minutes of ordinary meeting of council - 6 november 2018 · 2019-01-24 · minutes of the ordinary...

Ordinary Meeting of Council

6 November 2018

Minutes

To: The Mayor and Councillors

Here within the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council of the City of

Stirling held Tuesday 6 November 2018 in the City of Stirling Council

Chamber,

25 Cedric Street, Stirling.

Stuart Jardine PSM | Chief Executive Officer

Our Vision, Mission and Values

Vision

The City of Stirling will be a place where people choose to live, work, visit and invest. We will

have safe and thriving neighbourhoods with a range of housing, employment and

recreational opportunities. We will engage with our diverse community to help shape our

future into the City of Stirling – City of Choice.

Mission

To serve the City’s diverse community through delivering efficient, responsive and

sustainable services

Values

The City of Stirling’s core values are:

Integrity

Community Participation

Accountability

Respect

Environment

Diversity

Disclaimer

Members of the public should note that in any discussion regarding any planning or other

application that any statement or intimation of approval made by any member or officer of

the City during the course of any meeting is not intended to be and is not to be taken as

notice of approval from the City. No action should be taken on any item discussed at a

Council meeting prior to written advice on the resolution of the Council being received.

Any plans or documents contained in this document may be subject to copyright law

provisions (Copyright Act 1998, as amended) and the express permission of the copyright

owner(s) should be sought prior to the reproduction.

MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL 6 NOVEMBER 2018

3

TABLE OF CONTENTS ITEM SUBJECT PAGE

1. OFFICIAL OPENING .................................................................................................. 6

2. ATTENDANCE AND APOLOGIES............................................................................. 6

3. APPROVED LEAVE OF ABSENCE ........................................................................... 7

4. DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST .................................................................................. 7

5. PETITIONS ................................................................................................................. 8

5.1 EPETITION - REQUEST TO CEASE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION (DA18/1475) AT 366 MAIN STREET, BALCATTA ..................................................................................... 8

6. RESPONSES TO PREVIOUS QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TAKEN ON NOTICE ................................................................................................... 9

6.1 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME - P ELLIS .............................................................. 9

6.2 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME - J GARBER ....................................................... 10

6.3 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME - D O'ROURKE ................................................... 14

6.4 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME - A DAVIES ........................................................ 15

7. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME ....................................................................................... 16

7.1 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME - P ELLIS ............................................................ 16

7.2 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME - R BLAKE ......................................................... 17

7.3 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME - P BLAKE ......................................................... 18

7.4 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME - A HARRY ......................................................... 19

7.5 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME - S ZORN ............................................................ 20

7.6 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME - A DAVIES ........................................................ 22

8. APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE .......................................................... 23

9. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES ............................................................................... 23

10. ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE PRESIDING MEMBER .............................................. 24

10.1 2018 LOCAL GOVERNMENT ROAD SAFETY AWARDS ............................ 24

11. UNRESOLVED BUSINESS FROM PREVIOUS MEETING ...................................... 24

12. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF COMMITTEES.................................... 25

12.1 COMMUNITY AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE - 23 OCTOBER 2018 ........ 25

12.1/PRS2 DELEGATION TO THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER TO GRANT THE SURRENDER AND PARTIAL SURRENDER OF DRAINAGE EASEMENTS AND GRANT OF REPLACEMENT EASEMENTS .................................................... 25


4

12.1/PRS5 NEW LEASE TO TELSTRA CORPORATION LIMITED AND OPTUS MOBILE PTY LTD OVER PORTION OF CROWN RESERVE 46963, LOT 14219, HOUSE NUMBER 17, HAMER PARADE, INGLEWOOD ........................................... 32

12.1/PRS6 NEW LEASE TO WEST 1978 PTY LTD OVER PORTION OF LOT 3, HOUSE NUMBER 895, BEAUFORT STREET INGLEWOOD ................................................................................ 44

12.1/F1 SCHEDULE OF ACCOUNTS PAID FOR PERIOD 3 ENDING 30 SEPTEMBER 2018 .................................................... 55

12.1/F2 MONTHLY STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL ACTIVITY FOR THE MONTH ENDING 30 SEPTEMBER 2018 .............................. 63

12.1/PRS1 RIGHT OF WAY MANAGEMENT STRATEGY - DEDICATION OF RIGHTS OF WAY FOR UPGRADE IN THE 2020/2021 FINANCIAL YEAR ............................................... 92

12.1/PRS3 NEW LEASE TO CARINE RESERVE HALL MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE INCORPORATED OVER PORTION OF CROWN RESERVE 46781 BEING LOT 51, HOUSE NUMBER 47, MONYASH ROAD, CARINE ................... 111

12.1/PRS4 NEW SEASONAL SUMMER LICENCE TO THE WOODLANDS TEEBALL CLUB OVER PORTION OF LOT 352, HOUSE NUMBER 33, TEAKWOOD AVENUE, WOODLANDS ............................................................................. 118

12.1/PRS7 DEDICATION OF PORTION OF CROWN RESERVE 31325 BEING LOT 8735 , HOUSE NUMBER 61, TELFORD CRESCENT, STIRLING AND LOT 10659, HOUSE NUMBER 61A, TELFORD CRESCENT, STIRLING - OUTCOMES OF ADVERTISING ................................................. 126

1.1/TE1 TENDER FOR THE BUTLERS RESERVE CLUBROOM UPGRADE .................................................................................. 135

12.1/GS1 2018 CITY OF STIRLING POLICY MANUAL REVIEW ............... 142

12.1/A1 MONTHLY PETITION STATUS REPORT UPDATE ................... 159

12.1/9.4 PROPERTY STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION PROGRESS REPORT OCTOBER 2018 .......................................................... 176

12.1/9.5 QUARTERLY STATEMENTS FOR THE CITY'S PROPERTY INVESTMENT PORFOLIO FOR THE PERIOD ENDING 30 SEPTEMBER 2018. ................................................. 178

13. REPORTS FOR CONSIDERATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH CLAUSE 4.2(4) OF THE MEETING PROCEDURES LOCAL LAW 2009 .............................................. 180

13.1 ESTABLISHMENT OF A DESIGN REVIEW PANEL - MEMBER APPOINTMENT .......................................................................................... 180

13.2 LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME NO.3 AMENDMENT NO.102 - REZONING OF VARIOUS LOTS IN THE FLORA TERRACE LOCAL CENTRE - OUTCOMES OF ADVERTISING ............................................... 187

13.3 TENDER FOR THE REFURBISHMENT WORK AT HERB GRAHAM COMMUNITY CENTRE MIRRABOOKA ..................................................... 223


5

14. MOTIONS OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN ........................... 232

14.1 NOTICE OF MOTION - COUNCILLOR KEITH SARGENT - CONSIDERATION OF SOLAR PANEL INSTALLATION AT THE MEN'S SHED, BALCATTA ......................................................................... 232

14.2 NOTICE OF MOTION - COUNCILLOR DAVID LAGAN - AED DEFIBRILLATOR UNITS AT CITY FACILITIES ......................................... 236

15. NOTICE OF MOTION FOR CONSIDERATION AT THE NEXT MEETING ............. 244

15.1 COUNCILLOR GIOVANNI ITALIANO - NOTICE OF MOTION - REQUIREMENTS AROUND RECEIPT OF ELECTED MEMBER GIFTS .......................................................................................................... 244

16. QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN ......... 245

16.1 QUESTION ON NOTICE - COUNCILLOR ANDREW GUILFOYLE ............ 245

17. NEW BUSINESS OF AN URGENT NATURE ......................................................... 248

18. MATTERS BEHIND CLOSED DOORS .................................................................. 249

12.1/9.1 HONORARY FREEMAN OF CITY OF STIRLING NOMINATION ........ 250

12.1/9.2 AMENDMENT TO CITY OF STIRLING PROPERTY STRATEGY 2016-2020 ............................................................................................ 252

12.1/9.3 PROPERTY STRATEGY ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY ................... 254

18.1 FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CANBERRA LOBBYING DELEGATION 2018 ............................................................................................................ 256

19. CLOSURE .............................................................................................................. 258


6

MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL OF TUESDAY 6 NOVEMBER 2018 HELD IN CITY OF STIRLING COUNCIL CHAMBER,

25 CEDRIC STREET, STIRLING

1. OFFICIAL OPENING

The Presiding Member declared the Ordinary Meeting of Council open at 7.02pm.

2. ATTENDANCE AND APOLOGIES

ATTENDANCE

Mayor Councillor Mark Irwin Deputy Councillor David Lagan Councillors Councillor David Boothman JP

Councillor Karen Caddy Councillor Andrew Guilfoyle Councillor Giovanni Italiano JP Councillor Suzanne Migdale Councillor Karlo Perkov Councillor Stephanie Proud JP Councillor Elizabeth Re Councillor Bianca Sandri Councillor Keith Sargent Councillor Adam Spagnolo

Employees Chief Executive Officer - Stuart Jardine PSM Director Community Development - Trevor Holland Director Corporate Services - Ingrid Hawkins Director Infrastructure - Michael Littleton Director Planning and Development - Ross Povey Manager City Planning - Fraser Henderson Manager Facilities, Projects and Assets - Paul Kellick Manager Governance - Jamie Blanchard Manager Recreation and Leisure Services - Cheyne Cameron Senior Coordinator Communications - Kate Phillips Senior Coordinator Governance - Toni Fry Governance Officer - Jaclyn Farrow

Public 16 Press 1

APOLOGIES

Councillor Joe Ferrante.


7

3. APPROVED LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Nil.

4. DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST

Community and Resources Committee - 23 October 2018 Councillor Adam Spagnolo disclosed an Impartial Interest in Item 12.1/PRS7 as he has a property in the area - Telford Crescent, Stirling. Council - 6 November 2018 Councillor David Boothman disclosed an Impartial Interest in Item 12.1/PRS5 as he has Telstra shares in his superannuation fund. Councillor Mark Irwin disclosed an Impartial Interest in Item 13.1 as the new candidate is known to him.


8

5. PETITIONS

5.1 EPETITION - REQUEST TO CEASE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION (DA18/1475) AT 366 MAIN STREET, BALCATTA

Councillor Giovanni Italiano tabled the following ePetition containing seven verified signatures:-

“We, the undersigned, respectfully request the City of Stirling to cease the development application of a Child Care Centre on Lot 27, House Number 366, Main Street, Balcatta. Building a Child Care Centre on this block has many safety risks, such as young children being close to Main Street; additional traffic congestion on Main Street throughout the day, especially in the peak hours; limited parking on site; and the potential of the centre extending operating hours past the proposal times. Residents surrounding this block will have their security and privacy jeopardized. By signing this petition you're helping a 'residential area' remain 'residential' and not supporting a Child Care Centre to be built so close to a main road and private quiet properties.”

The ePetition has been forwarded to the Development Services Business Unit.

Council Resolution

1118/001 Moved Councillor Lagan, seconded Councillor Spagnolo

That Council RECEIVES the petition tabled at the Council meeting held Tuesday 6 November 2018 and the petition be REFERRED to the Chief Executive Officer for the appropriate action. The motion was put and declared CARRIED (13/0). For: Councillors Boothman, Caddy, Guilfoyle, Irwin, Italiano, Lagan, Migdale, Perkov, Proud, Re, Sandri, Sargent and Spagnolo. Against: Nil.


Item 6.1 9

6. RESPONSES TO PREVIOUS QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TAKEN ON NOTICE

The responses to questions that were answered during Public Question Time at the previous

Council meeting were published in the minutes of that meeting.

Only the responses to questions that were taken on notice at the previous Council meeting appear in the minutes below.

6.1 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME - P ELLIS

The following question submitted by Mr P Ellis, 7 Taxal Close, Carine WA 6020 was taken on notice at the Council Meeting held Tuesday 16 October 2018. Q2. “Can you please advise how many new employees have been employed by the CEO

of the City of Stirling in the calendar years 2017 and 2018, and the total cost of those new employees, including salary, wages, superannuation and any other payment of any kind?”

A2. The Mayor advised that the question would be taken on notice and a written response

provided.

Additional Information

A2. In the 2017 calendar year, the City recruited 82 new starters into existing budgeted positions, with the annualised cost of those employees being $5,933,227.

In the 2018 calendar year, the City has had 94 new starters into existing budgeted positions, with the annualised cost of those employees being $7,386,618.


Item 6.2 10

6.2 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME - J GARBER

The following questions submitted by Mr J Garber, 36A Pola Street, Dianella WA 6059 were taken on notice at the Council Meeting held Tuesday 16 October 2018. Q1. "I note that the Auditor General released a report on local government procurement.

Stirling was one of the cities audited. In that process, there were 20 procurement invoices audited, all under the amount of $150,000. The City of Stirling failed that, with an error rate of 50%. On 20 items audited, 10 errors were found. I would like to know the financial impact to the City from those 20 transactions audited."

A1. The Director Corporate Services advised that there were 20 samples undertaken. With

regard to the 10 findings, this is 10 issues that were found by the audit, but not 50% of those 10 samples. So there were issues that were found, but not directly related to the samples.

Two of the 10 errors have been dealt with through the City’s electronic tendering system that was implemented in January 2017; there were two other items that the City was not in agreement with, because the City has processes in place; and of the remaining six, the items were actually an ‘easy fix’ in terms of the Auditor’s report, about reaffirming processes that the City already has in place. There is no financial impact to the City. The Mayor also advised that a written response would be provided to clarify the issue.

Q2. "My problem is that just a few years ago, the City was subject to a procurement rort.

How do we reconcile, as a ratepayer, the failures that have not been addressed and not been resolved?"


provided. Q3. "Will the CEO’s employment and performance evaluation framework for 2018 / 2019

include KPIs to ensure that he will be penalised if he fails to rein in this procurement procedure?”


provided.


A1. The City of Stirling welcomes the results of the review performed by the Office of the Auditor General (OAG).

The City has taken the OAG’s findings (rated ‘minor’ and ‘moderate’) on board and is working to address them through a tailored action plan. There is no financial impact to the City arising from the findings of the OAG. Ten observations were noted, however, these do not directly relate to the 20 transactions tested, but to minor process amendments required to further improve existing processes.


Item 6.2 11

A2. The findings have reassured the City that the action taken over recent years has put the City on the right track, addressing issues raised previously, which have had their implementation tracked through the Audit Committee and Council. The City is always reviewing ways to strengthen processes, which the OAG findings will enable it to do. It should be noted that the actions arising from the OAG’s findings are largely around reaffirming process to City employees.

A3. The summary report and more detailed confidential Management Letter received by

the City from the OAG - along with the Internal Audit report on Procurement and Contract Management in late 2017 - provides the City with reassurance that it has in place robust procurement processes. Ensuring that this continues is the role of every City employee.

Further Additional Information (from the Council meeting held 2 October 2018)

The following questions submitted by Mr J Garber, 36A Pola Street, Dianella WA 6059 were taken on notice at the Council Meeting held Tuesday 2 October 2018. Q1. "What is the schedule of the annual travel for the last two mayoral terms for Councillor

Boothman and Councillor Italiano on an annual basis?" Q2. "What is the breakdown of the mayoral allowances spent on food, beverages and

entertainment for the years Councillor Boothman and Councillor Italiano were in office?"

A1. The Elected Members’ Conference and Training Development Policy provides support

for Elected Members to participate in professional networking, and encourages training development to promote their role while effectively representing their constituents in attending an event in Western Australia, interstate or overseas.

The schedule of annual travel for former Mayor Boothman and former Mayor Italiano is as follows:-

Former Mayor Boothman - October 2007 to September 2013

Period Month Destination

October 2007 to September 2008 November 2007 Darwin

May 2008 Gold Coast

May 2008 Sydney

June 2008 Sydney

June 2008 Canberra

September 2008 Sydney


Item 6.2 12

Former Mayor Boothman - October 2007 to September 2013

October 2008 to September 2009 November 2008 Canberra

December 2008 Melbourne

February 2009 Melbourne

March 2009 Canberra

May 2009 Darwin

June 2009 Canberra

June 2009 Melbourne

October 2009 to September 2010 May 2010 Sydney

June 2010 Sydney

June 2010 London

October 2010 to September 2011 October 2010 Canberra

October 2010 Sydney


May 2011 Cairns

June 2011 Melbourne

June 2011 Canberra

June 2011 Sydney

October 2011 to September 2012 March 2012 Canberra

June 2012 Canberra

October 2012 to September 2013 October 2012 Gold Coast

May 2013 Hobart

June 2013 Canberra

Former Mayor Italiano - October 2013 to September 2017

Period Month Destination

October 2013 to September 2014 February 2014 Gold Coast


March 2014 Canberra

May 2014 Canberra

August 2014 Rome


Item 6.2 13

Former Mayor Italiano - October 2013 to September 2017

October 2014 to September 2015 November 2014 Darwin

February 2015 Canberra

March 2015 Canberra

April 2015 Brisbane

October 2015 to September 2016 November 2015 Canberra

January 2016 Canberra

February 2016 Gold Coast

April 2016 Sydney

August 2016 Melbourne

August 2016 Canberra

September 2016 Brisbane

October 2016 to September 2017 February 2017 Italy

February 2017 Spain

March 2017 Hobart

April 2017 Canberra

May 2017 Hobart

July 2017 Seoul

A2. The Mayoral allowance, detailed in Section 5.98(5) of the Local Government Act 1995, is not used for civic functions. The City holds a separate budget for all civic events, with total expenditure of $3,139,912 for the years Councillor Boothman and Councillor Italiano were in office.


Item 6.3 14

6.3 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME - D O'ROURKE

The following question submitted by Mr D O’Rourke, 2 The Grove, Churchlands WA 6018 was taken on notice at the Council Meeting held Tuesday 16 October 2018. Q2. "Can my child’s play equipment, being a trampoline and climbing frame, stay on the

verge until the policy is reviewed by the Council?" A2. The Director Planning and Development advised that the matter is actually in relation

to the City’s Local Laws, so the question would be taken on notice and a written response provided.


A2. The current requirements of the City’s ‘Thoroughfares and Public Places Local Law 2009’ do not permit the placement of a trampoline and/or climbing equipment on a verge. In the absence of any provisions, including a potential Policy, allowing the placement of these items on the verge, and their continued presence on the verge, would be a breach of the City’s Local Laws. The items will need to be removed until Council has had an opportunity to consider allowing it through the possible introduction of a new Policy.


Item 6.4 15

6.4 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME - A DAVIES

The following questions submitted by Mr A Davies, 50 Francis Avenue, Karrinyup WA 6018 were taken on notice at the Council Meeting held Tuesday 16 October 2018. Q3. “In which specific area were the savings made to cover the $360,000 for the cost of the

Organisational Review which was carried out in the past two years?” A3. The Director Corporate Services advised that it was considered as part of the full

budget process. Q4. “But there has been no reduction in employment within the City of Stirling over the last

two years.” A4. The Mayor advised that the question would be taken on notice and a written response

provided, to allow a breakdown of expected savings to be supplied.


A3. and A4.

The City has been reviewing its structure to increase efficiency and effectiveness throughout the organisation. Changes continue to be made to build capacity and capability to create a sustainable future for the City. A service based structure has been introduced, which has resulted in the reduction of four Business Units within the City, including the reduction of four Business Unit Manager positions. Implementation of these changes will occur progressively over the next three years, generating estimated savings of $2 million per annum within three years.


16

7. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

7.1 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME - P ELLIS

The following questions were submitted by Mr P Ellis, 7 Taxal Close, Carine WA 6020 at the Council Meeting held Tuesday 6 November 2018. Q1. “May I acknowledge the swift response from Mr Jardine last meeting and his offer of an

alternative to my question, but can you please advise why the verbal requirement to enter a confidential agreement to sight the CEO’s contract was not recorded in the minutes?”

A1. The Chief Executive Officer advised that as per the response provided within the

previous Council minutes, any resident is able to make arrangements to come to the City’s Administration Building and view the CEO’s Contract of Employment. A ‘confidential agreement’ as such is not a requirement, but all confidential details (such as personal information) would be removed prior to a resident viewing the contract.

Clarification:-

In accordance with Regulation 11.(e) of the Local Government (Administration) Regulations 1996 and Clause 5.7(10) of the City of Stirling Meeting Procedures Local Law 2009, only a summary of the question and response is required to be included within the minutes.

Q2. “Can you please advise, from your records, how many extra work hours were required

by the City Building section on the refurbishment of the Carine Hall after the first chosen builder went bankrupt and the commencement five months later for the new builder to commence work?”

A2. The Director Infrastructure advised that the broader number of man hours was not

captured however it was considerable. The Mayor advised the question would be taken on notice and a written response provided.

Q3. “How far in advance of the end date of the CEO’s current contract is the CEO position

advertised in the West Australian newspaper, so that any possible candidates have a reasonable time frame to apply?”

A3. The Chief Executive Officer advised that it was a prescriptive process that needed to

be adhered to.


17

7.2 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME - R BLAKE

The following questions were submitted by Ms R Blake, 31 Castle Street, North Beach WA 6020 at the Council Meeting held Tuesday 6 November 2018. The following questions are in relation to Item 13.2 on the agenda:- Q1. "The rezoning of Lot 50, House Number 20, Castle Street from ‘Civic’ to ‘Local Centre’

has been proposed due to the perceived lack of parking. Parking may have been an issue in 2016/2017, but in 2018 is rarely an issue with multiple car parking bays available. Why then would the City of Stirling continue to support the rezoning of Lot 50, House Number 20, Castle Street when 68% of residents within 200m are against the rezoning?”

A1. The Mayor advised that the item was on the agenda for consideration during the

meeting; the item includes the report containing the feedback provided during public advertising.

Q2. "Most people want to park as close as possible to facilities they want to use, therefore,

why not allow the rezoning of Lot 118, Flora Terrace as the owner wishes to redevelop this site? The extra car parking bays could be positioned on this site and therefore keep everything central and on the main arterial road and not interfere with the residential area along Castle Street. This option would not cost ratepayers.”


meeting. Q3. “Currently there are 11 parking bays and two disabled parking bays located behind the

Autumn Centre and five disabled bays along Samuel Way. With the Planning Department stating Option 2 for the redevelopment of Lot 50, House Number 20, Castle Street, is the preferred option, have these parking bays been taken into consideration when stating the proposed new building would provide 26 car park bays?”

A3. The Director Planning and Development advised that his understanding is that within

the initial concepts, this would be the number of bays that would be created within that possible development.

Q4. “Why is there the need to rezone Lot 50, House Number 20, Castle Street, North

Beach when there are currently no parking issues, and there is an oversupply of apartments and offices? There are still nine apartments and two offices for sale at 99 Flora Terrace. 68% of residents within 200m object to the rezoning. It is just going to cost ratepayers a lot of money.”


meeting.


18

7.3 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME - P BLAKE

The following questions were submitted by Mr P Blake, 31 Castle Street, North Beach WA 6020 at the Council Meeting held Tuesday 6 November 2018. The following questions are in relation to Item 13.2 on the agenda:- Q1. "Have Councillors studied the Flora Terrace Feasibility Study on Lot 50, House Number

20, Castle Street, North Beach? If so, they will see some shortfalls with local rate payers’ expectations of a two to three storey height. Lot 50, House Number 20 has no frontage or boundary onto Flora Terrace. In September 2017, the planning draft had a basement carpark with a two storey building on top; in September 2018, this had changed to a ground level carpark with three storeys on top. This is not what the community wants. Have Councillors anticipated and studied the Feasibility Study? I am concerned that they have not looked at the possibility of the future outcome.”

A1. The Mayor advised that Councillors have received it, and it does form part of the report

which is on the agenda for consideration during the meeting. Q2. “How will the City of Stirling develop the Lot 50, House Number 20 site if, as stated,

they will retain ownership?” A2. The Mayor advised that the item was on the agenda for consideration during the

meeting.


19

7.4 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME - A HARRY

The following questions were submitted by Ms A Harry, 6/7 Farris Place, Innaloo WA 6020 at the Council Meeting held Tuesday 6 November 2018. Q1. “Concerning my letter of 29 August 2018 to the Development Services Business Unit

against DA18/1008, and my petition presented by Councillor Elizabeth Re to Council on 4 September 2018 (containing many signatures), no compromise or amendments were made to application DA18/1008. Is Stirling’s apparent and supposed consultation process anything more than lip service?”

A1. The Director Planning and Development advised that the question would be taken on

notice and a written response provided. Q2. “Myself and others affected by the proposed planning development were informed in

writing by Stirling on 20 September 2018 that application DA18/1008 had been deemed to comply. Why, at the Council meeting held 25 September 2018, were those present told that objections to the application had not yet been processed, and so therefore there was no comment able to be made at that time?”


provided. Q3. “Stirling is touted as ‘Perth’s second CBD’. Stirling enjoys geographical proximity to

Perth’s CBD that makes this a likely outcome. With Stirling’s dense housing infill, how can it not become another Redfern, King’s Cross, Footscray or St Kilda? How can City of Stirling remain the ‘City of Choice’ with its myopic planning policies?”

A3. The Director Planning and Development advised that the area being referred to as

‘Perth’s second CBD’ is the ‘Stirling City Centre’, which is the area that is sited around this building [the City of Stirling Administration Building] and extends over to and beyond the Westfield Innaloo shopping centre; it is centred around the Stirling Train Station. This project is the City’s largest project and will take in the order of 20 to 30 years to reach fruition. The City is aiming to create the Centre around the station, and the activity precinct around the Westfield site and on this side of the station as a vibrant Activity Centre. The City has developed a very clear structure plan and planning strategy for this area, and is working hard on the investment enabling infrastructure to see the Centre realised. The Centre is designed very much to be a place for people – where people walk and cycle; it is designed to be a vibrant City Centre, and that is the vision that the City is working to realise.


20

7.5 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME - S ZORN

The following questions were submitted by Dr S Zorn, 6 Hicks Street, Karrinyup WA 6018 at the Council Meeting held Tuesday 6 November 2018. Q1. “Residents on the ‘Parks Pesticide Notification List’ are not informed when spraying

occurs in areas defined as ‘minor knapsack applications for garden / streetscape landscaping’; only warning signs are in place. Why are residents not informed, to allow them to make a conscious decision to avoid an area proactively?”

A1. The Director Infrastructure advised that the City takes a risk based approach to the

spraying of glyphosate. The City currently has a draft Pesticide Policy and a draft Pesticide Use Notification Plan, which is available for public comment. Sections 3 and 4 deal specifically with the notification process, and Section 5 relates to the Pesticide Notification Register. The Director advised that, where possible, people on the list are notified of the City’s intention to spray pesticides; it does, however, stipulate instances where the City may not give prior notice of pesticide use. The draft Pesticide Use Notification Plan states that there ‘…may be instances such as an emergency, or other particular circumstances, where the City may not be in a position to provide notification for the treatment of a pest. Other occasions where notification may not be provided include minor spot spraying of herbicides and insecticides by hand held equipment; cut and paint or stem injection techniques where a tree is removed; and the urgent removal of biting insects near a playground or other sensitive site. On these occasions, the City will assess and manage the risk with signage and staff, and where possible, notify residents in the immediate area.’ The Policy and the Notification Plan are in draft form and you are welcome to make comment on these drafts.

