COB-RGB

 

 

 

 

 

Council  Agenda

 

 

 

9 July 2014

 

 

 

 

 

ALL INFORMATION AVAILABLE IN VARIOUS FORMATS ON REQUEST

 

 

 


CITY OF BUSSELTON

MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDA – 9 July 2014

 

 

 

TO:                  THE MAYOR AND COUNCILLORS

 

 

NOTICE is given that a meeting of the Council  will be held in the the Council Chambers, Administration Building, Southern Drive, Busselton on Wednesday, 9 July 2014, commencing at 5.30pm.

 

Your attendance is respectfully requested.

 

 

 

Mike Archer

 

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

 

30 June 2014


CITY OF BUSSELTON

Agenda FOR THE Council  MEETING TO BE HELD ON 9 July 2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

ITEM NO.                                        SUBJECT                                                                                                                              PAGE NO.

1....... Declaration of Opening and Announcement of Visitors. 5

2....... Attendance. 5

Apologies. 5

Approved Leave of Absence. 5

3....... Prayer. 5

4....... Public Question Time. 5

Response to Previous Questions Taken on Notice. 5

Public Question Time. 5

5....... Announcements Without Discussion.. 5

Announcements by the Presiding Member. 5

Announcements by other Members at the invitation of the Presiding Member. 5

6....... Application for Leave of Absence. 5

7....... Petitions and Presentations. 5

8....... Disclosure Of Interests. 5

9....... Confirmation and Receipt Of Minutes. 5

Previous Council Meetings. 5

9.1          Minutes of the Council  held on 25 June 2014. 5

Committee Meetings. 6

9.2          Minutes of a meeting of the Meelup Regional Park Management Committee held on 10 June 2014. 6

9.3          Minutes of a meeting of the Policy and Legislation Committee held on 19 June 2014. 6

10..... Reports of Committee. 7

10.1        Policy and Legislation Committee - 19/06/2014 - LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROPERTY LOCAL LAW DETERMINATION – HORSE EXERCISE AREAS. 7

11..... Planning and Development Services Report. 22

11.1        PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF BUSSELTON FORESHORE MASTER PLAN AND ADOPTION OF DEVELOPMENT GUIDE PLAN – SPECIAL PURPOSE (BUSSELTON FORESHORE) ZONE, CONSIDERATION FOR ADOPTION OF FINAL APPROVAL. 22

12..... Engineering and Work Services Report. 56

12.1        AWARD OF TENDER RFT07/14 – QUARRY PRODUCTS. 56

13..... Community and Commercial Services Report. 61

Nil

14..... Finance and Corporate Services Report. 61

Nil

15..... Chief Executive Officer's Report. 61

15.1        COUNCILLORS' INFORMATION BULLETIN.. 61

16..... Motions of which Previous Notice has been Given.. 76

Nil

17..... Confidential Reports. 76

Nil

18..... Questions from Members. 76

19..... Public Question Time. 76

20..... Next Meeting Date. 76

21..... Closure. 76

 


Council                                                                                      5                                                                            9 July 2014

 

1.               Declaration of Opening and Announcement of Visitors

2.               Attendance 

Apologies

 

Nil

Approved Leave of Absence

Councillor Gordon Bleechmore

Councillor Grant Henley

3.               Prayer

4.               Public Question Time

Response to Previous Questions Taken on Notice 

Public Question Time

5.               Announcements Without Discussion

Announcements by the Presiding Member 

Announcements by other Members at the invitation of the Presiding Member

6.               Application for Leave of Absence

7.               Petitions and Presentations 

8.               Disclosure Of Interests

 

9.               Confirmation and Receipt Of Minutes 

Previous Council Meetings

9.1             Minutes of the Council  held on 25 June 2014

Recommendation

That the Minutes of the Council  Meeting held 25 June 2014 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

 


 

Committee Meetings

9.2             Minutes of a meeting of the Meelup Regional Park Management Committee held on 10 June 2014

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

1)         That the minutes of a meeting of the Meelup Regional Park Management Committee      held on 10 June 2014 be received.

 

2)         That the Council notes the outcomes of the Meelup Regional Park Management Committee meeting held on 10 June 2014 being:

            

             a)            The Committee were advised by the Dunsborough and Districts Country                                              Club that it no longer planned to use Meelup Regional Park for the Down                               South Mountain Bike Festival 3hr MTB Endurance Race. Therefore, the                                             Committee was not required to consider the Item.

 

             b)            The Committee received the Meelup Regional Park Environment Officer’s                          report.

 

 

 

 

9.3             Minutes of a meeting of the Policy and Legislation Committee held on 19 June 2014

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

1)         That The minutes of a meeting of the Policy and Legislation Committee held on 19             June 2014 be received.

 

2)         That the Council notes the outcomes of the Policy and Legislation Committee      meeting held on 19 June 2014 being:

            

             a)            The Local Government Property Local Law Determination – Horse Exercise                         Areas Item is presented for Council consideration at Item 10.1 of this agenda.

            

             b)            The Review of Delegations Item was presented as a Late Item for Council                            consideration and at the 25 June Council meeting in order to complete the                           required statutory review.

 

 

 


Council                                                                                      7                                                                             9 July 2014

10.             Reports of Committee

10.1           Policy and Legislation Committee - 19/06/2014 - LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROPERTY LOCAL LAW DETERMINATION – HORSE EXERCISE AREAS

SUBJECT INDEX:

Animal Management

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

A City of shared, vibrant and well planned places that provide for diverse activity and strengthen our social connections.

BUSINESS UNIT:

Environmental Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Ranger and Emergency Services

REPORTING OFFICER:

Ranger and Emergency Services Coordinator - Dean Freeman

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Planning and Development Services - Paul Needham

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Horse Exercise Area Wonnerup West

Attachment b    Horse Exercise Area Wonnerup East

Attachment c    Horse Exercise Area Anniebrook

Attachment d   Submission Schedule  

 

This item was considered by the Policy and Legislation Committee at its meeting on 19 June 2014, the recommendations from which have been included in this report. 

 

PRÉCIS

 

On 9 April 2014 Council resolved to advertise for public comment a notice of intention to make determinations pursuant to the City’s Local Government Property Local Law 2010, to enable horses to be exercised on sections of beach at Wonnerup and Anniebrook.

 

This report considers the public submissions received in response to the notice of intention and recommends that Council proceed with the making of the Determination to allow horses to be exercised on a section of beach to the east of the Wonnnerup boat ramp and on a section of beach at Anniebrook. It is also recommended that Council not proceed with the making of a determination to allow horses to be exercised on the beach (being portion of Reserve 5217 and Unallocated Crown Land) from Wonnerup Boat Ramp, westerly to McCormack Street.

 

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

In January 2011, Council resolved (resolution C1101/020) to make determinations under the City’s Local Government Property Local Law to enable horses to be exercised on the following beaches within the district.

 

a)    That the exercising of horses, including water therapy, be permitted on the beach (being portion reserve 5217 and Unallocated Crown Land) from Wonnerup Boat Ramp (west) to McCormack Street excluding sand dunes and vegetated areas.

 

b)    That the exercising of horses, including water therapy, be permitted on the beach (being portion Reserve 39193 and Unallocated Crown Land) adjacent to Forrest Beach Road, north east, to the Shire of Capel border as bounded by the high water mark to the water’s edge, excluding sand dunes and/or vegetated areas.

 

Following a review of Council’s determinations relating to horse exercise areas, on 9 April 2014, Council resolved (resolution C1404/089) to give local public notice of its intention to make Determinations under the Local Government Property Local Law to allow horses to be exercised at the following locations –

 

a)    The beach (being portion of Reserve 5217 and Unallocated Crown Land) from Wonnerup Boat Ramp, westerly to McCormack Street excluding sand dunes and or vegetated areas (refer to Attachment A);

 

b)    The beach (being portion Reserve 39193 and Unallocated Crown Land) adjacent to Forrest Beach Road from the Wonnerup boat ramp east, to the Shire of Capel border excluding sand dunes and/or vegetated areas (refer to Attachment B); and

 

c)    The beach (being portion of Reserve 23572 west of Station Gully drain to the eastern boundary of Reserve 29844 for a distance of approximately 1.2 kilometres excluding sand dunes and/or vegetated areas (refer to Attachment C) .

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

The procedure for making a determination is outlined in the City’s Property Local Law 2010 (clause 2.2), and includes a requirement to give 21 days local public notice of Council’s intention to make the determination.

 

If submissions are received in response to the public advertising of Council’s intention to make a determination, the City’s Property Local Law 2010 indicates that Council is to consider the submissions and decide whether or not to amend the proposed determination; or not to continue with the proposed determination.

 

If the Council decides to amend the proposed determination, it is to give local public notice—

a)    of the effect of the amendments; and

b)    that the proposed determination has effect as a determination on and from the date of publication.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

There are no plans or policies especially relevant to the consideration of this matter.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

Subject to Council making the proposed determinations, there may be some financial implications associated with installation of signage at the proposed horses exercise areas and trail path access to the beach at the Anniebrook. These costs are however minimal and can be accommodated within existing operating budgets.

 

Access to the proposed Anniebrook horse exercise area is via a single lane causeway over Toby Inlet adjacent to Station Gully Drain, to a relatively small car park area for accommodating vehicles and horse floats.

 

There is no proposal to upgrade the access road or car park, however, the access trail from the car park to the beach will require the installation of some low level post and rail fencing and bollards to be installed to delineate the access trail to the beach and to protect the fore dune vegetation and this expenditure can be accommodated within existing operating budgets.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

This matter is considered relevant to the following objective of the Strategic Community Plan 2013:

 

Key Goal Area 2 – Well Planned, Vibrant and Active Places – Community Objective 2.2 – A City of shared, vibrant and well planned places that provide for diverse activity and strengthen our social connections

 

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the officer recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk assessment framework. The assessment sought to identify ‘downside’ risks only rather than ‘upside’ risks and where the risk, following implementation of controls has been identified is medium, or greater. No such risks were identified.

 

CONSULTATION

 

The City of Busselton Property Local Law 2010, clause 2.2 empowers the Council to make a determination to regulate various activities on land managed by the City of Busselton and includes a requirement to give 21 days local public notice of Council’s intention to make a determination. 

 

Notice of intent to make a determination for the proposed horse exercise areas was advertised in a local newspaper and on the City’s website. In addition to this public advertising, 153 land owners in close proximity to the proposed horse exercise areas were also notified in writing.

 

The public submission period closed on 9 May 2014 and 49 submissions were received. Details of the submissions received are included with this report as Attachment D.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

The submission summary indicates 32 objections and 8 submissions in support of the proposed horse exercise area from the Wonnerup boat ramp west to McCormack Street. The main reason outlined in the objections related to public safety and health concerns and potential damage to fore dune vegetation.

 

The submission comments also indicate general support for the use of the beach to the east of the Wonnerup boat ramp to the Shire of Capel boundary for the exercising of horses however, there are 5 submissions expressing objection to the use this section of beach for the exercising of horses. There are also 5 submissions in support and 2 objections to the proposed horse exercise area at Anniebrook.

 

Given the number of objections to the proposed determination to allow horses to be exercised on the beach (being portion of Reserve 5217 and Unallocated Crown Land) from Wonnerup Boat Ramp, westerly to McCormack Street excluding sand dunes and or vegetated areas, it is recommended that Council not continue with this proposed determination.

 

It is further recommended that Council pursuant to the City of Busselton Local Government Property Local Law 2010, make the following Determinations to allow horses to be exercised, including water therapy, at the following locations ‐

 

a)    the beach (being portion Reserve 39193 and Unallocated Crown Land) adjacent to Forrest Beach Road from the Wonnerup boat ramp east, to the Shire of Capel border excluding sand dunes and/or vegetated areas; and

 

b)    the beach (being portion of Reserve 23572 west of Station Gully drain to the eastern boundary of Reserve 29844)for a distance of approximately 1.2 kilometres excluding sand dunes and/or vegetated areas.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The exercising of horses using coastal areas and ocean is an established practice within the City district and a determination to designate areas for this purpose is recommended.

OPTIONS

 

Council may choose not to make determinations regarding Horse Exercise Areas. The effect of this decision would be that there would be no areas of public land within the City on which horses could be exercised.

               

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF RECOMMENDATION

 

If the Officer recommendation is adopted by the Council, then this determination will have effect from the date of publication of a notice to that effect. That will occur within one month of a resolution consistent with the officer recommendation.

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council -

 

1.            Pursuant to the City of Busselton Local Government Property Local Law 2010, make the following Determinations to allow horses to be exercised, including water therapy, at the following locations:

 

a.             the beach being portion of Reserve 39193 and unallocated Crown land) adjacent                Forrest Beach Road, north east, to the Shire of Capel boundary excluding sand dunes       and/or vegetated areas; and

 

b.            the beach(being portion of Reserve 23572 west of Station Gully drain to the eastern         boundary of Reserve 29844) for a distance of approximately 1.2 kilometres excluding           sand dune sand/or vegetated area.

2.            Not continue with the making of the proposed Determination to allow horses to be          exercised on the beach (being portion of Reserve 5217 and Unallocated Crown Land) from              Wonnerup Boat Ramp, westerly to McCormack Street excluding sand dunes and or vegetated            areas.

 

 

Note:    Because the  section of beach between McCormack Street and the mouth of the Wonnerup Inlet comprises Unallocated Crown Land, Reserve 5217 and Reserve 385, the Officer Recommendation 2 was amended to include reserve 385,  with all of the  beach between the Wonnerup Boat Ramp and the mouth of the inlet as the area where horses are no longer permitted to be exercised.

