city of perth index · city of perth index item description page ......

$: CITY OF PERTH INDEX · CITY OF PERTH INDEX Item Description Page ... \\CH_FS1\VOL2\DATA\CORPORAT\CPS\WORD\AGENDAS\MN010522.DOC ... Answer: The Chief Executive$
COUNCILMINUTES 22 MAY 2001

\\CH_FS1\VOL2\DATA\CORPORAT\CPS\WORD\AGENDAS\MN010522.DOC

Ord Con Mins 22 May 2001

CITY OF PERTH

INDEX

Item Description Page

364/01 PRAYER 797

365/01 DECLARATION OF OPENING 797

366/01 APOLOGIES 797

367/01 QUESTION TIME FOR THE PUBLIC 797

368/01 MEMBERS ON LEAVE OF ABSENCE ANDAPPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE 801

369/01 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES 801

370/01 ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE LORD MAYOR WITHOUTDISCUSSION 801

371/01 DISCLOSURE OF MEMBERS’ INTERESTS 802

372/01 QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVENWITHOUT DISCUSSION 802

373/01 CORRESPONDENCE 802

374/01 PETITIONS 802

375/01 174-176 (LOTS 6 AND 18) JAMES STREET,NORTHBRIDGE - CHANGE OF USE FROM RECEPTIONCENTRE TO CABARET 803

376/01 42 (LOT 49) MOUNT STREET, WEST PERTH -PROPOSED ROOF GARDEN 810




377/01 298 - 306 MURRAY STREET, PERTH - PROPOSEDCHANGE OF USE FROM "TAVERN" TO "SPECIALFACILITY" - MOON AND SIXPENCE 814

378/01 30 ST GEORGES TERRACE, PERTH - COFFEE FACILITYAT CENTRAL LAW COURTS 818

379/01 553 - 561 (LOTS 17 AND 18 OF PERTH TOWN LOT 24)WELLINGTON STREET, PERTH - RETENTION OF THEEXISTING BUILDING FACADES AND THECONSTRUCTION OF A TWO STOREY RETAILDEVELOPMENT 820

380/01 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONSTRATEGY 829

381/01 PROVISION OF NON ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES FROMVENDING MACHINES IN THE CITY'S CAR PARKS FOR APERIOD OF TWO YEARS - TENDER NO. - 054-00/01 834

382/01 WEBSITE - PHASE TWO - TENDER NO. 91-00/01 836

383/01 EAST PERTH CARPARK TENDER 839

384/01 FOOTPATH - KINGS PARK AVENUE, CRAWLEY. 843

385/01 ROYAL STREET WEST CAR PARK SITE - CONCEPTPLAN 850

386/01 FEDERAL ROAD SAFETY BLACK SPOT PROGRAM2001/02 856

387/01 WINE BAR/CAFE - SHOP 4 REGAL PLACE CARPARK,EAST PERTH 858

388/01 ADVERTISING RIGHTS - PADBURY WALK 863

389/01 BONUS PLOT RATIO ADVISORY PANEL 865

390/01 BUDGET COMMITTEE MEETINGS HELD ON 27 MARCHAND 10 AND 24 APRIL 2001 872

391/01 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CITY OF PERTHPARKING LOCAL LAW 1999 872

392/01 REVIEW OF DELEGATIONS OF AUTHORITY 890

393/01 SALARIED OFFICERS ENTERPRISE BARGAININGAGREEMENT 904




394/01 MOTION OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEENGIVEN 908

395/01 REPRESENTATION ON STATUTORY AUTHORITIES ANDPUBLIC BODIES 910

396/01 URGENT BUSINESS 910

COUNCILMINUTES - 797 - 22 MAY 2001


Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Council of the City of Perth held in theCouncil Chamber, Ninth Floor, Council House, 27 St George’s Terrace, Perth, onTuesday, 22 May 2001 at 6.05pm.

Presiding: The Rt Hon Lord Mayor, Dr P C R Nattrass

Councillors Present: Sutherland, Davidson, Goodman, McEvoy,MacGill, Stroud and Tudori

In Attendance:

Garry Hunt - Chief Executive OfficerNoelene Jennings - Director Corporate ServicesDoug Forster - Director Business UnitsGarry Dunne - Director Service UnitsJohn Bruning - Acting Director StrategyMax Hipkins - Director PlanningPeter Monks - Manager Approval ServicesJamie Parry - Manager Corporate SupportLeah Holleley - Acting Administrative Team LeaderSharene Chatfield - Co-ordinator Public RelationsGabby Lawrence - Public Relations Officer

364/01 PRAYER

The Lord Mayor took the Chair and the prayer was read by the Chief ExecutiveOfficer.

365/01 DECLARATION OF OPENING

The Lord Mayor declared the meeting open.

366/01 APOLOGIES

Nil

367/01 QUESTION TIME FOR THE PUBLIC

The Chief Executive Officer advised that the following questions had been received.



Mr Paul Ritter66 Orange Valley RoadKalamunda WA 6076

Question 1: Enquiries to the WA Planning Commission, made asrecommended by the CEO, has given the information thatsome of the conditions placed by the City Council on itsapproval of the Convention Centre and Soccer Stadium,5.12.2000, Planning Application, have been met.

Answer: The Chief Executive Officer responded that the situationis that the City is recommending authority to the WesternAustralian Planning Commission. There is no furtherinput from the Council required until further plans arelodged.

Question 2: “The Business”, as reported, in the media, is the main reasonfor purchasing 99 year leases by the City Council. What is theevidence that in a hundred years time carparking will still be abusiness, which was used by the CEO, to regard the escalationto a 45,000.000 price advisable to accept?

Answer: The Chief Executive Officer responded that the leasingperiod for the two sites is 99 years, the price of$45,000,000 for 1,800 bays is based on $25,000 per bayunder certain conditions. The financial analysis wasbased on a 20 year period. Any operation beyond thatterm would provide additional surplus funds. In anychange of purpose of the site the City still retains userights to the land.

Question 3: As the CEO advises Council on how to carry out its policies,was the business plan, based on independent valuation of theparking, so Councillors could evaluate the purchase of the“parking business” and the hypothetical income for a hundredyears hence?

Answer: The Chief Executive Officer responded that he hadalready answered part of that in question 1. In relation tothe independent valuation, advice was given in terms ofthe modelling. The advice on the figures that wereproduced for the cash flow and for the parking business



were provided by independent experts.

Mr K Daw1/7 Burt WayEast Perth WA 6004

Question 1: Does the Council agree that, in written law, unless the contraryintention appears, particular provisions override generalprovisions dealing with the same subject matter?

Answer: The Chief Executive Officer responded that, yes, that isusually the case.

Question 2: Will the Council reconcile its answer to Question 10 put to the24th of April meeting, with Clause 5.5.1 of the Model SchemeText, and with the explanatory note at page 2.3.5.2 of thePlanning Schemes Manual, namely: “This (Scheme) discretionto vary site and development requirements, however, does notapply in respect of the Residential Planning Codes.”?

Answer: The Chief Executive Officer responded that the questionwould be taken on notice.

Question 3: Does the Council agree clause 1.2.2 of the R codes is a verydeliberate mechanism by which the Planning Commissionprevented the Codes becoming subject to normal Schemediscretionary provisions?

Answer: The Chief Executive Officer responded that the questionwould be taken on notice.

Question 4: Why were the developers of what is now the Hyatt site not ableto transfer plot ratio from Adelaide Terrace to Terrace Roaddespite the enactment of a minor town Planning Scheme?

Answer: The Chief Executive Officer responded that there are infact several sites for the Hyatt Hotel complex and if herecalls correctly there is still one site vacant on thecorner of Plain Street and Terrace Road. Again heresponded that he would take the question on notice inorder to give an adequate response.



Question 5: Does the Council agree it is a specific objective of the TerraceRoad Design Policy to prevent the transfer of plot ratio fromAdelaide Terrace to Terrace Road?

Answer: The Chief Executive Officer responded that he wouldneed to refer to the Policy directly and would thereforetake the question on notice.

Mr Bill BradburyPO Box 6489East Perth WA 6892

Question 1: Can the Chief Executive Officer give a report on the progressof the Convention Centre and stadium contracts as they standto date?

Answer: The Chief Executive Officer responded that the positionis no different to that resolved by the Council on the 9thof April this year, other than there has been advice in themedia and in written form from Multiplex saying theyhave all funds available to progress the project to theState Government by the 28th of May.

Question 2: Will the outcome of the Royal Street West Carpark site conceptplans see the destruction of what is known as City Farm?

Answer: The Chief Executive Officer responded that so far as theCouncil is concerned it has specifically identified that itwill not be involved in any aspect of City Farm, and that isa matter which previously when raised, the City hasrecommended be referred to the East PerthRedevelopment Authority.

Question 3: Has this Council considered making the foreshore an alcoholfree area for next Australia Day Lotto fireworks?

Answer: The Lord Mayor responded that the City considers thatevery year and there are a lot of pros and cons in relationto that and ultimately the Council has to make a decisionon what it thinks is in the best interest of the City of Perthand the event, and as you know there are nine people



that make that decision.

The Lord Mayor also responded that it is not appropriatefor some of the questions to be read out here, thoughcertainly they will be addressed and his answersprovided to Mr Bradbury.

368/01 MEMBERS ON LEAVE OF ABSENCE ANDAPPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Cr Scaffidi had previously been granted leave of absence for 22 May 2001.

369/01 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

The minutes of the Special Meeting of the Council held on 7 May 2001 and theminutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Council held on 8 May 2001 were submittedfor consideration.

Moved by Cr Davidson, seconded by Cr Sutherland

That the minutes of the Special Meeting of the Council held on 7 May 2001,be taken as read and confirmed.

The motion was put and carried.

Moved by Cr Davidson, seconded by Cr McEvoy

That the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Council held on 8 May2001, be taken as read and confirmed.

The motion was put and carried.

370/01 ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE LORD MAYOR WITHOUTDISCUSSION

The Lord Mayor advised that Mr John Da Silva, from Celebrate WA was inattendance at the meeting.



371/01 DISCLOSURE OF MEMBERS’ INTERESTS

The Chief Executive Officer advised that the following Members had disclosed aninterest in the following matters.

Member/Officer Minute No. Page No. Nature of InterestThe Lord Mayor 384/01 843 Family owns property adjacent to the

proposed siteThe Lord Mayor 394/01 908 Director/Shareholder of a company

that part owns a listed propertyCr McEvoy 375/01 803 Operates a hotel in the CityCr McEvoy 377/01 814 Operates a hotel in the CityCr McEvoy 394/01 908 Leases a heritage listed propertyCr MacGill 394/01 908 Employed in a building on the heritage

list

372/01 QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVENWITHOUT DISCUSSION

Nil

373/01 CORRESPONDENCE

Nil

374/01 PETITIONS

The Chief Executive Officer advised that the following petition had been received:-

The petition from Mr John Pszonka containing 66 unverified signatures, states thefollowing:-

“We the undersigned strongly object to the reclassification of 75-77 AberdeenStreet from an ‘Amusement Centre’ into a ‘Dance Entertainment Lounge’ as soughtby Lynn Upton in this application before Council.



Our concerns surround the type of patronage, hours of operation, noise, anti-socialbehaviour, and safety and security problems that this operation will attract, as asimilar business has been publicly reported in The West Australian on January 27,2001.”

Moved by Cr Davidson, seconded by Cr McEvoy

That the petition objecting to the reclassification of 75-77 Aberdeen Streetfrom an ‘Amusement Centre’ into a ‘Dance Entertainment Lounge’ bereceived.

The motion was put and carried

375/01 174-176 (LOTS 6 AND 18) JAMES STREET,NORTHBRIDGE - CHANGE OF USE FROM RECEPTIONCENTRE TO CABARET

BACKGROUND:

SUBURB/LOCATION: Corner of James Street and Mountain Terrace,Northbridge

DA/BA REFERENCE: 01/2511FILE REFERENCE: P1001418-2RESPONSIBLE DIRECTOR: Garry Dunne, Director Service UnitsDATE: 20 April 2001

LANDOWNER: Mr G R Rispoli, Mr V Rispoli, Mr C P G Rispoli,Cavaye Investments Pty Ltd, Mr A J De Gois

APPLICANT: Mitchell Goff and AssociatesZONING: (MRS Zone) Central City Area

(City Planning Scheme Zone) Industry C1APPROXIMATE COST: $100,000SITE HISTORY: The existing building was granted approval in 1988

to operate as a function and reception centre. Thepremises operated with a restaurant on the groundfloor and reception centre on the first floor.

For approximately 12 months the ground floor of thesubject premises operated as a night club known as



the “Viper Room”, without the Council’s approval.The Council, at its meeting held on 23 January2001, resolved to institute proceedings against theoccupier of the “Viper Room”, for offences underSection10(4) of the Town Planning and DevelopmentAct 1928, for operating outside its approved use asa function and reception centre.

The Council at its meeting held on 13 February2001 resolved to refuse an application for a changeof use of the ground floor restaurant on the subjectsite to a day/night club (the Viper Room) as theproposed hours of operation, noise and allegedpatron behaviour would be incompatible with theestablished commercial and residential activities inclose proximity to the site. The premises is currentlyvacant.

DETAILS:

An application has been received seeking approval to change the use of the subjectpremises from a function and reception centre to a cabaret. The proposal involvesrefurbishing the interior of the building, establishing the ground floor as an“Australiana pub theme” and the upper floor as a cabaret and comedy venue whichwould include a stage and seating. The ground floor is intended to have an intimateatmosphere, playing recorded popular music at a volume that would allowconversation to occur. The cabaret will feature comedians as the principal form ofentertainment with low level recorded music played between performances.

The applicant has submitted an acoustic assessment of the premises, which includesrecommendations to reduce the noise emitted from the premises. The findings of theassessment are discussed under the comment section of this report.

POLICY/LEGISLATION/STRATEGIC PLAN:

PolicyPolicy Name and Number: Northbridge StudyThe subject site falls within the Northbridge Study area, adopted by the Council in 1991,which investigated the planning issues and opportunities affecting future development ofthe Precinct. The Study encourages the acceptance of all uses in Northbridge other thanthose that would clearly be incompatible with the location and surrounding activities.



COMPLIANCE WITH PLANNING SCHEME:

The proposed cabaret is a use that can not reasonably be defined under theprovisions of the City Planning Scheme, as it does not conform with the definitions fora “club”, “tavern” or “hotel” (the latter two being subject to specific liquor licences).Such a use can only be permitted by the Council if it has been advertised for publiccomment in accordance with Clause 37 of the Scheme which requires the applicantto give notice of the proposal by advertising in a local newspaper at least once aweek for three consecutive weeks, by placing a notice specifying details of theproposal in a prominent position, and for owners and occupiers of the surroundingproperties to be advised in writing of the proposal.

The proposal will not affect the existing development on the site, in terms of plot ratioor building height. There is no car parking on the site.

Draft City Planning Scheme:

The site is located within the Northbridge Precinct (P1) of the draft City PlanningScheme. This Precinct will remain Perth’s primary entertainment and night life areaand provide a variety of residential accommodation and commercial services. Eastof Russell Square, entertainment activities such as restaurants, cafes, nightclubs andtheatres will remain prevalent.

The proposed use would fall within the ‘Entertainment’ use group under the draftScheme, which is a preferred (‘P’) use in Northbridge, east of Russell Square.

COMMENTS:

Consultation:

The proposal was advertised for public comment, in accordance with the provisionsof Clause 37 of the Scheme. At the conclusion of the advertising period on 23 April2001, two submissions had been received, one of which had been signed by twelveresidents of the apartments at No. 191 James Street. The submissions aresummarised as follows:-

• the proposed use will subject nearby residents to intolerable noise levels andpotential anti-social conduct from patrons;

• the Council has introduced inner city living to Northbridge and must take intoaccount that to approve another loud/trouble making club in such close proximity toresidents would be “madness”.

• there are already too many night clubs in Northbridge;• there are many apartment buildings located close by and conflict can only result

between residents and the club’s lessee/owners and the City of Perth;



• lessees/owners of the premises have, in the past, shown a total disregard forresidents in Northbridge and for the Council’s requirements, particularly in regardto playing loud music;

• the new use will only add to the serious social problems of drunkenness and rowdyinconsiderate patron behaviour.

These matters will be discussed in the following sections of this report.

Noise Impact and Acoustic Assessment:

The premises has not been purpose built as a music/entertainment venue and,therefore, is not designed to contain noise. The previous occupiers played loudelectronic music on weekends which resulted in several noise complaints beingmade to the City by nearby residents. An Acoustical Engineer has undertaken anassessment of the building and, although only low level recorded music is proposedto be played by the cabaret, it was concluded that the estimated noise levelsgenerated by the cabaret/comedy club will exceed the requirements of theEnvironmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997, as measured at the nearbyresidential apartments in James Street. Notwithstanding, when the noise levelsresulting from music being played within the premises were measured against theexisting ambient noise levels (measured at 11.50pm on a Saturday night), the reporthas shown that the additional noise impact to nearby premises will be minimal.

To ensure that the noise impact to other premises in the vicinity of the cabaret is keptto a minimum, the acoustic assessment recommends the following:-

1. The rear door to the building should be kept shut at all times while music isbeing played, or during comedy/cabaret performances. This will reduce noiselevels for the commercial and residential premises directly to the west of theproposed cabaret.

2. Any holes left in the upstairs plasterboard ceiling as a result of the removal ofbuilding services by the previous occupant, should be repaired to increasenoise transmission losses through the roof structure.

3. The upstairs front windows should be boarded up with 13mm thick plasterboardto further reduce noise break-out to residents on the opposite side of the street.

4. The ‘L’ shaped walls constructed outside the entrances to the upstairs toiletsshould include a simple ceiling to reduce noise break-out through the toiletwindows.



These recommendations should be applied as conditions of any approval.

Cabaret Use:

Northbridge is known for its night life, particularly the restaurants, nightclubs andhotels. The Northbridge Study, adopted in 1991, is the Council’s planning policy fordevelopment in Northbridge. Both the Study and the Draft City Planning Schemespecifically indicate that applications that contribute to the mixed use, entertainmentbased character of Northbridge are to be supported, except where a particularactivity would have a detrimental impact on the amenity of the locality.

It is acknowledged that residential apartments are located in close proximity to thesubject premises, however, provided the operators of this venue ensures thebusiness complies with noise regulations and that adequate management plans areimplemented in regard to patron behaviour, the proposal should not adversely impactupon the amenity level that an inner city resident could expect to obtain in this mixeduse environment.

Hours of Operation / Impact on Surrounding Uses:

The two submissions made reference to the previous use of the premises, as theViper Room, and the residents have based their objection upon their experience withthis former activity. It should be noted that the Viper Room operated at different hoursand was also principally a dance venue where loud electronic music was played.

Unlike the Viper Room, the proposed cabaret would be restricted to operating withinthe hours permitted for a cabaret licence under the Liquor Licensing Act (closing by6am). The requirement for night clubs to close at 6am ensures that there is atransition in Northbridge between the accepted night and day activities, allowing thecleaning of streets and footpaths, and the conduct of businesses within the area thatcould otherwise be incompatible. The applicant advised that the cabaret will featurecomedians as the principal form of entertainment, setting it apart from other nightclubs in the Northbridge area, and consequently it was unlikely that the facility wouldtrade beyond 1am on weekends and 12am on weekdays. This information, however,has not been confirmed by the cabaret operators (Pure Profit Pty Ltd) and they couldtrade until 6am without contravening the cabaret licence.

As noise is the main concern of the surrounding residents, and as the applicantclaims that comedy performances will be the major form of entertainment, it isconsidered reasonable to place a condition on any forthcoming planning approval torestrict the hours to 1:00am on weekdays and 3am on weekends.

Conclusion:

It is acknowledged that the Northbridge Precinct will remain Perth’s primaryentertainment and night life area, yet it is also intended to provide a variety of



residential accommodation and commercial services in this area. The use of thesubject premises as a comedy club is considered to be appropriate in Northbridge,provided that noise abatement measures are put in place prior to the opening of thefacility and that the operators submit and implement an adequate management planfor the control of patron behaviour, particularly outside the premises.

