minutes - city of fremantle - ocm... · thorstou goedicke the following members of the public spoke...

MINUTES

Ordinary Meeting of Council

Wednesday, 24 August 2016, 6.00pm

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM NO SUBJECT PAGE

DECLARATION OF OPENING / ANNOUNCEMENT OF VISITORS 1

NYOONGAR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT STATEMENT 1

IN ATTENDANCE 1

APOLOGIES 2

LEAVE OF ABSENCE 2

RESPONSE TO PREVIOUS PUBLIC QUESTIONS TAKEN ON NOTICE 2

PUBLIC QUESTION TIME 2

DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST BY MEMBERS 3

APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE 3

PETITIONS / DEPUTATIONS / PRESENTATIONS 4

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES 4

ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE MAYOR 4

QUESTIONS OR PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS BY ELECTED MEMBERS 5

TABLED DOCUMENTS 5

LATE ITEMS NOTED 5

COMMITTEE REPORTS 5

FINANCE POLICY OPERATIONS AND LEGISLATION COMMITTEE 10 AUGUST 2016 5

FPOL1608-4 AUSTRALIA DAY CELEBRATIONS 5

PLANNING SERVICES COMMITTEE 3 AUGUST 2016 11

PC1608-5 HENDERSON STREET, NO 7-41 (LOTS 2073, 2074 & 2075), FREMANTLE - ALTERATIONS, CONSERVATION AND LANDSCAPING WORKS TO EXISTING GROUPED DWELLINGS (PW0001/16); & THREE (3) X BUILT STRATA SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS - (WAPC464-16; WAPC465-16; & WAPC467-16) 11

PC1608-12 HERITAGE LIST AND MUNICIPAL HERITAGE INVENTORY REVIEW FOR NORTH FREMANTLE 2016 36

PC1608-13 PROPOSED SCHEME AMENDMENT NO. 71 CHANGES TO TREE PROTECTION PROVISIONS ADOPTION FOR PUBLIC ADVERTISING 47

STRATEGY AND PROJECT DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE 8 AUGUST 2016 60

SPD1608-1 KINGS SQUARE UPDATE REPORT 60

SPD1608-3 INFORMATION REPORT - NEW OPERATIONS CENTRE 65

SPD1608-4 FUTURE OF FREMANTLE PORT 69

SPD1608-5 PERTH FREIGHT LINK UPDATE REPORT 72

SPD1608-7 KNUTSFORD ST DEPOT SITE REDEVELOPMENT 75

SPD1608-8 PROGRESS ON DEVELOPMENT OF 2 POINT STREET, FREMANTLE 78

SPD1608-2 FREMANTLE OVAL REDEVELOPMENT 83

SPD1608-6 BOUNDARY REFORM UPDATE - AUGUST 2016 86

FINANCE POLICY OPERATIONS AND LEGISLATION COMMITTEE 10 AUGUST 2016 89

FPOL1608-1 DADAA LEASE FOR OLD BOYS SCHOOL, 92 ADELAIDE STREET, FREMANTLE 89

FPOL1608-3 WALYALUP ABORIGINAL CULTURAL CENTRE MANAGMENT OPTIONS 96

FPOL1608-7 NOTICE OF MOTION BY ELECTED MEMBER - CR RACHEL PEMBERTON JOINT DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANELS (DAP) 101

FPOL1608-8 PROPOSED CHANGES TO FEES AND CHARGES SCHEDULE 110

FPOL1608-10FINES ENFORCEMENT REGISTRY (FER) WRITE OFF - 3RD AND 4TH QUARTER OF THE 2015 -2016 FINANCIAL YEAR 116

FPOL1608-9 APPOINTMENT OF COUNCILLOR TO THE AUDIT AND RISK COMMITTEE 119

LIBRARY ADVISORY COMMITTEE 10 AUGUST 2016 122

LAC1608-1 LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SERVICE REPORT - APRIL - JUNE 2016 122

LAC1608-2 TOY LIBRARY QUARTERLY REPORT - APRIL TO JUNE 2016 132

COUNCIL ITEMS 136

C1608-1 INFORMATION REPORT AUGUST 2016 136

C1608-2 COMMUNITY SPORT AND RECREATION FACILITY FUND (CSRFF) SMALL AND ANNUAL GRANTS 2016 137

C1608-3 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT - JULY 2016 141

C1608-4 DONATION - WILD FIRES IN FUNCHAL SISTER CITY 148

CONFIDENTIAL MATTERS 150

FPOL1608-11 MARKET REVIEW - MOUNTAIN DESIGNS 150

FPOL1608-12 MARKET REVIEW - OLD FIRE STATION BACK PACKERS 152

CLOSURE OF MEETING 153

SUMMARY GUIDE TO CITIZEN PARTICIPATION AND CONSULTATION 154

MINUTES ATTACHMENTS 1

Minutes - Ordinary Meeting of Council 24 August 2016

Page 1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL

Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council

held in the Council Chambers, Fremantle City Council on 24 August 2016 at 6.00 pm.

DECLARATION OF OPENING / ANNOUNCEMENT OF VISITORS

The Mayor, Dr Brad Pettitt declared the meeting open at 6.02 pm and welcomed members of the public to the meeting.

NYOONGAR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT STATEMENT

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

IN ATTENDANCE

Dr Brad Pettitt Mayor Cr Doug Thompson North Ward Cr Bryn Jones North Ward Cr Simon Naber City Ward Cr Dave Coggin Deputy Mayor / East Ward Cr Ingrid Waltham East Ward Cr Sam Wainwright Hilton Ward Cr Jeff McDonald Hilton Ward Cr Jon Strachan South Ward Cr Andrew Sullivan South Ward Cr David Hume Beaconsfield Ward Mr Glen Dougall Acting Chief Executive Officer Ms Marisa Spaziani Director Community Development Mr Paul Trotman Director Strategic Planning & Projects Mr Graham Tattersall Director Infrastructure & Project Delivery Mr Paul Garbett Manager Strategic Planning Ms Natalie Martin Goode Manager Development Approvals Mr Pete Stone Manager Arts and Culture Ms Beverley Bone Manager Community Development Mr Tom Griffiths Manager Economic Development and Marketing Mr Alan Kelsall Heritage Coordinator Ms Vanessa Collins Heritage Planning Officer Ms Alexandra Peach Minute Secretary


Page 2

There were approximately 35 members of the public and 3 members of the press in attendance.

APOLOGIES

Nil

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Cr Rachel Pemberton City Ward

RESPONSE TO PREVIOUS PUBLIC QUESTIONS TAKEN ON NOTICE

Questions taken from Mr Andrew Luobikis in relation to the alleged hire of Victoria Hall by the Green’s Party.

1. Was the hire taken from the community use element? 2. Is a political party considered a community use? 3. Was the hire paid by a political party? 4. Should ratepayers be paying for political use?

"The tenant can confirm that the hirer paid for the hire of the venue/production for the

hire to conduct a public meeting"

PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

The following member of the public spoke in relation to item SPD1608-6: Thorstou Goedicke The following members of the public spoke in favour of the Officer’s Recommendation for item FPOL1608-4: Corina Abraham William Collard Seamus Doherty Chace Hill Brian Joseph Northoves The following members of the public spoke against the Officer’s Recommendation for item FPOL1608-4: Olwyn Williams Ra Stewart


Page 3

DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST BY MEMBERS

Cr D Coggin declared a financial interest in item number SPD1608-2. Cr D Coggin has previously worked for one of the stakeholders. Cr J McDonald declared a financial interest in item number FPOL1608-1. Cr J McDonalds partner is the executive director of DADAA. Cr J Strachan declared a financial interest during part of the debate in item number FPOL1608-7. Cr J Strachan is a member of SWDAP and receives a meeting fee. Cr B Jones declared a impartiality interest in item number FPOL1608-1. The Chief Executive officer is Cr Bryn Jones's son in law. Cr Jones also does voluntary work for the foundation.

APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE

MOVED: Mayor, Brad Pettitt Cr J McDonald request for a leave of absence from 10 October 2016 to 10 October 2016 (inclusive) is approved. SECONDED: Cr D Coggin CARRIED: 11/0

For Against

Mayor, Brad Pettitt Cr Doug Thompson Cr Bryn Jones Cr Andrew Sullivan Cr Jon Strachan Cr Simon Naber Cr David Hume Cr Dave Coggin Cr Ingrid Waltham Cr Sam Wainwright Cr Jeff McDonald

MOVED: Mayor, Brad Pettitt Mayor, Brad Pettitt and Cr D Thompson request for a leave of absence from 9 September 2016 to 15 October 2016 (inclusive) is approved SECONDED: Cr D Thompson CARRIED: 11/0


Page 4

For Against


PETITIONS / DEPUTATIONS / PRESENTATIONS

Nil

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

MOVED: Mayor, Brad Pettitt That the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council dated Wednesday 27 July 2016 be confirmed as a true and accurate record. SECONDED: Cr D Hume CARRIED: 11/0

For Against


ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE MAYOR

Nil


Page 5

QUESTIONS OR PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS BY ELECTED MEMBERS

Nil

TABLED DOCUMENTS

Addition documents

LATE ITEMS NOTED

Nil

COMMITTEE REPORTS

FINANCE POLICY OPERATIONS AND LEGISLATION COMMITTEE 10 AUGUST 2016

FPOL1608-4 AUSTRALIA DAY CELEBRATIONS

ECM Reference: 154/008 Disclosure of Interest: Nil Meeting Date: 10 August 2016 Previous Item: Nil Responsible Officer: Director Community Development Actioning Officer: Manager Arts and Culture Decision Making Authority: Council Agenda Attachments: Nil

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The current Australia Day fireworks event has been reviewed in line with elected member feedback in relation to future event programming and the fireworks event agreement with the City of Cockburn.

BACKGROUND

The City of Fremantle is currently in a contract with the City of Cockburn to deliver the Australia Day fireworks events in 2017 and 2018. The total cost of the annual event is $145,000 to which the City of Cockburn contributes $25,000. As a result of feedback from elected members staff have been researching alternative Australia Day celebrations. This involves moving away from the recent fireworks event to a more cost effective, environmentally friendly and culturally sensitive celebration. Officers are proposing a weekend of activities as follows: Fremantle’s Australia Day Weekend – a celebration for all Australians. Thursday 26 January, 10.30 am to 1.00 pm


Page 6

Fremantle’s Australia Day Weekend citizenship ceremony at Fremantle Arts Centre. To invite guest speaker Member for Fremantle Josh Wilson to deliver the key note address on the tradition of multiculturalism in Australia. The Mayor to preside over the ceremony and highlighting the varied country of origin backgrounds of the new citizens. Lunch to be served after the ceremony for all those attending. The general public will be encouraged to attend to declare their own personal welcome to all those becoming Australian Citizens. Saturday 28 January, 4.00 pm to 7.00 pm Fremantle’s Australia Day Weekend picnic and concert held on the Esplanade Reserve. Families will be encouraged to bring a picnic and enjoy the surrounds of the Esplanade Reserve whilst celebrating the diversity of modern day Australia. The Mayor to welcome guests and to talk of the opportunity of celebrating Australia on a day for all Australians. To invite guest speaker Pat Dodson to deliver the key note address on the future of Australia Day. Invite the Pigram Brothers to perform as the sun sets. Sunday 29 January, 2.00 pm to 4.00 pm Fremantle’s Australia Day Weekend Indigenous music celebration at Fremantle Arts Centre. Come and celebrate the diversity of Australia and dance to the rhythms of the Desert Sevenz, Hill Boys and E Town Boyz. The above celebrations maintain a strong connection to 26 January whilst offering the people of Fremantle and beyond the chance to celebrate the diversity of Australia on different days. Entry to all events will be free. As the City has a current agreement with the City of Cockburn we will need to write to the City of Cockburn to negotiate release from this agreement. Discussions with staff from the City of Cockburn have indicated that this would be seen as a reasonable request. COMMENT Community sentiment is calling for an alternative to the recent tradition of celebrating Australia Day with fireworks on January 26. We also need to consider the ongoing cost and environmental impact of the fireworks event. The budget for this event has been reduced for 16/17 so the city could not deliver the same level of event as in previous


Page 7

years. RISK AND OTHER IMPLICATIONS Financial

Staff can work within the reduced 16/17 budget to deliver all three events as outlined. Legal

N/A Operational

The City events and marketing teams would need to work together with the City of Cockburn to deliver a positive message around the change in direction of the event. Organisational

Existing contract with Cockburn would need to be negotiated to be ended.

STRATEGIC AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS

Proposed changes are in line with the City’s approach to environmental sustainability and cultural awareness.

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

Staff did receive feedback post the 15/16 event from members of the public expressing an interest in alternative Australia Day celebrations.

CONCLUSION

By maintaining links with January 26 with a well-executed citizenship ceremony as well as providing two other meaningful event opportunities to celebrate Australia Day across the weekend, the City of Fremantle will be offering an inclusive suite of events which can be enjoyed by all Australians.

VOTING AND OTHER SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS

Simple Majority

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

MOVED: Cr D Hume 1. The City to write to the City of Cockburn requesting an immediate end to the current

Australia Day event contract that runs until 2018. 2. Council to discuss with the Chamber of Commerce and Nyoongar Elders other

options for marking Australia Day.


Page 8

SECONDED: Cr D Thompson Mayor, Brad Pettitt MOVED a minor amendment to read as follows: 1. The City to write to the City of Cockburn requesting an immediate end to the

current Australia Day event contract that runs until 2018. 2. Council to discuss with the Chamber of Commerce and Nyoongar Elders

other options for making Australia Day.

3. Based on the feedback received from Aboriginal elders, the Fremantle community, and the Fremantle business sector, City of Fremantle staff are requested to look at future options for the replacement event(s) that:

a) Fit both appropriately into Fremantle’s extensive calendar of events and

potentially aligns with significant times on the aboriginal Nyoongar calendar;

b) Takes into consideration a day when as many as possible Fremantle

businesses are open and would therefore most benefit from an event that attracts people into Fremantle;

c) Gives consideration in future events of alternative activities that will be

especially attractive to young families (eg a laser light show) SECONDED: Cr D Hume CARRIED: 10/1

For Against

Mayor, Brad Pettitt Cr Doug Thompson Cr Bryn Jones Cr Andrew Sullivan Cr Jon Strachan Cr Simon Naber Cr David Hume Cr Dave Coggin Cr Ingrid Waltham Cr Sam Wainwright

Cr Jeff McDonald

Cr D Thompson left the meeting at 7.05 pm prior to consideration of the following and did not return for the discussion or the vote. MOVED: Mayor, Brad Pettitt 1. The City to write to the City of Cockburn requesting an immediate end to the

current Australia Day event contract that runs until 2018. CARRIED: 9/1


Page 9

For Against

Mayor, Brad Pettitt Cr Bryn Jones Cr Andrew Sullivan Cr Jon Strachan Cr Simon Naber Cr Dave Coggin Cr Ingrid Waltham Cr Sam Wainwright Cr Jeff McDonald

Cr David Hume

MOVED: Mayor, Brad Pettitt 2. Council to discuss with the Chamber of Commerce and Nyoongar Elders

other options for making Australia Day. CARRIED: 9/1

For Against

Mayor, Brad Pettitt Cr Bryn Jones Cr Andrew Sullivan Cr Jon Strachan Cr Simon Naber Cr Dave Coggin Cr Ingrid Waltham Cr Sam Wainwright Cr Jeff McDonald

Cr David Hume

MOVED: Mayor, Brad Pettitt 3. Based on the feedback received from Aboriginal elders, the Fremantle

community, and the Fremantle business sector, City of Fremantle staff are requested to look at future options for the replacement event(s) that:






especially attractive to young families (eg a laser light show)


Page 10

CARRIED: 9/1

For Against

Mayor, Brad Pettitt Cr Bryn Jones Cr Andrew Sullivan Cr Jon Strachan Cr Simon Naber Cr Dave Coggin Cr Ingrid Waltham Cr Sam Wainwright Cr David Hume

Cr Jeff McDonald

COUNCIL DECISION

1. The City to write to the City of Cockburn requesting an immediate end to the current Australia Day event contract that runs until 2018.

2. Council to discuss with the Chamber of Commerce and Nyoongar Elders

other options for making Australia Day.

