PROPOSED LOT 100 PROPOSED LOT 101

(1)

4.10 EXTENSION TO THE AGED CARE FACILITY AND TWO (2) CONSULTING ROOMS - LOT 71 (NO.6) EVELINE ROAD AND LOT 3 (NO.27) GREAT NORTHERN HIGHWAY, MIDDLE SWAN (DA990-20)

Ward: (Swan Valley/Gidgegannup Ward) (Statutory Planning) Disclosure of Interest: Nil.

Authorised Officer: (Executive Manager Planning and Development)

KEY ISSUES

• An application has been received for an extension to an approved Aged Care Facility including two (2) Consulting Rooms open to the general public at Lot 71 (No.6) Eveline Road and Lot 3 (No.27) Great Northern Highway, Middle Swan.

• The proposed building is two (2) storeys and consists of Consulting Rooms, undercroft parking on the ground floor, a multi-use space for exercise treatment, programs and physiotherapy for exclusive use of the aged care residents and staff amenities on the first floor.

• The application was advertised for public comment with two (2) objections being received, relating to

o The increase in traffic along Richardson Road, Leslie Road and Bassett Road;

o The increased use of the existing driveway on Richardson Road;

o Audio and visual amenity associated with the use of the existing driveway; and

o Property devaluation.

• One (1) submission also noted that the Acoustic Report submitted with the application was for the Stage 1 Building which is already under construction and not for the subject development.

• The City has reviewed the objections and provides the following comments:

o Richardson Road, Leslie Road and Bassett Road are all classified as Access Roads with a maximum traffic volume capacity of 3000 vehicles per day, as established in Liveable Neighbourhoods;

o The latest City data shows that the average weekday daily traffic counts for these roads are 320, 104 and 456 daily movements respectively which are well below the 3000 vehicle design capacities;

(2)

o The submitted Traffic Impact Statement predicts approximately 140 additional vehicle trips per day associated with this development, representing a 43% increase in the existing traffic on Richardson Road, assuming all vehicles associated with the development use Richardson Road alone, and a total of 15.3% of the maximum capacity the roads are designed to accommodate;

o The use of the existing driveway for all vehicles associated with the proposed development is the safest and best option as it will not result in proliferation of driveways and maintains clear sightlines along Richardson Road;

o The noise and visual impacts of the driveway are considered to be acceptable given there are only 20 vehicle trips in the morning peak period and 15 in the afternoon peak period, averaging at one (1) vehicle every six (6) minutes in the morning peak and one (1) vehicle every eight (8) minutes in the afternoon peak;

o The development is of a commercial nature and not required to be constructed to noise insulate, and

o Property devaluation is not a planning consideration.

• The application was referred to the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation (DWER) and the Department of Health (DoH). DWER advised the applicant must comply with the Environmental Protection Act 1986, and DoH provided no response.

• The application underwent a Peer Review in accordance with Design WA with findings that the revised proposal satisfies the 10 design principles.

It is recommended that the Council resolve to approve the proposed Extension to the Aged Care Facility at Lot 71 (No.6) Eveline Road and Lot 3 (No.27) Great Northern Highway, Middle Swan subject to conditions.

AUTHORITY/DISCRETION

Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 (cl.68 (2))

Council has discretion in accordance with cl.68 (2) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 to determine an application for development approval by:

• Granting development approval without conditions; or

• Granting development approval with conditions; or

• Refusing to grant development approval.

(3)

Local Planning Scheme No.17 (cl.10.3)

Council has discretion in accordance with cl.10.3 of Local Planning Scheme No.17 (LPS17) to approve (with or without conditions) or refuse the application.

BACKGROUND

Applicant: Doepel Marsh Architects

Owner: Grand Lodge of Western Australia Freemasons Homes for the Aged (Incorporated) - CEO: Marie-Louise MacDonald

Zoning: LPS17 - Residential MRS - Industrial

Strategy/Policy: State Planning Policy 7.0 - Design of the Built Environment

POL-TP-129 Vehicle Parking Standards Development Scheme: Local Planning Scheme No.17

Existing Land Use: Vacant

Lot Size: 1,483m²

Use Class: Use Not Listed and Consulting Rooms

DETAILS OF THE PROPOSAL

The application seeks approval for a mixed use building on the land adjoining the approved Aged Care Facility at Lot 71 (No.6) Eveline Road, Middle Swan. The Ground Floor will be available to the public at large, and be used for Consulting Rooms with two (2) practitioners.