It was therefore recommended that:-

That in accordance with the provisions of the City Planning Scheme and theMetropolitan Region Scheme, the Council approves the application for a change ofuse from a function and reception centre to a “cabaret” at 174-176 (Lots 6 and 18)James Street, Northbridge, as detailed on the Metropolitan Region Scheme FormOne dated 3 March 2001 and as shown on the plans received on 15 March 2001,subject to the:-

1. hours of operation being limited from 6:00pm to 1:00am Mondays to Thursdays,6:00pm to 3.00am Fridays and Saturdays, and 8pm to 12:00midnight onSundays;

2. submission of a management plan for the cabaret detailing control of patronbehaviour within the premises and the location and management of patronqueuing areas at the front of the premises being submitted and approved priorto the issue of a building licence;

3. following measures being taken to reduce noise emissions from the premises:-

3.1 the rear door to the building being kept shut at all times while music isbeing played, or during comedy/cabaret performances;

3.2 all holes left in the upstairs plasterboard ceiling as a result of the removalof building services by the previous occupant, being repaired to reducenoise transmission losses through the roof structure;

3.3 the upstairs front windows being boarded up with 13mm thickplasterboard to reduce noise break-out to residents on the opposite sideof the street;

3.4 ‘L’ shaped walls constructed outside the entrances to the upstairs toilets toinclude a simple ceiling to reduce noise break-out through the toiletwindows;



details of the modifications listed in 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 above, beingsubmitted and approved prior to the issue of a building licence;

4. operation of the cabaret complying with the requirements of the EnvironmentalProtection (Noise) Regulations 1997.

(Cr McEvoy disclosed a financial interest and did not vote on this item)

Member Nature of Interest

Cr McEvoy Operates a hotel in the city.

Cr McEvoy departed the Chamber at 6.20pm

The Chief Executive Officer advised that a question had been receivedregarding the extent of the City’s advertising process required under theTown Planning Scheme for Item 1, 174-176 James Street, Northbridge,Change of use from Reception Centre to Cabaret, of the notice paper.

Cr Tudori entered to the Chamber at 6.20pm

Cr Tudori departed the chamber at 6.21pm

Motion to suspend standing orders

Moved by Cr Davidson, seconded by Cr Tan

That clause 9.5 of the City’s Standing Orders be suspended to allowmembers to speak more than once.

The motion was put and lost

Motion to defer



Moved by Cr MacGill, seconded by Cr Stroud

That the item relating to 174-176 (Lots 6 and 18) James Street, Northbridge -Change Of Use From Reception Centre To Cabaret be defered pendingclarification of the question relating to the advertising requirements.

The motion to defer was put and carried

376/01 42 (LOT 49) MOUNT STREET, WEST PERTH -PROPOSED ROOF GARDEN

BACKGROUND:

SUBURB/LOCATION: 42 Mount Street, West PerthDA/BA REFERENCE: 01/0113FILE REFERENCE: P1005122RESPONSIBLE DIRECTOR: Garry Dunne, Director Service UnitsDATE: 3 May 2001

LANDOWNER: Selected Enterprises Pty LtdAPPLICANT: Mr David AnthonyZONING: (MRS Zone) - Urban and Clause 32 Parliament

House Precinct(City Planning Scheme Zone) - Residential R160

APPROXIMATE COST: $80,000SITE HISTORY: The existing holiday apartment building was originally

approved as a block of flats in 1960.

The Council at its meeting held on 14 September1999 approved a two storey addition to the existingholiday apartments incorporating seven additionalunits, subject to numerous conditions. The additionallevels have not been built, however the applicationremains valid until 14 September 2001.

DETAILS:

Approval is sought for the construction of a roof garden, above the previouslyapproved additional two levels, to provide open space for the occupants of the sevenapartments on the upper two levels. The roof garden will be divided into seven areas,each with individual private access from the seven upper level apartments.



The roof garden will be screened by a mixture of vegetation and privacy screens to aheight of 1800mm. A glass balustrade will be installed around the roof gardens at adistance of between one and two metres from the edge of the building. The roofgarden will have a light weight steel roof which has been designed with curved linesand is predominantly a sun canopy rather than a roof. The canopy has beendesigned in an irregular shape and only provides cover to portions of each roofgarden.


PolicyPolicy Name and Number: Parliament House Precinct Policy

The site falls within the “outer precinct” of the Parliament House Precinct, which aimsto recognise the significance of the Institution of Parliament and reinforce the uniquerole Parliament Hill plays in the structure of the city. The application does not complywith the height controls under the Parliament House Precinct. A height of between10.72 and 13.77 metres is permitted whereas the proposed building measuresbetween 19.3 and 21.70 metres. Given that the application does not comply with theheight requirements of the Parliament House Precinct, the application will need to bereferred to the Western Australian Planning Commission for determination under theMetropolitan Region Scheme.

PolicyPolicy Name and Number: Mount Street Design Policy

The proposed development generally complies with the objectives of the MountStreet Design Policy, including building height. An assessment of the proposalagainst the Mount Street Design Policy is shown in the table below.


The proposed development has been assessed in accordance with the City PlanningScheme and the Residential Planning Codes. In regard to the upper level additions,the proposed plot ratio, setbacks, dwelling density, open space and car parkingprovisions were previously approved by the Council at its meeting held on 14September 1999, and as the roof garden does not affect these developmentstandards, these requirements will not be further discussed. Following is a summaryof the assessment of the building height resulting from the addition of the roof garden:

DevelopmentStandard

Proposed Required/Permitted

Scheme Mount Street Parliament



Design Policy House PolicyHeight 20.5 metres 20.6 metres

AHD21 metres 13.77 metres


The subject property falls within the Residential R100 area of the West Perth Precinct(P.10). The draft Scheme aims at ensuring that development within the residentialarea is of a high standard and complimentary to the historic residential character ofthe area. The proposal is generally consistent with the objectives of the draft Scheme to encourage quality medium to high-density residentialaccommodation within this part of the West Perth Precinct.

COMMENTS:

Consultation:

The owners and occupiers of the properties located to the north, east and west of thesubject site were invited to comment on the plans submitted for the proposeddevelopment. Seven submissions were received within the consultation period. Sixof the submissions objected to the proposal and one submission supported theproposal. The objections are summarised as follows:

• Opposition to any further increase to the height;• Potential for overlooking;• Potential for noise and anti-social behaviour. There are no divisions between

each garden and therefore large numbers of people may gather on the roof level;• The proposed roof top garden has the potential to be accessed by other

occupants within the serviced apartments on the lower levels;• It was suggested that the roof top gardens be sectioned off from the other garden

areas and that only the seven upper level apartments have access to the roof;• Safeguards that the roof top will never be licensed by Liquor Licensing;• Safeguards that the roof level will not have solid walls;• Roof should be of an attractive flat design;

The submissions received are discussed below.

Building Height:

The height of the light weight roof structure is approximately 2.5 metres above thepreviously approved roof level. The maximum height of the roof structure is 20.5metres high, which is 0.5 metres lower that the maximum 21 metres prescribed by theMount Street Design Policy. As the height of the building is lower than the maximumheight prescribed by the Policy the objection is not supported, however, a condition of



any approval should be imposed to ensure that the height of the building does notexceed 21 metres.

Overlooking:

The roof garden has been designed into individual sections for the use of eachapartment. Each garden area will be screened by either a 1800mm translucentprivacy screen, 1800mm high landscaping or landscaping which is setbackapproximately 2 metres from the roof edge. Each section will also be divided fromcommon access areas by 1100mm glass balustrades. It is considered that theprivacy screens and landscaping will prevent overlooking and therefore the objectionsregarding overlooking are not supported, however, a condition relating to theprovision and detail of the screens should be imposed on any approval.

Roof Garden Design and Access:

The roof gardens have been designed to provide private open space areas for theseven upper level apartments and, consequently, access to the roof areas will only bepossible from within the upper level apartments. Each section of the garden hasbeen divided so that the area cannot be used as one large communal space. Acondition of any planning approval should be imposed to ensure communal access isprevented.

To reduce the impact of the roof garden on the appearance of the building and onadjoining properties the roof has been designed in an irregular shape and will beconstructed of flat, light weight steel. Translucent screen walls, glass balustrades andlandscaping are proposed to soften the impact of the structures.

Licensing of the Roof Garden:

The application does not include a proposal to sell alcohol from the roof garden. It isunlikely that the City would support any application made for the licensing of the rooftop area, as the licensing of the roof garden would not comply with the requirementsof the City Planning Scheme.

Conclusion:

The proposed roof garden will provide additional open space for the residents of theupper level apartments and will also provide an interesting roof design when viewedfrom the City and from adjoining apartment buildings. The roof garden has also beendesigned to prevent overlooking. It is considered that the application be supportedsubject to the conditions outlined above.

Cr McEvoy returned to the Chamber at 6.21pm

Moved by Cr Sutherland, seconded by Cr Stroud



That:-

1. in accordance with the provisions of the City Planning Scheme, theCouncil APPROVES BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the applicationsubmitted for a roof garden at 42 (Town Lot 49) Mount Street, WestPerth, as detailed on the Metropolitan Region Scheme Form One dated26 March 2001 and as shown on the plans received 27 March 2001,subject to:-

(Cont’d)1.1 the height of the building not exceeding 21 metres as measured

from the level of the existing footpath at the centre of the frontboundary of the property, in accordance with the Mount StreetDesign Policy;

1.2 privacy screens and dense screen planting to a minimum heightof 1800mm being provided to maintain the visual privacy ofadjoining properties, with details of the screens being submittedfor approval prior to the issue of the relevant building licence;

1.3 details of the design and finishes for the proposed roof structurebeing submitted and approved by the City prior to the issue of therelevant building licence;

1.4 access to the roof garden being provided only from within theseven apartments on the upper levels;

2. the application be referred to the Western Australian PlanningCommission with a recommendation for approval.

Discussion ensued

The motion was put and carried by an absolute majority

Cr Tudori returned to the Chamber at 6.22pm

377/01 298 - 306 MURRAY STREET, PERTH - PROPOSEDCHANGE OF USE FROM "TAVERN" TO "SPECIALFACILITY" - MOON AND SIXPENCE



BACKGROUND:

SUBURB/LOCATION: Moon and Sixpence British Pub - Murray Street,Perth

DA/BA REFERENCE: 01/2509FILE REFERENCE: P1007841RESPONSIBLE DIRECTOR: Garry Dunne, Director Service UnitsDATE: 3 May 2001

LANDOWNER: Western Plaza Hotel Corporation Pty Ltd, BrockwellHospitality Investments Pty Ltd

APPLICANT: Talbot and Olivier, Barristers and SolicitorsZONING: (MRS Zone); Central City Area

(City Planning Scheme Zone): Shopping CSSITE HISTORY: The Moon and Sixpence British Pub has been

operating on the site since 1989. It was formerly afunction centre that was part of the Wentworth PlazaHotel.

The Moon and Sixpence currently operates under atavern licence. The licence allows the premises totrade until midnight on Monday to Thursday and until1.00 a.m. on Friday and Saturday nights.

DETAILS:

Approval is sought for a change of use of the existing tavern to permit the issue of aSpecial Facility Liquor Licence.

The application proposes trading hours to be extended from 1:00am to 3:00amFriday and Saturday nights, and from 12:00 midnight to 1:00am on Sunday toThursday. The venue will commence operations from 10:00am compared with thecurrent opening hours at 11am.

There are no alterations proposed to the existing building or to the operation of theMoon and Sixpence, other than the extension of trading hours. The services providedwould be identical to those currently provided under the existing tavern licence.


The proposed ‘special facility’ is a use that can not reasonably be defined under theprovisions of the City Planning Scheme, as it does not conform with the definitions fora “tavern” or “hotel”, which are both defined as being subject to specific liquorlicences. Such a use can only be permitted by the Council if it has been advertised



for public comment in accordance with Clause 37 of the Scheme which requires theapplicant to give notice of the proposal by advertising in a local newspaper once aweek for three consecutive weeks, by placing a notice specifying details of theproposal in a prominent position, and for owners and occupiers of the surroundingproperties to be advised in writing of the proposal.


The subject land is located in the City Centre Area of the Citiplace (P5) Precinct ofthe Draft City Planning Scheme. The proposed use is classified as ‘entertainment’,which is a preferred use in this location.

COMMENTS:

Consultation:

In accordance with Clause 37 of the City Planning Scheme, the application wasadvertised to the public including 143 owners and/or occupiers of neighbouringproperties were consulted by registered mail. At the conclusion of the advertisingperiod, no submissions were received.

Impact of Extended Trading Hours:

Extending the trading hours of a licensed premises can be made by applying for anextended trading permit (ETP) or by changing the licence category. The subjectapplication has arisen from some recent decisions by the Director of LiquorLicensing to refuse ETPs for other existing hotels and taverns. The applicant hasadvised that that the Liquor Licensing Division would only grant an ETP to a tavernlicence to allow it to trade after 1am in exceptional circumstances. Hence, theapplicant has applied for a Special Facility Licence in place of the current TavernLicence.

The Council has generally supported land uses that contribute to the mixed usecharacter of the Shopping CS Zone, particularly beyond the retail malls. In assessingthe suitability of the proposed extended trading hours, the Council must take accountof the potential for conflict between different land uses, particularly with residentialuses. Noise and the behaviour of patrons outside licenced venues can causedisturbance and annoyance for residents in nearby apartments.

The nearest residential apartment to the Moon and Sixpence is on Queen Street,although the former Town and Country Building on the opposite side of Murray Street



is currently being converted into residential apartments. The owners and occupiers ofthese properties, together with other surrounding commercial properties, have beeninvited to comment and no objections were received.

The licensee does not propose to alter the operations of the Moon and Sixpence inany way under the special facility licence, other than by extending the closing time,and the services provided would be identical to those provided under its existingtavern licence. It is considered, therefore, that the extended trading hours would nothave an adverse impact on the surrounding area.

Conclusion:

The Moon and Sixpence has been operating at the same location since 1989, andthe City has not received any complaints about its operation or its impact on thesurrounding area. The proposal to extend the trading hours by one hour in themorning and one hour at night to 1am (Monday to Thursday) and two hours at night to3am on Fridays and Saturdays, is unlikely to have a negative impact on thesurrounding area given the nature of the business and the type of entertainmentoffered. The proposal can therefore be supported.It was therefore recommended that:-

That in accordance with the provisions of the City Planning Scheme and theMetropolitan Region Scheme, the Council approves the application for a change ofuse from “Tavern” to “Tavern - Special Facility” at 298 - 306 (Lots 20 and 21) MurrayStreet, Perth, as shown on the plan received on 1 March 2001, and the MetropolitanRegion Scheme Form One received on 1 March 2001, subject to the hours ofoperation being limited from 10:00am to 1:00am Sunday to Thursday, and 10:00amto 3:00am Friday and Saturday inclusive.

(Cr McEvoy disclosed a financial interest and did not vote on this item)


Cr McEvoy Operates a hotel in the city.

Cr McEvoy departed the Chamber at 6.22pm

The Chief Executive Officer advised that a question had been receivedregarding the extent of the City’s advertising process required under theTown Planning Scheme for Item 3, 298-306 Murray Street, Perth - Proposed



change of use from “Tavern” to “Special Facility” - Moon and Sixpence, ofthe notice paper.

Moved by Cr MacGill, seconded by Cr Stroud

That the motion relating to 298 - 306 Murray Street, Perth - ProposedChange Of Use From "Tavern" To "Special Facility" - Moon And Sixpencebe deferred pending clarification of the question relating to the advertisingrequirements.


Cr McEvoy returned to the Chamber at 6.23pm

378/01 30 ST GEORGES TERRACE, PERTH - COFFEEFACILITY AT CENTRAL LAW COURTS

BACKGROUND:

SUBURB/LOCATION: Central Law Courts, between St Georges Terraceand Hay Street, Perth

DA/BA REFERENCE: 01/146FILE REFERENCE: P1015510RESPONSIBLE DIRECTOR: Garry Dunne, Director Service UnitsDATE: 4 May 2001

LANDOWNER: Ministry of JusticeAPPLICANT: Director Magistrates’ Courts and TribunalsZONING: (MRS Zone): Central City Area

(City Planning Scheme Zone): General CommercialCC and Office CO

DETAILS:

An application has been received for a retail coffee cart on the Level two walkway,located between the St George’s Terrace and Hay Street entrances to the CentralLaw Courts. The coffee cart will remain at one location and will not be taken fromfloor to floor. It is designed to be used to serve coffee and small prepared food itemssuch as cakes and biscuits to both staff and clients of the courts.



The applicant has advised that the Courts are fulfilling the recommendations made bythe Law Reform Commission in the recent Review of the Criminal and Civil JusticeSystem, to develop waiting areas that offer conveniences to people attending thecourts.


PolicyPolicy Name and Number: Mobile Vending Carts on Private Property, SU54

The objective of the Policy is to restrict the issue of further approvals for mobilevending carts on private property. The Policy statement is “that no further approvalsfor mobile vending carts on private property be issued”.


The proposed coffee cart can be defined as a fast food facility, “where food isprepared and sold for consumption on the premises and to be taken away”, which isa discretionary use in both the General Commercial CC and Office CO zones. Theinstallation of the cart within an existing building complies with the City PlanningScheme development requirements.


The subject land is located in the City Centre Area of the Civic (P7) Precinct of theDraft City Planning Scheme. The proposed use is considered as ‘retail’, which is acontemplated use in this location.

COMMENTS:

Policy No. SU54 “Mobile Vending Carts on Private Property” was adopted by theCouncil in 1996 in order to restrict mobile vendors being established on privateproperty in the City. This was in response to concerns that such mobile carts couldeasily move their operations to a variety of different private sites and were able tocapture trade over a wide area with minimum setting up costs or overheads. Suchvendors were considered to be able to compete unfairly with established food outletsin the locality, as mobile vendors often do not have the same operating costs, do notneed to meet the same stringent health requirements or are subject to highcommercial rental costs.

The establishment of a proper café within the Central Law Courts building wasdiscussed with the applicant who advised verbally that due to space and fundingconstraints, this option was not possible or realistic. The installation of vendingmachines was also not considered to meet the requirements of the Law ReformCommission.



The venture is being pursued to fulfill the recommendations of the Law ReformCommission to provide facilities and services to people attending the courts, will notbe promoted outside of the Court complex and is to be subject to a formal lease withthe Ministry for Justice.

Restricting mobile carts on public land is controlled by the Council’s Local Lawentitled “Activities on Thoroughfares and Trading in Thoroughfares and PublicSpaces”, however, the use of private land for any purpose is managed by the CityPlanning Scheme and in this regard there are no statutory provisions preventing theestablishment of mobile carts. Refusing an application on the basis of the Policywould be difficult to defend on town planning terms in any appeal.

To be consistent with the Policy, however, the application is recommended forrefusal.

Moved by Cr MacGill, seconded by Cr McEvoy

That in accordance with the provisions of the City Planning Scheme and theMetropolitan Region Scheme the Council refuses the application for acoffee cart located on the Level 2 walkway at 30 (Lots 653, 743 and 744) StGeorge’s Terrace, Perth, as shown on the plan received on 18 April 2001,and the Metropolitan Region Scheme Form One received on 18 April 2001,as the proposal does not comply with the Council’s Policy SU54 - “MobileVending Carts on Private Property”.


379/01 553 - 561 (LOTS 17 AND 18 OF PERTH TOWN LOT 24)WELLINGTON STREET, PERTH - RETENTION OF THEEXISTING BUILDING FACADES AND THECONSTRUCTION OF A TWO STOREY RETAILDEVELOPMENT

BACKGROUND:

SUBURB/LOCATION: South-east corner of Wellington Street and QueenStreet, Perth

DA/BA REFERENCE: 01/0103



FILE REFERENCE: P1010616-4RESPONSIBLE DIRECTOR: Garry Dunne, Director Service UnitsDATE: 18 May 2001

LANDOWNER: Crestland Investments Pty LtdAPPLICANT: Montague Grant ArchitectsZONING: (MRS Zone) - Central City Area

(City Planning Scheme Zone) - Shopping CSAPPROXIMATE COST: $1.4 millionSITE HISTORY: The subject site was listed on the draft Municipal

Heritage Inventory. The Council at its meeting heldon 13 March 2001 resolved to adopt an amendedMunicipal Heritage Inventory (MHI) which excludedthe subject property.

On 19 March 2001, the applicant submitted theplanning application. As part of the application theexisting facades were proposed to be retained.Furthermore no tenant car parking bays wereproposed. The applicant was not aware of theCouncil’s decision at its meeting held on 13 March2001 until after they had lodged the application.

On 3 April 2001 the applicant, after becoming awarethat the subject site was no longer listed on the MHI,submitted an amended application for the completedemolition of the building and the incorporation of abasement parking area.

The Council at its meeting held on 8 March 2001deferred determining the application for thedemolition of the existing building and theconstruction a two storey retail development.

DETAILS:

Following further negotiations with the applicant, approval is now sought for theretention of the existing Queen Street and Wellington Street facades and theconstruction of a two storey retail development. The retention of the facades involvesthe removal of the existing awning and replacing it with a new awning at the corner ofQueen and Wellington Streets and the refurbishment of the existing facades includingreconstruction of the ground level shopfronts.

The development incorporates a basement car park which will accommodate 20 carparking bays, two store rooms and various plant rooms. The basement car parkingbays will be accessed via a ramp from Wellington Street.



The ground level will accommodate five retail tenancies and one café. The groundfloor tenancies fronting Queen Street will have direct access from Queen Street andthrough the internal arcade. The tenancies fronting Wellington Street will only beaccessed from the corner of Queen and Wellington Streets through an arcade to acentral atrium.

