COB-RGB

 

 

 

 

 

Council  Agenda

 

 

 

22 October 2014

 

 

 

 

 

ALL INFORMATION AVAILABLE IN VARIOUS FORMATS ON REQUEST

 

 

 


CITY OF BUSSELTON

MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDA – 22 October 2014

 

 

 

TO:                  THE MAYOR AND COUNCILLORS

 

 

NOTICE is given that a meeting of the Council will be held in the Council Chambers, Administration Building, Southern Drive, Busselton on Wednesday, 22 October 2014, commencing at 5.30pm.

 

Your attendance is respectfully requested.

 

 

 

 

 

PAUL NEEDHAM

 

A/CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

 

10 October 2014


CITY OF BUSSELTON

Agenda FOR THE Council  MEETING TO BE HELD ON 22 October 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 8 October 2014. 5

Committee Meetings. 5

9.2          Minutes of a meeting of the Meelup Regional Park Management Committee held on 9 September 2014. 5

9.3          Minutes of a meeting of the Finance Committee held on 2 October 2014. 6

10..... Reports of Committee. 7

10.1        Finance Committee - 2/10/2014 - FINANCIAL ACTIVITY STATEMENTS – PERIOD ENDING 31 AUGUST 2014. 7

10.2        Finance Committee - 2/10/2014 - LIST OF PAYMENTS MADE – AUGUST  2014. 30

10.3        Finance Committee - 2/10/2014 - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT – BUDGET ITEM REQUEST. 52

10.4        Finance Committee - 2/10/2014 - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - BUDGET ITEM REQUEST. 95

10.5        Finance Committee - 2/10/2014 - BUDGET AMENDMENT - CYCLEWAY PROJECTS 2014-15. 98

10.6        Finance Committee - 2/10/2014 - WATER CART FOR DUST SUPRESSION AND FIRE-FIGHTING   103

11..... Planning and Development Services Report. 107

11.1        MANAGEMENT OF DOGS IN PUBLIC PLACES INCLUDING BEACHES. 107

11.2        AMENDMENT 7 TO LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME 21 - REZONING LOT 376 KENT STREET AND LOT 309 PRINCE STREET, BUSSELTON FROM RESERVE FOR RECREATION TO BUSINESS - CONSIDERATION FOR INITIATION FOR COMMUNITY CONSULTATION.. 153

12..... Engineering and Work Services Report. 159

Nil

13..... Community and Commercial Services Report. 160

13.1        DESTINATION MARKETING: PROPOSED UNIFIED REGIONAL BRAND IDENTITY. 160

13.2        BUSSELTON MARINE BERTHING STUDY REPORT (INFRASTRUCTURE CONCEPTS FOR BUSSELTON JETTY, SCOUT ROAD JETTY AND SWIM JETTY). 165

13.3        PERFORMING ARTS CENTRE - ESTABLISHMENT OF A WORKING GROUP. 181

13.4        PROVISION OF CLEANING SERVICES AT THE GEOGRAPHE LEISURE CENTRE AND NATURALISTE COMMUNITY CENTRE INCLUDING LIBRARY. 190

14..... Finance and Corporate Services Report. 196

14.1        DUNSBOROUGH BAY YACHT CLUB LEASE. 196

15..... Chief Executive Officer's Report. 204

15.1        BUSSELTON FORESHORE REDEVELOPMENT RELOCATION OF SCOUTS HALL FROM CROWN GRANT LOT 340 TO RESERVE 17319. 204

15.2        COUNCILLORS' INFORMATION BULLETIN.. 215

16..... Motions of which Previous Notice has been Given.. 223

Nil

17..... Confidential Reports. 224

17.1        CONTRACT RENEWAL - CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

This report contains information of a confidential nature in accordance with Section 5.23(2(a) of the Local Government Act 1995, as it contains information relating to a matter affecting an employee or employees

17.2        APPOINTMENT OF A SENIOR EMPLOYEE

This report contains information of a confidential nature in accordance with Section 5.23(2(a) of the Local Government Act 1995, as it contains information relating to a matter affecting an employee or employees

18..... Questions from Members. 224

19..... Public Question Time. 224

20..... Next Meeting Date. 224

21..... Closure. 224

 


Council                                                                                      5                                                                 22 October 2014

 

1.               Declaration of Opening and Announcement of Visitors

2.               Attendance 

Apologies

 

Nil

Approved Leave of Absence

 

Nil

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 8 October 2014

Recommendation

That the Minutes of the Council  Meeting held 8 October 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 9 September 2014

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

1)         That the minutes of a meeting of the Meelup Regional Park Management Committee      held on 9 September 2014 be received.

 

2)         That the Council notes the outcomes of the Meelup Regional Park Management Committee meeting held on 9 September 2014 being:

 

a)    The Committee approved the use of Meelup Regional Park for the Cape to Cape Mountain Bike Event to be held on 26 October 2014 subject to an acceptable risk management plan and that problem areas of the event trail alignment within Meelup Regional Park be identified and remedial measures undertaken after the event.

b)    The Committee endorsed the Meelup Regional Park Annual Report 2013/14 and requested that a note be added to the financial report when it is presented to Council to clarify the apparent underspend. The outcomes of this will be reported to Council at a later time. 

c)    The Committee discussed the 2014 Gourmet Escape and expressed their concerns that after receiving the plans for the proposed event set up from the organisers, that they did not reflect what had previously been decided on. The Committee recommended that the plans submitted by the organisers be amended to provide for a maximum beach footprint of 45 x 25 metres and reposition of the beach footprint 20 metres to the South East to provide clear access to the beach area adjacent to the carpark for the general public.

 

 

 

 

9.3             Minutes of a meeting of the Finance Committee held on 2 October 2014

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

1)    That the minutes of a meeting of the Finance Committee held on 2 October 2014 be received.

 

2)    That the Council notes the outcomes of the Finance Committee meeting held on 2 October 2014 being:

 

a)   The Committee noted the Information Bulletin – August 2014.

b) The Financial Activity Statements – August 2014 Item is presented for Council consideration at Item 10.1 of this agenda.

c) The List of Payments Made – August 2014 Item is presented for Council consideration at Item 10.2 of this agenda.

d) The Community Development – Budget Item Request is presented for Council consideration at item 10.3 of this agenda.

e)  The Community Development – Budget Item Request is presented for Council consideration at item 10.4 of this agenda.

f)    The Budget Amendment – Cycleway Projects 2014-15 is presented for Council consideration at item 10.5 of this agenda.

g)   The Water Cart for Dust Supression and Fire-Fighting is present for Council consideration at item 10.6 of this agenda.

 

 

 

 

 


Council                                                                                      7                                                                  22 October 2014

10.             Reports of Committee

10.1           Finance Committee - 2/10/2014 - FINANCIAL ACTIVITY STATEMENTS – PERIOD ENDING 31 AUGUST 2014

SUBJECT INDEX:

Budget Planning and Reporting

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

An organisation that is managed effectively and achieves positive outcomes for the community.

BUSINESS UNIT:

Finance and Information Technology

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Finance and Information Technology

REPORTING OFFICER:

Manager, Finance and Information Technology - Darren Whitby

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Finance and Corporate Services - Matthew Smith

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Financial Activity Statements – Period Ending 31 August 2014  

 

This item was considered by the Finance Committee at its meeting on 2 October 2014, the recommendations from which have been included in this report. 

 

PRÉCIS

 

Pursuant to Section 6.4 of the Local Government Act (‘the Act’) and Regulation 34(4) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations (‘the Regulations’), a local government is to prepare, on a monthly basis, a statement of financial activity that reports on the City’s financial performance in relation to its adopted/ amended budget.

 

This report has been compiled to fulfil the statutory reporting requirements of the Act and associated Regulations, whilst also providing the Council with an overview of the City’s financial performance on a year to date basis for the period ending 31 August 2014.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

The Regulations detail the form and manner in which financial activity statements are to be presented to the Council on a monthly basis; and are to include the following:

 

§   Annual budget estimates

§   Budget estimates to the end of the month in which the statement relates

§   Actual amounts of revenue and expenditure to the end of the month in which the statement relates

§   Material variances between budget estimates and actual revenue/ expenditure/ (including an explanation of any material variances)

§   The net current assets at the end of the month to which the statement relates (including an explanation of the composition of the net current position)

 

Additionally, and pursuant to Regulation 34(5) of the Regulations, a local government is required to adopt a material variance reporting threshold in each financial year. At its meeting of 30 July 2014, the Council adopted (C1407/190) the following material variance reporting threshold for the 2014/15 financial year:

 

That pursuant to Regulation 34(5) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations, the Council adopts a material variance reporting threshold with respect to financial activity statement reporting for the 2014/15 financial year to comprise variances equal to or greater than 10% of the year to date budget amount as detailed in the Income Statement by Nature and Type/ Statement of Financial Activity report, however variances due to timing differences and/ or seasonal adjustments are to be reported on a quarterly basis.  

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

Section 6.4 of the Local Government Act and Regulation 34 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations detail the form and manner in which a local government is to prepare financial activity statements.    

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

NA.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

Any financial implications are detailed within the context of this report.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

This matter principally aligns with Key Goal Area 6 – ‘Open and Collaborative Leadership’ and more specifically Community Objective 6.3 - ‘An organisation that is managed effectively and achieves positive outcomes for the community’. The achievement of the above is underpinned by the Council strategy to ‘ensure the long term financial sustainability of Council through effective financial management’.

 

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

Risk assessments have been previously completed in relation to a number of ‘higher level’ financial matters, including timely and accurate financial reporting to enable the Council to make fully informed financial decisions. The completion of the monthly Financial Activity Statement report is a treatment/ control that assists in addressing this risk.   

 

CONSULTATION

 

NA.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

In order to fulfil statutory reporting requirements, and to provide the Council with a synopsis of the City’s overall financial performance on a year to date basis, the following financial reports are attached hereto:

 

§ Statement of Financial Activity

This report provides details of the City’s operating revenues and expenditures on a year to date basis, by nature and type (i.e. description). The report has been further extrapolated to include details of non-cash adjustments and capital revenues and expenditures, to identify the City’s net current position; which reconciles with that reflected in the associated Net Current Position report.

 

§ Net Current Position

This report provides details of the composition of the net current asset position on a year to date basis, and reconciles with the net current position as per the Statement of Financial Activity.

 

§ Capital Acquisition Report

This report provides year to date budget performance (by line item) in respect of the following capital expenditure activities: 

Land and Buildings

Plant and Equipment

Furniture and Equipment

Infrastructure

 

§ Reserve Movements Report

This report provides summary details of transfers to and from reserve funds, and also associated interest earnings on reserve funds, on a year to date basis. 

 

§ Reserve Transfers to Municipal Fund

This report provides specific detail in respect of expenditures being funded from reserves.  

 

Additional reports and/ or charts are also provided as required to further supplement the information comprised within the statutory financial reports.

 

COMMENTS ON FINANCIAL ACTIVITY TO 31 AUGUST 2014

 

Historically, reasonable variances are evident in the majority of revenue and expenditure categories during the early part of each financial year. This is primarily due to the timing of year to date budget allocations. In terms of the Council’s adopted reporting threshold, variances resulting from timing differences are only required to be reported on a quarterly basis. Consequently, this report will only make comment on reportable variances attributable to matters other than timing, unless specific comment is otherwise warranted.

   

Operating Activity

 

§  Operating Revenue

 

As at 31 August 2014, there is a variance of -1% in total operating revenue, with the following categories exceeding the 10% material variance threshold:  

 

Description

Variance

%

Variance

$000’s

Operating Grants, Subsidies and Contributions

+37%

+$242

Other Revenue

-22%

-$22

Interest Earnings

-60%

-$329

Non-Operating Grants, Subsidies and Contributions

-32%

-$366

Profit on Asset Disposals

+650%

+$3

 

Whilst primarily due to earlier than projected receipt of grant funding, the ‘Operating Grants, Subsidies and Contributions’ category includes an unbudgeted reimbursement claim of $99K in respect of the September 2013 storm event. Should this final claim be paid by the Department of Fire and Emergency Services, it will represent windfall revenue in 2014/15.

 

Whilst presently reflecting an adverse variance due to timing matters, the ‘Other Revenue’ category does include approximately $6K in unbudgeted registration fees in relation to the Mayoral Prayer Breakfast, as the City has been required to partly administer this event in 2014. However, (unbudgeted) expenditure associated with this event will offset the registration fee revenue.

 

The ‘Interest Earnings’ and ‘Non-Operating Grants, Subsidies and Contributions’ variances are predominantly as a result of current timing differences.             

 


 

 

§   Operating Expenditure

 

As at 31 August 2014, there is a variance of -16% in total operating expenditure, with the following categories exceeding the 10% material variance threshold:  

Description

Variance

%

Variance

$000’s

Materials and Contracts

-53%

-$1,498

Utilities

-19%

-$71

Depreciation on Non-current Assets

+19%

+$324

Insurance Expenses

-15%

-$74

Allocations

-34%

-$114

Loss on Asset Disposals

+29%

+$2

 

The current variances are primarily as a result of timing differences. For example, the major variance in the ‘Materials and Contracts’ category relates to waste management activities including concrete crushing, green waste processing and kerbside recycling contractors, all of which are ongoing activities. Other material variances in this category, due to timing differences, include computer software licences, and also scheduled Busselton Jetty contract works.

 

Notwithstanding the above, the variance in the ‘Depreciation on Non-current Assets’ category is primarily attributable to the Buildings fair value valuation (as at 30 June 2014), coupled with the significant value of donated assets brought to account as at financial year end. The depreciation budget is developed reasonably early in the annual budget process, based on financial year end projections. Whilst generally accurate, this approach has this year been impacted by the aforementioned activities, the outcomes of which were not known until very late in the 2013/14 financial year. It should be noted however that depreciation expense is reversed as a non cash adjustment, and as such has no net effect on the Net Current Position.                       

 

Capital Activity

 

§  Capital Revenue

 

As at 31 August 2014, there is a variance of +4% in total capital revenue, with the following categories exceeding the 10% material variance threshold:  

 

Description

Variance

%

Variance

$000’s

Proceeds from the Sale of Assets

-76%

-$67

Transfers from Restricted Assets

+140%

+$753

 

The variance in the ‘Transfers from Restricted Assets’ category is primarily due to the return of bond monies held. Due to the nature of this item, it is not feasible to include a notional budget allocation, particularly as this activity has no direct impact on the City’s Net Current Position. 

 

§  Capital Expenditure

 

As at 31 August 2014, there is a variance of -4% in total capital expenditure, with the following categories exceeding the 10% material variance threshold: 

 

Description

Variance

%

Variance

$000’s

Land and Buildings

+55%

+$338

Plant and Equipment

-87%

-$224

Furniture and Equipment

-97%

-$67

Infrastructure

-61%

-$1,117

Transfers to Restricted Assets

+140%

+$242

 

The attachments to this report include detailed listings of the following capital expenditure (project) items, to assist in reviewing specific variances:

§   Land and Buildings

§   Plant and Equipment

§   Furniture and Equipment

§   Infrastructure

 

The favourable variance in the ‘Transfers to Restricted Assets’ category is primarily due to the receipt of Developer Contributions (predominantly pertaining to the Vasse Newtown and Via Vasse subdivisions).

 

BUDGET VARIATIONS AND OTHER ‘KNOWNS’

 

Nil.

 

CONCLUSION

 

As previously mentioned, material variances are not unusual in the early part of each financial year, with this primarily due to budget timing differences , coupled with an increased tendency for higher variances to occur based on ‘lesser’ year to date budget allocations. In reviewing the financial performance to the end of August, and excepting those items specifically highlighted in this report, the major variances are primarily attributable to timing differences at this juncture. However, any significant trends in current financial year performance should start to become apparent by the end of the first quarter, and will be reported accordingly.            

 

OPTIONS

 

The Council may determine not to receive the statutory financial activity statement reports.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

NA.

 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION AND OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council receives the statutory financial activity statement reports for the period ending 31 August 2014, pursuant to Regulation 34(4) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations.

 

 

 


Council

13

22 October 2014

10.1

Attachment a

Financial Activity Statements – Period Ending 31 August 2014

 


 


Council

13

22 October 2014

10.1

Attachment a

Financial Activity Statements – Period Ending 31 August 2014

 


Council

15

22 October 2014

10.1

Attachment a

Financial Activity Statements – Period Ending 31 August 2014

 


 


 


 


 


Council

19

22 October 2014

10.1

Attachment a

Financial Activity Statements – Period Ending 31 August 2014

 


Council

21

22 October 2014

10.1

Attachment a

Financial Activity Statements – Period Ending 31 August 2014

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Council                                                                                      31                                                               22 October 2014

10.2           Finance Committee - 2/10/2014 - LIST OF PAYMENTS MADE – AUGUST                2014

SUBJECT INDEX:

Financial Operations

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

An organisation that is managed effectively and achieves positive outcomes for the community.

BUSINESS UNIT:

Finance and Information Technology

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Finance

REPORTING OFFICER:

Manager, Finance and Information Technology - Darren Whitby

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Finance and Corporate Services - Matthew Smith

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   List of Payments Made – August 2014  

 

This item was considered by the Finance Committee at its meeting on 2 October 2014, the recommendations from which have been included in this report. 

 

PRÉCIS

 

This report provides details of payments made from the City’s bank accounts for the month of August 2014, for noting by the Council and recording in the Council Minutes.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

The Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations require that when the Council has delegated authority to the Chief Executive Officer to make payments from the City’s bank accounts, that a list of payments made is prepared each month for presentation to, and noting by, the Council.

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

Section 6.10 of the Local Government Act and more specifically, Regulation 13 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations; refer to the requirement for a listing of payments made each month to be presented to the Council. 

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

NA.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

NA.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

This matter principally aligns with Key Goal Area 6 – ‘Open and Collaborative Leadership’ and more specifically Community Objective 6.3 - ‘An organisation that is managed effectively and achieves positive outcomes for the community’.

 

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

NA. 

 

CONSULTATION

 

NA.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

NA.

 

CONCLUSION

 

NA.

 

OPTIONS

 

NA.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

NA.

 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION AND OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council notes the payment of voucher numbers M109449 - M109629, EF035807 - EF036228, T007097 - T007099, and DD002248 - DD002267, together totalling $23,431,362.52.

 

 

 


Council

33

22 October 2014

10.2

Attachment a

List of Payments Made – August 2014

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Council                                                                                      53                                                               22 October 2014

10.3           Finance Committee - 2/10/2014 - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT – BUDGET ITEM REQUEST

SUBJECT INDEX:

Leisure Services

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Community Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Community Development

REPORTING OFFICER:

Community Development Coordinator - Jeremy O’Neill

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Community and Commercial Services - Naomi Searle

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Absolute Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Integrated Community and Recreation Precinct Concept (Vasse Country Club)

Attachment b    Invoices from project contractors 

Attachment c    VDCCC Community Bids application

Attachment d   VDCCC CSRFF application  

 

This item was considered by the Finance Committee at its meeting on 2 October 2014, the recommendations from which have been included in this report. 

 

PRÉCIS

 

The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval to amend the adopted 2014/2015 budget through the transfer of $8,059 from a restricted asset account (Community and Recreation Facilities – Vasse Precinct) to create a new budget line item for expenditure relating to the finalisation of the Vasse and Districts Community Centre Committee’s (VDCCC) Vasse tennis court resurfacing and lighting upgrade project.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

The Vasse Newtown Developer Contribution Staging Plan (VNDCSP) was formally adopted (C1101/007) by the then Shire of Busselton Council pursuant to the Shire of Busselton Town Planning Scheme No. 20 on 24 February 2011. This Plan outlines the Developers’ responsibilities for contributing towards community infrastructure and facilities relating to the development of Vasse Newtown.

 

In September 2011, a public meeting was held at the Vasse Hall with over 100 local residents in attendance. It was agreed at the meeting (by a show of hands) to progress the development of a Vasse Country Club and that the development of an active space be a priority for the community. In October 2011 the City received a formal proposal from the community for a Country Club facility in Vasse.

 

In January 2012, in response to the Vasse Country Club proposal, the Council requested City Officers investigate whether the community’s proposal could be incorporated into the existing VNDCSP.

 


 

The current VNDCSP (Stage 1, Item 1) is as follows:

 

Table 1. Current VNDCSP

 

Infrastructure/land item

Stage by which infrastructure must be built or land transferred (as set out on Figure 1)

Category for purposes of clause 10

Value for purposes of clause 10

1.Upgrading of Vasse Community Hall and Kaloorup Road Recreation Reserve

 

Clearance of any subdivision in Stages 2 or 3.

1

$700,000

The details section of Stage 1, Item 1 states that “In consultation with the community at the time, the undertaking of the following works – Resurfacing of and upgrading lights at the existing tennis courts.”

 

In reviewing the VNDCSP for the new Vasse Country Club community proposal, Officers identified a number of issues with upgrading the Kaloorup Road Recreation Reserve, the main issues being; it is a ’sub-optimal‘ oval (in terms of size for active sport) and therefore has restrictions for future use, and; it has no on-going water supply. In light of the new Country Club and active space proposal, and the significant investment required to bring the Reserve to a useable standard, Officer’s concluded that it would not be in the best interest of the community to draw on a significant proportion of Developer Contribution funds for a reserve that would continue to have usage limitations. 

 

As part of this review, and as per the Council endorsed (C1304/088) Active Open Space Strategy, Officers undertook extensive consultation with the developers of the Vasse Newtown development, Department of Education and Training (DET) - facilities branch, Executive of Cape Naturaliste College, proponents of the Vasse Country Club, and various sporting groups, to develop a concept plan (See Attachment 1) for an ‘integrated community and recreation precinct’ at Vasse which incorporates the following sporting and recreational facilities; 

 

·     Upgrade of the existing Cape Naturaliste oval for use by junior Australian Rules Football for competition, training and summer sports (and training for other sports);

·     Two new rectangular fields for Soccer, Rugby and other rectangular sports;

·     Sports lighting for the rectangular fields to a training standard of 50 Lux;

·     A local community club facility (country club) which would also include change rooms and toilets for sports participation;

·     Competition facilities for Lawn Bowls, Croquet, Tennis, Bocce and Multi Sports (Basketball, Tennis and Netball).

 

In February and May 2014, Council was briefed on the proposed ‘integrated community and recreation precinct’ and the subsequent proposed changes to the VNDCSP which would require the majority of funds allocated towards the development of the precinct, rather than towards the upgrading of the Vasse Community Hall and Kaloorup Road Recreation Reserve as it currently stands.   It was also proposed that the City continue to work with the VDCCC to ensure that the existing tennis courts are re-surfaced and lights upgraded to maintain a minimum standard in the interim.

 

Officers have determined, in consultation with key stakeholders, that it is feasible for Country Club facilities such as bowls, multi-sports (tennis, netball and basketball) and croquet (local level facility only) to be incorporated as part of the proposed active open space strategy located adjacent to the Cape Naturaliste College. This concept once developed will meet ‘whole of community’ needs as part of an ‘integrated community and recreation precinct’ for Vasse. The proposed amended VNDCSP is due for Council consideration in the latter half of 2014.

 

The VDCCC was successful in obtaining funding through the City’s Community Bids Programme in 2013/14. Council endorsed (C1308/208) the allocation of $11,047 out of a proposed $33,140 total project budget to re-surface the tennis courts and improve the lighting at the facility adjacent to the Vasse Hall. Council also indicated in the Community Bids Programme Councillor workshop, in-principle support for a portion of the VNDCSP funds to be utilised towards this, should there be a funding shortfall. 

 

Upon the City awarding a third funding of the total project cost through the Community Bids Programme, the potential use of the VDNCSP funds was informally discussed with the VDCCC, and was subsequently included as part their funding application to the Community Sport and Recreation Facilities Fund (CSRFF) through the Department of Sport and Recreation (DSR), as a way of assisting in leveraging funding for the project. No further discussions were had as to when these monies may, or would be available, or the process by which the VDCCC could access these funds.

 

As part of CSRFF application, the VDCCC was unable to obtain all of the necessary quotations for the lighting component of the project. This was due to the initial quote in the community bids application including an electrical upgrade to the switchboard that supplied electricity to the tennis courts. In the period between the Community Bids application and the CSRFF application processes, the switchboard was reported as a significant ‘safety’ hazard to the community and was urgently fixed by the City. Subsequently the VDCCC was unable to obtain quotes for the lighting upgrade until the work on the switchboard had been completed, and as a result, the CSRFF application only incorporated the re-surfacing of the tennis courts, totalling $17,121. The VDCCC was successful in their application and received a third funding for the re-surfacing of the courts ($5,707 through the CSRFF programme.  With this amount and the $11,047 in Community Bids Programme funding used towards the resurfacing project, a shortfall of $1,067 remained, which was paid for out of the VDCCC operational budget to ensure prompt payment of the resurfacing contractor (Malatestas).

