At the close of the advertising period a total of 59 submissions were received comprising of 42 objections and 17 non objections

(1)

3.3 KIARA LOCAL STRUCTURE PLAN - LOT 9000 BOTTLEBRUSH DRIVE, KIARA (SWAN-SP002/16)

Ward: (Altone Ward) (Statutory Planning) Disclosure of Interest: Nil

Authorised Officer: (Executive Manager Planning and Development)

KEY ISSUES

• Burgess Design Group (on behalf of the Department of Housing) has prepared a Structure Plan over Lot 9000 Bottlebrush Drive, Kiara (the former Kiara TAFE site) for the subdivision of 100 residential lots, a private High School and the retention of 30% Public Open Space.

• The proposed Local Structure Plan No.2 (LPS2) relates to the development of approximately 13.76ha that is generally bound by Morley Drive East, Bottlebrush Drive, Roseheath Boulevard, Beckworth Avenue and Altone Road in the suburb of Kiara.

• The land is zoned ‘Urban’ under the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS) and

‘Residential Development’ under the City’s Local Planning Scheme No.17 (LPS17).

The ‘Residential Development’ zone requires the preparation of a Structure Plan to inform zoning and density, land use permissibility, street layout and location of Public Open Space.

• The proposed Structure Plan was advertised in September 2016 for a period of 21 days. At the close of the advertising period a total of 59 submissions were received comprising of 42 objections and 17 non objections.

• Objections received predominately raised concern with the removal of vegetation, legitimacy of environmental assessment, increased traffic and associated safety concerns, appropriateness of a High School and the proposed residential density.

The submissions have been summarised and addressed in a Schedule of Submissions that is attached to this report.

• The Structure Plan was referred to relevant government agencies for comment.

The responses received have been summarised in the Schedule of Submissions and issues that required resolution have been summarised and addressed in the report.

• The revised Bushfire Management Plan is acceptable to City staff although Department of Fire and Emergency Services have not had the opportunity of reviewing it.

• Subject to some minor modifications, the proposed Structure plan is considered to comply with the proposed requirements for the land as set out in the endorsed Scheme amendment.

• In order to comply with the provisions of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015 (the Regulations) relating to the processing and consideration of structure plans, the local government is to forward its report and recommendation on the proposed structure plan to the Western Australian

(2)

AUTHORITY/DISCRETION

The processes and determination powers with respect to structure plans are governed by the Deemed Provisions of Schedule 2 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015 (the Regulations). Under these regulations the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) is the sole authority responsible for making determinations on structure plans.

Pursuant to clause 20 of Part 4 of Schedule 2 of the Regulations, the responsible authority must prepare a report to the WAPC on that plan, inclusive of a recommendation as to whether or not it should be approved, within 60 days of the date of closure of the public advertising period.

BACKGROUND

Applicant: Burgess Design Group

Owner: Department of Housing

Zoning: LPS17 - Residential Development

MRS - Urban

Strategy/Policy: N/A

Development Scheme: Local Planning Scheme No.17 Existing Land Use: Vacant land

Lot Size: 13.7682ha

DETAILS OF THE PROPOSAL

The proposed Kiara Local Structure Plan No.2 (LPS2) seeks to guide the future development of one singular allotment compromising of approximately 13.7 hectares of land generally bound by Morley Drive East, Bottlebrush Drive, Roseheath Boulevard, Beckworth Avenue and Altone Road in the suburb of Kiara.

As the land is zoned ‘Residential Development’, it requires the preparation of a Structure Plan to guide land use and density outcomes.

The proposed structure plan comprises the following:

• An estimated 100 residential lots with assigned density codings of R30,R40 and R60;

• A designated site for a private Catholic high school that adjoins the existing Good Sheppard private Primary School;

• Public Open Space (POS) area of approximately 4.11ha (30%) to be retained in the northern area of the site.

Key attributes of the land subject to the proposed structure plan area:

• The lot is designated ‘Bushfire Prone’ in accordance with the Department of Fire and Emergency Services (DFES) Map for Bushfire Prone Areas, and assessed as

‘extreme’;

• 111 potential breeding habitat trees for the Carnaby’s & Forest Red-Tailed Black Cockatoo;

(3)

• Two (2) bisected wetlands classed as ‘Resource Enhancement’

The applicant has submitted the following documents as technical appendices in support of the proposal:

1. Environmental Assessment Report (PGV Environmental) 2. Geotechnical Investigation (Douglas Partners)

3. Local Water Management Plan (Cardno)

4. Bushfire Management Plan (Bushfire Prone Planning) 5. Transport Assessment Report (Cardno)

6. Servicing Report (Cardno)

DESCRIPTION OF SITE

The proposed LPS2 covers one singular allotment comprising of approximately 13.7 hectares of land generally bound by Morley Drive East, Bottlebrush Drive, Roseheath Boulevard, Beckworth Avenue and Altone Road in the suburb of Kiara.

The site is currently undeveloped bushland and is gently undulating with approximately 6m from the north-west, south and north east corner.

Low density R20 residential development borders the north and north-east of parts of the subject site, with west of Bottlebrush Drive having a dual density coding of predominately R20/R50. The Kiara Shopping Centre is located west of Bottlebrush Drive, the Kiara Police Station and Fire Station to the south and the Good Shepherd Catholic Primary School to the south-east of the subject site.

OTHER RELEVANT PREVIOUS DECISIONS OF COUNCIL

The site was originally proposed to be developed as a TAFE (Tertiary and Further Education) site. However, following purchase of the site by the Ministry of Housing (now Department of Housing) in 1998, the Housing Authority formed a stakeholder consultation group to identify alternative uses for the site, as the TAFE was no longer required.