3. Based on the feedback received from Aboriginal elders, the Fremantle community, and the Fremantle business sector, City of Fremantle staff are requested to look at future options for the replacement event(s) that:






especially attractive to young families (eg a laser light show)


Page 11

PLANNING SERVICES COMMITTEE 3 AUGUST 2016

Cr J Strachan MOVED en bloc recommendations numbered PC1608-5 and PC1608-12. SECONDED: Cr D Coggin CARRIED: 11/0

For Against

Mayor, Brad Pettitt Cr Bryn Jones Cr Andrew Sullivan Cr Jon Strachan Cr Simon Naber Cr David Hume Cr Dave Coggin Cr Ingrid Waltham Cr Sam Wainwright Cr Jeff McDonald

The following item number PC1608-5 was MOVED and carried en bloc.

PC1608-5 HENDERSON STREET, NO 7-41 (LOTS 2073, 2074 & 2075), FREMANTLE - ALTERATIONS, CONSERVATION AND LANDSCAPING WORKS TO EXISTING GROUPED DWELLINGS (PW0001/16); & THREE (3) X BUILT STRATA SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS - (WAPC464-16; WAPC465-16; & WAPC467-16)

ECM Reference: 059/002 Disclosure of Interest: Nil Meeting Date: 3 August 2016 Responsible Officer: Manager Development Approvals Actioning Officer: Senior Planning Officer Decision Making Level: Planning Committee Previous Item Number/s: SGS1506-6 Strategic and General Services Committee

(17 June 2015) SGS1506-6 Ordinary Council Meeting (24 June 2015)

Attachment 1: Development Plans (inc applicants Heritage Impact Statement)

Attachment 2: City’s Heritage Assessment Attachment 3: Subdivision Application WAPC464-16 Attachment 4: Subdivision Application WAPC465-16 Attachment 5: Subdivision Application WAPC467-16 Date Received: 4 May 2016 Owner Name: Heritage Council of Western Australia Submitted by: Heritage works – State Heritage Office Scheme: City Centre (R-AC3, as per R-Codes, R80) Heritage Listing: Yes, MHI management category level 1A;


Page 12

WECA Heritage Area Existing Landuse: Grouped Dwelling Use Class: Grouped Dwelling Use Permissibility: D

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The application seeks planning approval for alterations, conservation and landscaping works at No’s 7-41 (Lots 2073, 2074 & 2075) Henderson Street, Fremantle (PW0001/16) and for three (3) built strata subdivision applications (WAPC464-16, WAPC465-16, WAPC467-16). Due to the nature of the proposal, and the delegated authority afforded to the City for public works, both the development application and the three built strata applications are to be determined by the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC). The City therefore, acts only in the capacity of a referral body to provide a recommendation and comments to the WAPC for their consideration of the respective proposals. The application is not seeking any discretionary assessment against Local Planning Scheme No. 4 (LPS4), however it is not considered to be consistent with the objectives of the City Centre zone as set out in clause 4.2.1(b)(iii) in that it will likely impact the conservation of heritage places, Council’s Local Planning Policies (LPP), or the Residential Design Codes (R-Codes). Notwithstanding this, both the application for planning approval, and the three built strata subdivision applications are considered to present significant detrimental heritage outcomes; or are otherwise likely to lead to a situation where it will result in such a position, and as such cannot be supported. The built strata applications are also inconsistent with June 2015 Council resolution. Both the application for planning approval and the three built strata subdivision applications are recommended to be referred to the WAPC with recommendations for refusal.


Page 13

BACKGROUND

The sites are zoned ‘City Centre’ under the City’s Local Planning Scheme No. 4 (LPS4) and are located within the City Centre Local Planning Area 1 (LPA 1) – sub area 1.3.1 as prescribed in Schedule 12 of LPS4. The sites are located in the street block bounded by Henderson Street to the west, Parry Street to the east, Holdsworth Street to the north and South Terrace to the south. The sites are individually listed on the City’s Heritage List and Municipal Heritage Inventory as a Management Category Level 1A; and it is also located within WECA Heritage Area, Convict Establishment Heritage Area, Henderson St Law & Order Precinct Heritage Area, which are prescribed heritage areas under Clause 7.2 of LPS4. The subject sites when combined account for approximately 3,544m2 (Lot 2073 – 808m2; Lot 2074 – 1,320m2; Lot 2075 – 1,416m2), have a predominantly north-south orientation and are improved by fifteen (15) two storey Grouped Dwellings. In terms of its topography, the subject site is relatively flat. A review of the property file revealed the following information relevant to planning and/or to this application. The Warders’ Cottages (fmr) (‘Warders’ cottages’ or ‘the cottages’) consist of three limestone convict built terrace buildings. They were established in the early 1850s as residential terraces to accommodate the warders of Fremantle Prison. The Warders’ cottages are the first row of houses built by the Colonial Government in the State and define the western boundary of the Convict Establishment precinct, which includes the world heritage listed Fremantle Prison, the Barracks for the Royal Sappers and Miners (now part of the Fremantle Police Station), the Fairbairn Street ramp and the Comptroller Generals Residence (now part of Fremantle Hospital). The cottages are also the first limestone terraces built in the State and rare examples of simple Victorian Georgian convict built terraced accommodation, possibly only comparable to buildings on Norfolk Island. The three terraces comprise of:

First Terrace 19-29 Henderson Street (1851), currently has three cottages

Second Terrace 33-41 Henderson Street (c1853), currently has six cottages

Third Terrace 7-17 Henderson Street (1858), currently has six cottages Following the closure of the prison in 1991 the Warders’ Cottages were transferred to Homeswest (now Department of Housing) who leased the cottages for inner city public housing. The properties were vacated in 2011 and have since stood vacant. In December 2011 Council considered the strata titling of the cottages. In its resolution Council supported strata titles for the cottages on the condition that the Department of Housing (DoH) upgraded the buildings and undertook conservation works, including urgent works required as per the Warders’ cottages conservation plan (Kelsall Binet Architects July 2011). In 2013 DoH offered the cottages to the City of Fremantle for a fifty-year peppercorn lease in return for the City taking financial responsibility for their conservation, refurbishment and ongoing maintenance and upkeep. Council considered this in a report on the matter on 26 June 2013 and resolved to accept the offer in principle subject to the state government covering all or part of the costs to complete stage 1 conservation


Page 14

works and the preparation of a business plan for the regeneration of the cottages. The business plan was to include identification of future uses for the place and any required adaptions that:

are consistent with the Heritage of Western Australia Act 1990;

generate sufficient income to repay the initial loan and fund future ongoing costs; and

can be accommodated in the buildings and meet the requirements of the Building Act 2011 and BCA.

On 29 January 2014 Council considered a further report on the matter following preliminary financial modelling of the expenditure and income associated with the City assuming control and responsibility for the cottages on a 50 year leasehold basis along the lines of the proposal considered by Council in June 2013. Council resolved to request the State Government to consider a revision of DoH’s original offer from a 50 year peppercorn lease to transferring the Warders’ Cottages’ freehold title to the City and/or making a substantial contribution to the initial conservation costs required to retain the heritage significance of the place. This resolution was influenced by the City’s preliminary financial modelling which indicated that an approach as outlined in the June 2013 resolution above would not be financially viable for buildings which would not ultimately be a City asset (i.e. the City would only have a leasehold interest in the property). The title to the properties was subsequently transferred to the State Heritage Office (SHO) on the 25 March 2015. The State Heritage Office is currently using a $2million revolving heritage fund to carry out conservation works to the buildings. The City’s understanding of the revolving fund is that the money taken from the fund for works to the warders’ cottages needs to be replenished within two years of the works. At the present time the City understands that the SHO is likely to sell individually strata titled cottages (one in each of the three blocks in the first instance) to generate income in order to replenish the revolving fund. At its meeting of 17 June 2015, Council’s Strategic and General Services Committee (SGS) considered its position in relation to the existing and future land tenure of the Warders Cottages and the likely impact this will have on the ongoing preservation and management of the buildings themselves (Refer to item SGS1506-6), where it was resolved as follows:

“Part 1 - That Council: Rescind its previous resolution PSC1112-221 dated 21 December 2011 advising that it would be prepared to issue a strata building approval certificate, subject to certain works and other actions being undertaken prior to the issue of strata titles and sale of the Warders’ cottages, as shown in Attachment 3 of the Strategic and General Services Committee agenda 17 June 2015. Part 2 - That Council:

1. Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to write to the State Heritage Office advising that the City of Fremantle’s position in respect of future ownership and use of the Warders’ cottages is as follows, and that the Council remains committed to working collaboratively with the State Heritage Office to try to achieve an effective outcome for the long term conservation and reuse of the cottage consistent with the City’s position:


Page 15

The Council is not supportive of a strata title subdivision of the Warders’ cottages, and instead the Council strongly supports the three blocks of cottages each remaining in a single ownership as this is considered most likely to ensure a consistent approach to property management and ongoing conservation of the integrity and other heritage values of the cottages.

