City of Canning Minutes – SMRC RRRC WCF Odour Issue – 27 APRIL 2011
4. DECLARATION OF MEMBERS’ AND OFFICERS’ INTERESTS
Declaration of Interest
Cr Elliott PD-127-11 – Odour Register – Regional Resource Recovery Centre – Canning Vale
Nature of Interest: My daughter lives in the area affected by the odour.
*******************************************
Declaration of Interest
Cr Elliott CF-012-11 – Urban Regeneration Tour
Nature of Interest: He is directly affected.
Cr Elliott sought a ruling on his interest on the item of business on the grounds that his daughter
lives in the area affected by the odour. Cr Elliott withdrew from the Council Chambers at
6.02pm.
MOVED Cr Barry, Seconded Cr Mason, that the interest declared by Cr Elliott in item
PD-127-11 – Odour Register – Regional Resource Recovery Centre – Canning Vale is
common to a significant number of electors or ratepayers.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
For: The Mayor, Crs Barry, Mason, Olsen, Dowsett, Wheaton, and Boylen.
Cr Elliott returned to his chair at 6.03pm and was informed of Council’s decision.
————————————————————————————————————————————————-
5.2 QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC GALLERY AT THE ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING ON 27 APRIL 2011
Mr Rod Petersen,
Question 1
Directed to Cr Barry, being the last member of City of Canning who sat on the SMRC, the SMRC CEO over the past eight years has not been able to fix the odour problem, has not been able to effectively engage the local community affected by the odour, and the treasury corporation loan he has overseen has blown out from $38m in 2006/07 to $53m this year. Would Cr Barry be able to indicate to us what the CEO’s KPIs are and if he is aware of what the SMRC Council believe he had achieved in that time and I understand that the CEO’s salary was discussed in private and I understand if Cr Barry cannot the question but if he could I would be
very interested in finding out what those KPIs what the CEO’s achievements were.
Answer: Mayor asked Cr Barry whether he was prepared to do so. Cr Barry advised Mr Petersen was right that was an item held in confidence, so I am unable to enlighten him in any way.
Question: Mr Mayor, when the City of Canning were represented amongst the SMRC, a West Australian Treasury Corporation Loan was taken out, would the City have a copy of any realisation plan that may have been submitted prior to the approval of that loan and if so, is that something that is a public document and could be passed on? The reason I ask if that I would be very keen based on SMRC performance over recent years with this apparent strategy of misinformation put out there to see what they put forward to the State Government to get their loan as a I have the loan has blown out to $53m today, and they don’t seem to be able to pay.
Answer: The Mayor from my memory and cannot recall and with the two Councillors here with me at the time whether we have seen that type of documents, but the loan was not taken out by the SMRC but was taken out or guaranteed by the partners which was Fremantle, Cockburn, Melville, Canning, East Fremantle and the other two participants which have not contributed anything, Rockingham and Kwinana.
Question:I have been reading the minutes of the City of Canning Meetings over the last few months, and I note on a number of occasions a Mr Gleeson has asked you about the circumstances leading up to the SMRC approval for the construction of Resource Material Facility which burned down some time ago having to go before the State Administrative Tribunal and believes that the City
of Canning may have been responsible for that delay and like Cr Olsen I am a member the Jandakot Airport Consultative Group and after the last meeting Cr Robartson from Melville spoke to me outside in the carpark and indicated he had received information from the SMRC CEO, who also advised that the City of Canning had also caused the delay. I would suggest there has been misinformation coming from the SMRC over a number of years regarding how productive they are and some other items which are not accurate, so Mr Mayor would be willing to explain the circumstances leading to the matter appearing before SAT if in fact it was the SMRC that generated the need for it to go before SAT.
Answer: Mayor very briefly, it is a long issue and I have already explained to Mr Gleeson, the way that the State Administrative Tribunal works and the SMRC has lodged its plan to the City like every other proponent has lodged with this Council and if Council has not dealt with that particular application within 60 days they have got every right to take the matter out of the Council hands
and go to the State Administrative Tribunal. In relation to the SMRC, when the application was lodged, I believe that there were in complete information that the assessment of the application was not able to be carried out and the Council, our City and requested further information on this matter and seeing this has taken time, a period of 60 days, the SMRC decided to take the matter out of the City’s hands and go to the State Administrative Tribunal, and if you read the Chairman’s at SAT findings was that the City of Canning has every right to ask for that information because at the end of the hearing, he allowed out of the sixteen issues or items that
this City brought up fifteen of them was allowed to stand apart from one which was the sixteen item. I have explained that to Mr Gleeson, but obviously Mr Gleeson probably does not understand what I have been telling him, this is all on record and it can be viewed and I would be surprised from what you tell me that Cr Robartson is not aware of it and just listens to the CEO and this is a matter of public information it is there for everyone to read or see. We can provide that and if go onto the SAT website you can download it and everybody is aware of it, so we were not responsible one little bit. Thankyou Mr Mayor, it is not the first time the SMRC has supplied incorrect or incomplete information. Mayor, I am still waiting to get some of my answers from a long time ago.
————————————————————————————————————————————————-
13.4 EXECUTIVE – PROPERTY ASSETS & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
PD-125-11 PROPOSED OFFICE ADDITIONS AND CHANGE OF USE TO GENERAL
INDUSTRY AT 48-50 BAILE ROAD (LOT 101), CANNING VALE APPLICANT: G WHEELER
OWNER: N S DUTTON, A J MORGAN, J M M STAMMERS, MAFFS PTY LTD, WESTCOAST PTY LTD, JOSHRICH PTY LTD, EASTERN DISTRICTS ABATTOIRS PTY LTD. WAIROA HOLDINGS PTY LTD, LEOTTA NOMINEES PTY LTD, STAMCO PROPERTY PTY LTD AND GIBAUD NOMINEES PTY LTD
(OCM: 27.04.2011; File: 48-50 Baile Road {Lot 101}; Lodged: 14.12.2010;
Processing Days: 76; Serial: 15/13854); l:paed120/eg
From: Executive Property Assets and Economic Development ID: 95
Following a comment from Cr Olsen on whose has authority, it was:
MOVED Cr Mason, Seconded Cr Wheaton that:
(a) Council RESOLVE, pursuant to Subclause 2.3.9 of the City Zoning Scheme (Town Planning Scheme No. 40) to approve office additions and change of use to general industry at 48-50 Baile Road (Lot 101), Canning Vale subject to the following conditions:
The proposed development is to comply in all respects with the submitted plans approved on 27 April 2011 and stamped accordingly.
(ii) The facility shall not accept or handle processed or enriched uranium for analysis.
(iii) Stormwater from all roofed and paved areas must be collected and discharged to Council drain via the existing connection point established on site. Stormwater must not affect or be allowed to flow onto or into any other property. Drainage systems must be in accordance with the BCA and AS/NZS 3500.3.2 or Section 5 of AS/NZS 3500.5.
(iv) The development being connected to the Sewer, in accordance with the requirements of the Water Corporation of Western Australia.
(v) Landscaping to be provided and maintained in accordance with the landscape plan approved on 27 April 2011 and stamped accordingly.
(vi) All street trees located in verge areas adjoining the subject lot/s are to be retained and protected, unless removal is approved by the Manager, Parks and Streetscape Services.
(vii) The owner/developer must obtain the approval of the City’s Parks and Streetscape Services for the removal or relocation of any street trees affected by the development. The owner must engage an appropriately qualified contractor for the removal or replacement of any street trees. Any contractor engaged to remove, relocate or replace street trees must have and maintain a public liability insurance policy with a sum insured of at least A$10 million and undertake a check of underground services prior to
the removal of any tree stump.
(viii) All hydrocarbons, oils, paints and chemical liquids which are stored onsite and which are greater than 50 litres in quantity, shall be stored within an area which
a) is designed to contain at least 25% of the total volume of the vessels stored within the compound
b) provided with a flooring that is chemically resistant to the chemicals stored within it and is of hardstand construction c) floor to be graded to an impervious sump and prevents the
entry and collection of rainwater, unless the hydrocarbons, oils, paints and
chemical liquids are stored in reinforced intermediate bulk containers.
(ix) All external openings to the building are to be provided with bunding at a height of 25mm or alternatively install cut-off drains (spoon drains) to the floor at all external openings which are connected internally to a below ground impervious sump at a minimum size of 600mm by 600mm provided with a pump out point.
(x) All wastewater produced by the activities onsite must be disposed of to the Sewer, with approval of the Water Corporation of Western Australia.
(xi) Odour, fumes and visible smoke emitted from the premises must not interfere with the health, welfare, convenience, comfort or amenity of any person who is not on the premises.
(b) Applicant be advised of (a) above.
*******************************************
PD-127-11 ODOUR REGISTER – REGIONAL RESOURCE RECOVERY CENTRE – CANNING VALE
(OCM: 27.04.2011; File: ECH/2/18); l:paed123/eg
From: Executive Property Assets and Economic Development ID: 69
Following questions by Councillors, it was requested that future reports include the level of intensity and nature be included in the report. It was then;
Moved Cr Barry, seconded Cr Mason that:
Formatted: Not Highlight
Report PD-127-11 Odour Register – Regional Resource Recovery Centre, Canning Vale, be received.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
For: The Mayor, Crs Barry, Elliott, Mason, Olsen, Dowsett, Wheaton, and Boylen MOVED Cr Barry, Seconded Cr Elliott, that the recommendation contained within the Report of the Executive Property Assets and Economic Development, No 128 be adopted.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
For: The Mayor, Crs Barry, Elliott, Mason, Olsen, Dowsett, Wheaton, and Boylen