Since this time, the subject lot has had a number of proposed Scheme Amendments which did not proceed. In each circumstance opposition was received from the community in respect to proposed development and clearing of bushland from the site.

It was considered that a broader based consultation process was necessary.

A draft Outline Development Plan (ODP) was presented at the Ordinary Council Meeting on the 4 May 2005, with the intension to use the ODP as a basis for the land to be rezoned to ‘Urban’ under the MRS. Council granted ‘in principle’ support to the ODP which included 30% of the site being retained as open space, with the remainder 70%

(4)

In December 2009, the (WAPC) considered the final adoption of the proposed MRS amendment to zone the land ‘Urban’ (MRS Amendment 1133/57). However, the WAPC resolved to defer consideration of the item pending specific advice from the City of Swan and Department of Environment and Conservation regarding which agency should take responsibility for management of the POS, and whether the land should be wholly reserved ‘Urban’ or only portion, with the remainder as ‘Parks & Recreation’.

At the OCM on the 24 February 2010, Council resolved to advise the WAPC that the City does not support the proposal to modify the MRS Amendment to zone only portions of the site and advised that Council will only assume management responsibility if the site is reserved under the LPS17 for ‘Local Open Space’.

The Minister for Planning approved the entire lot to be zoned ‘Urban’ under the MRS and was published in the Government Gazette on the 9 April 2010.

APPLICANT'S SUBMISSION

• The Housing Authority was instructed to submit a Plan showing 30% gross Public Open Space in accordance with a Media Statement issued by the Minister for Planning on 22 April 2010.

• The ecological values of the site have been considered in detail and a significant portion of the site has been identified in the reserve. This will ensure a large part of the site (more than triple the standard 10% Public Open Space requirement) is set aside from conservation, rehabilitation and recreation uses in accordance with a Public Open Space Management Plan to be prepared as a condition of subdivision approval.

• The Environmental Assessment Report was completed in November 2015 and included updated studies, site inspections and a review of previous studies completed over the site. This provides a robust understanding not only of the existing condition of the vegetation, but how it has changed over time and how its environmental values can be managed and potentially rehabilitated as an integral part of the development. The recent listing of the Banksia Woodland as ‘endangered’ under the EPBC Act has no effect as the Department of Environment has issued a conditional approval to the proposed action.

• The proposed density codes respond directly to the character of the area, the interface with existing development and proximity to existing and proposed services and amenities. In particular, the Structure Plan designates low density (R30) uses adjacent uses adjacent to existing development along Chauvel Court to ensure a sensitive interface; increasing to medium density (R40) facing the proposed reserve to maximise passive surveillance; and culminating in medium to high density (R60) uses directly adjacent to the proposed private high school and the existing Kiara Shopping Centre to maximise access to and use of those amenities and services (refer to section 3.3 of the Structure Plan Report).

• The detailed Traffic Assessment prepared to support the Structure Plan demonstrates that the intersection has sufficient capacity and requires no modification to support the proposed development.

• As outlined in Section 3.6 of the Structure Plan Report, the Catholic Education Office has established that its nearby private high schools are currently operating at

(5)

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

In accordance with the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, clause 18, Part 4, Schedule 2, the application was advertised for 21 days from the 21 September 2016 until the 18 October 2016.

Advertising comprised of letters to landowners within 200m of the Structure Plan boundaries (in consultation with Town of Bassendean), four (4) signs on site, a notice in the local newspaper (Eastern Reporter) and all information was paced on the City’s website and available at the City’s office.

At the close of the advertising period a total of 59 submissions were received from the public; 17 do not object whilst the remaining 42 objecting on the basis of the following concerns summarised below:

• Developing the natural bushland and subsequent environmental impacts;

• The legitimacy in the environmental assessment;

• The proposed R60 density is not consistent with the surrounding area and subsequent anti-social behaviour;

• Appropriateness for a High School in this locality; and

• Impact on increased traffic on Bottlebrush Drive, Morley Drive East and Altone Road and subsequent safety concerns;

A Schedule of Submissions has been prepared containing all issues raised and including a response. A copy of this has been attached to the report.

CONSULTATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES AND/OR CONSULTANTS

In addition to the public consultation, service providers and government agencies were invited to provide comment on the proposal. The following agencies have provided comment:

• Town of Bassendean

• Department of Education

• Department of Environment Regulation

• Environmental Protection Authority

• Department of Fire and Emergency Services

• Public Transport Australia

• Department of Transport

• Main Roads WA

• Department of Aboriginal Affairs

• Department of Health

(6)

• ATCO Gas

All Agencies offered no objection and/or standard advice and recommendations, subject to Department of Fire & Emergency Services (DFES) and specific recommendations from Main Roads WA (MRWA) and Public Transport Authority (PTA). Specific comments from Agencies are discussed within the content of this report.

Refer to the ‘Schedule of Submissions Attachment’ for further details on all Agencies comments. It is noted that Department of Parks & Wildlife (DPAW) has not provided a response.

DETAILS

Consistency with Zoning

The land subject of the Structure Plan is zoned ‘Urban’ under the MRS and ‘Residential Development’ under the City’s LPS17. Pursuant to Clause 4.2.14 of LPS17, the

‘Residential Development’ zone provides for the subdivision and development of land in accordance with an approved Structure Plan.The land use permissibility is in accordance with the corresponding zone under Scheme.

Lot Layout and Density

17 out of the 42 objectors raised concern with the proposed density; in particular R60, as it is not considered complimentary to the existing abutting residential zones.