In respect of the cottages in Block W1, due to the proximity of the cottages and their rear gardens to Fremantle Markets future use should be for purposes compatible with market activities; these include (but are not necessarily limited to) use as short stay accommodation intended primarily for occupation by tourist visitors and/or uses at ground level, possibly utilising the rear gardens area, that could interact with the street and/or laneway access to the markets. The Council is not supportive of reoccupation of the cottages in Block W1 as dwellings intended for long term occupancy as a primary residence, as the amenity expectations of long term dwelling occupiers would be difficult to reconcile with the prevailing character of this area.

In respect of the cottages in Block W2, future use should be considered as part of an integrated approach to adaptive re-use of the former Police Station/old courthouse complex and the W2 cottages as a whole; this could potentially allow for a diverse range of uses compatible with the cultural heritage significance of both places, recognising the impacts of previous modifications to the original heritage fabric of both building groups. The Council would be most supportive of uses which help activate the eastern section of Henderson Street; however an element of residential use of some form (short and/or long term occupancy) may be supported if it forms part of a broader mix of compatible uses which reactivate the cottages and Police Station complex as a whole.

In respect of the cottages in Block W3, due to the proximity of the cottages to Fremantle Markets and other hospitality and entertainment land uses in Henderson St Mall and South Terrace Block W3 is exposed to high levels of noise and activity; therefore future use should be for purposes compatible with these predominant existing uses. Short stay tourist-orientated accommodation and/or non-residential uses (at least at ground level) that could interact with the street and complement the established character of the area would be preferable so long as any physical alterations needed to make such uses viable can be undertaken without unacceptable impact on the heritage values of the existing building fabric. The Council is not supportive of reoccupation of the cottages in Block W3 as dwellings intended for long term occupancy as a primary residence, as the amenity expectations of long term dwelling occupiers would be extremely difficult to reconcile with the prevailing character of this area.

At its meeting of 24 June 2015, Council’s Ordinary Council Meeting (OCM) considered its position in relation to the existing and future land tenure of the Warders Cottages and the likely impact this will have on the ongoing preservation and management of the buildings themselves (Refer to item SGS1506-6), where it was resolved as follows:

“That Council: Rescind its previous resolution PSC1112-221 dated 21 December 2011 advising that it would be prepared to issue a strata building approval certificate, subject to certain works and other actions being undertaken prior to issue of strata titles and sale of the Warders’ cottages, as shown in Attachment 3 of the Strategic and General Services Committee agenda 17 June 2015. That Council:


Page 16

1. Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to write to the State Heritage Office advising that the City of Fremantle’s position in respect of future ownership and use of the Warders’ cottages is as follows, and that the Council remains committed to working collaboratively with the State Heritage Office to try to achieve an effective outcome for the long term conservation and reuse of the cottage consistent with the City’s position:

The Council is not supportive of a strata title subdivision of the Warders’ cottages, and instead the Council strongly supports the three blocks of cottages each remaining in a single ownership as this is considered most likely to ensure a consistent approach to property management and ongoing conservation of the integrity and other heritage values of the cottages.

In respect of the cottages in Block W1, due to the proximity of the cottages and their rear gardens to Fremantle Markets future use should be for purposes compatible with market activities; these include (but are not necessarily limited to) use as short stay accommodation intended primarily for occupation by tourist visitors and/or uses at ground level, possibly utilising the rear gardens area, that could interact with the street and/or laneway access to the markets. The Council is not supportive of reoccupation of the cottages in Block W1 as dwellings intended for long term occupancy as a primary residence, as the amenity expectations of long term dwelling occupiers would be difficult to reconcile with the prevailing character of this area.

In respect of the cottages in Block W2, future use should be considered as part of an integrated approach to adaptive re-use of the former Police Station/old courthouse complex and the W2 cottages as a whole; this could potentially allow for a diverse range of uses compatible with the cultural heritage significance of both places, recognising the impacts of previous modifications to the original heritage fabric of both building groups. The Council would be most supportive of uses which help activate the eastern section of Henderson Street; however an element of residential use of some form (short and/or long term occupancy) may be supported if it forms part of a broader mix of compatible uses which reactivate the cottages and Police Station complex as a whole.

In respect of the cottages in Block W3, due to the proximity of the cottages to Fremantle Markets and other hospitality and entertainment land uses in Henderson St Mall and South Terrace Block W3 is exposed to high levels of noise and activity; therefore future use should be for purposes compatible with these predominant existing uses. Short stay tourist-orientated accommodation and/or non-residential uses (at least at ground level) that could interact with the street and complement the established character of the area would be preferable so long as any physical alterations needed to make such uses viable can be undertaken without unacceptable impact on the heritage values of the existing building fabric. The Council is not supportive of reoccupation of the cottages in Block W3 as dwellings intended for long term occupancy as a primary residence, as the amenity expectations of long term dwelling occupiers would be extremely difficult to reconcile with the prevailing character of this area.”

On 10 December 2015, the City referred an application for restoration works to the existing buildings (Warders Cottages) at No’s 7-17, 19-29 and 31-41 (Lots 2075, 2074 and 2073) Henderson Street, Fremantle to the WAPC with a recommendation for conditional approval (PW0007/15);


Page 17

On 14 January 2016, the WAPC granted conditional planning approval for restoration works to existing buildings (Warders Cottages) at No’s 7-17, 19-29 and 31-41 (Lots 2075, 2074 and 2073) Henderson Street (PW0007/15).

On 16 December 2015, the City referred an application for a six (6) lot survey strata subdivision of No. 7-17 (Lot 2075) Henderson Street, Fremantle to the WAPC with a recommendation for refusal (WAPC1274-15).

On 29 January 2016, the WAPC granted conditional subdivisional approval for the six (6) lot survey strata subdivision of No. 7-17 (Lot 2075) Henderson Street, Fremantle (WAPC1274-15).

On 16 December 2015, the City referred an application for a six (6) lot survey strata subdivision of No. 19-29 (Lot 2074) Henderson Street, Fremantle to the WAPC with a recommendation for refusal (WAPC1275-15).

On 29 January 2016, the WAPC granted conditional subdivisional approval for the six (6) lot survey strata subdivision of No. 719-29 (Lot 2074) Henderson Street, Fremantle (WAPC1275-15).

On 16 December 2015, the City referred an application for a three (3) lot survey strata subdivision of No. 31-41 (Lot 2073) Henderson Street, Fremantle to the WAPC with a recommendation for refusal (WAPC1277-15).

On 29 January 2016, the WAPC granted conditional subdivisional approval for the three (3) lot survey strata subdivision of No. 31-41(Lot 2073) Henderson Street, Fremantle (WAPC1277-15).

In the City of Fremantle 2016/17 budget that was adopted at the Special Council Meeting on 30 June 2016, $800,000 was included for the purchase of a Warder Cottage (project code 10774) and $20,000 was included to undertake a land swap with the State Government for the rear yards of Warders Cottage W1 (project code 10774).

DETAIL

This item covers two parts:

Part A – Development Application (PW0001/16)

Part B – Three (3) x Built Strata Subdivision Applications (WAPC464-16, WAPC465-16, WAPC467-16)

Part A – Development Application (PW0001/16)

Broadly speaking the proposal comprises of the following works, as outlined by the applicant, the State Heritage Office (SHO) in their covering letter:

“The proposed scope of work has been developed to assist the Heritage Council in conserving significant elements of the place through:

Maintenance and conservation of the significant elements of the place;

Removal of items of little significance, intrusive fabric or contaminated fabric; and,

Providing a contemporary standard of living with new driveway and parking amenities, as well as cabinetry, fixtures and fittings to Unit 17.

This work is being undertaken to successfully dispose of the property in a staged Expression of Interest campaign, to take place in the last quarter of 2016.”

The scope of the works is further outlined in the City’s Heritage Assessment which is contained as Attachment 2, and states:


Page 18

“In summary the works include but are not limited to the following; Warders’ Cottages 1

Upper floor - Bathroom to be located in a zone of exceptional significance.

