minutes - city of fremantle - ocm... · confirmation of minutes 3 ... sgs1404-1 wilson park...

MINUTES

Ordinary Meeting of Council

Wednesday, 23 April 2014, 6.00pm

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM NO SUBJECT PAGE

DECLARATION OF OPENING / ANNOUNCEMENT OF VISITORS 1

NYOONGAR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT STATEMENT 1

IN ATTENDANCE 1

APOLOGIES 1

LEAVE OF ABSENCE 2

RESPONSE TO PREVIOUS PUBLIC QUESTIONS TAKEN ON NOTICE 2

PUBLIC QUESTION TIME 2

DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST BY MEMBERS 3

APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE 3

PETITIONS / DEPUTATIONS / PRESENTATIONS 3

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES 3

ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE MAYOR 4

QUESTIONS OR PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS BY ELECTED MEMBERS 4

TABLED DOCUMENTS 4

LATE ITEMS NOTED 4

COMMITTEE REPORTS 5

PLANNING SERVICES COMMITTEE 2 April 2014 5

PSC1404-61 DOURO ROAD, NO. 19 (LOT 1), SOUTH FREMANTLE - DEMOLITION OF EXISTING BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION OF THREE STOREY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT (OFFICE, LUNCH BAR/SHOP AND 20 MULTIPLE DWELLINGS) - (AA DA0587/13) 5

STRATEGIC AND GENERAL SERVICES COMMITTEE 9 April 2014 29

SGS1404-1 WILSON PARK BASKETBALL COURT AND LANDSCAPE OPTIONS 29

SGS1404-2 DELEGATED AUTHORITY REGISTER REVIEW 2014 38

SGS1404-3 BUILDING AWNING AT 22 QUEEN STREET 42

PLANNING SERVICES COMMITTEE 16 April 2014 45

PSC1404-71 SCHEME AMENDMENT NO. 61 - AMENDMENT TO SUB AREA 1.3.2 OF LOCAL PLANNING AREA 1 - INITIATION 45

PSC1404-72 AMENDMENTS TO LOCAL PLANNING POLICY 2.4 - BOUNDARY WALLS IN RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT - FINAL ADOPTION 71

PSC1404-73 REPORT - FINAL ADOPTION OF MODIFICATIONS TO LOCAL PLANNING POLICY 2.2 - SPLIT DENSITY CODES AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND SUSTAINABILITY SCHEDULE 75

PSC1404-74 MODIFIED LOCAL PLANNING POLICY 2.9 - RESIDENTIAL STREETSCAPE POLICY - FINAL ADOPTION 81

MOTIONS OF WHICH NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN 90

REPORTS BY THE MAYOR OR OFFICERS OF COUNCIL 90

STATUTORY COUNCIL ITEMS 90

C1404-1 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT - MARCH 2014 90

COUNCIL ITEMS 94

C1404-2 WARRAWEE SERVICE AGREEMENT VARIATION 94

C1404-3 CAPITAL WORKS QUARTERLY INFORMATION REPORT - APRIL 2014 97

C1404-4 INFORMATION REPORT FOR APRIL 2014 100

C1404-5 STRATEGIC PLAN PROGRESS REPORT JANUARY TO MARCH 2014 102

CONFIDENTIAL MATTERS 105

SGS1404-5 CONFIDENTIAL REPORT - 73 HAMPTON ROAD, FREMANTLE 106

SGS1404-6 CONFIDENTIAL REPORT - 2 JONES STREET, O'CONNOR 107

CLOSURE OF MEETING 108

MINUTES ATTACHMENTS 1

ATTACHMENT 1 - ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR ITEM: PSC1304-19 DOURO ROAD, NO. 19 (LOT 1), SOUTH FREMANTLE 2

Minutes - Ordinary Meeting of Council Wednesday, 28 April 2014

Page 1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL

Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held in the Council Chambers, Fremantle City Council

on 23 April 2014 at 6.00 pm.

DECLARATION OF OPENING / ANNOUNCEMENT OF VISITORS

The Mayor, Dr Brad Pettitt declared the meeting open at 6.01 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

Brad Pettitt Mayor Cr Robert Fittock North Ward Cr Simon Naber City Ward Cr Ingrid Waltham East Ward Cr Bill Massie Hilton Ward Cr Jon Strachan South Ward (entered 6.02pm) Cr Andrew Sullivan South Ward Cr David Hume Beaconsfield Ward Cr Josh Wilson Deputy Mayor / Beaconsfield Ward Mr Graeme Mackenzie Chief Executive Officer Mr Glen Dougall Director Corporate Services Ms Marisa Spaziani Director Community Development Mr Peter Pikor Director Technical Services Mr Paul Garbet Manager Planning Projects Mrs Natalie Martin Goode Manager Statutory Planning Mrs Melody Foster Minute Secretary There were approximately 16 members of the public and no members of the press in attendance.

APOLOGIES

Cr Doug Thompson North Ward Cr Dave Coggin East Ward


Page 2

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Cr Rachel Pemberton City Ward Cr Sam Wainwright Hilton Ward

RESPONSE TO PREVIOUS PUBLIC QUESTIONS TAKEN ON NOTICE

Nil Cr J Strachan arrived at 6.02 pm prior to consideration of the following item.

PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

Vicky Shilvock spoke in relation to item PSC1404-61 against the proposed development application. Nick Silich spoke in relation to item PSC1404-61 in favour of the committee recommendation and the proposed development application. Cr S Naber left the meeting at 6.12 pm and returned at 6.12 pm. Peter Jodrell spoke in relation to item PSC1404-61 in favour of the committee recommendation and the proposed development application. Darryn Bortolotti spoke in relation to item PSC1404-61 against the proposed development application. Cherie McNeill spoke in relation to item PSC1404-61 against the proposed development application. Bobby Wilson spoke in relation to item SGS1404-11 in favour of the committee recommendation, if the council can consider making changes to the landscaping to insure it is not over landscaped and kept simple. She also asked if there are final plans for the park in relation to landscaping because she has seen many different versions and is unsure which is up for approval tonight. Summary of response from Peter Pikor, Director Technical Services

Yes the proposed landscaping plan is shown in the attachments, which outlines the path to the northern side and a number of trees to be planted around the perimeter of the park. The plan that is included in the attachments is the only plan which is proposed for approval by council tonight. Fiona Dunham spoke in relation to item PSC1404-61 against the proposed development application. She then spoke in relation to item SGS1404-11 in favour of the committee recommendation with changes to the vegetation and parking limitations on the park.


Page 3

Tony Calalesina spoke in relation to item PSC1404-61 against the proposed development application. Simon Jodrell spoke in relation to item PSC1404-61 in favour of the committee recommendation and the proposed development application. Kate Whitton spoke in relation to item PSC1404-61 in favour of the committee recommendation and the proposed development application. Donna Ghondani spoke in relation to item SGS1404-11 in favour of the committee recommendation with changes to minimise the landscaping and keep it simple.

DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST BY MEMBERS

Nil

APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Nil

PETITIONS / DEPUTATIONS / PRESENTATIONS

Cr Bill Massie spoke of his attendance at the Second Sixteenth Battalion annual Anzac event at Kings Park on behalf of the Mayor and the City and noted that it was a great event.

