15.1 PROPOSED MARKETS - LOT 2 (NO. 8731) WEST SWAN ROAD, HENLEY BROOK ...€¦ · 15.1 PROPOSED...

Ordinary Meeting of Council 30 April 2008

15.1 PROPOSED MARKETS - LOT 2 (NO. 8731) WEST SWAN ROAD, HENLEY BROOK

(Swan Valley) (Development Services) (DA885-07)

KEY ISSUES

• This item was deferred from the last Meeting of Council held on 9 April 2008 and the matter will be the subject of a Briefing session to Council on 23 April 2008 and it is to be discussed at the Swan Valley Planning Committee Meeting to be held on Monday 28 April 2008. Limited additional information has been received from the applicant and its consultants at this time. Additional information may be provided by way of late item should it be received in time to be assessed.

• The application received is for a market (approx. 5,200m2 floor area), arts

centre (1,400m2) and children’s animal petting area to be operated from Thursday to Sunday and public holidays. The site contains the existing Elmars restaurant and brewery which is proposed to be retained.

• The market is expected to attract 750 persons at any one time. • Based on traffic estimates a passing lane needs to be constructed on West

Swan Road, which may require the removal of a row of landmark street trees opposite the subject land.

• A decision on this application may be premature as there are a number of

outstanding issues, most importantly – effluent disposal, stormwater management and the above-mentioned passing lane.

• The application was advertised for public comment. 38 submissions were

received - 16 do not object, 10 do not object in part, or have requirements/conditions that must be met in order to support the proposal, and 12 object.

• The applicant advises that the development will have an emphasis on quality,

both the development itself and the range of goods to be sold. Provisions of Local Planing Scheme No. 17 (LPS17), definition of market, do not oblige the proponents or any future landowners to ensure ‘quality’ goods are sold, and this cannot be ‘policed’ by the City.

• The long term sustainability of the proposal’s tourism aspect (quality) and

artisans centre is questionable. • It is considered that the size and scale of the proposal detracts from the rural

character and amenity of the area. • It is indeterminate if the proposal constitutes a neighbourhood centre,

according to the Western Australian Planning Commission’s (WAPC) Metropolitan Centres Policy, and therefore should be determined by the WAPC.


• The proposal is not supported by the City’s relevant Strategic Planning Officer

or its Economic Development Officer. • At the time of writing the minutes of the Swan Valley Planning Committee had

not been received, however it is understood that the application was not supported by the SVPC.

• At the time of writing this report verbal advice from the WAPC indicates that it

believes the proposal to be of state significance and it may therefore determine the application.

It is recommended that the City resolve to refuse the proposal on the grounds that it does not comply with some of the Planning Objectives of the Swan Valley Planning Act and the objectives of the Swan Valley Rural zone in LPS 17, and that it is indeterminate if it constitutes a neighbourhood centre according to the WAPC Metropolitan Centres Policy.

AUTHORITY/DISCRETION

This matter was deferred from the Council Meeting held on 9 April 2008 to allow further information to be supplied by the applicant and their consultants. Limited additional information has been supplied at the time of writing this report.

Council may approve (with or without conditions) or refuse to approve the application in accordance with Local Planning Scheme No.17. If the applicant is aggrieved with the decision of the Council a right of review may exist in accordance with part 14 of the Planning and Development Act 2005.

However at the time of writing this report verbal advice had been given that the WAPC believes the proposal is of state significance and may determine the application, and therefore withdraw its delegation of authority to the Council in accordance with Clause 32 of the Metropolitan Region Scheme.

BACKGROUND

Applicant: Statewest Surveying and Planning Owner: A & E Dieren Zoning: TPS - Swan Valley Rural MRS - Rural Strategy/Policy: Swan Valley Planning Act, Commercial Centres Policy,

Tree Policy Development Scheme: - Existing Land Use: Restaurant, Brewery, Keeping of Horses Lot Size: 6.9ha Area: 6600m2 floorspace Use Class: Market - “A”, Exhibition Centre - “A” and Kids Farm -

“A”


At the time of writing this report there are a number of outstanding issues that must be clarified prior to any approval being granted.

The proponents advise they have a strict timeline and have requested that this application be considered at this Council meeting. Normally the City would ensure all outstanding issues are addressed prior to placing an item on the agenda.

DETAILS OF THE PROPOSAL

The application received is for a market (approx 5,200m2 floor area), arts centre (1,400m2) and children’s animal petting area to be operated from Thursday to Sunday and public holidays. The site contains the existing Elmars restaurant and brewery which is proposed to be retained.

The application is described in detail further in this report under ‘Applicants Submission’.

DESCRIPTION OF SITE

Locality

The subject land is located on the west side of West Swan Road and is 6.5ha in area. The property to the north contains a table grape vineyard and residence, to the south is Chesters restaurant and vineyard. Opposite the subject land is a property containing a residence, and used for the keeping of various animals. Please refer to the attached locality plan.

Existing Uses

The principal use of the property is “Elmars” Brewery & Restaurant. This comprises a brewery and restaurant building and associated car parking and licensed outdoor area on the grassed area at the rear.

A residence is located at the south-east corner of the lot adjacent to West Swan Road, and has associated outbuildings at the rear. The remainder of the property is used for the keeping of horses.

Topography

The subject land is relatively flat falling gently towards the wetland at the rear. To the west of the wetland the property rises at a gradient of almost 7%.

Natural Features

Minchin Creek traverses the rear of the property and forms a wetland. This is discussed further in the report. There are no other natural features on the property.

Vegetation


Due to the historic use of the site as a vineyard and later for horse agistment, there is little remnant vegetation remaining. Some remnant vegetation remains around the periphery of the wetland. The Environmental Report submitted by the applicant states that this vegetation is degraded.

The property contains numerous large eucalypts and other introduced trees, most of which are proposed to be removed.

Soils

The subject land is located on the Swan Coastal Plain of the Bassendean Dune System, which generally consists of sand (quartz sand dunes) overlying a variable depth of clay (clay, loam, sand and gravel).

Hydrology and Drainage

The subject land is located within the Swan Catchment and Henley Brook Catchment Areas. According to the Department of Water Perth Groundwater Atlas, the groundwater is at a depth of 8m to 12 m below natural ground level west to east. Groundwater flow is generally in an east/south-easterly direction towards the Swan River (1.5kms east).

Natural surface drainage is currently in the direction of the wetland.

Groundwater is subject to seasonal variation of the water table of around 3m above the average level. The environmental report states that the winter increase in groundwater is not expressed at the surface in the wetland area, but rather the wetland is a result of poor infiltration causing it (the low point) to become inundated.

SITE HISTORY/PREVIOUS APPROVALS

26-7-2000 – Shop, Restaurant, Microbrewery – Refused

11-5-2001 – Shop, Restaurant, Microbrewery (modified application) – Approved

4-10-2002 – Shed – Approved

9-4-2003 – Shop, Restaurant, Microbrewery (modified application) – Approved

11-2-2005 – Entry Statement – Approved

5-11-2007 – Sign & Flagpoles – Approved

OTHER RELEVANT PREVIOUS DECISIONS OF COUNCIL

This item was deferred from the last Meeting of Council held on 9 April 2008 and the matter will be the subject of a Briefing session to Council on 23 April 2008 and it is to be discussed at the Swan Valley Planning Committee Meeting to be held on Monday 28 April 2008.


Limited additional information has been received from the applicant and their consultants at this time. Additional information may be provided by way of late item should it be received in time to be assessed.

APPLICANT'S SUBMISSION

The application received is for a market, arts centre and children’s animal petting area to be operated from Thursday to Sunday and public holidays. It is proposed to continue the operation of the brewery and restaurant from Wednesday to Sunday and public holidays, but modify the restaurant so it is a ‘food hall’ offering various types of meals.

The proposed opening hours for the market are 10am – 6pm.

The applicant expects a total of 2,500 persons to visit the site throughout the day, with a maximum of 750 persons attending at any one time.

Market

The proposal is for a purpose built market (a permanent structure) unlike other markets elsewhere which typically use existing buildings or temporary structures.

The existing residence is proposed to be demolished to accommodate the market building. No other residence is proposed in this application.

The proposed market has a floor area of 4,890m2 with an entry area of 256m2, bringing the total floor area to 5.146m2. It is a long narrow building to be constructed entirely of concrete tilt-up panels. Some feature walls will be created either by fixing timber, stone or metal (not zincalume) to the concrete panels or will have the concrete moulded to shapes and painted to look like timber, stone or metal. Please see artists’ impression graphics to be tabled at this meeting. The applicant has not provided a full schedule of colours, textures etc

The applicant advises that the entrance is designed to reflect old winery buildings with its large wooden door and overhead gantry that historically allowed for carts (and later trucks) to load wine barrels.

The building is to be 1 story approximately 11m high (equating to 2 storeys). The applicant advises that the single vast space is desirable for the internal erection of market stalls.

The applicant advises that the markets will consist of 65% produce stalls and 35% bazaar style stalls, a maximum of 90 stalls, generally as follows:

Produce Stalls Bazaar Style Stalls Fruit & Vegetable (traditional, Asian, Italian, organic etc) Meat Seafood Poultry Small goods Patisserie Bakery

Knick Knacks Soaps Candles Home made products Craft Jewellery Posters, prints Clothing Book Exchange


Coffee Shop Gourmet Juice bar Health foods

The applicant advises that the aim is to have a large proportion of the market set aside for West Australian Produce, and where possible, local Swan Valley produce. The market is designed to facilitate multiple stall holders which are expected to ensure healthy competition and excellence in quality.

Entry Area

The entry area is to be a permanent display of the history of the Swan Valley and to direct people to areas of interest in the Swan Valley.

The applicant advises:

It is our intention that this area will serve as a chronological history of the Valley – from the early settlers and founding families pioneering viticulture and other farming pursuits to the present day. We envisage a Welcome Wall similar to that at the Fremantle Maritime Museum with accompanying artifacts and pictures – recognizing the endeavours of these early settlers but also becoming a tourist destination in its own right.

