Council                                                                                      1                                                               9 December 2015

Please note:  These minutes are yet to be confirmed as a true record of proceedings

CITY OF BUSSELTON

MINUTES FOR THE Council  MEETING HELD ON 9 December 2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM NO.                                        SUBJECT                                                                                                                              PAGE NO.

1....... Declaration of Opening and Announcement of Visitors. 3

2....... Attendance. 3

3....... Prayer. 3

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

5....... Announcements Without Discussion.. 4

6....... Application for Leave of Absence. 4

7....... Petitions and Presentations. 4

8....... Disclosure Of Interests. 4

9....... Confirmation and Receipt Of Minutes. 4

Previous Council Meetings. 4

9.1          Minutes of the Council  held on 25 November 2015. 4

Committee Meetings. 5

9.2          Minutes of the Policy and Legislation Committee held 19 November 2015. 5

9.3          Minutes of the Meelup Regional Park Management Committee held 24 November 2015. 5

9.3          Minutes of the Airport Advisory Committee held 27 November 2015. 101

9.4          Minutes of the Finance Committee Held 3 December 2015. 101

10..... Reports of Committee. 7

10.1        Policy and Legislation Committee - 19/11/2015 - OUTDOOR EATING FACILITY POLICY. 7

10.2        Meelup Regional Park Management Committee - 24/11/2015 - PROPOSED WHALE VIEWING PLATFORM POINT PICQUET. 17

10.3        Airport Advisory Committee - 27/11/2015 - BUSSELTON-MARGARET RIVER AIRPORT MASTER PLAN.. 102

10.4        Airport Advisory Committee - 27/11/2015 - SKYLINE HELICOPTER OPERATIONS PROPOSAL. 108

10.5        Finance Committee - 3/12/2015 - FINANCIAL ACTIVITY STATEMENTS – PERIOD ENDING 31 OCTOBER 2015. 118

10.6        Finance Committee - 3/12/2015 - OLD BUTTER FACTORY UPPER FLOOR. 86

10.7        Finance Committee - 25/12/2015 - MARINE BERTHING CHARGES AT BUSSELTON JETTY. 125

10.8        Finance Committee - 3/12/2015 - LIST OF PAYMENTS MADE - OCTOBER 2015. 134

 

 

11..... Planning and Development Services Report. 21

11.1        PROPOSED AMENDMENT NO. 15 TO LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME NO. 21 - LOT 4001 METRICUP-YELVERTON ROAD, YELVERTON - CONSIDERATION OF INITIATION FOR PUBLIC CONSULTATION.. 21

11.2        PROPOSED AMENDMENT NO. 16 TO LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME NO. 21 - LOT 519 BELL DRIVE, BROADWATER - CONSIDERATION FOR FINAL ADOPTION.. 26

11.3        RESPONSE TO PETITION (BEACH SHELTERS) RECEIVED AT 14 OCTOBER 2015 ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING.. 30

12..... Engineering and Works Services Report. 95

12.1        TENDER RECOMMENDATION - RFT 16/15 CONSTRUCTION OF LANDFILL CELL 1 AT DUNSBOROUGH WASTE FACILITY. 95

13..... Community and Commercial Services Report. 34

13.1        12 MONTH REVIEW OF RETAIL TRADING HOURS IN BUSSELTON.. 34

13.2        2015/16 COMMUNITY BIDS - SECOND ROUND ALLOCATION.. 38

13.3        ARTGEO CULTURAL COMPLEX LEASES. 44

13.4        PROPOSED NEW LEASE FOR A PORTION OF RESERVE 38558 (EQUINOX CAFE AND RESTAURANT AT BUSSELTON FORESHORE). 60

14..... Finance and Corporate Services Report. 52

14.1        PROPOSED LEASE WITH BUSSELTON WOODTURNERS. 52

15..... Chief Executive Officer's Report. 67

15.1        PROPOSED ADOPTION OF A REVISED BUSSELTON FORESHORE MASTER PLAN.. 67

15.2        EXPRESSIONS OF INTEREST FOR A LOCAL GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE ON THE BOARD OF THE SOUTH WEST DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION.. 56

15.3        COUNCILLORS' INFORMATION BULLETIN.. 58

15.4        PROPOSED MEMORIAL BENCH TO REPLACE EXISTING SEATING AT SMITHS BEACH.. 136

16..... Motions of which Previous Notice has been Given.. 139

16.1        AMENDMENT OF COUNCIL POLICY TO PROVIDE FOR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY AT COUNCIL MEETINGS. 139

17..... Confidential Reports. 141

18..... questions from members. 141

19..... Public Question Time. 141

20..... Next Meeting Date. 141

21..... Closure. 141

 


 

MINUTES

 

MINUTES OF A Meeting of the Busselton City Council HELD IN the Council Chambers, Administration Building, Southern Drive, Busselton, ON 9 December 2015 AT 5.30pm .

 

1.               Declaration of Opening and Announcement of Visitors

The Presiding Member opened the meeting at 5.30pm.

2.               Attendance

Presiding Member:

Members:

 

Cr Grant Henley     Mayor

Cr Coralie Tarbotton

Cr Ross Paine

Cr Terry Best

Cr John McCallum

Cr Gordon Bleechmore

Cr Robert Reekie

Cr Paul Carter

Cr Rob Bennett

 

Officers:

 

Mr Mike Archer, Chief Executive Officer

Mr Oliver Darby, Director, Engineering and Works Services

Mr Anthony Rowe, Manager Development Services and Policy

Mrs Naomi Searle, Director, Community and Commercial Services

Mr Matthew Smith, Director, Finance and Corporate Services

Miss Lynley Rich, Manager, Governance Services

Miss Hayley Barge, Administration Officer, Governance

 

Apologies

 

Mr Paul Needham, Director, Planning and Development Services

 

Approved Leave of Absence

 

Nil

 

Media:

 

“Busselton-Dunsborough Times”

“Busselton-Dunsborough Mail”

 

Public:

 

23

3.               Prayer

The prayer was delivered by Reverend Desiree Snyman from St George’s Anglican Church Dunsborough.

4.               Public Question Time

Response to Previous Questions Taken on Notice 

 

Nil

Public Question Time

 

Nil

5.               Announcements Without Discussion

Announcements by the Presiding Member

 

The Presiding Member thanked Reverend Snyman for her contributions to the community throughout her time in Busselton and wished her and her family well in their new ventures.

Announcements by other Members at the invitation of the Presiding Member

 

Nil

6.               Application for Leave of Absence

Nil

7.               Petitions and Presentations

Mrs Renae Gibson addressed the Council in accordance with Section 6.1 of the Standing Orders as a party with an interest in Item 11.2. Mrs Gibson was generally not in agreement with the Officer Recommendation.

 

Mrs Emily Bateman addressed the Council in accordance with Section 6.1 of the Standing Orders as a party with an interest in Item 11.2. Mrs Bateman was generally in agreement with the Officer Recommendation.

 

Mr Jay McDaniel addressed the Council in accordance with Section 6.1 of the Standing Orders as a party with an interest in Item 15.1. Mr McDaniel was generally in agreement with the Officer Recommendation.

8.               Disclosure Of Interests

Nil

9.               Confirmation and Receipt Of Minutes 

Previous Council Meetings

9.1          Minutes of the Council Meeting held on 25 November 2015

Council Decision

C1512/343              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor T Best

That the Minutes of the Council  Meeting held 25 November 2015 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

CARRIED 9/0

 Committee Meetings

9.2          Minutes of the Policy and Legislation Committee Meeting held 19 November 2015

Council Decision

C1512/344              Moved Councillor R Bennett, seconded Councillor C Tarbotton

 

1)    That the minutes of a meeting of the Policy and Legislation Committee held 19 November 2015 be received.

 

2)    That the Council notes the outcomes of the Policy and Legislation Committee meeting held 19 November 2015 being:

 

a)    The public consultation period for the Outdoor Eating Facility Policy Item is presented for Council consideration at Item 10.1 of this agenda.

 

b)    The general discussion items are noted.

CARRIED 9/0

 

9.3          Minutes of the Meelup Regional Park Management Committee Meeting held 24 November 2015

Council Decision

C1512/345              Moved Councillor T Best, seconded Councillor J McCallum

 

1)    That the minutes of the meeting of the Meelup Regional Park Management Committee held 24 November 2015 be received.

 

2)    That the Council notes the outcomes of the Meelup Regional Park Management Committee meeting held 24 November 2015 being:

 

a)    The Proposed Whale Viewing Platform Point Picquet Item is presented for Council consideration at Item 10.2 of this agenda.

CARRIED 9/0

 


 

Items Brought Forward and Adoption by Exception Resolution

En Bloc Motion

 

At this juncture the Mayor advised the meeting that with the exception of the items identified to be withdrawn for discussion, that the remaining reports, including the Committee and Officer Recommendations, will be adopted en bloc.

 

Council Decision

C1512/346              Moved Councillor G Bleechmore, seconded Councillor P Carter

 

That the Committee and Officer Recommendations in relation to the following agenda items be carried en bloc:

10.1        Policy and Legislation Committee - 19/11/2015 - OUTDOOR EATING FACILITY POLICY

10.2        Meelup Regional Park Management Committee - 24/11/2015 - PROPOSED WHALE VIEWING PLATFORM POINT PICQUET

11.1        PROPOSED AMENDMENT NO. 15 TO LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME NO. 21 - LOT 4001 METRICUP-YELVERTON ROAD, YELVERTON - CONSIDERATION OF INITIATION FOR PUBLIC CONSULTATION

11.2        PROPOSED AMENDMENT NO. 16 TO LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME NO. 21 - LOT 519 BELL DRIVE, BROADWATER - CONSIDERATION FOR FINAL ADOPTION

11.3        RESPONSE TO PETITION (BEACH SHELTERS) RECEIVED AT 14 OCTOBER 2015 ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

13.1        12 MONTH REVIEW OF RETAIL TRADING HOURS IN BUSSELTON

13.2        2015/16 COMMUNITY BIDS - SECOND ROUND ALLOCATION

13.3        ARTGEO CULTURAL COMPLEX LEASES

13.5        SETTLEMENT ART PROJECT STEERING COMMITTEE - APPOINTMENT OF COMMUNITY MEMBERS

14.1        PROPOSED LEASE WITH BUSSELTON WOODTURNERS

15.2        EXPRESSIONS OF INTEREST FOR A LOCAL GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE ON THE BOARD OF THE SOUTH WEST DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION

15.3        COUNCILLORS' INFORMATION BULLETIN

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

 


 

10.             Reports of Committee

10.1        Policy and Legislation Committee - 19/11/2015 - OUTDOOR EATING FACILITY POLICY

SUBJECT INDEX:

Food Premises

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Environmental Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Environmental Health

REPORTING OFFICER:

Environmental Health Coordinator - Tanya Gillett

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Planning and Development Services - Paul Needham

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Nil

 

This item was considered by the Policy and Legislation Committee at its meeting on 19 November 2015, the recommendations from which have been included in this report. 

 

PRÉCIS

 

The Outdoor Eating Facility Policy is presented to Council for review and to initiate public consultation.  Once submissions are collated and assessed, the revised Policy will be brought back to Council for final adoption early in 2016.

 

BACKGROUND

 

Outdoor or al fresco dining (now referred to as outdoor eating facilities) have previously been governed by the Local Law Relating to Eating Areas in Streets and Other Public Places.  This Local Law has now been repealed and the governance framework for all outdoor eating facilities is now included within the recently gazetted Activities in Thoroughfares and Public Places and Trading Local Law 2015

 

The proposed Policy provides Council with a consistent framework to encourage, control and regulate outdoor eating facilities located in public places within the City.  The Policy will provide guidance for the consistent assessment of applications and include standard conditions of approval for Outdoor Eating Facility permits to be issued in accordance with the Local Law.

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

Local Government Act 1995

Activities in Thoroughfares and Public Places and Trading Local Law 2015

Local Law Relating to Eating Areas in Streets and Other Public Places (repealed)

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

Nil

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

Council adopted a fee structure for Outdoor Eating Facilities within the Schedule of Fees and Charges for 2015/16.  This introduced a number of fees as follows:

 

·     Application for Outdoor Eating Facility Permit -                                                         $100

·     Minimum Outdoor Eating Facility Fee/year - <10m2 -                                              $50

·     Outdoor Eating Facility Fee/year/non-liquor-licensed area - <30m2 -                $100

·     Outdoor Eating Facility Fee/year/non-liquor-licensed area - >30m2 -                $250

·     Outdoor Eating Facility Fee/year/Liquor-licensed area - <30m2 -                        $300                      

·     Outdoor Eating Facility Fee/year/Liquor-licensed area - >30m2 -                        $500

·     Application for Transfer of Outdoor Eating Facility Permit -                                   $100

 

This report was previously deferred to let further work be completed to allow the Council to reconsider these fees, with the objective of removing all fees other than the initial application fee and a transfer fee should the business change ownership.   It is thought that removing the annual fee structure may encourage food businesses to consider providing more Outdoor Eating Facilities within the City’s CBD’s resulting in further activation of these areas, particularly after traditional business hours.  It is proposed this be further considered during the 2016/17 budget deliberations.  Similar consideration is envisaged in relation to fees to occupy car parking spaces for the purpose of outdoor eating facility approval.

 

The City currently licences 13 Outdoor Eating Facilities which provided an income of $5,795 in 2014/15.  The current fee structure has yet to be implemented in 2015/16 due to the repealing of the governing Local Law and the need to develop a guiding Policy, the subject of this report. Should Council agree to further consider the abovementioned adopted fees with a view to removing all fees other than the initial application fee and the transfer fee, it is proposed that the current 13 licences be renewed for the current financial year without charging the fees adopted by Council within the City’s 2015/16 Fees and Charges.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

This proposal aligns with the City of Busselton Strategic Community Plan 2013 (revised 2015) as follows:

 

Key Goal Area 1 - A welcoming, inclusive, healthy and capable community that provides accessible services for all residents.

 

Key Goal Area 2 - Well planned, active and vibrant community.

 

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

An assessment of the potential implication of implementing the officer recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk assessment framework.  The assessment sought to identify ‘downside’ risks only rather than ‘upside’ risks and where the risk, following implementation of controls has been identified is medium or greater.

 

Risk

Controls

Consequence

Likelihood

Risk Level

Reputational risk:

 

Vehicle collides with an occupied and approved Outdoor Eating Facility

 

Full assessment of the proposed Outdoor Eating Facility at application including location, safety and compatibility with adjacent areas;

Major

 

 

 

 

 

Rare

 

 

 

Medium

 

 

 

 

 

Reputational risk:

 

Pedestrian walking around an approved Outdoor Eating Facility is hit by a vehicle

 

Location of appropriate pedestrian clearways and clearance from adjacent kerbs;

Use of appropriate furniture, shelter and screens within the Outdoor Eating Facility.

 

 

Major

 

 

Rare

 

 

Medium

 

CONSULTATION

 

Should the proposed Outdoor Eating Facility Policy be accepted by Council, it will be advertised for an eight week period where the City will invite written submissions.  Once all submissions are assessed, a report will be brought back to the Policy and Legislation Committee (if required) for determination and subsequently to Council for final adoption of the Policy. 

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

The City is committed to facilitating opportunities for business at locations that contribute to the wellbeing and prosperity of residents and to the overall experience of visitors to the District.  Outdoor eating facilities contribute to the vibrancy of the City streetscapes and town centres while supporting local economic development and commercial viability.  City Officers continue to encourage the provision of quality outdoor eating facilities providing a high standard of service delivery to the local community and visitors to the District. 

 

Previously, outdoor eating facilities have been governed by the Local Law Relating to Eating Areas in Streets and Other Public Places which was recently repealed concurrently with the gazettal of the new Activities in Thoroughfares and Public Places and Trading Local Law 2015.  The previous Local Law provided a prescriptive set of criteria that an applicant was to meet and therefore did not require a Policy to provide further requirements for assessment.  The new Local Law provides the governance framework and the proposed Policy will now provide the more detailed elements required by the City.  Additionally, the previous Local Law included fees within the Local Law, while the new Local Law allows for fees and charges applicable to any application for an outdoor eating facility to be set by Council under the provisions of the Local Government Act 1995 during annual budget deliberations.

 

The proposed Policy introduces a governance framework and minimum standards applicable to the assessment of an application for an Outdoor Eating Facility.  These elements include:

·    Determining an application for an outdoor eating facility and reasons for refusal;

·    The location of an outdoor eating facility and its proximity to an existing food premises;

·    The type and location of furniture within an outdoor eating facility;

·    Cleanliness and hygiene;

·    Umbrellas, shade, screens, barriers, awning and planter boxes within outdoor eating facilities;

·    Advertising permitted within an outdoor eating facility; and

·    Requirements for gas heating, lighting and electrical connections.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The Outdoor Eating Facility Policy is presented to Council for review and to initiate public consultation.  Once submissions are collated and assessed, the revised Policy will be brought back to Council for final adoption early in 2016.

 

OPTIONS

 

Council may determine to not endorse one or more of the following:

 

1.    The proposed Outdoor Eating Facility Policy; and/or

 

2.    Any clause contained within the proposed “Outdoor Eating Facility Policy”.

 

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

Should the Officer Recommendation be endorsed and proceed to public consultation, it is proposed that the completed review of the Policy be submitted to the City’s Policy and Legislation Committee Meeting (if required) and if accepted be placed before Council for final adoption at a meeting in early 2016.

 

Council Decision / Committee Recommendation and Officer Recommendation

C1512/347              Moved Councillor G Bleechmore, seconded Councillor P Carter

 

That the Council:

 

1.    As part of 2016/17 budget deliberations, consider removing all fees pertaining to the Outdoor Eating Facility permit, other than the initial application fee and the transfer fee;

 

2.    That the Council approves for public consultation and  invites written submissions on the Outdoor Eating Facility Policy as follows:

 

City of Busselton

Outdoor Eating Facility Policy

 

1.0      PURPOSE

 

This policy will be used to set standard conditions of approval and provide guidance for permits for outdoor eating facilities issued in accordance with the City of Busselton Activities in Thoroughfares and Public Places and Trading Local Law 2015 (the Local Law).

 

2.0      SCOPE

 

This policy applies to all applications for an Outdoor Eating Facility permit in a public place within the City of Busselton.

 

3.0      POLICY CONTENT

 

3.1      OBJECTIVE

 

The purpose of this policy is to provide the Council with a consistent framework to encourage, control and regulate outdoor eating facilities located in public places within the City of Busselton. Note – this Policy does not apply to thoroughfares on private land, for example Fig Tree Lane, where the approval to permit an outdoor eating facility is covered under other legislation.

 

The City is committed to facilitating entrepreneurial opportunities on the sites that contribute to the wellbeing and prosperity of residents and to the overall experience of visitors to the region.  This policy further aims to encourage a high standard of service delivery to the local community and visitors whilst supporting local economic development and commercial viability.

 

3.2      DEFINITIONS

 

City means the City of Busselton.

 

Council means the Council of the municipality of the City of Busselton.

 

Facility or Reserve means any property owned by the City of Busselton and includes buildings, recreation centres, community centres, halls and reserves (passive and active).

 

Public Place includes –

(a)  any thoroughfare or place which the public are allowed to use, whether or not the thoroughfare or place is on private property; and

(b)  local government property;

but does not include premises on private property from which trading is lawfully conducted under another written law.

 

4.0      OUTDOOR EATING FACILITY PERMITS 

 

In addition to clause 5.17 of the Local Law, matters to which the City of Busselton may have regard in determining an application for an outdoor eating facility permit include, but are not limited to –

 

1.    the proposed location of the outdoor eating facility including:

a)  the size of the proposed location;

b)  the desirability of the outdoor eating facility in the proposed location;

c)   any safety issues, including change in ground levels and speed of adjacent traffic;

d)  whether any hazard or obstruction is likely to arise from the outdoor eating facility;

e)  compatibility with existing uses, including other businesses, street entertainment, loading zones, bus stops, trees and fixed street furniture; and

f)   compatibility with pedestrian, vehicle and emergency access.

 

2.    whether the proposed outdoor eating facility area may:

a)  obstruct the visibility or clear sight lines of any person or driver of any vehicle at an intersection of a thoroughfare(s);

b)  result in the gathering of customers or incidental structures that:

i)  impede pedestrian access or vehicular movements; and/or

ii) cause conflict with or inconvenience other adjoining activities.

 

3.    whether the proposed furniture –

a)  is unsuitable, in any respect to the location in which the permit is to operate; or

b)  may obstruct or impede the use of the public place for the purpose for which it was designed.

 

4.    whether users of the outdoor eating facility will have access to proper and sufficient sanitary and  other facilities;

 

5.    whether an outdoor eating facility is in keeping with the amenity of the locality;

 

6.    whether in the interests of the amenity of the locality and/or public safety, require that the outdoor eating facility should be of a higher standard or of an alternative form;

 

7.    potential for nuisance, including rubbish, increased noise, or anti-social behavior;

 

8.    whether the application for a permit is an application for the renewal of a permit under clause  6.7 of the Local Law; and

 

9.    any other matters that the City of Busselton  considers to be relevant in the circumstances of an individual application.

 

 

 

5.0      STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR AN OUTDOOR EATING FACILITY PERMIT      

 

GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

 

1.      If the City of Busselton approves an application for an Outdoor Eating Facility, it may require that the licensee shall -

a)    ensure that the Outdoor Eating Facility only occurs in the permitted location;

b)    ensure that the furniture is only placed within the Outdoor Eating Facility area and does not obstruct or impede the reasonable use of the public place by any person or interfere with or be hazardous to vehicular or pedestrian traffic;

c)    ensure that the Outdoor Eating Facility does not obstruct or impede the vision of a driver of a vehicle entering or leaving a thoroughfare or a vehicle crossover;

d)    ensure that the Outdoor Eating Facility does not obstruct -

(i)   footpath pedestrian flow; or

(ii)  arcade or business premises entrances;

e)    remove the furniture at the request of an authorized person:

(i)     where in the opinion of the authorized person there is any hazard or obstruction or is likely  to  be a hazard or obstruction caused by reason of the location of the Outdoor Eating Facility, notwithstanding that the location may have been approved by the City of Busselton; or

(ii)    for the purpose of an event, market, parade, thoroughfare works or any other contingency which requires relocation or removal of all or part of the Outdoor Eating Facility;

f)   ensure that the Outdoor Eating Facility does not encroach into designated emergency access  areas or service vehicle access ways;

g) ensure that the furniture is removed and/or secured daily before the close of the adjacent food premises; and

h) display the Outdoor Eating Facility permit in a conspicuous place in the adjoining food premises.

 

2.      The City may vary any of the conditions referred to in clause 5.0 when approving the application if, in the opinion of the City, the circumstances of a particular application warrant the variation and the variation is in accordance with the Local Law.

 

3.      All tables, chairs and other structures shall be removed from the Outdoor Eating Facility forthwith upon the direction of any person or body authorized to carry out any works in the street or public place in which the Outdoor Eating Facility is situated or of any employee of such person or body.

 

4.      The Permit Holder of the Outdoor Eating Facility shall pay all costs associated with the alteration, removal, repair, reinstatement, or reconstruction of all or part of the Outdoor Eating Facility arising from any works proposed or done in the thoroughfare by or on behalf of a government department, instrumentality of the Crown or the City, and shall not have any claim for compensation or damages as a result of any disruption to business or loss incurred due to such works.

 

5.      The Permit Holder of the Outdoor Eating Facility shall pay all costs to repair any damage to the pavement, fixtures, fittings, utility services or any other entity caused as a result of or attributable to the operation of the Outdoor Eating Facility and any associated activities.

 

6.      The Permit Holder of the Outdoor Eating Facility shall ensure trading within the Outdoor Eating Facility is limited to the operating hours where stated in the permit.

 

 

LOCATION OF AN OUTDOOR EATING FACILITY

 

7.      An Outdoor Eating Facility shall only be located directly adjacent to the corresponding food premises.

 

8.      A minimum pedestrian clearway of 2 metres is required from the Outdoor Eating Facility to the building line. However, greater widths or lesser widths may be required depending on the location and at the discretion of the City.  

 

9.      The Outdoor Eating Facility must be located adjacent to the kerb with a minimum kerb clearance of 1 metre.  In exceptional circumstances the City may permit an Outdoor Eating Facility in specified streets to be located:

a)    adjacent to the building line, when an acceptable alternative pedestrian clearway has been provided; or

b)    adjacent to the kerb line; or

c)    within adjacent areas (including carparks); and at the discretion of the City.

 

INSURANCE

 

10.   All Outdoor Eating Facility permit holders must effect and maintain public liability insurance indemnifying the City (and the Crown, where the outdoor eating facility is located on a Reserve vested with the City of Busselton) against all actions, suit, claims, damages, losses and expenses made against or incurred by the City arising from any activity, action or thing performed or erected in accordance with the permit. In particular, the Permit Holder shall maintain the following:

a)  a minimum of $10 million Public Liability Insurance or such higher amount as considered appropriate by the City having assessed the potential risk involved.  The policy must be able to meet any  possible claim which may be sustained against the permit holder or the City in relation to the death or injury to any person or property arising out of anything authorised by the permit;

b)  hold indemnified the City, and where applicable the Crown, against any claims for compensation however arising from the operation of the outdoor eating facility;

c)   hold indemnified the City, and where applicable the Crown, or any person acting on their behalf, compensation by way of damages or loss of income arising from any City approved event or market or any public works within the permit location or its vicinity;

d)  ensure that the City, and where applicable the Crown, depending on the location, is expressly listed on such policy as an ‘interested party’;

e)  advise the City if the policy lapses, is cancelled or is no longer in operation;

f)   on the request of an Authorized Person, provide to the City a copy of a current public liability insurance policy meeting the requirements of this clause. 

 

11.   Should the insurance policy referred to in clause 5.0 (10) be terminated for whatever reason then the Outdoor Eating Facility permit shall also be terminated simultaneously.   A permit holder is required to provide to the City a copy of a current public liability insurance policy meeting the requirements of clause 5.0 (10) upon request by an Authorised Officer of the City.

 

12.   Evidence of the public liability insurance required by clause 5.0 (10) must be submitted to the satisfaction of the City prior to the establishment, transfer or renewal of the Outdoor Eating Facility Permit.

 

FURNITURE

 

13.   The placement of furniture within an Outdoor Eating Facility must not compromise the access and safety of patrons, pedestrians, emergency and service vehicle visibility.

14.   The style, layout and orientation of furniture should be chosen according to the extent and shape of the Outdoor Eating Facility and to dissuade patrons from moving furniture beyond the boundaries of the approved area.  In kerbside locations, chairs should not be placed with their backs to the kerb.

 

15.   All furniture must be placed and kept within the boundaries of the approved Outdoor Eating Facility only.

 

16.   The furniture style should make a positive contribution to the street environment.  A style that is practical and elegant and in keeping with the style and character of the host food premises and/or the streetscape is required.

 

17.   All furniture should be clean, safe, strong, operational, durable, waterproof, rustproof and weather resistant and should fold or stack for storage or removal from the Outdoor Eating Facility as required.  Furniture with sharp edges, hinges or other moving parts that could be a potential hazard for patrons should be avoided. 

 

18.   All furniture should be provided in colours which provide a good contrast with the pavement to allow people with low vision to distinguish the chairs from the footpath. Reflective colours, such as pure white or silver, are to be avoided due to the unpleasant glare they may cause.

 

CLEANLINESS AND HYGIENE

 

19.   The management and operation of the Outdoor Eating Facility must comply with the Food Act 2008 and subsidiary Regulations, the City of Busselton's Local Laws, the Litter Act 1979 and all other relevant legislation.

 

20.   The Permit Holder is not permitted to prepare food or beverages in the Outdoor Eating Facility. For example, coffee machines are not permitted in the Outdoor Eating Facility.

 

21.   Permit Holders shall maintain all components of the Outdoor Eating Facility to a high standard of cleanliness and hygiene and to the satisfaction of the City of Busselton.  General cleaning is to be completed on a daily basis, tables are to be cleaned after each customer and footpath cleaning is to be completed on a weekly basis, or more frequently if directed/required.  The cleaning of footpaths shall ensure that all ground surfaces remain free of any grease and stains and keep the vicinity clear of litter and waste materials to the satisfaction of the City.  No litter, waste or sweepings are to be placed into the gutter or onto the adjacent road or road reserve.

 

22.   Where the permit holder fails to comply with clause 5.0 (21):

a)  the City may clean the Outdoor Eating Facility or arrange for it to be cleaned, at the Permit Holder’s expense; and/or

b)  the Outdoor Eating Facility Permit may be cancelled;

c)   the City is not liable to compensate any person for work carried out under sub clause (a) or cancellation of a permit under sub clause (b).

 

23.   In the case of a fast food or takeaway establishment, the City of Busselton may require the Permit Holder to install litter bins of an approved design, with all additional costs (including rubbish removal) attributed to the Permit Holder.

 

UMBRELLAS, SHADE OR SHELTER, SCREENS, AWNINGS, BARRIERS, PLANTER BOXES AND OTHER INCIDENTAL STRUCTURES

 

24.   Outdoor Eating Facility areas shall be demarcated to the satisfaction of the City of Busselton. This is to be achieved through the use of barriers, planter boxes or the like, fences are not permitted.

 

25.   Outdoor Eating Facility areas may incorporate non-permanent shelter or shade structures, such as umbrellas, under the following conditions:

a)  Shade structures are to be adequately secured and free of sharp protrusions.  These structures shall be removed during inclement weather.

b)  Shade structures are to be of high quality and have a minimum 2 metre vertical clearance from the pavement to the base of any overhead structure.

 

26.   Removable screens of up to 1.2 metres in height may be used to define the boundary of an Outdoor Eating Facility.  Screens of more than 1.2 metres in height, including glass or perplex panels or clear plastic rolled down from umbrellas and awnings are not permitted, unless otherwise approved by the City.

 

27.   Unless otherwise approved by the City, Outdoor Eating Facilities may incorporate planter boxes or other such structures, subject to the following conditions:

a)  Structures are not erected within the minimum pedestrian clearway between the Outdoor Eating Facility and the building line;

b)  The section of the Outdoor Eating Facility facing the food premises or building must remain open and without structures at all times;

c)   Structures are not to be greater than 1.2 metres in height;

d)  Structures do not hinder the use of the public place during and after trading hours;

e)  Structures must not damage street trees, street furniture, street art or pose a safety risk;

f)   Should plants be utilised within an Outdoor Eating Facility, they must be well maintained and flourishing.  Plants must not spread, have spikes, thorns, contain allergens or be poisonous. Compact plants requiring low maintenance are encouraged;

g)  Defined accessways of a minimum 1 metre width for each 6 metres of Outdoor Eating Facility are required.  The City of Busselton will consider public safety issues and urban design standards in assessing any application for the use of any structures.

 

WAITER’S STATION

 

28.   A temporary waiter's station for the storage of cutlery and/or crockery may be provided within the Outdoor Eating Facility.

 

29.   A waiter’s station within an Outdoor Eating Facility must not be used for the preparation of food or beverages (including coffee).

 

PORTABLE GAS HEATERS

 

30.   Portable gas heaters may be permitted in an Outdoor Eating Facility where the heaters are:-

a)  located completely within the approved Outdoor Eating Facility area;

b)  located and of a type that are not a safety or fire hazard;

c)   removed when the Outdoor Eating Facility is not being used unless otherwise approved;

d)  in compliance with the following:

i)    Gas Standards (Gasfitting and Consumer Gas Installations) Regulations 1999;

ii)   AS/NZS  5601 - Gas Installations;

iii)  AS/NZS 1596 – The Storage and Handling of LP Gas;

iv) AS 4656 – Radiant Gas Heaters for Outdoor and Non-residential Indoor Use;

e)     free-standing and self-contained but must be secure and stable.

 

ADVERTISING

 

31.   Advertising on any item of furniture, screen, awning or other barrier, is limited to the name and logo of the corresponding food premises. The advertising must only appear once on each item and should not exceed 50% of the area of the particular item of furniture, screen, awning or other barrier.