The first floor will accommodate four retail tenancies, including a mezzanine level,accessed from the central atrium.


PolicyPolicy Name and Number: Perth Parking Policy

The Perth Parking Policy sets desirable and maximum levels of tenant carparkingwithin the city, dependant on the category of road used to gain access to the siteand the type of access to the site. In this instance access to the site is at grade fromWellington Street which is a category three street. The desirable number of tenantcar parking bays is 11 and the maximum number of car bays permitted on the site is14 bays.

Legislation:Local Law relating to Awnings Over the Street

The Local Law states that awnings shall not project more than 2.7 metres from thebuilding and must be a minimum of 2.4 metres above the footpath to a maximum of3.2 metres. The awnings proposed by the applicant do not comply with the maximumheight requirement of the Local law.


Shops and eating houses are a permitted (‘P’) use under the City Planning Scheme.The proposal’s compliance with the Scheme requirements is summarised below.

SCHEMESTANDARD

PROPOSED PERMITTED/REQUIRED

POLICY

Plot Ratio 1.89:1 Commercial 5:1Car Parking 20 14 11 Desirable

14 MaximumBuilding Height 9.4 metres 16 metres along

Queen Street.60 metres alongWellington Street




The subject property falls within the City Centre area of the Citiplace Precinct (P.5)under the draft City Planning Scheme. The draft Scheme contains the samedevelopment standards as the current Scheme with the exception of the buildingheight at the street boundaries which is at a ratio of 1:1 with the road reserve width,compared to the current ratio of 2:1. The proposed building complies with the draftScheme. The draft Scheme also identifies that shopfronts should provide activity,interest and direct customer service, and that shopfronts should provide awnings andverandahs over footpaths.

COMMENTS:

The use of the subject property for the purposes of retail and an eating house is inkeeping with the objectives of the City Planning Scheme. The proposed

development, however, raises a number of issues associated with heritage,shopfronts, awnings and carparking requirements, which are discussed below.

Heritage:

The subject property was listed under the draft Municipal Heritage Inventory with Level2 protection, however, the building was not included in the final list adopted by theCouncil at its meeting held on 13 March 2001. The subject property is not listed bythe Heritage Council of Western Australia and is not listed under Clause 46 of theCity Planning Scheme as a building of historical or architectural interest.

Given that the building was recognised as having cultural heritage significance in thepreparation of the draft MHI and that the applicant’s heritage advisor stated that theQueen Street facade contributes to the character of the streetscape the applicationwas referred to one of the City’s Heritage Advisors to assess. The heritage advisorstates that:

‘553-561 Wellington Street has aesthetic, historical and social cultural heritagesignificance in its own right, but more particularly as part of a cohesive streetscape(along Queen Street) of largely intact buildings dating from the late nineteenthcentury.

553-561 Wellington Street, is important as an integral component of the significantstreetblock bounded by William, Murray, Queen and Wellington Streets within thecentral Business District of Perth…and is a relatively intact example of acommercial building dating from the late nineteenth to early twentieth century. Anopportunity exists to renovate the building to create new commercial opportunities.



The proposal for new commercial tenancies could be accommodated by internalremodelling and extensions to the rear without the need to demolish the Wellingtonand Queen Street facades.’

The heritage advisor has recommended that:

‘The City should encourage the owners to retain the Wellington and Queen Streetfacades and the two storey form of 553-561 Wellington Street. Demolition of theBuilding should not be approved. The demolition of the property would be asignificant and irreplaceable loss to a cohesive streetscape on the eastern side ofQueen Street. This streetscape is reminiscent of King Street and has the potentialto be a substantial asset to both the City and the owners. The demolition of theproperty would be a further loss to the streetscape on the southern side ofWellington Street, which at present has only one gap in an otherwise cohesivestreetscape between William and Queen Street.

The City should allow the owners to undertake internal remodelling as well asextending the building to the rear to accommodate new commercial opportunities.

Some demolition of the fabric to the rear of the building may be permitted toaccommodate the new commercial requirements.

The City should refer the proposal to the Heritage Council of Western Australia forcomment, in light of the Heritage Council’s interest in the proposed development inthe neighbouring Raine Square. The Heritage Council has indicated that aprecinct approach is appropriate for any proposed development in the streetblockbounded by William, Murray, Queen and Wellington Street.’

The application was not referred to the Heritage Council as the subject property andall immediate properties are not listed by the Heritage Council.

The City requested that the applicant reconsider their position regarding thedemolition of the facades as it is considered that the building has heritage value andcontributes to the streetscape, particularly along Queen Street. The applicant hassubmitted an amended plan which retains the facades of the building. The applicanthas agreed to the retention of the facade on the basis that the Council:

1. approve an increase in the number of car parking bays in the basement from 14 to20;

2. remove the requirement for the visual truncation at the entrance to the basementramp from Wellington Street so as to maintain a vertical continuity of the existingfacade;



3. approve the revised design to the main ground floor corner entrance with a newsteel and glass canopy to provide a more open and inviting entry to the building ;

4. agree in principle to consider a reduction of the Council rates over the tenancies ofthis building (a fully costed submission in this respect will be presented at a laterdate).

The alterations to the ground floor entrance are considered acceptable as they do notsignificantly impact on the heritage of the building as the ground level has beenaltered previously. It is also considered that a degree of flexibility should be allowedgiven that the applicant has agreed to retain the facades and that the premises is acommercial building which requires exposure and easy access into the tenancies.

Shopfronts:

The building has been designed so that all of the shops fronting Wellington Street, areaccessed from an internal arcade and atrium. There is no external access toindividual shops from outside of the building. The current Scheme does not have anyprovisions for the location of, or access to shopfronts, however, the draft Schemestates that all shops at ground level should have direct customer service. To betteraddress this issue it is considered that the windows fronting the streets should not beback of store areas and that the display areas near the windows should not havesolid backgrounds so that pedestrians can see into the store which provides someinteraction and interest, as seen in Forrest Chase.

Parking:

The applicant has proposed 20 bays on the site which will be allocated as 14 tenantbays, one disabled bay and five short term public car parking bays. The PerthParking Policy sets the desirable level of tenant car parking at 11 bays and themaximum negotiable allowance at 14 bays if the development confers significantcommunity benefits. The Department of Transport has verbally advised that they areprepared to license 14 tenant bays, one disabled bay and five short term publiccarparking bays.

The applicant has advised that they require 14 tenant bays and the five short termpublic car parking bays for financial reasons as the cost of retaining the facadesagainst the demolition is in the order of $300,000. It is considered that the maximum14 tenant car parking bays and the five short term public carparking bays isacceptable as the proposed development confers significant community benefitthrough the retention of the heritage facades.

The other issue associated with the basement car park is the access ramp fromWellington Street and the layout of the car parking spaces. The limited room withinthe basement means that some of the bays adjacent to the wall may be difficult toaccess, consequently a condition should be imposed on any approval requiring that



bays 1, 2 and 13 be dedicated and marked as small car parking bays. Furthermoreone of the bays will need to be dedicated as a disabled parking bay.

The basement ramp does not have truncations to provide for adequate sightlines.The retention of the facade reduces the ability to provide the truncations and thereforea condition of any approval would be required to ensure that an alternate warningsystem be implemented.

Amalgamation of Lots:

The subject building is built over two lots. A condition of approval would need to beimposed requiring the amalgamation of the subject lots into one lot on one Certificateof Title.

Awnings:

The proposed building includes an awning covering the building entrance along theQueen Street and Wellington Street frontages. The plans do not provide enoughdetail of the material and design of the awnings and consequently a condition shouldbe imposed on any approval requiring further details of the materials and design ofthe awning and evidence that the awning is in keeping with the heritage of thebuilding.

Rates Reduction:

The applicant has requested that the Council consider in principle a request toreduce the rates for the subject property as an incentive to retain the facade of thebuilding. The Local Government Act enables the Council to make decisionsregarding the reduction of rates. While there is no current policy on incentives for theretention of heritage buildings this idea is being considered as part of the incentivespackage accompanying the Municipal Heritage Inventory. This package has notbeen finalised as yet.

In considering any rates reduction the Council needs to be careful that a precedent isnot set, particularly given that a formal policy or package has not been approved. It isconsidered therefore that any request for a rates reduction should be considered aspart of the heritage incentives package.

Conclusion:

The proposed development will provide retail activity in the city centre and providesfor the retention of a heritage facade. It is considered that the application should beapproved subject to the conditions discussed above.




In accordance with the provisions of the City Planning Scheme and the MetropolitanRegion Scheme, the Council APPROVES BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY theapplication submitted by Montague Grant Architects for the retention of the existingbuilding facade and the construction of a two storey retail development and basementcarpark at Lots 17 & 18 of Perth Town lot 24 (Nos. 553 - 561) Wellington Street,Perth as detailed on Metropolitan Region Scheme Form One dated 16 March 2001and as shown on the plans dated 18 May 2001, subject to:-

1. the design, finish and materials used for the proposed alterations andrestoration to the heritage buildings being compatible with the design andcharacter of the original building, with additional details of the design andfinishes, including identification of existing building fabric to be removed orretained, being submitted prior to the issue of the relevant building licence;

2. the areas adjacent to the shopfront windows not being used as back of storeareas and any display in the windows not having solid backgrounds;

3. the total number of car parking bays approved is 20, being 14 tenant bays, onedisabled bay and five short term public carparking bays;

4. car parking bays 1, 2 and 13 being dedicated and marked as small car bays;

5. a warning safety system being provided at the exit of the basement ramp toprotect pedestrians from exiting vehicles, with details of the warning systembeing submitted and approved prior to the issue of the relevant building licence;

6. signage for the commercial tenancies being subject to a separate applicationfor a sign licence;

7. the subject lots being amalgamated into one lot on one Certificate of Title;

8. further details of the awnings being submitted and approved. The materials anddesign of the awning will need to be sympathetic to the heritage significance ofthe building;

9. an archival record being submitted including plans, elevations, sections, awritten description and colour photographs of the exterior and interior of theexisting building, including all architectural features, prior to the demolition of theinternal areas of the building.

Moved by Cr Stroud, seconded by Cr McEvoy



That:-

1. in accordance with the provisions of the City Planning Scheme and theMetropolitan Region Scheme, the Council APPROVES BY ANABSOLUTE MAJORITY the application submitted by Montague GrantArchitects for the retention of the existing building facade and theconstruction of a two storey retail development and basement carparkat Lots 17 & 18 of Perth Town lot 24 (Nos. 553 - 561) Wellington Street,Perth as detailed on Metropolitan Region Scheme Form One dated 16March 2001 and as shown on the plans dated 18 May 2001, subject to:-

1.1 the design, finish and materials used for the proposed alterationsand restoration to the heritage buildings being compatible with thedesign and character of the original building, with additionaldetails of the design and finishes, including identification ofexisting building fabric to be removed or retained, being submittedprior to the issue of the relevant building licence;

(Cont’d)

1.2 the areas adjacent to the shopfront windows not being used asback of store areas and any display in the windows not havingsolid backgrounds;

1.3 the total number of car parking bays approved is 20, being 14tenant bays, one disabled bay and five short term publiccarparking bays;

1.4 car parking bays 1, 2 and 13 being dedicated and marked as smallcar bays;

1.5. a warning safety system being provided at the exit of thebasement ramp to protect pedestrians from exiting vehicles, withdetails of the warning system being submitted and approved priorto the issue of the relevant building licence;

1.6 signage for the commercial tenancies being subject to a separateapplication for a sign licence;

1.7 the subject lots being amalgamated into one lot on one Certificateof Title;

1.8 further details of the awnings being submitted and approved. Thematerials and design of the awning will need to be sympathetic tothe heritage significance of the building;



1.9 an archival record being submitted including plans, elevations,sections, a written description and colour photographs of theexterior and interior of the existing building, including allarchitectural features, prior to the demolition of the internal areas ofthe building;

2. the Council approves in principle to consider a detailed request for anappropriate rates reduction for the subject property as an incentive toretain the facade of the building as part of the proposed heritageincentives package.

Discussion ensued


380/01 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONSTRATEGY

BACKGROUND:

FILE REFERENCE: P1015041RESPONSIBLE DIRECTOR: Charlotte Stockwell, Director StrategyDATE: 4 May 2001

The City of Perth is a member of the Cities for Climate Protection ™ (Australia)program, part of an international program to assist local governments to reducegreenhouse gas emissions. In Australia, the program is delivered by ICLEI (theInternational Council for Local Environmental Initiatives), in collaboration with the AGO(the Australian Greenhouse Office).

The Council resolved to participate in the Cities for Climate Protection™ Australiaprogram on 24 November 1998.

The achievement of the following five Milestones was endorsed in this resolution:-

1. Conduct an inventory and forecast for Community and Corporate (council)greenhouse gas emissions;

2. Establish an emissions reduction goal;3. Develop and adopt a Local Action Plan;



4. Implement the Local Action Plan;5. Monitor and report on achievements.

Each milestone has an internal corporate component and a community component.The City of Perth has achieved Milestone One (inventory of emissions) in both thecorporate and community sectors and it was awarded to the Council at the CCP™recognition event held in August 1999.

In order to continue participating in the program, the City is required to completeMilestones 2 and 3.


Strategic PlanKey Result Area: EnvironmentObjective No: EN1 Objective: Protect and enhance Perth’s natural

environment.Strategy: Minimise the energy consumed in Councilservices and activities.

DETAILS:

The City has been a member of the Cities for Climate Protection Program sinceNovember 1998 and achieved Milestone 1, an inventory of emissions in August1999. The draft Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Strategy is detailed inSchedule 1. It comprises Milestone 2; an Emissions Reduction Target andMilestone 3; the reduction strategy.

It is proposed that there be community consultation of the draft targets and actions beundertaken following adoption by the Council.

Milestone Two - Reduction Target

The reduction target, expressed as a percentage, will be met through theimplementation of the emissions reduction strategy. It demonstrates the Council’scommitment, and will raise community awareness about greenhouse issues. Thereare also economic benefits in setting a reduction target through ensuring efficientenergy management and reducing corporate costs.

A 20% reduction target is recommended for corporate and community emissions forfive main reasons.

1. To date, of the 47 Australian Councils that have set a community reduction target34 have endorsed a 20% (or greater) target, and 53 of the 55 Councils haveendorsed a 20% (or greater) corporate reduction target.



2. Reduction measures have already been identified, as described in theEnvironment Plan. These have been included in the strategy and will result insignificant reduction of greenhouse gases and savings in energy costs.

3. Over 150 local authorities and municipal organisations from 50 countries

worldwide support a 20% greenhouse reduction target. 4. International experience demonstrates that the targets are achievable. For

example, the City of Toronto in Canada endorsed a 20% reduction goal - on 1988levels by 2005. By 1995, emissions had dropped 7% from 1990 levels. The Cityof Saarbrucken, Germany, resolved to reduce emissions by 25% on 1990 levelsby 2010. Research in 1996 showed that emissions had dropped 15%.

5. The CCP™ target is a flexible - rather than a mandatory target - and can be readilyadjusted as the implementation of the Emissions Reduction Strategy progresses.Savings of 20% in energy costs by reducing waste and hence reducinggreenhouse gas emissions by the same amount are largely regarded by Councilsand industry as being achievable. Stages 2 and 3 are not intended to definitivelyquantify energy reduction outcomes and this is why the target is flexible and thestrategy is a living document.

Milestone Three - greenhouse gas emissions reduction strategy

To achieve Milestone Three of the CCP™ program, the City of Perth is required toadopt a Local Action Plan outlining the strategy for both the corporate (City of Perth)and community sectors.

The draft Emissions Reduction Strategy focuses on achieving reductions in five keyareas:-

• City of Perth OperationsBy promoting and implementing practices to reduce energy use and greenhouse gasemissions throughout the City’s area of operations.

• CommunityBy encouraging local residents to participate in emissions reduction initiatives andraising awareness about greenhouse issues.

• Commercial and Industrial sectorBy promoting practices and assisting local commerce and industry to operate withgreater energy efficiency.

• Transport and AccessBy promoting a balanced transport system which will provide a high level ofaccessibility to and within the city, whilst enhancing the city environment.



• Waste Management and RecyclingBy reducing the City’s use of resources and minimising the production of waste, inconjunction with business, residents and visitors.

The draft Strategy draws heavily from existing actions outlined in the City EnvironmentPlan 1999 - 2002 and includes a number of short term (12 -18 month) and longerterm (two - five year) actions.

It is envisaged that the strategy will have a range of benefits, including:-

Economic Benefits

• Many of the initiatives are energy efficiency initiatives that will reduce the energycosts of the City.

• The strategy aims to assist community members reduce their energy use andtherefore accrue financial savings.

• The implementation of measures within the strategy may act to have flow onbenefits for the local economy through the development of new markets in areassuch as renewable energy and the creation of local job opportunities throughimplementation of measures in the strategy.

Social

• The improvement of public health through improved local air quality• The implementation of the strategy will require the development of partnerships

with the commercial, residential and industrial sectors of the community. This canact to improve community relations.

Environmental

• The implementation of the strategy will play the primary role in City of Perth’scontribution to the slowing of global warming.

• It is expected that the implementation of the strategy will also play a role in theimprovement of local air quality, through initiatives related to transport.

• Efficient resource use is central to the strategy and is a core environmentalimperative.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

Community consultation on the draft Emission Reduction Strategy is estimated tocost $3,000 and will be completed this financial year. The budget requirements willbe assessed on an annual basis. Completion of Milestones 2 and 3 will make theCity eligible for greenhouse gas grants at Milestone 4; the implementation of theAction Plan. In addition it is expected that energy efficiency initiatives will createsavings with these savings being reinvested to fund additional greenhouse gasreduction actions.



A provision has been included for consideration in the budget deliberations for2001/2002.

ACCOUNT NO: CL16260000BUDGET ITEM: Strategies, Policies and ResearchBUDGET PAGE NUMBER: 18BUDGETED AMOUNT: $117,952AMOUNT SPENT TO DATE: $NilPROPOSED COST: $ 3,000BALANCE: $114,952

All figures quoted in this report are exclusive of GST.

COMMENTS:

The key points for consideration of the Strategy are:-

• the 20% reduction target to 2010 based on 1996 figures is achievable and can beadjusted, if required, when the Strategy is finalised and implemented atMilestone 4;

• there are significant economic benefits in reducing energy costs as well as theenvironmental benefits of reduced contribution to greenhouse gases;

• the majority of the actions identified in the Strategy already exist in the CityEnvironment Plan 1999 - 2002;

• the draft Strategy will benefit from broad community consultation.

The City has a number of plans and strategies in place that support the CCPprogram, and is already participating in a number of initiatives that will help reducegreenhouse gas emissions. They are:-

• City Environment Plan 1999 -2002;• Smogbusters - Way to Work;• Green Energy Learning Program;• Perth Access;• Central Area Transit System;• Automatic Carpark Lighting Controllers; and• Solar powered ticket vending machines, solar powered lighting and electric

vehicle for malls.

Following adoption by the Council, the staged implementation of the GreenhouseGas Emissions Strategy will begin. It should be noted that the Strategy is seen as a‘living document’. The achievement year for the reduction target set as part ofMilestone Two is 2010. As such, the Strategy is not to be seen as an action plancovering all possible actions that will be undertaken in this ten year period. It is



envisaged that review of the Strategy will occur on a yearly basis in line with budgetcycle.

The completion of Milestone Three will make City of Perth eligible for fundingopportunities, such as The Emissions Reduction Incentives Program (ERIP). TheERIP module was recently announced by the Australian Greenhouse Office. Theprimary objective of ERIP is to support local government to take action to achievesignificant, sustained greenhouse gas reductions beyond the core activities ofcouncil(s). $1 million has been made available for the first round, with applicationrounds expected annually. At present only 24 Councils have achieved MilestoneThree in the CCP Program and are eligible for ERIP funding. Another round of ERIPfunding is anticipated early in the new financial year.

The implementation of actions outlined in this Strategy will take the City to MilestoneFour in the CCP program. ICLEI will assist the City at this stage with a MilestoneFour verification process that will quantify the emissions reductions achieved fromprojects implemented.

Given that the most significant source of greenhouse gas emissions is from thecommunity (residential, commercial and industrial), community awareness of andsupport for the Emissions Reduction Strategy is essential for the City to succeed inimplementing this project.

Once the draft has been approved by the Council it will be advertised for publicconsultation for six weeks, prior to being finalised.

Moved by Cr Sutherland, seconded by Cr McEvoy

That the Council approves the:-

1. goal of reducing Corporate greenhouse gas emissions from 1996levels by 20% by 2010;

2. goal of reducing Community greenhouse gas emissions from 1996levels by 20% by 2010;

3. Draft Emissions Reduction Strategy and note that this fulfils therequirement of Milestone Three of the Cities for Climate Protectionprogram;

4. release of the draft Cities for Climate Protection Emission ReductionStrategy for a six week period for public consultation.