Artisan Building

A separate artisan building is proposed and consists of 3 components.

An area with 5 stalls is proposed facing the market building with a combined area of 459m2. The applicant advises these are intended to be used by persons such as:

• Blacksmith/Ironmonger (forging unique ironware) • Leather worker (working with saddlery style items, belts, hats and traditional horse

brasses) • Woodturner (handmade furniture and architectural timber products)

The above persons will use these areas to demonstrate their skills and sell their products. It is anticipated that these persons will be permitted to work there during the week when the market is closed, but not be open for the general public.

A 372m2 area is proposed for craftspeople. The applicant advises that it is intended for craftspeople requiring more space for their proposed use and for the public to view the production of their craft and sale of products. Examples of anticipated uses are:

• Potter • Sculpturist • Painter • Glass Blower • Ceramicist

The central area is 312m2 and the applicant advises it is intended to be used for the display of the abovementioned craftsperson’s’ product and/or a display area to


celebrate and promote festivals eg Indigenous Week, Taste of the Valley, Spring in the Valley, Wildflower Festival etc.

The applicant further advises that the use of the above building could be flexible. It may be rearranged as deemed necessary to conduct workshops for markets visitors such as workshops for jewellery, mosaics etc.

Kids Farm

A 600m2 ‘Kids Farm’ is proposed where children can hand feed and interact with young animals such as a pony, lambs, goats, rabbits, chickens, guinea pigs, ducks and geese within holding pens.

No animals will be kept on the site overnight. All manure will be removed daily.

Village Green

A 2,500m2 level grassed area already exists on site at the rear of Elmars. This forms part of the licensed area of ‘Elmars’ which will be retained.

It is proposed to install playground equipment, shade sails and some informal seating. The applicant advises that this will be a pleasant, identifiable and accessible meeting place.

Car Parking

A total of 390 sealed car parking bays with an overflow area to accommodate 120 vehicles are proposed – a total of 510 bays (includes existing Elmars parking area).

2 crossovers 7m wide are proposed (3 crossovers currently exist).

It is proposed to use a dedicated one-way service land for delivery vehicles and the like and loading/unloading bays and 6 staff bays along the southern boundary adjacent to the Chesters property.

103 bays and 3 existing coach bays are proposed along the northern boundary adjacent to the table grape vineyard on the neighbouring property.

The remainder of the car parking bays are proposed at the rear of the property.

The applicant has provided a Traffic Impact Statement which will be discussed later in this report.

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

The proposal was advertised for public comment in accordance with the requirements of the City’s previous TPS No.9. LPS No.17 was gazetted during the advertising period for this application, however it prescribes the same level and manner of public consultation for this use.

Advertising occurred in the following manner:


• Notice in the local newspaper; • Landowners within 200m being notified in writing; • Sign erected on site; • Proposal posted on City website; • Written notification to the Swan Valley Planning Association; and • Written notification to the Ward Councillors.

38 submissions were received, as follows:

• 16 do not object • 10 do not object in part, or have requirements/conditions that must be met in

order to support proposal. • 12 object

Please refer to the attached Schedule of Submissions in the Appendix.

• Support of the proposal was generally for reasons of attracting more tourism, convenience of local shopping and its family focus.

• Conditional support of the proposal was generally subject to addressing concerns of traffic and speed limit, effluent disposal, music concerts, noise, rights of adjoining vignerons, quality of goods to be sold and security issues.

• Objections were mainly regarding traffic, car parking, affect on roadside stall holders, security, alternative locations, concerts, loss of unique area, size and scale and creation of a precedent.

The Swan Valley Progress Association supports the proposal and its full submission is contained in the Appendix.

Persons considered most affected by the proposal are those immediate neighbours to the south and north.

In summary:

R & M Bacon (table grape growers to the north) no objections to the proposal subject to:

• The development being reduced in size. • A 2m high solid fence (colourbond or similar) being erected along the boundary for

the length of the vineyard. • Retaining the right to spray vineyard when conditions demand. • The boundary being resurveyed.

N Head (Chesters Restaurant & Winery to the south) no objections, however raises following concerns:

• Request relocation of leach drain area to the middle of the property, further setback from restaurant.

• Request removal of southern proposed crossover to mitigate concerns about traffic conflicts with Chesters patrons.

• Request provision of a slip lane on West Swan Rd. • Suggest reduction of speed limit to 60kph on West Swan Rd. • Access between Chesters and subject land to be pedestrian only and subject to

legal agreement.


CONSULTATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES AND/OR CONSULTANTS

The proposal was referred to the Swan Valley Planning Committee and was discussed with the Department of Environment and Conservation. The stormwater plan was referred to the Department of Water. This is discussed further in the report.

REPORT

CITY OF SWAN - LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME No.17

Zoning and Permissibility of Uses

The subject land is zoned Swan Valley Rural under LPS 17.

The proposed uses fall into the following land use categories of LPS 17:

Market – premises used for the display and sale of goods from stalls by independent vendors.

Market is an ‘A’ use in the Swan Valley Rural zone which:

…means that the use is not permitted unless the local government has exercised its discretion by granting planning approval after giving special notice in accordance with clause 9.4; (clause 9.4 is public advertising)

History Hall/Entrance, Exhibition Centre and Artisan Stalls fall into the land use of ‘Exhibition Centre’ defined as:

Exhibition Centre – means premises used for the display, or display and sale, of materials of an artistic, cultural or historical nature, and includes a museum or art gallery.

Exhibition Centre is also an ‘A’ use in the Swan Valley Rural zone.

Kid’s Farm proposal does not clearly fit into any given use class definition and therefore clause 4.4.2. is applied. This clause gives Council the discretion to consider the use as:

1. consistent with the objectives of the particular zone, and therefore permitted; 2. possibly being consistent with abovementioned objectives and advertise proposal;

or 3. not being consistent with objectives and not permit the use.

It was considered that the kids farm falls into the category of 2. above and was accordingly advertised and is being considered. It could also be argued that the kids farm is an incidental use to the market given its small size and tourism nature.

The proposed food hall falls into the land use definition of restaurant:


Restaurant – means premises where the predominant use is the sale and consumption of food and drinks on the premises and where seating is provided for patrons, and includes a restaurant licensed under the Liquor Control Act 1988.

The restaurant is already an approved use on the site, and whilst its ‘style’ and cuisine as a food hall will be different from the current Elmars activity, including the possibility for some takeaway food, it is still a restaurant land use and holds a planning approval.

CAR PARKING

Upon application the applicant advised that the proposed 390 car bays plus area for an additional 120 overflow bays, exceeds the number required by Town Planning Scheme No.9. However TPS 9 has since been superseded by Local Planning Scheme 17, and therefore cannot be applied to this development. LPS 17 is applied as follows:

Car Parking Requirements of LPS 17

Land Use Parking requirement Total Bays required

Market 3 spaces for every stall, = 3 x 90 = 270

Or,

1 space per 10m2, = 5,146m2 (GLA) /10m2 = 515 bays

Whichever is greater.

Therefore 515 bays are required.

(Net Leasable Area is not specified to be used in this calculation)

515 bays

Exhibition Centre

(Includes History Hall & Artisan stalls)

1 space for every 4 persons the building is designed to accommodate.

Public Building Regulations uses a measurement unit of 4m2 per person, therefore:

1400m2/4m2 = 349.75m2,

349.75/4 (persons) = 87 bays

(Could be argued to be incidental to market use, discussed below)

87 bays


Restaurant 1 space for every 4 persons the building is designed to accommodate.

Existing approved car parking area calculated = 56 bays

56 bays

Kids Farm To be negotiated with Council.

Occupies an area of approx 700m2.

Potential to attract many children, but can be argued to be incidental to market use, likely that the parents will use market or other facilities at the same time.

Estimate 4 staff members = 4 spaces

4 bays

Total required = 662 bays

Total provided = 510 (including 120 overflow bays)

Car Parking Dispensation

As mentioned above it could be argued that the uses of exhibition centre, history hall, artisan stalls and kids farm are incidental to the main market use As a consequence dispensation for car parking should be considered given these uses may not solely attract all of their patronage without these patrons also accessing the market or food hall.

Estimates of Patrons and Staff

The applicant advises that the development could attract up to 750 persons at any one time and 100 staff. It is suggested that 100 staff could be an underestimated figure given:

• Restaurant/Food hall - traffic report advises staff estimates of 30 persons; and • Up to 90 stalls – many stalls may be operated by more than 1 person,

conservatively 50% may have 2 staff.


Without including the uses considered to be to some extent incidental to the market, and just using the above assumption, a total of 165 staff members could be expected. Added to 750 expected patrons, car parking provided could be inadequate.

Notwithstanding, other factors to be taken into account that may reduce the number of car bays required are other forms of transport to the site eg bus/coach tours, public transport, walking, cycling, persons getting set down/picked up (particularly young employees) and the family focus of the development resulting in a number of persons per vehicle.

A breakdown of expected patronage forms of transport to the site has not been provided, nor how the figure of 750 patrons and 100 staff was arrived at. For example the City does not know how many coach tours for example would visit the site, or how often. Nor how many residents live within walking or cycling distance or how practical it is to give weight to this consideration given the practicalities of carrying shopping on a bicycle.

For a weekend market development application in a light industrial, commercial or city centre area, these transport, parking and traffic issues would be mitigated by use of existing car parking areas, availability of public transport, the network of urban roads to disperse traffic, and being supported by a residential catchment, to name a few benefits. However in this rural tourist area if enough car parking is not provided on site in an easily accessible manner, people may choose to park on the road verge with dangerous consequences. A number of submitters cited Ducksteins Brewery as an example that concerned them with this proposal. People may also park in the car parks of nearby businesses such as Chesters reducing their businesses viability.

