agenda - city of armadale · held on 15 june 2020 corporate services committee meeting held on 16...

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL

MONDAY, 22 JUNE 2020

AGENDA

C ON T E N T S

AGENDA

REPORTS

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING

HELD ON 15 JUNE 2020

CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING

HELD ON 16 JUNE 2020

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER’S REPORT

NOTICE OF MEETING

AND AGENDA

CR ______________________________________

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the next ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL will be

held in the Council Chambers, Orchard Avenue, Armadale at 7.00pm

MONDAY, 22 JUNE 2020

JOANNE ABBISS

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

18 June 2020

1 DECLARATION OF OPENING / ANNOUNCEMENT OF VISITORS

2 RECORD OF ATTENDANCE / APOLOGIES / LEAVE OF ABSENCE

3 ADVICE OF RESPONSE TO PREVIOUS PUBLIC QUESTIONS

TAKEN ON NOTICE

Nil

4 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

Public Question Time is allocated for the asking of and responding to questions raised by members of the public. Members of the Public are requested to register if they wish to attend this meeting at least 8 hours prior to the commencement by emailing their name and contact number to [email protected] Minimum time to be provided – 15 minutes (unless not required)

Policy and Management Practice EM 6 – Public Question Time has been adopted by

Council to ensure the orderly conduct of Public Question time and a copy of this procedure

can be found at http://www.armadale.wa.gov.au/PolicyManual.

It is also available in the public gallery. The public’s cooperation in this regard will be appreciated.

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.armadale.wa.gov.au/PolicyManual

ORDINARY MEETING 3 22 JUNE 2020

OF COUNCIL

5 APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE

5.1 Request for Leave of Absence – Cr Kerry Busby

Request for leave of absence received from Cr Kerry Busby for the period

Wednesday 1 July 2020 to Sunday 12 July 2020 inclusive.

RECOMMEND

That Council grant leave of absence to Cr Kerry Busby for the period

Wednesday 1 July 2020 to Sunday 12 July 2020 inclusive. (does not

include an Ordinary Meeting of Council).

6 PETITIONS

7 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

7.1 PREVIOUS ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

HELD ON 8 JUNE 2020. ..................................................................... (ATTACHED)

8 ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE PERSON PRESIDING WITHOUT

DISCUSSION

9 QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN

GIVEN – WITHOUT DISCUSSION

Nil

10 REPORTS

10.1 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING

Report of the Development Services Committee held on 15 June

2020. ...................................................................................................... 5

BUSINESS ARISING FROM REPORT

10.2 CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING

Report of the Corporate Services Committee held on 16 June 2020. . 77


ORDINARY MEETING 4 22 JUNE 2020

OF COUNCIL

10.3 CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER’S REPORT

Report of the Chief Executive Officer . ............................................ 107


11 MOTIONS OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN

Nil

12 URGENT BUSINESS APPROVED BY THE PERSON PRESIDING OR

BY DECISION

13 MATTERS FOR REFERRAL TO STANDING COMMITTEES –

WITHOUT DISCUSSION

14 MATTERS REQUIRING CONFIDENTIAL CONSIDERATION

15 CLOSURE

CITY OF ARMADALE

MINUTES

OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE HELD IN THE FUNCTION ROOM,

ADMINISTRATION CENTRE, 7 ORCHARD AVENUE, ARMADALE ON MONDAY, 15

JUNE 2020 AT 7.00PM.

PRESENT: Cr D M Shaw (Chair)

Cr C M Wielinga (Deputy Chair)

Cr R Butterfield

Cr C Frost

Cr J Munn CMC

Cr M S Northcott

Cr G J Smith

APOLOGIES: Nil

OBSERVERS: Cr G Nixon via MS Teams

Cr S Peter via MS Teams

Cr H Jones via MS Teams

IN ATTENDANCE: Mr P Sanders Executive Director Development Services

Ms J Abbiss Chief Executive Officer

Ms L Jarosz Executive Assistant Community Services

Mr J Lyon Executive Director Corporate Services via MS Teams

PUBLIC: 8

“For details of Councillor Membership on this Committee, please refer to the City’s website

– www.armadale.wa.gov.au/your council/councillors.”

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 6 15 JUNE 2020

COMMITTEE COUNCIL MEETING 22 JUNE 2020

DISCLAIMER

As there were Members of the public present, the Disclaimer for protecting Councillors and

staff from liability of information and advice given at Committee meetings was read.

DECLARATION OF MEMBERS’ INTERESTS

Cr Butterfield

Proposed Local Planning Policy Pln 4.1 The design of Industrial Estates

Cr Shaw

Panel of Pre –Qualified Suppliers PPS/2/20 for Design Review Panel

QUESTION TIME – 7.17PM

Mr Mervyn Krugar - 2 Armstrong Road, Kelmscott

1. Regarding access to Armstrong Road, as traffic increases, how will the traffic be

managed?

The Chair advised that Brookton Highway is a Primary Regional Road managed by

Main Roads WA, and that extensive modelling would have taken place already to

ensure they are satisfied with the traffic management.

2. If there is a need to widen the road, how close will this come toward Buckingham

Cottage and my property?

The Chair advised that if there was a need to widen Armstrong Road that it would need

to be widened on the landowners side and therefore not impact Mr Krugar’s property.

The Committee also advised that the draft design considered by Main Roads WA was

included in the attachments.

PUBLIC QUESTION TIME CLOSED AT 7.19PM



DEPUTATION

Item 1.1 - Proposed Place of Worship at No.31 Armstrong Road, Kelmscott (8893)

Mr Jeremy Hofland (Senior Planner, Rowe Group) addressed the Committee at 7.02pm and

provided the following main comments -

Advised that the Armadale Gospel Trust as the applicant supports the recommendation

for approval and does not oppose any of the recommended approval conditions

Gave a background to the Armadale Gospel Trust and links to the local community

Advised the following key aspects of the proposal and associated benefits including:

- No complaints regarding their other operations in the City

- 163 car parking bays and an understanding of the potential impacts

- Once constructed, the church is prepared to make available for emergency

bushfire

- 40-50m separation to the nearest property

Upgrading and construction of Armstrong Road;

- Upgrading of the Armstrong Road/Brookton Highway intersection;

- Satisfies objectives and relevant provisions from the City’s LPS4;

- Positioning of the building on site, in conjunction with existing and proposed

vegetation, to limit visibility of the development from public vantage points;

Committee discussed the above comments and asked questions in relation to the proposed

place of worship at no. 31 Armstrong Road, Kelmscott.

Chair thanked Mr Hofland for his attendance.

Deputation retired at 7.16pm

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

RECOMMEND

Minutes of the Development Services Committee Meeting held on 19 May 2020 be

confirmed.

Moved Cr J H Munn

MOTION CARRIED (7/0)



ITEMS REFERRED FROM INFORMATION BULLETIN - ISSUE 9 - MAY 2020

Outstanding Matters & Information Items

Report on Outstanding Matters - Development Services Committee

Review before the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT)

Health

Health Services Manager’s Report - May 2020

Planning

Planning Applications Report - May 2020

Town Planning Scheme No.4 - Amendment Action Table

Subdivision Applications - WAPC Approvals/Refusals - May 2020

Subdivision Applications - Report on Lots Registered for 2019/2020

Compliance Officer’s Report - May 2020

Building

Building Services Manager’s Report - May 2020

Building Health/Compliance Officer’s Report - May 2020

Committee noted the information and no further items were raised for discussion and/or further

report purposes.

CONTENTS

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE

15 JUNE 2020

1. DEVELOPMENT

1.1 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - PROPOSED PLACE OF WORSHIP - LOT 201

(NO.31) ARMSTRONG ROAD, KELMSCOTT ...........................................................................10

2. STRATEGIC PLANNING

2.1 STRUCTURE PLAN RECOMMENDATION TO WAPC - LOT 9006 REILLY ROAD

AND LOT 9005 WRIGHT ROAD, HARRISDALE ...................................................................... 34

2.2 PROPOSED LOCAL PLANNING POLICY PLN 4.1 THE DESIGN OF

INDUSTRIAL ESTATES ...............................................................................................................51

3. SCHEME AMENDMENTS & STRUCTURE PLANS

3.1 AMENDMENT NO.113 TO TPS 4 - REZONING LOT 3 ARMADALE RD & LOT

301 ANSTEY RD FORRESTDALE FROM URBAN DEVELOPMENT ZONE TO

LOCAL CENTRE ZONE ...............................................................................................................57

4. MISCELLANEOUS

4.1 PANEL OF PRE-QUALIFIED SUPPLIERS PPS/2/20 FOR DESIGN REVIEW

PANEL ............................................................................................................................................70

5. COUNCILLORS’ ITEMS

NIL ............................................................................................................................................................ 73

6. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REPORT

6.1 WALGA PERFORMANCE MONITORING REPORT - 2018/19 REPORT ................................ 74

6.2 DWA – NORMALISATION APPROACHES ...............................................................................70

SUMMARY OF ATTACHMENTS ....................................................................................................... 76


COMMITTEE – Development COUNCIL MEETING 22 JUNE 2020



1.1 - DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - PROPOSED PLACE OF WORSHIP - LOT 201

(NO.31) ARMSTRONG ROAD, KELMSCOTT

WARD

: RIVER In Brief:

The City received an application for Place

of Worship at Lot 201 No. 31 Armstrong

Road Kelmscott on 01/20/2018.

Place of Worship is a discretionary A use

in the City’s Rural Living zone

The application was advertised for a

period of 3 weeks. A total of 121

submissions were received, 101 objecting

to the proposal.

The significant issues raised during the

application assessment relate to transport

and access, environmental impact, noise,

bushfire, visual impact and siting.

It is considered that the applicant has

sufficiently demonstrated the capability

for reasonable and acceptable outcomes in

these aspects. It is therefore considered

that the proposal is compliant with the

requirements and objectives of the City’s

Town Planning Scheme No.4.

Recommend that the Council

conditionally approve the application

subject to appropriate conditions.

As the proposal adjoins the management

waters of the Swan River Trust dual

determination by the WAPC.

FILE No.

: - M/220/19

APPLN NO.

: 10.2018.297.1

DATE

: 27 May 2020

REF

: CV

RESPONSIBLE

MANAGER

: EDDS

APPLICANT

: Rowe Group Pty Ltd

LANDOWNER

: Ray Sprigg, Michael

Bloomfield, Arthur

Baker, David Wallis &

Jonathan Jackson

SUBJECT LAND

: Property size 4.4 ha

ZONING

MRS /

TPS No.4

:

:

Rural

Rural Living 2

Tabled Items

Nil.

Decision Type

☐ Legislative The decision relates to general local government legislative functions such as

adopting/changing local laws, town planning schemes, rates exemptions, City

policies and delegations etc.

☐ Executive The decision relates to the direction setting and oversight role of Council.

☒Quasi-judicial The decision directly affects a person’s rights or interests and requires

Councillors at the time of making the decision to adhere to the principles of

natural justice.

Officer Interest Declaration

Nil.



Strategic Implications

2.3 Diverse and attractive development that is integrated with the distinctive character of

the City.

2.3.1 Provide supportive planning and development guidance and liaison on major

land developments

2.4 Attractive and user-friendly streetscapes and open spaces

2.4.1 Implement townscape, streetscape and parkland improvements to enhance the

distinctive character of the City.

Legislation Implications

Planning and Development Act 2005

Swan and Canning Rivers Management Act 2006

Town Planning Scheme (TPS) No.4

Local Planning Strategy 2016

Metropolitan Region Scheme

Council Policy/Local Law Implications

PLN 2.5 Erosion Preventions & Sediment Control

PLN 2.6 Water Sensitive Design

PLN 2.9 Landscaping

Budget/Financial Implications

Nil

Consultation

The application was advertised to the public for a period of three weeks, closing on 18/11/18.

Letters were sent to 405 landowners within 500m of the development site. Advertising was

undertaken in conjunction with the advertising of the nearby Place of Worship application at

No. 182 Brookton Highway Kelmscott to the same radius of properties.

The application was referred to the following state agencies for comment:

- Department of Health (DoH)

- Department of Biodiversity Conservation and Attractions /Swan River Trust - DBCA

- Department of Fire and Emergency Services (DFES)

- Main Roads Western Australia (MRWA)

- Water Corporation

The proposal was also distributed to the City’s Development Control Unit for comment.

BACKGROUND

The subject site is likely to have been a former orchard as fruit trees are evident on the

property. Aerial photographs from 1953 onwards indicate little change to the property since

then. A single house and outbuildings are present on the property adjacent to Armstrong

Road.

The file history indicates that Council granted a development approval in March 2008 for

Holiday Accommodation and Reception Centre uses on the site. The development approval

has expired and was not enacted.



A subdivision approval was granted by the WAPC (ref 154880) in August 2017 and is valid

until 2020. The subdivision is to create three lots and a public open space reservation

alongside the Canning River. This approval was granted for a period of three years and

expires in August 2020. Simultaneous implementation of the subdivision and this proposed

development would not be viable due to the location of the building.

DETAILS OF PROPOSAL

The subject application proposes the following:

- A Place of Worship building with a floor area of 839m2 and provision for up to 440

attendees (once fortnightly, see attendance and hours of operation below). The building

will be inclusive of required amenities such as bathrooms. No other buildings are

proposed as part of this application.

- A 163 bay car park to service the proposed Place of Worship.

- A grassed temporary overflow car parking area for 55 vehicles is proposed.

- Landscaping within and around the car park area is proposed, including the addition of

nutrient runoff filtration swales.

- Waste disposal is proposed to occur via mains sewer connection.

- Vehicle access is proposed to be via Armstrong Road with two crossovers to service the

site proposed. Upgrades to Armstrong Road and the intersection with Brookton

Highway will be required if the proposed development goes ahead.

- The demolition of the existing single house and outbuildings is proposed.

The proposed hours of operation and forecast patronage per service numbers for the Place of

Worship.

- Services on Sundays:

o 6:00am-7:00am, Weekly worship service, 30 to 40 patrons;

o 10.00am-12.00pm, Fortnightly worship service, 380 to 440 patrons;

o 4:45pm-6:00pm, Fortnightly worship service, 120 to 150 patrons.

- Services on Saturdays:

o 7:45am-9:15am – Monthly worship service – 180 to 220 patrons.

- Services on weeknights:

o Monday 6pm-7pm – Weekly worship service – 30 to 40 patrons

o Tuesday 7:15pm- 8:30pm – Weekly worship service – 120 to 180 patrons

o Wednesday – no services

o Thursday 7:15pm- 8:30pm – Weekly worship service – 180 to 220 patrons

o Friday 7:00pm-8:30pm – Monthly worship service – 120 to 180 patrons

In support of the application; the applicant has provided the following documentation:

- Planning Report and Plans;

- Traffic Impact Assessment;

- Bushfire Management Plan;

- Environmental Acoustic Assessment Documentation;

- Land Capability for On-Site Effluent Disposal;

- Erosion and Sediment Control Plan;

- Local Water Management Plan; and

- Landscape Concept Plan



COMMENT

Development Control Unit (DCU)

The application was referred to the business units comprised in the City’s Development

Control Unit, namely Planning Services, Health Services, Engineering, Environment and

Waste Services. These comments on the proposal are detailed further in the Analysis section

of this report.

Public Advertising

Place of Worship is a discretionary (A) use within the City’s Rural Living zone. Public

advertising of A uses is required under TPS No.4. The application was advertised for three

weeks, closing on 18/11/18. Advertising was carried out by way of letters to all landowners

within 500m of the development site, a notice on the City’s website containing links to plans

and documentation. These documents were made available for in person viewing at the City’s

offices also.

Advertising of the proposal was conducted in concert with advertising of the nearby Place of

Worship JDAP development application at Lot 11, No. 182 Brookton Highway Kelmscott.

The City used a combined 500m radius consultation area for both applications.

Total No. of letters sent to residents/owners : 405

Total No. of submissions received : 121

No. of submissions of conditional support/no objection : 19

No. of submissions of objection : 101

The main issues raised in submissions, together with a comment on each issue are outlined

below.

Key Issues

Issue 1 - The proposal is inconsistent with the rural character of area in terms of the nature

of the use, its intensity and appearance and will detract from the area’s characteristics.

Comment

An issue consistently raised in submissions objecting to the proposal was that the scale and

appearance of the proposed Place of Worship would undermine the rural character of the

surrounding locality. Place of Worship uses are located in rural or predominately residential

zonings. Places of Worship are most commonly found in proximity to the faith communities

they serve. As such, they are commonly located in residential and rural style zones across all

local government areas, although the suitability of locations will vary.

In this case the locality around the subject site is characterized by a mixture of the Rural

Living zone and higher density Residential zone areas. Brookton Highway a Category 3

Primary Regional Road (PRR) runs through the area and is a regional freight route. There is

an adjacent Local Centre zone opposite the subject site. At a broader scale the subject site is

with 2km of the Kelmscott District Centre and 3km of the Armadale Regional Centre.



Given these characteristics it is reasonable to conclude the locality as an area on a primary

transport route and is a transitional area between the urban areas to the south and west and the

more sparsely populated areas to the east and north. Furthermore it is common for uses that

may generate higher traffic volumes to be located in proximity to Primary Regional Roads as

these roads are capable of accommodating larger volumes of traffic and provide traffic access

to the broader district. In this light it is considered that the development of a Place of Worship

on the proposed site is not incongruous with the prevailing characteristics of the area. It is

noted that there is a higher incidence of non-residential uses either adjacent to or in close

proximity to Brookton Highway. A Place of Worship application was approved by the JDAP

nearby at Lot 11, No.182 Brookton Highway on 15/04/2020 approximately 200m from this

proposed Place of Worship. This approval allows for attendance of up to 200 patrons on a

smaller site, being 1.5ha in area in comparison to the subject sites 4ha area.

The City does not consider of the appearance and siting of the proposed building to be out of

keeping with the Rural Living zone. The proposed building is not excessive in terms of its

scale and is intended to have simple architecture with elements of rural character, including

large verandahs and a simple pitched roof. The siting of the building roughly in the centre of

the 4ha site with large amounts of open space around it is also typical of development in rural

zones. It is accepted that the car park space is significant and is not (in general) a typical

element of the area, however there is the capability to screen the car park from general view

with landscaping.

Recommendation

That the issue is not supported.

Issue 2 - The proposal will generate excessive traffic that will negatively impact upon traffic

congestion on Brookton Highway and raise the potential for unsafe vehicle movements.

Comment

Although the application proposes direct access from Armstrong Road, the proposal does

generate additional traffic that will need to enter and exit Brookton Highway. Brookton

Highway is under the control of MRWA as it is a Primary Regional Road Category 2 (PRR

Cat 2). The City referred the traffic impact assessments and plans prepared by the applicant to

MRWA for comment. After extensive review, over an extended period MRWA has advised

the City that it conditionally supports the proposal.

The evaluation of MRWA is that additional traffic volume generated will be within the

carrying capacity of Brookton Highway and will not result in undue congestion. It is the

conclusion of MRWA that the intersection of Armstrong Road and Brookton Highway will

require modification to create a safer intersection. These modifications are likely to include

the construction of a slip lane on the eastbound lane of Brookton Highway to Armstrong

Road and changes to the kerb line in the intersection. MRWA’s support for the proposal is

conditional upon the applicant obtaining its approval for an intersection upgrade design and

completing the works prior to occupancy.

The proposal complies with the City’s TPS 4 parking requirements as it provides 163 onsite

parking bays in lieu of the required 152. The applicant has indicated there is also room for 55

cars to park temporarily in a grassed overflow area. The proposal is highly unlikely to create

parking demand that spills over the site.



Recommendation

That the issue is supported in part.

Issue 3 - The proposal will generate excessive noise that will negatively impact upon the

amenity of the locality.

Comment

It is reasonable for noise to be raised as an area of interest and concern by submitters. The

applicant has provided an acoustic assessment. The assessment has been reviewed by the

City’s Health Services who have advised that its findings on compliance with the

Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 is acceptable subject to a condition

applied to any development approval that disallows amplified music or singing. The applicant

has advised in this instance that amplified music and singing do not form part of their

worship practices and therefore they hold no objection to the condition.

Religious worship and vehicle engine noise are exempted from compliance with the Noise

Regulations. It is not expected that the religious worship practices in themselves in this

instance would generate significant noise. Vehicle engine noise may generate a noticeable

impact on Armstrong Road and Brookton Highway, particularly as patrons leave during

evening periods. However, it is also acknowledged that Brookton Highway is a significant

source of traffic noise irrespective of the presence of the proposed development. It is

reasonable to expect traffic noise within areas adjacent to a PRR and in this context the

proposed development is not considered likely to significantly detract from the existing and

expected amenity level of the area.

The proposed use is unlikely to attract consistent traffic from trucks after the construction

phase.

Recommendation

That the issue is supported in part.

Issue 4 - The proposal has the potential to negatively impact upon the natural environment.

Comment

The subject site mostly contains degraded former orchard plantings. Minimal clearing of

native vegetation is required to facilitate the proposal. The site does abut the Canning River

and fringing native vegetation is present along the river shore. No development is proposed in

the river edge areas.

The applicant has provided a draft Local Water Management Plan (LWMP), Erosion and

Sediment Control Plans and Landscape Plan. These have been referred with the rest of the

application to the DBCA/Swan River Trust for comment as the proposal affects their

management waters. They have advised the City that they have no objection to the proposal

subject to conditions requiring connection of the site to reticulated sewerage and the

endorsement of a finalized Stormwater Management Plan, Erosion and Sediment Control

Plan and Landscaping Plan.



The applicant initially proposed onsite effluent disposal however they have subsequently

confirmed that they can connect the proposed development to reticulated sewerage. The

nearest connection point is on Brookton Highway. This will assist to lower the potential

infiltration of excess nutrients to the Canning River.

Recommendation

That the issue is not supported.

Issue 5 - The proposal represents an undue risk in a bushfire emergency situation.

Comment

This is a reasonable concern given the locality has a history of being impacted by bushfires,

particularly during the February 2011 bushfires. The subject site is identified as bushfire

prone under the WAPC’s SPP 3.7 – Planning in Bushfire Prone Areas.

The applicant provided a Bushfire Management Plan (BMP) as part of the application to the

City. These documents were referred to DFES for comment. DFES advised that the

documentation was acceptable subject to various revisions and clarifications, although these

would not require further referral to DFES. DFES recommended that an Emergency

Evacuation Plan also be prepared (EEP). It is noted that under the EEP the basic requirement

of having road access in at least two directions via Brookton Highway has been met.

The applicant has submitted the revised BMP and EEP documents to the City and they are

considered to be acceptable.

Recommendation

That the issue is not supported, as acceptable measures have been demonstrated.

State Agency Comments

DBCA/Swan River Trust

The proposal was referred to the Department of Biodiversity Conservation and

Attractions/Swan River Trust for statutory comment as required under the Swan and Canning

Rivers Management Act 2006. The DBCA/Swan River Trust advised the City that it did not

object to the proposal subject to conditions.

Department of Fire and Emergency Services

The City referred the proposed to DFES for comment given it is in a bushfire prone area and

includes aspects (attendance of older persons and children) that show similarities with

vulnerable land uses as defined under SPP 3.7. DFES advised the City that it did not object to

the proposal subject to an EEP being prepared and the BMP being revised in some places.

Water Corporation

The proposal was referred to the Water Corporation for non-statutory comment. The Water

Corporation advised that it did not object to the proposal. In relation to the requirement of

DBCA/Swan River Trust for the site to be connected to reticulated sewerage; the Water

Corporation has advised that a private pumping station is likely to be required by the

developer.



Department of Health

The proposal was referred to the Department of Health for non-statutory comment. The

Department of Health advised that it did not object to the proposal.

Main Roads Western Australia

The proposal was referred to the MRWA for statutory comment as it involved an increase of

traffic utilizing Brookton Highway via the local road network (Armstrong Road). MRWA

required multiple submissions from the applicant in relation to traffic analysis and plans for

upgrades to the intersection of Armstrong Road and Brookton Highway. MRWA has advised

the City that it does not object to the proposal subject to conditions.

ANALYSIS

City of Armadale Town Planning Scheme No. 4

Part 3 Zones and the Use of Land

The use class of Place of Worship is discretionary (A) in the Rural Living zone. Public

consultation will be undertaken as part of this application. Place of Worship is defined under

TPS 4 as:

“place of worship” means premises used for religious activities such as a church, chapel,

mosque, synagogue or temple;

In this case it is understood that the Armadale Gospel Trust, who are currently based in their

current Place of Worship in Seville Drive, Seville Grove are proposing to relocate to the

subject site.

The objectives for the Rural Living zone are defined as:

(a) To provide for a variety of rural living environments based on defined lot sizes, land

form and natural environmental characteristics.