Warders’ Cottages 2

Ground floor - Conversion of the kitchen to a laundry, a zone of exceptional

significance and the dining room into a kitchen, a zone of considerable

significance.

Upper floor is for adaption of bedroom 4 to a bathroom, a zone of

considerable significance.

Warders’ Cottages 3

Ground floor - Renovated kitchen, a zone of exceptional significance.

Upper floor - Bedroom 2 to be converted into a bathroom, a zone of

exceptional significance”

A copy of the Development Application for PW001/16, including the applicant’s heritage impact statement is contained as Attachment 1. It is important to note that the land use is not something that is being considered as part of this application. The existing land use of the Warders Cottages as ‘Grouped Dwellings’ remains. The proposal is to bring the cottages up to a more modern standard in terms of fitout, whilst the built strata applications will allow the cottages to be sold separately. Clause 8.2(n) of LPS4 allows a single house, multiple dwelling, or in this case a grouped dwelling to be used for the purposes of a ‘short stay dwelling’ without further planning approval from the City. Part B – Three (3) x Built Strata Subdivision Applications (WAPC464-16, WAPC465-16, WAPC467-16)

Part B of this item covers three (3) x built strata subdivision applications. It is noted that the Department of Planning date stamped receipt of all three applications on 10 May 2016, however they inadvertently did not refer any of them to the City for its consideration until 12 July 2016. Notwithstanding the above, the three built strata applications are set out below:

A three (3) lot built strata subdivision of No’s. 31-41 (Lot 2073) Henderson Street, Fremantle (WAPC464/16);

A six (6) lot built strata subdivision of No’s. 19-29 (Lot 2074) Henderson Street, Fremantle (WAPC465/16); and

A six (6) lot built strata subdivision of No’s. 7-17 (Lot 2075) Henderson Street, Fremantle (WAPC467/16).

The SHO, in their covering letter to the WAPC in relation to the above built strata subdivision applications states:


Page 19

“As discussed, please proceed to seek approval on behalf of the landowner for a Built-strata subdivision of the Fremantle Warders Cottages at 7-41 Henderson Street, Fremantle.

The Heritage Council received conditional approval from the WA Planning Commission in January 2016 for the survey-strata subdivision of the Fremantle Warders Cottages. Approval reference numbers are 1274-15, 1275-15 and 1277-15.

There are 15 Cottages in the complex, and they site in three strata plans because the Cottages comprise three terrace blocks separated by roadways.

It has become apparent in 2016 that achieving coordinated repair-and-maintenance of the Cottages, once survey-strata lots are sold to multiple private owners, will be more difficult than expected. We always intended that the Strata Companies should be responsible for external building maintenance, but Survey-Strata does not lend itself well to that arrangement because the building fabric does not form part of the common property.

Accordingly, our solicitor and the State Solicitor’s Office have recommended that we seek Built Strata approval.

As you’re aware, we approached the Department of Planning in late February 2016 to ascertain whether the WA Planning Commission would consider determining an application in this case…”

Copies of the subdivision plans are contained as Attachments 3 to 5 inclusive. STATUTORY AND POLICY ASSESSMENT

The proposed development has been assessed in accordance the relevant provisions contained within LPS4 and Council Local Planning Policies. The proposed development is not seeking any discretionary assessment. Local Planning Scheme No. 4 (LPS4) Objectives of the zone Clause 4.2.1(b) sets out the objectives of the City Zone:

“Development within the city centre zone shall— (i) provide for a full range of shopping, office, administrative, social, recreation,

entertainment and community services, consistent with the region-serving role of the centre and including residential uses, and

(ii) comply with the objectives of local planning area 1 of schedule 12, (iii) conserve places of heritage significance the subject of or affected by

development.” Whilst the proposal may be considered to be consistent with (i) and (ii) above, the City has a number of concerns on heritage grounds as will be discussed throughout this report. In this regard, the proposal is not considered to be consistent with (iii) and are not supported. Planning Bulletin


Page 20

Western Australian Planning Commission’s Planning Bulletin 110/2013 – Guidance on processing certain classes of Built Strata Title applications and WAPC delegation to local government (PB110/2013) Typically, the WAPC’s PB110/2013 and associated delegated authority permits the majority of built strata subdivision applications to be determined by the local government. Notwithstanding this, there are certain circumstances where the local government relinquishes its delegated authority powers back to the WAPC, with such circumstances set out below (bold for emphasis):

“In May 2009, the WAPC resolved to delegate its power to issue a certificate of approval under s25 of the Strata Titles Act to local government, except for built strata applications that:

propose the creation of a vacant lot(s);

propose vacant air stratas in multi-tiered strata scheme developments;

where, in the opinion of the WAPC as notified to the relevant local government in writing, or in the opinion of the relevant local government as notified to the WAPC in writing, relates to: (a) a type of development; and/or (b) is within an area which is of state or regional significance, or in respect

of which the WAPC has determined is otherwise in the public interest. Applications that meet the above criteria are not delegated to local government to determine and require WAPC determination.”

The City understands that the WAPC have taken the position that the three built strata applications must be “within an area which is of state or regional significance, or in respect of which the WAPC has determined is otherwise in the public interest.” This is consistent with the reasons outlined by the SHO in their covering letter that accompanied all three built strata applications. The City would ordinarily determine such built strata applications; however the WAPC’s position means that this power has been relinquished back to the WAPC. In this regard, the City is providing comments and a recommendation only to the WAPC in respect to the proposed built strata applications also being considered as part of this item. CONSULTATION

Community

The application was not required to be advertised in accordance with Clause 9.4 of the LPS4. City’s Infrastructure and Project Delivery Directorate

The previous subdivision application for WAPC1275-15 (Central Terraces) was referred to the City’s Infrastructure and Project Delivery directorate as it was necessary for a new crossover to be installed onto William Street which had implications for existing City infrastructure. The following comments were received at that time and are considered relevant for the purpose of considering the current proposal:


Page 21

“The proposed location of the crossover for the Warders Cottages can be supported provided there is no Heritage implication i.e. the wall, etc. Only left turn coming out from crossover. Crossover application required to be submitted for a formal support. The bike lane be painted green at the crossover and move the bike lane sign towards Henderson St. All associated costs for the relocation of the affected street sign, [Western Power] WP streetlight and the green paint will be at the proponents cost.”

This would be recommended as a condition of without prejudice approval that the above requirements be applied where applicable. Heritage

The City’s heritage department has reviewed the works proposed as part of the development application and has outlined numerous concerns with the proposal, particularly in relation to the impact of proposed works on previously identified ‘zones of significance’. The following recommendation is provided, however there is also a significant level of discussion relating to the heritage issues provided in the complete heritage comments:

“Levels of Significance The [Conservation Management Plan] CMP also identifies Warders’ Cottages (fmr) as being of exceptional significance (ref the addendum to this assessment). It also recognizes that the place comprises zones, sections and elements that are of varying degrees of significance. The level of significance of a place is proportionate to the weight given to its heritage values. Relative degrees of cultural significance may lead to different conservation actions. Managing change Keeping a significant place in use is likely to require continual adaptation and change. Change must be managed in accordance with Articles 3 and 15 of the Burra Charter:

Article 3. Cautious approach 3.1 Conservation is based on a respect for the existing fabric, use, associations and meanings. It requires a cautious approach of changing as much as necessary but as little as possible. 3.2 Changes to a place should not distort the physical or other evidence it provides, nor be based on conjecture.

Article 15. Change 15.1 Change may be necessary to retain cultural significance, but is undesirable where it reduces cultural significance. The amount of change to a place and its use should be guided by the cultural significance of the place and its appropriate interpretation. When change is being considered, including for a temporary use, a range of options should be explored to seek the option which minimises any reduction to its cultural significance.


Page 22

15.2 Changes which reduce cultural significance should be reversible, and be reversed when circumstances permit. Reversible changes should be considered temporary. Non-reversible change should only be used as a last resort and should not prevent future conservation action.

Policies 7, 8 and 13 of the CMP are of particular relevance when deciding on the appropriateness of proposed change:

Policy 7 Future works to the place should aim to retain the original concept of the

place. The cultural significance of the Warders’ Cottages (fmr) is largely embodied in the original concept of the place, its fabric, setting and its relationship with other places in the Convict Establishment. Importantly the high degree of integrity and intactness of the buildings contribute greatly to an understanding of the cultural significance of the place. It therefore follows that retaining the integrity and intactness of the original concept to a high degree is an integral part of conserving the cultural significance of the Warders’ Cottages (fmr).