 

The VDCCC undertook the court re-surfacing works during March 2014. At the same time, a City contractor was working on the electrical upgrade (switchboard) adjacent to the tennis courts in Vasse. This contractor was also working on a project for the City to replace the sports lights at Sir Stewart Bovell Park. Through a conversation between VDCCC and the electrical contractor it transpired there were some additional globes at Bovell Park that could be used to replace the globes at the Vasse tennis courts. VDCCC, the contractor and City Officers met and agreed to utilise the light globes from Bovell Park at the Vasse Tennis Courts.  Funding for the installation of the globes was not discussed with the City.

 

Without consultation with City Officers, VDCCC engaged an electrical contractor to undertake a full light replacement and complete the re-trenching and re-wiring of the tennis courts at Vasse at a cost of $6,992. Payment for these works is now outstanding, and the VDCCC are in receipt of a tax invoice from the electrical contractor.    Whilst these works are retrospective, they are in-line with the current VNDCSP and the proposed maintenance and upgrade of the Kaloorup Recreation Reserve, and as such this report recommends that the VNDCSP funds be utilised to fund the completion of these works and the shortfall in the court resurfacing (paid for by the VDCCC), at a total cost of $8,059. This amount includes the following components:

 

·     $6,992 for the upgrade to the sports lighting;

·     $1,067 of operational funds that the VDCCC utilised to complete the court re-surfacing project (See Attachment 2).

 

 

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

Section 6.8 of the Local Government Act refers to expenditure from the municipal fund that is not included in the annual budget. In the context of this report, where no budget allocation exists, expenditure is not to be incurred until such time as it is authorised in advance, by an absolute majority decision of the Council. 

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

This matter aligns with the City of Busselton Strategic Community Plan 2013 and principally with the following strategic goal:

 

Caring and Inclusive Community

1.3          A community that supports healthy, active ageing and services to enhance quality of life as we age.

 

Well Planned, Vibrant and Active Places

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

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

 

City’s Purchasing and Procurement Policy

 

Whilst procurement for this project was not in accordance with the City of Busselton’s Purchasing and Procurement Policy, under the grant application requirements of the Department of Sport and Recreation’s CSRFF programme and City of Busselton’s Community Bids programme, the VDCCC was required to obtain two written quotes for each element of the project (See Attachment 3 and 4). Unfortunately, due to the changing nature of the lighting project the original quotes from the Community Bids Programme funding application were no longer valid at the time of implementation of this stage of the project and an electrical contractor was subsequently contracted by the VDCCC to undertake electrical works without the work scope being requoted.  The funding of the project shortfall and electrical upgrade is for retrospective works.

 

Vasse Newtown Developer Contribution Staging Plan (VNDCSP)

 

The VNDCSP was prepared and endorsed by Council (C1101/007) to comply with the requirements of the Town Planning Scheme, specifically clause 1.8.6 in Schedule 11, which contains special provisions applicable to the Vasse Development Zone.

 

The developer contributions consist of cash contributions required on a per lot basis at clearance stage and requirements for ceding of land or development of infrastructure in association with specified stages of subdivision. The cash contribution payable under this DCSP includes a component to meet the provision of community facilities and services within Vasse Newtown, and a component to meet the demand generated by this development for the provision of district level facilities.

 

In the current VNDCSP section of Stage 1, Item 1 states that “In consultation with the community at the time, the undertaking of the following works – Resurfacing of and upgrading lights at the existing tennis courts.”

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

This report recommends that $8,059 be transferred from the restricted asset account (Community and Recreation Facilities – Vasse Precinct) to the Recreation Administration (Donations, Contributions and Subsidies ) account, to provide the VDCCC with the funds to pay for the shortfall in the total grant funds received to complete the tennis court re-surfacing project, and to pay the outstanding account from the electrical contractor for the tennis court lighting upgrade.  The use of these funds is in accordance with the existing VNDCSP and there will be no net impact on the City’s 2014/15 budget.

 

The proposed budget amendment is as follows:

Description

2014/15

Adopted Budget

$

2014/15 Amended Budget

(PROPOSED)

$

Variance

$

Restricted Asset Account (Community and Recreation Facilities – Vasse Precinct)

-$8,059

-$8,059

Donations, Contributions and Subsidies 332.10540.3640.0000

 

$8,059

$8,059

NET VARIANCE

 

 

0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The final project costs are as follows:

 

 

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

The recommendations contained within this report are considered low risk and as such a formal risk assessment is not provided.

 

CONSULTATION

 

Consultation has taken place between City Officers and the VDCCC on the Vasse Tennis Court upgrade project. The VDCCC misunderstood the funding processes, which has led to a shortfall in project funding. 

 

Staff from the South West Office of DSR were also consulted in regard to the funding submission received for the CSRFF.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

The previous developers of Vasse Newtown were required to make developer contributions towards the development of community and recreation facilities to service the Vasse community. The current endorsed Developer Contributions Plan currently provides approximately $700,000 towards the upgrading of Kaloorup Oval and adjoining precinct, including the Vasse Hall, Tennis Courts and Sports Lighting. The City has worked with the VDCCC to assist in accessing funding through the City’s Community Bids Programme and DSR’s CSRFF programme for the re-surfacing of the tennis courts and the upgrading of lighting as part of the VCDCSP. 

Unfortunately the amount secured through these two funding schemes was insufficient to undertake both components of the project.  As the project is in-line with the current VNDCSP and the proposed maintenance and upgrade of the Kaloorup Recreation Reserve, this report recommends that the VNDCSP funds be utilised to fund the completion of these works, at a total cost of $8,059.

 

This will have a no impact on the City’s 2014/15 operating budget and will enable City officers to assist the VDCCC in finalising this project.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The project to re-surface the Vasse tennis courts and upgrade the sports lighting has been an identified community need for a significant period of time, and identified as a key project in the current VNDCSP. Whilst there has been a significant amount of work in reviewing the VCDCSP, a proposal has been developed that would see the development of an ‘integrated community and recreation precinct’ which would require the use of Developer Contributions funding to implement.  Through this review process, the upgrade of the existing tennis courts and sports lighting were still identified as a required component of recreation facilities and services in Vasse and recommended by Officers to be implemented.  Additionally, these works are in line with the Council endorsed (C1304/088) Active Open Space Strategy.

 

City Officers are recommending a budget transfer from a restricted assets account to the Recreation Administration (donations, contributions and subsidies) expenditure account (332.10540.3640.0000) to finalise the project expenditure.

 

OPTIONS

 

The Council may determine to approve the transfer of the outstanding amount of $6,992 for the electrical component of for the lighting upgrade works only.

 

The Council may determine to approve the transfer of $1,057 contributed by the VDCCC out of their operational funds for the shortfall in the court re-surfacing project only.

 

The Council may determine not to support the approval for the transfer of any funds out of the restricted assets account for this project.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

Should the Officer Recommendation be endorsed, City Officers will liaise with the VDCCC to ensure prompt payment of the electrical contractor and the re-imbursement of the shortfall incurred by the VDCCC for the re-surfacing works completed.

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

ABSOLUTE MAJORITY DECISION OF COUNCIL REQUIRED

That the Council:

 

1.    Approves the transfer from the restricted asset account (Community and Recreation Facilities – Vasse Precinct) of $8,059 to the Recreation Administration budget (Donations, Contributions and Subsidies) for the completion of the Vasse tennis court re-surfacing and lighting upgrade project.

 

2.    Approves an amendment to the 2014/15 budget on the following basis:

 

 

 

 

Description

2014/15

Adopted Budget

$

2014/15 Amended Budget

(PROPOSED)

$

Variance

$

Restricted Asset Account (Community and Recreation Facilities – Vasse Precinct)

-$8,059

-$8,059

Recreation Administration (Donations, Contributions and Subsidies )332.10540.3640.0000

 

$8,059

$8,059

NET VARIANCE

 

 

0

 

Note:     The Committee supported the Officer Recommendation subject to the amendment of the amount of the approved transfer from the restricted asset account (Community and Recreation Facilities – Vasse Precinct) to $6,992 in so that the VDCCC will be responsible for the $1,067 of operational funds shortfall.

 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

ABSOLUTE MAJORITY DECISION OF COUNCIL REQUIRED

 

That the Council:

 

1.    Approves the transfer from the restricted asset account (Community and Recreation Facilities – Vasse Precinct) of $6,992 to the Recreation Administration budget (Donations, Contributions and Subsidies) for the completion of the Vasse tennis court re-surfacing and lighting upgrade project.

 

2.    Approves an amendment to the 2014/15 budget on the following basis:

 

Description

2014/15

Adopted Budget

$

2014/15 Amended Budget

(PROPOSED)

$

Variance

$

Restricted Asset Account (Community and Recreation Facilities – Vasse Precinct)

-$6,992

-$6,992

Recreation Administration (Donations, Contributions and Subsidies)

332.10540.3640.0000

 

$6,992

$6,992

NET VARIANCE

 

 

0

 

3.   That the Vasse and Districts Community Centre Committee be responsible for the $1,067 of operational funds shortfall.

 

 

 


Council

61

22 October 2014

10.3

Attachment a

Integrated Community and Recreation Precinct Concept (Vasse Country Club)

 


Council

63

22 October 2014

10.3

Attachment b

Invoices from project contractors

 


 


Council

65

22 October 2014

10.3

Attachment c

VDCCC Community Bids application

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Council

77

22 October 2014

10.3

Attachment d

VDCCC CSRFF application

 


Council

75

22 October 2014

10.3

Attachment d

VDCCC CSRFF application

 


Council

79

22 October 2014

10.3

Attachment d

VDCCC CSRFF application

 


 


 


 


Council

83

22 October 2014

10.3

Attachment d

VDCCC CSRFF application

 


 


Council

87

22 October 2014

10.3

Attachment d

VDCCC CSRFF application

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Council

93

22 October 2014

10.3

Attachment d

VDCCC CSRFF application

 


Council

95

22 October 2014

10.3

Attachment d

VDCCC CSRFF application

 


 


 


Council                                                                                      97                                                               22 October 2014

10.4           Finance Committee - 2/10/2014 - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - BUDGET ITEM REQUEST

SUBJECT INDEX:

Grants & Subsidies

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Community Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Community Development

REPORTING OFFICER:

Community Development Officer - Naomi Davey

Community Development Coordinator - Jeremy O’Neill

Manager, Community Services - Maxine Palmer

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Community and Commercial Services - Naomi Searle

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Absolute Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Nil

 

This item was considered by the Finance Committee at its meeting on 2 October 2014, the recommendations from which have been included in this report. 

 

PRÉCIS

 

The purpose of this report is to seek approval to amend the 2014/2015 Community and Commercial services budget to include grant funding of $3,327 (ex GST) from the Royal Automobile Club of WA (inc.) (RAC) Grass Roots grants programme for the upcoming City of Busselton Community Safety Expo (Expo).

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

Identified in the City of Busselton Social and Ageing Plan 2012-2020 are strategies to improve community cohesion and specifically improve public safety through greater levels of neighborhood and community collaboration. As such the Community Development team, have organized a Community Safety Expo to be held on the 15th October 2014 at the Busselton Senior Citizens Centre. 

 

The City of Busselton has applied and been successful in securing a grant from the RAC to the value of $3,327 (ex GST) for the purpose of holding an Expo targeted at Seniors to promote gopher safety on roads and home security. The objectives of the expo are:

 

·    To raise awareness of community safety concerns and about road safety and security; and

·    To educate gopher users about road safety, road rules and best-use pathways.

 

During the expo the RAC Driver Education and Training Centre and Western Australian Police (WAPOL) will deliver the gopher education workshops and a representative from WAPOL will deliver information relating to safety in and around the home.  The grant will also pay for the production and distribution of 100 RAC branded gopher safety flags to be given out on the day.

 

The aim of the Expo is to:

·    encourage connectedness between the community and service agencies, WAPOL, City of Busselton and other commercial business who can assist and aid in promoting safety;

·    Strengthen and encourage community safety and home safety programs; and

·    Strengthen and encourage community and educational programs addressing road safety issues.

 

The Expo will also include community and commercial stall holders relevant to the community and safety areas.

 

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

Section 6.8 of the Local Government Act 1995 refers to expenditure from the municipal fund that is not included in the annual budget. In the context of this report, where no budget allocation exists, expenditure is not to be incurred until such time as it is authorized in advance, by an absolute majority decision of the Council.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

This matter aligns with the City of Busselton Social and Aging Plan 2012-2020, and the City of Busselton Strategic Community Plan 2013, with the following strategic goal:

 

·   Caring and Inclusive Community

1.3  A Community where people feel safe, empowered, included and enjoy a sense of good health and wellbeing.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

The total cost of the project is covered in its entirety by the RAC grant of $3,327, there is therefore no negative financial implication resulting from the Officer recommendation.

 

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

The recommendations contained within this report are considered low risk and as such a formal risk assessment is not provided.

 

CONSULTATION

 

Consultation during the development phase of the project has taken place with various community groups and service agencies including the Busselton Senior Citizens Centre, BESS, Australian Hearing, Cape Care, members of the Vasse Human Service Alliance, RAC Driver Education and Training Centre, and the WAPOL.

 

City Officers have created a strong working relationship with these agencies and will work collaboratively to stage the Expo.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

In accordance the key goals of the City of Busselton Strategic Community Plan and the Social and Aging Plan, Community Development staff have successfully secured grant funding from the RAC Grass Roots grants programme of $3,327 for the Community Safety Expo. The aim of the Expo is to:

 

·    encourage connectedness between the community and service agencies, WA Police, City of Busselton and other commercial business who can assist and aid in promoting safety;

·    Strengthen and encourage community safety and home safety programs; and

·    Strengthen and encourage community and educational programs addressing road safety issues.

 

The Expo will also include community and commercial stall holders relevant to the community and safety areas.

 

There has been strong support from community groups and agencies for the Expo. City Officers will work collaboratively to promote and conduct the Expo to ensure maximum exposure and

attendance.

This report seeks Council approval to amend the 2014/2015 Community and Commercial Services budget to include grant funding received from RAC for the Expo.

 

CONCLUSION

 

A key initiative of the City’s Community Development team is to engage with and create opportunities for the community. This Expo will provide a focal point to raise the awareness of seniors in relation to community safety concerns and road safety and security, in addition to educating gopher users about road safety, road rules and the usage of pathways.

 

The Community Safety Expo is a community initiative as identified in the City of Busselton Strategic Community Plan and Social and Aging Plan.

 

OPTIONS

 

Council may determine not to support the Officer’s recommendation of creating a new budget allocation for the RAC grass roots grant, in which case the funds will be required to be returned.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

Should the Officer recommendation be endorsed, the Expo will take place on the 15 October 2014. The project and acquittal will be completed by 30 November 2014.

 

 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION AND OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

ABSOLUTE MAJORITY DECISION OF COUNCIL REQUIRED

That the Council:

 

1.    Approves an amendment to the 2014/15 budget to facilitate grant funding of $3,327 from the Royal Automobile Club of WA (inc.) (RAC) Grass Roots grants programme for the purposes of facilitating a Senior’s Expo to be held in Busselton on the following basis:

 

Description

 Account String

2014/15 Adopted Budget  $

 2014/15 Amended Budget (PROPOSED)  $

Variance $

Operating Grants & Subsidies (RAC)

330.10530.1239.9667

$0

-$3,327

-$3,327

Consultancy

330.10530.3260.9667

$0

$3,327

$3,327

Net Variance

 

$0

$0

$0

 

 

 

 

 


Council                                                                                      101                                                             22 October 2014

10.5           Finance Committee - 2/10/2014 - BUDGET AMENDMENT - CYCLEWAY PROJECTS 2014-15

SUBJECT INDEX:

Budget Planning and Reporting

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Engineering and Facilities Services; Operations Se

ACTIVITY UNIT:

 

REPORTING OFFICER:

Engineering Management Accountant - Stephen Wesley

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Engineering and Works Services - Oliver Darby

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Absolute Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Busselton Bypass Path - Strelly St to Vasse Diversion Drain  

 

This item was considered by the Finance Committee at its meeting on 2 October 2014, the recommendations from which have been included in this report. 

 

PRÉCIS

 

The City was recently informed that it was unsuccessful in obtaining grant funding under the Regional Bicycle Network Program for 2014/15. To this end, the following two projects adopted in in 2014/15 budget have been adversely impacted.

 

·    Navigation Way section between Guerin Street to Marine Terrace.

·    Busselton Bypass section between Strelly Street and Clydebank Avenue.

 

The projects valued at $98,638 and $89,448 respectively are budgeted to be funded 50% from grants with a 50% matching contribution by Council.  Thus the consolidated City contribution from municipal funds towards both projects totals $94,043.

 

This report seeks Councils approval to undertake only the Busselton Bypass path section between Strelly Street and Clydebank Avenue using the allocated City funds from both projects.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

Each year City Officers submit grant funding applications to the Department of Transport under the Regional Bicycle Network Program. The 2014-15 program made available $1.33m in State Government funding for the development of Regional Bicycle Infrastructure.  Unfortunately the City was unsuccessful in securing any of the available 2014-15 funding this time around, it should be noted that the City has had two very successful years, securing grants under the program totaling $750,000 that was put towards the Busselton to Dunsborough dual use path project. 

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

Section 6.8 of the Local Government Act refers to expenditure from the municipal fund that is not included in the annual budget. In the context of this report, where no budget allocation exists, expenditure is not to be incurred until such time as it is authorised in advance, by an absolute majority decision of the Council. 

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

City of Busselton Bike Plan dated September 2010.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

This budget adjustment will have no financial implications on the City’s overall financial position, having no impact on municipal funding.

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

4. Connected City

4.3 A linked network of cycle ways and pedestrian paths providing alternative transport options.

 

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

Not applicable

 

CONSULTATION

 

The Bike plan endorsed by Council in 2010 contains the following references to this section of path;

 

Project - Busselton Bypass - Vasse Diversion Drain to Strelly Street

Recommendation

To provide alternative C1 east – west route.

Recommended works are:

1) Construct new 2.5 metres asphalt path (600 metres);

2) Provide appropriate ramps and;

3) Sign accordingly.

 

The Bike plan endorsed by Council in 2010 gave the public an opportunity to comment on the City’s bike infrastructure needs. A number of responses indicated a community desire for a designated path running along the length of the Busselton Bypass linking Vasse in the West through to the Busselton CBD in the East.

 

The following are a sample of responses contained in the plan relevant to works along the Busselton Bypass; 

 

Public comment 19 - “Busselton Bypass Clydebank to Cook Street - complete paths”

Public comment 25 - “improve the rough surface on bypass path”

Public comment 26 - “Finish seal on bypass Fairway Drive to Redgum Way”

Public comment 32 - “Busselton Bypass – link cycle lanes to bridges”

Public comment 46 - “Bypass – continue path Vasse to Bunnings”

Public comment 59 - “need to create a separate cycle way alongside the highway”

Public comment 80 - “Provence, Willow Grove, Country Road extend to Geographe Leisure Centre and Vasse Newtown. Busselton Bypass”

Public comment 84 - “From the Vasse diversion drain to Clydesbank Avenue on Bypass”

Public comment 93 - “Bunnings to Vasse along Bypass”

Public comment 105 - “Fairway Drive  to Vasse”

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

The City was recently informed that it was unsuccessful in obtaining grant funding under the Regional Bicycle Network Program for 2014/15 for the following two projects;

 

·    Navigation Way section between Guerin Street to Marine Terrace.

·    Busselton Bypass section between Strelly Street and Clydebank Avenue.

 

The Busselton Bypass project (asphalting the section between Strelly Street to Clydebank Avenue has been deemed the more important of the two projects on this year’s budget. This project will formalise a West-East link between the bridge on the Busselton Bypass crossing the Vasse Diversion Drain into the existing path adjacent to Bunnings and the Caltex Service Station. The path will run adjacent to the Busselton Bypass opposite Cook Street with a distance of approximately 870 metres in length.  Attachment A shows the proposed alignment.

 

The second part of the path project heading west from the Vasse Diversion Drain Bridge (crossing the Busselton Bypass) to the Clydebank Avenue intersection will now be constructed at a later date (most likely next financial year) with a contribution made by the Developer of lot 9001, Peppermint Park. Upon completion this will link the two sections together creating an asphalt path 1.5 kilometres in length.

 

The long term aim is to create an asphalt dual-use path extending from Vasse in the West through to Busselton running adjacent to the Busselton Bypass. This is being referred to as the “Busselton Bypass Cycle Highway”.  This path, once complete will be some 10 kilometres in length.  It should be noted that there are no designated cycle lanes marked on the Busselton Bypass itself and cycling on this road could be considered dangerous particularly for children given the traffic volume and speeds travelled by commuters.

 

City Officers are currently working towards securing either Federal or State Blackspot funding for the 2015/16 financial year to asphalt the 4km section of path between Fairway Drive to the recently refurbished Kangaroo Bridge. This section also forms part of the Busselton to Flinders Bay Rail Trail alignment. If successful this will formalise another section of the Busselton Bypass cycle highway. 

 

CONCLUSION

 

Due to the fact that the City was unsuccessful in securing Regional Bicycle Network grant funding  Council approval is sought to adjust the budget by transferring the portion of Councils own funding totaling $49,319 from the Navigation Way path project to the Busselton Bypass path project. This will allow for one of the cycle-way projects to be completed this financial year.  

 

OPTIONS

 

The Council may determine not to support the proposed budget amendments. The Council funds could be returned to the City’s surplus or reassigned to a higher priority project. Alternatively Council can amend the Officer Recommendation in any way they deem appropriate.     

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

Should the Officer Recommendation be endorsed, the associated budget amendments will be processed within a month of being approved.

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

ABSOLUTE MAJORITY DECISION OF COUNCIL REQUIRED

 

That the Council endorse the budget amendments as follows:

 

·    Reduce the Navigation Way path project grant revenue by $49,319 being account code    541.F1011.1215.

 

·    Reduce the Busselton Bypass path project grant revenue by $44,724 being account code    541.F1008.1215.

 

·    Increase Busselton Bypass path project expenditure by $49,319 being account number 541.F1008.XXXX.

 

Note:         Councillors had been briefed the day prior to the meeting on the progress of the Brown Street extension project. The issue of inadequate budget to construct all of the car parking area as per the detailed design was raised as an issue of concern. Subsequently the municipal funding assigned to these two cycleway projects that had been unsuccessful in securing the necessary 50% of external grant funding provided a good opportunity for Council to redirect this municipal funding back to the Brown Street extension so that all of the car parking could now be built as planned.     

 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

ABSOLUTE MAJORITY DECISION OF COUNCIL REQUIRED

 

That the Council endorse the budget amendments as follows:

 

1.    That the budgeted grant revenue on both projects be deleted as follows;

•              Reduce the Navigation Way path project grant revenue by $49,319 being account                                 code    541.F1011.1215.

•              Reduce the Busselton Bypass path project grant revenue by $44,724 being account                                 code    541.F1008.1215.

2.    That the budgeted expenditure on both projects be deleted as follows;

·           Reduce the Navigation Way path project expenditure by $98,638

·           Reduce the Busselton Bypass path project expenditure by $89,448

3.    That the municipal funds totalling $94,043 then be applied against the Busselton Foreshore Brown Street Road Extension (W0120) so that all of the Car Parking component can be constructed, as per the detailed design. The current budget does not allow for the completion of the current extensions and it was felt that it would be more appropriate to allocate these funds to fully complete the works. The additional funding should enable the job to be completed, without the need for additional funding sources being required.   

4.    That the path projects are to be postponed until Regional Bicycle Network funding can be secured at a future date.

 

 


Council

101

22 October 2014

10.5

Attachment a

Busselton Bypass Path - Strelly St to Vasse Diversion Drain

 


Council                                                                                      105                                                             22 October 2014

10.6           Finance Committee - 2/10/2014 - WATER CART FOR DUST SUPRESSION AND FIRE-FIGHTING

SUBJECT INDEX:

Waste

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Operations Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Waste Management

REPORTING OFFICER:

Waste Coordinator - Vitor Martins

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Engineering and Works Services - Oliver Darby

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Absolute Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Nil

 

This item was considered by the Finance Committee at its meeting on 2 October 2014, the recommendations from which have been included in this report. 

 

PRÉCIS

 

Authorisation is requested to draw up to $25,500 (ex. GST) from the Waste Management Facility and Plant Reserve to purchase a water cart, tray and pump which can be attached to the existing hooklift truck to perform daily dust suppression and act as an emergency fire-fighting unit at the Busselton and Dunsborough Waste Facilities.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

Dust is a significant issue at the waste facilities during dry weather, particularly at the Dunsborough Waste Facility.  Internal roads at the facility are clouded with dust after every truck, unless the roads are watered at least three times a week during dry weather.

 

The City’s operating licence from the Department of Environment Regulation (DER) states that the City “shall use all reasonable and practical measures to prevent and where that is not practicable to minimise dust emissions from the Premises”.  The licence also states that the City shall ensure that no visible dust generated by the activities of the Premises shall cross the boundary of the Premises.

 

In order to comply with the  licence conditions, and to enable City workers and customers to operate in reasonable working conditions, the City uses  the services of a professional water cartage contractor to provide dust suppression at Dunsborough Waste Facility for three days a week during the summer months at considerable cost to the organisation.

 

The cost of dust suppression at the Dunsborough Waste Facility for the 2012-13 and 2013-14 financial years totalled on average of  $30,000 per year (ex GST).

 

The Department of Environment Regulation (DER) has over the past couple of years recommended the City undertake dust suppression in order to comply with the conditions of the license. The Department now seeks evidence annually of the City’s dust suppression compliance measures.

 

In May 2013 the City took delivery of a new hooklift truck and bins, primarily for the purpose of transferring waste from the Busselton Transfer Station to Dunsborough Waste Facility.  The hooklift truck is a versatile piece of machinery: in addition to transferring waste, the vehicle is also used to cart cover sand at Dunsborough, and to cart loads of recyclable materials such as glass to Perth. It was also envisages that the vehicle could be used for water cartage for dust suppression purposes.

 

The City has since investigated the possibility of acquiring a 12,000-litre water cart and pump which can be fitted to the truck tray, and can then be attached (or detached) from the hooklift truck in a matter of minutes to provide an easy solution to watering roads for dust suppression.

 

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

Section 6.8 of the Local Government Act refers to expenditure from the municipal fund that is not included in the annual budget.  In the context of this report, where no budget allocation exists, expenditure is not to be incurred until such time as it is authorised in advance, by an absolute majority decision of the Council

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

There are no policy implications.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

This purchase requires up to $25,500 ex. GST (or approximately $28,000 including GST) to be drawn from the Waste Management Facility and Plant Reserve. This cost includes $14,500 for the cart, $9,200 for the tray and $1,800 for the pump (all prices ex GST).

 

The Waste Management Facility and Plant Reserve had an opening balance at 1 July 2014 totalling $5.824m with the Long Term Financial Plan indicating that this purchase can be easily funded from the reserve without any future adverse impact.  There is also the additional benefit that any savings generated from this undertaking (indicated below) will be represented in the annual Waste Services net operating surplus and effectively returned to the reserve in future years.

 

The following calculation indicates that the City can save in the order of $230,000 over the next 10 years by undertaking its own dust suppression with very minimal initial capital outlay and with improved utilisation of existing plant (hooklift truck) and staff.

 

Water Cart Annual Cost’s                             $             Comment

Depreciation (capital Cost)                          2,550     Based on an estimated 10 year life with no scrap value

Fuel                                                                      2,080     Estimated $40 per week in Diesel to operate

Repairs & Maintenance                                1,000     Estimated cost of annual service and minor parts

Bank Interest foregone (City Reserve)     1,350     Estimated at 4.5% on full Capital amount

Total Estimated Annual Cost                       6,980    

 

Less: Current Contractor cost                     30,000

 

Total annual saving to the City                    23,020

                               

Total estimated saving over 10 years       230,200

 

The calculation above does not include the cost of the City labour to operate the plant as this will be undertaken by an existing staff member of the Waste Services team, following a re-prioritisation of duties currently being performed. This approach provides a true and fair estimation of the expected savings that can be achieved. 

 

For comparison purposes only if additional City labour was required to operate the plant, which it is not, than this would cost approximately $8,424 per annum including all employee overheads. This is based on watering the roads three times per week at 2 hours per service over the 6 months of both spring and summer. In reality servicing would be less than this based on weather conditions. Even under this scenario the City would still stand to save approximately $146,000 over the 10 year life of the water cart purchase.   

 

There is very little doubt from a financial perspective that the City should undertake its own dust suppression activities in the knowledge that it has available its own hooklift truck that can be easily adapted at minimal cost to provide self-sufficient dust suppression while achieving operational savings.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

 

The purchase of a water cart is relevant to the Strategic Community Plan 2013:

 

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

 

Community Objective 2.3 Infrastructure assets are well maintained and responsibly managed to provide for future generations.

 

Key Goal Area 5:               Cared for and Enhanced Environment

 

Community Objective 5.3 Environment and climate change risks and impacts are understood and managed.

 

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 identifies ‘downside’ risks only, rather than ‘upside’ risks as well. Risks are only identified where the residual risk, once controls have been identified, is identified as ‘medium’ or greater. No such risks have been identified.

 

CONSULTATION

 

Nil.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

We have looked at using the two other City’s water carts, which could be a viable option in principle. Of these, one is a 12,000 litres cart and the other is a smaller 6000 litre unit. However, these are used by the works crew for road construction and are fully utilised during the dry weather months, when the roadmaking is done. This dry period is coincident with the period that requires more frequent dust suppression. If the City only needed dust suppression to be performed occasionally (i.e. once every couple of weeks) it could probably be arranged that the construction crew would take the cart out to Dunsborough. However, the ongoing need for dust suppression as per the license requirements totally justifies a unit being permanently stationed at the Dunsborough Waste Facility.

 

If Council approves the purchase of a 12,000-litre water cart and pump, staff at the Dunsborough Waste Facility will be able to water the internal roads leading to the tip face early in the morning during summer, detach the water cart, and then use the hooklift truck to transfer waste from Busselton to Dunsborough.

 

The water cart will be filled from the 50,000-litre tank standpipe located at the Dunsborough depot, adjacent to the Dunsborough Waste Facility. That is, water will be supplied with no significant cost to the City.

 

The water cart can also be used as an effective emergency firefighting unit, and can be taken to the Busselton Transfer Station for dust suppression or fire-fighting should the need arise.

 

If approved, City Officers will proceed in obtaining three formal written quotes for the purchase of the equipment.

 

CONCLUSION

 

Owing to the fact that the City would otherwise be spending in the order of $30,000 per year on an external contractor to provide dust suppression at the Dunsborough Waste Facility, the purchase of this equipment is strongly justified. With anticipated savings over the 10 year life of the asset amounting to $230,000, it will pay for itself within two years of operation.

 

OPTIONS

 

Council may reject the request for funds to be drawn from the Waste Reserve for this piece of equipment, in which case a contractor will continue to be used for dust suppression, at an annual cost of approximately $30,000 per year.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

A 12,000-litre water cart and a suitable pump can be bought “off the shelf” immediately; however a tray to fit the cart to the hooklift truck will need to be manufactured.  This may take several months to obtain.

 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION AND OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

ABSOLUTE MAJORITY DECISION OF COUNCIL REQUIRED

 

That the Council:

 

1.            Approve up to $25,500 to be drawn from the Waste Management Facility and Plant Reserve        in order to purchase a water cart, tray and pump, primarily for the purpose of dust suppression but also for emergency fire-fighting at the City’s waste facilities.

2.            Add up to $25,500 to the existing Plant Purchases cost code (to account string 528-11402-              7723-0000).

 

  


Council                                                                                      109                                                             22 October 2014

11.             Planning and Development Services Report

11.1           MANAGEMENT OF DOGS IN PUBLIC PLACES INCLUDING BEACHES

SUBJECT INDEX:

Animal Management

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

A Council that engages broadly and proactively with the community.

BUSINESS UNIT:

Environmental Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Ranger and Emergency Services

REPORTING OFFICER:

Manager, Environmental Services  - Greg Simpson

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Planning and Development Services - Paul Needham

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Extract from Council Agenda and Minutes of 24 September 2014 Council Meeting

Attachment b    Map of Proposed Dog Management Areas on Beaches

Attachment c    Proposed Dog Management Areas on Beaches  

  

 

PRÉCIS

 

The Council is asked to consider the City’s approach to the management of dogs in public places under the care and control of the City. It is recommended that the proposed approach be adopted for consultation purposes (noting consultation is required by State law), with consultation being undertaken and the issue then being referred back to the Council for its consideration before any final decisions are made.

 

The proposed approach has taken into consideration feedback received from a community consultation process undertaken in late 2012, as well as a resolution of the Council at its 24 September 2014 ordinary meeting, when these matters were previously considered. At that time the Council considered a proposal put forward by staff, and asked that the proposal be reviewed and presented for the Council’s further consideration; but that the proposals first be modified to reflect several specific objectives. This report sets out a range of modifications relative to the proposals presented to the Council in September, and those modifications seek to address the objectives identified by the Council at that time.

 

Until September 2014, for a range of reasons, most notably change and uncertainty in terms of the State level legislative framework, the review process had not been advanced much since the late 2012 consultation process, but it is considered that the City is now in a good position to recommence and finalise the review process.

 

In formulating the approach proposed in this report, officers have sought to balance a wide range of different, often divergent, views and interests, together with other factors that need to be considered, including the actual potential for conflict in different contexts, as well as the resources that can reasonably be allocated to promotion, monitoring and enforcement of controls.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

At its ordinary meeting of 24 September 2014 the Council considered a report in relation to this matter and resolved as follows –

That the Officer Recommendation not be adopted and that the item be referred back to the CEO to enable him to prepare a revised plan of the City’s coastline showing prohibited, exercise and seasonal areas for Council’s consideration.

1.          The revised plan to be prepared with the following objectives:

a)         Increase significantly the number of prohibited areas in high population sections of the City throughout the coastline to ensure residents and visitors can enjoy our beaches without having dogs on the beaches.

b)         A significant reduction in the number of exercise and seasonal areas throughout the coastline by aiming to have no area shorter than approximately 500M.

c)         Rather than aiming to provide exercise areas in close walking distances from residential areas, adopt the position that some dog owners may need to take their dog by vehicle to a designated exercise area whether it be on the coast or inland.

d)         Identifying additional exercise areas away from the coast to cater for the impact of the significant reductions of exercise and seasonal areas if practical.

2.         The Council authorises the CEO to seek an Order of the Governor under section 9 of the Dog Act 1976 to declare that the Act shall apply beyond the boundaries of the City of Busselton into the Indian Ocean to a distance 100 metres seawards from the high water mark, including clarification that such an Order would provide for the City to declare areas to be exercise and/or prohibited areas where those areas are on the seaward side of the high water mark.

 

Point 2 of the Council’s previous resolution is being actioned by officers and does not require further consideration at this time. In relation to point 1 above, however, a revised set of proposals that seeks to reflect the objectives set out is now presented for consideration by the Council. It should also be noted that the officer recommendation now presented also incorporates a number of detailed changes to the wording which were mostly incorporated in an alternative recommendation presented by officers prior to the 24 September meeting. A relevant extract from the agenda and minutes of the 24 September meeting is provided as Attachment A. That extract contains extensive background information and discussion which, for reasons of simplicity and brevity, is therefore not repeated in the body of this report.

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

See Attachment A.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

See Attachment A.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

See Attachment A.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

The recommendations of this report reflect Objective 6.1 of the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2013, which is; “A Council that engages broadly and pro-actively with the community”.

 

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, is medium or greater.

 

Risk

Controls

Consequence

Likelihood

Risk Level

Significant public objection to proposed approach – reputational risk

Develop a sound approach and communicate that approach clearly and consistently

Moderate

Possible

Medium

 

CONSULTATION

 

See Attachment A.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

As noted above, in pursuance of Council’s 24 September resolution, revised proposals for the management of dogs in public places, including beaches, have been developed and are now presented for consideration by the Council. The Council identified four objectives for the revised proposals, generally as follows –

1.         Increase significantly the number of prohibited areas in high population sections of the City throughout the coastline to ensure residents and visitors can enjoy our beaches without having dogs on the beaches;

2.         A significant reduction in the number of exercise and seasonal areas throughout the coastline by aiming to have no area shorter than approximately 500 metres;

3.         Rather than aiming to provide exercise areas in close walking distances from residential areas, adopt the position that some dog owners may need to take their dog by vehicle to a designated exercise area whether it be on the coast or inland; and

4.         Identifying exercise areas away from the coast to cater for the impact of the significant reductions of exercise and seasonal areas, if practical.

 

City officers have prepared revised proposals that include changes to address objectives 1-3 above. City officers are of the view, however, that objective 4 was addressed to the maximum extent reasonably possible in the proposals presented in September. Before outlining the changes proposed to address objectives 1-3, it is therefore worth setting out why changes to address objective 4 are not proposed.

 

The proposals presented in September and now in this report would, if implemented, permit the exercising of dogs off leash, most of the time, on the grassed areas of nearly all parks and reserves managed by the City, other than high use foreshore and town centre areas (where dogs are still proposed to be allowed, but only on a leash). That would mostly be the case, other than when events or sporting uses are taking place. Exceptions to that are Meelup Regional Park (where dogs are proposed to be prohibited at all times), and parks where dogs are proposed to be permitted on a leash only: Mitchell Park; the Busselton Foreshore between Marine Terrace, the coast, Scout Road and Gale Street (except for Signal Park); the Dugalup Brook reserves (to the immediate north of Dunsborough Town Centre, from Cape Naturaliste Road to Gifford Road); Lions Park; Seymour Park; and on the Dunsborough Foreshore between Gifford Road and the Centennial Park car park.

 

Excluding children’s playgrounds, on the grassed areas of all other parks and reserves (including Signal Park), dogs are proposed to be allowed to be exercised off leash, other than when events or sporting uses are taking place. That is set out in point 1(j)(B) of the officer recommendation. The only opportunities for expanding the areas available for off-leash exercising of dogs are therefore considered to be on un-grassed parts of parks and reserves (i.e. mostly areas vegetated with trees and/or shrubs), in the Meelup Regional Park and/or some or all of the identified high use foreshore and town centre areas – changes of that kind are not considered appropriate and are therefore not recommended by officers.

 

In terms of the changes proposed to reflect objectives 1-3 of Council’s September resolution, the officer recommendation proposes an increase in the number and length of prohibited areas on the City’s beaches, and a decrease in the number and length of both exercise and seasonal areas. The changes may be summarized as follows (noting that the total length of the portions of the City’s coast in question is approximately 50 km) –

·        A decrease in the total number of segments into which the coast is proposed to be divided from 33 to 29;

·        An increase in the number of prohibited areas from 5 to 9, and an increase in the approximate total length of prohibited areas from 12.17 to 16.25 km;

·        A decrease in the number of seasonal areas from 14 to 9, and a decrease in the approximate total length of seasonal areas from 15.33 to 11.8 km;

·        A decrease in the number of exercise areas from 13 to 10, and a decrease in the approximate total length of exercise areas from 21.73 to 21.18 kilometres; and

·        The number and extent of proposed modified seasonal areas remains the same, with only one such area identified, with an approximate length of 0.45 km – and this relates to addressing a particular issue only present in that section of the coast, at Eagle Bay.

 

Notable differences between the previous proposal and the officer recommendation presented with this report are as follows –

·        Identification of additional prohibited areas either side of the Port Geographe marina entry;

·        A westward expansion of the prohibited area at Busselton Foreshore, which now extends to Gale Street, rather than stopping at West Street;

·        Identification of an additional prohibited area between King and Margaret Streets (and including the beach in front of the Geographe Bay Yacht Club);

·        Identification of an additional prohibited area between Holgate Road and Harnett Street;

·        Deletion of a small seasonal area adjacent to the Wyndham Resort; and

·        Expansion of the prohibited area at Dunsborough Foreshore eastward from Centennial Park to Chester Way, and westward from Gifford Road to Burt Court, involving the deletion of what had been the most westerly proposed exercise area.

 

If one excludes long sections away from the main urban areas of Busselton and Dunsborough (so, excluding the area to the east of Port Geographe, the area between Siesta Park and Quindalup, and Meelup Park through to Bunker Bay), however, a slightly different picture emerges in terms of the proportions of the coast proposed to be allocated to the various categories (with the total length of the coast excluding those three areas being approximately 23.6 km) –

·        An increase in the number of prohibited areas from 3 to 7, and an increase in the total length of prohibited areas from 1.47 to 4.95 km;

·        A decrease in the number of seasonal areas from 12 to 9, and a decrease in the approximate length of seasonal areas from 14.6 to 11.8 km;

·        A decrease in the number of exercise areas from 10 to 8, and a decrease in the total length of exercise areas from 7.53 to 6.85 km; and

·        As previously, the only modified seasonal area is away from the main two urban areas.

 

Given the above, if the Council was to support the revised proposal presented in this report, during the ‘daytime in summer’, dogs would be prohibited from 15.75 km of the approximately 23.6 km of coast adjoining the main urban areas, or almost exactly two-thirds of the beach areas adjoining those main urban areas. Dogs would also be prohibited at all times from 4.95 km (or approximately 21%) of the coast adjoining the main urban areas – which is more than a tripling of the length of the coast from which dogs would be prohibited at all times, relative to the proposal previously presented by officers. If the Council were minded to identify additional areas of beach where dogs might be prohibited at all times, officers consider that areas in proximity to the Abbey and Quindalup boat ramps might be the most appropriate, as these are both areas where high levels of beach use might be expected, and where there are reasonably accessible, alternative areas nearby where dog owners can take their dog to exercise on the beach, off-leash, without having to drive via Bussell Highway and/or Caves Road to get there.

 

A map of the proposed dog management areas on beaches is included as Attachment B. A spreadsheet which compares the previously proposed dog management areas on beaches with those that are now proposed, seeking to reflect the objectives identified by the Council in September, is included as Attachment C.

 

In Attachment C, where a change is proposed the row is highlighted in orange, and the specific change, including changes in the ‘Notes’ column, are identified in bold text – if there is no highlight colour and no bold text, no change is proposed or even suggested. The two sections of the coast that officers have identified as being potential candidates for the identification of additional prohibited areas are highlighted in yellow in Attachment C.

 

In both Attachments B and C, for ease of comparison, other than where segments of the coast have been entirely merged or split relative to the previous proposals, the segment number remains the same – so, for instance, segment 9 is still segment 9, even though there is actually now no segment 8 (because it has been merged into segment 7). Prior to any consultation occurring, however, the segments would be renumbered in simple, sequential order, with no gaps.

 

In addition to the above, it is worth reiterating information previously provided in the September report and/or in comments provided in relation to alternative recommendations presented at that time –

·        The more controls there are on when and where dogs may be allowed on beaches, the more difficult the education, monitoring and enforcement task is likely to be, and officers are concerned that there may not be sufficient resources to consistently enforce the approach recommended in this report, but which seeks to reflect the objectives identified by the Council; and

·        Other than in areas away from the main urban areas, it is considered that all access points to the beach where controls on dogs are proposed (i.e. everywhere except exercise areas), signage should be provided at each and every beach access point, and at most beach access points even in exercise areas (and, as such, a further reduction in the number of segments into which the coast is split would have no significant impact on the amount of signage needed, unless it involved an increase in the extent of exercise areas).

 

CONCLUSION

 

The approach to dog management areas set out in the report and revised recommendation below is seen as providing a balanced and sound overall approach to the management of dogs in public places in the District, and, in particular, incorporates changes relative to the recommendation presented to the Council in September that seek to reflect the objectives identified by the Council at that time.

 


 

OPTIONS

 

There are a number of options that the Council could consider, and some of the key alternatives are set out briefly both above and within Attachment A. Should the Council be of a mind to want further, fundamental or very significant departures from the revised approach proposed by officers, it may wish to consider making a resolution that establishes basic principles to guide the preferred approach, and request that officers prepare proposals that reflect those basic principles for presentation to the Council, rather than attempting to comprehensively modify the approach proposed by officers in a more specific fashion through an alternative motion or motions. The Council also has the option, in terms of the approach to management of dogs on beaches, of reverting to the proposal as presented by officers in September.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

It is envisaged that consultation would commence within one month of the Council making a resolution consistent with the officer recommendation.

 

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council –

 

1.    Pursuant to section 31 of the Dog Act 1976 (other than where the context does not require the powers contained within s31), and subject to any other written law and any law of the Commonwealth about assistance animals as defined in the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Commonwealth) section 9(2), resolve to adopt for consultation purposes a proposed approach to dog management areas as follows –

 

a.         Dogs to be prohibited/managed as per existing controls in cemeteries, the Busselton Regional Airport and the Busselton Jetty (as per the Cemeteries Local Law, Busselton Regional Airport Local Law and Jetties Local Law);

 

b.         Dogs to be prohibited in public buildings (i.e. ‘buildings’ as defined in the  City’s Property Local Law);

 

c.         Dogs to be prohibited at all times within all childrens’ playgrounds (i.e. ‘childrens’ playground’ defined as; “an area set aside for use by children and noted by the presence of dedicated childrens’ playground equipment and the presence of either sand or other form of soft fall surface”);

 

d.         Dogs to be prohibited from City depot and waste management sites;

 

e.         Dogs to be prohibited in the whole of Meelup Regional Park, other than a small portion of beach within the Park and adjacent to part of Eagle Bay townsite (see point (h) below)

 

f.          Dogs to be permitted, but only on a leash, within Mitchell Park, the Busselton Foreshore between Marine Terrace, the coast, Scout Road and Gale Street (except for Signal Park), the Dugalup Brook reserves (to the immediate north of Dunsborough Town Centre, from Cape Naturaliste Road to Gifford Road – Reserves 42673, 35758, 22613 and 26513), Lions Park, Seymour Park, and on the Dunsborough Foreshore between Gifford Road and the Centennial Park car park, other than when organised events, approved by the City are taking place, wherein dogs will be prohibited, unless specifically permitted by the City;

 

g.         Beach areas, including the beach only (i.e. from the limit of ephemeral vegetation or the toe of a seawall to the high water mark only, and not including vegetated foreshore areas, beach access paths or car parks) to be categorised as ‘Prohibited’, ‘Exercise’, ‘Seasonal’ or ‘Modified Seasonal’, with those areas being defined as follows –

 

‘Prohibited’ is as per s31(2B)(a) of the Dog Act 1976 and means that dogs are prohibited at all times (except assistance dogs and other dogs exempted by State and Commonwealth law);

 

‘Exercise’ is as per s31(2) of the Dog Act 1976 and means that dogs are permitted, including off-leash, at all times, except when approved, organised events are taking place, wherein dogs are to be prohibited, unless specifically permitted by the City (except assistance dogs and other dogs exempted by State and Commonwealth law);

 

‘Seasonal’ means that dogs are permitted as per ‘Exercise Area’, except during the period 9.00am-5.00pm, 1 December to 30 April inclusive, when they are prohibited as per ‘Prohibited Areas’; and

 

‘Modified Seasonal’ means that dogs are permitted as per ‘Exercise Area’, except during the period 1 August to 30 April inclusive, when they are permitted at all times, but only a leash as per s31(1) of the Dog Act 1976; and

 

h.         Beach areas under the care, control or management of the City (therefore excluding privately owned land, land in National Park and Unallocated Crown Land), extending along the coast from the Shire of Capel boundary to the Shire of Augusta-Margaret River boundary, to be categorised according to the categories described at (g) above and as follows –

 

Segment

Description

Proposed category

1.  

Municipal boundary (with Shire of Capel) to eastern side of Port Geographe Seawall

Exercise

2.  

Eastern side of Port Geographe Seawall to eastern side of Port Geographe channel

Prohibited

3.  

Western side of Port Geographe channel to beach access path from Groyne Road car park

Prohibited

4.  

Beach access path from Groyne Road car park to beach access path from car park east of Russell Street

Seasonal

5.  

Beach access path from car park east of Russell Street to beach access path from car park at Ford Road/Geographe Bay Road intersection

Exercise

6.  

Beach access path from car park at Ford Road/Geographe Bay Road intersection to eastern side of Scout Road car park

Seasonal

7.  

Eastern side of Scout Road car park to beach access just to the east of a continuation of Gale Street

Prohibited

9.  

Beach access just to the east of a continuation of Gale Street to beach access to the eastern side of the King Street car park

Exercise

10.  

Beach access to the eastern side of the King Street car park to beach access to the beach access from the Margaret Street car park

Prohibited

11.  

Beach access from the Margaret Street car park to the east of the groyne between Craig Street and Bower Road (i.e. either side of Vasse Diversion Drain)

Exercise

12.  

Beach access just to the east of the groyne between Craig Street and Bower Road to beach access from car park opposite Mandalay Holiday Park

Seasonal

13.  

Beach access from car park opposite Mandalay Holiday Park to beach access path at end of Alan Street

Exercise

14A

Beach access path at end of Alan Street to beach access path at end of Holgate Road

Seasonal

14B

Beach access path at end of Holgate Road to beach access path at end of Harnett Street

Prohibited

15.  

Beach access path at end of Harnett Street to eastern side of car park associated with Abbey Boat ramp

Exercise

16.  

Eastern side of car park associated with Abbey Boat ramp to Locke Drain (i.e. both sides of Buayanyup Drain)

Seasonal

17.  

Locke Drain to Siesta Park Groyne

Exercise

18.  

Siesta Park Groyne to western boundary of Siesta Park Holiday Park

Seasonal

19.

Western boundary of Siesta Park Holiday Park to eastern side of Quindalup Boat Ramp

Exercise

22.  

Eastern side of Quindalup Boat Ramp to 1.1km to western side of ‘Fisherman’s Boat Ramp

Seasonal

23.  

Western side of ‘Fisherman’s Boat Ramp to beach access to the east of Lot 30 (237) Geographe Bay Road

Exercise

24.  

Beach access to the east of Lot 30 (237) Geographe Bay Road to beach access from car park to the west of Dunsborough YHA

Seasonal

25.  

Beach access from car park to the west of Dunsborough YHA to beach access path just to the west of Tulloh Street

Prohibited

26.  

Beach access path just to the west of Tulloh Street to beach access path opposite Chester Way

Exercise

27.  

Beach access path opposite Chester Way to beach access path just to the north west of Burt Court

Prohibited

29.  

Beach access path just to the north-west of Burt Court to the southern boundary of Meelup Regional Park (just to the north of Hurford Street)

Seasonal

30.  

Southern boundary of Meelup Regional Park to Jingarmup Brook (in Eagle Bay townsite)

Prohibited

32.  

From Jingarmup Brook (in Eagle Bay townsite) 450 metres to the north (and within Meelup Regional Park)

Modified Seasonal (dogs allowed on leash from 1 August to 30 April, allowed to be exercised off leash the rest of the year)

33.  

From 450 metres north of Jingarmup Brook to northern end of Bunker Bay where Leeuwin Naturaliste National Park begins (and other than small areas where private land extends to the high water mark, within Meelup Regional Park)

Prohibited

 

i.          Notwithstanding point (h) above, dogs are prohibited when organised events approved by the City are taking place on a given section of beach;

 

j.          Dogs to be permitted to be exercised off-leash on the grassed areas of all other local government property (including Signal Park), subject to the following limitations and conditions-

 

A.        Dogs are prohibited from the active playing surface(s) at sporting events (including training) approved by the City;

 

B.         Dogs are prohibited when organised events approved by the City are taking place (such as weddings, concerts or sporting events not generally open to the public without charge, but excluding markets or the area surrounding the active playing surface(s) at sporting events [including training] generally open to the public without charge);

 

C.         Dogs are permitted, but only on a leash (or otherwise restrained as per s31(1) of the Dog Act 1976) on areas surrounding active playing surface(s), at sporting events [including training] approved by the City and generally open to the public without charge, and at markets approved by the City; and

 

D.        Dogs are permitted, but only on a leash (or otherwise restrained as per s31(1) of the Dog Act 1976), on any paths and within any parking area (i.e. ‘parking area’ as defined in the City’s Parking Local Law).

 

k.         Dogs to otherwise be regulated in public places as per the Dog Act 1976 (which generally allows dogs to be in public places, provided they are on a leash);

 

l.          The approach is to be reviewed 12 months after finalisation and implementation, including through a further public consultation period; and

 

m.       Refinements to and/or modifications to the approach to be considered for particular places on an as needs basis, but only after the overall approach has been established and settled;

 

2.    Pursuant to s31 of the Dog Act 1976, gives public notice of its intention to specify the proposed dog management areas as set out in 1 above, and for the proposals to be returned to Council for determination and to consider any submissions received in relation to the proposals before making any final determinations; and

 

3.    In relation to Yallingup, indicate its intention to identify the beach from Slippery Rocks to a point just to the north of the Dawson Drive car park beach access as a ‘Seasonal Area’ once that land is transferred to the City’s management, and also to seek Department of Parks and Wildlife formal consideration of identifying an area of beach to the north of the Dawson Drive car park beach access as an ‘Exercise Area’ (but which will remain in National Park for at least the foreseeable future); and to also seek comment on those proposals in parallel with the proposals set out at point 1 above.

 

 


Council

119

22 October 2014

11.1

Attachment a

Extract from Council Agenda and Minutes of 24 September 2014 Council Meeting

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Council

139

22 October 2014

11.1

Attachment b

Map of Proposed Dog Management Areas on Beaches

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Council

151

22 October 2014

11.1

Attachment c

Proposed Dog Management Areas on Beaches

 

 

PREVIOUS PROPOSAL

 

REVISED PROPOSAL

Segment

Description

Approximate length (km)

Proposed category

Notes

 

Segment

Description

Approximate length (km)

Proposed category

Notes

1.  

Municipal boundary (with Shire of Capel) to eastern side of Port Geographe Seawall

7.5

Exercise

Very little potential for conflict between users in the eastern part of this segment, and community support for exercise in the westernmost portion, where potential for conflict is greatest

 

1.  

Municipal boundary (with Shire of Capel) to eastern side of Port Geographe Seawall

7.5

Exercise

Very little potential for conflict between users in the eastern part of this segment, and community support for exercise in the westernmost portion, where potential for conflict is greatest

2.  

Eastern side of Port Geographe Seawall to eastern side of Port Geographe channel

0.9

Seasonal

As the land adjoining this section of coast is developed, it may be appropriate to introduce a Prohibited area in future

 

2.  

Eastern side of Port Geographe Seawall to eastern side of Port Geographe channel

0.9

Prohibited

This area is to be landscaped to support intensive use as part of the reconfigurations works. An extensive exercise area to the east is also easilty accessible for residents of Wonnerup and the eastern part of Port Geographe.

3.  

Western side of Port Geographe channel to beach access path from Groyne Road car park

0.3

Exercise

Car parks provided at both ends of this area, which is considered best opportunity for an exercise area in the area from Port Georaphe for several kilometres to the west

 

3.  

Western side of Port Geographe channel to beach access path from Groyne Road car park

0.3

Prohibited

This area is to be landscaped to support intensive use as part of the reconfigurations works. An extensive exercise area to the west is also easilty accessible for residents of the adjoining area.

4.  

Beach access path from Groyne Road car park to beach access path from car park east of Russell Street

1.4

Seasonal

Includes popular, summer swimming areas and Busselton Beach Resort, as well as multiple small car parks

 

4.  

Beach access path from Groyne Road car park to beach access path from car park east of Russell Street

1.4

Seasonal

Includes popular, summer swimming areas and Busselton Beach Resort, as well as multiple small car parks

5.  

Beach access path from car park east of Russell Street to beach access path from car park at Ford Road/Geographe Bay Road intersection

1.3

Exercise

Less popular for swimming than areas to the east and/or west, with fewer car parking opportunities

 

5.  

Beach access path from car park east of Russell Street to beach access path from car park at Ford Road/Geographe Bay Road intersection

1.3

Exercise

Less popular for swimming than areas to the east and/or west, with fewer car parking opportunities

6.  

Beach access path from car park at Ford Road/Geographe Bay Road intersection to eastern side of Scout Road car park

1.2

Seasonal

Includes popular, summer swimming areas, as well as a number of car parking opportunities

 

6.  

Beach access path from car park at Ford Road/Geographe Bay Road intersection to eastern side of Scout Road car park

1.2

Seasonal

Includes popular, summer swimming areas, as well as a number of car parking opportunities

7.  

Eastern side of Scout Road car park to beach access steps just the east of a continuation of West Street

0.5

Prohibited

Principal Busselton Foreshore area, with greatest intensity of use throughout the year, and because of the presence of the swim jetty and other facilities, it is used for swimming outside the identified ‘summer’ period

 

7.  

Eastern side of Scout Road car park to beach access just to the east of a continuation of Gale Street

0.8

Prohibited

Principal Busselton Foreshore area, with greatest intensity of use throughout the year, and because of the presence of the swim jetty and other facilities, it is used for swimming outside the identified ‘summer’ period

8.  

Beach access steps just to the east of a continuation of West Street to beach access just to the east of a continuation of Gale Street

0.3

Seasonal

Includes popular, summer swimming areas, as well as car parking

 

8.  

Merged into Segment 7

 

 

 

9.  

Beach access just to the east of a continuation of Gale Street to beach access to the eastern side of the King Street car park

0.8

Exercise

Limited use for swimming, even during summer, and best opportunity for an exercise area in central Busselton area

 

9.  

Beach access just to the east of a continuation of Gale Street to beach access to the eastern side of the King Street car park

0.8

Exercise

Limited use for swimming, even during summer, and best opportunity for an exercise area in central Busselton area

10.  

Beach access to the eastern side of the King Street car park to beach access to the beach access from the Margaret Street car park

0.3

Seasonal

Very popular swimming area in summer, includes Geographe Bay Yacht Club, close to central Busselton and with good parking and other facilities very close to the water

 

10.  

Beach access to the eastern side of the King Street car park to beach access to the beach access from the Margaret Street car park

0.3

Prohibited

Very popular swimming area in summer, includes Geographe Bay Yacht Club, close to central Busselton and with good parking and other facilities very close to the water

11.  

Beach access from the Margaret Street car park to the east of the groyne between Craig Street and Bower Road (i.e. either side of Vasse Diversion Drain)

1.1

Exercise

Limited accessibility west of Margaret Street car park, but very popular area for those with dogs throughout the year in area east of the Drain, in area west of the drain, best opportunity for exercise area in area for several kilometres to the west of Vasse Diversion Drain, as seasonal area desirable further west because of Mandalay Holiday Park

 

11.  

Beach access from the Margaret Street car park to the east of the groyne between Craig Street and Bower Road (i.e. either side of Vasse Diversion Drain)

1.1

Exercise

Limited accessibility west of Margaret Street car park, but very popular area for those with dogs throughout the year in area east of the Drain, in area west of the drain, best opportunity for exercise area in area for several kilometres to the west of Vasse Diversion Drain, as seasonal area desirable further west because of Mandalay Holiday Park

12.  

Beach access just to the east of the groyne between Craig Street and Bower Road to beach access from car park opposite Mandalay Holiday Park

1.8

Seasonal

Includes beach near Mandalay Holiday Park, as well as car park and other facilities at Dolphin Road

 

12.  

Beach access just to the east of the groyne between Craig Street and Bower Road to beach access from car park opposite Mandalay Holiday Park

1.8

Seasonal

Includes beach near Mandalay Holiday Park, as well as car park and other facilities at Dolphin Road

13.  

Beach access from car park opposite Mandalay Holiday Park to beach access path at end of Alan Street

0.8

Exercise

Fairly inaccessible, with wide, mostly heavily vegetated foreshore reserve

 

13.  

Beach access from car park opposite Mandalay Holiday Park to beach access path at end of Alan Street

0.8

Exercise

Fairly inaccessible, with wide, mostly heavily vegetated foreshore reserve

14.  

Beach access path at end of Alan Street to beach access path at end of Harnett Street

2

Seasonal

Includes a number of caravan parks and tourist resorts, as well as facilities at Holgate Road

 

14A

Beach access path at end of Alan Street to beach access path at end of Holgate Road

0.7

Seasonal

Mostly adjoins residential area.

 

 

 

 

 

 

14B

Beach access path at end of Holgate Road to beach access path at end of Harnett Street

1.3

Prohibited

Includes a number of caravan parks and tourist resorts, as well as facilities at Holgate Road

15.  

Beach access path at end of Harnett Street to eastern side of car park associated with Abbey Boat ramp

0.85

Exercise

Best opportunity for exercise area in Abbey locality

 

15.  

Beach access path at end of Harnett Street to eastern side of car park associated with Abbey Boat ramp

0.85

Exercise

Best opportunity for exercise area in Abbey locality

16.  

Eastern side of car park associated with Abbey Boat ramp to Locke Drain (i.e. both sides of Buayanyup Drain)

2.3

Seasonal

Access to facilities at Abbey Boat Ramp and includes Locke Estate

 

16.  

Eastern side of car park associated with Abbey Boat ramp to Locke Drain (i.e. both sides of Buayanyup Drain)

2.3

Seasonal

Access to facilities at Abbey Boat Ramp and includes Locke Estate. If the Council wanted to allocate an additional prohibited area, part of this area seen by officers as potentially appropriate, as this is the most accesible beach to the significant growing population at Vasse.

17.  

Locke Drain to Siesta Park Groyne

0.6

Exercise

Accessible area, but less potential for conflict with beach use than areas either side

 

17.  

Locke Drain to Siesta Park Groyne

0.6

Exercise

Accessible area, but less potential for conflict with beach use than areas either side

18.  

Siesta Park Groyne to western boundary of Siesta Park Holiday Park

0.8

Seasonal

Contains Siesta Park Holiday Park

 

18.  

Siesta Park Groyne to western boundary of Siesta Park Holiday Park

0.8

Seasonal

Contains Siesta Park Holiday Park

19.  

Western boundary of Siesta Park Holiday Park to eastern beach access track in proximity to the Wyndham Resort

3.1

Exercise

Very limited public access and limited potential for conflict

 

19.  

Western boundary of Siesta Park Holiday Park to eastern side of Quindalup Boat Ramp

6.83

Exercise

Very limited public access and limited potential for conflict

20.  

Eastern beach access track in proximity to the Wyndham Resort to western beach access in proximity to Wyndham Resort

0.13

Seasonal

Small section of beach accessible from Wyndham Resort

 

 

 Merged into Segment 19

 

 

 

21.  

Western beach access in proximity to Wyndham Resort to eastern side of Quindalup Boat Ramp

3.6

Exercise

Relatively inaccessible section of beach, with limited potential for conflict

 

 

 Merged into Segment 19

 

 

 

22.  

Eastern side of Quindalup Boat Ramp to 1.1km to western side of ‘Fisherman’s Boat Ramp

1.1

Seasonal

Includes significant car parking and facilities, as well as Dunsborough Bay Yacht Club

 

22.  

Eastern side of Quindalup Boat Ramp to 1.1km to western side of ‘Fisherman’s Boat Ramp

1.1

Seasonal

Includes significant car parking and facilities, as well as Dunsborough Bay Yacht Club.  If the Council wanted to allocate an additional prohibited area, part of this area seen by officers as potentially appropriate, as this is the popular swimming area and there is good accessibility to alternative exercise areas in this area.

23.  

Western side of ‘Fisherman’s Boat Ramp to beach access to the east of Lot 30 (237) Geographe Bay Road

0.6

Exercise

Relatively inaccessible section of beach, with limited potential for conflict

 

23.  

Western side of ‘Fisherman’s Boat Ramp to beach access to the east of Lot 30 (237) Geographe Bay Road

0.6

Exercise

Relatively inaccessible section of beach, with limited potential for conflict

24.  

Beach access to the east of Lot 30 (237) Geographe Bay Road to beach access from car park to the west of Dunsborough YHA

0.6

Seasonal

Includes Dunsborough YHA and good beach access from car park at western end

 

24.  

Beach access to the east of Lot 30 (237) Geographe Bay Road to beach access from car park to the west of Dunsborough YHA

0.6

Seasonal

Includes Dunsborough YHA and good beach access from car park at western end

25.  

Beach access from car park to the west of Dunsborough YHA to beach access path just to the west of Tulloh Street

0.6

Prohibited

Intended to protect waterbirds using Elmore Lagoon and is a relatively short segment, with seasonal and exercise areas proposed either side

 

25.  

Beach access from car park to the west of Dunsborough YHA to beach access path just to the west of Tulloh Street

0.6

Prohibited

Intended to protect waterbirds using Elmore Lagoon and is a relatively short segment, with seasonal and exercise areas proposed either side

26.  

Beach access path just to the west of Tulloh Street to beach access path from Centennial Park car park

1

Exercise

Westernmost significant opportunity for exercise area with limited potential for conflict, and with prohibited areas either side

 

26.  

Beach access path just to the west of Tulloh Street to beach access path opposite Chester Way

0.8

Exercise

Westernmost significant opportunity for exercise area with limited potential for conflict, and with prohibited areas either side

27.  

Beach access path from Centennial Park car park to beach access path just to the west of Gifford Road

0.37

Prohibited

Principal Dunsborough Foreshore area, with greatest intensity of use throughout the year

 

27.  

Beach access path opposite Chester Way to beach access path just to the north west of Burt Court

0.75

Prohibited

Principal Dunsborough Foreshore area, with greatest intensity of use throughout the year

28.  

Beach access path just to the north-west of Gifford Road to beach access path just to the north-west of Burt Court

0.18

Exercise

Westernmost opportunity for exercise area with limited potential for conflict

 

 

Merged into Segment 27

 

 

 

29.  

Beach access path just to the north-west of Burt Court to the southern boundary of Meelup Regional Park (just to the north of Hurford Street)

1.9

Seasonal

Contains Dunsborough resort strip and Old Dunsborough

 

29.  

Beach access path just to the north-west of Burt Court to the southern boundary of Meelup Regional Park (just to the north of Hurford Street)

1.9

Seasonal

 

30.  

Southern boundary of Meelup Regional Park to beach access path adjacent to Baudin Memorial

6.2

Prohibited

Reflects values of Meelup Regional Park

 

30.  

Southern boundary of Meelup Regional Park to Jingarmup Brook (in Eagle Bay townsite)

6.8

Prohibited

Reflects values of Meelup Regional Park

31.  

Beach access path adjacent to Baudin Memorial to Jingarmup Brook (in Eagle Bay townsite)

0.6

Seasonal

Popular summer swimming area with good beach access, but lower environmental risks that other areas in Meelup Regional Park, because road is so close to the coast

 

31.  

Merged into Segment 30

 

 

 

32.  

From Jingarmup Brook (in Eagle Bay townsite) 450 metres to the north (and within Meelup Regional Park)

0.45

Modified Seasonal (dogs allowed on leash from 1 August to 30 April, allowed to be exercised off leash the rest of the year)

Best opportunity to provide exercise area at Eagle Bay, but limited during extended summer period to protect nest sites of Hooded Plover – understood the proposed arrangement is broadly supported by both Meelup Regional Park Management Committee and Residents of Eagle Bay Association

 

32.  

From Jingarmup Brook (in Eagle Bay townsite) 450 metres to the north (and within Meelup Regional Park)

0.45

Modified Seasonal (dogs allowed on leash from 1 August to 30 April, allowed to be exercised off leash the rest of the year)

Best opportunity to provide exercise area at Eagle Bay, but limited during extended summer period to protect nest sites of Hooded Plover – understood the proposed arrangement is broadly supported by both Meelup Regional Park Management Committee and Residents of Eagle Bay Association

33.  

From 450 metres north of Jingarmup Brook to northern end of Bunker Bay where Leeuwin Naturaliste National Park begins (and other than small areas where private land extends to the high water mark, within Meelup Regional Park)

4.5

Prohibited

Reflects values of Meelup Regional Park

 

33.  

From 450 metres north of Jingarmup Brook to northern end of Bunker Bay where Leeuwin Naturaliste National Park begins (and other than small areas where private land extends to the high water mark, within Meelup Regional Park)

4.5

Prohibited

Reflects values of Meelup Regional Park

 


11.2             AMENDMENT 7 TO LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME 21 - REZONING LOT 376 KENT STREET AND LOT 309 PRINCE STREET, BUSSELTON FROM RESERVE FOR RECREATION TO BUSINESS - CONSIDERATION FOR INITIATION FOR COMMUNITY CONSULTATION

SUBJECT INDEX:

Town Planning Schemes and Amendments

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:

Principal Strategic Planner - Louise Koroveshi

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Planning and Development Services - Paul Needham

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Location Plan  

  

 

PRÉCIS

 

The Council is requested to consider initiating for community consultation proposed Scheme Amendment 7 to Local Planning Scheme 21 (LPS21) which seeks to rezone Lot 376 Kent Street and Lot 309 Prince Street, Busselton from ‘Reserve for Recreation’ to ‘Business’.

 

The proposed amendment follows the decision of the Council to broadly support, in principle, a concept for the redevelopment and expansion of the Busselton Central Shopping Centre, Target and Rivers stores to incorporate, amongst other things, a full size Discount Department Store and the activation of the western side of Mitchell Park.

 

The proposed amendment is required to ensure that, should the concept for Busselton Central be realised, future land uses contemplated for Lot 376 Kent Street and Lot 309 Prince Street are consistent with the applicable statutory planning framework.

 

Officers are recommending that the Council initiates the proposed amendment for referral to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) and subsequent community consultation.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

The proposal comprises a scheme amendment that seeks to rezone Lot 376 Kent Street and Lot 309 Prince Street, Busselton from ‘Reserve for Recreation’ to ‘Business’ (Attachment A). Lot 309 Prince Street is freehold land that is owned by the City and currently accommodates the Old Library building. Lot 376 Kent Street is Crown land managed by the Water Corporation and contains an underground sewer pump station.

 

The proposed amendment follows a a decision of the Council, being -

 

·    At its meeting on 12 June 2013 the Council resolved (C1306/142), amongst other things, to give ‘in-principle’ support for the staged redevelopment and expansion of the Busselton Central complex and revitalisation of Mitchell Park, including the proposal to potentially transfer the Old Library site (being Lot 309 Prince Street) as part of a negotiated ‘heads-of-agreement’ between the City and the proponent.

 

The reason for the proposed amendment relates to the identification of the Old Library site and the Water Corporation land as ‘Recreation Reserve’ in the City’s local planning scheme. The rest of the land that is the subject of the Busselton Central concept is zoned ‘Business’. Whilst officers are of the view that the development contemplated for the Old Library site and the Water Corporation land could be approved under the existing designation in LPS21, there is a risk that the planning authority assessing an application for planning consent (most likely to be a Development Assessment Panel given the likely value of the development over $7M) may not hold that view. The amendment would change the reservation of the land to a zone under LPS21, meaning that the land uses contemplated for these land parcels would be consistent with the statutory planning framework.

It is understood that the Water Corporation is willing to negotiate transfer of Lot 376 Kent Street with the proponent as it is redundant to their needs. The proposed amendment, if initiated, will be referred to the Water Corporation for the opportunity to comment during the advertising period.

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

The Planning and Development Act 2005 outlines the relevant considerations when preparing and amending local planning schemes. The relevant provisions of the Act have been taken into account in preparing and processing this amendment.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

There are no plans or policies relevant to the proposal.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

There are no direct financial implications arising from the recommendations of this report.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

             The proposed amendment is considered to be consistent with the following community objectives of       the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2013 – ‘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 identified ‘downside’ risks only, rather than upside risks as well. The implementation of the Officer Recommendation will involve initiating the proposed scheme amendment and referring it to the Environmental Protection Authority. In this regard, there are no significant risks identified. 

 

CONSULTATION

 

There is no requirement under the Planning and Development Act 2005 to advertise a proposed scheme amendment prior to it being initiated by the Council. Accordingly, no advertising has occurred to date.

 

If the Council resolves to initiate the proposed amendment, the relevant amendment documentation would be referred to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) for consideration of the need for formal assessment under Part IV of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. Should the EPA resolve that the amendment does not require formal assessment it will be advertised for 42 days in accordance with the Town Planning Regulations 1967.

 

Subsequent to the 12 June 2013 Council meeting, the City issued a media release that outlined the Council’s decision to broadly support, in principle, a preliminary proposal for the upgrade and expansion of the Busselton Central Shopping Centre, Target and Rivers stores and enter into a ‘heads-of agreement’ with the proponent to allow further due diligence and discussion without legal obligation. A full public consultation process in relation to the proposal will be undertaken before any final decision is made.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

The Council has made a decision to broadly support, in principle, a concept for the expansion of the Busselton Central Shopping Centre, Target and Rivers stores to incorporate, amongst other things, a full size Discount Department Store. The concept, if realised, will require the inclusion of the Old Library site and the Water Corporation land and will be pivotal in facilitating the activation and revitalization of Mitchell Park, which is a very valued asset at the heart of our City Centre. The rezoning of these two parcels of land to ‘Business’ is consistent with the current zoning of the balance of the land the subject of the Busselton Central Shopping Centre concept and would ensure that future proposals could be accommodated within the statutory planning framework.  

 

The previous decision of the Council also includes the proposal to potentially transfer the Old Library site as part of a negotiated ‘heads-of-agreement’ between the City and the proponent. The retention of the Old Library Building is not viewed as being of significant value. The building does not have any long term economic value and, although it has in the past housed some community groups, such groups are now better accommodated in the purpose-built Busselton Community Resource Centre and the current library building. The Old Library building also contains asbestos that would be costly to remove and is not considered to have significant heritage value.