Based on the above considerations further car parking is possibly required on site. The calculation of parking for this proposal is to be negotiated with Council before approval is granted. It is suggested that there is enough area at the rear to provide more car parking, however this needs to be carefully considered in association with the areas also required for stormwater and leach drains.

TRAFFIC AND ACCESS

Traffic Impact Statement

The applicant has provided a Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) addressing traffic volumes generated, suitability of West Swan Rd (WS Rd), design of crossovers and provides recommendations.

The TIS provides assumptions of traffic volumes based on estimated number of visitors provided by the proponents, and using traffic figures from the City of Swan.

The TIS concludes that from a transport perspective the development is sound and worthy of approval for the following reasons:

1. The volume of traffic is well within the capacity of the existing road provision (WS Rd) and will not adversely impact the surrounding road network;

2. The site is well serviced by a pathway and a bus stop close by; 3. Ample parking is proposed on site; 4. Crossover widths of 9m are proposed in accordance with City’s requirements; 5. Sight distances north and south along WS Rd are adequate; and


6. Management measures are proposed to ensure patrons leaving the site do so with caution across the dual use path.

The TIS recommends the City support a Main Road WA proposal to reduce the speed limit to 70kph.

The City has assessed the TIS and supports Point 1 above and the validity of the research information provided (based on applicants estimates of patronage), but believes that modifications to West Swan Rd and a crossover will be required if approval is granted (discussed further below).

District Distributor

WS Rd is classified as a district distributor road, which moves traffic from locality to locality. The estimated additional traffic volumes combined with existing volumes are well within what is expected a district distributor to carry. WS Rd is also a tourist route and given this the City would prefer the traffic volumes to be lower. However it does meet the requirements expected and Henley Brook Ave, when constructed, will carry commuters thereby taking some pressure off West Swan Rd.

Traffic Estimations

The existing traffic volumes provided in the TIS are considered to be low (taken in June), but are overall acceptable. Obviously there are going to be peak periods of increased tourism activity such as Spring in the Valley, however that is a time of temporary congestion and is not relevant to this proposal.

The traffic figures state that within a 1 hour period 400 vehicles will be travelling north and 400 south. During this hour 72 vehicles will be turning right into the site and 94 vehicles turning left.

Based on these increased volumes the City’s’ Engineers require as a minimum that WS Rd be modified as discussed below:

West Swan Rd Modification

If approval is granted, the road will have to be modified to allow vehicles continuing south to pass right turning vehicles. Otherwise all traffic on WS Rd will be stopped.

Passing Lane to the East – (Trees)

To provide a passing lane the first option to be explored is to use the verge land on the eastern side of the road. However the verge contains a number of mature Ficus (hillii) trees that are a City asset and a community landmark. Please refer to the photograph attached.

An extra width of 3.5m carriageway and 1.2m shoulder is required, totalling 4.7m. A field inspection conducted by City Officers (not using surveying equipment) found that the centre of the tree trunks are located approximately 3.3m from the end of the existing carriageway, thereby requiring their removal if this passing lane is constructed.

The applicant could undertake a site feature survey by a licensed surveyor to establish the exact location of the trees and the road.


City Landscape officers advise that the trees would not survive being relocated.

Council’s Tree Policy C-038 identifies verge trees as a City asset and it is interpreted that it does not advocate the removal of street trees for development purposes. The policy allows consideration of removal of trees on a case by case basis.

It is argued that these trees are a City and community asset, a living landmark in Henley Brook. Removal is not recommended and at the very least it would not be appropriate for the City to allow their removal without consulting Henley Brook residents, and in particular the landowners adjacent to the verge. No such consultation has occurred.

As it is expected that the trees would need to be removed, it raises the question of the suitability of the site, weighing the value of the trees against the perceived benefit of the market for the Swan Valley community.

Deviation of West Swan Rd

To retain the trees the alternative is to modify the road by deviating it to the west for a length of some 100m either side of the subject site. This would need to take into account the existing power lines, the dual use path, and adjoining properties.

From the field inspection it was estimated that the power poles are located approximately 4.4m from the edge of the carriageway, and then the path occupies the area in between the power poles and the boundary. Again there is insufficient area for the road widening. Options to address this may include:

• Diverting power underground (very costly option); or • The landowner giving up land free of cost for the road deviation (however would

also require some adjacent landowners to give up some of their land, maybe unrealistic).

Again it is stressed that this information is based on a field survey estimate and should be established by a licensed surveyor at the applicants cost as a requirement prior to approval.

If a passing lane cannot be provided, the application would have to be refused for traffic safety reasons on West Swan Rd.

Speed Limit on West Swan Rd

The City has recently received a request from Main Roads WA for comments on its proposal to reduce the speed limit to 70kmph. This request will be put to Council at an upcoming Council meeting. Advice from City Engineers indicates that they will recommend Council support the proposal. If Council supports the proposal it may be a matter of only several months before the speed limit is reduced.

Nevertheless, City Engineers advise that the proposed reduction of the speed limit makes no difference to the requirement for a passing lane. The passing lane is necessary because of the volume of traffic turning into the site, not the speed the vehicles are travelling at.

Slip Lanes


Submitters have requested a left turning slip lane into the subject site, however this is not supported by City Engineers. The widening of the crossovers to 9m is satisfactory on a district distributor road to allow easy access for cars leaving the road and must be a condition of approval. It is also considered that a left slip lane in front of Chesters could create confusion for Chesters patrons. In addition it could also create an undesirable precedent along West Swan Rd.

Crossovers

The reduction of the number of existing crossovers from 3 to 2 is supported. However the southern crossover is considered to have potential for a dangerous situation for patrons leaving Chesters. Patrons may believe vehicles indicating into the market are indicating into Chesters and pull out causing a collision. Furthermore it is not of such a concern in an urban area where there a number of crossovers on roads that have lower speed limits and/or are dual lane so the driver may have potential to change lanes to avoid a collision.

For this location with high traffic volume and number of nearby crossovers, the proposed southern crossover must be relocated further north. This will in turn affect the design of the car park and internal accessways. This modified design must be approved by the City prior to approval being granted.

Bus Parking

The existing location of the coach parking for Elmars is inadequate for this proposed development. Therefore the applicant has submitted a redesign that utilizes the existing front carpark for bus parking, however there is not enough area for buses to manoeuvre here. This issue is considered minor and can be overcome with a redesign to the City’s satisfaction.

EFFLUENT DISPOSAL

As no reticulated sewer is available effluent disposal must be in accordance with the Metropolitan Sewerage Policy (MSP) and is finally approved by the Department of Health (DOH). The City must make a recommendation to the DOH.

The applicant submitted an environmental report which addresses, amongst other issues, effluent disposal. The report recommends a septic and leach drain system and the applicant has since provided figures as to the expected volumes of wastewater being produced.

The City has determined that it is unlikely that the proposal complies with the MSP and has requested further justification from the applicant in how the figures were determined. The City Environmental Health Service considers, however, that the DOH may grant some flexibility to the minimum requirements of the MSP based on justification of wastewater figures and depending upon the type of system proposed (preference may be given to an aerobic treatment system or similar where the waste water is treated before being used for irrigation of landscaping areas).

Without further information in this regard at the time of writing, it is an issue that must be resolved prior to granting of approval. For legal purposes an approval should not be given with a condition that requires the approval of another Authority if the City is not confident that approval from that Authority will be forthcoming. Consequently the City should not grant approval to the application subject to the effluent disposal


system being approved by the DOH, as it is not confident at the time of writing that the approval will be forthcoming.

In addition it is considered important for the applicant to address the concern of locating the leach drain area close to the boundary adjoining the Chesters restaurant. This in turn impacts upon available area for stormwater disposal as a minimum separation distance is required.

BUFFERS FROM VITICULTURE

A continuing concern in the Swan Valley is the right for the vignerons whose vineyards adjoin other development to continue to successfully operate. Guidelines on spray drift place the onus on the farmer to manage.

The vineyard to the south at Chesters is less likely to be affected by the development than the northern vineyard because:

• wine grapes require less spraying than table grapes, • the vigneron already has to manage the vineyard in a manner compatible with

restaurant; • the service side of the market is closer to this boundary; and • the large building will act as a buffer to the Village Green.

The vineyard to the north is for table grapes and is located directly adjacent to the Village Green playground area. Spraying and other farming practices occur seasonally so the potential conflicts are not likely to occur consistently all year round.

Guidelines recommend 40m vegetated buffers to provide effective barriers to spray drift and dust. However the vigneron to the north has requested that no vegetation be planted within 3m of his boundary in an attempt to reduce the possibility of birds destroying his harvest. This is considered an acceptable request.

In addition a 40m vegetated buffer cannot be created as the lot is too narrow and the buffer would intrude into the proposed Village Green licensed area, car parking and accessway.

It is up to the farmer to contain his dust, noise and spray on his property which may be difficult to achieve given the narrowness of the lots. This vigneron, in his submission, states that he must retain the right to spray his vineyard when conditions demand.

Furthermore he has requested, if approved, that a 2m high solid or colourbond fence be built to contain spray drift (and for security and privacy purposes). The City’s Environmental Health Service advise that the fence will, in their opinion, do little to contain spray drift. Nevertheless WAPC Planning Bulletin No.63 suggests a particular type of 1.8m fence in residential areas adjacent to market gardens in Wanneroo so there may be some merit in this approach.

The Village Green and associated children’s playground is within 20m of the adjacent vineyard, spray drift remains a concern that requires further consideration and therefore further questions the suitability of this site for the proposal.

STORMWATER


A stormwater management plan has recently been lodged with the City. It recommends using soakwells and piped drainage directed to a basin located at a 30m offset from the effluent disposal area for the 1 in 10 year storm event. For the 1 in 100 yr storm event it is proposed to create a ‘living stream’ to connect to the existing wetland for discharge. The intention of the living stream is to clean some of the nutrients from the stormwater before it enters the wetland. In addition a hydrocarbon trap is proposed to capture and contain a range of contaminants.