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

MOVED: Mayor, Brad Pettitt That the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council dated 26 March 2014 be confirmed as a true and accurate record. SECONDED: Cr B Massie CARRIED: 9/0

For Against

Mayor, Brad Pettitt Cr Robert Fittock Cr Andrew Sullivan Cr Jon Strachan Cr Simon Naber Cr Josh Wilson Cr David Hume Cr Ingrid Waltham Cr Bill Massie


Page 4

ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE MAYOR

Nil

QUESTIONS OR PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS BY ELECTED MEMBERS

Nil

TABLED DOCUMENTS

Attachment1 - Additional information for item PSC1404-19

LATE ITEMS NOTED

Nil


Page 5

COMMITTEE REPORTS

PLANNING SERVICES COMMITTEE 2 APRIL 2014

PSC1404-61 DOURO ROAD, NO. 19 (LOT 1), SOUTH FREMANTLE - DEMOLITION OF EXISTING BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION OF THREE STOREY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT (OFFICE, LUNCH BAR/SHOP AND 20 MULTIPLE DWELLINGS) - (AA DA0587/13)

DataWorks Reference: 059/002 Disclosure of Interest: Nil Meeting Date: 2 April 2014 Responsible Officer: Manager Statutory Planning Actioning Officer: Planning Officer Decision Making Level: Planning Services Committee Previous Item Number/s: PSC1112-216 (7 December 2011)

PSC1008-150 (18 August 2010) PSC0902-18 (4 February 2009)

Attachments: 1 Development Plans (18 March 2014) 2 Site Photos 3 DAC minutes (13 March 2014) 4 47 signature petition received at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 26 March 2014

Date Received: 3 December 2013 Owner Name: S-Cargot Pty Ltd Submitted by: Motus Architecture Scheme: Neighbourhood Centre (R25) Heritage Listing: South Fremantle Heritage Area Existing Landuse: Vacant Use Class: Office, Lunch Bar & Multiple Dwellings Use Permissibility: D (Office), A (Lunch Bar, Shop & Multiple Dwellings)


Page 6

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The application seeks planning approval for the demolition of an existing (vacant) building at the subject site and the construction of a three storey mixed use development including offices, a lunch bar and 20 multiple dwellings. The application originally included a restaurant land use instead of a lunch bar land use. Following the community consultation period, the applicant submitted amended plans that replaced the restaurant with the lunch bar land use and which also made the following additional modifications;

The provision of 6 additional on-site vehicle bays through the introduction of vehicle stacking equipment (a total of 30 bays provided on-site, increased from 24 bays);

The reduction in residential plot ratio area by 20m2 (1,260m2);

The reduction in non-residential plot ratio area by 16.5m2 (total 420m2);

The glazed entry to Douro Road being reduced in height;

Minor re-arrangements being made to internal areas to address design concerns of the Citys Design Advisory Committee;

The deletion of 7 external store rooms available for the multiple dwellings.

During the public consultation period of the application (which occurred prior to the abovementioned modifications) a number of concerns were raised in relation to building scale and size, vehicle parking, design and density. The modifications made by the applicant sought to address the issues that arose during the consultation period. As the changes are considered to improve the proposal, no further community consultation was undertaken. The amended application seeks merit based assessments against the following criteria of the planning framework;

Land use (discretionary land use);

Building size;

Boundary walls;

Lot boundary setbacks;

Visual privacy;

Street setbacks;

Open space;

Vehicle parking;

Solar access to adjoining sites;

Vehicle sightlines; and,

Essential facilities. The proposed development is considered, on-balance, to broadly satisfy the merit based criteria of the R-Codes, local planning policies and LPS4 in relation to the all of the above elements. Moreover the proposal has been presented to the Citys DAC for comment and is supported subject to conditions. The application is recommended, on balance, for conditional approval.


Page 7

BACKGROUND The subject site exists on the north eastern corner of Douro Road and Hulbert Street, South Fremantle. The subject site measures 1326m2 and contains an existing (vacant) building at the street corner. On 3 May 2005, the City granted approval for the demolition of the existing (vacant) building at the subject site (DA161/05). On 25 September 2008, the City received an application for re-approval of the abovementioned demolition and redevelopment of the subject site as a mixed use development. At its meeting of 18 March 2009, the City refused the application (DA0504/08). The decision of the PSC was reviewed by the State Administrative Tribunal and (upon reconsideration of the application) at its meeting of 18 August 2010, the PSC granted planning approval for Proposed Demolition of Existing Building and Construction of a Mixed Use Development (Offices, Multiple and Grouped Dwellings) (DA0504/08). At its PSC meeting of 7 December 2013, the City granted planning approval to Proposed two storey development of three commercial units, five multiple dwellings and three grouped dwellings at the subject site (DA0416/11). This revised proposal included minor modifications to that approved as part of DA0504/08. The approval to commence development for this determination was issued on 19 December 2011. The City received the current application on 3 December 2013. On 18 March 2014, the City received modified plans. Further discussion of the modified plans is made in the Details section further in this report. DETAIL The application seeks planning approval for the demolition of an existing building contained on the subject site and development of a three storey mixed use development including;

A three storey building containing to a maximum external wall height of 7.0m and overall building height up to 11.3m;

A ground floor containing 420m2 of non-residential floor space (Lunch Bar/Shop & Office), lobby, service areas, storage (including bin storage) areas and on-site parking for 30 vehicles;

A first and second floor containing 6 single bedroom or studio dwellings and 6 two bedroom dwellings;

A second (upper floor) containing a further 7 two bedroom dwellings;

A ground floor, corner alfresco area for the abovementioned lunch bar;

Provision of 5 additional on-street vehicle bays on Hulbert Street and a further loading/disabled access bay on Douro Road; and,

Depicted areas of landscaping on the subject site and adjoining verge area including the provision of green wall elements to the building facade.

Development plans are included in this report at Attachment 1.


Page 8

The application originally included a restaurant land use instead of a lunch bar land use. Following the community consultation period, the applicant submitted amended plans that replaced the restaurant with the lunch bar land use and which also made the following additional modifications;

The provision of 6 additional on-site vehicle bays through the introduction of vehicle stacking equipment (a total of 30 bays provided on-site, increased from 24 bays);

The reduction in residential plot ratio area by 20m2 (1,260m2);

The reduction in non-residential plot ratio area by 16.5m2 (total 420m2);

The glazed entry to Douro Road being reduced in height;

Minor re-arrangements being made to internal areas to address design concerns of the Citys Design Advisory Committee;

The deletion of 7 external store rooms available for the multiple dwellings. STATUTORY AND POLICY ASSESSMENT The proposed development has been assessed against the relevant provisions contained within the Structure Plan, LPS4, the R-Codes and Council Local Planning Policies. The proposed development includes the following discretions and design principles assessments:

Land use (discretionary land use);

Building size;

Boundary walls;

Lot boundary setbacks;

Visual privacy;

Street setbacks;

Open space;

Vehicle parking;

Solar access to adjoining sites;

Vehicle sightlines; and,

Essential facilities.

Further discussion of the above is contained in the Planning Comment section of this report. CONSULTATION Community The application was required to be advertised in accordance with Clause 9.4 of the LPS4. The below submission comments are on the basis of the original proposal. The amended plans were no re-advertised as the modifications are considered to be of minor planning consequence or otherwise improve the proposal. This does not alter the relevancy of the comments previously received. The application was advertised as a significant application in accordance with Local Planning Policy 1.3 Public Notification of Planning Proposals.


Page 9

At the conclusion of the advertising period, being 21 January 2014, the City had received 57 submissions. It is noted that 29 submissions were original submissions, while the other 28 submissions consisted of a pro-forma document co-signed by a number of parties. Some submissions supported (generally) the redevelopment of the subject site but raised concern relating to the proposed development. The issues raised and the applicants response to the submissions is summarised in the table below;

Submission comment Applicants response

Density; The proposed number of dwellings proposed is too great for the location

The proposal, after consultation with councils planning office, is within the allowable mixed use guidelines.

Height; The height of the proposed development is incompatible with surrounding development

Considerable discussion has been had with council with regard to in-roof development to achieve an acceptable height and scale. The building deliberately sets back at the upper levels and conceals them within the roof structure. There are several 3 storey buildings in the southern end of Hulbert St and on Douro Rd the building is compatible with what already exists.

Scale; The scale of the proposal is inappropriate for the location both in terms of dwelling density and scale of buildings

Insufficient street parking; There is insufficient street parking

Amendments have been made to the parking provisions to bring the proposal into full compliance with councils requirements. This incorporates an allowance for the additional on-street bays created by the proposed crossover reductions.

Streetscape; The use of utilitarian materials (concrete, steel, glass) is not consistent with the materials used in the surrounding streets (weatherboard, limestone, corrugated iron, brick and tiles)

The material palette has consciously opted for compatible yet contemporary materials. Corrugated steel, raw brick, expressed steel, vertical landscaping on the streets, will all contribute to continuity of the streetscape character. The surrounding streets offer a diverse range of materials; all of our proposed materials can be found in situ in surrounding streets.

Design; The proposed building design is not sympathetic to the surrounding area

Disagree. The design reflects the industrial aesthetic of Fremantle, with use of saw-tooth roofs, raw bricks, raking ceilings, and a heavy reliance on street-front landscaping to compliment the community gardens in the street. The building is both sympathetic and complimentary.