(b) To provide for a range of associated compatible development, consistent with the

environmental opportunities and constraints applicable to individual sites.

(c) To ensure development is sited, designed and managed in harmony with the natural

environment and so as to protect the rural landscape and amenity.

On balance it is considered that the applicant has demonstrated that the proposal can manage

the site requirements without unduly detracting for the values or capabilities of the locality.

The applicant has secured the conditional support of state agencies that deal with

environmental and traffic matters indicating that the proposal is viable without creating

excessive impact in these aspects. Therefore it is considered that the proposal is capable of

being consistent with the objectives of the Rural Living zone.

Part 4 General Development Requirements

Management of Construction Sites

If the proposed development is approved by Council a condition requiring the submission of

a construction management plan is recommended.



Effluent Disposal

The applicant has indicated that they have no objection to the condition of support from

DBCA/Swan River Trust requiring effluent disposal to be via reticulated sewer connection.

Part 4B Rural Living, General Rural and Special Rural Zone Requirements.

Setbacks

The minimum lot boundary setback for the zone is 15m. The proposal complies as it provides

the following setbacks:

South side boundary – 68m

East side boundary – 83.7m

The northern and western boundaries are marked by the shoreline with the Canning River.

All structures must be at least 50m from a permanent water course, including the Canning

River. The plans indicate that the building is approximate 100m from the Canning River at

the closest setback (west) and 140m from the northern side.

Building Height

Limits of 6m for wall height and 9m for overall pitch apply. If the additional fill required to

facilitate the sand pad level is factored in there is a 0.9m variation to the maximum roof

height proposed.

The application proposes heights relative to:

Finished Floor Level – Wall 3.9m/Pitch 7.9m

Natural Ground Level – 5.9m/9.9m

A maximum sand pad height of 1.5m above NGL unless otherwise approved applies. The

applicant is proposing a maximum sand pad height of 2.0m above NGL.

It is noted that the proposed sand pad fill level is intended to moderate the slope of the site

down the Canning River edge. Given the generally lower aspect of the subject site in

comparison to the surrounding area, any roof pitch height variation would not result in the

building giving an impression of excessive height as seen from nearby vantage points.

Building coverage

The proposal incorporates an 839m2 area building, which exceeds the 500m2 building

coverage specified under clause 4B.3 of TPS 4. A variation in this case is considered to be

acceptable in light of the high open space provision (98.1%) across the lot. The existing

single house on the property and associated outbuildings are proposed to be demolished. It is

not considered that the proposed building will not result in excessive building coverage given

the significant size of the lot.

Car Parking and Vehicular Access

Under Schedule 7A of TPS 4 a Place of Worship requires parking to be provided at the

following rate:

1 space for every 2.5 square metres seating area, plus

1 space for every staff member present during peak operation



The main hall area measures approximately 529m2 in area, however this includes aisles

which would not be used for seating. The applicant has provided a calculation of 355m2

seating area which is considered to be accurate. This requires 142 parking bays. Ten staff are

likely required, thereby resulting in an overall requirement of 152 bays. The applicant has

proposed 163 bays, thereby resulting in a surplus of 11 bays. The applicant has also indicated

that there is room for a further 55 cars to be accommodated in a temporary overflow parking

on grassed open space on the site.

Water Supply

The applicant has proposed connection to mains water. Onsite rain water tanks are not

proposed.

Remnant Native Vegetation

The subject site is former orchard land and exhibits little remnant native vegetation outside of

the area fringing the Canning River. Significant removal of remnant native vegetation is not a

part of this application. Removal of the remaining exotic orchard plantings is not considered

to be raise concern on environmental or amenity grounds.

“A” uses to the Rural Living zone

As part of Amendment 97 to TPS 4 the following criteria were added to Part 4B for

discretionary ‘A’ uses in the City’s Rural Living zone. This criteria applies to Place of

Worship applications:

(a) accessibility by public transport, cycling and walking;

(b) potential to meet outdoor noise criteria as specified in noise regulations that operate

under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (may include the requirement for an

Acoustic Assessment);

(c) potential for the form, layout, appearance, colours and textures of any building and

landscaping to mitigate against any potential visual impact (may include the

requirements for a Visual Impact Assessment);

(d) potential for setbacks and separation distances from adjacent sensitive land uses to

mitigate against rural amenity impacts and land use conflicts;

(e) adequacy of the road capacity in the locality to accommodate traffic generated by the

development, and access capable of safely accommodating vehicle movements

generated by the development (may include the requirement for a Traffic Impact

Assessment); and

(f) potential impact of any uses incidental or ancillary to the predominant use.

The following comments are made against each point from the criteria:

a. It is reasonable to expect that most visits to the use would be via private motor vehicles.

The applicant has nonetheless investigated this criteria and has advised that “Existing

infrastructure provides good access for cycling and walking through the provision of a

dual use path along Brookton Highway. In addition, a bus stop is located on Brookton

Highway (near Bernard Street), approximately 200m from the subject land, which

provides access to bus routes connecting to Kelmscott Train Station.”

b. The applicant has provided an acoustic assessment which has been reviewed by the

City’s Health Services who have advised that its findings on compliance with the

Environmental Protection Act Regulations are acceptable subject to condition

disallowing amplified music and singing.



c. The proposed siting of the building in the centre of the lot with ample open space

around it assists with its rural setting. The appearance of the building is simple in style

with large verandahs and a simple roof pitch design. The car park can be landscaped. It

is not considered that a visual impact assessment is warranted in this case.

d. The proposal amply exceeds boundary setback requirements. The proposal is not

adjacent to sensitive land uses.

e. The applicant has secured the conditional support of MRWA in relation to impacts

upon Brookton Highway, which is a Category 2 PRR. The proposal utilises Armstrong

Road and no other local road. At present two properties utilise Armstrong Road for

access. The applicant will be required to upgrade Armstrong Road to a suitable

standard to satisfy City of Armadale and DFES requirements.

f. The application proposes no incidental or ancillary uses.

Based on the above it is considered that the proposal meets the criteria for ‘A’ land uses in

the Rural Living zone.

PLN 5.1 – Highway Development

The City’s PLN 5.1 states that discretionary land use (D and A) proposals must demonstrate

that they do not generate more traffic than a permissible (P) use if directly accessing a PRR,

such as Brookton Highway.

In this instance the use can be considered by the City as the application is proposing direct

access via a lower order road, being Armstrong Road instead of directly to Brookton

Highway.

MRWA has assessed the traffic impacts and required road upgrades.

PLN 2.6 – Water Sensitive Design

The applicant provided a Local Water Management Plan (LWMP) and On Site Effluent Land

Capability Report as part of the application. These documents were referred to the City’s

Environmental Services Officers, DBCA/Swan River Trust and Department of Health for

comment. The main part of the potential concerns relating to the proposal were addressed by

the applicant accepting the advice of the DBCA/Swan River Trust that onsite effluent

disposal should be replaced by a connection to the reticulated sewerage system.

Notwithstanding this, there is still the requirement to ensure that stormwater runoff generated

onsite is appropriately filtered before entering the Canning River. The DBCA/Swan River

Trust has recommended that an LWMP, Landscaping Plan and Stormwater Disposal Plan are

finalised as a condition of any development approval. Such plans will need to demonstrate

that landscaping water retention swales are constructed to filter runoff from the building and

car park area. The City’s Environmental Services has indicates that this is viable if the

applicant constructs the swales to accommodate 1 in 5 year storm event volumes and

undertakes landscaping in accordance with the Vegetation Guidelines for Stormwater

biofilters in the south-west of Western Australia. This advice is consistent with the conditions

of support for the proposal provided by the DBCA/Swan River Trust.



SPP 3.7 – Planning in Bushfire Prone Areas

The entirety of the site is identified as bushfire prone. The applicant provided a Bushfire

Management Plan (BMP) with the application. The key finding is that:

- A BAL rating of BAL 29 applies to the site based on an asset protection zone (APZ) of

14m width being applied around the periphery of the building.

The APZ is not considered to be potentially detrimental to remnant native vegetation as there

is little native vegetation affected, particularly where the former orchard is located.

DFES in its comments to the City has indicated that it had no objection to the proposal

subject to the following issues being clarified or resolved:

- Clarification of the location of the development area as shown in the BAL assessment.

The applicant has clarified this in the revised BMP submitted January 2019. The BAL

rating of BAL-29 remains in the revised BMP.

- Clarification if the City is accepting of vegetation in Plot 2 being designated as low

risk. Plot 2 takes in smaller properties mostly containing residences. It is considered

that designating this vegetation as low risk is a reasonable conclusion in the longer term

and no agreement with the respective landowners is warranted.

- That a cul de sac turning head be built as part of the extension of Armstrong Road. This

is a reasonable recommendation and the City will expect the developer to fund and

construct it following a civil works submission for the upgrade of Armstrong Road.

DFES also recommended the creation of a full EEP, which was not part of the initial

submission to the City. Following DFES’s recommendation the application had an EEP

prepared by Smith Consulting (who also prepared the BMP) and submitted this to the City in

January 2019. The EEP document contains measures such as processes for monitoring of

bushfire threats and coordinator of evacuation duties. The EEP indicates that the

congregation will not meet on days where DFES has forecast catastrophic fire danger. The

document is considered to be acceptable and its implementation would be recommended as a

condition of any development approval.

Acoustic Assessment

The applicant has provided an Environmental Noise Assessment prepared by Herring Storer

Acoustics. The key conclusion of the Assessment is that noise generated by plant and carpark

noises is capable of complying the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 and

no mitigation measures are required. The City’s Health Services has advised that the findings

of the acoustic assessment are acceptable subject to a condition disallowing amplified music

or singing.

Swan and Canning Rivers Management Act 2006

The subject site abuts the management waters of the Swan River Trust as defined under the

Swan and Canning Rivers Management Act 2006. The applicant is required to obtain a

development approval from the Western Australian Planning Commission in accordance with

the advice of DBCA/Swan River Trust. The City must notify the Commission of its

determination outcome so that it can finalise its determination process also.



OPTIONS

1. Council could approve the application for a Place of Worship at Lot 201, No. 31

Armstrong Road, Kelmscott subject to appropriate conditions.

2. Council could refuse the application for a Place of Worship at Lot 201, No. 31

Armstrong Road, Kelmscott and state the reasons for doing so.

CONCLUSION

The conclusion of the assessment of this application if that the applicant has demonstrated

that the proposal is capable of complying with the objectives for the City’s Rural Living

zone. The applicant has addressed site factors, such as traffic impacts, acoustic impacts

mitigation of environmental impacts upon the Canning River and bushfire threat through

submissions to state agencies. The proposed development is not considered to be out of

keeping with the capabilities of the land and the appearance of the proposed building is

consistent with a more modest rural character. The scale of the proposal is considered to be

acceptable given the particular characteristics of the locality as it differs from typical Rural

Living zone content in that it is a transitional urban to rural area and its amenity and

transportation values are already marked by the existing Brookton Highway PRR. The recent

conditional approval by the MEJDAP of a Place of Worship adjacent to Brookton Highway

within 200m of the subject site under similar circumstances is noted in this light. Given this,

it is considered that there is no reasonable basis for the City to recommend refusal of the

application and it is recommended for conditional approval.

ATTACHMENTS

1.⇩ Site Plan - Lot 201 Armstrong Road, Kelmscott

2.⇩ Elevations Plan - Lot 201 Armstrong Road, Kelmscott

3.⇩ Floor Plan - Lot 201 Armstrong Road, Kelmscott

4.⇩ Roof Plan - Lot 201 Armstrong Road, Kelmscott

5.⇩ Landscape Concept Plan - Lot 201 Armstrong Road, Kelmscott

6.⇩ Details Plan - Lot 201 Armstrong Road, Kelmscott

7.⇩ Concept Plan - Armstrong Rd / Brookton Hwy Intersection - Lot 201 Armstrong Road,

Kelmscott

8.⇩ Photograph 1 - Lot 201 Armstrong Road, Kelmscott

9.⇩ Photograph 2 - Lot 201 Armstrong Road, Kelmscott

10.⇩ Artists Impression 1 - Lot 201 Armstrong Road, Kelmscott



13.⇩ Schedule of Submissions - Lot 201 Armstrong Road Kelmscott 14. Confidential Submitter Plan - Lot 201 Armstrong Road, Kelmscott - This matter is

considered to be confidential under Section 5.23(2) (b) of the Local Government Act, as it

deals with the matter relates to the personal affairs of a person

15. Confidential Schedule of Submitters Addresses - Lot 201 Armstrong Road, Kelmscott -

This matter is considered to be confidential under Section 5.23(2) (b) of the Local

Government Act, as it deals with the matter relates to the personal affairs of a person



Committee Discussion

Committee considered the proposed application, landscaping proposed, Main Roads WA

requirements and matters raised in the submissions. Committee requested additional

landscaping to address the visual appearance and views across the site from nearby areas.

As such, the recommendation was amended accordingly, with the moving of the advice note

regarding the City’s landscaping requirements to a separate landscaping condition to the

landscaping condition/requirements required by the Swan River Trust to separately address

the above visual appearance and views. Committee included additional landscaping

measures.

RECOMMEND D1/6/20

That Council:

A) Approves the application for Planning Approval for a Place of Worship on Lot

201, No. 31 Armstrong Road Kelmscott, subject to the following conditions:

1. The development shall be connected to the reticulated sewerage system prior

to occupation. (DBCA/Swan River Trust)

2. Prior to the commencement of works, the applicant shall prepare and have

approved, a Stormwater Management Plan to the satisfaction of the

Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions and the City of

Armadale (DBCA/Swan River Trust)

3. Prior to the commencement of works, the applicant shall prepare and have

approved, and Erosion and Sediment Control Plan to the satisfaction of the

Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions and the City of

Armadale. (DBCA/Swan River Trust)

4. Prior to the commencement of works or any development being undertaken

on the site, the applicant shall submit for approval to the Department of

Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions, a Landscape Plan (Advice Note

E). The Landscape Plan is to be approved by the City of Armadale and

continuously implemented thereafter. (DBCA/Swan River Trust)

5. Prior to any fill and/or top soil being brought onto the site, the applicant

shall demonstrate that all material is certified clean, uncontaminated, and

free from rubble, weeds and disease and is geotechnically suitable for the

proposed works. (DBCA/Swan River Trust)

6. Prior to the commencement of construction of the development, the

applicant is to submit a preliminary intersection design (15% concept) for

the Brookton Highway/ Armstrong Road intersection, to the specification of

Main Roads (MRWA) and the satisfaction of the City.

7. Prior to the occupation of the building, the applicant shall design and

construct the approved intersection design as detailed in condition 6, to the

specification of Main Roads WA. The cost of the design and construction of

this intersection upgrade shall be borne by the applicant to the specification



of Main Roads WA and to the specification of the City.

8. Prior to occupation of the development, air conditioning units, compressors

and other equipment related to utilities shall be screened from public view

and positioned so as to avoid any adverse effects, including noise, on the

occupants of nearby residential properties to the satisfaction of the City.

9. Prior to the occupation of the development, a Final Acoustic Assessment

must be prepared and provided to the City of Armadale which demonstrates

to City’s satisfaction, that the completed development complies with the

Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997.

The Final Acoustic Assessment must include the following information:

a. noise sources compared with the assigned noise levels as stated in the

Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997, when the noise is

received at the nearest “noise sensitive premises” and surrounding

residential area;

b. tonality, modulation and impulsiveness of noise sources; and

c. confirmation of the implementation of noise attenuation measures. Any

further works must be carried out in accordance with the Acoustic

Report and implemented as such for the duration of the development.

10. A notification, pursuant to Section 70A of the Transfer of Land Act 1893 is

to be placed on the certificate of title of the subject site. The notification is to

state as follows:

“The land is located in the vicinity of a transport corridor and is affected, and

may be further affected by transport noise in the future”.

11. Attendance and times of operation for worship are to be limited to the

following:

Services on Sundays

6:00am-7:00am - Weekly worship service - up to 40 patrons;

10.00am-12.00pm - Fortnightly worship service - up to 440 patrons;

4:45pm-6:00pm - Fortnightly worship service - up to 150 patrons.

Services on Saturdays:

7:45am-9:15am - Monthly worship service - up to 220 patrons.

Services on weeknights:

Monday 6pm-7pm - Weekly worship service - up to 40 patrons

Tuesday 7:15pm-8:30pm - Weekly worship service - up to 180 patrons

Wednesday - no services

Thursday 7:15pm- 8:30pm - Weekly worship service - up to 220 patrons

Friday 7:00pm-8:30pm - Monthly worship service - up to 180 patrons

Additional services are permitted for Easter and Christmas Day to the

satisfaction of the City.

12. Outdoor areas are not to be used for gatherings.



13. The Bushfire Management Plan submitted by Smith Consulting (21 January

2019), shall be implemented including site preparation and establishment of

the Asset Protection Zone once approved and prior to commencement of the

use on site. Information including a completed ‘Certification by Bushfire

Consultant’, is to be provided to the City to demonstrate that the measures

contained within the Bushfire Management Plan have been implemented

during construction and continuously thereafter.

14. The Emergency Evacuation Plan submitted by Smith Consulting Protection

(20 January 2019), is to be continuously implemented and must be available

to all persons on site upon commencement of the use.

15. ‘End of trip bicycle facilities’ in accordance with Clause 4.11.1 and Schedule

7B own Planning Scheme No.4 shall be provided prior to occupation of the

development in a location agreed to by the City and continuously maintained

thereafter.

16. A finalised schedule of external colours and materials shall be submitted to

the City’s Planning Services and approved by the Executive Director

Development Services. The development shall be completed and maintained

in accordance with the approved schedule to the satisfaction of the City.

17. Engineering drawings and specifications must be submitted and approved

prior to commencement of site works, and works must be undertaken in

accordance with the approved plan, engineering drawings and specifications

prior to occupation of the development, to the satisfaction of the City

(Executive Director Technical Services) for the proposed works in the

Armstrong Road road reserve. The drawings / specifications / works shall

include:

a. The proposed driveway and crossovers;

b. The construction of the Armstrong Road extension, including a new cul

de sac head;

c. The relocation / removal of any other services as necessary; and

d. The replacement of any street trees removed as a result of works.

18. Prior to occupation, to meet vehicle manoeuvring space requirements on site

the developer/owner shall, to the specifications and satisfaction of the City

(Executive Director Technical Services):

a. Construct/seal all such areas, including

b. drainage and kerbing/marking where necessary, in accordance with

the approved site plan;

c. Relocate/remove any services/infrastructure as necessary; and

d. Arrange for continuous maintenance of all such areas thereafter.

19. To ensure parking does not exceed the total number of parking bays

available onsite at any one time and cause adverse impacts on the amenity of

the area, a car parking strategy shall be prepared by the applicant/owner

and approved by the City (Executive Director Development Services) to

manage the demand for parking upon commencement of operations, via

appropriate management practices.



20. A Construction Management Plan shall be prepared and submitted to the

City for approval at least 30 days prior to the commencement of works. The

Construction Management Plan shall be implemented to the satisfaction of

the City (Executive Director Development Services) and detail how the

construction of the development will be managed, including the following:

a. Public safety and site security;

b. Hours of operation;

c. Dust management;

d. Waste and material disposal;

e. Traffic management plans for the various phases of the construction;

f. Parking arrangements for contractors and sub-contractors;

g. Delivery and access arrangements;

h. The storage of materials and equipment on site (no storage of materials

within the public realm will be permitted);

i. Bonding and remediation arrangements;

j. Measures to ensure no deleterious runoff enters the Canning River

and;

k. Any other matters likely to impact upon the surrounding properties or

public realm.

21. A Waste Management Plan for onsite waste collection shall be submitted to

and approved by the City (Executive Director Technical Services) prior to

commencement of site works. The plan shall detail bin storage and collection

areas, turning circles, surface thickness and gradient suitable to a 25 tonne

dual axle vehicle as well as entry and exit to/from the site in forward gear.

Waste collection shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plan

thereafter.

22. In accordance with the requirements of Local Planning Policy PLN 3.12 -

Percent for Public Art, prior to the occupancy of the development, the

applicant or landowner is to either:

a) make a monetary contribution to the City of Armadale Public Art

Reserve Account equal to one per cent (1%) of the estimated total

development cost; or,

b) install public art work on site to the value of one per cent (1%) of the

total development cost and continuously maintain the public art work

thereafter

23. The landscape plan shall include:

a) Plant species (predominantly West Australian natives);

b) Numbers, location, container size;

c) Method of irrigation of the landscaped areas;

d) Landscaping and treatment of adjoining verge areas;

e) The provision of shade trees within the car park at the rates of at least

1 tree per 10 metre interval along any line of car parking;

f) Retention of existing trees wherever possible;

g) The provision of a landscaped buffer 10m wide on all sides of the

development (outside the Asset Protection Zone) to soften the visual

impact of the buildings & carpark from all vantage points. The



landscaped buffer to include tall trees over 5m and shrubbery; and

h) The provision of a 50 metre strip of revegetation abutting the foreshore

(measured from the river’s edge).

All landscaping shall be installed prior to occupancy of the development and

maintained as per the approved plan thereafter

24. All conditions are to be complied with prior to exercising the right of this

approval, to the satisfaction of the Executive Director Development Services.

Advice Notes:

A. The required plans and specifications can be emailed to

[email protected].

B. The applicant is advised that it is an offence under the Swan and

Canning Rivers Management Regulations 2007 to destroy, pull up, cut

back or injure any tree, shrub or perennial plant that is on land within

the Swan Canning Development Control Area, except with the

approval of the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and

Attractions or unless otherwise exempt by the Regulations.

C. The applicant is advised that if clearing of native vegetation is proposed

then a clearing permit is required in accordance with the

Environmental Protection Act 1986. An application must be submitted

to and approved by the Department of Water and Environmental

Regulation.

D. With regard to Condition 2, the applicant is advised the stormwater

management system shall be designed to prevent mobilisation of

sediment, nutrients and contaminants from the site to the river.

Stormwater from the proposed development should be managed in

accordance with Corporate Policy Statement 49: Planning for

Stormwater Management Affecting the Swan Canning Development

Control Area, the Department of Water and Environmental

Regulation's Stormwater Management Manual for Western Australia

and Decision Process for Stormwater Management in WA, and water

sensitive urban design principles with reference to Monash University

(2014) Vegetation Guidelines for stormwater biofilters in the south-

west of Western Australia, November 2014, and Adoption Guidelines

for Stormwater Biofiltration Systems, Facility for Advancing Water

Biofiltration, Monash University, June 2009. The stormwater

management system shall adhere to the following criteria;

a. Stormwater runoff from constructed impervious surfaces

generated by small rainfall events (i.e. the first 15 mm of rainfall)

must be retained and/or detained at-source as much as practical

and will not be permitted to enter the river untreated.

b. Pre-development hydrology (including peak flow rates, runoff

volumes, floodplain storage volumes and flood levels) is to be

maintained, unless alterations have either been published in an

mailto:[email protected]



approved catchment plan, or are to the satisfaction of the

Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions,

Department of Water and Environmental Regulation and the

Water Corporation (where applicable).

c. Existing tributaries and surface water flow paths are to be

retained, unless it can be demonstrated that replacement with

piped systems will maintain or improve the habitat values and

water quality of receiving waterways.

d. No drainage infrastructure can be constructed within the Swan

Canning Development Control Area.

e. The stormwater management system should include where

possible infiltration within the carpark using biofilters vegetated

with local native plant species.

f. Revegetation is to be undertaken downslope from the

bioretention / detention basins in the area where overland flow is

likely to occur, and the Landscape Plan required by Condition 4

should be updated accordingly.

E. With regard to Condition 4, the applicant is advised the Landscape

Plan shall include, unless otherwise agreed in writing:

a. demonstrate the softening of the visual impact of the buildings,

carpark and any other structures when being viewed from the

public access areas and river foreshore;

b. all features in the proposed landscaping surrounding the new

facility;

c. details of any retaining walls, demonstrating how the walls will be

terraced and/or screened with appropriate native plants to

visually soften the structures when viewed from the public areas

and river foreshore;

d. the location, number and type of proposed vegetation including

size and planting density (please note that the majority of plant

species are to be locally native and suited to the soil type of the

area to sustain local biodiversity and due to their low fertiliser

and water requirements);

i. any existing vegetation and/or landscaped areas to be

retained/reinstated; and

ii. intended maintenance regime, including whether bore or

scheme water will be utilised.

F. The applicant is advised that this approval does not negate the need to

obtain any other approval from relevant agencies, or from the

Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions.

G. The applicant is advised that any upgrade or modification to pump

infrastructure adjacent to the Canning River will require separate

planning approval. Please note that the Department of Biodiversity,

Conservation and Attractions will not support modified or new pump

infrastructure within the River reserve.

H. Further to condition 7, the applicant must obtain approval from Main



Roads before all works are undertaken within the Brockton Highway

road reserve. The applicant seeking access to the Main Roads network

will be required to submit an application as outlined in the

"Application Kit and Guidelines" for State Roads. Application Kits

can be found on the Main Roads website > "Our Roads" >

"Conducting Works on Roads".

I. With regard to the Condition requiring submission of a colour and

material schedule, please be advised that the colour and material

schedule submitted is acceptable (copy attached). Any amendments to

the attached schedule should be resubmitted to Planning Services for

consideration.

J. With regard to Condition requiring a car parking strategy, the strategy

should outline appropriate management practises including (but not

limited to):scheduling/timing of services and meetings, advice to

patrons on specifics such as peak periods and events, and

encouragement of car-pooling and alternative forms of transport.

K. Lighting shall comply with Australian Standard 4282-1997 “Control of

the obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting” or its equivalent and the

City’s Environment, Animals and Nuisance Local Laws.

L. The developer is reminded of the requirement under the provisions of

the Environmental Protection Act that all construction work (which

includes earthworks and similar) be managed with due regard for noise

control. Works generating noise, and rock breaking in particular, are

not permitted:-

• Outside the hours of 7.00am to 7.00pm; or

• On a Sunday or Public Holiday.

M. Compliance with the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations

1997 is required, particularly with regard to installation of equipment

(air conditioning units, pumps etc.).

N. With regard to part b) of the condition relating to the City’s PLN 3.12

– Percent for Public Art, the arts approval process is outlined under

section 5 of the policy and the proponent will be required to lodge a

Public Art Submission Form to the City’s Community Services, which

is available on the City’s website:

https://www.armadale.wa.gov.au/sites/default/files/assets/documents/do

cs/Planning_and_Land_Use/Percent_for_Public_Art_Submission_For

m.pdf

O. Please note, Clause 4B.3 (Building Coverage) of Town Planning

Scheme No.4 (TPS No.4) specifies that in the Rural Living Zone

building coverage is not to exceed 500 square metres (including

outbuildings), unless otherwise approved by the City in accordance

with the provisions of Clause 4.5 of TPS No.4. Given site coverage on

the lot is beyond the limit specified in TPS No.4, you are advised that

any proposed future increases to the site coverage on the lot will be

https://www.armadale.wa.gov.au/sites/default/files/assets/documents/docs/Planning_and_Land_Use/Percent_for_Public_Art_Submission_Form.pdf





considered with caution and in detail by the City and will unlikely be

approved without being justified to the City’s satisfaction and with

consideration to TPS No.4 provisions. (mirrors 182 Brookton approval)

P. The owner and/or applicant is encouraged to provide written evidence

to the City to demonstrate compliance of the conditions noted above.

For further information please refer to Planning Information Sheet

“Development Application Condition Clearance” available at

https://www.armadale.wa.gov.au/planning-information-sheets

Q. The applicant and landowner are advised that it is a statutory

requirement to comply with all conditions of this approval, and that

not complying with any condition is therefore illegal. Failure to comply

with any condition of this approval or the approved plans constitutes

an offence under the Planning Development Act 2005. The City can

issue a Planning Infringement Notice of $500 (without notice) and/or

commence legal action with higher penalties up to $200,000 for each

offence and a daily penalty of $25,000 per day for the continuation of

that offence. It is the responsibility of the applicant and/or landowner

to inform Council in writing when they consider the development to be

complete and all conditions of this approval have been satisfied.

R. All septic sewer systems including all tanks and pipes and associated

drainage systems (soak wells or leach drains) and any stormwater

disposal systems are to be decommissioned, in accordance with the

Health (Treatment of Sewerage and Disposal of Effluent and Liquid

Waste) Regulations 1974, removed, filled with clean sand and

compacted. Proof of decommissioning is to be provided in the form of

either certification from a licensed plumber or a statutory declaration

from the landowner/applicant, confirming that the site has been

inspected and all septic tanks, soak wells, leach drains and any

associated pipework have been removed.

S. A Building Permit application is required prior to the erection of any

structures on the property.

T. Compliance with the Building Code of Australia is required. In this

regard, a Building / Demolition Permit application shall be submitted

to the City’s Building Department and approved prior to the

demolition of any structures on the subject site.

U. The landowner/applicant shall make arrangements with the Water

Corporation for the provision of the necessary sewer and water

services to the development.

V. If the applicant is aggrieved by a Refusal to Approve his/her

application, or, where Approved, is aggrieved by any Condition

imposed in that Approval he/she may apply for a Review to the State

Administrative Tribunal pursuant to the provisions of Part 14 of the

Planning and Development Act 2005 against such refusal or imposition

of such aggrieved Condition.

https://www.armadale.wa.gov.au/planning-information-sheets



Such application for Review must be made not more than twenty eight

(28) days after the date of this determination via the form available

from the State Administrative Tribunal (copies available from the State

Administrative Tribunal, at Level 4, 12 St Georges Terrace, Perth, or

GPO Box U1991, Perth, WA, 6845, or www.sat.justice.wa.gov.au or

from Council's offices), and should be accompanied by the relevant fee

detailed in Schedule 18 of the State Administrative Tribunal

Regulations 2004.

W. If the development the subject of this approval is not substantially

commenced within a period of 4 years from the date of this letter, the

approval shall lapse and be of no further effect. Where an approval has

lapsed, no development shall be carried out without the further

approval of the responsible authority having first been sought and

obtained.

B) Advise the submitters and the Western Australian Planning Commission of the

Council’s decision in this regard.

Moved Cr C M Wielinga



COMMITTEE - Strategic Planning COUNCIL MEETING 22 JUNE 2020



2.1 - STRUCTURE PLAN RECOMMENDATION TO WAPC - LOT 9006 REILLY ROAD

AND LOT 9005 WRIGHT ROAD, HARRISDALE

WARD

: RANFORD In Brief:

CLE Town Planning + Design lodged a

Structure Plan for Lot 9006 Reilly Road

and Lot 9005 Wight Road Harrisdale, in

accordance with the ‘Urban

Development’ zoning and the

‘Development Area 25’ provisions of the

City’s Town Planning Scheme No.4.

The Structure Plan proposes a Residential

land use with densities ranging from R25

and pockets of R40 around the two

proposed Public Open Space areas, which

are located within the north-western

corner and south-eastern corner.

The Structure Plan was advertised to the

public and State Government agencies for

28 days, from 06/01/2020 to 03/02/2020.

The City received 45 landowner

submissions and 7 utility and State

Government agency submissions.

Recommend that Council resolve to

forward the Structure Plan to the WAPC,

recommending final approval, subject to

several modifications.

FILE No.

: M/190/20

DATE

: 27 May 2020

REF

: AR

RESPONSIBLE

MANAGER

: EDDS

APPLICANT : CLE Town Planning +

Design

LANDOWNERS : Sytka Pty Ltd &

Carey Baptist College

Inc

SUBJECT LAND : Lots 9006 & 9005 Reilly

Road, Harrisdale

MRS ZONING/

RESERVATION

: Urban

TPS No.4

ZONING

: Urban Development

Development Area 25

Tabled Items

Nil.

Decision Type





Quasi-judicial The decision directly affects a person’s rights or interests and requires


natural justice.


Nil




2.5.1.1 Implement the Local Planning Strategy recommendations through amendments to

TPS No.4, Structure Plans, Planning Policies and strategies.

2.5.1.3 Deliver key strategic planning projects and strategies.

Legal Implications


Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015


Town Planning Scheme No.4

Environmental Protection Act 1986

Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (Commonwealth) 1999

Regional Land Use Policy Implications

Perth and Peel @ 3.5 million - South Metropolitan Peel sub-regional planning

framework (2018)

Southern River / Forrestdale / Brookdale / Wungong District Structure Plan (2001)

(District Structure Plan)

State Planning Policy 2.0: Environment and Natural Resources Policy

State Planning Policy 3.0: Urban Growth Settlement

State Planning Policy 3.7: Planning in Bushfire Prone Areas

State Planning Policy 5.4: Road and Rail Noise

Liveable Neighbourhoods (WAPC 2009; 2015 draft)



Local Biodiversity Strategy


Nil

Consultation

1. Development Control Unit and City Directorates

2. Adjoining/nearby landowners (Refer to Plan of Advertising Extent)

3. State Government agencies and utility service providers (Refer to Schedule of

Submissions)

BACKGROUND

Southern River / Forrestdale / Brookdale / Wungong District Structure Plan (2001)

Lot 9006 Reilly Road (formerly known as Lot 1001 Wright Road) was initially identified for

urban development in the Southern River / Forrestdale / Brookdale / Wungong District

Structure Plan (2001) (DSP). The DSP was the major strategic planning and community

consultation study the WAPC conducted to plan a large portion of the City of Armadale’s

western growth areas (now known as Harrisdale, Piara Waters, Haynes, Hilbert and

Forrestdale).



North Forrestdale Structure Plan First Stage (2005) The Primary School site was previously set aside on the eastern half of Lot 9006 by the North

Forrestdale First Stage Structure Plan (2005). This also identified requirements for an

additional flora survey and an additional Noise Assessment study in order to determine the

structural layout and development over the portion of Lot 9006 located west of the Primary

School site. These additional planning requirements were needed to ensure noise impacts

from operating kennels could be appropriately managed for residential development and to

ensure vegetation assessments had provided sufficient certainty that no Declared Rare Flora

existed on Lot 9006.

Planning Requirements The additional planning assessments required under the District Structure Plan require that a

separate Structure Plan be prepared which resulted in the current proposal. Since 2004, the

District Structure Plan implementation has been ongoing through rezoning, structure

planning, Developer Contribution Plan (DCP No.3) and subdivision plans including the

following:

Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1072/33 (2004) transferred Lot 9006 to the

‘Urban Deferred’ zone in the rezoning of the North Forrestdale First Stage from ‘Rural’

to ‘Urban/Urban Deferred’ zone (now Harrisdale);

Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1336/27 (2018) transferred Lot 9006 from

the ‘Urban Deferred’ zone to the ‘Urban’ zone and WAPC correspondence (6 February

2018) advised that future structure planning should address environmental attributes

including that:

suitable vegetation be retained within Public Open Space (POS) areas,

particularly where vegetation is contiguous with adjacent land;

mature trees be retained in verge and median areas; and

the potential to retain vegetation within the Primary School site is to be

determined by the Department of Education.

TPS Scheme Amendment No.190 (2004) rezoned Lot 9006 from ‘General Rural’ to

‘Urban Development’ zone as part of the North Forrestdale First Stage (initially zoned

under Town Planning Scheme No.2);

The North Forrestdale First Stage Structure Plan (2005) identified the eastern portion of

Lot 9006 for the future Primary School (currently being constructed), however, the

western portion of Lot 9006 was identified as requiring an additional flora survey and

an additional Noise Assessment study, prior to development and before an appropriate

landuse (zone) could be identified for the western portion of the lot via a separate

Structure Plan to be prepared (refer to the current proposal);

WAPC Subdivision 156256 (May 2018) approved subdivision of Lot 9006 into two (2)

lots to facilitate delivery of the Primary School on the eastern portion of Lot 9006;

Development Approval (November 2019) was granted for construction of the Primary

School through a Metro East Joint Development Assessment Panel (JDAP) approval;



WAPC Subdivision 158712 (March 2020) approved subdivision of the western

proposed residential lot to create 2 (two) parcels of POS and commencement of site

works, including land clearing, which is generally in accordance with the location of

POS shown on the proposed Structure Plan. The City did not support this application.

Please refer to the attached Subdivision Approval Plans.

DETAILS OF PROPOSAL

The current Structure Plan proposal for Lot 9006 Reilly Road (subject proposal) has a total

area of 10.01ha of currently vacant land with pockets of vegetation along the northern corner

and southern portion of the site. It includes a small portion of Lot 9005 Wright Road (Carey

Baptist College) along the south-western corner. The Structure Plan area is bounded by Carey

Baptist College to the west, ‘General Rural’ lots along the northern boundary, the Primary

School site (being constructed in 2020-1) within the eastern portion of Lot 9006 and Reilly

Road along the southern boundary.

The Structure Plan proposes Residential zoned lots spanning east and west with the majority

of the lots having a base density coding of R25, and R40 density lots adjacent to Public Open

Space. The Structure Plan area has an estimated yield of 85 to 95 dwellings, with an

estimated dwelling yield of 24.6 dwellings per hectare.

The two Public Open Space areas, which have already been approved by WAPC Subdivision

158712, are proposed:

o along the south western corner of site, on the corner of Reilly Road and the new road

dividing the Primary School lot from the balance of Lot 9006 (created by the previous

WAPC subdivision approval): and

o along the north eastern comer of the structure plan area, where vegetation is contiguous

with adjacent land, as required by the WAPC in the aforementioned advice dated 6

February 2018 (refer to Comment section below and relevant discussion of the Federal

approval to clear Banksia Woodland vegetation and the requirement to retain 4000m2 in

accordance with the application).

The Structure Plan application (as advertised) includes the following component documents:

Structure Plan Map

Structure Plan Report (Part 1 and Part 2)

Environmental Assessment Report (includes details of the Federal Environmental

Protection & Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 approval for land clearing of

Banksia Woodland associated with residential development and bushfire protection)

Landscape Management Plan

Bushfire Management Plan

Transport Assessment

Noise Management Plan

Local Water Management Strategy

Engineering Service Report



COMMENT

Public Advertising

The Structure Plan was advertised for 28 days from 6 January 2020 until 3 February 2020 by

means of signs on site, notifications to government/service agencies, advertisement in the

West Australian newspaper, information on the City’s website and letters to affected and

nearby landowners. At the close of advertising, the City received:

Total No. of public submissions received : 45

No. of submissions of conditional support/no objection or comments only : 10

No. of submissions of objection from within the Armadale municipality : 33

No. of submissions of objection from outside the municipality : 2

Total No. of Agency submissions received : 7

No. of submissions of conditional support/no objection or comments only : 6


Refer to Confidential Submitter Plan and Schedule of Submissions attached to this report.

Agency objections were received from the Department of Fire and Emergency Services in

relation to the proposed Bushfire Management Plan. Comments raising concerns with the

proposed land clearing were also provided by the Department of Water Environmental

Regulations and the Department of Biodiversity Conservation and Attractions. Key issues

raised in the submissions of objection are discussed below. Please refer to the Schedule of

Submissions for responses to the main issues in the submissions.

Issue 1 – Land Clearing

Landowners nearby and the Department of Water Environmental Regulations, along with the

Department of Biodiversity Conservation and Attractions raised concerns with the clearing of

the Banksia Woodland within the residential portion of Lot 9006 and the Primary School site.

Landowners were also not supportive of the Federal Government’s conditions of approval

under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC) that

required the developer to fully fund the purchase of Banksia Woodland located outside of the

City of Armadale. The developer was required to provide this funding directly to the

Department of Biodiversity Conservation and Attractions (details are further discussed

below).

Comment

The Federal Department of the Environment and Energy (DEE) working closely with the

State Government’s Department of Biodiversity Conservation and Attractions to determine

where offsets acquisitions should be located, providing protection and management of

otherwise threatened Banksia Woodland vegetation. Unfortunately, the Local Government

does not have any input or role in determining where the offset funding is spent when it

comes to Federal DEE clearing approvals.

It is noted the Federal environmental legislation is entirely separate legislation to the Western

Australian Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015 under

which the City is required to advertise and consider the Structure Plan application.

Notwithstanding, the Structure Plan is in accord with the DEE clearing approval and the POS

allocated to protect existing vegetation.



It is noted that the WAPC also assessed vegetation of regional importance through its

planning Bush Forever (2000) study including the now Harrisdale area. This resulted in the

setting aside of large areas of land for conservation purposes including bushlands and

wetlands in the Forrestdale, Harrisdale and Southern River localities. Bush Forever resulted

in the protection of hundreds of hectares of land in the City of Armadale for environmental

conservation, including privately owned land and government lands. Over time, reservations

and Special Control Areas have been put in place in the MRS and Local Planning Schemes to

protect these sites for future public acquisition or ceding by developers as part of negotiated

planning solutions or in some cases by reallocation of purpose on existing crown reserves.

Protection of vegetation through Structure Planning

Lot 9006 has been zoned Urban Development under the City’s TPS and the Primary School

site has been set aside by the North Forrestdale First Stage Structure Plan since 2005. This

Structure Plan also set aside the high priority environmental areas within the area for

conservation and recreation as POS parkland protected by TPS Reservation. These

environmental areas included over 7 hectares of high priority wetland and wetland buffer area

and vegetation. This is now managed by the City for environmental protection and

conservation and recreation purposes.

Two Conservation Category Wetland (CCW) areas were set aside from development in the

Structure Plan including one 2.5 ha parkland area and another 5.5 ha area both comprising of

a core Conservation Category Wetland and buffer area including native vegetation. The

smaller CCW located south-east of “Bakers House” was acquired by the Developer

Contribution Plan and subsequently became “Jim and Alma Baker Park”. The “Bakers

House” heritage homestead was itself also acquired and restored for use by the community

through the First Stage Structure Plan by the mechanism of Developer Contribution Plan’s

(No.3) pooled infrastructure funds. DCP No.3 remains funded through contributions made

by all land developers in the DCP catchment, inclusive of the current developer of Lot 9006

Reilly Road.

The second 5.5 ha parcel comprising the core CCW and buffer of wetland and native

vegetation was identified in the Structure Plan to be set aside from development and was

subsequently ceded by the subdivider in compliance with the Structure Plan. The larger

wetland is now known as “Heronwood Reserve”. The North Forrestdale First Stage Structure

Plan also provided for an additional 6 ha of “Living Stream” parkland providing for

environmental, water management and recreation functions including a central multipurpose

corridor providing movement of avian and aquatic biota across the landscape as well as social

recreational functions for residents.

Application for land clearing under the EPBC Act

The Banksia Woodland vegetation on Lot 9006 is listed as a ‘Threatened Ecological

Community’ under the Federal Government Environment Protection and Biodiversity

Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). As it is a vegetation community considered to have

National Environmental Significance, any impacts on Banksia Woodlands above the

threshold values, such as clearing for residential development are classed as a “Controlled

Action” under the EPBC Act. The Banksia Woodland vegetation on Lot 9006 is above the

threshold condition and area size values that required the Federal Government’s approval for

clearing and development. The landowner accordingly lodged an application under the EPBC

Act to the Federal Department of Environment and Energy (DEE) for land clearing

associated with residential development and bushfire protection in 2016.



The EPBC application sought Federal Government approval to clear approximately 6.3ha of

remnant native vegetation within the western (residential) portion of the subject site including

4.66 ha of Banksia Woodland Threatened Ecological Community. The application proposed

the retention of approximately 0.4 ha of the Banksia Woodland vegetation in POS.

On 17 March 2019, the Federal Government granted EPBC Act approval, which included

approval conditions, including a requirement for the developer to provide financial offset

contributions to compensate for the loss of Banksia Woodland pursuant to the development

of the site. The EPBC approval limited the Banksia Woodland clearing to 4.66 ha maximum

with conditions as follows:

1. The approval holder must not clear more than 4.66 hectares of Banksia Woodlands

TEC within the project area.

2. To compensate for the loss of Banksia Woodland TEC, the approval holder must:

a. make a financial contribution to DBCA to fully fund the purchase and

management for conservation of 13 hectares of Banksia Woodland TEC at Lot

102 Wannamal Road South (Cullalla); and

b. make a financial contribution to DBCA to fully fund the purchase and

management for conservation of an additional offset site(s) that contains a

minimum of 56 hectares of Banksia Woodlands TEC in very good to excellent

condition.

The City is advised that the financial contribution to fund the above has been made to the

DBCA. It is noted that the Federal DEE has an active compliance audit program that ensures

its approvals are fully compliant with the approval conditions. The City understands that the

offset land at Wannamal Road South is in the Shire of Gingin vicinity, located north and

outside of the Metropolitan Area. The City would prefer to protect vegetation within its

District.

Protection of vegetation on Lot 9006

The WAPC subdivision approval on 16 March 2020 proposed to create two Public Open

Space (POS) areas within the residential portion of the subject site, as shown on the draft

Reilly Road Structure Plan Map. The north-western corner 4000m2 POS area is intended to

retain the existing vegetation in accordance with the DEE approval under the EPBC. This

new environmental parkland adds to the extensive area of vegetated parklands available to

the Harrisdale community.

The second POS area is located along the southern boundary to Reilly Road and the new

central subdivision road. Under the Reilly Road Structure Plan Landscape Concept Plan, the

southern POS has limited capacity for retention of vegetation but will provide opportunity for

active recreation with the installation of playground equipment and retention of storm water

drainage from the residential portion of the structure plan area.

The subdivision works involving clearing of the site in accordance with the DEE approval

and cut and fill works related to preparing the adjoining Primary School site are currently

progressing. It is noted that the City had recommended to the WAPC that the subdivision

application be deferred pending the final outcomes of the Structure Plan and submissions

process to be considered by Council and then the WAPC. However, the WAPC proceeded to

issue the approval prior to the determination of the Structure Plan.



Recommendation:

It is recommended that the objection not be supported.

Issue 2 – Noise Bund

Landowners raised the following objections to the proposed 6m high noise bund that runs

along the entire length of the proposed residential and Primary School northern boundary:

Visually amenity impact on the adjoining Hatch Court properties.

Dust/soil being blown from the noise bund onto adjoining properties.

Noise bund encroaching on the vegetation within the north-western corner that is

required to be retained in accordance with the DEE clearing approval.

Lack of detail provided regarding material, management, and footprint.

In addition to the above, the Department of Education advised that the noise bund should not

be built within the new Primary School site.

Comment

As part of discussions between the applicant and the City, the applicant has advised that the

noise bund will be removed and replaced with quiet house design requirements for new

dwellings located in close proximity to the kennels. The Noise Management Plan and

Structure Plan Report is capable of being amended following the City’s recommendation of

the Structure Plan to the WAPC and prior to the WAPC determining the Structure Plan.

Recommendation

It is recommended that the objection be supported.

Issue 3 – Noise levels

Nearby landowners raised concerns that the noise emitted from the kennels within Hatch

Court would impact the new residents within the Reilly Road Structure Plan area.

Comment

It is noted the number of dog kennels in the adjacent area has declined over time as properties

have been sold, often for land banking pursuant to ultimate urban development in the Urban

Deferred and Urban MRS zones abutting. Refer to the attached confidential active kennel

license plan. Kennel licenses within the Hatch Court area are accordingly progressively

phasing out through non-renewal of non-operational licenses, once properties are on sold.

The Structure Plan Noise Management Plan proposes that notices will be required on title for

all new lots in close proximity to the kennels, advising landowners of the potential noise

impact from nearby kennels. Additionally, the Noise Management Plan will be amended to

require new residential dwellings in close proximity to remaining active kennels to build to

quite house design standard.

Recommendation




Issue 4 – Traffic

Landowners have objected to the potential traffic on Reilly Road caused by the increase in

residents within the Structure Plan area and from the new Primary School. In addition,

landowners also had concerns with parking overflowing from the new Primary School onto

Reilly Road and the local road network within the existing southern residential area.

Comment

The City’s Technical Services consider that the Structure Plan Transport Assessment

demonstrates that traffic volumes can be appropriately managed through three separate

intersections into the residential site and one intersection into the primary school site from

Reilly Road. Intersections into the residential portion are proposed through the perimeter road

along the western boundary, a cap road along the central portion of the residential site and the

subdivisional road between the school site and the residential portion. Traffic will be

dispersed through three local roads that run parallel to Reilly Road and connect to the western

boundary perimeter road and the central subdivisional road. Once the abutting northern Hatch

Court area has been developed, through future Structure Planning and subdivision, the central

road will allow for vehicle traffic to connect to Hatch Court, Shepherd Court and Ranford

Road, thus alleviating traffic on Wright Road and Reilly Road. Please refer to attached

Concept Context Plan.

Additionally, since the 2001 District Structure Plan and the 2005 North Forrestdale Stage 1

Structure Plan, the development of Reilly Road and the existing surrounding road networks

has taken into consideration, that the subject site was planned for a new Primary School and

residential development.

Parking for the new Primary School is addressed as part of the 2019 JDAP approval. The

Primary School proposes onsite parking bays, kiss and drive lane and embayment’s located

along the new central subdivision road. Any parking occurring within the verges of

residences during school pick up and drop off times will be referred to the City’s Rangers

Services for action and monitoring.

Recommendation


Issue 5 – Proposed lots and dwellings inconsistent with surrounding area

Landowners objected to the smaller lots being developed in the area as they are considered to

be inconsistent with the existing residential area to the south of the subject site.