The First Floor will be for the exclusive use of the Aged Care residents, to provide services associated with exercise and rehabilitation. The First Floor will be physically connected to the approved Aged Care Building, via an enclosed bridge/walkway.

The development includes 32 vehicle car parking bays as undercroft parking and 23 parking bays along the internal access road leading out towards Richardson Road.

DESCRIPTION OF SITE

The subject site adjoins the former Middle Swan Primary School to the south. The site lies north of the former Swan Districts Hospital zoned 'Local Reserve – Public Purpose'.

To the north of the site, there is a pocket of 'Residential' land coded R20 with an underlying 'Industrial' zone under the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The subject site itself falls within that pocket of 'Residential' zoned land.

East of Great Northern Highway there is a small Local Reserve for Recreation and a pocket of 'General Commercial' zoned land with Residential development beyond. The Middle Swan Caravan Park is on the opposite corner of the development site with Residential development beyond. West of the development is the Midland Brick Brickworks.

(4)

SITE HISTORY/PREVIOUS APPROVALS

DA-683/2018 - Use of the land for an Aged and Dependant Persons Care Facility - approved by the Joint Development Assessment Panel on 28 February 2019

APPLICANT'S SUBMISSION

• This community-based development is to provide a variety of amenities and services for Aged Persons (SPP3.1 55 years old and over) for the local surrounding area in particular, and the region in general.

• Stage One comprising both Building No.1 and now Building No.2, located on the corner of Great Northern Highway and Eveline Road on the proposed Lot 100 forms the urban edge in architectural built form terms, creating ground level interaction and activation to the streets and surrounds. The design achieves passive surveillance from the site as well as public space.

• Future stages will follow the Master Plan once the rezoning and a Lot amalgamation take place. Lot 3 will then form part of the parent Lot. Expanded community engagement in the facility as a shared resource, by formalising the zone use and achieving a positive outcome with community interaction part of the longer-term goal of the development.

• Building No.2, the subject of this Application, will provide ancillary support and treatment in Aged Care.

• The building addresses Great Northern Highway and has windows and access facing it so the building can interface the Highway and provide both interest and engagement with the locality.

• The public access Consulting Rooms on the Ground Floor will provide for interaction and engagement with the local community.

• The architectural form and appearance are of a similar concept to Building No.1 and is articulated to be an extension toward it.

• The external Design Philosophy for Building No.2 is to respect the architectural form, colours and materials of Building No.1 so that both read as one (1) development, reinforcing the Urban Design of this significant corner and landmark site in the City of Swan, but at the same time due to the lower height are designed in scale to these proportions.

• As Building No.2 adjoins residential zoned R20 land, the height has been restructured to two (2) storeys and setback 3m from the site boundary. Screened car parking is located at ground level under the building with some additional parking as a continuation of the parking to the West and North of the site, set behind landscaping.

• It is proposed that the roof will be nominally flat to reduce the overall height, and non-reflective material, with solar collectors to be installed and hidden from the adjoining lots.

• A perforated screen, angled and facing the northern boundary, is to provide sightline privacy in addition to the 3m wide landscaping.

(5)

• A Traffic Report has been prepared by Shawmac Traffic Consultants. Their detailed report confirms that the surrounding roads and intersection can accommodate the forecast increase in traffic from the proposed expansion.

In response to objections received, the applicant submits the following:

• The crossover referred to Richardson Road has already been approved as part of the current Development Approval for Building No.1. The Building Permit has already been issued to construct the crossover and access road and car parking.

• Masonic Care WA (MCWA) has no jurisdiction over any public streets or roadways, and as such cannot direct traffic over such public roadways.

• Previously, prior to MCWA purchasing the site, others have been using their property as an unauthorised carpark.

• Since MCWA purchased the site, the parking has relocated, parking on street verges in Leslie Road which is mentioned by one of the respondents. That respondent believes these vehicles are associated with the 'Rise Facility'. Once again, MCWA has no direction of roadways or verge areas.

• If verge parking is happening associated with another business in the area (we cannot confirm if it is or is not), does that property have sufficient car parking bays on site?

• Policing verge parking is the responsibility of the City of Swan, as is the approval of the land use, development and car parking. MCWA has no control over other land.