Policy 8 Future works or changes to the place should aim to conserve the original fabric of the place and the additions from the early phases of construction.

If change is needed it must be directed towards the concept of retaining what

future generations will value and not towards short-term gains. This is of

particular relevance to places with high levels of authenticity and rarity value

such as the Warders’ Cottages (fmr) because by this definition these

characteristics are irreplaceable

Policy 13 The more significant a place, piece of fabric, space, relationship or

vista, the more care should be taken in any change which might affect it

so that this change will not reduce, and could enhance, its significance.

Decisions about change Conservation is an integral part of good management of places of cultural significance. Wherever possible the Warders’ Cottages should be used and managed in ways that will ensure that their significance can be appreciated by generation to come. Decisions about change to the Warders’ Cottages must be based on an understanding of their cultural significance. It requires a cautious balanced approach to changing: do as much as necessary to care for the place and to make it useable, but otherwise change it as little as possible so that its cultural significance is retained. Where conflict cannot be avoided, making a balanced decision includes considering the cultural significance of the place and the impact that the proposed change will have on that significance. The weight given to the heritage values is a determining consideration and should be proportionate to the significance of the place, zone or elements. The greater the level of significance of a place, a zone or elements, the greater the weight that should be attached to retaining their heritage values when determining the ‘right balance’.

This guidance is particularly pertinent when considering the zones of exceptional and considerable significance in the Warders’ Cottages. The cottages are simple vernacular, functional buildings and their heritage values are expressed not only in


Page 23

the visually obvious external features such as their facades, and in internal elements such as the staircases, but also in the completeness and simplicity of the internal spaces and the decorative finishes applied to the original fabric in these zones. These are primary reasons for their high levels of significance, and at the same time they are qualities that are particularly vulnerable to the harmful effects of incompatible change. It therefore follows that taking great care to retain the high levels of integrity and intactness of these zones is an integral part of conserving the cultural significance of the Warders’ Cottages (fmr). For this reason decisions about the appropriateness of proposed changes need to take full account of the impact or consequence of any proposed changes within in these zones. This understanding should go beyond implications that are immediately apparent. These questions are particularly relevant for the zones of exceptional and considerable significance in the Warders’ Cottages where the physical intervention required to accommodate the proposed change of use to kitchens, bathrooms, toilets and laundries and the methods by which it would be achieved would be extensive and intrusive. Furthermore, these changes would create other on-going issues stemming from the moisture they produce and the need for limestone walls to breath. All the proposed changes will cause a significant loss of simplicity and intactness. Although it is accepted that the Warders’ Cottages will need to change, it is also recognised that the heritage values of the zones of exceptional and considerable significance in the Warders’ Cottage are particularly vulnerable to change, including the cumulative effects of many small changes. Furthermore, these zones represent a finite resource which once lost cannot be regained. This fact heightens the concern that the interventions may not deliver the predicted outcomes that justified the loss of heritage values in the first place. Ideally the optimum use for zones of exceptional and considerable significance is a use that will retain the simplicity of the space by doing virtually nothing. Bedrooms, dining and sitting rooms would fulfill these criteria. It is considered that it is possible to achieve the ‘right balance’ provided the design process is guided by reasonable flexibility and a willingness to avoid standard design solutions in favour of an approach that avoids or minimises harm to the heritage values of the Warders Cottages (fmr). The CMP notes that the established method of accommodating change at the Warders Cottages (fmr) in the past had involved constructing new rooms, either as additions or as free standing structures in the yard, rather than modification of the existing fabric. It also states that accommodating change in this way had prevented loss of character thus retaining the high integrity of the original fabric, and that this had greatly benefitted the building in the past and should be the preferred option in the future when questions arise of how to accommodate change while minimizing the reduction of cultural significance. It is considered that the existing zones of some, little or no significance offer, to varying degrees, the opportunity for the implementation of this preferred option. Recommendation

It is recommended that the current proposal not be supported on heritage grounds.


Page 24

It is recommended that the proposed changes to the Warders’ Cottage be re-planned as necessary to ensure that the new uses are accommodated in ways that avoid or minimise the impact on the heritage values of the zones of exceptional and considerable significance.”

A copy of the Heritage Comments is contained as Attachment 2. It is noted that demolition of a number of rear structures have previously been approved by the WAPC in them making their determination in relation to the approval of subdivisions for WAPC1274-15, WAPC1275-15 and WAPC1277-15. The City was previously not supportive of this element of the proposal, despite the WAPC’s position and ultimately resolution to support those demolition works. The demolition proposed as part of the current built strata subdivisions (and the DA) therefore, which include the demolition of the rear outbuildings, are still not considered to be consistent with clause 5.15.1 of LPS4 Under the provisions of Clause 5.15.1 of LPS4, Council will only grant Planning Approval for the demolition of a building or structure where it is satisfied that the building or structure:

“(a) Has limited or no cultural heritage significance, and (b) Does not make a significant contribution to the broader cultural heritage

significance and character of the locality in which it is located.” The Heritage comments prepared for the previous survey strata subdivision applications already approved by the WAPC concluded that:

“The outbuildings of some significance.” In this regard, the proposed demolition of the existing outbuildings as proposed should not be supported as it does not satisfy clause 5.15.1(a) of LPS4. PLANNING COMMENT

Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 The proposal has been considered against the provisions of the clause 67 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 which relates to ‘deemed provisions for local planning schemes’. The proposal is not considered to be consistent with clauses 67 (b), (c), (k) and/or (w) which state:

“In considering an application for development approval the local government is to have due regard to the following matters to the extent that, in the opinion of the local government, those matters are relevant to the development the subject of the application — (b) the requirements of orderly and proper planning including any proposed

local planning scheme or amendment to this Scheme that has been advertised under the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 or any other proposed planning instrument that the local government is seriously considering adopting or approving;


Page 25

(c) any approved State planning policy; (k) the built heritage conservation of any place that is of cultural significance; (w) the history of the site where the development is to be located;”

For those reasons the proposal should not be supported. State Planning Policies

State Planning Policy 3.5 – Historic Heritage Conservation (SPP3.5) The proposal is not considered to be consistent with the WAPC’s SPP3.5, specifically clauses 6.5 and 6.6 respectively, which state:

“6.5 Relevant considerations for development assessment The Model Scheme Text provisions require local governments in considering applications for planning approval to have regard, amongst other things, to—

The conservation and protection of any place or area that has been registered in the register of heritage places under the Heritage Act or is the subject of a conservation order under the Act, or which is included in the heritage list under clause 7.1 of the scheme, or which is designated as a heritage area under clause 7.2 of the scheme.

Whether the proposed development will adversely affect the significance of any heritage place or area, including any adverse effect resulting from the location, bulk, form or appearance of the proposed development.

In addition to these broad considerations, local governments should also have regard to the following specific matters. Alterations, extensions, change of use or demolition affecting a heritage place (including a place within a heritage area)

The level of heritage significance of the place, based on a relevant heritage assessment. Measures proposed to conserve the heritage significance of the place and its setting.

The structural condition of the place, and whether the place is reasonably capable of conservation.

Whether the place is capable of adaptation to a new use which will enable its retention and conservation.

Development within a heritage area

Whether the proposed development responds sympathetically to the heritage values of the area as a whole and that part of the heritage area in the vicinity of the proposed development.

Whether the siting, scale, style and form, materials and finishes of the proposed development responds sympathetically to the heritage values of the area.

The local planning policy for the heritage area including any places designated of heritage significance and the objectives and guidelines for conservation and enhancement of the heritage area.


Page 26

6.6 Development control principles The following development control principles should be applied in considering planning applications in relation to a place entered in a heritage list, a place or area entered in the state register, or a heritage area designated pursuant to a local planning scheme. The weight given to heritage as a consideration will vary, depending on the degree of significance of a place or area, and relevant economic, social or environmental factors that may apply. Alterations, extensions or change of use affecting a heritage place

Development should conserve and protect the cultural significance of a heritage place based on respect for the existing building or structure, and should involve the least possible change to the significant fabric.

Alterations and additions to a heritage place should not detract from its significance and should be compatible with the siting, scale, architectural style and form, materials and external finishes of the place. Compatibility requires additions or alterations to sit well with the original fabric rather than simply copying or mimicking it.