Heritage; The proposal will negatively impact of the South Fremantle Heritage Area and adjoining heritage listed buildings

Disagree. It is designed to complement them.


Page 10

Open space; There is almost no open space provided on the subject site as a result of the proposal. This is inconsistent with the surrounding locality

The provision of large balconies to each apartment well exceeds the minimum requirements of the R Codes. The addition of vertical gardens at ground level is also considered to provide a positive contribution to the street level.

Visual privacy; The proposal will overlook many adjoining properties and impact on privacy

All balconies will be fully compliant with the overlooking provisions of the R Codes.

Overshadowing; The proposal will adversely impact on access to light to adjoining properties

The proposal clearly illustrates that only the site to the south of the lot is overshadowed, and in no instance is an outdoor living area affected by the R Code requirements. The increase to the shadow already caused by the existing limestone structures is negligible.

Landscaping; The proposal should make greater allowance for landscaping

A large proportion of the Hulbert St interface is landscaped at ground level. There are also numerous vertical gardens along both Street facades and the large balconies allow for substantial planting opportunities in pots.

Vehicle parking; The volume of parking proposed is inadequate for the scale of uses proposed

The parking provisions have now been increased to bring them into full compliance with councils requirements.

Insufficient requirements; The vehicle parking requirements for the site are inadequate. Even if these were met, parking would still be concerning

Hulbert Street has a number of homes with no provision for parking, and numerous households with more vehicles than their site can accommodate. This cannot be attributed to the proposed development.

Traffic; The volume of new traffic will adversely affect conditions and impact on safety. The street intersection is already congested and Douro Road is difficult to cross. The proposal will further impact this proposal

The proposal has limited the number of crossovers to one, compared to the previous approval that had five, and the existing building that has 3.

Driveway; The single lane driveway will result in a dangerous interface for pedestrians and vehicles

Disagree. It will be far safer than the existing number of crossovers and the previously approved crossovers noted above.

Vehicle site lines; The proposed boundary wall results in a loss of adequate vehicle sightlines to adjoining properties

Vehicle site lines are currently impeded by the bus-stop shelter when within the property boundary. The bus shelter remains unchanged in the proposal. The embayed bus lane provides an increased visual sight line once a vehicle has left the crossover.

Restaurant land use; This use is unnecessary and no allowance is made for how this will impact the surrounding residential environment

Consideration has been given to the proposed use. The caf/restaurant use has been amended to a local shop/lunch bar use. This will provide local residents with


Page 11

an increased level of local amenity, together with a reduction of car parking requirements.

Office land use; Inappropriate for the location and will impact on neighbouring residential properties

Disagree. The council encourages mixed use development on the site due to its location relative to Douro Road and other commercial uses to surrounding lots.

Noise; The density of the proposal will lead to a noise impact on adjoining properties

Douro Rd already produces more noise than the occasional residential noise component. The proposed building will in fact buffer the noise from Douro Rd.

Alternative development; Townhouse development would be preferred

N/A

Property values; The value of surrounding properties will be negatively affected

Disagree. The proposed development will be of a high standard and will increase property values in the area.

Community use; The subject site should be used for community purposes

N/A

Dwelling composition; One bedroom units are not sympathetic to the surrounding area

Housing Affordability is one of the big issues in Perth and Fremantle, and these apartments aim to provide an affordable accommodation option for first home-buyers.

The City also received two submissions supporting the proposal. The comments made are summarised as follows;

Design; The proposed design is considered to be of high quality;

Local benefit; The proposal will be of benefit to the surrounding residential area. The proposal may also benefit local businesses.

Vehicle parking; The amount of parking provided is considered appropriate;

Density; The density of the proposal is considered appropriate.

After the close of advertising a 47 signature petition was received at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 26 March 2014. This is included in Attachment 4. The matters raised in the petition are similar to those issues mentioned above. Technical Services The application includes depiction of the formalisation (line-marking and embayment) of 6 off-site street bays. As a result the application was referred to the Citys Technical Services department for comment. The comments raised are summarised as follows;

The bays proposed on Hulbert Street shall be embayed to allow for safe use with two way traffic exiting from Douro Road;

The position of vehicle bays to Hulbert Street may have an impact on existing and future line markings on Douro Road;

The design of cycle lanes along Douro Road is currently underway. This may affect the depicted alfresco and delivery bay. The applicant should communicate with the design team to achieve an adequate solution;


Page 12

The site will generate a moderation level of vehicle trips in peak hours. This should be quantified and presented to Council.

On the basis of the above, the provision of off-site parking and access is considered sufficient and manageable. A condition of approval requiring the provision of a parking management plan, demonstrating how off-site parking bays will be provided is therefore recommended. Design Advisory Committee The application was presented to the Citys Design Advisory Committee at its meeting of 16 January 2014. The following comments were provided; SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS CHARACTER

The street elevations show a well-considered architectural outcome in their composition and use of materials.

The precinct has a mix of predominantly one and two storey residential with three-storey apartment buildings closer to the beach. This proposal is more related in scale to those apartment buildings than to its immediate surroundings.

QUALITY OF PUBLIC REALM

The design of the corner to Hulbert Street contributes to the public realm with a set back and the provision of external caf amenity.

The location of the single car park crossover is well-considered in terms of reducing scale of the development to the southern boundary.

The planning of the units has given consideration to the acoustic and visual privacy of the neighbouring property to the east.

The parking bays proposed adjacent to Parmelia Park in Chester St may decrease the perceived amenity of the park as the grassed verge can be understood as part of the park setting;

OVERALL DESIGN QUALITY AND FUNCTIONALITY

The proposed design exemplars provide the promise of a good architectural outcome.

While the section through the internal walkway shows potential, the amenity of the bedrooms directly adjacent to this walkway is compromised from the perspective of natural light and ventilation, and acoustic and visual privacy.

The eastern studio units have internal courtyards located next to each other. This will create acoustic and visual privacy issues. Reconsideration of this pairing of courtyards is recommended.

Consideration should be given to relocation of the internal walkway to help overcome the above two points.

The long internal corridors to the west-oriented units should be reconsidered.

Poor acoustic and ventilation conditions exist in some of the units. The design should be modified to improve these conditions


Page 13

Good sized usable balconies are proposed.

The 3 storey glazed entry hall facing Douro road needs to be reduced as it is clearly above the 7.0m wall height permitted by the scheme.

The outward relocation of the inward facing courtyards of the eastern units could be considered subject to ensuring that they do not compromise the neighbours privacy.

It is recommended that each residential unit be allocated a car parking bay with the remaining parking bays being shared by the ground floor commercial uses.

There is support for embedding the sub-station in the site as a considered part of the design.

APPROPRIATNESS OF MATERIALS AND FINISHES

More information is required in this regard. GENERAL COMMENTS

The DAC accepts the reading of wall height, for the purpose of measuring town planning scheme compliance, as proposed by the applicant.

Reducing the yield of the development will allow redesign and reorientation of the units to improve the identified problems of internal amenity and functionality.

WHAT ARE THE STRENGTHS

The ground plane contributes to the public realm by providing a single vehicle crossover, embedding the sub-station within the site and activating the full length of the ground floor, including provision of a caf to the corner.

The street elevations are well considered in terms of architectural outcome in their composition and use of materials.

Generous sized balconies are proposed.

The proposed design exemplars provide the promise of some distinctive internal spaces and a good architectural outcome.

WHAT ARE THE WEAKNESSES

The amenity of the bedrooms directly adjacent to the internal walkway is compromised from the perspective of natural light and ventilation, and acoustic and visual privacy.

the parking bays proposed adjacent to Parmelia Park in Chester St may decrease the perceived amenity of the park as the grassed verge can be understood as part of the park setting;

The eastern studio units have internal courtyards located next to each other. This will create acoustic and visual privacy issues.

Poor acoustic and ventilation conditions exist in some of the units and should be improved

Access to natural light to some units is compromised.

The glazed wall to the entry hall to Douro Road exceeds scheme height limits. HOW CAN THE PROPOSAL BE IMPROVED


Page 14

The 3 storey glazed wall to the entry hall to Douro road needs to be reduced as it is clearly above the 7.0m wall height permitted by the scheme.