 

Should the Council decide to retain the Old Library site for whatever reason, the proposed change in zoning would have no impact on how the land might be used by the City itself.

 

Officers are of the view that the proposed amendment would facilitate key elements of the planned, progressive renewal and revitalisation of an important part of the City’s retail, commercial and social heart.

 

CONCLUSION

 

It is recommended that the proposed amendment is initiated for referral to the EPA and subsequent advertising for public comment.

 

OPTIONS

 

Should the Council not support the Officer Recommendation, the Council could consider the following options –

 

             1.            Resolve to decline the request to initiate the proposed amendment which potentially could          compromise some aspects of the proposed Busselton Central Shopping Centre concept.

 

2.            Resolve to initiate the proposed amendment, subject to modification(s).

 

Officers consider that there are no substantive issues that would support either option.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

The Officer Recommendation will be implemented through the completion of the amendment documentation and forwarding of the amendment to the Environmental Protection Authority within one month of the Gazettal of Local Planning Scheme 21.

 

 

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

1.            That the Council, upon Gazettal of Local Planning Scheme No. 21 and in pursuance of Part V          of the Planning and Development Act 2005, adopts draft Amendment 2 for community                 consultation, which proposes to:

 

a)         Rezone Lot 376 Kent Street and Lot 309 Prince Street, Busselton from Reserve for Recreation to Business; and

b)        Amend the Scheme Map accordingly.

 

2.         2.            That as the draft Amendment is in the opinion of the Council consistent with Part V of the             Act and Regulations made pursuant to the Act, that upon the preparation of the necessary            documentation, the draft Amendment be referred to the Environmental Protection Authority          (EPA) as required by Part V of the Act and on receipt of a response from the EPA indicating      that the draft Amendment is not subject to formal environmental assessment, be advertised           for a period of 42 days, in accordance with the Town Planning Regulations 1967.

 

 


Council

165

22 October 2014

11.2

Attachment a

Location Plan

 

 

http://bsnspatial/intramaps70/ApplicationEngine/ImageProxy.ashx?imageUrl=http%3a%2f%2fBSNSPATIAL%2fIntraMaps70%2fSpatialEngineWS%2fPrintMap.ashx%3fwidth%3d620%26height%3d750%26scale%3d1332%26exportFormat%3dwmf%26id%3dba47b8f4-56d8-42fa-9953-d2af4dd28af8&SessionID=fc3wg23kzrrulj45iprzlh55

Disclaimer: Every effort has been made to make the information displayed here as accurate as possible. This process is ongoing and the information is therefore ever changing and can not be disseminated as accurate. Care must be taken not to use this information as correct or legally binding. To verify information contact the City of Busselton office.

Attachment A – Location Plan

 

Lot 376 Kent Street & Lot 309 Prince Street, Busselton

north

 


Council                                                                                      167                                                             22 October 2014

12.             Engineering and Work Services Report

Nil

 

13.             Community and Commercial Services Report

13.1           DESTINATION MARKETING: PROPOSED UNIFIED REGIONAL BRAND IDENTITY

SUBJECT INDEX:

Tourism Development

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

A strong, innovative and diversified economy that attracts people to live, work, invest and visit.

BUSINESS UNIT:

Commercial Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Property and Business Development

REPORTING OFFICER:

Economic and Business Development Coordinator - Jon Berry

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Community and Commercial Services - Naomi Searle

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Nil

  

 

PRÉCIS

 

A unified branding strategy has previously been proposed by a Regional Marketing Group and has been conducted concurrently with a structural and governance review of the Geographe Bay Tourism Association Inc (GBTA) and the Augusta Margaret River Tourism Association Inc (AMRTA).  These projects aim to:

 

1.        consider the merits of a new destination marketing brand identity for the geographic region consisting of the local government areas of the City of Busselton and the Shire of Augusta Margaret River; and,

2.        review structural and governance arrangements of the two local tourism associations with a view to exploring the merits of establishing a new single local tourism entity representing the combined geographic area.

 

This report provides an overview of recent research undertaken for Tourism Western Australia by independent market research organisation TNS.  The report recommends Council acknowledges the consumer research findings and supports a proposed strategy to develop an umbrella brand identity (‘The Margaret River Region’) supplemented with ‘location-based’ sub-regional brand identities for the City of Busselton district (‘Busselton’, ‘Dunsborough’, ‘Yallingup).

 

The structural and governance review of the two tourism associations is being conducted by Churchill Consulting and has recently recommended a single membership-based tourism entity be established to enable efficient and effective delivery of a unified brand strategy.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

On 26 March 2014, Council considered its position on a unified regional brand identity ‘The Margaret River Region’, that was recommended by the Regional Marketing Group (a forum of regional stakeholders in tourism, government and industry).  Council resolved (C1403/081) its position to be as follows:


 

 

1.         Acknowledges the Unified Regional Branding Strategy project undertaken by the Regional Marketing Group and its endorsement ‘in‐principle’ of a proposed new tourism destination marketing brand for the Capes Region as being ‘The Margaret River Region’, noting that further development of sub‐regional branding will occur with further input from stakeholder organisations including the City of Busselton;

 

2.         Request that the Regional Marketing Group’s consideration of the brands ‘The Busselton Margaret River Region’ or ‘The Margaret River Busselton Region’ or ‘The Capes Region’ and the inclusion of sub‐regions that retain the City of Busselton’s major population points (Busselton, Dunsborough, Yallingup);

3.         Contributes to the review of governance and structural arrangements that support visitor servicing and destination marketing of the Capes Region currently being undertaken by the Geographe Bay Tourism Association Inc (GBTA) and the Augusta‐Margaret River Tourism Association Inc (AMRTA); and

 

4.         Awaits the outcomes of the review of governance and structural arrangements of the GBTA and AMRTA before further consideration of its role and responsibilities in supporting visitor servicing and destination marketing including support for any proposed unified brand and associated sub‐regional brands.

 

Point 2 of the Council resolution stated above, aims to ensure that the merits of including Busselton in a unified regional brand identity, was fully explored.  Subsequent to the Council resolution, Tourism Western Australia commissioned market research company TNS, to undertake an in-depth study and analysis on brand identity for the area from Busselton to Augusta and to compare this to existing research on Western Australian destinations.  On 20 August 2014, the CEO of Tourism Western Australia accompanied TNS to present the research findings to a closed briefing session of the Council.

 

The findings of the research are described in the report in the section ‘Officer Comment’.

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

There are no statutory considerations relating directly to this report.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

There are no plans or policies of the City of Busselton that relate directly to this report.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

There are no financial implications relating directly to the Officer recommendations contained in this report.  Notwithstanding this, the City of Busselton currently applies a differential rate to properties zoned commercial or industrial and applies the funds to supporting events development and destination marketing activities, some of which are delivered by the GBTA.  The City also makes a financial assistance grant of $150,000 per annum to support the visitor serving operations of the GBTA.  The City has recently provided non-binding correspondence to the GBTA indicating it would likely continue these financial arrangements, however Officers recommend Council decide its position following the results of the structural and governance arrangements to be resolved by the two associations’ members at an Extraordinary General Meeting in late 2014.

 


 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

Key Goal Area 3:

Robust local economy: A strong local economy that sustains and attracts existing and new business, industry and employment opportunities.

3.1       A strong, innovative and diversified economy that attracts people to live, work, invest and visit

3.2       A City recognised for its high quality events and year round tourist offerings

3.3       A community where local business is supported.

 

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

Risk

Controls

Consequence

Likelihood

Risk Rating

REPUTATIONAL

Some residents and businesses may perceive that Busselton will lose its identity and visitors will by-pass Busselton, Dunsborough and Yallingup and travel directly to Margaret River.

 

1. Ensure the sub-regional branding is location based and emphasised within destination marketing campaigns. The focus needs to be on individual, localised attributes/experiences to differentiate from the Margaret River township, particularly for the intrastate audience. (for example, regional promotions must consistently use imagery and marketing collateral for Busselton that incorporates the Jetty, which the research shows has high levels of awareness in people’s minds).  Similarly, promotions for Augusta, would feature Cape Leeuwin Lighthouse, which also has high levels of awareness in consumer research)

 

2. Advocate to tourism authorities an ongoing education program to media, residents, tourism associations, chambers of commerce and industry operators, to be delivered as part of a future regional unified brand implementation program that focuses on using the full name ‘The Margaret River Region’, rather than an abbreviated name ‘Margaret River’.

Minor

Possible

Medium (M8)

 

 

CONSULTATION

 

The initial recommendation to develop a uniform brand identity for destination marketing was made through a forum of regional stakeholders including Tourism Western Australia; South West Development Commission; Australia’s South West Inc; Augusta Margaret River Tourism Association Inc; Geographe Bay Tourism Association Inc; Shire of Augusta‐Margaret River; Margaret River Wine Industry Association Inc; Busselton Jetty and Environment Conservation Association Inc; Busselton Chamber of Commerce and Industry Inc; Dunsborough‐Yallingup Chamber of Commerce and Industry Inc; Margaret River Chamber of Commerce and Industry Inc; City of Busselton and, Augusta Chamber of Commerce and Industry Inc.

 

The initial recommendation for an umbrella brand identity to be ‘The Margaret River Region’ was guided by research and consultation undertaken by Tourism WA and marketing firm ‘Braincells’, who also held meetings and workshops with stakeholder organisations in the wider tourism industry.

 

The more recent research and consultation conducted by TNA is described in this report in the section ‘Officer Comment’.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

On 20 August 2014, Tourism WA and market research firm TNS, presented the findings of research undertaken on the brand identities of Western Australian destinations.  The desired outcome of conducting the research was to understand consumer appeal of the region from Busselton to Augusta, to maximise future visitation.  The research aimed to better understand consumer awareness, appeal and recall of destinations in order to develop strategies for improved communication about the region.  Key focus areas were:

 

Awareness:              What is the level of knowledge about the destinations and experiences on offer in the Region?

Appeal:                      What are the destinations and experiences that most interest (potential) visitors?

Branding:                  What are the implications of adopting ‘The Margaret River Region’ as the brand name?

Communication:    How can we optimise our communication of the Region through the new strategy?

 

The methodology for the research by TNS involved focus groups and in-depth interviews held in Melbourne, Sydney and Perth; and an online survey.

 

The research findings, analysis and recommended approach to future branding was outlined in a detailed presentation provided by Tourism Western Australia and distributed to the Mayor and Councillors following the 20 August 2014 closed briefing session.

 

The findings of the research support a previous recommendation of the Regional Marketing Group to adopt the brand identity ‘The Margaret River Region’, due to its strong awareness and appeal, particularly in interstate and international markets, where Busselton and other brand identities supported by Council resolution C1403/081 appear to have low brand recognition in these market segments.  Conversely, the research recommends discontinuance of the originally proposed sub-brands (Northern Bays; Bountiful Hinterland; Surf Coast and Wild South).

 

The results of the TNS research recommended intrastate marketing efforts should retain a sharp focus on associated ‘location-based’ sub-branding, with experiences/activities nested within.  Locational sub-brands and associated experience/activities recommended by TNS are:

 

·   Busselton (‘Jetty’ and ‘Beaches’);

·   Dunsborough (‘Family’ and ‘Beaches’);

·   Yallingup (‘Surf’ and ‘Wines’);

·   Margaret River (‘Wine’ and ‘Food’,’ Spa’); and,

·   Augusta (‘Lighthouse’, ‘Whales’).

 

CONCLUSION

 

The Unified Regional Branding Strategy project has been initiated by the two local tourism associations (GBTA Inc and AMRTA Inc), and has been supported by Tourism Western Australia.  Recently conducted market research on brand identity for the geographic area between Busselton and Augusta has concluded a strong case for a unified approach to branding the region using an umbrella identity ‘The Margaret River Region’.  The research has also concluded that destination marketing efforts in the intrastate market, maintain a sharp focus on the locational sub-brands ‘Busselton’, ‘Dunsborough’ ‘Yallingup’, ‘Margaret River’ and ‘Augusta’ showcasing unique experiences and activities.

 

This report recommends Council acknowledges the consumer market research and endorses further development of a unified umbrella brand identity (‘The Margaret River Region’) and associated locational sub-brand identities for future tourism destination marketing.

 


 

OPTIONS

 

Should Council not endorse the Officer Recommendation, it may elect to:

 

a)      Recommend an alternative unified brand identity and sub-region brand identities; or

 

b)     Not communicate a formal position on a unified brand identity for tourism destination marketing

 

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

Should the move to a single tourism association proceed by vote of the association memberships in late 2014, further development of the recommended umbrella brand identity ‘The Margaret River Region’ and associated locational sub-brand identities, would proceed drawing on the findings of the recently completed consumer research.

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council:

 

1.            Acknowledges the independent tourism destination market research undertaken by TNS, for Tourism Western Australia; and,

 

2.            Supports further development of ‘The Margaret River Region’ as the future umbrella brand identity for tourism destination marketing purposes, on the basis that associated ‘location-based’ sub-brand identities within the City of Busselton district (‘Busselton’, ‘Dunsborough’ and ‘Yallingup’) accompany the umbrella brand identity, as key destination points.

 

 

 


Council                                                                                      171                                                             22 October 2014

13.2           BUSSELTON MARINE BERTHING STUDY REPORT (INFRASTRUCTURE CONCEPTS FOR BUSSELTON JETTY, SCOUT ROAD JETTY AND SWIM JETTY)

SUBJECT INDEX:

Tourism Development

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

A strong, innovative and diversified economy that attracts people to live, work, invest and visit.

BUSINESS UNIT:

Commercial Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Commercial Services

REPORTING OFFICER:

Economic and Business Development Coordinator - Jon Berry

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Community and Commercial Services - Naomi Searle

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Summary of responses to a demand survey conducted by MP Rogers Associates Pty Ltd

Attachment b    Shortlisted Concept 1: New fixed extension to Scout Road Jetty

Attachment c    Shortlisted Concept 6: Busselton Jetty Inner Landing (2A) New Ramp and Mooring Piles

Attachment d   Shortlisted Concept 9: New 10m Lower Landing with Universal Access Ramp and Swing Moorings on the Western Side of the Busselton Jetty  

  

 

PRÉCIS

 

This report summarises the content and recommendations of a consultant’s study into marine berthing options at the jetty structures adjacent to the Busselton foreshore redevelopment (Busselton Jetty, Scout Road Jetty and Swim Jetty).  The provision of improved access to the Busselton foreshore precinct by marine craft, aims to facilitate marine tourism opportunities emerging from the foreshore redevelopment program, resulting in a stimulus to local and regional economic activity.

 

This report recommends Council notes short term infrastructure improvements to the U-shaped swim jetty in the immediate term, in order to facilitate berthing of cruise ship tenders which commence arriving in Busselton from 27 November 2014.  It also recommends that Council seeks capital funding grants to provide more permanent berthing infrastructure at the Busselton Jetty, for use by cruise ship tenders, commercial whale-watching/tourist charter vessels and visiting recreational vessels. Acceptance of grants would be subject to demonstrated success and longer term commitment by cruise ship operators for a continuing visit program.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

At its 28 September 2011 meeting, Council resolved (C1109/293) to receive a report titled ‘Busselton Jetty Super Yacht Charter Feasibility Study’, prepared by Marine WA Inc.  Council also supported Officers sourcing external funding to undertake a more detailed feasibility study and business case for capital funding of the concept presented, being a major new marine berthing infrastructure at the end of the Busselton Jetty to attract large vessels and particularly superyachts (vessels over approximately 25m in length but generally of the order of 40m plus in length).

 

In April 2012, a Federal Tourism Grant (T-Qual), was identified to progress a more detailed feasibility assessment into the preliminary concept presented by Marine WA Inc and to consider other alternatives in order to maximise use of the Busselton Jetty for marine tourism.  The scope of the study included an investigation of the specific requirements to facilitate cruise ship tender berthing and charter vessels such as whale watching, eco-tours and sunset cruises.

 

On 26 September 2012, Council resolved (C1209/271) to accept a Federal T-Qual Tourism grant of $34,850 (ex gst) for the purposes of undertaking a feasibility study into a marine berthing facility at the Busselton Jetties, on the basis that matching funds be committed to the project.  An additional $10,000 (ex gst) was sourced from the South West Development Commission with the remaining $24,850 (ex gst) funded by the City from its Strategic Projects Reserve.

 

In late 2013, the City commissioned consulting firm MP Rogers and Associates Pty Ltd to prepare a report into marine berthing options on the Busselton Jetty, Scout Road Jetty and Swim Jetty.  The objective of the report was to provide sufficient information to consider the merits of establishing new marine berthing facilities that may assist to attract and to enhance the experience of visits by leisure craft (both sail and power, including superyachts); whale watching/dive charters, and cruise ship tenders.

 

In February 2014, Councillors were provided with an overview of the draft marine berthing study prepared by MP Rogers Pty Ltd, which was presented in two parts being:

 

Stage 1: Demand and Impact Analysis:

This analysis included a berthing demand study and social, environmental and economic impact assessment.  Based on user survey research, the report states that the concept of a temporary pick-up and drop-off landing platform on the Busselton Jetty was received well and would be used regularly by recreational and commercial vessels if installed.  The report suggests the biggest economic contributor to the district would occur through increasing the number of tourists undertaking regular whale-watching tours, so any new berthing facilities should aim to accommodate these vessels.  Cruise ship visits were identified as an emerging market and should also be accommodated in planning any new structures.

 

Stage 2: Alternate Concept Designs:

This stage included a peer review and critical analysis of the preliminary study completed in 2011 by Marine WA Inc for a superyacht berthing concept at the end of the Busselton Jetty.  It also presented alternative concepts/strategies to berth cruise ship tenders and other commercial and recreational vessels on the three local jetty structures (Busselton Jetty, U-shaped Swim Jetty and Scout Road Jetty).

 

These alternative concepts are listed below and are described further in the section ‘Officer Comment’.

 

1.            Commercial pickup and drop off landing options (berthing only):

a.    Extend Scout Road Jetty with a fixed concrete extension (Concept 1) or a floating pontoon (Concept 2);

b.    U-shaped Swim Jetty berthing with fender piles and frame (Concept 3) or a fixed extension (Concept 4)

c.     Existing lower landing (2A) on eastern side of the Busselton Jetty (addition of fendering piles and a new universal access ramp (Concept 6)

d.    New lower landing (55m or 10m concrete or grated deck options) on western side of the Busselton Jetty (Concept 7 and Concept 9), with or without adjacent swing moorings (Concept 8)

2.            Protected Swing Mooring and T-Head Jetty on the Busselton Jetty (Concept 5)

3.            Swing Moorings Only (for recreational vessels)  – No Protection (Concept 8)

4.            Add wave shelters for all the options to provide a protected space)

5.            New protected space at the end of the Jetty (per Marine WA Inc super yacht berthing concept with large wave screen structure):  No advancement on this concept was made during the study due to prohibitive costing.

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

A number of legislations will need to be considered through the progression of a new marine berthing addition to the Jetty, and will be considered at the relevant stages during the development of the project.  Such legislations include the Land Administration Act 1990, Heritage of Western Australia Act 1990, and Jetties Act 1926. 

 

Further, consideration will need to be given to various agreements relating to the Jetty, including license agreements between the City and the Department of Transport and BJECA.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

Busselton Jetty 50-Year Maintenance Plan

The Busselton Jetty 50-Year Maintenance Plan identifies the maintenance, capital replacement and capital upgrade tasks required to maintain the Busselton Jetty, including the exterior and structural maintenance of the Interpretive Centre and the Underwater Observatory, for the 50-year period from 2013 to 2062.  Reconstruction of the existing lower landing fishing platform (known as 2A) is scheduled in the year 2020 (with no access ramp) at a forecast cost of ~$500k.

 

South West Regional Blue Print (South West Development Commission/Regional Development Australia South West): 2013

 

The South West Regional Blueprint has been prepared to guide the future development of the South West region up until year 2050.  It identifies how the region can grow, create new jobs, build prosperity and lifestyle opportunities.  The Blueprint is jointly produced by the South West Development Commission and Regional Development Australia (South West).  The document states as a specific  objective … ‘to establish Busselton as a major lifestyle city based on tourism, wine and food, creative industries, events and high value professional services’.  Under the central theme ‘Industry and Business Place’ the blueprint states as an action (with a 3-15 year time frame), to …“complete cruise ship facilities at Bunbury, Busselton and Augusta’

 

Draft South West Draft Planning and Infrastructure Framework (Department of Planning):  2014

 

Table 4 of the document identifies infrastructure initiatives, particularly cruise shipping infrastructure.  It identifies the cruise ship sector as Australia’s fastest growing tourism sector.  It states …‘With appropriate port infrastructure improvements the South West is well positioned to attract increased cruise ship visits with passenger visitation providing significant economic benefits to the region’.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

The financial implications emanating from the Officer Recommendation follows:

 

Interim and short term berthing arrangements

·   Minor improvements to the U-shaped swim jetty.  $20k has been incorporated into the 2014/15 adopted budget for the 2014/15/16 cruise ship visit program.

·   There are no negative financial implications for the recommended short-term arrangements.

 

Permanent/long term berthing arrangements

The Officer recommendation is to seek funding for new infrastructure (for marine berthing from 2017 onward), subject to demonstrated sustainable demand and relevant statutory approvals.  Potential funding sources include the City of Busselton (Reserve funds), Austrade and the South West Development Commission (SWDC), to achieve a total capital pool of $1.45 million, consisting of:

·    New 10m lower landing platform on western side of Busselton Jetty (~$1.3m)

(n.b. Relocate swim jetty berthing installations (see above) and reuse on the proposed new platform); and,

·    Install new fender piles on Platform 2A at the Busselton Jetty (eastern side), to enable a contingency landing in weather conditions unfavourable for berthing at the proposed new 10m platform (~$150k)

 

Potential sources of capital funding include:

 

·   Austrade:  The Federal Government has recently announced a new ‘Tourism Demand-Driver Infrastructure’ (TDDI) program.  The Commonwealth will provide $43.1 million over four years for projects that drive demand, improve quality and increase tourism expenditure to assist the tourism industry in meeting Tourism 2020 targets.  TDDI projects will fall into the following categories: environmental, built, transport and enabling infrastructure.  Tourism Western Australia has advised it would likely support an application for marine berthing infrastructure once the guidelines are completed, with funds likely to be available in the 2015/16 financial year on a ‘dollar for dollar’ matching cash basis.

 

·   South West Development Commission:  SWDC administers Royalties for Regions programs on behalf of the State Government and may leverage Commonwealth and City funds to support this project identified in the South West Investment Blueprint.  City staff understand new program guidelines are currently being prepared, including a regional capital grants program for smaller projects, to be administered by SWDC.

 

Reconstruction of the existing lower landing fishing platform (known as 2A) is scheduled in the year 2020 (with no access ramp) at a forecast cost of ~$500k.  This is to be funded from the Jetty Maintenance Reserve.

 

Annual asset management costs for the new infrastructure recommended (Concept 9: New 10m lower landing on western side of Busselton Jetty, with universal access ramp) is estimated at $50,000 per annum.  This amount would ideally be reserved each year to allow for regular maintenance and a total overhaul of the platform and ramp at year 30.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

Key Goal Area 3:

Robust local economy: A strong local economy that sustains and attracts existing and new business, industry and employment opportunities.

3.1          A strong, innovative and diversified economy that attracts people to live, work, invest and visit;

3.2          A City recognised for its high quality events and year round tourist offerings; and,

3.3          A community where local business is supported.

 

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

The following risks have been identified as a result of the Officer recommendation

 

Risk

Controls

Consequence

Likelihood

Risk Level

FINANCIAL

The City builds new marine infrastructure and cruise ships discontinue visiting the region

A moderate cost option has been provided on the western side of the Busselton Jetty that is smaller (10m) and cheaper ($1.3m) than the recommended longer (55m) and more expensive ($2.4m) concept initially recommended by MP Rogers PL.  Being on the western side of the Jetty it is in deeper water affording greater berthing capability for visiting yacht tenders and commercial charter operators, which also provides tourism and economic benefits for the district in a more stable environment.

 

Minor works to the U-shaped swim jetty provide a short term, cost effective solution to berth cruise ship tenders while longer term demand is being assessed and capital grants investigated.

Minor

Possible

Medium (M8)

 

CONSULTATION

 

The following organisations were consulted by MP Rogers and Associates Pty Ltd during the preparation of the marine berthing report.

·    Department of Transport (DoT)

·    Busselton Jetty Environment and Conservation Association (BJECA)

·    Carnival Australia

 

The table below provides an overview of the stakeholder issues raised and the Consultant’s comments.

 

Department of Transport (DoT)

Consultant’s comment

The proposed structure would need to be designed/constructed such that no berthing loads are transferred to the existing jetty.

These comments are in line with the requirements of any new item of marine infrastructure being constructed.  It is not expected DoT will have any significant opposition to the facility.

The final design will need to be approved by DoT Maritime Planning and be certified by a maritime engineer in accordance with AS3962 and AS4997.

No construction can commence prior to obtaining a commercial jetty licence.

Busselton Jetty Environment and Conservation Association (BJECA)

Consultant’s comment

BJECA had no significant issues with the general lower landing concept however noted that management issues would need to be addressed with the City.  The additional facility would also have maintenance costs and issues for which some sort of agreement would be required with the City.

These comments are fair and reasonable and could be worked through in consultation with BJECA.

Carnival Australia

Consultant’s comment

Universal access is not a requirement.  Passengers are advised upon going ashore, that they may not have wheel chair access and would be required to use a gangway and have some minimal mobility requirements.  Assisted access is generally suitable and the existing infrastructure (such as the stairs to the existing lower level landing (2A), would be adequate).

Assisted access is noted for the cruise ship tenders, however the structure is also proposed to be used by local charter operators, who may not have the additional staff to assist passengers.  In addition, AS 1428 and the City’s Disability Access and Inclusion Plan (DIAP) recommend universal access for any new facility.  Interpretations of the requirements of these guidelines suggest that minimum slope angles of 1 in 14 for ramp access.

The shortest distance to the shoreline is preferred as passengers do not like to have to walk long distances after disembarking.

It would be possible to move the facility back so that it is approximately 200 m from the shoreline.  Water depths would be slightly reduced to approximately 2.5 m CD.  This may restrict some vessels using the structure.

Both the short term option of the swimming jetty and the proposed new lower level landing are on the western side of the jetty.  If an additional berthing solution was available on the eastern side, it would provide greater flexibility during times of unfavourable wind and wave climate conditions.

 

Suggests undertaking short term retrofitting to the existing Busselton Jetty inner landing (2A) on the eastern side of the jetty as an alternative landing option.  Using this landing would require tender vessels to travel further and it is also noted that the water depths at this facility are marginal for the use by cruise ship tender vessels.

The capital cost of a new landing with universal access ranging from $1.3m (10m) to $2.4m (55m), is seen as excessive for a trial period for cruise ship tenders.

 

The proposed new lower level landing structure (western side) is likely to improve marine tourism (cruise ship tenders; recreational vessels; and commercial charter vessels).  Estimated possible returns to the area by way of increased tourism appear to significantly benefit the region.

 

In addition to the above stakeholder consultation, a survey of potential users of marine berthing facilities (yacht clubs and commercial operators) was undertaken.  A summary of the survey feedback is in Attachment A.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

The marine berthing report prepared by MP Rogers and Associates Pty Ltd (MRA) provides strategic guidance for the City of Busselton and regulatory, funding and management organisations to make more informed decisions to support the growth of marine tourism to the Busselton district.

 

The report has provided ten design alternatives to accommodate commercial, recreational and cruise ship tender vessels.  At the time of preparing this report, Carnival Australia had scheduled fourteen cruise ship visits to Busselton for the period 2014/15 to 2016/17. However it should be noted that this schedule can be changed at any time.

 

MRA has investigated ten design alternatives for further consideration by the Council and potential funding bodies.  These are detailed in the report, including preliminary design drawings:

Concept 1:           Fixed extension of Scout Road Jetty

Concept 2            Heavy duty floating pontoon extension of Scout Road Jetty

Concept 3:           Fender frame addition to U-shaped Swim Jetty

Concept 4:           Commercial landing extension to U-shaped Swim Jetty

Concept 5:           Deeper water T-Head and protected swing moorings at end of Busselton Jetty

Concept 6:           Existing inner landing (2A) on eastern side of Busselton Jetty, with new universal access ramp and mooring piles

Concept 7:           New 55m lower landing on Busselton Jetty (western side) with universal access ramp and swing moorings

Concept 8:           Swing Moorings only (say 10) adjacent to Busselton Jetty

Concept 9:           New 10m lower landing on Busselton Jetty (western side) with universal access ramp and swing moorings

Concept 10:        New 10m lower landing on Busselton Jetty (western side) with stairs & swing moorings

 

A more detailed overview of each alternative concept along with estimated capital cost and economic return to the Busselton district is provided in the table below.  Three shortlisted concepts (shown shaded in the table below) are illustrated in the attachments to this report.

 

 

Concept

Estimated Cost of Facility

Estimated Return from Cruise Ship Tourism

Estimated Return from increased Commercial Vessel Tourism

Estimated Return from Recreational Vessels

Total Estimated Additional Tourist Spend

Including Spending Multiplier within Region Using a multiplier of 2.2 (Average between quoted figures of 1.9

and 2.38)

Concept 1

Fixed extension of Scout Road Jetty

$1.4million

Assume 2 – 4 visits per year Total $0.2 to $0.4 million per year

Additional $0.18 to $0.74 million per year

-

$0.38 to $1.14 million

$0.84 to $2.5 million Approximately 3.8 to 11.2 jobs

Concept 2

Heavy duty floating pontoon extension of Scout Road Jetty

$0.7

million

Total $0.2 to $0.4 million per year

Additional $0.18 to $0.74 million per year

-

$0.38 to $1.14 million

$0.84 to $2.5 million Approximately 3.8 to 11.2 jobs

Concept 3

Fender frame addition to U-shaped Swim Jetty

$0.35

million

Total $0.2 to $0.4 million per year

Additional $0.18 to $0.74 million per year

-

$0.38 to $1.14 million

$0.84 to $2.5 million Approximately 3.8 to 11.2 jobs

Concept 4

Commercial Landing Extension to U-shaped Swim Jetty

$1.4

million

Total $0.2 to $0.4 million per year

Additional $0.18 to $0.74 million per year

-

$0.38 to $1.14 million

$0.84 to $2.5 million Approximately 3.8 to 11.2 jobs

Concept 5

Deeper water T-Head and protected swing moorings at end of Busselton Jetty

$7.1

million

Total $0.2 to $0.4 million per year

Additional $0.18 to $0.74 million per year

Additional $50,000 to $90,000 per year

$0.43 to $1.23 million

$0.95 to $2.71 million Approximately 4.3 to 12.2 jobs

Concept 6

Existing inner landing (2A) on eastern side of Busselton Jetty, with new universal access ramp and mooring piles

$0.5

million

Total $0.2 to $0.4 million per year

Additional $0.18 to $0.74 million per year

-

$0.38 to $1.14 million

$0.84 to $2.5 million Approximately 3.8 to 11.2 jobs

 

Concept 7

New 55m lower landing on Busselton Jetty (western side) with universal access ramp & swing moorings

$2.4

million

Total $0.2 to $0.4 million per year

Additional $0.18 to $0.74 million per year

Additional $50,000 to $90,000 per year

$0.43 to $1.23 million

$0.95 to $2.71 million Approximately 4.3 to 12.2 jobs

 

Concept 8

Swing Moorings only (say 10) adjacent to Busselton Jetty

Ten moorings installed for

$100,000

-

-

Additional $50,000 to $90,000 per year

$0.05 to $0.09 million

$0.11 to $0.20 million Approximately 0.4 to 0.9 jobs

 

Concept 9

New 10m lower landing on Busselton Jetty (western side) with universal access ramp and swing moorings

$1.3

million

Total $0.2 to $0.4 million per year

Additional $0.18 to $0.74 million per year

Additional $50,000 to $90,000 per year

$0.43 to $1.23 million

$0.95 to $2.71 million Approximately 4.3 to 12.2 jobs

 

Concept 10

New 10m lower landing on Busselton Jetty (western side) with stairs & swing moorings

$0.66

million

Total $0.2 to $0.4 million per year

Additional $0.18 to $0.74 million per year

Additional $50,000 to $90,000 per year

$0.43 to $1.23 million

$0.95 to $2.71 million Approximately 4.3 to 12.2 jobs

 


 

The option initially recommended in the MRA report is ‘Concept 7’, being a new 55m Lower Landing (western side of the Busselton Jetty) with universal access ramp and swing moorings.  Concept 7 would efficiently and effectively accommodate cruise ship tender vessels, visiting recreational yachts and commercial tour charters.  Concept 7 (subject to further preliminary design) was costed at approximately $2.4m and would provide the following outcomes;

·      Space for two 25m vessels (for example whale watching craft) could be simultaneously berthed;

·      Is located on the deeper western side of the Busselton Jetty;

·      Is slightly closer to the proposed cruise ship mooring locations;

·      Is located away from the swimming jetty area to minimise conflicts with swimmers;

·      Is located in approximately 3 m CD of water depth to provide access for a large number and type of vessels.  Deeper draft vessels may have to anchor offshore and tender in to the landing or the shore;

·      Provides universal access in the form of a 1 in 14 ramp with landings from the main Busselton Jetty deck to the lower landing level;

·      May have either a grated deck or a precast concrete deck.

 

MRA concluded that a concrete deck structure would provide the most durable structure for the City, however a grated deck may reduce piling costs by reducing the wave uplift loads on the structure, a hybrid concrete and grated deck option may be the most cost effective for the City.  MRA also suggested the City would achieve a more economical unit rate for the construction of the structure by building a facility that would be capable of holding two vessels at a time, instead of staging the construction of the facility.

 

Following further discussion with potential users, including cruise ship companies, a variation of Concept 7 was subsequently considered in order to meet a more conservative and achievable budget and is described as ‘Concept 9’ with the following features:

 

·    10 m lower level platform on the western side of the Busselton Jetty;

·    Stair or universal access from the main Busselton Jetty; and

·    Mooring piles to aid berthing of larger vessels

 

Carnival Australia (who has scheduled 14 cruise ship visits between 2014/15 and 2016/17), has indicated use of the existing landing platform on the eastern side (known as platform ‘2A’) would meet their requirements, however an independent structural engineering report commissioned by the City has recommended its use not be encouraged, due to the deteriorating condition of its aging piles.  Accordingly, City Officers have recommended as a short term option to berth cruise ship tenders, modifications to the U-shaped Swim Jetty, by the addition of cleats, fenders, slip matting and railing in order to accommodate the first three years of cruise ship visits and until funding is secured for more permanent arrangements. This has been incorporated into the 2014/15 budget endorsed by Council. Following a meeting with Carnival Australia in September 2014, the use of the existing landing Jetty (2A) was supported by its Director of Marine Operations as a suitable supplementary contingency option to the Swim Jetty and may be considered as a last resort (with risk mitigation measures in place) should unfavourable wind and wave climate render the U-shaped swim jetty unsuitable on cruise ship visit days.

 

These temporary, low cost measures are recommended while longer term demand is monitored for a more permanent structure (proposed to be Concept 9) is undertaken and funding is sourced.

 

CONCLUSION

 

This report provides an overview of an independent consultant’s report into marine berthing options at the jetty structures adjacent to the Busselton foreshore redevelopment (Busselton Jetty, Scout Road Jetty and Swim Jetty) with the aim of facilitating marine tourism opportunities to stimulate local and regional economic activity.

 

Officers recommend Council proceed with implementation of the study findings by continuing minor infrastructure upgrades at the U-shaped swim jetty budgeted for delivery in 2014/15, in order to facilitate berthing of cruise ship tenders in the short term.  It also recommends that Council seeks Federal and State Government capital funding grants to provide more permanent berthing infrastructure at the Busselton Jetty, for use by cruise ship tenders, commercial whale-watching/tourist charter vessels and visiting recreational vessels.  Funding applications and any subsequent offers of capital grants would be subject to demonstrated success and longer term commitment by cruise ship operators for a continuing program of visitation to Busselton.

 

It should be noted that the use of the U-shaped swim jetty as a short term measure to facilitate the berthing of cruise ship tenders will impact on the location of the recently announced beach enclosure for Busselton.  With the jetty being utilized by tenders, the opportunity for the enclosure to be located around the jetty is limited without sufficient budget allocation to remove it for each cruise ship visit.  On this basis, alternative locations for the enclosure may need to be considered.

 

OPTIONS

 

Council may elect to:

1.    Receive the marine berthing report and take no further action on its recommendations

2.    Not support the Officer recommendation and pursue an alternative concept from the alternative concepts provided

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

Officers would commence implementation as follows:

·    October 2014:  Commence installation of temporary berthing facilities at the U-shaped Swim Jetty (budgeted in 2014/15) in readiness for 27 November cruise ship tender visits;

·    October 2014: Distribute the marine berthing study to regulatory and funding agencies;

·    Late 2014/Early 2015:  Seek funding from Federal and State Government agencies upon finalisation of program guidelines;

·    Upon confirmation of funding, seek Council endorsement to commence detailed design of Concept 9;

·    2016/17/18:  Construct Concept 9 (new lower landing on western side) and install fender piles at existing lower landing 2A (subject to demonstrated sustainable demand; statutory approvals and achieving sufficient grant income)

 


 

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council:

 

1.    Receives the Marine Berthing report prepared by MP Rogers and Associates Pty Ltd and authorises its distribution to potential funding and regulatory stakeholder organisations;

 

2.    Notes short-term infrastructure improvements to the existing U-shaped Swim Jetty, as per the 2014/15 City budget, to accommodate the 2014/15/16 cruise ship visit program and undertakes basic risk mitigation measures at Lower Jetty Landing 2A (for contingency landings of cruise ship tenders only, in specific wind and wave climatic conditions)

 

3.    Seeks capital grant funding, including from the Federal Government’s Demand Driver Infrastructure program (Austrade) and the State Government’s Royalties for Region’s programs (SWDC) for medium to long term infrastructure improvements for the following:

a)    A new 10m lower landing platform with universal access on the western side of the Busselton Jetty and inclusive of swing moorings for recreational vessels: ~ $1.3m;

b)    Install new fender piles on Platform 2A  on the eastern side of the Busselton Jetty, to enable a more reliable contingency landing for cruise ship tender vessels in conditions unfavourable for berthing at the proposed new platform on the western side: ~ $150k

 

 


Council

183

22 October 2014

13.2

Attachment a

Summary of responses to a demand survey conducted by MP Rogers Associates Pty Ltd

 

SUMMARY OF RESPONSES TO A DEMAND SURVEY CONDUCTED BY

MP ROGERS ASSOCIATES PTY LTD

 

MP Rogers Associates provided a user survey to a number of yacht clubs in the South West and Perth metropolitan regions and commercial vessels for whale-watching, sunset tours and eco charters. 

 

1.            Yacht Clubs

 

Responses were received from four clubs, with comments summarised below:

·    Fremantle Sailing Club;

·    Mandurah Offshore Fishing and Sailing Club;

·    Dunsborough Bay Yacht Club; and

·    Geographe Bay Yacht Club.

 

Fremantle Sailing Club (FSC)

The FSC Cruising division appears to be one of the largest users of the area.  They estimated approximately 80 vessels from the Club currently use the area over a year, with an additional 50 odd vessels likely to use the area if some facilities were provided closer to the Jetty.  FSC estimated vessels would stay within the region for two to five days, with a spend per stay in the order of $500.

 

FSC also noted that there would be approximately four or five popular sites suitable for the installation of swing moorings along the western edge of Geographe Bay.  This would encourage longer stays within the region for vessels travelling from Perth.  FSC noted that many members are currently put off staying longer within the region by pen fees at the existing marina.

 

Mandurah Offshore Fishing and Sailing Club

Estimates that up to 12 vessels per year would travel to Geographe Bay, however a large number of their members have been put off by the following:

-              Questionable condition of moorings at Quindalup;

-              Limited anchorage areas; and

-              Although an excellent facility, the distance of the existing marina from town is restrictive

 

Dunsborough Bay Yacht Club (DBYC)

DBYC indicated that while facilities would be used at the Jetty, only a small number of vessels would likely stay on the facilities overnight, estimating approximately four vessels might use them.  DBYC also noted that boating facilities in the western part of Geographe Bay could be better improved, particularly some sort of protection for the mooring area at Quindalup. 

 

Geographe Bay Yacht Club (GBYC)

GBYC indicated that a landing jetty on the main Busselton Jetty would be well utilised to pick up and drop off passengers.  They noted conflict issues with fisherman on any vessel platforms and indicated that these would need to be addressed.

 

All surveys noted that the lack of shelter in northerly conditions puts a large number of vessels off from sailing or staying longer within the region.  Port Geographe is the only safe anchorage in northerly conditions.

 

In preparing the survey, it was assumed that cruising vessels to the region would either use a fixed sheltered mooring pen or a swing mooring system (similar to that used at Rottnest, within the Swan River, Quindalup or the Whitsundays). Figure 1 demonstrates the difference between a fixed pen and a swing mooring.

 

Figure 1: Examples of mooring methods (Fixed pens or swing moorings)

 

Figure 2:  Example of public swing moorings (at Whitsundays)

 

 

2.            Commercial Operators

 

Five commercial vessel operators within the region were surveyed to determine the potential usage of a facility on Busselton Jetty.  Vessels operate within Geographe Bay for approximately nine months between September to May.

 

All commercial operators were positive towards the inclusion of some sort of pick up and drop off facility at the main Busselton Jetty.  This was seen as a positive for tourism and growth of the businesses.  The Busselton based businesses deemed a new facility would save them travel time over their current base at Port Geographe.

 

The Dunsborough based charter vessel operators expressed concerns that there was a lack of vessel facilities on the western side of Geographe Bay.  Some facilities have been built for recreational craft, however commercial operators are not able to utilise these items of infrastructure.  They are currently operating as an ‘over the beach’ operation, which potentially causes a number of issues for elderly tourists.


Council

175

22 October 2014

13.2

Attachment b

Shortlisted Concept 1: New fixed extension to Scout Road Jetty

 


Council

185

22 October 2014

13.2

Attachment c

Shortlisted Concept 6: Busselton Jetty Inner Landing (2A) New Ramp and Mooring Piles

 


Council

177

22 October 2014

13.2

Attachment d

Shortlisted Concept 9: New 10m Lower Landing with Universal Access Ramp and Swing Moorings on the Western Side of the Busselton Jetty

 


Council                                                                                      189                                                             22 October 2014

13.3           PERFORMING ARTS CENTRE - ESTABLISHMENT OF A WORKING GROUP

SUBJECT INDEX:

PERFORMING ARTS CENTRE

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Governance Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Community Development

REPORTING OFFICER:

Strategic Projects Officer - Tracey King

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Community and Commercial Services - Naomi Searle

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Draft Terms of Reference - Performing Arts Centre Working Group  

  

 

PRÉCIS

 

This report is presented to progress the 2014/2015 KPI set for the CEO, to “Ensure the formation of a working group involving Councillors, City staff and external parties if required, to commence the development of a robust business case for the potential development of a Performing Arts Centre”

and in response to recommendations for progressing a dedicated Performing Arts Centre (PAC) endorsed at the 24 July 2014 Council meeting.

 

Council is requested to formally endorse the formation of the Busselton PAC Working Group, with the objective to progress the development of a purpose built PAC within the Busselton Central Business District (CBD), with a preference of it being within the Cultural Precinct, as outlined in the attached Draft Terms of Reference.

 

It is also requested that Council nominate three representatives to the Group, as per the proposed membership structure.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

Significant work has already been undertaken towards the feasibility of a PAC in Busselton, including a specific feasibility report undertaken by Pegasus Venue Management in 2008, and an Arts and Cultural Facilities Needs Assessment for the Capes in 2012 by Peter Alexander. Recognising the importance of this project, the development of a PAC has been included in the City of Busselton Strategic Community Plan (2013).

 

A report to Council in April 2011 confirmed Lot 450 Queen Street as the preferred location for a performing arts and conference centre due to synergies with existing facilities such as Art Geo, Weld Theatre and the Courthouse Gallery within the Cultural Precinct, as well as the opportunity to increase vibrancy and connectivity between the CBD and redeveloped Busselton Foreshore.

 

More recently, Council explored an opportunity for a multi-functional civic centre to be included in the construction of new Administration and Civic building, which after a lengthy community consultation process was recommended not to be included, due to concerns that included parking, site coverage and congestion. Due to these and other constraints, it was determined that a multi-functional civic centre would not entirely meet the community expectations as a PAC.  Further, at its meeting on 23 July 2014 Council resolved the following:

 

That the Council:

 

1.    not include a Multi-functional Civic Centre in the construction of the Civic and Administration Building at 2 Southern Drive, Busselton;

2.    endorses the concept plans of a Civic and Administration Building identified as Attachment B including a function room/community and civic use space in the lower foyer to be constructed in the 2015/16 financial year;

3.    reconfirms its commitment to Lot 450 Queen Street, Busselton in the Cultural Precinct being its preferred site for a Performing Arts Centre based on a Proscenium Theatre design concept and continues land negotiations with the Department of Parks and Wildlife to secure the site;

4.    endorses the concept of the proposed Performing Arts Centre located in the Cultural Precinct and it being elevated as a City of Busselton local priority project;

5.    requires the Corporate Business Plan action for the development of a business case for the design and development of a performing arts space / convention centre to be for a Performing Arts Centre in the Cultural Precinct;

6.    includes indicative funding for a Performing Arts Centre in the Long-Term Financial Plan from 2017/18 financial year onwards with design costs, construction over two years and operational costs, and that grant funding be actively sought for this project;

7.   earmarks the proposed Performing Arts Centre project as a beneficiary of the proceeds of the sale of land surplus to the City’s requirements in accordance with the Strategic Land Audit in recognition of its District-wide benefits.

 

Subsequently, Kerry Hill Architects, who was contracted in 2010 to deliver concept designs for a purpose built PAC at Lot 450, was invited to brief Council on new impressions they had developed of their own initiative, consisting of revised concepts to those that had been previously presented in 2010 and were in response to concerns at that time regarding the building’s scale, capacity and costs. 

An outcome from this briefing was that Kerry Hill will continue to be kept informed of the City’s progress in developing a Business Plan and sourcing funding to enable the PAC to proceed. The establishment of a Working Group is a key step in the process to progress these outcomes.

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

The PAC working group will not be formed as a constituted committee under the Local Government Act 1995 and while the Group may be supported and recognised by Council, will operate without the formalities and delegations of such a Committee. 

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

The formation of a Performing Arts Centre has been included in the City of Busselton Strategic Community Plan (2013).

 

The South West Regional Blueprint, 2014 – People and Place- “a region of first choice” identifies the construction of a performing arts academy /venue in the Busselton Cultural Precinct as a key regional infrastructure priority, to be developed in a timeframe of 1-3 years. This timeframe concurs with the City of Busselton Corporate Business Plan which includes provision for the progression of the business case for the design and development of a performing arts / convention centre.

 

-      Pegasus Report: Pegasus Venue Management, 2008;

-      Arts and Cultural Facilities Needs Assessment for the Capes: Peter Alexander, 2012

 


 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

It is not envisaged that there would be significant immediate financial implications to Council upon the formation of the PAC working group.

 

However, depending on how negotiations proceed with the Department of Parks and Wildlife for the acquisition of Lot 450 Queen Street, there may be costs associated with securing and developing the site that will require the consideration of Council as part of the budget process.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

The formation of a Working Group to progress the development of a dedicated PAC will support the following objectives in the City of Busselton Strategic Community Plan 2013:

 

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

 

The risks associated with forming a Working Group to make recommendations to Council are considered to be low, and as such, a formal risk assessment is not included.

 

CONSULTATION

 

Extensive community consultation has been undertaken over the years with regard to developing a PAC which has led to this being a project identified in the City of Busselton Strategic Community Plan 2013. More recently, the community was consulted with regarding the inclusion of a multi-functional civic centre as part of the City Administration Building redevelopment project.  While not being the sole focus of the consultation, of the 272 submissions received, 47 mentions were made in reference to a preference of a stand-alone PAC versus the inclusion of a multi-functional civic centre with the civic administration building.

 

The formation of a PAC within the Busselton Cultural Precinct is included in the “South West Regional Blueprint”, a guiding document outlining priority regional infrastructure projects as identified by the South West Development Commission and Regional Development Australia after significant consultation with the public sector, local government, industry, not for profit and community bodies.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

Large scale City infrastructure projects have been successfully progressed through the formation of either a reference, steering or working group such as the Busselton Foreshore Reference Group, the Busselton Regional Airport Steering Committee and the Administration Building Working Group. The establishment of these groups achieves the purpose of assisting the Council in obtaining a broader opinion and collection of differing views, experiences and expertise to achieve the best outcomes.

 

In the setting of the CEO KPIs, Council recommended that a Working Group be established for this particular project with the proposed structure to include Councillors, City staff and external parties if required.

 

The following membership structure is suggested as a sound basis that will bring together relevant experience and interest to progress the objectives:

 

·   3 Community Members – Expressions of Interest to be advertised

·   3 Councillors

·   Staff: Director, Community Commercial Services

·   Staff: Manager, Community Services

·   Staff: Strategic Projects Officer

·   Other staff seconded as required.

 

It is proposed that community nominations for the PAC Working Group be advertised prior to December 2014 so that selection can occur and the Group be established early in the New Year.

 

The proposed objectives of the Group, and qualifications of external membership is outlined in the attached Draft Terms of Reference.

 

CONCLUSION

 

For many years, the development of a purpose built PAC has been deliberated. The City has undertaken a feasibility analysis, consultation and high level conceptual design work that will form the groundwork to progress this project. Council has resolved to elevate this project to a local priority and has endorsed the establishment of a Working Group to oversee the development of the concept and to have input to recommendations being prepared for Council’s consideration.

 

The City has a consistent reputation for delivering well managed quality projects that meet community need and expectations. The formation of a Working Group is a tried and tested mechanism which allows for a mix of staff, Elected Members and community members to offer input, experience and expertise into a project with extensive community benefits.

 

The formation of a Working Group to commence the development of a robust business case for the potential development of a PAC is in line with the CEO’s KPI.  It is therefore considered prudent that a Working Group be formed in a timely manner to progress this project.

 

OPTIONS

 

1.    Council can choose to endorse the formation of a PAC Working Group with a modified membership structure and/or Terms of Reference.

 

2.    Council can choose to not endorse the formation of a PAC Working Group at this point in time.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

The formation of the PAC Working Group is an outcome set by Council as part of the CEO Performance review process, to be achieved by August 2015. Given that Council has also resolved that indicative funding for a Performing Arts Centre be included in the Long Term Financial Plan from 2017/2018 financial year onwards, a significant amount of work in formulating a business case and seeking funding opportunities will need to occur over the next two years.

 

Advertising for Community members interested in membership to the PAC Working Group would ideally occur prior to December 2014, so the Group is established and planning can commence early in 2015.


 

 

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council:

 

1.         Endorses the attached Performing Arts Centre Working Group Terms of Reference being the framework within which the Working Group will conduct their activities.

 

2.         Nominates three (3)  Councillors to the PAC Working Group, being:

 

             Cr ___________________ , Cr ________________ and   Cr ___________________

 

3.         Authorises the CEO to advertise the community positions for the PAC Working Group by Expression of Interest, seeking members with relevant and varied experience.

 


Council

193

22 October 2014

13.3

Attachment a

Draft Terms of Reference - Performing Arts Centre Working Group

 

 

1.    BACKGROUND / CONTEXT

 

The City of Busselton has elevated the development of a dedicated Performing Arts Centre (PAC) to being a key local priority, and as such Council has outlined its intention to include the development of the Centre in the City’s Long Term Financial Plan as of 2017/18, with construction to occur over a two year period. 

 

Significant work has already been undertaken with regards to the formation of a performing arts venue for Busselton, including a feasibility report undertaken by Pegasus Venue Management in 2008 and a joint Capes Regional Arts and Cultural Facilities Needs Assessment undertaken by Peter Alexander in 2012. More recently, Kerry Hill Architects provided Council with concept drawings and cost estimates for a quality centre to be built at Council’s endorsed preferred location, Lot 450 Queen Street in the Cultural Precinct, being the site currently occupied by the Department of Parks and Wildlife.

 

The Busselton PAC Working Group will be tasked with consolidating reports, feasibility studies and consultation that have already occurred, undertake further investigations to produce a solid business case and source funding opportunities that will lead to the design and development of a PAC that will meet the needs of our growing community.

 

2.    FUNCTION

 

The function of the PAC Working Group is to take responsibility for the development of a business case to progress the formation of a purpose built PAC within the Busselton Cultural Precinct.  The Working Group will be required to progress the design and development of a PAC, prepare a sound business case for the development and ongoing operations of the Centre, and identify and actively seek grant funding towards design and construction costs.

 

3.    ROLES AND OBJECTIVES

 

The Role of the PAC Working Group is to:

 

i.    Review the outcomes and recommendations of the studies and assessments contained in Appendix 1 and apply these to the business case development as appropriate

ii.   Develop sound justification for development of a PAC including:

 

·   Evaluate the feasibility and sustainability of the project.

·   Engage appropriate expertise to provide input into the business case proposal.

·   Provide local knowledge and information to assist with the process.

·   Develop a communications strategy to facilitate community consultation and stakeholder engagement throughout the development process.

·   Identify and secure funding to progress elements of the development including design, construction and operation.

 

·   Provide a conduit to the community in a supportive role.

 

·   Have input to recommendations being prepared for Council’s consideration.

 

4.         MEMBERSHIP

 

4.1          Members

The PAC Working Group shall be comprised of the following:

·   3 members of the community

·   3 elected members of Council

·   Staff: Director,  Community Commercial Services

·   Staff: Manager, Community Services

·   Staff: Strategic Projects Officer

·   Staff: Other staff by secondment as required

 

In the event of being unable to attend a meeting, representatives may nominate a deputy member, endorsed by the representative organisation. 

 

The Working Group may request the attendance of any other person or representative for advisory purposes only. 

 

4.2          Qualification(s) of External Members

Community member qualification to the Working Group is provided below.

For a member of the community to be considered as a member to the PAC working group they would ideally:

 

1.  Be a resident within the City of Busselton for a minimum of five (5) years, or have the necessary skills, knowledge and experience that are required for the Working Group’s role.

2.  Be willing to serve the Working Group for its duration of the project.

3.  Have (preferably) demonstrated a commitment or contribution to community development that has relevance to the purpose of the Working Group.

4.  Acknowledge acceptance and support of the terms of reference.

5.  Agree to serve the Working Group without prejudice or conflict of interest and to comply with the City’s Code of Conduct.

6.  Be willing to serve the Working Group in a voluntary capacity without remuneration.

 

If a Representative has any conflicts of interest, they need to declare these to the Working Group prior to discussing any relevant issues.

 

Representatives must not make any public statements in reference to the Group’s activities unless prior approval has been provided by the City’s Public Relations Officer.

 

4.3          Working Group Structure

The PAC Working Group is not a formal Committee of the City of Busselton, but rather a Working Group that is established by the City to have input to recommendations that may be progressed to Council.

 

Council requires the Group to ensure that it has in place relevant procedures to ensure that any recommendations made to the Council are via the Director, Community and Commercial Services and are the result of a consensus view of the group.

 

The Group will be resourced by the City who will be responsible for development and distribution of agendas/minutes, meeting arrangements and liaison with the Director, Community and Commercial Services on the Group’s recommendations.

 

It is recommended that the Group elects a chairperson from amongst its members and that this person be responsible for the chairing of meetings.

 

 

 

5.         FREQUENCY OF MEETINGS

 

Meeting shall be held as required as agreed by the Working Group.

 

 

 

 

 


APPENDIX 1. 

 

Reports and Studies relevant to the formation of a Performing Arts Centre:

 

1.      Capes Regional Arts and Cultural Facilities Needs Assessment: 30 June 2012, Peter   Alexander

2.    Pegasus Report: 2008,  Pegasus Venue Management 

3.    Busselton Performing Arts Centre Promo Brochure: June 2013, Kerry Hill Architects

4.    Multi-Function Civic Centre Study: July 2014, Peter Alexander

 


Council                                                                                      197                                                             22 October 2014

13.4           PROVISION OF CLEANING SERVICES AT THE GEOGRAPHE LEISURE CENTRE AND NATURALISTE COMMUNITY CENTRE INCLUDING LIBRARY

SUBJECT INDEX:

Leisure/Recreation Facilities

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Community Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Community Services

REPORTING OFFICER:

Manager, Community Services - Maxine Palmer

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Community and Commercial Services - Naomi Searle

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Absolute Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Nil

  

 

PRÉCIS

 

This report presents a business case outlining the benefits to the City of providing its own cleaning resources and services at the Geographe Leisure Centre (GLC) and Naturaliste Community Centre (NCC) including Dunsborough Library. Council is requested to approve amendments to the 2014/15 adopted budget to replace contract cleaners at these facilities with City employed resources.

 

This report has been unable to be submitted to the Finance Committee as it requires a decision from Council within sufficient timeframes to enable outcomes to be implemented prior to the cessation of the current cleaning contract on 29 November 2014.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

On 24 September 2014, Council resolved (C1409/230):

 

“That the Council

 

1.            awards contracts for RFT11/14 “Provision for Cleaning Services of City Owned Buildings” to the following tenderers for the following schedules:

 

•             Schedule 1           (Administration/Council):             Multiclean

•             Schedule 2           (Ablutions/Change rooms):          Ocean Air

•             Schedule 3           (Public Halls):                                     Multiclean

•             Schedule 5           (Busselton Ablutions)                     Multiclean

•             Schedule 8           (Dunsborough Ablutions)              Multiclean

•             Schedule 9           (BBQ’s – Dunsborough)                 Delron Cleaning

•             Schedule10         (BBQ’s – Busselton)                         Delron Cleaning

•             Schedule11         (Community Resource Centre)    Multiclean

 

and appoint Multiclean, Ocean Air and Delron Cleaning to provide periodic and event cleaning services on an “as required” basis.

 

2.            Not award contracts for RFT11/14 “Provision for Cleaning Services of City Owned Buildings” for the following schedules:

 

Schedule 6:                          Geographe Leisure Centre                                           

Schedule 7:                          Naturaliste Community Centre & Library

 

Noting that a further report will be presented to the Council with a business case determining the potential of bringing these schedules/services in house. “        

This decision was made on the basis that officers believed it would represent better value for money to conduct cleaning services at the GLC and NCC “in-house” using new staff resources. A more detailed business case was required to outline the costs and benefits of making this change. This report provides this business case, and in the interim of the business case being completed, a temporary short term cleaning contractor has been engaged to provide continuity of cleaning services at these venues.

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

Section 6.8 of the Local Government Act 1995 refers to expenditure from the municipal fund that is not included in the annual budget. In the context of this report, where no budget allocation exists, expenditure is not to be incurred until such time as it is authorised in advance, by an absolute majority decision of the Council.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

The Council’s Purchasing Policy 239 is relevant to achieve the outcomes detailed in this report. All proposed procurement processes will comply.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

The 2014/15 adopted budget incorporates a budget allocation of $105,000 for Contract Building Cleaning for the GLC and $65,000 for the NCC. Although Tender submissions received for RFT11/14 “Provision for Cleaning Services of City Owned Buildings” offered some savings against current budgets, combined hourly rates across both Centres in the Tender responses were similar to the costs associated with the City employing its own cleaning staff.  In essence, by using City employed resources staff can be employed within current budget parameters to clean over a greater number of hours. The table below demonstrates this and outlines the contract cleaning schedules quoted in the Tender and the suggested hours in which City employed cleaning staff could operate.

 

All employees of the City of Busselton are employed under the City’s Enterprise Agreement, the City of Busselton Enterprise Agreement 2014 (Agreement).  This Agreement is read in conjunction with the Local Government Industry Award (Award) such that when a condition is not specifically cited in the Agreement the Award applies. 

 

The position of a cleaner, although not specifically referenced within the Agreements classification structures, would fit most appropriately within the Outside Workforce Classification Structure, payable at a level 1.  This currently equates to a base hourly rate of $24.14.  With an additional 30% incorporated for overheads (including superannuation costs) the hourly rate for a permanent cleaner is currently $31.38.  It should be noted that the Agreement does contain a Recreation Classification Structure, however this is designed to cover those employees who perform work aligned to the recreation industry (ie lifeguards, pool operators) and is not designed to cover the work of a cleaner whose duties are limited to cleaning at a recreation centre.

 

The Award provides for varying work arrangements dependent on the type of work an employee undertakes.  The role of cleaner is specifically referenced in the Award as being able to work an ordinary spread of hours (maximum 38 hours per week) on a Monday to Sunday between the hours of 5am to 10pm.  This is the spread of hours within which the City may roster a cleaner without the payment of weekday penalty rates.  Hours worked on weekends do attract penalties; time and a half payable on a Saturday, and time and three quarters on a Sunday.  Cleaners may also be able to claim the adverse working conditions penalty for time spent working in adverse conditions as defined by the Award.  This is payable at the rate of 3.5% of the standard Award rate as defined in the Award (currently 66 cents per hour or part thereof).  As it would apply so infrequently it has not been included in the cost comparison below.

 

As of 30 September 2014, the GLC has expended $18,737 of the $105,000 contract cleaning budget leaving a balance of $86,263. Subject to Council’s agreement it is expected the GLC could commence cleaning using City employed staff on 30 November, 2014. It is estimated that by 30 November 2014, there will be a balance of $73,700 remaining in the 2014/15 Contract Building Cleaning budget. The balance of the Contract Building Cleaning budget would be required to be transferred to the GLC Salaries budget prior to the first pay cycle in December 2014.

As of 30 September 2014, the NCC has expended $16,433 of the $65,000 annual Contract Building Cleaning budget leaving a balance of $48,567. Subject to Council’s agreement it is expected that NCC cleaning, using City employed staff, would also commence on 30 November 2014. It is estimated that by 30 November 2014, $37,600 would be the remaining balance in the 2014/15 Contract Building Cleaning budget. The balance of the NCC Contract Building Cleaning budget would be required to be transferred to the NCC Salaries budget prior to the first pay cycle in December 2014.

 

One capital item, a floor scrubber for the NCC estimated to cost $5,000, would be required to be purchased in December. It is proposed the scope of the NCC floor sanding, which has a budget of $10,000, is reduced by $5,000 and that this be transferred from the Contractors operating budget to the NCC Furniture and Equipment capital budget to enable this to be procured. Alternatively a scrubber could be shared with the GLC. Floors at the NCC are scrubbed once a month. The GLC already has a scrubber that could be used at both facilities, although this is not ideal due to transportation logistics.

 

Some additional chemicals and cleaning equipment would also need to be purchased, however both the NCC and GLC have small cleaning materials budgets that these will be sourced from.

 

Under the City’s budget system, a specific activity code for building cleaning (4025) already exists. This will enable all costs associated with cleaning these facilities to be measured, monitored and evaluated for best value going forward.  Under the current cleaning contract arrangements, the City does not budget at activity code level, therefore this is not reflected in the requested budget amendments.

 

In summary, to commence in-house cleaning from 30 November 2014 the following estimated budget amendments would be required, noting this results in a net neutral outcome to the 2014/15 budget:

 

Description

Account String

2014/15 Adopted Budget

2014/15 Amended Budget (PROPOSED)

Variance

 

 

$

$

$

GLC Contract Building Cleaning

522-10591-3112-0000

$105,000

$31,300

-$73,700

GLC Salaries

336-10591-3001-0000

$568,196

$630,657

$62,461

GLC Superannuation (Occ 9.5%)

336-10591-3025-0000

$63,619

$70,436

$7,002

GLC Superannuation (Council 5.75%)

336-10591-3026-0000

$6,394

$10,816

$4,237

NCC Contract Building Cleaning

522–10590–311 - 0000

$65,000

$27,400

-$37,600

NCC Salaries

336–10590-3001-0000

$69,517

$101,713

$32,196

NCC Superannuation (Occ 9.5%)

336-10590-3025-0000

$7,653

$11,225

$3,572

NCC Superannuation (Council 5.75%)

336-10590-3026-0000

$3,830

$5,662

$1,832

NCC Contractors

522-10590-3280-0000

$23,258

$18,258

-$5,000

NCC Exp Offset Acc-Furniture & Equipment

336-10590-7743-0000

$10,000

$15,000

$5,000

NET VARIANCE

 

$922,467

$922,467

$0

 

Note: The above are forecast estimates only and may not be exact. This may lead to some end of financial year account variances, however it is expected they will be in acceptable variance limits.  The remaining overheads (excluding superannuation) include other salary components such as leave entitlements, therefore it is expected there will be some variations to these accounts, albeit minimal. 

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

This proposal aligns to the City’s Strategic Community Plan of 2013:

 

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

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

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

               

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 identifies ‘downside’ risks only, rather than ‘upside’ risks as well. Risks to continuity of cleaning services were identified during the transition period, however, the officer recommendation is considered to be “low” risk.

 

CONSULTATION

 

Research was undertaken with other Recreation Centres who employ their own cleaning staff.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

Both the GLC and NCC have experienced many years of inconsistent cleaning standards using contract cleaning resources. The GLC has received constant customer complaints, particularly about the cleanliness of the change rooms and toilet areas. Communication and resolution of problems have been difficult. The majority of the cleaning occurs when staff are not present to identify issues and liaise directly with the cleaners performing the work. Problems are reported after the fact and issues have been found to have been lost in translation or not passed on to relevant contract staff.

 

The efficiency of using contract cleaners has also been questioned. Both GLC and NCC staff perform a large number of cleaning duties within their roles, for example lifeguards hose down the pool decks and change rooms each night and regularly scrub the stadium floor. The NCC has lower usage rates and on occasions there would be insufficient work to fill a full cleaning shift. In addition, because the City is locked into guaranteed schedules of work in the contract, there is no flexibility to vary services in response to changing needs or specific events.

 

Consultation, with other Recreation Centres who have changed to employing their own cleaning staff revealed positive outcomes. They have found quality has improved, complaint levels have reduced, cleaning can be varied according to need, and cleaning staff have more ownership and see themselves as part of the team.

 

The cost analysis in the Financial Implications section of this report, shows set up costs are minimal and can be achieved within existing budgets and the hours of cleaning time at both facilities can also be significantly increased, potentially for marginally less than what we have allocated to cleaning in the current budget. Fundamentally, the biggest improvement would be that cleaning staff will be on site during high traffic periods and can respond to cleaning needs when they are most required. This would include emptying bins which are often overflowing under the current cleaning arrangements and mopping floors which will help to reduce slip hazards. The key benefit is that the City will be providing consistently high standards of cleanliness throughout the Centres, for all our customers no matter what time of day they visit.

 

CONCLUSION

 

This report outlines the business case to employ cleaning staff at the GLC and NCC (including the library) rather than engaging contractors on the basis that a much higher and consistent level of cleaning can be achieved using City appointed cleaning staff. This can be achieved at a similar cost, potentially less, than using contractors. Budget amendments would be required to transfer funds from Contract Building Cleaning budgets to the relevant GLC and NCC salary budgets and to transfer a portion of the operating budget to capital to enable the NCC to purchase a floor scrubber. All other equipment can be procured from existing cleaning material budgets.

 

OPTIONS

 

1.            The Council may choose not to accept the officer’s recommendation and proceed to consider the award of the relevant schedules in accordance with RFT11/14 “Provision for Cleaning Services of City Owned Buildings” for the GLC and NCC cleaning.  This will require a further report addressing the tender evaluation for those schedules.  This report could follow immediately upon such a decision. 

 

2.            The Council may not support the $5,000 capital budget amendment to enable the NCC to purchase a floor scrubber and request this be included in the 2015/16 draft budget and the GLC floor scrubber be used at both centres as an interim measure.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

The recruitment process to appoint the cleaning staff can commence immediately after the Council has endorsed the officer’s recommendation. Current interim cleaning contracts will end on 29 November 2014. Employment contracts must therefore be in place from 30 November 2014.

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

ABSOLUTE MAJORITY DECISION OF COUNCIL REQUIRED

1.         That the Council

2.        

 

1.    Approves an amendment to the 2014/15 budget on the following basis to enable the City to employ cleaning staff at the Geographe Leisure Centre and Naturaliste Community Centre:

 

Description

Account String

2014/15 Adopted Budget

2014/15 Amended Budget (PROPOSED)

Variance

 

 

$

$

$

GLC Contract Building Cleaning

522-10591-3112-0000

$105,000

$31,300

-$73,700

GLC Salaries

336-10591-3001-0000

$568,196

$630,657

$62,461

GLC Superannuation (Occ 9.5%)

336-10591-3025-0000

$63,619

$70,436

$7,002

GLC Superannuation (Council 5.75%)

336-10591-3026-0000

$6,394

$10,816

$4,237

NCC Contract Building Cleaning

522–10590–311 - 0000

$65,000

$27,400

-$37,600

NCC Salaries

336–10590-3001-0000

$69,517

$101,713

$32,196

NCC Superannuation (Occ 9.5%)

336-10590-3025-0000

$7,653

$11,225

$3,572

NCC Superannuation (Council 5.75%)

336-10590-3026-0000

$3,830

$5,662

$1,832

NCC Contractors

522-10590-3280-0000

$23,258

$18,258

-$5,000

NCC Exp Offset Acc-Furniture & Equipment

336-10590-7743-0000

$10,000

$15,000

$5,000

NET VARIANCE

 

$922,467

$922,467

$0

 

 

  


Council                                                                                      203                                                             22 October 2014

14.             Finance and Corporate Services Report

14.1           DUNSBOROUGH BAY YACHT CLUB LEASE

SUBJECT INDEX:

Agreements/Contracts

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Corporate Services  

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Property and Corporate Compliance

REPORTING OFFICER:

Property Management Officer - Vaughan Williams

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Finance and Corporate Services - Matthew Smith

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   EXISTING LEASE BOUNDARY

Attachment b    PROPOSED LEASE BOUNDARY  

  

 

PRÉCIS

 

The Dunsborough Bay Yacht Club leases an area of Crown land which forms part of Reserve 34111 being Lot 501 Geographe Bay Road, Dunsborough.  The club has requested an extension of their lease area to enable a new storage shed to be constructed on the southern side of the existing improvements.  The club has also requested the lease period be extended.

 

This report recommends the City take the steps necessary for this proposal to proceed, as outlined in the Officer Recommendation.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

In February 2008 the Council resolved (C0802/071) to issue a planning consent for a boat storage shed to be built by the Dunsborough Bay Yacht Club Inc. (DBYC) on portion of Reserve 34111, Geographe Bay Road, Dunsborough.

 

The planning consent was subject to a number of conditions, one being that the DBYC enter into a lease agreement with the City of Busselton for the boat shed and it’s immediate curtilage, subject to the following requirements:

 

“(i)      land tenure being leasehold not exceeding five years with a right to an extension of a possible further five years if required and with no automatic right of extension;

 

(ii)       lease area limited to the footprint of the boatshed and on expiration of the lease, the boat shed may be required to be removed and the natural environment reinstated to its pre development state;

 

(iii)      the DBYC to be required to remove the boat shed if threatened by erosion or creates an erosion threat to other land;

 

(iv)      the provision of public access to the public toilet and adjoining beach is not to be impeded upon;

 

(v)       the yacht club be responsible for maintenance of the boatshed and its associated facilities;

 

(vi)      no further expansion of the facility will be supported; and

 

(vii)     the lease is to be finalised prior to the issue of a permit to use.”

 

The process to excise the portion of land to lease to the DBYC was finalised in July 2010 with new titles issued by the Department of Lands.  Reserve 34111 comprises of three lots, Lots 43, Lot 500 and Lot 501 and is a ‘C’ Class Reserve for the purpose of Recreation. The area of land occupied by the DBYC is Lot 501 on Deposited Plan 67916 Volume LR3156 Folio 996. The management order for the Reserve is subject to Lot 501 only being vested with the power to lease for a term not exceeding 21 years.

 

The lease agreement was executed between the City and the DBYC on the 13 August 2010, with the conditions required by the Council Resolution reflected in the agreement.  The term of the existing lease is for 5 years commencing on 1 August 2010 and expiring on 31 July 2015 with the option of a further term of 5 years commencing on 1 August 2015. 

 

In October 2010, Council supported a request made by the DBYC to modify the planning consent issued on 11 March 2008.  The plans were modified to include an extension to the mezzanine and balcony the full length of the existing building.  Again in December 2011 planning approval was granted to make an addition to  the verandah, which partially extended outside the existing lease area. 

 

In April 2013, the DBYC submitted an application to the City seeking funding to construct a secure shed to the southern side of the existing building, shown hatched on ‘Attachment A’.  The DBYC were successful in their bid and in 2014 planning consent was granted for this.  The Department of Lands advised the applicant that the proposed shed is partially outside the lot boundary which is outlined in green on ‘Attachment A’.  Prior to construction of the new shed commencing, the lease area and lot boundary will need to be amended to encompass both the existing verandah and the proposed new shed.

 

The proposed new lease area is shown hatched on ‘Attachment B’ and the proposed new lot boundary is outlined in green on ‘Attachment B’.

 

As can be seen from Attachment B, it is proposed to remove the existing public toilets from the revised lease area.  This proposal has arisen as a result of discussions with the DBYC. 

 

The lease currently includes the public toilets although it is a condition of the lease, as required by the relevant Council Resolution, that public access to the public toilets must be maintained at all times.  Given the public toilets are part of the lease, the responsibility for cleaning and maintenance of them also rests with the DBYC. 