381/01 PROVISION OF NON ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES FROMVENDING MACHINES IN THE CITY'S CAR PARKS FOR APERIOD OF TWO YEARS - TENDER NO. - 054-00/01

BACKGROUND:

FILE REFERENCE: P1016107RESPONSIBLE DIRECTOR: Douglas Forster, Director Business UnitsDATE: 3 May 2001

Tenders were called for the provision of non alcoholic beverages from vendingmachines in the City’s car parks in March 2001, as the current contract was due toexpire. The contract is for a period of two years.

Vending machines are installed as a service to car park customers and provide anincome to the City. The machines remain the property of the contractor and aremaintained accordingly.


PolicyPolicy Name and Number: CS2 - Expenditure - Authorisations - Annual ItemsLegislationSection: Local Government (Functions and General) 1996 Part 4. Tender for providingGoods or Services.

Strategic PlanKey Result Area: Service QualityObjective No: SQ6 Objective: Customer Focus

Strategy: Improve focus on customer service as a drivingforce for organisational improvement.Action: To value add opportunities for increasingcustomer satisfaction.

Key Result Area: EconomyObjective No: E1 Objective: A Financially Healthy City

Strategy: Income maintenance and growth. Developstrategies for the future through income maintenance,diversity and growth.Action: To see out opportunities for new income sourcesincluding grants.



DETAILS:

In November 1998 public tenders were invited for the installation and maintenance ofdrink vending machines in the City’s multi-storey and ground level car parks. Twotenders were received, one from Pepsi and one from Coca Cola Amatil. The tenderwas awarded by Coca Cola Amatil for a two year period.

In March 2001 tenders were called for a further two years. In this instance Coca ColaAmatil was the only tenderer.

There were very few changes to the tender submission with the rate of commissionremaining the same at 15% of the total value of sales payable to the City of Perth.Coca Cola Amatil informed the City of Perth that they would be very selective aboutplacement of the machines, especially in ground level car parks due to the risk ofvandalism.


INCOME:ACCOUNT NO: VariousBUDGET ITEM: Parking Fees/ChargesBUDGET PAGE NUMBER: 10BUDGETED AMOUNT: $12,000 (this portion)AMOUNT RECEIVED TO DATE: $8,679 (this portion)All figures quoted in this report are exclusive of GST.

The contract with Coca Cola Amatil has been earning approximately $12,000 perannum.

COMMENTS:

The placement of drink vending machines at the City’s car parks, has proved to bevery popular with the City’s car park customers as a ‘value-added service’, as well asgenerating additional income.

Cr Sutherland departed the Chamber at 6.30pm

Moved by Cr McEvoy, seconded by Cr Stroud

That the sole tender submitted by Coca Cola Amatil for the provision of nonalcoholic beverages from vending machines in the City’s car parks for aperiod of two years be accepted.



Discussion ensued


Cr Sutherland returned to the Chamber at 6.31pm

382/01 WEBSITE - PHASE TWO - TENDER NO. 91-00/01

BACKGROUND:

FILE REFERENCE: P1016160RESPONSIBLE DIRECTOR: Noelene Jennings, Director Corporate ServicesDATE: 7 May 2001

The City of Perth website has been in operation since August 1999. The site isprimarily providing information.

Tenders have been called for the provision of web development, hosting and supportservices. This is to extend the City’s current website to provide e-commerce facilitiesas well as allowing the City’s clients to interact with the City online.

These features have been supported by the City’s stakeholders, as noted in thePrinciple Activities Plan Focus Groups undertaken in 2000 and 2001.

Some of the comments from these Focus Groups included:-

• Residents thought it was appropriate that they be able to register with the City ofPerth to receive update emails about activities taking place in their area. They alsomentioned the importance of the web site being constantly updated.

• Retailers felt that it was important for the future for the City of Perth to have a goodweb presence and e-commerce capabilities

• Business stakeholders highlighted that the security of the site must be ensured ifratepayers are going to be making financial transactions online.


LegislationSection: Local Government Act 1995Strategic PlanKey Result Area: Economy



Objective No: E1 Objective: A Financially Healthy CityRecognise and acknowledge the City's role in the State'seconomy. For the City's economic viability to befinancially healthy, the City needs to develop a financialPlan which will take into consideration the followingelements.

Key Result Area: LeadershipObjective No: L1 Objective: To give the City Clarity of Direction

Strategy: To be competitive within Western AustraliaKey Result Area: Service QualityObjective No: SQ6 Objective: Develop and sustain high quality relationships

with the City’s customers and stakeholders.Strategy: Improve focus on customer service as a drivingforce for organisational improvement.

DETAILS:

Ten tenders were received in response to advertising the tender, of which one fromRelak Business Systems was found to be non-compliant. The other nine wereevaluated against the criteria.

Criteria:• Proposed Development Methodology;• Proposed Support Methodology;• Qualifications and Experience of people on the team/company;• Proposed solution to Functional Requirements.

Company Price

Pretzel Logic $309,322.38

GEAC $263,011

AlphaWest $179,770

Spherion $142,065

Chrome Global $72,500-80,500

Stenning Group $74,588

Highway 1 $48,508

Power Business Systems $41,074

Online Marketing Solutions $26,825



Highway 1 is the only tenderer who can provide the City with all of the requestedfunctional requirements, excellent security for e-commerce facilities, and otherrequirements for the project. The support provided by Highway 1, was also ranked asthe most extensive and their experience in the Government area was equalled only byAlphaWest who were unable to deliver all of the requirements. The hostingarrangements for the City’s website will be undertaken internally which providesbetter support for the future.

Although Highway 1’s pricing was one of the lowest quotes received, credentials andreference clients of the company, attest to the quality of their work. It is consideredthat, Highway 1 offer the best value for money.


ACCOUNT NO: AS. 00330 - 7605BUDGET ITEM: Internet Infrastructure UpgradeBUDGET PAGE NUMBER: 43BUDGETED AMOUNT: $95,000AMOUNT SPENT TO DATE: $ 6,674PROPOSED COST: $48,508BALANCE: $39,817.90

ANNUAL MAINTENANCE: $3,300


Moved by Cr McEvoy, seconded by Cr MacGill

That the:-

1. most suitable tender, being that submitted by Highway 1 for theprovision of web development, hosting and support, at a total cost of$48,508, be accepted;

2. expenditure in part 1. Above be charged to Budget Item “Internet -

Infrastructure Upgrade”.

Discussion ensued




383/01 EAST PERTH CARPARK TENDER

BACKGROUND:


In January 2001, the Board of the East Perth Redevelopment Authority (EPRA)resolved to:- 1. Approach the City to assume the care control and management of the Belvidere

Carpark on land leased from Westrail at the northern end of Victory Terrace. 2. Sell by public tender three lots used for public carparking at:-

• Lot 70 Haig Park Circle, East Perth;• Lot 51 Saunders Street, East Perth;• Lot 220 Royal Street, East Perth.

The carpark at Lot 70 Haig Park Circle is operated by EPRA. The other two carparksare operated by the City under a monthly tenancy from the Authority.

At its meeting on 13 February 2001, the Council resolved the following:-

“That the Council:-

1. approves in-principle the development of a town square on lot 220 Royal Street,East Perth;

2. approaches the East Perth Redevelopment Authority (EPRA) to acquire the landfor the purposes of developing a town square;

3. relinquishes the lease on the Royal Street Ground Level Carpark at the earliestopportunity;

4. lists for consideration funding to acquire the land and develop the town square inthe capital works budget for 2001/2002”.

At its meeting on 13 March 2001, the Council resolved the following:-



“That the Council:

1. supports the lodgement of an application by the East Perth RedevelopmentAuthority for Western Australian Government Railways Lease No 6597 over“Belvidere Carpark” Victory Terrace, East Perth to be assigned to the City ofPerth for continuation of the short term public carpark conducted on the site;

2. advises the East Perth Redevelopment Authority that part 1. Above is notentered into with any commitment to maintain the “free” status of the carpark, asthe introduction of parking fees may be a useful management tool to resolve thedemand for parking in the area, in the future;

3. requests the East Perth Redevelopment Authority to transfer the followingfreehold ground level public carparks to the City of Perth at no cost, inconsideration for the liberation of the “Dobbie Dico” site for development, as aconsequence of the construction of the Regal Place multi-storey carpark by theCity:-

Lot 70 Haig Park Circle, East Perth;Lot 51 Saunders Street, East Perth;Lot 220 Royal Street, East Perth;

4. advises the East Perth Redevelopment Authority that it will operate Lot 70 HaigPark Circle and Lot 51 Saunders Street as public carparks, but that it wishes todevelop Lot 220 Royal Street as a “Town Square”;

5. authorises the Lord Mayor and the Chief Executive Officer to enter into theassignment of lease set out in part 1. Above”.

The East Perth Redevelopment Authority has now advised that it intends to sell theselots by public tender, on the condition that they continue to be used for public carparking in perpetuity.

Burgess Rawson has commenced a marketing campaign on behalf of EPRA, andthe tender will close at the offices of the East Perth Redevelopment Authority at 12:00noon on 28 May, 2001.

Consideration must now be given to any tender/s the City might wish to submit.




Strategic PlanKey Result Area: Urban Development and TransportObjective No: U5 Objective: To ensure that public transport provision and

routes adequately meet the needs of the community andthat the City has adequate and properly located parking.

Strategy: Develop and integrated public transport andparking strategy.

Action: Investigate the current needs and futuredemands for parking in the City.

DETAILS:

Lot 70 Haig Park Circle, East PerthThis carpark serves the commercial developments on the section of Royal Street,East of Plain Street, as well as providing some visitor parking for the “Haig Park”section of East Perth. It is bitumen paved and accommodates approximately 30cars. However, it appears to be unable to meet the demand for parking in this areaon weekends. This problem is expected to escalate with the completion of theapartment complex under construction on the southern side of the Claisebrook inlet,and the proposed hotel, adjoining.

EPRA does not charge fees for this carpark.

The adjoining commercial development on Lot 71 Plain Street, corner of Royal Streethas an access easement over the site. The owner has requested the City to resistthe sale of the carpark.

Lot 51 Saunders Street, East PerthThis carpark is operated by the City of Perth under a monthly tenancy from EPRA. Ithas 61 bays and it is intended to serve as a commuter carpark. The carparkoperates at close to 100% occupancy during business hours. Parking fees are notcharged after 6:00pm, and it then serves as a visitor carpark for the nearbyresidential developments.

Lot 220 Royal Street, East PerthThis carpark comprises 27 ground level car bays, operated by the City of Perthunder a monthly tenancy from EPRA. Continued operation after the opening of theadjoining Regal Place multi-storey carpark is illogical. It is full at most hours of theday, at the expense of the covered carpark next door.

The Council has recognised this incongruity, has resolved to correct the situation, andto investigate the opportunity to develop this land as a “Town Square”. Burgess



Rawson has been apprised of this Council resolution. They have referred this matterto EPRA and responded with verbal advice that a non-conforming tender for thispurpose will be considered.

A short-form valuation report covering each of the lots, from independent valuersChristie Whyte Moore has been discussed with the Elected Members.


ACCOUNT NO: N/ABUDGET ITEM: Parking Facilities Development ReserveBUDGET PAGE NUMBER: 28BUDGETED AMOUNT: Balance of $766,699 budgeted for 30 June 2001AMOUNT SPENT TO DATE:PROPOSED COST: To be advisedBALANCE:ANNUAL MAINTENANCE:

The above account may be accessible for the properties to be operated as carparks.A separate source of funds may need to be investigated for the lot to be developedas a town square.


OPERATING INCOME:ACCOUNT NO: 09088000BUDGET ITEM: Ground Level Car ParksBUDGET PAGE NUMBER: 10BUDGETED AMOUNT: $8,509,345 (Saunders St $45,000)AMOUNT RECEIVED TO DATE: Saunders St $38,148PROJECTED INCOME: $45,768

OPERATING EXPENDITURE:ACCOUNT NO: 09088000BUDGET ITEM: Ground Level Car ParksBUDGET PAGE NUMBER: 27BUDGETED AMOUNT: $3,098,131 (Saunders St $30,000)AMOUNT RECEIVED TO DATE: Saunders St $28,235PROJECTED EXPENDITURE: Saunders St $33,876

The projected net income from Lot 51 Saunders Street disclosed above includes rentof $15,000. In the City’s ownership, the net income would be approximately $26,896per annum at present charges and operating costs.



COMMENTS:

A request has been made for the administration of EPRA to provide a writtenresponse to the City’s question, whether its Board was advised of the Councilresolution of 13 March 2001, or the decision not to address the Council’s views andto proceed with the tender of these land parcels was made administratively.

Further, the City has requested that the Board of EPRA reconsiders the Council’sposition on these sites.


That the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to submit tenders to the EastPerth Redevelopment Authority in respect of its carpark tender closing 28May 2001.


384/01 FOOTPATH - KINGS PARK AVENUE, CRAWLEY.

BACKGROUND:

FILE REFERENCE: P1008121RESPONSIBLE DIRECTOR: Garry Dunne, Director Service UnitsDATE: 18 April 2001

This item was presented to the Crawley Precinct Committee meeting held on 5 April2001 where it resolved to recommend:-

“That the Crawley Precinct Committee recommends to the Council that theproposed footpath be located on the western side of Kings Park Avenue.”

At its meeting held on 5 September 2000, the Council approved therecommendation of the Crawley Precinct Committee that “future footpathconstructions in Crawley be brick paved in place of existing footpath constructions.”Existing footpath construction in Crawley is primarily 600mm x 600mm concreteslabs laid to a width of 1.5 metres along the verge adjacent to the property line. Somepaths have been upgraded to “in-situ” mass concrete. In view of the impendingconstruction of a brick footpath in Kings Park Avenue, the Crawley PrecinctCommittee meeting of 5 April 2001 was asked to select a brick style and colour forthis and all future footpaths in Crawley from a display of suitable paving bricks, in



differing styles and colours, recommended by the two principal suppliers, MidlandBrick and Metro Brick.


Strategic PlanKey Result Area: The Built EnvironmentObjective No: EN2 Objective: Plan, integrate and implement sustainable

development for Perth to ensure its liveability.Strategy: Public Places Enhancement Strategy EN2.1.Action: Set down guidelines for style of street furniture,litter bins, street signs, road construction standards,footpath standards and verge treatments .

DETAILS:

The Crawley Precinct Committee at its meeting held on 5 April 2001, discussed thebrickpaving standard for Crawley and in particular the proposed footpath in KingsPark Avenue.

Brick Paving Standard for Crawley:

In view of the impending construction of a brick footpath in Kings Park Avenue, adisplay of suitable paving bricks, in differing styles and colours, recommended by thetwo principal suppliers, Midland Brick and Metro Brick, was presented to theCommittee. The bricks on display were identified only by an alphabetical prefix. TheCommittee Members were asked to view the display and to record their preferredbrick style for Crawley on a ballot sheet. Ballot sheets were collected and the result ofthe ballot was a clear majority in favour of the “Courtstone” manufactured by MetroBrick as the preferred brick style for Crawley.

Proposed Kings Park Avenue Footpath:

Members discussed the proposal to construct the footpath on the eastern side ofKings Park Avenue, highlighting that it would be more convenient to pedestrians toplace the path on the western side. Members noted the decision for constructing thepath on the eastern side was due to uneven terrain and future developments on thewestern side of the road. However, the Committee resolved to recommend

to the Council that the footpath be constructed on the western side of Kings ParkAvenue rather than the eastern side as had been proposed.

Following this resolution, a full technical assessment and costing of possible footpathalignments on the eastern and western sides of Kings Park Avenue was undertakenwith the objective of providing the Council with additional information on which tobase a decision on the preferred location of the footpath. This assessment has foundthat there is one possible alignment on the eastern side and two possible alignments



on the western side. These alignments are illustrated in Drawing Nos. AO 8314 - 1(Alignment A), AO 8314 - 2 (Alignment B) and AO 8314 - 3 (Alignment C):-

• Alignment A (eastern side) - adjacent to the road kerb from the southern end ofKings Park Avenue to a point 24 metres north, from which point the footpath wouldfirst move to the centre of the verge (80 metres) and then to the property line.

• Alignment B (western side) - adjacent to the property line along the full length ofKings Park Avenue.

• Alignment C (western side) - adjacent to the road kerb from the southern end ofKings Park Avenue to a point 75 metres to the north, from which point the footpathwould then adopt an alignment adjacent to the property line.

Assessment of alignment A (eastern side):-

1. All significant trees are preserved by this alignment. The presence of these treesand the existing landscaping, combined with a curvilinear alignment, shouldprovide a pleasurable experience for walkers.

2. There is minimum interference with the existing verge landscaping which is

primarily lawn grass. 3. In the lower central part of Kings Park Avenue, where the adjacent property

landscape slopes steeply into the verge, the need to construct a retaining wallalong the footpath edge is avoided by locating the footpath closer to the roadkerb. This also preserves the quality of the landscape in this area.

4. At the southern end of Kings Park Avenue, the close spacing of driveways and the

fact that one of these serves a basement carpark and is therefore cut in to theverge, makes it only possible to locate the footpath adjacent to the road kerb. Inthis section, a minimum path width of 1.8 metres is proposed to provide a safetymargin for pedestrians. Elsewhere, a footpath width of 1.5 metres is proposed.

5. Verge landscaping and irrigation systems will require reinstatement.

Assessment of Alignments B and C (western side):-

1. At the southern end of Kings Park Avenue, vehicle crossovers have been cut intothe verge. To overcome sudden sharp increases in gradient at the intersectionbetween footpath and driveway, it will be necessary to reduce the verge levelsacross the full width of the verge, with consequent loss of existing vegetation andlandscaping.



2. Adjacent to the southernmost property, the verge slopes steeply up from the roadkerb to the property line and contains some substantial trees and shrubs. Toensure that the gradient across the footpath in this section does not exceed theaccepted maximum 2.5% crossfall, it will be necessary to cut the entire verge toachieve appropriate slopes, with consequent loss of all vegetation. The depth ofcut required will be substantially greater if alignment B is adopted. In the case ofalignment C, the verge will be sloped from its existing level at the property line tothe required level at the kerbside footpath edge.

3. The two most southerly crossovers will require re-sheeting with asphalt as their

condition is poor. The third crossover from the southern end will require completereconstruction to achieve an acceptable camber for intersection with the footpath.

4. A brick parking area on the verge and a raised and kerbed island (between two

driveways) will require removal. 5. Several large shrubs which would otherwise obstruct the alignments will require

removal. 6. Verge landscaping and irrigation systems will require reinstatement

Assessment of Alignment B:-

1. At the southern end of Kings Park Avenue, garden levels adjacent to the propertyline are in some places retained by short lengths of wall of approximately 900mmmaximum height. In some places where retaining walls have not been constructed,the existing verge slopes steeply up from the road kerb to the property line. In thisarea, it will be necessary to construct a new retaining wall, 47 metres in length xup to 1.1 metres in height, to retain the adjacent properties after the verge hasbeen cut to a level suitable for the construction of a footpath adjacent to theproperty boundary line. The existing walls are likely to become unstable as a resultof the necessary earthworks and will require demolition. Reinstatement ofadjoining walls and landscaping will be required.

2. Two large trees will require removal at the southern end of Kings Park Avenue as

a result of level changes needed to accommodate the footpath. 3. The proposed footpath width is 1.6 metres for the full length of the footpath. 4. At the midpoint of Kings Park Avenue, some large trees within private property

and adjacent to the property line have large surface roots which may interfere withfootpath construction. It may be necessary to move the footpath further away fromthe property line in this area to avoid the interference of the tree roots.

Assessment of Alignment C:-



1. Where the footpath abuts the road kerb, a minimum path width of 1.8 metres isproposed to provide a safety margin for pedestrians. Elsewhere, a footpath widthof 1.6 metres is proposed.

2. Four large trees will require removal as a result of level changes and the need to

remove obstructions to the alignment. 3. The existing road kerb will require renewal along the entire section of footpath

abutting it because the kerbing is no longer true to levels.


