Southport Street - traffic signal modifications;
           Cambridge Street / Harborne Street - traffic signal modifications and street
             lighting;
           Cambridge Street / Station Street - intersection splitter island installation;
           Howtree Place / Brookdale Street / Oceanic Drive - roundabout construction;
           Lake Monger Drive / Kimberley Street - speed reducing plateau installation;
           Grantham Street / Pangbourne Street - install intersection island and signage;
           Herdsman Parade / Ellerby Street / Jon Sanders Drive - traffic signals upgrade;
           Perry Lakes Drive / Oceanic Drive - improve sight distance by tree removal;
           Cambridge Street / St Leonards Avenue - install intersection island;

(ii)    the funding contribution required for all approved Black Spot projects be included
        for consideration in the 2010/2011 Draft Budget submission to Council:

(iii)   the Cambridge Street/Birkdale Street intersection be investigated for possible
        inclusion in a future Black Spot funding application.

Carried            4/0




MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                               15
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010




IC10.3      KERBSIDE PARKING RESTRICTIONS - MINOR AMENDMENTS AT STATION
            STREET AND CONNOLLY STREET



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To review the kerbside parking restrictions at several locations following requests by adjacent
property owners and residents.

BACKGROUND:

Kerbside parking restrictions have been progressively implemented in many streets within the
Town, in accordance with Policy No. 5.2.22. In general, this has been done to improve the
safety and amenity of residents.

Requests are regularly received from directly affected residents to modify the posted
restrictions over short distances to address changed circumstances and requirements which
would not negate the original intent of the restrictions. Minor changes at times also become
necessary due to the introduction of traffic management devices.

Policy No. 5.2.22 (i)(b) states that:-

"Parking restrictions shall be reviewed when:-

    Requested by the adjacent property owner or occupier in writing;
    Considered necessary by the Town;
    Requested by other persons in writing".

DETAILS:

Station Street - Cambridge Street to Barrett Street

This small section of Station Street, approximately 90 metres long, has various parking
restrictions on each side of the street indicating:-

    "No Parking Road or Verge, Residential Parking Permit Exempt" adjacent to house No.
      23, 24, 26 and 28;
    "2P 8.00am to 5.30pm, Monday to Saturday" adjacent to house No. 24 and No. 200
      Cambridge Street (cnr Station Street);
    No restrictions adjacent to house No. 202 Cambridge Street (cnr Station Street).

This has resulted in parking confusion for motorists and requests from adjoining property
owners for more uniform parking restrictions to better cater for their and their visitor's
requirements. The Town's Ranger services have liaised with the residents and propose that a
consistent parking restriction be implemented on both sides of the road indicating:-

    "2P 8.00am to 5.30pm, Monday to Saturday" adjacent to house No. 200 and 202
      Cambridge Street (cnr Station Street) and;
    "No Parking Road or Verge, Residential Parking Permit Exempt" adjacent to house No.
      23, 24, 26 and 28 Station Street.




MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                           16
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010

This will satisfy the needs of adjoining property owners and discourage long term or all day
parking by commuters or persons attending events at Subiaco Oval.

Connolly Street - Cambridge Street to Barrett Street

This section of Connolly Street, approximately 90 metres long, has parking restrictions
indicating:-

    "2P 8.00am to 6.00pm, Monday to Friday", "2P 8.00am to 11.00am Saturday", "No
      Parking 6.00am to 11.00am, Monday to Friday", "No Parking 11.00am to 11.00pm
      Saturday, Sunday, Public Holidays, Residential Permit Parking Exempt" on the western
      side from Cambridge Street to Stent Lane;
    No Parking Road or Verge, Residential Permit Parking Exempt" on the eastern side from
      Stent Lane to Barrett Street.

The Town's Ranger services have liaised with the adjoining property owners and residents and
propose that uniform parking restrictions be implemented on both sides of Connolly Street from
Cambridge Street to Barrett Street indicating:-

    "2P At All Times, Residential Permit Parking Exempt".

This will remove the current confusing restrictions times without affecting the parking
requirements of adjoining residents. It will also discourage long term or all day parking by
commuters or persons attending events at Subiaco Oval. This proposal is shown on Plan No.
E277-08-01 attached to this report.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

Amendments for parking restrictions as detailed in this report are in conformity with Policy No.
5.2.22 (i) - 'Implementation of Restrictions'.

Council may make regulations for parking under the provision of the Local Government Act
1995, Schedule 9.1.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

The total cost of the proposed parking amendments is estimated to be $800. This amount can
be accommodated under Budget Item - 'Road Name Signs and Parking Signs'.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

The Town's Strategic Plan 2009-2020 has specific outcome areas to strive for, namely:-

Community
-   Quality service to meet identified community needs and expectations;
-   A safe community.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

There was no formal community consultation carried out. This report has been submitted in
response to requests from directly affected residents. Each proposal will improve the amenity
for adjacent property owners and their visitors.




MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                            17
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010

ATTACHMENTS:

1.     Sketch Plan for Station Street Proposed Parking Restrictions.
2.     Plan No. E277-08-01 - Connolly Street Parking Restrictions.

COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Bradley, seconded by Cr King

That:-

(i)    parking restrictions in Station Street be amended to "2P 8.00am to 5.30pm, Monday
       to Saturday" adjacent to house No. 200 and 202 Cambridge Street (cnr Station
       Street);

(ii)   parking restrictions in Station Street be amended to "No Parking Road or Verge,
       Residential Parking Permit Exempt" on both sides of Station Street adjacent to
       house No. 23, 24, 26 and 28;

(ii)   parking restrictions in Connolly Street be amended to "2P At All Times, Residential
       Permit Parking Exempt" on both sides from Cambridge Street to Barrett Street, as
       indicated on Plan No. E277-08-01.

Carried           4/0




MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                      18
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010

            IC10.4 BOLD   PARK             AQUATIC         CENTRE       PROPOSED       WINTER
            OPERATIONAL HOURS



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To provide an overview of the 2009 Bold Park Aquatic Centre winter operational hours and to
recommend future winter operational hours.

BACKGROUND:

Council, at its meeting held on 23 June 2009, decided that:-

“(i)   the current revised Bold Park Aquatic Centre winter opening hours of Monday - Friday
       5.30am and Saturday 7.00am and Sunday and Public Holidays 8.00am remain
       operational until 30 September 2009;

(ii)   a further report, outlining an overview of (i) above, be presented to Council in November
       2009.”

A copy of the report pertaining to the above Council decision is provided as an Attachment.

DETAILS:

An overview of the 2009 winter months (May – September) revised operational opening hours
has now been completed.

Table 1 below provides a summary of attendances. Results reveal that a total of approximately
2,900 swimmers used the facility between 5.30am – 6.00am Monday – Friday and Saturday
between 7.00am – 8.00am. The average per month of 545 for the Monday – Friday time slot
was far greater than the average of 43 per Saturday morning.

Note: The Sunday morning opening time slot did not change and remained at 8.00am.

Table 1: Attendance Figures (May – September 2009)
                                                          Month

                          May         June         July        August      September     Total

   Monday - Friday            521         456          620           580         546          2,723
   5.30 – 6.00am

   Saturday                     34           39           38          46          57           214
   7.00 – 8.00am
   TOTAL                      555         495          658           626         603          2,937




MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                               19
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010

Costs to Council

1.    Income

A total of 2,937 people swam during the trial period and if all customers were paying single
adult fee, rather than seniors, squad trainers or a book of tickets, revenue generated for the
month would be approximately $13,800.

Although additional revenue is generated, there are also additional costs associated with
opening earlier during the winter months.

2.    Expenditure

The approximate staffing costs (as outlined in Table 2) for the months May – September 2009
were approximately $3,000 (109 hours @ $27 per hour).

Table 2: Additional Staffing Costs

        Month               Additional            Cost Per
                             Hours                 Month
 May                                    21                $567
 June                                   22               $594
 July                                   23               $621
 August                                 21               $567
 September                              22                $594
 TOTAL                                 109              $2,943

In addition to the staffing costs, there would also be further electricity costs from additional
lighting in the car park, on pool side, as well as heat pumps starting earlier. It is difficult to
ascertain this cost, however, there has been a significant increase in electricity charges. A
figure of $400 per month has been used based on 16 pole top carpark lights and 60 fluorescent
lights in the building therefore the extra utility cost would be approximately $2,000 to open
earlier during the winter months

Therefore, the total costs associated with opening the pool earlier during the winter months is
approximately $5,000 (staff and electricity).

3.    Net Result

Taking into consideration the additional income and expenditure costs associated with the trail
winter operational hours, the net result to Council is positive $8,800.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

There are no Policy or Statutory Implications related to this report.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

Based on average attendance figures during the trail period from May through to September
2009, the result is a net positive of $8,800.




MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                              20
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

The review of the winter opening hours at Bold Park Aquatic Centre supports a number of the
number of goals within the Town's 2005-2009 Strategic Plan, namely:-

Communication
-   The community engagement of planning and service delivery, effective community
    information and interaction.

Community
-   Quality service to meet identified community needs and expectations.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

This has been assessed under the Community Consultation Policy. In accordance with the
assessment criteria, it was rated at 57 points (out of 100) which provides for Level 2
consultation.

Consultation has been undertaken by the daily recording of patrons using the facility during
5.30am to 6.00am weekdays and 7.00am on Saturdays from May to October 2009.

SUMMARY:

Following the one month trial period introduced in May (to assess the support for the Bold Park
Aquatic Centre opening at 5.30am on weekdays rather than 6.00am and 7.00am on Saturday's
rather than 8.00am), a decision was made to extend the trial during the remaining winter
months so that an actual pattern of use could be measured.

From the pattern that emerged, patrons have embraced the earlier opening Monday - Friday
winter operational hours and to a lesser degree the earlier Saturday morning time slot. Further,
a net result of approximately $8,000 has occurred.

Although the earlier Saturday morning time slot of 7.00am rather than 8.00am is not as popular
as the earlier time slots during weekdays, the majority of neighbouring aquatic centres open at
7.00am. Furthermore, they also have similar opening hours in summer and winter rather than
different opening hours, which is the case at the Bold Park Aquatic Centre.

It is therefore recommended that the following operational hours at the Bold Park Aquatic
Centre are endorsed:

                               SUMMER                                WINTER
 DAY                     Open             Close            Open                Close
 Monday - Friday        5.30am           8.00pm           5.30am              7.30pm
 Saturday               7.00am           8.00pm           7.00am              6.00pm
 Sunday                 8.00am           8.00pm           8.00am              6.00pm
 Public Holidays        8.00am           8.00pm           8.00am              6.00pm

ATTACHMENTS:

1.     Report IC09.58 - Review of Winter Opening Hours – Bold Park Aquatic Centre.




MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                            21
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010


COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Bradley, seconded by Cr King

That the proposed Bold Park Aquatic Centre summer and winter opening detailed below
be approved:-

                              SUMMER                            WINTER
 DAY                     Open        Close                 Open         Close
 Monday - Friday        5.30am      8.00pm                5.30am       7.30pm
 Saturday               7.00am      8.00pm                7.00am       6.00pm
 Sunday                 8.00am      8.00pm                8.00am       6.00pm
 Public Holidays        8.00am      8.00pm                8.00am       6.00pm


Carried          4/0




MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010               22
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010




IC10.5     HIRING OF ENTERTAINMENT DVD'S - CAMBRIDGE LIBRARY



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To report on the charges and concepts associated with the hiring of entertainment DVD’s from
the Cambridge Library.


BACKGROUND:

Council, during the review of fees and charges at the Cambridge Library in June 2009,
requested a further report on the potential to create an additional income stream through
charging for the hire of entertainment DVD's.

Although background information was provided, more information was requested. A copy of
the background information previously circulated in June 2009 is provided as an Attachment.


DETAILS:

Further research has now been undertaken in relation to aspects associated with the possible
charging of entertainment DVD’s from the Cambridge Library. Specifically:-

   Copyright Restrictions;
   Potential Markets;
   Library Services Directions; and
   Financial Implications.

1.    Copyright Restrictions

The Copyright Act 1968 is the main impediment to libraries renting DVD's. The Copyright Act
differentiates between “lending” and “renting”. As renting involves payment, then the
arrangement is a “commercial rental arrangement”. The Cambridge Library DVD's stock (total
of 734) carry the warning that the copyright proprietor has licensed the film for home use only
and that unauthorised usage including “hiring” is strictly prohibited. A further 450 DVD Items
are the property of the State Library and under the Library Board of Western Australia Act
1951, the Town cannot charge for these.

Copyright rental restrictions apply to video and DVD films which have recorded music, such as
music previously released on CD, or on the soundtrack. Currently, this applies to most movie
releases. There may also be contractual restrictions, for example, where the purchase contact
prohibits rental. This is the case with the Cambridge Library DVD stock. Should the
Cambridge Library rent items in their current collection, there would be a risk of legal
prosecution. Research into the process of acquiring permission from the Copyright owner
found it to be very complex, resource intensive and no guarantee that approval would be given.

2.    Potential Markets

Media publications report the decline of the DVD format and demand for DVD rentals. This is
evidenced by an increasing number of video store closures associated with the rapid growth of
major movie download services offering convenient access to hundreds of movies at
comparable pricing to rental outlets and the increasing rate of legal and illegal downloading. It


MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                             23
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010

is anticipated the DVD format will have a limited future as consumers upgrade to digital
televisions. Increasingly, customers will find it more convenient to have immediate access to a
vast range of the most recent movies without leaving home to borrow or return DVDs or risk
fines for late returns.

3.    Library Service Directions

Research only identified two Australian libraries which have charged for DVD hire. Both the
Wyndham and Geelong Library Services have now ceased this practice. Reasons included the
imminent implementation of self check loans requiring the removal of all restrictions in front of
customers, a lack of customer focus, the anomaly of charging for DVD's but not for the similar
music CD format, the decline of DVD usage and the potential risk of Copyright infringement.

Although the international situation varies from that of Australia, it is interesting to note that
Leicestershire libraries in the United Kingdom established a best seller collection in order to
generate income. Although the libraries enjoyed a niche market initially, it is now proposed to
withdraw this service as this niche position has lost momentum with rentals rapidly decreasing
sue to downloads, pay to view digital TV and faster availability in shops of new releases.

4.    Financial Implications

To rent part of the current collection (excluding State Library property) would involve a very
complex and lengthy process requiring additional staffing to identify each copyright owner and
pursue agreements when there are risks of being unsuccessful and customers may not be
prepared to pay for these older movies. Further, staff time would be involved in establishing
renting protocols and policies, determining length of hire (ie. nightly, weekly, monthly), costing
models, pricing models, competitive analysis and other associated issues. The exact costs are
therefore unknown.

The proposal to introduce DVD rental charges at the Cambridge Library arose from the need
for the library to increase revenue in order to become more cost effective. A broader review of
potential new income generation streams has indicated the introduction of fines for overdue
library offers positive financial and service benefits. This is a separate matter and has been
addressed via a separate report to the Infrastructure and Community Committee (refer IC10.06)
in February 2010.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:
The Copyright Act 1968 does not allow for the Town to charge rental on the current Cambridge
Library entertainment DVD's, without acquiring permission from the owner and distributor.
Such a process is time consuming.

If the Cambridge Library was to establish a new DVD rental collection, copyright issues would
need to be overcome and the following Council policies would require amendment:-

Policy No: 2.2.1 - 'Library Service – Collection Development and Management':-
-     Sections 2; 3; 3.5; 3.5.6; 5.1 will require amendment as Cambridge Library service is
      based on providing free access to materials. New policies would be required to guide
      selection based on revenue generation capacity of the DVD format.

Policy No. 2.2.1 - 'Library Service – General Administration':-
-     Sections 3; 4; 5; 6; will require amendment to include DVD rental periods, overdue fines
      and reservations applicable to DVD's.




MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                              24
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

Current expenditure of $2,500 per annum on the DVD loan collection supports a small
collection of older releases.


STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

The copyright issues, anticipated decreasing popularity of DVD's, anticipated future changes to
accommodate self service and financial projections indicates that introduction of charges for
entertainment DVD’s from the Cambridge Library would not fully embrace the Town’s 2009-
2020 Strategic Plan.


COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

This project has been assessed under the trial community consultation policy. In accordance
with the assessment criteria it rated at 32 points (out of 100) which provides for a Level 1
consultation.

Level 1 consultation states that no specific consultation is required other than the investigative
and assessment process undertaken by Council staff.

Following discussion on the rental of DVD’s at the June 2009 meeting of Council, an article
appeared in the Post newspaper which generated letters to the editor, written communications
to the Town and verbal feedback from customers at the Library. These comments did not
support the introduction of rental charges.


ATTACHMENTS:

1.   Additional Information – Library DVD and video collection (circulated on 18 June 2009).


COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Bradley, seconded by Cr King

That a charge not be introduced to rent entertainment DVD's at the Cambridge Library.

Carried         4/0




MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                              25
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010




IC10.6      CAMBRIDGE LIBRARY - INTRODUCTION OF OVERDUE LOAN FINES



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To seek Council support for the introduction of fines for overdue library loans applicable to the
Cambridge Library.

BACKGROUND:

The core business of public libraries is the provision of free access to information. The Library
Board of Western Australia Act 1951 precludes the charging for core services. This limits the
capacity for Local Government to offset the cost of running a library service. Each year, the
potential to increase the range of income generation services is reviewed as part of the annual
budget review of annual fees and charges. An opportunity to generate income at the
Cambridge Library via the introduction of fines for overdue loans has been identified.

DETAILS:

In recent years, customer service levels have been impacted by Cambridge library members
who do not return library loans by the due date. Several marketing initiatives have been
unsuccessful in encouraging library members to comply with loan periods. Not only does this
limit the availability of stock to other members but it incurs a significant follow up work load with
very little cost recovery.

Historically, Western Australian libraries have not been strong advocates of fines for overdue
library loans due to concern resources would not be returned, the high administrative cost for
the return and loss of customer goodwill. When library systems were smaller they enjoyed a
more intimate relationship with a customer, which was accompanied by a good rate of returns
by the due date.

Over the last few years, a trend to introduce overdue fines has started to emerge within the
library industry. This is largely a reflection of the increasing lack of customer concern to return
loans by the due date and is associated with the lack of any penalty for late returns. Due to the
scale of numbers this changing customer behaviour first became evident in the larger library
systems. The introduction of fines has also been facilitated in recent times by automated
library management systems developing the capacity to undertake much of the financial
administrative processes. Local Government's wishing to introduce fees for overdue library
loans needs the approval of the Library Board of Western Australia. The Library Board
2008/2009 Financial Return identifies eleven library systems which currently charge penalties
for overdue library loans. These are highlighted in Table 1.

Table 1: Councils with penalties for overdue library loans

      Local Government              No. of Libraries
 1.    Armadale                            3
 2.    Canning                             4
 3.    Belmont                             1
 4.    Cockburn                            2
 5.    Fremantle                           1
 6.    Gosnells                            3
 7.    Joondalup                           4


MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                                 26
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010

 8.    Kalgoorlie                         1
 9.    Nedlands                           2
 10.   Stirling                           6
 11.   Subiaco                            1

The introduction of fines for overdue loans has the potential for a negative response from
library users although this is a fee totally within the borrower's capacity to control. Should the
Cambridge Library introduce overdue fines, the following initiatives are proposed in order to
create a more positive environment for the introduction of this change:-

1.     Extend the current 3 week loan period to 4 weeks;
2.     Increase the members privileges from 10 to 12 items; and
3.     Commence with a grace period accompanied by a customer awareness marketing
       strategy.

No exemptions or reductions are recommended. Fines for overdue loans are to apply to all
Cambridge Library members with the exception of Books on Wheels members and external
libraries. It is not considered appropriate to impose fines on housebound members when
library staff have responsibility for managing the return of these loans. There is a reciprocal
agreement not to impose any administrative fees for inter library loans except where loss of
damage occurs.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

Policy No. 2.2.2 - Library Service - General Administration 2.2.2 1. This policy provides a guide
on the role, responsibilities and services for the Cambridge Library. Should Council support the
introduction of overdue fees, this policy will be amended accordingly during the bi-annual
review of the Town's policies (envisaged April/May 2010). Further, the loan periods and loan
privileges will need to be updated.

In accordance with The Library Board of Western Australia Act 1951, Library Board (Registered
Public Libraries) Regulations 1985, approval must be sought from the Library Board to
introduce fines for overdue library loans.

It is proposed that the concurrence of the Library Board be sought and procedures and
guidelines be developed in March/ April 2010, marketing and a grace period occur in May/June
2010 and the implementation of fees to commence 1 July 2010.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

Fee Structure

It is recommended the following fees be applied:-

     20 cents per day to commence the first day after the due date;
     $5.00 maximum fee per item.

There are a variety of penalty rates and schedules applied by Councils for overdue library loans
from a rate per day overdue, charges per piece of overdue correspondence to a flat rate when
a very overdue period is reached. Table 2 highlights Councils with a comparable fine schedule
to that proposed.

Suspension of borrowing rights is also recommended when a member's fines account reaches
$10.00. Overdue fees will be additional to the replacement cost of the item. If the item is


MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                              27
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010

subsequently returned the overdue fees will stand. Replacement charges plus overdue fees
will apply for non- returned items.

Table 2: Comparison of Overdue Library Fines

            Council                     Daily Fee Per Item              Maximum Fee Per Item
Armadale                                       $0.20                           $2.00
Canning                                        $0.25                           $2.00
Joondalup                                      $0.25                          $10.00
Stirling                                       $0.20                           $5.00

It is difficult to estimate annual revenue based on LGA's due to the variety of administrative
policies and customer behaviour. Revenue budgets per library range from $4,000 to $20,000.
Fines applicable from the first day an item is overdue are accompanied by higher annual
revenues. It is anticipated Cambridge Library fines will generate $8,000 - $10,000 in the first
year then increasing gradually in subsequent years.

As this is not a charge for service provided it will not attract GST.

Refunds

Refunds are not applicable to overdue fees, however, it will be necessary to cancel or waive
overdue library fines under specific conditions. The Library Service will establish guidelines to
be applied consistently by staff in the administration of overdue fines. Delegated Authority
A5.11 Waiving of Fees and Charges covers library fees.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

The introduction of fees for overdue library loans is consistent with the Town's Strategic Plan
2009-2020 key focus area 'Capacity to Deliver' and its goal of a financially sustainable local
government.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

This matter has been assessed under the Community Consultation Policy. In accordance with
the assessment criteria it was rated at Level 1, for which no community consultation is required.

Customer response to the implementation of fines for overdue library loans will be reviewed as
part of the Cambridge Library biennial survey scheduled for October 2010.

In accordance with Section 6.19 of the Local Government Act 1995, the introduction fees for
overdue library loans will be advertised in the community newspapers, on the Town's website
and within the Cambridge Library.

ATTACHMENTS:

Nil.




MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                             28
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 09 FEBRUARY 2010


COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Bradley, seconded by Cr Grinceri

That:-

(i)     approval be sought from the Library Board of Western Australia in relation to the
        introduction of fines for overdue library loans at the Cambridge Library effective
        from 1 July 2010;

(ii)    subject to (i) above, the introduction of the following fines for overdue library loans
        be approved, effective from 1 July 2010:-
        a) 20 cents per item per day to commence the first day after the due date;
        b) $5.00 maximum charge per item;

(iii)   subject to (i) and (ii) above, the intention to impose the loan overdue fees at the
        Cambridge Library and the effective date be advertised in accordance with Section
        6.19 of the Local Government Act 1995.

Carried            4/0




MINUTES - INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 9 FEBRUARY 2010                           29
      GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
                                15 FEBRUARY 2010
                              ORDER OF BUSINESS

1.   DECLARATION OF OPENING

2.   RECORD OF ATTENDANCE/APOLOGIES/LEAVE OF ABSENCE

3.   PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

4.   DEPUTATIONS AND PETITIONS

5.   CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

6.   DECLARATION OF MEMBERS' INTERESTS

7.   REPORTS

     GOVERNANCE

     GC10.1      Delegated Authority - 2009/2010 Christmas/New Year Recess                 3

     CORPORATE AND STRATEGIC

     GC10.2      Payment of Accounts - January 2010                                   5
     GC10.3      Investment Schedule - January 2010                                   8
     GC10.4      Monthly Financial Statements, Review and Variances - January 2010   13
     GC10.5      Mid Year Budget Review - 2009/2010                                  17
     GC10.6      Lake Monger Reserve - Memorial for Civilians Killed in Wars         26
     GC10.7      Pat Goodridge Reserve - Carpark Licence                             30
     GC10.8      City Beach Oval Reserve - Optus Telecommunications Facility         35
     GC10.9      Documents Sealed                                                    40
     GC10.10     Tamala Park Regional Council Meeting - 9 December 2009              41
     GC10.11     Proposed WACA Facilities at Alderbury Sports Ground / Perry Lakes   44

8.   CLOSURE




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                      (I)
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE OF
THE TOWN OF CAMBRIDGE HELD AT THE ADMINISTRATION/CIVIC CENTRE, 1 BOLD
PARK DRIVE, FLOREAT ON MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010.

1.   DECLARATION OF OPENING

     The Presiding Member declared the meeting of the Governance and Corporate
     Committee open at 6.03 pm.

2.   RECORD OF ATTENDANCE/APOLOGIES/LEAVE OF ABSENCE

     Present :                                                    Time of    Time of
                                                                  Entering   Leaving

     Members:

     Cr Alan Langer (Presiding Member)                            6.03 pm     7.25 pm
     Mayor Simon Withers                                          6.18 pm     7.25 pm
     Cr Sonia Grinceri                                            6.03 pm     7.25 pm
     Cr Tracey King                                               6.03 pm     7.25 pm
     Cr Otto Pelczar                                              6.03 pm     7.25 pm

     Observers:

     Cr Hilary Pinerua

     Officers:

     Jason Buckley, Chief Executive Officer
     Jason Lyon, Director Corporate and Strategic
     Cam Robbins, Director Community Development
     Roy Ruitenga, Manager Finance
     Denise Ribbands, Administration Officer (Governance)

     Adjournments:                                                               Nil

     Time meeting closed:                                                    7.25 pm

     APOLOGIES/LEAVE OF ABSENCE

     Nil

3.   PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

     Nil

4.   DEPUTATIONS AND PETITIONS

     Item GC10.6         Phillip Skelton




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                    1
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010



5.   CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

     Moved by Cr Grinceri, seconded by Cr Pelczar

     That the Minutes of the Ordinary meeting of the Governance and Corporate
     Committee held on 14 December 2009 as contained in the December 2009 Council
     Notice Paper be confirmed.

     Carried           5/0

6.   DECLARATION OF MEMBERS' INTERESTS

     Nil

7.   REPORTS




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                 2
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010




GC10.1       DELEGATED AUTHORITY - 2009/2010 CHRISTMAS/NEW YEAR RECESS



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To note any action taken over the 2009/2010 Christmas/New Year recess in accordance with
the powers delegated to the Chief Executive Officer by the Council at its meeting held on
22 December 2009.

BACKGROUND:

The Council, at its meeting held on Tuesday, 22 December 2009, decided:-

      "That in accordance with Section 5.42 of the Local Government Act 1995, the Chief
      Executive Officer be delegated authority by an ABSOLUTE MAJORITY to exercise the
      powers and duties of the Council, other than those referred to in Section 5.43 of the Act,
      from 22 December 2009 to 8 February 2010 provided:-

      (i)    in relation to Ward matters, a majority of the four Ward Members of the relevant
             Ward are in agreement with the Administration recommendation;

     (ii)    in relation to general matters, where the recommendation is for an item of business
             of a general nature, a majority of all Elected Members are in agreement;

     (iii)   a report summarising the items of business dealt with by delegated authority is
             submitted for information to the Council meeting to be held on 23 February 2010;

      (iv)   the Mayor be kept informed of all items of business to be considered under delegated
             authority during the Christmas/New Year period;

      (v)    Elected Members to notify their agreement or otherwise to issues within the
             timeframe set out in the request. If no response received, it will be assumed that the
             status quo position will be maintained (ie. no change)."

DETAILS:

The following item was dealt with under delegated authority by the Chief Executive Officer
during the 2006/2007 Christmas/New Year recess:-

1.    Tender No. T19-09 - Design, Manufacture, Supply, Deliver and Install Shade Sail
      Structures

      A report was circulated to all Elected Members seeking acceptance of the tender for the
      supply, delivery and installation of shade sail structures at various Council Parks

      The preferred tenderers were approved.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

There are no Policy or Statutory Implications related to this report.




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                  3
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no Financial Implications related to this report.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

The delegated authority process implemented during the Christmas /New Year period satisfies
the goal to provide open and transparent governance.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

This matter has been assessed under the Community Consultation Policy. In accordance with
the assessment criteria it was rated at Level 1, for which no community consultation is required.