 

It is not uncommon for public toilets to be constructed as part of an adjoining lease premises.  Examples of this type of arrangement exists at both the Busselton and Dunsborough Sea Rescue facilities.  In both these instances the City is responsible for the cleaning and maintenance of the public toilet facility. 

 

In the case of the DBYC, the City currently provides and maintains two portable toilets for public use, located immediately west of the DBYC building.  These portable toilets were in use prior to the construction of the DBYC building, but with the construction of the public toilets as part of the building the officers are of the opinion that the portable toilets are no longer required.  The DBYC are, however, reluctant to see the portable toilets removed if the City is not agreeable to taking over responsibility for cleaning and maintenance of the public toilet facility constructed within the DBYC building.  The DBYC are concerned at the additional cost and responsibilities associated with increased use of the public toilet facility if the portable toilets are removed. 

 

Thus while the DBYC clearly currently have responsibility for cleaning and maintenance of the public toilet facility, the transfer of this responsibility to the City would smooth the way for removal of the portable toilets, although the City of course has the option of removing the portable toilets without taking on responsibility for cleaning and maintenance of the public toilets in the DBYC building.  It currently costs approximately $9500 per year to lease the portable toilets and an additional $10,000 per year to clean them.  It is estimated that it would cost approximately $10,000 per year for the City to clean and maintain the public toilet facility within the DBYC building.  Thus provided the City taking on responsibility for cleaning and maintenance of the public toilet in the DBYC building was associated with the removal of the portable toilets, there would be an overall cost saving to the City of approximately $9500 per year. 

 

For all of these reasons it is proposed that the City take on responsibility to maintain and clean the public toilet facility in the DBYC building and thus that portion of the building be excluded from the leased area.  The City could then also erect suitable signage in the car park area and on the DBYC building to direct the public to the location of the public toilet facility. 

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

When disposing of property whether by sale, lease or other means, a Local Government is bound by the requirements of section 3.58 of the Local Government Act. However 3.58(5)(d) provides exemption to this process under Regulation 30(2)(b)(i) & (ii) of the Local Government (Functions & General) Regulations.

 

This section states "disposal of land to incorporated bodies with objects of benevolent, cultural, educational or similar nature and the members of which are not entitled to receive any pecuniary profit from the body's transactions, are exempt from the advertising and tender requirements of section 3.58 of the Local Government Act." The constitution of the DBYC Inc. is such that this exemption applies.

 

The land occupied by the Dunsborough Bay Yacht Club is part of Reserve 34111, being Lot 501 on Deposited Plan 67916 Volume LR3156 Volume 996. The land is vested with the City of Busselton with the power to lease for any term not exceeding 21 years for the designated purpose of ‘Recreation’, subject to the consent of the Minister for Lands.

 

Under Section 18(2) of the Land Administration Act 1997, approval of the Minister for Lands is required for a lease on a Crown Reserve. Additionally the lease agreement and any amendments are to be lodged with Landgate in accordance with the Transfer of Land Act 1893 (TLA).

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

Nil.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

In 2010, when the existing lease was executed, the annual rent charged to community and sporting groups leasing City owned or managed land was $150.00 per annum.  Additionally, at the time the standard community group lease did not contain any provision for annual rent reviews. 

 

The annual rent that is now charged is $200.00 per annum.  The current standard community lease terms also contain a requirement for the rent to be increased annually by CPI.  In surrendering the existing lease and entering into a new lease it is proposed to bring the rent in line with the current fees and charges and further it is proposed to include a rent review clause. 

 

The costs associated the preparation of the surrender document and the new lease agreement will be the responsibility of the DBYC.

 

Whilst it is proposed that the City maintain and clean the public toilet which would no longer be part of the leased area, this cost could be offset against  the costs currently associated with the supply and maintenance of the two portable toilets which would no longer be required.  Thus there would in effect be a saving of approximately $9,500 per year to the City from this arrangement.  As mentioned earlier it is estimated the public toilet will cost approximately $10,000 per year to clean and maintain.

                                                                                                                                                                                                               

In the 2013/2014 financial year the club was awarded $11,553 towards the construction of a storage shed through the City’s Community Bids Scheme; however the project has not yet been undertaken as it was subject to the development application approval and extension to the current lease area.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

The proposal to amend the lease plan and enter into a new lease agreement with the DBYC is consistent with the following City of Busselton Strategic Priorities:

 

Key Goal Area 2

•             Well planned, vibrant and active places

•             Provide a range of quality leisure, cultural, recreation and sporting facilities and services

•             Responsible management of public infrastructure assets

 

Council Strategy

•             Ensure our recreational facilities meet the needs of our growing community

•             Maintain community assets at an appropriate standard, consulting with the community
              about expectations and costs of maintenance.

 

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

An assessment of the potential implications has been undertaken using the City’s risk assessment framework.  The table below describes identified risks where the residual risk, once controls have been identified, is identified as ‘low’

 

Risk

Controls

Consequence

Likelihood

Risk Level

Potential public disapproval of the additional development of portion of Reserve 34111.

 

The public was previously consulted on the development in the reserve with reference to the Foreshore Management Plan. 

Environmental and conservation damage to the Reserve.

Unlikely

Low

 

CONSULTATION

 

Officers have consulted with the DBYC regarding the proposed changes to the leased area.

 

In 2008 extensive public consultation was undertaken prior to the construction of the boatshed.  The most recent development application for the addition of the secure shed was advertised in the Busselton Dunsborough Mail on 11 December 2013.  There were 5 submissions in support and one submission not supporting the development.  The development application was subsequently approved under delegated authority.

 

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

The proposal to incorporate the DBYC’s existing improvements into a revised lease boundary will increase the leased area from approximately 225m2 to approximately 305m2. 

 

The DBYC’s proposed new shed has been given planning consent but development of the shed cannot progress until the realignment of the boundary of Lot 501 and corresponding leased area have been approved by the Minister for Lands. 

 

However, to put in place the changes to the lease boundary, the existing lease will need to be surrendered and a new lease entered into.  The term of the current lease is 5 years, which commenced on 1 August 2010 and is due to expire on 31 July 2015, with a further 5 year option at the lessee’s request.

 

The lessee has requested that the lease period be extended as part of the process of creating the new lease.  It is recommended that a new lease term be offered to the DBYC of 5 years from the date of the surrender of the current lease, together with an option of a further term of 5 years at the lessee’s request.  Additionally as the rent has not been adjusted since 2010 and to provide consistency with the current lease conditions it is proposed that the annual rent be increased to $200.00 per annum and reviewed annually by CPI.

 

The original approval for the DBYC facility required that a toilet was to be made available for public use.  The club has kept this toilet open to the public and has been cleaning and maintaining it since its construction.  It is proposed that the public toilet facility be excluded from the new lease area and that the City take over the cleaning and maintenance of the toilet.  This will facilitate the removal by the City of the two existing portable toilets from the parking area.

 

CONCLUSION

 

To enable the new development of the new DBYC shed to proceed, it is recommended that Council take the necessary steps to seek the approval of the Minister for Lands to amend the boundary of Lot 501 and enter into a new lease with DBYC for the same.  

 

If for any reason the Minister for Lands does not support the amendment to the leased area, the DBYC would not be able to construct the proposed new shed.   If this is the case, it would still be relevant for the City to make changes to the lease agreement in relation to the public toilets as this will clarify and simplify the situation for both parties and ultimately facilitate the saving of money by the City.  

 

OPTIONS

 

 1.           The Council could resolve to support the amendment of the Lot boundary and entering into a new lease agreement, but the maintenance and cleaning of the public toilet remain with the DBYC. 

 

2.            The Council could resolve not to support the amendment to the Lot boundary, thus restricting any further development on the DBYC site.  This option is not recommended as the existing improvements are partially located outside the existing lease area (Lot 501) and have already been granted planning consent by the City.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

If Council is supportive of the new lease area and the new lease, a request will be made to the Minister for Lands to make the necessary changes. This process can take up to 12 months to complete.

 

When all requirements are met a surrender of the existing lease and a new lease document will be prepared and forwarded to the DBYC.

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council:

 

1.    Request the Minster for Lands to amend the boundary of Lot 501 as shown outlined in green on ‘Attachment B’ with all associated costs being the responsibility of the Dunsborough Bay Yacht Club Inc.

 

2.    Accept the surrender of the lease agreement dated 13 August 2010 between the City of Busselton and the Dunsborough Bay Yacht Club Inc. subject to a new lease agreement being entered into.

 

3.    Enter into a lease agreement with the Dunsborough Bay Yacht Club Inc. for portion of Reserve 34111 as shown hatched on ‘Attachment B’  The terms and conditions of the new lease will be the same as the current lease, with the following changes:

 

a)         the initial 5 year term to commence on the date of the surrender of the current lease agreement;

b)        the option of a further 5 year term at the lessees request;

c)         rent to commence at $200.00 per annum;

d)        rent to be reviewed annually at CPI; and

e)        the public toilet facility shown outlined in orange on ‘Attachment B’ to be excluded from the new lease area with the City being responsible for the cleaning and maintenance of the public toilet.

 

 

 


Council

209

22 October 2014

14.1

Attachment a

EXISTING LEASE BOUNDARY

 


Council

201

22 October 2014

14.1

Attachment b

PROPOSED LEASE BOUNDARY

 

 


Council                                                                                      213                                                             22 October 2014

15.             Chief Executive Officer's Report

15.1           BUSSELTON FORESHORE REDEVELOPMENT RELOCATION OF SCOUTS HALL FROM CROWN GRANT LOT 340 TO RESERVE 17319

SUBJECT INDEX:

Busselton Foreshore Redevelopment Relocation of Scouts Hall

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Major Projects

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Major Projects

REPORTING OFFICER:

Major Projects Officer - Mersina Robinson

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Acting Chief Executive Officer  - Paul Needham

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Lot 340 Geographe Bay Road

Attachment b    Reserve 17319 Margaret Street - Option 2 concept

Attachment c    Letter from Geographe Bay Yacht Club

Attachment d   Letter from Busselton Fitness Club  

  

PRÉCIS

 

In accordance with the Busselton Foreshore Master Plan and land rationalisation approved by Parliament on the Busselton Foreshore, a proposal has been lodged by Scouts WA (Busselton Sea Scouts) to relinquish their Crown Grant 340 on the Busselton Foreshore (Attachment A).

 

Their proposal to relinquish Crown Grant Lot 340 is subject to receiving approval for their relocation to a new Crown Grant site on Reserve 17319 Margaret Street, Busselton (Attachment B).

 

The City has been requested by the Department of Lands to endorse the proposed relocation of Scouts WA before the Minister for Lands’ approval is sought.   Officers are recommending that the City support relocation of the Scouts WA Hall to a site to be excised from Reserve 17319 and on a newly created Crown Grant.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

A proposal has been lodged with the Department of Lands (DoL) by Scouts WA to relinquish their Crown Grant Lot 340 in exchange for relocation to a site to be excised from Reserve 17319.   DoL requires endorsement of the proposal from the Council before seeking approval from the Minister for Lands.  

 

Lot 340 is a Crown Grant (fee simple) held in trust by the Boy Scouts Association of WA for the purpose of a Scout Hall.  The grant was made because of the community benefit that would be provided by the use of the land for the specified use.   The lot which has an area of 781m2 is a freehold tenure, but with conditions that:

 

-      It cannot be offered for sale;

-      Commercial activities on the title would only be supported if it was directly related to delivering the community benefit intended;

-      Any dealings in the land must be approved by the Minister for Lands; and

-      Any approval of commercial use of the site would only apply to the area of the title (Lot 340 as surveyed).  Given that the current building and use are partly outside the surveyed boundary of Lot 340 and on land managed by the City, approval of the City would also be required.

 

The existing Scout Hall straddles the boundaries of the unusually shaped Lot 340. The Scout Hall building has been at Lot 340 for over 20 years, is not used very intensively and requires at least partial replacement.  The coastal beachfront to the building has been unstable, and is often subject to coastal erosion in winter.  Scouts WA have been advised by the City that the Scout Hall is not located within the footprint of the Crown Grant and if they wish to remain at this locality, the boundaries of Lot 340 would ideally be rationalised or rectification of this situation will require partial or complete demolition of the building, including removal of asbestos by Scouts WAIf rationalisation were proposed and supported the building would need to be located within the boundaries of any new Lot 340.

 

Scouts WA acknowledge the need to redevelop the facility in the near future and are aware of the City’s redevelopment plans for the Foreshore, including construction of coastal defences and new infrastructure that could have an impact on Lot 340.

 

The City and Scouts WA representatives have met on a number of occasions in recent years to discuss the integration of Scouts WA as part of a new building.  However Scouts WA have opted to retain their own facility within a new site and relinquish their title to Lot 340 in return for a new purpose built building on another site. Scouts WA require a position on the coast with direct access to the ocean, preferably via a boat ramp although this is not critical. The facilities they require in a robust but simple building include:  a large meeting room, gear storage, leaders’ room, kitchen, showers and toilets, and boat storage.  Several sites have been considered for their relocation.

 

Scouts WA have agreed to relocate to portion of Reserve 17319 (west of the Geographe Bay Yacht Club and east of the Busselton Fitness Centre). Reserve 17319 has an area of 11.6 ha  and is vested in the City for the purpose of ‘Recreation’.  The City has the power to lease portion of the reserve for any term not exceeding 21 years.  There are currently two lease agreements over the portion of the reserve on the seaward side of the cycleway, being:

 

-      The Geographe Bay Yacht Club (GBYC). The current lease is due to expire 30 June 2015.

-      Busselton Fitness Club (BFC). This lease expires 29 June 2016, but with a 5 year option expiring 29 June 2021. 

 

The site that has been identified has been agreed to by all the relevant parties including Scouts WA and the other two lessess, GBYC and BFC.  The City is considering two options in relation to the layout of and access to the site with regard to roads and carparking.  One option involves the access to the site being provided on the seaward side of the BFC, while the other provides a more direct route on the landward side of the building.  The preferred option is to provide the access on the landward side of the BFC.    

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

Scouts WA agreement to relocation, in part, is on the basis that a title is provided similar to that held over Lot 340. That can be achieved under section 75 of the Land Administration Act 1997 (LAA). DoL has advised the City that it supports, in principle, the proposed relocation and grant of a title under section 75 and will seek the approval of the Minister for Lands for that to occur subject to the following:

 

1.    The City acknowledge the proposed site has no legal road access and access arrangements will be through Reserve 17319; 

2.    As the grant of land under section 75 is a freehold title (with conditions) the approval of the Department of Planning will be required (and is being sought) for the creation of the lot without legal access;

3.    The proposal is that, rather than an easement arrangement, conditions will be included into the management order held by the City over Reserve 17319 that will require the City to provide, at all times, appropriate access to the Scouts WA site.  (The title held by Scouts WA will include a condition whereby the title is accepted without legal access other than the agreement of the City to provide access through Reserve 17319.  It is recognised that in the future a dedicated road access or easement access may be able to be provided to the Scouts WA site);

4.    Scouts WA will be responsible for the cost and arranging for the provision of services (eg; water, power, sewer, drainage) to the new site and neither the State nor DOL accepts any responsibility for the provision of services to the site; and

5.    Scouts WA will meet the cost of survey for the new site.

 

The third condition is included, as at this stage there is no formal agreement between Scouts WA and the City that the title is accepted without legal access.  DoL is seeking advice on likely costs in this respect and whether a contribution to the costs by the DoL is possible.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

Busselton Foreshore Master Plan

 

The City of Busselton initially adopted the Busselton Foreshore Master Plan in April 2012 followed by a revised version in July 2014.  A Youth and Community Activities Precinct is a major component of the Busselton Foreshore redevelopment.  It was proposed to include Lot 340 as part of the rationalisation of landholdings for this Precinct.  The Precinct comprises a Youth and Community Activities and Surf Life Saving Club building to accommodate the coordination of City events and Busselton Surf Life Saving Club (BSLSC).  The intent was to accommodate the Scouts WA as a key tenant in this building.  Scouts WA (in the form of Busselton Sea Scouts) initially intended to be accommodated in the proposed building and they were offered the opportunity for reinvigoration and expansion as part of co-located facilities.   However, as already noted, Scouts WA have opted to retain their own facility within a new site and relinquish their title to Lot 340 in return for a new purpose built building on another site.

 

State Planning Policy 2.6 (SPP 2.6) – State Coastal Planning

 

State Planning Policy 2.6: State Coastal Planning Policy (SPP2.6) provides guidance for planning and development along and in proximity of the coast throughout the State. One of the key things that SPP2.6 seeks to do is provide guidance in terms of setbacks from the coast so that development is not affected by coastal processes – either in the form of coastal inundation or flooding, or in the form of coastal erosion. There is a clear need to consider both matters in relation to the planning and development of this site. The coastal flooding issue is fairly simply addressed through the setting of a minimum, finished floor level in accordance with Department of Water advice, and that would be a minimum floor level of 3.0 metres AHD.

 

The coastal erosion consideration is somewhat more complicated. Were this site in an area isolated from other development, there would be a clear need to either consider setting the development back from the coast such that it would not be affected during the planning timeframe – i.e. usually 100 years from today, and a coastal setback of perhaps 130-170 metres – or that measures are put in place to either provide for the protection of the site, or allow for the future relocation or removal of the development if necessary. Other development in this particular location would most likely involve leasehold tenure only, in which case coastal process issues would, primarily, only need to be considered in the context of the proposed lease term, rather than the normal, 100 year, planning timeframe. As leasehold tenure is not proposed, however, there is a need to consider coastal process issues over the normal planning timeframe and, effectively, as if the proposal was for private development on ordinary, freehold land. The proposal is, however, clearly ‘infill’ development for the purposes of SPP2.6 and, as such, would ordinarily be permitted. That does not mean that coastal protection may not be required in relation to development of this site at some future time. In fact it is almost certain that some protection will be required. Development on this site, however, would require protection, and could be protected, in common with the existing Fitness Club and Geographe Bay Yacht Club developments, and with the development being placed between the two sites, does not add to the length of coast that may need to be protected or the cost involved in doing so – and, in fact, effectively increases the return on investment of coastal protection that will, in any event, most likely be required.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

The City of Busselton has allocated a total of $175,000 in its 2014/2015 budget to bear some of the costs of Scouts WA relocation including: demolition of the existing Scout Hall, removal of asbestos and site remediation estimated as having a value of $20,000, some of the construction and infrastructure costs.  Negotiations have identified that the City’s contribution will be capped at $175,000, with any costs in excess of this to be borne by Scouts WA.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

This project contributes to the objective of a City where the community has access to quality cultural, recreation, leisure facilities and services.  

 

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the officer recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk assessment framework.

 

Risk

Controls

Consequence

Likelihood

Risk Level

Site chosen for relocation of Scouts WA is not an appropriate site

Close negotiation with all parties involved to ensure needs are met

Moderate

Unlikely

Medium

 

CONSULTATION

 

The key stakeholders potentially affected by the Scouts relocation are the adjoining leaseholders, the Geographe Bay Yacht Club (GBYC) and the Busselton Fitness Centre (BFC).  Consultation with both the GBYC and BFC has been undertaken.  Both groups have considered the proposal and advised the City in writing that they have no objection to the proposed relocation of Scouts WA.

 

While it would be preferred by Scouts WA to have access to a boat ramp, agreement has not been reached with GBYC and Scouts WA to provide this access at the ramp at GBYC.  While Scouts WA would prefer to be provided with this access, the relocation can proceed without it on the basis that there is direct access to the ocean from the site identified for Scouts WA via an identified sand track.  Negotiations could continue in the future if it was felt necessary, however, GBYC’s current position is not to agree to the request to provide access and use of the boat ramp to Scouts WA for various reasons such as traffic and liability.

 

The BFC have advised that the Club is in support of the Scouts being relocated to Reserve 17319. The only concern raised by the Club was that of the access/driveway location (as shown in Attachment B – Option 1), whereby Scout members would need to drive between the Club and their proposed premises on a narrow drive-way with a tight corner. It would be preferable that the access to the Scouts building be considered on the landward side of the Club rather than the seaward.  The Club believes there would be a similar, if not less, amount of vegetation that would need to be removed and it would be a more direct route to the Scouts’ premises.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

The proposed relocation of Scouts WA is a key enabler for the achievement of the Busselton Foreshore Master Plan.  The relocation of the Scouts WA building allows for the development of the Youth and Surf Lifesaving Building in the Youth Precinct on the proposed location. 

 

Following negotiations with the existing lessees to the seaward of the cycleway portion of Reserve 17319, it is proposed that a portion of the reserve is excised for the purposes of Scouts WA and that the access to the site is provided in accordance with option 2 (access road landward side of BFC) rather than the previous option 1 (access road seaward side of BFC).

 

The reasons for this being the preferred option include:

 

-     The shared access way is shorter (186m2) than Option 1 (367m2) and more direct without turning required to the proposed Scouts WA site;

-     There will be less potential conflict between pedestrians and vehicles;

-     It enables a better shaped lot for development of the Scout Hall and car parking.

 

Scouts WA’s relocation to Reserve 17319 is based on their preference of having a position on the coast with direct access to the ocean, preferably via a boat ramp.  While the GBYC advised that they do not agree to provide access and use of the Club’s boat ramp to Scouts WA, there is an alternative direct access to the ocean that can be utilised by Scouts WA.  Negotiations for limited use of the GBYC boat ramp could occur if necessary at a later time and would be subject to mechanisms to address the traffic and liability concerns.

 

The issues raised by the BFC regarding the access/driveway location (as shown in Option 1), have been addressed in Option 2 through the provision of a more direct access way to the proposed Scouts building on the landward side of the BFC rather than the seaward.  The amount of vegetation that would need to be removed would be slightly less.

 

Scouts WA agreement to relocation, in part, is on the basis that a title similar to that held over Lot 340 can be provided. That can be achieved under section 75 of the Land Administration Act 1997 (LAA). The DoL has advised the City of Busselton that it supports, in principle, the proposed relocation and grant of a title under section 75 and will seek the approval of the Minister for Lands for that to occur subject to the conditions set out in the ‘Statutory Environment’ section of this report.

 

CONCLUSION

 

Officers are in support of: Scouts WA’s proposal to relinquish Crown Grant Lot 340 on the Busselton Foreshore as this is consistent with the Busselton Foreshore Master Plan and Development Guide Plan; and Scouts WA’s relocation to a new Crown Grant site excised from Reserve 17319 Margaret Street, Busselton.

 

Officers recommend that Council advise the Department of Lands (DoL) of its support for the proposed relocation of Scouts WA to an excised portion of Reserve 17319 on a newly created Crown Grant, to enable the Minister for Land’s approval to be sought. 

 

Officers support the relocation in accordance with Option 2 where the access to the site is provided on the landward side of the building. 

 

OPTIONS


The Council has the option of preferring the original plan to provide access to the site by way of a road on the seaward side of the BFC, or of requiring that the City identifies a different site for Scouts WA to relocate to.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

Following receipt of the City’s advice of support for the proposal the Department of Lands will seek the approval of the Department of Planning.  Following this the Minister for Lands’ approval for the proposed relocation of Scouts WA to an excised portion of Reserve 17319 on a newly created Crown Grant will be sought by the Department of Lands. 

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council:

 

1.    Supports Scouts WA’s proposed relinquishment of Crown Grant Lot 340 on the Busselton Foreshore on the basis that a title similar to that held over Lot 340 can be achieved under section 75 of the Land Administration Act 1997.

 

2.    Supports the relocation of Scouts WA to an excised portion of Reserve 17319 in accordance with Option 2 (Attachment C) acknowledging that:

a)         The proposed site has no legal road access and access arrangements will be through Reserve 17319; 

b)        The grant of land under section 75 is a freehold title (with conditions) the approval of the Department of Planning will be required (and is being sought) for the creation of the lot without legal access;

c)         Conditions will be included into the management order held by the City over Reserve 17319 that will require the City to provide at all times, appropriate access to the Scouts WA site.  (The title held by Scouts WA will include a condition whereby the title is accepted without legal access other than the agreement of the City to provide access through Reserve 17319); 

d)        Scouts WA will be responsible for the cost and arranging for the provision of services (e.g. water, power, sewer, drainage) to the new site and neither the City or the State accept any responsibility for the provision of services to the site;   

e)        Scouts WA will meet the cost of survey for the new site; and 

f)         Scouts WA are advised that the City’s financial contribution to the relocation is capped at $175,000.

 

 


Council

207

22 October 2014

15.1

Attachment a

Lot 340 Geographe Bay Road

 


Council

209

22 October 2014

15.1

Attachment b

Reserve 17319 Margaret Street - Option 2 concept

 


Council

221

22 October 2014

15.1

Attachment c

Letter from Geographe Bay Yacht Club

 


Council

223