• MCWA development site was a WA Government School, and as such vehicle traffic of similar numbers would have accessed the existing public road systems.

• The local road systems have therefore been designed to cater for these additional numbers

• Staff Parking: The premises are manned 24/7, staff are on three (3) x eight (8) hour shifts, as a shift changes over both lots of staff are on site at the same time.

And that is why the number of bays have been allowed. Once the shift changeover has happened, half the staff bays will be vacant.

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

Public Consultation was carried out in the following manner:

Duration: 12 January 2021 to 2 February 2021

Method: Letters to landowners within 200m of the subject site and to landowners outside of the 200m who provided a submission as part of DA-683/2018, sign on site and notice on the City's website.

Submissions Received: Two (2) submissions of objection, relating to traffic and access, visual amenity and property devaluation. It is noted that one (1) objection was received outside of the advertising period, but considered to be directly affected by the development and therefore taken into consideration.

(6)

CONSULTATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES AND/OR CONSULTANTS The application was referred to DoH and DWER

DWER provided a response requiring the applicant to comply with s.51C of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 relating to the clearing of native vegetation. In this instance no native vegetation exists on Lot 3 (No.27) Great Northern Highway and two (2) trees are located on Lot 71 (No.6) Eveline Street where access and parking is proposed. It is the responsibility of the applicant to comply with the Environmental Protection Act 1986.

No response was received from DoH.

Through the consultation period, the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions (DBCA) also made a submission on the proposed development. DBCA advised that the site is in close proximity to the Blackadder Creek which is a tributary to the Swan River and a known Threatened Ecological Community.

DBCA recommend that tree pits and bio filters are incorporated into the parking area to capture and treat runoff before it is detained in the detention system below the carpark.

DBCA also suggest that swales could also be incorporated into the landscaping to allow for natural conveyance and evaporation rather than piping all to the detention system.

The drainage plans submitted with this application show the existing drainage plan for Building No.1 but do not adequately depict the new overall layout, therefore this will form a condition of planning approval.

In relation to landscaping, DBCA recommend that the use of non-native deciduous trees should be avoided given the ultimate discharge of stormwater into the Creek which would carry fallen leaves. DBCA also note that deciduous trees produce a high leaf litter load which may briefly but rapidly fill stormwater systems (blocking some) and release excess nutrients to receiving water bodies.

DBCA recommend that the landscaping plan be updated to use locally native species rather than exotic species.

DBCA recommends a condition relating to drainage plans and a condition relating to a revised landscaping plan which is reflected within the recommended conditions.

DETAILS

Zoning and Use Permissibility

The subject site is zoned 'Residential' under LPS17 and 'Industrial' under the MRS.

A Consulting Room is a 'D' use in the 'Residential' Zone, meaning it is not permitted unless the local government has exercised its discretion by granting planning approval.

An Aged and Dependant Persons Dwelling Care Facility is not a use class specifically mentioned within LPS17.

City staff established through DA-683/2018 that the proposed Aged Care Facility did not reasonably fall under any other type, class or genus of activity listed in the Zoning Table, and therefore assessed the development in accordance with cl.4.4.2 of LPS17 which states:

(7)

If a person proposes to carry out on land any use that is not specifically mentioned in the Zoning Table and cannot reasonably be determined as falling within the type, class or genus of activity of any other use class the local government may –

(a) Determine that the use is consistent with the objectives of the particular zone and is therefore permitted;

(b) Determine that the use may be consistent with the objectives of the particular zone and thereafter follow the advertising procedures of clause 9.4 in considering an application for planning approval; or

(c) Determine that the use is not consistent with the objectives of the particular zone and is therefore not permitted.

The objectives of the 'Residential' zone are to:

(a) provide for a range of forms and densities of residential development to meet the needs of the wide variety of households which make up the community;

(b) promote a residential environment in each locality consistent with the form and density of residential development permissible in the locality, so as to enhance a sense of place and community identity;

(c) preserve and enhance those characteristics which contribute towards residential amenity, and to avoid those forms of development which have the potential to prejudice the development of a safe and attractive residential environment;

(d) provide for a limited range of ancillary development compatible with the form and density of residential development, and complementary to the needs of local communities, but which will not compromise residential amenity;

(e) avoid development of land for any purpose or in any manner that would detract from the viability or integrity of development in either the Strategic Regional Centre or the Commercial zones.