 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council -

 

1.            Pursuant to the City of Busselton Local Government Property Local Law 2010, make the following Determinations to allow horses to be exercised, including water therapy, at the following locations:

 

a.             the beach being portion of Reserve 39193 and unallocated Crown land) adjacent                Forrest Beach Road, north east, to the Shire of Capel boundary excluding sand dunes       and/or vegetated areas; and

b.            the beach(being portion of Reserve 23572 west of Station Gully drain to the eastern         boundary of Reserve 29844) for a distance of approximately 1.2 kilometres excluding           sand dune sand/or vegetated area.

2.         Not continue with the making of proposed Determination to allow horses to be exercised on the beach (being portion of Reserve 5217 and Unallocated Crown Land )     from Wonnerup Boat Ramp,westerly to McCormack Street and inclusive of Reserve 385, sand dunes and or vegetated areas.

 

 

 


Council                                                                                      11                                                                                                             9 July 2014

10.1                             Policy and Legislation Committee - 19/06/2014 - LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROPERTY LOCAL LAW DETERMINATION – HORSE EXERCISE AREAS   

Attachment a          Horse Exercise Area Wonnerup West

PDF Creator


Council                                                                                      13                                                                                                             9 July 2014

10.1                             Policy and Legislation Committee - 19/06/2014 - LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROPERTY LOCAL LAW DETERMINATION – HORSE EXERCISE AREAS   

Attachment b          Horse Exercise Area Wonnerup East

PDF Creator


Council                                                                                      15                                                                                                             9 July 2014

10.1                             Policy and Legislation Committee - 19/06/2014 - LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROPERTY LOCAL LAW DETERMINATION – HORSE EXERCISE AREAS   

Attachment c          Horse Exercise Area Anniebrook

PDF Creator


Council                                                                                      21                                                                                                             9 July 2014

10.1                             Policy and Legislation Committee - 19/06/2014 - LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROPERTY LOCAL LAW DETERMINATION – HORSE EXERCISE AREAS   

Attachment d          Submission Schedule

 

Submission Number

ADDRESS

Nature of Submission

Submission

Officer Comment

GOVT AUTHORITIES

 

 

COMMUNITY GROUPS

 

PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS

1

 Layman Road, Wonnerup

Objection

Oppose Wonnerup West

Concerns over increased excrement from both dogs and horses posing health risk.

Increased traffic and litter.

Proposed limit Wonnerup East to before 9am.

Recommend horse exercise areas be limited to low use beach areas to avoid health risk, environmental impact and user conflicts.

 

2

 

Support

Good use of the beach

Comment noted

3

 Estuary View Drive, Wonnerup

Objection

Limit Wonnerup West to no further than Captain Baudin Reserve.

Reduction in usable area for residents.

Suggest off road car park separating horse area and beach area is long overdue.

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

 

No additional formal beach access proposed.

4

Wonnerup

Support

Already lots of dog excrement, increased excrement inevitable with horses too.

Comment noted

5

Stevens Street, Mundaring

Objection

Objection to Wonnerup West area.

It’s a family beach – adding horses would be a conflicting use.

Plenty of area in Wonnerup East

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

6

PO Box Busselton

Objection

Objection to Wonnerup West, Wonnerup East no objection.

Conflicting use of horses and children.

Already less beach area due to Port Geographe development.

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

7

Andon Link, Yalyalup

Objection

Objection to all areas.

People should take priority over horses.

Horse owners should exercise their horses on their own properties.

Comment noted

8

 Keel Retreat, Busselton

Objection

Opposed to Wonnerup West area.

Already less beach area due to Port Geographe development.

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

9

Layman Rd, Wonnerup

Objection

Opposed to Wonnerup West area.

Concerned about beach degradation.

Risk management a concern for family safety

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

10

Keel Retreat, Geographe

Objection

Opposed to Wonnerup West.

Too many conflicting uses

Already less beach area due to Port Geographe development.

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

11

Keel Retreat, Geographe

Objection

We would be very disappointed if the Beach from Wonnerup Boat Ramp to McCormack Street were to be used by Horses. It is one of the few beaches in this area accessible by us within walking distance that can be used without worry of vehicles or horses.  I vote NO to this proposal 

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

12

Anchor View, Geogprahe

Objection

Oppose to Wonnerup West

Only beach accessible for local residents

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

13

 Mainsail Street, Geographe

Objection

Opposed to Wonnerup West.

No area for children to play

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

14

 

 

Proposed Wonnerup West exercise area to stop at Captain Baudin Reserve.

Unsafe to use beach with horses running on it.

Needs to be some area free of horses for people to utilise. 

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

15

PO Box Capel

 

Objection

Opposed to Wonnerup East area.

There is already a dog exercise area- dogs and horses don’t mix.

Beaches shouldn’t be used for business.

Conflict of uses (fishing, swimming, horses.

Concerns with safety and increased accidents.

Horse excrement and people cleaning out horse floats a health hazard.

Public safety a concern, specifically insurance.

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

16

 Layman Road, Wonnerup

Objection

Objection to Wonnerup West area.

It’s a family beach – adding horses would be a conflicting use.

Plenty of area in Wonnerup East

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

17

 Estuary View Drive, Wonnerup

Objection

Opposed to Wonnerup West

Already less beach area due to Port Geographe development. Should not become overrun with horses.

Will impact on revegetation. 

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

18

 Layman Road, Wonnerup

Objection

Opposed to Wonnerup West.

Property devaluations.

Conflict with the existing dog beach.

Health concerns with increased excrement.

Already less beach area due to Port Geographe development.

A conflict of between people and horses.

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

19

 Layman Road, Wonnerup

Objection

Oppose Wonnerup West area only.

Conflict between people and horses.

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

20

Layman Road, Wonnerup

Support

Opposed to Wonnerup West area only.

Already less beach area due to Port Geographe development.

Beach is very narrow.

Beach is used by locals and visitors

Horses cause damage/ erosion to the beach.

Health concerns over excrement.

No objection to the other proposed areas.

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

21

 Estuary View Drive, Wonnerup

Objection

Opposed to Wonnerup West area.

Beach is eroded.

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

22

Estuary View Drive, Wonnerup

Objection

Opposed to Wonnerup West area.

Beach is sued by locals/ families

Conflict with people/ horses

Health concerns with increased excrement.

On objection to other proposed areas.

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

23

 Layman Road, Wonnerup

Objection

Opposed to Wonnerup West area.

Already less beach area due to Port Geographe development.

Conflict with people and horses

Beach already subject to erosion

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

24

 Layman Road, Wonnerup

Objection and Support

Opposed to Wonnerup West area.

Conflict with people and horses.

Increased density/ population means increased beach users.

Beach already subject to erosion.

Decreased amenity to the beach area

No objection to other proposed areas.

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

25

 Caves Road, Anniebrook

Support

Verbal comment via telephone conversation.

Comment noted

26

 

Support

Support all proposed areas.

Proposed signs telling people to pick up excrement.

Better visibility for vehicles using this area.

Restricted times mean that in winter there’s not a lot of light.

Comment noted

27

Capel

Support

Support all proposed areas.

Large horse industry in the South West with little room to exercise.

Horse owners do pick up horse excrement.

Comment noted

28

PO Box Dunsborough

Support

Support all proposed areas.

Expanding horse community in Busselton.

Limited parking at the Quindalup exercise area, especially with general beach users and fishermen.

Recommend the use of existing infrastructure to access proposed horse exercise areas.

29

PO Box Busselton

Objection

Opposed to Wonnerup West area.

Beach is narrow due to erosion

Already less beach area due to Port Geographe development. Once completed this will increase the users of the beach.

Conflict with people and horses.

Oppose Wonnerup East area as this is a 4WD beach- conflict of uses as horses and cars don’t mix.

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

 

Activities and associated user behaviour on City land are monitored and periodically reviewed.

30

Estuary View Drive, Wonnerup

Objection

Oppose Wonnerup West area.

Increased population and visitors to the marina means more people using the beach.

Already less beach area due to Port Geographe development.

Beach subject to erosion.

Conflict between horses and people.

Sufficient room at the Wonnerup East area.

Signage needs to be improved

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

 

Recommend signage upgrade to indicate approved activity on City land.

31

PO Box  Capel

 

Objection

Opposed to Wonnerup East area.

There is already a dog exercise area- dogs and horses don’t mix.

Beaches shouldn’t be used for business.

Conflict of uses (fishing, swimming, horses.

Concerns with safety and increased accidents.

Horse excrement and people cleaning out horse floats a health hazard.

Public safety a concern, specifically insurance.

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

32

 Layman Road, WONNERUP

Objection

Opposed to Wonnerup West.

Beach is most accessible/ closest for locals.

Conflict between people and horses.

On objection to the other proposed areas.

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

33

 Mitchell Road, Newlands

No position stated

Concerns over proper parking and access.

Concerns over damage to the dunes

Comment noted

34

PO Box  Dunsborough

Support

Supportive of all of the proposed areas.

Proposed exercise times conflict with recreational riders and professional trainers. 

All uses can coexist without conflict.

Need better signage telling people to pick up excrement and bins for this purpose.

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

35

John Street, Abbey

Support

Supportive of all of the areas.

Would like a horse beach in central Busselton (away from tourist accommodation)

Does not want to exercise around dawn and dusk due to concerns of shark attacks.

Refer Officer Comment submission 30

36

PO Box Capel

 

Objection

Opposed to Wonnerup East

Already a declared dog exercise area

Horse excrement needs to be cleaned up by riders.

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

37

 Keel Retreat Geographe

Objection

Opposed to Wonnerup West area.

Conflict between people, horses and dogs.

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

38

 Darnell Road, Rosa Brook

Support

Horse exercise areas are limited in WA.

Need to have car parks suitable for cars and floats to safely get in and unload horses.

Comment noted

39

Egan Crescent, Vasse

Support

Support all areas.

Should be no time restrictions.

Better car parking is needed.

Horse ownership increases as the population does.

Comment noted

40

Stock Road, Attadale

Objection

Opposed to Wonnerup West area.

Concerned that if Wonnerup East and West are used; there would be no horse free areas to be used by locals.

Is a popular area and should be kept for local users with less popular beaches being used for horse exercise areas.

Supports the Anniebrook exercise area.

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

41

 Estuary View Drive, Wonnerup

Objection

Opposed to Wonnerup West Area.

Already less beach area due to Port Geographe development.

Conflict between horses, people and dogs.

Health issues due to excrement.

Parking issues.

Support Wonnerup East as there is less population in this area.

Need better signage.

Query if the City will enforce regulations/ will there be more staff ?

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

42

 Layman Road, Wonnerup

Objection

Objection to Wonnerup West area.

It’s a family beach – adding horses would be a conflicting use.

Plenty of area in Wonnerup East

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

43

Caves Road, Anniebrook

Objection

Opposed to Anniebrook exercise area. 

Degradation to sand dunes

Poor parking and access.

Health issues with horse excrement not being cleaned up.

Safety concerns as the area is accessed from a busy part of Caves Road and crosses over the new cycle path.

Refer Officer Comment submission 29

44

PO Box   Yallingup

 

Support

Support the Anniebrook exercise area.

Is a regular user of this area.

Car parking and path needs to be improved.

Would like to see the area expanded more towards Busselton.

Comment noted

45

Ballarat Road, Wonnerup

Objection and Support

Supports the Wonnerup East Area.

Areas is currently well utilized and is safe.

Opposed to Wonnerup West.

Too many people use this area.

4WD’s on beach already causes conflict.

Horses and people should be kept separate.

Beach is very narrow and also very popular- not enough room.

Safety concerns with horses and dogs and 4WD’s.

City should consider closing the beach to 4WD’s

Beach is already eroded.

Already less beach area due to Port Geographe development.

Refer Officer Comment submission 29

46

P O Box Cottesloe

 

Support

Need better car parking at Quindalup.

Riding on beach not ideal during winter.

Request extended horse use times.

Conflict with recreational riders and professional trainers.

City of Busselton needs bridle trails.

Recommend the use of existing infrastructure to access proposed horse exercise areas.

47

 Estuary View Drive, Wonnerup

Objection

Opposed to Wonnerup West and East areas.

Beach is already narrow due to erosion.

Conflict between people and horses.

 

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

48

PO Box Busselton

 

Objection

Opposed Wonnerup West and East- to the river mouth.

Conflict between 4WD’s, people and horses.

Support of the use of the area from the River mouth to the Capel border.

Refer Officer Comment submission 1

49

Blue Manna Mews, Geographe

Support

Support of Anniebrook exercise area.

 

Comment noted

 

 

 


Council                                                                                      25                                                                          9 July 2014

11.             Planning and Development Services Report

11.1           PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF BUSSELTON FORESHORE MASTER PLAN AND ADOPTION OF DEVELOPMENT GUIDE PLAN – SPECIAL PURPOSE (BUSSELTON FORESHORE) ZONE, CONSIDERATION FOR ADOPTION OF FINAL APPROVAL

SUBJECT INDEX:

DP12/0012

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

A City of shared, vibrant and well planned places that provide for diverse activity and strengthen our social connections.

BUSINESS UNIT:

Strategic Planning and Development

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Strategic Planning and Development

REPORTING OFFICER:

Major Projects Officer - Mersina Robinson

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Planning and Development Services - Paul Needham

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Busselton Foreshore Concept Plan 2010

Attachment b    Adopted Master Plan Busselton Foreshore

Attachment c    Initial Draft Development Guide Plan (as advertised October / November 2013)

Attachment d   Proposed Change to Master Plan

Attachment e    Draft Development Guide Plan (as advertised January / February 2014)

Attachment f    Schedule of Submissions 2014

Attachment g   Design Guidelines for the Busselton Jetty Precinct  

  

PRÉCIS

 

Officers seek the Council’s consideration to endorse a modified Busselton Foreshore Master Plan (BFMP) and adopt for final approval a Development Guide Plan (DGP) that relates to the proposed land uses in the ‘Special Purpose (Busselton Foreshore)’ zone.