Further design resolution of the roof facing Douro Road resulting from the changes to the glazed wall referred to in the above point.

Reducing the yield of the development will allow redesign to improve internal amenity and functionality.

Increased access to natural light and ventilation to some units.

Improving acoustic privacy to internal studio courtyards and to bedrooms adjacent to the internal walkway.

More detailed information provided about materials and finishes. The application was presented to the Citys Design Advisory Committee for a second time at its meeting of 13 March 2014. The following comments were provided; CABE DESIGN PRINCIPLES CHARACTER (as per January 2014 DAC comments)

The street elevations are well-considered in terms of their composition and use of materials.

The precinct has a mix of predominantly one and two storey residential with three-storey apartment buildings closer to the beach. This proposal is more related in scale to those apartment buildings than to its immediate surroundings.

CONTINUITY AND ENCLOSURE The above issue did not arise during the presentation QUALITY OF PUBLIC REALM (as per January 2014 DAC comments)

The design of the corner to Hulbert Street contributes to the public realm with a set back and the provision of external caf amenity.

The location of the single car park crossover is well-considered in terms of reducing scale of the development to the southern boundary.

The planning of the units has given consideration to the acoustic and visual privacy of the neighbouring property to the east.

The parking bays proposed adjacent to Parmelia Park in Chester St may decrease the perceived amenity of the park as the grassed verge can be understood as part of the park setting;

EASE OF MOVEMENT The above issue did not arise during the presentation LEGIBILITY The above issue did not arise during the presentation ADAPTABILITY


Page 15

The above issue did not arise during the presentation DIVERSITY The above issue did not arise during the presentation OVERALL DESIGN QUALITY AND FUNCTIONALITY

The proposed design exemplars provide the promise of a good architectural outcome.

While the section through the internal walkway shows potential, the amenity of the bedrooms directly adjacent to this walkway is compromised from the perspective of natural light and ventilation, and acoustic and visual privacy. Consideration should be given to design modifications, including the widening of the internal walkway, to overcome this issue.

The reconsideration of the location of the studio courtyard as detailed in option 3 is supported as it improves the acoustic and visual privacy issues previously identified.

Good sized usable balconies are proposed.

The reduced 3 storey glazed entry hall facing Douro road is supported, although there is a lack of information about how it works in section.

The increase in on site car parking such that each residential unit is allocated 1 car parking bay is supported.

APPROPRIATNESS OF MATERIALS AND FINISHES

The proposed materials and finishes are of a good quality however additional detail is required in this regard. This can be included as a condition of approval.

GENERAL COMMENTS

The overall design quality is high and the revised design which increases the number of car bays on site and seeks to modify the layout of the studio apartments to improve acoustic privacy and access to sunlight is supported. There are however aspects of the design relating to improving access to natural light, ventilation and acoustic and visual privacy that need to be improved. It was agreed that, although these are important issues, their resolution can be included as conditions of approval.

DESIGN ASSESSMENT A WHAT ARE THE STRENGTHS (as per January 2014 DAC comments)

The ground plane contributes to the public realm by providing a single vehicle crossover, embedding the sub-station within the site and activating the full length of the ground floor, including provision of a caf to the corner.

The street elevations are well considered in terms of their composition and use of materials.


Page 16

Generous sized balconies are proposed.

The proposed design exemplars provide the promise of some distinctive internal spaces and a good architectural outcome.

HOW CAN THE PROPOSAL BE IMPROVED

Additional detail relating to colour, texture and material arrangement for final facade finishes.

Modifications to improve access to natural light and ventilation and acoustic and visual privacy to the internalised mid-level bedrooms next to the internal walkway.

Further information about the Douro Road entry lobby in terms of its resolution in section.

RECOMMENDATION The design is supported subject to the following conditions; Prior to the issue of a Building Permit, plans hereby approved being modified and the supporting details being to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Officer- City of Fremantle, having regard to advice from the Design Advisory Panel:

i. Modifications to improve access to natural light and ventilation and acoustic and visual privacy to the internalised mid-level bedrooms next to the internal walkway;

ii. Additional detail relating to colour, texture and material arrangement for final facade finishes;

iii. Further information about the Douro Road entry lobby in terms of its resolution in section.

The comments of the DAC are considered to be relevant planning and amenity concerns. Conditions of approval reflecting the above are therefore recommended. PLANNING COMMENT Density Bonus Clause 5.2.5 of LPS4 states that;

Notwithstanding the requirements of clause 5.2.3 residential density in the Local Centre, Neighbourhood Centre and Mixed Use zones may be increased up to R60, where residential development is part of a mixed use development, where in the opinion of Council the proposal is not detrimental to the amenity of the area.

The application is consider to meet the requirements of LPS4 relating to mixed use development and therefore the application is assessed at the higher, R60 density code. Land use Clause 4.2.1 (d) of LPS4 outlines the objectives of the Neighbourhood centre zone as follows;


Page 17

Objective Officer comment

(i) provide for the daily and convenience retailing, shops, cafe, office, administration and residential uses (at upper levels or where proposed as part of a mixed use development) which serves the local community and are located within and compatible with residential areas;

The subject site includes provision for Office and a local convenience lunch bar/food use. The proposal also includes 20 above ground multiple dwellings. This is considered wholly consistent with the zoning of the land.

(ii) ensure that development is not detrimental to the amenity of adjoining landowners or residential properties in the locality, and

The land uses proposed are considered compatible with residential land use. General amenity related issues are discussed further in the report relating to each specific merit based assessment.

(iii) conserve places of heritage significance the subject of or affected by the development.

The subject site adjoins properties contained on the Citys Heritage List. The application has been reviewed by the Citys Heritage department and no comments have been raised.

Building size (plot ratio)

Deemed-to-comply Provided Merit based assessment

0.7 (954.1m2) 0.92 (1260m2) 0.24 (305.9m2)

The design principle contained as clause 6.1.1(P1) of the R-Codes states that;

Development of the building is at a bulk and scale indicated in the local planning framework and is consistent with the existing or future desired built form of the locality.

The proposal is considered to meet the design principle in the following ways;

The proposed development is considered to meet the wall height requirement specified in Schedule 12 of LPS4 and other merit based assessments relating to lot boundary setbacks are otherwise supported. This leads to the interpretation that the building is consistent with the scale of buildings anticipated in the local planning framework;

The zoning of the subject site anticipates density development and the built form of the proposal is considered broadly sympathetic to expected at the site, and otherwise of manageable impact on the adjoining streetscape;

The above stated plot ratio could be reduced by reduction in the size of internal areas of dwellings proposed. This would have a limited impact on the intensity of the proposal and reduce the amenity of the dwellings proposed.

It is also noted that plot ratio for the purpose of the R-Codes does not include the ground floor non-residential land uses. LPS4 would permit an increase in the non-residential floor area in the building to reduce the overall plot ratio of the multiple dwellings. This could allow the proposal to meet the deemed-to-comply criteria of the R-Codes without altering the size of the building.


Page 18

Vehicle parking

Element Deemed-to-comply

Provided Merit based assessment

Multiple Dwellings (0.75+0.25 per dwelling)

20 30 (18 at grade bays +

12 stacker bays)

6 Office (1:30m2) 10

Lunch Bar (1:20m2) 6

TOTAL 36

The application includes the provision of 18 at-grade bays on the subject site and 12 bays serviced by mechanical car-stacking equipment. In submitting the application, the applicant provided the following justification for the shortfall of parking proposed;

We have also considered the additional 6 on-street bays as offering reciprocal use between the residential and commercial visitors to the building.

The application depicts 6 bays located on Hulbert Street and Douro Road. As these bays are not located on the subject site, they are not considered as part of the vehicle parking provision for the proposal. Notwithstanding the above, the proposal is considered to satisfy the discretionary criteria of clause 5.7.3 of LPS4 in the following ways;

The provision of 6 formal off-site bays is considered to sufficiently account for the shortfall of parking provided on-site;

The shared parking area on the ground floor will allow for the use of reciprocal parking by dwellings and non-residential land uses;

There are opportunities elsewhere in the locality for off-site vehicle parking, particularly nearby along Chester Street;

The subject site is located nearby to local convenience retail, service and hospitality operations and recreational opportunities along South Terrace and at Hampton Road. This access to local activities will result in a reduced demand for parking on the subject site; and,

The subject site is located adjacent to high frequency public transport and cycling infrastructure along Douro Road, South Terrace and Hampton Road.

To ensure the provision of off-site vehicle bays and the reciprocal use of on-site bays, a condition of approval requiring the submission of a parking management plan, prior to the issue of a building permit is recommended. Boundary walls

Element Deemed-to-comply Provided Design Principles Assessment

East Boundary Ground and First

Floor

Walls built up to boundaries up to a maximum average height of 3.5m and

average height of 3.0m

45.1m long, 2.0m-7.0m high

See comments.

South Bin Storage Area

7.5m long, 2.0m high


Page 19

up to two-thirds the length of the boundary.

The application seeks planning approval for a boundary wall along the entirety of the eastern boundary of the subject site. The majority of the wall proposed is 2.0m high and consists of external store rooms. A portion of the wall closer to Douro Road is up to 7.0m high for a length of 8.4m. The proposed eastern boundary wall is considered to meet the design principles of the R-Codes and the additional criteria of LPP2.4 in the following ways;

The boundary wall is located on the eastern boundary. As a result there will be no direct loss of light to the western adjoining site as measured by the R Codes;

The majority of the wall is 2.0m in height. This height is considered equivalent to a boundary fence;

The higher 7.0m element adjoins a vehicle access leg to the Mixed Use zoned property to the east (No. 23 Douro Road). Despite the Mixed Use zoning, the adjoining property is currently used for residential purposes only; and,

Major openings on the adjoining site are setback approximately 4.2m from the wall. This is considered sufficient in maintaining access to ventilation and light generally.

The proposed southern boundary wall to the bin storage area is considered to meet the design principles of the R-Codes and LPP2.4 in the following ways;

The wall will be almost completely concealed behind an existing high boundary fence and adjoins a high tower structure on the southern adjoining site;

As a result of the above, the proposal will not result in any adverse impact on access to light, ventilation or building bulk when viewed from the adjoining site.

Lot boundary setbacks

Element Deemed-to-comply Provided Merit based assessment

East First & second Floor

3.3m 1.2-1.9m 1.4-2.1m

The lesser setback is considered to meet the design principles of the R-Codes in the following ways;

The wall is articulated between vertical and along horizontal elements of the wall;

Higher portions of the wall mostly abut a vehicle access leg at No. 23 Douro Road;

The lesser setback affects approximately half the boundary to the adjoining property at No. 1 Thomas Street. The setback between the wall and the adjoining dwelling is approximately 8.2-8.9m. A below ground swimming pool


Page 20

exists in this area. The impact of bulk from a swimming pool is considered to be substantially lower than from an opening or outdoor area;

The lesser setback does not contribute adversely to a loss of direct sun as measured by the R Codes, light generally or ventilation owing to the setback of adjoining buildings and the north-south orientation of the land; and,

The lesser setback does not result in any new merit based decision relating to visual privacy.

The majority of the top floor is setback 8.8m from the western boundary. Visual privacy


7.5m 5.5m 2.0m

The application includes a minor incursion of the cone-of-vision to the southern adjoining property from balcony of Apartment 8 facing Hulbert Street (first floor). A condition requiring screening of this elevation to protect the privacy of this adjoining property is recommended. Street setbacks

Element Deemed-to-comply Provided Merit based assessment

Douro Road 2.0m Nil-2.6m up to 2.0m

Hulbert Street 2.0m 0.8-3.5m up to 1.2m

Table 4 of the R-Codes prescribes a 2.0m setback to both the primary and secondary streets. The lesser street setback is consider to meet the design principles of the R-Codes in the following ways;

A sense of articulation of building elements is provided for by the change of materials, landscaping and layout across the development facade;

The lesser setback of the building is consistent with that contained on nearby streets, with particular reference to the adjoining development at No. 17, 25 & 34 Douro Road which also have nil setbacks to both Douro Road and adjoining streets (either Hulbert Street, Thomas Street or Chester Street); and,

The lesser setback assists in providing weather protection by way of the corner alfresco area proposed.

Open space


45% (613.5m2) 76% (1036.5m2) 31% (423m2)

The lesser amount of open space provided is considered to be consistent with the design principles of the R-Codes in the following ways;

The level of open space provided responds to the features of the subject site by reason of the development existing at a street corner and being zoned for


Page 21

non-residential development. The proposal takes advantage of this street corner by providing a continuous frontage of development;

The character of development immediately adjoining the subject site is one of buildings built close to street boundaries. This results in a sense of lesser open space on these sites when viewed from the public street. The proposed development will be consistent with this pattern of development.

Despite the above, the Council may form the opinion that the proposal, by reason of its combination of lesser setbacks, building height proposed and lesser open space, is of scale inconsistent with the surrounding locality. An alternative recommendation is provided should Council form this view. Solar access to adjoining sites


25% (113.75m2) adjoining site area

33.2% (151.3m2) 8.2% (37.55m2)

The proposal is considered to meet the design principles of the R-Codes in the following ways;

The majority of shadow cast falls over non-habitable driveway and external side areas of the adjoining site;

While the shadow cast will affect major openings to the existing dwelling, this opening is already maintains restricted light access by an existing verandah feature;

The saw-tooth style gabled roof form near the southern boundary of the site reduces the overall impact of the proposal and will result in only intermittent loss of light throughout the day;

The primary outdoor living area for the affected adjoining site is located at the rear of the site and remains unaffected by the proposed development.

The significant southern setback of 5.54m 10.5m has been designed to specifically minimise overshadowing impact on the adjoining southern property

Vehicle sightlines


Walls and buildings not greater than 0.75m above natural ground level where

within 1.5m of a vehicle access point

Nil setback to vehicle access point at eastern

adjoining property.

See comments.

The proposed development does not provide adequate vehicle sightlines to the existing vehicle access point at the adjoining property at No. 23 Douro Road, South Fremantle. This access point is already constrained in terms of vehicle sightlines as a result of existing verge infrastructure and buildings.


Page 22

A condition of approval requiring the plans to be modified to improve the visibility at the vehicle access point is therefore recommended. Essential facilities


Each dwelling provided with an external lockable

storeroom of at least 4m2

13 stores provided for 20 multiple dwellings

7 store rooms.

In order to cater for the proposed car stacking equipment, the applicant has removed 7 store rooms from the original proposal. A condition of approval requiring the provision of an alternative storage solution for dwellings is therefore recommended. The City has previously accepted above vehicle bay cage storage solutions on other multiple dwelling developments. Such a solution would be considered suitable in this instance to provide for the shortfall of dwelling storage. A condition of approval requiring 6 cage storage areas be provided is therefore recommended. Local Planning Policy 2.13 Sustainable Building Design Pursuant to LPP2.13, the application is required to achieve a rating of not less than 4 Star Green Star using the relevant Green Building Council of Australia rating tool, or an alternative rating tool to the same affect. A condition of approval requiring compliance with LPP2.13 is therefore recommended. CONCLUSION The application seeks planning approval for the demolition of an existing (vacant) building at the subject site and the construction of a three storey mixed use development including offices, a lunch bar and 20 multiple dwellings. The proposed development is considered, on-balance, to broadly satisfy the merit based criteria of the R-Codes, local planning policies and LPS4 in relation to all discretionary elements. Notwithstanding this, the proposal is considered to be of considerable scale compared to existing development in the surrounding locality. As a result, should Council form an alternative opinion to officer regarding development requirements, in particular development height, the following alternative recommendation is provided;

That the application be REFUSED under the Metropolitan Region Scheme and Local Planning Scheme No. 4 for the Demolition of existing building and construction of three storey mixed use development (Office, Lunch Bar and 20 Multiple Dwellings) at No. 19 (Lot 1) Douro Road, South Fremantle, as detailed on plans dated 18 March 2014, for the following reasons;

1. The proposal may have a detrimental impact on amenity by reason that it

is of greater bulk, scale and size compared to the existing character of development in the surrounding locality.

2. The proposal is inconsistent with the desired future character and intensity of development in the surrounding locality having regard to such factors as residential density and vehicle parking.


Page 23

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION That the application be APPROVED under the Metropolitan Region Scheme and Local Planning Scheme No. 4 for the Demolition of existing building and construction of three storey mixed use development (Office, Lunch Bar and 20 Multiple Dwellings) at No. 19 (Lot 1) Douro Road, South Fremantle, as detailed on plans dated 18 March 2014, subject to the following conditions; 1. This approval relates only to the development as indicated on the approved plans

dated 18 March 2014. It does not relate to any other development on this lot and must substantially comment within 4 years from the date of the decision letter. If the subject development is not substantially commenced within a 4 year prior, the approval shall lapse and be of no further effect.

2. Despite condition 1 of this approval, the plans hereby approved being modified

and/or additional details being provided prior to the issue of a Building Permit, to address the following issues to the satisfaction of the City of Fremantle, on advice of the Design Advisory Committee;



iii. Further information about the Douro Road entry lobby in terms of its resolution in section;

iv. The plans being modified so as to provide improved vehicle and pedestrian sightlines at the junction of the adjoining vehicle access point at No. 23 Douro Road and the subject sites eastern boundary; and,

v. The plans being modified to provide additional storage for the Multiple Dwellings in the form of overhead storage lockers above the 6 ground floor car bays on site that do not already have storage areas.

3. Prior to the issue of a Building Permit, the applicant is to submit and have endorsed

a Parking Management Plan dealing with the following, to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Officer, City of Fremantle;

i. The design and construction of 6 on-street vehicle bays including the

embayment of these bays; ii. The reciprocal use of vehicle parking bays on the land including the provision

of one of the bays provided for delivery purposes; and, iii. The suitability of the embayment of vehicle bays on Douro Road and Hulbert

Street and the potential impact of peak traffic on the Douro Road and Hulbert Street intersection.

4. The car stacking equipment shown on the plans hereby approved being designed,

installed and maintained thereafter in order to allow for access and egress of stacked vehicles independent of other vehicles, to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Officer, City of Fremantle.


Page 24

5. All storm water discharge shall be contained and disposed of on site or otherwise approved by the Chief Executive Officer City of Fremantle.

6. The new/ modified vehicle crossover shall be separated from any verge infrastructure by; i. a minimum of 2.0 metres in the case of verge trees ii. a minimum of 1.2 metres (in the case of bus shelters, traffic management

devices, parking embayments or street furniture), and iii. a minimum of 1.0 metre in the case of power poles, road name and directional

signs. 7. Prior to the occupation of the development, vehicle crossovers shall be constructed

in either paving block, concrete, or bitumen and thereafter maintained to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Officer, City of Fremantle.

8. Prior to occupation any redundant crossovers and kerbs shall be removed and the

verge reinstated to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Officer, City of Fremantle and at the expense of the applicant.

9. Prior to occupation, the first floor balcony (apartment 8) on the southern elevation

shall be either:

i. fixed obscured or translucent glass to a height of 1.60 metres above floor level, or

ii. fixed with vertical screening, with openings not wider than 5cm and with a maximum of 25% perforated surface area, to a minimum height of 1.60 metres above the floor level, or

iii. a minimum sill height of 1.60 metres as determined from the internal floor level, or

iv. screened by an alternative method to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Officer, City of Fremantle,

in accordance with Clause 5.4.1 C1.1 of the Residential Design Codes and thereafter maintained to the satisfaction of Chief Executive Officer, City of Fremantle.

10. Prior to occupation, the boundary wall located on the eastern and western

boundaries shall be of a clean finish in sand render or face brick, to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Officer, City of Fremantle.

11. The design and construction of the development is to meet the 4 star green star

standard as per Local Planning Policy 2.13 or alternatively to an equivalent standard as agreed upon by the Chief Executive Officer, City of Fremantle when a green star rating tool is not available. Any costs associated with generating, reviewing or modifying the alternative equivalent standard is to be incurred by the owner of the development site. Within 12 months of an issue of a certificate of Building Compliance for the development, the owner shall submit either of the following to the City to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Officer City of Fremantle;


Page 25

i. a copy of documentation from the Green Building Council of Australia certifying that the development achieves a Green Star Rating of at least 4 Stars, or

ii. a copy of agreed equivalent documentation for instance where there is no green star rating tool available certifying that the development achieves a Green Star Rating of at least 4 Stars.

At committee - Cr B Massie MOVED to defer the item to the next appropriate Planning Services Committee meeting to allow the applicant to submit revised plans reducing the density and increasing parking. LOST: 2/4 COMMITTEE AND OFFICERS RECOMMENDATION That the application be APPROVED under the Metropolitan Region Scheme and Local Planning Scheme No. 4 for the Demolition of existing building and construction of three storey mixed use development (Office, Lunch Bar and 20 Multiple Dwellings) at No. 19 (Lot 1) Douro Road, South Fremantle, as detailed on plans dated 18 March 2014, subject to the following conditions; 1. This approval relates only to the development as indicated on the approved plans

dated 18 March 2014. It does not relate to any other development on this lot and must substantially comment within 4 years from the date of the decision letter. If the subject development is not substantially commenced within a 4 year prior, the approval shall lapse and be of no further effect.

2. Despite condition 1 of this approval, the plans hereby approved being modified

and/or additional details being provided prior to the issue of a Building Permit, to address the following issues to the satisfaction of the City of Fremantle, on advice of the Design Advisory Committee;



iii. Further information about the Douro Road entry lobby in terms of its resolution in section;

iv. The plans being modified so as to provide improved vehicle and pedestrian sightlines at the junction of the adjoining vehicle access point at No. 23 Douro Road and the subject sites eastern boundary; and,

v. The plans being modified to provide additional storage for the Multiple Dwellings in the form of overhead storage lockers above the 6 ground floor car bays on site that do not already have storage areas.

3. Prior to the issue of a Building Permit, the applicant is to submit and have endorsed

a Parking Management Plan dealing with the following, to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Officer, City of Fremantle;


Page 26

i. The design and construction of 6 on-street vehicle bays including the embayment of these bays;

ii. The reciprocal use of vehicle parking bays on the land including the provision of one of the bays provided for delivery purposes; and,

iii. The suitability of the embayment of vehicle bays on Douro Road and Hulbert Street and the potential impact of peak traffic on the Douro Road and Hulbert Street intersection.

4. The car stacking equipment shown on the plans hereby approved being designed,

installed and maintained thereafter in order to allow for access and egress of stacked vehicles independent of other vehicles, to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Officer, City of Fremantle.

5. All storm water discharge shall be contained and disposed of on site or otherwise approved by the Chief Executive Officer City of Fremantle.

6. The new/ modified vehicle crossover shall be separated from any verge infrastructure by;

i. a minimum of 2.0 metres in the case of verge trees ii. a minimum of 1.2 metres (in the case of bus shelters, traffic management

devices, parking embayments or street furniture), and iii. a minimum of 1.0 metre in the case of power poles, road name and directional

signs. 7. Prior to the occupation of the development, vehicle crossovers shall be constructed

in either paving block, concrete, or bitumen and thereafter maintained to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Officer, City of Fremantle.

8. Prior to occupation any redundant crossovers and kerbs shall be removed and the

verge reinstated to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Officer, City of Fremantle and at the expense of the applicant.

9. Prior to occupation, the first floor balcony (apartment 8) on the southern elevation

shall be either:

i. fixed obscured or translucent glass to a height of 1.60 metres above floor level, or

ii. fixed with vertical screening, with openings not wider than 5cm and with a maximum of 25% perforated surface area, to a minimum height of 1.60 metres above the floor level, or

iii. a minimum sill height of 1.60 metres as determined from the internal floor level, or

iv. screened by an alternative method to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Officer, City of Fremantle,

in accordance with Clause 5.4.1 C1.1 of the Residential Design Codes and thereafter maintained to the satisfaction of Chief Executive Officer, City of Fremantle.


Page 27

10. Prior to occupation, the boundary wall located on the eastern and western boundaries shall be of a clean finish in sand render or face brick, to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Officer, City of Fremantle.

11. The design and construction of the development is to meet the 4 star green star

standard as per Local Planning Policy 2.13 or alternatively to an equivalent standard as agreed upon by the Chief Executive Officer, City of Fremantle when a green star rating tool is not available. Any costs associated with generating, reviewing or modifying the alternative equivalent standard is to be incurred by the owner of the development site. Within 12 months of an issue of a certificate of Building Compliance for the development, the owner shall submit either of the following to the City to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Officer City of Fremantle;

i. a copy of documentation from the Green Building Council of Australia

certifying that the development achieves a Green Star Rating of at least 4 Stars, or

ii. a copy of agreed equivalent documentation for instance where there is no green star rating tool available certifying that the development achieves a Green Star Rating of at least 4 Stars.

CARRIED: 4/2 At committee - The above item is referred to the Ordinary Meeting of Council for determination in accordance with 1.1 or 2.1 of the City of Fremantle Delegated Authority Register which requires that at least 5 members of the committee vote in favour of the Committee Recommendation in order to exercise its delegation. Cr J Strachan MOVED to defer the application to the next appropriate Planning Services Committee in order for amended plans to be submitted that address the following matters: 1. Reduce plot ratio; 2. Increase on site parking; 3. Matters raised by the Design Advisory Committee; Cr A Sullivan MOVED an amendment to the deferral recommendation to include the following 3 points: 4. Increase the number of store rooms 5. Reduce overshadowing on the southern side of the development 6. Indication of suitability to achieve a 4 star green star energy rating SECONDED: Cr J Strachan CARRIED: 7/2


Page 28

For Against

Mayor, Brad Pettitt Cr Andrew Sullivan Cr Jon Strachan Cr Simon Naber Cr Josh Wilson Cr David Hume Cr Ingrid Waltham

Cr Robert Fittock Cr Bill Massie

REASON/S FOR CHANGE TO OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION Cr Sullivan felt that these additional points should be incorporated in the requirements of the development application to try and address some of the issue that have been raise in relation to this application. Cr J Strachan MOVED the deferral motion as amended with committee delegation to read as follows; COUNCIL DECISION

That the application be deferred to the next appropriate Planning Services Committee with delegation in order for amended plans to be submitted that address the following matters: 1. Reduce plot ratio; 2. Increase on site parking; 3. Matters raised by the Design Advisory Committee; 4. Increase the number of store rooms; 5. Reduce overshadowing on the southern side of the development; and 6. Indication of suitability to achieve a 4 star green star energy rating. SECONDED: Cr S Naber CARRIED: 8/1

For Against

Mayor, Brad Pettitt Cr Andrew Sullivan Cr Jon Strachan Cr Simon Naber Cr Josh Wilson Cr David Hume Cr Ingrid Waltham Cr Bill Massie

Cr Robert Fittock


Page 29

STRATEGIC AND GENERAL SERVICES COMMITTEE 9 APRIL 2014

SGS1404-1 WILSON PARK BASKETBALL COURT AND LANDSCAPE OPTIONS

DataWorks Reference: 148/016 Disclosure of Interest: Nil Meeting Date: 9 April 2014 Previous Item: Nil Responsible Officer: Peter Pikor, Director Technical Services Actioning Officer: Lionel Nicholson, Manager City Works Decision Making Authority: Council Agenda Attachments: Wilson Park landscape concept plan - under separate

cover

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In 2011, the City removed the marked out basketball court together with the backboards and posts from the northern end of the car park at South Beach to reinstate parking in view of the needs of the ISAF World Sailing Championships. The reinstatement of this section of car park since that time has assisted to provide for additional parking demand at South Beach with Wilson Park also used to provide for overflow parking. With the removal of the basketball court, the City investigated reinstatement of a basketball facility within the nearby area. Due to various constraints within the South Beach Reserve a half basketball court in Wilson Park appears a suitable option. As part of 2013/14 capital works program, budget funds have been made available for the installation of a half basketball court and landscaping works in Wilson Park. The City invited comments from the local community and received submissions indicating opposition to locating the half basketball court in Wilson Park. The City has also received two petitions from residents opposing the proposal. As a result of this community feedback, it is recommended that the installation of a half basketball court in Wilson Park does not proceed. It is also recommended the mature trees in the northern section of Wilson Park be protected by new landscaping treatment with future consideration given to installation of bollards on the perimeter of this park.

BACKGROUND

During the early 1990s, in response to complaints of anti-social behaviour and hooning, Council resolved to close off a section of the South Beach car park (north of the kiosk) and installed a basketball court on the former car park surface. This facility existed for some time despite numerous requests to re-open the car park due to the lack of parking during peak periods. There was an attempt to get a resolution and relocate the basketball court to a new location in 2005, resulting in community consultation providing no clear outcome. Council was asked to give direction on solving the issues of choosing a new site for the court and reinstating parking in the area north of the kiosk.


Page 30

In December 2005, Council resolved to retain the status quo and not trial the car park until the summer of 2006 / 2007, allowing time to provide a detailed user analysis for the basketball court. This period was also to be used to examine alternative solutions to car parking on Wilson Park so that Council could consider retaining the court in its then present form. In 2011, prior to the ISAF World Sailing Championships in Fremantle, the car park at South Beach was identified as an area that needed to be opened to allow additional parking. Consequently, funding was allocated, the basketball court removed and the parking reinstated for the full length of the car park area. The reinstatement of this section of car park since that time has assisted to provide for additional parking demand at South Beach with Wilson Park also used to provide for overflow parking. During this time, the City looked at options for a suitable site including in Wilson Park for the installation of a basketball court. Following assessment of potential sites on the South Beach reserve and noting the various constraints, it was considered that the installation of a half basketball court in Wilson Park maybe a suitable option. Accordingly, a draft concept plan was prepared and feedback from the community was sought. Of the 20 submissions received, 10 were against the proposed installation, 8 were supportive and 2 were neutral. The comments in the submissions suggested that there was a strong opposition regarding locating the half basketball court in Wilson Park. There were also concerns about this park not being protected by bollards on the perimeter, allowing cars to park at night, issues with potential lighting of the court and associated issues for the residents of adjacent properties. Council also received a petition in August 2013 signed by 117 residents opposing the installation of the basketball court in Wilson Park. The most recent petition opposing installation of the basketball court signed by 61 residents was received on 26 February 2014. Both these petitions also requested Wilson Park and the assets within the park be protected by installation of bollards around the perimeter of the park and to review the current parking signage and limit car parking.

COMMENT

Past community consultation addressing a basketball court suggests the community recognises that this type of facility is needed and appreciated, however the most recent consultation shows opposition to locating a half basketball court in Wilson Park. In addition, this recent consultation indicates support for better protection of the Wilson Park area through the installation of bollards on the parks perimeter and landscaping works. As a result, it is recommended to investigate an alternate location for the installation of a basketball court suitable to the communitys needs. In 2011, the City removed the marked out basketball court to reinstate parking in view of the needs of the ISAF World Sailing Championships. The reinstatement of this section of car park since that time has assisted to provide for additional parking demand at South Beach with Wilson Park also used to provide for overflow parking. A formal crossover has been constructed at the southern end of Wilson Park near the railway line and signs installed to indicate the park can be used for only overflow parking. There have been concerns regarding the access and parking of vehicles on Wilson Park together with vehicles being parked close to the existing mature trees. To better protect Wilson Parks


Page 31

assets the installation of bollards along with landscaping works at the northern end of the park provides practical treatments. A proposed landscaping concept has been prepared which consists of 25 new trees, mulched areas with new water wise native plants and some 70 metres of path to assist protect the mature Fig Trees as well provide easier access through the northern end of the park. This proposed landscaping concept is shown on Attachment 1.

RISK AND OTHER IMPLICATIONS

Financial

Funds totalling $145 000 were allocated in the 2013/14 budget for the installation of a half basketball court and associated landscaping works at South Beach. The estimated cost to install the bollards around the Wilson Park perimeter is $30 000. The estimated cost to undertake the proposed landscaping works is $60 000. Legal

Nil Operational

Nil Organisational

Nil

CONCLUSION

Although there appears to be previous support for installing a basketball court in South Beach, the results of the most recent community consultation indicates that a half basketball court in Wilson Park is not supported by the local community. As such, and due to the various constraints to place a basketball facility along the South Beach reserve, Council may wish to consider another location in the City for this facility. Furthermore, there is local community support for protecting Wilson Park through installing bollards and undertaking landscape works. The landscape treatment will assist to control the parking of vehicles near the mature trees on Wilson Park. Currently Wilson Park is used for overflow parking during peak periods. This limited usage and the installation of the landscape treatment to control parking near the mature trees may not at this stage warrant the installing of bollards on the perimeter of this park.

STRATEGIC AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS

Nil


Page 32

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

The community consultation in May 2013 was aimed to inform the residents of the planned installation of a half basketball court in Wilson Park. Of the 20 submissions received, 10 were opposed to the installation of the court in this location, 8 were in favour and 2 neutral. Further to this, petitions have been received by Council in August 2013 and March 2014 opposing installation of the basketball court in Wilson Park but recommending installation of bollards to protect the parks assets as well as a review of the current overflow car parking arrangements.

VOTING AND OTHER SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS

Simple Majority Required

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION

That Council

1. Does not proceed with the installation of a basketball court on Wilson Park and considers another site within the City for installation of this facility.

2. Authorises the installation of landscaping works in Wilson Park as shown in Attachment 1.

3. Gives future consideration to the installation of bollards on the perimeter of Wilson Park following installation of the landscape works and monitoring of the parking situation.

At committee - Cr D Coggin MOVED the following alternative recommendation for part 2: That Council 2. Authorises the following works be undertaken;

Turf restoration works (Spring 2014) - $20 000

Perimeter Bollards - $30 000

Landscaping works as per Attachment 1 - $60 000

CARRIED: 6/0 REASON/S FOR CHANGE TO OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION To modify the original landscaping proposal according to budget parameters. At committee - Cr A Sullivan MOVED the following alternative recommendation for part 1: 1. Defers consideration of the installation of a basketball court in Wilson Park to

further investigate alternative options for basketball facilities within the vicinity of South Beach in liaison with the community.


Page 33

CARRIED: 6/0 REASON/S FOR CHANGE TO OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION To allow the opportunity to liaise with the local community to further investigate alternative options for basketball facilities within the vicinity of South Beach. At committee - Cr A Sullivan MOVED the following alternative recommendation for part 3, and to include parts 4 and 5 as follows: 3. Prepare plans for additional landscape improvements to Wilson Park for

consideration by Council as part of the 2014/15 budget including consideration of: a) new parkland planting of endemic tree species within the existing grassed

areas limited to the very northern and southern ends of the park to increase the usable areas of shaded lawn suitable for passive recreation;

b) additional ground cover planting beds to the periphery of the park to reduce the overall extent of lawn at the margins of the park and to increase the separation and safety in relation to surrounding roads and the railway, while maintaining the traditional large open lawn area for the majority of the park suitable for use for informal active recreation activities;

c) achieving an integrated landscape approach consistent with the adjoining areas of the South Beach subdivision; and,

d) includes suitable vehicular access and egress points to Wilson Park so as to assist in managing any wear and tear on the grassed areas resulting from vehicular activity.

4. A separate report be provided to the Strategic and General Services

Committee addressing the need to install a full basketball court in the vicinity of South Beach and / or in the area of the vicinity of the Esplanade Youth Plaza.

5. The City to develop an operational plan to manage the use of Wilson Park for

overflow parking and to ensure the central grassed area is maintained at a standard suitable for informal active recreation.

CARRIED: 6/0 REASON/S FOR CHANGE TO OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION To prepare plans for additional landscape improvements to Wilson Park for the 2014/15 draft budget, consider the installation of a full size basketball court in the South Beach or Esplanade Youth Plaza vicinity and develop a plan for the use of Wilson Park to accommodate overflow parking needs.


Page 34

At committee - Cr A Sullivan MOVED to include part 6 to the recommendation as follows: 6. Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to modify the proposed landscaping

plan to provide additional shaded grassed areas under the existing trees in at least the months of December through to March inclusive.

CARRIED: 6/0 REASON/S FOR CHANGE TO OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION To modify the proposed landscaping plan to provide additional shaded grassed areas under the existing trees.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

That Council; 1. Defers consideration of the installation of a basketball court in Wilson Park to


2. Authorises the following works be undertaken;



Landscaping works as per Attachment 1 - $60 000 3. Prepare plans for additional landscape improvements to Wilson Park for

consideration by Council as part of the 2014/15 budget including consideration of: a) new parkland planting of endemic tree species within the existing grassed

areas limited to the very northern and southern ends of the park to increase the usable areas of shaded lawn suitable for passive recreation;

b) additional ground cover planting beds to the periphery of the park to reduce the overall extent of lawn at the margins of the park and to increase the separation and safety in relation to surrounding roads and the railway, while maintaining the traditional large open lawn area for the majority of the park suitable for use for informal active recreation activities;

c) achieving an integrated landscape approach consistent with the adjoining areas of the South Beach subdivision; and,

d) includes suitable vehicular access and egress points to Wilson Park so as to assist in managing any wear and tear on the grassed areas resulting from vehicular activity.

4. A separate report be provided to the Strategic and General Services Committee

addressing the need to install a full basketball court in the vicinity of South Beach and / or in the area of the vicinity of the Esplanade Youth Plaza.




Page 35

6. Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to modify the proposed landscaping plan to provide additional shaded grassed areas under the existing trees in at least the months of December through to March inclusive.

CARRIED: 6/0 Cr A Sullivan MOVED a minor amendment to the Committee Recommendation to include the following wording (shown in italics) to the end of point 3 of part 2, to read as follows: 2. Authorises the following works be undertaken;



Landscaping works as per Attachment 1 - $60 000 (excluding the proposed trees along the railway line)

SECONDED: Cr R Fittock CARRIED: 9/0

For Against


REASON/S FOR CHANGE TO OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION It was felt that the park has been over landscaped and should be minimised. Therefore the removal of the proposed trees along the railway line was felt to be the most appropriate way to reduce the number of trees in the park.


Page 36

COUNCIL DECISION

MOVED: Cr A Sullivan That Council; 1. Defers consideration of the installation of a basketball court in Wilson Park to


2. Authorises the following works be undertaken;



Landscaping works as per Attachment 1 - $60 000 (excluding the proposed trees along the railway line)

3. Prepare plans for additional landscape improvements to Wilson Park for

consideration by Council as part of the 2014/15 budget including consideration of: e) new parkland planting of endemic tree species within the existing

grassed areas limited to the very northern and southern ends of the park to increase the usable areas of shaded lawn suitable for passive recreation;

f) additional ground cover planting beds to the periphery of the park to reduce the overall extent of lawn at the margins of the park and to increase the separation and safety in relation to surrounding roads and the railway, while maintaining the traditional large open lawn area for the majority of the park suitable for use for informal active recreation activities;

g) achieving an integrated landscape approach consistent with the adjoining areas of the South Beach subdivision; and,

h) includes suitable vehicular access and egress points to Wilson Park so as to assist in managing any wear and tear on the grassed areas resulting from vehicular activity.

4. A separate report be provided to the Strategic and General Services

Committee addressing the need to install a full basketball court in the vicinity of South Beach and / or in the area of the vicinity of the Esplanade Youth Plaza.



6. Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to modify the proposed landscaping

plan to provide additional shaded grassed areas under the existing trees in at least the months of December through to March inclusive.

SECONDED: Cr R Fittock


Page 37

CARRIED: 9/0

For Against



Page 38

Cr A Sullivan MOVED en bloc recommendations numbered SGS1404-2 and SGS1404-3. SECONDED: Cr S Naber CARRIED: 9/0

For Against


SGS1404-2 DELEGATED AUTHORITY REGISTER REVIEW 2014

DataWorks Reference: 100/003 Disclosure of Interest: Nil Meeting Date: Council - 23 April 2014 Previous Item: Nil Responsible Officer: Glen Dougall, Director Corporate Services Actioning Officer: Melody Foster, Governance Officer Decision Making Authority: Council Agenda Attachments: Draft Delegated Authority Register

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A review of the Delegated Authority Register has been undertaken in accordance with the Local Government Act requirement, to ensure that it contains the requirements for the City of Fremantle to function efficiently and to ensure good governance.

BACKGROUND

Under the Local Government Act 1995, local governments may delegate the exercise of any of its powers or duties to a committee of Council or the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) except those powers specifically identified under the Act. The CEO may then delegate these powers (or part thereof) to other office

minutes - city of fremantle - ocm... · confirmation of minutes 3 ... sgs1404-1 wilson park...

Documents