Another option to dispose of stormwater is via underground drainage trenches.

The stormwater management plan has just been referred to the Department of Water. Approval cannot be granted to this application until its advice has been received.

TORTOISE HABITAT

It was bought to the City’s attention by local residents that the wetland at the rear of the site is a habitat for long necked tortoises.

The City sought advice from the Department of Environment and Conservation and was advised that a formal referral, to investigate any potential threat to these creatures and their habitat, was not required. Therefore it does not consider this to be a significant environmental concern.

GROUNDWATER IMPLICATIONS

Groundwater Extraction

The subject site contains 2 licensed bores for the extraction of groundwater. Currently groundwater is used to irrigate the landscaping of Elmars, the horse paddocks and the residential garden.

It was suggested to the City by a local vigneron that the license may be revoked if not used for rural purposes. The Department of Water (DOW) verbally advises that this allocation will not change if the development is approved. Providing license holders continue to use the groundwater, the DOW does not differentiate or give priority to one particular water demanding activity over another. For example even though this proposal is a commercial activity, the DOW will not restrict or remove its license providing groundwater continues to be used.

Groundwater Contamination

The issue of groundwater contamination from effluent disposal is addressed by the DOH upon application for approval of an effluent disposal system.

KIDS FARM

The City received a submission that objected to the kids farm component of the proposal by the owners of a larger scale kids farm on John St in Henley Brook. Please refer to the attached Schedule of Submissions.

The objection was based on issues of competition, rendering the John St farm unviable.


Whilst the concerns of the submitters are understandable, they are not valid from a planning perspective. If Council refused the kids farm on the basis of unfair competition for an existing operator, it would be overturned in an appeal situation.

A parallel may not be drawn concerning competition issues between the proposed market and roadside stall holders, as a planning objective of the Swan Valley Act is to protect viticulture. Therefore this legislation is the mechanism that allows Council to consider the economic impact the market would have on existing roadside vendors. Without the Act Council couldn’t take competition into account. Roadside vendors are discussed further in this report.

MARKET AS A RETAIL CENTRE – LONG TERM SUSTAINABILITY

Control of Goods to be Sold at Market

The definition for Market in LPS 17 is:

….premises used for the display and sale of goods from stalls by independent vendors.

If approved market management can consider leasing floorspace/stalls to vendors selling any type of goods. Approval cannot restrict the type of goods to be sold or the type of vendor businesses, in accordance with the above definition. Whilst the proponents have made public commitments to high quality goods, local produce etc, they will be under no legal obligation to ensure this occurs and neither will any future owners/managers.

Any type of goods could be sold (vacuums, mobile phones, automotive products, cleaning products – anything) as occurred at the Midland Military Markets (vendors sold airconditioning systems and billiard tables for example).

Again it is stressed that the proponents have advised their full intention is to create a quality development in all respects, one that is iconic and that the Swan Valley will be proud of. They hope it to be a major tourist destination for visitors to WA. There is no reason to doubt these intentions, however it is important to be cognisant of the fact that approval cannot ensure this proposed level of quality. An approval would allow any goods to be sold.

Further whilst the proponents propose a 65% fresh produce 35% bazaar type stall breakdown, it is questionable if it can be applied as a condition of approval. Legal advice may need to be sought on this matter.

Sustainability – Other Scenarios

The Swan Valley does not have a supermarket, residents typically travel to Ellenbrook or Midland for groceries. In the absence of a supermarket in the Valley, it could be reasonably argued that the market will be a commercially viable development purely as a retail centre, as the Swan Valley catchment contains a fair population and West Swan Rd is used as a commuter route to northern urban areas.

The proponents have given many public commitments about the type of development this will be and advise they are making a substantial financial investment in its success. Nevertheless it is the role of the Local Authority and the SVPC to consider all scenarios.


In the absence of a professional commercial feasibility study being released to the City, a concern is the long term use of such a large building if the development fails. Pressure would be applied to the City to consider other uses. If this scenario occurred in an urban area, it would not be as problematic as these areas are more robust for a variety of land uses than the Swan Valley. However options for this large building would likely to be limited to large scale operations.

Perhaps a more likely scenario is the possible failure of the artisan centre. Submitters cite similar activities that failed at Whiteman Park. Similarly no feasibility information has been provided. (Please refer economic comments below.) In the event it fails a logical step could be to apply to the City for this building to be an extension of the market, thereby expanding the market to possibly act as a large neighbourhood shopping centre. In a Tribunal appeal situation it may be difficult for the City to defend a refusal decision given the proposal may be considered as a minor extension to a use already deemed appropriate.

The kids farm is likely to become a seasonal attraction, closing in the winter months, a scenario together with the potential for the artisan centre to fail, that renders the market as a large retail centre in a tourist region.

The City has obtained legal advice and it confirms that feasibility information (and thereby concerns of viability and long term sustainability), whilst not normally a planning consideration, is justifiable in this situation given its location in the Swan Valley and the magnitude of the development.

Advice from City’s Economic Development Officer

“Whilst in principal a quality market facility in the Swan Valley would be a tourism attraction, the issue centres around viability of the proposal and its potential effects on existing tourism and markets in the area.

There already exists in proximity to the Swan Valley the Guildford Heritage Markets which operates monthly on a Sunday and the Midland Farmers’ Markets (MFM) which is an expanding weekly farmers’ market largely selling fruit and vegetables.

There is also the Midland Fresh Markets on the corner of Morrison Road and Great Eastern Highway Midland which sells local produce 7 days a week.

The new proposed market includes 30-40 produce stalls which will be in direct competition with the stall holders at MFM and the Fresh markets.

The Guildford markets does not sell fresh produce but does sell a range of market goods which could be duplicated by the new proposal

We are also aware of a proposal for the establishment of a market in the existing Swan Settlers building in Herne Hill. A number of former stall holders from the former Midland Military markets are interested in the Herne Hill proposal.

The proponents of the Markets of the Valley are promoting the sale of local fresh produce. However one might define “local”, it is difficult to imagine that there is sufficient local produce to cater for a further 30-40 market stalls.

Another factor that should be considered is that many of the produce growers in the Swan Valley sell their produce at the farm gate. This is a practice which is considered


as an attraction to tourists and the local population. Farm gate sales are also a way in which SV property owners are able to source income from their properties.

The new proposal would be in direct competition with these producers and could force some of them out of business and cause pressure for change of land use.

Artisan Building

Whilst this facility would undoubtedly be a tourist attraction, it needs to be understood that a similar proposal is under development at the former foundry building on the MRA workshops site in Midland.

The Midland Fine Arts Incubator as it is called is being led by the MRA and the City of Swan with the support of key arts organizations such as FORM Contemporary Craft and Design Centre. There are also a number of artisans based at Whiteman’s Park.

There are limited number of quality craftsmen in WA to fill these spaces.

There is no mention in the application of the proponents having discussed this artisans proposal with either Form or the local Artisans group Artisan’s on Swan. (Note – the applicant submitted a letter from the Artisans indicating support and they would be interested it if was affordable, needed more discussion).

History of the Valley Building

Again this is in direct competition with a new display to be opened at the Swan Valley Visitors Centre in April 2008. The VC interpretive display has involved widespread consultation with Swan Guildford Historical Society, local Swan Valley identities and families who emigrated to the valley in early settlement times and indigenous leaders of the area. There is probably not sufficient quality memorabilia available to sustain two similar exhibitions.

Whilst all these are not strictly defined as planning issues they are a cause for concern from a holistic viability of the development. If one or more or all of these components prove to be unviable then what would the future of the development be?

The following questions need to be asked:

What research has been done in terms of where the stallholders will come from?

What if any consultation has taken place with the potential competitors mentioned above?

How is it proposed to be marketed? Is there a marketing plan?

Availability of fresh local produce is seasonal in WA, how will this affect the financial viability of the food stalls?

What are the ramifications of the building becoming unviable due to competition or lack of interested tenants for the space?”

OPENING DAYS


The market is proposed to be open from Thursday – Sunday including public holidays. Most markets are open either just Sunday or Friday – Sunday (and public holidays). No justification has been provided for the ‘extra day’. It is assumed that it has been a business decision based on viability, which may reflect its nature to act largely as a neighbourhood retail centre. Apparently the main tourist activity in the Swan Valley is Friday – Sunday.

If the market is approved, it is an important consideration to determine if the extra day of Thursday is warranted and sufficient weight given to the extra noise and traffic that it will create for nearby residents for 4 out of 7 days a week. Without feasibility information it is difficult to know if opening 4 days is a pivotal element in the development proceeding.

WA PLANNING COMMISSION – STATE PLANNING POLICY 4.2 – METROPOLITAN CENTRES STATEMENT

The WAPC’s policy above provides for a hierarchy of commercial/retail centres based on floorspace throughout the Perth Metropolitan Area, requires Local Authority’s to prepare their own Local Planning Strategies (retail) and provides for circumstances where proposals that are outside the Policy parameters are to be determined by the WAPC, not the Local Authority.

The use of market is classified by the Policy as Shop/Retail and its floorspace is the equivalent size of a local neighbourhood shopping centre (NSC).

The definition of a NSC refers to day to day shopping and ancillary uses such as medical centres. It could be reasonably argued that, based on the applicants expected stalls, a large extent of day to day shopping could be undertaken at the market. However it could also be argued that as there are no ancillary uses, its nature (not floorspace) is not that of a NSC.

The subject land has not been identified as an existing/future NSC in the City’s Commercial Centres Strategy (discussed below).

At the recent Swan Valley Planning Committee meeting a representative from the WAPC advised that it considers the development to be of state significance and may withdraw its delegation of authority for the City to determine the application. If this is confirmed before this Council meeting then the Council must make a recommendation to the WAPC who will determine the application.

