AN error in a City of Swan officer report has sparked questions about the proposed North Ellenbrook West locality, with concerns raised over incorrect zoning information presented to councillors.

The February 11 ordinary council meeting item was about giving a name to a new suburb area named North Ellenbrook West.

While most of the area fell within the North Ellenbrook West district structure plan (DSP), three additional properties, Lots 108, 1452 and part of Lot 101, were also included within the proposed locality boundary despite not forming part of the DSP.

Resident Jan Zeck told council the report inferred that three parcels of land had already been rezoned for future urban and public open space use.

“I had doubts about the zoning of these lots,” she said.

Ms Zeck said confirmation from the city’s manager of statutory planning showed the lots were still zoned general rural, were never the subject of a rezoning action and were not included in Amendment 1 to the structure plan.

This meant they were not rezoned for urban development, with Ms Zeck claiming the report gave the opposite impression.

“How did this situation eventuate?” she said.

City of Swan planning and development executive director Leon Van der Linde said the land to the east of the DSP was never part of the planning for the area.

He said references to the lots being included in Amendment 1 came from documentation submitted by the proponents of the locality name change.

“That information comes from the proponents,” he said.

When asked why the lots were included within the proposed locality boundary, Mr Van der Linde said the inclusion was put forward by the developers and their reasons were “known to them”.

Ms Zeck said the issue went beyond the naming of a suburb.

“The council along with the residents and ratepayers of the city rely on reports to council being accurate, comprehensive and truthful,” she said.

“If part of the information before councillors is incorrect, that is no basis for sound decision-making.”

She questioned how councillors and the community could “trust and rely on the information that the city is presenting” and asked whether the item would be withdrawn and corrected.

Ms Zeck also raised environmental concerns relating to the properties and said environmental issues were frequently incompletely addressed in planning reports.

She said officers should not “cherry pick” which issues are included in reports and needed to ensure balanced and comprehensive assessments, particularly where biodiversity and black cockatoo habitat may be affected.

“City officers’ responsibility is to provide accurate, comprehensive and balanced information to council and not just regurgitate proponents material,” Ms Zeck said.

Councillor Catalano also voiced concerns about the standard of information presented to council, noting councillors rely on officer reports to base their decisions.

Mr Van der Linde told council it was open to councillors to recommend excluding land from the proposed locality boundary if they determined it necessary.

No formal motion to withdraw the item was moved at the meeting.

The City of Swan was contacted for comment.