 

The proposed Development Guide Plan for the Busselton Foreshore will provide the statutory framework for development.  In accordance with Schedule 7, Special Provision 44 of the City of Busselton Town Planning Scheme No.20 the DGP is required to be guided by the City of Busselton endorsed Busselton Foreshore Master Plan (BFMP).  The BFMP is a strategic document that provides detailed guidance for the planning and development of the Busselton Foreshore. 

 

The modified BFMP and DGP were advertised on two occasions, firstly in October/November 2013 and the second time following the making of changes to the draft documents in January/February 2014.  As a result of advertising some modifications are recommended. 

 

Officers are recommending that the City endorse a modified BFMP and adopt the DGP for final approval.  The modified DGP is required to be forwarded to the Western Australian Planning Commission for consideration for endorsement.

 

BACKGROUND

 

The proposal comprises a modified Busselton Foreshore Master Plan (BFMP) and Draft Development Guide Plan (DGP) for final approval.  The DGP is for the ‘Special Purpose (Busselton Foreshore)’ zone which applies to the foreshore area between West Street, Marine Terrace and the alignment of what will be a future Brown Street extension (refer Attachments D and E). 

 

The BFMP is a strategic document that provides detailed guidance for the planning and development of the Busselton Foreshore extending between King Street and Ford Road.  The DGP incorporates statutory controls relating to land use, building heights and floor areas that reflect the BFMP. The DGP is not proposed to incorporate controls relating to more detailed design elements, relying on the BFMP and subsequent documents providing guidance on these matters.

 

The Draft DGP has been advertised on two occasions as follows:

 

-              October/November 2013: In parallel with proposed revisions to BFMP and to relocate Short Stay Accommodation sites, modify height controls and create ‘Wildlife Corridor’ to, amongst other things, achieve environmental outcomes required by State and Federal agencies.

-              January/February 2014: Increase the planned scale of the Microbrewery site to support better activation of the ‘Busselton Jetty Precinct’.

 

October/November 2013

 

The first advertising followed Council’s resolution of October 2013 to adopt for the purpose of advertising the revised Busselton Foreshore Master Plan (4/10/13) and a DGP (13/9/13) for the Busselton Foreshore for public consultation pursuant to clause 25(4) of the Scheme for a period of 28 daysThe revisions to the BFMP included:

 

-              accommodating a possum habitat corridor to address the requirements of the EPBC Act, and the resultant changes required including movement of the short stay accommodation precincts to incorporate this corridor.

-              changes in the height limit controls for the short stay accommodation from 15.8m to 20m default maximum.  Under the then working draft DGP the maximum building height was 15.8 metres from natural ground level or 4 storeys plus loft. More recent work indicated that it may be difficult to develop a building with 4 storeys plus a loft that is 15.8 metres in height above natural ground level.  In particular, it wouldn’t enable higher ground floor ceiling height and may encourage ‘blocky type’ building design that attempts to maximise development potential yet not exceed 15.8 metres.  The proposed height limits are also formulated in a manner consistent with the height standards as outlined in the new State Planning Policy 3.1 Residential Design Codes.   Hence 20 metres was adopted for the purpose of advertising.

 

The revised BFMP and DGP were advertised for public comment from 23 October to 19 November 2013.  That initial draft DGP is provided as Attachment C.  Three submissions from State Government agencies and two submissions from the public (BADRA and one resident) were received. 

 

The Department of Water (DoW) recommended that a Local Water Management Strategy (LWMS) consistent with State Planning Policy 2.9 – Water Resources and the Better Urban Water Management Framework be prepared to support the DGP.  The DoW also recommended a provision within the DGP calling for the production of an Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) for each precinct and one UWMP covering the whole DGP area.  The DoW suggested that the UWMP should be prepared for DoW endorsement prior to implementation.  This requirement has now been dismissed by the State Minister for the Environment following consideration of appeals on Clearing Permit 5792/1. 

 

Further minor changes to the DGP as requested by the Department of Planning (DoP) were incorporated into the draft DGP (Attachment E).

 

The issues raised in the two public submissions include objection to the amount of commercial and short stay accommodation land use and the proposed increase in height limit of the short stay accommodation from 15.8 metres to 20 metres.  These issues are addressed in the response to the advertising in January/February 2014 in the Officer Comment section of this report.

 


 

January/February 2014

 

The second advertising of the Draft DGP followed the CEO’s delegated adoption of January 2014 to approve proposed modifications to the Master Plan and Draft DGP for the purpose of advertising for 28 days.  The CEO’s delegated decision followed informal consultation with the Busselton Foreshore Reference Group (BFRG) and the Council.

 

That also followed the outcomes of an initial market testing for three commercial sites identified in the BFMP. The City had conducted a process seeking registrations of interest from October to January 2013.  Further market interest was then sought, including more detailed proposals from the registration of interest process throughout April and May 2013.  In June 2013, Council selected preferred proponents for Site 4 and Site 5 (Attachment C) and invited them to prepare more detailed concepts for further consideration.

 

Following a review of concepts for both sites, the Council resolved to discontinue redevelopment of the existing Nautical Lady site (Site 4) and focus on a single development at Site 5 (behind the Nautical Lady building) and selected a single preferred proponent to further develop concept plans and artists’ impressions. Council also resolved to discontinue seeking commercial interest in a development site at Site 1 (adjacent the Equinox Café).

 

Responses from the commercial sector regarding the viability of upgrading the Nautical Lady site (including new Building Code and universal access requirements) have determined that the redevelopment costs of the Nautical Lady would be cost prohibitive and not feasible.  Hence, there was no suitable proponent for the then proposed site four.  

 

Consideration was given to accommodating a larger development for a microbrewery, function centre, restaurant, and associated facilities of 2100 m2 at the rear of the Nautical Lady site to replace the existing Nautical Lady tower café site (total building area 350m2); the eastern-most kiosk site (total building area 90m2) and the 450m2 microbrewery/restaurant site, (so a net increase of built form envisaged by approximately 1,100 m2

 

On 10 December 2013 the BFRG met to discuss the proposal and resolved that it be advertised for public comment.  Under delegated power in January 2014 the CEO adopted the proposed modifications to the Master Plan and revised Draft DGP for the purpose of advertising for 28 days.

 

Following the 28 day advertising period a total of 30 submissions were received, mostly raising concerns with the proposed increase in footprint.  Concerns related to: 

 

-      opposition to an additional licensed premises on the Busselton Foreshore as it is perceived to be not family friendly and may attract anti-social behaviour;

-      the size of the proposed microbrewery, restaurant, function centre considered out of character with the location;

-      considered to be inadequate car parking to cater for use, particularly in peak periods.

-      objection to height limit increase in short stay accommodation areas.

 

These issues are discussed in the ‘Officer Comment’ section of this report.

 

Due to the response to the second advertising, City Officers have considered reduction of the floorspace for the site intended to contain the proposed microbrewery/restaurant (which is now site four on the draft DGP at Attachment E).  Officers have discussed with the preferred proponents a proposal for a microbrewery, restaurant and function centre with a ground floor area of 1700m2 covered area including verandahs, plus 400m2 of additional al fresco.   

 

This revised proposal was discussed at a Council briefing on 16 April 2014 and by the Busselton Foreshore Reference Group (BFRG) on 17 April 2014.  On 17 April 2014 the BFRG met to discuss the revised concept for a site to contain a Microbrewery/Restaurant and were in agreement that the revised proposal be advertised for public comment. This was undertaken in June 2014 and the submissions from this proposal will be considered in a separate report to Council.   It needs to be noted that neither the BFMP nor the DGP can or should resolve or direct all matters associated with development of any particular site – that must occur with the more detailed commercial and planning processes that will, ultimately, occur for all sites.

 

It was therefore important to consider the Master Plan and DGP that provides the planning framework for the Busselton Foreshore prior to final or detailed consideration of a proposal for any particular site. The DGP and Master Plan sets the broader land use and direction for the area, and hence should precede the details of a development proposed for any site.

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

The key elements of the statutory environment with respect to this proposal are set out in the relevant objectives, policies and provisions of the City of Busselton District Town Planning Scheme No. 20. In addition the land is reserved and subject to the Land Administration Act 1997.  The Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act is also relevant. Each of these is discussed below under appropriate sub headings.

 

District Town Planning Scheme No. 20

 

The subject land is zoned ‘Special Purpose (Busselton Foreshore)’ and comprises Special Provision Area No. 44, which sets out detailed planning matters that are to be addressed through the preparation of a DGP.  The Special Purpose zone provides for land uses which do not easily fit within the scope of other zones.

 

The Special Purpose zone was introduced to facilitate the Busselton Foreshore redevelopment. The DGP is being processed in accordance with the provisions of Clause 25 of the Scheme, which includes advertising, consideration of submissions and final approval/determination by the City and the Western Australian Planning Commission.  Development is to be generally in accordance with a Development Guide Plan.  The DGP is to be guided by the City of Busselton endorsed ‘Busselton Foreshore Master Plan’.  

 

Land Administration Act 1997

 

In addition to town planning considerations, land tenure considerations are also relevant subject to the Land Administration Act 1997 (LAA). The LAA is administered by the Minister for Regional Development and Lands in his statutory role as Minister for Lands, with advice provided by the Department of Lands. Further control on the use of the reserve is protected by the Management Order conditions which may range from specific land management restrictions to the granting to the management body of the power to lease.

 

Rationalisation of the existing reserves on the site was approved by Parliament in November 2012 subject to the following conditions:

 

-     Finalisation of the proposed rezoning of the site (Amendment No.173) bound by West Street, Marine Terrace, Brown Street extension and the coast;

-     City adoption and WAPC endorsement of a Development Guide Plan for the rezoned site; and

-     Finalisation of an agreement to the satisfaction of the Minister for Lands for the relocation of the tennis club facilities from Reserve 28535, including the right for the tennis club to continue to operate in its present location until relocation has been achieved.

Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

 

Since adoption of the BFMP in March 2012, the (then) Commonwealth Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water Population and Communities (DSEWPC) determined that the proposed Busselton Foreshore redevelopment is a ’controlled action’ that requires assessment under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPBC Act) for its potential impact on Western Ringtail Possum (WRP) habitat and the Ramsar wetlands.   

 

Following discussions with DSEWPC, State Department of Parks and Wildlife (DPAW), and completion of WRP surveys and reports, the BFMP has been revised to further enhance and protect WRP habitat.  The most significant change to the BFMP is the inclusion of a possum corridor and the resultant changes that are required to incorporate this corridor. This proposal has received support from the Commonwealth Department of Environment and formal approval. This is seen as a positive environmental outcome from the Busselton Foreshore Redevelopment. 

 

Following public review and an appeal period on a permit to clear 30 native trees on the Busselton Foreshore, the State DER received three appeals. In June 2014, the Minister for Environment resolved to partially dismiss the Appeals and made a decision to grant the clearing permit in accordance with Section 110 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

The key policies relevant to the proposal are State Planning Policy 2.6 - State Coastal Planning (SPP 2.6) and the City’s Local Tourism Planning Strategy. Each is addressed below under appropriate subheadings.

 

State Planning Policy 2.6 – State Coastal Planning

 

SPP 2.6 has been considered in the development of the BFMP and DGP.  The policy requires that a coastal planning strategy and/or foreshore management plan should be prepared to support proposals on the coast.

 

In this regard the City of Busselton engaged Shore Coastal to undertake a study of coastal impact on the Busselton Foreshore and completed coastal protection upgrade works within the Busselton Foreshore, west of Queen Street. Works have been undertaken consistent with this study and as part of Stage 2 Phase 1 of the Busselton Foreshore Redevelopment project, reconstruction of the seawall to 4 metres AHD has been completed.

 

Further to this, Shore Coastal has undertaken a coastal defences study for the foreshore between Queen Street to east of the Brown Street extension.  This study has provided preliminary setbacks for the area from Queen Street to Brown Street and the ‘Youth Precinct’ east of the Jetty. The proposed setbacks have been applied to the location of proposed development and lower level infrastructure consistent with Shore Coastal’s advice.

 

Part 5.4 of SPP 2.6 provides direction to local governments in defining the heights of buildings within 300 metres of the coast. Due regard is to be given to planning criteria considerations set out in the policy.  The height of the short stay accommodation development is proposed to be limited by the DGP to a maximum of four storeys plus a loft (total building height not exceeding 20m). Design criteria for buildings within the Busselton Foreshore will ensure built form is of a high quality and address the surrounding public realm, providing for view corridors to the coast.

 


 

WAPC Regional Strategy: South-West Planning and Infrastructure Framework March 2014 (Draft)

 

Officers consider the proposed Busselton Foreshore redevelopment is consistent with the relevant parts of the WAPC document.

 

Local Tourism Planning Strategy

 

The subject land is identified by the Local Tourism Planning Strategy (LTPS) as a strategic tourist site that meets criteria of tourism significance and importance. The intention of the LTPS is to retain strategic tourism sites for tourism use.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

The revised BFMP is considered consistent with the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2013 which identifies the following community objectives especially relevant to the Busselton Foreshore Redevelopment:

 

2.1: A City where the community has access to quality cultural, recreation, and leisure facilities and services.

2.2: A City of shared, vibrant and well-planned places that provide for diverse activity and strengthen our social connections.  

 

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the officer recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk assessment framework. The implementation of the officer recommendation will involve referral of the DGP to the WAPC. In this regard, there are no significant risks identified.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

There are not considered to be any direct financial implications for the City arising from the recommendations of this report.