Comment

The Structure Plan provides a variety of lot and dwelling sizes in accordance with Element 3,

Requirement 2 and 4 of Liveable Neighbourhoods. The City is supportive of the majority of

the lots having a density coding of R25 with higher density coding of R40 fronting POS

areas, which is consistent with the density coding found in the surrounding areas under the

North Forrestdale Stage 1 Structure Plan.

Recommendation

It is recommended that the objection is not supported.



Issue 6 – Department of Fire and Emergency Services objection to the Bushfire

Management Plan

The Department of Fire Emergency Services (DFES) does not support the grouped housing

lot along the northern boundary being located within a BAL40 / BALFZ rated area due to the

bushfire risk from the retained vegetation within the northern corner POS and the vegetation

found within the adjoining northern rural lots. Under State Planning Policy 3.7 – Planning in

Bushfire Prone Areas, residential development within Structure Plans should be located in

areas with a bushfire rating of BAL29 or below.

In order to reduce the BAL rating within the residential block, and given the vegetation

cannot be cleared or reduced to a manageable level within the northern POS, DFES

recommends that a road should be provided between the northern POS and the residential

block to create hazard separation and to improve emergency vehicle access in the event of a

bushfire.

Comment

The City is supportive of including a new north/south public road between the northern POS

and the residential block, as it also provides an improved interface, surveillance and access to

the POS in accordance with Element 4, Requirement 12 of Liveable Neighbourhoods. This

can be achieved through a condition of approval should the structure plan be supported.

Recommendation

It is recommended that the objection is supported.

Issue 7 – Dieback

Landowners raised concerns regarding potential dieback within the northern retained

vegetation POS location and that the POS should be moved to where higher quality

vegetation is located.

Comment

The City is supportive of the proposed location of the northern POS, as it addresses the

WAPC requirements in its letter dated 6 February 2018, which recommended that the

retained vegetation provide a potential connection with the POS located along the southern

boundary of the Shepherd Court Structure Plan and the existing vegetation within Carey

Baptist College. The Environmental Management Plan acknowledges that dieback is

affecting the proposed northern POS retained vegetation, but it also found dieback currently

covering over half of the site including the south east, with dieback spreading to the north

west. Please refer to the attached Concept Context Plan.

Through further discussion between the applicant and the City, the applicant has also advised

that it will investigate the potential for retaining more vegetation within the southern POS.

This can be investigated further and an amended Landscape Concept Plan can be provided for

the Southern POS once the City’s recommendation has been forwarded to the WAPC.

In addition to the recommendations minimising the spread of dieback through the waterways

and surrounding area, the City recommends that Part 1 of the Structure Plan be amended to

include a requirement for dieback hygiene measures to be implemented and observed during

subdivision works.

Recommendation




Issue 8 - Construction of Reilly Road roundabout and Primary School site

Several objections were received from adjoining landowners raising issue with the traffic

caused from the construction of the school site and the new 3 way roundabout along the

intersection of Reilly Road and the new central subdivision road. Landowners also raised

objections with the construction of the roundabout and school site occurring prior to

landowners being notified.

Comment

The eastern portion of the site has been zoned Public Purpose – Primary School since it was

identified on the 2005 North Forestdale Stage 1 Structure Plan. The construction of the new

Reilly Road roundabout and school site is in accordance with the WAPC’s subdivision

approval for 2 lots, which was approved by the WAPC in 2018.

Recommendation

It is recommended that the objection is not supported.

ANALYSIS

The Structure Plan has been assessed against the State Government’s planning framework

and requirements. In addition to the issues raised in the submissions above, the City provides

the following comments.

Public Open Space

The Structure Plan provides 2 separate POS areas with a total area equating to approximately

10% of the developable area in accordance with the WAPC’s Liveable Neighbourhoods

Policy. These areas are consistent with the recent WAPC subdivision approval, which has

determined the final POS allocation predetermining the outcome notwithstanding the

Structure Plan was still under consideration.

The northern POS is 4000m2 and upon request the applicant has provided additional

information in the form of an amended overall Landscape Plan illustrating how the northern

POS can be used for passive recreation. The amended Overall Landscape Concept Plan now

shows:

Location of existing fire breaks;

1.5m crushed limestone paths that weave around the perimeter of the POS;

Signs distributed along the pathway providing information on the local flora and fauna;

and

Location of conservation wired fencing along the southern, eastern and northern POS

boundaries.

The City appreciates the additional information, however, as per the City’s original request to

the applicant, the City recommends a separate Landscape Concept Plan for the northern POS

be provided in the amended Structure Plan documents to clearly identify:

The total areas for retained vegetation, firebreaks and limestone paths;

Whether banking/retaining is required along the southern and eastern boundary of the

POS to allow for the construction of the local road and residential lots; and

Potential for additional paths weaving through the center of the POS in order to

enhance the passive reactional attributes of the site.



Given that the State Government has already approved the subdivision prior to consideration

of the Structure Plan and public submissions to create the two POS areas and enabling the

land outside of the POS areas to be cleared, the City recommends that potential for additional

vegetation provided within the southern POS area be investigated.

The proposed southern POS is located on the corner of Reilly Road and the new central

subdivisional road. The POS area is approximately 2200m2 and provides:

active recreation through the use of various playground equipment within the north

western portion;

passive recreation with winding paths through vegetated areas and turf area;

an undercover picnic bench along the northern boundary; and

landscaped stormwater drainage swales within the southern and eastern portion of the

POS area. Please refer to the attached Landscape Concept Plans, which will be assessed

by the City’s Parks Department.

Through the advertisement process, the applicant has modified the Landscape Concept Plan

to include additional winding path through the centre of the vegetated area and along the

western boundary to provide opportunity for the adjoining residential nested lots to access the

POS.

The City is supportive of the southern POS, however, once the City’s recommendation has

been forwarded to the WAPC, the City will keep liaising with the applicant and the WAPC

on the possibility of further retention of vegetation within the southern POS.

Drainage

The applicant has submitted a Local Water Management Strategy (‘LWMS’) prepared by

drainage consultants RPS. The LWMS has already been supported by the City’s Technical

Services and State Government agencies. The LWMS facilitated approval of the subdivision

creating two (2) lots and the central subdivisional road so that construction of the Primary

School site could begin.

The LWMS provides modelling and management solutions for attenuation and conveyance of

drainage in and through the residential and Primary School portions of the Structure Plan

area. The stormwater for the residential portion will be conveyed from the northern boundary

and will run down through a drainage pipe system into the southern POS drainage swale

which will connect into the Balannup Drain. Rainfall from the 1 year event will be retained

within a vegetated basin along western boundary, with the larger 1:5 and 1:100 events being

retained within the entire western portion of the POS, outside of the playground and sheltered

picnic areas.

All rainfall from the Primary School site will be retained within bio retention basins along the

southern boundary of the Primary School and will connect into the Balannup Drain for all

1:100 year rainfall events.



Traffic

The existing 3 way roundabout along the intersection of Reilly Road and Mingara Avenue

allows for vehicles to move east and west and southern direction. As part of the Structure

Plan proposal, the roundabout will be extended to be a 4 way roundabout allowing vehicles

to exit the site onto Reilly Road and Mingara Avenue. However, vehicles will only be able to

enter the site when traveling east through a new intersection located just before the

roundabout along the Carey Baptist College Boundary. Therefore the site will not be

accessible from the roundabout for vehicles travelling along Mingara Avenue and vehicles

travelling west along Reilly Road.

The City’s Technical Services recommends that the roundabout be amended to show the

proposed access street intersecting with the existing roundabout at 90 degrees to allow for full

movement in and out of the site from Reilly Road and Mingara Avenue, as it will improve

access to the site and help alleviate traffic along Reilly Road during peak school times.

The applicant argues that this should be reviewed further as part of the subdivision process,

however, the City recommends that this should be addressed prior to the WAPC determining

the Structure Plan due to the potential redesign and reduction of the south-western residential

block. The Structure Plan amendments can be addressed once the City has provided its

recommendation to the WAPC.

The 8m cap road along Reilly Road, provides vehicle access for the lots that front Reilly

Road and the nested POS residential lots. The cap road only allows for one way movement

through a separate access point and egress point along Reilly Road. Given the potential traffic

and that underground infrastructure is unable to be installed within a 9m laneway, the City

recommends widening the cap road and laneway to be an 11.5m mews. Please refer to the

attached Overall Landscape Concept Plan, which provides an indicative road layout for the

Structure Plan area.

Again, the applicant argues that this should be reviewed at subdivision stage, however given

the potential reduction and redesign of the residential block along Reilly Road and the nested

lots, the City recommends the structure plan be amended once the City’s recommendation has

been forwarded to the WAPC.

OPTIONS

The following options are available to Council:

1. Resolve to recommend that the WAPC approve the Structure Plan with or without

modifications.

2. Resolve to recommend that the WAPC refuse the Structure Plan and provide reasons

for its decision.



CONCLUSION

The Structure Plan has been assessed together with submissions received and with the

recommended modifications it is able to guide further subdivision and development in the

area, consistent with the WAPC’s decisions. The Structure Plan has been advertised in

accordance with the requirements of the Regulations, with the Structure Plan considered to be

satisfactorily progressed for the purposes of Council’s recommendation to the WAPC subject

to the landscaping, roundabout intersection and road width issues being addressed.

The decisions by the WAPC to approve subdivision of the western portion of Lot 9006 and

the Federal DEE to approve clearing and development under the EPBC Act are important

factors shaping the final outcomes and the Council’s consideration of these issues. The City

will also continue to liaise with the WAPC, DFES and the applicant to ensure that supporting

technical studies/management plans are prepared and completed to the City’s satisfaction.

It is recommended that Council recommend to the WAPC that it approve the Structure Plan

subject to modifications (including agency and City endorsement of outstanding management

plans). It is also recommended that Council endorse further advice to the WAPC on requiring

Structure Plan finalization before subdivision approvals and the relevant Federal and State

Agencies on involving Local Governments in the matter of land acquisitions for

environmental offsets.

In accordance with the above report and attachments, Option 1 is recommended.

ATTACHMENTS

1.⇩ Site Plan - Lot 9006 Reilly Road, Harrisdale

2.⇩ Structure Plan - Lot 9006 Reilly Road, Harrisdale

3.⇩ Schedule of Submissions - Reilly Road Structure Plan

4.⇩ Local Government - Schedule of Modifications - Reilly Road Structure Plan

5.⇩ North Forrestdale Structure Plan 1 - Lot 9006 Reilly Road, Harrisdale

6.⇩ North Forrestdale Structure Plan 2 - Lot 9006 Reilly Road, Harrisdale

7.⇩ District Structure Plan 1 - Lot 9006 Reilly Road, Harrisdale

8.⇩ District Structure Plan 2 - Lot 9006 Reilly Road, Harrisdale

9.⇩ Subdivision Concept Plan 1 - Lot 9006 Reilly Road, Harrisdale

10.⇩ Subdivision Concept Plan 2 - Lot 9006 Reilly Road, Harrisdale

11.⇩ Concept Context Plan - Lot 9006 Reilly Road, Harrisdale

12.⇩ Landscape Concept Plan - Lot 9006 Reilly Road, Harrisdale

13.⇩ Southern POS Landscape Concept Plan - Lot 9006 Reilly Road, Harrisdale 14. Confidential Submitter Plan - Lot 9006 Reilly Road, Harrisdale - This matter is considered

to be confidential under Section 5.23(2) (b) of the Local Government Act, as it deals with

the matter relates to the personal affairs of a person

15. Confidential Schedule of Submitters Addresses - Reilly Road Structure Plan - This matter is



16. Confidential - Active Kennel License - Lot 9006 Reilly Road, Harrisdale - This matter is





Committee Discussion

Committee discussed concerns that the Federal Environmental approval offsets were being

used in areas or localities a significant distance from where the vegetation that has been

removed. Committee recommended amendments to the Schedule of Modifications to the

Structure Plan to include dieback spraying/injections, relocation of paths and conservation

fencing of the northern POS area

RECOMMEND D37/6/20

That Council:

1. Endorse the comments made in this report, the Schedule of Submissions and the

Schedule of Modifications (as amended) attached to this report in response to

public comments, agency referral and assessment of the Structure Plan.

2. Pursuant to Schedule 2 Clause 20 of the Planning and Development (Local

Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015:

a) Forward this report and attachments (including Schedule of Submissions

and Schedule of Modifications) to the Western Australian Planning

Commission; and,

b) Recommend that the Western Australian Planning Commission approve the

proposed Structure Plan subject to the modifications listed in the Schedule

of Modifications attached to this report.

3. Advise submitters of its decision at the time that the Structure Plan is granted

final approval by the WAPC.

4. Advise the WAPC that it is preferable that subdivision applications are not

approved when the Local Government has not provided its recommendation on

the Structure Plan application. As prior approval of subdivision limits the ability

for the Local Government to consider public submissions and limits the range of

potential outcomes the Structure Plan is able to address.

5. Advise the Federal Department of the Environment and Energy, State

Government Departments of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions and

Water and Environmental Regulation, that the City would prefer offset funds

obtained from residential land developers within the City of Armadale, to be used

to acquire land or provide environmental management of equivalent areas of

Threatened Ecological Community or natural vegetation located within the City

of Armadale or adjoining Local Governments.

Moved Cr J H Munn




2.2 - PROPOSED LOCAL PLANNING POLICY PLN 4.1 THE DESIGN OF

INDUSTRIAL ESTATES

Cr Butterfield declared a non-financial interest in this item as she is a member on the Metropolitan

Redevelopment Authority Armadale Land Redevelopment Committee and a Member of DevelopmentWA. As a

consequence, there may be a perception that her impartiality on the following matter may be affected, but

declared that she would disregard this association, consider the matter on its merits and vote accordingly.

WARD

: ALL In Brief:

At the meeting held on 24 February 2020

Council resolved to advertise Local

Planning Policy PLN 4.1.

One submission was received.

Recommend that Council adopt the

modified Local Planning Policy as shown

in the Attachment to this report.

FILE No.

: - M/266/20

DATE

: 27 May 2020

REF

: BH

RESPONSIBLE

MANAGER

: EDDS

Tabled Items

Nil.

Decision Type

Legislative The decision relates to general local government legislative functions such as




☐ Quasi-judicial The decision directly affects a person’s rights or interests and requires


natural justice.


Nil.


2.1 Long term planning and development that is guided by a balance between economic,

social and environmental objectives.

2.1.1 Review, update and implement the City’s Town Planning Scheme, taking into account

the Local Biodiversity Strategy and other environmental considerations.

Legal Implications




PLN 4.1 The Design of Industrial Sites and Estates.


Nil.



Consultation

As the main amendments to the policy are related to including planning development

provisions for lots located within Forrestdale Business Park East (FBPE), letters inviting

comments on the proposed amendments were sent to all landowners within FBPE. In

addition, the proposal was advertised in the “Examiner” and on the City’s website.

BACKGROUND

At its meeting of 24 February 2020, Council resolved to amend Local Planning Policy PLN4.1-

The Design of Industrial Estates and to advertise the proposal for a period of 28 days in

accordance with in accordance with Schedule 2, Part 2, Clause 4 of the Planning and

Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.

PLN4.1 currently applies to all industrial areas within the City’s Town Planning Scheme.

Forrestdale Business Park East (FBPE) is the industrial area bounded by Tonkin Highway,

Ranford Road and Armadale Road. It is currently under DevelopmentWA jurisdiction and is

proposed to be normalised to the City in June 2020. Amendment No.107 is currently in

progress to reintroduce the FBPE in the City’s Town Planning Scheme No.4 (adopted by

Council at its January 2020 meeting). There is also a current MRS amendment in progress to

zone DevelopmentWA areas within the City of Armadale to bring them into the WA planning

framework at Normalisation.

Under the DevelopmentWA planning framework, the Forrestdale Business Park East Design

Guidelines are in use. After assessment of the provisions in that document, it was determined

that rather than carrying across the Design Guidelines at Normalisation, a better planning

outcome would be to carry across the provisions that best facilitate optimum planning

outcomes for both FBPE and the wider industrial areas within the City.

DETAILS OF PROPOSAL

The main amendments to Policy PLN4.1-The Design of Industrial Sites and Estates are

related to including planning development provisions for lots located within FBPE

encapsulating provisions relating to:

Building setback

Existing industrial areas within the City to remain unchanged (7.5 metres front setback,

secondary street setback to be determined at the discretion of the City).

FBPE front setback minimum 15 metres, maximum 21 metres.

Minimum site cover

Existing industrial areas within the City to remain unchanged (no minimum site cover).

FBPE minimum site cover 20% of the lot area for lots up to 1,500m2.

FBPE minimum site cover of 300m2 for lots greater than 1,500m2.

Building design

A number of design elements have been added from the FBPE Design Guidelines

including building layout and massing concept, as well as articulation of buildings.



Vehicle access

Including provisions to ensure future subdivisions in FBPE align with planned road

layout, given the expiry of the Development WA’s FBPE Structure Plan.

Front fencing

Mandatory garrison style fencing within FBPE, encouraged within all other industrial

areas within the City.

Landscaping

FBPE lots to provide a 3 metre landscaping zone along all street frontages.

All other industrial areas within the City to provide a 2 metre landscaping zone along

all street frontages.

DevelopmentWA (DWA) do not require the landscaping of verges as part of a development

approval. The City has advocated for this requirement to apply for a number of years, like in

most planning policies and systems in WA, however DWA have not been prepared to impose

the requirement. This has caused a number of streetscape, drainage and tree coverage issues

for Forrestdale Business Park East. Clause 4.7.5 of the Policy PLN 4.1 proposes to require

the provision of a minimum of one 45 litre tree within the verge for every 10 metres of street

frontage as well as a minimum of one 45 litre tree for every four parking bays within the lot,

which is the requirement the City has imposed in its existing industrial areas.

It is noted that under Clause 4D.4.3 of the City’s Town Planning Scheme No.4 there is a

requirement of a 2 metre landscaping zone along the primary street frontage. At its meeting

on 25 May 2020 Council initiated TPS Amendment No.109 to include a provision for FBPE

lots to provide a 3 metre landscaping zone along all street frontages, as well as all other

industrial areas to provide a 2 metre landscaping zone along all street frontages.

Signage

All industrial areas within the City, including FBPE to comply with Council’s Policy

PLN4.2 – Advertisements – Signage.

Advertising of Local Planning Policy PLN 4.1

The proposed Local Planning Policy was advertised for 28 days from 12 March 2020 to 13

April 2020. Advertising was carried out by way of advertisements in the local Examiner

newspaper, including the policies in the “out for comment” section of the City’s website, and

by writing to all landholders in the FBPE area.

One submission was received.

Total No. of letters sent to residents/owners : 177

Total No. of submissions received : 1

No. of submissions of conditional support/no objection : 0


No. of submissions of general advice by Service Agencies : 0



COMMENT

Prior to preparing the proposed amendments to PLN4.1, a study into the DevelopmentWA

(MRA)’s FBPE Design Guidelines was undertaken. The Design Guidelines are very lengthy

and contain a large amount of information that sometimes makes it difficult to understand the

overall intent. The Design Guidelines incorporate requirements (ie subdivisions) that are

more appropriately considered by City of Armadale documents (ie Subdivision Guidelines).

It was determined that there were a number of provisions in the Design Guidelines that would

be beneficial to apply both to FBPE as well as the wider industrial areas within the City.

Therefore it is proposed to utilise the optimal sections to form part of assessment criteria

within an amended PLN4.1. This will assist the City to be able to promote higher quality

development within existing industrial areas in the City, while still ensuring the continued

high quality of development that is occurring within FBPE.

The Design Guidelines contained a number of concepts related to building design to promote

higher quality development such as building massing to ensure adjacent development

compliments existing development to create a more cohesive streetscape. Another important

aspect was the promotion of building articulation to create interest and interactivity along the

street frontage.

It was also noted that while a number of concepts within the Design Guidelines would benefit

the existing industrial areas within the City, some concepts would continue to apply only to

FBPE. For example, a 3m landscaping strip along street frontages is required in FBPE

however, it was deemed that this would be too difficult a target for other smaller industrial

lots to achieve in existing areas. Another example is related to fencing requirements. Lots

within FBPE are required to have garrison style fencing whereas this fencing will not be a

mandatory requirement within other industrial areas in the City. As FBPE is a new industrial

estate, it is important for fencing to be congruent with surrounding lots, whereas the existing

industrial areas within the City have varying fencing as per the City’s Local Law. The City

also did not include the maximum parking requirement of the Design Guidelines as this

requirement discourages businesses from determining their requirements for future growth

and would lead to future parking issues.

The proposed amendments to PLN4.1 will have positive benefits in relation to built form

outcomes for both FBPE as well as the existing industrial areas within the City.

The amended PLN 4.1 is aimed to take effect in the FBPE area upon normalisation to ensure

any new industrial applications within FBPE can be assessed under the new policy. This will

ensure the City can apply a consistent approach to applications and to complement existing

development within FBPE.

The proposed amendments will ensure that development applications within Industrial areas,

including FBPE, will have the necessary planning framework to be assessed to ensure

beneficial outcomes for the area as well as the wider City industrial areas.

As a result of the above amendments, it is recommended to advise DevelopmentWA that the

DWA’s FBPE Design Guidelines do not need to be normalised to the City.



Key Issues Raised by Submission

The submission supports the normalisation of the area back to the City due to various matters,

including the DWA’s FBP Design Guidelines. A summary of the submission received and

comment on the various points made is included in the Attachments. As a result of the

submission some minor amendments have been proposed to the policy including:

Amendments to some clauses to give further clarity for developers.

Minor administrative amendments.

A copy of the proposed amended Local Planning Policy is presented in the Attachments to

this report.

ANALYSIS

Schedule 2, Part 2, Clause 3 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes)

Regulations 2015 allows Council to prepare a Local Planning Policy which:

a) May apply generally or in respect of a particular class or classes of matters specified in

the policy;

b) May apply to the whole of the Scheme area or to part or parts of the Scheme area

specified in the policy; and

c) A local planning policy must be based on sound town planning principles and may

address either strategic or operational considerations in relation to the matters to

which the policy applies.

In this regard, the draft Local Planning Policy – PLN 4.1 has been prepared in accordance

with Deemed Provisions of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes)

Regulations 2015. Briefly, as outlined in the Planning and Development (Local Planning

Schemes) Regulations 2015, and the City’s Town Planning Scheme No.4 the procedures for

amendment of a Local Planning Policy are:

Once the City resolves to make amendments to a planning policy, the City must

advertise the proposed amended policy in a newspaper circulating in the scheme area,

with public submission period being not less than 21 days from the day on which the

notice of Local Planning Policy is published. The City may carry out such other

consultation as considered appropriate.

Council is then required to review the proposed amended policy in light of any

submissions made during the advertising period, and resolve to proceed (with or

without modifications), or not proceed with the amended Local Planning Policy.

If the Council resolves to proceed with the amended policy, the City must publish

notice of the amended policy in a newspaper circulating in the scheme are and if the

policy affects the interests of the Western Australian Planning Commission, forwarding

a copy of the Policy to the Commission.



OPTIONS

1. Council could resolve to adopt the policy and the modifications referred to above.

2. Council could choose not to adopt the modified policy.

CONCLUSION

Amendments to the Local Planning Policy PLN4.1 - The Design of Industrial Sites and

Estates will transfer/establish a necessary planning framework for the Forrestdale Business

Park East following normalisation and will assist the City in improving the quality of

development in the City’s existing Industrial areas. In this regard, Option 1 is recommended.

ATTACHMENTS

1.⇩ PLN 4.1 - The Design of Industrial Estates - Policy final with edits

2.⇩ PLN 4.1 - The Design of Industrial Estates - Policy final without edits

3.⇩ PLN 4.1 - The Design of Industrial Estates - Overview of Submissions Table

RECOMMEND D38/6/20

That Council:

1. Adopt the amended Local Planning Policy PLN 4.1 - The Design of Industrial

Estates modifications as shown in the Attachments.

2. Publish a notice in a newspaper circulating in the district stating that the

modifications to Local Planning Policy PLN 4.1 - The Design of Industrial Estates

has been adopted.

3. Advise DevelopmentWA and Western Australian Planning Commission that the

City does not need or support the normalisation of the DWA’s Forrestdale

Business Park Design Guidelines to the City for the reasons included in this report

and attachments.

Moved Cr C Frost



COMMITTEE - Scheme Amendments COUNCIL MEETING 22 JUNE 2020



3.1 - AMENDMENT NO.113 TO TPS 4 - REZONING LOT 3 ARMADALE RD & LOT

301 ANSTEY RD FORRESTDALE FROM URBAN DEVELOPMENT ZONE TO LOCAL

CENTRE ZONE

WARD

: Lake In Brief:

A request has been received for

Council to initiate an amendment to

rezone Lot 3 Armadale Road and

Lot 301 Anstey Road Forrestdale

from “Urban Development” zone to

“Local Centre” zone.

