CITY OF STIRLING

MINUTES

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL
11 DECEMBER 2001

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM SUBJECT/LOCATION/NAME PAGE

ITEM SUBJECT/LOCATION/NAME PAGE

ITEM SUBJECT/LOCATION/NAME PAGE

ITEM SUBJECT/LOCATION/NAME PAGE

ITEM SUBJECT/LOCATION/NAME PAGE

ITEM SUBJECT/LOCATION/NAME PAGE

* - Indicates Separate Attachments submitted with Agenda.

@ - Indicates Councillor Interest.

MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CIVIC PLACE, STIRLING ON TUESDAY 11 DECEMBER 2001

Present:

Mayor

Councillor D C Vallelonga JP

 

Deputy

Councillor B R Ham

 

Councillors

D Boothman, J M Camilleri OAM JP, T W Clarey, J Copley JP, R J Daniel, T E Pickard, S Popovski, P L Rose JP, A A Spagnolo JP (from 4.07pm), W M Stewart, T J Tyzack (from 4.15pm) and R M Willox JP

 

Officers

Acting Chief Executive Officer - R A Constantine, Executive Manager Works - R Moody, Executive Manager Development - S Johnson, Executive Manager Community Services - T Holland, Executive Manager Corporate & Customer Services - C Watts, Manager Administrative Services - F Bentley, Manager Budget and Strategic Planning - R Watts, Communications Manager - P Beard and Senior Administration Officer - C Evans

 

Public

8

 

Press

1

DECLARATION OF OPENING OF MEETING

The Mayor declared the ordinary meeting of Council on 11 December 2001 open at 4.03pm.

At 4.07pm Councillor Spagnolo arrived at the meeting during consideration of Item 1.

ITEM: 1 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

1.1 Mr and Mrs V and C Cikara, 62 Porter Street, Gwelup

RE: 60 Porter Street, Gwelup

Could you please confirm the following:

Q1 Did the City of Stirling issue a building approval that included the removal of the existing dividing fence?

Q2 Is the building licence in accordance with the Minister of Planning determination of 21 February 2001?

Q3 Is the retaining wall and proposed parapet wall 50mm from the common boundary in accordance with the Minister of Planning determination of 21 February 2001?

Q4 Has a building licence been issued for the retaining wall for the difference in ground level in excess of 600mm to ensure a structurally sound and safe retaining wall and keeping with the principles of Council policy?

Q5 Is the height of the proposed parapet wall much the same height as a normal 1.8 metre high fence as stated in the Minister for Planning's determination of 21 February 2001?

Q6 Does the height of the proposed parapet wall include the height of the gutter?

Q7 That no footings have been approved on the common boundary or to encroach on our property.

A The Acting Chief Executive Officer advised a written response would be provided.

1.2 Mr A Willemsen, 16 Morgans Street, Tuart Hill

RE: St Kierans Primary School's Parking challenges

Q1 To Ward Councillors: How many of the 9 remaining on-street parking bays in Tyler Street plus the 18 new right-angle to street bays in Morgans will be for teacher/staff car parking and how many will be for 15 minutes parent pick-up and set down (Totals please i.e. 12 teacher and 15 parent)?

Q2 To Ward Councillors: What happens if the survey failed to be delivered to the reported area of the survey i.e. both Hector Street and Myers Street? (Repeat of Q1: Council meeting on 27 November, not answered, copy attached) Asked "What happens"?

A The Acting Chief Executive Officer advised a written response would be provided.

1.3 Mr W Nisbett, 20A Morgans Street, Tuart Hill

RE: St Kierans Primary School Parking and Traffic Management

Q1 Will these questions and subsequent response be recorded in the minutes of this Council meeting?

Q2 What alterations/changes have the City Road Traffic/Engineers made to the final plan, from the original concept plan, drawn up by a private consultant, and submitted by St Kierans Primary School?

OR

Is this final plan, virtually the same as that originally submitted to Council by St Kierans?

Q3 Prior to the vote on this resolution, how many of the Councillors at the previous meeting (27 Nov 2001) had actually seen:

a. A copy of the final road traffic plan design/drawings?
b. Had actually visited the school site at Tyler and Morgans Street?

Q4 Why has the Council adopted a `cavalier' approach to the expenditure of $200,000 of ratepayers funds when:

a. The traffic design engineer at the last Council meeting, when asked twice about the viability of these roadwork proposals actually fixing the problem, responded with:

"I/we think the plan will work", and "I/We believe it should work".

b. In fact the report forwarded to the Technical Services Committee on 20 November 2001 from the Executive Manager Works, states under the Conclusion Number 2:

"The proposals developed for St Kierans should resolve a long standing issue which cannot be resolved without some level of intervention"

I would have thought that the Council should expect a more positive and professional response from their Road Traffic experts to give some guarantee/assurance that this plan is actually going to remedy the safety, parking and traffic problems, before agree to spend $200,000 of ratepayers funds.

Q5 If in the new year, when this Council plan/solution actually fails to resolve the Safety, Parking and Traffic problems associated with both St Kierans and Servite College, will the Mayor and Council members present guarantee to reinstate all the modified roadworks back to their original configuration (specifically Morgans Street and Tyler Street)? If not, why not?

A The Acting Chief Executive Officer advised a written response would be provided.

ITEM: 2 APOLOGIES AND LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Councillor T J Tyzack (late).

ITEM: 3 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

3.1 ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL - 27 NOVEMBER 2001

Moved Councillor Spagnolo, seconded Councillor Rose

The motion was put and declared CARRIED.

ITEM: 4 BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES AND NOT APPEARING SEPARATELY IN THE AGENDA

NIL.

ITEM: 5 APPLICATION FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE

NIL.

ITEM: 6 MAYORAL BUSINESS

NIL.

ITEM: 7 BUSINESS LEFT OVER FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING

NIL.

ITEM: 8 QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE WITHOUT DISCUSSION

NIL.

ITEM: 9 PETITIONS