 

CONSULTATION

 

The proposed revised Master Plan and DGP were advertised for community consultation on two occasions, in slightly different form as described earlier in this report, in October/November 2013 and January/February 2014.

 

The first advertising followed Council’s resolution of 9 October 2013 to adopt for the purpose of advertising the revised Busselton Foreshore Master Plan (4/10/13) and the revised DGP (13/9/13) for public consultation pursuant to clause 25(4) of the Scheme for a period of 28 days.  Advertising was undertaken between 23 October and 19 November 2013.  Three submissions from State Government agencies and two submissions from the public (BADRA and one resident) were received. 

 

The second advertising of the Draft DGP followed the CEO’s delegated adoption decision of 20 January 2014 to approve proposed modifications to the Master Plan and Draft DGP for the purpose of advertising for 28 days.  Advertising was undertaken between 11 January and 26 February 2014. Five submissions from State Government agencies and 25 submissions from the public were received.  

 

The City has consulted with the Department of Planning and officers are generally supportive of the key elements of the BFMP, DGP and response to issues as outlined in this report. 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

The following four key contentions were raised in the public submissions (refer Attachment F):

 

1.            An additional licensed premise on the Busselton Foreshore is not required and perceived to be not family friendly and will attract anti-social behaviour.

2.           The size of the proposed microbrewery, restaurant, function centre is out of character with the location. 

3.           There is inadequate car parking to cater for use, particularly in peak periods.

4.           Objection to the height limit increase in short stay accommodation areas.

 

Each of these issues is discussed below under the four headings listed.

 

An additional licensed premise on the Busselton Foreshore is not required and perceived to be not family friendly and will attract anti-social behavior

 

There was opposition to the concept of a site for a microbrewery, restaurant and function centre in what is supposed to be a family friendly public open space.

 

The proposed microbrewery, restaurant, function centre is located within the Busselton Jetty Precinct, wherein the objective is ‘to function as a magnet to enliven the central part of the Busselton Foreshore; and enhance the views of the foreshore and jetty, improving the pedestrian experience and development to provide for maximum activation of surrounding spaces’. 

 

Whilst the Busselton Foreshore Working Group Concept Plan 2010 and BFMP approved in April 2012 did not include a tavern or microbrewery within the Busselton Jetty Precinct, this use is considered to be compatible with the restaurant, café and railway house uses within the Precinct.  

 

Microbreweries developed in the Cape to Cape Region in recent years have been of a high quality, typically developed as a combination of microbrewery, restaurant, gallery, children’s playground. Many have a sophisticated and family friendly atmosphere often within a picturesque and attractive environment.  Examples include: Cheeky Monkey Brewery and Cidery, Duckstein Brewery, Eagle Bay, Brewery, Bootleg Brewery. All of these venues and facilities have a strong appeal and cater to families, couples, individuals and groups and offer a safe affordable product to locals and visitors.

 

The setting on the Busselton Foreshore is considered ideal for this type of facility where the recreational uses and playgrounds are within easy accessibility and enable a range of activities to be undertaken on the foreshore by families.

 

With the increasing population and visitation to the City the current facilities at this location are often at capacity in the peak season. When special functions or events are held at the current facilities there is no alternative food and beverage outlet near the City’s prime attraction.  Hence this facility would also provide a facility that is currently lacking in the CBD and foreshore. 

 

Furthermore, there is no facility of this nature on the foreshore between Dunsborough and the Mash Brewery in Bunbury.  Facilities such as Little Creatures in Fremantle and those that exist in the Capes region have not been known to have issues related to drinking offences or to the detriment of families safety.

 

Whilst the formal consultation process has resulted in the expression of concerns about having an additional licensed premises, it is also very clear that there is a substantial level of support from others in the community.

 

The size of the proposed microbrewery, restaurant and function centre is out of character with the location

 

A number of submissions suggested that “a 2100m2 footprint, plus additional alfresco space, together with a second storey, is out of context with the present overall free flow and accessibility to the public foreshore. The proposed allocated designated area is too near and imposing to the seafront public area, and such developments should be encouraged towards the Marine Terrace area of the foreshore plan.”

 

As outlined in the DGP, the microbrewery/tavern and restaurant site originally had an area of 450m2, the Nautical Lady tower café site has a total building area 350m2 and the eastern-most kiosk has a total building area of 90m2.  Hence this total area of 890m2 was proposed to be increased to an area of 2100m2 (plus 400m2 al fresco) in one consolidated site.   The intention for this site is to combine the restaurant, Nautical Lady Café and kiosk to create one building for the purpose of a microbrewery/tavern, function centre and restaurant.  The building would have a maximum building footprint of approximately 2100m2 plus 400m2 al fresco.  The building footprint would be retained at the Restaurant site, but will extend a further 1750m2 plus 400m2 al fresco into the surrounding recreation area.  The building may be a maximum of two storeys.  In addition to the removal of the Nautical Lady tower, the easternmost of the five proposed kiosks would be removed to enable the proposed development of the site.

 

More recently City Officers, Councillors and BFRG have discussed and considered a revised proposal for a microbrewery, restaurant and function centre with a ground floor area of 1700m2, covered area including verandahs, plus additional 400m2 al fresco (and a reduction in total floor area of 400m2 relative to the advertised DGP in January/February 2014).  Officers, Councillors and the BFRG consider the revised proposal will be more in keeping with the mass and scale of the other existing and proposed buildings north of the proposed east west spine road and the foreshore in the Busselton Jetty Precinct.  Reference has been made to the Master Plan which includes principles of protecting the open and informal character and retaining visual links to the Busselton Foreshore.   Whilst the scale of the building will be increased this will be offset to some degree by the removal of the Nautical Lady tower and proposed café site to its north.

 

From a planning perspective the proposed increase in total floor area from 890m2 to 1700m2 (plus 400m2 al fresco) will provide a greater opportunity to activate the Busselton foreshore area.  It will enable the development of a tourist/commercial landmark building complementary to the site and surrounding commercial, recreational and entertainment uses within the Busselton Jetty Precinct. It will stimulate activity in this precinct towards the jetty, open onto the public realm, provide for integration with activity along the foreshore promenade, along the east west spine road and with the Busselton CBD.

 

Development will be guided by the BFMP Design Guidelines for the Busselton Jetty Precinct including the following:

 

-     Light weight construction

-     Large openings and interstitial spaces

-     Attractive facades

-     Service areas screened from view

-     Primary orientation is to the beach, however buildings must be designed in recognition of their landscape setting.

 

This will stimulate activity in this precinct towards the jetty and provide for further integration with activity along the foreshore promenade, the east west spine road and with the Busselton CBD.  The impact on the amount of recreational space will be minimised given that it will replace the existing Nautical Lady tower café site and the eastern-most kiosk into one consolidated site.

 

It should also be noted that the Concept Plan 2010 (Attachment A) included two retail/restaurant buildings in the approximate location of the proposed microbrewery/tavern, function centre, restaurant and associated facilities.  The proposal represents an opportunity to create a landmark building at this focal location on an important entry road to the Busselton Jetty precinct and activating the western side of the central piazza area.

 

Officers consider that the reduced ground floor area of 1700m2 for the proposed microbrewery, restaurant and function centre with a covered area including verandahs, plus 400m2 additional al fresco is appropriate and will be more in keeping with the scale of other proposed buildings within the Busselton Jetty Precinct on the foreshore than the proposal for a 2100m2 microbrewery, restaurant and function centre with a covered area including verandahs, plus 400m2 additional al fresco.

 

Inadequate car parking to cater for use, particularly in peak periods

 

A number of submissions raised concern regarding the parking implications associated with increasing the floorspace limit within Development Location 4 from 890m2 to 2100m2, given that the DGP states that no on-site parking will be required for this precinct and there does not appear to be a commensurate increase in offsite parking to reflect the increased floorspace.

 

The Master Plan aims to encourage more visitors to the foreshore and to persuade them to stay longer.  The design approach has been to reduce parking bays in the inner core to enable a greener and more people friendly environment.  The proposal reinforces the concept of having parking outside of the inner core on the periphery, as well as improving access and legibility. A key principle of the Master Plan is to utilise car parking throughout the Busselton Foreshore redevelopment as opposed to provision of private parking.  Car parking will be in the form of short term on-street parking, longer term parking within landscaped car parks and generally provided as shared facilities.  This will reduce the visual dominance of the car parking and allow for better traffic management. 

 

The amount of existing car parking has been rationalised and substantially increased. There are approximately 1043 car parking bays planned throughout the Busselton Foreshore area extending between Gale Street and Georgette Street.  However, there is a greater reliance on street and shared parking areas.   Car parking will also be provided informally during events, where parking is directed to ovals and grassed areas away from activity.  

 

Two large parking areas that will incorporate retention WRP habitat will be created on the southern side of the short stay accommodation. These car-parks are able to be expanded with parking fitted within the constraints of the existing Peppermint trees and until a detailed design for this area has been completed, the exact number of car-parks is not determined.  The east west link road, Queen Street and Stanley Street will be designed as ‘shared streets’ that will be utilised by both pedestrians and vehicular traffic designed for low speed. Limited areas of parking will be available from the ‘shared streets’, providing special needs bays, public transport, coach access and servicing to the commercial tenancies.  

 

Integration with the central business district (CBD) is an important element of the foreshore and it is expected that visitors will walk between these two areas and not shift their vehicle from one to the other unless time restrictions (such as in the CBD) dictate otherwise.  

 

Consideration should be given to the point that most of the activity generated on the foreshore and in the CBD is during the day. A Transport and Parking Assessment for the BFMP indicated that the highest peak hour traffic volumes are generally experienced on a Saturday around midday. This is typical for a coastal resort.  Parking surveys also indicated that the average stay is around 2 hours, despite there being no time restrictions on the parking bays.  Hence there is likely to be a substantial amount of under-utilised parking in the evenings.  The proposed microbrewery will attract patronage largely from the early-afternoon into the evenings, hence there will be opportunities for use of shared parking areas. 

 

A 2007 Riley Consulting/Landcorp report ‘Proposed Busselton Foreshore Revitalisation and Residential Redevelopment’ recommends that “The design of the foreshore should seek to integrate bus movements throughout the precinct. The provision of bus services in Busselton would be based on commercial requirements and should be considered in a separate study in liaison with transport operators.”  The grid pattern of the CBD and foreshore is conducive to providing a tourist style bus, and this is likely to be integrated into the transport network of the CBD and Busselton Foreshore in the future.

 

In summary it is considered that there is significant parking strategically located around the Busselton Foreshore to accommodate the proposed development on the foreshore.  The foreshore development has been designed to reduce parking bays in the inner core to enable a greener and more people friendly environment.  People will be encouraged to walk, cycle or skate to the site through being well cater for by the extensive pedestrian and cycling pathway system.  This will be achieved through the provision of attractive pathways and facilities for pedestrians, skaters and cyclists.

 

The reduced ground floor area of 1700m2 for the proposed microbrewery, restaurant and function centre with a covered area including verandahs, plus additional al fresco should, however, reduce the potential peak demand for car parking generated by use/development of Site 4.

 

Objection to the height limit increase in short stay accommodation areas

 

There was some objection to the height of the short stay accommodation being increased from 15.8m to 20m, with submitters suggesting that ‘it is more likely the height has been increased to make it more attractive to developers. Such a height increase would substantially increase the visual impact of the development’.

 

The purpose of increasing the height limit was to enable some flexibility in design. It may be restrictive to develop a building with 4 storeys plus a loft that is 15.8 metres in height above natural ground level.  In particular, it may encourage ‘blocky type’ building design that attempts to maximise development potential yet not exceed 15.8 metres.  

 

That would especially be the case if a developer wished to accommodate commercial or food/beverage land uses, especially at ground floor level, where floor-to-floor heights of up to 4.0 metres may be necessary.  What is instead proposed is an approach similar to what is used in the R-Codes where there are controls on height for ‘top of the external wall’, ‘top of pitched roof’ and ‘top of external wall (concealed roof)’. To ensure that developers of 4 storeys plus loft can be accommodated whilst still providing for design flexibility, it is proposed the top of the external wall could be 16 metres, top of pitched roof to be 20 metres, and top of external wall (concealed roof) be 18 metres.  

 

Other Issues

 

The Department of Planning (DOP) has recommended:

 

- modifying the Master Plan or DGP to incorporate ‘design guidelines’ or ‘built form parameters’ to ensure that the proposed built form and scale of development meets the Busselton Jetty Precinct objectives; and

 

-in the Short Stay Accommodation Precinct adding a provision in the DGP making ‘Shop’ and ‘Tavern’ uses incidental to the ‘Hotel’ and ‘Tourist Accommodation’ uses to reflect the primacy of this precinct for tourist accommodation purposes as envisaged by the Master Plan.

 

The BFMP outlines ‘Design Guidelines’ for the Busselton Jetty Precinct. These guidelines have and will be provided to prospective developers, and will be taken into consideration in the assessment of development applications.  There is no need to modify the BFMP or DGP to incorporate ‘design guidelines’ or ‘built form parameters’, as these are already contained within the BFMP and referred to in the DGP Report.  Any proposed built form and scale of development will be guided by the City of Busselton endorsed BFMP.

 

The uses ‘Shop’ and ‘Tavern’ are intended to be incidental to the ‘Hotel’ and ‘Tourist Accommodation’, however ‘Incidental Use’ is not recognised in the City of Busselton TPS.  This intention is proposed to be depicted in the DGP Land Use Permissibility Table within the objective for the Short Stay Accommodation Precinct. It is proposed to modify the Precinct Objective to state:

 

‘This precinct will provide for high quality development sites for tourist accommodation and supporting land uses, aiming to provide active frontage to the east-west spine road, an open, landscaped setting, and retain wide view corridors between buildings. The predominant land use in this precinct will be short stay accommodation such as hotels and serviced apartments  Restaurants, shops and bars will be provided at ground level to address surrounding streets and the public realm..’

 

This will reflect the primacy of this precinct for tourist accommodation purposes as envisaged by the BFMP.

 

SUMMARY

 

Officers consider that the proposed DGP will provide an appropriate planning framework for land use and development on the foreshore.  The proposed changes will not adversely impact the amenity of adjoining occupiers, the provision of parking, will not restrict the use and development of adjoining land, and will not adversely impact on environmental areas. 

 

From a planning perspective the proposed floor area of 1700m2 for the proposed microbrewery, restaurant and function centre will provide greater opportunity to activate the Busselton foreshore redevelopment.  It will enable the development of a tourist/commercial landmark building complementary to the site and surrounding commercial, recreational and entertainment uses within the Busselton Jetty Precinct. It will stimulate activity in this precinct towards the jetty and provide for further integration with activity along the foreshore promenade, the east west spine road and with the Busselton Central Business District.  The impact on the amount of recreational space will only be minimal given that it will replace the existing Nautical Lady tower café site and consolidate the eastern-most kiosk into one consolidated site.  It will also open up the public realm area in the core activities precinct.

 

The reduction in footprint size for Site 4 to a maximum development area of 1700m2 plus 400m2 al fresco will require a change to the Master Plan and DGP.  

 

Officers are therefore proposing the adoption for final approval modification to the part of the Master Plan and DGP that relates to the maximum ground floor footprint of 1700m2 (plus 400m2 al fresco) for the proposed microbrewery/tavern, function centre, restaurant and associated facilities (Site 4).  In addition, this site is proposed to replace the existing Nautical Lady tower/Café, the 450m2 microbrewery/restaurant site and the eastern-most kiosk of 90m2.

 

Officers consider the variations to be consistent with the objectives of local and State policy.  Therefore, Officers recommend Council adopt the proposal for final approval.

 

CONCLUSION

 

Officers are recommending that:  Council adopt the modified Busselton Foreshore DGP subject to modifications for final approval; and that the modified DGP be adopted subject to modifications and forwarded to the Western Australian Planning Commission for endorsement.

 

OPTIONS

 

Should the Officer Recommendation not be supported, the following options could be considered –

 

1.            Resolve to adopt the modified Master Plan and Development Guide Plan for final approval without modification.

 

2.            Resolve to adopt the modified Development Guide Plan for final approval, with further changes.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF RECOMMENDATION

 

Implementation of the Officer Recommendation will occur within one month of the date of the Council decision.

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council resolves:

 

1.         1)            to endorse for final approval the Busselton Foreshore Master Plan, subject to the following                 modifications:

                a)            Depiction of the tavern, restaurant, to a maximum ground floor building footprint of                        1700m2.

 

2)         pursuant to Special Provision No. 44 in Schedule 7 of the District Town Planning Scheme No. 20, to adopt the Development Guide Plan (Attachment C) that relates to the proposed land uses in the ‘Special Purposes (Busselton Foreshore)’ zone for final approval subject to the following modifications:

             a)            Reduction in maximum building ground floor area of the tavern, restaurant, shop                           within the Busselton Jetty Precinct to 1700m2 plus 400m2 al fresco (site four);

             b)            Modify the Land Use Permissibility Table within the objective for the Short Stay                               Accommodation Precinct to state:

 

i.             ‘…. The predominant land use in this precinct will be short stay accommodation such as hotels and serviced apartments.  Restaurants, shops and tavern land uses may be provided at ground level to address surrounding streets and the public realm, but accommodation uses must be the predominant use on all sites.’

 

2.         3)            That the City forward the revised Development Guide Plan to the Western Australian       Planning Commission for endorsement. 

 

 


Council                                                                                      33                                                                                                             9 July 2014

11.1                             PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF BUSSELTON FORESHORE MASTER PLAN AND ADOPTION OF DEVELOPMENT GUIDE PLAN – SPECIAL PURPOSE (BUSSELTON FORESHORE) ZONE, CONSIDERATION FOR ADOPTION OF FINAL APPROVAL

Attachment a          Busselton Foreshore Concept Plan 2010

PDF Creator


Council                                                                                      37                                                                                                             9 July 2014

11.1                             PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF BUSSELTON FORESHORE MASTER PLAN AND ADOPTION OF DEVELOPMENT GUIDE PLAN – SPECIAL PURPOSE (BUSSELTON FORESHORE) ZONE, CONSIDERATION FOR ADOPTION OF FINAL APPROVAL

Attachment b          Adopted Master Plan Busselton Foreshore

PDF Creator


Council                                                                                      39                                                                                                             9 July 2014

11.1                             PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF BUSSELTON FORESHORE MASTER PLAN AND ADOPTION OF DEVELOPMENT GUIDE PLAN – SPECIAL PURPOSE (BUSSELTON FORESHORE) ZONE, CONSIDERATION FOR ADOPTION OF FINAL APPROVAL

Attachment c          Initial Draft Development Guide Plan (as advertised October / November 2013)


Council                                                                                      41                                                                                                             9 July 2014

11.1                             PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF BUSSELTON FORESHORE MASTER PLAN AND ADOPTION OF DEVELOPMENT GUIDE PLAN – SPECIAL PURPOSE (BUSSELTON FORESHORE) ZONE, CONSIDERATION FOR ADOPTION OF FINAL APPROVAL

Attachment d          Proposed Change to Master Plan

PDF Creator


Council                                                                                      43                                                                                                             9 July 2014

11.1                             PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF BUSSELTON FORESHORE MASTER PLAN AND ADOPTION OF DEVELOPMENT GUIDE PLAN – SPECIAL PURPOSE (BUSSELTON FORESHORE) ZONE, CONSIDERATION FOR ADOPTION OF FINAL APPROVAL

Attachment e          Draft Development Guide Plan (as advertised January / February 2014)


Council                                                                                      47                                                                                                             9 July 2014

11.1                             PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF BUSSELTON FORESHORE MASTER PLAN AND ADOPTION OF DEVELOPMENT GUIDE PLAN – SPECIAL PURPOSE (BUSSELTON FORESHORE) ZONE, CONSIDERATION FOR ADOPTION OF FINAL APPROVAL

Attachment f          Schedule of Submissions 2014

 

No

NAME & ADDRESS

NATURE OF SUBMISSION

STAFF COMMENT

STAFF RECOMMENDATION

1.

Department of Planning

 

Whilst the Department supports the proposed changes in principle, it is recommended that the City consider:

- the possible parking implications associated with increasing the floorspace limit within Development Location 4 from 890m2 to 2,100m2, given that the DGP states that no onsite parking will be required for this precinct and there does not appear to be a commensurate increase in offsite parking to reflect the increased floorspace;

- modifying the Master Plan or DGP to incorporate ‘design guidelines’ or ‘built form parameters’ to ensure that the proposed built form and scale of development meets the Busselton Jetty Precinct objectives; and

-in the Short Stay Accommodation Precinct, adding a provision in the DGP making ‘Shop’ and ‘Tavern’ uses incidental to the ‘Hotel’ and ‘Tourist Accommodation’ uses to reflect the primacy of this precinct for tourist accommodation purposes as envisaged by the Master Plan.

 

CONSIDER PARKING IMPLICATIONS FROM INCREASE IN GROUND FLOOR AREA OF CONSOLIDATED SITE AT REAR OF NAUTICAL LADY FROM 890M2 TO 2100M2

 

Whilst development standards for reserved land are generally the subject of discretion, the implications of increased development for parking requirements needs to be taken into consideration.

 

The key principle of the Master Plan is to utilise car parking throughout the Busselton Foreshore redevelopment as opposed to provision of private parking.  Car parking will be in the form of short term on-street parking, longer term parking within landscaped car parks and generally provided as shared facilities.  This will reduce the visual dominance of the car parking and allow for better traffic management.   There are significant numbers of parking bays throughout the Foreshore area.  The design approach has been to reduce parking bays in the inner core to enable a greener and more people friendly environment.  The amount of car parking to be provided will be increased and the proposal reinforces the concept of

 

There are approximately 1043 car parking bays planned throughout the Busselton Foreshore area extending between Gale Street and Georgette Street.  However, there is a greater reliance on street and shared parking areas.   Car parking will also be provided informally during events, where parking is directed to ovals and grassed areas away from activity.  

 

As a rough guide, for a tavern we can calculate 1 space for 3sqm of public/ licensed area and for a restaurant it is 1 space per 4 seats/6sqm of public area.  Using an average figure of 1 per 4m2, the proposed increase would generate a substantial number of car parking bays plus generation of parking from the al fresco area if within a commercial zoned privately owned lot.

 

Following further consultation with the Busselton Foreshore Reference Group and Councilliors a revised proposal with a reduced ground floor area of 1700m2 plus 400m2 al fresco has been ssupported. This would slightly reduce the demand for car parking.

 

In summary it is considered that there is significant parking strategically located around the Busselton Foreshore to accommodate the proposed development on the foreshore.  The foreshore development has been designed to reduce parking bays in the inner core to enable a greener and more people friendly environment.  People will be encouraged to walk, cycle or skate to the site through being well cater for by the extensive pedestrian and cycling pathway system.  This will be achieved through the provision of attractive pathways and facilities for pedestrians, skaters and cyclists.

 

INCORPORATE DESIGN GUIDELINES

 

The Master Plan outlines ‘Design Guidelines’ for the Busselton Jetty  Precinct (refer Attachment F). These guidelines have and will be provided to prospective developers, and will be taken into consideration in the assessment of development applications.  There is no need to modifying the Master Plan or DGP to incorporate ‘design guidelines’ or ‘built form parameters’ to ensure that the proposed built form and scale of development meets the Busselton Jetty Precinct objectives,

 

Under Schedule 7, Special Provision 44 of the City of Busselton Town planning Scheme No.20 the DGP is required to be guided by the City of Busselton endorsed Busselton Foreshore Master Plan.

DEPICT SHOP AND TAVERN INCIDENTAL USES TO THE HOTEL

 

 

The uses ‘Shop’ and ‘Tavern’ are intended to be incidental to the ‘Hotel’ and ‘Tourist Accommodation’, however ‘Incidental Use’ is not recognised in the City of Busselton TPS.  This intention is proposed to be depicted in the DGP Land Use Permissibility Table within the objective for the Short Stay Accommodation Precinct. It is proposed to modify the Precinct Objective to state:

 

‘The precinct will provide for high quality development sites for tourist accommodation and supporting land uses, aiming to provide active frontage to the east-west spine road, an open, landscaped setting, and retain wide view corridors between buildings. The predominant land use in this precinct will be short stay accommodation such as hotels and serviced apartments  Restaurants, shops and bars will be provided at ground level to address surrounding streets and the public realm..’

 

This will reflect the primacy of this precinct for tourist accommodation purposes as envisaged by the BFMP.

 

 

Noted

Partly uphold to modify the objective for the Short Stay Accommodation Precinct in the DGP Land Use Permissibility Table.

 

 

2.

Department of Water

 

Consistent with State Planning Policy 2.9 – Water Resources and the Better Urban Water Management framework, the DoW recommends that a Local Water Management Strategy be prepared to support the Development Guide Plan. (The LWMS should address only those water matters relevant to the proposal.)

 

The DoW also recommends a provision within the Development Guide Plan calling for the production of an Urban Water Management Plan for each precinct or one UWMP covering the whole of the DGP area.  The UWMP(s) should be prepared for DoW endorsement prior to implementation.

Preparation of a LWMS and UWMP for this site is not required.  .In assessing the application for a clearing permit, the DER found that no significant environmental issues relating to surface or groundwater were raised by the DER’s assessment and the DER found that the proposed clearing was not at variance with their clearing principles.  The clearing of 30 trees will not increase the risk of salinity.  Await WAPC advice on this issue.  Drainage/water management Foreshore area due to deep sand, buildings will need to have soak wells and rain gardens, road runoff will be directed to vegetated areas. This is not required, as the scale of the Foreshore redevelopment is well below the level that would trigger the need for a LWMS.

In its decision of 29 January 2014 the Australian Government Department of Environment determined that the proposed Busselton Foreshore redevelopment will be assessed for its impacts on Wetlands of International Importance. Ln its draft approval notice of 3 June 2014, it did not impose any conditions relating to the proposal’s impact on Wetlands of International Importance.  Similarly the State Minister for Environment and DER have issued a clearing permit for the Busselton Foreshore redevelopment without the imposition of conditions relating to this issue. 

Noted

3.

Water Corporation

 

The proposed development is within the WC’s Wastewater Operating Licence Area and therefore will be served.  An increase in wastewater flow resulting from the development area will require an investigation to determine a discharge point into the existing system. Being on Crown land the internal system will be private.  All these elements should be considered by a consulting engineer. Reticulation mains (under 300mm) and private works are to be funded by the developer. 

The Civil Engineering Study undertaken as part of the detailed land investigations for the Busselton Foreshore Redevelopment has addressed these issues. 

Noted. 

4.

Western Power

 

Western Power strives to continually improve the accuracy and timeliness of it planning information. Toward this objective, Western Power presents its plans via the Annual Planning Report (APR) and the Network Capacity Mapping Tool (NCMT) In addition Western Power supplies its NCMT data to the Department of Planning for integration into cross-agency publications and planning tools. I invite you to review the information provided via the APR and the NCMT for your area.

The Civil Engineering Study undertaken as part of the detailed land investigations for the Busselton Foreshore Redevelopment has addressed these issues. 

Noted.

5.

Busselton Water

 

There is currently no reticulation mains to service this proposed new development area. Hydraulic planning, design and installation of a suitable water supply to this development would be required and should be factored into the development cost.

The Civil Engineering Study undertaken as part of the detailed land investigations for the Busselton Foreshore Redevelopment has addressed these issues.  The development is able to be connected to reticulated water mains. 

 

6

John and Barbara Lang

 

To this point, planning done by the Busselton Foreshore Working Group and concomitant on-the-ground construction have focused on the idea of a family friendly environment in this area. Frequent visits to the foreshore over the Christmas period demonstrated just how successful that focus has become.

We are disappointed that the proposed changes would add yet another alcohol outlet to the many already in existence in our community and deplore the fact that it would be located within the heart of this family centred endeavour.

If the community feels strongly that it needs more opportunities to purchase alcohol, please let that happen outside the perimeter of our Foreshore.

ADDITIONAL LICENCED PREMISES ON FORESHORE NOT REQUIRED AND INAPPROPRIATE

The proposed microbrewery, restaurant, function centre is located within the Busselton Jetty precinct, wherein the objective is to function as a magnet to enliven the central part of the Busselton Foreshore; and enhance the views of the foreshore and jetty, improving the pedestrian experience and development will provide for maximum activation of surrounding spaces. 

 

Whilst the Busselton Foreshore Working Group Concept Plan 2010 and BFMP approved in April 2012 did not include a tavern or microbrewery within the Busselton Jetty Precinct the foreshore, this use is considered to be compatible with the restaurant, café and railway house uses within the Precinct.  

 

Microbreweries developed in the Cape to Cape Region in recent years have been of a high quality, typically developed as a combination of microbrewery, restaurant, gallery, children’s playground. Many have a sophisticated and family friendly atmosphere often within a picturesque and attractive environment.  Examples include: Cheeky Monkey Brewery and Cidery, Duckstein Brewery, Eagle Bay, Brewery, Bootleg Brewery. All of these venues and facilities have a strong appeal and cater to families, couples, individuals and groups and offer a safe affordable product to locals and visitors.

 

The setting on the Busselton Foreshore is considered ideal for this type of facility where the recreational uses and playgrounds are within easy accessibility and enable a range of activities to be undertaken on the foreshore by families.

 

With the increasing population and visitation to the City the current facilities at this location are often at capacity in the peak season. When special functions or events are held at the current facilities there is no alterative food and beverage outlet near the City’s prime attraction.  Hence this facility would also provide a facility that is currently lacking in the CBD and foreshore. 

Dismiss

7.

Creena Holly

 

The suggested 2100m2 footprint, plus additional alfresco space, together with a second storey, is totally out of context with the present overall free flow and accessibility to the public foreshore. The proposed allocated designated area is far too near and imposing to the seafront public area, and I thought such development applications were to be encouraged towards the Marine Terrace area of the foreshore plan.

I strongly oppose the tavern/microbrewery licence. Recently, there has been an additional number liquor licences already successful in Busselton and I am totally against the brewing of alcohol on prime foreshore land.

Response as per submission 6.

Dismiss

8.

Charmian & Kevin Terry

 

Do not support the amalgamation of the Nautical Lady, Kiosk and Tavern/Restaurant sites, a total of 890m2 to create a 2100m2 site plus al fresco area.  A two storey building with a footprint this size is out of character, dominating the beachfront which is promoted as a family-friendly public open space.  The site to be promoted as a venue to hold seminars/conferences and reception has inadequate parking to cater for the increase in numbers, particularly in the peak holiday/tourist season.    

ADDITIONAL LICENCED PREMISES ON FORESHORE NOT REQUIRED AND INAPPROPRIATE

Response as per Submission 6. 

 

FLOOR AREA AND SIZE OF BUILDING OUT OF CHARACTER WITH BEACHFRONT

 

The proposal will rationalise café and microbrewery uses in the Busselton Jetty Precinct into one development location, focussed on the proposed intersection of the east-west link road and Stanley Street. From a planning perspective the proposal will provide greater opportunity to activate the Busselton foreshore redevelopment.  A future landmark building in this location will be complementary to the site and surrounding commercial, recreational and entertainment uses within the Busselton Jetty Precinct. Development will be guided by the BFMP Design Guidelines for the Busselton Jetty Precinct.  

 

This proposal will stimulate activity in this precinct towards the jetty and provide for further integration with activity along the foreshore promenade, the east west spine road and with the Busselton CBD.  The impact on the amount of recreational space will only be minimal given that it will replace the existing Nautical Lady tower café site and the eastern-most kiosk into one consolidated site.

 

Officers consider that the reduced ground floor area of 1700m. for the proposed microbrewery, restaurant and function centre with a covered area including verandahs, plus 400m2 additional al fresco is appropriate and will be more in keeping with the scale of other proposed buildings within the Busselton Jetty Precinct on the foreshore than the proposal for a 2100m2 microbrewery, restaurant and function centre with a covered area including verandahs, plus 400m2 additional al fresco.

 

INADEQUATE CAR PARKING TO CATER FOR USE PARTICULARLY IN PEAK PERIODS

Also refer to Submission 1. The key principle of the Master Plan is to utilise car parking throughout the Busselton Foreshore redevelopment as opposed to provision of private parking.  There are significant numbers of parking bays throughout the Foreshore area.  The design approach has been to reduce parking bays in the inner core to enable a greener and more people friendly environment.  The amount of car parking to be provided will be increased and the proposal reinforces the concept of having parking outside of the inner core.

Two large parking areas that will incorporate retention WRP habitat will be created on the southern side of the short stay accommodation. These car-parks are able to be expanded with parking fitted within the constraints of the existing Peppermint trees and until a detailed design for this area has been completed, the exact number of car-parks is not determined.

 

The east west link road, Queen Street and Stanley Street will be designed as ‘shared streets’ that will be utilised by both pedestrians and vehicular traffic designed for low speed. Limited areas of parking will be available from the ‘shared streets’, providing special needs bays, public transport, coach access and servicing to the commercial tenancies.  

 

The reduced ground floor area of 1700m2 for the proposed microbrewery, restaurant and function centre with a covered area including verandahs, plus additional al fresco should reduce the demand for car parking.

Partially uphold

9

Duncan Gardiner

 

Object to the height of the short stay accommodation being raised back to 20m. The documents states that the previously agreed 15.8m "may encourage 'blocky type' building design that attempts to maximise development potential yet not exceed 15.8m". This seems a very poor excuse, and controls could be put in place to ensure the building design fits the plan. It is far more likely the height has been increased to make it more attractive to developers. Such a height increase would substantially increase the visual impact of the development.

I understand some possum habitat will be lost, although this is not clear from the plan. As there is so little habitat left, no mature trees should be removed. Rather the development should incorporate and embrace such habitat. In short, I believe that the development does

HEIGHT LIMIT INCREASE SHORT STAY ACCOMMODATION

 

It may be difficult to develop a building with 4 storeys plus a loft that is 15.8 metres in height above natural ground level.  In particular, it may encourage ‘blocky type’ building design that attempts to maximise development potential yet not exceed 15.8 metres.   

 

That would especially be the case if a developer wished to accommodate compressing land uses, especially at ground floor level, where floor-to-floor heights of up to 4.0 metres may be necessary.  What is instead proposed is an approach similar to what is used in the R-Codes where there are controls on height for ‘top of the external wall’, ‘top of pitched roof’ and ‘top of external wall (concealed roof)’. To ensure that developers of 4 storeys plus loft can be accommodated whilst still providing for design flexibility, it is proposed the top of the external wall could be 16 metres, top of pitched roof to be 20 metres, and top of external wall (concealed roof) be 18 metres.  

 

LOSS OF POSSUM HABITAT

 

adoption of the BFMP in March 2012, the (then) Commonwealth Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water Population and Communities (DSEWPC) determined that the proposed Busselton Foreshore redevelopment is a ’controlled action’ that requires assessment under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPBC Act) for its potential impact on Western Ringtail Possum (WRP) habitat and the Ramsar Wetlands.   

 

Following discussions with the DSEWPC, State Department of Parks and Wildlife (DPAW), and completion of WRP surveys and reports, the BFMP has been revised to further enhance and protect WRP habitat.  The most significant change to the BFMP is the inclusion of a possum corridor and the resultant changes that are required to incorporate this corridor.

 

This proposal has received support from the Commonwealth Department of Environment and formal approval. This is seen as a positive environmental outcome from the Busselton Foreshore Redevelopment.  

 

 

Dismiss

10.

Barry and Jenny Jones

 

Opposed to 20m high short stay buildings on foreshore, that will be a blight on the family friendly atmosphere.  Concerned about parking spaces being reduced unless you are staying in the monstrosities.  Taking away our POS. Could build further up the beach.   

Refer to Response to Submission 9.

Dismiss

11

Veteran Car Club of WA (Inc)

 

The proposed Master Plan including planting of trees adjacent to the building, additional trees to form a possum corridor and construction of a footpath diagonally through the licenced area results in encroachments. The Council should maintain the function and area of the existing license which provides for parking of 50 vehicles.  The possum corridor should be reduced to one row of trees and stop southward progress of the new path to the now southern fence of the tennis courts.   

As outlined in response to Submission 9.  Following discussions with the DSEWPC, State Department of Parks and Wildlife (DPAW), and completion of WRP surveys and reports, the BFMP has been revised to further enhance and protect WRP habitat.  The most significant change to the BFMP is the inclusion of a possum corridor and the resultant changes that are required to incorporate this corridor. This proposal has received support from the Commonwealth Department of Environment and formal approval. This is seen as a positive environmental outcome from the Busselton Foreshore Redevelopment. 

 

 

12.

Busselton and Districts Residents’ Association

Strongly object to proposed size of 2,100m2 plus alfresco for the new site derived from amalgamation of Nautical Lady, kiosk and Tavern/ Restaurant sites. The total size obtained from the three contributing sites is 890m2, much larger than the Goose restaurant which considered to be a reasonable size. BaDRA members would support a new lot size of up to 1,500m2 including alfresco.

Members voiced the firm opinion that a two storey building with a footprint of 2,100m2 plus alfresco would totally dominate the area which has been designed as a family friendly public open space.

BaDRA members are not opposed to the concept of a Tavern/ Restaurant on the new site per se, but they strongly oppose the proposal of a microbrewery being built in the middle of what is supposed to be a family friendly public open space.

Concern about lack of parking space in vicinity of the site,

Response as per Submission 6 and 8. 

Dismiss. Partially uphold in relation to ground floor area of tavern, restaurant site.

13

Helen McInnes

 

The foreshore is the wrong place for a microbrewery. We have restaurants and the pub on Marine Terrace. Foreshore plans are great without the microbrewery. Why not retain and rejuvenate the Nautical Lady Tower. Keep the foreshore family friendly.

Refer response to submission 6.

Dismiss

14

Christine Swarbrick

 

Object to microbrewery.   that it would certainly bring and doesn't the whole area surrounding Busselton have enough liquor venues (far too many in town) for tourists and locals to visit. Any multi storey building is also so highly unsuitable, why, because why do you want to lose the very uniqueness that attracts people to live here(whose concerns should be considered before any developers) and tourists who flock to Busselton because it is unspoilt by such developments. Big sporting and music events that are happening here now do not need such accommodation on our foreshore at the Jetty as there is plenty available from local businesses and resorts. These businesses provide quality accommodation for tourists and sporting events, you must remember that in winter they all struggle to keep staff as there is not a lot of visitors to the area during this time to provide full time employment. This not only applies to accommodation but to all businesses from Cafes, Restaurants, Clothing Stores, Take a Way's and much, much more. Why would you want local business owners and rate payers to suffer for developments that eventually would, I believe, to either be a white elephant or troublesome in the future.

Response as per Submission 6 and 8. 

Dismiss. Partially uphold in relation to ground floor area of tavern, restaurant site.

15

MJ Cassanet

 

Microbrewery inappropriate. Footprint too large. Should be limited to 1000m2.  With the short stay the Foreshore will become an extension of the CBD.  Areas covered by buildings urban warming occurs.  Excessive parking will be required. 

Response as per Submission 1, 6 and 8

Dismiss. Partially uphold in relation to ground floor area of tavern, restaurant site.

16

Rae Cooper

 

Strongly object to a microbrewery right near Busselton Jetty. More than enough liquor outlets in Busselton region.

Strongly object to hotel or short stay accommodation on A Class reserve or Marine Terrace. 

Response as per Submission 6.

 

 

17

R G Palmer 

Strongly object to a microbrewery in this area, there is insufficient parking facilities in the immediate area and such a proposal would encourage excess alcohol drinking without sufficient transportation facilities. The question is, is this a family friendly area or not?

 

May I also object to the size of an intended alfresco area.  This is as big as my house block and much too large.  The family friendly area theme is great, let’s not spoil it now.

Response as per Submissions 1, 6 and 8. 

Dismiss. Partially uphold in relation to ground floor area of tavern, restaurant site.

18

VJ Bussell

 

Opposed to a Brewery being built on the space limited prime Foreshore area in the vicinity of our heritage listed world famous Busselton Jetty.

One of the main requirements outlined by our Community for our prime central foreshore area was plenty of lawn and shade and space for families and children and all visitors to enjoy this wonderful prime beachfront area.

Like most others I applaud Council for the great job they have done to date on stage one of the main beachfront upgrades. However I feel that a microbrewery proposed for the crucially important next stage of our beachfront development, especially one of anywhere near the size proposed, would seriously put at risk the ability for families and visitors and many others to continue to enjoy this prime section of beachfront and would certainly not attract the overall approval of our community that is a feature of the previous stage.

I am like many others also very disappointed that this proposal is connected with a plan to demolish The Nautical Lady Tower.

This Tower offers visitors and the Community the opportunity to gain wonderful high level 360 degree views of the jetty, the town, and the whole surrounding area.

Busselton is very flat and a tower of this type or height is something that our town needs and appreciates much more, than yet another liquor outlet in that general location.

Most people I’ve spoken to regarding the proposal to build a large Micro Brewery in the heart of our prime central beachfront area are opposed to the idea primarily like myself, on the basis of location, so I hope that if the majority of submissions also oppose the project, that our Councillors will be guided by the majority and vote accordingly when the matter comes before Council.

Refer to response to Submissions 6 and 8.

Dismiss. Partially uphold in relation to ground floor area of tavern, restaurant site.

19.

Hilda Mitchell

 

Object to microbrewery on foreshore near jetty.  Will reduce POS and cause more congestion. Car parking is limited. Alcohol on foreshore is detrimental to children’s use of the foreshore.  . 

Response as per Submissions 1, 6, 8 and 9..

Dismiss. Partially uphold in relation to ground floor area of tavern, restaurant site.

20

Jocelyn Elphick

 

Object to the footprint of microbrewery and reduction in POS. 

Object to further provision of liquor availability.

Parking issues. 

Object to removal of mature peppermint trees, though replanting is on the agenda will have a detrimental impact on the WRP population

Response as per Submissions 1, 6, 8 and 9.

Dismiss. Partially uphold in relation to ground floor area of tavern, restaurant site.

21

Jacqueline Emery

 

Object to the footprint and height of the microbrewery which will reduce POS which was approved at prior community consultation, seriously affect the aesthetics and limit community activity. 

The removal of the peppermint trees, though replanting is on the agenda will have a detrimental impact on the WRP population

Response as per Submissions 8 and 9.

Partially uphold in relation to ground floor area of tavern, restaurant site.

22

Pat Bignell

 

Object microbrewery on foreshore and impact on community. Not family friendly.

Object to size of proposal and two storey inappropriate. 

Response as per Submissions 6 and 8.

Dismiss. Partially uphold in relation to ground floor area of tavern, restaurant site.

23

William Farquharson

 

Object to microbrewery on this site. Better suited to industrial area.  This is the jewel of foreshore sites.

Opposed to encouraging liquor and drinking on foreshore

Building footprint too large and 2 storey inappropriate.  Not family friendly.

Response as per Submissions 6 and 8.

Dismiss. Partially uphold in relation to ground floor area of tavern, restaurant site.

24

Ian Atkins

 

As owner/director of brewing company and would like to bring his brewing brand to Busselton region.  The site is not suitable for a microbrewery and recommend a more suitable site further from the tourist and recreational area. The site is more suited to an outlet for a microbrewery or trendy bar. The use will result in increase in traffic caused through deliveries and collections in an area that should be more focussed on reducing traffic and car free.   Light industrial or rural site would be more suitable. 

Response as per Submissions 1, 6 and 9.

Dismiss.

25

Margaret Strong

 

The size of the proposed Tavern, Restaurant and Microbrewery plus al fresco is too large and could be reduced to 1500m2.  Concern at losing POS and amount of alcohol that would be available. Doesn’t mix with families enjoying POS.

Do not support proposed size of the 5 short stay apartment blocks being increased from 15.8m to 20 metres.  This needs to be debated by full Council.  Inadequate parking to cater for proposed development. 

Response as per Submissions 6, 8 and 9.

Dismiss. Partially uphold in relation to ground floor area of tavern, restaurant site.

26

Kiri Errey

 

No need for a microbrewery on the foreshore when there a number of liquor outlets close by.  Concerned for safety of women and young people that may walk past at night. Issues already occur at The Esplanade now.  

Response as per Submission 6.

Dismiss

27

Nat Errey

Opposed to the proposed plan of having a commercial space of some 2,100 square metres taking up a significant part of the public open space on the BusseIton Foreshore. I understand the need to have some commercial activities that service the beach goers and other activities that occur in this area but the concept of having: • A micro-brewery in a prime family friendly area is totally wrong. There is already a number of outlets that sell alcohol in the immediate area — another one is NOT required.. • A reception area, - including wedding receptions within this area. This is a blatant commercial activity. This should be built in an appropriately zoned area — not within prime commercial space on the foreshore.

Response as per Submissions 6 and 8.

 

28

Ian Clarke

Opposed to concept of 2100m2 being set aside for commercial activity on prime foreshore land. Opposed to microbrewery being included in any commercial activity on the foreshore.  

Response as per Submissions 6 and 8.

Dismiss. Partially uphold in relation to ground floor area of tavern, restaurant site.

29

Jan Clarke

 

Opposed to concept of 2100m2 being set aside for commercial activity on prime foreshore land. Opposed to microbrewery being included in any commercial activity on the foreshore.  

Response as per Submissions 6 and 8.

Dismiss. Partially uphold in relation to ground floor area of tavern, restaurant site.

30

Michael Chartres

The proposed revision (manipulation) of the above Plan to accommodate specific commercial interests to the detriment of the Busselton community is unacceptable.

For councillors to properly comprehend the scale impact of the proposed 2100sq m. structural footprint it would be desirable to have the proponents to peg the site boundaries. Further to this it is surprising that professional planners would even consider an open ended area for so called "alfresco" purposes.

To complete the degradation of the Busselton community's foreshore, council is being asked to consider a two storey development! 

There is no provision for vehicle parking to service the proposal. Council's ad hoc approach to foreshore parking lacks any semblance of responsibility and will further degrade the our community's asset

Response as per Submissions 6, 8.and 9.

Dismiss. Partially uphold in relation to ground floor area of tavern, restaurant site.

 


Council                                                                                      59                                                                                      9 July 2014

11.1                             PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF BUSSELTON FORESHORE MASTER PLAN AND ADOPTION OF DEVELOPMENT GUIDE PLAN – SPECIAL PURPOSE (BUSSELTON FORESHORE) ZONE, CONSIDERATION FOR ADOPTION OF FINAL APPROVAL

Attachment g         Design Guidelines for the Busselton Jetty Precinct

 


Council                                                                                      61                                                                          9 July 2014

12.             Engineering and Work Services Report

12.1           AWARD OF TENDER RFT07/14 – QUARRY PRODUCTS

SUBJECT INDEX:

RFT07/14 - Quarry Products

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

Infrastructure assets are well maintained and responsibly managed to provide for future generations.

BUSINESS UNIT:

Engineering and Works Services  

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Construction and Maintenance

REPORTING OFFICER:

Engineering Technical Officer, Construction & Maintenance - Raelene Lamb

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Engineering and Works Services - Oliver Darby

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Confidential Tender Evaluation Report - RFT07/14  

  

 

PRÉCIS

 

The Council is requested to consider the tenders received in response to Request for Tender RFT07/14 – Quarry Products and consent to award the tender in accordance with the evaluation panel‘s recommendation.

 

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

The Principal objectives with this Request for Tender are to appoint a panel of suitably qualified contractors for the supply of quarry products within the City of Busselton on an as required basis.  Products include, gravel base course material, sand (screened yellow and fill), crushed limestone, sealing aggregate, drainage aggregate, laterite sealing aggregate, laterite asphalt gravel, rock armour/ filter rock (granite, ironstone and limestone) and rock filter stone (granite, ironstone, limestone and basalt), drainage aggregate.

 

This Tender relates to materials and services currently supplied under two existing City of Busselton contracts:

·    RFT11/13 “Supply and Delivery of Quarry Products” (which expires on 1 October 2014), and;

·    RFT03/10 “Gravel Base Course Material” (which expires on 1 August 2014).

Materials and services currently provided under each of RFT11/13 and RFT03/10 will only be purchased by the City under the Contract resulting from this Tender once the respective existing contracts expire.

 

After due diligence by the evaluation team, a panel of Contractors offering the range of services which satisfy the compliance and selection criteria and who offer a competitive price and service will be created.

 

The Contract will run for three (3) years from award with an option of two (2) twelve (12) month extensions, exercisable at the absolute discretion of the City of Busselton.

 

Five (5) submissions were received in response to this Request for Tender.  Submissions were received from Busselton Civil and Plant, Leeuwin Civil, Holcim, Carbone Bros Pty Ltd and B & J Catalano Pty Ltd.

 

The review process of all submissions for RFT07/14 has been completed by the Tender Evaluation Panel that comprised of the following City Officers:-

 

Mark Tyler                                          Contracts & Tendering Officer

Raelene Lamb                                    Engineering Technical Officer (Panel Chair)

Norm Read                                         Construction Supervisor

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

Part 4 (Tenders) of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 apply, In particular, Regulation 11: “Tenders are to be publicly invited according to the requirements of this Division before a local government enters into a contract for another person to supply goods or services of the consideration under the contract is, or is expected to be, more, or with more, than $100,000…” and Regulation 14 (2a).

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

The following Council policies have relevance to the Tender process.

 

Policy 239 – Purchasing:

The procurement process complies with this policy.

 

Policy 049/1 –Regional Price Preference:

The Regional Price Preference was applied to this tender.

 

Policy 031 – Tender Selection Criteria:

The procurement process complies with this policy.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

Application of appropriate selection criteria to the tender has contributed to ensuring that tenderers are offering the "best value" with respect to the supply of services and is highlighted via the tender assessment process.

 

A comparison of rate increases from the gravel base course material and quarry products tenders, awarded in 2011 and 2013, respectively, is provided below. 

 

Quarry Products Description

Percentage Change (TEN03/10 & TEN11/13

vs RFT 07/14)

Gravel Base Course Material

3%

Crushed Limestone 75mm

0%

Crushed Limestone 37mm

0%

Crushed Limestone 19mm

0%

Sealing Aggregate (MRWA) 5mm

8.35%

Sealing Aggregate (MRWA) 7mm

8.35%

Sealing Aggregate (MRWA) 10m

7.9%

Sealing Aggregate (MRWA) 14mm

8.35%

Sealing Aggregate (General) 5mm

8.35%

Sealing Aggregate (General) 7mm

8.35%

Sealing Aggregate (General) 10m

7.9%

Sealing Aggregate (General) 14mm

8.35%

Sealing Aggregate Dust

30%

(Small Annual Usage - Approx 50T PA)

Drainage Aggregate 20mm

New Product

Drainage Aggregate 40mm

New Product

Rock Amour Stone >3.0 Tonne (Ironstone)

0%

Rock Amour Stone 1.0 - 3.0 Tonne (Ironstone)

0%

Rock Amour Stone 0.5 – 1.0 Tonne (Ironstone)

0%

Rock Filter Stone 100mm – 500mm (Basalt)

0%

Clean Fill Sand

9%

Clean Grit Sand

New Product

 

In comparison, the Consumer Price Index for Perth (all groups) has increased by eight percent (8%) between March 2011 and March 2014.

 

The costs of services within this tender are provided for in capital works and operational budgets for each financial year.  Purchasing under this contract will be in accordance with these adopted budgets.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

Key Goal Area 2:                               Well Planned, Vibrant and Active Places

Community Objective 2.3:            Infrastructure assets that are well maintained and responsibly

managed to provide for future generations.

 

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

The objective of this tender is to create a panel of Contractors who best demonstrate the ability to provide quality services at a competitive price across the identified areas of supply.  Therefore, should a Contractor not be able to deliver, an alternative Contractor, with compatible resources will be sourced from the panel. 

 

The risk has been categorised as an L5 (Unlikely with minor operational consequences). The risk has been assessed in this manner because the panel contractors have all demonstrated an ability to provide the services, underpinned by providing laudable referees and supportable financial profile information.

 

Therefore the City has no reason to believe that any of the Contractors may not be able to perform the services as and when required. The risk is perceived to have minor operational consequences for the City given the panel nature of the contract. The flexibility in the contract terms means that the City should always be able to find a replacement provider with minimal delay and at no additional cost to the City.

 

CONSULTATION

 

Nil.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

As part of the tender evaluation an initial compliance check was conducted to identify submissions that were non-conforming with the immediate requirements of the RFT.  This included compliance with contractual requirements and provision of requested information. All submissions were deemed to be compliant.

 

The assessments of the tenders were based on the following Qualitative Criteria as included in the Request for Tender Document:

 

·    Relevant Experience: 10% - a review of relevant work experience, including relevant referees.

·    Tenderers Resources: 20% - detailing the company’s ability to fulfil the contract requirements.

 

The Tendered price was given the following weighting:

 

·    Tendered Price: 70%

 

Given the Request seeks to assemble a panel, the Qualitative Criteria scores and Tendered Price were not determinative in selecting the panel members, but where distances from quarry to worksite vary, the final decision of which tenderer should be chosen for use within a specific project will be made by the member of staff commissioning the works.  This decision will be based upon the tenderers qualitative score, the price of the specific product required and distance from the quarry to the worksite.

 

1.       As a result of the Evaluation Panels assessment tenderers were ranked on their Qualitative scores.   The Basis of this decision is as follows:

2.          

3.       Busselton Civil and Plant:  Daily operations in the South West for in excess of 17 years and have worked for the City of Busselton for the duration of that time.  BCP is structured around service delivery to the City of Busselton and Water Corporation.  Services are also provided to the private sector.  Director with 25+ years’ experience and other key personnel have 15-35 years civil construction experience.  Employs a dedicated pit supervisor.  Demonstrated sound judgement, competency and good management and provided examples of community consultation, providing amicable solution to frequent truck movements in a built up environment.

 

4.       Leeuwin Civil:  A good range of projects including many types of work that the City undertakes regularly.  Have local private and local government experience, including the City of Busselton.  35 employees, including 4 operational directors each with 15+ years construction experience.  Details of key operational staff provided.  Fleet consists of a wide range of plant and a team of full time mechanics.