The purpose of the Amendment is

to facilitate the development of a

small Local Centre within the

Development Area in the short

term to address the needs of the

future residents in the precinct.

It is recommended that Council

initiate the proposed Scheme

amendment.

FILE No.

: - M/234/20

DATE

: 27 MAY 2020

REF

: MK

RESPONSIBLE

MANAGER

: EDDS

APPLICANT

: CLE Town Planning & Design

LANDOWNER

: Lot 3: G. Nelson & J. Wilson

Lot 301: Declare Investments

Pty Ltd

SUBJECT LAND

: Lot 3 (799) Armadale Road and

Lot 301 (12) Anstey Road,

Forrestdale

ZONING

MRS /

TPS No.4

:

:

MRS: Urban

TPS No.4: Urban Development

Tabled Items

Nil.

Decision Type

Legislative The decision relates to general local government legislative functions such as






natural justice.


Nil


2.1 Long term planning and development that is guided by a balance between economic,

social and environmental objectives.

2.1.1 Review, update and implement the City’s Town Planning Scheme, taking into account

the Local Biodiversity Strategy and other environmental considerations.



Legal Implications


Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015





Local Planning Policy PLN 5.1 Highway Development

Armadale Activity Centres Strategy Working Paper 2012


Nil.

Consultation

Development Control Unit.

If initiated, the scheme amendment will undergo a process of advertising for public

submissions in-accordance with the requirements of the Planning and Development (Local

Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.

BACKGROUND

Lot 3 Armadale Road and Lot 301 Anstey Road Forrestdale are currently zoned “Urban

Development” under Town Planning Scheme No.4 (TPS No.4). The subject properties are

located within the Anstey-Keane Urban Development Precinct. Both properties currently

contain residential dwellings and associated outbuildings.

A Structure Plan is required to be approved prior to the commencement of any development in

the “Urban Development” zone. A Structure Plan has been prepared for the majority of the

Anstey Keane Precinct on the eastern side of Anstey Road and is currently with the WAPC for

approval. However, none of the lots fronting Armadale Road (including Lot 3 and Lot 301) are

within that Structure Plan. Therefore, development of the proposed Local Centre could not occur

currently.

The subject property (and the remainder of the precinct) are included in proposed Development

Contribution Area No.4 via Amendment 102 to TPS No.4. Amendment 102 is currently

awaiting approval by the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) and the Hon.

Minister for Planning.

DETAILS OF PROPOSAL

The City has received a request to initiate an amendment to rezone Lot 3 Armadale Road and

Lot 301 Anstey Road from “Urban Development” zone to “Local Centre” zone.

The purpose of the amendment is to enable the development of a small commercial hub for the

Anstey Keane Precinct. A Development Concept is included in the Amendment

documentation showing how the site could develop as a Service Station with associated local

retail conveniences.



This Development Concept includes:

200m2 of floor area associated with a fuel station, including 10 fuel filling stations

(bowsers).

400m2 of floor area associated with other retail uses.

22 onsite (car) bays to support the retail uses.

The applicant advises that the purpose of this Development Concept is to provide one

possible scenario to demonstrate that the site can be reasonably supported as a ‘Local Centre’

zone. The Development Concept is supported by the following technical reports:

Retail Needs Assessment

Transport Impact Assessment

Bushfire Management Plan

Engineering Servicing Report

Acoustic Advice Note

The applicant’s justification for the proposed Local Centre zoning is summarised as follows:

(i) It will serve the needs of the growing trade area population within Forrestdale most

particularly that of the emerging Anstey Road Urban Precinct, with the small scale

offered by the site easily absorbed into the retail supply of the area;

(ii) It will have a minimal impact on any of the surrounding (existing and planned) retail

centres due to its size;

(iii) It will provide for the convenience-oriented needs of local residents;

(iv) It will provide for fuel and convenience-oriented needs of passing traffic; and

(v) It will create a node for local employment.

COMMENT

Development Control Unit (DCU)

A number of matters were raised by Technical Services with regard to upgrades needed to

Anstey Road and the Armadale Road access road to support the proposed development of a

Local Centre as well as servicing matters. These are discussed within the relevant sections of the

report relating to traffic impact and servicing.

Environmental Services advised that there are no mapped environmental values of

significance on or nearby the site and that no native vegetation within or adjacent to the site

would be impacted by the proposed development or bushfire mitigation. Retention of existing

mature trees (non-native) on the site or adjacent verges should be considered in the

development proposal.

Desirability of a Community Hub within the Anstey Keane Precinct

Amendment 113 will enable the development of a small local centre in the short term future to

provide a community hub for the developing Anstey Keane Precinct and existing residents

within the area including the Forrestdale townsite. The small size of the centre and the isolation

of the Anstey Keane Precinct from other residential areas in Harrisdale and Piara Waters means

that it will not compromise the viability of other centres existing or proposed within the area.



This is supported by the results of the Retail Sustainability Analysis provided with the

application which demonstrates that both economic and community benefits will be created

through the provision of a small centre aimed predominantly at serving the local community.

In undertaking this RNA, it was assumed that the local centre would comprise 200m2 floor

space associated with the Service Station with 400m2 of floor space supporting other retail

activities, consistent with the Development Concept.

The RNA found that with the expected population growth and demographic type within the

Anstey Keane Precinct and the wider Forrestdale surrounds (by the year 2031) there will be

demand for an increase in retail floor space of 26,800m2 (food, liquor and groceries) and

9,100m2 for food related services. In coming to this conclusion, the RNA considered the

number of planned and existing centres within the Forrestdale / Piara Water / Harrisdale

locality, finding that a number of these existing communities were already well serviced by

larger neighbourhood and district centres, meaning that the small scale of any local centre on

the subject site would pose no impact to these larger retail centres.

The nearest existing centre future residents of the precinct and existing residents in Forrestdale

are able to purchase convenience goods (such as bread and milk) is within the Forrestdale

Business Park 3km to the east (existing service station and convenience store) and the future

Piara Waters Shopping Centre on the corner of Nicholson Road and Armadale Road. A Local

Centre in the Anstey Keane Precinct will allow residents to potentially walk or ride their bikes to

the centre as an alternative to driving.

Transport Impact Assessment

A Transport Impact Assessment (TIA) was provided with the application and is based on the

Development Concept of a Service Station and Convenience store. The Development

Concept shows a number of vehicle access points into and out of the site on both Anstey

Road and the existing access road that provides vehicle access for properties fronting

Armadale Road. The TIA concludes that the surrounding road network can support the

proposed development concept on the site. However, as per the comments provided by the

Development Control Unit (DCU) access to/from the site will require more detailed

consideration including:

The need to upgrade the existing Armadale Road access road to both support increased

traffic volumes from that which currently occurs and to accommodate the heavy and

long trucks associated with the operation of a service station.

Main Roads Western Australia’s approval will be required for this development to use

the existing intersection to the Armadale Road Access Road.

The design for Anstey Road does not currently include deceleration/turning lanes to

access the development site and additional road widening may be needed to achieve these

additional requirements. This would potentially impact on the size of the development site.

When a Development Application is lodged in the future for a specific development on the

subject site, the traffic and access matters will be dealt with comprehensively including

consideration of the above issues. Appropriate conditions could be placed on the

development with regard to any road upgrades or widening that need to be implemented by

the developer.



The Scheme Amendment and any future Development Application will be referred to Main

Roads Western Australia (MRWA) for comment and the developer will also be required to

liaise directly with/obtain approval from MRWA for any modifications to the Armadale Road

access point required to facilitate the development.

The design of Anstey Road is currently being progressed by consultants engaged by Cedar

Woods, in consultation with the City, under a DCP 4 prefunding approval issued by the City.

Bushfire Risk

The Amendment Area is identified by the DFES mapping as Bush Fire Prone. In accordance

with the WAPC’s ‘Planning in Bushfire Prone Areas’, a Bushfire Management Plan (BMP)

that includes a Bushfire Hazard Assessment has been prepared for the subject site. In

addition, a Service Station is considered a high risk land use in a Bush Fire Prone area so the

BMP includes a Bushfire Risk Management Plan.

The Bushfire Management Plan concludes that bushfire risk is not a barrier to the

development of the Amendment Area and that the subject site carries a Bushfire Attack Level

of 12.5 – which is within the acceptable level of risk.

Servicing

An Engineering Servicing Report was included with the application and addresses

Earthworks, Drainage, Water Supply, Power, Sewer and Gas services required to support the

development.

Earthworks & Stormwater Drainage

The Amendment Area is flat and sand fill will be required to address the following matters:

Adequate separation from groundwater.

Provide for onsite drainage for the more frequent storm events, in accordance with the

WAPC’s Better Urban Water Management.

Accommodation of gravity fed sewer reticulation.

Coordination of levels with adjacent road reserves.

Appropriate interface with the neighbouring residential properties to the north and east.

The Engineering Servicing report states that stormwater drainage infrastructure will likely

comprise of a vegetated swale onsite to collect and dispose of the 10 year Annual Exceedance

Probability stormwater event prior to discharging into drainage infrastructure within the

adjacent road reserves. A defined overflow path will be provided for the major 100 year ARI

event.

Sewer

The Amendment Area will connect to a 300mm diameter gravity sewer line that will be

located in the adjacent Anstey Road reserve. This 300mm sewer line is being constructed as

part of the Anstey Keane Precinct works and includes a waste water pump station being

installed to the north-east (within the Anstey Road East cell). Construction works for this

infrastructure is scheduled to be completed by the end of 2020, prior to the rezoning of the

site.



Water Supply

Water Corporation information shows that the Amendment Area can be provided with a

reticulated water connection by way of a small extension to an existing 100mm diameter

water distribution main located adjacent to the site, within the Anstey Road reserve.

Power Supply

Power supply can be provided to the subject sites via connections to the existing overhead

power lines located on the north-western side of Anstey Road or the north side of Armadale

Road. It is expected that as a condition of future development approval, the developer will be

responsible for the undergrounding of the power line adjacent to the Amendment Area.

Gas Supply

An existing Medium Pressure gas main is located within the Armadale Road reserve, abutting

the subject site and only a minor extension of the main is require to provide a gas supply to

the site.

ANALYSIS


Current Zoning: Urban Development zone

Amendment 102: DCA No.4 Anstey Keane Precinct

Special Control Area Map 1 (SCA 1): Lot 301 abuts but is not within 300m buffer for

Dampier-Bunbury Natural Gas Pipeline

Special Control Area Map 2 (SCA 2): The site is indicated within a few hundred metres of

Forrestdale Lake (SCA 2 indicates a former EPA

Groundwater Environmental Management Area

which has been superceded and no longer exists)

Special Control Area Map 3 (SCA 3): Development Area 51

Proposed Zoning: Local Centre zone.

Remove Lots 3 and 301 from DA 51.

Clause 4.2.5 of TPS No.4 establishes the key objective of the ‘Local Centre’ zone as:

a) To provide for a limited range of shopping and community services to meet the day-to-

day needs of individual neighbourhoods.

b) To ensure the design and landscaping of development provides a high standard of

safety and amenity and contributes towards a sense of place and community within the

local neighbourhood.

Under Schedule 12 of TPS No.4 Development Area 51 requires a Structure Plan to be

approved prior to development occurring on land within the Anstey-Keane Precinct. Structure

Plans are already approved for the south west and eastern portions of the precinct and a

structure plan has been prepared, and is with the WAPC for approval, for the north eastern

portion of the precinct (abutting the northern boundaries of Lots 3 and 301). Only the strip of

lots fronting Armadale Road (including Lots 3 and 301) do not have a Structure Plan in place

to date. Removal of Lots 3 and 301 from DA 51, along with the change of zoning, will

remove the requirement for a Structure Plan to be in place prior to development of the two (2)

lots and road access is already available to the two (2) lots via Anstey Road and the Armadale

Road Access Road.



Development Approval will be required prior to development to provide a more detailed

Plan.

Amendment 102 to TPS 4 – Development Contribution Plan No. 4 Anstey Keane Precinct

Lot 3 Armadale Road and Lot 301 Anstey Road are also subject to proposed Amendment

102, which will introduce the requirement for development contributions for development

and subdivision within the Anstey Road Urban Precinct. Amendment 113 will not modify

any of the provisions proposed in Amendment 102 or the boundary of the Development

Contribution Plan area (DCP No.4) with regard to Lots 3 and 301 and the land will still be

subject to the requirements of DCP No.4.

Dampier-Bunbury Natural Gas Pipeline Buffer

The proposal will be referred to the Pipeline Managers as part of the advertising process but it

is not expected that the pipeline location will impose any constraint on the development as

the subject site is outside the buffer area.

Forrestdale Lake

The site is approximately 320 metres from Forrestdale Lake. The proposed amendment does

not necessitate an environmental assessment with regard to this issue. However, a number of

technical studies and management plans will be required as part of the Development

Application process to ensure the wetland and groundwater resources are not impacted by

any future proposed land use. These may include, for example, a Hazardous Material/Spill

Management Plan and Drainage Management Strategy depending on the ultimate land use.

Development Area 51 SCA Map 3

It is necessary to remove the subject lots from Development Area 51 in order to allow

development of the Local Centre to occur without the need for preparation of a structure plan

over the subject lots and adjacent lots fronting Armadale Road. Preparation of a structure

plan for this portion of the Anstey Keane Precinct has not commenced to date and due to the

fragmented land ownership in this part of the precinct it may be several years.

The desirability of allowing and encouraging the creation of a commercial hub in the precinct

early in the precinct’s development supports the proposed rezoning of the subject land to

Local Centre zone and the concurrent removal of the lots from Development Area 51.

City of Armadale Local Planning Strategy (Activity Centres Planning Strategy)

The City’s existing Local Planning Strategy (LPS) was endorsed in December 2016 and sets

out the objectives and recommended actions associated with the future development of the

City. The City’s Activity Centres Planning Strategy 2012 (ACPS) is incorporated as part of

the LPS and specifically deals with the development or expansion of activity/shopping

centres. throughout the City of Armadale. The ACSP identifies that there needs to be

flexibility to respond to unforeseen opportunities for new or expanded centres.

A new Retail and Commercial Centres Strategy (RCCS) is currently being prepared for the

whole of the City of Armadale in preparation for a review of the LPS. Neither the existing

Strategy nor the draft RCCS identify any proposed centres in the Anstey Keane Urban

Precinct. The draft RCCS will be referred to Council for consideration in July or August

2020.



The residents of Forrestdale have been advocating for a local shop to be developed in the area

for some time now. There is a property directly opposite the subject site on the southern side

of Armadale Road within the Forrestdale townsite that has been zoned Local Centre for many

years. This Local Centre site is owned by the State Government and there have been attempts

by the State Government to dispose of the property by sale in the past. However, the sale did

not occur and there haven’t been any proposals to develop the site.

In the case of the existing 2012 Strategy, the Anstey Keane Urban Precinct was not at the

time contemplated so there was not any identified need for a centre in that location. With the

draft RCCS the identification of future centres in new growth areas has been based on the

intentions shown in adopted and proposed structure plans for the new areas.

The existing structure plans for the Anstey Keane Precinct do not identify any commercial

centres and to date the portion of the Anstey Keane Precinct containing the subject site does

not have a structure plan either in place or in preparation. The Draft Structure Plan for the

eastern portion of the Anstey Keane Precinct includes a small area of Industrial Business

zone on Keane Road that will provide a transitional interface to the adjoining Forrestdale

Business Park. Shops are a land use that can be considered under the Industrial Business zone

along with other low key service industrial type land uses. This will be approximately 1.7

kilometres from the Local Centre proposed by Amendment 113. The Draft Structure Plan for

the eastern portion of the Anstey Keane Precinct is currently with the WAPC for

determination.

Given the location of the subject site on the corner of Anstey and Armadale Roads and with

Anstey Road proposed to be the main neighbourhood connector road in the precinct it is

considered that the subject site would be the most likely location for a commercial centre

when a structure plan is prepared for that portion of the precinct.

If the subject land is rezoned to Local Centre there is the opportunity to include the centre in

the draft RCCS prior to the Strategy being adopted by Council.

State Planning Policy 4.2: Activity Centres for Perth and Peel

State Planning Policy 4.2 (SPP4.2) sets out the broad planning requirements for the planning

and development of new activity centres throughout Perth and Peel. SPP4.2 acknowledges

that local centres are community focal points that play an important role in providing

walkable access to services and facilities for communities, providing for the daily to weekly

household shopping and community needs. This includes the smaller local centres such as

delicatessens and convenience stores that provide for the day-to-day needs of local residents.

SPP 4.2 itself is generally silent of the delivery of local (and neighbourhood) centres other

than stating that these centres should be recognised in local planning strategies and also in

structure plans for new urban areas.



As outlined in the section of the City’s existing and proposed retail strategies above, none of

the existing or proposed structure plans have provided for a local centre in the Anstey Keane

Precinct. Therefore, the proposed Scheme Amendment will address the need for a local

convenience centre to provide a community hub for the precinct. Marketing of the new Cedar

Woods residential estate within the Anstey Keane Precinct has already commenced and the

knowledge that there may be a local centre in the precinct will assist with attracting

purchasers to the estate.

Local Planning Policy PLN 5.1 Highway Development (PLN 5.1)

PLN 5.1 aims to control the development of land along all Primary Distributor Roads in the

interests of maintaining and improving their efficiency and safety. PLN 5.1 applies to

development, structure plans and scheme amendments on land abutting those roads identified

as a Primary Distributor Road or on roads likely to achieve this status in the road hierarchy

(Armadale Road, Albany Highway, Brookton Highway and South Western Highway are

currently Primary Distributor Roads).

The Policy objectives are:

a) To encourage the uninterrupted movement of traffic.

b) To minimise conflicts between traffic passing, entering or leaving a property.

c) To minimise conflicts between pedestrians and motor vehicles.

The table below sets out the development criteria/policy provisions contained in PLN 5.1 and

demonstrates how the proposal meets those requirements. It should be noted however that the

policy requirements relate particularly to land use and development and will be

predominantly assessed at Development Application stage rather than at the rezoning stage.

Policy Provision Proposal Compliance

Only “P” (Permitted) land uses will be

approved unless there is an alternative means

of access from a lower order road.

“Convenience Store” is a “D” (Discretionary)

land use and “Service Station” is an “A

(Discretionary – Advertising required) land use

in the Local Centre Zone. There is access

available to the site from a lower order road

being Anstey Road.

The City may give consideration to

Discretionary uses (“D” and “A” uses) in a

zone but these uses will only be approved on

the basis that they would not compromise the

objectives of the zone and are, in the opinion

of the City equal or lesser traffic generators

than uses permitted (“P” uses) in the zone.

Under the Zoning Table in TPS No.4 in the Local

Centre zone a large range of land uses are listed

as “P” (Permitted) including Shop, Medical

Centre, Child Care Centre, Lunch Bar, Office

and Restaurant among others. A Service Station

and Convenience store could be said to be similar

traffic generators as some of the above Permitted

uses but are unlikely to be lesser traffic

generators. However, given the site will have

alternate access from a lower order road it is

considered that these uses could be considered on

Lot 3 and 301.

The City may require cross easements and

reciprocal rights of carriageway agreements

where appropriate.

Not required for this proposal as direct road

access is available.

The City will need to be satisfied on the

following points before determining any

application:

These requirements would be addressed

specifically at Development Application stage.



Policy Provision Proposal Compliance

a) Whether the development would

inordinately restrict the movement of

vehicles along the highway frontage or on

side entrance roads;

b) Whether vehicular access to the property

could be provided from an alternative road

or route to the highway, and whether it

would be desirable to so require;

c) Whether, in respect of shopping

development or any other activity likely to

attract pedestrians, suitable setback

distances or other barriers or facilities will

be provided to prevent conflict between

pedestrians and motor vehicles; and

d) Whether the amenity of surrounding

properties would be significantly affected

by the proposed development.

Convenience retail and Service Stations are more

likely to be financially viable if they are located

on major roads that will provide the benefit of

passing traffic.

OPTIONS

1. Council may initiate the Scheme Amendment as proposed and advertise the amendment

for a period of 42 days.

2. Council may decline the initiation of the Scheme Amendment if it considers the

proposed rezoning to be contrary to the orderly and proper planning of the area or for

any other reason.

CONCLUSION

The amendment proposes to rezone Lot 3 Armadale Road and Lot 301 Anstey Road from Urban

Development zone to Local Centre zone and removal of the two (2) lots from Development

Area 51 on Special Control Area Map 3. This will enable the development of a small local

centre in the short term future to provide a community hub for the developing Anstey Keane

Precinct. The Local Centre would will also provide a significant benefit in terms of access to

convenience retail for the existing residents of Forrestdale including the Forrestdale townsite.

The small size of the centre and the isolation of the Anstey Keane Precinct from other residential

areas in Harrisdale and Piara Waters means that it will not compromise the viability of other

centres existing or proposed within the area. This is supported by the results of the Retail

Sustainability Analysis provided with the application.

Following the closure of the advertising period, the proposed amendment and any

submissions received during the advertising period will be forwarded to Council for its

consideration of final adoption.

Given the above, Option 1 is recommended.



ATTACHMENTS

1.⇩ Site Plan - TPS No.4 - Amendment No.113

2.⇩ Architectural Concept Plan - TPS No.4 - Amendment No.113

3.⇩ Existing and Proposed Zoning Plan - TPS No.4 - Amendment No.113

RECOMMEND D39/6/20

That Council:

1. Pursuant to Part 5 of the Planning and Development Act 2005, initiate Amendment

No. 113 to Town Planning Scheme No.4 as a ‘Standard Amendment’ in accordance

with Part 5, Clause 34 – Standard Amendment, subsection (a), (e), (f) and (g) of

the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 to:

a) Amend the Scheme maps to rezone Lot 3 Armadale Road and Lot 301

Anstey Road, Forrestdale from “Urban Development” to “Local Centre”;

and

b) Amending Special Control Are Map No. 3 by amending the boundary of

Development Area 51 to exclude Lot 3 Armadale Road and Lot 301 Anstey

Road, Forrestdale.

2. Refers the above Amendment to Town Planning Scheme No.4 to the Environmental

Protection Authority (EPA) pursuant to section 81 of the Planning and Development

Act 2005. Should the EPA advise that the amendment does not require assessment,

advertise the amendment for a period of 42 days.

3. Authorise the Mayor and the Chief Executive Officer to execute the Amendment

documents.

4. Forward a copy of the amendment to the Western Australian Planning Commission

for information.

5. Advise the applicant of the above decision.

Moved Cr C Frost



COMMITTEE – Miscellaneous COUNCIL MEETING 22 JUNE 2020

4.1 - PANEL OF PRE-QUALIFIED SUPPLIERS PPS/2/20 FOR DESIGN REVIEW

PANEL

WARD

: ALL In Brief:

At its meeting in April 2020, Council

appointed Stephen Carrick from Stephen

Carrick Architects Pty Ltd to fill one of

two Design Review Panel positions for

Architecture.

Stephen Carrick was appointed at a rate of

$250/per hour when the tender presented a

rate at $240/per hour. Stephen Carrick has

been contacted and concur that the hourly

rate should be $240/per hour.

Recommend that Council set aside its

approval to appoint Stephen Carrick at a

rate of $250/per hour and instead appoint

Stephen Carrick for a rate of $240/per

hour.

FILE No.

: M/257/20

DATE

: 27 May 2020

REF

: SF

RESPONSIBLE

MANAGER

: EDDS

Tabled Items

Nil.

Decision Type




Executive The decision relates to the direction setting and oversight role of Council.



natural justice.


Nil.


2.2.1 Deliver attractive and functional streetscapes, open spaces, City buildings and

facilities.

2.2.3 Revitalise existing neighbourhoods whilst retaining the character of places.

2.5.1 Implement and administer the City’s Town Planning Scheme and Local Planning

Strategy to deliver quality outcomes.

Legal Implications

Local Government Act 1995 - Section 3.57 Tenders for providing goods and services

Local Government (Function and General) Regulations 1996 - Division 2, tenders for

providing goods and services

Councillor Shaw disclosed a non-financial interest as she has a professional association with the

panel member, but declared that she would set aside this association, consider the matter on its

merits and vote accordingly.




City of Armadale Local Planning Strategy (2016)


Council Policy ADM 19 – Procurement of Goods and Services

Code of Conduct


There is adequate budget set aside in the 2019/20 financial year and proposed 2020/21

Budget for the operation of a Design Review Panel.

Consultation

Request for Panel of Pre-Qualified Suppliers PPS/2/20 was prepared in consultation with the

City’s Governance and Procurement Team and Development Services.

BACKGROUND

During February / March 2020 the City issued a Request for Panel of Pre-Qualified Suppliers

to seek a total of 8 suitably qualified professionals to make up the four faculties of the Design

Review Panel which is identified below:

Category A - Architect (2 positions)

Category B - Town Planner and/or Urban Designer (2 Positions)

Category C - Landscape Architect (2 Positions)

Category D - Heritage Architect (2 Positions)

Following the closure of the request, conforming submissions were received for Category A

(Architect) and Category B (Town Planner and/or Urban Designer). At its meeting in April

2020, Council resolved to:

1. Appoint Stephen Carrick Architecture Pty Ltd (Stephen Carrick @ $250 per hour) and

Hocking Planning and Architecture Pty Ltd (Dinah Mujati @ $200 per hour) for the

Architecture Panel (Category A) for a period of two years in accordance with the

Terms and Conditions of the Design Review Panel.

2. Appoint Mackay Urban Design (Malcolm Mackay @ $250 per hour) and UDLA Pty

Ltd (Scott Lang @ $250 per hour) for the Town Planning and Urban Design Panel

(Category B) for a period of two years in accordance with the Terms and Conditions of

the Design Review Panel.

3. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to complete, sign and issue the contract for the

above appointments.

4. Note that the City will re-advertise for Landscape Architecture (Category C) and

Heritage Architecture (Category D) with the hourly rate for the Heritage Architect

increased to $200 per hour.



DETAILS OF PROPOSAL

During the process of preparing contracts to issue to successful Panel Members, the City

identified that the submission received for Stephen Carrick from Stephen Carrick Architects

Pty Ltd identified a rate of $240 per hour. An administrative error was made in the previous

report where a rate of $250 per hour was recommended. This proposal aims to rectify this

administrative error and appoint Stephen Carrick from Stephen Carrick Architects Pty Ltd for

$240 per hour.

COMMENT

The proposal is required to appoint Stephen Carrick to the Design Review Panel at a rate of

$240 per hour as per the tender submission received. The proposal will ensure that fairness is

applied to the appointment of Design Review Panel Members with hourly rates reflecting the

submissions received during the tender process.

The first phase of appointing the Design Review Panel will be completed by the above

recommendation by completing the appointment of two Architects and two Planners for the

panel. The City is currently advertising for two Landscape Architects and two Heritage

Architects. This is likely to go before Council with recommendation at its July 2020 meeting.

OPTIONS

1. Reaffirm its current decision by appointing Stephen Carrick from Stephen Carrick

Architects Pty Ltd to the Design Review Panel at a rate of $250 per hour; or

2. Set aside its previous decision made at the Council meeting on the 14th April 2020 to

appoint Stephen Carrick from Stephen Carrick Architects Pty Ltd at a rate of $250 per

hour and instead appoint at a rate of $240 per hour.

CONCLUSION

The setting aside of Council’s previous decision to appoint Stephen Carrick from Stephen

Carrick Architects at a rate of $250 per hour and instead appoint Stephen Carrick at a rate of

$240 per hour is supported to correct an administrative error. Accordingly, Option No.2 is

recommended.

ATTACHMENTS

There are no attachments for this report.

RECOMMEND D40/6/20

That Council in regard to Panel of Pre-Qualified Suppliers PPS/2/20 for Design Review

Services set aside its approval to appoint Stephen Carrick at a rate of $250/per hour

and instead appoint Stephen Carrick for a rate of $240/per hour.

Moved Cr C M Wielinga




COUNCILLORS’ ITEMS

Nil


COMMITTEE - Executive Director's Report COUNCIL MEETING 22 JUNE 2020

6.1 - WALGA PERFORMANCE MONITORING REPORT - 2018/19 REPORT

At the DSC Meeting on 18 June 2019 the Executive Director Development Services

presented to Committee a report on WALGA’s Performance Monitoring Report 2017/18 for

the City of Armadale. The City has recently received the WALGA’s Performance Monitoring

Report 2018/19 and a brief summary on the City’s performance was provided via memo to

Councillors on 6 May 2020.

The Growth Alliance Perth and Peel (GAPP) Local Governments initiated this project with

WALGA to develop a suite of performance indicators to measure how well Local

Government is managing its planning and development functions. This report provides

information collected from the third year of the project. The number of Local Governments

participating in the Project has increased from the original 11 in the first year of the project to

26 this year. Local Governments are also grouped by type, to enable more meaningful

comparison, and the City is included in the ‘Fringe Growth’ category in recognition that it is

a ‘growth’ Council.

Overall, the City has performed exceptionally well, performing above the industry average in

most categories against the Benchmark Local Governments in the survey. A summary of the

key benchmark criteria and the City’s performance is listed below:

• The City of Armadale is one of only 10 Local Governments surveyed that has a current

Local Planning Strategy with a strong strategic alignment with State Government Policies

and the City’s Strategic Community Plan.

• Number of Scheme Amendments Finalised - Survey Average 3, CoA 6. The City is also

managing its Scheme Amendments within the statutory timeframes.

• The City of Armadale has 9 other related Strategies supporting its land use planning

functions, well above the average.

• % of All Applications determined within Statutory Timeframes - Survey average 93%,

CoA 95%.

• % of Development Applications determined within Statutory Timeframes - Survey

average 82%, CoA 87%.

• % of Subdivision Referrals completed within timeframe - Survey average 83%, CoA 94%.

• % of Building Applications determine within Statutory Timeframes - Survey average

97%, CoA 98%.

In addition to the above, the City will be commencing this year the preparation of a new

Local Planning Strategy and Town Planning Scheme No.5 to align these planning documents

with the City’s Strategic Community Plan which is also currently under review. Council

supported this initiative at its 31st May 2020 Council meeting.

The results of the above survey indicate the City’s continued commitment to providing

excellent customer service to the community and industry in the areas of Planning and

Building services. The City will work to maintain and improve its performance moving

forward.


COMMITTEE - Executive Director's Report COUNCIL MEETING 22 JUNE 2020

6.2 – DWA – NORMALISATION APPROACHES

The EDDS briefly outlined that the City has been advised by DevelopmentWA it had

received legal advice which advised that their proposed approach to normalisation was not

able to occur and that there is a need to establish alternative approaches to normalisation of

the Project areas, which meant that the DevelopmentWA’s target normalisation dates would

be delayed. One of the possible solutions is for the City to initiate a number of new scheme

amendments and policy changes. The City’s officers are currently investigating the

implications.

MEETING DECLARED CLOSED AT 8.38 PM


COMMITTEE

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE

SUMMARY OF ATTACHMENTS 15 JUNE 2020

ATT

NO.

SUBJECT

1.1 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - PROPOSED PLACE OF WORSHIP - LOT 201

(NO.31) ARMSTRONG ROAD, KELMSCOTT

1.1.1 Site Plan - Lot 201 Armstrong Road, Kelmscott

1.1.2 Elevations Plan - Lot 201 Armstrong Road, Kelmscott

1.1.3 Floor Plan - Lot 201 Armstrong Road, Kelmscott

1.1.4 Roof Plan - Lot 201 Armstrong Road, Kelmscott

1.1.5 Landscape Concept Plan - Lot 201 Armstrong Road, Kelmscott

1.1.6 Details Plan - Lot 201 Armstrong Road, Kelmscott

1.1.7 Concept Plan - Armstrong Rd/Brookton Hwy Intersection - Lot 201 Armstrong Road,

Kelmscott

1.1.8 Photograph 1 - Lot 201 Armstrong Road, Kelmscott

1.1.9 Photograph 2 - Lot 201 Armstrong Road, Kelmscott

1.1.10 Artists Impression 1 - Lot 201 Armstrong Road, Kelmscott



1.1.13 Schedule of Submissions - Lot 201 Armstrong Road Kelmscott

2.1 STRUCTURE PLAN RECOMMENDATION TO WAPC - LOT 9006 REILLY ROAD

AND LOT 9005 WRIGHT ROAD, HARRISDALE

2.1.1 Site Plan - Lot 9006 Reilly Road, Harrisdale

2.1.2 Structure Plan - Lot 9006 Reilly Road, Harrisdale

2.1.3 Schedule of Submissions - Reilly Road Structure Plan

2.1.4 Local Government - Schedule of Modifications - Reilly Road Structure Plan

2.1.5 North Forrestdale Structure Plan 1 - Lot 9006 Reilly Road, Harrisdale

2.1.6 North Forrestdale Structure Plan 2 - Lot 9006 Reilly Road, Harrisdale

2.1.7 District Structure Plan 1 - Lot 9006 Reilly Road, Harrisdale

2.1.8 District Structure Plan 2 - Lot 9006 Reilly Road, Harrisdale

2.1.9 Subdivision Concept Plan 1 - Lot 9006 Reilly Road, Harrisdale

2.1.10 Subdivision Concept Plan 2 - Lot 9006 Reilly Road, Harrisdale

2.1.11 Concept Context Plan - Lot 9006 Reilly Road, Harrisdale

2.1.12 Landscape Concept Plan - Lot 9006 Reilly Road, Harrisdale

2.1.13 Southern POS Landscape Concept Plan - Lot 9006 Reilly Road, Harrisdale

2.2 PROPOSED LOCAL PLANNING POLICY PLN 4.1 THE DESIGN OF INDUSTRIAL

ESTATES

2.2.1 PLN 4.1 - The Design of Industrial Estates - Policy final with edits

2.2.2 PLN 4.1 - The Design of Industrial Estates - Policy final without edits

2.2.3 PLN 4.1 - The Design of Industrial Estates - Overview of Submissions Table

3.1 AMENDMENT NO.113 TO TPS 4 - REZONING LOT 3 ARMADALE RD & LOT 301

ANSTEY RD FORRESTDALE FROM URBAN DEVELOPMENT ZONE TO LOCAL

CENTRE ZONE

3.1.1 Site Plan - TPS No.4 - Amendment No.113

3.1.2 Architectural Concept Plan - TPS No.4 - Amendment No.113

3.1.3 Existing and Proposed Zoning Plan - TPS No.4 - Amendment No.113

The above attachments can be accessed from the Minutes of the Development Services

Committee meeting of 15 June 2020 available on the City’s website.

CITY OF ARMADALE

MINUTES

OF CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE HELD IN THE FUNCTION ROOM,

ADMINISTRATION CENTRE, 7 ORCHARD AVENUE, ARMADALE ON TUESDAY,

16 JUNE 2020 AT 7:00PM.

PRESENT: Cr JH Munn CMC (Chair)

Cr C A Campbell JP (Deputy Chair)

Cr H Jones

Cr E Flynn

Cr K Busby

Cr C Frost

Cr G Nixon

APOLOGIES: Nil

OBSERVERS: Cr S Peter via MS Teams

Cr R Butterfield via MS Teams

IN ATTENDANCE: Ms J Abbiss Chief Executive Officer

Mr J Lyon Executive Director Corporate Services

Mr P Sanders Executive Director Development Services via MS Teams

Mr K Ketterer Executive Director Technical Services

Mrs Y Loveland Executive Director Community Services via MS Teams

Mrs F Baxter Executive Manager Corporate Services via MS Teams

Ms L Jarosz Executive Assistant Community Services via MS Teams

PUBLIC: Nil

“For details of Councillor Membership on this Committee, please refer to the City’s website

– www.armadale.wa.gov.au/your council/councillors.”

CORPORATE SERVICES 78 16 JUNE 2020


DISCLAIMER

As there were no members of the public present the Disclaimer for protecting Councillors and

staff from liability of information and advice given at Committee meetings was not read.

DECLARATION OF MEMBERS’ INTERESTS

Nil

QUESTION TIME

Nil

SUSPENSION OF RELEVANT MEETING PROCEDURES (STANDING ORDERS)

LOCAL LAW

The following clause in the City of Armadale’s Meeting Procedures (Standing Orders) Local

Law cannot be complied with when conducting an eMeeting. As there are Councillors and

Officers in attendance via MS Teams during this meeting, the below clause is required to be

suspended for the conduct of this Meeting.

RECOMMEND

That Council suspend the operation of the following clauses:

(i) Clause 8.6 (3) – Prevention of Disturbance (use of mobile telephones)

of the City of Armadale Standing Orders Local Law for the duration of this

meeting and that these matters be determined at the discretion of the Presiding

Member.

Moved Cr C A Campbell


DEPUTATION

Nil



CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

RECOMMEND

Minutes of the Corporate Services Committee Meeting held on 18 May 2020 be

confirmed.

Moved Cr K Busby


ITEMS REFERRED FROM INFORMATION BULLETIN

None of the items from the Information Bulletin required clarification or a report for a

decision of Council.



CONTENTS

CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE

16 JUNE 2020

1. FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT & PLANNING

1.1 LIST OF ACCOUNTS PAID - MAY 2020 .................................................................................... 81

1.2 STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL ACTIVITY - MAY 2020 ........................................................... 84

1.3 **ADOPTION OF VALUE FOR REPORTING MATERIAL VARIANCES...............................87

2. GOVERNANCE & ADMINISTRATION

2.1 DELEGATIONS AND POLICY REVIEW ...................................................................................92

3. MISCELLANEOUS

3.1 NATIONAL GROWTH AREAS ALLIANCE NGAA UPDATE ..................................................97

4. COUNCILLORS’ ITEMS

NIL .......................................................................................................................................................... 103

5. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER’S REPORT

NIL .......................................................................................................................................................... 105

6. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S REPORT

NIL .......................................................................................................................................................... 103

SUMMARY OF ATTACHMENTS ........................................................................................................... 106


COMMITTEE - Financial Management & Planning COUNCIL MEETING 22 JUNE 2020

1.1 - LIST OF ACCOUNTS PAID - MAY 2020

WARD

: ALL In Brief:

The Report presents, pursuant to

Regulation 13(1), (3) and (4) of the Local

Government (Financial Management)

Regulations 1996, the List of Accounts

paid for the period 1 May to 30 May 2020

as well as the credit card statements for

April 2020.

FILE No.

: M/291/20

DATE

: 26 May 2020

REF

: FB

RESPONSIBLE

MANAGER

: Executive Director

Corporate Services

Tabled Items

Nil

Decision Type

☐ Legislative The decision relates to adopting/changing local laws, town planning

schemes, and City policies.

☒ Executive The decision relates to the direction setting and oversight role of

Council.

☐ Quasi-judicial The decision directly affects a person’s rights or interests and

requires Councillors at the time of making the decision to adhere to

the principles of natural justice.


Nil


4. Leadership

4.3.1.1 Implement the Annual Budget as derived from the Corporate Business Plan

Legal Implications

Section 6.10 (d) of the Local Government Act 1995 refers, i.e.

6.10. Financial management regulations

Regulations may provide for —

(d) the general management of, and the authorisation of payments out of —

(i) the municipal fund; and

(ii) the trust fund,

of a local government.

Regulation 13(1), (3) & (4) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations

1996 refers, ie.

13. Lists of Accounts



(1) If the local government has delegated to the CEO the exercise of its power to

make payments from the municipal fund or the trust fund, a list of accounts paid

by the CEO is to be prepared each month showing for each account paid since

the last such list was prepared —

(a) the payee’s name;

(b) the amount of the payment;

(c) the date of the payment; and

(d) sufficient information to identify the transaction.

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

(a) presented to the council at the next ordinary meeting of the council after the

list is prepared; and

(b) recorded in the minutes of that meeting.

(4) After the list referred to in subregulation (1) has been prepared for a month the

total of all other outstanding accounts is to be calculated and a statement of that

amount is to be presented to the council at the meeting referred to in

subregulation (3)(a).


Nil


All accounts paid have been duly incurred and authorised for payment as per approved

purchasing and payment procedures.

Consultation

Nil

BACKGROUND

Pursuant to Section 5.42 of the Local Government Act 1995 (Delegation of some powers and

duties to CEO), Council has resolved to delegate to the CEO (Primary Delegation No: 150

refers) the exercise of its powers to make payments from the municipal and trust funds.

COMMENT

The List of Accounts paid for the period 1 May to 30 May 2020 is presented as an attachment

to this report as well as the credit card statements for April 2020.

ATTACHMENTS

1.⇩ List of Payments May 2020



RECOMMEND CS23/6/20

That Council note the List of Accounts paid as presented in the attachment to this

report and summarised as follows:

Municipal Fund

Accounts paid totalling $8,055,714.02 on Batch 2498-2508, 2510, Direct Debits &

PY01.23-PY01.24

Trust Fund

Accounts paid totalling $80.00 on Batch 2509

Credit Card

Accounts Paid totalling $3,486.59 for the period ended April 2020.

Moved Cr G Nixon




1.2 - STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL ACTIVITY - MAY 2020

WARD

: ALL In Brief:

This Report presents the City’s Monthly

Financial Report for the eleven (11) month

period ended 31 May 2020.

The Report recommendation is to accept the

Financial Report noting there are reportable

actual to budget material variances for the

period.

FILE No.

: M/301/20

DATE

: 28 May 2020

REF

: FB

RESPONSIBLE

MANAGER


Corporate Services

Tabled Items

Nil

Decision Type

☐ Legislative The decision relates to adopting/changing local laws, town

planning schemes, and City policies.


Council.





Nil


4. Leadership

4.3.1.1 Implement the Annual Budget as derived from the Corporate Business Plan

Legal Implications

Local Government Act 1995 – Part 6 – Division 3 – Reporting on Activities and Finance

Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations – Part 4 – Financial Reports.


Nil


The Statement of Financial Activity, as presented, refers and explains.

Consultation

Nil



BACKGROUND

A local government is required to prepare a statement of financial activity reporting on the

revenue and expenditure as set out in the annual budget for that month. The details in the

statement are those as prescribed and the statement is to be reported to Council.

COMMENT

Presented as an attachment is the Monthly Statement of Financial Activity for the eleven (11)

month period ended 31 May 2020.

For the purposes of reporting material variances from the Statement of Financial Activity,

indicators, as resolved by Council, have been applied.

These indicators are:

Revenue Material variances are identified where, for the period being reported, the actual varies

to the budget by an amount of (+) or (-) $100,000 and in these instances an explanatory

comment has been provided.

Expense Material variances are identified where, for the period being reported, the actual varies

to the budget by an amount of (+) or (-) $100,000 and in these instances an explanatory

comment has been provided.

For the purposes of explaining each Material Variance, a three part approach has been taken.

The parts are:

1. Period Variation

Relates specifically to the value of the Variance between the Budget and Actual figures

for the period of the report.

2. Primary Reason

Explains the primary reasons for the period Variance. As the report is aimed at a higher

level analysis, minor contributing factors are not reported.

3. Budget Impact

Forecasts the likely $ impact on the Annual Budget position. It is important to note that

figures in this part are ‘indicative only’ at the time of reporting, for circumstances may

subsequently change.

ATTACHMENTS

1.⇩ May 2020 - Monthly Financials



RECOMMEND CS24/6/20

That Council:

(i) pursuant to Regulation 34 of the Local Government (Financial Management)

Regulations 1996 (Financial Activity Statement Report) accepts the Statement of

Financial Activity for the eleven (11) month period ended 31 May 2020; and

(ii) notes there are reportable actual to budget material variances for the period.

Moved Cr C Frost




**1.3 - ADOPTION OF VALUE FOR REPORTING MATERIAL VARIANCES

WARD

: ALL In Brief:

Each financial year Council is required to set

a value for reporting material variances in

monthly statements of financial activity;

This report recommends that the

values adopted by Council for the current

2019/20 financial year remain unchanged for

the coming 2020/21 financial year, i.e.

Revenues – Material variances will be

identified, where the actual varies to

budget by an amount of (+) or (-)

$100,000.

Expenses – Material variances will be

identified where the actual varies to

budget by an amount of (+) or (-)

$100,000.

This report also recommends that the

reporting thresholds for budget variations be

approved.

FILE No.

: M/288/20

DATE

: 25 May 2020

REF

: FB

RESPONSIBLE

MANAGER


Corporate Services

Tabled Items

Nil

Decision Type

☐ Legislative The decision relates to adopting/changing local laws, town planning

schemes, and City policies.


Council.





Nil


4.1.2 Make decisions that are sound, transparent and strategic.

4.3.1 Prepare and implement short to long term financial plans



Legislation Implications

The Local Government Act 1995 states that:

2.7. Role of council

(1) The council —

(a) governs the local government’s affairs; and

(b) is responsible for the performance of the local

government’s functions.

(2) Without limiting subsection (1), the council is to —

(a) oversee the allocation of the local government’s finances

and resources; and

(b) determine the local government’s policies.

6.8. Expenditure from municipal fund not included in annual

budget

(1) A local government is not to incur expenditure from its

municipal fund for an additional purpose except where the

expenditure —

(a) is incurred in a financial year before the adoption of the

annual budget by the local government; or

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

(c) is authorised in advance by the mayor or president in an

emergency.

* Absolute majority required.

The Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 – Regulation 34 Clause 5

– states:

Each financial year, a local government is to adopt a percentage or value, calculated

in accordance with AAS (Australian Accounting Standards), to be used in statements of

financial activity for reporting material variances.

AASB 1031 (Australian Accounting Standards Board) relates to the issue of materiality.

Whilst there are a number of factors associated with materiality, the notion of materiality

influences whether an item or an aggregate of items is required to be recognised, measured or

disclosed in accordance with the requirements of an Australian Accounting Standard.


Nil


Nil

Consultation

Accounting advisors

Other local governments



BACKGROUND

Each year Council is required to adopt a percentage or value for the purposes of reporting

material variances in the (Monthly) Financial Activity Statement. This value or percentage is

then used throughout the financial year to identify potential instances where actual revenues

and expenditures may not be in keeping with Council’s budget. The early identification of

potential budget variances can assist in better utilisation and allocation of Council funds and

resources.

For the current 2019/20 financial year, Council adopted the following material variance

factors:

i) Revenues – Material variances will be identified where, for each Management Area, for

the period being reported, the actual varies to budget by an amount of (+) or (-)

$100,000.

ii) Expenses – Material variances will be identified where, for each Management Area, for

the period being reported, the actual varies to budget by an amount of (+) or (-)

$100,000.

The values chosen are believed to provide a good indication of variances to budget that

require closer examination, and if necessary, remedial action. The values as proposed have

worked well for the identification of potential variances in the past, and are, from a financial

management perspective, felt to adequately serve the purpose for which they are resolved.

The Annual Budget is a financial estimate of expected revenues and expenditures and

inevitably, variations do arise largely due to economic factors. During the year, budget

variations may be necessary to reallocate budgets within services and manage the overall

financial position, or to respond to changes in the economy. This is a critical financial

management process that requires endorsement by the Council in the exercise of its duty

under s2.27(2)(a) of the Local Government Act 1995.

The following budget variation process map is submitted to Council for endorsement. The

circumstances in which a budget variation is submitted to Council is outlined in the process

and a general threshold of $80,000 is included.



Variations will be presented to Council for authorisation by “Absolute Majority” in

circumstances where a forcast variation requires a movement from:

Operating to Capital

Capital to Capital over $40,000

Capital to Operating

Operating to Operating for amounts greater than 5% or $80,000 (whichever is greater).

The proposed budget variation process map facilitate budget management at the Council and

officer level. Specific to capital works, where a capital to capital variation is requested, if the

capital works job is within the same sub program (for instance footpaths), then the respective

Director can amend the budget between capital jobs to accommodate variations for

unforeseen circumstances, up to $40,000. Importantly, this does not permit any new jobs or

extended scope of works beyond the scope which was originally approved.

COMMENT

Taking into account the commentary held in AASB 1031 (Materiality), the understood intent

for which the material variances values are intended to serve and the successful use of these

values from past financial years, it is proposed that the same values be used again in the

2020/21 financial year.

For instances where Budget Variations are required to accommodate business and operational

changes, the Budget Variation process will be applied.



ATTACHMENTS There are no attachments for this report.

RECOMMEND CS25/6/20

That Council, pursuant to Regulation 34(5) of the Local Government (Financial

Management) Regulations 1996, adopt the following values for reporting material

variances in the monthly Statements of Financial Activity during the 2020/21 financial

year, i.e.

1. Revenues - material variances will be identified where, for each Management

Area, for the period being reported, the actual varies to budget by an amount of

(+) or (-) $100,000.

2. Expenses - material variances will be identified where, for each Management

Area, for the period being reported, the actual varies to budget by an amount of

(+) or (-) $100,000.

3. Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to vary the budget, except in the following

circumstances, which require the proposed variations to be presented to Council

for authorisation by “Absolute Majority”

Capital to Operating

Operating to Capital

Capital to Capital (unless the value is less than $40,000, within the same sub

program and does not extend the original scope of works approved.

Operating to Operating for amounts greater than 5% or $80,000 (whichever

is greater).

Where no budget is provided for an additional purpose (s6.8 of the Local

Government Act 1995)

ABSOLUTE MAJORITY RESOLUTION REQUIRED

Moved Cr C A Campbell




2.1 - DELEGATIONS AND POLICY REVIEW

WARD

: ALL In Brief:

A full review of the City’s Policy

Manual and delegations is currently

being undertaken.

This report proposes a systematic

approach and schedule for the review

of delegations and policies over the

next six months.

Recommend that Council adopt the

schedule to review Council delegations

and policies as detailed.

FILE No.

: M/282/20

DATE

: 19 May 2020

REF

: KD

RESPONSIBLE

MANAGER


Corporate Services

Tabled Items

Nil

Decision Type

☐ Legislative The decision relates to general local government legislative

functions such as adopting/changing local laws, town planning

schemes, rates exemptions, City policies and delegations etc.


Council.





Nil


4.1 Visionary Civic Leadership and Sound Governance

4.1.2 Make Decisions that are sound, transparent and strategic

4.1.2.1 Implement policies and associated delegations to improve transparency

of decisions.

Legal Implications

Local Government Act 1995:

s2.7 - Role of the council

s5.41 - Functions of CEO

s5.42 - Delegation of some powers and duties to CEO

s5.43 - Limits on delegations to CEO


COMMITTEE - Governance & Administration COUNCIL MEETING 22 JUNE 2020

s5.44 - CEO may delegate powers and duties to other employees

s5.46 - Register of, and records relevant to, delegations to CEO and employees

Local Government (Administration) Regulations 1996:

r18G - Delegations to CEO’s limits on

r19 - Delegates to keep certain records

Interpretation Act 1984:

s53 - Appointments may be by name or office

s58 - Delegates, performance of functions by

s59 - Power to delegate, effect of


All Council Policies

All Local Laws


Nil

Consultation

1. Governance and Administration

2. Executive Leadership Team

BACKGROUND

Under section 5.18 of the Local Government Act 1995, Council is required to undertake a

review of all delegations each financial year.

This has previously been facilitated by each directorate presenting their review of delegations

to their respective committees before being presented to Council.

This year in an attempt to consolidate processes and apply a consistent approach to the annual

review it was intended that the review would be facilitated by the Governance team and

undertaken in conjunction with the relevant directorates then presented Council via the

Corporate Services Committee.

As reported to Council on the 6 April the review of delegations had commenced. At that

meeting some delegations that needed attention were presented for review to ensure that

operational activities continue effectively, particularly with regards to the responding to any

actions required as a result of COVID-19. The report also indicated that the full review would

be presented to Council before the end of the financial year.

However, as the review has progressed it has highlighted the need to introduce

a systematic review that incorporates not only an opportunity for Council to provide

comment and seek further information outside of a formal council meeting environment, but

also analyse the relationship between the delegations with any related Policy.

Council has traditionally reviewed one third of its policies every year, enabling each policy to

be reviewed once every three years. However under the direction of the Chief Executive

Officer the Policy Manual is concurrently being reviewed in its entirety by an external

consultant, which will provide a completely new format and content.



This review is limited only to Council policies and does not include Local Planning Policies

of which the review if facilitated under a different process.

DETAILS OF PROPOSAL

Rather than rush these reviews in order to meet the requirement that delegations be reviewed

once every financial year and a third of the policies every year and given the numbers

of these this time, it is proposed that they be reviewed at a series of SOHAG meetings before

still being presented to Council via their respective Committees.

Round SOHAG

Wednesday

1 24/06/2020 (1pm - 3pm)

2

8/07/2020 (1pm - 3pm)

22/07/2020 (1pm - 3pm)

3

12/08/2020 (1pm - 3pm)

26/08/2020 (1pm - 3pm)

4

9/09/2020 (1pm - 3pm)

23/09/2020 (1pm - 3pm)

5

14/10/2020 (1pm - 3pm)

28/10/2020 (1pm - 3pm)

6 11/11/2020 (1pm - 3pm)

Due to the number of delegations and policies to be reviewed a risk assessment will be

undertaken to determine the order of precedence in which items will be presented to

SOHAG ensuring that where a delegation and policy relate to each other they are presented at

the same time. The risk assessment with take into consideration the following factors:

1. Delegations and/or policies considered to have legal implications on the City.

2. Delegations and/or policies considered to have operational implications on the

administration.

ANALYSIS

The City’s approach to reviewing delegations and policies has generally been decentralised

with each directorate responsible for presenting their own delegations and policies to their

respective Committee before being presented to Council.

After each Council meeting the delegations are consolidated into one delegations register and

policies into the policy manual.



Last year saw the City move delegations into Attain (The same system used for primary and

Annual Returns and Gifts) which resulted in some renumbering and a slightly different

appearance in the presentation of them to Council for review.

Since then the developers of Attain have undertaken further enhancements which has meant

that the appearance will be slightly different again this year, however the benefits of this is

that it provides more information on where the power to delegate comes from and what

exactly is being delegated.

Centralisation of the process through Governance will allow logistically for the inclusion of a

consultation session via SOHAG. Thus, providing Councillors with that opportunity to

discuss delegations and policies in more depth prior to being formally presented to Council

via their respective Committees.

While it is proposed that this review of delegations / policies (being a very comprehensive

review) be undertaken over a period of 6 months, possible a bit longer - it is envisaged future

reviews won’t require multiple SOHAG meetings over such a period of time.

It should be noted that while it is proposed that a systematic approach be made to the review

of delegations and policies, it will result in the City being non-compliant with section 5.46(2)

of the Local Government Act 1995 which ultimately will be reflected in the 2020 Compliance

Audit Return (CAR).

Whilst a 100% Compliance Audit Return is the ideal outcome, it is an opportunity to

demonstrate that the City is taking a new strategic and systematic approach to reviewing

delegations and policies, which will strengthen the City’s position around compliance in this

area going forward. And while not an excuse, it can be said that the COVID-19 State of

Emergency has brought forth a change in priorities for Council, resulting in changes to how

we operate all of which in turn has impacted on our day to day operations and impaired our

ability to have this review done before 30 June 2020.

OPTIONS

Option 1

Not formally review Council delegations and policies for the 2019/2020 financial year and

agree to the systematic and scheduled approach through SOHAG for their review.

Option 2

Present the current delegations to Council as they currently are for formal review, while a

systematic and scheduled approach through SOHAG is undertaken for a further review of the

delegations and policies.

CONCLUSION

Given the City is transitioning through changes, option 1 is the preferred choice. This enables

Council to undertake a systematic approach to the review of delegations and policies,

whilst acknowledging in a clear and transparent way shortfalls in meeting compliance

criteria.

ATTACHMENTS

There are no attachments for this report.



RECOMMEND CS26/6/20

That Council approve the scheduling of the SOHAG meetings for the review of

delegations and policies and the presentation of the outcomes to the respective their

respective Committees and Council as follows:

Round SOHAG

Wednesday

1 24/06/2020 (1pm - 3pm)

2

8/07/2020 (1pm - 3pm)

22/07/2020 (1pm - 3pm)

3

12/08/2020 (1pm - 3pm)

26/08/2020 (1pm - 3pm)

4

9/09/2020 (1pm - 3pm)

23/09/2020 (1pm - 3pm)

5

14/10/2020 (1pm - 3pm)

28/10/2020 (1pm - 3pm)

6 11/11/2020 (1pm - 3pm)

Moved Cr G Nixon



COMMITTEE - Miscellaneous COUNCIL MEETING 22 JUNE 2020

3.1 - NATIONAL GROWTH AREAS ALLIANCE NGAA UPDATE

WARD

: ALL In Brief:

The City of Armadale is an active

member of the National Growth Areas

Alliance (NGAA), the peak body

representing growth area councils in

Australia.

NGAA has prepared its Strategic Plan

2021–2023 and a COVID-19 Economic

Recovery Proposal: Boosting Australia’s

Economy through Growth Area

Productivity.

The City of Armadale intends to continue

working with NGAA as part of its

advocacy efforts particularly now that

there is legitimate support to expand on

TAFE training facilities by the Federal

Government.

Recommend that the Council:

Receives an update on the NGAA’s

purpose, highlights, focus areas and

future activities.

Acknowledges the importance of

advocating via the NGAA at Federal

Government level.

Endorses the 2020/21 membership of

the NGAA as part of the City’s

advocacy activities to progress priority

projects.

FILE No.

: M/290/20

DATE

: 25 May 2020

REF

: LP

RESPONSIBLE

MANAGER

: Chief Executive Officer

Tabled Items

Nil

Decision Type





Council.





Nil




3.1 Encourage Infrastructure and Investment

3.1.1 Advocate for infrastructure and policy developments.

3.1.1.2 Together with regional partners, pro-actively lobby State and Federal

Governments on key regional projects.

3.1.1.7 Work with State Government to maximise opportunities and outcomes through

the Metronet program.

3.1.2 Encourage and facilitate public and private sector investment

3.1.2.4 Grade separation/undergrounding of Armadale Train Station in conjunction with

the Metronet team and broader State and Federal Governments

3.3.4 Identify critical infrastructure needs to facilitate growth

4.1 Visionary Civic leadership and sound Governance

Legal Implications

Nil


Strategic Community Plan

Corporate Business Plan 2019/2020 – 2021/24

Economic Development Strategy 2018 – 2022

Advocacy Strategy 2019


The NGGA is a membership-based organisation which relies on its members’ yearly fee to

continue its operations. Membership fees vary across the population size of each Council

from under 50,000 to more than 200,000 people. The City of Armadale’s 2020/21 fee is

$20,000 (excluding GST) for a mid-sized growth area Council (population 50-100,000).

This membership fee has been budgeted under the CEO’s Office Advocacy activities for

2020/21 FY.

Consultation

(ELT)

All Councillors.

BACKGROUND

The City of Armadale was one of the founding members of the NGAA in 2015 which today

represents 20 growth councils across Australia.



These are:

NSW

Blacktown City Council

Camden Council

Liverpool City Council

Penrith City Council

Wollondilly Shire Council

WA

City of Wanneroo

City of Swan

City of Cockburn

City of Kwinana

City of Armadale

City of Gosnells

VIC

City of Casey

Cardinia Shire Council

Mitchell Shire Council

Wyndham City Council

City of Melton

Hume City Council

City of Whittlesea

SA

District Council of Mount

Barker

City of Playford

QLD

Council of Mayors South

East Queensland

The NGAA prepares yearly Federal budget submissions containing key major infrastructure

projects needed by their members (Attachment 1).

In recent years, the City of Armadale has benefited from its membership by securing Federal

funding contributions towards the major upgrades currently taking place on Armadale Road.

These projects are aimed at reducing congestion and improving connectivity to the Kwinana

Freeway and Cockburn including a contribution towards Metronet’s Denny Avenue level

crossing removal and the rail extension to the Byford.

In 2019 the City attended at the NGAA Annual Symposium hosted by the City of Swan

where the AFAC received a commendations at event’s excellence award.

Overall, NGAA’s advocacy efforts have resulted in a number of wins for its members,

including:

Announcement of two City Deals for Melbourne’s North and West, and South East.

Calls for continued Federal focus on the implementation of the Western Sydney City

Deal

Urban Congestion Fund.

Creation of a $4 billion fund to fix congestion hot spots that impact productivity.

$740 million commitments to NGAA member Councils.

National-level review of Planning Regulations in the wake of COVID-19 with an

opportunity to form a national approach to accommodating population growth.

$500 million new local government infrastructure funding post COVID-19.

The NGAA’s goals during the next three years, as outlined in its Strategic Plan and Policy

Platform (as attached) are as follows:

Federal and State Government policies impacting outer urban growth areas better

meet local government needs and expectations.

Member Councils have increased capacity to build livable, resilient communities.

Both the challenges and opportunities in growth areas are positively represented in

national discourse.

The Alliance is sustainable, accountable and engaged.



DETAILS OF PROPOSAL

As part of the commitment to its advocacy priorities, it is recommended the City of Armadale

continue to be an active NGAA member. The NGAA 2020/21 Federal Budget submission

provides the following recommendations:

Leveraging Current Investment Budget Recommendations

Armadale’s ambition to revitalise its City Centre is outlined within this recommendation

including the grade separation of the Armadale Train Station, unlocking development

capacity and building a new town centre.

Skills and Education Budget Recommendations

NGAA recommends improving access through decentralisation of vocational and university

campuses and the spatial distribution of Commonwealth supported places, to create education

student pathways close to home, grow local skills to support job growth and transition to the

knowledge economy.

The City’s intention to secure a new inner-City TAFE is outlined within this

recommendation.

Recreation Infrastructure Budget Recommendations

NGAA recommends a national approach be taken to the need for Federal Government

co-investment in sport and recreational facilities in outer urban growth areas.

The Armadale Regional Recreational Reserve is part of this national advocacy which has

been recently presented to the Infrastructure Australia CEO and the Ministers for

Infrastructure, Urban Infrastructure and Sport.

COMMENT

The projects mentioned above have been top advocacy priorities for the City, particularly

now as we plan economic recovery measures as a result of COVID-19.

In response to the global pandemic crisis, NGAA submitted to Federal Government the

Economic Recovery Proposal: Boosting Australia’s Economy through Growth Area

Productivity (as attached).

The NGAA is currently calling on the Federal Government to prioritise growth areas in

immediate and medium-term responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Fast-tracking major

projects in particular, will create local jobs, address the infrastructure deficit in growth areas

and stimulate residential housing development.

Stimulus allocations to growth areas are essential and the economic recovery period provides

an unparalleled opportunity to increase growth areas’ productivity.



In addition to prioritising Growth Area projects in short-term stimulus allocation, the

Alliance proposes recovery activities focus on:

Ensuring Local Government can deliver the level of service required by local business

and community

Improving conditions for Australian businesses to grow

Supporting construction industry to continue residential development.

ANALYSIS

NGAA represents Councils from the fast growing outer urban areas around Australia’s major

cities, home to more than 5 million people. Growth area Councils accommodate 20% of

Australia’s population in just over 5% of Australia’s local government areas.

The economic shock brought on by COVID-19 will have a disproportionate effect on growth

areas due to their reliance on the hardest hit sectors for employment, and the prominence of

vulnerable communities.

Conservative estimates of unemployment rates up to 16% could leave 424,000 people in

growth areas unemployed.

334,000 of Australia’s most vulnerable small businesses – those employing fewer than

20 people - operate in growth area LGAs.

GDP is forecast to decline in most growth area councils at a higher percentage rate than the

national average.

16 of the top 20 postcodes suffering mortgage stress are in growth areas.

Half of all households in growth areas are under mortgage stress, with more than 300,000

lower income families at particular risk.

Internal migration and high birth rates will see population growth in these areas continue at

above average rates during the pandemic recovery.

CONCLUSION

NGAA has been an advocacy platform at Federal level for the City of Armadale. Its current

focus is towards giving outer urban growth areas the opportunity to reach their economic and

productivity potential, and play a pivotal role in the nation’s recovery from COVID-19

economic shock.

The NGAA Economic Recovery Proposal outlines a number of opportunities that provide the

chance for growth areas and the Australian economy more broadly to emerge better and

stronger post-pandemic. These include:

Fast-tracking capital works projects through streamlined approval and funding

mechanisms, to create local jobs.



The roll-out of infrastructure stimulus packages at both the state and federal

government level.

An appetite to build the capacity of small business to embrace innovation and new

technologies and build resilience.

Reduced commuting and resultant expenses for growth area residents through being

able to work from home and remotely (as the majority of growth areas having low job

self-sufficiency rates, around three quarters travel out of area).

⇩ ⇩ ⇩

RECOMMEND CS27/6/20

That Council:

1. Receives an update on the NGAA’s purpose, highlights, focus areas and future

activities.

2. Acknowledges the importance of advocating via the NGAA at Federal Government

level.

3. Endorses the 2020/21 membership of the NGAA as part of the City’s advocacy

activities to progress priority projects.

Moved Cr K Busby


ATTACHMENTS 1. Attachment 1 - NGAA_Budget 2020_BOOKLET 2. Attachment 2 - NGAA Strategic Plan FY21-FY23 DRAFT_ 3. Attachment 3 - NGAA COVID-19 Economic Recovery Proposal



COUNCILLORS’ ITEMS

Nil


1 COVID-19

The City has continued to swiftly respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. Following the State

Government’s announcement of its Roadmap to Recovery, the City aligned its own Recovery

Plan, particularly in regard to the reopening of its administration centre and community

facilities. Phase 2 was scheduled for Monday 18 May, with social distancing protocols and

caps on the number of people (20) permitted in indoor and outdoor venues.

The Response Team had already been scenario planning in preparation for re-opening

with the installation of perspex barriers in customer facing areas, appropriate signage

and sanitizer stations.

With the State releasing COVID Safety Plan guidelines on 14 May the Team

promptly documented Safety Plans for each of its facilities. Staff quickly familiarised

themselves with the content and undertook the mandatory State Government hygiene

training course.

The #BeKind campaign was launched on the City’s website and social media

platforms which invoked a positive response from the community.

Phase 2 of the Recovery Plan kick started with the Seville Grove and Kelmscott

Libraries opening on Thursday 21 May, the Visitor Centre on Friday 22 May and the

Administration Centre on Monday 25 May. Due to renovation works, the opening of

the Armadale Library was delayed (due to reopen on Wednesday 17 June).

With the announcement of Phase 3 on 29 May, and the further easing of restrictions

and numbers of people permitted in indoor (100) and outdoor spaces (300), the City

reopened the AFAC facility on Saturday 6 June 2020. The new procedures, as well as

hygiene and social distancing measures put in place, were respected by members.

Being able to open community facilities and the Armadale Fitness & Aquatic Centre

was essential in restoring a sense of normality in the community and highlighted the

value the public place on local government facilities and services.

Playgrounds, skate parks, dog parks, Drop ‘n’ Shop and the History House Museum

also opened to the public that week with the public encouraged to engage in

appropriate social distancing practices.

Council and Committee meetings were reopened to the public from Monday 8 June

with measures put in place to maintain social distancing and to enable contact tracing.

The reopening of the City’s facilities (halls etc.) for long term and regular hirers is the

current priority. Long term and regular hirers will be required to prepare COVID

Safety Plans. The gymnastics and basketball clubs who have prepared their COVID

Safety Plans are now able to access the Arena which was opened on Monday 8 June.

The City has also been working with the local swimming clubs for their return to the

AFAC as well as planning for the return of Swim School from the 22 June. Opening

facilities for casual hirers will be the next priority.

The crisis has provided the catalyst for moving more of the City’s business to digital

platforms. Working from home has provided an opportunity to develop new ways of

operating that are delivering a range of benefits to the organisation. A staged and

cautious approach is being taken on returning staff to the office with customer

service, building, health and planning now providing those essential front counter

services. Consideration is being given to defining the “new normal” way of working

so as to strike the best balance between the digital and work from home experiences



and staff being in the workplace.

The City continues to host the Local Emergency Management Committee and

participates in the Metropolitan Operational Area Support Group meetings on a

fortnightly basis.

Local Roads and Community Infrastructure (LRCI) Program Following the City’s submission to the Deputy Prime Minister, the Hon Michael McCormack

on a comprehensive list of “shovel ready” projects, the Department announced on 22 May

2020 that the City qualifies for funding of an amount of $953,448 under the Local Roads and

Community Infrastructure (LRCI) Program. A recommended list of projects that meet the

program guidelines and conditions will be presented for discussion at the Councillor

workshop on Wednesday 17 June and a report subsequently submitted to the Council

meeting on 22 June for Council resolution.

State and WALGA Webinars

Following the announcement of Phase 3 of the State’s recovery program, the State

Government have suspended the weekly webinars and have instead commenced a series of

Recovery Roundtable meetings with both WALGA and Local Government representation.

2 Business as Usual

Updates to Council

Executive updates to Council via the Teams platform have now moved from weekly to

fortnightly as recovery issues evolve in regard to the COVID-19 Pandemic situation.

On Thursday 21 May the Council was given a presentation by Roberts Day on the Jull Street

Mall proposal and officers are now preparing a report to Council on the matter.

Budget Workshops

A considerable amount of time and effort has gone into bringing together a “business as

usual” budget as well as an “alternate COVID-19” budget. Five budget workshops have been

held during the past month with more workshops scheduled over the next fortnight to discuss

the City’s capital expenditure, waste services and rates.

Meeting with Local Parliamentarians The Mayor and CEO have met with local parliamentarians to advocate on issues affecting the

City and to share the City’s approach during the COVID-19 crisis. Community cabinet

meetings organised by the Hon. Matt Keogh MHR have now moved from weekly to

fortnightly and include participation by the Cities of Armadale, Canning and Gosnells as well

as the State Labor MPs in the area and Business Armadale.

South East Corridor Alliance

On 26 May the Mayors and CEOs of Armadale, Canning, Gosnells and Victoria Park met to

consider formalising this strategic alliance and to discuss a preferred approach to positioning

and advocating for the region. The group will meet on a monthly basis with meetings rotating

at the four Councils while the alliance concept is further developed before presentation to

Council.



Streamline WA Meeting

On Thursday 28 May attended a Streamline WA meeting via the Webex platform which

involved consideration of initiatives to assist in economic stimulus through red tape

reduction.

Growth Areas Perth & Peel (GAPP) & National Growth Areas Alliance (NGAA)

On Thursday 11 June the GAPP Council CEOs met via the Zoom platform and the main

matters discussed included:

Priority Infrastructure Projects – this includes a potential coordinated GAPP

submission to State and Federal Governments on projects over $5 million that are of

regional, state or national significance.

DCP Meeting Outcomes – Meeting held with Department of Planning, Lands &

Heritage to discuss the DCP list from the Department and the UDIA priority list.

Discussion with Senator Matt O’Sullivan

On Wednesday 3 June an introductory meeting with Senator Matt O’Sullivan was held where

the impacts of COVID-19 on the community and the City’s operations, as well as the Federal

government’s response measures were discussed.

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S REPORT

Nil

MEETING DECLARED CLOSED AT 8.17PM


COMMITTEE

CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE

SUMMARY OF ATTACHMENTS 16 JUNE 2020

ATT

NO. SUBJECT

1.1 LIST OF ACCOUNTS PAID - MAY 2020

1.1.1 List of Payments May 2020

1.2 STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL ACTIVITY - MAY 2020

1.2.1 May 2020 - Monthly Financials

3.1 NATIONAL GROWTH AREAS ALLIANCE NGAA UPDATE

3.1.1 Attachment 1 - NGAA_Budget 2020_BOOKLET

3.1.2 Attachment 2 - NGAA Strategic Plan FY21-FY23 DRAFT_

3.1.3 Attachment 3 - NGAA COVID-19 Economic Recovery Proposal 107

The above attachments can be accessed from the Minutes of the Corporate Services

Committee meeting of 16 June 2020 available on the City’s website.


22 JUNE 2020

INDEX

1. REPORTS

1.1 LOCAL ROADS AND COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM -

STIMULUS FUNDING ................................................................................................................ 108

1.2 COUNCILLORS INFORMATION BULLETIN - ISSUE NO 10/2020 ......................................114

ATTACHMENTS ................................................................................................................................... 116

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER’S 108 22 JUNE 2020

REPORT

CITY OF ARMADALE

Chief Executive Officer’s Report

Mayor and Councillors

City of Armadale

Following is my Report for the period

ended 22 June 2020

1.1 - LOCAL ROADS AND COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM -

STIMULUS FUNDING

WARD

: ALL In Brief:

The City has been allocated an amount of

$953,448 under the Federal Government

Local Roads and Community

Infrastructure Investment (LRCI)

Program, which aims to stimulate the

economy by supporting Local

Governments to deliver priority Local

Road and Community Infrastructure

Projects.

This report recommends that Council

prioritise the Creyk Park Pavilion project

for LRCI funding, submit the project to

the Federal Government, and allocate the

additional funding required to deliver the

project in its 2020/21 budget.

FILE No.

: M/300/20

DATE

: 28 May 2020

REF

: TN

RESPONSIBLE

MANAGER


Technical Services

Tabled Items

Nil

Decision Type




☒Executive The decision relates to the direction setting and oversight role of

Council.





REPORT


Nil


2.2.1 Deliver attractive and functional streetscapes, open spaces, City buildings and facilities.

2.2.1.1 Deliver new and upgraded facilities that are multi-purpose where appropriate.

4.3.2 Pursue non-rates revenue opportunities

4.3.2.1 Investigate opportunities for grants, contributions and partnerships

from Government, not for profit and commercial agencies.

Legal Implications

General Assessment has not revealed any restrictions. However should Council endorse the

recommendation contained within this report, procurement of the relevant goods and services

will need to be in accordance with:

Section 3.57 Local Government Act 1995 – Tenders for providing goods or services

Division 2 Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 – Tenders for

providing goods or services

The project will need to be undertaken in compliance with the LRCI funding criteria, which

includes a condition that all projects must be completed by 30 June 2021.