ATTACHMENTS:

1.    Tender No. T19-09 - Shade Sail Structures

COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Pelczar, seconded by Cr Grinceri

That the selection of preferred tenderers for the provision of shade sail structures as
outlined in Tender No. T19-09 approved over the 2009/2010 Christmas/New Year recess
in accordance with the powers delegated to the Chief Executive Officer by the Council at
its meeting held on 22 December 2009, be noted.

Carried           4/0




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                 4
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010



GC10.2     PAYMENT OF ACCOUNTS - JANUARY 2010



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To confirm the payment of accounts in accordance with the Local Government Act (Financial
Management) Regulations.

DETAILS:

Regulation 13 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 requires a
list of accounts to be prepared and presented to Council. Below is a list of the cheques raised
and Electronic Funds Transfers for the payment of accounts from the Municipal Account (and
Trust Account where applicable). Included as an attachment to this report is a listing of all
payments issued for the period 1 December 2009 to 31 January 2010.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

Payments are in accordance with Policy No. 3.2.3 “Council Bank Accounts and Payments”.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

Expenses incurred are charged to the appropriate items included in the annual budget.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

The presentation of details of accounts is consistent with the Town’s Strategic Plan key
outcome area of capacity to deliver and its goal of open and transparent governance.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

This matter has been assessed under the Community Consultation Policy. In accordance with
the assessment criteria it was rated at Level 1, for which no community consultation is required.


COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Grinceri, seconded by Cr Pelczar

That in accordance with Regulation 13 of the Local Government (Financial Management)
Regulations 1996, the schedule of accounts as detailed below and attached, be
confirmed:




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                 5
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010



(i)    CHEQUE PAYMENTS

       Municipal Fund
       Date From               Date To                      Details                Amount
       01-December-2009        04-December-2009         032064 - 032251        $796,017.24
       04-December-2009        10-December-2009         032252 - 032395        $295,150.58
       14-December-2009        17-December-2009         032396 - 032536        $708,713.29
       22-December-2009        22-December-2009         032537 - 032546         $97,250.22
       23-December-2009        29-December-2009         032547 - 032639       $1,624,577.12
       05-January-2010         07-January-2010          032640 - 032785        $224,143.94
       11-January-2010         15-January-2010          032786 - 032870        $163,028.88
       19-January-2010         22-January-2010          032871 - 034383        $261,955.06
       25-January-2010         25-January-2010          034384 - 034486        $200,992.28
       28-January-2010         29-January-2010          034487 - 034577        $302,085.15
                                                                              $4,673,913.76
       Golf Course
       01-December-2009        23-December-2009             16 - 19                $996.51
       06-Januaary-2010        25-January-2010              20 - 27               $4,629.15
       Sub Total                                                                  $5,625.66


       Total Cheque Payments                                                  $4,679,539.42


(ii)   ELECTRONIC FUND TRANSFERS (EFT'S)


       Investments
       01-December-2009        31-December-2009       Inv 00220 -Inv 00228    $6,221,857.53
       01-January-2010         31-January-2010        Inv00229 - Inv 00237    $7,852,747.26
       Sub Total                                                             $14,074,604.79


       Direct Bank Charges
       01-December-2009        31-December-2009        Sup 083 - Sup 084        $20,048.71
       01-January-2010         31-January-2010         Sup 085 - Sup 086        $18,685.18
       Sub Total                                                                $38,733.89


       Accounts Payable
       01-December-2009        01-December-2009        E001586 - E001587        $18,831.57
       02-December-2009        10-December-2009        E001588 - E001606        $46,219.07
       11-December-2009        17-December-2009        E001607 - E001645       $561,989.91
       18-December-2009        24-December-2009        E001646 - E001657       $978,213.00
       25-December-2009        07-January-2010         E001658 - E001689       $231,631.32
       08-January-2010         12-January-2010         E001690 - E001700        $16,545.13
       13-January-2010         19-January-2010         E001701 - E001739       $285,312.18
       21-January-2010         25-January-2010         E001740 - E001765       $632,809.94
       Sub Total                                                              $2,771,552.12


       Golf Course
       10-December-2009        10-December-2009          EFT6 - 00001           $32,688.47
       17-December-2009        17-December-2009          EFT7 - 00002           $48,927.34
       05-January-2010         05-January-2010           EFT8 - 00002           $14,687.85
       14-January-2010         14-January-2010           EFT9 - 00001           $28,169.05
       28-January-2010         28-January-2010           EFT11 - 00001          $18,899.25
       Sub Total                                                               $143,371.96




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                         6
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010



     Payroll
     08-December-2009      31-December-2009            Pay 158 - Pay 168    $1,299,881.40
     01-January-2010       31-January-2010             Pay 169 - Pay 177     $942,901.82
     Sub Total                                                              $2,242,783.22


     Total EFT Payments                                                    $19,271,045.98


     TOTAL PAYMENTS                                                        $23,950,585.40


Carried            5/0




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                       7
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010




GC10.3     INVESTMENT SCHEDULE - JANUARY 2010



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To advise the Council of the amount of surplus funds invested, the distribution of those funds
and the financial performance of each investment (ie. interest earned) year to date.

BACKGROUND:

Council’s Investment Policy No. 3.2.5 allows for investing of funds into direct investment
products and managed funds.

Investment products must comply with both the credit risk rating and terms to maturity
guidelines as set out in the policy.

Investment reports are to be submitted on a monthly basis and are to contain the details as
stipulated in the policy for each of the three sources of Council funds, namely General,
Reserves and Endowment Lands.

DETAILS:

At its February 2009 meeting, the Reserve Bank of Australia decided against all market
expectations, not to increase the official cash rate of 3.75%. The investment markets had
anticipated an increase in the cash rate as being almost certain with the Australian economy
beginning to recover quite strongly. Unemployment is much less than anticipated, housing
construction is up, the property market has improved significantly and consumer confidence is
up. Given this, the Reserve Bank’s main reason for not increasing the cash rate, is that lenders
have in the past raised interest rates in excess of cash rate increases. The Reserve Bank
wants to assess the impact of these before making any further cash rate increases.

Although the cash interest rate has not increased this month, the Town was able to obtain
some excellent investment rates in the 6% to 7% range where funds were able to be invested
for periods of between six and twelve months. These are extremely good value at 2.25% to
3.25% above the prevailing cash rate of 3.75% and the Town has begun to see a significant lift
in the overall interest earnings of the portfolio with respect to reserves and Endowment Lands
funds.

The UBS Bank Bill Index rate (which is an index measuring performance of interest rates over a
ninety day period) was 4.16% for January 2010. At 1 February 2010, the 90 day BBSW or
Bank Bill Swap rate, which is a measure of future interest rates, was 4.21%. As the Council’s
investment portfolio is predominantly short term cash products, the cash rate is likely to be the
more appropriate performance measure. The investment portfolio out performed the cash rate
of 3.75% at the end of January with the weighted average interest rate of the portfolio being
5.31%.




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                 8
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


The graph below shows the interest rate performance of the Town's investment portfolio for the
12 month period January 2009 to January 2010.


I n t e r e st R a t e s
                                                           Investment Performance
                                                      For January 2009 to January 2010
        10.00

           9.00
           8.00

           7.00
           6.00
           5.00

           4.00
           3.00
           2.00
           1.00

           0.00
                           Jan-09 Feb-09 Mar-09 Apr-09 May-09 Jun-09   Jul-09 Aug-09 Sep-09 Oct-09 Nov-09 Dec-09 Jan-10



                                           Weighted Avg Interest       UBS Bank Bill Index      Cash Rates


The graph below shows the rolling 12 month weighted average investment performance of the
Town's investment portfolio, since January 2007.

                                            Rolling Weighted Average Investment Performance
Int er est R at es                                  For January 2007 to January 2010

   9.00

   8.00

   7.00

   6.00

   5.00

   4.00

   3.00

   2.00
       Jan-07 Apr-07 Jul-07                  Oct-07 Jan-08 Apr-08 Jul-08       Oct-08 Jan-09 Apr-09     Jul-09   Oct-09 Jan-10
                                                      Weighted Avg Interest      UBS Bank Bill Index




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                                                  9
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


The total investment at the end of January 2010 is $24.64 million which consists of Municipal
Funds of $8.28 million, Reserve Funds of $8.83 million and Endowment Lands Funds of
$7.53 million. The graph below represents the total investment portfolio of the Town from
January 2009 to January 2010.


                                              Investment Portfolio
 24,000,000.00

 22,000,000.00

 20,000,000.00

 18,000,000.00

 16,000,000.00

 14,000,000.00

 12,000,000.00

 10,000,000.00

  8,000,000.00

  6,000,000.00

  4,000,000.00

  2,000,000.00

           -
                 Jan-09   Feb-09   M ar-09   A pr-09    M ay-09   Jun-09     Jul-09   A ug-09   Sep-09   Oct-09   No v-09   Dec-09   Jan-10




                                                       Reserves            Endowment            Municipal




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                                                               10
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


The investment performance as at the end of January 2010 is as follows:

                                                   Current        January         Total         % of
                                 Term              Interest            2010     Amount        Funds
                                (Days)    Rating      Rate         Income      Invested     Invested
 Floating Rate Notes                                                 .
 ANZ Subordinated Debt                    "AA-"      4.34%           $1,844     $496,091       2.01%
 Emerald Reverse Mortgage                  "A"       4.37%           $3,609     $980,563       3.98%

 Sub-total                                                           $5,454    $1,476,654      5.99%



 Term Deposits and Bank
 Bills
 BANKWEST - Bank Bill               180   "A1+"      5.30%           $3,225      $724,235      2.94%
 BANKWEST - Bank Bill               180   "A1+"      5.25%           $4,475    $1,013,350      4.11%
 BANKWEST - Term Deposit             91   "A1+"      5.30%           $4,519    $1,011,000      4.10%
 BANKWEST - Term Deposit            182   "A1+"      5.50%           $3,120      $675,751      2.74%
 BANKWEST - Term Deposit            182   "A1+"      5.80%           $2,463      $503,734      2.04%
 BANKWEST - Term Deposit             19   "A1+"      4.20%           $3,728    $1,803,728      7.32%
 BANKWEST - Term Deposit             83   "A1+"      5.40%           $1,154      $601,154      2.44%
 BANKWEST - Term Deposit             94   "A1+"      5.40%           $1,154      $601,154      2.44%
 BANKWEST - Term Deposit            102   "A1+"      5.40%             $740      $500,740      2.03%
 BANKWEST - Term Deposit             90   "A1+"      5.40%           $1,169      $791,169      3.21%
 NAB - Term Deposit                  92   "A1+"      4.57%           $1,386            $0      0.00%
 NAB - Term Deposit                 181   "A1+"      6.00%             $876      $534,065      2.17%
 NAB - Term Deposit                  92   "A1+"      4.57%           $6,296            $0      0.00%
 NAB - Term Deposit                 181   "A1+"      6.00%           $1,644    $1,001,644      4.06%
 NAB - Term Deposit                 182   "A1+"      5.20%           $1,562      $357,580      1.45%
 NAB - Term Deposit                 181   "A1+"      5.36%           $9,203    $2,041,466      8.28%
 BOQ - Term Deposit                 181    "A2"      5.60%           $2,665      $566,072      2.30%
 WESTPAC - Term Deposit             365    "AA"      7.00%           $2,973      $503,836      2.04%
 WESTPAC - Term Deposit             365    "AA"      7.00%           $2,973      $503,836      2.04%
 WESTPAC - Term Deposit             365    "AA"      7.00%           $2,973      $503,836      2.04%
 StGeorge - Term Deposit             54   "A1+"      5.22%           $4,433    $1,007,580      4.09%
 StGeorge - Term Deposit             75   "A1+"      5.22%           $4,433    $1,007,580      4.09%
 StGeorge - Term Deposit             59   "A1+"      4.75%           $3,407            $0      0.00%
 StGeorge - Term Deposit             74   "A1+"      5.30%           $2,614    $1,002,614      4.07%
 StGeorge - Term Deposit             60   "A1+"      5.30%           $2,691    $1,032,249      4.19%
 StGeorge - Term Deposit            126   "A1+"      4.37%           $7,423    $2,029,213      8.23%
 StGeorge - Term Deposit            126   "A1+"      4.37%           $2,227      $608,764      2.47%
 StGeorge - Term Deposit            180   "A1+"      5.45%           $4,629    $1,010,153      4.10%
 StGeorge - Term Deposit            182   "A1+"      5.71%           $1,057      $219,876      0.89%
 Suncorp - Term Deposit             367   "A1+"      7.00%           $5,945    $1,008,630      4.09%

 Sub-total                                                          $97,157   $23,165,007     94.01%

 Total Investments                                                $102,610    $24,641,661    100.00%

Weighted Average Interest

The weighted average interest is 5.31% compared against the 90 day Bank Bill Index
benchmark which has been an average of 4.16% for January 2010. The Bank Bill Index is a
measure of past performance as opposed to the Bank Bill Swap Rate (BBSW) for 3 months of
4.21% at 1 February 2010, which is based on forward interest earnings.


MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                 11
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

The general, reserves and Endowment Lands funds are invested in accordance with the
guidelines set down in the Town’s Policy No. 3.2.5 – Investment.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

Interest from investments represents a significant revenue item in the Council’s Budget and it is
therefore important that the Council’s investment performance is monitored closely. Detailed
monthly reports together with detailed policy investment guidelines support this.

The Investment Schedule, as circulated, provides details of the performance of each individual
investment to date. A summary of the investment performance to budget is provided below:-

                                         Actual as at                           Actual as at
                             Budget       January                   Budget       January
                            2008/2009       2009          %        2009/2010       2010         %
    General                   $641,000      $404,312      63.1%      $583,300      $236,763     40.6%
    Reserves                  $350,000      $256,404      73.3%      $300,000      $221,705     73.9%
    Endowment Lands         $2,150,000      $100,276       4.7%      $100,000      $122,349    122.3%
    Total Investments       $3,141,000      $760,992      24.2%      $983,300      $580,817     59.1%

*         Includes Bank Account Interest and Underground Power Interest of $49,153


STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

The investment of Council funds is consistent with the Strategic Plan's key area of Capacity to
Delivery and its goal of financial sustainability by ensuring strategies are in place for maintaining
the Town's wealth and revenue capacity.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

This matter has been assessed under the Community Consultation Policy. In accordance with
the assessment criteria it was rated at Level 1, for which no community consultation is required.