 

Holcim:  Has been delivering construction materials since 1901 and is a leading supplier of aggregates.  Holcim operates from a network of, in excess of, 88 quarries providing consistent, quality products to a diverse range of customers Australia wide.  Holcim are the preferred aggregates supplier to the Shires of Nannup, Donnybrook, Dardanup, Kojonup, West Arthur and previously to the City of Busselton.

 

Carbone Bros Pty Ltd: Is a long established company and has been in operation in the South West for the past 52 years with a vast variety of plant and heavy duty machinery.  They specialise in the delivery of gravel, limestone and sand which are mined and mixed in the company’s own quarries.  Many of the staff are multi skilled ensuring a continuous flow of production, also ensuring absenteeism does not cause delay in contractual fulfilment.

 

B & J Catalano Pty Ltd: Transport material, including sand, gravel and limestone, from their numerous pits.  They operate a comprehensive fleet of over 80 trucks and its operations extend across the Metropolitan area, the Mid-West and the South West.  The fleet includes semi-trailers, rigid vehicles, road trains, truck and dog configurations, as well as bulk end and side tippers.  They are fully accredited under the Main Roads WA Heavy Vehicle accreditation scheme which includes requirements under fatigue management and occupational health and safety requirements.

 

CONCLUSION

 

This report seeks the Council’s endorsement of the officer’s recommendation to create a panel of preferred suppliers in accordance with the Terms and Conditions as specified in RFT07/14 – Quarry Products.

 

All tenderers have demonstrated the company’s ability to service the contract to an acceptable City of Busselton standard, within tolerable time frames and at a competitive price.

 

OPTIONS

 

The Council may consider the following alternative option:

 

1.    The Council may choose not to accept the officer’s recommendation to create a tender panel of preferred suppliers. Where works for the year are expected to exceed the amount required for a public tender process, in order to meet its financial obligations under Part 4 (Tenders) of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 in particular, Regulation 14 (2a), the City would generally seek to use suppliers on a WALGA Preferred Supplier Panel if no tender was awarded. WALGA, however, does not currently operate a suitable panel of contractors which would cover the requirements of RF07/14. Therefore, if Council does not approve the creation of a tender panel, the City would be required to approach each purchase of materials as a new purchase under the Purchasing Policy, thereby significantly increasing the administrative burden and costs.  This would further frustrate operational efficiency in obtaining critical quarry supplies in a timely manner.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

The award of the tender can be announced immediately after the Council has endorsed the officer’s recommendation. Successful tenderers will receive formal written notification within seven (7) days of the decision being handed down.  There were no unsuccessful tenderers.

 

This Tender relates to materials and services currently supplied under two existing City of Busselton contracts:

·    RFT11/13 “Supply and Delivery of Quarry Products” (which expires on 1 October 2014), and;

·    RFT03/10 “Gravel Base Course Material” (which expires on 1 August 2014).

Materials and services currently provided under each of RFT11/13 and RFT03/10 will only be purchased by the City under the Contract resulting from this Tender once the respective existing contracts expire.

 

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council:

 

             Approves the creation of a panel of the following preferred suppliers in accordance with the Terms and Conditions as specified in RFT07/14 Quarry Products for a period of three (3) years from the date of award, with two (2) optional one (1) year extensions to be exercised at the Principal’s discretion:

 

·    B & J Catalano Pty Ltd

·    Carbone Bros Pty Ltd

·    Holcim (Australia) Pty ltd

·    BCP Civil and Plant

·    Leeuwin Civil

 

That materials and services currently provided under each of RFT11/13 and RFT03/10 will only be purchased by the City under the Contract resulting from this Tender once the respective existing contracts expire.

 

  


Council                                                                                      67                                                                          9 July 2014

13.             Community and Commercial Services Report

Nil

14.             Finance and Corporate Services Report

Nil

15.             Chief Executive Officer's Report

15.1           COUNCILLORS' INFORMATION BULLETIN

SUBJECT INDEX:

Councillors' Information

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

Governance systems that deliver responsible, ethical and accountable decision-making.

BUSINESS UNIT:

Executive Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Governance Services

REPORTING OFFICER:

Reporting Officers - Various .

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Chief Executive Officer - Mike Archer

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Planning Applications Received

Attachment b    Planning Applications Determined

Attachment c    REBA Correspondence Finger Jetty Issue

Attachment d   REBA Newsletter April 2014 

Attachment e    Letter from Hon Warren Truss MP  

  

PRÉCIS

 

This report provides an overview of a range of information that is considered appropriate to be formally presented to the Council for its receipt and noting.  The information is provided in order to ensure that each Councillor, and the Council, is being kept fully informed, while also acknowledging that these are matters that will also be of interest to the community.

 

Any matter that is raised in this report as a result of incoming correspondence is to be dealt with as normal business correspondence, but is presented in this bulletin for the information of the Council and the community.

 

 

INFORMATION BULLETIN

15.1.1    Planning and Development Services Statistics

 

Planning Applications

 

Attachment PDS1 is a report detailing all Planning Applications received by the City between 1 and 15 June, 2014.  Twenty two formal applications were received during this period.

 

Attachment PDS2 is a report detailing all Planning Applications determined by the City between 1 and 15 June, 2014.  A total of twenty seven applications (including subdivision referrals) were determined by the City during this period with all approved / supported. 

15.1.2    Correspondence from Residents of Eagle Bay Association (REBA)

 

A thank you letter regarding the Naturaliste Volunteer Marine Rescue finger jetty issue and REBA newsletter – April 2014 have been received from Don Best, REBA President. Copies of the correspondence are provided as attachments.

15.1.3    Correspondence from Hon Warren Truss MP

 

Attachment E is a copy of a letter received from Hon Warren Truss in response to a letter from the City inviting him to visit Busselton.

 

15.1.4    Thank you Letter for Assistance with the Shire of Exmouth ICT Review 2014

 

Correspondence has been received from Rob Manning A/ Director, Shire of Exmouth:

 

 “On behalf of the Shire of Exmouth I extend our thanks to the Shire of Busselton for making the services and knowledge of your staff member Hendrik Boshoff available to us earlier this month.

 

During his stay with the Shire of Exmouth he has conducted a thorough and very insightful Review Report for our current ITC systems and processes.

 

The various recommendations for improvements will assist our Shire not only in being more productive, but also in managing risks and put in place better purchase & ICT Service plans.

 

Hendrik has been a pleasure to work with and he is an asset to the City of Busselton. We hope that his visit to a remote regional Shire with its own particular ICT challenges has had value to him and to the City of Busselton in terms of exchange of knowledge and experience.

 

On behalf of all staff I thank you for the generous offer of support and hopefully we have made a start for an ongoing partnership between our Shire and the City of Busselton.”

 

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

That the items from the Councillors’ Information Bulletin be noted:

·    15.1.1              Planning and Development Services Statistics

·    15.1.2              Correspondence from Residents of Eagle Bay Association (REBA)

·    15.1.3              Correspondence from Hon Warren Truss MP

·    15.1.4              Thank you Letter for Assistance with the Shire of Exmouth ICT Review 2014

 

 

 


Council                                                                                      69                                                                                                             9 July 2014

15.1                             COUNCILLORS' INFORMATION BULLETIN        

Attachment a          Planning Applications Received

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council                                                                                      71                                                                                                             9 July 2014

15.1                             COUNCILLORS' INFORMATION BULLETIN        

Attachment b          Planning Applications Determined

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council                                                                                      75                                                                                                   9 July 2014

15.1                             COUNCILLORS' INFORMATION BULLETIN        

Attachment c          REBA Correspondence Finger Jetty Issue

 

27 May 2014

Mr Ian Stubbs

Mayor of City of Busselton

4 Ibis Court

GEOGRAPHE  WA  6280

Dear Ian

Re: NVMR Finger Jetty Issue

The Residents of Eagle Bay Association would like to pass on its thanks for your assistance in ensuring that a sensible and logical decision was finally achieved on the issue of the location for a finger jetty  on the east side of the Cape, suitable for use by NVMR for the emergency landing of people injured in boating incidents.

Resolving contentious issues where conflicting objectives arise is never an easy task hence our appreciation for ensuring that all parties with an interest or concern had a chance to have their concerns considered at Council debate level. In that regard we would also like to thank Councillor John McCallum who attended various jetty discussion meetings on behalf of Council and allowed a fair and balanced hearing to all sides of the debate presented at these meetings.

There were a number of relevant issues that were raised with Council officers, during the two years of considerable consultation on the finger jetty issue, that clearly provide support to the Councillors ultimate decision to vote in favour of  extending the existing finger jetty at the old Dunsborough boat ramp as the best option.

Just to ensure these points are documented for future reference we have noted them as follows :

·    At the recommendation of Councillor John McCallum the NVR undertook some time trials in their rescue boats to compare Eagle Bay versus the old Dunsborough boat ramp as potential, suitable jetty locations. From the Swan diving wreck site the time for a rescue boat to reach old Dunsborough was only 3 minutes longer than boat travel time to Eagle Bay. For a boat coming from an area west of Cape Naturaliste the extra boat travel time to reach old Dunsborough rather than Eagle Bay was 6 minutes. The driving time for an ambulance from Eagle Bay to Dunsborough would be at least 12 minutes hence the quickest time to get an injured person to hospital in Busselton is to land them at the old Dunsborough location. In addition, the existing finger jetty at old Dunsborough already has 24 hour lighting, an existing bitumen access to the base of the jetty for an ambulance and a cleared area adjacent to the jetty where a helicopter could be landed, if required.

 

·    In December 2012, COB obtained a grant from RBFS to have a wave study undertaken of the coastal region from Wonnerup around to Canal Rocks. Analysis of this data shows that during the summer months of November through to March, safe boating access to a jetty would be approx. 46% of the time at Eagle Bay compared to 63% of the time at the old Dunsborough boat ramp location. During the winter months, Eagle Bay would only be available 21% of the time compared to 50% of the time at old Dunsborough.  i.e. from a weather and  sea conditions point of view the old Dunsborough location is a far better site for extended periods of safe access for landing at a jetty.

·    REBA engaged two separate marine engineering consultants to assess the proposal put forward to construct a finger jetty at Eagle Bay. Both consultants concluded that as Eagle Bay is an exposed beach location subject to severe winter storms and swells, a substantial breakwater would be required to protect a jetty structure. Also, due to the seasonal sand movement within the near shore areas of Eagle Bay, a jetty to   provide a guaranteed sufficient depth for rescue boats would need to be around twice the length being proposed (i.e. around 120m rather than the proposed 60m).

·    During the holiday period from Christmas to New Year in December 2013, REBA undertook a survey of recreational beach users to obtain feedback on their views of the proposed finger jetty at the Eagle Bay beach. Those “not in favour” were asked if they would sign a petition against the proposal. Over that short 6 day period 530 signatures were obtained opposing the jetty and of that number who signed, 180 were actual boat owners. Less than a dozen people were “in favour” of the jetty concept and declined to sign the petition.

We were not surprised at the overwhelming opposition to the proposed finger jetty, but we were very surprised at the number of recreational beach goers that utilise the Eagle Bay beach. Many came from the Dunsborough and Busselton areas, plus quite a few tourists.

·    Also during the holiday period noted in the dot point above, we made a number of visits to the old Dunsborough boat ramp and discussed with recreational boating people using the ramp their views on the existing finger jetty at that location. Almost all thought it was a great improvement for boat ramp users but complained that it was not long enough. Only the dog legged section can be used for tying up boats that have just been launched or waiting to be pulled out and this current length only accommodates about 2 boats. Hence the Councils decision to extend the finger jetty at the old Dunsborough ramp not only services the needs of the NVMR, but also provides an added benefit for recreational boating. 
(Although the proposal approved by Council recommended a jetty extension of 12m our investigations and research indicated that a jetty extension of at least 20m would be more appropriate to service the needs of the boat ramp users. Perhaps this is still an option that warrants further consideration by Council officers.)

·    During joint discussion meetings with NVMR they noted that they expected that a finger jetty at Eagle Bay might be used for an emergency situation about once every 5 years and then it would only be possible if the weather conditions were reasonably calm at the time of the emergency. This hardly seems like a reasonable justification for the initial construction cost and ongoing maintenance cost of a jetty for just emergency purposes.

 

It is also worth noting that during our two years of research and fact gathering we checked on the actual reported emergency boating incidents in the Cape Naturalist region and we obtained from the Department of Transport (Marine Division) a list of all the reported boating incidents in the southwest region for the years 2007 through to 2012. These incident reports showed that the vast majority of reported incidents occurred on the west side of Cape Naturaliste and the closest point of emergency response to these incidents would have been Canal Rocks. At a joint meeting with NVMR they also stated that Canal Rocks would be their first preference for a rescue finger jetty but a breakwater protection would be required to ensure all weather availability for a finger jetty at this location.

We would therefore urge Council to give serious consideration to upgrading the Canal Rocks facilities, including providing a breakwater protection, as this would greatly improve NVMR emergency response capability and also greatly enhance safety at this popular boat ramp for the recreational boating fraternity.

Thanks you  again for ensuring our issues and concerns obtained a fair hearing and for allowing us to share the above information with you.

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

 

Don Best – President REBA

 


Council                                                                                      77                                                                                      9 July 2014

15.1                             COUNCILLORS' INFORMATION BULLETIN        

Attachment d          REBA Newsletter April 2014


 


 


 


 


Council                                                                                      81                                                                                      9 July 2014

15.1                             COUNCILLORS' INFORMATION BULLETIN        

Attachment e          Letter from Hon Warren Truss MP

PDF Creator

 


Council                                                                                      77                                                                          9 July 2014

16.             Motions of which Previous Notice has been Given

Nil  

17.             Confidential Reports  

Nil

18.             Questions from Members  

19.             Public Question Time

20.             Next Meeting Date

23 June 2014

21.             Closure