General Assessment has not revealed any applicable policies or local laws, however should

Council adopt the recommendation contained within this report, procurement of the relevant

goods and services will need to be in accordance with the Council Policy ADM 19 –

Procurement of Goods and Services.


The City is eligible to receive an amount of $953,448 under the LRCI Program. Should

Council adopt the recommendation contained within this report, Council will also need to

allocate a further $1.38M in its 2020/21 budget to deliver the project.

Consultation

1. Councillors

3. Executive Leadership Team

2. Inter-Directorate

BACKGROUND

In March 2020 the City received a letter from the Deputy Prime Minister, the Hon Michael

McCormack MP seeking Council’s assistance in fast-tracking the delivery of land transport

infrastructure projects on local roads as an economic stimulus measure in response to the

COVID-19 Pandemic.

A number of projects were identified and workshopped with Councillors on 7 April 2020 and

subsequent to the workshop a comprehensive list of projects was submitted to the Department

of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications (the Department).


REPORT

In conjunction with this, at a workshop held on 14 April 2020, Council also considered a

number of Community Infrastructure, Park and Building projects which could be considered

for any potential Federal or State Government stimulus funding provided to Local

Governments in response to the COVID-19 Pandemic. Information on these projects was

provided to Local MPs as part of the City’s Stimulus Community Infrastructure Investment

Prospectus.

On 22 May 2020 the Australian Government announced the new $500 million Local Roads

and Community Infrastructure (LRCI) Program, which provides funding for either local

transport or community infrastructure projects. Under the program, the City is eligible to

receive an amount of $953,448 from 1 July 2020.

This report presents options and recommendations relating to projects that the City could

proceed with under the LRCI Program for Council’s consideration.

The LRCI Program

General

Local governments have been identified as playing a critical role in delivering vital services

and ensuring the quality of life for communities across Australia. In addition Local

Governments are now also playing a key role in protecting the community from the impacts

of COVID-19.

The Australian Government has committed $500 million to the LRCI Program to support

jobs, businesses and the resilience of local economies.

Funding

The aim of this program is to support local Councils to deliver priority local road and

community infrastructure projects across Australia, supporting jobs and the resilience of local

economies to help communities bounce back from the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Funding allocations have been calculated in a similar way to how the Roads to Recovery

(R2R) Program and the road component of the Financial Assistance Grants works. This

formula takes into consideration road length and population and is based on

recommendations of Local Government Grants Commissions.

An amount of $953,448 has been allocated to the City under the LRCI program. The

Department will be consulting with Local Governments to finalise implementation

arrangements for the LRCI Program. Councils will then be asked to agree to the program

arrangements and identify local projects.

Councils will be able to access the funding to support the delivery of priority local road and

community infrastructure projects from 1 July 2020. Projects to be funded are to be selected

according to priorities at the local level. Similar to the R2R Program, Councils will need to

submit a Work Schedule that outlines the project(s) they plan to undertake.


REPORT

DETAILS OF PROPOSAL

Eligible Projects

Funding is available for local roads projects and community infrastructure projects that

involve the construction, maintenance and/or improvements to council-owned assets

(including natural assets) that are generally accessible to the public.

Projects will need to deliver benefits to the community, such as improved accessibility, visual

amenity and safety benefits.

Eligible local road projects could include works involving any of the following associated

with a road:

Traffic signs.

Traffic control equipment.

Street lighting equipment.

Bridge or tunnel.

Facility off the road used by heavy vehicles in connection with travel on the road (for

example, a rest area or weigh station).

Facilities off the road that support the visitor economy.

Road and sidewalk maintenance, where additional to normal capital works schedules.

Eligible community infrastructure projects could include works involving:

Closed Circuit TV (CCTV).

Bicycle and footpaths.

Painting or improvements to community facilities.

Repairing and replacing fencing.

Improved accessibility of community facilities and areas.

Landscaping improvements, such as tree planting and beautification of roundabouts.

Picnic shelters or barbeque facilities at community parks.

Playgrounds and skateparks (including all ability playgrounds).

Noise and vibration mitigation measures.

Off-road car parks (such as those at sporting grounds or parks).

The above examples do not include building projects, however they do not exclude such

projects either. In order to obtain clarity, the City contacted the Department and they have

confirmed that building projects do indeed fall within the eligibility criteria. They did

however emphasise the other eligibility criteria:

Consistent with the guidelines of the LRCI Program, Councils will need to

demonstrate that projects are additional to their pre-COVID-19 work program for

2020/21.

If a project has however been brought forward from a future work program it will be

eligible for funding.

The funding guidelines state that projects must commence within the next three to six

months and be fully delivered by 30 June 2021, for Councils to receive their full share

of the funding.

Further clarification was sought as to co-funding, and it has been confirmed that larger

projects can be partially funded with these funds, with the balance from other sources

including municipal funds, but that the other criteria, particularly the 30 June 2021

completion date, would still be applicable.


REPORT

Another condition of funding is the local content, which has as an aim the stimulation of local

industries.

Additional conditions, such as signage requirements, will be outlined in program guidelines,

which are currently being finalised by the Department.

ANALYSIS

To determine projects eligible for LRCI funding from the list of Council’s previously

endorsed stimulus projects, a departmental assessment was performed to identify those

projects which would not be eligible for the grant funding, based on the above criteria. Those

assessed as being ineligible relate primarily to those which:

Have been included in the 2019/20 works programmes

Have been assessed as being unable to be completed before 30 June 2021.

Attachment 1 details the projects which were considered at the aforementioned Council

Workshops, with comment provided as to their eligibility for LRCI funding as indicated.

OPTIONS

In applying for LRCI funding, in the main, there are three approaches that could be taken:

1 Allocate the funds to one larger project, and then resolve to fund the difference

with municipal funding. (Note that the municipal funding component can also

include alternate grant funding sources).

2 Allocate the funds to number of smaller projects within works programmes

(Footpath improvement projects, road reconstruction projects and small park

improvement projects) which would assign the funding to a greater number of

areas across the City.

3 Allocate the funds to a series of smaller projects identified in Council’s previous

stimulus projects submission.

Council, at its CAPEX budget workshop held on 18 June 2020, considered the eligible

projects detailed in attachment 1 giving consideration to the LRCI criteria. In addition to the

previously prioritised stimulus projects, Council also give consideration to potentially

allocating the LRCI funds to landscaping works at the major entry points to the City, or

expanding the City’s CCTV network to encompass the Brookdale and Camillo areas.

Following consideration of the potential projects, Council prioritised the Creyk Park Pavilion

project as the first priority for LRCI funding.

The upgrade of the Creyk Park Pavilion is one of Council’s Key Project priorities, with

Council most recently receiving a report on the matter at its meeting of 08 June 2020

(C15/6/20 refers). In considering the report Council resolved to request an increased scope to

accommodate expanded community use, and accordingly the total estimated cost to deliver

the project is in the order of $2.33M.

In prioritising the Creyk Park Pavilion project, in order to be in compliance with the LRCI

funding criteria, Council will, as detailed in option 1, need to fund the difference. This results


REPORT

in Council being required to allocate $1.38M to the project in addition to the LRCI funding

component as detailed below:

Project

Estimated

Project

Cost

LRCI

Funding

Component

Additional

Municipal

funding required

Creyk Park Pavilion $2,335,000 $953,448 $1,381,552

CONCLUSION

The City is eligible to receive an amount of $953,448 under the LRCI program. The aim of

the program is to support Local Governments to deliver priority local road and community

infrastructure projects, supporting jobs and the resilience of local economies to help

communities bounce back from the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Council has considered potential stimulus projects previously identified against the LRCI

funding criteria. The Creyk Park project is considered to meet the aims of the LRCI program

and will deliver significant benefits to the local community.

To deliver the project, Council will need to allocate $1,381,552 in its 2020/21 annual budget

for this purpose in addition to the LRCI grant funding amount.

ATTACHMENTS

1.⇩ Attachment 1 - Stimulus Projects for Consideration of LRCI Funding

RECOMMEND

That Council:

1. Endorse the Creyk Park Pavilion project being submitted for LRCI Program

funding to the amount of $953,448.

2. Include the project in Council’s 2020/21 Capital works budget, with an amount of

$1,381,552 to be allocated to the project in addition to the LRCI funding

component.

3. Authorise the CEO to call for tenders for the project ahead of the adoption of the

2020/2021 budget in order to assist in meeting the project completion date of 30

June 2021.

ABSOLUTE MAJORITY RESOLUTION REQUIRED FOR PART (3)


REPORT

1.2 - COUNCILLORS INFORMATION BULLETIN - ISSUE NO 10/2020

WARD

: ALL In Brief:

Councillor’s Information Bulletin –

Councillors are advised to take note of

the information submitted in Issue No.

10/2020 to be received by Council

FILE No.

: M/322/20

DATE

: 10 June 2020

REF

: MC

RESPONSIBLE

MANAGER

: Chief Executive Officer


The following general information and memorandums were circulated in Issue No 10/2020

on 18 June 2020.

COMMENT

Correspondence & Papers

NIL

Information from Human Resources

Employee Movements

Information from Technical Services

Outstanding Matters and Information Items

Various Items

Monthly Departmental Reports

Technical Services Works Program

Information from Community Services

Information Items Report on Outstanding Matters

Community Planning

Community Development

Library and Heritage Services

Ranger and Emergency Services

Information from City Strategy

NIL

Information from Development Services

NIL


REPORT

ATTACHMENTS There are no attachments for this report.

RECOMMEND

That Council acknowledge receipt of Issue 10/2020 of the Information Bulletin


REPORT


ATTACHMENTS 22 JUNE 2020

ATT

NO. SUBJECT PAGE

1.1 LOCAL ROADS AND COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM - STIMULUS

FUNDING

1.1.1 Attachment 1 - Stimulus Projects for Consideration of LRCI Funding 117


REPORT

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL

MONDAY, 8 JUNE 2020

MINUTES

C ON T E N T S

1 DECLARATION OF OPENING / ANNOUNCEMENT OF VISITORS.............................................. 3

2 RECORD OF ATTENDANCE / APOLOGIES / LEAVE OF ABSENCE ............................................ 3

3 ADVICE OF RESPONSE TO PREVIOUS PUBLIC QUESTIONS TAKEN ON NOTICE............... 4

4 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME ..................................................................................................................... 4 NIL ............................................................................................................................................................... 4

5 APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE ..................................................................................... 4

6 PETITIONS ................................................................................................................................................ 4 NIL ............................................................................................................................................................... 4

7 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES ........................................................................................................... 4 MINUTES OF ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON 25 MAY 2020 ........................................ 4

8 ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE PERSON PRESIDING WITHOUT DISCUSSION ........................... 4 1. CONSULTATION AND COMMUNICATION ............................................................................... 4 2. GOVERNANCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ................................................................. 4 3. GOVERNANCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ................................................................. 4

9 QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN – WITHOUT

DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................................................. 5

10 REPORTS ................................................................................................................................................... 5 10.1 TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING - 2 JUNE 2020 ........................................... 5

10.1.2 CLEARING PERMIT APPLICATION - WILLIAM SKEET OVAL EXPANSION (1.1) .. 5 10.1.3 DECOMMISSIONING OF RESIDENTIAL VERGE RETICULATION CONNECTED

TO THE CITY’S IRRIGATION SYSTEM (2.1) .................................................................. 6 10.1.4 TENDER 7/20 DESIGN, SUPPLY AND OPERATION OF THE WUNGONG MASTER

PLAN WASTE WATER TREATMENT AND MAR SCHEME (3.1) ................................. 6 10.1.5 TENDER 25/19 - PROFESSIONAL CONSTRUCTION SERVICES FOR LANDFILL

STAFF FACILITIES (3.2)..................................................................................................... 6 10.2 COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING - 3 JUNE 2020 ........................................ 7

10.2.1 PROPOSED MURAL ON THE REAR WALL OF THE SEVILLE GROVE LIBRARY

(1.1) ........................................................................................................................................ 7 10.2.2 ARMADALE HILLS OPEN STUDIO ARTS TRAIL FEES AND CHARGES (1.2) ......... 7 10.2.3 CREYK PARK PAVILION (2.1) ......................................................................................... 8

10.2.4 HILBERT DISTRICT COMMUNITY CENTRE AND LIBRARY (2.2) ............................. 8 10.2.5 PETITION - BANYARD AVENUE (3.1) ............................................................................ 8

10.3 CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER’S REPORT - 8 JUNE 2020 ......................................................... 9 10.3.1 COUNCILLORS INFORMATION BULLETIN - ISSUE NO 9/2020 (1.1) ....................... 9

11 MOTIONS OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN ................................................... 9

12 URGENT BUSINESS APPROVED BY THE PERSON PRESIDING OR BY DECISION ............. 10 NIL ............................................................................................................................................................. 10

13 MATTERS FOR REFERRAL TO STANDING COMMITTEES – WITHOUT DISCUSSION ..... 10 NIL ............................................................................................................................................................. 10

14 MATTERS REQUIRING CONFIDENTIAL CONSIDERATION ..................................................... 10 NIL ............................................................................................................................................................. 10

15 CLOSURE................................................................................................................................................. 10

CITY OF ARMADALE

MINUTES

OF ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS,

ADMINISTRATION CENTRE, 7 ORCHARD AVENUE, ARMADALE ON MONDAY, 8

JUNE 2020 AT 7.00PM .

1 DECLARATION OF OPENING / ANNOUNCEMENT OF VISITORS

The Mayor, Cr Butterfield, declared the meeting open at 7.00 pm.

2 RECORD OF ATTENDANCE / APOLOGIES / LEAVE OF ABSENCE

(previously approved)

PRESENT:

Mayor, Cr R Butterfield River Ward

presided over

Deputy Mayor, Cr C Frost Lake Ward

Cr H T Jones River Ward

Cr J H Munn CMC Ranford Ward

Cr S Peter JP Ranford Ward

Cr M S Northcott Palomino Ward

Cr C A Campbell JP Palomino Ward

Cr D M Shaw Heron Ward

Cr E J Flynn Heron Ward

Cr G J Smith Minnawarra Ward

Cr K Busby Minnawarra Ward

Cr G Nixon Hills Ward

Cr C M Wielinga Hills Ward

IN ATTENDANCE:

Ms J Abbiss Chief Executive Officer

Mr J Lyon Executive Director Corporate Services

Mr P Sanders Executive Director Development Services

Mr K Ketterer Executive Director Technical Services

Mrs Y Loveland Executive Director Community Services

Mrs S D’Souza CEO’s Executive Assistant

Public: Nil

LEAVE OF ABSENCE:

Nil

APOLOGIES:

Apology received from Cr M Silver

MINUTES - ORDINARY MEETING 4 8 JUNE 2020

OF COUNCIL

3 ADVICE OF RESPONSE TO PREVIOUS PUBLIC QUESTIONS

TAKEN ON NOTICE

Nil

4 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

Nil

5 APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Nil

6 PETITIONS

Nil

7 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

7.1 PREVIOUS ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

HELD ON 25 MAY 2020.

MOVED Cr K Busby that the Minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 25 May

2020 be confirmed as a true and accurate record.

MOTION not opposed, DECLARED CARRIED (13/0)

8 ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE PERSON PRESIDING WITHOUT

DISCUSSION

1. CONSULTATION AND COMMUNICATION

Over the course of this fortnight I have written several media releases and messages for

the City’s Facebook page.

2. MARKETING AND PUBLIC RELATIONS

On Tuesday 2 June met with Matt Keogh at the Champion Centre for discussion about

local issues and so he could see firsthand our food security program. A photo taken was

later shared on the City of Armadale’s Facebook page to promote our good work.

3. GOVERNANCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

On Wednesday 27 May along with the CEO attended the round table meeting to

discuss the potential formation of a Perth South East Alliance Group. The purpose of

this group is to establish an alliance for collaboration and advocacy for future funding

for our areas, (along the heritage rail line).

On Friday 29 May attended the FOGO (Food Organics Garden Organics) Forum. Later

that afternoon attended the WALGA COVID-19 Webinar update.


OF COUNCIL

On Wednesday 3 June attended the Armadale Land Redevelopment Committee

meeting.

On Friday 5 June attended the Bury Community Cabinet meeting to update local

politicians on local issues relating to COVID-19.

Also attended the Better Bins Plus Go FOGO Q& A session. The Better Bins Plus: GO

FOGO is a program to support the transition to better practice, high performing three

bin FOGO kerbside collection services. The Hon Stephen Dawson MLC announced

$20million towards this program.

This meeting was immediately followed by the WALGA COVID-19 Webinar.

9 QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN

GIVEN – WITHOUT DISCUSSION

Nil

10 REPORTS

10.1 TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING

Report of the Technical Services Committee held on 2 June 2020 .

CORRECTION:

Page 19 – The word compliment be corrected to read “complement”

MOVED Cr G Nixon that the report, subject to the above correction, be received.



Recommendation T25/6/20 - Clearing Permit Application - William Skeet Oval Expansion

MOVED Cr G Nixon

That Council:

1. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to sign the clearing permit application to be

submitted to the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation for the

expansion of William Skeet Oval.

2. Note that a Policy on the submission of Clearing Permit Applications is currently

under development and is expected to be presented for Council’s consideration

later this year.



OF COUNCIL

Recommendation T26/6/20 - Decommissioning of Residential Verge Reticulation Connected

to the City’s Irrigation System

MOVED Cr G Nixon

That Council endorse the irrigation systems on the verges fronting private properties in

Harrisdale and Piara Waters be disconnected from the municipal irrigation supply

system by 1 November 2020; and that adjoining property owners be offered the

opportunity, advice and a generic plan to connect the existing system to their own water

supply/irrigation system at their cost.


Recommendation T27/6/20 - Tender 7/20 Design, Supply and Operation of the Wungong

Master Plan Waste Water Treatment and MAR Scheme

MOVED Cr G Nixon

That Council, in regard to Tender 7/20 for Design, Supply and Operation of the

Wungong Master Plan Waste Water Treatment and MAR Scheme:

1. Accept the tender from Water West Pty Ltd for a period of five (5) months for

separable portion 1 – Option Evaluation and Concept Design in accordance with:

The tenderer’s submitted Price Schedule as presented in Confidential

Attachment 1

Council’s contract documentation, Budget and Long Term Financial Plan

estimates.

That the extent of surface stormwater harvesting for consideration in the

Separable Portion 1 analyses be limited to the Regional Recreation Reserve

sporting fields catchment area.

2. Accept the tender from Water West Pty Ltd for separable portions 2, 3 and 4

subject to:

A further report to Council detailing the outcome of separable portion 1

Council’s contract documentation

Council allocating funding for separable portions 2, 3 and 4.

3. Following the receipt of the Separable Portion 1 - Option Evaluation and Concept

Design, the preservation requirements of waterways and wetlands water be

evaluated before proceeding with Separable Portions 2, 3 and 4.


Recommendation T28/6/20 - Tender 25/19 - Professional Construction Services for Landfill

Staff Facilities

MOVED Cr G Nixon

That Council, in regard to Tender 25/19 for Professional Construction Services for

Landfill Staff Facilities:


OF COUNCIL

1. Accept the tender from Geared Construction Pty Ltd in accordance with:

The tenderer’s submitted Lump Sum consideration as presented in

Confidential Attachment 1

Council’s contract documentation, Budget and Long Term Financial Plan

estimates.


10.2 COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING

Report of the Community Services Committee held on 3 June 2020 .

MOVED Cr K Busby that the report be received.



Recommendation C13/6/20 - Proposed mural on the rear wall of the Seville Grove Library

MOVED Cr K Busby

That Council:

1. Endorse the mural concept design for the external rear wall of the Seville Grove

Library

2. Note an early review is to be undertaken of the Public Art Policy (COMD8)


Recommendation C14/6/20 - Armadale Hills Open Studio Arts Trail Fees and Charges

MOVED Cr K Busby

That Council:

1. Pursuant to section 6.16(1) and 6.16(3) of the Local Government Act 1995, amend

the 2020 fees and charges for Recreation and Culture by imposing a fee specific to

the Armadale Hills Open Studio Arts Trail annual project as follows:

$150 per artists (in individual or shared studios);

$200 per collective (not for profit group); and

$300 per sponsorship arrangement

2. Give local public notice of the intent to amend the fees and charges in accordance

with section 6.19 of the Local Government Act 1995 to take effect from 15 June

2020.

*ABSOLUTE MAJORITY RESOLUTION REQUIRED

MOTION DECLARED CARRIED BY AN ABSOLUTE

MAJORITY RESOLUTION OF COUNCIL (13/0)


OF COUNCIL

Recommendation C15/6/20 - Creyk Park Pavilion

MOVED Cr K Busby

That Council endorse the scope, functionality and cost estimate for a replacement

facility for Creyk Park, for consideration in the next review of the City’s Corporate

Business Plan and Long Term Financial Plan.

That Council

1. Note this report in regard to the scope, functionality and cost estimate for a

replacement facility for Creyk Park.

2. Request an increased scope to accommodate expanded Community use, for

consideration in the next review of the City’s Corporate Business Plan and Long

Term Financial Plan.


Recommendation C16/6/20 - Hilbert District Community Centre and Library

MOVED Cr K Busby

That Council:

1. Endorse an integrated multi-level Community Centre and Library as shown on

attachment 2 the preferred option for the Hilbert Community Centre and Library

2. Endorse the site adjacent to Shipwreck Park as shown on attachment 1 as the

preferred site for an integrated Community Centre and Library

3. Request DevelopmentWA to include the Hilbert Community Centre and Library

as a priority project within Wungong Urban Water DCP’s Capital Expenditure

Plan for review and discussions with the City, as part of the normalisation of the

Wungong Project area.

4. Note influencing factors as indicated in this report regarding availability of

development contributions and site feasibility in the current review of the City’s

Corporate Business Plan.


Recommendation C17/6/20 - Petition - Banyard Avenue

MOVED Cr K Busby

That Council endorse the proposed actions of the City in collaboration with other key

organisations and advise the residents of Banyard Avenue of the future actions and

support being:

Continue to liaise with local WA Police to facilitate an aligned and united response

and to reiterate the same messages the WA Police are communicating to residents


OF COUNCIL

Encourage residents to continue to report instances of crime correctly to the WA

Police.

Conduct a safety audit program – officers can conduct a Crime Prevention

Through Environmental Design (CPTED) audit of all properties (not just those

properties presenting with issues) to provide each resident with recommendations

on how to improve their home security. These recommendations will address all

key home safety domains (maintenance, access control, target hardening, and

surveillance) and include free and cost-effective options which can be implemented

instantly.

Rangers can issue infringements for littering if they occur on verges as Council-

owned land

Health Services can be contracted to safely and appropriately remove syringes

Once COVID-19 restrictions are lifted, host a Street Meet & Greet barbeque with

local WA Police and Armadale Neighborhood Watch (ANW). The City’s new

activity trailer can be used to provide the residents the opportunity to access safety

information and tips, become familiar with the functions of the City, ANW and

WA Police, improve passive surveillance of the street, encourage residents to

communicate with one another and increase perceptions of safety.

The City has committed to investigate the existing street lighting, against

Australian Standards.


10.3 CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER’S REPORT

Report of the Chief Executive Officer .

MOVED Cr M S Northcott that the report be received.



Recommendation - Councillors Information Bulletin - Issue No 9/2020

MOVED Cr C Frost

That Council acknowledge receipt of Issue 9/2020 of the Information Bulletin


11 MOTIONS OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN

Nil


OF COUNCIL

12 URGENT BUSINESS APPROVED BY THE PERSON PRESIDING OR

BY DECISION

Nil

13 MATTERS FOR REFERRAL TO STANDING COMMITTEES –

WITHOUT DISCUSSION

Nil

14 MATTERS REQUIRING CONFIDENTIAL CONSIDERATION

Nil

15 CLOSURE

The Mayor, Cr Butterfield, declared the meeting closed at 7.10pm

MINUTES CONFIRMED THIS 22 JUNE 2020

MAYOR

CONFIDENTIAL TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE

SUMMARY OF CONFIDENTIAL ATTACHMENTS 2 JUNE 2020

ATT

NO. SUBJECT PAGE

3.1 TENDER 7/20 DESIGN, SUPPLY AND OPERATION OF THE WUNGONG MASTER

PLAN WASTE WATER TREATMENT AND MAR SCHEME

3.1.1 Price Consideration - Tender 7/20 12

NB: Confidential Attachments detailing the recommended tenderer’s price/consideration is now being

made public following Council’s resolution of the successful tender.


OF COUNCIL

agenda - city of armadale · held on 15 june 2020 corporate services committee meeting held on 16...

Documents