In some cases, the conservation and protection of a heritage place may require a change of use to ensure a reasonable beneficial use or return. Sympathetic adaptation and change of use should be supported in such cases.

Development should be in accordance with any local planning policies relating to heritage.

Demolition of a heritage place (including a place within a heritage area)

Demolition of a State heritage place is rarely appropriate and should require the strongest justification. Demolition of a local heritage place should be avoided wherever possible, although there will be circumstances where demolition is justified. The onus rests with the applicant to provide a clear justification for it.

Demolition approval should not be expected simply because redevelopment is a more attractive economic proposition, or because a building has been neglected. Consideration of a demolition proposal should be based upon the significance of the building or place; the feasibility of restoring or adapting it, or incorporating it into new development; the extent to which the community would benefit from the proposed redevelopment; and any local planning policies relating to the demolition of heritage places.

Development within a heritage area

Development within a heritage area should respect and complement the heritage significance of the area as identified in the local planning policy. A respectful design approach gives special consideration to the siting, scale, architectural style and form, materials and finishes of the proposed development in relation to its neighbours, without copying historic detailing or decoration.

Alterations and additions to existing buildings should be designed and sited in a manner that respects and complements the heritage significance of the area.


Page 27

A general presumption should apply in favour of retaining buildings that make a positive contribution to the significance of the area.

Approval for demolition, if granted, may be accompanied by a requirement for an acceptable redevelopment proposal to avoid gap sites. If redevelopment is likely to be delayed, consideration should be given to the interim use of the land including a requirement for sympathetic treatment such as facade retention, landscaping or boundary treatment.

Any new buildings erected in heritage areas should be designed and sited in a way that respects and complements the heritage significance of the area. New construction that is imaginative, well designed and harmonious should not be discouraged.”

Based on the City’s Heritage Comments as discussed earlier in this report, and contained as Attachment 2 of this report, the proposal is not considered to be consistent with the WAPC’s SPP3.5, specifically clauses 6.5 and 6.6 respectively, and as such should not be supported. STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS The proposal is consistent with the City’s following strategic documents: Strategic Community Plan 2015-25:

Increase the number of people living in Fremantle.

Increase the number of people working in Fremantle.

Protect current tree canopy cover in Fremantle.

Provide for and seek to increase the number and diversity of residential dwellings in the City of Fremantle.

Increase the number of additional dwellings provided in the city centre. The proposal is inconsistent with the City’s following strategic documents: Green Plan 2020:

Encourage the retention of vegetation on private land. The proposal includes the removal of a number of trees, which is required to either accommodate vehicle access arrangements or to facilitate the proposed modifications to the buildings. The removal of the trees (denoted on the plans as dashed lines) is comprised approximately of the following:

o Warders Cottages 1: 6 trees;

o Warders Cottages 2: 4 trees;

o Warders Cottages 3: 1 tree.


Page 28

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION

PART A – DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION (PW0001/16) That the application be REFERRED to the Western Australian Planning Commission with a recommendation for REFUSAL under the Metropolitan Region Scheme and Local Planning Scheme No. 4 for the Alterations, conservation and landscaping works to existing Grouped Dwellings at No’s 7-41 (Lots 2073, 2074 & 2075) Henderson Street, Fremantle, as detailed on plans dated 4 May 2016, for the following reasons: 1. The proposal is inappropriate having regard to the purposes for which the land is

zoned and Clause 4.2.1(b) of the City of Fremantle’s Local Planning Scheme No. 4.

2. The proposed demolition is inconsistent with Clause 5.15 of the City of Fremantle’s Local Planning Scheme No. 4 as the structures are considered to have some local significance.

3. The proposed works are not acceptable because they are not shown as being in accordance with good conservation practice as the extent and nature of the physical work proposed to accommodate kitchens, bathrooms, toilets and laundries would be excessively intrusive and cause irreversible damage and change to parts the place which are of considerable or exceptional heritage significance contrary to the Burra Charter.

4. The proposed works are not acceptable because they will exceed what is needed to retain as much as possible of the original building fabric. It is recommended that the extent of the work be re-considered and that it be based on a careful analysis of the high level of integrity and intactness of the zones.

5. The proposal is inconsistent with clause 67 (b), (c), (k) and (w) of the Deemed Provisions of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 as:

a) The works that would create on-going issues stemming from the moisture they produce and the need for limestone walls to breath is not consistent with orderly and proper planning;

b) The works do not comply with State Planning Policy 3.5 – Historic Heritage Conservation specifically clause 6.5 – Relevant considerations for development assessments and clause 6.6 – Development control principles;

c) For the reasons detailed in the City’s heritage assessment, the works will adversely affect the built heritage conservation of the place and the history of the site.

6. The proposed works that facilitate the change of use of the buildings to residential is inconsistent with Council’s resolution of 24 June 2015 that states:

“In respect of the cottages in Block W1, due to the proximity of the cottages and their rear gardens to Fremantle Markets future use should be for purposes compatible with market activities; these include (but are not necessarily limited to) use as short stay accommodation intended primarily for occupation by tourist visitors and/or uses at ground level, possibly utilising the rear gardens area, that could interact with the street and/or laneway access to the markets. The Council is not supportive of reoccupation of the cottages in Block W1 as dwellings


Page 29

intended for long term occupancy as a primary residence, as the amenity expectations of long term dwelling occupiers would be difficult to reconcile with the prevailing character of this area.” and

In respect of the cottages in Block W3, due to the proximity of the cottages to Fremantle Markets and other hospitality and entertainment land uses in Henderson St Mall and South Terrace Block W3 is exposed to high levels of noise and activity; therefore future use should be for purposes compatible with these predominant existing uses. Short stay tourist-orientated accommodation and/or non-residential uses (at least at ground level) that could interact with the street and complement the established character of the area would be preferable so long as any physical alterations needed to make such uses viable can be undertaken without unacceptable impact on the heritage values of the existing building fabric. The Council is not supportive of reoccupation of the cottages in Block W3 as dwellings intended for long term occupancy as a primary residence, as the amenity expectations of long term dwelling occupiers would be extremely difficult to reconcile with the prevailing character of this area.”

Advice Notes: i. It is considered that it is possible to achieve the ‘right balance’ provided the design

process is guided by reasonable flexibility and a willingness to avoid standard design solutions in favour of an approach that avoids or minimises harm to the heritage values of the Warders Cottages (fmr). The CMP notes that the established method of accommodating change at the Warders Cottages (fmr) in the past had involved constructing new rooms, either as additions or as free standing structures in the yard, rather than modification of the existing fabric. It also states that accommodating change in this way had prevented loss of character thus retaining the high integrity of the original fabric, and that this had greatly benefitted the building in the past and should be the preferred option in the future when questions arise of how to accommodate change while minimizing the reduction of cultural significance. It is considered that the existing zones of some, little or no significance offer, to varying degrees, the opportunity for the implementation of this preferred option.

WITHOUT PREJUDICE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL In the event that the WAPC was of the mind to support the proposal, the following conditions are recommended by the City of Fremantle, without prejudice: 1. The approval related only to the development as indicated on the approved plans

dated 4 May 2016. It does not relate to any other development on this lot and must substantially commence within four years of the date of this decision letter.

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

3. The works hereby approved are to be undertaken in a manner that will retain as much as possible of the building. Additionally the work should not cause irreparable damage or contribute to the loss or deterioration of the building’s original or significant fabric. Conservation works required to rectify the non-compliance with this requirement will be undertaken at the applicant’s expense and to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Officer, City of Fremantle.


Page 30

4. Before the issue of a Building Permit the Owner/Applicant is to submit detailed

drawings of the proposed work to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Officer, City of Fremantle.

5. The internal fit-out works hereby approved are to be undertaken in a manner that does not irreparably damage any original or significant fabric of the building. Should the works subsequently be removed, any damage is to be rectified to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Officer, City of Fremantle.

6. Suitable arrangements being made with the local government for the provision of vehicular crossover(s) to service the lot(s) shown on the approved plan of development approval.

7. Arrangements being made to the satisfaction of the WAPC and to the specification of Western Power for the removal, relocation and/or replacement of electricity supply infrastructure, including plant and/or equipment located on or near the lots shown on the approved plan of development.