 

32.   Unless otherwise approved, product advertising is limited to umbrellas and must only relate to products sold by the food premises.

 

LIGHTING

 

33.   If the Outdoor Eating Facility occurs outside daylight hours, the permit holder must provide adequate, clear and well distributed lighting to ensure the safety and amenity of both patrons and the public.

 

34.   Lighting shall not cause a nuisance, distraction or be unsafe to any adjacent businesses, pedestrian or vehicular movements.

 

ELECTRICAL WIRING

 

35.   All electric wiring connected to lights, devices or appliances which are situated in or about the Outdoor Eating Facility shall not be placed :

a)  on or under the ground or floor surface of the main floor area within the Outdoor Eating Facility;

b)  above any part of a public place so as to interfere or obstruct the passage of vehicles or pedestrians; or

c)   in any manner or in any place which may be prejudicial to safety.

 

36.   All electrical wiring must be installed by a licensed electrical contractor and/or approved by Western Power and must not be placed across the surface of a footpath.

 

6.0   ADMINISTRATION OF THIS POLICY

 

The Chief Executive Officer (CEO) has the authority to administer the requirements of the

Outdoor Eating Facility Policy on behalf of Council.

 

Policy Background

 

Policy Reference No. –

Owner Unit – Environmental Health

Originator –Environmental Health Coordinator

Policy approved by – Council

Review Frequency – As required

Related Documents –

Activities in Thoroughfares and Public Places and Trading Local Law 2015

Local Law Relating to Eating Areas in Streets and Other Public Places (Repealed)

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

 


Council                                                                                      17                                                             9 December 2015

10.2        Meelup Regional Park Management Committee - 24/11/2015 - PROPOSED WHALE VIEWING PLATFORM POINT PICQUET

SUBJECT INDEX:

Meelup Regional Park

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

Our natural environment is cared for and enhanced for the enjoyment of the community and visitors.

BUSINESS UNIT:

Environmental Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Environmental Planning

REPORTING OFFICER:

Manager, Environmental Services  - Greg Simpson

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Planning and Development Services - Paul Needham

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Concept Design and Construction Drawings  

 

This item was considered by the Meelup Regional Park Management Committee at its meeting on 24 November 2015, the recommendations from which have been included in this report. 

 

PRÉCIS

 

A concept design and construction drawings have been developed for a proposed whale viewing platform to be established at Point Picquet. The proposed whale viewing platform concept design and construction drawings (Attachment A) were advertised for a period of four weeks to give the community opportunity to comment on the proposal. This report recommends that Council endorse the proposal to develop a whale viewing platform in accordance with the concept design and construction drawings (Attachment A).

 

BACKGROUND

 

Since 2004, community volunteers from Dunsborough Coast and Land Care Inc (D-CALC), in partnership with Western Whale Research, have been using Point Picquet during the whale migration season as the vantage point for monitoring the whales’ southwards passage through Geographe Bay. This land-based monitoring forms part of a wider research program undertaken by SouWEST as part of a south west whale ecology study. SouWEST was formed in 2010, it is a collaborative science program which integrates the research expertise of Western Whale Research the Centre for Marine Science and Technology at Curtin University and the community through D-CALC, to monitor whale sightings as part of a program for the long-term conservation of whales and their critical habitats in south Western Australia.

 

In April 2013, D-CALC approached the Committee with a proposal to construct a whale viewing platform at Point Picquet to assist their whale monitoring program and for the benefit of the wider public, as this location provides a unique ocean vantage point of Geographe Bay. The D-CALC proposal was presented at the May 2013 Committee meeting and Committee resolution (MP1305/010) from that meeting is as follows:

 

That the Committee provides in‐principle support for the whale watching deck and walkway, according to the following guidelines:

1.         That DCALC consults with the Meelup Regional Park Committee on the project’s development and implementation;

2.         That the materials used for the decking and walkway are consistent with those recommended in the Meelup Beach Master Plan; and

3.       That the design of the decking fits into the existing granite rocks to create an organic shape that fits into the landscape, rather than a rectangularshaped decking.

 

In December 2013, Council resolved (resolution C1312/324) to endorse the Meelup Regional Park Coastal Nodes Master Plan; as an informing strategy for the purpose of planning and managing the Meelup Regional Park.

 

The Coastal Nodes Master Plan was developed to guide the sensitive development of the Meelup Regional Park coastal nodes and it acknowledged the D-CALC proposal for a whale viewing platform at Point Picquet. The Coastal Nodes Master Plan concept for the upgrade of Point Picquet carpark and surrounds includes an indicative location for the platform at Point Picquet and a notation that the feasibility of a whale viewing platform be investigated further in consultation with D-CALC.

 

In August 2015, Council resolved (resolution C1508/215), to endorse the proposed concept design and construction drawings for the establishment of a whale viewing platform at Point Picquet for the purpose of public consultation and that the design and drawings be advertised for a  period of four weeks.

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

The Council has appointed a Meelup Regional Park Management Committee, in accordance with Section 5.8 of the Local Government Act 1995.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

The Meelup Regional Park Management Plan (2010) does not specifically address coastal management prompting the development of the Meelup Regional Park Coastal Nodes Master Plan in 2013, to guide the sensitive development of the Meelup Regional Park coastal nodes and to manage the impacts that result from increasing visitation to the Park’s coastal areas including Point Picquet.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

Following advice that the City was eligible for funding under the Federal Government’s National Landcare Programme (Whale and Dolphin Protection Plan), an application to the National Landcare Programme resulted in the City receiving an offer of $25,000 towards the establishment of a whale viewing platform.

 

In April 2015, Council amended the 2014/15 Budget to receive the $25,000 National Landcare grant as revenue towards the establishment of a whale viewing platform. Expenditure for construction of the Whale viewing platform is identified in the City’s 2015/16 Budget.

 

D-CALC has indicated their intent to contribute funds towards the whale viewing platform, for the installation of interpretive signage.  The installation of interpretive signage will occur post construction and following consultation and support from the Meelup Regional Park Committee.

 

Long-term Financial Plan Implications

 

Nil.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

This matter is considered relevant to Key Goal Area 5 ‐ Cared for and Enhanced Environment and Community Objective 5.1 ‐ Our natural environment is cared for and enhanced for the enjoyment of the community and visitors.

 

 

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

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

 

CONSULTATION

 

The advertised (September 2012) Meelup Regional Park Coastal Nodes Master Plan concept design for the upgrade of Point Picquet carpark and surrounds included an indicative location at Point Picquet for the establishment of a whale viewing platform.  A notation on the plan alerted readers that the feasibility of a whale viewing platform will be further investigated in consultation with D-CALC. No submissions were received in response to the advertising of the Master Plan, objecting to establishing a whale viewing platform at Point Picquet.

 

The notation in the Meelup Regional Park Coastal Nodes Master Plan that the feasibility of a whale viewing platform be investigated further in consultation with D-CALC, resulted in the formation of a working group to progress the design for the whale viewing platform at Point Picquet. The Whale viewing platform working group comprised:

·    One City Environmental Officer and Meelup Environment Officer

·    One Dunsborough Coast and Landcare  Group representative

·    Two Meelup Regional Park Management Committee representative

In May 2015, the proposed site for the establishment of a whale viewing platform at Point Picquet was inspected by representatives of the Nyungar community as part of an Aboriginal heritage assessment. No Aboriginal heritage sites or places were found to be located within the proposed Point Picquet whale viewing platform area. The assessment concluded that the proposed Whale viewing platform would have a low key impact on the environment and recommended that the City of Busselton proceed with the proposal to construct a whale viewing platform at Point Picquet without risk of breaching Section 17 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 in relation to Aboriginal heritage sites/places as defined by Section 5 of the Act.

 

The concept design and construction drawings for a proposed whale viewing platform to be located at Point Picquet were advertised for public comment for a period of 28 days during September 2015. The City received three submissions, none of which objected to or raised concerns with the proposal. 

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

Since 2004, community volunteers from Dunsborough Coast and Land Care Inc (D-CALC), in partnership with Western Whale Research, have been using Point Picquet during the whale migration season as the vantage point for monitoring the whales’ southwards passage.

 

Point Picquet is considered to be the best site for whale monitoring as it is the northern projection of the “greater Castle Bay” area with deeper water close to the coast and provides an almost 180-degree view for monitoring passing whales. This site also provides a ready reference point for whale monitoring, in the form of the buoy of the Swan wreck dive, north-east of the site.

 

The concept design for the whale viewing platform due to its low key design and setting into an existing depression in the coastal granite will have low visual impact due to the higher elevation of the surrounding landform.

 

The materials proposed for construction of the platform include exposed aggregate concrete and locally sourced granite. The use of exposed aggregate concrete is consistent with the material palette in the Meelup Beach Master Plan, and will also allow an ‘organically-shaped’ structure that fits into the landscape, rather than a rectangular-shaped deck. Locally sourced granite will help blend the structure into the landscape and will continue the granite theme used elsewhere in the Park and seating will be incorporated as part of the granite stone surround to the concrete platform.  The proposed platform will provide universal access for disabled and a compass will be embedded into the concrete platform, to assist orientation for the public whilst providing a useful function for whale watching monitors.

 

There are limited formalised lookouts elsewhere in the Park; these include a timber deck at the termination of the universal trail alongside Meelup Brook, and a lookout car park on Meelup Beach Road. The proposed lookout at Point Picquet is unique in that it will be the only such infrastructure on the coastline in Meelup Regional Park, which will also provide universal access and has an almost 180-degree view of Geographe Bay.

 

CONCLUSION

 

Point Picquet has been used for the purpose of monitoring Whale migration since 2004 due to its proximity to deeper water close to the coast and almost 180-degree view for monitoring passing whales. Given that Point Picquet is currently the preferred location for whale monitoring activities and that the development of whale viewing platform will have low visual impact, it is recommended that Council endorse the proposed concept design and construction drawings.

 

OPTIONS

 

The Committee or Council may resolve not to accept the recommendation or may resolve to amend the Officer and/or Committee Recommendations. The Committee or Council may also consider a review of other sites for the establishment of a whale viewing platform.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

Subject to endorsement of the Officer Recommendation, the proposed timeline to complete construction of the proposed whale viewing platform is 31 March 2016.

 

 

Council Decision / Committee Recommendation and Officer Recommendation

C1512/348              Moved Councillor G Bleechmore, seconded Councillor P Carter

 

That the Council endorses the proposal to develop and construct a whale viewing platform at Point Picquet within Meelup Regional Park in accordance with the concept design and construction drawings, Attachment A.

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

  


Council                                                                                      21                                                             9 December 2015

11.             Planning and Development Services Report

11.1        PROPOSED AMENDMENT NO. 15 TO LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME NO. 21 - LOT 4001 METRICUP-YELVERTON ROAD, YELVERTON - CONSIDERATION OF INITIATION FOR PUBLIC CONSULTATION

SUBJECT INDEX:

Town Planning Schemes and Amendments

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

Growth is managed sustainably and our environment is protected and enhanced as we develop.

BUSINESS UNIT:

Strategic Planning and Development

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Strategic Planning

REPORTING OFFICER:

Strategic Planner - William Hosken

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Planning and Development Services - Paul Needham

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Location Plan

Attachment b    Aerial Photograph

Attachment c    Proposed Scheme Amendment Plan

Attachment d   Proposed Structure Plan  

  

PRÉCIS

 

The Council is requested to consider initiating, for public consultation, proposed Amendment No. 15 to Local Planning Scheme No. 21 (LPS21) and accompanying Structure Plan (SP). The proposal seeks to rezone a portion of Lot 4001 Metricup-Yelverton Road, Yelverton from ‘Agriculture’ to ‘Bushland Protection’ and facilitate subdivision of two additional lots under the City’s Biodiversity Incentive Strategy.

 

Officers recommend that the Council adopt the proposed Amendment and SP for the purpose of consultation. This will include referral of the proposal to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) for assessment and, subsequently, referral to relevant State Government agencies during the period of public advertising.

 

BACKGROUND

 

The City’s Biodiversity Incentive Strategy (BIS) was adopted by the Council in 2011 and provides a voluntary subdivision incentive for the conservation of large and/or poorly represented areas of remnant vegetation.

 

The proposed Amendment and accompanying SP relates to Lot 4001 Metricup-Yelverton Road, Yelverton, a lot of approximately 77.7 hectares located approximately 24 kilometres south-west of the Busselton City Centre (Attachment A). The lot has been substantially cleared for timber plantation but retains several areas of remnant vegetation totaling approximately 14.9 hectares (Attachment B).

 

The majority of remnant vegetation on the site (14ha of 14.9ha, or 94%) has been classified as being in ‘very good – excellent’ condition (in accordance with the Keighery Scale). This vegetation has been identified as representing various Cowaramup vegetation complexes, including the Cowaramup Cw2 complex which is poorly represented (less than 30% of pre-European extent remaining).

 

The subject site is eligible for a voluntary subdivision incentive in accordance with the ‘alternate’ track criteria outlined in the BIS, on the basis that it contains more than 10 hectares of remnant vegetation that will not be impacted upon by development (including fire management measures), remnant vegetation is classified as being in better than ‘good’ condition, there is a high likelihood of the existence of declared and/or priority flora (although not observed), and there is habitat for vertebrate species listed as ‘endangered’.

 

In accordance with the BIS, a proposed Local Planning Scheme Amendment (Attachment C) and accompanying Structure Plan (Attachment D) have been submitted which propose subdivision of Lot 4001 into three lots. Remnant vegetation on the site is proposed to be preserved within proposed Lots 1 and 3 (8.35ha and 32.9ha), which is proposed to be rezoned to ‘Bushland Protection’ and subject to a restrictive (conservation) covenant. Proposed Lot 2 (36.4ha) contains the majority of timber plantation on the site and no other significant vegetation, and is therefore proposed to retain its current ‘Agriculture’ zoning.

 

A Fire Management Plan (FMP), Environmental Assessment, and Pest & Weed Management Plan have also been lodged in support of the proposal to demonstrate environmental values, priorities for ongoing management by the landowner, and compatibility with the requirements of relevant planning policies including the Western Australian Planning Commission’s Planning for Bushfire Protection Guidelines.

 

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.

 

The Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, which came into operational effect on 19 October 2015, identifies three different levels of amendments – basic, standard and complex.  The resolution of the local government is to specify the level of the amendment and provide an explanation of the reason for the local government forming that opinion.

 

The new Regulations provide separate processes for the approval of scheme amendments and structure plans, adherence to which would advance the proposed SP ahead of the Amendment. However as the SP is reliant upon the change in zoning proposed in the Amendment, and the nature of BIS proposals supports their assessment in parallel, the SP and Amendment are being progressed concurrently. Progression of the proposed SP will therefore assume the process and timeframes associated with the Amendment.

 

The proposed Amendment and SP are considered to be consistent with the policies, objectives and provisions of the ‘Bushland Protection’ Zone as identified at Clauses 4.2.11 and 5.39 of the City of Busselton Local Planning Scheme No. 21. Environmental surveys have been submitted in accordance with the requirement at Clause 5.36, and should the Council resolve to initiate the proposed Amendment these will be referred to the Department of Parks and Wildlife for assessment.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

The proposal has been submitted subject to the City’s Biodiversity Incentive Strategy (BIS), and is consistent with the criteria and operational guidelines provided in the BIS including the number of allowable additional lots.

 

The subject site is located within ‘Precinct 4 – Western Rural’ in the City’s Local Rural Planning Strategy. In seeking to conserve an area of significant remnant vegetation (particularly as this includes riparian vegetation and adjoins State Forest), the proposed Amendment and SP are consistent with the objectives for this Precinct.

 

The proposal has been submitted with an accompanying Fire Management Plan (FMP), with related provisions included on the proposed SP, which is considered to meet the requirements of the Planning for Bushfire Protection Guidelines and the City’s Local Planning Policy 9B – Bushfire Protection Provisions while having no impact on biodiversity conservation on the subject lot. Further discussion is provided in the ‘Officer Comment’ section of this report.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

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

 

Long-term Financial Plan Implications

 

Nil.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

The proposed amendment is considered to be consistent with the following objective of the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2013 – ‘5.2 Growth is managed sustainably and our environment is protected and enhanced as we develop’.

 

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. Officer assessment identified no significant risks associated with this proposal.

 

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 resolve to initiate the proposed Amendment, being of the opinion that it is consistent with Part V of the Planning and Development Act 2005 and the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, the proposal and accompanying documentation will 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 determine that the proposed Amendment does not require formal assessment it will be advertised for a period of 42 days in accordance with the Regulations, and including referral to relevant state government agencies. In the event that the EPA determines that the proposed Amendment is to be subject to formal environmental assessment, this assessment is to be prepared by the proponent prior to consultation.

 

The applicant has provided a copy of a letter received from the Department of Parks and Wildlife confirming the high biodiversity values of the subject site, however, the applicant has not provided confirmation from the Department or the alternative covenanter body (i.e. National Trust) confirming the eligibility of this proposal for a conservation covenanting program, as would be usual practice. Notwithstanding, this amendment proposal has been progressed at the request of the applicant and in acknowledgement that conservation covenants for relevant lots will be required as a condition of subdivision (as outlined in the conditions of the SP). The applicant bears any risk and cost associated with progressing this proposal should it ultimately not be possible to achieve appropriate conservation covenants.

 


 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

Officers do not consider that this proposal presents any substantial issues which would preclude the Amendment (and accompanying Structure Plan) from being initiated by the Council, referred to the EPA, and progressed to public consultation.

 

The FMP submitted in accompaniment of this proposal will be implemented through relevant conditions contained in the SP, including the placement of a notification on newly created titles. Building protection zones are identified in the FMP and SP for proposed Lots 1 and 3, but not for proposed Lot 2 which is to retain its current zoning of ‘Agriculture’.

 

Proposed Lot 2 is to retain its current ‘Agriculture’ zoning and land use, and officers consider that the designation of a building envelope would be unnecessarily restrictive given that future residential development on Lot 2 will nonetheless be required to comply with the construction requirements of Australian Standard 3959:2009 to minimize the risk from bushfire if it is proposed to be located within close proximity to the vegetated areas contained on adjoining lots.

 

While only a small area of remnant vegetation (3.5ha approx.) is to be preserved on proposed Lot 1, this area is contiguous with vegetation on the State Forest reserve adjacent. All remnant vegetation of conservation value is proposed to be retained on lots to be rezoned to ‘Bushland Protection’.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The proposed Amendment and accompanying SP provide for the subdivision of Lot 4001 in accordance with the City’s Biodiversity Incentive Strategy, and will thereby secure the preservation of remnant vegetation on the site. Officers therefore recommend that the Council adopt the proposal for the purpose of public consultation.

 

OPTIONS

 

Should the Council not support the Officer Recommendation the Council could instead resolve –

 

1.            To decline the request to initiate the proposed Amendment in its entirety (and provide a reason for such a decision). It should be noted that under the relevant legislation there is no right of appeal against a Council decision not to initiate an amendment.

 

2.            To seek further information before making a decision.

 

3.            To initiate the proposed Amendment subject to further modification(s) as required.

 

Officer assessment has not revealed any substantive issue or reasonable grounds that would support any of these options.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

The implementation of the Officer Recommendation would involve provision of advice of the Council resolution to the applicant and referral of the proposed Amendment to the Environmental Protection Authority. This will occur within one month of the resolution.


 

Council Decision and Officer Recommendation

C1512/349              Moved Councillor G Bleechmore, seconded Councillor P Carter

 

That the Council:

 

1.    Pursuant to Part V of the Planning and Development Act 2005, initiates proposed Amendment No. 15 to the City of Busselton Local Planning Scheme No. 21 for the purpose of rezoning a portion of Lot 4001 Metricup-Yelverton Road, Yelverton from ‘Agriculture’ to ‘Bushland Conservation’ and amending the Scheme map accordingly.

 

2.    In accordance with regulation 35(2) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, it is the opinion of the Council that draft Amendment No. 15 is a ‘standard amendment’, for the following reason(s):

(a)    the draft Amendment is consistent with the objectives identified in the Scheme for that zone;

(b)    the draft Amendment is consistent with the City’s adopted Biodiversity Incentive Strategy;

(c)    the draft Amendment will have no significant environmental, social, economic or governance impacts on land in the Scheme area not subject to the draft Amendment proposal.

 

3.    Upon preparation of the necessary documentation, refer the proposed Amendment to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) as required by the Planning and Development Act 2005. On receipt of a response from the EPA indicating that the draft Amendment is not subject to formal environmental assessment, the proposed Amendment will be advertised for a period of 42 days in accordance with the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 and referred to relevant state government agencies for comment. In the event that the EPA determines that the proposed Amendment is to be subject to formal environmental assessment, this assessment is to be prepared by the proponent prior to consultation.

 

4.    Adopts the draft Structure Plan for Lot 4001 Metricup-Yelverton Road, Yelverton for public consultation, concurrent with draft Amendment No. 15, pursuant to Clause 7.5 of the City of Busselton Local Planning Scheme No. 21.

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

 


Council                                                                                      27                                                             9 December 2015

11.2        PROPOSED AMENDMENT NO. 16 TO LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME NO. 21 - LOT 519 BELL DRIVE, BROADWATER - CONSIDERATION FOR FINAL ADOPTION

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:

Strategic Planner - William Hosken

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Planning and Development Services - Paul Needham

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Location Plan

Attachment b    Aerial Photograph

Attachment c    Proposed Scheme Amendment Plan

Attachment d   Summary of Submissions  

  

PRÉCIS

 

The Council is requested to consider final adoption of proposed Amendment No. 16 to Local Planning Scheme No. 21 (LPS21) following public consultation. The proposal seeks to rezone a portion of Lot 519 Bell Drive, Broadwater from ‘Residential (R20)’ to ‘Residential (R40)’ to increase the residential density coding applicable to the site.

 

Officers recommend that the Council acknowledge the submissions received and adopt the proposed Amendment unmodified, which will then be forwarded to the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) for consideration.

 

BACKGROUND

 

The proposed Amendment relates to a portion of Lot 519 Bell Drive (corner Broadwater Boulevard), Broadwater, a lot of approximately 2.6ha located 5.5 kilometres west of the Busselton City Centre (Attachment A). Lot 519 includes vacant land on the western side of Bell Drive (the subject of this Amendment) and the recently developed Ellenvale Aged Care facility and vacant land on the eastern side of Bell Drive (not the subject of this Amendment) (Attachment B). This lot is currently the subject of an approved subdivision application (separate to this Amendment) which, once completed, would separate the portion of Lot 519 west of Bell Drive into a single, separate title of 3546m2.

 

The applicant (on behalf of the landowner, Aegis Aged Care Group) has submitted proposed Amendment 16 which seeks to increase the applicable residential density coding from R20 to R40 over the portion of Lot 519 west of Bell Drive (Attachment C). If supported, this proposal will allow (subject to a subsequent development approval) for an increase in the number of multiple dwellings permitted to be developed on the site from 7 to 16.

 

Further background detail is provided in the report to Council of 12 August 2015, when the Council adopted this Amendment for public consultation.

 

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.

 

The Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, which came into operational effect on 19 October 2015, identifies three different levels of amendments – basic, standard and complex. As the identification of the amendment type occurs at the time of the Council’s initiation, which in this case occurred prior to the adoption of the Regulations, it is not necessary to identify the amendment level at this stage. Notwithstanding, Amendment 16 will be progressed as though it were a ‘standard’ amendment.

 

LPS21 identifies the subject land within the ‘Residential’ zone, with a coding of ‘R20’.  An objective of the Residential zone is:

“(b)     To provide opportunity for the development of a wide range of housing stock commensurate with the changing characteristics and housing needs of the City’s population.”

 

The proposed Amendment is considered to be consistent with the relevant provisions of LPS21.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

As discussed in the report to Council of 12 August 2015, the proposed Amendment is considered to be consistent with relevant planning policies including the Western Australian Planning Commission’s Regional Strategy: South-West Framework, State Planning Policy No.3 - Urban Growth and Settlement, Liveable Neighbourhoods, and State Planning Policy No.3.1 – Residential Design Codes of WA.

 

Lot 519 is located within the area of the Broadwater Structure Plan – Precinct 1, which guides subdivision and development within the Broadwater area. The Structure Plan identifies the subject site for residential development, indicatively at R20 density. As discussed in the ‘Officer Comment’ section of this report, City officers consider the proposed increase to R40 density as appropriate and desirable under this framework.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

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

 

Long-term Financial Plan Implications

 

Nil.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

The proposed amendment is considered to be consistent with the following community objective 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. Officer assessment identified no significant risks associated with this proposal.

 

 

 

 

CONSULTATION

 

Prior to public consultation, the proposed Amendment was referred to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) in accordance with the requirements of the Planning and Development Act 2005, who responded advising that the Amendment did not require formal assessment.

 

The proposed Amendment was subsequently advertised for public consultation for a period of 42 days, closing 4 November 2015. Letters of advice were sent to three adjoining landowners and relevant State Government servicing agencies. One response was received from an adjoining landowner in objection to the proposal and two responses from servicing agencies (Busselton Water and the Water Corporation) providing advice relevant to development of the site, which has been forwarded to the applicant. A summary of submissions and officer comments is provided at Attachment D, and is further discussed in the ‘Officer Comment’ section of this report.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

Appropriate opportunities to support urban consolidation are generally supported by the strategic planning framework, especially at a State level. Opportunities to provide a diversity of lot sizes and housing types in urban areas, and therefore a variety of lifestyle options, are also broadly supported. The Broadwater Structure Plan encourages a range of residential densities to provide for housing choice, and is generally but not specifically prescriptive in where medium density development might be located.

 

A small area of R40 development exists nearby (Milkman Avenue), and as this is less significant than has been anticipated in the Broadwater Structure Plan, officers consider that the proposed Amendment does not provide a greater amount of medium density housing in this general location than might have been expected. The subject site exhibits favourable attributes for medium density development being a large land parcel (allowing for an integrated development), opposite land reserved for the Broadwater wetlands and supporting the existing Aegis aged care development.

 

The concerns raised by an adjoining landowner (Lot 560, immediately north of the subject site) relate principally to the development concept for multiple dwellings provided by the applicant in support of the proposal, and the potential impacts on residential amenity which may result. Should the landowner ultimately develop multiple dwellings on the subject site, a planning application to the City will be required which can address considerations of overlooking, overshadowing, car parking, and the location of carports, common areas and access as appropriate. Relevant controls within the Residential Design Codes (R-Codes) can be applied at that stage, and are not significantly varied by the proposed change in density from R20 to R40 (for example, there is no change to the assessment of the matters above or for side boundary setbacks).

 

Officers therefore recommend the Council consider adopting the proposed Amendment unmodified, noting that specific concerns regarding the form of the development will ultimately be resolved at the development approval stage.

 

CONCLUSION

 

Officers consider that proposed Amendment 16 represents an appropriate and desirable increase in residential density in a suitable location, with sufficient support provided by the strategic planning framework. It is therefore recommended that the Council acknowledge the submissions received and adopt the proposed Amendment unmodified, which will then be forwarded to the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) for consideration.

 

 

OPTIONS

 

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

 

1.            Resolve not to adopt the draft Amendment for final approval and provide a reason for such a       decision.

 

2.            Resolve to adopt the draft Amendment for final approval subject to modification(s).

 

Officers consider that there are not substantive issues that would support either option.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

The implementation of the Officer Recommendation will involve referral of the Amendment documents to the Western Australian Planning Commission within 21 days of the Council decision.

 

Council Decision and Officer Recommendation

C1512/350              Moved Councillor G Bleechmore, seconded Councillor P Carter

 

That the Council

 

1.    In pursuance of Part V of the Planning and Development Act 2005, adopts draft Amendment No. 16 to the City of Busselton Local Planning Scheme No. 21 for final approval for the purpose of rezoning portion of Lot 519 Bell Drive, Broadwater from ‘Residential R20’ to ‘Residential R40’ and to amend the Scheme Map accordingly.

 

2.    Endorses the Summary of Submissions prepared in response to the public consultation undertaken in relation to draft Amendment No. 16.

 

3.    Refers draft Amendment No. 16 to the City of Busselton Local Planning Scheme No. 21, so adopted for final approval, to the Western Australian Planning Commission with a request for the approval of the Hon. Minister for Planning.

 

4.    Where notification is received from the Western Australian Planning Commission that modifications to the draft Amendment are required prior to the approval of the Amendment by the Minister, the modifications are to be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, unless the modification affects the intent of the draft Amendment, in which case it shall be referred to the Council for consideration.

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

 


Council                                                                                      31                                                             9 December 2015

11.3        RESPONSE TO PETITION (BEACH SHELTERS) RECEIVED AT 14 OCTOBER 2015 ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

SUBJECT INDEX:

Petitions

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

Our natural environment is cared for and enhanced for the enjoyment of the community and visitors.

BUSINESS UNIT:

Environmental Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Ranger and Emergency Services

REPORTING OFFICER:

Ranger and Emergency Services Coordinator - Dean Freeman

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Planning and Development Services - Paul Needham

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Petition - Beach Shelters 2015  

  

PRÉCIS

 

At its ordinary meeting of 14 October 2015, the Council received a petition that effectively asks that the Council support allowing the placement of shelters on beaches and to allow those shelters to remain in place for the duration of the summer - rather than having to be put up and taken down each day or as needed, which is what the City’s Property Local Law requires (unless a permit has been issued to allow a shelter to remain in place for a longer period). At its 14 October meeting, the Council resolved that the CEO prepare a report relating to the petition for consideration by the Council or a committee. This report is being presented for the Council’s consideration pursuant to that earlier Council resolution.

 

It is understood that the petition has been presented, at least in part, because of action taken by the City last summer to facilitate removal of a number of shelters that had been placed on the beach and left in place for considerable periods of time (weeks to months), most particularly in the Quindalup area. The practice did not commence last summer and is not exclusive to the Quindalup area, but has grown in prevalence and scale over recent years, with the City facilitating the removal of approximately 25 shelters last summer.

 

It is recommended that the Council resolve to indicate that it: does not support the placement of shelters for private purposes on beaches overnight; supports the implementation of the Property Local Law by facilitating removal of shelters placed on beaches (or in any other public place), contrary to the local law; and also that it prepares a draft policy to that effect for consideration by the Policy and Legislation Committee. The reasons for that recommendation are set out in the ‘Officer Comment’ section of this report.

 

BACKGROUND

 

Council has been presented with a petition (containing some 540 signatures) as follows –

 

We, the undersigned respectfully ask the City of Busselton to rescind its decision to ban the long-term use of beach shelters on its beaches during the summer months. We agree that they should be removed if they are vandalised or damaged and must not have any protruding ropes or pegs of which could pose a safety threat.

 

We base our request on the following reasons.

·        It is an impractical policy to erect and dismantle the shelter on a daily basis outside of daylight hours. Why is it necessary to dismantle them at night when they are used primarily to protect us from the sun especially when both the Cancer Council and the Sun Smart programs strongly promote protection from the U.V Rays?

·        Our beaches are famous and help bring large numbers of International, Eastern States and local visitors to our City who spend large amounts on accommodation and commercially while here. Many of these visitors enjoy the use of the shelters of which we erect, as do all our families.

·        The shelters also act as a deterrent to those whom regularly illegally drive along the beach at night, often becoming bogged leaving large holes and rubbish behind. Why just target beach shelters when there are far more objects left on the beach. Dinghies, and surf cats are left for months all along the beaches often right on the waters’ edge where people like to walk.

·        These beach structures must be commercially manufactured and built so as to be suitable for long term positioning.

·        These shelters can remained permanently erected between December 1st –March 31st.

 

A copy of the petition is provided, in full, as Attachment A to this report.

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

The principal statutory environment is set out in the City of Busselton Local Government Property Local Law 2010 (‘the local law’). The local law contains the following key provision:

 

3.14 Permit required to camp outside a facility…

3) A person must not without a permit…

(b) erect any tent, camp, hut or similar structure on local government property other than a beach shade or windbreak erected for use during the hours of daylight and which is dismantled during those hours on the same day.

 

It is clear that a ‘beach shelter’ or similar can therefore not be placed on local government property without the prior granting of a permit, following the making of an application for such a permit.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

There are no plans or policies particularly relevant to this matter.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

Resources required for implementation of the local law, that is to remove shelters left overnight or longer, are provided for within the City’s overall operational budget and can be achieved without any significant effect on other operational areas. Changing that approach, however, through seeking, assessing and then monitoring compliance with permits allowing shelters to remain overnight or longer would require more resources and would have a discernible effect on other operational areas, unless additional resources were made available.  Additionally the City would have a duty of care to ensure that structures were maintained and safe and this would require additional resourcing.

 

Long-term Financial Plan Implications

 

There are no long-term financial plan implications associated with this matter.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

Consideration of this matter is consistent with Key Goal 5 – Cared for and Enhanced Environment, Community Objective 5.1 - Our natural environment is cared for and enhanced for the enjoyment of the community and visitors – of the City of Busselton Strategic Community Plan 2013.

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

An assessment of the risks associated with implementing the officer recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk assessment framework. Only ‘downside’ risks, rather than ‘upside’ risks are identified, and risks are only identified where the residual risk, once controls are identified, is assessed as ‘medium’ or greater. No such risks have been identified.

 

CONSULTATION

 

No community consultation has been undertaken in the preparation of this report. The Council could, either in considering this report or at some point in the future, choose to undertake consultation, but it is not considered practicable for that to occur prior to the coming summer.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

It is understandable that some people, especially people that live in close proximity to the beach, might like the ability to place and keep shelters on the beach during the summer. It is not, however, seen as practicable or reasonable to allow that to occur on beach areas in the City of Busselton. Key reasons for that view are as follows –

 

·    The beach is public property, generally available for all residents and visitors to utilize equally, and permitting some people to erect semi-permanent structures would constitute the de facto, partial ‘privatization’ of sections of the beach.

 

·    The opportunity to erect semi-permanent structures would need to be provided to all. Given the number of residents of and visitors to the City, there would need to be some way to equitably and fairly determine who should be permitted to erect a shelter, when, where and for how long.  It is very difficult to conceive of a workable means of doing so (most likely, there would need to be some kind of expression-of-interest process) and it would only be possible for a small proportion of those who might wish to do so to be permitted to place and leave structures on the beach.

 

·    The objective of providing shade for persons using the beach during the day is already adequately provided for through allowing shelters to be brought to the beach and erected, but then removed at the end of the day. That will be less convenient for some people, but achieves the same sun protection outcomes as would more permanent structures.

 

·    The placement of such structures on the beach on a semi-permanent basis would detract from the perceived ‘naturalness’ of the beach environment, which is a key part of the attraction of the coast for many people. There are locations along the coast where infrastructure is provided and the inherent naturalness of the beach environment is reduced, but it is not seen as appropriate to potentially erode that value along more extensive portions of the City’s coast.

 

·    The City’s coast can be subject of weather and oceanic events, even during the summer, which shelters of the kind envisaged or otherwise appropriate would not be able to withstand. Permitting such structures would, in the event of those kinds of events, pose a significant management and/or safety risk, and would also create a risk of structures ending up in the ocean or in other locations other than those intended.

 

·    If the City were to permit the placement of semi-permanent structures, the City would have a duty of care to ensure that structures were maintained and safe, and it would require significantly more resources to meet that duty than the resources required to continue with the current approach of not permitting such structures.

It is seen as important that the Council determine its response to the petition prior to the peak summer/tourist season. Uncertainty around the City’s approach could create confusion within the community, and potentially leave City officers with no clear direction, should shelters be left in place overnight (or for longer periods) during the coming summer and/or application(s) for permit(s) be received.

 

CONCLUSION

 

For the reasons set out above, it is recommended that the Council resolve to indicate that it: does not support the placement of shelters for private purposes on beaches overnight; supports the implementation of the Property Local Law by facilitating removal of shelters placed on beaches (or in any other public place), contrary to the local law. It is also recommended that a draft policy to that effect be prepared for consideration by the Policy and Legislation Committee.

 

OPTIONS

 

Should the Council not support the officer recommendation, it would be recommended that a draft policy be prepared and considered before the Council contemplates issuing permits for private beach shelters of the kind envisaged. It is not, however, seen as appropriate to contemplate issuing of permits on an ad hoc basis in the interim. It is therefore seen as important that, even if the Council may contemplate issuing permits at some point in the future, that it be made clear that the issuing of permits not be contemplated this summer, and that action to enforce the local law is supported through not allowing such structures during the coming summer. Another option the Council may wish to consider is investigating options to provide more public shelters in foreshore areas along the coast, although not generally on the beach as such.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

If the officer recommendation is supported, the party that lodged the petition will be advised of the Council’s decision within one week.

 

Council Decision and Officer Recommendation

C1512/351              Moved Councillor G Bleechmore, seconded Councillor P Carter

 

That the Council resolve –

 

1.    That it does not support the placement of shelters for private purposes on beaches overnight;

 

2.    Supports the implementation of the Property Local Law by facilitating removal of shelters placed on beaches (or in any other public place), contrary to the local law; and

 

3.    That a draft policy to that effect be prepared for consideration by the Policy and Legislation Committee.

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

  


Council                                                                                      35                                                             9 December 2015

13.             Community and Commercial Services Report

13.1        12 MONTH REVIEW OF RETAIL TRADING HOURS IN BUSSELTON

SUBJECT INDEX:

Retail Trading Hours

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Commercial Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Economic 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:

Attachment a   Letter from Minister for Commerce with Variation Order for Retail Trading Hours in Busselton

Attachment b    Submission from Margaret River Busselton Tourism Association Inc

Attachment c    Submission from Busselton Chamber of Commerce and Industry Inc  

  

PRÉCIS

 

This report follows a Council decision (C1409/241) on 24 September 2014 to make application to the Minister for Commerce for year-round extensions to retail trading hours in Busselton and a request for the CEO to review the extended hours in twelve (12) months’ time.

 

The Minister for Commerce approved a permanent extension to Busselton’s trading hours in February 2015, following a temporary seasonal extension that commenced 12 months ago in December 2014.

 

The report recommends no further amendments be made to retail trading hours in Busselton.

 

BACKGROUND

 

The Retail Trading Hours Act 1987 applies to retail shops in Western Australia south of the 26th parallel.  It sets out the trading hours and rules covering various categories of retail outlets.  The trading hours of restaurants, cafes and takeaway food shops are not covered by the Act.

 

Trading hours for general retail shops in the metropolitan area are currently:

·    8.00 am – 9.00 pm on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday Thursday and Friday

·    8.00 am – 5.00 pm on Saturday

·    11.00 am – 5.00 pm on Sunday

·    11.00 am – 5.00 pm on public holidays

·    CLOSED on Christmas Day, Good Friday and ANZAC Day

 

Non-metropolitan Local Governments are empowered, subject to endorsement by the Minister for Commerce, to extend general retail trading hours beyond those stipulated in the Retail Trading Hours Act 1987 and any permitted exemptions.

 

A review of retail trading hours across the City of Busselton was conducted in 2014, following greater liberalization of hours in the Perth Metropolitan area and recognition of continued support from key business and industry groups for the City to apply for annual extensions for major events and the holiday season in Busselton.  Additionally, an anomaly existed between Busselton and Dunsborough, which has had permanent extended trading hours since 1993.  At the time of the 2014 review, Busselton’s trading hours for general retail shops operated in accordance with the Retail Trading Hours (Shire of Busselton) Variation Order 2011:

·    8.00am-7.00pm - Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Friday

·    8.00am-9.00pm - Thursday

·    8.00am-6.00pm: -Saturday

·    10.00am-6.00pm: - Sunday and Public Holidays

·    CLOSED on Good Friday, ANZAC Day and Christmas Day.

 

On 24 September 2014, Council reviewed public submissions on a review of retail trading hours and resolved (C1409/241) to progress towards unifying trading hours across the local government district by allowing year-round extensions in Busselton as follows:

 

·    8.00am to 9.00pm on Monday to Sunday

·    1.00pm to 9.00pm on ANZAC Day

·    CLOSED on Christmas Day and Good Friday.

 

The 2014 review proposed Dunsborough’s extended trading hours (as approved by the Minister for Commerce in 1993) be retained.

 

On 9 February 2015 the Minister for Commerce wrote to the City approving extended retail trading hours on a permanent basis and issued the Variation Order in Attachment A.

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

Busselton currently operates under the Retail Trading Hours (Busselton) Variation Order 2015 of the

Retail Trading Hours Act 1987.

 

Dunsborough operates under the Local Government Retail Trading Hours Exemption Order (No 23) 1993 of the Retail Trading Act 1987.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

The Officer recommendation is in line with Council policies.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

Nil

 

Long-term Financial Plan Implications

 

There are no implications for the City’s Long term Financial Plan

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

This matter aligns with the City of Busselton’s endorsed Strategic Community Plan 2013, and principally with the following Strategic Goal:

 

Well planned vibrant and active places;

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

 

Robust Local Economy;

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

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

·    A community where local business is supported.

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

As a result of feedback from business and industry groups, the Officer recommendation contained within this report is considered low risk and as such a formal risk assessment is not provided.

 

CONSULTATION

 

Broad consultation with businesses, industry groups and residents has been undertaken over several years in accordance with Department of Commerce guidelines for Local Governments applying to extend trading hours on a temporary or permanent basis.

 

Although this report does not seek to amend the existing trading hours, the review process included consultation by inviting selected industry, business and community groups to make a submission on the success (or otherwise) of extended hours that commenced (on a temporary basis) in December 2014 and were endorsed by the Minister for Commerce (on a permanent basis) in February 2015.

 

On 11 September 2015, City officers wrote to the following organisations seeking a written submission by 30 October 2015:

 

Busselton Chamber of Commerce and Industry Inc

 

The BCCI reports a generally positive response from larger and small retailers, including those not directly affected by the legislation.  The BCCI has observed that as a consequence of the larger retailers taking advantage of extended trading hours, more foot traffic is drawn to the CBD and as a result, other small businesses have been encouraged to open, particularly on Sundays.  Feedback to the BCCI from customers of the major retailers is reported as positive, with two major themes being as follows; Firstly, the availability of extended hours allows greater flexibility for customers to be able to shop when they want to shop and secondly, the uniformity of opening hours are more acceptable as they are simpler and thus better understood by customers, rather than inconsistent variations throughout the week, weekends and seasonal extensions.  The BCCI submission is in Attachment B.

 

Margaret River Busselton Tourism Association Inc (MRBTA)

 

Based on feedback from their members and visitors to the Region, the MRBTA continues to be supportive of extended trading hours in Busselton.  The MRBTA views the new hours as providing greater uniformity across the wider Busselton-Margaret River Region, resulting in the major tourist centres of Busselton, Dunsborough and Margaret River being open for similar periods of time, thus reducing confusion for visitors to the Region, particularly Perth.  The MRBTA submission is in Attachment C.

 

Busselton and District Ratepayers Association Inc (BADRA)

 

No submission was received.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

The September 2014 decision by Council to permanently extend retail trading hours in Busselton is supported by Busselton’s key tourism and business representative groups.  Easing of retail trading restrictions that were previously in place has anecdotally provided more convenience, choice and flexibility for consumers, while promoting competition and boosting employment opportunities in the retail sector, particularly for young people, a demographic with relatively high unemployment.

 

The extended hours in Busselton have also removed anomalies between Busselton, Dunsborough and Margaret River, making for more uniform opening hours across the wider Busselton-Margaret River Region, thus catering for the needs of tourists, who bring significant income to the regional economy.  The permanent extensions now in place have also reduced red tape for the City’s administration and industry groups, which formerly made application on an annual basis to the Minister for Commerce for extensions over the Christmas and summer holiday periods.  Every application required a community consultation period inviting public submissions for review by the Council and the Minister for Commerce.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The retail trade sector is the largest employer in the City of Busselton and in 2013/14 contributed around $134m to the City of Busselton’s Gross Regional Product.  Tourism expenditure is also a significant feature of Busselton’s economy and thus it is important that services to visitors are available at convenient times throughout the week and on weekends.

 

Submissions from both regional tourism and local business groups support the extension to retail trading hours that commenced on a permanent basis in February 2015.  Accordingly the Officer recommendation is for Council to continue with the existing trading hours being:

 

­  8.00am to 9.00pm on Monday to Sunday

­  1.00pm to 9.00pm on ANZAC Day

­  CLOSED on Christmas Day and Good Friday.

 

OPTIONS

 

Council may elect to amend Busselton’s retail trading hours to be:

 

1.            more restrictive on a year round, or seasonal basis; or,

 

2.            less restrictive on a year round, or seasonal basis

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

Should Council accept the Officer recommendation no further action is required.

 

Council Decision and Officer Recommendation

C1512/352              Moved Councillor G Bleechmore, seconded Councillor P Carter

 

That the Council notes submissions to the 12 month review of retail trading hours from the Busselton Chamber of Commerce and Industry Inc and the Margaret River Busselton Tourism Association Inc and maintains the existing extended hours as stated in the Retail Trading Hours (Busselton) Variation Order 2015 being:

­  8.00am to 9.00pm on Monday to Sunday

­  1.00pm to 9.00pm on ANZAC Day

­  CLOSED on Christmas Day and Good Friday.

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

 


Council                                                                                      39                                                             9 December 2015

13.2        2015/16 COMMUNITY BIDS - SECOND ROUND ALLOCATION

SUBJECT INDEX:

Donations, Contributions and Subsidies

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Community Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Community Services

REPORTING OFFICER:

Community Development Officer - Naomi Davey

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Community and Commercial Services - Naomi Searle

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Nil

  

PRÉCIS

 

             Each year the City of Busselton provides financial assistance to community groups and not-for-profit        organisations through the Community Bids process. This assistance is provided for specific activities or projects proposed to be undertaken by that group or organisation within the forthcoming   financial year.

 

This report provides a summary of results from the Councillor workshop on 11 November 2015, and seeks formal endorsement regarding the community bid submissions to be funded in the second round of the 2015/16 financial year.

 

BACKGROUND

 

The City of Busselton has historically invited community groups and not-for-profit organisations to apply for funding through the City’s annual budget development process. In April 2010 Council resolved to restructure the process under which external organisations applied to the City for financial assistance. This included the following changes to the various funding application schemes:

·   Amalgamation of the Community Environment and Minor Sporting, Recreational and Community Grants schemes into a consolidated scheme;

·   Development of a two tiered scheme for major and minor projects, with a capping of the overall budget allocations for each tier (resolved by Council);

·   Discontinuation of Small Local Project fund of Councillors to be replaced by a Sponsorship and Donations fund (administered by officers).

 

In August 2010 Councillors considered that a number of established community organisations, who apply for funding each year, warranted ongoing support of Council across a number of financial years.  This would therefore provide organisations with secured financial support over a longer planning period and alleviate the necessity to submit an annual application. These activities / events would become part of the future ‘multi-year agreement process’ and would not form part of the future annual Community Bids process.

 

In March 2011 the Council resolved to allocate funding to the Community Bids program as follows:

 

C1103/097           Moved Councillor Henley, seconded Councillor Hanran Smith:

 

1.            Council allocate a total of 0.5% of estimated rates to be levied to

Major Project Assistance Grants to be determined as part of the
Community Bids assessment process advertised in the first quarter of each year.

               2.           Allocate a total of $50,000 to Minor Project Assistance Grants to be

determined twice each year, once as part of the Community Bids

process, and once again in September each year.

 

               3.           Increases the maximum amount of Minor Project Assistance Grants

              from $3,000 to $5,000 for any one project.

 

In September 2014 City officers prepared and distributed a ‘Community Bids Information Pack’ to interested parties which contained general guidelines for applications and eligibility. The guidelines reflected direction provided by Council during previous Community Bids Councillor workshop sessions.

 

The guidelines indicate eligibility for Community Bids as follows:

·    Not for profit groups and organisations located in the City of Busselton, except in circumstances where a proposed project, program or activity will take place in the City or have significant regional benefit;

·    Project/ program delivery within the 2015/16 financial year;

·    One application per category, per organisation;

·    Completion of the application form provided;

·    ABN and Incorporation required.

 

The guidelines also provided the following as considerations for funding:

Supported

·    Programs/ projects providing benefit to the broader community;

·    One off projects or activities;

·    Equipment grants for durable equipment only;

·    One-off program related operational expenses.

Not supported

·    On-going operational expenses;

·    Consumable equipment;

·    Retrospective funding/ projects already commenced;

·    Projects that are an event (separately funded);

·    Training;

·    Facility maintenance;

·    Programs, projects and services considered the responsibility of other government departments, individuals and private for-profit groups;

·    Activities that do not relate to the Key Result Areas in the City’s Strategic Community Plan;

·    Proposals not complementary to the services and functions of local government.

 

In August 2015, Council resolved to allocate the following amounts to Round 1 of this funding scheme for the 2015/16 financial year:

 

·   $15,678   Minor Projects (Under $5,000)

·   $162,970 Major Projects (Over $5,000)

 

The remaining funding available for the second round of the 2015/16 Community Bids program is, $41,882 for minor projects. The second round of Community Bids funding for the 2015/16 financial year was opened during October 2015 and a total of eleven (11) applications were received (See Attachment A). Applications were called for Minor Bids (under $5,000) only.

 

Applications were assessed by an officer working group, in accordance with the Community Bids guidelines, and recommendations were discussed with Councillors at a workshop held on 11 November 2015. The results of the Councillor recommendations that followed form the basis of the Officer recommendations in this report.

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

Nil.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

The Community Bids Funding Programme is a funding opportunity for community based facility projects, and other programs and initiatives, and is an action contained within the Council endorsed City of Busselton Social and Ageing Plan

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

The proposed funding detailed in the officer recommendation of this report, based on the workshop with Councillors, includes a total of $41,822 to be awarded to minor bids. The City’s 2015/16 adopted budget includes this funding allocation.

 

Long-term Financial Plan Implications

 

Nil.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

Well Planned, Vibrant and Active Places:

2.1  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. The assessment identifies ‘downside’ risks only, rather than ‘upside’ risks as well. The table below describes identified risks where the residual risk, once controls have been identified, is identified as ‘medium’ or greater;

 

Risk

Controls

Consequence

Likelihood

Risk Level

Applicants do not obtain relevant and adequate insurances such as Public Liability exposing the City and/or Applicant to litigation.

Ensure conditions of funding are clear and copies of relevant insurances are obtained.

Moderate

Rare

Medium

 

CONSULTATION

 

The Community Bids funding programme was advertised in the local community newspaper on 26 September 30, 7, 14 & 21 October 2015, via the Council for the Community page. Recognised Community, Sporting and Environmental groups and clubs in the City of Busselton were also notified of the Community Bids process via email. A hard copy of the Community Bids application form and guidelines were available at the City Administration Building, Dunsborough Library and the Busselton Library.

 

A workshop was held with Councillors on 11 November 2015 to discuss Officer comments related to the submissions, with this feedback used to inform the final Officer recommendations in this report. 

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

Applications were initially assessed by an officer working group, who considered the following criteria:

·    Does the project, program or activity meet the Community Bids criteria?

·    Has the applicant outlined why the projects, programs or activities are needed by the community?

·    Is there an expectation or risk to the community if the project, program or activity does not proceed?

·    Did the organisation or group state the level of cash or in kind contribution they will make to the project, program or activity?

·    Has the applicant demonstrated attempts at seeking funding from other sources?

·    Has the applicant been successful in previous community bids applications and what was the funded amount?

·    Does the project align with the City of Busselton’s Strategic Plan?

 

Officers presented the applications to Councillors at a workshop on 11 November 2015, where the following recommendations were made:

 

 

Applicant

Project Title

Recommendation

Specific Conditions of Funding

1

Acting Up Drama School

Outdoor Cinema Equipment

$2,470

n/a

2

Busselton Softball Assoc.

Permanent Back Stop

$5,000

n/a

3

Busselton and Sugito Sister Cities Association

Promotional/20th Anniversary BASSCA

$1,660

n/a

4

Busselton Tee-Ball Assoc.

Equipment Trailer

$5,000

n/a

5

Fishability

Fishability Busselton Capacity Building Project

$5,000

All equipment to stay in Busselton

6

Geographe Bay Football (Soccer) Club

Enclosed Compound

$3,050

n/a

7

Geographe Outrigger Canoe Racing Club

Junior Program equipment

$2,932

n/a

8

Smiths Beach Surf Lifesaving Club

Training Equipment

$4,500

n/a

9

1st Cape Naturaliste Scout Group

Equipment for Scout Group and New Venturer Unit

$3,000

n/a

10

Dunsborough Community Garden

Garden Shed

$4,270

n/a

11

Busselton Hockey Stadium Club

Balcony Repairs

$5,000

n/a

 

 

Total

$41,822

 

Notification of Applicants:

 

Successful applicants of round two funding will be individually notified of the Council’s decision. Successful applications will be required to sign a grant agreement with the City and meet any specific conditions of funding.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The Community Bids application process is constantly evolving and aims to match community needs with the funds available within priority areas identified in the City of Busselton’s Strategic Community Plan (2013).

 

It is recommended that Council adopts the round two Community Bids funding allocations proposed as a result of the Councillor Workshop held on 11 November 2015.

 

OPTIONS

 

The Council may wish to consider re-assessment and differing levels of funding proposed for all or some of the community bid applications. In pursuing this option the Council needs to consider budget availability and the immediacy for some funding items and the effect this delay could have on organisations being able to finalise their plans and budgets for the 2015/16 year.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

All Community Bids applicants will be individually advised in writing of the outcome of the Council decision within 21 days. Successful applications will be required to sign a grant agreement with the City and meet any specific conditions of funding.

 

City officers will continue discussions with the various applicants regarding eligibility for other grant funding opportunities.

 

Council Decision and Officer Recommendation

C1512/353              Moved Councillor G Bleechmore, seconded Councillor P Carter

 

That the Council endorses the provision of funding for Round two of the 2015/16 Community Bids program as outlined in the table below, subject to the specific conditions as stated:

 

a)         Minor Bids

 

 

Applicant

Project Title

Recommendation

Specific Conditions of Funding

1

Acting Up Drama School

Outdoor Cinema Equipment

$2,470

n/a

2

Busselton Softball Assoc.

Permanent Back Stop

$5,000

n/a

3

Busselton and Sugito Sister Cities Association

Promotional/20th Anniversary BASSCA

$1,660

n/a

4

Busselton Tee-Ball Assoc.

Equipment Trailer

$5,000

n/a

5

Fishability

Fishability Busselton Capacity Building Project

$5,000

All equipment to stay in Busselton

6

Geographe Bay Football (Soccer) Club

Enclosed Compound

$3,050

n/a

7

Geographe Outrigger Canoe Racing Club

Junior Program equipment

$2,932

n/a

8

Smiths Beach Surf Lifesaving Club

Training Equipment

$4,500

n/a

9

1st Cape Naturaliste Scout Group

Equipment for Scout Group and New Venturer Unit

$3,000

n/a

10

Dunsborough Community Garden

Garden Shed

$4,270

n/a

11

Busselton Hockey Stadium Club

Balcony Repairs

$5,000

n/a

 

 

Total

$41,822

 

 

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

 


Council                                                                                      45                                                             9 December 2015

13.3        ARTGEO CULTURAL COMPLEX LEASES

SUBJECT INDEX:

ArtGeo Cultural Complex Leases

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

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:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   ArtGeo Studio 1 and Studio 2

Attachment b    Formal Valuation of Studios 1 and 2  

  

PRÉCIS

 

The two stables located at the rear of the Old Courthouse Courtyard at the ArtGeo Cultural Complex (“the Complex”) have been used as artists’ studios since the 1980s.  One of the stables can be divided into two, providing opportunities for three artists to lease the studios in which they can develop professionally and grow their profile in the industry.  Leases have been granted in the past for terms of up to twelve months to encourage turnover of the spaces and the growth and diversity of arts practiced within the Complex. The current leases expired on the 30 September 2015. The City called for Expressions of Interest (EoI) seeking artists wishing to lease the studios for the next twelve month period.

 

Only two submissions were received from the current Lessees, Namaya Fox and Nalda Hoskins to remain sharing Studio Two. Enquiries have been received for Studio One, but no formal submissions have been received to date. The purpose of this report is to inform the Council of the outcome of the advertising of the proposed disposition and make recommendations on the terms and conditions of the proposed leases. 

 

BACKGROUND

 

The Complex comprises the ArtGeo Gallery, the Old Courthouse and Gaol Cells, the old Stables and Fodder Room, the Police Sergeants’ Cottages and the Woodturners’ shed. These buildings are located on three different parcels of land that make up the Complex. 

 

Studio 1 (Stable 1) and Studio 2 (Stable 2) are located at the rear of the courtyard and form part of the Old Courthouse buildings, as shown hatched on attachment A.  The Old Courthouse is located at Lot 361 and the Stables and Courtyard on Lot 453, Queen Street Busselton, which is crown land vested with the City for the purpose of “Community and Cultural Purposes”.

 

The Stables have been artists’ studios since the Arts Council commenced using the building at the end of the 1980s. Various arrangements have been in place over the years for hire or lease of the spaces. Current rents are $60 per week for Studio 1 ($104 per m2) and $100 per week for Studio 2 ($231.81 per m2).  The recent market valuation (attachment B), dated 11 September 2015 indicates that current rents are in line with the market place.

 

On the 4 June 2015, the City called for Expressions of Interest (EoI) from artists seeking studio space for a period of up to twelve months.  The EoI ran for a period of 14 weeks closing on the 14 September 2015.  

 

Although some interest was expressed from other parties, only two formal submissions were received from the current tenants Namaya Fox and Nalda Hoskins.  Their leases expired on 30 September 2015, but they remain in occupation on a month by month basis.  Their submissions are detailed in the officer comment section of this report.

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995 (LGA) relates to the disposal of property by a local government and disposal is defined to include leasing.

 

Local Governments are compliant with the LGA if the procedure under section 3.58(3) is followed. This requires the publishing of prior notice to the local public of the proposed disposition which describes the property concerned, gives details of the proposal and invites submissions to be made before a specified date, not less than two weeks after the notice is first given. Any submissions received before the date specified in the notice must be considered and if a decision is made by the council or a committee, the decision and the reasons for it must be recorded in the minutes of the meeting at which the decision was made.

 

Section 3.58(4) of the LGA requires that the disposition includes either a valuation not more than six months old or a declaration by resolution that a valuation older than 6 months is considered a true indication of the value at the time of the disposition.  A formal valuation of Studios 1 and 2 was obtained on the 11 September 2015 (see Attachment B).

 

The Studios are located on a part of Reserve 35361, being Lot 453, Plan 182761, Volume LR3013 Folio 834, 4 Queen Street, Busselton.  The land is vested with the City with the power to lease for any term not exceeding 21 years, subject to the consent of the Minister for Lands, for the designated purpose of “Community and Cultural Purposes”.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

The provision of resident artist opportunities at the Complex is in line with the ArtGeo Cultural Complex Business Plan 2014/15 – 2018/19 and the designated purpose of the land for community and cultural purposes.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

The current rent amount to lease Studio 2 is $100 per week ($123.81 per m2 per annum) inclusive of GST and outgoings. Currently the two tenants sharing Studio 2 pay $50 per week each rent inclusive of GST and outgoings.

 

A market rental value of between $75 to $82.60 per week (inclusive of GST and outgoings) was provided by an independent valuer on the 15 September 2015.  The valuation noted “that should ‘Stable 2’ be partitioned into two studios, or even let to two artists in its current format, a higher rental income may be achievable.”

 

The current tenants have made submissions to continue to lease Studio 2 based on the rent remaining at $100 per week, inclusive of GST and outgoings. This rental amount is in line with the recent market valuation and therefore it is recommended that the terms remain unchanged.

 

Long-term Financial Plan Implications

 

The recommended rental income supports the achievement of revenues forecast in the Long Term Financial Plan for the Complex.

 

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

The request to enter into a lease with Mr. Namaya Fox and Mrs. Nalda Hoskins is consistent with the following City of Busselton Strategic Priorities:

 

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.

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

 

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

There are no identified risks of medium or greater associated with the officer recommendation, with the recommendation serving to mitigate the risks associated with there not being a lease in place.

 

CONSULTATION

 

City Staff have kept the proponents informed about the process and consulted with them on their submissions. 

 

The disposition was advertised for a period of 14 days in accordance with the section 3.58 of the Local Government Act.  The advertising closed on 11 November 2015.  No submissions were received.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

As mentioned above, the only submissions received in response to the EoI were from the current tenants, Namaya Fox and Nalda Hoskins. Mr. Fox and Mrs. Hoskins are expecting to continue to pay weekly rents of $50 per week each, inclusive of GST and outgoings.  These expectations are in line with the independent market valuation (attachment B), which recommended a rental value of between $75 to $82.60 per week (inclusive of GST and outgoings). The valuation noted “that should ‘Stable 2’ be partitioned into two studios, or even let to two artists in its current format, a higher rental income may be achievable.” As current rents are line with the market valuation it is recommended that the rent terms remain unchanged.

 

Mr. Fox is an emerging glass artist who has been a resident in Studio 2 since 1 July 2014. He is a lampworker who uses clear and coloured rods to produce unique glass art forms. Mr. Fox’s work and practical demonstrations have added diversity to the experiences available in the Complex and have been popular with cruise ship visitors and school groups who gather round to watch him at work. He has found that being in the Studio has pushed his skills and inspired him to create new collections of marbles and sculptured pieces.  Further tenancy at ArtGeo will allow him to continue to develop as an artist and grow his profile in the industry.

 

Mrs. Hoskins has been a resident artist in Studio 2 since 5 May 2015. She has manufactured lampworked glass beads for eleven years. Use of the Studio in the last year has allowed Mrs. Hoskins to expose her work to the public and experiment with new techniques to develop her art.  Longer term Mrs. Hoskins would like to teach her art and the Studio is helping her develop teaching skills and grow in confidence in this area. The range of products at the Complex has been enhanced by Mrs. Hoskins jewellery work and is becoming increasingly popular with visitors who view her work in her studio and are then able to purchase it through the Courthouse Gallery.

 

The existing leases provide that the tenants shall not operate a retail business from the studios.  The tenants may sell their artwork but only through the Courthouse and not direct to the public. This enables the complex to earn a small commission to contribute to the cost of facilities available to the artists and their audience. It is therefore proposed that the provisions of the new lease include a similar restriction. Should the tenants conduct any direct retail sale from the Studio this would constitute an actionable breach.  

 

As involved ArtGeo stakeholders both proponents provide a lot of support and advocacy for the other arts, entertainment and cultural experiences within the Cultural Precinct.  Another year would allow them to implement their ideas to increase visitation to and activation of the ArtGeo Courtyard.

 

CONCLUSION

 

Both Mr. Fox and Mrs. Hoskins have added vibrancy and something a little different at the complex.  Their live demonstrations and interactions with visitors have been particularly popular with school groups and cruise ship tourists. They have helped to support an increase in visitor numbers to the Complex and to activate and add vibrancy to the Cultural Precinct overall.  For these reasons, it is recommended that the City enters into a new lease with Mr. Fox and Mrs. Hoskins for the use of Studio 2. A nine month lease commencing on or before 1 January 2016, would keep the next annual lease renewal program to an October 2016 commencement date. 

 

OPTIONS

 

1.            Council can resolve not to enter into a lease with either Mr. Fox or Mrs. Hoskins and re-  advertise the premises at the current market rent. 

 

2.            Council can resolve to enter into a different term of lease with Mr. Fox or Mrs. Hoskins.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

A lease would be forwarded to the Minister for Lands for preapproval by the 18 December 2015.   It is anticipated that signing of the lease would be on or before the 1 January 2016.

 

Council Decision and Officer Recommendation

C1512/354              Moved Councillor G Bleechmore, seconded Councillor P Carter

 

That the Council:

 

1.    Enter into a lease, subject to the Minister for Lands approval, with Namaya Fox and Nalda Hoskins for the occupation of Studio 2, on a portion of Reserve 35361, being Lot 453, Deposited Plan 194423, Volume LR3115 Folio 243, 4 – 6 Queen Street, Busselton as shown hatched on Attachment A, subject to the terms and conditions of the lease  including the following:

 

a)     a term of 9 months commencing 1 January 2016;

 

b)     weekly rent to be $100 inclusive of GST and outgoings;

 

c)      the tenant to be responsible for telephone and internet consumption charges applied to the leased premises;

 

d)     the retail sale of items by the tenant to be prohibited from the Studio and the requirement for any sales to be transacted through the ArtGeo Courthouse; and

 

e)     other terms and conditions appropriate to the use of the Studio.

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

 


 

13.5       SETTLEMENT ART PROJECT STEERING COMMITTEE - APPOINTMENT OF COMMUNITY MEMBERS

 

SUBJECT INDEX:

Busselton Settlement Art Project Steering Committee

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:

Cultural Development Officer - Jacquie Happ

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Community and Commercial Services - Naomi Searle

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Nil

  

PRÉCIS

 

In accordance with the formal re-formation of the Busselton Settlement Art Project Committee and appointment of Councillor members (Cr Bennett, with Cr Bleechmore as a deputy) at the Special Council Meeting on 19 October 2015 (i.e. immediately following the recent local government elections) this report recommends the appointment of those community members that have expressed an interest in their continued involvement on the Committee: that will allow Committee meetings/work to continue, allow the Committee to appoint their Presiding Member, and allow the process associated with filling of vacancies to commence.

 

BACKGROUND

 

The Busselton Settlement Art Project is a public art initiative commemorating the successful establishment of Busselton as one of the first settlements outside Perth. The project involves the commissioning of six (6) life-sized bronze sculptures (one per year) at a total cost of approximately $770,000 (inc GST) with fundraising by a community fundraising group.

 

A steering group had been working since September 2010 to advance the Busselton Settlement Art Project. The initiative entails commissioning a series of six life-sized bronze sculptures by WA sculptor Greg James commemorating the successful establishment of Busselton as one of the first settlements outside Perth). The project was conceived during the 175th anniversary celebrations held in Busselton and will be funded by the City of Busselton in partnership with public donations via a tax deductible public appeal hosted by the National Trust of Western Australia.

 

In June 2013, the group supporting the development of the concept was disbanded to create a formal committee of Council.  At this time Council resolved (C1306/139) to establish the “Busselton Settlement Art Project Steering Committee” (BSAPSC) in order to provide a vehicle by which the commissioning of the sculptures could be overseen while enabling a fundraising (sub) committee to also work towards raising the necessary funds.

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

Under Section 5.8 of the Local Government Act 1995 (the Act), a local government, by absolute majority, may establish Committees of three or more persons to assist the Council, and to exercise the powers and discharge the duties of the local government that can be delegated to committees. 

Authority can be delegated to formally constituted Committees of Council in accordance with Sections 5.16 and 5.17 of the Act.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

Social & Ageing Plan (2012-2020)

BSAPSC Terms of Reference

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

The commissioning of the six sculptures has been undertaken on an annual basis over the past few years.  The 2015/16 adopted budget has $100,000 allocated for the third sculpture, John Garrett Bussell, which was commissioned in September 2015.

 

Long-term Financial Plan Implications

The Settlement Art Project is incorporated into the City’s Long-term Financial Plan, and is funded on the basis of 50% through the municipal budget and 50% through fundraising and donations.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

The Strategic Community Objective of “a City of shared, vibrant and well planned places that provide

for diverse activity and strengthen social connection” is supported by this proposal to enhance

public areas with significant works of art celebrating the history of Busselton. The Committee assists with the achievement of this objective.

 

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

An assessment of the potential risks of implementing the Officer recommendation was undertaken, and as a result, no risks were rated as ‘medium’ or above were identified.

 

CONSULTATION

 

Expressions of interest for continuing involvement and reappointment to the Busselton Settlement Art Project Steering Committee as a member have been received from the following community members:

 

Mr David Reid

Mrs Anne Faithfull

Mrs Ramona Johnson

Mrs Delys Forrest

Mrs Margaret Dawson

Mr Tom Tuffin

 

The membership of the Committee shall comprise six community members as appointed by the Council; one officer of the City and representative of the Council.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

The reappointment of previous Committee members that have expressed an interest in the Busselton Settlement Art Project Steering Committee will ensure the continuity of the current fundraising activities and the project being undertaken.

 

CONCLUSION

 

In order to continue the valuable contribution to the City made by the Busselton Settlement Art Project Steering Committee, it is considered that community members with an interest in a continuing involvement be reappointed to allow the work of the Committee to continue.


 

OPTIONS

 

The Council may choose to review nominations for reappointment on the Committee and advertise some or all the community positions on the Committee.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

Immediately upon the making the of a Council resolution consistent with the officer recommendation.

 

Officer Recommendation

 

That the Council endorses the appointment of the following persons as members on the Busselton Settlement Art Project Steering Committee:

 

                Mr David Reid

 

                Mrs Anne Faithfull

 

                Mrs Ramona Johnson

 

                Mrs Delys Forrest

 

                Mrs Margaret Dawson

 

                Mr Tom Tuffin

  

Note:                 Mr Tom Tuffin was a late withdrawal and therefore was not included in the below decision.

 

Council Decision

C1512/355              Moved Councillor G Bleechmore, seconded Councillor P Carter

 

That the Council endorses the appointment of the following persons as members on the Busselton Settlement Art Project Steering Committee:

 

                Mr David Reid

 

                Mrs Anne Faithfull

 

                Mrs Ramona Johnson

 

                Mrs Delys Forrest

 

                Mrs Margaret Dawson

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc


Council                                                                                      51                                                             9 December 2015

14.             Finance and Corporate Services Report

14.1        PROPOSED LEASE WITH BUSSELTON WOODTURNERS

SUBJECT INDEX:

Leases

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Corporate Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Property Management Services

REPORTING OFFICER:

Property Management Officer - Julie Oates

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Finance and Corporate Services - Matthew Smith

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Lease Map  

  

PRÉCIS

 

The Busselton Branch of the Woodturners Association of Western Australian (Inc) (“BWA”) currently lease a workshop at the rear of the gallery at Artgeo, Lot 468 Queen Street Busselton (“the Premises”).  The BWA wish to erect a shed on the land adjacent to the Premises for the purpose of increasing their storage capacity. 

 

The purpose of this report is to make a recommendation to Council on the proposed tenure of the area required.

 

BACKGROUND

 

The BWA was formed in 1986 and is part of the larger West Australian Woodturners Association. The group has operated in various locations; the Busselton Senior High School, a studio workroom in the Old Courthouse at Artgeo and more recently from a workshop at the rear of the art gallery at Artgeo.

 

In August 2009, the BWA were granted a lease of the workshop at the rear of the Artgeo gallery for a term of 5 years with a further 5 year option.  The Premises are located on a portion of Lot 468, 7 Queen Street, Busselton which is freehold land owned by the City.

 

The current workshop is approximately 50m2 with a small adjoining storeroom.  The BWA have informed City officers that these areas are not sufficient for their storage needs.  They have therefore requested consent to construct a removable storage shed on land next to the workshop, being Lot 43, 9 Queen Street, Busselton.  The area of land required for the shed is approximately 16m2. It is proposed that the BWA be given the right to access land of approximately  1m in width around the perimeter of the shed for the purpose of maintenance, making the total area proposed approximately 20m2.

 

The area and location of the Premises is shown hatched on the plan attached and marked Attachment 1. The approximate extent of the additional area the BWA wish to lease is shown stippled on the same plan. The BWA have applied for and been issued with a Development Approval for the construction of the shed.  A Building Permit will also need to be obtained before construction can commence. 

 

In 2010, the City acquired the freehold of Lots 43 & 44 Queen Street, formerly the old police station site, from the State.  The City has been seeking expressions of interest for commercial and mixed use development of this site since its acquisition.  Should development on this land be approved it is likely that it will be necessary for any structures placed on it to be removed.  The BWA are aware of this and that use of the area into the future cannot be guaranteed.

 

As outlined further in the officer comment section of this report it is proposed that the BWA be provided with a periodic short term lease and that the lease be conditioned to require removal of the shed and reinstatement of the land by the termination date. 

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

When disposing of property whether by sale, lease or other means, a Local Government is bound by the requirement of section 3.58 of the Local Government Act.  However 3.58 (5) (d) provides exemptions 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 member of which are not enlisted 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 BWA is such that this exemption applies.

 

Lot 43, 9 Queen Street, Plan 31643, Volume 2746, Folio 534 is freehold land owned by the City.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

None.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

The rent charged to Community and Sporting groups for City land and/or buildings is currently $205 per annum (inclusive of GST).

 

As this will be a periodic lease it is suggested that the rent for the additional land be the same annual amount but payable quarterly.  If Council adopt the officer recommendation, BWA would be responsible for management and maintenance of the shed together with the cost of removing it at termination of the lease. 

 

Long-term Financial Plan Implications

 

None.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

The request for the provision of land adjacent to the existing BWA shed is consistent with the following City of Busselton Community Objectives:

 

Key Goal Area 2: Well planned, vibrant and active places:

 

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

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

 

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

An assessment of the potential implications has been undertaken using the City’s risk assessment framework.   The only potential risk identified is a financial one that would arise should the BWA be unable to demolish the shed and restore the land.  The City may then have to bear the cost of removal initially and claim reimbursement from the BWA.  Should the BWA disband or cease to function, the cost may be unrecoverable.  There is nothing to suggest however that the BWA would not be able to meet their obligations in this respect so the risk is considered low.

 

CONSULTATION

 

City staff met with representatives of the BWA to discuss the City’s long term intention for the land concerned and the fact that any construction is to be of a temporary nature only with tenure to be on a periodic short term lease basis. 

 

As part of the consultation process, staff recommended that the shed be colorbond steel colour Heritage Red to match the existing workshop doors.

OFFICER COMMENT

 

The BWA feel that their current premises no longer meet their needs; specifically they require more storage space.  They would prefer however to remain on site and expand onto adjoining land, Lot 43, noting that their current lease does not expire until 2019.  The proposed placement of a removable storage shed allows them to do this while retaining their capital investment when the time comes to relocate the shed to alternative premises.

 

The current strategy for the cultural precinct is to generate a wider variety of activities and the City has for some time been seeking expressions of interest for further development of Lot 43.  For this reason the City’s preferred tenure by the BWA is a periodic short term lease whereby either party can give 90 days’ notice to terminate. 

 

The lease would also be conditioned to require removal of the shed and reinstatement of the land by the termination date.  The temporary nature of the proposed shed means that this can be accommodated with the shed to be placed on a paving slab floor on a sand base able to be removed when the lease is brought to an end.  

 

The issue of a short term periodic lease would not prevent the City from continuing to seek expressions of interest for Lots 43 and 44. The process of redevelopment is likely to take some time and whilst a proposal could be forthcoming at any stage, BWA are aware of this and accept that they may receive 90 days’ notice of termination requiring them to remove the shed at any time.

 

The area proposed to accommodate the storage shed is not so large that it would be visually off putting or distracting to any future development of the space.  Additionally anyone expressing an interest in developing the adjoining land would be made aware of the temporary nature of the agreement.  

 

As this is an interim solution to their storage needs, City officers will recommend to BWA that they investigate other possible sites that are more suitable for future expansion should they need it.  City staff can assist with this if required.

 

CONCLUSION

 

Whilst officers are supportive of BWA and their needs they are also mindful of the adopted Council strategy to activate the cultural precinct and develop the vacant blocks next to the BWA workshop.  The proposed short term lease therefore enables BWA to temporarily make use of the vacant land but without hindering the potential for development should a viable proposal be received in the future. The BWA understand and accept the temporary nature of the tenure they are being offered.

 

OPTIONS

 

1.            Council can resolve not to enter into a lease with the BWA. 

             2.            Council can resolve to enter into a different lease term with the BWA. 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

It is anticipated that the lease would be executed by all parties no later than 30 January 2016.

 

 

Council Decision and Officer Recommendation

C1512/356              Moved Councillor G Bleechmore, seconded Councillor P Carter

 

That the Council:

 

Enter into a lease with The Woodturners Association of Western Australia (Inc) for the occupation of a portion of Lot 43, Plan 31643, Volume 2746, Folio 534, 9 Queen Street, Busselton, as indicated in Attachment 1 on the following terms;

 

                a)            The lease to be a periodic lease requiring 90 days’ notice of termination by both                                                 parties commencing on 1 December 2015;

 

                b)            The lessee will be required to remove all improvements and associated                                                  infrastructure from the premises on termination and all costs associated with this                              will be the responsibility of the lessee.

 

                c)            The annual rent will be $205.00 inclusive of GST, payable quarterly with annual CPI                           rent reviews

 

                d)            All costs associated with the development of the lease to be met by the Lessee

 

                e)            The authorised use will be the placement of a removable shed for storage only and                           not an extension of the workshop; and

 

                f)             Other terms of  the lease to be consistent with the City’s standard community and                            sporting groups lease.

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

  


Council                                                                                      55                                                             9 December 2015

15.2        EXPRESSIONS OF INTEREST FOR A LOCAL GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE ON THE BOARD OF THE SOUTH WEST DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION

SUBJECT INDEX:

Committees and Representation

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Governance Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Governance Support

REPORTING OFFICER:

Manager, Governance Services - Lynley Rich

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Chief Executive Officer - Mike Archer

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Letter Advising of South West Development Commission Board Vacancy  

  

PRÉCIS

 

The South West Development Commission (SWDC) has advised of a current vacancy on its Board of Management as a result of the completion of the term of Busselton’s previous Mayor, Ian Stubbs.  This item is presented to seek expressions of interest from Councillors who may wish to nominate for this vacancy, for endorsement by Council and submission to the Minister for Regional Development for consideration.

 

BACKGROUND

 

A 10 member SWDC Board meets monthly to make decisions about a broad range of economic development projects and initiatives for the South West.  The SWDC’s role is to coordinate and promote economic development in the region, including maximising job creation, broadening local economies, identifying the need for infrastructure services, providing information and advice to business and ensuring access to government services.

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

Not applicable to the Council endorsement of a nominee for this position. 

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

NA.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

NA.

 

Long-term Financial Plan Implications

 

NA.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

The South West Regional Blue Print, which guides the activities of the SWDC, is relevant to all objectives in the City’s Strategic Community Plan.

 

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

Not required.

CONSULTATION

 

The SWDC has sought nominees from Local Governments throughout the South West.  Nominations are to be forwarded to the Minister for Regional Development, Hon Terry Redman MLA, for consideration.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

People nominated as prospective members should possess interest and knowledge relevant to regional communities.  Relevant fields of involvement could include business and industry; employment, education and training; tourism and recreation.  Nominations from Mayors or Shire Presidents are particularly encouraged, however, this does not preclude local governments from nominating any other elected members.

 

Applicants will be assessed on their ability to make a significant contribution to a Board of Management together with a demonstrated involvement in either the economic or social development of the region.  The term of appointment will be determined by the Minister and can be up to a maximum term of three years.  It is also important to note that Board members are required to represent the interests of the South West and not a particular locality.  A merit-based selection process will be utilised.

 

Strong relationships between the SWDC and the City, which can be enhanced by a City member being on the Board of Management, can contribute to good outcomes and partnerships to deliver strategic priorities in the City of Busselton.

 

CONCLUSION

 

Expressions of interest are sought from Councillors for endorsement by the Council to submit a nomination to the Minister for Regional Development for consideration.

 

OPTIONS

 

The Council is not obliged to nominate a Councillor if no Councillor is interested in the position.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

Any nomination will need to be submitted by 18 December, 2015.

 

Note:                 Cr Grant Henley nominated to be the Local Government representative on the South West Development Commission’s Board of Management.

 

Council Decision and Officer Recommendation

C1512/357              Moved Councillor G Bleechmore, seconded Councillor P Carter

 

That the Council endorses the nomination of ­­­­­­­­­Councillor Grant Henley for consideration of the Minister for Regional Development, Hon Terry Redman MLA, for appointment as a Local Government representative on the South West Development Commission’s Board of Management.

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

 


 

15.3        COUNCILLORS' INFORMATION BULLETIN

SUBJECT INDEX:

Councillors' Information

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Executive Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Executive Services

REPORTING OFFICER:

Reporting Officers - Various .

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Chief Executive Officer - Mike Archer

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Planning Applications Received 1st - 15th November 2015

Attachment b    Planning Applications Determined 1st - 15th November 2015

Attachment c    State Administrative Tribunal Appeals as at 23 November 2015

Attachment d   Cape to Cape Catchments Group - Annual Report 2015

Attachment e    Busselton Water Growth Strategy

Attachment f    Letter of Appreciation - Seniors Variety Day

Attachment g   DFES – 2015/16 Local Government Grants Scheme Capital – Additional Approvals

Attachment h   Hon Barry House MLC – Letter of Congratulations

Attachment i     Busselton RSL – Letter of Appreciation

Attachment j     Vasse Primary School – Letter of Appreciation  

  

 

PRÉCIS

 

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

 

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

 

 

INFORMATION BULLETIN

15.3.1    Planning & Development Services Statistics

 

Planning Applications

 

Attachment A is a report detailing all Planning Applications received by the City between 1 and 15 November, 2015.  Twenty nine formal applications were received during this period.

 

Attachment B is a report detailing all Planning Applications determined by the City between 1 and 15 November, 2015.  A total of eighteen applications (including subdivision referrals) were determined by the City during this period with all approved / supported. 

15.3.2    State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) Appeals

 

Attachment C is a list showing the current status of State Administrative Tribunal Appeals involving the City of Busselton as at 23 November 2015.

15.3.3    Cape to Cape Catchments Group – Annual Report 2015

 

The 2015 Annual Report has been received from the Cape to Cape Catchments Group and is available to view in attachment D.

15.3.4    Busselton Water Growth Strategy

 

Correspondence from the Minister for Water; Sport and Recreation; Forestry has been received regarding the Busselton Water Growth Strategy and is available to view in Attachment E.

15.3.5    Letter of Appreciation regarding Seniors Variety Day

 

Correspondence has been received regarding the Seniors Variety Day in appreciation of sponsorship.

15.3.6    Department of Fire & Emergency Services – 2015/16 Local Government Grants Scheme Capital – Additional Approvals

 

Correspondence has been received from the Department of Fire & Emergency Services regarding the 2015/16 Local Government Grants Scheme Capital.

15.3.7    Hon Barry House MLC – Letter of Congratulations

 

Correspondence has been received from the Hon Barry House congratulating the City on its achievement in the 2015 WA Tourism Awards.

15.3.8    Busselton RSL Sub Branch – Letter of Appreciation

 

Correspondence has been received from the Busselton RSL Sub Branch in appreciation of the Poppy Day Project.

15.3.9    Vasse Primary School – Letter of Appreciation

                                                     

Correspondence has been received from Vasse Primary School in appreciation of sponsorship.

 

Council Decision and Officer Recommendation

C1512/358              Moved Councillor G Bleechmore, seconded Councillor P Carter

 

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

·    15.3.1              Planning & Development Services Statistics

·    15.3.2              State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) Appeals

·    15.3.3              Cape to Cape Catchments Group – Annual Report 2015

·    15.3.4              Busselton Water Growth Strategy

·    15.3.5              Letter of Appreciation regarding Seniors Variety Day

·    15.3.6              Department of Fire & Emergency Services – 2015/16 Local Government                           Grants Scheme Capital – Additional Approvals

·    15.3.7              Hon Barry House MLC – Letter of Congratulations

·    15.3.8              Busselton RSL Sub Branch – Letter of Appreciation

·    15.3.9              Vasse Primary School – Letter of Appreciation

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

 


Council                                                                                      59                                                             9 December 2015

ITEMS CONSIDERED BY SEPARATE RESOLUTION

 

At this juncture, in accordance with Clause 5.6 (3)(a) & (b) of the Standing Orders, those items

requiring and Absolute Majority or in which Councillors had declared Financial, Proximity or

Impartiality Interests were considered.

 

13.4        PROPOSED NEW LEASE FOR A PORTION OF RESERVE 38558 (EQUINOX CAFE AND RESTAURANT AT BUSSELTON FORESHORE)

SUBJECT INDEX:

Busselton Foreshore Redevelopment

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Commercial Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Economic 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:

Attachment a   Letter from the Department of Lands Approving New Head Lease

Attachment b    Proposed Areas to be Leased and Licensed to Ravensthorpe Nominees Pty Ltd  

  

PRÉCIS

 

This report recommends Council delegates authority to the CEO to extinguish the existing lease of a portion of Reserve 38558 (Busselton foreshore) between the City of Busselton and Ravensthorpe Nominees Pty Ltd (proprietors of the Equinox Café) and to enter into a new head lease between the City of Busselton and the Minister for Lands, and a new sub-lease and license between the City of Busselton and Ravensthorpe Nominees Pty Ltd.

 

BACKGROUND

 

The Equinox Café and Restaurant is located on a portion of Lot 3001 on Deposited Plan 43542 (Reserve 38558), 2 Queen Street, Busselton, being Crown land vested to the City of Busselton under management order (H665372) with the power to lease for up to 21 years.  Ravensthorpe Nominees Pty Ltd (Lessee) has a current lease of all the premises presently known as Equinox Café and Restaurant (approximately 568m2 in extent) from the City, expiring 15 November 2022.

 

The Lessee approached the City with a proposal for renovations and extensions to the existing premises and extension of the term of the existing lease. On 27 May 2015, Council resolved (C1505/127) to give planning approval (DA15/0119) for proposed alterations and additions to the existing building, which are expected to be completed in late December 2015 and will extend the buildings beyond the existing lease area.

 

To facilitate the proposed building improvements over an area of land outside the existing lease, on 12 August 2015 Council resolved (C1508/228) to:

 

·    Delegate authority to the CEO to enter into an agreement with the Lessee, allowing building works to commence on a portion of Lot 3001 (Reserve 38558) in accordance with Development Approval DA15/0119; and

 

·    Write to the Minister for Lands reaffirming the City’s intent to extinguish the existing lease and request to create within Lot 3001 Queen Street Busselton (Reserve 38558) and a new lot (reserve) of approximately 1,362 m2 for the purpose of granting the Lessee a new sub‐lease of approximately 1,155 m2, with the balance of the new lot to be used for construction of public ablution facilities.

 

In accordance with abovementioned Council resolution:

·    The City and the Lessee entered into a Variation of Lease which extended the lease area to allow the Lessee to undertake the proposed alterations and renovations to the premises without any delay;

 

·    Department of Lands confirmed that they are in process of creating a new lot (which will be a new reserve with a separate title) to be leased to the City under a new ‘head lease’ for a period of 49 years, with the power to sublease to the Lessee; and

 

·     The City obtained ‘in principle’ approval from Department of Lands in granting a new sublease to the Lessee of the extended lease area for a period of 49 years (25 years with an option for a further 24 years).

 

The Department of Lands advised Officers it will shortly commence surveying the new lease area.  Once the new reserve area has been created, the City will be in a position to formalize a new head lease with the Minister for Lands and then be in a position to enter into a new sublease with the Lessee. This report proposes that Council resolve to enter into a ‘head lease’ with the State and a sublease with the Lessee in respect of the newly created lease area, which will replace the existing lease between the City and the Lessee.

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

The proposed new sublease between the City and the Lessee will constitute a ‘disposal’ of local government property as contemplated under Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995 (LG Act). In terms of section 3.58 of the LG Act Council must give local public notice of its intention to dispose of local government property and consider any submissions which are received within the specified period, prior to entering into a new sublease.  Notice of the proposed disposition was duly given in accordance with sec 3.58 of the LG Act, the detail and outcome of which is discussed in the CONSULTATION section of this report.

 

Under section 3.58 of the LG Act abovementioned public notice must include the market value of the proposed disposition based either on a valuation carried out not more than 6 months before the proposed disposition or on a valuation, if carried out more than 6 months before the proposed disposition, which has been confirmed by Council to be a true indication of the relevant value. The valuation obtained by the City of the rent market value of the new premises ($88,374 per annum exclusive of GST and outgoings) is dated 7 April 2015 and therefore older than 6 months. However based on current market circumstances (as in particular reflected by current conservative inflation figures) it is considered that the 7 April 2015 valuation is currently still a true a true indication of the value of the new sublease. Therefore it is recommended that Council declare this amount to be a true indication of the current value of the proposed disposition.

 

Under section 3.59 of the LG Act, read with Regulation 8A.(1) of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996, a local government, before it enters into a ‘major land transaction’, is to prepare a business plan. A ‘major land transaction’ includes disposal of local government property and is defined as a land transaction of which the total value of the consideration under the transaction and anything done by the local government for achieving the purpose of that transaction, is more (or worth more) than 10% of the operating expenditure incurred by the local government from its municipal fund in the last completed financial year.  The City’s budgeted total operating expenditure for 2014/15 financial year was $56.6 million which means the threshold for purposes of abovementioned Regulation 8A(1), is $5.6 million. The total value of the proposed new sublease will be less the abovementioned threshold of $5.6 million and therefore the proposed transaction will fall outside the application of section 3.59.

 

In terms of section 18 of the Land Administration Act 1997 (LA Act) a person must not assign, sell, transfer or otherwise deal with interests in Crown land or create or grant an interest in Crown land (which includes lease or sublease) without approval from the Minister for Lands. The premises where the Equinox is located, is Crown land as contemplated under section 18 of the LA Act. Therefore, once the new title for the extended lease area has been created, Ministerial approval for the proposed sublease between the City and the Lessee has to be obtained.

 

Depending on the area/extent of the new lease area, the Commercial Tenancy (Retail Shops) Agreements Act 1985 (CTA Act) may apply to the new sublease. Under the CTA Act a lease is a “retail shop lease” if the lease area:

 

•             will be used wholly or predominately for the carrying on of a retail business; and 

•             has a lettable area of 1,000 square meters or less.

 

Should the CTA Act apply to the new sublease, the following legislative requirements, among other things, will have to be considered (note this is not an exhaustive list):

 

·    The City must provide a disclosure statement to the Lessee at least 7 days before the new sublease is entered into;

·    A tenant guide must be incorporated into the new sublease; and

·    The CTA Act regulates the manner in which certain items may be dealt with, potentially limiting the parties’ ability to negotiate these items. These include rent reviews, cost recovery, early termination rights and dispute resolution.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

Busselton Foreshore Master Plan (BFMP)

 

The BFMP is a strategic document that provides detailed guidance for the planning and development of the Busselton Foreshore extending between King Street and Ford Road.  The proposal for expanded food and beverage hospitality services at the western end of the core precinct is consistent with the land uses identified in the BFMP.  Officers have integrated the Equinox café expansion onto the revised master plan being considered by Council in late 2015.  Some minor modifications to the location of barbeques and the proposed future water playground have been accommodated.

 

Development Guide Plan (DGP)

 

The DGP incorporates statutory controls relating to land use, building heights and floor areas that reflect the BFMP. The DGP is not proposed to incorporate controls relating to more detailed design elements, relying on the BFMP and subsequent documents providing guidance on these matters. Consideration of matters pertaining to the DGP were considered by Council in its decision to issue planning scheme consent on 27 May 2015.

 

City of Busselton Community Engagement and Consultation Policy

 

To achieve the aims of its Strategic Community Plan (2013) Council has placed high priority on the need to engage with the community and encourage community participation in decisionmaking processes.

 

Activities undertaken in accordance with the Engagement and Consultation Policy are outlined in the section ‘Consultation’ below.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

The rent payable by the Lessee in respect of the original lease area was $63,230.54 plus GST. The City obtained an independent market valuation for the proposed new lease area of 1,155 m2 on 7 April 2015, which valued the market rent value of the new premises at $88,374 per annum (exclusive of GST and outgoings). The valuation report also recommended the City of Busselton and Department of Lands grant a 25 year lease plus 24 year option to the Lessee, given the cost of the proposed additions/alterations. This will make the substantial private investment economically viable on leasehold land, by enabling finance to be obtained and allowing the Lessee to fully depreciate the capital expenditure of the proposed extensions and alterations.

 

Long-term Financial Plan Implications

 

The revenue obtained from proposed leasing of additional Crown land will be directed into the Jetty Maintenance Reserve. The revenue streams identified above will be incorporated into the next LTFP review.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

Key Goal Area 2:

Wellplanned vibrant and active places: An attractive city offering great places and facilities promoting an enjoyable and enriched lifestyle.

2.1       A City where the community has access to quality cultural, recreation, 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

Key Goal Area 3:

Robust local economy: A strong local economy that sustains existing and attracts 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

 

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the Officer Recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk assessment framework. Risks are only identified in Council reports where the residual risk, once controls are identified, is ‘medium’ or greater. No such risks have been identified.  The recommended Lease and License documentation will contain conditions that will mitigate risks to the City.

 

CONSULTATION

 

In accordance with section 3.58 of the LG Act local public notice of the proposed disposition was given on 26 June 2015 by publishing the details in a local newspaper, inviting public submissions by 10 July 2015. Details that were advertised were:

 

Description of Property

×     Property ‐ Portion (approximately 1,155sqm) of Lot 3001 on Deposited Plan 43542 (Reserve 38558), 2 Queen Street, Busselton, Western Australia 6280.

×     Permitted Use ‐ Restaurant/Café – Licensed and BYO.

Details of Disposition

               

×     Names of Parties: Lessor – City of Busselton. Lessee – Ravensthorpe Nominees Pty Ltd

×     Consideration: The rent to be paid by the Lessee is $88,774* per annum (exclusive of GST) with an annual increase of an amount equal to the consumer price index (but not exceeding 5%) and a market rent review every five years. The Lessee will also be responsible for payment of outgoings.

×     Lease Term:  49 years (an initial period of 25 years with an option to renew for another 24 years)

×     Market Rent Value as determined by a valuation dated 20 April 2015:  $88,774* per annum (exclusive of GST and outgoings)

 

*Note:

 

There was a typographical error in advertising the proposed disposition and in the Council agenda report of 12 August 2015, being the ‘Consideration’ and ‘Market Rent Value’ were incorrectly notated as $88,774 per annum instead of $88,374 per annum (as per the valuation report dated 20 April 2015 and correctly stated in the Officer Recommendation below). The City has consulted with the Regional Manager (South West) of the Department of Lands in the preparation of this report and the approval of the Minister for Lands has been given as shown in Attachment A.

 

No submissions from the public were received.

 

The City has consulted with the Regional Manager (South West) of the Department of Lands throughout this process and obtained ‘in principle’ approval for the proposed new sublease as indicated in Attachment A.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

Since Council resolved to enter an agreement of variation of lease with the Lessee in August 2015, Officers have worked closely with the Lessee to facilitate a timely completion of the proposed extensions and alterations and to ensure the relevant development approval and conditions under the variation of lease are satisfied.  Redevelopment of the premises has progressed well and is expected to be fully completed by mid-December 2015.

 

On 13 November 2015, the Department of Lands wrote to the City and the Lessee advising the following actions will proceed under delegated authority of the Minister for Lands (see Attachment A):

 

­  excise under section 51 of the Land Administration Act 1997 (LAA) land from Reserve 38558 required to accommodate the Equinox café;

­  grant a lease under section 74 of the LAA to the City for a period of 49 years over the land to be excised. With the purpose being "Restaurant, Cafe and Kiosk".

­  proposed sub lease to Ravensthorpe Nominees Pty Ltd for a period of 25 years with an option for a further 24 years.

 

As part of the redevelopment of the Equinox site an external open storage area will be created adjacent to the Equinox buildings and within the boundaries of the new lot. This area (+/- 115 m2) will be available for use by the City and the Lessee for, among other things, screened storage, grease trap and sewerage pumping station and is therefore proposed to be licensed to the Lessee for purposes of non-exclusive possession/use.

Attachment B shows the land areas that are affected by the Officer recommendation and includes the proposed new lease area for the expanded café (+/- 1,150 m2); new public toilets (+/- 95 m2) to be constructed by the Lessee and to be maintained by the City of Busselton and the public open storage area (+/- 115 m2) to be licensed to the Lessee.

 

The proposed redevelopment of the Equinox site should revitalize the existing site and operations is considered to be consistent with vision and objectives of the overall Busselton foreshore redevelopment project.

 

CONCLUSION

 

No public submissions in relation to the proposed sublease between the City and the Lessee were received following the public consultation process under section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995. This report is recommending that Council formalize the governance and contractual requirements for implementation of the August 2015 Council resolution which approved redevelopment and extension of the existing Equinox site  and extension of the term of the lease which will result in surrendering of the existing lease between the City and the Lessee (expiring 15 November 2022), creation of a new lot (reserve) on the Busselton Foreshore of which the Minister for Lands will grant the City a head lease for a 49 year term and the City granting the Lessee a new sublease and licence over a portion of this lot for 25 years with an option for a further 24 years.

 

OPTIONS

 

Council may elect to not proceed with the proposed new by sub-lease and/or amend the term and consideration proposed.  Such action is however not recommended as it will be inconsistent with the City and Lessee’s intent and the 12 August 2015 Council resolution (C1508/228).

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

Should Council support the Officer recommendation, the Minister for Lands and the City will enter into a new head lease once a title for the new lot has been created, which will in all likelihood occur in early 2015, following which the City will enter in to a new sublease with the Lessee.


 

Council Decision and Officer Recommendation

C1512/359              Moved Councillor J McCallum, seconded Councillor C Tarbotton

 

That the Council

 

1.    Delegates to the CEO the power to negotiate and authorizes the CEO to enter into a new head lease with the Minister for Lands in relation to the new lot to be excised from Reserve 38558 to accommodate the Equinox café development, on the terms and conditions as outlined in this report;

 

2.    Delegates to the CEO the power to negotiate and authorizes the CEO to enter into a new sub-lease and licence with Ravensthorpe Nominees Pty Ltd in respect of the land referred to in resolution 1, on the terms and conditions as outlined in this report; and

 

3.    Authorises the CEO, upon entering into the sublease mentioned in resolution 2, to surrender the existing lease between the City of Busselton and Ravensthorpe Nominees Pty Ltd of a portion of Lot 3001 on Deposited Plan 43542 (Reserve 38558) expiring 15 November 2022.

 

4.     In accordance with Section 3.58 (4)(c)(ii) of the Local Government Act 1995, declares the valuation carried out on 7 April 2015 in respect of the land referred to in resolution 1, to be a true indication of the value at the time of the proposed disposition.

CARRIED 9/0

by absolute majority

 


Council                                                                                      67                                                             9 December 2015

15.             Chief Executive Officer's Report

15.1        PROPOSED ADOPTION OF A REVISED BUSSELTON FORESHORE MASTER PLAN

SUBJECT INDEX:

Busselton Foreshore Master Plan

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Governance Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Governance

REPORTING OFFICER:

Strategic Projects Officer - Tracey King

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Chief Executive Officer - Mike Archer

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Due to their size, attachments to this report will be provided separately.

  

PRÉCIS

 

In response to briefing session outcomes, City officers have reviewed the current construction and funding schedule for the Busselton Foreshore (“Foreshore”) redevelopment and identified an alternative strategy for Council’s formal consideration for delivering the redevelopment in a timely and cost effective manner, given current constraints of external funding programs.

 

The strategy proposes to defer the relocation of the Busselton Tennis Club to like-for-like facilities within the Barnard Park Active Sporting Precinct, with a view of constructing Foreshore Parade West around the existing tennis club to enable the Central Core Activities Precinct to be fast tracked for revitalisation earlier than previously identified timeframes.

 

In addition, it is proposed that a modest ablution / change room facility be built between Barnard east and west ovals at Milne Street and a combined clubroom facility, incorporating the Busselton Tennis Club, be built on Carey Street for all user groups of the Barnard Park Active Sporting Precinct.

 

To assist Council in considering the strategy proposed in this report, Attachment  B provides a detailed description of the proposed alterations to the current Busselton Foreshore Master Plan (adopted by Council June 2012, amended July 2015); a revised delivery schedule for as yet unconstructed and unfunded elements; and financial implications of the proposed strategy.

 

Council is requested to adopt a revised Busselton Foreshore Master Plan as per Attachment A and seek public feedback on the adopted plan; and to endorse a proposed funding and delivery strategy, which will inform amendments to the City’s Long Term Financial Plan (LTFP) (adopted February 2015).

 

BACKGROUND

 

The Busselton Foreshore Master Plan (BFMP) was adopted by the Busselton Council on 28 March 2012, after the consideration of public submissions resulting from a 48 day advertising period.  The BFMP built on extensive and comprehensive community consultation undertaken by the Busselton Foreshore Working Group (BFWG) since 2008, in response to the community desire to progress redevelopment of the Foreshore as supporting amenity to a refurbished Busselton Jetty.

 

The BFMP guides development of the Foreshore into the future. It identifies a series of complimentary precincts where visitors and the community alike can enjoy active and passive recreation, interspersed with existing and proposed commercial developments from which lease income can be derived to contribute towards substantial ongoing maintenance costs for both the Busselton Jetty and redeveloped Foreshore area.

Since being adopted in 2012, modifications to the BFMP have been approved by Council. Most significantly, in 2013, Council endorsed modifications in response to issues raised by the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water Population and Communities (DSEWPC) of the potential impact of the proposed Foreshore redevelopment on the habitat of endangered species, Western Ringtail Possum. After public consultation over a period of 28 days, the BFMP was modified to include:

­ Introduction of a wildlife corridor along Marine Terrace between Queen Street and Georgette Street;

­ Removal of the green spine on the south side of the proposed east-west road link;

­ Relocation of the proposed short stay accommodation precinct to the green spine fronting the east west link road;

­ Realignment of the east-west link road (the east-west road link is now known as “Foreshore Parade”).

 

The current BFMP and the subsequently endorsed Development Guide Plan (DGP) have incorporated these modifications. No proposed adjustment outlined in this report has any impact on environmental conditions imposed to date.

 

The total Foreshore redevelopment has been estimated to cost approximately $74 million, which includes the rebuild of the Busselton Jetty as Stage 1 and the Western Foreshore precinct, including Signal Park and the swim jetty, as Stage 2. These components were funded as follows:

 

Stage 1. Funding Components, Busselton Jetty Rebuild

$ 28.1million

State Government - Royalties for Regions

 $24,100,000

 

City of Busselton and community

 $ 3,000,000

 

Busselton Jetty Environment Conservation Association

 $ 1,000,000

 

 

Stage 2. Funding components, Signal Park and Foreshore West 

$8.132 million

State Government - Royalties for Regions

$6,544,000

 

City of Busselton

 $1,588,000

 

 

Total Stage 1 & 2 works completed

$36.232 million

 

Stage 3 is the final stage of the Busselton Foreshore Redevelopment. Works have been carefully planned to be delivered in a series of complimentary precincts in accordance with a logical construction and funding schedule. The City has proactively sought and continues to seek partnerships with government agencies and funding bodies to complete the redevelopment, and to date has been successful in sourcing approximately $8.218 million in external funding for Stage 3 with the City so far contributing approximately $9.276 million.

 

Stage 3. External Funding received to date

$8.218 million

Barnard Park Active Sporting Precinct Regional Playing fields

CLGF

Dept. Sport & Rec

$1,400,000

$ 629,000

Completed

Skate Park - Youth and Community Activities Precinct-

Lotterywest

$2,100,000

Nearing completion

Youth and Community Activities Building

Lotterywest

$2,881,000

Yet to commence

Stage 1. Barnard Park Community Sporting Club Complex- ablutions / kiosk

Dept. Sport & Rec

$ 542,314

Yet to commence.

*Subject to review as an outcome of this report

Railway House

BJECA

$ 665,415

In progress

Stage 3: City of Busselton Contributions to date

 

$9.276 million

Barnard Park Active Sporting Precinct - Brown Street Extension

$ 800,000

Completed

Youth and Community Activities Precinct- Coastal Defences, promenade, landscaping and amenity; Foreshore Parade East construction

$6,000,000

Completed or in progress

Barnard Park Active Sporting Precinct -Playing Fields

$1,100,000

Completed

Railway House

$1,376,425

In progress

 

In addition, the City has made several applications to both State and Federal funding programs for the relocation of the Busselton Tennis Club. As shown on the current BFMP, two of the five sites identified for future development as hotel / short stay tourism accommodation are currently occupied by the Busselton Tennis Club. It is a condition of the Management Order granted to the City for the Foreshore reserve that the tennis club is to remain at its current site until such time as funding allows for relocation and reestablishment of a like-for-like, playable facility.

 

Applications to both Royalties for Regions (RfR) and the Department of Sport and Recreation (DSR) in 2012 were unsuccessful and advice from DSR is that they are not likely to fund this project, as requirement to shift the tennis club is more aligned to unlocking economic development of the hotel / short stay accommodation sites rather than provision of community sporting infrastructure, as there is an existing tennis facility to meet the needs of the community.

 

In 2012, the City also successfully applied for $3.5 million to the Australian Government Regional Development Australia Fund (RDAF) program for the relocation of the tennis club and courts. With a change in Government, this program was withdrawn before a funding agreement could be signed off and the program to date has remained unfunded.

 

Elements of the current BFMP that remain to be commenced are the Central Core Activities Precinct; Hotel Short Stay Accommodation Precinct and Barnard Park Multi-Purpose Club House and Tennis - Croquet Complex. Funding for these remaining elements of the Foreshore has been provisionally allocated in the City’s Long Term Financial Plan (LTFP), identifying funds to be sourced through restricted assets, reserves, City borrowings and unconfirmed external grant funding.  The total funding identified for finalisation of these remaining elements amounts to $24,885,840. A detailed breakdown of the provisional funding allocations is provided at Attachment B.

 

Towards this total, the City has been successful in an application to DSR for $542,314 through the highly competitive Community Sporting and Recreation Facilities Fund (CSRFF) towards Stage 1 of the Barnard Park Community Sporting Club Complex (ablution and change room facilities), proposed under the current BFMP to be located between the two new ovals at Barnard Park.  Stage 1 was originally costed at approximately $1.5 million - being on a 1/3 to 2/3 basis, with the $1 million balance of City funds budgeted from reserves and restricted asset accounts.

 

However, at a recent workshop to discuss resourcing of the City’s Major Projects, it was agreed that representation should be made to DSR to see if the current grant funding could be carried over, pending the success or otherwise of a Stage 2 application for a $500,000 contribution towards the first floor of the building. This would allow for economies of scale in building the $3.1 million complex as a single stage construction.

 

Whilst DSR has indicated that it would be receptive to a variation, it has been made clear no confirmation or commitment can be made on the success or otherwise of an additional $500,000. As the CSRFF program for the entire state of WA has been reduced from $20 million to only $7 million, it is doubtful that the City would receive even a portion, let alone the entire request of $500,000.

 

It is also now known that $408,900 provisionally allocated from RfR towards Stage 2 of the combined club house is not likely to be forthcoming due to the reluctance of the Department of Regional Development (DRD) to fund recreational facilities.  This would leave a shortfall in external funding of close to $1 million, only delivering a ground floor ablution and change room facility for the Barnard Park user groups, or require nearly $3 million as a City contribution for the full 2 storey facility.

 

The current LTFP was endorsed by Council in February 2015, and also shows a provisional allocation upwards of $9.1 million in RfR funding towards Foreshore works. This includes the $408,900 provisionally allocated towards the Barnard Park Multi-Purpose Clubrooms which will not be funded; $4.5 million which is subject of a formal funding application submitted in February 2015 towards the Hotel/Short Stay Tourism Accommodation Precinct; and a further $4.2 million provisional allocation towards the Central Core Activities Precinct.

 

In addition to a widespread tightening up of funding, the South West Development Commission (the State representatives with regards to administering RfR funding for the South West) has indicated that it is highly unlikely that the City would be supported in any future applications to RfR past the current application for $4.5 million. It is acknowledged that with the State funding the majority of costs associated with the upgrade of the Busselton - Margaret River Regional Airport, further applications to the RfR program are less likely to be favourably considered against competing funding applications from other communities, due to the City already having benefitted substantially through this program.

 

RfR allocations were included in the LTFP adopted in February 2015 as at the time, there was no certainty surrounding the airport funding, which was not announced until June 2015. The current application to RfR for $4.5 million, submitted prior to the airport funding announcement, has been supported by DRD due to the City’s willingness to make an underwriting  commitment of up to $3.5 million towards marketing the Airport, and at the Minister’s request, the City changing an application to the Federal National Stronger Regions Fund (NSRF) seeking a $10 million Federal contribution towards the airport in place of an original application for the $4.5 million Foreshore funding.

 

An announcement regarding the City’s application for the $4.5 million is expected sometime in December 2015. If the RfR grant is successful, unless a variation can be agreed to with DRD, the City may be obligated to fund a like-for-like relocation of the Busselton Tennis Club to the Barnard Park Active Sporting Precinct, commencing in the 2016/2017 financial year. For this, the City has provisionally allocated $6 million in its LTFP to be funded through City borrowings, after numerous unsuccessful attempts to source external funding for the tennis club relocation.

 

Due to the provisional allocations in the LTFP from RfR and DSR of approximately $5.1 million now highly unlikely to be funded, there is a great deal of uncertainty around timeframes for when construction of the Central Core Activities Precinct might be commenced. Under the current funding and delivery strategy, construction of this precinct was reliant on $4.2 million through RfR in 2016/17 and unless the current funding strategy is amended, it is likely that this area, being the entry precinct and the activity “hub” of the Foreshore, will remain undeveloped until at least 2020.

 

City officers have identified that an option exists that alleviates the necessity for the relocation of the Busselton Tennis Club in the short to medium term and propose an alternative strategy to deliver the “centrepiece” of the Busselton Foreshore Redevelopment in a timely and cost effective manner. This is presented for Council consideration.

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

The Busselton Foreshore is Crown land administered under the Land Administration Act 1997 (LAA) with a management order vested in the City of Busselton. The LAA is administered by the Minister for Regional Development and Lands in his statutory role as Minister for Lands, with advice provided by the Department of Lands.

The overall Busselton Foreshore area consists of Crown reserves and leases under the LAA.  The reserves are currently under the management of the City of Busselton on behalf of the State of WA. Further control on the use of the reserve is protected by the Management Order conditions which range from specific land management restrictions to the granting to the management body of the power to lease.

 

Land rationalisation of the Busselton Foreshore was approved by Parliament in December 2012, subject to conditions, including rezoning of the site, and an agreement for relocation of the Tennis Club facilities from Reserve 28535 to Reserve 8485 (within the Barnard Park Active Sporting Precinct).  The site was rezoned to ‘Special Purposes’ in 2013, to accommodate the Busselton Foreshore redevelopment.  A DGP to facilitate the land use changes on the site was adopted by the Council and endorsed by Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) in November 2014.

 

Consistent with approval of the land rationalisation, agreement has been reached for the relocation of the tennis club, allowing development of the site and surrounding supporting infrastructure such as new road networks, to proceed as and when funding becomes available.

 

Staff have had interim conversations with the Department of Lands (DoL) regarding implications of the proposed alterations to the BFMP. Advice from DoL has been received that the proposed amendments will not affect the land rationalisation process, as the proposed alterations do not materially alter the intent of the adopted BFMP and are essentially only minor changes to the land use plan.  Initial advice from the Department of Planning has confirmed that given a land use change is proposed, amendment of the DGP will be required for their approval.    This will follow consideration and adoption of the revised BFMP by Council.

 

All project land within the Busselton Foreshore reserve remains Crown reserve with leasehold tenure for commercial and community buildings. As such, the City of Busselton cannot sell any of this prime beachfront land to fund any component of the Foreshore redevelopment or to contribute to the ongoing maintenance and preservation of the Busselton Jetty. Instead, the City is reliant from lease income generated from commercialisation of designated areas, in accordance with the DGP to offset substantial annual maintenance costs.

 

As a condition of the licence agreement between the Department of Transport and the City of Busselton for the management of the Busselton Jetty, the City has established a Jetty Maintenance Reserve. Under the conditions of the licence agreement, the City is obligated to contribute to this reserve:

 

Busselton Jetty Licence Agreement (2009)

6.3

(i) “all income received from existing ground leases for the (Equinox, Nautical Lady and Goose);

(ii) A minimum of $650,000 per annum from tourism revenues associated with jetty related activities”.

 

Whilst there is no statutory requirement for lease income from future commercial developments to be directed towards the Jetty Maintenance Reserve, the City currently contributes approximately $350,000 from municipal funds annually to make up the shortfall in required funds as per the Jetty asset maintenance schedule. It is anticipated this amount will be offset by future lease income derived from commercial activation of the Busselton Foreshore.

 

Further, the Busselton Foreshore Statement of Intent is a commitment from the City of Busselton ensuring funds from lease sites developed on the Foreshore (such as the hotel development, proposed family restaurant /microbrewery and seasonal commercial hire sites) will be allocated for the upkeep and maintenance of the surrounding Foreshore area. 

 

BUSSELTON FORESHORE REDEVELOPMENT: STATEMENT OF INTENT

Adopted by the former Busselton Shire Council on 8 June 2011

Updated City of Busselton, 25 February 2015

 

Viability for the Community

The City of Busselton is committed to facilitating commercial development in the area that is self-sustainable and contributes towards the ongoing operations of the Foreshore whilst ensuring the vision and principles that Council have expressed are met:

·    We will proactively seek Government support for the development;

·    We will seek a partnership with levels of Government to fulfil the Foreshore development;

·    We will seek to develop economically viable lease areas which deliver sustainable revenue;

·    We will ensure all development on the Foreshore is complimentary and sympathetic to existing infrastructure;

·    We will ensure commercial developments benefit the community and business; and,

·    We will ensure an allocation of funds from the leased sites developed on the Foreshore are used to fund the maintenance and upkeep of the Foreshore.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

The Busselton Foreshore Concept Plan (BFCP) was developed as a collaborative effort between the community, the City of Busselton and State Government agencies.  The resultant BFMP was formulated after significant community and stakeholder engagement and consultation. The BFMP intends to guide the development of the Busselton Foreshore in alignment with the visions, objectives and priorities of these community and stakeholder groups.

 

The overarching Statement of Intent relating to the development of the Foreshore concludes:

 

“The Foreshore will to be developed in a manner that respects Busselton’s identity and heritage whilst providing economic, social, environmental and cultural benefits to the City and the South West region”.

 

This statement underpins the principles and objectives of the numerous community, sporting and service organisations and commercial enterprises that are set to benefit from the redevelopment. Further, the Busselton Foreshore Redevelopment project aligns with numerous regional, state and national strategic objectives.

 

The BFMP is a strategic document that provides detailed guidance for the planning and land use of the Site and has been prepared in parallel with Town Planning Scheme (TPS) Amendment No.173. This rezoned the Site to ‘Special Purpose’ (Busselton Foreshore) to facilitate the redevelopment consistent with the BFMP.

 

The DGP has been developed in accordance with the provisions of Clause 25 of the Town Planning Scheme, which includes advertising, consideration of submissions and final approval/determination by the City and the WAPC.

 

In October 2014 the City of Busselton endorsed the DGP over the introduced ‘Special Purpose’ zone which will provide a statutory planning mechanism for the implementation of planning and development requirements based on the principles of the BFCP and BFMP.  Development is to be generally in accordance with the DGP.  This was endorsed by the WAPC in November 2014. 

The City of Busselton LTFP is a ten year plan which details and supports the Council's proposed strategic priorities.  It aligns with the Strategic Community Plan and Corporate Business Plan as part of the City’s integrated planning framework. The strategy proposed for Council consideration regarding the future delivery of the Busselton Foreshore redevelopment would require an amendment to the current LTFP, endorsed by Council February 2015, as described in the Officer’s Comment section of this report.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

The City has provisional allocation in the current LTFP adopted by Council February 2015, of approximately $13.3 million, comprised of $11.0 million in borrowings and $2.3 million municipal funds, over a three year period from 2016/17 through to 2018/19 to fund yet to be commenced works in accordance with the current BFMP. This amount is shown to be leveraged by provisional allocations through external funding which includes RfR, DSR and Tennis Australia.

 

Recent communication with representatives from these organisations indicates that it is unlikely the City will be successful in future applications through their funding programs. This would adversely affect the bottom line of the current LTFP, generating a significant deficit of approximately $5.51 million.

 

The strategy presented in this report proposes that a modification to the BFMP can decrease this deficit to $2 million. Staff have undertaken financial modelling to determine that an extra $2 million in City borrowings over a five year period from 2016/17 to 2020/21, to a total of $13 million, can be readily accommodated in the LTFP without compromising other endorsed commitments, such as the proposed Performing Arts and Convention Centre, and with predicted rate increases remaining at or under 5%. This presents Council with a financially responsible option to deliver remaining Foreshore redevelopment works.

 

A more long term implication for consideration is a potential decrease in lease income yielded from a reduction of the commercial development sites allocated in the current BFMP. A modified BFMP would see total development area allocated for the hotel / short stay tourism accommodation reduced by approximately 2,000m2. Based on current land valuation; with a best case scenario that private developers would take a commercial interest in all available developable land; equates to a reduction from approximately $403,000 p/a lease income to approximately $308,000 p/a. Similarly, the development footprint of the proposed family restaurant / microbrewery is set to be decreased by 261m2, from 2,100m2 (1,700m2 building and 400m2 alfresco) to 1,839m2 to (1,505m2 building plus 334m2 alfresco) reducing ground lease income by approximately $11,000 p/a. Other opportunities derived from this option including a proposed 600m2  lot earmarked for small tourism retail businesses and seasonal “pop ups”, could provide lease income to offset this. 

 

It should be noted that this potential loss of revenue from hotel /short stay accommodation sites of $95,000 per annum only becomes a financial implication for the best case scenario, of all available land being developed. It may be the case that a reduction in the total developable space in this prime location may increase the demand for the sites, realising an economic gain in a shorter time span.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

The City of Busselton Strategic Community Plan 2013 (adopted by Council 27 February 2013, reviewed April 2015) identifies the following community objectives relevant to the Busselton Foreshore Development:

 

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 Busselton Foreshore Redevelopment is a large scale, multi-million dollar project. The financial risks considered in this risk assessment reflect consequences associated with financial risk from $1 million to in excess of $5 million, aligned to a “major” or “catastrophic” weighting, which results in a residual “high” risk even if likelihood is mitigated to unlikely, or possible.

 

This report is presented to Council in order to put in place controls to reduce the likelihood of financial and reputational risk associated in delivering this multi-million dollar strategic project.

 

Risk

Controls

Consequence

Likelihood

Risk Level

Needs of user groups not fully met

Good community consultation, Try and achieve a “middle / conciliatory” position, provide rationale for reasons behind the decision.

Moderate

Likely

High

Political risk of decision

Work with both users and community to explain the change in project parameters.

Major

Possible

High

 

Financial Risk -Opportunity loss of not developing Core Activities Precinct, as an environment of high amenity in support of existing and proposed commercial businesses for the precinct- vital to the ongoing sustainability of the Foreshore and jetty area.

Present Council with a financially responsible option to bring forward funding for the revitalisation of the Core Activities Precinct, in keeping with the intent of the adopted BFMP.

Major

Possible

High

 

Financial Risk -SWDC and DRD not supporting a variation to Financial Assistance Agreement (FAA) releasing City from obligation to relocate tennis club in 2016/17 timeframe. (Should application for $4.5m to RfR be successful)

 

Consultation and briefing with SWDC, DRD and local MP to elicit support for the proposed alternative strategy.

Major

Possible

High

 

 

CONSULTATION

 

City representatives including the Mayor, Deputy Mayor and CEO have recently briefed members of the past Busselton Foreshore Reference Group (BFRG), Busselton Tennis Club, Busselton Croquet Club and Barnard Park user groups on the proposed strategy.

 

Members of the past BFRG were supportive in principal of the proposed alteration to the BFMP on the basis that more car parking is incorporated into the Foreshore precinct; there is more certainty of delivery of the Central Core Activities Precinct in a timely manner without reliance on external funding sources; better provision of public toilet amenity is planned for, in particular in the Barnard Park Active Sporting Precinct; and the proposal to develop one multi-purpose combined clubhouse at Barnard Park is a more sustainable option in the longer term and will reduce the impost on ratepayers through a reduction in City borrowings, compared to  building two stand-alone $3 million community buildings.

 

Busselton Croquet Club remains concerned about anticipated timeframes for relocation for croquet to the proposed combined tennis / croquet facility, citing current facilities are in need of an upgrade and expansion to meet current and projected membership.

 

Busselton Tennis Club representatives were receptive to the overall proposal. Club delegates understood that a proposal to realign Foreshore Parade West and defer construction of the new facility at Barnard Park in favour of bringing forward funding for the Central Core Activities Precinct would mean the Club could remain in situ for a greater length of time. The Tennis Club cites a major concern as being the uncertainty of tenure on the current site, as there are substantial maintenance issues to consider for the court infrastructure and concerns about overcapitalising in the current location. Representatives were supportive in principle of the establishment of one combined club house at the Carey Street location, having themselves explored a similar location for the proposed tennis / croquet clubhouse. Delegates also identified advantages of other sporting groups utilising the combined facility, which would be subject to an agreed management structure to be developed as an outcome of this proposal. An outcome of the meeting was for there to be continued discussions in the short term regarding the City reclaiming a small truncation of the north west corner of the existing tennis complex to improve pedestrian movement in the area. 

 

Discussions with Tennis Australia have been ongoing. Most recent information is that Busselton is still considered by Tennis Australia as a regional priority within their National Infrastructure Plan, but their focus in the past year has been to develop new facilities in the Northern Territory and Blacktown in NSW. Tennis Australia is very keen to see a regional tennis facility within the Barnard Park Active Sporting Precinct with increased capacity to host state and national events in the highly desirable location; but with Busselton having an existing club which is meeting the needs of the community, this has not been a top priority for Tennis Australia to advocate at a Federal government level, nor likely to attract any significant funding towards the project. Representatives from Tennis Australia have been briefed at a high level on the strategy proposed in this report do not see any issues arising by the tennis relocation being put back up to five years, except at a local level; if the current club facility deteriorated to an extent where events / competition ceased to be viable.

 

Members of the Barnard Park user groups expressed concerns about the proposed location of a combined clubhouse impacting on spectators, without capacity for an outlook over both playing fields, which would be preferred for when clubs were hosting major tournaments; and the undesirable eastern outlook over the premier playing field. Other concerns raised were the capacity or not of one combined club house to cater to all user groups of the sporting precinct, given the projected growth in all sports; and a reduced ability of  individual clubs to fundraise through sales of food and beverage, should there be one “anchor tenant” of the facility. Representatives were encouraged to have their clubs make a submission as part of the community consultation and for the group to reconvene after a Council decision has been made on the matter, for input into design elements for a combined club and a facility management model that might address these concerns.

 

The CEO and Mayor have met with representatives from DSR regarding a carryover of the current funding for Stage 1 of the multi-purpose clubrooms. DSR is receptive to a variation for the funding being submitted to offset development of a $600,000 ablution and kiosk facility proposed to be located on Milne Street, but due to time constraints of the project being required to commence in 2015/16, DSR is unlikely to continue to carry over funding for development of the $3 million combined club facility to be located on Carey Street. Therefore, it is important that a timely decision is made regarding the strategic direction this project takes.

 

Discussions have taken place with representatives from SWDC, Department of Lands, Member for Vasse Libby Mettam MLA, and Member for the South West Barry House MLC about the proposed change in timeframes for relocation of the tennis club to instead bring forward revitalisation of the Central Core Activities Precinct. All have been supportive in principle for the proposal, however confirm that if the City is successful in its application to RfR for $4.5 million funding, a formal request for variation may need to be submitted to DRD supported by SWDC.

 

Advice from DoL has been received that the proposed amendments will not affect the land rationalisation process, as the proposed alteration does not materially alter the intent of the adopted BFMP and are essentially only minor changes to the land use plan.  Initial advice from the DoP has confirmed that given a land use change is proposed, amendment of the DGP will be required for its approval. This will follow consideration and adoption of the revised BFMP by Council.

 

In addition to this process, should Council endorse the proposed funding delivery strategy and subsequent required amendment to the BFMP, broad community consultation seeking submissions on the proposed modification to the BFMP will commence.

 

Whilst the proposed alterations to the BFMP are relatively minor, development of the Busselton Foreshore holds significant interest to the majority of the Busselton population, including residents, absentee landowners and the significant number of annual visitors.  Council has the opportunity to capture feedback from this broad sector by undertaking consultation over an  extended period of up to 56 days, commencing the end of December 2015 throughout the summer holiday period, to the beginning of February 2016.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

In September 2010, the BFWG presented its Final Report for progressing redevelopment of the Foreshore. The report, which was endorsed by Council states:  

 

“The plan presented to the Council with this report is staged to allow development over the next 12 years. This timeframe is consistent with the expiry of the Busselton Tennis Club lease over a portion of the project area. Relocation of the Tennis Club is integral to the development of the Foreshore and dialogue should commence with the Tennis Club immediately to ensure every opportunity available to the club is explored. Similarly, the Busselton Veteran Car Club (BVCC) would also be required to relocate and the club should be advised that the Shire does not intend to enter into a new lease following the expiry of their current agreement.  The BVCC lease expires in March 2020, allowing sufficient time for the club to plan for its relocation.”

 

As yet, there is no formal decision regarding a relocation of the BVCC from the current location to a like for like facility provided by the City, as is the arrangement with the Busselton Tennis Club. As the BVCC building will not impact on any short to medium term Foreshore construction or redevelopment works, it is anticipated that the club can remain in its current location until such time as the site is required for a hotel /short stay accommodation development.

 

Contained in the BFWG Final Report are a number of recommendations, as provided below. An updated Officer’s Comment is provided for Council information, to highlight progress for the redevelopment to date:

 

 

 

Working Group Recommendation:

 

Officer Comment, November 2015

1.   that a dedicated project manager be appointed to progress the overall Foreshore project and the planning for Stages 2 & 3 would be progressed concurrently with Stage 1

 

The CoB Major Projects team, under the direct leadership of the CEO, has taken responsibility for delivering the Foreshore Redevelopment to date.

2.   that a committee or reference group, be established with community representation to ensure continued community involvement in the Foreshore project

 

The BFWG was reformed to the BFRG which continued to be updated on the redevelopment project on a regular basis, and acted as a conduit to the broader community. On 11 November 2014, following discussion of the Group’s Terms of Reference a unanimous decision was reached to disband the BFRG; however the group does reconvene from time to time, depending upon issues.

3.   that a Task Force be established, inclusive of  representatives from Scouts, Southern Rip, the Busselton Surf Lifesaving Club and the Shire to progress the combined youth facility (37) as noted on the plan

 

The CoB Youth Development Team has lent considerable assistance to the Major Projects Team in leading stakeholder consultation and engagement in relation to the development of the Youth Precinct, in particular, the skate park facility. Extensive consultation and input from the Busselton Surf Lifesaving Club has been undertaken and a successful submission has been made to Lotterywest for full funding of $2.881M for the facility.

4.   the Skate Park and Adventure Playground to be professionally designed but local youth be consulted and have input regarding the design

 

The Busselton Skate Park is a result of extensive community and stakeholder consultation, with local youth encouraged to participate in design though numerous workshops, visits to schools and public advertising for submissions.  The official opening of the skate park in December 2015 is highly anticipated by the community.

5.   that the contribution of the community be acknowledged through a community launch

 

A community celebration acknowledging the work of the BFWG and wider community was held in conjunction with the reopening of the Busselton Jetty, attended by the Premier of WA in February 2011.

6.   that further, low level, community consultation should occur as details of the Stage 2 and 3 Master Plans become available

 

Community consultation has been a continual process for each of the remaining precincts, for example, consultation occurring with sports and user groups as Barnard Park Active Sporting Precinct develops. Liaison with existing and proposed commercial lease holders is ongoing as is relevant communication with a variety of government agencies in order to continue redevelopment works. Council has conducted formal briefings to state and federal politicians including Ministers and Senators, and our Local MP is regularly updated.  Development of Barnard Park Active Sporting Precinct has involved Community Development Team coordinating community consultation.

7.   that timber from the old jetty be utilised for public art, interpretive works and in playground construction where appropriate

 

Jetty timber remains a prominent feature for custom made seating and shelters on the Foreshore and within the Cultural Precinct. Stock pile of remaining timber is identified for use for the Skate Park, Central Core Activities Precinct, Railway House and yet to be developed adventure playground.

8.   that local native flora be used in the majority of the landscape design

 

Design principles for the Busselton Foreshore redevelopment incorporate the use of native plants for a majority of the landscaped areas. Interpretation of the plants will show the Latin, English and Noongar names of species, as well as traditional cultural uses of certain species as part of a wider signage strategy. Retention of native peppermint trees to form a possum wildlife corridor, as a requirement by the Department of SEWPC, is a key feature of the BFMP.

9.   that in the main, the history of Busselton be told through interpretive artworks not plaques, and the use of descriptive and interactive walks be encouraged

 

This is ongoing and will be further developed in conjunction with Railway House Interpretive Centre, which also forms the trail head for the Rails to Trails link. The Settlement Art project within the connecting Cultural Precinct supports this recommendation.

10. that lighting design be appropriate for illumination of features and to encourage safe after dark use of the area, essential to sustain an evening economy

 

This is a key and prominent feature of the redevelopment works undertaken so far. Lighting has been carefully considered and designed in a manner that makes the most of solar and wind power along the Foreshore Promenade, as well as LED technology featured in locally custom designed in ground lights and bollards. Feature lighting has been installed along Promenades and special feature lighting is planned to be integrated throughout the Central Core Activates Precinct, as the Foreshore Entrance Point and Hub.

11. that high quality materials be used throughout the Foreshore

 

A consistent colour palette and quality of design continues to be featured throughout the redeveloped precincts. The high amenity landscaping from works undertaken so far has been well received by all stakeholders.

12. that Scout Rd be closed and Brown St opened up between Marine Terrace and Geographe Bay Rd, with large vehicle parking available off Brown St

 

This has been completed.

13. that parking areas that enable viewing of the water from vehicles be retained east and west of the study area

 

Parking areas along both the eastern and western sections of the Foreshore have been completed and are well utilised.

14. that detailed car-parking plans are required for the area with inbuilt seasonal flexibility and being cognisant of commercial requirements

 

Car parking has been provided for throughout the precincts, in close proximity to existing and planned for commercial areas. A revised car parking plan for the Hotel / Short Stay Accommodation precinct, linking through to the Cultural Precinct and CBD has been undertaken as part of the proposed alteration to the BFMP.

15. that a portion of Signal Park be available and designed to accommodate overflow car parking

 

A well-developed car park within Signal Park caters for overflow parking.

16. that subject to the Shire’s acquisition of the Nautical Lady lease site;

a.   the tower should remain, conditional upon significant and  sensitive remodelling, with architectural input

b.  that if the tower is retained then the amphitheatre (Area 14 on Concept Plan) could be moved west to ensure the maintenance of views

c.   the Nautical Lady cafe / ice-cream outlet should remain in the short to medium term until other structures are  developed then be removed

 

The City was successful  in negotiating a purchase of the Nautical Lady Tower and site, however failed after extensive advertising to find a proponent willing to invest in upgrading and paying a commercial rent for the site. As per (c) and the DGP, the Nautical Lady Tower was demolished in June 2015 to enable planning and redevelopment of the Central Core Activities Area.

17. that additional commercial lease sites be established as market forces dictate

 

DGP was adopted by Council and endorsed by State Lands in November 2014. Commercial lease sites being hotel / short stay accommodation sites and a proposed family restaurant / microbrewery are provided for under current DGP.

18. that the urban design, architecture and landscaping strategies proposed by the consultants be considered for application to all Foreshore development between Ford Rd and Gale St

 

The landscaping and amenity of the Foreshore works completed so far are considered to be of a high quality, attractive standard. The City’s Town Planning Scheme and WAPC Design Codes control and guide commercial and residential development within this area.

 

19. that the application by the Scouts WA for additional land area up to 1600sqm be rejected in favour of negotiations of a reconfigured footprint of the same size

 

Relocation of Scouts WA to a site adjacent to the Busselton Yacht Club has been successfully negotiated.

20. that facilities for storage of jetty related equipment and maintenance activities be accommodated off site wherever possible 

 

A new jetty compound site has been developed outside of the main central precincts with the existing building scheduled to be removed by the end of 2015.

21. that the Sustainability Assessment   Criteria tool continues to be applied to the projects as the Master Plan develops

 

The design of all new buildings to be located at the Busselton Foreshores incorporate high levels of sustainable outcomes.

22. that buildings are required to be maintained to an acceptable standard

 

This is controlled under strict lease/hire conditions imposed on all commercial developments.

23. that a Foreshore maintenance fund be established

 

A separate Foreshore Maintenance Fund has not been established to date. Until the shortfall of the City’s commitment to the Jetty Maintenance Reserve is achieved, the focus has been to divert additional lease income to the existing Reserve.

24. that the market place be predominantly for the sale and display of locally produced food, arts and crafts

 

 The City has developed a Markets Policy that encourages the participation of local stallholders and the sale of locally made and produced offerings.

25. that the combined youth, surf lifesaving and café building be integrated with the playground and skate park and encourage youth employment and training wherever possible

 

These elements have been incorporated into the current design of the Youth and Community Activities Building and Precinct.

26. that the commercially leased areas be encouraged to have a mix of high quality retail and activity operations, appealing to tourists and locals alike

 

The Foreshore currently caters to a mix of established quality cafes and seasonal hire sites to provide a range of activities enjoyed by locals and visitors. Plans for future commercial developments such as extensions and upgrades to the Equinox Café and construction of a family restaurant / microbrewery have been carefully negotiated to ensure the continuation of only high quality offering at the Foreshore.

27.  that community based facilities, not be permitted to compete with commercial operations on the Foreshore whilst paying peppercorn rents

 

This is an accepted strategy with community based associations / clubs. Busselton Surf Life Saving Club proposed lease does not provide for commercial use of the premises.

28.  that every effort be made to incorporate on-site power generation by the use of solar cells and roof top wind power

 

To date, the City has incorporated wind and solar energy generated lighting along the Promenade as a design feature and energy efficiency initiative.

 

29.  that all new buildings and significant remodelling, be designed and constructed using solar passive principles

 

All new buildings will comply with the Building Code of Australia Standards which requires due consideration of energy efficiencies and passive solar consideration. A water management plan has been prepared and approved by Dept. of Water.

30.  that recycled rainwater be used where ever possible to contribute to the water usage

 

Water sensitive urban design principles have been applied in regard to design and installation of landscaping and amenity throughout the Foreshore redevelopment.

31.      that plans be developed for the incorporation of public transport into the Foreshore i.e. tram loop

 

A traffic management plan has been prepared. Bus bays have been included in the design of Foreshore Parade to enable public transport opportunities to be expanded in the future.

32.      bike racks be available at many locations within the Foreshore area

 

These have been installed in redeveloped areas.

 

33.  that day and night markets be encouraged in the area

 

Since 2013, Signal Park has become the home of the Sunday markets which has added vibrancy and activated the Foreshore, growing each year. Pop up seasonal kiosks are proposed to be included in an upgraded Central Core Activities Precinct, which will provide adequate lighting and amenity to also facilitate night market stalls.

34.      that street entertainment including buskers be encouraged to perform

 

The City is adverting for street performers / buskers to activate the Foreshore for this coming summer season.

35.      that the area be focused and promoted on the basis of sport, culture, slow food, wine and tourism

 

The development of the Barnard Park Active Playing fields has increased the level of active participation for sports within the precinct. Tourism activities are supported and encouraged, including the presence of the Visitor Centre on the Foreshore, cruise ship arrivals. Expansion of the existing Equinox Café, upgrade of the amenity around the Goose café and development plans for another restaurant within the Foreshore precinct are in support of this recommendation for a focus on tourism, food and wine.

36.      that a method be developed to engage with community individuals and groups, plus business, to enable them to 'buy' into the Foreshore development by purchasing enhancements such as seating, bike racks, artwork, etc

 

This has not been implemented, however officers are progressing a donation and contributions policy that will enable the City to proactively seek contributions for smaller elements within the Foreshore. Staff are currently in communication with community groups and local enterprise with regards to funding elements of the 0-6 play area within the Youth and Community Activities Precinct and Railway House Interpretive space.

37.      that a proactive and managed programme of entertainment be developed to encourage the area to become a focal point for a wide range of entertainment and events

 

The City of Busselton Calendar of Events has grown substantially in recent years, with a number of high profile quality events staged on and around the Foreshore including Rally Australia, Human Powered Pedal Prix; Sunsmart Iron Man; Oz Rock; Festival of Busselton and cruise ship arrival destination.

38.      that a mix of high quality retail and tourism activities and also the engagement of youth activities be encouraged

 

The City continues to facilitate this objective at every opportunity. Short term commercial hire sites, a broad range of events and festivals including the Festival of Busselton and RAC supported Pedal Prix are well received at the Foreshore. The finalisation of the skate park will enable more opportunity to facilitate youth orientated competitions and events on the Foreshore.

39.      that due to the low number of submissions regarding placement or inclusion of the Performing Arts Centre on the Foreshore area, the BFWG feels it has no clear direction as to the community’s preference and is therefore unable to make a recommendation on this matter

 

Council have resolved that preferred location for a Performing Arts / Convention Centre is within the Cultural Precinct, Queen Street.

40.      to ensure the community is informed of this report it be available on the Shire webpage and available for public viewing at the Shire Customer Service counter and the Busselton and Dunsborough Libraries

 

The report and Master Plan documentation has been available to the public through these means. Subsequent consultation and information is regularly provided to the public by way of a dedicated web page on City public website, as well as public displays, local media and signage on an as required basis.

 

The BFWG Final Report to Council, September 2010, cites an anticipated timeframe of 12 years for completion of the Busselton Foreshore redevelopment, to coincide with expiration of the lease over the site currently occupied by the Busselton Tennis Club, which falls due in year 2021. Commencing in 2011 /2012, the project has been steadily progressed over the past 5-6 years, and funded through provisional allocations in the City’s LTFP; the project was on target for finalisation within this timeframe.

 

The flow on effect of current funding constraints at both a State and Federal level makes it likely that there will be a shortfall of at least $5.1 million in external funding required to finalise the Foreshore redevelopment. Officers have undertaken financial modelling and reviewed the current BFMP to identify an alternative strategy for how the City might deliver yet to be constructed Foreshore components in a timely and financially responsible manner, in keeping with the intent of the original BFCP.

 

The strategy recommends amending the BFMP as shown at Attachment A: Busselton Foreshore Master Plan, Revision I, and is explored in greater detail at Attachment B: Busselton Foreshore Redevelopment, Proposed Development Strategy-Going Forward.

 

Proposed amendments to the BFMP include:

1.    Realignment of Foreshore Parade West, to be constructed around the current tennis courts, allowing the Busselton Tennis Club to remain in current location in the short to medium term.

 

2.    Develop one multi-purpose combined clubhouse, relocated from Milne St to a more centralised position on Carey Street and reconfigured to be shared with active playing field users and both tennis and croquet clubs and not build a stand-alone tennis /croquet club.

 

3.    Ablution and kiosk facility to be installed on Milne Street; as a low-key club facility for current user groups and event users, complimentary to a multi-purpose combined clubhouse.

 

Other than to allow for the construction of Foreshore Parade, which is overcome by this proposed strategy, the importance of the tennis club relocation has been to enable development of a five star hotel at the Busselton Foreshore. To date, while there has certainly been interest from high level proponents, no formal development proposition has been forthcoming for any of the sites designated on the current BFMP. It is anticipated that the upgrade of the Busselton-Margaret River Regional Airport, due for completion in 2018/19 will generate more interest in the development opportunity, therefore aligning well with timeframes for a proposed delay for the tennis club relocation.

 

Under the recommended strategy, two hotel sites (depicted as Sites 2 and 3 on the revised plan) remain immediately available for development. Should a developer have interest in the site currently occupied by the Tennis Club, the timeframe that will be required for the planning and development applications, approvals and lease negotiations; anticipated to take 2 or 3 years; could occur concurrently with the tennis club relocation.  It is also likely that bringing forward funding to redevelop the Core will be advantageous in attracting private investment, by adding to the appeal and amenity of the development sites.

 

The Central Core Activities Precinct is currently “bookended” by two newly developed, high amenity precincts, highlighting its run down and dilapidated state. The Core is planned to become the central activity precinct of the Foreshore, offering a high amenity landscaped area integrating public open space with existing and new commercial leases planned for this area. The proposed realignment of Foreshore Parade West around the existing tennis courts alleviates the need for the City to fund a relocation of the tennis club in the short term. Instead, Council has the option to divert funds allocated in LTFP for the tennis relocation into the Central Core Activities Precinct, ensuring delivery of this key component of the Foreshore redevelopment.

 

Amendments Required to Long Term Financial Plan

 

Page 31 of Attachment B: Option 3. Staged Tennis – Croquet Club Relocation - CEO RECOMMENDATION - details the recommended funding allocation by budget year to deliver remaining Foreshore development works.  The rationale for the recommended strategy and subsequent modifications to the BFMP is to provide the City with an opportunity to change the timing of a $6 million City contribution towards the relocation of the Busselton Tennis Club, provisionally allocated in 2016/17. It is instead proposed to bring forward funding through City borrowings to finance works in the Central Core Activities Precinct as of 2016/17, finalised in 2017/18 and to delay commencement of the tennis / croquet courts and combined clubhouse until 2018/19 onwards, to be finalised in 2020/21 or thereafter.

 

The City is able to achieve savings from the establishment of one combined clubhouse on Carey Street, to be funded by the City to the value of $3 million, compared to the City financing a $3.1 million multi-purpose club house as well as a $2.8 million stand-alone tennis / croquet clubhouse.

 

With the relocation of the combined clubhouse, ablution facilities will need to be provided for users of Barnard east and west ovals. A small $600,000 kiosk / ablution facility planned for 2015/16 on Milne Street can service the users of Barnard east and west ovals, proposed to be funded by a variation to of the current funding received from DSR towards Stage 1 of the multi-purpose clubrooms.

Necessity for commercialisation mixed with public open space

 

While the proposed realignment of Foreshore Parade West is a minor adjustment to the BFMP, there are impacts to be considered for commercial development sites planned for the Foreshore. In developing this strategy, Officers have been mindful to not encroach on highly valued public open space, and also without a substantial reduction of the land allocated for commercial development. The City of Busselton is committed to returning revenue received from commercial activities, such as lease arrangements, into the maintenance and sustainability of the Busselton Jetty and Foreshore area. The Busselton Jetty alone requires an approximate annual maintenance requirement of $1.3 million, indexed by CPI. The City makes an allocation of approximately $350,000 per annum towards this amount. Without the projected future revenue derived from lease income, the shortfall would continue to be subsidised by ratepayers.

 

The realignment would necessitate a reduction in the hotel / short stay development areas from 5 Sites (total development area available 9,414 m2) to 3 sites (total developable are of 7,195m2) reducing potential commercialisation of the Busselton Foreshore, therefore a potential reduction in lease revenue. However, there remains immediate capacity to meet the likely initial development, as per advice from Tourism WA, of 225 rooms.  Further, fewer opportunities for development may increase the demand for the sites, making them more attractive to potential developers.

 

An allocation of up to 600m2 is shown between proposed Site 1 and 2 that may be developed as small business shopfronts for tourism retail that could offset any projected decrease in lease revenue from a reduction in the other commercial sites. This was provisionally provided for in the original BFCP and is subject to further research to formulate a business case.

 

A revised BFMP would see the proposed family restaurant/function centre and small microbrewery reduced by 261m2. The modified design of the proposed building will also ensure view corridors from Railway House are not impacted. Officers have worked with the proponents who are amenable to this change.

 

Increased Car Parking in the Foreshore Precinct

 

The proposed road realignment and subsequent modification of the hotel /short stay development sites creates the opportunity to revisit provision for parking in the Foreshore precinct. Under the revised BFMP, approximately 100 more bays would be available to the public, alleviating concerns that car parking hasn’t been accurately accommodated in the Master Plan.

 

RfR Application

 

In the current application to RfR for $4.5 million to fund works within the Hotel / Short Stay Development Precinct, the City made an undertaking to contribute up to $6 million towards the relocation of the Busselton Tennis Club. Should the City be successful in the RfR application, Officers can liaise with SWDC to seek a variation allowing the City contribution towards the tennis club relocation to be carried over for two years until 2018/19, or whether a City allocation of funds towards works within the Core Activities Precinct would be an acceptable co-contribution towards the project.

 

The City can still deliver on all milestones contained in the RfR application to develop the hotel / short stay precinct, other than the given timeframe for the tennis club relocation. By Council endorsing the preferred Option 3 for a staged relocation of the tennis club and including provision in a revised LTFP as of 2018/19, the City is meeting the key objective of providing prospective hotel developers with a degree of certainty of the tennis club relocation, and access to the development site.

 

Should the City not be successful in obtaining the $4.5million through RfR, it is suggested that Council could look to a hybrid of Option 2 (no tennis / croquet club relocation and no combined clubhouse facility on Carey Street) and have the required $4.5 million to finalise the Hotel / Short Stay Development Precinct funded through City borrowings. For this option, the scope of works for this precinct and the Central Core Activities Precinct will need to be reduced by $500,000 to bring borrowings back to $11 million as per the current LTFP.

 

CONCLUSION

 

Whilst to date, the City has been somewhat successful in sourcing external funding for the Foreshore Redevelopment, there has been a shift in the economic environment at both a State and Federal level, with funding programs becoming more competitive with more stringent criteria focussing on supporting projects that demonstrate a significant regional economic development output. Being funded for $55.9 million for the Busselton Regional Airport by the State of WA and awaiting the outcome of a $10 million from the Australian Government makes it less likely for Busselton to receive significant amounts of Federal or State funding in the short to medium term beyond the current $4.5 million application to RfR for the Hotel / Short Stay Tourism Accommodation Precinct.

 

The proposed strategy presents Council with an option to progress the redevelopment of the Busselton Foreshore, in keeping with the original intent of the BFCP that can be accommodated in the City of Busselton LTFP and without reliance on substantial external funding sources unlikely to be forthcoming.

 

OPTIONS

 

Council may consider the Options as presented at Attachment B: Busselton Foreshore Redevelopment:  Proposed Development Strategy-Going Forward, being;

·    Option 1: Maintain a status quo position and deliver the Busselton Foreshore redevelopment in accordance with the current BFMP as and when funding can be sourced;

·    Option 2: make no provision for a staged relocation of the Busselton Tennis and Croquet Clubs; or

·    Council may choose to develop another delivery and funding strategy than the options presented.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

The City is currently holding over $542,314 CSRFF funding received for Stage 1 of the multi-purpose club facility in Barnard Park. DSR is receptive to a variation for the current funding, however it has been stipulated that the project will still need to commence in 2015/16, so is subject to a timely decision of Council.  Further, an announcement on the success or not of the current application to RfR funding of $4.5 million is expected in December 2015. With $1.5 million of that funding required to pay for the installation of services, which is critical in current construction works, a Council decision at this meeting will provide Staff with direction to commence community consultation processes and, should it be required, to progress a variation to funding agreement.

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council:

 

1.    Adopt a revised Busselton Foreshore Master Plan: Attachment A: Busselton Foreshore Master Plan Revision I and seek public feedback on the adopted plan; and

 

2.    Endorse Attachment B - Busselton Foreshore Redevelopment:  Proposed Development Strategy - Going Forward as the proposed funding and delivery strategy, which will inform amendments to the City’s Long Term Financial Plan (adopted February 2015).

 

Note:    Councillor Henley proposed an alternative motion.

 

Council Decision

C1512/360              Moved Councillor G Henley, seconded Councillor P Carter

 

That the Council:

 

  1. Endorse Attachment A-Busselton Foreshore Master Plan, Revision I, (November 2015)with the following amendments –

 

a)                   A proposed combined club house facility depicted on Carey Street to be removed in favour of a single storey community club facility to be located on Milne Street in accordance with Community Sport and Recreation Facilities Funding received to date of $542,314, with a City contribution of up to $1,084,626 as per the current City of Busselton budget and Long Term Financial Plan. This facility to be developed in consultation with user groups to obtain optimal value inside of budget constraints and commence within the 2015/16 financial year.

 

b)                  That when and if required like-for-like tennis club and court facilities are to be located at Barnard Park, East (part Reserve 8485)bounded by Marine Terrace, Georgette Street, Geographe Bay Road and Carey Street; and

 

  1. Seeks public feedback on the resultant plan until 31 January 2016.

CARRIED 9/0

 



Council                                                                                      85                                                             9 December 2015

At this time the Mayor approved the introduction of a number of Late Items for consideration by Council.

10.6        Finance Committee - 3/12/2015 - OLD BUTTER FACTORY UPPER FLOOR

SUBJECT INDEX:

Old Butter Factory

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

Facilities Coordinator - Shawn Lombard

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Engineering and Works Services - Oliver Darby

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Absolute Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Building Report - Compliance and Structural Assessment of 1st Floor Structure Old Butter Factory

Attachment b    Draft Operational Practices and Procedures - Old Butter Factory  

 

This item was considered by the Finance Committee at its meeting on 3 December 2015, the recommendations from which have been included in this report. 

 

PRÉCIS

 

In 2012, a structural assessment report of the Old Butter Factory identified certain risks associated with the continued use of the upper floor as a museum display area with public access. The Council subsequently resolved to temporarily close the upper floor to the public, whilst alternative engineering and heritage solutions were investigated. This report details the results of this investigation and provides a solution and cost estimates for improvement works required to enable the upper floor to be re-opened to the public.

 

BACKGROUND

 

The City of Busselton is the owner of Lot 1, Lot 2 and Lot 328, 76 Peel Terrace, Busselton, (the Old Butter factory site). Over many years a complex of buildings have been constructed on these Lots, including the main building once used as a butter factory and other detached buildings used, amongst other things, as a boiler house and blacksmith shop. Historical records indicate that the Old Butter Factory was constructed as long ago as 1918. However, since approximately 30 years ago (and ever since) the Old Butter Factory has been used as a museum, currently under the auspices of the Busselton Historical Society (BHS).

 

In 1995 the City of Busselton entered into a 10 year lease of the Old Butter Factory with BHS and the Busselton Pottery Group, which expired in June 2010. At that stage the Busselton Pottery Group entered into another 10 year lease with the City. However, due to land title issues in relation to portions of the land, BHS’s lease was not renewed and BHS has since been occupying the Old Butter Factory and surrounds under a holding over provision, on a month-by-month basis (BHS Lease). 

 

The Old Butter Factory is a double storey building, which is used in the main as a museum operated by BHS, with a section at the western end used as premises for the Busselton Pottery Group. The total building area is 750m2, with 580m2 at the lower floor and 170m2 in the upper floor. BHS has been using the first floor as museum exhibition area and as such making it accessible to the general public. Access to the first floor is provided by two sets of stairs, both designated as fire escape exits:

 

·    A set of internal timber stairs to the west of the main entry which is normally used for public access to the upper floor; and

·    A set of external steel stairs from the rear of the upper floor.

 

BHS has indicated that the use of the first storey as a museum display area, which is open to the public, forms an integral part of their museum operations. Based on floor area, the upper floor has capacity for approximately 40 persons at any one time. The current upper floor museum display consists of a variety of household artifacts, including: kitchenware; radios; china; and clothing. BHS has also indicated that the existing ground floor area is insufficient to accommodate the upper floor museum display and, should upper floor public access not be allowed, will have to be replaced with a new building.

 

Under the BHS Lease the permitted use of the Old Butter Factory is for “ANY USE CONSISTENT WITH THE LESSEE’S CONSTITUTION”. The use of the building as a museum is considered to be consistent with the permitted use under the BHS Lease. The BHS Lease does, however, also stipulate that:

 

·    BHS, at its own expense, must comply with the requirements of all acts, local planning schemes, by-laws or regulations or requisitions or orders thereunder applicable to the building or the use or occupation thereof (clause 3.9);

·    BHS shall not be liable to effect any structural alterations of the building unless the same is necessitated or occasioned by the reason of any act or default of BHS (clause 5.5); and

·    The City of Busselton as lessor does not warrant that the building is or will remain suitable or adequate for the purposes of the lease (clause 5.8).

 

In 2012 the City engaged the services of Cotan Engineers to assess the condition of the Old Butter Factory and to present the City with recommendations in relation to refurbishment work and maintenance required to achieve Building Code of Australia compliance, and to preserve the structural condition of the building frame in order to prolong its life (Building Report). The City also commissioned a Conservation Management Plan for the Old Butter Factory building and site. That was completed in April 2014.  The plan was funded by LotteryWest and developed by a heritage conservation specialist. Included in the scope of works for the plan was a specific requirement to verify the advice provided in the Cotan Building Report. The Conservation Management Plan (Section 8.5.2.1) concurred with Cotan’s conclusion that “the level of intervention required to achieve fire standards and access requirements for continued public access would have a major adverse impact on the heritage fabric of the main factory building.” Policy 5.3, Section 8.5.2.1 of the Conservation Management Plan recommends “careful design of all necessary works to ensure the minimum possible impact on the heritage values of the fabric and setting of the place,“ and Policy 5.4 suggests that “subject to further analysis of the fire safety and floor loading requirements it is suggested the first floor  could be adapted to alternative uses that do not require public access.”

 

On 10 September 2014, Officers briefed Council on the recommendations in the Building Report and the Conservation Management Plan relating to the upper floor, informing Council of the following key issues:

 

·    The Building Report identified that, in its current state, use of the upper storey of the Old Butter Factory as a museum posed a fire safety risk due to the load-bearing parts of the lower floor (timber framed walls, steel columns and suspended floor structure) not having the required fire resistance construction, and the fire escape exits not being compliant with the relevant fire safety requirements;

·    To upgrade the existing structure to achieve the required fire resistance would require those components to be lined with fire resistant materials which will impact on the heritage value of the building (“the level of intervention required to achieve the fire standard and access requirements for continued public access would have a major adverse impact on the heritage fabric of the main factory building.”).

·    The cost of fire resistance improvements which would allow use of the upper level for public purposes were significant (approximately $295,000). This cost estimate did not include or provide for any heritage considerations, and also had no provision for any contingency costs that might arise when undertaking the works;

·    The engineers recommended changing the use of the upper level to prevent public access to the second storey; and

·    A further detailed structural assessment was required to consider using part of the upper floor for storage of museum goods that are not on public display (calculations indicated that the structures supporting the upper floor are suitable for live loads up to 200kg/m2. Such use may also require upgrades to the existing upper floor fire escapes.

 

Based on the information provided at the briefing session, Councillors indicated their broad support for City officers to work with BHS to close the Old Butter Factory’s upper storey to public access and restrict the use thereof to storage.

 

Following further work with the BHS and the City’s Heritage Advisor, a report was represented to Council at the 10 December 2014 meeting, at which time Council resolved:

 

That the Council:

 

1.    Not allow public access to the upper floor of the Old Butter Factory after 25 December 2014;

2.    Subject to resolution 3, to allow the lessee, Busselton Historical Society, to use the upper floor of the Old  Butter Factory for storage and a workroom for members/volunteers;

3.    To authorize the Chief Executive Officer to determine and impose conditions in relation to the use of the upper floor to ensure compliance with safety and statutory requirements;  

4.    To authorize the Chief Executive Officer to alter the current monthly tenancy arrangements with Busselton Historical Society in relation to the Old Butter Factory to implement resolutions 1, 2 & 3 above;

5.    To engage a heritage consultant and fire engineer to review the Building Report in line with Section 8.5.2.1 of Policy 5.3 4 of the Conservation Plan and to investigate alternative solutions providing for public use of the upper floor of the Old Butter Factory and the impact of associated works on significant building fabric and to prepare a detailed report for Council consideration.

      

Subsequent to this, the City entered into a deed of amendment with the BHS to vary their existing lease restricting the use and the access rights to the upper floor until otherwise advised in writing by the City.

 

This report presents the Building Report and future recommendations developed by Cotan Engineers under specific instruction from the City Facilities Department , which was noted as a requirement in point 5 of the above resolution (attachment A).

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

The Building Code of Australia (BCA) is a uniform set of technical provisions for the design and construction of buildings and other structures in Australia. The BCA is produced and maintained by the Australian Building Codes Board on behalf of the Commonwealth, State and Territory Governments and as such has been given the status of building regulations by all States and Territories.  The previous Building Report found that for the public to access the upper floor of the Old Butter Factory fire resistance of all lower floor building walls, lower floor columns and upper floor external walls would be required, in accordance with the BCA to be a Type B construction. This means that loadbearing walls and columns must have a specified resistance and external walls must be non-combustible. The Old Butter Factory is not a type B construction, and work required to meet this standard would be extensive and expensive (as was outlined in the Building Report).

 

Under the Health Act 1911, the City also has the ability to close or cause the closing of public buildings or to exclude persons from entering public buildings which are considered to be unsafe or unsuitable for the use it is being put. Section 179(3)(dd) stipulates:

 

If it appears to an authorised person that, whether or not a valid certificate of approval is issued in respect of a public building, the public building is unsafe or is unsuitable for the use to which it is being put, or is about to be put, then the authorised person may do any one or more of the following:

 

(a)          close or cause the closing of, the doors of the public building;

(b)          exclude any person or cause any person to be excluded from entering the public building;

(c)           direct any person to leave the public building;

(d)          direct the occupier, owner or person in charge of the public building to comply with one or              both of the following requirements – 

i)             to close the public building;

ii)            to refuse to allow any person to enter or remain in the public building 

 

The Heritage of Western Australia Act 1990 is applicable in that the Old Butter Factory is on the State Heritage Register and any work that interferes with the structure or appearance of the building requires the written approval of the Heritage Council of WA.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

The City has an Asbestos Management Policy (010) which was developed to assist with compliance with government policy and legislative requirements in the management of Asbestos Containing Materials (ACM) in workplaces.  This policy applies to management of ACM in all buildings on City owned or managed land, including art and cultural buildings; which is the category applied to the Old Butter Factory.  The City is committed to ensuring that ACM in all buildings on City owned or managed land is managed and controlled to protect the health and well-being of workers (including contractors) and the community.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

In an effort to confirm the estimated cost for the recommended works noted in the Cotan Report, tenders have been invited under RFT17/15 Old Butter Factory First Floor Fire Compliance to test and determine the true budget cost.   This tender closed on 26 November 2015, and will take two to three weeks from that time to review and have ready for final award by the CEO under delegation.

 

For the sake of this report, the cost of the project has been assumed and estimated using the Cotan estimated value in the report, as well as the market tested values under the Tender to estimate the work scope cost noted in the report, as well as considering the practical aspects noted in the site visit that would have associated costs.


 

The table below collates this estimated financial information:

 

Description:

60% Building Reserve funded Value  (Ex GST):

40% Asbestos Reserve  funded Value (Ex GST):

 

$

$

Internal/External Staircase demolition and re-fabrication External Roofing remedial works

 

(As per Cotan design & Report)

147,000

No asbestos found in this portion, pure fabrication and installation cost

Asbestos:

Removal and remediation

 

 

20.000

Facilities additional costs:

– Outside display relocation

–Temporary storage

 

(As per site visit findings & report review)

 

6,000

 

4,000

Contingency

6,000

4,000

TOTAL PROJECT COST PER RESERVE account.

159,000

28,000

 

It is noted that in both the staircase work scopes, asbestos is going to be required to be disturbed and/or removed to complete these works.

 

It is also the intention of the City officers to apportion the works on a ratio of 40% asbestos and 60% general construction works to the funding sources noted below. As the tender values are not yet known, this format has been used and adopted by the City’s Facilities team in the interim to facilitate fair distribution of funds to the correct funding streams.

 

Officers are recommending work be funded from two funding sources, these being:

·    Asbestos Removal and Replacement (Cost code B1514); and

·    A further transfer from the Building Reserve (Reserve Fund 106).

 

Asbestos Removal and Replacement has a 2015/16 adopted budget of $125,000 which can cover the apportioned 40% of the associated cost ($28,000).  The Building Reserve has a 2015/16 projected balance noting all transactions to date of $1.325m, which can cover the apportioned 60% of the associated cost ($159,000).

 

The remaining Asbestos Removal and Replacement budget of $97,000 will be sufficient for all other asbestos related works noted in the City’s Asset and Facilities Department’s list of ongoing identified work scopes for this current 2015/16 financial year (note that expenditure of some of that budget on the Old Butter Factory was envisaged when the 2015/16 budget was developed.

 

Long-term Financial Plan Implications

 

Nil.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

The recommendations in this report support the City’s Strategic Community Objective that “Infrastructure Assets are well maintained and responsibly managed.”

 

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

An assessment of the risks in implementing the Officer Recommendation was conducted using the City’s risk management framework. The table describes identified risks, once treatments have been identified:

 

Risk

Controls

Consequence

Likelihood

Risk Level

Work reveals a larger amount of asbestos removal is required than planned and the total project costs exceed the budget forecast.

The remaining asbestos removal and replacement budget for 2015/16 is held in contingency until all works for the Butter Factory upper floor are complete.

Insignificant < $20,000

 

 

 

Unlikely

 

Low 2

The BHS do not adequately implement the Operating Practices and Procedures to ensure public safety in the upper floor.

Consultation is undertaken with the BHS to finalise the draft Operational Practices and Procedures.

 

The new lease for the BHS incorporates the requirement to adequately implement the agreed Operating Practices and Procedures.

Major - Death or life threatening injury or multiple serious injuries causing hospitalisation

 

Unlikely

High 14

 

CONSULTATION

 

City Officers have consulted with BHS to develop and implement an Emergency Evacuation Plan for the upper floor and have shared the draft Operating Practices and Procedures supplied with the Building Report (Attachment B). BHS have not indicated any issues with implementing those Operating Practices and Procedures.

 

Officers have also liaised with the BHS to arrange and discuss the implementation and timeframes for the works outlined in this report.  They have also provided support in an effort to minimise the impact on the BHS when undertaking the relocation of items required to be moved to accommodate the proposed works.

 

The City will continue to work with the BHS to support actions previously identified to rationalise and improve the management of their collection and the use of space within the Butter Factory building and grounds.

 

Cotan Engineers have also liaised extensively with all the relevant authorities regarding building codes and regulations in an effort to present a report with recommendations that show both transparency and due diligence to meet or achieve the best level of compliance, noting the sensitivity of this historical building.

 

Furthermore, the City has passed on all detail design information and associated correspondence for comment and final approval from the Heritage Council. This is pending a final response from the Heritage Council.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

As per the previous Council resolution (C1412/336), the Old Butter Factory building first floor has been closed to the public since 24 December 2014.

Cotan Engineers were engaged to undertake a more detailed inspection of the Old Butter Factory and to provide a report which recommended, in consultation with a fire engineer and heritage advisor, solutions to re-open the upper floor to the public. Cotan Engineers have provided the Building Report  - Compliance & Structural Assessment of 1st Floor Structure (Attachment A). This report has re-evaluated building works which can practically be achieved to, where possible, address the BCA and meet health and fire requirements to enable the 1st floor of the Old Butter Factory to be re-opened safely to the public.

 

The Cotan Report recommends the following works:

 

·    Demolition of the internal and external staircases to the upper floor and re-fabrication to meet new and improved fire and access/egress codes of compliance;

·    Implementation of new Operational Practices and Procedures which include the limitation of persons in the upper floor, emergency plans and associated training and specific display and storage requirements;

·    Some additional signage; and

·    Adherence to specified maximum load bearings in the upper floor.

 

In addition to these works, the following actions will also need to occur:

 

·    The relocation of display items in both the internal and external staircase work scope locations;

·    Minor repair works to the existing roof structure in proximity to the new external staircase;

·    The allocation of a temporary storage container to house some of the display items whilst works are being conducted;

·    Asbestos removal in the areas noted within the proposed work scope locations; and

·    Contingency considerations to allow for unidentified works that may be found within the wall spaces once uncovered.

 

It is also to be noted that the City has reviewed the existing staircase found on the exterior of the Council Chambers to be salvaged and possibly re-used at the Old Butter Factory.  That staircase has in the interim been assessed by Cotan noting this request, and has been found to not be useful in this regard for the following reasons:

·    The width of the staircase does not meet the compliance width requirement.

·    The fabric that this staircase has been manufactured from does not suit DFES requirements.

·    The tread width and amount of treads does not align to the height as found on the Old Butter Factory.

·    To use and refabricate the old staircase would be more costly, as the level and amount of changes required are too many. It would be better to start from scratch as was recommended in this review.

 


 

CONCLUSION

 

As the owners and custodians of the Old Butter Factory, the City of Busselton has a responsibility to ensure that the Old Butter Factory is safe for the public, as well as being fit for the purpose for which it is being used.

 

Implementation of the recommendations of the Cotan Building Report, including the Operating Practices and Procedures by the BHS (Attachment B) outlined in this report will enable the upper floor to be safely re-opened to the public.

 

Tenders have been advertised to verify the true project cost, and closed on 26 November 2015, and a tender review and award under delegation by the CEO can be concluded within two to three weeks from that date.

 

The estimated project value including contingency of $10,000 is reflected in the financial table above, and amounts to a total estimated project cost of $187,000.

 

The City’s Asbestos Removal and Replacement budget is $125,000. It is recommend that due to the extent of asbestos removal required to implement the work recommended in the Building Report, that this is an appropriate use of the this budget. An estimated $28,000 would be drawn from it to fund the associated asbestos works.

 

The balance of the required project budget, this being $159,000, will be drawn, pending Council’s approval, from the Building Reserve Fund 106, noting a financial year end balance of $1.325m.

 

Officers recommend that the Council notes the recommendations in the Cotan Building Report – Compliance & Structural Assessment of First Floor Structure as a practical and appropriate course of action and authorises the CEO to arrange for the work to be undertaken utilising the City’s Asbestos Removal and Replacement budget and the Building Reserve as the appropriate funding sources.

 

OPTIONS

 

Council may also consider the following option:

 

Council may not want to undertake the work outlined in the Building Report (Attachment A) and choose to keep the upper floor closed to the public, but accessible to BHS members as a work space and store room, noting the impact this will have on the operations of the museum.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

Should Council resolve to endorse the Officer recommendation, BHS will be notified immediately of the Council’s decision and a meeting will be established to coordinate implementation of the decision. Works are proposed to be completed this financial year, and are noted under the tender timelines to commence early January 2016, with a completion date 12 weeks later.

 

Council Decision / Committee Recommendation and Officer Recommendation

C1512/361              Moved Councillor T Best, seconded Councillor J McCallum

 

That the Council:

 

1)    Notes the recommendations in the Building Report – Compliance & Structural Assessment of First Floor Structure (included as Attachment A to the agenda report) as a practical and appropriate course of action to enable the Butter Factory upper floor to be re-opened to the public.

 

2)    Acknowledges the proposed use of the Asbestos Removal and Replacement budget for the implementation of the recommended works associated with asbestos.

 

ABSOLUTE MAJORITY DECISION OF COUNCIL REQUIRED

 

3)    Approves an amendment to the 2015/16 adopted budget as follows:

 

Budget Account Number

Section

Description

2015/16 adopted budget

2015/16 proposed budget

Difference

Old Butter Factory - Upgrade Works

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

522-B9551-3280-0000

Building Facilities

Contractors

$0

$159,000

$159,000

106-9103

Equity Transfer

Transfer from Building Reserve

$0

-$159,000

-$159,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

TOTAL

 

 

$0

$0

$0

 

CARRIED 9/0

by absolute majority

 


Council                                                                                      93                                                             9 December 2015

12.             Engineering and Works Services Report

12.1        TENDER RECOMMENDATION - RFT 16/15 CONSTRUCTION OF LANDFILL CELL 1 AT DUNSBOROUGH WASTE FACILITY

SUBJECT INDEX:

Waste Management

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

Environment and climate change risks and impacts are understood and managed.

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:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Confidential Tender Evaluation and Recommendation Report   

  

The attachment to this item is confidential in accordance with Section 5.23(2)(c) of the Local Government Act 1995, a contract entered into or that may be entered into by the Local Government.

 

PRÉCIS

 

The City of Busselton invited RFT 16/15 Construction of Landfill Cell 1 at Dunsborough Waste Facility and received 14 submissions. This report summarises the tender responses and makes recommendation to award the tender.  This report is presented for consideration as a late item at the Council meeting as the tender closed on 1 December, 2015. Fourteen tenders were received and in order to meet the appropriate project delivery schedule a contract needs to be awarded by 31 December, 2015.

 

BACKGROUND

 

The objectives of this Request for Tender are to appoint a suitably qualified contractor for the Construction of Landfill Cell 1 at Dunsborough Waste Facility located at Western Cape Drive, Naturaliste, for the City of Busselton.

 

This Request for Tender specified the requirements of the City and invited suitably qualified and experienced respondents to submit bids to enter into a Contract for the Construction of Landfill Cell 1 at Dunsborough Waste Facility, in accordance with the detailed design and specification set out in the request for tender.

 

The requirements of for the new waste cell include:

 

•             trimming and shaping existing floor and batters of Cell 1 to final contours

•             excavation of leachate drainage sump and perimeter anchor trench

•             construction of leachate extraction system

•             supply, delivery and installation of lining system

•             construction of perimeter access road

•             construction of leachate treatment pond

 

The successful tenderer will be reporting to the Director of Engineering and Works Services.

 

The contract will be a construction contract only. Previously the City of Busselton engaged Bowman & Associates consultants to complete the detailed design of Cell 1. Bowman & Associates will continue to be engaged to sign off on portions of the construction work as required to ensure the work has been completed in accordance with the detailed design.

 

The request for tender for the Construction of Landfill Cell 1 at Dunsborough Waste Facility was advertised from 24th October 2015 for a period of four weeks, closing on the 1st December 2015.

 

The City received forty nine requests for the tender documents and received fourteen tender submissions. A tender evaluation panel was formed to evaluate all tenders submissions and prior to the evaluation meeting and the tenders were assessed in accordance with the relevant WALGA guidelines and in the manner described in the Officer Comment section below.

 

A comprehensive summary of these responses and pricing schedules has been included in the confidential attachment.

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

Section 3.57 of Local Government Act 1995 requires “A local government to invite tenders before it enters into a contract of a prescribed kind under which another person is to supply goods and services”.

 

Part 4 (Tenders) of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 require that tenders be publicly invited for such contracts where the estimated cost of providing the total service exceeds $150,000.

 

Compliance with the Local Government Act 1995 section 3.57 is required in the issuing and tendering of contracts.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

The City’s purchasing, tender selection criteria, occupational health and safety and engineering technical standards and specifications, were all relevant to this tender and have been adhered to in the process of requesting and evaluating tenders.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

The total budget for the Construction of Landfill Cell 1 at Dunsborough Waste Facility is $3.0 million.

 

To date $785,000 has been spent on bulk earthworks, detailed design, surveys, works supervision, leaving a balance of $2.2 million.

 

WBHO submitted a tender price of $1,063,838.35.

 

The tender contract value will be $1,063,838.35 (excl GST) which is under budget. This amount does not include any funds for potential contingencies/variations which might amount to up to 10% of the contract, which will be required to be spent against the available budget. Due to the nature of these works there is the potential of an unforeseen element which may require a variation to be paid to the contractor.

 

It is expected that any variation will be paid from the existing budget, authorised by the superintendent. 

 

Any unspent funds will remain in the Waste Facility and Plant Reserve.

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

The Construction of Landfill Cell 1 at Dunsborough Waste Facility is consistent with following the City of Busselton’s Strategic Objectives:

 

5.            Cared for and enhanced environment;

 

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’s recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk assessment framework. The assessment sought to identify ‘downside’ risks only rather than ‘upside’ risks and where the risk, following implementation of controls has been identified as medium or greater are included below.

 

Risk

Controls

Consequence

Likelihood

Risk Level

Delay of materials from a third party. Lining materials for construction are supplied by a sub-contractor. The worst impact would be a delay in materials delaying the completion of the project

Early award to the contractor.

 

Included in the contract scope and project timeline. Delay would be at contractor’s risk.

Liquidated damages to be imposed for delays that cause loss to the City.

 

Medium

Unlikely

Medium

The contractor fails to complete the waste cell by the end of the contract period (subject to approved extensions of time) or the financial year

Weekly project meetings to monitor progress. Liquidated damages to be imposed for delays that cause loss to the City

Medium

Likely

Medium

The costs associated with the construction is over the Council endorsed budget due to variations to the contractors scope of work

Tender contract terms & conditions; Weekly project meetings to monitor progress and any variations to scope

Medium

Likely

Medium

The contractor fails to construct the waste cell in accordance with the design

Designer will be contracted  to provide sign off on construction in

accordance with design and any hold points

High

Unlikely

Medium

 


 

CONSULTATION

 

Nil.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

The tender assessment was carried out by a tender review panel consisting of Vitor Martins, Waste Coordinator, Allan Miller, Waste Management Officer and Sophia Moore, Contract & Tendering Officer. Tender submissions were received from the following organisations:

 

•             Spannas Engineering

•             BCP Contractors Pty Ltd

•             Leeuwin Civil Pty Ltd

•             McMahon Services Australia P/Ltd

•             Ertech Pty Ltd

•             WBHO Infrastructure Pty Ltd

•             Charles Hull Contracting Pty ltd

•             The 8 Construction Pty Ltd

•             Cowara Contractors Pty Ltd

•             All Earth Group Pty Ltd

•             BMD Constructions Pty Ltd

•             Gunther Civil Pty Ltd

•             JAK Civil Pty Ltd

•             Infratech Construction Pty Ltd

 

All tenders were found to comply with the terms and conditions and mandatory requirements of the RFT. Accordingly, each tender was scored according to the qualitative criteria and included in the tender documentation as follows:

 

Criteria Weighting

 

(a)          Relevant Experience                                    10%

(b)          Key Personnel Skills and Experience         10%

(c)           Tenderer’s Resources                                  10%

(d)          Demonstrated Understanding                   20%

 

The net tendered price was scored using the ‘Average Based Scoring Method’ recommended by WALGA in the ‘Local Government Purchasing and Tender Guide’.

 

The panel members individually assessed the compliance and qualitative criteria and then applied an average to provide a final rating. The scores were then added together to indicate the rankings for 

each tender. The Confidential report attached provides further detail in relation to the relative merits of each of the individual tenderers. Following this evaluation, Officer’s recommend that WBHO Infrastructure Pty Ltd should be the preferred tenderer for the reasons outlined in the confidential report.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The tender evaluation panel have completed their assessment in line with the City’s tender process and Officers now recommend the Council award RFT 16/15 Construction of Landfill Cell 1 at Dunsborough Waste Facility to WBHO Infrastructure Pty Ltd.

 


 

OPTIONS

 

The Council may consider the following alternate options:

 

1.            The Council chooses not to accept the Officers Recommendation and award the Tender to an alternative tenderer. In the view of the Officer’s this could result in a Tender being awarded to a tenderer that has not presented the “best value” for money offer.

 

2.            The Council may choose not to accept the Officers Recommendation and not award the tender. This would mean going back out to tender, resulting in significant delays to the contract award and potential significant delays to the Construction of Landfill Cell 1 at Dunsborough Waste Facility.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

The award of the tender can be made immediately after the Council has endorsed the Officer’s recommendation. Subject to finalisation of a number of minor contractual points, the successful tenderer will receive formal written notification within seven (7) days of the resolution. All unsuccessful tender applicants will also be notified at this time.

 

 

Council Decision and Officer Recommendation

C1512/362              Moved Councillor T Best, seconded Councillor P Carter

 

ABSOLUTE MAJORITY DECISION OF COUNCIL REQUIRED

That the Council:

 

1.     Award tender RFT 16/15 – Construction of Landfill Cell 1 at Dunsborough Waste Facility to WBHO Infrastructure Pty Ltd for the total contract sum of $1,063,838.35 (exclusive GST).

 

2.     Delegate authority to the CEO to award variations, but limited so as not to exceed the overall project budget.

CARRIED 9/0

by absolute majority

 


 

En Bloc Motion

 

At this juncture the Mayor advised the meeting that with the exception of the items already dealt with by separate resolution as they required an Absolute Majority, the remaining reports, including the Committee and Officer Recommendations, will be adopted en bloc.

 

Council Decision

C1512/363              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor G Bleechmore

 

That the Committee and Officer Recommendations in relation to the following agenda items be carried en bloc:

 

9.3          Minutes of the Airport Advisory Committee held 27 November 2015

9.4          Minutes of the Finance Committee Held 3 December 2015

10.3        Airport Advisory Committee - 27/11/2015 - BUSSELTON-MARGARET RIVER AIRPORT MASTER PLAN

10.4        Airport Advisory Committee - 27/11/2015 - SKYLINE HELICOPTER OPERATIONS PROPOSAL

10.5        Finance Committee - 3/12/2015 - FINANCIAL ACTIVITY STATEMENTS – PERIOD ENDING 31 OCTOBER 2015

10.7        Finance Committee - 25/12/2015 - MARINE BERTHING CHARGES AT BUSSELTON JETTY

10.8        Finance Committee - 3/12/2015 - LIST OF PAYMENTS MADE - OCTOBER 2015

15.4        PROPOSED MEMORIAL BENCH TO REPLACE EXISTING SEATING AT SMITHS BEACH

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

 

 

Note:                 This includes the addition on page 26 of the Airport Advisory Committee Minutes for 27 November the words ‘CARRIED 4/0’ after the COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION.

 


 

 9.3         Minutes of the Airport Advisory Committee held 27 November 2015

Council Decision

C1512/364              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor G Bleechmore

 

1)    That the minutes of a meeting of the Airport Advisory Committee held 27 November 2015 be received.

 

2)    That the Council notes the outcomes of the Airport Advisory Committee meeting held 27 November 2015 being:

 

a)    The Committee noted the Airport Update.

 

b)    The Busselton-Margaret River Airport Master Plan Item is presented for Council consideration at Item 10.3 of this agenda.

 

c)    The Skyline Helicopter Operations Proposal Item is presented for Council consideration at Item 10.4 of this agenda.

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

 

9.4          Minutes of the Finance Committee Held 3 December 2015

Council Decision

C1512/365              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor G Bleechmore

 

1)    That the minutes of a meeting of the Finance Committee held 3 December 2015 be received.

 

2)    That the Council notes the outcomes of the Finance Committee meeting held 3 December 2015 being:

 

a)    The Financial Activity Statements – Period Ending 31 October 2015 Item is presented for Council consideration at Item 10.5 of this agenda.

 

b)    The List of Payments Made – October 2015 Item is presented for Council consideration at Item 10.6 of this agenda.

 

c)    The Finance Committee Information Bulletin – October 2015 was received by the Committee.

 

d)    The Old Butter Factory Upper Floor Item is presented for Council consideration at Item 10.7 of this agenda.

 

e)    The Marine Berthing Charges at Busselton Jetty Item is presented for Council consideration at Item 10.8 of this agenda.

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

10.3        Airport Advisory Committee - 27/11/2015 - BUSSELTON-MARGARET RIVER AIRPORT MASTER PLAN

SUBJECT INDEX:

Busselton-Margaret River Airport

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Community Services; Commercial Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Commercial Services

REPORTING OFFICER:

Director, Community and Commercial Services - Naomi Searle

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Community and Commercial Services - Naomi Searle

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Placing the Terminal Today for Tomorrow's Experience - Busselton Regional Airport Master Plan

Attachment b    Busselton-Margaret River Airport Concept and Staging Plan  

 

This item was considered by the Airport Advisory Committee at its meeting on 27 November 2015, the recommendations from which have been included in this report. 

 

PRÉCIS

 

Following the submission of a comprehensive business case to the State Government, the City of Busselton was awarded $55.9m for the redevelopment of the Busselton-Margaret River Airport. 

 

As part of the overall project, a review of the key plans and studies completed as part of the business case is currently being undertaken, including the key informant to the overall project, the Busselton Regional Airport Master Plan (2011/2031).  This report provides an overview of the review and recommends that Council endorses the Busselton – Margaret River Airport Concept and Staging Plan as a key informant to the Busselton – Margaret River Airport Master Plan (2015-2035).

 

BACKGROUND

 

The City of Busselton completed the Busselton Regional Airport Master Plan (2011-2031) in 2011, outlining future opportunities for growth and development.  Since then, the City of Busselton has undertaken considerable studies in conjunction with the South West Development Commission to prepare a State Government Business Case that detailed the completion of Stage 1 (current intrastate services), Stage 2 (future domestic services), and 2a (future short haul international services). 

 

In June 2015 the City was awarded funding of $55.9m to complete Stage 2 of the Business Case.  In addition to this, a funding application is currently pending Federal Government approval which will see the completion of Stage 2a.  Since the completion of the original Master Plan and the Business Case, progress has been made in delivering aspects of Stage 1, and new initiatives including precinct planning have occurred.  In order to deliver Stage 2, and potentially Stage 2a, the Master Plan needs to be reviewed and updated. 

 

The purpose of the revised Master Plan is to establish the framework for the future planning and development of the redeveloped Busselton - Margaret River Airport (BMRA) to ensure the region achieves its strategic objectives and capitalizes on the aeronautical and commercial opportunities provided by the airport.  The Master Plan is intended to establish the basis for more detailed studies of design, infrastructure planning, land use planning and environmental impacts required to achieve the strategic direction.

 

To inform the Master Plan a ‘Concept and Staging Plan’ has been developed outlining the infrastructure requirements of stages 2 and 2a.  Each stage comprising of a number of precincts for design purposes, and is informed through consultation with key stakeholders.  Whilst stages 2 and 2a addresses the infrastructure requirements as per the State Government funding agreement and Federal Government funding application, it also outlines other development areas that add strategic value to the general operations of the airport, however can be developed over a staged period of time.

 

This report outlines the key aspects of the BMRA Concept and Staging Plan as a key guide to the BMRA Master Plan (2015-2035) and seeks Council’s endorsement of the Plan as an informant to the Master Plan.

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

The BMRA operates in accordance with the following; Aviation Transport Security Act 2004, Aviation Transport Security Regulations 2005, CASA MOS 139, the City of Busselton’s Transport Security Plan, policies and procedures.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

The Busselton Regional Airport Master Plan (2011- 2031) and Busselton Regional Airport Statement of Intent outline the vision for the BRA redevelopment and are relevant to this report.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

The State Government project funding of $55.9m has been incorporated into the City’s 2015/16 adopted budget, and will form part of future budgets.  The funding covers operational and capital costs associated with the project.  Cost estimates (+/- 30%) are being undertaken as part of the BMRA Concept and Staging Plan and overall Master Plan. It is anticipated that there will be variations between costings within the business case and the revised Master Plan due to the business case budget being based on costings prepared in 2013.  In any case the City has set obligations within the State Government funding agreement which Officers are confident will be met within budget.  

 

Long-term Financial Plan Implications

 

An operational financial model was developed as part of the State Government business case proposal which incorporated a 10-year financial plan.  The model considered revenues and costs associated with the upgraded facility, including up-front and recurrent capital and ongoing operational expenditure.  The model demonstrates that the upgraded facility will be self-sustainable, generating a modest profit into the future, to be transferred into the City’s Airport Infrastructure Renewal and Replacement Reserve at the end of each financial year.

 

The Long Term Financial Plan (LTFP) is currently based on the ‘here and now’ scenario (stage 1b), and will now require updating to reflect the project, including ongoing operational and capital revenue and expenditure based on the stage 2 redevelopment.  This work has commenced and will be incorporated into the next LTFP review.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

The BMRA is consistent with following the City of Busselton’s strategic Objectives:

 

Well Planned, Vibrant and Active Places:

 

·    Infrastructure Assets that are well maintained and responsibly managed to provide for future generations;

 

·    Connected City of Busselton Transport options that provide greater links within our district and increase capacity for community participation.

 

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

Whist a formal risk assessment is being developed as part of the overall development project, at a high level, and based on the Busselton Regional Airport Master Plan (2011-2031), a comprehensive risk assessment was undertaken as part of the development of the State Government business case proposal that identified and evaluated the effect of uncertainty on the project’s objectives and deliverables, including risk mitigation strategies.  The assessment considered the full project lifecycle, including pre and post project implementation mitigation strategies.  Whilst there are risks assessed as both ‘high’ and ‘medium’, it was considered by business case steering committee members that the risks are manageable and were therefore accepted as part of the business case proposal.  Below outlines the risks assessed as ‘high’;

 

Risk

Controls

Consequence

Likelihood

Risk Level

Passenger demand (competition from other leisure destinations and whether direct access is required)

Ensure attractive route schedules

 

Ensure competitive ticket pricing

 

Effective airport and destination marketing and positioning including iconic Margaret River brand

Major

Possible

High

Sustainable and long term airline operating at BRA

Industry and government support is required to underwrite the route

 

Potential to regulate the route to protect the first airline entrant in commencement years

 

Seek agreement to guarantee the route during underwriting period

Major

Possible

High

Projected aeronautical revenue not realised

Letter of intent, in-principle agreement from commercial airlines to operate from the BRA

 

Effective airport and destination marketing

Major

Possible

High

 


 

CONSULTATION

 

A significant amount of consultation was undertaken as part of the development of the business case proposal, which was overseen by a State Government appointed steering committee comprising of representatives from; SWDC, Department of Transport, Department of Treasury, Tourism WA and the City of Busselton.  Following the announcement of the State Government funding, a Project Governance Committee has been established to oversee the overall deliverables of the project and associated funding.  Committee members include; SWDC, Department of Transport, Department of Treasury, Tourism WA, City of Busselton, and the Department of Regional Development as observers.

Throughout the development of the BMRA Concept and Staging Plan a number of stakeholders were consulted with including; DFES, DPaW, RFDS, McDermotts Aviation, Busselton Aero Club, Satterley Property Group, Busselton Water, Water Corporation, Western Power, Office of Environmental Protection Agency, Cristal Mining, and regular users of Airport.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

As previously reported to the Council through the Airport Advisory Committee, phase two ‘ project initiation phase’ of the development project incorporates the completion of a comprehensive review of the outcomes and recommendations of the State Government business case and related studies to determine the upgrade requirements to achieve the ultimate outcome for the project.  Whilst the business case was based on the Busselton Regional Airport Master Plan (2011-2031), it was identified during the review that limitations within the overall planning existed, in that the Master Plan only considered infrastructure requirements within a 20 year period.  Given the opportunity to revise these requirements, the City engaged an aviation specialist to prepare a revised Master Plan that takes into consideration potential infrastructure requirements over a much longer timeframe to ensure that further planning and development works ‘future proofs’ the Airport.

 

In developing the revised BMRA Concept and Staging Plan, three main constraints were identified:

 

·    The Plan catered well for Code 4C aircraft (B737, A320), however did not consider requirements of larger Code 4E (A330, B787) and 4F aircraft (A380).  Constructing the new terminal and expanding the apron parking bays to the north, abutting the lot boundary, only allows for one Code E aircraft parking on the primary bay at any one point in time, thus reducing its usability and future expansion potential;

·    The main entry point into the Airport and terminal is behind a future industrial estate.  This was seen as a major detractor to the visitor experience entering and departing the pristine Busselton-Margaret River Region;

·    The timeframe for the undergrounding of overhead powerlines is estimated to take anywhere from 12-24 months.  This would impinge on the construction of the terminal and apron parking bay to the north, potentially extending project timeframes, and subsequently project costs, significantly.

 

On the basis of these constraints a terminal planning process (Attachment A) was undertaken to inform the direction of the revised Master Plan by illustrating a choice of two main options for the terminal placement along with associated opportunities and constraints.  Two cases were used as a basis for the analysis, and in summary two main options were identified and considered, those being;

 

·    Option 1 - Construction of the terminal and apron parking bays to the north (as per Busselton Regional Airport Master Plan (2011-2031)): based on the consolidation of planning and works to date, integrating future terminal works with the existing car park and terminal.  Whilst functionally acceptable, this option does not consider future expansion opportunities and is immersed in a future industrial precinct with the presentation of back of house airport operations on arrival rather than the terminal journey experience;

·    Option 2 – Construction of the terminal and apron parking bays to the south: has less connection to existing functions however provides improved opportunities for expansion while future proofing for Code 4F aircraft into the future.  The site experience is improved through simplified wayfinding and early terminal presentation, thus minimizing visitor exposure to the adjacent future industrial park and the areas allocated to general aviation and support services.

 

On consideration of the above analysis, option 2 was deemed as the most viable, practicable and appropriate concept to pursue, and based on high level preliminary cost estimates, able to be achieved within budget.  Subsequently when weighing up the two considerations, Officers determined this option as the best to progress. 

 

On the basis of option 2 being the preferred development concept, further concept planning was undertaken to ensure all airport related activities were catered for in the revised Master Plan, with the opportunity of expansion of each function into the future if required.  Concept planning was also informed by recent consultation and planning into the General Aviation and Emergency Services’ requirements. 

 

As part of the concept plan, six key precincts (Attachment B) have been identified to guide the way finding and general functions of the developed Airport, those being;

 

·    Aeronautical business park: future commercial airside and landside development opportunities;

·    Aeronautical operations precinct: larger airside infrastructure including but not limited to runway, taxi-ways, apron parking bays, helicopter parking pads;

·    Terminal precinct: terminal entrance, terminal, works depot, Jet A1 fuel farm, parking bays, coach parking, provision for service station, hire car services, general development opportunity;

·    Aviation logistics precinct: freight development opportunity, logistic development opportunity, future air traffic control, existing terminal and existing car park;

·    Light aviation precinct: General Aviation hangars, future ARFFS, AVGAS facility;

·    Helicopter operations precinct: helicopter parking pads.

 

Further to this, it has been identified that there is an opportunity to utilize the existing terminal to service the future aviation and/or general operational requirements including, but not limited to:

 

·    Charter terminal;

·    Patient transfer station;

·    Freight logistics terminal;

·    Office space for aviation related businesses, such as AQIS, General Aviation, etc.

 

The BMRA Concept and Staging Plan (Attachment B) outlines the overall concept and precinct planning that will guide the finalization of the BMRA Master Plan (2015-2035), which will then form the basis of the overall planning and design of the BMRA, and Project Definition Plan (PDP) to be presented and considered by the State Government in early 2016.  Council’s endorsement of the Plan as a key informant to the BMRA is therefore recommended.

 

CONCLUSION

 

As part of the BMRA development project, a review of the business case endorsed by the State Government, including associated plans and reports, is required to determine the infrastructure upgrade requirements which will form the basis of a PDP to be considered by the State Government.  The PDP is the second milestone of the project and upon approval the second installment of project funding will be released, allowing detailed designs to proceed.

 

As the overall informant to the infrastructure upgrade requirements of the Airport into the future, a review of the Busselton Regional Airport Master Plan (2011-2031) was undertaken, resulting in a new and improved Concept and Staging Plan that meets the deliverables of the State Government funding agreement, and potential Federal Government funding requirements, whilst future proofing the airport well into the future.  After a considerable analysis of development options, future opportunities, other current Airports as case studies, and stakeholder engagement, the BMRA Concept and Staging Plan (Attachment B) has been developed as a key informant to the revised BMRA Master Plan (2015-2035) and is subsequently recommended for Council endorsement.

 

OPTIONS

 

Council could choose not to accept the Officer’s recommendation.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

The BMRA Master Plan document will be finalized within one (1) month of Council’s endorsement of the Concept and Staging Plan.

 

Council Decision / Committee Recommendation and Officer Recommendation

C1512/366              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor G Bleechmore

 

That the Council endorses the Busselton-Margaret River Airport Concept and Staging Plan (as attached) as an informing document to the Busselton-Margaret River Airport Master Plan (2015-2035).

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

 


Council                                                                                      107                                                          9 December 2015

10.4        Airport Advisory Committee - 27/11/2015 - SKYLINE HELICOPTER OPERATIONS PROPOSAL

SUBJECT INDEX:

Busselton-Margaret River Airport

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

A community that is well connected to its neighbours and the broader world.