Q2. “Millett Park was sprayed on 18 October 2018, and according to data from the Bureau

of Meteorology, the wind speed was over 30km per hour. (I was there and it was pretty windy.) City of Stirling staff members have advised that the wind threshold is 10km per hour. The people who spray the park make this judgement, so how is such a significant difference between 30km and 10km explainable?”

A2. The Director Infrastructure advised that the question would be taken on notice and a

written response provided. Q3. “Why don’t we use Bureau of Meteorology data, instead of letting people and

contractors in these parks make a judgement?” A3. The Mayor advised that the question would be taken on notice and a written response

provided.


21

Council Resolution 1118/002 Moved Councillor Sandri, seconded Councillor Sargent

That in accordance with Clause 5.7(12) of the City of Stirling’s Meeting Procedures Local Law 2009, Public Question Time be EXTENDED for a further 15 minutes. The motion was put and declared CARRIED (13/0). For: Councillors Boothman, Caddy, Guilfoyle, Irwin, Italiano, Lagan, Migdale, Perkov, Proud, Re, Sandri, Sargent and Spagnolo. Against: Nil.


22

7.6 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME - A DAVIES

The following questions were submitted by Mr A Davies, 50 Francis Avenue, Karrinyup WA 6018 at the Council Meeting held Tuesday 6 November 2018.

Q1. "Did the spending of the $300,000 in 2017 on the drainage problem in the Gwelup area rectify the problem, and was the $300,000 returned to the Wembley Downs drainage program?”

A1. The Director Infrastructure advised that the groundwater situation in Gwelup is continually being monitored and managed. The $300,000 investment in additional sub-surface drainage has certainly improved the situation. In terms of whether the money was returned to the Capital Program, the Director believes so, but advised that the question would be taken on notice and a written response provided in order to confirm.

Q2. “What enquiries did the City of Stirling make to check the validity of the serious allegations aired on the ABC’s ‘4 Corners’ program 18 months ago, about a City of Stirling Freeman?”

A2. The Mayor advised that the question would be taken on notice and a written response provided.

Q3. “Can you explain why the City of Stirling’s Planning Department recommended the approval of the construction of the 7 storey apartments at the corner of Francis Avenue and Davenport Street, Karrinyup and the two Councillors who represented the City of Stirling on the Metro North-West Joint Development Assessment Panel voted in favour of the application when it was clear that the residents were not in favour of the height of the construction?”

A3. The Director Planning and Development advised that the City has a responsibility to assess the application against the City’s planning framework; that was clearly set out in the Responsible Authority Report. That led the City’s officers, following the assessment of both the application itself and the submissions received during the advertising of the application, to recommend support, or approval, for the application subject to conditions. That Responsible Authority Report was presented to the JDAP; the JDAP considered the report, together with any other submissions that were made, and then they made their determination.

Q4. “Without consideration of the residents?”

A4. The Director Planning and Development advised that the residents submissions were included as part of the Responsible Authority Report.


23

8. APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Councillor David Boothman requested a leave of absence for the period 17 November 2018 to 23 November 2018 inclusive.

Council Resolution

1118/003 Moved Councillor Caddy, seconded Councillor Spagnolo

That Council APPROVES Councillor David Boothman's request for a leave of absence for the period 17 November 2018 to 23 November inclusive. The motion was put and declared CARRIED (13/0). For: Councillors Boothman, Caddy, Guilfoyle, Irwin, Italiano, Lagan, Migdale, Perkov, Proud, Re, Sandri, Sargent and Spagnolo. Against: Nil.

9. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Council Resolution

1118/004 Moved Councillor Boothman, seconded Councillor Italiano

That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council of 16 October 2018 be confirmed as a true and correct record of proceedings. The motion was put and declared CARRIED (12/1). For: Councillors Boothman, Caddy, Guilfoyle, Irwin, Italiano, Lagan, Migdale, Perkov, Proud, Sandri, Sargent and Spagnolo. Against: Councillor Re.


24

10. ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE PRESIDING MEMBER

10.1 2018 LOCAL GOVERNMENT ROAD SAFETY AWARDS

Councillor Stephanie Proud made the following announcement:- “On Tuesday 16 October 2018 the Mayor and I attended the 2018 Local Government Road Safety Awards which was held in conjunction with the WA Transport and Roads Forum at the Crown Ballroom in Perth. I am very pleased to announce that the City of Stirling received the Safe System Approach - Road Infrastructure Improvements Award for the ‘Scarborough-Doubleview Local Area Traffic Management Precinct Scheme’. The judges praised the delivery of the scheme which was driven by extensive public consultation and delivered substantial road safety outcomes across eight infrastructure projects including a 60% reduction in total crashes and a 78% reduction in crashes resulting in serious injury. I would like to give some context around this project. The community consultation phase involved the distribution of questionnaire surveys in March 2009 to almost 3,600 homes and businesses seeking feedback on areas of concern and possible solutions to address those concerns. As part of the surveys, residents were able to nominate to participate in a Community Reference Group from which 12 residents were chosen (from 61 nominations) who represented diversity in age, gender, road-user type and distribution across the precinct. The project locations were the grid section within the boundaries of Huntriss, Newborough, Deanmore and Scarborough Beach Roads. The Community Reference Group (including the Coastal Ward Councillors and the Doubleview Ward Councillors) met on a number of occasions during 2009, and based on the information obtained from the surveys, a number of locations were identified for potential LATM treatments to address concerns regarding traffic and road safety issues. The eight identified locations were considered and endorsed by Council in November 2009 and subsequently prioritised and listed on the City’s five year forward works programme with detailed design and implementation of the projects installed periodically between 2010 to 2015. I live in the area and it is noticeable, the slower and calmer traffic. Council's sincere thanks and well done to the City’s officers in the Engineering Design and Engineering Operations Business Units who worked tirelessly to deliver this exceptional Traffic Management scheme - it gives me great pleasure to present the framed award to Council.”

11. UNRESOLVED BUSINESS FROM PREVIOUS MEETING

Nil.


Item 12.1/PRS2 25

12. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF COMMITTEES

12.1 COMMUNITY AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE - 23 OCTOBER 2018

12.1/PRS2 DELEGATION TO THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER TO GRANT THE SURRENDER AND PARTIAL SURRENDER OF DRAINAGE EASEMENTS AND GRANT OF REPLACEMENT EASEMENTS

Report Information

Location: Not Applicable

Applicant: Not Applicable

Reporting Officer: Director Infrastructure

Business Unit: Property Services

Ward: City Wide

Suburb: City Wide

Authority/Discretion

Definition

☐ Advocacy when Council advocates on its own behalf or on behalf of its community to another level of government/body/agency.

☐ Executive the substantial direction setting and oversight role of the Council. e.g. adopting plans and reports, accepting tenders, directing operations, setting and amending budgets.

☒ Legislative includes adopting local laws, town planning schemes and policies. It is also when Council reviews decisions made by Officers.

☐ Quasi-Judicial when Council determines an application/matter that directly affects a person’s right and interests. The judicial character arises from the obligation to abide by the principles of natural justice. Examples of Quasi-Judicial authority include town planning applications, building licences, applications for other permits/licences (e.g. under Health Act, Dog Act or Local Laws) and other decisions that may be appealable to the State Administrative Tribunal.

☐ Information Purposes

includes items provided to Council for information purposes only, that do not require a decision of Council (i.e. - for 'noting').


Item 12.1/PRS2 26

Council Resolution

1118/005 Moved Councillor Guilfoyle, seconded Councillor Proud

1. That Council APPROVES the delegation of authority to the Chief Executive Officer to grant the surrender and partial surrender of drainage easements which benefit the City of Stirling where:-

a. a minor encroachment of a building or structure has occurred within the easement area and a partial surrender of easement is required to accommodate the encroached structure, subject to:-

i. The partial surrender being no greater than 10% of the total easement area and no greater than 10% of the overall width of the easement;

ii. The Applicant must safeguard any building, structures and City infrastructure to the satisfaction of the City of Stirling; and

iii. The Applicant paying all costs to effect the partial surrender of easement.

b. The drainage easement is considered redundant and no longer required to secure the City’s infrastructure (as determined by the City of Stirling) subject to:-

i. The Applicant being responsible for the removal of any redundant infrastructure within the easement area to the satisfaction of the City of Stirling; and

ii. The Applicant paying all costs to effect the partial surrender or surrender of easement.

c. An alternative easement area is required due to the modification or relocation of the City’s drainage infrastructure as part of the development or redevelopment of private property, subject to:-

i. The Applicant being responsible for the removal, relocation or replacement of the City’s infrastructure to the satisfaction of the City of Stirling; and

ii. The Applicant paying all costs to effect the surrender or partial surrender of easement.

2. That AUTHORITY be given to the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer to sign and affix the Common Seal to all documentation to effect the above delegation.

The motion was put and declared CARRIED (12/1) by an absolute majority vote. For: Councillors Boothman, Caddy, Guilfoyle, Irwin, Italiano, Lagan, Migdale, Perkov, Proud, Sandri, Sargent and Spagnolo. Against: Councillor Re.


Item 12.1/PRS2 27

Committee Recommendation

1. That Council APPROVES the delegation of authority to the Chief Executive Officer to

grant the surrender and partial surrender of drainage easements which benefit the City of Stirling where:-












Officer's Recommendation

1. That Council APPROVES the delegation of authority to the Chief Executive Officer to grant the surrender and partial surrender of drainage easements which benefit the City of Stirling where:-




Item 12.1/PRS2 28










NB: ABSOLUTE MAJORITY VOTE REQUIRED AT COUNCIL

Report Purpose

For Council to consider granting delegated authority to the Chief Executive Officer to grant the surrender and partial surrender of drainage easements and replacement easements required to protect the City’s drainage infrastructure within private property.

Relevant Documents

Attachments

Nil.

Available for viewing at the meeting

Nil.

Background

At present, where an applicant requests a surrender or partial surrender of an easement, the City is to report to Council and obtain authority for the execution of legal documentation and for the affixing of the common seal in the presence of the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer (except where a specific delegation applies).


Item 12.1/PRS2 29

An applicant may, for a number of reasons, need urgent confirmation that their application for surrender or partial surrender of an easement will be granted to enable the creation of a subdivision; sale of property; development of the land; or other similar property transactions. The current process (of obtaining Council approval) for each individual instance can add up to eight weeks to the timeframes required to instigate a surrender or partial surrender of easement. In reviewing these processes, the City has presented a delegation of authority pertaining to the surrender or partial surrender of drainage easements for Council’s consideration.

Comment

The City manages over 600 easements within private property, which provides the City with various rights and protections over its infrastructure networks. In managing these easement rights and protections, the City receives requests from private property owners to grant a surrender or partial surrender of easements in circumstances where:-

A partial surrender of a City easement is required to accommodate a minor encroachment of a building or structure into the City easement. Retention of the City easement is still required, however a partial surrender of the City easement can be accommodated to authorise the minor encroachment, subject to additional conditions for protection of the City’s drainage infrastructure as well as the buildings/structures on the private property;

A surrender or partial surrender of the City easement is required as the City easement is considered surplus to the City’s requirements as there is either no infrastructure within the easement or the infrastructure is considered redundant to the City’s current or future requirements; or

A surrender or partial surrender of the City easement would facilitate development or redevelopment of the private property, subject to the satisfactory relocation of the City’s drainage infrastructure and the grant of a replacement drainage easement to protect the new infrastructure requirements.

The Chief Executive Officer currently has delegated authority to enter into easement as well as surrender or partially surrender easements when they form part of a conditional development approval. This delegation does not extend to surrender or partial surrender of easements resulting from means outside of the planning approval process. In respect of ad-hoc applications (i.e. applications that do not form part of a planning approval) for the surrender or partial surrender of easements, the City has undertaken a review of past Committee and Council decisions. A review of Council decisions relating to applications submitted to the Community and Resources Committee (since its creation on 5 November 2013) shows that in all instances, the recommendation to approve the surrender or partial surrender of easement was supported unanimously at the Community and Resources Committee and subsequently on referral to Council.


Item 12.1/PRS2 30

Any applications considered under this delegation are subject to an extensive review process by the City, and the City places all financial and risk burdens on the applicant to ensure that the City remains protected. It will also ensure that any supported proposal is required to meet the conditions detailed in the recommendation. Where an application does not fall under the proposed delegation (i.e. where an encroachment is greater than 10% of the easement as per Recommendation 1(a)(i) of this report), a submission to the relevant Committee and subsequently Council for consideration will be required. A delegation to the Chief Executive Officer to enter into the surrender or partial surrender of easement would:-

Expedite finalisation of customer applications;

Assist the City in meeting the needs of its customers and reduce the perception of ‘red tape’; and

Allow the City to better manage timeframes and carry out its administrative functions.

Consultation/Communication Implications

Nil.

Policy and Legislative Implications

The proposed delegated authority complies with Section 5.42 of the Local Government Act 1995 and includes the specific functions to be performed. A surrender or partial surrender of easement requires an application to Landgate in accordance with Section 136J of the Transfer of Land Act 1893.

Financial Implications

Nil.

Strategic Implications

Theme 6: Making It Happen Objective 6.2: Good Governance


Item 12.1/PRS2 31

Sustainability Implications

The following tables outline the applicable sustainability issues for this proposal:-

ENVIRONMENTAL

Issue Comment

Nil.

SOCIAL

Issue Comment

Amenity The proposed delegations will improve the processing of applicants’ requests for the surrender and partial surrender of easements. This will also improve the City’s agility in securing its access rights over its drainage infrastructure network.

ECONOMIC

Issue Comment

Nil.

Conclusion

It is recommended that Council approves the delegated authority to the Chief Executive Officer to grant surrender and partial surrender of easements which is expected to have the following benefits:-

Improve timeframes for the City to respond to applicants’ requirements regarding the surrender or partial surrender of easement; and

Create a more streamlined process when assessing and undertaking the City’s ongoing requirements pertaining to management of its easements.

If a delegation of authority is not approved, the responsibility to consider the partial surrender or surrender of drainage easements would continue to be a matter for Council consideration (except where a specific pre-existing delegation applies).


Item 12.1/PRS5 32

Councillor David Boothman disclosed an Impartial Interest in Item 12.1/PRS5 as he has Telstra shares in his superannuation fund.

12.1/PRS5 NEW LEASE TO TELSTRA CORPORATION LIMITED AND OPTUS MOBILE PTY LTD OVER PORTION OF CROWN RESERVE 46963, LOT 14219, HOUSE NUMBER 17, HAMER PARADE, INGLEWOOD

This item was REFERRED to the Community and Resources Committee meeting to be held 23 October 2018 at the Council meeting held 17 April 2018 to allow for the assessment of the planning application to occur prior to consideration of the lease. Additional information and a revised officer recommendation has been included at the end of the report.

Report Information

Location: Portion of Crown Reserve 46963, Lot 14219, House Number 17, Hamer Parade, Inglewood

Applicant: Telstra and Optus



Ward: Inglewood

Suburb: Inglewood


Definition


☒ Executive the substantial direction setting and oversight role of the Council. e.g. adopting plans and reports, accepting tenders, directing operations, setting and amending budgets.

☐ Legislative includes adopting local laws, town planning schemes and policies. It is also when Council reviews decisions made by Officers.





Item 12.1/PRS5 33

Council Resolution

1118/006 Moved Councillor Guilfoyle, seconded Councillor Migdale

1. That Council APPROVES a new lease over portion of Crown Reserve 46963, Lot 14219, House Number 17, Hamer Parade, Inglewood to Telstra Corporation Limited subject to compliance with Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995, in line with the following essential terms:-

a. An initial term of 10 years;

b. Two further terms of five years each;

c. Rent at the commencement of the lease be set at $27,500 plus GST plus outgoings; and

d. Rent to be reviewed annually by a fixed increase of 2.5%. 2. That Council APPROVES a new lease over portion of Crown Reserve 46963, Lot

14219, House Number 17, Hamer Parade, Inglewood to Optus Mobile Pty Ltd subject to compliance with Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995, in line with the following essential terms:-


b. A break clause to the benefit of the tenant every five years;


d. Rent to be reviewed annually by a fixed increase of 3%. 3. That AUTHORITY be given to the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer to enter into

these leases and to sign and affix the Common Seal to any necessary documentation required to effect these leases.

The motion was put and declared CARRIED (9/4). For: Councillors Boothman, Caddy, Irwin, Italiano, Migdale, Perkov, Proud, Sargent and Spagnolo. Against: Councillors Guilfoyle, Lagan, Re and Sandri.

Committee Recommendation 1. That Council APPROVES a new lease over portion of Crown Reserve 46963, Lot

14219, House Number 17, Hamer Parade, Inglewood to Telstra Corporation Limited subject to compliance with Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995, in line with the following essential terms:-




d. Rent to be reviewed annually by a fixed increase of 2.5%.


Item 12.1/PRS5 34

2. That Council APPROVES a new lease over portion of Crown Reserve 46963, Lot 14219, House Number 17, Hamer Parade, Inglewood to Optus Mobile Pty Ltd subject to compliance with Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995, in line with the following essential terms:-






Officer's Recommendation (Suggested Alternative Recommendation - refer to Additional Information)

1. That Council APPROVES a new lease over portion of Crown Reserve 46963, Lot 14219, House Number 17, Hamer Parade, Inglewood to Telstra Corporation Limited in line with the following essential terms:-





14219, House Number 17, Hamer Parade, Inglewood to Optus Mobile Pty Ltd in line with the following essential terms:-




d. Rent to be reviewed annually by a fixed increase of 3%. 3. That AUTHORITY be given to the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer to sign and affix

the Common Seal to any necessary documentation required to effect these leases.

Report Purpose

To seek Council’s approval to enter into new leases over portion of Crown Reserve 46963, Lot 14219, House Number 17, Hamer Parade, Inglewood (Crown Reserve 46963) with:-

Telstra Corporation Limited (Telstra) for the purposes of Telecommunication Tower and Equipment Shed; and

Optus Mobile Pty Ltd (Optus) for the purpose of Equipment Shed.


Item 12.1/PRS5 35

Relevant Documents

Attachments

Attachment 1 - Locality and Lease Area Plan ⇩

Attachment 2 - Aerial Photograph ⇩

Attachment 3 - Extract Statutory Planning Committee Minutes* ⇩

Available for viewing at meeting

Nil

Background

Crown Reserve 46963 is owned by the State of Western Australia and is managed by the City of Stirling (City) for Telecommunication purposes. Crown Reserve 46963 is currently improved with a Telecommunication Tower managed by Telstra.

Comment

The City received a proposal from Telstra identifying that the Telecommunication Tower was in need of major structural repairs and have proposed a complete replacement of the Telecommunication Tower. Part of the proposal required Telstra to sort out the land tenure and leasing arrangements to comply with the Telecommunications Act 1997 which requires that lease agreements over Council owned or managed land to be entered into only with the Local Authority. Telstra have also agreed for Optus to co-locate off the same Telecommunications Tower negating the need for Optus to construct a separate Telecommunication Tower at this location. To facilitate this Optus have required a lease over portion of Crown Reserve 46963 to construct its equipment shelter. The following terms have been negotiated between the City with both Telstra and Optus.


Item 12.1/PRS5 36

Lessee: Telstra Corporation Limited Optus Mobile Pty Ltd

Location: Crown Reserve 46963 Crown Reserve 46963

Lease Area: 45m2 17m2

Permitted Use:

Telecommunications Tower and Equipment Shelter

Equipment Shelter

Term of Lease: 10 years from commencement date

20 years from commencement date

Further Term/s: Two, five year options Nil.

Commencement Date: Date of the execution of the lease

Date of the execution of the lease

Annual Rent: $ 27,500 plus GST $ 10,000 plus GST

Outgoings: Tenant is responsible for all outgoings

Tenant is responsible for all outgoings

Maintenance/Repair: Tenant is responsible for all capital and general repairs and maintenance

Tenant is responsible for all capital and general repairs and maintenance

Rent Review: Fixed increase of 2.5% on each anniversary date of the lease

Fixed increase of 3% on each anniversary date of the lease

Special Conditions:

Maximum height of the lessee’s tower to be restricted to be 30m

Nil.

Break Clause: Nil. Within six months of every fifth anniversary date of the lease.

The City appointed an independent valuer in order to negotiate an appropriate market rental for each proposal. The rent agreed by both Telstra and Optus is equivalent to the valuers determined market rent for each leased area.


The City is required to comply with Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995 which requires the City to advertise the proposed lease by local public notice for a period of not less than 14 days. In the event that any objections are received during the statutory advertising period a report will be prepared to Council for further consideration.


A local government may dispose of property, including by way of a lease, in accordance with Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995.


Based on the proposed lease terms the City is projected to receive rent income of $37,500 ($27,500 Telstra; $10,000 Optus) plus GST at the commencement of the two leases. Both Telstra and Optus have agreed to pay for the City’s reasonable legal costs in relation to preparation and review the two leases.


Item 12.1/PRS5 37


Theme 4: Accessible and Connected City

Objective 4.1: Planning and Accessibility



ENVIRONMENTAL

Issue Comment

Nil.

SOCIAL

Issue Comment

Nil.

ECONOMIC

Issue Comment

Nil.

Conclusion

Provision of ongoing Telecommunication services by both Telstra and Optus at this location ensures effective mobile network coverage for the surrounding residents and users. The City will also receive rent from Telstra and Optus totalling $37,500 per annum plus GST during the first year.

Following successful negotiations and based on the proposed lease terms outlined in this report, it is considered appropriate to grant a new lease to Telstra Corporation Limited and Optus Mobile Pty Ltd for Telecommunication purposes.

Additional Information – Community Resources Committee 23 October 2018

At its meeting held 17 April 2018, Council resolved (Council Resolution Number 0418/004) as follows:-

“That the item relating to the new lease over portion of Crown Reserve 46963, Lot 14219, House Number 17, Hamer Parade, Inglewood to Telstra Corporation Limited and Optus Mobile Pty Ltd be REFERRED to a future meeting of the Community and Resources Committee to allow for the assessment of the planning application to occur prior to consideration of the lease.”

Subsequent to the above, the applicants submitted a development application for the replacement of a Telecommunications Monopole. Council considered the application at its meeting held 12 June 2018 and resolved (Council Resolution Number 0618/019) as follows:-

1. “That Council DOES NOT ENDORSE the City's recommendation to the Western Australian Planning Commission, which recommends approval of the proposed Telecommunications Infrastructure at Lot 14219, House Number 17, Hamer Parade, Inglewood for the following reasons:-


Item 12.1/PRS5 38

a. The proposed development is inconsistent with the subject site’s ‘Parks and Recreation’ reservation under the Metropolitan Region Scheme;

b. The proposed development is inconsistent with the orderly and proper planning of the locality with alternative sites available for the location of Telecommunications Facilities in the immediate vicinity which are considered to have a lesser impact on the amenity of the locality;

c. The proposed development is to be situated in a highly visible location and therefore will have an adverse impact on the amenity of the locality;

d. The proposed location and height of the telecommunication tower will have a detrimental impact upon the existing heritage protection area and visual amenity of the rea and does not comply with Clause 67 (m) and (n) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015; and

e. The development does not generally comply with State Planning Policy 5.2.

2. That Council DIRECTS the Chief Executive Officer to arrange discussion between the City and Telstra representatives in order to identify a more suitable location for the telecommunications infrastructure which does not have a detrimental impact upon the visual amenity of the area.”

Council’s resolution above was sent with the City’s comments to the Statutory Planning Committee for determination of the planning application. Additionally, in line with Council’s resolution, a meeting was held with representatives from Telstra on 26 July 2018 at which the City suggested potential alternate locations further away from the residential area and outlined the processes to accommodate relocation if Telstra was to determine this as a feasible option.

Telstra advised that they would review and provide a deputation to the Statutory Planning Committee which was held on 28 August 2018. The Statutory Planning Committee resolved to ‘approve the development application for the telecommunication infrastructure (and lighting pole) with a condition that the monopole be positioned, as far as practicable, in the southern most portion of the lease area’ as well as other conditions.

A copy of the determination by the Statutory Planning Committee (WAPC) is included as Attachment 3.

As required by Council, further consideration of the leases to both Telstra and Optus are proposed for consideration on the same terms and conditions in the above report.

Telecommunication carriers are not required to enter into a lease agreement where development approval for infrastructure is approved on Crown Land (as is the case with this proposal). Telecommunications carriers, in good faith, prefer to formalise a leasing arrangement as this represents an effective tool to manage ongoing access and tenure requirements.

Entering into a lease with both Telstra and Optus in line with the recommendation will have the following benefits:-

Formalises ongoing conditions of tenure which ensure that guidelines are in place for the ongoing operational management of the site;

Annual rent income to be received by the City of $37,500 plus GST; and

Replacement lighting structure will be installed at the Inglewood United Soccer Club as part of the approval.


Item 12.1/PRS5 39

The potential risks of not approving leases over the property include:-

Crown Reserve 46963 is owned by the State of Western Australia and managed by the City of Stirling for telecommunication purposes. Where Crown land is not used for intended purpose (under the management order) the State of Western Australia has the ability to reclaim management of the land; and

Losing out on potential revenue from the leasing of Crown Reserve 46963. If Council was to approve the new leases to Telstra and Optus, the City would still need to comply with Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995, which requires the City to advertise the proposed lease by local public notice for a period of not less than 14 days. In the event that any objections are received during the statutory advertising period, a report will be prepared to Council for further consideration. Following approval being issued by the WAPC for the development of telecommunication infrastructure on Crown Reserve 46963, the development is able to proceed, whether or not Council agrees to lease the reserve to Telstra and Optus. In consideration of the benefits and risks detailed above, it is therefore recommended that:-

Revised Recommendation -

1. That Council APPROVES a new lease over portion of Crown Reserve 46963, Lot 14219, House Number 17, Hamer Parade, Inglewood to Telstra Corporation Limited subject to compliance with Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995, in line with the following essential terms:-





14219, House Number 17, Hamer Parade, Inglewood to Optus Mobile Pty Ltd subject to compliance with Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995, in line with the following essential terms:-







Item 12.1/PRS5 - Attachment 1 - Locality and Lease Area Plan 40


Item 12.1/PRS5 - Attachment 2 - Aerial Photograph 41


Item 12.1/PRS5 - Attachment 3 - Extract Statutory Planning Committee Minutes 42


Item 12.1/PRS5 - Attachment 3 - Extract Statutory Planning Committee Minutes 43


Item 12.1/PRS6 44

12.1/PRS6 NEW LEASE TO WEST 1978 PTY LTD OVER PORTION OF LOT 3, HOUSE NUMBER 895, BEAUFORT STREET INGLEWOOD

Report Information

Location: Café at Inglewood Civic Centre being portion of Lot 3, House Number 895, Beaufort Street, Inglewood

Applicant: West 1978 Pty Ltd trading as Mori Japanese Cuisine



Ward: Inglewood

Suburb: Inglewood


Definition








Item 12.1/PRS6 45

Council Resolution


1. That Council APPROVES a new lease of the Café at Inglewood Civic Centre, Lot 3, House Number 895, Beaufort Street, Inglewood to West 1978 Pty Ltd subject to compliance with Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995, with the following essential terms:-

a. An initial term of five years;

b. One further term of two years;

c. Annual rent at the commencement of the lease be set at $19,000 plus GST; and

d. Rent to be reviewed annually by fixed increase of 3% or CPI whichever is greater.

2. That Council APPROVES that the Chief Executive Officer be granted delegated

authority to enter into new leases, and any variation, extension or assignment of lease for the Café at the Inglewood Civic Centre located at Lot 3, House Number 895, Beaufort Street, Inglewood, subject to:-

a. The intention to dispose of property being advertised in accordance with

Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995, as required under the Act;

b. The rental be set at not less than 10% below that of a licenced valuation as determined by a licenced valuer; and

c. In the event an objecting submission is received this delegation does not apply and the proposal is presented to Council for consideration.

3. That AUTHORITY be given to the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer to enter into

the lease and to sign and affix the Common Seal to the necessary documentation to effect the lease.

The motion was put and declared CARRIED (13/0) by an absolute majority vote. For: Councillors Boothman, Caddy, Guilfoyle, Irwin, Italiano, Lagan, Migdale, Perkov, Proud, Re, Sandri, Sargent and Spagnolo. Against: Nil.


1. That Council APPROVES a new lease of the Café at Inglewood Civic Centre, Lot 3, House Number 895, Beaufort Street, Inglewood to West 1978 Pty Ltd subject to compliance with Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995, with the following essential terms:-





Item 12.1/PRS6 46




a. The intention to dispose of property being advertised in accordance with Section

3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995, as required under the Act;



3. That AUTHORITY be given to the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer to enter into the

lease and to sign and affix the Common Seal to the necessary documentation to effect the lease.








a. The intention to dispose of property being advertised in accordance with Section

3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995, as required under the Act;



3. That AUTHORITY be given to the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer to enter into the

lease and to sign and affix the Common Seal to the necessary documentation to effect the lease.

NB. ABSOLUTE MAJORITY VOTE REQUIRED AT COUNCIL


Item 12.1/PRS6 47

Report Purpose

To seek Council approval to enter into a new lease of the Café at Inglewood Civic Centre being a portion of Lot 3, House Number 895, Beaufort Street, Inglewood to West 1978 Pty Ltd trading as Mori Japanese Cuisine (West 1978).

Relevant Documents

Attachments

Attachment 1 - Locality Plan ⇩

Attachment 2 - Aerial Plan ⇩

Attachment 3 - Lease Plan ⇩


Nil

Background

The Café at the Inglewood Civic Centre located at Lot 3, House Number 895, Beaufort Street, Inglewood (the property) is owned by the City in freehold. The property comprises a 78m2 café, with internal toilets, kitchen, storeroom and dining area. The property was initially leased to Kham Lien (Oriental Secrets) and when the business was sold in 2015, the lease was assigned to West 1978. At its meeting held 17 November 2015, Council resolved (Council Resolution Number 1115/009) as follows:-

1. “That Council APPROVES the assignment of the lease of the Café at Inglewood Civic Centre, Lot 3, House Number 895, Beaufort Street, Inglewood from Kham Lien to West 1978 Pty Ltd, on the condition that a security deposit of $3,000 be provided by the proposed assignee.

2. That AUTHORITY be given to the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer to sign and

affix the Common Seal to the Deed of Assignment of Lease between the City of Stirling, Kham Lien and West 1978 Pty Ltd.”

The current lease with West 1978 expires on 30 November 2018 and does not contain any further renewal rights. The City is now in a position to proceed with entering into a new lease with West 1978.


Item 12.1/PRS6 48

Comment

The City has reviewed the new lease requirements and the following terms have been negotiated and agreed between the City and West 1978.

Lessor City of Stirling

Lessee West 1978 Pty Ltd (trading as Mori Japanese Cuisine)

Lease Purpose Café

Annual Commencing Rent $19,000 plus GST

Initial Term Five years commencing on 1 December 2018 and expiring on 30 November 2023

Further Term Two years commencing on 1 December 2023 and expiring on 30 November 2025

Rent Reviews Annually on each anniversary of the commencement date by 3% or CPI whichever is greater.

Outgoings The Lessee is to pay all rates and taxes (if any) and all outgoings included, but not limited to:-

Local or Public Authority Rates including but not limited to the Fire and Emergency Services Levy.

Water Rates.

Water, Gas and Electricity consumption; Fuel; Telephone and Waste Removal.

Building insurance (taken out by the City for the value of the building).

Any and all other services installed by the Lessee at the premises.

Maintenance The Lessee is to be responsible for maintenance and repair obligations to be in line with the terms of the City’s standard lease agreements.

Tenant’s Right to Assign The City may not unreasonably withhold consent to an assignment of the lease if the proposed assignment satisfies detailed terms and criteria. These include a requirement for the proposed assignee to have good financial standing.

The above conditions are in line with what is considered appropriate for a commercial food operator.


Item 12.1/PRS6 49

The City obtained a market rental valuation from a licenced valuer and the annual market rental for the premises was $19,500 plus GST. The current rent for the premises is $18,983 plus GST per annum. The Lessee has requested that the City considers accepting a rental of $19,000 plus GST. West 1978 are the current holders of a lease; it is considered appropriate to commence the rent at $19,000 plus GST as the costs of going to market to procure tenants outweighs the lower rent consideration. A delegation to the Chief Executive Officer is sought for the purposes of entering into variation or assignments of lease to allow facilitation of the following:-

Management of the commercial relationship with the tenant within time sensitive commercial time frames;

More efficient and effective management over the premises; and

Ensures the City is able to meet its legal and statutory obligations regarding commercial and retail lease management.


Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995 requires the City to advertise the proposed lease by local public notice for a period of not less than 14 days.


A local government may dispose of property, including by way of a lease, in accordance with Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995. The City and its lease are required to comply with the provisions of the Commercial Tenancy (Retail Shops) Agreements Act 1985 as the proposed business meets the definitions of a Retail Tenancy under this Act. The proposed delegated authority complies with Section 5.42 of the Local Government Act 1995 and includes the specific functions to be performed.


In line with legislative requirements, the City will be responsible for advertising and legal costs - in relation to the preparation of and entering into the lease - which are estimated at $2,500. The lease will generate an income stream for the City, commencing at an annual rental of $19,000 plus GST.


Theme 1: Liveable City and Thriving Neighbourhoods Objective 1.6: Active and Vibrant City


Item 12.1/PRS6 50



ENVIRONMENTAL

Issue Comment

Nil.

SOCIAL

Issue Comment

Community engagement The proposal will establish a business which is likely to promote greater community engagement and greater activation of the Beaufort Street precinct, especially during the ‘Inglewood on Beaufort Monday Night Markets’.

ECONOMIC

Issue Comment

Nil.

Conclusion

Following evaluation of the new lease, it is recommended to grant a new lease to West 1978 Pty Ltd which provides the following benefits:-

An annual income stream for the City commencing at $19,000 plus GST; and

Maintains the current amenity and service provision at the Inglewood Civic Centre.


Item 12.1/PRS6 - Attachment 1 - Locality Plan 51


Item 12.1/PRS6 - Attachment 2 - Aerial Plan 52


Item 12.1/PRS6 - Attachment 3 - Lease Plan 53


54

Council Resolution

1118/008 Moved Councillor Guilfoyle, seconded Councillor Re

That the balance of the Community and Resources Committee recommendations, excluding Items 12.1/9.1 - Honorary Freeman of the City of Stirling Nomination, 12.1/9.2 - Amendment to City of Stirling Property Strategy 2016-2020 and 12.1/9.3 Property Strategy Acquisition of Property, which are to be considered behind closed doors, be ADOPTED by exception resolution in accordance with Clause 4.7 of the City of Stirling Meeting Procedures Local Law 2009.

The motion was put and declared CARRIED (13/0). For: Councillors Boothman, Caddy, Guilfoyle, Irwin, Italiano, Lagan, Migdale, Perkov, Proud, Re, Sandri, Sargent and Spagnolo. Against: Nil.


Item 12.1/F1 55

12.1/F1 SCHEDULE OF ACCOUNTS PAID FOR PERIOD 3 ENDING 30 SEPTEMBER 2018

Report Information



Reporting Officer: Manager Finance

Business Unit: Finance Services

Ward: Not Applicable

Suburb: Not Applicable


Definition








Item 12.1/F1 56

Council Resolution


That the schedule of cheques drawn and payments made for Period 3, 1 September – 30 September 2018 amounting to:-

Municipal Fund $30,068,887.71

Trust Fund 27,645.77

Reserve Fund 0 ___________

TOTAL $30,096,533.48

be RECEIVED.

The motion was put and declared CARRIED (13/0) by exception resolution. For: Councillors Boothman, Caddy, Guilfoyle, Irwin, Italiano, Lagan, Migdale, Perkov, Proud, Re, Sandri, Sargent and Spagnolo. Against: Nil.






TOTAL $30,096,533.48

be RECEIVED.






TOTAL $30,096,533.48

be RECEIVED.


Item 12.1/F1 57

Report Purpose

To inform Council of funds disbursed for the period 1 September to 30 September 2018.

Relevant Documents

Attachments

Attachment 1 - Schedule of Accounts - September 2018 ⇩

Attachment 2 - Cheque Listing Attachment - September 2018 (ECM Doc No: 10258319) (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*


Nil *(Please note the Cheque Listing Attachment can be viewed as a separate document to the Agenda on the City of Stirling Website).

Background

Nil.

Comment

The reported schedules are submitted in accordance with Regulation 13(1) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996.


Nil.


Regulation 13 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 requires that a list of accounts paid by the Chief Executive Officer is to be prepared each month and presented to Council at the next ordinary meeting of Council after the list is prepared.


Nil.


Nil.


Item 12.1/F1 58



ENVIRONMENTAL

Issue Comment

Nil.

SOCIAL

Issue Comment

Nil.

ECONOMIC

Issue Comment

Nil.

Conclusion

This report is to allow the schedules of cheques drawn and payments made during the reporting period to be presented.


Item 12.1/F1 - Attachment 1 - Schedule of Accounts - September 2018 59


Item 12.1/F2 63

12.1/F2 MONTHLY STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL ACTIVITY FOR THE MONTH ENDING 30 SEPTEMBER 2018

Report Information



Reporting Officer: Manager Finance

Business Unit: Finance Services




Definition







Council Resolution


That the monthly Statement of Financial Activity and other relevant Financial Reports for the month ending 30 September 2018 be RECEIVED.



Item 12.1/F2 64





Report Purpose

To apprise Council of the financial position of the City at 30 September 2018 in compliance with the provisions of Section 6.4 of the Local Government Act 1995 and Regulation 34 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 as amended.

Relevant Documents

Attachments

Attachment 1 - A Statement of Financial Activity in the form of a Rate Setting Statement ⇩

Attachment 2 - A Statement of Comprehensive Income by Programme - City Wide ⇩

Attachment 3 - An Operating Statement by Nature - City Wide ⇩

Attachment 4 - An Operating Statement by Nature - Directorate ⇩

Attachment 5 - A Statement of Financial Position ⇩

Attachment 6 - Current Assets Less Restricted Assets ⇩

Attachment 7 - A Statement of Cash Flows ⇩

Attachment 8 - A Statement of Capital Transactions - Summary ⇩

Attachment 9 - A Statement of Capital Transactions - Detail by Business Unit ⇩

Attachment 10 - An Investment Summary ⇩

Attachment 11 - An Investment Report ⇩

Attachment 12 - A Statement of Financial Performance of City Services ⇩


Nil

Background

The City's Financial Reports are produced in accordance with the Local Government Act 1995 and Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 as amended. Regulation 34 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 requires that local governments produce a monthly statement of financial activity and such other supporting information as is considered relevant by the local government. The City of Stirling (City) produces a number of reports to assist in the understanding of its operations and financial position.


Item 12.1/F2 65

The City's financial reporting framework provides Council, management and employees with a broad overview of the City Wide financial position. The format for the financial report is in two parts:- 1. A financial summary comprising a Statement of Financial Activity and an explanation

of the composition of net current assets, less committed assets (Attachment 1) and restricted assets plus an explanation of each material variance in accordance with the requirements of Regulation 34.

The financial information presented is mandated and the previous year-end adjustments are yet to be accounted for as the audit is still underway and planned to be completed in October 2018.

2. A package of other relevant financial reports as detailed above (Attachment 2 – 12).

Comment

To comply with the requirements of Regulation 34, a Statement of Financial Activity in the form of a Rate Setting Statement is attached. A summary of this statement follows:- Comments are required for variances that are more than 10% of budget and $50,000. Part 1 Monthly Statement of Financial Activity for period ending 30 September 2018

It should be noted that this statement only includes transactions as they relate to the Municipal Fund and it removes the non-cash items to allow an assessment of the City's dependency on rate levies. A summary of this statement follows:-

YTD Actual $'000

YTD Budget $'000

Full Year Budget $'000

Opening Funds Operating Revenue Operating Expenditure Net Operating Surplus/(Deficit) Operating Activities Excluded Amount Attributed to Operating Activities Investment Activities Grants & Subsidies Equity Share of Investment Proceeds from Disposal of Assets Profit / (Loss) on Disposals Capital Expenditure Amount attributed to Investment Activities

31,292

49,629

(49,091)

538

11,732

12,270

575 -

388 (613)

(6,241)

(5,891)

18,974

49,323

(56,210)

(6,887)

11,321

4,434

967 -

352 (16)

(10,257)

(8,954)

18,974

89,400

(236,119)

(146,719)

45,110

(101,609)

8,333 2,333 2,328 (476)

(69,163)

(56,646)


Item 12.1/F2 66

YTD Actual $'000

YTD Budget $'000

Full Year Budget $'000

Funded From Transferred to/from TPS’s Transferred to/from Accumulated Funds Total Amount Raised from General Rates Closing Funds Net Current Assets at End of Period - Surplus/(Deficit)

-

(23)

137,055

174,702

(15)

15

136,403

150,858

(60)

1,990

137,351

0

In addition, it should be noted that the opening funds position is subject to year-end audit adjustments. An explanation of major variances between YTD Actual and YTD Budget for the period ending 30 September 2018 is as follows:- Operating Revenue

1. Other Rates Revenue

This revenue item has a positive variance of 38% of YTD Budget. This can be attributed to the phasing of the instalment interest charges on rates in the budget.

2. Grants & Subsidies

This revenue item has a negative variance of 32% of YTD Budget. This can mainly be attributed to the phasing of funds from the Western Australian Government Department of Heath for HACC Program and the Commonwealth Government Home Support Program as compared to budget, this is deemed to be a timing issue only.

3. Contributions, Reimbursements and Donations

This revenue item has a positive variance of 61% of YTD Budget. This can mainly be attributed to revenue from insurance recovered and administration costs charged being higher than forecast in budget. 4. Registration, Licences & Permits

This revenue item has a negative variance of 21% of YTD Budget. This is the result of lower revenue from inspection fees, development application fees and building licences compared to budget. 5. Fees & Charges

This revenue item has a negative variance of 11% of YTD Budget. This is the result of lower revenue from admission fees, learn to swim program and other miscellaneous fees and charges. 6. Other

This revenue item has a positive variance of 51% of YTD Budget. This is mainly the result of recovery of costs from the MRA for the Scarborough pool and foreshore development.


Item 12.1/F2 67

Operating Expenditure 7. Employee Costs

This expenditure item has a positive variance of 14% of YTD Budget. This can be attributed to vacant positions yet to be filled contributing to lower salaries and wages than forecast in budget. 8. Material and Contracts Direct MTC of NCA

This expenditure item has a positive variance of 25% of YTD Budget. This is mainly due to lower cost for maintenance for buildings, reserves, roads and drainage than forecast in budget.

9. Material and Contracts Other Works

This expenditure item has a positive variance of 18% of YTD Budget. This is mainly attributed to lower than expected costs in the areas of waste and cleaning charge, computer software and furniture and office equipment expenses than forecast in budget. 10. Utilities

This expenditure item has a positive variance of 19% of YTD Budget. This is mainly due to lower cost of street lighting than forecast in budget 11. Insurance

This expenditure item has a negative variance of 57% of YTD Budget. This is mainly due to phasing of the budget. Cost of scheme insurance for 2018/2019 is $1.27 million excluding dividend surplus allocations. Non - Operating Activity 12. Profit or Loss on Disposal of Assets and Proceeds from Disposal of Assets

Loss on disposal of assets is mainly the result of the disposal of several waste trucks during August where the price that was received for the disposal of these trucks was very low compared to their book value; this resulted in large losses on these vehicles.

13. Grants & Subsidies

This revenue item has a negative variance of 41% of YTD Budget. This can be attributed to grant funding due from the Main Roads Department not received as forecast in budget. This is a timing issue only.

14. Capital Expenditure

See separate report for details on variances in capital expenditure “A Statement of Capital Transactions – Detail by Business Unit”.


Item 12.1/F2 68

Regulation 34 also requires an explanation of the composition of the Net Current Assets less committed assets and restricted assets. The following table provides this information: -

CURRENT ASSETS

Cash and Cash Equivalent

Receivables

Stock on Hand

Total Current Assets

CURRENT LIABILITIES

Payables and Other Provisions

Total Current Liabilities

$’000

192,745

78,052

3,412

274,209

(45,829)

(45,829)

NET CURRENT ASSETS 228,381

Less Restricted Assets

(66,264)

Net Current Assets adjusted for Committed and Restricted Assets

Add Cash Backed Leave Provisions

CLOSING FUNDS

162,117

12,585

174,702

Part 2 Other Relevant Financial Reports Other supporting information considered relevant to this financial report is attached. The report comprises:-

A Statement of Financial Activity in the form of a Rate Setting Statement;

A Statement of Comprehensive Income by Programme - City Wide;

An Operating Statement by Nature - City Wide;

An Operating Statement by Nature - by Directorate;

A Statement of Financial Position;

Current Assets less Restricted Assets;

A Statement of Cash Flows;

A Statement of Capital Transactions - Summary;

A Statement of Capital Transactions - Detail by Business Unit;

An Investment Summary;

An Investment Report; and

A Statement of Financial Performance of City Services.


Item 12.1/F2 69

The following table summarises the City's operations as reported by the Operating Statement by Nature (Attachment 3). These are more traditional accrual-based Operating Statements consolidating all Council operations except Trust Fund transactions. They contain both cash and non-cash (e.g. depreciation) transactions.

YTD

Actual

$'000

YTD

Budget

$'000

Full Year

Budget

$'000

Operating Activity

Revenue

Expenditures

Change in Net Assets

Resulting from Operations

Non-Operating Activity

Total Non-Operating Activity

Net Result

Capital

186,684

(48,341)

138,343

(781)

137,562

(6,307)

185,727

(55,460)

130,266

201

130,468

(10,257)

221,811

(230,968)

(9,157)

9,956

799

(70,612)


Each month Business Units are issued detailed management reports for their review and a budget control meeting is held with the CEO, Executive Team and Finance to discuss significant variances and status of capital works programs.


Regulation 34 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 as amended requires all local governments to prepare each month a Statement of Financial Activity reporting on the revenue and expenditure for the month in question. Financial Management Regulation 34 also requires this statement to be accompanied by:- a. An explanation of the composition of the net current assets, less committed assets and

restricted assets. b. An explanation of material variances; and c. Such supporting information that is relevant to the Local Government.


Nil.


Item 12.1/F2 70


Theme 6: Making It Happen Objective 6.3: Prudent Financial Management



ENVIRONMENTAL

Issue Comment

Nil.

SOCIAL

Issue Comment

Nil.

ECONOMIC

Issue Comment

Nil.

Conclusion

Local Government (Financial Management) Regulation 34 requires local governments to prepare each month a Statement of Financial Activity, reporting on revenue and expenditure for the month in question. This report demonstrates responsible financial management in line with the City’s strategic priorities to ensure that the City remains in a solid financial position.


Item 12.1/F2 - Attachment 1 - A Statement of Financial Activity in the form of a Rate Setting Statement 71


Item 12.1/F2 - Attachment 2 - A Statement of Comprehensive Income by Programme - City Wide 72


Item 12.1/F2 - Attachment 3 - An Operating Statement by Nature - City Wide 73


Item 12.1/F2 - Attachment 4 - An Operating Statement by Nature - Directorate 74


Item 12.1/F2 - Attachment 5 - A Statement of Financial Position 75


Item 12.1/F2 - Attachment 6 - Current Assets Less Restricted Assets 76


Item 12.1/F2 - Attachment 7 - A Statement of Cash Flows 77


Item 12.1/F2 - Attachment 8 - A Statement of Capital Transactions - Summary 78


Item 12.1/F2 - Attachment 9 - A Statement of Capital Transactions - Detail by Business Unit 79


Item 12.1/F2 - Attachment 9 - A Statement of Capital Transactions - Detail by Business Unit 80


Item 12.1/F2 - Attachment 10 - An Investment Summary 81


Item 12.1/F2 - Attachment 11 - An Investment Report 84


Item 12.1/F2 - Attachment 12 - A Statement of Financial Performance of City Services 85


Item 12.1/PRS1 92

12.1/PRS1 RIGHT OF WAY MANAGEMENT STRATEGY - DEDICATION OF RIGHTS OF WAY FOR UPGRADE IN THE 2020/2021 FINANCIAL YEAR

Report Information

Location: City Wide



Business Unit: Infrastructure Administration

Ward: City Wide

Suburb: City Wide


Definition








Item 12.1/PRS1 93

Council Resolution


1. That the Minister for Lands be REQUESTED to dedicate the following private Rights of Way as roads pursuant to Section 56(1)(c) of the Land Administration Act 1997:-

a. ROW 22002 being the whole of Lot 32 on Plan 2452(5) and being the whole of the land comprised in Certificate of Title Volume 2821 and Folio 207 as shown in Attachment 1 - 'Locality Plan A’;

b. ROW 27002, 28053 and 28052 being the whole of Lot 430 on Plan 2343(3) and being the whole of land comprised in Certificate of Title Volume 2654 and Folio 306 as shown in Attachment 2 - 'Locality Plan B’;

c. ROW 28061 being whole of Lot 602 on Plan 2877(4) and being the whole of land comprised in Certificate of Title Volume 2831 and Folio 927 as shown in Attachment 3 - 'Locality Plan C’;

d. ROW 15053 being whole of Lot 1400 on Plan 2856(1) and being the whole of land comprised in Certificate of Title Volume 2737 and Folio 245 as shown in Attachment 4 - 'Locality Plan D’;

e. ROW 16015 being whole of Lot 15346 on Deposited Plan 37636(8) and being the whole of land comprised in Certificate of Title Volume 2228 and Folio 164 as shown in Attachment 5 - 'Locality Plan E’;

f. ROW 17024 being whole of Lot 15356 on Deposited Plan 37636(9) and being the whole of land comprised in Certificate of Title Volume 2228 and Folio 174 as shown in Attachment 5 - 'Locality Plan E’;

g. ROW 17025 being whole of Lot 15353 on Deposited Plan 37636(9) and being the whole of land comprised in Certificate of Title Volume 2228 and Folio 171 as shown in Attachment 5 - 'Locality Plan E’; and

h. ROW 17008 being part of Lot 80 on Plan 4106(2) and being part of land comprised in Certificate of Title Volume 2762 Folio 515 as shown in Attachment 6 - 'Locality Plan F'.

2. That the Minister for Lands be REQUESTED to dedicate portion of private ROW 22042A being portion of Lot 33 on Plan 2452(1) and being the portion of land comprised in Certificate of Title Volume 2931 and Folio 601 as shown in Attachment 7 - 'Locality Plan G’ as road pursuant to Section 56(1)(c) of the Land Administration Act 1997.

3. That the Minister for Lands be REQUESTED to dedicate the following private ROW 16079 being the whole of Lot 905 on Plan 3697(4) and being the whole of land comprised in Certificate of Title Volume 2201 and Folio 803 as shown in Attachment 8 - 'Locality Plan H’ as road pursuant to Section 56(1)(a) of the Land Administration Act 1997.


Item 12.1/PRS1 94

4. That the Minister for Lands be REQUESTED to dedicate the following land as roads pursuant to Section 56(1)(a) of the Land Administration Act 1997:-

a. Land abutting ROW 28061 comprising of Crown Reserve 50410 being Lot 301 on Strata Plan 54684 being the whole of land comprised in Crown Land Title Volume LR3157 and Folio 740;

b. Land abutting ROW 15053 comprising of Unallocated Crown Land being Lot 300 on Strata Plan 67977 being the whole of land comprised in Crown Land Title Volume LR3164 and Folio 673;

c. Land abutting ROW 16015 comprising of Unallocated Crown Land being Lot 300 on Strata Plan 62252 being the whole of land comprised in Crown Land Title Volume LR3161 and Folio 896;

d. Land abutting ROW 17024 comprising of Unallocated Crown land being Lot 3000 on Strata Plan 60640 being the whole of land comprised in Crown Land Title Volume LR3162 and Folio 426;

e. Land abutting ROW 17025 comprising of:-

i. Crown Reserve 51077 being Lot 301 on Strata Plan 62566 being the whole of land comprised in Crown Land Title Volume LR3161 and Folio 230;

ii. Crown Reserve 49814 being Lot 305 on Strata Plan 66392 being the whole of land comprised in Crown Land Title Volume LR3163 and Folio 608;

iii. Crown Reserve 49814 being Lot 300 on Strata Plan 52294 being the whole of land comprised in Crown Land Title Volume LR3147 and Folio 622;

iv. Crown Reserve 49814 being Lot 3 on Strata Plan 54930 being the whole of land comprised in Crown Land Title Volume LR3157 and Folio 468; and

v. Crown Reserve 49814 being Lot 300 on Strata Plan 73273 being the whole of land comprised in Crown Land Title Volume LR3165 and Folio 259.

f. Land abutting ROW 17008 comprising of:-

i. Crown Reserve 52984 being Lot 300 on Deposited Plan 409094 being the whole of land comprised in Crown Land Title Volume LR3168 and Folio 399; and

ii. Crown Reserve 52984 being Lot 301 on Deposited Plan 409094 being the whole of land comprised in Crown Land Title Volume LR3168 and Folio 400.

g. Land abutting ROW 22042A comprising of Lot 71 on Plan 41125 being the whole of land comprised in Certificate of Title Volume 2588 and Folio 465.


Item 12.1/PRS1 95

5. That Council ADVISES that any future land set aside for widening, ceded after the resolution but prior to the dedication of these Rights of Way, be included in the dedication request to the Department of Lands.

6. That the Department of Lands be INDEMNIFIED from any claims arising from the dedications actions.

7. That Council RELINQUISHES Management Orders issued over the Crown Land which are the subject of this report.



1. That the Minister for Lands be REQUESTED to dedicate the following private Rights of

Way as roads pursuant to Section 56(1)(c) of the Land Administration Act 1997:-










Item 12.1/PRS1 96

















Item 12.1/PRS1 97







1. That the Minister for Lands be REQUESTED to dedicate the following private Rights of Way as roads pursuant to Section 56(1)(c) of the Land Administration Act 1997:-










Item 12.1/PRS1 98

















Item 12.1/PRS1 99






Report Purpose

To seek approval to request the Minister for Lands to dedicate 10 Rights of Way (ROWs) and nine abutting lots as road. These ROWs are proposed for upgrading by the City in the 2020/2021 financial year in accordance with the objectives for the City's Right of Way Management Strategy.

Relevant Documents

Attachments

Attachment 1 - Locality Plan A - Showing ROW 22002. ⇩

Attachment 2 - Locality Plan B - Showing ROW 27002, 28053 and 28052. ⇩

Attachment 3 - Locality Plan C - Showing ROW 28061. ⇩

Attachment 4 - Locality Plan D - Showing ROW 15053. ⇩

Attachment 5 - Locality Plan E - Showing ROW 16015, 17024 and 17025. ⇩

Attachment 6 - Locality Plan F - Showing ROW 17008 ⇩

Attachment 7 - Locality Plan G - Showing ROW 22042A ⇩

Attachment 8 - Locality Plan H - Showing ROW 16079 ⇩


Nil


Item 12.1/PRS1 100

Background

At its meeting held 10 November 2009, Council resolved (Council Resolution Number 1109/014) as follows:-

"1. That the revised funding approach for the Rights of Way Management Strategy using City Funds and Development Contributions be ENDORSED in light of the advice from the Department of Regional Development and Lands (Local Government) in relation to the use of Differential General Rates and the difficulty associated with administering a rating-based system of funding on strata properties.

2. That a 10 year program for upgrading and dedication of Categories 1, 2 and 3 Rights of Way and acquisition of Categories 4 and 5 Rights of Ways be ENDORSED.

3. That the draft Rights of Ways Management Strategy as modified and updated (reflecting the revised funding approach using only City Funds and Development Contributions) be ADOPTED.

4. Prior to each Right Of Way being upgraded the adjacent Right Of Way residents be CONSULTED and their views be considered prior to a decision being made on whether the Rights Of Way will be upgraded."

The objectives of the Right of Way Management Strategy include the dedication and upgrade of all Category 1,2 and 3 ROWs as public roads to allow for the ROWs to be managed by the City.

The dedication of Category 1, 2 and 3 ROWs is staged year to year in line with the City's design and upgrade works programme. This will allow each ROW to be vested in the City prior to the design and upgrade being undertaken.

Comment

The Department of Lands has advised the City that the request for dedication must include the legal description of subject land and copies of the relevant surveys (Plans, Strata Plans, Deposited Plans, Diagrams) with the lots to be dedicated highlighted. The Department of Lands also requires that the request be grouped into Private ROWs, Crown ROWs and Crown Reserves as per the recommendations within this report. Pursuant to the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) policy on ROWs and Laneways, a number of ROW widening areas have been ceded from lots abutting the ROW to be dedicated. It is therefore proposed that these widening areas be dedicated concurrently with the dedication of the abutting ROW. The parcels of land set aside for widening are currently vested in the Crown as Crown ROWs under Section 152 of the Planning and Development Act 2005 (and formerly under Section 20A of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928). These Crown ROWs have been created as Crown Reserves for the purpose of ‘Rights of Way’ with or without a Management Order in favour of the City of Stirling.


Item 12.1/PRS1 101

Naming of these Laneways and ROWs, as well as the associated widening areas, will be undertaken following dedication in accordance with the Geographic Names Committee’s ‘Principles, Guidelines and Procedures’ controlled by Landgate, as well as Council Resolution Number 0813/057, adopted by Council at its meeting held 20 August 2013 as follows:-

“That Council ENDORSE ‘Option 4 – Rights of Way Naming Maps’, as outlined in the Manager City Planning’s report.”

Specific requirements pertaining to the Partial Closure of ROW 22042A The northern part of ROW 22042A from Swan Street to the rear of House Number 254, Main Street and House Number 207, Waterloo Street, Osborne Park has been fenced into the adjoining lots by the owners for some time. The City is not proposing to dedicate this portion of ROW 22042A given the potential for adverse possession to be lodged from the owners in possession. It is proposed that the remainder of ROW 22042A be dedicated as road as per all other ROWs within this report.


The Department of Lands, Planning and Heritage, the WAPC and the Geographic Names Committee have been consulted. The WAPC has advised that it does not object to the City progressively dedicating these parcels of land which have been ceded for ROW widening as the abutting ROWs are dedicated.


Sections 56(1)(a) and (c) of the Land Administration Act 1997 provide that a Local Government may request the Minister for Lands to dedicate land as a road.


The costs of undertaking a request for dedication by the City will be of an administrative nature and will not require significant expenditure. Following dedication, these ROWs will form part of the City’s road network and all future maintenance will be budgeted as part of the City's road maintenance budget.


Theme 4: Accessible and Connected City Objective 1.4: Safer City


Item 12.1/PRS1 102



ENVIRONMENTAL

Issue Comment

Nil.

SOCIAL

Issue Comment

Nil.

ECONOMIC

Issue Comment

Nil.

Conclusion

At its meeting held 10 November 2009, Council resolved to adopt the Rights of Way Management Strategy, which includes scheduling of the City’s Upgrade Works Programme. To allow implementation of the Rights of Way Management Strategy, the City is proposing to undertake dedication actions, through the Department of Lands, Planning and Heritage, to progress the dedications for the 2020/2021 financial year. Progressing with these dedication actions will allow the City to undertake upgrades, repairs, maintenance and management of the Rights of Way as public roads. This will result in improved services to the local community.


Item 12.1/PRS1 - Attachment 1 - Locality Plan A - Showing ROW 22002. 103


Item 12.1/PRS1 - Attachment 2 - Locality Plan B - Showing ROW 27002, 28053 and 28052. 104


Item 12.1/PRS1 - Attachment 3 - Locality Plan C - Showing ROW 28061. 105


Item 12.1/PRS1 - Attachment 4 - Locality Plan D - Showing ROW 15053. 106


Item 12.1/PRS1 - Attachment 5 - Locality Plan E - Showing ROW 16015, 17024 and 17025. 107


Item 12.1/PRS1 - Attachment 6 - Locality Plan F - Showing ROW 17008 108


Item 12.1/PRS1 - Attachment 7 - Locality Plan G - Showing ROW 22042A 109


Item 12.1/PRS1 - Attachment 8 - Locality Plan H - Showing ROW 16079 110


Item 12.1/PRS3 111

12.1/PRS3 NEW LEASE TO CARINE RESERVE HALL MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE INCORPORATED OVER PORTION OF CROWN RESERVE 46781 BEING LOT 51, HOUSE NUMBER 47, MONYASH ROAD, CARINE

Report Information

Location: Portion of Crown Reserve 46781 being Lot 51, House Number 47, Monyash Road, Carine

Applicant: Carine Reserve Hall Management Committee



Ward: Hamersley

Suburb: Carine


Definition








Item 12.1/PRS3 112

Council Resolution


1. That Council APPROVES a new lease over a portion of Crown Reserve 46781 being Lot 51, House Number 47, Monyash Road, Carine to the Carine Reserve Hall Management Committee Incorporated with the following essential terms:-


b. One further term of five years; and

c. Annual rent at the commencement of the lease be set at $1,000 plus GST.

2. That AUTHORITY be given to the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer to enter into the lease and to sign and affix the Common Seal to the necessary documentation to effect the lease.















Item 12.1/PRS3 113

Report Purpose

To seek Council's approval to enter into a new lease with the Carine Reserve Hall Management Committee Incorporated over a portion of Crown Reserve 46781 being Lot 51, House Number 47, Monyash Road, Carine (Crown Reserve 46781).

Relevant Documents

Attachments




Nil

Background

Crown Reserve 46781 is owned by the State of Western Australian and is managed by the City of Stirling under the terms of a management order for the purpose of Recreation and Landscape Protection.

The Carine Reserve Hall Management Committee (the club) leased the previous Carine Reserve Hall facility beginning in the late 1980s, with the lease being placed on hold whilst the newly refurbished Carine Clubrooms were being redeveloped and a management structure review was conducted.

The Carine Reserve Hall Management Committee is an incorporation made up of a number of member clubs. The refurbished Carine Clubrooms were officially opened in September 2017. The facility accommodates the following nine sporting groups which form part of the overarching management committee:-

Member Club Activity Occupation/Season

Northern Suburbs Dog Training and Obedience Club

Dog Training Year Round

Carine Cats Ball Club – Teeball Teeball Summer Season

Carine Cats Ball Club – Softball Softball Year Round

Carine Cats Ball Club – Baseball Baseball Summer Season

Glendale Little Athletics Club Athletics Summer Season

Hamersley Carine Amateur Football Club Australian Rules Winter Season

Carine Junior Football Club Australian Rules Winter Season

Hamersley Rovers Soccer Club Soccer Winter Season

Hamersley Rovers Junior Football Club Soccer Winter Season

The current management arrangement is that the club was the holder of the lease and each member club formed part of the committee overseeing the running of the facility. Due to the management requirements of many clubs sharing the same facility, the governing incorporation was considered the most suitable arrangement for ongoing management of the facility.


Item 12.1/PRS3 114

Following the redevelopment of the Carine Clubroom and review of the management structure, the City is now in a position to proceed with entering into a new lease with the club.

Comment

The City has reviewed the new lease requirements which are in line with the City’s standard lease terms and will form part of the agreement:-

Lessee Carine Hall Management Committee Club

Lease Purpose Sporting and Community

Annual Commencing Rent $1,000 plus GST

Initial Term Five years

Further Term Five years

Rent Review In line with Council approved community leasing fees

Outgoings The club is to pay all rates and taxes (if any) and all outgoings including, but not limited to:-

Local or Public Authority Rates including but not limited to the Fire and Emergency Services Levy;

Water rates;

Water, Gas and Electricity consumption; Fuel; Telephone; Waste Removal; and


Maintenance The club is to be responsible for maintenance and repair obligations to be in line with the terms of the City’s standard lease agreements.

Special Conditions Any installation made by the tenant will be the sole responsibility of the tenant to maintain, repair and replace.

The above conditions are in line with the current standard lease terms offered to similar sporting and community groups. The current rent paid for the property is $1,000 plus GST, the same amount as the proposed rent.


Nil.


A local government may dispose of property, including by way of a lease, in accordance with Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995.

Leasing of Crown Land is to be undertaken in accordance with Section 18 of the Land Administration Act 1997.


Item 12.1/PRS3 115


The City will be responsible for the preparation of the initial lease document which will be undertaken in house at no-charge to the club. The club will be responsible for its own legal costs, as well as any legal costs incurred by the City for any substantial amendments initiated by the club. The City will receive an annual rent from the lease commencing at $1,000 plus GST.


Theme 3: Engaged Communities Objective 3.2: Active Participation and Volunteering



ENVIRONMENTAL

Issue Comment

Nil.

SOCIAL

Issue Comment

Community engagement Granting a new lease to the club will secure future tenure for the club and allow its members to continue with current activities from the premises, as well as encourage new members to participate.

ECONOMIC

Issue Comment

Nil.

Conclusion

It is considered appropriate to enter into a new lease agreement with the Carine Reserve Hall Management Committee over a portion of Crown Reserve 46781 being Lot 51, House Number 47, Monyash Road, Carine as it:-

Will allow the clubs to continue providing sporting and recreational services to its current and future members; and

Secures tenure for the clubs to undertake longer term planning. Following successful negotiations and based on the proposed lease terms outlined in this report, it is considered appropriate to grant a new lease to the Carine Hall Management Committee Club to continue recreational services at the property.


Item 12.1/PRS4 118

12.1/PRS4 NEW SEASONAL SUMMER LICENCE TO THE WOODLANDS TEEBALL CLUB OVER PORTION OF LOT 352, HOUSE NUMBER 33, TEAKWOOD AVENUE, WOODLANDS

Report Information

Location: Portion of Lot 352, House Number 33, Teakwood Avenue, Woodlands

Applicant: Woodlands Teeball Club



Ward: Doubleview

Suburb: Woodlands


Definition








Item 12.1/PRS4 119

Council Resolution


1. That Council APPROVES a new seasonal summer licence over portion of Woodlands Reserve being Lot 352, House Number 33, Teakwood Avenue, Woodlands to the Woodlands Teeball Club with the following essential terms:-



c. Annual rent at the commencement of the lease be set at $500 plus GST.

2. That AUTHORITY be given to the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer to enter into the seasonal summer licence and sign and affix the Common Seal to the necessary documentation to effect the seasonal summer licence.



1. That Council APPROVES a new seasonal summer licence over portion of Woodlands

Reserve being Lot 352, House Number 33, Teakwood Avenue, Woodlands to the Woodlands Teeball Club with the following essential terms:-



c. Annual rent at the commencement of the lease be set at $500 plus GST.

2. That AUTHORITY be given to the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer to enter into the seasonal summer licence and sign and affix the Common Seal to the necessary documentation to effect the seasonal summer licence.


1. That Council APPROVES a new seasonal summer licence over portion of Woodlands Reserve being Lot 352, House Number 33, Teakwood Avenue, Woodlands to the Woodlands Teeball Club with the following essential terms:-



c. Annual rent at the commencement of the lease be set at $500 plus GST. 2. That AUTHORITY be given to the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer to enter into the

seasonal summer licence and sign and affix the Common Seal to the necessary documentation to effect the seasonal summer licence.


Item 12.1/PRS4 120

Report Purpose

To seek Council’s approval to enter in to a new seasonal summer licence with the Woodlands Teeball Club over a portion of Woodlands Reserve being Lot 352, House Number 33, Teakwood Avenue, Woodlands.

Relevant Documents

Attachments


Attachment 2 - Aerial Plan ⇩


Nil

Background

Woodlands Reserve Clubrooms, located at Lot 352, House Number 33, Teakwood Avenue, Woodlands (the property) is owned by the City in freehold and is managed as active open space. The property is currently leased to the Teeball Association of Western Australia Incorporated (the Association) who has occupied the property since 1996. The Association has been holding over under the current lease which expired in June 2015 as a monthly tenant while a management structure review was conducted. The Association is the State Sporting Association and it has been the long standing primary lease holder since 1996, has effectively maintained the facility and managed community bookings, however it does not utilise the reserve on a regular basis. Primary use is for storage and regular meetings and the City is not intending to proceed with further leasing arrangements with the Association. The Woodlands Teeball Club (Woodlands Teeball) are a long standing regular summer user of the reserve and the building, and provide community based junior sporting opportunities for the community. Whilst there are a number of other reserve and/or facility users, Woodlands Teeball has considerable use of both the reserve and the property and facilities. It is recommended that the City provides a seasonal summer licence to the primary summer tenant, being Woodlands Teeball, given their utilisation of both the facility and the reserve. Both the Association and Woodlands Teeball have been consulted and have agreed, in principle, to Woodlands Teeball managing the facility in the summer season. The Association will still have access to the facility and will be able to hire directly from Woodlands Teeball in line with the Council endorsed Schedule of Fees and Charges. The City is also currently investigating alternative opportunities for the Association to potentially relocate following their request. Following the review of the management structure, the City is now in a position to proceed with entering into a new seasonal summer licence with Woodlands Teeball.


Item 12.1/PRS4 121

Comment

The City has reviewed the new seasonal summer licence requirements which are in line with the City’s standard licence terms and will form part of the agreement:-

Licensee Woodlands Teeball Club Incorporated

Licence Purpose Sporting Club

Period of Occupancy Summer Season

Annual Commencing Rent $500 plus GST

Initial Term Five years

Further Term Five years

Rent Review In line with Council approved community licensing fees

Outgoings The club is to pay all rates and taxes (if any) and all outgoings including, but not limited to:-

Local or Public Authority Rates including but not limited to the Fire and Emergency Services Levy.

Water rates

Water, Gas and Electricity consumption; Fuel Telephone and Waste Removal;


Maintenance The club is to be responsible for maintenance and repair obligations to be in line with the terms of the City’s standard lease agreements.

Special Conditions Any installation made by the tenant will be the sole responsibility of the tenant to maintain, repair and replace.

The above conditions are in line with the current standard licence terms offered to similar sporting clubs. The current rent paid for the property is $500 which is comparable to other seasonal licensees. Review of Seasonal Winter Use The City is currently undertaking further review of the winter users of the Woodlands Clubrooms, which does not impact approval of the seasonal summer licence above. Additional information regarding the winter users is provided below for information. The Woodlands Wolves utilise the reserve during the winter season and have approached the City requesting access to the facility. The Association and Woodlands Teeball have supported access through the provision of storage for the winter season for the club. Given the existing use of the facility and reserve, it is considered prudent that the City continues to review winter use of the reserve and the buildings with all Clubs over the course of the next financial year prior to allocating a seasonal licence holder for the winter sporting season.


Item 12.1/PRS4 122

This winter arrangement will be reviewed on an annual basis to ensure the most appropriate arrangement is in place. It is recommended that Woodlands Teeball be provided with a hire arrangement for the winter period concluding on 30 September 2019 whilst the City engages with all clubs to ascertain winter needs and assess utilisation following the conclusion of the 2019 winter season. It is noted that the Woodlands Wolves can seek access to the facility during winter through Woodlands Teeball. The City continues to progress negotiations with all of the groups, both new and old, at the reserve regarding both reserve and facility requests to accommodate needs where appropriate.


Nil.


A local government may dispose of property, including by way of a lease, in accordance with Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995. Leasing of Crown Land is to be undertaken in accordance with Section 18 of the Land Administration Act 1997.


The City will be responsible for the preparation of the initial seasonal licence document which will be undertaken in house at no-charge to Woodlands Teeball. The proposed Licensee will be responsible for costs incurred if substantial amendments are required. The City will receive an annual rent from the seasonal licence commencing at $500 plus GST.


Theme 3: Engaged Communities Objective 3.2: Active Participation and Volunteering


Item 12.1/PRS4 123



ENVIRONMENTAL

Issue Comment

Nil.

SOCIAL

Issue Comment

Community services Granting a new seasonal licence to the club will secure future tenure for the club and allow its members to continue with the current activities from the premises as well as encourage new members to participate.

ECONOMIC

Issue Comment

Nil.

Conclusion

It is considered appropriate to enter into a new seasonal summer licence agreement with the Woodlands Teeball Club Incorporated over a portion of Woodlands Reserve being Lot 352, House Number 33, Teakwood Avenue, Woodlands as it:-

Will allow the club to continue providing a sporting and recreational services to its current and future members; and

Secures tenure for the club to undertake longer term planning.


Item 12.1/PRS4 - Attachment 2 - Aerial Plan 125


Item 12.1/PRS7 126

Councillor Adam Spagnolo disclosed an Impartial Interest in Item 12.1/PRS7 as he has a property in the area - Telford Crescent, Stirling.

12.1/PRS7 DEDICATION OF PORTION OF CROWN RESERVE 31325 BEING LOT 8735 , HOUSE NUMBER 61, TELFORD CRESCENT, STIRLING AND LOT 10659, HOUSE NUMBER 61A, TELFORD CRESCENT, STIRLING - OUTCOMES OF ADVERTISING

Report Information

Location: Crown Reserve 31325 being Lot 8735, House Number 61, Telford Crescent, Stirling and Lot 10659, House Number 61A, Telford Crescent, Stirling

Applicant: City of Stirling



Ward: Osborne

Suburb: Stirling


Definition








Item 12.1/PRS7 127

Council Resolution


1. That, Council APPROVES for the City of Stirling to request the Minister for Lands to:-

a. Excise a 415m2 portion of land from Reserve 31325 being part of Lot 8735 on Diagram 42103, House Number 61, Telford Crescent, Stirling and the whole of Lot 10659 on Diagram 46213, House Number 61A, Telford Crescent, Stirling as shown in Attachment 1 (subject to survey); and

b. Dedicate the excised portion as road reserve in accordance with Section 56 of the Land Administration Act 1997 as shown in Attachment 1.

2. That the Minister for Lands be INDEMNIFIED from any claims arising from the

dedication actions. The motion was put and declared CARRIED (13/0) by exception resolution. For: Councillors Boothman, Caddy, Guilfoyle, Irwin, Italiano, Lagan, Migdale, Perkov, Proud, Re, Sandri, Sargent and Spagnolo. Against: Nil.






dedication actions.





2. That the Minister for Lands be INDEMNIFIED from any claims arising from the dedication

actions.


Item 12.1/PRS7 128

Report Purpose

To report on the submissions received in response to the City’s statutory advertising and to seek Council’s approval to request the Minister for Lands to:-

Excise a 415m² portion of land from Crown Reserve 31325 being part of Lot 8735, House Number 61, Telford Crescent, Stirling and the whole of Lot 10659, House Number 61A, Telford Crescent, Stirling; and

Dedicate the excised portion as road reserve in accordance with Section 56 of the Land Administration Act 1997.

Relevant Documents

Attachments




Nil

Background At its meeting held 12 June 2018, Council resolved (Council Resolution Number 0618/017) as follows:-

‘1. That subject to no objections being received to public advertising, Council APPROVES for the City of Stirling to request the Minister for Lands to:-

a. Excise an approximately 415m2 portion of land from Crown Reserve 31325 being part of Lot 8735 on Diagram 42103, House Number 61, Telford Crescent, Stirling and the whole of Lot 10659 on Diagram 46213, House Number 61A, Telford Crescent, Stirling, as shown in Attachment 1 (subject to survey); and



dedication actions.’ The proposal was advertised in terms of the following procedures agreed with the Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage:-

Signposting of the reserve;

Notifications to owners and occupiers of abutting properties; and

Notification of service agencies.


Item 12.1/PRS7 129

Comment

Statutory advertising was undertaken to progress the proposal in accordance with the requirement of the Land Administration Act 1997. The 30 day consultation period commenced on 16 July 2018 and concluded on 16 August 2018. In response to the statutory advertising period, a total of 33 submissions were received. A summary of the submissions received is outlined in the table below:-

TABLE 1 - SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED

SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED QUANTITY PERCENTAGE

SUPPORT THE EXCISION AND DEDICATION OF LAND

25 75.76%

DO NOT SUPPORT THE EXCISION AND DEDICATION OF LAND

8 24.24 %

The issues raised in the objections have been summarised in the table below.

Number of times

issue raised

Issue Officer Comment

3

Concerns regarding loss of trees if the excision of crown reserve (open space) and dedication to road is to proceed.

A proposed development will include the planting of two new street trees on Telford Crescent, Stirling and three advanced trees in the front setback area of the private property.

New trees will add to the streetscape and contribute to the 18% canopy targets.

4

Safety concerns raised regarding increase to traffic levels with access being granted via Telford Place, Stirling.

Specifically:-

Additional conflict points along Telford Crescent, Stirling

Impact on Safety

Access along Telford Crescent, Stirling during construction times whilst adjoining properties are being developed.

The adjacent local road network is currently operating well within its practical design capacity and is able to accommodate the additional trips generated by the proposed development without any adverse impacts on road safety.

Access to future developments along Telford Crescent can be accommodated without any adverse impact on road safety.


Item 12.1/PRS7 130

Number of times

issue raised


Regardless of whether the access is directly via Telford Crescent or indirectly via alternate frontages, all vehicles will still need to enter and exit Telford Crescent and the number of conflict points will remain the same.

3

a) Impact on Cycle Pathways and Cyclist Safety.

b) Provision of Cycling Infrastructure is inadequate.

Access to future developments along Telford Crescent can be accommodated without any adverse impact on the safety of cyclists.

Future development with access to Telford Crescent, Stirling does not constrain the potential increase in cyclists using Telford Crescent, Stirling.

The position of cycle lanes along the western side of Telford Crescent is not expected to be modified. The Stirling City Centre Structure Plan does not propose to change the layout of the cycle path to provide a ‘single direct on either side of the road’. The current cycle path is located on the western side of this section of Telford Crescent. This is on the opposite side of the road from where the proposed crossovers for the subject sites would be located.

1

Concerns regarding increase in antisocial behaviour.

The excision and dedication of Crown Reserve is unlikely to contribute to anti-social behaviour.

2

Concerns raised regarding high density living in the area.

The excision and dedication of Crown Reserve does not directly contribute to increase density in the precinct.


Item 12.1/PRS7 131

Number of times

issue raised


Increasing residential densities around activity corridors and centres (such as the Stirling City Centre) is a key component of the State Government’s strategic planning framework.

The Stirling City Centre Structure Plan and the corresponding Local Development Plans align with this strategic planning framework.

1 Inconsistencies regarding approval of development applications.

This submission does not relate to the excision and dedication of Crown Reserve.


The consultation process reported on has been undertaken as required by the Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage. It is necessary for the objections to be considered by Council, before the City may request the Minister for Lands to undertake the proposed excision of land and dedication for road reserve.


Section 51 of the Land Administration Act 1997 provides for the Minister to cancel, or amend the boundaries of a reserve. Section 56 of the Land Administration Act 1997 provides for a local government to request the Minister to dedicate a portion of land as a road.


There will be costs to the City for undertaking the required public consultation, survey and subdivision. These costs are estimated at approximately $6,000. The Minister requires an indemnity from any claims arising from the dedication actions. Due to the nature of the proposals, no claims are envisaged. The City is already responsible for the maintenance of Reserve 31325. Following dedication as road reserve, the City will continue to be responsible for maintenance.


Item 12.1/PRS7 132


Theme 3: Engaged Communities Objective 6.1: Customer Focus



ENVIRONMENTAL

Issue Comment

Nil.

SOCIAL

Issue Comment

Transport and access The proposal addresses submissions requesting that access to certain new development sites be changed to be taken from Telford Crescent, instead of Trevithick Close.

ECONOMIC

Issue Comment

Nil.

Conclusion

The proposal to excise an approximately 415m² portion of land from Reserve 31325 (being part of Lot 8735 on Diagram 42103, House Number 61, Telford Crescent, Balcatta and the whole of Lot 10659 on Diagram 46213, House Number 61A, Telford Crescent, Balcatta) for dedication as road reserve will facilitate the approval of vehicular access and egress crossovers to Telford Crescent. The public consultation process has further evidenced overall public support for this proposal, with 25 submissions in support, and eight submissions in objection to the proposal. The terms of the objections have been reported on and commented for consideration. Implementation of the proposal will assist the City in achieving the diversion of traffic from certain new development sites to be via Telford Crescent, instead of from Trevithick Close.


Item 1.1/TE1 135

1.1/TE1 TENDER FOR THE BUTLERS RESERVE CLUBROOM UPGRADE

Report Information

Location: Scarborough


Reporting Officer: Manager Facilities, Projects and Assets

Business Unit: Facilities, Projects and Assets

Ward: Coastal

Suburb: Scarborough


Definition







Council Resolution


That the Tender from Hoskins Investments Pty Ltd as trustee for M R Hoskins Family Trust trading as AE Hoskins Building Services for the Butlers Reserve Clubroom Upgrade be ACCEPTED at the fixed price lump sum of $547,552.02 (excluding GST). The motion was put and declared CARRIED (13/0) by exception resolution. For: Councillors Boothman, Caddy, Guilfoyle, Irwin, Italiano, Lagan, Migdale, Perkov, Proud, Re, Sandri, Sargent and Spagnolo. Against: Nil.


Item 1.1/TE1 136


That the Tender from Hoskins Investments Pty Ltd as trustee for M R Hoskins Family Trust trading as AE Hoskins Building Services for the Butlers Reserve Clubroom Upgrade be ACCEPTED at the fixed price lump sum of $547,552.02 (excluding GST).


That the Tender from Hoskins Investments Pty Ltd as trustee for M R Hoskins Family Trust trading as AE Hoskins Building Services for the Butlers Reserve Clubroom Upgrade be ACCEPTED at the fixed price lump sum of $547,552.02 (excluding GST).

Report Purpose

To report on the results from public Invitation for Tender (IFT) and the evaluation of tenders, in accordance with Regulation 18 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996.

Relevant Documents

Attachments

Attachment 1 - Schedule of Tenderers Received (previously circulated to Councillors under confidential separate cover)

Attachment 2 - Weighted Scores ⇩


Nil

Background

Tender Details

IFT Number 18.057.S.IFT

IFT Title Butlers Reserve Clubroom Upgrade

Recommended Tenderer(s) Hoskins Investments Pty Ltd as trustee for M R Hoskins Family Trust trading as AE Hoskins Building Services

Expenditure under this Contract is not capped or fixed. The estimated Contract award value is based on estimated expenditure at this time but may vary depending on budget availability.

Contract Term Initial: 16 weeks

Extension Options: Not Applicable

Defects Liability Period: 12 months from date of practical completion

Tendered Rates/Cost Provided in Attachment A to this report (confidential)


Item 1.1/TE1 137

Advertising: Saturday 11 August 2018 The West Australian

Tender Deadline: Wednesday 12 September 2018 1.00pm

Tender Opening: Wednesday 12 September 2018 3.00pm

Tender Submissions

Eight tenders were received, including Alternative and non-conforming Tenders:-

Cambercentric Pty Ltd as trustee for The Hyde Family Trust trading as HS Hyde and Son

Geared Construction Pty Ltd

Hoskins Investments Pty Ltd as trustee for M R Hoskins Family Trust trading as AE Hoskins Building Services

Quality Group Services Pty Ltd trading as Cercon Building

LKS Constructions (WA) Pty Ltd

Vera Builders Pty Ltd

Hickey Constructions Pty Ltd

Interstyle Building

Contract

Commencement Date of New Contract: Not Applicable

Completion Date of New Contract: 16 weeks for Project and 12 months defects liability period from practical completion

Estimated Value of New Contract: $547,552.02 (excluding GST)

Price Basis of New Contract: Fixed Lump Sum Price Tender Evaluation Panel

The tender evaluation panel comprised of four members, including a Business Unit Manager (Chairperson/non-voting) and Officers. Process and probity advice during evaluation was provided by a City Procurement Officer. Evaluation of Tenders

The objective of the evaluation panel is to recommend a suitably qualified and experienced Contractor or Contractors to satisfy the requirement of the above mentioned IFT. Based on evaluation of the received submissions and subsequent compliance assessments, the Evaluation Panel recommend that the Respondent(s) recommended in this report be accepted at the estimated Contract value and Contract term provided, from the anticipated commencement date. Evaluation Justification

The Evaluation Panel recommends AE Hoskins Building Services based on the results of non-priced and priced scores and further information obtained from the probity, financial and OSH Evaluations.


Item 1.1/TE1 138

Four tenderers performed well in the qualitative (non-priced) assessments, being Geared Construction Pty Ltd, LKS Constructions (WA) Pty Ltd, AE Hoskins Building Services and Quality Group Services Pty Ltd trading as Cercon Building. They finished first to fourth respectively in the qualitative scoring, however AE Hoskins Building Services significantly outperformed all other tenderers in the price adjusted scoring with a rating of 82.3, being 8.8 ahead of the second placed tenderer. Based on the tendered submissions and subsequent compliance assessments, the Evaluation Panel recommend that the tender submitted by AE Hoskins Investments Pty Ltd as trustee for M R Hoskins Family Trust trading as AE Hoskins Building Services is accepted at the fixed lump sum price and duration as the Contract details above.

Comment

All members of the evaluation panel have made a conflict of interest declaration in writing confirming they have no relationships with any of the tenderers.

It is confirmed that the following checks have been undertaken:-

Has the recommended Tenderer(s) undergone Reference Checks successfully?

YES

Has the recommended Tenderer(s) undergone Probity assessment and been deemed compliant?

YES

Complied

Has the recommended Tenderer(s) undergone Financial Viability assessment and been deemed acceptable?

YES

Complied

Was a Conflict of Interest declared? If yes, please specify how it was managed

NO

No Conflict of Interest declared by recommended tenderer


In accordance with Section 1.8 of the Local Government Act 1995 and Regulation 14(1) of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996, the Tender was advertised in a state wide publication. A link to the Tender documents was also made available via the City’s website.


The Tender has been conducted in accordance with Part 4 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996.


Item 1.1/TE1 139


Account Number: G0902 – BRP001

Budget Item: Butlers Reserve Clubroom Upgrade

Budget Amount: $865,126.00 (excluding GST)

Amount Spent to Date: $17,848.00 (excluding GST)

Proposed Cost: $547,552.02 (excluding GST)

Balance: $299,725.98 (excluding GST) All figures quoted in this report are exclusive of GST.


Theme 3: Engaged Communities

Objective 1.6: Active and Vibrant City



ENVIRONMENTAL

Issue Comment

Energy consumption The upgrade includes improved thermal performance achieved by roof colour selection and increased insulation, natural and solar powered ventilation and solar powered and new LED lighting.

SOCIAL

Issue Comment

Amenity The upgrade will improve asset condition and appearance to meet community expectations.

Community Engagement This upgrade will allow for greater participation in the sport facilities at this reserve as it includes full unisex change room and toilet facilities.

Equity This upgrade also includes the provision of a unisex universal access toilet and new ambulant facilities.

ECONOMIC

Issue Comment

Dvlpmt of key business sectors Improved storage and general facilities will allow the facilities to be used by a second club during the soccer off season.


Item 1.1/TE1 140

Conclusion

The Evaluation Panel recommends that the contract for the Butlers Reserve Clubroom Upgrade for the City of Stirling be awarded to AE Hoskins Investments Pty Ltd as trustee for M R Hoskins Family Trust trading as AE Hoskins Building Services at the fixed price lump sum of $547,552.02 (excluding GST).


Item 1.1/TE1 - Attachment 2 - Weighted Scores 141


Item 12.1/GS1 142

12.1/GS1 2018 CITY OF STIRLING POLICY MANUAL REVIEW

Report Information



Reporting Officer: Manager Governance

Business Unit: Governance

Ward: City Wide

Suburb: City Wide


Definition







Council Resolution


That the Item relating to 2018 City of Stirling Policy Manual Review be REFERRED to the Community and Resources Committee meeting to be held 27 November 2018 as there are some anomalies that have been raised that have not been addressed. The motion was put and declared CARRIED (13/0) by exception resolution. For: Councillors Boothman, Caddy, Guilfoyle, Irwin, Italiano, Lagan, Migdale, Perkov, Proud, Re, Sandri, Sargent and Spagnolo. Against: Nil.


Item 12.1/GS1 143


That the Item relating to 2018 City of Stirling Policy Manual Review be REFERRED to the Community and Resources Committee meeting to be held 27 November 2018 as there are some anomalies that have been raised that have not been addressed.


1. That Council ADOPTS the following policies with amendments:-

a. Art Collection Policy

b. Asset Management Policy

c. Committee and Working Group External Members Policy

d. Crossover Policy

e. Directional Signs Policy

f. Dog Exercise Areas Policy

g. Elected Members’ Conferences and Training Policy

h. Elected Members’ Entitlements Policy

i. Equal Employment Opportunity Policy

j. Gifts, Benefits or Hospitality Policy

k. Honorary Freeman of the City of Stirling Policy

l. Investments Policy

m. Issue and Use of Corporate Credit Cards Policy

n. Modification of Traffic Management Treatments for Property Access Policy

o. New Footpath Policy

p. Overdue Rates and Service Charges Collection Policy

q. Procurement Policy

r. Sponsorship Policy

s. Street Lighting Improvements Policy

t. Traffic Management Warrants Policy

u. Verge Treatments Policy


Item 12.1/GS1 144

2. That Council ADOPTS the following policies with minor amendments:-

a. Bulk Bins on Verges Policy

b. Complaints Policy

c. Information and Communication Technology Asset Disposal Policy

d. Information and Technology Acceptable Use Policy

e. Information Management Policy

f. Legal Representation for Elected Members and Employees Policy

g. Library Collection Development Policy

h. Library Services Policy

i. Non-Current Asset Accounting Policy

j. Risk Management Policy

k. Stirling History Collection Policy

3. That Council ADOPTS the review of the following policies with no amendments:-

a. Beach Recreational Activity Policy

b. Charity Clothing Bins on Council Controlled Land Policy

c. Coat of Arms and Corporate Symbol Policy

d. Community Garden Policy

e. Compliance Enforcement Policy

f. Council Election Caretaker Policy

g. Disaster Appeals Policy

h. Elected Members’ Allowances and Expenses Policy

i. Elected Members’ Communications Policy

j. Election Signs on Road Reserves and Council Land Policy

k. Erection of Signs in Thoroughfares by Not for Profit Groups Policy

l. Fines and Costs Recovery Policy

m. Leisure Planning Policy

n. Line Markings on Reserves Policy


Item 12.1/GS1 145

o. Media and Communication Policy

p. Occupational Safety and Health Policy

q. Out of Season Use of Active Reserves Policy

r. Outdoor Eating Facilities in Public Places Policy

s. Parking Facilities Adjacent to Schools Policy

t. Parking Permit Policy

u. Parking Restrictions – Notification to Affected Residents Policy

v. Parking Restrictions Adjacent to Schools Policy

w. Personal Training Policy

x. Playground Policy

y. Public Open Space Barbeque Policy

z. Public Open Space Exercise Equipment Policy

aa. Public Toilet Policy

bb. Requirements for Private Connections to the City’s Street Drainage System Policy

cc. Stallholders and Traders Permits in Thoroughfares Policy

dd. Stormwater Runoff Disposal Policy

ee. Street and Reserve Trees Policy

ff. Surf Skills Coaching Lessons Policy

gg. Sustainability Policy

hh. Swimming Pools – Carnivals Policy

ii. Use of Fireworks and Pyrotechnics Policy

jj. Waiver of Municipal Rates on an “A” Class Reserve

Report Purpose

To seek Council’s adoption of the review of the City of Stirling Policy Manual.


Item 12.1/GS1 146

Relevant Documents

Attachments

Attachment 1 - Art Collection Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 2 - Asset Management Policy - current (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 3 - Asset Management Policy - re-written (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 4 - Committee and Working Group External Members Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 5 - Crossover Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 6 - Directional Signs Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 7 - Dog Exercise Area Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 8 - Elected Members' Conference and Training Development Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 9 - Elected Members' Entitlements Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 10 - Equal Employment Opportunity Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 11 - Gifts, Benefits or Hospitality Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 12 - Honorary Freeman of the City of Stirling Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 13 - Investments Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 14 - Issue and Use of Corporate Credit Cards Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 15 - Modification of Traffic Management Treatments for Property Access Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 16 - New Footpath Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 17 - Overdue Rates and Service Charges Collection Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 18 - Procurement Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 19 - Sponsorship Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*


Item 12.1/GS1 147

Attachment 20 - Street Lighting Improvements Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 21 - Traffic Management Warrants Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 22 - Verge Treatments Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 23 - Bulk Bins on Verges Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 24 - Complaints Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 25 - Information and Communication Technology Asset Disposal Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 26 - Information and Technology Acceptable Use Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 27 - Information Management Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 28 - Legal Representation for Elected Members and Employees Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 29 - Library Collection Development Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 30 - Library Services Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 31 - Non-Current Asset Accounting Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 32 - Risk Management Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*

Attachment 33 - Stirling History Collection Policy - proposed amendments marked up (previously circulated to Councillors under separate cover)*


Nil * Please note Attachments 1 to 33 can be viewed within a separate document on the City of Stirling website.

** The policies with no proposed amendments are not attached to this report. All City of Stirling policies are available for viewing via the 'Policies' page on the City of Stirling’s website.

Background

Section 2.7(2)(b) of the Local Government Act 1995 provides the basis for introducing local government policies. Policy must meet the City’s strategic direction and comply with relevant legislation. Policy provides clear and concise direction for Elected Members, officers and the community.


Item 12.1/GS1 148

The City’s Policy Manual comprises 83 policies. The following 13 policies were not considered as part of the review and will be presented to Council under separate cover once the internal reviews have been finalised:-

Cultural Development Fund Policy;

Financial Assistance, Donations, Grants and Recognition Policy;

Hamersley Public Golf Course – Group/Event Bookings Policy;

Memorial Plaque Request Policy;

Motorised Model Aeroplanes Policy;

Permits to Use Verge Areas and Protection of City Property During Building Works Policy;

Public Art Policy;

Recognition of Employees’ Service Policy;

Sale of Land Policy;

Sports Floodlighting Policy;

Superannuation Contribution Policy;

Taking Land Policy; and

Temporary Bins for Events Policy. The Civic Facilities Policy and Illuminated Street Signs Policy have recently been reviewed by Council and are not the subject of this report. An extensive review has been undertaken on the remaining 68 policies to maintain the effectiveness and relevance of each policy. Each policy has been reviewed by the relevant Business Unit/s and, if required, amended.

Comment

Of the 68 policies included in the review, 36 policies required no amendments. Of the remaining 32 policies, 21 policies required amendment and 11 required minor amendments. The officers' comments on those policies requiring amendments are detailed below. Art Collection Policy The proposed amendments bring context into current work practices but do not change the objective of the policy. Asset Management Policy The current policy is aligned with the Asset Management Framework, set-out in the Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework. Its application is practise focused and restrictive.


Item 12.1/GS1 149

ISO 55000 is an international standard covering management of physical assets. The policy has been rewritten to reflect the City's commitment to ISO 55000 while remaining focused on the following key elements of an effective asset management system: Context of the Organisation; Leadership; Planning; Support; Operations; Performance Evaluation; and Improvement. Adopting the international standard commits the City to meet the requirements of the Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework, adapt to changes and implement continuous improvement in asset management. Committee and Working Group External Members Policy At its meeting held 31 October 2017, Council resolved (Council Resolution Number 1017/033) in part, as follows:-

“2. That Council ENDORSES the change of name of the Disability Advisory Panel to the Disability Advisory Group and the recommended community representatives as per confidential Attachment 2 for the 2017 - 2019 term.

3. That Council ENDORSES the change of name of the Heritage Advisory Panel to the Heritage Advisory Group and the recommended community representatives as per confidential Attachment 3 for the 2017 - 2019 term.

4. That Council ENDORSES the change of name of the Natural Environment Working Group to the Environment Advisory Group and the recommended community representatives as per confidential Attachment 4 for the 2017 - 2019 term.

5. That Council ENDORSES the change of name of the Road Safety Working Group to the Road Safety Advisory Group and the recommended community representatives as per confidential Attachment 5 for the 2017 - 2019 term.”

In keeping with Council’s resolution, it is proposed to amend the Committee and Working Group External Members Policy by deleting reference to 'Working' and replacing it with 'Advisory'. Crossover Policy At its meeting held 12 June 2018, Council resolved (Council Resolution Number 0618/024) as follows:-

“That a report be PRESENTED to the Community and Resources Committee to consider options for introducing further flexibility and discretion in the application and interpretation of the City’s Crossover Policy and Permits to Use Verge Areas and Protection of City Property during Building Works Policy.”

The reference to “minor” in regards to variation under the policy has been removed. This provides the City with the ability to consider any variation to the policy where adequate justification is deemed to have been met in accordance with the objective of the policy. Directional Signs Policy Clause 7 refers to advertising on bus shelters, seats and rubbish bins. It has been removed on the basis that companies responsible for advertising are engaged under a standalone contract. Clause 7 is redundant and not required.


Item 12.1/GS1 150

Dog Exercise Areas Policy The policy has been retitled to Dog Area Control Policy to address the following amendments. The Prohibited Areas section in the policy has been revised to distinguish “public buildings” under the care control and management of the City. The policy states areas where dogs can be walked or exercised “on-leash” and “off-leash”. The Dog Act 1976 (the Act) does not provide for areas to exercise a dog on a leash and it is therefore prudent to amend the policy in accordance with the Act. The policy has been redefined to identify the following areas:-

Dog Exercise Areas (off leash); and

Exemptions (must be held by a leash). The “Offences which modified penalties apply” has been removed. The Act confers the power on a local government to create a Dogs Local Law which includes offences and modified penalties. It is not necessary to duplicate offences and modified penalties in the policy. The “Exclusions” section where a dog can or can’t be in a place, i.e. Guide Dogs, Assistance dogs etc. has been deleted as it is covered by the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 and other relevant legislation. Elected Members’ Conferences and Training Policy The terms ‘discretionary allowance’ and ‘corporate funds’ have been deleted and replaced with the actual line item description in the budget – Conference Allowance or Training Allowance. An amendment has been made to the Company Directors Course offered by the Australian Institute of Company Directors. The policy currently provides for 50% of the cost to be covered by the Elected Members Training Allowance with the balance to be paid from the Elected Member's personal funds. The proposed amendment will enable Elected Members to meet the cost for the remaining 50% from either the Elected Member's personal funds or the Elected Member's Conference Allowance with the approval of the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer. A carer entitlement clause has been added in line with the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 and Equal Opportunity Act 2010. Elected Members’ Entitlements Policy The provision of annual donations to the seven RSL's and the WA Naval Association to assist with conducting ANZAC Day ceremonies has also been included to ensure the donations are reviewed as required.


Item 12.1/GS1 151

The City has historically allocated an annual donation to each of the below RSL Branches and the WA Naval Association in the City of Stirling, to assist with defraying the costs in hold the ANZAC Day Ceremony:-

General Sir John Monash RSL Branch;

Mount Lawley/Inglewood RSL Branch;

Nollamara RSL Branch;

North Beach RSL Branch;

Osborne Park RSL Branch;

Scarborough RSL Branch; and

Yokine/Joondanna RSL Branch.

The current allocation is $2,000 for each RSL Branch and $1,500 for the WA Naval Association.

In addition, the Mount Lawley/Inglewood and the North Beach RSL Branches are responsible for costs associated with traffic management for the ceremony. This involves the preparation and implementation of a Traffic Management Plan with an accredited company and endorsed by a Road Traffic Manager. The average cost is $2,000.

Due to the financial impact of the Plan, following the ceremony the Mount Lawley/Inglewood and the North Beach RSL Branches may apply to the City for reimbursement up to $2,000 in addition to the annual grant. The allocation takes into consideration the Branches capacity to raise sufficient funds, the responsibility to provide a safe environment and for the City to work with service organisations on community events.

Equal Employment Opportunity Policy

The policy has been renamed to the Equal Employment Opportunity and Diversity Policy. The integration of equal employment opportunity and diversity is encouraged by the Equal Opportunity Commission and will bring the City's policy into line with current legislation while recognising diversity within the broader workforce planning.

Gifts, Benefits or Hospitality Policy

The policy has been amended to include the gift disclosure exemptions and definition of “relative” as prescribed in the Local Government Act 1995. Other minor grammatical amendments have been made.

Honorary Freeman of the City of Stirling Policy

The format of the Civic Reception has been removed from the policy as this is a procedural function performed by Civic and Hospitality.

Investments Policy

The policy has been amended to narrow the divestment to those supporting fossil fuel projects. The reporting requirements to Council have been simplified to make the data presented more meaningful and easier to understand.

In addition the definition of “Approved Borrowers” has been clarified and a definition of “fossil fuels” has been included.


Item 12.1/GS1 152

Issue and Use of Corporate Credit Cards Policy

The policy has been amended to make aspects of the policy and instructions clear. An additional clause has been added that all use of corporate credit cards shall be in accordance with the City’s Code of Conduct.

The instructions have been amended to include reasons for withdrawal of an issued credit card and recovery of unauthorised expenditure.

Modification of Traffic Management Treatments for Property Access Policy

An additional condition has been added to Clause 2.3 of the policy to ensure that any proposed modifications do not restrict the access to existing crossovers or crossovers proposed under a current development application.

New Footpath Policy

Clause 4 of the policy has been amended to reflect the recent changes to the Crossover Policy, whereby all new footpaths constructed by the City will be constructed through existing crossovers.

Overdue Rates and Service Charges Collection

As agreed to during the recent Budget Workshops, the policy has been amended to remove the restriction of payment arrangements only being valid for the financial year that it was entered into.

Procurement Policy

The policy has been amended to provide more clarity to Business Units with regards to the procurement practices of the City and in particular where engaging panels of pre-qualified suppliers.

The procurement requirements table has been simplified to reduce duplication and an additional column has been inserted to provide guidance on the number of evaluation members required when purchasing within the relevant thresholds.

Panels of pre-qualified suppliers

The distribution of work amongst panel members has been amended to reflect more competitive and value adding processes.

Ranking of contractors has been removed. This practise is restrictive and offers no incentive to contractors that are not ranked number one.

The distribution of work will be through standing offers, or based on thresholds. The standing offer assists to establish fixed pricing for 12 months on products that are standard, off the shelf items, bought on a regular basis and of a small value. Current practise requires Business Units to obtain multiple quotes each time they have a requirement.

The threshold allows for a minimum threshold to be set by the Business Unit Manager enabling direct engagement with the contractor using the pricing fixed within the contract. Above the threshold all panellists will be requested to provide quotes. This method of engagement will be detailed in a Procurement User Guide (as required) and included in the tender documents and contract.


Item 12.1/GS1 153

A new section has been included ‘Removal or Addition of Suppliers from a Panel’ which provides for the replacement of a panellist should they leave or be terminated from the panel. Sponsorship Policy The proposed amendments bring the context into current work practices but do not change the objective of the policy. Street Lighting Improvements Policy Under the heading 'Definitions', the relevant components of Australian Standard AS/NZS1158 have been combined to a single reference and moved under the more appropriate heading of 'Legislation/Local Law Requirements'. A minor formatting amendment has been made to address the incorrectly numbered clauses and sub-clauses in Clauses 2 and 3. Traffic Management Warrants Policy A significant review of the supporting text in the policy has been undertaken. Much of the wording and information under the heading 'Policy' was developed in 2003. While this information remains relevant to traffic investigations, it covers issues that are considered at an operational level and do not need to be included in the policy. The information under the previous sub-heading 'Factors Considered in the Traffic Management Model' has been re-worded and more clearly explained under the new Clause 1 (Investigation) and Clause 2 (Level of Action). Clause 2 also includes reference to the extent of community consultation that needs to be undertaken as part of any project development, and includes a requirement that all owners and occupiers of properties located on side roads up to 100m from the road under construction. This has been introduced to address previous concerns by Council of projects not being consulted widely enough. The policy is still based on the principle of allocating points for various factors to determine a relative ranking and prioritisation of projects, however, the number of points allocated under each category has been reviewed to address some deficiencies in the current system. The scoring point system has been modified as follows:-

Travel Speed – the current policy allocates points in stepped levels, resulting in potentially sharp increases in the number of points for two similar travel speeds. The proposed policy allocates points on a more linear basis, with the rate of points increasing more sharply as the travel speed exceeds 10km/h and 20km/h above the posted speed limit.

Traffic Volume – the current and proposed policy both allocate points based on ranges of volumes, but the current policy increases at a more uniform rate. The number of points allocated for traffic volumes has reduced in the proposed policy, as the Travel Speed and Crash Data categories represent the greater indicators of risk to road safety.


Item 12.1/GS1 154

Crash Data – the proposed policy now considers crash length and allocates points on a crash rate per kilometre (rather than just number of crashes). This addresses issues where relatively long sections of road score much higher based on the higher exposure to crashes. An additional sub-category has been added to differentiate between Major and Minor Property Damage crashes, which were previously combined in to a single 'Non-Injury crash' category.

Road Design and Topography – the number of points for this category have been reduced in the proposed policy as these factors are already partially considered in the travel speed data, and due to previous concerns that these factors were unnecessarily increasing the total points scored. The category has been retained to highlight the concern for safety at locations with restricted sight lines.

Vulnerable Road Users – the number of points for this category have been reduced in the proposed policy, as these factors are already reflected in the travel speed data, and due to previous concerns that these factors were unnecessarily increasing the total points scored. The category has been retained to highlight the concern for safety adjacent to major pedestrian and cycle routes.

Activity Generators – the number of points for this category have been reduced in the proposed policy, as these factors are already reflected in the travel speed data, and due to previous concerns that these factors were unnecessarily increasing the total points scored. The category has been retained to highlight the concern for safety around highly pedestrianised areas. The two separate sub-categories for Schools and Colleges in the current policy have been combined into a single sub-category for 'Educational Institutions'.

Amenity Factors – the number of points for this category have been modified to reflect average values for local roads as determined by traffic surveys over the last twenty years. The values have been reduced due to previous concerns that these factors were unnecessarily increasing the total points scored.

The revised scoring system is considered to provide a more robust and justifiable outcome when assessing the needs for traffic management treatments and/or when comparing the relatively priority of two or more roads. Verge Treatments Policy At its meeting held 12 June 2018, Council resolved (Council Resolution Number 0618/024) as follows:-

“That a report be PRESENTED to the Community and Resources Committee to consider options for introducing further flexibility and discretion in the application and interpretation of the City’s Crossover Policy and Permits to Use Verge Areas and Protection of City Property during Building Works Policy.”

The reference to “minor” in regards to variation under the policy has been removed. This provides the City with the ability to consider any variation to the policy where adequate justification is deemed to have been met in accordance with the objective of the policy.


Item 12.1/GS1 155

Minor Amendments The following policies have been identified as having minor amendments. These amendments are grammatical, typographical or formatting in nature and do not alter the objective of the policy.

Bulk Bins on Verges Policy

Complaints Policy

Information and Communication Technology Asset Disposal Policy

Information and Technology Acceptable Use Policy

Information Management Policy

Legal Representation for Elected Members and Employees Policy

Library Collection Development Policy

Library Services Policy

Non-Current Asset Accounting Policy

Risk Management Policy

Stirling History Collection Policy. No Amendments Proposed The following policies have been reviewed and no amendments are proposed:-

Beach Recreational Activity Policy

Charity Clothing Bins on Council Controlled Land Policy

Coat of Arms and Corporate Symbol Policy

Community Garden Policy

Compliance Enforcement Policy

Council Election Caretaker Policy

Disaster Appeals Policy

Elected Members’ Allowances and Expenses Policy

Elected Members’ Communications Policy

Election Signs on Road Reserves and Council Land Policy

Erection of Signs in Thoroughfares by Not for Profit Groups Policy

Fines and Costs Recovery Policy

Leisure Planning Policy

Line Markings on Reserves Policy

Media and Communication Policy

Occupational Safety and Health Policy

Out of Season Use of Active Reserves Policy

Outdoor Eating Facilities in Public Places Policy

Parking Facilities Adjacent to Schools Policy

Parking Permit Policy

Parking Restrictions – Notification to Affected Residents Policy

Parking Restrictions Adjacent to Schools Policy


Item 12.1/GS1 156

Personal Training Policy

Playground Policy

Public Open Space Barbeque Policy

Public Open Space Exercise Equipment Policy

Public Toilet Policy

Requirements for Private Connections to the City’s Street Drainage System Policy

Stallholders and Traders Permits in Thoroughfares Policy

Stormwater Runoff Disposal Policy

Street and Reserve Trees Policy

Surf Skills Coaching Lessons Policy

Sustainability Policy

Swimming Pools – Carnivals Policy

Temporary Bins for Events Policy

Use of Fireworks and Pyrotechnics Policy

Waiver of Municipal Rates on an “A” Class Reserve.


The review was circulated to Elected Members, the Executive Team and Business Unit Managers. One comment was received on two policies as detailed below.


Item 12.1/GS1 157

Submission Officer’s comments

Crossovers Policy

Crossover Conflict with Road Reserve Infrastructure Areas Modifications require approval from City of Stirling – refer to Modifications of Traffic Management Treatments for Property Access Policy.

The following sentence has been included to clarify - “Modifications to road reserve infrastructure assets will be assessed in accordance with the Modifications of Traffic Management Treatments for Property Access Policy.”

Existing Footpath at or adjacent to the property boundary

Leaving the existing concrete path in; Is this the preferred option?

It is the City’s preference that a concrete path at or adjacent to property boundary remains when installing a new crossover or that the path is clearly delineated through the installation of matching control joint edge lines. The City has provided further options for residents in these situations to allow further flexibility considering the different products that can be used to construct a crossover.

Relevant Policies/Management Practices/Documents There seems to be a relationship between this policy and the Modification of Traffic Management Treatments for Property Access Policy, but I don’t see any reference to that here in this policy.

“Modification of Traffic Management Treatments for Property Access Policy” has been added to Relevant Policies/Management Practices/Documents section.

Dog Exercise Areas Policy Insert “to achieve the following objectives” at the end of point 2 under the Policy section.

Inserted.

Correct the English of point 2 under the Policy section.

The paragraph has been reworded to correct the grammar.


Section 2.7(2)(b) of the Local Government Act 1995 provides Council with the power to determine policies. In keeping with good governance principles, a full review of the City’s Policy Manual will be undertaken on a biennial basis.


Nil.


Item 12.1/GS1 158


Theme 6: Making It Happen Objective 6.2: Good Governance



ENVIRONMENTAL

Issue Comment

Nil.

SOCIAL

Issue Comment

Community engagement Reviewing the City’s Policy Manual on a biennial basis ensures the community are kept up to date on the City’s decision make processes.

ECONOMIC

Issue Comment

Nil.

Conclusion

Policies provide Council and the administration with the ability and direction to make decisions that are considered to be accurate and unbiased. It also provides direction on a matter in which the City undertakes or requires a matter to be undertaken. It is important policies meet strategic and operational needs and comply with statutory and legislative requirements. Equally, it is recognised to review the City’s Policy Manual on a biennial basis to ensure each policy is accurate and meets the City’s day to day operations.


Item 12.1/A1 159

12.1/A1 MONTHLY PETITION STATUS REPORT UPDATE

Report Information








Definition





☒ Information Purposes


Council Resolution


That Council NOTES the Petition Status Report Update for the month of October 2018.



Item 12.1/A1 160


That Council NOTES the Petition Status Report Update for the month of October 2018.


That Council NOTES the Petition Status Report Update for the month of October 2018

Report Purpose

To provide Council with an update on petitions for the month of October 2018.

Relevant Documents

Attachments

Attachment 1 - Petition Status Report - October 2018 ⇩


Nil

Background

At its meeting held 21 August 2018, Council resolved (Council Resolution Number 0818/047) in part as follows:-

"1. That Council RECEIVES a report submitted monthly to the Community and Resources Committee, with the following information to allow the public to see how their submitted petitions are to be tracked and the outcomes therein. The report tabled to show:-

Name and preamble of Petition;

Date petition submitted to Council/City of Stirling;

Action - if referred to a committee/workshop etc. if so date outcome - of petition (if Council resolution was required etc.); and

Date of completion of addressing the petition details."

Comment

As per the above Council Resolution, Attachment 1 contains all outstanding petitions as at 23 October 2018. The Petition Status Report is available on the Councillors' Portal; it was implemented in February 2011, contains the full list of petitions raised since then, and has been updated regularly with details of the City's progress and outcomes. By including the Petition Status Report Update within the Community and Resources Committee Agenda it allows members of public to view the details on the City's progress in dealing with outstanding petitions.


Item 12.1/A1 161

At its meeting held 21 August 2018, Council resolved (Council Resolution Number 0818/047) in part as follows:-

"2. This action is to be REVIEWED at the February 2019 meeting of Council, along with the report on the evaluation and uptake of the e-petition module."

As part of the ePetition module launched on Wednesday 19 September 2018 on the City's website, the Petition Status Report Update will be available to view electronically via the City's website (after further development of the module) so that members of the public will have access at all times.


Nil.


Nil.


Nil.


Theme 3: Engaged Communities Objective 6.1: Customer Focus



ENVIRONMENTAL

Issue Comment

Nil.

SOCIAL

Issue Comment

Community engagement The status of outstanding petitions in the agenda keeps constituents informed on a monthly basis.

ECONOMIC

Issue Comment

Nil.


Item 12.1/A1 162

Conclusion

To provide Council with a monthly update on outstanding petitions (in addition to the Councillors' Portal updates). The Petition Status Report Update within the Community and Resources Committee Agenda allows members of the public to view outstanding petitions monthly. Councillors are also able utilise the Councillors' Portal to obtain updates when liaising with constituents in relation to any petition.


Item 12.1/A1 - Attachment 1 - Petition Status Report - October 2018 163


Item 12.1/9.4 176 CONFIDENTIAL

12.1/9.4 PROPERTY STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION PROGRESS REPORT OCTOBER 2018

Confidentiality

This report is CONFIDENTIAL in accordance with Section 5.23(2)(e(ii)) of the Local Government Act 1995 , which permits the meeting to be closed to the public for business relating to the following:-

(e) a matter that if disclosed, would reveal - (ii) information that has a commercial value to a person

Report Information








Definition









Council Resolution


That Council RECEIVES the October 2018 Property Strategy Programme Implementation Report. The motion was put and declared CARRIED (13/0) by exception resolution. For: Councillors Boothman, Caddy, Guilfoyle, Irwin, Italiano, Lagan, Migdale, Perkov, Proud, Re, Sandri, Sargent and Spagnolo. Against: Nil.



12.1/9.5 QUARTERLY STATEMENTS FOR THE CITY'S PROPERTY INVESTMENT PORFOLIO FOR THE PERIOD ENDING 30 SEPTEMBER 2018.

Confidentiality



Report Information








Definition









Council Resolution


That Council RECEIVES the Quarterly Statements for the City’s Property Investment Portfolio for the period ending 30 September 2018. The motion was put and declared CARRIED (13/0) by exception resolution. For: Councillors Boothman, Caddy, Guilfoyle, Irwin, Italiano, Lagan, Migdale, Perkov, Proud, Re, Sandri, Sargent and Spagnolo. Against: Nil.


Item 13.1 180

13. REPORTS FOR CONSIDERATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH CLAUSE 4.2(4) OF THE MEETING PROCEDURES LOCAL LAW 2009

In accordance with Clause 4.2(4) of the City of Stirling Meeting Procedures Local Law 2009, the Chief Executive Officer may include on the agenda of a Council meeting; in an appropriate place within the order of business; any matter which must be decided, or which he considers is appropriate to be decided, by that meeting.

Councillor Mark Irwin disclosed an Impartial Interest in Item 13.1 as the new candidate is known to him.

13.1 ESTABLISHMENT OF A DESIGN REVIEW PANEL - MEMBER APPOINTMENT

This item was REFERRED to the Ordinary Meeting of Council to be held 6 November 2018 at the Council meeting held 16 October 2018, to seek further clarification from the Director Planning and Development regarding the potential increase in the number of panel members; the consistency of panel members reviewing applications; and whether one heritage planner is sufficient. Additional information and a suggested alternative officer recommendation has been included at the end of the report.

Report Information

Location: City Wide


DA Reference: Not Applicable

Reporting Officer: Director Planning and Development

Business Unit: Development Services

Ward: City Wide

Suburb: City Wide


Item 13.1 181


Definition







Council Resolution

1118/020 Moved Councillor Caddy, seconded Councillor Sandri

1. That Council ENDORSES a change to the Design Review Panel Terms of Reference to increase the pool of membership of the panel from 10 to 15 members.

2. That Council ENDORSES the alternative recommended nominees for the Design

Review Panel totalling 15 members, including a Chair and Deputy Chair (as detailed in Attachment 4) until 31 October 2021.

The motion was put and declared CARRIED (12/1). For: Councillors Boothman, Caddy, Guilfoyle, Irwin, Italiano, Lagan, Migdale, Perkov, Proud, Sandri, Sargent and Spagnolo. Against: Councillor Re.

Recommendation (Suggested Alternative Recommendation - refer to Additional Information)

1. That Council ENDORSES a change to the Design Review Panel Terms of Reference to increase membership of the panel from 10 to 15 members.

2. That Council ENDORSES the recommended nominees for the Design Review Panel totalling 15 members, including a Chair and Deputy Chair (as per confidential Attachment 1) until 31 October 2021.


Item 13.1 182

Report Purpose

To seek Council’s endorsement of panel membership for the establishment of a Design Review Panel, and to amend the Terms of Reference to increase the number of specialists to be appointed from 10 to 15 members.

Relevant Documents

Attachments

Attachment 1 - Evaluation Matrix of Nominees (previously circulated to Councillors under confidential separate cover)

Attachment 2 - Panel Member Resumes (previously circulated to Councillors under confidential separate cover)

Attachment 3 - Nominee Resumes (previously circulated to Councillors under confidential separate cover)

Attachment 4 - Revised Evaluation Matrix of Nominees (previously circulated to Councillors under confidential separate cover)

Attachment 5 - Revised Panel Member Resumes (previously circulated to Councillors under confidential separate cover)

Attachment 6 - Revised Nominee Resumes (previously circulated to Councillors under confidential separate cover)


Nil

Background At its meeting held 20 March 2018, Council resolved (Council Resolution Number 0318/031) as follows:-

“1. That Council ENDORSES the establishment of a Design Review Panel in accordance with Option 2 of this report.

2. That Council ENDORSES the Terms of Reference as shown in Attachment 1

with the following changes:-

a. DELETE the following sentences under sub-heading 5 – ‘Membership Expertise’ on page 2:-

“The Panel shall have at least five members with the final number of panel members.

A Design Review Panel meeting shall comprise a maximum of five members with a Chairperson, Deputy Chairperson and three other panel members.

A Design Review Panel meeting may not proceed unless a quorum comprising a minimum of three members is present.


Item 13.1 183

The Panel will be multi-disciplinary. Members will have appropriate qualifications and substantial experience in one or more of the following nominated areas:- • Architecture • Heritage • Landscape Architecture • Planning • Sustainability and Environmental Design • Urban Design”

b. INSERT the following sentences under sub-heading 5 – ‘Membership

Expertise’ on page 2:-

“The Panel will be multi-disciplinary. Council shall appoint a maximum of 10 members to ensure appropriate expertise can be obtained. Members will have appropriate qualifications and substantial experience in one or more of the following nominated areas:- • Architecture • Heritage • Landscape Architecture • Planning • Sustainability and Environmental Design • Urban Design

A Design Review Panel meeting shall comprise a maximum of 5 members with a Chairperson, Deputy Chairperson and three other panel members.

A Design Review Panel meeting may not proceed unless a quorum comprising a minimum of three members is present.”

3. That Council CONSIDERS the inclusion of a budget allocation of $130,000 to

enable implementation of a Design Review Panel in the 2018/2019 financial year subject to operating savings being identified in the draft budget to support this initiative.”

As a result of Council’s resolution on 20 March 2018, an Expression of Interest was publically advertised seeking suitably qualified members to join the Design Review Panel. The Expression of Interest was open from 24 July 2018 and concluded on 24 August 2018.


Item 13.1 184

Comment

At the close of the Expression of Interest advertising period, a total of 89 submissions were received; the submissions are broken down by profession as follows:-

Architecture – 31

Heritage – 4

Landscape Architecture – 18

Planning – 10

Sustainability and Environmental Design – 1

Urban Design – 11

Engineering – 7

Other – 7 The CVs of the recommended panel member nominations and an evaluation scoring matrix for all nominees received has been provided to Councillors under separate confidential cover. Specialist diversity across a range of professions is sought. Given the strength of the Expression of Interest response, it is recommended to Council that the Design Review Panel membership be expanded to a total of 15 members; this would enable greater flexibility in the scheduling of Design Review Panel meetings and would ensure a broad range of panel expertise is obtained. Design Review Panel meetings will comprise five members. However a greater pool of members from which to draw from will maximise attendance. In this regard, the Design Review Panel Terms of Reference are required to be amended.


An advertisement was placed in the local community newspaper on 24 July 2018 and an advertisement ran on Facebook between 24 July and 24 August 2018. In addition, advertisements were placed on the City’s website, the City’s Digi Screen, the Stirling Business E-newsletter and Stirling Scoop between 24 July and 24 August 2018. A message promoting the Design Review Panel was also placed on the City’s telephone hold message during this period.


Draft State Planning Policy 7- Design of the Built Environment currently advocates for the establishment of a Design Review Panel. This may become a mandatory requirement upon gazettal of State Planning Policy 7 – Design of the Built Environment. Design Review Panels have no decision making power and can only provide advice to the City and Council.


Expansion of the number of members from 10 to 15 has no financial impact, as member fees are based on meeting attendance. The Design Review Panel is funded for this financial year.


Item 13.1 185


Theme 1: Liveable City and Thriving Neighbourhoods

Objective 1.1: A Strong Sense of Place

Objective 1.2: Housing Choice

Objective 1.3: Beautiful Streetscapes and Open Spaces



ENVIRONMENTAL

Issue Comment

Sustainability Good design can help avoid or minimise impacts on the environment.

SOCIAL

Issue Comment

Community Good design creates quality places that foster strong communities.

ECONOMIC

Issue Comment

Built Form High quality built form improves the economic performance of places and attracts investment.

Conclusion

Nominations were called for panel membership for the Design Review Panel, closing on 24 August 2018. It is recommended that Council endorses the recommended nominees for the Design Review Panel, totalling 15 members, including a Chair and Deputy Chair. It is recommended that the Design Review Panel Terms of Reference be amended to increase membership of the panel from 10 to 15 members.

Additional Information – 6 November 2018 At its meeting held 16 October 2018, Council resolved (Council Resolution Number 1018/022) as follows:-

“That the Item relating to 12.2/DS2 – Establishment of a Design Review Panel – Member Appointment be REFERRED to the Council meeting to be held 6 November 2018 to seek further clarification from the Director Planning and Development regarding the potential increase in the number of panel members; the consistency of panel members reviewing applications; and whether one heritage planner is sufficient.”


Item 13.1 186

In response to Council’s resolution, the following clarification and additional information is provided:-

Potential to Increase the Number of Panel Members

At its meeting held 20 March 2018, Council resolved (Council Resolution Number 0318/031) to endorse the Design Review Panel Terms of Reference which identified that Council would appoint a maximum of 10 panel members. The Terms of Reference further specified that a Design Review Panel meeting shall comprise a maximum of five members, and that a meeting could not proceed unless a quorum comprising a minimum of three members was achieved.

The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s endorsement to amend the Terms of Reference to increase the number of specialists to be appointed from 10 to 15 members. Expanding the membership pool would enable greater flexibility in the scheduling of Design Review Panel meetings and would ensure a broad range of panel expertise is obtained.

In view of the above, the City is satisfied that an increased specialist pool of 15 members and the provisions of the existing Terms of Reference will ensure sufficient panel member availability and breadth of expertise to call upon.

Consistency of Panel Members Reviewing Applications

The City will endeavour to retain consistency within a Design Review Panel in the event that an item which is the subject of review is deferred to a second Design Review Panel meeting. Panel consistency, however, is ultimately dependent upon panel member availability. Where a panel member is unavailable for a deferred item, the City will appoint a replacement member with similar technical and specialist expertise to ensure consistent design advice is provided to all applicants and the City.

Number of Heritage Planners

A review of the City’s records indicates a total of three Development Assessment Panel applications for sites located within the City’s Heritage Protection Areas (HPA) have been received by the City within the last calendar year. Accordingly, the City is satisfied that the amended list of recommended nominees will ensure that suitable expertise is available to the Panel to address any future development applications within the City’s Heritage Protection Areas.

Notice of Nomination Withdrawal

Following the Ordinary Meeting of Council held 16 October 2018, the City received written correspondence from a recommended nominee informing the City of a request to withdraw from the Design Review Panel nomination process.

The recommended list of nominees (refer Attachment 1) for the Design Review Panel presented to the Planning and Development Committee held 9 October 2018 has been amended accordingly to reflect this withdrawal (refer Attachment 4).

Suggested Alternative Officer Recommendation

1. That Council ENDORSES a change to the Design Review Panel Terms of Reference to increase the pool of membership of the panel from 10 to 15 members.

2. That Council ENDORSES the alternative recommended nominees for the Design Review Panel totalling 15 members, including a Chair and Deputy Chair (as detailed in Attachment 4) until 31 October 2021.


Item 13.2 187

13.2 LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME NO.3 AMENDMENT NO.102 - REZONING OF VARIOUS LOTS IN THE FLORA TERRACE LOCAL CENTRE - OUTCOMES OF ADVERTISING

This item was REFERRED to the Ordinary Meeting of Council to be held 6 November 2018 at the Council meeting held 16 October 2018, to allow all Councillors an opportunity to fully consider the item.

Report Information

Location: Various lots in the Flora Terrace Local Centre


Reporting Officer: Manager City Planning

Business Unit: City Planning

Ward: Coastal

Suburb: North Beach


Definition








Item 13.2 188

Moved Councillor Caddy, seconded Councillor Proud

1. That pursuant to the Planning and Development Act 2005, Council ADOPTS Amendment No.102 to Local Planning Scheme No.3 in a modified form as shown in Attachment 1.

2. That AUTHORITY be given to the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer to sign and affix the Common Seal to Local Planning Scheme No.3 Amendment No.102 documents, and that the Amendment be REFERRED to the Western Australian Planning Commission and the Minister for Transport, Planning and Lands for determination.

3. That the City continues to RETAIN community uses on Lot 50, House Number 20, Castle Street, North Beach as part of any future redevelopment and that further community consultation BE UNDERTAKEN if redevelopment of the community centre site is proposed, with particular regard to:-

Building heights;

Public car parking;

Building envelope; and

Access and egress. Reason for Change

Council forms the opinion that any redevelopment of the site will seek to retain the community uses while providing for additional public car parking for Flora Terrace Local Centre though a mixed use redevelopment of the site as an innovative way to fund and redevelop the site. While there is no proposal to undertake redevelopment at this time, as the City of Stirling owns this land it will have control over any development application that would be needed, when and if redevelopment is proposed. Further community consultation will inform more detailed planning if this is undertaken in the future. At the request of Council the Presiding Member put the recommendations separately.

Council Resolution

1118/021 Moved Councillor Caddy, seconded Councillor Proud


2. That AUTHORITY be given to the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer to sign and

affix the Common Seal to Local Planning Scheme No.3 Amendment No.102 documents, and that the Amendment be REFERRED to the Western Australian Planning Commission and the Minister for Transport, Planning and Lands for determination.

The motion was put and declared CARRIED (10/3). For: Councillors Boothman, Caddy, Guilfoyle, Irwin, Italiano, Lagan, Perkov, Proud, Sandri and Sargent. Against: Councillors Migdale, Re and Spagnolo.


Item 13.2 189

3. That the City continues to RETAIN community uses on Lot 50, House Number 20, Castle Street, North Beach as part of any future redevelopment and that further community consultation BE UNDERTAKEN if redevelopment of the community centre site is proposed, with particular regard to:-

Building heights;

Public car parking;

Building envelope; and

Access and egress. The motion was put and declared CARRIED (7/6). For: Councillors Boothman, Caddy, Guilfoyle, Irwin, Italiano, Proud and Sargent. Against: Councillors Lagan, Migdale, Perkov, Re, Sandri and Spagnolo.

Recommendation


2. That AUTHORITY be given to the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer to sign and affix

the Common Seal to Local Planning Scheme No.3 Amendment No.102 documents, and that the Amendment be REFERRED to the Western Australian Planning Commission and the Minister for Transport, Planning and Lands for determination.

Report Purpose

To consider the outcomes of advertising of Local Planning Scheme No.3 Scheme Amendment No.102 to rezone:-

Lot 15, House Number 118, Flora Terrace, North Beach from ‘Business’ to ‘Local Centre’;

Lot 35, Strata Lots 1 and 2, House Numbers 21 and 21A, Malcolm Street, North Beach from ‘Residential R20’ to ‘Special Use – Local Centre’; and

Lot 50, House Number 20, Castle Street, North Beach from ‘Civic’ to ‘Local Centre’.

Relevant Documents

Attachments

Attachment 1 - Local Planning Scheme No.3 - Scheme Amendment No.102 Documentation (for adoption) ⇩

Attachment 2 - Schedule of Submissions ⇩


Nil


Item 13.2 190

Background

The Flora Terrace Local Centre, located in the suburb of North Beach, provides a hub for both the immediate and wider community. It is located approximately 17kms northwest of the Perth Central Business District, 3kms northwest of the Karrinyup Regional Centre, 150m east of the Indian Ocean (West Coast Drive) and 350m west of the Star Swamp Regional Reserve. Flora Terrace has undergone a transformation over the past 20 years and the centre now has a diversity of land uses. However, as the centre continues to intensify and attract more residents and visitors, concern has emerged around increased traffic and pedestrian conflicts, and a shortage of available car parking. As a result of these issues, and particularly in response to concerns expressed about a lack of parking, the City held a Vision Workshop, Design Workshop and Community Open Day to consult with the community to better understand community concerns. This community engagement process contributed to the options recommended in the Flora Terrace Local Centre Parking and Urban Design Study, which Council considered at its meeting held 14 November 2017. At this meeting, Council resolved (Council Resolution Number 1117/012) as follows:-

“1. That Council ENDORSES the recommendations of the Flora Terrace Local

Centre Parking and Urban Design Study as shown in Attachment 1. 2. That consideration BE GIVEN in the 2018/2019 budget process for appropriate

funding to implement Option 1 (Short Term Upgrades) of the Flora Terrace Local Centre Parking and Urban Design Study.

3. That pursuant to the Planning and Development Act 2005, Council INITIATES

Local Planning Scheme No.3 Amendment No.102 as shown in Attachment 2. 4. That pursuant to Regulation 35 of the Planning and Development (Local

Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, Council RESOLVES that, in its opinion, Local Planning Scheme No.3 Amendment No.102 is a Standard Amendment.”

Resolution 1 was addressed when Council resolved to initiate Scheme Amendment No.102, which puts in place the framework to facilitate the long term redevelopment of the centre which was recommended in the Flora Terrace Local Centre Parking and Urban Design Study. In relation to Resolution 2, funding is not yet in place to implement the Short Term Upgrades recommended in the Flora Terrace Local Centre Parking and Urban Design Study. The Engineering Design Business Unit has identified infrastructure upgrades that will provide additional car parking, improve pedestrian movement around the centre, improve traffic circulation and improve the streetscape of the area. Where possible, upgrades will be undertaken where these can be accommodated within existing budgets, until such time as the necessary budget allocations are made. The location of the subject lots, aerial photograph and the surrounding zoning under LPS3 are shown in Figures 1, 2 and 3 below:-


Item 13.2 191

Figure 1 - Location Plan


Item 13.2 192

Figure 2 - Aerial Photograph

Figure 3 - Zoning Map


In recent years, the City has consulted extensively with the community around Flora Terrace, in relation to the following:- 1. Flora Terrace Local Centre Parking and Urban Design Study Prior to the initiation of Scheme Amendment No.102, the City undertook a series of community consultation exercises in 2016 and 2017 as part of the Flora Terrace Local Centre Parking and Urban Design Study. A Vision Workshop was held on 3 December 2016 which provided the first opportunity for the community to review the consultant’s analysis of the area, and enabled discussion on the key issues and opportunities for the precinct. A Design Workshop was held on 25 February 2017 and reported on options developed from the Vision Workshop. A Community Open Day was held on 29 April 2017 and provided an opportunity for members of the community to view a series of concept plans for the future of the centre. The outcomes of the community consultation contributed to the final options recommended in the Study, one of which was the rezoning of the three lots subject of Scheme Amendment No.102.


Item 13.2 193

2. Scheme Amendment No.102 Advertising of Scheme Amendment No.102 was undertaken for a period of 42 days in accordance with the Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015 and the City’s Planning Consultation Procedure. Advertising commenced on 27 February 2018 and concluded on 10 April 2018. An advertisement was placed in local community newspapers on 27 February 2018 and 6 March 2018. Three signs were erected on the road verges abutting each of the lots, and advertisements were also placed on the City’s website and on notice boards in the City’s Administration Centre. In addition to this, the City also held an Information Evening on 22 March 2018 during the advertising period, where the City’s officers were present to provide clarification on Scheme Amendment No.102 to attendees. A total of 469 letters regarding the advertising of Scheme Amendment No.102 were mailed to owners and occupiers of properties within 200m of the site. Additionally, the City wrote to 23 government agencies and public authorities. At the conclusion of the advertising period, 34 submissions were received – six from government agencies and 28 from owners and residents. This represents a response rate of 6% from owners and residents, and a response rate of 7% overall. A summary of the relative location of the submissions received in regards to Scheme Amendment No.102 is outlined in Table 1 below:-

TABLE 1 - SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED - RELATIVE LOCATION

SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED WITHIN 200M RADIUS OF

PROPOSED SITE

OUTSIDE 200M RADIUS OF

PROPOSED SITE

ALL SUBMISSIONS

SUPPORT 2.94% 2.94% 5.88%

OBJECT 67.65% 0% 67.65%

OTHER (Not stated / No opinion /

Conditional) 8.82% 17.65% 26.47%

Of the 28 submissions received from owners and residents, the City received one submission in support, three submissions providing comments and 23 submissions objecting to the Scheme Amendment, from submitters who live or own property within 200m of the subject lots proposed to be rezoned. One additional submission in support of the Scheme Amendment was received from a submitter residing outside the 200m radius of the subject lots. Of the three lots proposed to be rezoned, the owners of the ‘Residential’ zoned site (House Numbers 21 and 21A, Malcolm Street, North Beach) objected to the Scheme Amendment. The owner of the ‘Business’ zoned site (House Number 118, Flora Terrace, North Beach) supported the Scheme Amendment, and the City owns the ‘Civic’ zoned site (House Number 20, Castle Street, North Beach).


Item 13.2 194

The issues raised during the advertising of Scheme Amendment No.102 were mainly related to building heights, parking and traffic concerns. A summary of the issues raised, and the Officer responses to those comments, is outlined in Attachment 2 to this report. In addition to the above submissions, the City also received two valid petitions - the first petition opposed the Scheme Amendment, and the second petition opposed specifically the rezoning of House Number 20, Castle Street, North Beach (North Beach Community Centre) from ‘Civic’ to ‘Local Centre’. A third petition, which was in support of the Scheme Amendment, was also received. However, the petition was considered invalid as it did not contain the details of an individual contact point as required by the City of Stirling’s Meeting Procedures Local Law 2009. Details of the petition are included in this report for information. First petition

The first petition opposed the rezoning of the following lots:-

House Number 118, Flora Terrace, North Beach from ‘Business’ to ‘Local Centre’; and

House Numbers 21 and 21A, Malcolm Street, North Beach from ‘Residential R20’ to ‘Special Use – Local Centre’.

This petition stated:-

“We the undersigned hereby express our objection to the current proposal for the rezoning of North Beach Flora Terrace from Business to Local Centre and Residential to Special Use – Local Centre and Civic to local Centre as presented in its current form in Local Planning Scheme No.3 – Amendment No.102”.

It should be noted that while this petition contained the names of 41 electors, only two of the electors provided their signatures on the petition. As the City’s Petition Information Sheet requires a petition to “contain the names, addresses and signatures of the electors”, the City could only count the two electors who had provided their signatures as part of the petition. Second petition

The second petition opposed only the rezoning of House Number 20, Castle Street, North Beach (North Beach Community Centre) from ‘Civic’ to ‘Local Centre’, and stated:-

“We the undersigned oppose the proposed rezoning of Lot 50 – House 20 Castle Street North Beach from “Civic” to “Local Centre” due to the impact on the mainly residential area in the vicinity of the proposed rezoning area, from a safety and noise aspect with the increased traffic flow entering and exiting onto Castle Street and Samuel Way and from the impact of “high rise” buildings on the residential neighbourhood.”

While this petition contained the signatures of 67 signatories, only 57 of these were counted as part of the petition, as some of the signatories do not reside within the City of Stirling. The City’s Petition Information Sheet states that a petition must “be made by electors of the district”.


Item 13.2 195

Third petition (invalid petition)

The third petition, which was considered invalid as it did not contain the details of an individual contact point as required by the City of Stirling’s Meeting Procedures Local Law 2009, contained 40 signatures (with only 18 of these considered valid signatures). This petition supported the Scheme Amendment, and stated:-

“We, the undersigned, as electors of the City of Stirling, wish to advise the Council of the City of Stirling that we acknowledge the efforts of the City to address the car parking and urban design issues facing the Flora Terrace Centre.

We believe that Amendment 102 will support redevelopment of the area and will help to create the right environment to support local businesses and to provide important amenities for the people who live in the area. We ask that Council adopt the amendment as it has been advertised.”

Of the 40 signatures, only 18 were considered verified because some of the signatories did not provide a valid residential address or did not reside within the City of Stirling (which are requirements for a signature to be considered as verified). Despite containing verified signatures, the third petition could not, overall, be treated as a valid petition as the document did not contain the details of an individual contact point as required by the City of Stirling’s Meeting Procedures Local Law 2009, which states that “a petition must state the name of the person upon whom, and an address at which, notice to the petitioners can be given”. The email address that was provided with the submission was also incorrect, and a number of contact attempts from both the Mayoral Office and the Governance Business Unit via phone and email to obtain the lead petitioner’s details were unsuccessful. As such, the City is unable to include the third petition as a valid petition. 3. Flora Terrace Feasibility Study The City also conducted extensive consultation as part of the Flora Terrace Feasibility Study, which looked at the feasibility of how the existing North Beach Community Centre site, in conjunction with the adjoining properties, could be redeveloped to provide additional parking. The Study was carried out in consultation with the community through a value capture workshop on 19 May 2018, where the community was provided the opportunity to vote on the preferred redevelopment options for those lots. A community open day was also held on 15 September 2018, where the outcomes of the value capture workshop were presented to the community.

Comment

The submissions received raised various planning concerns, relating mainly to building heights, parking and traffic issues. The submissions also raised concerns relating to noise, safety, privacy, community well-being and the provision of community facilities. Building Heights

Concerns were raised during public advertising of the Scheme Amendment regarding the potential issues that could be caused by new developments in the area and the lack of height restrictions for the proposed developments.


Item 13.2 196

Should the subject sites be rezoned to ‘Local Centre’, all developments on those sites will be assessed as per the requirements in the City’s local Planning Policy 4.2 Mixed Use and Commercial Centre Design Guidelines, which states that “new buildings shall generally be between two and three storeys”. Having spoken to those who object to the proposed rezoning because of the height of what may be built, it is clear that some members of the local community have lost trust in the Metropolitan North West Joint Development Assessment Panel to consider the impacts of developments on the community. Parking

Concerns were also raised regarding the potential parking issues that may be caused by rezoning the proposed lots. This Scheme Amendment has its origins in community concerns about the level of new residential development occurring in the centre parking problems. The amount of parking available in the area has partly resulted from the retail area of the centre being developed at a time when parking rates were less than those that would be required today. In order to improve parking in the area, the Flora Terrace Local Centre Parking and Urban Design Study recommended a number of ways to provide additional car parking. Firstly, improvements to how public car parking is provided in the area are being examined, and whether it is possible to provide an additional 10 public car parking spaces in the area. The City’s Engineering Design Business Unit is considering what short term parking improvements can be undertaken within its existing budget allocation. As part of the Flora Terrace Local Centre Parking and Urban Design Study the City also considered the introduction of timed parking restrictions throughout the precinct to enable existing car parking to be used in a more efficient manner. Secondly, the only other way to address the historical shortfall in parking is to redevelop the shops and community centre site and provide car parking at contemporary ratios. To this end, as part of the Flora Terrace Feasibility Study the City has used a community engagement process to investigate the feasibility of how the existing community centre site and adjoining retail properties, could be redeveloped. The redevelopment of these sites would provide additional parking. The Feasibility Study was carried out in consultation with the community through a workshop and an open day, where three development options were presented to the community. The community was generally supportive of mid-level (3 Storey) redevelopment on the sites. The additional parking would result primarily from new development providing parking at current rates. This would result in an additional amount of parking. While this work is an informing exercise, the outcomes have supported the proposed rezoning. Traffic

Concerns were also raised regarding the potential traffic issues that may be caused by the proposed rezonings, particularly in regards to the additional traffic movements and congestion.


Item 13.2 197

The City’s Engineering Design Business Unit has advised that:-

Officers are not aware of any particular traffic congestion or traffic safety issues in this area.

Latest counts showed that Flora Terrace (north of Malcolm Street) carries 2,127 vehicles per day and as a Local Distributor Road, this is within its capacity (7,000 vehicles per day).

Latest counts for Castle Road (east of Samuel Way) are from 2015 and at the time the road carried 275 vehicles per day, which is within its capacity of 3,000 vehicles per day.

Objections to the rezoning of House Numbers 21 and 21A, Malcolm Street, North Beach The City received submissions from the owners of House Numbers 21 and 21A, Malcolm Street, North Beach opposing the rezoning. When the City’s officers recommended rezoning this property, it was on the grounds that doing so would help to facilitate redevelopment of a lot that had frontage to Flora Terrace. However, this rezoning does not have to occur to deliver the outcomes sought by the Flora Terrace Local Centre Parking and Urban Design Study. The City’s officers recommend that the rezoning of House Numbers 21 and 21A, Malcolm Street, North Beach not proceed. Flora Terrace Feasibility Study - Community Open Day The Flora Terrace Feasibility Study Community Open Day was held on 15 September 2018. The purpose of the Open Day was to present to the community the medium and high-yield scenarios and three delivery options for the redevelopment of three lots within the Flora Terrace Local Centre:-

Lot 53, House Number 109, Flora Terrace, North Beach (privately owned land).

Lot 6, House Number 113, Flora Terrace, North Beach (privately owned land).

Lot 50, House Number 20, Castle Street, North Beach (Council owned land). The redevelopment plans also showed how additional public parking could be provided on a combined development site if the existing community centre and the adjoining sites were redeveloped. In addition to this, a concept plan showing how additional public parking could be provided in the area in the short term was presented to the community. The Flora Terrace Feasibility Study looked at whether it was possible to provide additional car bays on site, at no cost to the ratepayers, in a way that retained the existing community centre and offices. The Feasibility Study found that an additional 26 car bays on site could be achieved, if the combined development site was redeveloped. The following three delivery options were presented to the community during the Open Day:-

Option 1 (no redevelopment on the subject sites).

Option 2 (which proposed a less intensive development of three storeys).

Option 3 (which proposed a more intensive development of five storeys).


Item 13.2 198

Overall, the community was supportive of redevelopment on the subject sites, with Option 2 being the most favoured option (as indicated during the value management process held at the Feasibility Study Workshop on 19 May 2018). The feedback provided by the community at the Flora Terrace Feasibility Study Community Open Day is detailed below:-

A belief that redeveloping the combined development site may worsen car parking in the area, unless there is a significant creation of public parking bays.

The lack of a public piazza providing a link between Apex Park and Flora Terrace is a lost opportunity to develop a unique space for the benefit of the community.

Lack of clear community support for additional building heights in the area, and that building should be limited to three storeys (including basement).

The community was supportive of redevelopment on the subject sites, with comments relating to limiting building heights and provision of adequate car parking made during the consultation exercises. This supports the proposal to rezone the community centre site from ‘Civic’ to ‘Local Centre’. Options The following options are available to Council. Option 1 – Not adopt Local Planning Scheme No.3 Amendment No.102 This option involves retaining the existing zonings of the subject lots. The costs and benefits of this option are outlined below:- Costs

Lost opportunity to change the zoning within the local centre to support its ongoing vibrancy and vitality.

Lost opportunity to change the zoning within the local centre to allow more flexible use of the City’s land assets to support the centre development into the future and provide a longer term option for managing parking in the centre.

Benefits

House Numbers 21 and 21A, Malcolm Street, North Beach would retain their current ‘Residential (R20)’ zoning, as requested by the owners of those properties.

This option is not supported as it would not allow opportunities to improve the centre and facilitate development to support the vibrancy and vitality of the centre.


Item 13.2 199

Option 2 – Adopt Local Planning Scheme No.3 Amendment No.102 (as advertised) This option involves rezoning the three lots to ‘Local Centre’. The costs and benefits of this option are outlined below:- Costs

Cost to undertake Scheme Amendment process.

Does not address the concerns of the owners of House Numbers 21 and 21A, Malcolm Street, North Beach.

Benefits

Facilitates the potential redevelopment of the lots within the south-eastern section of the Study area.

Provides longer term potential for additional public and private parking within the local centre.

Facilitates additional land use opportunities within the local centre. This option is not recommended as the City received submissions from the owners of House Numbers 21 and 21A, Malcolm Street, North Beach objecting to the rezoning of their properties. After further consideration, the City’s officers are of the view that the exclusion of this site from the Scheme Amendment will not have a negative impact on the implementation of the Flora Terrace Local Centre Parking and Urban Design Study, or on the redevelopment of the Flora Terrace Local Centre. Option 3 – Adopt Local Planning Scheme No.3 Amendment No.102 in a modified form This option involves rezoning only House Number 118, Flora Terrace, North Beach from ‘Business’ to ‘Local Centre’ and House Number 20, Castle Street, North Beach from ‘Civic’ to ‘Local Centre’. Costs

Cost to undertake Scheme Amendment process.

Lost opportunity to change the zoning of House Numbers 21 and 21A, Malcolm Street, North Beach from ‘Residential R20’ to ‘Special Use – Local Centre’ to allow more flexible use of the land in conjunction with the adjacent lot.

Benefits

House Numbers 21 and 21A, Malcolm Street, North Beach would retain their current ‘Residential (R20)’ zoning, as requested by the owners.

Still allows for some potential redevelopment on the two lots that are rezoned, while reducing impact on the neighbouring properties adjoining House Numbers 21 and 21A, Malcolm Street, North Beach.

Facilitate some additional land use opportunities within the Flora Terrace Local Centre.

Provides some longer term potential for additional public and private parking within the local centre.


Item 13.2 200

This option is recommended as it will allow for the implementation of the recommendations of the Flora Terrace Local Centre Parking and Urban Design Study. The rezoning will support the vibrancy and vitality of the centre by changing the current zoning. Rezoning the land owned by the City will provide more flexible use for the site into the future to support the development of the local centre, the potential redevelopment of the City’s asset and longer term options for public parking.

Implementation Implications Should Council resolve to adopt Scheme Amendment No.102, development on the subject sites will be as per the requirements for a Local Centre zone.


Part 5 of the Planning and Development Act 2005, together with the Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015, details procedures for amending an existing Town Planning Scheme. Following Council’s resolution on 14 November 2017 to initiate LPS3 Amendment No.102, advertising commenced on 27 February 2018 and was carried out in accordance with the above requirements. Advertising concluded on 10 April 2018. As Scheme Amendment No.102 has been advertised for public comment, and submissions received, Clause 50(2) and (3) of Part 5 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015 apply, which state:-

(2) The local government –

(a) must consider all submissions in relation to a standard amendment to a local planning scheme lodged with the local government within the submission period; and

(b) may, at the discretion of the local government, consider submissions in relation to the amendment lodged after the end of the submission period but before the end of the consideration period.

(3) Before the end of the consideration period for a standard amendment to a local

planning scheme, or a later date approved by the Commission, the local government must pass a resolution -

(a) to support the amendment without modification; or (b) to support the amendment with proposed modifications to address issues

raised in the submissions; or (c) not to support the amendment.

Clause 50(1) of Part 5 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015 requires the local government to consider all submissions received in relation to a Standard Scheme Amendment within 60 days of the end of the submission period. The submission period for Scheme Amendment No.102 closed on 10 April 2018. However, due to the issues that were raised in the submissions received during the advertising period, the City’s officers considered it necessary to hold off presenting the outcomes of advertising report to Council until the Flora Terrace Feasibility Study workshop and Open Day had been held.


Item 13.2 201

The Flora Terrace Feasibility Study workshop was held on 19 May 2018, and the Open Day was held on 15 September 2018. The Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015 require a local government to forward the Scheme Amendment to the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) within 21 days of passing a resolution on a Scheme Amendment.


All costs associated with the processing of Scheme Amendment No.102 are being met by the City. The City’s Engineering Design Business Unit has advised that the provision of short term public parking improvements recommended in the Flora Terrace Local Centre Parking and Urban Design Study may be undertaken using existing budgets. However the reconfiguration of parking along Flora Terrace, including the provision of new and wider footpaths will be subject to Council funding, which will be sought in the 2019/2020 financial year.


Theme 1: Liveable City and Thriving Neighbourhoods Objective 1.1: A Strong Sense of Place



ENVIRONMENTAL

Issue Comment

Energy consumption The rezoning identified in the Scheme Amendment will allow for long-term redevelopment in the Flora Terrace Local Centre, which in turn will improve the vibrancy and vitality of the local centre, and will provide local shops and services, reducing the need for local residents to travel.


Item 13.2 202

SOCIAL

Issue Comment

Community services The rezoning of the land on which the City’s existing community centre is located may allow for the joint redevelopment of the community centre in conjunction with adjoining private lots in the long-term. This could ultimately facilitate a new community centre on the site as part of a mixed use development.

Amenity The rezoning of the ‘Civic’ zoned site could, in the long-term, potentially facilitate the provision of a new community centre, public square and arcade link to Apex Park, all of which would provide a significant contribution to the amenity of the Flora Terrace Local Centre. Concerns were also raised during the public advertising of the Scheme Amendment that the redevelopment of the subject sites could potentially negatively affect the amenity of the area.

Transport and access The rezoning of these sites could, in the long-term, potentially contribute to the significant improvement in the traffic and access arrangements within the local centre.

ECONOMIC

Issue Comment

Job creation The proposed rezonings will expand the boundaries of the Flora Terrace Local Centre, creating additional local employment opportunities.

Conclusion

Scheme Amendment No.102, as advertised, proposed to rezone three lots in the Flora Terrace Local Centre from various zonings to ‘Local Centre’ in order to implement the recommendations of the Flora Terrace Local Centre Parking and Urban Design Study. The Scheme Amendment was advertised in accordance with the Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015 and the City’s Planning Consultation Procedure, and the City’s officers’ responses to those submissions are detailed in this report. When the City’s officers recommended the rezoning of House Numbers 21 and 21A, Malcolm Street, North Beach it was on the grounds that doing so would help to facilitate redevelopment of a lot that had frontage to Flora Terrace. However, this rezoning does not have to occur to deliver the outcomes sought by the Flora Terrace Local Centre Parking and Urban Design Study. The recommended modified Scheme Amendment No.102 will still assist in supporting the vitality of the Flora Terrace Local Centre. It is recommended that Scheme Amendment No.102 be adopted in a modified form (as shown in Attachment 1) and forwarded to the WAPC and the Minister for Planning for determination.


Item 13.2 - Attachment 1 - Local Planning Scheme No.3 - Scheme Amendment No.102 Documentation (for adoption) 203


Item 13.2 - Attachment 2 - Schedule of Submissions 206


Item 13.3 223

13.3 TENDER FOR THE REFURBISHMENT WORK AT HERB GRAHAM COMMUNITY CENTRE MIRRABOOKA

This item was DEFERRED to a future meeting at the Council meeting held 2 October 2018, to allow the submissions to be assessed by an external party. Additional information has been included at the end of the report.

Report Information

Location: Herb Graham Recreation Centre


Reporting Officer: Manager Facilities Projects and Assets


Ward: Balga

Suburb: Mirrabooka


Definition








Item 13.3 224

Council Resolution

1118/022 Moved Councillor Boothman, seconded Councillor Sargent

That the Tender from Geared Construction Pty Ltd for the provision of Refurbishment Work at Herb Graham Recreation Community Centre Mirrabooka be ACCEPTED at the fixed price lump sum of $1,167,233.15 (excluding GST). The motion was put and declared CARRIED (12/1). For: Councillors Boothman, Caddy, Guilfoyle, Irwin, Lagan, Migdale, Perkov, Proud, Re, Sandri, Sargent and Spagnolo. Against: Councillor Italiano.

Recommendation

That the Tender from Geared Construction Pty Ltd for the provision of Refurbishment Work at Herb Graham Recreation Community Centre Mirrabooka be ACCEPTED at the fixed price lump sum of $1,167,233.15 (excluding GST).

Report Purpose

To report on the results from public Invitation for Tender (IFT) and the evaluation of tenders, in accordance with Regulation 18 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996.

Relevant Documents

Attachments

Attachment 1 - Weighted Scores ⇩

Attachment 2 - Schedule of Tenders Received (previously circulated to Councillors under confidential separate cover)

Attachment 3 - Weighted Scores - External Party ⇩


Nil

Background

The inception of the Herb Graham Refurbishment Project in 2017 was intended to improve the condition of the facilities and meet the community expectations of the multicultural centre. The primary brief was to improve the aesthetics of the sports courts, entrance and mezzanine, and to expand the use of the areas to become multi-purpose. The courts are currently used for public, local and state government events such as concerts, market stalls, religious and multicultural events, citizenship ceremonies and local member public speaking.


Item 13.3 225

As part of the 2017 Labour Party State Election Campaign, Mirrabooka State Member Janine Freeman MLA offered the City an election funding commitment of $400,000 to support the refurbishment of the minor and main stadiums at Herb Graham on the condition that the City would match the funding amount. In October 2017, the commitment was accepted by the City and designs to provide sport impact, acoustic and fire rated cladded panels to the sports stadiums were included to meet the needs and use of the multi-purpose centre. The project also details the provision of a lift from the major stadium to the mezzanine floor to comply with the National Construction Code and Disability (Access to Premises – Buildings) Standards. Tender Details

IFT Number 19.009.S.IFT

IFT Title Refurbishment Work at Herb Graham Community Centre Mirrabooka

Recommended Tenderer(s) Geared Construction Pty Ltd

Expenditure under this Contract is not capped or fixed. The estimated Contract award value is based on estimated expenditure at this time but may vary depending on budget availability.

Contract Term Initial: 32 weeks.

Extension Options: Nil.

Defects Liability Period: 52 weeks from the completion date of each separable portion.

Tendered Rates/Cost Provided in Attachment A to this report (confidential) Advertising: Wednesday 15 August 2018 The West Australian

Tender Deadline: Wednesday 5 September 2018 1.00pm

Tender Opening: Wednesday 5 September 2018 3.00pm

Tender Submissions

Six tenders were received, including alternative and non-conforming Tenders:-

AE Hoskins and Sons;

Byte Construct Pty Ltd;

FDC Construction and Fitout (WA) Pty Ltd;

Geared Construction Pty Ltd;

LKS Constructions (WA) Pty Ltd; and

Molivi Construction Pty Ltd.

Contract

Commencement Date of New Contract: October 2018

Reason for gap between Contracts: Nil.

Completion Date of New Contract: May 2020

Estimated Value of New Contract: $1,167,233.15 (excluding GST)

Price Basis of New Contract: Fixed Price Lump Sum


Item 13.3 226

Tender Evaluation Panel

The tender evaluation panel comprised of four members, including a Business Unit Manager (Chairperson) and Officer(s). Process and probity advice during evaluation was provided by a City Procurement Officer. Evaluation of Tenders

The objective of the evaluation panel is to recommend a suitably qualified and experienced Contractor or Contractors to satisfy the requirement of the above mentioned IFT. Based on evaluation of the received submissions and subsequent compliance assessments, the Evaluation Panel recommend that the Respondent(s) recommended in this report be accepted at the estimated Contract value and Contract term provided, from the anticipated commencement date. Evaluation Justification Upon considering the results generated from the selection criteria matrix and value for money application displayed in the consensus meeting, the submission by Geared Construction Pty Ltd is recommended, as this will provide the City of Stirling with the best outcome and value for money.

Comment

All members of the evaluation panel have made a conflict of interest declaration in writing confirming they have no relationships with any of the tenderers. It is confirmed that the following checks have been undertaken:-

Has the recommended Tenderer(s) undergone Reference Checks successfully?

YES

Has the recommended Tenderer(s) undergone Probity assessment and been deemed compliant?

YES

Has the recommended Tenderer(s) undergone Financial Viability assessment and been deemed acceptable?

YES

Was a Conflict of Interest declared? If yes, please specify how it was managed

YES

Tenderer has made the following statement:-

Although not directly involved with the Invitation for Tender process, Geared Construction would like to disclose a personal relationship (spouse) between the Operational Director (Geared Construction Director) and the City of Stirling's Facilities Project and Assets Business Support Officer. The Managing Director (Geared Construction Director) was also employed by the City of Stirling between September 2013 and December 2014. Geared Construction does not believe this to be a conflict of interest; however Geared Construction believes it to be in the best interests of all parties for this information to be disclosed.


Item 13.3 227


In accordance with Section 1.8 of the Local Government Act 1995 and Regulation 14(1) of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 the Tender was advertised in a state wide publication. A link to the Tender documents was also made available via the City’s website.


The Tender has been conducted in accordance with Part 4 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996.


Account Number: G0879 – INT0024

Budget Item: Herb Graham Regional RC – Stadium Upgrade

Budget Amount: $1,347,302 (excluding GST)

Amount Spent to Date: $23,784 (excluding GST)

Proposed Cost: $1,167,233.15 (excluding GST)

Balance: $156,284.85 (excluding GST) All figures quoted in this report are exclusive of GST.


Theme 3: Engaged Communities

Objective 1.6: Active and Vibrant City



ENVIRONMENTAL

Issue Comment

Energy consumption The project includes LED lighting, thermal insulation and passive ventilation improvements


Item 13.3 228

SOCIAL

Issue Comment

Amenity The refurbishment will improve asset condition and appearance to meet community expectations, in line with the Multicultural Centre recently constructed

Equity The proposal meets multicultural needs by providing a space that allows for a wider range of cultural events over and above single use sports courts. The area also includes the provision of a lift to enable equal access to the mezzanine floor area.

ECONOMIC

Issue Comment

Nil.

Conclusion

The Evaluation Panel recommends that the contract for the Refurbishment Work at Herb Graham Community Centre Mirrabooka be awarded to Geared Construction Pty Ltd at the rates listed in Attachment A at a total fixed price lump sum contract cost of $1,167,233.15 (excluding GST). Additional Information - 6 November 2018 At its meeting held 2 October 2018, Council resolved (Council Resolution Number 1018/005) as follows:-

"That the Item relating to 12.1/TE1 - Tender for the refurbishment work at Herb Graham Community Centre Mirrabooka be DEFERRED and have the submissions assessed by an external party."

The City engaged an external tender evaluation panel consisting of three external evaluators to assess the tender submissions. To ensure a comparative assessment was undertaken, the evaluation criteria remained unchanged to the original assessment. The external tender evaluation panel was briefed on the tender documentation as advertised to the market and provided with the necessary evaluation resources to complete their individual assessments. The external tender evaluation panel comprised:-

Principal – Andrew Burchfield Consulting Pty Ltd;

Senior Architect – Bollig Design Group Pty Ltd; and

Director – RBB Construction Cost Consultants. The combined cost for the external panel was $7,480.00 (excluding GST).