Alignment Option A:ACCOUNT NO: CW.04592BUDGET ITEM: Footpaths ConstructionBUDGET PAGE NUMBER: 40BUDGETED AMOUNT: $701,900 ($35,000 - this portion)AMOUNT SPENT TO DATE: NilPROPOSED COST: $21,170 (this portion)BALANCE: $13,830 (this portion)

ANNUAL MAINTENANCE: $310

Alignment Option B:ACCOUNT NO: CW.04592BUDGET ITEM: Footpaths ConstructionBUDGET PAGE NUMBER: 40BUDGETED AMOUNT: $701,900 ($35,000 - this portion)AMOUNT SPENT TO DATE: NilPROPOSED COST: $43,800 (this portion)BALANCE: -$8,800 (this portion)


Alignment Option C:ACCOUNT NO: CW.04592BUDGET ITEM: Footpaths ConstructionBUDGET PAGE NUMBER: 40BUDGETED AMOUNT: $701,900 ($35,000 - this portion)AMOUNT SPENT TO DATE: NilPROPOSED COST: $34,800 (this portion)BALANCE: $200 (this portion)





Assessment of cost implications of each alignment:-

1. The estimated cost of each alignment is as follows: Alignment A - $21,170;Alignment B - $43,800; Alignment C - $34,800. The high cost of Alignment B isattributable to the requirement for substantial earthworks, construction of aretaining wall, relocation of services within the verge, crossover reconstructionand landscape reinstatement. The cost of alignment C, though lower than Bbecause a retaining wall is not required, still includes substantial costs forearthworks, crossover reconstruction and landscape reinstatement.

2. The estimated cost of Alignments A and C is within the Capital Works Budget

allocation of $35,000 for this project. However, the cost of Alignment C couldescalate dependent on the extent to which the earthworks necessitate therelocation of underground services. Funds are insufficient to undertake the worksrequired in Alignment B.

COMMENTS:

1. The estimated cost of locating the footpath on the eastern side of Kings ParkAvenue (Alignment A), as previously proposed, is $21,170 compared to $43,800for Alignment B (western side) and $34,800 for Alignment C (western side). Onthis basis alone, it is recommended that the footpath be constructed on theeastern side in accordance with Alignment A.

2. It is understood that development approval has been given for the property at the

southern end of the western side of Kings Park Avenue. Since development isimminent on this site, location of a footpath along the adjacent verge is notrecommended at this time. It is probable that the proposed development willinvolve substantial changes to and impact on the existing verge which wouldnecessitate substantial changes to any existing footpath construction in this area.

3. The eastern side is also recommended on aesthetic grounds as it is considered

that the landscape and the shade afforded by mature trees in this area will providea more pleasant pedestrian environment.

In terms of convenience and safety, no advantage is perceived in locating thefootpath on one side in preference to the other. The origin and destination of apedestrian will determine whether they have to cross the road to reach the footpath,regardless of the side on which it is situated.

It was therefore recommended that the Council:-



1. approves the proposed location of a footpath on the eastern side of Kings ParkAvenue, Crawley as illustrated in Drawing No. AO 8314-1 (Alignment A);

2. adopts the “Courtstone” paving brick manufactured by Metro Brick as thestandard paving brick to be used for all future footpath construction in Crawley.

(The Lord Mayor disclosed a financial interest and did not vote on this item)


The Lord Mayor Family owns property adjacent to the proposed site

The Lord Mayor departed the Chamber at 6.33pm and the Deputy Lord MayorCr McEvoy assumed the Chair


That the Council:-

1. approves the proposed location of a footpath on the western side ofKings Park Avenue, Crawley as illustrated in Drawing No. AO 8314-1(Alignment A);

2. adopts the “Courtstone” paving brick manufactured by Metro Brick asthe standard paving brick to be used for all future footpathconstruction in Crawley.

The motion was put and lost

As requested by Cr Tudori the votes were recorded as follows:-

For: Crs Tudori, Davidson and Tan

Against: Crs Sutherland, McEvoy, MacGill and Stroud

Moved by Cr Stroud

That the Council:-



1. approves the proposed location of a footpath on the eastern side ofKings Park Avenue, Crawley as illustrated in Drawing No. AO 8314-1(Alignment A);

2. adopts the “Courtstone” paving brick manufactured by Metro Brick asthe standard paving brick to be used for all future footpathconstruction in Crawley.

The motion lapsed due to the want of a seconder

The Lord Mayor returned to the Chamber at 6.42pm and resumed the Chair

385/01 ROYAL STREET WEST CAR PARK SITE - CONCEPTPLAN

BACKGROUND:


The original EPRA concept plan for the entire development area showed the siteopposite ‘Silver City’, including the City’s Royal Street Car Park, to be developed asat-grade car parking and an extension of e-Central (AMTC) College.

In October 2000 there was general agreement that with the exception of the landrequired by e-Central (AMTC), the City would acquire the remaining land from EPRAto maintain as at-grade car parking until it was financially viable to develop the landand construct a multi-storey car park. EPRA appears to have ignored this previousagreement and developed a new concept plan for development of the mainly City ofPerth owned property for mixed commercial, residential and parking use. EPRA nowpropose to assemble the land to achieve the latest concept plan (February 2001).

The City presently operates a 655 bay, ground level car park known as the RoyalStreet Car Park opposite the State Government office buildings occupied by Childrenand Family Services and the Health Department, commonly referred to as ‘SilverCity’.

The original EPRA concept plans for the entire development area identifiedlandscaped at-grade car parking for this site as well as allowing the extension of thee-Central College (AMTC) to the west of their current site.

The City owns the freehold of the majority of the car park in two titles with anaggregate land area of 1.9503 hectares, and it leases an irregular shaped lot of



approximately 2891 square metres from the East Perth Redevelopment Authority atthe corner of Royal and Lord Streets.

Adjoining land to the north-east, owned by EPRA, contains the City Farm buildingsand land which is leased to the Men of The Trees to operate as a community facility.

Over the last three years EPRA has developed a number of proposals for this sitewithout satisfying the City’s objectives of :-• amenity• car parking• long term development of street frontage• limited capital development short term.

In January 2000, EPRA approached the City with a proposal to develop the majorityof the Royal Street frontage and allow a small site for a multi-storey car park to bebuilt by the City of Perth. Feasibility studies were undertaken by the City and theproposal was considered to be non-viable for the following reasons: financially, eitherin the short or medium term; as an optimum site for reasons of configuration, access,security and commercial visibility; insufficient to meet the current or projected parkingneeds in the area; and did not protect the assets of the City.

A Joint Control Group and Steering Committee, comprising EPRA and Cityconsultants and officers were developed to look at alternative options. Thesecommittees ceased to meet after June 2000 and no resolution as to designdevelopment guidelines was reached. In July 2000, the Chief Executive Officers ofthe City and EPRA met to discuss the possibility of land rationalisation to enable thee-Central (AMTC) site to be progressed. An agreement to exchange EPRA land onthe corner of Royal and Lord Streets, together with part of the City Farm area (leaseto expire June 2002, excluding City Farm buildings), for City owned land adjacent tothe e-Central site, was reached with the then acting CEO of EPRA, who advised byletter dated 1 August 2000:

“I now set out the general terms of agreement to progress land assembly in theRoyal Street Super Lot area, subject to EPRA’s Board approval:-

• City of Perth to acquire from EPRA:

• Lot 1061 and Part Lot 998 City Farm vacant land (western side of existingbuildings as per attached plan) - subject to lease arrangements until 30 June2002.

• Lot 127 cnr Royal and Lord Streets

EPRA to acquire from City of Perth



• Part Lot 500 Royal Street.

It is anticipated that the land exchange process will be completed by December2000, with the initial priority being the acquisition of Part Lot 500 by EPRA toenable amalgamation with the adjoining land for the AMTC.

City of Perth and EPRA will be responsible for their own due diligence in relation tothe land that each party is acquiring e.g. environmental and geotechnical studies.City of Perth and Department of Training as land owners will be responsible forsubdivision costs.

City of Perth and EPRA will jointly brief the Valuer General’s Office to undertakevaluations to be adopted in the exchange of land.

It is appreciated that development of the land will not occur in the short term andtherefore EPRA will provide design guidelines to cover future development, whichalso includes the proposed AMTC site.”

On 10 October 2000 the Council resolved:-

That the Council:-

1. approves in principle, a land exchange between the City and the East PerthRedevelopment Authority in the vicinity of the Royal Street Car Park, wherebythe East Perth Redevelopment Authority will acquire Part of Perth Town Lot500 from the City of Perth and the City will acquire the following lots fromEPRA:

Part Lot 1061 Lime StreetPart Lot 998 Brown StreetPart Lots 4, 5 and 6 Brown StreetLot 127 Corner Royal and Lord Streets;

2. approves the Valuer General’s Office be jointly instructed with EPRA, toundertake the land valuations to be adopted in this exchange;

3. works with the East Perth Redevelopment Authority to formulate designguidelines for the future development of its land.


The consolidation of the Royal Street Car Park on freehold land bounded by RoyalStreet to the south, Lime Street to the east, the Rail Reserve to the north and PlainStreet to the west, is considered to address the following elements of the City’sStrategic Plan.



Economic Strategy E1.3 - Develop Strategies for the Future through IncomeMaintenance, Diversity and Growth.

Urban Development and Transport Strategy U5.1 - Develop an Integrated PublicTransport and Parking Strategy”.

Strategic PlanKey Result Area: EconomyObjective No: E1 Objective: Recognise and acknowledge the City’s role in

the State’s economy. For the city’s economic viability tobe financially healthy the City needs to develop afinancial plan which will take into consideration thefollowing elements.Strategy: Develop strategies for the future throughincome maintenance, diversity and growth.

Key Result Area: Urban Development and TransportObjective No: U5 Objective: To ensure the public transport provision and

routes adequately meet the needs of the community andthat the City has adequate and appropriately locatedparking.Strategy: Develop an integrated public transport andparking strategy.

DETAILS:

New EPRA Proposal

Resulting from an enquiry on the progress of the joint valuation and land exchangewith EPRA Officers, the following advice was received 20 April 2001:

“You will recall we met briefly on 30 March, when Chris Melsom advised you ofEPRA’s preferred option for assembly of the above land.

A copy of the Royal Street West Car Park Site - Concept Plan which contains thepreferred option is provided for your perusal and retention. The report wasconsidered by EPRA’s Planning Committee on 2 April wherein it was resolved:

i) to note the revised concept plan options prepared by consultants ThePlanning Group for the Sector 31 land

ii) to adopt concept plan Option 4 as the preferred planning option for the land,and as the basis for: a) the preparation of detailed subdivision plans for the site; b) detailed feasibility assessment; and



c) further negotiation with the City of Perth and e-Central towardsdevelopment of the land in accordance with the objectives of East PerthRedevelopment Scheme and the concept plan as proposed; and

iii) that an implementation plan would be prepared and put back to theCommittee with the next planning phase report.

EPRA will now proceed to assemble the land in accordance with that resolution andfurther dialogue will obviously need to occur with key stakeholders, including theCity of Perth.

I understand our respective Chief Executive Officers will meet over the next week todiscuss this matter further.”

The Royal Street West Car Park Site concept plan prepared for EPRA by SpowersArchitects and The Planning Group is dated February 2001 and has been developedwithout any input from the City of Perth nor it would appear, any consideration of theprevious agreements. The concept plan, tacitly agreed at Officer level and due to bepresented to the Council for consideration, was totally ignored.

The concept developed 4 options with the recommended option being Option 4.

Features of Option 4 are:• Commercial development addresses Royal Street and Lord Street frontages.• Continuous street frontage achieved to Royal Street, maximising potential for

activity along this edge.• Access to site obtained by internal street. Configuration allows for future extension

of street along northern boundary, to connect to Claisebrook Road.• Internal road layout provides access and street frontage to rear development sites.• Car park is 3 levels with ability to expand (vertically).• Larger (higher) building(s) to rear, giving site definition from northern approach.• Development reinforces corner of Royal and Lord Streets.• Concentration of building mass at corner of Royal and Lord Streets provides

gateway to Royal Street.

The plan seeks endorsement for Option 4 from the EPRA Board as the preferredoption for the development of the area. The plan further seeks Board endorsement ofthe appointment of a consultant to prepare Design Guidelines for the site to reflect theintent of the preferred option, and to assist in the development of the Sector.


There are no financial implications associated with this report.



COMMENTS:

EPRA appears to have ignored the Council resolution to investigate a land exchangeenabling the City to acquire the entire site for at-grade car parking. It has developeda new concept plan for the area without any consultation with the City, who is themajor landholder.

Previous discussions with EPRA and their consultants agreed that the original planfor the area was for at-grade car parking and an extension of the e-Central (AMTC)College and that any development that required multi-deck car parking was notfinancially viable and unlikely to be so for up to 10 years.

The City has a valuation of its landholding from October 1999, which values theCouncil-owned land at $9.3Million.

As EPRA has the power to compulsorily acquire land in areas under its control andhave indicated in its letter of 20 April 2001 to “now proceed to assemble the land”,the City will need to carefully consider its options for this landholding.


That the:-

1. Council re-affirms its decision of 10 October 2000, as follows:-

“That the Council:-

1. approves in principle, a land exchange between the City andthe East Perth Redevelopment Authority in the vicinity of theRoyal Street Carpark, whereby the East PerthRedevelopment Authority will acquire Part of Perth Town Lot500 from the City of Perth and the City will acquire thefollowing lots from EPRA:

• • Part Lot 1061 Lime Street;• • Part Lot 998 Brown Street;• • Part Lots 4, 5 and 6 Brown Street;• • Lot 127 Corner Royal and Lord Streets;

(Cont’d)2. approves the Valuer General’s Office be jointly instructed

with EPRA, to undertake the land valuations to be adopted inthis exchange;



3. works with the East Perth Redevelopment Authority toformulate design guidelines for the future development of itsland.”

2. Chief Executive Officer writes to the East Perth Redevelopment Authorityexpressing the Council’s concern at the apparent disregard of the 10October 2000 decision.

Discussion ensued


386/01 FEDERAL ROAD SAFETY BLACK SPOT PROGRAM2001/02

BACKGROUND:

FILE REFERENCE: P.1000570/4RESPONSIBLE DIRECTOR: Charlotte Stockwell, Director StrategyDATE: 4 May 2001

Main Roads WA have informed the City of Perth that three projects submitted forfunding under the 2001/02 Federal Government Black Spot Program have beensuccessful.


Strategic PlanKey Result Area: Urban Development and TransportObjective No: UD3 Objective: Ensure vehicular movement in the City is

effective and efficient.Strategy: Develop a road system that will meet thepresent and future needs of the City.Action: Confirm established road hierarchy.

DETAILS:

212 applications amounting to $17.7 million were received for the $2.8 millionavailable for funding projects under the 2001/02 Federal Government Black SpotProgram. The $2.8 million is divided equally between metropolitan and rural projectsin Western Australia.



The following projects submitted by the City of Perth have been successful:-

Adelaide Terrace/Plain StreetInstall backing boards to traffic signal aspects $1,300

Plain Street/Wellington Street/Waterloo CrescentInstall backing boards to traffic signal aspects $1,300

Wittenoom Street/Hill StreetRealignment of right turn slip lane from Wittenoom $300,000Street to Hill Street and installation of new trafficsignals


All of the proposed projects are fully funded by the Federal Road Safety Black SpotProgram.

COMMENTS:

Traffic crash statistics show that there have been a high number of rear end and rightangle crashes occurring at the intersections of Adelaide Terrace/Plain Street andPlain Street/Wellington Street/Waterloo Crescent. The proposed installation ofbacking boards will make the traffic signals more visible and reduce the number ofthese types of crashes occurring.

Crash statistics for the intersection of Wittenoom Street/Hill Street shows a highincidence of same direction side-swipe crashes occurring in Hill Street immediatelysouth of the intersection. These crashes are caused by the high number of weavingmanoeuvres that occur when the eastbound traffic in Wittenoom Street wants to turnleft from Hill Street to Wellington Street eastbound and the westbound traffic inWittenoom Street wants to turn right from Hill Street to Wellington Street westbound.All of these merging manoeuvres have to occur over a very short distance in HillStreet between Wittenoom and Wellington Streets. The outcome of one particularcrash was a car ending up in the reception area of the business on the south-westerncorner of the intersection of Hill and Moore Street.

To complete the acceptance process the City is required to inform Main Roads thatthe projects will proceed and be completed before 30 June 2002.


That Main Roads be informed that the Council will accept and complete thefollowing projects by 30 June 2002 to be funded under the 2001/02 FederalRoad Safety Black Spot Program:-



1. $1,300 for backing boards to the traffic signal aspects at the AdelaideTerrace/Plain Street intersection;

2. $1,300 for backing boards to the traffic signal aspects at the PlainStreet/Wellington Street/Waterloo Crescent intersection;

3. $300,000 for the realignment of the slip road from Wittenoom Street toHill Street and the installation of new traffic signals at the WittenoomStreet/Hill Street intersection.


387/01 WINE BAR/CAFE - SHOP 4 REGAL PLACE CARPARK,EAST PERTH

BACKGROUND:

FILE REFERENCE: P1016009RESPONSIBLE DIRECTOR: Garry Dunne, Director Service UnitsDATE: 2 May 2001

L J Hooker East Perth was appointed leasing agent for the retail tenancies in theRegal Place Carpark by the exercise of a delegation of authority for the ChiefExecutive Officer to accept quotations for the supply of goods and services which willnot exceed the $50,000 tender trigger point under the Local Government Regulations.

This appointment was made following a formal quotation process, in which eight ofthe major Perth based commercial and industrial real estate agencies were invited toparticipate.


Legislation Local Government Act 1995Section: Section 3.58

Under Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995, the Council is obliged to give aminimum of 14 days notice of its intention to enter into a lease by private treaty in anewspaper freely circulating in the district, inviting submissions from any interested party,which must then be considered by a subsequent meeting of the full Council, before thetransaction can be finalised.



Strategic PlanKey Result Area: EconomyObjective No: E1 Objective: A financially healthy City.

Strategy: Develop a comprehensive Asset ManagementStrategy.

Action: Optimise the City’s assets by identifying the best useof the asset.

DETAILS:

On 22 November 2000, L J Hooker East Perth secured a written offer to lease Shop4 at the City’s Regal Place Carpark from Perthmetro Pty Ltd for the establishment ofa Wine Bar/Café, subject to planning approval of the proposed use and approval of aSpecial Facilities Liquor Licence.

The initial offer proposed is a 5+5+5+5 lease at an initial rental of $170/squaremetres per annum, inclusive of outgoings, fixed for the first five years, with annual CPIadjustments beyond that. Director’s guarantees were not offered and no deposit waspaid. Seven car bays were sought in the tenant carpark, rent free.

Protracted negotiations have resulted in the compromise agreement set out in therecommendation which is part of this report.


ACCOUNT NO: 145 6339 737 166BUDGET ITEM: Property RentalBUDGET PAGE NUMBER: 11BUDGETED AMOUNT: $507,301 - this component $16,440INCOME TO DATE: NilACTUAL INCOME: Nil in 2000/01BUDGET SHORTFALL: $16,440

COMMENTS:

The prospective Lessee is a shelf company which has been acquired for this projectby the Directors, who are both well experienced in the entertainment industry and whohave demonstrated adequate financial resources to undertake this venture.

The Directors have approval in another company name to establish a new wine-bar inthe Leederville Shopping Centre. Their concept is to establish a “European style”licensed premises serving Café style food in a relaxed atmosphere, with wine andpossibly some beer available “on-tap” by the glass, and providing a mixture of liveand recorded mainstream popular musical entertainment.



The Subiaco Wine Room in Rockeby Road, just north of Hay Street has been givenas the closest illustration of the concept in Perth. However, it offers fine dining in amore formal environment than that proposed by Perthmetro.

It is difficult to predict the outcome of the proposed Lessee’s application for a“special facilities” liquor licence. However, the proximity of the Subiaco Hotel to theSubiaco Wine Room suggests that the proposed Majestic Quay Hotel, diagonallyopposite, and the Vintage Liquor Cellars opposite may not prevent approval. It isconsidered to be a reasonable risk to tie up the subject premises for up to six monthswhile the application is processed.

Retail tenancies in the East Perth redevelopment area are relatively difficult to lease.There is now a wide choice of premises from which tenants can select, which hasdriven rental values down. Whereas early leasings in Royal Street were achieved at$240/m2/pa net to $270/ m2/pa net, face rents in recent lettings have been in therange $200/m2/pa net to $240/ m2/pa net, before incentives are taken into account.

Before the rental holiday is considered, the offer from Perthmetro represents a netincome of $223.48/ m2/pa, when the following outgoings to be paid by the City aretaken into account:

Council Rates $4,483Water and Sewerage Charges $2,500Insurance $480Land Tax $800Common Area Cleaning $2,500External Building Maintenance $300

$11,063

It is common commercial practice to grant rent relief for anywhere from 6 to 12months at the beginning of a 10 year lease. The grant of one year in ten, rent-free,represents a 10% leasing incentive, which reduces the initial net effective rent to$201.13 per square metre per annum. That is considered to be a reasonableoutcome for the subject premises, in the current circumstances.

It is usual in this vicinity for retail tenancies to be assigned parking bays at noadditional rental. In this instance, the Regal Place carpark has been configured toinclude eight tenants car bays in a separate compound, representing approximatelyone bay for every 150 square metres leased. The allocation of two tenant bays to thistenancy is therefore in line with both commercial practice in the area, and theallocation ratio within the property.

Moved by Cr Tudori, seconded by Cr Sutherland



That the Council advertises its intention to enter into a lease withPerthmetro Pty Ltd (ACN 077 480 614) over Shop 4 at the Regal PlaceCarpark, 81 Royal Street, East Perth, on the following terms andconditions:-

Premises:Shop 4 on the frontage of the Regal Place Carpark, East Perth, comprising aletable area of 302.9 sqm, being the premises cross hatched on the planattached to this report;

Use of Premises:Wine Bar/Café, which is not to offer an Italian food menu;

Lease Term:Lease commencement ten 10 years with a Ten 10 year option of renewal;

Lease Commencement:Sixty (60) days after approval of a “special facilities” liquor licence overthese premises by the Director Liquor Licensing;

Initial Rental:$78,754 per annum gross ($260.00 per square metre), payable by monthlyinstalments of $6,562.83 in advance, plus GST fixed for the first three yearsof the lease;

Rent Reviews:Commencing from year 4, rental shall be indexed annually to the ConsumerPrice Index (all groups Perth), with rental to be adjusted to the market at theend of each five year period, subject to determination by an independentexpert appointed by the President of the Australian Property Institute in theevent of a dispute;

Rent Commencement:Twelve 12 months after commencement of the lease;

(Cont’d)

Outgoings:All outgoings, except service charges (energy consumption, waterconsumption and communications costs) are to be paid by the landlord;



Signage:The Lessee may, with the approval of the Lessor, affix a sign of theLessee’s choice to the outside of the building, provided that the Lessee firstobtains any necessary planning approval from the City;

Carparking:The Lessee shall be granted a licence to occupy two car bays in the tenantcarpark at no additional cost;

Documentation:This lease shall be documented in the form of the draft lease prepared byCorsers, on the City’s behalf. The Lessee shall pay the solicitor’s costsand the stamp duty assessed on the lease;

General Conditions:The Lessee’s offer is made conditional upon them obtaining writtenapprovals from the relevant authorities for the specified use of the premiseswithin 60 days of adoption of this resolution by the Council. The Lessee’soffer is also made conditional upon them obtaining approval for a “specialfacilities” liquor licence within six months of adoption of this resolution.

Discussion ensued

Motion to defer


That the motion relating to Wine Bar/Cafe - Shop 4 Regal Place Carpark,East Perth be deferred.


388/01 ADVERTISING RIGHTS - PADBURY WALK

BACKGROUND:

FILE REFERENCE: P1015530/2



RESPONSIBLE DIRECTOR: Garry Dunne Director Service UnitsDATE: 7 May 2001

In January 2000, tenders were invited for a five year licence to use both ends on theinside of the barrel-vaulted roof space of Padbury Walk for advertising purposes.

The Tender was advertised in the West Australian on Saturday 29 January 2000.

When the tender closed at 2.0pm on Wednesday 8 March 2000 three tenders werereceived.

At its meeting held on 11 April 2000, the Council adopted the following resolution:-

“That the most suitable tender being that submitted by Space-Time Media Pty Ltd touse both ends on the inside barrel-vaulted roof space of Padbury Walk for advertisingpurposes for an annual fee of $41, 860 plus GST be accepted”.


LegislationSection: 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995 (Disposal of Property)

Strategic PlanKey Result Area: EconomyObjective No: E41 Objective: Economy - A financially healthy City

Strategy: Asset Management : Develop acomprehensive Asset Management StrategyAction: Optimising the City’s assets by identifying thebest use of the asset

DETAILS:

Each time a progress report has been requested Space-Time Media Pty Ltd hasadvised that it was negotiating with its supplier in the United States for the provisionof plasma screens incorporating the latest digital technology.

It has become apparent that the Licensee may be unable to complete its contract tooperate digital advertising screens and this matter was brought to a head at a recentmeeting. As a result, the following advice has been received from Space-Time MediaPty Ltd:

“Despite my best efforts, we will not be able to progress the Padbury Walkadvertising in the short term.

A number of factors have conspired to block our progress. These include theterrible US dollar exchange rate causing large screen prices to skyrocket, the



sudden reluctance on the part of our bank to fund leasing prior to the anticipatedupswing in the economy mid next year, and the personal situation of one of ournon-executive stakeholders. All of these issues are unfortunately beyond my directpersonal control.

As discussed, Cell-media has promptly paid its rent despite gaining no revenuefrom the site - but we agree that this is not quite the point. The City wants tounderstandably develop it.

I believe the choices available are as follows:-

• Allow Cell-media to use the site for standard billboard/poster advertising with areview in 6 months time;

• rescind the lease and assign it to another party who can actively develop the

site.

While this is not the report that I would have liked to file, it will however allow the Cityto now move forward”.


INCOME:ACCOUNT NO: 145 530 000BUDGET ITEM: Air Space - Video PostersBUDGET PAGE NUMBER: 8BUDGETED AMOUNT: $42,000AMOUNT RECEIVED TO DATE: $42,208INCOME ACTUAL: $42,208

COMMENTS:

While Space-Time Media Pty Ltd has promptly paid its rent to date, that was not theonly objective in tendering the licence to operate digital advertising screens inPadbury Walk.

It is considered that the Licensee’s proposal to allow the installation of fixedbillboards as an interim measure would be contrary to the City’s second objective ofadding visual interest and colour in this space.

Accordingly, it is proposed that the Licensee’s offer to voluntarily terminate itscontract be accepted and that this opportunity be re-tendered as soon as possible.

It is known that at least one of the under-bidders remains interested in these sites,and that it would re-tender.



Moved by Cr Sutherland, seconded by Cr Stroud

That the Council accepts the offer from Space-Time Media Pty Ltd tosurrender its licence to use both ends on the inside barrel-vaulted roofspace of Padbury Walk for advertising purposes effective from 22 May2001.

Discussion ensued


389/01 BONUS PLOT RATIO ADVISORY PANEL

BACKGROUND:


At the special meeting of the Council held on 7 May 2001 it was agreed that thecomposition of the Bonus Plot Ratio Advisory Panel be deferred pending furtherconsideration.

The current role of the Bonus Plot Ratio Advisory Panel is as follows:-

To provide independent technical advice and make recommendations to theCouncil concerning development proposals seeking bonuses for additional plotratio and to consider and advise the Council on the design aspects of developmentwhere they interface with and impact on the public domain.

The current membership of the Panel is as follows:-

Members:

Mr Garry Hunt - Chief Executive OfficerMr Peter Monks- Manager Approval Services

Mr Steve WoodlandMr Graham WhitleyMr Hans Bollig(Vacant)



Deputies:

Mr Greg HowlettMr Darryl WayMr Chris AntillMr Ed Turner


Legislation Local Government Act 1995Section: 5.8

DETAILS:

Plot Ratio has been used as a planning tool in the control of development withincentral areas of towns and cities for many years. It was first described as “FloorSpace Index” (FSI) and was introduced into the United Kingdom in a planninghandbook on the redevelopment of central areas. At that time the rationale given forusing the floor space index or plot ratio as a planning tool was described as:-

“the theory on which the FSI survey is based is that sites can be developed up tovarious maxima of intensity according to their use, having regard to the need for astreet system adequate to accommodate the traffic, both vehicular and pedestrian,to be expected in various parts of the central area, sufficient parking spaces andaccess for goods vehicles to buildings and satisfactory daylight standards forbuildings”.

This rationale behind plot ratio as a planning tool remains valid today.

The concept of bonus plot ratio in Perth began in late 1968 as a result of a visit toPerth by the Senior Design Partner from Architects Skidmore, Owen and Merill fromNew York. He believed that there was a need for encouragement to be given todevelopers to provide facilities for the public which could be achieved through theprovision of plot ratio or floor space bonuses. As a result of discussions betweenArchitect, Mr Gres Cohen and the Council, a bonus plot ratio panel was formed in1969. This was to be a technical advisory panel and comprised three architects fromthe Royal Institute of Architects, two representatives of the Royal Australian PlanningInstitute, the City Planner, and the City Building Surveyor.

In September 1969 the panel prepared a policy for the proposed bonus system andfor the calculation of floor area within the central area. This policy paper set down afew definitions and some guidelines to establish under what

circumstances bonuses may be granted. These guidelines were used as the basisfor determining what aspects of a development would attract bonuses indevelopments presented to the panel. The amount of bonus awarded was not



predetermined for each particular type of development but based on individualassessment of the development currently being presented and any precedent alreadyestablished. The Panel did however have some rules for the maximum amount ofbonus which could be attracted by each of the areas within that policy.

In January 1975 a report was presented to the Town Planning Committee of theCouncil indicating that the Bonus Plot Ratio Panel had discussed the need to reviewthe basis of assessment of development proposals and to consider the broadeningof the scope and function of the panel as an advisory body. It requested the TownPlanning Committee give some consideration to extending the function of the Panelto embrace more broadly the environmental and aesthetic aspects of developmentwithin the centre of the City. A meeting between the Town Planning Committee andthe Bonus Plot Ratio Advisory Panel was held. It is not clear what the resultantoutcome was from that meeting, however, the panel continued to meet and evaluatedevelopments in the same way as it had done in the past.

At about this time the Royal Australian Planning Institute withdrew its representationon the panel and the number of Architects reduced to two. By the late 1970’s themembership of the panel was the City Planner, the City Building Surveyor, andArchitects, Mr Peter Arney and Mr Gres Cohen.

Many of the bonuses awarded up to that time were for the provision of pedestrianspaces in one form or another. These included the central pedestrian space andupgrading of the heritage building at Cloisters/Mount Newman House, the forecourt tothe AMP Building on St George’s Terrace, the pedestrian underpass and space atAllendale Square and the pedestrian forecourt space and financial contributions forthe underpass in connection with the St Martins City Centre tower in St George’sTerrace.

Current Situation

The 1985 City of Perth City Planning Scheme contains provisions under Clause 137which relate to the amount of plot ratio that is permitted in various parts of the CentralArea. The Scheme, by virtue of Clause 138 enables the Council to grant plot ratio upto 20% in excess of that prescribed in Clause 137 where:-

“in the opinion of the Council, the proposed development includes a community orother facility or amenity and that facility or amenity and the design, standard andnature of the development as a whole constitute a significant improvement to theamenities or environment of the central area.”



Since the restructuring of the Council the membership of the Bonus Plot RatioAdvisory Panel in recent times has primarily consisted of two architects and twoplanners, the Chief Executive Officer, and the Manager - Approval Services.

As stated previously there is no set and well defined method of measuring bonuses.This has been largely based on the extent of the offer being made by the developer interms of its contribution to the community as a public facility and the amount ofbonuses awarded for similar contributions in the past.

The current City Planning Scheme also requires the Council to appoint an AdvisoryCommittee. Clause 138(2) states:-

“The Council shall appoint an advisory committee for the purpose of consideringand advising the Council with respect to proposed buildings which have a plot ratioin excess of that prescribed by this Division.”

Role of the Panel

The role of the Panel is to provide independent technical advice and makerecommendations to the Council concerning development proposals seekingbonuses for additional plot ratio and to consider and advise the Council on the designaspects of development where they interface with and impact on the public domain.

Panel Membership

In the past the panel membership has been made up of external professionals andinternal technical advisers to the Council.

The membership of the panel are drawn from the Royal Australian Institute ofArchitects and the Royal Australian Planning Institute. These professional institutesnominate a panel of names from which the Council approves the nominatedrepresentatives. Employee membership of the Chief Executive Officer and theManager Approval Services is approved by the Council.

The members have deputies to ensure that there are no delays in the assessmentprocess and to ensure that there are no conflicts of interest should a panel memberdeclare an interest in a proposal which is the subject of a bonus plot ratio application.


Not applicable.

COMMENTS:

It is suggested that in giving consideration to the future membership of the Panel,members should have experience, knowledge and an understanding of urban andbuilt environment design matters particularly with regard to major Central City



developments and their relationship with the public domain. The members should berecognised and have a well respected profile in the design community.

That Elected Members give consideration to the role and composition of the BonusPlot Ratio Advisory Panel.


That in accordance with Section 5.8 of the Local Government Act 1995, the CouncilAPPROVES BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the establishment of the Bonus PlotRatio Advisory Panel with the following guidelines:-

1. Role:

To provide independent technical advice and make recommendations to theCouncil concerning development proposals seeking bonuses for additional plotratio and to consider and advise the Council on the design aspects ofdevelopment where they interface with and impact on the public domain.

2. Membership:

• Two members and two deputies (recommended from the nominationssubmitted by the Royal Australian Planning Institute);

• Two members and two deputies (recommended from the nominationssubmitted by the Royal Institute of Architects);

• Two Chief Executive Officer representatives;

3. Quorum:

At least 50% of the membership of the Committee.

Moved by Cr Tan, seconded by Cr Davidson

That in accordance with Section 5.8 of the Local Government Act 1995, theCouncil APPROVES BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the establishment ofthe Bonus Plot Ratio Advisory Panel with the following guidelines:-

(Cont’d)

1. Role:



To provide independent technical advice and make recommendationsto the Council concerning development proposals seeking bonuses foradditional plot ratio and to consider and advise the Council on thedesign aspects of development where they interface with and impacton the public domain;

2. Membership:

• • Two members and two deputies (recommended from thenominations submitted by the Royal Australian PlanningInstitute);

• • Two members and two deputies (recommended from thenominations submitted by the Royal Institute of Architects);

• • Two Chief Executive Officer representatives;• • Two Elected Members;

3. Quorum:


The motion was put and lost as an absolute majority was not achieved

As requested by Cr Tudori the votes were recorded as follows:-

For: Crs Tan, Tudori, Davidson and MacGill

Against: The Lord Mayor and Crs Sutherland, McEvoy and Stroud

Motion to reconsider the item


That the item be reconsidered

The motion to reconsider the item was put and carried




That in accordance with Section 5.8 of the Local Government Act 1995, theCouncil APPROVES BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the establishment ofthe Bonus Plot Ratio Advisory Panel with the following guidelines:-

1. Role:

To provide independent technical advice and make recommendationsto the Council concerning development proposals seeking bonuses foradditional plot ratio and to consider and advise the Council on thedesign aspects of development where they interface with and impacton the public domain.

2. Membership:

• • Two members and two deputies (recommended from thenominations submitted by the Royal Australian PlanningInstitute);

• • Two members and two deputies (recommended from thenominations submitted by the Royal Institute of Architects);

• • One Chief Executive Officer representative;

3. Quorum:


Discussion ensued


390/01 BUDGET COMMITTEE MEETINGS HELD ON 27 MARCHAND 10 AND 24 APRIL 2001

BACKGROUND:

FILE REFERENCE: P.1014037-4



RESPONSIBLE DIRECTOR: Noelene Jennings, Director Corporate ServicesDATE: 8 May 2001

DETAILS:

The role and function of the Budget Committee is to:-

• consider and recommend to the Council the Budget of the City for the upcomingfinancial year;

• monitor the progress of the current year’s budget and the Principal Activity Plan.

COMMENTS:

The minutes of the meetings of the Budget Committee held on 27 March and 10 and24 April 2001 are detailed in Schedule 2. It is suggested the minutes be noted.

Moved by Cr Davidson, seconded by Cr Stroud

That the Council notes the confirmed minutes of the Budget Committeemeetings held on 27 March and 10 and 24 April 2001.


391/01 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CITY OF PERTHPARKING LOCAL LAW 1999

BACKGROUND:


In December 1999, the present Parking Local Law came into operation, withpractical application occurring in January 2000.

Contained within that Local Law were modified penalty amounts considered relevantto the various offences contained within that Local Law.



Practical application made apparent various anomalies within the modified penaltyamounts that related to certain offences, in comparison to other modified penaltyamounts for offences of a similar nature.

State legislation has also altered considerably by way of the repeal of the RoadTraffic Code 1975 and the enactment of the Road Traffic Code 2000


LegislationCity of Perth Parking Local law 1999; Local Government Act 1995; Road Traffic Code2000, Clause 7 Agreement to Implement Competition Policy and Related Reforms

Strategic PlanKey Result Area: Urban Development and TransportObjective No: U3 Objective: Ensure vehicular traffic movement in the

City is effective and efficient

DETAILS:

MODIFIED PENALTIES.

Amendments 2.1 to 2.4 will bring about a common modified penalty wheredesignated parking areas have been set aside specifically for commercial usepurposes, such as Taxi Zones, Loading Zones, Charter Bus Bays and Al frescoeating areas and remove varying modified penalties for those areas, that occurred atthe time of the making of the current Parking Local Law.

The present modified penalty amounts are presently set at $42.00 for Loading Zones,$55.00 for Alfresco dining zones or $100.00 for a Charter Bus zone.

The proposed amendment would place all penalties to the one common amount of$100.00 for those zones.

ROAD TRAFFIC CODE 2000

The vast majority of the required amendments, numbers 3 to 13 are as a result of therecently introduced Road Traffic Code 2000, a State based piece of legislation thatwas required to bring about a national uniformity of driving and parking practices.

All Local Government Authorities within Western Australia that utilise a parking Local-law, be it an individual local law that relates only to the one Local GovernmentAuthority, or a model parking Local-law, have been required to make such changes inorder that compliance occurs.



The more detailed or specific the contents of the Local-law, the greater the number ofamendments required, the more basic the contents of the Local-law utilised, the lessamendments required.

The Western Australian Municipal Association (WAMA) in conjunction with theMinistry of Transport formed a working group and advisory body to Local GovernmentAuthorities specifically for the changes to State legislation and the resultant changesrequired to Local Government legislation.

IMPOUNDING OF GOODS ( including vehicles)

Amendment number 14 is required in order that the City may enforce the provisionsof the Local Government Act 1995 in regard to the impounding of goods, includingvehicles.

The need for those provisions grows daily within the City, with car park access waysbeing blocked by illegally parked vehicles and there-by not allowing fee payingcustomers to exit or enter, secured taxi zones being parked out by vehicles other thantaxi’s, there-by forcing taxi passengers to be picked up and dropped off in the middleof carriageways rather that at the kerb side and the same for charter bus bays,charter buses and the passengers that utilise those vehicles.

PERMITS

Item number 15.1 would allow for greater use of Loading Zones, by expanding thecategory of vehicles presently allowed to use those zones, for example commercialand delivery vehicles only, to also include vehicles issued with a permit by the City, forexample, appropriately recognised retailers within the City.


Costs associated with the proposed amendments are minimal and relate toadvertising only.

Advertising costs of approximately $1,000 will be covered from the ComplianceServices operating budget.

COMMENTS:

The proposed amendments will remove modified penalty anomalies from the ParkingLocal law and bring about equity of penalty to offences of a like kind.

The amendments will also bring about compliance to the requirements of the RoadTraffic Code 2000.



The proposed amendment to Clause 2.3(1)(a), vehicles parking in a Taxi Zone hasalready received full support of the Taxi Industry Board.

Section 3.12 of the Act specifies the procedure for making a new local law, which isas follows:-

• a summary of the purpose and effect of the proposed local law is to be read aloudat a council meeting by the presiding person;

• give state-wide public notice on at least 2 days (7 days apart) stating that:-- Council proposes to make a local law the purpose and effect of which is

summarised in the notice;- a copy of the proposed local law may be inspected or obtained at any place

specified in the notice;- submissions about the proposed local law may be made to the Council within

6 weeks after the notice is first given;• as soon as the notice is given, a copy of the proposed local law and a copy of the

notice is to be sent to the Minister; and• provide a copy of the proposed local law, in accordance with the notice, to any

person requesting it.

After the last day for submissions, the Council is to consider any submissions madeand may make the local law (special majority) as proposed or make a local law(special majority) that is not significantly different from what was proposed.

After making the local law, the Council is to publish it in the Gazette, give a copy of itto the Minister and send copies and explanatory memoranda to the Joint StandingCommittee on Delegated Legislation.

After the local law has been published in the Gazette Council is to give State-widepublic notice:-

• stating the title of the local law;• summarising the purpose and effect of the local law (specifying the day on which it

comes into operation);• advising that copies of the local law may be inspected or obtained from the

Council's office.

The following time frame is proposed:-

22 May 2001 Finalise and read out the purpose and effect of theproposed local law at a Council Meeting.

2 June and 9 June 2001 Advertise two times, seven days apart.14 July 2001 Close of receipt of public submissions.

14 August 2001 The Council considers submissions, if any, and makesthe new local law.

17 August 2001 Publish new law in Government Gazette.



31 August 2001 Law comes into effect 14 days after gazettal.

Summary of the Purpose and Effect of a Proposed New Standing OrdersLocal Law

Draft statement to be read aloud at the Council meeting by the presiding person:-

The Council intends amending the City of Perth Parking Local law 1999 in orderto:-• Have one modified penalty amount for offences in parking service bays;• Make the Parking Local law comply with changes brought about by the

introduction of the Road Traffic Code 2000;• Allow for enforcing the tow away provisions allowed for within the Local

Government Act 1995;• Allow for greater vehicle usage of Loading Zones.

The City of Perth Parking Local law allows for the effective management of trafficwithin the City.

The amendments to the Parking Local law will ensure that it remains a viable,efficient and effective piece of legislation.

Cr Sutherland departed the Chamber at 7.10pm

Moved by Cr Tudori, seconded by Cr Tan

That:-

1. the Council APPROVES BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the amendmentsto the City of Perth Parking Local Law 1999, in accordance withSection 3.12 of the Local Government Act 1995, as follows:-

2. the third schedule be amended by:-

2.1 in Item, Penalty Number 3, delete the figures and period“2.15”;

(Cont’d)2.2 in Item, Penalty Number 4, delete the figures, brackets and

period “2.3(1)(a)” and “2.8(1)(a)”;



2.3 in Item, Penalty Number 2, insert the figures, brackets andperiods,“2.15”,“2.3(1)(a)” and “2.8(1)(a)”;

2.4 in Item, Penalty Number 4, insert the figures, brackets andperiod “6.6(1)”;

3. clause 2.3 be amended by:-

3.1 deleting the number “6”, in sub clause (6), and replacing itwith the number “8”;

3.2 deleting the number “5”, in sub clause (5) and replacing itwith the number “7”;

3.3 deleting the number “4” in sub clause (4), and replacing itwith the number “6”;

3.4 deleting the number “3”, in sub clause (3) and replacing itwith the number “5”;

3.5 deleting all words and numbers in the presently existingclause 2.3(3) and replacing them with the words, numbers,periods and brackets;

“2.3(4) A person must not stop or park a vehicle on or in anarea of a carriageway signed or marked as a keep cleararea”;

3.6 creating a new clause 2.3(3) with the words, numbers,brackets and periods;

“A person must not stop a vehicle at the side of acarriageway marked with a continuous yellow edged line.”;

(Cont’d)

4. clause 3.4(3)(d) be amended by:-

4.1 deleting all words and numbers contained in that sub clauseand replacing them with the following;



“(d)(i) A person shall not stop a vehicle on a carriagewaywithin 20 metres from the nearest point of anintersecting carriageway at an intersection with traffic-control signals, unless the driver stops at a place on alength of carriageway, or in an area, to which a parkingcontrol sign applies and the driver is permitted to stopat that place under this Local Law.

(ii) A person shall not stop a vehicle on a carriageway sothat any portion of the vehicle is within 10 metres ofthe prolongation of the nearer edge of any intersectingcarriageway (without traffic-control signals)intersecting that carriageway on the side on which thevehicle is stopped, unless the person stops:-

(a) at a place on a carriageway, or in an area, towhich a parking control sign applies and theperson is permitted to stop at that place under thisLocal Law; or

(b) if the intersection is a T-intersection along thecontinuous side of the continuing road at theintersection”.


5.1 in sub clause (1) deleting the number “9” and replacing itwith the number “10” and deleting the number “18” andreplacing it with the number “20”;

5.2 deleting the number “2” in sub clause (2) and replacing it withthe number “3”:-

(Cont’d)

5.2.1 immediately after the number “1”, inserting the wordand number “and 2”;

5.3 creating a new sub clause (2) with the words, numbers,brackets an periods;



“(2) Subject to sub clause (3), a person must not stop avehicle so that any portion of the vehicle is within 3metres of the departure side, or within 10 metres of theapproach side of;

(a) a marked foot crossing, that is not at anintersection;

(b) a bicycle crossing equipped with bicycle crossinglights, that is not at an intersection”;

6. immediately after clause 3.14(8)(c)(ii) a new clause is created with thewords, numbers, brackets and periods:-

“3.15 A person must not stop or park a vehicle in a sharedzone unless the vehicle;

(a) stops at a place on a length of carriageway, or in anarea, to which a parking control sign applies and thevehicle is permitted to stop at that place under this LocalLaw;

(b) stops in a parking bay and the vehicle is permitted tostop in the parking bay under this Local Law;

(c) the vehicle is dropping off, or picking up, passengers orgoods; or

(d) the vehicle is engaged in the door-to-door delivery orcollection of goods, or in the collection of waste orgarbage”.

(Cont’d)

7. clause 2.3(1)(d) be amended by:-

7.1 immediately after the letter and brackets “(d)” and before theword “unless”, insert the number and brackets “(i)”;

7.2 after the word and semicolon “sign;” insert the words, numbers, brackets and periods, following;



“or (ii)(a) if the vehicle displays an ACROD sticker.

(b) The vehicle may park continuously on a length ofcarriageway, to which a “permissive parking” signapplies (except in a parking area for people withdisabilities) or twice the period indicated on the sign”.

8. clause 2.3(1)(e) be amended by:-

8.1 immediately after the letter and brackets “(e)” and before theword “other”, include the number and bracket “(i)”;

8.2 after the word “or” include the words, numbers, bracketsand periods following:-

“(ii) if a vehicle is too wide or long to fit completely within asingle parking bay, the person stopping the vehicle shallpark the vehicle within the minimum number of parkingbays needed to park that vehicle; or”;


9.1 in sub clause (3)(d) deleting all words and numberscontained in that sub clause and replacing them with:-

“(3)(d)(I) on a carriageway within 20 metres from thenearest point of an intersecting carriageway at anintersection with traffic-control signals, unless the vehiclestops or parks at a place on a length of carriageway, or in anarea, to which a parking control sign applies and the vehicleis permitted to stop or park at that place under this LocalLaw.

(Cont’d)

(ii) on a carriageway so that any portion of the vehicleis within 10 metres of the prolongation of the neareredge of any intersecting carriageway (withouttraffic-control signals) intersecting thatcarriageway on the side on which the vehicle isstopped, or parked unless the vehicle stops orparks:-



(a) at a place on a carriageway, or in an area, towhich a parking control sign applies and thevehicle is permitted to stop or park at that placeunder this Local Law; or

(b) if the intersection is a T-intersection - along thecontinuous side of the continuing road at theintersection”.


10.1 inserting after sub clause (2)(d), the following:-

“(e) a bus lane;(f) a transit lane;(g) a truck lane; or(h) a bicycle lane,

unless the person is driving a public bus or taxi and isimmediately dropping off, or picking up, passengers”.

11. part 3, stopping and parking on roads and other areas to be amendedby:-

11.1 Immediately following clause 3.14 in its entirety insert thefollowing:-

(Cont’d)

“Stopping on a carriageway - heavy and long vehicles”

“3.15(1) A person shall not park a vehicle or anycombination of vehicles that, together with anyprojection on, or load carried by, the vehicle orcombination of vehicles, is more than 7.5 metresin length or exceeds a GVM of 4.5 t -



(a) on a carriageway in a built-up area, for anyperiod exceeding one hour, unless engaged inthe picking up or setting down of goods; or

(b) on a carriageway outside a built-up area,except on the shoulder of the carriageway, orin a truck bay or other area set aside for theparking of goods vehicles.

(2) nothing in this sub clause mitigates the limitationsor conditions imposed by any other regulation ortraffic sign relating to the parking or stopping ofvehicles”.


12.1 after all words associated with the definition “footpath”and before any words associated with the definition“kerb”, insert the following;

“Keep Clear Area - means a portion of a carriageway thatlies;

(a) between 2 consecutive signs inscribed with the words“KEEP CLEAR” and each with an arrow pointinggenerally towards the other; or

(b) between a sign inscribed with the words “KEEPCLEAR” and whichever of the following that lies in thegeneral direction indicated by an arrow inscribed onthe sign

(Cont’d)

(i) the end of the carriageway; or

(ii) an area in which stopping is prohibited; or

(iii) the furthest point of “KEEP CLEAR” markings.

“keep clear marking” means the words ‘keep clear’marked across all or part of a carriageway, with or



without continuous lines marked across all or part ofthe carriageway;”;

12.2 after all words associated with the definition “eating area”and before any words associated with the definition“emergency vehicle”, insert the following;

“ ‘edge line’, for a carriageway, means a line marked alongthe carriageway at or near the far left or far right side ofthe carriageway;”;

12.3 after all words associated with the definition “loadingzone” and before any words associated with the definition“median strip” insert the following:-

“marked foot crossing” means a portion of a carriageway

(a) at a place with pedestrian lights facing pedestrianscrossing the carriageway, and traffic-control signalsfacing drivers driving on the carriageway; and

(b) indicated by a different road surface, or between 2continuous or broken lines, or rows of studs ormarkers, or the road surface substantially from oneside of the carriageway to the other;”;

12.4 after all words associated with the definition “bicycle” andbefore any words associated with the definition “bus”,insert the following;

(Cont’d)

“bicycle crossing lights” means a device designed toshow, at different times, a green, yellow or red bicyclecrossing light:”;

12.5 after all words associated with the definition “servicezone” and before any words associated with the definition“sign” insert the following;

“shared zone” means the network of roads in an area with-

(a) “shared zone” sign on each road into the area,indicating the same number; and



(b) an “end shared zone” sign on each road out of thearea;”;

12.6 in relation to the definition “road verge”, immediately afterthe word “line” and immediately before the word “but”,insert the following;

“and also includes the term “nature strip”.

12.7 in relation to the definition “sign”, immediately after theword “sign” where second occurring, and immediatelybefore the word “inscription”, insert the following:-

“permissive parking sign,” and immediately after the word“vehicles” insert the following:-

“and any sign bearing a reasonable likeness of anyrepresentation of a traffic sign or permissive parking signcontained within the Road Traffic Code”.

12.8 in relation to the definition “parking facility” immediatelyafter the words “ticket machine zone” and immediatelybefore the words “parking bay”, insert the following:-

“truck zone, work zone, taxi zone, bus zone, charter buszone, public bus zone, bicycle zone,”.

(Cont’d)

and immediately after the words “or a specified class ofpersons” and immediately before the word “for”, insertthe following;

“or a specified class of vehicle,”.

12.9 in relation to the definition “special purpose vehicle”,delete all words after the word “vehicle”, where firstoccurring and insert the following;

“ has the meaning given to it in the Road Traffic Code andalso includes a postal vehicle and commercial vehiclesowned by the City.”;



12.10 in relation to the definition “Road Traffic Code”,immediately after the word “code” where secondoccurring, delete the numbers “1975” and insert thenumbers “2000”;

12.11 in relation to the definition “loading zone”, immediatelyafter the word “vehicle” where second occurring, andimmediately before the semicolon, and the following, “oran authorised vehicle.”;

12.12 in relation to the definition “No Parking area”;

12.12.1 in sub-clause (a) delete the word “words”, andinsert “symbol denoting”.;

12.12.2 in sub-clause (b) delete the word “words”, andinsert “symbol denoting”.;

12.13 in relation to the definition “No Stopping area”;

12.13.1 in sub-clause (a) delete the word “words”, andinsert “symbol denoting”;

12.13.2 in sub-clause (b) delete the word “words”, andinsert “symbol denoting”;

(Cont’d)

12.13.3 in sub-clause (b)(ii) after the word andsemicolon “prohibited;” insert the word “or”;

12.13.3 after sub-clause (b)(ii) in its entirety insert thefollowing new sub-clause;

“(c) adjacent to a continuous yellow edge line.”;

12.14 in relation to the definition “Parking area”;

12.14.1 delete all words, letters, numbers and bracketsafter the word “area”, and insert “has themeaning given to it in the Road Traffic Code.”.

13. the third schedule be amended by:-



13.1 in item, penalty number two (2), insert the figures,brackets and periods “2.3(4), 2.3(3), 2.3(8), 3.4(3)(d)(i),3.4(3)(d)(ii), 3.8(2)(a), 308(2)(b), 3.15(1)(a), 3.15(1)(b)”;

13.2 in that same item number deleting the figures, bracketsand period “3.4(3)(d)”;

13.3 in item penalty number four (4) delete the numbers,brackets and period “2.3(3)” and in that same item numberinsert the figures, brackets and period “2.3(5)”;


14.1 after the number “3” and before the word “The” insert thebrackets and number “(1)”;

14.2 after the word and period “Act.” Insert the new followingsub-clauses;

“2.23(2) any offence against any provision of this locallaw is prescribed to be a contravention thatcan lead to impounding for the purposes ofsection 3.37. of the Act.

(Cont’d)

2.23(3) (a) an employee authorised specifically forthe purposes of section 3.39. of the Act andthis clause may remove and impound anyvehicle that is involved in a contravention thatcan lead to impounding; and

(b) a person so authorised may use reasonable force to exercise the power given by sub-clause (a).

2.23(4) the form of the notice referred to in section3.42. of the Act is set out in Schedule 4.”;

2.23(5) a person is not entitled to make any claim, byway of damages or otherwise, against theauthorised person or the City in respect of avehicle removed and impounded under theprovisions of these local laws, or against any



person who purchases a vehicle disposed ofby the City under the provisions of the Act.”;

14.3 after all the contents contained within Schedule 3, insert anew schedule, being “Schedule 4”.


15.1 in sub-clause (1)(a) immediately after the word “vehicle”where second occurring and immediately before thesemicolon inserting the following:-

“or a vehicle authorised by permit that is current andprominently displayed”;

15.2 in sub-clause (2) after the word “vehicle” wheresecond occurring inserting the following:-

“or an authorised vehicle”.

(Cont’d)

16. clause 2.14 be amended by:-16.1 deleting the word, “station”, where-ever occurring and

inserting the word, “facility”.

Schedule 4

NOTIFICATION OF IMPOUNDMENT OF VEHICLE

Date…./…./….

To: (1)………………………………………………………………………

of: (2)……………………………………………………………………….

Department of Transport records indicate that you are the registered ownerof the vehicle detailed below and notice is hereby given that the vehicle hasbeen impounded in accordance with the provisions of the LocalGovernment Act 1995.

Vehicle Registration No: (3) ……………………………………………

Impounded from: (4) …………………………………………………….



Side of Street: (5)…………………………………………………………

Between: (6)……………………………… and (7)……………………..

Date: (8)……………………………… Time (9)…………………………

The vehicle has been taken to a secure facility at the following address:

(10)………………………………………………………………………….

………………………………………………………………………………

and is available for release, after payment has been processed (see below),between the following hours:

Monday to Friday:

(11)……………………….(Cont’d)

Prior to the release of the vehicle all necessary payments must be paid, infull, at the Customer Service Centre, Ground Floor, Council House, 27 StGeorge’s Terrace, PERTH, which is open from 8.30am until 5.00pm Monday- Friday (excluding Public Holidays). Payments can be made by either cashor cheque and EFTPOS facilities are also available.

The following documentation is required before payment can be acceptedand release of the vehicle is permitted:

Current Vehicle Registration Document.Drivers licence or other legal form of identification.Payment receipt (required for vehicle release at secure facility).

IT IS A REQUIREMENT THAT ALL PAYMENTS ARE RECEIVED PRIOR TOTHE RELEASE OF THE VEHICLE.

If you have an inquiry in regards to this notice (or monies owing to date),please call Compliance Parking Services between 9:00am and 4:30pmMonday to Friday (excluding Public Holidays).

Costs: Vehicle impound fee: (12)….Additional days storage fee or part thereof (13)……



Take note: Unless all fees are paid for and the vehicle collected within twomonths from the date of impounding, the City of Perth may sell the subjectvehicle.

(1) Name of owner.

(2) Address of owner.

(3) Vehicle registration number.

(4) Street name (location where vehicle impounded from).

(5) Side of Street (location where vehicle impounded from).

(6) First point position in location where vehicle impounded from.

(7) Second point position in location where vehicle impounded from.

(Cont’d)

(8) Date vehicle impounded.

(9) Time vehicle impounded.

(10) Address of secure location vehicle impounded to.

(11) Hours of business.

(12) Cost of vehicle impound fee.

(13) Cost of additional days storage fee.


392/01 REVIEW OF DELEGATIONS OF AUTHORITY

BACKGROUND:

FILE REFERENCE: P1009409-4RESPONSIBLE DIRECTOR: Noelene Jennings, Director Corporate Services



DATE: 30 March 2001

Section 5.46 of the Local Government Act 1995 requires that the register ofDelegations of Authority be reviewed at least once every financial year.

The current register of delegations is detailed in Schedule 3.


Legislation Local Government Act 1995Section 5.46

DETAILS:

The Local Government Act 1995 provides that the register of the delegations ofauthority made by the Council is required to be reviewed at least once every financialyear.

The Council last reviewed the Register of Delegations at its meeting held on 11 April2000.

A review of the register of Delegations of Authority was undertaken to ensure that it isup to date with current legislation and aligned to the current operations of the Council.

The following amendments are proposed to be made to the register:-

3.9 Building Services - Notices

It is recommended that the Function Delegated be amended to read“Authority to form opinions and to issue, withdraw or amend Notices, makecomplaints to the Courts, recover costs incurred, and all other powers ofthe local government pursuant to Part XV of the Local Government(Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1960”.

3.14 Temporary Closure of Streets for Street Parties and Events onRoads

It is recommended that the References be amended to include “Part 6 ofthe Activities on Thoroughfares and Trading in Thoroughfares and PublicPlaces Local Law”.

3.15 Unauthorised Works in the Street

It is recommended that the delegation be amended to read as follows:-

Title: “Notices Under Schedule 3.1 of the Local Government Act 1995



Function Delegated:

Authority to serve notices for matters listed in Schedule 3.1 of the LocalGovernment Act 1995 and City of Perth Local Laws.

Conditions:

1. A direct or immediate hazard, including an obstruction, exists formembers of the public, pedestrians, neighbours, vehicles;

2. Damage to private property, public places or thoroughfares islikely;

3. Possible increase in stormwater run-off; or,

4. An unsightly condition exists that is prejudicial to nearbyproperties.

Delegated by the Council to:

Chief Executive Officer

Delegated by the Chief Executive Officer to:

Director Service UnitsManager Compliance ServicesCo-ordinator Urban EnvironmentOperations Co-ordinator.

Reference:

Section 3.25 and Schedule 3.1 of the Local Government Act 1995.City of Perth Local Laws permitting the power to serve notices to owners oroccupiers of land, in accordance with Schedule 3.1 of the LocalGovernment Act 1995)”.

3.16 Works in the Street

It is recommended that Condition (1) be amended to read “That theproposed works are in accordance with the Activities on Thoroughfaresand Trading in Thoroughfares and Public Places Local Law, and do notadversely affect the safety, functionality, and aesthetics of the street oradjoining properties to an unacceptable degree”.

It is also recommended that the Reference be amended by adding“Clauses 2.13 and Part 6 of the Activities in Thoroughfares and Trading inThoroughfares and Public Places Local Law”.



3.17 Fencing and Crossovers to Construction Sites

It is recommended that the Conditions be amended to read “Authority to bein accordance with the Activities on Thoroughfares and Trading inThoroughfares and Public Places Local Law and Policy SU18 - BuildingSites Adjacent to Forrest Place, Hay Street and Murray Street Malls”.

It is also recommended that the Reference be amended to include“Clauses 2.4 and 2.5 of Activities on Thoroughfares and Trading inThoroughfares and Public Places Local Law”.

3.22 Removal and Disposal of Abandoned Vehicles:

It is recommended that the Conditions be amended to read Authority to bein accordance with Part 3, Division 3, Subdivision 4 of the LocalGovernment Act 1995 and Part 4 of the Activities in Thoroughfares andTrading in Thoroughfares and Public Places Local Law”.

It is also recommended that the Reference be amended to include “Part 3,Division 3, Subdivision 4 of the Local Government Act 1995, Clause 29 ofthe Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996, andPart 4 of the Activities in Thoroughfares and Trading in Thoroughfaresand Public Places Local Law”.

3.26 City Planning Scheme - Planning Powers

It is recommended that the Function Delegated be amended to include “(v)service and enforcement of Notices, and institution of legal action underSection 10 of the Town Planning and Development Act 1928 (asamended) as the responsible authority for enforcing observance of thescheme.”It is also recommended that the Delegations by the Chief Executive Officerbe amended to include “Manager Compliance Services(limited to (v),above)”.

3.27 Appointment of Authorised Persons

It is recommended that the Function Delegated be amended to read“Authority to appoint employees of the City of Perth as ‘authorisedpersons’ under Section 9.10 (1) of the Local Government Act 1995, for thepurpose of enforcing legislation and receipt of payment on behalf of theCouncil.”



It is also recommended that the Reference be amended, in light of thereview of Local Laws, as follows:-

◊ Replace the “Streets and Footpaths Local Law” and “ObstructingAnimals and Vehicles Local Law” with “Activities on Thoroughfares andTrading on Thoroughfares and Public Places Local Law”.

◊ Replace the “Eating Areas Local Law” with “Alfresco Dining Local Law”. ◊ Delete the “Noises Local Law” and “Street Trading Local Law”.