Advice Notes: i. Good conservation practice is based on following a cautious approach of ‘changing

as much as necessary but as little as possible’. Accordingly the aim is to cause a minimal loss of fabric from heritage buildings as opposed to making them appear to be new by returning them to a perfect state. For this reason, where repair is needed, it should be limited to the section that is badly deteriorated or missing. This requires a careful process of skilful repair, based on the use of traditional techniques and materials matching those used originally, rather than the complete removal of elements because they are partly damaged.

ii. An underlying principle in the care and conservation of 19th and early 20th century buildings is that of allowing the fabric of these buildings to perform as originally intended through the use of traditional techniques and materials. Traditional mortars and renders were almost invariably lime-based and the decorative finishes were of lime wash. These materials are permeable and they assist the evaporation of moisture from the walls. Evaporation is beneficial because it helps to diminish the build-up of damp in walls, which in turn helps to prevent the severe problems that can result if excessive damp is allowed to penetrate to the inner face of the wall. Preference for traditional techniques and materials is not therefore based purely on aesthetics and a desire for authentic reconstruction; it is also because it can be demonstrated that conservation works undertaken in this manner will not irreparably damage the original fabric of the building, always provided that the materials and techniques are correct and that the buildings are maintained regularly.

iii. In relation to condition 7, the WAPC and the applicant is advised that this may involve the relocation of the City’s street and directional signage which will be affected by any future crossover as indicated on the subdivision plan. The City will also likely require that the bike lane immediately in front of the crossover is to be painted green, for the extent of the crossover width to the satisfaction of the City. These works are to be done at the expense of the applicant and to the satisfaction of the City.


Page 31

iv. In relation to condition 7, the WAPC and the applicant is advised that the City’s Infrastructure and Project Delivery team will not support vehicles exiting the development site and turning right (ie east) given its proximity to an intersection (roundabout) and its associated road infrastructure. Left only exits from the development site will be supported.

v. In relation to condition 8, the WAPC is advised that this has been recommended as

there is an underground street light pole which will have to be relocated as in order to provide vehicle access to the development site as indicated on the subdivision plan. It is understood that this will likely be considered as part of Western Power’s referral comments to the WAPC.

vi. The City strongly encourages deep planting zones that should be uncovered, contain a retained or planted tree to Council’s specification, have a minimum dimension of 3.0m and at least 50% is to be provided on the rear 50% of the site.

PART B – BUILT STRATA SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS (WAPC464-16, WAPC465-16, WAPC467-16) WAPC464-16 That the application be REFERRED to the Western Australian Planning Commission with a recommendation for REFUSAL under the Metropolitan Region Scheme and Local Planning Scheme No. 4 for the proposed three (3) lot built strata subdivision of No’s. 31-41 (Lot 2073) Henderson Street, Fremantle, as detailed on plans dated 10 May 2016 (Department of Planning Date), for the following reasons: 1. The Council is not supportive of a strata title subdivision of the Warders’ cottages,

and instead the Council strongly supports the three blocks of cottages each remaining in a single ownership as this is considered most likely to ensure a consistent approach to property management and ongoing conservation of the integrity and other heritage values of the cottages.


Advice Note: (i) In relation to reason 1, refer to agenda item no. SGS1506-6 from the City of

Fremantle’s Ordinary Council Meeting (OCM) of 24 June 2015 for a detailed background and explanation of Council’s position and its ultimate resolution in relation to this matter (highlighted in grey). The meeting minutes can be downloaded via the following link:

http://www.fremantle.wa.gov.au/sites/default/files/20150624%20-%20OCM%20-%20Minutes.pdf

WITHOUT PREJUDICE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL In the event that the WAPC was of the mind to support the proposal, the following conditions are recommended by the City of Fremantle, without prejudice:

http://www.fremantle.wa.gov.au/sites/default/files/20150624%20-%20OCM%20-%20Minutes.pdfhttp://www.fremantle.wa.gov.au/sites/default/files/20150624%20-%20OCM%20-%20Minutes.pdf


Page 32

1. The subdivision being in accordance with the approved plan dated 10 May 2016

(Department of Planning date), including any amendments placed thereon by Council, other than any modifications that may be required by the conditions that follow.

2. Suitable arrangements being made with the local government for the provision of

vehicular crossover(s) to service the lot(s) shown on the approved plan of subdivision.

Advice Notes: i. Pursuant to Section 157 of the Planning & Development Act, the demolition of all

structures as detailed on the subdivision plan for demolition on site do not require further planning approval of the City. Please be advised that a demolition permit may still be required from the City’s Building department.

WAPC465-16 That the application be REFERRED to the Western Australian Planning Commission with a recommendation for REFUSAL under the Metropolitan Region Scheme and Local Planning Scheme No. 4 for the proposed six (6) lot built strata subdivision of No’s. 19-29 (Lot 2074) Henderson Street, Fremantle, as detailed on plans dated 10 May 2016 (Department of Planning Date), for the following reasons: 1. The Council is not supportive of a strata title subdivision of the Warders’ cottages,

and instead the Council strongly supports the three blocks of cottages each remaining in a single ownership as this is considered most likely to ensure a consistent approach to property management and ongoing conservation of the integrity and other heritage values of the cottages.


Advice Note: (ii) In relation to reason 1, refer to agenda item no. SGS1506-6 from the City of



WITHOUT PREJUDICE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL In the event that the WAPC was of the mind to support the proposal, the following conditions are recommended by the City of Fremantle, without prejudice:

http://www.fremantle.wa.gov.au/sites/default/files/20150624%20-%20OCM%20-%20Minutes.pdfhttp://www.fremantle.wa.gov.au/sites/default/files/20150624%20-%20OCM%20-%20Minutes.pdf


Page 33

1. The subdivision being in accordance with the approved plan dated 10 May 2016 (Department of Planning date), including any amendments placed thereon by Council, other than any modifications that may be required by the conditions that follow.



3. Arrangements being made to the satisfaction of the WAPC and to the specification of

Western Power for the removal, relocation and/or replacement of electricity supply infrastructure, including plant and/or equipment located on or near the lots shown on the approved plan of subdivision.



ii. In relation to condition 2, the WAPC and the applicant is advised that this may involve

the relocation of the City’s street and directional signage which will be affected by any future crossover as indicated on the subdivision plan. The City will also likely require that the bike lane immediately in front of the crossover is to be painted green, for the extent of the crossover width to the satisfaction of the City. These works are to be done at the expense of the applicant and to the satisfaction of the City.

iii. In relation to condition 2, the WAPC and the applicant is advised that the City’s

Infrastructure and Project Delivery team will not support vehicles exiting the development site and turning right (ie east) given its proximity to an intersection (roundabout) and its associated road infrastructure. Left only exits from the development site will be supported.

iv. In relation to condition 3, the WAPC is advised that this has been recommended as there is an underground street light pole which will have to be relocated as in order to provide vehicle access to the development site as indicated on the subdivision plan. It is understood that this will likely be considered as part of Western Power’s referral comments to the WAPC.

WAPC467-16 That the application be REFERRED to the Western Australian Planning Commission with a recommendation for REFUSAL under the Metropolitan Region Scheme and Local Planning Scheme No. 4 for the proposed six (6) lot built strata subdivision of No’s. 7-17 (Lot 2075) Henderson Street, Fremantle, as detailed on plans dated 10 May 2016 (Department of Planning Date), for the following reasons: 2. The Council is not supportive of a strata title subdivision of the Warders’ cottages,

and instead the Council strongly supports the three blocks of cottages each remaining in a single ownership as this is considered most likely to ensure a


Page 34

consistent approach to property management and ongoing conservation of the integrity and other heritage values of the cottages.


Advice Note: (i) In relation to reason 1, refer to agenda item no. SGS1506-6 from the City of



WITHOUT PREJUDICE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL In the event that the WAPC was of the mind to support the proposal, the following conditions are recommended by the City of Fremantle, without prejudice: 1. The subdivision being in accordance with the approved plan dated 10 May 2016

(Department of Planning date), including any amendments placed thereon by Council, other than any modifications that may be required by the conditions that follow.





COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION MOVED: Cr J Strachan

1. The Planning Committee note the officer’s report as the Western Australian

Planning Commission has already determined the applications before

consideration by the City’s Planning Committee.

2. The Planning Committee advise the Western Australian Planning

Commission and the owner that the given the heritage importance of these

buildings at both a state and local level, Council is extremely disappointed

http://www.fremantle.wa.gov.au/sites/

minutes - city of fremantle - ocm... · thorstou goedicke the following members of the public spoke...

Documents