BUSINESS UNIT:

Commercial Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Airport

REPORTING OFFICER:

Manager, Commercial Services - Jennifer May

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Community and Commercial Services - Naomi Searle

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Skyline Aviation Busselton Helicopter Proposal

Attachment b    Noise Data B206 B206L  

 

This item was considered by the Airport Advisory Committee at its meeting on 27 November 2015, the recommendations from which have been included in this report. 

 

PRÉCIS

 

This report presents a proposal submitted to the City of Busselton to operate helicopter scenic flights from the Busselton-Margaret River Airport catering for local residents, tourists, cruise liner passengers and other tour companies.

 

BACKGROUND

 

The Busselton-Margaret River  Airport (the Airport) is a public aerodrome owned and operated by the City of Busselton supporting a range of aviation operations from recreational, light and general aviation, open and closed charter services for both private individuals/companies and Fly In Fly out passengers, fixed and rotary wing emergency services, RFDS and formerly RPT services. There are a number of aviation businesses that also operate from the Airport including Margaret River Busselton Tourism Association (MRBTA), Southern Skydivers, Busselton AirServices, Tigermoth Adventure Flights, Westward Aviation and Mission Air Inc. Other than MRBTA, all businesses operate from their respective hangars and have obtained approval from the Council (C1507/190) to do so.

 

Currently, rotary wing operations out of the Airport are restricted to the SLSWA Rescue helicopter which operates between November – April conducting mainly shark patrols and the DFES firefighting helitacs which are based at the Airport between December – April each year for the firefighting season. Other helicopter operators operate from the Airport to support events such as Ironman WA and the Busselton Jetty Swim however these operations are only during the event and not on a regular basis.

 

In September 2015, City Officers were approached by Skyline Aviation Group with an initial proposal to operate helicopter scenic flights from the Airport. Officers have since consulted with Skyline Aviation and are now presenting their final proposal for consideration (Attachment A).

 

Skyline Aviation Group, based out of Newcastle (NSW) operates as one of Hunter Valley region's most experienced helicopter pilot training, charter and scenic tour company and is now expanding their operations to Western Australia. Skyline Aviation is proposing to be based at Jandakot Airport and is requesting to also operate from the Busselton-Margaret River Airport ‘to cater for the growing tourism market and for domestic helicopter charters’. As the Skyline proposal states, the Western Australian operations ‘has already built stable relationships with many other tourism operations in the Busselton and Margaret River region of Western Australia through our previous operation, Wild Blue Helicopters.’ 

 

The former operations known as Wild Blue helicopters used to operate from a Cowaramup site in the Shire of Augusta –Margaret River offering scenic flights. In late 2014 the operations were moved to Margaret River Silk Road, located in Metricup. At this time, City of Busselton Planning and Environmental Health Officers consulted with MR Silk Road and Wild Blue Helicopters as the required planning approvals for the helicopter operations from a private property had not been sought. Further consultation between the City and Wild Blue Helicopters on the requirements for gaining the planning approvals resulted in the helicopter operations being withdrawn from the region in 2014.   

 

The Skyline Aviation proposal is to operate a Bell 206 Longranger aircraft that can carry up to six passengers at any one time. The proposal is requesting approval for the following operations;

·    To operate up to 15 scenic flights per day (30 movements per day);

·    Operations for Monday – Sunday, 9am- 5pm;

·    Access to the General Aviation parking area, located in front of the Aero Club;

·    Approval to erect temporary A-frame signage during operational periods;

·    Operations to commence from 1 December 2015; and

·    Operations to be a trial period for two years (ending on 30 November 2017).

 

Skyline’s proposal provides information on the standard time for each flight, including briefings, flight time and aircraft start/shut down times, which they estimate to be at 45 minutes, implying that that only one flight can operate per hour. Their request for up to 15 flights per day either suggests that they would not complete the standard flight procedures (listed under Standard Time Frame for a Single Flight) operating more than one flight per hour or operate outside of the proposed hours (9.00am-5.00pm). This point has not been clarified with Skyline Aviation.

 

The proposal considers the City’s Noise Management Plan (NMP) and discusses the noise abatement zones and the importance of Fly Neighbourly procedures and provides example flight paths that would be used. Two of the three example flight paths avoid residential areas however one of the flight paths lies directly west of the CBD and over residential areas and would require further clarification on the frequency of use prior to approval.

 

The proposal comments on flight procedures to reduce the noise profile which includes climbing to a height of 1,000ft as soon as possible after take-off and climbing to a flying height of 1,500ft for the flight duration. Such measures will reduce the noise footprint to some extent however one of the anticipated issues is likely to be noise complaints from the community. The proposal discusses strategies such as sharing the noise over the community so that one residential area is not unduly affected, providing a noise complaint process and providing estimated noise emissions (dbs) from the proposed aircraft. The City offered assistance in performing noise monitoring of the proposed aircraft using the City’s Environmental Health department noise monitors however Skyline Aviation declined the offer and actual noise emissions from the proposed aircraft have not been verified.

 

Aircraft noise emissions detailed in the proposal suggest that the Bell 206L noise levels using the EPNdB (Effective Perceived Noise) levels are as follows;

 

 

Over Flight (500ft)

Take Off

Approach

Aircraft

Level

Limit

Level

Limit

Level

Limit

Bell 206L-4

85.4

92.1

88.3

93.1

90.8

94.1

 

The sound levels above have been provided as additional information by Skyline Aviation and can be referenced from European Aviation Safety, Type Certificate Data Sheet for Noise (No. EASA.IM.R512); Page 16 of 20 (Attachment B).

 

Skyline’s proposal also suggests that ‘noise dissipates over both vertical and horizontal distances at a rate of approximately 30dB over 30m’ and hence the noise reduction can be estimated for the proposed helicopter would be ‘by more than 50 decibels when directly overhead at any point on the ground’, estimated to be at 1000ft. Using the implied assumptions from the proposal, the noise emitted by the Bell 206L at 1,000ft is estimated to be 35.4 dBA.

 

The City’s Environmental Health Department and Airport Officers can find no reference material to support the reduction in noise levels by 50dB and generally, accredited literature estimates that sound levels can decrease by 6dB per doubling of distance. Hence, if the distance is doubled from 500ft to 1000ft, the aircraft noise level would decrease by 6dB from 85.4dB to approximately 79.4dB.

 

The proposal also includes information on the pilot and ground crew capabilities, insurance coverages and information that the operations would be based from the Aero Club building for the duration of the trial period.   

          

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

The Busselton Margaret River Airport operates in accordance with the following: The Aviation Transport Security Act 2004, Aviation Transport Security Regulations 2005, CASA MOS 139, Council’s Transport Security Plan and City policies and procedures.

 

The City of Busselton’s Property Local Law 2010 also applies to the Airport land / precinct and Part 3; 3.13 Activities needing a Permit states that:

 

(1) A person must not without a permit –

 

(e) carry on any trading on local government property unless the trading is conducted –

(i)            with the consent of a person who holds a permit to conduct a function, and where the trading is carried on in accordance with the permit; or

(ii)           by a person who has a licence or permit to carry on trading on local government property under any written law. 

 

As Skyline’s proposal is to base operations from the Busselton-Margaret River Airport there is a requirement for a permit to be issued in accordance with the City’s property Local Law. The Property Local Law also states in Part 9.3 Breach of a permit;

 

If a permit holder breaches a condition of the permit, or fails to comply with a direction under clause 3.16(b), the CEO or an authorised person may, give the person a notice under this Division.  

 

Officers would include in the issuance of such a permit to operate that any breaches of the Permit conditions, including conditions contained within the Fly Neighborly Agreement and receipt of a significant number of complaints about the operations could result in the cancellation of the permit.

 

Additionally, Skyline is proposing to operate from the Busselton Aero Club building. In accordance with the Clause7.1 Permitted Uses of the lease with the Busselton Aero Club Inc, the Lessee shall not carry on a business at or from the Clubroom Area without the written approval of the City of Busselton. This approval will need to be sought by the Busselton Aero Club prior to any operations commencing.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

The City of Busselton’s Noise Management Plan, 2015 (NMP) and Ministerial Statement 1009 require the City to manage the operations and specifically the noise emissions associated with aircraft noise from the Busselton-Margaret River Airport. Specifically, Chapter 3; Management of Operational Activities and 3.1.3 Standard Hours of Operation define the Bell 206L aircraft as meeting the General Aviation criteria with the following conditions;

Operator/Aircraft Type

Standard Hours of Operation

Conditions

Light Aviation

Single engine aircraft under 2000kgs MTOW not exceeding 65dB(A)

UNRESTRICTED

Flight Training approval required (only available for aircraft below 1500kg MTOW and flight training conditions apply.

General Aviation

Any light aircraft that does not comply with the Light Aviation definition.

0700-1900 May-November

0600-2100 December -April

Subject to noise not exceeding 85dB(A).

 

Where an operator breaches the NMP, the City is required to report the non-compliances to the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority (OEPA) and at this time the non-compliance is recorded against the City, with the expectation that the City will prevent further occurrences. These regulatory controls require the City to ensure that any future operations based from the Airport can then be compliant with the terms of the NMP and Statement 1009. 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

If the proposal is approved, there is no direct expenditure implications to the City as no additional facilities or upgrade to facilities are required for the Skyline operations to occur. Further, there would potentially be an increase in revenue received based on the landing fees associated with the flights of $8.50 per landing (incl GST).

 

It should also be noted that the complaints process detailed in the NMP allows for ‘noise affected’ residents to request for noise monitoring to be completed at the affected residences. The City’s Environmental Health Department can complete the noise monitoring however there are the associated costs with staff time and analysis of the noise monitoring. Should staff and associated resources not be available then the City would need to engage a third party to undertake the works which then comes at a direct cost to the City. Further, if the noise levels from an affected residence were found to exceed the acceptable levels in Chapter 6 Noise Amelioration of the NMP then noise amelioration measures could potentially apply at the City’s cost.  

 

Long-term Financial Plan Implications

 

There are no long term financial plan implications associated with this report.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

The Busselton Margaret River Airport is consistent with following the City of Busselton’s strategic Objectives:

 

Well Planned, Vibrant and Active Places:

 

·    Infrastructure Assets that are well maintained and responsibly managed to provide for future generations;

 

·    Connected City of Busselton Transport options that provide greater links within our district and increase capacity for community participation.

 

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the officer recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk assessment framework. The assessment sought to identify ‘downside’ risks only rather than ‘upside’ risks and where the risk, following implementation of controls, has been identified as medium or greater.

 

Risk

Controls

Consequence

Likelihood

Risk Level

The City receives noise complaints from community members relating to the helicopter operation.

The NMP has a complaints process in place describing the timeframes and mitigating processes.

Moderate

Likely

High

Noise Complaints relating to the helicopter operations adversely impact the Airport Development Project Environmental Approval Process.

A Fly Neighborly Agreement needs to be signed as part of the permit conditions including the cancellation of the permit if significant noise complaints are received by the City.

Major

Possible

High

The helicopter operations breach the requirements of the NMP and Statement 1009.

Noise monitoring to be completed and assessment of actual noise emissions from proposed aircraft.

Approval conditions will regulate the hours of operations.

Minor

Possible

Medium

The helicopter operations result in noise monitoring and noise amelioration in accordance with the NMP.

Noise monitoring to be completed and assessment of actual noise emissions from proposed aircraft.

Minor

Possible

Medium

 

CONSULTATION

 

Consultation with has occurred with Skyline Aviation Group on a number of occasions in determining the details of their proposal. Consultation with the City’s Environmental Health Department on the assessment and validation of the noise levels provided in the Skyline proposal has also occurred.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

In principle, Officers support the concept of increasing tourism opportunities and activities at the Airport which not only benefit the Airport from revenue raised from landing fees but also have the potential to increase tourism to the region. However, Officers have concerns with regards to the level of noise that may be generated from the helicopter operations and any potential non-compliance, general noise nuisance and community complaints that may result. The proposal and reference material provided by Skyline Aviation report that published noise emissions for the Bell206L are in the range of 85.4 -90.8 dB for differing aircraft movements (overflight at 500ft, take-off and landing). As the noise emissions are expected to decrease (with height) over residential areas it is likely that the Bell 206L will meet the noise requirements of the NMP (not exceeding 85dBA) however this has not been verified and raises concerns with Officers.   

 

The proposal requests that up to 15 flights per day be considered for approval, this could result in up to 30 movements per day which would overfly the Busselton community and if the noise emissions from the helicopter were in the range of 75-79dBs for each movement then it is extremely likely that noise complaints would be received by the City of Busselton. The responsibility of managing these noise affected residents once the operations have been approved would then lie with the City of Busselton and while the noise emissions for individual movements may fall within the NMP requirements the accumulative effect may trigger complaints and requests for noise monitoring and amelioration which would be at the City’s cost. 

 

Additionally there is also the potential for complaints and non-compliance with the NMP and Statement 1009 to have an adverse impact on the Airport Development Project Environmental approvals process that is currently underway. Such impacts could jeopardise the approvals being sought for the regulatory controls being proposed as part of the future NMP and the future operations of the redeveloped Busselton-Margaret River Airport.

 

It is acknowledged however, that tourism is a key economic driver in the South West Region and the proposed scenic flights have the potential to offer a good experience for tourists and visitors to the region. In evaluating the proposal, Officers considered the following options to formulate a recommendation to Council. It is to be noted that for the options listed below, Officers recommend that noise monitoring is completed prior to issuance of a permit to determine the actual proposed aircraft noise emissions in combination with the alternative operational conditions.

 

Option 1

That a permit for a trial operation period of six months be issued subject to the following conditions;

·    Up to five scenic flights per day

·    Scenic Flight Operations Monday –Sunday, between 10.00am – 4.00pm

·    No scenic flights allowed on Good Friday, Christmas Day and Anzac Day

·    Flight paths and utilisation of flight paths to be provided to the City of Busselton

·    Monthly reports to be provided to the City of Busselton on all scenic flights conducted including times of operation and duration of flights

·    Operations commencement date from Council approval

·    Signed Fly Neighbourly Agreement in accordance with the NMP.

 

This option takes a conservative approach to approving the helicopter operations in that the number of flights per day is kept to one per hour over a time span of six hours. The maximum number of scenic flights per week would therefore be 35 flights (70 movements). This approach allows the community to adjust to the presence of the flights without a significant impact on their amenity. The direction of approach and departure flight paths could be shared across the five flights per day ensuring that no residential area is unduly impacted. This option ensures that the amenity of the community is safeguarded however may not be considered viable by Skyline Aviation. 

 

Option 2

That a permit for a trial operation period of six months be issued subject to the following conditions;

·    Scenic Flight Operations, up to 6 scenic flights per day, Monday –Friday, 10.00am – 4.00pm

·    Scenic Flight Operations, up to  7 scenic flights per day, Saturday - Sunday, 10.00am – 5.00pm

·    No scenic flights allowed on Good Friday, Christmas Day and Anzac Day

·    Flight paths and utilisation of flight paths to be provided to the City of Busselton

·    Monthly reports to be provided to the City of Busselton on all scenic flights conducted including times of operation and duration of flights

·    Operations commencement date from Council approval

·    Signed Fly Neighbourly Agreement in accordance with the NMP.

This option allows for one scenic flight per hour during week days and allows for additional flights to be conducted on the weekend when there may be more demand. This approach still allows the community to adjust to the presence of the flights without a significant impact on their amenity however some residential areas may be subject to more flights during a single day due to the additional number of flights that can operate on weekends.

 

Option 3

That a permit for a trial operation period of six months be issued subject to the following conditions;

·    Flight Operations are approved for the months of April – November

·    Scenic Flight Operations, up to 6 scenic flights per day, Monday –Friday, 10.00am – 4.00pm

·    Scenic Flight Operations, up to  7 scenic flights per day, Saturday - Sunday, 10.00am – 5.00pm

·    No scenic flights allowed on Good Friday, Christmas Day and Anzac Day

·    Flight paths and utilisation of flight paths to be provided to the City of Busselton

·    Monthly reports to be provided to the City of Busselton on all scenic flights conducted including times of operation and duration of flights

·    Operations commencement date from Council approval

·    Signed Fly Neighbourly Agreement in accordance with the NMP.

 

This option approves the helicopter operations to operate out of the Airport however at times of the year when there is less rotary wing traffic protecting the amenity of the community. The option still allows for one scenic flight per hour during week days and allows for additional flights to be conducted on the weekend when there may be more demand. This approach facilitates the community adjusting to the presence of the flights without a significant impact on their amenity at times of the year when there is increased helicopter activity due to the emergency services helicopter operations.

 

Alternatively, the above options could also be approved for a twelve month trial period.

 

Option 4

Under the City of Busselton’s Property Local Law 2010, Skyline Aviation requires a permit to operate from the Busselton-Margaret River Airport. As such the Council may choose to reject the proposal and not issue a permit to allow the operations from the Airport.

 

If approved, the City will consider the following criteria below following the trial period and prior to a report being presented to the Council for consideration before any further operations are approved;

·    The number and nature of complaints received relating to the Helicopter operations received by the City of Busselton or any other government agency;

·    Any resulting non-compliances with the NMP and Statement 1009 from the helicopter operations;

·    Any breaches with the terms and conditions of the initial approval for the proposal.

 

In ensuring the ongoing implementation and compliance with the NMP and Statement 1009, Officers are suggesting that the City works with Skyline Aviation in determining a level of operation that provides both a tourism opportunity without adversely impacting the community and hence an alternative level of service to the Skyline proposal is offered for discussion.


 

CONCLUSION

 

The City of Busselton has received a proposal for helicopter scenic flights to operate from the Busselton-Margaret River Airport for a trial period of two years requesting approval for the following operations;

·    To operate up to 15 scenic flights per day

·    Operations for Monday – Sunday, 9am- 5pm

·    Access to the General Aviation parking area, located in front of the Aero Club

·    Approval to erect temporary A-frame signage during operational periods

·    Operations to commence from 1 December 2015

·    Operations to be a trial period for  two years (ending on 30 November 2017)

 

The proposal has the potential to offer a good tourism experience to tourists and visitors to the region including cruise ship passengers. However, the helicopter operations also have the potential to cause noise complaints and adversely impact the community. Further, there is the potential for noise complaints and non-compliances to jeopardise the future operations of the Airport by adversely influencing the environmental approval process currently underway for the Airport Development Project. Any aircraft operations that have the potential to impact the future airport operations of the redeveloped Airport need to be assessed and careful consideration given.

 

Hence, Officers believe a balanced approach should be taken and recommend that noise monitoring is performed using the proposed aircraft overflying at 500ft,  1000ft and 1,500ft to record and verify the actual noise emissions that would be generated from the scenic flight operations. Subject to the noise monitoring meeting the requirements of the NMP, approval could then be given for the commencement of operations based on the following conditions outlined in Option 1;

 

·    Up to five scenic flights per day

·    Scenic Flight Operations Monday –Sunday, between 10.00am – 4.00pm

·    No scenic flights allowed on Good Friday, Christmas Day and Anzac Day

·    Flight paths and utilisation of flight paths to be provided to the City of Busselton

·    Monthly reports to be provided to the City of Busselton on all scenic flights conducted including times of operation and duration of flights

·    Operations commencement date from Council approval

·    Trial period for six months only

·    Signed Fly Neighbourly Agreement in accordance with the NMP.

 

Additionally, a report be presented back to the Council post the trial and prior to any subsequent approvals to operate from the Airport, including the following;

·    The number and nature of complaints received relating to the Helicopter operations received by the City of Busselton or any other government agency;

·    Any resulting non-compliances from the helicopter operations with the NMP and Statement 1009

·    Any breaches with the terms and conditions of the initial approval for the proposal.

 

OPTIONS

 

The Council chooses;

 

1.    Not to accept the Officer’s recommendation of;

That a permit for a trial operation period of six months be issued subject to the following conditions;

a)    Up to five scenic flights per day

b)    Scenic Flight Operations Monday –Sunday, between 10.00am – 4.00pm

c)    No scenic flights allowed on Good Friday, Christmas Day and Anzac Day

d)    Flight paths and utilisation of flight paths to be provided to the City of Busselton

e)    Monthly reports to be provided to the City of Busselton on all scenic flights conducted including times of operation and duration of flights

f)     Operations commencement date from Council approval

g)    Signed Fly Neighbourly Agreement in accordance with the NMP.

 

2.    To recommend Option 2 to the Council including;

That a permit for a trial operation period of six months be issued subject to the following conditions;

a)    Scenic Flight Operations, up to 6 scenic flights per day, Monday –Friday, 10.00am – 4.00pm

b)    Scenic Flight Operations, up to  7 scenic flights per day, Saturday - Sunday, 10.00am – 5.00pm

c)    No scenic flights allowed on Good Friday, Christmas Day and Anzac Day

d)    Flight paths and utilisation of flight paths to be provided to the City of Busselton

e)    Monthly reports to be provided to the City of Busselton on all scenic flights conducted including times of operation and duration of flights

f)     Operations commencement date from Council approval

g)    Signed Fly Neighbourly Agreement in accordance with the NMP.

 

3.    To recommend Option 3 to the Council including;

That a permit for a trial operation period of six months be issued subject to the following conditions;

a)    Flight Operations are approved for the months of April – November

b)    Scenic Flight Operations, up to 6 scenic flights per day, Monday –Friday, 10.00am – 4.00pm

c)    Scenic Flight Operations, up to  7 scenic flights per day, Saturday - Sunday, 10.00am – 5.00pm

d)    No scenic flights allowed on Good Friday, Christmas Day and Anzac Day

e)    Flight paths and utilisation of flight paths to be provided to the City of Busselton

f)     Monthly reports to be provided to the City of Busselton on all scenic flights conducted including times of operation and duration of flights

g)    Operations commencement date from Council approval

h)    Signed Fly Neighbourly Agreement in accordance with the NMP.

 

4.    To recommend Option 4;

Not approve the proposal for Skyline Aviation to operate Helicopter scenic flights from the Airport.

 

5.    To recommend an alternative option to the Council.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

Skyline Aviation will be notified of Council’s consideration immediately following the resolution of Council.

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council;

 

1.    Endorses the CEO to issue a permit for the commencement of helicopter flights by Skyline Aviation on the following basis;

a)         Up to five scenic flights per day

b)        Scenic Flight Operations Monday –Sunday, between 10.00am – 4.00pm

c)         No scenic flights allowed on Good Friday, Christmas Day and Anzac Day

d)        Flight paths and utilisation of flight paths to be provided to the City of Busselton

e)        Monthly reports to be provided to the City of Busselton on all scenic flights conducted including times of operation and duration of flights

f)         Operations commencement date from Council approval

g)         Signed Fly Neighbourly Agreement in accordance with the NMP.

 

3.       That the issuance of the permit is subject to noise monitoring be performed using the proposed aircraft for the Skyline Aviation scenic flight operations, overflying at 500ft,  1000ft and 1,500ft meeting the noise level requirements of the City of Busselton Noise Management Plan 2015.

 

Council Decision and Committee Recommendation

C1512/367              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor G Bleechmore

 

That Skyline’s proposal not be supported and that a formal expression of interest process is undertaken, outlining clear criteria and operating conditions for commercial tourism rotary wing operations at the BMRA, and that regular ongoing rotary wing operations be considered as part of the next Noise Management Plan review.

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

 


Council                                                                                      117                                                          9 December 2015

10.5        Finance Committee - 3/12/2015 - FINANCIAL ACTIVITY STATEMENTS – PERIOD ENDING 31 OCTOBER 2015

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:

Financial Services

REPORTING OFFICER:

Financial Accountant - Ehab Gowegati

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Finance and Corporate Services - Matthew Smith

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Statement of Financial Activity (October)  

 

This item was considered by the Finance Committee at its meeting on 3 December 2015, 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 October 2015.

 

 

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 23 July 2015, the Council adopted (C1507/208) the following material variance reporting threshold for the 2015/16 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 2015/16 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: 

o    Land and Buildings

o    Plant and Equipment

o    Furniture and Equipment

o    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. 

 

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 October 2015

 

Operating Activity

 

§   Operating Revenue

 

As at 31 October 2015, there is a variance of +2% in total operating revenue, with the following categories exceeding the 10% material variance threshold:  

 

Description

Variance

%

Variance

$000’s

Operating Grants, Subsidies and Contributions

+67%

+$467

Interest Earnings

+19%

+$150

Profit on Asset Disposals

+45%

+$3

 

A summary of the above variances is provided as follows:

 

Operating Grants, Subsidies and Contributions (+$467K)

The current variance is primarily attributable to:

§ Timing differences attributable to the receipt of operating contributions for the fire prevention officer by DFES  -$8k;

§ Timing differences attributable to the receipt of the emergency services levy for the operation of the bush fire brigades +$36k;

§ Budget timing difference associated with the receipt of the Busselton Jetty licence fee  +$356k (budget allocation was in November);

§ Horticultural apprentice rebate +$21k (one off unbudgeted revenue associated with funding relating to current worker traineeships);

 

Interest Earnings (+$150K)

The current variance is primarily attributable to:                                                                                       

§ Interest on Reserve Funds +$37k;

§ Interest on Restricted Funds +$108k (Relates to airport funds – not budgeted for);

 

Profit on Asset Disposals (+$3K)

The current variance is primarily attributable to:

§ Minor timing difference associated with book Profits due to disposal of assets. It should be noted that this is an accounting entry only, and has no direct impact on the Net Current Position.

 

§   Operating Expenditure

 

As at 31 October 2015, there is a variance of -10% in total operating expenditure, with the following categories exceeding the 10% material variance threshold:  

Description

Variance

%

Variance

$000’s

Materials and Contracts

-33%

-$1,734

Utilities

-16%

-$121

Other Expenses

-21%

-$219

Allocations

-38%

-$287

Loss on Asset Disposals

+172%

+$34

 

A summary of the above variances is provided as follows:

 

Materials and Contracts (-$1,734K)

·    Variances associated with material and contracts are predominately attributable to timing differences at this stage of the analysis. Materials and contract nature and type comprises of some 547 cost codes with the main areas of significant variances (over $50k) as follows;

 

Busselton Jetty maintenance expenditure -$206k. Timing variance only, corrosion protection assessment and repairs are yet to begin, handrails will be painted in the warmer months of the year and alternative LED light globes are now being tested and trialled;

Timing differences attributable to Airport Operations -$51k, which includes consultancy -$10k, airport maintenance -$14k, contractors -$15k, purchase of materials -$6k, data communications costs -$2k,  commission charges -$2k;

Information technology -$357k. Timing variance only that predominately relate to computer software licenses -$311k, GIS Costs -$31k and consultancies -$23k;

Port Geographe  Emergency funds for works in association with Department of Transport -$100k, funds are to be utilised as required;

 

Utilities (-$121k)

·    Variances associated with utilities are attributable to timing differences. The breakdown is as follows;

 

Telephones (-$10k);

Electricity (-$29k);

Water (-$82k);

 

Other Expenditure (-$219k)

·    Variances associated with other expenditure are predominately attributable to timing differences. The main areas involved are as follows;

 

Members of Council expenses -$121k (main variances are for Elected Members Election & Poll Expenses -$75k, elected members sitting fees -$20k, Trade Subscriptions -$20k and allowances -$7k);

Public Relations -$25k (main variances are for advertising Council page -$5k, catering -$6k and marketing and promotions -$5k ,staff Christmas function -$5k, community consultations and surveys -$3k), full budget allocations have not yet been required;

Office of the CEO -20k. This is attributable to timing variances for the CEO’s discretionary fund -$9k, and CapeROC regional development -$11k;

Timing differences within the rate administration business unit with regard to property valuations -$11k;

Property and Business Development -$39k (main variance is a timing difference associated with expenses for Peel Terrace building and surrounds maintenance);

 

 

Allocations (-$287k)

·    This activity incorporates numerous internal accounting allocations. Whilst the majority of individual allocations are administration based (and clear each month), the activity also includes plant and overhead related allocations. Due to the nature of these line items, the activity reflects as a net offset against operating expenditure, in recognition of those expenses that are of a capital nature (and need to be recognised accordingly). Variances, particularly early in the financial year, are not uncommon, as the activity is highly dependent upon a range of works related factors.

 

Loss on Asset Disposal (+$34k)

·    Timing difference associated with book losses due to disposal of assets. It should be noted that this is an accounting entry only, and has no direct impact on the Net Current Position.

 

Capital Activity

 

§   Capital Revenue

 

As at 31 October 2015, there is a variance of -74% in total capital revenue, with the following categories exceeding the 10% material variance threshold:  

 

Description

Variance

%

Variance

$000’s

Proceeds from Sale of Assets

-22%

-$40

Proceeds from New Loans

-100%

-$850

Transfer from Restricted Assets

-91%

-$457

Transfer from Reserves

-67%

-$$2,295

 

·    Variances associated with capital revenue are as follows;

 

Proceeds from Sales -$40k

Timing difference associated with the sale of light vehicles and minor plant that were scheduled to be disposed of, which are yet to occur;

 

Proceeds from New Loans -$850k

The adopted budget included the drawdown of a loan for the purchase of Lot 40 Vasse highway. This has been delayed pending further review of current trends with regard to borrowing rates. It is anticipated that the loan will be drawn early in the new year subsequent the RBA rate review;

 

Transfer from Restricted Assets -$457

 

The 2015/16 budget includes a transfer from restricted assets of $500k that is associated with expenditure to be incurred for the Busselton Regional Airport development. To date no transfer has been made as expenditure for the project is yet to reach $500k;

 

Transfer from Reserves -$2,295k

 

The 2015/16 budget includes a transfer from reserves of $2,295k that is associated with the building of the new Civic and Administration Centre. As this is expenditure has not been realised as at 31st October, no transfer has been made.

 

 

 

§   Capital Expenditure

 

As at 31 October 2015, there is a variance of -39% in total capital expenditure, with the following categories exceeding the 10% material variance threshold: 

 

Description

Variance

%

Variance

$000’s

Land and Buildings

-81%

-$4,825

Plant & Equipment

-32%

-$180

Furniture and Equipment

-49%

-$102

Infrastructure

-31%

-$2,298

Transfers to Restricted Assets

+74%

+$444

 

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

 

A summary of the remaining variance is provided as follows:

 

Transfers to Restricted Assets (+$444k)

 

The annual budget in this category is spread evenly across the financial year. The favourable year to date variance is due to the receipt of additional developer contributions in excess of budget totalling approximately $444k. The additional funds received were predominately for contributions attributable to Provence, Vasse, and Peppermint Park. These funds have been receipted into the Community and Recreation Facilities account and are subsequently transferred to the Restricted Assets account.

 

Transfers to Restricted Assets has no direct impact on the surplus/ deficit position, as associated transactions represent equity transfers to quarantine funds received in the form of, amongst others, developer contributions (via the ‘Non-Operating Grants, Subsidies and Contributions’ operating revenue category) and borrowings.

 

BUDGET VARIATIONS AND OTHER ‘KNOWNS’

 

Nil.

 

CONCLUSION

 

As at 31 October 2015, the City’s financial performance is considered satisfactory, with no obvious trends evident at this time. Whilst current variances exist in some operational areas, these are primarily due to timing differences, or involve transactions that have no direct impact on the Net Current Position. Additionally, and excluding timing differences, operating expenditure is also generally in line with historical performance at this time of the financial year.

 

Whilst also acknowledging that capital expenditure in the land, buildings and infrastructure asset class’s performance is presently tracking below year to date budget estimates, this is also attributable to timing differences at this time.

 

In line with previous year’s analysis, a more accurate reflection of the City’s 2015/16 financial performance will be available at which time the December 2015 quarterly report is compiled.

OPTIONS

 

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

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

NA.

 

Council Decision / Committee Recommendation and Officer Recommendation

C1512/368              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor G Bleechmore

 

That the Council receives the statutory financial activity statement reports for the period ending 31 October 2015, pursuant to Regulation 34(4) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations.

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

 


Council                                                                                      123                                                          9 December 2015

10.7        Finance Committee - 25/12/2015 - MARINE BERTHING CHARGES AT BUSSELTON JETTY

SUBJECT INDEX:

Tourism Development

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT: