new home | city of fremantle - spc meeting standard · 2018. 3. 8. · restaurants, window tinting,...

MINUTES

Special Projects Committee

Wednesday, 13 May 2015, 6.00pm

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM NO SUBJECT PAGE

REPORTS BY OFFICERS (COUNCIL DECISION) 4

SPC1505-2 PROPOSED SCHEME AMENDMENT - SCHEME AMENDMENT NO 66 CHANGES TO THE RESIDENTIAL DENSITY AND MODIFICATIONS TO THE ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS TO PART OF THE LOCAL CENTRE ZONE AND MIXED USE ZONE ON HAMPTON ROAD, SOUTH FREMANTLE 4

NOTICE OF MOTION BY ELECTED MEMBERS (COUNCIL DECISION) 25

SPC1505-1 NOTICE OF MOTION - CR JON STRACHAN - FREMANTLE COUNCIL'S POSITION ON THE PROPOSED PERTH FREIGHT LINK 25

CONFIDENTIAL MATTERS 29

CLOSURE OF MEETING 29

MINUTES ATTACHMENTS 1

Minutes – Special Projects Committee 13 May 2015

Page 1

SPECIAL PROJECTS COMMITTEE

Minutes of the Special Projects Committee Meeting

held in the Council Chambers, Fremantle City Council on 13 May 2015 at 6.00 pm.

DECLARATION OF OPENING / ANNOUNCEMENT OF VISITORS

The Presiding Member declared the meeting open at 6.13 pm and welcomed members of the public to the meeting.

NYOONGAR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT STATEMENT

"We acknowledge this land that we meet on today is part of the traditional lands of the Nyoongar people and that we respect their spiritual relationship with their country. We also acknowledge the Nyoongar people as the custodians of the greater Fremantle/Walyalup area and that their cultural and heritage beliefs are still important to the living Nyoongar people today."

IN ATTENDANCE

Dr Brad Pettitt Mayor Cr Rachel Pemberton City Ward / Presiding Member Cr Robert Fittock North Ward Cr Simon Naber City Ward (arrived at 6.14 pm) Cr Dave Coggin East Ward Cr Ingrid Waltham East Ward Cr Sam Wainwright Hilton Ward (arrived at 6.14 pm) Cr Bill Massie Hilton Ward Cr Jon Strachan South Ward / Deputy Presiding Member Cr Andrew Sullivan South Ward (arrived at 6.14 pm) Cr David Hume Beaconsfield Ward Mr Graeme Mackenzie Chief Executive Officer Mr Glen Dougall Director City Business Mr Paul Trotman Director Strategic Planning & Projects Mr Paul Garbett Manager Strategic Planning Mr Sam Van Baren Minute Secretary There were approximately 3 members of the public and nil members of the press in attendance.


Page 2

APOLOGIES

Cr Josh Wilson Deputy Mayor / Beaconsfield Ward Cr Doug Thompson North Ward

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Nil

RESPONSE TO PREVIOUS PUBLIC QUESTIONS TAKEN ON NOTICE

Nil

PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

Nil

DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST BY MEMBERS

Nil

PETITIONS / DEPUTATIONS / PRESENTATIONS

Nil


Page 3

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

MOVED: Cr R Pemberton That the minutes of the Special Projects Committee dated 11 March 2015 as listed in the Council agenda dated 25 March 2015be confirmed as a true and accurate record. CARRIED: 11/0

For Against

Mayor, Brad Pettitt Cr Robert Fittock Cr Andrew Sullivan Cr Jon Strachan Cr Rachel Pemberton Cr Simon Naber Cr David Hume Cr Dave Coggin Cr Ingrid Waltham Cr Sam Wainwright Cr Bill Massie

TABLED DOCUMENTS

Nil


Page 4

Cr S Wainwright, Cr S Naber and Cr A Sullivan arrived at 6.14 pm prior to consideration of the following item.

REPORTS BY OFFICERS (COUNCIL DECISION)

SPC1505-2 PROPOSED SCHEME AMENDMENT - SCHEME AMENDMENT NO 66 CHANGES TO THE RESIDENTIAL DENSITY AND MODIFICATIONS TO THE ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS TO PART OF THE LOCAL CENTRE ZONE AND MIXED USE ZONE ON HAMPTON ROAD, SOUTH FREMANTLE

DataWorks Reference: 218/073 Disclosure of Interest: Nil Meeting Date: Special Projects Committee 12 May; Council 27 May Responsible Officer: Manager Strategic Planning Actioning Officer: Strategic Planning Officer Decision Making Level: Council Previous Item Number/s: SPC1403-47 (26 March 2015) SPC1409-03 (24 September 2014) PSC 1403-47 (26 March 2014) Attachments: 1. Track changes to current Schedule 12 in LPS4 to show

proposed modifications


Page 5


Page 6

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The purpose of this report is to recommend that Council resolves to initiate an amendment to Local Planning Scheme No.4 to:

a) change the residential density coding of Local Centre and Mixed Use Zones on the western side of Hampton Road, South Fremantle at the intersection with South Street from R30 to R80; and

b) modify and include new provisions into Schedule 12: Local Planning Area 4 – South Fremantle – Specific Development Controls for Sub Area 4.3.6 relating to the proposed density increases.

The recommendation to initiate this amendment follows from Council’s resolution on 26 March 2014 to support the ‘in principle’ amendments to LPS4 to increase mixed use and residential density on nominated sites along the South Street transit corridor. Subsequently, on 24 September 2014 Council again supported the identification of specific nodes along South Street transit corridor to implement more intensive mixed use redevelopment at four key ‘nodes’. The report also recommends no further investigation into a draft scheme amendment for 234-244 South Street, South Fremantle. Officers have prepared draft Scheme Amendment No.66 for public advertising. BACKGROUND

In 2014 the City undertook investigations regarding its ability to encourage higher density mixed use and residential redevelopment along South Street, one of the City’s key public transport routes. At its Ordinary Meeting of 26 March 2014 (refer to Council item PSC1403-47 for full background) Council adopted an initiative to amend LPS4 to provide for higher density development along South Street. As part of this resolution, Council requested further investigation of the potential for existing Local Centre, Neighbourhood Centre, Mixed Use and Commercial zones along South Street (including adjacent Residential zoned land) to function as nodes of mixed use high density development with a substantial residential component. Subsequently, a number of specific areas and nodes were identified as suitable for higher density redevelopment and were presented to Council at its Ordinary Meeting of 24 September 2014. The resolution supported a range of amendments to strategic locations and this report addresses part 1 c) and d) of the resolution: 1. That amendments to Local Planning Scheme No. 4 be prepared for each of the

following locations, for consideration by the Special Projects Committee:

a) Hilton Local Centre zone: i. Prepare a draft scheme amendment to increase density and increase building

height.

b) 199-213 South Street, White Gum Valley and 214-230 South Street, Beaconsfield and surrounding residential area:


Page 7

i. Prepare a draft scheme amendment to increase density, increase building height and criteria for vehicular access and car parking requirements in the Local Centre zone.

ii. Prepare a draft scheme amendment for residential zoned land adjacent to area (i) for a split density code to achieve a higher density and potential increase in building height, where minimum lot size criteria are met.

c) 234-244 South Terrace, South Fremantle:

i. Prepare a draft scheme amendment to increase density, increase building height and criteria for vehicular access and car parking requirements.

d) 95-109B Hampton Road (corner of South Street), South Fremantle:

i. Prepare a draft scheme amendment to increase density and increase building height where vehicular access and car parking criteria are met.

2. That further investigation be undertaken in relation to consideration of a scheme

amendment to facilitate more intensive redevelopment of No’s 350-366 South Street & 6-9 Prichard Street, O’Connor for employment-generating land uses consistent with the current zoning under the Metropolitan Region Scheme, and the outcomes be reported back to the next appropriate Special Projects Committee for further consideration.

Parts 1a) and b) are separate Scheme amendment documents. Part 1 a), also known as Amendment No. 64, was presented to Special Projects Committee on 11 March and to Council on 25 March 2015. Council deferred consideration of the item to enable officers to investigate and provide further advice on the development control provisions recommended in the amendment and the possible inclusion of an additional property at 286/288 Carrington Street in the amendment. A further report on this matter, and also a report dealing with the draft scheme amendment referred to in Part 1 b) will be presented to Council in June 2015. PLANNING COMMENT

This report relates to two of four locations outlined in Council’s previous resolution of 24 September 2014 above (part 1 c) and d). Accordingly the report is separated into two parts.

Part 1. Firstly, the report proposes the initiation of amendment No.66 to increase density and include new and modified development control provisions into Schedule 12: Local Planning Area 4 – South Fremantle – Specific Development Controls. These changes apply to five properties zoned Local Centre on the western side of Hampton Road (between South Street and Norman Street) and three properties on the south western corner of the Hampton Road and South Street intersection zoned Mixed Use, refer Figures 1 and 2 below. This amendment is in line with part 1 d) of Council’s previous resolution.

Part 2. Secondly, the report recommends actions for Part 1 c) relating to No 234-244 South Street, South Fremantle as documented in the 24 September 2014 Council report.


Page 8

These two parts of the report are discussed separately below.


Page 9

Part 1: Proposed Scheme amendment No. 66 - 95, 97, 99, 101, 103, 109A and 109B Hampton Road, South Fremantle

Figure 1 Figure 2

Existing planning framework As shown on the plan above, the scheme amendment applies to 8 lots. The 5 lots on the northwest side of the intersection are zoned Local Centre R30, whilst the 3 lots on the southwest side of the intersection are zoned Mixed Use R25, refer to Figure 3 below.