The Structure Plan proposes residential densities between R30 and R60. The application of residential densities across the Structure Plan area is to be determined at subdivision stage. However, an ultimate yield of 100 residential lots is envisaged. There are two calculations to ascertain if the development meets the requirements of Directions 2031 and Liveable Neighbourhoods.

Dwellings Gross Urban Hectare

• Target = 15

• Proposed =7.29

The gross urban zone on which density is applied is 13.7044 hectares. Based on the estimated number of dwellings (x100), the site achieves a density of 7.29 dwellings. The density is below the recommended target of 15 dwellings per gross urban hectare outlined in Directions 2031.

City staff note that the Structure Plan Report has incorrectly calculated the gross urban zone at 11 dwellings and recommend amending clause 3.3 of the Structure Plan report.

Recommendation: Amending clause 3.3 of the Structure Plan Report to update the calculated density at 7.29 dwellings per gross urban zoned hectare in lieu of 11 dwellings.

Dwellings per Site Hectare

• Target = 22

• Proposed = 33

The site per hectare zone is applied which is the density applied to the available

(7)

main bus route. The number of dwellings provided is slightly over the recommended target.

Due to the number of submissions received, particular question is given to the appropriateness of the proposed density of R60 and its location. It is intended that small lots capable of development to medium density (up to R60), will be developed within 400m to neighbourhood centres (such as the Kiara Shopping Centre) major nodes (such as Morley Drive East) and POS, all of which are consistent with the provisions of Liveable Neighbourhoods.

The residential lots west of Bottlebrush Drive have a dual density coding of R20/R50, which was approved in 2015 as part of Scheme Amendment No.92 – Urban Housing Strategy. Comparatively with an R50 density, the proposed R40 - R60 has exactly the same minimum lot area for a green title lot, as per Table 1 of the State Planning Policy 3.1 – Residential Design Codes. Notwithstanding, majority of the areas designed with an R60 coding is located away of the periphery from all existing road roads adjoining the subject lot.

Overall, given the balance the Structure Plan achieves in delivering additional housing opportunities in the community whilst retaining a significantly larger provision of POS, together with the high number of dwellings per site hectare, this density is considered to be appropriate in this context.

Public Open Space

A breakdown of the provision of Public Open Space (POS) across the Structure Plan area is provided in Appendix 1 of the Structure Plan Report. The breakdown stipulates one parcel of POS encompassing 4.11 hectares of land and representing 30% of gross site area and a 32.17% net POS contribution.

Liveable Neighbourhoods requires a minimum 10% allocated for POS, whereas this proposal provides an overprovision of POS and was a key consideration in the Scheme Amendment process to rezone the land to ‘Urban’.

At the 24 February 2010 OCM, City staff considered that it is unlikely that the retention of a portion of the existing bushland will be of significant advantage to the Altone Ward from a POS perspective, given at the time there was already 6.1% of the area reserved for ‘Local Open Space’ and 8.9% for regionally reserved ‘Parks & Recreation’.

Notwithstanding, Council resolved to advise the WAPC that the Council will only assume management responsibility for the local open space that is reserved under the LPS.

Again, the question is highlighted as part of this Structure Plan, as to whether the City ought to manage the reserve, or given the City’s limited resources and overprovision of POS, to re-evaluate its position.

Given the area of land is above the minimum 10%, and to address resourcing issues, it is recommended for the Department of Housing maintain the area for 2 years. This can be addressed by way of a POS Management Plan which should be prepared prior to or as a condition of subdivision, to the satisfaction of the City of Swan.

(8)

Flora and Fauna

17 out of the 42 objections raised concerns with the potential loss of flora and fauna as a result of the development of the site. In support of the Structure Plan, the proponent has prepared an Environmental Assessment and Management Strategy which identifies existing vegetation on site and outlines the process for determining areas of POS and removal of vegetation.

Vegetation across the site ranges from ‘Degraded’ to ‘Very Good’ condition. As noted, the development proposes the retention of a minimum 30% of the site for POS, which is above and beyond the minimum 10% required under Liveable Neighbourhoods.

The development has not only been designed to maximise the retention of predominately ‘Very Good’ quality vegetation, it also accommodates portions of two

‘Resource Enhancement’ wetlands and their respective 50m buffers and also retains a number of significant trees. A POS Management will be a condition of subdivision approval which will manage the ecological value of the site.

The proponent has obtained development approval from the Department of the Environment (DoE) on 17 July 2014 (EPBC 2013/7050) with conditions. This approval is valid until the 31 June 2019 and allows the clearing of a maximum 11.2ha of Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo foraging and potential breeding habitat. The Structure Plan results in the clearing of a maximum of 9.65ha.

A few concerns raised by landowners included the legitimacy in the environmental assessment. The Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) considered the Kiara Structure Plan based on the abovementioned points and provided support on the 25 October 2016. EPA notes that the proposal does not raise any significant environmental issues that cannot be adequately managed through detailed planning and processes and in consultation with relevant agencies. No concerns were raised on the assessment of the report.

High School

The LSP includes the provision of a new private High School. Three (3) objections were received regarding the need for an additional High School.

The school is anticipated to accommodate up to 1,000 students, and will help to relieve pressure on the nearby Chisholm Catholic College and La Salle College. The location and design of the High School is consistent with Element 8 – Schools within Liveable Neighbourhoods. The application was also referred to the Department of Education whom provided no objection on the proposal.

Traffic & Infrastructure The subject land is bound by:

• A Other Regional Road Reserve (Morley Drive East) to the south;

• Bottlebrush Drive to the west;

• Beckworth Avenue to the north; and

• A portion of Altone Road to the east.