ATTACHMENTS:

1.      Oakvale Consolidated Investment Report – January 2010

COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Pelczar, seconded by Cr Grinceri

That the Investment Schedule as at 31 January 2010 forming part of the Notice Paper be
received.

Carried             5/0




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                    12
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010




GC10.4        MONTHLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, REVIEW AND VARIANCES - JANUARY
              2010



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To review the financial position for the period ended 31 January 2010 and to comment on both
permanent and timing variances that have occurred during the period and their impact on
financial results.

BACKGROUND:

A list of detailed explanations has been provided for budget line items where permanent
variations are $30,000 or more and timing variances are $100,000 or more.

DETAILS:

A table of key financial indicators is provided below comparing year to date actual figures
against the year to date budget.

                                                  Annual
                                                  Budget       Budget        Actual
 Details
                                                 2009/2010    31 Jan 10    31 Jan 10
                                                  ($000's)     ($000's)     ($000's)
 Balance Sheet
 Working Capital (net current assets)                                         29,253
 Investments:
   General                                                                     8,275
   Reserves                                                                    8,834
   Endowment Lands                                                             7,531
                                                                              24,640

 Financial Operations
 Revenue                                            41,333        31,239      30,408
 Expenditure                                        33,194        19,916      18,976
 Operating Profit/(Loss)                             8,139        11,323      11,432

 Other
 Overall Surplus (from rate setting statement)                     5,746        9,097
 Transfers from/(to) Reserves                       (3,956)      (3,169)      (1,354)
 Transfers from/(to) Endowment Lands                10,049         6,955        5,178
 Capital Expenditure                                19,841       12,892         7,333



I.         The Balance Sheet

      The following observations are made:

       Cash assets increased during the month by $1.5 million mainly due to the sale of two
         Ocean Mia land lots, and total $24.5 million at the end of January.




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                            13
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


       Current receivables are $3.7 million, with rates debtors outstanding as at 31 January
         2010 being $2.1 million after raising rates of $16.2 million at the commencement of
         the financial year;

       Non current loans increased by $0.5 million during the month to $7.4 million, relating
         to the Wembley Golf Complex reticulation system and golf course driving range
         development. Provision is made in the budget for an $11 million loan for the driving
         range project.

II.   Financial Operations

      Net Result from Operations

                                                         Net Operating Result
              20                                                                                          Budget
                                                                                                          Actual
              16


              12
       Millions




                  8


                  4


                  0
                           Aug      Sep   Oct    Nov    Dec       Jan   Feb   Mar   Apr   May   June
                                                              Month Ended


      Reviewing the operating statement for the period ended 31 January 2010 the following
      key points are made:

      Revenue

                    Total revenue is 97.3% of the year to date budget with $30.4 million actual revenue
                      against a budget of $31.2 million. The $800,000 difference is mainly due to gain on
                      sale of land assets being less than budgeted.

                      Permanent Differences for Revenue

                               There are no permanent variances above $30,000 as at 31 January 2010.
                      .

                      Timing Differences for Revenue

                               Timing variances above $100,000 as at 31 January 2010 (see attachment).
                                 There are four timing variances currently to report on – Ocean Mia land sales,
                                 senior services grant, waste fee and capital grant funding for roads.

      Expenditure

                    The expenditure for the year was below year to date budget with actual expenditure
                      being $18.9 million against year to date budget of $19.9 million or 95.3%.


MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                              14
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


                     Looking at the operating statement by program, the majority of the areas are under
                       the year-to-date budget, due to timing differences with programmes and projects
                       having commenced or yet to commence.
                     The operating statement by nature and type indicates most areas of expenditure
                       are below budget with materials and contracts 12% below year to date budget due
                       to timing differences.

                     Salaries and wages at $7.4 million are just above year to date of $7.3 million or
                       102%. This variance is due to the second lump sum contribution to the City of
                       Perth Superannuation fund of $136K which should be able to be absorbed within
                       the salaries and wages budget.

                       Permanent Differences for Expenditure

                                There are no permanent variances above $30,000 to report on.

                       Timing Differences for Expenditure

                                There are seven timing differences over $100,000 to report on as at 31
                                  January 2010.

       Overall Cash Surplus from the Rate Setting Statement

       The surplus as at 31 January 2010 is $9.1 million and above year to date budget of $5.8
       million. A contributing factor has been capital expenditure below year to date budget.
       This will decline as the year progresses with day to day operational expenditure and the
       carrying out of budgeted capital works throughout the year.


                                                          Cash S urplus

               16


               12
            Millions




                   8


                   4


                   0
                            Aug     Sep   O ct   N ov   D ec   Ja n   Fe b   M ar   A pr   May   J u ne


                                                           M onth Ended
                                                                                                          Budget
                                                                                                          Actual



III.   Capital Works Programs

       The total amount of funds spent on the Town’s capital works program for the period
       ended 31 January 2010 is $7.3 million against budget of $12.9 million, a variance of
       $5.6 million. The golf complex driving range accounts for $2.6 million of this variance.



MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                               15
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


      Unspent road works of $1.1 million identified as possible carry forwards as listed in the
      mid year budget review also contribute to this variance.

      A brief overview by asset class shows that $3.9 million has been spent within the parks
      and reserves against a year to date budget of $7.1 million, $1.3 million within roads and
      lanes against a year to date budget of $2.8 million and $283K within footpaths against a
      year to date budget of $436K.

VI.   Budget Reallocations

      No budget reallocations have been received.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

The Local Government Act 1995, Section 6.4 requires the preparation of financial reports. The
Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996, in particular Regulation 34,
expands on this requirement to include a monthly financial report to be prepared identifying
significant variations between actuals and budget. This report complies with this requirement.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

The variations in expenditure and revenue line items, compared to budget, may have an impact
on Council funds.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

The management of budgeted funds is consistent with the Strategic Plan’s goal of financial
sustainability, by ensuring our expenditure is matched by our revenue.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

This matter has been assessed under the Community Consultation Policy. In accordance with
the assessment criteria it was rated at Level 1, for which no community consultation is required.

ATTACHMENTS:

1.    Monthly Financial Statements - January 2010
2.    Extract of Management 31 January 2010 Financial Statements.
3.    Variation Report

COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Pelczar, seconded by Cr King

That the report on the Financial Statements as at 31 January 2010 be received and the
variances to the Budget be noted.

Carried          5/0




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                16
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010



GC10.5     MID YEAR BUDGET REVIEW - 2009/2010



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To conduct a review of the budget and assess the financial performance for the six month
period ended 31 December 2009, consistent with good governance principles and the
requirements of the Local Government Act.

BACKGROUND:

Council is required to conduct a budget review between 1 January and 31 March each financial
year as per Regulation 33A of the Financial Management Regulation 1996.

The conclusions made have been arrived at after having conducted the following tasks:

   conducting a critical assessment of material variances to determine whether they are
     permanent or timing differences;

   identify any offsetting increases in income or reductions in expenditure that will help
     reduce major variances;

   establish whether the budget review process and recommendations have a material
     impact on the long term plans;

   establish whether at the close of the financial year there is sufficient working capital to
     meet current commitments before the following year’s budget is adopted;

   identify projects that may not be completed and which will need to be carried forward into
     the new financial year for inclusion in the following year’s budget;

   identify grants and contributions received that are likely to remain unspent at the close of
     the financial year.

DETAILS:

Statement of Financial Activity

The statement (shown at attachment one) is an overview of sources and application of funds.
The Town budgets for a nil or ‘balanced budget’ position at the end of the financial year and the
Statement reflects proposed amendments to the budget as a result of examining variations,
resulting in a revised end-of-year position of -$108k.

The major variances are discussed in the following section. Further, specific attention is given
in this report on the Wembley Golf Course operations, having taken over the operations of the
pro shop and hospitality services, and also given the construction of new facilities and it effect
on course operations.




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                 17
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010



Operating Revenue

                                      Annual       Budget          Actual      Variance      % to
                                      Revised       YTD             YTD           to         YTD
                                      Budget
                                       2009       31-Dec-09    31-Dec-09       Budget       Budget
                                         $            $              $            $
OPERATING REVENUES
Rates                                16,363,300   16,274,800   16,199,191      (75,609)     -0.46%
Operating Grants, Subsidies and
Contributions                        1,897,000     975,100        943,353      (31,747)     (3.26%)
Non-Operating Grants, Subsidies
and Contributions                     751,800      206,100        170,578      (35,522)     (17.24%)
Fees and Charges                     9,568,300    4,923,700       4,559,374   (364,326)     (7.40%)
Interest Earnings                    1,062,300     558,600        560,910       2,310        0.41%
Other Revenue                        1,774,900     891,300        876,753      (14,547)     (1.63%)
Gain On Disposal of Assets           9,758,700    5,334,100       3,801,737   (1,532,363)   (28.73%)
Total Revenue                        41,176,300   29,163,700   27,111,896     (2,051,804)   (7.04%)

Rates
The rates revenue of $16.2 million is below year to date budget by $75k. Interim rates, which
are generated by the completion of land subdivisions or completed home constructions, are
down around $50k when compared to previous year’s results. In addition an adjustment by the
Valuer General for the Ocean Mia land subdivision which removed the two original lots, also
had an impact, with $26K of rates having to be reversed. It is estimated that overall revenue
will be down $25K at year end, which represents a permanent difference.

Operating Grants, Subsidies and Contributions
Grants and subsidies revenue of $943k received or claimed to date is $32k below year to date
budget. These are due to timing differences in claiming operational grants and subsidies within
various cost centres. Claims tend to be made when a project has been completed and when all
costs have been accounted for.

Non Operating Grants, Subsidies and Contributions
Grants and subsidies revenue of $171K is below year to date budget by $35K. Claims are
made at certain stages of progress with respect to capital works funded by Commonwealth and
State Government grants. Therefore this variance represents a timing difference. Main Road
rehabilitation capital grants and main roads blackspot capital grants are respectively $10K and
$25K below year to date budget within the transport programme. These will be claimed when
the works are completed.

Fees and Charges
Actual revenue to date from fees and charges as at December 2009 is below year to date
budget by $364K. This variance is largely attributable to the Wembley golf course (see section
on Wembley Golf Complex for further details).

Other fees, such as planning fees are $50k above year to date budget and likewise building
licence fees are $24k above. In terms of impact on the Municipal fund, a permanent variance of
$90K additional revenue for other fees is expected.

The waste disposal levy shows $739k against a budget of $498k, prior to the waste rebate
being processed. Approximately 1,550 properties will receive the rebate, totalling $93k and


MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                     18
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


leaving a balance of $646k. The additional waste fee which remains over the budgeted waste
fee will be transferred to the Waste Reserve at the end of the year, once any further rebates
have been processed and the Mindarie disposal costs have been reconciled back to budget.

Interest Earnings
Total investment earnings are in line with year to date budget, however, an analysis of specific
fund performance reveals a mixed result.

Reserve interest at $181k is $31k above year to date budget with some major capital works
funded by reserves not as yet commenced or completed allowing a greater amount of funds to
be invested for longer periods of time than originally anticipated.

Endowment Lands Account interest at $93K is $44K above year to date budget. Ocean Mia
land sales have occurred early in the financial year. This inflow of $3.5 million of funds has
been invested at interest rates exceeding 5% which has contributed to the strong year to date
earnings.

Municipal interest at $194k is well below year to date budget of $283k. This is a direct
consequence of the lower rates from August to November – the period when typically the Town
has the most cash to invest. On average, rates for this period were 4.2%, compared with 7.2%
for the same period last year.

Whilst interest rates have improved to the extent that recent investments are now achieving 6%
to 7%, the funds available for investing are diminishing and a permanent variation is forecast of
$200,000.

Other Revenue
Revenue from other income sources is $876K against a year to date budget of $891K giving a
variance of $15K or 1.6% below budget. The variation is due to timing differences.

Operating Expenditure


                              Annual         Budget       Actual      Variance      % to
                              Revised         YTD          YTD           to         YTD
                           Budget 2009      31-Dec-09   31-Dec-09      Budget      Budget
                                 $              $            $            $
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
Employee Costs              12,758,300      6,305,400    5,842,587    (462,813)    (7.34%)
Materials and Contracts     11,995,600      6,484,900    5,481,300   (1,003,600)   (15.48%)
Utilities                    1,325,700       659,600      558,895     (100,705)    (15.27%)
Insurance                     312,600        221,400      236,244      14,844       6.70%
Interest Expense              636,700        318,400      124,235     (194,165)    -60.98%
Other Expenses                519,400        339,800      373,877      34,077      10.03%
Depreciation                 5,430,000      2,701,300    2,698,235     (3,065)     (0.11%)
Loss On Disposal of
Assets                        50,300          5,400       16,069       10,669      197.57%
Total Expenditure           33,028,600     17,036,200   15,331,443   (1,704,757)   (10.01%)

Salaries and Wages
Actual salaries and wages expenditure is $5.8 million against year to date budget of $6.3
million as at December 2009 resulting in a favourable variance of 7% or $462k. $200k is


MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                19
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


attributed to the Wembley Golf Course range and teaching lessons. The remainder is due to
salary and wage increases effective from early January 2010 of 3.8% and a payment of
$136,000 to the COP Super Trustee, which both are yet to impact. Overall this budget item will
be down for the year with a permanent difference primarily within the Wembley Golf Course
budget.

Materials and Contracts
This expenditure line item as at December 2009 is currently $1.03 million or 15% under budget.
This represents a timing difference with purchases of materials or contractor services
scheduled to be utilised within programmes, day to day operational maintenance or specific
maintenance projects not yet acquired or currently in progress.

Some programmes or maintenance projects accounting for $266K of the under expenditure
are:
     Information technology software and system administration $48K under year to date
        budget;
     Administration centre building maintenance $38K under budget;
     Waste management waste collection and refuge disposal $100K below year to date
        budget;
     Sustainability programmes $80K below year to date budget;
.
Specific maintenance works accounting for $236 of the under expenditure are:

   Parks specific maintenance projects $34K below year to date budget;
   Ocean beaches specific maintenance projects $43K below year to date budget;
   Building management specific maintenance projects $35K below year to date budget;
   Cambridge library and The Boulevard Centre specific maintenance projects $46K below
     year to date budget;
   Quarry Amphitheatre specific maintenance projects $36K below year to date budget;
   Road reserves specific maintenance projects $42K below year to date budget;


Other Expenses
This expenditure line item is currently over budget by $34K or 10%. Key items include set up
costs for operating the temporary professional shop $8,000 over, and “governance – other
expenditure” which is $4,500 over year to date budget due to expenditure associated with
various workshops and meetings held.


Wembley Golf Course Operations

This is a transitional year for the Wembley Golf Course (WGC) in which the Town has taken
over the operating responsibilities of the Pro Shop merchandising, green fees and buggy hire
and also the Tavern operations, which is managed through a catering services contract.

As such, the operating budget requires a one-off draw on reserves this year, to deal with some
of the one off set up costs. These set up costs include:

       PGA Links Consultancy…………………………..$75,000
       Tavern Fit Out ……………………………………..$50,000
       Fit out of temporary pro shop…………………….$35,000
       Launch event………………………………………$35,000
       Range Minor Equipment and tools………………$25,000
       Purchase of range equipment (balls, picker)……$40,000
       Purchase of tee to green items…………………..$20,000


MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                             20
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


       Legal work………………………………………….$70,000

       Total………………………………………………..$350,000

In summary, the operating and capital budgets required a $372k draw on the reserve, which
has been increased in the amended budget by $34k to $406k. The following summarises the
draw on the Wembley Golf Course Reserve:

                          Budget      Amended
                                      Budget
       Operations         $240        $294
       Capital Works      $132        $112
       Total              $372        $406


Each area of operation is discussed below.

Administration
The budgeted cost was $493k, and has been revised to $505k. Whilst salaries have increased
by $25k due to a reallocation, operational expenses have been cut to largely offset this amount.

Driving Range
The surplus from range operations has increased from $218k to $388k, mainly driven by a
reduction in costs for teaching staff and range maintenance. Golf lessons were over estimated
as there has been a loss of clientele, with the departure of the Head Golf Professional, resulting
in reduced revenue and expenditure. It is expected that the client base will recover relatively
quickly. The revised budget also allows for the closure of the range for one month. In summary,
revenue has been revised down by $271k and expenditure by $440k.

Professional Shop
There has been a significant revision to gross profit on sales from $630k to $193k. Sales were
extremely slow in September and October however picked up in November and December to
around $25k/month (gross profit). The Tee to Green ‘fire sale’ prior to the closure of the Pro
Shop and the limited capacity of the temporary pro shop seem to be contributing factors.

Moving forward, staff are currently examining high and low volume and margin merchandise in
order to establish the right product mix moving into the new pro shop, due around June/July.

Buggy hire has also been reduced down by $55k due to the later acquisition of the golf cart
fleet. Since the Town took stock of the carts, hire proceeds have been good, with December
yielding $53k.

To offset some of the reduced profit, expenditure has been cut by $137k, but this still results in
a $336k turnaround.

Hospitality (Tavern)

Generally this area is performing as expected.

Course Operations
Green fees have been revised down $55k due to lower participation levels over the extremely
wet winter and spring. Other revenue items have also been revised down, resulting in a revised
revenue budget of $3.15 million, $91k less than the original budget.




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                 21
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


This is compensated by reductions in expenditure by $222k, significantly by reduced interest
costs. Smaller principal draw downs on the loan occurred in the first half of the financial year
due to delays in the range and pro shop construction caused by wet weather.

Overheads and Plant operations

Generally this area is performing as expected.

Capital Expenditure

Capital expenditure as at 31 December 2009 is $6.3 million against a year to date budget of
$11.2 million. The variance does not reflect actual work carried out, as invoices lag the work in
progress. The current amount of committed funds, in addition to invoices paid is $1.24 million.

 Land
Net proceeds from land sales are $4.3 million against a year to date budget of $3.7 million, with
land sales from the Ocean Mia subdivision having improved in line with a resurgence in the
property market. The Town budgeted for the sale of fourteen lots, however with an early
settlement on one lot occurring in June last year, only thirteen lots are available. Out of those
thirteen, nine have sold. If all lots are sold, profit will be $453,000 less than the budget, but will
not adversely affect the final position of the Town, as proceeds are transferred to the
Endowment Lands Account and do not fund operations.

Buildings
Building capital works actual expenditure is $1.03 million against a year to date budget of $1.4
million and annual budget of $1.8 million. All works are expected to be completed except for
the following:

           Budget Item                         Amount                  Reason
Sewerage System – Alderbury and                  $47,500 Deferred pending the Pat Goodridge
Selby St                                                 Masterplan detailed design phase

Alderbury Reserve –                               $20,000     Funds are not sufficient to carry out
Toilet/Changerooms – Upgrade                                 the required works. The project will
                                                             be reconsidered in the future.


Total                                             $67,500

Infrastructure - Roads and Lanes
The work in progress as at 31 December 2009 indicates $1.1 million spent against year to date
budget of $2.4 million. A review of all capital works projects indicates that the majority of works
will be completed with the exception of the following works which are likely to be carried
forward into the 2010/2011:

              Budget Item                      Amount                        Reason
Cambridge Street - Northwood to                   $100,000
Kimberley - Streetscape                                      Waiting for Council approval


Dodd Street (Gregory to end) –                    $150,000   Not approved by Council as yet - still in
reconstruction of pavement & parking                         the design stage
improvements




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                     22
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


              Budget Item                    Amount                        Reason
Railway Parade / Kimberley Street -             $150,000   Council approved - however State
relocate services for roundabout ( Stage 1                 Government directive received not to
of 2 )                                                     proceed as a result of the Subiaco Oval
                                                           redevelopment

Alderbury Street / Lichendale / Meagher -       $150,000   Council has not approved - job
construct roundabout                                       specifcations have changed - now
                                                           considering blister islands as an option.

Empire Avenue / Durston Road –                  $250,000   In design stage with City of Stirling -
roundabout                                                 scope and specifications have changed
                                                           significantly as have the estimated costs.

Salvado Road - Jersey to Selby - Traffic         $40,000   Not approved by Council as yet - still in
calming                                                    the design stage

Selby / Grantham Intersection - provide         $201,000   Drawings are with Main Roads for
dedicated right turn lanes on Selby Street                 approval. Expect a June or July project
                                                           commencement.

Simper / Cambridge Intersection - pre-           $30,000   Not approved by Council as yet - still in
deflections for roundabout                                 the design stage

Total                                         $1,071,000


All drainage, footpath and bus shelter projects are expected to be completed.

No material permanent differences have been identified within roads and lanes as at 31
December 2009.

Infrastructure – Parks and Reserves
The work in progress for parks, reserves including the Wembley Golf Complex is $3.2 million
against a revised annual budget of $11.7 million or 27.4%. The majority of unspent funds
relates to the Wembley Golf Course driving range project which is $7.2 million under budget.

It is expected that all parks and reserves capital projects will be completed by year end except
for Wembley Golf Course pathways and tees, which have been placed on hold following the
budget review.

Current Assets and Liabilities

The balance sheet, as at 31 December 2009, shows the Town has a solid financial base with a
net current asset position or working capital of $29.6 million.

Current receivables are down to $4.9 million after the Town having raised rates of $16.2 million
in August last year. The outstanding amount includes rates instalments due in January and
March 2010.

Cash assets of $23 million includes investments of $21.7 million in term deposits and bank bills.

Inventories of $6.6 million which includes Ocean Mia land held for resale of $6.2 million.

Current liabilities of $4.9 million, includes payables of $3.3 million with major work in progress
payments due in relation to the driving range project at the Wembley Golf Course.



MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                    23
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

The Local Government Act (1995), Section 6.4 requires the preparation of financial reports.
The Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996, in particular Regulation
33A, which has effect as from 1 July 2005, expands on this requirement to include an annual
budget review to be carried out between 1 January and 31 March for each financial year. The
intention is to ensure local governments conduct at least one budget review each financial year.
This report complies with this requirement.

In accordance with the Regulations, the results of the budget review are to be submitted to
Council within thirty days of the review being completed. Council is then required to consider
the results of the review and determine whether or not to adopt the review, any part of the
review or any recommendations made in the review. As per Regulation 33A, a copy of both the
review and Council’s determination are then to be provided to the Department of Local
Government within thirty days.

The Town’s Budget Implementation and Management Policy 3.2.2 states that:

       It is the function and duty of the CEO to cause Council decisions to be implemented and
       manage the day-to-day operations of the Town. To ensure the CEO has the capacity to
       undertake this role, the CEO may reallocate funding to accommodate over expenditure
       variances. The reallocation of funds shall result in a revised budget for the purpose of
       producing the monthly financial report and be reported as a permanent variance
       accordingly.

       The CEO may authorise expenditure over a revised budget to a maximum of $50,000.
       In all other instances, authority from Council shall first be obtained.

As some of the budget amendments are greater than $50,000, the amendments are submitted
to Council for approval. Note that Absolute Majority is not required as the budgets are not for an
additional purpose.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

The projected budget for year end indicates a variation of -$108K which is within tolerable
thresholds.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

The management of budgeted funds is consistent with the Strategic Plan’s goal of financial
sustainability, by ensuring our expenditure is matched by our revenue.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

This matter has been assessed under the Community Consultation Policy. In accordance with
the assessment criteria, it was rated at Level 1, for which no community consultation is
required.


SUMMARY:

The main permanent variations from budget as at 31 December 2009 affecting general purpose
(Municipal) funding have been identified as follows:

       Rates ………………………….($25,000)


MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                 24
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


             Municipal Interest…………….($200,000)
             Planning Fees………………….$90,000

             Total…………………………….($135,000)

Coupled with previous amendments to the budget approved by Council, the estimated final
position is now -$108,000, which is in the acceptable range for variations.

Golf course variations result in an extra draw on the Wembley Golf Course reserve of $34k.

ATTACHMENTS:

       1.      Summarised Statement of Financial Activity as at 31 December 2009
       2.      Wembley Golf Complex Operations

COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Pelczar, seconded by Cr Grinceri

That:-

(i)         the report on the mid year review of budget for the 2009/2010 financial year be
            received and the variances to the budget be noted;

(ii)        the amendments to the budget outlined in Attachment Two be approved.

Carried               5/0




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                              25
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010




GC10.6      LAKE MONGER RESERVE - MEMORIAL FOR CIVILIANS KILLED IN WARS



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To seek in principle support for a memorial at North Lake Monger to commemorate civilians
who have been killed in all wars.

BACKGROUND:

The Town has received a proposal from Allen Stenhouse and Phillip Skelton for a memorial to
be located at Lake Monger. Allen is a long term resident of Wembley (since 1919), serving in
World War II as a sergeant of a platoon. Phillip is currently the Deputy Warden of the State War
Memorial.

The concept is different to that of other memorials provided in Perth in that its purpose is to
remember civilians as opposed to service men and women killed in all wars. Whilst it is
envisaged that the memorial will be iconic and attractive, it will also to be a place of quiet
contemplation and peace where individuals, families and groups with a common interest can
remember loved ones, colleagues and others who have been killed in or as a result of any wars
in any place at any time.

DETAILS:

Basis for the proposal

There are numerous war memorials in many countries dedicated to the memory of navy, army,
air force and merchant marine people killed in or as a result of war. In stark contrast the
number of civilians of all nationalities killed in all wars number in the tens of millions, however,
there is no general memorial to them.

The only three memorials to civilians in Perth do not meet the purpose of the proposed
memorial. Each is very narrowly focused. There is a memorial located on the edge of the
Swan River below Arden Street, East Perth dedicated to two people - the President of Israel
and the President of Egypt both of whom were assassinated. The Bali memorial in Kings Park
to remember those killed in the Bali bombing clearly does not meet our much broader need.
(additionally they were killed in a criminal atrocity rather than a war.) Thirdly, under
construction in Kings Park is a rotunda and bush paths as a place of reflection for children and
adults who died of SIDS, leukaemia, suicide, adventure accident or other personal tragedy.
Again clearly different in intent and style to an iconic memorial.

Location

Lake Monger has been identified by the proponents as a location that meets the general
requirements for the location of a memorial including access to public transport parking, and
reasonably central. Ideally, the northern side is viewed as desirable. The specific location can
be decided by the Town once the North Lake Master Plan is complete and an assessment of
whether it can fit within that area. Alternatively, the North Western portion of the Reserve
adjacent to the Master Plan area may be considered.




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                   26
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


Design

There are no preconceived views as to the specific design of the memorial, however, it is
acknowledged that the design should fit sympathetically with the selected location, require the
minimum of maintenance and be as vandal and graffiti proof as practicable. With this in mind it
is likely that the memorial will not be a typical pillar design.

Cost and Funding

The project has not yet been costed in detail but may well be in the order of $500,000 to
$1,000,000.

It is planned to obtain seed funding through application to LotteryWest in order to enable
project scoping and a design competition.

The major funding is intended to come from public subscription. To that end, a trust fund
eligible for tax deductibility will be established and donations sought from corporate entities and
the general public.

The significant number of migrants from previously war-torn countries and limited canvassing of
the concept leads the proponents to believe such a venture is highly likely to succeed.

Governance

The proponents are planning to establish a legal entity to assume responsibility as a partner in
the project. The Rotary Club of Perth has agreed to support the project and whilst
responsibilities remain to be formalised, it is anticipated that a joint working group would be
established with membership from the Town of Cambridge and the proposed entity.

Support

An expanding number of people and groups are being briefed on the project. Informal
expressions of support have been given by various members of parliament. A list of those
expressing support will be provided at a later point in time.

The proponents have met with key staff at the Town and are generally supportive of the
proposal as a concept. One view is that the project could help activate the north eastern corner
of Lake Monger, which is a current objective of the Town. The proposal is now submitted for
Council comment.

If Council support in principle is obtained, further effort can be expended on the process for
developing the project, including consulting the community and the management
arrangements.

Ultimately, if supported, there is no doubt this project will impact to some extent on the Town's
resources. If the project is consistent with the objectives of the North Lake Monger project, then
the Administration believes this to be a reasonable proposition.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

The Lake Monger Management Plan provides the vision, goals and objectives for management
of the reserve.




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                  27
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010



The sections that may be of some relevance are:

         ‘Visitation and Recreation’ which aims to provide and enhance suitable access for all
         reserve users and manage environmentally friendly recreation opportunities that are
         compatible with the long term integrity of the Lake Monger values; and

         ‘Information, Interpretation and Education’ of which a future direction is to promote the
         Reserve as a significant wildlife refuge, recreational facility and culturally significant
         urban wetland.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

Nil. The cost of the project will be met through grants and subscriptions. Ongoing maintenance
would be determined as part of the final design, but is envisaged to be minimal.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

Nil

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

The Lake Monger Manager Plan under ‘planning and community liaison’ states that continued
liaison should occur with stakeholders groups, community groups and the general public for
community group based projects; and with the Lake Monger Reserve Working Group
Committee.

This matter has been assessed under the Community Consultation Policy and has been
assessed to require a Level 4 consultation - Information given to the public but also solicit
information and responses systematically.

ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Pelczar, seconded by Cr Grinceri

That:

(i)     in principle support be given to the Lake Monger Memorial Project with the location to be
        within the northern section of the Reserve; and

(ii)    initial consultation be undertaken to assess the extent of community support or objection.

Committee Meeting 15 February 2010

During discussion, Members supported the proposal for a memorial, however, it was agreed
that that further work be undertaken on the proposal, including broadening the concept to focus
on global peace, the artistic element of the memorial and the use of the term 'memorial'.

The Administration recommendation was then voted upon and lost 1/4.

For:               Cr Pelczar
Against:           Mayor Withers, Crs Grinceri, King and Langer




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                  28
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Mayor Withers, seconded by Cr Grinceri

That the Administration give further consideration to the Lake Monger Memorial Project
and a further report be submitted to Council.

Carried          4/1

For:             Mayor Withers, Crs Grinceri, King and Langer
Against:         Cr Pelczar




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                     29
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010




GC10.7         PAT GOODRIDGE RESERVE - CARPARK LICENCE



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To consider submissions from the public to a proposal to licence up to 400 dedicated bays for
daytime parking to commercial, government and not-for-profit organisations at the Pat
Goodridge Reserve car park.

BACKGROUND:

The area of the Pat Goodridge car park is approximately 1.5ha (15,500m2) and contains
approximately 800 bays – see Attachment 1. It currently serves a variety of purposes including
occasional car parking for users of the recreational facilities, including Sporting Groups and
Schools, a formalised Park and Ride area as well as driver training for both Roadsafe and WA
Police Traffic Training.

Parking at Pat Goodridge has been considered by Council at its meetings held on 23
September 2003 (Item TS03.85), 26 February 2008 (Item GCS08.9), 22 April 2008 (Item
GC08.23) and 22 December 2009 (Item GC09.96).

At its meeting on 22 December 2009 Council decided that:

       "(i)      Community consultation be undertaken with residents along Selby Street from
                 Hay to Salvado Roads, with the various community groups using the Pat
                 Goodridge car park and with the Public Transport Authority on the proposal to:

                 (a)    Licence up to 400 parking bays to specific organisations;
                 (b)    From Monday to Friday;
                 (c)    Between 6am to 6pm;
                 (d)    For a fixed period of twelve months, with a review after nine months.

       (ii)      The Pat Goodridge car park be declared as a parking station in accordance with
                 Clause 3.1 of the Town of Cambridge Parking Local Law, and appropriate
                 signage to indicate as such be placed in prominent locations adjacent to the
                 entry points to the car park.

       (iii)     The Chief Executive Officer advise those parties seeking dedicated use of the
                 Pat Goodridge car park that should the proposal proceed, the Town seeks an
                 annual fee of $1,000 per bay ($4 per day)."

DETAILS:

Consultation has been undertaken with residents along Selby Street (from Hay Street to
Salvado Road), with the various community groups who use the Pat Goodridge car park and
with the Public Transport Authority. The deadline for responses was 22 January 2010.

The Town received responses from the Perth Netball Association, Public Transport Authority
and the Hackett Civic Association (Hackett locality of Nedlands, Floreat) and their comments
are incorporated in the summary of issues section below, along with responses from the
Administration. No responses were received from residents, apart from the Hackett Civic
Association.


MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                 30
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


Summary of Issues:

 Perth Netball Association – The only concerns were that the parking limitations should not
   apply on public holidays (due to netball field days). They also enquired as to what happens
   if cars start using the free parking area.

   If Council decides to proceed, this parking area would be monitored by the Rangers.

 Public Transport Authority (PTA) – Had no objections to the proposed dedication of car
   parking bays provided that the Park and Ride provision is retained.

   The Park and Ride area would be retained where it is.

 Hackett Civic Association – Whilst not totally against the idea of utilising the car park for
   commercial car parking, the Association believes changes should be made to address
   traffic flow and pedestrian safety issues:

   o   The pedestrian crossing at the intersection of Selby and Hay Street / Underwood
       Avenue is considered unsafe and inadequate.

       This was the subject of a December 2009 report to Council (IC09.105) – The Town is
       currently liaising with Main Roads WA, the City of Nedlands and the City of Subiaco and
       further report be made to Council.

   o   Vehicles travelling north on Selby Street must do a u-turn at the intersection of
       Alderbury Street and Selby Street to get back to the car park. This creates a hazard
       and also makes it more difficult for buses to turn.

       The extent that this intersection is a hazard will depend on the volume of traffic travelling
       north, from the southern suburbs. If indeed there is a large volume of traffic over a
       concentrated period, one option is to install a break in the central island. This may cost
       in the vicinity of $50k-$60k. It is suggested that this be considered as part of the overall
       Pat Goodridge Master Plan which is currently undergoing the detailed design phase.
       Further, it is suggested that traffic movements be monitored periodically should the
       Town proceed with licensing bays and that such traffic movements be considered as
       part of the review.

   o   The existing bus stop on Selby Street has no pull in area, reducing Selby Street to one
       flowing lane.

       The current position of Transperth and Main Roads WA is that a bus pull in area is not
       preferred. This is due to the hazard of a bus pulling back out into traffic. As such there
       are no plans to provide a dedicated pull in area.

   o   The pedestrian cross-over path 20 metres south of the car park exit is frequently difficult
       to cross.

       A 2003/2004 survey of traffic flows in Selby Street showed an average of 21,000
       vehicles per day, an extra 200 vehicles would add further 0.9%. Crossing dual lane
       roads in peak hours is safer at pedestrian crossings and in this regard, the improvement
       to the pedestrian crossing noted in point one is viewed as the best option to pursue.

   o   St John of God and others may have staff buses running which would increase existing
       traffic problems.



MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                   31
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


       St John of God state that it is likely a 20 seater shuttle bus would run in the morning and
       evening to the hospital at Subiaco.

   o   The community consultation undertaken with residents along Selby Street from Hay
       Street to Salvado Road is too small.

       Invitations to comment were invited through local newspapers. It is also thought that the
       Hackett Association have raised most of the main considerations to the proposal.

Comment

From a planning point of view, subject to acceptable traffic/access conditions, the proposal can
be supported since:

 the carport is an existing facility;
 it is mostly only fully occupied on Saturdays during the (winter) netball season;
 the primary purpose of the car park to serve the adjacent recreational grounds will be
   protected;
 an otherwise wasted, midweek resource, will be put to a beneficial use;
 in relation to the hospitals, the use will support the existing bus service and offer a more
   sustainable means of getting to work; and
 in relation to AIM, the Councils’ Parking Policy encourages reciprocal parking arrangements
   to between surrounding uses, to optimise utilisation of available facilities.

The Town Planning Scheme is not clear with regard to the question of the need to obtain
development approval for the proposal. The facility itself is already there, and it is not
uncommon for parking areas of this nature to be utilised for alternative purposes when not
otherwise in use.

To avoid any doubt on this matter, should Council decide at the end of this year to continue on
with the arrangement, a development application could be lodged. As mentioned above, there
are a number of planning grounds for supporting such an application.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

The Town can administer parking by tickets through the Parking Local Law. In this case it is
recommended that 180 bays of the Pat Goodridge car park (see Attachment 2) be set aside for
dedicated parking under the provisions of Clause 3.2 of the Parking Local Law, which specifies
obtaining an entrance ticket for entering a parking station. The tickets in this case would be for
annual use and be arranged under an agreement/licence with the relevant organisations.

Tickets would be valid for use on weekdays (except public holidays) from 6am to 6pm.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

The Town has recently received confirmation from the following organisations that they would
be prepared to pay $1,000 per bay ($4 per day):

       1.    The Australian Institute of Management (AIM) - seeking temporary space in
             February 2010, but would like 80 bays long term.

       2.    St John of God Hospital - 100 bays are sought. There is potentially a period
             where they would need more than this - probably through the period of financial
             year 2010/2011.


MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                 32
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010



         3.    Department of Health – Still considering (on behalf of three hospital locations
               namely Queen Elizabeth II Medical Centre, Princess Margaret Hospital and King
               Edward Memorial Hospital).

If 180 bays are licensed, or permits issued, this would in $180,000 in revenue per annum. It is
recommended that this revenue be placed in the Community Facilities Reserve after deduction
of costs.

The cost of setting up a basic 180 bay parking facility including the painting of bays, the
erection of signs and the setting up of a computerised ticket system is estimated to be
approximately $15,000, which would be charged to the Community Facilities Reserve. There
will also be operational costs associated with enforcement. These could be minimised by
responding to user feedback.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

The Strategic Plan 2009-2020 provides strategies that are relevant to this issue in the 'Planning
for Our Community' and 'Capacity to Deliver' priority areas as follows:-

Goals
   Financial Sustainability

Strategies
    Identify opportunities for commercial development and revitalisation

Ensure strategies are in place for maintaining the Town’s wealth and revenue capacity.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

This matter has been assessed under the Community Consultation Policy. In accordance with
the assessment criteria it was rated at 65 points (out of 100), which provides for Level 3
consultation.

Information given to the community but also solicit general responses for consideration by the
Council.

ATTACHMENTS:

1.      Diagram of Option A (iii) and GIS Property Reports.
2.      Diagram of designated parking bays.

COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Pelczar, seconded by Cr Grinceri

That:

(i)     180 bays of the Pat Goodridge car park, as designated in Attachment 2, be set
        aside for dedicated parking to commercial, government and not for profit
        organisations for a period of one year at an annual fee of $1,000 per bay per year
        ($4 per day) under the provisions of Clause 3.2 of the Parking Local Law. This
        parking to be allowed on weekdays (except public holidays) from 6am to 6pm.



MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                33
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


(ii)    an amount of $30,000 for parking ticket income and $15,000 for setting up a basic
        180 bay parking facility including the painting of bays, the erection of signs and
        modification of the Town’s computerised ticket system be authorised by
        ABSOLUTE MAJORITY as unbudgeted expenditure in accordance with Section 6.8
        of the Local Government Act 1995.

(iii)   the Town monitor usage and traffic flow periodically for the first 6 months of paid
        parking; and

(iv)    a development application be lodged at the end of the year should Council decide
        to continue with the arrangement.

Carried           5/0




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                          34
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010




GC10.8     CITY BEACH OVAL RESERVE - OPTUS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To consider a request from Optus Mobile Pty Ltd to lease a portion of land on the City Beach
Oval Reserve site so that they may install a new mobile base station.

BACKGROUND:

Optus is endeavoring to provide mobile phone coverage to the areas around the City Beach
Oval Reserve, along the strip of Challenger Parade where the City of Perth Surf Life Saving
Club and Oceanus Restaurant are located, and parts of West Coast Highway, particularly for
the City to Surf annual event.

After discussions with the Town, a site on the City Beach Oval Reserve which is currently used
as a storage area was nominated as a preferred site – see attached diagram.

The subject site is reserved as Parks and Recreation under the Town Planning Scheme (Urban
under the Metropolitan Region Scheme). The site provides the required phone coverage, is
surrounded by trees to reduce impact and has an existing temporary structure in the form of a
wire cage. This caged structure is currently used by Parks for storage of bins and poles, as
well as some club items.

Optus stated that they would be prepared to consider erecting a properly designed solid
structure for Park usage at their cost, to protect their investment and pay annual rent. The
Manager Parks and Landscape has advised that the Town would be interested in a permanent
structure on this site, similar to the Parks storage building at Beecroft Park, Oban Road, City
Beach.

DETAILS:

Optus have submitted a formal proposal for the Town to consider and is included as an
attachment to this report. In summary, the proposal covers the following:

1.   Staged Installation

As shown in the attached Annexure A: “Photo Montages” Optus is proposing to first install
antennas onto the existing wire mesh caged storage facility together with a small outdoor unit,
solely for the purpose of meeting the City to Surf event date of 29 August 2010. This is a
temporary facility.

Also shown is a new storage shed to be constructed after 29 August 2010. Optus would build
the new storage shed and utilize the new building for the installation of its antennas and a small
portion of the inside of the building for its equipment room. This is the permanent facility.

2.   Temporary Facility

The temporary facility involves installing a mounting pole to support both the antenna pods.
This mounting pole will be supported with a concrete foundation, and is to be tied into the
existing caged storage structure. The mounting pole itself is to be approximately 4 metres long
(from ground level). The overall height of the installation, from ground level will be
approximately 9.3 metres, though this will need to be confirmed during the final design process.

MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                 35
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010



3.     Permanent Facility

A permanent facility is to be constructed in approximately February 2011. Optus contractors
would construct a new brick and iron storage shed on the site of the wire mesh cage storage
facility, built around the initial Optus antenna installation.

The shed would be modelled on an existing storage shed the Town has sited at another
property, with the colours shown being a limestone coloured brick work and green colorbond
roof, based on the Town’s preferred colour scheme. The Town has requested that the shed
have a floor area of approximately 88 square metres (ie. 11 metres x 8 metres). The new shed
would be used by the Town in addition to allowing space for the Optus equipment room.

Optus would have a partitioned equipment room within the shed, this being on the south
elevation and which would comprise an area of 7.5 square metres. The Optus area would have
its own access door.

Power to the facility is proposed to be 30A three phase (or 60A single phase) and Optus will
bear the cost of providing power to the Optus facility.

The proposed works will not affect the planning or renewal of the City Beach Sports Pavilion as
the storage shed is located on the Northern side of the oval.

4.      Planning

The proposed installation of telecommunications equipment is deemed Low-Impact in
accordance with the Telecommunications (Low-Impact Facilities) Determination 1997 and
therefore exempt from requiring town planning approval from State and/or Local planning
agencies – See Attachment 2.

The site is within an open space reserve and for the purposes of the Low-Impact determination
the principle designated use of the area is regarded as “Residential”. The site is not within a
known area of heritage significance or within a registered area of natural environmental
significance.

5.      Lease

It is proposed that the lease make provision for the shed to be constructed and paid for by
Optus, with Optus to engage its contractors to build the shed. Optus will ultimately own the
pole, but the Town would own the shed. Should subsequent carriers wish to install equipment
on the pole, then Optus would seek to recoup a proportionate amount of shed costs back from
those carriers and the Town could potentially lease another portion of the shed.

Optus has offered an amount of $15,000 per annum plus GST to lease this area on the
following basis:


     LOCATION               City Beach Oval Reserve / Fred Burton Park
     LAND DESCRIPTION       Lot 1911, the subject of Plan 231327 and being the whole
                            of the land contained in Certificate of Title Volume 2138
                            Folio 18
     TENANT                 Optus Mobile Pty Ltd
     LEASE TERM             20 years
     RENTAL                 $15,000 per annum plus GST
     RENTAL REVIEWS         Annual with fixed 4% increases


MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                              36
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


  BREAK DATES                Every 5 years with year 5 being in Optus’ favour and
                             years 10 and 15 being for the benefit of both parties.
  TERMS                      Optus standard lease

Optus state that the rental offered is for what is a predominantly special event site and in their
Proposal have provided rental evidence for telecommunications sites negotiated over the last
12 months which range from $12,000 pa to $16,000 pa. For low impact stations at Wembley
Downs, Telstra and Vodafone started at a rental of $19k pa in 2006, but without constructing a
building, therefore this rental is considered reasonable.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

There is a legislative requirement under section 3.58(3) of the Local Government Act for
Council to comply with the following with respect to entering into a land transaction other than
by tender or auction:-

(a) give local public notice of the proposed disposition:-

     (i) describing the property concerned; and
     (ii) giving details of the proposed disposition; and
     (iii) inviting submissions to be made to the local government before a date to be specified
           in the notice, being a date not less than 2 weeks after the notice is first given;

     and

(b) it considers any submissions made to it before the date specified in the notice and, if its
    decision is made by the council or a committee, the decision and the reasons for it are
    recorded in the minutes of the meeting at which the decision was made.

Section 3.58(4) of the LGA requires the details of a proposed disposition that are required by
subsection (3)(a)(ii) to include:-

The details of a proposed disposition that are required by subsection (3)(a)(ii) include:-

(a) the names of all other parties concerned; and
(b) the consideration to be received by the local government for the disposition; and
(c) the market value of the disposition —

     (i)    as ascertained by a valuation carried out not more than 6 months before the
            proposed disposition; or
     (ii)   as declared by a resolution of the local government on the basis of a valuation carried
            out more than 6 months before the proposed disposition that the local government
            believes to be a true indication of the value at the time of the proposed disposition.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

Depending on the outcome of the negotiations, the Town will receive additional rental income,
which will increase the revenue the Town and be used to offset operations.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

The Strategic Plan 2009-2020 provides strategies that are relevant to this issue in the 'Planning
for Our Community' and 'Capacity to Deliver' priority areas as follows:-




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                  37
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010



Goals
   Financial Sustainability

Strategies
    Identify opportunities for commercial development and revitalisation

Ensure strategies are in place for maintaining the Town’s wealth and revenue capacity.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:


This matter has been assessed under the Community Consultation Policy. In accordance with
the assessment criteria it was rated at 65 points (out of 100), which provides for Level 3
consultation. Information given to the community but also solicit general responses for
consideration by the Council.

Because low impact facilities are exempt from development approval, community consultation
is required to be carried out by Optus under the Communications Alliance Ltd Industry Code
ACIF C564:2004 Deployment of Mobile Phone Network Infrastructure.

Optus will submit a consultation plan to which the Town has 5 days to respond with any
recommendations of its own. The results of the consultation will be submitted to Council and
carriers will generally carry a further review if required.

If the community view of the proposal is entirely negative then Council would not proceed with
leasing the land to Optus.

ATTACHMENTS:

1.     Optus Mobile Formal Proposal
2.     Low-Impact Facilities

COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Pelczar, seconded by Cr King

That:-

(i)    in accordance with section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995, the Town
       provides local public notice of its intention to enter into a lease with Optus Mobile
       Pty Ltd;

(ii)   the Chief Executive Officer be delegated authority under section 5.42 of the Local
       Government Act 1995 to consider public submissions to the proposed disposition,
       and, if satisfied that the disposition is in the best interest of the Local Government
       and community, that Optus Mobile Pty Ltd be leased a portion of land on the City
       Beach Oval Reserve, for the purpose of placing a mobile base station under the
       following essential terms and conditions:-

       (a)   rent commencing at $15,000 (excluding GST) per annum;
       (b)   annual rent reviews with fixed 4% increases;
       (c)   term of 20 years with break dates every 5 years with year 5 being in Optus’
             favour and years 10 and 15 being for the benefit of both parties;


MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                             38
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


     (d)   construction of the storage shed to the Town’s satisfaction to be completed
           by 1 April 2011; and
     (d)   any fees associated with the vetting of the lease by the Town’s legal advisors
           be borne by Optus Mobile Pty Ltd.

Carried          4/1

For:             Mayor Withers, Crs King, Langer and Pelczar
Against:         Cr Grinceri




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                        39
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010




GC10.9      DOCUMENTS SEALED



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To advise Council of documents that have been affixed with the Town of Cambridge Common
Seal.

DETAILS:

There is no statutory requirement for the Council to give prior approval for the Seal of the
Municipality to be placed on documents, however, Council Policy directs the type of
documentation to which the seal may be affixed, and requires a subsequent report Council.

A schedule of documents affixed with the Common Seal of the Town of Cambridge is included
as an attachment to this report.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

There are no Policy or Statutory implications related to this report.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no financial implications related to this report.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

Sealing of Council documents is consistent with the Town's Strategic Plan 2009-2020 priority
area of Capacity to Deliver and goal of open and transparent governance.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

This matter has been assessed under the Community Consultation Policy. In accordance with
the assessment criteria it is rates at Level 1, for which no community consultation is required.

ATTACHMENTS:

1.     Schedule of documents that have been affixed with the Town of Cambridge Common
       Seal.


COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Pelczar, seconded by Cr Grinceri

That it be noted that the Common Seal of the Town of Cambridge has been affixed to the
documents as listed in the schedule attached to this report.

Carried           5/0




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                               40
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010




GC10.10    TAMALA PARK REGIONAL COUNCIL MEETING - 9 DECEMBER 2009



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To report on items considered at the Tamala Park Regional Council (TPRC) Ordinary Meeting
held on 9 December 2009.

BACKGROUND:

The Town of Cambridge is one of seven members of the Tamala Park Regional Council
(TPRC). The complete membership and equity ownership varies between members as follows:

 Member                                 Equity              Member Representation
 City of Stirling                        4/12                        4
 City of Joondalup                       2/12                        3
 City of Wanneroo                        2/12                        3
 Town of Cambridge                       1/12                        1
 Town of Vincent                         1/12                        1
 Town of Victoria Park                   1/12                        1
 City of Perth                           1/12                        1

The purpose of the TPRC is to:

   undertake, in accordance with the Establishment Agreement objectives, the rezoning,
     subdivision, development, marketing and sale of the Tamala Park land;

The objectives of the Council are:

   to develop and improve the value of the land;
   to maximise within prudent risk parameters, the financial return to the participants;
   to balance economic, social and environmental issues; and
   to produce a quality development demonstrating the best urban design and development
     practice.

DETAILS:

The TPRC met formally on 9 December 2009 and the following items of significance are
reported:

Item 2 - Election of Chairman
Cr John Italiano was elected Chairman of the Tamala Park Regional Council.

Item 3 - Election of Deputy Chairman
Cr Glynis Monks was elected Deputy Chairman of the Tamala Park Regional Council.

Item 12 - Election of Committees
Election of members to the following committees was conducted:
 Audit Committee
 CEO Performance Review Committee



MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                         41
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


 Project Steering Committee - election was held over to the 11 February 2010 Council
   meeting to allow a review of the Terms and Reference of the steering committee to be
   prepared by the CEO and presented to the 11 February 2010 Council meeting.

Item 14.6 - Land Acquisition of Lot 807 Neerabup Road from Main Roads WA
Ongoing discussions have been held with Main Roads WA (MRWA), who have now advised
that the Acting Commissioner of MRWA has given approval to proceed with the sale of Lot 807
at a price of $2M plus GST.

A settlement date of 18 March 2010 has been agreed.

The recommendation put and carried at the meeting was:

      "1.   That Council confirm previous negotiations and reiterate its resolution to acquire Lot
            807 Neerabup Road from Main Roads WA for an amount of $2M (plus GST).

      2.    That the necessary formalities to facilitate transfer of the land to TPRC be
            completed.

      3.    That Council notes the subject land has been included as part of the land to be
            developed by TPRC in the Structure Plan submitted to City of Wanneroo for
            approval."

Other Items of Business attended to were:

Item 14.1   Business Report - period ended 30 November 2009
Item 14.2   Statement of Financial Activity for the months of October and November 2009
Item 14.3   List of Monthly Accounts submitted for the months of October and November 2009
Item 14.4   Presentation - Strategic Marketing and Research
Item 14.5   Elected Member Allowances
Item 14.7   Election of External Auditor
Item 14.8   TPRC Structure Plan Status Update

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

There are no Policy or Statutory Implications related to this report.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no Financial Implications related to this report.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

Develop, renew, rationalise and consolidate capital assets to ensure their sustainability for
future generations.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

This matter has been assessed under the Community Consultation Policy. In accordance with
the assessment criteria it was rated at Level 1, for which no community consultation is required.




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                 42
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


COMMITTEE AND DMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Grinceri, seconded by Cr Pelczar

That the report relating to items considered at the Ordinary Meeting of the Tamala Park
Regional Council held on 9 December 2009 be received.

Carried          5/0




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                      43
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010




GC10.11     PROPOSED WACA FACILITIES AT ALDERBURY SPORTS GROUND / PERRY
            LAKES



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To seek Council's in principle support for future Western Australian Cricket Association (WACA)
training facilities and cricket operation office accommodation to be established at Alderbury
Sportsground/Perry Lakes.

BACKGROUND:

The WACA, for a number of years, has been examining the future direction of its facilities
located at East Perth. Four options were considered by the WACA, specifically:

1.   Continue to operate the facility as is and eventually lose international cricket fixtures;
2.   Reduce the ground to a domestic level (inter-state competition) and play international
     cricket fixtures elsewhere;
3.   Sell the ground and establish a domestic level (inter-state competition) ground elsewhere;
     or
4.   Actively pursue development opportunities with private enterprise to secure the future of
     the WACA ground.

The WACA endorsed Option 4 (pursue development opportunities with private enterprise to
secure the future of the WACA ground) and have signed a joint venture redevelopment
agreement with Ascot Capital Limited (ACL). It is proposed to develop areas of the WACA into
housing and relocate cricket training facilities and cricket operations to another location. The
WACA has written to the Town seeking in-principle support for the establishment of cricket
training facilities and cricket operations at Alderbury Sportsground/Perry Lakes.

A copy of correspondence from the WACA dated 4 February 2010 is provided as an
attachment to this report. Letters of in-principle support by the seasonal users of Alderbury
Sportsground – Subiaco-Floreat Cricket Club and the YMCA Costal Hockey Club and three
illustrations of potential sites at Sportsground/Perry Lakes are also attached to the WACA
correspondence.

The Town has met WACA and ACL officials to discuss the proposal and, following these
discussions, the WACA was requested to present a formal written request for consideration.

DETAILS:

It is envisaged that these facilities will be undertaken in two distinct stages:

1.   Training nets, second oval, reconfiguration of hockey pitches, upgrade and improvements
     to change room/toilet facilities and car park improvements; and
2.   Cricket operations accommodation and club accommodation for YMCA Costal Hockey
     Club.

The WACA will facilitate this development and is prepared to fund all capital costs (including
office accommodation for the YMCA Coastal Hockey Club) and be responsible for the ongoing
maintenance of the playing fields at Alderbury Reserve/Perry Lakes. The capital costs



MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                               44
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


associated with the development have yet to be ascertained. Costs associated in maintaining
the playing fields at Alderbury Reserve/Perry Lakes will also be met by the WACA.

Master Plan

Although the WACA has provided three preliminary illustrations with its submission, indicating
that facilities could be accommodated within the Alderbury Sportsground/Perry Lakes, further
planning work is required. The first stage of the planning process would be to develop a Master
Plan for the entire Alderbury Sportsground/Perry Lakes section to plan how the proposed
facilities will fit in with the existing facilities and provide scope for other potential facilities in the
future.

For example, there is currently a request (through a petition tabled at the November 2009
meeting of Council) to expand the skate-park at Perry Lakes, in addition to the YMCA Coastal
Hockey Club's intention to install an artificial hockey pitch and upgrade existing lighting.

The WACA supports the idea of developing a Master Plan. However, the WACA is aware of
costs and consultation involved. Accordingly, the WACA has requested in-principle support
from Council before embarking on the Master Planning process.

Other issues that require further clarification are as follows:

Planning Considerations

Alderbury Sportsground is reserved under the Metropolitan Region Scheme for Parks and
Recreation. This means that any development or Master Plan will be subject to approval from
the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC). The development of WACA training
facilities and cricket operation office accommodation at Alderbury Sportsground/Perry Lakes is
considered consistent with the zoning of the land as advised by the Town’s planning staff.

As the WACA has requested a ground lease in the vicinity of 40+ years, under the Planning
and Development Act 2005, approval of the lease will also be required.

Cambridge Scouts/Girl Guides

The WACA has consulted with the Subiaco-Floreat Cricket Club and the YMCA Coastal
Hockey Club, however, it will also need to consult directly with Cambridge Scouts/Girl Guides.

General Community Consultation

It is recommended that feedback be sought by the WACA from nearby residents to Alderbury
Sportsground/Perry Lakes and the general community during the master planning process.
Comments received by the WACA will be taken into consideration during the process.

Leasing Arrangements

Broad leasing arrangements will need to be developed including length of tenure (40 years
requested), maintenance requirements of facilities (including the sportsground), parking,
security, sub-leasing, etc. These can be negotiated in due course, however, the initial proposal
by the WACA is to contribute 100% to redeveloped facilities (including accommodating the
YMCA Costal Hockey Club and associated parking infrastructure) and maintaining the sporting
grounds at Alderbury Sportsground/ Perry Lakes.




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                          45
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

Planning and Development Act 2005.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

Nil. Costs associated with the preparation of a Master Plan will be met by the WACA.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

The in-principle support for the future Western Australian Cricket Association (WACA) training
facilities and cricket operation office accommodation to be established at Alderbury
Sportsground/Perry Lakes supports a number of the Business Philosophies of Town’s 2009-
2020 Strategic Plan:-

         Partnerships
         Sustainability: and
         Enhances Services.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

This matter has been assessed under the Community Consultation Policy. In accordance with
the assessment criteria it was rated at Level 3, with information sought by the public.

The WACA has already met the two permanent hirers of the Alderbury Sportsground – the
Subiaco-Floreat Cricket Club and the YMCA Costal Hockey Club to discuss their plans and its
impacts. Both clubs support the WACA’s potential plans and their responses are provided as
an attachment.