Item 13.3 229

On completion of the individual evaluations, a consensus meeting was held on 19 October 2018 to consolidate the external tender evaluation panel’s assessment scores. Previous and external tender panel scoring is summarised below:- AE Hoskins

& Sons Byte Construction Pty Ltd

FDC Construction and Fitout Pty Ltd

Geared Construction Pty Ltd

LKS Construction (WA) Pty Ltd

Molivi Construction Pty Ltd

Internal panel (/100)

54.7 63.5 62.6 65.9 63.1 56.3

External panel (/100)

57.9 61.5 65.6 69.9 67.5 63.0

The external tender evaluation panel also provided feedback supporting the assessment including:- ‘Geared Construction has provided a comprehensive work programme, methodology and sequence. They seem to have a clear understanding of the complexity of the project and have identified the important risks and provided methodology to prevent the risks. Geared Construction has noted projects of similar complexities and value. They seem to have experience in working in occupied spaces. Geared Construction is a small company but their personnel seems to be experienced and qualified and capable of undertaking a project of this nature. They seem to have sufficient resources to undertake this project. They have a consistent team of sub-contractors to call on.’ Geared Construction's relevant experience includes eight recent refurbishments for four local governments’. Other tenderers also provided reasonable methodologies but some failed to address specific project complexities such as strict lead time requirements. The previous experience of some tenderers also lacked working in occupied spaces which is critical to this project. Most tenderers had a sound ‘company profile and resources’ response. Upon considering the external tender evaluation panel’s selection criteria matrix and value for money aassessment, the submission by Geared Construction Pty Ltd is recommended, as this will provide the City of Stirling with the best outcome and value for money.


Item 13.3 - Attachment 1 - Weighted Scores 230


Item 13.3 - Attachment 3 - Weighted Scores - External Party 231


Item 14.1 232

14. MOTIONS OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN

14.1 NOTICE OF MOTION - COUNCILLOR KEITH SARGENT - CONSIDERATION OF SOLAR PANEL INSTALLATION AT THE MEN'S SHED, BALCATTA

Councillor Keith Sargent submitted the following Notice of Motion at the Council meeting held Tuesday 16 October 2018:- “That Council CONSIDERS, as a part of the mid-year budget review, the installation of solar panels on the Men’s Shed in Balcatta”

Report Information

Location: Lot 3134, House Number 8, Vasto Place, Balcatta


Reporting Officer: Manager Facilities, Projects and Assets


Ward: Hamersley

Suburb: Balcatta


Definition








Item 14.1 233

Council Resolution

1118/023 Moved Councillor Sargent, seconded Councillor Caddy

That Council CONSIDERS, as a part of the 2019/2020 budget process, the installation of solar panels on the Men’s Shed in Balcatta. The motion was put and declared CARRIED (13/0). For: Councillors Boothman, Caddy, Guilfoyle, Irwin, Italiano, Lagan, Migdale, Perkov, Proud, Re, Sandri, Sargent and Spagnolo. Against: Nil.

Reason for Alternative Recommendation If funds to deliver this project are included as part of the mid-year review process, works will not be completed prior to the end of the financial year which will result in a carry forward. In order to plan, scope, procure and deliver this project effectively, a full financial year is required.

Notice of Motion Recommendation (Suggested Alternative Recommendation - Refer to Conclusion)

That Council CONSIDERS, as a part of the mid-year budget review, the installation of solar panels on the Men’s Shed in Balcatta.

Report Purpose

To respond to the Notice of Motion submitted by Councillor Keith Sargent.

Relevant Documents

Attachments

Nil.

Available for viewing at the meeting

Nil.

Background

The City has a sustainable energy program that includes the installation of solar photovoltaic panels on City owned facilities. Installations are prioritised based on the savings returned to the City, with systems to date having a return on investment (or payback period) of two to six years and those in the forward program five to seven years. The current program runs to 2021/2022 and does not include the Men’s Shed.


Item 14.1 234

Comment

City officers have carried out a high level review of the site in terms of energy usage, shading and roof space and estimated that a system of 10-15kW is expected to be feasible and provide good savings/payback in line with other systems in our forward plan. There is reasonable shading on the west side of the roof, particularly in winter, which is a limiting factor on size. Interval data shows fairly consistent electricity usage throughout the year Monday to Saturday with limited use on Sundays. Were the project to receive funding, a more detailed assessment of the site load and roof shading would need to be carried out to determine the optimal system size. The site meter includes the Men’s Shed, BMX Club and Model Engineering Society, so they would all use the PV output at different times although consumption would still show the same on their sub meter.


This item has been suggested by the Men’s Shed and no further consultation has taken place.


Nil.


Subject to confirmation through design works, a 15kW system would cost in the order of $35,000 with a possible renewable energy subsidy of around $7,800 available.


Theme 2: Sustainable Environment Objective 2.2: Energy Wise City The proposed installation would reduce the City’s purchase of energy and its greenhouse gas emissions.



ENVIRONMENTAL

Issue Comment

Greenhouse gas emissions This proposal will reduce the City’s greenhouse gas emissions.


Item 14.1 235

SOCIAL

Issue Comment

Nil.

ECONOMIC

Issue Comment

Nil.

Conclusion

Whilst a relatively small facility compared to other buildings already in the sustainable energy program, the proposed system at the Men’s Shed does provide a good return on investment and is supported.

Suggested Alternative Recommendation

That Council CONSIDERS, as a part of the 2019/2020 budget process, the installation of solar panels on the Men’s Shed in Balcatta.

Reason for Alternative Recommendation If funds to deliver this project are included as part of the mid-year review process, works will not be completed prior to the end of the financial year which will result in a carry forward. In order to plan, scope, procure and deliver this project effectively, a full financial year is required.


Item 14.2 236

14.2 NOTICE OF MOTION - COUNCILLOR DAVID LAGAN - AED DEFIBRILLATOR UNITS AT CITY FACILITIES

Councillor David Lagan submitted the following Notice of Motion prior to the Council Meeting to be held 6 November 2018:-

“A report be presented to Council detailing:

1. The number of AED defibrillator units within City owned and managed facilities and that a city ‘hot map’ showing the location of AED defibrillator units BE PRODUCED and MADE AVAILABLE within relevant publications and on the city web page.

2. The percentage of City facility officers trained in first aid and certification levels BE ATTAINED.”

Background Information/Reason for Motion (provided by Councillor David Lagan)

With some 2,451 out of hospital cardiac arrest events throughout WA in the last year the need for fast and efficient on site intervention at the time of an event is clear. The City is bound to provide an acceptable level of duty of care to all those who attend events within City facilities. This information should best inform the City as to how it is tracking with regards to community safety and duty of care within City facilities.

Report Information

Location: City Wide


Reporting Officer: Manager Recreation and Leisure Services

Business Unit: Recreation and Leisure Services

Ward: City Wide

Suburb: City Wide


Definition








Item 14.2 237

Council Resolution

1118/024 Moved Councillor Lagan, seconded Councillor Sandri

1. That Council NOTES the information provided in relation to the current availability and distribution of AED devices in City owned and managed facilities.

2. That Council NOTES the qualification levels of City officers included in the

report based on the level of risk of various job roles. 3. That Council NOTES the promotion of the St John 'Community First Responder'

Application as the preferred method of communicating AED unit locations across the City.

4. That Council NOTES the continued funding of additional AED units in City

owned and managed facilities as part of the 2019-2020 operational budget. The motion was put and declared CARRIED (13/0). For: Councillors Boothman, Caddy, Guilfoyle, Irwin, Italiano, Lagan, Migdale, Perkov, Proud, Re, Sandri, Sargent and Spagnolo. Against: Nil.

Reason for Alternative Recommendation The St John 'Community First Responder' Application is an existing tool developed for mapping AED locations, and is maintained by a professional organisation in the field of first aid response. Any creation of an independent mapping tool for the City would duplicate information already available from St John Ambulance and would be confusing. The information already available on the App includes additional AED locations that are not under the care or control of the City of Stirling and hence, it provides a broader benefit to the community.

Notice of Motion Recommendation (Suggested Alternative Recommendation - refer to Conclusion)

That a report be presented to Council detailing:-

1. The number of AED defibrillator units within City owned and managed facilities and that a city ‘hot map’ showing the location of AED defibrillator units BE PRODUCED and MADE AVAILABLE within relevant publications and on the city web page.

2. The percentage of City facility officers trained in first aid and certification levels BE ATTAINED.


Item 14.2 238

Report Purpose

To respond to the Notice of Motion submitted by Councillor David Lagan relating to Automated External Defibrillator (AED) units in City owned and managed facilities.

Relevant Documents

Attachments

Attachment 1 - St Johns 'Community First Responder' Application AED Location Map ⇩


Nil

Background

The City of Stirling directly manages 30 major facilities through the Recreation and Leisure and Community Services Business Units. These venues, some of which have AED units, include recreation and aquatic facilities, community facilities and libraries.

Comment

Depending on the nature and type of activity that occurs in each venue, a range of safety measures are in place to respond to emergencies that may occur. These measures include provision of first aid and resuscitation equipment, AED units and trained officers that are able to respond to the types of emergencies that are likely to occur. The level of risk assigned to each location is defined by the nature of the activity that occurs, the number of users that attend the location and the likelihood of an incident taking place. Accordingly, three aquatic facilities and the Beach Services Team are considered high risk locations. Each location contains multiple AED devices; resuscitation and first aid equipment; and highly trained officers at each location that are ready and able to respond in an emergency situation. The remaining four recreation facilities all have AED units, first aid kits and trained officers that are able to respond in the event of an emergency occurring. The general community facilities and libraries where officers are permanently based are equipped with a range of first aid kits, trained officers and some have AED devices currently installed. The community facilities with no permanent officers present do not currently provide first aid or administer first aid assistance as the likelihood of a major incident occurring is lower. Table 1 below highlights the number of facilities that currently have an AED unit on site for use by officers in the event that a cardiac arrest occurs. Multiple devices are installed at the aquatic facilities and beaches due to the high risk environment, building layout and the mobile nature of the work undertaken by the Beach Services Team.


Item 14.2 239

Table 1: AED Units in City Managed Facilities

Facility Type Number of Facilities

Number of AED Units

Aquatic Centres and Beach Services

4 15

Recreation Facilities 4 4

General Community Facilities and Libraries

9 2

Unstaffed Community facilities 13 0

AED units are being progressively installed in the remaining general community facilities and libraries based on priority order. Officer training is also being undertaken as the equipment is rolled out. This ensures that officers are adequately trained and able to respond in the event of an emergency occurring. AED units have not been installed at community facilities which do not have the presence of permanent officers; locations with a higher patronage and a permanent officer presence are prioritised, as there is an increased likelihood of an incident occurring at these locations. Any future deployment of AED units to facilities without a permanent officer presence will also be based on priority demand, as well as logistical arrangements around the security of the equipment and its installation in a readily accessible location. Some providers of AED units have produced a secure (locked) AED cabinet. These units can be installed in a public area and can be accessed via a PIN code when officers are not present to assist. The cabinets are registered with the Triple Zero Call Centre through the St John Community First Responder Program. The Call Centre is also able to provide a caller with the PIN code to unlock the AED cabinet if the device is registered with the Community First Responder program. St John Ambulance has implemented a 'Community First Responder' application (App) for mobile devices that can be used by the community in the event of a first aid emergency. The free App can be downloaded to handheld smartphone devices and provides a variety of essential first aid information. The App enables the user to identify any nearby registered AED unit (based on map location) as well as providing the GPS coordinates of the user to assist the Ambulance service with locating the casualty requiring assistance. A snapshot of the map is included at Attachment 1. The benefit of this system is that all registered AED units (including those privately owned) are displayed, resulting in a far greater awareness of units available, not just those owned by the City of Stirling. Currently all City of Stirling facilities that have an AED unit on site are included in this App. As new devices are registered, these are automatically added to the App by St John Ambulance. It is recommended that the City promote the use of this App through social media, a link on the City’s website and posters at each of the AED locations as an alternative to creating and maintaining a separate interactive AED location map for City owned devices. This ensures that information relating to AED locations is up to date and also includes those devices not located within City owned or managed facilities. More importantly, this app is underpinned by a recognised provider of professional first aid services across the community. To assist with general facility hire enquiries, information on each City facility that has an AED will be included on the City’s website.


Item 14.2 240

Further to the provision of first aid equipment, the City is also committed to ensuring that City officers are provided with the appropriate first aid training to undertake their role effectively. Where a particular position has a prerequisite requirement for First Aid qualifications (such as a Lifeguard, Beach Inspector Duty Officer, Gym Instructor etc) each employee appointed to these roles must maintain the qualification throughout the course of employment. First aid qualifications are classified into two categories for all roles that require first aid skills:-

Provide First Aid (Previously known as Senior First Aid).

Provide Advanced First Aid. As illustrated in Table 2, 61% of officers working in a facility have a first aid qualification. Table 2: First Aid Certification for City of Stirling Facility Officers as at 1 October 2018

First Aid Qualification Number of Employees with qualification

Provide First Aid / Advanced First Aid

223

No Certification required 143

Total Number of Positions 366

Percentage Holding First Aid Qualifications

61%

Regular in-service training is conducted for officers at facilities particularly in the high-risk aquatic facilities and Beach Services Teams. This ongoing training ensures officers are ready and able to respond in a professional manner in the event of a first aid emergency.


The City has consulted with St John Ambulance and the Royal Life Saving Society WA to research information relating to the 'Community First Responder' App and current first aid certification standards. St John Ambulance is supportive of the City promoting the 'Community First Responder' App through the City’s website.


Nil.


The cost to install an AED unit in a secure locked cabinet is currently $3,400 per unit. There are additional ongoing equipment replacement costs of $350 per unit every two years, as the batteries require replacement and the chest pads have a limited shelf life. As the deployment of AED units continues to other community facilities and libraries, there are additional employee training costs to ensure officers are provided with the necessary training to competently use the unit in an emergency situation. Training costs are approximately $70 - $90 per officer, and it is recommended that a requalification is undertaken every 12 months.


Item 14.2 241


Theme 1: Liveable City and Thriving Neighbourhoods Objective 1.5: Health and Wellbeing



ENVIRONMENTAL

Issue Comment

Nil.

SOCIAL

Issue Comment

Community services Access to the St John’s First Responder App provides a valuable community service in potentially helping to save lives.

ECONOMIC

Issue Comment

Communications infrastructure Promotion of the St John’s First Responder App on the City’s website allows the community free access to important information.

Conclusion

It is acknowledged that the installation of AED units across the City’s aquatic, recreation and general community facilities, as well as City libraries, is important to ensure a high level of care is provided. The current staged deployment of AED devices ensures that the highest risk venues already have AED units in place and that the remaining general community facilities and libraries will continue to be equipped in priority order. The easy availability of the St John 'Community First Responder' App provides detailed information to users about the location of the nearest AED device and allows users to make direct contact with the Triple Zero Call Centre in the event of an emergency. All of the City’s existing facilities that have AED devices are displayed on the App; as new facilities are equipped, these are added to the system.


Item 14.2 242

Suggested Alternative Recommendation

1. That Council NOTES the information provided in relation to the current availability and distribution of AED devices in City owned and managed facilities.

2. That Council NOTES the qualification levels of City officers included in the

report based on the level of risk of various job roles. 3. That Council NOTES the promotion of the St John 'Community First Responder'

Application as the preferred method of communicating AED unit locations across the City.

4. That Council NOTES the continued funding of additional AED units in City

owned and managed facilities as part of the 2019-2020 operational budget. Reason for Alternative Recommendation

The St John 'Community First Responder' Application is an existing tool developed for mapping AED locations, and is maintained by a professional organisation in the field of first aid response. Any creation of an independent mapping tool for the City would duplicate information already available from St John Ambulance and would be confusing. The information already available on the App includes additional AED locations that are not under the care or control of the City of Stirling and hence, it provides a broader benefit to the community.


Item 14.2 - Attachment 1 - St Johns 'Community First Responder' Application AED Location Map 243


244

15. NOTICE OF MOTION FOR CONSIDERATION AT THE NEXT MEETING

15.1 COUNCILLOR GIOVANNI ITALIANO - NOTICE OF MOTION -

REQUIREMENTS AROUND RECEIPT OF ELECTED MEMBER GIFTS

Councillor Giovanni Italiano submitted the following Notice of Motion at the Council meeting

held 6 November 2018 for consideration at the next meeting of Council:-

“1. That a report be PROVIDED to Council:-

a. On any legal or other requirements of an Elected Member who procures or

receives a benefit including gifts, hospitality or financial benefit in relation to their

current or proposed future as an elected member;

b. On the requirements under the Local Government Act 1995 to disclose a benefit

including gifts, hospitality or financial benefit in relation to an Elected Member’s

current or proposed future as an Elected Member;

c. On whether the City’s current policies cover the situation of an Elected Member

receiving a benefit; and

d. On whether City equipment including phones, laptops and business cards can be

used to procure a benefit for a proposed future as an Elected Member.

2. That a Council workshop be ORGANISED as soon as possible to discuss these issues.

3. That a gift register for Officers and Councillors BE MADE readily available and accessible on the City's website.”


Item 16.1 245

16. QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN

16.1 QUESTION ON NOTICE - COUNCILLOR ANDREW GUILFOYLE

Councillor Andrew Guilfoyle submitted the following questions prior to the Council meeting held 6 November 2018:- Q1. “According to our policy contractors (or our 37 staff members or volunteers) who spray

pesticides must do so in line with regulatory and product label requirements. These instructions are largely designed to protect the user from harm. What specific instructions must contractors follow when spraying in public to ‘ensure’ (our word) their spraying has no risk to public health?”

A1. There are a number of requirements for City contractors applying pesticide on City

managed lands. Firstly, the contractor needs to be certified under the WA Department of Health regulations to ensure the contractor’s operators have the technical and operational knowledge in dealing with chemicals in a public space. Secondly, there are a number of requirements in the tender contract specification and assessment process to ensure the potential contractor has the management skills, operational experience and performance track record of applying pesticide responsibly on City property.

These requirements include:-

The contractor must have all spray vehicles fitted with GPS guidance devices for tracking and recording pesticide applications;

The City reserves the right to randomly sample, analyse the tank mix, and audit the plant and equipment to ensure that the specified type and rate of pesticide is being applied (typically once per spray program order with each contractor);

The City will conduct regular inspections of the pesticide application and complete an audit form. Any adverse reports will be emailed to the contractor for their immediate rectification or rehabilitation (generally for a spray program one inspection and an audit is undertaken each day with each contractor, while an inspection for the street program occurs generally twice per week);

The City may direct the contractor to cease pesticide application if, in its opinion, weather conditions are not suitable for spraying; for example: excessive wind (greater than 10km/hr), and/or extreme temperatures (either greater than 35C or less than 1C), and whenever rain or showery periods have been forecast during the intended spraying of an area (during a spray program, the City communicates with the contractor at the start and end of each day to plan upcoming works based on matters such as the forecast weather - conditions are monitored regularly during the day and if they change, a decision is made to cease works and the time is recorded);

The City reserves the right to demand to see daily Job Safety Audits whenever the contract company is working in the City (a daily inspection takes place on site each day with each contactor; at this time the daily Job Safety Audits are typically inspected); and

The City maintains and actively responds to provide a “No Spray residents list” for Engineering Operations spray activities and a “Notification Spray lists” for work undertaken by Parks and Sustainability as per the draft Pesticide Notification Plan.


Item 16.1 246

Thirdly, the City briefs the contractor at the start of each dedicated spraying program event (the pre-start meeting) to detail the job, confirm that warning signage is in place at appropriate locations and on spray vehicles, and check wind speed using an anemometer at the actual site before giving the ‘green light’ to proceed. Thereafter, the responsible officer supervises the contractors with daily and or unscheduled inspections to ensure compliance with the contract. These include ensuring compliance to the following:-

That (1) with respect to spraying of reserves near school zones, this is only permitted during school holidays and not during school term (2) no spraying is permitted without the City’s confirmation that residents of the ‘No Spray Notification List’ have been notified and (3) Dieback quarantine measures are observed whenever operating in conservation reserves.

That with regard to safety, contract staff engaged to undertake pesticide spraying observe at all times personal and environmental safety standards in the use if Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), the preparation of pesticides for spraying and safe us of spray equipment.

Supervisory employees have undertaken contract management and administration training courses. Furthermore, supervisory employees have had industry training to identify issues and understand the requirements for the safe use of pesticides.

Finally, in assessing the contractor’s invoice for payment, the City officer will verify that the work undertaken has been in accordance with that specified prior to commencement of each spraying event under the program.

Given the nature of the work residents are also vigilant in providing intelligence with regard to alleged poor performance.

Note – volunteers, be it maintaining and planting bushland, community tree planting program or the City’s nursery, do not use pesticides.

Q2. “In light of our ‘rigorous contract management and supervision’ and ‘clear and accountable management systems’: How do we supervise, monitor or know if a contractor has in anyway breached these specific conditions, which ensure no risk to public health? For example, how do we know they did or did not spray on a day where their anemometer recording says they should not spray, or when people including children are nearby, downwind or otherwise present, or during peak public use times, or did or did not use signage appropriately etc.?”

A2. See above processes outlined in A1. Where poor performance is observed by a City officer managing the contract, there is an appropriate follow-up with the contractor. Where there is a report of alleged poor performance by a member of the public, specific details are secured and an investigation is undertaken. If the report is found to be confirmed, then the impact on the contractor is commensurate with the severity of the performance deficiency.

Q3. “How many breaches to these specific conditions for ensuring public health have been recorded in the last two years?”

A3. There have been no substantiated major breaches of public safety guidelines issued by the WA Department of Health with the two contracts involving the use of pesticides managed by the City over the last two years.


Item 16.1 247

Q4. “What were these breaches?” A4. There have been no substantiated major breaches; there have been minor

performance issues involving process and communications with City contract officers that have has not jeopardised public safety with the use of pesticides on City managed lands.

Q5. “When a breach occurs, specifically what action do we take against the contractor?” A5. These matters are discussed with the contractor, right of reply given, a determination

made and the matter recorded on file for future reference. Q6. “Is the contract terminated or is there a breach tolerance level set per contractor?” A6. Should the current contractor bid for subsequent City tenders/ work any performance

issues are referred to, thereby potentially affecting the tender assessment. Q7. “Have we re-contracted a company known to have previously breached a condition?” A7. The impact on the contractor of any confirmed poor performance is commensurate

with the performance deficiency.


248

17. NEW BUSINESS OF AN URGENT NATURE

Nil.


249

18. MATTERS BEHIND CLOSED DOORS

Council Resolution

1118/025 Moved Councillor Lagan, seconded Councillor Migdale

That Items 12.1/9.1 - Honorary Freeman of the City of Stirling Nomination, 12.1/9.2 - Amendment to City of Stirling Property Strategy 2016-2020, 12.1/9.3 Property Strategy Acquisition of Property and 18.1 - Federal Government Canberra Lobbying Delegation 2018 be CONSIDERED Behind Closed Doors in accordance with Section 5.23(2)(b)(c)(e) of the Local Government Act 1995 , which permits the meeting to be closed to the public for business relating to the following:-

(b) the personal affairs of any person.

(c) a contract entered into, or which may be entered into, by the local government and which relates to a matter to be discussed at the meeting.

(e) a matter that if disclosed, would reveal -

(ii) information that has a commercial value to a person The motion was put and declared CARRIED (13/0). For: Councillors Boothman, Caddy, Guilfoyle, Irwin, Italiano, Lagan, Migdale, Perkov, Proud, Re, Sandri, Sargent and Spagnolo. Against: Nil.

At 8.18pm the meeting was closed to the public, and all employees who were not required left the meeting prior to consideration of Item 12.1/9.1.



12.1/9.1 HONORARY FREEMAN OF CITY OF STIRLING NOMINATION

Confidentiality

This report is CONFIDENTIAL in accordance with Section 5.23(2)(b) of the Local Government Act 1995 , which permits the meeting to be closed to the public for business relating to the following:-

(b) the personal affairs of any person.

Report Information





Ward: City Wide

Suburb: City Wide


Definition









Council Resolution


That Council PROCEEDS with the Community and Resources Committee recommendation as outlined in the conclusion of this report.

The motion was put and declared CARRIED (9/4). For: Councillors Boothman, Caddy, Guilfoyle, Irwin, Italiano, Migdale, Proud, Sandri and Sargent. Against: Councillors Lagan, Perkov, Re and Spagnolo.



12.1/9.2 AMENDMENT TO CITY OF STIRLING PROPERTY STRATEGY 2016-2020

Confidentiality



Report Information








Definition









Council Resolution


That Council PROCEEDS with the recommendation as outlined in the conclusion of this report.

The motion was put and declared CARRIED (12/1). For: Councillors Boothman, Caddy, Guilfoyle, Irwin, Italiano, Lagan, Migdale, Perkov, Proud, Sandri, Sargent and Spagnolo. Against: Councillor Re.



12.1/9.3 PROPERTY STRATEGY ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY

Confidentiality



Report Information

Location: Various







Definition









Council Resolution 1118/028 Moved Councillor Guilfoyle, seconded Councillor Lagan

That Council PROCEEDS with the confidential alternative recommendation as outlined in the conclusion of the report.

The motion was put and declared CARRIED (13/0) by an absolute majority vote. For: Councillors Boothman, Caddy, Guilfoyle, Irwin, Italiano, Lagan, Migdale, Perkov, Proud, Re, Sandri, Sargent and Spagnolo. Against: Nil.


Item 18.1 256 CONFIDENTIAL

18.1 FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CANBERRA LOBBYING DELEGATION 2018

Confidentiality

This report is CONFIDENTIAL in accordance with Section 5.23(2)(c) of the Local Government Act 1995 , which permits the meeting to be closed to the public for business relating to the following:-

(c) a contract entered into, or which may be entered into, by the local government and which relates to a matter to be discussed at the meeting.

Report Information



Reporting Officer: Chief Executive Officer

Business Unit: Office of the Chief Executive Officer




Definition

☒ Advocacy when Council advocates on its own behalf or on behalf of its community to another level of government/body/agency.







Item 18.1 257 CONFIDENTIAL

Council Resolution

1118/029 Moved Councillor Lagan, seconded Councillor Italiano

That Council AUTHORISES the Mayor and the Chief Executive Officer to conduct a Federal lobbying delegation to Canberra, during the period 26 November 2018 to 29 November 2018. The motion was put and declared CARRIED (12/1). For: Councillors Boothman, Caddy, Guilfoyle, Irwin, Italiano, Lagan, Migdale, Perkov, Proud, Sandri, Sargent and Spagnolo. Against: Councillor Re.

6 NOVEMBER 2018

258

Council Resolution

1118/030 Moved Councillor Lagan, seconded Councillor Proud

That the Meeting be REOPENED to the public. The motion was put and declared CARRIED (13/0). For: Councillors Boothman, Caddy, Guilfoyle, Irwin, Italiano, Lagan, Migdale, Perkov, Proud, Re, Sandri, Sargent and Spagnolo. Against: Nil.

At 8.35pm the meeting was reopened to the public.

19. CLOSURE

The Presiding Member declared the meeting closed at 8.35pm.

These minutes were confirmed as a true and correct record of proceedings on:- ………/…………/ 2018 SIGNED:- Councillor Name: …………………………………….. _____________________________

PRESIDING MEMBER