Figure 3


Page 10

Existing land uses in this location consist of a; petrol station, car hire, residential, restaurants, window tinting, computer repair, photography and one vacant premise. The surrounding residential development has been shifting away from small lots with single dwellings to townhouses and multiple residential developments. Already existing on Hampton Road and Norman Street are two and three storey multiple dwellings with the City recently granting approval for a mixed use (R60) development at 95 Hampton Road (corner of Norman Street); consisting of ground and first floor offices, as well as, a number of multiple dwellings in accordance with Clause 5.2.5 of LSP4. The area is well serviced, with existing infrastructure and good transport connections. Agency feedback will be sought during the consultation process on the scheme amendment on infrastructure capacity to support a higher density. No 101 (Lot 22) Hampton Road is listed as a historic / archaeological site on the City’s Heritage List. The heritage listing is as a result of the site’s former use as a garage since the 1920s, although it is unlikely that any remnant of the old 1920s garage remains on site given alterations and additions were undertaken to the old garage in 1952, and then a new service station was built in 1970. However it would be appropriate, should the site be redeveloped, for some interpretative signage to be erected to provide information on the historical use of the place. Proposed Scheme Amendment No.66 The Hampton Road and South Street intersection consists of a small commercial precinct, 1 kilometre from the Fremantle City Centre. The precinct has the potential to facilitate a more intensive redevelopment outcome given the large lot sizes, surrounding amenity and its location on the South Street transit corridor. In line with Council’s resolution of 24 September 2014 officers propose the following amendments to the Scheme:

a) Modifications to the Scheme Map for part of the Local Centre and Mixed Use zones on the western side of Hampton Road, South Fremantle at the intersection with South Street to increase the residential density coding from R25 and R30 to R80; and

b) Modifications to the Scheme text to include Sub Area 4.3.6 and associated development controls into Schedule 12: Local Planning Area 4 – South Fremantle – Specific Development Controls relating to the proposed density increase.

The following paragraphs examine these two proposed modifications in turn. Proposed modification (a): Change to the residential density coding of the Local Centre (R30) and Mixed Use (R25) Zones on the western side of Hampton Road, South Fremantle at the intersection with South Street from R25 and R30 to R80. The Amendment proposes to up-code the existing density of the Mixed Use R25 and Local Centre R30 to R80, as shown on Figure 4. A straight up-coding is proposed given:

the area’s 1km proximity to the City Centre;


Page 11

existing and recently approved built form in the area is consistent with the proposed development standards; and

the area’s location on the South Street transit corridor.

Figure 4

The current R25 and R30 density limits residential redevelopment in this location; the proposed increase to R80 facilitates a greater dwelling yield whilst not compromising the commercial mix of land uses in the area. This is achieved through the Local Centre and Mixed Use zone requirement for residential uses to be located on upper levels, ensuring activation of the ground floor via a commercial use with residential development located above. The increase in residential density also allows for a change in development standards allowing greater flexibility in terms of the built form outcomes. The proposed development controls would allow for development generally consistent with the recently approved Mixed Use development at No 95 (Lot 14), Hampton Road, South Fremantle, ensuring new development in the area is consistent with the preferred neighbourhood character. Proposed modification (b): Include a new Sub Area and provisions into Schedule 12: Local Planning Area 4 – South Fremantle – Specific Development Controls being Sub Area 4.3.6 relating to the proposed density increases and specific development controls. As discussed above, the proposed Amendment 66 would increase the residential density code from R25 and R30 to R80 which subsequently modifies the permitted development standards for the area in accordance with the Residential Design Codes thus allowing for


Page 12

more intensive redevelopment of properties than currently permitted. Given the Amendment’s intention is to achieve a preferred redevelopment outcome, the proposed changes allow for greater density through specific development controls to ensure redevelopment of the area in is keeping with the City’s vision. This is delivered through the inclusion of Sub Area 4.3.6 within Schedule 12: Local Planning Area 4 – South Fremantle – Specific Development Controls. These specific development controls relate to; building height and setbacks, vehicle access, as well as activated ground floor frontages and minimum open space requirements. The proposed inclusion of Sub Area 4.3.6 map and associated specific development controls are set out below:

Sub Area 4.3.6

1. Within Sub area 4.3.6 provisions of clause 5.2.5 do not apply.

Building Height and Setbacks -

2. Clause 4.2 ‘Matters to be considered in applying general and specific height

controls’ does not apply to Sub Area 4.3.6.

3. Building height shall be limited to a maximum of 12 metres as measured from ground level.

4. A minimum street setback of nil and a maximum street setback of 2 metres to Hampton Road and South Street, South Fremantle.


Page 13

5. Buildings setback from boundaries or adjacent buildings may be reduced to 1 metre

except where the building adjoins No 63-65 (Lots 1 and 2) South Street and No 111 and 111A (Lots 1 and 2) Hampton Road, South Street. Development adjoining these properties must be in accordance with the Residential Design Codes.

Vehicle Access -

6. Vehicle parking shall only be provided at the rear of buildings and / or below ground level.

7. Vehicular access points must be no more than 4 metres in width.

8. Vehicular access shall be coordinated for No 99 (Lots 16 and 17) Hampton Road and limited to one crossover along Hampton Road.

9. No 97 (Lot 15) South Street is required to locate its vehicular access point on the southern boundary.

Other Development Standards -

10. Buildings shall incorporate active ground level frontages to Hampton Road and

South Street.

11. Open space can be reduced up to 30% where development respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character.

A number of other minor modifications to the Schedule 12 – Local Planning Area 4 - South Fremantle have also been included as part of this amendment to correct anomalies, refer to Attachment 1.


Page 14

Part 2: 234-244 South Terrace, South Fremantle An editorial error has been identified in the 24 September 2014 Council report with regard to the written intent for No 234-244 South Terrace, South Fremantle and Council’s resolution of 1 c). As part of this report officers recommend rectifying this matter as outlined below. The 24 September 2014 report text clearly states that “no further investigation of this area for more intensive mixed use redevelopment” be undertaken. The report outlined the basis for this finding on the following information:

6 small land parcels with a total area of 2642m2;

One property is heritage listed and all surrounding properties are heritage listed;

The site is located on the corner of a busy intersection of South Street and South Terrace; and,

The site is currently zoned Local Centre R30. Although the 6 lots are owned by 3 landowners, the current zoning of the site already allows for a mixed use development proposal compliant with LPS4 Clause 5.2.5 to be developed at R60 density. Given the small lots, a development of this size would be a suitable outcome with regard to the area’s heritage context and therefore it was considered appropriate for no further amendments be undertaken to increase density or maximum building height. However, the officer recommendation at the end of the report incorrectly duplicated the wording of the recommendation relating to 95-109B Hampton Road, and this was reflected in the Council’s resolution 1 c) as follows: “1 c) 234-244 South Street, South Fremantle:

Prepare a draft scheme amendment to increase density, increase building height and criteria for vehicular access and car parking requirements.”

Officers have taken the opportunity in preparing this current report to reconsider the merits of amending the development provisions applying to these properties to allow for higher density and larger scale buildings; however on balance officers remain of the view that this would not be appropriate for the reasons stated above and in the 24 September 2014 report. Therefore, it is recommended as part of this report to address this matter by recommending that Council resolve to not progress with the preparation of a draft scheme amendment to increase density, increase building height and criteria for vehicular access and car parking requirements at No. 234-244 South Terrace, South Fremantle. CONSULTATION

Should Council resolve to initiate Amendment 66 to the Scheme, it will be referred to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) for assessment, prior to the commencement of advertising. Assuming the EPA does not require an environmental assessment the amendment will be publicly advertised for not less than 42 days in accordance with the Planning and Development Act 2005, the Town Planning Regulations 1967 and the City’s Local Planning Policy 1.3 - Public Notification of Planning Approvals.


Page 15

CONCLUSION

It is recommended that Council resolve to initiate Amendment No. 66 to LPS4 as described in this report to increase density and incorporate a variety of development standards reflective of the City’s vision for redevelopment on the western side of the intersection of South Street and Hampton Road, South Fremantle. This amendment is one in a series of three being prepared to give effect to Council’s strategic aim of facilitating higher density development nodes along South Street. The increased density and development control provisions are intended to facilitate more intensive transit-serviced development in this location, having regard to its proximity to a primary public transport corridor. The proposed amendment up-codes the Local Centre and Mixed Use properties and includes development control provisions via the inclusion of Sub Area 4.3.6 into the Scheme, relating to controls over maximum building height, vehicular access, building setbacks, parking layout and site cover to ensure redevelopment is consistent with the City’s preferred built form outcomes for the area. Given that this location has been identified by Council as an appropriate node for more intensive mixed use redevelopment along one of the City’s key transport routes, it is considered the proposed planning controls are appropriate to further encourage redevelopment and population growth in this location. Council is therefore recommended to resolve to initiate draft Scheme Amendment No. 66 as set out in the Officer’s recommendation below. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION

MOVED: Cr R Pemberton SECONDED: Cr A Sullivan

1. That Council resolve, pursuant to Section 75 of the Planning and Development Act 2005, to amend Local Planning Scheme No. 4 as follows:

a) As shown on the map below, amend the Scheme map to apply a residential

density coding of R80 to 95 (Lot 14), 97 (Lot 15), 99 (Lots 16 & 17) and 101 (Lot 22), 103 (Lot 400), 109A (Lot 1) and 109B (Lot 2) Hampton Road, South Fremantle


Page 16

b) Inset title ‘4.3 Specific Development Controls for Sub Areas’ within Schedule 12: Local Planning Area 4 – South Fremantle.

c) Insert an amended map of Sub Area 4.3.3 as shown below into Schedule 12:

Local Planning Area 4 – South Fremantle as a result of the removal of properties at 95, 97, 99, 101, 103 and 105B Hampton Road from Sub Area 4.3.3 and there inclusion in a new Sub Area 4.3.6.


Page 17

d) Insert new Sub Area 4.3.6 below, into Schedule 12: Local Planning Area 4 –

South Fremantle.

Sub Area 4.3.6


Page 18





3. Building height shall be limited to a maximum of 12 metres as measured from ground level.

4. A minimum street setback of nil and a maximum street setback of 2 metres to Hampton Road and South Street, South Fremantle.

5. Buildings setback from boundaries or adjacent buildings may be reduced to 1 metre

except where the building adjoins No 63-65 (Lots 1 and 2) South Street and No 111 and 111A (Lots 1 and 2) Hampton Road, South Street. Development adjoining these properties must be in accordance with the Residential Design Codes.

Vehicle Access -

6. Vehicle parking shall only be provided at the rear of buildings and / or below ground level.


8. Vehicular access shall be coordinated for No 99 (Lots 16 and 17) order to limit the number of crossovers to one along Hampton Road.

9. No 97 (Lot 15) South Street is required to locate its vehicular access point on the southern boundary.


10. Buildings shall incorporate active ground level frontages to Hampton Road and

South Street.

11. Open space can be reduced up to 30% where development respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character.

2. That notwithstanding part 1 c) of Council’s resolution SPC1409-03 dated 24 September 2014, no further action be taken in relation to the preparation of a draft scheme amendment for 234-244 South Street, South Fremantle.


Page 19

Cr A Sullivan MOVED an amendment to the Officer's Recommendation to include the following wording as a new point 12 in Part 1 d):

12. In the part of all new development with frontage to Hampton Road and/or South Street the ground floor level must be no greater than 600mm above the level of the adjacent footpath, and the first floor level must be at least 4 metres above the level of the footpath adjacent to the site.

CARRIED: 11/0

For Against


Cr A Sullivan MOVED an amendment to the Officer's Recommendation to amend Point 3 to amend the maximum building height from 12 metres to 15 metres. CARRIED: 11/0

For Against



Page 20

Cr S Wainwright MOVED an amendment to the Officer's Recommendation to amend point 3 in part 1 d) to include the following wording in italic and bold as follows:

3. Building height shall be limited to a minimum of 7 metres with two levels of active building use and a maximum of 15 metres as measured from ground level.

CARRIED: 11/0

For Against



Page 21

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

MOVED: Cr R Pemberton

1. That Council resolve, pursuant to Section 75 of the Planning and Development Act 2005, to amend Local Planning Scheme No. 4 as follows:

a) As shown on the map below, amend the Scheme map to apply a

residential density coding of R80 to 95 (Lot 14), 97 (Lot 15), 99 (Lots 16 & 17) and 101 (Lot 22), 103 (Lot 400), 109A (Lot 1) and 109B (Lot 2) Hampton Road, South Fremantle

b) Inset title ‘4.3 Specific Development Controls for Sub Areas’ within Schedule 12: Local Planning Area 4 – South Fremantle.

c) Insert an amended map of Sub Area 4.3.3 as shown below into Schedule

12: Local Planning Area 4 – South Fremantle as a result of the removal of properties at 95, 97, 99, 101, 103 and 105B Hampton Road from Sub Area 4.3.3 and there inclusion in a new Sub Area 4.3.6.


Page 22

d) Insert new Sub Area 4.3.6 below, into Schedule 12: Local Planning Area 4

– South Fremantle.

Sub Area 4.3.6


Page 23





3. Building height shall be limited to a minimum of 7 metres with two levels of active building use and a maximum of 15 metres as measured from ground level

4. A minimum street setback of nil and a maximum street setback of 2 metres to

Hampton Road and South Street, South Fremantle.

5. Buildings setback from boundaries or adjacent buildings may be reduced to 1 metre except where the building adjoins No 63-65 (Lots 1 and 2) South Street and No 111 and 111A (Lots 1 and 2) Hampton Road, South Street. Development adjoining these properties must be in accordance with the Residential Design Codes.

Vehicle Access - 6. Vehicle parking shall only be provided at the rear of buildings and / or below

ground level.


8. Vehicular access shall be coordinated for No 99 (Lots 16 and 17) order to limit the number of crossovers to one along Hampton Road.

9. No 97 (Lot 15) South Street is required to locate its vehicular access point on

the southern boundary.


10. Buildings shall incorporate active ground level frontages to Hampton Road and South Street.

11. Open space can be reduced up to 30% where development respects the

existing or preferred neighbourhood character.

12. In the part of all new development with frontage to Hampton Road and/or South Street the ground floor level must be no greater than 600mm above the level of the adjacent footpath, and the first floor level must be at least 4 metres above the level of the footpath adjacent to the site.

2. That notwithstanding part 1 c) of Council’s resolution SPC1409-03 dated 24

September 2014, no further action be taken in relation to the preparation of a draft scheme amendment for 234-244 South Street, South Fremantle.


Page 24

CARRIED: 11/0

For Against



Page 25

NOTICE OF MOTION BY ELECTED MEMBERS (COUNCIL DECISION)

SPC1505-1 NOTICE OF MOTION - CR JON STRACHAN - FREMANTLE COUNCIL'S POSITION ON THE PROPOSED PERTH FREIGHT LINK

DataWorks Reference: 216/012 Meeting Date: 13 May 2015 Author: Cr Jon Strachan Actioning Officer: Director Strategic Planning and Projects Decision Making Level: Council ELECTED MEMBER SUMMARY

The Western Australian State Government has committed to building the Perth Freight Link (PFL). Council has developed positions relating to aspects of the PFL, but has not decided to fully support or reject the proposal. It is now timely for Fremantle Council to make that commitment. BACKGROUND

Fremantle Council has been proactive on issues of roads and freight starting with a strong stand against the Fremantle Eastern Bypass (FEB), seeing its deletion as a road reserve in 2001. More recently Council resolved to not support the Roe Highway extension through Beeliar Wetlands, known as Roe 8. Prior to the announcement of the PFR the State Government proposed significantly increasing the capacity of High Street east of the Stirling Highway, Stirling Highway north of High Street and the intersection of the two roads. Council resolved to support this work, but only if it were limited to two lanes in each direction. In February 2015 Council adopted an Integrated Transport Plan (ITP), in which issues of Port related freight are discussed. The motion to adopt the ITP also included a point 3, which reads:

Officers undertake as a priority task for immediate action an evidence- based investigation into alternatives to the current Perth Freight Link proposals to address freight transport requirements associated with Fremantle Port, and report the findings to Council for further consideration.

Fremantle Council has a position of supporting a working port, and aspires to see a working port in long term planning for the future of Fremantle. However the predicted increase in container trade makes it essential an outer harbour is progressed as a matter of urgency. Fremantle Council, through the Integrated Transport Strategy, considers the southern extension of the heavy rail line reserve from Fremantle Station to the South Fremantle Power Station as ideal for Transit Infrastructure, and as such it should not be compromised by rail freight. COMMENT

Fremantle Council is clearly concerned about aspects of the PFL but has not developed a definitive position strongly against (or for) this proposed project. It is now an


Page 26

appropriate time for Fremantle Council to make that decision and inform our community, the State Government, the South West Group and other key stakeholders of that decision. RATIONALE Unlike other urban centres in metropolitan Perth, Fremantle not only has to deal with freight needs associated with its city status, it also accommodates freight demands from Fremantle Ports; this eclipses all other freight challenges. Fremantle is home to Western Australia’s largest and busiest general cargo port. The Inner Harbour currently handles the vast majority of containerised freight imports and exports for the state. In addition the Inner Harbour also handles trade associated with:

Livestock

Bulk items such as scrap metal

General Cargo

RORO including cars, trucks and caravans

Cruise ships The port currently handles 700,000 TEU (twenty foot equivalent) containers annually (source: WA Minister for Transport), with strong growth in numbers predicted to grow to 1,400,000 TEU (source: South West Group) annually in the next decade. The State Government has committed to transporting up to 30% of containers by rail, yet does not have plans to upgrade rail infrastructure to meet that commitment. This aspiration is currently not realised with only 14% of containers transported by rail in 2013-14 financial year (source: WA Minister for Transport). The existing rail infrastructure cannot support the existing 30% target with current demand; it is unreasonable to contest it could support double that number of containers. It is essential that investment be made in rail infrastructure to transport containers. The proposed $1.575 billion PFL is a road based freight solution; however it is internationally acknowledged that more roads do not solve congestion; building freeways increases overall road use and contributes to worsening congestion (Leigh Glover, University of Melbourne). Furthermore, as a toll road, purportedly for trucks only, it can be expected to reach capacity with cars that do not pay the toll. Furthermore, by taking a longer route from Port to destinations than the existing truck route leads to a strong probability many truck drivers will choose to not switch to the PFL and continue to use Leach Highway. It is not clear how the planners of the PFL intend to deal with the North Fremantle section. There is no logical way to get trucks from the PFL to Fremantle Ports without maintaining the North Fremantle bottleneck, or alternatively extending the PFL through North Fremantle with potential devastating consequences. Whilst a container terminal is mooted for the Outer Harbour, progress is limited or non-existent; even with such a facility predictions still have TEU numbers through the Inner Harbour at 1,000,000 annually (source: South West Group). There are two options open to the state, continue to try and build congestion out of the road network, or embark on a strategic piece of rail network that will serve the state well into the future. We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we


Page 27

created them (Einstein). The PFL is an attempt to do just that by attempting to solve road congestion by building another road, and as such is doomed to failure. A long-term solution to container freight transport issues based on rail as the key component would result in:

A more cost effective long term solution for freight transport

Saving the high values conservation area, Beeliar Wetlands, from decimation through road building

Minimise localised freight impacts, especially at High Street and North Fremantle

Reduction of carbon intensive greenhouse gas emissions

Reduction in community health issues related to road trauma and exhaust emissions

Better utilisation of existing road infrastructure CONCLUSION

The PFL is not in the best interests of Fremantle, its community or the population at large. It is doubtful it will address the serious freight issues associated with Fremantle Ports for anything other than a very short period. If built, it will destroy the significant Beeliar Wetlands that are crucial to Perth’s biodiversity, and will be in conflict with a stated position of this Council. The very significant budget associated with the PFL would better serve Western Australia through getting containers off trucks and onto freight rail. For these reasons this Council does not support the Perth Freight Link as currently proposed by Government. STRATEGIC AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS This Notice of Motion is consistent with existing positions held by this council relating to:

Fremantle Eastern Bypass

Roe 8

High Street upgrade The motion is also consistent with the Strategic Plan 2010 to 2015 Transport section that states:

(Fremantle will) Lead in the provision of environmentally and economically sustainable transport solutions.

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT The Local Government Act does not require this item to go to formal community engagement. However its genesis was as a result of community concerns about the PFL. VOTING AND OTHER SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS Absolute majority required.


Page 28

NOTICE OF MOTION

MOVED: Cr R Pemberton

1. This Council does not support a road based response to significantly increased container trade at Fremantle Ports, and as such does not support construction of the proposed Perth Freight Link.

2. This Council believes the significant State Budget allocation to the PFL should be directed towards a rail based solution for container distribution related to Fremantle Ports.

3. This position is conveyed to the State Government, South West Group and other key stakeholders.

4. Council considers a budget amount of $100,000 to assist Officers develop alternative options for Port Related Freight as per point 3 of Council Item SPC 1502-2.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

Cr R Pemberton MOVED to defer the item to the next appropriate Special Projects Committee meeting in order to receive the results of the study commissioned to investigate the impacts of, and alternatives to, the Perth Freight Link. CARRIED: 9/2

For Against

Mayor, Brad Pettitt Cr Robert Fittock Cr Andrew Sullivan Cr Rachel Pemberton Cr Simon Naber Cr David Hume Cr Dave Coggin Cr Ingrid Waltham Cr Bill Massie

Cr Jon Strachan Cr Sam Wainwright


Page 29

CONFIDENTIAL MATTERS

Nil.

CLOSURE OF MEETING

THE PRESIDING MEMBER DECLARED THE MEETING CLOSED AT 7.09 PM.


Page 30

SUMMARY GUIDE TO CITIZEN PARTICIPATION & CONSULTATION

The Council adopted a Community Engagement Policy in December 2010 to give effect to its commitment to involving citizens in its decision-making processes. The City values community engagement and recognises the benefits that can flow to the quality of decision-making and the level of community satisfaction. Effective community engagement requires total clarity so that Elected Members, Council officers and citizens fully understand their respective rights and responsibilities as well as the limits of their involvement in relation to any decision to be made by the City.

How consultative processes work at the City of Fremantle

The City’s decision makers 1. The Council, comprised of Elected Members, makes policy, budgetary and key strategic decisions while the CEO, sometimes via on-delegation to other City officers, makes operational decisions.

Various participation opportunities 2. The City provides opportunities for participation in the decision-making process by citizens via itscouncil appointed working groups, its community precinct system, and targeted community engagement processes in relation to specific issues or decisions.

Objective processes also used 3. The City also seeks to understand the needs and views of the community via scientific and objective processes such as its bi-ennial community survey.

All decisions are made by Council or the CEO

4. These opportunities afforded to citizens to participate in the decision-making process do not include the capacity to make the decision. Decisions are ultimately always made by Council or the CEO (or his/her delegated nominee).

Precinct focus is primarily local, but also city-wide

5. The community precinct system establishes units of geographic community of interest, but provides for input in relation to individual geographic areas as well as on city-wide issues.

All input is of equal value 6. No source of advice or input is more valuable or given more weight by the decision-makers than any other. The relevance and rationality of the advice counts in influencing the views of decision-makers.

Decisions will not necessarily reflect the majority view received

7. Local Government in WA is a representative democracy. Elected Members and the CEO are charged under the Local Government Act with the responsibility to make decisions based on fact and the merits of the issue without fear or favour and are accountable for their actions and decisions under law. Elected Members are accountable to the people via periodic elections. As it is a representative democracy, decisions may not be made in favour of the majority view expressed via consultative processes. Decisions must also be made in accordance with any statute that applies or within the parameters of budgetary considerations. All consultations will clearly outline from the outset any constraints or


Page 31


limitations associated with the issue.

Decisions made for the overall good of Fremantle

8. The Local Government Act requires decision-makers to make decisions in the interests of “the good government of the district”. This means that decision-makers must exercise their judgment about the best interests of Fremantle as a whole as well as about the interests of the immediately affected neighbourhood. This responsibility from time to time puts decision-makers at odds with the expressed views of citizens from the local neighbourhood who may understandably take a narrower view of considerations at hand.

Diversity of view on most issues 9. The City is wary of claiming to speak for the ‘community’ and wary of those who claim to do so. The City recognises how difficult it is to understand what such a diverse community with such a variety of stakeholders thinks about an issue. The City recognises that, on most significant issues, diverse views exist that need to be respected and taken into account by the decision-makers.

City officers must be impartial 10. City officers are charged with the responsibility of being objective, non-political and unbiased. It is the responsibility of the management of the City to ensure that this is the case. It is also recognised that City officers can find themselves unfairly accused of bias or incompetence by protagonists on certain issues and in these cases it is the responsibility of the City’s management to defend those City officers.

City officers must follow policy and procedures

11. The City’s community engagement policy identifies nine principles that apply to all community engagement processes, including a commitment to be clear, transparent, responsive , inclusive, accountable andtimely. City officers are responsible for ensuring that the policy and any other relevant procedure is fully complied with so that citizens are not deprived of their rights to be heard.


Page 32


Community engagement processes have cut-off dates that will be adhered to.

12. As City officers have the responsibility to provide objective, professional advice to decision-makers, they are entitled to an appropriate period of time and resource base to undertake the analysis required and to prepare reports. As a consequence, community engagement processes need to have defined and rigorously observed cut-off dates, after which date officers will not include ‘late’ input in their analysis. In such circumstances, the existence of ‘late’ input will be made known to decision-makers. In most cases where community input is involved, the Council is the decision-maker and this affords community members the opportunity to make input after the cut-off date via personal representations to individual Elected Members and via presentations to Committee and Council Meetings.

Citizens need to check for any changes to decision making arrangements made

13. The City will take initial responsibility for making citizens aware of expected time-frames and decision making processes, including dates of Standing Committee and Council Meetings if relevant. However, as these details can change, it is the citizens responsibility to check for any changes by visiting the City’s website, checking the Fremantle News in the Fremantle Gazette or inquiring at the Customer Service Centre by phone, email or in-person.

Citizens are entitled to know how their input has been assessed

14. In reporting to decision-makers, City officers will in all cases produce a community engagement outcomes report that summarises comment and recommends whether it should be taken on board, with reasons.

Reasons for decisions must be transparent 15. Decision-makers must provide the reasons for their decisions.

Decisions posted on the City’s website 16. Decisions of the City need to be transparent and easily accessed. For reasons of cost, citizens making input on an issue will not be individually notified of the outcome, but can access the decision at the City’s website under ‘community engagement’ or at the City Library or Service and Information Centre.


Page 33

Issues that Council May Treat as Confidential Section 5.23 of the new Local Government Act 1995, Meetings generally open to the public, states: 1. Subject to subsection (2), the following are to be open to members of the public -

a) all council meetings; and b) all meetings of any committee to which a local government power or duty has

been delegated.

2. If a meeting is being held by a council or by a committee referred to in subsection (1) (b), the council or committee may close to members of the public the meeting, or part of the meeting, if the meeting or the part of the meeting deals with any of the following:

a) a matter affecting an employee or employees; 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; d) legal advice obtained, or which may be obtained, by the local government and

which relates to a matter to be discussed at the meeting; e) a matter that if disclosed, would reveal –

i) a trade secret; ii) information that has a commercial value to a person; or iii) information about the business, professional, commercial or financial

affairs of a person. Where the trade secret or information is held by, or is about, a person other than the local government.

f) a matter that if disclosed, could be reasonably expected to - i) impair the effectiveness of any lawful method or procedure for preventing,

detecting, investigating or dealing with any contravention or possible contravention of the law;

ii) endanger the security of the local government’s property; or iii) prejudice the maintenance or enforcement of a lawful measure for

protecting public safety.

g) information which is the subject of a direction given under section 23 (Ia) of the Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1971; and

h) such other matters as may be prescribed.

3. A decision to close a meeting or part of a meeting and the reason for the decision are to be recorded in the minutes of the meeting.


Page 34

MINUTES ATTACHMENTS

Special Projects Committee

Wednesday, 13 May 2015, 6.00 pm

Minutes Attachments – Special Projects Committee 13 May 2015

Page 2

new home | city of fremantle - spc meeting standard · 2018. 3. 8. · restaurants, window tinting,...

Documents