Further consultation is recommended with the Cambridge Scouts/Girl Guides and consultation
with nearby residents and the general community during the master planning process.

ATTACHMENTS:

1.       WACA correspondence dated 4 February 2009 (including supporting letters from the
         Subiaco-Floreat Cricket Club and YMCA Coastal Hockey Club and three identified sites).

COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Grinceri, seconded by Cr King

That:-

(i)      in-principle support be provided to the Western Australian Cricket Association
         (WACA) for training facilities and cricket operation office accommodation to be
         established at Alderbury Sportsground/Perry Lakes;

(ii)     a Master Plan be prepared by the WACA for the Alderbury Sportsground/Perry
         Lakes area taking into consideration the needs of the Subiaco-Floreat Cricket Club,
         YMCA Costal Hockey Club, Cambridge Scouts/Girl Guides, expanded Perry Lakes
         Skate Park and associated facilities and parking and traffic requirements;

(iii)    community consultation be undertaken by the WACA during (ii) above; and


MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                              46
GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010



(iv)   a further report be presented to Council following the outcome of (ii) and (iii)
       above.

Carried          5/0




MINUTES - GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                      47
                                  AUDIT COMMITTEE
                                  15 FEBRUARY 2010
                                ORDER OF BUSINESS

1.    DECLARATION OF OPENING

2.    RECORD OF ATTENDANCE/APOLOGIES/LEAVE OF ABSENCE

3.    PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

4.    DEPUTATIONS AND PETITIONS

5.    CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

6.    DECLARATION OF MEMBERS' INTERESTS

7.    REPORTS

      AU10.1      Internal Audit Stage 1 - Financial Compliance Review       3
      AU10.2      Internal Audit Plan                                        7
      AU10.3      Audit Plan - 2010                                          9


8.    CLOSURE




MINUTES - AUDIT COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                             I
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE OF THE TOWN OF CAMBRIDGE
HELD AT THE ADMINISTRATION/CIVIC CENTRE, 1 BOLD PARK DRIVE, FLOREAT ON
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010.

1.    DECLARATION OF OPENING

      The Presiding Member declared the meeting of the Audit Committee open at 5.25 pm.

2.    RECORD OF ATTENDANCE/APOLOGIES/LEAVE OF ABSENCE

      Present :                                                   Time of        Time of
                                                                  Entering       Leaving

      Members:

      Mayor Simon Withers (Presiding Member)                      5.25 pm          5.45 pm
      Cr Rod Bradley                                              5.25 pm          5.45 pm
      Cr Alan Langer                                              5.25 pm          5.45 pm

      Observers:

      Nil

      Officers:

      Jason Buckley, Chief Executive Officer
      Jason Lyon, Director Corporate and Strategic
      Roy Ruitenga, Manager Finance

      Also in attendance:
      Santo Cassilli, Auditor

      Adjournments:                                                                       Nil

      Time meeting closed:                                                        5.45 pm

      APOLOGIES/LEAVE OF ABSENCE

      Apology - Cr Pelczar

3.    PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

      Nil

4.    DEPUTATIONS AND PETITIONS


      Nil




MINUTES - AUDIT COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                              1
AUDIT COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010



5.    CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

      Moved by Cr Langer, seconded by Cr Bradley

      That the Minutes of the Ordinary meeting of the Audit Committee held on 8 October
      2009 as contained in the October 2009 Council Notice Paper be confirmed.

      Carried             3/0

6.    DECLARATION OF MEMBERS' INTERESTS

      Nil

7.    REPORTS




MINUTES - AUDIT COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                         2
AUDIT COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010




AU10.1      INTERNAL AUDIT STAGE 1 - FINANCIAL COMPLIANCE REVIEW



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To consider the internal audit which covered the:

    Review of bond collection procedures including collection and reimbursement processes;

    Identification of all areas where cash is being received on behalf of the Town by external
      parties and to assess controls, accountability and proper recording of transactions;

    Review of the administration procedures for the day to day operations of the Wembley
      golf course operations and the Club house catering function.

BACKGROUND:

In order to satisfy this requirement, an internal audit process has been established based on a
three stage year program to cover all the areas of the Town’s financial management systems.
The program for the first year is based on the following stages:-

Stage 1 (a) – Completed
1.   Governance Systems (Compliance Return)

Stage 1 (b) – Completed
2.   Fees and Charges

Stage 1 (c) – This Report
3.   Bonds and Deposits
4.   Cash Receipting – Bold Park Aquatic Centre
5.   Wembley Golf Complex Operations

Stage 1 (d) – to be completed
6.   Debtors Invoices
7.   Financial Reporting Framework
8.   Governance Systems (Reporting Mechanisms)

The Town engaged the services of auditors, Santo Casilli Accounting and Auditing Services to
undertake the Internal Audit Program and their report, included as an attachment to this item,
concludes stage 1(c) for the internal audit.

DETAILS:

The objective of the audit was:-

    Review of the necessity for bond collection and assess whether the current process of
      collecting and reimbursing bonds can be improved;

    Identification of all areas where cash is being received on behalf of the Town by external
      parties and to assess the adequacy of controls in place to ensure all cash received is
      being properly accounted for and reported to the Town for recording in the Town’s
      Finance One accounting system;


MINUTES - AUDIT COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                                  3
AUDIT COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010



    Review of the appropriateness of the administration procedures developed by the Town
      for the day to day operations of the Wembley golf course operations and the Club house
      catering.

A summary of the findings is provided below:-

Bonds and Deposits

The Audit has recommended that the Town’s existing policy and procedures be strengthened to
incorporate the following processes with respect to building and development applications:-

    When a building licence application is received the Town should undertake a pre-
      approval inspection of the building site, taking photos of the site in relation to the state of
      the Town’s property and infrastructure before approval is given and before any building
      activity is undertaken.

    All building applications should include a proposed commencement and completion date
      of the building works/activity to enable the Town to follow up completion progress.

    The application wording in relation to the applicant’s responsibility for repairing damage
      caused to the Town’s property and infrastructure should be strengthened and made
      clearer in relation to recovery of costs associated with repairs.

    The Town to take a more pro active and prompt approach to the follow up of building
      activity completion to avoid possible delays in identifying possible damage and the
      refunding of the initial bond.

With respect of bonds secured for community hire and parks and reserve hire, consider
eliminating the need for bonds due to their small value and look at strengthening the wording
on hire applications.

Conclusion

The Auditor is satisfied that management will positively respond to these issues. As a result
the collection of cash bonds is to be minimised in favour of bank guarantees or blanket bank
guarantees. Since undertaking the audit, the Town has been progressing towards reducing
outstanding bonds by identifying and refunding old outstanding cash bonds.

Cash receipting and recording facility at the Bold Park Aquatic Centre

No major procedural controls were noted that would require management attention.                The
following minor issues were noted and have been reported in the audit report:-

    The existing security cameras situated at the entrance of the Centre and in the retail
      shop area are not active and are only being used as a deterrent. Staff working at the
      Centre are aware of this. We have recommended the two security cameras be activated
      and monitored to ensure any shop lifting or theft is recorded to enable possible
      prosecution.

    The existing cash receipting procedures are not well written and need to be improved to
      ensure current and new staff fully understand their responsibility and the correct
      procedure to be followed. We have recommended that the Manager Finance Services
      review and enhance these procedures.



MINUTES - AUDIT COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                                       4
AUDIT COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


    The Bold Park Aquatic Centre staff do not at present have use of a coin scale to enable
      more efficient and effective counting of coins. The Town should seek to ensure that the
      Centre staff are adequately resourced to enable accurate counting of coins collected.

Conclusion

Adequate management comments have been received and incorporated within this report
stating that these issues have now been resolved or are in the process of being resolved.

With respect to the Quarry Amphitheatre an audit review is currently ongoing due to changes in
management. The new procedures have been received and a site visit scheduled for next
month. The audit will review the new procedures, provide a report on the adequacy of the new
procedures and ensure compliance.

Administration Procedures Wembley Golf Complex (Interim Review)

Wembley golf course administrative and operational procedures and the clubhouse catering
daily receipting and banking procedures were reviewed. A number of changes were
recommended throughout the review process to ensure the procedures provide satisfactory
control processes.

A review of the accounting procedures relating to the recording and reporting of the Wembley
Golf Course income and expenditure processing via Clublinks accounting system and
subsequent entries into the Town’s Finance 1 accounting system has been carried out and
found to be satisfactory. A site visit to the Wembley Golf Complex has been scheduled for next
month to confirm that these are being complied with.

Conclusion

All matters raised during the review period regarding Wembley golf course administrative and
operational procedures and the clubhouse catering daily receipting and banking procedures
have been addressed and the procedures were amended accordingly.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

Pursuant to Regulation 5(2)(c) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations
1996, “The Chief Executive Officer is to undertake review of the appropriateness and
effectiveness of the financial management systems and procedures of the local government
regularly (and not less than once in every 4 financial years) and report to the Local Government
the results of those reviews".

Internal controls are administered in accordance with administration policies and procedures.

The review of fees and charges as scheduled in Stage one of the internal audit program has
been conducted in accordance with Regulation 5(2)(c) of the Local Government (Financial
Management) Regulations 1996.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no Financial Implications related to this report.




MINUTES - AUDIT COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                                    5
AUDIT COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010


STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

This report is consistent with the strategic plan’s goal of financial sustainability by ensuring our
expenditure is matched by our revenue. Internal audit achieves this by ensuring appropriate
controls and procedures are in place.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

Nil required.

ATTACHMENTS:

1.    Internal Audit Report - Stage 1 (c) (Santo Casilli).

COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Langer, seconded by Cr Bradley

That Council notes and endorses the Internal Audit Report - Stage 1 (c) of the Internal
Audit Program relating to the:-

    review of bonds and deposits;
    cash receipting process at Bold Park Aquatic Centre;
    Wembley Golf Complex procedures.

Carried           3/0




MINUTES - AUDIT COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                                      6
AUDIT COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010




AU10.2      INTERNAL AUDIT PLAN



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To consider the remaining two years of the three year internal audit plan, as submitted by the
Town's internal auditors “Santo Casilli and Associates”.

BACKGROUND:

In order to satisfy this requirement, an internal audit process has been established based on a
three year program to cover all the areas of the Town’s financial management systems. The
program has been structured to review different components of the system each year so that
after the three year programme all systems have been reviewed.

DETAILS:

The programme was endorsed by the Audit Committee in February last year and encompasses
the following remaining areas for review.

Year 2

Accounts Payable & Purchasing - review the administration and receipting (workflows
and controls) of the purchasing accounts payable function.

    Electronic requisitions – review procedures, processes and controls;
    Review ability for raising requisition and release of purchase order by same staff
      member;
    Consider preferred suppliers (WALGA) and State Government Tender utilisation by the
      Town;
    Streamline of suppliers with respect to common ordered goods and services;
    Review authorised purchasing limits for staff – efficiencies etc;
    Review of purchasing limits for staff against authorisation limits set up for staff within
      Finance 1;
    Expenditure threshold set up for suppliers – warnings etc if approach tender limit
      $100,000.

Payroll - review the administration and receipting (workflows and controls).

    Human Resources – review procedures for sick leave, annual leave etc;
    Review efficiency/effectiveness of the forms used;
    Confidentiality of information aspects – access to personal files, general security etc;
    Review adequacy of information retained on personal files.

Stores - review controls and procedures.

    Review security/access controls of stock;
    Review necessity of goods kept as stock items.




MINUTES - AUDIT COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                                     7
AUDIT COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010



Year 3

     Risk Management Audit.
     Asset Management Module - review procedures and processes.
     Investment Policy and Wealth Management Strategy Development - review.

The Audit Committee requested the opportunity to review the internal audit program annually.
As such, this report is provided. The Administration are not suggesting any change

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

Pursuant to Regulation 5(2)(c) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations
1996, “The Chief Executive Officer is to undertake a review of the appropriateness and
effectiveness of the financial management systems and procedures of the local government
regularly (and not less than once in every 4 financial years) and report to the Local Government
the results of those reviews".

The internal audit program is being conducted in accordance with Regulation 5(2)(c) of the
Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no Financial Implications related to this report.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

Nil.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

This matter has been assessed under the Community Consultation Policy. In accordance with
the assessment criteria it was rated at Level 1, for which no community consultation is required.

ATTACHMENT:

Nil.

COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Langer, seconded by Cr Bradley

That the remaining two-year Internal Audit Plan, as outlined, be endorsed.

Carried           3/0




MINUTES - AUDIT COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                                   8
AUDIT COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010




AU10.3      AUDIT PLAN - 2010



PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To adopt the Audit Plan for 2010.

BACKGROUND:

The Audit Charter suggests a number of key areas that the Audit Committee should review, as
part of its responsibilities. As such, a plan of activities has been outlined for the year to ensure
that such reviews are undertaken.

DETAILS:

The Audit Plan has set out the key areas that the Audit Committee should consider to
adequately discharge its duties assigned by Council under the Audit Charter. Aside from the
main tasks of reviewing the Annual Financial Statements, the Internal Audit and the Annual
Financial Audit and Budget Reviews, the Audit Committee also reviews the Town’s Local
Government Compliance Return and Risk Management Plan.

The attached plan provides an indicative program for 2010, concluding with the adoption of the
annual financial statements by Council.

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:

There are no Policy or Statutory Implications related to this report.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no Financial Implications related to this report.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:

This report is consistent with the strategic plan’s goal of financial sustainability by ensuring our
expenditure is matched by our revenue. Internal audit achieves this by ensuring appropriate
controls and procedures are in place.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

This matter has been assessed under the Community Consultation Policy. In accordance with
the assessment criteria it was rated at Level 1, for which no community consultation is required.

ATTACHMENTS:

1.    Audit Plan.




MINUTES - AUDIT COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010                                                      9
AUDIT COMMITTEE
MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2010



COMMITTEE AND ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:

Moved by Cr Langer, seconded by Cr Bradley

That the Audit Plan for 2010 be adopted.

Carried           3/0




MINUTES - AUDIT COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2010   10
COUNCIL
23 FEBRUARY 2010



10.    COUNCIL REPORTS

       Nil

11.    URGENT BUSINESS

       Nil

12.    MOTIONS OF WHICH NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN

       Nil

13.    CONFIDENTIAL REPORTS

       Nil

14.    CLOSURE




H:\Ceo\Gov\Council Minutes\Council Agenda\10 Agenda\C 23 February 2010.doc   1

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:0
posted:1/24/2013
language:English
pages:162