As part of the submission of the Structure Plan, a Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) has been submitted which models the impact of traffic from the Structure Plan. A number of submissions raised concern with increased traffic along Morley Drive East and

(9)

In accordance with conclusions of the TIA, there is no requirement to upgrade the road infrastructure as part of this development as all intersections have sufficient capacity to accommodate the traffic generated by the proposed development.

Although Morley Drive East is not under the control of MRWA as it is classified as an

‘Other Regional Road’ and its planning responsibility of the Department of Planning (DoP), MRWA has provided comments due to their involvement with the Ellenbrook Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) study. The following findings/recommendations from MRWA are listed below:

• The intersection of Altone Road and Morley Drive East currently becomes congested during the AM peak period. This is mainly due to the designated drop off access for the existing Good Sheppard Catholic Primary School being located approximately 70m from the intersection. As part of this proposed local structure plan it is recommended that an additional drop off zone be located on the proposed neighbourhood connector (Road 1), this is to help ease congestion and increase the safety of children and road users within the area.

• It is also recommended that the access for the proposed high school be restricted from Morley Drive East, thus preventing future traffic congestion and increased safety concerns for surrounding road network. It is essential at this stage of planning to ensure the structure plan has considered the road widths of the local roads, ensuring the roads have enough capacity to support the anticipated traffic.

City staff agree with this recommendation and should be a key consideration at this stage of planning.

Recommendation: Access for the proposed High School to be restricted from Morley Drive East.

Recommendation: Increase the road width of the proposed neighbourhood connector (Road 1), to allow for the incorporation of a ‘drop off’ zone.

The Structure Plan was also referred to the Public Transport Authority (PTA) in relation to the current bus services and in particular, future bus services to the proposed High School. PTA have advised that in order to allow TransPerth to operate services for students a 60 metre bus bay is required adjacent to the College on Access Street C. PTA have also advised buses will operate in one direction on this road, however, the proposed pavement width is insufficient to accommodate buses and needs to be reviewed.

In accordance with Liveable Neighbourhoods, Access Streets are designed for residential subdivisions, where traffic volumes are low. Where a neighbourhood connector abuts a school, it should include on street parking and wide enough for buses to stop. Therefore, City staff consider a more appropriate location for the bus bay would be within the neighbourhood connector.

Recommendation: Increase the road width of the proposed neighbour connector (Road 1) to allow for the incorporation of a ‘bus bay’ zone.

(10)

Further to this, the City recommends modifying the internal road layout off Bottlebrush Drive towards Access Street C to ensure it is not ‘staggered’ as it is in its current form and is considered to propose traffic safety concerns.

Recommendation: Modify the internal road off Bottlebrush Drive to ensure it is not staggered.

Bushfire Risk

In January 2016, Bushfire Prone Planning prepared a Bushfire Management Plan (BMP) that was subsequently forwarded to the Department of Fire and Emergency Service (DFES) for review in September.

City staff and DFES raised several concerns relating to the assessment of bushfire risk undertaken against State Planning 3.7 – Planning in Bushfire Prone Areas.

In particular:

• Policy objective 5.4 recognises the need to consider bushfire risk management measures and is the most effectively addressed at the strategic planning stage to help determine the most appropriate location, scale and intensity of future development. The submitted BMP has not adequately addressed the bushfire risk associated with the retained vegetation.

• Policy objective 6.3 (a) (ii) states that where the lot layout of the proposal is known, a Bushfire Attack Level (BAL) Contour Map is required which determined the indicative acceptable BAL ratings across the subject site. A BAL Contour Map has not been submitted.

• The BMP assumes the areas of POS will be maintained to a moderate to low threat vegetation. However, no evidence is provided to justify this assumption to validate compliance with Element 1 (A1.1).

• It is unclear if areas of proposed residential zoned land adjacent to the POS are located within areas that, on completion, are subject to either a moderate or BAL- 29 or below.

As the above cannot be validated, compliance of State Planning Policy 3.7 – Planning in Bushfire Prone Areas (including supplementary Guidelines) therefore cannot be demonstrated. As a result of the advice received an amended BMP was submitted to the City in November 2016. The revised BMP includes:

• Revised Section 5.1.1 of the BMP including that the POS will be developed in accordance with a POS Management Plan. In the absence of this Plan, the BMP adopts a conservative approach by assuming the entire extent of the Reserve will remain vegetated, representing a worst-case scenario.

• A BAL Contour Map has been provided, which shows the residential zoned land with a maximum rating of BAL-29.

This revised Hazard Assessment and Bushfire Management Plan is acceptable to City staff, although it is noted that these documents have, for timing reasons, not been referred to the Department of Fire and Emergency Services.

(11)

Administrative Modifications:

In addition to those modifications recommended above, a number of administrative modifications are recommended.

It is recommended to modify the ‘Parks and Recreation’ zoning on the Structure Plan Map as this is not a zoning under the Local Planning Scheme.

Recommendation: Modifying the ‘Parks and Recreation’ zoning to ‘Recreation’

so that it is consistent with the zoning of the Local Planning Scheme.

It is recommended to correct an administrative error under clause 3.3 of the Structure Plan Report to replace the calculated gross urban zoned hectare from 11 dwellings to 7.29 dwellings.

Recommendation: Amending clause 3.3 of the Structure Plan Report to update the correct calculated density at 7.29 dwellings per gross urban zoned hectare in lieu of 11 dwellings.

OPTIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Option 1: Council may resolve to recommend that the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) approve the proposed Kiara Local Structure Plan No.2, pertaining to Lot 9000 Bottlebrush Drive, Kiara subject to a revised Bushfire Management Plan and other modifications to the structure plan documentation.

Implications: The WAPC will determine the Structure Plan in accordance with clause 22 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015.

This is the recommended option.

Option 2: Council may resolve to recommend that the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) refuse the proposed Kiara Local Structure Plan No.2, pertaining to Lot 9000 Bottlebrush Drive, Kiara for the following reasons:

1. The Structure Plan has not demonstrated compliance with the objectives of State Planning Policy 3.7 – Planning in Bushfire Prone Areas

Implications: The WAPC will determine the Structure Plan in accordance with Clause 22 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015.

This is not the recommended option.

(12)

CONCLUSION

The report relates to Council’s recommendation to the WAPC on the Kiara Structure Plan.

If approved by the WAPC, the structure plan will determine the zoning, residential density, street layout and subdivision requirements for the land.

Matters relating to provision of assessment of the Bushfire Management Plan and compliance with State Planning 3.7 – Planning in Bushfire Prone Areas remain outstanding. It is considered that subject to this matters being addressed, the proposed Kiara Structure Plan is capable of approval.

Other modifications include minor errors within the report, and modifications to the internal road widths to facilitate and support additional bus services and drop off zones for proposed High School.

In order to comply with the provisions of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015 (the Regulations) relating to the processing and consideration of structure plans, the local government is to forward its report and recommendation on the proposed structure plan to the WAPC within 60 days of the close of the advertising period.

ATTACHMENTS Structure Plan (Map) Schedule of Submissions

STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS

Should the Kiara Structure Plan be approved by Council, the area will be developed for residential purposes, including an estimated 100 residential lots, a private clubs and institutions zone which could facilitate a number a Private High School and 30% Public Open Space site.

STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS Planning and Development Act 2005 Local Planning Scheme No.17

Should the Kiara Structure Plan be approved by Council, it will guide the City's recommendations on subdivision and development of the subject area.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Future Maintenance cost associated with Public Open Space site.

(13)

VOTING REQUIREMENTS Simple majority

RECOMMENDATION That the Council resolve to:

1) Recommend to the Western Australian Planning Commission to approve the proposed Kiara Local Structure Plan No.2 (LPS2) subject to the following modifications to the Structure Plan and associated documentation:

1. Modifying the ‘Parks and Recreation’ zoning to ‘Recreation’ so that it is consistent with the zoning of the Local Planning Scheme.

2. Amending clause 3.3 of the Structure Plan Report to update the calculated density at 7.29 dwellings per gross urban zoned hectare in lieu of 11 dwellings.

3. Notating the Structure Plan and referencing the documentation to restrict access to the proposed High School from Morley Drive East.

4. Increasing the road width of the proposed neighbourhood connector (Road 1), to allow for the incorporation of a ‘drop off’ zone.

5. Increasing the road width of the proposed neighbourhood connector (Road 1), to allow for the incorporation of a ‘bus bay’ zone.

6. Modifying the internal road off Bottlebrush Drive to ensure it is not staggered.

2) Forward the proposed Structure Plan to the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) for their determination.

3) Advise the Western Australian Planning Commission that the Bushfire Hazard assessment undertaken as part of the structure plan should inform an update of the Department of Fire and Emergency Services Bushfire Prone Areas Map 2015.

4) Advise the applicant, landowner, and those persons and agencies who lodged a submission, of Council’s decision accordingly

(14)

MOTION that the Council resolve to:

2. Amending the designated Residential Density Coding of R60 to R30 or R40.

5) Record the reason for changing the recommendation is to provide for urban residential development of a density and type more in keeping with the surrounding locality.

(Cr Lucas – Cr Färdig)

(15)

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY TO:

2. Amending the designated Residential Density Coding of R60 to R30 or R40.

5) Record the reason for changing the recommendation is to provide for urban residential development of a density and type more in keeping with the surrounding locality.

(16)

ALTONE RD CT

CHAUVEL BRIDGES

RISE

BECKWORTH AV

MORLEY DRIVE EAST BOTTLEBRUSH DRIVE

249

260 259 252

266

271

635

253

269

1003 1

246

242

641

10

843

545

256 221

19 211

51

130

1004 636

14 263

264

238 234

627

230

9 ROSEHEATH

BVD

RISE

R30

R60

R40 R30

R60 R40

R30

R60

Private Clubs

& Institutions (High School)

4.6772ha

Aboriginal Heritage Site KE#1 Wetland

Wetland

50m Buffer

50m Buffer

Parks and Recreation 4.1128ha

All areas and dimensions are subject to survey, engineering and detailed design and may change without notice. © Copyright of Burgess Design Group.

Structure plan area

Local Structure Plan Zoning and Reservations Residential R30

Residential R40 Residential R60 Parks and Recreation Private Clubs & Institutions Other

Indicative high school layout Significant trees to be retained Wetland Core

Wetland Buffer

Gross area

Lot 9000 Bottlebrush Drive 13.7091ha Land Use

Private Clubs & Institutions 4.6772ha

Residential 2.9800ha

Residential R30 1.5924ha Residential R40 0.3519ha Residential R60 1.0357ha

Gross POS 4.1128ha

LAND USE SUMMARY

(17)

PROPOSAL: Kiara Local Structure Plan – Lot 9000 Bottlebrush Drive, Kiara

Agencies

No. Name/Address Affected Property Summary of Submission Council’s Recommendation A1 Department of

Transport (DoT)

140 William Street PERTH WA 6000

No comment Noted

A2 Department of Education (DoE) 151 Royal Street, EAST PERTH WA 6004

No objection Noted

A3 ATCO Gas Australia

31 Prinsep Road, JANDAKOT WA 6164

No objection

Comments:

ATCO recommends early consultation with any developer to ensure any proposed gas

requirements can be designed and programmed.

Noted

A4 Department of Aboriginal Affairs 151 Royal Street, EAST PERTH WA 6004

Comments:

There are currently three Aboriginal heritage places known to DAA within the Subject Area. Those places are:

x Lodged place DAA 3612 (Wireless Station);

x Lodged place DAA 17543 (Kiara E1); and x Stored Data place DAA 17542 (Kiara A1)

Noted

(18)

48 Old Perth Road, BASSENDEAN WA 6054

A6 Telstra

Locked Bad 2525, PERTH WA 6001

No objection Comments:

The Federal Government has deemed developers are now responsible for telecommunications infrastructure on all developments.

The owner/developer will have to submit an application before construction is due to start to Telstra (less than 100 lots or living units) or NBN Co. (for greater than 100 lots or living units)

Noted

A7 Department of Environment Regulation (DER) Locked Bag 33, Cloisters Square, Western Australia

DER expects that the WAPC will request advice from DER when a subdivision application is

submitted for the proposed development. Based on the available information, DER will recommend that acid sulfate soils conditions (EN8) and advise (ENa1) should be applied to the approval.

Noted

A8 Water Corporation PO Box 100

LEEDERVILLE WA 6902

No objection Noted

A9 Public Transport Authority (PTA)

Comments:

Allow a bus service to be provided to the Catholic

Noted. However, Access Street C is not designed to accommodate buses. It is recommended to increase the road with to

(19)

(MRWA) Po Box 6202 EAST PERTH WA 6892

a. The intersection of Altone Road & Morley Drive East currently becomes congested during the AM peak period. This is mainly due to the designated drop off access for the Good Sheppared Catholic Primary School being located 70m from the

intersection. It is recommended that than an additional drop off zone be located on the proposed neighbourhood connector (Road 1) as this will help ease congestion and increase the safety of children and road users within this area.

b. It is recommended that the access for the proposed High School be restricted from Morley Drive East, thus preventing future traffic congestion and increased safety concerns for surrounding road network. It is noted by MRWA that it is essential at this stage of planning to ensure the structure plan has considered the road widths of local roads, ensuring the roads have enough capacity to support the anticipated school traffic.

have noted this as a recommendation to WAPC

A11 Department of Health (DoH)

Comments:

1. All developments are required to connect to scheme water and reticulated sewerage.

2. DoH has a document on ‘Evidence

supporting the creation of environments that

Noted.

(20)

Services (DFES) 20 Southport Street, WEST

LEEDERVILLE WA 6007

1. General observations

i. Many bushfire prone areas also have high biodiversity values. Policy objective 5.4 recognizes the need to consider bushfire risk management measures alongside environmental, biodiversity and conservation values.

The submitted BMP recognises an area of natural bushland is required to be retained as part of the Department of Environment Approval Notice. Policy objective 5.4 is most effectively

addressed at the strategic planning stage where biodiversity and bushfire concerns can be considered

collectively to help determine the most appropriate location, type, form, scale and intensity of future development in an area. The submitted BMP has not adequately addressed the bushfire risk associated with the retained

vegetation.

2. Policy Objective & Measures

i. Policy Measure 6.3 of SPP 3.7 applies to the proposal, and states:

Any strategic planning proposal to which policy measure 6.2 applies is to be accompanied by the following information prepared in accordance with the Guidelines:

a) (i) the results of the BHL assessment determining the

Planning Policy 3.7 – Planning in Bushfire Prone Areas (including supplementary

Guidelines) therefore cannot be demonstrated.

As a result of the advice received an amended BMP was submitted to the City in November 2016. The revised BMP includes:

x Revised Section 5.1.1 of the BMP including that the POS will be developed in accordance with a POS Management Plan. In the absence of this Plan, the BMP adopts a conservative approach by assuming the entire extent of the Reserve will remain vegetated, representing a worst-case scenario.

x A BAL Contour Map has been provided, which shows the residential zoned land with a maximum rating of BAL-29.

Notwithstanding that this information has been received by the City, it will need to be referred to both the WAPC, DFES and other relevant agencies for review. As such it is

recommended that the WAPC should not approve the Structure Plan until a revised BMP is submitted which:

a) Identifies bushfire hazard and bushfire attack levels in more

(21)

proposal is known, a BAL Contour Map to determine the indicative acceptable BAL ratings across the subject site, in accordance with the Guidelines. The BAL Contour Map should be prepared by an

accredited Bushfire Planning Practitioner; and

(b) the identification of any bushfire hazard issues arising from the relevant assessment; and (c) clear demonstration that

compliance with the bushfire protection criteria in the Guidelines can be achieved in subsequent planning stages.

The submitted BMP cannot be validated and therefor compliance to this policy measure has not been demonstrated.

Recommendation:

DFES advice is to seek a revised BMP for the proposal in line with the above points and the attached detailed advice for the bushfire consultant, included demonstrated application of SPP3.7 and the current guidelines.

b) Provide a BAL Contour Map to ensure that no development areas (residential zoned land, or private clubs and institutions land) are affected by either BAL-40 or BAL-FZ; and

c) Demonstrate how and who will maintain the Public Open Space areas to a low threat vegetation state (e.g. Public Open Space Management Plan)

A13 Office of The OEPA supports the proposed Structure Plan Noted.

(22)

x Retains a number of significant trees as required under the EPBC Act and the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972.

The OEPA considers the Kiara Structure Plan does not raise any significant environmental issues that cannot be adequately managed through detailed planning processes and in consultation with relevant agencies.

Public Submissions

No. Name/Address Affected Property Summary of Submission Council’s Recommendation P1 Ms Tina Bunter 19 Beckworth Avenue,

Kiara

No objection Noted

P2 Tarshae Pty Ltd (Renae Hilder) 3 St Fallans Bend, Wanneroo

19 Bradley Way, Lockridge

No objection Noted

P3 M Peghini 8 Penlea Glade, Kiara No objection Noted

P4 Thomas David John

26 Penlea Glade Kiara

No objection Noted

P5 John Fredericks 25 Altone Road, Lockridge

No objection Noted

P6 Robert Fynn Unit 44/52 Aussat Drive, Kiara

No objection Noted

P7 Gaye Cruickshank 38 Loxleigh Gardens, Kiara

No objection Noted

P8 Sumit 23 Altone Road,

Lockridge

No objection Noted

P9 Chang Dai He 30 Loxleigh Gardens, No objection Noted

(23)

Hill

P14 Roger Kiely 208 Morley Drive, Eden Hill

No objection Noted

P15 Boon Yew Lim (Lim

& Lim Holding)

19 Allen Williams Parade, Winthrop

64 Aussat Drive, Kiara 68 Aussat Drive, Kiara

No objection Noted

P16 Gordon & Lynette Norris

25 Chauvel Court, Kiara

All fencing will need to be replaced as the current condition of the fences is not suitable.

Concerns with respect to the design and heights of the adjoining R30 zoning.

Noted

P17 Esther Toh 4 Romsey Groce, Kiara No objection Noted

P18 Doreen Fong Lin Day & Norman John Day

26 Satellite Retreat, Kiara

Object:

1. Wants to continue growing vegetables in the back garden without it being compromised by future development.

1. The subject area comprises of a single allotment and does not include the landowner’s property. Therefore, there will be no impact.

P19 Edmund & Erica Rosowski

15 Penlea Glade, Kiara Object:

1. All R60 lots to be reduced to R40 1. The residential density responses to the State and Local Government

(24)

in this context.

2. As part of the submission of the Structure Plan, a Traffic Impact

Assessment (TIA) was submitted which models the impact of traffic from the proposed development. In accordance with conclusions of the TIA, there is no requirement to upgrade the road infrastructure as part of this

development as all intersections have sufficient capacity to accommodate the traffic generated by the proposed development. Main Roads WA (MRWA) and Department of Planning (DoP) did not object to the findings within this report.

3. As part of the submission of the Structure Plan, a Local Water Management Strategy (LWMS) was submitted. The overall drainage strategy for the site is to retain and infiltrate rainfall as close to the source as possible. Stormwater will be

discharged from the site to the existing discharge locations, with residential lots draining directly into the City’s system.

Department of Water (DoW) have not objected to the findings within this report.

4. The City and MRWA have

(25)

2. Against the development of high density housing

3. Concerns that an increased in housing will have a negative effect on the suburb

is zoned ‘Urban’ under the MRS and

‘Residential Development’ under the City’s LPS17. Pursuant to Clause 4.2.14 of LPS17, the ‘Residential Development’ zone allows for the subdivision and development of land in accordance with an approved Structure Plan. The land use permissibility is in accordance with the corresponding zone under Scheme.

2. Refer to ‘P19.1’ (above) for response.

3. This is not a valid planning consideration.

P21 Barry & Derryn Busby

10 Forrest Court, Kiara Object:

1. The area has rare orchids and concerns that the removal of vegetation will have a negative impact for roosting places for Black Cockatoos & Kookaburras 2. Enjoy walking to the existing bushland

1. The proponent has obtained development approval from the Department of the Environment (DoE) on 17 July 2014 (EPBC 2013/7050) with conditions. This approval is valid until the 31 June 2019 and allows the clearing of a maximum 11.2ha of Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo foraging and potential breeding habitat. The Structure Plan results in the clearing of a maximum of 9.65ha. The location of the development to be retained as part of the Public Open Space has been designed to maximise the retention of

(26)

relevant agencies. A POS Management will be a condition of subdivision

approval which will manage the ecological value of the site.

2. A minimum 30% of the site will be retained for POS in lieu of the minimum requirement of 10%.

P22 Stephen & Eileen Gaffey

16 Satellite Retreat, Kiara

Object:

1. No objection of the space allocated for Private Clubs and Institutions (High School), however, would like more information regarding the Private Clubs.

2. Opposed to the residential area on Bottlebrush Drive. This area should be allocated as ‘Parks & Recreation’ as there is a significant amount of wildlife and flora in the area.

1. The ‘Private Clubs & Institutions’ zone has been designed to accommodate a new private High School. The specific design of the High School will be determined once a Development Application is submitted.

2. Refer to ‘P20.1’ (above) for response.

P23 Steven Do 4 Calway Rise, Kiara Object:

1. Opposed to the increase in population 2. Decrease in property values.

3. Concerned about increase in public housing

1. Refer to ‘P19.1’ (above) and ‘P20.1’

(above) for response.

2. This is not a valid planning concern.

3. The purpose of the Structure Plan is to guide the subdivision and development of the site in accordance with the land uses shown on the Structure Plan Map.

It does not prescribe or presume any land tenure or ownership arrangements

(27)

2. Appropriateness of an additional High School, as there are already two within the locality

3. Looking at the proposed plan there will be no area large enough to support the wildlife.

Recommend area should be retained.

4. Increase in antisocial behaviour

Schools of Liveable Neighbourhoods.

The Structure Plan was also referred to the Department of Education whom did not object.

3. Refer to P20.1, P21.1 and P21.2 (above) for response.

P25 Paul Gallichan 178 Morley Drive East, Eden Hill

(Town of Bassendean)

Object:

1. Do not wish for a new High School to be built across the road from us because we live in a quiet area and wish for it to remain this way.

2. Appropriateness of an additional High School, as there are already two within the locality.

3. Concerned about the potential safety issues that may arise for local residents and school children due to the Emergency Service Station.

1. Refer to P20.1 (above) for response.

3. It is unclear how the development for residential development will impact local residents and school children. The development includes constructed pathways throughout the Structure Plan area for safe pedestrian use.

P26 Karen & Mark Coughlan

30 Penlea Glade, Kiara Object:

1. Recommend the use of low density housing 2. The proposed development and impacts on

2. Refer to P20.1 (above) for response. It

(28)

P28 Florence Walters 1 Vilberie Close, Kiara Object:

1. Impact of up to 1000 students the noise and traffic which will impact the quiet amenity of this locality and will make resale difficult.

2. The lots will be utilized for public housing and subsequent effects of antisocial behavior.

1. Refer to P20.1 and P24.2 (above) for response.

2. Refer to 23.3 (above) for response.

P29 Mavin Hall 4 Norvills Retreat, Kiara Object:

1. Impact on high density development and subsequent effects on antisocial behavior 2. Decline with infrastructure in the area

P30 Anne Lehane 23 Penlea Glade, Kiara Object:

1. The lots being utilized for public housing and subsequent effects of antisocial behavior.

2. Devalue property

3. Decline with infrastructure in the area

P31 Jamesina &

Michael Curran

26 Loxleigh Gardens, Kiara

Object:

1. The lots being utilized for public housing and subsequent effects of antisocial behavior.

2. Devalue property

(29)

2. The present woodland is the last habitat for a large area of Carnaby’s Cockatoos and this should be maintained.

and increased safety concerns for the surrounding road network.

2. Refer to P20.1 and P21.1 (above) for response.

P33 Vera Cover 26 Beckworth Avenue, Kiara

Objection:

1. Concerns with the location of the proposed residential lots as part of the new access way off Beckworth Avenue as it is right on the bend and is a dangerous spot.

Reconsideration of this location and design.

1. Noted. City staff will recommend at subdivision stage to provide a median strip on the internal road between Beckworth Avenue and Altone Road as it is a 90 degree bend and there are concerns with road safety.

P34 Chris Ambatziadis 24 Loxleigh Gardens, Kiara

Object:

1. Concerns about the increase in crime, decline in property values and infrastructure in the area.

P35 Xiao Chen & Yin Hing Hui

47 Roseheath Boulevard, Kiara

Object:

1. The density proposed (R30-R60) is not consistent with the locality.

2. The increase in housing will impact property

values and result in increased antisocial behaviour

P36 Ewart Sorrell 46/52 Aussat Drive, Kiara

Object:

1. Concerns that the development will attract antisocial behaviour

(30)

size and environmental condition are rapidly becoming scarce due to urban expansion and are irreplaceable one lost. For these reasons, the site would be better preserved and maintained as a natural bushland area than developed as proposed.

2. Though the document says that the

vegetation types present at the site are ‘well reserved within the MRS’…and ‘as such, the site does not contain any areas of regionally significant vegetation and development of the site, it will not impact on any significant flora species’. This assessment of the

conservation value is contradicted by the following:

a. Banksia woodlands have recently (16 September 2016) been listed by the federal Department of Environment and Energy as endangered

ecological community under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 b. The site is a ‘stepping stone’ between

two Bush Forever sites (site 305 &

307). So it provides habitat to avifauna that can fly from these surrounding bushland areas.

c. The site hosts mature Marris and Banksia trees which are an import food source for Carnaby and Forest

(ODP) was presented at the Ordinary Council Meeting on the 4 May 2005, with the intension to use the ODP as a basis for the land to be rezoned to

‘Urban’ under the MRS. Council granted ‘in principle’ support to the ODP which included 30% of the site being retained as open space, with the remainder 70% being developed for residential purposes, in addition to a school site, FESA site and child care centre.

In December 2009, the WAPC considered the final adoption of the proposed MRS amendment to zone the land to ‘Urban’ (MRS Amendment 1133/57). However, the WAPC resolved to defer consideration of the item pending advice from the City of Swan and Department of Environment and Conservation regarding which agency should take responsibility for management of the POS, and whether the land should be wholly be reserved

‘Urban’ or only portion, with the

remainder as ‘Parks & Recreation’ due to the ecological value of the site. The Minister for Planning approved the amendment to zone the entire allotment as ‘Urban’ under the MRS, and ‘Residential Development’ under the LPS17.

(31)

a. Not include a school oval in the ‘Pars &

Recreation’ area.

b. Retain and protect remaining bushland, so it does not further degrade.

c. It is recommended that ‘temp fences’ be installed around the significant trees during construction.

d. Landscaping should be done in such a way as to retain the understory plants as well as trees.

e. Additional mature trees should be retained in areas designated for housing.

f. Relocate bobtail lizards and any other fauna living on the ground before clearing.

g. Provide a suitable buffer around the

Aboriginal Heritage Site Marri tree (Heritage Site KE#1)

Environmental Assessment Report was submitted. Clause 2.9.3 of this report notes that “the biodiversity value at the genetic level is highly unlikely to be

impacted as a result of developing the site”

(c) Refer to P21.1 (above) (d) Refer to P21.1 (above).

Furthermore, The development has not only been designed to maximise the retention of predominately ‘Very Good’

quality vegetation, it also accommodates portions of two

‘Resource Enhancement’ wetlands and their respective 50m buffers and also retains a number of significant trees. A POS Management will be a condition of subdivision approval which will manage the ecological value of the site.

Notwithstanding, an over provision of POS is provided.

3. (a) There is no school oval located in the Local Reserve.

(b) A POS Management will be a condition of subdivision approval which will manage the ecological value of the site.