CITY OF SWAN - COMMERCIAL CENTRES STRATEGY (CCS)

The proposal was referred to the City’s relevant Strategic Planner, seeking an assessment against the City’s CCS. He advised that he does not support the proposal due to its scale and size and provides the following summarised advice:

Commercial Centres Strategy (CCS)

The proposal would be considered ‘Other Commercial Facilities’ under the CCS and is subject to individual assessment outlined on page 10:

“Other commercial facilities such as rural produce outlets, lunch bars (in association with employment centres), convenience stores (in association with service stations),


rural restaurants and wineries will be subject to individual assessment in the context of the Strategy, taking into consideration:

• the need for the particular service or facility, • the suitability of the site for the proposed development, • the purpose for which the land has been zoned, • the nature and scale of development proposed, • the potential impact on the amenity of the area, • the nature and location of other commercial facilities in the locality, both existing

and planned, and • the potential impact on the viability of and therefore service function of adjacent

commercial facilities, both existing and proposed.”

The above considerations are discussed as follows:

Need

The applicant’s initial report provides no information supporting why a market is required at this location. The applicant has now advised that since the Midland Military Markets burnt down there is no other market in this region. The applicant further advises that the markets are already ‘over subscribed’ on the basis of expressions of interest (including Military Market vendors).

Suitability

Despite attempts to create a built form that tries to emulate a ‘ruralist’ character, the scale of the development and associated infrastructure (water, electricity, car parking etc.) renders it unsuitable in Area B of the Swan Valley Planning Act 1995.

It is essentially claiming the land from less-intensive uses that is unlikely to reclaim in the foreseeable future. Furthermore, intensifying the built form on the lot could have a spin-off effect on the surrounding locality that will ultimately change the area from its rural amenity.

A market of that scale be better positioned, ideally in a location with access to multiple transportation, supported by a residential catchment (to improve viability) and its pedestrian linkages to nearby businesses are relatively unimpeded.

Commercial/retail developments should be sited to maximise the benefits of co-location and facilitate the shared use of facilities such as access, parking and amenities.

Swan Valley Planning Act - limited expansion of the existing retail and community facilities at Herne Hill. Herne Hill would be a more preferable location for a Market in light of the CCS. The scale of the proposal would be better positioned in Midland, proposed Albion, Ellenbrook or a place in the Swan Valley where pedestrian business co-location can be exploited to its fullest and other site preferences can be met.

Purpose

The purpose appears simple; Markets being a use that Council has discretion to approve. It, to an extent, will encourage tourist facilities in the area. But it is not the purpose of the zoning to provide such an intense land-use.


Nature

The nature of the land use has merits befitting the zoning (markets being a discretionary use) and surrounding tourism adding land uses. However, the scale of the development is inappropriate.

Whilst a fixed structure provides flexibility in use, the sheer size of the building limits its potential re-use to a small number of appropriate activities.

Such a large building is inappropriate for the Swan Valley to support such activity with few supporting land uses that encourage pedestrian permeability.

Market research should be conducted on markets in similar rural settings.

No justification has been provided as to why it is proposed to operate four-days a week. The only information given regarding business models used for research on other markets to justify that an adequate number of stalls will be open most days, has been statements regarding research into national and overseas markets, naming Adelaide and Sovereign Hill. However even the Adelaide Central Markets (located in the middle of Adelaide CBD with excellent transport linkages) is a ‘ghost-town’ on at least one of the four days it operates, despite being positioned next to China-Town, Central Arcade and a strip of restaurant and cafés.

Impact

The required car parking provisions for the site does have an impact on the amenity of the locality. This impact correlates with the size of the proposal. The smaller the proposal, its impact lessens. The proposal encompasses most of the site.

Nature and Location of Other Commercial Facilities.

It is considered that a 90-stall market will have implications on the commercial viability of nearby Centres; depending on the tenancy-mix. The quantity of tenancies that can be considered as grocery retail would influence the Hierarchy of Centres. The markets will have a larger customer catchment due to its tourism draw. The capacity of the area to operate a number markets is obviously limited both from potential stallholders and customers. This is a list of markets the City is aware of:

• Midland Farmer’s markets • Guildford Heritage Markets • A larger market in Guildford (proposed in WAPC strategies)

Justification has not been provided to illustrate that the proposed development will not prejudice the viability/sustain existing or planned centre in the locality. Encouragement of tenancies selling Swan Valley produce may mitigate the potential implications on the CCS Hierarchy of Centres, however it would be encouragement only as selling local produce cannot be guaranteed or a condition of approval.

Nearest are proposed centres of the Sub Regional Growth Corridor. In a thirty year period 3 medium neighbourhood centres, 3 small local centres and 1 large neighbourhood centre expanding into a district centre are proposed 1 - 2 kilometres away. If this proposal is approved it would be difficult for these Centres to comprehend why they have to abide by the floorspace restrictions of the hierarchy,


when a 5,000m2 market the same size as a neighbourhood centre is permitted with the provision of limited infrastructure.

SWAN VALLEY PLANNING ACT

The subject land is located within Area B.

Below is each Objective for Area B, the applicants statement addressing these (in italics) and then the City’s comments.

1. The Protection of Viticulture.

“Lot 2 has no vines on it. Historically it has been used for horse agistment, although this activity has been significantly reduced. There will be no loss of viticulture should this proposal be approved. Indeed, the proposal by providing a centralized outlet for local produce, will benefit local table grape producers.” Site Capability for Viticulture

The subject land was used for viticultural purposes until 1977 when the vines were removed to make way for horse activities. Vineyards are located on either side of the property. 2 bores are currently licensed to extract groundwater.

It is therefore considered that the land is capable of supporting viticulture.

Site Suitability for Viticulture

Whilst the land contains an existing restaurant and brewery, it is located at the front of the property. A wetland is at the rear, leaving approximately 5ha available for viticultural use, which is considered large enough for a small commercial operation and is above the minimum lot size for subdivision in Area B (4ha).

Its location in between vineyards also confirms its suitability for viticulture.

Benefit to Viticulture

The applicant argues that the market may benefit local growers by providing a centralized outlet for the sale of their produce. In theory this may be a benefit by providing another outlet for sale. However until shown otherwise, the City is unconvinced that in reality it will be utilized by local growers, when growers can sell their produce by roadside at no expense.

Submitters argue that it will not benefit local growers and no evidence to the contrary, from Valley grape growers for example, has been provided by the applicant.

Whilst commercial competition is not normally a planning matter, it is argued that if there is a threat to viticulture, it is a valid planning concern in accordance with the SVP Act.

Threat to Viticulture

The proposal may not protect viticulture for the following reasons:


• The proposal may detrimentally impact existing roadside stall vendors due to the increased competition from the markets.

• Approval would render the property being unable to be used again as a vineyard. • The adjoining vignerons may find it difficult to contain noise, dust and spray drift

and as a consequence their vineyards may become unduly impacted. • The development may create an undesirable precedent for the use of other viable

viticultural land for large scale commercial/tourism purposes, considering that almost the entire property is proposed to be devoted to development.

• The development may inflate the local land value given the precedent for larger scale commercial development. This makes the establishment of new vineyards less likely (they are expensive to establish and returns can’t compare to those for commercial development) and may cause the loss of further vineyards (as mentioned above).

• The proponents propose that for every tree removed on site, three more will be planted. The planting of trees will provide more habitats for bird life which threatens the existing vineyards. Proposed landscaping can be modified as a condition of approval. However landscaping and viticulture are a paradox in this area given it is desired in commercial developments to mitigate the affects of development on the landscape, but may be detrimental to vineyards.

• On the basis above it is considered overall that the proposal is incompatible with this objective.

2. The provision of water for viticulture and horticulture and the discouragement of other activities that have high water demands.

“The existing bores on the property will only be used to maintain existing and proposed landscaping. Proposed landscaping will be designed for minimum water use. All water for use in the buildings will be scheme water so the impact upon the groundwater will be negligible.”

It is agreed that the proposal will not have high groundwater demands.

As already discussed the property has a groundwater license and the DOW will allow the continued extraction of groundwater regardless of the use of the land. This raises a variety of questions regarding this ‘policy’ considering groundwater is fully allocated. It would be more appropriate to require the proponents to use a recycled wastewater/stormwater system to reticulate the grounds and sell their allocation for rural/viticultural use. However this is a management issue for the owners to address separate to this application.

On this basis it is considered that the proposal is compatible with this objective.

3. The encouragement of tourist facilities provided that they do not detract from the rural character of the area.

“The proposal will create a strong tourist drawcard. It will build on the existing brewery/restaurant tourist base that already compliments other activities in the Valley. The mix of ‘relaxed’ but busy and interesting uses – produce markets, exhibitions/demonstrations, village green, meals, brewery, visitor’s centre – area all consistent with the character of the area. This activity is complimented by the architectural style of the proposed buildings.”


Submitters had a varying range of comments about the tourism aspect of this proposal, and the effect upon the rural character of the area (please refer schedule of submissions) including:

Tourism

• Huge tourism asset. • For the Swan Valley to survive and prosper it has to change to meet the new

demands as a tourist destination. • Developers think they can get approvals if they add a tourism element – it’s a

shopping centre under the guise of a tourism venture. • The traffic congestion and danger on West Swan Rd that this proposal will cause,

may detrimentally affect the existing tourism uses in the immediate locality.

The nature of markets generally have a tourism element, to an extent. It is considered a large proportion of patronage will be local residents using the market as a centre to mainly buy fresh produce on a weekly basis. However by its very location in the Swan Valley it is considered that the proposal will attract some tourism.

The artisan building and history hall is considered to be an added tourist attraction to the main draw card of market. The tourism aspect of the proposal hinges, however on its long term sustainability as discussed previously.

If it is considered that the development is sustainable then it could be reasonably concluded that it would serve the dual purpose of providing shopping for tourists as well as local residents. The breakdown or percentage of the tourism vs. local residents is a matter of speculation in the absence of research information.

If concluded that the proposal is a tourist facility to an extent more than a local shopping centre, it must also be determined that it does not detract from the rural character of the area, as discussed below.

Rural Character of the Area

Submitters varying comments:

• This is ideally located as this area of Henley Brook is already the commercial hub of this tourism area.

• This represents a redevelopment of an already commercial site. • Beauty of Swan Valley is the scattering of attractions throughout the rural

landscape, not a large concentrated retail outlet. • Increased noise, traffic and security problems more a kin to a residential suburb

than a rural area. • The size and scale of the proposal is out of character for the rural area and this

long narrow property. The rural character referred to is Area B, which covers the core central viticulture and tourist area of the Valley. This is where rural land use must co-exist with tourist facilities, however priority is given throughout the SVP Act to allowing activities (such as tourism) to occur only where they meet certain criteria which is designed to protect viticulture and the rural character and amenity of the area. It is therefore a precarious balance between complimenting land uses and raises a number of complex issues of compatibility depending on the development proposed.


The proposal includes approximately 7,200m2 of total building floor area including the existing Elmars building (6,600m2 of new buildings). Car parking proposed in addition to existing is 12,000m2 in area. It is considered that the proposal will detract from the rural character of the area given its large scale and size and the associated car parking, noise and traffic it will generate.

Whilst merit is given to the narrow width of the market building and the facade proposed to give rustic rural character, its height, length and position close to West Swan Rd make it an imposing structure on the rural landscape.

In other areas of the Swan Valley where large non-residential buildings have been approved they have been substantially setback from the road on large lots eg Belvoir Function Centre, which reduces the impact on the rural character of the area. If the proposed market building was set further back from West Swan Rd it would possibly require the relocation of the car parking to the front which would also detract from the rural character of the area.

The option of repositioning of the building and carparking further down the property and the effluent disposal area at the front may not be practical given the location of the existing restaurant and the design elements that tie in the village green as a central component. This may also detract from the amenity of Chesters and the ‘rural living’ areas adjacent at the rear. Overall it is considered unlikely that a redesign may overcome its detraction from the rural character and amenity of the area.

It has been claimed that this area of Henley Brook is the commercial hub of the tourist area already, implying rural character is already diminished. To some extent this may be valid. However these existing businesses are small scale restaurants, wineries and tearooms broken up by vineyards, paddocks etc and are not comparable on a scale or nature to this proposal. The subject land is surrounded on both sides by vineyards, overall rural character is still intact. In addition as there is a concentration of tourism developments here (although not all adjacent), allowing another development, one that is larger than anything proposed before in the Swan Valley, would collectively undermine the rural character of the area and may create an undesirable precedent. Tourism uses such as restaurants and tearooms, rely on the rural character of the area as a backdrop for their businesses.

Furthermore, if approved, the owner of the adjacent vineyard to the north has requested that a 2m high colourbond fence be constructed along the length of the vineyard for the purposes of security, privacy and an effort to contain dust and spray drift. If deemed appropriate, this fence will further detract from the rural character of the area, again questioning the suitability of the development for the site and create a precedent for similar fences elsewhere.

On the basis of the above it is considered that the proposal is incompatible with this objective.

4. The encouragement of traditional activities of the Swan Valley and industries associated with viticulture, horticulture and cottage industry provided that they are compatible with the rural character of the area.

“As described above, the range of uses proposed compliments the viticultural, horticultural and cottage industries traditional in the Swan Valley.”


For the reasons outlined in relation to objective 3 above, it is considered that the proposal is incompatible with this objective.

5. The encouragement of the consolidation of retail and community facilities at Herne Hill, Caversham and West Swan.

5A.The limited expansion of existing retail and community facilities at Herne

Hill, Caversham and West Swan where such facilities are required to service the local community and will not detract from the rural character of the area.

“Of these three locations only Herne Hill has an identifiable retail/community centre, and that is on the eastern side of the Swan River quite remote (by road) from this site. Retail facilities at Caversham and West Swan are limited to tourist based activities (restaurants, wineries, breweries etc) and are most intensively located in the vicinity of the subject site.”

The lack of an identifiable retail centre in the western half of the Swan Valley divided by the Swan River, is not justification to create a quasi-shopping centre (if determined that is its main use) in the absence of that being recognised as appropriate by the Swan Valley Planning Act and the Commercial Centres Strategy.

The SVP Act directs commercial activities to the areas described in order to protect the remainder of Area B from retail activity and development that would detract from the rural character of the Valley.

The City’s Commercial Centres Policy also identifies Herne Hill as a neighbourhood centre, and identifies the future Albion area as having a neighbourhood centre easily accessible for residents of Henley Brook and this western side of the river.

Therefore it could be argued that this proposal is a retail centre, and it should be located in an area identified by this objective, not outside as proposed as an undesirable precedent for ad hoc retail development could be created.

Alternatively it could be reasonably argued that retailing already occurs outside these areas in association with tourism. For example The Chocolate Factory is a retail use, however it is also a tourism use. In contrast, at the market a person could get the majority of their grocery shopping, whereas The Chocolate Factory is more specialized. These existing tourism uses with retail elements are not the size and scale of this proposal.

On this basis it is considered that the proposal is incompatible with this objective.

6. The compatibility of design, siting and landscaping with the character of the area.

“The proposal has been designed specifically to respond to the character of the area with traditional but mixed architectural style. The new buildings will be surrounded by landscaping to minimize their visual impact from off-site and incorporate non-bird attracting plants.”

Vignerons advise that there is no such thing as non-bird attracting plants, as all birds will roost/perch in trees and bushes regardless if they provide a food source or not. If


approved, landscaping will need careful consideration being mindful of the adjacent vineyards.

As discussed previously, the rustic materials and architectural design of the façade has merit. However it is considered that the size, siting and scale of the development are out of character with the area. Further the necessary instalment of a passing lane on the eastern side of West Swan Road may entail the removal of the established line of Ficus trees which contribute significantly to the appearance and amenity of this location.

On this basis the proposal is considered to be incompatible with this objective.

7. The discouragement of uses that are incompatible with the rural character and traditional agricultural activities of the area.

“As discussed above, the uses proposed are complementary to the traditional agricultural activities and rural character of the area in a variety of ways.”

It is considered that the size and scale and location of the development, with its associated noise and traffic, make it incompatible with the rural character of the area.

8. The extraction of basic raw materials so far as it is compatible with the character and amenity of the area and subject to the rehabilitation of the affected land.

“Not applicable as no basic raw material extraction is proposed.”

Not applicable.

9. The subdivision into lots of less than 4ha only where this is consistent with the objectives set out in this section.

“Not applicable as no subdivision is proposed.”

Not applicable.

10. The avoidance of overstocking, of activities causing pollution or degradation of the environment and of any other land management practices detrimental to the amenity of the area.

“Stock on the property will be limited to small numbers of animals in the ‘kids farm’ area. They will be contained in enclosures when they are on site, which will only be on the 4 days per week the markets are open. They will be brought to the site and removed each day.

The animals will be hand fed and manure removed from site each day.

Other aspects of environmental impact are dealt with in the attached report from Strategen, which concludes environmental from the proposals are able to be managed such that they should not affect the natural environment significantly.”

It is considered that if managed carefully, the proposed ‘kids farm’ will not cause pollution or land degradation problems.


A large amount of stormwater and effluent is expected to be generated by this proposal. The disposal of this waste water may have the ability to cause pollution to the groundwater and in turn the Swan River, affect the habitat of the tortoises claimed to be living in the wetland, and the hydrology of the wetland. The DOW and the DOH will assess this issue.

On the basis above it is presently inconclusive whether the proposal is compatible with this objective.

SWAN VALLEY PLANNING COMMITTEE (SVPC)

In accordance with the requirements of the Swan Valley Planning Act, the proposal was referred to the SVPC for its recommendation.

Minutes from the SVPC had not been received at the time of writing.

City Planners in attendance believe:

1. The SVPC resolved the application is incompatible with planning objectives 3,4,5,6 and 7 of Area B of The Swan Valley Planning Act 1995;

2. The SVPC had concerns regarding the size and scale of the development and the

lack of information presented; and

3. A representative from the WAPC advised at the meeting that the WAPC considers the development to be of state significance and may withdraw its delegation of authority (under Clause 32 of the Metropolitan Region Scheme) for the City to determine the application. If this is confirmed with the WAPC before this Council meeting then the Council must make a recommendation to the WAPC who will determine the application.

If Council’s resolution conflicts with the resolution of the SVPC, the application must be determined by the WAPC.

SUMMARY OF OUTSTANDING ISSUES

If Council support the application, prior to formal approval the following technical issues are to be addressed:

• Further justification/clarification of effluent disposal system and compliance with the Metropolitan Sewerage Policy.

• Feature site survey of suitable length of West Swan Rd. Results of survey may require the applicant to engage civil engineer to address design of passing land and provide the applicant with a quote for roadworks, at applicant's cost.

• Negotiation of number of car parking bays • Crossover and adjacent carpark/accessways to be redesigned. • Applicant to demonstrate that the bus parking and manoeuvring area works or

redesign. • Resolution of issue of spray drift from adjacent vineyard. • DoW raising no objection (stormwater). • Legal advice possibly being obtained regarding restriction of goods to percentages

proposed. • Negotiation of days of opening.


The issues highlighted in bold above may determine if the application can actually be approved. Other issues may impact the application but are issues that could be overcome.

MAIN ISSUES TO BE DEBATED

Issues that lie at the heart of the proposal that should be debated are:

1. Does the development have the capacity for long term sustainability as a tourist development, and therefore if tourist elements fail, is it acceptable as a stand alone retail centre?

2. The proponents give commitments regarding the proportion of fresh produce and

bazaar type stalls, quality of goods, local and WA produce being promoted and the type of goods for sale. This cannot be guaranteed by conditions of planning approval and the proponents cannot be held accountable, due to the definition for a market in LPS 17. Are these elements integral and determining factors in accepting the developments suitability for Area B?;

3. Is the size and scale appropriate for the subject land, and therefore does it accord

with the amenity and character of the rural area?; 4. If a site survey and civil engineers report determines that there are no other

feasible options to accommodate the required passing lane, is it an acceptable consequence to remove the landmark row of trees opposite the subject land?; and

5. Is Council satisfied that the proposal is compatible adjacent to a table grape

vineyard, that this vignerons right to farm is not compromised and that the concerns regarding spray drift and dust affecting the village green/playground area are able to be overcome?

OPTIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Option 1

1. That Council resolve to refuse the application for the following reasons:

a) The application is incompatible with Planning Objectives 3,4,5,6 and 7 of Area B of the Swan Valley Planning Act.

b) The application is inconsistent with the objectives of the Swan Valley Rural zone in Local Planning Scheme No.17, in particular objective (d) ensure that the development and use of land accords with planning objectives for Area B as specified in the Swan Valley Planning Act 1995.

c) It is indeterminate if the application can be considered as a neighbourhood shopping centre under WAPC’s State Planning Policy 4.2 Metropolitan Centres Strategy and therefore must be assessed against the City of Swan Commercial Centres Strategy.

2. Advise the applicant that Council may consider a fresh application proposing a

significantly smaller market floorspace.

Implications


The applicant can exercise his appeal rights to the State Administrative Tribunal. It is considered that the City would have strong arguments to defend its decision on the application as submitted.

Option 2

That Council resolve to defer the application pending resolution of the outstanding issues as follows:


• Feature site survey of suitable length of West Swan Rd. Results of survey may require the applicant to engage civil engineer to address design of passing lane and provide the applicant with a quote for roadworks, at applicants cost.

• Advice being received from the WAPC as to if the proposal can be considered as a neighbourhood centre in accordance with its Commercial Centres Strategy.

• Negotiation of number of car parking bays. • Crossover and adjacent carpark/accessways to be redesigned. • Applicant to demonstrate that the bus parking and manoeuvring area works or


proposed. • Negotiation of days of opening.

Implications

Clause 10.9 of LPS 17 (Deemed Refusal) provides for the applicant to exercise appeal rights to SAT where the local government has not issued a determination within 90 days of receipt of the application. As the application was received in early December, the applicant can exercise appeal rights at any stage, even if the application is to be determined by the WAPC.

This Option 2 allows for important issues to be addressed that may or may not be able to be resolved. In particular it would allow for the landowner adjacent to the verge trees on West Swan Rd to be consulted and all options for a passing lane investigated.

Even if all the above issues are addressed however, it is considered the scale and size of the development does not accord with the rural character of the area and therefore the various objectives of Area B of the SVP Act.

Option 3

That Council resolve to support the application in principle, and grant delegated authority to the Principal Planner to approve the application:

1. Upon resolution of the following issues to the satisfaction of the Principal Planner:



• Feature site survey of suitable length of West Swan Rd. Results of survey may require the applicant to engage civil engineer to address design of passing lane and provide the applicant with a quote for roadworks, at applicants cost.

• Negotiation of number of car parking bays. • Crossover and adjacent carpark/accessways to be redesigned. • Applicant to demonstrate that the bus parking and manoeuvring area works or


proposed. • Negotiation of days of opening; and 2. Subject to conditions to the satisfaction of the Principal Planner.

Implications

This validity of this option (granting delegation to the Principal Planner) depends upon clarification of minutes from the SVPC and advice from the WAPC regarding ‘calling in’ the application for its determination. If the WAPC approved the application following Council’s recommendation, the row of verge trees would be removed without consultation with adjacent landowner, who may be aggrieved by this decision. The Henley Brook community may also be aggrieved as the removal of trees was not included in the original advertised proposal.

The WAPC may request the Council readvertise the proposal (removal of trees) prior to making its decision.

Approval may create an undesirable precedent for other similar large scale developments within Area B of the Swan Valley Planning Act.

CONCLUSION

For the reasons discussed at length above in this report and the options and implications, it is considered that the site is not suitable for this development proposal regardless of the outstanding issues, and the proposal does not have the support of the Swan Valley Planning Committee.

ATTACHMENTS

Schedule of Submissions

Swan Valley Progress Assoc. Submission

Site Plan – Submissions

Site Plan

Floorplan


Elevations

Photograph of Street Trees

RECOMMENDATION

A recommendation on this matter will be tabled at the Council and will be dependent upon the outcome of the Swan Valley Planning Committee and information received from the applicant and their consultants.

The following was tabled at the meeting:

Further supplementary information to the agenda report for this item is included below.

WAPC Call in

The City received notice in writing from the Western Australian Planning Commission on Monday 28 April 2008 that the application has been called in, in accordance with Resolution No.54 under Clause 32 of the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). The notice states the reason for the call in is that the WAPC considers the proposal “…to be of regional significance”. It is the City’s established practice that, where the WAPC has called in determination of an application under the MRS, the City makes a recommendation to the Commission only.

Additional information submitted by Applicant

Further to the agenda report, the applicant has submitted additional information which is discussed as follows:

Traffic Impact

To accommodate traffic accessing the site, a right turn lane (from the north) is required. The applicant’s consultant has prepared two design options for the widening of this section of West Swan Road. Option 1 provides for widening into the road reserve on both sides, with Option 2 indicating widening on the eastern side only. Option 2 will require the removal of a number of mature Ficus trees within the road reserve. It is considered that these trees make a significant aesthetic contribution to the rural character and amenity of the locality and should be preserved.

It is noted that the length of the right turn lane indicated in the two design options does not extend the full length of the property to provide access to the southern crossover. This is considered important to accommodate circumstances where southbound vehicles miss the northern crossover and then seek to turn across traffic into the southern crossover. The absence of a passing lane along this section could result in traffic banking up. The design options provided would only be partially effective in such instances.


Option 1 is therefore the recommended option that should be pursued as a condition of any development approval contemplated by Council. It is noted that the view of City staff is that the passing lane should be extended in length.

Stormwater

The stormwater management plan previously submitted has now received the endorsement of the Department of Water.

Effluent Disposal

The proposal needs to comply with the Government Sewerage Policy – Perth Metropolitan Region. The applicant has submitted a supplementary report that indicates the proposed effluent disposal system is compliant with the Policy. It is noted that approval or refusal of any application for an effluent disposal system is the responsibility of the Health Department of Western Australia (HDWA), with the City making a recommendation. The City’s Environmental Health section have concerns as to whether the proposal complies with the Policy and have not received any written advice from the Health Department on this matter. Given that the determination of the application is now the responsibility of the WAPC it is understood they will refer the proposal to HDWA to resolve the issue of compliance with the Government Sewerage Policy prior to determination.

It is noted that this remains an unresolved aspect of the City’s consideration of the submitted application. However, if approval is contemplated, any resolution by Council to recommend to the WAPC approval of the development application should be provisional on the WAPC attaining a sufficient level of certainty that the development proposal can be serviced by an onsite effluent disposal system that can suitably dispose of the likely wastewater volume. On this basis, standard conditions pertaining to onsite effluent disposal would be recommended with a special condition requiring that the siting of the system should be setback 20 metres from the side boundary with the adjoining lot to the south (Chesters).

Reduction in floor space area and height

The applicant has submitted a revised site plan and elevations (stamp received 24 April 2008) reducing the floor space to 4610m2 (applicant’s figure) and the height of the market building (behind the front entrance) to 10 metres.

Parking and access

The applicant has indicated provision of 608 parking bays onsite. Given the modification to the floor space area this is consistent with Scheme requirements. The design of the coach parking and access area to the front of the development will need to demonstrate manoeuvrability prior to the issue of a Building Licence and this requirement would be recommended as a condition of any development approval issued by the WAPC.

Interface with adjoining properties

No.8931 West Swan Road

This is a working vineyard where spraying of vines occurs on a seasonal basis. Guidelines indicate a vegetated buffer distance of 40 metres, however it is a noted


concern of vignerons that the attraction of birds by tree planting increases damage of grape crops. The applicant has supplied a letter from the owners of this lot requesting a 1.8 metre high solid brushwood fence – to which they are agreeable. Whilst this can be included as a condition of any recommendation of approval to the WAPC it is not certain such a measure would be sufficient to fully mitigate against all potential drift, especially considering the proposed children’s playground to be located within the central “village green”. Provision of further screens and/or vegetation within the site may be required.

“Chesters”

The submitted revised plans indicate a crossover access to “Chesters” Winery. It is understood that the owners of this property were in favour of a pedestrian connection only and accordingly any recommendation of approval should stipulate the connection as a pedestrian link only.

Compliance with Swan Valley Planning Act Objectives and Statement of Planning Policy No.9 “Metropolitan Centres Policy”

At the previous Council meeting of 9 April 2008 the application was deferred pending the advice of the Swan Valley Planning Committee (SVPC). This application was not considered at the SVPC meeting of 28 April 2008 as requested in Council’s resolution. The need for Council, as the determining authority on the application to receive the advice of the SVPC has effectively been superseded now that the WAPC is the determining authority.

Notwithstanding that the City is required by the Scheme objectives for the Swan Valley Rural Zone to ensure that development and use of land is compatible with the relevant planning objectives of the Swan Valley Planning Act, City staff are able to make a judgement on this unfettered by any requirement to be advised by the Swan Valley Planning Committee. The City can do so in the capacity that it is now a referral authority and no longer the determining authority for the purposes of the MRS.

The views expressed by City staff on the proposals compatibility with the Planning Objectives of Area B of the SVP Act have to date been based on the perception that, by the nature of the unconstrained retail of goods by independent vendors, allied to the scale and design of the built form, the proposal is effectively a shopping centre. Shopping centres are normally located in urban environments, that is land which is zoned “Urban” or “Central City Area” under the Metropolitan Region Scheme. The WAPC Statement of Planning Policy No.9 provides a framework for the regulation of the location and size of shopping centres, or commercial centres as they are termed, within the Perth Metropolitan Region. The Policy stipulates all local government authorities prepare and have endorsed by the WAPC a strategy that designates the location and size of such centres within their administrative jurisdiction. The City has such an adopted Commercial Strategy which was prepared in accordance with the framework of the Metropolitan Centres Policy.

Council, in its resolution on this item at the OCM of 9 April 2008, requested clarification from the WAPC as to whether the subject application should be considered within this framework but have received no advice to date other than the “call in” notice.

Therefore, proceeding on the basis of a lack of advice to the contrary, it is difficult for City staff to avoid the view that the proposal functions and appears as a shopping


centre in a rural zone. As such it would be manifestly inconsistent with the intent of a “rural” zoning category and not in keeping with rural character. Within the framework of assessment of this application the preservation of rural character is a component of a number of the listed planning objectives for Area B under the Swan Valley Planning Act. It follows therefore that the proposal should be considered inconsistent with those objectives.


RECOMMENDATION

That Council resolve to:

1) Recommend to the Western Australian Planning Commission that the application for the proposed market, arts centre and kids farm on Lot 2 (8731) West Swan Road, Henley Brook be refused for the following reasons:

a) The application is considered incompatible with Planning Objectives 3,4,5,6 and 7 of Area B of the Swan Valley Planning Act 1995.

b) That on the basis of (a) above, the application is inconsistent with Objective (d) of the Swan Valley Rural Zone, which is stated in the City’s Local Planning Scheme No.17 as:

“ensure that the development and use of land accords with planning objectives for Area B as specified in the Swan Valley Planning Act 1995”.

2) Advise the applicant and those who lodged submissions of Council's decision accordingly.

MOTION that the Council resolve to:

1) Consider the assessment of the subject application against the Western Australian Planning Commission’s Statement of Planning Policy No. 9 “Metropolitan Centres Policy” as an unresolved issue that will be properly addressed by the Commission in its consideration and determination of the application in accordance with its powers under Clause 32 of the Metropolitan Region Scheme.

2) Accordingly set aside this matter as a consideration in Council’s recommendation to the Commission on this application.

3) Consider the application is consistent with the Planning Objectives of Area B of the Swan Valley Planning Act 1995 in that the proposal provides a significant focus for tourism in the Swan Valley in a manner that is not prejudicial to existing viticultural and horticultural activities or the rural character and amenity of the locality.

4) Recommend to the Western Australian Planning Commission that the revised application for a proposed 4610m2 Market, Arts Centre and Kids Farm on Lot 2 (No.8731) West Swan Road, Henley Brook, (site plan and elevations stamp received 24 April 2008) be approved provided that the Commission is sufficiently certain that the development proposal can be serviced by an onsite effluent disposal system that can suitably dispose of the likely wastewater volume, and if so, subject to the following conditions:

(a) This approval is for markets and is limited to the display and sale of goods only from stalls by independent vendors. Services such as hairdressers, beauty therapists, health consultants and the like are prohibited to operate from the premises under the terms of this approval.


(b) The market is restricted to operate Thursday to Sunday and public holidays between the hours of 10.00am and 6.00pm.

(c) Prior to the issue of a Building Licence, the applicant is to enter into a legal agreement with the Western Australian Planning Commission and the City of Swan placing a Restrictive Covenant on the Certificate of Title of the subject lot specifying the limitations on trade and hours of operation of the development approval.

(d) Prior to the issue of a Building Licence, a landscape plan must be submitted to the City of Swan for approval. For the purpose of these conditions a detailed landscape plan shall be drawn to a scale of 1:100. Guidelines are available from the City of Swan.

(e) The applicant to provide a 1.8m high solid brushwood fence along the northern side boundary of the subject lot to the extent of the length of the vineyard on the adjoining property.

(f) The applicant is to provide options to further address the issue of spray drifts from the adjoining lot through provision of additional screen fencing and or vegetation within the Village Green area, and such options to be approved by the City of Swan prior to the issue of a Building Licence.

(g) Prior to the issue of a Building Licence a waste management plan, detailing proposed collection and disposal of bulk waste must be submitted to the City of Swan for approval.

(h) Use of the site for the purpose approved shall not commence until a Certificate of Classification is issued under Regulation 20 of the Building Regulations 1989.

(i) Provision must be made for access and facilities for use by people with disabilities in accordance with provisions of the Building Code of Australia and AS 1428.1.

(j) A total of 608 parking bays shall be provided, each measuring 5.5 x 2.5 metres, clearly marked on the ground and served by a 6 metre wide paved accessway. Where the accessway abuts a building or other barrier, a minimum width of 6.5 metres is required. Disabled bays to measure 5.5 x 3.5m, bays near obstructions to measure 5.5 x 2.8m.

(k) Vehicle access onto the site shall be restricted to that shown on the approved site plan and subject to demonstration (by application of turning templates) of sufficient manoeuvrability for bus, truck and tourist coaches.

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


(m) Landscaping, drainage, parking areas, pavement, kerbing, line marking as depicted on the approved plans shall be maintained at all times to the satisfaction of the City.

(n) All pavements on the site must be capable of accepting anticipated loadings (including accessways, parking areas, storage and hardstands). The City will not accept any responsibility for subsequent failure of any pavement.

(o) All stormwater is to be collected and contained onsite. No stormwater is to be discharged from the property into other land or reserves. Stormwater drainage plans are to be included at submission of Building Licence application and should be consistent with the Department of Water’s Stormwater Management Manual for Western Australia (2004-2007).

(p) No fluid, other than uncontaminated stormwater is to enter any stormwater drain without prior approval from the City and the Environmental Protection Authority.

(q) A gross pollutant trap must be incorporated as part of the internal drainage system.

(r) Stormwater to be designed in accordance with Council’s Policy C110.

To avoid delays and ensure your application is complete you must provide a stormwater drainage design certified by a:

• Registered Plumber; or • Civil Engineer who is either MIE or NPER registered; or • Hydraulic Consultant who is a registered member of the

Association of Hydraulic Services Consultants Australia Inc.

(s) The applicant shall submit detailed plans and specifications including the site feature survey of a licensed surveyor, levels (proposed), earthworks, drainage, crossovers, access ways, hardstands, carports, parking bays, loading bays, lighting, existing easements, pavement details, proposed service connections and compound and refuse/bulk bin areas. Such plans and specifications should be submitted with the building licence application and be in accordance with the City of Swan Property Development Design Guidelines and its relevant specifications.

(t) Refuse bin areas adequate to service the development shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City’s Principal Environmental Health Officer before the development is occupied or used.

(u) An approved effluent disposal system must be installed prior to the occupation of any building the subject of this approval.

(v) The applicant/owner shall obtain approval from the Department of Industry and Resources for the storage of Chemical/dangerous goods in accordance with the Dangerous Goods Regulations. For


further advice contact the Duty Inspector of the Explosives and Dangerous Goods Division on 9222 3333.

For goods stored underground within an Underground Water Pollution Control Area, subject to approval from the Water and Rivers Commission (Ph: 9278 0300).

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

(x) Emergency lighting design is to be prepared by a qualified electrical consultant.

(y) All crossovers must be built and maintained in accordance with City's specifications.

(z) All modifications to West Swan Road required to facilitate access to the development must be designed and constructed by a suitably qualified practicing civil/traffic engineer and approved by the City’s engineering department prior to the issue of a Building Licence. Where the road modification(s) require the removal or relocation of any infrastructure, the consent of the authority responsible for that infrastructure must be obtained. All design and construction works must be carried out by the developer at his expense.

(aa) At occupancy, the owner is responsible for the maintenance of the crossover, landscaping and reticulation in the verge.

(bb) No street tree on the verge is to be removed or relocated, subject to the City approving removal or relocation. The cost of removal is to be paid prior to the issue of a Building Licence.

(cc) The applicant is to ascertain the location and depth of any services that may interfere with this development. Any adjustment to these services required as part of this approval, must be arranged by the applicant prior to works commencing on the site. Any adjustment must be approved by the relevant service authorities and will be at the applicant's expense.

(dd) Any access to link to the adjoining property to the south shall be restricted to a pedestrian link only, no vehicular access is permitted.

Advice Notes: To be provided separately to the WAPC.

5) The applicant and those who lodged a submission to be advised of Council’s decision accordingly.

6) Record that the reason for changing the Recommendation is because of the reduced size of the proposal and the fact that the matter now requires determination by the WAPC. Council’s support is predicated upon further matters being resolved to the WAPC’s satisfaction.

(Cr Congerton - Cr Marino)


THE MOTION WAS PUT TO THE VOTE AND LOST (5/7)

MOTION that the Recommendation be adopted.

(Cr Jones - Cr Lucas)

RESOLVED (8/4) TO:

1) Recommend to the Western Australian Planning Commission that the application for the proposed market, arts centre and kids farm on Lot 2 (8731) West Swan Road, Henley Brook be refused for the following reasons:

a) The application is considered incompatible with Planning Objectives 3,4,5,6 and 7 of Area B of the Swan Valley Planning Act 1995.

b) That on the basis of (a) above, the application is inconsistent with Objective (d) of the Swan Valley Rural Zone, which is stated in the City’s Local Planning Scheme No.17 as:

“ensure that the development and use of land accords with planning objectives for Area B as specified in the Swan Valley Planning Act 1995”.

2) Advise the applicant and those who lodged submissions of Council's decision accordingly.

Cr Gregorini requested that votes of members be recorded:

For: Councillors McNamara, Haynes, Cheung, Jones, Lucas, Wainwright, Bailey and Croy

Against: Mayor Cr Gregorini, Councillors Congerton, Alban and Marino

Cr Zannino returned to the Chamber at 6.17pm.

15.1 PROPOSED MARKETS - LOT 2 (NO. 8731) WEST SWAN ROAD, HENLEY BROOK ...€¦ · 15.1 PROPOSED...

Documents

Transcript of 15.1 PROPOSED MARKETS - LOT 2 (NO. 8731) WEST SWAN ROAD, HENLEY BROOK ...€¦ · 15.1 PROPOSED...