It is considered that both the proposed Consulting Rooms and the Extension to the approved Aged Care Facility are entirely consistent with the objectives of the 'Residential' zone. It proposes development that meets the needs of the community, is consistent with the form of the adjoining approved Aged Care Building to build sense of place, does not adversely impact residential amenity based on its siting on Great Northern Highway, and does not detract from the viability or integrity of the Strategic Regional Centre or Commercial Zones.

State Planning Policy 7.0 - Design of the Built Environment (SPP 7.0)

While the development is on 'Residential' zoned land, the development itself is not a residential type. As such, the application of SPP 7.0 is required. In accordance with SPP 7.0, the application underwent a Peer Review by Silver Thomas Hanley.

Silver Thomas Hanley raised a number of design opportunities as follows:

• Pedestrian Awning to Great Northern Highway could be a continuous awning by connecting to Building No.1 to the south;

• The height of the awning on Building No.2 should be aligned with Building No.1;

(8)

• The articulation of the awning has the potential to be glass rather than solid with metal fascia;

• The first floor roofed link that connects to Building No.1 could be better resolved with the potential to be clad in contrasting materials such as the standing seam metal cladding used on the north-west stair core;

• Reduced solar access and visual amenity to Room 1.70 in Building No.1 is noted due to Building No.2 being 3m to the north. To offset this, the treatment of the roof to the plant room of Building No.1 could be landscaped which would also benefit the proposed outdoor seating area off the connecting link;

• The translucent privacy glass to the corridor for the toilets to Building No.2 could be changed to clear glass with fixed privacy screens angling to the east to also capture landscaped views;

• Building No.1 dementia garden could be designed to allow glimpses of landscape whilst maintaining privacy to the dementia residents. The wall facing east could also have surface treatments by the means of vertical planting to soften the interface to vehicles entering and exiting the carpark;

• The entry lobby off Great Northern Highway could be reconfigured to be more generous;

• The distance between the stairs and entry door could be increased to improve flow into the building and create a more welcoming arrival from the street;

• The stair width could be wider to reduce reliance on the lift for the more able- bodied personnel and potential for a larger void to create an internal atrium would be welcomed and help reinforce the vertical nature of this space both internally and externally;

• Further consideration to the detailed design of the privacy screening to the northern façade on the first floor should occur and the finish should be durable enough to maintain its appearance over the building's life cycle. The fixing methods and supporting structure also need to be visually appealing to the occupants within the first floor office space. Thought should be given to how cleaning and maintenance could be carried out to the screen and the glass behind it;

• The underside of the concrete slab to the carpark and the connecting link bridge to Building No.1 could be lined or painted to be more aesthetically pleasing. The risk is the required building services and insulation, once installed, will detract from the aesthetics of this space;

• The bridge link connection between Building No.1 and Building No.2 is also deep within the building and during the day will appear dark and tunnel like. Suggest looking at energy efficient LED lighting to illuminate the darker portions of this area even during the day; and

• Consider the addition of vertical shading to the large windows on the east and west elevations on the first floor, consideration of building fabric and glazing thermal performance in detailing and specification. Appropriate and sustainable treatment of verge landscaping.

The applicant amended the plans in the following way:

(9)

• Increased the height of the awning on Building No.2 to match that of Building No.1;

• Included the recommended metal cladding on the first floor roofed link that connects Building No.1 and Building No.2;

• Reduced the number of windows on the southern elevations and included brick feature detail to act as an accent to soften the view to Room 1.70 in the adjoining Building No.1;

• Increased the width of the stair flight from 1000mm to 1100mm between handrails;

• Stairs have been moved 510mm north to allow more space at the entry;

• The lift has been moved 750mm north to increase the size of the lobby on both levels;

• The window sill heights on the western façade have been raised to reduce solar gain; and

• Amending pedestrian crossings to be parallel and perpendicular to the buildings, rather than the originally proposed diagonal crossing.

All other recommended changes that were not implemented were justified by the applicant. Silver Thomas Hanley were accepting of the responses and justification from the proponent in these instances.

The revised plans were referred back to Silver Thomas Hanley who after reviewing the amended plans confirmed that the proposed development now satisfies the 10 design principles established in Schedule 1 of SPP 7.0.

City Staff have reviewed both the recommendations of the peer review and the amended proposal and are satisfied with the changes and conclusions of the Peer Review.

Traffic Access to the Site:

An objection was received relating to the increase in traffic the development will have on Richardson Road and Leslie Road. It was contended that the original development allowed only service vehicles to exit on the crossover onto Richardson Road, whereas the current proposal allows for full vehicle access and egress. It is noted that the proposal will result in an approximate 140 vehicle movements per day which represents a 43%

increase in traffic volumes on Richardson Road, but still the aggregate daily traffic count would be only 15.3% of the ultimate design capacity that Richardson Road is capable of accommodating.

There was also concern as to the veracity of the Traffic Impact Statement (TIS). The same submitter contends that the intersection at Richardson Road and Great Northern Highway is congested and will result in people using Leslie Road and Bassett Road which were not contemplated in the traffic assessment.

The access point to the development on Richardson Road is approximately 73m to the Great Northern Highway intersection. It is not considered reasonable to expect vehicles to rely on Leslie Road to get to Great Northern Highway, being approximately 490m distance.

(10)

The City also has traffic counts which show that Richardson Road, Leslie Road and Bassett Road are all designed as Access Roads, with a design capacity of 3000 vehicles per day. At present, all three (3) roads are operating at less than 15% capacity. In the event vehicles associated with this development did utilise Leslie Road and Bassett Road, it would not be significant to warrant additional traffic modelling to contemplate alternative scenarios.

The submitter also states that Leslie Road is unsafe as there is no footpath and additional traffic will make the road more hazardous. They conclude that repairs and resurfacing is required. Given there is no reliance of Leslie Road and Bassett Road for access to this development, there is no liability on the applicant to upgrade Leslie Road.

It is noted that Leslie Road upgrades are being reviewed by the City as a separate matter.

Both submitters objected to the use of the driveway for full access/egress, and one (1) objector requested the driveway location be moved as it would devalue their property and be an audio/visual stressor. In considering this, of fundamental importance is that the driveway location onto Richardson Road has already been approved and is under construction. It is noted that property value is not a planning consideration and the noise and visual impacts of the driveway are considered to be acceptable given there are only 20 vehicle trips in the morning peak period and 15 in the afternoon peak period, averaging at one (1) vehicle every six (6) minutes in the morning peak and one (1) vehicle every eight (8) minutes in the afternoon peak.

At present, the development masterplan indicates a Dementia Garden and landscaping in this location. To introduce cars through the site to alternative access locations would prejudice the safety of internal residents. To introduce an additional driveway may prejudice the safety of external road users through the proliferation of driveways. The current driveway is in a safe location which allows for good sightline distances.

Parking Adequacy:

One (1) submitter queried the parking adequacy, contending that 69 vehicle parking bays are required for the development as the Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) indicated six (6) practitioners. The applicant noted that error in the original TIS and has since revised the documentation. In any event, an independent parking assessment has been conducted in accordance with the City's Local Planning Policy POL-TP-129 Vehicle Parking Standards as follows:

Consulting Rooms parking requirement -

• Six (6) spaces for one (1) general practitioner

• 10 spaces for two (2) general practitioners

• All other allowable practitioners:

o Four (4) spaces for one (1) practitioner o Six (6) spaces for two (2) practitioners

The application proposes two (2) practitioners, therefore requiring six (6) spaces.

The First floor will be for exclusive use of the residents of the adjoining Aged Care Building. Through the assessment for the Aged Care Building, a parking standard for 'Hospital' was utilised and this will be extended to this space as it is the most logical in

(11)

The parking requirement for 'Hospital' is one (1) space to every four (4) patients’ beds plus one (1) space for each employee. No additional beds are proposed as part of this expansion, and the applicant has submitted that there will an additional nine (9) staff members required as a result of the first floor extension. This generates the requirement for an additional nine (9) parking bays.

Based on this assessment, a total of 15 parking bays are required for the Ground Floor Consulting Rooms and First Floor Aged Care uses. 55 car parking bays have been provided representing a surplus of 40 parking bays.

Acoustic Considerations

One (1) submitter drew attention to the submitted Acoustic Report, which was prepared to support Building No.1 and is not specific to the proposed Building No.2.

City staff reviewed the submissions and advised that the subject application is of a commercial nature and therefore, no additional acoustic assessment is required.