3.28 Legal Proceedings - Various Statutes

It is recommended that the Function Delegated be amended to read“Authority to institute, withdraw, and suspend legal proceedings throughthe Council's Solicitors and/or authorised officer(s) for the recovery of anypenalties, and for the punishment of any person committing an offenceunder the Health Act 1911, Litter Act 1979-1981, Local Government Act1995, Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1960, TownPlanning and Development Act 1928 (as amended), City PlanningScheme 1985, Bush Fires Act 1954 and Environmental Protection Act1968, and Regulations or local laws made thereunder which it is the dutyof the Local Authority to enforce”.

It is also recommended that the Reference be amended by adding the“Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1960, Town Planningand Development Act 1928 (as amended), and City Planning Scheme1985”.

3.29 Legal Proceedings - Parking

It is recommended that the Reference be amended by replacing “ParkingFacilities Act 1956-1982” with “Local Government Act 1995 and City ofPerth Parking Local Law 1999”.’

3.30 Residential and Visitor Parking permit Applications:

It is recommended that references to “Parking Facilities Act 1956-1982” bereplaced with “Local Government Act 1995 and City of Perth ParkingLocal Law 1999”.’

The following additions are proposed to be made to the register:-

Finalisation of Property Sales and Leases by Private Treaty



Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995 provides that the Council is togive a minimum of 14 days notice of its intention to enter into a lease by privatetreaty in a newspaper freely circulating in the district, inviting submissions fromany interested party, which must then be considered by a subsequent meeting ofthe Council before the transaction can be finalised.

Since the Act came into operation the City has entered into a significant numberof property sales and leases by private treaty. In all cases, but one, no objectionshave been received as a result of advertising the City’s intention to undertakethese transactions. However, the Council has had to deal with the balance ofthese matters twice: firstly to consider the proposal and to resolve to advertise anintention to enter into the transaction; and secondly, to review any submissionsreceived as a result of advertising, and to resolve to finalise the transaction.

In order to improve the efficiency of the process it is proposed that a delegationof authority be granted to the Chief Executive Officer to finalise any property saleor lease by private treaty only where no submissions have been received as aresult of advertising under Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act.

It is submitted that this proposal will not frustrate the intention of the LocalGovernment Act to facilitate transparency of Local Government, as anytransaction where a submission was received as a result of advertising wouldcontinue to be the subject of a second report to the Council, so that it can giveproper consideration to the submission, or submissions, in order to determinethe appropriate course of action.

Legal advice has confirmed that such a delegation may be granted by theCouncil.

The following delegation is therefore proposed:-

Function Delegated:

Authority to finalise any property sale or lease by private treaty where nosubmissions have been received as a result of advertising under Section 3.58of the Local Government Act 1995.

Conditions:

1. Authority to be in accordance with Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act1995.

2. There being no submissions received following the advertising of theproposal.



3. The delegation not applying to property exceeding the prescribed maximumvalue or any future regulation prohibiting such a delegation.



Reference:

Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995.

Annual Public Events

Over the past years, the City has approved and supported a number of largecommunity and sporting annual events. These include:-

• City to Surf.• New Year’s Eve celebrations.• Anzac Day.• Christmas Pageant.• Rally Australia.• Australia Day celebrations.

Delegated authority for the temporary closure of streets for events and theallocation of recreational reserves for various activities is already granted to theChief Executive Officer. However, because of the significance of these events inthe city, every year a report is prepared and presented to the Council onindividual events. Most years, the events are identical to the previous events orwith minor amendments. The reports generally seek approval for the event, useof reserves, road closures and associated parking restrictions and costs. Thecosts are also included in annual budgets.

The cost relating to Rally Australia and Skyworks are usually the subject ofseparate reports.

In order to improve the efficiency of the process it is proposed that a delegationof authority be granted to the Chief Executive Officer to approve the followingannual events and associated road closures, parking restrictions, and costs:-

1. City to Surf.2. New Year’s Eve celebrations.3. Anzac Day.4. Christmas Pageant.5. Rally Australia (excluding costs).6. Australia Day celebrations (excluding costs).



Prior to the issue of any approval for these events, the Elected Members wouldbe notified and given the opportunity to comment.

The following delegation is therefore proposed:-

Authority to approve the following annual events and associated road closures,parking restrictions, and costs:-


Conditions:

1. The Authority to be in accordance with Policy CS2, ExpenditureAuthorisations - Annual Items.

2. Costs are approved in the annual budget. 3. Compliance with local laws. 4. Submission of a comprehensive risk management plan. 5. The proposed event to be approved under delegated authority is to be made

available to Elected Members prior to the event being approved.



Reference:

Policy CS2, Delegations 1.7 and 3.14

COMMENTS:

It is recommended that the amendments and addition to the Delegations of AuthorityRegister be approved by the Council.



Moved by Cr Davidson, seconded by Cr Tudori

That the Council APPROVES BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY to reaffirm theRegister of Delegations of Authority to Officers and Committees as detailedin Schedule 3, subject to:-

1. the following amendments:-

1.1 3.9 Building Services - Notices:The Function Delegated be amended to read “Authorityto form opinions and to issue, withdraw or amendNotices, make complaints to the Courts, recover costsincurred, and all other powers of the local governmentpursuant to Part XV of the Local Government(Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1960;”

1.2 3.14 Temporary Closure of Streets for Street Partiesand Events on Roads:

The Reference be amended to include “Part 6 of theActivities on Thoroughfares and Trading inThoroughfares and Public Places Local Law;”

(Cont’d)

1.3 3.15 Unauthorised Works in the Street:

The delegation be amended to read as follows:-

Title: Notices Under Schedule 3.1 of the LocalGovernment Act 1995;

Function Delegated:

Authority to serve notices for matters listed in Schedule3.1 of the Local Government Act 1995 and City of PerthLocal Laws;

Conditions:



1. A direct or immediate hazard, including anobstruction, exists for members of the public,pedestrians, neighbours, vehicles;

2. Damage to private property, public places orthoroughfares is likely;

3. Possible increase in stormwater run-off; or,

4. An unsightly condition exists that is prejudicial tonearby properties;


Chief Executive Officer;

Delegated by the Chief Executive Officer to:

Director Service Units.Manager Compliance Services.Co-ordinator Urban Environment.Operations Co-ordinator;

(Cont’d)

Reference:

Section 3.25 and Schedule 3.1 of the Local GovernmentAct 1995. City of Perth Local Laws permitting the powerto serve notices to owners or occupiers of land, inaccordance with Schedule 3.1 of the Local GovernmentAct 1995);”

1.4 3.16 Works in the Street:

Condition (1) be amended to read “That the proposedworks are in accordance with the Activities onThoroughfares and Trading in Thoroughfares andPublic Places Local Law, and do not adversely affect the



safety, functionality, and aesthetics of the street oradjoining properties to an unacceptable degree;”

The Reference be amended by adding “Clauses 2.13and Part 6 of the Activities in Thoroughfares andTrading in Thoroughfares and Public Places LocalLaw;”

1.5 3.17 Fencing and Crossovers to Construction Sites:

The Conditions be amended to read “Authority to be inaccordance with the Activities on Thoroughfares andTrading in Thoroughfares and Public Places Local Lawand Policy SU18 - Building Sites Adjacent to ForrestPlace, Hay Street and Murray Street Malls;”

The Reference be amended to include “Clauses 2.4 and2.5 of Activities on Thoroughfares and Trading inThoroughfares and Public Places Local Law;”

(Cont’d)

1.6 3.22 Removal and Disposal of Abandoned Vehicles:

The Conditions be amended to read Authority to be inaccordance with Part 3, Division 3, Subdivision 4 of theLocal Government Act 1995 and Part 4 of the Activitiesin Thoroughfares and Trading in Thoroughfares andPublic Places Local Law;”

The Reference be amended to include “Part 3, Division3, Subdivision 4 of the Local Government Act 1995,Clause 29 of the Local Government (Functions andGeneral) Regulations 1996, and Part 4 of the Activities inThoroughfares and Trading in Thoroughfares andPublic Places Local Law;”

1.7 3.26 City Planning Scheme - Planning Powers:



The Function Delegated be amended to include “(v)service and enforcement of Notices, and institution oflegal action under Section 10 of the Town Planning andDevelopment Act 1928 (as amended) as the responsibleauthority for enforcing observance of the scheme;”

The Delegations by the Chief Executive Officer beamended to include “Manager ComplianceServices(limited to (v), above);”

1.8 3.27 Appointment of Authorised Persons:

The Function Delegated be amended to read “Authorityto appoint employees of the City of Perth as ‘authorisedpersons’ under Section 9.10 (1) of the LocalGovernment Act 1995, for the purpose of enforcinglegislation and receipt of payment on behalf of theCouncil;”

The Reference be amended, in light of the review ofLocal Laws, as follows:-

(Cont’d)

◊ ◊ Replace the “Streets and Footpaths Local Law” and“Obstructing Animals and Vehicles Local Law” with“Activities on Thoroughfares and Trading onThoroughfares and Public Places Local Law;”

◊ ◊ Replace the “Eating Areas Local Law” with “AlfrescoDining Local Law;”

◊ ◊ Delete the “Noises Local Law” and “Street TradingLocal Law;”

1.9 3.28 Legal Proceedings - Various Statutes:

The Function Delegated be amended to read “Authorityto institute, withdraw, and suspend legal proceedingsthrough the Council's Solicitors and/or authorisedofficer(s) for the recovery of any penalties, and for thepunishment of any person committing an offence underthe Health Act 1911, Litter Act 1979-1981, LocalGovernment Act 1995, Local Government(Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1960, Town Planning



and Development Act 1928 (as amended), City PlanningScheme 1985, Bush Fires Act 1954 and EnvironmentalProtection Act 1968, and Regulations or local laws madethereunder which it is the duty of the Local Authority toenforce;”

The Reference be amended by adding the “LocalGovernment (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1960,Town Planning and Development Act 1928 (asamended), and City Planning Scheme 1985;”

1.10 3.29 Legal Proceedings - Parking:

The Reference be amended by replacing “ParkingFacilities Act 1956-1982” with “Local Government Act1995 and City of Perth Parking Local Law 1999;”

(Cont’d)

1.11 3.30 Residential and Visitor Parking permit Applications:

The references to “Parking Facilities Act 1956-1982” bereplaced with “Local Government Act 1995 and City ofPerth Parking Local Law 1999.”

2. the following additions:-

2.1 Title: Finalisation of Property Sales and Leases byPrivate Treaty

Function Delegated:

Authority to finalise any property sale or lease byprivate treaty where no submissions have beenreceived as a result of advertising under Section 3.58 ofthe Local Government Act 1995.

Conditions:

1. Authority to be in accordance with Section 3.58 of theLocal Government Act 1995.



2. There being no submissions received following theadvertising of the proposal.

3. The delegation not applying to property exceeding the

prescribed maximum value or any future regulationprohibiting such a delegation.



Reference:

Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995;

(Cont’d)

2.2 Title: Annual Public Events

Function Delegated:

Authority to approve the following annual events andassociated road closures, parking restrictions, and costs:-


Conditions:

1. The Authority to be in accordance with Policy CS2,Expenditure Authorisations - Annual Items.

2. Costs are approved in the annual budget. 3. Compliance with local laws. 4. Submission of a comprehensive risk management plan.



5. The proposed event to be approved under delegatedauthority is to be made available to Elected Members priorto the event being approved.



Reference:

Policy CS2, Delegations 1.7 and 3.14


393/01 SALARIED OFFICERS ENTERPRISE BARGAININGAGREEMENT

BACKGROUND:



LegislationEnterprise Bargaining Agreements are legal agreements which take precedence overthe relevant Industrial Award in determining terms and conditions of employment. TheAgreement is registered in the Australian Industrial Relations Commission inaccordance with the Australian Workplace Relations Act.

Strategic PlanKey Result Area: Service QualityObjective No: SQ5 Objective: People. Encourage and enable the

organisation’s staff to make a personally satisfyingcontribution to the organisation’s goalsStrategy: Establish and ensure effective formal andinformal corporate communication and participationstrategies.Action: Develop Human Resource Strategy integratedwith the Strategic Plan.Refers to Human Resource Strategic Plan (Our People -



Our Plan) Core Issue 7 Goal 1, and Core Issue 3 Goal 2.

DETAILS:

The City’s first Enterprise Bargaining Agreement (EBA) with Salaried Officers wasapproved by the Council on 10 December 1996, and expired on 14 March 1999. AnInterim Agreement was approved by the Council at its meeting held on 8 August2000, and this Agreement expired on 13 February 2001, although it remains in forceuntil replaced. The City is committed to Enterprise Bargaining as a way of linkingsalary increases to significant workplace change and continuous improvement ofservices. The first EBA and Interim EBA have had a major impact on developing amore flexible workforce that understands the changing environment and the need tolink salary increases to workplace improvement. The Enterprise BargainingAgreement 2001 builds on the significant achievements already made and deliversmajor benefits for the City and its employees.

The City of Perth (Salaried Officers) Agreement covers the salaries and conditions ofapproximately 350 City of Perth employees who are employed largely inAdministrative, Professional and Technical functions.

A negotiating group of Employee Representatives and Management Representativeshas been meeting fortnightly to develop a replacement Agreement which woulddeliver appropriate benefits to both the City and its employees (Salaried Officers).

A copy of the City of Perth (Salaried Officers) Agreement 2001 is detailed inSchedule 4.

OBJECTIVES OF THE AGREEMENT

City of Perth to become an employer of preference in Local Governmentby developing an EBA that benefits both parties by providing appropriaterecognition and rewards to staff and improved benefits for theorganisation.

The strategic people related business issues are set out in Our People - OurPlan. This Plan therefore provides us with the objectives for the EnterpriseBargaining Agreement:

1. To have the flexibility to meet the changing work and social environment.

2. To have an organisation which provides value for money and quality services.

3. To have people who have the capability to meet current and future customerrequirements and provide people with job security.

4. To have a culture built on our seven keys.

5. To link individual, team and organisational performance to our strategic



outcomes.

6. To improve our performance through the development of learning andevaluation and use of knowledge and potential.

7. To reward and recognise individuals and team contributions.

The 2001 Agreement carries forward the terms and conditions negotiated andagreed in the Salaried Officers Enterprise Bargaining Agreement 1996 and InterimAgreement 2000. In addition the Agreement contains some significant changes towork practices to improve customer service, to support the change in culture, and toachieve a work/life balance. Major changes include:-

• The change in standard hours from 8.15 am to 4.45 pm to 7 am to 7 pm, enablingthe City to provide Customer Service over a greater span of hours.

• Improved flexitime arrangements• An availability allowance to ensure that essential staff are available out of hours if

required• Improved redeployment, retraining and redundancy provisions• Initiatives to improve employee health and wellbeing (subsidised gym

membership, more flexible personal leave, deferred salary scheme to allowcareer break)

• Paid maternity (5 weeks), sporting and military forces leave.• Linking individual and team performance to organisational performance, through

development of performance measures.• Inclusion of the 7 Keys, Code of Conduct, and Employee Performance

Management System.• The Commitment to continuous improvement by using the Business Excellence

Framework.• The establishment of an Enterprise Bargaining Consultative Committee to work

on the ongoing development of performance targets and strategies to achieve thetargets.

• Retention of the City of Perth and Local Government Superannuation Funds asthe only choice of Funds, helping to ensure their viability.

• Maintaining the City of Perth (and City of Perth’s Fund for City of PerthSuperannuation Fund) contribution for contributory members at 5% when thesuperannuation guarantee levy rises to 9% in July 2002.

The Agreement demonstrates a significant advancement in the City developing ahighly skilled and flexible work force, committed to continuously improving CustomerService, and delivering value for money services.

The main issues for management were that the Agreement deliver increasedflexibility. This has been achieved through a span of hours from 7 am to 7pm andalso improved flexible hours arrangements.

The main benefit for the employees is that the Agreement proposes a 4% per annumpay increase. The review group has based this increase on expected wage and CPI



movements, and the recent salary movements in other large WA Local Authoritiesand Public Sector Agencies, plus the deliverables in the Agreement.

The WAMA Salary Survey 2000 suggests that City of Perth pay rates were belowsome other major metropolitan WA Councils for a range of positions. Whilst it isdifficult to do a direct comparison as the content of positions varies, the differencesranged from around 1.5% under to 3.8% under (comparing with Joondalup, Melville,Wanneroo and Canning) , In addition, City of Perth employees do not have access tofree parking, which is available at many other local council offices.

The Interim Agreement has since delivered a 3.7% increase. However some of theother Councils have also reached new agreements. (Canning Agreement in 2000delivered 4% in the first year and 3.5% in the second, City of Stirling 1999 was 6%over two years). Some other Councils either have Agreements in place deliveringfurther increases, or are currently negotiating.

Salary forecast dataWA Treasury Forecast for wages growth for 2000/01 is 3.5% and for 2001/02 is3.5%.WA CPI is forecast to increase by 3% in 2000/01 (for Perth this is 3.25%) and by2.75% in 2001/02.These figures are based on the December 2000 quarter published figures.March quarter CPI figure for Perth rose 0.6% with an annual average of 4.6% to theMarch quarter 2001.


ACCOUNT NO: VariousBUDGET ITEM: Salaries and wages, superannuation, workers

compensation insurance, annual leaveloading, long service leave

BUDGET PAGE NUMBER: VariousBUDGETED AMOUNT: Provision was made for 6% increase in

2000/01. Agreements will deliver an annualincrease of 3.48% for 2000/01 plus anadditional 1% super for contributory members.

AMOUNT SPENT TO DATE: 3.7% increase from August 14 2000PROPOSED COST: 2000/01 (3.25 months) $157,713

2001/02 (full year) $592,0982002/03 (full year) $615,780

COMMENTS:

This is an important Agreement for the City of Perth, as the employees have agreedto major changes in the hours of work, which is the basis of flexibility to meet both



current and future customer needs. It will also enable the City to remain competitivein attracting and retaining high calibre employees.


That the Council endorses the:-

1. City of Perth (Salaried Officers) Enterprise Bargaining Agreement;

2. payments as documented in the Enterprise Bargaining Agreementconditional on union/staff approval.

(Cont’d)

Discussion ensued


Cr Sutherland returned to the Chamber at 7.15pm

394/01 MOTION OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEENGIVEN

MUNICIPAL INVENTORY - ESTABLISHMENT OF A NEW COMMITTEE

The following motion was received from Councillors Davidson, Tudori and Tan.

(The Lord Mayor, Cr McEvoy and Cr MacGill disclosed financial interests anddid not vote on this item)

The Lord Mayor, Deputy Lord Mayor Cr McEvoy and Cr MacGill departed theChamber at 7.20pm


The Lord Mayor Director/shareholder of a company that part owns a listedproperty

Cr McEvoy Leases a heritage listed property

Cr MacGill Employed in a building on the heritage list



The Chief Executive Officer requested nominations for Presiding Member

Cr Stroud nominated Cr Sutherland

Cr Tan nominated Cr Davidson

Both Crs Sutherland and Davidson accepted the nomination therefore theChief Executive Officer asked for a show of hands.

The Chief Executive Officer declared Cr Davidson as the presiding person

Cr Davidson assumed the Chair

As required under Regulation 10 of the Local Government Act(Administration) Regulations 1996, this motion received the support of atleast one third of the members of the Council.

Moved by Cr Tan, seconded by Cr Tudori

1. That in accordance with Section 5.8 of the Local Government Act1995, the Council APPROVES BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY theestablishment of the Heritage Evaluation Committee with the followingguidelines:-

1.1 Role:The role and function of the Heritage Evaluation Committee is tocomplete the following, in accordance with the resolutions passedon 13 March 2001 in relation to the subject of ‘MunicipalInventory’, and provide its advice to the Council:-

1.1.1 to continue to compile an inventory of places within theCity of Perth which in its opinion are, or may become, ofcultural heritage significance in accordance with s45 of theHeritage of Western Australia Act 1990;

1.1.2 to commence the process of compiling a draft list of placesfor possible inclusion in the Register of Places of CulturalHeritage Significance referred to in the draft City PlanningScheme No. 2;



1.1.3 to develop a terms of reference to ensure that the role andfunctions set out in paragraph 1(a) are undertakensatisfactorily.

2. That Three Elected Members are nominated to serve on the HeritageEvaluation Committee.

3. Membership:Three Elected Members

4. Quorum:Two

(Cont’d)

5. Termination Date:31 December 2001

Discussion ensued


As requested by Cr Davidson the votes were recorded as follows:-

For: Crs Davidson, Tan and Tudori

Against: Crs Sutherland and Stroud

The Lord Mayor, Cr McEvoy, and Cr MacGill returned to the Chamber at7.29pm and the Lord Mayor resumed the Chair.

395/01 REPRESENTATION ON STATUTORY AUTHORITIESAND PUBLIC BODIES

Nil

396/01 URGENT BUSINESS

Nil



The Lord Mayor declared the meeting closed at 7.30pm with Councillors McEvoy,Sutherland, Davidson, Tan, MacGill, McEvoy, Scaffidi and Stroud in attendance.

city of perth index · city of perth index item description page ......

Documents