Midland Drainage Contribution

The City's Local Planning Policy POL-C-040 Midland District Drainage Development Reserve Fund requires that a drainage contribution fee shall be collected from all new developments within the area indicated on Plan No D86-4s. The subject site falls within the area indicated on Plan No D86-4s. POL-C-040 requires a condition of development approval that a drainage contribution fee shall be paid prior to the issue of a building licence and be applied at a rate set by the City of Swan during the annual budgeting process indicated in the current financial year’s budget.

In this instance, the area is calculated at the total allotment of Lot 3 (No.27) Great Northern Highway, Middle Swan (1,483m²) and an additional portion of Lot 71 (No.6) Eveline Road, Middle Swan (200m²) that was not previously included in DA-683/2018.

Provision of Public Art

In accordance with the City's Local Planning Policy POL-LP-1.10 Provision of Public Art, the landowner is liable to make a contribution to public art either monetarily or through development onsite, should the development be approved. The estimated cost of the proposed development as stated on the City of Swan Application Form is $4.57 million, which requires either a cash-in-lieu contribution of $45,700 (being 1% of the construction cost) or the provision of public art onsite to the value of $45,700.

OPTIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Option 1: Council may resolve to approve the proposed Consulting Rooms and Extension to the Aged Care Facility at Lot 71 (No.6) Eveline Road and Lot 3 (No.27) Great Northern Highway, Middle Swan subject to conditions.

Implications: The construction of the Aged Care Facility and Consulting Rooms can commence.

This is the recommended option.

(12)

Option 2: Council may resolve to refuse the proposed Consulting Rooms and Extension to the Aged Care Facility at Lot 71 (No.6) Eveline Road and Lot 3 (No.27) Great Northern Highway, Middle Swan for the following reasons:

1. The proposed development introduces a full movement access way onto a residential street that will reduce the amenity and enjoyment of the existing residents.

2. The development will have an adverse impact on the amenity of the locality.

Implications: If aggrieved by the decision of Council, the applicant/owner would have a right of appeal to the State Administrative Tribunal.

This is not the recommended option.

CONCLUSION

The proposed development is for an Extension to the approved Aged Care Facility to the south of the subject site and the provision of Consulting Rooms to the broader community. It will provide a service to the diverse community, being to the aged residents as well as the broader community.

The built form has been assessed and considered to sit harmoniously within the locality, which is described as being a mix of Commercial, Residential, Parks and Tourism land uses.

Two (2) objections were received through the advertising period which have been reviewed as part of the assessment. It is considered that the application has addressed all concerns raised without modifications being required.

ATTACHMENTS Development Plans

STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS Nil.

(13)

STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS Planning and Development Act 2005

Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 State Planning Policy 7.0 - Design of the Built Environment

Local Planning Scheme No.17

Local Planning Policy POL-TP-129 Vehicle Parking Standards

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The average cost for a Hearing to defend Council’s decision at the State Administrative Tribunal is $60,000.

VOTING REQUIREMENTS Simple majority

RECOMMENDATION That the Council resolve to:

1) Approve the proposed Extension to the Aged Care Facility and Two (2) Consulting Rooms at Lot 71 (No.6) Eveline Road and Lot 3 (No.27) Great Northern Highway, Middle Swan subject to the following conditions:

1. The approved development must comply in all respects with the attached approved plans, as dated, marked and stamped, together with any requirements and annotations detailed thereon by the City of Swan. The plans approved as part of this application form part of the development approval issued.

2. The ground floor is approved for Consulting Rooms as defined in the City of Swan Local Planning Scheme No.17 and the subject area may not be used for any other use without the prior approval of the City.

3. The first floor is approved as an extension to an Aged and Dependent Persons Dwelling Care Facility and the subject area may not be used for any other use without the prior approval of the City.

4. All building works to be carried out under this development approval are required to be contained within the boundaries of the subject lot.

5. Prior to occupation or use of the development, vehicle parking bays must be provided on the lot in accordance with the approved plans. The design of vehicle parking and access must comply with AS/NZ 2890.1 (as amended). Accessible parking bays must comply with AS/NZ 2890.6 (as

(14)

6. Vehicle parking, access and circulation areas must be sealed, kerbed, drained and maintained to the satisfaction of the City of Swan, in accordance with the approved plans.

7. No wall, fence or landscaping greater than 0.75m in height measured from the natural ground level at the boundary, shall be constructed within 3m of a vehicular accessway unless such wall, fence or landscaping is constructed with a 3m truncation, as depicted on the approved plan.

8. Prior to the lodgement of a Building Permit application, the applicant shall prepare and have approved, a Drainage Management Plan to the satisfaction of the City of Swan on advice from the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions.

9. Suitable arrangements being made for the connection of the land to the comprehensive district drainage system at the landowner/developer’s cost.

The contribution amount is based on 1,703m² to the satisfaction of the City of Swan in accordance with the City of Swan Local Planning Policy POL-C-040 ‘Midland District Drainage Development Reserve Fund'. This fee is to contribute towards the upgrade and supply of an adequate drainage service within the area. Payment must be made prior to the issuance of a building permit or prior to any work commencing on the site (at the earliest instance).

10. Refuse bin areas adequate to service the development must be provided to the satisfaction of the City of Swan prior to occupation or use of development.

11. External lighting shall comply with the requirements of AS 4282 – Control of Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting.

12. No contaminated stormwater is permitted to enter any stormwater drain.

13. Prior to a building permit being issued, a detailed landscaping and reticulation plan for the subject site and/or road verge(s) must be submitted to, and approved to, the satisfaction of the City of Swan and the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions and must include the following:

a. The location, number and type of proposed trees and shrubs including planter and/or tree pit sizes and planting density;

b. Any lawns to be established;

c. Any existing vegetation and/or landscaped areas to be retained;

d. Any verge treatments;

e. Evidence that the proposed landscaping will not, at maturity, negatively impact the development and adjoining properties or Waterways.

(15)

14. The approved landscaping and reticulation plan must be implemented within the first available planting season after the initial occupation of the development, and maintained thereafter, to the satisfaction of the City of Swan. Any species that fails to establish within the first two (2) planting seasons following implementation must be replaced in consultation with, and to the satisfaction of, the City of Swan.

15. All piped, ducted and wired services, air conditioners, hot water systems, water storage tanks, service meters and bin storage areas must be located to minimise any visual and noise impact on the occupants of nearby properties and screened from view from the street. Design plans for the location, materials and construction for screening of any proposed external building plant must be submitted to and approved by the City of Swan prior to the issue of a building permit.

16. The development must be connected to the Water Corporation’s sewer where available.

17. All crossovers must be built and maintained in accordance with the City’s specifications.

18. Prior to a building permit being issued, the landowner must contribute a sum of 1% of the total development construction value toward Public Art in accordance with the City of Swan Local Planning Policy POL-LP-1.10 Provision of Public Art, by either:

a) payment to the City of a cash-in-lieu amount equal to the sum of the 1% contribution amount ($45,700). This must be paid to the City prior to the date specified in an invoice issued by the City, or prior to the issuance of a building permit for the approved development, whichever occurs first; or

b) provision of Public Art on-site to a minimum value of the 1%

contribution amount ($45,700). The following is required for the provision of Public Art on-site:

i. the landowner or applicant on behalf of the landowner must seek approval from the City for a specific Public Art work including the artist proposed to undertake the work to the satisfaction of the City in accordance with POL-LP-1.10 and the Developers’ Handbook for Public Art (as amended). The City may apply further conditions in regard to the proposed Public Art;

ii. no part of the approved development may be occupied or used until the Public Art has been installed in accordance with the approval granted by the City; and,

iii. the approved Public Art must be maintained in compliance with the approval granted by the City and any conditions thereof, to the satisfaction of the City.

19. No bunting is to be erected on the site (including streamers, streamer strips, banner strips or decorations of similar kind).

(16)

20. External illumination shall not flash or pulsate to the satisfaction of the City of Swan.

2) Advise the applicant/owner and those who lodged a submission of the resolution of Council accordingly.

MOTION that the Council resolve to:

1) Adopt the officer recommendation with Condition 8 being amended to read:

8. Prior to the lodgement of a Building Permit application, the applicant shall prepare and have approved, a Drainage Management Plan which shall incorporate tree pits and bio-filtration mechanisms to the car parking area, to the satisfaction of the City of Swan on advice from the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions.

(Cr Catalano – Cr Kiely)

RESOLVED (8/5) TO: